Leo Allatius's Dissertation on the Pselli and Their Writings

^A Leo, as they say, sought after letters and poets in the capital, but he studied rhetoric, philosophy, the recovery of arithmetic, and the methods of the other sciences while he was on the island of Andros. For there, having chanced upon a certain learned man, Michael Psellus, and having received from him only the foundations, some arguments, and the beginnings—since he did not find as much as he wished—he roamed through the monasteries, searching for and acquiring the books stored in them; and through diligent practice and meditation, he was raised to the height of such knowledge.

*Constantine, of your nectar, Calliope,* *Having drunk well, says with knowledge:* *“He who has parsed the mysteries of the heart,* *Late and with difficulty has understood the hidden malice.”* *Farewell to me, O thrice-miserable Polymnia. Farewell, Muses.* *But I, from now on, desire rhetoric,* *Having found Photius, the high priest and elder-teacher,* *Who nurtured me with the milk of divine springs.*

He did not, however, cease to be friendly and respectful toward Photius even before this, because of the manifold wisdom and virtue in him. And although he had removed him from the patriarchal throne—not wishing to prefer anything before justice—nevertheless, he did not fail to provide him with everything for his consolation. Whence, having even given him a place of stay in the palace, he appointed him as instructor and teacher of his own children.

^B For he now at last feels the desire for rhetoric, since I have found Photius, the supreme president and elder-teacher, who nurtured me with the milk of divine springs. He calls Photius *gerontodidaskalos* (elder-teacher), either because he was an old man, or because he instructed an old man; for both were of older age. And that turned out more conveniently for Leo, as he was not the last among the primates of the court. For Photius, having been stripped of his dignity, lived a life in the palace of Basil the Macedonian, informing Leo and Constantine, and the rest of Basil’s children, in humanity, eloquence, and other disciplines. From this, an approach was also given to Leo for grasping more divine studies. I have this from Constantine Porphyrogenitus concerning the life and deeds of Basil the Macedonian: “Nor yet had he before this neglected the studies of humanity in him, Photius; nay, he increased him with honors on account of the manifold wisdom and virtue in him. And although he had removed him from the patriarchal throne, granting primacy to justice, he nevertheless conferred upon him everything by which he might solace him. Whence, having summoned him to the palace, he established him as the informant and master of his own children.”

^C [4] IV. Leo, therefore, whether by the office of teaching philosophy or by the excellence with which he himself surpassed others in philosophical matters, claimed for himself the surname of Philosopher. When the parent of ecclesiastical history had noted this in his *Annals*, he affirmed, not incongruously, that Michael Psellus flourished in the year of our Lord 859. For indeed at that time Michael Psellus was approved as a man not unlauded in the science of philosophizing, distinct from the other Michael Psellus under Constantine and Michael Ducas, whom many, through little caution, confounding, have miserably disturbed the order and times of history, so that not a few thrust upon their readers as many lies and trifles in very few words. Lest I be too long, [attend to] the words of Gregorius Gyraldus *De poet. histor.*, Dialogue 5: “That Leo, indeed, was not uncelebrated, who was the son of Basil, nicknamed the Philosopher, who for about years from the Word of God made flesh held the empire of Byzantium and the East, whose son was Constantine Ducas, who both felt rightly concerning the Christian religion and busily devoted his effort to the best arts and disciplines. ^D That famous book of this Constantine exists, which, dying, he left to his son Romanus, in which he encompassed the sum total of the empire, the treaties of allies, the forces of enemies, what and how great they were, and all other things pertaining to the empire: which book the Republic of Venice most diligently [keeps] in its own private library today.”

^A It also makes the city keep watch. In the time of this Constantine, there also flourished a man skilled in every scientific and liberal art, as well as foreign ones, M. Psellus, whose nearly countless books are passed through the hands of the curious and scholarly. To this Constantine, indeed, the books of Psellus on the "rationale of life," that is, on diet, and on the making of gold—that is, the *Chrysopæia*—are attributed; which books someone, not truly unlearned, wrongly believed in writing had been given to Constantine the Great: just as the *Commentaries* which are read in the Chaldean symbols of Zoroaster, and the *Astronomical Canons*, etc.; and with a few words inserted: “There was also the son of this Constantine Ducas, and a disciple of M. Psellus, the Emperor Michael Ducas of Constantinople, who, because of the famine and poverty which had invaded the city of Constantinople at the beginning of his reign, was surnamed ‘Parapinaces.’” This Michael, indeed, was otherwise ignorant and lethargic, except that he progressed in the good arts under Psellus, and especially in the making of verses, in which matter Greek history commends him as an emperor.

^B V. I am amazed that a man of sound mind could have spoken so inconsiderately. To him, Leo the Philosopher is the Emperor Leo, son of Basil. This is an error. It is certain that the Emperor Leo, being most devoted to the humanities, philosophy, and sacred studies, wrote many things—some of which still exist—in every branch of knowledge in a praiseworthy manner: and for this reason he was surnamed *sophos*, that is, “the wise,” but the name of “philosopher” was never attributed to him by the more learned. Therefore, from Leo the Philosopher and a second [emperor called] the Wise, he makes one Leo, and [calls] him the son of Basil. The author of *Theatrum vitæ humanæ* (vol. XXI, lib. II, page 3759) has fallen into a more ignorant lapse. “The Emperor Leo the Philosopher was initiated into letters at Byzantium; he learned rhetoric, philosophy, arithmetic, and the remaining sciences on the island of Antros, having stayed there with Michael Psellus.” [According to] Cedrenus. “A truly huge and ardent zeal of the emperor, although he had no authority or resources, who, having left his home and neglected the riches of the highest station, traveled to the island of Antros to obtain learning from the master Psellus.” Would it not have been much easier, by proposing a great reward, for Psellus to have been summoned and arrived? It is also false for Cedrenus to assert this, for he knows the Philosopher Leo as distinct from Leo the Wise and [the] Emperor. And the words of Cedrenus are [exactly] those concerning Leo the Philosopher which we brought forward above.

VI. Gyraldus continues: “Whose son, that is to say, Leo’s son, was Constantine Ducas.” Who said this? Constantine Ducas lived long after these times. Nor did Constantine, the son of Leo, ever assume the surname of Ducas for himself, but rather Porphyrogennetos, in which he took the greatest pleasure and pride. The surname of Ducas was taken in the empire at least one hundred and sixty years later. He who... and felt correctly concerning the Christian religion. Concerning Constantine Ducas, it might perhaps be true. But by what reasoning could Constantine, the son of Leo, a defender of schism, have felt correctly concerning the Christian religion? Others may judge. His attempt to defend Photius from wrongs, or [his defense of] the Tome of Union, edited by Leunclavius in the *Jus Græco-Romanum* (Book II), is clear enough and more. That celebrated book of this Constantine, which he left at his death to his son Romanus, is well known. Joannes Meursius edited it from a codex of the Palatine library, which was once said to have belonged to Baptista Ignatius, in Greek and Latin, along with other short works of the same Constantine, at Leiden by Elzevir in 1627, in 8°. But he was not a Ducas, but a Porphyrogennetos. In the time of this Constantine also there flourished Michael Psellus. If the discussion is about Psellus, whose countless books, as he says himself, are circulating, he is mistaken. For he did not live at that time. If it is about the tutor of Leo the Philosopher, although he may not be mistaken, he is nevertheless not celebrated by the edition of countless books. Concerning whom, whether he wrote anything ^D I still doubt. To this Constantine, surely, [are attributed] the books of Psellus on the “rationale of life,” that is, on diet. This is also false. For Psellus, who wrote the book *On the Rationale of Life*, dedicated the book to Constantine Ducas, or if you prefer, Constantine Monomachos. And [he is said to have written] *On the Making of Gold*. Nothing could be further from the truth. For he sent that little book to the Patriarch Michael Cerularius, at whose urging he had written it. Whom someone not entirely unlearned [attributes to Constantine]... He most excellently rejects the ineptitudes of others, and recounts some commentaries of Psellus, though not those of Leo the Philosopher, the master. He adds: “There was also the son of this Constantine Ducas, and a disciple of M. Psellus, the Emperor Michael Ducas of Constantinople, who was surnamed Parapinaces because of the famine and poverty.” Nonsense. Of Constantine, the son of Leo, there was no son Michael, but Romanus, to whom he left, as Gyraldus had said above, his dying [work] *On the Administration of the Empire*. And this Michael, under his tutor Psellus, recognizes Constantine Ducas as his father. Does Gyraldus treat history well? Does he deserve well of Psellus and these emperors, whom he confuses by mixing them together so vilely, and casts them forth from their proper place into other times?

VII. Possevinus likewise, while he transfers the writings of the more recent Psellus to that ancient tutor of Leo, receives antiquity quite poorly: “Michael Psellus, who is said to have been the tutor of Leo, surnamed the Philosopher, wrote many things, concerning both theology, and philosophy, and other disciplines, whether pertaining to mechanics or medicine; provided, however, that all the things which are ascribed [to him] are his legitimate works.” Nor does Franciscus Bosquetus show more wisdom in his preface to the reader for Michael Psellus’s *On the Laws*.

VIII. And certainly, Andreas Schottus in his preface to Psellus’s *Commentary on the Song of Songs*, and Gerhard Vossius in his *De Historicis Graecis* book II, chapter 26, are deceived—and they impose upon Caesar Baronius and Bellarmine—by attempting to persuade themselves and others that Psellus flourished in the year of Christ 859, at which time Leo the Philosopher was emperor at Constantinople, whom Psellus supposedly instructed in letters. For although it may be true regarding Psellus—and Baronius is not mistaken in this—that there was indeed a certain Psellus at that time, distinguished in literature, Baronius never affirmed that he instructed the Emperor Leo in letters; rather, he distinguished Leo the Philosopher from the Emperor Leo. Baronius, they say, relates that Simeon Metaphrastes was celebrated in a panegyric oration by a Psellus, not of the same age as Leo, but much more recent. This is true. But he did not say that there existed only one Psellus. And we, for our part, cannot affirm with certainty to which Psellus the oration should be attributed. Yet we are led by a conjecture, and a very light one at that, that this more recent one is the author of it; because he wrote more extensively in every discipline and was most celebrated for the glory of his writings. Whether that elder one handed down anything in writing, it is not certainly established. ^B

IX. But I, for my part, have no doubt, if we wish to confess the truth, that that Psellus under Basil the Macedonian consigned many philosophical things to writing, and that they are now circulated under the name of the more recent Psellus, indistinct due to the affinity of the name. For all the writings which point to Psellus the father—since they differ in their manner of treatment, in the acumen of discovery, and neither in the same form of expression nor in the color of their figures do they rejoice, but rather present, on the one hand, that unadorned and Greek philosophy (not barbaric, clearly, but manly, and which shines with its own splendor), and on the other hand, others play with the Muses and the Graces and the blossoms of words, and dance happily with a polished structure of periods—demand different parents for themselves because of the diversity of their genius. And although great men sometimes, wearied by the labor of bringing forth lofty matters, might seem to be bereft of their strength and to turn themselves into various different forms of expression, there always shines forth in them a certain power of nature, never degenerating from itself, by which sharp-witted men and keen judges of works can track down the true author. Even if Ganymede limps with a disfigured face and twisted feet, he cannot migrate into another man in such a way that he is not recognized as Ganymede; you can readily discern those lines, and the sparks of beauty, however badly received, and the rays latent in the limbs, if you are not a complete fool. And often in broken, worn-away, and partially mutilated marble, I have detected the heaven of Praxiteles. Since, therefore, in these works everything is far different, I judge clearly that they are not to be referred to the ancients. Those will be the chief ones which expound most of Aristotle’s books by way of paraphrase, not ineleganter. ^C And I have always had a slight doubt about that *Dialogue* in which the operations of demons are asserted, and about its author. The style is more solid than flowery, and the subject matter—outside the schools of the Peripatetics, akin to the teachings of Plato and Zoroaster, and those magical trifles—indicates a Psellus other than the more recent one. In this *Dialogue*, Marcus, staying on the island of Cherson, explains the secrets of magic to a foreigner; Leo the Philosopher is taught philosophy and the remaining sciences by Michael Psellus on the island of Antro. I see the history of Leo brought onto the stage under alien names as if masked. Moreover, does not that account, where Timotheus says he heard from his paternal grandfather about the evil customs of the Euchites, seem to fit better with the age of the elder Psellus—at the time when, as John Damascene relates regarding the heresies, the heresy of the Massalians was most cruelly ravaging the Church of God, which in the time of the younger one was nearly extinct and languishing? Add to the *Dialogue* the treatise on Demons (not yet edited in Greek, as far as I know) which, by the judgment of the Greeks, you would call a uterine and German offspring; and historians report that Leo the Philosopher and John, his kinsman, were accused and charged with magic, through whom it is probable they learned it from none other than that Michael Psellus. ^D

X. The little book of Psellus *On Stones*, also edited by Maussac, must be attributed either to this elder Psellus, if my conjecture does not fail me, or certainly to no one. Hear what he himself says, while at the end he enumerates the authors who rendered the causes for the virtues of stones, and after all of them subjoins: "Among those not long before us was Alexander of Aphrodisias, a man, to put it simply, most ready in all things and even in the hidden secrets of nature." That is: "Among those who lived a little before us, Alexander of Aphrodisias was very ready to unfold even the most occult things of nature, to embrace many things in few." Must we say that Alexander of Aphrodisias, who wrote under Antoninus and Severus, lived "a little before" the times of Psellus, who flourished under Constantine and Michael Ducas? If a space of eight hundred and fifty years is a small interval of time for Psellus, what will be a long one? Therefore, either this little book must be claimed for this elder Psellus, or if six hundred or more years are long times, and therefore it is not to be attributed to the elder, another author of the little treatise must be sought by us diligently, lest we be forced to admit—most foolishly—that Psellus was asleep while he wrote these things.

XI. The Medical and Therapeutic book, also by Psellus, which he dedicated to Constantine Porphyrogenitus, unless the inscription deceives us, perhaps belongs to the elder Psellus.

If he prolonged his life to that time; surely the recent era denies it.

XII. It is therefore likely that this Psellus composed many things in Philosophical and Rhetorical studies. But you will say, did he not write, whatever may be said of others, a panegyric on Simeon Metaphrastes, as Baronius dreams, 9 when the younger Psellus wrote it? Wherefore Baronius is mistaken both regarding Psellus, whom he relegates to another time, and regarding Metaphrastes, whom he contends, on account of an imaginary Psellus, had devoted his labor to the Church in narrating the lives of the saints two hundred years before he existed. Nor with any more fortunate outcome did Bellarmine in his *De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis*, for the ninth century, year 850; or Jacobus Gaulterus in his ^B *Tabula Chronologica*, ninth century, page 598; or Jacobus Gretser in [*De imaginibus manu non factis*], ch. 10, and others, follow Baronius.

XIII. These enemies of ecclesiastical history and the most fierce opponents of Simeon Metaphrastes think they triumph in the downfall of such great men. But they attempt this with no evident reason, if my opinion does not deceive me. Baronius did not distinguish the times of Psellus; but in what way do they distinguish them? They themselves assign that Panegyric on Metaphrastes to the younger Psellus, but by what argument? By absolutely none. They will never prove that the author of that oration was the other Psellus, and not the teacher of Leo the Philosopher. He wrote many things, as is likely; why could he not also have written this oration? And that he did write it—I will prove this with a most firm argument, if the manuscripts do not deceive me, and if those who argue the contrary are not stones. They should concede, and must concede, that the parent of the oration was nicknamed Psellus, and that he lived not long after the times of Metaphrastes. Behold his words : "^{A C} For he showed even at the end what kind of life he had busily pursued. For they who watched him do not say he was honored, nor divided, but he seemed to be freed as if from some bond, and to be raised easily toward the angels who were leading him." That is: For he showed even in the end what kind of life he had lived. For they who saw him do not say that he was as if severed, or divided: but he seemed to be freed as if from a certain shackle, and with a cheerful nod to extend himself to the angels taking him. Nor can they deny that Nicetas, who was also called David, a Paphlagonian, lived contemporary to the holy Ignatius of Constantinople, and, with documented writings, was most celebrated in the same times as the elder Michael Psellus. He himself relates this of himself in the beginning of the *Life of Ignatius* written by him. Most Vatican codices make this Nicetas the same person as Nicetas Serron. Indeed, the exposition on the *Poems* of Gregory Nazianzen, by the same Nicetas who also commented on other works of Gregory—namely, Serron—which also very many manuscript codices ^D affirm, attribute it to this Nicetas David. For they have quite evidently: "Nicetas the Philosopher of Paphlagonia 10, *Exposition on the Poems of the Theologian*." Or, "Nicetas also called David, *Exposition on the same*." Nicetas the Philosopher of Paphlagonia's *Exposition on the Poems of the Theologian*, and Nicetas, who is also David, *Exposition on the same*. Nor are the Augustan manuscript codices different from these; and the Venetian edition under the year 1563 confirms it. So that from this you may see, by the combined agreement of so many manuscripts, not by the carelessness of one copyist, that these expositions were not changed, but in a continuous series were proven by many that the author was Nicetas, who was also called David and the Paphlagonian Philosopher. Therefore Serron, Nicetas, and David, by the authority of these codices, are one and the same author. Follow these things, my dear Gaffarel. Nicetas, besides the expositions on the orations of Gregory, and other products of his genius in every kind of doctrine, very elegantly compiled a sufficiently rich and lucid *Catena* on the Gospel of Saint Luke, divided into four books, from many Fathers and ecclesiastical writers; among whom Simeon Metaphrastes and Psellus are not the least. Can we therefore admit that this Psellus, who flourished under Constantine Ducas, is he? Away. Mere trifles. It is certain that he died before the times of Nicetas. Let them prove, if they can, that he revived again after Nicetas.

XIV. This argument is certainly effective, but to me, in the present, to tell the truth, it does not satisfy. Nor do I think it sufficiently proven by the faith of the manuscript codices, which I reviewed above, that Nicetas David is the same as Nicetas Serron, the compiler of the *Catena* on Luke; for I believe a long interval of time passed between them both. For Nicetas Serron, first a deacon of the Great Church, and a master, or doctor—the author of the *Catena* on Luke, Matthew, and others, and later Archbishop of Heraclea—flourished in the same times as Theophylact, Archbishop of Bulgaria, to whom I read the ninth letter of Theophylact among those printed by Meursius. But there will be another place for inquiring about these.

XV. But if I wished to insist on the doctrines of the innovators, Metaphrastes was contemporary to the very disciples of the apostles in the ultimate antiquity of the Christian Church, so far is he from being the most recent. A knot which I do not know if the adversaries will ever untie. Gesner, and his Epitomator, suspect that Hippolytus the Theban, the writer of an *Ecclesiastical Chronicle*, whose fragment Canisius produced for us in *Antiquit. tom. III* in Greek and Latin, is the one whom Jerome mentions in the book *De viris illustribus*, namely, [Hippolytus] of Porto, and not inappropriately; since both Nicephorus Callistus in *Histor. Eccles. lib. II, c. 3*, Glycas, [i] and 11 Theodorus Metochita in [index: entries preserved]

their annals attribute those things which are Hippolytus the Theban’s to Hippolytus, bishop of Porto, and substitute the Portuensian for the Theban. But the Portuensian suffered martyrdom under the emperor Alexander, namely, in the year of Christ 229. Metaphrastes is therefore more ancient, since the Metaphrastes of Simeon is mentioned in the Chronicle, and by conjecture they flourished together with the disciples of the apostles. Many are now producing Metaphrastes here, yet they say the most recent of all wrote the Lives of the saints. Trifles and dreams.

XVI. Let there be a single Simeon Metaphrastes, that he may be considered distinct from the Theban of Porto, just as Hippolytus is; and let us seek the very obscure times of his life and his way of living from sources other than Psellus’s time, and, if possible, from the Metaphrastes himself. The author of the Life of the holy Theoctiste of Lesbos—as Lippomano, Surius, and others, without any hesitation, though I know not why one would transmit it to an uncertain author—is this Metaphrastes. And this is confirmed by the most certain testimony of Psellus himself. For Psellus, when introducing his commentaries on the Metaphrastes in a canon on the Metaphrastes, writes that he undertook the task of writing at the counsel and admonition of an anchorite of Paros, and that first of all he composed that dialogue, and graphically celebrated the life of the virgin Theoctiste; in Ode 6: "Thy first work [sprang] from divine providence, and from the conversations of the holy elder and monk, O divine Simeon, whom thou hast seen on the island of Paros. For in a manner worthy [of praise] thou hast celebrated the bright and divine struggles of the Lesbian Theoctiste, who in truth lived an angelic and almost bodiless way of life, wisely accomplishing it." That is: "Your first commentary was made by divine Providence and the conversation of the holy elder and anchorite, O admirable Simeon, whom you saw on the island of Paros." And: "For the dignity of the praised Lesbian, the illustrious and divine struggles, truly of Theoctiste, fashioned by God, who wisely completed the angelic and almost incorporeal way of life." In this writing, both the conversation of the elder in Paros and the exhortations and the life of Theoctiste are set forth according to the limitations of human talent. Therefore, whoever might deny that this writing is the genuine work of Metaphrastes would be alien to reason. But in this work, the way of life of the same author, and the times of his age, are set forth clearly and without any ambiguity. Therefore, we seek in vain for testimony about Simeon from another, or from Simeon himself. But let us learn from Simeon that he did not abhor taking a wife, but also begat children by her, and discharged civil duties; then at last, when he had been sent as an envoy with Himerius, a man most skilled in leading armies, to the Arabs who had invaded Crete: and, as it was not permitted to proceed further due to contrary winds, he sailed to Paros, and having become most familiar with that elder and anchorite of the same name, from whom he had learned the deeds of Theoctiste on the condition that he should commit everything to writing, and having heard the end of his own embassy, which was fortunate, and the gifts to be brought back from the emperor—things that that divine old man had foretold—after the navigation was completed, by writing down the things he had seen and heard, he fulfilled the elder’s instructions. He was living at that time, therefore, when the Arabs afflicted the Aegean islands and the maritime coasts of Greece not without a successful outcome, though to the wretched calamity and slaughter of Greece. But especially then, when Himerius was sent to defeat the Arabs with a fleet and sword—the man himself by word and by duties—[he was] at the time when he had not yet turned his mind to writing. But these things happened in the times of Leo the Wise, the son of Basil the Macedonian, if faith is to be placed in Cedrenus, Curopalates, Zonaras, and other Greek historians. Therefore, this Simeon Metaphrastes, a writer of Lives, flourished at that time, enriched with duties and honors. And if one may venture a guess, that Simeon who was a secretary under this Leo—who had offered the gold left by Rhodophyllus to the infamous apostate Leo of Tripoli, to turn him away from the destruction of Thessalonica, and because of this was decorated by the emperor with the dignities of patrician and primary secretary—is none other than our Simeon Metaphrastes here, who is distinguished by the name of Logothete by Psellus, as we shall say below, and by others.

XVII. Simeon Metaphrastes therefore began his writing under Leo, and under Constantine Porphyrogennetus, Leo’s son, and his grandson Romanus, and even in his more advanced age he used to finish his labors—as can be gathered from his oration on the exportation of the right hand of John the Baptist in Lippomano and Surius. For he says that at that age, under the emperors Constantine and Romanus, the hand was brought from Antioch to Byzantium by Job the deacon. And that this occurred under the said emperors is confirmed by Cedrenus and Zonaras regarding Constantine Porphyrogennetus.

XVIII. Therefore, Gerard Vossius and others err who think that Simeon Metaphrastes flourished under Constantine Ducas, or at least around those times; and that Baronius and Bellarmine erred, since Simeon, as Vossius himself thinks, lived two hundred years later than they imagined.

XIX. Furthermore, how terribly Hospinianus hallucinated, while he split up the Metaphrastes and the Pselli at his own whim, so to speak, is abundantly shown by Jacobus Gretserus in *De imaginibus manu non factis*, c. 19. I shall also contribute some things from my own side, beyond what has already been said, to so rich a harvest, that the truth may shine more clearly. Metaphrastes was not a trivial schoolmaster of Constantinople, but illustrious by birth, born of an eminent family, abounding in wealth, famous in the imperial court, [a man] of the secretarial staff and intimate counsels, and even after his death illustrious for miracles. Psellus on the same: "And more wonderful still, that he was both well-born, and from his own house [possessed the fruits] of glory."

^A abounding in great wealth, and those things which would make anyone lazy toward disciplines. It is for this reason that Psellus composed the Office for that same [saint], which might be chanted by ecclesiastics on his feast day, as is customary to be done for other saints. In it, in Ode 3, he writes: "Having been adorned with the dignities of the earthly senate, as a man of counsel you acquired the way of conducting life in heaven, and adorned the senate above." And he often calls him Logothete. Ode 1: "Grant me, Word of God, a harmonic song, when I have begun to celebrate your servant, Symeon the Metaphrast, the truly admirable Logothete." And elsewhere: "Let us all celebrate with fitting songs the great servant of God, Symeon the holy Logothete."

Hence, some consider that certain things ascribed to Symeon were added by later writers, ^B as Baronius, Bellarmine, and others have observed, since those men lived after the times of Symeon. But Andreas Schottus, in his preface to the reader in the *Canticle of Canticles*, opines that they were annexed and published by Psellus, who is indeed more recent. Whence Schottus had this information is not clear, even if it be true that Psellus, whether out of emulation of Symeon or reverence for the saints, quite elegantly and accurately wrote up the many Lives of the saints. I wish, having neglected childish arguments, in which he sometimes seems to have wallowed, he had spent more hours on these grave matters than he did! We will detail his efforts regarding the saints in the list of works below.

XXI. Michael Psellus, tutor of Emperor Michael Ducas, famous around the year 1050. Others.

The third was Michael Psellus, tutor of Michael Ducas, who, having merited most of all men from the republic of letters, consecrated an honorific memory of himself to posterity, such that he overwhelmed the other men of the same name by the sharpness of his genius, the abundance of his erudition, the depth of his sciences, the variety of his arguments, the multitude of his writings, and the splendor of his glory; ^C wherefore, with the memory of the others extinguished—and, if I may so speak, obliterated—he alone appears to have deserved that name. So when we say "the poet" or "the orator," Homer and Demosthenes—I speak of the Greeks—at once offer themselves to us and present themselves to the eyes of the mind.

XXII. His homeland was Constantinople, from a lineage of consuls and patricians, although not of such fortunate standing.

He relates this himself in the epitaph of his mother: "My father's lineage, therefore, was ancient, traced back to consuls and patricians; but his own affairs were not in too prosperous a state." After two daughters, he himself was brought into the light as the third birth, with many sighs and prayers poured out by his mother to God. It is strange what is narrated of his birth, that he shed no tears, nor ever thereafter, even in the greatest vicissitudes, did he weep, but [15] from that tender age and always had joyous and sparkling eyes; he only hungered for his mother's breasts, to which he was drawn both by habit and by his mind. At five years old, he was handed over to a tutor, and he took up the burden of studies so vigorously that all playful things, except for the study of letters in which he took the greatest delight, became distasteful to him. Behold his own feeling, expressed in his very own words: "Thence ^D my mother, being guided toward better things, placed me at five years of age with a teacher. And my lesson was not only easy for me, but also more pleasant than any other form of play. I would indeed grieve if they did not give me my schoolbooks for the entire day. And it was for me, play was study and study was play, not as one playing at these things, but as one studying those..."

^A with the result that my mind, avid for any kind of study, could never be sated with knowledge. I would wish for nothing to exist that might escape my notice; and it would not be irksome to me to know things even beneath the earth. Nor do I, like most people, apply myself to just one thing while neglecting others; but I obtain knowledge even of base and abominable things, so that I may have the means to oppose those who use them. He speaks of this at greater length in his *Oration on his Mother*, in which he enumerates all these individual matters to the point of satiety. The reader may see them there, lest I myself become tedious.

XXIII. Meanwhile, having attained sufficient age and prudence, he became known at court to the emperors, who experienced his useful services in the greatest affairs. For Michael Stratioticus, among the men chosen from the enrolled senators whom he sent to bring Isaac Comnenus into concord with those in revolt, also sent our Psellus, celebrated with no mean praise by Zonaras in volume III. ^B It is recorded that select men from the enrolled senators were sent to Comnenus: the President Constantine Lichudes, the President Leo Alopus, and Michael Psellus, the most wise prince of the philosophers. And Cedrenus in his *Synopsis*: "There met him there the envoys of the Emperor: the President Constantine Lichudes, Theodore Alopus, and Constantine Psellus, the prince of the philosophers." For these three men, appearing to surpass in wisdom and power of speech the people of that day—and Psellus ^C incomparably so—were chosen to act as envoys, and the Emperor expected to achieve great things through their eloquence and grace.

There, however, the envoys themselves acted treacherously, and approaching Cecaumenus in secret, in one way or another, they exhorted him to persist in his resistance and not to yield at all. And that they did this, the men well-informed of the matter affirmed—men who were not the sort to lie—and they confirmed this to Comnenus himself under oath, stating that the entire civilian population held him in ill favor, and that as soon as he approached the city, they would drive out the old man and receive him ^D with songs of victory and hymns. It was recorded, moreover, that these same envoys had acted deceitfully, and had at various times urged Cecaumenus now one way, now another, to strongly attack the offers...

^A of conditions, and to grant nothing. Indeed, those who are quite familiar with these matters, and who are above suspicion of falsehood, assert for certain that they did this, even confirming to Comnenus, with an oath, that he was ardently loved by the urban populace; and that if he were only to approach the city, it would come to pass that the city itself, having cast out the former, would receive him with songs of triumph and imperial praise.

XXIV. Isaac Comnenus, when he was seeking to depose Michael Cerularius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, made use of the assistance of others, and especially of Psellus, whom he charged by a written Oration with many and various crimes. Zonaras says the same in that place: And he also set his mind upon bringing him to a deposition, and for this purpose made use of certain of the bishops as his co-workers; and by collecting a great many strange accusations against him, which he had gathered and composed in an ^B oration against him, he made it known through certain men to the man himself that he should renounce the pastoral office, so that he might appear to resign voluntarily, lest, if he did not do so, he should be deprived of it against his will by the charges being set openly against him.

He then considered deposing him from the patriarchate, and employed the work of certain bishops, and of Psellus, the compiler of various and absurd calumnies, which he had assembled in an Oration written against him, and through certain men indicated to the man that he should pretend to cede the pontificate voluntarily, which he would otherwise lose unwillingly amid public disgrace.

[18] XXV. Hostile to the Emperor Diogenes, he himself being the first among the senators, together with John the Caesar and his sons, they force the Empress Eudocia into a monastery; they proclaim Michael Ducas emperor; they depose Diogenes, who was already returning ^C to the empire, with the same Psellus as the author and assistant of their plans. Zonaras, on Romanus Diogenes: Therefore, John the Caesar and his sons, always hostile to Diogenes, as has been said, having seized the opportunity—with some of the Senate also taking part in their crime, among whom the *hypertimos* Psellus was the most honorable, who himself was also an enemy of Diogenes—having relegated Empress Eudocia to a monastery which she herself had built near the Propontid strait, they hail Michael as emperor.

XXVI. Having therefore been liberally educated from his youth, with a mind eager for the arts and learning, he reaped the fruits he sought from them—not brief and uncertain, but rich and timely. For he cultivated eloquence, which was then harsh and unrefined, and did not turn it to destruction or plague, but to salvation. In the end, he gathered the entire method of philosophizing, ^D and having tested his diligence as fruitful for himself and others, he pulled out the roots of evils; he discoursed most excellently and clearly concerning nature and hidden things, he revealed what is true and what is false in speech, and was a teacher of living and speaking to the supreme emperors. Indefatigable toward labors, he spent his time day and night either writing something or reading; nor had his strength withered, nor had his spirit failed. And since he considered that the best and most fruitful gift that can be offered to princes is that they be taught and educated, he strove with the greatest effort to instruct Michael Ducas and form him in good morals. In human life, what can one desire better or wish for as more excellent? The lust of princes must be curbed and their fury bridled, and we can achieve this by no other way than through doctrine and education. The ornament of man is talent, the light of talent is eloquence, the splendor of eloquence is philosophy, and the guide and mistress of philosophy is piety, which, unless it is bolstered by the warnings of teachers, falls into the darkness of ignorance and causes ruin.

XXVII. He could not, however, escape calumny. Zonaras, Book III of the Annals: Men were being oppressed and weighed down by hardships: and there was no one who took care of these things. For the Emperor, occupied with childish matters, seemed to be led into the study of letters by the prince of philosophers and most honorable Michael Psellus; and he was schooled now in the art of grammar, in verses, and in the differences of languages, now he was accustomed to rhetorical declamations, now to histories, now he was prepared for hearing philosophical precepts, although he was inept at all these things. Held fast by such studies, therefore, the Roman Emperor committed the administration of affairs to another, and to him alone, so that what seemed best to the Logothete should have the authority of law. And further down: However, with no one caring for the public good, for the Emperor was occupied with his studies and was being taught by Psellus to write iambics, a shortage of grain began to weigh upon the city. Thus, there is nothing so holy (n) that calumny dares not attempt it, and that which is worthy of praise, unexpectedly, the prince abandons, so that intent upon those things, he might leave the care of the empire to others.

fraudulently creeping in, I know not what criminal, he tears him apart. And a blind mob of men applauds as if at an oracle, a truly miserable and harsh condition for the most prudent of men. Under other emperors, too, with the Greek empire already aging and all branches of learning transformed into barbarism, when, alas, inertia stood for wisdom, he himself lived out his life very famous for his renown, pleasant to his friends, useful to the needy, and, in short, dear to everyone.

XXVIII. I would not, however, have undertaken the cause and defense of his faith, if the things which Joseph, Bishop of Methone, delivers in his apology against Mark of Ephesus are true. For he enumerates him among the schismatics Photius, Cabasilas, Palamas, Camaterus, Phurnius, Moschambarus, Bulgaria, Nicholas of Methone, and Panaretus, who by word and writing assailed the Latin Church. *And you indeed attached yourself, as you say, to your holy Fathers and teachers, Photius the first schismatic, or rather the author and creator of the schism and the division, to Cabasilas, Palamas, Camaterus, Phurnius, Psellus, Moschambarus, Bulgaria, Nicholas of Methone, Panaretus, and to the rest who, after the schism, spoke much contention against the Roman Church.* If, indeed, as you say, you joined yourself to your holy Fathers and teachers, to Photius the prince of schismatics, or rather truly the author and creator of the schism and discord: to Cabasilas, Camaterus, Phurnius, Psellus, Moschambarus, Bulgaria, Nicholas of Methone, Panaretus, and the others who, after the schism, inveighed with much contention against the Roman Church. Indeed, I have read the commentaries of Photius, Cabasilas, Palamas, Nicholas of Methone, and others against the Latin Church, which are most trifling, not without weariness and disgust. I have not to this day encountered a similar disputation of Psellus, and perhaps he did not write one. Nevertheless, let him go in his Exposition of the Faith to Michael Ducas; while he speaks words about the procession of the Holy Spirit, he asserts that It proceeds from the Father alone, by which very name his persistence in defending the opinions of the more recent Greeks, and his spirit for daring even more stubborn things, should the opportunity arise, becomes known. ^A

XXIX. Finally, now an old man, with Michael Ducas deposed, he himself also stripped of his dignities by Nicephorus Botaniates, putting on the monk’s habit, he was compelled to change his soil; and not long after, whether from old age or even from grief, he ended his life: and I conjecture this from the words of Anna Comnena, *Hist.* lib. v. But especially from these: “There also, after Psellus had departed from Byzantium, after he had tonsured his hair, he himself presides as teacher of all philosophy.” Where, when Psellus withdrew from Byzantium after clipping his hair, the Italian himself was created master of all philosophy. ^B

XXX. Whatever the case may be, however, he was adorned with the greatest praises, besides Anna Comnena, by Joannes Scylitza, and Cedrenus in the prologue of his History, *ὑπέρτιμος Ψελλός*, the most honored Psellus, and in [the work concerning] Comnenus, *Πολὺς τὴν γλῶτταν ὁ σοφώτατος Ψελλός*. Not having understood the force of the expression, the interpreter rendered it incorrectly as *verbosus* (wordy). Away with that most "wise" man; if he is wordy, the Greeks use the expression *πολύς* when they wish to point out someone admirable, not to be compared with the vulgar. Hence, you would very aptly say, and according to the norm of Attic eloquence, *Πολὺς τὰ θεῖα* (abundant in divine things) Gregory, excelling as holy. ^C *Πολὺς τὴν θείαν Γραφήν* (profound in Holy Scripture) Michael Ghislerius, most learned in the discipline of divine things, and most acute in talent and prudence in expounding the holy Scriptures. *Πολὺς τὴν φιλοσοφίαν* (proficient in philosophy) Fortunius Licetus. Concerning those who pertain to philosophy, he is most powerful, so that there are few who might be endowed with such gifts of philosophy. *Πολὺς τὰ μαθηματικά* (master of mathematics) Petrus Gassendus, ingenious in treating mathematical matters, and most skilled in unraveling their difficulties. *Πολὺς τὰ ἰατρικά* (master of medicine) Gabriel Naudæus, excessively powerful in medical matters, much practiced, exercised above most others, now imbued with excessive usage and liberally instructed. *Πολὺς τὴν παιδείαν* (learned) Nicolaus Villanus. Adorned with illustrious erudition and doctrine: never not sufficiently instructed in erudition and flourishing studies, great. *Πολὺς τὴν σοφίαν* (wise) Renatus Moreau, most approved in the most perfect discipline, and most instructed in whatever disciplines by an incredible magnitude of talent. *Πολὺς τὴν ἱστορίαν* (master of history) Jacobus Philippus Thomasinus, most illustrious for writing histories: in illustrating antiquity, he is exceedingly famous and singular by diligent study. *Πολὺς τὸν νοῦν* (deep of mind) Joannes Bourdelotius. Wise with a full chest: excellently bearing a mind fortified by wisdom; accomplishing all things considerately. ^D *Πολὺς τὴν ποίησιν* (master of poetry) Joannes Rhodius, miraculously versed in poetic studies; excited by a certain admirable zeal for poetry, he held a relationship with all the Muses most excellently. *Πολὺς τὴν ἀρετὴν, καὶ τὴν φρόνησιν* (great in virtue and prudence) Dominicus Molinus, most excellent in virtue itself. Does he not introduce that Ciceronian [ideal]? Such is the man, that no thing is so great and so difficult, which he might not be able to govern by counsel, protect by integrity, and accomplish by virtue: and similar things. Thus Psellus is said to be *πολὺς τὴν γλῶτταν*, as if you would say great, many-sided, admirable in speech, of singular eloquence. He is also heard everywhere as *Σοφώτατος*, most wise, both by Glycas in his *Annals* and by Metochites in his *History*. And those who have followed him, the writers have brightened their own Commentaries with his sentences no less than with the testimonies of other Fathers. Among others, the most prominent are Nicetas Serron, a most absolute *Catena* on the Gospel of Luke; Macarius Chrysocephalus in the Great *Alphabet*, where he interprets the Gospels most perfectly from the sayings of diverse Fathers; and Joannes Diaconus of the Great Church, in his Treatise: *Who is the goal of God for the first creation of man, and for the second re-creation through God.*

XXXI. We must meanwhile notice,

in the *Bibliotheca*, that Gesner argues quite ridiculously that Michael the Ephesian and Michael Psellus are the same person. For my part, the conjecture did once occur to me to consider Michael the Ephesian and Michael Psellus the same. For, besides sharing the same praenomen, it is established that both were of a later age, Christians, Peripatetics, and commentators on Aristotle. If many others of the same name, more recent, Christian, and Peripatetic, were to be considered Pselli because of this new mode of argumentation, it would be absurd. It is indeed true that both are of a later age, but whether they were both Christians, or equally Peripatetics, is doubtful; 22 it is absolutely certain they are not paraphrasts: unless we wish to confuse scholia and very short expositions of the text with a Paraphrase. Let the commentaries of both on Aristotle be compared; although they may agree in opinion on many points, they differ greatly in the mode and method of expounding Aristotle. Psellus reveals the meaning through a continuous paraphrase of the text, whereas the Ephesian devotes his efforts only to the more difficult parts, neglecting the clear and open parts that are obvious to everyone.

XXXII. But who is this Michael the Ephesian, who labored so much in unraveling Aristotle, even with published minor works, many have asked. But they have spent their efforts in vain. Where no trace of the thing appears, if the matter does not succeed for the hunter, he deserves praise for the attempt, not reproach because he did not find it. Nevertheless, while I also investigate everything, if I have caught a scent of anything, I will bring it forward until better things are produced by others. The similarity of the thoughts and of the explanations indicates sufficiently that these two authors were aided by one another, or that both were aided by another, and that the works of both flow from a single source. And since I do not possess information as to where Psellus drew his material, I at least believe—if my conjecture is worth anything—that the Ephesian drew his own from Psellus, either from his spoken word or his writings, though more probably from his spoken word, and that he is Michael Ducas Parapinaces, a disciple of Psellus. For this man, while he held the height of imperial power, was instructed by Psellus, and after Psellus was lost to him, he was carried off to Ephesus and consecrated as the prelate of that Church. Zonaras in *Botaniata*: "Michael, who had formerly been emperor, as it is said, crops his hair, and by the vote of the synod is ordained Metropolitan of Ephesus, and having journeyed there once, he returned, and made his dwelling in the monastery of Manuel." Michael, indeed, formerly emperor, with hair shorn, as has been said, is made Metropolitan of Ephesus by the suffrages of the council. And when he had once arrived there, he returned and lived his life in the monastery of Manuel. Constantinus Manasses: "And this, an old man, to a tender one, sends a young woman. But he, being burdened and growing indignant, sets him as shepherd of the city of the Ephesians." He joins to himself in matrimony the wife of the predecessor Michael, the old man to a tender and dedicated woman, while he himself is decrepit and destined for the grave, yet makes her, who was vigorous and youthful and who bore her lot with misery and annoyance, the shepherd of the Ephesian city. And Ephraem in his *Chronicle*: 23 "Michael becomes a wearer of black, then a chief priest, and presiding officer of Ephesus." Michael indeed, clothed in black garments, becomes prince of the sacrifices and prelate at Ephesus. In that leisure—if it is leisure to feed the flock of Christ—he wrote much on various disciplines; and I do not doubt that, as the Ephesian Michael, being more fond of quiet, mindful of the troubles, and not of the emperor, he desired—by the example also of other emperors—that these things should become known to men. Does it not please? Let the saying be unsaid: "Let this offspring return to me, its author."

XXXIII. Psellus, therefore, as he was most preeminent in doctrine, so he was polugraphōtatos (most prolific) of all. I would dare to say that no one, in that or the following age, either discovered things in Greek more sharply, or ordered them more aptly, or spoke more eloquently, or treated matters more profoundly. There was no branch of knowledge that he did not either illustrate with notes, or attempt in a compendium, or resolve by means of an excellent method. Of those things which he wrote and which have come to my knowledge, some have been published, and some are still unpublished; I shall first speak of those that are published. They are published:

XXXIV. Psellus's *On the regimen of diet, and on the faculties, and the quality of humors, of the elements*, two books to the emperor Constantine (p), in Latin, translated by Georgio Valla, together with Rhazes's *Book on Pestilence*, and Joannes Manardus Ferrariensis's *Exposition on the Art of Galen*. Basel, Andreas Cratander, year 1529, in 8vo.

XXXV. The same author’s *Iambics on vices and virtues*. Also, *Anagoges on Tantalus, The Allegory on the Sphinx, Anagogue on Circe*, who wished to transform Ulysses, which Arsenius, Bishop of Monemvasia, first published at Rome (q). Afterwards, restored and interpolated in many places by Conrad Gesner, Joannes Oporinus (r) published it at Basel in the year 1544, in 8vo, together with Heraclides Ponticus's *Allegories on the fables of Homer concerning the gods*, on which see below under Joannes Psellus § 49, 56, 80. It should be noted also in passing that those poems which Federicus Morellus [published] at Paris in the year 1608, in 8vo, [index: entries preserved]

^A together with Theodorus Prodromus's dissertation on Wisdom, he edited as excerpts in Greek, with only a few words changed, from Psellus's iambic poems. Morellus had published them under the name of 'Anonymous' as *Iambic Ethopoeiae* (Character Sketches). Nothing of the sort. Except for the *Phronesis* (Wisdom), the rest are on philosophy, rhetoric, and grammar, which, as to how much they pertain to manners, let others judge.

XXXVI. His paraphrase on Aristotle’s book *Peri hermeneias* (*De interpretatione*), Aldus published in Greek at Venice, with Ammonius and Magentinus, in 1503, in folio; Robert Winter published it in Latin translation [s], along with the same Psellus’s compendium on the five Porphyrian terms and Aristotle’s *Categories*, at Basel in 1542, in 8vo. This latter had first been edited in Greek at Paris in 1540, along with his *Introduction to the Six Modes of Philosophy*, and in 1541, in 12mo. It was translated into Latin in the same place by Jacobus Foscarenum, son of Michael. In another manuscript codex, the title of the Paraphrase is headed thus: *Paraphrasis tou Peri hermeneias, apo phones tou kyriou Bestarchou kai hypatou ton philosophon tou Psellou*. Paraphrase on the book *De interpretatione*, from the mouth of the lord Bestarch and prince of philosophers, Psellus. From this we conclude that he was honored with the dignity of Bestarch, from which title, later, the name of that most noble family was derived.

XXXVII. His book [t] on the four mathematical sciences—arithmetic, music, geometry—edited in Greek and Latin with other authors at Wittenberg in 1560, and also at Basel by Joannes Oporinus in 1556, in 8vo, by the interpreter Guilielmus Xylander of Augsburg, with some annotations of the same Xylander on the same [book]. To this were added Xylander’s poem on philosophy and its parts, and some other poems of various subject matter. Arsenius, bishop of Monemvasia, first saw to the printing of this work in Greek at Rome, in which edition he had written that it was uncertain whether it was the work of Psellus or of a certain Euthymius 25, though it seemed to most to be Psellus's. "And these things [he offers] to the father of this [work], whether it was Psellus, as it seems to most, or Euthymius." It was also printed [u] at Paris in Greek in 1545, in 12mo, by Jacobus Bogardus. Not long after, Elias Vinetus, who was the first to render it into Latin—a thing no one had done before him—in the year 1553, ^B saw to its publication at Paris in the year 1557; however, he omitted the final part, which is on astrology, both because it required those ancient Greek tables, the ratios of which did not sufficiently agree with his own times, and because it was corrupt, apart from other reasons, and as he himself declares, he could not yet explain it to his own satisfaction; in its place he substituted Proclus’s *Sphere*. This same work was edited from Vinetus’s interpretation at Tournon by Claudius Michael, in the year 1592. After Vinetus, Xylander set about his own interpretation.

XXXVIII. His treatise *Peri chrysopoiias* (*On the Method of Making Gold*), addressed to Michael Cerularius, Patriarch of Constantinople, translated by Dominicus Pizimentius of Vibo, along with Democritus of Abdera, Synesius, Pelagius, and Stephanus of Alexandria on the great and sacred art, was edited at Padua at the house of Simon Galignanus in 1572, in 8vo. The said authors, along with many others on the same art—among whom the chief are Zosimus, Olympiodorus the Christian, and Heliodorus in verse, Hierotheus, Theophrastus, Archelaus, and others not to be despised—will comprise one volume of various ancients in the Latin language, and in Greek and Latin, along with our own tracts on the same subject, if the Muses are not always contrary to my studies, [a volume] which will not be unpleasant for those devoted to the chemical art. It must also be noted that Pizimentius incorrectly attributed the letter of Psellus to Xiphilinus [v], who was called Joannes, not Michael, unless we wish to say that Psellus sold the same treatise to many friends while changing only the name, which was also common among others. And so that I do not waste time by recounting others, it will suffice for me to bring forward just one 26, which, because of the dignity of the author, will seem strange to some. For who would believe that Isocrates, that guiding spirit of orators and rhetoricians, as if destitute of subject matter, and so unskilled in the poverty of his art, would have inscribed one and the same oration—with his name alone changed to the one to whom he had directed it, and a few others—with a rare example, to several people? Although the books of the rhetoricians published to this day are silent on this, perhaps out of reverence for such a great master, the contemporary author of the letter to King Philip did not keep silent. I include the passage here the more willingly because it is most beautiful, and rare [x], and not observed, so far as I know. "Likewise also Isocrates..."

[NOTES] [s] The Latin version of Psellus’s paraphrase on the book *Peri hermeneias*, by the efforts of certain friends of Nic. Martimbosius, appeared at Paris in 1339, in 4to. Labbeus also mentions the Venetian edition of 1541, in folio, and the Basel edition of 1542. There also exists an introduction by Psellus to the six modes of philosophy and a compendium of the five terms of Porphyry and of the ten categories, Venice, 1532, with the version of Jacobus Foscarenum. [t] Psellus testifies that he wrote this book (in which many things were culled from Theon) in the year of the Greeks 6516, that is, 1008 of Christ. [u] It also [occurs] at Venice in the year 1532, in 8vo, which Greek edition is found at Rome in the Barberini library. The Latin interpretation by Xylander, however, was reprinted at Leiden in 1647, in 8vo. Lampertus Alardus, with his own Latin interpretation, appended Psellus’s booklet on Music from this *Tetrabiblos* to his own book on the music of the ancients, Schleusingen, 1636, in 12mo. [v] Also in the royal Greek codex at Paris, an apograph of which I possess through the kindness of the illustrious Paul Vindingius, the name of Xiphilinus exists: *Tou makariou kai pansophou Psellou epistole pros ton agiotaton patriarchin Xiphilinon peri chrysopoiias*. But in the Vienna codex it is directed to Michael (Cerularius): *tou logotatou kai pansophou ypertimou kyrou Michael tou Psellou peri chrysopoiias pros ton patriarchin kyrion Michael*. p. 66.

^A The work *On the operation of demons* was translated from Greek into Latin by Peter Morel of Tours, and published in Latin with a preface by François Feuardent in Paris by Guillaume Chaudière in 1577, 8vo, and in the year 1615. Gilbert Gaulmin first edited it in Greek (from two manuscripts, his own and Morel’s) for the Parisians in Lutetia, illustrated with his own notes, together with the Latin interpretation of the same Morel. Furthermore, many excerpts from that same Dialogue, rendered into Latin for John de' Medici, along with others from Jamblichus, Proclus, and Porphyry, had been dedicated by Marsilio Ficino. Gesner left a writing stating that Psellus had written two books on Demons, which Diego Hurtado possessed in Venice, and they were printed in Latin at the Aldine press. I say nothing of Hurtado. As for the Aldine press, it is false that these two books on demons were printed there, since that edition contains nothing other than those Ficinian excerpts, ^B which were frequently published in many places, in the same order and arrangement. Gaulmin conjectures from the words of Psellus himself at the end of the dialogue on demons that he wrote two books. This escaped the translators Morel and Ficino, precisely because in the excerpts from Psellus, which are published along with excerpts from Jamblichus, Proclus, and Porphyry, he brings forward, in the last chapter, things that seem to be taken from that second book, if it exists. A fine conjecture, and consistent with the truth; for the contents of that chapter, as can be manifest to the reader, are not contained in this Dialogue, so they must necessarily have been taken from another book. There are, however, not to detain you longer, reader, from a treatise by the same Psellus on this same matter, under this title, *Τίνα περὶ δαιμόνων δοξάζουσιν Ἕλληνες·* (What the opinions of the Greeks are concerning demons), the beginning of which is: *Ὁ μὲν ἡμέτερος λόγος προαιρέσεις καὶ τοῖς ἀγγέλοις διδούς*. Whether this is the same as the second book of Hurtado, I would not venture to affirm: and especially with this writer, who did not lack powers of eloquence, ^C nor an abundance of arguments with which he would treat the same subject not once, but several times; as can be seen in other works written by him. Furthermore, others attribute these two books on demons to Michael of Ephesus, as Possevinus writes in his *Apparatus*. Their Latin translation is read in Codex 3122 in the Vatican manuscript, and excerpts on demons from Psellus by Giovanni Giacomo Bartolotti of Parma, physicist, in codex 5376. See also what we have said above [(b)].

XXXIX. The same author’s *On the operation of demons*. XL. The same author’s *Exposition on the Chaldean Oracles* [(c)].

^A And of this work, Nicephorus Gregoras, the orator of the emperor to the Venetians, reports in his Commentaries on Synesius’ *Treatise on Dreams* that Gesner, in his work on Michael Psellus, and Possevinus in his *Apparatus*, transcribed it word for word without mentioning Psellus’ name. It is also manifest from the same sources that he wrote on other books of Aristotle, namely the *Epitome of Aristotelian Philosophy on Generation and Corruption*, and *On Meteors*. Also an *Exposition on the Metaphysics of Aristotle*. And there lie hidden, as Andreas Schottus writes in his Preface to the *Song of Songs*, many of Psellus’ works on this same *Physics* of Aristotle and his *First Philosophy*, in the library of the Emperor Augustus in Vienna. Furthermore, the *Brief Declaration of Chaldean Dogmas* (d) was first edited in Greek and Latin by Francesco Patricio in *Nova Philosophia de Universis* (e) on Zoroaster, yet imperfectly and confusedly, since he concludes both commentaries with the same opinion, for he thus closes: "Most of these dogmas both Aristotle and Plato accepted; but those who followed Plotinus, Porphyry, Jamblichus, and Proclus accepted everything, and received these things as divine voices without syllogizing." However, both Aristotle and Plato accepted many of these dogmas; but Plotinus, Porphyry, Jamblichus, and Proclus are of all ages, ^B and they accepted them as divine voices. Patricius observes regarding Psellus: "Psellus later handed down things similar to these; I wish it had been as prolixly and also as diligently; but whatever be their quality, they will not be useless to know." Nor should we pass over in silence [29] the fact that the first *Exposition of the Chaldean Oracles* is ascribed by others to Proclus Lycius (f), for it is so noted by its transcriber in the Vatican codex 572: *Alibi inveni, Procli Lydii Hypotyposis*. Elsewhere I found: *Hypotyposis of Proclus Lycius*. Nor do I doubt that Proclus, being much addicted to these matters, composed a little book on this same subject. But whether the little work be by Proclus or by Psellus, it will profit no good man to know. I think the same thing is in the library of the Queen of France, which formerly belonged to Joannes Lascaris, later to Petrus Strozza, but firstly to Cardinal Rodolphus, as Draudius writes in his *Bibliotheca classica*. Nor does it seem to be any other than that which was held in the library of Antonius Augustinus, codex 219, Psellus’ *Explanation of Dogmas among the Assyrians*. It was afterwards published more fully at Paris, along with the Sibylline Oracles and others, by the efforts of Joannes Obsopæus (g) in 1599, in 8vo. A manuscript Latin translation of these same opuscula, different from the published one, is held in the Vatican codex 3122, by an uncertain author.

XLI. The same author’s Commentaries (h) on the eight books of Aristotle’s *Physics*, from the translation of Joannes Baptista Camotius, consecrated to Cardinal Hercules Gonzaga, were edited in Latin at Venice by Federicus Turrisanus in 1554, in folio. That they existed in manuscript in Greek in the library of Didacus Hur-

XLII. The same author’s book *On the Faculties of the Soul* (Περὶ δυνάμεων τῆς ψυχῆς), of which this is the beginning: "That of the faculties of the soul, some are irrational," edited under an anonymous name and the title *Famous Opinions on the Soul* (Δόξαι περὶ ψυχῆς), as if it were from a longer and more perfect book of *Selections and Chrestomathy* [30], has been translated into Latin by Joannes Tarinus Andegavus, and edited in Greek and Latin along with Origen’s *Philocalia*; Zacharias Scholasticus, bishop of Mitylene, *On the Creation of the World*; and Anastasius Sinaita, *On the Creation of Man according to the Image and Likeness of God*, Lutetia Parisiorum, by Sebastian Cramoisy 1624, 4to. ^C Ancient manuscript codices vindicate it for Psellus, and it is not far from the structure of Psellian oratory. And if I am not mistaken, it is the very one they attribute to Psellus, *On the Soul according to the Various Opinions of Philosophers*, in the Augustan library, in closet II. The Augustan Index and in the library of the Emperor in Vienna, Spachius. Nor is it perhaps any other that is read in the library of the King of the French, Psellus’ *On the Soul*.

XLIII. The same author’s Annotations on some passages of Gregory Nazianzen, along with those of Elias of Crete, bishop, and others, were made Latin by the study and labor of Jacobus Billius and have been published many times with the works of Gregory Nazianzen.

XLIV. The same author’s Panegyrical oration on Simeon Metaphrastes, edited (i) in Latin by Surius on November 27. It exists in a Greek manuscript in the Vatican codex 568, which begins: *Τὸν μέγαν ἐν βίῳ καὶ λόγῳ Συμεὼν, ἐπαινεῖν προελόμενοι*, with others by the same Psellus on the same subject, which we shall note not much further down.

XLV. The same author’s poems (j) on the *Song of Songs* were translated by Franciscus Zinus Veronen-

NOTES

[é dited along with the interpretations of Theodoret, Maximus, and Nilus, Rome 1563, folio; separately at Venice, by Hieronymus Polus, 1573, in quarto; and frequently with the works of Theodoret. Finally, at Antwerp, with the *Catena Patrum* and the *Thaumaturge on Ecclesiastes*, by Peltanus, at the press of Caspar Bellerus, 1615, in octavo. In this edition, Andreas Schottus first translated the first chapter into Latin, using Zinus’s interpretation for the rest. The little work is inscribed to Nicephorus Botaniates, the Constantinopolitan emperor, whom he calls ^A *stephanophoros*, that is, one who wears a crown, meaning an emperor—just as he was accustomed in other 31 minor works to address other emperors, whatever others may dream. Joannes Meursius was the first to bring it out of the shadows and publish it in Greek, along with the expositions of Polychronius, Eusebius, and others on these same Canticles, Leiden, 1617, in quarto. Martinus Deltius, in his *Isagoge into the Canticle of Canticles*, chapter 5, reports that Psellus is deficient in that exposition, being, as he himself says, a too concise abbreviator: and he is deceived far too carelessly while saying that Psellus is cited by Theodoret, treating the most recent author as if he were the most ancient, even though he wrote only about eight hundred years later. There is also a commentary on the Canticles from three Fathers, collected by the same Psellus, if the Bavarian index codex 99 is not misleading, which has been published in Latin quite often with Theodoret. Behold the words of the index: "Item, a commentary from three Fathers, Gregory of Nyssa, Nilus, and Maximus, with Psellus as collector."

XLVII. Certain theological chapters by the same author to the emperor Michael [(k)], concerning the Trinity and the person of Christ, in Greek and Latin, with notes by Joannes Wegelinus. Augsburg, by Georgius Viller and Sebastianus Mylius, 1608, in octavo.

XLVII. Philippus Jacobus Maussacus [(l)] was the first to publish, translate into Latin, and emend the same author’s little work *On the Virtues of Stones*; it was published in Toulouse in Greek and Latin in the year 1615, in octavo. But this little work was rendered into Latin and Italian before Maussacus by Adrianus Spigelius, philosopher and physician and anatomist of the Gymnasium of Padua, and it is preserved to this day at the house of Liberalis Crema, a most excellent philosopher and physician of Treviso, in his own letter ^B attached to it.

XLVIII. The same author’s *Synopsis of Laws* was edited in iambic and political verses in Greek, and illustrated with a Latin interpretation and notes, through the work and study of Franciscus Bosquetus of Narbonne, from the library of the Archbishop of Toulouse, Paris, at the press of Joannes Cainusat, 1622, in octavo. In some 32 codices it is inscribed [(n)] to the emperor Michael Ducas. Another Vatican codex, as the same Bosquetus notes, has "Alexius," and: *The most wise Psellus on the laws to the King Lord Alexius*. And the old Sirmondian codex has "Nicephorus": *Beginning with God of the political verses of the law set forth by the Lord Michael Psellus, to the Porphyrogennetos Lord Nicephorus. Being unwilling to attend to the studies of the law because of the sea of its depth.* The title, or the Porphyrogennetos cognomen attached to Nicephorus Botaniates, is suspect. I do not doubt, however, that he inscribed the little work—so necessary to those bearing the sum of affairs—to different emperors as the occasion arose, so that they might, if they wished, run through the principal rules of Law, treated in summary from the very fountains of all Law, and smoothed over by the charm of verse, without the tedium of longer reading, as we said above regarding his *Chrysopoeia*. Some of these were formerly published under the name of scholia by Leunclavius in Volume II of the *Jus Græco-Romanum*. In Michael Attaliota’s *Synopsis of Laws*, titles especially 16, 25, 28, 32, 37, 40, 42, 48, 83. The one who published this, not having noticed the number of the verses, printed it indistinctly as prose.

XLIX. The same author’s political poems to the same [(o)] Michael Ducas, *On Doctrine*, were edited in Greek by the same Bosquetus with the *Synopsis of Laws*, received from Jacobus Sirmondus, from which is read a *Treatise on the Seven Holy Ecumenical Synods*, [(p)] edited in Latin in Volume III of the Councils, part one, p. 400.

NOTES. [...] collected by the same, as they claim, Psellus, from Gregory of Nyssa, St. Nilus, and Maximus. (k) In the Catalogue of the Barberini Library, Vol. II, page 253, it is wrongly attributed to M. Comnenus. The reader will find these theological chapters in their more complete form at the end of this Allatian little work. (l) Maussacus added this to the little work of Psellus *on rivers*, testifying that he was publishing it from a transcript of Jacobus Sirmondus, in a dedicatory epistle to Gaulminus. (m) Justus Rycquius, in an epistle to M. Velserus dated at Rome, 1610: "To me, recently exploring the Saregic library, certain Greek minor works written out by hand have come into my hands. One hundred epistles of Maximus Planudes and certain famous men. Psellus on the virtues of gems. Iambic verses of an unknown author (commonly attributed to Empedocles) on the sphere of the fixed stars, emended by Demetrius Triclinius. Certain *parecbolae* of those things which are missing in the printed codices of Athenaeus. A commentary of an unknown author on Aristotle’s book *On Colors*. A book of Canicleus ^C against Plotinus, perhaps by the same author whose writing *On the Immortality of the Soul* Cardanus praises in his book *De rerum varietate* as an unpublished work. A summary of Sallust the philosopher on the Homeric problems of Heraclitus. Excerpts from the Monody of Gemistus Plethon, *on the immortality of the soul*. The same author’s defense of Aristotle against the *scholarios*. Michael Apostolis’s book for Plethon, *on the Aristotelian substance*, against Gaza. Little works of Demetrius Triclinius on political meters. You will judge, I pray, whether anything is worthy of cedar and pumice. So he." (n) Thus also in the Vienna Codex, which Lambecius and Nesselius mention in part II, p. 28, and in another codex from which Allatius produced several verses before Bosquetus’s edition, at Eustathius’s *Hexaemeron* p. 280. (o) In the Imperial ms., inscribed to Constantine Monomachus. See Lambecius, VI, p. 163. (p) It is completed entirely by 71 political verses.

^A Cologne, 1606, through the industry of Severinus Binius; and in Greek under the name of John Psellus, with the verses of Theodorus Prodromus and Nicephorus Callistus, at Basel, by Joannes Bebelius, 1536, 8vo. John Tilius of Angoulême also attributes this to John in his *Decretis* of the apostles and holy councils, printed at Paris by Conradus Neobarius, 1540. Franciscus Feuardentius wrote on this same treatise; and Bellarmine claims that Psellus hallucinated in it regarding the time when the first Constantinopolitan council was celebrated, which was the second of the first four; and in the Ephesian, which was the third (Tom. I, Controvers. 4, de Conciliis, cap. 5).

L. Bosquetus edited the poems of the same author on the Nomocanon in Greek along with the previous works, but since they are quite relaxed, I strongly doubted they were his; nor did my mind deceive me, for in another manuscript codex they are attributed to Constantine Psellus. "By Constantine, Proedros and consul of the philosophers, Psellus, on the subject of the Nomocanon." In the library of Antonius Augustinus, codex 151 and 175, they are also attributed to the same Constantine Psellus. But it does not seem worth the time to dwell longer on searching for the author of whose work it is.

^B LI. Under his name is distributed a *Syntagma* (selected from medical books, regarding the power of foods, and their utility and harm), concerning the faculty, utility, and harm of foods, collected from medical books, for Constantine Monomachus, arranged by the order of letters, whose beginning is: "O wisest and most learned." This is attributed to Simeon Seth, the teacher from Antioch, and rendered into Latin by Gyraldus; it was published in Greek and Latin by Isingrinius at Basel in 8vo, 1538. Since, however, not only the sentiments but the very words themselves are found repeated in both, I think that Simeon added some things to the *Collectanea* of Psellus which he had noticed while reading, or perhaps a third party compiled it from both, which can be gathered from a manuscript index: "A *Syntagma* concerning the powers of foods by Psellus and Simeon the Magistrate." For I cannot be brought to believe that Psellus borrowed his own work from Seth, the more erudite and eloquent from the less erudite and eloquent. For we strive for our work to emerge better, not worse, than the labors of others. And Psellus, if he were cloaked in those Sethian writings as if in borrowed plumage, would have tarnished his own most brilliant works. Gyraldus also saw this, and in a dedicatory epistle he indicated all things to Constantine, whom I suppose to be the parent of Michael Ducas, concerning whom Michael Psellus had written a book before, a copy of which is with Meletius, a writer on all medicine, not in the same manner of argument, but sometimes using almost the same words. I, having translated this Simeon, although it is corrupt and mangled in many places, into Latin too, and having been aided primarily by Psellus’s own little book, and then by a second copy of it translated very poorly into Latin by Georgius Valla, and to you in every medical faculty, etc. Everything is correct, if you except the point that Constantine Monomachus was the parent of Michael Ducas, since he is entirely different from the Constantine Ducas who was Michael’s parent.

^C LII. I see that the book *On Gout* (Περὶ ποδάγρας) is attributed in some codices to the same Psellus, the beginning of which is: "Since the most excellent and holy one has decided regarding me," composed in forty-six chapters; which, since it is directed to the Palaiologoi, by whose command it had been written, unless we wish to imagine another Psellus to whom it might be attributed, certainly it is not by Psellus. The author lived in the time of Michael Palaiologos, whose care for his health he mentions, as he confesses himself: "Since, therefore, the most divine king has commanded me, and I am one of his physicians, and knowing his nature, his temperament, and his condition as far as possible, because I have not been with him for a short time, I now write, obeying his command, concerning those things that belong to my own ability." ^D Whence, therefore, the most holy king has commanded this to me, and since I am one of his physicians, I therefore know his nature and temperament, especially since I have spent a long time with him, I begin to treat of this disease, for the sake of the knowledge I possess, so that I may obey his command. And if you consider the matters treated therein, the knot, and the form of speaking, other things are far removed from the Psellian method of speaking and treating. I later saw it published in Latin under the name "Anonymous" by Henricus Stephanus, among medical authors, Vol. II, from the version of Marcus Musurus for Scara Trivultius, whose judgment concerning it is this: "That just as the author, whoever he may be who published these, was infant and tongueless, as one who did not know if he had learned anything by art or had learned it by experience, to express, etc." And a few years ago, it was published in Greek at Paris in 8vo, 1558, by Guilielmus Morelius, attributed to Demetrius Pepagomenos; and separately in Latin from the interpretation of a certain most learned man, whom he himself does not name. But indeed, since it is attributed to Psellus in many places, although it is not his, it holds a place among other published monuments of Psellus.

LIII. And these are the Psellian works that I have chanced to see published ^A. Whether there be others as well, I do not yet know. You should know, reader, that there are also other editions of some of these works, which I have willingly and gladly omitted. Let it suffice to have mentioned the principal ones. Would that others, which still lie hidden, might experience the same good fortune as these! But since the wickedness of the most evil men will not allow this to happen, behold, I here append a catalogue of some still inedited works, of which I retain a memory, and I will disclose, as far as they are said to be, the location, so that, if the opportunity should one day be given, you might be able to acquire such great treasures. And I shall praise the authors, so that the source from which I have this may be known to you, and if any fraud is detected, you will have those to whom you may refer the crime. Concerning these, I do not promise you an exact judgment or a certain narration, since they were not at hand. This is certain: that among these, some are repeated twice or thrice, and some have even been printed. However, because from the mere knowledge of the title, and that a varied one, we cannot pass judgment on the whole treatise and distinguish one from another, just as we find in others, ^B so we give them to you, passing over those that are certainly published, so let it be:

LIV. Psellus’ book *Contra Eunomium*, preserved at Rome in the Vatican: Gesner in the *Bibliotheca*; Gilbert Gaulmin [in] notes to the same *Περὶ ἐνεργείας Δαιμόνων* (On the operation of demons); and Francis Feuardent in the preface to the interpretation by Peter Morell of the same little book *De dæmonibus*. Scholia by the same on a certain statement of Basil, Rome; Gesner in the same place. *Epitome of the books of Moses* in 4 [folios], manuscript in the Imperial Library at Vienna: Gesner.

*Dioptra*, that is, *Perspectiva*, containing four discourses in which the soul and body argue, in the Augustan library: Gesner [36] and the Augustan index: Plut. 6, num. 12. Whether this is the same as the *Dioptra* of Philip the Solitary, now published in Latin, I cannot divine; and perhaps the index’s author, deceived by the name of the preface-writer Psellus, has quite imprudently attributed the entire *Dioptra* work, taken away from its true writer Philip, to Psellus. Yet it appears to be Philip’s, since Jacob Pontanus published it in Latin at Ingolstadt, from the press of Adam Sartorius, 1604, in 4, having taken it from the Augustan library, along with Cabasilas, Philotheos, John Carpathios, and Glycas.

^C LV. *Theological Questions with answers, to Michael Doukas*, in which are also contained things pertaining to physiology, folio, in the Augustan library, in cabinet VI. The Augustan manuscript index also holds the same index: *Pselli ad Michaelem Commenum varia capita theologica*: *Περὶ ἐνυποστάτου* (On the enypostatic), on the soul, on the virtues, and physics on the senses; on the similitude and dissimilitude of children with parents; on the embryo; on dreams; on celestial circles; on meteors; on the lunar eclipse; on solar heat; on the stars; on the Dioscuri; on rain, hail, snow, frost, dew; on the typhoon and squalls, on lightning; on the parts of the world; on earthquakes; on storms; on the saltiness of the sea; on showers; on rivers; on the light of the stars; what is necessity, contingence, time, matter, form, element? What is an encyclopedia? On the inventors of letters; on the Amazons; on the names of measures; on the beginnings of circles; what the heaven, sea, and sun possess; on the triple rising of the sun, and on fire fallen from heaven at the prayers of philosophers; on Potidaea, Arcadia; and on Aristotle, Cleanthes, Anaxagoras; on Euboea, Sicily. Gesner likewise, *On the faith by the same to Michael Doukas*, joined with his *Epitome of Aristotelian philosophy*, which is physics, on generation and corruption, on meteors, with a supplement by Gregory of Nyssa to his brother Peter in 4, manuscript of the Imperial Library of Vienna. Israel Spachius also has the same in his *Nomenclator* of philosophical and philological writers. Likewise, at Rome in the Sancto-Silvestrina library on the Quirinal Hill, there is this same book of his in manuscript in Greek, which I have seen; the title was: *Ψελλοῦ πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα κύριον Μιχαὴλ τὸν Δοῦκαν* (Psellus to the Emperor lord Michael Doukas); the chapters were: 1'. *Ὁμολογία τῆς πίστεως* (Confession of faith). 2'. *Περὶ ὀνομάτων τινῶν λεγομένων ἐν τῷ τῶν Χριστιανῶν δόγματι* (On certain names used in Christian dogma). 3'. *Περὶ ἐνυποστάτων* (On the enypostatic). 4'. *Περὶ Ὁμοουσίου* (On the Homousion). 5'. *Περὶ Ὁμοϋποστάτου* (On the Homohypostatic). 6'. *Περὶ οὐσιώδους ἑνώσεως, καὶ διαφορᾶς* (On essential union, and difference). 7'. *Περὶ ὑποστατικῆς ἑνώσεως, καὶ διαφορᾶς* (On hypostatic union, and difference). 8'. *Περὶ σχετικῆς ἑνώσεως* (On relative union). 9'. *Περὶ τῆς ἁγίας Τριάδος* (On the holy Trinity). 10'. *Περὶ τρόπου τῆς ἀντιδόσεως* (On the mode of the communication). 11'. *Περὶ θείας ἑνώσεως* (On divine union). 12'. *Περὶ φύσεως* (On nature). 1. Confession of faith. 2. On certain names used in Christian dogma. 3. De enypostasibus. 4. De Homousio. 6. De essentiali unione, et differentia. 7. De hypostatica unione, et differentia. ^D 8. De relativa unione. 9. De sancta Triade. 10. De modo retributionis. 11. De divina unione. 12. De idiomatum.

Whether all these are one work, or diverse, those who read will judge. I myself believe it to be one, yet contained more abundantly in one codex; but that out of all of them one work could be fashioned, perfect and absolute in all its parts. This is a task that should not be altogether despised by learned men. Consult also what we shall say below concerning this same work: incidentally, however, here I shall note that the title of the second Augustan manuscript does not lack the mark of falsity, which foists upon us a Michael Comnenus instead of a Michael Ducas, on whose authority Woehelinus, deceived, retained it in his edition, and in the notes relates with a strange ignorance that Michael, son of Constantine Ducas, was among the Comneni, although he should have been entirely changed, while other codices—which all with one voice propose Michael Ducas, to whom he dedicated those chapters—protested. Marquard Freher in his *Chronology of Both Empires*: Michael Psellus wrote to Michael Ducas, who was most learned at that age in law and philosophy and [the most] writer-like [ἀνιστορήτως?], a *Synopsis of Laws* in political verses; it exists in MS in the Palatine and Constantinopolitan libraries. The same Psellus's responses to this Ducas concerning diverse theological questions and general doctrine, comprised in 194 chapters, are in the Palatine library. These codices, just like the remaining Greek and Latin manuscripts of that most famous library, are preserved by my labors (a) and vigils, whole and unharmed, in the Vatican. Which is surely worthy of all admiration, and to be ascribed to the gift of the highest God, that on such a vast journey, in most savage weather, in winter storm and rain, with a shortage of all things, through towns and enemy territories, such a number of books was brought to Rome unhurt and whole, so that not even a single slip of paper was lost. But to Psellus.

LVI. Certain short works *On the Passion and Burial of Christ*; a booklet called *Antichrist*; *On Paradise*; *On the Nativity of Christ*, in 4to, in the imperial library of Vienna, Gesner, Possevinus. [38] *On the Crucifixion of the Lord* (Εἰς τὴν σταύρωσιν τοῦ Κυρίου), in the library of Cardinal Columna. Gretser [in his] notes on the oration of Macarius Chrysocephalus on the exaltation of the holy Cross, vol. II, on the Cross. It is not established whether the enlarger of the Gesnerian library understands this one [to be] by George, Archbishop of Nicomedia *On the Cross*, which some falsely ascribed to Psellus, Greek MS in 4to, in the imperial library of Vienna. A compendious exposition on the books of Aristotle *On Natural Listening*, exists in the library of Didacus Hurtadus. Gesner. In the Bavarian library codex... ^A Vienna, Israel Spachius. *Synopsis of the Logic of Aristotle*, in 4to, in the Augustan library, in cabinet no. 5. Augustan Index. *Interpretations of Natural Doubts*, ^B in the imperial library of Vienna, in 4to, Gesner, and Israel Spachius: *Solution of one and another astrological question*, Augustan library, in 4to, in cabinet, Augustan Index MS.

LVII. Among the books which Joseph Scaliger bequeathed to the Leiden library, in the index of Greek manuscripts in-folio, is read, along with Hero’s *Geometry*, certain astrological [works] by Psellus. Are these the same, or different from the previous ones, we cannot divine. Are they perhaps also those which are contained under that booklet on the four mathematical sciences? But I suspend judgment. *Mathematical Exposition on Plato’s Timaeus, on the generation of the soul, or [its] essence*, in folio, Augustan library, Augustan Index MS. Is it the same as *Psychogonia*?

[39] *Greek work from medical books, in alphabetical order*, at Rome in the Vatican. Gesner, Paschalis Gallus, and Joannes Georgius Schenckius in the Medical library. *Useful Ecloga from the book of Parallels*. In the same place. Gesner and Spachius. *Diverse Encomia*. In the same place, Gesner. *Monody*, at Rome, in the Vatican, Gesner. *Explication on the book of Dioscorides*, in the library of Manuel Eugenicus and Joannes Suzius. Antonius Verderius in the *Supplement*, and Schenckius in the Medical library. *Enigmas*, in the Bavarian library, cod. 38.

LVIII. Meursius maintains that Psellus wrote a work of *Histories*, and that it is praised by Zonaras vol. III. In [the life of] Isaac Comnenus, and in [that of] Romanus Diogenes; likewise by Theodorus Metochita in ^C *Sacred History* bk. II. Cedrenus, Joannes Curopalata in the beginning of his *History*, Michael Glycas in his *Annals* once and again. It was also in the catalogue exhibited by the grammarian ^D, in Antoninus Verderius in the supplement.

NOTES. (a) Concerning the Palatine codices which Emperor Ferdinand II donated to Pope Gregory XV, transferred to the Vatican library in the year 1623, Allatius boasts passim, as in [his work on] Eustathius of Antioch in the preface and in the notes p. 151, and in the *Animadversions on Etruscan Antiquities*, p. 58.

Gaulminus has this to say concerning the writings of Psellus: There is another [work] of his, which is certain to exist both in the royal library and in the Vatican; namely, his *Psychogonia* of Plato, an epitome of medicine, a commentary on the *Categories* and *Metaphysics* of Aristotle, a work *On Interpretation*, Porphyry's *Five Voices*, one book *Against Eunomius*, two books *On Laws*, a *Monodia*, and various *Encomia*. Casaubon, in his *Athenaeus*, also praises his elegant epistles in the adage "to let out smoke."

LIX. Antonius Verderius enumerates still more in his *Supplement to the Bibliotheca Gesneriana*, derived from the libraries of Constantinople. For among other items in the possession of Joannes Suzius was Michael Psellus’s *Explanation of the Psalter of David*, and his [work] *On Gregory Nazianzen*. In a catalogue provided by a grammarian, there appears a medical work by Michael Psellus; a philosophical book; *On the Philosophical Works of Aristotle*; an astronomical work; an *Explanation of Mystic Philosophy*; *On the Five Voices of Porphyry*; *On the Topography of Strabo and Ptolemy*; *On Arithmetic*; *On Galen’s Explanation of the Four Books of Hippocratic Resolutions*; and—O treasures!—twenty-three comedies of Menander, explained by Michael Psellus. In the library of the Most Christian King: *On the Sophistical Elenchi*; *Scholia on Definitions*; *On the Motion of Time*; *On the Circle of the Sun and Moon*; *On the Invention of the Day of Easter*; *On Angels and Demons*; *On New Names for Diseases*; *On the Signs of Spirits*; *On the Division of Animals*; *On the Angelic Salutation*; and *On the Physics of Aristotle*, besides many other things which we have mentioned above. Below we shall also review several others. And in the library of Ansonius Augustinus there is Psellus’s *Apophthegms*, codex 227; a mathematical explanation of the speculation in Plato’s *Timaeus*; a complete narration on the *Lemma*; an explanation of the Platonic "charioteering" of souls and of the "militia of the gods" in the *Phaedrus*; and an explanation of a difficult crux, [concerning] how from five a sextuple is derived, and [that] regarding the five figures no other figure can be established contained under equilateral and rectangular figures equal among themselves, codex 191.

LX. These, reader, are the monuments of Psellus which, as it seems to me, lie hidden until now in those libraries, which you can not only see, but also—if I may use the expression—exploit; for you will exploit them, provided that, given the abundance of opportunity to compare, interpret, and publish, you yourself will only bestow the study and time upon the writer. It seemed highly opportune to set my own seal upon my writing here; for you have, if I am not mistaken, an exact enumeration of the works of Psellus; nevertheless, so that I may not seem to defraud the republic of letters, for whose benefit I am always anxious to serve, I will record here a third catalogue of the books of Psellus which, while I am always avidly seizing upon anything new, it has been my lot to read. For it is wonderful how the mind always yearns for new subjects, succumbing to no labors and no sleepless nights. I know that another kind of happiness is prepared for men, toward which every man ought to strive; and if I were ignorant of it, I would deem that the reading of the best writers ought to be cultivated, and that I should consider the highest happiness to be occupied in their preservation. To consume all our diligence and indulgence in these things is most pleasant and most worthy. For me, truly, the light of the sun, the day, and life itself will be ungrateful and bitter if I do not have material to read; if the monuments of the most illustrious men should fail; for compared to their dignity and sweetness, riches, pleasures, and whatever is held in esteem among men are but dross and trifles. Therefore, may this thirst, or madness (allow me to call the eagerness of a mind inclined toward letters, which knows no measure, by this name), while it incessantly urges upon me the study of investigating new authors, always subject some new thing to my intellect: which, after I have learned it, I am vexed and grieved that I have been frustrated of it for so long a time. Hence I am impelled more and more by sharper goads. I will therefore give you, reader, without fables and fallacies, a number of the manuscript books of Psellus which now lie hidden in libraries and have not seen the light, and at the same time their beginnings, so that you may have a clearer knowledge of these matters. To Rhodes itself and the leap.

LXI. The books of Psellus that have been seen or read by me are therefore these: *Political verses on grammar, addressed to the Lord Constantine Monomachus*. *On grammar, addressed to Constantine Monomachus, political poems*. P. "Let it be a concern to you of grammar, and of orthography." ^A [41] *To the same, on the Antistoecha*. P. "For the messenger is a messenger, to adorn is to reverence." ^B I know that these two are regarded by most people as digested into one body, as it were, and praised under the name of grammar; however, the Vallicellanus codex divides them into two, assigning the first to the second place and the second to the first, with other works of others also interspersed; and the argument of each demands a different treatment. Nor do the rules of grammar and the explanations of diction coalesce into one, unless you confuse everything. Casaubon mentions [this] in *Athenaeus*, bk. 11, c. 26: "Psellus in political verses, in which he explained more obscure terms." ^C I have no doubt that Michael Psellus is the author of these. However, Meursius ^D insinuates that John—to whom he attributes iambics on virtues and vices—is the author of these; since he supposes it is John whom Suidas praises among the rhetoricians, saying: "And Psellus says, the *hegetoria* is natural to figs." I have found this same Psellus more often cited by Suidas, under *Dertron*. "*Dertron*—Hippocrates calls the thin [part] of the intestine so. And Psellus says, he names the thin [part] of the intestine *dertron*." And [under] *Ghoras*, "*Ghoras* the alien, of Psellus; *ghoras* the alien, and *gerdes* the weaver." Since these are read in these works on grammar and *antistoecha*, Meursius forces upon us no other author than John for them.

NOTE. (b) Meursius on Psellus on the *Song of Songs*, p. 177.

What is a Babulxicarius.

Concerning the Gillo.

Whence the name of Cornutus originated.

What Caesar's name signifies.

On the phrase, "If he had arrived."

Explanation of the passage, "The bow whistled, and the string sounded loudly."

On the "audition" so-called in Nicomedia.

What is the distinction between the writings, of which Chariclea is the subject for one, and Leucippe for the other?

On paradoxical auditions.

Encomium on bugs.

Encomium on the louse.

Encomium on the flea.

To his student Sergius, who had said he was never bitten by a flea.

To his own Papa.

Encomium on wine.

To a certain vainglorious innkeeper, and one philosophizing on empty things.

To a certain innkeeper who became a lawyer.

LEONIS ALLATII on the cause of displaying talent, and the riches of eloquence, and the force, which increases things by praising, and strikes back by vituperating: and what is more remarkable, it approves small things as if they were great, and likewise attenuates great things, and reduces them to the smallest. It has always been permitted, both to the ancients and to those in the succeeding times, to every most eloquent man, and it is permitted even now. They used to call similar subjects "infamous materials," or "implausible themes." For if they commended shameful deeds, they were said to attack things ^A contrary to human opinion and paradoxical. Homer [wrote on] the battle of the frogs; Pittacus, one of the wise men of Greece, praised the millstone: Dio Prusaeus adorned the parrot, Polycrates the mice, Clitarchus the woodworm, Lucian the fly, Themison the plantain, Marcius the radish, Erasistratus the lysimachia, Pythagoras the bulbs, Diocles the turnip, Phanias the nettle, Cato the cabbage, Alcidamas death, Aristophanes poverty, Favorinus the quartan fever, Synesius baldness, ^B others, salt—which Plato laughs at in the *Symposium*—others vomit, pots, insects, and such things of this kind, which Plutarch and Isocrates, and in our own time others, have pursued with magnificent and eloquent speech in their praises; one [praised] an egg, another an ass, another drunkenness, another stupidity, another lying, and what not? All these Gaspar Dornavius gathered into one volume under the name of the *Joco-Serium Theatrum*, (d) and published it not without an Appendix. And what you might wonder at more, at Wittenberg a certain Bruno Nolanus is said to have impiously recited a panegyric to the devil; and a certain other, whom I omit to name, to the public executioner: but in return for so great a favor to the ministers of Acheron, the other executioners of Italy, lest they seem ungrateful, attempted to return the favor by letters sent to the eulogist, promising their services, when the time comes, that they would treat him well and kindly. ^C It is no wonder, therefore, if our Psellus also, for the sake of testing himself, exercised his style on these most contemptible things. I remember that I debated quite extensively in my *Rhetorics* whether it is more difficult, and therefore more excellent and admirable, to adorn vile, smallest, or even evil things by speaking, or their opposites, such as virtue, wisdom, and men famous and illustrious by these very things. Now, so that we may relieve the reader, exhausted by the reading of the works of Psellus, we shall adduce for both sides a few things out of the many to be brought forward according to one's talent. Isocrates attacks similar attempts even with most bitter words in many places; Plato ridicules them in the *Symposium*; Synesius disapproves in his *Epistles*; and this especially if those things which we pursue with all our strength are vituperated with wicked cleverness; as is recounted of Carneades vituperating justice. Add: just as it would be far better to have moderate opinions about useful things, than to seek out [the opinions] of superfluous ones. ^D

^A We marvel at the works of bees, as much as at the immense bodies of whales.

LXIV. But these few things about small matters are enough. Let us follow the rest of Psellus.

On his own grandson, still an infant. P. I shall perhaps not see you, my dearest little babe.

[45] Encomium on a certain monk, Nicholas, who had been superior of the monastery on Olympus. [The text is headed:] *Higher than the things from the...*

Encomium on the monk John Crustulas, who had been a reader at Hagia Sophia. P. What is this, for [it is] right into the temple that I have gone. ^B *—as if they had something to say about wicked things, they will easily find a supply [of words] about the good and virtuous.*

Praise of the Italian. P. How well for the Italian. And if he wished.

To his disciples, on the same subject. P. There is no one among us who is a spearman, nor a javelin-thrower.

To those who envy him. You [do] thus, but I say...

To the same. P. Nor will there remain for you any occasion for envy.

Against one who had reviled him in secret. The discourse [is] toward the reviling.

To the disciples who were absent from the interpretation of [the book] *On Interpretation*. To those who were absent, the discourse.

When his disciples were late in gathering for the school. P. You who are considered philosophers among yourselves do nothing new. ^C

LXV. Monody on Romanus the Referendarius. P. Many of my friends have died.

Monody on the president, lord Michael Radenus. P. To the others...

Monody on the sister of John the Actuarius... what kind of occasions for words [does] the daimon [provide].

Monody on John the Patrician, his pupil... The audience is deaf to us.

[To] John Bourtzes the Bestarches, upon the death of his brother. P. I do not know what [to say] to you.

Funeral oration on a certain friend and fellow-student of his. P. I indeed thought [there was] a truce.

Funeral oration on the daughter Styliane who died before the hour of her marriage. P. Honoring the daughter in speech.

[46] Funeral oration on his own mother. P. The encomium, but not as.

simultaneously with the mourning of the old corpse. ^A

Funeral Oration for Irene Caesarissa.

Encomium for the Empress.

To the Emperor Diogenes, as if from the mouth of a citizen.

To the Emperor Ducas.

Public address to the Emperor Ducas.

As from the person of the Emperor.

Address to Lord Michael Ducas.

Formal silence, spoken by the Emperor Michael Ducas.

Silence, spoken during the days of the Empress, the lady Theodora.

Golden Bull.

Speech offering precepts of friendship to the nephews of the Patriarch, Lord Michael.

To his own Grammarian.

LXVII. Speech on the translation of the venerable relics of the holy Protomartyr Stephen. Delivered impromptu.

Speech on the miracle that took place at Blachernae.

On the miracles of the Archstrategos Michael.

On Great Sunday, the feast of Saint Agatha, and on her disciples.

Life of the holy Father Auxentius.

To the Protosyncellus, concerning Saint Gregory the Wonderworker.

Encomiastic speech on Simeon Metaphrastes.

Enigmas to Michael Ducas.

[alt-version omitted]

NOTES. (e) Augusta. (f) This oration, together with the Office on Simeon, was edited in Greek and Latin by Allatius at the end of his dissertation on the Simeons, Paris 1664, 4.

^A

DIATRIBA ON THE PSELLUSES

522

*A compendious exposition of the books On Interpretation.* P. “What a lucid doctrine of the books On Interpretation.” P. That is: Multo abhinc tempore sapientiæ specimen amabile, pulchras epistolas genui, quas ipse cum sæpius accepisses, forte earum gratias admiratus, similes me, et rursum edere posse existimas. Propterea tu quidem fetus meos exoptas; ego vero tibi partum excludere renuo.

LXIX. *An impromptu oration to Pothus Vestarchus, who had requested him to write concerning the theological character.* P. Do not marvel, my dearest Pothus, if... “Sing, O Goddess, the wrath of the son of Peleus.” ^B

*An exposition of the five voices of Porphyry.* Why indefinitely?

*An exposition of the Categories of Aristotle.* P. Of things, some share...

*A compendious and most lucid doctrine concerning the ten Categories, and the Propositions, and the Syllogisms, a knowledge of which, if first acquired, will open for everyone, with little difficulty, an access to every other science and art, but especially to rhetoric.* P. Since some, I know not from whence, say concerning dialectic...

*On the Introduction of Porphyry, and some of the Categories of Aristotle.* P. Many of the ancients, in many ways... ^C

*An exposition of the book of Aristotle On Interpretation.* P. The purpose of the work On Interpretation is to treat of Propositions.

*An exposition of the book of Aristotle On Interpretation.* To set down now instead of to define.

*A synopsis and most lucid translation of the doctrine of the work On Interpretation; Scholia and Annotations of Psellus and others on the first book of the Prior Analytics of Aristotle.* And the tenth problem.

*An exposition of the first and second books of the Prior Analytics of Aristotle.* In the first, saying...

*An exposition of the first book of the Posterior Analytics.* The purpose here for Aristotle...

*Prolegomena to the Sophistical Refutations of Aristotle.* That the discourse concerning Proof... In another manuscript, however, these are attributed to Michael of Ephesus.

LXX. *What the Greeks opine concerning demons.* P. I think this is the other [(i)] book on demons, from which Marsilius excerpted those things which are read in the last chapter in his work, and I am the more led to this opinion because in my codex there follows immediately after this treatise a Dialogue on demons, in which Timotheus and Thrax converse, concerning which we spoke earlier in the published books of Psellus. ^D

*On the generation of the soul according to Plato.* P. The common saying is that it is not in vain.

*A passage from the Physics, on soul and mind.* P. Mind is a habit of the soul.

*On the soul.* For the soul is intellectual, intellectual...

*On the five faculties of the soul.* P. Mind is that which is moved by God according to nature.

*On the location of the earth.* P. The earth has obtained the middle location of the universe. I am not unaware, however, that in another manuscript this little work is attributed to Nicephorus Blemmydes.

*When the sun is eclipsed, and when the moon, and how the eclipse of both happens to occur.* If you ask concerning the manners of the eclipses.

*On the science of sacrificing.* You have asked concerning the science of sacrificing.

NOTES (g-h) In political verses. (i) See above, § 39, p. 28.

^A *On the art of making gold, to the patriarch lord Michael.* You see, my master, what you make me do—the tyranny over my soul. *On the Pulse.* I come to you also with what is on the Pulse. *Memorandum on those with fevers.* If the patient was bedridden at the beginning.

LXXI. *Medical treatise to Constantine Porphyrogenitus.* I have had the opportunity, through the agency of the most upright Melchior Inchofer, who brought it from Messina, to see the abridgments requested by your Divinity; and because it is still unpublished, I shall set it down here so that you may have the method of the procedure: "The abridgments requested by your Divinity, O God-crowned Emperor, concerning the collection of medical theories, I have hastened to go through, as far as possible, with brevity and clarity, neglecting none of the necessary points according to my ability. I have set forth each of the maladies, first clearly declaring the causes, second the signs by which they are easily recognized, and then the treatment, by which we shall treat all things according to art, beginning first from the head, ^B because the sacred part of the rational soul is established there." ^C

This noted man, learned in the practice of the arts, composed that treatise; it must be said that Psellus lived for over one hundred and forty years, a fact unheard of until this day. Wherefore this Psellus is either another man than the tutor of Michael Ducas, or it is not Psellus at all.

LXXII. *Omnifarious Doctrine*, and entirely most necessary, viewed in one hundred and ninety-four chapters, apart from the various other spontaneous discourses and verses on different subjects, set forth for the most pious and famous Emperor lord Michael Ducas, who was Autocrator. Chapters contained in it are as follows: α'. On certain names used in the doctrine of the Christians. β'. On essence and nature. γ'. On that which exists in itself (enypostaton). δ'. On consubstantiality. ε'. On the co-substantial (homoousios). ς'. On hypostases. ζ'. On essential union and difference. η', θ'. On hypostatic union and difference. ι', ια'. On the holy Trinity. ιβ'. On the manner of the *antidosis* (communication of properties). ιγ'. On divine union. ιδ'. On the impassible nature. ιε'. Who is God? ις'. Is the Divine infinite, and how is it infinite? ιζ'. How God knows the things that change. ιη'. From what primary element God began to create the world. ιθ'. Whence humans had ^D the conception of God. κ'. Whether angels or humans are more numerous. κα', κβ', κγ', κδ', κε', κς', κζ', κη', κθ'. On the intellect. λ', λα', λβ', λγ', λδ', λε', λς', λζ', λη', λθ', μ', μα', μβ', μγ', μδ', με', μς', μζ'. On the soul. μη'. Whether the soul changes into an angel. λθ'. Whether the soul is without beginning. ν'. More precisely on the faculties of the soul. να'. How Plato declares the soul to be both created and immortal. νβ'. What is the Platonic *psychogonia* (generation of the soul). υγ'. Why the soul is called the mean between the divisible and the indivisible. νδ'. What soul Plato creates in the *Timaeus*. νε'. What is the power of the soul. νς'. What are the powers of the soul, and which are they? νζ'. What is nature? νη'. What is the division of the common activities of the soul in relation to the body. νθ'. When the soul is united to the embryo body. ξ'. How the soul is united to the body. ξα'. On the irrational soul. ξβ'. What is volition, and what is the practical faculty of reason. ξγ'. On elective will and attention. ξδ'. Whether the soul is dissolved from the body, or the body from the soul. ξε'. How the soul is held together in the body. ξς', ξζ', ξη', ξθ', ο', οα', οβ', ογ', οδ', οε', ος', οζ', οη', οθ', π', πα'. On the virtues. πβ'. In what does an *arche* (principle) differ from elements. πγ'. On the *archai*, what they are. πδ'. On the Ideas. πε'. On demons and heroes. πς'. On matter.

^A πζ'. On causes. πη'. On figures. πθ'. On the parts of the earth. ρξδ'. On earthquakes. ρξε'. On colors. 4. On mixture and blending. Κα'. On generation and destruction. Ιβ'. On bodies. Αγ. On minima. 48. On the difference of knowledge. με'. How we do not always partake of God, though He is always acting. 4ς'. Why evil exists at all. ιζ'. On evil, in greater detail. η'. Whether there is any evil among the angels. 4θ'. Whether the incorporeal is in a place. ρ'. Whether matter is evil. ρα'. On the return of beings to the Divine. ρβ'. On time. ργ'. On motion. ρδ'. On necessity. ρε'. On fate. ρς'. On fortune and chance. ρζ'. On aeon and time. ρη'. On the five senses. ρθ'. Whether it is true that some are bewitched by the gaze of onlookers. ρι'. How eclipses occur. ρια'. How males and females are produced. ριβ'. Why a woman often has intercourse but does not conceive. ριγ'. Why twins and triplets occur. ριδ'. Whence come the resemblances of parents, and the dissimilarities to them. ριέ'. Whether the embryo is also a living thing, and how it is nourished. ρις'. How dreams occur. ριζ'. On health, and disease, and old age. ριη'. Why those who fast are more thirsty than hungry. ριθ'. Why, if those who are hungry drink, and those who are thirsty eat, they are exacerbated. ρκ'. Whether there is anything outside the universe. ρκα'. On the essence of man. ρκβ'. Into how many cycles the heaven is divided. ρκγ'. On the milk-white circle appearing in the sky, called the Galaxy. ρκδ'. On the various fiery apparitions appearing in the sky. ρκέ'. On the bloody-red colors and chasms appearing in the sky. ρκς'. On the essence of the sun, and whether there are many suns. ρκζ'. On the size of the sun, and moon, and earth. ρκη'. On the eclipse of the sun. ρκθ'. On the eclipse of the moon. ρλ'. Whether the sun is hot. ρλα'. What is the essence of the stars. ρλβ'. On the course and motion of the stars. ρλγ'. Of what kind are the shapes of the stars. ρλδ'. On the order of the stars. λε'. Whence the stars are illuminated. ρλς'. On the signification of the stars, and how winter and summer occur. ρλζ'. How much time each of the planets ^B takes for its period. ρλη'. On the stars called the Dioscuri. ρλθ'. On comets. ρμ'. On rain, and hail, and snow, hoarfrost and dew. ρμα'. On dew again and hoarfrost. ρμβ'. On the rainbow. ρμγ'. On the halo. ρμδ'. On rods (parhelia). ρμε'. On parallels. ρμς'. On winds. ρμζ'. On the whirlwind. ρμη'. On the storm-cloud. ρμθ'. On lightning. ρν'. On the fiery-whirlwind. ρνα'. How the world was constituted. ρνβ'. Whether the All is one. ρνγ'. On the void. ρνδ'. On place. ρνε'. On space. ρνς'. Whether the world is ensouled. ρνζ'. Whether the world is generated and indestructible. ρνη'. Whether the world is nourished. ρνθ'. On the order of the world. ρξ'. What is the cause of the inclination of the whole world. ρξα'. Whence one might know through Hellenic demonstrations the end of the world. ρξβ'. What are the right parts of the world, and what the left. ρξγ'. On change, and on the great winter. ρξδ'. Why sea water is salty. ρξε'. What is the cause of finding fresh water in the sea. ρξς'. Why sea water does not nourish trees. ρξη'. Why, when oil is poured upon the sea, it becomes clear and calm. ρξθ'. What is the cause by which, when lightning falls into the sea, it drives away the fish. ρο'. On the back-flow in Euboea. ροα'. Why trees and seeds are naturally nourished more by rainwater than by irrigation. ροβ'. Why rainwater is sweeter to seeds than water that comes with thunder and lightning. ρογ'. On certain lakes. ροδ'. On rivers. ροε'. On the rise of the Nile. ρος'. Why the Nile alone of rivers does not release breezes. ροζ'. On the greatest kingdoms. ροη'. On humors. ροθ'. Why shepherds put salt before their herds. ρπ'. Why the octopus changes its color according to the rocks it clings to. ρπα'. Why the paw of the bear is most sweet to eat. ρπβ'. Why the Dorians pray for a bad harvest of grass. ρπγ'. Why the bear does not eat the nets when it is caught. ρπδ'. Why the cuttlefish, when it appears, is a sign of winter. ρπε'. Why we plant wheat in muddy soil, but barley in dry ground. ρπς'. Why the vine is dried up most by the wine that proceeds from it. ρπζ'. Why roses bloom more when certain foul-smelling plants are planted beside them. ρπη'. For what reason the tear of wild boars is sweet, but that of deer is salty. ρπθ'. For what reason pebbles and lead tossed into water make it colder. ρή'. For what reason snow is preserved by straw and garments. ρία'. What *boulimos* (ravenous hunger) is. ρήβ'. What is the cause by which meat hung in a fig tree becomes tender. ρήγ'. ^C

1. On some names that are used in Christian dogma. 2. On essence and nature. 3. On the hypostatic. 4. On the substantial. 5. On the hypostasized. 6. On the enypostatic. 7. On essential union and difference. 8, 9. On relative union and difference. 10, 11. On the holy Triad. 12. On the mode of retribution. (k) 13. On divine union. 14. On the nature that cannot suffer. 15. Who is God. 16. If the Deity is infinite, and in what way infinite. 17. How God knows things that change. 18. From what first element God began to create the world. 19. Whence men received their opinion about God. 20. Which are more numerous, angels or men? 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29. On the mind. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47. On the soul. 48. If the soul is changed into an angel. 49. If the soul is without beginning. 50. More accurately on the faculties of the soul. 51. How Plato decides that the soul is both generated and immortal. 52. What is the Platonic generation of souls. 53. Why the soul is said to be between the partible and the impar^Dtible. 54. Whom Plato decided soul was generated…

^A from in the Timaeus. 55. What is the faculty of the soul. 56. What the faculties of the mind are, and what they are. 57. What the division of the common operations of the mind to the body is. 59. When the mind is united during generation to the body. 60. In what manner the mind is united to the body. 61. Concerning the soul devoid of reason. 62. What is the will, and what is operative thought. 63. Concerning choice and attention. 64. Whether the mind is dissolved by the body, or the body by the mind. 65. How the mind is contained in the body. 66–81. Concerning the virtues. 82. In what the principle differs from the elements. 83. Concerning principles, what they are, 84. Concerning ideas. 85. Concerning demons and heroes. 86. Concerning matter. 87. Concerning causes. 88. Concerning figures. 89. Concerning colors. 90. Concerning mixture and temperament. 91. Concerning generation and corruption. 92. Concerning bodies. 93. Concerning minimal parts. 94. Concerning the differences of cognitions. 95. In what manner we do not always participate in God, since He is always operating. 96. Why evil exists at all. 97. More absolutely concerning evil. 98. Whether there is any evil in angels. 99. Whether what is incorporeal is in a place. 100. If evil is matter. 101. Concerning the conversion of things toward God. 102. Concerning time. 103. Concerning motion. 104. Concerning necessity. 105. Concerning fate. 106. Concerning fortune and chance. 107. Concerning age and time. 108. Concerning the senses. 109. Whether it is true that some are fascinated by those who see. 110. How eclipses occur. 111. How males and females are generated. 112. Why a woman having often experienced a man does not conceive. 113. Why twins and triplets are born. 114. Whence similarities and dissimilarities of parents arise. 115. Whether the embryo is an animal, and by what reason it is nourished. 116. How dreams occur. 117. Concerning health, disease, and old age. 118. Why those who fast are thirsty rather than hungry. 119. Why those who are hungry, if they drink, and those who are thirsty, if they eat, are distended. 120. Whether there is anything outside the heavens. 121. Concerning the essence of man. 122. Into how many circles the heaven is divided. 123. Concerning the circle appearing in heaven similar to milk, called the Galaxy. 124. Concerning the various igneous specters appearing in the heaven. 125. Concerning the blood-colored appearances and chasms in the heaven. 126. Concerning the essence of the sun, and ^B whether there are several suns. 127. Concerning the magnitude of the sun, the moon, and the earth. 128. Concerning the solar eclipse. 129. Concerning the lunar eclipse. 130. Whether the sun is hot. 131. What the essence of the stars is. 132. Concerning the motion and carrying of the stars. 133. What the configurations of the stars are. 134. Concerning the order of the stars. 135. Whence stars have their light. 136. Concerning winter and summer. 137. How great is the circuit time of each planet. 138. Concerning the stars called the Dioscuri. 139. Concerning the comet. 140. Concerning rain, hail, snow, frost, and dew. 141. Concerning dew again, and frost. 142. Concerning the rainbow. 143. Concerning the halo. 144. Concerning sun-pillars. 145. Concerning parallels. 146. Concerning the winds. 147. Concerning the typhoon. 148. Concerning the squall. 149. Concerning lightnings. 150. Concerning wonders. 151. How the world was put together. 152. Whether the universe is one. 153. Concerning the void. 154. Concerning place. 155. Concerning the earth. 156. Whether the world is animate. 157. Whether the world was made, and is incorruptible. 158. Whether the world is nourished. 159. Concerning the order of the world. 160. For what cause the entire world is inclined. 161. Whence the end of the world is grasped by the demonstrations of the Gentiles. 162. What is the right of the world, and what is the left. 163. Concerning the transmutation of the parts of the earth. 164. Concerning the movements of the earth. 165. Concerning the great winter. 166. Why sea water is salt. 167. For what cause fresh water is found in the sea. 168. Why sea water does not nourish trees. 169. Why, when oil is poured into the sea, the sea becomes clear and quiet. 170. For what cause, when lightning falls into the sea, salt emerges. 171. Concerning the Euboic flux and reflux. 172. Why trees and seeds are nourished by rainwater more than by running water. 173. Why seeds are more moistened by rainwater, which falls with thunder and lightning. 174–176. Concerning various lakes and rivers. 177. Concerning the rise of the Nile. Why the Nile alone does not blow forth winds. 178. Concerning the greatest kingdoms. 179. Concerning the humors. 180. Why shepherds sprinkle salt on newly born animals. 181. Why the polypus assumes the color of the rocks to which it has applied itself. 182. Why the meat of the bear is most pleasant to eat. 183. Why the Dorians pray for a poor harvest of herbs. 184. Why a captured bear does not eat the net. 185. Why seeing a marten presages a storm. 186. Why we sow wheat in muddy, barley in dry ground. 187. Why a vine is dried up if wine is poured upon it, especially its own. 188. Why roses bloom more if they are sown with them [garlic]. 189. Why the tears of wild pigs are sweet, those of stags salt. 190. Why pebbles and leaden sheets thrown in make water colder. 191. Why snow is preserved by straw and garments. 192. What bulimos is. 193. Why meats hung in a fig tree become more tender. These 162 chapters were shown to me by the very keen and great man Jo. Jacobus Buccardus, translated into the Latin tongue by I know not whom.

73. Brief solutions of natural questions

orbit of the stars. Whence the stars have their light. How the four seasons come to be. Concerning the magnitude of the sun and moon. Concerning the eclipse of the sun. Concerning the substance and illumination of the moon and its shape. Concerning the eclipse of the moon. Further, concerning the eclipse of the moon. Into how many circles the heaven is divided. Concerning the orbit and motion of the stars. Whence one might know by Greek demonstrations the end of the world. That the earth is spherical, situated in the middle of the universe. Concerning the size of the earth. Description of the horizon. Concerning the elements between the earth and the heaven, and their affections. Concerning the air, and fire, and rains, and lightnings, and thunders. Concerning earthquakes. Concerning comets. Concerning winds. Concerning the rainbow. Concerning the bow. Concerning the shape of the heaven. Concerning the world. Whether the world is animated, and governed by providence. Concerning the order of the world. Concerning the inclination of the world. Whether there is a vacuum outside the world. Whether the world is incorruptible. Which is the right side of the world, and which the left. What the substance of the heaven is. Concerning the circles which we imagine in the heavens. Concerning the substance of the stars. Concerning the shape of the stars. Concerning the orbital path of the stars. Whence the stars have light. How the four tempests occur. Concerning the magnitude of the sun and the moon. Concerning the defect of the sun. Concerning the substance of the moon, its illuminations, and its shape. Concerning the defect of the moon. Further on the defect of the moon. Into how many circles the heaven is divided. Concerning the motion and movement of the stars. How one may know the end of the world from the demonstrations of the Gentiles. There is another tract of the same subject matter. Natural and logical doubts, which begins: "Many of the ancients in many ways," and others under diverse titles and principles, which for the most part contain the same things. Nor do the things which are read under various titles in the library of the King of the Gauls appear to be different from these. Solutions of questions for Michael Ducas. Epitome of physical questions. CXCI chapters of questions. Theological and physical questions. On God, to Michael Ducas. The Philosophical works of Psellus, from all of which, as we have said before, one absolute work can be composed.

LXXIV. A reply to a certain monk who had inquired concerning the definition of death. R. It was not as the question proposed by you was a matter of doubt. Perhaps these are the same as those of the same author: On the term of life, which are read in the library of the King of the Gauls.

The solution of the common question of all who are outside the Christian faith, which they propose saying: What was the necessary or urgent need for the Cause of all things to descend from heaven, and to descend to the human race, and to be born, and to undergo all human sufferings, and to be crucified, and be buried, and to rise again? For what could He not have saved the whole world by a mere nod, and without being emptied of His own glory, not even in the smallest degree? For this would have been worthy of the height of Divinity, and more profitable to us men. R. This question is not only held by the Agarenes, but also by the Greeks.

Why is the year said to begin from the beginning of the month of September, although the creation of the world took its beginning in the month of March? R. Because the year is called time. ^A Concerning the scapegoat. Q. You asked at what time of the year the high priest [performed the rite]. ^B Concerning why the angels are depicted as winged, crowned, in human form, and carrying a sphere in their hands. And for what reason we make their commemoration on the second day of the week, that is, the day of the Forerunner, and successively up to the seven [days]. ^C In the theological saying, why the unity from the beginning moved into a duality and stopped at a trinity. R. I will not hide from you, O dearest ones. On the same saying, I have read also the interpretation of George Acropolites.

LXXV. On the phrase, "The beautiful one to the fair one." ^D R. By the omission of "Cut off." On that which is said in the feast of the Ascension of Christ: "Today Sancta Cundura, and tomorrow the Ascension." R. Not from the more exalted ones only. What is, "According to the image," and what is, "According to the likeness." R. Alone of all things that come to be. The Father, is it a name of substance or of operation? R. To another problem again. Expositio in the phrase, "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us. Amen." R. Of every dogmatic [question]. Concerning the end of the age. R. I found this in the Commentary on the Apocalypse. In loca difficiliora Basilii, expositio. In loca difficiliora Nazianzeni expositio. On the inscriptions of the Psalms. R. Of those things which are in the Psalms. On the inscriptions of the Psalms, and that of the Dia-

-^Apsalma. R. The Psalter, my master, is not a book. Diverse verses. Verses on the emperor Lord Romanus the elder, indicating the name at the beginnings of the words: Rose-faced, Noble, Guardian of the rays of victory in the heavenly dominion. Similar verses on the emperor Lord Basil: Steady Star, Revered Atonement, very much. He shone to hold the rudders of dominion. On the flag of Monomachus, having depicted Saint George, the emperor on horseback, carrying a spear, and pursuing the Barbarians. Witness, King, Rider, Spear, Barbarians, breathe together, pursue, hasten, strike, fall. Ulysses fleeing the fighting of Ilium, the multitude, and the deceits of the Lotus-eaters and the Cicones, the terrible eye of the man-slaying Cyclops, the cruelty of the Laestrygonians, and the uncertain and contrived ways of Circe, the frightful Hades, and the voice of the Sirens, and the wandering rocks, and the mouth of Charybdis, and the terrible and violent Scylla, as it was said, has died by the hands of his son in his homeland. To a senseless slanderer. And frogs croak, but out of marshes. And dogs bark, but from afar, and beetles play, but in dung, so what is new, if the stones speak. Differing little from coarse frogs. Concerning seleniasmos. Seleniasmos is something natural. Scoptics against the Sabbaitic monk. Against Satan, you the viper of life. Paraphrase in iambic verse on the Canon of our holy Father Cosmas, Bishop of Maiuma, which he composed to be chanted on Holy and Great Thursday. R. A black sea before it was cut, has been cut. For they give suspicion of things of which not each is one. It behooved once, most divine king, philosophy which judges all things. O King, sun, and who might blame me for aptly attributing this title to you? O King, without addition and conjunction, and alone of beings incomparable. Do not marvel, O King, if having heard ^B of most learned men. Greatest king, this visible world, the great handiwork of God. As from the emperor Monomachus to a certain wise catechumen: I have read your letter, most learned and wise one, and by its unspeakable beauty. To rekindle philosophy itself that had been extinguished. As much as I leaned toward the art of letters and philosophy, and touched upon the sciences, not having taken from another; for their torch had been extinguished in them. But I, having relit it again and having sent it forth to those who long for it. Of strange hearings. Concerning scapulimancy and augury: That Socrates of Sophroniscus, having encountered the Platonic dialogues. This youth, he says, leads concerning Plato where he also wishes, etc. pariter iambicos feliciter transtulit, uno tantum carmine politico. [alt-version omitted] LXXVI. Divers carmina, in varied meter, but iambic most acutely and successfully. I will describe some here out of many as a sample. Verses on the emperor Lord Romanus the elder, which manifest the name at the beginnings of the words. Similar verses on the emperor Lord Basil. [59] On the flammulum of Monomachus, on which were depicted Saint George, and the emperor sitting on a horse, holding a spear, and putting the Barbarians to flight. That also on the contests of Ulysses: To a maledictive senseless man. These the man most learned and most eloquent by the calculation of all, Gaspar de Simeonibus, translated from Greek into Latin ^C verse with more authority; and indeed he made them altogether better; while Psellus himself, entangling himself in the meaning, makes a comparison that is little adapted, as can be plain to any learned and ingenuous person who compares the Greeks with the Latins. And they are: A foul frog croaks, but lying in the mud; A troublesome dog barks with its voice, but from afar; A black beetle plays, but lurking in dung: And while you cast jests with a stinking mouth, You were not a match for one of these three, you stone, A greater monster. Unless you are a babbling stone. [60] De seleniasmo. P. Scoptics against a Sabbaitic monk. P. Paraphrase in iambic verse on the canon of our holy Father Cosmas, Bishop of Maiuma, which he composed so that it might be sung on holy and great Thursday. P. A black sea before it was cut, has been cut.

LXXVII. Many are, as you see, these writings of this author which you see. They do not, however, quench the thirst, but still [1] I anxiously accuse my lot, because I have not had everything. For it has been reported to me by a man [61] worthy of faith, and signified by autograph, that many manuscripts of this author lie neglected in a certain library here in Rome. Perhaps at some time, for I shall attempt it with all my strength, the power will be given of seeing, reading, and finally comparing with others. Which if it happens, I pledge to you my word, my Gaffarel, that I will sincerely inform you of everything. Meanwhile, enjoy these.

LXXVIII. Michael Psellus also writes a preface to the Dioptra of Philip the Solitary, which has already been edited in Latin, from the interpretation of Jacob Pontanus, at Ingolstadt, in 4to. Which, however, either through the carelessness of the scribes, or of someone who ^D inserted the words of Psellus into that treatise as if to light a lamp, by private industry, not taught by another. These things Allatius notes in the same place from the funeral oration edited by Psellus on John Xiphilinus the patriarch. Combefis testifies that more manuscripts of Psellus survive in the Mazarin codex, whom see p. 293 of the Manipuli of the origins and things of Constantinople. The Imperial Library at Vienna also preserves not a few, and among these a book to Michael Cerularius, Patriarch of Constantinople, from which Lambecius quotes a long passage, Vol. VII, pp. 222-224, then a booklet on divination from the shoulder blades of slaughtered sheep or lambs, and concerning auspices. It begins:

^A King Theodore, having learned of these things, made haste to return to the East, having left behind in the West for its protection Lascaris, the brother of his father, and Michael Psellus with small forces—specifically, three hundred. To Theodore Calampaces, whom they nicknamed Talam of the Court, he entrusted duty in the region of Perilapos and the neighboring tract; to Constantine Chabaras he entrusted the prefecture of the Albanian region; and to me he handed over supreme command over all of them.

But, to confess the truth, I suspected that there was a corruption in this passage. For since the names and surnames of all the others to whom the emperor had entrusted the army were provided, I saw that he had been silent—contrary to his custom—regarding the name of Lascaris alone. Furthermore, when he had entrusted other matters of no less consideration to a single person’s care, there seemed no reason to have appointed two commanders for a minimal task; and it is truly ridiculous to have commended such small forces, specifically three hundred men, to two individuals. Indeed, another edition of the same author’s work on the same subject inserts the name of Lascaris for us while not even hinting at Psellus. And, although he repeats the knowledge and surnames of all these men to the point of tedium in the narrative of events, he never mentions this Psellus. For he wrote two editions of the same history: the one, which Theodore Dousa published in Greek and Latin, is brief, concise, and does not narrate but only points out the matter with a finger—and is therefore very obscure and truncated—so that if you were to call it a compendium of the other, you would not miss the mark. The second edition is diffuse, explaining not just the principal matters but even the most minor details—at times in an oratorical manner—and, as if by way of commentary, clarifying obscure and difficult things. I will not allow this second edition, which does not contain Psellus and on preparing which I have spent a few hours, to languish longer with me to the great detriment of the republic of letters, but as soon as my strength permits, it will be published for public use. I would most gladly transcribe more of the author here so that you might recognize, by making a collation, what the difference is between the two editions, but he proceeds with a speech that is too long, as well as his journey to Prilapos, accomplished in the space of three months; and the storming of Prilapos; and finally the unhappy end of this expedition—about which there is not even a word in the published editions. Nevertheless, I will provide a few things as a sample for the passage already cited:

^D King Theodore, when he learned of the things that had happened in the land of the Muslims—having care not so much for those things but for his own (for he suspected that no small danger was befalling the Roman territories)—hastened to return to the East. And, having taken along the entire Roman army with himself, he set out on the road leading to the East. But he had left behind in Thessalonica and the western regions, for the supposed protection of the country, his father’s brother-in-law, Lascaris, [and] Michael Psellus, with a small and easily counted force...

^A of three hundred, he also entrusted the Illyrians to Chabarones as overseer. Furthermore, he appointed George Acropolites as ruler of all, and leader, having previously honored him with the rank of praetor.

Nevertheless, having arranged the affairs of the West well, the emperor flew to the East, leaving as commanders in Thessalonica the vigorous man Michael Lascaris, at Prilapos the Scuterius Xyleas—by a name not truly dissimilar to his own—and at Belesos ^B and the surrounding regions, the warden Theodore Calampaces; and to the Illyrians, Chabarones as prefect. Moreover, he appointed George Acropolites as president of all, and chief, he who had previously been adorned with the rank of praetor. Finally, beyond all suspicion, he openly demonstrated that that place was depraved and crippled, [according to] a very ancient Vatican codex, in which the Dousian edition is contained; which does not even know this Psellus by name. I shall transcribe the passage here, as it was edited previously by Dousa in a mutilated and gaping form, so that you may complete and make it whole by the aid of this most correct codex. ^C "The emperor Theodore, when he learned of what had transpired, hastened to return to the East, and having left in Thessalonica and the parts of the West, for protection, his uncle by his grandfather’s side, Michael Lascaris, with a small army, counted at about three hundred; and of Prilapos, and the armies around him, the man whom he had, the Scuterius named Xyleas; and for Belessos and the parts around it, Theodore Calampaces, whom they also dubbed Tatan of the Court; and Constantine Chabarones to the command of Albania; and [appointed] me to stand in charge of them all," etc.

These things, however, have not been said by me in order to deny that this Psellus lived at that time; he could have been, and perhaps was; but in order to show that this cannot be affirmed with certainty from these words of George.

LXXX. There were also other Pselli; among them, the chief was John Psellus. Meursius thinks that the iambics, which Gesner formerly published with Heraclides Ponticus, belong to him, and that he [Gesner] erred when he attributed them to Michael. But Andrew Schottus also attributes them to Michael in his *Preface to the Song of Songs*. Certainly, he composed maxims in iambic verse concerning virtues and vices, which are read today with the Homeric allegories of Heraclides Ponticus. Not equally well. Also published are poems of the same man, *On the Three Hierarchs, Basil, Gregory, and John Chrysostom*. Likewise, *On the Seven Holy Synods*, with the poems of Theodore Prodromus and Xanthopulus. Basel, by Bebelius, 1536, 8vo. But we have previously indicated that the little work *On the Seven Synods* is by Michael Psellus. Likewise, Constantine Psellus, whose *Lexicon on the Evangelists*, or brief exposition of difficult places in them, he says exists in manuscript in Greek in the Imperial Library at Vienna, in quarto. Gesner and Possevinus [mention it]. I also read his *Exposition of the Faith*, which begins: "I believe in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit," which was also held in the library of Antonius Augustinus as manuscript codex 166. ^D

THE FIRST PART OF THE WORKS OF MICHAEL PSELLUS COMPRISING THEOLOGICAL WORKS.

EXPOSITION OF THE SONG OF SONGS BY PARAPHRASE, COLLECTED FROM THE COMMENTARIES OF SAINT GREGORY OF NYSSA, SAINT NILUS, AND SAINT MAXIMUS.

^ASince Solomon also sang the Proverbs and Ecclesiastes; in the Proverbs, turning one away from evil, exhorting toward the good, and instructing morally; and in Ecclesiastes, demonstrating the vanity of present things and persuading one to despise them, and instructing naturally from those things on account of which love for God arises; as if moving our desire toward the truly good from that which is merely thought to be good, and the rest.