Prolegomena.

————————————

Chapter I.

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Prolegomena/Literature/Editions

§1. , &c. (A) Before 1601 only Latin translations. The first, at , 1482, completed by Barnabas Celsanus after the death of the translator of Lonigo; dedicated to Paul II. Contained a few works only, viz. the ‘two books c. Gentes,’ the letter to Serapion de Morte Arii, the De Incarn. adv. Arian. and adv. Apollin., ‘the Dispute with Arius at the Council of Nicæa.’ (2) , 1520, pub. by Jean : two books c. Gent. fragment of the ad Marcellin. and some ‘spuria.’ (3) Second edition at , 1522. (4) , 1527, by : Serap. ill. and iv., de Decr., Apol. Fug., Apol. c. Ar. (part of), ‘ad Monach.,’ and some ‘spuria’ (he rejected Serap. i. as unworthy of Athan.!). (5) , 1532, same contents as numbers (2) and (4), but with renderings by Politian, Reuchlin, Erasmus, &c. (6) , 1632, similar contents. (7) 1556, (‘apud Frobenium’), by P. , in 4 volumes; great advance on previous editions. 3 vols. contain the version by Nannius of the ‘genuina,’ the fourth ‘spuria,’ rendered by others. The Nannian version was ably tested, and found wanting, under the direction of the congregation of the Index (Migne xxv. pp. xviii. sqq.). (8) 1564 (or 1584?) (substantially the same). (9) 1570, , Vita Antonii and ‘five dialogues de Trin.,’ version of Beza. (10) 1572, , five volumes, combining Nos. 7 and 9. (II) 1574, , Letter ad Amun, Letter 39 (fragment), Letter ad Rufinianum. (12) 1581, , incorporating the latter with No. 10. (13) , 1623, the spurious de variis quæstionibus.

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Prolegomena/Literature/Editions

(B) The first Greek Edition (14) 1601 at by , with the Nannian Latin version (2 vols. fo. with a supplement of fragments, letters, &c., communicated by P. Felckmann). This edition was founded upon Felckmann’s collation of numerous , of which the chief were (α) that in the Public Library at Basel (sæc. xiv., not ix.–x. as Felck. states; formerly belonged to the Dominican Friary there). (β) The ‘Codex Christophorsoni,’ now at Trin. Coll., Camb., sæc. xvi. ineunt. (γ) A ‘Codex Goblerianus’ dated 1319, formerly τῆς μονῆς τοῦ κυρίζου, and principally used by Nannius. Neither this nor the remaining of Felckmann are as yet, I believe, identified. (Particulars, Migne, P.G. xxv. p. xliii.) (15) 1608, , pub. by C. Chappelet, edited by Fronton le Duc, S.J., Latin only. (17) 1612, , No. 15, with Vit. Ant. in Greek and Latin, from an edition (16) of 1611, , by Höschel, 4º. (18) 1627, , Greek text of 1601 with version of Nannius from edition No. 17, both injudiciously revised by Jean le Pescheur, from the critical notes of Felckmann himself, which however are omitted in this edition. (19) ‘Cologne,’ or rather , 1686, poor reprint of No. 18 with the Syntagma Doctrinæ which Arnold had published in the previous year (see below, ch. ii. §9). (Montf. wrongly dates this 1681.)

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Prolegomena/Literature/Editions

(C) All the above were entirely superseded by the

great (20) 1698 Paris Benedictine Edition by Bernard de , aided, for part of vol. 1, by Jacques Loppin, 3 volumes fol. (i.e. vol. 1, parts 1 and 2, ‘genuina,’ vol. 2 ‘dubia et spuria’), with a Latin Version and ample prolegomena, &c. Montfaucon took over, apparently without revision, the critical data of Felckmann (including his mistake as to the age of the Basel but collated very many fresh (principally Parisian, full particulars in Migne xxvi. pp. 1449, sqq.), and for the first time put the text on a fairly satisfactory footing. The Works of Athanasius were freshly arranged with an attempt at chronological order, and a ‘Monitum’ or short introduction prefixed to each. Critical, and a few explanatory, notes throughout; also an ‘onomasticon’ or glossary. This splendid edition was far more complete than its predecessors, and beautifully printed. After its completion, Montfaucon discovered fresh material, most of which he published in vol. 2 of his ‘,’ Paris, 1706, with some further supplementary matter to his Prolegomena, partly in reply to Tillemont upon various critical questions; small additions in his Biblioth. Coisliniana, 1715. (The letters to Lucifer, included in Montfaucon’s edition, had already seen the light in vol. iv. of the Bibliotheca Maxima Patrum (Lyons, 1677, Greek fathers in Latin only), and the two notes to Orsisius were taken from the life of Pachomius in the Acta SS. for May.)