PREFACE.

The previous editors of Iamblichus’s Protrepticus, Iohannes Arcerius Theodoretus (Franeker, 1598) and Theophilus Kiessling (Leipzig, 1813), used manuscripts riddled with the foulest errors, of which the editors’ skill removed only a very small part. Indeed, the "good" Arcerius has been criticized so frequently and vehemently by learned men that it is shameful now to add insults to insults. 1) What needed to be said about Arcerius was said by Nauck in his Prolegomena to the Life of Pythagoras, p. V, note. Furthermore, there are emendations and corrections in Arcerius’s Protrepticus that testify that Cobet’s judgment was too harsh. Kiessling’s edition is somewhat better; he himself corrected some things through his own ingenuity, 2) He had found p. 9, 7 "to the body" or "to the body the body", 15 "and", 16, 1 "turns away", 18, 21 "thus" or "being", 29, 10 "these things", 36, 24 "such things", 49, 12 "on account of this", etc.; he conjectured "to the the body", "at least", "encourages", "truly", "of this", "such", "on account of something", etc., all of which the Florentine codex now provides as Kiessling had corrected them. Furthermore, cf. Critical Notes. but more often he caused new damage, since he "corrected"—that is, foully corrupted—not a few passages that were transmitted in a perfectly sound state. Anyone can gather examples from almost any page; I will offer a few. On p. 60, 21, he separates θεωρίας ἀμηχάνους, τὸ κάλλος ἀτενί- impossible contemplations, staring at beauty (i.e., "occupied with very difficult contemplations, staring at beauty" etc.), even though Arcerius himself had seen the truth.