Complete Works of Lactantius, Vol. I

much more fragile than it now is, provided that it were human, rather than that irrational strength. But evidently, these "prudent" men neither want human reason with fragility, nor the strength of dumb animals without reason. There is nothing so repugnant, and so contrary, as the fact that every animal must be instructed either by reason or by the condition of nature. If it is instructed by natural defenses, reason is superfluous. For what will it devise? What will it do? Or what will it contrive? Or in what will it show that light of genius, when nature grants of its own accord those things which can be of reason? But if it is endowed with reason, what need will there be for defenses of the body? Once granted, reason can fulfill the duty of nature: which, indeed, is so powerful for adorning and protecting man, that nothing greater or better could have been given by God. Finally, although man is not of great body, and is of slight strength, and of infirm health, yet since he has received that which is greater, he is both better instructed than other animals, and more adorned. For although he is born fragile and weak, yet he is safe from all dumb animals, and all those things which are born stronger, even if they stoutly endure the force of the sky, nevertheless cannot be safe from man. Thus it happens that reason confers more on man than nature does on the dumb animals; since in them, neither the magnitude of strength, nor the firmness of the body can prevent them from either being oppressed by us, or subjected to our power.

Can anyone, therefore, when he sees even elephants original: "boves lucas" or horses, despite their most massive bodies and strength, serving man, complain against God, the artificer of things, because he received moderate strength and a small body? And he does not esteem divine benefits towards himself according to their merit, which is that of an ungrateful, or (to speak more truly) an insane person. Plato, I believe, to refute these ungrateful men, gave thanks to nature that he was born a man. What that itself is like, is not for this material to weigh. How much better, and saner, [is he] who felt that the condition of man is better than those who preferred to be born as animals. If God should happen to turn them into those animals whose lot they prefer to their own, they would now surely desire to return, and with great clamor would demand their former condition; because the strength and firmness of the body is not worth so much that you would lack the duty of the tongue, or the free wandering of birds through the air, that you would need hands: for hands provide more than the lightness and use of wings, the tongue [provides] more than the strength of the whole body. What madness, therefore, is it to prefer those things which, if they were B given, you would refuse to accept?

CHAPTER IV.

The same people complain that man is subject to diseases and untimely death. They are indignant, evidently, that they were not born gods. "Not at all," they say: "but from this we show that man was not made by any providence, because he should have been made otherwise." What if I show that this very thing was provided with great reason, that he could be vexed by diseases, and that life would often be broken in the middle of its course? For since God knew that the animal He had made would of its own accord pass into death, so that it could grasp death itself, which is the dissolution of nature, He gave it fragility, which would find a path for death to dissolve the C animal. For if he were of such strength that disease and sickness could not approach him, then death

NOTES OF VARIOUS AUTHORS.

Than that. In the Bov. manuscript, than or that.
Which [Quod]. So all manuscripts and the older editions. Perhaps more correctly whereby [quo], as in the editions of Graphaeus and Crato. Most printed editions [have] Why [Quare].
That every animal. 5 recent manuscripts and 2 recent editions [have] "but every animal." 2 recent Colbert manuscripts [have] "as."
If. In the Bov. manuscript, "even if."
Force of the sky. Compare chapter 2, force of frosts. BUN.
Elephants [Boves lucas]. So the 1st antique Bononiensis, Royal-Puteanus, and 2 other Royal, 2 Vatican, Caucensis, 1 Colbert, Ultrajectinus, Pithou, Navarrensis, Victorinus, Gothanus, Gatianus, Emmanvelensis, Brunsvicensis, Claromontanus (by the first hand), Antwerp edition 1570, Tornesius, Soubranus, 2 Parisian, Spark, Cellarius. The true reading, which pleased Cujacius and Petro Ciaconio. And it is read thus again and again in Lucretius, D book V, shortly before the end, who is refuted by our author. Now, elephants are called "Lucanian oxen" because they were first seen in Lucania, according to Varro On the Latin Language, book VI: "Luca bos, elephant." Those who did not understand this changed "lucas" into "vaccas" [cows], as was done in 3 Royal, 3 Vatican, 5 Colbert, 1 Sorbonne, 1 Claromontanus (by the second hand), in the Roman editions 1468, 1470, Aldine, Parisian 1525, Crato, Fasitel, Thomas. In 1 Vatican it is lucanos; in 1 other Vatican and 1 Colbert, lucos; in Lipsius, lupos [wolves]; in Cambridge, Tornesius, Marmoutier, equos [horses]; in 5 recent, equos, lupos, vaccas. But which of all these have most massive bodies? Or when do wolves serve? So Lucretius:

Then the Poeni taught the Lucanian oxen [elephants],
Terrible with turreted body,
Hand-armed [with trunks], to be the winged-ones of war.

Even. I added this from the Bov. manuscript.
Received. I restored this from the old editions and all manuscripts except the recent Royal, in which it is "has received."
To speak more truly. Bunemann uses the singular number

from many manuscripts which he cites in the following note. — To speak more truly [Ut verius loquar]. For the plural "loquamur," I have written "loquar" from the Bononiensis, Taxensis, Pithou, Lipsius, 2, 3, Reimmann, Venetian 1472, both of 1478. BEN.

Plato. Whom Lactantius attacks for this very reason, book III, ch. 19, and contends that nothing more delirious was ever said in human affairs. — In five recent manuscripts and some editions, better therefore is placed before it, which follows soon after; and it is missing in other manuscripts and the older editions with Cellarius and Walch.

That and... weigh. These are missing in the Bov. manuscript. — Erasmus, Gotha, Lipsius, and others, also from the edition of O. F. Fritzsche himself.

Felt [Sentit]. The Bov. manuscript has sensit, and so also Heumann and Bonemann.

Preferred [Maluerunt]. So all manuscripts and old editions. In eight common ones it is may prefer [maluerint].

Desire [Cupiant]. The Bov. manuscript [has] cupient.

Man subject to diseases. In 8 manuscripts, men subject to death. — The same people complain that man is subject to diseases and untimely death, etc. Lucretius, V, near the beginning:

Why do the seasons of the year [bring] diseases, etc.;

Theophrastus in Cicero, III Tusculan Disputations, near the end; and indeed undeservedly, as Sallust says in the beginning of Jugurtha. Quintilian, book XII Institutes, ch. 11; Seneca, beginning of book on the Brevity of Life. ISAEUS.

What if I show. 2 Royal, 2 Colbert and Brunsvicensis manuscripts [have] what if I show [quid si ostendo].

Life often in the middle. The Bov. manuscript [has] his life in the middle. To this [note]: Missing in Bov.