Complete Works of Lactantius, Vol. I

divided throughout the whole body, through which humor and blood, flowing, would irrigate all the limbs with vital juices; and He covered those viscera, formed in the manner that was suitable for each species and place, with an overlying skin, which He decorated either with beauty alone, or covered with bristles, or fortified with scales, or adorned with distinguished feathers. Truly, that divine invention is wonderful, that one arrangement, and one habit, should present innumerable varieties of image. For in almost all things that breathe, the same series and order of limbs exist. First, indeed, the head, and the neck attached to it. Likewise, the chest joined to the neck, and shoulders protruding from it, the belly adhering to the chest. Likewise, the genitals attached below the belly. In the last place, the thighs and feet.

B And not only do limbs keep their own tenor and position in all things, but also the parts of the limbs. For in one head itself, the ears possess a certain seat, the eyes a certain one, likewise the nostrils, the mouth also, and in it the teeth, and the tongue. Although all these are the same in all living creatures, there is nevertheless an infinite and multiplex diversity of shaped parts; because those things which I have mentioned are comprised of lines that differ variously, being either more prolonged or more contracted. Why, is that not divine, that in such a great

---

VARIOUS NOTES.

B Through which. So I have replaced from 2 Bologna, 2 Royal, 2 Colbert, Tax, Baluze, Marm, Clarom (by a second hand) manuscripts, and five editions. Correctly, I think, by referring to the veins; nor is it bad [to read] through whom in ten vulgate editions, if you refer it to the streams. Ten manuscripts with the Roman edition read through which.

Covered with bristles. Reimmann wrongly [reads], sufficiently adapted. Betuleius: covered. Book VII, c. 27: covered over.

Distinguished. Missing in the Bovius manuscript.

Image. 7 manuscripts with the Isaeus edition have of the image. 1 Colbert: images, erroneously. The other manuscripts and printed copies [have] of living creatures. What if you were to read, presents innumerable varieties of images? For in most codices it is of living creatures, perhaps for of images; and it is read below, there is a multiplex diversity of shaped parts.

Present. Thus I restored from 7 editions and all manuscripts, except for one Royal, in which, as in ten vulgate editions, it is endure; in 1 Colbert, proferat [bring forth].

The same series and order of limbs exist. This is a Lactantian phrase, which enjoys a similar one. Below, chapter 10: two feet and likewise hands. Another would have said, and the same order of limbs... and two hands likewise.

Attached. 2 Bologna manuscripts: bound.

Thighs. I have no doubt that Lactantius wrote this: for who would have changed femora thighs, a word known to everyone (which is in nine recent manuscripts and editions), into femina thighs/feminine, which is in 3 Royal, 2 Bologna, Cauc, Tax, 1 Colbert, Baluze? In Marm and Clarom it is femoralia, corruptly. See also length of the thighs, below, chapter 13, shortly after the beginning.

Alone. But in the Bovius manuscript [it is] sola feminine/neuter plural, and that quite aptly.

In it. Skilfully [used by] very many manuscripts and older editions. In 5 recent manuscripts and 10 editions [it is] in the mouth, an unpleasant repetition, since the mouth also just preceded.

Shaped parts. Thus I replaced from 4 Royal, 6 Colbert, 4 Oxford, Goth, Lips, Clarom, Em, Cantab, Marm, Brun manuscripts, and older editions; in 2 Royal and Baluze and many vulgate editions it is of the shapes.

In its own genus and species. We restored its own original: "sui" from older editions and 6 Royal, 5 Colbert, Cauc, Pen, Ultr manuscripts and 1 ancient Bologna [manuscript] in which it is in the species of its own genus. In 5 recent ones and in almost all vulgate editions [it is] in its own genus and species. The conjunction is missing in 3 manuscripts and 2 editions.

Nothing more obstructive to utility, nothing more deformed to the as-

C multitude of living things, each animal is most beautiful in its own genus and species? So that if something were to be transferred from one to another in turn, it would necessarily be seen as nothing more obstructive to utility and nothing more deformed to the aspect: as if you were to grant a long neck to an elephant, or a short one to a camel; or if you were to add feet to serpents, or hair, in which case nothing else would be shown to the length of a body stretched out equally, except that, distinguished on their backs with spots and supported by the smoothness of scales, they might slide into slippery paths with sinuous flexures. In quadrupeds, however, the same craftsman extended the structure of the spine drawn down from the top of the head further beyond the body, and sharpened it into a tail, so that the obscene parts of the body might either be covered because of their filth, or protected because of their tenderness, [or] so that certain small and harmful animals might be warded off from the body by its movement: D which limb, if you take it away, the animal would be imperfect and weak. But where there is reason and hands, it is not as necessary as a covering of hair: thus each thing conforms most aptly in its own genus, so that nothing more shameful can be imagined than a naked quadruped or a clothed human.

But yet, although the nakedness of a human itself is marvelously conducive to beauty, it is not, however, fitting for the head

---

pect.* Lactantius often places adjectives of this kind thus. In this book, chapter 8: To appearance, there is no number more perfect. Ibid.: than which nothing is more foul to appearance, more useless to use; chapter 10: Manageable for the use of fingers; ibid.: That, in marvelous ways, is apt for use; On the Anger of God, chapter 10: Than which nothing can be more arranged for order, nor more apt for utility, nor more ornate for beauty, nor greater for bulk. C D BUN.

Exhibit. It is read in Bünemann: demanded; and he gives the reason for this variant thus. — Demanded. Thus I publish from Bologna, Tax, Isaeus, which Spark and Heumann approve. Reimmann and the rest [read] exhibeat, which has the same value as above, presents. BUN.

Distinguished on their backs with spots. This is a Grecism, distincti quoad terga attinet distinguished regarding the backs.

Supported by the smoothness of scales. Cellarius doubts if it is genuine. But thus [it is in] all [manuscripts], in which with better orthography Parrh, Betul, and Torn (1587) [read] squamarum lævitate, with the ae. Thus [in] On the Anger of God, chapter 10, smoothness original: "lævitudo", as here, smoothness in slippery paths. Thus Pliny, book 11, chapter 3, He granted a slippery body to serpents with smoothness. Nor should supported original: "suffulti" be suspect. Our [author], chapter 2, supported by hooves. BUN.

Sharpened. Regarding this word, consult Savaro, who collected many examples [in his notes] to Sidonius, book VII, and to book VIII.

If you take it away. So I replaced from all manuscripts and 5 editions. In eleven vulgate editions it is, if you will take it away.

In its own genus. Thus I amended from Bologna, 4 Royal, Em, Brun manuscripts and Roman, Graph, Betul, Tornes, Soubron, 2 Paris, Is, Cellar, Walch editions, with Betuleius and Francius approving. In the others it is read each original: "quoque".

Can be. I corrected from manuscripts and almost all editions. In 5 recent vulgate editions, it is held to be could be original: "posset".

But yet although. But original: "Sed" added from 2 Royal, 2 Bologna, Tax, 2 Colbert, Baluze, Clarom (by a second hand) manuscripts, and five editions. It is missing in the others. But when yet the nakedness of a human, etc. Hence perhaps, because naked statues pleased the Greeks, because they cover nothing. Pliny, XXXIV, 5: They pleased, he says, even naked [statues], holding a spear from the examples of the gymnasia of the youths, which they call Achillean. It is a Greek thing to cover nothing. Roman and military [practice] is to add breastplates. And this nakedness in the statue of an old man