Corpus of Latin Ecclesiastical Writers, Vol. LXV: Hilary's Treatise on the Mysteries, Fragments, and Hymns

words of the quire, which is now the second (p. 37, 21). I. F. Gamurrini thought that many things, perhaps two quires or thirty-two pages, had perished. H. Lindemann, however, whom A. Wilmart follows, judged that only one quire was missing. He thinks, moreover, that the last words pertained to the interpretation of the type of the prophet Elijah, which had been preceded by the interpretations of other prophets (such as David, Jonah). It cannot indeed be denied that the last words of the Tractatus handed down to us speak of the prophet Elijah and that, if faith were to be placed in the subscription of codex A (cf. p. 38, 3 note), they pertained to the treatise on Elijah. But once this is posited, it could be greatly doubted whether that treatise had been handed down in its proper place. But since the learned Aug. Engelbrecht (cf. p. 35, 23) correctly pointed out that chapters 11—15 manifestly contain the peroration of the whole work, and since it can be conjectured from the abrupt beginning of the entire second book preserved in codex A that the interpretations of several other prophets perished in this place in a certain archetype of codex A, it must rather be thought that the treatise on the prophet Elijah itself, which seems to be briefly summarized by the last words of the peroration, held its place in that part now lost. The subscription of codex A cannot stand against this opinion, perhaps composed by the very scribe of this codex; for in it, neither are all the types of the first book reviewed, and from the examples of the second book, Joshua is manifestly omitted. That only Hosea and Elijah are named from the prophets is easily explained by the fact that the scribe copied these names from the beginning and end of the material handed down to him.

We believe that the epilogue of the Tractatus, summarizing the example of Elijah in a few words as it is handed down in A, responds best to the nature of this work, since it discusses the restitution of all things to be accomplished in the last days. For by the words of that epilogue, that preaching of the prophet is denoted by which, as he shows in the end of the world he will restore all things, that is, the remainder which he will find from Israel, to the knowledge of God; Hilary shows this also in his commentary on Matthew¹. But since f. 13v is the last folio of the third quire, that part of the peroration which perished (p. 37, 21) filled at least one folio of the new quire; no reason compels us to establish that more folios perished. That Hilary did not neglect the type of the prophet Elijah in the Tractatus is also to be concluded from the fact that he speaks of that prophet more frequently in other commentaries composed on the Holy Scriptures. For he mentions the raven accustomed to bring food to Elijah¹, the prophet caught up in the body to a heavenly habitation², the same one established on Mount Tabor at the Transfiguration of Christ³, and finally, that he will come at the end of the world and be killed by the Antichrist⁴. It is therefore very probable that these or similar types were also narrated by Hilary in the Tractatus mysteriorum.

¹ 17, 4. cf. ib. 26, 5. in ps. 59, 13 p. 201, 20 sq.