Of the original non-Photian form of the Oecu- menian Catena on St. Paul the following MSS in Karo-Lietzmann’s list (op. cit. p. 605) are attri- buted to the 10th century :
i. Paris coislin 95, foll. 348. ii. Vatic. gr. 766, foll. 249. iii. Oxford Bodl. Roe 16, foll. 255. iv. Venice Marcianus 546, foll. 59-205 (but foll. 134-173, Gal 32-1 Ti 4”, are a later insertion).
PATRISTIC COMMENTARIES
v. Milan Ambros. C 295 inf., foll. 190. vi. Florence Laurent. plut. x. 6, foll. 286. . Paris gr. 224, foll. 1-222 (contains also the
Apocalypse).
Paris coislin 224, foll. 151-328 (contains also Acts, Cath. Epp., Apoc.). ix. Vatic. gr. 1480, foll. 267. x. Vatic. Palat. gr. 10, foll. 268. xi. Athens 100, foll. 377 (1 Co 15°°-He 11%).
Of these eleven MSS the first five are, so far as can be gathered, homogeneous in the matter which they contain. No data are given about the last two; the remaining four, Nos. vi.-ix. (save that No. viii. perhaps contains only excerpts), while agreeing with the first five ‘for all the anonymous citations in Oecumenius, differ from them with regard to the (in number much fewer) named citations, which they either transpose or, more rarely, omit. Both classes of MSS give the anonymous citations in one and the same con- tinuous series marked by Greek numerals; and the choice appears to lie between the hypothesis that the named citations, though they entered into the Catena long before the Photian matter, are yet no part of the original Oecumenius, and the more probable hypothesis that in the original form of the Catena the named citations were separated in some way from the continuous series of the anonymous citations,—perhaps by being written in the margin,—and so were exposed, in the course of the propagation of the text, to special danger of either transposition or omission.
Another Catena, Vatic. gr. 1270, which is treated as an independent Catena in Karo-Lietzmann’s scheme (op. cit. No. viii. p. 610), should perhaps, aS was suggested on p. 489%, above, be treated as belonging to the Oecumenian group. This MS, which was written in southern Italy about A.D. 1100, contains the Acts and Catholic epistles, and on foll. 79-164 a Catena on Romans and 1 Corin- thians. From Karo-Lietzmann it would not be possible to deduce more than that the names of Chrysostom, Severian, and Theodoret were found in it; but Acacius, Cyril, Gennadius, and Oecu- menius also occur, and once at least Basil éx rod mpos Zweoroduv émcorodfjs (sic). It is significant that a similar reference to this last appears in Oecu- menius; see above, p. 499+.
2. On the need for a new edition of the com- mentary on the Pauline epistles by John of Damascus, and on some of the MS material for ils enough has already been said on p. 519».
3. Cod. Vatic. gr. 1650, A.D. 1037, is a commen- tary on the Pauline epistles written by Nicolas, eee Wbidhoy of Reggio in Calabria. Ehrhard (in Krumbacher’s Geschichte der byzantinische Lit- teratur?, p. 133), who. mentions the MS, gives no details of its contents, so that it is impossible to say whether it contains ancient elements.
C. Original authorities as preserved in the Catene.—
It is obvious that not much can be done under this head until the Catena themselves are made accessible in trustworthy texts; and how far that is from being the case at the present date it has been the business of the preceding paragraphs to demonstrate. But, as soon as this preliminary work has sufficiently advanced, it would be the turn of definitive collected editions of the more important writers. Since the Catene are mainly on the longer epistles (see especially p. 518" above), the results to be anticipated from this line of research will be, in the case of the majority of writers, most marked on the Roman, or on the Roman and Corinthian, epistles.
Origen.—The work has already been done tenta- tively for the Ephesians (pp. 493-495, above) ; but it still remains to be done for the Romans, and for
| Viil.
the First at any rate of the Corinthian epistles (pp. 492, 493).
Didymus: p. 499.—It does not seem likely that much can be restored for any other epistle than 2 Corinthians; but Mai’s text (from Vat. gr. 762) will need re-editing, and the Didymus material of Vat. gr. 692 (see pp. 489%, 522) will need to be tested, though it may turn out to be not independ- ent of the other MS. :
Diodore: yp. 501.—The evidence here rests wholly on Vat. 762, and a separate edition might probably wait for Harnack’s promised undertak- ing of a ‘Corpus operum Diodori’ (see his ‘ Diodor von Tarsus,’ Vexte und Untersuchungen, N. F. vi. 4, 1901, p. 68).
Severian: p. 507.—Severian is perhaps the author for whom most is to be expected from a careful cross-examination of the Catenz: on the Romans (unless Oecumenius should here come to the rescue) less has been preserved from him than from several other writers; but for 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, and probably for the other shorter epistles as well, a rich harvest should be yielded.
Theodore of Mopsuestia.—For the shorter epistles the work has been done by Dr. Swete (p. 5114): for the longer epistles the texts of Mai and Cramer (p. 510*) would need revision, and for Theodore, as for Didymus, the Catena of Vat. 692 may or may not add new matter.