(iv.) p. 542: rpdypaypa. Introduction (of 7 ortxor) to No. v. (summary table of Scripture quotations), explaining the use of black and red numerals in
* See, further, for the meaning of crixor, p. 527%, below.
t But in the case of the prologue and the Martyrium the ovixo are not given in all of Zacagni’s MSS.
the following table [this will be best understood from a concrete case; see the next paragraph] : every red numeral would be found repeated in the margin of the text itself; the series of both red and black numerals would begin afresh for each epistle.
(v.) p. 542: dvaxedadatwois Oeiwy paprupidyv (78 crix). Carrying out the rules just given, the table begins as follows: ‘In the Epistle to the Romans xlviii. [quotations]; Genesis vi., namely, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13; Exodus iii., namely,-15, 16, 40,’ and so on, meaning that the six quotations from Genesis are the 6th, 8th, 9th, 11th, 12th, and 13th in order among the 48 OT quotations in Romans. The numbers here represented in roman numerals would be black letters in the Greek, those in arabic numerals would be red, and the same red letters would be found opposite to the quotations in the body of the text: thus in the margin of Ro 4° erloreucey dé’ ABpadu TO OeG, k.7.A., We Should expect + Tevécews, and of Ro 4” rarépa roddGv ebvev réOerkd oe, we should expect 7’ Tevécews (the numeral in each case in red), meaning that the quotations came from Genesis, and were respectively the sixth and eighth OT quotations made in the epistle.
(vi.) p. 546. List of the places from which the Epistles were written (12 crixou).
(vii.) p. 547. List of the names associated with St. Paul’sin the headings to the Epistles (12 oréyor).
(viii.) p. 548: mpdypaupya (not reckoned by orixo). Introduction to No. ix. (second or fuller table of Scripture quotations), explaining that all St. Paul’s quotations would be found written in full, with the name of the book from which each was taken, and with two numbers, red and black respectively : the red signified the place in the series of quota- tions contained im that particular epistle,—a fresh reckoning in red beginning with each epistle,— while the numeration in black was continuous throughout the Epistles, and signified the number in the series of quotations taken from that par- ticular book of the OT. The same red number (but not the black) recurred in the margin of the text at the point where the quotation was made.
(ix.) p. 549: dvaxe@adralwors Oelwy haprupiav (not reckoned by orixo.), To illustrate the above rule, let us turn to the table for 1 Corinthians, and we should find it begin somewhat thus: A’ Hoalov mpo- pirov IH’ dod rhy codtay r&v copdy Kal rhv otvecw T&v cuver@y aberjow, Where the A’ would be in red, signifying the first quotation in 1 Corinthians, and the IE’ in black, signifying the fifteenth quotation from Isaiah, fourteen havig been marked already in Romans.* Now it seems obvious that (vill. ) (ix.) are not additional to, but a substitution for, the other table of Scripture quotations described above (iv.) (v.): the title is the same, rpéypauma* dvaxepa- Aalwors Oelwy paprupidv: the use of the red numbers in the summaries and in the margin of the text is the same, but the use of the black numbers is dif- ferent and inconsistent: the orlyo are reckoned for the first table, but not for the second. Either table is useful taken by itself, but the table of No. ix. gives more information than that of No. v.: its black numeration being continuous throughout the Epistles, it enables the reader to see at a glance the total amount of use which St. Paul’s writings make of any particular OT book. Which of the two is the table promised in the prologue, is a question we need not yet finally answer; but we shall hardly be wrong in supposing that they represent different strata in the development of the collection, and the natural hypothesis to start from will be that the fuller and more elaborate one is the later.
_ * Zacagni inserts a third numeration, which he admits is not in the MSS; he has misunderstood, as Robinson (EHuthaliana, p. 19) points out, the language of the T poy poemepeor,
PATRISTIC COMMENTARIES
(x.) p. 569. List of the 14 epistles of St. Paul; probably connected with what follows.
(xi.) p. 570. ‘Why the epistles of Paul are ealled 14?’ This is taken from the same source as the next piece.
(xil.) p. 570: brdbeow mpwryns mpds Pwpatovs éame- oTodfs (incipit ratrnv émicré\Ner amd KoplyOov, ex- plicit redevot Thy ércorodjv). This and the preceding come, as Matthzei and von Dobschiitz have pointed out, from the pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis sacre scripture. But now that Euthalius is transferred to the 7th cent., there is no reason why matter which ‘ Euthalian’? MSS have borrowed from the Synopsis should not have been borrowed by Eutha- linus himself. These pieces cannot have belonged to the collection in its original, or what we may without prejudice call the Evagrian, form: that they came to it through Euthalius himself is prob- able enough, but is one of the many things that cannot be decisively asserted until we have more knowledge of the MSS. None of the last three pieces are reckoned by orixa.