Volume  I. 




T.    O.     WEIGEL.

[Blank Page]

P R E F A C E.



        Among the Latin Fathers of the Ancient Church of whose great monuments of doctrine our age says little, if perhaps they were reviewed, the dignity of the name and the gravity of the doctrine and the native difficulty of the diction might have recommended someone to undertake Tertullian anew with unwearied and repeated efforts just as much as the disgraceful corruption of his works because of the indifference of the age.

        In this effort have taken part those of blessed and immortal memory such as Beatus Rhenanus, Sigismund Gelenius, Joannes Gangneius, Iacobus Pamelius, Iacobus Gothofredus, Desiderius Heraldus, Claudius Salmasius, Ludovicus de la Cerda, Nicolaus Rigaltius, Ludovicus Ant. Muratorius, and others, if not all with equal labour or result, nevertheless with praise and merit to the works of no one person alone.   And the following era has favoured Tertullian not a little, both at the hands of  Io. Sal. Semler et Chr. Godofr. Schützius and other interpolators more than emendators who might better have abstained entirely from his works, and the last ten years have produced two new editions of the works of Tertullian, one at Leipzig from the press of Dernhard Tauchnitz, the other in Paris from Migne, with the notes of various people, of which E.F. Leopold, who took care of these preceding, has certainly excelled in that he tried to correct the works recently interpolated to the standard of the old and better edition of Rigaltius, but in this also would have done better by his author, if he had not neglected to weigh more diligently his sources and authorities.  But a greater expectation was provoked at the same time, when the rumour spread both that among the English a new edition of the works of Tertullian was to be prepared and that in our own country G.P. Hildebrand was to attempt the same, after help from public funds had been procured to prepare an apparatus using the well-examined libraries of Paris, Leiden and Vienna for the works to be undertaken.


Meanwhile in various ways I too had begun to collect material that related to Tertullian, as one who had always been involved in and delighted in these studies, but those rumours of the two editions of his works obviously dissuaded me from adding yet a third to them within such a short time.  Also the disturbances of the times and the public  discords intervened, and hardly had my edition of the Apologeticum and Ad Nationes appeared, which I had undertaken to publish as a specimen, when I rightly abandoned the idea.  Yet the times soon changed, and when the honourable Mr. Hildebrand, overwhelmed with many other tasks abandoned his project and kindly condescended to hand over to me his apparatus, when from every side I was called on and encouraged to act as I wished to do; when I witnessed also the kindness of the first minister of the Kingdom of Borussia himself to offer help from his liberality, I did not doubt that I should return to Tertullian, and to prepare everything which I more maturely could to satisfy these expectations.

These items were available for examination and incorporation into my apparatus:

  1. A collation of the manuscript Codex Agobardinus, Paris n. 1622, produced by Stephen Baluzius and written in the margin of a copy of the 1641 reprint of the Rigaltius edition, which is preserved in the Royal Library in Münich, n. 1471. 
  2. A collation of part of the Codex Vindobonensis n. 282
  3. A collation of the Codex Ambrosianus n. 58, once from Bobbio
  4. A collation of these MSS: Codex Parisinus n. 1623, Gotha n. M. 50, Erfurt Amplonian Library n. 87, Erlang, which was once of the Heilsbronn monastery, Ambrosian n. 51, all of which I had used for the edition of the Apologeticum which Halus Saxonus in 1849
  5. Specimens of collations of MSS from Florence, Montpelier and Selestadt
  6. Emendations and conjectures of Josiah Mercer and Joseph Scaliger, excerpted from the margin of a copy which is preserved in the public library of Lugdunum-Batava

 and from that library I daily hoped that a codex which contains many works of Tertullian would be transmitted by the honourable I. G. Geelius.

        The following were purchased from the honourable Mr. Hildebrand:

  1. A collation of the MSS Paris n. 1623, n. 1656, n. 1689, n. 2618 and Leiden n. 315, all of which contain the Apologeticum alone.
  2. A collation of the Agobardine books



 3.  A collation of the MSS Vindobonensis n. 282 and 283
 4.  A collation of the Leiden MSS which already I've noted, and is listed in the Catalogue of the Public Library of Lugdunum-Batava on p. 324.
 5.  Variants from the MSS of De Corona excerpted by the hand of the honourable Fr. Furia, prefect of the Medici-Laurentian library, from the MS Laurentian plut. 26. cod. 12, and in addition the various conjectures of Hildebrand himself in several books, and a basic glossary of words used by Tertullian which Hildebrand intended to include in his intended edition of the works of Tertullian.  However I was unable to make any use of these, on account of the different organisation of these works; of those which seemed useful, I have carefully noted the name of the author against them among the MS variants.

            Having explained this it remains to more accurately describe those MSS used than previous editors of the works of Tertullian.   They are:

l.  MS Codex Parisinus, n. 1622 of the Bibliotheque Nationale, parchment, saec. IX.  Cf. Catal. Bibl. Reg. tom. III. p. 160.  This contains:

1. Libri duo Ad Nationes. 
2. De Praescriptione Haereticorum.
3. De Scorpiace. 
4. De Testimonio Animae. 
5. De Corona. 
6. De Spectaculis. 
7. De Idololatria. 
8. De Anima (codex inscription is De Sensu, i. e. Censu, Animae). 
9. De Oratione. 
10. Libri duo De Cultu Feminarum. 
11. Libri duo Ad Uxorem. 
12. De Exhortatione Castitatis. 
13. De Carne Christi (mutilated).

Iac. Gothofredus in the Prolegomen of his edition Librorum Ad Nationes described it thus: 

"The inscriptio of the codex is thus: LIBER OBLATVS AD ALTARE SCI STEPHANI EX VOTO AGOBARDI EPI.   Obviously I imagine this Bishop Agobard can be no other than that Bishop Agobard, colleague or coeval of Charlemagne, Louis the Pious and his sons, who died aged more or less 80.  And as you can see (which is rather more useful to know) this codex came into my hands in the town of Lyons for a year, having been stolen a little while ago from the biblioteca Tornaesiana, clearly long water-damaged and the edges of the pages either nibbled away or decayed.  The reverse of the first page exhibits this index: HIC SVNT TERTVLLIANI LIB. XXIV. AD NATIONES LIBER I. IT. AD NATIONES LIB. II. etc.  Nevertheless from this excellent codex 8 complete books have perished; as well as the best part of De Carne Christi, which today is at the end of the book, there have perished, I believe,  De Spe Fidelium, De Paradiso, De Virginibus Velandis, De Carne et Anima, De Patientia, De Paenitentia, De Animae Summissione, and De Superstitione Saeculi.


Of all those whose loss is to be most greatly regretted, which once existed in this volume and are now lacking from the works of Tertullian, I think De Spe Fidelium, of which Jerome says little, but is mentioned by Tertullian himself.  Also lacking is De Paradiso of which he also makes mention somewhere.  Finally also lacking are De Animae Summissione, and De Superstitione Saeculi, of which as far as I know there is no mention anywhere.  There are still many others apart from those mentioned.   There are books of Tertullian to be wished for, but fortunately no longer missing are the booklets Ad Nationes, until now just a rumour, now recently by me published.  Also Jerome in his time (the fifth century from Christ) wrote that there were many works of Tertullian which were not extant, but also in his letter to Fabiola, he says that the book De Vestibus Aaron, which also was to be found in the list of Tertullian, he thought might be found in Rome on account of the fame of the city, but he did not have it himself".   

Thus Gothofredus.  Of this Agobardinus, in a copy of the Rigaltius edition of 1634 which I own an unknown learned hand has written: "Papire Masson encountered the Agobardus (sic) in the shop of a bookbinder, who wanted some of it to bind his books, like Pogius, who found Quintilian on the counter of a porkbutcher while he was at the council of Constance" etc.  This book, which, although the negligence of the copyist has sometimes omitted whole lines or words, for a long time has been considered foremost of all those which exist, since Gothofredus, who printed the Ad Nationes from it, was used by Nicolaus Rigaltius, and with it among others cleaned up the work De Exhortatione Castitatis so that for the first time it was possible to read and understand it.  For alone this same man, rightly judged learned, from the remains passed to us an intact book with correction by the hand of the masters, as appears from that one place in De Exhort. Castit. ch. 10, the prophecy of Prisca, which is missing in the rest.  

Whatever particular reason there may be for the obvious textual discrepancies between this and the rest of the MSS, they contain together the various works of Tertullian, and the recensions follow:

2. Codex MS. Vindobonensis n. 282. paper saec. XV.  This contains first the Carmen de Iona Propheta, copied in the hand of Janus Parrhasius from the Codex Bobiensis, now Vindobonensis n. 322., then books

1. De Carne Christi. 
2. De Resurrectione Carnis. 
3. De Corona Militis.
4. Ad Martyras. 
5. De Paenitentia. 
6. De Virginibus Velandis.
7. De Habitu Muliebri, et De Cultu Feminarum. 
8. Ad Uxorem libros II 
9. De Fuga in Persecutione. 
10. Ad Scapulam. 
11. De Exhortatione Castitatis. 
12. De Monogamia. 
13. De Pallio. 
14. De Patientia

[RP: See note on Papire Masson]


15. Adversus Praxean. 
16. Adversus Valentinianos.
17. Adversus Marcionem. (the first 3 books of 5).  Cf. Endlicher Catal. Codd. Philol. Lat. Bibl. Palat. Vindob. p. 180 sqq. 

The book is badly marked, and corrected often, and is of the same family as the Leidensis, Laurentianus and the MSS which Rhenanus had.

3. Codex MS. Vindobonensis n. 283. parchment. saec. XV. written throughout in the hand of Io. Cuspinianus.  It contains, besides Aristeas, de LXX Interpretibus, these works of Tertullian:

1. De Came Christi, and 
2. De Resurrectione Carnis. Cf. Endlicher 1. 1. p. 183 sqq.

4. Codex MS. Leidensis, parchment saec. XV., written in Italy by Antonius Marius Filius, in the opinion of  Henricus Keil V. Cl., who inspected it with me.   It is most elegantly written, swarming with the characteristic faults of the vulgate family of Tertullian's MSS.  It contains

1. De Carne Christi. 
2. De Carnis Resurrectione. 
3. De Corona Militis. 
4. Ad Martyras. 
5. De Paenitentia. 
6. De Virginibus Velandis. 
7. De Habitu Muliebri, et De Cultu Feminarum. 
8. Duos Ad Uxorem libros. 
9. De Fuga in Persecutione. 
10. Ad Scapulam. 
11. De Exhortatione Castitatis. 
12. De Monogamia. 
13. De Pallio. 
14. De Patientia. 
15. Adversus Praxean. 
16. Adversus Valentinianos. 
17. Libros quinque Adversus Marcionem. 
18. Adversus Iudaeos. 
19. Adversus Omnes Haereses.  
20. De Praescriptione Haereticorum. 
21. Adversus Hermogenem. 
22. Apologeticum.   

Cf. Catal. Bibl. Publ. Lugduno-Batavae p. 324. 

I have noted all the variants of these works of Tertullian from these codices equally and also of the Vienna,  so that they could be a copy of the specimen.  I have left out obvious errors of the copyist.

5. Codex MS. Florentinus, bibliothecae Laurentianae, plut. 26. cod. 12., parchment. saec. XV. It contains 

1. De Carne Christi. 
2. De Carnis Resurrectione. 
3. De Corona Militis. 
4. Ad Martyras. 
5. De Paenitentia. 
6. De Virginibus Velandis. 
7. De Habitu Muliebri, and De Cultu Feminarum. 
8. Duos Ad Uxorem libros.  
9. De Persecutione. 
10. Ad Scapulam.  
11. De Exhortatione Castitatis. 
12. De Monogamia. 
13. De Pallio. 
14. De Patientia. 
15.  Adversus Praxean. 
16. Adversus Valentinianos. 
17. Adversus Marcionem books 1-4. 

Cf. Bandini Catal. Bibl. Mediceo-Laurentianae tom. I. p. 764.

6. Codex MS. Florentinus, bibliothecae Laurentianae, plut. 26. cod. 13., parchment. saec. XV.,  written in the same hand as cod. 12. plut. 26. It contains:

1. Adversus Marcionem book 5, with inscription „Contra Iudaeos liber I.“ 
2. Apologeticum. 
3. Adversus Iudaeos. 
4. Adversus Omnes Haereticos 
5. De Praescriptionibus Haereticorum


6. Adversus Hermogenem. 

Of these two Florentine MSS, I have given lengthy specimens of the discrepancies of the text.  They hardly coincide at all with the Leiden, Vienna,  Selestadt MSS and the rest of that family. Cf. Bandini Catal. I. 1.

7. Codex MS. Florentinus, bibliothecae Laurentianae, paper. saec. XV. It contains: 

1. Adversus Iudaeos. 
2. Adversus Omnes Haereses. 
3. De Praescriptionibus Haereticorum. 

Cf. Bandini Catal. tom. III. p. 318.   I've given a specimen of these books to the first chapter of Adversus Iudaeos. To these I attach:

8. Codex MS. Florentinus, bibl. Laurentianae, once Faesulanus, for which see Bandini Catal. Suppl. tom. III. p.1.  Montfaucon Diar. Ital. p. 392. and Bibl. Bibl. tom. 1. p. 431.  I've given a specimen of these books as far as the first chapter of  De Resurrectione Carnis.

9. Codex MS. Florentinus, bibliotheca Magliabechiana n. 527., once of the Monastery of S. Marco, paper, saec. XV.  It contains: 

1. De Patientia. 
2. De Carne Christi. 
3. De Carnis Resurrectione. 
4. Adversus Praxean. 
5. Adversus Valentinianos. 
6. Adversus Marcionem libros quinque. 
7. Apologeticum. 
8. De Fuga sive De Persecutione.
9. Ad Scapulam. 
10. De Corona Militis. 
11. Ad. Martyras. 
12. De Paenitentia. 
13: De Virginibus Velandis. 
14. De Habitu Muliebri et De Cultu earum. (sic). 
15. De Exhortatione Castitatis.
16. Ad Uxorem libros duos. 
17. De Monogamia. 
18. De Pallio.
19. Contra Iudaeos. 
20. Adversus Omnes Haereticos. 
21. De Praescriptionibus Haereticorum. 
22. Adversus Hermogenem. 

This codex agrees in every place with the Pithoeanus and Montispessulanus, as will be shown by the specimen of its text-variants which I've given in the first chapters of De Patientia, and certainly seems more worthy than the rest of the Florence MSS which may be examined more fully by some future editor, which I myself was prevented from doing by lack of time. Indeed that specimen with the rest I owe to the distinguished humanism of Francisco De Furia V. Cl., prefect of the bibliotheca Mediceo-Laurentianae.

             This codex agrees in every place with the Pithoeanus and Montispessulanus, as will be shown by the specimen of its text-variants which I've given in the first chapters of De Patientia, and certainly seems more worthy than the rest of the Florence MSS which may be examined more fully by some future editor, which I myself was prevented from doing by lack of time. Indeed that specimen with the rest I owe to the distinguished humanism of Francisco De Furia V. Cl., prefect of the bibliotheca Mediceo-Laurentianae.

10. Codex MS. Florentinus, bibliotheca Magliabechiana n. 528., once of the abbey of S. Marco, paper, saec. XV. It contains 

1. De Carne Christi. 
2. De Carnis Resurrectione. 
3. De Corona Militis. 
4. Ad Martyras.   
5. De Paenitentia. 
6. De Virginibus Velandis. 
7. De Habitu Muliebri, et De Cultu Feminarum. 
8. Ad Uxorem libros duos. 
9. De Persecutione. 
10. Ad Scapulam. 
11. De Exhortatione Castitatis. 
12. De Monogamia. 
13. De Pallio. 
14. De Patientia. 
15. Adversus Praxean. 
16. Adversus Valentinianos. 
17. Adversus Marcionem libros quinque. 
18. Adversus Iudaeos. 
19. Adversus omnes Haereses. 


20. De Praescriptionibus Haereticorum. 
21. Adversus Hermogenem.  

I have given a specimen of the textual variants of this codex against the first chapters of De Corona.

11. Codex MS. Florentinus, bibliothecae Magliabechianae n. 529., once from S. Marco, paper. saec. XV., incomplete. It contains

1. De Carne Christi. 
2. De Carnis Resurrectione. 
3. De Corona Militis. 
4. Ad Martyras. 
5. De Paenitentia. 
6. De Virginibus Velandis. 
7. De Habitu  Muliebri, et De Cultu Feminarum. 
8. Ad Uxorem libros. 
9. De Persecutione. 
10. Ad Scapulam. 
11. De Exhortatione Castitatis. 
12. De Monogamia. 
13. De Pallio. 
14. De Patientia Dei. 
15. Adversus Praxean. 
16. Adversus Valentinianos. 
17. Adversus Marcionem librum primum. 

I have given a specimen of the textual variants of this codex against Ad Martyras. However these Magliabechiani are of the same family, the vulgate, of which also are the Vindobonensis, Leidensis, Laurentiani, Seletstadiensis, and others. They are listed in the library of the abbey of S. Marco in Montfaucon Bibl. Bibl. tom. I. p. 420.

            12. Codex MS. Montispessulanus, Library of the School of Medicine, once belonging to P. Pithoeus, from the library of the Collegius Oratorius of Troyes, parchment saec. XI., incomplete. It contains 

1. De Patientia. 
2. De Carnis Resurrectione. 
3. Adversus Praxean. 
4. Adversus Valentinianos. 
5. Adversus Marcionem libros quinque. 
6. Apologeticum (which book I observe has been added to the codex from some other source, according to the inscription;  now after enumerating those works which precede continues: "After the six foregoing, is the most elegant book Apologeticum on the ignorance of God in Christ Jesus which is written against the pagans."  Cf. Catalogue Général de Manuscrits des Biblioth. Publ. des Départements tom. 1. p. 307. n. 54. 

This volume was used by Nicol. Rigaltius and everywhere he  noted readings taken from it. Cf. etiam Nic. le Nourry Diss. in Apolog. III, 1.  I myself have given two large specimens of its discrepancies, one at Adv. Marcion. IV chap. 20. and 21., the other at De Carne Christi, chap. 1-6. The first I owe to the friendship of Henricus Keil V. Cl., editor of a forthcoming Latin Grammar, the other to the humanism of Kuhnholtzius V. Cl., Professor of the School of Medicine at Montpellier. The book is not at all a bad text nor unworthy, and all of it should be examined afresh on its condition since Rigaltius.

            13. Codex Ms. Ambrosianus, once Bobiensis, n. 58. parchment. saec. IX., miscellaneous contents. In it are these works: 

"1. Regulae definitionum B. Gregorii Papae maioris et eius epistola. 
2. Augustini et Gregorii definitiones mixtim congestae. 
3. Zosimi epistola ad presbyterum Ravennae. 


4. Excerpta ex libro legum novellarum et codicis ad episcopos et clerum pertinentia. 
5. Augustini epistola ad Auxilium episcopum, pro causa iniustae excommunicationis. 
6. Excerpta ex tractatibus eiusdem et aliorum, ad idem pertinentia. 
7. Rabbani archiepiscopi Mogontinensis synodus a. 847. 
8. Excerpta quaedam ex diversis conciliis. 
9. De ieiunio, de modis paenitentiae et liber paenitentialis. 
10. Bedae excerptum de paenitentia. 
11. Excerptum de canonibus catholicorum patrum de paenitentia ad remedium animarum (manus secunda correxit animae) domini Eichberti archiepiscopi Eboracensis. 
12. Augustini episcopi liber sive Gennadii presbyteri Massiliensis dogmatum ecclesiasticorum Niceni concilii. 
13. Tractatus Tertulliani diversarum rerum necessariarum. 
14. Synodus Ephesina prima. 
15. Synodus Romana III. a. 863. seu Metensis synodi abolitio."   

All written by a single hand. From this book Ludovicus Anton. Muratorius published the missing portion of De Oratione, but it contains nothing else by Tertullian.   When I myself was travelling in the region of Milan three years ago, I examined all of it most carefully.

            Apart from those MSS I've already listed, the I have the following collations of the Apologeticum:


Of these mss. the best are n. 1623, which has already been used by Pamelius, Heraldus and Rigaltius, and just after it n.2616. The other two have an inferior text and belong to the vulgate family of the mss of Tertullian, to which also the Vatican, Leiden, Florence and many others belong. Cf. also on these Paris MSS Nic. le Nourry Diss. in Apolog. III, 1.

    These mss are inferior only to Paris mss n. 1623 and 2616. They are indeed correct, but however of better readings.


  • Erlangensis, once the Heilsbronnensis, parchment. saec. XV.,
  • and Vindobonensis n. 294. paper. saec. XV. (cf. Endlicher Catal. Codd. Philol. Bibl. Palat. Vindob. p. 193).  

     Neither of these mss are of


the same family as Paris n. 1623. and 2616., nor that of the Gothanus, Erfurtanus, Ambrosianus, Oxoniensis, nor do they agree with the text of the vulgate and inferior mss., but repesent a new recension of the Apologeticum proceeding from the hand of some erudite master. The scriptura agree everywhere with the Fuldensis. Indeed the orthography of the Erlangensis and Vindobonensis also suggests a common origin.

            Unless I am mistaken, Franciscus Zephyrus used the Florentine mss in the recension of the Apologeticum which we  have added  as paraphrasus in the editions of  Sig. Gelenius and Iac. Pamelius.  For in the introductory letter to Simon and Nicolaus Nero, citizens of Florence p. 797. ed. Gelen. in 1562: "For our use," he says, "[there was] a smattering of his works and we read freely and repeatedly and he nobly ordered that the book to be corrected  from a collation of the oldest mss." But the text of these mss was bad and of that vulgar family to which I've often referred. The better mss were first used by Iac. Pamelius, although  how he used them is not well known.  He definitely used the Puteaneus, today known as the Paris n.1623., he used the Elnonensis of St. Amand (cf. Sander Bibl. Belg. MSS. p. 51. n. 228.) and the Gandavensis from St. Bavonis, from the same family as the Puteaneus, how much may be collected from the indicated writings, he used three Vatican mss (cf. Montfauc. Bibl. Bibl. tom. I. p. 69.), the Pithoeanus, a Coloniensis and Leodiensis, once known as the Torrentianus, if the index prefixed to the Pamelian edition is accurate; now we look around in vain in his text for the name and variants, and that codex of Pithoeus which I have described above certainly does not contain the De Pallio and De Anima of Tertullian, which his index attributes to it.  The best after Pamelius to work on the Apologeticum was a man of great erudition and surpassing dexterity of judgement, Desiderius Heraldus, whose edition appeared at Paris in 1613, and constructed on the authority of two mss., the most frequently emended Puteanus and the Bongarsianus, which was  sequioris and of age and of soundness. The collected works of Sigeb. Havercamp achieved nothing for Tertullian's Apologeticum.  A man, if nothing else, without sound judgement in the recension of the ancient works of the African and entirely ignorant of all his words used that Codex Leidensis which contains many works of Tertullian, plus another exemplar of the edition of Rigault from the library of Franc. Fabricius, in the margin of which Paul Colomesius transcribed variants from the Codex Agorbardinus excerpted I don't know when by Jos. Mercer.  The evidence is this inscription in the hand of Colomesius himself:

"In the margin of this volume you have the notes and variant readings of Josiah Mercer plucked from the codex Agobardinus by


the same. Paul Colomesius copied [them] at Soudley, near Windsor, in the house of Vossian, AD 1684."

This book can be no different from that third Leidensis, once the Vossianus (cf. Catal. Bibl. Publ. Lugduno-Batavae p. 376. Catal. Bibl. Angliae et Hiberniae tom. II. p. 65. n. 2419. cf. ibid. p. 71. n. 2744.), which collation, added as an appendix to his edition by Havercamp, together with other writings persuaded me and seems just about certain.  Also the emendations of Petrus Scriverius, which Havercamp lists in many places and thinks are repeated from two MSS of  Heribert Rosveidus (cf. Havercamp's preface) are simply conjectures of Scriverius himself, or perhaps of Fulvio Orsini and Jo. Wouwer, which I discussed earlier, as I also did the Codex Fuldensis, whose readings are frequently also mentioned by Havercamp.

There are manuscript codices of the Apologeticum, which it was not possible for me to inspect, at St. Petersburg, Venice, Turin. (cf. Pasini Catal. Bibl. Regiae Taurin. fol. 6. cod. 31. d. III, 36. Mabillon Iter Ital. p. 8. Montfaucon Bibl. Bibl. tom. II. p. 1401.), and in the library of the Hon. M. I. Routh (cf. his Scriptt. Eccles. Opusc. tom. I. p. 175. ed. Oxon. 1840.). Nicolaus le Nourry, when he wrote his dissertationem in Apologeticum cett, as well as the Puteaneus and Pithoeanus, and as well as Parisinos n. 2616. n. 1689. n. 1656., had a codex, parchment, written saec. XI., which Achilles Harlaeus lent to him, he had a codex of the library of the monastery of Murbach saec. XI. or XII. (cf. Montfaucon Bibl. Bibl. tom. II. p. 1177. and Nourry 1. 1. cap. III. art. 1.), and variants from a manuscript codex of Justus Fontaninus.  A codex Corbeiensis of the Apologeticum is recorded in Vet. Catal. bibl. Corbeiensis in Naumanni Serapeo p. 107. a. 1841. and by Ang. Mai Spicil. Rom. tom. V. p. 207., another of Contius by Rigalt. in Tertull. Apolog. cap. 14. and cap. 19., another of Fulvius Ursinus quinquies is cited in Latinus Latinius Bibl. Sacra et Profana p. 192 sq., others are recorded by Montfaucon. Bibl. Bibl. tom. II. p. 1250. from the library of the monastery of the B. Mary of Bec, p. 1269. from the library of the monast. St. Ebrulphus Uticensis (Saint-Evroult d'Ouche), tom. I. p. 628. from the library of the King of England another two in Catal. Bibl. Angliae et Hiberniae, one tom. II. p. 248. from the library in Aedibus Iacobaeis, the other p. 24. from the library of the Eccl. Cathedr.  Sarisberiensis, and two fragments of De Carne Christi and Apologeticum in cod. 146. 33. bibl. Caesar. Vindob. published by Lambecius.

I now pass on to the editions of all the works of Tertullian. The first of these is by Beatus Rhenanus, which was published at Basle in 1521. This contains:

1. De Patientia.
2. De Carne Christi.
3. De Resurrectione Carnis.
4. De Praescriptionibus Adversus Haereticos.
5. Adversus Omnes Haereses.


6. Adversus Iudaeos.
7. Adversus Marcionem libros V.
8. Adversus Hermogenem.
9. Adversus Valentinianos.
10. Adversus Praxean.
11. De Corona Militis.
12. Ad Martyres.
13. De Paenitentia.
14. De Virginibus Velandis.
15-16. De Habitu Muliebri, De Cultu Feminarum.
17. Ad Uxorem Suam libros II.
18. De Fuga in Persecutione.
19. Ad Scapulam. 
20. De Exhortatione Castitatis.
21. De Pallio.
22. Apologeticum Adversus Gentes.

Of the two manuscripts which Beatus Rhenanus used, the first he obtained from the library of Iac. Zimmermann, Decanus of Colmar, who had removed it from the monastery of Paterniacum Transiuranus, the other belonged to the library of the monastery of Hirsau. Of this we learn the following:

"And so he (Thomas Rappius) brought with him the books of Tertullian, which I received from him a little later at Basle with no less joy than if he had sent me precious stones. At once I shouted w thj eudaimoniaj, thinking myself lucky to have obtained so great a treasure. And since then at Froben the presses were vacant, immediately the books before me began to be set up in type. For as I didn't want to lose the opportunity of either the presses or the convenient volumes, this was the chance to send it out,  as I knew I had to return the codex at a predetermined time, and of course once the works were returned, it was uncertain when they might be obtained again.  So if I had decided in spite of these reasons to wait, Tertullian would not have been edited by us. For if through idleness I had begun examining before I started work, I might have been deterred from editing by discovering so many blemishes.  For who attempts anything with such corrupt exemplars? Certainly I personally hoped that the codex Paterniacensis would come to the rescue in those books which were included in the Hirsaugensis, but it proved otherwise.  If a place happened to be corrupt, as so many were, the text was either corrupt in both, or the one seemed to be different from the other." 

Of these manuscripts today only the Paterniacensis seems to survive, which itself is preserved at Seletstat in the library of Beatus Rhenanus, I learned from  Karl Schmidt V. Cl., Professor at Strasbourg, whom I assisted with letters to investigate. The book is parchment, most elegantly written, containing:

1. De Pacientia.
2. De Vera Carne Domini.
3. De Resurrectione Carnis.
4. Adversus Praxean.
5. Adversus Valentinianos.
6. Adversus Iudeos.
7. De Praescriptione Haereticorum.
8. Adversus Omnes Haereses or De Haeresibus, without title.
9. Adversus Hermogenem., without title, after which follows in a different hand "Vita S. Simeonis monachi qui stetit super columnam," and the narration of Darius beginning "Antiquas per historias dum quaererem."

From this index it appears that


the following were edited from the Hirsaugensis only:

1. Adv. Marcionem libros V.
2. De Corona Militis.
3. Ad Martyres.
4. De Paenitentia.
5. De Virginibus Velandis.
6. De Habitu Muliebri, et De Cultu Feminarum libros.
7. Ad Uxorem libros.
8. De Fuga in Persecutione.
9. Ad Scapulam.
10. De. Exhortatione Castitatis.
11. De Monogamia.
12. De Pallio.
13. Apologeticum adversus Gentes

This is apart from the Apologeticum which was reprinted by Rhenanus from the early Italian editions, as already in 1483 in Venice this work had been  produced in combination with works of Lactantius by Bernardinus Benalius, and so he certainly used the Aldine of 1515 which agrees to the letter with Rhenanus' edition.

The first edition of Rhenanus was reprinted at Basle in 1528. This was further emended, with many corruptions of the old books removed by conjecture or at least attempted; for he was unable to obtain the help of further manuscripts.

"I had no spirit", says Rhenanus in the preface, "to alter anything in Tertullian unless I was guided by ancient exemplars. I avidly expected a manuscript from Gorze near Metz and books On the Games from Trier, but in vain."

Certainly he later obtained a collation of the codex Gorziensis, and produced with it a third heavily emended edition of his work at Basle in 1539. He owed this, as he writes in the preface, 

"to the diligence and dexterity of Hubert Custineus, a man of piety and excellent erudition, with the help of Brother Dominic Florentinus I was carried through to the end by the care of the noble juristconsult Claudius of Cantiuncula the counsel of the Emperor Ferdinand."

This codex was much more emended in many places than the Hirsaugensis and Paterniacensis, but seem to go back to one and the same archetype, and included the same number of works of Tertullian already printed. But others still lay hidden. This we owe to Ioannus Gangneius, once of Paris, "theologian and First Almoner to the most Christian king of France", by whom an edition of the works of Tertullian after Rhenanus "anew by hand faithfully from old exemplars described, collated and restored" was produced at Paris in 1545. For these works were added "taken from a most ancient codex": 

1. De Testimonio Animae.
2. De Anima.
3. De Spectaculis.
4. De Baptismo.
5. Adversus Gnosticos Scorpiacum.
6. De Idololatria.
7. De Pudicitia.
8. De Ieiunio Adversus Psychicos.
9. De Oratione.,

and also, with these Novatian's De Trinitate and letter De Cibis Iudaicis, both under the name of Tertullian.  In these however both the corrupt and the edited books benefited in a thousand places from the works of Gangney supplying what had formerly been omitted or damaged (cf. e.g. De Patientia cap. 13., where the entire lemma „in corporis quoque quae apostoli“ was for the first time restored by Gangney from manuscripts)


or emending what was corrupt, which he did with so much moderation of judgement and probity, that he was content to note many and better readings only in the margin.

In 1550 at Basle a new edition of the works of Tertullian now extant was produced by Sigismund Gelenius, a man learned to the highest degree in Tertullian and deserving well of other writers. Gelenius boasted in the front of the first pages of the works of Tertullian:

"Diligently through the real industry of the literati some of very many old MSS have been sought and found in French and German libraries, among which the foremost and most desirable was one by far the most incorrupt from remotest Britain."

to which words correctly understood (for 'MSS sought from French and German libraries' can hardly mean any other but those which Rhenanus and Gangneius used) the preface adds, in which

"I can hardly say", he says, "how much all is degenerated to the bad which might be improved.  Even Pliny was first given to the press in a  miserably bad edition, and to improve it many learned men sweated, while I made it pristine once more. Likewise this also happened to Tertullian, in which that most learned man Beatus Rhenanus laboured again and again to make it good, as appears from his own annotations in his edition.  But it was much easier to transcribe the whole work afresh.  But no sufficiently accurate copy of a codex has been available.  At last from remote Britain John Leland, an antiquarian and deserving of better health, has communicated an exemplar of this kind discovered in the most ancient Abbey of Masbury, in which you can desire nothing more ample.  So great was the completeness, unless that some books were lacking. However it contained also all those which were added to the latest edition of Paris: which if you compare it with this, it will be seen that it was not vain to be Gelenius.  If this codex alone were left to posterity, there would be nothing required for this writer."

Therefore from this codex Masburensis Gelenius emended some of these works, and some supplemented:

1. De Resurrectione Carnis.
2. De Praescriptionibus adversus Haereticos.
3. De Monogamia. 
4. De Testimonio Animae.
5. De Anima.
6. De Spectaculis.
7. De Baptismo.
8. Contra Gnosticos Scorpiacum. 
9. De Idololatria.
10. De Pudicitia.
11. De Ieiunio adversus Psychicos.
12. De Oratione., and also Novatian's De Trinitate and De Cibis Iudaicis, which likewise were added under the name of Tertullian.

The rest of the works of Tertullian, which the codex Masburensis did not contain, Gelenius in many places made conjectures, apart from the Apologeticum, which, as was demonstrated above, he based on that of Franciscus Zephyrus of Florence.


Nor is it possible to deny that in not a few places Tertullian has been much purified and emendatio avoided from the codex Masburensis, however I wish that Gelenius had described it to us, that it would be possible today to form a more accurate judgement on it, at least what was changed because of it, and that he had not neglected to indicate where he made a change on the authority of this codex.  Now indeed, as we are ignorant of where this was and was not done, being hardly unaware of how much in other writers, primarily Arnobius, Gelenius indulged a bold taste for corrections, and to show that there is reason, not to abandon the Gangney edition, it is enough to look, e.g. at the start of De Baptismo in that memorable place where the name of Quintilla is brought into all the editions by Gelenius.  Indeed in many places, as De Pudicitia ch. 6 and ch. 14, De Monogamia ch. 3, ch., 5 ch. 9, ch. 14, ch. 16 and ch. 17, earlier editions are supplemented by the MS of Gelenius, 

huic profecto rei non tantum adtribuendum esse existimo, ut ille propterea etiam Gangneii vetusto exemplo longe melior censeatur. Hoc enim vitio haud raro vel optimos laborare libros sciunt qui eis uti norunt, quinetiam in propinquo adest egregii illius Agobardini libri exemplum.

        The edition of Jac. Pamelius follows, which appeared in 1579. He indeed collected much to illustrate the teaching of the writer, which he selected, especially whatever shed light on the teaching, rites and history of the ancient church, apart indeed from exhibiting material liable to corrupt.  For apart from all that which he used from these Vatican MSS (

Three MSS were used for

De Patientia, 
De Paenitentia, 
Ad Martyres, 
De Corona Militis, 
De Velandis Virginibus, 
Adversus Valentinianos, 
De Carne Christi, 
De Resurrectione Carnis, 
Adversus Praxeam, 
De Habitu Muliebri et De Cultu Feminarum, 
Ad Uxorem, 
Ad Scapulam, 
De Fuga in Persecutione, 
De Exhortatione Castitatis,
De Monogamia, 

Two for

the five books of Adversus Marcionem, 

One for 

Adv. Iudaeos, 
De Praescriptionibus Adv. Haereticos, 
Adv. Haereses Omnes, 
Adv. Hermogenem)

the notes are very poor and of the least useful kinds, nor does Pamelius add anything new.  In the catalogue of the Vatican library published by Montfaucon in Bibl. Bibl. tom. I. p. 98. n. 189-194.  six volumes contain works of Tertullian.  It is to be hoped that extant in the Palatine library among the relics of the library of Lorsch, once so celebrated, is a part of that certainly ancient codex of Tertullian of which we are told, from the text of the ancient catalogues published by Angelus Mai V. Cl. Spicilegium Romanum tom. V., where 

p. 186 ff. ch. XXIX. reads "Libri


Tertulliani presbyteri. id est 1. De patientia lib. I.  De carnis resurrectione lib. I.  Adversus Valentinianos lib. I.   Adversus Marcionem lib. V.   De carne Christi lib. I. in uno codice.  2. Item libri Tertulliani presbyteri in alio codice.",  

p. 190. cap. XLVI.  "6. Liber Tertulliani presbyteri. 7. Item alius liber Tertulliani.",  

p. 192. cap. L. "2. Metrum Tertulliani de resurrectione". (which today is lost)  "3. eiusdem libri V. adversus Marcionem.", 

of which text also Beatus Rhenanus in the preface to the edition of Tertullian AD 1528.:

"Again," he says, "I gladly would have added the poem of Tertullian on the fire of the Sodomites, which some time ago our good friend John Siccard discovered in Lorsch library, than whom no-one known to me anywhere in recent times is better equipped from good authors, and on the evidence of the old index of the library, soon with luck it may come into the light, as it appears that the republic of letters is greatly damaged by the wasteful [hoarding] in that library.  The beginning of the poem is, ‘Iam deus omnipotens primaevi crimina secli Vindice diluvio cunctis aboleverat undis. Quos coelum sparsit, Tyrii maris expuit aequor.’  But sadly our dear friend, who discovered by his ability an indeed truly elegant poem by Victorinus Afer on the Maccabees and likewise edited it with other ancient fragments, was not pleased to now add this colophon."

But that hope was disappointed, and the noble Heyse, who excerpted learned variants from some English writings, denied that the heavily emended MSS from the Vatican library, which have been rediscovered today, had any part in improving the Pameliana.  Certainly Pamelius made use of one better MS (apart from those three used for the Apologeticum, of which I spoke earlier), of John Clement the Englishman.  In this, as well as Novatian's de Trinitate, were:

1. De Spectaculis.  
2. De Praescriptionibus Haereticorum. 
3. De Resurrectione Carnis.  
4. De Monogamia.  
5. De Ieiunio adversus Psychicos. 
6. De Pudicitia., 

and from that time on no [new] real and genuine work of Tertullian has ever been found anywhere.  This codex Clementis, if we may speculate a bit, perhaps was not different from that Corbeiensis, which we noticed in the catalogue of the old library of Corbie which Angelo Mai edited in Spicilegium Rom. vol. V., p.203., where ch. II. lists, 


de resurrectione carnis, 
de Trinitate, 
de spectaculis, 
de munere, 
de praescriptionibus haereticorum, 
de ieiuniis adversus psychicos, 
de monogamia, 
de pudicitia."  

You see that this Corbeiensis contains no more or different books than the Jo. Clementis did.  For the other book "De Munere" listed after "De Spectaculis" is obviously an error made by the indexer, who gave us the title of 


chapter 12. of De Spectaculis, which is "De Munere", for the title of some new separate book.   Cf. my note on this matter for the title of the Apologeticum.  I think the same error is responsible for what Beatus Rhenanus in the preface of his 1528 edition says he vainly hoped to get from Trier "Spectaculorum libros" [Books on the Games], and Caspar Barthias wrote to the Statii Theb. IX, 169, p. 967 that he had read in the Life of Ulrich Fabricius, once the most noble of Councillors and Legates in Spain and sometime Elector of Trier, had been in his hands "two books of Tertullian on the Games", the same, unless I am wrong.  For when the titles of the chapters of that work stop before chapter 12 in the old books, in many places it seems to have been made to see that there were two books on the Games, namely one including the first 11 chapters, and the other the remainder.  But now that's enough about that.  And on the edition of Pamelius there is nothing to add, except that in many places also he used the emendations and conjectures of Latinus Latinius, Ludovicus Carrio, and John Harris.

        In 1580 an edition of the works of Tertullian was produced at Paris, by the study and labour of Renatus Laurentius de la Barre, if you removed the notes, a part compiled from the notes of Rhenanus and from his enemies Turnebus, Crinitus, Beroldus, Cuiacius and many others, which represents a Gangnet-Gelenius recension,as the edition of Franciscus Junius which was produced at Franeker in 1597 is a Pameliana.  The annotations of Junius that the erudition of the author added everywhere to this book, but likewise demonstrate faulty judgement.  Far more important than Junius for Tertullian are the additions at the end of his book of important manuscript variants of that codex Fuldensis, now lost, which contained the Apologeticum and Contra Judaeos, as appears from the catalogue of the ancient library of Fulda edited by Kindlinger, where p. 81. 16 lists

"Apologeticum Tertuliani contra Iudaeos."

Junius prefaced this trailer to his works thus:

Christian Reader, Greetings.  When this work of Septimius Tertullian was completely finished, just at that moment that most learned young man and afficionado of these studies Gaspar Schoppius of France wrote to me from Noricum and kindly offered to help me.  For he opportunely sent an accession to this work which could not be contemned, when I had offered my notes and observations to the judgement of the public.  However this accession is a list of variant readings in the Apologeticum and Adversus Iudaeos, which were made by collation from parchment MSS many years ago; preeminently from the sumbolh~| Fulda MS, by a most learned man Franciscus Modius of Bruges.  That most great man M. Velserus of Augsburg and the most accurate writer of annals of our day had them at his house,


and so that they should not be lost through carelessness, with Schoppius, the most knowledgeable on antiquity, he kindly sent them on.  And so, Christian Reader, these variant readings can be seen added to the rest of our work, and returned to their author: which office I am not ungrateful to carry out, nor is it useless to our republic of letters.  For this indiculus has the variant readings which are obviously best and which are evidently most in the style of the author.  It is also true that the collation was made with that exemplar that Renatus Laurentius Barraeus of Paris edited in 1580". etc.

Thus Junius so far.  Whoever diligently examines those variants, will discover three things which they can most strongly affirm:  

  1. That these were excerpted from ancient parchment MSS with the highest faithfulness and diligence

  2. That these were not collected from many MSS in various libraries, as Junius suggests, but obtained from one origin

  3. This codex, i.e. the Fuldensis, not only does not follow the vulgar family, but evidently is different from the family of the other books of Tertullian.

Thus they go wrong who with plainly obtuse judgement prefer to attempt to patch together a single work out of shreds of the Fuldensis and the vulgate-type codices.  Thus Rigaltius, thus Havercamp, thus others, who all take no care to use the Junius edition complete.

        For a long time the best edition of the works of Tertullian was that of Nicholas Rigaltius, which was published at Paris in 1634, and many times reprinted. He was the first to make use of the complete and entire Codex Agobardinus and by his work and authority helped and carried forward such a great and wonderful work.  He also used the Pithoeanus and for the Apologeticum the Puteanus, which I have mentioned above, and thirdly the Divionensis, which he saw at the house of the noble P. Belinius, but which, as he himself admitted could hardly be called very old.  This Divionensis included, according to the index prefixed to the text of the Rigaltiana, these books:

1. Ad Scapulam.
2. De Paenitentia.
3: Ad Martyras.
4. De Carne Christi.
5. De Resurrectione Carnis.
6. De Monogamia.

However as Rigaltius also cites it for De Patientia (cf. his adnot. on De Patientia cap. 3.), De Virginibus Velandis (cf. his adnot. on De Virg. Veland. cap. 1., cap.7., cap.11., cap. 13., cap. 14.), Adversus Iudaeos (cf. his adnot. on Adv. Iud. cap. 8., cap. 11., cap.  13.), De Praescriptione Haereticorum (cf. his adnot. on De Praescr. Haeret. cap.17. et cap. 22.), Adversus Hermogenem (cf. his adnot. on Adv. Hermog. cap. 27.), that codex


seems to have contained many other works. However he had, if I am not mistaken, not the codex itself but a copy of Rhenanus' edition in the margin of which in the hand of P.Pithoeus the variants were noted, together with Pithoeus' own emendations and with excerpts from other manuscripts (e.g. from a codex Remensis, about which cf. note of Rigaltius, on De Pudic. cap. 10.), of which today we know nothing. Cf. Rigalt notes. on Adv. Marcion. IV, 19. , on De Praescr. Haeret cap. 21., on Adv. Valentin. cap. 4.   Although to this day the shape of our works of Tertullian is due to Rigaltius, I wish he had  been more diligent and religious in examining his sources before he put them to use. For since he knew of nothing apart from the Fuldensis which he could rightly use, as I have objected above, he very often interpolated the genuine words of the text with the conjectures and emendations of Fulvio Orsini, which while they might be very true here and there, seem to have owed very little however to ancient MS codices repeated by Fulvio Orsini.  These Ursinianae, which are not from old MSS but on inspection are adjudged scholarly emendations, by those who have reviewed the discrepancies of the MSS of the Apologeticum in the  various MS families, were divulged by Ioannes Wouwer in a book entitled 

"Ad Q. Septimii Florentis Tertulliani Opera Emendationes Epidicticae.   Io. a Wouwer.  Francofurti ad Moenum.  Impendio Rulandiorum, Typis Richterianis. MDCXII."   

In the preface he says: 

"In case you should err, you do not," he says, "owe the benefit of these to me but to Fulvio Orsini, a most erudite man: for from his own book, which is preserved in the Vatican Library, I have excerpted them, and lest you should doubt me, the most learned Dominic Raynald, prefect of this library, allowed me the use of that book, whose kindness to me and singular helpfulness I can never praise enough" etc.

To this Rigaltius adds in his preface:

"The following age contained Fulvio Orsini, who certainly inspected codices far better than those of Rhenanus, noting excerpts and readings in the margin of a Pamelius edition, but not naming the owners of the exemplars.  The Fulvian readings, transferred from the autograph in a book owned by the great and learned Archbishop of Tolosa, Cardinal Monchalli, are also in this work, as in the edition, The Accurate Notes of Wouwer published, which also deserves credit as the separate publication" etc..   

As if indeed Fulvio Orsini could name the possessors of exemplars, which themselves did not exist! No indeed, wherever in other writers, primarily in Arnobius, it came about that the child of the genius of Orsini was usurped on behalf of older and better MSS, likewise the same error remains to be purged in Tertullian.  Orsini corrected in many places at his peril, in many places fro the authority of the Gangney edition,


long the rarest and best of the older ones, as in De Ieieun. ch.1., ch.7., ch.15.  Latinus Latinius in Bibl. Sacra et Profana cites such an MS of the Apologeticum of Fulvio Orsini, in his book for ch. 3., ch. 21., ch. 40., ch. 47., ch. 48., of which number one such, i.e. ch. 47, agrees in that text with the Orsini emendation noted in Wouwer.  Montfaucon completes the matter, whose Bibl. Bibl. vol. I.. p. 120.  in the catalogue of the Vatican Library n. 5398., enumerating those says eloquently 

"Fulvio Orsini's emendations on Tertullian, and Lactantius Firmianus."

        This of the editions of Rhenanus, Gelenius, Rigaltius and of the MSS which have been used.  It remains to add a little about the remaining MSS of which we have had notice.  

"in the recesses a handwritten codex among the other books whose frontispiece displayed more than once the name of Terquillianus",

denying, "the opportunity was available for anyone to fabricate this", and however confessing that he should have found out "where this codex is preserved, and what sort of men, that came to inspect the old books in this century, and hardly valued it."  I do wish that the most learned Barthius without so many ambiguous words had indicated to us the place where this codex is preserved.

1. De Patientia Dei lib. I.    
2. Adversus Praxeam lib. I.     
3. Contra Marcionem lib. V.   
4. Contra Iudaeos lib. I.    
5. Contra Omnes Haereses lib. I.   
6. De Proscriptionibus (sic) Haereticorum  lib. I.     
7. Adversus Hermogenem lib. I.   


8. Contra Valentinianos lib. I.   
9. De Carne Christi lib. I.   
10. De Resurrectione Carnis lib. I.   
11. De Corona Militis lib. I.   
12. Ad Martyres lib. I.   
13. De Poenitentia lib. I.
14. De Velandis Virginibus lib. I.  
15. De Habitu Muliebri lib. I.
16. De Cultu Feminarum lib. I.   
17. Ad Uxorem lib. II.   
18. De Persecutione ad Fabium lib. I.   
19. Ad . Scapulam lib. I.   
20. Exortatorium (sic) Castitas lib. I.   
21. De Monogamia lib. I.   
22. De Pallio lib. I.  

he also cites:

1. De Spectaculis lib. I.   
2. De Extasi lib. VI.    
3. De Pudicitia lib. I.  
4. De Ieiuniis lib. I.   
5. Adversus Apollonium lib.1., 

however since for these books the first words are not likewise added, it is not entirely necessary to think that he had seen them.  (Cf. also Fabric. note on ch. 9, p. 7).  Nor as far as I know is there today any MS codex extant of De Pudicitia or De Ieiunio adversus Psychicos.

        It remains for me to say a little about my edition of these works of Tertullian. I have studied what would adorn this collected works, I revised the works so that the words of the author could be made everywhere genuine and much more accurate, nor did I hesitate to add notes on words, subjects and ideas wherever there might be a reason to do so. I excerpted or transcribed from Beatus Rhenanus, Jacobus Pamelius, Franciscus Junius, Ludovicus de la Cerda, Desiderius Heraldus, Claudius Salmasius, Nicolaus Rigaltius and others, whatever seemed useful. I have placed beneath the text readings of the codices used by me and of the editions of Rhenanus, Gangneius, Gelenius, Pamelius, Rigaltius, in the Apologeticum, De Oratione and De Pallio I shall publish the editorial discrepancies in the books of Heraldus, Muratorius, Salmasius; except that I will suppress material in the very corrupt Leidensis and Vindobonensis MSS which is manifestly correct in many books


in order to reduce the tedium which would obstruct the judgment of those who read it.  Where it is evident to me that the fidelity of the text is not good enough, I have enclosed the problem in brackets, and where indeed I was doubtful, I have placed a question mark above it.  In the third volume of the work I have reprinted various dissertations, by Jac. Pamelius, P. Allix, Nic. le Nourry, Jo. Laur. Mosheim, Godofr. Centner, Jo. Aug. Noesselt, Jo. Sal. Semler, Sir Jo. Kaye, in choosing which I was aided by the judgement of the noble Car. Thilo, foremost of men in Germany capable in this part of letters, not just because of his conspicuous erudition as on account of the great charm of wisdom known to all those who are more familiar with him and his conversation.  I had decided to add my name to the number of those who had produced an introduction on the life and times of Tertullian , but the troubles of the times and the constraints of reduced pages made it impossible.  I defer, therefore, to years to come, where, if God allows it, I promise that the works of Tertullian by me will be explained and interpreted at more length. Now indeed I hope and wish that those at least who follow me, as I have made these books available, so they may be able to read them with understanding and profit.

This page has been accessed by ****** people since 18th April 2001.

Return to the Tertullian Home Page  Original Language About these pages