And as it writings against Julian after Antiochien sent,  likewise in addition, what it had written over the scapegoat, asked it  the blessed Johannes, the bishop von Antiochien to show this the  teachers who stood out in the Orient.  And the blessed Johannes  responded to the letter, by sending us the books, and after we had  read her, we admired her and sent Kyrill of blessed memory a letter.  And it wrote back us and certified us both accuracy and affection, and  these letters are received with us.  
 
 Since Johannes 428 or 429 mounted the bishop chair of Antiochien and  441 or 442 died, Kyrill must have sent in this period the two works  mentioned to it.  Since on the other hand the nestorianischen disputes  stressed Kyrills worker starting from 425 strongly, he might have  prepared CI already before.  The past attempts to limit the time of  the drawing up and publication further are contradictory and are not  able not to convince.  
 The newest dating suggestion comes from Markus Vinzent.  It proceeds  from the surely dated fixed letters Kyrills, which enter in each case  with current conditions in Egypt.  In between 414 and 417 fixed  letters developed the 1.3-6 and 9-10 Kyrill before the background of  the remaining heaths and the only half bekehrten Christians generally  argues with the relationship of Christianity and brightism.  This  argument in the fixed letters 12-14 from the years 424 to 426, whose  main topic is the " Hellenisieren " within as outside of the  Christianity, reaches their high point.  In the letters 15-18 from the  years 427-430 the topic fades away then noticeably, in order to  disappear in the letters 19-30 from 431 to 442 nearly completely.  
 
 The fixed letters 12-16 of the years 424 to 428 contain again and  again resemblances to CI, partially literal parallels.  Already in the  year 12 parallels meet 424 to several books and to the Prosphonema of  CI in fixed letter.  With these convincing arguments Vinzent pleads  for the completion of the work between 423 and 428, probably even at  the latest at Easter 424.  
 
 It is noticeable that only about sixty years after CG circulated to  CI.  As reason for the retort Kyrill calls the disconcertion of  numerous creditors in the dedication letter at Theodosius II. by the  writing July to.  Both thoughtless and Christians strengthened in the  faith appeared by the apparent writing knowledge July to impressed,  and the heaths did not use its arguments against the Christianity,  whereby they stated, a Christian teacher Julian to disprove had been  able.  These statements Kyrills cover themselves with the findings  raised from Markus Vinzent from the Easter letters, according to which  it in the two first decades 4.  Century in Alexandrien numerous  baptizing gave, which practiced a Synkretismus from Christianity and  Heidentum.  
 Perhaps an investigation of the religion politics Theodosius could  throw ' II. and the relationship between the emperor and Kyrill  additional light on these questions.  Such an investigation is still  pending and cannot not be carried out also in the context of the  available study.  
 
 3.  The extent of CI 
 In order to be able to determine the original extent of CI, we must  provide first over the situation of the direct and indirect excessive  quantity and over the book organization clarity.  
 
 3,1 the printouts 
 Only the first ten books are as well known directly delivered.  In the  printed expenditures they are sequentially counted.  Oecolampadius  overwrites it in its latin translation with " Liber primus " to etc..    That he this sequential counting however to his Greek collecting  main, from who lost Codex Capnioneus took out of the possession of its  teacher Reuchlin, but introduced, does not say it at the beginning of  book VI (f. 46D):  
 In exemplari praescribebatur liber Secundus, nimirum pars secunda  operis, quae et ipsa quinque libros continet.  
 Therefore the Codex Capnioneus was divided in Pentaden.  
 Borbonius prepared book I from CI except the Prosphonema only to the  pressure.  It overwrites it????????????  which no conclusions on the  book counting in it admitted of handwriting permit.  
 Aubert counts the ten books sequentially?????????????????/  Liber  primus etc.).  At the beginning of its Variae lectiones it writes:  
 Dividuntur rear libri in aliis more aliter codicibus.  Sunt enim qui  in 2. libros, singulos in Vth tomos totum hoc adversus Iulianum opus  dividunt.  
 Also it knew thus handwriting, which divided the ten books in two  Pentaden to five books each.  Unfortunately it indicates neither the  handwriting used by him nor the source for the sequential counting  preferred by it.  The sequential counting of the books was transferred  also to volume 76 the Patrologia Graeca.  
 
 3,2 the direct handwritten excessive quantity of the books IX  
 The Prosphonema (= Pr.)  and the first ten books of CI are more or  less completely directly delivered in fourteen handwriting, which is  only partial however for the text excessive quantity of importance  (s.o. S. 31f.).  
 Of the remaining handwriting (without consideration of?)  contained:  
 5 the Prosphonema and the books IX (FMEBQ), 
 2 contains only the books IV (VI), 
 1 because of mutilating only the books IV-X (H), 
 1 because of mutilating only the Prosphonema and book I (G).  
 Cod.  V seems to have found the first five books in its collecting  main only, like the conclusion note??????  at the end of the fifth  book suggests.  It follows Kyrills versus Anthropomorphitas.  In cod.    B follows after book V of CI likewise versus Anthropomorphitas, but  is thereafter the books VI-X of CI. of these Codex is contaminated  from different handwriting families.  In the first five books it  follows V, during it in the books which are missing there VI-X i.w.  M  follows.  The organization of the books in these handwriting comes out  from Ta¬belle 2.  
 
 3,3 the indirect excessive quantity 
 Indirectly Exzerpte are both from the first ten books and delivered  made of book XI-XIX of CI in Florilegien and Katenen Greek and Syrian.  These collections must be first presented, as far as they throw light  on the question about the book organization:  
 
 Florilegien 
 1.  Florilegium Cyrillianum (before 483) 
 The Florilegium Cyrillianum is developed a prochalkedonensische  Anthologie from the works Kyrills, in Alexandria before 483.  It is  only indirectly delivered.  Between 508 and 511 it was copied in  Konstantinopel by Severus of Antiochien in the first part of its  Philalethes word for word, corrected and disproved in the second part  by comparison with the original works.  At the latest at this time it  contained under the numbers 176-180 of five quotations from CI, three  the books lost of it from XII-XIV.  Later Severus repeated into the  Apologie for the Philalethes a part of the Florilegs and its  refutation.  Both writings of the Severus are only in Syrian  translations from to thirties the twenties 6.  Century receive, the  Philalethes in cod.  Vat. syr. 139 (8th century), the Apologie in cod.  Vat. syr. 140 (6th century).  These two Syrian Codices are the oldest  indirect handwritten witnesses for CI. before the loss of the Greek  Philalethes (supposed in 6. or 7.  Century) had been copied the  Florileg contained in it alone to the largest part.  In this form it  has itself in three Greek handwriting 13. to 15.  Century receive.  
 
 2.  The Dyotheleti Florileg Roman legaten on that of the 6.  Oekumeni  council of Konstantinopel 680/81 
 On that 6.  Oekumeni council of Konstantinopel submitted to legaten of  the Pope a dyotheletisches Florileg, which contained among other  things two quotations from book XII of CI.  The Florileg was arranged  probably briefly before the council of Greek monks in Rome.  At the  tenth meeting of the council the Florileg will completely read out,  whereby the individual quotations are compared with the text of the  original works from the Patriarchatsbibliothek by Konstantinopel.  Since this proceeding is applied also to the quotations from CI, still  another copy of CI must have existed at that time in the patriarchat,  which was enough at least to book XII.  
 
 3.  The Christologi Florileg cod.  Athous Vatopedianus 507 (after 685)  
 With this Florileg it concerns 13 Testimonien a comprehensive addition  of the Doctrina Patrum de Incarnatione Verbi, behind which it stands  in the handwriting.  Term post office quem for the Florileg of  Vatopedi is therefore at the earliest around 685 locked Doctrina  patrum, which it presupposes, the term ante quem is formally the  drawing up of the handwriting at the beginning 12.  Century.  However  Maximus Confessor seems to be the youngest among the quoted authors,  so that the time of the compilation might have to be set rather soon  after the Doctrina patrum.  The Kompilator is unknown.  Since he  scoops his material obviously from other collections, it is not to be  accepted that a copy of CI was accessible to him 
 
 The text of the Exzerptes from CI corresponds to that in approximately  that of the two sections of the Florilegs legaten of 681/82, but  contains it the sentence omitted there between both pieces, cannot  thus not from the council documents be taken over.  Since it exhibits  gaps on the other hand opposite the Florileg from Rome, also a  dependence is not possible in reverse direction.  
 
 4.  Johannes of Damascus, Hiera (Sacra Parallela – before 754)  
 
 The original form of this large Florilegs carried the names???????  and covered three books.  First contained Testimonien over God, second  over humans and third over the virtues and vices.  Into both first  books the Exzerpte was alphabetically arranged according to  references, in third per a virtue and the opposite vice parallelisiert  in pairs.  The work is not however in this original form, but receive  only in different later reviews.  It is attributed by numerous  handwriting Johannes of Damascus.  
 
 Only one review, the Florilegium Vaticanum, is by Michel Lequien after  cod.  Vat.  gr. completely edits 1236 (saec. XV) under the title Sacra  Parallela.  From another review, the Florilegium Rupefucaldinum, he  divides after the only received handwriting (cod. Berolin.  gr. 46 [  Phill.  1450 ];  saec.  XII) only the index and some Exzerpte also.  The work titles are added the Exzerpten, which it prints to this  handwriting only in the Lemmata to find and from Lequien also after  the Vat. gr. 1236.  Both reviews contain parts from all three books of  the Hiera.  The edition of Lequien offers from both handwriting  together altogether 17 Exzerpte from the lost books of CI, of it 2  pairs of doublets (pair falsely the book V assigned, probably from  book XV), to 1 falsely book I assigned (probably from book XI), 3  without indication of book and 1 falsely Chrysostomus attributed.  
 Of the Recensio Vaticana of the second book of the Hiera became by  Angelo May the Vorrede, the index and some excerpts after cod.  Vat.  gr. 1553 (saec. X) under the  title??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????  
 edited.  Here altogether 24 Testimonien, which originate from the lost  books from CI, of those are however inadvertent book a V (instead of  XV?),  two book VII (instead of XVII?)  are assigned, while on the  other hand two allegedly Exzerpte in book IV and/or VI, taken made of  book XIV, are.  
 If the nearly unanimous writing up of the Hiera at Johannes of  Damascus in the handwriting is correct, it in the middle of the 8th  century might have been accessible in Palestine a copy of CI, which  was enough at least to book XVIII.  Since the expenditures Lequiens  and corn are very insufficient, new and more reliable material is to  be expected by a future critical expenditure of the Hiera.  
 
 5.  Florilegium Patmiacum (11 century) 
 
 The Florilegium Patmiacum belonged to the Florilegia sacro profana and  was published of Étienne Sargologos after the five received  handwriting, under which the Patmiacus is gr. 6 (saec. XI) the oldest  and most important.  In 56 chapters it offers to Exzerpte to topics of  the Christian lebensfuehrung, which are enriched mostly from other  Florilegia sacro profana and different reviews of the Hiera taken over  and from Katenen, Christian asketischen, Jewish and heidnischen  authors.  The anonymous Kompilator becomes from the publisher into the  11.  Century dates.  
 
 In the Lemmata the author, not however the work, is usually indicated  made of which the Exzerpt comes.  The publisher from 21 handwriting of  other compilations added the missing work titles, in which the same  Exzerpte are.  Altogether the Florileg contains of eight excerpts from  CI, six of it from the lost books.  From the latters ever one is  printed also at Lequien and/or May from the reviews of the Hiera.  Altogether six remaining places Sargologos in not edited handwriting  of different reviews of the Hiera identified five to that.  Is there  the material not directly out of CI, but taken out of the Hiera,  offers the Florilegium Patmiacum no additional reference point, in  order to date the loss of the books XI the following from CI to.  
 
 Katenen and Bible comments 
 
 1.  So-called Mark US comment of the Viktor of Antiochien (CPG C125)  
 The edition of Pierre Poussin contaminates the two reviews of the  comment among themselves and with other handwriting.  The only  Scholion of the expenditure, which refers to CI, is only in cod.  Vat.  gr. 1692 (saec. XIII) to Mk 15,23.  This handwriting contains an  anonymous Katene to Markus, whose " chain kettenschmied " is not  identical to Viktor of Antiochien.  The emergence sets Joseph Reuss on  the beginning 6.  Century.  
 
 2.  Katene to the Paulusbriefen, type Vaticanus (CPG C160) 
 
 By John the A. Cramer to Paris.  gr. 227 (saec. XVI) printed part of  the Katene to I Kor, originates from that 10.  Century, goes however  on an anonymous Katene of the 7./8.  Century back.  In it Kor 15.24 a  quotation made of book IV of CI. is to I 
 
 3.  Katene of the HP Oekumenius to the Paulusbriefen (CPG C165)  
 
 This Katene decreases/goes back not on Oekumenius, but originates in  their original review from an anonym from the end 8.  Century and  became in 9. and 10.  Century of another anonym extends.  One of the  sources is the type Vaticanus of the Pauluskatenen described above.  Altogether at least five reviews of the Katene of the HP Oekumenius  are well-known.  
 
 The two quotations from CI, printed with Migne, originate from the  very bad cod.  Paris.  gr. 219 (saec. XI), the only representative of  an independent, extended type of these Katene.  One is to I Kor 15.24  and is taken out of book IV of CI.  It is with the quotation to the  same Bible place in the type Vaticanus of the Pauluskatenen (s.o.)  identically.  The other one refers to II Kor 4.4 and comes from book I  of CI.  
 
 John A. Cramer has the extended type after the Katene cod.  Paris.  gr. 223 (saec. XI) given change.  It prints (likewise to II Kor 4.4) a  Lemma, which refers I of CI to book.  The following text is there  however not and does not belong obviously not to the Lemma.  The  associated text therefore failed in the handwriting or in the  printout.  Perhaps it concerns the evenly mentioned passage, itself in  cod.  Paris.  gr. 219 to the same place finds.  
 Of the quotation from CI to I Kor 15.24, which it had edited after the  type Vaticanus (s.o.), gives Cramer from cod.  Oxon.  Bodl.  Roe 16  (saec. X), which however apparent to the normal type of the Katene of  the HP Oekumenius belongs, additionally the Lemma alone out.  
 
 4.  Katene of Andreas to the Apostelgeschichte (CPG C150) 
 
 The expenditure Cramers follows cod.  Oxon.  Coll.  Novi 58 (saec.  XII) and offers some additives from Paris.  Coisl.  25 (saec. X).  Andreas mentioned in the latter handwriting is probably not the  Katenist, but only a writer.  This handwriting gives the only notion  for dating.  Altogether three quotations from CI are printed.  
 
 5.  The Apokalypse comment of the Arethas of Caesarea 
 
 Arethas wrote its after Apokalypse comment the Bischofsweihe, probably  not before 913.  On far distances Arethas took over the comment of his  predecessor Andreas von Caesarea (bishop between 563-614).  The  edition of the Arethas comment of John A. Cramer follows cod.  Oxon.  Baroccianus 3 (saec. XI).  Here apparent is the only reference of the  work to CI.  In the comment on Apk 7.8 the Kommentator quotes the  place process card 23.34 and contradicts Kyrill, which denied the  authenticity of this verse in book XIII of CI.  Since the passage in  the comment of Andreas is missing, it belongs obviously only to the  existence of the Arethas comment.  
 
 6.  Katene of the Nikolaos Muzalon to Jesaja 1-16 (CPG C62) 
 
 Nikolaos IV.  Muzalon was after its resignation as an archbishop of  Cyprus around 1110 an abbott in Konstantinopel, of 1147-1151 Patriarch  of this city.  Probably still as an archbishop of Cyprus it compiled a  Katene to Jesaja (to chapter 16), of which only the Vorrede is edited.  In the ungedruckten Katene he quotes at least once from CI.  
   
 3,4 copies and repositories of CI 
 
 From above the saying it results that at least three (complete?)  
 
 Copies of CI existed.  
 
 Since Kyrill of Alexandrien its work against Julian to emperors  Theodosios II. dedicated, a copy of the writing must have arrived  after Konstantinopel into the palace.  A further copy remained  reliably in the patriarchat of Alexandrien.  A third copy sent Kyrill  to the certification Theodorets at Johannes of Antiochien, thereby to  these it " the teachers outstanding in the Orient shows " (s.o. S.  36f).  
 
 From the copy of the works Kyrills in the patriarchat Alexandrien of  the Timotheos Ailouros must in to 70's the 50's 5 of  chalkedonensischen circles at the latest around 482, perhaps even  already as answer to the Florileg.  Jh., the Florilegium Cyrillianum  compiled its (s.o. S. 40f.).  
 
 Between 508 and 511 had Severus of Antiochien in Konstantinopel  entrance to a copy of CI, from which he corrected the Testimonien of  the Florilegium Cyrillianum and supplemented (s.o. S. 40f.).  Due to  his good relations with the yard among emperors Anastasius it may be  accepted that it acted thereby around the complimentary copy out of  the palace library.  In which form it CI during drawing up of the  Apologie for the Philalethes in the Egyptian exile it was present  whether in di¬rekter or indirect excessive quantity, leaves itself not  to say.  
 
 Regarding the copy, which had sent Kyrill to Johannes of Antiochien,  it remains unclear whether of it in the area by Antiochien copies for  other eastern " church teachers " were manufactured and whether  Theodoret sent back the copy again.  
 
 A copy of CI meets us 682 on that 6.  Oekumeni council again in  Konstantinopel, this time however in the patriarchat (s.o. S. 41f.).  For the acceptance, it arrived in the meantime from the palace there,  gives it no reason.  Rather Kyrill will have sent its work except to  the emperor and at Johannes of Antiochien also to the Patriarchen of  the capital.  Before the council also the Greek Kompilatoren of the  dyotheletischen Florilegs probably working in Rome must have had  entrance to CI.  Since they write only two passages out from this  work, it is not to be said with security whether they inferred the  text from the direct excessive quantity (s.o. S. 41f.).  
 
 Very often quotes however Johannes of Damascus in the Hiera from CI  (s.o. S. 43f.).  Because of their frequency and self-sufficiency this  Exzerpte might originate earliest from the direct excessive quantity.    Since they are enough in addition to book XIX (= Frg. 49 Neumann),  the acceptance lies close that the Damaszener in the first half of the  8th century a copy of CI was present, which contained four Pentaden.  Whether this copy belonged to the library of the patriarchats  Jerusalem or the Sabasklosters or whether it was in the patriarchat of  Antiochien, can be answered just as little like the question whether  it concerned a copy of the Codex sent from Kyrill to Antiochien.  
 
 To the surely testified three copies in the patriarchat of  Alexandrien, in the emperor palace of Konstantinopel and in the  patriarchat of Antiochien thus probably two further step in the  patriarchat of Konstantinopel and in Palestine and one into Rome ways  of the extent of CI are not very probable perhaps it that very many  copies were ever made.  
 
 3,5 the book organization of CI 
 
 From the tables 2-4 the occurrence of the different Lemmata types is  evident in the direct and indirect excessive quantity.  Thereby only  for the text excessive quantity the relevant are considered codd.  GV  and FME as well as Q. for reasons of clarity are not proven the places  of discovery of the Lemmata in the works of the indirect excessive  quantity in detail.  
 Four different types of the book organization occur:  
 
 Type A only Pentaden (??????) indicated 
 Type A sequential counting of all " books "  (??????,???????,???????????????????? or only cardinal numbers) without  indication of the Pentaden 
 Type Aa indication of the Pentaden??????????  or?????????  and  sequential counting of all " books " (??????) 
 Type starting from indication of the Pentaden (?????????) and separate  counting of the " books " within the individual Pentaden (???????  or??????)  von?1-5 
 
 The findings permit the following statements:  
 
 Direct excessive quantity (see table 2) 
 
 1.  Cod.  G does not result in anything for the question about the  book organization.  The handwriting mutilated I at the beginning of  the Prosphonema and at the end of book.  It offers neither explicit  for the Prosphonema still another heading to book I. for the latters  is however free space calmly, likewise for the missing initials of the  first word.  Heading and initials of the books should be classitied  obviously later, which did not happen however.  
 
 2.  V is uncertain, since it contains only the first five books.  
 
 3.  The remaining relevant Codices of the direct excessive quantity  (FMEQ) succession type.  The terminology is constant thereby:  The  Pentaden always becomes as????????  the " books " as???????  designated.  
 4.  Two of these handwriting (MQ) exhibit however in the second  Pentade additionally to type starting from another counting:  
 
 In cod.  M are counted over the books VI-IX additionally according to  type A (VI become thereby as??????????  VII-IX become as????????  designated).  This additional counting is only at the edge of the  Folia and from other hand.  It is secondary.  
 In cod.  Q are counted over off the books VII-IX additionally for  Greek written counting according to type on Latin according to type A  ("Liber VII " etc.).  This counting is likewise secondary.  
 
 5.  The respective subscription of book X (??????), with F in addition  incipit this book puts near that surely with codd.  FM and probably  with codd.  EQ (indirect) the collecting main ended here.  (indirect)  the collecting main of cod.  V contained – from the  subscription??????  to close ago – only five books.  This is  correct with the text excessive quantity altogether together:  The  text was originally probably in Codices delivered, which were divided  in Pentaden, so that in a case two Codices, in other trap only a Codex  was present.  
 
 Indirect excessive quantity (see table 3-4) 
 
 1.  Only the christologische Florileg of Vatopedi and the Catena of  the Nikolaos Muzalon follow the type used in the direct excessive  quantity off 
 
 2.  Follow type Aa the oldest witnesses, the Florilegium Cyrillianum  (before 483) and the dyotheletische Florileg Roman legaten on the  third council of Konstantinopel (680/81).  They designate the Pentade  with?????????  or?????????  the " book " with????????  Not clearly to  clarify it is whether the indication of the Pentaden was only  secondarily introduced by the Florilegisten out of book-practical  reasons or taken however them the available, today lost handwriting of  the direct excessive quantity.  Certain signs point on the fact that  the latter is the case.  On the other side Kyrill designates the  individual books of its work repeated than??????.  The grouping in  five, however going through counted Logoi each (type Aa) will  decrease/go back therefore to the handwriting of the patriarchats and  in the long run on Kyrill themselves.  
 
 3.  Following Florilegien and Katenen follow type A, whereby the "  books " will provide as more?????????????????oder???????bezeichnet or  only with a cardinal number:  
 
 + the Florilegium Rupefucaldinum and the Recensio Vaticana of the  Hiera, which decrease/go back both to the Hiera (Sacra Parallela) of  the Johannes of Damascus;  
 + the Florilegium Patmiacum, which probably likewise draws its  quotations from CI from the Hiera;  
 + the so-called Mark US comment of the Viktor of Antiochien;  
 + the Katene to the Paulusbriefen of the type Vaticanus;  
 + the Apokalypse comment of the Arethas.  
 
 The Katene of Andreas to the Apostelgeschichte follows only in one of  three quotations from CI type A (????????????waehrend it twice type A  follows.  
 
 4.  Type A is twice represented thus only in the Katene of Andreas to  the Apostelgeschichte.  Book IX and X of CI are???????????gezaehlt as;  the word???????  met only here.  
 
 3,6 consequences 
 
 1.  Type A is probably a modification of type Aa.  Thus -- one sees A  once of the nearly not occupied type off -- the types Aa remain and  starting from type Aa leave themselves into the 5./6.  Jh. retrace and  are alexandrinischen origin (Florilegium Cyrillianum).  This type  meets also 681/82 in Konstantinopel.  Type is uniformly used off  against it in the direct excessive quantity of the received two first  Pentaden.  This puts the assumption close that the direct excessive  quantity decreases/goes back to a text tradition of CI, which cannot  be deduced directly from the copies in Alexandrien and Konstantinopel.  
 
 2.  The received fragments are enough to therefore accept XIX. to book  are that the books were bound divided in four Pentaden and the  Pentaden to their own Codex each.  From that originally four Codices  two the latter were lost before using the direct handwritten excessive  quantity.  Therefore four Pentaden are testified, which covered  probably twenty books.  
 
 3.  The indirect excessive quantity already using before 483  (Florilegium Cyrillianum) quotes only to inclusively to the fourth  Pentade.  If it would have given a fifth and sixth Pentade, how  Neumann assumed, then they would have probably likewise contained  material, which would have been usable against the Monophysiten in the  controversy.  Since the Florileg was probably made in the kanzlei of  the patriarchats Alexandrien, where the Opera might have been still  available omnia Kyrills few decades after its death, the existence of  the books XXI-XXX is improbable.  Also Severus, which used a copy of  CI around 510 in Konstantinopel, does not mention these books  anywhere.  The same applies to 6.  Oekumeni council of Konstantinopel  681/82, on which a copy was consulted of CI, which contained the third  Pentade at least, and for all later works, which state Exzerpte from  CI.  
 
 3,7 time of the loss of the books XI ff 
 
 Term post office quem:  The last Florileg, which quotes from the books  XI-XIX, is supposed in the 11.  Jh developed Florilegium Patmiacum  (from book XVI).  The Kompilator draws these quotations however from  older collections.  It seems safe however that Johannes Damascenus (†  before 754) used the third and fourth Pentade of CI during the  composition of the Hiera still, since he quotes to book XIX  extensively.  
 
 Term ante quem:  Using the direct excessive quantity (13th Jh.)  forms  probably the term ante for quem for the loss of the third and fourth  Pentade.  The writer cod.  M (fol. 109r;  14.Jh.)  noticed:  
   
 Bessarion, to which this Codex belonged, from which it cod.  N to copy  left noticed, on fol. 153r:  
 
 The third and fourth Pentade is probably between 8. and that 13.  Century lost gone.  By the publication of the fragments of the books  XI-XIX scattered in Florilegien and Katenen we are in the meantime in  a somewhat luckier situation than the cardinal 15.  Century.  
 
 The full article with footnotes CAN found in:  \Adolf Martin  knight/Wolfgang Wischmeyer/Wolfram Kinzig (Hrsg.)... at present or  wrong time.  Studies to spaetantiken theology -, history of art and  spirit and their aftereffect.  **time-out** Hans George Thuemmel to  honour, TASHT 9, Cambridge 2004, 29-62.  
 The book CAN ordered here on academici via direct message.