A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

ORIGENES. ORIGENES. 51
to the carelessness or mistake of the writers or and Cc7tol/i( of Origen himself and of Pamphilus
transcribers, than to any variation in the order of and Eusebius, long remained in the library of the
the versions in different copies of the He apla; for martyr Pamphilus at Caesareia; and were probably
this appears to have been so fixed as to have sug- destroyed in the seventh century, either at the
gested the common mode of referring to them by capture of that city by Chosroes II. the Persian, or
their place in the arrangement. The Quinta, Sexta, its subsequent capture by the Saracens. The few
&c. versions, are anonymous; at least the authors transcripts that were made have perished also, and
are not known. Jerome (zAdv. Rzsfin. ii. 34, the work, as compiled by Origen, has been long lost.
ed. Vallars.) calls the authors of the Quinta and Numerous fragments have, however, been preserved
Sexta, Jews; yet a citation from the Editio Sexta, in the writings of the fathers. Many of these, conwhich citation Jerome himself has given in Latin, taining scraps of the versions of Aquila and the other
shows that the author of that version was a Chris- Greek translators, collected by Petrus Morinus, were
tian. Josephus, author of the Hypomnnesticon [Jo- inserted by Flaminius Nobilius in the beautiful and
SEPHUS, No. 12] mentions a current report that valuable edition of the Septuagint, fol. Rome, 1587.
the author of the Editio Quinta was a woman. These fragments, and some additional ones, with
The author of the Editio Septirsla was probably a learned notes, were prepared for publication by JoJew. (Montfauc. Praelim. in Hexapla, cap. viii. annes Drusius, and published after his death with
~ 5.) These three versions are far less literal this title, Veterui ln/terpretumn Gr1aecorum in to/urn
than the other four versions; the Sexta, in parti- V. T. Fragmnenta, 4to. Arnheim, 1622. But the
calar, has some amplifications of most unauthorized most complete edition is that of the learned Benecharacter. dictine Montfaucon -Hexaplorumz Origenis quae
Beside the compilation and arrangement of so supversunt, 2 vols. fol. Paris, 1714. Montfaucon revaluable a critical apparatus as these versions, tained the arrangement of the versions adopted by
Origen added marginal notes, containing, among Origen, and also his asterisks and obeli, wherever
other things, an explanation of the Hebrew names, they were found in the MSS. employed for the
There is reason to think that he occasionally gave edition; and added a Latin version both to the
in his marginal notes a Greek version of the read- Hebrew text (for which he employed that of
ings of the Syriac and Samaritan versions, of the Santes Pagninus or of Arias Montanus with slight
former in various books, of the latter in the Penta- alterations, and also the Vulgate), and to the Greek
teuch only. Certainly such readings are found, not versions. He prefixed a valuable Praefatio and Praeonly in extant MS. where the Hexapla is cited, limsinaric, to which we have been much indebted,
but in the citations of it by the fathers of the fourth and added to the edition several A.necdota, or unpuband fifth centuries. It is to be observed also that lished fragments of Origen and others, and a Greek
Origen did not content himself with giving the and a Hebrew Lexicon to the Hexapla. An editext of the Septuagint as it stood in his own time, tion based on that of Montfaucon was published in
deeming it to have been much corrupted by the 2 vols. 8vo. Leipzig and Lubec, 1769,1770,underthe.
carelessness or unscrupulous alterations or additions editorship of C. F. Bahrdt: it omitted the Itebrew
or omissions of transcribers. (Origen. Comment. in text in Greek letters, the Latin versions, the AnecAlatth. apud Hodium, De Text. Originalibus, lib. iii. dota, or previously unpublished extracts from Origen
c. iv. ~ 8.) He amended the text chiefly by the and others, and many of the notes. Bahrdt proaid of Theodotion's version, allowing the received fessed to correct the text, and increased it by some
reading to remain, but marking his proposed alter- additional fragments; and he added notes of his
ations or additions with an asterisk (*), and pre- own to those which he retained of Montfaucon's.
fixing an obelus (-) to such words or passages as Bahrdt's preface intimated his purpose of preparing
lie thought should be omitted. The use of another a Lexicon to the work, but it is not subjoined to
mark, the lemniscus ( --- or -— ), which he is the copy now before us, nor can we find that it was
said to have employed, can only be conjectured: ever published.
the account of its use given by Epiphanius (De II.'ESr1-yyrsLcd, Exegetical works. These compreMigenslr. et Ponderib. c. viii.), is evidently erroneous. hend three classes. (Hieron3ym. Praef. in Tran2slt.
Origen's revision of the text of the Septuagint was Hooiil. Origen. in Jelrea. et Ezeck.) 1. Touol, which
regarded by succeeding generations as the standard; Jerome renders Volumaina, containing ample comit was frequently transcribed, and Latin, Syriac, nentaries, in which he gave full scope to his inteland Arabic versions made from it. lect. 2. 2Xo0Aa, Schiolia; brief notes on detached
In the preparation of this most laborious and passages, designed to clear tip obscurities and revaluable work, Origen was encouraged by the ex- move difficulties. 3. lo7miliae, popular expositions,
hortations and supported by the wealth of his delivered chiefly at Caesareia; and in the latter part
friend Ambrose. It is probable that, from the of his life (i. e. after his sixtieth year, A. D. 246),
labour and cost required, comparatively few tran- extemporaneously, being taken down at the time
scripts were ever made; though there were a suffi- of delivery by persons employed for the purpose.
cient number for the leading ecclesiastical writers Of the Td,uoa there are few remains. Of the
of succeeding ages to have access to it; as Pam- Sc/solia a number have been collected chiefly from
philus, Eusebius of Caesareia, (these two are said to the citations of the fathers, and are given by
have corrected the text of the work, and Eusebius Delarue under the title of'EiXoTyai, Selects. Of
added Sholia,) Athanasius, Theodorus of Hera- the Hlomiliace a few are extant in the original, and
cleia, the Arian, Diodorus of Tarsus, Epiphanpuls, many more in the Latin versions (not very faithful
Rufinus, Jerome, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Proco- however) of Rufilus, Jerome, and others. Our
pius of Gaza, &c. Others of the fathers employed space does not allow us to give an enumeration of
the work less frequently; and some borrowed their Origen's Exegetical works, but they will be found
acquaintance with its various readings from the in Delarue's edition of his works.
citations of their predecessors. Origen's own copies In his various expositions Origen sought to
of the Tetractla and Ilexapla, with the corrections extract from the Sacred Writings their historical.
2