Chapter XXXIII

.

[24] _Bellum Gallicum_, iii. 10.

[25] _Bellum Gallicum_, v. 6.

[26] Porcius Cato, in his _Origines_, written a hundred years before Caesar crossed the mountains, says that Gallia was devoted to the art of war and to eloquence (_argute loqui_). Presumably the Gallia that Cato thus characterized as clever or acute of speech, was Cisalpine Gaul, to wit, the north of Italy; yet Caesar’s transalpine Gauls were both clever of speech and often the fools of their own arguments. Lucian, in his _Hercules_ (No. 55, Dindorf’s edition) has his “Celt” argue that Hercules accomplished his deeds by the power of words.

[27] See, generally, Fustel de Coulanges, _Institutions politiques de l’ancienne France_, vol. i. (_La Gaule romaine_).

[28] _Bellum Gallicum_, vi. 11, 12.

[29] Cf. Julian, _Vercingetorix_ (2nd ed., Paris, 1902).

[30] _Bellum Gallicum_, iv. 5; vi. 20.

[31] There are a number of texts from the second to the fifth century which bear on the matter. Taken altogether they are unsatisfying, if not blind. They have been frequently discussed. See Gröber, _Grundriss der romanischen Philologie_, i. 451 _sqq._ (2nd edition, 1904); Brunot, _Origines de la langue française_, which is the Introduction to Petit de Julleville’s _Histoire de la langue et de la littérature française_ (Paris, 1896); Bonnet, _Le Latin de Grégoire de Tours_, pp. 22-30 (Paris, 1890); Mommsen’s _Provinces of the Roman Empire_, p. 108 _sqq._ of English translation; Fustel de Coulanges, _Institutions politiques_, vol. i. (_La Gaule romaine_), pp. 125-135 (Paris, 1891); Roger, _L’Enseignement des lettres classiques d’ Ausone à Alcuin_, p. 24 _sqq._ (Paris, 1905).

[32] Such words are, _e.g._, wine, street, wall. See Toller, _History of the English Language_ (Macmillan & Co., 1900), pp. 41, 42.

[33] See Paul, _Grundriss der germanischen Philologie_, Band i. pp. 305-315, (Strassburg, 1891).

[34] A prime illustration is afforded by the Latin juristic word _persona_ used in the Creed. The Latins had to render the three ὑποστάσεις of the Greeks; and “three somethings,” _tria quaedam_, was too loose, as Augustine says (_De Trinitate_, vii. 7-12). The true and literal translation of ὑπόστασις would have been _substantia_; but that word had been taken to render οὐσία. So the legal word _persona_ was employed in spite of its recognized unfitness. Cf. Taylor, _Classical Heritage, etc._, p. 116 _sqq._

[35] On these Peripatetics see Zeller, _Philosophie der Griechen_, 3rd ed. vol. ii. pp. 806-946.

[36] See Boissier, _Étude sur M. T. Varron_ (Paris, 1861).

[37] _Hist. naturalis_, ii. 41.

[38] From the reign of Augustus onward, Astrology flourished as never before. See Habler, _Astrologie im Alterthum_, p. 23 _sqq._ (Zwickau, 1879).

[39] _De abstinentia_, ii. 34.

[40] _De abstinentia_, iii. 4.

[41] Porphyry before him had spoken of angels and archangels which he had found in Jewish writings.

[42] For authorities cited, see Zeller, _Ges. der Phil._, iii.{2} p. 686.

[43] _De mysteriis_, i. 3.

[44] _Ibid._ ii. 3, 9.

[45] Cf. Döllinger, _Sektengeschichte_.

[46] All my Christian examples are taken from among the representatives of Catholic Christianity, because it was that which triumphed, and set the lines of mediaeval thought. Consequently, I have not referred to the Gnostics, not wishing to complicate an already complex spiritual situation. Gnosticism was a mixture of Hellenic, oriental, and Christian elements. Its votaries represented one (most distorting) way in which the Gospel was taken. But Gnosticism neither triumphed nor deserved to. It flourished somewhat before the time of Plotinus.

[47] See Origen, _De principiis_, iii. 2.

[48] The Athanasian _Vita Antonii_ is in Migne, _Patr. Graec._ 26, and trans. in _Nicene Fathers_, second series, iv. The _Vita S. Martini_ is in Halm’s ed. of Sulp. Severus (Vienna, 1866), and in Migne, _Pat. Lat._ 20, and trans. in _Nicene Fathers_, second series, xi.

[49] See Harnack, _Dogmengeschichte_, ii. 413 _sqq._, especially 432 sqq. Also Taylor, _Classical Heritage_, pp. 94-97.

[50] In cap. iii. § 2 of the _Celestial Hierarchy_, Pseudo-Dionysius says that the goal of his system is the becoming like to God and oneness with Him (ἡ πρὸς θεὸν ἀφομοίωσίς τε καὶ ἕνωσις). He classifies his “celestial intelligences” even more systematically than the _De mysteriis_ of Iamblicus’s school. His work is full of Neo-Platonism. Cf. Vacherot, _Histoire de l’école d’Alexandrie_, iii. 24 _sqq._

[51] The cult of the Virgin and the saints was of very early growth. See Lucius, _Die Anfänge des Heiligen Kults in der christlichen Kirche_ (ed. by Anrich, Tübingen, 1904).

[52] See, _e.g._, Grandgeorge, _St. Augustin et le Néoplatonisme_ (Paris, 1896).

[53] On Gregory, see _post_,