Cesti The Extant Fragments Bilingual Martin Wallraff Editor

Cesti The Extant Fragments Bilingual Martin
Wallraff Editor download
https://ebookbell.com/product/cesti-the-extant-fragments-
bilingual-martin-wallraff-editor-49062498
Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.
Costi And The Raindrop Adventure Johnny Khamis
https://ebookbell.com/product/costi-and-the-raindrop-adventure-johnny-
khamis-1897842
Knowing The Spirit Costi W Hinn
https://ebookbell.com/product/knowing-the-spirit-costi-w-hinn-59364694
Nanoporous Materials For Energy And The Environment Centi Gabriele
Kanellopoulos
https://ebookbell.com/product/nanoporous-materials-for-energy-and-the-
environment-centi-gabriele-kanellopoulos-4393766
Designing The City Of People 40 Reflections On Strategic And
Sustainable Urban Design After Covid19 Pandemic The City Project 1 1st
Ed 2022 Costi
https://ebookbell.com/product/designing-the-city-of-
people-40-reflections-on-strategic-and-sustainable-urban-design-after-
covid19-pandemic-the-city-project-1-1st-ed-2022-costi-35119752

Understanding The Linux Kernel Cesati Marco Bovet Daniel P Marco
Cesati
https://ebookbell.com/product/understanding-the-linux-kernel-cesati-
marco-bovet-daniel-p-marco-cesati-10509418
More Than A Healer Not The Jesus You Want But The Jesus You Need Costi
W Hinn
https://ebookbell.com/product/more-than-a-healer-not-the-jesus-you-
want-but-the-jesus-you-need-costi-w-hinn-46264904
The Exquisite Book Of Paper Flower Transformations Livia Cetti
https://ebookbell.com/product/the-exquisite-book-of-paper-flower-
transformations-livia-cetti-44233404
Stairs 2008 Proceedings Of The Fourth Starting Ai Researchers
Symposium Amedeo Cesta
https://ebookbell.com/product/stairs-2008-proceedings-of-the-fourth-
starting-ai-researchers-symposium-amedeo-cesta-1937976
The Sails Of Tau Ceti Michael Mccollum
https://ebookbell.com/product/the-sails-of-tau-ceti-michael-
mccollum-26645204

Iulius Africanus
Cesti

Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie
der Wissenschaften
Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller
der ersten Jahrhunderte
(GCS)
Neue Folge · Band 18

Iulius Africanus
Cesti
The Extant Fragments
Edited by
Martin Wallraff, Carlo Scardino,
Laura Mecella and Christophe Guignard
Translated by William Adler
De Gruyter

Herausgegeben durch die
Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften
von Christoph Markschies
ISBN 978-3-11- 028676-2
e-ISBN 978-3-11- 028680-9
ISSN 0232-2900
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress.
Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen
Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet
über http://dnb.dnb.de abrufbar.
2012 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston
Druck und Bindung: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen
Gedruckt auf säurefreiem Papier
Printed in Germany
www.degruyter.com

PREFACE
The inclusion of a work like the Cesti in a series devoted to Greek Christian
authors is hardly self-explanatory. The surviving fragments of the work reveal
no traces of Christian faith or Weltanschauung . Yet the plan to publish the work
in the GCS series is a long-standing one; it reaches back more than a century, to
the time of the series’ founder, Adolf von Harnack.
1
In its own way, the Cesti,
composed by an author whose other works are unquestionably Christian, adds
an essential dimension to the intellectual proﬁle of one of the most fascinating
ﬁgures of the early Church. More than that, it represents a vital witness to the
contribution of a prominent Christian scholar to the cultural landscape of the
Severan age.
The arrangement of names on the frontispiece is purely mechanical (in
inverse alphabetical order). Although there were speciﬁc assignments and areas
of competence (see the detailed information at the bottom of p. X), the four
editors have worked on the text with equal rights and responsibilities. All major
problems have been discussed collectively. For the main issues of authenticity,
classiﬁcation of the material, and organization of the apparatuses, we have tried
to use consistent criteria throughout. The description of the ﬁfth member of the
group as the “translator” is somewhat simplistic. Edition and translation cannot
be—and were not—independent processes. Although the editorial équipe and
the translator hail from diﬀerent sides of the Atlantic, there was an intensive
exchange in all phases of the project, including three periods of direct collabo-
ration in Basel (in the summers of  and , and in winter /). In
many cases, editorial decisions and the interpretation of diﬃcult passages have
been discussed together. The notes to the text are generally the fruit of the com-
mon endeavor of editors and translator.
Despite the variety of academic backgrounds and perspectives within our
group, we are acutely aware of the fact that the Cesti, a complex work with an
equally complicated textual history, requires an even broader approach. We are
therefore grateful for two opportunities to discuss the material with an extended
group of specialists. One was the workshop “Magic – Paratechnology – Warfare,”
held in Basel from  to  June . The papers delivered there, along with
other products of our work, are published in a volume that can serve in part as a
supplement to the introduction to the present edition.
2
The other was a
memorable day of reading and debating in Berlin in June , together with the

1 See below, p. LXXXVIII.
2 Wallraﬀ/Mecella .

VI Preface
members of the commission of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy, responsible
for the GCS project. The day proved highly productive, both philologically and
with regard to contents. Our gratitude to the commission and in particular to its
president, Prof. Christoph Markschies, thus extends beyond formal recognition
of the opportunity to publish in this distinguished series; it also reﬂects a lively
and proﬁtable scholarly exchange.
There are many others to whom we owe thanks. The Swiss National Science
Foundation generously funded the project for ﬁve years. As always, it has been a
privilege to publish with Walter de Gruyter; Dr. Albrecht Döhnert accompanied
the process from its beginning with competence and patience. The camera ready
copy of the edition, prepared in Basel, would have been impossible without the
computer program “Classical Text Editor.” Its author, Dr. Stefan Hagel (Austrian
Academy of Sciences, Vienna), is both a gifted software engineer and a specialist
in ancient music. He helped with advice in both ﬁelds. Although three diﬀerent
mother tongues are spoken in the European group, none of them is English. It
would not have been possible for us to publish the introduction and notes in
English without the competent help of a native speaker. Jasper Donelan (Stras-
bourg) assumed the tedious task of translating and correcting our English texts.
Finally, we thank the British Library for permission to reproduce the Papyrus
Oxy.  (pp. –) and Lea Meier for her precious help with the indexes.
The previous (and so far only) edition of the Cesti
3
is of mixed quality, not
always user-friendly, and diﬃcult of access, either in the marketplace or in libra-
ries. We were also able to make signiﬁcant additions to the amount of material.
Even in areas where the quantitative gain is limited, readers will now ﬁnd a solid
base for judgment on authenticity and transmission (this applies, for instance, to
the agricultural material).
In a sense, the present edition is the last element of an opera omnia of Iulius
Africanus. His two main works are now available in recent editions and trans-
lations in the GCS series,
4
prepared according to similar criteria and methods
(the main diﬀerence being that the use of the category of D[ubia] in the case of
the Cesti turned out to be useful). Africanus’ two minor works have also been
edited and translated according to modern critical standards, one of them re-
cently and in close contact with the project presented here.
5
It is hoped that the
availability of the texts will promote further enquiries into the work of a multi-
faceted author and his cultural world.

Basel, April  Martin Wallraﬀ

3 Vieillefond .
4 Chronographiae (ed. Wallraﬀ/Roberto/Pinggéra ).
5 Epistula ad Origenem (ed. de Lange , –); Epistula ad Aristidem (ed. Guignard ,
–).

CONTENTS

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V
Introduction
1. Iulius Africanus and the Background of the Cesti . . . . . . . . XI
2. The Cesti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XVII
2.1. Dating and Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIX
2.2. Sources and Literary Character . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XXIII
2.3. Technical and/or Magical Character . . . . . . . . . . . . XXVII
3. The Text and its Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XXXII
3.1. Papyrus Oxy. 412 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XXXIII
3.2. Byzantine Military Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XXXIX
3.2.1. The Seventh Cestus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XXXIX
3.2.2. The Apparatus Bellicus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XLVIII
3.3. Hippiatric Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LII
3.4. Metrological Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LXIII
3.5. Agricultural Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LXX
3.6. Alchemical and Medical Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . LXXVI
3.7. Michael Psellus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LXXVIII
4. Earlier Editions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LXXXIV
5. Principles of the Edition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XC
6. Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XCIII
7. Ancient Texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CXI
8. List of Manuscripts and Editions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CXXV
9. Critical Signs and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CXXXII

Iulius Africanus, Cesti
Testimonia on General Aspects of the Cesti
T1 Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History and a Later Reader . . . . . . . . . 2
T2 Eusebius on Africanus’ Erudition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
T3 Georgius Syncellus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
T4 Photius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
T5 Suda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
T6 Michael Italicus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Michael Psellus as a Critical Reader of the Cesti
T7 Africanus’ Unorthodox Devices and Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . 10
T8 On the Hidden Powers of Nature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
T9 Africanus’ Exaggerations about the Hidden Powers of the Alphabet 22

VIII Contents
Material in Direct Transmission
F10 From the 18
th
Cestus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Material from Military Literature
D11 Contents of the Seventh Cestus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
F12 The Seventh Cestus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
F13 A Remedy to Plague . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
D14 Method for Deep-Dyeing Ebony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
D15 How to Use Wine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
D16 Destruction of Trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
D17 Destruction of Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
D18 Immobilization of the Horses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
D19 Coating Arrows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . 108
D20 The Health of the Troops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
D21 For Immunization against Poison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
D22 Closing a Wound without Suture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
D23 A Hemorrhage Diﬃcult to Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
D24 To Keep Horses from Taking Ill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
D25 Spontaneous Combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
Material from Hippiatric Literature
D26 A Potion for Elephantiasis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
D27 Remedies for Ailments of the Eyes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
F28 A Technique to Ensure the Desired Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
D29 Celestial Positioning of Horses to Ensure the Desired Gender . . 124
D30 Sweet Cicely and the Restorative Properties of Its Root . . . . . . 126
D31 Improving Sexual Endurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
D32 Amulets to Promote Conception and Determine Gender . . . . . 126
D33 Using Galactite to Stimulate Milk Production . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
F34 Anti-Miscarriage Drugs Derived from the Remora Fish . . . . . . 128
D35 Relieving Ear Pain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
D36 A Treatment for Nasal Disorders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
D37 Two Treatments for Edema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
D38 Artiﬁcially Altering the Color of Horse Coats . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
D39 A Formula for a Permanent Hair Dye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
D40 An Ointment for Mange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
D41 The Use of Dog’s Brain in Mending Bone Fractures . . . . . . . . 134
D42 Ways to Remove Skin Growths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
D43 Eradicating Acrochordons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
D44 A Technique for Drug-Free Worm Extraction . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
D45 The Ass’s Resistance to Parasites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
D46 Antidotes for Victims of Snake Bites and Scorpion Stings . . . . . 140

Contents IX
D47 Remedies for Asp Bites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
D48 Protecting Horses Against Venoms and Other Toxins . . . . . . . 142
D49 Poultices for Animal Bites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
D50 A Potion and a Poultice for Wounds from Venomous Sea
Creatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
D51 Protective Remedies against Venomous Bites . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
D52 Remedies for Scolopendra Bites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
D53 Treatments for Harmful Spider Bites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
D54 An Ointment and Plaster for Insect Bites, and an All-Purpose
Insecticide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
F55 Symptoms of the Dipsas Bite and Potions to Counteract It . . . . 148
D56 The Dryinas Snake and a Potion to Counteract Its Venom . . . . 150
D57 All-Purpose Remedies for Animal Bites and Wounds . . . . . . . 150
D58 Foiling Poisonous Tree-Frogs Lurking in Stables . . . . . . . . . . 156
D59 A Plaster for Inﬂamed Feet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
D60 An Amulet against Colic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
F61 A Cunning Way to Steal Horses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
Material from Metrological Literature
F62 About Measures and Weights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
D63 Metrological Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
T64 Authorities on Ancient Metrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
Material from Agricultural Literature
T65 Vindonius Anatolius of Berytus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
T66 Anatolius B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
D67 Purifying Bad Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
D68 Determining the Right Time to Harvest Grapes . . . . . . . . . . 180
Material from Alchemical Literature
F69 Preparation of Bright-Red Purple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
F70 Astringent for All-Purpose Dyeing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
F71 Materials for Dye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
F72 An Arsenic-Resistant Glass Cup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
T73 Alchemical Authorities I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
T74 Alchemical Authorities II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Material from Medical Literature
F75 Concerning Cinnamon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
F76 Simple Purgatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188

X Contents
Material from Other Sources
F77 An Erection-Inducing Plaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
F78 Drowning and Divinization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
T79 Septimius Severus’ Siege of Byzantium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
Indexes
1. Ancient and Medieval Texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
2. Proper Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
3. Table of Concordance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
The main responsibles for the following texts (along with the correspondin
g

parts of the introduction, chapter ) were: Ch. G. for D–F and D–D; L. M. for F–D, F–T, and F–T; C. S. for F–F and T; M. W. for
T–T. For T–T the responsibility was shared between M. W., L. M. and
Ch. G., for T between Ch. G. and C. S. In the introduction, chapter  was
written by W. A., . by M. W., . by C. S., . by Ch. G.,  by L. M., and  by M. W
.

and W. A. The introductor
y
remarks to chapters  and  were written b
y
M.W.

INTRODUCTION
. Iulius Africanus and the Background of the Cesti
In his Quaestiones evangelicae, Eusebius praises Iulius Africanus as “an erudite
man” widely recognized for his grounding in “secular learning” (τῆς ἔξωθεν παι-
δείας).
1
While Eusebius could have reached that conclusion from any one of
Africanus’ writings, the words “erudite” and “secular” apply especially well to his
Cesti. A sprawling treatise, it encompassed virtually every branch of technical
and practical learning, including, in the author’s own words, “secret knowledge”
(ἱστορίαν ἀπόρρητον).
2

Africanus’ embrace of occult science was enough to convince a scholiast on
Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History that Eusebius had strayed in ascribing the Cesti
to the Christian author bearing the same name. For the scholiast, the advocate
of the “pagan error” who had composed a work shot through with “nonsense
about some magical rites, amulets, and written symbols alien to the faith of the
Christians” could scarcely have been the pious Christian who, in his epistle to
Aristides, tried to reconcile disagreements between the genealogies of Jesus in
the gospels.
3
The scholiast’s conjecture remained a lone voice of skepticism until
Joseph Scaliger revived it in the 
th
century. Scaliger noted that the name of
Africanus in the tenth-century Suda lexicon was idiosyncratic: not the com-
monly used “Iulius Africanus,” but rather “Africanus, the one called Sectus (sic ).”
4

From this, Scaliger concluded that Eusebius and his successors had collectively
confused the Christian “Iulius Africanus” with the “Sextus (Iulius) Africanus” of
the Cesti.
5

Dissociating the two ﬁgures was an elegant, but ultimately unpersuasive,
way to resolve what some scholars have called the “Africanus problem.” The ﬁnal
blow to the theory of mistaken identity came from the Cesti itself. A fragment
from the end of the 
th
book of the Cesti discovered at Oxyrhynchus named the
author of the work as “Iulius Africanus,” not the “Sextus Iulius Africanus”
required by Scaliger’s hypothesis.
6
It further veriﬁed the link, already implied by
the middle Byzantine chronicler George Syncellus (T), between Africanus and

1 T,f. For further background about the author and his writings, cf. Wallraﬀ/Roberto/ Pinggé-
ra , XIII–XVII.
2 F,pr.,–.
3 Tb. On the epistle cf. Guignard .
4 See Ta. For discussion of the word Σέκτος cf. Wallraﬀ/Roberto/Pinggéra , XIII.
5 Scaliger , b; cf. also Valesius , , n. . For discussion, cf. Thee , –.
6 F, (= Pap. Oxy. ): Ἰουλίου Ἀφρικανοῦ Κεστὸς ιηʹ.

XII Introduction
the Roman emperor Severus Alexander.
7
Most signiﬁcantly, it settled a long-
standing question about Africanus’ place of origin. Perhaps misled by his cogno-
men, the Suda, the only other ancient testimony about Africanus’ origins, called
him “a Libyan”.
8
For Gelzer, this, together with his supposed knowledge of Latin,
proved that Africanus was “kein Ostländer”.
9
The Oxyrhynchus papyrus frag-
ment told another story, however. There, Africanus identiﬁes as his “former
homeland” Colonia Aelia Capitolina, the name given to the city of Jerusalem
after its refounding as a Roman city.
10

Even apart from the disconﬁrming evidence of the Oxyrhynchus papyrus,
the Suda’s testimony was hard to square with Africanus’ own self-identiﬁcation
and his ﬁrst-hand familiarity with cities and sites of the Roman Near East.
11
One
of the places about which he writes at some length in the Cesti was the court of
the Edessene king Abgar the Great. While silent about the circumstances that
brought him to this Mesopotamian city state bordering Parthia and Rome, Afri-
canus apparently encountered little diﬃculty gaining entry into Edessene royal
society. He recalls participating, albeit only as a spectator, in a hunt for big game,
and witnessing extraordinary demonstrations of skill and artistry with the bow
by Edessene noblemen. In one such display, Bardesanes, the Christian aristocrat
and renaissance man, created with arrows the likeness of a Syrian man on the
buckler set before him.
12

Gelzer once suggested that Abgar received Africanus into his court as a
fellow Christian and Roman oﬃcer serving in the army of Septimius Severus
during his Parthian campaigns.
13
Africanus mentions none of this, however, in
the record of his visit to Edessa.
14
And while Abgar may himself have formed

7 See below, F, p. , n. .
8 Ta, (= Suda A ).
9 Gelzer –, vol. , .
10 F,. Cf. Vieillefond , , who translated the words τῆς ἀρχαίας π[α]τρίδος as “de notre
vielle patrie,” and went on to conclude that Africanus considered Aelia Capitolina as “the
birthplace of our people (le berceau de notre peuple).” From this, Vieillefond reasoned that
Africanus, a Jewish convert to Christianity, addressed the Cesti to fellow Jews. Vieillefond’s
understanding of the passage made up one of a series of arguments in support of Africanus’
Jewish origins. Among other things, Vieillefond proposed that the word Σέκτος in the Suda
was a transcription of the Latin word “sectus” (that is, “the cut one”), an epithet meaning
“circumcised” and either self-imposed or conferred on Africanus by others (f). Vieillefond
, f, further theorized that the pentagon and hexagon, two frequently occurring symbols
in the Cesti (see below, p. XXXI), were Jewish magical symbols. These theories have generally
not been accepted; for a critique, cf. Habas ; Adler , –.
11 For Africanus’ self-identiﬁcation as an Easterner, see also F,, where he states that the
“Kab,” a Semitic unit of measurement, is a term that “we” use. Vieillefond , , n. , saw
this as additional evidence of Africanus’ Judaism (see previous note).
12 F,,–.
13 Gelzer –, vol. , . The same claim is uncritically repeated in many modern hand-
books.
14 Africanus’ statement that he participated in the royal hunt only as a spectator (F,,f)
casts his personal experience with arms into further doubt; cf. further Vieillefond , f.

. Iulius Africanus and the Background of the Cesti XIII
close ties with Christian elites, the king’s own Christian self-identiﬁcation is far
from assured.
15
The prominence of Christian intellectuals like Bardesanes in the
Edessene court thus probably owes more to the cosmopolitanism of Abgar’s
Edessa than it does to their shared religious outlook. Hellenistic kings typically
included in their inner circle trusted men of learning who served them as ad-
visors, conﬁdants, and teachers.
16
Bardesanes, the artist with the bow and ﬁxture
in the Edessene court, exempliﬁes the role they also played as symbols of Hel-
lenistic high culture. From the very outset, Epiphanius writes, Bardesanes was a
close friend of the king, “collaborating with him, and at the same time partaking
of his paideia.”
17
Africanus had his own contribution to make to the cultural en-
richment of Edessa. In the Cesti, he recalls an elaborate scientiﬁc experiment
with the bow and arrow, the object of which was to determine the distance an
arrow would travel on a continuous -hour trajectory. The experiment cap-
tured the interest of everyone in the king’s court, including prince Mannus. “I
personally witnessed it in the court of Abgar the king,” Africanus writes, “when
his son Mannus often conducted the experiment, under my supervision (ἐμοῦ
ὑφηγησαμένου).”
18

The other autobiographical notices dispersed throughout the Cesti and
Chronographiae reveal a well-traveled man of voracious intellectual appetites
and the ﬁnancial means to satisfy them. He purchases antiquities in Egypt,
studies relics, searches libraries and archives throughout the Mediterranean,
meets with famous people, and visits religious, archaeological, and geographic
sites of international interest.
19
His activities extended into the public sphere as
well. In the last year of the reign of Elagabalus (coincidentally, the chronological
endpoint of the Chronographiae ), Africanus presided over a delegation to Rome
on behalf of the Palestinian village of Emmaus. Thanks to his good oﬃces,
Emmaus was refounded as a Greek polis and renamed Nicopolis.
20

Following the death of Caracalla, many prominent Christians beneﬁted
from a documented thaw in relations with Rome. During the reign of Severus
Alexander, Origen reportedly delivered lectures to the emperor’s mother Julia

15 Cf. Brock , f.; Ross , f.
16 On the professional functions of the friends of the Hellenistic king, cf. Habicht ; Austin
, f; Herman , –.
17 Epiph., haer. ,,. On Bardesanes as a representative of the cultural values of Edessa, cf.
Drijvers , f.
18 F,,–.
19 F,f (libraries and archives of Rome, Jerusalem, and Nysa of Caria); Iul. Afr., chron.
F,– (expeditions to purported sites of Noah’s ark); chron. F,– (visit to the Dead
Sea); chron. F,– (purchase of the Sacred Book of the Egyptian pharaoh Suphus); chron.
T,– (work in the archive of Edessa [of uncertain authority]); chron. T (travel to
Alexandria to meet with Heraclas, because of his “great fame”). Africanus’ reports about
Jacob’s tent in Edessa (chron. F) and the burnt-oﬀerings at the site of the terebinth tree in
Shechem (chron. F) may or may not reﬂect eyewitness testimony.
20 Iul. Afr., chron. Ta (= Eus., chron. ad an.  [
h
Helm]).

XIV Introduction
Mamaea on the resurrection.
21
But while Africanus may also have gained at least
indirectly from an improvement in church/state relations, introducing a reli-
gious element into his own dealings with Rome only creates confusion. These
dealings had little overt connection with the interests of the Church. They are
more akin to the civic-minded and personally rewarding roles played by Greek
sophists and other learned men on behalf of cities of the East.
22
As with them,
the success of the embassy helped to launch Africanus’ career in Rome. In the
Cesti, he speaks with pride, and a touch of overstatement, about “supervising the
construction of the beautiful” library in the Pantheon for Elagabalus’ successor,
Severus Alexander (F,f). The Cesti, said by Syncellus to have been dedicated
to the same emperor (T,–), in many ways culminates the process of Africa-
nus’ Roman self-identiﬁcation. At the beginning of the seventh book, Africanus
oﬀers Rome the assistance of his expertise in dealing with barbarian peoples
and laments the military reversals in the East that have given the nations of
inner Asia reason to boast that they have attained “freedom and equality with
us.” If only in the political sense, Africanus had thrown in his lot with Rome.
23

The wide-ranging contents of the Cesti typify, almost to the point of carica-
ture, the appetite of the Severan age for encyclopedic knowledge.
24
In the pro-
logue to the seventh Cestus, Africanus promises his readers a wealth of learning:
medical treatments, “beauty in speech,” secret knowledge, and the art of war
(F,pr.). Much of what survives from the Cesti reads like a paean to skill and
expertise, by means of which almost all of life’s challenges and uncertainties can
be surmounted. Aretē in battle is not an intrinsic moral quality, but rather a
teachable and transmittable skill, a technē.
25
By Africanus’ analysis, Rome’s
setbacks against a newly resurgent Persian kingdom stemmed not from a lack of
courage or poor leadership, but rather from faulty equipment and training. Even
the gods shrink in the face of superior technical know-how. In warfare, Afri-
canus writes, Tyche (chance) is often as determinative as superior weaponry. To
prevent her from becoming the mistress of war, he thus counsels the use of
many technai, including clandestine ones. In this way, she “will spontaneously
become subject to our skill.”
26

21 Eus., h. e. ,,f. On Severus Alexander’s dealings with Christians, cf. Santos Yanguas .
22 Cf. Bowersock , –; Anderson , –.
23 F,,–. On Greek authors of the second and third centuries identifying themselves as Ro-
mans, cf. Palm , f, . On Africanus’ Roman identity cf. also Roberto , –.
24 Cf. Trapp , f.
25 For the history and development of this notion, cf. Kube , –. Africanus even roots
the eﬃcacy of amulets and other devices in the same theory (F,,f): “Those who are
knowledgeable about such things,” he writes, “universally praise stones found in the gizzards
of well-bred cocks, in the belief that they contribute to military prowess and triumph (ὡς
ἀρετῆς τε καὶ νίκης συνεργούς).”

26 F,,f, see also F,,f, where “the poets make Zeus slumber.”

. Iulius Africanus and the Background of the Cesti XV
Far more than a work of dry specialized prose, the Cesti is as entertaining as
it is informative.
27
Scattered throughout the work are eye-witness reports and
personal discoveries, and experiments.
28
Anyone practiced in rhetorical school
exercises would have had little diﬃculty discerning the inspiration behind the
prooemium to the seventh Cestus and his encomium of the horse.
29
Tendencies
toward literary bravado are especially visible when Africanus pleads the case for
his secret knowledge. He gloats over the misery, humiliation, and self-loathing
that enemy combatants will experience once they see their bodies swollen
beyond recognition by his biological and chemical weapons.
30
Before revealing
his secret weapon against the god of Sleep, another nemesis to soldiers, Africa-
nus contemplates the power of a god to whom even Zeus submits. Adorning the
narrative with allusions to Homer and Hesiod, he at one point even challenges
Sleep to a duel.
31
Authors of works of otherwise serious intent were known to
enliven their subject matter with frivolous spells, games, conjuring tricks, and
other paignia performed at symposia.
32
The Cesti indulges the same practice.
According to Psellus, a technique that Africanus prescribed to put a parasite at a
banquet to sleep was a “source of merriment” for him.
33
Descriptions of his re-
cipes sometimes recreate the conviviality of a symposium or banquet scene. In
recommending new recipes for making wine without grapes, Africanus casts
himself as a new Dionysus, oﬀering “the cup of friendship” to peoples whom the
god had deprived of the grape.
34
The drinking language of the symposium even
turns up in the more sinister parts of the work. In one place, he likens his poison
gas to “a cup of friendship” oﬀered by the Romans to the barbarian enemy.
35

Its purely technical content aside, personal anecdotes, rhetorical showman-
ship, and the promise of hidden wisdom secured for the Cesti a wide and endur-
ing readership. Dating a mere generation after the publication of the work, the
Oxyrhynchus papyrus demonstrates that the work of copying this massive trea-

27 See below, p. XXVI.
28 F,,f.; F,f; F,f.
29 F,pr.; F,,–. For the literary/rhetorical background of the prooemium to the seventh
Cestus, cf. Meißner , f. For the encomium of the horse as an exercise in the rhetorical
schools, cf. Ps.Herm., prog. ,.; Aphthon., prog. ,f; for an example of this sort of
exercise from the papyri, cf. Pap. Oxy. . Cf. further McCabe , –; McCabe ,
–. For Africanus’ knowledge of Greek rhetoric, see further below, pp. XXVf.
30 F,,–.
31 F,,–.
32 See below, p. XXVII, n. .
33 T,. In the same work, and immediately after his critique of Africanus, Psellus himself
describes at some length many of these diversions (T,–; it is uncertain whether Afri-
canus is the source). By Africanus’ day, collections of conjuring tricks circulated in the names
of Democritus and Anaxilaus, the latter a Pythagorean philosopher and physician of the ﬁrst
century B.C. See further Bain , –.
34 F,,–.
35 See, for example, F,,; cf. also F,,f, on the toasts that Sleep and Death oﬀer each
other after putting people to sleep.

XVI Introduction
tise commenced almost immediately after its ﬁrst appearance. Conﬂicting wit-
nesses about the number of books in the Cesti also raise the possibility that it
circulated in diﬀerent editions.
36
Its literary appeal probably explains why, even
after its technical advice had become obsolete, substantial portions of the Cesti
managed to survive intact, and not in epitomes or summaries.
37
The profusion
of devices, formulas, and spells promiscuously ascribed to him in Byzantine
manuals of horse medicine and agronomy could only have enhanced his repu-
tation as a man of inexhaustible technical know-how. Honored in later sources
as “the most learned” (T,), “the Babylonian” (T,–,app.), the “philosopher”
(Ta,) and the “professor of medicine” (F,), the name Africanus appears
alongside other towering, even mythical, ﬁgures of ancient secret wisdom,
among them Democritus, Apollonius of Tyana (T,f), Agathodaimon, and
Hermes (T).
But from those writers more conscious of Africanus’ standing as a church
father, the Cesti received a much cooler reception. In his translation of Eusebius’
Ecclesiastical History, Ruﬁnus, and after him Jerome, discreetly removed the
work from their lists of Africanus’ recognized writings.
38
Syncellus (T) and the
Suda (Ta) provide brief descriptions of the Cesti, but without editorial com-
ment. The 
th
century compiler of the Sylloge Tacticorum, a Byzantine military
collection, complained that Africanus’ biological and chemical instruments of
total war were “unworthy of the Christian way of life.”
39
The most unsparing
critic of the Cesti was Michael Psellus. The 
th
century Byzantine polymath, who
must have known the contents of the Cesti intimately (and may have thought
more highly of the work than he was publicly willing to let on), runs down a
long list of devices and techniques that in his view gave the work the appearance
of a “teratology,” a book of wonders meant to inspire awe and wonder. The “un-
recognized remedies, amulets and incantations” that Africanus called technai
were in his estimation little more than sorcery and encroachments into realms
properly belonging either to God or nature.
40
Elsewhere, he even dismisses
Africanus as a self-regarding poseur, promising, to no discernible eﬀect, that his
discoveries about the hidden properties of the letters of the Greek alphabet
could transform a man into a hero or even a god.
41

Only marginally less severe at times in their judgments, modern critics have
spoken with disdain about the stylistic self-indulgence of the Cesti and the
“crasse Supersition”
42
and the “personalité fort vaniteuse” of its author.
43
Gelzer

36 See below, p. XIX.
37 Cf. McCabe , ; Vieillefond , .
38 Ta (= Eusebius, note Ruﬁnus in app.); Hier., vir. ill. .
39 ἀνάξια … χριστιανικῆς καταστάσεως. Syll. tact. ; cf. also Vieillefond , , n. .
40 T,–; f; f. For the educated person, Psellus says later in the same work, the devices of
Africanus and other writers are of use only as recreation.
41 T,–.
42 Gelzer –, vol. , .

. The Cesti XVII
wondered how the sharp and clear mind behind the epistle to Origen could also
have assembled “ein solches Magazin der tollsten, theilweise tief unsittlichen
Superstition.”
44
W. Kroll criticised Africanus for abusing his obvious training in
rhetoric.
45
For Vieillefond, Africanus’ fondness for rhetorical displays, Atticisms,
baroque syntax, neologisms, and rare words, all symptoms of the “mauvais goût
d’Africanus et de son époque,” proved that Africanus had fallen prey to the
literary excesses of the Second Sophistic.
46
G. Björck even wrote oﬀ the whole
project as pure parody, a send-up of the intellectual pretensions of the age of Se-
verus Alexander.
47
But there is no reason to doubt the seriousness of the Cesti—
a work very much of a piece with Africanus’ previous life story, of which his
Christianity is only one, and not necessarily the most deﬁning part. His encyclo-
pedic learning, philological and rhetorical skills, ﬁnancial means, sundry occu-
pations, self-reinvention, and professional ambitions are in many ways emblem-
atic of the inﬂuence, resourcefulness, and versatility of the pepaideumenos dur-
ing the later years of the Second Sophistic.
. The Cesti
Given its fragmentary preservation, a well-deﬁned picture of the work’s overall
purpose and character remains elusive. The title, almost unanimously attested in
the ancient witnesses, provides one clue. Beginning already with Eusebius of
Caesarea, the work, wherever mentioned by name, was known as the Cesti
(Κεστοί).
48
Because this title is attested in the subscriptions to the two fragments
of the work with the best textual pedigree, it is highly likely that Africanus
coined the name himself.
49

The work’s unique and memorable name is one likely reason why the title
Cesti is so well-documented in later witnesses. It is more diﬃcult, however, to
determine the precise meaning of the word and Africanus’ own motives for

43 Vieillefond , , here in reference to Africanus’ habit of claiming personal experience,
even in places where his knowledge was likely derivative.
44 Gelzer –, vol. , .
45 Kroll in Kroll/Sickenberger , : “Africanus eine gute rhetorische Bildung genossen hat
und sie zu missbrauchen versteht.”
46 Vieillefond , : “Oriental et vivant à un des moments les plus brilliants de la Seconde
Sophistique, Africanus ne pouvait manque d’être seduit par la mode littéraire dont il
embrasse tous les excès … [Il] atteint les sommets de l’art sophistique et, avant la lettre, du
gongorisme” (ibid., ). See further below, pp. XXVf.
47 Björck , –, esp.  (see below, pp. XXVIIf); cf. Edelstein ; Vieillefond , –.
48 Ta (Eusebius); Tb; T (Georgius Syncellus); T (Photius); Ta–b (Suda); T,, see also the
excerptors’ formulations in F, (?); F,; F,. There is no reason to suppose that paradoxa
was an alternative title or a subtitle (as suggested by Gelzer –, vol. , ); at most it
could have been used to designate certain parts, see below, p. LXXIV, n. .
49 F,; F,,. A similar expression is also found in the pinax D,. In all likelihood, all
books originally bore a subscription like this.

XVIII Introduction
choosing it in the ﬁrst place. Africanus’ single use of the word in a non-technical
sense oﬀers a good starting point. In a chapter on sleep, Africanus describes how
Hera “borrowed the κεστός from Aphrodite” (F,,f). The reference recalls
the episode in the Iliad in which Hera sought Aphrodite’s help in enchanting
Zeus. Aphrodite complied and “loosened from her breasts the ﬁnely decorated,
embroidered garment (κεστὸν ἱμάντα ποικίλον) in which all her magic charms
were ﬁxed—for love, erotic lust, ﬂirtation, and seduction” (Il. ,–). On the
basis of its etymology (from κεντέω), the adjective κεστός is usually rendered as
“embroidered;”
50
while far from certain, the later nominal use of the word
(Κεστοί) apparently then came to mean “embroideries.” Although the exact
shape and placement of Aphrodite’s garment are unclear (“girdle” or “ribbon” are
common translations),
51
the κεστός was thought either to produce or enhance
feminine charm and grace.
52
In the literature of the imperial period, the beauty
of the object was not the sole source of its power; its eﬀect was magical (φαρ-
μακὶς γάρ ἐστιν
53
) as well, sometime even on a cosmic scale.
54

Africanus himself must have grasped the word’s multiple connotations.
While it appears in a strictly erotic context in the Iliad, we need not assume that
this was the main reason why the author chose the word as a title for the entire
work. Rather, the “hidden powers” conferred by the garment and its colorful,
variegated appearance will have recommended the word to him. Nor should the
magical connotations of the word κεστοί overshadow its other nuances.
55
Quite
rightly, Africanus’ title has been likened to other colorful literary titles meant to
stress the diversity and variety of the subjects treated. Both Clement of
Alexandria and Origen wrote Stromateis, Aulus Gellius Noctes Atticae, and
Cicero the (now lost) Limon, to name but a few.
56
The Stromateis (“carpets”) is
the closest parallel to the Cesti, not only in terms of cultural and temporal pro-
ximity, but also from a formal point of view: the diversity implied by the plural
form of title is counterbalanced by the singular usage for individual books (a
Cestus/Stromateus).

50 The root κεντ- “developed to κεσ- before dental. Thus κεσ-τός < *κεντ-τός ‘stitched’ (epic),”
Beekes , .
51 For possible identiﬁcation with iconographic evidence, cf. Hug .
52 References are quoted in Speyer , f.
53 Lucian, dearum iud. ,.
54 In Nonnus of Panopolis (
th
cent.) the κεστός becomes a “universal weapon” of the goddess
Ἀπάτη (“deceit”), Dion. ,–.
55 “Amulettes ou Talismans” as a translation of the title (Vieillefond , ) is somewhat
strong.
56 Cf. Vieillefond , – with more details on this type of title. Origen’s Stromateis is also
lost, with the exception of a very few fragments; cf. Nautin , –.

. The Cesti XIX
.. Dating and Structure
Syncellus’ statement that the Cesti was dedicated to Severus Alexander (T)
would put the work in the reign of this emperor (– A.D.). Its date can be
further delimited on the basis of a few passing notices in the work itself. A ter-
minus post quem is provided by Africanus’ allusion to the baths of Alexander
(F,), the completion of which, according to Eusebius/Jerome, occurred in
the ﬁfth year of Alexander, i.e. in .
57
At F,,, Africanus claims that “the Per-
sians have never been defeated by the Romans.” A Roman author would hardly
have expressed himself in such categorical terms after the military campaign of
Severus Alexander against the Sassanids in /. Although the outcome was
far from an unqualiﬁed success, it was presented in Rome as a great victory.
58

While the Cesti should therefore be dated to the years –,
59
writing and
publishing a work of this magnitude would presumably have required several
years. Around , a substantial amount must have already been published (or
at least written). But it is perfectly possible (even likely) that the author com-
menced the project much earlier. Likewise, the date of its completion could have
been somewhat later: obviously, later parts of the work might well have been
composed after the terminus ante quem of  implied by Africanus’ comment
in F. Nothing certain can be said about the place of its composition. But Afri-
canus’ own account of performing professional services in Rome at about the
time of the writing of the Cesti (F,) may suggest that a part or all of the
work was written there.
The collection of  books that probably comprised the work at the time of
its completion does not exclude the possible existence and circulation of earlier
or partial editions.
60
This would also account for the divergent witnesses about
the number of books that made up the work; admittedly, however, this may also
be attributable to later loss or corruption, if not simple confusion or misunder-
standing. In the passage quoted above, Syncellus speaks of an ἐννεάβιβλος (nine
books), Photius knows of  books (T), and the Suda mentions the Cesti “in 
books” (Ta). Of the three, the Suda’s witness is the most credible. The sub-
scription to the 
th
Cestus is found in the third century Papyrus Oxy. 
(F,). Moreover, Africanus himself apparently ascribed a special signiﬁcance

57 Thermae Alexandrinae Romae aediﬁcatae. chron. ad ann.  (
a
Helm). For discussion of
the exact location, cf. Ghini ; Hammerstaedt , f.
58 HA Alex. Sev. –; Aur. Vict., Caes. , (but cf. also ,); Eutrop. ,; Festus ; cf. dis-
cussion in Rösger , –, and comparison with epigraphic and numismatic evidence
in Winter , –. For the reconstruction of the campaign, see above all Herodianus ,f,
with the analysis of Winter –. What really happened was not an open battle: both armies
retired (for diﬀerent reasons) before an actual encounter took place; they left Mesopotamia to
Rome (and later Nisibis as well), while Persia had a free hand in Armenia.
59 Cf. Vieillefond , –.
60 See below, p. , n. , for a possible interpretation of F in this sense.

XX Introduction
to the number , a ﬁgure equalling in number the letters (elements) of the
Greek alphabet (T). Attention to numeric symbolism and/or symmetry (like 
blocks of  books each or  of  books or similar) conceivably shaped the over-
all conﬁguration of the work as well. But because the surviving evidence is not
suﬃcient to reconstruct such an arrangement, it has not been possible in the
present edition to organize the material in an order reﬂecting, even hypo-
thetically, its original structure.
Only a few of the existing fragments identify the number of the Cestus to
which they originally belonged. Apart from the above-mentioned subscription
to the 
th
Cestus (F,), there is also a quotation “from the third Cestus” (F).
A designation of chapter division in one fragment (F: “from chapter  of
Cestus ”) raises the question of subdivision by chapter (see discussion below).
The most important witness is, of course, the seventh Cestus, wherein the extant
material begins with the preface and concludes with the subscription (F).
Because it is likely that in this case the whole Cestus survives almost intact,
61

some rough inferences about the length and character of the individual books
of the work are possible.
The two preserved subscriptions have the same formula: Ἰουλίου Ἀφρικανοῦ
Κεστός, followed by the number of the book (F,, and F,). This
suggests that all the books concluded with a similar phrase. Whether they all
contained a short preface like F,pr. is diﬃcult to know. The seventh Cestus
could also have required a prologue, because it introduced a relatively large
block of material (possibly consisting of several Cesti). For this reason, it may
not have been a practice observed for the entire work.
The length of the book in its edited form is about , characters (exclu-
ding the spaces, which would of course have been superﬂuous). Although only
the very end of the 
th
Cestus survives (F), the numbering of the columns in
the papyrus allows us to estimate the length of the entire book. The text must
have consisted of a total of  lines.
62
This would amount to at least about
, characters, which on a scroll would correspond to a length of . m.
However, depending on the width of the columns,
63
a higher value would also
be possible; in any case, a scroll of only three meters would be unusually short.
And, of course, it is by no means certain that all books had even roughly the
same length.
By a very inexact estimate, the extant material from the Cesti lies somewhere
in the range of  to % of the whole work. The fraction of the text that survives
is itself hardly a representative sample of material; most of it reﬂects later

61 A few words possibly missing in the transition from F, to F, (see below, p. , n. )
should not lead to far-reaching hypotheses (contra Vieillefond , ).
62 Cf. Hammerstaedt , .
63 Because only two “atypical” columns survive, there is a slight uncertainty about the width, see
below, p. XXXIV.

. The Cesti XXI
interests and criteria (see below on the “ﬁlters” of transmission, p. XXXII).
Extrapolations and argumenta e silentio about the contents of the entire work
thus demand extreme caution.
Little can be said about the other organizational principles of the work. One
interesting feature is the occasional supplementation of the text with geometric
symbols. In F,, depictions of triangles play a largely illustrative role.
Although Africanus’ exposition could have succeeded without them, understan-
ding his argument would not have been easy; a reader would almost inevitably
need a sketch of the triangles on a separate sheet. For these reasons, it cannot be
established with absolute certainty that they constituted part of the original text
(see note ad locum). Another interesting case is the πεντάγωνα (pentagons, not
pentagrams) and ἑξάγωνα mentioned, but not actually included, in the text.
64

Africanus’ statement that they were to be found ἐπὶ τέλει
65
could refer either to
the end of the book or to the end of the whole work. Nor can it be excluded that
they were provided (or even sold?) on a separate sheet/cardboard as a sort of
“hermeneutical key” to the text.
The above-mentioned subdivision of books into smaller literary units poses
a tricky question. A quotation from “chapter  of Cestus ” in codex Laurentia-
nus ,  (
th
cent., F) certainly presupposes an edition with numbered
chapters, presumably including titles. It seems unlikely, however, that this sub-
division originated with Africanus, at least not in its developed form. Strictly
speaking, one has to distinguish between the numbering, the titles of chapters,
and the subdivision of the text. With respect to the last point, the presentation
of the text of the seventh Cestus as a continuous unit and the transitions from
one chapter to the next make it hard to imagine that the narrative was
interrupted by the insertion of titles.
66
To be sure, this does not entirely rule out
the possibility that a list of titles was authentic. A pinax of  numbered titles
for the  chapters survives in fact in some manuscripts (D). This may or may
not have been provided by the author himself as an aid for readers. A close
reading of those titles reveals that they are not entirely descriptive of the text.
67

On the other hand, some textual parallels suggest that the titles must be fairly
old, probably at least as early as the fourth century.
68

64 Nine numbered pentagons are mentioned, see references and discussion below p. XXXI, n.
. In F, the author speaks of a hexagon.
65 F,,; F,,; F,, (pentagons nº , , ).
66 See below, p. XLVII, n. . Strangely, Vieillefond , f, shared this opinion, but printed
the titles in the text anyway.
67 F, is not really and not principally a recipe against “equine cataracts (πρὸς ἵππων ὑπό-
χυσιν);” the title could have been περὶ μαντικῆς ἵππων, cf. Vieillefond , . F,
contains more than just a method “preventing the loss of draft animals (πρὸς ὑποζυγίων
φθοράν).”
68 Although F, (πρὸς ἡμίονον λακτίζουσαν) does not have a textual parallel in the surviving
hippiatric material, manuscript Γ preserves a very similar title: πρὸς τὸ παῦσαι ἡμίονον
λακτίζοντ(α). Interestingly, D, which has close parallels in the tradition of the Geoponica

XXII Introduction
Authors of ancient agricultural and technical literature were known to have
prefaced their works with brief summaries of their contents. This is possibly the
case with Cato’s De agri cultura, and certainly later with Pliny’s Naturalis historia
and Columella’s De re rustica.
69
In the realm of historiography, Polybius and
Diodorus Siculus come immediately to mind.
70
In terms of date and literary
genre, the closest parallels would probably be Aulus Gellius’ Noctes Atticae and
the Paedagogus of Clement of Alexandria.
71
In most cases, however, the system
they employed was somewhat diﬀerent from the pinax to Africanus’ seventh
Cestus, the latter of which is more akin to a summary than a table of contents.
Furthermore, most literary works at the time did not include a pinax: the gener-
al tendency to organize books in numbered chapters occurred only later, with
the spread and popularization of the codex. In the fourth century, authors even
started writing handbooks with the programmatic title kephalaia (e.g. Evagrius
Ponticus). Even so, Eusebius of Caesarea, the “impresario of the codex,” and an
author fascinated by the potential of the new medium for organizing knowl-
edge, adopted the new system in some, but not all of his works, as it seems.
72

In the preserved fragments of Africanus’ Cesti, there is unfortunately no
internal evidence for chapter subdivision. If the author refers to other passages
of his work, he always uses generic formulations like “elsewhere” or “as shown
previously.”
73
Hence, the surviving pinax of the Cestus may or may not be
original (or there may have been a diﬀerent table altogether); it must therefore
be considered a dubium (D).

(see third app.), features a similar title in both traditions (περὶ τῆς τῶν στρατιωτῶν ὑγείας, as
opposed to περὶ τῆς τῶν γεωργῶν ὑγιείας, Gp. ,).
69 Cf. Albino /,  (along with several other examples).
70 Cf. Mutschmann , f and Irigoin , f. One might even think of Africanus himself:
an enigmatic Latin text preserves a systematic overview of his Chronographiae (T), which
contains precious and certainly authentic information. Its origin is uncertain. In any case, it is
quite diﬀerent in character from the pinax here (it is a summary of the contents, not a guide
to single chapters).
71 For Aulus Gellius, cf. Albino /, ; for Clement, cf. Mutschmann , , who rightly
points out that the other works of the Alexandrian philosopher do not have this feature, in
particular not the Stromateis, which would be the closest parallel to the Cesti.
72 Eusebius as “impresario of the codex” is treated by Grafton/Williams . His Ecclesiastical
History was organized in chapters and had a corresponding pinax (Schwartz , CXLVII–
CLIII); the same applies to the Praeparatio evangelica (Mras/des Places , VIIIf). In the
case of the Vita Constantini, the titles and tables seem to be later additions (Winkelmann
, XLVI–XLIX). Eusebius’ continuators and successors in the ﬁeld of ecclesiastical history
also did not use this system (Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret).
73 F,,f and F,,f, see also F,,; F,,f. It must be noted, though, that the
subdivision in books (Cesti) is likewise not used by Africanus for internal references.

. The Cesti XXIII
.. Sources and Literary Character
Because of the partial preservation of the Cesti and the incomplete and some-
times distorted picture of the work created by the editorial reworkings of ex-
cerptors and epitomizers, the Cesti’s literary character can only be conﬁdently
reconstructed on the basis of the best preserved fragments. With a relative
degree of certainty, these fragments can be assumed to reﬂect the original
wording of the text. They comprise ﬁrst and foremost the papyrus, which con-
tains the end of the 
th
Cestus, and the seventh Cestus (although the authen-
ticity of the latter is subject to some qualiﬁcation).
74

In the preserved parts of the Cesti, Africanus only rarely quotes literary
sources explicitly. This is also true for the specialized authors from whom he
takes much material, yet never cites by name. Homer is named as an authority
on the various temperaments of horses (F,), and for the use of units of
weights diﬀerent from those of Africanus’ time (F,–). At the end of the

th
Cestus and after a critical analysis of the text of the Odyssey, he adds his own
supplement to the Nekyia as it appears in the vulgate version of Homer, the
latter, in Africanus’ judgment, an incomplete text. Euclid is cited as an authority
on geometry (F,),
75
and the fragment about the cinnamon tree (F) quotes
the relevant passage from Herodotus (Hdt. ,). As a general rule, however,
literary authorities are not identiﬁed. In the case of Homer’s Iliad , the source for
several literary examples and passages illustrating the danger that sleep poses
for soldiers (F,), the naming of the work was hardly necessary, even when
we cannot be certain as to which text of the Iliad Africanus is referring. These
examples reveal a further aspect of Africanus’ approach to his (literary) sources:

he defamiliarizes and decontextualizes them and nearly always uses a version at
odds with our standard text.
76
For example, the anecdote about Themistocles
(F,,– and F,,–) is found neither in Plutarch’s Vitae nor Polyaenus’
Stratagems. The same holds true for other historical anecdotes: the stratagems of
Alexander the Great (F,,; D,f), the Messenian Aristomenes (F,,–),
and the Pharisees (F,,–), and his account of elephants in battle (F,).
In all of these cases, it is diﬃcult to determine if Africanus is relying on a litera-
ry antecedent or unwritten tradition, or if we are dealing with one of the
author’s own inventions.

74 Although the text is in principle probably complete (or almost complete, see above, p. XX, n.
) and authentic, the complex process of transmission makes it impossible to vouch for all
details of formulation and style.
75 For the rarely named scientiﬁc sources such as the Quintilii (D), Neptunianus’ Physica
(D) and perhaps Lucius (D), see below, pp. XXVIII and LXVIII.
76 In some cases, the manner of the text’s transmission and its resulting corruption admittedly
make reconstruction of the Cesti diﬃcult. However, the discrepancies between Africanus’ text
and the named (or not named) sources cannot be attributed solely to this cause.

XXIV Introduction
The aforementioned fragment about the cinnamon tree, in which Africanus
attempts to refute Herodotus, exempliﬁes his liberal method of citation. Rather
than quoting Herodotus verbatim here, he reproduces the gist of his words,
along with several changes and additions. Even with regard to Homer,
Africanus, as he himself acknowledges at the end of the 
th
Cestus, produces
and uses his own version of the text of the Nekyia.
Aside from Homer and the historians, Africanus probably also borrows an
iambic trimeter from comedy (F,,f: τοιοῦτον αὐτοῖς κόρον Ἐρινὺς προ-
ξενεῖ) and perhaps alludes to a line from Virgil (F,,f). Otherwise, he does
not appear to have been familiar with Latin literature. The surviving parts of the
Cesti reveal virtually no inﬂuence from such genres as lyric, Hellenistic poetry,
and philosophy. Given the work’s general reception as an encyclopedic work of
technical or abstruse scientiﬁc content, it is of course conceivable that lost
portions of the work did include such material.
In most cases, Africanus uses examples drawn from his own ﬁeld of experi-
ence or education. To vouchsafe the veracity of his statements, he often intro-
duces himself in the ﬁrst person (e.g. F,,f), typically pitting his own knowl-
edge and experience against generally accepted truths or a literary authority. He
makes a personal appearance at both the beginning and the end of the seventh
Cestus. At the outset of the book, he tries, so it seems, to win the emperor’s favor
as an expert in strategic matters; at the end, he reminds the reader of his stay at
the court of Abgar of Edessa, thereby implicitly evoking his role as a courtier
with access to the innermost circle of power. In a similar fashion, he also
reminds the reader, at the end of the 
th
Cestus, of his role in the construction
of the library in the Pantheon at Rome. Conﬁdence in his own social standing,
experience, and knowledge emboldened him to openly criticize literary autho-
rities such as Herodotus and even to elevate himself to the same level as Homer.
Africanus repeatedly appears as both the authority who guarantees the
accuracy of his own declarations, and as a narrator announcing his presence via
short parenthetical glosses and connecting passages. Within the seventh Cestus,
he introduces the separate sections of the res militares treated in it and links
them together with transitional phrases. Only seldom does he shift the focus to
another voice, mostly to indeterminate ethnic groups (such as the Mauretanians
in F,) and to individuals introduced as sources (see above). Indirect speech
is also rare. He once quotes a sentence from Alexander in direct speech
(F,,f).
77
In the seventh Cestus, Africanus also refers to the book using the
expression σύγγραμμα (F,,); in referring to other books in the same work,
he uses the terms διφθέραι (F,,) and σύγγραμμα (F,,; D). How-
ever, he never names the book or the chapter to which he refers.
78

77 For these narratological termini, cf. Bal  and de Jong .
78 For the reference to the pentagons that were probably to be found at the end of the work (ἐπὶ
τέλει), see above, p. XXI.

. The Cesti XXV
Classical models inform the speech and style of the work.
79
Some ex-
pressions are redolent of Herodotus (ἀλλ’ ἐξ ἐπιδρομῆς ἁρπαγή F,, = Hdt.
,), an author with whom he was apparently deeply familiar. We also ﬁnd
nominal phrases that call to mind Thucydides or Polybius (e.g. F,,f). While
keen to employ a classical idiom, his Attic, like that of other authors of the
Second Sophistic (e.g. Lucian or Philostratus), is not immune to the inﬂuence of
Koine Greek or an Ionian substratum. Although Africanus always uses con-
tracted verb forms, progressive thematic forms such as δεικνύω instead of the
athematic δείκνυμι (F,,) do appear. Together with the Attic -ττ in πράττω
(F,,), φυλάττω (F,,), κρείττων (F,,), θάττων (F,,), Θετταλός
(F,,), he also employs forms with –σσ, such as προνύσσω (F,,),
ὀρύσσω (F,,), βήσσω (F,,), τέσσαρας (D,) and θάλασσα
(F,, next to the adjective θαλάττιος F,,). As well as the older im-
perative forms ending in -ντων (e.g. F,, ἀντιπροπινόντων, F,, ἑστάν-
των), we ﬁnd later forms ending in -τωσαν and -σθωσαν (F,, θεραπευέτω-
σαν, F,, ἔστωσαν, F,, συγκαθειργνύσθωσαν). There is even one
occurrence, as with the Atticists, of the dual (F,, τὼ πόδε).
Alongside the classical vocabulary are words dating from the imperial pe-
riod. Among them are κατόρθωμα and συναγρυπνέω, the latter of which also
appears in Philostratus. Africanus also adopts termini from the language of
Hellenistic oﬃcialdom, including composite words made up of multiple parts
(συγκαθείργνυμι, see above).
Africanus was a proliﬁc creator of new words, Vieillefond identiﬁed several
neologisms and hapax legomena, e.g. ἀηττησία (F,,), ἀντιτοξότης
(F,,) and δυσμετάγωγος (F,,). On the other hand, apart from a mea-
surement term, Africanus does not seem to include Semitic words. Nor is any
Latin inﬂuence recognizable in his phraseology.
80

Rhetorical ﬁgures and tropes are scattered throughout the work. Examples
include alliteration (F,, ἀκμῆτες τὸν τρόπον τοῦτον), anaphora (F,,
νυκτός), antithesis (F,,– καὶ ἄλλος στρατηγεῖ μέν, ἀλλ’ οὐ σωφρονεῖ … βα-
δισταί, ἀλλ᾽ ὑβρισταί), antonomasia (F,, ὁ Φρύξ for Midas), apostrophe
(F,, Ὕπνε and  ὦ Ὕπνε), asyndeton (F,,f ἁλυσιδωτὸς θώραξ, κνη-
μὶς μία, μακρὰ ἡ σπάθη, θυρεὸς πρόβλημα ἄκρᾳ χειρὶ φορούμενον; F,,
σιδηροῖ, ὀξεῖς, ἑδραῖοι, παχεῖς), irony (F,,f τοιοῦτον αὐτοῖς κόρον Ἐρινὺς
προξενεῖ), metonymy (F,, τὸν Διόνυσον), polyptoton (F,, λίτρου
λίτραν), homeoteleuton (F,, καὶ νεῦμα καὶ βλέμμα καὶ φωνὴ καὶ σιωπή),
chiasmus (F,,f τοξικῇ γραφικὴν συλλαβών, καὶ γράφων τοξεύμασι καὶ το-
ξεύων γραφάς), paronomasia (F,, μένει μεμνημένον), periphrasis (F,,
Ὁ γοῦν Ἰλιεὺς ἡγεμὼν), polysyndeton (F,pr.,f λόγον ἢ νόμον ἢ εἱμαρμένην ἢ

79 For an in-depth account of Africanus’ language, cf. also Vieillefond , –.
80 For the Semitic κάβος, see F,.

XXVI Introduction
τύχην; F,, καὶ νεῦμα καὶ βλέμμα καὶ φωνὴ καὶ σιωπή) and climactic phrases
(F,,–).
81

While we do not know how the books of the Cesti were originally arranged,
the seventh Cestus and the other fragments lead us to conclude that Africanus
treated a wide range of scientiﬁc and cultural subjects. The initial impression
created by the seventh Cestus of a purely arbitrary and unsophisticated juxta-
position of unrelated arguments is deceptive. In reality, Africanus is in complete
control of the literary design, connecting his arguments according to the
principle of ποικιλία (variatio). After the introduction, he takes up in succession
issues relating to arms, war stratagems, biological warfare agents, the treatment
of wounds, hippiatrics, geometry, agriculture, and the use of a talisman and ele-
phants in warfare. These disparate parts are often joined together with transi-
tional passages and digressions referring back to literary authorities.
As we have already seen, Africanus makes a personal appearance at the be-
ginning and the end of each Cestus. Throughout the entire work, he accompa-
nies the reader in the persona of an educated and omniscient narrator with
advice to give and, above all, a solution for all of the problems discussed. In the
spirit of the Alexandrian genres of paradoxography or Buntschriftstellerei,
82
Afri-
canus gravitates to paradoxical topics and questions, as indeed the title Cesti
suggests.
83
Vieillefond was thus right to compare the Cesti to Clement’s Stroma-
teis and Gellius’ Noctes Atticae: “il s’agit d’une œuvre qui ne saurait guère s’inti-
tuler directement faute de représenter une unité de sujet, voire une idée géné-
rale. Ce sont des recueils, des mélanges … l’auteur ne se souciait ni d’un plan
strict ni d’un but précis. La crainte des redites ou des digressions ne le troublait
pas.”
84
At the same time, material taken from other sources is for the most part
arranged in a new and ambitious format. The polished assembly and presenta-
tion of this encyclopedic knowledge serve the twin ends that Africanus himself
assigns for himself in the preface to the seventh Cestus: to promote enjoyment
(delectare), without at the same time losing sight of practical beneﬁt (prodesse).

81 Cf. the examples in Vieillefond , , n. f and the notes to the present edition.
82 For the term cf. Bowie , : “Der Begriﬀ wurde von der deutschen altphilologischen
Forschung geprägt (auf der Basis von Ailianos’ Titel ποικίλη ἱστορία, poikílē historía), um
Prosawerke zu klassiﬁzieren, die ihren Stoﬀ in einer bewußt unterschiedslosen Reihenfolge
präsentieren. Wir haben keinen antiken Gattungsbegriﬀ für derartige Werke (genausowenig
eine ausführliche kritische Erörterung), können jedoch folgende Unterscheidung treﬀen: (a)
Werke, deren Inhalte scheinbar wahllos aufeinanderfolgen und deren Themen unterschied-
lich sind, und (b) Werke, deren Inhalte scheinbar wahllos aufeinanderfolgen, deren Themen
aber auf ein bestimmtes Gebiet beschränkt sind, entweder (i) ausdrücklich oder (ii) versteckt.”
Africanus’ individual Cesti belong to type (b) whereas the entire work belongs to type (a).
83 See above, pp. XVIIf.
84 Vieillefond , .

. The Cesti XXVII
.. Technical and/or Magical Character
The Cesti thus had an inherent practical dimension, and, in its content, is akin to
ancient technical literature.
85
It was not at all uncommon in the Hellenistic and
Roman periods to treat technical or scientiﬁc subjects in a literarily recherché
form; alongside treatises lacking in stylistic ambition, there existed a long
tradition of didactic poetry. Examples include Aratus, Nicander of Colophon,
Virgil (Georgics), and Oppian. In the 
rd
century, however, the taste for rhetoric
encouraged by the Second Sophistic meant that prose became the natural
medium of choice. From this point of view, the Cesti is comparable to Aelian’s
Natura animalium, a work composed about the same time.
The adopted rhetorical form allows for technical or scholarly material to be
presented in a more appealing manner. Indeed, it is useful to reﬂect upon the
balance between prodesse and delectare in the work.
86
The attention paid to style,
the role of historical and mythological references, the choice of poikilia over
systematic presentation, and the desire to entertain, diﬀerentiate the Cesti from
purely technical or scientiﬁc treatises. Certain pages even seem to have been
openly humorous.
87
We can also question just how seriously Africanus could
claim the eﬀectiveness of some of the procedures prescribed in the work. For
Björck, this exposed the Cesti for what it was: a misunderstood parody of con-
temporary pseudo-science.
88
Contrary to this reading, Vieillefond emphasized
the seriousness of some of Africanus’ advice.
89
Furthermore, where comparison
is possible, Africanus’ information hardly diﬀers from that of his sources. Nor
was credulity (whether real or aﬀected) peculiar to Africanus—numerous
examples from many contemporary authors could be adduced. To sustain a
parody over  books would arguably have also run the risk of taxing the
readers’ patience. By comparison, Lucian’s parodical Verae historiae contained

85 For this aspect of the Cesti, cf. Meißner .
86 Readings that stress the Cesti’s usefulness in terms of the war against the Persians have been
proposed (Rampoldi ; Wheeler a, b; Meißner , esp. –). Relying essen-
tially on the seventh Cestus, they seem, however, unable to take into account the extreme va-
riety of subjects broached by Africanus, some of which are very frivolous.
87 Examples of humorous passages are to be found above all in the paignia, such as those
attested by Psellus (T,f and ; if all or a part of ll. – of his account derive from the
Cesti, we will need to reevaluate the role of the comical in the work). These kinds of magical
tricks (or in some cases simply conjuring tricks) were especially designed for symposia (cf.
Bain , f; Dickie , ). It is possible that collections of paignia circulated in the
pseudo-Democritan tradition (Dickie , f, but cf. Bain , , n. ). On the other
hand, it was also not rare for paignia to coexist alongside more serious elements in magical or
technical/magical collections.
88 Björck , – (but not without certain nuances to his argument at p. ). As examples of
passages that cannot, in his opinion, have been written seriously he points to F,,–
and D.
89 Vieillefond ,  notes in particular the theorem in F, and the “précepte de médicine
‘pasteurienne’” whereby water puriﬁed by boiling (D,–).

XXVIII Introduction
only one book. Ultimately, the question raised by Björck is a matter of the work’s
intended purpose. Full recognition of the Cesti ’s literary character allows us to
avoid one-dimensional readings of the work as either “serious” or “parodic.”
Read not so much as a technical encyclopedia than as a piece of erudite
entertainment meant to celebrate the author’s universal learning, the Cesti
sidesteps the requirement to present solely useful and truly applicable advice.
The Cesti’s technical character is especially visible in its orientation toward
practical problems—this is at least the impression created by the seventh Cestus .
The preserved fragments of the work deal mostly with tactics and medicine
(human as well as veterinary), but further fragments and testimonies prove that
other subjects were also discussed: agriculture, weights and measures, literary
problems, botany, zoology, cosmetics, dyes, love-magic, and so forth. In order to
address such a wide range of material, Africanus must have drawn upon highly
diverse sources. In most cases, however, their identity escapes us. Indeed, Afri-
canus only rarely identiﬁes the origin of technical information.
90
Nor are all of
the authorities necessarily cited ﬁrsthand.
91
An examination of parallel passages
sometimes reveals correspondences between the tradition that Africanus was
drawing on and other authors’ sources. In particular, we note numerous points
of contact with Pliny, and Dioscorides and, regarding agriculture, with Anatolius
of Berytus.
92
However, it is also not rare (as, for example, in the case of the
historical anecdotes) for Africanus to represent a tradition for which no precise
parallel exists.
The prominence of magic in the Cesti has generally been discussed in the
context of its compatibility with the author’s supposed Christianity.
93
A good
number of procedures presented in the work can indeed be rightly considered
magical.
94
However, the Cesti is not a book of magical spells. Nor is the vo-

90 He does refer to the Quintilii brothers (consuls in  A.D.; on these ﬁgures, cf. Oliver ,
–; McCabe , f; Wachtel/Heil/Strobach , Q [Condianus], – and Q
[Maximus], –) who were authors of an agricultural treatise (D,), and the Physica of
Neptunianus (D,), who is linked to the pseudo-Democritan tradition. Unknown,
the author of the latter work was identiﬁed by Wilamowitz (in Oder , , n. ) with
Nepualius, to whom is attributed a treatise entitled Περὶ τῶν κατὰ ἀντιπάθειαν καὶ συμπά-
θειαν.
91 The Mauritanian stockbreeder mentioned in D,f (see p. , n. ) and the doctor named
Phobius in D, (otherwise unknown) are most certainly not direct sources. If these lines
do stem from Africanus, then we would probably have to add Zenaria the Pythagorean to the
list of authorities cited indirectly (T,). The case of Lucius/Licius (Da,/Db,) is
uncertain (see p. LXVIII).
92 For Pliny, cf. e.g. Meißner ,  on F,; for Anatolius, cf. Guignard b.
93 Cf. esp. Thee .
94 The amount of space occupied by magic in the Cesti clearly depends on one’s deﬁnition of the
concept of “magic” (cf. Wallraﬀ , f). For our purposes, it is unnecessary to decide
whether or not to count physica as magic; even if physica is not considered magic sensu stricto
(especially if one presupposes that magic involves demonic powers), they certainly still
belong to a kind of magical world-view.

. The Cesti XXIX
cabulary of magic in the narrowest sense (μαγεία, γοητεία) attested in the pre-
served fragments.
95
Africanus does speak, on the other hand, about the τέχνη
φύσεως (F,,)
96
and ἱστορία ἀπόρρητος (F,f), the latter of which refers to
esoteric knowledge. In this way, he aligns not with the tradition of magical
books, but rather with a ﬂourishing contemporary trend exempliﬁed by some
treatises passed down under the name of Democritus.
97
Exponents of this
school of thought were especially interested in the secret properties of the “na-
tures” (φύσεις) of animals, plants, and minerals; in this context, “nature” referred
to “a speciﬁc identity,” a meaning the word acquired during the Alexandrian and
Roman periods.
98
Stemming from this same understanding, the word physica
was used to describe these secret properties and the remedies drawn from them.
One deﬁning feature of this trend was the notion of sympathy/antipathy—that
is, the inherent aﬃnity or opposition between the “natures” of any two given
beings.
99
This “mystico-magical way of viewing nature”
100
occupies an essential
place in the Cesti. Incidentally, the Suda explicitly compares the Cesti with
physica literature.
101
Such phenomena do receive explicit mention in the work,
such as the antipathy between wolves and horses: a wolf’s footprint or bone will,
he writes, stop a horse in its tracks.
102
Even when not directly invoked, the idea
of sympathy/antipathy is often visible in the background.
103

95 Wallraﬀ ,  also notes that much vocabulary typical of magical papyri is missing.
96 It is signiﬁcant, however, that Psellus in T, uses the word γοητικός to refer to procedures
that Africanus calls τεχνικός.
97 Some of these were from Bolus of Mendes; for this ﬁgure, cf. Gaillard-Seux . On the
pseudo-Democritan tradition, cf. also Wellmann ; Kroll ; Festugière , –;
Martelli  and , esp. −, −.
98 Cf. Zucker , .
99 This notion was studied by Weidlich ; among more recent titles, cf. esp. Zucker .
100 Wellmann ,  speaks of the rise of “eine ganz neue Betrachtungsweise der Natur, zum
größten Teil mystisch-magischer Art” in Hellenistic Egypt. For want of a better formulation,
we are reusing Wellmann’s words to describe material in the Cesti relating to nature’s secret
properties and their use in magical procedures or procedures related to magic (see n. ).
101 Ta,; cf. also T, (Georgius Syncellus).
102 See respectively F,,– (where the text is corrupt, but can be illuminated by parallels; see
app. loc. sim.) and D (where Africanus cites Neptunianus). Vocabulary related to antipathy
is found in T,.f, Fa,/Fb,, D, (cf. D,tit.). In many cases, it is difﬁcult to
determine whether ἀντιπαθές and ἀντιπαθεῖν refer simply to a remedy and its eﬀect or
presuppose an actual antipathy. Conversely, although the idea of sympathy clearly appears in
contrast with that of antipathy in T,f, the word συμπάθεια and its derivatives are absent
from the preserved fragments. This imbalance might not only be due to the contingencies of
transmission: Pliny also mentions antipathies far more often than he does sympathies (Gaide
,  and ).
103 We recall that Aelian never uses the terms antipathy or sympathy, although such phenomena
occupy an important place in his work (see Weidlich ,  and Zucker , ).

XXX Introduction
The boundary between the exploration of nature’s hidden properties and
magic was not always sharp.
104
As we have seen, magic in the more narrow sense
of the word was included in the Cesti; we even encounter harmful magic and
love-magic.
105
For the most part, however, Africanus’ magic ﬁts into the broader
scheme of physica . Indeed, judging by the preserved fragments, the Cesti’s magic
is ﬁrst and foremost oriented toward hidden natural properties rather than the
invocation of demonic powers. Even so, the latter was not completely excluded.
We catch a glimpse of it in Africanus’ explanatory glosses on the incantation
uttered by Odysseus in the pseudo-Homeric citation (F,.). Fragment D,
which stands a good chance of being genuine,
106
also features a sacriﬁce to
Aphrodite in the preparation of an amulet against ophthalmia (l. ). But proce-
dures like these are rare; of course, censorship by Byzantine excerptors of
magical procedures overtly pagan in character may at least partially account for
their almost total absence from the Cesti.
Generally, however, the Cesti pays scant attention to religion.
107
Most of the
references to gods are found in the mythical allusions embellishing the narra-
tive. One passage seems nonetheless to be signiﬁcant in terms of the role of
religion in the Cesti ’s world. Here Africanus claims to have discovered a drug
even more eﬃcacious than a prayer that soldiers on the brink of combat address
to Poseidon Taraxippos.
108
In moments of self-aggrandizement, the author even
ventures comparisons between himself and the gods, sometimes actually claim-
ing to surpass them.
109
In this way, religion seems almost outdone, without,
however, being discredited. Indeed, the title of the Cesti indirectly draws a
connection between the work and Aphrodite (whilst, as we have seen, also
retaining a magical dimension): via an intertextual nod to the Iliad ,f, the
Cesti becomes the book “where all charms reside.”
The mystico-magical dimension of the Cesti also reveals itself in the use of
geometrical ﬁgures. To judge by the example of the seventh Cestus, at least cer-
tain books seem to have been punctuated by a series of magical ﬁgures—geo-
metric forms containing a picture or formula associated with musical notation.
The seventh Cestus contains only pentagons, but a hippiatric fragment from

104 The study of physica for practical (often therapeutic) purposes further blurred the boundary.
This aspect is highlighted by Festugière , f, who notes a fundamental diﬀerence
between the “pseudo-sciences de la nature” and Aristotelian enquiry.
105 See e.g. F, for harmful magic. As for love-magic, it is implied by T, as well as F.
106 See p. LV.
107 See Wallraﬀ , – and . The religious universe in question here is that of Greco-
Roman religion. The preserved fragments do not make the slightest mention of either Juda-
ism or Christianity. If the Pharisees are mentioned in F,,, it is only to exemplify the
military ruses and perﬁdy of barbarian peoples.
108 F,,–.
109 See F,,f; F,,–.

. The Cesti XXXI
another book makes reference to a hexagon.
110
Following
Vincent, Vieillefond defended the idea that these were
star-shaped pentagons or hexagons (like
üor ὡ).
111

However, the terms πεντάγωνον and ἑξάγωνον refer to
simple pentagons and hexagons (ῆἃ and ῆἴ ).
112
This is also
suggested by what seems to be the unique remnant in the
manuscript tradition of the illustrations contained in
Africanus’ original work. In the hippiatric manuscript of
Cambridge (Γ),
113
the lower margin of the page containing F, includes a geo-
metric form with some unintelligible letters (p. ; reproduced above).
114
On
the other hand, the form here is one of a rhombus, thus giving only a distorted
reproduction of the original pentagon. We may assume that the pentagon and
the hexagon bear some connection with the symbolism of the numbers ﬁve and
six;
115
nonetheless, their exact meaning eludes us. Nor can we determine wheth-
er other geometric ﬁgures were used, or whether such ﬁgures (which seem to
link together several diﬀerent interpretive levels of reality) were connected to
the arithmological and alphabetic mysticism of which Psellus allows us to catch
a glimpse (T). If we exclude the short prooemium to the seventh Cestus
(F,pr.), then the aforementioned text is unfortunately the only evidence in the
entire corpus of fragments for the theoretical developments of Africanus’ mysti-
cal understanding of the cosmos.

110 There were nine pentagons in all: F,,..; F,,; F,,; F,,; F,,; F,,f;
F,,. The hexagon at F, carried the number seven. Certain Byzantine sources perhaps
allude to these symbols (Tb,; Ta,). On these geometric ﬁgures, cf. Vieillefond , –;
Thee , –; Wallraﬀ , f.
111 Vincent , f; Vieillefond , . Thee ,  bases his reconstruction on this
hypothesis. For esoteric uses of the pentagram, cf. Iwersen . Objections to Vieillefond’s
hypothesis further undermine his claim for the Judaic character of these symbols (ibid. –
).
112 Cf. Mugler –, f, s.v. ἑξάγωνον, and f, s.v. πεντάγωνος. A pentagon in the shape
of a star was labeled τριπλοῦν τρίγωνον or πεντάγραμμον (Lucian, laps. ).
113 See p. LIII.
114 Whereas the number of the pentagon (nº ) has been suppressed, the link between its men-
tion in the text is reinforced by the replacement of its number by τῷδε τῷ ὑποκειμένῳ (“the
one that is below,” F,,,app.). The letters inserted into the ﬁgure obviously should
constitute the Latin formula referred to in the text (l. ), but they seem to be unintelligible.
Only the ﬁrst two (φε) could possibly be interpreted as the phi and digamma indicated as
musical notation for the pentagon under question. As observed by Desrousseaux (cited by
Vieillefond , , in the footnote), some other letters, on the right of the geometrical
ﬁgures, can be interpreted as θεοφύλακτον (“protected by God”); only a slight correction is
necessary (αελφχοθπψλν instead of αελφχοθ πψλυ). The cryptographic alphabet used to
write this word could have already existed in Africanus’ lifetime (cf. Ruelle , f, with the
key to the alphabet). However, since this adjective, which is attested only from the 
th
/
th

centuries, is obviously no part of the Latin formula and has no evident link with the ﬁgure, it
was probably added later by a copyist.
115 Cf. Vieillefond , , who draws upon Pythagorean symbolism; cf. Delatte , –,
who suggests a connection with Aphrodite.

XXXII Introduction
The coexistence of the work’s mystico-magical dimension with technical
and scientiﬁc knowledge constitutes certainly one of the most striking features
of the Cesti. Admittedly, it is not unique to Africanus; to varying degrees, it is
characteristic of much of the Fachliteratur of Late Antiquity. Even so, the space
allocated in the Cesti to magic and physica is disproportionately high.
116
In order
to “gather a harvest of various kinds of beneﬁt” (F,pr.,f), Africanus avails
himself both of the mysterious properties of beings and the resources of magic,
and of a wide range of specialized knowledge. In this way, geometry (F,)
and rational medicine (F) take up their place alongside irrational
procedures.
117
Ultimately, what assures the unity of this very disparate subject
matter is, on the one hand, the work’s (purported) practical utility and, on the
other, a taste for the ingenious, the curious, and the marvelous.
. The Text and its Transmission
The highly heterogeneous transmission of the extant fragments of the Cesti
covers a broad spectrum from very early attestation in direct transmission (in
one case, F) to distant and muddled echoes of the work in later sources. For
that reason, the reader has always to take into consideration the context in
which each fragment has been handed down. Heuristic distinctions between the
categories F, T, and D (see below, p. XC) serve only as a rough guideline. The
notes to the text and the remarks that follow should also provide additional
clariﬁcation.
For the most part, what interested later generations in the Cesti were prac-
tical considerations, not the literary work as a whole and its general Weltan-
schauung, much less the intellectual proﬁle of the author. In many cases, the
larger literary units were thus “atomized” into single recipes and reduced to
“operational” skeletons. Similarly, the preservation of a large proportion of mili-
tary and medical material (including veterinary) topics reﬂects more the pre-
occupations of later generations than it does the overall character of the original
work. Perhaps with the single exception of Psellus, excerptors of the work show
little interest in Africanus’ philosophical or religious convictions. The selective
nature of the work’s transmission and preservation needs to be factored into
discussions of its “Christian” or “non-Christian” character.
Because the name Africanus had, by the Byzantine era, become a sort of
“trademark” for encyclopedic technical and medical knowledge of all kinds, the
mere mention of the name is not suﬃcient to establish a reliable link to the

116 Cf. Meißner , . Magic is especially rare in military literature; cf. Wheeler a and
Weidlich , .
117 The irrational character of physica was well recognized even in Antiquity; cf. Björck , ;
Gaide , f; Meißner , ; Zucker , –, f.

. The Text and its Transmission XXXIII
Cesti. Careful analysis of context and selection criteria is required. For the main
areas of transmission, this is discussed in the following pages. In addition, there
are a few cases where the reference to the Cesti remains uncertain or unlikely.
The 
th
century poet Theodoros Meliteniotes, for instance, speaks of Africanus
as ὁ ποιητὴς ὁ ξένος χρονογράφος.
118
He may or may not have heard something
of the work. Other cases arise from scribal misunderstanding or error.
119
This is
especially true of references to Africanus in the Latin-speaking world of the
West. The standard works by Ruﬁnus and Jerome (both based on Eusebius’
Ecclesiastical history, where the Cesti is mentioned, Ta) suppress any mention of
it.
120
With the single exception of F, later Latin writers knew little or nothing
of the Cesti. Hence, in the Decretum Gelasianum, the name Africanus probably
belongs to the preceding entry: Lactantius, an “African” author.
121
This is likely
also because the Cesti would have been the only plausible reason why Africanus
was condemned.
.. Papyrus Oxy. 
Only one fragment survives in direct transmission. The ﬁnal two columns of the

th
Cestus have been preserved thanks to a papyrus scrap discovered in the
Egyptian city of Oxyrhynchus at the end of the 
th
century and acquired by the
British Museum in .
122
Written across the grain of the papyrus, the recto,
which contains the text of Africanus, has been given the number  (F, see
also ﬁg. – on pp. –).
123

Because of the papyrus’ reuse, the text of the Cestus has been truncated. The
verso of the papyrus (Pap. Oxy. ), which runs against the grain and thus in
the opposite direction of the Cestus text, contains a copy of the testament of a
certain Hermogenes, originally drafted in  A.D. during the reign of the Em-

118 Text in Miller ,  (verse ), brieﬂy mentioned in Vieillefond , f, n. , on the
author cf. Beck , .
119 For example, in the “interreligious dialogue” De gestis in Perside (CPG ), the name
Ἀφρικανός is confused with Ἀφροδιτιανός (see the edition by Bratke , ). Heyden ,
f discusses the reference to Africanus and comes to the conclusion that it was a misreading
of the abbreviation Αφρ (as surmised already by Brakte).
120 Ruﬁnus in his translation of Eusebius (see app. to Ta), Jerome in De viris illustribus  (= Iul.
Afr., chron. Tb).
121 According to the edition of von Dobschütz , the list of admitted and rejected books
(usually dated around , cf. Peretto , f) denounces opuscula Lactantii sive Firmiani
and opuscula Africani in two successive entries as apocrypha (,, l. f). The editor did not
see a speciﬁc reason why Africanus was included, and thought it was an erroneous condem-
nation (–, esp. ). However, Schwartz ,  pointed out that the best manuscript
tradition actually reads opuscula Lactantii sive Firmiani, sive Africani (family Δ, highly
esteemed both by von Dobschütz ,  and Massigli , ) and that we are probably
dealing with only one entry.
122 British Library inv.  (P.Lit.Lond.  in Milne ).
123 Grenfell/Hunt , –.

XXXIV Introduction
peror Tacitus.
124
In terms of the recto’s dating, we should assume that the copy
of the testament found on the verso was produced not long after its initial publi-
cation. We can also reasonably assume that the book roll with the text of the
Cesti had been left in that state for a fairly long time before being cut up and
reused. The terminus ante quem for the recto can, therefore, be arguably set at
around  A.D., and perhaps even as early as the middle of the ﬁfties of the
third century. The book copy of the Cesti would thus have been produced only a
generation after the completion of the original work.
125

The papyrus, measuring . × . cm, contains two vertically intact
columns of text. The second of these, also horizontally intact, includes, at the
end of  lines of text, both a subscript with the author’s name Iulius Africanus
and the number of the 
th
Cestus, which concludes at this point.
The ﬁrst preserved column, containing  lines of text, was truncated on the
left side before the papyrus was reused. The quantity of text lost can, however,
be calculated with a high degree of certainty, seeing that it contains a passage
from Homer’s Odyssey (with some additions), and each line represents exactly
one hexameter. This left-hand column is notably wider than the right-hand one,
which contains prose text only. Over the original middle of the ﬁrst column is
the number  (λε), and over the second we can also make out the number 
(λ
.
ς
.
). The 
th
Cestus thus consisted of  columns, probably consisting of 
columns, each with  lines, and  lines in the last column for a total of 
lines.
126
The prose column measures . cm wide for the text with an additional 
cm for the gap between this column and the preceding one, giving a total of
approximately  cm. On the other hand, the reconstructed hexameter column
runs to an estimated  cm (including the gap after the preceding prose col-
umn). We can thus only guess at the width of the 
th
Cestus’ lost opening 
columns. If we do not envisage any further hexameter columns, then the total
length of the 
th
Cestus would extend to .m.
127

The rounded print of the papyrus is characterized by a strictly observed bi-
linearity; even χ and β normally remain within the conﬁnes of the lines. Only
the noticeably wide φ clearly breaches the bilinearity; ξ, τ, and π occasionally
stretch over the line, whereby the verticals are often slightly curved at the bot-
tom to the right forming an apex. Overall, the letters tend toward either a square
or a round form and are more or less equal in size, even including in many cases
the omicron. The wide breadth of the κ is, however, striking. While the print,

124 Cf. Hammerstaedt , f.
125 For the dating of the Cesti, see above, p. XIX.
126 Calculation in Grenfell/Hunt ,  and Hammerstaedt , .
127 We are thus dealing with a relatively short book roll for which, however, comparable exam-
ples do exist. One cannot exclude the possibility that the roll contained multiple Cesti of simi-
lar length. Nor can we reject out of hand the suggestion that one or even several further Cesti
came after the 
th
, although the appearance of the author’s name in the subscription militates
against this hypothesis; cf. Hammerstaedt , .

. The Text and its Transmission XXXV
sometimes in scriptio continua, is ﬂowingly written, it remains clearly within the
realm of the book face type.
128

Problems in this excerpt extend well beyond the reconstruction of the lost
parts and the reading of unclear passages. Despite its early date, it contains
many textual corruptions and poses signiﬁcant problems of interpretation.
Studies of the text from the ﬁelds of classical philology and religious studies
were most numerous during the ﬁrst half of the 
th
century, most notably by
Ludwich , Wünsch , and Hopfner . Aside from Vieillefond’s edition
of the Cesti,
129
the following period saw no study encompassing all of its
linguistic and contextual aspects. Aland and Rosenbaum oﬀer a concise albeit
incomplete bibliography,
130
while Thee provides a very comprehensive overview
of modern scholarship.
131
Kahane’s proposed new interpretation of the text
neglects all German-speaking studies from the 
th
century.
132
Hammerstaedt
has produced a new edition and interpretation of the second column.
133

The ﬁrst  lines of the ﬁrst column correspond to lines – and – of
the 
th
book of the Odyssey (Nekyia). In this episode, Odysseus begins by
describing how, in accordance with the advice of the sorceress Circe given in the
tenth book, he travelled to the outer limits of the world-encircling Oceanus to
enquire about the fate awaiting him from the dead prophet Tiresias. To attract
the shades of the dead, Odysseus has carried out a bloodless sacriﬁce in a pit
dug especially for this purpose. Picking up directly after this, the papyrus
passage from the Odyssey describes both the sacriﬁce of the sheep (,–)
and the approach of the lifeless souls (,–). The following four lines (,–
), in which Odysseus urges his companions to call upon Hades and Perse-
phone after the skinning and burning of the sheep, are omitted in the papyrus,
which then immediately continues with the three succeeding lines (,–).
Here, Odysseus stays the shades of the dead with his drawn sword. In place of
the Homeric ending of the last line (,)—“before I asked Tiresias” (πρὶν Τει-
ρεσίαο πυθέσθαι), Africanus’ version substitutes the somewhat inappropriate
words: “and in response, I uttered these words” (καὶ ἀμειβόμενος ἔπος
ηὔδων).
134

The following lines (col. I –) completely abandon the text of the Odys-
sey. Only in the ﬁnal line of the ﬁrst column does the text resume at Od. ,, at

128 Cf. Hammerstaedt , .
129 Vieillefond , –.
130 Aland/Rosenbaum . Further literature on magical invocations can be found in Brashear
, esp.  (for PGM ).
131 Thee , –.
132 Kahane  and .
133 Hammerstaedt .
134 It is notable Africanus used the so-called vulgate—an edition of the Odyssey not inﬂuenced
by the work of the Alexandrian scholars. In this way, he retains lines –, otherwise athetized
by Zenodotus, Aristophanes, and Aristarchus, and even provides us with a variant on line 
unattested to in any other version; cf. West .

XXXVI Introduction
which point Odysseus meets with his unfortunate companion Elpenor. For
reasons of content, Africanus skips over the Odyssey’s account of how Odysseus,
following his sacriﬁces (Od. ,– = col. I –), bids his companions to make
a prayer (Od. ,–). He replaces it with a diﬀerent command, also spoken by
Odysseus. This departure from the canonical text is indicated by the parenthe-
tical remark (col. I ): “He has described the actions that must be done” (ἃ δεῖ
ποιῆσαι εἴρηκεν), which parallels a further remark a few lines later (col. I ):
“He utters the incantation that must be sung” (ἃ δεῖ ἐπᾶσαι λέγει). In between
these two one-line prose interjections, we ﬁnd six lines (col. I –) in which
rivers, Gaia, and the gods of vengeance for perjurers are called upon as wit-
nesses and as helpers for the invocation (col. I –). By invoking this trilogy of
gods, the necromancer hopes to facilitate the arrival of the human souls, with
whose help he will enquire about how to return home where he has left his
young son Telemachus (col. I –). This appeal, composed in Homeric style,
rounds oﬀ the portion quoted from the Odyssey (see ποιεῖν col. I ). Although
the ﬁrst three lines of the appeal reproduce verses from the Iliad (,–),
and the other three resemble Homeric phraseology, violations of metrical rules
suggest that the author of the interpolation lacked total mastery of epic versi-
ﬁcation.
135

Fifteen completely diﬀerent lines (col. I –) follow the second parenthet-
ical remark (col. I ).
136
Here we ﬁnd a magical invocation made up of a mix-
ture of Greek (chthonic Zeus, Helios etc.), Egyptian (Anubis, Ptah, Nephthys)
and Judaic (Iaa for Jahwe) religious elements. It also contains typical voces ma-
gicae and propitious names (Omososon, Abraxas, Ablanatho), through whose
acknowledgement their invoker could, in the Egyptian-Oriental tradition, bring
a deity under his control.
137
While to some extent comparable with invocations
in other magical papyri (e.g. PMG , f), it is entirely unrelated to the
situation in the Nekyia and thus distinctly set apart from the preceding six lines
(col. I –) that for their part clearly supplement the text of the Odyssey.
Six further Homeric-sounding verses (col. I –) seamlessly follow on
from col. I , which ends with the words “for the following was a most useful
spell.” These six lines describe how the rivers of the underworld earlier invoked
now make their actual appearance. The Odyssey interpolation in the ﬁrst
column is thus made up of two parts. The ﬁrst part consists of the Homeric lines
(col. I – and –), which Wünsch dates to the pre-Christian era on the

135 See below, p. , n.  and p. , n. .
136 Wünsch  has produced an important analysis and classiﬁcation of the conjuration in its
wider context, to which Hopfner  has also made signiﬁcant contributions.
137 For this typical feature of magical texts, cf., for example, Fowden , –. Kahane ,
 argues that because these words are unintelligible according to conventional grammatical
and semantic rules and make sense only in a magical context, they represent for their
audience a “a secret, hieratic language of power and wisdom.”

. The Text and its Transmission XXXVII
basis of the absence of any later syncretic or magical elements.
138
The second is
the magical hymn, whose composition can conﬁdently be dated to the Roman
Empire, probably not long before Africanus or perhaps even in his age. The met-
rical anomalies provide additional support for this conclusion.
139
Contrary to
Wünsch’s conclusion, the metrical inaccuracies found in the Homeric lines sug-
gest that this part too stems from the period of the Roman Empire and served
simply to create a link between the magical invocation and the authentic text
from the Odyssey . (In this case, Africanus himself is arguably the most likely
candidate for the authorship.)
In the second column, Africanus speaks in his own voice. He ﬁrst explains
how the invocation that he has quoted had been omitted either by Homer or by
the Pisistratidae, the Athenian tyrants credited with having drafted the ﬁrst text
of Homer in the sixth century. They did so, he says, because it was deemed
inappropriate in the context of heroic epic poetry. Africanus is therefore
concerned less with questions of textual criticism and authenticity than he is
with literary criticism. Because, in his opinion, the incantation as it currently
stands in Homer is only hinted at, it is incomplete and does not adequately
portray the conjuring up of the souls.
140

Contrary to the view of some modern interpreters, Africanus nowhere
claims to have discovered this version of the Odyssey while conducting anti-
quarian research in some library, which he then credulously adopted.
141
There is
equally little evidence for the claim that Africanus either deliberately or even
maliciously falsiﬁed these additional lines,
142
or that he composed them as a

138 Wünsch , –.
139 See below, p. , n.  and p. , n. .
140 Hopfner , : “Da aber diese zwingenden Zauberformeln in der Folgezeit seit dem Ein-
dringen orientalischer Vorstellungen auch für die Totenbeschwörung das Wichtigste waren,
so hat man zweifellos das Fehlen eines Zaubergebets in der homerischen Nekromanthie am
schmerzlichsten empfunden; diesem Mangel suchte ein Interpolator abzuhelfen …”
141 Cf. Ludwich , f: “Die Ehrlichkeit und Glaubwürdigkeit des Verfassers dieser seltsa-
men Mitteilung auch nur im geringsten zu bezweifeln, liegt gar kein Grund vor. Wir müssen
ihm glauben, daß er wirklich in Jerusalem, Nysa und Rom Odysseehandschriften vorgefun-
den hatte, welche die von ihm rehabilitierten Verse enthielten. … Was aber sollen wir zu dem
absoluten Mangel an jeder eigenen kritischen Regung bei Iulius Africanus sagen?” He cites as
a parallel Euthydemos’ claim in Athenaeus that Hesiod had composed  verses on the curing
of ﬁsh, to which Athenaeus critically adds: ταῦτα τὰ ἔπη ἐμοὶ μὲν δοκεῖ τινος μαγείρου εἶναι
μᾶλλον ἢ τοῦ μουσικωτάτου Ἡσιόδου (Athen., deipn. ,,). Thee , f also believes
that Africanus could have found these variants on Homer’s text in several libraries.
142 Kroll in Kroll/Sickenberger , : “Das geistige Niveau des Ganzen ist aus dem Ange-
führten hinlänglich klar … Africanus behauptet allen Ernstes, daß diese Verse uralt seien, …
der Verdacht liegt nahe, daß es sich bei den beiden anderen Exemplaren um einen groben
Schwindel handelt, für den man kaum einen anderen verantwortlich machen könnte als
Africanus selbst. Hat er sich den Unsinn aufbinden lassen, so lautet das Urteil über ihn fast
noch härter.”

XXXVIII Introduction
parody such as one ﬁnds, for example, in Lucian’s handling of epic.
143
Rather,
Africanus, taking as his point of departure a gap in the text of the Odyssey,
complements the text with his own inspired, epic-like composition.
144
This is
also the best explanation for the line: “bearing within me a very valuable fruit”
(κύημα πολυτελέστερον ἔπογκος).
145
If we can credit his own claim, the im-
portance of Africanus’ edition of the Odyssey caused it to be deposited in three
public libraries—at Jerusalem, Nysa, and Rome.
146
As he does at both the be-
ginning and end of the seventh Cestus, Africanus once again inserts himself into
the picture at the end of the 
th
Cestus and gives the reader insight into his skills
as a literary critic. Moreover, the authorization to deposit his edition of the
Odyssey in the three aforementioned urban libraries,
147
together with his claims
about supervising the construction of the library at the Pantheon in Rome,
underscores his social standing and prestige within the inner circle of the
Roman elite.
143 Finding Africanus’ seeming naïveté implausible, Björck , f entertained the possibility
that he did intend the lines to be a parody. A comparable approach to the Homeric Nekyia is
indeed found in Lucian’s dialogue Menippus sive necyomantia, where the protagonist enlists
the aid of a Babylonian magician in order to descend into Hades and consult Tiresias (he
gives here the two lines from Od. ,f). Similar to the text of Africanus, he also calls upon
δαίμονάς τε ὁμοῦ πάντας ἐπεβοᾶτο καὶ Ποινὰς καὶ Ἐρινύας καὶ νυχίαν Ἑκάτην καὶ ἐπαινὴν
Περσεφόνειαν, παραμιγνὺς ἅμα βαρβαρικά τινα καὶ ἄσημα ὀνόματα καὶ πολυσύλλαβα.
144 The Odyssey contains other passages suited to magical additions. Cf., for example, Eustathius’
note on Od. ,: νεκυομαντικῆς δέ φασι γοητείας καὶ ταῦτα, δοκεῖ γὰρ τῆς τοιαύτης τερα-
τείας ἡ ἐπαοιδὴ μόνη ἐλλείπειν παρὰ τῷ ποιητῇ, τὰ δὲ τῆς λοιπῇς τερθρείας ἐκτεθεῖσθαι
ἀνελλιπῶς (Eust., Od. ,–). In a similar vein, Servius remarks in his note on Aeneid
, (Gorgones Harpiaque et forma tricorporis umbrae) that Virgil had written four further
lines describing the Gorgon Medusa. He claims that these lines were removed from the text
by the editors of the Aeneid.
145 This could be an elaboration on the enthousiasmos doctrine already touched upon in Plato’s
Ion, whereby the rhapsode’s art is based not upon technical competence (τέχνη), but rather
upon divine inspiration (ἐνθουσιασμός).
146 Cf. Hammerstaedt , : “Er bietet also einen im homerischen Epos unberücksichtigten
Zaubergesang, der zu dem dort behandelten Anlaß gesungen werden muß. Da Homer, Afri-
canus zufolge, den Gesang gekannt, aber möglicherweise nicht berücksichtigt hat, hält letz-
terer die Verse und die damit verbundene Praxis oﬀensichtlich für uralt. Keineswegs behaup-
tet er freilich, daß er eine sie enthaltende homerische Überlieferung ausﬁndig gemacht hätte.
Somit ist er weder ein Schwindler noch redet er kritiklos einem absurden Überlieferungsge-
schehen bei Homer das Wort. Der Passus fällt nicht, wie bisher angenommen, in den Bereich
antiken Textkritik der homerischen Epen, sondern geht auf inhaltliche Lücken in der home-
rischen Darstellung magischer Praktiken ein.”
147 Kahane , : “Africanus, paradoxically perhaps … still subscribes to ﬁrm notions of high
and low arts. His Cesti , he would have us believe, embody hallowed, public, literary charms to
be treasured in public libraries, not to be privately, secretly, shamefully buried at crossroads.
Africanus, in short, tries to keep the more immediate elements of his magical sources at bay.”
This presupposes, of course, that F,f refers to the Odyssey; for an alternative interpre-
tation see below, p. , n. .

. The Text and its Transmission XXXIX
.. Byzantine Military Literature
... The Seventh Cestus
Along with other military fragments from Africanus, the seventh Cestus (F),
the longest continuous fragment from the Cesti, is included in Byzantine collec-
tions of military writers. Probably dating back to the ninth century, the common
archetype (written in minuscule script)
148
was a rather careless copy, reﬂecting
errors typical of this type of script.
149

For the seventh Cestus , it is necessary to diﬀerentiate between two branches
of transmission. First, the text is transmitted as a self-contained section of a
codex probably produced at the urging of Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus.
Today it is housed in the Biblioteca Laurenziana in Florence.
150
The codex
Laurentianus plut. ,  (henceforth L) is divided into three main parts, totaling
 folia. It contains various, anonymous Byzantine military treatises as well as
the works of older military writers, including Africanus’ seventh Cestus (fol.

r
–
v
). Almost all of the treatises in L are missing their ﬁrst and last
folium.
151
It is for this reason that the seventh Cestus in our edition begins at line
F,, and ends at line ,. At the beginning, the loss equates to almost
exactly one page. If a pinax was included, it surely stood on the recto of the
missing page. It is possible, although less likely, that there was no pinax, and that
the recto of the missing page had been simply left blank. Only a few lines have
been lost at the end of the Cestus. At least in terms of the available space, it is
conceivable that the chapter making up ﬁller in the other Africanus manuscripts
(D) was also included here in L.
152

148 See the stemma below, p. XLIII.
149 Vieillefond , XII cites the following cases of errors arising from transliteration into
minuscule script: F,, ἀσυμφωνεῖ instead of the correct ἀσυμφανεῖ (α instead of ω) and
F,, βερβησίαν instead of the correct κερβησίαν (κ instead of β). To these we can add
orthographical errors such as F,, σπαργιατῶν instead of σπαρτιατῶν or F,, παχεῖς
instead of ταχεῖς.
150 For details of the codex’s contents, cf. Bandini –, vol. , – and Dain , –
. For a description of the codex, cf. also Irigoin , –; Vieillefond , XXXf and
Vieillefond , –.
151 The reason for this systematic cropping remains unclear. Lucas Holstein—the ﬁrst modern
philologist to use the manuscript—blamed a collector of painted decorative motifs (“mutila-
tio orta est, quia singulis fere singulorum auctorum libris primum folium detractum est ob
lemniscos miniatos,” cited in Bandini –, vol. , ). Köchly/Rüstow ,  were of
the same opinion. Dain , , n.  also assumed a “collectionneur de morceaux choisis.”
Vieillefond , XXX disagreed and suggested that the manuscript had no miniatures, while
Dain a,  thought that, given the widespread lack of writing material at the time, the
white sections of the pages between the treatises were simply removed for reuse.
152 Vieillefond , XXXI.

XL Introduction
Each folium in L contains  lines of text, originally without marginal
glosses.
153
Because the codex has been exposed to moisture, the elegant and clear
script is now faded; parts of it are barely legible.
154
Compared with other ver-
sions containing the same material, L is distinguished by its attentiveness to
accurate reproduction of the text.
155
The scribe has worked meticulously, largely
limiting himself to a true reproduction of his exemplar, and in general re-
fraining from personal intervention.
156

The two copies of this codex (codices descripti) from the Renaissance period
were produced after the loss of the beginning and end pages. As far as Africanus
is concerned, they reproduce the same text as L. These copies are Bernensis gr.
 from the 
th
century,
157
and Parisinus gr.  (former Dalmare-Reg. , )
from the 
th
century, which for its part is a copy of Bernensis.
158

In addition to the Laurentianus tradition, the manuscripts preserving the
seventh Cestus as the ﬁrst part (chapters –) of the Apparatus Bellicus repre-
sent a second, independent branch.
159
The name Apparatus Bellicus, ﬁrst em-
ployed in the 
th
century, designates a collection of excerpts transmitted in
three codices dating to the end of the 
th
or the beginning of the 
th
century:
Vaticanus gr.  (V), Barberinianus gr.  (D), and Scorialensis Y-III- (E), as
well as other manuscripts from the Renaissance period that ultimately derive
from these manuscripts. The close relationship between these three codices,
which share the same title and marginal glosses, has been long recognized.
160
In
the three codices, the Apparatus Bellicus is found either at the very beginning of
the manuscript or immediately after the ﬁrst treatises. The collection diﬀers
from Laurentianus in its selection of military writings, including such works as
Leo VI’s Tactica and excerpts from Polyaenus.

153 The manuscript’s marginal glosses F,,. and , were written by one or two dif-
ferent hands. One of these is perhaps Lami, who used the codex for his edition of Meursius
(on which see below, pp. LXXXVIf).
154 Vieillefond ,  rightly calls the handwriting “splendide et distinguée.”
155 Orthographic errors (iotacisms and hypercorrections) such as χραιμετίζω instead of χρεμετί-
ζω (F,,.) or ἀφροδησίων instead of ἀφροδισίων (F,,) have only been included in the
apparatus when the variants result in a diﬀerence of meaning. Note in addition the un-
acceptable κ(αὶ) ὡς in place of σκεῦος (F,,). Dain , – makes similar observa-
tions with regard to the text of Aelian included in the same codex.
156 As Vieillefond , , n.  has already noted, the form στέατος F,, instead of στῆρος
that we ﬁnd in the two other manuscripts DE (which, however, have στέατος in their
margins) could be a rare intervention by the copyist and attributable to the “soins puristes
d’un érudit byzantine.” This seems especially likely given that all the manuscripts read στῆρι
(F,,) in the dative instead of στέατι.
157 Cf. Vieillefond , XLIV; Andrist , –.
158 Dain , – and Vieillefond , XLIV
159 The title Apparatus Bellicus was ﬁrst used by G. Naudé (Syntagma de studio militari, Rome
, vol. , ch. IV , f, non vidimus ) to describe the chapter ascribed to Iulius Africanus in
Vaticanus gr.  (see below). For the Apparatus Bellicus, see below, section ...
160 Cf. Vieillefond , XXXII.

. The Text and its Transmission XLI
Compared to the version in L, the text of the seventh Cestus in the Appa-
ratus Bellicus is less reliable, containing more errors, as well as marginal glosses
inserted directly into the text. These glosses probably originated from a com-
parison of VD’s exemplar with another textual witness to Africanus’ seventh
Cestus.
161
The diﬀerences between the two branches conﬁrm Vieillefond’s opin-
ion that L is superior to VD (and E).
162

The most important representative of the branch is Barberinianus gr. 
(D). Consisting of  folia, it contains the ﬁrst part of a larger collection of
tactica.
163
Each page has  lines of text. The text of the Apparatus Bellicus is
found in fol. 
v
–
v
. The handwriting, characterized by an even, ﬂowing form,
is highly legible. The only known direct copy of Barberinianus is Vaticanus Regi-
nensis gr.  (
th
–
th
century).
Alongside D, we also have the now mutilated manuscript Vaticanus gr. 
(V), which is the second representative of this branch. It has  folia, with each
page containing  lines of text.
164
Because of physical damage responsible for
the loss of four quaterniones ( pages), the Apparatus Bellicus (which begins at
fol. 
v
) breaks oﬀ at chapter  (= F,,, fol. 
v
) and resumes only at
chapter , shortly before the end of the text. Although the handwriting is
meticulous and elegant, the manuscript contains more abbreviations than the
other codices.
The codex Parisinus gr.  is an interesting copy of this manuscript.
According to Dain, it was produced by Nikolaos Sophianos (–)—a
scholar hailing from Corfu and active in Venice—after Vaticanus had already
suﬀered the loss of the four quaterniones.
165
Unlike the other descripti , this codex
has been very carefully copied and contains but a few errors.
166
Generally,
Sophianos directly incorporated the marginal glosses from V into the body of
his text.
167
He also made some conjectures of his own, which he does not explic-

161 Several of the marginal notes from VDE correspond with the readings found in L.
162 Vieillefond , –.
163 According to Vieillefond , XXXII and Dain , –, this manuscript must be taken
together with Parisinus gr. , which contains the second part of the collection.
164 Cf. Vieillefond , XXXII.
165 For Sophianos, cf. Dain , f, who believes that, with regard to this codex (p. ), “le Pari-
sinus S(ophianos) peut être cité comme un type de reproduction mécanique d’un modèle.
Copié sur le Vaticanus, il n’en diﬀère que par quelques négligences de détail que ne peut éviter
le copiste le plus soigneux…” The text of Africanus ends at the same place here as in V (in
F,, τρεῖς), but the copyist has added ἐνταῦθα λείπονται πλεῖστα κεφάλαια. Vaticanus gr.
 (
th
cent.) and Barberinianus gr.  (
th
cent.) are also copies of V.
166 Cf. F,,. μητά instead of μετά; the errors are generally iotacisms, such as F,, τίλεως
instead of τήλεως.
167 E.g. F,, καλοῦσι δέ instead of καλυσία in the text and καλοῦσι δέ in the margin. Also
F,, ἐλέγχων instead of ἐδέσχων in the text and ἐλέγχων in the margin.

XLII Introduction
itly identify as additions or corrections.
168
He (or judging by the diﬀerent hand-
writing, probably another scribe) only seldom writes comments in the margins.
A close comparison between this manuscript and L has shown that Sophianos
most likely did not know L; any similarities are coincidental and cannot
necessarily be traced back to knowledge of a tradition different from that repre-
sented by the Apparatus Bellicus (VDE). They are, rather, the result of conjec-
tures made by a scriba doctus. Finally, in comparison with L, Parisinus gr. 
contains the same lacunae as VD; had Sophianos possessed L, he would have
been able to ﬁll out these gaps in the text. It is likely, on the other hand, that So-
phianos had access to and used D. This is demonstrated both by a marginal
comment in fol. 
v
of D and by numerous agreements between Parisinus gr.
 and D.
169
Because they are most likely the result of Sophianus’ philological
work and not based upon any comparisons with a text diﬀerent from that of V,
readings from Parisinus gr.  that are relevant for the present edition are
designated by the siglum Sophianos.
Scorialensis Y-III- (E), the ﬁnal representative of the second branch, con-
tains  folia, but is incomplete.
170
As with the two other manuscripts in this
branch, E has also been carefully copied. Each page has  lines. The seventh
Cestus is found on fol. 
r
–
r
.
With regard to the relationship between V and D, there is general consensus
among scholars that the codices are independent versions stemming from the
same exemplar. The relationship between V and E, on the other hand, is dis-
puted. F,, attests their close relationship: whereas L and D give the number
ηʹ after the pentagon, V and E give ιηʹ. This difference doubtless originates from
an incorrectly read iota subscript in the (common) archetype.
171
On the basis of
a line in the text of Philo, omitted by E but preserved intact by V, Schöne was
right to rule out a dependency of Vaticanus on E. Indeed, on the basis of further
observation, he concluded that E was dependent on V.
172

168 F,, στρατηγίας instead of στρατηγίαις in the other codices; l.  ῥᾳθυμούντως instead of
ῥᾳθυμοῦντες in the other codices; l.  πεπωκότων instead of πεπτωκότων in the other
codices.
169 The readings that Parisinus gr.  shares with D are e.g. F,pr., φθάνουσι instead of
φάνουσι VΕ; F,, σπάθης (also in L) instead of πάθεις VE; l.  θλάσαντα (also in L)
instead of θολάσαντα VΕ; l.  ἐμβολήν (also in L) instead of ἐμολὴν VΕ; F, ἀπάγουσαν
instead of ἀπέγουσαν VE; F,, δεσπότας (also in L) instead of δεσπότους VΕ; a lacuna is
present in F,,f, where both VD and Parisinus gr.  are missing the words καὶ διὰ τὴν
εἰδέχθειαν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ μισούμενος.
170 The second part of this codex is Neapolitanus C-III-.
171 Cf. Vieillefond , , n. .
172 Schöne , IX.

. The Text and its Transmission XLIII
L
β
α
(archetype in minuscle)
Iulius Africanus, Cesti
A
pparatus Bellicus
D
X (= Z?)
recentiores
V
E
P
(Sophianos)
collection of excerpts
(Exercitationes)

rd
cent.

th
cent.

th
cent.

th
cent.

th
cent.
(insertion
of glosses)
(loss of
text)
6
th
cent.
Dain, on the other hand, thought V and E represented two independent
branches of the tradition and denied that E was a descriptus of V.
173
After inves-
tigating the so-called “recension interpolée” of Aelian’s text, he postulated the
existence of a lost prototype, which he named “Mazoneus” and which he dated
to the end of the 
th
century. According to Dain, E is a direct copy, and V and D
indirect copies of this manuscript. Dain argued that V and D only knew
Mazoneus via a lost intermediary manuscript.
174
In his  edition, Vieillefond
expressed the same opinion, oﬀering the following two observations in support
of this separate common prototype for V and D. First, V has the form ἀγωνι-
στικόν in the pinax, whereas E has
π
ε
(= Περὶ) γωνιστικόν, which cannot have
been copied from V.
175
Secondly, the marginal gloss on the word ἐπιτύχη F,,
in V (and also D) is στοιβῆ, but in E simply ιιβῆ. Given the fact that Vaticanus is
very clear and legible at this point, Vieillefond found it incomprehensible that
the copyist was unable to make out the ﬁrst letter.
176
He came to the conclusion
that “le Scorialensis ne peut être ﬁls du Vaticanus . Ce sont obligatoirement deux

173 Dain , –; cf. also Lammert , ; Dain a, –.
174 Dain , – calls this manuscript “exemplar.”
175 Vieillefond , XXXIIIf.
176 Vieillefond , XXXIV.

XLIV Introduction
frères qui ont pour cousin ou pour oncle le Barberinianus.”
177
However, in his
 edition, Vieillefond revised his position. A detailed examination of Scoria-
lensis showed that “la marge de Scorialensis, ayant été rognée, ne permet pas de
lire la première moitié du mot en question qui a toute chance d’avoir été στοιβῆ,
comme dans les autres codices.”
178
Thus, the second of his two observations
must be discounted. In terms of the ﬁrst, Vieillefond, drawing an analogy with
the titles of the other chapters, concluded that “rien n’empêche d’estimer que le
scribe aura été entraîné à écrire
π
ε
par les formes semblables des titres precedents
qui donnent en eﬀet dans le Vaticanus
π
ε
ὁπλίσεως, π
ε
πολεμίων φθορᾶς.” He
therefore reverted to the communis opinio, namely that “le Scorialensis est une
copie du Vaticanus.”
179

A collation of the texts of the Apparatus Bellicus has shown that in instances
of disagreement between V and D, E agrees with V and never with D.
180
Further-
more, E reproduces all of the “errors” from V, adding its own as well (for the
most part orthographic, e.g. due to iotacism). But it never oﬀers a reading
superior to that of V. It is therefore certain that E (at least in terms of the Appa-
ratus Bellicus) is a descriptus of V.
181
Consequently, E is only cited in the present
edition in places where text is missing from V.
According to Vieillefond, the majority of copies of the Apparatus Bellicus
from the Renaissance period are codices descripti of E. Because, as simple copies
of E, they mostly contain only rudimentary improvements to the text, they are
thus “d’aucun secours.”
182
As a result, he did not take these later codices into

177 Vieillefond , XXXIV.
178 Vieillefond , .
179 Vieillefond , .
180 See the apparatus of F in the present edition.
181 If E and V were truly “brothers,” then we would have to conclude that all  divergences of VE
from LD were also present in VE’s common subarchetype. We would also need to suppose
that E’s copyist made  further mistakes, whereas V’s copyist did not make a single mistake
in over  lines of text. This is all the more evident when we consider that there is not a
single example of V having a lectio singularis when compared with LDE.
182 The manuscripts dependent upon E are: Basiliensis A.N.-II- (
th
cent.); Berolinensis gr.
 fol.  (
th
–
th
cent., now in Kraków); Bibliothèque de feu M.H. Bordier, à Châtelaine, 
(
th
cent., now at the Bibliothèque de Genève), Bodmerianus  (formerly Philipps  and
) (
th
cent.); in Leiden: Leidensis B.P.G  G (
th
cent.), Perizonianus Q  (
th
cent.),
Scaligerianus  (
th
cent.), Vossianus gr.  (
th
cent.), Vossianus gr.  (
th
cent.),
Vulcanianus  (
th
cent.); in London: Burneianus  (
th
cent.), Burneianus  (
th
–
th

cent.), Royal Manuscripts. Gr.  C XIV (
th
cent.); in Madrid, Bibl. Nac.  (O-) (= L-I-
) (
th
cent.), Madrid, Bibl. Nac.  (N-) (
th
cent.); in Milan: Ambrosianus gr.  (
th

cent.), Ambrosianus gr.  (
th
cent.); in Modena: Biblioteca d’Este, cod. gr.  (III-F-)
(
th
cent.); Monacensis  (
th
cent.), Monacensis  (
th
cent.); in Naples: Codex graecus
Regiae Bibliothecae Borbonicae  (Neapolitanus III. C. ) (
th
cent.); in New Haven:
Beinecke  (Library Yale University) (
th
cent.); in Oxford: Magdalensis gr.  (
th
cent.),
Baroccianus gr.  (
th
cent.), Savile  () (
th
–
th
cent.); Parisinus gr.  (
th
cent.),
Parisinus gr.  (
th
cent.), Parisinus gr.  (
th
cent.), Suppl. gr.  (
th
cent.), Suppl. gr.
 (
th
cent.); in Rome: Palatinus gr.  (
th
cent.), Urbinas gr.  (
th
cent.), Vaticanus gr.
 (
th
cent.), Vaticanus gr.  (
th
cent.); in Salamanca: Bibl. Univ.  (former Madrid,

. The Text and its Transmission XLV
consideration for his edition.
183
In his investigation of the text of Leo IV’s
Tactica, however, Vári suggested that many of the codices clearly deriving from
E actually disagree with this exemplar, owing to contamination from V.
184

Although a collation of all the Renaissance manuscripts was not possible for
the present edition, we were able to examine four of the codices descripti, all
dating to the 
th
-century: Leidensis B.P.G  G, Basiliensis A.N.-II-, Bodme-
rianus  and Parisinus gr. . Collectively representative of the entire later
tradition, they belong, as is clear from the secondary literature, to different
branches of the transmission.
185
While a review of these manuscripts generally
conﬁrms Vieillefond’s theory, it has also shed new light on the history of the
text’s transmission.
Of these codices, Leidensis is the only one that (like E and the other, older
codices) has κατάλογον ἢ νόμον at the beginning (F,pr.,). The other
recentiores have simply κατάλογον ἦν. In all other cases as well, Leidensis repro-
duces the orthographic peculiarities of E and always agrees with this manuscript
against the others. We can therefore assume with relative conﬁdence that
Leidensis is a careful but purely mechanical reproduction of E; it is notable,
however, that (perhaps due to the bad condition of some of E’s edges) the
marginal glosses have not been copied. The other 
th
-century codices deviate
from E, occasionally agree with D,
186
and contain peculiarities and variants that
arguably cannot be ascribed merely to the work of a scriba doctus .
187
For
example, all of these codices (as well as Thévenot’s  and Lami’s  edi-
tions) have κατάλογον ἦν instead of κατάλογον ἢ νόμον in the prooemium. This
suggests that they were copied not from E, but from an apograph (X) perhaps
dependent on E, but which contained this lacuna. The absence of marginal
glosses in these codices is not, however, a decisive argument on its own against

Palacio ) (
th
cent.); in Uppsala: Universitetsbibliotek cod. gr.  (Benzelius, n. ) (
th

cent.), cod. gr.  (modern copy); in Venice: Marcianus Classis XI, codex e (= codex ,
fondo Contarini) (
th
cent.); in Vienna: Vindobonensis phil. gr.  (
th
cent.),
Vindobonensis. phil. gr.  (
th
cent.); in Zeitz: Stiftsbibliothek, cod. gr.  (
th
cent.).
Destroyed or missing are: in El Escorial: Scorialensis Z III  (antiquus), Scorialensis Z III 
(recens); in Turin: Torino, BNU C. II.  (former C. III. ) (
th
cent.).
183 Vieillefond , XLIII: “Ils oﬀrent surtout des erreurs qui se greﬀent les unes sur les autres
de manière à rendre le texte inintelligible et les très rares bonnes leçons qu’il fournissent sont
des corrections élémentaires … En tenant compte de leurs variantes, c’est-à-dire de leurs
fautes, on décuplerait la hauteur de l’apparat critique et le transformerait en un répertoire de
bévues qui n’ont aucune sorte d’intérêt.”
184 Vári , XVIIﬀ.
185 Cf. Vári ; Dain  and .
186 E.g. F,, ἐμβολήν LD Parisinus , Bodmerianus , versus ἐμολὴν VE Basiliensis;
F,, τὸν LD Parisinus , Basiliensis versus τὴν VE Bodmerianus ; F,,
συναλλαλάξαι VΕ, versus συναλλάξαι LD Parisinus , Basiliensis, Bodmerianus .
187 E.g. F,, τῶν βαρβάρων Parisinus  τὸν βάρβαρον in the other codices; F,,
κωλύσομεν Parisinus  κελεύσωμεν VD κελεύσομεν L; F, ἀπάγουσαν DP ἀπέγουσαν
VE ἀπέχουσαν Parisinus , Basiliensis.

XLVI Introduction
their dependency upon E; as in the case of Leidensis, it can be attributed to the
physical condition of E.
Dated to , the Bodmerianus (formerly Philipps  and )
188
was
produced by Andreas Darmarios—a copyist and manuscript dealer active in the

th
century throughout Europe and especially in Spain. Rather than copying the
text from a single exemplar, the scribe probably collated his exemplar with D
(minus the marginal glosses) or another ancient manuscript.
189
The same can
also be assumed for the anonymously produced Basiliensis A.N.-II- and Pari-
sinus gr. . However, the model for all of these (that is to say, the source of
their contamination) must be an older manuscript (X); unlike VDE, it did not
include, or no longer included, marginal glosses. While possibly from the same
branch of the tradition as VD, the codex was distinguished from them by its
lack of marginal glosses, and by the lacuna present in the prooemium. The most
likely candidate is the codex Scorialensis Z III  (Z), destroyed by ﬁre in .
The buyer of this manuscript, which was clearly very old (antiquus), received it
from Darmarios in Holland.
190
If it was indeed the exemplar, or at least belonged
to the codices used by Darmarios to compile Bodmerianus, then (following
Dain) this now lost manuscript, and not E, descended directly from Mazoneus.
In the event that Bodmerianus was contaminated by Z, then several unique
readings in the recentiores from the Renaissance period could actually represent
a further branch of the Apparatus Bellicus’ transmission.
The attribution of excerpts from Polyaenus to Africanus in the codex Pari-
sinus gr.  (
th
cent.), fol. – is erroneous. In the exemplar, these ex-
cerpts, found directly after the Africanus section of the Apparatus Bellicus, were
probably anonymous.
191

188 Cf. Andrist . The following manuscripts were also produced by Darmarios: Royal Manu-
scripts gr.  C XIV, Palatinus gr. , Vossianus gr. , Salamanca Bibl. Univ.  (olim
Madrid, Palacio ), Bordier , and Beinecke . According to Shailor , , this last
codex, written in , diﬀers from the others in converting the start of the new sentence
(Πῶς ἀμύνηταί τις θηρίον δύσμαχον, F,,) into the (unnumbered) title of a new section.
189 This is demonstrated by the many emendations that the copyist has included currente calamo
in the text and which agree with the readings in other manuscripts. E.g. F,, σπάθης, l. 
ἐμβολήν, F,,tit. ἀγωνιστικόν. On the basis of Darmarios’ manuscript of Oppian’s Halieu-
tica, Martínez Manzano  has shown that Darmarios did not produce his copies haphaz-
ardly or in an indiscriminate manner; rather, he used the manuscripts available to him to
carefully collate and improve the text, and to correct mistakes.
190 Cf. Andrés ,  (nº ); Graux , : “Darmarius achetait à l’occasion des ori-
ginaux d’Orient: c’est ainsi qu’il se rencontre à l’Escurial des manuscrits de quelque antiquité,
sur lesquels se lisent des notes attestant qu’ils passèrent par les mains de Darmarius.”
191 In this codex, which for the most part contains the works of Latin authors, we ﬁnd the fol-
lowing introduction at fol. 
r
: Ex vetere M.s. Ἐκ τῶν Ἰουλίου Ἀφρικανοῦ πολεμικῶν
στρατηγήματα. Parts of Leo IV’s Tactica in the codices Madrid, Palacio  and Manuscript
Bamberg B VI,  have been wrongly attributed by Darmarios to Africanus ( Ἰουλίος Ἀφρι-
κανὸς ὁ χριστιανός); cf. Vieillefond , , n. .

. The Text and its Transmission XLVII
Considering the seventh Cestus’ reception as Gebrauchsliteratur , it is no
wonder that its internal organization, which already existed in the original work
in the form of connecting phrases, was later further clariﬁed by the division of
the text into chapters. This division not only appears in DVE in the form of a
pinax with  chapters, but also in all of the existing Africanus codices in the
form of  unnumbered chapters. Twenty of these correspond to the chapter
titles in DVE’s pinax .
192
This reader-oriented organization of the Cestus into
chapters is most likely a later development. While meant to facilitate the loca-
tion of individual pieces of information or recipes, it clashes with the transi-
tional phrases already present in the text.
As evidence of the limited value of the division of the seventh Cestus into 
chapters, Vieillefond pointed out places in which chapter titles do not cor-
respond with the contents of the section to which they refer. It also seems likely
that this division occurred after the pinax’s organization of the text into 
chapters, thus continuing an ongoing process of dividing the work into
sections.
193
The earlier arrangement of  chapters is itself neither satisfactory
nor especially helpful.
194
Close analysis of the Cestus’ contents as well as its in-
ternal organization speaks for an originally unitary seventh Cestus, uninter-
rupted by chapter divisions. This undivided Cestus had as leitmotifs ὠφέλεια
ποικίλη and καλὸν εἰδέναι, both of which are expressed in the prooemium. The
latter is repeated in the sentence following the prooemium, where it is related to
the speciﬁc military focus of the seventh Cestus (F,, καλὸν δὲ … καὶ πόλεμον
εἰδέναι). Throughout the entire Cestus, Africanus makes his presence felt as the
text’s organizer and as a narrator actively guiding the reader through the work.
Division of the book into chapters would thus not only be superﬂuous; it would
be at odds with the literary objectives informing the composition of the seventh
Cestus.
195

192 Incidentally, the titles of the parallels to chapters F,.. in the Hippiatrica show that a
diﬀerent version (or perhaps an epitomized version, as Vieillefond ,  and  suggests),
which was unrelated to the collections of military writers, was in circulation and that it was
also divided into  or  chapters.
193 Vieillefond , XXXV and Vieillefond , . Several titles are in the wrong place; e.g. 
(ἀέρος φάρμαξις) and  (οἴνου σκευασία). Chapter  (τέχνη προγνωστικὴ τῶν μελλόντων)
has an unsuitable title which is in the middle of a sentence. The system is also imprecise.
Thus, in F, we ﬁnd only the subchapters  (οἴνου φάρμαξις) and  (ἀέρος φάρμαξις),
although the spoilage of food and water is also treated here and we search in vain for a title
such as τροφῆς or ὕδατος φάρμαξις (cf. Nic. Ur. –). The passage concerning garum
(F,) is also missing a title.
194 F, is actually the ﬁnal part of F,. Alternatively, F,,ﬀ and F, could form a new
literary unit. The division of closely related material in F, and  is arbitrary. The titles of
F, and F, are not appropriate, see above, p. XXI, n. .
195 For the Cesti’s literary character, see above, section ..

XLVIII Introduction
The seventh Cestus can be subdivided into six thematic blocks, which,
thanks to Africanus’ personal comments at its beginning and end, acquire a kind
of spherical unity:
) F,–: Military superiority over one’s enemies through the use of accoutre-
ments and technical know-how, for which the author himself vouches.
) F,–: Medical knowledge.
) F,–: Hippiatric section.
) F,–: Knowledge from various other domains whose military appli-
cations could provide an advantage over the enemy (hunting, geometry, es-
pionage, ways to fend oﬀ sleep, and elephants).
) F,: Geoponic section.
) F,: Sphragis: conclusion with a private episode concerning arms (a
resumption of the theme in block ).
With the exception of the fourth, the separate blocks are (in terms of their sub-
ject matter) relatively homogeneous, each of them including an introductory or
bridging passage to the following block. A transitional passage seems to be
missing only between F, and F,; perhaps some text has been lost at this
point.
196
The fourth block, for its part, is arranged according to the principle of
variatio (cf. the prooemium’s ὠφέλειαν ποικίλην).
... The Apparatus Bellicus
As we have seen, the ﬁrst section of the Apparatus Bellicus constitutes a branch
in the transmission of the seventh Cestus. This work also contains other pas-
sages probably originating from Africanus.
The Apparatus Bellicus is a collection of military writings preserved in the
above-discussed Barberinianus gr.  (D), Vaticanus gr.  (V), and Scoria-
lensis Y-III- (E), as well as in other manuscripts from the Renaissance period
onwards.
197
The collection has only been published in its entirety by Melchisé-
dech Thévenot in the Veteres Mathematici, and in the  edition of the works
of Ioannes Meursius edited by Giovanni Lami.
198
It has  chapters as well as an
opening, untitled fragment (F,pr.). The text is preceded by a heading that
reads τάδε ἔνεστιν ἐν τῷ τῶν Ἀφρικανοῦ Κεστῶν and by a pinax (which, how-
ever, features only  of the  titles in the text).
199

The collection can be divided into three sections. The ﬁrst contains the text
of the seventh Cestus (chapters −). The second is made up of a series of

196 See below, F,, p. , n. .
197 A complete list of the “minor manuscripts” is provided above, n. .
198 Thévenot , – (note that the numbering of the pages jumps from  to );
Meursius/Lami , –.
199 For the problem of the pinax and the number of chapters in the seventh Cestus ( or ), see
above, pp. XXIf and XLVII. There is no subscriptio at the end of the Apparatus Bellicus in any
of the three aforementioned manuscripts, but only a decorative dividing band.

. The Text and its Transmission XLIX
diverse excerpts involving various strategies of war: they summarize, and some-
what simplify, the contents of a selection of classical military writings (chapters
−).
200
The work ends with passages from Syrianus Magister’s military com-
pendium,
201
alongside other passages dealing with military technology in use
from the ninth to the beginning of the 
th
century (chapters −).
202
The ﬁnal
part of chapter  describes a ﬁre-signal system devised by Leo the Mathema-
tician between  and , but which then fell out of use in the ﬁrst half of the

th
century;
203
this part of the work should therefore be dated between the s
and the early s. Indeed, it is likely that the entire collection was completed
during this period.
204
A terminus ante quem is also provided by the Sylloge Tacti-
corum (mid-
th
century). This anonymous military treatise draws on the Appa-
ratus Bellicus for some of its material.
205

The attribution to Africanus, which precedes the pinax of the entire collec-
tion, is therefore misleading: the third section of the work (chapters –) un-
questionably dates to the Byzantine period. Nor can the second section (chap-
ters –) as a whole be considered as belonging to the Cesti , even when it
contains material probably traceable to Africanus.
The presentation of the text in the manuscript tradition already suggests a
break between the ﬁrst part, which includes the text of the seventh Cestus, and
the rest of the collection: at the end of chapter , there is a dividing line,

200 Following a description of how to ﬁght without weapons (ch. –), there is a chapter on
how to coat arrows with poison (ch. ), suggestions on defense and hygiene (ch. –), a
brief digression on incendiary devices (ch. –), and ﬁnally a list of various stratagems
(–).
201 We owe the reconstruction of the work of Syrianus Magister to Zuckerman . According
to him, the treatises previously referred to separately as Rhetorica Militaris , Naumachica, and
De re strategica (chapters – and the initial part of chapter  of the Apparatus Bellicus are
taken from the last of these) are in fact part of a single work by Syrianus. Zuckerman’s hy-
pothesis has been widely accepted, even though the dating of the work remains disputed.
Zuckerman himself proposes a date between  and , while Cosentino  and Rance
 place the work in the ninth century.
202 The numbering of the chapters widely adopted in the secondary literature follows the system
devised by Thévenot, who for no apparent reason does not number the chapters directly
following  and  (they are therefore conventionally labeled bis and bis). There are
thus  actual chapters, but only  are numbered. The derivation of chapters – from De
re strategica (for whose place in the work of Syrianus, see the previous note) was already
recognized in Köchly/Rüstow , –; chapters bis– reveal some of Syrianus’
inﬂuences as wells as traces of original composition lacking obvious parallels with any known
material (Zuckerman ).
203 This optical telegraph was a warning system based on the long-distance transmission of
messages by means of ﬁre beacons; cf. Rife .
204 On chapters –, cf. in particular Zuckerman ; on the genesis and structure of the
Apparatus Bellicus, cf. also Mecella , –.
205 See the edition of Dain . On the legacy of the Apparatus Bellicus (β in the stemma on
p. XLIII, i.e. after the edition of the glosses to the seventh Cestus) in the Sylloge Tacticorum
and in the Tactica of Nicephorus Uranus (early 
th
century) via the Corpus Perditum, cf. Me-
cella  (with accompanying bibliography).

L Introduction
followed by the words Ἰουλίου Ἀφρικανοῦ Κεστὸς ζʹ; after a few lines of blank
space, there appears a short text of only two lines entitled ἄλλως βάψαι βέννον
διὰ βάθους (here D).
206
A new decorative band marks the end of this frag-
ment, after which chapter  begins.
207
Vieillefond rightly interpreted the refer-
ences to Africanus and the seventh Cestus at the end of chapter  as an explicit
that, referring to the previous chapters, marks the end of a section.
208
The origin
of the fragment that follows (D), however, is uncertain—it is not mentioned in
the initial pinax, and no directly comparable passages exist. But its subject
matter (how to obtain dye through the use of leeches) plausibly makes it an
excerpt from the Cesti used to ﬁll in the blank space between the sections.
209
At
any rate, it seems that the work’s compiler intended to mark a separation
between the ﬁrst  chapters and the rest of the collection.
A further consideration makes a more decisive argument against assigning
all the material in chapters – to Africanus. Chapters , – and –
are taken from Aeneas the Tactician, and chapters – and  from Polyaenus.
Direct comparisons wth these sources remove any doubts about their author-
ship.
210

The source of chapters –,  and – (D– in the present edition)
is more problematic. It seems very likely, however, that these chapters do origi-
nate from the Cesti . First of all, the preservation of Cesti material in this second
section of the Apparatus Bellicus is conﬁrmed by chapter , a shortened version
of the paragraph ἤχου κλοπή from the seventh Cestus (see F,,– with the

206 For the emendation to the text, see below, pp. lˆ with n. .
207 Cf. Barberinianus gr. , fol. 
r
(a photograph of which is reproduced in Mecella , )
and Scorialensis gr. Y-III-, fol. 
r
(where, judging by the digital copy of the manuscript
consulted for the present edition, the decorative band is barely visible). On the hiatus in Vati-
canus gr.  at this point, see above, p. XLI.
208 Vieillefond , XXXVI–XXXVIII; Vieillefond , . The hypothesis is supported by Pap.
Oxy.  (F), wherein the preserved section of Africanus’ text ends with the words Ἰουλίου
Ἀφρικανοῦ Κεστὸς ιηʹ.
209 Cf. Vieillefond , ΧΧΧΙΙ; Vieillefond , ; see also below, p. LXXVII.
210 Because these texts have already been studied (cf. Köchly/Rüstow , , , ; Dain b,
–; Vieillefond , ; Mecella , f), we oﬀer just one case here exempli gratia:
Aen. Tact. , (ed. Dain b, from cod.
Laurentianus
p
lut. , )
App. bell. : πρὸς καιομένας πύλας

Ἐ
ὰν δὲ ἐμπρησθῶσιν πύλαι, προσφέρεσθαι
ξύλα, καὶ ἐμβάλλοντα ὡς μέγιστον τὸ πῦρ ποιεῖν, μέχρι οὗ <ἂν> ταφρεύσῃς τὰ ἔσωθεν
,

καὶ ἀντιδείμῃς ἐκ τῶν σοι συνυπαρχόντων
τάχιστα· εἰ δὲ μή, ἐκ τῶν ἐγγύτατα οἰκιῶν
καθαι
ρ
οῦντα.
Ἐ
ὰν ἐμπρησθῶσιν αἱ πύλαι, δεῖ προσφέρε-
σθαι ξύλον καὶ ἐμβάλλοντα ὡς μέγιστον τὸ
πῦρ ποιεῖν, μέχρις οὗ ταφρεύσει τὰ ἔσωθεν
,

καὶ ἐάν τι δέῃ ἐκ τῶν σοι ὑπαρχόντων οἴκοι
καθαίρειν.

ἄν suppl. Meineke | ταφρεύσῃς Βoivin ταφρεύσῃ
cod. | ἀντιδεί
μῃ
ς Schoene ἄν τι δέ
η
cod.

ἐμβάλλοντα Dain ἐμβάλλονται ED | δέῃ Dain δὲ ἑνί ED | καθαί
ρ
ειν Paris.
g
r.  καθαί
ρ
εις ED

Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:

III
uéníasÉ que el Mikado, al ver en un álbum, regalo del
presidente Porfirio Díaz, fotografías de soldados del Ejército
mejicano, hizo notar al ministro de Méjico el parecido de ellos
con sus soldados nipones. Tal recuerdo me vino al ver
evolucionar a los soldados nicaragüenses, que, por otra parte, han
demostrado poseer, a más del físico, otras cualidades japonesas. El
tipo indígena puro o el mestizo tiene mucho de azteca. «Los
primeros habitantes (nicaragüenses)—dice Gámez—, de origen
mongólico, como los demás del continente americano, hicieron en
sus primitivos tiempos la vida nómada de los pueblos salvajes; pero
parece ser muy cierto que inmigrantes de Méjico y de las naciones
vecinas, que llegaban organizados en tribus, fueron sucesivamente
ocupando el territorio y formando de una manera paulatina la
sociedad aborigen de estos pueblos.» Entre los nacionales se
encuentra una interesante variedad etnográfica. Existen los tipos
completamente europeos, descendientes directos de españoles o de
inmigrantes europeos, sin mezcla alguna; los que tienen algo de
mezcla india, o ladinos; los que tienen algo de sangre negra, los que
tienen de indio y de negro, los indios puros y los negros. De éstos
hay muy pocos
[1]
. En el carácter han dejado su influjo los hábitos
coloniales y la agilidad mental primitiva. «Y nunca indio, a lo que
alcanzo, habló como él a nuestros españoles.» Tal dice Francisco
López de Gómara, refiriéndose al cacique Nicaragua o Nicarao, que
dió nombre a aquellas tierras americanas. El conquistador Gil
González de Ávila, después que hubo tomado posesión de aquellas
regiones y hubo bautizado la bahía de Fonseca, en recuerdo del
obispo de Burgos, y gratificado a una isla con el nombre de su
sobrina Petronila, se había encontrado con el cacique Nicoián, al cual
y a toda su gente logró convertir. «Informóse—dice Gómara—de la
tierra y de un gran rey llamado Nicaragua, que a cincuenta leguas
estaba, y caminó allá. Envióle una embajada, que sumariamente

contenía fuese su amigo, pues no iba por le hacer mal; servidor del
emperador que monarca del mundo era, y cristiano, que mucho le
cumplía, e si no que le haría guerra».
»Nicaragua, entendiendo la manera de aquellos nuevos hombres,
su resoluta demanda, la fuerza de las espadas y braveza de los
caballos, respondió por cuatro caballeros de su corte «que aceptaba
la amistad por el bien de la paz, y aceptaría la fe si tan buena le
parecía como se la loaban.»
Los españoles fueron bien recibidos por el jefe indio y se trocaron
dádivas. Un fraile iba allí, mercedario, que predicó el cristianismo y
anatematizó las antiguas costumbres. Nicaragua y sus gentes
aceptaron pasablemente todo, menos dos cosas: que se les
prohibiese la guerra y la alegría, «ca mucho sentían dejar las armas
y el placer». Dijeron que «no perjudicaban a nadie en bailar y tomar
placer, y que no querían poner al rincón sus banderas, sus arcos, sus
cascos y penachos, ni dejar tratar la guerra y armas a sus mujeres,
para hilar ellos, tejer y cavar como mujeres y esclavos». Como el
peruano Atabaliba con el P. Valverde, Nicaragua arguyó varios
puntos de religión, «que agudo era, y sabio en sus ritos y
antigüedades. Preguntó si tenían noticia los cristianos del gran
diluvio que anegó la tierra, hombres y animales, e si había de haber
otro; si la tierra se había de trastornar o caer el cielo; cuándo y
cómo perdería su claridad y curso el sol, la luna y las estrellas, que
tan grandes eran; quién las movía y tenía. Preguntó la causa de la
oscuridad de las noches y del frío, tachando la natura, que no hacía
siempre claro y calor, pues era mejor; qué honra y gracias se debían
al Dios trino de cristianos, que hizo los cielos y sol, a quien adoraban
por Dios en aquellas tierras; la mar, la tierra, el hombre que señorea,
las aves que volan y peces que nadan, y todo lo del mundo. Dónde
tenían de estar las almas, y qué habían de hacer salidas del cuerpo,
pues vivían tan poco siendo inmortales. Preguntó asimesmo si moría
el santo padre de Roma, vicario de Cristo, Dios de cristianos; y cómo
Jesús, siendo Dios, es hombre, y su madre, virgen pariendo; y si el
emperador y rey de Castilla, de quien tantas proezas, virtudes y
poderío contaban, era mortal; y para qué tan pocos hombres

querían tanto oro como buscaban. Gil González y todos los suyos
estuvieron atentos y maravillados oyendo tales preguntas y palabras
a un hombre medio desnudo, bárbaro y sin letras, y ciertamente fué
un admirable razonamiento el de Nicaragua, y nunca indio, a lo que
alcanzó, habló tan bien a nuestros españoles.»
El nicaragüense se distingue en toda la América Central por
condiciones de talento y de valor. A la levadura primitiva se
agregaron elementos coloniales. Si, una vez proclamada la
independencia, hubo descuido en la general cultura, fué a causa de
las inquietudes incesantes que mantuvieron a todos los cinco
Estados centroamericanos en continuas agitaciones y guerras.
El historiador de Indias ya citado hace notar el estado de relativo
adelanto que encontraron en algunas tribus de Nicaragua los
conquistadores. «Sea como fuere, que cierto es que tienen estos
que hablan mejicano por letras las figuras de los de Culúa, y libros
de papel y pergamino, un palmo de anchos y doce largos, y
doblados con fuelles, donde señalan por ambas partes de azul,
púrpura y otros colores, las cosas memorables que acontecen; e allí
están pintadas sus leyes y ritos, que semejan mucho a los
mejicanos, como lo puede ver quien cotejare lo de aquí con lo de
Méjico.»
Y en otro lugar: «Los palacios y templos tienen grandes plazas, y
las plazas están cerradas de las casas de nobles y tienen en medio
de ellas una casa para los plateros, que a maravilla labran y vacían
el oro.» Esta condición aun hoy puede admirarse en los trabajos de
orfebrería nicaragüense. Tales labores he mostrado yo a mis amigos
europeos, que las han comparado con manufacturas de Tifany o
Froment-Meurice. Escultores y pintores hay asimismo que, sin haber
frecuentado nunca talleres ni museos, pues no han salido del país,
producen obras que me han causado sorpresa y admiración. Así los
que actualmente decoran la catedral de León, bajo el cuidado del
obispo Pereira.
Ciertos indios fabrican utensilios de barro que no son inferiores a
los que produce la alfarería peninsular en Andújar; las «tinajitas» de
allá alegran la vista y refrescan el agua en los estíos, como las

españolas alcarrazas. La habilidad original y criolla se manifiesta en
esteras o «petates», en hamacas tejidas de la fibra de la «cabuya» o
de la pita, teñidas con los colores que extraen del mismo modo que
los abuelos, colores que hacen rememorar cómo ante no sé cuál
tapiz oriental evocara un expresivo pintor francés la comparación de
un «perroquet». Se hacen en los telares rebozos de hilo y de seda,
semejantes a chales indios; se labran en el duro hueso de un fruto
de palmera, el «coyol», sortijas y pendientes que se dijeran de
azabache. Y se descubre en las mentes una natural claridad de
entendimiento y una facultad de asimilación que hacen que se
aprendan con facilidad y acierto importadas industrias extranjeras.
Los zapatos son famosos, y podrían pasar los de algunos fabricantes
por los que en las zapaterías sevillanas han llenado el gusto del
coronado que tiene por nombre Eduardo VII. Aprovechando la
riqueza de los bosques, que es extraordinaria, combinan los
carpinteros y ebanistas piezas de exposición que son maravillosos
mosaicos. Sorprenden las vivaces disposiciones mecánicas. El primer
automóvil que haya llegado a la República fué el del presidente
Zelaya. Con él fué un chauffeur francés. Al poco tiempo los buenos
conductores no escaseaban. Y hasta algo como un Charles Cros
nicaragüense ha habido que haya experimentado allá un sistema de
teléfono sin hilos mucho antes de las hoy triunfantes tentativas de
electricistas europeos. Me refiero al doctor Rosendo Rubí, que
obtuvo en Washington una patente el año de 1900.
Si el clima predispone para la fatiga y hay en él el tropical incentivo
de la pereza, adelanta, sin embargo, la actividad artesana. Managua,
León, Masaya, Granada, Rivas, Matagalpa, son centros principales de
trabajo. Aunque las condiciones de vida del país son tan diversas de
las que hacen levantar tantas protestas al obrero en naciones
europeas y americanas, no ha dejado de sentirse por allá uno que
otro vago soplo de espíritu socialista; mas no ha encontrado
ambiente propicio en donde nadie puede morirse de hambre ni hay
vida de dominadores placeres.
El nicaragüense es emprendedor, y no falta en él el deseo de los
viajes y cierto anhelo de aventura y de voluntario esfuerzo fuera de

los límites de la patria. En toda la América Central existen
ciudadanos de la tierra de los lagos que se distinguen en industrias y
profesiones, algunos que han logrado realizar fortunas y no pocos
que dan honra al terruño original. No es el único el caso del
navegante matagalpense de que hablara Ángel Ganivet; y en
Alemania, en Francia, en Rumania, en Inglaterra, en los Estados
Unidos, sé de nicaragüenses trasplantados que ocupan buenos
puestos y ganan honrosa y provechosamente su vida. Recuerdo que,
siendo yo cónsul de Nicaragua en París, recibí un día la visita de un
hombre en quien reconocí por el tipo al nicaragüense del pueblo. Me
saludó jovial, con estas palabras, más o menos: «No le vengo a
molestar, ni a pedirle un solo centavo. Vengo a saludarle, porque es
el cónsul de mi tierra. Acabo de llegar a Francia en un barco que
viene de la China, y en el cual soy marinero. Es probable que pronto
me vaya a la India». Se despidió contento como entrara y se fué a
gastar sus francos en la alegría de París, para luego seguir su
destino errante por los mares.
[1] Según los cálculos de Paul Levy, en su obra sobre Nicaragua,
las proporciones son: indio, 550 por 1.000; mestizo, 400 por
1.000; blanco y criollo, 45 por 1.000; negro, 5 por 1.000

MIS LIBROS
«LA CARAVANA PASA»

IV
uando llegaron los españoles a Nicaragua existía ya en los
naturales cierta cultura intelectual, sin duda alguna reflejada
de Méjico. Cierto que en Guatemala, entre los quichés, había
una civilización superior; mas los nicaragüenses no eran en
verdad bárbaros, cuando Gómara señala en ellos ciertos adelantos.
Todo esto no obsta para la crueldad de los ritos, que, como los
mejicanos, tenían su parte de antropofagia. De todas maneras,
había libros y archivos, que, según dice el historiador Gámez,
«fueron tomados por los españoles y quemados solemnemente en la
plaza de Managua, por el reverendo padre Bobadilla, en el año
1524». Bobadilla no hizo sino lo mismo que el obispo Zumárraga
hiciera con los tesoros escritos de la capital de Moctezuma. No iban
a América los conquistadores a civilizar, sino a ganar tierras y oro; y
a la América central le tocó la peor parte, entre aventureros de
espada y frailes terribles.
«Los que atravesaron los mares—expresa el historiador citado—en
frágiles naves para correr aventuras en tierras lejanas y
desconocidas, tuvieron que ser, fueron por lo regular, la escoria de la
sociedad española, sobre la que, como es consiguiente, sobresalió
alguna que otra medianía social, a quien las malas circunstancias
arrojaron a nuestras playas.»
Lo más escogido fué a los virreinatos peruano y mejicano. Se
cuenta tradicionalmente en Nicaragua que allá estuvo un hermano
de Santa Teresa de Jesús, y que él fué quien llevó la imagen que
aun hoy se venera en el santuario de Nuestra Señora de la
Concepción de El Viejo. Pudiera suceder, y quizá de él desciendan
algunos de los Cepedas del país. Llegó también un Loyola, que no
juzgo haya sido de sangre de San Ignacio. Mas quien en realidad
estuvo allá, e hizo perdurable obra de bien, pues si no era un santo
era un héroe, fué aquel fraile que en el Capitolio de Washington

tiene estatua, y cuyo nombre brilla con singular luz entre los de los
bienhechores de la Humanidad: Fray Bartolomé de las Casas. La
importada clerecía no fué, por cierto, modelo de virtudes
evangélicas. Como todos los que llegaban, aquellos tonsurados
tenían el oro por mira. Así, fué un sacerdote de Cristo el que tuvo la
peregrina idea de descender por el cráter del volcán de Masaya,
creyendo que la lava fundida era el metal codiciado. Los religiosos
no se preocupaban gran cosa ni de enseñar lo fundamental que se
encuentra en el catecismo. Gobernadores, encomenderos, capitanes,
no tenían más objeto que su deseo de riqueza, y entre ellos se
aprisionaban y se mataban. Guatemala, reino o capitanía general,
era el centro de la escasa cultura del tiempo de la colonia. Mas por
todas partes está el dominio de las armas y la cogulla. El fanatismo
imperaba. En Guatemala se practicaban la magia y la hechicería. Es
muy curioso lo que a este respeto cuenta en su obra, que hizo
traducir Colbert al francés, el fraile inglés Tomás Gage, quien logró, a
pesar de ser extranjero, ir hasta la capital guatemalteca, donde
enseñó teología por espacio de doce años.
El período colonial es sombrío para la vida intelectual. Así hasta la
Revolución francesa, que tuvo en tonas partes repercusión. La
prohibición de que llegasen libros extranjeros concluyó con las
ordenanzas de Carlos III. La Enciclopedia en aquellos países, como
en el resto de América, ayudó a preparar la independencia. Un fraile
eminente, el P. Goicochea, dió nueva luz a los estudios filosóficos,
antes envueltos en mucha teología y mucho peripato. Hay que
advertir que fueron también clérigos los que, como antaño la
sombra, hacían ahora la Luz.
«En los primeros años—expresa Gámez—que siguieron al
descubrimiento de Nicaragua, la población se hallaba, en cuanto a
letras, en completas tinieblas. Los aventureros españoles que
llegaban a nuestras colonias tenían más afición a la espada que a la
pluma, y era raro el que siquiera sabía escribir su firma. Los escritos
de aquel tiempo, confiados a las personas más inteligentes e
instruídas, ponen de manifiesto la ignorancia de sus autores. El clero
fué entre nosotros, como en otras muchas colonias, el que descorrió

el velo a la enseñanza, comenzando a propagarla. Pero la instrucción
se limitaba a las castas privilegiadas y se reducía a las primeras
letras y a la doctrina cristiana. Más tarde se estableció en León un
colegio seminario para fabricar los sabios de la colonia. Se estudiaba
allí latinidad, cierto embrollo metafísico-religioso que apellidaban
filosofía, y teología moral y dogmática. La sabiduría y la ciencia no
pasaban nunca más allá de los dinteles de la sacristía. Se creó
después una Universidad en Guatemala; pero tanto en ésta como en
el seminario de León, no se podía avanzar más que lo que conviniera
a la política de España en las colonias. En 1794 había en la capital
del reino diez y seis conventos, muchas iglesias y «una sola escuela
de primeras letras». No obstante, en Guatemala hubo antes cierto
florecimiento mental, pues no debe de haber sido caso aislado el de
aquel poeta contemporáneo de Cervantes, a quien éste alaba en su
Viaje al Parnaso en estos términos, después de celebrar a Gaspar de
Ávila:
Llegó Juan de Mestanza, cifra y suma
de tanta erudición, donaire y gala,
que no hay muerte ni edad que lo consuma.
Apolo le arrancó de Guatimala
y le trujo en su ayuda para ofensa
de la canalla en todo extremo mala.
A fines del siglo ñvááá dió un gran paso la enseñanza en Guatemala.
Hubo un Flores «que se adelantaba a Galvani y Balli en
experimentos físicos sobre la electricidad, y a Fontana en las
estatuas de cera para el estudio de la anatomía». En el país
nicaragüense «llegábamos a la víspera de nuestra emancipación
hablando malamente el idioma castellano, llena la cabeza de
cuestiones teológicas y metafísicas; pero en lo demás, tan pobres y
atrasados como cuando Nicaragua fué a recibir a Gil González»
[2]
.
Las ideas revolucionarias francesas, la doctrina de los
enciclopedistas, fueron conocidas por la introducción de algunas
obras, y produjeron su efecto a pesar de lo arraigado que estaba en
los burgueses el espíritu colonial. En 1812 las Cortes de Cádiz

elevaron a la categoría de Universidad el antiguo seminario conciliar
de León. Del foco guatemalteco llegan después las ideas puestas en
circulación por pensadores como Valle, Molina, Barrundia. Ya en los
albores de la independencia se destaca en Nicaragua una figura
prestigiosa: la de Larreinaga. Desde entonces, a las luchas de la
colonia suceden las luchas que preceden a la formación de los
Estados, a la república federal. Y en el año 1824 «el bello país de
Nicaragua, «el paraíso de Mahoma», como le llamó Gage, se
convirtió en un teatro de guerras civiles». Todo, claro está, en
merma del adelanto y de la instrucción del pueblo. Y guerras, y más
guerras. En largos períodos, la única literatura que aparece es la
violenta y declamatoria de los periódicos de combate. La libertad del
pensamiento no existía. En 1825 el jefe del Estado, Cerda, ordena,
entre otras cosas, retrocediendo a la época de la conquista, «que no
se escribiera por la prensa concepto alguno que no estuviera
conforme con los preceptos católicos», y que se quemaran todos los
libros prohibidos por la Iglesia. Más tarde, durante la administración
Herrera, pudo bien verse en Nicaragua una vislumbre de progreso y
de cultura, dado el retrato moral que de aquel gobernante se lee en
un antiguo periódico citado por Gámez: «Desde muy joven leía los
filósofos más profundos, los genios de la Francia, la historia antigua.
Su corazón noble se había incendiado en las nociones de gloria y
libertad. Su cabeza activa y fecunda combinaba los grandes
problemas de la legislación y la política. Su estudio privado, su trato
íntimo con los dos grandes literatos honor de su país, habían
desarrollado en él un carácter de empresa, un talento de gobierno,
un tacto y conocimiento de los hombres y de los negocios».
No sé a punto fijo en qué época fué introducida la imprenta en
Nicaragua; mas el libro ha sido escaso, y de aquellos tiempos no
conozco ninguno. El primer periódico oficial apareció en 1835, bajo
la administración Zepeda, con el título de Telégrafo Nicaragüense;
luego figuraron varones de estudio al par que hombres de política:
Buitrago, Hermenegildo Zepeda. Y se admirará a una personalidad
interesante y valiosa: D. Francisco Castellón, varón de viva
inteligencia y de instrucción notable. En 1844 fué enviado como

ministro a Europa, a fin de ver si era posible evitar las rudezas e
imposiciones de Inglaterra en Nicaragua. En Londres no quisieron ni
oirle. Luego fué a Francia. Gámez narra un curioso episodio de ese
viaje, que merece copiarse íntegro: «Castellón, que era un hábil
diplomático, concretó entonces sus esfuerzos a la Corte de Francia,
para que siquiera interpusiese su mediación y nos librara de ser
tratados como pueblos bárbaros puestos bajo la férula de cónsules
descorteses y arbitrarios.
»Despertó con tal objeto el interés del público francés por el canal
interoceánico de Nicaragua, por medio de la prensa y de
conversaciones con los hombres más notables de aquel tiempo. El
príncipe Luis Napoleón, después Napoleón III, estaba preso en el
castillo de Ham, y la Corte de Luis Felipe lo hacía aparecer como
demente. Castellón quiso también sacar partido del bonapartismo y
solicitó permiso de visitar al reo de Estado. Luis Napoleón agradeció
la visita del diplomático nicaragüense, quedó prendado de su
agradable presencia y finos modales, y se sintió vivamente
reconocido cuando Castellón, burlando la vigilancia del carcelero, le
deslizó disimuladamente dos cartuchos de oro, que el príncipe
rehusó. Desde ese día el futuro emperador fué un partidario decidido
del canal por Nicaragua, y todos los bonapartistas franceses se
convirtieron en sus propagandistas más entusiastas. Estaba logrado
el objeto. (La gratitud de Napoleón fué imperecedera. Apenas ocupó
el trono imperial, mandó a Nicaragua a buscar a Castellón, cuya
muerte ignoraba. Pasó una pensión a su familia, y más tarde, en
1867, tuvo en París educando a Jorge, hijo menor de D. Francisco.)
Castellón se dirigió entonces a la Cancillería francesa, y en una
conferencia con el ministro Guizot ofreció a Francia toda clase de
privilegios sobre el canal y también cederle en propiedad una isla en
el Atlántico para hacer allí un fuerte que sirviera de llave al mismo
canal, a condición de que interpusiera su mediación con Inglaterra,
¡Vana demanda! La Corte de Luis Felipe manifestó francamente al
representante de Nicaragua que los procedimientos de Inglaterra
eran correctos, «porque—añadió—las naciones de Europa no
pueden, sin rebajarse, entenderse con esos «gobiernitos

mosquitos». El Gobierno de Nicaragua, al dar cuenta más tarde, en
el periódico oficial, del fracaso de su Legación, exclamaba con
tristeza: «Nuestro Gobierno, cuando se trata de condenarlo a pagar
sin ser oído, está constituído; pero no lo está cuando quiere
manifestar sus agravios y defenderse.» Y el espíritu de Drago flotaba
aún sobre la superficie de las aguas...
Don Patricio Rivas y D. Cleto Mayorga, ambos políticos, fueron
aficionados a las musas y produjeron cosas ingeniosas que no se
conservan en ninguna antología. En medio de las agitaciones y
guerras que se sucedían, solían aparecer canciones populares de
rimadores anónimos. Máximo Jerez, caudillo, infatigable apóstol de
la Unión Centroamericana, fué persona de cultura literaria. Díaz
Zapata es nombre grato al arte. El hombre de Estado Zeledón era un
universitario. El filibustero yanqui Walker, que cultivó su espíritu en
una Universidad alemana, no llevó a Nicaragua sino la barbarie de
ojos azules, la crueldad y el rifle. Otro anglosajón que llegó de paz
fué Squire, quien escribió un libro notable sobre aquellas tierras.
Leyendo este libro tuvo Víctor Hugo la idea que le hizo producir Les
raisons du Momotombo. Buenaventura Selva fué estadista, abogado
de gran mérito y también hombre de letras. Gregorio Juárez, sujeto
estudioso, lleno de nociones, sabio para su tiempo y que tuvo que
ver también con los asuntos públicos, dió a la prensa muchas
ingenuas y modestas poesías. El Dr. De la Rocha cultivó la
elocuencia y dejó páginas históricas y literarias. En 1660 se introdujo
la imprenta en Guatemala, y tres años después se hizo el primer
trabajo tipográfico. Respecto a Nicaragua no tengo ningún dato
seguro. En León creo que fueron de los primeros impresores Pío
Orue y Justo Hernández. Mas el libro, como he dicho, era escaso en
esos tiempos, y aun continúa siéndolo ahora. Conozco muy mal
impresas y mendosas las obras de un historiador de buenas
intenciones, aunque harto apasionado: Jerónimo Pérez. Cerrada la
Universidad leonesa, los estudios se hacían en contados Institutos y
Liceos. La Filosofía se enseñaba por Balmes; la Física, por Ganot. La
fundación de los Institutos de Oriente y de Occidente en Granada y
en León fué un gran paso en el adelanto intelectual de la República.

Llegaron para enseñar en ellos españoles eminentes. Al de León
debió ir como director Augusto González de Linares, gloria de la
ciencia moderna de España. No pudo realizar el viaje, y fué en su
lugar José Leonard, un polaco admirable, que había sido ayudante
del general Kruck en la última insurrección, y que en España llegó a
dominar el castellano con toda perfección—era un políglota
consumado—y a ocupar el puesto de redactor de la Gaceta de
Madrid. Con él fué el doctor Salvador Calderón, sabio naturalista,
hoy profesor de la Universidad matritense. A Granada fueron el
padre Sanz Llaría y otros notables peninsulares.
[2] Gámez: Historia de Nicaragua.

MIS LIBROS
«CANTO A LA ARGENTINA»

V
oco se ha escrito sobre la literatura en Centroamérica, y
especialmente en Nicaragua. Menéndez Pelayo le dedica
algunas palabras en el prólogo de su Antología. No tengo
recuerdo de que en la Lira americana que publicó Ricardo
Palma en París esté representada Nicaragua, ni en la obra de
Lagomagiore. El poeta Félix Medina comenzó la publicación de una
Lira Nicaragüense hace ya muchos años. La obra quedó a medio
hacer. En épocas pasadas los rimadores no han sido raros, dado que
excelentes sacerdotes, doctores, hombres públicos, licenciados, han,
como decía el inocente énfasis de antes, «pulsado la lira». Tengo
memoria de haber oído en mi infancia muchos cantos nacionales,
patrióticos, guerreros y amorosos.
Del corazón del pueblo han brotado, como en todos los países,
cantares sentidos y sencillos como éste:
Mañanitas, mañanitas,
como que quiere llover...
Así estaban las mañanas
cuando te empecé a querer.
Era costumbre que en los entierros se distribuyesen a los
concurrentes, junto con las velas de cera, prosas y poesías impresas
en papel de luto. En esa literatura fúnebre se solían encontrar
producciones de cierto mérito, firmadas con nombres conocidos o
con seudónimos. La novela no ha tenido cultivadores. Apenas un
caballero de la ciudad de Granada, el Sr. Gustavo Guzmán, ha dado
hace tiempo a la publicidad algunas tentativas sin pretensiones. El
historiador Gámez publicó también en 1878 un ensayo de novela:
Amor y constancia. Los estudios históricos sí están representados
por libros plausibles y meritorios. Fuera de Jerónimo Pérez, ya
citado, y de Hernández Somosa, cuyos trabajos se han circunscrito a
épocas determinadas, el país se enorgullece con la labor de Tomás

Ayón y de José Dolores Gámez. Ayón fué un jurisconsulto eminente,
que en los últimos años de su vida se dedicó a escribir la historia de
Nicaragua sin más elementos que los historiadores de Indias, los
historiadores guatemaltecos y lo poco de aquellos pobres archivos.
Publicó su trabajo por la imprenta Nacional. Como fué un escritor
para quien los clásicos eran familiares, su producción se recomienda
por discreción y elegancia de estilo, aunque se le hayan hecho
algunos reparos como analista. Dejó ese varón ilustre un hijo que
heredó sus dotes estéticas, y que hoy es uno de los primeros
cultores del arte de escribir en aquella República: Alfonso Ayón.
Gámez, cuya actuación política ha sido mucha y muy agitada, es
uno de los más firmes sostenedores de las ideas liberales en
Centroamérica. Su radicalismo es fundamental, y su intransigencia
reconocida. Así en su obra no busca disimular las tendencias
preferidas de su espíritu. «Yo—dice en la introducción de su Historia
de Nicaragua—, debo declararlo con franqueza, no puedo ni podría
nunca ocultar mis simpatías por el sistema republicano, por las
luchas en favor de la independencia y libertad de los pueblos, por los
progresos modernos y por las avanzadas ideas del liberalismo en
todas sus manifestaciones», etc. De esta manera, en su producción
hay siempre un vago relampagueo de jacobinismo que se hace
advertir entre la facilidad y la claridad de su discurso.
Después de la publicación de su Historia, el autor anunció la de
otras obras, como Archivo histórico de Nicaragua, «voluminosa
recopilación cronológica de documentos históricos desde 1821 hasta
nuestros días»; un Diccionario biográfico y geográfico de la
República de Nicaragua; sus Memorias del destierro y Los grandes
nacionalistas, estudios de la vida y hechos de los grandes caudillos
que en Centroamérica se han esforzado por reconstruir la Patria de
1834. Estos libros han quedado hasta ahora inéditos. Gámez ha
tenido que dejar muchas veces de escribir historia por «hacer
historia». Nadie ha podido por allá dedicarse a las puras letras. Pero
¿acaso no hay la misma queja en toda la América latina? ¿Y en
España misma? Hay en aquellos países, y en Nicaragua muy
particularmente, una abundancia de materia prima, o, mejor dicho,

de espíritu primo, que es de admirar. Mas el ambiente es hostil, las
condiciones de existencia no son propicias, y la mejor planta mental
que comienza en un triunfo de brotes se seca al poco tiempo. La
impresión de libros, como lo he dicho ya, casi es nula. La producción
de literatos y de poetas ha tenido que desaparecer entre las
colecciones de diarios y de una que otra revista de precaria vida
[3]
.
Hubo un poeta de gran cultura, a quien yo conocí anciano, y que
murió siendo director de la Biblioteca Nacional de Managua:
Antonino Aragón. Había sido amigo de un famoso romántico español
que recorrió casi toda la América: el montañés Fernando Velarde,
autor de los Cantos del Nuevo Mundo. Aragón, lírico y sentimental,
escribió buen número de poesías, y no queda de él ni un solo
volumen. Carmen Díaz, que poseyó lo que antes se llamaba
«inspiración», no dejó tampoco ni un libro. Lo propio Cesáreo
Salinas, que rimó asuntos galantes y graciosos, y a quien, como a
tantos otros, fué fatalmente destructor el medio en que su talento se
desenvolviera. Nada queda de los pasados cultores de las letras...
Nada de Juárez, de Rocha, de Díaz, de Buitrago; nada quedará de
Aguilar, cerebro privilegiado; nada de un delicado poeta: Manuel
Cano; nada del fuerte talento de un Anselmo H. Rivas. Dos
extranjeros de grata recordación contribuyeron a la cultura del país,
impulsando y dando nueva vida al periodismo naciente: un alemán,
H. Gottel, y un italiano, Fabio Carnevalini. Este último dejó un solo
volumen: la traducción de la obra del filibustero William Walker
sobre su invasión a Nicaragua. Los padres jesuitas, durante su
permanencia en la República, contribuyeron mucho a la difusión del
amor a las Humanidades en la juventud que atraían. En tiempo de
ellos comenzaron a brillar inteligencias que más tarde serían glorias
de la Patria. Luis H. Debayle, una de las más finas, nobles y puras
almas que me haya sido dado conocer en mi vida; José Madriz,
talento tan vigoroso como sagaz; y Román Mayorga Rivas, gallardo y
elegante poeta, comenzaron su educación de ciencia y belleza
cuando estaban en el país aquellos religiosos. Debayle es un médico
y cirujano ilustre, digno de figuración y loa en cualquier parte del
mundo, y que con el argentino Wilde fué de las primeras

personalidades en el Congreso Médico Panamericano de la Habana.
Luego ha figurado brillantemente en el Internacional de Budapest.
Joven aún, goza en toda la América Central de una autoridad
indiscutible. Su carrera la hizo en París, en donde conquistó por
concurso el título de interno de los hospitales—único en
Centroamérica—, y en donde Charcot, Richelot, Pean y Guyot le
estimularon, le demostraron su afecto, predijeron su porvenir de
éxitos y de gloria. Discípulo ferviente de Pasteur, llevó a su Patria las
nuevas ideas, siendo considerado como el innovador de la Medicina
y de la Cirugía en Nicaragua. En medio de sus triunfos científicos, no
ha podido echar en olvido a las Gracias divinas. Y ha escrito y
escribe de cuando en cuando artículos, estudios y delicados poemas,
unos impregnados de aroma romántico, otros muy modernos y de
técnica hábil, todos bellos de humanidad y de sinceridad. Madriz
ocupa hoy uno de los primeros puestos en la política
centroamericana; abogado de gran mérito, es en todo un combativo.
Mas no ha sido tampoco infiel a las letras, y tiene por publicar
importantes estudios de historia patria, que han de ser dignos de su
sólido y áureo talento. Mayorga Rivas estaba llamado a ser el
fundador del periodismo a la moderna en Centroamérica, y, en
efecto, dirige en San Salvador el primer diario de aquellas cinco
Repúblicas. No obstante, su antigua musa le acompaña siempre, y
suele, al amor de ella, formar en su jardín de lirismo muy lindos
ramos de rosas de poesía. Hay que tener en cuenta que todos los
escritores tienen necesariamente que ir a parar al terreno de las
discusiones políticas. Los mejores cerebros se han gastado así ¿Qué
obras perdurables no habrían podido dejar un Carlos Selva, un
Tiburcio G. Bonilla, o un Rigoberto Cabezas en lo pasado, y no
podría hacer un Salvador Mendieta en lo presente? Cabezas fué a la
acción, y en ella dejó un nombre luminoso. Otros han arrojado su
tinta al viento y al olvido. Modesto Barrios, un verdadero literato y
maestro de la palabra, se fatigó en vanas oposiciones y se refugió en
la jurisprudencia y en el profesorado. Otro muy culto espíritu,
Manuel Coronel Matus, ha ocupado altos puestos públicos, y hoy
dirige un diario y un Instituto.

Singular figura entre las gentes que escriben ha sido la de D.
Enrique de Guzmán, miembro correspondiente de la Real Academia
Española, el único miembro correspondiente de la Real Academia
Española que haya existido en Nicaragua... El Sr. Guzmán se dedicó
a la política y a la gramática. En lo segundo ha tenido por allá, en
años ya lejanos, bastante éxito. Es un hombre de cierta lectura, con
dotes socarronamente satíricas, y cuya manera ha consistido en
mezclar al chiste castellano y a la cita clásica algo de la pimienta un
poco fuerte y del «chile» usual en su parroquia. De este modo, el Sr.
Guzmán es menos gustado en el resto de Centroamérica que en
Nicaragua; y en Nicaragua, para saborearlo por completo, se
necesita ser de su ciudad de Granada, y, posiblemente, de su barrio.
Es algo, por otra parte, semejante al español Valbuena, con más
cultura, y que mezcla taimadamente a falsas inocencias de cura
oblicuo desplantes y pesadeces de dómine criollo. ¡Excelente Sr.
Guzmán, el mismo, invariable, incambiable desde hace treinta,
cuarenta, cincuenta años; qué sé yo!
Nilne puset capiti non posse pericula cano
Pellere, quin tepidum hoc optes audire: decenter?
El gramaticismo y el filologismo llegaron por influjo colombiano. En
un tiempo, cuando a Bogotá se la llamaba Atenas de América,
fueron aquellos países como dependencias académicas de Colombia
y de Venezuela. De ahí que todavía se encuentre quienes juzguen
que el hombre ha sido creado por Dios para aprenderse el
Diccionario de galicismos de Baralt y las apuntaciones sobre el
lenguaje bogotano de D. J. Rufino Cuervo. Dos caballeros discuten
sobre política, o sobre no importa qué, por la prensa. Desventurado
de aquel que, aunque lleno de buena doctrina, escribe: «es por esto
que» o «avalancha». Una de las razones que hicieron popular y
famoso a un escritor ecuatoriano, genial, por otra parte, D. Juan
Montalvo, fué su manera de escribir arcaica, su culto por Cervantes y
por el Diccionario. Y hay quienes en Nicaragua se han dedicado a la
tarea de estudiar el idioma, y que merecen el título de miembros
correspondientes de la Real Academia Española tanto como el Sr.

Guzmán. Me refiero al Sr. Fletes Bolaños; a un poeta honesto y
sensitivo: mi antiguo maestro Felipe Ibarra y a un concienzudo e
infatigable minero de las minas clásicas: Mariano Barreto.
Todo esto me era conocido. A mi llegada pude darme cuenta de lo
que vale y representa la nueva generación. Allá, como en toda
América, ha habido un florecimiento, una renovación de brillo y
valores. Encontré un tesoro de entusiasmo, una corriente que tan
sólo necesita ser bien encauzada, una fuerza que, con un poco de
apoyo y de estímulo, con paz en la República y con voluntad en los
espíritus dirigentes, puede convertirse en el impulso dinámico que
transforme el alma del país. Juventud y porvenir significan en el
fondo una misma cosa.
[3] Hay ahora dos revistas importantes en Nicaragua: La Patria,
que dirige el notable escritor Félix Quiñones, y La Torre de Marfil,
fundada y sostenida por Santiago Argüello.

MIS LIBROS
«PARISIANA»

VI
níre los poetas actuales es el primero Santiago Argüello. Ha
producido ya una obra considerable. Se le reconoce como a
un maestro. Ha sido vario en sus efusiones líricas; se le ha
aplaudido, ha triunfado. Es fecundo, es sonoro, es tropical, es
un trabajador y un virtuoso del verso. Ha publicado no solamente
poesía, sino libros de crítica y, por motivos docentes, un texto de
literatura. Ha ensayado el drama con ruidoso éxito. En Argüello hay
una mezcla de cerebral y de sensitivo. Su imaginación es rica y
derrochadora. Su talento ha revelado su fortaleza cuando, a pesar
del medio en que ha vivido, ha podido crear lo que ha creado. A
pura intuición y a puro libro ha realizado sus primeros sueños de
arte. Con motivo del estreno de su drama Ocaso escribíale Max
Nordau: «No le felicito sólo por el éxito, sino también por la obra
misma, fuerte y bella, y, sobre todo, por la idea que usted ha tenido
de escribir una pieza vivida, auténtica, arraigada en su suelo,
poblada de un mundo suyo, cargada de ideas propias y sentimientos
reales: una pieza que traduce la vida en el espacio y en el tiempo.
Necesitaba usted valor para emanciparse de la influencia extranjera,
para apartarse de ese mundo ficticio, casi siempre parisiense, en que
se mueve el teatro sudamericano, y colocar sobre la escena los seres
y las cosas que le son familiares. Ha hecho usted un bellísimo début.
¡Ojalá sea el creador del teatro nacional hispanoamericano!» El
famoso israelita se refiere a la valiente tesis social del drama, que en
Madrid habría causado el ruido de una Electra galdosiana. No hay
duda de que en Centroamérica, Argüello, con el gran salvadoreño
Gavidia, en asuntos de teatro va a la cabeza. Su poesía es, como él
la llama en uno de sus libros, «de tierra cálida»; sin embargo, su
alma ha ido a todas partes, ha viajado en peregrinación y adoración
de bellezas por épocas y países diversos. ¿Qué poeta verdadero no
lo ha hecho, sobre todo en nuestras Américas, de irreductibles
ensoñadores? Ha habido quienes critiquen la preferencia en nuestras

zonas por princesas ideales o legendarias, por cosas de prestigio
oriental, medioeval, Luis XIV, o griego, o chino... Homero, señores
míos, tenía sus lotófagos; Shakespeare, su Italia, o su Dinamarca, o
su Roma, y, sobre todo, sus islas divinas... Para ser completo y
puramente limitado a lo que nos rodea se necesita el honrado, el
santo localismo de un Vicente Medina el murciano, o de un Aquileo
Echeverría el costarricense... Y ya Medina está en Buenos Aires...
Argüello siente la Naturaleza y se comprende unido a ella. Su llama
interior brota en la profusión de sus ritmos y rimas. Sus formas
tienen de lo clásico y de lo moderno. Gusta, más que del símbolo, de
la alegoría. Su vocabulario es muy rico, quizás excesivo, pues ocurre
que al leer algunas de sus páginas tiene uno que recurrir al
Diccionario. Labra y engarza sus palabras con minucias de
orfebrería. Así como a Robert de Montesquiou en Francia, a él sería
al único quizá que se le podría llamar entre nosotros poeta
decadente. Tiene, sin embargo, otras maneras, pues ya he dicho
que es un notable «virtuoso». Ved cuánta diferencia hay entre unas
y otras de sus poesías. Citaré ésta, del libro De tierra cálida, titulada
Germinal:
El horno de abril. En la hoguera
se abrasan los llanos. Extiende
sus velas el pájaro y hiende
los aires. Resopla la fiera.
El horno de abril reverbera,
y se oye zumbar: es el duende
que fuegos eróticos prende.
Después, la gentil Primavera
su espeso cabello prendido
con regias coronas. El nido
renueva las notas del coro.
Rosal lujurioso se cubre
de rosas. Da leche la ubre;
la espiga, mazorcas de oro.
Y este fragmento de un poema, Habla Safo de sus tres amores:

¡Oh, vírgenes de Lesbos...! ¡Adoradas
y encantadoras vírgenes! ¡Vosotras
prendéis en el fanal de mi pupila
esa vívida lumbre de las diosas!
¡Qué fulgentes los ortos de mi dicha
cuando os veo venir; cuando radiosas,
el perfume esparcís de las praderas;
cuando, a su paso, vuestros pies enfloran;
cuando bajan en densas espirales,
del cabello, las víboras, que enroscan
sus anillos de seda en vuestro cuello:
esas ávidas víboras que flotan
como obscuros afluentes del Cocito
o cual rayos de una alba esplendorosa,
buscando sobre el seno palpitante
la miel de Hymeto en la colmena roja!
¡Athis divina! ¡Que se encienda mi alma
en la risa de luz que hay en tu boca,
y que es rayo auroral que va jugando
en los pétalos frescos de una rosa!
¡Que me envuelva tu pelo rubio, como
un áureo manto real! Y que a la sombra
de tu pestaña crespa, Amor encienda
en tus célicos ojos tus auroras,
en tus ojos azules como el Actium,
y como el Etna ardientes...
¡Tú, Anactoria,
que enloqueces mi mente! ¡Tú, el ensueño
del alma ambicionado...! ¡De tu boca
riega sobre la mía la cascada
de tus ígnicos besos!
¡Venid todas,
bellas hijas de Pira...! ¡Ven, Cyrina,
la del mohín lascivo...! ¡Ven, Andrómeda!
¡Timas, Naís... volad! ¡Volad! ¡Que escancie

la madre del Amor en nuestras copas
sus embriagantes vinos...! ¡Que se tiñan
los auríferos bordes, y las rosas
de vuestros grasos labios encendidos
ensangrienten la tez de sus corolas!
¡Matadme, delirantes...!
¡Ven, Corina;
hazme que pruebe de tu piel sabrosa!
¡Ponme borracho de deleite...! ¡Déjame
con mis sedientos labios en la copa!
Y tú, mi Cydno, ¡mi adorada Cydno!
¡Blanca como el plumón de la garzota,
como la espuma que envolvió a Citeres
en pañales de tul...! Ya la zozobra
de nuestras gratas expansiones íntimas
me agita el corazón, e hirviendo, azota
mi sangre las arterias. ¡Haz que sea,
por el amor, mi sangre abrasadora,
mar de oleaje bravío, mar de lava
que se estrella en sus cárceles de roca,
y levanta vorágines, y escupe
a los cielos la espuma de su cólera!
¡Llegad presto, queridas! El deseo
con sus puntas eléctricas me toca.
¡Me parece que os tengo entre mis brazos,
que vuestras carnes con mis carnes rozan,
que un aliento caldeado me enloquece,
en un pujante resollar de forja,
y que son vuestros senos pebeteros
do eróticos perfumes se evaporan!
¡Volad, hijas de Zeus...! Que ya siento
calcinarse las frases en mi boca;
mi lengua se entumece, y es mi labio
un páramo. ¡La angustia, sudorosa,
me aprieta el corazón, tiembla en mis carnes,
tjl t f !

me estruja la garganta y me sofoca...!
¡Venid a refrescar este desierto
de mis áridos labios con las pomas
humedosas de miel de vuestros pechos!
Que vuestras carnes, en sus tibias combas,
cual los poros sutiles de los pétalos
dan al insecto su embriaguez de aromas,
me den a mí su seductor perfume...
¡Toda la esencia de sus flores todas!
¡Todo el dulce rocío de sus cálices!
¡Todo el grato licor de sus corolas!
¡Y dormirme, ebrio ya...! ¡Siempre soñando
con otro goce más...! Que me aprisionan
otros brazos mejores, y otros ojos
más fúlgidos me queman... ¡Y en las ondas
del piélago supremo, en los arrullos
del abrasante amor, sentir ansiosa
la divina epilepsia del deleite,
con avidez frenética de loca...!
¡Venid! ¡Que ya mi ceñidor desciende!
¡Mi túnica está suelta; ya pregona
la pasión delirante...! ¡Me parece
el mareo sentir de vuestras rondas,
oh, lúbricas hetairas...! ¡Vuestro pelo,
en viperina contorsión, retoza
en los rápidos giros de la danza...,
y las sedeñas vestes en la alfombra...,
y la gloriosa seducción sin velos
que vuestros regios cuerpos aureola...,
y los senos recónditos, que emanan
arábigas esencias voluptuosas...,
y los besos que sangran..., y las sangres,
embriagantes, dulcísimas y rojas...,
y la estrechez gratísima..., y el lánguido
desmayo de la dicha enervadora...,
y el hondo frenesí que al reino vuela

y q
donde tiene el Delirio su corona...!
En el Poema de la locura, hecho con bizarrías musicales y
caprichos métricos, muy romántico si se quiere, demuestra
mayormente su dominio técnico y su ensoñadora fantasía. En Ojo y
alma, su último libro, continúa su adoración ideal, y la música, en el
amplio sentido griego de la palabra, impera siempre.
Junto con Argüello sostienen en aquella tierra el culto artístico
escritores como Ayón, de quien ya he hablado; como Félix Quiñones,
a cuyo ferviente humanismo debe tanto la cultura intelectual
nicaragüense; Manuel Maldonado, que es un poeta sentimental y
elegante, duplicado de un orador admirable, de un crisóstomo
fogueado por aquellos soles, Francisco Huezo, inteligencia
largamente abarcadora y verbo ardiente y cordial; los hermanos
Paniagua Prado: Francisco, sutil, sensitivo y a veces complicado,
cuya prosa elegante y moderna es reveladora del espíritu progresista
y asimilador de Nicaragua; José María, líricamente airoso y amador
de quimeras.
Los nuevos en la vida de la mente, los de ahora, tienen su
esperanza en flor y su corazón lleno de futuro. El P. Casco es
sapiente y armonioso
[4]
; meditabundo, sereno e impregnado de
universal amor escribe sus ritmos Manuel Tejerino; con ímpetu y con
fragancias sílvicas exterioriza sus energías Antonio Medrano; Juan R.
Avilés decora bizarramente sus prosas poemáticas; el poeta
Vanegas, quizás el más firme y sólido, expresa su generoso sentido
de la vida en hermosas estrofas; José Olivares sinfoniza suaves
melancolías y eterizadas divagaciones; Lino Argüello, de finos
caprichos y prematuras languideces, combina plausibles versos, y
García Robleto y Narciso Callejas, que heredara superioridades
maternas, y Juan Guerra y Rivas Ortiz, y otros más, hacen la noble,
y allí por desgracia estéril, buena campaña del arte. En Managua
está la Biblioteca Nacional. Los libros extranjeros llegan raramente.
Hay dos cronistas meritorios que se dedican a comentos y
exposiciones de los anales patrióticos: Jenaro Lugo y Sotomayor.

[4] En prensa ya este libro, me llega la noticia de la muerte del
P. Casco. Expreso mi duelo por la desaparición de ese generoso
talento, que tanto hubiera hecho por la cultura de Nicaragua.

Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.
More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge
connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and
personal growth every day!
ebookbell.com

Cesti The Extant Fragments Bilingual Martin Wallraff Editor

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Tags

Categories

Download

Quick Actions

Statistics

Related Slideshows

Cesti The Extant Fragments Bilingual Martin Wallraff Editor

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 5

Slide 6

Slide 7

Slide 8

Slide 9

Slide 10

Slide 11

Slide 12

Slide 13

Slide 14

Slide 15

Slide 16

Slide 17

Slide 18

Slide 19

Slide 20

Slide 21

Slide 22

Slide 23

Slide 24

Slide 25

Slide 26

Slide 27

Slide 28

Slide 29

Slide 30

Slide 31

Slide 32

Slide 33

Slide 34

Slide 35

Slide 36

Slide 37

Slide 38

Slide 39

Slide 40

Slide 41

Slide 42

Slide 43

Slide 44

Slide 45

Slide 46

Slide 47

Slide 48

Slide 49

Slide 50

Slide 51

Slide 52

Slide 53

Slide 54

Slide 55

Slide 56

Slide 57

Slide 58

Slide 59

Slide 60

Slide 61

Slide 63

Slide 64

Slide 65

Slide 66

Slide 67

Slide 68

Slide 69

Slide 70

Slide 72

Slide 73

Slide 74

Slide 75

Slide 76

Slide 77

Slide 78

Slide 80

Slide 81