Where the texts came from
The dissertation of 1874. The source is a copy of De Apellis gnosi monarchica. Commentatio historica (Leipzig: E. Bidder, 1874) digitized by Google, which bears the perforated stamp of the University of California. It has a title page, ninety-two numbered pages and a page of contents headed “Index.” The last numbered page also carries a short list of addenda and corrigenda.
The essay of 1891. The source is Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, volume 6, part 3 (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1891), in a bound copy of volume 6 digitized by Google and held by the Internet Archive (item bub_gb_8jERAQAAIAAJ). The essay fills pages 111–120 and is the first of two studies printed together under one title page; the second, on the Syriac fragments of Hippolytus published by John Gwynn, is not part of this book.
The appendix of 1921. The source is Marcion: Das Evangelium vom fremden Gott (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1921; Texte und Untersuchungen, volume 45), the first edition, in the copy held by the Internet Archive (item marciondasevange00harn). Appendix VII fills pages 323*–339*. The first edition was used because it is the edition of Harnack’s reconstruction of Marcion’s texts already in this Library, and because the machine-read text of the 1924 second edition that was available is unusable.
What was translated
The dissertation is translated complete: title page, Prolegomena, both parts, the addenda and corrigenda, and the table of contents. The 1891 essay is translated complete. The 1921 appendix is translated complete, with one exception. On pages 333*–335* Harnack prints again, in full, the Latin of five objections from Ambrose, On Paradise VI, 30; VI, 31; VI, 32; VII, 35 and VIII, 38, and of two more on page 335*, VIII, 40 and 41, all of which he had already printed in 1891. They are given once here, with English, in the 1891 essay, and the 1921 appendix points to them there. The wording of 1921 differs from 1891 in small ways; the one that matters is in VI, 32, where 1921 prints “obedire malo” (“to obey evil”) for the “obedire mandato” (“to obey a commandment”) of 1891, evidently a misprint. Harnack’s comments between the passages in 1921 are all translated.
The rest of the 1891 volume and the rest of Marcion are not part of this book, including Harnack’s own account of Apelles in the main text of Marcion and his essay “Rhodon und Apelles” of 1916.
How the English was made and checked
The working text of each page was the machine-read text of the scan. It was translated page by page and checked against the page images wherever the machine reading could not be trusted: every comparison table, set in two or three columns, which the machine reading scrambles; the order of text and notes at every page where the machine reading had moved a sentence or a note to the wrong page; the longer Greek passages, where the machine reading of the 1874 and 1891 scans is often garbled; the title page and the table of contents; and every place where the sense was doubtful. Not every word of every page was read against the image. After the translation was finished, the whole book was checked a second time in four ways: every number in the three texts (references, volume and page numbers, verses, years and note numbers) was compared with the source, five pages at a time; every Greek word was compared with the source and every doubtful one with the page image; the length of the English for each run of five pages was compared with the source to find anything left out; and pages were reread against the Latin and German. The corrections that check found are in this book. The English has not been read by a second, independent translator.
Where the machine reading of a Greek passage was faulty and the passage is one Harnack prints more than once in this book, such as Rhodon in Eusebius, Epiphanius on Apelles, or Hippolytus’ Refutation VII, 38, the reading was checked against his other printings and the page image. In a few short Greek quotations accents were supplied from the standard text of the passage where the scan was unclear. A reader who needs Harnack’s exact printing of a Greek accent should consult the page image.
How the printing is represented
Words Harnack sets in spaced type for emphasis are given in italics where the check against the image showed them; because the machine reading loses the spacing, some may have been missed. Greek is given with the accents and breathings he printed. Inside quotations, words in round brackets are Harnack’s own comments; words in angle brackets, ⟨ ⟩, are letters or words he supplies in the ancient text; words in square brackets are the translator’s. Where Harnack himself puts a question mark in square brackets after a word or quotation, it is given in round brackets, (?), so that it is not taken for the translator’s. In the dissertation, Harnack refers to the author of the lost treatise against heresies as “Hippolytus I” and to the author of the Refutation of All Heresies as “Hippolytus II,” for reasons he gives on page 42; the English keeps his usage.
Slips in the printings
Where a printing is wrong, a reference or a Greek or Latin word is kept as printed and marked [sic] or explained in square brackets; a slip in Harnack’s own Latin or German is translated by its evident sense. Those found are these.
The dissertation:
- Pages 30 and 31. Harnack’s own corrigenda correct “epitomator” to “epitomatore” and “Pseudert.” to “Pseudotert.”; both concern only his Latin, and the English is not affected.
- Page 41, note 3. The note ends with a comma, as if a clause were missing; it is translated as a complete sentence.
- Page 42, note 2. The first reference is printed so that it reads “Lib. VII, 1.”; the text above it refers to chapter 12, and it is given as VII, 12.
- Page 44. “Hippolytus I” is printed where the argument requires “Hippolytus II”; it is kept and marked in square brackets.
- Page 52, note 4. The date of Cotelier’s edition is printed incomplete in the scan; it is given as 167[7].
- Page 70. The saying about the money-changers is printed Γίνεσθαι, where page 74, note 2, prints γίνεσθε; it is kept as printed.
- Page 89, note 1. In Origen’s Greek, προστατικόν is printed where Origen’s text has προστακτικόν (“as a command”); it is kept and marked [sic], and the English gives the sense.
The essay of 1891:
- Page 115, note 1. The pseudo-Justinian Questions are cited from Otto, volume IV, page 130; the 1921 appendix cites the same passage as page 136. Both are kept.
The appendix of 1921:
- Page 326*. The passage “Quidam discentes Pontici illius” is headed “De carne 7”; it stands in chapter 6 of Tertullian’s On the Flesh of Christ, and it is marked [sic].
- Page 330*. Epiphanius’ words about the money-changers read “χρῶμαι γάρ” (“for I make use”) in 1921, where the dissertation of 1874, page 70, prints “Χρῶ γάρ” (“for make use”); each is given as printed.
- Page 335*. In On Paradise VI, 32, “obedire malo” is printed for “obedire mandato”; see above.
What was not added
Harnack is not corrected from later scholarship, modern critical texts of the Church Fathers, or the wording of the True Testament. Where he cites a book by a short title, the title is kept as he gave it.
This note is by the present editor, not by Harnack.