accused before his second letter to Nestorius and the contemporary letter to his agents. We learn this from the Treatise of Heraclides. We saw[1] that Nestorius here quoted and discussed the last part of Cyril's letter to his agents, which by ancient scholars was held to be a supplement to it; and the French translator of the Treatise of Heraclides really is of the opinion that Nestorius quoted only the mere conclusion of this letter[2]. But in no words of Nestorius is there a hint that he deals with a part of a letter[3]. And more: if he had known the beautiful phrase which we found in a preceding section of the letter: That wretched man shall not hope that he can be my judge etc.[4], he would not have passed it by. Hence he knew the "supplement" as a separate letter. That it really was one[5] is confirmed by the translation of the letter to the agents made by Cyril's contemporary Marius Mercator; for in this translation the "supplement" is missing[6]. Then
- ↑ Above, p. 34 f.
- ↑ Nau, p. 93, note 6.
- ↑ Nestorius however omitted at least an introductory sentence; for the opening words of the "supplement": Τὸ δέ γε σχεδάριον κ.τ.λ. cannot have been the exordium of a letter.
- ↑ Above, p. 34, note 1.
- ↑ Comp. the restriction made above in note 3.
- ↑ Baluze, p. 108. Garnier (ii, 56), giving Peltan's (comp. Nestoriana, p. 9 f.) Latin translation by the side of the Greek text, has induced some of his readers (e.g. Walch, Historie der Kezereien, v, 392, note 4, and, as it seems, also Migne, ser. gr. 77, p. 78) to take the Latin text as a translation of Mercator.
προσδοκάτω δὲ ὁ δείλαιος, ὅτι κ.τ.λ.; and 68 c: κατὰ τοῦ ἐκεῖσε—ἢ ἀδελφοῦ ἢ πῶς ἂν εἴποιμι; κ.τ.λ.
