Next we come to various theorists on Bible who all would build upon earlier works, e.g. de Lyra and Glossa Ordinaria.
In the book You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by one Fransisco Ortiz, 1549, the following passage is given (folio 44):
In another book of 1591, by a certain Dominicus Banjes, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (the book must have been selling well, because there is also the 1602 edition), we find this (p. 352-353):
A translation of this would also be welcome, but we see that this author is more elaborate and tells us that not all things are consumed by fire. He mentions Exodus 3 where a bush is burning not consumed by fire, and also mentions salamander and some fly of Cyprus.
Both authors refer to the tabernacle and altar of Exodus, the second author being more specific in his references which would enable us to consult those (if still preserved). It appears that St.Gerome probably faced the same difficulty of how would acacia not burn, so he waved it away by declaring "shittim" to be the tree of Paradise instead. The original source should be checked, of course, to validate this.
However, when coming to anchiton, it is not clear where the reference is made to any exact source or not (imo dicunt). It appears though as anchiton is not shittim, but another tree (aliud genus ligni), mentioned only by way of comparison.
There are however examples, as Searcher finds out in a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. of sources where in the same context the stuff is called not "anchiton" but "amianton". To these we will turn next.
In the book You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by one Fransisco Ortiz, 1549, the following passage is given (folio 44):
Quote:Qui enim verbo aut exemplo peccatores convertit, quasi dens Christi est, quo illius atteritur cibus. At veri servi Dei si transeunt per ignem & aquam, immo tanquam aurum puriores redduntur in fornace tribulationis. Ideo comparantur lignis sethin, ex quibus in exodo iussit deus fieri altare, illa enim ut dicit Lira, erant incremabilia, quod requirebatur, quia ignis semper erat in altari. Ideo Hieronymus ait, Altaris ligna, quae de lignis paradisi sunt, non cremantur igne vicino: sed puriora redduntur. Nec mirum hoc credere, cum etiam anchiton ligni genus vel ligno simile, quanto plus arserit, tanto mundius inveniatur. Haec Hieronymus: & habentur in glosa ordínaria. Et haec sat sit de ornamento pallii, dixísse obiter, cuius si anima non obliviscatur, utique nec Christi obliviscetur.
In another book of 1591, by a certain Dominicus Banjes, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (the book must have been selling well, because there is also the 1602 edition), we find this (p. 352-353):
Quote:Elementum ignis poterat ornari sicut caetera elementa: & tamen non ornatur vel distinguitur in aliquo praedictorum dierum, ergo non sufficiunt illi septem dies. Probatur maior: quoniam multa sunt corpora mixta quae in igne conservari possunt, ut narrat Augustin, libro 1, de mirabilibus sacrae scripturae capit. 16 & Diu.Hieronym. super Ezechielem capit.41, esse naturam cuiusdam virgulti coloris linei, qualis (inquit Augustin) erat rubus, de quo dicitur Exodi capit. 3, quod dum arderet non comburebatur, imo quanto plus ardebat, purior erat. Hoc ipsum docent Beda, & glossa ordinaria Exodi 27 in illud; sùbter arulam, & Lyra in principio illius capitis. Et de huiusmodi lignis, quae, ex sententia Hieronymi putantur esse de lignis paradisi, censetur esse constructum altare holocausti, ne à vicino igne eius structura concremaretur. Imo dicunt esse aliud genus ligni, quod dicitur Anchiton: quod quidem quanto plus arserit, tanto mundius evadit. Quotidiana etiam experientia docet aurum igne non consumi, sed potius purificari. Salamandra etiam non solum ab igne non leditur, sed etiam ipsum extinguit, sicut docet Nazianzenus. Et Pierius libro 16. capit. de Salamandra titulo Amoris constantia, citat autores multos dicentes ésse in rerum natura bestiolam quandam paulò maioré grandi musca, quam alii Pyraslim, alii Pyraustam, alii Flamidem, alii Nitedulam, Graeci Lampridem vocaverunt: quæ in medio igne nata, per ignem salit & inambulat, quod in Cypro insula tradunt videri in fornacibus aeräriis, ubi Calchites lapis diebus pluribus concrematur. Et illud maxime admirandum, quod cum primum volatu paululum a flammis abscesserit, emoritur. Ergo cum huiusmodi animalia possint in igne vivere, & ipsum ornare: oportebat, ut dies peculiaris huic ornatui designaretur.
A translation of this would also be welcome, but we see that this author is more elaborate and tells us that not all things are consumed by fire. He mentions Exodus 3 where a bush is burning not consumed by fire, and also mentions salamander and some fly of Cyprus.
Both authors refer to the tabernacle and altar of Exodus, the second author being more specific in his references which would enable us to consult those (if still preserved). It appears that St.Gerome probably faced the same difficulty of how would acacia not burn, so he waved it away by declaring "shittim" to be the tree of Paradise instead. The original source should be checked, of course, to validate this.
However, when coming to anchiton, it is not clear where the reference is made to any exact source or not (imo dicunt). It appears though as anchiton is not shittim, but another tree (aliud genus ligni), mentioned only by way of comparison.
There are however examples, as Searcher finds out in a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. of sources where in the same context the stuff is called not "anchiton" but "amianton". To these we will turn next.