254 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



73. The errors continue -.je suis affiige pour tot, o roi, {voyant) quelle 

 fin f attend [^176, z]. But the words are, knarhtek ephae , ' thou m^^ 

 repent at the end,' cf. Prov. xx. 25 ; xxv. 8 for the use of r-hte -f , 

 &c., which it is evident M. Bouriant does not know, for he renders 

 the next clause Vinutilite de ta gloire , but it is tek-mntreff htef , 

 from the same root, meaning, " thy [repenter-ship-ness =] penitence". 



74. The quotation from Ps. cxiii. 4 [12] sqq. is not rightly given 

 [174, x], neeidolon ne nhethnos hn hat hi nwb ne hnhbeue 

 ne ncij nrome, les idoles des gentils qui sont d''or et d^argent sont 

 Vceuvre de la main des hommes. What is to be said of the three ne he 

 has edited ? "Whence has he his qui'^ The first ne should be joined 

 on with the following word, and the second ne is the copula, oblite- 

 rating his qui. 



And then again: eueerteuhe nci pentautamiow , which 

 means, "they who have made them shall he lihe them^\ is thus 

 rendered, elles sont par eilles a ceux qui les ont faites\^.~\ 



And why are ne mmwng [175,4] separated? What does he 

 suppose ne is here? 



75. The following lines are also wrong [176, g], for he renders 

 netko nteuhae haeiatw nwoeis nim, by ceux qui passent leur vie 

 d mediter constamment. M. Bouriant does not understand the words of 

 his text, which mean, ' ' those who at all times keep their end in their 

 view'\ teu-hae ha eiat-w. He was not speaking of 'thinkers', 

 but of 'those whose thoughts ever dwell on death'. He must have 

 read teu - ahe , ' their life', in utter ignorance apparently that ahe , 

 'life', is masculine] 



76. It is a mere detail, but not without interest, to see how 

 M. Bouriant deals with the Coptic word for ' to make naked'. Thus 

 [177,5] I16 has etreu-kakf aheu ; at [181, 4] he has ef-kek 

 aheu ; at [195 z] mn wkok aheu; from which we may infer that 

 aheu was an entity with him. But then, tvhat were kakf and kek 

 supposed to be ? 



77. But of course it is just the inattention to this kind of small 

 detail, which leads up to the grave defects which are so patent in 

 M. Bouriant's work. What would be thought of a historian, using 

 the foreign languages he has to study and is supposed to have 

 mastered, in anything like the following way ? 



Diocletien irrite voulait donner %in dementi a Victor, mais se souve- 

 nant de la compagnie dans laqxielle il avait vectc avee son pere, ou plutot 

 de la sollicitude avec laquelle Dieu avait veille sur lui, {il imagina) de 



