[Footnote 6: From here to the end of the section on p. 479 Cr., is a copy from Sextus Empiricus’ work, _Adversus Physicos_, c. 10. So close is this that we are able by its aid to correct by it the faulty text of Sextus, and _vice versâ_. Sextus, as a sceptic, was of course as much opposed to the study of nature as Hippolytus, and was therefore only interested in showing the discrepancies among its teachers. But how does this make the quotation from him an “epitome”?] [Footnote 7: Not mentioned in Book I.] [Footnote 8: Karsten, VIII, p. 45.] [Footnote 9: _Il._, XIV, 201.] [Footnote 10: _Il._, VII, 99.] [Footnote 11: Karsten, IX, p. 49.] [Footnote 12: Said to be a quotation from Euripides’ _Hymns_.] [Footnote 13: Not mentioned in Book I.] [Footnote 14: Cf. pp. 83, 84 _supra_.] [Footnote 15: Not mentioned in Book I.] [Footnote 16: Not mentioned in Book I.] [Footnote 17: φυσιολογία.] [Footnote 18: Cf. p. 371 Cr.] [Footnote 19: In this chapter on the Naassenes, Hippolytus may be supposed to have had before him either the whole of Book V or the notes from which it was written. We may see, therefore, from this, what his idea of an epitome is. He does not try to condense his former statements so as to give us a bird’s-eye view of the whole heresy, but picks out from them a few sentences which seem to him of special importance. Hence it is only useful to us as a means of checking the text, and brings us no nearer to an appreciation of the doctrines of the sect.] [Footnote 20: Cf. Vol. I, p. 69 _supra_, where this Ademes is called Akembes and both he and Euphrates are mentioned as astrologers only. In Vol. I, p. 149 also the order is reversed and Ademes is called Celbes. Theodoret, _Haer. Fab._, I, 17, quotes this chapter almost _verbatim_, thereby showing that it was Book X and not Book V which he copied.] [Footnote 21: Words in ( ) added from Theodoret, _ubi cit._] [Footnote 22: Cf. Vol. I, pp. 146-148 _supra_, which this chapter follows closely.] [Footnote 23: Words in ( ) added from Vol. I, p. 161 _supra_. Nearly four lines are wanting here which can be filled from the page quoted.] [Footnote 24: Throughout this chapter, the summarizer copies closely the former account of the Sethians, for which see Vol. I, pp. 160-169 _supra_. I have not thought it worth while to draw attention to the slight differences in readings, but it is plain that the meaning in both cases was as obscure to the summarizer as it is to us.] [Footnote 25: φρόνησις. This is evidently taken from the account of Simon’s doctrine in Book VI, c. 12 (p. 6 _supra_), which says that the unseen parts of the fire have φρόνησις “and a share of mind,” without mention of the seen parts. The rest of this chapter, with the exception of the last sentence attributing supreme power to Simon, is substantially, but not exactly word for word, identical with c. 12 of Book VI. Cf. pp. 247, 250 and 259 Cr.]