«О душе»

In the treatise presented to the reader's attention, Tertullian tries to refute the teaching of ancient philosophers about the human soul 100. In particular, he argues that it is derived from the soul of Adam, which God breathed into him, and does not move from one person to another. The latter point of view was close to the great Alexandrian Origen. In his essay “On Principles,” he wrote: “Those beings who fell from the state of initial bliss, but at the same time did not fall incurably, are subject to the order and management of the holy and blessed ranks; taking advantage of their help and being corrected under the influence of saving instructions and teachings, they can return and be placed in the state of their bliss. It is from these beings that this real order of the human race consists, which in the next century or in subsequent centuries will be restored to the unity that the Lord Jesus promises” (I 6, 2) 101. Apparently, in the era of Tertullian there was no opinion that God creates the soul at the moment of conception, and the words of Jesus Christ “My Father works until now, and I work” (John 5:17) were not associated in the minds of the first Christians with the problem of the origin of the soul. Tertullian's polemic against philosophers reflects the contradiction between two worldviews, two religious paradigms: the Judeo-Christian belief in creation ex nihilo and the pagan belief in the cyclical development of humanity and the eternity of matter. It should be noted that Tertullian in this matter was a more consistent supporter of Judeo-Christianity than the Hellenized Origen and Clement of Alexandria. Early Christian authors can be divided into two categories. One group includes writers of the church-speculative direction, who are tolerant of ancient culture; this is, first of all, Justin, Clement of Alexandria, and partly Athenagoras. To the other - irreconcilable enemies (at least in words) of everything pagan, including art and philosophy; these are Tatian, Theophilus of Antioch and Tertullian. According to A. A. Stolyarov, Tertullian in his spirit “represents the radical direction of Christianity, which reduced cultural dialogue to an inevitable minimum” 102. Comparing different apologists, V.V. Bychkov writes: “In Justin and Athenagoras, God appears as the artist of the world in an almost stoic sense. He organizes and decorates pre-existing matter. Only Tatian and Theophilus in the East, and Tertullian in the West, consciously raise the question of special divine creativity - “out of nothing” 103. Apparently, this commitment to creationism made these writers especially hostile to ancient culture. Tertullian “was not too keen on the allegorical interpretation of biblical texts. Unlike the Alexandrians, he constantly emphasized that they have first of all a literal and then an allegorical meaning” 104. According to A. A. Stolyarov, the Latin apologist used the method of allegorical interpretation “more out of necessity than out of preference” 105. The desire for a literal reading of biblical passages is also characteristic of the treatise “On the Soul”. Tertullian argued that in every person there is a “branch” (tradux) (cf.: On the soul, 36, 4) of the soul of Adam, from which “all this abundance of souls comes” (27, 9), because the seed of the flesh is inseparable from the seed of the soul (27, 4). Tertullian’s “traditionism” is manifested not only in his doctrine of the human soul, which he compares to a cutting from a trunk (19:6), but also in his belief that the seeds of bodies at the resurrection will become teeth. In the 42nd chapter of the essay “On the Resurrection of the Dead” (7–8), Tertullian writes: “But let it be known to you that the bodies of the most ancient giants were not consumed, for their skeletons still exist. We have already said this elsewhere. But even recently, when in this city, while laying the foundation for the odeon 106, the most ancient tombs were sacrilegiously damaged, the people were in awe of the almost five-hundred-year-old bones, still wet, and hair that had not lost its smell. It is known that not only the bones are preserved intact, but also the teeth do not deteriorate, for they represent the seeds of the body that will grow from them in the resurrection (constat non tantum ossa durare verum et dentes incorruptos perennare, quae ut semina retinentur fruticaturi 107 corporis in resurrectione)” 108 (Translated by A. A. Stolyarov). Here Tertullian does not refer to the words of the Bible 109. His version of the method of resurrection of the flesh is by no means canonical 110. The use of the verb fruticāre is curious: “to put out branches”, “to give shoots” 111. In Greek, “branch”, “branch” is ὄξος, while “tooth” is ὀδούς. It is possible that Tertullian’s choice of the word fruticāre when talking about the growth of a body from teeth was influenced by the phonetic similarity between the Greek words “branch” and “tooth” 112. Tertullian’s version is also not entirely canonical from the point of view of pagan writers and poets, according to which the seeds for the Spartans were not their own teeth, but the teeth of the dragon killed by Cadmus 113. Tertullian not only gradually turns this myth into a real fact, but also expands it, speaking about the teeth of all people. Based on the words of the essay “On the Resurrection of the Dead” (42, 8), the following conclusion can be drawn. Although, unlike such authors as Justin and Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian does not allow the idea of ​​​​the existence of truth in pagan literature independent of the Bible, in this place he, not to mention the “plagiarism” of demons or poets, quietly uses the idea of ​​​​the myth of the Spartans to prove Christian teaching. Here we encounter one of those rare cases where he gives new meaning to old myths. Another such case can be considered his statement about the stones in the heads of snakes (On Women's Attire, 16, 2–3) 114. Here we are again faced with a statement of a mythological, even fairy-tale nature 115. According to Tertullian, God created human flesh on the sixth day and breathed into it the breath of life. The descendants of Adam and Eve, along with their flesh, receive from their forefathers their souls, which after death leave their bodies in order to later reunite with him, rising from the teeth, like a phoenix from the ashes (cf.: On the Resurrection of the Dead, 13, 1–4). To paraphrase the philosopher Seneca, who said of God “semel iubet, semper paret” (“once commands, always obeys”), the point of view of the Carthaginian apologist can be formulated as follows: “Deus semel creat, semper tradit” (“God once creates, always transmits”). A curious “trichotomy” in Tertullian’s teaching on the soul is observed in the eleventh chapter (3–6), where we are talking about the addition of a spirit from God or from the devil to the human soul: here Tertullian follows the Apostle Paul, who distinguished spirit, soul and body in man (1 Sol. 5:23). The treatise “On the Soul” was written during the “Montanist” period of Tertullian’s work. In addition to Montanist influences (for example, the ninth chapter talks about prophecy after John), the treatise is permeated with Stoic ideas (for example, that the soul is a body of its kind [9, 1]). Despite many unorthodox positions, and perhaps precisely because of them, it is of great interest to all those interested in the history of early Christianity, when, in the fight against erroneous opinions, church teaching about man, the human soul, the world and God was born. Scholars who have studied Tertullian's work talk about the difficulty of determining his sources. There are several reasons for this: firstly, he willingly took second-hand quotations 116 ; secondly, he very often did not refer to the cited literature; thirdly, many of the works that he used are lost today 117. In addition, everything that he borrowed, he thoroughly processed, putting his extensive knowledge at the service of a practical goal 118. Like other experienced rhetoricians, Tertullian selected the necessary material from several main sources, while making extensive use of secondary ones (reference books, doxographs, etc.) 119 . One more reason should be added to this list: Tertullian sometimes gave incorrect indications of his source 120. Tertullian's writings contain seven direct quotations from Greek literature and 26 from Roman literature 121 . However, Greek pagan authors are mentioned much more often by Tertullian than Latin ones, and prose writers are mentioned more often than poets. He names eight Greek epic and lyric poets and playwrights (24 mentions in total) and four Roman poets who wrote in hexameters. At the same time, Ennius is named twice, Lucretius, Virgil and Ovid - once each. Also rarely does an apologist mention dramatic poets: the tragedian Pacuvius, the comedian Novius, the mimographer Laberius, the compiler of centons Hosidius Geta 122. The small number of direct quotations containing complete verse is explained either by the fact that Tertullian strictly followed the rule of style (die Stilregel), which did not allow the inclusion of verse in skillfully composed prose (in der kunstmässigen Prosa) 123, or by the fact that the apologist “consciously distanced himself from all pagan literature” 124. Despite the fact that Tertullian declared the gulf between Christianity and pagan culture, between Jerusalem and Athens, 125 he often used even the names of the pagan gods and heroes he hated as ordinary rhetorical examples. Therefore, one can hardly talk about his intention to abandon everything created by ancient prose writers and poets. It seems more plausible that it was the desire to follow the best prose models that forced him to avoid long verbatim quotations. On the pages of Tertullian's works there are references to dozens of authors. He did not read the works of all of them directly. Let us consider only those of his sources to which he could turn while working on the treatise “On the Soul”. Tertullian, who received a good education, could and should have used the works of the writers who preceded him. Firstly, in these writings he found the information he needed. Secondly, with references to famous authors, he added weight to his judgments, made them understandable to readers, and at the same time refuted the thesis about the lack of education of Christians. The main source for the essay “On the Soul” is considered to be the works of the physician Soranus from Ephesus 127. In addition to the name of Soran, on the pages of the said treatise we find about a hundred names of other writers (philosophers, historians, poets, doctors 128, heretics 129, magicians 130). The links to most of them are “blind”. For example, in chapter 46, Tertullian refers to numerous authors who wrote about prophetic dreams: Herodotus, Charon of Lampsacus (4), Ephorus (5), Heraclides, Euphorion, Strabo, Callisthenes (6). We have the right to doubt that he read them all directly: it is unlikely that the impatient Carthaginian spent time searching for the necessary information in the books of different writers instead of using one person who had already done the work before him to systematize everything related to dreams and dreams. Below, Tertullian refers to the Vitellian Notes (46, 7), as well as to Artemon, Antiphon, Strato, Philochorus, Epicharmus, Serapion, Cratippus, Dionysius of Rhodes and Hermippus (46, 10) as those who confirm the existence of prophetic dreams. According to M. von Albrecht, the doctrine of sleep presented in Chapter 46 was created under the influence of Hermippus from Beritus 131. Tertullian writes: “You will learn more than enough about other oracles, about their foundation, rituals and people who described the oracles, about the entire history of dreams in the five volumes of Hermippus of Berita” (46, 11). Did Tertullian look at Homer's original text when writing his treatise On the Soul? In the 46th chapter (46, 2) he notes: “Homer singled out two gates for dreams, horny for truth, ivory for deception; they say that you can look through the horn, but ivory is solid.” The presence of the word “they say” (inquiunt) suggests that Tertullian in this case borrowed this information in some commentary on Homer (Odyssey, XIX 562–567) or simply gleaned it from Hermippus of Berita. The same can probably be said regarding Homer’s exegesis (On the soul, 56, 2 cf.: Iliad, XXIII 59–92): “They believe that the souls of the unburied are not brought down to the underworld before they receive what is due, as was the case with Homer’s Patroclus, who in his dreams demanded burial from Achilles, since otherwise he could not enter the gates the underworld, as he is driven away by the souls of the buried. We see here not only the freedom of Homer, but also his piety. After all, he, having paid attention to the care of the burial, also condemned its delay as unfair in relation to souls, so that no one, keeping the deceased at home, would languish with him more because of the abnormal consolation that is fueled by grief. For this purpose, Homer invented the complaints of the unburied soul, so that the timeliness of burial and honoring of bodies would be observed and so that the memory of experiences would be dulled.” Tertullian refers to Herodotus in three places (46, 4; 49, 2; 57,10) 132 of the treatise under consideration. In all these cases, information about Herodotus is drawn from an unsurvived book about the dreams of Hermippus of Berita 133. In chapter 44, Tertullian states: “Suetonius denies that Nero ever saw dreams, and Theopompus denies that Thrasymedes, unless Nero saw them at the end of his life after his fears” 134. Suetonius Tertullian no doubt read 135. As for Theopompus, the Latin apologist refers to this historian in the essay “Against Hermogenes” (25, 5), saying that everyone knows that “earth” is the name of one of the elements, “since it is taught, firstly, by nature, and secondly by Scripture, unless one must believe that Silenus who proved to King Midas the existence of another world, as Theopompus writes 136. But he also talks about many gods.” In the essays “On the Cloak” (2, 1) and “On the Soul” (2, 3), Tertullian also uses the myth of the captured Silenus talking with Midas. However, based on these passages, we cannot say with certainty that Tertullian used the original text of Theopompus and did not use compendiums or reference books. In the essay “On the Soul” Tertullian names Ennius only once 137: in the 33rd chapter he writes: “Homer remembered himself as a peacock, as Ennius saw in a dream; but I won’t even believe the poets who are awake.” Tertullian also speaks about the infusion of Homer’s soul into the peacock in other places (On the soul, 34, 1; On the resurrection of the dead, 1, 5). Based on this passage, it is impossible to conclude that Tertullian was familiar with the text of Ennius himself: Ennius’s dream was a kind of “common place” in Latin literature 138 . In the 20th chapter of the treatise “On the Soul” we read: “Comedians mock the fearful Phrygians, Sallust condemns the vain Moors and wild Dalmatians; Even the apostle condemns the lying Cretans” (3). Tertullian could not obtain this complete information about the authors of (Greek?) comedies, the Roman historian Sallust and the Apostle Paul either from the Greek apologists who wrote him earlier, or from the Latin pagan writers. We have the right to assume his independence in the selection of this material. Sometimes Tertullian refers to his source without naming it. In chapter 25 he mentions the “ancient astrologers” (9). In addition, he refers to civil law (ius civile) (6, 8 and 38, 1). Which works of the philosophers he mentioned did Tertullian read directly, and which ones was he familiar with through reference books, compendia and commentaries? 139 Tertullian probably did not read those ancient philosophers whom he mentioned, without singling them out in any way, only once along with others. These are [1] Eubulus (named along with Critolaus, Xenocrates, Plato and Aristotle - 5, 1), [2] Hipparchus, Hippo and Critias (named along with Heraclitus, Thales, Empedocles, Epicurus, Critolaus - 5, 2), [3] Anaximenes (named along with Aenesidemus, Heraclitus and Heraclides Pontic - 9, 5), [4] Apollophanes and Panetius (named along with Plato, Zeno, Aristotle, Soranus, Chrysippus and especially noted Posidonius -14, 2), [5] Xenophanes and Parmenides (named along with Anaxagoras, Empedocles, Strato, Democritus, Aristotle - 43, 2). Based on the words (12, 2–3): “Oh, how confused is the thought of Anaxagoras! For, having thought that the mind is the beginning of everything, 140 suspending the swing of the universe on its axis and asserting that it is pure, simple and unmixed, mainly on this basis removes it from mixing with the soul, but, however, declares it in another place to be the soul. This inconsistency was also noted by Aristotle” - it can be assumed that Tertullian here, as usual, used some kind of reference book, and did not extract this information from the works of Stagirites or Anaxagoras himself. There are two points of view on the nature of Tertullian’s borrowings from Plato: they are considered either direct 141 or indirect 142. At the same time, scientists do not deny the apologist’s familiarity with the works of the Greek philosopher 143. It is curious that the name of Plato appears in the treatise more often than the name of Christ. Tertullian mainly refers to the dialogues “Phaedo”, “Phaedrus”, “Timaeus” 144. Quite often Tertullian also mentions Aristotle 145. In particular, in chapter 46 (10) he ridicules this philosopher as the author of the statement that Saturn was the first of all to see dreams: “I will laugh, perhaps, only at one of them who imagined that he would prove that Saturn was the first of all to see dreams, unless Saturn lived before everyone else. Aristotle, excuse the laugher.” It is possible that in this case we are talking about a work attributed to Stagirites in the time of Tertullian. In the treatise “On the Soul” we find several direct quotes. In addition to Plato, Tertullian quotes Lucretius (On the Nature of Things, I 304) (5, 6), Epicharmus (18, 1), Seneca (20, 1 and 42, 2), Epicurus (42, 1). The reference made from memory or taken from Soranus in chapter 15 to the verse “either Orpheus or Empedocles” suggests that other direct quotes could have been borrowed by Tertullian from intermediaries. In the 2nd chapter he quotes Heraclitus, in the 24th - Cicero, in the 32nd - Empedocles, in the 33rd - Hermes Trismegistus. In chapter 51, Tertullian refers to the observations of Democritus. Perhaps the author of the treatise “On the Soul” was familiar with the text of Plato’s commentator Albinus 146. The treatise briefly outlines individual provisions of the teachings of Zeno (chapter 5), Cleanthes (chapter 5 and 25), Chrysippus (chapter 5), Empedocles (chapter 8 and 20), Posidonius (chapter 14), Arius (chapter 54 and 55), references to Critolaus, Heraclides of Pontus, Strato, Thales, Aenesidemus. I sincerely thank Prof. Valery Semenovich Durov, head of the Department of Classical Philology at St. Petersburg State University, for his assistance in preparing the publication. Valery Semenovich checked my translation, pointed out errors and inaccuracies, and offered his understanding of many complex parts of the Latin text. Translation based on the edition: Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina II. Q. S. F. Tertuliani opera. Pars II. Opera Montanistica. Turnholti: Typographi Brepols, 1954 (Cura et studio J. H. Waszink). According to T. D. Barnes, “the treatise On the Soul is intended to destroy the psychological theories underlying several Gnostic systems” (Barnes T. D. Tertullian: a historical and literary study. 2nd edition. Oxford, 1985. P. 206). The translation was published by the Kazan Theological Academy in 1899. Stolyarov A. A. Tertullian. Epoch. Life. Teaching // Tertullian. Selected works: trans. from lat. / General ed. and comp. A. A. Stolyarova. M., 1994. P. 11. Bychkov V.V. Aesthetics of the Church Fathers. P. 191. W. Friend calls Tertullian a Western counterpart of Tatian [Frend W. Martyrdom and persecution in the early Church. P. 285]. Bychkov V.V. Aesthetics of the Church Fathers. P. 244. Stolyarov A. A. Tertullian. P. 24. On Tertullian’s use of the allegorical method in interpreting biblical texts, see: Morgan J. The importance of Tertullian in the development of Christian dogma. P. 117–118. Odeum, a building dedicated to music competitions. On the Carthaginian Odeon, see: Noeldechen E. Das Odeum Karthagos und Tertullian’s Skorpiace. 212 // Zeitschrift für kirchliche Wissenschaft und kirchliches Leben. 1886. Heft. 2. S. 87–98. According to another reading, fructificaturi. Compare: Justin. Apology, I 19: “human bodies, decomposed and, like seeds, scattered into the ground, can at the right time, by the will of God, rise up and put on incorruption.” As, for example, in the 35th chapter of the same work: “In addition, it is said: So that of all that the Father has given Me, I should not lose anything (John 6:39), that is, not a hair, not an eye, not a tooth. Otherwise, where will there be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt. 8:12; Matt. 13:42, Matt. 13:50; Matt. 22:13; Matt. 24:51; Matt. 25:30; Luke 13:28), if not from the eyes and teeth, even when the body is cast into Gehenna and thrown into utter darkness, which causes special torment eyes" (Translated by N. Shaburov). Compare: Eze.37:7-8, Eze.37:10: “And when I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold, a movement, and bones began to come together, bone to bone. And I saw, and behold, sinews were on them, and flesh grew, and skin covered them from above, but there was no spirit in them. And I prophesied as He commanded me, and the spirit entered into them, and they lived and stood on their feet - a very, very great army"; 1 Corinthians 15:42–44: “It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption; sown in humiliation, raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in strength; the natural body is sown, the spiritual body is raised.” The verb fruticāre in Tertullian is also used in the essay “Against Hermogenes” (22, 1; 29, 5), where the book of Genesis is quoted (Gen. 1:11–12): “Fruticet, inquit, terra herbam foeni” (“The earth will produce grass, he says”). In the Vulgate, instead of the verb "fruticāre", the verb "germināre" is used. Compare: Plato. Cratylus, 418c: “And then instead of iota they began to insert epsilon or this, and instead of delta - zeta, as if for the sake of solemnity” (Translated by T.V. Vasilyeva.) See, for example: Euripides. Phoenician women, 657 ff., 818 ff.; Pausanias. Description of Hellas, IX 5, 3; Apollonius of Rhodes. Argonautics, III 1177–1180, 1183–1187; Apollodorus. Mythological Library, III 4, 1; Virgil. Georgics, II 140–142; Ovid. Metamorphoses, VII 121–129. Compare: Pliny the Elder. Natural History, XXXVII (57) 158: “Draconitis or Dracontias is formed from the brain of snakes, but due to the malice of an animal that senses death, the precious stone does not arise if the head is not cut off from the living; That’s why they cut it off from those who are sleeping.” See also: Philostratus. Life of Apollonius of Tyana, III 8. “A fairy tale sometimes tells that the hero finds diamonds or precious stones in the stomach or head of a snake and that the snake gives them to the hero” [Propp V. Ya. Historical roots of a fairy tale. 2nd ed. L., 1986. P. 231]. For example, quotations from Laberius, given in the essay “On the Cloak” (1, 3), are conveyed, according to M. von Albrecht, through grammar. See: Albrecht M. von. Geschichte der römischen Literatur. S. 1215. These three reasons are given by P. Monceau. See: Monceaux. Histoire littéraire de l’Afrique chrétienne. T. 1: Tertullien et les origines. Paris, 1901. P. 219. See: Nisters B. Tertullian. S. 61. Hagendahl H. Von Tertullian zu Cassiodor. S. 18. T. D. Barnes talks about Tertullian's use of handbooks or florilegia and compilations. See: Barnes T. D. Tertullian: a historical and literary study. 2nd ed. Oxford, 1985. P. 196. For example, in the first book of To the Gentiles (11:2) he says that Tacitus talks about the Jewish War in the fourth book of the History. Tertullian corrects this mistake of his in Apologetics (16, 2). He attributed the Epistle to the Hebrews to Barnabas (On modesty, 20, 1–5). There are many similar examples. See: Krause W. Die Stellung der frühchristlichen Autoren zur heidnischen Literatur. S. 174. Hagendahl H. Von Tertullian zu Cassiodor. S. 17–18. According to W. Krause, this is evidenced by the nature of quotations from Greek and Roman literature and the way they are presented [Krause W. Die Stellung der frühchristlichen Autoren zur heidnischen Literatur. S. 174]. See: On the prescription of heretics, 7, 9. See, for example: About the soul, 17, 9; 25, 8. Albrecht M. von. Geschichte der römischen Literatur. S. 1215. Information about the doctors Andrei (15, 2–3), Asclepiad (15, 2–3 and 6; 25, 5; 38, 1 [?]), Herophilus (10, 4 [?]; 15, 3 and 5; 25, 5), Hippocrates (15, 3 and 5; 25, 5), Diocles (15, 3; 17, 2[?]), Moschion (15, 5), Erasistrate (15, 3 and 5; 25, 5), as well as about Hykesia (25, 2 and 6) were probably learned by Tertullian from “Soranus himself” (15, 3; 25, 5; 6, 6 and 7; 8, 3; 14, 2; 44, 2). Tertullian speaks about his medical studies in the second chapter (6). Apparently, information about Dicaearchus, Plato, Strato, Epicurus, Democritus, Empedocles, Socrates, Aristotle, Xenocrates, Protagoras, Apollodorus, Chrysippus and the “verse of Orpheus or Empedocles” mentioned in the 15th chapter also goes back to Soranus. The treatise mentions Apelles, Valentinus, Hermogenes, Carpocrates, Marcion, Menander, Saturninus, and Simon. The presence among Tertullian’s works of the works “Against the Valentinians”, “Against Hermogenes”, “Against Marcion” proves that he knew the teachings of these heresiarchs well. Ostan, Typhon, Dardan, Damigeron, Nectabis and Berenice (57, 1). In the 57th chapter, in addition to Herodotus, “Heraclides or Nymphodorus” and Nikander are named. Information about all of them is obviously drawn from the compendium. Barnes T. D. Tertullian: a historical and literary study. P. 197. At the beginning of chapter 46 of Nero, Suetonius writes: “He was also frightened by obviously ominous dreams, fortune-telling and signs, both old and new. He had never dreamed before; and after the murder of his mother, he began to dream that he was steering a ship and the helm was eluding him” (Translated by M. L. Gasparov). Tertullian could not borrow information about Nero from Soranus (see: Barnes T. D. Tertullian: a historical and literary study. P. 198). Aelian writes about Silenus’ story to Midas about an unknown continent with reference to Theopompus in “Motley Tales” (III 18). In the essay “Against the Valentinians” (7, 1) we read: “The first of all Ennius, the Roman poet, artlessly declared the “greatest heavenly palaces” (caenacula maxima caeli), by the name of a high place or because he read in Homer about Jupiter who dined there” (cf.: On the Wreath, 13, 8: “Claudius will declare that even the sky in Homer’s songs crowned with stars (Iliad, XVIII 485), - of course, by God, of course, for man"). It is curious that in both cases when Tertullian mentions Ennius, he does so in connection with Homer. Horace (Epistle, II 1.50–52) and Persius (Satires, VI 9–11) wrote about Ennius’s dream. In the second chapter, Tertullian writes: “I am not ignorant of the abundance of material on this subject that philosophers have, considering also the number of their commentators.” It is very likely that he used the latter to extract the necessary information about most philosophers. According to T. D. Barnes, the stories and sayings of ancient philosophers used by Tertullian were widely distributed in compendia [Barnes T. D. Tertullian: a historical and literary study. P. 196]. Compare: Clement of Alexandria. Exhortation to the Pagans, 5, 66, 1: “Of those remaining philosophers who, having stepped over the elements, began to zealously explore something more sublime and extraordinary, some sang of the infinite, like Anaximander the Milesian, and Anaxagoras the Clazomenian, and the Athenian Archelaus; the last two placed the Mind above infinity.” Barnes believes that many passages in Tertullian's writings show his "direct acquaintance" with Plato's text. In particular, in the essay “On the Soul” (18, 1) Tertullian gives a fairly accurate quote from the Phaedo (65a-b) [Barnes T. D. Tertullian: a historical and literary study. P. 205]. Hagendahl admits that a person with Tertullian's knowledge of language and interest in philosophy read Plato's dialogues in the original. However, according to the scientist, the method of quoting and the anecdotal nature of the cited passages in most cases speak in favor of borrowing from secondary sources [Hagendahl N. Von Tertullian zu Cassiodor. S. 18]. According to M. von Albrecht, “Tertullian’s knowledge of literature often comes from second hand, but one can take into account his reading of Plato” [Albrecht M. von. Geschichte der römischen Literatur. S. 1215]. Cp.: Barnes T. D. Tertullian: a historical and literary study. P. 205. In the treatise “On the Soul,” Aristotle is quoted 12 times (Barnes T. D. Tertullian: a historical and literary study. P. 206, n. 2). T. D. Barnes writes: “Tertullian thoroughly adopted the late Platonism of Albinus (an older contemporary of Galen) and the Stoic ideas that had always prevailed in Latin intellectual circles” (Barnes T. D. Tertullian: a historical and literary study. P. 206). You might be interested in: