Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Interesting. Didn't Porphyry refute the authorship of some book ascribed to Zoroaster? It's not in Eunapius, tho, so I'm not sure how I know this.

Originally Posted by PORPHYRY

Eubulus, who wrote the history of Mithra, in a treatise consisting of many books. In this work he says, that the first and most learned class of the Magi neither eat nor slay any thing animated, but adhere to the ancient abstinence from animals. The second class use some animals indeed [for food], but do not slay any that are tame. Nor do those of the third class, similarly with other men, lay their hands on all animals. For the dogma with all of them which ranks as the first is this, that there is a transmigration of souls; and this they also appear to indicate in the mysteries of Mithra. For in these mysteries, obscurely signifying our having something in common with brutes, they are accustomed to call us by the names of different animals. Thus they denominate the males who participate in the same mysteries lions, but the females lionesses, and those who are ministrant to these rites crows. With respect to their fathers also, they adopt the same mode. For these are denominated by them eagles and hawks. And he who is initiated in the Leontic mysteries, is invested with all-various forms of animals; of which particulars, Pallas, in his treatise concerning Mithra, assigning the cause, says, that it is the common opinion that these things are to be referred to the circle of the zodiac, but that truly and accurately speaking, they obscurely signify something pertaining to human souls, which, according to the Persians, are invested with bodies of all-various forms

Originally Posted by gstafleu

.... que precisement ces elements
sous figures dans les representations
mithriaques du banquet et qu'on
etablis-
sais un(e?)
relation
mystique entre les
stoicheia
tou kos-
mou et
le ban-quet sa
cre' (e-accent aigu)

Originally Posted by gstafleu

My stab at the scribbles

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

According to this site (from The Coptic Encyclopedia, vol. 1, 1991 ), the page on which the second quote appears is in Abuū al-Majd's Commentary on the Creed:

"Furthermore, the Mingana Syriac 481 (Western garshūnī, A.D. 1689, fols. 221v-25v) appears to contain a fragment of this commentary (d. cols. 586 and 889 of the Mingana catalog, Vol. 1)."

"At the article "he was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary," Abū al-Majdalūs' Commentary cites several messianic witnesses from among pagan philosophers: the Kitāb al-Asrār attributed to Plato (cf. Graf, Vol. 1, p. 486, sec. 3); the Kitāb al-'Ulūm al-'Ulwiyyah and the Letter to Alexander attributed to Aristotle (cf. Graf, Vol. 1, p. 485, sec. 4); the 'Ilm al-Tanjīm attributed to the philosopher Augustus (cf. Graf, Vol. I, pp. 485, sec. 3, and 486, sec. 4); and a text attributed to a certain Yūniyūn or Yūthiyūn, depending upon the manuscripts, as yet unidentified."

"Abū al-Majd's Commentary was published in 1940 by Constantine Bacha, in Volume 7 of Al-Risālah al-Mukhallisiiyyah in several issues, and reedited the same year in a small fascicule of thirty-five pages. "

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

When I can next go to CUL I will look again at the Mingana catalogue and see what the other manuscript is and contains, and see about obtaining a copy of the second text which Cumont was told about.