THE CHARACTER AND HISTORY OF
PELAGIUS’ COMMENTARY ON THE
EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL
**
BY PROFESSOR A. SOUTER
Read March 15, 1916
NINE years ago, when last I had the honour to address the Academy, 1 I chose as my subject, ‘ The Commentary of Pelagius on the Epistles of Paul : The Problem of its Restoration ‘. In that lecture I endeavoured to sketch the history of the attempts to recover the lost commentary of Pelagius, the oldest extant book by a British author, and called attention to the anonymous MS., no. CXIX, of the Reichenau collection in the Grand-Ducal Library at Karlsruhe, which I claimed to be the only known example of the work in its original form. I also argued that it was the Vulgate text of the epistles that was employed by the author as the basis of his commentary, and suggested that this Reichenau MS. might thus be the best surviving authority for that text. It was at the same time my good fortune to prove for the first time that the related commentary, printed under the name of Primasius, was none other than the revision of the Pelagius commentary, which Cassiodorus and his pupils prepared. The lecture dealt also with other matters, which need not now be referred to.
Souter. The character and history of Pelagius’ Commentary on the Epistles of St. Paul [1916].