In this article I suggest that at 122a27-8 we should emend μήτ’ αὐξήσεως μήτ’ μειώσεως to μήτ’ αὐξήσεως μήτ’ ἀλλοιώσεως. This although μείωσις, the opposite of αὔξησις, seems to be quite natural here. My reasons for this emendation are complex, and involve a discussion, with many quotations from Aristotle and from Alexander of Aphrodisias as testimonies for the various points I make. Much of my discusuon also helps in sorting out some details in Aristotle's discussions of κίνησις of various sorts, and is directed at students who have paid much attention to the Physics in the original Greek.

This is the most puzzling piece of the so-called Corpus Pseudo-Iustini.'It opens with and closes with ' ( = 3:15; Heb 13:25).1 2 Back in 1881, Adolf Har nack suggested that an unknown Justin (not Justin Martyr) may be the author of the Epistle.3In his turn, in 1896 Pierre Batiffol suggested Sisinnius, a Novatian bishop of Constantinople and adversary of John Chrysostom (t 407), as its author.4But both suggestions are only a shot in the dark.I have argued elsewhere5 that the Epistle is a forgery, a , an idle exercise in Christian rhetoric.Its author proves to be a mediocre rhetorician stitching together a quilt (or a cento) consisting of Christian, Stoic and Cynic commonplaces in Ethics.Among his many sources the lion's share belongs to Clement of Alexandria (particularly his Paedagogus, Book 2).6That means that Zenas, Serenus and Papas (1.4) existed only in the author's imagination.And if the inscription in A is authentic ( ... ), it 1On this Corpus compare Christoph Riedweg in Reallexikon f Antike u.

It was formerly assumed that Judaism ceased to relate to Graeco-Roman society after the destruction of the Temple in 70 and the banning of Jews from Jerusalem after Bar Kochba's defeat in 135.'Hated and despised by the world, Israel turned in on herself.Perishuth, "unsociability", became a social requirement', Ernest Renan had written.* 1 Harnack wrote in 1908: 'It seems to me unquestionable that Judaism henceforth slackened her tie with Hellenism, in order to drop it alto gether as time went on.'2 Louis Duchesne wrote in 1909: 'The day of liberal Jews who coquetted with Hellenism and with the government was past and gone for good.There was no longer any reason to stand well with other nations ... The Jews retired within themselves.'3During this century, scholars have come to recognise that Judaism after 135 won standing in pagan society and found ways of sharing in its culture, attracted sympathizers and achieved credit with the Roman authorities on which it could draw even after Christianity became established in 312.Historians, above all Marcel Simon,4 have constructed a new picture from the evidence of the Church Fathers and the Mishnah and Talmud.Recent archaeological discoveries have enriched it further.But among non-specialists, the old arguments for an inwardlooking Judaism after 135 linger.In this essay, after some words about the set ting, I shall try to answer them in the light of modem knowledge, and conclude by attempting to put into perspective the hostility between Christians and Jews under the Christian emperors.5