[49:3] [The author's mode of dealing with this pa.s.sage in his later editions is commented upon below, p. 191 sq. In the Complete Edition (1879) the words 'as elsewhere' still remain. The last sentence however, which survived ed. 6, is at length withdrawn, and with it the offending note.]

[50:1] _S.R._ II. pp. 374-379, 336-341.

[50:2] [On this matter see below, p. 191 sq.]

[51:1] _S.R._ II. p. 62.

[51:2] _S.R._ II. p. 66.

[52:1] [See below, p. 188 sq.]

[53:1] [See above, pp. 3 sq, 5 sq.]

[54:1] II. p. 328. In the quotations which follow, I have italicised some portions to show the difference of interpretation in the earlier and later editions.

[55:1] I see that it was pointed out in the _Inquirer_ of Nov. 7th [1874].

[55:2] [_S.R._ (ed. 4) 11. p. 326.]

[56:1] [_S.R._ (ed. 2) 11. p. 327.]

[57:1] [_S.R._ II. p. 330.]

[58:1] [_S.R._ II. p. 334. See above, p. 6.]

[59:1] [The Essay on the Ignatian Epistles represents the writer's views at the time when it was written. In the course of the Essay he has stated that at one time he had entertained misgivings about the seven Vossian letters. His maturer opinions establishing their genuineness will be found in his volumes on the _Apostolic Fathers_ Part II. S.

Ignatius, S. Polycarp, 1885 (London, Macmillan and Co.), to which he refers his readers.]

[60:1] _S.R._ i. p. 263.

[62:1] I. p. 269.

[62:2] I. p. 270.

[62:3] I. p. 274.

[63:1] I. p. 274.

[63:2] ['many' ed. 6 (I. p. 264); the reading 'most' is explained in the preface to that edition (p. xxvi) as a misprint.]

[63:3] I. p. 263 sq.

[64:1] _Die Ignatianischen Briefe etc., Eine Streitschrift gegen Herrn Bunsen_, Tubingen, 1848.

[64:2] _Apostelgeschichte_ p. 51. He declares himself 'ganz einverstanden' with Baur's view.

[64:3] _Apostol. Vater_ p. 189; _Zeitschrift_ (1874) p. 96 sq.

[64:4] _Meletemata Ignatiana_ (1861).

[64:5] _Die alt. Zeugn._ p. 50.

[64:6] _Evangelien_ (1870) p. 636.

[64:7] Volkmar himself, in the pa.s.sage to which the last note refers, supposes that the seven Epistles date about A.D. 170.

[64:8] For the earlier opinion of Lipsius, see _Aechtheit d. Syr.

Recens. d. Ign. Briefe_ p. 159; for his later opinion, _Hilgenfeld's Zeitschrift_ (1874), p. 211 sq.

[66:1] p. 142 (ed. 1862).

[66:2] The references in the case of Lipsius are to his earlier works, where he still maintains the priority and genuineness of the Curetonian letters.

[66:3] See Pearson's _Vindiciae Ignatianae_ p. 28 (ed. Churton).

[67:1] The reader will find the opinions of these writers given in Jacobson's _Patres Apostolici_ I. p. xxvii; or more fully in Pearson's _Vindiciae Ignatianae_ p. 27 sq, from whom Russel's excerpts, reprinted by Jacobson, are taken.

[67:2] [In his preface to ed. 6 (p. x.x.xiii) our author admits his error in the case of Rivet, whose name is struck out from the note on I. p.

260 in that edition.]

[69:1] See Jacobson _Patres Apostolici_ I. p. xlvi, where the pa.s.sage is given.

[69:2] [Our author (ed. 6, p. x.x.xv sq) falls foul of my criticism of his references. It is contrary to my purpose to reopen the question, but I confidently leave it to those who will examine the pa.s.sages for themselves to say whether he is justified in his inferences. He however 'gives up' Wotton and Weismann.]

[70:1] p. x.x.xiv (Reprint of 1858).

[70:2] _Fortnightly Review_, January, 1875, p. 9.

[71:1] He mentions an earlier edition of this Version printed at Constantinople in 1783, but had not seen it; _Corp. Ign._ p. xvi.

[72:1] I. p. 264.

[72:2] I. p. 265.

[73:1] The Roman Epistle indeed has been separated from its companions, and is imbedded in the Martyrology which stands at the end of this collection in the Latin Version, where doubtless it stood also in the Greek, before the MS of this latter was mutilated. Otherwise the Vossian Epistles come together, and are followed by the confessedly spurious Epistles in the Greek and Latin MSS. In the Armenian all the Vossian Epistles are together, and the confessedly spurious Epistles follow. See Zahn _Ignatius von Antiochien_ p. 111.

[73:2] I. p. 262.

[73:3] p. 164.

[73:4] Ign. _Rom._ 5, where the words [Greek: ego ginosko nun archomai mathetes einai] are found in Eusebius as in the Vossian Epistles, but are wanting in the Curetonian. There are other smaller differences.

[74:1] _S.R._ I. p. 269.

[74:2] _S.R._ I. p. 267.

[75:1] This objection is well discussed by Zahn _Ignatius von Antiochien_ p. 278 sq (1873), where our author's arguments are answered by antic.i.p.ation substantially as I have answered them in the text. I venture to call attention to this work (which does not appear yet to have attracted the notice of English writers) as the most important contribution to the Ignatian literature which has appeared since Cureton's publications introduced a new era in the controversy. Zahn defends the genuineness of the Vossian Epistles.

[76:1] Ruinart _Acta Martyrum Sincera_ p. 134 sq. (Ratisbon, 1859.)