variations, of which there are also both Greek and Latin texts. After a couple of centuries of discussion, critics almost without exception have finally agreed that the longer version is nothing more than an interpolated version of the shorter and more ancient form of the Epistles. The question regarding the authenticity of the Ignatian Epistles, however, was re-opened and complicated by the publication, in 1845, by Dr. Cureton, of a Syriac version of three epistles only-to Polycarp, to the Ephesians, and to the Romans-in a still shorter form, discovered amongst a large number of MSS. purchased by Dr. Tattam from the monks of the Desert of Nitria. These three Syriac epistles have been subjected to the severest scrutiny, and many of the ablest critics have pronounced them to be the only authentic Epistles of Ignatius, whilst others, who do not admit that even these are genuine letters emanating from Ignatius, still prefer them to the version of seven Greek epistles, and consider them the most ancient form of the letters which we possess.1 As early as the sixteenth century, however, the strongest doubts were expressed regarding the authenticity of any of the epistles ascribed to Ignatius. The Magdeburg Centuriators first attacked them, and Calvin declared

1 Bunsen, Ignatius v. Ant. u. s. Zeit, 1847; Die drei ächt. u. d. vier unächt. Br. des Ignat., 1847; Bleek, Einl. N. T., p. 145; Böhringer, K. G. in Biograph., 2 Aufl., p. 16; Cureton, The Ancient Syriac Version of Eps. of St. Ignatius, &c., 1845; Vindicia Ignat., 1846, Corpus Ignatianum, 1849; Ewald, Gesch. d. V. Isr., vii. p. 313; Lipsius, Aechtheit d. Syr. Recens. Ign. Br. in Illgen's Zeitschr. f. hist. Theol., 1856, H. i., 1857, Abhandl. d. deutsche-morgenl. Gesellschaft, i. 5, 1859, p. 7; Milman, Hist. of Chr., ii. p. 102; Ritschl, Entst. altk. Kirche, p. 403, anm.; Weiss, Reuter's Repertorium, Sept. 1852. It must be remembered that many critics, who had previously declared themselves in favour of the shorter Greek version of the seven Epistles, have not re-examined the subject since the discovery of the three Syriac Epistles, or have not expressed any further opinion, while many others had previously died.

them to be spurious,' an opinion fully shared by Chemnitz, Dallæus, and others, and similar doubts, more or less definite, were expressed throughout the seventeenth century, and onward to comparatively recent times,3 although the means of forming a judgment were not then so complete as now. That the epistles were interpolated there was no doubt. Fuller examination and more comprehensive knowledge of the subject have confirmed earlier doubts, and a large mass of critics recognize that the authenticity of none of these epistles can be established, and that they can only be considered later and spurious compositions.*

"Nihil næniis illis, quæ sub Ignatii nomine editæ sunt, putidius. Quo minus tolerabilis est eorum impudentia qui talibus larvis ad fallendum se instruunt." Instit. lib., i. 3.

2 By Bochartus, Aubertin, Blondel, Basnage, Casaubon, Cocus, Humfrey, Rivetus, Salmasius, Socinus (Faustus), Parker, Petau, &c., &c.; cf. Jacobson, Patr. Apost., i. p. xxv.; Cureton, Vindiciae Ignatianæ, 1846, appendix.

3 Wotton, Præf. Clem. R. Epp., 1718; J. Owen, Enquiry into original nature, &c., Evang. Church: Works, ed. Russel, 1826, vol. xx. p. 147; Oudin, Comm. de Script. Eccles. &c., 1722, p. 88; Lampe, Comm. analyt. ex Evang. Joan., 1724, i. p. 184; Lardner, Credibility, &c., Works, ii. p. 68 f.; Beausobre, Hist. Crit. de Manichée, &c., 1734, i. p. 378, note 3; Ernesti, N. Theol. Biblioth., 1761, ii. p. 489; Mosheim, de Rebus Christ., p. 159 f.; Weismann, Introd. in Memorab. Eccles., 1745, p. 137; Heumann, Conspect. Reipub. Lit., 1763, p. 492; Schroeckh, Chr. Kirchengesch., 1775, ii. p. 341; Griesbach, Opuscula Academ., 1824, i. p. 26; Rosenmüller, Hist. Interpr. Libr. Sacr. in Eccles., 1795, i. p. 116; Semler, Paraphr. in Epist. ii. Petri, 1784, Præf.; Kestner, Comm. de Eusebii H. E. condit., 1816, p. 63; Henke, Allg. Gesch. chr. Kirche, 1818, i. p. 96; Neander, K. G., 1843, ii. p. 1140, cf. i. p. 357, anm. 1; BaumgartenCrusius, Lehrb. chr. Dogmengesch., 1832, p. 83, cf. Comp. chr. Dogmengesch., 1840, p. 79; Niedner, Gesch. chr. K., p. 196; Thiersch, Die K. im ap. Zeit, p. 322; Hagenbach, K. G., i. p. 115 f.; cf. Cureton, Vind. Igr. append.; Ziegler, Versuch ein. prag. Gesch. d. kirchl. Verfassungs-formen, u. s. w., 1798, p. 16; J. E. C. Schmidt, Versuch üb. d. gedopp. Recens. d. Br. S. Ignat. in Henke's Mag. f. Rel. Phil., u. s. w., 1795; cf. Biblioth. f. Krit., u. s. w., N. T., i. p. 463 ff., Urspr. kath. Kirche, II. i. p. 1 f.; H'buch Chr. K. G., i. p. 200.

• Baur, Die sogenannt. Pastoralbr., p. 81 ff., Zeitschr. f. Theol., 1836, iii. p. 199 ff., 1838, iii. p. 148 ff.; Die Ignat. Br., p. 5 ff.; Gesch. chr.

1

Omitting for the present the so-called Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, the earliest reference to any of these epistles, or to Ignatius himself, is made by Irenæus, who quotes a passage which is found in the Epistle to the Romans (ch. iv.), without, however, any mention of name, introduced by the following words: “As a certain man of ours said, being condemned to the wild beasts on account of his testimony to God: ‘I am the wheat of God, and by the teeth of beasts I am ground, that I may be found pure bread.'" Origen likewise quotes two brief sentences which he refers to Ignatius. The first is merely: "But my love is crucified," which is likewise found in the Epistle to the Romans (ch. vii.); and the other quoted as "out of one of the Epistles" of the martyr Ignatius: "From the Prince of this world was concealed the virginity of Mary, ,"3 which is found in the Epistle to the Ephesians (ch. xix). Eusebius mentions seven epistles,* and quotes one passage from the Epistle to the Romans (ch. v.), and a few words from an apocryphal Gospel contained Kirche, 1863, i. p. 275 f., anm. 3; Vorles. Dogmengesch. I. i. p. 252; cf. Bleek, Einl. N. T., p. 145; Davidson, Introd. N. T., i. p. 19; Eichhorn, Einl. N. T., i. p. 142 f.; cf. Gfrörer, Allg. K. G., i. p. 302 f.; Harless, Comm. üb. Br. Pauli an d. Eph., 1834, p. xxxiv,; Hilgenfeld, Die ap, Väter, p. 187 ff., Der Paschastreit, 1860, p. 199; Hase, K. G. 5 Ausg., p. 70; Köstlin, Der Ursprung synopt. Evv., p. 126; Krabbe, Urspr. d. apost. Constit., p. 267; Lipsius, Verhältn. d. Textes d. drei Syr. Br., u. s. w., 1859; Ueber Ursprung u. d. ält. Gebrauch d. Christennamens, 1873, p. 7, anm.; Lechler, Das ap. u. nachap. Zeit., p. 521 f., anm. 2; Netz, Stud. u. Krit., 1835, p. 881 ff.; Rumpf, N. Rev. de Théol., 1867, p. 8; Réville, Le Lien, 1856, Nos. 18-22; Schliemann, Die Clementinen, p. 421, anm. 18; Scholten, Die ält. Zeugnisse, p. 40 ff., 50 ff.; Schwegler, Das nachap. Zeitalter, ii. p. 159 ff.; Volkmar, Der Ursprung, p. 52 ff.; Die Evangelien, p. 636; Zeller, Die Apostelgesch., p. 51, anm. 2.

1 Irenæus, Adv. Hær., v. 28, § 4; Eusebius, H. E., iii. 36. Lardner expresses a doubt whether this is a quotation at all.

Prolog. in Cantic. Canticor,

3 Hom. vi. in Lucam.

H. E., iii. 36.

in the Epistle to the Smyrnæans (ch. iii.), the source of which he says that he does not know, and he cites from Irenæus the brief quotation given above, and refers to the mention of the epistles in the letter of Polycarp which we reserve. It will be observed that all these quotations, with the exception of the last, are taken from the three Epistles which exist in the Syriac translation, and they are found in that version; and the first occasion on which any passage attributed to Ignatius is quoted which is not in the Syriac version of the three Epistles occurs in the second half of the fourth century, when Athanasius, in his Epistle regarding the Synods of Ariminum and Selucia,' quotes a few words from the Epistle to the Ephesians (ch. vii.); but although foreign to the Syriac text, it is to be noted that the words are at least from a form of one of the three epistles which exist in that version. It is a fact, therefore, that up to the second half of the fourth century no quotation ascribed to Ignatius, except one by Eusebius, exists, which is not found in the three short Syriac letters.

As we have already remarked, the Syriac version of the three epistles is very much shorter than the shorter Greek version, the Epistle to the Ephesians, for instance, being only about one-third of the length of the Greek text. Those who still maintain the superior authenticity of the Greek shorter version argue that the Syriac is an epitome of the Greek. This does not, however, seem tenable when the matter is carefully examined. Although so much is absent from the Syriac version, not only is there no interruption of the sense and no obscurity or undue curtness in the style, but the epistles read more

1 Opera Bened. ed., i. p. 761.

2 Cureton, The Ancient Syriac Version, &c., p. xxxiv.

consecutively, without faults of construction or grammar, and passages which in the Greek text were confused and almost unintelligible have become quite clear in the Syriac. The interpolations of the text, in fact, had been so clumsily made, that they had obscured the meaning, and their mere omission, without any other alteration of grammatical construction, has restored the epistles to clear and simple order. It is, moreover, a remarkable fact that the passages which, long before the discovery of the Syriac epistles, were pointed out as chiefly determining that the epistles were spurious, are not found in the Syriac version at all.2 Archbishop Usher, who only admitted the authenticity of six epistles, showed that much interpolation of these letters took place in the sixth century, but this very fact increases the probability of much earlier interpolation also, at which the various existing versions most clearly point. The interpolations can be explained upon the most palpable dogmatic grounds, but not so the omissions upon the hypothesis of the Syriac version being an abridgment upon any conceivable dogmatic principle, for that which remains renders the omissions for dogmatic reasons absurd. There is no ground of interest upon which the portions omitted and retained by the Syriac version can be intelligently explained. Finally, here, we may mention that the MSS. of the three Syriac epistles are more ancient by some centuries than those of any of the Greek versions of the Seven epistles. The strongest internal, as well as other evidence, into which space forbids our

Cureton, The Ancient Syriac Version, &c., p. xxvi, f.

2 Io., p. xix. f.; cf. Dallæus, De Scriptis, &c., p. 386 ff,

3 Dissert., ch. vi. p. xxxiii.

4 Cureton, ib., р. xvi. ff.

Ib., p. xl.