PG 5 · cols. 635–642

C. J. Hefele, Praefatio in S. Ignatii epistolas genuinas et Acta martyrii

Editors' preface

d) Paulo post Irenaeum Origenes de epistolis Ignatii verba fecit.

d) Shortly after Irenaeus, Origen spoke of the epistles of Ignatius.

α) Memini aliquem sanctorum dixisse, Ignatium nomine, de Christo : « Meus autem amor crucifixus est. » Ex Ep. Ignatii ad Rom. c. 7.

α) I remember that a certain one of the saints, Ignatius by name, said of Christ: "But my love has been crucified." From the Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans, ch. 7.

β) Secundum Origenis testimonium vide supra, col. 9.

β) For the second testimony of Origen, see above, col. 9.

e) Addamus hisce testibus Eusebium, qui non solum de Romano Ignatii itinere sed et de septem ejus epistolis nominatim agit, singulas paucis describens, ex epistolis vero ad Rom. c. 5 et ad Smyrn. c. 3 plurima depromens. (Eusebii testimonium vide supra, col. 11, sub num. V.)

e) Let us add to these witnesses Eusebius, who treats by name not only of the Roman journey of Ignatius, but also of his seven epistles, describing each in a few words, and drawing very many things from the epistles to the Romans, ch. 5, and to the Smyrnaeans, ch. 3. (For the testimony of Eusebius, see above, col. 11, under no. V.)

f) Athanasius quoque Ignatianis epistolis testimonium perhibet (supra, col. 15, num. VI).

f) Athanasius also bears witness to the Ignatian epistles (above, col. 15, no. VI).

g) Denique Hieronymum, qui non nisi verba Eusebii repetiisse videtur, audiamus : Ignatius, Antiochenae Ecclesiae tertius post Petrum apostolum episcopus, etc. (Reliqua vide supra col. 16; num. VII).

g) Finally, let us hear Jerome, who seems only to have repeated the words of Eusebius: Ignatius, third bishop of the Church of Antioch after Peter the apostle, etc. (For the rest, see above, col. 16; no. VII).

Posteriorum Patrum testimonia, inter ea decem testimonia Theodoreti, apud Gallandium et Cotelerium congesta invenies, initio hujus voluminis. EDIT. PATROL.

The testimonies of later Fathers, among them ten testimonies of Theodoret, you will find collected in Gallandi and Cotelier, at the beginning of this volume. EDITOR OF THE PATROLOGIA.

3) Baurius contendit Ignatium omni modo in his litteris, tum justo fervidiori desiderio martyrii, tum absona humilitatis et modestiae cum jactatione et superbia conjunctione se talem praebere, ut apostolici viri vestigia nullibi detegas, fictam vero personam facile reperias.

3) Baur contends that Ignatius in every way in these letters, both by an overly fervent desire for martyrdom and by a discordant combination of humility and modesty with boasting and pride, shows himself to be such that nowhere can you detect the traces of an apostolic man, while you may easily find a fictitious persona.

Verum

Yet

a) Singularis animi calor et commotio, inaffectata et nativa se praebendi ratio omnimoda sinceritas et simplicitas, scriptorem ex intimo corde verba sua proferentem, non falsarium produnt. In primis nemo falsarius praeclarum illud cap. 4 ad Trallianos scripsisset, ubi Ignatius aperte testatur, quantopere ipsi, ad coronam martyrii properanti, superbia quaedam sit periculosa. In fervidiori enim martyrii desiderio falsarius gloriam herois sui posuisset.

a) A singular warmth and emotion of soul, an unaffected and natural manner of presenting himself, and a complete sincerity and simplicity betray a writer uttering his words from his inmost heart, not a forger. Above all, no forger would have written that famous ch. 4 to the Trallians, where Ignatius openly testifies how dangerous a certain pride is to him as he hastens towards the crown of martyrdom. For a forger would have placed the glory of his hero in a more fervent desire for martyrdom.

b) Revera minime nobis mirum videtur, si Ignatius, coronam martyrii exspectans, eadem via, qua Paulus, Romam ductus, a fratribus longe lateque salutatus laudibusque ornatus, fervidoque erga Christum amore flagrans, vehementi quodam martyrii desiderio ardebat.

b) Indeed, it seems to us not at all surprising if Ignatius, awaiting the crown of martyrdom, led to Rome by the same road as Paul, greeted far and wide by the brethren and adorned with praises, and burning with a fervent love towards Christ, was ablaze with a certain vehement desire for martyrdom.

c) Absonam humilitatem Baurius in iis locis detexisse putat, ubi Ignatius se ipsum minimum et indignum praedicat, et cum diaconis tantum, non cum episcopis se comparat; e. g. ad Smyrn. c. 11 et 12; ad Rom. c. 4 et 9 ; ad Ephes. c. 8 et 18 ; ad Trall. c. 13, ad Philad. c. 4 ; ad Magn. c. 2. Sed eamdem humilitatem divo quoque Paulo propriam

c) Baur thinks he has detected a discordant humility in those passages where Ignatius declares himself the least and unworthy, and compares himself only with deacons, not with bishops; e.g., to the Smyrnaeans, ch. 11 and 12; to the Romans, ch. 4 and 9; to the Ephesians, ch. 8 and 18; to the Trallians, ch. 13; to the Philadelphians, ch. 4; to the Magnesians, ch. 2. But that this same humility was proper to the holy Paul also

Editors' notes and page, col. 635

Footnotes

(61) ‹anchor: Paulo post Irenaeum Origenes› · call in col 635

Prolog. in Cant. canticor.

Prologue to the Song of Songs.

(printed under page 324)

(62) ‹anchor: hisce testibus Eusebium› · call in col 635

Hist. eccl., III, 34.

Ecclesiastical History, III, 34.

(printed under page 324)

(63) ‹anchor: f) Athanasius› · call in col 635

De syn. Arim. et Seleuc., n. 47

On the Synods of Ariminum and Seleucia, no. 47.

(printed under page 324)

(64) ‹anchor: Denique Hieronymum› · call in col 635

Catal. script. eccl., c. 16.

Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers, ch. 16.

(printed under page 324)

(65) ‹anchor: non falsarium produnt› · call in col 635

Cfr. Rothe, Anf., etc., p. 718 sqq. Huther, l. c.

Compare Rothe, Anfänge etc., p. 718 ff.; Huther, in the place cited.

(printed under page 324)

(66) ‹anchor: desiderio ardebat› · call in col 635

Cfr. Rothe, l. c., p. 722.

Compare Rothe, in the place cited, p. 722.

(printed under page 324)

(67) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 635

Cfr. Rothe, l. c., p. 718, not. 5.

Compare Rothe, in the place cited, p. 718, note 5.

(printed under page 324)

Page

running head: 635 SANCTI IGNATII EPISTOLÆ
marginal letters: A d) Paulo post Irenæum; B g) Denique Hieronymum; C a) Singularis animi; D tyrii desiderio ardebat
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: d) Paulo post Irenaeum (Hefele's preface)

PG 5:636

fuisse ex I Cor. XV, 8-10, Ephes. III, 8, et I Tim. I, 12-13 perspicies.

you will perceive from 1 Cor. 15:8-10, Eph. 3:8, and 1 Tim. 1:12-13.

d) Jactatio et superbia, apostolico viro indecora, in cognomine Θεοφόρος inveniri non potest. Temporibus enim apostolicis plures fidelium talibus honorificis nominibus ipsi sunt usi, ut B. Petrus, Barnabas, Barsabas Justus et alii. Praeterea S. Ignatius non immodestior est beato Paulo (II Cor. X, 1. 11; V, 11, 21-23. Gal. II, 11, 17), quem nec censor acerrimus ob eam rem fictam personam nominare velit.

d) Boasting and pride, unbecoming an apostolic man, cannot be found in the surname Theophorus. For in apostolic times several of the faithful themselves used such honorific names, as blessed Peter, Barnabas, Barsabas Justus, and others. Moreover, St. Ignatius is not more immodest than blessed Paul (2 Cor. 10:1, 11; 5:11, 21–23; Gal. 2:11, 17), whom not even the sharpest critic would wish on that account to call a fictitious persona.

4) Falsarius in Pseudo-Ignatio suo excolendo et commendando vix neglexisset, de necessitate Ignatii cum Joanne apostolo verba facere. Sed nullibi in epistolis nostris talia reperies.

4) A forger, in adorning and commending his Pseudo-Ignatius, would scarcely have neglected to speak of the intimacy of Ignatius with John the apostle. Yet nowhere in our epistles will you find such things.

5) Qui in favorem explanandae episcopatus ideae has epistolas confectas et confictas esse putant, epistolam Ignatii ad Romanos non in consilium vocant, in qua nulla episcopatus fit mentio. Falsarius utique, Romae sua fingens, de Romano quoque episcopatu verba fecisset. Notandum vero, auctorem epistolarum non id in primis egisse, ut hierarchiam ecclesiasticam et obedientiam, etc., erga episcopos commendaret. Multo enim magis curae ei fuit, ut fideles a veneno judaizantium Docetarum dehortaretur. Ad evitandam deinde hanc contagionem unitas ecclesiastica et arctissima cum episcopo conjunctio postulatur.

5) Those who think that these epistles were composed and fabricated in favour of developing the idea of the episcopate do not take into counsel the epistle of Ignatius to the Romans, in which no mention is made of the episcopate. A forger, certainly, fabricating his work at Rome, would have spoken of the Roman episcopate as well. Indeed, it must be noted that the author of the epistles did not make it his primary aim to commend the ecclesiastical hierarchy and obedience, etc., towards bishops. For it was much more his care to dissuade the faithful from the poison of the Judaizing Docetists. Then, in order to avoid this contagion, ecclesiastical unity and the closest union with the bishop are demanded.

6) Haereses quas beatus Ignatius perstringit, clare demonstrant, epistolas ejus primis saeculi secundi temporibus esse ascribendas. Duo diversa haereticorum genera (Docetas et Judaizantes, ab Ignatio impugnari plerique crediderunt. Hutherus autem bene docuit, Ignatium non nisi in unum genus haereticorum, judaizantium dico Docetarum, tela acuisse. Beatus enim Pater, si contra Judaistas quoque proprio sensu pugnasset, absque omni dubio etiam de circumcisione verba fecisset, quod nullibi in epistolis ejus reperitur. Ejusmodi igitur legis fautores intelligi jubent Hutherus et Düsterdieck illum sequens, quales Coloss. II, 16 sqq. perstringantur, quorumque ascesis judaismi instar sit visa. Unicum hoc judaizantium Docetarum genus Dusterdieck (l. c., p. 55) in duas familias disjungit, easque e Cerinthi erroribus profectas affirmat. Utraque Cerinthiacae haereseos elementa servabant Magnesii et Philadelphenses, cum Gnosticismo seu Docetismo minus exculto Judaismum conjungentes (cfr. ad Magn. c. 9, ad Philad, c. 6), Smyrnaeenses vero, Ephesini ac Tralliani, Graeca philosophia magis imbuti, haeresin Cerinthiacam adeo perpoliverant, ut Judaico illo elemento relicto, Gnosticas solum opiniones, ipsius

6) The heresies upon which blessed Ignatius touches clearly demonstrate that his epistles are to be ascribed to the first times of the second century. Most have believed that two different kinds of heretics (Docetists and Judaizers) are attacked by Ignatius. Huther, however, has well taught that Ignatius sharpened his darts against only one kind of heretics, I mean the Judaizing Docetists. For the blessed Father, if he had fought against Judaizers also in the proper sense, without any doubt would have spoken of circumcision as well, which is found nowhere in his epistles. Huther, therefore, and Düsterdieck following him, bid us understand partisans of the law of such a kind as are censured in Col. 2:16 ff., and whose asceticism seemed like Judaism. This single kind of Judaizing Docetists Düsterdieck (loc. cit., p. 55) divides into two families, and affirms that they proceeded from the errors of Cerinthus. Both elements of the Cerinthian heresy were preserved by the Magnesians and Philadelphians, joining Judaism with a less developed Gnosticism or Docetism (cf. to the Magnesians, ch. 9; to the Philadelphians, ch. 6); whereas the Smyrnaeans, Ephesians, and Trallians, more imbued with Greek philosophy, had so refined the Cerinthian heresy that, having left that Jewish element behind, they bore and cherished only Gnostic opinions, going beyond the measure of

Editors' notes and page, col. 636

Footnotes

(68) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 636

Cfr. Möhler, Athanasius, t. I, p. 18.

Compare Möhler, Athanasius, vol. I, p. 18.

(printed under page 324)

(69) ‹anchor: conjunctio postulatur› · call in col 636

Cfr. infra primam nostram notam ad epistolas Ignatii.

Compare below our first note on the letters of Ignatius.

(printed under page 324)

(70) ‹anchor: Hutherus› · call in col 636

Betrachtung der wichtigsten Bedenken gegen die Aechtheit der Ignatianischen Briefe, in Illgenii Zeitschrift für histor. Theol., t. XI, p. IV, p. 32 sqq.

Betrachtung der wichtigsten Bedenken gegen die Aechtheit der Ignatianischen Briefe (An examination of the weightiest doubts against the genuineness of the Ignatian letters), in Illgen's Zeitschrift für historische Theologie, vol. XI, part IV, p. 32 ff.

(printed under page 324)

Page

running head: SANCTI IGNATII EPISTOLÆ GENUINÆ. 636
marginal letters: A fuisse ex I Cor. XV, 8-10; B 5) Qui in favorem; C demonstrant, epistolas; D que e Cerinthi erroribus
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: fuisse ex I Cor. XV, 8-10 (Hefele's preface)

PG 5:637

Cerinthi modum superantes, jamque magis ad severiorem recentiorum Gnosticorum Docetismum accedentes, ferrent foverentque, quo factum, ut Ignatius in epistolis ad Ephesios, Smyrnaeos, Polycarpum et Trallianos Docetismum solum impugnaverit. Haereticos autem illos non e numero posteriorum Gnosticorum fuisse, qui mediis saeculi secundi temporibus floruerunt, clare ex eo apparet, quod Ignatius Docetismum solum perstringit, caeteros autem posteriorum Gnosticorum errores ne minime quidem tangit.

Cerinthus himself, and now approaching more closely to the stricter Docetism of the more recent Gnostics; whence it came about that Ignatius in his epistles to the Ephesians, Smyrnaeans, Polycarp, and Trallians attacked Docetism alone. That those heretics, however, were not from the number of the later Gnostics, who flourished in the middle times of the second century, clearly appears from this, that Ignatius censures Docetism alone, and does not even in the least touch upon the other errors of the later Gnostics.

7) Negari denique non potest, nonnullis epistolas nostras non ex criticis, sed ex dogmaticis tantum causis displicuisse. Quicunque enim aut divinam episcopatus institutionem, aut divinitatem Christi, aut realem Domini in Eucharistia praesentiam negant, auctoritatem epistolarum Ignatii minuere conentur oportet. Sed confer quae contra hos Hutherus l. c., p. 12 sqq., monuit.

7) Finally, it cannot be denied that our epistles have displeased some not from critical, but only from dogmatic causes. For whoever denies either the divine institution of the episcopate, or the divinity of Christ, or the real presence of the Lord in the Eucharist, must endeavour to diminish the authority of the epistles of Ignatius. But compare what Huther, loc. cit., p. 12 ff., has noted against these.

VI. Paucos ante menses V. D. Guilielmus Cureton, Anglus, veterem versionem Syriacam trium S. Ignatii epistolarum publici juris fecit. Jam anno 1839 Henricus Tattam, Copticarum litterarum peritissimus, Aegyptum peragrans, in Syriaco Nitriae monasterio codicem antiquissimum, ante medium saec. VI exaratum, detexit, qui Syriacam versionem epistolae S. Ignatii ad Polycarpum continebat. Pecuniis deinde publicis adjutus doctissimus Tattamus anno 1842 secunda vice in Aegyptum profectus est, et prospera fortuna gaudenti multos alios monasterii illius codices emere contigit, inter quos etiam ( e saec. VI vel VII ) antiqua versio Syriaca trium S. Ignatii epistolarum ad Ephesios, ad Romanos et ad Polycarpum, una cum pluribus Ignatianarum epistolarum fragmentis reperta est. Quibus codicibus detectis Guilielmus Curetonus, Orientalium litterarum apprime gnarus, optime se de re patristica fore meriturum sperabat, si versionem illam Syriacam prelo subjiceret et versionem Anglicam adderet, atque textum Graecum, Syriacae versioni (non accurate) respondentem exarare conaretur.

VI. A few months ago the learned William Cureton, an Englishman, published an ancient Syriac version of three epistles of St. Ignatius. Already in the year 1839 Henry Tattam, most skilled in Coptic literature, travelling through Egypt, discovered in the Syriac monastery of Nitria a most ancient codex, written before the middle of the sixth century, which contained a Syriac version of the epistle of St. Ignatius to Polycarp. Aided thereafter by public funds, the most learned Tattam set out for Egypt a second time in the year 1842, and rejoicing in prosperous fortune he succeeded in purchasing many other codices of that monastery, among which also (from the sixth or seventh century) an ancient Syriac version of three epistles of St. Ignatius, to the Ephesians, to the Romans, and to Polycarp, together with several fragments of the Ignatian epistles, was found. When these codices had been discovered, William Cureton, exceedingly well versed in Oriental literature, hoped that he would deserve most well of patristic studies if he put that Syriac version to press and added an English version, and endeavoured to produce a Greek text corresponding (not accurately) to the Syriac version.

Cum vero Tattamus duos codices epistolae ad Polycarpum, ut diximus, ex Aegypto apportasset, unum anno 1839, alterum anno 1842 ; Curetonus non nisi priorem, quia antiquiorem, typis exscribendum curavit, recentioris codicis lectiones variantes adjiciens. Praeterea vir doctissimus magnum quoque Syriacum fragmentum Martyrii S. Ignatii et epistolae ejusdem ad Romanos, quod Curetonus ipse anno 1839 in Musaeo Britannico detexerat, in vulgus edere et libro suo addere decrevit. Sic prodiit Londini 1845 opus ejus sub titulo : The ancient Syriac version of the epistles of saint Ignatius to St. Polycarp, the Ephesians, and the Romans ; together with extracts from his epistles, collected from the

Since, however, Tattam had brought two codices of the epistle to Polycarp out of Egypt, as we have said, the one in the year 1839, the other in the year 1842, Cureton took care to have only the former, because more ancient, printed in type, adding the variant readings of the more recent codex. Moreover, the most learned man decided also to publish and add to his book a large Syriac fragment of the Martyrdom of St. Ignatius and of his epistle to the Romans, which Cureton himself had discovered in the year 1839 in the British Museum. Thus appeared at London in 1845 his work under the title: The ancient Syriac version of the epistles of saint Ignatius to St. Polycarp, the Ephesians, and the Romans; together with extracts from his epistles, collected from the

Editors' notes and page, col. 637

Footnotes

(71) ‹anchor: ne minime quidem tangit› · call in col 637

Cfr. Huter, l. c. p. 42 et Düsterdieck, l. c.

Compare Huther, in the place cited, p. 42, and Düsterdieck, in the place cited.

(printed under page 325)

Page

running head: 637 C. J. HEFELII PRÆ
marginal letters: A Cerinthi modum superantes; B aut realem Domini; C monasterii illius codices; D priorem, quia antiquiorem
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Cerinthi modum superantes (Hefele's preface)

PG 5:638

writings of Severus of Antioch, Timotheus of Alexandria, and others, edited with an english translation, and notes. Also the greek text of these three epistles, corrected according to the authority of the Syriac version. By William Cureton, M. A. London : Rivingtons. Berlin : Asher et Comp. MDCCCXLV. Libro hoc usi omnem majorem inter versionem illam Syriacam et textum nostrum Graecum differentiam suo loco adnotavimus. Curetonus nobis persuadere conatur, versionem illam Syriacam genuino textui Ignatiano accuratissime respondere, et omnia quae in nostro Graeco textu plura inveniuntur, ab aliis addita esse et introducta. Tantum vero abest ut ei astipulemur, ut versionem Syriacam non nisi epitomen Ignatianarum epistolarum, a monacho quodam Syriaco in proprios usus pios confectam (cfr. infra not. ad cap. 2 epist. ad Ephes.), reputare possimus, praesertim cum iidem codices a Tattamo detecti et alia plura excerpta ex epistolis Ignatianis, nec non alios libellos asceticos, ut Curetonus ipse fatetur, contineant. Praeterea saepius inde ex eo, quod nexus sententiarum in versione Syriaca minus est arctus, apparet, monachum illum non tam interpretis, quam epitomatoris partes egisse. Confer quae ad singulos locos monuimus : ad Ephes. capp. 3, 8, 9, 14, 19 ; ad Trall. in titulo et cap. 4 ; ad Rom. cap. 6 ; ad Polyc. in titulo et cap. 7 ; Martyrium S. Ignatii in titulo.

writings of Severus of Antioch, Timotheus of Alexandria, and others, edited with an English translation, and notes. Also the Greek text of these three epistles, corrected according to the authority of the Syriac version. By William Cureton, M. A. London: Rivingtons. Berlin: Asher et Comp. 1845. Making use of this book, we have noted in its proper place every major difference between that Syriac version and our Greek text. Cureton endeavours to persuade us that that Syriac version corresponds most accurately to the genuine Ignatian text, and that all the additional things which are found in our Greek text were added and introduced by others. So far are we, however, from agreeing with him, that we can regard the Syriac version as nothing else than an epitome of the Ignatian epistles, made by a certain Syriac monk for his own pious uses (cf. below, note on ch. 2 of the epistle to the Ephesians), especially since the same codices discovered by Tattam contain both several other excerpts from the Ignatian epistles and other ascetic tracts, as Cureton himself confesses. Moreover, it very often appears from this, that the connexion of thoughts in the Syriac version is less close, that that monk played the part not so much of a translator as of an epitomizer. Compare what we have noted at the individual passages: on Ephesians, chs. 3, 8, 9, 14, 19; on Trallians, in the title and ch. 4; on Romans, ch. 6; on Polycarp, in the title and ch. 7; the Martyrdom of St. Ignatius, in the title.

VII. Male etiam de integritate epistolarum Ignatii dubia mota sunt. Praesertim omnia de episcopatu et de deitate Christi effata interpolatori a quibusdam tribuuntur. Sed

VII. Wrongly also have doubts been raised concerning the integrity of the epistles of Ignatius. Especially all the utterances concerning the episcopate and concerning the deity of Christ are attributed by some to an interpolator. But

a) nullum externum interpolationis adest indicium.

a) no external indication of interpolation is present.

b) Loci a veteribus laudati pari modo in breviori nostra recensione leguntur. Cfr. supra testimonia veterum.

b) The passages cited by the ancients are read in like manner in our shorter recension. Cf. above, the testimonies of the ancients.

c) Arctior materiae et orationis nexus omni interpolationis suspicioni nuntium mittunt ; effata enim illa displicentia sine totius sermonis pariter ac sensus devastatione evelli non possunt.

c) The closer connexion of matter and discourse dismisses all suspicion of interpolation; for those displeasing utterances cannot be plucked out without the devastation of the whole discourse as well as of the sense.

d) Praeterea eamdem styli rationem cum in repudiatis, tum in approbatis epistolarum partibus invenies.

d) Moreover, you will find the same manner of style both in the rejected and in the approved parts of the epistles.

e) Quod c. 8 ep. ad Magn. Σιγῆς facta sit mentio, interpolationis non praebet indicium, ut in notis ad h. l. demonstravimus.

e) That in ch. 8 of the epistle to the Magnesians mention is made of Σιγῆς does not furnish an indication of interpolation, as we have demonstrated in the notes on this passage.

f) Polemicis tantum causis ducti nonnulli viri docti integritatem epistolarum nostrarum in dubium vocarunt.

f) Led only by polemical causes, some learned men have called into doubt the integrity of our epistles.

g) Qui episcopatus causa epistolas nostras interpolatas esse putant, nullo modo rationem reddere possunt cur epistola ad Romanos sola ab interpolatore non fuerit foedata, cum sex reliquis impias ejus manus non pepercisse credant.

g) Those who think that our epistles were interpolated for the sake of the episcopate can in no way give a reason why the epistle to the Romans alone was not defiled by the interpolator, when they believe his impious hands did not spare the other six.

Editors' notes and page, col. 638

Footnotes

(72) ‹anchor: dubia mota sunt› · call in col 638

E. g. a. Neandro, Kirchengesch. t. I, p. 738, et a Netzio in Ullmann, Studien und Krit. 1835, p. 881 sqq. Qui breviores quoque S. Ignatii epistolas interpolatas putant, novissimis diebus validissimum interpolationis ejusmodi testimonium assecuti videntur versione Syriaca, a Guil. Cureton edita.

For example, by Neander, Kirchengeschichte, vol. I, p. 738, and by Netz in Ullmann's Studien und Kritiken 1835, p. 881 ff. Those who think even the shorter letters of St Ignatius interpolated appear in these latest days to have obtained the strongest evidence of such interpolation in the Syriac version edited by William Cureton.

(printed under page 325)

(73) ‹anchor: in dubium vocarunt› · call in col 638

Möhler, Patrol., t. I, p. 125 sqq.

Möhler, Patrologie, vol. I, p. 125 ff.

(printed under page 325)

Page

running head: HEFELII PRÆFATIO. 638
marginal letters: A writings of Severus; B quodam Syriaco; C scopatu et de deitate; D e) Quod c. 8 ep. ad Magn.
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: writings of Severus (Hefele's preface)

PG 5:639

Ut brevi dicam, interpolationis suspicio ne minimum quidem mereri applausum videtur, planeque persuasum mihi est, talem judicii mediocritatem non auream esse. Epistolae Ignatii sint ut sunt, aut non sint.

To put it briefly, the suspicion of interpolation seems not to deserve even the least applause, and I am fully persuaded that such a middle way of judgement is not golden. Let the epistles of Ignatius be as they are, or not be at all.

VIII. Epistolarum auctor Graeci sermonis non apprime gnarus, et ardentis potius animi impetus, quam grammaticae regulas secutus, periodorum structuram non semel violavit, orationis nexum sententiis interjectis saepius interrupit, et sublimes profundasque cogitationes suas sufficientibus verbis exprimere nequivit; ita ut facile non Graeciae, sed Asiae filium detegas.

VIII. The author of the epistles, not thoroughly versed in the Greek tongue, and following the impulses of an ardent spirit rather than the rules of grammar, more than once violated the structure of his periods, quite often broke the connection of his discourse with interjected sentences, and was unable to express his sublime and profound thoughts in adequate words; so that you may easily detect in him a son not of Greece, but of Asia.

IX. De tempore quo hae epistolae exaratae fuerint, duae feruntur celebriores sententiae, quarum altera anno 107, altera anno 116 favet. Nos, qui supra § I martyrium Ignatii anno 107 assignavimus, eodem anno et epistolas conscriptas esse censeamus oportet.

IX. On the time at which these epistles were written, two better-known opinions are put forward, one of which favours the year 107, the other the year 116. We, who above in § I assigned the martyrdom of Ignatius to the year 107, must hold that the epistles too were written in the same year.

X. De doctrina Ignatii disputarunt Lumperus, Junius, Heynsius ac van Gilse, Mohlerus et alii.

X. On the doctrine of Ignatius, Lumper, Junius, Heynsius and van Gilse, Möhler and others have treated.

II. DE ACTIS MARTYRII S. IGNATII.

II. ON THE ACTS OF THE MARTYRDOM OF ST IGNATIUS.

I. Acta Martyrii S. Ignatii a. 1647 e msto codice Caiensi edidit Usserius Armachanus, optime de B. martyre ejusque epistolis meritus. Huic veteri versioni vir doctissimus alteram adjunxit, ex antiquissimo Cottonianae bibliothecae codice descriptam, in qua multae absurdae et fabulosae narrationes contra fidem historiarum ex novitiis Actis interpolatis desumptae continentur.

I. The Acts of the Martyrdom of St Ignatius were edited in 1647 from a manuscript codex of Caius [College] by Ussher of Armagh, who deserved very well of the blessed martyr and his epistles. To this old version that most learned man added another, copied from a very ancient codex of the Cottonian library, in which are contained many absurd and fabulous narratives, contrary to the credit of history, taken from recent interpolated Acts.

Anno autem 1689 ex msto codice Parisino, olim Colbertino, nunc regio Acta nostra Graece una cum nova versione Latina Parisiis evulgavit Theodericus Ruinartus, presbyter e congregatione S. Mauri, in Appendice ad Acta primorum martyrum sincera atque selecta. Graecum autem hoc exemplar cum antiqua versione codicis Caiensis maxime convenire, cuivis ex leviuscula collatione facile constat.

But in the year 1689 Thierry Ruinart, priest of the Congregation of St Maur, published our Acts in Greek at Paris, together with a new Latin version, from a manuscript codex of Paris, formerly Colbert's, now the king's, in the Appendix to the Genuine and Select Acts of the First Martyrs. That this Greek copy agrees very closely with the old version of the Caius codex is readily evident to anyone from even a slight collation.

Post Ruinartum praecipue Grabius, Ittigius, Smithius et Jacobsonus Acta nostra, mendis, quae passim irrepserant, sublatis, ediderunt.

After Ruinart, chiefly Grabe, Ittig, Smith and Jacobson edited our Acts, removing the errors which had crept in here and there.

II. Acta haec, ut cum Smithio loquar, « a familiaribus S. Ignatii, qui Antiochia Romam usque illum sunt comitati, atque illius ultimo et maxime glorioso agoni interfuere, descripta esse, multa in ipsis Actis id testatissimum reddunt. In his enim sic loquuntur, qui ea litteris tradidere: Ἡμεῖς μὲν ἄκοντες ἀπηγόμεθα, στένοντες ἐπὶ τῷ ἀφ' ἡμῶν μέλλοντι χωρισμῷ τοῦ δικαίου γίνεσθαι. Et nonnullis interjectis sub finem: Τούτων αὐτόπται γενόμενοι. Haec, inquam, aliaque extra omne dubium ponunt, a S. Ignatii comitibus Acta hujusmodi fuisse perscripta; et quidem non longe post ipsius consummationem,

II. That these Acts, to speak with Smith, “were written down by intimates of St Ignatius who accompanied him from Antioch all the way to Rome and were present at his last and most glorious contest, many things in the Acts themselves make most fully attested. For in them those who committed them to writing speak thus: ‘We indeed were led away unwillingly, groaning at the separation of the just man that was about to take place from us.’ And, some matter intervening, towards the end: ‘Having become eyewitnesses of these things.’ These, I say, and other things put it beyond all doubt that Acts of this kind were written by the companions of St Ignatius; and indeed not long after his consummation,

Editors' notes and page, col. 639

Footnotes

(74) ‹anchor: aut non sint› · call in col 639

Optime integritatem harum epistolarum defendit Düsterdieck, l. c., p. 80 sqq.

The integrity of these letters is very well defended by Düsterdieck, in the place cited, p. 80 ff.

(printed under page 326)

(75) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 639

Cfr. Möhler, Patrol., t. I, p. 122.

Compare Möhler, Patrologie, vol. I, p. 122.

(printed under page 326)

(76) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 639

Hist. theol. crit., t. I, p. 305-327.

Historia theologica critica, vol. I, pp. 305–327.

(printed under page 326)

(77) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 639

Commentationes de Patrum apostolicorum theologia morali a) p. 38-71. b) p. 39-58. c) p. 54-71.

Commentationes de Patrum apostolicorum theologia morali (Studies on the moral theology of the Apostolic Fathers): a) pp. 38–71; b) pp. 39–58; c) pp. 54–71.

(printed under page 326)

(78) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 639

Patrol., t. I, p. 131-152.

Patrologie, vol. I, pp. 131–152.

(printed under page 326)

(79) ‹anchor: alteram adjunxit› · call in col 639

Utramque hanc versionem apud Gallandium reperies.

You will find both these versions in Gallandi.

(printed under page 326)

(80) ‹anchor: desumptae continentur› · call in col 639

Grabe, Spicileg., t. II, p. 3 et 4. Smith, praef. in Acta Martyr. S. Ign. apud Jacobsenum, t. II, p. 523.

Grabe, Spicilegium, vol. II, pp. 3 and 4. Smith, preface to the Acts of the Martyrdom of St Ignatius, in Jacobson, vol. II, p. 523.

(printed under page 326)

(81) ‹anchor: facile constat› · call in col 639

Grabe et Smith, ll. cc.

Grabe and Smith, in the places cited.

(printed under page 326)

(82) ‹anchor: δικαίου γίνεσθαι› · call in col 639

Martyr. Ign., c. 5.

Martyrdom of Ignatius, ch. 5.

(printed under page 326)

(83) ‹anchor: αὐτόπται γενόμενοι› · call in col 639

Ibid., c. 7.

Ibid., ch. 7.

(printed under page 326)

(84) ‹anchor: Haec, inquam, aliaque› · call in col 639

E. g. συναντῶμεν τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς c 6.

For example, "we meet the brethren," ch. 6.

(printed under page 326)

Page

running head: 639 SANCTI IGNATII EPISTOL
marginal letters: A Ut brevi dicam; B I. Acta Martyrii; C ex leviuscula collatione; D perscripta ; et quidem
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Ut brevi dicam (Hefele's preface); full-width heading II. DE ACTIS MARTYR above section I cut off at right edge, not set; word con- split at end of column
other: a full-width band stands across cols 639/640 in mid-page: the 3 paragraph(s) above it in col 640 are set here, after the 2 above it in col 639 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
running head: 639 SANCTI IGNATII EPISTOLAE GENUINAE. 640
marginal letters: A ‹Ut brevi dicam, interpolationis› / ‹exprimere nequivit›; B ‹I. Acta Martyrii S. Ignatii› / ‹summationem, et proximo›; C ‹ex leviuscula collatione› / ‹landio, Lumpero›; D ‹nunt, a S. Ignatii comitibus› / ‹jam ex iis, quae supra›
old-edition numerals: (none)

PG 5:640

et proximo, ut verisimillimum videtur anno; dum res gestae cum totius itineris ratione in recenti fidelius inhaeserint memoria. »

and, as seems most likely, in the following year; while the events, together with the course of the whole journey, still clung more faithfully in fresh memory.”

« Illos autem fuisse Philonem et Agathopodem, quorum meminit sanctissimus martyr in epistolis ad Smyrnaeos et ad Philadelphenses, hunc Antiochiae, illum vero Tarsensis Ecclesiae diaconum, vix a quoquam dubitari aut potest aut debet. » Hactenus Smithius. Gallandius addit, Philoni et Agathopodi adjungendum saltem esse nominatim et Crocum, qui sanctum martyrem Romam usque assectatus fuisse perhibetur.

“And that they were Philo and Agathopus, whom the most holy martyr mentions in the epistles to the Smyrnaeans and to the Philadelphians, the latter a deacon of the Church of Antioch, the former of that of Tarsus, hardly anyone either can or ought to doubt.” Thus far Smith. Galland adds that to Philo and Agathopus should at least be joined by name Crocus also, who is said to have followed the holy martyr all the way to Rome.

III. Authentica et genuina censentur Acta nostra ab Usserio, Dodwello, Ruinarto, Grabio, Tillemontio, Pearsonio, Smithio, Cotelerio, Mamachio, Gallandio, Lumpero, Möhlero et aliis. Dallaeus vero, ut ipsius S. martyris scripta, ita et Acta ejusdem pro supposititiis habuit; sed sicut illorum, ita horum quoque defensionem suscepit doctissimus Pearsonius parte II Vindic. Epist. S. Ign., c. 12. Praeter Dallaeum Oudinus quoque, Heumannus et alii Actorum veritatem impugnare aggressi sunt; sed funditus eorum sententiam evertit vir eruditissimus Mamachius, ex ordine Praedicatorum.

III. Our Acts are held authentic and genuine by Ussher, Dodwell, Ruinart, Grabe, Tillemont, Pearson, Smith, Cotelier, Mamachi, Galland, Lumper, Möhler and others. Daillé, however, held the Acts of the holy martyr to be spurious, just as he did his writings; but as of the latter, so of the former too the most learned Pearson undertook the defence, in part II of the Vindiciae Epistolarum S. Ignatii, chapter 12. Besides Daillé, Oudin too, Heumann and others set about attacking the truth of the Acts; but their opinion was overturned from its foundations by that most erudite man Mamachi, of the Order of Preachers.

Revera nullius ponderis sunt Dallaei et sociorum argumenta.

In truth the arguments of Daillé and his associates are of no weight.

a) Exceptiones, quae adversus Romanum Ignatii iter itinerisque rationem sunt prolatae, esse futiles, jam ex iis, quae supra ad iter hoc defendendum protulimus, apparet. Maxime autem doctissimae

a) That the objections brought forward against Ignatius's journey to Rome and the manner of the journey are futile is already apparent from what we set out above in defence of this journey. But most of all the most learned

Editors' notes and page, col. 640

Footnotes

(85) ‹anchor: Gallandius› · call in col 640

Bibl. Veterum Patrum, t. I, Proleg., p. LX.

Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum, vol. I, Prolegomena, p. LX.

(printed under page 326)

(86) ‹anchor: fuisse perhibetur› · call in col 640

Ep. Ign. ad Rom., c. 10.

Ignatius's Letter to the Romans, ch. 10.

(printed under page 326)

(87) ‹anchor: Lumpero› · call in col 640

Hist. theol. crit., t. II, p. 428-433.

Historia theologica critica, vol. II, pp. 428–433.

(printed under page 326)

(88) ‹anchor: Möhlero› · call in col 640

Patrol., t. I, p. 408 sq.

Patrologie, vol. I, p. 408 f.

(printed under page 326)

(89) ‹anchor: Epist. S. Ign., c. 12› · call in col 640

Apud Cotel., t. II, p. 411.

In Cotelier, vol. II, p. 411.

(printed under page 326)

(90) ‹anchor: Mamachius› · call in col 640

Origines et Antiquit. Christ., t. IV, p. 401-404.

Origines et Antiquitates Christianae, vol. IV, pp. 401–404.

(printed under page 326)

Page

running head: ATII EPISTOLÆ GENUINÆ. 640
marginal letters: A exprimere nequivit; B summationem, et proximo; C landio, Lumpero; D jam ex iis, quæ supra
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: exprimere nequivit (Hefele's preface); full-width heading MARTYRII S. IGNATII. above margin B cut off at left edge, not set; word summationem split from col. 639
other: the 3 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 639 (reading order, moved on receipt)
running head: 639 SANCTI IGNATII EPISTOLAE GENUINAE. 640
marginal letters: A ‹exprimere nequivit›; B ‹summationem, et proximo›; C ‹landio, Lumpero›; D ‹jam ex iis, quae supra›
old-edition numerals: (none)

PG 5:641

Tafelii de via Egnatia dissertationes novam rei nostrae lucem attulerunt ; quas qui perlegerit, tantum abest, ut viam, qua S. martyr ductus esse narratur, monstrosam putare possit, ut clare perspiciat, non nisi vulgari Romanorum via Ignatium esse usum.

dissertations of Tafel on the Via Egnatia have brought new light to our subject; and whoever reads them through, so far is he from being able to think the road by which the holy martyr is narrated to have been led monstrous, that he will clearly perceive that Ignatius used none other than the common road of the Romans.

b) Actorum auctorem diu post Ignatii tempora vixisse, Dallaeus e sermonibus conjecit, quos cum Trajano a martyre habitos Acta nostra praeter omnem veri ac decori speciem finxisse putat vir ille criticus. Ei jam Pearsonius respondit, sermones istos certe neque veri, neque decori rationes turbare contendens. Una tantum vox κακοδαίμων (c. 2), a Trajano usurpata, objectioni illi occasionem praebuisse videtur, quam nemo dixerit imperatori minime convenire, qui eam recte intellexerit. Qui enim novit, quid sit κακοδαίμων, et quomodo Christianos in judicio compellare soliti fuerint ethnici, facile sentiet, et verum hoc et decorum esse. Est autem κακοδαίμων, ut ex multis exemplis Pearsonius docuit, nil aliud quam infelix homo.

b) That the author of the Acts lived long after the times of Ignatius, Daillé conjectured from the discourses held by the martyr with Trajan, which that critic thinks our Acts fabricated beyond all appearance of truth and propriety. To him Pearson has already replied, contending that those discourses certainly disturb neither the principles of truth nor those of propriety. Only one word, κακοδαίμων (ch. 2), used by Trajan, seems to have furnished the occasion for that objection, a word which no one who has rightly understood it would say is not at all fitting for an emperor. For he who knows what κακοδαίμων is, and how the pagans were accustomed to address Christians in judgement, will easily perceive that this is both true and fitting. For κακοδαίμων, as Pearson has taught from many examples, is nothing else than an unfortunate man.

Praeterea monendum, sermones Ignatii et Trajani a scriptore Actorum non ad verbum relatos, auctoremque nostrum eadem licentia usum esse, quam omnino historici in enarrandis aliorum sermonibus sibi vindicabant. Quod si e. g. capite 2 Trajanus deos gentilium daemones appellat, certe scriptorem Christianum verbis Christianis mentem Trajani exposuisse facile perspicies.

Moreover, it must be noted that the discourses of Ignatius and Trajan were not reported word for word by the writer of the Acts, and that our author used the same licence which historians altogether claimed for themselves in recounting the discourses of others. And if, e.g., in chapter 2 Trajan calls the gods of the pagans demons, you will easily perceive that a Christian writer certainly set forth the mind of Trajan in Christian words.

c) Authentiae argumentum inde quoque nobis petendum videtur, quod Acta haec pressa simplicique oratione sint conscripta, atque

c) An argument for authenticity seems to us to be drawn from this also, that these Acts are written in a concise and simple style, and

d) mire illis respondeant, quae ab Eusebio et S. Joanne Chrysostomo de martyrio Ignatii docemur.

d) correspond wonderfully to those things which we are taught concerning the martyrdom of Ignatius by Eusebius and St. John Chrysostom.

e) Nihil denique ibi legitur, cum Trajani historia pugnans.

e) Finally, nothing is read there that conflicts with the history of Trajan.

Testimonia vero Veterum pro Actis nostris e sex primis aerae Christianae saeculis inveniri non possunt.

Testimonies of the Ancients, however, for our Acts from the first six centuries of the Christian era cannot be found.

IV. Postremam Actorum Ignatii partem spuriam, et ab interpolatore quodam assutam, arbitrati sunt Usserius, Grabius et alii ; causis, ut mihi videtur, non sufficientibus.

IV. The last part of the Acts of Ignatius has been judged spurious, and patched on by some interpolator, by Ussher, Grabe, and others; for reasons, as it seems to me, that are not sufficient.

a) Postremam Actorum partem in altera Latina versione codicis Cottoniani deesse, minime negamus, sed hunc codicem nullius auctoritatis esse, ex iis, quae supra § 1 diximus, satis apparet ; luceque est clarius interpretem istum, Ignatii adventu in Urbe narrato, a genuino Actorum exemplari ad fabulas interpolatoris sese convertisse.

a) That the last part of the Acts is wanting in the other Latin version of the Cottonian codex we by no means deny, but that this codex is of no authority sufficiently appears from what we have said above in § 1; and it is clearer than light that that translator, having narrated the arrival of Ignatius in the City, turned from the genuine exemplar of the Acts to the fables of an interpolator.

Editors' notes and page, col. 641

Footnotes

(91) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 641

Vide infra not. 4 ad c. 5 Martyrii S. Ign.

See below, note 4 on ch. 5 of the Martyrdom of St Ignatius.

(printed under page 327)

(92) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 641

Vindiciae Ign., parte II, c. 12, supra.

Vindiciae Ignatianae, part II, ch. 12, above.

(printed under page 327)

(93) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 641

Pearson., l. c.

Pearson, in the place cited.

(printed under page 327)

(94) ‹anchor: martyrio Ignatii docemur› · call in col 641

Lumper., Hist. theol. crit., t. I, p. 433.

Lumper, Historia theologica critica, vol. I, p. 433.

(printed under page 327)

(95) ‹anchor: historia pugnans› · call in col 641

Lumper., l. c.

Lumper, in the place cited.

(printed under page 327)

Page

running head: 641 C. J. HEFELII PRÆ
marginal letters: A Tafelii de via Egnatia; B peratori minime convenire; C c) Authentiæ argumentum; D a) Postremam Actorum partem
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Tafelii de via Egnatia (Hefele's preface)

PG 5:642

Exstat autem posterior illa Actorum pars, a Grabio in dubium vocata, in versione codicis Caiensis, et in Graeco exemplari Parisiensi.

Moreover, that latter part of the Acts, called into doubt by Grabe, is extant in the version of the Caius codex, and in the Paris Greek exemplar.

b) Si Grabium audias, aperte sibi invicem repugnare videntur ista verba c. 7, quae in versione nostra ita sonant : Horum nos ipsi spectatores facti, cum in lacrymis totam noctem exegissemus, et genibus flexis multaque oratione Dominum, ut nos infirmos de iis, quae facta fuerant, certos faceret, essemus precati, etc. Si enim haec facta, Grabius inquit, ipsimet spectatores oculis usurpaverant, quid opus erat, ulteriorem de iis certitudinem a Deo postulare ? — Sed Grabius Graecum textum male interpretatus haec objecit ; αὐτόπται enim illi non de morte Ignatii, sed de eo certiores fieri volebant, num martyrium ejus Deo esset acceptum, ut jam Clericus monuit.

b) If you listen to Grabe, those words of ch. 7 seem openly to contradict each other, which in our version run thus: Having ourselves become spectators of these things, when we had spent the whole night in tears, and with bended knees and much prayer had besought the Lord to make us weak ones certain concerning the things that had been done, etc. For if, says Grabe, the spectators had themselves beheld these things done with their own eyes, what need was there to ask for further certainty concerning them from God? — But Grabe raised these objections through badly interpreting the Greek text; for those αὐτόπται wished to be made more certain, not concerning the death of Ignatius, but concerning this, whether his martyrdom was acceptable to God, as Le Clerc has already pointed out.

c) Falsum esse contendit Grabius, quod c. 7 Ignatius mortuus fuisse dicatur consulibus apud Romanos iterum Sura et Senecione, i. e. anno 107. Grabius enim, ut supra vidimus, unam tantum Trajani expeditionem Parthicam admittens, mortem S. martyris anno 116 ascripsit. Nos contra tutius putavimus, alteri accedere sententiae, quae Ignatium anno 107 e vivis decessisse censet.

c) Grabe contends that it is false that in ch. 7 Ignatius is said to have died when Sura and Senecio were consuls for the second time among the Romans, i.e., in the year 107. For Grabe, as we saw above, admitting only one Parthian expedition of Trajan, ascribed the death of the holy martyr to the year 116. We, on the contrary, have thought it safer to accede to the other opinion, which judges that Ignatius departed from the living in the year 107.

d) Objectio Usserii, detecto exemplari Graeco diluta, jam a Grabio est omissa. Usserius in codice Caiensi legebat (c. 4) : per PRAECEDENTES litteras gratias agens, appositas ad ipsas, etc. Hinc vir doctissimus conclusit, postremam Actorum partem ab illo scriptore saeculi quinti esse confectam, qui Graeca Acta in Latinum sermonem transtulit, exemplarique suo syllogen epistolarum Ignatii praeposuit ; quam praecedentem epistolarum syllogen verbis illis praecedentes litteras indicari Usserius suspicatus est. Sed Graeca : ..... διὰ τῶν ἡγουμένων, γραμμάτων εὐχαρίστων ἐκπεμφθέντων κ. τ. λ. ita reddantur oportet : utque Ecclesiis, quae ipsi per rectores (ἡγουμένων) suos occurrerant, mercedem redderet, gratias agens litteris (γραμμάτων) ad eas missis (Cod. Caiensis male : appositas ad ipsas).

d) The objection of Ussher, dissolved by the discovery of the Greek exemplar, has already been omitted by Grabe. Ussher read in the Caius codex (ch. 4): giving thanks through the PRECEDING letters, placed beside them, etc. Hence the most learned man concluded that the last part of the Acts was composed by that writer of the fifth century who translated the Greek Acts into Latin speech and prefixed to his exemplar a collection of the epistles of Ignatius; which preceding collection of epistles Ussher suspected to be indicated by those words preceding letters. But the Greek words: ..... διὰ τῶν ἡγουμένων, γραμμάτων εὐχαρίστων ἐκπεμφθέντων etc., must be rendered thus: and that to the Churches which had met him through their rulers (ἡγουμένων) he might render a reward, giving thanks by letters (γραμμάτων) sent to them (the Caius codex badly renders: placed beside them).

Cum res ita se habeat, objectioni, Usserii nullam vim inesse facile perspicies, neque de integritate Actorum dubitabis, licet fortasse paucissima quaedam, aut vitio librariorum corrupta, aut manibus posteriorum addita sint.

Since the matter stands thus, you will easily perceive that there is no force in the objection of Ussher, nor will you doubt the integrity of the Acts, although perhaps some very few things have either been corrupted by the fault of copyists or added by the hands of later men.

V. Acta Martyrii S. Ignatii interpolata e saeculo circiter sexto, Graece habet Metaphrastes ad 20 Dec., et exinde Latine Surius et Bollandus, calendis Febr. ; Graece et Latine in editione Patrum apostolicorum Cotelerius.

V. The interpolated Acts of the Martyrdom of St. Ignatius from about the sixth century Metaphrastes has in Greek at 20 December, and thence Surius and Bollandus in Latin at the Calends of February; Cotelier has them in Greek and Latin in his edition of the Apostolic Fathers.

Editors' notes and page, col. 642

Footnotes

(96) ‹anchor: ut jam Clericus monuit› · call in col 642

Vide not. ad c. 7 Martyr. Ignat.

See the note on ch. 7 of the Martyrdom of Ignatius.

(printed under page 327)