arding the authenticity of
any of the Epistles ascribed to Ignatius.' The facts however are these
[67:1]. Bochart condemns the Ignatian Epistle to the Romans on account
of the mention of 'leopards,' of which I shall speak hereafter, but says
nothing about the rest, though probably he would have condemned them
also. Aubertin, Blondel, Basnage, R. Parker, and Saumaise, reject all.
Humfrey (1584) considers that they have been interpolated and mutilated,
but he believes them genuine in the main. Cook (1614) pronounces them
'either supposititious or shamefully corrupted.' F. Socinus (A.D. 1624)
denounces corruptions and anachronisms, but so far as I can see, does
not question a nucleus of genuine matter. Casaubon (A.D. 1615), so far
from rejecting them altogether, promises to defend the antiquity of some
of the Epistles with new arguments. Rivet explains that Calvin's
objections apply not to Ignatius himself but to the corrupters of
Ignatius, and himself accepts the Vossian Epistles as genuine [67:2].
Petau, before the discovery of the Vossian letters, had expressed the
opinion that there were interpolations in the then known Epistles, and
afterwards on reading the Vossian letters, declared it to be a _prudens
et justa suspicio_ that these are the genuine work of Ignatius.

The next note (^3) p. 260 is as follows:--

[Wotton, _Praef. Clem. R. Epp._, 1718]; J. Owen, _Enquiry into
original nature, etc., Evang. Church: Works_, ed. Russel, 1826,
vol. xx, p. 147; Oudin, _Comm. de Script. Eccles. etc._ 1722, p.
88; Lampe, _Comm. analyt. ex Evang. Joan._, 1724, i. p. 184;
Lardner, _Credibility, etc., Works_, ii. p. 68 f.; Beausobre,
_Hist. Crit. de Manichee, etc._, 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; Rosenmueller, _Hist. Interpr.
Libr. Sacr. in Eccles._, 1795, i. p. 116; Semler, _Paraphr. in
Epist. ii. Petri_, 1784, Praef.; 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];
Baumgarten-Crusius. _Lehrb. chr. Dogmengesch._, 1832, p. 83, cf.
_Comp. chr. Dogmeng