esch._, 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. Ign. append._; Ziegler, _Versuch
ein. prag. Gesch. d. kirchl. Verfassungs-formen_, u.s.w., 1798, p.
16; J.E.C. Schmidt, _Versuch ueb. 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. I f.]; _H'buch Chr. K.G._, i. p. 200.

The brackets are not the author's, but my own.

This is doubtless one of those exhibitions of learning which have made
such a deep impression on the reviewers. Certainly, as it stands, this
note suggests a thorough acquaintance with all the by-paths of the
Ignatian literature, and seems to represent the gleanings of many years'
reading. It is important to observe however, that every one of these
references, except those which I have included in brackets, is given in
the appendix to Cureton's _Vindiciae Ignatianae_, where the passages are
quoted in full. Thus two-thirds of this elaborate note might have been
compiled in ten minutes. Our author has here and there transposed the
order of the quotations, and confused it by so doing, for it is
chronological in Cureton. But what purpose was served by thus importing
into his notes a mass of borrowed and unsorted references? And, if he
thought fit to do so, why was the key-reference to Cureton buried among
the rest, so that it stands in immediate connection with some additional
references on which it has no bearing?

Moreover, several of the writers mentioned in this note express opinions
directly opposed to that for which they are quoted. Wotton, for instance
[69:1], defends the genuineness of the Vossian Epistles very decidedly,
and at some length, against Whiston, whose Arianism led him to prefer
the Long Recension. Weismann declares that 'the authenticity and
genuineness of the Epistles have been demonstrated clearly and solidly'
by Pearson and others, so that no valid objections remain affecting the
main question. Thiersch again, who wrote after the publication of
Cureton's work, uses the three Syriac Epistles as genuine, his only
doubt being whether he ought not to accept the Vossian Epistles and to
regard the Curetonian as excerpts. Of the rest a considerable number, as
for instance, Lardner, Beausobre, Schroeckh, Griesbach, Kestner,
Neander, and