uages. The learning of this curious pamphlet keeps pace
with its absurdity. If the reader is disposed to think that this writer
must be laughing in his sleeve at the methods of the modern school to
which he belongs, he is checked by the obviously serious tone of the
whole discussion. Indeed it is altogether in keeping with Hitzig's
critical discoveries elsewhere. To this same critic we owe the
suggestion, that the name of the fabulist AEsop is derived from
Solomon's "_hyssop_ that springeth out of the wall," 1 Kings iv. 33:
_Die Sprueche Salomo's_ p. xvi. sq.

[25:2] _e.g._ respecting the date of the book of Judith, on which
depends the authenticity of Clement's Epistle (I. p. 222), the date of
Celsus (II. p. 228), etc.

[25:3] [See further, p. 141.]

[27:1] [Our author objects to this conclusion; see below, p. 138 sq.]

[27:1] II. p. 484.

[27:2] II. p. 487 sq.

[27:3] II. p. 486.

[27:4] II. p. 487 sq.

[27:5] II. p. 489.

[28:1] _S.R._ II. p. 490.

[29:1] _S.R._ I. p. xiv.

[30:1] II. p. 492.

[30:2] II. p. 492.

[30:3] II. p. 492.

[32:1] I. p. 212. The references throughout this article are given to
the fourth edition. But, with the single exception which I shall have
occasion to notice at the close, I have not observed any alterations
from the second, with which I have compared it in all the passages here
quoted.

[32:2] Euseb. _H.E._ iv. 26, 27.

[34:1] _S.R._ I. p. 432.

[34:2] I. p. 433 sq. I must leave it to others to reconcile the
statement respecting the Apocalypse in the text with another which I
find elsewhere in this work (i. p. 483): 'Andrew, a Cappadocian bishop
of the fifth century, mentions that Papias, amongst others of the
Fathers, considered the Apocalypse inspired. _No reference is made to
this by Eusebius_; but although, from his Millenarian tendencies, it is
very probable that Papias regarded the Apocalypse with peculiar
veneration as a prophetic book, _this evidence is too vague and isolated
to be of much value_.' The difficulty is increased when we compare these
two passages with a third (II. p. 335): 'Andrew of Caesarea, in the
preface to his Commentary on the Apocalypse, mentions that Papias
maintained 'the credibility' [Greek: to axiopiston] of that book, or in
other words, its Apostolic origin.... Apologists _admit the genuineness
of this statement_, nay, claim it as undoubted evidence of the
acquaintance of Papias with the Apocalypse.... Now _he must therefore
ha