apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

MANUSCRIPTS AND VERSIONS.
II9
Ignatian
to Ignatius) entire.
Epistles of the Long recension (including the Letter of Mary
9. Vatic. Regius {Reginensisl) 30 [gg], a Vatican ms collated by Dressel
and called by him [R].
He thus describes it (p. Ivii); 'Membraneus,
foliis octonariis, saeculi xi ineuntis. Insunt 0pp. Dionysii Areopagitae
cum glossis baud indoctis, necnon ad loannem Apostolum spectantia
(i— 160). Postea fragmentum Epistolae Ignatii ad Ephesios exhibetur
in sex foliis cum dimidio'. After Dressel, it was collated by Funk.
The fragment extends from the beginning of the epistle to § 18 irov
Kavxw'-^ ^^ Xeyo-. This epistle is' numbered a, which points to an
arrangement differing from the common order, where it would be ia-
10. Barber. d8, in the Barberini Library at Rome. At the
beginning is written 'S. Ignatii Martyris Epistolae Graecae ex Codice
Vaticano a Leone Allatio erutae', and below is the number 428. Dressel
wrongly copies it 'ex codice Vaticano 428 a Leone Allatio erutae', and
adds ' Cod. Vaticanus frustra quaeritur, cum ille numero 428 insignitus
Ignatium non contineat, neque ad Vaticanum 859 aut Ottobonianum
348 ne ex longinquo quidem accedat'. The correct position of 428
points not to the number of the Vatican ms from which it was copied,
but to the number of the transcript itself in the collection to which it
at one time or other belonged, as I ascertained by personal inspection.
Montfaucon indeed {Bibl. Bibl. i.
pp. 116, 131, 142) mentions a Vatican
MS of the Ignatian Epistles numbered 4248, but I was informed on the
spot that there was no Greek ms corresponding
to this number. This
transcript {Barber. 68) contains the twelve Epistles of Ignatius in the
order usual in the Long recension. The Epistle of Mary to Ignatius is
not included. Dressel in his preface (p. Ix) promises to designate this
MS C, but in his notes it
appears as B.
But what is the value of this professed transcript In the margin
Allatius gives various readings from the famous Medicean ms (see above,
P- 73 sq),
and in reference to these Dressel describes him as 'baud raro
suas conjecturas pro libri scripti lectionibus tacite venditans'. How
just this accusation is, any one may see for himself by comparing these
marginal readings with any fair collation of the Medicean MS itself
But I can prove to demonstration that his text is even less trustworthy
than his margin. On a closer inspection of the text of this transcript, I
became more and more convinced that its characteristic readings were
taken from some printed edition of the Ignatian Epistles; and at
length I obtained direct proof of this. In Hero 4 this transcript reads
£t [K-T]
l-Ri rOtv TTpwTwv TTjocDTOTrAacrTwi/, inserting the worse than superfluous
TrpwTcov. This reading is obviously false, and is not found in any other