apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

252 EPISTLES OF S. IGNATIUS.
letters occupy with reference to the Seven in the collections of the
Long and Middle Forms, as exhibited in the table on p. 234, reveals
plainly the history of their connexion with the two recensions respectively.
Of the Seven . Epistles four are dated from Smyrna and three
from Troas. Of the six Additional Epistles two— the letter from Mary
and the answer of Ignatius
— are represented as belonging to the time
when he is still peacefully ruling three— at Antioch ; Tarsians, Antiochenes,
Hero— are dated from Philippi; and the remaining one—
Philippians — professes to have been written after he had already reached
Italy (see in. p. 128). Now in the Long Recension these six epistles
are artfully intermingled with the Seven, so that attention may not be
attracted to their spuriousness by their isolation. Yet there is some sort
of symmetry, as they are interposed two and two, thus showing that
the order was not the result of pure accident. Again, though the proper
sequence of time and place is not strictly observed in the arrangement
(as indeed it was not in the seven original Ignatian Epistles which the
forger had before him), yet the letter from Mary and the answer of
Ignatius are placed first, as dating from a time anterior to the journey
to Rome. With the Middle Form the case is different. Here we have
two different arrangements with the Additional Epistles included, the
one of the Greek and Latin copies, the other of the Armenian. The
differences of order seem to show that the two collections were made
independently ; and, if so, it is the more remarkable that they agree in
the one essential point of keeping the Additional Epistles distinct from
the others and appending them as a sort of supplement to the rest'. In
the Greek and Latin copies the Additional Epistles stand in the same
order in which they occur in the Long Recension, if picked out from
the rest, the Epistle to the Philippians however being omitted by an
accident of which an explanation will be offered presently (p. 254). In
this collection the position of the Additional Letters, as an appendix,
is
slightly obscured by the fact that the Epistle to the Romans is removed
from its
proper place as one of the seven original letters. This was a
1
Cureton argues that 'no prejudice (p. 338). The answer is twofold ; (i) The
can result to the Epistles to the Tarsians, order is not chronological in the earlier
to the Antioclienes, and to Hero, from part, where the epistles dated from Smyrna
the circumstance of their being placed are mixed up with those dated from Troas;
after the others in the collection [he is (2) He has omitted all mention of the
speaking of the Latin and Greek, for he letter of Mary and the answer of Ignatius.
was not acquainted with the Armenian]; Professing to have been written while
for they are evidently arranged in chronological
order and rank after the rest, as after the seven letters dated from Smyrna
Ignatius is still at Antioch, they come
having been written from Philippi' etc and Troas.