apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

294 EPISTLES OF S. IGNATIUS.
version the extant Armenian translation was made at a comparatively
early date. It lias been proved also (p. 91 sq) that this Syriac version
was intimately connected with the Curetonian letters ;
that where they
cover the same ground, the two are identical ;
that this identity is such
as to preclude the supposition of accidental coincidence; and that
therefore the only conclusion is the alternative, either that the Curetonian
letters are abridged from the Syriac version of the Vossian
letters, or that the Syriac version of the Vossian letters was an
expansion from the Curetonian letters made by filling in the missing
parts with the aid of the Greek. Which is the more probable supposition
The abridgnieiit theory
is a very simple postulate. The abbreviator
had only to run his pen through the passages which he wished to omit,
to substitute here and there an epitome for a longer passage, to supply
here and there a link of connexion, and to transcribe the whole. He
need not even have taken so much trouble as this. He might have
performed the work of abridging as he went on, currente calamo. A
very few hours would serve to complete his task.
On the other hand the expansion theory
is full of difficulties. We
must suppose that
some Syrian had before him the Curetonian letters
in Syriac, and the Vossian letters in Greek ;
that he carefully noted all
the passages which were wanting or transposed
or different in the
former; that he produced conformity by translating from the latter,
supplying omissions, inverting transpositions, and altering divergences ;
and that he did this in such a way as to produce a harmonious Syriac
whole corresponding to the Greek whole which he had before him. If
any one will take the trouble to compare the Vossian letters with the
Curetonian, he will see what enormous labour and care such a work
would involve. The relation is not one of simple curtailment or simple
expansion. It is one either of careless, rough, and capricious manipulation,
if the Curetonian letters be an abridgment of the Vossian, or of
elaborate and consummate literary artifice, if the Vossian letters be an
expansion of the Curetonian. This being the relation between the two
forms, it will be seen at once how great must have been the labour of
the Syrian who set himself to fulfil the task here supposed. Any one
for instance, who will compare in the two recensions the 19th chapter
of the Ephcsians or the opening salutation of the Romans will be able
to judge for himself. Or we may take the close of the Epistle
Romans in
the Vossian Epistle to
to the
the Curetonian Form, which incorporates two chapters from
the Trallians, and try to imagine the amount of
care and attention which would be required for such a task. Indeed it