apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

3^2 EPISTLES OF S. IGNATIUS.
referred to the exegetical and historical bearings of this fact (see
above, p. 33 sq, and below, 11. pp. 2, 211, 241, 251, 256, 267), and
I wish now to call attention to its evidential value.
The pohit to be observed that is, though this route which has been
sketched out, when once apprehended, commends itself, for it
explains
the fact does not lie on
all notices and allusions in these epistles ; yet
the surface so as to be obvious. So far is this from being the case, that
the author of the
these geographical references,
Antiochene Acts altogether overlooks the bearing of
and sends Ignatius by sea from Seleucia
to Smyrna {Mart. Ign. Ant. 3 see 11.
; e.sp. pp. 384, 484 sq), though
he seems certainly to have been acquainted with the epistles. The same
view of his journey was taken also by Ussher and Pearson and the great
majority of critics— even the ablest — until quite recent times, notwithstanding
that Eusebius had represented the matter correctly {H.E. iii. 36 Tr]v Si
'Ao-tas avaKOfxiS-qv). Only when the spuriousness of the Antiochene Acts
came to be generally acknowledged, was the journey by land recognized
as the route indicated in the epistles. The fact is
gathered from a
comparison of passages scattered here and there in the letters. Thus in
Ro/ii. 5, writing from Smyrna, Ignatius speaks of himself as 'fighting
with wild beasts ',
for so he describes the harsh treatment of his guards,
'
by land and sea.' This expression however would not be decisive
in itself If he had come to Smyrna by sea, the mention of the ' land '
must be prospective;
if on 'the other hand he had come by land, the
mention of the 'sea' must be prospective, unless indeed we suppose him
already to have crossed the water from Seleucia to some Cilician or
Pamphylian port (see 11. p. 211). But a later passage in the same
epistle {Ro/n. 9) is more explicit. He speaks of ' the churches which
received ' him, ' '
not as a mere passer-by w TrapoSeuovra), and adds
{ov)(^
that 'even those which did not lie on his route (at /x} Trpoa-yJKovaaL fxoL
rrj oSw Trj Kara aapKo) went before him from city to city (Kara 7roA,tv fj.e
TrpoTJyov).'
No natural interpretation can be put on these words which
is consistent with the continuous voyage from Seleucia to Smyrna.
The tricks of exegesis to which even the ablest critics have resorted to
reconcile them with the assumed sea route will be seen in the notes on
the passage (11. pp. 231, 232).
But it is not here that the most subtle coincidences are to be sought.
The main fact of the land journey might have been inferred by a
careful reader, as it was inferred by Eusebius, notwithstanding the
expression 'land and sea', which might put him on the wrong scent.
It is when we come to trace the particular overland route which he
took, that the undesigned coincidences reveal themselves. Not a word