[82:1] Contemporary Review, February 1875, p. 348 [ibid. p. 74].

[82:2] S.R. i. p. 265.

[83:1] Contemporary Review, February 1875, p. 347 [ibid. p. 72 f.] Dr. Lightfoot makes the following important admission in a note:  “The Roman Epistle indeed has been separated from its companions, and is embedded in the Martyrology which stands at the end of this collection in the Latin Version, where doubtless it stood also in the Greek, before the MS. of this latter was mutilated.  Otherwise the Vossian Epistles come together, and are followed by the confessedly spurious Epistles in the Greek and Latin MSS.  In the Armenian all the Vossian Epistles are together, and the confessedly spurious Epistles follow.  See Zahn, Ignatius von Antiochien, p. 111.”

[83:2] Note to Horne’s Int. to the Holy Scriptures, 12th ed. 1869, iv. p. 332, note 1.  The italics are in the original.

[83:3] The Ancient Syrian Version, &c. 1845, p. xxiv f.

[84:1] Corpus Ignat. p. 338.

[84:2] Ibid. p. ii.

[84:3] Dressel, Patr.  Ap. p. lvi.

[84:4] Cureton, Corp.  Ign. p. iii.

[84:5] Dressel, Patr.  Ap. p. lvii f.

[84:6] Cureton, Corp.  Ignat. p. vii f.

[84:7] Ibid. p. xi; Dressel, Patr.  Ap. p. xxxi; cf. p. lxii; Jacobson, Patr.  Ap. i. p. lxxiii; Vossius, Ep. gen.  S. Ign.  Mart., Amstel. 1646.

[84:8] Dressel, Patr.  Ap. p. lxi.

[86:1] “A Few Words on ‘Supernatural Religion,’” pref. to Hist. of the Canon, 4th ed. 1874, p. xix.

[87:1] “A Few Words on ‘S.R.,’” preface to Hist. of Canon, 4th ed. p. xix f.

[87:2] S.R. i. p. 268.

[88:1] On the Canon, Preface, 4th ed. p. xx.

[89:1] These consist only of an additional page of Baur’s work first quoted, and a reference to another of his works quoted in the second note, but accidentally left out of note 3.

[90:1] I take the liberty of putting these words in italics to call attention to the assertion opposed to what I find in the note.

[91:1] It is the same work, I believe, subsequently published in an extended form.  The work I quote is entitled Kirchengeschichte der ersten sechs Jahrhunderte, dritte, umgearbeitete Auflage, 1869, and is part of a course of lectures carrying the history to the nineteenth century.

[92:1] I do not know why Dr. Westcott adds the ‘ff’ to my reference, but I presume it is taken from note 4, where the reference is given to ‘p. 52 ff.’  This shows how completely he has failed to see the different object of the two notes.

[93:1] On the Canon, Pref. 4th ed. p. xxi f.

[97:1] P. 213.

[98:1] On the Canon, Preface, 4th ed. p. xxiv.  Dr. Westcott adds, in a note, “It may be worth while to add that in spite of the profuse display of learning in connection with Ignatius, I do not see even in the second edition any reference to the full and elaborate work of Zahn.”  I might reply to this that my MS. had left my hands before Zahn’s work had reached England, but, moreover, the work contains nothing new to which reference was necessary.