by Valentinus Pacaeus in 1557, [84:4] and the order at the same time represents that of the Cod.  Pal. 150. [84:5] The third (C) is the ancient Latin translation, referred to above, published by Archbishop Usher. [84:6] The fourth (D) is the celebrated Medicean MS. assigned to the eleventh century, and published by Vossius in 1646. [84:7] This also represents the order of the Cod.  Casanatensis G.V. 14. [84:8] I italicise the rejected Epistles: 

A.        |      B.       |       C.        |       D.        |
FABER STAP.  | VAL.  PACAEUS. |     USHER       |    VOSSIUS.     |
|               |                 |                 |
1.  Trallians    | Mar.  Cass.  | Smyrn.          | Smyrn.          |
2.  Magn.        | Trallians     | Polycarp        | Polycarp        |
3. Tarsians   | Magnes.       | Ephes.          | Ephes.          |
4. Philip.    | Tarsians    | Magnes.         | Magnes.         |
5.  Philad.      | Philip.      | Philad.         | Philad.         |
6.  Smyrn.       | Philad.       | Trallians       | Trallians       |
7.  Polycarp     | Smyrn.        | Mar. ad.  Ign._ | Mar. ad.  Ign. |
8. Antioch.   | Polycarp      | Ign. ad.  Mar. | Ign. ad.  Mar. |
9. Hero       | Antioch.     | Tarsians_      | Tarsians      |
10.  Ephes.       | Hero        | Antioch.      |                 |
11.  Romans       | Ephes.        | Hero          |                 |
12.              | Romans        | Mart.  Ign.    |                 |
13.              |               | Romans          |                 |

I have given the order in MSS. containing the “Long Recension” as well as the Vossian, because, however much some may desire to exclude them, the variety of arrangement is notable, and presents features which have an undeniable bearing upon this question.  Taking the Vossian MS., it is obvious that, without any distinction whatever between the genuine and the spurious, it contains three of the false Epistles, and does not contain the so-called genuine Epistle to the Romans at all.  The Epistle to the Romans, in fact, is, to use Dr. Lightfoot’s own expression, “embedded in the Martyrology,” which is as spurious as any of the epistles.  This circumstance alone would justify the assertion which Dr. Lightfoot contradicts.

I must now, in order finally to dispose of this matter of notes, turn for a short time to consider objections raised by Dr. Westcott.  Whilst I have to thank him for greater courtesy, I regret that I must point out serious errors into which he has fallen in his statements regarding my references, which, as matters of fact, admit of practical test.  Before proceeding to them I may make one or two general observations.  Dr. Westcott says:—­