he Medicean MS., and in the ancient
Latin version corresponding with it, which is, that the Epistles
presumed to be the genuine production of that holy Martyr are mixed
up with others, which are almost universally allowed to be spurious.
Both in the Greek and Latin MSS. all these are placed upon the same
footing, and no distinction is drawn between them; and the only
ground which has hitherto been assumed for their separation has been
the specification of some of them by Eusebius and his omission of
any mention of the others." [83:3]

"The external evidence from the testimony of manuscripts in favour
of the rejected Greek Epistles, with the exception of that to the
Philippians, is certainly greater than that in favour of those which
have been received. They are found in all the manuscripts, both
Greek and Latin, in the same form; while the others exhibit two
distinct and very different recensions, if we except the Epistle to
Polycarp, in which the variations are very few. Of these two
recensions the shorter has been most generally received: the
circumstance of its being shorter seems much to have influenced its
reception; and the text of the Medicean Codex and of the two copies
of the corresponding Latin version belonging to Caius College,
Cambridge, and Corpus Christi College, Oxford, has been adopted ...
In all these there is no distinction whatever drawn between the
former and latter Epistles: all are placed upon the same basis; and
there is no ground whatever to conclude either that the arranger of
the Greek recension or the translator of the Latin version esteemed
one to be better or more genuine than another. Nor can any prejudice
result to the Epistles to the Tarsians, to the Antiochians, and to
Hero, from the circumstance of their being placed after the others
in the collection; for they are evidently arranged in chronological
order, and rank after the rest as having been written from Philippi,
at which place Ignatius is said to have arrived after he had
despatched the previous Letters. So far, therefore, as the evidence
of all the existing copies, Latin as well as Greek, of both the
recensions is to be considered, it is certainly in favour of the
rejected Epistles, rather than of those which have been retained."
[84:1]

Proceeding from counter-statements to actual facts, I