ot been able to consult, but | 20th December, 115.
from secondary references I gather |
that it repeats the arguments given |
under the next reference.] |
|
"10. Volkmar, Haindb. _Einl. Apocr._ | Ibid. _Handbuch Einl. Apocr._
pp. 121 f., 136. 'Ein Haupt der | p. 121 f., affirms the martyrdom
Gemeinde zu Antiochia, Ignatius, | at Antioch, 20th December, 115.
wurde, waehrend Trajan dortselbst |
ueberwinterte, am 20. December den |
Thieren vorgeworfen, in Folge der |
durch das Erdbeben vom 13. December |
115 gegen die [Greek: atheoi] |
erweckten Volkswuth, ein Opfer |
zugleich der Siegesfeste des |
Parthicus, welche die Judith- |
Erzaehlung (i. 16) andeutet, Dio |
(c. 24 f.; vgl. c. 10) voraussetzt |
...' |
|
"P. 136. The same statement is | Ibid. p. 136. The same
repeated briefly." [93:1] | statement, with fuller
| chronological evidence.

It will thus be seen that the whole of these authorities confirm the
later date assigned to the martyrdom, and that Baur, in the note in
which Dr. Westcott finds "nothing in any way bearing upon the history
except a passing supposition," really advances a weighty argument for it
and against the earlier date, and as Dr. Westcott considers, rightly,
that argument should decide everything, I am surprised that he has not
perceived the propriety of my referring to arguments as well as
statements of evidence.

To sum up the opinions expressed, I may state that whilst all the nine
writers support the later date, for which purpose they were quoted,
three of them (Bleek, Guericke, and Mayerhoff) ascribe the martyrdom to
Rome, one (Bretschneider) mentions no place, one (Hagenbach) is
doubtful, but leans to Antioch, and the other four declare for the
martyrdom in Antioch. Nothing, however, could show more conclusively the
purpose of note 3, which I have explained, than this very contradiction,
and the fact that I claim for the general statement in the text,
regarding the martyrdom in Antioch itself in opposition to the legend of
the journey to and death in Rome, only the authorities in note 4, which
I shall now proceed to analyse in contrast with Dr. Westcott's
statements, and here I beg the favour of the reader's attention.

NOTE 4.