장음표시 사용
12쪽
13쪽
ERRATUM.Ρ. 39, litiora, Aliould stand thus euidenter deola res Sed et profectionem poli ab ur
15쪽
16쪽
17쪽
18쪽
Muratori, Onaround Whicli heraives in his description ascribes his fragm0n to tho Roman Presbyter CaiuS, bout the ea A. D. 196 an opinion ardiniora reconcil0d With thu fac Whicli the writer states that Pius a bishorios Rome in his time: th dat of the Episcopatum Piusi VariouSi giVen, I 27 142 and 42-157ς. ther place his death 15o. That it Was originalty ritton in reoli, and that Some of the mistat es in the Ambrosian op are thos os a translator, a O cours the opiniono Muratori in supposin Caius orae ih author But th Greel originalis a potnt Whollyrii respective of an opinion a to the authorShip. 2. It Wasini natural that ome attention hould oon have been directo to so curious a monument of Christian antiquity bearin ascitdoe suci an important relation to the evidonee so the Can0n of th NewΤ0stament.
St0Sch in 1755, quali rejecte tho opinion that Caius ad deuth author but he also dente iis Gr00k original, and Aought to explain the documen on the supposition that it ad been originalty rittenin Latin. In 177st, Simon de Magistris, in editin Daniel secundum LXX ex codice Chisiano in the dissertations subj0ined attributed the authorshimio Papias of Hierapolis p. 467ὶ he rightly Sa that Greeli a tho originalWesteoti's Histor os the anon os the through disserent paris os a very long period Ne Testament, an ed. I 865 p. 185) Dr. Routh's edition is the Euthydemus and the round bove stated, and thers, uel a Gorgias os Plato appeared in I 784 his res the eterodoxies mentioned the Fragmen is breVes Tractatus exacti SeVent year insterno vnreasOnabi supposed tot no later thau Wards, in I 85 But the rarit os suci a cir- the ear I7o, O probabi earlier cumstane malles the difficult os ascribiti this The questionis date mines it improbabis that Fragmen to Caius very manifest, a does thei cari e the or os Caius although there contextis the passage hieli Spealis o Pius asare uot antiri instances o literar activit living in his time.
19쪽
language, and that the Ambrosian op is impi a translation; ut in Suppositi Papias to have been the author, he a almost, fiso quite, a Sincorrect in his chronol0gy by placiniit to early a Muratori ad been in placiniit to late. Most of thos wh have discussed the Fragmen have been contentwith rogardiniit a boin lilio the Episti to Diognetus, ne O the early Christian monuments of the authorship of Whicli, know nothing. Andiliis in tho absence of ali evidene is tho Only 0ursorio e adoptud is Wowould avoid speculation. ho late Baron Bunsen, in his Analoeta Ante- Nicaena t. 125 λα), in publiShing thi Fragment, aseribes it to Hegesippus '. Thati live at the samo time a th author of this Fragment, linoW; but his in itsul prove nothing, a Bunsen trul states: ut e trius tofindisomo confirmationis his conjecture DOm the anne in hieli Eusebius and Jerome Speali of Hegesippus an his mode Os using acred bookS.Αl that cana suid, Pthinii in favour of Bunsen' hypothesis is that it is not like thos of Muratori and Simon de Magistris, contradicte by facis: it oes no involvo any actuat impossibility. s. 0r a long time the ex of the Fragment Was ni known romtho dition os Muratori, although it might have been thought probabio that in a document of so peculiar a Lini Some of the obscure Ord Would admit os a re-examination belli made With ad vantago A collation of Iuratori' luxi illi the S. itfel Wa made by GEORGE FREDERI NOTI, Who communicatsed the resulis to Dr. Routh, Wh after tho collator' duath inserto thsem in the secon edition of his Reliquiae Sacrae 1846ὶ In 1847 another collation a made by Pror FRIEDRICHAEIEAELER, Whicli aspublislio by his rothor, Pros Kari Wiesoler, in the Studion und ritii sensor that ear. In 184 PalS M. HERT made the collation used by Baron Bunsen in his edition. Some of thOS Who endeavoured to Scorta in the tria reading of the Fragment di so, as assumin that the Latin is the original, and thus ali
H hadrarsi dono this in the announoemen that the Presbyter Caius is the author, o also hic appeare at the en os his Ignatius voti is Bunsen's opinion, accordini to hicli the Antiochie uti sein Zeit. Sieben Sen Ischris Fragmen is ahen tu os Hegesippus'. Five te a Dr. August eander, Hamburg 1847. Book of υπομν ara . . . Hegesippus himself id In the Nachschrist, . 24 , he expressos his no abide by this Canon, ut sed the Gospelliope os publishin in the fame ea Marcion accordin to the Hebrem Eusebius H. E. V. und Hegesippus ider Mer tries ac Diognet a). ... Eusebius, ho mo hight honouredund iam muratorisches Bruchstve liber de Hegesippus H. E. v. in and adis nil ae-
Creduer Geschichte des neutestamentlichen no in his inquir so lisis of the anon avo Κanon, p. I 2, 3 thus discusses the theor omitte to infert his lis in his delesiasti eat whicli ascribes the authorshipo Hegesippus Histor had taeen Dunxi Hegesippus.' Iust a utilenabi ascis Muratori' supposition
20쪽
have been Routh Says:- Ego e veStigiis satis claris deprehendisse mini videor hominem, qui Graece scripserit, Subter haec Latina Verba latentem o indicio quod eadem ita graecissant, ut etiam e illa lingua reddita esse videantur. Rel Sae i. ost. These remariis re in OppoSition to Froind- allor, ho, hile e revived the hyp0thesis Os Muratori that Caius asth author salil also Tragmentum nostrum Latinae p0tius Originis stylum Sapit.'Dr. Roulli' notos on the Fragment ero os more importa ne so thuillustration of the writer' mea in than hos of ali ho ad pr000d0dhim a Such the have a permanent alue, undis One an Salal neglect