[15]. Ibid. p. 450.
[16]. Hibbert Journal, ii. 620.
[17]. Enc. Bibl. ii. 2554.
[18]. Beginnings of Christianity, ii. 166 ff.; cf. von Dobschütz, Probleme, p. 94.
[19]. Character, &c., p. 157 f.
[20]. An incidental passage in Dr. Dill’s Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius (p. 120 f.) deserves to be set by the side of Dr. Drummond’s. He is speaking of the Satiricon of Petronius. ‘Those who have attributed it to the friend and victim of Nero have been confronted with the silence of Quintilian, Juvenal, and Martial, with the silence of Tacitus as to any literary work by Petronius, whose character and end he has described with a curious sympathy and care. It is only late critics of the lower empire, such as Macrobius, and a dilettante aristocrat like Sidonius Apollinaris, who pay any attention to this remarkable work of genius. And Sidonius seems to make its author a citizen of Marseilles. Yet silence in such cases may be very deceptive. Martial and Statius never mention one another, and both might seem unknown to Tacitus. And Tacitus, after the fashion of the Roman aristocrat, in painting the character of Petronius, may not have thought it relevant or important to notice a light work such as the Satiricon, even if he had ever seen it. He does not think it worth while to mention the histories of the Emperor Claudius, the tragedies of Seneca, or the Punica of Silius Italicus.’
[21]. The two books of Drs. Drummond and Stanton were reviewed by M. Loisy in the Revue Critique, 1904, pp. 422-4, and Dr. Drummond’s by Prof. H. J. Holtzmann in Theol. Literaturzeitung, 1905, cols. 136-9. Both reviews were disappointing, though Dr. Holtzmann’s contains the usual amount of painstaking detail. It is natural that play should be made with the real inconsistencies of Dr. Drummond’s position; but his weightier arguments are in neither case directly grappled with.
[22]. Ignatius, i. 405.
[23]. See the story in the Moscow MS. of the Martyrium Polycarpi (Lightfoot, Ignatius, iii. 402), which professes to be taken from ‘the writings of Irenaeus.’
[24]. Character and Authorship, p. 348.