(2) From _Ignatius_, whose early date and connexion with Antioch, a chief centre of apostolic work, render, as Lightfoot well urges, his personal intercourse with apostles at least probable. The earliest tradition represents Ignatius as the second of the Antiochene bishops. His martyrdom must be dated _circa_ A.D. 110. He was evidently then an old man. He was certainly a younger contemporary of some of the apostles. (3) From _Polycarp_, whose close connexion in youth with S. John is indisputable, since his own disciple, the well-known Irenæus, tells us that Polycarp was a scholar of the beloved disciple; and that he (Irenæus) had heard from his master, Polycarp, many anecdotes of the apostles, which he had treasured up in his memory. (4) From _Barnabas_, whose immediate connexion with the apostle is less certain; but the early date of his Epistle, written apparently during the days of the Flavian dynasty, would render the ancient traditions of this connexion at least highly probable. These writings, few and humble, which have come down to us, are all we can with any certainty ascribe to “Apostolic” men; and they _are all cast in “letter form,”_ viz., the one somewhat lengthy Epistle of Clement, the seven authentic Epistles of Ignatius, the one brief Epistle of Polycarp, the one (of considerable length) Epistle of Barnabas. These Epistles are genuine “Letters,” and “represent the natural outpouring of personal feeling arising out of personal relations”; but they contain doctrinal statements of the deepest importance, notably emphatic or positive statements bearing on the Godhead of Jesus Christ.[28] These Epistles[29] were obviously meant by the writers for a far more extended circle of readers than the congregations of Corinth, Philippi, Rome, etc., to whom the Letters were formally addressed. PART IV I HADRIAN, A.D. 117-A.D. 138 Some four years after his correspondence with Pliny on the subject of the Christians in Bithynia, the Emperor Trajan died somewhat suddenly in the course of his Eastern campaign, at the Cilician, town of Selinus (A.D. 117). Trajan was succeeded by his kinsman Hadrian, who had married the Emperor’s great-niece Julia Sabina. The circumstances of Hadrian’s succession are somewhat confused. It was given out generally that he had been adopted by Trajan as his successor. It is certain, however, that his pretensions to the imperial power were favoured by Trajan’s Empress, Plotina, and some even ascribe his succession largely to a palace intrigue; it is clear that no real opposition to his peaceable assumption of the imperial power was offered. It is regrettable that we possess no notable contemporary history of one of the most remarkable of the Roman Emperors. How intensely interesting would have been a picture by Tacitus of so extraordinary and unique a personality!