Yesterday, my new book that attempts to develop an alternative way of writing history, not just that of Early Christianity. Yet, after developing the concept of a retrospective form of approaching the past, I am using four controversial case studies of Patristics and the beginnings of Christianity: The so-called 'Abercius' Inscription, the statue of Hippolytus, the Apology of Aristides and finally the famous letters of Ignatius of Antioch.
A good section of the opening can be read on googlebooks: https://books.google.de/books?id=AluHDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Erratum: On p. 266, n. 4 regarding IgnRom it should not read 'as it was not handed down ... nor as part ... but was part', instead: 'as it was handed down ... but was part ... and was part'
A good section of the opening can be read on googlebooks: https://books.google.de/books?id=AluHDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Erratum: On p. 266, n. 4 regarding IgnRom it should not read 'as it was not handed down ... nor as part ... but was part', instead: 'as it was handed down ... but was part ... and was part'
