The Syriac ([Greek: hatina en haesouchia Theou to asteri] [or [Greek: apo tou asteros]] [Greek: eprachthae]), abrupt and difficult as it is, does not look like an epitome of the Greek, and the Greek has exactly that exaggerated and apocryphal character which would seem to point to a later date.

It corresponds indeed somewhat nearly to the language of the Protevangelium of James, Sec.21, [Greek: eidomen astera pammegethae lampsanta en tois astrois tou ouranou kai amblunonta tous allous asteras hoste mae phainesthai autous].

Both in the Protevangelium and in the Vossian Ignatius we see what is clearly a developement of the narrative in St.Matthew.If the Vossian Epistles are genuine, then by showing the existence of such a developement at so early a date they will tend to throw back still further the composition of the Canonical Gospel.

If the Syriac version, on the other hand, is the genuine one, it will be probable that Ignatius is directly alluding to the narrative which is peculiar to the first Evangelist.
These are (so far as I am aware) the only coincidences that are found in the Curetonian version.

Their paucity cannot surprise us, as in the same Curetonian text there is not a single quotation from the Old Testament.