De Boor’s Fragment is more precise in its assertion, ‘Papias, in his
second book, says that John the divine (ὁ θεολόγος) and James his
brother were slain by the Jews.’ ‘John the divine’ is naturally
questioned; it is defended by Schwartz, but may quite well be due to the
fragmentist. The main arguments against the statement are the silence of
the early writers, especially Eusebius, and the possibility of confusion
between John the Baptist and John the Apostle, or between red martyrdom
and white. No doubt this is one of the better examples of the argument
from silence, and no doubt we must reckon with the possibility of
mistake. Still I do not feel that the statement altogether loses its
force. I said something about it in Lecture III; I will at present only
add that supposing it were true, the language of Papias about the two
Johns can be explained more satisfactorily.