es Timothy dane op ‘idea sre mine oration with 5 uteri vwace” saint premier martyr in A. FREY-R, Gowrie, des réunies en Vhonne fons du Z8bre, 2007, pp,ke a mer ob ap unanimously adopt a ne + whi BAtive 5 40 sine Deceim Cnanan the apoeryPha, ec ‘Anyone who has some got feel ented to. view ferundisputed fact bon ean ete rote - ne Nn cose ofa ih ac Pate chiefly in ica of Severus of a, tion in 536 ang a” crap Timothy Aciures ative te and the cos tNeM 3 on itn spool ess roe iain Mca ——— Tn boca Gel 5; —poasenlre, Das Decretim Colslaram de tp punted rg a, Leipie: .C. Hines, 1912, pp 21-61, rie crypha). i ey a CPO, 2028 CE ln Orato de epiphania (CPG 4849) i Nat Ne es 00) p08 495 Giovanni Crisosione *Crvations, G. DORIVAL, “Nouveaux fragments grec stoi Seite this happened ae aa eerind now extensively analyzed by SThis writing, which, a iCcording Ch, wit so japon. Hulde aan Dr. Maurits Geerard bij de vottoons 120-121)6 "de tig conta ne ar te Prenangtiom Taco is 0 standard ely dt century, ereatboogh It coctpte cn. apoctyph ef. C. BOTTRICH, “ApokrYphe Jester f WUNT 254 pp. 655-684, especially p. 667, note 33; carat Cann ranma ts Hor of bred tease eh Src ar ne mhntg tet at Mase ies them; ef. ibid, p. 671. b = M, MCNAMARA, “Latin Infancy Gospels. The J Compile Introduction and Edition”, in Apocrypha Hiberniae. 1. Evangelia Infantiae (CSA 14) pay p. 49-60.1. The Inventory fancy apocrypha. Sti Il. The Paidika y Gospel of Thomas. This recent, ted the Ifane sare dn inthe manuscript tradition, isn sansa af Thomas, concocted by Johan interpreta Alben jed by a hurr fictitious preface," where & uthor of the Paidika, and ide ), Turnhout: Brepols, 1989, yy _ Top som, Pricun, Acta Andreae. Fl (CCSA 5. -protvangile de Jacques, in EAC I, pp. 71-104 (102-103), Testamenti... Hamburg: B. Schite, ion of Feb. cs, Codex Apocryphus No ih pp. 128-158 where the zstimonia concerning the Euangelium Th the Paidika. The second e 1A. PREY. ion on this point. addition (0 the primitive text of the jose referring Poiita and is absent from all the early strands of the manuscript tradition, porreicu, “Apokryphe Jesustberlieferungen”, bop. 2N), especially the stemma’ Wer. vorcu, “Verso together discount that the Paidika exis (9.99) and p31 ay in Tenge ine, sted ales s derived from Greek; 1.667, note 82 ieIv. Secondary 3 vanctan sera ete Pe pr tne nee spc Lome hits eine or trees (Sa ms i in oa aan terpalenn Tome, in colaboration with 2 sbacertanns Dig on can Mei i xe 1. bai: 1. Wish se Buchhandting NZL ll te PHT 2 gun, Proennetion ie dealin Chit ey Le ama thc mit con rs Bong ar i eee inl Hirosolmis, Baan emt le inna rl Met eet sr a ta cee es na et le, Sane 2 This is characterized notably by serieien in Io, Revelations ef cries. Nowveaw Testament et revenge ec ees th 29), Coes Lark Py * Cf. J. VAN HAELST. Miarct euangelistoe, colleta ex pn, asl: toh Oporins, 1552, The hee tba ryote inder ete le "Pap. papyrolgie” 1, Pais: Publications de la Sorbonne, 1976, p. 501, n° 600 eo Tino’ ie Pes di eat bcc pani, @, Cavaase gent Florence: Gonneli, 1998, pp. 25-38, at 25-26. st (alan) which Was copie wnies Told t0 John (CANT™Y® “arbi Gospel of John M. is known al vas in (Ueh teansated inna Gees Mensa nto G sive name of the Miracle: "82 (Class vod the f the Miracles of Jesus (cate wea Eihion, Prot. SOR), were onset wee 8 Thou We recension St NBEACL pp. 205 8 i qext and Healian translation in ext and I : ML. Provera, 1 Ih vangelo arabo ere ae tauren oe (a sand Franciscan pining pest, 1973, 7) (Quader 6e “La tena ee hate telat nL; MORALDL, Vga aa apc aa damn Manos oteca Ambrosiana (Di ome Ca eet loan — 'S), Milano: ok 1991 The Arabi text was published Iewonim arabic oem eit aie ‘conve yt Erna Sant ides 1 Arabica complcen. Liber th Toten pepe rs Sastanae ex Oriente monumenta), Mediolani: in aedibus Monee etait Si stand French tanaton ies Gene ens rien publié et VAUT, Les miracles és nl ttraduit (PO 12, 4 = 60), Pats: Frmin-Dider voy eee ae published in its entirety in 1990 by the Orthodox Ethiopian Church ant eee eS with facing Amatsiderable success leged sources Jesus mainly is in ca po. 383-579 Ss a ome details about tis SUCCESS and try 19 fing ome rhe spread of the Protea sre Pre 140 manoscrps 0 Cree _ Th also THDROS ABRANA — D. ASSEFS, “Apoctyphal gospels int i", in WUNT 254. pp. 611-653, es pp. 621-638, ' Eth. IY does it su was translated into gat Joseph le. Charpenti Monotes), Paris Montréal: Médiaspaul. 2004, pp. able text in A, BATTISTA~ B. BAOATTL, Edi ica del testo ‘Histor louephe fabri tnarite ricerche sulla sua origine (SBF. Collectio an Priaing Press, 1978. Gabo de Minor 20), The Armenian Gospel of the Infancy we revngeum of anes, Oxfors New York Ona nd Me te forma naps Tacs & ep = New York: Oot Unive pe bo Epc apBEv05 (hom. 1 § 2: N, Constna es PERS & 'Enfance de Késus en Arménie" in WUNT 254, pp. 557-582. ‘spoeryphe de ocalt ofthe Virgin in late Antiquity: homilies 1's (cece of E. DE STRYCKER, De griekse handschr | Tie 3) wera coeow aapdévos Buewey (hom. 2 § 10: ine ingen on Ke Vea acer) en Eases (om 24 9 3: Co Ma Fee games akateni vr Ehrstlogiques des IV et V"sicles sur la Nativité Par ts 1 1968, rf 11-87 (41), ete. sri er Early Versions Press, 2008; ef. also I. DORFMANN-LAZAREV, “Ladike VI. The transmission oF the Bg onener lost revision, made nits current position joseph and cade-tranted an enormoun wa em might be sin in manuscripts. But 1! some memory of the old distrust re. Me. Sainte es Sin gael ram ip or be Ie excl des doi odio, 1962-1963, vol. I. pp. 20-21 N von di monastere dt Saint Sauveur & Mes ci: fy (OrCheAn 185), Rome: P. Ins ee nee Le ensis gr 115. ADH erent ln te Proeuaneliom scaly ¥0y ol pings cil in Coden st 2 Bag obraphice Nig ‘Apocrypha ti : +. 18-91. Sone ‘can be exty fom To cin fe extaed fea lin Gon of oe $8 also TeDRoS co-operation with Z Aer. Series IberoCi M. McNamara. tt sch ty of Mary | ining Some, but then rejected because of its non-scriptural nature. AC least 1993), pp. 47-71. in Late Fourth Century Rome”, in JECS.P gisturdine tH nosly secondary Toles: in Ch es pad some bearing. since the a wel, never achieved thee ‘VIL. Apocrypha in he Liturgy a 4 6 0G wt he gy, oo ee ea eet ay ana a success. * Certain, se chen the Pada wy ia) agents with No See ee Oe a Goapel Bloowtas mene Mitory of loeph the Cane + taken over ony twice. However ty eipere the Paidika exist (almost?) always in the wo almost lays 2 “The Race mmeone who ly over Jesus Z ge Stud = 1. CHACHER te, a hho corrective note nor any other det wealypse of Peter (Studies on Early Christian "LACHES? (Edy {very intresting suggestion concerning the author oft ch should be placed atthe beginning ofthe Be eh Se of com “8 com ‘rims of Peta she Autor athena ge eo sou, un nouveau engin de Ia rencontre entre judaisme et christianisme & Antioche ay Wessitcle® 433-458, crear pp. 41-42. Only Georgius Syncelis, Byzantine auchor of the Sth-Mth century, describes the Paidika as ahistorical source ¥¥C 62 (2008), pp. 1-34.ito st oak el wae 9M WALLRARE ~ Re BRANDLE Coat Cryin ri ea hehe cer Hise Fate ain ~ New York, NY: Walter de G ers ne to anachronisms. ‘nuyter : Hoan Notes 2 et Crt 2008. p- 173. et Ns Pa BESO. Pa a tin yu ery existence it Freee spsing cam he end of the ‘rtamous passage of Egerias tested towards the end my OY Snow both Greek and Syris may know S fe him who translates the Greek into Sy mn son ic cnn supporting aster Travels to the Holy si tal Poblhing Hoe witxinsow, Exeria’s of ed., Jerusalem ~ sent nd te Revs Pras, 1981, 9149) F un Egera's book, writen between 380 and 383 85 (1967), pp. 165-194), whic re the other hand, Ege inference agrees wa date du voyage o'Egerie”s cal readings from the eanoni sie ed day ceremonies (tinerarium 35-37: WILKINSON, Egeria’ oi ia coincides in is essential features, with the ructars Wie essed to atthe beginning of the Sth century by the various recensions of the Armeniag Lectionary (A. RENOUX, Le codex nian ‘arménien Jérusalem 121. I. Edition comparée dy caen nde deus autres manuscrts (PO 36, 2 = 168), Turnhout: Brepols, 1971, peat 1139}-295 [I57), which leaves no room for non-scriptural readings; see also S dans la tradition liturgique byzantine (SA 99; Analect 1988. turgica 13), Rome: Benedi VIII. Apocrypha as Historica, ‘eal Sources sot shel a tae a eM, Spo first instance of this phenomenon erent es on is Soman, Nita see? “ Paradoxical gant a, £8. John Cass wich mam hae ee di Alessandria. Len ets (2004), pp. 115-138; ead., “Medi the Apost » “Medieval Memo le Andee a Gee of the Apocryphal Acts in he Litemeny ut APs Pa Apocrypha 19 (2008), pp. 123-148, Commemtrtion ofthe eoe ts pols explains the e inary resuy Po next the enoxmous sues eng by rei) Ke comme ost, Ri Meme Latin €¢ et BR i Memory: The Apoeryphal sess ecu f Prado turgical Comme. win the Early Medie 500-1215 ) (Mintle “jen ~ Boston, MA: Brill, 2009) In the Byrne wane Suen nt Tene part of the Acta lohannis (CANT 213), sunives in a ec iaot siagale numer af weve last ig te nts (ef E. JUNOD J-D. KABST, Aca lek terra ait ~ commentarius ~ indices (CCS 1-2, Tormout ee 1983, oh 01 1 pp. 30-39). which were used for his feast on September 2 Riplains the enormous success of the Latin Gory of aie fsa sa ts ofthe Evangelium Nicodemi: A Census Subs Meta ee to: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1993, who isis 435 =‘ ov Y le ini nen Mth be ens 9 Meta 8 1x. The Theory of Interpolations 1 be followed by fee of the ean the he New Testament. THIS need pactitting he gdopred by John, bishop of The’ the inamely, that SOME teXts whieh Oni s. If thei that John himself paid only ip sery ras ache tt eBoy “te aston noed 60 “purifyr fneie? OF naifary (CANT 102-103) ced 10 tion Baa ANT porthodox traits emerges inthe rewriting of S°°Phy rom cil a peay sen soe eampes of i.e oer nes. paps the best example is the reshaping of tne ,*&dia di bat seudo-Prochorus and which Survives in gosh oF “SFr contrast with the scarcity of witnesses of gr 150 "© origi. Greek manuscripts ral text. X. Ideological Interpretation ory of Joseph the Carpent. We have already seen that the History of. Spin etme ay ons cares over from the Paidika by alee meaniné fuveen the theological roles of Joseph and Jesus. 8 the mn happens With a controyer But a more subtle kind of reinterpret p which appears quite often i the ancient apocrypha, tht sial concep! Christ's polymorphy. Whereas in early Christianity it the reality of the Incarnat surreptitious way of denying In ly viewed as a manifestation of divine power.“ Something si s, 1995, pp. 97-118; HJ. KLave Kok Pharos, 199: WUCK, Die apokryphe Seay cm fen Christen (Ti cov Tages Wa ee ebesk, 208, 9p. 403-374. Concerning medieval instances of polymorphy, cf. R. Favanoe mn diem natalem Christ: PG 46, 1137 D. La tradition grecque de la dormition et de “ct, $C. Mavouni SJ. Vor es introduts,traduits et annote... (Sagesses chrétienne Oriente Cristiano 4, 2), Rome, 2000, yp. 29-144 assomption de Marie. Paris: Cer, 2003, pp. 110- Cf JuNoD - KAgSTLL, Acta ohannis, cit, vol. I, pp. 3-8 and If, pp. 718-749, Mereveli (= Studi su in JN. BREMMER (ed.) The GrKr. MCKAY, “Christ's Polymorphism in Jerusalem, T: inpent : Taphou 14 ‘Text and Image”, in Apocrypha 14 (2003), pp. 177-191. aphou 14: An Examination of “CE PJ. LALLEMAN, “Polymorphy of Chi Apocryphal Acts of John (Studies on the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles Kampen: