iii. VERSIONS AND MANUSCRIPTS.—The writing is extant (a) in a Greek text (only chs. 1-16), repre- sented by some 12 MSS of 12th-l5th cent., of which Par. τ: 770 (C) may be counted the best; some, like Par. gr. 929 (E) and still more Par. gr. 1021 (D), contain complete transformations and ex-
ansions, partly upon the lines of the canonical
ospels, and partly upon those of other apocrypha, Mon. gr. 192 (A), very much overrated by Tischen- dorf, is re-touched as to style. The so-called Ana- phora (et Paradosis) Pilati as well as the so-called Narratio Josephi are frequently found appended to the Evang. Nicodemi.
(4) Nearest to the above text stands a Coptic version, edited by Fr. Rossi after a Turin papyrus manuscript, and made known b Mischendast, in & Latin translation by Peyron. This version is sup- posed to belong to the 5th cent.
(6, d) Then come two Armenian versions pub- lished by Conybeare after 3 MSS, in a Greek (Latin) rendering ; d being a revision of ὁ with the aid of Greek texts.
_(e) Of far more importance is a Latin versior diffused in numerous MSS (in Bernard’s Bibl. Anglie et Hibernie alone more than 50 may be counted), and belonging perhaps to the 5th or 6th cent. The oldest MS is a palimpsest, Vind. pal. lat. 565, from the 7th cent., completely deciphered
NICODEMUS, GOSPEL OF
and soon to be edited by Dr. Gildlin of Tiefenau; then come Mus. Brit. Royal 5 E xiii, belonging to the 8th cent., and a large number of MSS from the 9th, 10th, and 11th cents. Of those hitherto used, the purest text is exhibited by Einsied]. 169 (called Ὧν by Tischendorf), of the 9th or 10th cent. Here, too, we find many different recensions, the most characteristic instance of which, extending back to the 11th cent. and represented, inter al., by the ed. ree of 1516, has, in addition, a chronology from Adam to Christ, based upon secret Jewish tradi- tion (ch. 28). A very frequent appendage is the letter of Pilate to the emperor Claudius (ch. 29). In one class of MSS the work is continued by the so-called Cura sanitatis Tiberii, the oldest text of the Veronica legend (von Dobschiitz, Christus- bilder, 157**-203**), in another by the so-called Vindicta Salvatoris, a narrative of the destruction of Jerusalem (‘Tischendorf, Zvang. apocr.? 471-486). This Latin text in course of time gained in the West almost canonical authority, was co-ordinated with the other Gospels as an equally valuable source for the history of the Passion, and was thus taken up, e.g., by Vincentius Bellovacensis almost entire into his Speculum historiale. On it are dependent all the numerous translations and re- censions in prose and in verse which are met with in Western languages (cf. R. Wiilcker, Das Evangel. Nicodemi in der abendland. Litteratur, 1872). This is true also, as it appears, of the Slavonic texts (cf. M. Ssperanskij, ‘The Slav. apocr. Gospels’ in Proc. of the viii archwol. Congress at Moscow, 1890, ii, Moscow, 1895 [Russ.]). Nay, even a late Byzantine recension (cf. g) is probably influenced by the above-named Latin text.
(f) Beside this Latin ‘ Vulgate,’ which, by the way, does not show in its Bible text any influence from the side of Jerome, stands a second Latin version, represented by Tischendorf’s manuscripts ABC and some others, which Tischendorf in utterly uncritical fashion has mixed up with the former in chs. 1-16. It is distinguished from the first- named Latin version both by the style of its translation and by the underlying Greek text, to which it adheres closely (most nearly allied are codd. CGI). It sometimes utilizes the text of Jerome. The form of the Descensus (see 2, above) is here manifestly more recent than in e (above).
(g) The latest text, very improperly placed alongside of a (above), is a Byzantine recension, which, extant in numerous MSS of 15th-17th cent., still constitutes part of the religious literature of the Gr. Church, and as such has sometimes been printed, ¢.g., under the title : Ἱστορία ἀκριβὴς περὶ τῶν κατὰ τὴν σταύρωσιν καὶ ἀνάστασιν τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ τελεσθέντων (μετὰ εἰκόνων) συγγρα- φεῖσα τὸ πρῶτον ὑπὸ ᾿Ιουδαίου τινὸς Αἰνέα, συγχρόνου τοῦ Κυρίου, μεταφρασθεῖσα μὲν εἰς τὴν Λατινίδα γλῶσσαν ὑπὸ Νικοδήμου Τοπάρχου τοῦ ἐκ 'Ῥώμης, μετενεχθεῖσα δ᾽ εἰς τὴν Ἑλληνικὴν ὑπὸ ᾿Αβερκίου ἱερομονάχου ᾿Αγιο- ρείτον, Athens, 1889. The earlier editors, Thilo and Tischendorf, were led to their overestimate of this text by the circumstance that it is the only one that contains the Descensus (chs. 17-27) in Greek ; but the latter is in a form decidedly later than either of the two Latin versions. The original Greek text, answering to the Latin e (above), emerges still from the Homilies of Eusebius of Alexandria (6th cent.). Cf. Augusti, Lusebii Emeseni que supersunt opusc. Graca, 1829 ; Thilo, Ueber die Schriften des Eusebius von Alexandrien, 1832; Migne, Patrol. Gr. Ixxxvi. 1.
The Latin text was the first to be printed, and that during the 15th and 16th cents. at various presses, which only to a partial extent stood in relation to one another (see Hain, Repert. bihl., Nos. 11749, 11750, 11751, Leipzig 1516, Venice 1522, Antwerp 1538; Herold’s and Grynweus’ Ortho-
VOL. Ill. —35
NICODEMUS, GOSPEL OF 545
doxographa, Basel 1555, 1569; J. A. Fabricius, Cod. apocr. NT, 1719, 1. 238-300 and oft.). Fre- quently printed also is a German translation, agreeing with the Leipzig edition of 1516 (Hain, No. 11751 and oft., Marburg 1555, 1561, 1568), and another German translation of the 17th cent., e.g. Hamburg [c. 1720]. An Anglo-Saxon text was issued by Ed. Thwaites, Oxford, 1698.