TWO NEW WITNESSES TO THE ACTA PILATI TRADITION*...Le Muséon 129 (3-4), 251-278. doi: 10.2143/MUS.129.3.3178244 - Tous droits réservés. © Le Muséon, 2016. TWO NEW WITNESSES TO

Le Muséon 129 (3-4), 251-278. doi: 10.2143/MUS.129.3.3178244 - Tous droits réservés.© Le Muséon, 2016.

TWO NEW WITNESSES TO THE ACTA PILATI TRADITION*

A manuscript from Vienna important for the transmission of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas has also proven an intriguing source for tradi-tions related to the Acta Pilati cycle of texts. The cycle includes several versions of the Acts of Pilate (or Gospel of Nicodemus as it is known in medieval Latin manuscripts), the Narrative of Joseph of Arimathea, the Vindicta Salvatoris, as well as several letters of Pilate and reports of his death1. Also related are a number of medieval sermons that draw upon either the cycle or common sources. Some of these sermons have yet to receive comprehensive treatment from scholars. When such a treatment materializes, the Vienna manuscript will have a role to play in establish-ing critical editions of two texts: In sancta et magna Parasceue et in sanctam passionem Domini (On the Passion, for the Preparation Day = BHGa 635b; CPG 5526) attributed to Eusebius of Alexandria, and a previ-ously unknown sermon detailing the burial of Jesus and the imprisonment of Joseph of Arimathea.

The manuscript is cataloged as Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. hist. gr. 91, (pap., 220/225 × 150 mm, 208 fols.) of the 14th or 15th cen-tury2. It contains a variety of texts, including NT excerpts (e.g., Luke 7:2-16 fol. 22r-22v), homilies (e.g., by Cyril of Alexandria, John Chrysostom, and others), sermons, hagiographica, and other miscellaneous texts (the Abgar Correspondence, various chronicles and church histories), many of which are without titles. The version of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas found in the manuscript belongs to the Greek A recension established by Tischendorf; indeed, it is the only known complete witness to the recension – all other manuscripts, including those used by Tischendorf, lack significant portions of the text3. Until recently, the manuscript was

* My thanks to Jack Horman, Andrew Bernhard, and Sarah Veale for their assistance in constructing the Greek editions of the two texts featured here.

1 For an accessible discussion of the various texts along with English translations see Ehrman – PlEšE, Apocryphal Gospels, p. 419-585. A more thorough treatment can be found in Izydorczyk, Nicodemus’ Gospel. See also GEErard, CANT 64-78, as well as the Garshuni texts “Lament of the Virgin” and “Martyrdom of Pilate”, in mInGana, Wood-brooke Studies, 2, p. 163-332; and the Georgian Story of Joseph in van EsbroEck, L’histoire de Lydda, p. 119-127.

2 For a complete description of the manuscript see hunGEr, Katalog, vol. 1, p. 94- 102.

3 The first mention of the manuscript in connection to Infancy Thomas was made by norEt, Pour une édition. It was then used peripherally by Rosén in his Slavonic Translation.

99279_Museon_2016_3-4_01_Burke.indd 251 29/11/16 06:02

252 T. BURkE

overlooked in research on the gospel; it has been overlooked also in dis-cussions of the Acta Pilati, likely because the two related texts it contains are fragmentary and without titles.

1. On the Passion, for the Preparation Day4

The first of the two texts under examination has been known in scholar-ship for centuries5. It is one among a group of homilies attributed to Euse-bius of Alexandria, four of which have parallels of content with the Acta Pilati tradition6. Upon its initial publication, On the Passion was placed among the spuria of John Chrysostom7, due to the information provided in the incipit of the manuscript used by Henry Saville in 16128. Saville did not reveal full details of this manuscript, only that it was from Vienna (he called it “ms. Caesareo”). Guy Lafontaine believed it to be either theol. gr. 247 or theol. gr. 263, both of which attribute the text to Chry-sostom9. Saville’s edition was reproduced a century later in Bernard de Montfaucon’s collection of Chrysostom’s works10. The determination that the text should belong to the corpus of Ps.-Eusebius was made by J.C. Thilo in 183211. Thilo wrote in objection to Johann Christian Wilhelm Augusti’s position that three of the Ps.-Eusebius sermons (numbered 13, 14, and 15) should instead be credited to another Eusebius: Eusebius of Emesa12. Thilo included in his refutation a reproduction of Saville/Montfaucon’s

Comprehensive treatment is found in burkE, De infantia Iesu, p. 131-132 and chartrand-burkE, Greek Manuscript Tradition, p. 138.

4 Greek text and translation, below p. 260-267. 5 Comprehensive overviews of the publishing history of the text can be found in lEroy –

GlorIE, ‘Eusèbe d’Alexandrie’, and GounEllE, Collectio Sermonum, p. 249-272. lafon-taInE, La version arménienne, contains the clearest discussion of the text’s early publishing history and includes a detailed list of the known Greek manuscripts.

6 The other three are On “Art Thou He That Should Come?”, On the Coming of John into Hades, and On the Devil and Hades. For an initial discussion of the four homilies see mcculloch, Harrowing of Hell, p. 174-191.

7 See dE aldama, Repertorium Pseudochrysostomicum, Nr. 489.8 savIllE, S. Ioannis Chrysostomi opera, graece, vol. 7, p. 459-462.9 lafontaInE, La version arménienne, p. 99 and also norEt, Un fragment homilé-

tique, p. 172, n. 1. Only a comparison of Saville’s edition to the Vienna manuscripts will resolve this issue. For catalog entries see hunGEr et al., Katalog, p. 161-169 and 212-215. Saville’s own copy of the text made from the unnamed manuscript is available at the Bodleian Library (Oxford, Bodl. Libr., Auct. E. 3. 8). For further information see aubInEau, Codices Chrysostomici Graeci, p. xv-xvii (on the history of the Saville collection), p. 122-125 (on the contents of the booklet containing his transcription of On the Passion).

10 dE montfaucon, Sancti Patris nostri Iohannis Chrysostomi, vol. 11, p. 793-796.11 thIlo, Eusebius von Alexandrien, discussion p. 30-32, text p. 81-91.12 See the summary in GounEllE, Collectio Sermonum, p. 250-253.


THE ACTA PILATI TRADITION 253

edition of On the Passion (now numbered Sermon 17) but with variants from a second Vienna manuscript: theol. gr. 30713. A revised edition of Montfaucon’s study appeared soon after and incorporated some of Thilo’s notes and variants14. This second edition was used for Migne’s PG (62, col. 721-724). In both works, however, the homily is featured among works of Ps.-Chrysostom, not Ps.-Eusebius.

A number of additional Greek manuscripts of On the Passion have been mentioned in subsequent scholarship. Angelo Mai published another edition of the sermons based on Vat. gr. 1633 from the 10th/11th century; however, he did not include Sermon 17 because the text had already been edited15. F. Nau discussed another manuscript – Paris, suppl. grec 407, fol. 203-206; copied 1592 – which is said to be identical to Mai’s manu-script16. M. Gronewald has published a fragmentary sixth-century papyrus17. And a 12th/13th-century fragment (MS 3219, fol. 209) at the National Library of Scotland, published initially by I.C. Cunningham18, was identi-fied as belonging to On the Passion by Jacques Noret19. Noret mentioned also a manuscript with similar readings at Lesbos: Μονὴ Ὑψηλοῦ 57, fol. 217-219. In the course of his discussion, Noret characterized Cunning-ham’s Edinburgh manuscript as superior in value to the Vienna manu script used in previous editions of the text. Virtually all of these additional sources and many more are presented in a comprehensive list of 47 manu-scripts made by Guy Lafontaine20. The text is available also in languages other than Greek, including Latin21, Armenian22, Arabic23, and Slavic24. Clearly much work has yet to be done to establish the text of the sermon.

13 Thilo identifies the manuscript only as “Vind”; the identification of the manuscript as theol. gr. 307 is made in lafontaInE, La version arménienne, p. 100.

14 dE montfaucon, Editio parisina, vol. 11, p. 867-871.15 maI, Spicilegium Romanum.16 nau, Notes.17 GronEwald, Kein durchtriebener Räuber.18 cunnInGham, Greek Manuscripts, p. 369.19 norEt, Un fragment homilétique.20 lafontaInE, La version arménienne, p. 100-101. Two of these manuscripts are listed

in BHG: Cod. Athen. 273 and Cod. Paris, 979, but BHG adds also Cod. Athen. Con-stamon. 14. A few others are mentioned in Thilo’s introduction to his edition (thIlo, Eusebius von Alexandrien, p. 30-32).

21 It is found combined with Sermon 15 (De Confusione Diaboli) in an Old Latin manuscript of the 5th/6th century published by rand, Sermo; see further, Izydorczyk, Two Newly Identified Manuscripts. And J. Leroy and F. Glorie note another witness in Vat. lat. 3835-3836, though here it is attributed to Augustine (lEroy – GlorIE, ‘Eusèbe d’Alexandrie’, p. 50-51 and reproduced p. 67-70 with readings from two other manuscripts: Vat. lat. 3828 and 1270).

22 lafontaInE, La version arménienne.23 sauGEt, Une ébauche d’homéliaire copte, p. 196, n. 37.24 hannIck, Maximos Holobolos, p. 263.


254 T. BURkE

For a start, the precise contents of each manuscript must be established; this has led to great confusion in the literature and makes difficult the process of situating new manuscripts in the transmission history of the text.

The presence of On the Passion in Vienna, Cod. hist. gr. 91 has not been previously noted. Hunger’s catalog merely refers to the text as “Apokryphes Fragment über die Aufnahme des rechten Schächers im Paradise” (about the admission of the Good Thief into Paradise). The fragment contains roughly the last quarter of the text. On the Passion begins with a brief account of the betrayal, arrest, trial, scourging, and crucifixion of Jesus. The Devil witnesses these events and fears the arrival of Jesus; so, he closes the gates to Hades. The Powers (angels) and prophets call for him to open the gates. Then Jesus approaches, tears down the gates, binds the Devil, and casts him down to the lowest parts of Hades. At this point the Vienna manuscript takes up the story. The prophets enter Paradise, see the Good Thief and wonder why he has preceded them. The thief responds with the story of his encounter with Jesus on the cross and his subsequent entry into Paradise where he encoun-tered Enoch and Elijah. The text concludes with a restatement of Jesus’ victory over the Devil.

The following edition of On the Passion presents the text of the Vienna manuscript with readings from Migne’s edition (represented by the siglum M) provided in the apparatus for comparison. The Vienna manu-script differs from Migne’s text in several significant ways; at paragraph 3 (line 10-11) it lacks the prophets’ concern that the thief will steal in heaven as he did on earth; paragraph 5 (line 18) lacks the explicit parallel to Luke 23:43; and the conclusion in paragraph 9 differs considerably.

2. On the Funeral of Jesus25

The second text in the Vienna manuscript fills two pages (fol. 18r-18v), beginning mid-sentence at an undetermined place in the narrative and running to the doxology that concludes the text. Likely it is a medi-eval homily similar in form and content to other such homilies that draw upon traditions from the Acta Pilati cycle. The homiletic character of the text is apparent in 1.5 where the narrator breaks into the story to ask why the face cloth was rolled up in a place by itself, and again at the close of the text (3.6) to indict the priests for not showing kindness to those who

25 Greek text and translation, below p. 266-275.



believed in Jesus. Unfortunately, neither the title of the text nor the name of its author is known; Hunger’s catalog refers to it only as “Anonyme. Fragment über die Bestattung Jesu Christi”.

The Acts of Pilate, the prime text of the Acta Pilati cycle, is extant in two forms: Greek A and B26. Greek A is believed to be the earliest, dating perhaps to the fourth century. It presents a new telling of the trial of Jesus (chs. 1-9), augmenting the canonical accounts with detailed tes-timony against Jesus and reports of witnesses who speak in his defense. Then, after a quick recounting of the crucificion (chs. 10-11), the text turns its attention to Joseph of Arimathea, who is imprisoned by the Jewish leaders as a Christian sympathizer. But when the leaders return to retrieve Joseph from his cell, he is gone (ch. 12). Reports then come in of Jesus’ resurrection – first from the guards at the tomb (ch. 13, recalling Matt 28:1-15), then from elders, priests and Levites who have seen Jesus and his disciples in Galilee (ch. 14). The Jewish leaders search for Jesus without success but find Joseph, who reports to them how Jesus appeared to him in his cell and transported him home (ch. 15). This tale of Joseph’s impris-onment and miraculous escape are expanded in another Acta Pilati cycle text: the Narrative of Joseph of Arimathea. The Greek A text of the Acts of Pilate concludes with the Jewish leaders once again interrogating the witnesses to the resurrection; though the leaders remain resolute in their denial of Jesus’ divinity, the people as a whole are convinced and return to their homes glorifying God (ch. 16). The Greek B form of the text is believed to be a retrotranslation from the Latin A recension of the Gospel of Nicodemus, the title given to the Acts of Pilate in its Latin forms (divided into Latin A, B and C)27. The most significant departure in the Greek B text is the addition of the Descensus Christi ad inferos (chs. 17-27), in which two of the dead saints restored to life in Matt 27:52-54 report Jesus’ entry into Hell to redeem the righteous dead. There Jesus breaks open the gates, binds Satan, and brings the patriarchs, martyrs and ances-tors to Paradise. On their way into Paradise they see Enoch and Elijah, who rose up to heaven body and soul (Gen 5:24; 2 kgs 2:11; Heb 11:5), and the Good Thief, who Jesus promised would precede him in Paradise (Luke 23:42-43).

26 Edited by tIschEndorf, Evangelia Apocrypha, p. 210-286 (Greek A), 287-332 (Greek B).

27 GounEllE, Les recensions byzantines, has proposed a revision to Tischendorf’s sigla so that Greek B is now referred to as Greek M (for “Medieval”) and divided into three distinct recensions: M1 (created 9th-10th cent.), M2 (12th-14th cent.), and M3 (14th-15th cent.).


256 T. BURkE

On the Funeral of Jesus begins with an unnamed figure, presumably Pilate, granting the body of Jesus to Joseph (cf. Acts Pil. 11.3)28. Nicode-mus asks to be involved with preparing the body for burial, and the two do so in a sequence that incorporates passages from the canonical Passion accounts (1.2, 6). Jesus is referred to several times here as a “foreigner” (or perhaps “stranger”; 1.1, 3), perhaps because he is a Galilean in Judea, though this would be a peculiar appellation. If the text is here understood correctly, there seems to be some dispute about the appropriate burial responsibilities when it comes to foreigners; Nicodemus overhears the priests questioning whether a foreigner is to be buried “differently than a family member and heir”. They worry that granting Jesus such honours would bring “every dying foreigner into Jerusalem from the temples” looking for similar treatment (1.3). Nicodemus then goes to “request the delivery of the body of Jesus” (1.4) – an odd development given that Joseph and Nicodemus have already been granted the body. Indeed Nicode-mus is not shown making the request, though he does obtain the face cloth (sudarium) mentioned in John 20:6-7 (1.5). Reference is made here of why the face cloth was “rolled up in a place by itself”; it appears that the face cloth was not accepted as part of the sacrifice of Jesus (because it is from the temple?). The text then continues, stating that Joseph and Nicode-mus accepted the linen wrappings (othonia) as a “sacrifice and burnt offering” (1:5). The sudarium may appear later in the text, when Joseph is accused of taking “the shroud of the foreigner” from the temple (2.5), but note that here it is called an entafia (burial shroud).

While Acts Pil. covers the event of Jesus’ burial, it does not do so in the detail we find here. The Greek A version mentions the request for the body and the burial only in passing (in ch. 11.3, though essentially just repeating Luke 23:50-53). Greek B offers more detail, but nothing is said of the burial cloths, nor the foreigner(s). Note also that the new text does not contain the subsequent laments of Mary and Mary Magdalene found in Greek B.

Greek A Greek BJesus’ acquaintances stood off at a distance, along with the women who accompanied him from Galilee, who saw these things. But acertain

And as the day of the preparation was drawing towards evening, Joseph, a man well-born and rich, a God- fearing Jew, finding Nicodemus, whose

28 Quotations from Acts Pil. and related texts are drawn from Ehrman – PlEšE, Apo-cryphal Gospels, op. cit., except for the Greek B text, given in full only in robErts – donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 8, p. 426-434.



man, named Joseph, a member of the council from the city of Arimathea, who was anticipating the kingdom of God, approached Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. He took him down, wrapped him in a clean linen cloth, and placed him in a stone-hewn tomb, where no one had ever been placed.

sentiments his foregoing speech had shown, says to him: I know that thou didst love Jesus when living, and didst gladly hear his words, and I saw thee fighting with the Jews on his account. If, then, it seem good to thee, let us go to Pilate, and beg the body of Jesus for burial, because it is a great sin for him to lie unburied. I am afraid, said Nicodemus, lest Pilate should be enraged, and some evil should befall me. But if thou

wilt go alone, and beg the dead, and take him, then will I also go with thee, and help thee to do everything necessary for the burial. Nicodemus having thus spoken, Joseph directed his eyes to heaven, and prayed that he might not fail in his request; and he went away to Pilate, and having saluted him, sat down. Then he says to him: I entreat thee, my lord, not to be angry with me, if I shall ask anything contrary to what seems good to your highness. And he said: And what is it that thou askest? Joseph says: Jesus, the good man whom through hatred the Jews have taken away to crucify, him I entreat that thou give me for burial. Pilate says: And what has happened, that we should deliver to be honoured again the dead body of him against whom evidence of sorcery was brought by his nation, and who was in sus-picion of taking the kingdom of Caesar, and so was given up by us to death? And Joseph, weeping and in great grief, fell at the feet of Pilate, saying: My lord, let no hatred fall upon a dead man; for all the evil that a man has done should perish with him in his death. And I know your high-ness, how eager thou wast that Jesus should not be crucified, and how much thou saidst to the Jews on his behalf, now in entreaty and again in anger, and at last how thou didst wash thy hands, and declare that thou wouldst by no means take part with those who wished him to be put to death; for all which reasons I entreat thee not to refuse my request. Pilate, therefore, seeing Joseph thus lying, and supplicating, and weeping, raised him up, and said: Go, I grant thee this dead man; take him, and do what-ever thou wilt.And then Joseph, having thanked Pilate, and kissed his hands and his gar-ments, went forth, rejoicing indeed in heart as having obtained his desire, but carrying tears in his eyes. Thus also, though grieved, he was glad. Accord-ingly he goes away to Nicodemus, and discloses to him all that had hap-pened. Then, having bought myrrh and aloes a hundred pounds, and a new tomb, they, along with the mother of God and Mary Magdalene and Salome, along with John, and the rest of the women, did what was customary for the body with white linen, and placed it in the tomb.

Jesus’ resurrection in On the Funeral is greeted by the priests and scribes with cries of “Horror, horror!” (2.1). They conspire to tell the people that Joseph and Jesus’ disciples stole Jesus’ body (2.2), thereby


258 T. BURkE

evoking Matt 28:12-14, which is the basis also for the expanded scene of the interrogation of the guards in Acts Pil. 13. The people take Joseph to the high priests for questioning (2.3); Joseph defends himself by illus-trating that he and the disciples would be unable to bypass the guards and break the seals on the tomb (2.4, evoking Matt 27:65-66). Joseph is then brought before Pilate, and the people lay out three charges: prepar-ing Jesus’ body out of their (sic?) own means (recall the dispute in 1.3), taking the entafia from the temple, and stealing the body of Jesus and claiming he rose from the grave. In response, Pilate becomes angry at the delegation and, recalling the trial of Jesus, washes his hands of Joseph’s blood (1.6-7; cf. Matt 27:24). This episode has a partial parallel with Acts Pil. 12 (see also Narr. Jos. 1), in which Joseph is seized by “the Jews”, but only because they suspect he is a sympathizer since he asked for the body of Jesus. Joseph rebukes them, and he is imprisoned. But when they open the prison the next day, he has vanished. No mention is made in Acts Pil. of a trial before Pilate; indeed, the antagonists do not hear the news of the resurrection until the following chapter.

In the text’s final episode, Joseph laments his fate in prison (3.1). Jesus appears, accompanied by the Good Thief of Luke 23:39-43 (3.2-3). Jesus then brings Joseph to Galilee so that he might “proclaim to [the disciples] his resurrection” (1.4); Joseph thus is presented in this text as the first witness to the resurrection of Jesus. When the priests discover Joseph’s absence, they lament their treatment of “those who believe in our Lord Jesus Christ” (3.6). It is in this final episode that we see the most significant parallels to the Acta Pilati tradition. In Acts Pil., Joseph disappears from prison in ch. 12 and then he is found in Arimathea in ch. 15. Joseph returns to Jerusalem and appears before the Sanhedrin. When asked about his disappearance, he says he was praying in prison and Jesus appeared to him, though Joseph first thought he was Elijah. Jesus took him to see the empty tomb, and then home to Arimathea where he is told to remain for 40 days while Jesus visits his disciples. Joseph does not proclaim the resurrection to the disciples, nor do we see the Good Thief. The only text to mention the thief in the prison scene is the Narra-tive of Joseph of Arimathea (ch. 4), a text that goes into great detail about the fate of the two thieves. Narr. Jos. also has Joseph journey with Jesus and the Good Thief to Galilee, not Arimathea, though they stay there only for a brief time, during which they speak to the apostle John.

On the Funeral of Jesus is a curious mix of canonical and apocryphal traditions. The NT gospels provide information about Jesus’ burial prep-arations and location, as well as the germ for such details as the fate of the Good Thief, the guards at the tomb, and the portrayal of Pilate in the



trial of Joseph. The Acta Pilati cycle provides the framework for the imprisonment and liberation of Joseph, but On the Funeral differs from Acts Pil. significantly in the details. The reason for the combination of these traditions is unclear. One can observe a certain anti-Semitism in the narrative in the way the priests treat Joseph and their resultant shame at the discovery of his absence; Nicodemus and Jesus tell Joseph not to fear the “threats of the Jews” (1.4; 3.2). But the Jews, on the whole, are largely innocent of wrongdoing – they only follow the directives of the priests and scribes, and the author of the text expresses his anger only at the priests (3.6). Similar treatment of Jewish culpability in the death of Jesus is found in Acts Pil.; indeed, the text even concludes with the peo-ple accepting the crucifixion, “if his rememberance extends until the year which is called Jubilee” (Acts Pil. 16.7). However, without the complete text of On the Funeral, it is difficult to determine the precise purpose of its portrayal of Joseph’s antagonists.

There is more still about On the Funeral that is unclear. The Vienna manuscript presented some difficulties in transcription and translation. Some of this difficulty is due to iotacism, some to manuscript damage – note line 4 of 2.8, and lines 1 and 2 of 3.1. It is possible that some of the more troublesome readings (particularly in 1.3-5) result from scribal omission; certainly this has occurred in 2.2 (at line 1) where a word has dropped out of the text (τῇ ἡμέρᾳ).

Undeniably, On the Funeral of Jesus is a fascinating text that warrants further exploration. It is a welcome addition to the corpus of homiletic literature inspired by the Acta Pilati traditions.


260 T. BURkE

tExt 1 PsEudo-EusEbIus, sErmon 17

Τῇ ἁγίᾳ καὶ μεγάλῃ Παρασκευῇ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον πάθος τοῦ Κυρίου

[1] (fol. 104r) . . . ἐπιγελῶντες αὐτόν1. Ὁ δὲ Κύριος λαβὼν πάντας2 ἐξέβαλεν ἐκ τοῦ ᾅδου, πρῶτον Δαυὶδ κρούων τὴν κιϑάραν3 λέγων4 · “Δεῦτε, ἀγαλλιασώμεϑα τῷ Κυρίῳ, ἀλαλάξωμεν τῷ Θεῷ τῷ σωτῆρι ἡμῶν ὅτι ὁ βασιλεὺς5 ἡμῶν πολεμήσας ἐνίκησεν”. καὶ πάντες ἔλε-γον6 τὸ ἁλληλουϊά.

[2] Και πάλιν7 · “Πάντα τὰ ἔϑνη κροτήτωσαν8 χεῖρας καὶ ἀλαλά-ξετε τῷ Θεῷ ἐν ϕωνῇ ἀγαλλιάσεως”9. καὶ οὕτως ἐπορεύοντο10 ἀγαλλιώμενος εἰς11 τὸν παράδεισον12. “Χαῖρε σϕοδρῶς ϑύγατερ Ζιὼν καὶ μετ᾿ ὀλίγον ἐξεγείρου Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐνδύσαι τὴν δόξαν σου ὅπου βασιλεύς σου πολεμήσας ἐνίκησεν”13.

[3] Καὶ εἰσελϑόντες ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ14 εὗρον15 ἐκεῖ16 τὸν λῃστὴν17 καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτόν18 · “Τίς εἶ σύ; τίς εἰσήγαγέν σοι ὧδε19; τίς δέ σοι τὰς πύλας ἤνοιξεν20; τί21 πεποιηκὼς22 ἡμῶν πρῶτον εἰσῆλϑες ὧδε”23.

1 ἐπιγελῶντες αὐτόν om. M 2 add. τοὺς προϕήτας M 3 πρῶτον Δαυὶδ (αον δ͞α͞δ cod.) – κιϑάραν om. M 4 add. πορεύεσϑε εἰς τὸν παράδεισον. οἱ δὲ χαίροντες ἐξεπήδησαν ἐκ τοῦ ᾅδου.

πρῶτος Δαυΐδ κρούων τὴν κιϑάραν ἔλεγεν εὐϕραινόμενος M 5 add. ὑπὲρ M 6 ἔλεγον: ὑπήκουσαν M 7 add. ὁ αὐτός M 8 κροτήτωσαν: κρωτίτωσαν cod., κροτήσατε M 9 add. ὅτι ὁ βασιλεὺς ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν πολεμήσας ἐνίκησε M10 ἐπορεύοντο om. M 11 εἰς: ἐπὶ M 12 add. ἔτρεχον M 13 χαῖρε – ἐνίκησεν om. M 14 ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ om. M 15 εὗρον M: εὗρων cod. 16 ἐκεῖ om. M 17 λῃστὴν M: λῃστὸν cod. 18 καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτόν: καὶ ἐξέστησαν καὶ ἔλεγον αὐτῷ M 19 pr. τίς – ὧδε: τίς εἰσήγαγέ σε ὧδε M 20 πύλας ἤνοιξεν: ϑὺρας ἀνέῳξε M 21 add. δὲ M 22 πεποιηκὼς M: πεποιηκὰς cod. 23 ἡμῶν – ὧδε: εἰσῆλϑες πρῶτος ἡμῶν ἐνϑάδε μὴ καὶ τὰ ἐνταῦϑα λῃστεύειν

εἰσῆλϑες; μὴ συλῆσαι τὰ ὧδε παρεγένου; οὐκ ἠρκέσϑης τῶν ἐπιγείων, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ ἐπουράνια ἁρπάσαι ϑέλει; εἰπὲ ἡμῖν, τίς εἰσήγαγέ σε ὧδε; οὑ ϕϑονοῦμέν σοι, διότι εἰσῆλϑες, ἀλλὰ τὴν αἰτίαν ζητοῦμεν M



tExt 1 PsEudo-EusEbIus, sErmon 17

on thE PassIon, for thE PrEParatIon day

[1] …laughing at him1. And the Lord, taking everyone2, led out of Hades first David (who was) playing the harp, saying, “Come3, let us sing to the Lord, that we may shout to the Lord our Saviour that our king, waging war, has conquered”4. And everyone said5 hallelujah.

[2] Again (he said), “Let all the peoples clap their hands and shout to God in a joyful voice”6. Thus they went7 joyfully into Paradise. “Rejoice greatly, daughter Zion, and after a little, awaken Jerusalem to enter your glory, where your king, waging war, has conquered”8.

[3] Going in to Paradise9, they found the thief and they said10 to him, “Who are you?11 Who brought you here? And who opened the gates to you? What have you done that you have entered here before us?”12.

1 The fragment begins just after Jesus has bound the Devil and cast him down to the lowest parts of Hades.

2 M has “all the prophets”.3 For “first…‘Come’” M reads: “saying, ‘Go into Paradise’”. And the ones rejoicing

rushed out from Hades. First David playing the harp said rejoicing”.4 Psalm 94:1.5 M has “answered”.6 Psalm 47:1. Then M adds: “because the king above us waging war, conquered”.7 M has “ran”.8 It is not clear who is the speaker here; it may even be the homilist. M lacks this

sentence.9 M lacks “into Paradise”.10 M has “were amazed and said”.11 M lacks “Who are you?”12 M has “What has happened that you went before us here? Did you not also come

here to thieve? Did you not come here to steal? Were you not satisfied with the earthly, he wants also to steal the heavenly? Tell us, why have you come here before us? We do not grudge you, because you came but we are looking for the cause”.


262 T. BURkE

[4] Λέγει αὐτοῖς24 · “Ἐγὼ λῃστής εἰμι25. ἄλλος δεσπότης ϕιλάνϑρωπός ἐστιν26 καὶ ἐλεήμων.27 ἐγὼ γάρ εἰμι ὁ οὐδένα ἀγαϑὸν κεκτημένος.28 ὅϑεν καὶ κατέκρινάν με29 ἀποϑανεῖν σταυρώσαντές με30 σὺν τῷ ἀϑανάτῷ βασιλεῖ.31 καὶ ϑέλοντές με ἀπολέσαι μᾶλλον ἐζωοποίησάν με32. ἔβλεπον γὰρ33 τὰ σημεῖα τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ γενόμενα34 καὶ νοήσας ὅτι υἱὸς Θεοῦ ἐστιν35, ἐβοήσα ϕωνῇ μεγάλῃ36 λέγων · Μνήσϑητί μου Κύριε ὅταν ἔλϑῃς ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ σου”.

[5] Καὶ εὐϑέως ὡς37 δεξάμενος ὁ Κύριος τὰς ἱκεσίας μου38 ἔδωκέν με39 τὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ σημεῖον καὶ ἀπέστειλέν μοι ἐνϑάδε.40 καὶ λέγει μοι41 · “Ἔαν42 κωλύσωσιν43 σε ἡ ϕλογία44 ῥομϕαία μὴ εἰσελϑεῖν εἰς τὸν παράδεισον45 ἐπίδειξον τοῦτο46 τὸ βασιλικὸν σημεῖον καὶ ἀνοί-ξει σοι47 τὰς ϑυρὰς τοῦ παραδείσου”48.

[6] Καὶ ἦλϑον καὶ49 ἰδοῦσέ με ϕλογιά50 ῥομϕαία ἡ ϕυλάσσουσα αὐτὸν51 παράδεισον ἔκλεισεν τὰς ϑυράς. ἐγὼ δὲ εἶπον ὅτι ὁ βασι-λεύς52 με ἀπέστειλεν. καὶ ὑπέδειξα αὐτὴν τὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ σημεῖον53.

24 λέγει αὐτοῖς: ὁ δὲ ἀποκριϑεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς M 25 ἐγὼ λῃστής εἰμι: διὰ τὰ ἔργα μου οὐκ εἰμὶ ἄξιος εἰσελϑεῖν ἐνταῦϑα M 26 ἄλλος – ἐστιν: ἀλλ’ ὁ ϕιλάνϑρωπος δεσπότης M 27 add. εἰσήγαγέ με ὧδε M 28 ἐγὼ – κεκτημένος: ἐγὼ γὰρ οὐδὲν ἀγαϑὸν κέκτημαι M 29 add. ϑανάτου M 30 σταυρώσαντές με om. M 31 σὺν – βασιλεῖ: μετὰ τοῦ ἀϑανάτου βασιλέως οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι M 32 ἀπολέσαι – με: ἀποκτεῖναι ἐζωοποίησαν μᾶλλον συσταυρώσαντές με τῷ

Χριστῷ M 33 ἔβλεπον γὰρ: καὶ ἰδὼν ἐγὼ M 34 γενόμενα: γινόμενα M 35 υἱὸς Θεοῦ ἐστιν: υἱὸς ἦν τοῦ Θεοῦ M 36 ϕωνῇ μεγάλῃ M: ϕωνὴν μεγάλην cod.37 ὡς om. M 38 ὁ Κύριος – μου: μου τὴν δέησιν λέγει μοι · Ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, σήμερον μετ᾿

ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ M39 ἔδωκέν με: καὶ ἔδωκέ μοι M 40 καὶ – ἐνϑάδε: om. M 41 καὶ λέγει μοι: λέγων M 42 ante ἔαν add. τοῦτο λαβῶν πορεύου εἰς τὸν παράδεισον καὶ M 43 κωλύσωσιν: κωλύσῃ M 44 ϕλογία: ϕλογίνη M 45 μὴ εἰσελϑεῖν [εἰσελϑεὶς cod.] – παράδεισον: εἰσελϑεῖν M 46 τοῦτο: αὐτῇ M 47 ἀνοίξει σοι M: ἀνοίξη σε cod. 48 τοῦ παραδείσου om. M 49 add. εὐϑέως M 50 ϕλογιά: ἡ ϕλογίνη M 51 ϕυλάσσουσα αὐτὸν: ϕυλάττουσα τὸν M 52 add. ὁ νῦν σταυρωϑεῖς αὐτός M 53 ὑπέδειξα – σημεῖον: ἔδειξα τοῦ σταυροῦ τὸ σημεῖον M



[4] He said to them, “I am the thief13. But the Lord is gracious and merciful14. For I am one who had gained nothing good. Therefore, they condemned me15 to die also, crucifying me16 with the immortal king. But those wishing me to die instead gave me life17. For I saw the signs taking place upon the cross. And realizing he is the son of God, I cried out greatly saying, ‘Remember me, Lord, when you go in your kingdom’”18.

[5] Instantly, after the Lord accepted my supplications19, he gave me the sign of the cross and sent me here20. He said to me21, “If the flaming sword hinders you22 from going into Paradise23, show this royal sign and the gates of Paradise24 will open to you”.

[6] I went in and25, seeing me, the flaming sword that guards Paradise closed the gates. I said that the king26 sent me. And I showed it the sign

13 M adds “because of my deeds I am not worthy to come here”.14 M adds “he led me here”.15 M has “the Jews condemned me”.16 M lacks “crucifying me”.17 M adds “crucifying me with Christ”.18 Luke 23:42.19 M has instead “instantly accepting my prayer he said to me, ‘Truly I say to you,

today you will be with me in Paradise’” (Luke 23:43).20 M omits “and sent me here”.21 M has “And saying, ‘Take this and go into Paradise and’”.22 The Vienna Ms here has the third person plural. 23 For “from going into Paradise”, M has “to go in”.24 M omits “of Paradise”.25 M adds “instantly”.26 M adds “he who was crucified”.


264 T. BURkE

καὶ ευϑέως ἤνοιξέν μοι καὶ εἴσελϑον. καὶ54 οὐδένα εὗρον καὶ ἐξέ-στη μου ἡ διάνοια λέγων πρὸς αὐτόν55 · “Ποῦ ἐστιν Ἀβραὰμ καὶ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακὼβ56 καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν57 πλῆϑος τῶν προϕητῶν58;”

[7] Καὶ ϑαυμάσοντός μου καὶ διανοουμένου59, ἰδοὺ ἐϕάνησαν60 εἰς τὰ δεξιὰ μέρη61 τῆς ἀνατολῆς δύο ἄνδρες παλαιοὶ τῶν ἡμερῶν καὶ62 ϑαυμαστοὶ τῇ ἰδέᾳ63 καὶ ἐκλεκτοὶ τῷ προσώπῳ. Καὶ ἦλϑον ἐγγύς μου64 καὶ ἐπηρώτησάν με λέγοντες · “Σύ τίς εἶ65; Ἀβραὰμ οὐκ ἦν66. ἐκεῖνος ἱερατικὸν κέκτηται σχῆμα67. Μωϋσῆς οὐκ ἦν68. ἐκεῖνος ἰσχνόϕωνος καὶ βραδύγλωσσος. ἡ δέ συ69 λαλιὰ τρανή70. σὺ λῃστής71 ϕαίνῃ καὶ γὰρ λῃστρικόν ἐστι72 τὸ σχῆμά σου”. καὶ ὡμολόγησα73 ὅτι λῃστής εἰμι. καὶ ὁ Κύριος74 τοῦ παραδείσου ἤγα-γέν75 με ὧδε ἐπειδὴ συνώδευσα76 αὐτὸν77 εἰς τὸν ϑάνατον ὅν ὑπέμει-νεν ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων78.

[8] Ἐγὼ δὲ πάλιν ἠρωτήσα αὐτὸν καὶ εἶπεν79 · (fol. 104v) “Ὑμεῖς τίνες ἐστέ; δέομαι ὑμῖν80 ἵνα μοι ἀπαγγείλατε”81. καὶ ἀποκριϑεὶς εἷς ἐξ αὐτῶν εἶπέν μοι · “Ἐγὼ Ἠλίας ὁ ϑεσβίτης82 εἰμί. καὶ ὑπὸ83

54 εἴσελϑον καὶ: εἰσελϑὼν M 55 λέγων πρὸς αὐτόν: καὶ ἔλεγον ἐν ἐμαυτῷ M 56 καὶ Ἰακὼβ om. M 57 τῶν λοιπῶν: τῶν λυπῶν cod., τὸ λοιπὸν M 58 τῶν προϕητῶν: τῶν ἁγίων προϕητῶν M 59 add. μου M 60 add. μοι M 61 μέρη M: μέρει cod. 62 τῶν ἡμερῶν καὶ: ἡμερῶν M 63 ἰδέᾳ M: εἰδεὰν cod. 64 καὶ ἦλϑον ἐγγύς μου: om. M 65 σύ τίς εἶ: τίς εἶ σύ M 66 ἦν: εἶ M 67 ἐκεῖνος – σχῆμα: ἐκείνου γὰρ τὸ σχῆμα ἱερατικὸν ἦν M 68 ἦν: εἶ M 69 συ: σὴ M 70 add. σύ τίς εἶ M 71 add. ἡμῖν M 72 λῃστρικόν ἐστι post σου transp. M 73 ὡμολόγησα M: ὁμολογῆσα cod. 74 καὶ ὁ Κύριος: καὶ ὅτι ὁ δεσπότης M 75 ἤγαγέν: εἰσήγαγέ M 76 συνώδευσα M: συνόδευσα cod. 77 αὐτὸν: αὐτῷ M 78 ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων: δι᾿ ἡμᾶς M 79 ἐγὼ – εἶπεν: καὶ εἶπον αὐτοῖς M 80 ὑμῖν: ὑμῶν M 81 ἵνα μοι ἀπαγγείλατε: om. M82 ὁ ϑεσβίτης [ϑεσβήτις cod.] post εἰμί transp. M 83 ὑπὸ: ἀπὸ M



of the cross. Instantly (the gates) opened to me and I went in. I found no-one and my mind was amazed, saying to it27, “Where is Abraham and Isaac and Jacob28 and the rest of number of the prophets?”29.

[7] While I was marveling and thinking to myself, behold, on the right side of the east appeared two men old of days, marvelous in form and pure in appearance. They approached me30 and asked me saying, “Who are you? He was31 not Abraham; he possessed a priestly likeness. He was not Moses; he (was) weak-voiced and slow of tongue, and you (have) clarity of speech. You appear to be a thief, for also your likeness is that of a thief”. I agreed that I was a thief and that the Lord of Paradise brought me here because I travelled with him into the death which he endured at the hands of the Jews32.

[8] Again I entreated him and said33, “Who are you? I beg you, tell me”34. Answering one of them said to me, “I am Elijah the Tishbite.

27 M has “to myself”.28 M omits “and Jacob”.29 M has “holy prophets”.30 M omits “they came near me”.31 Here and following, M has “you are”.32 M has “which he endured on account of us”.33 M has only “And I said to them”.34 M omits “tell me”.


266 T. BURkE

πυρίνου ἅρματος ἀνηνέχϑην84 ἐνταῦϑα, καὶ οὐκ εἶδον ϑάνατον85. καὶ αὐτὸς86 ὁ μετ᾿ ἐμοῦ Ἐνώχ ἐστιν ὁ μετατεϑεὶς ἐνταῦϑα ῥήματι Θεοῦ”.

[9] Οἱ δὲ προϕῆται ἀκούσαντες ἐδόξασαν τὸν Θεὸν ἐπὶ τὴν αὐτοῦ δωρεὰν τὴν δοϑεῖσαν87 τοῖς ἁμαρτωλοῖς. ὁ δὲ Κύριος σκυλεύσας τὸν ᾅδην δήσας τὸν διαβολὸν συντρίψας τὰς πύλας συνϑλάσας τοὺς μοχλοὺς εἰς τὸ μηκέτι τις ἐξ αὐτῶν τυραννεῖσϑαι88 καὶ τὸν κόσμον ἐλευϑερώσας καὶ εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀναβιβάσας89. ὁ ἀντὶ τῶν ἐπιγείων τὰ ἐπουράνια ὑποσχόμενος90 δοῦναι, ὁ ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστὰς Χριστὸς ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα91 εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, ἀμήν.

tExt 2 Εἰς τὴν Κηδείαν τοῦ Ἰησοῦ

1. [1] (fol. 18r)… ἐϕοβήϑη σϕόδρα. Λέγει πρὸς τὸν Ἰωσήϕ · “Χαρίζομαί σοι, Ἰωσήϕ, τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ”. Ἀκούσας δὲ ὁ Νικό-δημος ὅτι Ἰωσὴϕ ἔλαβεν ἐξουσίας τοῦ καϑελεῖν τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, δραμῶν1 ἤρχετο πρὸς τὸν Ἰωσὴϕ λέγων · “Κύριε μου Ἰωσήϕ, μὴ στερίσῃς2 μου τοῦ μισϑοῦ σου, ἀλλὰ κἀγὼ ἔσομαι3 μετά σου εἰς τάϕον τοῦ ξένου ἵνα εὕρωμεν ἔλος”.

[2] Ὁ δὲ Ἰωσὴϕ ἤνεγκε σινδόνα4 καϑαράν. Νικόδημος δὲ σμύρ-ναν καὶ ἀλόην5 ὡς λίτρας ρ ̅. καὶ καϑελόντες τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ ἐσμύρνησαν αὐτὸ6 καὶ ἔϑηκαν εἰς τὴν σινδόνα7.

84 ἀνηνέχϑην: ἠνέχϑην M 85 add. ἀκμὴν M 86 αὐτὸς: οὗτος M 87 τὴν αὐτοῦ – δοϑεῖσαν: τῇ τοιαύτῃ δωρεᾷ τῇ δοϑεῖσῃ M 88 ὁ δὲ Κύριος – τυραννεῖσϑαι: ὁ δὲ Κύριος σκυλεύσας τὸν ϑάνατον καὶ τὸν

ᾅδην πατήσας, καὶ τῷ ξύλῳ τὸ ξύλον ἰασάμενος, καὶ τὰς πύλας συγκλάσας, καὶ τοὺς μοχλοὺς συντρίψας, καὶ τὸν διάβαλον δήσας M

89 καὶ εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀναβιβάσας: πάντας εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀνεκόμισεν ἀναστὰς ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν τοιγαροῦν μνήσωμεν τὸν σαρκωϑέντα, δοξάσωμεν τὸν σταυρωϑέντα εὐχαριστήσωμεν τὸν ἀναστάντα, ὅπως καὶ ἡμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ ζόϕου τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐξέληται, καὶ τῆς αὐτοῦ βασιλείας κληρονόμους ποιήσῃ M

90 ἐπουράνια ὑποσχόμενος: ἐπουνία ὑποσχούμενος cod.91 ὁ ἀντὶ – δόξα: αὐτῷ γὰρ πρέπει τιμὴ καὶ προσκύνησις σὺν τῷ ἀνάρχῳ αὐτοῦ

πατρὶ, καὶ τῷ παναγίῳ καὶ ζωοποιῷ πνεύματι, νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ, καὶ M

1 δρομαίεν cod. 2 εἰστερίσης cod. 3 ἔσωμαι cod. 4 συνδώνα cod. 5 ἀλώην cod. 6 αὐτὼ cod. 7 συνδώνα cod.



I was taken up here by a fiery chariot and I did not see death35. He who is with me is Enoch, the one taken up here by the word of God”.

[9] The prophets listening praised God concerning his gift given to sinners. And the Lord stripped Hades, bound the Devil, broke the gates, shattered the bars at once so that this one would no longer be a ruler36, and he set the world free and ascended into heaven37. The one who took upon himself to entrust the heavenly with the earthly, Christ risen from the dead, our God, to him the glory forever and ever, amen38.

tExt 2 on thE funEral of JEsus

1. [1] …he was very afraid. He said to Joseph, “I grant to you, Joseph, the body of Jesus”1. And Nicodemus2, having heard that Joseph received the right to take down the body of Jesus, came running to Joseph saying, “My Lord Joseph, do not deprive me of your reward; rather, I too shall be with you at the tomb of the foreigner so that we may obtain mercy”.

[2] And Joseph brought a clean linen cloth3 and Nicodemus about one hundred pounds of myrrh and aloe4. And taking down the body of Jesus from the cross, they embalmed it with myrrh and laid (it) in the linen cloth.

35 M adds “even now”.36 M reads “And the Lord stripped death, trampled Hades and restored the tree by the

tree, broke the gates, shattered the bars, and bound the Devil”. 37 M expands “and ascended into heaven” as “raised all of the dead into heaven, so

we may remember the one made flesh, praise the one crucified, give thanks for the one raised, that also he will rescue us from the darkness of our sins, and make us heirs of his kingdom”.

38 M reads “For honour is fitting to him and worshipping with his father without begin-ning and the all-holy and creative spirit, now and always, and forever and ever, amen”.

1 Mark 15:45; Luke 27:56.2 John 19:39.3 Matt 27:59; Mark 15:46; Luke 23:53; John 19:39.4 John 19:39.


268 T. BURkE

[3] Λέγει Ἰωσὴϕ πρὸς Νικόδημος · “Γινώσκεις, ἄδελϕε, ὅτι παράτυπον ἐγένετο εἰς τὴν ἐνταϕίαν τοῦ ξένου; αὐτὸς ξένος. κἀγὼ ἐχϑὸς8 ἐγενόμην τῆς συναγωγῆς καϑὼς λέγουσιν οἱ ἱερεῖς καὶ ὡς ξένον οὐκ ἐνταϕιάζομεν9 αὐτὸν ἄλλως ἴδιον καὶ κληρόνομον. καί συ εἶδες10 ὅτι πᾶς ξένος ἀποϑνῄσκων εἰς Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἐκ τῶν ναῶν11 γίνηται ἡ ἔξοδος αὐτοῦ”.

[4] Λέγει Νικόδημος · “Μὴ ϕοβοῦ Ἰωσὴϕ διὰ τὰς παγίδας καὶ ἀπειλὰς τῶν Ἰουδαίων. ἐγὼ πορεύσομαι12 πρὸς τὸν ναὸν καὶ ἐρῶ τὴν ἔξοδον τοῦ σώματος τοῦ Ἰησοῦ καὶ περὶ καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς ξένοις”. λέγει ὁ Ἰωσήϕ· “Πορεύου ἐνταχύ”.

[5] Καὶ ἐπορέυϑη Νικόδημος εἰς τὸν ναὸν καὶ ἤνεγκεν τὸν σου-δάριον ὅν ἦν ἐπὶ τῆς κεϕαλῆς αὐτοῦ οὐ μετὰ τῶν ὀϑονίων13 κείμε-νον ἀλλὰ χωρὶς ἐντετυλιγμένον14 εἰς ἕνα τόπον15. διὰ τί χωρίς; διότι εἶτον16 ἐκ τοῦ ναοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐδέξατο εἰς ϑυσίαν ἀλλὰ μόνον τὰ ὀϑόνια17 τὰ ἐόα ἅ18 Ἰωσὴϕ καὶ Νικόδημος ὡς ϑυσίαν καὶ ὁλο-καυτώματα ἐδέξατο.

[6] Μετὰ δὲ τὸ ἐλϑεῖν τὸν Νικόδημον ἐκ τοῦ ναοῦ ἔϑηκεν τὸ19 σῶμα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ εἰς τὸν τάϕον τοῦ Ἰωσὴϕ ὃ ἦν λελατομημένον ἐκ πέτρας κατέναντι τοῦ τόπου κρανίου ὅπου ὁ Χριστὸς ἐσταυρώϑη. καὶ ἐκύλισαν20 λίϑον μέγαν εἰς τὴν ϑύραν τοῦ μνημείου καὶ ἀνε-χώρησεν ἕκαστος εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ.

2. [1] Μετὰ δὲ τρεῖς ἡμέρας ταϕίας ὥρας γ ἀνέστη ὁ Κύριος. λέγουσιν οἱ ἱερεῖς καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς · “Οὐαὶ οὐαί, τίς ἡμῶν ἡ ταλαιπωρία αὕτη; δεῦτε οὖν εἴπωμεν ὅτι Ἰωσὴϕ καὶ οἱ μαϑηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἔκλεψαν αὐτὸν καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτοὶ ὅτι ἀνέστη ἐκ νεκρῶν. λοιπὸν21 παραδώσωμεν τὸν Ἰωσὴϕ εἰς ϑάνατον ἵνα ἐλησμονηϑὴ22 ἡ ἀνάστασις τοῦ Ἰησοῦ εἰς τὴν ἀϕορμὴν τοῦ Ἰωσήϕ”.

8 ἐχϑρὸς cod. 9 ἐνταϕιάζωμεν cod. 10 εἶδας cod. 11 τὸν ναὸν cod. 12 πορεύσωμαι cod. 13 ὀϑῶνιων cod. 14 ἐντετηλειγμένων cod. 15 τόπων cod. 16 ητον cod. 17 ὀϑυόνια cod.18 τὰ εἰο ἅ cod.19 τῶ cod. 20 ἐκύλησαν cod.21 λοιπῶν cod. 22 ἐλισμονηϑὴ cod.



[3] Joseph said to Nicodemus, “Do you know, brother, that there is dispute5 concerning the burial of the foreigner? This foreigner. And I was outside the synagogue just as the priests were saying that, ‘We do not prepare a foreigner himself for burial differently than a family member and heir. Do you understand that his delivery would bring every dying foreigner into Jerusalem from the temples?’”6.

[4] Nicodemus said, “Fear not Joseph, because of the snares and threats of the Jews. I shall go to the temple and I shall request the delivery of the body of Jesus and (ask) also about the other foreigners”. Joseph said, “Go quickly”.

[5] Nicodemus went to the temple and brought the face cloth that was on his head, not lying with the linen wrappings but rolled up in a place by itself 7. Why by itself? Because it was from the temple and he did not accept in sacrifice but only his own linen wrappings, which Joseph and Nicodemus accepted as a sacrifice and a burnt offering.

[6] After Nicodemus came from the temple, he placed the body of Jesus in the tomb of Joseph, which was hewn out of rock8 opposite the place of the skull9 where Christ was crucified. They rolled a great stone against the entrance of the tomb10 and returned each to his home.

2. [1] And after the third day of burial, at the third hour, the Lord rose. The priests and the scribes said, “Horror, horror! Why is this misery for us? Come then, let us say that Joseph and his disciples stole him, and that they say he rose from the dead. In addition, we will sentence Joseph to death so that the resurrection of Jesus will be forgotten as the pretext of Joseph”.

[2] Making a plot, the priests and the scribes on the day of the Lord said to the synagogue of the Jews, “Listen, people of Israel, the promise of Jacob: Joseph of Arimathea did not want to come into our council, but to go with the nailed one, the enemy of us and of God and the law. He prepared him for burial in his garden and in his tomb. Then he devised with the disciples of Jesus and stole his body and they said that he rose from the dead”.

5 παράτυπος: LSJ has “counterfeit,” but in modern speech it means “irregularity.” The meaning here might be closer to τύπτω: “beat, strike.”

6 Matt 27:52-53?; Matt 21:14?; Luke 9:31. The temples mentioned here may be healing sites of Asclepius, abandoned by supplicants in search of more effective healing. Note, in Acts Pil. 1.1 the Jewish leaders state that “No one can cast out demons by an unclean spirit, but only the god Asclepius.” Healing plays a large part in the trial of Jesus (see Acts Pil. 2.6; 6.1-2, 7).

7 John 20:7.8 Mark 15:46 par.9 Mark 15:22 par / John 19:17.10 Mark 15:46; Matt 27:60.


270 T. BURkE

[2] Συμβούλιον23 ποιήσαντες οἱ ἱερεῖς καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς 24 τῇ κυριακῇ λέγουσι πρὸς τὴν συναγωγὴν τῶν Ἰουδαίων · “Ἀκούσατε λαὸς τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ κληρονομία τοῦ Ἰακώβου Ἰωσὴϕ ὁ ἀπὸ Ἀριμαϑαίας οὐκ ἠϑέλησεν ἐλϑεῖν εἰς τὴν βουλὴν ἡμῶν ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἀπελϑεῖν ἀπὸ καϑήλωσιν τὸν ἐχϑρὸν ἡμῶν25 καὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ νόμου. καὶ ἐνεταϕίασεν αὐτὸν εἰς τὸν κῆπον αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς τὸν τάϕον αὐτοῦ. εἶτα εὕρησε26 τοῖς μαϑηταὶς τοῦ Ἰησοῦ καὶ ἔκλε-ψαν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ καὶ λέγουσιν ὅτι ἀνέστη ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν”.

[3] Καὶ λέγει ὁ λαός · “Τί ϑέλωσιν τὸ σῶμα νεκρόν;” ἠδὲ27 δραμόντες τὸ πᾶν πλῆϑος ἥρπασαν τὸν Ἰωσὴϕ πρὸς τοὺς ἀρχιε-ρεῖς. (fol. 18v) καὶ λέγουσιν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς πρὸς αὐτόν · “Τί τοῦτο ἐποίησας ὦ παράνομε καὶ παραβάτα τοῦ νόμου”.

[4] Ἀποκριϑεὶς δὲ ὁ Ἰωσὴϕ εἶπεν · “Ὦ ἀνόητοι καὶ τυϕλοὶ καὶ ἀναίσχυντοι, οὐκ αἰσχύνεσϑε λέγοντες28 τοιαῦτα, τίς ϑέλῃ κλέψαι νεκρὸν σῶμα, μάλιστα29 δὲ καὶ γυμνοῦν30; ποῦ αἱ σϕραγῖδες τοῦ μνῆματος καὶ ἡ τοῦ Πιλᾶτου κουστωδία; πῶς ἐσυλήϑη ὁ νεκρὸς ὑπὸ ταπεινῶν καὶ εὐτελῶν ἀνϑρώπων; οὐκοῦν μὴ ϕλυαρεῖτε”.

[5] Ἀκούοντες δὲ τὸν Ἰωσὴϕ οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ ἅπας ὁ λαὸς καὶ ἡ συναγωγὴ πᾶσα ἔβρυχον τοὺς ὀδόντας. καὶ ἐϑυμώϑησαν σϕόδρα καὶ δύσαντες τὸν Ἰωσὴϕ ἀπήγαγον πρὸς Πιλᾶτον λέγοντες · “Οὗτος31 ὁ ἄνϑρωπος παραβάτης ἐστὶ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τὸν ἐσταυρωμένον κατή-γαγεν ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου καὶ ἐνεταϕίασεν32 αὐτὸν ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων πραγ-μάτων. ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡ ἐντάϕια τοῦ ξένου ἐκ τοῦ ναοῦ προσκομίζεται καὶ οὐκ ἠρκέσϑη εἰς τὸ τοιοῦτον τόλμημα ἀλλὰ καὶ εὕρησεν καὶ τοῖς μαϑητοῖς αὐτοῦ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ. καὶ ἔλϑοντες ἔκλεψεν33 τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ καὶ λέγουσιν ὅτι ἠγέρϑη ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν”.

[6] Θυμωϑεὶς34 δὲ ὁ Πιλᾶτος λέγει τοῖς Ἰουδαιοῖς ἐν ὀργῇ μεγάλῃ ἐμβριμώμενος35 · “Ὦ βίαν μεϑ᾿ ὑμῶν, σκληροτράχηλοι καὶ στερεο-κάρδιοι καὶ ἄμωμοι. χϑὲς ταραχὴ ἐγενήϑη καὶ ϑόρυβος μέγας καὶ ἄνϑρωπον δίκαιον ἐσταυρώσατε ἀδίκως. τὸν τοιαῦτα σήμεια καὶ

23 συμβούλιονται cod. 24 τῇ ἡμέρᾳ scripsi 25 ὑμῶν cod. 26 εὕρησεν cod. 27 εἰδε cod. 28 λεγὸν cod. 29 μάλλιστα cod. 30 γυμνὸν cod. 31 οὗτως cod32 ἐνταϕίασεν cod. 33 ἔκλειψεν cod.34 Θυμωϑὴς cod. 35 ἐμβρημοῦμενος cod.



[3] The people said, “Why do they want the dead body?” And the whole crowd ran and took Joseph by force to the high priests. And the high priests said to him, “Why did you do this, O wrongdoer and trans-gressor of the law?”

[4] Joseph answered and said, “O foolish and blind and shameless, are you not ashamed saying such things? Who wants to steal a dead body, especially one stripped bare? Where (are) the seals of the tomb, and the guard of Pilate11? How was the dead one carried off by lowly and shabby men? So, do not accuse”.

[5] Hearing Joseph, the high priests and all the people and the entire synagogue were gnashing their teeth. They were very furious and, com-ing upon Joseph, they led him away by force to Pilate saying, “This man is a transgressor of the law. He took down the crucified one from the tree and prepared him for burial out of their own means. But also the burial shroud of the foreigner was brought from the temple. And, unsatisfied with such a shameless act, he devised also with the disciples of Jesus himself, and coming, they stole his body and said that he was risen from the dead”12.

[6] Pilate, becoming furious, said to the Jews, speaking angrily in great anger, “O violence among you! Stubborn, hardhearted, and impious! Yes-terday a disturbance happened and great confusion13. And you crucified a just man unjustly. Such signs and wonders were accomplished and you

11 Matt 27:66.12 Matt 27:64.13 Matt 27:51-54.


272 T. BURkE

τέρατα ποιήσαντα καὶ οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε. καὶ πάλιν σήμερον συνα-γωγὴ καὶ ταραχὴ εἰς τὸν ποιήσαντον ἀγαϑόν. ἐγὼ δὲ οὐ κρίνω οὐδὲ κελεύω ἐν τούτῳ”.

[7] Τότε ἐκέλευσεν ὁ Πιλᾶτος καὶ ἐξέβαλεν αὐτοὺς ἔξω λέγων · “Ὕπαγε καί τι36 ϑέλετε ποιήσατε. ὑμεῖς ὄψεσϑε. ἀϑῷός εἰμι ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἀνϑρώπου τούτου καὶ πᾶς ὁ οἶκός μου”.

[8] Ἐξέλϑοντες δὲ οἱ ἱερεῖς ἦλϑον εἰς τὴν συναγωγὴν καὶ ἀπέκλεισαν37 τὸν Ἰωσὴϕ εἰς ϕυλακὴν σκοτεινὴν38 λέγοντες · “Αὔριον λιϑοβολήσομεν39 αὐτὸν ὡς παράνομον”. Στήσαντες ϕύλακας πιστοὺς ἐπὶ τὴς ϑύρας τῆς ϕυλακῆς μὴ ἵέλϑο-ντες οἱ δούλοι αὐτῶν μετὰ τῶν μαϑητῶν αὐτοῦ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ καὶ ἐξενέγκωσιν αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τῆς ϕυλακῆς.

3. [1] Ἐκάϑη δὲ Ἰωσὴϕ ἐν τῇ ϕυλακῇ μόνος40. καὶ ἔκλαιεν πικρῶς λέγων · “Τί μοι τὸ ὄϕελος ἄρτι ἐκ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ; ἰδού, τὰ γνωτόν41 μου ἐξωλέϑρευσαν42 ὁμοίως καὶ ἡ ψυχή μου ἀποκτείνε-ται. αὔριον γὰρ λιϑοβολοῦμαι ὡς παράνομος καὶ ἀποϑνῄσκω ἀδίκως”.

[2] Ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνϑυμωμένου43 ϕῶς μέγα ἔλαμψεν καὶ ϕωνὴ ἦλϑεν πρὸς αὐτὸν λέγουσα · “Μὴ ϕοβοῦ Ἰωσήϕ, ἐγὼ γάρ εἰμὶ μετά σου. μὴ ϕοβηϑεὶς τὰς ἀπειλὰς τῶν Ἰουδαίων. ἔγειρε”.

[3] Ὁ δὲ ἀνάβλεψας Ἰωσὴϕ εἶδεν ἐν μέσῳ τῆς ϕυλακῆς τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἕστωτα μετὰ τοῦ λῃστοῦ βαστάζοντα44 τὸν σταυρὸν. καὶ γνώρισας τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἔπεσεν εἰς τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ λέγων · “Ἀληϑῶς εἶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος. ἀληϑῶς ἠγέρϑης ἐκ τοῦ μνημείου45 ὡς δυνατὸς καὶ κατίσχυσας πάντας τοὺς μισοῦντάς σε”.

[4] Τότε ἁπλώσας ὁ Ἰησοῦς τὴν δεξιὰν αὐτοῦ ἐπελάβησεν τὸν Ἰωσὴϕ καὶ ἐκβάλων αὐτὸν ἔξω τῆς πόλεως ἀπήγαγεν αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν. καὶ δίδαξας αὐτὸν ἀπέλυσεν46 αὐτὸν εἰς τοὺς μαϑη-τὰς αὐτοῦ ὅπως κήρυξῃ47 αὐτοῖς τὴν ἀνάστασιν αὐτοῦ.

36 τη cod. 37 ἀπέκλησαν cod. 38 σκοτινὴν cod. 39 λιϑοβολίσωμεν cod. 40 μονοττ cod. 41 γνουτῶν cod. 42 ἐξολέϑρευσαν cod. 43 ἐνϑϋμωμονμενου cod. 44 βαστάζωντα cod. 45 μνημϊου cod. 46 ἀπέλισεν cod. 47 κήρυξει cod.



did not believe. And again today an assembly and disturbance (occurs) at the good thing accomplished. But I do not decide nor command about this”.

[7] Then Pilate commanded and sent them away outside saying, “Go and do what you wish; see to it yourselves. I am innocent of this man’s blood and all my house”14.

[8] The priests, coming out, went into the synagogue and locked Joseph in a dark prison, saying, “Tomorrow we will stone him as a wrongdoer”, placing faithful guards at the entrance of the prison, their slaves may not come in with the disciples of this very Jesus and carry him out from the prison.

3. [1] Joseph sat alone in the prison. And he cried bitterly, saying, “What advantage is there to me now from Jesus? Look! The 15 destroyed my friend, and likewise my soul is condemned to death, for tomorrow I will be stoned like a wrongdoer and I will die unjustly”.

[2] As he was thinking these things, a great light shone and a voice came to him saying, “Fear not, Joseph, for I am with you. Do not be afraid of the threats of the Jews. Rise”.

[3] Looking up, Joseph saw in the middle of the prison Jesus standing with the thief, holding the cross16. Discovering Jesus, he fell down at his feet saying, “Truly you are the son of the living God. Truly you were raised from the grave, so mighty and prevailing over all who despise you”.

[4] Then Jesus, stretching out his right hand, took hold of Joseph and, bringing him out of the city, he led him to Galilee. And, after teaching him, he delivered him to his disciples so that he might proclaim to them his resurrection.

14 Matt 27:24.15 Damage to the manuscript has obscured the text here. The missing word or partial

word is about three letters long. The tail of a rho is visible, suggesting that the subject is “the priests”; however, the word must be a neuter plural.

16 Grammatically, Jesus is holding the cross, but the thief is often depicted holding his own cross (see Acts Pil. B 26; Narr. Jos. 5.3).


274 T. BURkE

[5] Τῇ ἐπαύριον συναχϑέντες οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι λέγουσι τοῖς ἱερεῦσι48 · “Δότε ἡμῖν τὸν παραβάτην Ἰωσὴϕ ὅπως λιϑοβολήσωμεν αὐτόν”. οἱ δὲ ἱερεῖς ἀπελϑόντες ἐν τῇ ϕυλακῇ τὰς σϕραγῖδας αὐτῶν εὗρον σῶας. ἀνοίξαντες δὲ ἔσω οὐδένα εὗρον.

[6] Λέγουσι οἱ ἱερεῖς πρὸς τὰς ϕυλακάς · “Ποῦ Ἰωσήϕ;” ἠδέ · “Οὐκ οἴδαμεν”. Τότε οἱ ἱερεῖς ἐγνῶντο49 τὸ πταῖσμα αὐτῶν. ϕόβῳ καὶ δειλίᾳ συνεχόμενος ἔπεσον50 χαμαὶ ὡς νεκροί. ὦ τῆς αὐτῶν πωρώσεως51, ὦ τῆς αὐτῶν ταλαιπωρίας μὴ ϑέλοντας εὐεργετῆσαι τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν.

[7] Ὅτι αὐτῷ πρέπει πᾶσα δόξα κράτος, τιμή, μεγαλοπρέπεια νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, ἀμήν.

48 ἱερεῖς cod. 49 γνῶντο cod. 50 ἔπεισον cod. 51 πορρώσεως cod.



[5] The next day, the Jews assembled and said to the priests, “Give us the transgressor Joseph so that we may stone him”. The priests went into the prison, found their seals preserved. And opening, they found nothing inside.

[6] The priests said to the guards, “Where is Joseph?” And (they said), “We do not know”. Then the priests knew their failure. Afflicted by fear and timidity, they fell to the ground as if dead. O their stubborn-ness, O their misery, not wishing to show kindness to those who believe in our Lord Jesus Christ!

[7] Because to him is fitting all glory, power, honour, mag-nificence, now and then and forever, amen.


276 T. BURkE

Bibliography

aubInEau, Codices Chrysostomici Graeci = M. aubInEau, Codices Chrysos-tomici Graeci, t. 1. Codices Britanniae et Hiberniae, Paris, 1968.

BHG = F. halkIn (ed.), Bibliotheca Hagiographica Graeca, 3rd ed. (Subsidia hagiographica, 8), Brussels, 1957.

burkE, De infantia Iesu = T. burkE, De infantia Iesu euangelium Thomae graece (Corpus Christianorum, Series Apocryphorum, 17), Turnhout, 2010.

chartrand-burkE, Greek Manuscript Tradition = T. chartrand-burkE, The Greek Manuscript Tradition of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, in Apocry-pha, 14 (2004), p. 129-151.

CPG = M. GEErard, Clavis Patrum Graecorum, vol. 3, Turnhout, 1979.cunnInGham, Greek Manuscripts = I.C. cunnInGham, Greek Manuscripts in

the National Library of Scotland, in Scriptorium, 24 (1970), p. 360-371.dE aldama, Repertorium Pseudochrysostomicum = J.A. dE aldama, Reperto-

rium Pseudochrysostomicum (Documents, Études et Répertoires publiés par l’Institut de Recherche et d’Histoire des Textes, 10), Paris, 1965.

dE montfaucon, Sancti Patris nostri Iohannis Chrysostomi = B. dE montfaucon, Sancti Patris nostri Iohannis Chrysostomi…opera omnia quae exstant…, 13 vols., Paris, 1718-1738.

dE montfaucon, Editio parisina = B. dE montfaucon, Sancti Patris nostri Iohannis Chrysostomi… Editio parisina altera, emendata et aucta, 13 vols., Paris, 1834-1840.

Ehrman – PlEšE, Apocryphal Gospels = B. Ehrman – z. PlEšE, The Apocryphal Gospels: Texts and Translations, Oxford – New York, NY, 2011.

GEErard, CANT = M. GEErard, Clauis Apocryphorum Noui Testamenti, Turn-hout, 1992.

GounEllE, Collectio Sermonum = R. GounEllE, Les éditions de la Collectio Sermonum d’Eusèbe d’Alexandrie, in Analecta Bollandiana, 127 (2009), p. 249-272.

GounEllE, Les recensions byzantines = R. GounEllE, Les recensions byzantines de l’Évangile de Nicodème (Corpus Christianorum, Series Apocryphorum, Instrumenta, 3), Turnhout, 2008.

GronEwald, Kein durchtriebener Räuber = M. GronEwald, Kein durchtrie-bener Räuber (P. Lit. Lond. 245 = Ps. Eusebius, Sermo 17), in Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 34 (1979), p. 22-25.

hannIck, Maximos Holobolos = C. hannIck, Maximos Holobolos in der Kir-chenslavischen homiletischen literatur (Wiener Byzantinische Studien, 14), Vienna, 1981.

hunGEr, Katalog = H. hunGEr, Katalog der griechischen Handschriften der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek, 4 vols., Vienna, 1961.

hunGEr et al., Katalog = H. hunGEr – o. krEstEn – c. hannIck, Katalog der griechischen Handschriften der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek, Teil 3/2. Codices theologici 101-200 (Museion N.F. 4, Bd. 1, T. 3,2), Vienna, 1984.

Izydorczyk, Nicodemus’ Gospel = Z. Izydorczyk, Nicodemus’ Gospel Before and Beyond the Medieval West, in Z. Izydorczyk (ed.), The Medieval Gos-pel of Nicodemus: Texts, Intertexts, and Contexts in Western Europe (Medi-eval & Renaissance Texts and Studies, 158), Tempe, AZ, 1997, p. 1-20.



Izydorczyk, Two Newly Identified Manuscripts = Z. Izydorczyk, Two Newly Identified Manuscripts of the Sermo de confusione diaboli, in Scriptorium, 43 (1989), p. 253-255.

lafontaInE, La version arménienne = G. lafontaInE, La version arménienne du sermon d’Eusèbe d’Alexandrie ‘Sur la Passion du Seigneur’, in Le Muséon, 95 (1982), p. 99-113.

lEroy – GlorIE, ‘Eusèbe d’Alexandrie’ = J. lEroy – f. GlorIE, ‘Eusèbe d’Alexandrie’ source d’‘Eusèbe de Gaule’, in Sacris erudiri, 19 (1969-1970), p. 33-70.

M = J.P. mIGnE (ed.), Patrologia Graeca, t. 62, col. 721-724.maI, Spicilegium Romanum = A. maI, Spicilegium Romanum, vol. 9. Graeca

vetera Eusebii Alex. …, Rome, 1843.mcculloch, Harrowing of Hell = J.A. mcculloch, The Harrowing of Hell:

A Comparative Study of an Early Christian Doctrine, Edinburgh, 1930.mInGana, Woodbrooke Studies, 2 = A. mInGana, Woodbrooke Studies: Chris-

tian Documents in Syriac, Arabic, and Garshuni, vol. 2, Cambridge, 1928.nau, Notes = F. nau, Notes sur diverses homélies pseudépigraphiques, sur les œuvres

attribuées à Eusèbe d’Alexandrie et sur un nouveau manuscrit de la chaîne Contra Severianos, in Revue de l’Orient Chrétien, 13 (1908), p. 429-433.

norEt, Pour une édition = J. norEt, Pour une édition de l’Évangile de l’enfance selon Thomas, in Analecta Bollandiana, 90 (1972), p. 412.

norEt, Un fragment homilétique = J. norEt, Un fragment homilétique grec à Édimbourg, in Analecta Bollandiana, 92 (1972), p. 171-172.

rand, Sermo = E.k. rand, Sermo de confusione diaboli, in Modern Philology, 2 (1904-1905), p. 261-278.

robErts – donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers = A. robErts – J. donaldson, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 10 vols., New York, NY, 1916.

rosén, Slavonic Translation = T. rosén, The Slavonic Translation of the Apoc-ryphal Infancy Gospel of Thomas (Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis: Studia Slavica Upsaliensia, 39), Uppsala, 1997.

sauGEt, Une ébauche d’homéliaire copte = J.-M. sauGEt, Une ébauche d’homé-liaire copte pour la Semaine Sainte: le manuscrit Borgia arabe 99, in Parole de l’Orient, 14 (1987), p. 167-202.

savIllE, S. Ioannis Chrysostomi opera, graece = H. savIllE, S. Ioannis Chry-sostomi opera, graece, 8 vols., Eton, 1612.

thIlo, Eusebius von Alexandrien = J.C. thIlo, Über die Schriften des Eusebius von Alexandrien und des Eusebius von Emisa. Ein kritisches Sendschreiben an Herrn Consistorialrath Dr. Augusti zu Bonn. Mit einem Anhange mehre-rer bisher unbekannter Homilien des Eusebius von Alexandrien, Halle, 1832.

tIschEndorf, Evangelia Apocrypha = C. von tIschEndorf, Evangelia Apocry-pha, 1853, 2nd ed. Leipzig, 1876.

van EsbroEck, L’histoire de Lydda = M. van EsbroEck, L’histoire de Lydda dans deux textes géorgiens, in Bedi Kartlisa, 35 (1978), p. 109-131.

York University Tony burkE18 Troy St.kitchener, ON N2H 1L8, [email protected]


278 T. BURkE

Abstract — A 14th/15th-century Greek manuscript in Vienna (Cod. hist. gr. 91) contains two fragmentary texts relating to the Acta Pilati corpus of the Christian Apocrypha. The first is a fragment of On the Passion, for the Preparation Day, a sermon attributed to Eusebius of Alexandria drawing upon the Descensus ad inferos, found appended to several versions of the Acts of Pilate. The paper includes a transcription and translation of the fragment along with an overview of the publication history of the sermon. The second text is an unpublished, untitled excerpt from an unknown homily dealing with the burial of Jesus and the impris-onment of Joseph of Arimathea. This paper presents a diplomatic edition of the text with an English translation along with a discussion of its relationship to the Acts of Pilate and the related Narrative of Joseph of Arimathea.
