Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 224




0 2003, Uitgeverij Peeters, Bondgenotenlaan 153, 3000 Leuven

ISBN 90-429-1 375-4 D. 2003/0602/127 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.


Preface List of abbreviations Notes on contributors I I1 I11 IV


vii ix


J.N. Bremmer, The Apocalypse of Peter: Greek or Jewish? P. van Minnen, The Greek Apocalypse of Peter M. Pesthy, "Thy mercy, 0 Lord, is in the heavens; and thy righteousness reacheth unto the clouds" J. Bolyki, False Prophets in the Apocalypse o f Peter-



E. Tigchelaar, Is the Liar Bar Kokhha? Considering the Date and Provenance of the Greek (Etlziopic) Apocalypse of Peter 63 T. Adamik, The Description of Paradise in the Apocalypse of Peter



K.B. Copeland, Sinners and Post-Mor-tem 'Baptism ' 91 in the Aclzerusian Lake

VIII I. Czachesz, The Grotesque Body in the Apocalypse of Peter



L. Roig Lanzillotta, Does Punishment Reward the Righteous? The Justice Pattern Underlying the Apocalypse of Peter

127 158 174


J. van Ruiten, The Old Testament Quotations in the Apocalypse of Peter

A. Jakab, The Reception of the Apocalypse of Peter in Ancient Christianity

G. Luttikhuizen, The Suflering Jesus and tlze Invulnerable Christ in the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter

187 200 204

XIII J.N. Bremmer, Bibliography of tlze Apocalypse of Peter

Index of names, subjects and passages


After the fall of the Berlin Wall the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen decided to intensify contacts with universities in Eastern Europe. In 1991 the then Head of the Department of Church History of the Faculty of Theology and Science of Religion, Professor Hans Roldanus, took this opportunity to forge links not only with the theologians of the Kholi Gispfir University of Budapest but also with the classicists of the Lorint-Eotvos University of Budapest. The initiative seemed highly promising, as the world of early Christianity was receiving ever increasing attention from New Testament and patristic scholars as well as from ancient historians. Initially, it was decided to focus on the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, a genre of which various representatives had recently been re-edited or were (are!) in the process of being re-edited. After completing the study of the major Acts, we have decided to proceed with the major Apocalypses. With the widening of the scope of our series we have also changed the title to Studies in Ear-ly Christian Apocl-ypha. The series will continue to publish the results of our conferences, but the editors also welcome other studies in this field, be they proceedings or monographs. Following the volumes on the Acts of John (1995), Paul and Tllecla (1996), Peter (1998), Andrew (2000) and Thonlas (2001), this volume is dedicated to the Apocalypse of Peter-. The volume starts with a short survey of the Forsckungsgeschichte and a discussion of the old question regarding its eventual inspiration: Greek or Jewish. It is followed by a new look at the circumstances of its finding, the composition of the codex and its character, and also by a new edition of the Bodleian and Rainer fragments. The major part of the book studies various aspects and passages of the Apocalypse: the nature of the Ethiopic pseudo-Clementine work that contained the Apocalypse, false prophets, the Bar Kokhba hypothesis, Paradise, the post-mortem 'baptism' of sinners, the grotesque body, the pattern of justice under-




lying our work, the Old Testament quotations, and the reception of the Apocalypse in ancient Christianity. The book concludes with a f Peter. As has become customary, study of the Gnostic Apocalypse o the volume is rounded off by a bibliography and a detailed index. The conference that formed the basis of this book took place at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen in the autumn of 2000. We would like to thank the Faculty of Theology and Science of Religion and the Onderzoekschool Rudolf Agricola, which is the Groningen Research School for the Humanities, for their financial support towards the conference. Alan Dearn helped to correct the English; Ton Hilhorst and Gerard Luttikhuizen assisted in correcting the proofs, and Birgit van der Lans was a great help in making the index. We are grateful to them all.

Jan N. Bremmer IstvAn Czachesz

Groningen, June 2003

List of abbreviations




Apoc~yphalActs of the Apostles Azrfstie,p und Niedergang d e romischen ~ Welt Jal7rbuch fur- Antike ~ ~ Christentum n d Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Early Chi-istian Studies Journal of Tl~eological Studies W. Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrvpha, tr. and ed. R. McL. Wilson, 2 vols (Cambridge, 1992') Patrologia Graeca Parrologia Latirla Realle.~ikonfiir Antike und Christentum 'issenRealenc~~clopiidie der classische17 Alter.t~rms~' schaft Society of Biblical Lite~.ature Supplen7er~tuin Epigrapkicun~Graecum Tl7eologisches Worterbuch zlr~n Neslen Tesran7ent Vigiliae Clzristianae Zeitschrifr fiir die ne~ltestan7entlickeWissenschaji Zeitschrift f i i ~ Papyrologie und Epigraphik

Notes on Contributors

Tamas Adamik b. 1937, is Professor Emeritus of Latin at the LorBnt-Eotvos University of Budapest. He is the author of the following studies in Hungarian: A Commenta~yon Catullils (1971), Martial and His Poetry (1979), Aristotle 's Rhetoric (1982), Jerome's Selected Works (1991), A Histo~yo f Roman Literature I-IV (199396), Ancient Theories of Style fr-om Gorgias to A~rgustine(1998), Martial: Selected Epigrams (2001), and translator of Ioannes Saresheriensis: Metalogicon (2003). He is also the editor of new Hungarian translations of the Apoc13plial Acts of the Apostles (1996), the Apoc13phal Gospels ( 1996), the Apocryphal Apocalypses ( 1997), and the Apocryphal Epistles (1999). Janos Bolyki b. 1931, is Professor Emeritus of New Testament Studies at the KBroli GBspBr University of Budapest. He is the author of Jes~lTischgenieirlschaften (1998), and of the following studies in Hungarian: The Questions of the Sciences in the History of Tlieologj~ in the 20th Centu~y (1970), Faith and Science (1989) and T17e Tahle Fellowships of Jes~is(1992), Principles and Methods of New Testan~eiltInterpretation (199g2), The Ecological Crisis in Tl7eological Perspective (1999), True Witness: Con7rnentary to the Gospel of John (2001), and The Gospel of Johrl in the Mirror of the Greek Tragedy (2002). He co-authored, in Hungarian, Codes D in the Book of Acts (1995) and Revelation: Two Approaches (1997). Jan N. Bremmer b. 1944, is Professor of History and Science of Religion at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of Tl7e Early Greek Concept of the Soul (1983), Greek Religion (1999') and The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife (2002); co-author of Roman Myth and Mythography (1987), editor of Interpretations o f Greek Mythology (1987), From Sappho to de Sade: Moments in the History of Se,i--



uality (1989), The Apocryphal Acts of John (1995), The Apocrvphal Acts of Paul and Tlzecla (1996), The Apoclyphal Acts of Peter (1998), The Apoc~yplralActs of Andrew (2000) and The Apocryphal of GesActs of Thomas (2002), and co-editor of A Cultural Histo~y ture (1991), Between Poverty and the Pyre. Moments in the history of widowhood (1995), A Cultural Histo~yof Humour (1997) and The Metamorphosis of Magic (2003).

Kirsti Copeland b. 1971, is a Woodrow Wilson Fellow at the University of Redlands in southern California. She completed her dissertation, Mapping tlie Apocalypse of Paul: Geography, Genre and Histoly, at Princeton University in 2001. She is the author of 'The Earthly Monastery and the Transformation of the Heavenly City in Late Antique Egypt', in A. Yoshiko Reed and R. Abusch (eds), In Heaven as it is on Earth (2003) and of 'Paulusapokalypse' in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, fourth edition (2003). Istvan Czachesz b. 1968, is a postdoctoral fellow of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of Con7missior7 Narratives: A Comparative Studv of rlze Canonical and Apocryphal Acts (2003), in Hungarian, of Gaia's Two Faces (1996), co-author of Codes D in the Book of Acts (1995), editor of Disciples, Wonde~workers, Martyrs (1997: a volume of essays on the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles), and translator of Tyconius' Book of Rules (1997). Attila Jakab b. 1966, teaches Geopolitics of Religions at the International Centre for GeopoliticaI Studies of Geneva (www.geopolitics.ch). In addition to numerous articles, he is the author of 20 siicles de prieres ckre'tiennes (1999) and Ecclesia alesandrina. Evolution sociale et ii7stitutio1111elle du christianisme alexandrin (IF er I F siecles) (2001). Gerard Luttikhuizen b. 1940, is Professor of Early Christian Literature and New Testament Studies at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of The Revelation of Elchasai (1985), Gnostische Geschriften I (1986) and De veelvoimigheid van her vroegste chrisrendom (2002). He is the editor of Paradise I~lterpreted(1999) and The Creation of Man and Woman (2000), and co-editor of Stories of the Flood ( 1 998).



Peter van Minnen, b. 1959, is Assistant Professor of Classics and Ancient History at the University of Cincinnati. In addition to numerous articles, he is the (co-)author of Papjlri, 0st1-aca, Parchments and Waxed Tablets in the Leiden Papyro10,qical Instit~ite(1991), Settling a Dispute: Toward a Legal Anthropology of Late Antique Egypt (1994), the Duke Papyrus Archive (1996; electronic address: htt~://scri~torium.lib.duke. edu/vav~rusf)and Zij die stelven gaan, groeten u (1998). He is editor, in Dutch, of Kleio goes Cleo (2001). Monika Pesthy b. 1954, teaches Theology at the Vilmos Apor Catholic College. She is, in Hungarian, the author of Origen: Commentaly on the Songs of Songs (1993), Origen, Interpreter of the Bible (1996), and translator of Origen: De Principiis N (1998) and (2001). Moses Bar Kepha: Paradise Commenra~y Lautaro Roig Lanzillotta b. 1967, is Research Assistant at the Department of New Testament and Early Christianity at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. In addition to several articles on Classical and Late Antiquity, he is the author of La envidia en el pensamiento griego. De la kpocca arcaica a1 heler~ismo (Diss. Univ. Complutense, 1997) and is about to complete his Groningen dissertation on the Apoc~yphalActs of Andl-ew. Jacques van Ruiten b. 1956, is Associate Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and Early Jewish Literature at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is author of Eel7 begin zonder einde. De doo~werking van Jesaja 65 in de interrestarnentaire literatz~zaen her Nieuwe Testament (1990) and Prin7aeval H i s t o ~ y Interpreted. The Re~lritingof Genesis 1-11 in the Book of Jubilees (2000), and co-editor of Studies in Deutel-onomy (1994) and Srzrdies in the Book of Isaiah (1997). Eibert Tigchelaar b. 1959, is Research Fellow at the Qumran Institute of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of Prophets The Day of The End. Zechariah, the Book of Warche~r of Old a i ~ d ar7d Apocalyptic (1996) and T o Increase Learning for the Understandir~gOnes. Reading and Reconst~vctingthe Fragmentary Early Jewish Sapienrial Text 4Qinstruction (2001), and co-editor of Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XXIII: Qumran Cave I 1 II (1998), The Dead Sea Sc~.ollsStudy Edition (20002), and The Sacrifice of (2002). Isaac. The Aqedah (Genesis 22) and Its I~~rerprerarions

1. The Apocalypse of Peter: Greek or Jewish?


When in the winter of 1886-87 a French archaeological team opened a grave near Akhmim in Upper Egypt, they struck gold. In the grave they found a parchment codex with fragments of the Book of Enoch, the Gospel of Peter and the Apocalvpse of Peter (ApPt). The texts immediately drew the attention of the foremost patristic and classical scholars of the time. In 1892 the meritorious J.A. Robinson (18581933) and M.R. James (1862-1936) published a 'pirate' edition based upon an unpublished version by the excavators'. In the next year the French team came with an official facsimile, but they had retouched the photographs, thus making their editio prirqceps somewhat unreliable'. On the basis of the English edition, the greatest patristic scholar of the late nineteenth century, Adolf von Hamack (18511930), published his own edition, which he followed one year later with a revised and expanded version3. The text also drew the interest J.A. Robinson and M.R. James, The Gospel according to Peter and the Revelation of Peter- (London, 1892). For the codex, see now Van Minnen, this volume, Ch. 11. U. Bouriant, 'Fragments du texte grec du livre d ' ~ n o c h et de quelques Ccrits attribuCs $ saint Pierre', Mhnzoires publihs par les Menzbres de la Mission Al.chPologique Fr-a~zcaise all Caire I X . 1 (Paris, 1892: editio princeps); for photogravures of the manuscript, see A. Lods, ibidem, IX.3 (1893). For urzd die more reliable photographs see 0. von Gebhardt, Das E~~angelbm Apokalypse des Petr-us (Leipzig, 1893). A. von Hamack, 'Bmchstiicke des Evangeliums und der Apokalypse des Petrus', SB Berlin 44 (1892) 895-903, 949-65, repr. in his Kleirze Schr-jfte~z zur alter^ Kir-che: Berliner- Akademieschr.ifre17 1890-1907 (Leipzig, 1980)

I. The Apocalypse of Peter: Greek or Jewish?


When in the winter of 1886-87 a French archaeological team opened a grave near Akhmim in Upper Egypt, they struck gold. In the grave they found a parchment codex with fragments of the Book of Enoch, the Gospel of Peter and the Apocalvpse of Peter (ApPt). The texts immediately drew the attention of the foremost patristic and classical scholars of the time. In 1892 the meritorious J.A. Robinson (18581933) and M.R. James (1862-1936) published a 'pirate' edition based upon an unpublished version by the excavators'. In the next year the French team came with an official facsimile, but they had retouched the photographs, thus making their editio prirqceps somewhat unreliable'. On the basis of the English edition, the greatest patristic scholar of the late nineteenth century, Adolf von Hamack (18511930), published his own edition, which he followed one year later with a revised and expanded version3. The text also drew the interest J.A. Robinson and M.R. James, The Gospel according to Peter and the Revelation of Peter- (London, 1892). For the codex, see now Van Minnen, this volume, Ch. 11. U. Bouriant, 'Fragments du texte grec du livre d ' ~ n o c h et de quelques Ccrits attribuCs $ saint Pierre', Mhnzoires publihs par les Menzbres de la Mission Al.chPologique Fr-a~zcaise all Caire I X . 1 (Paris, 1892: editio princeps); for photogravures of the manuscript, see A. Lods, ibidem, IX.3 (1893). For urzd die more reliable photographs see 0. von Gebhardt, Das E~~angelbm Apokalypse des Petr-us (Leipzig, 1893). A. von Hamack, 'Bmchstiicke des Evangeliums und der Apokalypse des Petrus', SB Berlin 44 (1892) 895-903, 949-65, repr. in his Kleirze Schr-jfte~z zur alter^ Kir-che: Berliner- Akademieschr.ifre17 1890-1907 (Leipzig, 1980)


Norden was not a member of the Religionsgeschichrliche Schule strict0 sensu, but his ambitions were closely related and he maintained contacts with some of its most prominent representatives, especially Richard Reitzenstein (1861-193 1)". As Norden observed, unlike in Rome, the absence of a central authority made it possible for the Greek world to have competing eschatologies. One of these, Orphism, had become very popular with the masses, according to Norden, due to the clever organisation of the movement by schlaue Priesrer". Orphism had originated in competition with the Eleusinian mysteries, but already at an early stage both mysteries started to influence one another, just like Orphism and Pythagoreanism often became indistinguishable. Important innovations as regards the traditional picture were the ideas of a judgement on moral basis, wonderful banquets for the righteous, and a paradise-like afterlife. These new ideas, as Norden claimed, constituted the basis of Vergil's description of the underworld in Aeneid VII2. Unfortunately, so still Norden, the first two centuries of the Christian era were strongly characterised by a superstition ('Aberglaube'), in particular influenced by oriental religions, which was greatly interested in a blessed life after death. That is why we find descriptions of the afterlife by such differing authors as Apuleius and Plutarch. It is in this context that we have to read the ApPt. Norden

See K. Rudolph, 'Norden und die Religionsgeschichtliche Schule', in B. Kytzler et a1 (eds), Edua1.d Norden (1868-1941) (Stuttgart, 1994) 83-105 at 95-105. For Reitzenstein see C. Koch, 'Richard Reitzensteins Beitrage zur Mandaerforschung', Zs. f. Religioizs~~issenschnfta 3 (1995) 49-80; add the observations by G. Wissowa, in G. Audring (ed), Gelehr-tenalltag. Der Briefiechsel z~~ischerl Eduar-d Meyer lrnd Georg W i s s o ~ ~ (1890-1927) a (Hildesheim, 2000) 12f. " This idea of the deceiving priests, the Priestertrug, originated in Enlightenment circles in the eighteenth century and had a long and influential life, but I do not know of a substantial treatment of the theme. Norden already betrays here his interest in apocalyptic literature which would later culminate in his authoritative commentary on the Aeneid VI, cf. E. Norden, P. Vergilius Maro Aeneis VI (Leipzig, 19273).For a more recent view of Vergil's sources see R. Schilling, Duns le sillage de Rome (Paris. 1988) 89-100.



did not present the whole of the treatise to his readers, however. He refused to insult them with the 'wirklich grauenhafter, nach meiner Meinung nur bei einem Orientalen moglicher Phantasie erdachten Hollenstrafen' (p. 229). In a similar manner, Harnack had already left the most cruel passage untranslated in a preliminary translation in the Preussische Jahrbiicher in order not to offend the sensibility of his readers13. Instead, Norden enumerated typically Greek elements in the ApPt. Successively, he noted the stream of fire (27), the wallowing in burning mire (23), the watching of the murderers by the souls of the murdered (25) and the suicides who cast themselves from a high slope, but, having landed at the bottom, were driven up again by their torturers (32). In this continuing punishment, Norden recognised an imitation of the mythological punishments of Ixion and Sisyphus. Norden concluded by observing that there was a great difference between the Greek spirit of this Christian Apocalypse and that of Jewish ones, as anybody reading the Book of Enoclz immediately would notice. One can only speculate to what extent Norden was moved to stress the perverse imagination of Orientals or the opposition between Christian and Jewish Apocalypses by his own Jewish origin. At the age of seventeen, Norden had converted to Christianity and he never came back on his decision. Can it be that he thought it necessary to demonstrate his definitive farewell to his own originI4? However this may be, his interest in the Greek elements of the ApPt had been independently shared by another German scholar, who even dedicated a complete book to it, published only shortly after Norden's article.

l3 A. Hamack, 'Die neuentdeckten Bruchstiicke des Petrusevangeliums und der Petmsapokalypse', Preussische Jahrh. 71 (1893) 36-58. l4 For Norden see most recently Kytzler et al., Eduard Norden: W.M. Calder I11 and B. Huss, "Sed sen~iendilmofficio.. ." The Corr-espondence

between Ulrich von Wi1amo~)itz-Moellendorff and Eduar-d Norden (18921931) (Berlin, 1997); W.A. Schroder, Der Altertumswissensckaftler Eduard Norden. Das Schicksal eines deutscken Gelehrten jiidisclzer Ahkunft (Hildesheim, 1999).


Later in 1893, too late to take fully notice of Norden's article, Albrecht Dieterich (1866-1908) published his views on the newly discovered ApPtlS. Dieterich, too, was highly sympathetic to the aims of the Religio~~sgeschichtlicke Schule. He had started his studies with theology, but in 1886 he changed to classical philology at Bonn, where he gained his doctorate in 1888 under the aegis of Hermann Usener. It was the time that Usener prepared his famous analysis of Christmas, Das Weihnachtsfest (1888), and increasingly paid attention to what he considered the pagan elements of Christianity in order to 'carry out the purification and elucidation of our religious consciou~ness'~ Dieterich ~. was greatly inspired by Usener, his later father-in-law, and until the end of his life he always had a keen eye for pagan roots of early Christianity1'. It is therefore not surprising that, like Norden, Dieterich also looked for the Greek roots of the ApPt. In order to prove his point he painted with a wide brush. He started with a survey of Greek popular belief in the afterlife, then analysed the Eleusinian and Orphic mysteries and completed his first part with a sketch of Orphic descents into the underworld. In the second part he discussed the sinners in Hades and their punishments, but in the penultimate part Dieterich finally came to speak of Jewish apocalypticism. Although he had an eye for Greek elements in Jewish life at the beginning of the Christian era, he stressed that the author of the Apocalypse of Peter did not use Jewish writings to compose his picture of the hell. In his last chapter, Dieterich concluded that the Egyptian Christian community derived its picture of heaven and hell from Orphic-Pythagorean traditions, since most Christians would have been Orphics. In Dieterich's view, then, Orphism stood in many ways at the cradle of Christianity.
A. Dieterich, Nekyia. Beitrage zur Erklarurzg der neuentdeckten Petrusapokabpse (Leipzig, 1893), who mentions Norden's article on p. 152. The second edition of 1913, edited by R. Wunsch, contains corrections, suggestions and additions from Dieterich's own copy and the various reviews. For Dieterich see the biography by Wunsch in A. Dieterich, Kleine Schriften (Leipzig and Berlin, 191 1) ix-xlii; F. Pfister, 'Albrecht Dieterichs Wirken in der Religionswissenschaft', ARW 35 (1938) 180-5. . "I Usener, Vortrage urzd Aufsatze (Leipzig and Berlin, 1907) 65. l7 For a good summary of his views see Dieterich, Kleine Sckrifen, vi.


Dieterich's book was well received, but the lack of new data meant that interest soon shifted to other areas of early Christianity. A second phase in the study of the ApPt was inaugurated with the publication of the Ethiopic text in 1910, a pseudo-Clementine composition in which the ApPr was embedded18. The nature of the text immediately raised the problem as to how the Ethiopic version was related to the Greek fragment from Akhmim. The modem consensus is that the Ethiopic tradition is 'authentic and offers the original text of the ApPt, albeit in parts somewhat distorted'19. The Greek version is therefore always to be used with caution for the establishment of the original text. For our problem it is important to note that the Ethiopic tradition added a few more references to the Greek tradition. In c. 14, of which the Greek version was found only later (the so-called Rainer fragment), we find 'the field Akrosja (= Acherusia) which is called Aneslesleja (= Elysium)' and in c. 13 we hear of an angel Tatirokos (= Tartarouchos), but in this second phase the old question - Jewish or Greek? - no longer played a role, and we have to wait until the 1980s before the question was raised again. Naturally, the scholarly and spiritual climate had now radically changed from that at the turn of the century. New questions were being asked and new approaches came to the forefront. In 1983 the American Jewish scholar Martha Himmelfarb published a detailed analysis of what she calls 'tours of hell' in Jewish and Christian literatureZ0.Naturally, the ApPr receives plenty of attention as the oldest surviving specimen of the genre. However, instead of considering it to be 'the successor to archaic and classical descents into Hades, far removed from Jewish literature', she puts forward the thesis that these tours of hell 'find their proper context in Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature' (3). Naturally, Dieterich is now the 'bad guy', whose work is regularly lambasted for his neglect of Jewish tradiS. GrCbaut, 'LittCrature Cthiopienne pseudo-clCmentine. La seconde venue du Christ et la resurrection des morts', Revue de I'Orient Clire'tien 15 ( 1 9 10) 198-214, 307-23 (text), 425-39 (translation). l9 C.D.G. Miiller, in NTA 11, 625. 20 M. Himmelfarb, To11r.sof Hell. An Apocalyptic Form in Je~lishand Christian Literature (Philadelphia, 1983).


tions and who is even suspected (accused?) of 'a certain kind of history-of-religions anti-Christian (and Jewish), pro-Greek feeling' (4.412'. Himmelfarb shrewdly observed that in these apocalypses a question of a seer (prophet) is followed by a demonstrative explanation from a supernatural guide. This distinctive formal feature of the tours must have developed from the cosmic tour apocalypses, of which the oldest specimen is Enoch's cosmic tour in the Book of Watchers. The latter Book also displays the same interest in rewards and punishments after death as many later apocalypses. These features, then, with certainty locate the ApPt in the Jewish apocalyptic tradition. Bauckham has added the observation to Himmelfarb's argumentation that in these apocalypses the active punishment of the wicked begins not at the last judgement, but already at death, probably a minority view among the Jews until well into the second century AD22.HOWever, Bauckham also returned to the questions posed by Dieterich. While admitting that Himmelfarb rightly observes that the tours of hell developed within the Jewish apocalyptic tradition, he also stresses that some of the punishments have clear precedents in Greek and Roman descriptions of Hades. Moreover, as in the apocalypses, in the Greek Hades the punishments take place now and not at a later stage in history2'. The conclusions of Bauckham seem in general unassailable. Yet while happily conceding his main points, we are still faced with the problem raised by Dieterich as to whether the ApPt stands in the Orphic-Pythagorean tradition. Admittedly, Bauckham himself has presented us with a large survey of Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Syrian, Israelite, Iranian, Greek and Roman descents into the ~ n d e r w o r l d ~ ~ . However, this survey is not targeted at the problem of the ApPt and neglects recent insights into the origin and development of the Orphic-Pythagorean ideas about the underworld. A balanced view Himmelfarb, Tours of Hell, 3, 5-6, 41-5,48, 67-8, 71, 116, 119-21. R. Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead. Studies on the Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (Leiden, 1998) 49-80 at 70f. 23 Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead, 35-6, 71-2, 208-9. " Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead, 9-48.



about Dieterich's ideas still remains a desideratum. It is therefore the aim of my contribution in the following pages to reconsider the Greek elements in the ApPt with special attention to their possible Orphic origins. Let us start with the evidently Greek names of the angels Tartarouchos (13 E) and Temelouchos (8 E)25.The first name means 'Keeper of the Tartarus' and is a strange name for an angel. It is fairly unique and, not surprisingly, occurs only in Christian literature clearly depending on the ApPr, such as the Apocalvpse of Paul (16)26, but also in the Book of TI7omas the Contender. This treatise derives from East Syria, but its basic document probably originated in Egyptian Alexandria2'; in fact, the connection between Edessa and the Egyptian Hermetica is well e~tablished*~. In any case, it is interesting to note that the name has more recently turned up as female in a third-century Cypriote curse tablet and in a second- or third-century erotic charm from O x y r r h y n c h u ~ ~ The ~ . latter text mentions the 'bronze sandal of Tartarouchos', and the same sandal recurs in the famous magical papyrus from Paris (PGM IV.2335) and in a Greek spell in Marcellus Empiricus' D e m e d i c a r n e n t i ~ ~ Apparently, ~. the early Church borrowed this angelic name from its pagan environment by letting the 'mistress of the Tartarus' undergo a sex-change. Its early appearance in an Egyptian milieu may point to Egypt as the place of origin of the ApPt3'.
For a full discussion see J.-M. Rosenstiehl, 'Tartarouchos-Temelouchos: Contribution B 1'Ctude de I'Apocalypse apocryphe de Paul', in Deusiknle Journhe d'Et~rdes Coptes (Louvain and Paris, 1986) 29-56. " s .' Paris has angelo Tartalvcllo, St Gall angelo tartari and Arnhem angel0 n~aliciae.I quote from the new authoritative edition by Th. Silverstein and A. Hilhorst, Apocalypse of Paul. A new critical edition o f three 1 0 1 7 ~ Latin versions (Geneva, 1997). " B. Layton, Nag Hanln7adi code,^ 11, 2-7: togetl~er~ 4 t h XIII. 2*, Brit. Lib. 0r.4926(1),and P.OXY. 1, 654, 655: ~ ~ i t cor1trih~rtions l? by 171an.v scholars (Leiden, 1988). 8 ' G. Fowden, The Egyptian Hernles (Princeton, 1993') 203f. 29 Cyprus: SEG 44.1279. Oxyrrhynchus: R.W. Daniel and F. Maltomini, Supplen7entum Magictrn7 I (Opladen, 1990) no. 49.58 = SEG 38.1837. 30 See Dieterich, Kleine Schrifren, 101f. " For the date and place of origin of our Apocalypse see most recently Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead, 185-94.


The case of Temelouchos is more ~ r o b l e m a t i c ~ Bauckham ~. writes that in 'chapter 34 of the Apocalypse of Paul he wields a threepronged fork, surely modelled on the trident of the Greek god Poseidon', but, in this chapter we only find the angel Tartarouchos, not Temelouchos, who extracts intestines with a three-pronged fork33.Temelouchos does occur in the Greek version of the Apocalypse of Paul as the name of the angel to whom the evil soul is entrusted after leaving the body (16) and who participates in the torture of a gluttonous elder (34). In the later Ethiopic Apocalypse of Mary and Apocalypse of Baruch the angel occurs at the end of the infanticide as in the ApPt. It is unclear how this coincidence has to be explained, and Himmelfarb thinks of an influence by the Coptic Apocalypse of Paul, which in turn would have been influenced by our Apocalypse. However, the Coptic Apocalypse of Paul calls the angel Aftemelouchos and the question still remains to be solved34. In a learned article, Rosenstiehl has argued that Temelouchos derives from an epithet of Poseidon, Themeliouchos, 'in charge of the foundation'. However, the other earliest sources for this angelic name, Clement (Eclog. 48) and Methodius (Symp. 2.6), give the name as T q p ~ h o G ~'in o~ charge , of care'. As Poseidon's epithet is rather rare and occurs only in Attica and on D e l o ~ it ~ seems ~, unlikely to have given birth to the name of our angel. Other striking Greek imports are the mention of the Acherusian Lake and the Elysian fields as quoted above. The Ethiopic translation is here less trustworthy than the Rainer fragment which gives 'Lake Acherusia, which they say is situated in the Elysian Field'. The same combination of Acheron and Elysium, although unidentified as such, occurs in 3 Baruch. Here the angel takes Baruch to the third heaven where he sees 'an unbroken plain and in the middle of it was a lake of water' (10.2). The location is followed by those treatises that used the ApPt, such as the Oracula Sihyllina I1 (335-8) and the Apoca32

In addition to Rosenstiehl (note 25) see also C.D.G. Miiller, Die Engellehre der Koptischerl Kircke (Wiesbaden, 1959) 314; J. Michl, RAC 5 (Stuttgart, 1962) no. 239 on col. 237. 33 Contra Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead, 224. 34 Hirnrnelfarb, Toirllr of Hell, 101-3. 35 SEG 30.93 (Eleusis): I. Delos 290.



lypse of Paul (22-3). From a traditional Greek point of view, the geographical location is rather curious, since in Homer the Acheron was located in northern Thesprotia, but the Elysian Fields at the ends of the earth. Apparently, the close combination derives from the belief that after baptism in the Acheron a straight transition into Paradise was possible, such as we find in the first-century Apocalypse of Moses (37.3), imitated perhaps by the late Coptic Book of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, by Bartholomew the Apostle (46.3 Westerhoff). However, the reason why Hellenistic Jews used this Greek terminology still remains obscure36. So far then we have found some Greek terminology but no Orphics. It is time therefore to pay attention to this elusive movement. Himmelfarb rather disparagingly talks about Dieterich's use of the term 'Orphic-Pythagorean' and stresses that we know so little about 0rphism3'. Given the relative dearth of data about Orphism at the time of her book's publication, Himmelfarb's scepsis about Orphism is understandable to some extent. However, since her book we have had a steady stream of new discoveries, such as the publication (albeit preliminary) of the Demeni papyrus3', new Orphic Gold Leaves39,new bone tablets40, and Apulian vases with new representations of Orpheus and the afterlife4'. These new discoveries enable us
For a discussion of the passage see E. Peterson, Friihkirche, Judentum urid Gnosis (Freiburg, 1959) 310-32; T.J. Kraus, 'Acheron and Elysion: Anmerkungen im Hinblick auf deren Venvendung auch im christlichen Kontext', Mnemosyne 46 (2003) 145-64; Copeland, this volume, Ch. 111. " Himmelfarb, Tours of Hell, 43f. 3R For a new text and translation see now R. Janko, 'The Derveni Papyrus: an Interim text', ZPE 141 (2002) 1-62. 39 For the Gold Leaves see most recently C. Riedweg, 'Initiation - Tod Unterwelt. Beobachtungen zur Kommunikationssituation und narrativen Technik der orphisch-bakchischen Goldblattchen', in F. Graf (ed), Ansicliten RI-iecliischerRituale. Fiir Walter Burke]? (Stuttgart, 1998) 36098; G. Pugliese Carratelli, Le lamitie d'oro orfiche (Milano, 2001'); A. Bemabe and A. JimCnez CrisMbal, I~wtr~rcciones para el mds a116. Las laminillas drflcas de or-o (Madrid. 2001). 'O L. Dubois, Inscriprions grecques dialectales d'Olbia du Pont (Geneva, 1996) 154-5. See most recently J.-M. Moret, 'Les departs des enfers dans I'imagerie Apulienne', Rev. Arch. 1993, 293-351; S.I. Johnston and T. McNiven,




to speak about Orphism with much more certainty than previous generations of scholars4*. It is now clear that in the early fifth century BC, Orphism originated from Dionysiac mysteries but very soon also became indebted to Pythagoreanism; indeed, in some respects it remains difficult to separate the One of the major interests of Orphism is salvation. To that end, Orphism adopted the just invented Pythagorean doctrine of reincarnation, but it also designed a new view of the afterlife. According to the Orphics, after death there is a strict separation between the good and the bad. The bad are penalised, but the good enjoy a life of eternal sunlight, play on green meadows and feast on sumptuous banquets. This new picture of the afterlife completely modified the traditional Homeric picture of a sombre afterlife with a stay on the Elysian fields for a few elect. The Orphic world view never became very popular and certainly in its initial stages was limited to the rich who could pay for their religious instruction and the gold for their passports into the underworld. In this respect, one can only conclude

'Dionysos and the Underworld in Toledo', Mus. Helv. 53 (1996) 25-36; M. Schmidt, 'Aufbruch oder Verharren in der Unterwelt? Nochmals zu den apulischen Vasenbildem mit Darstellungen des Hades', Antike K~tnst43 (2000) 86- 101. 42 For the most recent views on Orphism see R. Parker, 'Early Orphism', in A. Powell (ed), The Greek World (London and New York, 1995) 483510; W. Burkert, 'Die neuen orphischen Texte: Fragmente, Varianten, "Sitz im Leben"', in W. Burkert et al. (eds), Fragn7et~tsamt~~lunger1 philosophischel- Texte der Antike (Gottingen, 1998) 387-400 and Die Griechen lrtlcl die Orient (Munich, 2003) 79-106; J.-M. Roessli, 'Orpheus, Orphismus und die Orphiker', in M. Erler and A. Graeser (eds.), Philosophet~ des Altertunzs I. Von cler Friihzeit bis zur Klassik (Darmstadt, 2000) 10-35; C. Calame, 'Orphik, Orphische Dichtung', in Der neue Palrly 9 (2000) 58-69; Bremmer, The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife (London and New York, 2002) 15-24 (text), 141-4 (notes); a new translation of the main fragments, A. BernabC, Hieros logos. Poesia drf7ca sobre 10s dioses, el alma y el m6s all6 (Madrid, 2003). 43 For an attempt at separating the two, see Bremmer, 'Rationalization and Disenchantment in Ancient Greece: Max Weber among the Pythagoreans and Orphics', in R. Buxton (ed), From Myth to Reasotl? (Oxford, 1999) 7183 at 79.



that Dieterich's picture of a popular cult with great followings, especially in Egypt, as a praeparario evangelica is highly imaginative, but also highly fantastic. Everything we know about the early centuries of our era points into the direction of little interest in the afterlife among the Greco-Roman population and even less belief in punishments after death44. Does this mean that Dieterich was completely wrong? That conclusion would perhaps go too far. In fact, there is at least one detail in the imaginative world of the ApPt, which can hardly be separated from the Orphic tradition. In cc. 23, 24 and 31 of the Akhmim fragment we hear of burning or boiling mire, P6pPopo~. It is interesting to note that this term does not occur in the corresponding chapters of the Ethiopic translation. This raises the question as to whether it was dropped by the Ethiopic translation or at a later stage introduced into the Greek version. Now the idea of 'boiling mire' is strange enough to be dropped by a translator. This seems particularly clear in c. 31 where the Greek 'another great lake, full of discharge and blood and boiling mire' is replaced by the bland Ethiopic 'another place near by, saturated with filth'. I take it therefore that the mire was part of the original ApPt. Now mire is not a totally unknown part of the underworld in Greek tradition. In Aristophanes' Frogs, Heracles sees a number of sinners lying in the mire, such as those who have wronged a guest, struck their parents or committed perjury (145-51, 273). The mire returns in Plato's Phaedo where Socrates says '...and so those who have established initiations really do seem not so far from the mark, but have long been saying in their riddling fashion that he who enters the Hades uninitiated and unenlightened shall lie in the mire. However, he who arrives there purified shall live with the gods, for there really are, as those of the rites say, "many carriers of the fennel-stalk, but few bacchoi (true initiates)"' (69C). In his authoritative discussion of early Orphism, Fritz Graf seems to be a bit wavering about the interpretation of this passage. On the one hand, he argues that the lines point to Eleusis, but on the other, he suggests that they also in44 R. MacMullen, Paganisn~ in the Roman Enlpire (New Haven and London, 1981) 53-7.



clude Orpheus and friends45.The whole context, though, with its reference to 'riddling', the repetition of 'rites' and bacchoi can hardly be interpreted otherwise than as Bacchic mysteries. And in the Republic Plato ascribes to 'Musaeus and his son' (Orpheus) the view that in Hades the just celebrate a symposium but 'they bury the impious and unjust in mud in Hades and compel them to fetch water in a sieve' (363D)46. Unfortunately, the text is not fully clear to whom this latter view can be ascribed, but it seems reasonable to accept that Plato here again means Musaeus and Orpheus. As in Aristophanes, the sinners are characterised by ethical faults, a characterisation that is typical of Orphism but not Eleusis4', it seems reasonable to conclude that mire played a big role in the Orphic picture of the underWe can also say that Orphic(-Pythagorean?) literature is the first in which we find ethical categories in the underworld, like the sinners in Aristophanes' Frogs (above). Moreover, it fits the presence of morally devious categories in the underworld that it is Orphic-Pythagorean literature in which we first find the mention of judges in ~~. it certainly seems to fit this picture that in the ~ n d e r w o r l d Finally, Orphic circles several poems about a descent into the underworld, the so-called katabaseis, circulated. Apparently, they had to enlighten people about the bad fate of the morally unjust and the happy life of the righteous in the new afterlife. From the various karabaseis written in the fifth century we can get some idea of those by Orpheus and

F. Graf, Ele~rsisur~ddie orphische Dicht~tr~g Athens it1 vorhellenistischer Zeit (Berlin and New York, 1974) 101f. J6 Note that this water carrying also occurs in what may be a remnant of a very early Jewish apocalypse, the so-called Isaiah fragment, cf. Himmelfarb, To~rrs of Hell, 94-6, 136-7. " Graf, Eleusis, 120. For the theme of the mud and its long lasting influence see M. Aubineau, 'Le thkme du "Bourbier" dans la littkrature grecque profane et chrktienne', Rev. Sc. Rel. 47 (1959) 185-214; P. Courcelle, Connais-toi toinle^n~e de Socrate r j Saint Bernard, 3 vols (Paris, 1974-75) II, 502-19. 49 Bremmer, Rise and Fall, 91-2; A. Lardinois, 'Het oordeel van Minos: boetes en beloningen na de dood', Hemeneus 75 (2003) 149-60.



Heracles. In the case of the latter we can also see that at an early stage Eleusis appropriated parts of the Orphic picture50. This is as far as we can go. With Bauckham I would conclude that Himmelfarb has demonstrated the Jewish origin of the genre of the tours of hell. At the same time I also agree with Bauckham that behind these Jewish apocalypses there looms in the shadowy background the genre of Orphic and Eleusinian descents and pictures of the underworld, as the presence of mire strongly suggests. The place where Jews were most likely to read Orphic literature must have been Alexandria. And indeed, we now know with certainty that the socalled Testament of Orpkezcs is an Egyptian-Jewish revision of an Orphic poem5'. It may be one more pointer to an Egyptian origin for the Apocalypse o f Peter-.



Graf, Eleusis, 142-9. C . Riedweg, Jiidisch-hellenistische Imitation eirtes orphischen Hieros Logos (Munich, 1993).

II. The Greek Apocalypse of Peter


In this chapter I discuss the Greek fragments of the Apocalypse of Peter ( A p P t ) from Egypt from a palaeographical, codicological, and philological point of view. I hope some basic insights will follow from this discussion with implications for the historical and theological interpretation of the text. First, I want to describe the codex containing the most substantial Greek fragment of the ApPt. This has not been done before in sufficient detail. Without recourse to the original, now kept in the Coptic Museum in Cairo, part of what I am going to say will remain hypothetical. Second, I want to reconsider briefly in what sense this Greek text represents an edited version of the original text of the ApPt, known very imperfectly through the Ethiopic text and a few other Greek fragments. In an appendix I present revised texts of these fragments. When the first substantial fragment of the ApPt was published in 1892', little attention was paid to the physical aspects of the parchU. Bouriant, Fragments grecs du livre d ' ~ n o c h (Paris, 1892) 91-147. The subscription is dated to November 1891. D.D. Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be Opened. A Study of the Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta, 1988) 84, says that James had access to the text before it was published, but this is incorrect. 0. von Gebhardt, Das Evangeliun~und die Apokal.ypse des Petrus (Leipzig, 1893) remarks in his preface that Bouriant's edition was available in September 1892. James and other scholars in Europe apparently began studying the text in November 1892. Thus, J.A. Robinson and M.R. James, The Gospel According to Peter, and the Revelation of Peter (London 1892), state in their preface that Bouriant's edition arrived in Cambridge on November 17, 1892 (their own preface is dated December 1, 1892: they wrote their booklet, which is still useful, in



ment codex that contained it. This is quite understandable: the discovery of substantial fragments of both the Gospel of Peter ( G P t ) and the ApPt as well as the first part of I Elloch in Greek caused great excitement. Scholars focused on the text of the fragments and more particularly on the content of the G P t and of the ApPt. The circumstances of the find, the composition of the Akhmim codex, and the date of the manuscripts (plural) contained in it are very hard to pin down in the literature2. The limited palaeographical analysis focused on the date of the manuscripts, which could not be established at the time for lack of parallels. Hundred years ago few comparable manuscripts from late antique Egypt had been published. Although this situation began to change soon after the publication of the Akhmim codex, the dating of the manuscripts continued to trouble scholars. Suggested dates range from the fourthififth century (C. Wessely) through the late fifth (H.A. Sanders), fifthisixth (B.P. Grenfell and A.S. Hunt,) and sixth century (E.G. Turner) to the eighthitwelfth century with a preference for the eighthininth century, first suggested on the basis of the earliest minuscule manuscripts by H. Omont. Only in 1987, in their pioneering study on the Greek bookhands of late antiquity', G. Cavallo and H. Maehler redated the manuscripts to the late
two weeks). Plates were published by May of next year (Gebhardt refers in his preface, which is dated to May 13, 1893, to these plates as having been l e/'Apocalypse de published a few days earlier) by A. Lods, ~ ' ~ v a n g iet Pierre (Paris, 1893), who provides retouched images of all pages of the codex except pp. 11-12, followed closely by Gebhardt, who gives photographic images of pp. 1-20 only. Lods also gives an image of the inside of the cover, but not of the outside. Only Gebhardt provides a sustained palaeographical description of both the Gospel and the Apocalypse of Peter in the Akhmim codex. We had to wait until 1987 for the next palaeographical analysis of the codex (see note 3 below). de Pierre (Paris, 1930) For a brief statement see L. Vaganay, L'~vangi1e 14-6. G. Cavallo and H. Maehler, Greek Bookhands of the Early B-yzantine Period. A.D. 300-800 (London, 1987) no. 41, with three illustrations of the hands represented in the codex. The hand of the fragment of the Martyrdom of Julian of Anazarhus also contained in the codex is not taken into consideration by Cavallo and Maehler. They provide a brief bibliography on earlier suggestions for the date of the codex.



sixth century. It is important to restate the case for such a date, because their study may not be in the hands of all those interested in the Greek ApPt. But first I want to say something about the circumstances of the find. The codex was found in the winter of 188611887 about 200 meters north-east from the top of a cemetery at Akhmim, ancient Panopolis in Upper Egypt. In this particular area of the cemetery Middle Kingdom tombs had also been found. On the map (fig. the three cemeteries to the north-east of Akhmim are clearly marked. Cemeteries B and C were not yet explored in 188611887, so that the codex was found in the central cemetery A. Cemeteries B and C contain tombs cut in the rock dating from the Middle Kingdom to the Graeco-Roman period. Cemetery A is quite different, being a low ridge of over two kilometers. This area has been used as a cemetery from the pre-dynastic period onwards. The tombs were dug in the surface and are generally not well preserved. This is the result not only of the wear of time, but also of human intervention. In 1884 the then director of the Egyptian antiquities service G. Maspero started digging there, but he did not exercise the supervision in person. The result is that no reliable information exists on anything that was found there. For five years the antiquities service worked on the site, but so did the local population. Both retrieved masses of objects that were carted off to the museum in Gizeh or to the antiquities market. From 1884 onwards many objects, especially textiles, from cemetery A were sold to museums around the world. Somewhere in this mess the codex containing a substantial fragment of the ApPt in Greek was found. Looking at the map and at photos from cemetery A, I would guess that the find was made in the central part of the cemetery, near Dayr al-Wastani. Where the Middle Kingdom tombs were found is unknown. The antiquities service had started from the north and was working its way to the south, which it did not reach until 1888. The first editor of the Akhmim codex claims that it was found in the tomb of a monk. This was no doubt merely an inference from the content of the codex, not based on actual indicaTaken from K.P. Kuhlmann, Materialien zur Archaologie iind Geschichte des Raunles von Achnzim (Mainz, 1983) 53, Abb. 14.



J)L,Dayr al- Bahri

A = al-Hawsw~S - B = (Bayt) al-Madina - C = as-Salimfini

Fig. 1 The Akhmim cemeteries (see n. 4)

tions in the tomb itself. The inference may be correct, but it should not be used as an independent fact in discussing the codex. As one can tell from the map, there are nowadays three monasteries in cemetery A. In Arabic they are appropriately called the Northern, the Middle and the Southern monastery. These are only a couple of centuries old, but they may ultimately go back to late antiquity. There were, however, many other monastic sites in the Akhmim area, and monks are certainly not the only candidates for the ownership of early Christian texts. Any Greek-speaking inhabitant of Panopolis with a penchant for apocalyptic literature may have been buried in



cemetery A. It would have been natural to include a codex with his or her5 favourite apocalyptic texts in the tomb. The composition of the codex is not satisfactorily discussed by the first editor. Unfortunately, E.G. Turner in his monograph on the typology of the early codex does not pay much attention to the codex pel- se6. The codex is in fact made up of several parchment manuscripts and the leftovers of other parchment manuscripts. Although the first editor does not say anything about the quires, I have reconstructed the codex physically with the help of paper, glue, and common sense7. The first quire containing a fragment of the GPr in Greek is a binio consisting of two bifolia or four leaves or eight pages to which a bifolium consisting of two leaves or four pages has been added (a new photo shows that pages 9-12 are one bifolium). The f i s t page contains an illustration, an ornamental cross. The second page is headed by a small cross to indicate the beginning of the text. The fragment of the Greek text of the GPr occupies nine pages, which leaves the last two pages of the added bifolium blank. At the bottom of page ten we find an ornamental border with three small crosses to indicate the end of the text. The text ends abruptly in mid-sentence. This has usually been taken as an indication that the text was copied from a defective exemplar, just as the text of the ApPr contained in the next quire. But both texts begin with a proper sentence and the ApPt ends with one, so I do not think the inference is correct. I rather
This is not merely deference to feminism on my part. The only documentary attestation of a Greek reading public for apocalyptic texts in Egypt happens to relate to a woman. P. 0,iy. 63.4365 is a fourth-century letter in which the writer asks a woman to lend him/her a copy of 4 Ezra in exchange for a copy of the Book of Jubilees (the 'Little Genesis'). On this text see D. Hagedom, 'Die "kleine Genesis" in P. Oxy. XLIII 4365', ZPE 116 (1997) 147-8. ".G. Tumer, The Typology of the Ear1.y Codes (Philadelphia, 1977) 185, dating it to the sixth century. Making a mock-up of a codex helps one to get a clear physical grasp of it. Detailed descriptions can only take one so far. In this case detailed descriptions are lacking. T.J. Kraus kindly showed me some new photos of the codex.




think that the fragments of the GPt and the ApPr were considered complete in themselves, but that in the case of the GPt there was no room left at the bottom of page 10 to finish the fragment. It seems as if the scribe drew the ornamental border first and that he could not continue the text beyond it on the next page. Originally he used a binio, as in the case of the fragment of the ApPt, but towards the end of page eight he realised that he had to add more text. He must have calculated the length of the remainder and found that the text would occupy another two pages. He added a bifolium of which he thought he could use only two pages, because the other two pages would be folded before page one, thus creating a ternio. The binder, however, folded the other two pages after page ten, so that page one with the illustration remained up front. The scribe apparently could not foresee this, so he drew the ornamental border on page ten, which he expected to be the last page. He continued to copy the Greek text on page nine. When he had almost reached the end on page ten he found that there was not enough room. He put as many words in the last line as possible, but the sentence could not be completed. Presumably there was not much text left to copy. The fragment of the GPt he wanted to copy consisted of a selection from the larger text which started with a proper sentence and ended with one. This selection will not have been much longer than what we now have. I score an important point here, because the selection we have was made on purpose. What dictated the choice of this particular section will be considered later when I deal with the fragment of the ApPt, which also seems to be a selection rather than a leftover. The handwriting of the fragment of the GPt and the ApPr is the same. It is a carefully written documentary hand, which is difficult to date precisely. The scribe uses traditional capital letterforms alongside more recent cursive letterforms. The latter (occasional delta and pi, occasional final upsilon) in conjunction with telltale cursive combinations of letters (epsilon-iota, epsilon-rho, tau-epsilon) date the hand to the sixth or seventh century. Cavallo and Maehler put the hand in the late sixth century, the date they assign to the hands used for 1 Enock contained in the same codex. The hand of the GPr and the ApPt is highly individual because of its unusual but not unparal-



leled leftward slant. Because it tries to produce the regularity of a bookhand and avoids the flourish of the contemporary documentary hand, it uses more traditional capital letterforms and only occasionally more recent cursive letterforms. This is in fact the same process as that which produced the Greek minuscule hand in the eighth century, but the process is here seen in an early stage. Most documents of the sixth and seventh centuries were written by professional scribes such as notaries. The hand of the GPt and the ApPt in the Akhmim codex is not a typical notarial hand, but the most direct parallels are in fact found in notarial documents of the late sixth century8. The most remarkable features are the triangular delta and especially the enlarged sigma, usually in final position. The latter is occasionally but never so consistently found in documents of the sixth and seventh century. It is odd that the scribe did not use contemporary literary letterforms for these two literary texts. One would rather have expected something in the order of the biblical majuscule used by the two scribes who wrote the fragment of I Enoch contained in the same codex. Yet the scribe knew what he was doing, because, as we have seen, he calculated the length of the text before-- ----hand. Nonzina sacra are strictly limited to KC, OC, and ANOC for ~ l j p t o0 ~ , ~ and 6 Gv0ponoq ~ respectively (occasionally ~ G p t and o~ 0 ~ 6 are 5 written out in full)9. The second quire is a binio consisting of two bifolia or four leaves or eight pages. It was bound upside down in the codex. The first page is left blank. No doubt it was intended for an illustration such as the one adorning the first page of the first quire, but this was never added. The second page is headed by a small cross to indicate the beginning of the text just as in the first quire. The Greek text of the ApPt occupies seven pages. On page 7 the text is headed by another small cross. Something went wrong here, because the text ends at the bottom of page 8, where one might have rather expected the V. Munch. I. 1 and 7 of 574 and 583 respectively. P. Miinch. 1.14 of 594 and P. Lond. 3.1012 of 633 use even more capital letterforms, but show less general similarity with the hand of the GPt and the ApPt. In the GPt and the ApPt there are no nomina sacra for 'I~pouoahjp, 'Iopajh, oBpav6<, o o r j p , and ~ 1 6 5 .



cross. There is no ornamental border there either, and the writing stops in the middle of the line. The last sentence is complete as it stands, and the letters in the last line are larger than in the rest of the text, indicating that it is the end. The third quire is written in a different hand. It is a quatemio consisting of four bifolia or eight leaves or sixteen pages. The first leaf is missing now, but my reconstruction of the quires presupposes its presence. It must have fallen out before the codex was deposited in the tomb. This may be an indication that the codex was used before it ended up in the tomb and that it was therefore not specifically made for the tomb, but the quire may also have been incomplete when it was first put in the codex. The text starts with a section of 1 Enoch repeated from further down. Only on the third preserved page does chapter 1, verse 1 start without any indication that it does, right in the middle of a line. How much text preceded this we cannot tell, because yet another quire may have preceded originally. The mistake probably arose because the exemplar had skipped sections 20 and following and added them at the front. The scribe copied this addition supposing it was the beginning of the text, but he also copied it at its proper place where the exemplar had no doubt added a marginal note refening to the addition at the front. The fourth quire is written in the same hand as the third. It is again a quaternio consisting of four bifolia or eight leaves or sixteen pages. The text continues that of the preceding quire. The fifth quire is written in yet another hand. It is again a quatemio consisting of four bifolia or eight leaves or sixteen pages. The text continues that of the preceding quire, but breaks off at the end. This is indicated by a small symbol that fills the space at the end of the line. Clearly, the person who put the Akhmim codex together had only the first three quires of a larger codex with 1 Elloch at his disposal. Such codices with incomplete texts are quite common in late antiquity. The last leaf of the codex was glued to the inside of the cover. That is at least what the first editor claims. Perhaps the leaf merely stuck to the inside. Originally this may have been another quatemio consisting of four bifolia or eight leaves or sixteen pages. The missing leaves could in that case have fallen out before the codex was



deposited in the tomb, but it is also possible that a stray leaf was used to strengthen the back cover. The Greek text is from the Martyrdom o f Julia11 of AnazarbuslO.The handwriting is the most literary in the codex and can be securely dated to the first half of the seventh century. The ornamental roundels underneath delta and the sling to the left at the bottom of beta are features that do not occur before the end of the sixth century. If this leaf was used to fasten the inside of the cover, as the first editor claimed, it might have been added to the codex at a later date. The size of the leaf, the pricking holes, and the ruling in any case suggest a link between it and the preceding three quires, which have a similar make-up. The last leaf therefore must stem from the same scriptorium as the preceding three quires. It employed three different scribes or styles, but not necessarily concomitantly. The fragment of the Martyrdom of Julian of Anazarbus may have been written at a slightly later date. The first scribe of the fragment of I Enoch is rather clumsy and sticks to the ruling even if the lines are not straight. His letterforms are slightly more difficult to date than those of the other scribe of the fragment of I E17ock and those of the scribe of the Martyrdom o f Julian of Anazarbus. Cavallo and Maehler assign the hand of the first fragment of I Enock with a small margin of error to the late-sixth century. It could conceivably be contemporary with the hand of the last leaf in the codex, which I put in the f i s t half of the seventh century. The second scribe of I Enoch is more careful", disregards the ruling if necessary and embellishes his letters with ornamental roundels at the end of thin letter-strokes but not underneath delta. The literary letterforms suggest a rather late date in the development of this type of script. Cavallo and Maehler put it also in the late sixth century, but again the script could also be slightly later and contemporary with that of the last leaf in the codex. The first half of
A. Ehrhard, her-liefer~rng urld Bestarrd der hagiograpl~ischerz urzd honziletischen Liter-atur der- griechischen Kirche vorl den Arlfiirzgen his zum Ende des 16. Jahrlz~rnderts1 (Leipzig, 1937) 70-2, is confused about the

identification. " Cavallo and Maehler, Greek Bookhands, no. 41, claim that the writing is equally crude as that of the first scribe, but this seems excessive.



the seventh century is the latest possible date for the composition of the portions of the codex written in bookhands. The traditional date assigned to the codex (eighthlninth century) is in any case too late. The hand of the first two quires with the fragments of the GPt and the ApPt may be contemporary or a little earlier than those of the other quires and the last leaf. It looks as if the codex was composed of leftovers. The three quires with 1 Enoch and the leaf of the Marordon? of Julia17 of Aizazarbus are clearly incomplete and were certainly not written for the present codex. The first two quires, however, although they do not give a complete text, were nevertheless regarded as selections complete in themselves. Were they specifically written for the codex or were they available before it was put together just as the leftovers of 1 Enoch and the M a r ~ r d o m o f Julian of Anazarbus? If they were written specifically for this codex, they were presumably copied from an exemplar in a different size, which did not fit the codex, and perhaps also on different material (papyrus). The exemplar may in any case have been written in a reformed documentary hand, as most of the earliest Christian literary texts on papyrus were until the fourth century. While copying such a text, a scribe might have preferred using documentary letterforms himself, because it would have been easier to calculate beforehand how much space the fragments would take up. The exemplar must have contained both the GPr and the ApPt, because the latter was edited to fit the former, as we can tell from a comparison with the Ethiopic. Yet the exemplar must also have clearly distinguished the two texts. The ApPt was not incorporated into the GPt, and the first two quires in the Akhmim codex do not represent detached fragments of a single composite text, but selections complete in themselves, as I have suggested. The first two quires may have been available for some time before the codex was put together. This may seem less likely on the surface. The first quire with its illustration seems to have been made for the opening of a codex and does not seem large enough by itself to form a separate codex, but there were other such small booklets in late antique Egypt. The second quire also seems rather small for an independent booklet that was only incorporated into a larger codex at a later date, but the blank page on its cover strongly suggests that it



was also meant to form a separate booklet. It never received an illustration such as the one found on the first booklet because it was kept with the first booklet. The two booklets were no doubt made at the same time and by the same scribe and in the order in which the two booklets were later incorporated into the composite codex. The script is most careful at the beginning of the GPt, but becomes less careful later on. The ApPt continues this less careful script, which shows that the same scribe wrote it immediately after the GPt. Whoever made up the booklets transferred two older, but related fragments onto parchment leaves in a size similar to that of the fragments of I Enoch and the Martyrdom of Julian of Anazar-b~uwith which they were eventually joined in a composite codex. These were written on rather small and squarish leaves (about 12 x 15 cm), which are otherwise rare at such a late dateI2. This format must have been current in the scriptorium where the various components of the codex were written. The first two texts were also written on quires of this size but without any ruling and in a documentary hand13. This must have happened at about the same time as the leftovers of I Enoch were written. When the codex was put together is not known. The owner did not mind the incomplete state of the texts. The GPt and the ApPt were incomplete, but they represented already edited chunks of the original compositions. After the codex was constructed, it may not have been used much. There are no certain signs of use. The occasional correction seems original, that is, made by the scribes themselvesI4. The leaf of the Martyrdom of Julian of Anazar-bus, which was glued to the back cover, perhaps to strengthen it, may have been added at a later stage, which would indicate that the codex was not immediately deposited in the tomb in which it was found.

l2 A fifth-century parallel from Panopolis is the famous Berlin gnostic papyrus codex (inv. 8502). l3 The size of the individual leaves can only be established with the original in hand. The plates of Lods, ~ v a n ~ iand l e Gebhardt, Evangeli~tm, do not seem to be consistently printed in natural size. IJ I think the correction of pavtorat to pa\oa/v~orai in section 23 is also original, but Gebhardt, Evangelilmz, 33, thought this could be in a later hand.



In late antiquity, leftovers of several manuscripts were often put together in a bundle to create a new codex, or selections from various texts were made to create a composite manuscript. Both phenomena seem to be at work in our codex15.The last three quires and the last leaf are clearly leftovers. The first two quires are complete as they stand, but their texts are selections of larger compositions. We may be tempted to look for a specific reason why the different parts were thus combined. The common denominator in the codex is Greek, and the combination of two apocalypses (that of Peter and 1 Enoch) seems deliberate. The Martyrdom of J~lliallof Anazarhus may well be connected with the GPt, which records the trial of Christ just as much as it records the trial of Julian. The GPt naturally joins the ApPt. The parallel between the Jews who condemned Jesus with whom the Gospel fragment opens and the false prophets with whom the Apocalypse fragment opens may well be deliberate. Why were all these texts put together in the seventh century or even later? There may be a link with the great upheavals in Egypt at the time, notably the Arab conquest, but I do not want to speculate on this. What does this interpretative description tell us about the ApPt? If the text was copied from a defective exemplar, which was incomplete, there is no use speculating about the selection of this particular portion of the text. But if the selection was made already in the exemplar the choice itself becomes the subject of historical inquiry. The fact that the order of the text is inverted compared to the Ethiopic text is also intriguing. Both the GPt and the ApPt begin with a proper sentence, even if the sentences seem to refer back to something that originally preceded it. The Gospel fragment ends abruptly, but this may well have been the result of lack of space, as I have suggested. The Apocalypse fragment ends with a proper sentence. If the selection of these texts was made specifically for the two booklets, it would be one of the last creative acts in Greek on the part of Egyptian Christians. It is not impossible to identify Egyptian Christians literate in Greek at this late date, even in monasteries, but if they
A. Petrucci has discussed this for Latin manuscripts in A. Giardina (ed), Tr-adizione dei classici, tr-asfor-n~azior~i della cultur-a (Rome and Bari, 1986) 173-87.



were not writing documents but creative works of literature, they would no longer do so in Greek. There may still have been pockets of Greek-speaking Origenists in Egypt, who may not have been unsympathetic towards this kind of early Christian literature, but even they would be preserving, not creating, such selections by this date. If the selection of the first two texts in the codex was already made in the exemplar or earlier still, this would push its date back to a time when Greek was still in active use among Egyptian Christians. The Greek text of the ApPt inverts the order of the original as we can tell from the Ethiopic. To make the text intelligible a few sentences had to be added at the beginning and between the two portions. This was the work of whoever made the selection from the ApPt. It is difficult to decide when this happened. Most intriguing is the fact that the first two quires are related, not in the sense that they are detached fragments of the same book, as many have thoughtI6, but in that the selection of both texts together was a coordinated effort which resulted in a set of two distinct texts transmitted together. The scribe of the exemplar and the scribe of the first two quires in the Akhmim codex knew that they were dealing with two distinct texts, but the scribe of the exemplar (or an even earlier scribe) had edited the fragment of the ApPt to conform it to the Gospel fragment. Because we do not have another text of the GPt, we cannot tell whether the Gospel fragment was also edited in the process. I think that the opening sentence of the Apocalypse fragment, for which there is no parallel in the Ethiopic text, was added when the selection was made and edited. 'Many of them will be pseudo-prophets' cannot refer back to a previous portion of the text of the ApPt, because there is nothing in the Ethiopic to link it with. I think that it should be read in light of the opening of the GPt. There the first sentence begins with a clear reference to the Jews. It is an anti-Jewish text and blames the Jews and king Herod while it let Pilate off the hook: 'Of the Jews no one washed his hands'. The reference to the Jews is picked up in the added opening of the Apoca(vpse fragment: 'Many of them will be pseudo-prophets'. Here
E.g. M.R. James, 'The Rainer Fragment of the Apocalypse of Peter', JTS 32 (1931) 275-8, criticising Vaganay, ~ v a n ~ i l187-92. e,



'them' cannot refer to a group of people mentioned earlier in the ApPt, as we know from the Ethiopic. Because it was added when the selection was made, it must refer to a group of people the editor had in mind when selecting the fragment of the ApPt, which immediately follows the fragment of the GPt. If the slant put on the ApPt derives from the anti-Jewish slant of the GPt, we can understand why the text of the ApPt was edited the way it was. Everywhere the positive references to things Jewish have been deftly edited away. An originally Jewish Christian text has thus been changed to an anti-Jewish text. This may have been done in the second or third century. It may have been done in Egypt and more particularly in Alexandria, where anti-Jewish feelings were strong. We know that the original version of the ApPt was available to Clement of Alexandria, but not necessarily in Alexandria itself". If the edited version was made in the second century in Egypt, it must have been done in Alexandria, because it would be too early for Christian literary activity in the Egyptian chora. But it may also have been made in the third century, in which case it might have been made in the chora. The reference to animal worship in section 10.5 of the Ethiopic text does not point to an original composition of the ApPt in Alexandria. This was general knowledge (cf. Romans 1.23). It is remarkable that section 33 of the Akhmim text drops this reference, but then it drops many more precise references as well. Another startling feature of the edited version of the ApPt represented by the Akhmim text is the suppression of the section on the generic 'guardian' (rqp&hoGxo<) angel". This is the only section of the ApPt actually quoted by Christian authors of the second and third century19. This was its trademark, so to speak, yet it was suppressed in the edited version represented by the Akhmim text. This version

Origen does not mention it, but by his time the Apocalypse of Paul may have replaced the ApPr. Section 26 of the Akhmim text as against section 8.10 in the Ethiopic, where T q p ~ h o C x o is ~ regarded as a proper name. For the angel, see also Bremmer, this volume. 10f. l9 Clement of Alexandria, Eclogne P I-opheticae 41 and 48 and Methodius of Olympus. Sytllposilrrli 2.6. where rqp~hoijxoq appears in the plural.





was probably meant to be more orthodox than the Jewish Christian original. The mention of the angel Ezrael (sections 7.10, 9.1 and 10.5 of the Ethiopic text) has also been removed in the version attested in the Akhmim text (sections 25, 27 and 33). R. Bauckham claims that the original ApPt was a Jewish Christian tract from Palestine written during the persecution of Christians by Bar Kokhba, the false messiah20. This is way too precise for the very general references to martyrs, false messiahs, and Jews, the very stuff of this kind of eschatology, to be accepted 2'. But it is nevertheless clear from the vision at the end (sections 15-17 of the Ethiopic text) that the original text was written from a Jewish Christian perspective2'. The focus on 'pagan' sins does not necessarily point to a

R. Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead. Studies or7 the .le~~isll ar~dCkrisriarl Apocalypses (Leiden, 1998) 160-258, which is taken from Apocrypha 5 (1994) 7-1 11. Cf. Tigchelaar, this volume, Ch. IV. ?' Bauckham, The Fate, 183-4, claims that the reference to the punishment of those who have persecuted or betrayed martyrs is unique. But that does not mean that it can only refer to Jewish Christians persecuted under Bar Kokhba (cf. Matthew 25.31-46 for the punishment of those who have failed to help martyrs, where the reference cannot be to Jewish Christians persecuted under Bar Kokhba). Note in this connection that Bauckham, op. cit., 184 and 241, adopts the translation of Muller (not Buchholz, as Bauckham, op. cir., 241, note 95, claims) for section 16.5 of the Ethiopic text ('those who are [or will be] persecuted for my righteousness' sake' instead of 'those who pursued my righteousness'. as in Buchholz, Your Eyes, 238). See Apokrypherl 2 C.D.G. Muller in W. Schneemelcher (ed), Ne~rtestar71er7tlicI7e (Tiibingen 19895)577, who regards the phrase 'those who are persecuted for my righteousness' sake' as a direct quotation of Marrhe~l5.10. The corresponding Greek text (section 20) just has 'the righteous'. Immediately following, the Ethiopic text (16.6) identifies 'those who pursued my righteousness' as a quotation from 'the book of my Lord Jesus Christ'. Cf. also E. Norelli, 'Situation des apocryphes pktriniens', Apocrypha 2 (1991) 31-83 at 45-6. note 43. It is therefore remarkable that the ApPt assumes a 'high christology', notwithstanding the strictures of Buchholz, Yolrr Eyes, 392-3. The false messiah claims in section 2.8 of the Ethiopic text: 'I am the Christ who has come into the world'. This implies that the true Christ has come into the world in the Johannine sense. The ApPt does not develop this idea further, but then it did not have to.





place of composition outside Palestine, but certainly does not rule it out either. Perhaps Rome should be considered a good candidate. The martyrdom of Peter in Rome is here unequivocally mentioned for the first time in an early Christian text23. Moreover, the ApPr is first mentioned in the Canon Muratori. Bauckham places special emphasis on the absence of any mention of the imperial which in his view would be strange anywhere but in Palestine, but even if we allow this argument from silence, it would not rule out Rome, where the imperial cult was not very intrusi~e'~. In section 14.4 of the Ethiopic text the enemy of the faithful is at any rate clearly identified with the Roman state embodied by the emperor Nero ('the son of the one in Hades'), as in Revelation. The original question with which the final vision in the ApPt grappled was the present fate of the Jewish believers before the coming of Christ. In the edited version of the Akhmim codex this has been carefully changed to a question about the present fate of the Christian believers who had passed away in the meantime. References to Moses, Elijah, and the patriarchs have been carefully removed26. The Apocalypse of Paul (ApPI) follows the
My confirmation of James's reading of the Rainer fragment (see the appendix) puts this beyond doubt. 24 Bauckham, The Fate, 185. 25 In Alexandria or Antioch one would perhaps have expected a reference to the imperial cult. For Antioch as a possible place of composition of the ApPt, see Norelli, 'Situation', 62. The only problem seems to be the possible reference to Jewish highpriests in section 20 of the Akhmim text. The reading there, a p x ~ p o ( v )can , be variously explained. In light of section 5 of the Akhmim text, which has no counterpart in the Ethiopic text, but is one of the sections added in the revision, we would expect &6&hq6(v) here with Wilamowitz, but apxepo(v) looks rather like a misspelling for & p x ~ ~ p e o ( v 'highpriests', ), as Harnack thought. There were officers within some Christian communities . called 'highpriests' (see Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lesicon, s . ~&p~1&p&6<), but I suspect that apx&po(v)is a misreading for &pxaio(v), 'ancients'. This could refer to the previous generation(s) of Christians who had died in the meantime. The difficulty glossed over by the revision is that at the dramatic date of the vision itself there were as yet no Christian 'brethren' about whose fate the disciples might be worried. At any rate the 'brethren' of sections 5 and 13 of the Akhmim text are meant here. The Ethiopic text refers




Akhmim version of the ApPt in presenting the fate of the sinners also as a vision rather than as a prophecy as in the Ethiopic version and the other Greek fragments2'. After the detailed description of the future punishments of the sinners follows the brief description of the future bliss of the believe r ~ In ~ the ~ . Ethiopic text this occupies section 14.1-3. This is followed by a prophecy for Peter personally and then, in sections 15-17, by a vision of the present fate of Jewish believers from before Christ came, which the Akhmim text has changed into a vision of the present fate of the previous generation(s) of Christian believers who have died in the meantime. Section 14.1-3 of the Ethiopic text is garbled, but a Greek fragment (see the appendix) preserves what seems a more correct version of this part of the text2" In it the claim is made that believers can ask for the release of sinners out of punishment. This is a startling statement in full contradiction with the rest of the ApPt as it is known from the Ethiopic. The Ethiopic text is consistent in itself and makes a careful distinction between the eternal punishments of the sinners and the eternal bliss of the believers, both future. Section 13 of the Ethiopic text contains the final demonstration of the idea that the punishment of sinners is fully justified, and the righteous are witness to this. They are even said to be content with the punishment of the sinners, not in the sense that they are satisfied so that they can subsequently plead for mercy. Not all sins committed by the sinners were directed specifically at the righteous, but all sins were directed against God (see section 3.7 of the Ethiopic text). In the Ethiopic text there is no room for last-minute transfers of sinners at the request of the righteous as there seems to be in the Greek fragment. This has been interpreted by Buchholz in such a way that the Ethiopic text has been edited, whereas the Greek fragto 'fathers' at this point and to Moses and Elijah in the text corresponding to section 13 of the Akhmim text, which was also revised. It would be odd if the ApPl would have preceded the edited version of the ApPr. In that case the publication of the ApPl would have triggered the revision of the ApPr. '8 S O in the Ethiopic; the punishments are in the present in the Akhrnim text. 29 Cf. Adamik, this volume, Ch. VI.



ment would preserve the original sense. This is hardly credible. The Ethiopic text is consistent in itself so that it is difficult to believe that this is the result of editing. If we would read section 14.1-3 in the Ethiopic text as Buchholz does, it would be very odd and terse. In fact, it is difficult to believe that the Greek text is completely understandable as it stands. The correct reading, iiv Eav Erljoovrai (for airljoovra~) ps EK rTjq K O ~ ~ ~ G E is OS completely out of tune with the rest of the text, even with what little remains of the Greek, because the punishments are clearly eternal and moreover future, thus the reference is not to some kind of 'intermediate' state out of which sinners might still be extracted through the good offices of the righteous30. Moreover, I think that the original Greek texts read just 6 Eav airljoovrai p ~ which , makes perfect sense and is compatible with the Ethiopic. The first thing said about the future bliss of believers is that they will receive what they have asked for. Although this is one step down from the New Testament, where believers receive what they ask for right now, it is understandable. In some of the parallels adduced by James this is in fact what is meant". In the Coptic Apocalypse of Elijak the believers will receive what they have asked for while the unbelievers will be punished32. One of the things believers have asked for is revenge (cf. section 13.2 of the Ethiopic text of the A P P ~ )In ~~ other . texts the thought that believers can ask for the
Cases of prayers for deceased sinners are not particularly common early on. See on this generally E. Peterson, Friikkirche, Juder7t~rr?i~rildGi70sis (Freiburg, 1959) 310-2; J.A. Trumbower, Rescue for the Dead. The Posth~rrvocrs Salvatiori of Non-Christians in Early Christianity (Oxford, 2001). Consider such cases as the Acts of Pall1 arid Tl7ecla 28-29. Here Thecla prays for the soul of the dead girl Falconilla. who had commissioned her mother in a dream to ask Thecla to do so. Strictly speaking, Falconilla is in an 'intermediate' state. 31 James 'Rainer Fragment', 272-3; cf. Buchholz, Your Eyes, 43-79 (a discussion of the indirect witnesses of the ApPt), and Bauckham, The Fate, 232-5. 3' Section 5.27-29 in the recent edition of this text by D. Frankfurter, Elijah it1 Upper Egypt (Minneapolis, 1993). 33 James interpreted the Coptic to mean that believers could ask in the fu30



salvation of sinners clearly applies to the present, not to some future and ~ ~ even in the Sibylline Oracles time. In the Epistula A p o ~ t o l o r u r n this is the case. In the latter text, however, there is an important addition. Believers can indeed request the salvation of sinners now, but this will in some cases be granted only at the end of time and not right away (e.g. through the conversion of the sinner prayed for). In SibOr 2.334-8 the release of sinners from punishments they are already experiencing is spoken of (note the use of Eoau015, 'later', in line 334). As James has suggested, this idea must have been taken from the ApPt. But not from the original version, which we know through the Ethiopic and which I assume to have read 6 Eav airfioovrai p ~ but , from a version represented by the Greek fragment. What probably happened very early on in the transmission of the text was an alteration from 6 to 6v, a difference of just one letter. To make sense of the new reading, it had to be specified in what sense God would give 'whomsoever' at the request of the believers. This specification is lacking in the Ethiopic and it presumably also lacked in the original text, because it needed no further specification when it said that believers would receive 'whatsoever' they asked for". Buchholz incorrectly states that the verb airfioovrat is in the future36.It is an aorist subjunctive and refers to requests made by believers now which are to be finally granted at the end of time (no doubt including requests for revenge). By changing 6 to 6v and adding that believers would receive 'whomsoever they asked for' our of pzrnishnient, the Greek fragment changes the meaning of the phrase without, however, transposing the requests themselves to the future3'. This rewriting of the ApPt gave rise to the idea that the requests of believers would save some sinners out of punishment at the end of ture for the release of those punished. but this is incorrect in light of Frankfurter's new edition. 3J In section 40 the righteous promise to evangelise the sinners, so this clearly refers to the present. 35 Most scholars assume the specification was removed from the Ethiopic; see, e.g., Buchholz, Your Eyes, 349; Trumbower, Rescue, 51. 36 Buchholz, Yo~rr Eyes, 349. 37 Future requests are. however, assumed by the n7isericordes mentioned by Augustine, De Ci~itate Dei 21.18.1.



time (and not now, e.g. through the conversion of the sinner prayed for). This idea is found in the Sibylline Oracles, which probably used an already corrupt text of the ApPt. It is not found in other early texts. There are other ideas about the ultimate salvation of sinners even out of punishment, such as Origen's idea that eventually all sinners would have served their time, but this is not what the Greek text of the ApPt implies3*. The conclusion must be that the idea that through the intercession of believers some sinners can be saved out of (rather than from) eternal punishment arose from a misreading of a text regarded as almost scripture in the second century. In section 14.1-3 of the Ethiopic text, which in my view fairly represents the original ApPt, only one kind of people is meant: the elect who will experience future bliss. First it is stated that they will be granted whatever they have asked for, next that they will be purified, which is apparently a necessary prerequisite for entering bliss. Even in the Greek text it is clearly the elect who will be purified. Although it had changed 6 6av airljoovzai P E to 8v 6av Ezfpovzai P E , it kept the plural a6zoiq in the next sentence, in which Christ says he will give them (i.e. the elect of the previous sentence) their baptism in the Acherusian Lake39. Thus they will be able to enjoy their rightful share of bliss.

Appendix: The Bodleian and Ruiner Fragments

Two fragments of a fifth-century Greek manuscript have survived40, which contained a version of the ApPt much closer to the Ethiopic
3R In the Mystery o f tlze Jud,qement o f Sinners, which is included in the same Ethiopic manuscript as the ApPt, it is Jesus who will plead for the release of sinners out of punishment, but this must be kept a secret. This is a late version of the idea that ultimately all sinners will be saved, but this is not the selective salvation of sinners implied by the Greek fragment of the ApPt. 39 See on this Copeland, this volume, Ch. VTT. " This is James's date for the Bodleian fragment. For a parallel see



than the Akhmim text. The Bodleian fragment was first published by James4', the Rainer fragment by W e ~ s e l y who ~ ~ , did not recognise it as a fragment of the ApPr. James correctly surmised that the fragments were from the same manuscript. From photographs of both fragments I can confirm that they are indeed from the same manuscript. There is a distinct possibility that other fragments lie undetected in other collections. In what follows I give a revised version of the Bodleian and Rainer fragments, which contain different sections of the ApPP3. The photographs do not always allow one to check the readings of the previous editors, especially in the case of the verso of the Bodleian fragment. From a comparison between the Bodleian fragment and the corresponding Akhmim text, which I have included for convenience, it follows that the latter is a rewriting of the Greek text. The Bodleian and Rainer fragments are much closer to the Ethiopic text and retain the future character of the punishments, whereas in the Akhmim text the punishments are in the present. Cavallo and Maehler, Greek Bookhands, no. 24a (the Cotton Genesis). This would point to the second half of the fifth century. The tiny format of the codex is compatible with such a date, not with Wessely's date for the Rainer fragment (third century), which is in any case too early. To the lower stroke of the epsilon a small stroke is often added so that it looks as thick as the upper stroke. Sometimes this small stroke is detached from the lower stroke of the epsilon. Wessely inadvertantly interpreted these detached strokes as 'commas'. J' M.R. James, 'A New Text of the Apocalypse of Peter I-111', JTS 12 (1911) 367-9 (addenda to p. 157). 42 C. Wessely, Les pl~rs anciens nioi~~ln~ents du ckristianisme 2 (Paris, 1924) 258-9. It was recognised as a fragment of the ApPr by K. Priimm, Biblica 10 (1929) 77-80, and subsequently republished by James, 'Rainer Fragment', 270-9. 43 1 do not give a revised version of the Greek text in the Akhrnim codex. For this see E. Klostermann, Apocrypha I. Reste des Petrusevangeliums, derPetrusapokalypse L I I I ~des Kerygma Petri (Berlin, 1933, a reissue of the 2nd edition of 1908). Further work on this text has been spotty. See my note on section 20 ( a p ~ ~ p o ( vabove )) and L. Radermacher, Wiener Studien 32 (1910) 157, on section 21 (xtr6v' EvF~Gupivo~ for ahr6v EvG~Gupiva).

Bodleian Ms. Gr.th. f. 4 (P)


The corresponding Akhmim text (33):


( ~ anap' i EK&ivot<6 v S p ~ q ETEPOI ~ a i ) Recto yuvai~~ birpGouq q xupoq Exovr~q [Y~]VQ?K&S K[P~][ro]6vr&q&h[G]~ a fihhqhouq i rljnrovr~q (skipping [o~]tq ~ apai Epxpoo9~v robrov ciGhhov nhavhv) [(3~]1')'06~~&[<] ~ a pqFkxors i nauopevot rijq rotacrqq Kohao&oq [Ealurobq E[p][np]oo9&vr[06][T]OV&%hJames: siGh[hov] [hlov xhav[h(v)] r 5 v xhavhv - Presumably xhav[a] MS ~ a fivavai xcrcoroq [El~ O U O ~ TV~ [ v ] ~ 6 h a o t'>-~' High dot and paragraph mark in MS Paragraph mark in MS Apostrophe in MS ~ a Ey'yiq i [a6]Verso The corresponding Akhmim text (34): ~ aEmpot i xirhtv Eyybq ~ K E ~ V O V [TI@!'~ ? E P [ o ~ ] [Eloov~a!h[v]y u v a i ~ ~ q a hv6peq i cphey6p~vot ~ a( J i Z P E ~ ~ ~ ~~ E V aO i~ [ ~ I P E~ S ~ ~ [lu li[ v ] ~ ~ K at]E< .cqyavt<op&vot(skipping ~5 K ~ ~ C TT E ~~ ~18ohopavhv). V [ ~ I ~ E v r?l ?! ofrot Fi: q o a v oi dcpkvrcq [KI~G(~E! T@[v] r q v 660v roc 8&oG [&136whop[al[ v ] ~ v0f'T0[t] . [6]6 ~ i o t v o[il[T~]v&< Ka[rklhtnov James: 6[T~]V TOG 8(&0)68- [Fo]v - & MS - James: 6[Folv ~ a Xi~ O E - [hoql
Recto, 7-8: There is no room for James's reading. The ~ i ' 8 o h aare the S o a v a mentioned just before in the Akhmim text. v, Verso 11-13: James's reading is odd. If there is a trace after ~ a ~ i h m o it is most likely a line filler (read as omicron by James). The present reading was already suggested by Bartlett apird James.



F. 1, recto ikopat rois Khr)roi< pou. ~ aE i K'K~E. i ~ r o pou i ~6v Eav Erjoovra\i/ p& E K r i j ~

On preceding page: napDot in MS Apostrophe in MS - Read: E K ~ E ~ r o is bv MS - Wessely: O(EO)V Eav o r j o o v ra\i/ - Iota added above the line - Read: a1rjoovrat

~ a i

s S h o o a6roiq
K ~ O pd17T5tV


o p a Ev o o r q pig ' A ~ ~ p o u o i a [ c J hipvqq YV Kaq v MS hoGotv Ev T@

F. 1, verso 'Hhuoiq 7cs6iq pipes S I K ~ I O oljvqs p s r a 4 r 6 v &yiov High dot in MS pow ~ a dimi he6oopat Ey b ~ a01 i EK~E8 ~ r o pou i dlyahhtGvrss psr a rGv narptap~Gv &isr$v) MS 12 aioviav pou Dot (?) and paragraph mark in MS [P]aothciav. >-

The inventory number has not been reported before. See also the photo and text in Adamik, this volume. Ch. VI.

F. 2, recto >~ anotfioo i p ~ T' a b ~ i i v ~ a Exa[y]q ~hiaq pov 8q E7~qy'y~thapqv ad~oiq Eyk ~ a b i n(at)fip pov 6 Ev ~oiq ob(pav)oiq. >>8


Paragraph mark in MS

Apostrophe in MS n q p M S - b MS mq MS - Dot and paragraph mark in MS Paragraph mark in MS Y6ou MS



i6ou EFfihooa oot l l i r p ~ ~ a E i6 ~ 8 i pqv xhvra. ~ a~ O i ~EOOU ~ i nohtv q Pip:F. 2, verso Xovoav 6 6 0 ~ o q ~ a nii E TO ~ 0 T f i p l ov 6 Envyy~thapqv cot EV X E ~ P E To6 ~ u(lo)6 r o c Ev "At60u ~ i ' v a dpxilv hapq adto6 i ldcpav t a ~ aoh i GEKTOS ~ i i q Enay'y~h~i-

Dot in MS Dots in MS

Wessely: 6 x O o ~ w5 Wessely: line filler in MS i Wessely: x ~ t p o i v Read: x ~ l pMS Read: i'va



Read: Bcpbv u a - High dot in MS - Wessely: line filler in MS Apostrophe in MS On next page: -aq - Read: Enayychiaq

F. 1, recto 4-6: James's correction of Wessely's reading is confirmed by the photograph. There is no horizontal bar in the omicron in bv, but there is one in the epsilon in E~flowvrat.H. Harrauer confirmed the existence of a rough breathing above bv.



F. 1, recto 10 - f. 1, verso 1: Translate: 'in the salvation of what is called the Acherusian Lake in the Elysian Field'. This was correctly translated by James, but not by more recent editors such as Buchholz and Miiller. F. 2, verso 1-2: James's correction of Wessely's reading is confirmed by the MS. What Wessely read as ox is nothing but no shining through from the back (f. 2, recto 1). H. Harrauer confirmed the existence of delta, which is visible in ultraviolet light. F. 2, verso 6-8: Not: 'the son who is in Hades', which the Greek would allow, but 'the son of the one who is in Hades'. The emperor Nero is intended: Peter's execution was the beginning of the end for Nero.
Apperzdix: Photos of the Bodleiart Fragmertt

Bodleian Library Ms. Gr. Th. f. 4 (P)


1 1 1 . "Thy mercy, 0 Lord, is in the heavens; and thy righteousness reacheth unto the clouds"

The aim of the present contribution is to examine the pseudo-Clementine work that contains the Apocalypse of Peter (ApPt) and investigate the relation of the ApPt to the rest of this work. Before entering the subject, it will perhaps not be superfluous to clarify the situation. As we know, the full text of the ApPt is left to us only in Ge'ez (old Ethiopic). We have two manuscripts: d'Abbadie 51 (BN Paris) and Tanasee 35 (catalogued by Hammerschmidt); the ApPt is embedded in a pseudo-Clementine work entitled Tlie Second Coniing of Christ a i d the Resurrection of the Dead, edited by Grkbaut in ROC, 1910, 198-214, 307-23, 425-39, the ApPt occupies pp. 199-208, 307-09 (text) and 208-14, 316-17 (translation). This treatise is followed by another pseudo-Clementine writing, The Myste~y of the Judgement of Sinners also edited by GrCbaut in ROC 1907, pp. 139-51 and 1908, pp. 285-87. For his editions, GrCbaut was able to use only one of the manuscripts: that of d'Abbadie 5 1. I deem it necessary to invoke these well-known facts, since none of the manuals (Altaner', Quasten2, Vielhaue13), or the modem translations (HemeckeSchneemelche?, allegedly based on the Ethiopic) are reliable in their

B. Altaner, Patr-ologie (Freiburg, 19513)62. J. Quasten, Initiation atcx PPr-es de 1 ' ~ ~ l i1 se (Paris, 1955) 166. Ph. Vielhauer, Gescliichte der ur-chr-istlichenLiteratur- (Berlin and New York, 19854)507. NTA 1 1 , 620.






indication as to where the ApPt is to be found. They seem to be unaware of the fact that it is not identical with Grkbaut's whole text. For the ApPt we now possess a modem edition compiled by Buchholz on the basis of both manuscriptss. While the ApPt has received a good deal of attention, the pseudo-Clementine work that contains it has never been examined to the best of my knowledge6. Cowley, however, in his brief note concerning the second manuscript of our text states that the two pseudoClementine works must be considered together as a whole and the ApPt as an integral part of them. According to him, 'if the potentially misleading title Ethiopic Apocalypse of Peter is used, it is better used' of the two works 'together". The second pseudo-Clementine work, published by Grkbaut in 1907 and 1908, will not be treated here, because, on the one hand, the limits of the present paper would not permit it, on the other hand, it seems to be only loosely connected to the first (though evidently connected). Thus my investigations are concerned with the treatise entitled The Second Coming of Christ and the Resul-rection of the Dead, edited by Grkbaut in 1910. First of all, I shall make a few remarks:

1. I consider this work as a rounded whole. Though we know that the ApPt ends in the middle of the text, we are not justified in cutting the work in two. In the Ethiopic text there is no division and it was read through and considered as a whole.

D.D. Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be Opened. A Study of the Greek (Etlliopic) Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta, 1988). At the Colloquium Origenianurn Octa~um held at Pisa (27-31 August 2001), G. Lusini in his lecture 'Tradition origknienne en ~ t h i o ~ idiscussed e' the two Ethiopic pseudoClementine works: Tlle Second Coming of Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead and The Mystery of the Judegemerzt of the Sinners, considering them as containing Origenian traditions. Unfortunately I was not able to be present at this lecture. The text will appear in the Acts of the congress. R. W. Cowley, 'The Ethiopic Work which is Believed to Contain the Material of the Ancient Greek Apocalypse of Peter', JTS 36 (1985) 151-53.




2. My studies are based strictly on the Ethiopic text as we have it. Buchholz in his book Your Eyes W i l l Be Opened reconstructs an Ethiopic version from the Greek fragments. I do not think it permissible to correct the Ethiopic text from the Greek: we cannot know what the underlying text of the Ethiopic translation was; we do not know whether or not it was directly translated from Greek or through the intermediary of other languages. Hence, this work was read in Ethiopic as it is, without taking account of the underlying original. 3. As to the second part of the text, I can rely only on Grkbaut's edition, made from manuscript d'Abbadie 51. The other manuscript remains unknown to me. As far as I know, the only work which treats even tangentially the relations of the ApPt to the pseudo-Clementine writing is the aforementioned book by Buchholz. According to him, 'the author of the Ps.-Cl. was not afraid to use ApPt creatively in his own work. He did not go back into the material of the apocalypse and harmonise it with his own later ideas. He had a text before him upon which he commented by taking ideas from it and changing them or expanding them as he saw fit. We may say, then, that the work as a whole (ApPt and Ps.-Cl.) is a midrash, for it attempts to make an older text relevant to its own age' (pp. 383-5). In his opinion 'the main theme [of the whole work] is God's mercy to sinners'. We shall reflect on these ideas after having examined the treatise. In my opinion, the text consists of three major parts with a revelation of Christ at the center of each. The first part is our ApPt, the second extends from p. 309,l. 5 to p. 316 'end' in Grebaut's edition, the third from p. 425 to the end. I quote the ApPt according to the chapters used by the modem editors, the rest according to the pagination of the manuscript d' Abbadie 51. We shall now examine the parts one by one (the ApPt only briefly, because it is well-known to everybody), and finally we shall try to draw some conclusions conceming the main ideas and the structure of the whole work. The first part contains a revelation of Jesus conceming 'his coming and the end of the world'. The revelation takes place on the Mount of Olives and is initiated by a question or remark from Peter: it were better for the sinners that they had not been created. Christ answers rebuking Peter: 'Thou resistest God. Thou wouldest not



have more compassion than he for his image.. .' and promises Peter to show him the works of the sinners 'in which they have sinned against the Most High' (c. 3). There follows the description of the judgement, Christ being established judge by God: 'my Father will place a crown upon my head, that I may judge the living and the dead and recompense every man according to his work'. For the sinners there is eternal torture (in chapters 6 to 13 the idea of eternal punishment appears at least ten times), in accordance with their sins, while the righteous are introduced into a sort of Paradise. The message of this revelation is expressed by the tortured sinners themselves: 'Righteous is the judgment of God: for we have heard and perceived that his judgment is good, since we are punished according to our deeds'. The central notion of this part is God's justice, meaning retribution to everyone according to his own deeds. I would emphasise that the idea of mercy does not appear. I do not want to enter into the question whether or not it was present in the Greek; in any case it is totally absent from the Ethiopic. This revelation is for everybody. All the apostles are present and ask Jesus questions in order that they can teach those coming after them (1). At the end of c. 14, Peter is charged to send out this story into all the world. The revelation itself ends with c. 14. Chapters 1517 constitute a sort of closure to the Apocalypse: the transfiguration scene on the Holy Mountain connected with the ascension of our Lord. There the ApPt ends, but the text continues without intemption. The second part begins with Peter speaking to Clement (137r b 138v b) about the glory of God: everything was created for the glory of God, even the revolt of the devil could not diminish it. This passage can be considered as a transition between the preceding scene and the following revelation. On p. 139r begins the second revelation, which takes place on the Holy Mountain during the transfiguration scene. Thus, on the one hand, a connection with the closing chapters of the ApPt is created, on the other, a parallel is established between the first revelation on the Mount of Olives and this one. Further on, as the place and the situation are now holy to an increased extent, it is to be expected that the revelation will also be of a higher order. This is also suggested by the fact that while all the apostles



were present when the first revelation took place, this time only the chosen ones (Peter, John, and James) can hear the words of Jesus. This revelation, just as the first one, concerns the second coming of Christ, but the underlying ideas are not the same. 'The Father will judge nobody, but he will give the judgement to his Son (John 5.22) in order that he might give eternal life to those who believe in him.' The judgement aims no more at judging everyone according to their deeds but rather rewarding the believers (the believers, and not the righteous!). This second revelation again is initiated by Peter asking a question, and the question is the same: would it not have been better for the sinners if they had not been created at all. For this time, however, Peter adds, 'because they die a second death' - and this second death is Peter's main concern throughout the whole work. Peter's idea is that everybody has to die, which is the first death. Everybody will be condemned according to their sins, which is the first judgement, a righteous one. After the resurrection, however, comes the second judgement, which means a second death for sinners. Peter, a sinner himself, is greatly afraid of the second death. Jesus replies as follows (140r a): 'Did you understand what I told you at first? It is permitted to you not to know in your heart what you have asked. It would not be useful to tell the sinners what you have heard so that they should not multiply their sins and evil deeds.' Hearing this, Peter falls to the feet of the Lord crying and imploring to him for a long time. At last Jesus has pity on him and answers his question, but his answer is an enigmatic one (140r b): "'for he maketh his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust" (Mt 5.45). Because the mercy of my Father is like this: as the sun rises and the rain falls in the same way, so shall we have mercy and compassion for all of our creatures.' Peter does not understand the parable and asks for an explanation. Having admonished Peter once again not to tell sinners anything, Christ gives him a revelation, which is what I consider as the second revelation of the treatise (140v b - 141v b). Its content is the following: as the sun shines on everybody, so it is with God's mercy. Satan will be destroyed, but before the glorious coming of Christ the demons will reign on earth, making many martyrs. Christ will come in his glory with his saints. Righteous and sinners will be separated



and Christ will judge them, his throne standing in the middle of the river of fire. The sinners will be transfixed in a moment and to be tortured by angels who are without mercy. While being tortured, they will cry 'until death', which Gribaut understands '2 en mourir' -that is, those hearing it are nearly dying - but I think the meaning is 'until they die', because this is the second death Peter speaks about. The sense of this revelation is not clear: though the beginning suggests that mercy is for everybody, the end presents a judgement scene in which the sinners are punished mercilessly. The second, longer part of the treaty ends here. The third part begins again with Peter crying and imploring Jesus with the words: 'this is the second death which I am afraid of! ' Jesus gives the same answer as at the beginning of the first revelation: mhb : l%4-% : H.~-~"VC- : APrh? : hTZf : 'you will have no more mercy on the sinners than I do' (141v b). Gribaut translates: 'ce n'est pas toi qui enseigne mieux les picheurs.. .' In Ethiopic the verbs 'to teach' (mud) and 'to have mercy' (@Ad) differ only in their middle letter, which in both cases is an 'h', but a different one8. There are three characters for 'h', different in writing but not in pronunciation, which often leads to confusion, as is the case with our manuscripts. Therefore, it seems evident to me that we should read 'to have mercy on the sinners', the more so because we have the parallel text in c. 3 of the ApPt, and the reading 'to teach the sinners' does not give a good sense in our context. Then Jesus adds, 'for I was crucified because of the sinners, in order to obtain mercy for them by my Father'. Seven lines are lacking here in the manuscript, and then the third revelation begins (142r a). This one is only for Peter. The mystery Jesus now reveals to him is not known to anybody, except Jesus and the Father, not even to the angels, the righteous, the martyrs, or the prophets. Jesus admonishes Peter to hide it in a box and not to tell it to anybody, except the sages. Then Jesus reveals that at the Last Judgement the sinners who believe in Christ will be pardoned, because Christ assumed their body and they ate his body and drank his blood. 'The Father will
Cf. 136r b where maLS means 'have mercy on us' and not 'teach us'.



grant to all of them life, glory and eternal kingdom, and his judgment will not be divided' (142r a). This is the mystery revealed to Peter: had he not cried and wept, Jesus would not have told him. Peter must not speak about this to the sinners: even when they hear about the punishment of the fire, they kill one another, so if they knew about the mercy, nobody would do what is right (142v b). Better to threaten them with fire. The revelation continues: God created Adam for his glory; he surely does not want to destroy him. Jesus quotes here Psalms 36(35).6: 'Thy mercy, 0 Lord, is in the heavens; and thy righteousness reacheth unto the clouds' (143r b). Adam sinned and was punished for it: he was expelled from Paradise and death came on him (common death, that is, the separation of the soul from the body). But God will not destroy by a second death that which he has created. Only Satan and his demons will descend into Sheol, and those who did not believe in Christ. Those who believed in him will not see the judgement of fire. It is a mystery that those who partook of the body and blood of Jesus will not descend a second time into the underworld, into the faith of Satan and his demons (143r a-b). After revealing all this, Jesus asks Peter whether he has any doubts left. Peter answers: 'Really, when I asked you concerning the sinners who are like me, you told me and explained to me very carefully the words of David, indicating that God's mercy is great. My heart was burning when I was thinking of it that after the resurrection of the dead there would be a second death for the sinners [which means] descending into the Sheol. Because of this you explained this word to me, and I am convinced and I have no more doubts' (143v b - 1 4 4 a). Grkbaut translates Peter's reply in the present or in the future: 'le coeur me brule [...I, explique-moi cette parole. Je croirai et je n'aurai plus de doutes'. I think we should take Peter's words in the past tense: Peter had learnt what he wanted to know and he is now satisfied. This translation is absolutely justified. The verbs are in the perfect, the only problem is 'you have explained to me', the Ethiopic verb in the manuscript being an imperative: 'explain it to me' (Am$!&). But the difference between the two forms is so slight ('you



have explained to me' should be hmP+k), that in a manuscript like ours, not copied with due care, they can very easily become mixed up9. Thus the central question is settled, but Jesus continues to give some more indications concerning the final events. I translate the passage which seems the most important to me: 'The children of Adam who have been resuscitated into life will then receive the rank and the throne of the devil and all his (Adam's) children will become the armies of the angels instead of the armies of the devil. But as to the demons, God will enclose them into the terrible Gehenna together with their lord, the devil, and with everybody who had become a host for them, each one according to his inhabitant will be enclosed with them into the depths of the Sheol' (144v a). In these lines, I think, there are two ideas which escaped Grkbaut's attention. The first is that the resuscitated human beings will become the armies of the angels instead of the armies of the devil. Grkbaut completes: 'instead of being the armies of the devil', but probably this is not the point. According to several Christian writers, the thrones of the devil and his demons remained empty in the heavens after their fall, and these seats will be occupied by the blessed after the resurrection (consequently there are to be as many blessed as there had been fallen angels). Our text seems to allude to this concept. The other problem is the difficult phrase with the dwelling place of the demons, which sounds in GrCbaut's translation: 'avec tous les etres qui sont dans leur propre demeure', which does not make much sense. In my opinion this phrase means that those human beings will be condemned forever, along with the demons who gave a place in themselves to a demon, that is, who became the prey of a demon. These souls will descend into the underworld, according to the demon that acted in them - an allusion probably to the demons of the sins. The treatise ends with some indications concerning the religious feasts.

To mix up P and fi is considered as a minor fault.


1. The structure of the work

The work is based on three revelations, which are strictly connected: their subject is the same, but the message contained in them is more 'esoteric' with each one. Thus they can be considered as three degrees in the acquisition of a secret knowledge, or three phases of initiation into a mystery. The description makes it clear how the revelations are based on one another: the setting is the same, but the details clearly indicate the progress in the knowledge communicated. Each revelation is provoked by a question from Peter: 'Were it not better for the sinners, that they had not been created?' in the first revelation and 'Would it not have been better for the sinners if they had not been created at all, because they die a second death?' in the second one. The question remains the same, but the second time Peter's reason for asking is added: the question is about the second death, which is Peter's real problem. In the third case there remains only Peter's desperate cry: 'This is the second death I am afraid of! ' Progress is also found in Jesus' answers. The first time, he rebukes Peter, 'Thou resistest God. Thou wouldest not have more compassion than he for his image'. Then Jesus shows Peter how the punishment of the sinners is in accordance with their sins - but this is no real answer to Peter's question, neither do we understand what it has to do with God's compassion. The second time, Christ gives no direct answer, only warns Peter of the dangers of higher knowledge. The real answer comes only on the third occasion, 'You will have no more mercy on the sinners than I do, for I was crucified because of the sinners, in order to obtain mercy for them by my Father'. The progress in the work can also be measured by Peter's behaviour. In the first part he plays no special role. He is one of the apostles and asks a question which any of them could have asked. It is only in the second part that we learn why Peter is so interested in the fate of the sinners: it is because he himself is the greatest of the sinners. While the first revelation is given by Jesus quite willingly, Peter has to implore him for the second. The scene is presented as excessively as with oriental tales: Peter lying before Christ for long hours,



weeping, wetting with his tears the feet of Jesus and liclung them with his tongue. Finally, Jesus has pity on him and grants him a second revelation which is, however, not quite clear. Peter weeps and cries again until he gets what he wants. 'Had you not cried [I would not have told you this]' (142 v b), says Jesus, and a little further he adds, 'You have wept and cried and molested me very much when you wetted my feet with your tears and you molested me greatly with your questions and supplications.. .' ( 1 4 4 a). The situation is very much like that of a child vexing his father till he gives in and lets him have his ways just to be left in peace. Jesus was reluctant to tell Peter the truth concerning divine mercy, but finally he gave in only to stop Peter crying and aslung questions. This is similar to the parable in Lk 11.5-8, where prayer is compared to a man who is so persistent in asking his friend for help that in the end the other gives him what he wants, only to get rid of him. The circle of those for whom the revelations are intended is also a clear indication of the way in which the ideas are getting increasingly mysterious. At the first revelation, all the apostles are present and they are sent out to tell the story all over the world. The second is only for the chosen, Peter, John and James, and they are admonished not to tell anything to the sinners, which means that it can be revealed only to the righteous. At the third revelation Peter alone is present. The mystery Jesus is about to reveal to him is hidden from everybody, except for Jesus and the Father. Peter is allowed to speak about it only to the sages - and these are not identical with the righteous. Thus we can establish that the treatise is very carefully composed, the three parts being built logically one upon the other, and all the details arranged according to the progress of the ideas.
2. What is the real meaning of the work?

As we have seen, in Buchholz' opinion the main theme of the work is God's mercy to the sinners. This is undoubtedly true, but let us examine the question more closely. The real teaching of our treatise seems to be the following. There are two judgements, and the first one takes place directly after death. It is just: everybody is condemned according to his or her sins. Mercy has no place in it; it is



God's justice that prevails. Adam, too, when he sinned, was punished accordingly: death came upon him and he was expelled from Paradise. But as God created everything for his glory, it would not be logical for him to destroy it afterwards. (We now understand the reason of Peter's long discourse about God's glory at the beginning of the second part.) If something does not work as it should, God will reconstruct and not annihilate it. This means that sins are requited, but the sinners themselves will not be destroyed by a second death meaning eternal torture in the underworld. The notion comes from Rev 20.14-15, 'And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.' The second judgement takes place after the resurrection, and this time mercy will reign: in this judgement there will be no division, all believers in Christ will receive eternal life and enter God's kingdom. Thus our treatise gives a perfectly clear definition of the respective places of justice and mercy in divine economy: in this world and as well as in the first judgment, justice reigns, but at the end of the world mercy will prevail. This is the very idea expressed by quotation from Psalrns which I chose for the title of my paper: 'Thy mercy, 0 Lord, is in the heavens; and thy righteousness reacheth unto the clouds'. It is probably not by accident, that in the second half of the phrase the original word 'faithfulness' (Hebrew) or 'truthfulness' (Greek) was replaced by 'righteousness'. It is not quite clear what it means that everybody who believes in Christ will be saved. Who are those who did not believe? The logical answer would be that they are the non-Christians, but this does not seem to be the idea of our treatise. Those who do not believe in Christ are Satan, his demons, and probably those human beings who hosted demons in themselves, if we correctly understand the phrase concerning the dwelling-places of the demons.

3. The relation of the ApPt to the whole treatise

Instead of describing the work as a midrash, I would rather consider it as a treatise consisting of three chapters. Its author used the ApPt as the first chapter but then he probably found the ideas expressed in it too cruel, so he wrote a continuation to it. In the light of



these additional parts, the meaning of the first part has also changed: what is contained in it is no more the final truth about divine judgement, but only a preparatory teaching meant for sinners to restrain them from more sinning. Thus for the writer of our Pseudo-Clementine work, the ApPr was no more than an instrument of divine pedagogy.

IV. False Prophets in the Apocalypse of Peter


'Among the apocalypses, we acknowledge those by John and Peter. However, as far as the latter is concerned, some of us do not want to allow its public reading in the church.' This comment in the Canon Muratori shows that the Apocalypse of Peter- (ApPt)' was almost included in the New Testament canon. In the following, we shall deal with a part of the Greek version (the so-called Akhrnim marked A) that brings up a temporal-historical theme: the appearance of and havoc brought about by false prophets in the church. These verses are translated as follows:
1. Many of them shall be false prophets and shall teach ways and diverse doctrines of perdition. 2. And they shall become sons of perdition. 3. And then God will come to my faithful ones who hunger and thirst and are afflicted and prove their souls in this life, and shall judge the sons of iniquity.

In order to understand the theme, we shall first attempt to place the text within the framework of the history of the Biblical motif of 'false prophets'. This will provide information for the analysis of the text itself. Second, we shall venture to propose a hypothesis as to whom the expression 'false prophet' was meant to refer to by the author of the writing and to what extent this is reflected in the extant text.
Textual editions: 0. von Gebhardt, Das Evan~elium und die Apokalypse des Petrus (Leipzig, 1893); E. Klostermann, Apocrypha I. Reste des Petrusevangeliums, der Perrusapokalypse und des Kerygma Petri (Berlin, 1908').


Review of the History of the Motif

The figure of the false prophet ( y r ~ u 6 ~7cpocpil~qq) jq is known in the OT, in fact, already in the Torah. In Deur 13.2-6, Moses commands the people that if a prophet were to entice them to turn away from the Law, he would have to be put to death even though, or all the more so because, he gives signs and wonders. Deut 18.20-22 demands death upon the prophet who speaks in the name of other gods or speaks words in the name of the Lord that he has not commanded him to say to the people. In Nun? 22-25, we encounter the ambivalent figure and role of the prophet Balaam. According to Num 31.8 and 16, it was upon the counsel of Balaam that the pagan women tempted the sons of Israel to apostatise and, therefore, the prophet had to die. This is reported in Josh 13.22. The LXX text refers to the enticement by the Greek verb n h a v a o (stray, in the passive: be strayed) and to the apostasy by the noun & n o o r a o q . Both words will be a constant element in the characterisation of false prophets. Finally, we mention two examples from Jeremiah. According to verse 14.14, fraudulent prophets deceiving people with illusions of a peaceful future do not follow the call of the Lord. And 23.13 mentions prophets who have misled the people (Enhhvqoav). To summarise, the legitimacy of the prophet lies in that he remains faithful to Mosaic Law and that he does not lead his people astray from the ways of the Lord neither by his teaching and prophetic words, nor by his wondrous deeds. The NT uses the expression 'false prophet' eleven times, among them Marthew and Revelation three times each, and 2 Peter once (2.1). A false prophet is someone who considers himself a prophet but is not one, or who proclaims lies, delivers false teachings, and thus misleads the congregation. Mt 7.15-20 characterises them as coming disguised as sheep, but underneath being ravenous wolves; that is, they are destructive to the congregation. These prophets can be known by their fruits, that is their deeds and their consequences. In verses 21-23 of the very same chapter, Jesus mentions people who would address him by the liturgical confession 'Lord, Lord' ( K ~ P I E , K~PLE and ) boast of having worked many miracles in his name; nonetheless, he would not accept them because they lived their life

without obeying him. According to Ulrich Luz2, Matthew speaks up against fanatic-enthusiastic prophecy here and contrasts it with obedience to Jesus law. Since prophecy and apocalypse went hand in hand in the ancient Church3, we encounter the figures of false prophets in the apocalyptic-eschatological sermons of Jesus (Mk 13.22 and Mt 24.1 1,24). Scholars have traditionally emphasised the relation between the ApPr and 2 PP. There are, indeed, many affinities between 2 Pt 2.1-2 and ApPt 1.1-3 (A). An important parallel is the emergence of false prophets as an apocalyptic theme. The expressions common to both writings in connection to false prophets are as follows: 'way, destruction, to teach, blasphemy, righteousness' (6805, dnhhsta, 6 t 8 a o ~ o phaocpqpia, , BhfiQsta).The vocabulary suggests that false prophecy in the congregation appears as false and misleading teaching, relying on signs and miracles worked by false prophets. False prophesy can cause part of the congregation to go astray, relinquish the true teaching and way of life, and contempt, or even blaspheme righteousness. The parallels in Revelation bring us closest to our subject, the eschatological role of false prophets in ApPt 1.1-3 (A). The designation ~psuFonpocpfi.rqq appears in Rev 16.13, 19.20, and 20.10. Rev 13.11-17 should also be listed here. In the preceding verses we read about the dragon-Satan, and the emergence of the beast-Antichrist from the sea. Then the 'second beast' rises from the ground, showing unmistakable traits of the false prophets. He 'was like the Lamb but spoke like the dragon' and his aim was to make all the people of the earth worship the beast-Antichrist. His description contains the concepts 'working miracles' and 'leading astray', which we have previously identified in the biblical passages about false prophets. However, most characteristic of Revelation is that in it the persons o f the false Christ, or Antichrist (the first beast), and the false prophet, or


U. Luz, Das Evangeli~in~ r7aclz Matthaus 1 (Ziirich and Neukirchen, 1989), 405-7. E. Hennecke and W. Schneemelcher, Ne~itesmrnentlicheApokryphen I1 (Tiibingen, 19714)181. W. Grundmann, Der Brief des Judas und der zweite Brief des Perms (Berlin, 1974) 87ff.



false teacher- (the second beast), appear- togethe15. According to

Ellul, the f i s t beast personifies Power, while the second beast, symbolising the false prophet, personifies Propaganda. The false prophet has the appearance of the Lamb because he imitates non-violence; his words, however, are those of the dragon, whom he glorifies, and whose worship he supports by way of ideological arguments. His role is diabolic since the first beast, whose propagator he is, is the double of the dragon-diabolos. False prophet and false messiah thus belong together.

After studying the historical background of some motifs, especially the false-prophet motif in 1.1-3 A, analysing and understanding the text should now prove easier. It should first of all be noted that we are dealing with a fragment. The phrase 'many of them shall be false prophets' implies a longer text, which would clarify those from whom the author thinks false prophets would arise. Albrecht Dieterich formulated an interesting theory on why this text has come down to us in a fragment6. He suggested that in the original text, which was longer, the eschatological focus appeared in this passage. Due to this feature, the text was copied from this point when it was used as a magic formula, buried with the corpse of a monk in the Akhmim grave. This, however, implies that our- text corltains the end of a longer- work. This conforms, for example, with the Didache, in which eschatological themes provide the closure. The end (20.34) of the surviving Akhmim text discusses those who have (in the end) 'forsaken the way of the Lord'. This idea also occurs in the Ethiopic version, beginning from chapter 10: 'these have forsaken the law of God and are haunted by. .. demons'. Thus the idea of apostasy imbues the extant and missing parts of the text and connects the Ethiopic and Greek versions.
J.J. Ellul, Apokalypse. Die Offetlharun,p der Joharlnes - Entkiill~l17g derWirklichkeit (Neukirchen, 1981) 81-7. A. Dieterich, Nelqia. Beitrage zur- Erklarung der rzeuentdecktetl Petrusapokalypse (Leipzig, 19132) 16.

False prophets - as we have seen in canonical and extracanonical texts -bring havoc to the congregations by their teaching. They teach various things. 'The way' (q 6605) is equivalent to the Jewish Halakha and concerns the way of life as well as 'diverse doctrines' (Foypa~a x o t ~ i h a ' ) that - according to the context - are related to beliefs and convictions about eschatological events. The text characteristically places 'the way' ahead of the doctrines, witnessing to a Jewish-Christian background. In Matthew, too, the way (of life) is more important than doctrine (5.19; 7.15-23). Both the Ethiopic and the Greek versions refer to the fact that the false prophets and their followers have not only deviated from the true way but have also slandered it. 'They were the ones who blasphemed the way of righteousness ... they spoke ill of it ... they forsook the way of the Lord' (7 E = 22, 28, 34 A). The terminology of 'the way' appears in other works belonging to the Petrine tradition (Acts of Petel- 6, 7, 12) and was characteristic of the Palestinian and Syrian Jewish Christiansx. For them 'the true way' meant the true religion and belonging to the true religious trend. The common denominator of 'the way' and 'diverse doctrines' is 8xhhs1a (corruption, destruction, perdition). They will thus bring destruction upon themselves, 'they shall become the sons of perdition' (2 A); they will die, bringing damnation on themselves and others. It is at this point that divine intervention is to occur: 'And then God will come' (3 A). The use of the noun 'God' in this context is wholly unusual. Most often 'the Lord' is used, known from OT eschatology and used by Christians as an honorific title for Christ. Why does a different word appear in this passage? One may argue that in this passage Jesus is speaking to Peter and he does not call himself 'the Lord' in his eschatological sermons. This is very well, but why does he not call Him that shall come 'my Father', as he did in the eschatological parts of the NT, or why does he not refer to himself as 'the son of man'?

W. Bauer, Wol-terh~rch, s . ~ 6665. . R. Bauckham, 'The Apocalypse of Peter: An Account of Research', in ANRW 11.25.6 (Berlin, 1988) 4712-50 at 4737.




This question has not yet been adequately answered by previous scholarship. It is certain that by 'Him that shall come' Jesus did not mean himself; in the subsequent phrase, however, he does refer to himself. The phrase is meant to answer the question whom God is to come to: 'to my faithful ones' (Eni robq 7c1oro6q pou) - that is, to the members of the Church who are faithful to the true way of life and teaching, not falling to the lures of false prophets. Of them, the text says: 'they thirst and hunger' (cf. the beatitude in Mt 5.6) - that is, the truth the false prophets adumbrated, but the faithful ones still desire. Nonetheless, their faithfulness is rewarded by affliction: Jesus calls them the 'afflicted' ( B h t P o p ~ v o ~They ). probably remained a minority within the congregation or they were persecuted by the authorities on account of their behaviour. Finally, the revelation to Peter states that the faithful ones 'proved their souls in this life' (Ev r o 6 t q t@ piq raq y u x a ~ 'saurov 6o~~pC1~ovraq). The verb 6 0 ~ 1 p a r a may mean 'try' or 'tempt'. The activities of the false teachers meant both a trial and a temptation for the faithful. Faith and faithfulness tried is more valuable than that which is untried (Jam 1.2,12). The reward of the faithful will not fail to be given when God comes in judgment. But the punishment of the unfaithful will also not be delayed. The text calls them 'the sons of iniquity' (01 u I o ~ rijq dvopiaq), that is, those who have trespassed against the Law. 'Law' may refer this time to the procedure against false prophets, or the opposition to them (Deur 13.2-6; 18.20-22). It is what the 'sons of iniquity' have failed to fulfil. God will therefore pass judgement upon them. The author speaks in the name of those who consider themselves faithful and think of their fellows as fallen to the lure of false teachers.

Historical Events and Personalities Behind the Text

Recent scholarship has maintained that the ~ ~ u 6 6 x p t o s o and t ~su6oxp1oroq (false Christ) mentioned in c. 1 E stand for Sinion hen Koseha9, the leader of the Jewish uprising against Rome in AD
R. Bauckham, 'The Two Fig Tree Parables in the Apocalypse of Peter',
JBL 104 (1985) 269-87; 'The Apocalypse of Peter', 4712.



132-135, who was given the Messianic name 'Bar Kochba' (the Son of the Star) on the basis of the prophecy in Num 24.17 by the famous Rabbi Akiba, who at that time was well in his eighties. He was called Bar Koziba (the Son of Falsehood, Y i b so6 ~ y&hFouq) by Christians, including Jewish Christians whom he persecutedI0. He is relatively well known from the coins he minted, rabbinical as well as Christian literature, and Roman records. The inscription of his coins reads 'Simon Nasi' (Simon the Prince), which can be understood to refer to the Messianic prince. He was ruthless with his opponents, even if they were Jews; there is evidence that he had the town of Tekoa burned down because it refused to obey his conscription orders". He was fundamentally opposed to Jewish Christians because they refused to acknowledge him as the Messiah and renounce Jesus' Messiahship. Justin Martyr complained of this a few decades later: 'in the Jewish war of not long ago, Barchochebas, the leader of the Jewish uprising, commanded the ruthless punishment of Christians until they deny and blaspheme Jesus Christ' (I Apology 31.6). According to Roman history (Vita Hadriani 14.2) Bar Kochba's uprising broke out in response to the prohibition on circumcision and, after its suppression, 580,000 men perished as a result of the ensuing executions, famine, disease, and fires, which sounds rather unbelievable. Let us briefly review the evidence that Bauckham quotes in support of his identification of the false messiah in c. 1 E as Bar Kochba. (a) It is characteristic of all eschatological literature to call one who persecutes Christians a false messiah (Christ). This is true enough in respect of Bar Kochba. In addition to Justin Martyr, this is found in Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 4.8.4 and Hieronymus, a d Rufinum 3.31. Apart from Bar Kochba, there was no other Jewish personage who made messianic claims and persecuted Christians between AD 80 and 160. 'The redaction can be seem to be controlled by a Sitz am Leben of persecution under the Antichrist figure, specifically the situation of Jewish Christians during the Bar Kochba revolt'". (b) The descriplo


P. Schafer, Gesclzichte der Juden in der Antike (Stuttgart, 1983) 162-3. Schafer, Geschichte, 168. Bauckham, 'Apocalypse of Peter', 4724.



tion in cc. 1-2 E could only have been valid for the period of the Bar Kochba revolt. The author's word makes it clear that he still hopes for the conversion of a significant portion of the Jews to Christianity. He calls them 'the sprouted buds and fruit of the fig tree'. However, their conversion is hindered by the activity of the Antichrist who tries to sway Christianised Jews into renouncing Jesus' Messiahship. Faithful Jewish Christian congregations did not comply, and thus began a period of martyrdom for them. (c) The text of cc. 1-2 E recapitulates everything from former Christian tradition that has to do with pseudo-messiahs, especially Jesus' eschatological sermons (Mt 24.4-5; 11.25-36). The passage calls on Christians to resist such deception. All of a sudden, however, it modifies the plural to singular and merely talks of one pseudo-messiah (Antichrist). According to Bauckham, the author of ApPt must refer to Bar Kochba: 'That this false messiah is Bar Kochba now seems a necessary conclusion'13 and 'The false messiah of E 2 is best identified with Bar Kochba'I4. From the fact that after a series of false messiahs only one is mentioned, we may conclude that from the series of false prophets one single false prophet emerges. One may compare the process of a collective literature emerging from the activities of the rabbisI5. Based on Bauckham's conclusions, we will demonstrate or at least make plausible our hypothesis that if the false messiah in ApPt was Bar Kochha, then the false prophet mentioned in A 1-3 must be Rabbi Akiha hen Josef. We adduce the following arguments in support of our hypothesis: (a) According to NT apocalyptic tradition, especially Revelation (13.1 1-17 ; 16.13; 19.20; 20. lo), where there is a false messiah there must also be a false prophet, who disseminates propaganda on behalf of the false messiah among the believers and promotes misleading ideology to persuade the believers to follow and worship him. This is precisely what Rabbi Akiba did when, referring to Num 24.17, he named Bar Koseba Bar Kochba, that is, a legal messiah from the house of Jacob according to the messianic prophecy. 'Upon seeing
l3 IJ


Bauckham, 'Fig Tree Parables', 275-79, 286-87. Bauckham, 'Apocalypse of Peter', 4733. E.P. Sanders, Pal11and Palestinian Judaism (London, 1977) 71.



Bar Koseba, Rabbi Akiba said: "This is the messiah king! "' (j. Taan 4,7 and 68d)I6. Three independent rabbinical sources have statements concerning this. (b) A false prophet should have considerable authority in the eyes of believers to grant credit to his deceptive words. Rabbi Akiba could perfectly fulfil this requirement: he was one of the leading figures of the rabbinical reform movement in Jabne, the main author of the Midrashim explicating the Pentateuch, the best-known exponent of the Mishnah tradition and Taanaitic theology. He was a charismatic personality, and believed to be a seer1'. (c) Apart from Akiba's straightforward declaration that Bar Koseba was the messiah, several of his indirect comments refer to the fact that he saw his own eschatological-messianic hopes realised in Bar Koseba. Schafer summarises this as follows: 'It appears from the few messianic statements which Akiba made, apart from the socalled messiah proclamations, that he held national-earthly as well as politically coloured views concerning the events of the near future. Though our sources have no direct reference to the Bar Kochba uprising, these messianic statements seem to prove that Akiba saw the realisation of his messianic hopes in the Bar Kochba revolt (at least temporarily)'18. Furthermore, we can be certain of his opposition to Rome, for he identified it with Esau and Edom, the ancient enemies of Israel. In explicating Gen 27.22 ('the voice is Jacob's voice but the arms are the arms of Esau'), he deliberated on what the 'arms' of Rome had done to his peopleI9. (d) Rabbi Akiba was known as an enthusiast and mystic, and wondrous signs were attributed to him. Such characters are easily infused with the qualities of unique personages, and are prone to dedicate themselves to the service of crediting their messages and aims. 'On the basis of what we know about Akiba's being an ecstatic, we
l6 P. Schafer, 'R. Aqiva und bar Kochba', in idem, Srlidien zlcr Gesclzichte lrtld Tlzeologie des rabhit~ischen Jlrder~tllrns(Leiden, 1978) 65-121 at 86. l7 J. Neusner, art. 'Akiba ben Josef', in TRE 2 (Berlin, 1978) 146-74; C.H. Hunzinger. art. 'Akiba', in RGG3 1 (Tiibingen, 1957) 209. l 8 Schafer, 'R. Aqiva', 120. l9 L.H. Feldman, Jew and Gentile it1 the Ancient World (Princeton. 1993) 493-94. note 57.



may well assume that his realisation about Num 24.17 [i.e. the recognition of Bar Koseba as Bar Kochba] must have seemed to him a pneumatic in~piration"~. Tradition handled his enthusiasm with a certain irony. It is reported that after Akiba's declaring Bar Koseba the messiah his companion and colleague Jochanan ben Torta said to him: 'Akiba, you will have grass growing on your jaws but the son of David still will not have come!' Concerning his mystical nature and miraculous powers, tradition has it that when he studied the Torah he seemed to have fire above him as at the giving of the Law on Mt Sinai. The one who was seen to have such fires above him must also have seen fires glowing above Bar Koseba whom he claimed as the messiah. Characteristic of his mysticism was his relish for the Song of Songs. Not only did he attempt everything to support its canonisation, but also used the colours, lights and odours describing the beauty of the bridegroom in Song 5.10-14 to depict the messiah king bringing salvation - the same features that appear in the description of the redeemed in the ApPt (15-16 E, 7-11 A). The end result, however, did not justity Akiba's enthusiasm: the revolt was brutally suppressed. 'From then on, the Jewry refrained from all prophetic enthu~iasm'~'. (e) It might also have been Akiba's eschatological and political optimism that led him to identify Bar Koseba, who had at first achieved military success, with the messiah king. Concerning his optimism, it was recorded that during a visit to Jerusalem he and his companion saw a fox jumping out of the ruins of the Temple. His companion began to cry, whereas Akiba began to laugh. He explained that he laughed because if the prophecy of Jer 26.18 about the Temple becoming a wooded height is fulfilled, so will be Zech 8.4-5, where God promises that aged people and children shall live in Jerusalem again, thereby foretelling peace and welfare2'. (f) The accounts of Akiba's imprisonment and execution after the suppression of the uprising are regarded as authentic. True
?" R. Meyer, art. y~u8onpocpfirq$, in TIiWNT 6 (Stuttgart, 1959) at 824ff and 835ff. Hunzinger, 'Akiba', 209. Schafer, 'R. Aqiva', 92-3.

" "



enough, the accounts do not connect this to his relation with Bar Kochba but rather to the fact that he continued to teach the Law even during Hadrian's persecutions when it was banned. It is, however, certain that the measures against Jewish religious practice were taken as retaliation for the revolt; by refusing to obey, Akiba expressed his solidarity with the uprising. 'To Pappas ben Judah who urged him to desist from studying and teaching the Tora, he answered with the parable of the fox which urged a fish to come upon dry land to escape the fisherman's net. The fish answered: "If we are afraid in the element in which we live, how much more should we be afraid when we are out of that element. We should then surely die." So it is with us with regard to the study of the Tora, which is "thy life and the length of thy days"' (Ber- 61b). In view of the above, we can also better understand cc. 1-3 A. The Jewish Christians who are addressed here suffered much during the few years of Bar Kochba's revolt, who tried to force them to renounce Jesus, for people cannot believe in two messiahs at the same time. The uprising was still being fought when the redactor of the ApPt combined the visions of heaven and hell, belonging to an earlier tradition, with cc. 1-2 E and 1-3 A, which provide the framework to the visions and refer to historical events of the period. Whereas cc. 12 E sought to unmask the false messiah and urges readers to remain faithful to Jesus, cc. 1-3 A likely did the same with respect to the false prophet. We have several reasons to identify the false prophets of the text with Rabbi Akiba and (possibly) his disciples. Jewish Christian readers may well have seen the punishment of false prophets, the & n h h ~ of ~ athe text, fulfilled in the execution of Rabbi Akiba.

V. Is the Liar Bar Kokhba? Considering the Date and Provenance of the Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter

But this liar is not the Christ. And when they have rejected him, he will kill with the sword, and many will become martyrs (ApPt 2.10).

In the past century scholars have been divided about the date and provenance of the Apocalypse of Peter (ApPt). According to one group, chapter 2 of the Ethiopic ApPt reflects the events of the Judaean revolt of AD 132-135, and the liar and deceiver should be identified with Bar Kokhba. In that case, the text may have a Palestinian Jewish Christian provenance. Whereas older scholars took this revolt as the terminus a quo, recent scholars argue that the text was written during the revolt. The other group of scholars argues that the description of ApPt 2 is of a general apocalyptic nature, not of necessity refemng to Bar Kokhba. In fact, references to specifically Egyptian elements, such as idols representing cats or reptiles, rather suggest an Egyptian provenance. In that case, the Jewish revolt of AD 115-117 may be the background of ApPt 2. In the last decades, the Bar Kokhba hypothesis has been resuscitated in the dissertation of Buchholz', and especially in a series of publications by Bauckham2. Buchholz's discussion is to some extent
D.D. Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be Operzed. A Study of the Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta, 1988) 408-13. * R. Bauckham, 'The Two Fig Tree Parables in the Apocalypse of Peter', JBL 104 (1985) 269-87; 'Apocalypse de Pierre. Introduction', in F. Bovon and P. Geoltrain (eds). ~ c r i r s apocryphes chre'tiens I (Paris, 1997) 747-49; Tile Fate of tlze Dead. Studies on the Jewislz and Christian Apocalypses



marred by an incorrect understanding of the Ethiopic text3. Bauckham, on the other hand, has presented the hitherto most thorough and comprehensive statement of the Bar Kokhba hypothesis. Not reflecting on Bauckham, but on earlier statements of the hypothesis, Schafer questioned the identification4. More recently, Lietaert Peerbolte dismissed the identification and date as tempting but not compelling5. Bauckham's arguments, which he first unfolded in 1985, and elaborated on in 1998, may be summarised as follows6. Chapters 1 and 2 of the Ethiopic text are primarily based on Matthew 24, which speaks of false messiahs and false prophets (24.24). The ApPr, however, is only concerned with false messiahs, not with false prophets. Moreover, the transition from multiple false messiahs in ApPr 2.7 to a single false messiah in ApPr 2.8 and following suggests that the author describes an actual messianic claimant. The concern with martyrdom in ApPt 2.10-1 l , 13 indicates that the author wrote in a situation of persecution. The only known figure who was regarded as a messiah in the period in which the text could have been written was Bar Kokhba, and there is evidence that he punished or killed Christians. Since the author expects Enoch and Elijah to come to denounce the false messiah, he must have expected them to come before the war was ended, i.e., between AD 132-135. It is unlikely that Alexandrian Christians were very much concerned with the Bar Kokhba revolt; therefore one may assume that the text was written in Palestine. Other details fit nicely within this interpretation. The description of the messianic claimant as a liar fits with the nickname
(Leiden, 1998) 160-258: 'The Apocalypse of Peter: A Jewish Christian Apocalypse from the Time of Bar Kokhba'. Earlier proponents of the Bar Kokhba identification are discussed in Bauckharn, 'Two Fig Tree Parables', 286, note 58, and P. Schafer, Der Bar Kokhba-A~rfstand.Stlrdien z~m7 z~~eiteri jiidischer7 Krieg geger7 Rot71(Tiibingen, 198 1 ) 6 1-2. See the discussion of J.V. Hills, 'Parables, Pretenders, and Prophecies: Translation and Interpretation in the Apocalypse of Peter 2', RB 98 (1991) 560-73. " chafer, Bar Kokhba-A~rfstartd, 62, 'mehr als unwahrscheinlich' L.J. Lietaert Peerbolte, The Ar7tecederlts of Antichrist (Leiden, 1996) 5561. Bauckham, The Fate, 176-94, 285-87: 'Two Fig Tree Parables'.



given to Bar Kokhba, namely Bar Koziba. The rebuke of Peter in ApPr 16.8-9 for his proposal to make three tabernacles, and the emphasis that there is one tabernacle, not made by human hand, may imply a criticism of Bar Kokhba's purported aspirations to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. The evidence for the identification of the liar with Bar Kokhba is cumulative. None of the arguments are in themselves compelling, but the elements taken together seem to be strongly indicative of the identification. The present contribution will comment on some of the suppositions and arguments related to the identification of the liar with Bar Kokhba.

1. On The Use of a Frequently C o m p t Text

Most of the arguments concerning the identification of the liar with Bar Kokhba and the dating of the text during the 132-135 war are based on the text of ApPt 2 which is only preserved in the Ethiopic manuscripts7. The comparison of the Ethiopic manuscripts with the Greek Bodleian and Rainer fragments shows that in general the Ethiopic corresponds to the Greek, but that the Ethiopic is less reliable in detail. Thus, the translation is said to be somewhat careless, and the text not infrequently corrupt or confuseds. Bauckham acknowledges that this makes it difficult to draw diffident conclusion from the details of the Ethiopic text9. Nonetheless, Bauckham argues that the transition from multiple false messiahs in ApPt 2.7 to a single liar and deceiver in ApPr 2.8b ('his evil deeds"') and following indicates that the author is con-


See the descriptions of the two manuscripts, one in Paris (= P) and one in a monastery of Lake Tana (= T), in Buchholz, Your Eyes, 119-34. On the relation, see Bauckharn, The Fate, 254. "auckharn, 'Two Fig Tree Parables', 270-71; The Fate, 254. See also P. Marrassini, 'Note sur le texte Cthiopien', in Bovon and Geoltrain, ~ c r i t s apocrypkes I, 750-52 at 751, note 8: 'confusion continuelle entre masculin et firninin et entre singulier et pluriel'; Buchholz, Your Eyes, 127. Bauckham. 'Two Fig Tree Parables', 270. lo For the translation of c. 2, see Hills, 'Parables, Pretenders', whose gram-




cerned with one specific pretendent. Perhaps one may emend the plural of ApPt 2.7 to a singular'l, or consider the plural as deriving from Mt 24.24, and the singular forms as portraying one specific messiah". One should also note that the Ethiopic manuscripts differ with regard to the number of several verbal forms (ApPt 2.8, 10)13, and that in general Ethiopic does not always sharply distinguish between singular and plural forms14. The differences between the manuscripts show that both Ethiopic copyists had difficulties with determining the subjects of the verbs in ApPt 2.8-10, and that they sometimes failed to understand the text. Yet, in spite of these incongruences, the manuscripts do agree in using third person singular forms in ApPt 2.1 1- 13. One cannot rule out the possibility that the switch from plural to singular was prompted by the statement 'and heithey will assure: I am the Christ'. The singular 'I am the Christ' may have prompted the use of a singular 'he' throughout the rest of the section.
2. Martyrdom and the Killing False Messiah

Whereas several elements of ApPt 1-2 are derived from Mr 24, the motif of a false messiah killing many with the sword has no parallel in Matthew. Mt 24.9 does mention martyrdom, 'but it is not a major theme and is not connected with the false Messiahs'". The statement that 'many' (ApPt 2.10, 11) will die and be martyrs may, however, be derived from Mr 24.10 'many shall stumble' (wai T ~ T E owav6ahtoOfloovscr~ xohhoi), quoting Dan 11.41 (MT 15~3' M371; LXX wai
matical remarks are on the whole sound, though his attempt to make sense of the probably corrupt text of ApPt 2.9 is not entirely convincing. For 'his evil deeds' (or: 'the wickedness of his deeds') see Hills, 565, and the Hebrew expression 19VYn Y V l (for example 4Q417 2 i 8). Hills, 'Parables, Pretenders', 573; Bauckham, 'Apocalypse de Pierre', 756. l2 Lietaert Peerbolte, Antecedents o f A~iticl~rist, 57-8. l3 ApPt 2.8 P 'he will assure'; T 'they will assure'; 2.10 P 'he will kill'; T 'they will kill him'. l4 In the two ApPt manuscripts incongruence of number is found in 10.6 and 15.6, and differences between T and P in the Prologue 2, and 15.3. Bauckham, The Fate, 183.



nohhai o~av6ahtoo1joovsat). This expression has been interpreted in several ways, for example in the Ethiopic translation of Daniel in mss 0 and P (ed. Lofgren) as 'many will be killed'. The motif of martyrdom is also implicit in the remainder of Mr 24.10, which in a minority reading includes 'giving over to death' ( ~ i qOavasov), whilst the Ethiopic text of Mt 24.10 reads 'and they will be killed' instead of 'and they will hate one another'. Still, the element that a false messiah will kill many, has no precedent. Even Lietaert Peerbolte, who questions the identification of the liar with Bar Kokhba, believes that it 'most likely reflects the historical reality out of which it originated'I6. The problem of the identification with Bar Kokhba is that whereas Eusebius tells that he killed Christians, there is no evidence that 'many' were killed by Bar Kokhba. Bauckham therefore suggests that a 'small number of martyrs would sufficiently explain the expectation that many more martyrdoms would soon follow'". Buchholz's incorrect understanding of ApPr 2.8-9 leads him to think that some Christians initially followed Bar Kokhba, but then deserted his cause". This interpretation is rightly criticised by Lietaert Peerbolte because the sources do not characterise the Christians killed by Bar Kokhba as his former follower~'~. With regard to Justin Martyr's and Eusebius' comments, one should note that neither author views Bar Kokhba as a persecutor par excellence. Justin Martyr observes in an aside to a description of the Hebrew Prophets, that the Jews, like the Romans, 'kill and punish us whenever they have the power' (I Apology 31). He then gives the example of Bar Kokhba. The lack of any further attention to Bar Kokhba in Justin's First Apology, may be due to the nature of this work, or to the fact that Bar Kokhba did not stand apart in this respect. One should also note that Eusebius, in his most extensive description of Bar Kokhba, calls him murderous and a bandit (Hist.
Lietaert Peerbolte, Antecedents of Antichrist, 60. Bauckham, The Fate, 189. Buchholz, Your Eves, 409. See Hills. 'Parables, Pretenders', for a discussion of the Ethiopic. '' Lietaert Peerbolte, Antecedents of Antichrist, 59.





eccl. 4.6), but does not mention persecution of Christians20. Only where Eusebius gives a series of quotations from Justin Martyr (Hist. eccl. 4.8.3ff), he includes the side-remark on Bar Kokhba. Finally we have the short report in the Chronicle, that Bar Kokhba killed Christians who did not support his revolt. In short, persecutions by Bar Kokhba are mentioned by these authors, but they do not suggest the martyrdom of many.
3. The Liar and Deceiver

ApPt 2.10 refers to the false messiah as a 'liar', and in 2.12 he is called a 'deceiver'. Bauckham argues that 'the idea of the Antichrist as a deceiver was, of course, thoroughly traditional', and that '1 John 2.22 may well indicate that the Antichrist was sometimes known specifically as 'the liar' ( b yr&6o~qq)', and that the use of the term 'liar' might reflect a pun on the name of Bar Kosiba2'. Bauckham's reference to the 'Antichrist' is apparently influenced by I and 2 John, but the point is that both in the Johannine Epistles and in earlier Jewish texts 'lying' and 'deceiving' are terms which are commonly used for both false prophets and (eschatological) opponents. This traditional language is, for example, reflected in several biblical pesharim or commentaries from Qumran which designate specific individuals as 'the liar' (3733 W'N), or 'spreader of lies who deceives many' (1QpHab X 9 P'31 ;rYn;l 1 W N 3133 TIDb); 'the liar who deceives many' (4QpPsa I 2 6 D l 3 1 ;rYn;l 1 W N 3133 WIN). Note also that texts found at Qumran have Hebrew and Aramaic terms parallel to Greek y~uFonpocpflrq~: lQH a XI1 17 (= Sukenik IV 16) 313 'N'33 and 4Q339 1 Nlp[W] lN131. In other words: not only 'deceiver', but also 'liar' are traditional terms, both of which are used by the author of the ApPt 2. These are general designations for false prophets, and, presumably by extension, for false messiahs. As such these terms may be applied to speNote that Josephus too refers to 'bandits' when referring to the groups of 'impostors' related to the sign prophets such as the Egyptian (JW2.264). Bauckham, Tlze Fate, 190. Note the contrast between 'of course, thoroughly traditional', and 'may well indicate that ... sometimes known specifically'.
O '




cific historical figures, as in 44339, the so-called 'List of False prophet^'^^. The use of the name Bar Koziba ('son of the lie' = 'liar') in Rabbinic texts is likely to be a pun on his real name Ben or Bar K ~ s i b abut ~ ~this , does not mean that the term 'liar' in ApPt 2.10 is a pun on Bar Kosiba. Because of the traditional use of the term 'liar' one cannot know whether ApPt 2.10 should be interpreted generically or specifically.
4. Evil Deeds and Signs and Wonders

The seeing of the evil deeds of the liar in ApPt 2.8 is not commented on by Bauckharn, whereas Buchholz, because of his incorrect interpretation of the end of the verse, fails to understand the clause. A distant parallel to ApPt 2.8 may be found in 44169 (4QpNah) 3-4 iii 25 which comments on Nah 3.7 'all those who see you will run away from you'. The Qumran interpretation of the verse says that at the end of time 'their evil deeds will be exposed', after which the simple people of Ephraim 'will leave those who misdirected them'. The reference is to those looking for easy interpretations (generally interpreted as the Pharisees) who 'walk in treachery and lies'. Though the pesher is not concerned with false prophets or messiahs, it describes false teachers in terms which are remarkably similar to those found in the ApPt. The 'doing of signs and wonders to deceive' (ApPr 2.12) is derived from Mr 24.24, which in turn depends on Deut 13.2-4. Note, however, that we are dealing with the common topic of sign prophets who promised to perform signs and wonders. This is clear from Josephus' description of the sign prophets who try to deceive and to delude the people with signs and wonders (Ant. 20.167-168)24.Some See Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XIX (Oxford, 1995) 77-9. R.G. Marks, The Image of Bar Kokkba in Traditional Jewish Literature (University Park, Pa., 1994) 15, argues that later generations may not have known that Koziva was not the original name. 2J Also other descriptions in Josephus' works describe these prophets as mendacious, deceiving, deluding, and promising signs. See Ant. 18.85-87; 20.97-98; 20.167-171; 20.188; JW 2.259-263; 2.283-287; 7.437-450. See for example R. Gray, Prophetic Figures in Late Second Temple Jewish Palestine (New York, 1993) l 12-44.




of these sign prophets, such as the Egyptian (Ant. 20.169-171; JW 2.261-263), claimed to be prophets but apparently also had messianic aspirations. The fact that this motif of the 'false prophet' (JW 6.285) or 'impostor' (yoqc,) who deceives and promises signs surfaces both in the New Testament and in Josephus, shows that the similar terms and phrases in the ApPt do not of necessity refer to a specific liar who deceived and did signs.

5 . Ex eventu Prophecy
Bauckham and Buchholz point out that the text does not record Bar Kokhba's defeat, and that therefore the work can be dated during the 132-135 revolt2'. ApPt 2.12 (the coming of Enoch and Elijah who will denounce the Deceiver) refers to an event still in the future. In fact, Bauckham seems to place the transition from the author's present to the future in ApPt 2.11 between 'there will be martyrs by his hand' and the next clause 'many will die and become martyrs' (or perhaps, between the parallel clauses in ApPt 2.10). In other words, the text is treated as a kind of ex eventci prophecy, although it is very unspecific compared to such prophecies in other a p o c a l y p ~ e s The ~~. prophecy consists of no more than three or four main movements2'. First, a false messiah will arise who will try to deceive. Second, he will kill those who reject him. Third, Enoch and Elijah will come to denounce him, and, perhaps, fourth, the day of judgment will appear. Ultimately, the argument of a specific ex eventu prophecy depends on 'the killing of those who reject him'. The evidence for this killing is the short report in Eusebius' Chronicle, Hadrian's Year 17 (= AD
Bauckham, Tlze Fate, 184-185; Buchholz, Your Eyes, 412. Compare Dan 10-12 which like the ApPt, has been dated to a very specific period. Dan l l , however, gives a series of detailed descriptions which can easily be correlated to the historical events preceding the Maccabaean Revolt. 27 Buchholz, Your Eyes, 409-11, describes two more movements between the first and second, namely that 'a group of Jewish Christians supported the revolt at first and then turned against him'. Bauckham, 'Two Fig Tree Parables', 279 and The Fare, 182, distinguishes between the killing of Christians (ApPr 2.10), and Jews becoming Christians (ApPt 2.1 1) who too will become martyrs.




133): 'Cochebas, duke of the Jewish sect, killed the Christians with all kinds of persecutions, (when) they refused to help him against the Roman troops', as well as Justin Martyr's statement (I Apol. 31) that Bar Kokhba commanded to punish the Christians severely if they did not deny Jesus as the Messiah and blaspheme him. We do not know of any other persecution by a messianic claimant, but Bauckham acknowledges that Lucuas, the leader of the 115-1 17 revolt must have been seen as a messianic figure, and that it 'is likely enough that Jewish Christians who refused to join the revolt wouId also have suffered'2R. In other words: it is possible to relate the first two movements of the prophecy to the Bar Kokhba revolt. Yet, the descriptions are general to such a degree that they may also refer to, for example, the 115-117 revolt.

6. Categories of Sinners
The catalogue of sins and accompanying punishments in hell (ApPt 7-12) includes some sins which are thought to shed light upon the provenance of the text. On the one hand, the sin of making idols 'which resemble cats, lions and reptiles' (ApPt 10.5) strongly points to an origin of the text in Egypt, though denunciations of animal idols are not entirely absent from texts of Palestinian p r ~ v e n a n c e On ~ ~ .the other hand, the unique groups of sinners in ApPt 9.2-4, namely persecutors and betrayers of my righteous ones (9.2), blasphemers and betrayers ,of my righteousness (9.3), and false witnesses who kill (9.430) may 'indicate a situation of persecution and martyrdom as the Sifz im Lehen of the Apocalypse of Peter'31. This catalogue of sinners seems to be a haphazardly assembled collection of diverse sins, without a clear systematisation or an area of special attention. However, one should note that the sins of ApPt
Bauckham, The Fate, 186. See references in Bauckham, The Fate, 186-87. The text seems to be corrupt, and probably should be emended to 'these are the false witnesses'; see the Akhmim text and P. Marrassini's notes in Bovon and Geoltrain, ~ c r i t apocryphes s I, 766. " Bauckham, The Fate, 184.





9.2 and 9.3 stand apart for several reasons. First, the sins are quite similar to those already mentioned in ApPt 7.2 and 3. Secondly, contrary to many other cases, there is no clear correspondence between sin and p ~ n i s h m e n t ~ Thirdly, ~. the Ethiopic text has here two first person singular pronouns, in 'my righteous ones' and 'my righteousness'. In the present text these first person forms should refer to Christ, but in the catalogue of sinners there are no other first person references, nor, for that matter, any specifically Christian elements at all. The present poor state of the text does not allow for a detailed source-critical analysis of the ApPt. Yet, the combination of the three elements mentioned above which put ApPt 9.2 and 9.3 apart, strongly suggests that these sins were inserted into an already existing catalogue. This would mean that ApPt 7-12 was by and large an already existing source which was reused and modified by the author of the ApPt. I suggest that the author modified an existing source or tradition3" Presently, the catalogue of sinners is part of a prophecy of the judgment of the sinners, but its original visionary language is still present in the visionary description of again and again 'place' after 'place', and perhaps in the 'behold' of ApPt 7.3. Because of the references to cat-idols, the original catalogue, or some of the elements, may have an origin in Egypt. The assumption of an inserted or modified source in ApPt 7-12 does not help us to determine to what extent the smaller framework of this section, namely ApPt 3-6 and 13-14, were the work of the author whb incorporated ApPt 7-12. For example, ApPt 13 may in part also have belonged to the author's source, which was slightly modified by adding 'my' in ApPt 13.1. The question is whether the additions or modifications to the assumed original source (such as in ApPt 9.2 and 9.3) 'indicate a situation of persecution and martyrdom as the Sitz im Leben' of the text.
But Bauckham, The Fare, 218, finds a measure-for-measure punishment in only eleven out of twenty-one cases. 33 See also Bauckham, TIze Fare, 184, and especially 207-8. Bauckham only speaks of a 'tradition', and not of a 'source'.



The phrase 'blaspheme the way of righteousness' has a close parallel in 2 Peter- 2.2 'blaspheme the way of truth', when discussing false prophets and teachers. The references to martyrdom may be implied in ApPt 9.2 which mentions those who persecute, and perhaps in 9.4 if one interprets the Ethiopic as 'those who put to death the martyrs with a lie'. This would imply that the author added the sinners of ApPt 9.2 and 9.3, and perhaps those of 9.4, in order to include those who persecuted Christians.

7. The Heavenly Temple

In the transfiguration scene of ApPt, based upon M t 17, Peter asks the same question as in Mr 17.4: 'do you wish that I make three tabernacles here, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah?'. Mr 17.5 continues with the voice from the cloud which announces that Jesus is the beloved son; in ApPr 16.8, however, Jesus severely rebukes Peter: Satan has veiled his understanding. Peter should not build tabernacles, since there is one tabernacle, not made by hands, 'which my Heavenly Father had made for me and for my elect'. The text carries on in ApPt 17.1 with a parallel to Mr 17.5. Bauckham reads the severe rebuke in the light of Bar Kokhba's presumed intention to rebuild the temple34.It would serve as a warning to those Jewish Christians who may have been tempted to participate in the attempts to rebuild the temple. Moreover, the following verse would explicitly identify Christ (and therefore not Bar Kokhba) as the true Messiah. It is clear that the text refers to the idea of a transcendent temple (such as in Heb 9.11 or Rev 21.3). The point is how r 17. In M r 17.4-8 there one should read the expansion to the text of M is no explicit answer to or rebuke of Peter's question. One may imagine that the author wanted to explain why Peter's question was inappropriate, expanding the text in the same manner as the text expands on the physical appearance of Moses and Elijah. The main reason to expect more than a mere expansion is the harshness of the rebuke. Yet, even this may be a literary reworking of M r 16.233'.
Bauckham, TIie Fate, 192-4. The two points in common are the references to Satan, and to 'the things of men' respectively 'the things of this world'.



The main motif of ApPt 15-17 is life after death. The text elaborates on the angelic appearance of Moses and Elijah, describes the paradisiacal abode of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the other righteous fathers, and promises that thus will be the future glory of those who pursue 'my righteou~ness'~~. The emphasis on the one tabernacle 'for me and for my elect' (ApPt 16.9) makes here more sense as a reference to the future abode of the elect, then as a veiled warning against Bar Kokhba's aspirations. 8. Conclusion Regarding the Bar Kokhba Identification The interpretation of the text of the ApPt is hindered by the uncertainties of the Ethiopic translation which is in many places problematic or even corrupt. In ApPt 9.4 and 16.5, Bauckham interprets a difficult text as refening to persecution, whereas the Ethiopic can also be explained differently. The same may go for the transition from plural messiahs to a singular 'he' in ApPt 2. Comparison of the Greek Rainer and Bodleian fragments show that the Ethiopic differs in many details from the Greek. Therefore, all hypotheses based on details of the text should be considered uncertain. The Parables of the Fig Tree in ApPt 2 describe a false messiah in rather general terms which are also used in other texts (Qumran pesharim, New Testament, Josephus) to denounce opponents or false prophets. It comes as no surprise that some of these terms were also applied to Bar Kokhba. The only element which is not common apocalyptic stock is the emphasis on martyrdom. This may be a reaction to persecutions during the Bar Kokhba revolt, but we do not have any evidence of large-scale martyrdom in that specific period, whereas Justin Martyr even states that whenever the Jews had the power they killed Christians. In short: the identification of the liar with Bar Kokhba is possible and tempting, but the arguments are not conclusive. However, the issue is not only whether this identification is compelling or not, or
Bauckham, The Fate, 184 adopts the translation of Miiller: 'this is the honour and glory of those who will be persecuted for my righteousness'. Here, once again, the Ethiopic is problematic, but 'those who will pursue my righteousness' seems preferable.



whether the text should be dated exactly to the years between 132 and 135, but also whether this particular identification should serve as a hermeneutical key to the understanding of the composition.


9. The Location of ApPr 15-7

An Egyptian provenance has been suggested on the basis of ApPr 10.5, whereas, more generally, Hellenistic influence is evident in, for example, ApPt 14.1. However, ApPt 7-12 is likely to preserve older traditions or an edited source which was incorporated by the author into the work. On the other hand, a Palestinian Jewish Christian provenance would be implied if the composition was written during the Bar Kokhba revolt. Also Sozomen's report that the ApPt was still read in some churches of Palestine in the 5th century, fits well with the supposition of a Palestinian origin3'. Even if one questions the Bar Kokhba identification, a Palestinian provenance need not be excluded. The framework of the ApPr presents three events which are located in the Gospels and Acts on three mountains. Both ApPr 1.1 and Mr 24.3 locate Jesus' speech on the Mount of Olives. In ApPr 15.1 the scene is transferred to 'the holy mountain', commonly interpreted as Mount Zion38.This seems to be consistent with 2 Peter 1.18 which locates the transfiguration on 'the holy mountain', but not with the location of the mountain of the transfiguration in Mr 17. The Gospels do not specify which mountain is involved, but the pericope is located in between events in the temtory of Caesarea Philippi (Mt 16.13) and Galilee (Mt 17.22). Ancient traditions therefore identify the mountain with Mount Hermon. In ApPt 15-17 the transfiguration and ascension are merged into one event. The Gospels indicate a Galilean setting of the post-resurrection christophanies, Mr 28.16 referring to 'the mountain where Jesus had told them to go', but the Acts account of the ascension indicates that the ascension was also

See text and discussion in Buchholz, Your Eyes, 39-40. Bauckham, Tlle Fate, 192-93; 300-301



located on the Mt of Olives (Acts 1.12). There is, however, no evidence that the author of the ApPt used either Luke or Acts. One should consider the possibility that 'the holy mountain' of ApPt 15.1, and perhaps also of 2 Peter 1.18, does not refer to Mt Zion, but to Mt H e r m ~ n Or, ~ ~ .stated more cautiously, that the account was originally based upon traditions connected with Mt Hermon, rather than with Mt Zion or the Mt of Olives. First, whether or not the name 'Hermon' means 'sacred mountain', the area around Dan and Banias were cultic centres from Bronze Age times up to the Late Roman period. Second, Nickelsburg has argued that the Book of Watchers, the Testament of Levi, and Mt 16, relate sacred revelation to Enoch, Levi, and Peter, in this particular tenitorqPO.I Enoch 6-16 and Test. Levi view Mt Hermon as the gate to heaven, through which angels and some human beings go up and down. A comparison of ApPt 15-17 to the New Testament accounts of the transfiguration and the ascension show that though there are some resemblances, the narrative and theological meaning has been changed. Specific connections with the Enochic literature or the Test. Levi are found in those elements of ApPt 15-17 which are not found in the Matthean account of the transfiguration or the Acts account of the ascension4'. These are the description of paradise (ApPt 16.2-4; see 1 Enock 32), the opening of (the gates of) heaven, and the referNot only Mt Zion is called a 'holy mountain'. See Ezek 28.14 which calls the mountain of the gods a 'holy mountain'. On the other hand, the combination of 'holy mountain' and God's announcement of his son, suggests a relation with Psalm 2.6-7 which identifies the mountain as Mt Zion. G.W.E. Nickelsburg, 'Enoch, Levi, and Peter: Recipients of Revelation in Upper Galilee', JBL 100 (1981) 575-600; 'Excursus: Sacred Geography in 1 Enoch 6-16' in his 1 Enoch 1. A Comn7entary on the Book of I Enoch, Chapters 1-36; 81-108 (Minneapolis, 2001) 238-47. See also C.H.T. Fletcher-Louis, 'The Revelation of the Sacral Son of Man. The Genre, History of Religions Context and the Meaning of the Transfiguration', in F. Avemarie and H. Lichtenberger (eds), Aufersrehung - Resurrectiorl (Tiibingen, 200 1 ) 247-98 at 261-71. 41 More in general, Nickelsburg, 'Enoch, Levi, Peter', 600 already referred to the fact that the ApPt, like 1 Enoch 17-19, records a vision of the places of eternal punishment, and that there are parallels between the ApPt and the Similitudes.




ence to the second heaven (ApPt 17.3,6; see I Enoch 13-16; Test. Levi 2.6-12; 5.1). Note also that the description of Moses and Elijah in ApPt 15.2-7 closely resembles the description of Noah in I Enoch 106. The reference to the one heavenly temple, and the short notice that 'we saw and were rejoiced' (ApPt 16.9) makes sense if one locates the event in the same area where Enoch was brought to the heavenly temple, and Levi saw the holy temple. In other words: the reference to the heavenly temple belongs to the tradition of reveiations in Upper Galilee. This, of course, does not exclude the possibility that the text also scorned Bar Kokhba's assumed attempts to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. It does show that the Bar Kokhba hypothesis should not serve as a hermeneutical key that veils other possible explanations of sections of the composition.

VI. The Description of Paradise in the Apocalypse o f Peter

1. I decided to discuss the description of paradise in the Apocalypse of Peter- (ApPt) for two reasons. First, because, according to R.J. Bauckham, paradise has been even 'less studied" then hell; paradise did not excite the fantasy of the artists and writers as much as hell did'. The second reason why I chose this subject is because, according to Ph. Vielhauer, apart from the unanimous praise of God, this picture of paradise lacks any religious character, nevertheless it has a pastoral idea: 'die Vorstellung, dass die "Envahlten und Gerechten" Verdammte aus ihren Hollenqualen durch Fiirbitte befreien k ~ n n e n ' ~ . The main purpose of my paper is to test Vielhauer's position. I attempt to settle the issue by analyzing the description of paradise in the ApPt and comparing it with other descriptions. Vielhauer bases his statements on c. 14 of the Ethiopic text and on chapters 15-20 of the Akhmim text. The Ethiopic manuscript reads as follows:

R.J. Bauckham, 'The Apocalypse of Peter: An Account of Research', in W. Haase (ed), Aufstieg lrnd Niedergarzg der romischen Welt 11.25.6 (Berlin and New York, 1988) 4712-50 at 4733. P. Bouet, Le fantastique duns la litte'rature latine du Moyen Age. La na~~igation de saint Brendan (Caen, 1986): 'Si I'iconographie du monde cCleste se rCvble froide et conformiste, les representations des dCmons et du monde infernal manifestent avec eclat le talent des artistes et la vigueur de I'imagination.' Ph. Vielhauer, Geschichte der urchristlicken Literatur (Berlin, 1975) 512-3.



And then I will give my elect, my righteous, the baptism and salvation which they requested of me. In the field of Akerosya which is called Aneslasleya a portion of the righteous have [sic Buchholz] flowered, and I will go there now. I will rejoice with them. I will lead the peoples into my eternal kingdom and I will make for them what I have promised them, that which is eternal, I and my heavenly Father. 1 have told you, Peter, and informed you. Leave, therefore, and go therefore, (to) the city which is in the west, to the vineyard (or: wine) (about) which I have told you, that his work of destruction might be made holy from the sickness of my Son who is without sin4.

Akhmim text:
15. And the Lord showed me a widely extensive place outside this world, all gleaming with light, and the air there flooded by the rays of the sun, and the earth itself budding with flowers which fade not, and full of spices and plants which blossom gloriously and fade not and bear blessed fruit. 16. So great was the fragrance of the flowers that it was borne thence even unto us. 17. The inhabitants of that place were clad with the shining raiment of angels and their raiment was suitable to their place of habitation. 18. Angels walked there amongst them. 19. All who dwell there had an equal glory, and with one voice they praised God the Lord, rejoicing in that place. 20. The Lord said unto us, 'This is the place of your high-priests <brothers?>, the righteous men'5.

2. Concerning paragraphs 15-20 of the Akhmim text, Vielhauer claims that it would lack any religious character, were it not for the inhabitants who with one voice praised God. His statement is true but the reason for this is that the description of paradise has a Greek background - as Albrecht Dieterich demonstrated at the end of the nineteenth century6. However, chapter 14 of the Ethiopic text has a Greek background, too, as the terms 'Acherusian Lake' and 'Elysian Fields' suggest.
I quote the English translation of D.D. Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be Opened. A Study of the Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta, 1988) 345, because his translation seemes to me to be more coherent than those of others. NTA 11, 634-5. A. Dieterich, Nekyia. Beitrage zlir Erklarung der tleuentdeckterl Petrusapokalypse (Leipzig, 1893, 191 3') 19-62.

The Acheron is a river of Thesprotia in southern Epirus, which breaks through an impenetrable gorge into the Acherusian plain where there was a lake in ancient times. The entrance to Hades was reputed to be there at the confluence of the Cocytus and Pyriphlegethon streams. The setting of Odysseus' convocation of the dead in Odyssey draws on the scenery of the Acherusian plain. Circe describes the immediate surroundings of the entrance to Hades (Odyssey 10.513-515). But the description belongs to the realm of folktale: both the people and their country 'are part of the irrational world which lies beyond the confines of the real world and surrounds it, itself being bordered by the circumambient Oceanus. Helios rises at the eastern shore of the river which encircles the world (12.4) and sets at the western edges, where we find the pylai of Helios (24.12) and the entrance to the Underworld (24.1 1 - 14)". The Acheron is mentioned by Herodotus, too, concerning Periander's divination for buried treasure: 'Periander had mislaid something which a friend had left in his charge, so he sent to the oracle of the dead, amongst the Thesproti on the river Acheron, to ask where he had put it' (9.92)$.W.W. How and J. Wells comment on this place as follows: 'The Acheron flows through profound and gloomy gorge, one of the darkest and deepest of the glens of Greece. ... Hence it was a spot likely to be accounted a descent into hell, where the ghost might be summoned back as was Samuel by the witch of Endor (1 Sam. 28)'9. We find the Acherusian Lake in Plato's Phaedo in a context which is similar to that of the ApPt: 'Now these streams are many and great and of all sorts, but among the many are four streams, the greatest and outermost of which is that called Oceanus, which flows round in a circle, and opposite this, flowing in the opposite direction, is Acheron, which flows through various desert places and, passing under the earth, comes to the Acherusian Lake. To this lake the souls of most of the dead go and, after remaining there the appointed time,


A. Heubeck and A. Hoekstra, A Commentary on Homer's Odyssev 2 (Oxford, 1989) 78. Trans. A. de Stlincourt and A.R. Bum (Penguin Books). W.W. How and J. Wells. A Conlnlentaly on Herodorus 2 (Oxford, 1912) 54.



which is for some longer and for other shorters, are sent back to be born again into living beings' (112e-11 3a)I0. A. Dieterich collected almost all texts about the Elysian Fields in Greek literature and some in Latin literature". He did not mention Tibullus and Virgil's descriptions of the Elysian Fields; therefore I treat them because they are important for our subject. In elegy 1.3, Tibullus provides the first surviving description of the Elysian Fields in Roman literature. He adapts the common Greek and Roman picture of the Elysian Fields to the young lovers. Venus will lead Tibullus to the Elysian Fields because he was always addicted to gentle love. There are dances, singing, the birds wander freely; there are aromatic shrubs, sweet-smelling roses. There is no more labour in Elysium than there was in the golden age. Groups of youths hold hands and dance with garlands on their heads. Hell is described as a deep night, contrasting with the dancing series and the reds and greens of the preceding lines i2. So the phrase refering to hell, at scelerata iacet sedes in nocte profunda (1.3.67), means that in hell there is deep darkness; it suggests that in the Elysian Fields, in turn, there is brightness and lightness. In elegy 1.10 Tibullus shortly describes hell: 'there is no crop of standing corn below, no cultivated vineyard' (non seges est in$-a,non vinea culta, 35). Putnarn is right when he comments on this statement, 'The sentiment suits the poet's present mood of devotion to the quiet life on the land and complements his description of the Elysian Fields at 1.3.61''3. Putnam's reading of Tibullus parallels the Apocalypse of Peter, which also mentions a vineyard in the description of paradise (14 E). In Virgil's description, the Elysian Fields are flourishing, there is a charming area of greenery and joyful places, all brilliantly illuminated by rich celestial light, a special sun, and stars. Here the heroes, statesmen, and artists - such as Orpheus - practise their former profession (Aeneid 6.637-50). This Elysium is particular because only a few distinguished souls remain there forever; the rest, after complet-



Trans. H.N. Fowler (Loeb). Dieterich, Nekyia, 19-62. M.C.J. Putnam, Tibullus. A Comnzeritary (Norman, 1973) 82-5. Putnam, Tib~rllus, 149.

ing their period of cleansing, accept their tainting bodies again (Aeneid 6.742-7). The concept of the body as a prison for the soul is of Orphic origin, and entered literature through Plato's works. It is philosophy and contemplation that is able to set us free from the contaminating effect of the bodyI4. Plato, too, teaches the purification of some souls: 'And those who are found to have lived neither well nor ill, go to the Acheron and, embarking upon vessels provided for them, arrive in them at the lake; there they dwell and are purified' (Plzaedo 1 13a). If we now compare the Elysian Fields of the ApPt with those of Greek and Roman writers and poets, we find that the description of the scene is Greek, but the inhabitants and their activities are different. The inhabitants of the Elysian Fields of the ApPt are clad with shining raiment and praise God. The special emphasis on light and the praise of God is Jewish-Christian. Both motifs appear in Psalms 104.1-2: 'Bless the Lord, 0 my soul. 0 Lord, my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who coverest thyself with light as with garment' (King James Version) and Ezekiel 1.28: 'As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face'. On the last day the righteous will shine: 'And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever' (Daniel 12.3); 'and the light of God shall shine unto them' (1 Enoch 10.8)15; 'But for the elect there shall be light' (1 Enoch 5.7); 'And the Great Glory was sitting upon it - as for his gown, which was shining more brightly than the sun, it was whiter than any snow' (1 Enoch 14.20)16.

Cf. M.C.J. Putnam, Virgil's Aeneid. Interpretatiorz and Injlrterice. (Chapel Hill and London, 1995) 287-9; J.N. Bremmer, Tlie Rise and Fall of tlze Afterlife (London and New York, 2002) 60. l5 Trans. J.H. Charlesworth, Tlte Old Testament Pseudepi~raplta,2 vols (New York, 1985) vol. 1. l6 Cf. H. Bietenhard, Die himmlisclte Welt im Urchristenrum und Spatjudentum (Tiibingen, 1951) 137-42.




3. As was mentioned above, according to Ph. Vielhauer the description of paradise in the ApPt has a pastoral concern: the elect and righteous can free the wicked from the torture of hell. Vielhauer refers to c. 14 of the Ethiopic text in order to demonstrate this idea. The idea cannot be found, however, in that passage. Nor can we find it in the Akhmimfi-agment. The structure of this fragment is quite different from that of the Ethiopic text. The beginning of the fragment is similar to that of the Ethiopic text: it is about the false prophets. Then heaven is mentioned, and the two righteous men and paradise are described. If the original text discussed the elect, as c. 14 of the Ethiopic text does, such a passage must have stood before the story of the two men. But there is nothing comparable in the text. From this I conclude that in the copy from which the fragment was transcribed there was no mention of the elect requesting mercy for the wicked. The idea that the elect request mercy from Jesus for the wicked in hell originates from a textual emendation of the so-called Rainer Ft.agment made by M.R. James. The Rainer Fragment was first printed by Wessely in 1924". K. Priimm wrote an interesting essay on it in 1929IR, under the influence of which James emended the first sentence of the fragment which originally read as follows:
Egoput r o i ~ ~hqroiq poll ~ aE i K K ~ ~ KT01S p O U~EOV tav o r ~ o o v rui PE EK r i j ~ ~ohaoeo~
I shall grant to my called

and my chosen God, if they call to me in the t~rment'~

The text is written in vulgar Greek, nevertheless it can be interpreted on the basis of Plato's following statement: 'And those who are found to have lived neither well nor ill, go to the Acheron and, embarking

'' Ch. Wessely, Les pl~rsnncieris nioriunients h r ckr-istianisme P'cr-itsslrrpnpJ1rlrs(Paris, 1924) 482-3. " '. Priimm, 'De genuino Apocalypsis Petri textu. Examen testium iam notorum et novi fragmenti Raineriani', Bihlicn 10 (1929) 77-80. l9 NTA 1 1 , 637, note 43.

upon vessels provided for them, arrive in them at the lake; there they dwell and are purified, and if they have done any wrong they are absolved by paying the penalty for their wrong doings, and for their good deeds they receive rewards, each according to his merits' (Phaedo 113d-e). Here is a case of those who have lived neither well nor ill and therefore after death their souls go to the Acherusian Lake as to Purgatory where they are purified. The idea of Purgatory is to be found both in the Old and New Testament, for example, inZechariach 13.9: 'And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried; they shall call on my name, and I will hear them; I will say, It is my people, and they shall say, The Lord is my God'; in Matthew 12.32: 'And whosoever speaketh against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come'20.The first sentence of the Rainel- Fragrneilt can be interpreted in its original form in a satisfactory manner; therefore we have no right to rectify it. James emended the above sentence as follows: <nap>SSopat toiq ~ h q z o i q pou ~ a Ei~ h S ~ t o pou t q 3v Eav a i r f p o v z a i p s E K rijq K o h a ( ~ &~ 'Then q will I give unto my called and my chosen whomsoever they shall ask me for, out of t ~ r m e n t ' ~This ' . emendation is problematic because its dogmatic content contradicts the torments in hell, about which the ApPr says they are eternal, for example: 'they shall be punished forever' (6 E); 'and this is their judgment forever' (10 E); 'therefore shall they be punished eternally' (11 E) and so on. In spite of this contradiction, James' emendation was taken over without any comment by P e t e r ~ o n ~ ~ , Vielha~er~ and ~, Ba~ckham~ James ~ . explains his reading in this


Cf. art. 'Purgatorium', in H. Haag, Bihel-le.~ikoti(Einsiedeln, 1968). M.R. James, 'The Rainer Fragment of the Apocalypse of Peter', JTItS

32 (1931) 271. 22 E. Peterson, 'Die "Taufe" im Acherusischem See', in Friihkircke, Judentunl urld Gr~osis (Rome, 1959) 310-32 at 31-2. 23 Vielhauer, Geschickte, 513. 24 R. Bauckham, T l ~ e Fate of the Dead. Studies on tlte J e ~ ~ i sand l z Christiarl Apocalypses (Leiden, 1998) 147-8; J.A. Trumbower, Rescue for- the
Dead. The Posthunlus Salvation of Non-Christians in Early Christianity

(Oxford, 200 1 ) 50-1.



way: 'I have no doubt of the correctness of my restoration of the opening lines, for they are closely paraphrased in the following lines of Sib. Orac. 11'25: And for them will almighty. eternal God provide (nap65~1) yet more. To the pious, when they ask eternal God (OEOV ... alrfioovra~), He will grant them to save men out of the devouring fire And from everlasting torments. This also he will do. For having gathered them again from the unwearing flame And set them elsewhere, he will send them for his people's sake Into another life and eternal with the immortals, In the Elysian plain, where are the long waves Of the ever-flowing, deep-bosomed Acherusian Lake26.(330-38) According to James, these lines paraphrase the Rainer Fragment. Therefore, he corrects the Rainer Fragment on the basis of this passage. In my opinion, these lines of the Sibyllines have to do with the Rainer Fragment only inasmuch as they both originate from Plato. The above lines of the Sibyllines are reminiscent of Plato's following text: 'Those, however, who are curable, but are found to have committed great sins - who have, for example, in a moment of passion done some act of violence against father or mother and have lived in repentance the rest of their lives, or who have slain some other person under similar conditions - these must needs be thrown into Tartarus, and when they have been there a year the wave casts them out, the homicides by way of Cocytus, those who have outraged their parents by way of Pyriphlegeton. And when they have been brought by the current to the Acherusian Lake, they shout and cry out, calling to those whom they have slain or outraged, begging and beseeching them to be gracious and to let them come out into the lake; and if they prevail they come out and cease from their ills, but if not, they are borne away again to Tartarus and thence back into the rivers, and this goes on until they prevail upon those whom they have wronged; for this is the penalty imposed upon them by the judges' (Phaedo 113e-114b).


James, 'Rainer Fragment'. 272. Trans. U. Treu in NTA 11, 663.



4. From our investigation we can draw the conclusions that the background of the description of paradise is Greek, and the idea of the Acherusian Lake as a place of purification of the souls originates in Plato's Phaedo, just as the idea that the souls which are neither good nor bad may receive salvation after purification. This idea is mirrored in the first sentence of the Rainel- Fragment in its original form. James' emendation, viz. that the called and chosen can free from torment 'whomsoever they shall ask Jesus for', is an impossible thought. Bauckham is right when he writes: 'In such situations an easy universalism which extends benevolent mercy equally to the oppressors and the oppressed would be an affront both to the oppressed and to the divine righteousness for which they long'". In spite of this statement, Bauckham accepts James' emendation without any comment. Nowhere can we find this idea except in the Sibyllines quoted above. James is confident that the Sibyllines paraphrase the text of the ApPt. Nevertheless, it could also be the other way round, as far as chronology is concerned. The ApPt could have parapharased the text of the Sibyllines because 'Kurfess dates the Jewish stage of the Sibyllines I1 about the turn of the era and the Christian stage before AD 150'28. In theory, it is more plausible that the Sibvllines influenced the ApPt than inversely, because the Sibyllines were more important documents in antiquity than the ApPr. Above I proposed Plato's Phaedo 114a-b as the source of the Sibyllines. Bauckham perhaps thought the same when he wrote:
Some part in the origin of this idea must have been played by Plato, Phaedo 114 A-B, according to which a certain class of sinners, who have committed serious crimes but are curable, can escape from torment into purifying waters of the Acherusian Lake only by seeking and obtaining forgiveness from those they have injured3.

Bauckham, 'Conflict', 186. Charlesworth, Old Testament Pse~rdepigr-aphaI , 331; cf. A. Kurfess, Sibyllische Weissagungen (Nordlingen, 1951) 285-6. '9 Bauckham, op. cit. 196.


Since a photo of the Rainer fragment was never published, its publication will probably be welcome. I d o it with the permission of the 0ster-reichische Natiorzalbibliothek to which I express my gratitude. I also print the Greek text of the fragment and its English and Latin

Ekopat roiq Khqroiq pou ~ a E i~ h b ~ r o tpou c ; 0(cd)v Eav orfioovra' p~ E K rijq Kohao&oq~ aGhoo i ahoic; Kahov panrtopa Ev omrqpiq 'A~~pouoia hipvqc; q iiv ~ a h o G o t v Ev r@ 'Hhuoio n s G i ~pbpoq Gt~a~ooGvqq psra rGv &yiov pou ~ a i cinsh~fioopat 2yh ~ a oi i iKh&Kroi pou dyahhtGvr~qp&ra TGV narptapxGv ~ i rq<v> q [alioviav pou [palothsiav ~ a nio ~ f i o oPET' abrGv r a Ena[y]&hiaq ~ pou B q EnqyystMpqv abroiq Eyh ~ a 6i n(ar)fip pou 6 E[v] roiq 06(pa)voic;. iGou EGfihwoa c o t n i r p ~ a Ek~0bpqv i navra. ~ a nop~Gou i ~ i n6htv q tip-

English translation 3 ' : Then will I grant to my called and chosen God, if they call to me in the torment and I will give to them a precious baptism unto salvation from the Acherusian Lake which men call in the Elysian Field the portion of the righteous with my holy ones. And I shall depart, I and my exulting chosen, with the patriarchs, into my eternal kingdom, and I will perform for them the promises which I promised them, I and my Father who is in heaven. Lo, I have manifested unto thee, Peter, and have expounded all this. And go thou into a city that ruleth over the fornication, and drink the cup which I promised thee, at the hands of the son of him that is in Hades, that his destruction may have a beginning, and thou mayest be worthy of the promise.. . See also the text as established by Van Minnen, this volume, Ch. 1 1 . I print James' English translation without his correction of the original; cf. NTA 1 1 , 637, note 43.


Latin translation3': Praebebo vocatis et electis meis deum, si me vocaverint ex supplicio, et dab0 eis pulchmm baptisrna in salute lacus Achemsii, quam in campo Elysio partem iustitiae cum sanctis meis vocant. Et abibo ego et electi mei iubilantes cum patriarchis in aetemum regnum meum, et faciam cum eis promissa rnea, quae promisi eis ego et pater meus qui est in caelis. Vide, declaravi tibi, Petre, et exposui omnia. Et proficiscere in urbem, quae praeest fomicationi, et ebibe poculum, quod promisi tibi, in manibus filii qui est in Orco, ut principium capiat destructio eius, et tu acceptus promissi[onis...


I translate the Rainer fragment into Latin because I am not satisfied with Priimm's translation, 'De genuino', 77.



VII. Sinners and Post-Mortem 'Baptism' in the Acherusian Lake


The Apocalypse of Peter (ApPt, early 2nd century AD) is one of the earliest extant works to depict the 'baptism' of sinners in the Acherusian Lake as a vital part of the Christian afterlife1. Through an examination of other Christian apocrypha that mention a postmortem 'washing' in the Acherusian Lake, Peterson rightly raises the question of whether the ApPt's 'baptism' is really a baptism at all. Washing in the Acherusian Lake is closely tied to baptismal cult only in the latest of the apocryphal works that includes the lake in its otherworldly landscape: the Book o f the Resurrection o f J e s ~ i s Christ lly Bartholomew the Apostle (ResJC, 8-9th c. AD)=.The majority of the other Christian texts of the first four centuries AD to mention the
The most important work to date on this topic is the now classic article by E. Peterson, 'Die "Taufe" im Achemsischen See', in his Friihkirche, J~rdent~rnz und Gnosis. Studien und Untersuch~~ngen (Rome, 1959) 310-32. Also valuable on this topic is R. Bauckham, 'The Conflict of Justice and Mercy', in his The Fate of the Dead. Studies on the Jewish and Clrristian Apocalypses (Leiden, 1998) 132-48. And of course, any current work on ApPt must be indebted to R. Bauckham, 'The Apocalypse of Peter: An Account of Research', ANRW 11.25.6 (1988) 4713-50. A translation and edition of ResJC are found in E.A. Wallis Budge, Coptic Apocrypha in the Dialect of Upper Egypt (London, 1913) 1-48, 179215 and in M. Westerhoff, Auferstek~rngund Jetzseits im koptischen 'Buch der At!ferstehung Jesu Christi. unseres Herrn' (Wiesbaden, 1999) 48-197. On the dating, I follow Westerhoff, 226-7. Earlier dates from the 5th-7th c. le have been suggested. See J.-D. Kaestli and P. Cherix, ~ ' ~ v a n g i de BarthPlen~yd'aprks d e u e'crits apocryphes (Turnhout, 1993) 172 and M.R. James, The Apocr~yplzalNew Testament (Oxford, 1924) 186.




Acherusian Lake, namely the second book of the Sibylline Oracles (SibOr.2, mid 2nd century AD), the Apocalypse of Moses (ApMos, 1st-3rd c. AD)3, Paul of Tamma's Cell (late 4th century AD), and the Apocalypse of Pazd (ApPl, late 4th century AD)4, suggest that the connection between baptismal cult and the Acherusian Lake is very weak in early Christianity5. The primary significance of the Acherusian Lake for these texts must be sought elsewhere. This 'washing' is indicative of three other aspects of early Christianity: the post-mortem washing of the dead, the need for an otherworldly rite to mark completed repentance, and the ability of martyrs to grant the remission of sins. ApPt 14 refers specifically to 'baptism' (baptisma) in the Acherusian Lake both in the Ethiopic manuscripts and in the Greek Rainer fragment that preserves this passage6. However, among the reI am currently of the opinion that the ApMos is a Christian text. However, many scholars have been inclined to see the ApMos as a Jewish text, see Peterson, 'Die "Taufe"', 320-2, and L.S.A. Wells, 'The Books of Adam and Eve', in R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseridepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford, 1963) 123-30. The ApMos is used extensively in the reconstruction of the Jewish Adam legends in Louis Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews (Philadelphia, 1961). I.M. Stone, A History of the Literatul-e of Adam and Eve (Atlanta, 1992) 57 seems to consider the work Jewish, but he is very tentative. D.A. Bertrand, La vie gr-ecque d'Adan1 er d'Eve (Paris, 1987) 36 writes of the provenance of the ApMos that, 'il est sans conteste juif'. On the dating of ApPl see P. Piovanelli, 'Les origines de I'Apocal-ypse de Pazrl reconsidCrkes', Apocrypha 4 (1993) 25-64 and now K. Copeland, Mapping tlze Apocalypse of Palrl. Geograp17yy, Ger1r-e and History, Dissertation (Princeton, 2001) 21-35. Both date ApPl by the consular date in its preface, AD 388, arguing against a third-century date suggested by R. Casey, 'The Apocalypse of Paul', JTS 34 (1933) 1-33. It is worth noting that, to my knowledge, no text from Nag Hammadi mentions the Acherusian Lake. Thus, the magical text London Ms. Or. 5987 remains the only text with gnostic associations to mention the Acherusian Lake; see A.M. Kropp, Airsgewalrlte Koptische Zauherte-rre (Brussels, 1931) 1.22-8,II.149-60. It does not, however. refer to washing or baptism in the Acherusian Lake. Thus. there is no evidence of a particular connection to gnosticism as Peterson, 'Die "Taufe"', 332, conjectured. M.R. James, 'The Rainer Fragment of the Apocalypse of Peter', JTS 32 (1931) 270-9. For the Ethiopic, I rely on D.D. Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be



maining Christian apocrypha that mention the Achemsian Lake, only the Latin version of ApPl uses the same technical term, ' b ~ p t i z a t ' ~ . Although the long Latin manuscripts of ApPl are generally the best indication of its contents, the late Greek abbreviations and the Coptic version are often more reliable witnesses to the original Greek vocabulary. Notably, none of these manuscripts refers to baptism. The Greek manuscripts of ApPI describe the soul being cast (ballouein) into the Acherusian Lake8. And the Coptic manuscript says that Michael washes ( i ~ k m the ) ~ soul in the Acherusian Lakelo. The other apocryphal texts agree with the Coptic version of ApPI. In ApMos, a seraph washes (apolouein, apoplounein) Adam's soul in the Acherusian Lake". Even ResJC, which uses baptizein in a different context, again records that Michael washed (iokm) the soul in the Acherusian Lake. Thus, ApPr is in the minority of these Christian texts in referring specifically to a 'baptism' and not to a 'washing' in this otherworldly lake. Peterson contrasts the use of 'baptism' in the Christian ApPt and the Latin ApPI with 'washing' in ApMos, a text he considers to be Jewish. He attempts to show that 'baptism' in the Acherusian Lake is
Opened. A Study of the Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta, 1988) 345. ApPl 22 ( L l : P, StG, Am), ed. T. Silverstein and A. Hilhorst. Apoca!\yse of Paul. A New C~iticalEdition of Tllree Long Latin Versions (Geneva, 1997) 118-9. The language of the earliest Latin manuscript (P, 8th c. AD) is usually dated to the 6th c. AD. V p P l 22 (Greek), ed. C. von Tischendorf, Apocalypses Apoclypkae (Lipsiae, 1866) 51. Although jokrn can be used in reference to baptism, baptizein would normally be rendered in Coptic by ti joknl, ti on7s or baptize. Without the helper verb ti, jokm generally means to wash. See W.E. Crum, A Coptic Dictionary (Oxford, 1939) 762-3. In ApPI 22 (Coptic), ed. Copeland, 262. Also edited by E.A. Wallis Budge, Miscellaneo~tsTexts in the Dialog~reof Upper Egypt (London, 1915). " There are three main editions of the Greek ApMos. Bertrand, La vie RI-ecque; M. Nagel in A.-M. Denis (ed), Concordance grecqlie des pse~rd6pi,qrapkesd'Ancien Testan~erlt (Louvain, 1987) 815-8, reprinted in G. Anderson and M. Stone, A Synopsis of the Books ofAdan? ard Eve (Atlanta, 1994); C. von Tischendorf, 'Apocalypsis Mosis', in Apocalypses Apocryphae, 1-23.





a secondary Christianisation of a Jewish motifI2. Peterson's argument has been challenged by Marinus de Jonge and Johannes Tromp, who highlight his failure to find Jewish parallels to the use of the Achemsian Lake outside of ApMos13. Peterson claims that Louis Ginzberg has found and noted several Jewish parallels to washing in the Acherusian LakeI4. However, Ginzberg's suggested parallels demonstrate his own mistaken assumptions about the Acherusian Lake in ApMos; they do not demonstrate that ApMos reflects common Jewish lore. First of all, Ginzberg writes that Adam is washed in the 'river Acheron'Is, when ApMos clearly states, the 'Acherusian Lake'. Ginzberg does not then adduce Jewish texts that mention either the Acherusian Lake or the river Acheron. Instead he draws parallels to the river of fire, wrongly assuming that the Achemsian Lake, the river Acheron, and the river of fire are all the same otherworldly bodyI6. In fact, although many modem scholars believe that early Christians conflated the Acherusian Lake and the river of fireI7, none of the Christian apocrypha that mention the lake describes it as a lake of fire. Furthermore, many of these Christian apocryphal works contain a river of f i e in addition to the Achemsian Lake, and this river of fire invariably has a very different function from that of the lake. In ApPt and ApPI, the river of f i e eternally torments the damnedIx. As a
Peterson, 'Die "Taufe"', 322. M. de Jonge and J. Tromp, The Life o f Adam and Eve and Related Literature (Sheffield, 1997) 67-75. l4 Peterson, 'Die "Taufe"', 322. j5 Ginzberg, Legends 1, 100. l6 Ginzberg, Legends 1, 125, note 134. See also K. Kohler, 'Acheron, or Acherusian Lake', Jewish Encyclopedia 1, 165. Kohler equates the river of fire in 1 Etzock 17 with Acherusia. l7 See, for example, C.-M. Edsman, Le haptEme de feu (Uppsala, 1940) 57-66. Edsman argues that the baptism in the Acherusian Lake in ApPt and ApPI corresponds to the many examples of post-mortem baptism by fire. So also V. MacDemot, The Cult of the Seer in the Ancient Middle East (Berkeley, 1971) 175. Of course, the presence of rivers of fire comes as no surprise given the fiery nature of the Greek Hades and the Hellenistic Jewish hell inherited by Christian authors. See A. Dieterich, Nekyia. Beitrage zur Elsl-larung der
l2 l3



means of punishment, the river of fire is distinct from the Acherusian Lake, a means of forgiveness. In ResJC, the river of fire does not inflict eternal torment, instead it tests the soul, becoming like a river of water to the righteous. The soul first passes through the river of fire, and then, it is washed in the Acherusian Lake; the two bodies of water are separate, even if proximate. Moreover, related texts that describe baptism of the righteous in the river of fire never, to my knowledge, refer to that fiery river as the Acherusian Lake19. Since Ginzberg's parallels to the river of fire are insufficient, there is little evidence at this point to suggest that the post-mortem washing in the Acherusian Lake derives from a Jewish source. Yet there is good evidence that this is primarily a 'washing' and only secondarily a 'baptism', raising the question of what other significance this post-mortem washing might have held for early Christians.

I . Washing of the Dead, Repentant Sinners, and Martyr Cult

Notably, early Jews and Christians both washed their dead for burial2'. In Acts 9.37, before Peter came to raise Tabitha, 'they had washed (lousantes) her and laid her in a room up stair^'^'. The Gospel of Peter (mid-2nd c. AD) adds a detail to the burial of Jesus not
neuentdeckten Petrusapokalypse (Berlin, 1893, 191 3') and M . Himmelfarb, Tours of Hell. An Apocalyptic Form in Jewish and Christian Literature (Philadelphia, 1983) 1 10-3.
I y An argument could be made that the baptism in the river of fire in the Coptic Encomium on Saint John the Baptist by Saint John Ch~ysostom, which claims at this point to be quoting an Apocalypse of Janles (EncApocJa), derives in part from the washing of the soul in the Acherusian Lake of ApPI. EncApocJa can claim to know ApPI on at least two other accounts: the golden boat and the fruitful date-palms of Paradise that yield ten-thousand clusters. If, in fact, EncApocJa does know ApPI, it is all the more intriguing that the author does not expressly conflate baptism in the river of fire with washing in the Acherusian Lake; he does not mention the latter at all. An edition and translation of EncApocJa is found in Budge, Coptic Apocrypha, 128-45, 335-5 1 . *O See A. Rush, Death and Burial in Christian Antiquity (Washington,

1941) 112-7. " Trans. The Holy Bible. New Re~~ised Standard Version (Grand Rapids,
Michigan, 1989).



found in any of the canonical gospels in that Joseph of Arimathea 'washed' (louein) Jesus before he wrapped his body in a linen ~ 1 0 t h Tertullian ~~. and Dionysius of Alexandria also refer to postmortem baths for the dead23.The Acts of Peter (Apt, late 2nd c. AD) has Marcellus take Peter down from the cross and bathe him in milk and wine. The washing of the dead in milk may be reflected in ApPl 22, which describes the Acherusian Lake as 'a river whose waters were very white, whiter than milk'24. The washing of the corpse certainly did take on deeper religious meaning for many of those who performed the act. Gregory of Nazianzus, for example, warns people not to defer baptism until the corpse is washed (louein) for burial2{ preaching against those who linked the washing of the corpse to the washing of the soul. In the Sacramentaly of Gellone (6th c. AD), monastic practitioners in late antique Gaul ask God to wash the soul with indulgence as they wash the body with water2< Although neither of these is directly related to the traditions around the Acherusian Lake, they demonstrate that the washing of the corpse and the washing of the soul were linked in the Christian imagination. Among the texts that deal explicitly with the Acherusian Lake, the connection to burial practices is best seen in ApMos. In ApMos, the archangel Michael expressly asks God about funeral rites. Although Abel dies before Adam, he has not yet been prepared for burial, so this is uncharted territory for everybody, angels included. God tells Michael and the others, 'Go away to Paradise in the third heaven, and strew linen clothes and cover the body of Adam and bring oil of the "oil of fragrance" and pour it over him'27. Because the washing of Adam in the Acherusian Lake takes place before this
GPt 6.24, NTA I , 224, compare Mt 27.59, Mk 15.46, Lk 23.53, Jn 19.40. Tertullian, Apol. 42.2; Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 7.22.9. ApPl 22, trans. H . Duensing and A. de Santos Otero, NTA 1 1 , 726. l5 Gregory of Nazianzus, Oratio 40.1 1 (PG 36.372-373). 26 Sacranrentary of Gellorre 2895, ed. A. Dumas, CCSL 159 (Tumhout, 1981) 462. See P. Brown, 'The Decline of the Empire of God', in C.W. Bynum and P. Freedman (eds), Last Things. Death and the Apocalypse irr the Middle Ages (Philadelphia, 2000) 41-59 at 48. 27 ApMos 40.1-2, trans. Wells, 151.

" "



exchange between God and his archangel, De Jonge and Tromp argue that it is not related to burial practices2x.Granted, it is Adam's soul that is washed in the Acherusian Lake and not specifically his corpse. But it seems unnecessary to separate the care of the soul from the care of the body, as evidenced by Gregory of Nazianzus' opponents. Adam is already dead and washing of the body would naturally take place before any other rite. In fact, to have described the washing of the soul in the Acherusian Lake and then the washing of the body would have been redundant. Although comparison to burial practices provides one answer to the question of what these texts mean by washing in the Acherusian Lake, it does not exhaust the relevant associations. 'Baptism' in ApPt is, in a sense, a Christianisation of a pre-Christian washing in the Acherusian Lake. This pre-Christian Acherusian Lake is not Jewish, as Peterson hoped to prove, but classical. Of the many classical sources that mention the Acherusian Lake, either as an earthly body of water or as an underworld lake, Plato's mythic description of the world in the Phaedo 11 le-114c provides the closest parallel to the Christian ap~crypha'~. In Plato's Phaedo, souls are judged and divided into four different categories. Those who are incurable are sent to their appropriate fate in Tartarus from which they will never reemerge (1 13e). Those who have lived a life of surpassing holiness pass upward to pure regions on the earth's surface (1 14b-~)~O. Two categories of souls fall in between these two extremes: those who have lived neutrally and e "' Jonge and Tromp, The LLife of Adan1 and Eve, 70. For descriptions of the Acherusian Lake as a real world location, see Thucydides 1.46; Livy, 8.24; Strabo 5.243-5, 6.256, 7.324; etc. For the Acherusian Lake as an underworld lake, see Homer, Od. 10.513; Strabo 1.26; Virgil, Aeneid 6.107; etc. See 'Acheron' and 'Acherusia' in RE 1 (Stuttgart, 1894) 217-9 and 'Acheron' in Der KIeirle Paulv 1 (Stuttgart, 1964) 45-6; J.G. Frazer. Pa~rsanias'sDescription of Greece 2 (London, 1913) 160-2; J.N. Bremmer, The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife (London and New York, 2002) 71-3. Plato also mentions a sub-category of this fourth group, namely those who purify themselves by philosophy, who will live in even more exquisite surroundings. For the separation of post-mortem souls into four separate categories, cf. 1 Elloch 22 and Augustine, Enchiridion, passim.
' 9



those whose sins are great but curable. Both of these are purified of their sins in the Achemsian Lake, which frees (apoluein)" them through punishment (1 13d)32.The former, those who have lived a neutral life, are purified as a matter of course. But the latter group, which consists of souls who misused others in anger and then spent the rest of their lives in repentance (metamelon), can only enter the Acherusian Lake from their less enviable positions in the Pyriphlegethon or the Cocytus if they can convince those whom they have wronged to invite them to do so (113e-114b). For Christian authors, this final category, the curable sinners, maintains the strongest association with purification in the Achemsian Lake. The majority of the Christian apocrypha that refer to the washing of the deceased in the Achemsian Lake agree with the Phaedo in that righteous souls are never washed in the lake, only the souls of sinners. This is true for the Rainer Fragment of ApPt, ApMos, ApPl, and SibOl-2. ApPt and SihOl-2 both allow sinners to be brought into the Achemsian Lake solely through the intervention of others, while ApMos and ApPl require the soul's own repentance. ApPt and SibOl-2 are markedly similar to the Phaedo because a soul cannot be washed in the Achemsian Lake without the beneficence of another soul. This reading of ApPt is based not on the Ethiopic version, but on M.R. James' reconstruction of the Greek Rainer fragment. James emends the passage to read, '1 will grant (par-exomai) to my called and my elect whomever they ask of me (hon ean ait&sontai)from out of punishment. And I will give (dbso) them a beautiful baptism in salvation of the Acherousian lake which is said to be in the Elysian Field, a share in righteousness with my saints.. . '33. James corrects theon ean st2sontai to read hon ean
It is possible that apolouein in the ApMos is a variant of or a wordplay on the Phaedo's apoluein. 3 q l t h o u g h Plato's Acherusian Lake frees 'through punishment,' there is no punishment associated with the Acherusian Lake in any of the Christian apocrypha, as I mention above. 33 James, 'Rainer Fragment', 271; see also the contributions of Adamik and Van Minnen in this volume. However, I have primarily followed the more fluid English translation of Buchholz, 345. I have made small changes, which I note through italics.



a i t e ^ ~ o n t a an i~~ emendation , he justifies on the basis of SibOr2, which he rightly reads as deeply indebted to A P P ~ApPt ~ ~ .14 is paraphrased beautifully in the poetic verses of SibOr 2.330-3836:
And to them will almighty, eternal God grant (parexei) yet more. To the pious, when they ask eternal God (hopotan theon aphthifon aite^sontai), He will give (d6sei) them to save men out of the devouring fire And from everlasting torments. This also he will do. For having gathered them again from the unwearying flame And set them elsewhere, he will send them for his people's sake Into another life and eternal with the immortals, In the Elysian plain, where are the long waves Of the ever-flowing, deep-bosomed Acherusian Lake.

James' reconstruction of the Greek fragment of ApPt on the basis of SihOr2 has been widely accepted3'. It is safe to say, then, that in the earliest versions of ApPt, as in SibOr2, souls are washed in the Acherusian Lake only on account of others. These souls are much like those in the Phaedo who are allowed to leave the Pyriphlegethon and the Cocytus because they have been forgiven by those whom they injured. ApPr and SibOr2 do differ from the Phaedo in one very significant way: they grant the ability to rescue individuals from torment to a different class of souls. In the Phaedo, on the one hand, it is the right of an injured soul to forgive its injurer. The injured soul is itself a neutral or curable sol11 who is in the Acherusian Lake, not one of those who have led a holy life and passed upward. ApPt and SibOr2, on the other hand, grant the ability to rescue other souls to 'my called
James' reconstruction is to be preferred to reading the manuscript as it stands: 'I will give to my called and my elect God, if they will raise me from the punishment'. Or, as C.D.G. Miiller, NTA 11, 637, note 42, translates it: ' I will grant to them God, if they call to me in the torment.' 5 . R James, The Testan7ent o f Abraham (Cambridge, 1892) 23-4, conjectured that SihOr2 was based on ApPr even before the fuller Ethiopic manuscripts were discovered. 36 Sib. Or. 2 330-8, trans. Ursula Treu, NTA 11.663. Where I have modified the translation, I have used italics. " See, for example, Peterson, 'Die "Taufe"', 310; Miiller, NTA 11, 637, note 42; Buchholz, Your Eym, 344; Bauckham, The Fate, 145.




and my elect' and the 'pious' respectively. These righteous souls do not wait in or tarry near the Acherusian Lake. Their reward is elsewhere; according to the ApPt, the elect 'will go rejoicing with the The Acherusian Lake is patriarchs into my eternal l~ingdom"~. merely a 'share in righteousness', fit only for those whom the elect remove from the punishments - not the proper abode for the elect themselves. Thus, although ApPt and SibOl-2 agree with the Phaedo that the souls of the righteous do not bathe in the Acherusian Lake, they grant the ability to intercede to the righteous, not to the other neutral or curable souls. Bauckham suggests that it is 'tempting to think that the idea of the salvation of the damned by the intercession of the righteous appealed to the author of the Apocalypse of Peter because of its congruence with the Christian tradition of praying for enemies and persecutors ( M t 5.44)'39. Bauckham's conjecture is related to the emphasis placed in ApPt 2 on martyrs and martyrdom and the inclination of martyrs to pray for the forgiveness of their persecutors (Acts 7.60; Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.2.5; Augustine, De civ. Dei 21.18)40. In suggesting that the elect rescue only their persecutors, Bauckham seems to be over-influenced by the parallel text in the Phaedo. Neither ApPt nor SihOd limits whom the elect are able to save from fiery torment. Bauckham is, however, very likely correct that the elect of ApPr derive their ability to secure the release of others through their status as martyrs. If the elect of the ApPt are martyrs, they can release, as ApPt suggests, whomever they choose4'.
ApPt 14, trans. Buchholz, 345. Bauckham, Tlie Fate, 235. Fate, 147, 153-9. Bauckham, T l ~ e 4' Peterson, 'Die "Taufew', 315-6, suggests that the function of the Acherusian Lake in ApPr and SibOlZ is a Christianised version of the Rabbinic notion that all Israel has a share in the world to come. He bases much of his argument on God saving men out of the torments for 'his people's sake' (SibOr 2.335). The texts, however. do not suggest that all Christians will be baptised in the Acherusian Lake, only those whom the pious choose. In fact, SihOr 2.339-41 does not express confidence that all Christians will be saved. for the narrative voice bemoans his own future: 'Ah, unhappy me, what will become of me in that day! For that in my folly, labouring more that all, I sinned, taking thought neither for marriage nor for reason'. trans. Treu, 663.



Already in the second century, martyrs and confessors could grant the remission of sins to their fellow C h r i ~ t i a n s For ~ ~ . instance, the account of the martyrs of Lyons and Vienne states: 'They defended all and accused none; they loosed all and bound none; they prayed for those who treated them so cruelly, as did Stephen, the fulfilled martyr: "Lord, do not charge them with this sin." If he pleaded for those who were stoning him, how much more for brother-christi an^?'^^ The intercession of a confessor on behalf of another Christian also appears in the Acts of Paul and Thecla (APTh) 28-944. Falconilla seeks Thecla's intercession from beyond the grave, and Thecla prays on her behalf so that she may go to the place of the just. The prayer is efficacious since Thecla is now facing a martyr's death. For early Christians, martyrdom was seen as a second baptism, since the first could not be repeated45.The blood of the martyrs could wash clean not only the sins of the martyrs themselves, but of others as well 6. The use of the term 'baptism' in ApPt may, in fact, have derived through an association of both re-baptism through blood and the Acherusian Lake with martyr cult and not through a connection with baptismal cult 7. The ability of the martyr-elect in ApPr to forgive sins makes it unnecessary for the sinning souls to repent during their own lives, as they must in the Phaedo. In ApPr, these souls repent only after dying,


See R.L. Fox, Pagans and Cltristiarzs (London, 1986) 338, 448-9, 458-


Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.2.5, trans. G.A. Williamson, Eusebius: The Histor-y of the Churchfronl Christ to Corlstarltii~e (London, 1965) 204. The APTIT can be securely dated between AD 160 and 200, see J. N. Bremmer, 'The Novel and the Apocryphal Acts: Place, Time, and Readership', in H. Hofmann and M. Zimmerrnan (eds), GI-oningen Colloqlria on the Novel 9 (Groningen, 1998) 157-80 at 161 and 'The Apocryphal Acts: Authors, Place, Time and Readership', in idem (ed), The Apocryphal Acts of Tl~onias (Leuven, 2001) 149-70 at 153. 45 See, for example, Tertullian, Scorp. 6.10-11. See also C. Straw, 'Eschatology in the Church of the Martyrs', in C.W. Bynum and P. Freedman (eds), Last Tl~ings. Death and the Apocalypse in the Middle Ages (Philadelphia, 2000) 32. 46 See Origen, Mart 30. This connection would be more certain if the Acherusian Lake were ever described as a lake of blood, which it is not.





'when there is no time for repentance and life did not remain'48. However, in certain other texts, namely ApMos and ApPI, repentance is essential in order for a soul to be washed in the Acherusian Lake. Thus, it is likely that for these texts, the ability of martyrs to forgive sins is not operative. What seems to be at work is an otherworldly rite that marks the completed penance of an individual. In ApMos, Adam repents when he is being driven from Parad i ~ eHis ~ ~great . fault is, of course, that he listened to Eve and ate of the tree that was forbidden him50. As in the Phaedo, repentance is only the first step, and it must be followed by the intercession of another being. In Adam's case, intercession does not come through anyone he wronged or the pious dead, but the holy angels themselves5'. ApMos marks the acceptance of Adam's repentance and the success of the angels' prayers through his washing in the Acherusian Lake. ApPI, on the other hand, makes no mention of intercession at all. The crucial act is the repentance of the soul prior to death. Repentance of souls after they are already experiencing the punishments, even when coupled with the intercession of Paul and the archangel Michael, does not lead to the baptism of these souls in the Acherusian Lake. These souls gain only a brief annual ease from their torments52. The souls that are washed in the Acherusian Lake are those souls who repent while they are still alive53:
This is the Acherusian Lake; the city of the Saints, which the father built for his only begotten son Jesus Christ, is east of all these things. It is not allowed for everyone to go into it. It is on account of this that the Acherusian Lake is on the way. If (one is) a fornicator or a sinner and


ApPt 13, trans. Buchholz, Your Eyes, 227. ApMos 27. Eve repents in ApMos 32; she takes most of the blame upon herself for causing Adam to eat. ApMos 7, 21-25; cf. Get1 3. 51 ApMos 35, trans. Wells, 149. 52 ApPl 43-44. The long Latin grants this ease only on Easter day, while the Coptic grants not only Easter, but also the 50 days following Easter and every Sunday. 53 ApPl 22, trans. Copeland, 200-1. I have followed the Coptic here because Michael 'washes' the soul. In the Latin, Michael 'baptises' the soul. Otherwise, the two versions are quite similar.



he tums and repents (metanoein) and produces fruit worthy of repentance (n~etanoia) and (then) he leaves the body, he first worships God and (then) he is given into the hands of Michael. He (Michael) washes him in the Acherusian Lake, and he is taken into the city to those who have not sinned.

Repentance is a recurring motif throughout ApP1. Elsewhere in ApPI, when the soul is brought before God in heaven, God does not allow the angel to relate the soul's bad deeds from its youth, only from the last year of its life. If the soul repents in that final year, God forgives it54. The repentant soul is washed in the Acherusian Lake and brought into the city of Christ. The overarching emphasis placed on repentance in ApPl suggests that this text describes a final ritual ablution of the repentant soul, a mark that, unlike the first baptism, cannot be undone through sin since the soul is now dead. Although the role of the intercessor is not as powerful in ApPl as in our other texts, ApPl agrees with them that only the souls of sinners are washed in the Acherusian Lake. There is no mention of those 'who have not sinned' being washed into the Achemsian Lake. They are merely led into the city of Christ55, sailing, no doubt, over the Acherusian Lake as Paul does in his otherworldly tour: 'And the angel answered and said to me: Follow me and I shall lead you into the city of Christ. And he stood by Lake Acherusia and put me in a golden boat and about three thousand angels were singing a hymn before me until I reached the city of Christ'56. Paul's journey over the Acherusian Lake recalls another fourth century text, Paul of Tarnma's treatise on the Cell. Paul of Tamma tells his spiritual son5': 'My son, obey God and keep his commandments and be wise and remain in your dwelling place, which is dear to you, as your cell remains with you in your heart while you are seeking after its grace. And the labor of your cell will come with you to God. Your cell will take you over the Acherusian Lake, and it will take you into the church of the firstborn' (cf. Heh 12.23). Here, as in
ApPl 17. Greek, Coptic, Latin (StG, Am; P: five years; Esc not extant). ApP122. ApPl23, trans. Duensing, 727. 57 Paul of Tamma, Cell 1-2, ed. T. Orlandi, Paolo di Tanma Oper-e (Rome, 1988) 88 (trans. mine).





the other Christian texts, there is no mention of the Achemsian Lake being a lake of fire or a place of punishment, yet Paul of Tamma teaches his spiritual son that it is necessary to pass over it. Reading the Cell in the light of the aforementioned Christian apocrypha raises the strong possibility that, for Paul of Tamma, the goal is to be righteous enough not to require washing in the Achemsian Lake58. In all of these texts, the washing has been reserved only for sinners. Devotion to one's cell should render one's soul pure enough to pass over the Achemsian Lake, as Paul is able to in ApPI. In texts such as ApPl and the Cell, washing in the Acherusian Lake is only a last resort, not because there is any implication of punishment, but because the washing would demonstrate that one had not led a righteous life. ApPt, SihOr2, ApMos, ApPI, and the Cell all present Christianised views of Plato's Phaedo. ApPt and SihOl-2 rewrite the intercession of others in the Phaedo in light of the ability of Christian martyrs to forgive sins. ApMos and ApPl connect the repentance of the sinners in Plato's Achemsian Lake with Christian penance, a theme that is negatively represented in the Cell. The question must be asked, did any of these draw independently from the Phaedo, or do the later texts merely repeat themes from the earlier texts? Although the exact relationship among these texts is uncertain, a few observations can be made. First, this portion of the Plzaedo, known independently as the Dialogue of the Soul, was well known to early Christians and met with considerable approval. Eusebius, for example, quotes the entirety of Phaedo 113a5-114c9 to prove that Plato held beliefs about the afterlife of the soul parallel to his reading of the Hebrew scripture^^^. Thus, the image of the Acherusian Lake
58 Orlandi, Paolo, 15, writes, 'In primo luogo I'accenno all'attraversamente della palude Acherusia (De Cella, 2), che rinvia probabilmente alla cultura "magica" dell'epoca, piuttosto che a fonti classiche'. Although Orlandi is certainly right that Paul of Tamma does not draw his reference to the Acherusian Lake directly from classical sources, it seems that Christian apocalyptic has a better case for being Paul of Tamma's source than 'la cultura "magica"'. 59 Eusebius, Praep. ell. 11.38. See also Clement, Srroni. 14; Amobius, 2.14, and Eusebius, Or. Const. 9.



could have entered the Christian apocrypha directly from the Phaedo and continued to be informed by the Phaedo, even as it started to develop primarily within the Christian tradition. Second, the only one of the Christian texts to maintain an interest both in individual repentance and the intercession of others is ApMos. This may suggest, as Peterson claims it does, that ApMos is the source for ApPt and A ~ P I ~This ' . would support the argument made by Himmelfarb that ApPt should not be seen so readily as the literary source of ApPI6'. Third, even if these texts choose to emphasise only one aspect of how the sinner anives in the Acherusian Lake, i.e. either through repentance or intercession, all of them maintain that only sinners are washed in the Acherusian Lake. ResJC breaks with this tradition and describes the washing of a righteous man in the lake. In ResJC, the disciple Thomas' son Siophanes dies. When he is raised from the dead by his father, he tells of his ascension into heaven, including his washing in the Achemsian Lake by Michael. Siophanes is not a sinner; on the contrary, he is called 'beloved' and 'blessed' by his father Thomas. Furthermore, when Siophanes comes to the river of fire prior to being washed in the Achemsian Lake, the former becomes like a river of water to him, implying that he is a worthy The Acherusian Lake is now for the righteous and not merely - or perhaps, not even - for the sinners.

2. Acherusian Lake, the Righteous, and Baptismal Cult

Also in ResJC, the Christian tradition of the Acherusian Lake has, for the first time, a true association with baptismal cult. Siophanes' acPeterson, 'Die "Taufe"', 320. Hirnmelfarb, Tours of Hell, 140-7, 169-71. h? Of a parallel nature, although not directly related, is the myth of underworld lakes and streams that prove whether or not an individual is innocent and chaste. Notably, the chastity test in the River Styx in Achilles Tatius' Cleitophon and Le~rcippeand Bardaisan's lake that rises if the accused is guilty and remains at knee-height if innocent. Cf. J.N. Brernmer, 'Achilles Tatius and Heliodorus in Christian East Syria', in H.L.J. Vanstiphout et al. (eds), All Those Nations... Cultural Encounters Within and With the Near East (Groningen, 1999) 21-29 at 21-23.

"' ''



count of his post-mortem adventure leads to the baptism of a large number of people63:
And when the crowd heard these things, they cast themselves upon their faces and worshipped him, saying, 'We beseech you, show us the place where the servant of Christ is [.. .]'. [...] And he took them to the place where the Apostle was. [...I And when the whole multitude had cried out these things, the Apostle blessed them, and he baptised (baptizein) twelve thousand men among them on that day. And he marked out for them the foundations of a church, and he appointed Siophanes the bishop of the church.

ResJC implies that those who want to experience Siophanes' fate including his heavenly baptism - must first be baptised on earth. The fact that both of these departures from the earlier tradition, the washing of a righteous soul in the Acherusian Lake and the explicit association with baptismal cult, occur in the same text strengthens the argument that the earlier texts are not concerned primarily with baptismal cult. It also implies that a connection between baptismal cult and the Acherusian Lake requires that righteous are washed in the lake. There is one final text in which the link between the Achemsian Lake and sinners is erased from the tradition, namely in the Ethiopic version of ApPt. In this version of ApPt, the righteous are baptised in the Achemsian Lake, not those whom they choose out of tormentM:
And then I will give my elect, my righteous, the baptism and salvation which they requested of me. In the field of Akerosya which is called Aneslasleya a portion of the righteous have flowered, and I will go there now. I will rejoice with them. I will lead the peoples into my eternal kingdom and I will make for them what I have promised them, that which is eternal, I and my heavenly Father.

In the Ethiopic ApPt, only the elect deserve baptism in the Acherusian Lake. By this stage in its history, ApPt rejected the idea that sinners could find a post-mortem release through the intercession of the martyr elect. In this version, 'baptism' in the Acherusian Lake
63 ResJC, fol. 20a-20b, ed. Budge, Coptic Apocrypha, 39-40 (trans. mine); Westerhoff's section 71, pp. 184-5. ApPt 14 E, trans. Buchholz, 345.



is more deeply related to baptismal cult since now it is the righteous who are baptised. This transformation was already beginning to take place in the Rainer fragment, which testifies to the intercession of the martyr elect only in James' reconstruction. No doubt, this passage owes its instability to the fact that the intercession of martyrs on behalf of others was a contested practice in the early churchh5. Thus, as the Ethiopic version of the ApPt demonstrates, ultimately baptismal cult was a far less controversial referent for the Acherusian Lake. We have come full circle, from the Rainer fragment of the ApPt to the Ethiopic version of the ApPt. In between, there are a number of images of the Acherusian Lake in various Christian sources. Although Plato's Socrates ends his tale with the caveat, 'Of course, no reasonable man ought to insist that the facts are exactly as I have described them'hh, the image of the Acherusian Lake in the Christian visions remains surprisingly close to his description. Despite the debt to the Phaedo and the remarkable stability of the theme over several centuries, the Acherusian Lake has been Christianised in a number of ways. First, it is linked to the washing of the dead, most easily seen in ApMos. Second, for the early Greek ApPt and SihOR, it has strong associations with the ability of the martyrs to forgive sins. Third, for ApPI and Paul of Tamma's Cell, it becomes an otherworldly rite marking the completion of penance. In the majority of the texts, washing in the Acherusian Lake is reserved for sinners. Only in ResJC and the Ethiopic version of ApPt, does the Acherusian Lake become a place for the baptism of the righteous, breaking completely from the Phaedo and assimilating to baptismal cult6'.

The abuse of the confessors' ability to forgive sins was scorned by Tertullian ( D e pud. 22, Ad ux. 2.4.1, Ad Mart. 1.6, De paen. 9.4, Scorp. 10.8) and Cyprian (Ep. 27.1, 15.4, 20.1). Plato, Pkaedo 114d, bans. H . Tredennick in E. Hamilton and H. Cairns (eds), The Collected Dialog~res o f Pluto (Princeton, 1961) 94. h7 I would like to thank Peter Brown, Martha Himmelfarb, Elaine Pagels, Jan Bremmer, Ra'anan Abusch, Annette Reed. and Mychal Rosenbaum for their comments and suggestions.



VIII. The Grotesque Body in the Apocalypse of Peter

'Didymon the flute-player, on being convicted of adultery, was hanged by his namesake.' This ancient Greek joke is quoted as an example of a chreia in Aelius Theon's Progymnasnzatal. It makes use of at least two correspondences. On the one hand, two different meanings of the word didymos are involved. First, it is the flute player's name, meaning 'a twin brother' (as with Jesus' disciple 'Thomas called D i d y m u ~ ' ) ~ the ; second half of the joke evokes the plural of the word in the meaning of testicle^'^. On the other hand, the fluteplayer's punishment corresponds to the sin that he committed. Beyond these primary and obvious sources of humor, the anecdote implies several other levels of meaning. For example, it can be interpreted in the framework of widespread associations of fluteplayers with gaietf. Our text adds an unexpected twist to the popular
Aelius Theon (1-2 centuries AD), Progymnasmata 99.2. The joke is also recorded (in different forms) by Diogenes Laertius, Lives of eminent pkilosoplzers 6.51 and 68. John 20.24. It was probably a slang expression, cf. R.F. Hock and E.N. O'Neil, The Chreia in Ancient Rhetoric I (Atlanta, 1986) 313. According to J. Neils, 'Others Within the Other: An Intimate Look at Hetairai and Maenads', in B. Cohen (ed), Not the Classical Ideal. Athens arid the Constrrtction of the Other in Greek Art (Leiden, 2000) 203-26 at 225, '[Aulos] was an instrument that produced bawdy music and deformed the face and so was not proper for free women, or even citizen men. Plato (Republic 399d) banned it from his ideal city, and according to Aristotle (Politics 1341), citizens could listen to it, but should not learn to play it for it was

image of flute-players: whereas in most literary references they appear as instruments or objects of ecstasy and lust5, the Didymon joke characterises its protagonist as the originator of sexual transgression. Thus the text confirms as well as generates prejudice. The point involved in the punishment itself, the comical position of hanging upside down from one's testicles, affects the listener in a different way. Whereas the puns and intertextual references generate satisfaction, the indication of the punishment brings about a certain ambivalent inconvenience, rather than relief. Although it can be seen as humorous, it is better called grotesque. The image of the human body evoked in the joke is abnormal, distorted, and disturbing6. The sorrowful fate of Didymon is not unparalleled in Jewish and Christian literature, where it normally belongs to the scenario of hell. In Jewish apocalypses, men and women are often hanged by their genitals or nipples7, whereas the Apocalypse o f Peter- (ApPt) uses the euphemistic expression 'hanged by the feet' (Ethiopic: thigh^')^. In
not considered a "moral" instrument'. For flute-players, see H. Stephanus et a/., Tl7esaurus Graecae Iittguae (Paris, 1805-71) S.V. aulPtCs; A. Forcellini et LII., Le,~ic017 totills Latinitatis (Padua, 1864-19264)), S.V. rihicen. Playing the auloi raised associations with fellatio, cf. R.F. Sutton, Jr., 'The Good, the Base, and the Ugly', in Cohen, Not tlze Classical Ideal, 180202 at 191. For a flute-playing young shepherd and satyr, see M. Pipili, 'Wearing an Other Hat: Workmen in Town and Country', in op. cit., 153-79 at 169; for flute-players raped by Tiberius, see Suetonius, Tiherius 44. For the origin of the concept of the grotesque, see A.K. Robertson, The Grotesque Interface (Vervuert, 1996) 1-14. The expression was coined from the Italian grotto in the fifteenth century when Nero's Domus Aurea was excavated in Rome. The walls of this palace were decorated with 'graceful fantasies, anatomical impossibilities, extraordinary excrescences, human heads and torsos' (10). In this article the term 'grotesque' is especially used to designate the combination of ludicrous and fearful, cf. op. cit., 6. For grotesque bodies in classical Greek art and comedy, see H.P. Foley, 'The Comic Body in Greek Art and Drama', in Cohen, Not the Classical Ideal, 275-311. Texts are quoted by S. Lieberman, 'On Sins and Their Punishment', in idem, Texts and Studies (New York, 1974) 29-51 at 33, 41-3, 47; M. Himmelfarb, Tours of Hell. An Apoclyptic Form in Jewish arzd Christian Literature (Philadelphia 1983) 82-92. V p P t 24 A, 7.7 E.




those sources, the punishment is meant dead earnest rather than humorous. Hanging by the genitals also appears as a punishment for adultery in the hell of Lucian's True Story. Cinyras, one of Lucian's travelling companions, abducts the wife of another member of the crew. The adulterer is whipped with mallow, bound by the genitals, and taken off to the abode of the wicked, where he is later seen 'wreathed in smoke and suspended by the testicle^'^. Comparing the occurrences of the same motif in Lucian's hell and the Jewish apocalypses confirms that whereas the former exploited the humorous aspects of grotesque body images, the latter used them to homfy the readers. Images of the grotesque body fill the infernal landscape of the ApPt. It has been argued that they usually follow the rule of retaliation: 'punishment fits the crime, like repays like'''. Many of the punishments have parallels in Greek and Jewish sources". They can also reflect the actual sufferings of Christians, or punishments used otherwise in the ancient worldI2. In this chapter we will pursue a literary analysis of the grotesque body in the ApPr, focusing on compositional structures as well as literary parallels, leaving the investigation of the historical context of torture to our contribution on the Visio Pauli in this series.

I . Sins and Puniskn~ents

The narrative frame, constituting the first major division of the extant text of the ApPt, is preserved in the Ethiopic text (E)". On the Mount
Lucian, True Story 2.25-26 and 31, trans. B.P. Reardon in idem (ed), Collected Ancient Greek Novels (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1989). Also quoted by R. Bauckham, The Fate o f the Dead. Studies on the Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (Leiden, 1998) 216. lo D. Fiensy, 'Lex talior~is in the Apocalypse of Peter', Hanlar-d Tlzeological Review 76 (1983) 255-8 at 256; cf. below. For Greek parallels see esp. A. Dieterich, Nekyia. Beitrdge zur Elllarung der rzeuerztdeckten Petrusapokalypse (Leipzig, 1893, 19132); A.E. Bernstein, The Formation of Hell (Ithaca and London, 1993). For Jewish parallels see Lieberman, 'On Sins' and Himmelfarb, Tours of Hell. l2 Cf. Liebennan, 'On Sins', 50-1 and Dieterich, Nehyia, 205. l3 In discussing the Ethiopic text, I use the English translations by

of Olives, the disciples approach Jesus and ask him to tell them about the signs of the last days and the end of the world. Most of Jesus' answer ( c c . 1-2 E) echoes eschatological passages from Mattlzew 2414. In the next part of the Ethiopic text ( c c . 3-6 E), Jesus shows Peter 'in his right hand ... and on the palm of his right' everything that shall be fulfilled on the last day: resurrection, Jesus' coming with glory on the clouds, and the final judgment. This is followed by the second main unit, dealing with sins and punishments, on which our article focuses. In this part of the book, the Ethiopic (cc. 7-13 E) and the Akhmim textI5 ( c c . 31-34 A) run basically in parallel, the Ethiopic version being somewhat longer. The third main unit deals with the fate of the righteous, resembling to a great extent the synoptic transfiguration scene16. This section is found at the end of the Ethiopic version (cc. 14-17 E), but it is placed before the description of hell in the Akhmim text ( c c . 1-20 A). After this quick overview of the extant parts of the book, let us look at the list of sins and punishments found in the ApPtI7: Sin Blaspheming the way of righteousness. (22 A; 7.1-2 E) Tuming away from righteousness. (23; 7.3-4) Women who beautified themselves for adultery. (24a; 7.5-6) Men who committed adultery with those women. (24b; 7.7-8) Murderers and their accessaries. (25; 7.9-11) Punishment Hanged from the tongue, fire. Pool of burning mud. Hanged from the hair over bubbling mud. Hanged from the legs, head in the mud, crying, 'We did not believe that we would come to this place'. Tormented by reptiles and insects, their victims watching them and

D.D.Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be Opened. A Study of the Greek (Ethiopic)

Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta, 1988) 162-244 and C.D.G. Miiller, NTA 11, 625-35. When not noted otherwise, I quote the latter. Cf. Bauckham, The Fate, 175-83. IS Text in E. Klostermann, Apocrypha I. Reste des Petrusevangeli~~n~s, der Petr-~rsapokalypse urid des Kerygnzata Petri (Bonn, 1908') 8-13. Ih Mark 9.2-13 and parallels. l 7 Cf. Buchholz, Your Eyes, 308-11; Bauckham, The Fate, 166-7.


Women who concieved children outside mamageI8 and procured abortion. (26; 8.1-4) Infanticide. (8.5-10 E)

Persecuting and giving over the righteous ones. (27; 9.1-2) Blaspheming and speaking ill of the way of righteousness. (28; 9.3) False witnesses. (29; 9.4) Those who trusted their riches, did not have mercy on the orphans and widows, and were ignorant of God's commandments. (30; 9.5-7) Lending money and taking interest on the interest. (31; 10.1) Men behaving like women, women having intercourse with each other. (32; 10.2-4)19 Those who made idols in place of God. (33a; 10.5-6) ? ? ? (33b A)20 Those who abandoned the ways of God. (34; 10.7) Those who did not obey their parents. (11.1-5 E)

saying, '0 God, righteous is thy judgment'. Sit in a pool of discharge and excrement, with eyes burned by flames coming from their children. Flash-eating animals come forth from the mothers' rotten milk and torment the parents. Sit in a dark place, burned waisthigh, tortured by evil spirits, innards eaten by worms. Biting one's lips, getting fiery rods in the eyes. Biting one's tongue, having burning flames in the mouth. Wearing rags and driven (dancing) on sharp and fiery stones.

Stand in a pool of blood, pus and bubbling mud. Endlessly throwing themselves into an abyss. Stand in a place filled with great fire. Man and women hitting each other with fiery rods. Burned, turned around and roasted. Slip down from a fiery place repeatedly2'. Hanged and tormented by flesh-eating birds.

l8 The Greek text is fragmentary; for different emendations, see Klostermann, Apocrypha, 11, notes. The Ethiopic has infanticide as a separate sin. Cf. Himmelfarb, Tours o f Hell, 96-7. l9 One of the Ethiopic manuscripts adds idolatry. Both Ethiopic mss. contain a remark on 'those who cut their flesh', cf. Buchholz, Your- Eyes, 212-5. For cultic tattooing and cutting in antiquity, see D.E. Aune, Re\~elation6-16 (Dallas, 1998) 465-9; W. Burkert, Ancient Mystery Cults (Cambridge, Mass., 1987) 81; and note 56 below. 20 This group is mentioned only in the Akhmim text. The sins are not specified. Cf. the punishment of the homosexuals above.



1 13

Maidens who did not retain their virginity until marriage. (11.6-7 E) Slaves who did not obey their masters. (11.8-9 E) Those who do charity and regard themselves righteous. (12.1-3 E) Sorcerers and sorcereresses. (12.4-7 E)

Their flesh is tom in pieces. Chewing their tongues, eternal fire. Blind and deaf pushing each other onto live coal. Wheel of fire.

First of all, we can discem that the punishments of the ApPt present a distorted picture of the whole body. The head is in the mud; hair is used to hang up women by it; eyes are burned; there is a bumirig flame in the mouth; people bite their tongues and are hanged up by it. Innards are eaten by worms; flames bum people waist-high; men are hanged up by their thighs (or by their genitals). Legs are also involved when the rich ones dance on sharp pebbles. The whole body is dressed in rags, roasted on flames, and often hanged upside down. These images can be compared to the appearance of the righteous (or 'Moses and Elijah'), where many of the body parts (hair, faces, shoulders, also clothing) are described as beautiful and harmonic. The beautiful bodies of the saints are contrasted with the distorted bodies of the condemned. The whole body is at the same time distracted. As the Ethiopic text writes of the fallen maidens: 'Their flesh will be tom in pieces'. In most cases, only certain parts of the body are tortured, which has been compared to the law of retribution (lex talionis) in the Torah2*. The famous principle of talion is read in Exodus 21: 'YOU are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, bum for bum, bruise for bruise'23. However, if we take a closer look Fiensy, 'Lex talionis', applies this rule as the main hermeneutical key to the text. The term les talionis originates from talis, 'such'. The principle of measure for measure punishment is known from the Ancient Near East as well as from Greece and Rome, yet it seems to have played the most important role in Jewish tradition, cf. Dieterich, Nekyia, 205-8; Lieberman, 'On Sins', 36 note 56, 47 note 106; Himmelfarb, Tours of Hell, 75-8; Bauckham, The Fate, 195-221. ' Esodus 21.23-25; cf. Genesis 9.6; Leviticus 24.20; De~lteronorny19.19. When not otherwise indicated, translations of Biblical books follow The Holy Bible. New Revised Standard Version (Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1989).
I '

at the tortures, we find that their order is similar to but not identical with the /ex talionis. The principle of measure for measure retribution is realised in its proper sense only in two cases in the ApPr: (1) the persecutors of Christianity are burned on fire and eaten by worms; (2) victims are watching their murderers' being eaten by reptiles and insects. Even in these passages some interpretation is required to clearly identify the principle of ta1ionz4. I suggest that the punishments of the ApPt rather follow a specific variation of the talion, a principle that is formulated in Jesus' advice in the Sermon on the Mount: 'If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of body than for your whole body to go into hell''? The concept behind this utterance is that certain crimes are committed by certain parts of the body. The idea occurs also in rabbinical Judaism: 'Those bodily members which commit transgression are punished in Gehenna more than the rest of the mernber~'~? In the hell of the ApPt, too, the members which committed specific sins are often punished rather than the whole body: blasphemy is attributed to the tongue and lips, false witness to the tongue and mouth, adultery to women's hair and men's genitals. In the Torah, the person as a whole is made responsible for his deeds, and pays with the body part he hurt in other persons. In Mattlle~l and the ApPt, individual members of the body get out of control, cause people sin, and therefore have to be punished.

2. The Grotesqzre Picture of Hell

The contrast between heaven and hell is particularly suggested by the head downward position of bodies. In the New Testament, Judas 'I

Bauckham, The Fare, 217-8, identifies the principle of talion in eleven punishments (out of a total of twenty-one). IS M n t t h e ~ 5.29-30. ~ ? v i e b e r m a n , 'On Sins', 39-40, translates Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg's quotation from an unknown midrash.



who evidently has a satanic character in the Lucan writings2' -, 'falls head downwards', 'his body bursts open', and 'all his intestines spill out' (Acts 1.18). Apart from that case, hanging head downwards is z not explicitly mentioned in the Bible g. It also appears as a punishment in the Acts o f Peter, where Peter is hanged on the cross head downward. There it is interpreted as the symbol of heavenly, rather than infernal, realities". In the ApPt, however, the upside down position of the body expresses the idea of hell as the realm of a negative reality. This is meant in the sense of 'being the opposite' rather than 'the place of non-being'. Whereas in Jewish Scriptures the nether world is populated by shadows in the stage of half- or non-existence30, in the ApPt the inhabitants of the hell are as active as they were in their existence of this world. The hell in our text is as real as the present world, being a grotesque variation of the latter. Ridiculing the rich and mighty of this world is also found in references to hell in Jewish Scriptures. The shadows of Sheol are mocking the king of Babylon at his arrival3':
You have also become weak, as we are; You have become like us. All your pomp has been brought down to the grave, along with the noise of your harps; maggots are spread out beneath you and worms cover you. [. . .] Is this the man who shook the earth, and made kingdoms tremble, the man who made the world desert, who overthrew its cities and would not let his captives go home?

Ridiculing the rich in the underworld is found also in Greek authors. Lucian dedicates a great part of his Menipplrs to describing the postCf. Luke 22.3, 'The Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot'. " f '. G. Bertram, art. b v n ~ a t ~ t ~ uin t nG. i , Kittel et a/. (eds), Tl~eologisckes Wiir-tetSuch xrnl Neuen Testat??et?t3 (Stuttgart, 1938) 915-20 at 916-8; Himmelfarb. TOLILY of Hell, 82-85. Acts o f Peter 38. Cf. J. Bolyki, 'Head Downwards', in J.N. Bremmer (ed), TIie Apoct-ypl~alActs of Peter (Leuven, 1998) 111-22. '" E.g. Job 10.21, 26.5; Psaln~s88.10, 94.17; Ecclesiastes 9.10; Isaiah 26.14; Ezekiel 32.21. Cf. T.J. Lewis, 'Abode of the Dead', in D.N. Freedman (ed), Tlfe Atichor Bible Dictionat:y 2 (New York, 1992) 101-5; J. Jarick. 'Questioning Sheol', in Stanley E. Porter et a/. (eds), Resurrection (Sheffield, 1999) 22-32; C. Houtman. 'Holle 11. Altes Testament', in RGG" 3 (Tiibingen, 2000) 1846-7. 31 Isaiall 14.10-1. 16-7.



mortem fate of the rich. When they die, Menippus reports after returning from Hades, Tyche takes back their costumes into which she dressed them in their earthly lives (cc. 12, 16). Later Menippus describes Hades as the opposite of earthly reality, a social utopia32:
But you would have laughed much more heartily, I think, if you had seen our kings and satraps reduced to poverty there, and either selling salt fish on account of their neediness, or teaching the alphabet, and getting abused and hit over the head by all comers, like the meanest of slaves. In fact, when I saw Philip of Macedon, I could not control my laughter. He was pointed out to me in a comer, cobbling worn-out sandals for pay. Many others, too, could be seen begging at the cross-roads - your Xerxeses, I mean, and Dariuses, Polycrateses.

Had early Christians been interested in such utopias, they could have created similar upside down underworld^^^. But the only approximate parallel we can quote here is the parable of the rich man and the beggar Lazarus in Luke's Gospel3". After both of them die, the beggar is carried to Abraham's bosom, whereas the rich man goes to the nether world and is tortured with fire. When he cries to Abraham, Abraham replies to him: 'Son remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things. But now he is comforted here, and you are in agony'35.One is reminded of this passage when reading about the unmerciful rich people in the ApPt, who enjoyed all luxury in their lives, but are condemned to wearing rags and being dragged on fiery pebbles in the nether world. The latter punishment is certainly grotesque, but not ridiculous in the same way as Lucian's underworld. Lucian depicts the rich in situations in which we find the poor in this world; Luke gives the rich man a 'stock' penalty, as it were; the ApPt, notwithstanding, creates a sophisticated and absurd punishment, where the rich actually continue what they
Lucian, Menippus 17, trans. A.M. Harmon in LCL. J. Perkins, The Suffering Self (London 1995) 132, 137, 141, interprets Peters' hanging head downwards in the Acts of Peter. as a symbol of social utopism. Cf. Bolyki, 'Head Downwards'; I. Czachesz, 'Who is Deviant?', in Bremmer, Acts of Peter, 84-96. 34 Luke 16.19-31 ; for the connection of this passage with the Jewish tradition of talion, see Himmelfarb, Tours of Hell, 79-80. For its Greek literary parallels, see Bauckham, The Fate, 97-1 18. 35 Luke 16.25


did in their earlier life. They neither beg nor do humiliating jobs, nor sit in mud or excrement. As a grotesque imitation of their earthly luxury and festivals, they wear filthy rags and dance on fiery stones36,eternally driven by demons and tormenting angels. The medieval 'dance of death' is anticipated in this picture. In the 'dance of death' or 'danse macabre', a series of characters representing members of different social classes and groups are shown dancing with a figure representing death3'. The 'dance of death' contains relentless criticism against all strata of society38. What the Greek authors and the Christian texts have in common is the sorrowful post mortem fate of the rich of this world. There are, however, major differences between the two kinds of texts. Lucian, on the one hand, selects well-known earthly rulers to display them in inferior situations. He does not condemn their earlier behaviour, and ridicules them without the slightest interest in moral issues, with the only purpose of raising laughter among his readership. What he displays is at most some lofty irony at the pride of the rich of this world. This is a social utopia with hardly any serious social considerations. The passages in Luke and the ApPt, on the other hand, do not picture any known persons in hell. They do not take an interest in the persons themselves, but rather in their moral qualities, especially as measured against the background of Jewish and Christian values. They display moral allegories in hell rather than real people: 'These are they who were rich and trusted in their riches ...' The same apThe passive of the Greek kuli6 has an active meaning: 'roll, whirl along', 'grovel' (of bees), 'roll about' (in pantomime), cf. Liddell-Scott, A Greek-E11glishLe.~icorlWith a Revised S~rppler~~etlt (Oxford 1996) S.V. The ApPt 34 uses strep116 for rotating people on fire. " Already Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1 153) pomays the 'death procession'; cf. L. Kurz, The Dance of Death arid the Macabre Spirit in Eliropean Literatrrre (New York, 1934) 11-2. The genre is especially widley attested in poetry and fine arts from the fourteenth century. Cf. H. Rosenfeld, Der Mittelalterliche Toterltar~z(Miinster and Cologne, 1954) 56-79; L. Silver, Middle Ages, vol 9 'Danse Macabre', in J.R. Strayer (ed), Dictionar?l of t l ~ e (New York, 1987) 93; M. Grams Thieme et a/., 'Totentanz', in N . Angermann et al., (eds), Le-vikor~ des Mittelalters, vol 8 (Munich, 1997) 898901 ; C. Vincent, 'Danse Macabre', in A. Vauchez et a / . (eds), Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages, vol I, trans. M. Lapidge (Cambridge, 2000) 407-8.

plies to all kinds of sinners mentioned: 'these were they who blasphemed the way', 'these were they who had adorned themselves for adultery', etc. Lucian uses flesh and blood figures of this world and places them into his fantastic landscapes. The hell of the ApPt is populated by moral allegories. Another grotesque notion about hell is that people are sitting in filth there. The idea that people sit in dirt in hell seems to be an archaic one. It has been compared with the purifying rituals of the mystery sinners are dirty and they remain eternally in dirt in the nether world. The general term used in such passages is 'mud' or 'filth' (horhor-os),but there is frequent reference to bodily materials and discharges: blood, sweat, pus, and excrement, the latter occuring especially frequently. In Aristophanes' Frogs, when Heracles prepares Dionysos to his tour of hell, he describes the infernal landscape to him4": Then you'll see lots of mud (bor-boros) and ever-flowing shit (sk8r);in it lies anyone who ever wronged a stranger, or snatched a boy's fee while screwing him etc. In a fragment, Aristophanes also writes of a 'river of diarrhoea' in the nether world4'. Lucian writes about three rivers: 'One of slime (horhoros), another of blood, and a third of fire'42. In the renaissance, the motif was picked up and elaborated on by Frangois Rabelais (c. 1494-1553)43. Rabelais predicts the fate of the sinful poet Raminagrobis in his novel: 'His soul goeth to thirty thousand carts full of devils. Would you know whither? Cocks-body, my friend, straight under Proserpina's close stool, to the very middle of the selfSee esp. J.M. Sola-Sole, 'Dan~a general de la muerte', in J.R. Strayer (ed), Dictionary of the Middle Ages, vol 9 (New York, 1987) 85-6. 39 See Dieterich, Nekyia, 72-3; Bremmer, this volume, Ch. I. Aristophanes, Frogs 145-8, trans. J. Henderson in LCL. J1 Aristophanes, Gervtades, fr. 146.13 Kassel-Austin. " Lucian, True Story 2.30. d3 M. Bakhtin, Rahelais and His World, trans. H . Iswolsky (Cambridge, Mass. 1968) 388, remarks that 'at the head of the medieval presentations of the underworld we must place the so-called 'Apocalypse of Peter'.'



same infernal pan, within which, she, by an excrementitious excuation, voideth the fecal stuff of her stinking clysters [.. In our contribution on the Acts of Andrew we have called attention to the particular interest of early Christian writings in various aspects of the human body'". We also highlighted parallels with the language and thought world of Aristophanes, Plautus, and RabelaisJ6. Topics related to the human body in the AAA include (1) the ideal of chastity, (2) mystical eroticism 7, (3) torture and bodily suffering (of the martyrs and the enemies of Christianity), (4) drastic humour, (5) the bodies of Jesus and the saints48.These subjects also appear in the ApPt, the most important being torture in hell and the beautiful bodies in heaven. In his comedies, Aristophanes frequently offers grotesque pictures of the human body and applies drastic humour related to metabolism ( ~ c a t o l o g y ) This ~ ~ . tradition was carried on by Plautus and the popular form of comedy, minzusS0.Rabelais in the Renaissance reached back to this heritage5'. The history of European literature provides us with a framework of drastic humour and grotesque images of the human body. The grotesque and scatological elements of early Christian literature certainly belong to this trajectory. Similarly to Aristophanes' spectators, the readers of the AAA were amused by scatological gags, in which the enemies of Christianity were ridiculed: chamber pots were emptied on their heads, and they were instantly struck by diarrhoea at the apostle's prayeg'. We should notice

F. Rabelais, Gargantua and Pantagruel 3.22, trans. Th. Urquhart and P. Motteux (Chicago, 1952) 171 ; cf. Bakhtin, Rahelais, 377. I. Czachesz, 'Whatever Goes into the Mouth', in J.N. Brernrner (ed), The Apocryphal Acts of Andrew (Leuven 2000) 56-69. 4h Czachesz, 'Whatever Goes into the Mouth', 61-4. . " E.g. Passion of Andrew 23. 4X E.g. Acts of Jokri 90; Acts of Tlzomas 80, 129, 149. '" For a detailed analysis, see J. Henderson, Tlze Maculate Muse. Obscene Larzg~ragein Attic Comedy (New Haven and London 1975) 187-203. K. DCr, Plautus vilhga (Budapest 1989); H . Wiernken, Der griechische Minl~rs.Dokurner~te zur Geschichte des arztiken Volkstheaters (Brernen 1972) 165-8. 5' Bakhtin, Rabelais, 457-543. " Acts of Peter 14; Passiorz of Andrew 13.

that getting dung in the face is known as a divine punishment also in the Old Testaments3; Luther also made use of scatology in his pamphlets against the popeS4. Excrement in the hells of Aristophanes and Rabelais induced laughter in the readers and spectators. But laughter was, at the same time, coupled with fear. The underworld was real: it could be ridiculed but not ignored. When we call these images 'grotesque' rather than 'ridiculous', we indicate that hell was comical as well as threatening. We have traced the grotesque, among others, in the upside down position of the body, the lower body parts, the distracted members, and the discharged fluids. Excrement is not infernal only because it is dirty or disgusting, but rather because it is the final product of the body. In other words, it belongs to the lower part of the bodily universe5s. Scatology is only one of the tools in the drastic repertoire of comedy. Although such language is not characteristic of the Bible, Paul can be caught on making an obscene joke at his enemies. In his epistle to the Galatians, arguing against the teachers who require that Christians be circumcised, he writes: 'As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate (apokopr6) themselves' (Galatiarzs 5.19)56.The joke also has a secondary edge, alluding to the false teachers' 'cutting in' (enkoptd) on the Galatians who 'were running a good race' (5.7). The sequence of puns and allusions is made up quite in the fashion of Aristophanes. In the same epistle Paul calls the Galatians his little children to whom he has given birth (4.19). In sum, Paul's claim on the Galatian church is expressed with the help of a series of sexual metaphors.
Malachi 2.3, ' I will rebuke your offspring, and spread dung on your faces, the dung of your offerings, and I will put you out of my presence'. On Luther's solicitation, Lukas Cranach, Jr. composed scatological etchings ridiculing the pope. Cf. D.M. Wulff, Psychology of Religion. Classic arzd Contemporary (New York and Chichester 1997) 390-1. 55 This connotation is indicated in Modem Greek, where esckatia can also mean 'excrement'. I thank L. Roig Lanzillotta for this remark. 56 Paul's pun may have been inspired by the famous self-castrating galloi (eunuch priests) in the Anatolian cult of Attis and Cybele; cf. Burkert, Ancient Myste~y Cults, 6 and 77-8.




The topics of castration and childbirth also occur in the ApPt. We have already discussed the former, which is evoked when men are hanged by the genitals. As for childbirth, we especially have to mention the place in hell for unmarried women who procured abortion. They are sitting in a pool of blood and fecal matter; their eyes are burned by the flames that come out of their children. This scene presents us with a riddle. Clement of Alexandria seems to refer to this passage three times in his Eclogues5'. His comments concentrate on the role of 'protecting angels' (te^melo~~choi angeloi), who bring up and nourish aborted foetuses and exposed children. Clement, however, does not reflect on the role of these children in the punishment of the parents58. In the ApPt, the foetuses are handled similarly as murdered victims (c. 25 A). They also watch the punishment of their murderers, but rather than praising God for his justice, they take an active part in torturing thems9. They resemble the tormenting angels and evil spirits active at other places of hell, and seem to be some kinds of demons or dwarfs. It seems that in early Christian literature only the ApPt assignes an active role to children in punishing their parents who committed abortion or infanticide, or exposed them. Many other texts mention that children accuse such parents while the latter are punished, but the children never (except in our passage) become instruments of the punishrnent60. Early medieval folklore traditions about Herlequin's army contain similar images. The earliest written source of this tradition is probably the Ecclesiastical History of Ordericus Vitalis (1075-ca. 1143), reporting the vision of a priest6' :

Clement of Alexandria, Eclogues 41,48,49; trans. R.P. Casey in idem, The Excapta e,u Tlwodoto of Clement of Alexandria (London, 1934). According to him, this is accomplished by the 'tiny flesh-eating beasts'
(tktr-ia lepta sar-kophaga) that come forth from the milk of the mothers. 59 In ApPt 8.5-10 (E) on infanticide, the victims are accusing their parents
but do not play an active role in their punishment. This is similar to the function of the murderers in c. 25 (A). For a survey of relevant passages, see Himmelfarb, Tours of Hell, 96101. h' Ordericus Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History 8.17. For text and translation, see M. Chibnall (ed. and trans.), The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic


A great crowd on foot appeared. [...] All lamented bitterly and urged each other to hurry. The priest recognized among them many of his neighbours who had recently died, and heard them bewailing the torments they suffered because of their sins. Next came a crowd of bearers. [...] They were carrying about five hundred biers, two men to each bier. On the biers sat men as small as dowarfs, but with huge heads like barrels. One enonnous tree-trunk was borne by two Ethiopians, and on the trunk some wretch, tightly trussed, was suffering tortures, screaming aloud in his dreadful agony. A fearful demon sitting on the same trunk was mercilessly goading his back and loins with red-hot spurs while he streamed with blood. Walchelin at once recognized him as the slayer of the priest Stephen, and realized that he was suffering unbearable torments for his guilt in shedding innocent blood not two years earlier, for he had died without completing his penance for this temble crime. Next came a troop of women, who seemed to the priest to be without number, riding in women's fashion on side-saddles which were studded with burning nails. Caught by gusts of wind they would rise as much as a cubit from the saddle, and then fall back on the sharp points. S o their buttocks were wounded by the red-hot nails, and as they suffered torments from the stabs and burning they cried out, 'Woe, woe', loudly bewailing the sins for which they endured such punishment. Indeed it was for the seductions and obscene delights in which they had wallowed without restraint on earth that they now endured the fire and stench and other agonies too many to enumerate.

The procession is closed by great troops of priests and knights, among whom Walchelin identifies a number of notable persons. 'Human judgment', he comments, 'is often in error, but nothing is hidden from ~ o d ' s sight. For men judge from outward appearances; God looks into the heart.' The tradition quoted by Ordericus Vitalis focuses on the same basic idea as the description of hell in the ApPt (and the Apocalypse of Paul): both provide a list of sins and punishments. The ApPt seemingly offers a topography of hell, but in reality it only contains a plain list without relating the different places (or sins) to each other. The account of Herlequin's army describes a few sins and punishments in detail. However it takes more interest in the groups and persons who suffer punishments in hell. Through the eyes of Walchelin,
Vitalis, vol 4 (Oxford 1973) 239-49. Chibnall, ibidem, xxxviii-xxxxix, calls the tradition 'of great antiquity and widespread occurrence'.

it describes typical social groups of the time and mentions several known figures by name. This feature of the text reminds us of Lucian's Menippus 11-18. The grotesque but at the same time very earnest report of sins and punishments cames on the tradition of the ApPt. The most grotesque part of Walchelin's vision is the image of women on horseback6" The description of their riding contains overtly obsence references. The tiny beings with large heads on the coffins are not explicitly identified as aborted foetuses. They are obviously associated with the fearful torturers, although do not play a role in enacting the punishments. If we add the women's position in the army immediately after the murderer on the gibbet, we cannot exclude that Walchelin's vision, similarly to the ApPt, refers to abortion. In the ApPt, the children are members of the infernal court, sharing the job of the tormenting angels and evil spirits. They are mixtures of birth and death, unborn and still alive, eternally torturing their own mothers. The women are sitting in blood and excrement up to their necks. Is this a distorted image of child-birth, symbolising abortion as the birth of death? Below we will argue that the representation of women and aborted children is the central image of the infernal landscape in the ApPt.

3 . Pregnailt Death
In order to understand the infernal imagery of the ApPt we have to look at the introductory parts contained in the Ethiopic text. Let us begin with the parables of the fig tree. The text combines two different sayings on the fig tree by Jesus. According to the first saying, as the sprouting of the fig tree marks the coming of the summer, so the events depicted by Jesus mark the coming of the last days6'. The second saying is about the man who wants to cut out his barren fig tree, but his servant asks him to leave it there for one more year". In ApPt


Cf. Bakhtin, Rabelais, 392. Matthew 24.32-6; Mark 13.28-9; Luke 21.29-3 1 . Luke 13.6-8.

2 (E), the sprouting of the fig tree is the sign of the last days, whereas the second parable is only introduced to interpret the first one so that the fig tree would refer to Israel. This is the conclusion concerning the last days (2.11 E):
Then shall the boughs of the fig-tree, i.e. the house of Israel, sprout, and there shall be many martyrs by his hand: they shall be killed and become martyrs.

The interesting outcome of the fig tree passages is that in the last days there will be a mixture of birth and death. The house of Israel will bring sprouts but will immediately kill them. In the last days, Israel will give birth to martyrs. Or, using the pivotal image of the ApPr, Israel will be like a woman procuring abortion. In the next section, everyone, including the righteous, the angels, and Jesus, weep when they see the distress and sorrow of the sinners. Peter quotes a saying of Jesus from the New Testament: 'It were better for them that they had not been created'". But Jesus refutes him (3.5-6 E): 'Thou resistest God. [. ..] For he has created them and has brought them forth when they were not'. Creation is good and necessary, the text argues, even if it falls into sin, death and suffering. The next passage also deals with birth and death. It describes the resurrection to judgment, also mentioned in Revelation, when God will 'command hell to open its bars of steel and to give up all that is in it'. All the beasts and fowls shall be commanded to give back all flesh that they devoured. The prophecy of Ezekiel on the revivification of the bones is quoted, and then the picture of the corn sown in the earth66:
As something dry and without a soul does a man sow (them) in the earth; and they live again, bear fruit, and the earth gives (them) back again as a pledge entrusted to it. And this which dies, which is sown as seed in the earth and shall become alive and be restored to life. is man.

We should notice that it is not only the righteous to whom this metaphor applies. On the day of judgment there will be a birth of all peo65

ApPr 3.4b E ; cf. Mark 14.21. The New Testament passage has 'be born'

instead of 'be created'. ApPt 4.10-1 E ; cf. I Corinrhia17s15.35-49.

ple from the nether world. In Revelation 21.14-15, sinners are thrown into the lake of fire, together with Hades and death. The ApPr does not know such a radical solution. Envisaging sinners in the different areas of Hades is much more spectacular than simply throwing all evil into a trash can. Thereby hell retains its ambiguous and transient nature. It remains in motion eternally, populated with damned souls, demons, and tormenting angels, who live their lives in this upside down world. Hell also retains its ambivalent function of birth and death. It appears as a huge Gargantuan belly, where people are smoked and roasted, all different kinds of bodily fluids are flowing constantly here and there, fire completes the digestion, and excrement is produced in huge masses. Passages by Lucian and Rabelais contain similar allusions to the nether world. Lucian in his True Story (1.30-2.2) narrates his adventure in the belly of a whale before visiting the islands of the saved and the condemned. The group spends more than a year and a half in the whale (1.39). The innards of the whale are populated by the citystates of different grotesque creatures: smoked people with eel-eyes and crab-faces, tritons with the lower bodies of sword-fishes, crabhanded, tunny-headed and other strange figures (1.34). Two humans, father and son, have lived for twenty-seven years in this world. The association with the nether world is made explicit when the two men say they 'feel they have died but still believe to live'67. Their hope is fulfilled in the end: after defeating the army of the infernal creatures and killing the whale, Lucian and his associates get out to the sunlight. In Rabelais' novel the narrator descends into Pantagruel's mouth and throat6x. There he finds great rocks (the teeth), fair meadows, large forests, great and strong cities. The history of the latter he writes in a book. This is a 'new world', which is in fact more ancient than the earth out there. He meets people who hunt pigeons coming from the nether world. Dangerous fumes break up from the depth Lucian, True Story 1.33, tethr7anai men gar eikazomen. ~$17 de pisteriomen. '' Rabelais, Gargantlra and Panta~ruel2.32.


that is, from Pantagruel's stomach - and kill more than twenty-two thousand citizens. The narrator does not intrude further into the hero's body. But the mouth and throat, which he visits, are evidently characterised as the entrance of the u n d e r ~ o r l d ~ ~ . We have seen that the ApPr also associates hell with a huge belly, swallowing and digesting people, but also giving them back in the last days at God's command. The fearful and the grotesque walk hand in hand in the description of hell. Death is a strange carnival, an upside-down universe, where earthly life continues in unexpected ways. The imagery of hell is based on the vision of the distorted, dismembered and oversize human body or body-parts. Instead of the allconsuming lake of fire in Revelation, the ApPr envisages everlasting hell as a complex structure, a grotesque and sensual synthesis of birth and death.

According to E. Auerbach, Minzesis. Tlze Representation of Reality in Western Literature, trans. W . Trask (New York, 1957) 233-5, Rabelais used Lucian, but notwithstanding Lucian's fabulous creatures, Rabelais depicted a familiar world, 'everything just as home'.


IX. Does Punishment Reward the Righteous? The Justice Pattern Underlying the Apocalypse of Peter

In a famous part of his Zur Genealogie der Moral Nietzsche criticised Dante's naivety in writing the inscription 'auch mich schuf der ewige Liebe' above the entrance of his inferno'. According to him, the motto 'auch mich schuf der ewige Hass' above the gateway to the Christian Paradise might have been much more fitting to describe the retaliatory morals of Christianity. The statement by Thomas Aquinas2
A rather free translation of Irlfer-no III.5-6, 'fecemi la divina potestade, / la somma sapienza e '1 primo amore'. See Zur- Ger~ealogie der- Mor-a11.15. Aquinas' statement in Sumn~a Tl~eologica,Suppl. 94.1 (similarly in Sentent. IV, 50.2.4) is surprising. Firstly, he does not seem to be at all concerned by the fact that if the other's suffering is necessary to complete it, the bliss of the blessed cannot be perfect. Perfection is complete in itself without the need of external stimuli to improve it. Secondly, it is also surprising that he is not even made uneasy by the idea that rejoicing at the suffering of others might diminish this perfection. The only reference to the issue is an indirect one, since it appears in his second objection and is, actually, related to the perfection of vision. He states, indeed, that since Aristotle (EN X.4) affirms that the perfection of vision depends on the perfection of the visible object, it might seem odd to assume that the perfection of the blessed can be affected by the extreme deformity of the suffering of the damned. His solution to this objection is far from convincing. He begins by stating that 'Nothing should be denied the blessed that belongs to the perfection of their



that the torment of the damned will enhance the happiness of the blessed in heaven and the mockery at the gruesome suffering of the pagan on the day of the Last Judgement imagined by Tertullian (De spectac. 30) illustrate, in his view, the continuity of a mode of thinking already present in Revelation3. Although Nietzsche's polemical analysis of Christian morals and his interpretation of Christian love as arising from 're~sentiment'~ have been challenged in several important works during the past century5, none of them has objected to his premises. Nietzsche's sharp criticism of the misanthropic psychological background of Tertullian's and Aquinas' utterances indeed holds true. If the idea of righteousness or bliss is not based on any objective notion but on a compensatory inversion of the present situation of injustice and despair, it is dangerously apt to take the form of a triumphant elevation over the suffering of others6. beatitude' and proceeds to argue that '...everything is known the more for being compared with its contrary, because when contraries are placed beside one another they become more conspicuous'. However, the function of comparison as a basis for knowledge is only valid for imperfect mortals who, as such, must base their understanding on always partial perceptions. Given that the blessed have already achieved their perfection, comparison is likely to be unnecessary, since complete understanding of everything in one single act of apprehension is inherent to perfect knowledge. See Bayle's opinion, note 55 below. Nietzsche, Zur Gerlealogie der- Moral I. 15-6. For Nietzsche's conception of 'ressentiment' see W. Kaufmann, Nietische. Philosopher. Psyckologist. Antichrist (Princeton, 1974" 371-8. See, for example, M. Scheler, 'Das Ressentiment im Aufbau der Moralen', in Vonl Umst~irzder Werte = Gesanlrnelte Werke 3 (Munich, 19725)33-147 at 70ff, esp. 75; M. Weber, Wirtschaf? urld Gesellsclzalfr.Die Wirtschafr und die gesellschaftlichen Ord~~urzgeri und Mackte 2 (Tiibingen, 2001) 257ff, 263ff; cf. A. Camus, L'homme re'11olte'(Paris, 1951) 23-36, 503. All three works reject, on solid grounds, Nietzsche's interpretation of Christian love as arising from 'ressentiment', but accept his discovery that 'ressentiment' can be a source of moral value-judgements. See Kaufmann, Nietische, 275. In situations of injustice or suffering accompanied by the feeling of incapacity to overcome by other means what he positively experiences as injustice, the suffering individual comforts himself with the imaginary and future inversion of the current situation, in



As a matter of fact, the relevance of the issue restated by Nietzsche goes far beyond the strict borders of Christianity. Pleasure at the other's misfortune has indeed been a central problem in ancient (and modem) Western culture and seems to be characteristic of societies with a competitive structure. As the individual's social and selfesteem are not pre-established but are largely dependent on his own skills in acquiring status tokens, in the long run comparative value tends to replace intrinsic value. In such an axiological context, objects are no longer valued according to an autonomous scale of values that measures the relationship between the individual's expectations and achievements. Rather they are valued according to a heteronomous and social scale of values that measures not the value of the object in itself but what it represents for the social whole. Even if deceitful, since the other's desires cannot be our own desires, such a value structure reveals itself as positive insofar as it responds to social dynamism and this in turn redounds to cultural change and development. However, it also has negative sides. Once started, the inertia of comparative evaluations is difficult, if not impossible, to stop. As individuals are used to valuing both objects and themselves on the basis of comparative processes, they are apt to extend these comparative criteria to domains where their application is rather questionable. The evaluation of the happiness or misfortune of others is one of these domains. Blinded by their comparative D l w ~ g and , obsessed with preserving and improving their status, individuals are likely to perceive the bliss or despair of others as obstacles in their quest for social (and self-) esteem. Envy and Schadenfreude are the concomitant effects of such a misanthropic evaluation of reality in which individuals experience the life of others as an obstacle to, or as an implement for, their self-realisation. Human joy or pain, qua joy and pain, no longer count, since they are valued not intrinsically but comparatively. The other's joy diminishes our own joy and gives us pain; the other's pain in turn gives us joy7. Such is the psychological structure criticised by Nietzsche. which his wrongdoers become the victims and he in turn contemplates their suffering. ' For a thorough analysis both of this evaluative structure and its psychological implications, see D. Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature, 2.2.8-9.



Although all Nietzsche's critics adhere to his reproving of this deceitful value-structure, they all exclusively comment on Tertullian's morbid malice, as though his case was exceptionalR. Such compensatory pleasure at the other's misfortune, however, is not as isolated as some might think. One of the most obvious examples of a compensatory kind of justice, the Lazarus parable, appears already in the New Testament9, and there are also enough references documenting its presence both in patristic texts and in later medieval theologianslO.In the same tenor as Tertullian and Aquinas, all these passages insist that the punishment of the damned is offered as a spectacle to the blessed either as a compensation for their sufferings on earth or as a means to fully understand both God's justice and their own bliss".
Tertullian is the favourite scapegoat for those who comment on the issue. See, for example. Scheler, Das Ressentiment, 57-8 and note; Camus, L'Homme, 30-1. Furthermore, Thomas Burnet, De statu mortuorum & resurger~tiumtractatits (London, 1733) 307, quoted by D.P. Walker, The Decline of Hell (London, 1964) 30. As Tertullian offers the most exaggerated and aggressive version of the idea, and as his personality presents enough pathological traits, commentators seem to consider him a rather exceptional case of hatred and impotence. Scheler even takes Tertullian's case as the most obvious example of one of his categories of resentful types ('the apostate', see Scheler, Das Resser~timent,57ff). Lk 16.19-31. The inconsistency of the justice pattern defended by this parable is obvious from the fact that the attitude of the rich man in the afterlife seems to be morally superior to that of Lazarus. Indeed, his concerns regarding the future of his brothers seem to contradict the orthodox view, according to which the damned are irrecoverable. The problem did not escape the attention of Bonaventure and Aquinas, who attempted an explanation of this peculiarity: the rich man actually desired everyone's condemnation, but knowing that this was not possible, he wanted his brothers to be saved rather than anyone else. However, as Leibniz, Tli6odicPe 111, 154, pointed out, the argument is rather weak. See Walker, The Decline, 34. lo See G. Bardy, 'Les Pkres de 1'~glise en face des problkmes poses par l'enfer', in M. Carrouges et a/., L'Etfer (Paris, 1950) 152-3; Walker, The Decline, 29-32; W.J.P. Boyd, 'Apocalyptic and Life after Death', Studia Evangelica 5 (1968) 39-56 at 50-6; R. Joly, CI11.istianisrne et Philosophie. t tildes s11r Justin et les Apologistes grecs dii deu.~i?me siecle (Bmssels, 1972) 171-82. " Cyprian, Ad Denletr. 30.2; Tertullian, De spectac. 10; John Chrysosto-



The obvious conclusion for all these authorities is, therefore, that this spectacle cannot but produce pleasure. That the idea is not restricted to the Middle Ages is further supported by the testimony of similar utterances in B e l l m i n e , Francis de Sales, and even Pascali2. Now the question arises whether apocalyptic literature, by contrasting the sinners' despair with the bliss of the righteous, pursues the spectacle of the other's suffering as a means of providing a similar compensatory or vindictive kind of justice. This goal is indeed explicitly or implicitly presupposed by numerous texts and it has been suggested that the idea originates in the context of oppression due to persecutions suffered by the Jews in the last two centuries BCI3. The theme, however, also appears in later Christian apocalyptic texts, in which case the Sitz i m Lehen can hardly be adduced to explain its appearanceIJ. Moreover, the emergence of vengeance desires in a Christian context is rather peculiar, since they seem to contradict the principle of neighbourly loveI5, which sought to supersede the anthropological dualism that in antiquity ruled the individual's relationship with the other. The aim of this paper is to consider the position adopted by the original Apoca/ypse of Peter. (ApPt) with regard to these issues. Is the reversal of fortune displayed by ApPt a simple compensatory inver-

mos, In 2 Cor. (PC 61, 471.49ff); Jerome, Hotn. in LC 16.26; Augustine, Civ. Dei 22.22; Enchr-. 94.24; Gregory the Great, Hom. 40.291-301 (CCSL 161, 405); Petrus Lombardus, Sent. IV, 50.7 (PL 192.962). '? Bellmine, De aeterna felicitate Sanctor~im IV.2; Francis de Sales, De I'amour- de Dieu IX.8; Pascal, Provinciales IX. l3 1 Enoclz 108.14-5; Juh 23.30; 4 Ezra 7.36-8; ApAb 31.4; TestMos 10.10; ApEli 5.27-8; cf. Boyd, 'Apocalyptic', 44. IJ The most obvious example appears in the Arabic Apocalypse of Peter, a rather late text without any connection with the Apocalypse of Peter. See A. Mingana, Apocalypse of Peter-, Woodhroke Studies 312 (Cambridge, 1931) 141: 'Who avoid the sins of the body and shine with the qualities of heart I mean the priests and deacons, who fear me and keep my commandments I have prepared for them gorgeous garments and diadems, and I will place them in the mansions of heaven which overlook the sufferings of the abyss, in order to double in that day their joy and their pleasures'. l5 See Mt 5.38ff.



sion of the injustice experienced by its writer and its intended readership? Or is it rather an effect of the triumph of justice, which, substituting an unjust system for a just one, extends punishment and reward to sinners and the righteous? Within this scope, the first section evaluates the psychological impact of this reversal on the reader in order to determine whether it is reactive or not. Attention is consequently paid to the question of whether the value system of the reader is so intrinsically mixed with what he reads that a compensatory inversion is strictly necessary in order for him to reorganise his own values and self-esteem. The second section analyses the notion of justice underlying ApPt on the basis of the emotional responses to the other's suffering appearing in the text. The third section, finally, attempts an explanation of the varying attitudes to the other's suffering attested in different versions of ApPt.

I. Is the Revel.sal of For-tunes Necessarily Reactive?

One of the most profound analyses of the individual's response to the 'spectacle' of the other's misfortune handed down from antiquity is without doubt the Platonic analysis of the pleasure provided by the comedy in the Pi~ilebus'~. For our present study the interest in Plato's approach arises from the fact that, in analysing the spectator's responses to what he sees on stage, he transcends the mere representation searching for an explanation in his vital experience. From the point of view of the individual's emotional responses, the line separating fiction from fact seems to be rather irrelevant. Accordingly, the effect of the reversal of fortune ( m p ~ n i r ~ tdisplayed a) by the plot of comedy on the psyche of the spectator is strongly determined by the same evaluative structure that governs his daily life. His evaluation of the hero's misfortune is intrinsically mixed with his own experience, namely with his self-esteem, with his fears' and expectations''.
Plato, Phlh. 48a ff. For an analysis of the section see M. Migliori, L'Uon~o,fia piacere, irttelligellza e Bene. Cornn~e~ltario storico-filosofico a1 'Fileho' di PIatol7e (Milano, 1993) 249-56. " As has been pointed out by H.G. Gadamer, PIatos dialektische Ethik. Phanonienologische Illterpretationen zlrm Philehos (Hamburg, 1983 [I93 11)



This approach determines Plato's condemnation of the pleasure provided by the ridiculous (zb yehoiov). In his view, this pleasure is clearly malicious, for our soul experiences a peculiar mixture of pleasure and pain when laughing at the misfortune of others. The idea behind such a statement seems to be that, as individuals establish their values on the basis of comparative processes, their emotional responses are inversely proportional to the fortune of others. Due to the competitive spirit that dominates his idea about his neighbour, the individual's subjective evaluation of the suffering of others transforms into pleasure what, from an objective point of view, is clearly evil. Whereas, considered in itself, the pain of others cannot but produce distress, when compared with our own situation it enhances our happiness. This psychological structure explains why at the scenic representation and at the 'tragedy and comedy of life' (Phlh. 50b) the individual I-e-acts by envying the other's fortune and rejoicing at his suffering. This latter statement implies that the pleasure of the ridiculous, namely the pleasure at the suffering of others, is necessary in order to remove the pain that their apparent happiness had arousedIR. Is it possible to establish a parallel between the emotional responses aroused in the spectator by the plot of comedy and those experienced by the reader of ApPt? Is the system of values of the reader so involved in the reversal as it is in the case of the spectator of the comic n e p ~ n k ~ ~A ta comparison ? of both genres will help us in establishing similarities and differences.
1.1. Similarities Between the Scope of Comic nsptxkzsta and the Reversal of Fortune in ApPt

The moral educational purpose of apocalyptic literature seems to be evident from its subjects, its characters, and its scenarios. The oppo150, the Platonic analysis is certainly pertinent to the question of the aesthetics of the comic, but his paramount importance arises from his subtle understanding of the individual's attitude to the circumstances of others. IR See R. Hackforth, Pluto 's Exan7ination of Pleuslu-e (Cambridge, 1945) 93. Furthermore G. Papini, 'I1 significato del riso', in Fornie del essistere. Tlrtte le opere di Giovarzno Papirli 7: Prose morali (Verona, 1959) 978-82 at 978.



sition between good and evil, and their consequent reward or punishment, seems to be its most visible goal. An Bya005 or 'righteous individual', with whom the readerhistener identifies himself, is acquainted, thanks to a divine figure (in ApPt, Jesus), with the future of humankind, the description of which mostly focuses on the impending suffering and punishment of a mean character. The scenario of the Last Judgement in ApPt displays before the eyes of the righteous a complete inversion of the unjust state of things according to a system of values implicitly defended by the text. Despite the apparent advantages and success of the wicked, and the visible disadvantages of the righteous, ultimately reward and punishment bring about the moral triumph of the latter. The eventual fall of the unrighteous brings to order the preceding chaos of an inverted system of values by means of appropriate retribution for their injustice. A fake &yaeo<,actually a true K ~ K o ~ is, brought , down to his real condition. In comedy, as Plato envisages it in the Philebus, we see the development of a mean character who, due to Gyvota or 'ignorance', overvalues himself at the beginning of the playI9. Even if during the representation the spectator becomes aware of the ignorance that causes the hero's over-evaluation, not so the hero who persists in his error. At the end of the play, however, his fall returns the hero to his proper place in the current scale of values. In his xeptxkrsta, his position moves from extreme happiness to its opposite, disgrace. Although at the beginning of the play the spectator feels momentarily brought down to an inferior position, at the end, and thanks to the inversion, he occupies a superior one. His feelings consequently move in an inverse direction to those of the protagonist, going from the extreme of (p06vog or 'envy' of the threatening superior position to the opposite malicious pleasure of seeing this danger disappear. Although for Plato this pleasure is just another aspect of envy, in Aristotelian terminology h ' t t ~ C Z t p & ~ is~ the ~ i aterm used to name this ,emotional response, namely 'the pleasure of seeing the destruction of that which had aroused envy'20.
See W. Szilazi, Macltt und Oknmacht des Geistes (Bern, 1946) 94. Furthermore, M. Mader, Das Problem des Lachens und der Komodie bei Platon (Stuttgart, 1977). 'O Aristotle, Rh. 1386b34-1387a2. The Platonic analysis received definil9



Different though they may be, we must admit, at a general level, certain parallels in the nature of the apocalyptic and the comic. The obvious reversal in the positions occupied by spectatorlreader and protagonist in the current system of values in both genres brings them close to each other. Both in comedy and in apocalyptic literature, spectator and reader represent the normative value in the displayed value systems, this standard measure being the touchstone for correct behaviour. Consequently, the original arrogance due to Piyvota, which characterises both the fallen hero of comedy and the punished sinner of apocalyptic literature, is corrected eventually through the knowledge they acquire by their suffering.

1.2. Differences Between Comic 7csptxkr~ta and the Reversal of Fortune in ApPr
However, once these general parallels have been established, we must refine the analysis, focusing on the relationship between the displayed value system and that of the society in which the spectator/ reader lives. This issue is essential, for the spectator's frame of reference is what determines his evaluation of the reversal and the psychological impact it may have on him. A closer analysis from this point of view reveals certain differences concerning the degree of involvement of the spectator/reader in the development of the plot. cp6po5 exploited by the plot of To begin with, the nat6t~bq or 'unreal' in apocalyptic literature. Comcomedy is not as natFt~65 edy recreates, within a stable value system, the whole development of a character from his original arrogance to his ultimate fall. The fall or tive support from the Aristotelian statement that ET~IxCII~EKCIK~CI 'Schadenfreude' (together with aioxvvria or 'shamelessness' and cpO6voq or 'envy'), unlike other affections, do not admit a mean (EN 1107a8 ff). Ever since, the condemnation of 'Schadenfreude' has been unanimous, not only among pagan writers (Plautus, Stichus 207ff; Cicero, TD 4.20; Horace, Sat. 1.4.78-9; Seneca, De ir.a 3.5.5; Plutarch, De Herod. malign. 15, p. 858; Epictetus, Diatr.. 2.16.45; Alcinous, Didasc. 32.4) but also among Christian authors such as Jerome (see P. Antin, 'Textes de S. JerBme [et d'autres] sur la joie du malheur d'autrui', Vigiliae Ckristianae 18 [I9641 51-6; cf., however, Joly, Christianisn~e, 175 and note 10 above); Ambrose, In Luc. 8.14 and Augustine, Etiar. in Ps. 96.1 1, In Ps. 108.20.



of the comic hero restates the legitimacy of the current system of values, since the discrepancy between his self-esteem and his real personal value is corrected on the basis of the normative value that proceeds from the very same system of values. Ln this sense comedy can be described as conservative2', since it purports and protects the status quo with regard to values. In the case of apocalyptic literature, however, the day of the Last Judgement describes the fall of a real danger, namely the fall of the transgressors of God's law, persecutors and oppressors. This fall of the unrighteous implies the superseding of the unjust current system of values by a righteous one. Apocalyptic literature might, from this perspective, be called revolutionary, since it suggests a radically different system of values based on a new normative value. The intrinsic differences are easy to perceive. Concerning values, comedy defends the current system denouncing the futility of those who pretend to surpass the 'golden mean' with which the spectator identifies himself and on which his social universe is based. Apocalyptic literature, on the other hand, denounces the injustice of the current system of values, aiming at its substitution by an ideally righteous one. Concerning the implication of the spectatorlreader, comedy is complete in itself. It represents a situation familiar to the spectator from his daily experience and, accordingly, he only has to place himself in effiigie in the action. His position does not change from beginning to end and it is precisely this apathy that explains his need of the other's suffering. By contrast, in apocalyptic writing, the reader is directly involved in the action. The 7csp17c6~~1a displayed in the text is the imaginary inversion of the current situation of injustice; it is the desired reversal of a perverted system of values that will make possible not only the punishment of the unrighteous but also the proper acknowledgement of the reader's own value. Consequently, it is not the reversal itself that is malicious, but rather its objective. In comedy the correction of the overvaluation is not satisfying enough, because the ultimate goal is not an attack on the system of values but rather on the very arrogant individual. The


J. Ortega y Gasset, Meditaciones del Qlrijote (Madrid, 1981 [1914]) 111-5 at 114.



malicious laugh of the spectator is strictly necessary in order for him to remove the pain produced by the apparent superiority of the hero. Similarly, Tertullian imagines his mockery at the pagans' suffering together with the reintroduction of Justice in the Last judgement. It must be noted, however, that in the latter case, his malicious mockery seems to compromise the justice he is claiming. By revengefully (or pleasantly) laughing at the suffering of others, the individual actually gives his assent to the injustice he is apparently denouncing and simply implies an inversion of roles between wrongdoers and victims. In apocalyptic texts, however, the case seems to be different, since it is the injustice of the current system that is questioned. In the case of ApPt, therefore, the main goal of the reversal may not be the unrighteous suffering individual, but rather the injustice of the world in which righteous and unrighteous live. Naturally, the substitution of a perverted system by a righteous one implies reward for the former and punishment for the latter; but these might be simple effects concomitant with the restitution of justice.

2. The Concept of Justice Underlying ApPt

It seems obvious that before proceeding to state or reject pleasure at the other's suffering as a constituent moment of ApPt's concept of justice we must consider the ideal righteous system the text implies. In order to do so I will focus on the emotional responses of those who witness the punishments. As the seers represent the community of the righteous protected by God's justice, the reader necessarily identifies himself with them and consequently their reactions are equal to his reactions.
2.1. Emotional Responses to the Other's Suffering

ApPt pays special attention to the spectators' responses to the suffering of the wicked. In ApPt 3 ED, the righteous, the angels and Jesus


References follow D.D. Buchholz, Yoiir- Eyes Will Be Opened. A Study o f the GI-eek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter- (Atlanta, 1988). English translations follow Buchholz's free translation.



see the punishment of the damned. In 7.10 victims of murder view the punishment of murderers; in 8.3-4 aborted children not only witness but also participate in the chastisement of their parents and, similarly, in 8.5-7, victims of infanticide take part in the prosecution. Furthermore, in ApPt 11.4 E, children and virgins see the chastisement of sins committed by children and, finally, in a somewhat different tone, 13.2 states that the righteous will see the torture of the damned. Strikingly, however, the attitude of the spectators is far from being unanimous. On the basis of their responses two groups may be distinguished: those who a priori reject the suffering of the damned and those who, implicitly or explicitly, accept it. 2.1.l. Rejection of the Other's Suffering: Compassion in ApPt 3 E. "E~EO orS'compassion' is the first emotional response to the others' suffering we encounter in the Ethiopic text. In c. 3, after Jesus has shown the future of both the righteous and sinners, the torments of the latter distress all those present (3.3): 'We saw further how the sinners will grieve in intense torment and anguish so that all of us watching it began to weep, the righteous, the angels, and even Jesus himself'. Although the latter weep, it is only Peter who is impelled to act by his feelings. His protest is not delayed (3.4): 'Lord, let me repeat what you said about these sinners, that it would have been better for them if they had never been created'. If this idea is a paraphrase of Jesus' words in Mt 26.24", its contents and implications are, as we will see, rather different. Jesus' severe rebuke shows that Peter seems to be questioning the sense of the creation of evil if some are exclusively destined to undergo eternal punishment (3.5): 'Peter! Why would you say such a thing, that they should never have been created? You are rebelling against God!' Peter's compassion at the sight of human suffering and existential protest against the need for pain rely on a sense of cpthavOponia or 'humanity', a sympathy with his fellow humans that a priori rejects a dualistic view of man, opposing the righteous against the unrighteous. In his answer, Jesus urges Peter to check himself until he has considered whether these punishments happen to be deserved or not:

Similarly Mk 14.21.



'When you saw how the sinners will lament on the final day it made you sad. But now I will show you how by their actions they have transgressed against the most High' (ApPr 3.7 E). The measure of the punishment, according to Jesus, strictly correlates with the measure of their transgressions. His urging Peter to pay attention not only to the sufferings but also to the nature of the sins that provoked them relies on the notion of distributive justice. The passage consequently displays three different notions or degrees of E ~ E O S .The first kind, a rather passive and pathological compassion, is represented by the weeping of the seers. In this case, the emotional response does not necessarily impel the person to act, because the suffering individual is not the one who provokes it. Rather, it is the objective idea of pain and suffering that moves the person. A second kind, Peter's E ~ E O S involves , both the pain and the suffering individual. His compassion presents an active character as a result of a rational process aiming to understand the circumstance of the other and the character of his ~uffering'~. The result of this process is an emotional response that combines. the act of 'being troubled along with' the pain of the other (ouva~8opa1) with a kind of 'fellow feeling' or oupxCl8~1a'~. The third kind of E ~ E O Sis the measured emotional response defended by Jesus' words. Whereas the first kind was defective and Peter's is excessive, the third kind represents, in his view, the only proper emotion, for it considers not only the pain and the suffering individual, but also the notion of merit upon which distributive justice is based. According to this notion of justice, E h s o ~ is only likely to appear in those cases where the other's disgrace happens to be undeserved. It is interesting to note that Jesus' restriction presents a strict parallel to the Aristotelian definition of E h s o ~ in the Rhetorics as 'a kind of pain excited by the sight of evil, deadly or painful,

For a similar differentiation see Aquinas, Sumrna Tlzeol. II/II, 3 0 . 1 2c, ~ and 3c. Compassion is an affection if it is simply a motus appetitirs sensitivi, but in turn is a virtue if its appearance is accompanied by reason, namely if it is a mottis uppetitus irztellectivi. 25 See W. Burkert, Zlrm altgrieckischerz Mitleidshegriff (Erlangen. 1955)



which befalls one who does not deserve it'26. But the notion of merit or &cia, which is the only normative value permitting the distinction between justice and injustice27,is also essential to the notion of retributive justice that seems to assign punishment or reward. Since Jesus' words focus on this principle of merit, one may assume that his demonstration aims to arouse in Peter the proper satisfaction of seeing justice fulfilled. Aristotle calls this emotional response V ~ ~ E G I G or 'righteous indignation' and defines it as 'feeling pain at undeserved adversities and prosperities and pleasure at those that are deserved'28. One should keep in mind, however, that Peter expresses his compassion even before he has been acquainted with the sins that, in Jesus' words, justih the punishments. He consequently not only questions the meaning of evil in the context of God's creation but also the meaning of a justice that for some implies unceasing torture.

2.1.2. Approval of the Other's Sufferirzg. In his gruesome sightseeing Peter is not only allowed to witness the punishments; he can also see how other seers contemplate their application. Rather differently than Peter and the righteous, this group of seers is not moved by the sight of the punishments and approves, whether implicitly or explicitly, of the torment that is taking place. Sometimes their attitude is silent contemplation - as it is, for example, in 7.10: 'The angel Ezrael brings the spirits of the murdered victims so they can watch the punishment'. The absence of any explicit reaction by the seers clearly indicates, in my opinion, that the objective of their presence is not so much satisfying their revenge desires as letting them see that, despite appearances, justice at last prevails. Another curious example is ApPt 11.4 E, where children and virgins, who are not directly involved in the crimes, contemplate the punishment of sins committed by children. In this case,athe presence of a public seems to be intended to achieve a corrective or preventive goal: 'Again the angel Ezrael brings children and virgins to show them those who are being punished'. As in the former case, the seers are simply spectators of a rather mechanical functioning of justice


Aristotle, Rh. 1385b13 ff. Aristotle, Rh. 1386b14-5, 6 6 1 ~ yap 0 ~ rZ, napa rflv &@avytyvop~vov. Aristotle. EE 1233b24-5.



that gives to each according to his deeds. At other times, participation by the seers is more active. This is the case with the aborted children (8.3-4), who participate in the punishment of their mothers, and with the victims of infanticide, who personally accuse their murderous parents (8.6-7). These are the only two exceptional cases where justice seems to slide into personal retaliation, and this shift may be due to the horrible nature of the

Within this group of approving reactions one may also include those utterances by the damned themselves admitting their guilt and the justice of their punishment. The first passage appears in 7.1 1: 'The killers will say to them together, "God's sentence was just and right because we heard that we would come to this place of retribution, but we did not believe it".' Similarly in ApPt 13.6 E: 'God's decision is correct for we heard and learned about the goodness of his decision and each of us has been paid back matching what we have done'. 2.2. Are These Attitudes Incompatible? Now the question arises whether these seemingly opposite attitudes by the seers are dealt with as incompatible with one another or rather as compatible. Do approving reactions seek to rule out compassion or are both emotional responses conceived of as legitimate responses to the sight of punishment? Scholars are normally inclined to accept the former possibility. On the a priori assumption that Jesus' answer intends to rebuke Peter's compassion, they seem to consider that approving reactions by the seers are a suitable support for this rebuke. This is the case, for example, in R. Joly's approach to the issue3'. In a large collection of patristic medieval texts documenting what he calls 'compensatory sadism', namely the pleasure at the other's suffering, he includes a version of ApPt 13.2 E, according to which the sight of the torment of the damned will avenge the righteous3'. As Joly does not mention the problem of 'compassion' in chapter 3, one might
Cf. section 3.2 below. Joly, Christianisnie, 171-82. Joly, Cl1ristianisn7e,173. See below, however, for the correct reading of the passage according to more recent editions.
30 3'




conclude that for him approving reactions rebuke compassion and that, consequently, they were directed at stating the need, even the right, of the righteous to take revenge on the sinners. As, one may presume, compassion and revenge exclude each other, he tacitly implies that Peter's compassion (that is, human compassion) is overruled by divine justice. Oppression and persecution account, in his view, for this peculiarly vindictive conception of divine justice. Other scholars have attempted an inclusive interpretation: although approving reactions do not completely rebuke Peter's compassion, they do correct it. According to Buchholz, for example, ApPr tried to solve the dilemma over mercy and justice. The question, implicit in ApPt 3 E, as to whether God is merciful, receives, in his view, a proper answer when the righteousness of punishment is acknowledged even by the sinners: God is merciful but he is also A similar approach is to be found in Bauckham's most thorough and erudite studies on our text33. In an effort to integrate what for him are incompatible attitudes toward the application of justice, this scholar takes the salvation granted by the Rainer fragment (R) to be a solution for an assumed 'conflict between justice and mercy'34. In his view, mercy can only be fair after the victims have received a compensation for their suffering through the suffering of the unrighteous.
Buchholz, Your Eyes, 338. R. Bauckham, 'The Conflict of Justice and Mercy: Attitudes to the Damned in Apocalyptic Literature', in his The Fate of the Dead. Studies O I I Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (Leiden, 1998) 132-48; 'The Apocalypse of Peter: A Jewish Christian Apocalypse from the Time of Bar Kohba', The Fate, 160-258. 34 This document is a fragment of ApPt that belongs to the Rainer Collection. It was first published by C. Wesseley, 'Les plus anciens monuments du Christianisme: ~ c r i t ssur papyrus II', Patrologia Orientalis' 1812 (1924) 345-511 at 482-3, who thought it belonged to the Acts of Peter. It was first identified as a section of ApPt by K. Priimm, 'De genuino Apocalypsis Petri textu: Examen testium iam notorum et novi fragmenti Raineriani', Bihlica 10 (1929) 62-80 at 77-8. It has also been published and translated by M.R. James, 'The Rainer Fragment of the Apocalypse of Peter', JTS 32 (1931) 270-9; see also, idem, The Apocryplzal New Testament (Oxford, 1955) 521. For more recent interpretations of the fragment see below.
32 33



Furthermore, he thinks that it is only the victims themselves who can request mercy for their oppressors. Therefore, instead of a desire for personal vengeance, it is the Sitz im Leben of persecution that explains the need for such a peculiar solution to the problem of theodicy. Punishment of the damned and rejoicing by the righteous are, in his view, nothing but the fulfilment of God's justice. 2.2.1. Problems With These Views. This approach to ApPt's conception of justice presents, in my view, some problems. Restrictive Interpretations of Peter's Compassion. Common to all these views is the fact that they apply a minimising interpretation of Peter's compassion in which his emotional response is exclusively evaluated from the perspective of the justice pattern implied by Jesus' answer. Since Peter's compassion appears to be excessive when compared with the v6p~o15stated by Jesus, interpreters attempt to integrate it into the framework of distributive justice. Obviously, as soon as compassion and justice are considered as polarities within a relationship, the following are the only possible solutions: justice overrules compassion, or mercy is subordinated to justice, or mercy is interpreted as forgiveness. Textual Problems: 'Compensatory Sadism' in ApPt? At the same time, Joly's interpretation of ApPt's concept of justice is based on an erroneous scholarly correction of a copyist error in ms P of the Ethiopic text. As Buchholz has shown, the text in 13.2 does not read: '(Les justes) verront ceux qui les auront hays, alors que le supplice les vengera pour toujours', as Joly wants35,but rather: '... and they will look at the one(s) who cursed it (scil. eternal life) while he takes revenge on them'36. In this sense, the text does not suggest the satisfaction of vindictive desires in the righteous, but simply states that they witness the punishment of the wicked. Conceptual Problems: A Justice Owed to the Victims? AS far as the conception of a justice owed to the victims is concerned,
35 Joly, Christianisrne, 173, based on S. GrCbaut, 'The second coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead', Revue de ['Orient chre'rien 15 (1910) 214. 36 See Buchholz, Your Eves, 340-1.



such an interpretation of the theodicy dangerously slides, in my view, from a general to a particular notion of justice. From this perspective, God's justice is no longer the materialisation of righteousness, but simply a compensation owed to particulars. And, naturally, this implies that punishment and reward are no longer effects of the restitution of justice, but rather its cause. As Jesus' programmatic words to Peter already announce, however, viewing the punishments is intended to demonstrate the correlation between sin and retribution. Jesus' urging Peter to consider the notion of merit is not a statement about the need of revenge for the victims of injustice, but rather a claim for the righteousness of punishing transgressions of the law. Consequently, a strict distinction must be made between vengeance and retributive justice. Revenge as a form of retrib~tion'~, on the one hand, establishes a polarity between injured and offender that concerns them as individuals, and it is ruled by the principle of harm done, not of culpability, since it is the act itself and not responsibility for it that provokes revenge. As far as retributive justice is concerned, on the other hand, the guilty party is considered as a member of a legal community. Since a given body of law regulates retribution through punishment, retributive justice punishes not the harm done against individuals but transgressions of this law. The application of the so-called 'mirror punishments' in ApPt3Rshows that it is not the acts that are punished,
37 Vengeance is sometimes considered an archaic form of retribution; see E. Klinger, 'Revenge and Retribution', in M. Eliade (ed), The Encyclopedia of Religion 12 (New York and London, 1987) 362-8 at 363. A first step towards the regulation of justice appears in the ills talionis that, even if historically related to vengeance, was directed at regulating the unmeasured application of retaliation. The application of talio was restricted to cases of non-fatal bodily injuries and referred to a codified numerical equality in every punishment, which assured a strict correlation between injury and punishment. 3R The talio therefore should not be confused with the so-called 'mirror punishments'. A strict differentiation between both was first urged by J. Weismann, Talion und offentliche Strafe im mosaiscl7en Rechte (Leipzig, 1913) 337 and more recently by B.S. Jackson, 'The Problem of Exod XXI 22-5 (ius talionis)', VT 23 (1973) 273-304 at 281 note 1; and H.-W. Jungling, ',,Auge fiir Auge, Zahn fur Zahn". Bemerkungen zu Sinn und



but the guilt that sinners have acquired through their transgressions. The precise correlation between sin and punishment reveals a clear codification of norms of behaviour as well as the stipulation of a suitable chastisement for contravening them. But punishment, it must be clear, is intended to chastise not so much the harm done against individuals as the harm done against the community. The fulfilment of God's justice concerns the injured individual only insofar as he belongs to the legal community that protects him with its body of law. This distinction between mere revenge and retributive justice is essential, I think, in order not to confuse the application of justice, which as such is only concerned with righteousness, with the potential satisfaction of the injured party when seeing justice fulfilled. The justice of hell and the concomitant suffering of the damned are not a justice owed to the righteous, but rather a justice owed to righteousness. The suffering of the damned is nothing but a consequence of the restitution of justice that extends reward and punishment to the righteous and u n r i g h t e ~ u s ~ ~ .

2.2.2. Implications of These Approaches. In spite of the scholarly efforts to exclude personal vengeance from the motivation of the apocalyptists, the above interpretations of theodicy at work in our text seem to imply the existence of a vindictive notion of justice in ApPt and its intended readership. If God's justice is a justice owed to the righteous (= oppressed) and if, hence, they ought to rejoice to see Geltung der altestamentlichen Talionsformeln', Tl~eologie und Philosophie 59 (1984) 1-38 at 4-5 with note 10. In spite of D. Fiensy, 'Lex Talionis in the Apocalypse of Peter', HTR 76 (1983) 255-8, ApPt does not display the 1e.u talionis, but rather 'mirror punishments' and these were not exclusive to the Jewish world. For the distinction between genuine and false taIio, see R. Haase, 'Korperliche Strafen im altorientalischen Recht', RIDA III, 10
(1963) 73.
39 In addition, if the final restitution of God's justice in ApPt equals the moral triumph of the righteous, the moral superiority of the latter cannot be simply established on the basis of the suffering of the unrighteous without becoming an elevation over the pain of others. As this restitution of justice implies the righteous' axiological promotion, they are now too far above the suffering of the damned to rejoice at their punishment. Instead, this suffering is likely to diminish their joy at seeing justice fulfilled.



God's justice done (= suffering of the damned), it seems to me that this justice is on the verge of becoming simple revenge4'. From this perspective ApPr might seem to pursue a compensatory goal, namely that it would provide the satisfaction of seeing oppressors and persecutors finally vanquished and humiliated. It must be noted, however, that if this were indeed the case, this peculiar conception of the theodicy would confirm malicious pleasure as a constitutive element of its sense of justice. True, the argument of external pressure might explain why vindictive justice takes place, but it does not excuse its existence. On the contrary, such a statement actually supports Nietzsche's argument of the 'hate creating value^'^' making justice equivalent to Max Scheler's description of 'ressentiment' as a soul's poisoning, resulting from the long repressed wish to avenge oneself combined with the consciousness of being incapable of carrying this outJ2. 2.3. An Alternative Explanation for the Different Attitudes of the Seers
f the Seers are Compatible. However, the atti2.3.1. The Attitildes o tudes of the seers are not necessarily incompatible. This is proven by the fact that approval by some seers does not actually rule out compassion by others. Despite all utterances stating the righteousness of punishment, compassion finally prevails and punishment is remitted. Thus, one might rightly conclude that compassion and approval, far from excluding, actually complement each another. As a matter of

Bauckham himself seems to acknowledge this equation. See 'The conflict', 136: 'It is important to realise that, difficult though it may be to exclude altogether a desire for personal vengeance from the motives of the apocalyptists, the essential motive was the wish to see God's justice done. If hell is the triumph for God's justice, setting to rights the idjustice of this world, then the righteous ought to rejoice to see it' [Similar difficulties in defending this joy of the righteous are in Thomas Aquinas, Sentent. IV, 50.2.4~1; 'The Apocalypse', 234: 'We should also remember the overriding context of persecution, so that, especially in the author's mind, justice is due to the martyrs against those who have persecuted and betrayed them. 41 Nietzsche, Z N Genealo,yie ~ der Moral 1.8. Scheler, Das Ressentirnent, 38ff.



fact the incompatibility of these attitudes disappears as soon as one challenges the assumption that Jesus' answer intends to rebuke Peter's emotional response (below). It is my conviction, therefore, that in the original ApPt compassion was not dealt with as a mere counterpoint to retributive justice, but rather as a central issue that could seriously challenge the meaning, the measure, and the duration of punishment. The essential significance of compassion in our text is certainly indicated by the thorough treatment of the issue in ApPr 3 E. Its pivotal function, however, is further emphasised by the fact that the motif of compassion is placed before and after the sight of the torments of hell. The compassion of the righteous at work in ApPr 3 E and in R, by introducing and closing, respectively, the sight of pain and the suffering of hell, intentionally functions as a frame intended to mitigate the predominance of punishment and suffering in the application of divine justice.

~ . order to understand the horizon of Peter's 2.3.2. Peter's Z ~ E O In EAEOS properly, one must keep in mind that, as stated above, he expresses his compassion even before he has been acquainted with the alleged reason for suffering. Even if Jesus urges him to observe the principle of merit, he must already be aware of the fact that the suffering of the damned is due to punishment, for he tells him (3.4): 'Lord, let me repeat what you said about the sinners'. In so doing, his use of Jesus' words about Judas presents an obvious shift"'. AS has been pointed out, nowhere except here is the idea applied to all those being punished4?. More important, however, is the fact that the scope of Jesus' words is radically changed. Whereas in the New Testament they express the severe and certain punishment that will come upon the traitor, here they express rather the opposite, that is, they question the meaning of the punishment itselfj5. Peter's words (3.4) 'it would have been better for them if they had never been created' represent an existential protest against the meaning of suffering. If the damned were created, just as he was, by a merciful God, how is it possible

See section 2.1.1 above. Buchholz, Your Eyes, 290. -" Similarly in 1 Clem 46.7-8 and Hermas vis. 4.2.6.



that, whereas he will enjoy the bliss of the righteous, his fellow creatures will have to endure unceasing suffering? Peter's preoccupation, consequently, concerns the problem of suffering and pain within the context of God's creation and not the question of whether this suffering is deserved or not. 2.3.3. Jesus' Rebuke. It is obvious, however, that Jesus' answer is especially concerned with the second issue. Does this mean that he rebukes Peter's compassion? It has been pointed out that this is indeed the case. According to some scholars, compassion is rebuked either because it is cheap (for it does not consider the demands of justice) or because it is p r e ~ i p i t a t e d But ~ ~ . is this really so? It must be noted that, if this is the scope of Jesus' words, his reply fails to give a proper answer to Peter's preoccupation. Jesus does show him the correlation between guilt and punishment, but this does not properly satisfy his existential concerns. The solution to this problem is that Jesus' words are not directed at rebuking Peter's E h ~ o 5 but , at showing him that his concerns regarding God's compassion are unfounded. Instead of rebuking Peter's compassion, Jesus intends to show him that God is certainly merciful, although his mercy is essentially different from human compassion. According to Jesus' words, Peter's protest is simply due to his lack of insight into its working and development. Whereas human compassion is concerned with pain and suffering, God's mercy is primarily concerned with justice. As a guarantee of righteousness, God gives to everyone according to their deeds, thus reward for the righteous and punishment for the unrighteous. His law a priori establishes a norm of behaviour that assures bliss for those who respect it. Transgressions of this norm, however, automatically generate unrighteousness and punishment. Bliss for the righteous and punishment for the unrighteous are but effects of the same measured application of justice. God's impartial and righteous attitude, however, is not that of an inflexible judge and his vSpsotq thus does not exclude mercy. As he is aware of the compassion of the righteous, he grants them the possi46

Buchholz, Your- Eyes, 292; Bauckham, 'The Apocalypse', 233.



bility of interceding for the damned. Mercy, therefore, can rather be seen as the very culmination of his restitution of righteousness. Since the salvation granted by R is the result of intercession by the righteous due to their compassion, it seems clear that Peter's compassion cannot be rebuked. Rather divine v k p s o q and % h e oby ~ the righteous are two sides of the same conception of justice.

2.3.4. Approval for Punishment: The Role o f the Audience in Judiciary Ceremonies. But if Peter's compassion is not rebuked and if, consequently, approval for punishment both by victims and guilty is not intended to correct or restrict the horizon of his feelings, one must explain why it appears in our text. The most obvious explanation comes from the meaning, application and scope of justice by punishment and from the essential role played by an audience in legitimating its functioning. As the public represents the community, both as potential source for and as a potential victim of transgressions, its presence is important not only to assure the exemplary function of punishment, but also, and especially, to complete with its testimony and approval the materialisation of justice. In his study on the modem conception of justice and imprisonment, Michel Foucault has pointed out that the presence of the public and admission of culpability by the guilty are essential elements by means of which justice is self-legitimated4'. Regarding the role of an audience, he recognises that the status of the public is an ambiguous one. On the one hand, the audience is a passive spectator of the exemplary punishment; on the other, it is an active participant inasmuch as its testimony is a guarantee of the fulfilment of justice, in which the public to a certain extent participates. Regarding the admission of culpability by the guilty, its function is so important that medieval and latter chronicles frequently include such self-inculpati on^^^, whether real or composed ad Itoc, in order to suit an inherent necessity in the fulfilment of justice".
M. Foucault, Sur-veille~et punir. Naissarlce de la prison (Paris, 1975) 61ff. JX For ancient parallels to this, see Bauckham, 'The Apocalypse', 232. j 9 Foucault, Su~~jeiller, 68ff. The suitable effect of these confessions by the guilty is proved by the existence of a genre of 'last words of a conj7



Both elements are clearly exemplified in our text. ApPtE presents the viewers both as passive spectators and as more active participants in the administration of justice. At the same time, admission by the guilty appears at least in two passages. We may conclude that approval for punishment in ApPrE is not intended as a counterpoint to Peter's compassion. It is simply an inherent element in the development of the justice at work in ApPt.

3. Different Conceptions of Jzistice in ApPt's Transmission

3.1. Salvation for the Damned in the Rainer Fragment It was M.R. James who, by comparing ApPt 14 E with R and SihOr2 330-8, first suggested that the maker of the Ethiopic version had consciously altered the 'dangerous doctrine' of the sinners' salvation. The idea that the sinners will be recipients of grace and will eventually be saved, which also appears in the Coptic Apocalypse of Elias, Epistle o f the Apostles 40, and in Thecla's intercession for Falconilla in the Acts o f Paul, might have been rejected on the grounds of theological objection^^^. Ever since, his view has been widely accepted. Buchholz, for instance, canies out a meticulous comparison of R and ApPr 14 E, in which he shows how the Ethiopic text succeeds in eliminating the theory of salvation by applying a small number of changes. These involve, firstly, the suppression of the words EK rfjq ~ o h d l o ~ w q 'from out of punishment' and PET& rGv &yiwv 'with the saints', for these last words implied that others besides the saints would receive a share in righteousness. Secondly, they also affect the verbal tense of the future a i r q o o v m ~ 'they will ask', which appears in Ethiopic as the past tense 'they have asked from me', and the phrase paxrtopa
demned' and by the importance of leaflets as a means of propaganda concerning the righteousness of justice in a given process (ihid., 69): 'La justice avait besoin de ces apocryphes pour se fonder en vCritC. Ses dCcisions Ctaint ainsi entourCes de toutes "preuvres" posthumes'. 50 James, Apocrypha, 521 and 'Rainer Fragment', 270-9; J.A. Trumbower, Rescue for- the Dead. Tlie Posth~rnzusSalvariotl of Non-Chr-istians in Ear-!,, Christianity (Oxford, 2001) 49-55.



Ev o m ~ q p i q 'baptism in salvation', which was changed to 'baptism and salvation' by the Ethiopic text in order to avoid the idea that the damned could be saved5'. Bauckham also accepts the text provided by R as original for ApPr and the salvation granted in R is essential for his interpretation of the notion of justice in ApPt5*. Disagreement, however, concerns the way in which salvation should be interpreted. The text of R reads:
I will give to my called and my elect whomsoever they request of me out of punishment. And I will give them a beautiful baptism in salvation from the Acherousian lake, which is said to be in the Elysian field, a share in righteousness with my saints.

Two readings of this salvation have been proposed. The first interpretative line construes it as a form of universal salvation. Although the request for pardon might be interpreted as proceeding from friends and relatives only, the text seems to imply that no saved person could be happy as long as any are being punisheds3. The second interpretative line is represented by a restrictive construction of salvations4. According to this view, punishment of the wicked can only be remitted if the victims of persecution and oppression, by forgiving their oppressors, ask for it. Thus, salvation is limited to those unrighteous who are forgiven by their victims. Note, however, that this last reading implies a considerable interpretation that restricts the meaning of two key references in R. On the one hand, the words ~ o i q Khqroiq pou ~ a E K i ~EKTO~ ('to < my called and elect') are taken to mean 'victims of oppression'; on the other hand, the words 8v Eav aitfioov~ai p~~~('whomsoever they request of me') are interpreted
Buchholz, Your- Eyes, 349. Bauckham. 'The Conflict', 145-8; 'The Apocalypse'. 232-5. 53 Buchholz, Your. Eyes, 348. See Bayle. Euvr-es Div. 111, p. 863: 'I1 y a m&me je ne sais quoi qui choque notre raison dans I'hypothkse que les Saints du Paradis tirent en partie leur f6licit6 de ce qu'ils savent que d'autres hommes son tourmentez & le seront Ctemellement'. For the idea that punishment of the damned diminishes the joy of the righteous see the arguments by the 'Choir of Innocents' in G. Papini's Judizio Ut~iver.sale(Florence, 1957) 1257-9. 54 Bauckham, 'The Apocalypse', 210. 55 Emendation by James ('Rainer Fragment', 271) confirmed by SihOr.2 331.




as 'oppressors'. Furthermore, the motivation of the righteous when requesting salvation for the damned does not seem to arise from forgiveness but rather from compassion, as clearly implied by the thorough treatment of the issue in ApPt 3 E. Since our text includes no explicit restrictions with regard to salvation, one might rather expect it to be as comprehensive as the compassion of the righteous. 3.2. The Emphasis on Vengeance in the Ethiopic Text The document provided by R clearly shows that the maker of the Ethiopic version was especially interested in eliminating from chapter 14 every trace of the idea of the sinners' salvation. That this idea was not theologically acceptable to all is also reflected by a scholion to SihOr 2.331, which rejects it on grounds of 0rigenisms6. One is therefore likely to think that this tendency to affirm the need of an everlasting vengeance also affected other sections of the text. This might indeed be the case in those passages of ApPtE that insistently state that punishment will last forever. Thirteen passages of the Ethiopic text present such an assertion57.Seven of these cases, however, do not appear in the parallel sections of the Akhmim Greek fragment (A)s8.Most interesting is the fact that the Bodleian fragment (B)'%upports A in two of these cases. In spite of its shortness and precarious condition, B exactly corresponds with ApPt 10.6-7 E, a section in which two of these statements, without parallel in A, appear. Thanks to the testimony of B, which is supported by A, it is possible to see how a reference to the incessant character of punishment (B: K a 1 CIV(TV~~~C(TU(STO< [E]I~ou(S~V Z ~ [ VI ]Koha(31v; A 33: K U
The refutation of SibOr 2.331 (quoted by Bauckham, 'The Conflict', 148 and note 53) appears in ms Y . Polemic undertones also appear in the passages by Chrysostomos. Jerome, Augustine and Aquinas referred to above in notes 2 and 11. j7 ApPtE 3.2, 6.6, 6.9 (twice), 7.8 (by the damned), 7.1 1 (by the damned). 8.9. 8.10, 10.3. 10.6. 10.7, 11.9, and 13.3. 58 ApPt 7.8 E / 24 A; ApPt 7.1 1 E / 25 A; ApPt 8.9 E / 25 A; ApPt 8.10 E / 25 A: ApPt 10.3 E / 32 A; ApPt 10.6 E / 32 A, ApPt 10.7 E / 34 A. 59 See M.R. James, 'A New Text of the Apocalypse of Peter', .ITS 12 (1911) 367-9.



pqFS7coze 7 c a u 6 p ~ v o r~ ijz ~o ~ a l j z q ~ohClosoq) ~ is transformed by ApPtE in an affirmation of the eternity of punishment. Likewise, 10.7 E introduces a similar statement without any correspondence in Greek60. It must also be noted that the two passages quoted above, presenting a curious slide from retributive justice to personal retaliation, are missing from the parallel passages of A as well. Of course, this does not necessarily imply that they are an original addition by ApPtE, but this possibility cannot be excluded. 3.3. The Discordant Position of ApPt 13 E Accepting the correction of ApPt 14 E according to the mentality of R puts ApPt 13 E in a rather discordant position. In the first place, this chapter affirms that the righteous impassively witness the punishment of the damned, and this punishment is explicitly described as vengeance (Ethiopic). In addition it includes one of the references to the everlasting character of punishment, which, as stated above, have a doubtful status in ApPtE. Furthermore, the request for mercy by the damned is severely rejected by Tatirokos, who instead applies increasing torment. Although all these elements perfectly fit within the framework of ApPtE, and consequently in the Ethiopic version of chapter 14, they hardly agree in general with the mentality of R and in particular with the theory of salvation. Since ApPt 13 E and 14 E present one and the same mentality and conception of justice, one might assume that c. 13 underwent revision as well. Despite the lack of textual evidence, this hypothesis gains some support, suggesting a possible Platonic influence on the whole section. Platonic traces are evident both in the corrective function of punishment and in the consequent eventual remission of the sinners. The conception of injustice as an infirmity and chastisement as a cure, which appears already in Protagoras 324a-b, is further developed by Gorgias 526b-c, which divides the guilty into curable and incurable and attributes an exemplary and corrective function to punishment. All these elements are blended in a more precise scene

James, 'A New Text', 367-8 already compared the three texts; see also Buchholz, Your Eyes, 145ff, Bauckham, 'The Apocalypse', 210.



by Pkaedo 112e-114b, where the purificatory function of the Acherousian Lake is brought to the foreground. It has been suggested that the doctrine of the sinners' salvation in R might have been inspired by the purification of the curable sinners in Pkaedo 1 14b6'. Similarly, the contrast between the righteous and unrighteous in ApPt 13 E might have presented, before its revision, a scene inspired by Phaedo 113d where all souls, whether righteous or unrighteous, are conducted to the place of judgement before the subsequent consignment of the guilty to the Acherousian Lake62. It might be objected that retributive justice, as stated in ApPt, and corrective justice, as implied in these Platonic passages, rely on different conceptions of guilt and responsibility. Whereas the former is directed at punishing transgression as such, the latter is concerned with correction and prevention. We must admit, however, that, as soon as the possibility of salvation appears, the function of punishment is essentially changed. The prayers of the martyrs asking for forgiveness for their persecutors instead of punishment (Acts 7.60) rely on a similar concept of guilt conceived as a deficient condition that might be improved with proper care. This approach to injustice is parallel to Peter's E h ~ o 5 in ApPt 3 E. Based on a different notion of guilt, Peter simply rejects the pain in itself as a possible solution for it. His compassion implies a holistic view of man (cf. Mt 5.44) that rejects a division of humanity into two groups on the basis of the principle of merit and on the concept of guilt as a stigma. 3.4. Possible Intention(s) of the Original ApPt Given the obvious transformations undergone by ApPtE, and the lack of a reliable touchstone to prove all key passages, it is difficult, if not
See Bauckham, 'The Conflict', 145-7, who also quotes parallels from apocalyptic literature (ApMos 37.3; ApPazrl 22-3). where the Acherousian Lake also presents a purificatory function; see Copeland, this volume, Ch. VII. According to E. Peterson, 'Die "Taufe" im Acherousischen See', Friihkir-cke, Jirdenturn lrr~dGnosis (Rome/Freiburg/Vienna, 1959) 3 10-32 at 3234, the imprecision concerning the consignment to the Acherousian Lake in the Elysian field is due to the fact that it replaces here the river of the water of life in the Jewish Paradise.




impossible, to establish a definitive explanation for the goal and meaning of the other's suffering in the original ApPt. Notwithstanding, it is evident that the vindictive pleasure of rejoicing at the sinners' suffering hardly fits in text that focuses on the notions of E ~ E O S and vSpeoq and eventually grants the sinners salvation. As the emphasis on vengeance and on everlasting punishment seems to proceed from later stages of the text's transmission, two hypothetical interpretations might be considered: According to the first interpretation, ApPt considered punishment and suffering as strictly necessary in order to provide the expiation of guilt. This first hermeneutic line is easier to argue and to support on the basis of the textual evidence. By emphasising the notion of merit, Jesus stresses the idea of responsibility and consequently the freedom to act right or wrong. If Eheoq is only likely to appear when the other's suffering happens to be undeserved, v S p ~ o or t~ 'righteous indignation' is the only possible attitude of the righteous when suffering is due to punishment. This conceptual context implies the notion of community and the need to correct and prevent transgressions of the law therein. Utterances by the damned refemng to their ignorance63 or to their incredulityM concerning the future application of justice might point in this direction. These two mentions, together with the admission of their injustice by the guilty in ApPt 7.11 E and 13.6 E and the explicit example of preventive punishment in 11.4, might be easily reconciled in a text defending the corrective goal of punishment. The final salvation, granted in R, is a suitable conclusion for such a text. According to the second (more radical) interpretation, Peter's compassion intended to reject altogether the idea that any man deserves eternal suffering. Although weaker attested and more difficult to demonstrate, this interpretation is nonetheless interesting. Peter's compassion and existential protest in ApPt 3 E might reflect a reaction against the application of justice by means of punishment and a step towards an inversion of the principle of retribution as stated in Mt 5.44-865. Such an attitude might be evidence of a new concept of

'' "

ApPt 7.8 E. ApPt 7.1 1 E. Klinger, 'Revenge', 366, interprets this new principle in line with Rom



justice that intended to supersede by means of the principle of neighbourly love a dualistic division of humanity. From a legal point of view, this new notion of justice might reflect the effort to overcome both particular applications of justice intending to chastise the harm done by means of retaliation or by talio and a more general conception of justice intending to chastise culpability by means of retribution. From the point of view of theodicy, the Early Christian idea of neighbourly love might have tried to supersede the dualistic division of humanity into two irreconcilable groups, viz. the righteous vs. the unrighteous, on the basis of the notion of merit. By a prior; stating an existential community of mankind, and by considering that injustice originates in ignorance, the text might have rejected the idea that pain and suffering can be a solution to the problem of injustice. It is important not to overlook the fact that, according to both interpretations, the text presents the conflict between the notion of punishment and suffering and the Christian principle of love. In both cases, either the corrective function of punishment or the a priol-i neighbourly love tries to limit the duration and prominence of pain in the fulfilment of justice. Far from defending a reactive notion of justice, the original text might have rejected suffering in itself as a solution to the problem of injustice. And this attitude is exactly the opposite of E n l x a ~ p & ~ a or ~ 'malice'. ia

4. Closirlg Remarks
These last considerations show that a distinction between 'justice' and 'reactive justice' exclusively on the basis of those who claim it is
12.20 and thinks that retribution continues to be retribution but is put on a new level: the guilt of the guilty party becomes a means of conversion. However, as Max Scheler has pointed out, the combination of Jesus' precept about offering the other cheek with Salomo's metaphor that 'coals of fire' are thus heaped on the enemy's head, implies a rather different objective. See Scheler, Das Resser~timerzt, 61 : '.. .wie auff'alig sehen wir hier die von Jesus ganz anders gemeinte Demut und Feindesliebe in den Dienst eines Hasses gestellt, dem Rache nicht geniigt, der erst in der tiefen Beschamung des Feindes und deren aul3eren Zeichen, dem Erroten bis zur Stirne usw., in einem Ubel vie1 tieferer Schicht also, als es der Schmerz des Gegenschlages ware, seine Befriedigung findet'.



rather narrow. The only difference between the sense of justice of the oppressors and the oppressed concerns the real or ideal character of the value systems they defend. In the so-called 'right' kind of justice the measure is stated according to the current system of values. In the so-called 'reactive' one it is stated according to an ideal system. However, the fact that the restitution of justice is accompanied by a reversal of fortunes does not imply a reactive or compensatory notion of justice, since this inversion might very well be a simple effect of the triumph of justice and not its first cause. Attention consequently must be paid to the underlying justice pattern and to the question of whether reversal of fortunes is a precondition or an effect of righteousness. Camus has rightly remarked that not every rebellion implies a resented view of reality. Only when it aims at a simple inversion of the roles might one call it resented. By contrast, in real rebellion rejection of injustice and suffering is not accompanied by the wish to see others suffering the same. It simply offers a new alternative according to its new view of the world'j6. AS an example of the former we may recall the quoted passages of Tertullian, of Aquinas, and the psychological background of comedy. As an example of the latter we may take the case of the ApPr. Regrettably enough, the principle of neighbourly love, by a pi-iori stating the existential community of the individual with his fellow men, goes against the prii~cipiumcontradictionis so pleasant to our polar thought. If this was in fact the doctrine defended by the original ApPr, its hypothetical perversion down through history is not difficult to understand.


Camus, L'Homme, 31: 'La rkvolte, au contraire, dans son principe, se borne B refuser l'humiliation, sans la demander pour I'autre. Elle accepte mCme la douleur pour elle-mCme, pourvu que son intCgritC soit respectee'.

X. The Old Testament Quotations in the Apocalypse o f Peter


The author of the Apocalypse ofPeter- (ApPt) uses frequently existing texts and traditions to express his own thoughts. One can point to literary connections with the Gospel o f Peter, the New Testament (especially 2 Peter and M a t t l ~ e ~ several t), early Jewish writings and also the Old Testament'. Mostly, the references are inlplicit. The words are assimilated into the own discourse of the author. However, on three places in ApPt the author refers explicitly to another text2. He uses an introduction formula to introduce a quotation. The first one is in ApPt 4.7b: 'And therefore it says in Scripture'. The other two are at the end of the book, i.e., ApPr 17.4a: 'And the word of Scripture was fulfilled'; and ApPt 17.5b: 'That the word of Scripture might be fulfilled which said'. The first reference seems to be to Ezekiel 37, the other two are to Psalnl 243. In this paper, I will restrict myself to
For an inventarisation of the links of ApPt with Jewish and Christian themes and traditions, see R. Bauckham. 'The Apocalypse of Peter. An Account of Research', ANRW, 11,2516, (Berlin, 1988) 4712-50; see also: idem, 'The Apocalypse of Peter. A Jewish Christian Apocalypse from the Time of Bar Kokhba', Apocrypha 5 (1994) 7-1 11, reprinted in R. Bauckham, TIw Fate o f the Dead. Studies or1 the J e ~ ~ i arzd s h Clzrisrian Apocalypses (Leiden, 1998) 160-258. Bauckham speaks about only one explicit citation to scripture, i.e. ApPt 4.7-9. See his 'A Quotation from 4Q Second Ezekiel in the Apocalypse of Peter', R Q 15 (1991-92) 437-64 (= Fate of the Dead, 259-68). In the Ethiopic text of the ApPt, I could find only one other e,rplicit r-eference to a textual source outside the text itself, i.e., ApPt 16.5: 'And I understood what is written in the book of my Lord Jesus Christ'. This refers to




these explicit quotations from the Old Testament. How, in what way, and why makes the autor use of the quoted texts. In all three cases, we are left with the Ethiopic version of the Apocalypse, because the original Greek version is not extanp. This means that one has to be very cautious as far as the form of the quotations is concerned.
1. Apocalypse of Peter 4.7-9 arid Ezekiel 37

The first text of interest is ApPr 4.7-95:

7a b c 8a b For everything is possible for God and therefore it thus says in Scripture: 'The son of man prophesied to each of the bones. And you said to the bone: "Bone (be) to bones in limbs, tendons and nerves, and flesh and skin and hair on it".' 9a And soul and spirit the great Uriel will give at the command of God, b for him God has appointed over his resurrection of the dead at the day of judgment.

At first sight, it seems clear that the explicit quotation of Scripture in ApPr 4.7-8, contains a reference, most probably to Ezek 37.1-14. Firstly, the expression 'the son of man' (ApPt 4 . 7 ~ ) refers to Ezek 37.3~.It is a phrase that is used frequently in the book of Ezekiel. Secondly, the phrase '(he) prophesied to each of the bones' (ApPt 4 . 7 ~ refers ) to Ezek 37.4b ('Prophesy to these bone^')^. The enumera-

what the author has just quoted, probably the Gospel o f Matthew, cf. D.D. Buchholz, You1 Ejles Will Be Opened. A St~rdyo f the Greek (Etl~iopic) Apoocal~pse of Peter (Atlanta, Georgia, 1988) 370-1. . I For a description of the Ethiopic manuscripts and the Greek fragments, see Buchholz. Your Eyes, 119-56. Bauckham points to a paraphrase of ApPr in Sibylline Oracle 2.194-338, which can be used as a check on the accuracy of the Ethiopic version. See Bauckham, 'Quotation', 438. The translation is according to the literal translation of Buchholz, Your Eyes, 183-5. Buchholz presents also a free translation, which is not useful for our presentation. " h e translation of the quotations from scripture is according to the Revised Standard Version (RSV).



tion of the components of the resurrected people (ApPt 4.8b: 'Bone (be) to bones in limbs, sinews and nerves, and flesh and skin and hair on it7)does refer to Ezek 37.6 ('I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin...'), to Ezek 37.7 ('.. And the bones came together, bone to its bones'), and to Ezek 37.8 (...there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them'). Finally, the words 'and soul and spirit' (ApPt 4.9a) might refer to the word n i l (nvacpa), which is used several times in Ezek 37 (see vv. 1, 5, 6, 8, 9 [3 times], 10, 14) and which is translated in the RSV by 'spirit', 'breath' and 'wind'. This m i finally enters into the resurrected people. Although the references to Ezek 37 are reasonably clear, the extent of the quotation is subject to debate7. The problem with regard to the demarcations of the quotation is related to some text-critical and syntactical problems. The quotation begins in ApPt 4.7~-8a: 'The son of man prophesied (tanabaja) to each of the bones. And you said (watbela) to the bone'. The word tanabaja is found in both Ethiopic manuscripts8. It is a perfect form of the verb 'to prophesy', whereas watbela is an irregular perfect-form, 2nd person singular, of 'to say' ('and you said'). There is not only a somewhat peculiar transition from the 3rd singular ('He prophesied') to the 2nd singular ('You said'), but, moreover, these forms do not correspond with the imperative-form in Ezek 37.4: ; 1 ? ~ 3 n1135Y;l ?Y El313 ('prophesy to these bones'), followed by a consecutive perfect, which has in the consec~rtio ten~polwm the value of an imperative: ~ 3 nl13Ell ~ ('and 5 say to them'). Because of the irregularities and because of peculiar punctuation marks in manuscript T, Buchholz suggests to understand the first line after the introduction formula (ApPt 4 . 7 ~ not ) yet as part of the quotation. In his eyes, the actual quotation starts from the second line onwards (ApPt 4.8: 'And you said etc.'). This, does not seem to me a convincing solution, since a new problem rises, i.e., the distance between the introduction formula and the beginning words of the actual quotation. Moreover, the problem of the strange transition between 3rd and 2nd person singular remains.
Cf. Buchholz, Yo~rrEyes, 296; Bauckham, 'Quotation', 438-40. For a description of the Ethiopic manuscripts, see Buchholz, Your- Eyes, 1 19-39.





In his 1910 edition of the ApPt, Grebaut already emended tanabaja into tanahaj, which is the imperative form of the verb (pr~phesy')~. He is followed by othersi0. Moreover, most of them consider wathela as an imperative, as if it were in the consecutio temporum. In their eyes, therefore, the quotation starts in ApPt 4.7: 'Son of man, prophesy to each of the bones and say to the bone'. Although the author of the Apocalypse has not the intention to quote a text, which corresponds literally with Ezek 37, it is not necessary to harrnonise with the biblical text; however, it is difficult to get around the emendation of Grebaut at this point". Also the end of the quotation is not completely clear. The Ethiopic text of the first part of ApPt 4.9 reads: wanafas wan~anfas wajekuh 'ahij 'Uraef hat'ezaz 'egziaheher, which is rendered literally: '. .. and soul and spirit, and the great UrieI gave at the command of God'. If we take the conjunction wa ('and') in wajelzuh ('and he gave') seriously, then the first two words of ApPt 4.9a ('and soul and spirit') should be added to the list of ApPt 4.8 ('bone [be] to bones in limbs, tendons and nerves, and flesh and skin and hair on it, and so~il and spirit'). In that case, however, the verb jehlrh ('he gave') has no object, and it is not clear what Uriel gave at the command of God. Buchholz considers these first two words of ApPt 4.9 ('soul and spirit') as object of the verb jehuh, although he has to ignore the conjunction". In that case ApPt 4.9a could belong to the quotation of
See S. Grkbaut, 'LittCrature ~ t h i o ~ i e n n Pseudo-CICmentine. e La seconde de e /'Orient Ckritien 15 venue du Christ et la rksurrection des morts'. R e ~ ~ u (1910) 198-214, 307-23,425-39 (at 201). lo E.g., C.D.G. Muller, 'Offenbarung des Petrus', in W. Schneemelcher (ed), Nelrtestan~et~tlichen Apokiypherl in deutscher ~ b e r s e t z u n5. ~ . A~!flage der on Edgar Hennerke Degriindeten Sammlung. II. Apostolisches ApokaIvpsen lrnd Vetwandtes (Tubingen, 1989) 562-78; Bauckham, 'Quotation', 439. " I have no clue as to the reason of the mistake in both manuscripts. It could be a mistranslation from the Greek. But it is also possible that the Ethiopic copyist made a mistake in a manucript preceding both remaining manuscripts. The difference in Ethiopic beween -ja- (jaman in the first order) and -jc- ljanlan in the sixth order) is only very small. See the literal translation of Buchholz, Your Eyes, 296-7: 'And soul and spirit the great Uriel will give...'.



Ezek 37. It can be considered as an interpretation of Ezek 37.12-14, where it is God who put the spirit into the resurrected bodies, so that they shall live. In ApPt this action is attributed to the angel U~-iel'~. One could go one step further. When one ignores the conjunction 'and' before '(he) will give' in ApPt 4.9a, then one could consider also all the elements of the list of ApPt 4 . 8 ~ as objects of the verb. In this case, we consider ApPt 4 . 8 ~ as an enumaration of several elements and not as a nominal clause. However, this is in conflict with the view that the resurrection in Ezek 37 takes place in two stages. First, there is the physical resurrection, then the psychological. I am therefore inclined to consider the end of ApPt 4.8 ('and hair on it') as the end of the quotation of Ezekiel, whereas the author of the Apocalypse refers in ApPt 4.9 to another tradition of interpretation of Ezekiel14.The second part of ApPr 4.9 ('For him God has appointed over his resurrection of the dead at the day of judgement') is clearly an explanation of the role of Uriel. 2 . The Conte.vt of the Quoratioi7
The reference in ApPt 4.7-8 to Ezek 37 is far from literal. ApPt does use words and phrases that occur in E;ek 37, but their grammatical form and syntactical function is different in both texts. Also the literary context of the quotation shows substantial differences with Ezek 37. As fas as the aspect of rime is concerned, the moment of the resurrection in Ezek 37 is not specified, although it seems to be in the present or in the near future. In ApPt the resurrection will take place in the 'last days when the day of God comes' (ApPt 4.1, 6). This is 'the day of judgement, the day of punishment' (cf. ApPt 4.2, 5, 9, 12, 13). As far as the aspect of space is concerned, the place of the resurrection is in Ezekiel 'in the midst of the valley' (Ezek 37.1), whereas Ezek 37.12 speaks about 'your graves'. In ApPt it is said that it will take place 'before my father who lives forever' (ApPt 4.2). As far as the slrhject of the ~.esur-rectionis concerned, Ezek 37 speaks about 'bones' (vv. 1, 3, 5, 7, 11) and 'dry bones' (vv. 4, 11).


Baukharn. 'Quotation', 439. Bauckham, 'Quotation', 439.




In Ezek 37.1 1, these bones are identified with the 'house of Israel'. This shows that 'bones' and 'resurrection' are used as metaphors. ApPt speaks about 'all the children of men' (ApPt 4.2), all the dead, which is 'each of the bones'. However, in ApPt 4.12, the resurrection seems to be limited to 'those who believe in him, and his elect ones'. In the Apocalypse, the (dry) bones are not used as methaphor, whereas the resurrection is understood as a literary resurrection of the dead. As far as the aim of the resurrection is concerned, Ezekiel speaks about the spirit, or the breath, that may enter in men so that they may live. Elsewhere in Ezek 37, this new life is interpreted as the return to the landI5. ApPt just speaks about a resurrection, which is revivification, a literally life giving to man. Finally, Ezekiel seems to speak about two stages in the resurrection. First, there is a physical resurrection (bone to bone; sinews; flesh; skin) prophesied by the prophet (= the son of man). Secondly, there is a spiritual resurrection (breath / spirit) also prophesied by the prophetI6. This phasing of the resurrection seems to be a rhetorical way to highlight the most important aspect of the enterprise, i.e., the giving of the spirit. Depending on the interpretaton of the beginning of ApPt 4.9, it is also possible to assume these two stages in ApPt. First, we have the physical resurrection (bone to the bones in limbs, sinews, nerves, flesh, skin, hair) prophesied by the son of man. Secondly, there is a spiritual resurrection (soul and spirit) given by Uriel at the command of God.

3. 4Q385 as a r ~ Intermediary behveer~Ezekiel 37 arid Apocalypse of Peter 4.7-9?

Although the reference to Ezek 37 is marked off by an explicit quotation mark, the actual wording is very much different from the text of Ezekiel. As far as I can see, this can mean three things. Firstly, the
Cf. W. Zimmerli, Ezekiel (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1969) 888; M. Greenberg, Elekiel21-37 (New York, 1983) 747. Ih E.R. Wendland, "'Can These Bones Live Again?" A Rhetoric of the Univ. Semin. Stud. 39 (2001) Gospel in Ezekiel 33-37, Part 11'. Afzdre~ls 241-72 at 263-5.




author has no intention to quote Ezekiel verbatim. He needs the text as proof-text, but is not concerned with the actual wording. He paraphrases and summarises the text". Although I cannot rule out the possibility completely, I consider it unlikely. We have to do here with one of the few explicit quotations from Scripture. One may assume that the author refers to Scripture with the actual words of Scripture. Secondly, it is possible that the author quotes a text-form that deviates from the Massoretic Text of Ezekiel. However, I did not find such a text-form. Thirdly, the author possibly does not intent to quote from Ezek 37 at all, but from another text that is authoritative to him. He uses it as proof-text, and calls it 'Scripture'. I think this last option is possibly most likely the case here, although it is difficult, if not impossible, to identify an intermediary between Ezekiel and ApPt 4.7-9. Bauckham has pointed to the Ezekiel apocalypse from Qumran Cave 4 as the source text of ApPt 4.7-9''. This text, the so-called 4QPseudo-Ezekiel, is preserved in five or six fragments, and three of them (4Q385, frg. 2; 4Q386, frg. 1 , col.1; 4Q388, frg. 8) reproduce partly a quotation of Ezekiel 37, which shows some resemblance with ApPr 4.7-919. I would like to go into the question if this text could have possible functioned as intermediary between Ezek 37 and ApPt 4. I first briefly discuss the relation between 4Q385 with Ezek 37 and, subsequently, the relationship between 4Q385 and the Apocalypse o f Peter-. I give here the translation of Deborah Dimant in the official edition of 4Q385, with my own lay-out, and line-counting20:

Cf. Bauckham, 'Quotation', 440. '"auckham, 'Quotation', 437-45. l9 See D. Dimant, Parabii>lical Tests, part 4: Pseudo-Prophetic Texts. Disco~~eries in the Judaean Desert X X X . Q~rn7r.017 Cave 4 - X X I (Oxford, 2001) 17-51, pl. I. See also D. Dimant. 'Ezekiel, Book of: Pseudo-Ezekiel', in L.H. Schiffman and J.C. VanderKam (eds), Encyclopedia o f the Dead Sea Scrolls. 2 vols (Oxford, 2000) 1.282-4. Dimant, Parabiblical Texts, 24. The translation is slightly different from the previously published edition in D. Dimant and J. Strugnell, 'The Merkabah Vision in Second Ezekiel (49385 4)', RQ 14 (1989) 331-48.




1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9

(3)... And thelse (things) when will they come to be, and how will they be recompensed for their piety? and the Lord said (4) to me: 'I will make it manifest [ ] to the children of Israel to see, and they shall know that I am the Lord'.

(5) And He said:] 'Son of Man, prophesy over the bones, and speak and let them be j[oi]ned bone to its bone and joint (6) [to its joint.' 1.10 And it wa]s so.

1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.21

And He said a second time: 'Prophecy, and let arteries come upon them, and let skin cover them (7) [ from above'. And it was so]. And He said: 'Prophecy once again over the four winds of heaven, and let them blow breath (8) [into the slain'. And it was so,] and a large crowd of people came [to lilfe, and blessed the Lord Sebaoth wh[o (9) had given them life'.]

The parallel with Ezek 37 can be found in 4Q385.5-8 (1.6-21). This passage seems to be an answer to the question how they will be rewarded for their piety (cf. 1.2). The answer is in short that they will live again, i.e., they will be resurrected. The first question, i.e., when they will be (cf. line l), seems to be answered in the next section, i.e., from line 22 onwards, but this section is preserved only fragmentary. When one compares 4Q385 with Ezek 37, a few things catch the eye. In the first place, only the commandment of God is given, 7 3 '3'1: 'and it was so'; 'and whereas the realisation is summarised ( so it happened'). Secondly, the phasing of the process of resurrection is made explicit: 'and he said' (1.6-lo), 'and he said a second time' (1.11-15), and finally: 'And he said' (1.16-21). In the first stage, the command over the bones is given. This probably refers to Ezek 37.7 ('... and the bones came together, bone to its bone'), although the phrasing is somewhat different. In the second stage, the covering of the bones with sinews and skins is described. It refers to Ezek 37.6



('And I will lay sinews upon you, and I will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin') and 37.8 (' ... there were sinews on them ... and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them'). The third stage continues with a prophesy regarding the four winds, and refers clearly to Ezek 37.9-10 (' ... Come from the four winds, 0 breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live .. .')2'. The true meaning of the vision is given by a nonbiblical detail added to the biblical description. According to it, the resurrected people came to life and blessed the Lord who had given them life (1. 20-21)22. This means that the author interpreted the vision of Ezekiel literally, as referring to a real resurrection of the righteous in the eschatological futurez3. Bauckham gives three arguments for the dependency of the Apocalypse of Peter on 4Q Second Ezekiel. First, both texts use the words 'son of man' in combination with the divine command to prophecy over the bones. However, this argument is not of great value since the formula 'son of man, prophecy over ... and say' is characteristic of Ezekiel. It occurs about 13 times in the book (Ezek 6.2-3; 13.2, 17-18; 21.7-8, 14, 33; 28.21-22; 29.2-3; 30.2; 34.2; 35.2-3; 38.2-3; 39.1). Secondly, both transfer the account of the resurrection of the bones in the command of YHWH to the prophet to prophecy. This argument seems to be decisive for B a ~ c k h a mHow~~. ever, the argument is of not great value either, since the compositional technique to put something in the divine command what is said only in the narrative execution of the command in the biblical text occurs quite often in the literature of early Judaism, especially in the the so-called rewritten Bible2'. Thirdly, the words lp79 5~ 779
M. Kister and E. Qimran, 'Observations on 4QSecot7d Ezekiel (4938.5 2-3)', RQ 15 (1991-92) 595-602, have proposed a slightly different restoration of 1. 18-19: 'And let the wind blow upon them and,they will live. And it was so'. According to this restoration the breath is blown into the bones. Dimant, Parahihlical Tests, 28, considers this unlikely. Cf. Dimant, 'Ezekiel', 283. 23 According to Dimant, 'Ezekiel', 283, this is the earliest witness for such an understanding of Ezekiel 37.1-14. Later, this understanding became widespread among Jews and Christians. I4 Bauckham, 'Quotation', 441-3. 25 P.S. Alexander, 'Retelling the Old Testament', in D.A. Carson and





('joints to its joints') have no counterpart in the biblical text (Ezek 37.7), but do seem to have a counterpart in westa rnelajaled ('in joints' or 'in limbs') in ApPt 4.8.
E;ek 37.7 MT
1 2 n

Ezek 37.7 L X X

4Q385, 2.5-6
[127p];1 -

ApPt 4.8

n l n x ~ ra bur6
1 7 3 5~ ~ ~ PSY

r p b rqv ~ &p-



1p13 +N p13

'asem haba ' a 'esmet westa melajaled

poviav ab-roii As I have said before, both in 4938.5 and in ApPt, the words of the account are transferred into a command. Both in 4Q38.5 and ApPt, the word n l n 5 seems ~ to be skipped over, although it is significant that the second word in ApPt ('a'esrnet) is put into the plural. It might reflect therefore MnYY of the biblical text. In any case, 4Q38.5 has a singular form (1nYY). It is unlikely that ApPt is at this point dependent on the Septuagint, because this version renders the odd expression l D S Y % DYY with a more intelligible expression ~ K ~ T E ~ npoq r q v &ppoviav afiroc ('each one to its joint'), in which k~arspov reflects the odd expression, whereas ApPt retains this expression. The expression westa rnelajaled could be dependent on 4Q38.5, although this proposal is not unambiguous. The f i s t i)73 is omitted, the word 5 R is rendered by westa, which is possible, and the third word 1?73 is taken over, but without the suffix. Moreover, the fact that 'joint' is already in the Septuagint suggests that this reading reflects an ancient tradition. It refutes the claim that ApPt 4.8 should be quoting 4Q38.5 at this point26.


H.G.M. Williamson (eds), It Is Written. Scriptlire Citing Scripture. Essays in Honour of Barnabas Lindars (Cambridge, 1988) 99-121, at 116-7; G. Vermes, Post-Biblical Jewish Studies (Leiden, 1975) 60-91 ('Bible and Midrash. Early Old Testament Exegesis'); see also J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten, Primaeval Histoly Interpreted. The Re~~riting of Genesis 1-11 in the Book of Jubilees (Leiden, 2000) 3-5. 0 " ' also recently Dimant, Parabiblical Tests, 26 note 7.



My conclusion is therefore a rather negative one. One cannot say for sure that ApPt 4.8 is depending on 4QSecond Ezekiel. Rather, it is depending on a tradition of interpretation of Ezek 37, of which 4QSecond Ezekiel is also a witness2'.

4. Psalm 24 a17d Apocalypse of Peter 17.2-6

The second explicit reference to the Old Testament occurs in the final chapter of the book (ApPt 17). It is the last of five visions of the reward of the righteous. Visions which were granted to the disciples, once they went with Jesus to 'the holy mountain'. After the vision of the true Temple, and the accompanying audition of the true Messiah (ApPt 16.9-17. l), ApPt 17.2-6 describes the Ascension. The disciples witness the ascension of Jesus, with Moses and Elijah, first to the first heaven, where they meet people 'who were in the flesh'. Jesus took with him these people and entered the second heaven. I quote ApPt 1 7.2-628: 2a b c d e 3a

c d e f 4a b c

And a cloud large in size came over head and (it was) very white and it lifted up our Lord and Moses and Elijah, and I trembled and was astonished. And we watched and this heaven opened and we saw men who were in the flesh and they came and went to meet our Lord and Moses and Elijah and they went into the second heaven. And the word of scripture was fulfilled: 'This generation seeks him and seeks the face of the God of Jacob'.

Dimant, Parabiblical Texts, 26 note 7 adds that the gap of date and languages which separates the two documents makes a direct quotation unlikely. ?' The translation is according to the literal translation of Buchholz, YouiEyes. 240-2.




5a And there was great fear and great amazement in heaven. b The angels flocked together that the word of scripture might be fulfilled which said: c 'Open the gates, princes'. 6a And then this heaven which had been opened was closed. After the ascension, the disciples descended from the mountain, glorifying God, who has written the names of the righteous in the book of life in heaven. The description of the ascension is connected with the Transfiguration scene in the Gospel of Matthew. In ApPt 17.1, which describes the audition of the true Messiah, Mt 17.5b is quoted literally. Also the cloud in ApPt 17.2 ('And a cloud large in size came over head and (it was) very white') could be connected with the same verse. However, in Matthew the cloud overshadows the disciples who were with Jesus on the mountain, whereas in the ApPt the cloud became the instrument of an ascension, which is not described in chapter 17 of Mt. This might be due to the influence of the ascension scene in Acts 1.1-11, where the cloud functions as a means to deprive the sight of the disciples, but seems to be at the same time the instrument of the ascension: 'He was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight'2y. In addition to these implicit references to the New Testament, the passage also contains a twofold explicit quotation from the Old Testament. The first one is a rather literal quotation of Ps 24.6 ('This generation seeks him and seeks the face of the God of Jacob'). Ps 24.6 is the end of the second strophe of the Psalm, which starts in Ps 24.3 with a question about who may be admitted to the temple ('Who shall ascend the hill of YHWH? And who shall stand in his holy place?'). Ps 24.4-6 give an answer to this question3'. First, it sets out the ethical requirements ('He who has a clean hand and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully'). Secondly, it gives words of blessing to those who are qualified to enter the temple ('He will receive blessing from YHWH, and vindication from the God of his salvation. Such is the generation of those who seek the face of the God of Jacob'). Finally, the anwer

Cf. Buchholz, Your Eyes, 373. -" See J. Day, Psalms (Sheffield, 1990) 60.



to the question 'who' is made concrete: it is this 'generation'. It is 'Jacob', that is Israel. The second strophe may have its Sitz in? Lehen in the liturgy and is often called an 'entrance liturgy'". The worshipper seeks to enter the Temple and is instructed as to the necessary conditions. In the actual Psalm, this so-called entrance liturgy is part of a larger liturgical piece, which might involve a kind of procession into the Temple (the third strophe of the Psalm, Ps 24.7-10)32. It sings the praise of YHWH. the King of glory, the Lord of Hosts, who has been victorious over the waters at the creation (cf. the first strophe, Ps 24.1-2). In the following table, the Hebrew text of Ps 24.6 is compared with the actual quotation of it in ApPr 17.4:
Psalnt 24.6
1 117 3 350 Ili?Y9 7-35 -Wi?3n Such is the generation of those who seek him, who seek your face, (it is) Jacob. Selah. 1

ApPt 17.4 :atitu~eledtakes lot~r ~ ~ t a h s a gaso s a la'antlnk ja'eqoh This generation seeks him,
and seeks the face of the God of Jacob.

The most important difference beween the Hebrew text of Ps 24.6 and ApPt 17.4 can be found in the closure of the verse. In Ps 24.6 'your face' is object of the verb 'to seek', whereas 'Jacob' is n0t.a vocative, but explains 'the generation'. According to the Psalm, this generation is Jacob. The structure of the parallelism in the Masoretic text of Ps 24.6 is fine: it has a clear chiastic pattern3'. The actual text, however, contains some problems. In the first place, there is a transition from 3rd person singular ('who seek him') to 2nd person singular ('your face'). This incongruence could indicate that the Psalmist addresses himself directly to God at the end of his wor~hip"~. AlSee, e.g., Day, Psalms, 13, 60 Cf. H.-J. Kraus, Psalmen I (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 197g5) 343-4; J. Ridderbos, De Psalmert I, Ps 1-41 (Karnpen, 1955) 208. 33 The structure is according to the pattern ab b'a', in which a (117 37) corresponds with a' (3pY9), and b (lWl7) with b' (1-35 -Wp2n). 34 S O Ridderbos, Psalmen. 2 13.
3' 3'



though this transition is not impossible, it is unexpected and surprising. The second problem is the syntactical function of Jacob at the end of the verse, which can not function as a vocative. It should therefore be taken as explaining ' g e n e r a t i ~ n ' ~ Although ~. also this solution is not impossible either, one would have expected something like Xl;l ('he is') or ;lT ('this is') before 'Jacob'. These problems are reflected in the history of the text. Whereas the Targum changes the 2nd person into the 3rd person ('who seek his face, (it is) Jacob'), the Septuagint and the Peshitta omit the suffix of the 2nd person singular. They add 'God', and connect it with 'Jacob': 'That is the generation of those who seek him, who seek rhe face of the God of Jacob'. All these changes in the textual history of Ps 24.6 can be considered as attempts at clarifying the difficult Hebrew text which underlies the Masoretic version. I think therefore that the Masoretic text reflects the more original reading. ApPt 17.4 has a syntactical structure somewhat different from the massoretic text of Ps 24.6. It has the verb ('he seeks') and an object ('the face of the God of Jacob'). It may be clear that ApPt 17.4 reflects the alternative reading of the Septuagint and the Peskitta. Whereas in the biblical text 'Such is the generation' refers to the worshipper with clean hands, who is about to enter the temple (cf. Ps 24.4), in ApPt 'this generation' refers to 'the men who were in the flesh', waiting in the first heaven before entering the second heaven. Although the text does not explain who these men in the flesh are, the reference to Ps 24 makes clear that they are the rigtheous, probably not yet covered with their heavenly clothes, and not yet having entered the sanctuary. They are waiting in a kind of hall, before they enter, in the following of Jesus, into the real sanctuary. It is clear that Ps 24 does not receive a historical interpretation. It is neither David36 nor Solomon3', nor any other worshipper, who asks himself if he is able to enter the sanctuary38, but the text is eschatologically and


See N.A. van Uchelen, Psalnzei7 II (Nijkerk, 1977) 168. Cf. Krauss. Psalmen, 348. " Cf. Day. Psalms. 74. 3"idderbos, Psalinen, 208, 214, opts for a post-exilic date of the psalm.



cosmologically interpreted39. The righteous people are waiting after their death in the first heaven. The last explicit quotation (ApPr 17.6: 'Open the gates, princes') refers also to Ps 24, i.e., Ps 24.7a, 9a ('Lift up your heads, o gates'). Also here ApPt does not follow a text that is identical with the Masoretic text. It comes close to the Septuagint. The Sepruagint of Ps 24 (23).7a, 9a reads: 'Lift up the gates, your princes' (Piparc nbhaq o E Pipxovrsq 6pi3v). The wording of the Vorlage of the Septuagint seems to be the same as the massoretic text of Ps 24.7a, 9a: lNW O3'WNl P57YW, but the syntactical construction of the verse is interpreted differentlfO. The vocative 097YW ( ' 0 gates') is read by the Septuagint as an accusative, whereas the accusative of the Hebrew text (O3'WNl: 'your heads') is interpreted by the translator as a nominative. Morover, the reference of D3'WN'l ('your heads') is interpreted as referring to a 'person' (01 Pipxovrsq). In the Sepruagint, the word Pipxov seems to be used especially with regard to people who exercise power over other people, the 'princes of the people', the enemies, the adversaries of the people of God. In the Sepruagint version of Ps 24.7-10 the princes function as adversaries of the righteous, and especially as the adversaries of the might of YHWH. They try to prevent him from entering the holy city, from showing his power and kingdom. Because &pxovreq belongs to the same semantic field as Paothsbq (cf. Ps 24 [23].7a, 8a, 9b, lOa), and the princes are the adversaries of the King YHWH, it is not surprising that ih certain interpretations of Ps 24.7-10 the hpxovrsq are understood as supernatural beings. This is also the case in ApPt. However, it is not completely clear whether 'the princes' does refer to foreign powers, adversaries of the rigtheous, or not. It is not completely impossible
The Fathers interpreted Ps 24 as a Messianic psalm. Especially, they interpreted it typologically as the entrance of Christ after his ascension to heaven, cf. Ridderbos, Psalmen, 24. According to E. Kahler, Studien zum Te Deum lrnd i u r Gesclrichte des 24. Psalm in der Alten Kirche (Gottingen, 1958) 53-5, ApPt 17.2-6 reflects the first christological interpretation of Psalm 24; cf. Buchholz, Your- Eyes, 115. In rabbinic exegesis, one can find traces of a messianic interpretation of this psalm as well. See Midlnsk Leqalr Tob 130a and Targum Psalm 24.7-10, cf. Kahler, Studien, 47-8. 40 Kihler, Studien, 48-9.



that the princes of the quoted text from Ps 24.7a, 9a are the same as the angels mentioned in ApPt 17.5. In that case, the flocking together of the angels is the same action as the opening of the gates. However, it is more probable that they refer to another sort of group, adversaries of the angels, servants of Beliar, Satan. Comparable to the massoretic text of Ps 24, where the gates are closed for the entrance of YHWH, or the Sept~~agint version of Ps 24 (23), where the princes, the foreign kings, try to prevent YHWH from entering the city of his throne, Jerusalem, in the ApPt they try to prevent the Lord and the righteous people from entering into the higher heavens. The author of ApPt does not quote only Ps 24.7a, 9a, but he presupposes the whole Psalm. The quotation makes clear that it is the princes, the servants of Satan, who kept closed the gates. Most probably these are the gates that give entrance from the second into the third heaven".

The ApPt contains three explicit quotations, all from the Old Testament. All three have an introduction formula, a phenomenon that is exceptional in the ApPt. The form and function of the quotation differ in these places. In the first one, the reference to Ezek 37 is fragmentary. It may be called a summarising quotation. We did not exclude the possibility that ApPt did not make direct use from the biblical text, but from an intermediary text, although we did not accept this text as 4Q385, as others have done. It is therefore safer to say that the ApPt depends on a tradition of interpretation of Ezek 37. The second and third references are both to P s 24. The whole Psalm, in the version of the Septuagint, is presupposed, although only very few phrases are actually taken over. It is an eschatological and cosmological interpretation of the Psalm. The Psalm is taken as a prophecy to the Ascension of the Lord during which adversary powers should be conquered.

The text does not state this explicitly. However, it is unlikely that the gates between the first and second heaven are meant, since the crowd is already in the second heaven.

. "

XI. The Reception of the Apocalypse of Peter in Ancient Christianity


According to Richard Bauckham', the Apocalypse of Peter (ApPt) 'deserves to be studied for the following reasons': 1) 'It is probably the most neglected of all Christian works written before' the middle of the second century. 2) It 'derives from Palestinian Jewish Christianity during the Bar Kokhba war of 132-135 C.E. 1. ..I It deserves an important place in any attempt to consider the very obscure matter of what happened to Jewish Christianity in Palestine in the period after 70 C.E.' The date and provenance suggested by Bauckham are generally accepted by scholars (Dennis D. Buchholz', Paolo Marrassini3 and Enrico Norelli4). 3) 'Outside Palestinian Jewish Christianity, the Apocalypse of Petel- evidently became a very popular work in the church as a whole, from the second to the fourth centuries'. 4) And finally, this work should be studied because it 'preserves Jewish apocalyptic traditions'. This paper provides a chronological and geographical analysis of the reception of the ApPt, following Buchholz' distinction 'between
I R. Bauckham, Tlte Fate of the Dead. Studies on the Jewish and Cltristian Apocalypses (Leiden, 1998) 160- 1. D.D. Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be Opened. A St~rdy of tlte Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta. 1988) 398-412. P. Marrassini, 'L'Apocalisse di Pietro', in Y. Beyene et al. (eds), Etiopia e oltre. Stlrdi in onore rli Lanfr-anco Ricci (Naples, 1994) 17 1-232. E. Norelli, 'Pertinence thCologique et canonkite: les premibres apocalypses chretiennes', Apocrypha 8 (1997) 147-64 at 157.



direct and indirect witnesses'" Our survey will enable us to test Bauckham's third thesis, namely, that the ApPr was 'a very popular work in the church' with a 'considerable influence in the early Christian c e n t ~ r i e s ' ~ .

2nd century
Direct Witness The Muratorian Canon 71-72 writes, 'We receive only the apocalypses of John and Peter (scripta apocalypse etian7 lolzanis et Petri tanturn recipimus) although some of us are not willing that the latter be read in church". From this fragment we can conclude that the ApPt was known before 200 in Rome and read in churchR. For the author of the catalogue there is no difference between the two texts (John and Peter). Some Christians, however, objected to its liturgical use. The reasons for their objection are unknown. We do not know if they rejected the text because of its content, its authenticity, or for some other reason. Indirect Witnesses
1) The Sibylline Oracles 2 (Syria, ca. AD 150) probably used the ApPt as a source. Buchholz proposed ten parallels between the two texts9. 2) There are also parallels between the Epistula apostolorum (Syria, second half of the second century) and the ApPt:
Buchholz, Your Eyes, 20, writes, 'Direct witnesses are references in which the document is mentioned by name or quoted directly. Actual texts of the apocalypse are also included here. Indirect witnesses are those which use, refer to, or allude to the apocalypse without revealing that this is their source.' In my contribution I quote the ApPt in Buchholz' translation. "auckham, The Fate, 6. B.M. Metzger, The Canon o f the New Testament (Oxford, 1987) 307. J.-D. Kaestli, 'La place du Fragment de Murarori dans I'histoire du canon. A propos de la thbse de Sundberg et Hahneman', Cristianesimo nella stor-ia 15 ( 1 994) 609-34. "uchholz, Your Eyes, 45.


Epist. upost. 16 Epist. apost. 26 Epist. apost. 39 Epist. upost. 51


ApPt ApPt ApPt ApPt

1.6-7 4-6 14.1-3 17

Conclusion: In the second century the ApPt was known only in Rome and Syria. It was probably read in the Christian assembly in Rome, but some Christians disapproved of its use. There is no witness to its use in Syria. 3rd century Direct Witnesses 1) Clement of Alexandria, Eclogue pr-opheticae (Ecl. pl-oph.). This work consists of quotations and was written after the author's departure from Alexandria (202), probably in Palestine (Jerusalem). Ecl. pr-opk. 41 : According to Clement, 'The Scripture says that the children exposed by parents are delivered to a protecting (t2melouckos) angel, by whom they are brought up and nourishedlO. [...I Wherefore Peter also says in his Apocalypse (ni.rpo5 Ev . t i ' A X O K ~ ~( ~pI~~ l~ E i"and L ) : a flash of fire, coming from their children and smiting the eyes of the women"'". Ecl. pl-oplz. 48: 'Peter in the Apocal~psesays that the children born abortively receive the better part. These are delivered to a protecting (t2melo~~chos) angel'". Ecl. pr-oph. 49: 'the milk of the mothers which flows from their breasts and congeals, says Peter in the Apocalvpse, shall beget tiny flesh-eating beasts and they shall run over them and devour them'I3.
Cf. ApPt 8.10. ApPt 8.4: 'When the babies call out to God, lightning comes out from them, burning into the eyes of the women who managed their destruction with this adultery'. Akhmim Greek Fragment 26: 'and flames of fire came out from them and struck the women in the eyes'. l 2 Cf. ApPt 8.10. l3 ApPt 8.8-9: 'Their mother's milk runs from their breasts. It thickens and becomes putrid. Meat-eating animals are in it, and they go in and out of it, and they are punished forever, with their husbands.'




For Clement of Alexandria, the ApPt had a certain authority in some moral questions, especially concerning the attitude to the undesirable children. But it is not so clear if he considered this work as Scripture. Nevertheless, the difference between Clement and Eusebius of Caesarea is important. According to Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 6.14.1) Clement included the ApPt in the books ( z ? ~ &v&taefl~ou ypacpijq) upon which he commented in his Hypotyposeis. For Eusebius, however, the ApPt was a disputed writing (&vzth&y6p~vov), together with the Epistle of Jude, the remaining Catholic Epistles, and the Epistle of Barnabas. 2) A further witness is the 'pagan writer', quoted by Macarius Magnes. Macarius was probably the bishop of Magnesia (Asia Minor) at the beginning of the fifth century14. In the Apocr-iticus, written in a dialogue form, there is a debate between a pagan philosopher and a Christian. The attack on Christianity provides a summary of the fifteen books of Porphyry's Against the Chrisrians, written sometime before AD 270. According to B u ~ h h o l z ' ~ 'while , quoting passages from the New Testament, after he has repudiated the saying from the Synoptics "Many will come in my name saying I am the Christ" and before he attacks some of Jesus' parables, Porphyry digresses to treat the topic of the destruction of heaven and earth. He quotes twice from the ApPt in order to refute two of its teachings'. Apocriticus 4.6: 'By way of superfluity let this word also be quoted from the Apocalypse of Peter. He introduces the view that the heaven will be judged along with the earth in the following words, "The earth will present before God on the day of judgment all men who are to be judged and itself also will be judged with the heaven that encompasses it"'I6. Apocriticus 4.7: 'And again he says this statement which is full of impiety, saying "And every power of heaven shall bum, and the
S.J. Voicu, 'Makarios Magnks', in Dictionnaire Encyclopddique du Christianisme Ancien, vol 2 (Paris, 1990) 1520. l5 Buchholz, Your Eyes, 30-1. l6 ApPt 4.13: 'The earth will return everyone on judgment day because then it will have to be judged at the same time, and heaven too.'



heaven shall be rolled up like a book and all the stars shall fall like leaves from a vine and like leaves from a fig-tree"'17. Provided that these references are from Porphyry, it can be concluded that the ApPt was known in the West (in Rome) in the second half of the third century, and still used as a work with authority (as Scripture) by some Christians. It is possible that Macarius never read the ApPt (see Apocriticus 4, 16). In any case, he did not consider it as Scripture. Indirect Witnesses 1) In Hippolytus of Rome (died AD 235) we can find two allusions. The first allusion is found in his 0 1 7 the U17iverse (llspi TOG n a v ~ 6 q ) ' written ~, before 225. The second reference is found in The Refirtation of all Heresies (Elenchos) 10.34.2, written after 222, ~. two referwhere the author uses the adjective r a p z a p o G ~ o q 'These ences suggest that Hippolytus knew the ApPt. 2) The Acts of T l ~ o m a 5 s 1-58 (Edessa, first half of the third century). The 'sixth act' of the book is about a young Christian who killed his girlfriend because she refused to live in celibacy with him. The girl is raised from the dead by the apostle and gives (chs. 55-57) a description of the hell, which she had visited. This description suggests that the author of the Acts of Thonlas was acquainted with ApPt 7-12. 3) Pseudo-Cyprian, De laude marh~r-ii ( O n the G l o ~ of y ~ar-or--' dorn) 19-2120.This is a sermon attributed to Cyprian and presently dated to the early 250s2I. Judging by the details of the punishments, the author probably knew the ApPt.
Cf. ApPt 5.4-5. Hippolytus, 'Against Plato, on the cause of the Universe', in T l ~ e AnteNicene Fatl~er-s 5, 22 1-3. l9 M. Marcovich (ed). Hippolytw. Reficturio ornniun? haeresi~rnl(Berlin, 1986) 415: ~ a rapraporjxwv i byyihwv Kohaorov cpop~pov6ppa. Cf. ApPt 13.5. ?O The Ante-Nicene Fathers 5, 579-87. For date and place see the concise discussion by . I . Doignon in R. Herzog and P.L. Schmidt (eds), Hai~dhucllder- lateiilischerl Literatzcr- derAntike I V (Munich, 1997) 578.
l7 Is




4) Pseudo-Cyprian, Adver-sos aleatores (Against Dice-Thrower-s) 8. The dependence of this sermon from North Africa at the end of the third century on the ApPt (cf. 12.5-6: 'wheels of fire') is likely but cannot be proven2'. 5) The author of the Coptic Apocalypse of Elijah (3rd century) was acquainted with the ApPtn. This is suggested by the following parallels:
Apoc. of Elijah Apoc. of Elijnh Apoc. of Elijalz Apoc. of Elijah 13.10-14.9 18.1-20.15 23.1-10 23.1 1-24.2 ApPt 1.5-7 ApPt 2.7-13 ApPt 6.3 ApPt 14.1-3; 13.1-2

Conclusion: In third century Christianity the ApPt was better known than it had been a hundred years earlier. We have witnesses for Rome, Palestine (Clement), Edessa, North Africa and Egypt. But we can also see that our treatise is not really a bestseller. In Rome the community no longer read it in the assembly. If we consider the other testimonies we can infer that the use of the ApPt was limited. There is no witness in the greatest centres of ancient Christianity, such as Alexandria, Carthage, or Antiochia. We have only one witness from Syria.

Direct Witnesses
1) The Bodleian (ApPt 10.67) and Rainer (ApPt 14.2-5) fragments of the Greek ApPt derive from the same codex and show that the ApPt was known in Egypt in the fourth century. 'The manuscript is in the same tradition as our Ethiopic text, but the Greek by this time already shows signs of being corrupt"'. 2) According to Jerome (De vir-is illustr-ihus83, written at Bethlehem in 393), Methodius was bishop of Olympus, then of Tyre, and

For date and provenance see J. Doignon in Herzog and Schmidt, Handhuch IV. 505-8. D. Frankfurter, Elijall in Upper Egypt (Minneapolis, 1993). Buchholz, Your Eyes, 34.





died a martyr's death in Chalcia in AD 31 1-312. We do not know any more details of his life. It is possible that he was not a bishop but only a Christian teacher and writer in Lycia at the end of the third and the beginning of the fourth century2s. In his Symposium (2.6) Methodius quoted the ApPt 'to defend the proposition that all human generation is the work of God, even the births which result from ad~ltery''~:
Whence, also, we have received from the inspired writings, that those who are begotten, even though it be in adultery, are committed to guardian angelsz7. But if they came into being in opposition to the will and the decree of the blessed nature of God, how should they be delivered over to angels, to be nourished with much gentleness and indulgence? And how, if they had to accuse their own parents, could they confidently, before the judgment seat of Christ, invoke Him and say, 'Thou didst not, 0 Lord, grudge us this common light; but these appointed us to death, despising Thy

Even if Methodius knew the ApPt and highly regarded it, it is uncertain whether this writing was very widely known by Christians in Asia Minor. Methodius fails to identify the title of his source. 3) Eusebius of Caesarea. The church historian, who discusses the writings of Peter, accepts only the first Epistle. He notes that 'the so-called second Epistle we have not received as canonical, but nevertheless it has appeared useful to many, and has been studied with other Scriptures' (Hist. eccl. 3.3.1). Eusebius continues:
On the other hand, of the Acts bearing his name, and the Gospel named according to him and the Preaching called his and the so-called Revelation ( T ~ V ~ahoup6vqv 'Ano~ahuynv). we have no knowledge at all in the Catholic tradition, for no orthodox writer of the ancient time or of our own has used their testimonies. (Hist. eccl. 3.3.2)z9 C. Moreschini and E. Norelli, Histoire de la litte'rature chre'tienne antique grecque et latine, vol 1 (Geneva, 2000) 364-5. 26 Buchholz, Your Eyes, 35. l7 Cf. the quotations of ApPt 8.10 by Clem. Alex., Ecl. Proph. 41 and 48 (see above). IR The Ante-Nicene Fathers 6, 316. Cf. ApPt 8.7; Marrassini, 'L'Apocalisse di Pietro', 206. 29 Trans. K. Lake (Loeb).


18 1

Later in the Church History (3.25.1-3), Eusebius summarises the writings of the New Testament. Following the list of disputed books (&wth&y6p&va) which are 'the Epistle called of James, that of Jude, the second Epistle of Peter, and the so-called second and third Epistles of John', Eusebius continues with the v60ot, 'the books which are not genuine'.
[They are] the Acts of Paul, the work entitled the Shepherd, the Apocalypse of Peter, and in addition to them the letter called of Barnabas and the so-called Teachings of the Apostles. And in addition, as I said, the Revelation of John, if this view prevails. For as I said, some reject it, but others count it among the Recognized Books. Some have also counted the Gospel according to the Hebrews in which those of the Hebrews who have accepted Christ take a special pleasure. These would all belong to the disputed books, but we have nevertheless been obliged to make a list of them, distinguishing between those writings which, according to the tradition of the Church, are true, genuine, and recognized, and those which differ from them in that they are not canonical but disputed, yet nevertheless are known to most of the writers of the Church. (Hist. eccl. 3.25.4-6)

We must notice the difference between the author of the Muratorian Fragment and Eusebius. The first accepted both the Apocalypse of John and the ApPt as writings with authority: they were read in the church assembly in Rome. For Eusebius, more than a century later, they belong to the disputed books that must be rejected. 4) Like Eusebius, Jerome, De vir-is illustribus 1.5, considered the ApPt as a rejected writing.
Libri autem, e quibus urz~tsActorum eius inscribitur, alius Evangelii, tertius Praedicationis, quartus 'Ano~ahuyfio~, q~ririt~rs Iudicii inter apocryphas script~rras repudiantur30.

5) The Hontilv on the Parable of the Ten Virgins is an allegorical explanation of Matthew 25.1-13. According to Andr6 Wilmart, its discoverer, this is a Latin sermon from the 4th century, probably from North Africa3'. This homily quotes the ApPt by title.
A. Ceresa-Gastaldo (ed), Gerolanzo. Gli uonzirzi illustri (Florence, 1988) 72-4. 31 A. Wilmart, 'Un anonyme ancien De X Virginibus', B~rlletin d'ancierzne litte'rature et archbologie ckrbtiennes 1 (1910) 35-49, 88-102.



The closed door is the river of f i e by which the ungodly will be kept out of the kingdom of God, as it is written in Daniel and by Peter in his Apocalypse. (lines 58-60) That party of the foolish shall also arise and find the door shut, that is, the river of fire lying before them3'. (lines 77-78) The author of the homily, an unknown member of a North African church, provides us with an important witness to the use of the ApPr as Scripture. Indirect Witness 1) Cyril of Jerusalem, Carecherical Lectures (towards AD 350). Lecture 15 contains, two parallels with the ApPt, namely, 15.20 (ApPt 6.1-2) and 15, 21 (stream of fire as an instrument of punishment). The bishop of Jerusalem witnesses the use of this writing in Palestine in the middle of the 4th century. Conclusion: In the fourth century the ApPt was known in Palestine, Egypt, North Africa and probably in Asia Minor (Methodius of Olympus). There is no longer a witness from Rome. 5th ceritury and hevorld Direct Witnesses 1) Sozomen, in his Church History 7.19 (compiled between 439 and 450 in Constantinople), writes about the customs of different nations and churches : Thus the book entitled 'The Apocalypse of Peter', which was considered altogether spurious by the ancients. is still read in some churches of Palestine. on the day of preparation, when the people observe a fast in memory of the passion of the Saviour [on Good Friday]33. According to this statement our Apocalypse was read as Scripture in the first half of the 5th century. Cf. ApPt 5.8-6.5, 12.4-7. A Select Lihraly of Nicerle and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, series 2. vol 2 (repr. Grand Rapids, 1976) 390.
3 ' 33



2) In the stichometry of the biblical writings in the Codes Claromo~itanus(Paris gr. 107, a bilingual Greek and Latin manuscript) the ApPr appears in last place. The catalogue was written in Latin between the fourth and sixth centuries. It is probably Western, but we do dot have any closer information about its p r ~ v e n a n c e ~ ~ . 3) The List of tlie Sixry Books names 60 canonical and 25 apocryphal books. This list, which we find in several manuscripts, may be from 600. The ApPt is the 16th on the list of apocryphal writingP. 4) The Akhmim fragment of the Greek text of the ApPt was discovered in Egypt in 1886-1887. It probably dates from the sixth century3? It is different from our Ethiopic text and the texts quoted by earlier Christian writers. The Akhmim fragment demonstrates that the ApPt was known in sixth-century Egypt. 5) The Stichometly of Nicephorzrs is a list of canonical books. It probably dates from the middle of the ninth century. The catalogue divides the writings in three groups: recognised, disputed (antilegomena) and apocryphal. The disputed books of the New Testament are: the Apocalypse of John, the ApPt, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Gospel of the Hebrews. Apparently in ninth-century Palestine our writing was valued higher than the apocrypha3'.
Indirect Witnesses

1) The Apocalypse of Paul, probably written in Palestine between 395 and 41638, shows the influence of the We can discern that the Apocalypse of John is interested in the destiny of the Church in the last days; the ApPt in judgement at the end of the world; and the author of the ApPI in personal judgement immediately after death. The success of the ApPI is probably due to this feature.
NTA 1, 37. NTA 1, 42-3. 3h See Van Minnen, this volume, Ch. 11. 37 NTA 1, 41-2. 38 P. Piovanelli, 'Les origines de I'Apoca~pse de Pa~cl reconsidtrkes'. Apocrypha 4 (1993) 25-64. This dating is accepted by C. Moreschini - E. Norelli, Storia della letrerat~rracristia11a antica greca e latir~a,vol 211 (Brescia. 1996) 326-7. 39 For the parallels see Buchholz, Your Eyes, 67-70.



2) The Apocalypse of Thomas is a fifth-century document, surviving in two Latin recensions40. The shorter text (Cod. Vindob. Palatinus 16) is generally accepted as the earlier and more original version. According to Buchholz, the 'combination of similarity in form and in details of expression makes it virtually certain that the author of the Apocalypse of Thomas knew, and used the Apocalypse of Peter-'. Further, 'the Apocalypse of Thomas is a witness that heretical, probably Manichean-related groups were interested in the Apocalypse o f Peter-' towards 4004'. Conclusion: In the fifth century and beyond, the ApPr was known in Palestine and Egypt, around Constantinople, and probably in the West. We can say with certainty that it was read in a few local churches, but then it.disappears before our eyes.

Final conclusior~
As a result of this geographical and chronological survey it cannot be concluded that the ApPt was 'a very popular It was only known in some parts of ancient Christianity, and its circulation was limited in time and space. Only in second-century Rome and in some local churches of fifth-century Palestine was this writing read in congregations. As far as its geographical circulation is concerned, it was known in Rome (2nd-3rd centuries), Syria (2nd century), Palestine. and Egypt (3rd-5th centuries), Edessa (3rd century), North Africa (3rd-4th centuries), and Asia Minor (probably by Methodius of Olympus at the beginning of the 4th century). The history of the reception of the ApPt shows that canonicity is not a specific (intrinsic) value of a text. In this respect, Enrico Norelli is right when he claims that canonicity is the result of a historical process rather than being a condition of that p r o c e ~ sIt ~ is ~ .necessary, in my view, to establish periods and contexts in the examination of early Christian literature. If we want to gain an appropriate picture of

J.K. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1993) 645-51. Buchholz, Your- Eyes, 73. 42 See the 'Appendix' below. 43 Norelli, 'Pertinence thCologique', 152: 'La canonkit6 est le rksultat d'un processus historique, non pas la condition de ce processus'.



the development and evolution of Christianity in its first centuries, we should study not only the reception of the canonical writings but also of other texts, such as the apocrypha and the authors before the Council of Nicea. In this way we can better understand how Christianity developed its institutions and doctrine, until it became the Religion of the Roman Empire at the end of the fourth century.
Appendix: Geographical and chronological o v e r v i e ~ j
Rome 2nd century: Direct witness: Murator-ian Canorz 71-72 3rd century: Direct witness: The 'pagan writer' quoted in Macarius Magnes Indirect witness: Hippolytus of Rome Syria 2nd century: Indirect witness: Sihyllirze Oracles 2; Epist~rla Apostolorunl Edessa 3rd century: Indirect witness: Tlze Acts of Thomas Palestine 3rd century: Direct witness: Clement of Alexandria, Eclogue Propheticae 4th century: Direct witnesses: Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.3.2, 3.25.4; Jerome, De viris illustribus 1.5 Indirect witnesses: Cyril of Jerusalem, Carechetical Lect~~res 15 (20 & 21) 5th century: Direct witnesses: Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History 7.19; Stichonzetry of Nicepkol-us Indirect Witnesses: Apocalypse of Pall1

3rd century: Indirect witness: The Coptic Apocalypse of ElijaA



4th century: Direct witnesses: The Ruiner and Bodleian Fragments of the Greek ApPt 5th century: Direct witness:The Akhrninl Fragnlent of the Greek ApPt North Africa 3rd century: Indirect witnesses: Pseudo-Cyprian, De laude martyr-ii; PseudoCyprian, Ah~ersusAleator-es 4th century: Direct witness: Homily on the Parable of the Ten Virgins Asia Minor 4th century: Direct witness: Methodius of Olyrnpus, Synlposium 2.6

XII. The Suffering Jesus and the Invulnerable Christ in the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter

This final chapter deals with a Gnostic writing of the same name as the Greek-Ethiopic Apocalypse of Peter. The Gnostic text is contained in one of the fourth-century Coptic manuscripts of Nag Hammadi (codex VII, 3)'. What the two Petrine apocalypses have in common is that they speak of revelations granted by Jesus Christ to Peter at some time during the Holy Week2. However, the actual contents of the two texts are entirely different. The Gnostic text discloses how, through several visions, Peter was led to full understanding of the nature and the mission of Christ, the mediator of the revelation. In the course of his teaching, Christ refutes the 'errors' of non-Gnostic Christian groups, notably the early orthodox Christians. The Coptic papyrus manuscript contains the complete text of the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter (GApPt) in a clear legible handwriting. However, in other respects, it is a poor copy. Almost every page contains one or more grammatically unclear phrases3. These obscurities This writing was the subject of the Groningen dissertation of H.W. Havelaar, The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter, 1993. It was published as volume 144 of Teste lrrld Untersltch~rrigen zur Geschickte &r altchristlicken Literatur (Berlin, 1999). I assume that the so-called synoptic apocalypse (MI 24 and parallels) is in the background of the revelation in the Greek-Ethiopic writing. The setting of the Coptic-Gnostic revelation will be discussed below. Virtually all grammatical problems are discussed in Havelaar, Coptic Apocabpse, 54-69 ('Grammatical Annotations').




may be due to the incompetence of the translator or to an inaccurate transmission of the Coptic text. In some cases, the transcriber is likely to have inserted his own comments into the text. This could explain some of the convoluted sentences (see e.g. the opening lines quoted below). On several occasions we have no other choice than to accept that the text of the only surviving manuscript is corrupt.

I . Date of Origin
In their attempts to date the hypothetical Greek original of the
GApPt, James Brashler and Henriette Havelaar rightly concentrate on the terminus post quem 4. The text can hardly be earlier than the end

of the second century. The many references to texts that later became part of the New Testament preclude this5. Brashler and Havelaar also point to the polemics directed at emerging mainstream Christians, notably the rejection of their claim that 'the mystery of truth' belonged to them alone6. In the third century, the exclusive claims of the great Church were increasingly pressed upon minority groups that did not accept orthodox teaching and practice. The dating of the Greek original to the end of the second century or the beginning of the third century means that it was written 50 to 100 years after the original version of the Greek-Ethiopic Apocalypse'. To Schneemelcher this seems reason enough to rank the GApPt with the later apocalypses and the Greek-Ethiopic writing with the earlier ones8. In my opinion, this is a somewhat arbitrary decision. It should be noted that the preserved manuscripts of the
J. Brashler, The Coptic 'Apocalypse of Peter': A Genre Analysis and Interpretation (dissertation, Claremont Graduate School, 1977) 217; Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse,l6. See Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, ch. 6 ('The Apocalypse o f Peter and the New Testament'). GApPt 76.31-34, quoted below, n. 2q. For the dating o f the Greek-Ethiopic Apocalypse see C.D.G. Muller, 'Offenbarung des Petrus', in W . Schneemelcher, Neutestarnentliclze Apokrypken II (Tubingen, 19895)563f = NTA 1 1 , 622; Tigchelaar, this volume, Ch. IV. Schneemelcher, NTApokS II, 628-33 = NTA II, 700-12.


Greek-Ethiopic Apocalypse are centuries younger than the Coptic text of the GApPt. This is important if we bear in mind that we are dealing with 'living texts19.

2. The Literary Setting of the Revelation

The clzronological setting of Christ's revelations to Peter is extraordinary. Christ speaks to Peter dza-ing the events of Good Friday, not shortly before the day, as he does in the synoptic apocalypse and in the Greek-Ethiopic ApPt. In comparison with other Gnostic revelation texts, the setting of Christ's teaching is also exceptional. The Secret Book of John, The Wisdom of Jesus Christ, The Letter of Peter to Philip, and comparable Gnostic revelation texts typically refer to post-Easter appearances of Christ io. These writings pretend to reveal the full and definitive teaching of Christ granted to a select group of followers; Christ manifests himself to them - or his voice speaks from the world above". It is more difficult to determine the exact location of Christ's revelation in the Gnostic ApPt. The opening lines give us a hint. Unfortunately, this occurs in one of the aforementioned obscure passages in the Coptic manuscript. In all editions, this passage has been emended. I quote Brasher's translation of 199612: APOCALYPSE OF PETER. As the Saviour was sitting in the temple, in the inner part of the hcrilding at the convergence of the tenth pillar, and as he was at rest above the congregation of the living incorruptible Majesty, he said to me: 'Peter, (...).'I3

Texts that were constantly revised and adapted to new situations. K. Rudolph, 'Der gnostische "Dialog" als literarisches Genus', in P. Nagel (ed), Probleme der koptischen Literatur (Halle, 1968) 85-107 at 91: 'Die Szene (Hintergrund, Ort) ist stets in die Zeit nach der Auferstehung Jesu verlegt.' Cf. Ph. Perkins, The Gnostic Dialogue. The Early Church and the Crisis of Gnosticism (New York, 1980) 37-58. I' G.P. Luttikhuizen, 'The Evaluation of the Teaching of Jesus in Gnostic Revelation Dialogues', NovTest 30 (1988) 158-68. In B.A. Pearson, Nag Hammadi Codex VII (Leiden, 1996) 219. l3 GApPt 70.13-20.



The translation: 'the inner part of the building', is an emendation of a combination of Coptic words that does not make sense14. However, if we assume that this emendation and its translation are correct, what does the text mean?I5 Is this a reference to the earthly temple in Jerusalem or, rather, to a spiritual temple in the divine world? It is quite probable that the reference is to both places at the same time. As we will see, GApPt frequently directs the attention to a spiritual dimension in visible reality. In particular, the subsequent phrase, 'and as he was at rest above the congregation of the living incorruptible Majesty', suggests that the Saviour is in his true spiritual environment together with all those who belong to the FatherI6.

3. Physical and Spiritual Realities

In our text, Peter speaks about teachings revealed to him by Jesus Christ on Good Friday. An important part of the revelation concerned the true meaning of the events of that day. Christ explained to Peter that he himself - the divine and, allegedly, impassible Saviour would not be arrested and crucified, but only the physical body of Jesus. The apostle also intimates that Christ used special didactics to teach him. For instance, after the first words had been addressed to him, Peter noticed that the priests and the people were running to-

l4 GApft 70.15-16: ii <ME? i r e n l c i i ~ Brashler: ~ ; i i<n> METi r e nlcii~e (the gender of the definite article is changed before MET).In his dissertation (note 4 above) and in his subsequent translation in J.M. Robinson (ed), The Nag Hamnladi Library in English (Leiden, 19883), Brashler suggested reading: 'in the three hundredth (year) of the covenant'; A. Werner proposes, in Schneemelcher, NTApok5 11, 637: 'im dreihundertsten (Jahr) der Emchtung'; English translation, 705: 'in the three hundredth (year) of the foundation'; Havelaar: 'in the threehundredth <.. .> of the construction'. Is J.-D. Dubois, 'Le Prkambule de 1'Apocalypse de Pierre (Nag Harnmadi VII, 70.14-20)', in Gnosticisme et nlonde helle'nistique: Actes du Colloque de Louvain-la-Neuve (11-14 mars 1980) (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1982) 384-93, and the grammatical annotation by Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 54. l6 Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 73-5.


wards them. Christ used this occasion to instruct the apostle how he could inwardly transcend visible reality":
And as he was saying these things, I (Peter) saw the priests and the people running toward us with stones, as if they were about to kill us. I was afraid that we were going to die1'.

Christ summoned the apostle to put his hands over his eyes and to describe what he could see. At first, Peter did not understand the instruction, for he said that he could not see anything in this way. However, when Christ asked him to do it once more, something changed. Peter reports :
Fear and joy came over me, for I saw a new light brighter than the light of day. Thereupon it came down upon the Saviour19.

This experience was repeated with Peter's auditory senses. Christ asked him to listen to what the priests and the people said. Peter describes what he heard:
I heard the priests as they sat with the scribes. The crowds were shouting with a loud voice (73.2-4).

When Christ insisted that he listen with his spiritual ear, Peter heard something quite different, for he said to Christ:
'You are glorified while you are seatedY2O.

With his physical eyes and ears Peter heard chaotic and threatening things but the inner self perceived the joyful truth about the Saviour. In this way, the apostle was prepared for what he would experience shortly later on that day.

I' Cf. U. Schoenbom, Diverbium Salutis. Literarische Struktur und theologische Ir~terztiondes gnostischen Dialogs am Beispiel der koptischen 'Apokalypse des Petrus ' (Gottingen, 1995) 110-12. l8 GApPf 72.4-8 (trans. Brashler 1996, 223). l9 GApPt 72.21-27 (apart from a few minor points I adopt Havelaar's translation). 20 GApPt 73.9-10. This statement recalls the opening lines of the text speaking about the Saviour sitting in the temple. In both cases the reference is to a spiritual temple in the divine world as well as to the earthly temple.



4 . Jesus' Arrest and Crucifixion

The actual arrest and the crucifixion of Jesus are reported on the last pages of the text. First Christ encouraged Peter: 'Peter, come! Let us go and fulfill the will of the incorruptible Father. Behold, those who will bring judgment upon themselves are coming. They will put themselves to shame. But me they cannot touch. And you, Peter, will stand in their midst. Do not be afraid because of your cowardice. Their minds shall be closed for the Invisible One has opposed them.' When he had said these things, I saw him seemingly being seized by them (80.23-81.6). In the last sentence of this quotation, the attention is shifted from the arrest (still in the temple?) to the crucifixion scene. Curiously enough, even during the crucifixion Christ remained Peter's angelus interpres and answered the questions posed by the apostle: And I said, 'What am I seeing, 0 Lord? Is it you yourself whom they take? And are you holding on to me? Who is the one who is glad and laughing above the cross? Do they hit another one on his feet and on his hands?' The Saviour said to me, 'The one you see above the cross, glad and laughing, is the living Jesus. But the one into whose hands and feet they are driving the nails is his fleshly part (sarkikon), which is the substitute. They put to shame that which came into existence after his likeness' (...). The son of their glory, instead of my servant, they have put to shame'". An essential feature of this vision account is the distinction made between the suffering Jesus and the impassible Saviour. What is more, the two figures are related to conflicting powers. The Saviour is an agent of the incorruptible Father, whereas the human body of Jesus supposedly is a product ('the son') of the cosmic powers". Such an GApPt 81.6-23, 82.1-3. Cf. Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 102. This body 'came into existence after his likeness'. The idea that the human body was formed after a heavenly archetype by cosmic powers is elaborated in the Secret Book (Apocrypphon) of John and in other Gnostic texts.

interpretation implies that the wrongdoers who arrested and crucified Jesus, did not torture the Saviour but a human body. Above the cross, 'the living Jesus' laughs at their blindness. Thereupon, Peter reports, he perceived another figure:
And I saw someone about to approach us who looked like him and like the one who was laughing above the cross. He was woven in holy Spirit. He was the Saviour. And there was a great ineffable light, surrounding them, and the multitude of ineffable and invisible angels, blessing them. And I saw that the one who glorifies was revealed (82.317).

After this vision of what seems to be a higher dimension of the Saviour, Christ resumed his explanations to Peter:
And he said to me, 'Be strong! For you are the one to whom these mysteries have been given through revelation in order that you will know that the one they crucified is the first-born, the home of the demons, the clay vessel in which they dwell; it belongs to Elohim and to the cross that is under the law. - But he who stands near him, is the living Saviour, he who was in him before, (in) the one who was seized. And he was released. He stands joyfully, looking at those who treated him violently. They are divided among themselves. Therefore, he laughs at their inability to see. He knows that they are born blind. - So, the one who suffers will stay (behind), because the body is the substitute. - But the one who was released is my incorporeal body. - I am the intellectual spirit filled with radiant light. - The one you saw coming to me is our intellectual Pleroma, who unites the perfect light with my holy spirit' (82.17-83, 15).

Peter's visions are characterised as 'mysteries' given exclusively to himz3. In his explanations, Christ paid special attention to the temporal dwelling of the Saviour in the physical Jesus: until the arrest of Jesus, the Saviour was in him ('he was in him before'); after his 'release' from Jesus, he witnessed how 'the one staying behind' was seized and treated violently.
Cf. 71.8-21, where Christ says to Peter, 'from you I have made a beginning for the others whom I have called to knowledge', and 71.25-27, where Peter is reminded that he was called 'to know him (Christ) in the proper way'.



Actually, the vision accounts and the subsequent interpretations refer to two different aspects of the impassible Christ. Like the physical Jesus, these higher forms were seen by Peter as more or less independent figures :
1) 'the living Jesus' or 'living Saviour', also designated by Christ as his 'servant' and his 'incorporeal body' 2) 'the intellectual Pleroma', who in Peter's vision looked like 'the living Jesus'

These two distinctions within the concept of the Saviour indicate that GApPr does not conceive of two 'natures' (one human and one divine, as in later orthodox Christology) but of three. In particular, 'the living Saviour' deserves closer examination. His position between Christ's intellectual, or pleromatic, spirit and the physical body of Jesus reminds us of the role of the soul in a trichotomous concept of reality. In this view of man and the world, the innermost centre of the human being (designated as the mind, nous, the spirit, pneuma, or also the soul, i.e. the rational part of the soul) is related to the supramundane realm of God. In contrast, the soul (or its irrational part) is, supposedly, of the same ethereal substance as the stars and the planets. In this concept, the soul mediates between the incorporeal spirit and a body composed of the four elements. Ethel-, the fine-material substance of the soul, was regarded as the fifth element (qirinta essentia) and was seen as a special kind of 'body'24. In Hellenistic and Roman times, it was thought that when the immaterial soul or spirit left the supramundane world, it was wrapped in ethereal 'clothes'. The function of this ethereal 'body' was to protect the spiritual principle, to bridge the distance between the spirit and the earthly body, and, more specifically, to serve as a vehicle (och6ma) for the spirit. In this 'body', the spirit descended to the lower world and, after the death of the eaqhly individual, returned to the world above25.
P. Moraux, 'Quinta essentia', in RE 47 (Suttgart 1963) 1171-1263 at 1245-56. According to the Gnostic Apocryphon of John, humans have a 'psychic body' (made of the fine-material substance of the planetary spheres) as well as a carnal body. 25 Cf. Galen, De placitis Hippocratis et Platonis VII.7.25-26: 'if we must

The cryptic designations, 'my incorporeal body' and 'my servant', that Christ used to refer to the figure who left the body of the earthly Jesus before he was arrested and later appeared to Peter above the cross, become more comprehensible if we relate them to the speculations about an ethereal soul-body and its mediating role between the spiritual and the earthly-material components of man. 5. Peter's Example

GApPt claims that the Saviour was immune to the attacks by the forces of it was not he who was tortured and humiliated but his temporal 'substitute': the human body of Jesus. This claim is also voiced in the sections dealing with the 'future' errors of other Christian groups2'. Orthodox followers of Jesus are criticised for worshipping 'a dead man128and for imposing their belief in redemption, through Jesus' death (?), on others:
speak of the substance of the soul, we must say (. ..) either that it is this, as it were, luciform and ethereal body (...) or that it is an incorporeal substance, and (that) this body is its first vehicle, by means of which it establishes partnership (koindnia) with other bodies'; similar views are expressed by Philo ( Q ~ l irel-~rn~ s dill. her. 281-2), Cicero, Plutarch, and also by Patristic authors. According to Irenaeus, Adv. kael-. 1.6-7, the Valentinian Gnostics had very definite ideas about the three levels of being. Among others things, they believed that when Christ's spirit came down it was wrapped in a 'body having psychic substance'. See further H.S. Schibli, 'Origen, Didymus, and the vehicle of the soul', in R.J. Daly (ed), Origeniana Quinta (Louvain, 1992) 381-91, and A.P. Bos, The Soul and its Instrvmentaf Body (Leiden, 2003), ch. 14; cf. idem, De ziel en kaar veer-ruig (Leende, 1999) 99-116. 26 This is already alluded to in the first words addressed to Peter (GApPt 71.5-7): 'the principalities sought him but they did not find him'. 27 For this aspect of GApPt see K. Koschorke, Die Polemik der- Gnostikergegen das kirchliche Chr-istent~rrn(Leiden, 1978), and Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 193-204. 28 GApPt 74.13-15: 'they adhere to the belief in a dead mean, thinking that they wiIl become pure'; Havelaar, Copric Apocalypse, 89: 'The belief in the name of a dead man will appear to be the core of the conflict between the Petrine Gnostics and their opponents'.



They are the ones who suppress their brothers saying to them: 'through this our God has mercy, because salvation comes to us through this'".

The Christians in question are depicted as victims of the archontic powers :

Many will accept our teaching in the beginning but turn away again in accordance with the will of the father of their erroPO,because they have done what he wanted3'.

Peter feared that in this way many of 'the living ones' would be led astray, but Christ reassured him:
For a period of time determined for them in proportion to their error, they will rule over the little ones. But, after the completion of the error, the ageless (race) of immortal understanding will be renewed, and they (the little ones) will rule over their rulers32.

When the text was written, the Petrine Gnostics were still in conflict with other Christian groups and they had reasons to believe that they lived in a world dominated by cosmic rulers. They could feel encouraged by the last words addressed to Peter and by Peter's exemplary reaction:
'You. therefore. be brave and do not fear anything, for I will be with you so that none of your enemies will domineer over you. Peace be with you. Be strong! ' When he had said these things, he (Peter) came to his senses (84.6-13).

The translation of the concluding words was proposed by Alexander Bohlig and adopted by Brashler and Ha~elaar?~. I suggest that the relGApPt 79.1-16; cf. 76.31-34: 'they will boast that the mystery of truth is with them alone'. 30 This seems to be a designation of the demiurge, the chief archon, who in several Gnostic texts is seen as the cause of evil andoasthe enemy of spiritual humanity. Cf. GApPt 74.29-30: 'they (nowGnostic Christians) stand in the power of the archons'. 3' GApPt 73.23-27; cf. 74.22: 'they will be ruled in a heretical manner'. 32 GApPt 80.8-16 (trans. Brashler, 1996, 239; I added 'race' between brackets). The designation of the Gnostics as 'the little ones' recalls the expression 'these little ones' used by Jesus to refer to his followers in Matthew's Gospel (10.42; 18.6,10,14). See Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 97, 152, 179f. 33 A. Bohlig, 'Zur Apokalypse des Petrus', Gottirlger Miszellen 8 (19731,



evant Coptic phrase is laden with far more meaning34: after Christ's teachings Peter 'came to himself (i.e. to his true self)'. This interpretation means that when the Saviour had completed his teachings, Peter achieved the state of perfection to which he was called before by Christ: You, too, Peter, become perfect (...) just like me, the one who has chosen you. For from you I have made a beginning for the others whom I have called to knowledge (7 1.5-21).

The Gnostic ApPr claims to contain Peter's own account of the revelations granted to him by Jesus Christ on Good Friday. The revelations pertain first and foremost to the true meaning of the things seen and events experienced by the apostle on that day. It is remarkable, and somewhat confusing, that Christ, the Saviour, is both the subject and object of the revelation. Peter saw different forms of Christ, while at the same time Christ was with him and spoke to him. Christ insisted that the suffering Jesus should not be mistaken for the divine Saviour. In Christ's explanation, the human body of Jesus was merely a temporary dwelling-place. Moreover, he repudiated this sarkikol~as the product ('the son') of quasi-glorious cosmic powers. In GApPr, the cosmic powers are the attackers and enemies of Christ and the Gnostics. As Christ disclosed in his first words addressed to Peter, 'the principalities' sought him but could not find him3'. Christ himself was fully immune to the attacks of the forces of evil. His followers could attain this level of protection if they allowed themselves to be enlightened by Christ's teaching and, accordingly, were prepared to live in this world as 'strangers' and 'children of light' (78.25-6, 83.17-9). Actually, Christ predicted that some of his followers would turn away from the truth and accused their leaders, 'the messengers of er11-3. For the use of the third person style in this interpretation of the last sentence of the text see Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 68-9 and 78f. 34 aq y w n e Z P A I N Z H T ~ ~ 35 GApPt 71 5 7 ; cf. note 26 above.



ror', of siding with his enemies (77.24ff, 80.2-6). The 'children of this age' would do what 'the father of their error' wanted them to Christ made great demands on Peter (and, through, him on the others whom he had called to knowledge3'). He frequently encouraged and reassured the apostle. Peter's fears concerned the future as well as the present. He was afraid of what might happen to Christ, and to himself, when he saw what the priests and the people wanted to do. But he also feared future oppression by the cosmic forces and the people 'in their power'38. Only gradually did the apostle overcome his fears; and through Christ's revelations he was led, finally, to full understanding. Of course, the inner transformation of Peter was meant to set an example to the Gnostic readers of this writing39. In conclusion, it has to be noted, that GApPt's interpretation of Jesus' arrest and crucifixion does not deviate substantially from what we find in some of the other early-Christian Gnostic writings. For instance, the Letter of Peter to Philip in codex VIII of Nag Hammadi contains a sermon by Peter in which the apostle first summarises the well-known account of Jesus' passion, death, and resurrection, but subsequently he says: 'My brothers, Jesus is a stranger to this suffering'40. His argument was that it was not the divine Saviour, the bringer of the Truth, who suffered but rather the Gnostics who, before his coming, had lived in darkness and were in need of Christ's redemptive message. We could also compare the Gnostic chapters of the Acts of John (99-101), where a distinction is made between the 'wooden cross in Jerusalem' and the 'cross of light' revealed to John when he fled from the crucifixion scene to the Mount of Olives. John was asked by the Saviour to scorn the 'humble' and 'unworthy' beliefs of those who assumed that he had been crucified in Jerusalem. The story ends

Cf. note 30 above. GApPt 7 1.20f. 3"ApPt 73.17-18. 39 This aspect of the GApPt is particularly highlighted in Schoenborn, Diverbium Salutis. Letter of Peter to Philip 139.13-25.

with an account of how John laughed at the people around the wooden cross. In these, and other Gnostic writings4', Christ is viewed as an 11luminator from the transcendent world. The idea that he could suffer as a physical being, is explicitly and vehemently rejected42.

4' Cf. the Treatise of Seth, the writing that precedes GApPr in NHC VII, esp. 51.20-52.3 and 55.16-56.20: Christ laughed at the ignorance of the executioners when they crucified 'their man'. 42 See further the discussions in G. Luttikhuizen, 'The thought pattern of Gnostic mythologizers and their use of biblical traditions', in J.D. Turner and A. McGuire (eds), The Nag Hammadi Library after Fifry Years (Leiden 1997) 89-101 at 90-93; idem, 'A Gnostic reading of the Acts of John', in J.N. Bremmer (ed), Tile Apocryplzal Acts of John (Louvain 1995) 119-52 at 127-47. I thank dr. A. Hilhorst for his critical comments and for several valuable suggestions.

XIII. Bibliography of the Apocalypse o f Peter

The Greek Apocaljpse of Peter Bouriant, U., 'Fragments du texte grec du livre d ' ~ n o c het de quelques Ccrits attribuCs B saint Pierre', Me'moires publikes par les Memhres de la Missiorl Arche'ologiq~re Fratlgaise alr Cair-e IX.1 (Paris, 1892: editio princeps) 142-7; A. Lods, photogravures of the manuscript, ibidem, IX.3 (1893) 224-8 Buchholz, D.D., Yolrr Eyes Will Be Opened: A Study of the Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta. 1988) Gebhardt, 0. von, Das E~rangeliirnilitid die Apokaljpse des Petivs (Leipzig, 1893) James, M.R., 'A New Text of the Apocalypse of Peter I-111', JTS 12 (191 1) 36-54 (with addenda at p. 157). 362-83 (the actual new text at 367-9), 573-83 , 'The Rainer Fragment of the Apocalypse of Peter', JTS 32 (1931) 270-9 Preuschen. E., Alltilegor71ena (Giessen, 1905') 84-8 (with patristic citations) Etkiopic Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be Opened GrCbaut, S., 'LittCrature Cthiopienne pseudo-clCmentine. Texte et traduction du trait6 "La seconde venue du Christ et la rCsurrection des morts",' Revire de I'Orienr Chrf'tien 15 (1910) 198-214, 307-23 (text), 425-39 (translation)

Sallmann, K. (ed), Handbuch der lateinischen Literatur der Antike, N , Die Liter-atur des Umbrvchs: Vorz den I-on~ischeli zur christlichen Literal

I am grateful to Ton Hilhorst for suggestions and corrections.


20 1

tur: 117 bis 284 n. Chr. (Munich, 1997) 406 (on early Latin translation) Translations Bauckham, R., in F. Bovon and P. Geoltrain (eds), ~ c r i t sapoctyplzes chre'tiens I (Paris, 1997) 745-74 Duensing, H., 'Ein Stiicke der urchristlichen Petmsapokalypse enthaltender Traktat der athiopischen pseudoclementinischen Literatur', ZNW 14 (1913) 65-78 (with philological notes) Elliott, J.K., The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1993) 593-615 Erbetta, M., Gli Apocri' del Nuovo Testamento Ill (Torino, 1966) 209-33 James, M.R., The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1953) 505-24 Klijn, A.F.J. (ed), Apokr-iefen van her Nieuwe Testament, 2 vols (Kampen, 1984-85) 11.205-9 , Apocriefe openharingen, orakels en brieven. Buitenhijhelse aanl~ullingen op het Nieuwe Testament (Baarn, 2001) 4 1-56 Marrassini, P., 'L'Apocalisse di Pietro', in Y. Beyene et a/. (eds), Etiopia e oltre (Naples, 1994) 17 1-232 Mingana, A., Woodhrooke studies: Christian documents in Syriac, Arabic, and Garskuni, 7 vols (Cambridge, 1927-34) I11 (1931): Vision of Tlzeophilus. Apocalypse of Peter Moraldi, L., Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento I1 (Torino, 1971) 1803-48 Preuschen, Antilegometfa, 188-92 Schneemelcher, NTA 11, 101-51 Starowieyski, M. (ed), Apokr-yfi Nowego Testanzerzta I n (Cracow, 2000) 225-41 Apocalypse of Peter Bauckham, R., 'The Two Fig Tree Parables in the Apocalypse of Peter', JBL 104 (1985) 269-87 , 'The Apocalypse of Peter: An Account of Research', ANRW 11.25.6 (Berlin, 1988) 4712-50. , 'The Conflict of Justice and Mercy: Attitudes to the Damned in Apocalyptic Literature', Apocrypha 1 (1990) 181-96, repr. in The Fate of the Dead, 132-48 , 'The Apocalypse of Peter: A Jewish Christian Apocalypse from the Time of Bar Kokhba', Apocr:yplra 5 (1994) 7-1 11, repr. in The Fate of the Dead, 160-258 , 'A Quotation from 4Q Second Ezekiel in the Apocalypse of Peter', Revue de Qunlran 59 (1992) 437-46, repr, in The Fare of the Dead, 259-68 , 'The Martyrdom of Peter in Early Christian Literature', ANRW 11.26.1 (Berlin, 1992) 539-95 , The Fate of the Dead (Leiden, 1998)



Berger, K., 'Unfehlbare Offenbarung. Petrus in der gnostischen und apokalyptischen Offenbarungsliteratur', in Korttinuitat und Einheit, Festsclzrift F. Mussner (Freiburg, 1981) 261-326 Cowley, R., 'The Ethiopic Work Which Is Believed to Contain Material of the Ancient Greek Apocalypse of Peter', JTS 36 (1985) 151-3 Dieterich, A., Nehyia (Leipzig, 1893, 19132) Edsman, C.M., Le baptgme de feu (Uppsala, 1940) 53-63 Gray, P., 'Abortion, Infanticide, and the Social Rhetoric of the Apocalypse of Peter', JECS 9 (2001) 313-37 Hamack, A., BI-uchstiicke des Evangeliums ~rnd der Apokalypse des Petrus (Leipzig, 1893) , Die Petrusapokalypse in der abendlandiscl~ettKirche (Leipzig, 1895) Hams, J.R., 'The Odes of Solomon and the Apocalypse of Peter', E.rpository Times 42 (1930) 21-2 Hills, J.V., 'Parables, Pretenders and Prophecies: Translation and Interpretation in the Apocalypse of Peter', Revue Biblique 98 (1991) 560-73 Himmelfarb, M., Tours of Hell: An Apocalyptic Fornt in Jewish and Christian Literature (Philadelphia, 1983) James, M.R., 'The Revelation of Peter: A lecture on the newly recovered fragment', in J.A. Robinson and M.R. James (eds), The Gospel Accordin,? to Peter and the Revelation to Peter-: Two lectures on the newly recovered,fr-agments together with the Greek texts (London, 1892) 37-82 , 'The Rediscovery of the Apocalypse of Peter', The Church Quarterly re vie^^, April 1915, 1-37 Kraus, T.J., 'Acheron and Elysion: Anmerkungen im Hinblick auf deren Venvendung auch im christlichen Kontext', Mnentosyrie 46 (2003) 145-64 , 'Die griechische Petrus-Apokalypse und ihre Relation zu ausgewahlten ~berlieferun~stragem apokalyptischer Stoffe', Apoctypha 14 (2003) Marnorstein, A., 'Jiidische Parallelen zur Petrusapokalypse', ZNW 10 (1909) 297-300 Norelli, E., 'Situation des apocryphes pktriniens', Apoctypha 2 (1991) 31-83 Priimm, K., 'De genuino apocalypsis Petri textu, examen testium iam notorum et novi fragmenti Raineriani', Biblica 10 (1929) 62-80 Quispel, G., and R.M. Grant, 'Note on the Petrine Apocrypha', VigChris 6 (1952) 31-2, repr. in R.M. Grant, Christian Beginnin~s:Apocalypse to History (London, 1983) Rodriguez, M., 'Tres apdcrifos non gndsticos sobre Pedro (el Apocalipsis de Pedro, el Evangelio de Pedro y 10s Hechos de Pedro', in R. Aguirre Monasterio (ed), Pedro en la Icqlesiaprimitiva (Estella, 1991) 141-84 Schmidt, D.H., The Peter Writings: Their Redactol-s and Their Relationships (Diss. Northwestern University. Evanston, Ill., 1972) Spitta, F., 'Die Petrusapokalypse und der zweite Petrusbrief', ZNW 12 ( 1911) 237-42



Tardieu, M., 'HCrCsiographie de I'Apocalypse de Pierre. Histoire et conscience historique dans les civilisations du Proche Orient ancien', Cahiers du Centre d' ~ t u d e du s Proche-Orient Ancien 5 (1991) 33-9

Index of Names, Subjects and Passages

Abel96 Abraham 74, 116 Acheron/Acherusia(n Lake) 6, 9-10, 79-80, 85-86, 91-107, 153 Achilles Tatius 105 Acts of Andrew 119 Acts of John 90: 119; 99-101: 198 Acts of Paul and Thecla 28-29: 32, 101, 150 Acts of Peter 6, 7,12: 56; 14: 119; 38: 115 Acts of Thomas 51-58,55-57: 178; 80, 129, 149: 119 Adam 93-94, 96-97, 102; Jewish legends 92 Aelius Theon, Progymnasmata 99.2: 108 Aftemelouchos 9 afterlife 11 Akhmim 16-18 Akiba 58-62 Alcinous, Didasc. 32.4: 135 Alexandria 8, 30 Ambrose, In Luc. 8.14: 135 Antichrist 54 Apocalypse of Abraham 31.4: 131 Apocalypse of Baruch 9 Apocalypse of Elias 150 Apocalypse of EIijalz 5.27-8: 131 ; 5.27-9: 32; 13.10-14.9, 18.1-20.15,23.110, 23.1 1-24.2: 179 Apocalypse of James 95 Apocalypse of Mary 9 Apocalypse of Moses 92-93, 104, 107; 7, 21-25, 27,' 32, 35: 102; 37.3: 10, 154; 40.1-2: 96 Apocalypse of Paul 16: 8; 34: 9 Apocalypse of Paul (Coptic version) 17: 103; 22: 102; 22-3: 9, 154 Apocalypse of Pal11 (Greek version) 16: 9; 17: 103; 22: 93; 34: 9; date: 92, 183 Apocalypse of Paul (Latin version) 17: 103: 22: 93, 96, 102; 23: 102-3 Apocalypse of Peter 1-3: 62; 1-20: 11 1; 1.1: 75; 1.1-3: 54-5; 1.5-7: 179; 1.6-7: 176; 2: 56; 2.7-13: 179; 3-6: 72; 3: 56; 4-6: 176; 5: 30; 5.4-5:



178; 5.8-6.5: 182; 6.1-2: 182; 6.3: 179; 7-11: 61; 7-12: 72, 75; 7.2: 72; 7.3-4: 111; 7.3: 72; 7.5-6.7.7-8,7.9-11: 111; 7.10: 29, 138, 140; 7.12: 71; 8.1-4: 112; 8.4: 176; 8.7: 180; 8.8-9: 176; 8.10: 176, 180; 9.1-2: 112; 9.2: 71-73; 9.2-4: 7; 9.3: 71-73, 112; 9.4: 71, 74, 112; 9.5-7, 10.1, 10.2-4, 10.5-6: 112; 10.5: 71,75; 10.6-7: 179; 10.7: 112; 12.4-7: 182; 12.5-6: 179; 13: 30-1, 102; 13-14: 72; 13.1: 72; 13.1-2: 179; 14: 92, 100; 14.1: 75; 14.1-3: 176, 179; 14.2-5: 179; 15-7: 75; 15-17: 75-76; 15-20: 78; 15-27: 15; 15.1: 75-76; 15.2-7: 77; 16.2-4: 76;16.5: 74; 16.9: 74, 77; 17: 176; 17.1: 73; 20: 29; 20.34: 55; 22: 56, 111; 23: 4, 12, 111; 24: 12, 109, 152; 24a,b: 111; 25: 4,29, 111, 121, 152; 26: 28, 112; 27: 4,29, 112; 28: 56, 112; 29: 112; 30: 112; 31: 12, 112; 31-34: 111; 32: 4, 112, 152; 33: 28, 29; 33a: 112; 33b: 112; 34: 56, 112, 117, 152; abortion 121; and Antioch 30; Arabic 131 ; baptism of sinners 91-107; and Bar Kochba 29,57-59.61-65,6771, 73-74, 77, 174; Bodleian fragment 35; castration in 121; childbirth in 121; Egyptian origin 14, 75, 71 ; finding 17-19: 17; and Gospel of Perer 158; grotesque body in 108-126; hell in 114-23; infanticide in 121; justice in 127-57; origin of text 75-7; and Palestine 30; Palestinian origin 75; and Paradise 83; and 2 Perer 54; Rainer fragment 35, 83-88, 107; reception in ancient Christianity 174-86; and Rome 30; and the Sinlilit~tdes 76; sinslsinners and punishment 71-73, 110-14; and temple 77 Apocalypse of Peter (Ethiopic) 6; 1: 57,58; 1-2: 59,64, 111; 2: 59,63,65, 68, 74, 124; 2.7: 64-66; 2.8: 29, 64, 66, 69; 2.8-9: 67; 2.8-10: 66; 2.8b: 65; 2.9: 66; 2.10: 68-70; 2.10-11, 13: 64, 66; 2.11: 70, 124; 2.12: 68-69; 3: 137-8, 142, 147, 152-3; 3-6: 111; 3.2: 152; 3.3: 138; 3.4: 138, 147; 3.4b, 3.5-6: 124; 3.5: 138; 3.7: 31, 139; 4.1: 162; 4.2: 162-3; 4.5,4.6: 162; 4.7: 161 ; 4.7-8: 159, 162; 4.7b: 158; 4 . 7 ~ :15960; 4.7~-8a:160; 4.7-9: 158-9, 163; 4.8: 160-1, 167-8; 4.8b: 160; 4 . 8 ~ 162; : 4.9: 161-3; 4.9a: 160, 162; 4.10-1: 124; 4.12: 162-3; 4.13: 162; 5: 30; 6: 84; 6.6, 6.9: 152; 7: 56; 7-13, 7.1-2, 7.3-4, 7.5-6, 7.78: 111; 7.7: 109; 7.8: 152, 155; 7.9-11: 111; 7.10: 29; 7.11: 141, 152, 155; 8: 8; 8.3-4: 138, 141; 8.5-7: 138; 8.5-10: 112, 121; 8.6-7: 141; 8.9: 152; 8.10: 28, 152; 9.1: 29; 9.1-2: 112; 9.3: 112; 9.4: 73, 112; 9.5-7: 112; 10: 55, 84; 10.1: 112; 10.2-4: 112; 10.3: 152; 10.5: 28, 29; 10.5-6: 112; 10.6-7: 152; 10.7: 112, 153; 11: 64; 11.4: 138, 140, 155; 11.6-7, 11.8-9: 113; 11.9: 152; 12.1-3, 12.4-7: 113; 13: 6, 8, 31, 153-4; 13.2: 32, 138, 141, 143; 13.3: 152; 13.6: 141, 155; 14: 6, 78-79, 81, 83, 106, 150, 153; 14-17: 111 ; 14.1-3: 31, 32; 14.4: 30; 15-16: 61; 15-17: 29, 31; 16.5: 29, 158; 16.6: 29; 16.8-9: 65; 16.917.1: 168; 17.1, 17.2: 169; 17.2-6: 168, 172; 17.3-6: 77; 17.4: 170-1; 17.4a: 158; 17.5: 173; 17.5b: 158; 17.6: 172; 20: 30; 23, 24a, 24b,


25: 111; 26,27,28,29,30: 112; 31: 12, 112; 32,33a, 34: 112; origin of text 64; temple in 168; vengeance 152-3 Apocalypse of Peter (Gnostic) 187-99;; 70.13-20: 189; 70.15-16: 190; 71.5-7: 195, 197; 71.5-21: 197; 71.20f.: 198; 71.25-27: 193; 72.4-8, 72.21-27, 73.2-4, 73.9-10: 191; 73.17-18: 198; 73.23-27: 196; 74.1315: 195; 74.22: 196; 74.29-30: 196; 76.31-34: 188, 196; 77.24ff.: 198; 78.25-6: 197; 79.1-16: 196; 80.2-6: 198; 80.8-16: 196; 81.6-23, 82.1-3: 192; 82.17-83, 15: 193; 83.17-9: 197; date of origin 188-9; literary setting 189-90; location 189-90 Apocalypse of Thornas 184 Apuleius 3 Aristophanes 13, 119-20; Frogs 145-8: 118; 145-51, 273: 12-3; Gerytades fr. 146.13: 118 Aristotle, Politics 1341: 108; Rh. 1386b34-1387a2: 134 Arnobius, 2.14: 104 Attis 120 Augustine, De Chitate Dei 21.18: 100; 21.18.1: 33; 22.22: 131; EE 1233b24-5: 140; Enar. in Ps. 108.20: 135; Enchiridion 97; 94.24: 131; Rh. 1385b13ff., 1386b14-5: 140 Bacchic mysteries 13 Balaam 53 Banias 76 Bardaisan 105 3 Barrtck 10.2: 9 Bauckham, R. 6, 14,29 Bayle, CEuvres Div. 111, p.863: 151 Beliar 173 Bellmine, R., De aeterna felicitate Sanctorum IV.2: 131 Bernardus of Claimaux 117 Bible: Gen 3: 102; 9.6: 113; 27.22: 60; Ex 21.23-25: 113; Lev 24.20: 113: Num 22-25: 53; 24.17: 58-59, 61; 31.8: 53; Deut 13.2-4: 69; 13.2-6: 53, 57; 18.20-22: 53, 57; 19.19: 113; Josh 13.22: 53; 1 Sam 28: 80; Job 10.21, 26.5: 115; Ps 2.6-7: 76; 24: 158, 168-73; 24.3: 169; 24.4: 171; 24.4-6: 169; 24.6: 169-71; 24.7-10: 170; 24.7a, 9a: 172-3; 88.10, 94.17: 115; 104.1-2: 82; Sorzg 5.10-14: 61; 23.30: 131; Eccl 9.10: 115; Is 14.10-1, 16-7, 26.14: 115; Jer 14.14: 53; 23.13: 53, 26.18: 61; Ezek 1.28: 82; 6.2-3, 13.2, 17-18, 21.7-8, 14: 166; 28.14: 76; 28.21-22, 29.2-3, 30.2: 166; 32.21: 115; 34.2, 35.2-3: 166; 37: 158-73; 37.1-14: 159-60, 166; 37.1, 37.3: 162; 3 7 . 3 ~ 159; : 37.4: 160, 162; 37.4b: 159; 37.5: 162; 37.6: 160, 165; 37.7: 159, 162, 165,167; 37.8: 159, 166; 37.9-10: 166; 37.11: 162-3; 37.12-14, 37.12: 162;



38.2-3, 39.1: 166; Dan 10-12, 11: 70; 11.41: 66; 12.3: 82; Nah 3.7: 69; Zech 8.4-5: 61; 13.9: 84; Ma1 2.3: 120; Mt 15; 5.6: 57; 5.10: 29; 5.19: 56; 5.29-30: 114; 5.38ff.: 131; 5.44: 100, 154; 5.44-8: 155; 5.45: 44; 7.15-20, 21-23: 53, 56; 10.42: 196; 11.25-36: 59; 12.32: 84; 16: 76; 16.13: 75; 16.23: 73; 17: 73, 75; 17.4, 17.4-8, 17.5: 73; 17.5b: 169; 17.22: 75; 18.6, 10, 14: 196; 24: 111; 24.3: 75; 24.4-5: 59; 24.9: 66; 24.10: 66-67; 24.11,24: 54; 24.24: 64, 66, 69; 24.32-6: 123; 25.1-13: 181; 25.31-46: 29; 26.24: 138; 27.59: 96; 28.16: 75; Mk9.2-13: 111; 13.22: 54; 13.28-9: 123; 14.21: 124, 138; Lk 13.6-8: 123; 16.19-31: 130; 21.29-31: 123; 22.3: 115; 23.53: 96; John 5.22: 44; 19.40: 96; 20.24: 108; Acts 1.1-11: 169; 1.12: 76; 1.18: 115; 7.60: 100, 154; 9.37: 95; Rom 1.23: 28; ICor 15.35-49: 124; Gal 4.19, 5.19, 5.7: 120; Heb 9.11: 73; 12.23: 103; Jam 181; 1.2, 12: 57; 2 Peter 158, 181; 1.18: 75-76; 2.1: 53; 2.1-1-2: 54; 2.2: 73; 1 John 2.22: 68; 1 and 2 John 68; 2 and 3 John 181; Jude 181; Rev 30, 128; 13.11-17, 16.13, 19.20, 20.10: 54, 59; 21.3: 73; 21.14-15: 125 Bonaventure 130 Book of Enoch 1 , 4 Book of Jubilees 19 Book of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, by Bartholomew the Apostle 91, 95, 105-7; fol. 20a-20b: 106; 46.3: 10 Book of Thomas the Contender 8 Book of Watchers 6, 76 horboros 118 Bucholz, D.D. 3 1-3, 42 Camus, A. 157 Caesarea Philippi 75 Disp. 4.20: 135 Cicero, T~isc. confessors 101, 107 Canon Muratori 30,52 Cavallo, G. 16, 20, 23 1 Clem. 46.7-8: 147 Clement of Alexandria 28; Eclogue Propheticae 41: 28, 121, 176, 180; 48: 9, 28, 121, 176, 180; 49: 121, 176; Stromata 14: 104 Cocytus 80, 85, 98-9 Codex Claromontanus 183 crucifixion 192-5 Cybele 120 Cyprian, Ad Demetr. 30.2; Adversos aleatores 8: 179; De laude martyrii 19-21: 178; Ep. 27.1, 15.4, 20.1: 107 Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures 15.20, 15, 21 : 182


Dan 76 danse macabre 117 Dante 127 David 171 Dead Sea Scrolls: IQpHah X 9: 68; 4QpPs a 126: 68; lQHa XI1 17: 68; 4Q339: 69; 4Q169: 69; 4Q38.5: 163, 167; 4Qpseudo-Ezekiel: 164; 4Q385, frg.2: 164-8; 4Q385.5.8: 165; 4Q386, frg. 1, col.1: 164-8; 49388, frg. 8: 164-8; 4QSecond Ezekiel: 166, 168 Didache 55 Didimon 108-9 Diels, H. 2 Dieterich, A. 5-7, 10, 12, 55, 78 Diogenes Laertius 6.51 and 68: 108 Dionysiac mysteries 1 1 Edessa 8 Edom 60 Eleusinian mysteries 5 Eleusis 12-4 Elijah 30, 64, 70, 73-74, 77, 113 Elysian fields 6, 9-10, 79, 154; in Rome 8 1 Encon1ilrnl on Saint John the Baptist by Saint John Chrysostonz 95 Enoch 64, 70, 76-77 I Erioch 16, 20. 23-5; 5.7: 82; 6-16: 76; 10.8: 82; 13-16: 77; 14.20: 82; 17-19: 76; 17: 94; 22: 97; 32: 76; 106: 77; 108.14-5: 131 Ephraim 69 Epictetus, Diatr. 2.16.45: 135 Epistlrla Apostolor~m~ 150, 175; 16, 26, 39: 176; 40: 33; 51: 176 Epistle of Barnabas 177, 183 Epistle of Jude 177 Esau 60 eschatia 120 Ethiopic translation of Daniel 67 Eusebius 67; Chronicle 68, 70; Hist. eccl. 3.3.1-2: 180; 3.25.1-3, 3.25.4-6: 181; 4.6, 4.8.3ff.: 68; 4.8.4: 58; 5.2.5: 100-101; 6.14.1: 177; 7.22.9: 96; Or. Const. 9: 104; Praep. elt. 11.38: 104 Eve 102 4 Ezra 19; 7.36-8: 131 Ezrael 29. 140 Falconilla 32, 101, 150 false messiahs 68


false prophet 53, 68, 70 fate 106 flute 108 Foucault, M. 149 Francis de Sales, De Isamour de Dieu IX.8: 131 Galen, De placitis Hippocratis et Platonis VII.7.25-26: 194 Galilee 75, 77 galloi 120 Ginzberg, L. 94-5 Good Friday 190. 197 Gospel of Peter 1, 16, 95; 6.24: 96; anti-Jewish 28 Gospel of tlw Hebrvws 183 Graf, F. 12 Gregory of Nazianzus 97; Oratio 40.1 1: 96 Gregory the Great, Horn. 40.291-301: 131 Grenfell, B.P. 16 grotesque, concept of 109 Hades 6, 12-3, 116, 125 Hadrian 62 Hamack, A. von 1-2, 4, 30 Heavenly Temple in ApPt 73-74 hell 120-1, 125 Heracles 14 Herlequin 121-2 Hermas vis. 4.2.6: 147 Hermetica 8 Herod 27 Herodotus 9.92: 80 Hieronymus, ad Rlrfirurnz 3.3 1: 58 Himmelfarb, M. 6-7, 9-10, 14 1 7 the Uni\~erse178; Ref~rtatio 10.34.2: 178 Hippolytus, 0 Homer, Odyssey 10.513-5, 12.4, 24.11-4, 24.12: 80; 10.513: 97 Homily on the Parable of the Ten Virgins 181 homosexuals 112 Horace, Sat. 1.4.78-9: 135 Hunt. A.S. 16 Imperial cult 30 impostor 70 inscriptions: I Delos 290: 9; SEG 30.93: 9; 38.1837: 8; 44.1279: 8

Irenaeus, Adv. haer. 1.5-7: 195 Isaac 74 Isaiah fragment 13 ius talionis 144


Jabne 60 Jacob 74, 17 1 James, M.R. 32-3, 35, 98, 150 Jerome, De viris illusrribus 1.5: 181; 83: 179; Horn. in LC 16.26: 131 Jesus Christ 144, 147-8, 187-99 John Chrysostomos, In 2 Cor. 130 Josephus, Ant. 18.85-87, 20.97-98, 20.167-7 1, 20.167-68, 20.188: 69; W 20.261-263: 70; 2.264: 68; 2.259-63, 2.283-87, 20.169-71: 70; J 7.437-50: 69; 6.285: 70 Judas 114 Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 31: 71 ; 31.6: 58, 67, 74 katabaseis 7, 13-4 Klostermann, E. 2 Lazarus 116, 130 Letter of Peter to Philip 139.13-25: 198 Levi 76-77 lex talionis 113 List of the Sixty Books 183 Livy 8.24: 97 1.30Lucian 117-18, Menippus 115; 11-8: 121; 12, 16, 17: 116; True S t o ~ y 2.2, 1.33-4 and 1.39: 125; 2.25-26 and 31: 110; 2.30: 118 Lucuas 7 1 Luther 120 Macarius Magnes, Apocriticus 4: 178; 4.6,4.7: 177; 16: 178 Maehler, H. 16, 20, 23 Marcellus Empiricus, De medicamentis 8 martyrdom 66-68 Martyrdom of Julian of Anazarbus 23-5 martyrs 101; intercession of 107 Maspero, G. 17 Messiah 73, 168-9 Methodius of Olympus 197, Synzp. 2.6: 9, 28, 180 Michael 96, 103, 105 Midrash Leqak Tob 130a: 172


mimirs 119 mire 12 Moses 30, 73-4, 77, 113 Mount Hermon 75-6 Mount of Olives 76 Mount Zion 75-6 mud 13 Muratorian CanonFragment 181 ; 71-2: 175 Musaeus 13 Nero 30; Domus Aurea 109 Nietzsche 127-30, 146 Noah 77 Norden, E. 2-4 Omont, H. 16 Oracula Sibyllina 86,91; 11: 86, 100, 104, 107, 175; 11. 194-338: 159; 3308: 85,98, 150; 331: 151-2; 335: 100; 339-41: 100; and Apocalypse of Peter 34 Ordericus Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History 8.17: 121 Origen. Mart 30: 101 Origenists 27 Orpheus 13, 81 Orphism 1-14. 82; Gold Leaves: 10 Pantagmel 125-26 papyri: Detveni papyrus 10; P. Berlin mu. 8502: 25; PGM IV.2335: 8; P.Lotid. 3.1012: 21; P. Miinch. 1.1: 21; 1.7: 21; 1.14: 21; P. Oxy. 63.4365: 19 paradise 86 Pascal, PI-ovincialesIX: 13 1 Passior~of Andrew 13, 23: 119 Patriarchs 30 Paul 103-104 Paul of Tamma, Cell 92, 103-104, 107; 1-2: 103; 2: 104 Periander 80 Peter 3 1, 76, 95, 138-9, 144, 148, 189-99 Petrus Lombardus, Sent. IV, 50.7: 131 Philo, Qiris I-erum div. her. 281-2: 195 Pilate 27 Plato, Gorgias 526b-c: 153; Plzaedo 86, 99, 102; 96C: 12; 1l le-14c: 97; 112e-13a: 80, 112e-14b: 153; 82; 113a5-14c9: 104; 113d-e: 84,97-8;



113e-14b: 85, 98; 114a-b: 86; 114b-c: 97; 114d: 107; Philebus 134; 48a ff.: 132; 50b: 133; Protagoras 324a-b: 153; Republic 363D: 13; 399d: 108 Plautus 119; Stichus 207ff.: 135 Plutarch 3; De Herod. malign. 15: 135 Porphyry, Against the Christians 177-8 Poseidon 9 prayers for deceased sinners 32 Preuschen, E. 2 Priestertrug 3 purgatory 84 Pyriphlegethon 80, 85, 98-99 Pythagoreanism 3, 7, 11 Rabelais, F. 118-20, 125 Reitzenstein, R. 3 Religionsgeschichtliche Schule 2-3, 5 river of fire 94-95 Rosenstiehl, J.-M. 9 Sacrarnentary of Gellone 2895: 96 salvation 153 Sanders, H.A. 16 Satan 173 scatology 120 Scheler, M. 146, 156 Secret Book of John 189, 192 Seneca, De ir-a 3.5.5: 135 Sheol 115 sins, remission 101 Siophanes 105 Socrates 107 Solomon 171 Sozomen 75, Church History 7.19: 182 Strabo 1.26, 5.243-5, 6.256, 7.324: 97 Stichometry of Nicephorus 183 Suetonius, Tiberius 44: 109 Styx 105 Tabitha 95 Talmud, Ber- 61b: 62; j.Taan 4,7 and 68d: 60 Targum Psalm 24.7-10: 172