Page:The Apocryphal New Testament (1924).djvu/512
together, and we marvelled'. Evidently upon this the disiecta membra of the child are joined together, and, from words of Andrew which follow, it seems that it was made to weep and laugh. But we have no more of the story.
So much for the Oriental Acts of the fabulous cycle. With them I class a text which has only survived in Slavonic—certain Acts of Peter translated by Franko (Zettschr. f. Ntl. Wiss., 1902). It is imperfect at the beginning.
A Child (Jesus) comes to Peter and bids him go to the sea where a ship waits to take him to Rome. The captain of the ship (Michael) feigns reluctance to take Peter on board, because he is a disciple of the crucified. There is a storm which Peter stills; he then baptizes Michael, and Michael sells him the Child. When they arrived at Rome, Peter told the Child to catch some fish. 'Make me some hooks,' he said. And in an hour he caught 12,000 fish, which followed him about on dry land.
A Roman noble, Aravistus, bought the Child from Peter for 50 pieces of gold; and took him to a teacher, whom he speedily put to silence (a motif from the Infancy Gospels). In the night the house was wakened by angels singing the thrice-holy hymn over the Child. All in the house were baptized by him.
Nero arrested Peter, and the Child went and rebuked him; his counsellor Cato smote the Child behind the ear, and was withered up (Infancy Gospel again). The city shook, and the dead rose, but the Child bade them go back till Michael should raise them.
Peter was crucified, head downwards. The Child was with him, and at the last revealed himself: the nails fell from Peter's head, breast, hands, and knees, and after praying for forgiveness for his murderers, he gave up the ghost.
Such are the main points of a rhapsody which serves to show how little the late story-teller cared about not merely history but older legend.
Not even now have all the texts been enumerated which could be classed as Apocryphal Acts: but the reader has before him a general view of the extent and character of the literature which I hope may be reckoned adequate. Put very broadly, the development is from rather dim historical reminiscences used as a framework for doctrinal teaching, to thaumaturgy plus doctrine, to pure thaumaturgy without any doctrine of significance.
John embodies some traditional memories of the residence of John at Ephesus. Paul, perhaps, in the Thecla-story uses an existing tale, true or fabulous. Peter has the crucifixion at Rome, the memory of Simon Magus, and little else. Andrew is a succession of miracles, and so is Thomas: but in all these the discourses of the apostles are the real raison d'être of the books. Not so with Philip, Andrew and Matthias, and the oriental cycle. In these the teaching is of a conventional kind, and becomes more and more perfunctory as we go on, while the miracles grow more and more sensational, until we perhaps reach the climax in the conversion and baptizing of an archangel.