Syriac Infancy Gospel of Thomas: Edition in Progress (Part 2)
When I returned to examining the Syriac Infancy Thomas tradition in 2008 I began with the Vatican manuscript translated in part (chs. 5-8 only) by Paul Peeters in 1914. He stated at the time that the manuscript was superior to William Wright’s sixth-century manuscript, despite its much more recent date of composition (17th century), because it contains portions missing in Wright. It was simple to obtain a microfilm copy of the Vatican manuscript and, being recent, it was quite easy to read. I could only wonder why it had taken so long for anyone to follow up on Peeters’ “superior” source.
I debuted the new text and translation at the 2008 Réunion de l’AELAC to largely positive response. However, Sever Voicu, well-known as a leading voice on Infancy Thomas, commented that the manuscript was so recent that it could hardly be important for reconstructing the text. Voicu’s resistance may stem from his belief that the Ethiopic tradition of the text is the best witness to its original form. After some revision, I submitted the paper to l’AELAC’s journal Apocrypha in September 2009 and waited for a response.
In the meantime I began investigating unpublished manuscripts of the text. Back in 1994, Simon Mimouni had prepared a study of Life of Mary traditions for Apocrypha (“Vies de la Vierge. État de la question,” Apocrypha 5 [1994]: 211-48) that I had somehow missed when preparing my dissertation. He had combed the manuscript catalogs and divided the Life of Mary sources into …








