The Gospel of Nicodemus (in Latin) was one of the earliest books printed, and there are subsequent editions in 149o, 1516, 1522, and 1538, and in 1569 in the Orthodoxographa of Grynmns. It was afterwards published by Fabricius (Cod. Ape.), who divided it into chapters. Fabricius gives us no information respecting the age or character of his MS., which is extremely defective and inac curate. Mr. Jones republished this with an Eng lish version.
Thc Greek Gospel of Nicodemus was first pub lished from an incorrect Paris MS. by Birch (Auc tarium), and subsequently from a collation of several valuable manuscripts, the most ancient of which are of the r3th century, by Thilo, with the Latin text of the very ancient MS. at Einsidl, described by Gerbert in his Rey Alemannicum. It has been shewn by Smidt (Bibl. !fir Critik und Exesese) that the present MSS. exhibit in their citations from the canonical books a text of the 6th centuty, and consequently that this gospel is ex tremely useful in a critical point of view.
The esteem in which this work was held in the middle ages may be seen from the number of early versions which were in popular use, of which innu merable MSS. have descended to our times. The earliest of these is the Anglo-Saxon translation, printed at Oxford in 1698, from a Cambridge MS. (Thwaites's Heptateuchus). This is a translation from the Latin, as none of the Greek MSS. con tain Pilate's letter to Claudius. There are also MSS. of the same in the Bodleian and 'Canter bury libraries. That in the Bodleian is divided into thirty-four chapters. There are several MSS. of the English version in the Bodleian, one in Sion College, and OM in English verse in Pepys's col lection. It was also translated by Wickliffe ; and there were versions printed in London, in 1507 and 1509, by Julian Notary and Wynkyn de Worde, which ran through several editions (Panzi's Anna/s). The latest published before Mr. Jones's work was by Joseph Wilson, in 1767. The regard, indeed, in which this book was held in England will be understood from the fact that, in 1524> Erasmus acquaints us that he saw the Gospel of ' Nicodemus affixed to one of the columns of the cathedral of Canterbury. Translations were also common in French, Italian, German, and Swedish. In the French MSS. and editions it is united with the old romance of Perceforest, Fins of Great Britain. There was also a Welsh translation (Llittyd's Archadogia, p. 256), and the work was known to the Eastern Christians, and has been even supposed to be cited in the Coptic liturgy ; but this has been shewn by Ludolf to be a mistake, as the lesson is from the history of Nicodernus, in John iii. [Brunn, De indole aetate et UM( Evans. Nicod., Ber. r794 ; Tischendorf, Pilati circa C'hr. judicio quid lucis afferatur ex Actis Pilati, Lips. 18551 Of the Gospels no longer extant, we know little more than that they once existed. We read in Irenus, Epiphanius, Origen, Eusebius, and other ecclesiastical writers, of the Gospels of Eve or of Perfection, of Barnabas (ancient and modern), of Bartholomew, of Basilides, of Hesycbius, of Judas Iscariot, of the Valentinians, of Apollos, of Cerin thus, of the Twelve Apostles, and several others.
Some of these were derived from the Gnostics and other heretics ; others, as the Gospel of Matthias, are supposed by Mill, Grabe, and most learned men, to have been genuine gospels now lost. Those of which we have the fullest details are the Gospel of the Egyptians and that of the NAZARENES. This latter is most probably the same with that of the Hebrews, which was used by the Ebionites. It was supposed by St. Jerome to have been a genuine Gospel of St. Matthew, who, he says, wrote it in the Hebrew language and letters. He copied it himself from the original in the library ot Czesarea, translated it into Greek and Latin, and has given many extracts from it. Grabe conceived this gospel to have been composed by Jewish con verts soon after our Lord's ascension, before the composition of the canonical Gospel of St. Mat thew. Baronius, Grotius, Father Simon, and Du Pin, look upon it as the Gospel of St. Matthew— interpolated, however, by the Nazarenes. Baro nius and Grabe think that it was cited by If,matius, or the author of the Epistles ascribed to him. Others look upon it as a translation altered from the Greek of St. Matthew. Mr. Jones thinks that this Gospel was referred to by St. Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians. It is referred to by Hegesippus (Euseb. Bet/. Hist. iv. 22), Clemens Alexandrinus (Strout. p. 280), Origen (Comm. on Yohn ; Hom. viii. in Matt.), and Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. 25, 27, 39). Epiphanius (Her. secs. 29, 3o) acquaints us that it was held in great repute by the ancient Judaizing Christians, and that it began thus : 'It came to pass in the days of Herod king of Juda that John came baptizing with the baptism of repentance in the river Jordan.' etc. It consequently wanted tbe genealogy and the first two chapters.
The GOSPEL OF THE EGYPTIANS IS cited by Clemens Alexandrinus (Strom. iii. pp. 445, 452, 453, 465), Origen (Ham. in Luc. p. 1), Ambrose, Jerome (Pref. to his COMM. on MOtt.), and Epi phanius (Hares. lxii. sec. 2). Grabe, Mill, Du Pin, and Father Simon, who thought highly of this Gospel, looked upon it as one of the works referred to by St. Luke in the commencement of his Gospel. Mill ascribes its origin to the Essenes, and supposes this and the former Gospel to have been composed in or a little before A.D. 58. It is cited by the Pseudo-Clement (Ep. Sec. ad Cor. ch. 12 ; Cf. Clem. Alex. Strom. iii. 9), who is generally supposed to have written not before the 3d century. [See Cave, !list. Liter., and Oudin, Scriptt. Eccl. passim ; Mill, Prolegg. in N. T., saepe ; Ant. v. Dale, De orig. idolol. p. 253, se ; Pritius, Intranet. in N. T. p. 6, 58 ; Kleuker, Ueb. die Apocr. des N. T., Hamb. 179S; Mosheim, De causis supposit. librorum inter Chris lianas Saw. L et ii., in his Dissertationes aa' Hist. .Eccl. Spat'. i. 217 ; Nitzsch, De Apocr. Ev.v. explicandis canonicis usu et abusn, Vit. 1808 ; Tischendorf, De Evv. apocr. orig,ine et um, Hag. 1851 ; Reuss, Gluck. der II. S. nezten Test., sec. 25S, sey. ; Hofmann, Das Leber., 7eszt nach den Apocryphen, Leipz. 35 id