148 L. Roig Lanzillotta of the John Rylands Library V [1920] 497f.) for the first part (pp. 723-73), and P. Berlin 13893, P. Michigan 1317, P. Oxyrh. 1602 and P. Michigan 3788 for the last part of Paul’s journeys that precede the Martyrium (pp. 822-29). Whether the editors also use the testimony of P. Oxyrh. 6, P. Antinoopolis and the Fackelmann fragment in the Münster Bibelmuseum (see Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament [Oxford 1993] 352) or not we do not know. The independent character of the present edition is also demonstrated by the inclusion of a Bodmer Coptic Papyrus –translated already in 1959 by R. Kasser (“Acta Pauli 1959”, RHPhR 40 [1960] 45-57) but unpublished so far– as the beginning of the Ephesus episode (pp. 782-85). In spite of the overlap between the Coptic document’s last words and the beginning of P. Hamburg, translations thus far have refrained from integrating it into the text and normally include it as an appendix (see e.g. W. Schneemelcher, New Testa- ment Apocrypha. II: Writings Related to the Apostles, Apocalypses [transl. ed. by R. McL. Wilson; Cambridge 1992] 263-65; referred to in Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, 379). This is also the case with Piñero and Del Cerro’s edition of CPC (pp. 802- 15) which adds the Greek text provided by the Bodmer Papyrus X (s. III) to the testimony of the Latin mss. Ambros. (s. X), Laon 45 (XIII) and Paris 5288 (s. X/XI). The same applies, finally, to the Martyrium text, which completes the witnesses Patmos 48 (s. IX) and Vatopedi 79 (s. X/XI) used by Lipsius-Bonnet with the readings preserved by P. Hamburg and P. Heidelberg. As far as the organization of the material is concerned, the edition of the AP (pp. 730-859) follows the guideline provided by P. Heid. and includes, in the first place, four stations of Paul’s journeyings (Damascus, to Jerusalem, Jerusalem and Antioch, numbered from 1 to 4) before Paul’s sojourn at Ico- nium (number 5: the long section including APTh). There then follow four other stations (Myra, Sidon, Tyre, Ephesus, numbers 6 to 9) before he reaches Philippi, of which CPC forms a part. Finally, two more sections (Corinth and From Corinth to Italy, numbers 11 and 12) introduce the Martyrium proper (number 13). Also included are four appendices, namely appendix 1, including variations, provided by different mss, on the end of APTh; appendix 2, the text preserved by P. Heid., pp. 79-80 and P. Michigan 3788, that some claim to have belonged to the original Acts; appendix 3, including a section by Nicephorus Calixtus’s Historia Ecclesiastica 2,25 about Paul’s sojourn in Ephesus; and appendix 4, The Epistle of Pelagia. With regard to the text’s tenor, the authors join Schneemelcher in con- sidering that with the exception of encratism it did not include tendentious thought, and in interpreting AP as the product of the “Great Church” (p. 710) and certainly not belonging to a “sect” (p. 722). Leaving aside the fact that –as the authors themselves affirm (vol. I, p. 18; II, 875)– it seems anachronistic to think, in the second century, in terms of the polarity orthodoxy-heresy, if AP was in fact composed in proto-orthodox milieus, several problems need to be addressed: why did Eusebius class AP as spurious, together, for example, with the Acts of Andrew? And, if the text was so blameless, why was it so castigated by the textual transmission? And further, why were a couple of epi-