Page:Apocryphal Gospels and Other Documents Relating to the History of Christ.djvu/80

lxxvi intimated in the note prefixed to my translation of this false Gospel, that it has been drawn from three principal sources, the first and third of which generally correspond to the Protevangel and the Pseudo-Thomas. As for the second source, it has not been clearly determined. As a compilation it has been ascribed to the fifth or sixth century, but I regard this as too early, for which I shall mention some reasons. The book is apparently an Egyptian production, whatever the language in which it first appeared. We only possess the Arabic text, for I feel justified in believing that the Syriac copies of a Gospel of the Infancy said to exist at Rome and Paris, will prove to be a Syriac recension of Pseudo-Thomas. No trace of it has been found in Coptic or any other ancient language.

The compiler put into a connected form the legends and traditions which he had at his disposal, but he executed his task without skill and judgment. His object was to glorify the infant Jesus and his mother. He pretends to have borrowed from a book by Joseph or Caiaphas the high priest, but it is uncertain whether this applies to