2; also James in Hastings' _Bible Dict._ i.
92-93; Hennecke, _NT. Apokryphen_, _in loc._ The best texts are given in
Bonnet's _Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha_, 1898, II. i. 1-127. These contain
also the _Acts of Andrew and Matthew_ (or Matthias) in which Matthew (or
Matthias) is represented as a captive in the country of the
anthropophagi. Christ takes Andrew and his disciples with Him, and
effects the rescue of Matthew. The legend is found also in Ethiopic,
Syriac and Anglo-Saxon. Also the _Acts of Peter and Andrew_, which among
other incidents recount the miracle of a camel passing through the eye
of a needle. This work is preserved partly in Greek, but in its entirety
in Slavonic.

_Acts of John._--Clement of Alexandria in his _Hypotyposes_ on 1 John i.
1 seems to refer to chapters xciii. (or lxxxix.) of these Acts. Eusebius
(_H.E._ iii. 25. 6), Epiphanius (_Haer._ xlvii. 1) and other ancient
writers assign them to the authorship of Leucius Charinus. It is
generally admitted that they were written in the 2nd century. The text
has been edited most completely by Bonnet, _Acta Apostol. Apocr._, 1898,
151-216. The contents might be summarized with Hennecke as
follows:--Arrival and first sojourn of the apostle in Ephesus
(xviii.-lv.); return to Ephesus and second sojourn (history of Drusiana,
lviii.-lxxxvi.); account of the crucifixion of Jesus and His apparent
death (lxxxvii.-cv.); the death of John (cvi.-cxv.). There are manifest
gaps in the narrative, a fact which we would infer from the extent
assigned to it (i.e. 2500 stichoi) by Nicephorus. According to this
authority one-third of the text is now lost. Many chapters are lost at
the beginning; there is a gap in chapter xxxvii., also before lviii.,
not to mention others. The encratite tendency in these Acts is not so
strongly developed as in those of Andrew and Thomas. James (_Anecdota_,
ii. 1-25) has given strong grounds for regarding the Acts of John and
Peter as derived from one and the same author, but there are like
affinities existing between the Acts of Peter and those of Paul. For a
discussion of this work see Zahn, _Gesch. Kanons_, ii. 856-865; Lipsius,
_Apok. Apostelgesch._ i. 348-542; Hennecke, _NT. Apokryphen_, 423-432.
For bibliography, Hennecke, _NT. Apok. Handbuch_, 492 sq.

_Acts of Paul._--The discovery of the Coptic translation of these Acts
in 1897, and its publication by C. Schmidt (_Acta Pauli aus der
Heidelberger koptischen Papyrushandschrift heraus