64), wrote about 160 (_op. cit._ p. 848). Schmidt and Ficker, however,
maintain that the Acts were written about 200 and in Asia Minor. These
Acts, which Ficker holds were written as a continuation and completion
of the canonical Acts of the Apostles, deal with Peter's victorious
conflict with Simon Magus, and his subsequent martyrdom at Rome under
Nero. It is difficult to determine the relation of the so-called Latin
_Actus Vercellenses_ (which there are good grounds for assuming were
originally called the [Greek: Praxeis Petrou]) with the Acts of John and
Paul. Schmidt thinks that the author of the former made use of the
latter, James that the Acts of Peter and of John were by one and the
same author, but Ficker is of opinion that their affinities can be
explained by their derivation from the same ecclesiastical atmosphere
and school of theological thought. No less close affinities exist
between our Acts and the Acts of Thomas, Andrew and Philip. In the case
of the Acts of Thomas the problem is complicated, sometimes the Acts of
Peter seem dependent on the Acts of Thomas, and sometimes the converse.

For the relation of the _Actus Vercellenses_ to the "Martyrdom of the
holy apostles Peter and Paul" (_Acta Apostol. Apocr._ i. 118-177) and
to the "Acts of the holy apostles Peter and Paul" (_Acta Apostol.
Apocr._ i. 178-234) see Lipsius ii. 1. 84 sqq. The "Acts of Xanthippe
and Polyxena," first edited by James (_Texts and Studies_, ii. 3.
1893), and assigned by him to the middle of the 3rd century, as well
as the "Acts of the Disputation of Archelaus, bishop of Mesopotamia,
and the Heresiarch Manes" ("Acta Disputationis Archelai Episcopi
Mesopotamiae et Manetis Haeresiarchae," in Routh's _Reliquiae
Sacrae[2]_, v. 36-206), have borrowed largely from our work.

The text of the _Actus Vercellenses_ is edited by Lipsius, _Acta
Apostol. Apocr._ i. 45-79. An independent Latin translation of the
"Martyrdom of Peter" is published by Lipsius (_op. cit._ i. 1-22),
_Martyrium beati Petri Apostoli a Lino episcopo conscriptum_. On the
Coptic fragment, which Schmidt maintains is an original constituent of
these Acts, see that writer's work: _Die alten Petrusakten im
Zusammenhang der apokryphen Apostelliteratur nebst einem neuentdeckten
Fragment_, and _Texte und Untersuch_. N.F. ix. 1 (1903). For the
literature see Hennecke, _Neutestamentliche Apokryphen Handbuch_, 395
sqq.

_Preaching of Peter