Josephus
A.J. Antiquitates judaicae
B.J. Bellum judaicum
Justin Martyr
1 Apol. First Apology
Dial. Dialogue with Trypho
LAB Liber antiquitatum biblicarum
LAE Life of Adam and Eve
m. Ket. Mishnah Ketubbot
m. Nid. Mishnah Niddah
m. Sotah Mishnah Sotah
m. Ta’an. Mishnah Ta’anit
m. Yoma Mishnah Yoma
Nat. Mary Nativity of Mary
Origen
Cels. Contra Celsum
Comm. Matt. Commentarium in evangelium Matthaei
Hom. Luc. Homiliae in Lucam
Philo
Mos. De vita Mosis
Somn. De Somniis
Spec. De specialibus legibus
Prot. Jas. Protevangelium of James
Ps.-Mt. Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew
Rev. Magi Revelation of the Magi
T. Adam Testament of Adam
T. Benj. Testament of Benjamin
T. Dan Testament of Dan
T. Gad Testament of Gad
T. Levi Testament of Levi
t. Hull. Tosefta Hullin
t. Pesah. Tosefta Pesahim
Tertullian
Carn. Chr. De carne Christi
Virg. De virginibus velandis
Modern
ANRW Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt
CCSA Corpus Christianorum: Series apocryphorum
CRRAI Compte rendu, Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale
CSCO Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium
CSEL Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum
ExpT Expository Times
GCS Die griechische christliche Schriftsteller der ersten [drei] Jahrhunderte
HTR Harvard Theological Review
JECS Journal of Early Christian Studies
JJS Journal of Jewish Studies
JQR Jewish Quarterly Review
LCL Loeb Classical Library
NTTS New Testament Tools and Studies
NovT Novum Testamentum
PG Patrologia Graeca
SBFA Studium Biblicum Franciscanum Analecta
SBLSP Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers
SH Subsidia Hagiographica
TS Theological Studies
TSK Theologische Studien und Kritiken
TUGAL Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur
VT Vetus Testamentum
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
Conventions
HB Hebrew Bible
LXX Septuagint
NT New Testament
Introduction
On display at the Yale University Art Gallery is a painting from Dura-Europos, an ancient city in eastern Syria and the location of major excavations in the 1920s and 1930s. Yale archaeologists found the painting in the remains of a third-century house that was used as a church—the earliest Christian church ever discovered. On the southern wall of the building’s baptistery is the image of a woman drawing water from a well, while looking over her left shoulder. While most scholars have assumed it is a depiction of the Samaritan woman narrated from the Gospel of John, Michael Peppard has suggested that the painting is better interpreted as Mary at the well.1 The canonical Gospels of Matthew and Luke do not give a specific location for the Annunciation, despite general assumptions that place the scene at her home based on centuries-long depictions of the Annunciation in Western art. While the scene of Mary drawing water from the well or spring is not a detail found in the canonical infancy narratives, it is a feature of the Protevangelium of James (Protevangelium hereafter) in which the divine voice attempts to make contact with Mary to announce her special role in salvation history (Prot. Jas. 11:1–9). Additionally, the image also depicts a vacant space behind the woman, most likely representing the invisible divine voice of the Annunciation,2 a detail again found in the Protevangelium which describes a bodiless voice speaking to Mary before the appearance of an angel; hence Mary is said to have been looking “all around her, to the right and left, to see from where the voice was coming” (Prot. Jas. 11:3). If Peppard’s interpretation is correct, this painting would be the oldest depiction of Mary’s Annunciation at the well. This interpretation is especially intriguing given that in the same house church a procession of women walking towards a large building with doors is also depicted. On the east wall, the feet and bottom garments of five women approach the structure. On the west wall three full women are each carrying a lit candle.3 Admittedly, there is no consensus on the identities of the women in the image, but Gertrud Schiller is convinced that the women are the virgins who guide Mary to the temple (Prot. Jas. 7:4).4 If these two proposals are correct, then the church house at Dura-Europos would appear to display artistically two dominant themes informed by this apocryphal text.
While the Protevangelium’s presence and impact on the Dura-Europos church house is debatable, there is no doubt regarding the Protevangelium’s influence on early Christian traditions, practices, and forms of piety associated with the Virgin Mary. Offering rich details from Mary’s miraculous conception by her mother Anna to her own conception and birth of Jesus, this narrative stands as the foundation for her prevailing depiction as extraordinarily pure and holy, but also for later apocryphal, hagiographical, and liturgical writings. Despite its early date, this document’s contributions to Marian piety and devotion cannot be overestimated.5 Surviving in at least 140 Greek manuscripts and translated into multiple languages including Syriac, Georgian, Latin, Armenian, Arabic, Coptic, Ethiopic, and Slavonic (see section on transmission below), the Protevangelium’s frequent copying attests to its popularity throughout the Christian world.6 Moreover, the text functions as a source for a variety of later writings on the life of Mary, including the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, the Nativity of Mary, the Armenian and Arabic Gospels of the Infancy, the History of Joseph the Carpenter, and Maximus the Confessor’s Life of the Virgin.7 From its use in liturgical readings for various feasts, including Mary’s Nativity, Conception, and Presentation, to its inspiration for numerous artistic representations found in church paintings, mosaics, and sarcophagi, the text enjoyed near canonical status despite its categorization as apocryphal.
As a narrative that features characters and events from the NT text but lacks a presence in the canon, the Protevangelium fits the criteria for extracanonical and apocryphal literature. However, other features attributed to works deemed apocryphal, including its rejection as a possible candidate into the NT canon, seem problematic not least because of its popularity and influence on early Christian practices, traditions, and beliefs. In his study of this categorization process, François Bovon proposed that church leaders, theologians, and ordinary Christians did not simply distinguish between canonical and apocryphal texts or accepted and rejected texts; rather, they were familiar with a third category of writing which were, according to Bovon, “useful for the soul.”8 Such writings functioned as the basis for religious life in the early church and were deeply cherished by the