1224. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

the narrowness of the inter-columnar space, becomes accentuated, since the Akhmim fragment shows that the Gospel of Peter was a work of considerable compass, for the completion of which many more pages would be needed. To evade the obstacle by the assumption that our Gospel was not finished in a single volume, but extended into a second, is not altogether satisfactory. If, on the other hand, recto ii be connected with Peter’s Fall, this column will follow recto i, and the double-column formation of the pages must be assumed. This, as remarked above, is on external evidence less satisfactory; but a more serious difficulty is the resulting necessity of supposing the omission in this Gospel of all the matter found in the Canonical Gospels between the Sermon on the Mount (Fragment 2 recto i) and the Fall of Peter. Dr. Bartlet holds this to be possible on a theory of the Gospel of Peter making it highly selective in the narrative of events preceding the Passion, in which interest was centred. Such a view, however, needs further substantiation. Another objection to any identification with the Gospel of Peter is that in the extant fragment of it the name Jesus is not used, being replaced by ho kyrios the Lord. Until further discoveries throw fresh light upon the problem, it will probably be necessary to acquiesce in a conclusion of non liquet it is not clear.

Fragment 1 recto. Plate I.

139

[. . . . . . . .]in all
[. . . . . . . .]mon. Truly I
[. . . . . . . . . . .]to[. . .
. . . . .

Fragment 1 verso.

[

will. You [. . . . . . . .
[. .] . s[
. . . . .

Fragment 2 verso. Plate I.

Col. i.

104

[. . . . . . .] answer
[. . . . . . . .] . . . . . .
[. . . . . . . .] and [. . .]
[. . . . . . . .] . [. . . .] and
5 [. . . . . . . . . . . .] and
. . . . .

Col. ii.

[

but the scribes and[. . . .
the priests, seeing [. . . .
indignant [. . . . . . .
with sinners [. . . . . . . .
5 And Jesus, hearing [. . . . . . . .
[. . .] . . . [. . . . . . . .
[. . . . . .] . [