An etching of the Serbian Orthodox Monastery of Studenica from Moscow (1758), currently housed in the Museum of the Serbian Church in Szentendre, Hungary. [Source: Wikimedia]

A key element of Wilhelm Schneemelcher’s classical definition of the term “New Testament Apocrypha” – today we would probably prefer to speak of “Christian Apocrypha” – is the following notion: With the more or less fixed closure of the New Testament Canon around the fourth century CE the production of New Testament Apocrypha came to an end.[1] In other words, according to Schneemelcher, the production of New Testament Apocrypha is not only a past phenomenon, but also one that is closely bound to the development of the New Testament canon; texts produced after the fourth century CE should be labelled hagiographical and not apocryphal.[2] Space does not allow us to deal with all the consequences of this element of Schneemelcher’s definition, be it the result that Christian apocryphal writings have been seen—misleadingly—as unsuccessful partners in competition with the writings which made it into the New Testament, or the fact that so many texts produced only after the fourth century have not (or not appropriately) been studied by scholars of the New Testament (or Christian apocrypha).[3] Suffice it to say that the strict division between pre-fifth century apocryphal and post-fifth century hagiographical literature has prevented scholars from seeing important lines of development and phenomena related to these texts. Of course, at least in some scholarly circles, this situation has changed dramatically during the last 20 years or so. One of the most recent outcomes in North American academic circles is the recent publication of two fascinating volumes titled New Testament Apocrypha: More Noncanonical Scriptures – the first edited by Tony Burke and Brent Landau, the second one by Burke only (with a third volume on the way)[4] — a publication project that follows along the lines already started with the wonderful French Écrits Apocryphes Chrétiens (by the French-Swiss AELAC group).[5]

Together with this tremendous change of paradigm, we have recently seen an increasing interest in ancient Christian history that attempts to describe the “Christian” movement (and “Christian” not only in its narrow sense of “Christian orthodoxy”) with the help of complex and varied representations and social theories,[6] along with an increasing interest in the phenomena of “lived religion.”[7] While it may be nice to describe the “Beyond Canon” project at the junction of these two scholarly developments, the seeds of the project were sown by personal experience: during the year 2015 I spent some unforgettable time in Middle Serbia, including some time in the Medieval Monastery of Studenica, today a UNESCO world heritage site. Everyone who visits the monastery’s main church will be impressed by its wonderful medieval frescoes, partly representing a world of saints, partly re-telling the Biblical story, and with a crucifixion scene in its center that unproblematically mixes canonical and extracanonical motifs. Moreover, I attended a liturgy in this building at the end of which several coffins in the church were opened. This happened to allow the participants of the liturgy to kiss the relics preserved there – most of them from members and relatives of the medieval Nemanjid dynasty (1167-1371), most memorialized not just as rulers of the state, but also as saints of the Serbian Church. I was immediately fascinated by the combination of ritual elements, stories (partly represented in pictures, partly told during and after the service), material artifacts, and the fact that boundaries between “canonical” and “non-canonical” elements did not play any role in this combination. After this experience, I found comparable phenomena not only in Orthodox contexts, but even in my Bavarian Catholic background; I started to ask whether we can find comparable phenomena in ancient sources. Some first results of my findings – using aspects Pierre Nora’s ideas of “lieux de memoire”[8] – were published and discussed in different contexts during the year 2016.[9] One year later, my friends and colleagues Harald Buchinger (Liturgical Studies) and Andreas Merkt (Patristics and Christian Archaeology) developed a project based on some of these impulses. During the year 2018 a massive funding by the DFG – the German research foundation – helped us to establish the Universität Regensburg Centre for Advanced Studies “Beyond Canon” where we invite fellows to do their own research (for up to one year) related to our overarching ideas.[10]

Our main assumptions are:

(1) Even if the fourth and fifth centuries may have brought important changes for large parts of the “Christian” movement (or better: the different groups of Christ followers), the production of texts which reasonably can be labelled “Christian apocrypha” did not simply stop. To the contrary, with some genres the production of texts seems to have exploded. While we know about five apocryphal acts written before the fourth century, dozens of writings related to the apostles or apostolic figures and their mission to different parts of the world were produced after the fourth century. The same is the case with apocryphal apocalypses, including both texts focusing on the end of times and those depicting otherworldly journeys. Other genres, like the so-called “Apostolic Memoirs” from the post-fifth century miaphysite Egyptian Church, developed anew.[11] Our very simple and basic assumption is this: these developments cannot be explained as a simple matter of chance. Instead, these texts (alongside the many older apocryphal writings which still were in use after the fourth century!) must have had important and varied functions in the worlds of late antiquity (Christian and beyond). Moreover, we are sure that these functions would have changed during their use in different historical situations.[12]

(2) Even in contexts where we can presuppose a certain degree of literacy, many people obtain their knowledge via means beyond written texts. This leads to a second assumption: ancient (but even post-modern) forms of “lived religion” (at least partly) related to extracanonical traditions are not only based on written texts. In many cases we observe that extracanonical traditions are “transported” by a fascinating mix of media. We have found written texts (and their enactment in different modes of storytelling) being connected to various forms of ritual, ranging from ecclesiastical liturgy and well-organized processions (what we might call “controllable” phenomena) to rather “uncontrollable” festivals and performances, as well as to a host of different forms of material culture: representations in images, architectural structures, or even “things” (like stones, trees, caves, springs). Against this backdrop, it becomes clear that we must understand how these different dimensions of mediality work together to describe the ongoing dynamics of the development and transmission of extracanonical traditions. Such an enterprise, of course, cannot be done by one scholar alone, but only in groups working in regular exchange—scholars who are interested in different aspects of the transmission and interpretation of Christian apocryphal writings, in liturgy and ritual studies, but also in any kind of aspect of material culture.

These two main assumptions can be related to a few additional overarching observations:

(1) The relationship between the “canonicity” of a tradition and its “authority” (or use as “authority” in different contexts) is much more complex than usually thought. Over the past few years, we have learned with many examples that extracanonical traditions (always within certain more or less concrete contexts and situations) can claim “authority” besides and even beyond canonical counterparts. Nota bene: I am not just speaking of some marginal circles outside of a developing mainstream “orthodoxy,” which did not (or did not yet) fully accept the canon of Biblical writings. I am speaking, for example, of texts and traditions like the Doctrine of Addai, the foundational story of the Church of Edessa, a kind of extracanonical Acts of the Apostles, which goes so far to define the canon to be used in the Church of Edessa of its time, but never claimed to be canonical itself.[13] One could add the impact of extracanonical apocalyptic writings like the Tiburtine Sibyl, the Apocalypse of the Virgin or the Medieval Vision of Tundale for late antique and medieval perceptions of world and time.[14] Other texts use images of the figure of Thecla as role model for women wished to remain unmarried and independent of a husband’s influence.[15] Here I have named just a few of many possible examples.

(2) If we understand “discourse” as a process wherein our way of thinking is shaped, a process which cannot be described appropriately without understanding the roles of power and authority used to enforce an argument, the reassessment of the functions of extra-canonical writings and the “authority” related to them leads to a reassessment of their role in what we could call an ongoing discourse about “Christian” self-understanding (or the self-understandings of different groups which call themselves “Christian” in relation to others).[16] In other words: even where the canon is (more or less) universally acknowledged, its writings and their use in different forms of an always dynamic Christian discourse leave open changing forms of “space” which cannot be filled by the use of canonical writings alone.[17] These “other spaces” have to be filled (and are filled) by extracanonical traditions. Some of them are related to the canon in complementary ways; other in compensatory, antagonistic, affirmative, or still other ways. That is, extracanonical traditions, with their different modes of expressing themselves and taking over “space” in ancient Christian discourse, can be understood as being or representing “heterotopias” (in a broad usage of Michel Foucault’s term “heterotopia”).[18] But, of course, there are others levels of relation to the idea of “heterotopia”: Extracanonical traditions may describe “heterotopias” like “hell”. Even if, according to the modern perception of some, “hell” is understood as a “real space” (in Foucault’s terms), it must have been perceived as a “real space” by ancient and medieval believers.[19] The fact that hell functions as a kind of outside Widerlager—an abutment against what we understand as “this world”—can easily be seen in many ancient writings.[20] In addition, extracanonical traditions may create “heterotopias” by giving (symbolic and/or emotional) meaning to different forms of real spaces: mountains or caves as well as pilgrimage sites or sacred landscapes can be imbued with new meaning.[21]

What we observe is, of course, not simply a “Christian” development, but must be embedded in a multifaceted religious history of late antiquity and the early Middle Ages; that’s why our project does not simply focus on Christian traditions, but works closely together with experts in Greco-Roman Religion, Rabbinic Judaism, “Gnostic” movements, Manichaeism, and early Islam.[22] And, of course, we need the interdisciplinary expertise of scholars usually concentrating on different areas of late antiquity (e.g. Syria, Ireland, Armenia, Georgia … etc.). In our work we both look into concrete regional developments – always seeing them entangled in a broader world of contexts, connections and networks – like the “Holy Land”[23], the Caucasus region[24], Ireland, or early Medieval Serbia.[25] We started our work by focusing on different groups of “traditions” (and related writings). We are especially interested in (1) stories about the origins of a regional (or even a local) Church, very often connected to the mission of an apostle or a related apostolic figure; (2) traditions related to the festal calendar (e.g. traditions related to Jesus’ birth and childhood); (3) pilgrimage stories; (4) apocalyptic writings developing new views about the world’s history and its end; (5) writings developing new views about the world, its relation to other worlds and life after death; and (6) post-fourth century Gospel like stories (like the newly found Apostolic Memoirs or Lives of the Virgin). Even as it becomes increasingly clear that we will not be able to cover all these text groups (and certainly not all the texts represented by them) we have learned that there are many more groups of writings that should be looked at in more detail. Inasmuch as many of these writings are not usually associated with what we call “apocrypha,” it is clear that we need to rethink not just the apocryphal – hagiographical boundary, but also the one which usually divides the works of well-known ancient Christian authors (that is, the “Church Fathers” or “patristic literature”) and apocryphal writings. I think, for example, about (1) “patristic” writings (like, for example, Pseudo-Cyprian’s De duobus montibus Sina et Sion) which includes passages retelling parts of Biblical stories, including Gospel or Gospel-related material. One can, however, also consider (2) historical writings (like, for example, Gregory of Tours’ History of the Franks), which includes passages related to Biblical stories, or (3) historical writings (like, for example, the Chronicle of Hydatius of Aquae Flaviae), which includes apocalyptic elements.[26] At the same time, we would like to take a closer look at (4) texts on the fringes of the usual labels “Christian Apocrypha” and “Old Testament Pseudepigrapha”, that is, writings focusing on Old Testament figures and motifs. In this context both Jewish writings that were used (or re-used) in late antique and/or medieval Christian circles and writings produced by “Christians” are of interest. Finally, it will be important to take a closer look into (5) the use and development of Biblical figures together with and alongside non-Biblical characters (like Thecla). The question of the extent to which a character found in the Bible is still a “biblical character” or can develop into a “figure” bearing completely new traits (shifting it to the fringes of what we would call “canonical”) is certainly worth a closer look as well.[27] We are just at the beginning.

Tobias Nicklas is the General Director of the Centre for Advanced Studies "Beyond Canon" at the University of Regensburg, where he is also Professor of Exegesis and Hermeneutics of the New Testament in the Catholic Theological Faculty.

[1] See W. Schneemelcher, Haupteinleitung, in his: Neutestamentliche Apokryphen I (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 61990) 52: „Schriften, die in den ersten Jahrhunderten der Kirchengeschichte entstanden sind und die durch Titel oder Gattung oder Inhalt in einer bestimmten Beziehung zu den neutestamentlichen Schriften stehen“. Schneemelcher was not alone with this idea. See, for example, J.H. Charlesworth, Research on the New Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, in: ANRW II.25.6 (1988) 3919-3968, esp. 3924, or H. Drobner, Lehrbuch der Patrologie (Freiburg et al.: Herder, 1994) 11 and others.

[2] For a discussion of this assumption see T. Nicklas, “Gedanken zum Verhältnis zwischen christlichen Apokryphen und hagiographischer Literatur: Das Beispiel der Veronica-Traditionen,” in: Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift 62 (2008) 45-63.

[3] See, for example, W. Rebell, Neutestamentliche Apokryphen und Apostolische Väter (Munich: Ch. Kaiser, 1992) 16 who speaks of “Konkurrenztexte(n)”.

[4] T. Burke and B. Landau (ed.s), New Testament Apocrypha: More Noncanonical Scriptures 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016) and T. Burke (ed.), New Testament Apocrypha: More Noncanonical Scriptures 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2020).

[5] See F. Bovon and P. Geoltrain (ed.s), Écrits apocryphes chrétiens I (Bibliothèque de la Pléiade; Paris: Gallimard, 1997) and P. Geoltrain and J.-D. Kaestli (ed.s), Écrits apocryphes chrétiens II (Bibliothèque de la Pléiade; Paris: Gallimard, 2006). For a broader discussion of the achievements behind these collections see T. Nicklas, Écrits apocryphes chrétiens: Ein Sammelband als Spiegel eines weitreichenden Paradigmenwechsels in der Apokryphenforschung, in: VigChr 61 (2007) 70-95.

[6] See, for example, the helpful overview offered by D. Brakke, The Gnostics: Myth, Ritual, and Diversity in Early Christianity (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2010) 5-18, the additional model developed by myself in T. Nicklas, “Parting of the Ways? Probleme eines Konzepts,” in: S. Alkier and H. Leppin (ed.s), Juden – Heiden – Christen? Religiöse Inklusion und Exklusion in Kleinasien bis Decius (WUNT 400; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018) 21-42, esp. 37-38 and the critical meta-discussion offered by M. Sommer, Witwen, Recht und Gerechtigkeit: Diskurse über Witwen im frühen Christentum als Rezeptionsorte prophetischer und weisheitlicher Kultkritik gelesen (Diss. habil. Universität Regensburg 2019; forthcoming in WUNT, 2021).

[7] For a successful adaptation of this term – first coined for the analysis of present phenomena (see M. McGuire, Lived Religion: Faith and Practice in Everyday Life (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008) – on ancient phenomena see J. Rüpke, On Roman Religion: Lived Religion and the Individual in Ancient Rome (Ithaca, N.Y. and London: Cornell University Press, 2016), but also (working with a smaller example) T. Nicklas, “Constructing Individual Selves within Social Hierarchies: The Letters of Copres and Synesios,” in: M.R. Niehoff and J. Levinson (ed.s), Self, Self-Fashioning and Individuality in Late Antiquity (Culture, Religion, and Politics in the Greco-Roman World 4; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019) 523-36.

[8] P. Nora (ed.), Les lieux de mémoire (3 vol.s; Paris: Gallimard, 1984-92). A very good German definition of what concept (which shows a clear development during the three volumes) is offered by E. François, “Pierre Nora und die ‘Lieux de Mémoire’,” in: P. Nora (ed.), Erinnerungsorte Frankreichs (Munich: C.H. Beck, 2005) 7-14, esp. 9: A lieu de mémoire is a “materiellen wie auch immateriellen, langlebigen, Generationen überdauernden Kristallisationspunkt kollektiver Erinnerung und Identität, der durch einen Überschuß an symbolischer und emotionaler Dimension gekennzeichnet ist, in gesellschaftliche, kulturelle und politische Üblichkeiten eingebunden ist und sich in den Maße verändert, in dem sich die Weise seiner Wahrnehmung, Aneignung, Anwendung und Übertragung verändert.“

[9] T. Nicklas, “New Testament Canon and Ancient “Landscapes of Memory””, in: Early Christianity 7 (2016) 5-23, and idem, “Neutestamentlicher Kanon, christliche Apokryphen und antik-christliche ‘Erinnerungskulturen’,” in: NTS 62 (2016) 588-602.

[10] See the website: Beyond Canon.

[11] For a very helpful introduction and overview see A. Suciu, The Berlin-Strasbourg Apocryphon: A Coptic Apostolic Memoir (WUNT; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017) 70-138. Several of these writings are now available in English translation in Burke, New Testament Apocrypha 2.

[12] And, of course, in many cases one can see that a certain tradition (or form of tradition) was not understood as useful anymore – and thus was no longer transmitted.

[13] For more details see A. Desreumaux, Das Neue Testament in der Doctrina Addai, in: J.-M. Roessli – T. Nicklas (ed.s), Christian Apocrypha: Receptions of the New Testament in Ancient Christian Apocrypha (NTP 26; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014) 233-48.

[14] See, for example, the impact of the Apocalypse of the Virgin and the Tiburtine Sibyl as described by S.J. Shoemaker, “The Apocalypse of the Virgin,” and “The Tiburtine Sibyl,” both in: T. Burke and B. Landau (ed.s), New Testament Apocrypha: More Noncanonical Scriptures 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016) 492-509, esp. 493-495 and 510-26, esp. 515-16. – Regarding the Visio Tnugdali, a very successful, but today almost forgotten Medieval otherworldly journey, see Marcus von Regensburg, Visio Tnugdali. Vision des Tnugdal, ed., transl. and comm. by H.-C. Lehner and M. Lix (Fontes Christiani 74; Freiburg et al.: Herder, 2018).

[15] See, for example, T. Nicklas, “An ‘Apocryphal’ Role Model Allowing for a Different Life Style: Olympias as a Late Antique Thecla”, in: Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 96 (2020) 509-18.

[16] I am somewhat hesitant to use the term “identity” (or “identity construction”). For a critical discussion of the problems related to this term see, for example, J. Straub, “Identität,” in: F Jaeger and B. Liebsch (ed.s), Handbuch der Kulturwissenschaften: Grundlagen und Schlüsselbegriffe (Stuttgart – Weimar: J.B. Metzler, 2011) 277-303 [including a bibliographical overview].

[17] This is, of course, also relevant for our understanding of (New Testament and/or Biblical) “canon history.” While New Testament introductions usually understand “canon history” as the history of events leading to the development, acceptance and closure of the canon it becomes clear that even a fully developed and accepted, even closed canon still has a history within the world of contexts wherein it is used. This history is related, but not simply identical to the reception history of the books it containsFor further thoughts see T. Nicklas, Kanon und Geschichte. Eine Thesenreihe, in: Sacra Scripta 15 (2017) 90-114, and idem, The Interaction of Canon and History. Some Assumptions, in: I. Saloul – J.W. van Henten (ed.s), Martyrdom: Canonisation, Contestation and Afterlives (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2020) 33-54.

[18] German definition: “wirkliche Orte, wirksame Orte, die in die Einrichtung der Gesellschaft hineingezeichnet sind, sozusagen Gegenplatzierungen oder Widerlager, tatsächlich realisierte Utopien, in denen die wirklichen Plätze innerhalb der Kultur gleichzeitig repräsentiert, bestritten und gewendet sind, gewissermaßen Orte außerhalb aller Orte, wiewohl sie tatsächlich geortet werden können“ (M. Foucault, Andere Räume (1967), in: K. Barck (ed.): Aisthesis: Wahrnehmung heute oder Perspektiven einer anderen Ästhetik; Essais [Leipzig: Reclam, 1993] 39).

[19] Even today it is possible to visit not hell, but St Patrick’s purgatory (understood as a real place!) during a pilgrimage to Lough Derg, Ireland.

[20] For further discussion see M. Henning, “Hell as ‘Heterotopia’: Edification and Interpretation from Enoch to the Apocalypses of Peter and Paul, in: J. Frey – C. Clivaz – T. Nicklas (ed.s), Between Canonical and Apocryphal Texts: Processes of Reception, Rewriting, and Interpretation in Early Judaism and Early Christianity (WUNT 419; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019) 309-32 and T. Nicklas, “‘I saw Another Place …’ (ApcPet 21). The Greek Apocalypse of Peter and its Otherworldly Landscape of Memories,” in: T. Hatina and J. Lukeš (ed.s), Social Memory Theory and Conceptions of Afterlife in Early Judaism and Christianity (Studies in Cultural Contexts of the Bible; Leiden – Boston: Brill, 2021) [forthcoming].

[21] As a good example see the traditions which formed the perception of Mount Athos: See, for example, V. Della Dora, Imagining Mount Athos: Visions of a Holy Place from Homer to World War II (Charlottesville – London: University of Virginia Press, 2011).

[22] Of course, I am aware of the fact that the term “Gnosis” is highly problematic – I use it here simply for the sake of convenience.

[23] The results of a conference Extracanonical Traditions and the Holy Land (2-5 july 2019) will be published in the Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum series (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck) in the year 2021.

[24] The results of a conference Sharing Myths, Texts and Sanctuaries in the South Caucasus (25-27 february 2020) will be published in the Studies on Early Christian Apocrypha series (Leuven: Peeters) in the year 2022. In his flyer for the conference I. Dorfmann-Lazarev speaks about an “organic space” which is “characterised by a highly discontinuous settlement of various ethnic, linguistic and religious groups” [Conference Description].

[25] A conference is planned to take place at the end of October 2021 in Banja Luka, Bosnia.

[26] For a first example see T. Nicklas, “From Historical Apocalypses to Apocalyptic History: Late Antique Historians and Apocalyptic Writings,” in: J. Schröter, T. Nicklas and A. Puig i Tarrèch (ed.s), Beyond the Categories: Apocalypses and their Creation of Authorities in late Antique Worlds (BZNW; Berlin – Boston: de Gruyter 2021) 431-458.

[27] See, in parts, M. Bar Asher Siegal and T. Nicklas (ed.s), Women in Biblical and Parabiblical Texts in Jewish and Christian Literatures of Antiquity, forthcoming in the EThL journal 2020.