The Acts of Peter and Paul are an apocryphal text well known and appreciated both in the Western and Eastern worlds, spuriously attributed to one Marcellus ('pseudo-Marcellus') who is also mentioned in other apocrypha. After providing a general introduction to the Acts of Peter and Paul in the Greek, Latin and Armenian traditions, this paper focuses on a comparison between the Greek text and its Armenian translation, providing relevant examples thereof. The philological analysis shows that the Armenian translation depends on a well-attested Greek text and clarifies on which branch of the Greek manuscript tradition it is most likely based. It also offers some possible explanations for the discrepancies between the two texts that cannot be ascribed to accidents occurring in the Greek manuscript tradition.
