Since A. Hilgenfeld, Die klement. Rekogn. u. Homilien, 1848, the Pseudo-Clementines have provided a much frequented field of research and controversy, of which the articles in CE, EB, and Realencyklopädie (1913), XXIII, 312-6, provide fairly recent summaries from varying ecclesiastical standpoints. For bibliography see pp. 4-5 in the recent monograph of W. Heintze, Der Klemensroman und seine griechischen Quellen, 1914, in TU, XL, 2. In the same series, TU, XXV, 4, H. Waitz, Die Pseudo-Klementinen, 1904.
Concerning Simon Magus may be mentioned: H. Schlurick, De Simonis Magi fatis Romanis; A. Hilgenfeld, Der Magier Simon, in Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol., XII (1869), 353 ff.; G. Frommberger, De Simone Mago, Pars I, De origine Pseudo-Clementinorum, Diss. inaug., Warsaw, 1866; G. R. S. Mead (Fellow of the Theosophical Society), Simon Magus, 1892; H. Waitz, Simon Magus in d. altchr. Lit., in Zeitschr. f. d. neutest. Wiss., V (1904), 121-43.
[1726] BN, Greek, 930; Ottobon, 443.
[1727] Isidore, De natura rerum, caps. xxxi, xxxvi, xxxix-xli (PL, 83, 1003-12).
[1728] PL, 83, 1003, note, “Sunt haec lib. VIII Recognitionum sed apparet Isidorum alia interpretatione usum ac dubitare posse an ea quae circumfertur Rufini sit.”
[1729] See CU, Trinity 1041, 14th century, fols. 7-105, “Inc. prologus in librum quem moderni itinerarium beati Petri vocant.”
[1730] Valois (1880), p. 204.
[1731] PL, 59, 162, “Notitia librorum apocryphorum qui non recipiuntur.”
[1732] Vincent of Beauvais, Speculum naturale, 1485, I, 14.
[1733] PL, 176, 787-8, Erudit. Didasc., IV, 15.