1 Enoch (Ethiopic Text)

§ 3. THE GREEK VERSION. EDITIONS OF THIS VERSION.

The Greek Version has only in part been preserved. Chapters 1–32:6 and 19:3–21:9 (the latter in a duplicate form) were discovered in 1886–1887 at Akhmîm A city in Upper Egypt where a significant cache of Christian and apocryphal manuscripts was found in a monk's grave. by the French Archaeological Mission at Cairo, and published by M. Bouriant in 1892. These are designated as Gᶢ and Gᶢ¹, and Gᶢ² in the case of the duplicate passage. Large fragments have been preserved in Syncellus George Syncellus, a 9th-century Byzantine chronicler who quoted Enoch in his "Extract of Chronography." 6–10:14, 15:8–16:1, and 8:4–9:4 in a duplicate form. These are designated as Gˢ and Gˢ¹, Gˢ² in the case of the duplicate passage.

The chief literature on these fragments is as follows:—

Bouriant, Greek Fragments of the Book of Enoch. Memoirs published by the members of the French Archaeological Mission at Cairo, volume 9, pages 91–136, 1892. This is praiseworthy as a first edition, but the text is disfigured by many errors.

— The Gospel and the Apocalypse of Peter with the Greek text of the book of Enoch. Text published in facsimile by photogravure from the photographs of the Gizeh manuscript. Paris, 1893.

Dillmann, Reports of the Proceedings of the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences at Berlin, 1892, 51–53, pages 1039–1054, 1079–1092. These studies are of course good, and several of this scholar's suggestions are excellent. In his comparison of the Ethiopic and Greek Versions he had the benefit of having collations of q t u Reference to specific Ethiopic manuscript codices used for comparison. before him. These gave him no inconsiderable advantage in dealing with the problems before him, though his article takes cognizance of only a limited number of readings where these manuscripts furnish a superior text.

Lods, The Book of Enoch, Greek Fragments discovered at Akhmîm, published with the variants of the Ethiopic text, translated and annotated. Paris, 1892. Lods' contribution is learned, scholarly, and judicious, but as he had the misfortune to base his work on the corrupt text published by Dillmann in 1851, a large portion of his conclusions was vitiated Spoiled or impaired in quality. from the outset.

Charles, The Book of Enoch, pages 318–370. Oxford, 1893. In this work I attempted an exhaustive comparison of the Greek and Ethiopic texts, and carried the criticism of the materials several stages beyond previous scholars in this department. An overestimate, however, of the Ethiopic Version led me to make some unjustifiable changes in the Greek text. This error has been set right in the present edition. Notwithstanding, the subsequent thirteen years of study have confirmed most of the suggestions made in 1893.