The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments (Vol. 1: Text and Apparatus & Vol. 2: Introduction, Translation and Commentary)

708 Pages·1979·43.73 MB·English

by  Michael A. Knibb

THE
ETHIOPIC BOOK
OF ENOCH
A NEW EDITION IN THE
LIGHT OF THE
ARAMAIC DEAD SEA FRAGMENTS
BY
MICHAEL A. KNIBB
IN CONSULTATION WITH
EDWARD ULLENDORFF
1
T E XT AND APPARATUS
1M
1978
OXFORD
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
Oxford University Press, Walton Street, Oxford 0x2 6DP
OXFORD LONDON GLASGOW
NEW YORK TORONTO MELBOURNE WELLINGTON
IBADAN NAIROBI DAR ES SALAAM LUSAKA CAPE TOWN
KUALA LUMPUR SINGAPORE JAKARTA HONG KONG TOKYO
DELHI BOMBAY CALCUTTA MADRAS KARACHI
ISBN O 19 826163 2
(g) Oxford University Press jgjS
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted,
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior
permission of Oxford University Press
Printed in Great Britain
by Thomson Litho Ltd.
East Kilbride,
Scotland
PREFACE
THIS work offers a new edition (volume i) and translation
(volume 2) of the Ethiopia text of Enoch. The edition is based on
Rylands Ethiopia MS. 23, and full account has been taken of the
Aramaic fragments of Enoch that were discovered at Qumr^n. The
intention is not to produce a new conflated text of Enoch, but
rather to present the sum total of the evidence for the text of Enoch
in as clear a way as possible.
In its present form this work is a revised version of a thesis that
was accepted by the University of London in 1974 for the degree
of Ph.D., but its origins go back much further than this. As long
ago as 1959 Professor Matthew Black and Professor Edward
Ullendorff had it in mind to produce a new edition and translation
of Enoch, and an exegetical commentary, and were only prevented
from making progress on this work by the delay in the publication
of the Aramaic fragments from QumrSn. As a result of this delay,
Professor Ullendorff eventually suggested that I should take over
his part of the enterprise, i.e. the edition and translation of the
Ethiopia text; and at a later stage it was decided that the exegetical
commentary, whicTi was to be prepared by Professor Black, should
be published separately. I would like to take this opportunity to
express the profound debt of gratitude that I owe to Professor
Ullendorff, both for his initial suggestion that I should undertake
this work on Enoch and for all the patient help and encouragement
that he has subsequently given me. The form that this work takes
owes much to his advice, and I have adopted many suggestions
that he has made without acknowledging them in each individual
case. I must, however, stress that the responsibility for everything
that appears here is mine.
On pp. 7 f. of volume 2 I have described the way in which I was
given access to the Aramaic fragments of Enoch. I have also
referred there to the fact that, after the Oxford University Press
had accepted this work for publication, J. T. Milik generously
agreed that proofs of his edition of the fragments be made available
to me. The edition has now been published,^ and it will be readily
' J. T. Milik, The Books of Enoch, Aramaic Fragments of Qumrdn Cave 4,
Oxford, 1976.
vi PREFACE
apparent that my view of the significance of these fragments is
very different from that of MiHk. Some of MiHk's ideas had of
course already appeared in earHer pubHcations, but I did not think
it proper in the present work to take issue with MiHk on the
arguments and detailed discussions that are contained only in the
edition, nor did I think it proper to make other than occasional
reference to it. However, a review of Milik's work, prepared
jointly by Professor Ullendorff and myself, has appeared in the
October 1977 issue of the Bulletin of the School of Oriental and
African Studies.
The interval that has occurred between the completion of the
thesis (December 1973) and its publication has enabled me to make
a number of additions and corrections. It has also enabled me to
incorporate into the apparatus in volume i the evidence of Lake
Tana Ethiopia MS. 9, and my thanks are due to Professor E.
Hammerschmidt for kindly sending me a copy of this important
manuscript.' However, it should be stressed that, apart from the
incorporation of the evidence of Tana 9 and apart from the fact
that text and translation have had to be separated for publication
(in the original they were on facing pages), no changes of a funda
mental kind have been introduced since the completion of the
thesis.
I have not normally repeated in volume 2 information that is
self-evident from the apparatus in volume i, unless, from the point
of view of the text, there was a particular reason to do so. However,
I have made an exception to this rule in the case of the so-called
Parables of Enoch (chapters 37-71) because of the widespread
interest in the figure of the Son of Man which occurs in this
section of the book.
My thanks are due to the authorities of the following institutions
which kindly supplied me with photographs or microfilms of
manuscripts in their possession: the John Rylands University
Library of Manchester; the Bodleian Library, Oxford; the British
Museum (now the British Library); the Bibliotheque Nationale;
the Vatican Library; the Tubingen and Marburg libraries of the
Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz. In addition my thanks are due
' In an Appendix in this volume I have given a list of important unique
readings attested by Tana 9 which in a number of places cast an interesting light
on the text of Enoch. In view of the evidence of this manuscript the discussion of
io6. 13 (see volume 2, pp. 39 f., 245 f.) is now in need of correction. See further
volume 2, p. 36 n. 34.
PREFACE vii
to many individuals who have given me help and advice on
particular matters, but here it is possible to mention by name
only Dr. Stefan Strelcyn and Professor P. R. Ackroyd. I would
also like to thank the staff of the Oxford University Press for their
help and for the care they have devoted to the publication of this
work. The greatest debt of all, however, is owed to my wife for all
she has done to see that this work was brought to a conclusion.
M. A. KNIBB
University of London King's College
December igyy

CONTENTS
VOLUME I
NOTE ON THE APPARATUS xi
ABBREVIATIONS xiv
LIST OF SIGLA XV
TEXT I
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS 424
APPENDIX 425
List of Unique Readings in Lake Tana Ethiopia MS. 9
VOLUME 2
ABBREVIATIONS vi
INTRODUCTION
1. Previous Editions of the Ethiopia Text of Enoch i
2. The Aramaic Fragments of the Book of Enoch 6
3. The Greek Version of the Book of Enoch 15
4. The Ethiopia Version of the Book of Enoch 21
5. The Versions Underlying the Ethiopia Text of Enoch 37
6. A Note on the Translation 47
BIBLIOGRAPHY 48
LIST OF SIGLA 53
TRANSLATION 55
REFERENCE INDEX 253
AUTHOR INDEX 259

NOTE ON THE APPARATUS
THIS introductory note is merely intended to describe the
organization of the material in the apparatus. The Introduction
proper to this work will be found in volume 2 where full details
are given of the manuscripts that have been used and the pro
cedures that have been followed.
The edition is based on Rylands Ethiopia MS. 23, and the text
consists of photographs of the manuscript; The apparatus below
the text is divided, where necessary, into an Ethiopia and a Greek
section.
(i) In the Ethiopia apparatus I give the variants of the Ethiopia
manuscripts used in this edition, both those that I have myself
collated (BM 485, BM 491, Berl, Abb 35, Abb 55, Tana 9, BodI 5,
and Ull), and those whose evidence I have taken from Charles's
text-edition (Bodl 4, Frankfurt MS., Curzon 55, Curzon 56,
BM Add. 24185, BM 484, BM 486, BM 490, BM Add. 24990,
BM 492, BM 499, Vat 71, Munich 30, Garrett MS., and Westen-
holz MS.).' Subject to the exceptions noted below, I give all the
variants (including mistakes) attested by the manuscripts that I
have myself collated. I have been more selective in the case of the
evidence taken from Charles's text-edition and normally ignored
readings attested only by one or two manuscripts, unless the
reading in question happened to agree with a reading in one or
more of the manuscripts collated by me.
The apparatus works on the principle that where a manuscript
is not mentioned, it is to be assumed that its evidence agrees with
that of Ryl. However, I have occasionally thought it necessary to
make quite clear which manuscripts (if any) agree with Ryl; in
such cases I give the manuscript support for the reading before
quoting the reading itself (cf. e.g. fol. 2rb, line 20 S11"ai>'rt ;).
' Cf. volume 2, pp. 36 f., and for the sigla see the list at the end of this
Note. In the case of the evidence taken from Charles, I normally do not name
the manuscripts to which the variants are to be attributed (unless only one
manuscript is involved), but merely use the formula '5 MSS', '7 MSS', etc.
Where Charles's evidence was incomplete, or there was some uncertainty about
it, I carried out such checks as I was able and made the necessary corrections.
There are some obvious misprints and some errors and omissions in Charles's
edition, and although in general his apparatus seems to be reliable, his collation
of the Eth II manuscripts was not always completely precise; the figures '5',
'7', etc., should only therefore be regarded as approximately correct.
xii NOTE ON THE APPARATUS
Although I have not attempted, much less achieved, absolute
consistency, I have normally left out of the apparatus all variants
of a purely orthographic character, and particularly variants
involving the following common phenomena :
(1) the formation of the imperfect (I i and II i) of verbs whose
first radical is a laryngal or pharyngal (cf. e.g. fol. 3rb, line 27
h.'f'iCh i for which the following variants occur: h.^'iC'h;, A-tOCT-;,
a-rOCh:; note that for the 11 imperfect the pattern J&0C7 : is very
frequently found in the Eth I manuscripts (particularly BM 485
and Berl) in the case of such verbs);
(ii) the occurrence of the vowels u and i with the corresponding
semivowels w and y (thus variants of the type F^COjp; / y^ayip ;,
^P-rh ;/ ^f'tb : have generally been ignored);
(iii) the spelling of names (here, particularly, I am conscious that
I have often had to make arbitrary decisions);
(iv) alternative spellings and forms of words that occur
frequently (e.g. the common variants I'i'M^:, ffi>?¥fl^!
Iao'ii.fl^jErfvC: /fi-fi^C: and related forms of this verb);
(v) the writing of the numerals (for which the Eth I manuscripts
normally use words, the Eth II manuscripts signs).
I have also normally left out of the apparatus such variants as
the following: hiiih: /hhtif:, "H : /"HTF:, ?ift»TF : / hii-'ifhiiO :
/»Aa-F;.
I have felt it necessary to treat Abb 5 5 differently from the other
manuscripts. From c. 83 onwards Abb 55 has a much abbreviated
text, and were its evidence for cc. 83-108 to be incorporated into
the apparatus, there is a serious risk that the apparatus would
become confused and overloaded. Since its evidence for cc. 83-108
is inevitably of very limited value, it seemed to me best to ignore
it altogether for these chapters except in one or two cases of special
importance.
(2) In the Greek apparatus I record the divergences between the
Greek and the Ethiopic texts. I have given rather more evidence
from the Greek version than was perhaps strictly necessary in
order to try to make as clear as possible the relationship between
the Greek and the Ethiopic. However, I have ignored trivial
variants of number (the singular in the Ethiopic, the plural in the