Since the publication of the Aramaic Enochic manuscript fragments by J.T. Milik in 1976, the secondary Greek and Ethiopic versions have played a key role in how the Enochic fragments have been reconstructed and restored. In the case of the Enochic theophany (1 Enoch 1:1–9) in 4QEn a (4Q201), the edges of the fragments are often retrospectively reconstructed and restored in dialogue with the Greek text-type preserved in Codex Panopolitanus and the Ethiopic text-types preserved in the manuscripts of Ethiopic Enoch. This study demonstrates the need for renewed reflection on how the Aramaic Enochic theophany in 4QEn a is reconstructed and restored in modern editions of the fragments, and highlights the methodological dangers inherent in the application of a retrospective text-critical and reconstructive method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alexander McCarron (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: