The study demonstrates issues with Fr. At‘anas Tiroyean’s edition of the Hexaemeron, suggesting new insights into its manuscript history.
Tracing the early history of the study of the old Armenian translation of Hexaemeron , a poem by George of Pisidia, the authors aim to demonstrate that Fr. At‘anas Tiroyean’s edition (1900, henceforth T.), due to some specifics of the editor’s work, cannot serve as a reliable witness for the evidence of the MSS. Examples are provided to show that a number of conjectural emendations proposed by contemporary scholars on the basis of Tiroyean’s text actually “restore” the readings unanimously attested in the manuscript tradition. The second part of the paper deals with the reconstruction of the Greek antigraph which the translator had at his disposal; postulating errors and interventions by the Greek scribe, the authors tend to explain several issues with the Armenian version (vv. 1143, 1154–1157, 1195–1196 T.). It is also suggested that the manuscript on which the translation is based was written in minuscule; if sound, this conclusion could help to date the Armenian Hexaemeron more precisely.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saribekyan et al. (2025) studied this question.