Search Results
Abstract
2 Enoch is one of the Slavonic pseudepigrapha that has caused and continues to provoke controversy about its origin. In particular, there is no agreement as to whether it comes from Jewish or Christian circles. However, there is a consensus among Slavists on a number of questions concerning its provenance, and these conclusions made by philologists have been confirmed by the Coptic fragments of the text discovered in 2009, and the Slavonic manuscripts themselves give us a lot of information about the possible origin of the text. Among others, the examining of the “obscure places” in 2 Enoch permits us to give an opinion on its possible original, the article deals with the analysis of one of them. At the same time, the research into such readings also demonstrates a long and complicated history of the pseudepigraphon in Slavonic, which we should always have in mind while studying 2 Enoch.
Abstract
2 Enoch without any doubt is one of the most interesting and enigmatic texts of Slavonic Pseudepigrapha. Since the publication of the first fragments of it in the middle of the 19th century, there has been a protracted debate on all the questions concerning the history of the pseudepigraphon. And the “astronomical information” in it is possibly one of the most mysterious parts of 2 Enoch. The contents of the two main recensions are quite different in the chapter dealing with astronomical material. The paper studies the fragment, in which, in the short recension, it is literally said: “I [Enoch] counted Sun’s faces”.
Abstract
In 2009, Joost Hagen made a remarkable discovery: he attributed four Coptic fragments from material excavated at Qasr Ibrim to 2 Enoch, since then most scholars no longer refer to this pseudepigraphon as “Slavonic Enoch”. Nevertheless, some works have appeared that question the authenticity of this attribution, the article deals with the problem and provides arguments in favour of Hagen’s identification of the fragments.
Abstract
On one hand, Slavonic Apocrypha share the same characteristics with the other Old Slavonic Literature. But on the other, they had their own peculiarities in terms of the process of translating, editing and copying the text during its existence in Slavonic version.