Fragments of Texts and Fragmentary Textual Traditions

Abstract

Abstract 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 4QEna (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 4QEna 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.