The Books of Enoch, Aramaic Fragments of Qumran Cave 4

48 INTRODUCTION
part of the beginning of the work (En. 91-4), the second preserving several
pieces of En. 104-7. add to this the CM papyrus which offers the Greek
text, more or less complete, of 97-107 (and in addition, two tiny Greek fragments
of the same papyrus, a Coptic fragment belonging to the beginning,
and a Latin fragment belonging to the end of the book), we have the best
preserved of the works attributed to Enoch, after the Book of Watchers,
either in its Greek version (and its derivatives) or in its samples of the original
Aramaic text.
The Aramaic text of 4QEn8 has definitely confirmed the hypothesis of
critics of the Ethiopic Enoch who placed the description of the three last
Weeks of the Apocalypse of Weeks (En. 91: 11-17) after that of the first
seven Weeks (93: 3~io). Calculations made on the original state of the scroll
which contained this manuscript, as also some phrases preserved in Aramaic,
show without any doubt that the beginning of the Epistle of Enoch (91:
i-io) was more fully developed in the original than in the Ethiopic version.
The Aramaic text corresponding to 92: 3-5 was also longer, and the section
93: 11-14 (itself quite different from the Ethiopic text) was preceded by an
analogous text three times as long as the Ethiopic passage. C. Bonner, the
editor of the CM papyrus, also came to the conclusion that the beginning of
the Greek version was more elaborate than the Ethiopic.^
From chapter 94 onwards (certainly from 97: 6, where CM begins) and
up to the end of the work the Ethiopic text reproduces the Greek model
relatively well, notwithstanding very numerous variations in detail and some
more notable divergences (e.g. in 98: 5; 99: 11-12; 102: 1-3 and 7-9; 103:
15; 104: 4-5). The CM papyrus does not contain En. 108, a fact which
must reflect the primitive state of the Epistle of Enoch. The work was
certainly not known to the author of the book of Jubilees. In this respect
I am in agreement with Charles, and in disagreement with those who find
reference to it in Jub. 4: 18 (which is in fact a reference to various astronomical
and calendrical texts) or in 4: 19 (a reference to the Book of Dreams;
see above, p. 45). The date of 4QEn«, towards the middle of the first century
B.C., constitutes the terminus ante quem of the composition of the Epistle.
An important indication may be drawn from the orthography of En«, which
retains several astonishingly archaic elements that must come directly from
the author's autograph, for instance, very elaborate defective forms and, above
all, ''T instead of "'l. The last-mentioned feature, normal in imperial Aramaic,
^ This is confirmed by my hypothetical identification of two small pieces of CM; see below,
notes to En«^ i i and i ii 22-3.