The Apocalypse of Baruch. Translated from the Syriac: Chapters I-LXXVII, from the Sixth Century MS. in the Ambrosian Library of Milan, and Chapters LXXVIII- LXXXVII—The Epistle of Baruch.—From a New and Critical Text based on Ten MSS. and published herewith. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and Indices. 7s. 6d. net.
The Assumption of Moses. Translated from the Latin Sixth Century MS., the unemended Text of which is published herewith, together with the Text in its restored and critically emended Form. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and Indices. 75. 6d.
A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life in Israel, in Judaism, and in Christianity ; or Hebrew, Jewish, and Christian Eschatology, from pre-Prophetic Times till the Close of the New Testament Canon. 155.
_A. & C. BLACK, SOHO SQUARE, LONDON.
The Book of Enoch. Translated from Dillmann’s Ethiopic Text (emended and revised in accordance with hitherto uncollated Ethiopic MSS. and with the Gizeh and other Greek and Latin Fragments), with Introduction, Notes, and Indices. 8vo, 16s.
The Ethiopic Version of the Hebrew Book of Jubilees. Edited from Four MSS. and critically revised, emended, and restored in accordance with the Hebrew, Syriac, Greek, and Latin Fragments of this Book. 4to, 125. 6d.
The Book of the Secrets of Enoch. Translated from the Slavonic by W. R. Morriiy, M.A., and’ Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and Indices, by R. H. CHARLES, M.A.
THE CLARENDON PRESS, OXFORD.
TRANSLATED FROM THE ETHIOPIC VER- SION, WHICH, TOGETHER WITH THE NEW GREEK FRAGMENT, THE LATIN VERSIONS AND THE LATIN TRANSLATION OF THE SLAVONIC, IS HERE PUBLISHED IN FULL
EDITED WITH INTRODUCTION, NOTES, AND INDICES
R. H. CHARLES, D.D.
PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL GREEK, TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN
LONDON ADAM AND CHARLES BLACK
TO MY FRIENDS N. BONWETSCH, B. P. GRENFELL, A. S. HUNT
TO WHOM I AM SO MUCH INDEBTED IN THE PRESENT WORK
PREFACE
A NEw edition of the Ascension has long been needed. That of Dillmann was in its time a most helpful and meritorious work, though his commentary is too brief, and his Ethiopic text less good than it might have been, owing to his somewhat faulty collation of the MSS. and his failure to use for critical purposes the Latin versions at his disposal.
For the present edition accordingly the Ethiopic MSS. have been collated and the text edited anew. Full account has therein been taken of the Latin versions and the Greek Legend, as well as of the new textual authorities now accessible—Grenfell and Hunt's fragmentary Greek text,and Bonwetsch’s translation of the Slavonic version. Indeed, to make the textual evidence complete I have arranged the Greek text, the Latin versions, and the Latin translation of the Slavonic in parallel columns with the Ethiopic, and appended at their close the Greek Legend, which, being built on the Ascension, is an important witness to its text. The genealogical relations subsisting between these authorities are set forth in the Introduction.
Before leaving this subject I must record my deep obligations to Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt for placing at my service the proofs of their critical and admirable edition of the valuable Greek fragment which they have recently discovered; to Professor Bonwetsch for his most helpful translation
viii PREFACE
of the Slavonic version, and to Father Mercati for a new and more accurate collation of the Vatican Latin fragments. For Father Mercati’s help I am beholden to the kind offices of Mr. C. H. Turner, Fellow of Magdalen College. Finally, my best thanks are due to Messrs. A. & C. Black for generously undertaking the publication of the above texts. The Ascension is a composite work, partly of Jewish, partly of Christian origin. The former element, which is derived from a Jewish work, the Martyrdom of Isaiah, possesses a value of its own, but it is the Christian element, which is based on two originally independent writings, the Testament of Hezekiah and the Vision of Isaiah, that chiefly engages our attention in the present work. These latter, particularly the Testament of Hezekiah, cast an illuminating, though at times lurid, light on certain outlying provinces of Christian belief and conduct towards the close of the first century. It bewails the fewness of the prophets, the prevalence of heresies,the sad declension in Christian character. It touches incidentally on the fact that there were Church Guilds, whose sole object was to keep believers in a state of readiness for the Advent of Christ, but expecting withal to experience first the dreaded coming of the Antichrist. Since the account it furnishes of the Antichrist is in some respects unique, I have brought the Introduction to a close with a Critical Essay on the Antichrist, Beliar, and Neronic myths as they appear in Jewish and Christian literature between 200 B.c. and 120 A.D.
17 Brapmore Roan, Oxrorp. September, 1900,
CONTENTS
PAGE InTRoDUCTION P a . ‘ ; * . xi-lxxiv
§ x. Short account of the Book (xi-xii). § 2. Various Titles of the Book (xii-xiv). § 3. The Ethiopic Version (E) and its MSS. (xiv-xvi). § 4. Editions of the Text (xvi-xvii). § 5. Translations of the Ethiopie Version (xvii-xviii). § 6. The Latin xi.) (xviii-xxi). § 7. The fuller text of @' asa rule derived from G (xxi-xxiv). § 8. The Slavonic Version (S) (xxiv-xxvii). § 9. The Greek Legend (= Gk, Leg.) (xxvii-xxviii). § 10. The newly recovered Greek Text of ii. 4-iv. 4 and its relation to E and L? (xxviii-xxxi). § 11. The Archetype of G and its Descendants (xxxi-xxxiii). § 12. Critical Inquiries (xxxiv-xxxvi). § 13. Different Elements in the Book (xxxvi-xliii). § 14. Dates of the various Constituents of the Ascension (xliv-xlv). § 15. Martyrdom of Isaiah and the Oriental Influences apparent in it (xlv-xlix). § 16. Value of the Ascension for the History of outlying Religious Thought (xlix-li). § 17. The Antichrist, Beliar, and Neronic Myths and their subsequent Fusion (li-lxxv).
Symzots aND BRACKETS USED IN THIS EDITION . a lxxiv TRANSLATION AND NoTES : . } : . ‘ 1-82
x CONTENTS
PAGE Latin TRANSLATION OF SLAVONIC VERSION. e - 98-139 APPENDIX ON THE Names ‘THE BELovED,’ ‘ BER,’
INTRODUCTION
§ 1. Sort Account or THE Book.
THE Ascension of Isaiah is a composite work of very great interest. In its present form we cannot be sure that it existed earlier than the latter half of the second century of our era. Its various constituents, however, and of these there were three, circulated independently as early as the first
1 From the third century onward the Ascension had an extensive circulation amongst Christian ‘heretics. Thus it was used by Hieracas and the Archontici (see quotations from Epiphanius, p. 67); by the Arians, to whom we owe the preservation of the Vatican fragments ; by the Massalians or Bogomils in the East, and the Cathari in the West. Its presence amongst the Massalians is attested by Euthymius Zigabenus (cire. 1100), *Edeyxos kat OplapBos tis. . . aipécews ray abéav Macoadavay, in Tollius, Insignia Itinerarii Italici, 1696, 116-117, érépav tivd elvat tpidda, 7) cat Swepwepévny efovolav, thy te bmeprdtw Tov éntd ovpavav émxabnuérny, Kata rv BdeAupdy wevdeniypapoy map’ abrois tod ‘Hoatov Spacw (see Migne, Patrol. Graec. cxxxi. col. 44); and amongst the Cathari by Moneta, Adversus Catharos et Waldenses (ed. Riechinius), 1742, p. 218, ‘Omnes (prophetas) damnabant praeter Isaiam, cuius dicunt esse quemdam libellum, in quo habetur, quod spiritus Isaiae raptus a corpore usque ad septimum caelum ductus est, in quo vidit et audivit quaedam arcana, quibus vehementissime innituntur.’
xii INTRODUCTION
century. These were the Martyrdom of Isaiah, the Vision of Isaiah, and the Testament of Hezekiah. The first of these was of Jewish origin, and is of less interest here than the other two, which were the work of Christian writers. The Vision of Isaiah is important for the knowledge it affords us of first-century beliefs in certain circles as to the doctrines of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Resurrection, the Seven Heavens, &c. The long lost Testament of Hezekiah, which is, I think, to be identified with iii. 13° to iv. 18 of our present work, is unquestionably of great value in the insight it gives us into the history of the Christian Church at the close of the first century. Its descriptions of the worldliness and lawlessness which prevailed among the elders and pastors, i.e. the bishops and priests, of the widespread covetousness and vainglory as well as of the growing heresies among Christians generally, agree with similar accounts in 2 Peter, 2 Timothy, and Clement of Rome (ad Cor. iii, xxiii), This work, moreover, is the first and oldest document that testifies to the martyrdom of St. Peter at Rome, Finally, it supplies us with indispensable materials for the history of the Antichrist.
§ 2. Various TiTLzs oF THE Book.
"Anékpudov “Hoatov is the name assigned to it by Origen in his commentary on Matthew xiii. 57 (Lommatzsch, iii. 49), Kat ‘Hoatas 88 wenploOar ind
INTRODUCTION xiii
Tod Aaod tordpyra’ el S€ ris od Mpoolerar Thy ioroplay did 7d ey TO droKpthe ‘Hoag aitiy dépecbar morevadrw tois éy tH mpds ‘EBpatovs obrw yeypaypevors (Heb. xi. 37). See also Ep. ad Afric. 9 (Lommatzsch, xiii. 31), and the Constitutiones Apostolicae,
In Epiphanius, Haer. xl. 2, it is termed 76 ’Ava- Barixéy ‘Hoatov, which he says was used by the *Addoyevels. AapBavovor d? AaBas axd Tod *AvaBarixod ‘Hoatov éri 5% cal GAAwy tidy aroxptoov. And in Ixvii. 3 Bodderas 3% (‘Iépaxas) rv redclay abrod ototacw moreioba. dnd tod ’“AvaBarixod “Hoatov, d40ev Os ey TH ’AvaBarixd Aeyouevw edreyev exeice Ort (the quotation which follows will be found in the notes on p. 67). In like manner Jerome calls it the Ascensio Isaiae. See quotation in notes
Thirdly, it was known as the “Opacts ‘Hoatov. This we infer from the texts of E S and L? of vi. 1. This designation actually appears in Montfaucon’s and Pitra’s list of Canonical and Apocryphal Books. It belongs specifically, and probably originally, only to vi-xi. 40. —
Finally, it is named the Avaéjxn "E¢exlov by such a work was incorporated in the Ascension might also be inferred from i. 2°-5* which describe the contents of Hezekiah’s Vision (see also Greek Legend, i. 2). This description is applicable to the Christian Apocalypse, iii. 13°-iv. 18, and to it alone in the Ascension. The fact, too, that Cedrenus
xiv INTRODUCTION
quotes partially iv. 12, 14, and refers to iv. 15-18 of this very section, points to the conclusion that such a book existed independently (see i. 2-4, notes).
§ 3. Tue Ernioric Version (E) anp its MSS.
The Ethiopic version, which we shall henceforth denote by E, is on the whole a faithful reproduction of the Greek (G?).
As we shall see later, there were at an early date two recensions (G! and G?) of the original Greek of vi-xi, which presented very divergent texts in a large number of passages. It is from the former of these (G") that E is derived.
E is, as we have said, a faithful reproduction of the Greek. So closely as a rule does it follow the latter that it can almost always be retranslated without difficulty. Like every version, however, with a long history behind it, it has its defects. Thus there are additions made to the text in ii. 5, vii. 4, Vili. 12, 34, ix. 18, and losses sustained in ii. 13, Vil. 13, 15, 17, X1.19. Manifest dittographies and mistaken renderings of the Greek in vii. 21, ix. 3, 5. Corruptions too are not infrequent, as in are obvious and admit of easy emendation.
Other defects in E are not native to it, but go back to G1, Thus the omission in iii. 5 is trace-
INTRODUCTION XV
able to this source: and likewise the addition in
The corruptions, moreover, in vi. 17, vii. 9, ix. 14, are simply reproductions of corruptions already existing in the Greek.
A discussion of the critical affinities of E to the other versions must be adjourned to the later sections.
The Manuscripts. Of E only three manuscripts a, b, c, have come to Europe; two of these are in the British Museum, 0 and ¢. These belong to the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries respectively, and appear on the British Museum Catalogue as Nos.
¢ is much less trustworthy than b, and yet in certain passages, particularly in xi. 2-24, we are obliged to follow it against a and 6 on the ground of external or internal evidence. For the sake of brevity I have not infrequently omitted its readings.
In 6 there are frequent omissions through homoioteleuton, and likewise many misleading corrections of the text. Notwithstanding, these two manuscripts are of indispensable worth for establishing the text of E. They were first used by Dillmann in his edition of the Ascension in 1877. His collation, however, of these manuscripts is defective and inaccurate, as we shall discover later (see p. Xvi).
b and ¢ are much inferior in value to a, which belongs to the Bodleian Library, Oxford. This
xvi INTRODUCTION
manuscript, which may be assigned to the fifteenth century, was published as it stands in 1819 by Laurence. I have followed it in the main in my text.
§ 4. Eprtions or THE Eruioric TrExv.
Lavrencsr. Ascensio Isaiae Vatis, Opusculum pseudepigraphum . . . cum Versione Latina Anglicanaque publict Turis factum, Oxoniae, 1819.
Laurence, as we have above mentioned, edited the text found in a. This he reproduced on the whole with great accuracy, and combined with it a Latin and an English translation. These translations, however, are often untrustworthy.
Ditimann. Ascensio Isaiae Aethiopice et Latine, cum Prolegomenis Adnotationibus criticis et exegeticis, additis Versionum Latinarum Reliquiis edita, Lipsiae, 1877.
In this edition, by means of the manuscripts b and ¢ (p. xvi), Dillmann made a vast advance on his predecessor. This advance, however, might have been somewhat greater if he had consulted the Latin fragments which he published pari passu with the construction of his text on a, b,c. On the other hand, his insight is shown by not a few happy emendations, and his translation is all that is admirable.
On the other hand, a very serious blemish disfigures the text and his apparatus criticus in the footnotes. Dillmann’s collation of a, 6, and ¢ is occasionally inaccurate and defective. Thus, as
INTRODUCTION xvii
regards one of the proper names in ii. 5, and of two in iv. 22, his text represents none of the manuscripts. He wrongly collates a in iii. 2, vi. 13, xi. and ix. 39. The above inaccuracies are, it is true, of no great moment, but the same is not true of the following passages: iii. 16 (twice), vii. 3, 14, 24, Vili. 5, X. 1, where the readings of the manuscripts differ, and not only is the wrong variant adopted in the text, but the right reading is not even collated in the footnotes. Sometimes the omitted variant merely upholds the order of the Greek as against the adopted one, as in ii. 9, but even this is of some value. j
Finally, Dillmann’s reduction of the orthography to one fixed norm is not desirable. It is better that the student should be presented with the forms that occur so commonly in the manuscripts.
§ 5. TRANSLATIONS OF THE ETHIOPIC VERSION.
Laurence. This translation, which has already been referred to (p. xvi), was reprinted by Gfrorer in his Prophetae veteres pseudepigraphi, 1840, and was done into German by Jolowicz, Die Himmelfahrt und Vision des Propheten Jesaja, aus dem Aethiopischen (2) und Lateinischen ins Deutsche tibersetzt, 1854.
Ditimann. See p. xvi.
Basszt. This scholar has translated Dillmann’s text into French: Les Apocryphes Ethiopiens, traduits en francais, III. L’Ascension dIsaie, 1894,
xviii INTRODUCTION
and aimed at smoothness rather than exactness of expression.
Brrr. Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des Alten Testaments, 1900, ii. 124-127. We have here an
of Dillmann’s text.
§ 6. Tue Latin Versions L? (ii. 14 -iii. 13,
There were two Latin versions, one of which L? embraces vi—xi., the other L? only ii. 14-iii. 13, vii. 1-19. The former was printed by Antonius de Fantis at Venice, in 1522, from a manuscript now unknown, and reprinted by Gieseler in a Gottingen program (Vetus Translatio Latina Visionis Iesaiae, 1832), and by Dillmann as an appendix in his edition of 1877.
As I have been unable to get access to the Venice edition, I have re-issued the version, as it appears in Dillmann’s edition, with certain corrections and critical notes.
Now as regards the two fragments of L', these were first discovered and edited by Mai in 1828 (Scriptorum Veterum Nova Collectio, III. part ii. 238, 239) from the codex rescriptus of the Acts of Chalcedon, Vat. 5750, the original writing of which belongs to the fifth or sixth century. His work unhappily was somewhat inaccurate and defective, but these shortcomings are now set right in the texts presented on pp. 87-92 and 102-108. For the corrections in question I am indebted to the
INTRODUCTION xix
assistant Librarian in the Vatican, Father Mercati, whose kind services were secured for me by Mr. C. H. Turner of Magdalen College.
When we proceed to compare L! and L? and E together in chapter vii, the agreement of L! and E against L? at once springs to light. Even within this limited portion of the text it becomes clear that L! and E on the one side, and L? on the other, are not directly derived from one and the same Greek text, but only indirectly through the medium of two distinct recensions, G! and G?, which in nine-tenths of their matter presuppose a common parent G.
Although I had arrived at the above conclusion through a study of E, Lt and L?, it was impossible to prove it beyond question till the Slavonic version (= 8S) was made accessible to me through the kindness of Professor Bonwetsch.
If the reader will now turn to the versions of chapter vii. on pp. 102-108, having first acquainted himself with the meaning of the symbols (see p. lxxiii, sq.) which I have used for critical purposes in this edition, he will see that E L!! agree against S L’ in presenting a fuller text in vii. 5,12, 15, 16,17, and likewise in the same corrupt addition in vii. 18,
On the other hand, S L? agree against EL} in
17, There are many other less obvious though not
1 In vii. 12, L? stands alone against E § L?, but this is due, as I have shown on p. 106, to its translator finding «aGapice in his text instead of xaParpyce,
XX INTRODUCTION
less weighty divergencies between EL! and SL’, that is, between G! and G? in this chapter, but the above instances are sufficient to establish our contention.
_ We have now to show that throughout the rest of vi—xi, where L! fails us, SL? agree against E alike in their additions and their omissions. Only the more important passages will be noticed. Thus S L? agree in more or less large additions in vii. 34, 36, 40. Again, they agree in giving short summaries instead of the Ethiopic text of x. 25-28, xi. 27-30, and especially in omitting the very important passage in E, i.e. xi. 2-22, with the exception of a single phrase in xi. 19.
The above divergencies have in some instances assumed such vast proportions that it may occur to the reader that these were possibly developed on Abyssinian soil. But such a supposition is precluded by the fact that many of the most suspicious passages are supported by an independent Greek authority. This authority which we must now invoke is the Greek Legend, which is printed on pp. 141-148, and of which a short account will be found on pp. xxvii-xxviii. This work was based on the same form of text that is preserved in E and L, It does not, indeed, make a continuous use of our text, but yet uses it sufficiently to show beyond possibility of doubt that its writer had before him not G? but Gt.
The evidence is as follows. In vii. 17 where we have all five authorities, E L! and Greek Legend
INTRODUCTION XXi
agree in giving a text ( gloriae) against that of S L? ( magnae gloriae). Next, in viii. 5 E and Greek Legend cdvidovdds cov etal, whereas S L? odp- Bovdos eiul. Here odpBovdos is corrupt. In vi. 2, are supported by the Greek Legend but omitted by SL*. Finally, the Greek Legend has preserved a clause (xi. 19, 20) out of the large section peculiar to E. To the above we might add that Greek Legend, ii. 10, has preserved a phrase found in LI, vii. 11, but lost in E.
We have now shown that in chapters vi—-ai. EL! and the ‘Greek Legend’ go back to a definite Greek text which we have named G1, and that S L? go back similarly to G?.
The main differences of G' from G are due to the editor of the entire work: whereas those of G? from G are due to the editor of this independent edition of vi-xi.
We have not as yet dealt with the first Latin fragment of Mai, ii. 14-iii. 13, but this need not delay us long; for it clearly belongs to the same form of text as the second fragment and agrees very closely with E. For a detailed treatment of its relations to E and the new Greek fragment, the reader should consult pp. xxvili-xxxi.
§7. Tae Fuuier Text or G! As A RULE Is DERIVED FROM G.
In certain passages S L? present a shorter text than E. If § L’, in other words G?, represent faith-
xxii INTRODUCTION
fully the text as it stood in the archetype G, then it is clear that in such passages the fuller text of E or G! is the work of the editor of G.. This is no doubt true in a few cases. Thus we may be fairly confident that certain clauses in vi. 1-13 are additions from the hand of the editor of G. It has been thought also that certain phrases in ix. 5,13, 17,X.7 which give the definite name of the Messiah are from the same source, on the ground that they are against a definite statement in the context which declares that this name cannot be heard by Isaiah till he has left the body (see, however, ix. 5 note). On the other hand, we cannot suppose that the short summaries which S L? offer of x. 25-28 and xi. 27- 30 are original, and that the fuller text in E is an expansion of these; for the text of E observes a due proportion which is wanting inSL?. Here undoubtedly the editor of G? abridges the text of G.
We must next deal with the very important passage xi. 2-22. This passage which is found in E goes back to G1, since phrases from verses 19, 20 reappear in the Greek Legend, ii. 39. But it goes back further still and is derived from the archetype G. We must now give the grounds for this view. First its subject-matter is quite in keeping with the context before and after; for from x. 8 to xi. 19 the concealment of the teal nature of Christ is the underlying thought of the entire passage.
Next from the command which Isaiah hears given to Christ to descend to the earth and to
INTRODUCTION xxiii
Sheol (x. 8), and afterwards to ascend therefrom (x. 14), we naturally expect Isaiah to witness these events in the vision in xi, seeing that he witnesses all else that is mentioned in x. 8-14. But the genuineness of xi. 2-22 is still more apparent, if we consider that in the short account of G? in xi. there is not a single reference to the crucifixion, descent into Sheol, and resurrection on the third day, though from ix. 12-17 we cannot do otherwise than expect a definite portrayal of these events in the vision. Thus in the latter passage it is told that Christ will descend to earth and assume human form ; that owing to the instigation of the prince of this world men will rise up against Him and crucify Him, ‘not knowing who He is.’ Thereupon He will descend into Sheol (this clause is peculiar to SL?) and rise again on the third day—and send out His Twelve Apostles (this last clause is peculiar to S L?)—and ascend into heaven. Now if we turn to xi. 2-22 this is just what Isaiah sees in vision: Christ is born of the Virgin, but the nature of the birth is to be told to none (xi. 2-16). Then He works great miracles and the Jews roused by the adversary crucify Him in Jerusalem, ‘not knowing who He is.’ Thereupon He descends into Sheol (xi. 18-20). And on the third day He rises again and sends forth His Twelve Apostles and ascends into heaven (xi. 21, 22)}.
1 We should observe also that xi. 14 is quoted in the Actus Petri, xxiv, xi, 16, by Ignatius ad Ephes., and xi. 11 most probably by Protev. Iacobi, xx. 4.
xxiv INTRODUCTION
In the light of the above facts the genuineness of xi, 2-22 as an original constituent of G can hardly be disputed. And now if we turn to the passage which the editor of G? has substituted in its stead, our convictions are, if possible, further strengthened. It runs: ‘ Missus sum a Deo "omnia tibi ostendere. Nec enim ante te quis vidit, nec post te poterit videre quod tu vidisti et audisti. Et vidi similem filii hominis et cum hominibus habitare et in mundo™ 1g. Et non cognoverunt eum. 23. Et vidi ascendentem in firmamentum.’ The words enclosed in brackets are peculiar to S L?. Of these the greater part, i.e. ‘Nec enim ante te... vidisti et audisti, appears to be based on viii. 11.
In the next place the words ‘ Et non cognoverunt eum’ have occurred before (ix. 14) in all versions in reference to those who crucified Christ, and in xi. 19 in E this significance is preserved where the same phrase recurs. In S L?, however, this phrase is given a setting and a relation which are foreign to it so far as our authorities go. We have already dwelt above on the thorough inadequacy with which the earthly life and destinies of the Messiah are treated in SL*. We conclude, therefore, that xi. 2-22 are derived from G, the archetype, and that here, as in x. 25-28, xi. 27-30, the editor of G? has abridged the text of G.
§ 8. THe Stavonic Version (= 8).
For a short account of this version I will simply reproduce Professor Bonwetsch’s note which he
INTRODUCTION XXV
appends to the translation which he has been so good as to make for this edition }:—
‘The manuscript from which A. Popov published this Vision of Isaiah (Bibliograf. Materialy, i. 13- 22) is No. 175 (18) in the Library of the Uspenschen Cathedral in Moscow, and belongs to the close of the twelfth century.. It consists of 304 leaves, of which two towards the. beginning are lost. The manuscript is written in two columns, each of thirty-two lines. Popov has added likewise the variants of a fourteenth-century manuscript of Servian origin, from which he had at an earlier date published the Vision of Isaiah (Opis rukop. Chludova, 414-419). The readings of this latter authority, which have not been accessible to me, I denote by ch, and those of the former by u. In the Latin translation of the text I have followed the phraseology of the Latin version, published at Venice, so far as it corresponds to the Slavonic text. Accordingly I often use the form of the imperfect where, according to S, the perfect could stand.’
I have already shown (p. xxi) that S is made from the same Greek text as L?, ie. G% It is, however, more faithful and full than L%, Thus where L? omits words, phrases, or even whole 18, 29, Xi. 23, the lacunae are supplied by S in
1 On the Slavonic texts see Kozak, Jahrbiicher f. prot. Theologie, 1892, pp. 138-139; Bonwetsch in Harnack’s Gesch. der altchr. Litteratur, i. 916.
2 Such words, phrases, &c., in S are enclosed in brackets thus 1,
xxvi INTRODUCTION
agreement with E. Thus, these passages that are lost in L? go back to the archetype G.
As regards the phrases and passages peculiar to 29, xi. 1, 34 it is impossible, in most cases, to say categorically whether they appear for the first time in G? or went back to G.
Of these the phrase ‘angelos innumerabiles’ in SL? vii. 33 appears to be derived from G; for though wanting in E it is found in Greek Legend, ii 19. In SIL? ix. 5 ‘filius Dei’ is likewise primitive since, though replaced by a different phrase in EH, it is found in Greek Legend, ii. 25. Again, in SL? ix. 17 ‘et mittet suos praedicatores, &c., may also be primitive, since the clause though not found in E in this passage is supported by E in xi, 22. Finally, the phrase ‘cum hominibus habitare’ in SL? xi. 1 reappears in Greek Legend, ii. 11 rots avOpdrois cvvavactpepecbat. Hence this phrase, though lost in E, was most probably in G? and therefore in G. The phrase in SL? xi. 1 that immediately precedes, ‘vidi similem filii hominis,’ ? may also be primitive though unattested by any derivative of G!. The exclusion of such a phrase by the editor of G1 is quite intelligible; for, from the close of the first century A.D., its use as a Messianic title was avoided, no doubt because it
1 Such phrases and passages peculiar to S L’ are enclosed in brackets thus T 1,
2 Cf. Rev. i, 13; xiv. 14; 4 Ezra vi. 1 (Syriac and Ethiopic versions).
INTRODUCTION xxvii
was thought to imply the exclusive humanity of Christ.
Though the four passages just dealt with are in all probability derived from the archetype, it is hardly possible that the peculiar text of SL? in xi. 34, which is in reality 1 Cor. ii. 9, can be derived from the same source. There is no reason for the omission by E or G! of such a striking statement, but rather every reason for its inclusion. The interpolation was made by the editor of G?.
§9. Tue Greek Lecenp (=Gn. LEc.).
The following Isaiah legend was found by Dr. O. von Gebhardt in a Greek manuscript of the twelfth century, which is numbered 1534 in the National Library in Paris, and published with certain introductory remarks and notes in the Z. f’ W. T., 330- 353, 1878. The manuscript consists of 337 folios. with two columns on each page, and the above legend is given on fol. 2457-251. Its division into chapters and verses, in our reprint on pp. 141-148, is due to Gebhardt. Of the four chapters into which he. divides it, the last, having no relation to the. present work, is not here reproduced. It will be.
Gebhardt remarks that the iota subscript is wholly wanting in the manuscript, but that the breathings and accents are generally rightly added. The accentuation of the manuscript in the matter of proper names is. followed in the printed text.
The critical affinities of the Greek Legend have
XXvili INTRODUCTION
already been discussed. It has been shown (p. xx) that, together with E and L, it is derived from G’. In a few passages, however, we have had occasion to remark that it attests the text of S L? where it stands alone, and by such attestation makes it more than probable that the passages in question belong to the archetype (see p. xxvi).
I have printed the Greek Legend as it stands in Gebhardt, save that I have emended two voces nullae that appear in it. The phrases that are taken directly from G! are printed in thick type, and the chapter and verse from which they are drawn placed in the margin.
§ 10. THE NEWLY RECOVERED GREEK TEXT OF IL 4-IV. 4, AND ITS RELATION To E anv L},
This very important Greek fragment of the text is written, according to Grenfell and Hunt, on a papyrus of the fifth or sixth century. ‘The papyrus is in book form and consists of three nearly complete sheets, measuring 23 x 26-5 cm., and part of a fourth, containing in all seven leaves and fourteen pages. The writing is in single columns on each side of the leaf, the pages, with the exception of the first two, being numbered continuously from 9 to 20. From the numbering and from the strip of parchment designed to prevent the cord, which runs down the centre of the margin between pages 12 and 13 (cols. vi. and vii.), from tearing through the papyrus, it is clear that our fragment consists of the second half of the
INTRODUCTION XxiX
third, and the whole of the fourth, fifth, and sixth sheets of a quire of six sheets. Six pages are therefore lost at the commencement of the quire. The missing beginning of the Ascension must have occupied not less than four pages. Probably, therefore, the first page, perhaps the first leaf, was left blank or had only the title’ (Grenfell and Hunt’s Ascension of Isaiah, p. 2). For other details relating to the papyrus and its orthography, the reader must consult the work of the scholars just cited.
The value of this fragment is very great. It supports L! in supplying gaps in E in ii. 16, iii. 2, and in emending iii. 1. Where L? fails, it helps to emend Hin iii. 14, 24, 31,iv.1,2. Itis true that some of these defects of E were so obvious that they were already remedied on internal evidence. Possibly its greatest contribution to our knowledge of the book is its clear text of the very important passage iv. 2°-4, where, owing to the variations in the manuscripts of E, it was difficult to determine which Manuscript should be followed.
On the other hand there are additions, omissions, and corruptions in the text. The chief corruptions, which are more deep-seated as a rule than in E, and the chief addition in iii. 7.
But what is of more moment than an exhaustive list of the excellencies and failings of this fragment is to determine its textual relations with E and L’. Now even a cursory examination shows that L';
XXX INTRODUCTION
notwithstanding the very imperfect form in which it exists, is more nearly related to E than to the Greek fragment which we shall call G2. Thus, whereas L' and G? agree against E in preserving ‘et dimidiam’ (jjy.ov) in iii. 2, and a correct reading in iii, 10, their points of divergence are very numerous and more weighty. This L! agrees with E in attesting three phrases which are lost by G? "in iii. 6, and in preserving a proper name in iii. 10 which has disappeared from G*. Again, they agree in rejecting additions of G? in iii. 7, 8, and in presenting the undoubtedly true readings in iii, 2, 10, where G? is at fault.
We have seen in an earlier section (see pp. xviii.— xxi) that in vi—xi. there were, at an early date, two distinct forms of the Greek text G! and G?, and that the second Mai Latin fragment vii. 1-19 (= L") and E were derived from the former, and L? and S from the latter. Now, from the close affinities existing between E and the first Mai Latin fragment L, as against the Greek fragment, it might be concluded that in i-v. also there were two Greek texts as in vi—xi. and that as E and Li belong to G1, so the papyrus Greek fragment is a representative of G2.
Thus it is characteristic of G? in vi—xi. to summarize shortly the primitive text as in x, 25-28, xi. 27-30, and in so doing to introduce confusion as in the latter passage. Now, in iii. 6 we find a similar (accidental ?) abridgement of the text —the omission of three phrases or clauses—with
INTRODUCTION xxxi
very disastrous results. Again, it is no less characteristic of G? in vi—xi. to make additions to the text as in vii. 37, viii. 3, &. (see p. xx). Now in iii, 7 there is an undoubted (2) addition.
Notwithstanding we must explain, I think, the differences between EL and the Greek fragment as due tothe errors and variations incidental to the process of transmission, whereas the differences between EL’ and SL? in vi-ai. are due to a deliberate recension. Thus all the differences between EL' and the Greek fragment arose subsequently to the formation of the complete work of the Ascension, whereas the substantial differences between EL! and S L? were the result of deliberation, and had practically attained finality on the publication of these distinct recensions.
Accordingly, though we may term the Greek fragment G*, and the Latin fragment L', these two forms were not related to each other as were G! and G? in vi—xi. Thus G? has one significance when used in reference to i—v., and another when used in reference to vi.—xi.
§ 11. THE ARCHETYPE G AND ITS DESCENDANTS.
We are now in a position to summarize the results of our inquiries. First of all we are obliged to presuppose the existence of an archetypeG for vi.—xi,
Some form of this archetype was still in existence early in the fourth century; as we must conclude from the quotation made by Epiphanius
XXxil INTRODUCTION
(Haer. lxvii. 3) from the Ascension of Isaiah, ix. 35, 36, which was used according to his testimony by the Ophites and Hieracites. This quotation contains in loose form factors peculiar in part to G? and in part to G’, and accordingly presupposes their common source G (see note on p. 67). The text of G was, in every probability, in the hands of Ignatius, and the writers of the Protevangelium Iacobi and the Actus Petri.
Two editors at an early date edited G afresh. Each pursued his own aims independently, and in some cases added to the text, in others abridged it.
Their methods can be studied in vi—xi., the chapters common to both, where in EL! and S L? we have very faithful reproductions of G! and G? respectively. The editor of G!, who was the editor of the entire work, has undoubtedly taken fewer liberties with the text before him, and has preserved important passages excised by the editor of G? (see pp. Xxi.-xxiv.).
The actual text of G' was used by the author of the Greek Legend, and some hundreds of its phrases are literally reproduced in this work (see pp. 141-148), and that of G? was used by Jerome when writing his commentary on Isaiah Ixiv. 4.
Of G?, owing to the happy discovery of last year, we are now in possession of two complete chapters, ii. 4-iv. 4. We must bear in mind that G!, G2, LI have not the same significance when used in reference to i—v. as when used in reference to vi.—xi. (see Pp. XXxi).
INTRODUCTION xxxiii
From G1 were made the Ethiopic, and a Latin version, EK and L', and from G? the Slavonic, and a Latin version, S and L2.
The following table will show at a glance the affinities of all the textual authorities on the Vision of Isaiah, vi—xi. 1-40.
G (= Greek Vision of Isaiah before its | incorporation in the ‘ Ascension.’ Used by Ignatius, and the writer
of the Actus Petri ix. 35, 36, and in part preserved in Epiphanius.)
G! (Recension of G in the ‘Ascen- G? (= lost recension of G in
sion.’ Some hundreds of its independent form) (lost phrases preserved in Gk. Leg.). parent of S 1’).
E Lt s Lv
And on the Martyrdom of Isaiah:
G (=Greek Martyrdom of Isaiah as edited in the ‘ Ascension’: known in its original form to writer of the Opus Imperfectum; see pp. xl-xlii.)
G@ (lost parent of E L') G? (Newly recovered frag-
And on the Testament of Hezekiah:
G@ (= Greek Testament of Hezekiah as edited in the ‘Ascension’; see p. xlii.)
G (lost parent of EL) G@* (Newly recovered fragment,
XXXIV INTRODUCTION
§ 12. CriticaL Inquiries.
Under this heading I shall content myself, for the most part, with enumerating the critical inquiries of scholars on the subject of this book.
Laurence. Ascensio Isaiae Vatis, 1819, pp. 141-180. This the earliest editor of the Ascension of Isaiah regarded it as the work of one hand, and as ‘composed towards the close of the year 68, or in the beginning of the year 69.’
Gxsenius, Commentar tiber den Jesaja, Bd. i,
GIESELER, Géttinger Pfingstprogramm, 1832, distinguishes i—v. and vi—xi. as two independent writings, of Jewish and Christian origin respectively.
ENGELHARDT, Kirchengeschichtliche Abhandlun-
GrrorER, Das Jahrhundert des Heils, 1838, i.
Horrmann, A. G., art. ‘Jesajas’ in Ersch and Gruber’s Allg. Encyklop., sect. ii, Bd. xv. 387-390
Movers-KavuLen. Wetzer’s and Welte’s Kir-
Lions, Hinleitung in die Offenbarung des Johanwriting which was interpolated by a Jew before Origen, and after his time, in the fourth century, by a Christian in i. 5, iii. 13-iv. 24. vi-xi. was written in the second half of the third century or earlier.
INTRODUCTION XXXV
BuEEK, Studien und Kritiken, 1854, pp. 994-998.
EWALD, Gesch.des Volkes Israel 3, 1868, vii. 369-373.
Lanaen, Das Judenthum in Palistina, 1800,
DILLMann, Ascensio Isaiae, 1877, pp. v.-xviii. ; art. ‘Pseudepigrapha’ in Herzog’s Real-Ene. xii. 359, 360. I will deal with this scholar’s work
Renan, L’église chrétienne, 1879, pp. 528, 529.
JELLINEK, Bet ha-Midrasch, vi., 1877, pp. XXXvii. sq. This writer makes no contribution to the explanation of our book.
StokgEs, art. ‘Isaiah, Ascension of, in Smith and Wace’s Dictionary of Christian Biography, 1882, lil. pp. 298-301. This is a most excellent piece of work, but hardly trustworthy as to its conclusions.
Deane, Pseudepigrapha, 1891, pp. 236-275, summarizes well the results of previous research.
Tuomson, ‘ Books that influenced our Lord,’ 1891,
ZOCKLER, Die Ayokryphen des alien Testaments,
Harnack, Gesch. der altchristl. Litteratur, i. 854-
Cuemen, ‘Die Himmelfahrt des Jesaja, ein altestes Zeugnis fiir das rémische Martyrium des Petrus,’ article of Clemen. Few, however, will be prepared to accept his critical analysis of the book, and still fewer the date he assigns to the Jewish Christian
Xxxvi INTRODUCTION
Apocalypse, iii. 13-iv. 22. On the other hand, the balance of evidence appears to be in favour of his main thesis, that we have in this work the oldest testimony to the martyrdom of St. Peter at Rome. ZELLER, ‘Der Martyrertod des Petrus in der CuemeEn, ‘Nochmals der Martyrertod des Petrus Scutiner, Gesch. des Jiidischen Volks, 1898, iii. 280-285, gives a short account of our book, and the references to it in ‘Patristic literature.’ He appends a very full bibliography. Rosrnsov, ‘ The Ascension of Isaiah,’ in Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, ii. 499-501. A splendid article. Buer, Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des alten Testaments, 1900, ii. 119-123. An excellent introduc- Barret, The Apostolic Age, 1900, pp. 521-524. This scholar assigns iii. 13-v. 1 to the years
§ 13. DirFrERENT ELEMENTS IN THE Book.
All writers on the Ascension, save Laurence, recognise a plurality of authorship. For the most part they agree in assigning i—v. to one source and vi-xi. to another. Ewald was the first to distinguish the works of three different authors :—
This analysis has undoubtedly much to recom-
INTRODUCTION XXXvii
mend it. Dillmann remodelled it and put forward
the following hypothesis, which is in some respects superior, in others inferior, to that of Ewald.
i. The history of the Martyrdom of Isaiah, of
ii, The Vision of Isaiah, of Christian origin:
iii, The above two constituents were put together by a Christian writer, who prefixed i. 1, 2,
iv. Finally, a later Christian editor incorporated the two sections iii. 13-—v. 1 and xi. 2-22, and added as well the following verses,
Dillmann’s view has, on the whole, been accepted by Harnack, Schiirer, Deane, and Beer. Harnack, it is true, is in doubt as to the unity of the Christian Apocalyptic Vision iii. 13-—v. 1, xi. 2-22. All these scholars have been influenced by Gebhardt’s statement that in the Greek Legend there is not a trace of iii. 13 —v. 1, xi. 2-22, and that, accordingly, these sections were absent from the text when the Greek Legend was composed. Thus, according to Gebhardt, Dillmann’s analysis is confirmed by external evidence.
But Gebhardt’s statement is wrong. Thus in Greek Legend, ii. 6, the words ri Spacw tip éai BaBv- AGva are derived from iv. 19. Again in ii. 38 jets éopev Geol, kal TARY HuGv odk gaTw GAXos Geds are More nearly related to iv. 6, 8 than to x. 13. Again, il, 11 6 xpatijoas rod xéopou comes from iv. 2 of our
XXXViii INTRODUCTION
book, and eis dmwAclas éxmépwes Bvddv in the same passage appears to be founded on iv. 14. But the most striking passage is ii. 39 where the corrupt text karaBion Kal mpds rov dyyehov Tod dou év ‘lepoveadrp is drawn literally from xi. 19, 20 of the Ascension.
The writer of the Greek Legend, therefore, was acquainted with the two sections in question. Furthermore, since elsewhere (pp. xxii.—xxiv.) we have shown that xi. 2-22 was an original constituent of vi—xi., we are obliged to deny the validity of divisions ii. and iv. in Dillmann’s theory.
Clemen, on very different grounds, has attacked Dillmann’s hypothesis and sought to replace it by a much simpler one. According to this scholar the earliest part of the Ascension was a Jewish Christian Apocalypse, consisting of iii. 13-iv. 22, and written between the years 64-68, and the rest of the Ascension originated under the guidance of this passage. This theory of Clemen does not solve the problem.
We shall now attempt to discuss the problem de novo. In the first place the work is composite. This is obvious, and has been all but universally recognized from the fact that ii. 1 -iii. 12 has been forcibly sundered from v. 1>-14 by a piece of writing alien to it, iii, 13-iv. 22,
But the arbitrariness and disorder are not confined to this passage. This will be best shown if we compare the chronological order of the events narrated in the book with the order in which they are actually narrated.
INTRODUCTION XXxix
Testament of Hezekiah}, iii. 13°—iv. 18—fifteenth year of Hezekiah (i. 4).
Isaiah’s Vision, vi.— xi. 1-4o—twentieth year of
Hezekiah gives commands to Manasseh in the presence of Isaiah, &c.: Isaiah’s prophecy, i. 1-2°, 6>-13—twenty-sixth year of Hezekiah (i. 1).
Manasseh becomes king and puts Isaiah to death, ii, I ill. 12, v. 1%-14—at least four years later than the date last mentioned.
A writer could hardly arrange his work in this topsy-turvy manner if he were writing it firsthand?. On the other hand, if he was dealing with existing materials which did not admit of disintegration (such as vi—xi., and in a less degree iii. 3°-iv. 18) and easy incorporation into his work, the present disorder of the work becomes more intelligible.
Having recognized the general fact of the compositeness of the work, we must now proceed to
1 See pp. xiii-xiv, xliv. 2, 29.
2 Though modern scholars have not, so far as I am aware, noticed this strange medley, the writer of the Greek Legend was conscious of it, and recast the whole work. In order to avoid manifest inconsistencies he changed or omitted the dates before him. Thus Hezekiah’s admonition to Manasseh he puts in the twenty-fifth year (twenty-sixth in Ascension), and omitting the date of Isaiah’s vision (the twentieth year, i. 6, vi. 1) he represents it as subsequent to the admonition referred to. Hezekiah’s vision belonging to the fifteenth year is almost without a reference. The date would have been in the way, but the reason more probably is that its contents were only remotely connected with the purpose the author of the Gk. Leg. had in hand.
xl INTRODUCTION
details, and here, to some extent, we find ourselves at variance with our predecessors in this field.
The Martyrdom of Isaiah =i. 1, 25, 6°-13%, ii. Schtirer, and many other scholars, it is clear that we must assume the section on the Martyrdom as having been originally an independent work. The limits of this section, according to Dillmann, are ii. i-ili. 12, v. 1-14. Dillmann rightly pointed out that the reasons assigned for Isaiah’s martyrdom in these sections are quite different from those given in their adjoining contents, ili. 13, v. 1%, v. 15, 16 (xi. 41). The last three have the appearance of editorial additions.
But the extent of the Martyrdom in our book is greater than that attributed to it by Dillmann. Other fragments survive in chapter i. Thus in ii, 1 the words ‘he did not remember the commands of Hezekiah’ suggest the questions, What commands were these? and when were they given ? Now we find the probable answer to the latter question in i. 1, 2°, in which Hezekiah summons Manasseh before him in the presence of Isaiah and Josab. The answer to the former question is still preserved in our text, though obscurely, owing to editorial additions, Thus in i. 6° we learn that Isaiah gave certain commands to Manasseh. These are referred to in i. 7, ii. 1. What these commands were is not recorded in our book, but they are found in the Latin fragments preserved in the Opus Imper- Jectum (quoted in notes on pp. 8, 9), which go back
INTRODUCTION xii
not to our text but to the original Martyrdom. There we find the explanation of many difficulties in our text. Thus in the first place we discover the reason for Isaiah summoning Manasseh in the twenty-sixth year, for the Latin supplies it: ‘cum aegrotasset Ezechias in tempore quodam.’ In the next place, the object with which Hezekiah summoned Manasseh is not,as in our text,to become the depositary of certain visions (i. 2°-6*), but to receive certain directions as to his religious duties, the government of the kingdom, &e.: ‘Vocavit Ezechias filium suum Manassen et coepit ei mandare, quod debeat Deum timere, quomodo regere regnum et alia multa,’ Now the final editor of our book, whose interests were centred in the visions, omitted these words, and attributed quite a different object to Hezekiah’s summons of Manasseh. Hezekiah, he tells us, in i, 2, 6, summoned Manasseh ‘in order to deliver unto him the words of righteousness which the king himself had seen’ (i.e. iii. 13>-iv. 18), ‘and also those which Isaiah the son of Amoz had given to him’ (i.e. vii-xi. 40). Hence we conclude that i. 2°-6* are editorial additions.
Thus the Latin passage referred to confirms a conclusion we should have arrived at independently. The Latin passage goes back apparently to the Martyrdom when existing in an independent form.
We have already seen that i. 1, 28, 6° are derived from the original Martyrdom, but still more of this chapter comes from this source, indeed from 6° to the close. This follows from the Latin passage
xlii INTRODUCTION
which either quotes or implies a knowledge of i. 7, probably an editorial change; for the Latin quotes the words and gives ‘Deus.’ The last clause ‘and I shall inherit the heritage of the Beloved’ is no doubt from the editorial hand, and likewise a clause in verse 7. It brings the Jewish work on the Martyrdom into some connexion with the Christian elements of the Ascension.
The Testament of Hezekiah iii. 1 3>-iv. 18, and the Vision of Isaiah vi.-xi. 1-40. With these two remaining constituents of our text we have now to deal.
We have elsewhere given reasons (pp. Xlli—xiv, 2,29) for regarding the former as having at one time existed independently. As it stands in the Ascension it is certainly mutilated, and without beginning or end.
The evidence is still stronger for the original independence of vi.-xi. 1-40. Thus the archetype of this section existed independently in Greek, inasmuch as the Latin and Slavonic versions L?S presuppose the independent circulation of G? in Western and Slavonic countries. Thus G?, which preserved the independence of its archetype, differs in many notable respects, for better or worse, from G', which represents the form in which it was republished by the editor of the entire work.
Between the Testament of Hezekiah and the Vision of Isaiah there are so many similarities of thought and diction that it is not unreasonable to assume that, though they appear to have been
INTRODUCTION xiii
independent works, they were the work of one and the same writer, or the work of two closely related writers.
Thus the following expressions and ideas are common to the two works:—The mention of the ‘seven heavens,’ ili. 18, iv. 14, 16, and passim in vi.—x1. ; ‘garments’ (= the spiritual body), iv. 11, vii. 22, Vill. 17, 26, &e.; ‘angel of the Holy Spirit,’ iii. 16, vii. 23, &e.; the blasphemous claim of the Antichrist, iv. 6, 8, x. 12, 13; judgement of the angels, and destruction of the world, iv. 18, x. 12.
On the other hand, it is not improbable that the Christian Testament of Hezekiah was based on an earlier Jewish work; for Hebrew or Aramaic idioms survive in the Greek, as efs xal efs kal efs év témois kal rémos in iii, 27. This Semitic idiom is reproduced, so far as possible, literally in the Ethiopic. The wodAol kat wodAol in iii. 19 seems to be simply a mistake for modAoé. It has not the support of the Ethiopic.
To sum up: the conditions of the problem are sufficiently satisfied by supposing a single editor, who had three works at his disposal, the Martyrdom of Isaiah of Jewish origin, and the two independent works, the Testament of Hezekiah, and the Vision of Isaiah, of Christian origin. These he reduced or enlarged as it suited his purpose, and put them together as they stand in our text. Some of the editorial additions are obvious, as i. 2°-64, 19%, ii. 9,
xliv INTRODUCTION
§ 14. Toe Dates oF THE VARIOUS CONSTITUENTS OF THE ‘ ASCENSION.’
v. 16-14). The martyrdom is quoted by the Opus Imperfectum (pp. 8, 9 notes), Ambrose (p. 40 note), Jerome (p. 18 note), Origen (pp. xii, xiii, xlvi, xlvii, 17 note), Tertullian (p. 41 note), and it can hardly be denied by Justin Martyr (p. 14 note). It was probably known to the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (xi. 37). This brings us, if the last reference is true, to the first century A.D. And this is no doubt the right date; for it is most improbable that works written by Jews in the second century should attain to circulation in the Christian Church.
‘The Testament of Hezekiah (= iii. 13>-iv. 18). This vision, or testament, was written between 88— 100 A.D. The terminus ad quem we have arrived at on pp. 30, 31, the terminus a quo on pp. lxxi, lxxii.
The Vision of Isaiah (= vi.—xi. 1-40). The later recension of this vision (G?) was used by Jerome (p. 81 note),a more primitive form of the text by Hieracas (p. 67 note), according to Epiphanius (Haer. lxvii. 3), by the Archontici (Haer. xl. 2). This shows that the book was in circulation towards the close of the third century. But it is much earlier attested by the Actus Petri Vercellenses (p. 77 note). This takes the Vision back to the second century, or at latest to early in the third, The Protevangel of James was apparently acquainted with it (see
INTRODUCTION xlv
notes on xi. 4, 8, 11), and I do think it is reasonable to explain the agreement between Ignatius, ad Ephes. xix. and xi. 16 (see note), otherwise than that the former is dependent on the latter. Thus the composition of the Vision in its primitive form G belongs to the close of the first century.
When the final editor put these works together in the form in which we now have them, it is impossible to say with any definiteness. Since the Greek papyrus fragment, which supposes the completed work, belongs to the fifth or sixth century, and presents many corruptions and variations from the text presupposed by E Li, the work of editing is thrown back to the third century or earlier. The Latin version, which is found on a fifth or sixth-century palimpsest, and represents a corrupt and traditional form of L!, demands such a date or an earlier one. When we consider also that the probable date of the Ethiopic version is the fifth century, it is probable that the work of editing goes back to early in the third century, or even to the second.
§ 15. Tae Martyrpom or ISAIAH, AND THE ORIENTAL INFLUENCES APPARENT IN IT.
The legend of the Martyrdom took its origin, no doubt, in 2 Kings xxi.16. Although Josephus does not mention it, it was certainly a Jewish tradition. That Isaiah was put to death by Manasseh is mentioned in the Talmud (Jebam, 49°). Simeon ben Azzai found a statement to this effect in the
xlvi INTRODUCTION
genealogical roll which he discovered in Jerusalem (Strack, Einleitung in d. Talmud’, p. 82). In the Babylonian Talmud (trad. par M. Schwab, xi. 49) we have a tradition that shows traces of Hastern influences, and in some respects approaches the account in the Ascension. It is there recounted that Isaiah concealed himself from Manasseh in a cedar tree, but that the end of his cloak projecting from the tree betrayed his hiding-place, and thereupon Manasseh had the tree sawn in two with Isaiah in it.
The legend was known to the Apostolic age, if, as is generally assumed, we have in Heb. xi. 37 énploOncay, a reference to the specific mode of Isaiah’s martyrdom. But, even if this be doubtful, there is the evidence of the Ascension (i. 1, 2°, 6°—iii. 12, v. 1*-14) which cannot be much later than the. middle of the first century a.p. In the next century Justin Martyr quotes from our text (see p- 41, note), though without naming it, and likewise Tertullian (see same reference). When we come to Origen we find many references to the account of Isaiah’s martyrdom in the Ascension. Thus in his Epistle to Africanus, ix (Lommatzsch, Xvii. 31) kal rovrov mapddevypa Sdcouey ra wept Tov *Hoatay toropovpeva, kal tnd ths mpos “EBpatovs émoroAfs paprupovpeva (Heb. xi. 37) .. . apes 8 Gre ab mapaddéces Adyovot menpicOat "Hoatay rov apopyrny’ kal éy tit dmoxpipw tobro peperar’ Smep rdxa enlrndes td “lovdalwv pepadiovpynrat, A€Eets Twas Tas pr TpE-: noboas tapeuBeBAnkdtwy TH ypagy Wh Sdn amornOH.
INTRODUCTION xlvii
Again, on Matt. xxiii. 37 (Lommatzsch, iv. 237, 238) Origen appeals to the testimony of our book: ‘Propterea videndum, ne forte oporteat ex libris secretioribus, qui apud Iudaeos feruntur, ostendere verbum Christi, et non solum Christi, sed etiam discipulorum eius . . . Fertur ergo in scripturis non manifestis serratum esse Iesaiam’ (see also ad Matt. xiii. 57, quoted on p. xii, and in Jesajam homil. i. 5, quoted on p. 17 note).
Now that we have shown that the tradition of Isaiah’s martyrdom was familiar to Jew and Christian from the first century onward, it is noteworthy that the form in which it is recorded appears to be derived from Eastern sources. What I refer to particularly is to martyrdom by means of a wooden saw at the instigation of Satan. To explain what I mean, I will make use of Larionoff’s translation from the Persian of the ‘Histoire du Roi Djemchid et des Divs’ (Journal Asiatique, pp. 59-83, Juillet-Aofit, 1889), and his learned notes on this legend.
Larionoff regards the Zend Avesta as the source of the various legends of this nature which reappear in Jewish, Persian, and Arabic works. The hero’s name, according to the Zend Avesta, is Yima Khsaéta, i.e. Djemchid. The story is summarized by Darmesteter (Zend Avesta, traduction nouvelle, according to other authorities 616} years, Yima was dethroned for his blind pride in accepting divine worship, and sawn in two by the serpent of
xlviii INTRODUCTION
three heads, Azhi Dah4ka, and Spityura (Yashé, xix. 34 sqq. 46). Dahaka then ruled and laid waste the land for 1000 years, at the close of which he was overthrown and cast into chains. Before the end he was to be set free for a period
Turning now to the above Persian writing translated by Larionoff, we find that when Djemchid’s throne was seized by Zohak, the man of serpents, he fled into the wilderness. One hundred years later, Ahriman and Biver (Zohak) having come upon him there, God caused a tree to open itself in order that Djemchid might conceal himself therein. Ahriman and Zohak accordingly failed to find him till Iblis informed them. Thereupon they ordered the tree to be sawn in twain. After several failures, this attempt succeeded on the third day, and Djemchid was killed. Again, in the Shah-nameh (trad. par J. Mohl, i. 47) this legend reappears, where it is told that, after having remained hidden for 100 years, Djemchid was discovered on the borders of the Chinese sea, and sawn asunder by Zohak.
From Jewish and Christian sources the legend passed over to the Mohammedans. The historian Tabari (Journal Asiatique, p. 64) tells how that when Isaiah admonished Joakim, the successor of Amon, on account, of his evil deeds, the Israelites sought to slay him. Thereupon Isaiah fied, and took refuge in a tree which had opened at God’s command to receive him, But Iblis seized his
INTRODUCTION xlix
cloak, and, when the tree closed, a piece of the cloak remained outside and betrayed Isaiah’s hidingplace to his pursuers (cf. Jerusalem Talmud above), who thereupon sawed the tree in which Isaiah was (Chronique de Tabari, traduite par M. Zotenberg,
§ 16. VALUE OF THE ‘ASCENSION’ FOR THE HisToRY OF OUTLYING RELIGIous THOUGHT.
Seeing that in § 16 I deal at length with the question of the Antichrist Legend, of which a special development appears in the Ascension, I can only briefly draw attention to a few other points that cannot be omitted in this connexion.
1. The Seven Heavens. The conception of the seven heavens which prevailed in certain sections of Judaism is here abandoned. No evil is allowed to enter any of the heavens. Satan is cast down to the Firmament under the first heaven. On the other hand, the five lower heavens are only in partial communication with the sixth and seventh, For a comparison of the various descriptions of the Seven Heavens in Judaism and Early Christianity, see my edition of the Slavonic Enoch, pp. xxx-xlvii.
a. Rise of Docetism. Traces of this appear in xi. 7-11, where the birth of Christ is represented as taking place without any natural pangs. ix. 13 does not necessarily fall under this head.
1 For an admirable and concise note on this question see Beer (Apoc. u. Pseudepig. des Alten Testaments, ii. 122, 123).
1 INTRODUCTION
3. Peculiar conception of the Trinity. The Son and the Holy Spirit receive adoration and worship, ix. 27-36, but they in turn worship God, ix. 39, 40. Moreover, the Holy Spirit is spoken of as an angel, the Angel of the Spirit, or the Angel of the Holy Spirit, just as, in the De Principiis, i. 4, Origen writes that, according to his Hebrew teacher, the two Seraphim seen by Isaiah in the vision (Is. vi.) were: the only begotten Son and the Holy Spirit (‘duo illa Seraphim, quae in Esaia senis alis describuntur clamantia adinvicem et dicentia: Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus Dominus Deus Sabaoth: de unigenito Filio Dei et Spiritu Sancto essent intelligenda’).
The Holy Spirit is often designated, either as or the Angel of the Holy Spirit, iii. 16, vii. 23; ix. 36, xi. 33. In two of these passages, iii. 16 and xi. 4, He is identified with Gabriel, the angel of the Annunciation. This certainly is the case in xi. 4, and all but certainly in iii. 16.
4. The use of the phrase ‘ One like a Son of Man’ This phrase, with a Messianic meaning, is found in the addition peculiar to S L? in xi. 1, but, as we have shown elsewhere (see p. xxvi), is most probably derived from the archetype G; for the use of such an expression subsequent to the first century of the Christian era is hardly conceivable. It is easy to understand its rejection by the editor of G}, as he shows signs of early Docetism. For other instances of its use see Rev. i. 13, xiv. 14.
5. Doctrine of the Resurrection. This doctrine is
INTRODUCTION li
very spiritually represented on the later Pauline lines in iv. 15-17, viii. 14, ix. 17,18. Immediately after death the faithful receive their ‘garments’ or spiritual bodies (as in 2 Cor. v. 1-8); their ‘thrones’ and ‘crowns, which signify the consummation of their blessedness, they do not receive till after the ascension of Christ (ix. 17, 18). This date of the consummation of the righteous would not agree with the Pauline teaching.
§17. Tae AnTIcHRIST, BELIAR, AND NERONIC MyTus, AND THEIR SUBSEQUENT FousIoN.
The actual significance of the Antichrist, Beliar, and Neronic myths, and the dates of their fusion with each other, as attested by the Ascension of Isaiah, present us with the most difficult question in Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic literature.
It fairly bristles with problems. Many of these, it is true, have already been solved, and others are on the way to solution. Nevertheless, a large number still bid defiance to the student and investigator. This failure, hitherto, is largely to be attributed to the erroneous views which have prevailed on the nature of Apocalyptic and the Antichrist Legend, as Gunkel and Bousset have shown at some length. In this field the services of these scholars have been truly epoch-making. It is with the writings of the latter scholar that we are here more immediately concerned ; particularly with his Antichrist Legend, his Commentary
li INTRODUCTION
on Revelation, and his article ‘Antichrist’ in the Encyclopaedia Biblica. These works, while most . helpful and stimulating in many directions, do not deal, satisfactorily with the relations of Beliar and the Antichrist, and their account of the fusion of the latter with the Neronic Saga is wanting in lucidity and consistency. The aim of the present chapter is to touch briefly on the history of the Antichrist, Beliar, and Neronic myths, before the fusion of any one of them with another, or of each with all, and next to mention the various passages where such fusion is attested, with their approximate dates. Thus I shall deal with
I. The independent development of the Antichrist, Beliar, and Neronic myths.
II. The fusion of the Antichrist myth with that of Beliar, and subsequently, and independently, with the Neronic myth.
III. The fusion of all these myths together.
I. The independent development of (i.) the Antichrist, (ii.) Beliar, (iii.) Neronic myths.
(i.) The Antichrist myth. The term ‘ Antichrist’ is comparatively late, though the thought signified by it is early. Thus it was not coined till far on in the first century of our era; for it is found only in the Johannine Epistles—1 John ii. 18, 22, iv. 3; 2 John 7. The idea, however, is expressed in Dan. xi. 36, ‘he shall exalt himself . . . above the God of gods’ (spoken of Antiochus), and in 2 Thess. ii. 4, ‘he that opposeth himself (6 dvrixetwevos) .. .
INTRODUCTION Viti
against all that is called God.’ This idea, before its fusion with that of Beliar, implies a being of human origin, whereas Beliar, who came subsequently to be identified with the Antichrist, was originally a superhuman or Satanic being.
That Antichrist denotes a god-opposing being of human. origin, we shall now proceed to prove. The earliest historical personage identified with him was Antiochus Epiphanes. The language applied to this king by the writer recalls, though it may be unconsciously, the old Babylonian Saga of the Dragon’s assault on the gods of heaven. Thus in viii. 10 it is said of him: ‘It waxed great even to the host of heaven; and some of the host and of the stars it cast down to the ground and trampled upon them.’ These words describe in symbolical terms Antiochus’ attack on the heathen deities. This attack is mentioned again in xi, 36, 37 in plain, unfigurative language. The same verses describe the god-opposing character of Antiochus: ‘He shall magnify himself above every god and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods (LXX iwwbycera: emt mdvta Oedv, kal emt roy Oedv Tdv Oey &Eadda AaAjoe) ... neither shall he regard the gods of his fathers.’
The next historical character to whom epithets befitting the Antichrist are applied is Pompey the Great, who committed the unpardonable act of profanation, by entering the Holy of Holies after his conquest of Jerusalem. Thus, in the Psalms of Solomon (48-40 B.c.) he is called ‘the Dragon’
liv INTRODUCTION
(6 Spdxwv), ii. 29. Is there an allusion here to the Dragon myth!? If so, it is at most only an unconscious survival. Pompey is described as ‘the sinner, ii. 1 (6 éuaprwAds), the personification of sin (cf. 2 Thess. ii. 3, 6 dvOpwros ris Guaptias—the reading of the inferior uncials). He is also called ‘the lawless one’ (6 dvoyos), xvii. 13, an attribute of Beliar. But since his soldiers are designated ‘the lawless ones’ (of dvoyo1), Xvii. 20, the epithet may mean no more than heathen as in 1 Cor. ix. 21, and probably in Acts ii. 23, ‘by the hand of lawless men’ (51a xetpds dvdywv). ‘Lawlessness’ (dvopia) in 2 Cor. vi. 14 is specifically heathen. The epithet ‘lawless’ is, if technically used, proper to the Beliar myth (see below).
The next reference to the Antichrist is to be found in the Apocalypse of Baruch xxxvi—xl. (date uncertain, before 70 a.D.). The rise of the Fourth Kingdom ( Rome) is referred to xxxix. 5, and subsequently the head of the Roman Commonwealth or Empire, xxxvi. 5, xxxix. 3, xl. 1. After all his hosts have been destroyed he is brought before the Messiah to Mount Zion to receive his sentence of we have the signs of the last times recorded in great fullness. Amongst these the rise of the Fourth Empire ( Rome) is foretold, v. 3,4, and subsequently the reign of Antichrist under the enigmatical words ‘He shall rule, whom they that dwell upon the
1 On the mythological origin of this expression see Cheyne’s art. ‘Dragon’ in the Encyclopaedia Biblica, i.
INTRODUCTION lv
earth look not for.’ It is not improbable that the Antichrist in this passage, also, is to be regarded as of Roman origin.
In all the above passages the Antichrist is a godopposing being of human not of superhuman origin, of Gentile not of Jewish descent.
In the Johannine Epistles of the New Testament is a collective name for the false teachers! who have gone forth from the bosom of the Church. Neither this nor any other conception of Antichrist is to be confused with that of the pseudo-Christ (evddxpicros) of Matt. xxiv. 24, Mark xiii. 22: the Antichrist in these Epistles is a deceiver (wAdvos). The personal Antichrist is most probably referred to in John v. 43, ‘If another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.’
(ii.) The Beliar myth. In the Old Testament Beliar does not appear as a proper name: see Bennett and Cheyne’s article ‘ Beliar, in vol. i. of Encyclopaedia Biblica. For Beliar conceived as a person we must come down to pseudepigraphal literature. In this literature Beliar, for the first time, attains to personality. Thus in Jubilees, i. 20, we read: ‘Let Thy mercy, O Lord, be lifted up upon Thy people... and let not the spirit of Beliar rule over them to accuse them before Thee. Since, elsewhere, Satan is conceived as the
1 Closely allied to this conception is that of the false prophet in Rev. xvi. 13, who is described at length in xiii. 11-17. Of this characterization of the Antichrist, however, we shall treat subsequently.
Wi INTRODUCTION
accuser of the brethren (cf. 1 Chron, xxi. 1; Eth. En. xl. 7; Rev. xii. 10), Beliar is to be regarded as a Satan, or the Satan? In the last passage, Rev. xii. 10, Satan is identified with the Dragon which stormed the heavens, and Beliar, who has his abode in the firmament, Ase. Is., vii. 9, appears to be a Jewish transformation of this monster of Babylonian mythology. Thus it is through the Beliar constituent of the developed Antichrist myth that the old Dragon Saga? from Babylon gained an entrance into the eschatologies of Judaism and Christianity. To return, Beliar like Satan possesses authority in the world of evil agencies; thus it is he that sends seven evil spirits against man to work his undoing, Test. xii Patriarchs Rub. ii. Possibly in 2 Cor. vi. 15,‘ What concord hath Christ with Belial, Beliar may be identified with Satan; see, however, below. Again, just as the name Satan belonged to a number of evil spirits (see Eth. En., xl. 7), So apparently did Beliar. Thus in Test. xii
1 This identification appears throughout the Christian pseud- épigraph The Questions of Bartholomew, ed. Bonwetsch, 1897. It will be sufficient to quote iv. 25, droxpiOels 5 6 BeAtap Aéyer’ El 6éAas padely 7d dvopd pov, mpdrov éheydunv Saravana, 5 epunveverar éfdyyedos Oeod' Ste 58 dréyvew aytirutov rod Oeod [Kal] exrHOn 7d Svopd pou Zaravas, 8 éorw dyyedos raprapodxos. This tradition is attested before 7o 4.p.:; see the Slavonic Enoch, xviii. 3; xxix. 4,53 xxxi. 4. According to this last and other Jewish writings Satan was originally regarded as an angel of God, and thus quite different from the Babylonian Dragon. Hence we have here a syncretism.
2 See Cheyne’s art. ‘Dragon’ in Encyclopaedia Biblica, i. ; Bousset, The Antichrist Legend, 155.
INTRODUCTION Wii
Patriarchs Levi 3, it is said ‘the spirits of deceit and of Beliar ’ will be punished, and in Levi 18 that Beliar himself will be bound. For other references see notes on i. 8 of our text and below. From the above evidence we may conclude that at the beginning of the Christian era, if not much earlier, Beliar was regarded as a Satanic spirit. In the sequel we shall, I think, recognize that Beliar was never regarded as aught else than a Satanic spirit, until the Beliar myth was amalgamated with that of Antichrist.
(iii.) The Neronic myth. Since we have here to deal only with the early and independent development of the Neronic myth, our present task is simply to show that soon after the death of Nero the myth became current that (a) Nero had not really died, but was still living; and (6) that he would soon return from the far East to take vengeance on Rome.
(a) When Nero, with the help of a freedman, committed suicide and was cremated (Suetonius, Nero 49), so great was the public joy that the people thronged the streets in holiday attire (Nero 57). All, however, did not share in the general rejoicing, nor yet in the belief of Nero’s death. Thus Tacitus writes that there were many who pretended and believed that he was still alive (Hist. ii. 8, ‘vario super exitu eius rumore eoque pluribus vivere eum fingentibus credentibusque’), and Suetonius declares that edicts were issued in his name, as though he were still alive and would return speedily to destroy his enemies (Nero 57,
viii INTRODUCTION
‘edicta quasi viventis et brevi magno inimicorum malo reversuri’). That this belief gained a wide | currency very soon after Nero’s decease, is shown by the fact that within a year after it (69 a.D.) an impostor had already appeared under his name. The pretender in this movement was put to death in Cythnus by Calpurnius Asprenas (Tac. Hist. ii. 8, 9, Dio Cassius, Ixiv. 9).
(b) That Nero had taken refuge in the far East probably formed a constituent of the myth from the outset!; for we are told that prophecies made during his lifetime had pointed to the East as the scene of his future greatness. Some of these declared that he would make Jerusalem the seat of his empire, and others that he would finally recover the sovereignty of the world (Suet. Nero 40, ‘Spoponderant tamen quidam destituto Orientis dominationem, nonnulli nominatim regnum Hierosolymorum, plures omnis pristinae fortunae restitutionem’). It was, probably, such vaticinations as these, combined with the fact that Nero had already established friendly relations with the Parthian king Vologeses I (Nero 57), that led Nero, as the end drew nigh, to think of fleeing to the Parthians (Nero 47).
In conformity with this expectation we find that the second pseudo-Nero appeared under Titus on the Euphrates, about 80 a.p., and was recognized by the Parthian king Artabanus (Zonaras xi. 18). Finally, in the reign of Domitian, about 88 4.D., a
1 See further evidence for this statement ‘below in the Sibylline Oracles, pp. lix-lx.
INTRODUCTION lix
third pretender came forward among the Parthians, and all but succeeded in hurling Parthia against Rome (Tac. Hist. i. 2, ‘mota prope etiam Parthorum arma falsi Neronis ludibrio’; Suet. Nero 57). Even as late as 100 a.p. the belief was current ’ that Nero was still alive. Thus Dio Chrysostomus, Orat. xxi. 10, cal viv &ru wdvres emOvpoior Chy, of 8% mActorot olovrat. But this statement is hyperbolical. The Nero myth was thus firmly rooted among the common folk of the Gentile world within the first decade after his death. Within the same decade it had established itself in the eschatology of Hellenistic Judaism. This statement can be proved from the following passages in the Sibylline Oracles. Thus in v. 143-147, which belongs to the oldest sections of the book, and was written 71-74 A.D. (see 155-161) as Zahn (Zeitschrift fir kirchliche Wissenschaft und Leben, 1886, 337 sqq.) and Bousset rightly assert, the flight of Nero from Babylon (= Rome) to the Parthians is mentioned—
Ded€crar éx BaBvddvos dvak hoBepds xat dvatdys, dv mdvres otvyéover Bporol kal pares dpioror" ddece yap ToAAovs Kal yaorépt Xelpas epijxey,
eis GAdxous jjmapre Kal ex prapOy érérv«ro.
hfe. 8 és Mijdov xal TepoGv wapBacidjas .. . Nero’s return is foretold in 361 sqq.— éooetat torario Kaip@ mept Tépua veAquns Koopopavys méAeuos Kal émlkAomos év SoAdTyTL. Hier & éx wepdreov yains pytpoxrdvos avyp .. . bs aacay yatay Kaede? kal mavra Kpatioe.
Ix INTRODUCTION
Early in the next decade! we find other testimonies to the prevalence of this myth. Thus in iv. I1g-122 (circ. 80 A.D.) Nero is described as a fugitive to Parthia—
cal ré7’ da "Iradlns Bacirebs peyas old re Spyotys
ever’ &avtos dmvetos rep mépov Edppyrao,
bs more 87) pnTpoov ayos aTvyepoio pdvoto
TAnoeTat GAda Te TOAAG Kaxlory xewpt mOHoas.
and in iv. 137-139 as returning to assail the West at the head of a vast host—
és 8& Svow TdreE velKos eyetpsuevoy TOAEHOLO, éer cat ‘Pdyns 6 puyds, peya eyxos delpas, Etdpirny d:aBds TodAais dua. pupidderow.
In the New Testament. This widespread expectation has left its memorial also in the New Testament. The first passage referring to the embattled might of the kings of the East marching against Rome is Rev. xvi. 12, ‘And the sixth poured out his bowl upon the great river, the Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way might be made ready for the kings that come from the sunrising. But in xvii. the traces of this myth are far more abundant and unmistakable. Indeed, as very many scholars have already observed, this chapter in original form was a symbolic description by a Jewish writer of Nero’s returning at the head of the Parthian kings. Nero is the eighth king
1 With later testimonies from the Sibylline Oracles as to the Neronic Myth in this stage we are not here concerned: they
INTRODUCTION Ixi
mentioned in xvii. 11, yet he is one of the seven spoken of in the same verse, the last of whom was Vespasian. The chapter, however, was subsequently worked over and adapted to the form of the later Neronic Myth. Thus verses 8, 11%, 14, 1 5 tell of Nero redivivus. He is ‘the beast’ ‘that was and is not and is about to come up out of the abyss’ (verse 8), and again, in the same verse, the beast which ‘ was and is not and shall have his parusia’ (mapéora). Similarly in verse 11% By excising, measure recover the original form of the Jewish document which prophesied the destruction of Rome by Nero and the Parthian kings. These kings are symbolically described in verses 12, 13, ‘And the ten horns that thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but they receive authority as kings, with the beast, for one hour. These have one mind and they give their power and authority unto the beast.’
Il. The fusion of the Antichrist myth (i.) with that of Beliar before 60 a.D.; and (ii.) independently with that of Nero redivivus, 88-100 A.D.
(i) As a result of this fusion the Antichrist is regarded as (a) A Grod-opposing man armed with miraculous powers. This appears to have been effected on Christian soil before 50 a.p. (6) A purely Satanic power, before 70 A.D.
(a) 2 Thess. ii, 1-12, according to the usual interpretation, presents an indubitable instance of
Ixii INTRODUCTION
this fusion. Thus, on the one hand, we have Beliar. ‘The man of lawlessness’ (6 av@pwz7os ris dvoulas) is all but certainly a translation of Beliar ; for dvéunpa is the LXX rendering of it in Deut. xv. 9, and dvopia in 2 Kings xxii. 5, and mapdvoyos is frequently found as its equivalent, when it is used as an epithet: Deut. xiii: 13; Judges xix. 22, xx.
In the next place it is Beliar appearing as the Antichrist ; for the words ‘he that opposeth himself . . . against all that is called God’ (6 dvtixelpevos ... eal mdvTa Aeyduevoy Oedv) form an excellent definition of the Antichrist. If 2 Thess. is an authentic writing of St. Paul (and the evidence appears to me to point decidedly in this direction), we have here the earliest evidence for the fusion of these myths (circ. 50.a.D.1),and also for the humanization of the Beliar myth through its fusion with that of Antichrist; for hitherto Beliar had been conceivedas a Satanic or superhuman being”. The Antichrist thus comes to be conceived as a God-opposing man armed with miraculous or Satanic powers.
We should next observe that in 2 Thess. ii. 1-12 the myth appears to have a purely religious signification and not a political one as in Rev. xiii. 1-10, xvii. Thus in 2 Thess. ii. 6, 7 the Roman empire
1 Schmiedel’s view which regards 2 Thess. ii, 1-12 (see his most excellent Commentary in loc., p. 43) a8 a Beliar-Neronic myth (68-70 4..) is at conflict with the law of development as well as with all the evidence accessible on the subject.
? The passage in the Sibylline Oracles, iii. 63-74, will be discussed later,
INTRODUCTION xiii
is referred to as the power which checks the manifestation of the Antichrist, whereas in Rev. xiii. I-10, Xvii., it is the Roman empire itself that is the Antichrist. In no case could 2 Thess. ii. 1-12 have been written after 70 a.p, This section, whether of Pauline authorship or not, is in its main features a Christian transformation of a current Judaisti¢ myth:
In 2 Thess. ii. 1-12 the Antichrist appears as a human sovereign armed with miraculous powers. In Rev. xiii. 11-17 he is a false teacher rather ; hence this conception is more akin to that which prevails in the Johannine Epistles. Though both in Jobn and Rev. xiii. 11-17 the Antichrist is human, in the latter passage he is armed with Satanic powers and ‘deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by reason of the signs which it was given him to do in the sight of the beast’ (xiii. 14). His task is to make the inhabitants of the earth worship the first beast (ie. Beliar Nero), whose death-stroke had been healed (xiii. 12). The reference in this passage is most probably to the priesthood which was attached to the cultus of the Caesars (Holtzmann, Pfleiderer, Bousset), and had as the chief seat of its activity the province of Asia. This Antichrist is designated ‘the false prophet’ in xvi. 13.
Again, it is possible, as Bousset says, that ‘the abomination of desolation’ in Matt. xxiv. 15, which belongs to the Judaistic Apocalypse introduced among the genuine utterances of our Lord, is to be
Ixiv INTRODUCTION
interpreted as the Antichrist taking his seat in the temple of Jerusalem ; ef. 2 Thess. ii. 4. This would constitute the original sense of the Apocalypse: its application to Rome would be an afterthought.
The same fusion of these conceptions may be attested also in the Testaments of the XII Patriarchs. Thus in Dan. 5 the Messiah is represented as making war on Beliar and stripping him of his captives (oijoe: mpds tov BeAlap méAeuov ... kal Thy alxyakwotay AdBn (sic) awd Tod BeAlap Wuyas dyiwv). Both the date and the nationality of this writer are uncertain. In this passage, however, as well as in Levi 18, where the Messiah is represented as binding Beliar, Beliar may be conceived merely as Satan (cf. Eph. iv. 8).
Sibylline Oracles, ii. 167, 168 (circ. 200 A.D) should probably be cited under this head—
kal BeAlap 0° i£et kat ojpara ToAAG wroujoet dvOpadrots
(b) The Beliar Antichrist=a purely Satanic power before 70 A.D. (or 30 A.D.?). This stage of the myth is found in Rev. xi. 7, ‘And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that cometh up out of the abyss shall make war with them and overcome them and kill them.’ The Antichrist in this instance makes his advent in Jerusalem (see verse 8), therefore before 70 a.p. This form of the myth js quite independent of that which appears in Rev. xiii. and xiv., where it is amalgamated with the Neronic Myth and assumes a political character.
INTRODUCTION Ixv
It is not clear whether 2 Cor. vi. 15, ‘what concord hath Christ with Beliar?’ should be reckoned under this head or under i, 2. On the other hand it may not be wrong to recognize in the Assumption of Moses, x. 1. 2, an instance of this compound conception.
‘And then His (God’s) Kingdom will appear throughout creation
And then Satan will be no more
And sorrow will depart with him.
Then the hands of the angel (Michael) will be filled
And he will be appointed chief
And he will avenge them of their enemies.’
If this passage comes rightly under this head, then the fusion of the ideas of Beliar and Antichrist must be anterior to 30 A.D.
"(ii.) Fusion of the Antichrist Myth with that of the Nero redivivus’. This fusion could hardly have taken place before the first half of Domitian’s reign, when the last Neronic pretender appeared. As soon, however, as the hope of the return of the living Nero could no longer be enter-
1 It is quite possible that the passages which I have classed under this head might on equally cogent grounds be reckoned. under III. The course adopted in the text has been followed owing to the appearance of the Dragon (i.e. Satan or Beliar) and the Neronic Antichrist on the same canvas in Rev. xiii. 1-10. But this fact is in itself far from decisive. Moreover, the simple Neronic myth appears to need some infusion of the Beliar myth in order to develop the expectation of Nero redivivus, or Nero as a semi-demonic power.
Ixvi INTRODUCTION
tained, the way was prepared for this transformation of the myth. The living Nero indeed was no longer expected to return from the East, but Nero! was to be restored to life from the abyss by the Dragon, ie. Satan. This expectation is recounted in Rev. xiii. First the beast that comes up out of the sea with ten horns and seven heads is clearly to be identified with the Roman empire (xiii. 1). To this beast the Dragon gives his power and his throne (xiii. 2). But one of his heads (i.e. Nero) had been as it were smitten unto death, but the death-stroke was healed, that is, Nero was restored to life, xiii. 3, 14. Nero,. so restored, spoke ‘ great things and blasphemies,’ and authority was given to him to reign for ‘forty and two months,’ that is the three and a half years for which, according to universal tradition, the Antichrist was to rule (see p.2gnote). Further references to Nero redivivus as the Antichrist will be found in xvii. 8 : ‘The beast, that thou sawest, was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and to go
1 That Nero is referred to under the mystical number 666 (Rev. xiii. 18) may be regarded as established. This interpretation was arrived at nearly seventy years ago. We obtain the number 666 by transliterating Nepdy Kaicap into Hebrew, and adding together the sums denoted by the Hebrew letters. Thus This solution is confirmed by the fact that it is possible to explain by it an ancient (Western ?) variant for the number 666, i.e. 616. This latter, which is attested by Irenaeus (V. 30. 1), the commentary of Ticonius, and the uncial C, can be explained from the Latin form of the name Nero, which by its omission of the final » makes the sum total 616 instead of 666.
INTRODUCTION Ixvii
into perdition’; and again, ‘when they beheld the beast, how that he was, and is not, and shall come.’ Finally, in verse 11 of the same chapter the identification of Nero redivivus with the Antichrist is inevitable. ‘And the beast that was, and is not, is himself also an eighth, and is of the seven, and he goeth to perdition.’
In the above passages Nero redivivus and the Roman Empire are identified. The former is regarded as an incarnation of all the might and horror of the latter.
III. Fusion of the Antichrist, Beliar, and Neronic myths in various degrees and forms.
From this fusion the myth emerges in three forms, which owe their diversity in the main to the three variations of the Neronie myth which enter into the combination. These forms are: (i.) Incarnation of Beliar as the Antichrist in Nero still conceived as alive. The Antichrist has here a political significance, and is human. (ii.) Incarnation of Beliar as the Antichrist in the form of the dead Nero. The Antichrist has here no political significance, and is a Satanic being. (iii.) Incarnation of Beliar as the Antichrist in Nero redivivus.
(i.) Incarnation of Beliar as the Antichrist in Nero still conceived as living—before 90 a.p. We have seen above, from documentary evidence, that before 80 A.D. the myth had gained wide circulation both among Gentiles and Jews, that Nero
Ixviii INTRODUCTION
was still living in the East, and would speedily return to avenge himself on Rome. We have further seen that long before 80 a.D. the minds of both Jews and Christians were familiar with the expectation of the Antichrist pure and simple, and of the Antichrist possessing the attributes of Beliar or Satan, and so denoting a, God-opposing man armed with miraculous powers, or a truly Satanic being. So strong was the tendency of such mythical currents to merge in a common stream that it is not surprising to find this coalescence achieved in the Sibylline Oracles, iii. 63-74. This passage is unhappily of uncertain date, though no doubt before go a.D., since Nero is still regarded as alive. Its significance, however, cannot be mistaken. Beliar comes as Antichrist, and is descended from Augustus (é ZeBacrnvdv)1, That this descendant of Augustus is Nero there is no room for doubt. The lines in question are
éx 5& SeBaornvar fet BedAlap perdmicGev
kal orjoe dpéwv thpos, orjcet 8& OdAacoay
HéAtoy mupdevta péyay Aawmpay Te oTEeARVHY
kal véxvas oThoer Kal orpara moAAG Tolnoet .. . kat ddvauis pdoyderoa 8: olduaros és yatav *&e kat BeAlap prc£er kal imepgiddovs avOpdzovs, mavras, Sco. tolrw wictw eveToijoayto.
To assign these lines to 30 B.c., as Gfrorer, Hilgen-
1 The excision of 61>-63" as an interpolation by Bleek, Liicke and Schiirer only serves to aggravate the confusion of the text.
INTRODUCTION Ixix
feld, Bousset, and other scholars have done, is impossible unless the S<«Bacrnvof=the inhabitants of SeBacry, ie. Samaria. In that case the passage would come under II. i. (6).
(ii.) Incarnation of Beliar as Antichrist in the form of the dead Nero. In due time the belief that Nero was still alive in the East began to die. The time of its extinction must naturally have varied according to temperament and locality. It is accordingly difficult to assign definite dates. Since, however, the latest pretender to the Neronic réle came forward in 88 A.D., we may not unreasonably infer that from that year the belief began to lose its grip on the common folk—on none others had it ever any real hold—and to decline steadily till it finally disappeared. No doubt during the next twenty to forty years it crops up sporadically, but even during that period its place has been taken by two rival and stronger forms of the same saga.
These new forms of the saga may have already been evolved in the later years of Vespasian. The older form, with which we have now to deal, is at all events not later than go—100 a.D. This phase of the Antichrist Myth is found in the present work, the Ascension of Isaiah, iv. 2-4, * And after (the world) is consummated, Beliar, the great ruler, the king of this world, will descend, who hath ruled it since it came into being; yea he will descend from his firmament in the likeness of a man, a lawless king, the slayer of his mother: who himself (even) this king 3. Will persecute
Ixx INTRODUCTION
the plant which the Twelve Apostles have planted. Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hand. 4. This ruler in the form of that king will come, &e.’
From this passage it is manifest that the belief in Nero being still alive had already been abandoned. Nero’s history belongs to the past. It is recorded in iv. 2-3. In such a case, if the Apocalyptic writer is bent on retaining the Neronic element, one of two courses is open. Either Beliar must come in the form of the dead Nero, or Nero must be recalled to life by a Satanic miracle. The first course is adopted by the writer of the Ascension, the second by the author of Rev. xiii, xvii. 8, 11%. The latter representation we have discussed already. Our present concern is with the former, and particularly with its probable date. This is a question of importance; for it has been objected on the one hand by Zeller that this form of the myth belongs to the second century (Z.f. W. T., ‘Der Martyrertod des Petrus in der Ascension Jesaiae,’ 1896, 558-568), and on the other by Harnack that it cannot be earlier than the third (Gesch. d. altchristl. Litteratur,
Zeller is moved to make this assertion on grounds really foreign to the subject at issue, such as the date of the Simon Magus romance, and the distinction which is already drawn in iii, 24, 29, between bishops and presbyters, a distinction that, in his opinion, was not established before the second half of the second century. Into the merits
INTRODUCTION Ixxi
of these questions it is needless to enter at present. We must rather turn to Harnack, who backs up his view with the statement that it cannot be proved that the conception of the returning Nero as the Antichrist prevailed in Christian circles of the second century. In the face of Rev. xiii, and Rev. xvii. 8, 119, and certain passages in Sibylline Oracles, v, which severally belong to various years of the period 88-150, we cannot understand on what grounds such a statement can be maintained.
In pages 714-716 of the same work, Harnack has rightly recognized that the Antichrist conception in the Ascension is compounded of two ideas: (xr) that Nero would return as the Antichrist; (2) that the devil is Antichrist. Now we have seen above, in II. i. (6), that the latter expectation did prevail, most probably before 3o a.D., and certainly before 7o a.D., and also that the former expectation is in all likelihood attested in the Sibylline Oracles, iii. 63-74 (see III. i. above), before go a.D., and certainly in Rev. xiii, xvii. 8, 11, not later than 100 A.D., and possibly as early as go A.D. There is thus no real difficulty in the evolution of such a myth as appears in the Ascension before 100 A.D.
Seeing, therefore, that, probably as early as the close of Vespasian’s reign, the materials were at hand for the formation of the myth, we may very reasonably set down 88 a.p. as the earliest probable date for the form of the myth, which is presented in the Ascension of Isaiah. We have found else-
Ixxii INTRODUCTION
where (see pp: xliv, 30, 31) that the section in which the form in question occurs cannot be later than 100 A.D. Hence 88-100 is the approximate date for this phase of the Antichrist legend.
(iii.) Incarnation of Beliar as the Antichrist in Nero redivivus. It is quite possible that the phase of the Antichrist myth which I have given under heading II. (ii.) should appear here (see note on p. Ixv). In that case this development would belong to the reign of Domitian.
In the Sibylline Oracles, v. 28-34 (written in the reign of Hadrian), the enigmatical account of Nero appears to involve all the above elements. Thus it is Nero redivivus that is described; for the author of the lines is writing two generations after Nero’s death. In the next place he is called in semimythological language ‘the serpent’ (herein we have the Beliar element), and finally he makes himself equal to God. The lines bearing on our
mevtnkovta 8 6 tis Kepainv Adxe, Kolpavos grat dewds dpist ...
GAN Etat kat dioros 6 Aolyios* el’ dvaxduyer iodo Oe adrov' édéy€er 8 ob pu edvra.
Book v. 214-227 belongs more clearly to the above classification. According to this passage, Nero is to return aloft through the air, upborne by the Fates. His achievements are portrayed in 219-225.
' This designation of Nero recurs in xii. 81, 264. See also ix. 41, where the reference is obscure. ;
INTRODUCTION Ixxiii
In Book viii, of which lines 4-429 belong to the close of the second century, the various myths have so thoroughly coalesced that Nero is no longer regarded as a man but as a Satanic monster.
He has himself become the Dragon, viii. 88 (mupépos doce Spdkwv), and assumed the monster's form, viii. 157 (6@fpa péyav).
It is needless here to pursue the ramifications of this myth further, than to state that so thoroughly did the Neronic element in the composite Antichrist saga gain the upper hand in the East, that in Armenian the word Nero became the equivalent for Antichrist (see Conybeare in Bousset’s Antichrist
SyMBOLS AND BRACKETS USED IN THIS EDITION.
u, b, ¢, denote the Ethiopic MSS. described on p. xv.
u, ch, denote the Slavonic MSS. described on p. xxv.
G denotes the lost Greek archetype of G' G?.
G' denotes the lost Greek text from which E L' were translated, and on which the Gk. Leg. was based. See pp. xxxi-xxxiii.
G? denotes the Greek text from which S L? were translated, of which II. 4-IV. 2 has now been recovered. See pp. xxviiixxxiii.
E denotes the Ethiopic Version based on a, }, c.
S denotes the Slavonic Version.
L' denotes the Latin Version from G! (consisting of II. 14-
L? denotes the Latin Version from G? (consisting of VI-XI).
Gk. Leg. denotes the Greek Legend printed on pp. 141-148. See also pp. xxvii-xxviii.
hmt =homoioteleuton.
C The use of these brackets in S L? means that the words so enclosed, though only in one of these authorities, are also found in E, and therefore go back to G.
[ ]The use of these brackets in G?L' L? or S means that the words so enclosed are found only in one of these authorities, and may or may not go back to G.
T 1 The use of these brackets in the English translation of E or in L? means that the words so enclosed are found in G', and not in G?: the words so enclosed in SL’ are found in G, but not in G'. In certain cases the words peculiar either to G! or G? are derived from G.
( ) The words or letters so enclosed are supplied by the editor in EL'L?§, but in the Greek fragment they are restorations, being undecipherable in the papyrus,
< > These brackets are used only in the Greek fragment. Words or letters so enclosed were omitted in the papyrus.
* The words so enclosed are emendations of the text.
+ + The words so enclosed are corrupt.
{ ] The words so enclosed are interpolated.
TRANSLATION
i. 1, And it came to pass in the twenty-sixth year i. x, 2*= of the reign of Hezekiah king of Judah that he (or
dom of called Manasseh his son. Now he was his only one. Isaiah.
2, And he called him into the presence of Isaiah
i. a. In the Greek Legend it is the twenty-fifth year.
Of the reign. Lit. ‘in the reign’; but I take the phrase to be equal to ém rod BaciAéws ‘ECexiov. Cf. 1 Mace. xiii. 42, xiv. 27;
2. Isaiah the son of Amoz the prophet. The word prophet here is no doubt to be taken with Isaiah and not with Amoz. Amoz is mentioned in the Old Testament in 2 Kings xix. 2 and Isa. i. 1, ii, 1, &. In iv. 22 he is wrongly identified with Amos, the eighth-century prophet—a confusion that the writer shares in common with many of the Greek and Latin Fathers. This mistake on the part of the latter may be due to the fact that the LXX inaccurately represents DY the prophet and YON the father of Isaiah by one and the same form “Apés, One and the same form also is used in Ethiopic for the two names, On the other hand there wasan old Talmudic tradition to the effect that Amoz, the father of Isaiah, was a prophet also. In Megilla, 10°, the writer seeks to prove by a very obscure line of argument that Amoz, the father of Isaiah, was a prophet. If
B
editorial addition.
the son of Amoz the prophet, and into the presence of Jésib the son of Isaiah, in order to deliver unto him the words of righteousness which the king himself had seen: 3. And of the eternal judgements and the torments of Gehenna, and of the * prince
this was even a current tradition, the confusion in iv. 22 becomes still more intelligible.
Jéséb, This name is found in Isa. vii. 3: TAWA, "Iacov8. In the Ethiopic version of our book, it is found variously as Jéséb, Josib, Jdsab, Joséb.
2b_s5* describe the vision of Hezekiah which he saw in the fifteenth year of his reign. These verses were inserted by the editor to prepare for the vision which is recounted in iii, 13-iv. 22. They give a brief description of it. This vision may in all probability be taken to be the testament of Hezekiah (see below). The evidence for this conclusion we shall now give. The vision is definitely ascribed to Hezekiah in verse 2: ‘which the king himself had seen.’ In verse 4 the same idea recurs: ‘words... which he himself had seen in the fifteenth year of his reign during his illness,’ and most probably in verse 5: ‘the written words which Samnas the scribe had written’; and again later in the same verse according to MS. a: ‘words ... which only the king had seen.’ That this idea is not an invention of the Ethiopic translation is clear from the Greek Legend, i. 2, which speaks of ‘The words which Hezekiah the king himself had seen during his illness’ (see p. 139). Nay, more, Georgius Cedrenus (see p. 29) quotes iv. 12 of our book as derived from the ‘Testament of Hezekiah’ (Ataéqen ‘ECexiov). Though little value need be attached to the evidence of Cedrenus individually, yet the rest of the evidence, when combined with it, is sufficient to show that the final editor of our apocrypha had seen and used a book purporting to be a work of Hezekiah, and iii. 13-iv. 22 appears to be the Testament in question.
3. This verse gives the contents of Hezekiah’s vision or prophecy.
Of the eternal judgements. be read, ‘of the judgements of this world.’ MSS. do not give genitive here but the accusative.
Gehenna. Mentioned only in iv. 14.
CHAPTER I. 2-4 3
of this world, and of his angels, and his authorities and his powers, 4. And the words of the faith of the Beloved which he himself had seen in the
And of * the prince* of this world. So Dillmann proposes. a reads, ‘ which is the eternal place of punishment’: bc ‘and of the place of punishment of this world.’ For phrase see ii, 4, iv. a, x.29. The reference is to the Antichrist in iv. 2.
Angels .. . authorities .. . powers, i.e. “Ayyedot, éfovoiat, Suvdpes. The very same list is found in 1 Pet, iii. 22 imorayévrory abr dyyAov Kal eovordy wai duvdpewv. Cf. Eph. i. 21, iii. 10, vi. 12;
4. The Beloved. This Messianic title is found throughout most grounds for believing this title pre-Christian. These are so excellently given by Canon Robinson in Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, ii. 501, that I take the liberty of reproducing them here. (1) ‘It is used in the Old Testament (6 #yarnpévos, LXX) as a title of Israel; e.g. Deut. xxxii. 15, xxxiii. 5, 26, where it renders ‘Jeshurun,” as it does also in Isa. xliv. 2; again in Isa, v. 1, 7 6 iyanquévos and 6 dyamqrdés render J) and WwW respectively. It was natural, therefore, that, like “the titles “Servant” and “Elect,” it should be transferred from the people to the Messiah. (2) At the period when the Gospels were written “the Beloved” and ‘‘the Elect ” were practically interchangeable terms, for Matthew writes 6 dyamyrés pov (xii. 18) in citing Isa. xlii. 1, where the Hebrew is ‘1a (LXX, 6 éxAekrds vov); and Luke (ix. 35) substitutes 6 enhereypevos for 6 dyannrés in the words spoken in the Transfiguration. (3) These two substitutions suggest that, whatever may have been the original meaning of the phrase 6 vids you 6 dyanyrés (Mark i. 11, ix. 7), both Matthew and Luke regarded 6 dyamnrés as a separate title, and not as an epithet of vids. And it is interesting to note that the old Syriac version emphasized this distinction by rendering “My Son and My Beloved.” (4) In Eph. i. 9 St. Paul uses év 79 Hyennpévy as equivalent to é& 7$ Xpiord in a context in which he is designedly using terms derived from Jewish sources, (5) Certain passages of the LXX where 6 dyarnrés occurs were explained by Christian interpreters as Messianic (Ps. xliv. (xlv.)
fifteenth year of his reign during his illness. 5. And he delivered unto him the written words which Samnas the scribe had written, and also those which Isaiah, the son of Amoz, had given to him, and also to the prophets, that they might write and store up with him what he himself had seen in the
tit. ; Zech. xii. 10). (6) Lastly we have several passages in early Christian writings in which 6 7yarnpévos is used as a title Ign. Smyrn., inser. ; Herm. Sim. IX. xii. 5; Acts of Thecla, c. 1 ; 6 dyarnrés is also used, but usually with vids or vais (Herm. Sim. V. ii. 6; Mart. Polyc. 14; Ep. ad Diogn. 8; Acts of Thecla, vu. aq; in the last three cases in a liturgical formula).’
Fifteenth year of his reign during his illness. See a Kings xx. 1-6; Isa, xxxviii. r-20. According to the Old Testament text Hezekiah reigned twenty-nine years, and his illness fell out fifteen years before he died. Hence the date harmonizes with the Old Testament chronology. This verse is almost wholly réproduced in the Greek Legend : see i. 2 (p. 141).
5%. The written words which Samnas the scribe had written. These words appear to relate to the vision of Hezekiah which was written out by Shebna the scribe after declaration of the king. The writing (AND) composed by Hezekiah during his illness (Isa. xxxvili. 9) may have suggested the idea in our text.
Samnas. See also vi. 17. In Greek Legend, i. 3 Zwpvds. In the LXX the Hebrew form maw is reproduced by Swpvds or XxXXvVii. z.
5°-6 describe the vision of Isaiah, vi—xi. 40, which he saw in the twentieth year of Hezekiah’s reign, vi. r.
Those which Isaiah... had given him. This is evidently the vision which Isaiah saw in the twentieth year of Hezekiah. See next verse.
Which Isaiah, the son of Amoz, had given to him and also to the prophets. Sobe. areads, ‘which Isaiah the son of Amoz and the prophets also had given to him.’
Store up with him what he himself had seen in the king’s house. Cf. Greek Legend, i. 2, The vision is that of Isaiah recorded
CHAPTER I. 4-7 5
king’s house regarding the judgement of the angels, and the destruction of this world,and regarding the garments of the saints and j their ¢ going forth, and regarding }their} transformation and the persecution and ascension of the Beloved. 6. In the twentieth year of the reign of Hezekiah, Isaiah had seen the words of this prophecy and had delivered them to Jésib his son. And whilst he (Hezekiah) gave i. 6°-13*=
commands, Jésib the son of Isaiah standing by, fox af
7. Isaiah said to Hezekiah the king, but not in the Isaiah. presence of Manasseh only did he say unto him: ‘ As the Lord liveth, whose name has not been sent into this world, and as the Beloved of my Lord
in vi.-xi. It is specially mentioned that this vision was experienced in the king’s palace ; see vi. 10-15. a@ reads, ‘store up with him what the king alone had seen’; bd (with a grammatical correction), ‘store up with him the vision which had been in the king’s house.’
Judgement of theangels. The only references to this judgement
Destruction of this world. See x. 12, iv. 18.
+ Their+ going forth, and regarding + their + transformation. The pronouns are all but certainly wrong. The words should refer tothe Messiah. Cf. iii. 13 of the Greek [7] éféAevors [rod dya}nyrod «+» [Kal 4] perapdppwors adrod ; also Greek Legend, i. 2. Thus these words could refer to iii. 13 as well as the account in vi.-xi.
The persecution and ascension of the Beloved. The former is men-
q. Manasseh was barely more than eight in the twenty-sixth year of Hezekiah’s reign.
As the Lord liveth, &c. The familiar Hebrew idiom 93 min'"N, The Greek is to be found in Greek Legend, ii. 8, iii. 13.
The Spirit which speaketh in me. Cf. ix. 36.
liveth, and the Spirit which speaketh in me liveth, all these commands and these words will be made of none effect by Manasseh thy son, and through the agency of his hands I shall depart mid the torture of my body. 8. And Sammael Malchira will serve
And as the Beloved. . . in me liveth. Editorial addition.
These commands. Referred to in the close of i. 6 and in ii. 1.
I shall depart, dc. There seems to have been a loss of the words ‘from this life’ or ‘ from life’ in his Ethiopic text. See Greek Legend, i. 8, 13.
8. Sammael = DNOD, Sammael was originally one of the chief archangels. But with a view to make the earth his kingdom he tempted Eve (Jalkut Shim Beresh. 25). Thenceforward he appears as the chief of the Satans (Debarim rabba, 11), and as the angel of death (Targ. Jer. on Gen. iii. 6). Moreover, just as Michael was the angelic patron of Israel, so Sammael was its special foe (Shem. rabba, 18). See Weber’s Jiidische Theologie?, 169, 218, 219, 253, from which these statements have been drawn.
Sammael is mentioned also in i. 11; ii. 1; iii. 19; v. 15, 16; vii. 9; xi. 41. On the various activities of Sammael and his relation to Beliar, see later notes on this verse,
Malchiré. Whence this name is derived I know not. It appears here to be a surname of Sammael. The name recurs in v. 8 (MS. a) as Milchiras, where see note. In xi. 41 Sammael has the surname Satan.
And he will become a follower of Beliar. Since these words most probably go back to a Hebrew original, we shall render: ‘so that he will become,’ &. Cf. ii. 4.
v. 1,4 (ac), 15. The form Berial is simply a corruption of the Ethiopie version ; for in the Greek version on iii, 11, 13 we have BeAlap, and in the Latin version in the same verses Beliac, a slip of the scribe for Beliar. In many cases the Ethiopic MSS. still retain the correct form : ¢ always right except in v. 1: aright ini. 9 and v.4:biniv.16. In v. 4, however, this reading seems corrupt. In Jubilees, i. 20, we find Belchér, and in xv. 33 of the same work Béléar and Biliar in the two best MSS. All these forms point
Manasseh, and execute all his desire, and he will become a follower of Beliar rather than of me:
to BeAlap. Beliar is spoken of also in 2 Cor. vi. 15; in Jubilees, as we have already noticed, the Sibylline Oracles, and the Test. XII Patriarchs. In Jubilees the references are i. 20, ‘spirit of Beliar’; XV. 33, ‘sons of Beliar.’ In the former passage Beliar is conceived as an evil spirit. In the Sibylline Oracles, ii. 167, Beliar is to come as the Antichrist and work many signs: while, according to iii. 63-73, he is to proceed from the emperors of Rome, and after working many great signs and deceiving even the elect he and his followers are to be burnt up. In the Testaments of his II Patriarchs, Beliar appears at times as the source of immoral deeds and at times as the Antichrist. Thus he is the source of impurity, Reub. 6, and of lying, Dan. 5. He cannot overcome a chaste man, Reub. 4, and flees from men who beware of wrath and lies, Dan.5. He sends seven evil spirits against man, Reub. 2. His works are to the Law of the Lord as darkness unto light, Lev. 19 (ef. 2 Cor. vi. 15). The spirits of Beliar will be punished, Lev. 3. The Messiah will war against him and wrest from him his captives, Dan. 5, and bind him, Lev. 18. Beliar is closely connected with the tribe of Dan: see.5, also Bousset, Antichrist Legend, 26, 171, 172. On the derivation and Old Testament meanings of the words, see Encyclopaedia Biblica, cols. 525-527.
Relation of Sammael to Beliar. In some respects their functions are identical, but in others they are clearly distinguishable. They are identical in the following respects. Both Sammael and Beliar dwell and rule in the firmament, vii. 9, iv. 2: both take possession of Manasseh, Sammael, ii. 1; Beliar, i. 9, iii. 11, v. 1: both are wroth with Isaiah for his visions, Sammael, v. 15 ; Beliar, iii. 13, v. 1, both have Isaiah sawn in sunder through Manasseh, Sammael, xi. 41; Beliar, v.15: both are ultimately to be overcome, Sammael, to be destroyed, v. 15 ; Beliar to be cast into Gehenna, iv. 16. But in certain respects they are to be differentiated, and Sammael herein appears to be the inferior of Beliar. Thus Sammael exerts himself to make Manasseh the subject of Beliar, i.8 (ii. 4). Beliar, moreover, has his subordinate kings (Satanic or human ?), iv. 16; he is the prince (or king) of this world, i. 3, iv. 2; and, as in the Sibyllines, he is the Anti-
g. And many in Jerusalem and in Judea he will cause to abandon the true faith, and Beliar will dwell in Manasseh, and by his hands I shall be sawn asunder. 10. And when Hezekiah heard these words he wept very bitterly, and rent his garments, and placed earth upon his head, and fell on his face. 11. And Isaiah said unto him: ‘The counsel of Sammael against Manasseh is consummated: nought will avail thee.’ 12. And on that day Hezekiah resolved in his heart to slay Manasseh his son. 13. And Isaiah said to
christ, iv. 2. This earth will be the scene of his parusia, iv. 2, and of his manifestation, iv. 18.
9. True faith. Literally, ‘ faith of truth’ or ‘ of righteousness.’
Beliar will dwell, dc. In the Greek Legend Beliar is replaced by Satan, just as Sammael in verse 11 : see i. 9, where much of this verse is reproduced.
ro. See Greek Legend, i. 10.
Ir. Counsel of Sammael .. . is consummated. The Greek Legend, i. 11, is clearer: Sef yap mAnpwOfvat tiv Bovddy rod Sarava rd. Observe that the familiar term Satan replaces Sammael.
Nought will avail thee. Cf. Greek Legend, i, 11 ode dpedqous ceavroy obdéy.
12, And on that day. Emended from be ‘on this day and’: a ‘on those words,’ See Critical Note, where Greek Legend is quoted. These words have hitherto been wrongly connected with the preceding verse.
1g. I shall inherit the heritage, dc. See viii. 12.
i-ii. 1. The sense and partly the diction of many clauses in i-ii, 1 are reproduced in the Opus Imperfectum in Matthaeum Homil. i. (printed among the works of Chrysostom, vol. vi. xx-xxi, Montfaucon). See also Fabricius, Codex Pseud. p. 10943 Laurence, 149; Dillmann, p. 65. ‘Providentia autem Dei sic eum dispensavit vocari, quia (ii. 1) obliturus fuerat omnem conversationem patris sui sanctam et omnia beneficia Dei pro merito eius collata in ipsum, et (i. 8, ii. 4) stimulatus ab insurgente diabolo, qui solet insurgere super genus humanum ad evertendum,
CHAPTERS I. g—II. I 9
Hezekiah : ‘the Beloved hath made of none effect thy design, and the purpose of thy heart will not be
accomplished, for with this calling have I been called i. 13'= editorial
and I shall inherit the heritage of the Beloved.’ addition. ii, 1. And it came to pass after that Hezekiah ii. 1-iii. 12
died and Manasseh became king, that he did not oe
remember the commands of Hezekiah his father Isaiah.
gesturus omnia, quae Deum ad iracundiam provocarent. Denique cum aegrotasset Ezechias in tempore quodam, et venisset ad eum Esaias propheta visitandum, (i. 1, 6") vocavit Ezechias filium suum Manassen et coepit ei mandare, quod debeat Deum timere, quaomodo regere regnum et alia multa. (i. 7) Et dixit ad eum Esaias : vere” quia non descendunt verba tua in cor eius, sed et me ipsum oportet per manum eius interfict (i. 10, 12) Quod audiens Ezechias volebat filium suum interficere, dicens: quia melius est me sine filio mori quam talem filium relinquere, qui et Deum exasperet et sanctos eius persequatur. Tenuit autem eum vix Esaias propheta, dicens : (i. 1g) irritum faciat Deus consilium tuum hoc, videns Ezechiae religionem, quia plus amabat Deum quam filium suum.’ I have italicized the words that are drawn from our book and added the references. On value of this text see Introd., pp. xl.-xli.
8-12. A somewhat different account of this interview of Isaiah and Hezekiah is found in the Talmud Berachoth, 10°. ‘What is the meaning of the words ‘Thou shalt die and not live”? ‘Thou shalt die in this world and not live in the next world.” He said: ‘Wherefore is all this?” He answered him: ‘Because thou hast not practised fruitfulness and increase.” He rejoined : “ Because it was revealed to me by the Holy Spirit that unprofitable children would spring from me.” He replied : “What concern hast thou in the secrets of the All Merciful? Thou shouldest have done what was commanded thee, and the Holy One, blessed be He, may do what pleases Him.” He replied thereto: ‘“‘Give me thy daughter : perhaps my merits and thine together will bring it about that profitable children may spring from me.” Then replied he: ‘“‘The judgement is already determined regarding thee.” ’
ii. 1. Manasseh ... forgat. These words represent a paronomasia in Hebrew, nw m2, This was observed by the author
but forgat them, and Sammael abode in Manasseh and clung fast to him. 2. And Manasseh forsook the service of the God of his father, and he served Satan and his angels and his powers. 3. And he turned aside the house of his father which had been before the face of Hezekiah (from) the words of wisdom and from the service of God. 4. And Manasseh turned aside his heart to serve Beliar ;
of the Opus Imperfectum in Matthaewm. See p. 8. ‘Providentia Dei sic eum (i.e. Manasseh) dispensavit vocari, quia obliturus fuerat.’ See Greek Legend, iii. 2. The same play on words is found in Genesis xli. 51.
Commands of Hezekiah. See i. 6, 7.
Sammacel abode, dc. See note on i. 8. x
2. This verse is found in its entirety in Greek Legend, iii. 2.
3. Turned aside the house of his father which had been before the Jace of Hezekiah. Such is the obvious and literal translation of the Ethiopic text. The Ethiopic verb (rendered ‘turned aside’) is used in this sense in the next verse and in iv.9; v. 8. This rendering is supported by the Greek Legend, iii. 3 eféAwe mévra tov olxov Tod narpds adrod. Dillmann (followed by Beer) translates : ‘mutavit in domo patris sui ea, quae coram facie Ezechiae fuerant.’ This rendering is based on a rare idiom, in accordance with which the word ‘house’ can stand in a locative sense without a preposition after verbs meaning ‘sojourning,’ &c., as in Gen. xxiv. 23; xxxviii. 11 ; Luke xix. 5. Such a verb is not indeed expressed in Num. xxx. 11; the sense, however, implies it. Since, however, our text neither expresses nor admits of such a verb, Dillmann’s rendering is very questionable, even if the Greek Legend was not decisive on this point.
(From) the words of wisdom and from the service of God. The text makes these words the object of the verb. I have supplied the preposition in accordance with the Greek Legend, iii. 3 dad ris Tov Geod Aatpelas Kal npookyycews.
4. Beliar, the angel of lawlessness, See on iv. w.
Beliar .. . the ruler of this world, Cf. i.3; x. 29; John xii. 31; xvi. 11 6 dpxav Tod Kécpov Tovrou: 2 Cor, iv. 4 6 eds Tov aldvos
CHAPTER Il. 1-7 II
for the angel of lawlessness, who is the ruler of this world, is Beliar, whose name is Matanbfichts. And he delighted in Jerusalem because of Manasseh, and he made him strong in apostatizing (Israel) and in the lawlessness which were spread abroad in Jerusalem. 5. And witchcraft and magic increased and divination and auguration, and fornication, [and adultery], and the persecution of the righteous by Manasseh and [Belachira, and] Tobia the Canaanite, and John of Anathoth, and by (Zadok) the chief of the works. 6. And the rest of the acts, behold they are written in the book of the Kings of Judah and Israel. 7. And, when Isaiah, the son of Amoz, saw the lawlessness which was being perpetrated in Jerusalem and the worship
rovrov : Eph. vi. 12 mpds rods xocpoxpdropas rod oxdrous rovrou : ii, a rdv dpxovra ris efovotas Tob dépos.
Matanbichis. So MSS. ac. b reads ‘Matanbakas.’ In v. 3 it appears as Méchémbéchis. It has been conjectured to be derived from NP {FD = worthless gift: see Liicke, i, 282.
Made him strong. So rightly emended by Dillmann.
In apostatizing. See 2 Kings xxi. 9, which gives this idea. G* less good : ‘in apostasy.”
5. See 2 Chron. xxxiii. 6 (LXX) é#Andovifero nai édappakevero kat olwvi{ero. Also 2 Kings xxi. 6. See Greek: also Greek Legend, iii. 3.
[And adultery], Bracketed as an addition on the Ethiopic. Wanting both in G@ and Greek Legend, iii. 3.
Persecution. See 2 Kings xxi. 16.
(Belachird and], I have bracketed these words as they are absent from the Greek. Moreover the name is evidently introduced for the first time in ii. 12. Z
Anathoth. See Encyclopaedia Biblica in loc.
(Zadok). Supplied from the Greek.
6. a Kings xxi. 17; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 18.
Us = ditorial ddition.
of Satan and his wantonness, he withdrew from Jerusalem and settled in Bethlehem of Judah. 8. And there also there was much lawlessness, and withdrawing from Bethlehem he settled on a mountain in a desert place. go. And Micaiah the prophet, and the aged Ananias, and Joel and Habakkuk, and his son Jésib, and many of the faithful who believed in the ascension into heaven, withdrew and settled on the mountain. 10. They were all clothed with garments of hair, and they were all prophets. And they had nothing with them but were naked, and they all lamented with a great lamentation because of the going astray of Israel. 11. And these eat nothing save wild herbs which they gathered on the mountains, and having cooked them, they lived thereon together with Isaiah the prophet. And they spent two
7. His wantonness. Greek has nopriy atrot : Greek Legend, iii. 8 dowriay.
g. This verse, which could not have appeared as it stands in the Jewish Martyrdom of Isaiah, is an editorial addition drawn largely and almost verbally from vi. 7. The clause ‘withdrew and settled on the mountain’ is repeated from ver. 8 ; the misleading phrase ‘his son’ and the clause ‘many of the faithful
. . ascension into heaven’ are the editor’s own.
Habakkuk. Eth. has Enbiqdm = Greek ’Apfaxovp.
11. Herbs. Dillmann refers to 2 Kings iv. 38sqq. This living on herbs may be designed to prepare them to receive supernatural disclosures. A similar preparation was made by Daniel, x. 2,3. In4 Ezra ix. 26, Ezra, when preparing for a divine revelation, declares : ‘ De herbis agri manducavi.’ Similarly in xii. 51 ‘Sedi in campo septem diebus ... et manducabam de fioribus solummodo agri, de herbis facta est esca mihi in diebus
years of days on the mountains and hills. 12. And after this, whilst they were in the desert, there was a certain man in Samaria named Belchira, of the family of Zedekiah, the son of Chenaan, a false
12-16 introduce Belchiraé and give certain details of his history. The subject of verse 11 is resumed in iii. x.
There are many difficulties connected with this name in our book. The first is concerned with the form of the word. Thus it has four forms in the Greek Papyrus Fragment : ii. 12 BeAryetdp ; iii. ra BeAyeipd; and Bexepa ii. 16; iii. 1; and MeAxepd iii. 6. The first appears to be merely a variant of the second. Next the form Beyxerpds occurs once in iii. 10 of the Greek Legend. In the Latin Fragment iii. 1, 11 only Bechira is attested. The same variance prevails within the Ethiopic version. Thus we find Belchira attested by a in ii. 1a; ili. 11; v. 2: Balchira by Melachiré by a in v. 1a: Milchiras by a in v. 8; fbchira by a, Abchira by bin ii. 16. Nowas regards Ibchira it is clear that it goes back to Bexepé. Balchira is simply a later orthographic variant of Belchira, which, though only found in a, is clearly the olderform. Belachira is very closely akin to Greek forms of the name in ii, 12 and iii. 12 of the Greek Fragment. Thus with
the exception of Melachiré in v. 12 (a), Milchirds in v. 8 (a), and MeAxe:pd in ii. 6, G’, all the above forms go back to Bexerpé and BeAxerpa.
But what are we to make of MeAxerpa in iii, 6, of Melachtra in v. 12 (a) and the closely related forms—Malchira in i. 8, Milchiras in v. 8? We may dismiss Malchira i. 8 from consideration as a surname of Sammael. As regards the rest they are clearly variants or equivalents of Belchira ; for over against MeAxeipa in iii. 6 all MSS. of E give Balchira, and rightly according to the context. In like manner Milchirds and Melachira are equivalents of Balchira, for whereas the former are attested only by a, the latter is read by tc. They are, however, ancient variants, for if we turn to the Greek Legend, we find frequent mention of a false prophet MeAxias. It is this Melchias in the Legend who addressed to Isaiah the words attributed to Milchirasin a in v.8 (a) of our book. And just as Milchiras clearly
prophet, whose dwelling was in Bethlehem. Now fHezekiahf the son of Chandni, who was the brother of his father, and in the days of Ahab, king of Israel, had been the teacher of the 400 prophets of Baal, had himself smitten and reproved Micaiah the son of Amada the prophet. 13. And he, Micaiah,
stands for an impersonation of the devil (see v. 9) and is actually so designated by Ambrose on Ps. cxviii, so Melchias is in the Legend called A:dBodos by Isaiah. Melachira in v. 12 is the same as Milchirds in v. 8, and as MeAxias in the Greek Legend. Thus at an early date in the tradition the name of the false prophet was sometimes written as Belchiré (with its variants) and Melchira (with its variants). From the presence of 7 in the great majority of the variants, it follows that Bexepd is a secondary form of BeAxepd. Gesenius, Studien und Kritiken, 1830, pp. 244-246, derives Belchira from mopba mp bya lord of the world. i ; ®
Zedekiah, the son of Chendan Xedexias vids Xaavé (B Xavava A) MIYIS"}2 MPT, Seer Kings xxii. 11, The Greek Fragment gives =. v. Xavavi.
Bethlehem. Bethany in the Greek.
Hezekiah the son of Chandni. Undoubtedly the same as the Zedekiah just mentioned. Indeed, as the Greek Fragment shows, for Hezekiah we should read Zedekiah. This is not a mere slip of the Ethiopic translation; for it appears from the Chron. Pasch. (p. 98 B joav pevdorpopijrat ECexias .. . nai ddA v’ and 96 C Pevdonpopijrat Sedexias . . . at GAA: rerpaxdorcoci—quoted. by Dillmann, p. 66) that these two different Greek transliterations of the same Hebrew name were current. As the Greek proves, however, they have no right in our text.
Brother of his father. This Zedekiah was an uncle of Belchira.
Of Baal. This is an error on the part of the writer. He has confounded the prophets mentioned in 1 Kings xxii. 6 with those mentioned in 1 Kings xviii. 22.
Smitten. 1 Kings xxii. 24.
Son of Amdadd, Son of Imlah. Various forms assumed by this name in Greek MSS. are Iepaa, IeuiAa, IexAa, See Holmes and Parsons, LXX on 2 Chron, xviii. 8,
had been reproved by Ahab and cast into prison. (And he was) with Zedekiah the prophet: they were with Ahaziah the son of * Ahab, king in Samaria*. 14. And Elijah the prophet of Tébén of Gilead was reproving Ahaziah and Samaria, and prophesied regarding Ahaziah that he should die on his bed of sickness, and that Samaria should be delivered into the hand of Leba Nasr because he had slain the prophets of God. 15. And when the false prophets, who were with Ahaziah the son of Ahab and their teacher Jalerjas of Mount } Joel t, had heard—16. Now he was a brother of Zedekiah—
13. (And he was). Supplied from G’.
Ahab, king in Samaria*. See Critical Note in loc.
14. Of Tébon of Gilead. Cf. 1 Kings xvii. 1 (LXX) 6é OecBeirns éx @coBav Hs Tadadd. Here we observe that our text takes ‘awn in 1 Kings xvii. 1 as signifying é« GecBéy or ‘from Thisbe,’ a town of Naphtali. So also Josephus, Ant. viii. 13. 2 mpophryns . . . é wbdews @eceBdvns ris Tadadiridos xwpas. This Thisbe (@:c24) is mentioned in Tobit i. 2. Further, it omits 6 @ecBeirnjs, as does MS. A of the LXX. The above Hebrew word, according to the Massoretic punctuation, = ‘of the sojourners of.’
Prophesied regarding Ahaziah. See 2 Kings i. 1-6.
Leba Nésr. Corrupt for Salmanassar. Cf. Apoc. Bar. Ixii. 6 and 4 Ezra xiii. 40 (Dillmann).
16. Now he was o brother. For ‘he’ E has fbchira (a), G? Bexepd. I have followed L, which omits this name. But the more natural rendering of E would be: ‘Now that Belchira was a brother,’ &. Inverse 12 Belchira is said to be a nephew of Zedekiah. Grenfell and Hunt appear to be right in relating the ‘he’ to Jalerjas.
+Aguarén}. Corrupt for Gomorrha. Gomorrha used contemptuously for Samaria. See iii. 10.
(Slew). Supplied from G?L',
when they had heard, they persuaded Ahaziah the king of ¢ Aguarén + and (slew) Micaiah.
iii. 1. *And Belchira* recognized and saw the place of Isaiah and the prophets who were with him ;. for he dwelt in the region of Bethlehem, and was an adherent of Manasseh. And he prophesied falsely in Jerusalem, and many belonging to Jerusalem were confederate with him, and he was a Samaritan. 2. And it came to pass when Alagar Zagar, king of Assyria, had come and captured Samaria and taken the nine (and a half) tribes captive, and led them away to the * mountains * of the Medes and the rivers of Tézén; 3. This (Belchira), whilst still a youth, had escaped and come to Jerusalem in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah, but he walked not in the ways of his father of Samaria; for he feared Hezekiah. 4. And he was found in the days of Hezekiah speaking words of lawlessness in Jerusalem. 5. And the servants of Hezekiah accused him, and he made his escape to
iii. 1. *.And Belchird* recognized. Text corrected from G? Li.
Confederate with him. According to G? we should have the same verb here as in the preceding sentence: ‘was an adherent of.’
2. Alagar Zagér, i. v. Salmanassar.
(And a half). The words in brackets are supplied from the Greek and Latin. Israel is so designated also in the Apoe. Bar. lxii. 5, Ixxvii. 19, lxxviii. 1; also in the Syriac and Arabic versions of 4 Ezra xiii. 40 and in John of Malalas, p. 158. See
Mountains*. E = dpa, ‘boundaries,’ corrupt for épy, as in G'L*, yet see note on p. 89.
Taz6n, i.e. Gozan. See a Kings xvii. 6, xviii. 11.
CHAPTER III, I-10 17
the region of Bethlehem. And * they * persuaded ... 6, And Balchira accused Isaiah and the prophets who were with him, saying: ‘Isaiah and those who are with him prophesy against Jerusalem and against the cities of Judah that they shall be laid waste and (against the children of Judah and) Benjamin also that they shall go into captivity, and also against thee, O lord the king, that thou shalt go (bound) with hooks and iron chains’: 7. But they prophesy falsely against Israel and Judah. 8. And Isaiah himself hath said: ‘I see more than Moses the prophet.’ 9. But Moses said: ‘No man can see God and live’; and Isaiah hath said: ‘I have seen God and behold I live.’ 10. Know,
5. *They* persuaded... E reads, ‘he persuaded,’ but G? gives plural. As Grenfell and Hunt propose, we should most probably supply Belchira as object of the verb and the false prophets as its subject.
6. Those who. The Greek and Latin give ‘the prophets who.’
(Against the children of Judah and). Supplied from L'.
(Bound) with hooks and iron chains = év yadedypas nat év médaus. The words are clearly based on 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11, ‘The captains. . . took Manasseh in chains (or with hooks) and bound him with fetters.’ Since the LXX renders xaréAaBov Mavacc? év Secpois wai einoav airdy év mésas, our text is independent of it. Tadedypa is a LXX rendering of O'NM in Ezek. xix. 9.
q. G? makes an addition here against E and Lt.
8-9. These verses are referred to by Origen, In LIesaiam Homil. i. 5 (Lommatzsch, xiii. 245, 246) ‘ Aiunt ideo Isaiam esse sectum a populo quasi legem praevaricantem et extra scripturas annuntiantem. Scriptura enim dicit: ‘nemo videbit faciem meam et vivet.” Iste vero ait: ‘Vidi Dominum Sabaoth.” Moses, aiunt, non vidit et tu vidisti? Et propter hoc eum secuerunt et condemnaverunt eum ut impium.’
9g. No man can see God, &e. Exod. xxxiii, 20.
I have seen God, &c. Isa. vi. 1.
therefore, O king, that *heislying*. And Jerusalem also he hath called Sodom, and the princes of Judah and Jerusalem he hath declared to be the people of Gomorrah. And he brought many accusations against Isaiah and the prophets before Manasseh. 13. But Beliar dwelt in the heart of Manasseh and in the heart of the princes of Judah and Benjamin and of the eunuchs and of the councillors of the king. 12. And the words of Belchira pleased him [exceedingly], and he sent and seized Isaiah. 13.
Testament For Beliar was in great wrath against Isaiah by
of Hezekiah =iii,
reason of the vision, and because of the exposure wherewith he had exposed Sammael, and because through him the going forth of the Beloved from the seventh heaven had been made known, and His transformation and His descent and the likeness
to. *Heislying*. Emended with L'G?. See Crit. note. Text = ‘they are lying prophets.’ But verses 8-10% refer to Isaiah only.
Jerusalem also he hath called Sodom, &c. Based on Isa. i. 10: ‘Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom ; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.’ Cf. Jerome’s Comm. in Ies. i, 10 ‘ Aiunt Hebraei ob duas causas interfectum Isaiam': quod principes Sodomorum et populum Gomorrhae eos appellaverit, et quod, domino dicente ad Mosen Non poteris videre faciem meam, iste ausus sit dicere Vidi dominum sedentem super thronum excelsum et elevatum.’ The same tradition is found in the Talmud, Jebam. fol. 49°.
11. Beliar. See note oni. 9.
1a. I have connected ‘and the words... exceedingly’ with verse 12 and not with rz asin preceding editions. ‘Exceedingly’ is an addition of E.
13. The exposure. G® has here the word deypariopés which is only found once elsewhere. Cf. Matt. i. 19 for the verb.
The going forth of the Beloved, &c. These words describe the contents of vi.-xi.
into which He should be transformed (that is) the likeness of man, and the persecution wherewith He should be persecuted, and the tortures wherewith the children of Israel should torture Him, and the coming of His twelve disciples, and the teaching, and that He should before the Sabbath be crucified upon the tree, and should be crucified together with wicked men, and that He should be buried in the sepulchre, 14. And the twelve who were with Him should be offended because of Him: and * the watch of * those who watched the sepulchre: 15, And the descent of the angel of the Christian Church, which is in the heavens, whom He will summon in the last days. 16, And that (Gabriel)
The coming of His twelve disciples, and the teaching. The terser form of G’ may be right: 7 ray dbbexa pabnreia. Here the words appear to mean the instruction given to the Twelve, but in verse 21 the instruction given by the Twelve.
Before the Sabbath be crucified upon the tree, and should. These words are not found in G*, but are supported by our text in xi. 20.
14. Offended because of Him. Matt. xxvi. 31.
The watch of * those who were watching. So emended with G? by a slight change of vocalization from corrupt text of (a) ‘ those watchers also were watching’; bc attempt to emend: ‘the watchers also watching.’ Cf. Matt. xxviii. 4.
15. Angel of the Christian Church. Of. Rev. ii. 1, 8, 12a, &e. G? has simply ‘Church,’ but the Ethiopic phrase means nothing more,
Whom He will summon. The text may also be rendered ‘who will summon.’
16. And that (Gabriel) the angel of the Holy Spirit. I have with the Greek connected these words with those that follow rather than with those that precede, as earlier editions, and accordingly have placed them in verse 16. This angel is, as Grenfell and Hunt assume, Gabriel. This name fills the lacuna in the G? (see also next note). He and Michael, according to the
the angel of the Holy Spirit, and Michael, the chief of the holy angels, on the third day will open the sepulchre: 17. And the Beloved sitting on their shoulders will come forth and send out His twelve
Greek, open the Sepulchre. This agrees with the Gospel of Pet. 9, which tells that two angels descended and stood on the tomb. In Matt. xxviii. 2 only one angel is mentioned as descending, but in Luke xxiv. 4, John xx. 12 two angels appeared after the Resurrection. In E the verb ‘will open’ is in the singular, but the Greek is decisive, and its evidence is supported by verse 17.
Angel of the Holy Spirit. Cf. iv. at, vii. 23 (viii. 14), ix. 36, 39, 40, X. 4, xi. 4, 33; Herm. Mand. xi. g 6 dyyedos rod mpopyrixot mvedpatos, Here and in xi. 4 this angel appears to be Gabriel, but elsewhere in the book to be the Holy Spirit.
Michael, the chief of the holy angels. The mention of Michael in this connexion points to the writer being a Jewish Christian. Michael is not again referred to in this book save in the Latin version ix. a3, 42.
17. The Beloved. The Ethiopic has ‘that Beloved.’ Here as frequently the Ethiopic has rendered the definite article by the demonstrative.
Sitting on their shoulders, i.e. of the Angel of the Holy Spirit and of Michael. Cf. Luke xxiv. 4; John xx. 12; Gospel of Pet. 10 rods Sto rév Eva tropotvras.
Will come forth and send out His twelve disciples. These words are loosely quoted in the Rest of the Words of Baruch ix. 18 Abrds yap édedoerar wat &fedevoerar Kal emadggerar éavr@ dkdexa | aroordéAous iva ebayyeriCovra: év trois éévectv. In the work cited these words are put into the mouth of Jeremiah. When the people heard them they were enraged, and said ix. 20 raira nddw éori ta phyata 7a ind ‘Hoalov rod viod ’"Apds cipnuéeva, AéyorTos Sr, Eidov rdv @edv wat Tov vidvy tov @eov. See Rendel Harris’
His twelve disciples. ‘The Twelve’ are mentioned elsewhere in 13, 14, 21,iv.3,and xi.2a, The expression is a stereotyped one. This usage of course springs from the Gospels. It does not include St. Paul. Cf. Acts vi. 2; Rev. xxi. 14. In this sense it is used by St. Paul himself, 1 Cor. xv. 5. In the above passage it cannot
disciples: 18. And they will teach all the nations and every tongue of the resurrection of the Beloved, and those who believe in His cross will be saved, and in His ascension into the seventh heaven whence He came: 19. And that many who believe in Him will speak through the Holy Spirit: 20. And many signs and wonders will be wrought in those days. 21. And afterwards, on the eve of His approach, His disciples will forsake the teaching of the Twelve Apostles, and their faith, and their love
include St. Paul; for the reference is to the commission given to the Apostles before the Ascension. The very next words iii, 18a are based on command given in Matt. xxviii. 19. Even as late as the third century, in the list of the Twelve given by the ‘ Ecclesiastical Canons of the Holy Apostles,’ the name of St. Paul is not included. On the other hand he figures as one of the Twelve in the Greek of the Apology of Aristides
18. Cf. Matt. xxviii. 19, where the Ethiopic rendering of pabnredw is the same as here, though the meaning of pabyretw is here different.
Believe in His cross. Of. ix. 26.
Ascension. The Ethiopic word means rather ‘ resurrection.’
ar. On the thought of the verse cf. Acts xx. 29, 30; 1 Tim.
Afterwards. Not in Greek.
Teaching. Gk. mpopnteia, See verse 13, where the same thought is expressed by yaéyreia. It is noteworthy that the word here is not day. Yet if this portion of the Ascension of Isaiah were late, there could hardly fail to be here the stereotyped expression 5:dax7) ray Sd5exa.
Their faith. G? reads ‘the faith.’ In this case wiorts should be taken objectively as equivalent to ‘the Christian faith,’ as in the Pastoral] Epistles, 1 Tim. i. 19 (see Bernard in loc.), iv. 1, 6,
Their love and their purity. These words relate to the inward disposition, and connote respectively a man’s duty to his
and their purity. 22. And there will be much contention on the eve of [His advent and] His approach. 23. And in those days many will love office, though devoid of wisdom. 24, And there will be many lawless elders, and shepherds dealing wrongly by their own sheep, and they will ravage (them) owing to their not* having* holy shepherds. 25. And many will change the honour of the garments of the saints for the garments of the covetous, and there will be much respect of persons in those days and
neighbour and to himself. The latter is more than chastity, and signifies purity of life and motive (see Bernard, 1 Tim. iv. 12).
It is noteworthy that the above three substantives are found together though not in the same order in 1 Tim. iv. 12, where Timothy is bidden to be a pattern for believers év dydng, év miore, év dyvela.
22. Much contention. The Ethiopic translator is far afield here as he not unfrequently is when he meets the word aipeas. Instead of ‘much contention’ read ‘many heresies.” Compare 2 Pet. ii. 1 ‘Among you also there shall be false teachers who shall privily bring in destructive heresies.’
[His advent and]. These words I have bracketed as a duplicate rendering of év 7@ éyyilew abtrdv.
24. They will ravage (them) owing to their not having holy shepherds. Instead of ‘ holy’ the Greek gives ‘pure.’ The above rendering is based on an emendation of a, which as it stands ‘they will ravage owing to their not... the holy shepherds.’ The dots indicate a vox nulla, which however by a change of one letter dia 7d ph yew as we actually have in G’. The words ‘holy shepherds,’ which in a is in the nominative, should be in the accusative as G’? has it. G* = ‘who will be ravaged through not having pure shepherds.’
25. Garments of the saints. A special form of dress is here designated. Harnack (Chronol. d. Alichristlichen Litteratur, 575) conjectures that the dress here referred to is that of the ascetics.
Covetous. Cf. 2 Tim. iii. 1, = & éoxdrats Hyépas ... €oovra... guddpyupot.
lovers of the honour of this world. 26. And there will be much slander and vainglory at the approach of the Lord, and the Holy Spirit will withdraw from many. 27. And there will not be in those days many prophets, nor those who speak trustworthy words, save one here and there in divers places, 28. On account of the spirit of error and fornication and of vainglory, and of covetousness, which shall be in those, who will be called servants of that One and in those who will receive that One. 29. And there will be great hatred in the shepherds and elders towards each other. 30. For there will be great jealousy in the last days; for
26. Much slander. There is here a dittography in E which = ‘slanderers [and slanderers] much,’ i. e. two different plural forms in E of the same singular, or rather the first word means ‘slander.’ See Crit. Note.
27. Prophets. There is no mention of the apostles. Their age therefore seems past, and that of the prophets to have taken their place as in Rev. where the apostles are only mentioned once as living contemporaries xviii. 20 (ii. 2 ?) but the prophets
Trustworthy words. Since G* here is merely icxvpa and E is a literal rendering of that word, we are forced by the context to give it an unnatural meaning. It is hardly possible to believe that Aadodvres ioxupa is aught else than a bad rendering of a Semitic original. The rest of the verse points also in this direction. I find that icxvpds is used once as a rendering of JONI by Aquila and Theodotion in Deut. vii. 9.
Save one here and there in divers places. G? shows that the idiom is thoroughly Semitic: 4 ¢fs wat ef(s) nat eis év tézo1s Kal Térots.
28, The spirit of error. This phrase is found in 1 John iv. 6.
Covetousness. See verse 25.
Receive that One, i.e. the Beloved. Cf. iv. 9.
every one will say what is pleasing in his own eyes. 31. And they will make of none effect the prophecy of the prophets which were before me, and *these* my visions also will they make of none effect, in order to speak after the impulse of their own heart.
IV. 1. And now Hezekiah and Jésib my son, *these* are the days of the *completion of the world*, 2. After it is consummated, Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world, will descend, who hath ruled it since it came into being ; yea, he will descend from his firmament in the likeness of a man,
30. Every one will say, dc. Of. Hermas, Sim. ix. 22,
gi. *These*. MSS. give At: ‘which’ corrupt for an: ~ ‘these.’
iv. 1. See Critical Note, p. 95.
Hezekiah and Jéséb my son. Editorial addition.
2. Beliar, the great ruler. See note on ii. 4. The Ethiopic may be rendered ‘angel’ or ‘archon’ or ‘ruler.’ From iv. 4, however, where the same Ethiopic word is a rendering of apxav, it is obviously a rendering of the same word here.
King of this world. In ii. 4 he is called ‘the ruler of this world’: in x. 29 ‘ the prince of this world.’ The two latter = 6 dpxwv robrou Tod Kécpov. See note on ii. 4.
From his firmament. This firmament is subsequently referred to in vi. 13, vii. 9-12, x. 29, as the dwelling-place of Sammael (and probably of Beliar). Unlike St. Paul, who in some way conceived evil powers to have their abode in heaven—Eph. vi. 12 7d. mvevparixd Tis Tovnplas év Tots émoupaviois—the writer of this book admits them to no higher place than the firmament which lies immediately below the first heaven. See my edition of | the Slavonic Enoch, xxix. 5 note.
Lawless king. In ii. 4 ‘the angel of lawlessness.’ In 2 Thess. ii. 3 the Antichrist is ‘the man of lawlessness.’ Lawlessness is the characteristic of Antichrist : see Introduction, pp. liv, lxii.
Slayer of his mother. For other references to the matricide
2-3. Who himself (even) this king 3. Will persecute the plant, ce.
CHAPTERS III. 30—IV. 3 25
a lawless king, the slayer of his mother: who himself (even) this king 3. Will persecute the _plant-which the Twelve Apostles of the Beloved
We must here follow the Greek (seep.95). MS. dof E, itis true, comes very near to this : ‘who himself (is) the king of this world and he will persecute the plant.’ See Critical Note in loc.
It is quite clear that these words and the rest of verse 3 belong to the historical Nero. The rest of the passage has to do with the Antichrist only.
3. Will persecute. It is of importance to observe that, just as in Revelation (xvii. 6; xix. 2), the persecution under Nero is the only persecution known to this writer. Hence he was not acquainted with that of Domitian, Tacitus, Agric. 44: this persecution extended to Palestine: Hegesippus in Eusebius,
The plant which . .. have planted. From the Greek riv gureiay dv putevcovow we seem bound to conclude that the writer was acquainted with Matt. xv. 13 réca pureia jy ode ipdrevcer 6 maTnp pou, where ¢uteia is used apparently for the first time in existing literature as the equivalent of the classical Greek gu7réy or gdrevya. It naturally means ‘a planting.’ The idea goes back to the Old Testament. Judah was ‘the plant’ of God’s delight, Isa. v. 7. This thought is adopted by the Enochic writers and
ghoreloped t in various directions. Thus Israel is ‘the plant o ighteousness’ (Eth. En. xciii. 5), ‘the plant of Uprightness’ Cet En. xclii, 2), &c. See my edition of Enoch, x. 16 note. The writer in the text has taken over this idex trom, Fudaisin and applied it naturally to the Christi an Church. _Itis only, — therefore;-in-point of diction and not of thought | that our text is dependent on Matt. xv. 13; for there the phrase is applied to Siero pera eerste
The Twelve Apostles. St. Paul is not included in the Twelve by this writer, though the doctrine of the resurrection taught in iv. 16-17 is certainly derived from 2 Cor. v. See note on iii. 17.
Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands. The Greek is peculiar, 7av dudena . . . rails xepolv abrov mapadotycera. The missing word of three letters I have supplied by eis in the Greek text, p. 95. Thus we have ray dwdexa els. From E, however, we should expect é# ray Sddexa (cf. Acts xxi. 8 dvros tx trav énra
have planted. Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands. 4. This ruler in the form of that king will come and there will come with him all the powers of this world, and they will hearken unto him in all that he desires. 5. And at his word the sun will rise at night and he will
and Rey. xxii. 11 é« TOv énrd = ‘one of the seven’). This idiom is found in Ethiopic, though not so frequently as in Hebrew.
Of the Twelve one will be delivered up. It is probable that it is St. Peter whose martyrdom is referred to here. The reference can only be to St. Peter or St. Paul; for the martyrdom took place under Nero. That it is St. Peter rather than St. Paul appears to follow from the inference drawn on iii. 17 that our writer does not include St. Paul in the number of the Twelve. I am not aware of any writer who does so till half a century later.
4. This ruler. MSS. ad add ‘ Berial’ against c and Greek.
With him all the powers of this world. In Rev. xx. 7-9 Satan assembles the nations from the four corners of the earth to attack the camp of the saints and the holy city. A closer parallel is to be found in Rev. xvi. 14, where the kings of the whole world are gathered together ‘unto the war of the great day of God.’ This expectation that all the kings and nations of the earth should combine against Israel goes back as far as Ezekiel xxxviii. 2—xxxix. 16. See also Zech. xiv. 2sq.; Eth. Christian writers this expectation was transformed so that the assault of the world powers was conceived as directed against the young Christian Church.
5. The sun will rise at night and he will make the moon to appear at the sixth hour, Similar portents are attributed to the Beliar Antichrist in Sibyll. Or. iii. 64-66, which may be a contemporary work of a Hellenistic Jew. It is quoted on p. lxviii of the Introduction. The same idea as one of the signs of the end of the world is reproduced by the author of 4 Ezra v. 4 ‘Si autem tibi dederit altissimus vivere, et videbis post tertiam turbatam,
Et relucescet subito sol noctu Et luna interdie.’ The Antichrist will make fire come down from heaven (Rev.
make the moon to appear at the sixth hour. 6. And all that he hath desired he will do in the world: he will do and speak like the Beloved and he will say: ‘I am God and before me there has been none.’ 7. And all the people in the world will believe in him. 8. And they will sacrifice to him and they will serve him saying: ‘This is God and beside him there is no other.’ g. And the greater
xiii. 13), and perform signs and lying wonders (Rev. xiii. 14, xix. 20; 2 Thess. ii.9). For later Christian references to such magical wonders of the Antichrist see Bousset’s Antichrist Legend, 175 sqq.
6. He will do and speak like the Beloved. So ac. b reads ‘He will make himself like to the Beloved.’ The Antichrist is the caricature of Christ. Like Him he is to have his advent and his manifestation and to be a worker of miracles: and as Christ is at the head of the kingdom of God, so he is supreme over the kingdom of evil.
I am God and before me there has been none. See iv. 8, x. 13. Cf. 2 Thess. ii. 4 where the Antichrist ‘exalteth himself above all that is called God . .. setting himself forth as God.’ In Sibyll. Or. v. 33, 34 (=xii. 85, 86) it is said of Nero redivivus: ez’ dvaxdppe | icdfov OG airév. This no doubt is the blasphemy on the part of the Neronic Antichrist mentioned in Rev. xiii. 5, 6: ‘And there was given to him a mouth speaking great ' things and blasphemies, and he opened his mouth for blasphemy against God.’ The impious claims of Caligula were never forgotten by the Jews. Philo writes (Leg. ad Caium, ii. 569) 6 Tdios éaurdv éferupucey ob éyav pdvoy, dAAd Kal oldpevos elvat Beds. The claims of the Caesars are most probably answerable for this particular feature in the Antichrist Legend. Domitian went to still greater lengths in this direction, Suetonius, Domit. 13 ‘Dominus et Deus noster hoe fieri iubet. Unde institutum posthac, ut ne scripto quidem ac sermone cuiusquam appellaretur aliter.’
9. This deceiving of the faithful is attributed to false Christs in Matt. xxiv. 24; Mark xiii.22. Only those who were faithless in their lives according to 2 Thess. ii. 10-12 should succumb to the deceits of the Antichrist.
number of those who shall have been associated together in order to receive the Beloved, he will turn aside after him. io. And there will be the power of his miracles in every city and region. 11, And he will set up his image before him in every city. 12. And he shall bear sway three
Associated . . . to receive the Beloved. Thus the Christians had organizations designed to keep them ready for the Parusia.
Io, See verse 5. The lying wonders spoken of here contain an allusion probably to the trickery of the priesthood devoted to the worship of the emperors throughout the cities of the East,
II. Set up his image before him in every city. In Rev. xiii. 14 the false prophet commanded those ‘that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, who hath the stroke of the sword and lived, i.e. Nero redivivus. In both these passages the image is set up with a view to the divine worship of the Antichrist. The historical ground for such an expectation is furnished by the command of Caligula that his statue should be placed in the temple and sacrifices offered to it. See Philo, De Leg. ad Caium, §§ 44 sqq.; Josephus, Ant. xviii. 8. 2. Images of the Roman emperors were erected in various cities of the East, and to these divine honours were paid. Caligula ordered Petronius, the Governor of Syria, to compel the Jews to join in the worship paid to him by the other provinces of the empire. The attempt to enforce such worship in the synagogues of Alexandria, though carried out at the cost of much bloodshed, failed finally, and the altar raised at Jamnia to the emperor was actually razed to the ground. This defiance of the imperial authority led to the above-mentioned orders of Caligula for the erection of his statue in Jerusalem,
12. Three years and seven months and twenty-seven days. Computed according to the Julian reckoning this period amounts, as Liicke (Einleitung in die Offenbarung, ii. 285) has pointed out, to 1335 days, the actual number found in Dan. xii. 12 and adopted therefrom by our writer. This period points back to the ‘time and times and half a time’ in Dan. vii. 25; xii. 7; Rev. xii. 14, in other words three and a half years. The same period is
years and seven months and twenty-seven days. 13. And many believers’ and saints having seen
otherwise described as forty-two months in Rev. xi. 2, xiii. 5, or as twelve hundred and sixty days in Rev. xi. 3, xii. 6, in which case the month is reckoned at thirty days, or as 1290 days in Dan. xii. 11 and the Arajxn ’E{exiov (see Clemen in
The above three and a half years has a special significance in apocalyptic literature as the period of the reign of Antichrist, or the period of the last and worst woes; cf. Rev. xiii. 5, xii. 6,14. Itis referred to as ‘the times of the Gentiles’ in Luke xxi. 24, which belongs to the interpolated Jewish Apocalypse. This apocalyptic period has affected also Luke iv. 25 and James v. 17. For though the famine in Elijah’s time lasted, according to 1 Kings xviii. 1, three years, it is said in Luke iv. 25 and James v. 17 to have lasted three anda half years. The same period is mentioned in 4 Ezrav. 4 ‘Thou wilt see it (the Roman Empire) troubled after the third (time).’ The Latin is ‘ post tertiam’ which =yerd tiv tpirnv. With this we should understand dpay rather than 7pépay as Blass.
This verse is reproduced in Cedrenus (ed. Bonn. i. 120-121) : ey 7H SiadnKn "ECextov Bacidéas “Iovéa Aéyer ‘Hoalas 6 mpophrys kparioa tov dyrixpioroy ern > Kat phvas éwrd, ywopeva hpépas agg’, wai pera 7d Tov dvtixpioroy BAnOfvar év TG Taprapy, édciv tov Sdeondrny rav Srov Xpicrdv roy Gedy Hydv, yevéobac Be nal dvdoraow kat dytandéiocw xaddv re kal xaxdv. Two difficulties present themselves here. The first concerns the name which Cedrenus assigns to our book, the Testament of Hezekiah, though attributing the Vision to Isaiah. The name we take to be rightly transmitted, see pp. xiii-xiv. 2 note.. The attribution of the words recorded to Isaiah may refer to Isaiah’s interpretation of Hezekiah’s Vision or may be a mere error of Cedrenus. The statements made in i. 2, 4 undoubtedly convey the idea that the book relates to the visions of Hezekiah. See note on i. 2.
The second difficulty has to do with the number 1290. This number is not found elsewhere with a like meaning except in Dan. xii. 11. I cannot discover any satisfactory solution of this difficulty, nor yet which of the two authorities has preserved the number correctly.
13. Dillmann renders differently ; ‘Et multi(quidem erunt)
Him for whom they were hoping, who was crucified, Jesus the Lord Christ, [after that I, Isaiah, had seen Him who was crucified and ascended]
fideles et sancti quum viderunt eum quem ipsi sperabant.. . et credentes quoque in eum—ex iis pauci, &c.’ Thistranslation appears to be doubly erroneous. It is against the sense of the context and against the grammar. It is against the context ; for this recounts the triumphs of the Antichrist at the close of the Christian era and not the conversion of men to Christianity who had personally seen Christ. Hence the words which Dillmann adds ‘quidem erunt’ are to be rejected. But even if he were right, the text would be senselessly tautological. The thought of ‘credentes in eum’ is already given by ‘fideles.’ It is against the grammar ; for the literal rendering of the Ethiopic should be not ‘et credentes quoque in eum’ but ‘et ii quoque qui eredebant in eum.’ The equivalent of ‘quoque’ in the Ethiopic is a particle, and is suffixed to the relative and not to the verb. In other words we have here a second class, distinct from that just mentioned. The first is composed of believers who had seen Christ, the second of believers who had not. To this question we shall return presently.
The words ‘And many believers and saints... believers in Him’ represent a nominativus pendens in E, which reflects in all likelihood a similar phenomenon in G; for in the Greek Legend, which was built on the Greek of the Ascension, this anomaly is found in the following passages: ii. 1; iii. 11, 19. Hence we may restore the Greek as follows: xal woAAol pey morot kai boro iddyres els dv adrol FAm ov Tov oravpwHévra Incovv rov Kupioy Xpiorov [pera 76 eve ‘Hoalay ideiy abrdv tov cravpabévra xat dvaBavra), of 8¢ cat morevorres eis abrév—dAlyor & abr&v, K.7.A.
We see that two classes of the faithful are discriminated in this verse; believers who had seen Christ personally and believers who had not. That this distinction was afamiliar one in the first century of our era is clear from the New Testament.
Thus in St. John xx. 29, ‘Because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed : blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed’; and 1 Pet. i. 8, ‘whom not having seen ye love.’ A kindred thought appears in St. Luke x. 23, ‘ Blessed are the eyes which see the things which ye see; for I say
and those also who were believers in Him—of these few in those days will be left as His servants,
unto you, that many prophets and kings desired to see the things which ye see and saw them not.’
Of the above two classes our text declares that few will be left. We have therefore, here, a guide to the date of this section of the book. Though somewhat vague, it is sufficiently definite to enable us to conclude that the author cannot have written later than 100 a.p, Eusebius (H. £. iii. 32. 8) holds that with the martyrdom of Simeon, bishop of Jerusalem, the last of those who had seen and heard Christ had passed away. (mapednAdvda re % yeved éxeivy Tov abrais dxoais THs évOéou copias émaxotca Karynfiwpévov.) Simeon’s death, which took place under Trajan (H. £. iii. 32. 3 éi Tpaiavod Kaicapos), has been assigned to various years between 102 and 110 A.D. Hence only a few, as our text has it, of those who had been personal followers of Christ could have been living between 90 and too a.p. Another passage in Eusebius (H. £. iii. 39. 4, 7) should be adduced here as bearing on the present question. In this passage Papias, who is quoted by Eusebius, claims to have met two men, Aristion and John the Elder, who had been personal followers of our Lord. Papias was bishop of Hierapolis in the first half of the second century. His book (Aoyiow kuptaxdv éfnyqoes) may be set down to the third or fourth decade in that century; that his meeting with John and Aristion was in the first we may reasonably infer if we combine this passage of Papias with that quoted above.
Thus we conclude that our text points to 100 a.p. as the terminus ad quem. We have elsewhere seen that the form of the Antichrist myth attested in the text could hardly have arisen earlier than 884.p. Hence the composition of the above section goes back to 88-100 A.D.
We must deal now with individual points of interpretation in this verse.
For whom they were hoping. See second note oniii.g. For this idea compare Luke ii. 25, where Simeon is described as ‘ waiting for the consolation of Israel’; also 1 Tim. i. 1, ‘ Christ Jesus our hope’; Col. i. 27; Ignatius, Magn. 11. In St. John v. 45 we have an exact parallel in diction, Mwajjs, eis dv bpeis jAmixare.
[After that I, Isaiah ... who was crucified and ascended]. This
while they flee from desert to desert, awaiting the coming of the Beloved. 14. And after (one thousand) three hundred and thirty-two days the Lord
awkward clause is an editorial addition made to adapt the Testament of Hezekiah to its present context.
Few will be left. Cf St. Luke xviii. 8, ‘when the Son of man cometh, shall he find the faith on the earth ?’
Flee from desert to desert. This flight of believers before the Antichrist is a familiar feature in Jewish Apocalypses. Thus this flight is enjoined in the Jewish Apocalypse interpolated in Mark xiii. 14-16, ‘ when ye see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not (i.e. the Antichrist) . . . letthem that are in Judaea flee unto the mountains,’ &c. In Rev. xii. 14 it is said that the stay of believers in the wilderness, whither they had fled (xii. 6) would be for ‘a time and times and half a time,’ that is for three and a half years, the period during which Antichrist should be supreme, as we have already seen. For references in later Christian writers to this subject see Bousset, Antichrist Legend, pp. 212-217.
For instances of such flights to the desert owing to persecutions
Awaiting the ing of the Beloved = dmexbeydpevor THy mapovolay i, ro.
There is thus in this verse no occasion for resorting to heroic measures with Bousset (Antichrist Legend, p. 138), who proposes to excise ‘who was crucified, Jesus the Lord Christ... His servants while they,’ to insert a negative before ‘were hoping.’ The text would in this case contain a reference to the Antichrist ; ‘And many believers and saints having seen him for whom they were (not) hoping will flee from desert,’ &e«. Such a eryptic reference to the Antichrist as the personage ‘for whom they were not hoping,’ after such a lengthy and explicit account as precedes would indeed be an anti-climax. The whole context is against Bousset’s proposal.
14. It will be observed that the text reads merely ‘three hundred and thirty-two days.’ I have with Liicke, Gfrérer,
will come with His angels and with the armies of the holy ones from the seventh heavén with the glory of the seventh heaven, and He will drag Beliar into Gehenna and also his armies. 15. And He will give rest to the godly whom He shall find
and Dillmann inserted ‘one thousand.’ Dillmann is probably right in regarding ‘two’ as an Ethiopic corruption of ‘ five.’ The text would then agree with iv. 12.
The Lord will come with His angels and with the armies of the holy ones from the seventh heaven. Of. 2 Thess. 1. 7, ‘At the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with the angels of His power.’
Drag Beliar into Gehenna. In Rev. xix. 20 the two forms of the Antichrist are cast into the lake of fire = Gehenna. Cf. Apoc. Bar. xl. 2, where the Antichrist is slain by the hands of the Messiah ; 2 Thess. ii. 8, where he is slain by the word of Christ. Destruction (amwAcia)is the destination of the Neronic Antichrist,
15-17. The first resurrection.
15. Give rest to the godly. So also in 2 Thess. i. 6, 7, ‘If so be that it is a righteous thing with God to recompense those that afflict you with affliction and you that are afflicted with rest at the revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ from heaven’ (dvramodotvat ».. bpiv rots OAtBopévors dveow). This rest, which is connected with the parusia, is synonymous with ‘the times of refreshing’ which are to ‘come from the presence of the Lord,’ Acts iii. 19 (Saws Av ZAOwor Keupot dvayitews dnd mpoodrov Tod Kupiov). Cf. also
Whom He shall find in the body. Cf. 1 Thess. iv. 17, ‘Then we that are alive that are left shall be caught up together with them in the clouds.’ In earlier literature a special blessing is pronounced on those who survive the coming of the kingdom. Dan. xii. 12; Sibyll. Or. iii. 371 © paxapiords, éxeivoy bs és ypdvov éocera: avnp (so most though not the best MSS.) ; Pss. Sol. xvii. 50 paxdpior of yvdpevor év tais Hpépats éxelvas. But according to certain writers those who were to participate in this blessing must be found in Palestine on the advent of the kingdom. See my note on xxix. 2 of the Apocalypse of Baruch, The idea goes back to Joel ii. 32.
D
in the body in this world, [and the sun will be ashamed]: 16. And to all who because of (their) faith in Him have execrated Beliar and his kings. But the saints will come with the Lord with their garments which are (now) stored up on high in the seventh heaven: with the Lord they will come, whose spirits are clothed, they will descend
[And the sun will be ashamed]. Though these words are not found in the chief MSS. of the LXX which presuppose a different text to the Massoretic, they are in one uncial and seventeen cursives, which add them after the ordinary text of the LXX according to Parsons and Holmes’ edition. Since the Ethiopic version of Isaiah xxiv. 23 agrees exactly with the LXX, the interpolation is not due to an Ethiopic scribe, but was made in the Greek text.
16. Beliar and his kings, Have we here a reminiscence of the intermediate stage of the Neronic myth which is partially preserved in Rev. xvii? See Rev. xvii. 12-13 : also Introduction, pp. lx-Ixi.
The saints will come with the Lord. Cf. 1 Thess. iii, 13, ‘At the coming of our Lord Jesus with all His saints’ : iv. 14, ‘Even so them that are fallen asleep in Jesus will God bring with Him.’
With their garments which are stored up on high in the seventh heaven. This idea goes back to 2 Oor. v. 1, ‘If the earthly house of our tabernacle be dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.’ In the Slavonic Enoch xxii. 8-10, the garments of the blessed are said to be composed of God’s glory. They are ‘ garments of life,’ Eth. En. the next place since according to the Ascension of Isaiah the final abode of the blessed is heaven, the spiritual bodies, or garments of the faithful, are said to be already there.
Whose spirits are clothed. Only the righteous shall have spiritual bodies. This is the Pauline doctrine : see my Eschatology, pp. 390 sqq. It is to be observed further that as their spirits are already clothed (see also ix. 9, where the departed righteous are represented as already vestured in these garments or
and be present in the world, and He will strengthen those, who have been found in the body, together with the saints, in the ¢ garments of the-saints, and the Lord will minister to those who have kept watch in this world. 17. And afterwards they will turn themselves upward in their garments, and their body will be left in the world. 18. Then
spiritual bodies), they have in reality already attained to the resurrection. This is also the later Pauline teaching: see above-quoted work, pp. 395, 399 sqq-
Will descend and be present in the world. This view is contrary to all the teaching of the New Testament, save of Rev. xx. 1-6; for it implies a stay, whether long or short, on earth of the saints who have descended from heaven with Christ. There is no reference to this event in vi.-xi. Apparently a feast is to be celebrated ; for it is said that Christ will minister to the faithful.
He will strengthen those, who have been found in the body... in the garments of the saints. If the text is right, it may be best taken as follows : ‘He will strengthen those who have been found in the body together with the saints (who are) in the garments of the saints’; i.e. He will bless together the living saints who are on earth, and the departed and glorified saints who have come down from heaven. But the text maybe corrupt. Thus the clause ‘those who have been found in the body’ is misleading if taken by itself. It is not ‘the living’ that will be blessed, but ‘the living saints.’ Hence omit ‘ together with’ before ‘the saints,’ and read ‘the saints who have been found in the body.’ But again the verb ‘will strengthen’ seems wrong. It = éuoxdoa, which may be a corruption of évvce: or émevdtces, Then we should have: ‘He will clothe the saints who have heen found-in.the. body, Sith. the e garments of the Saints,” ar ee
The Lord will minister to those who have kept wat watch, che dc. From Luke xii. 37. Our text does not agree with the Ethiopic version of Luke. The words ‘minister’ and ‘ kept watch’ go back to the Luean Saxovqce and ypryopotvras.
17. The words ‘and their body will be left in the world’ show that this verse does not refer to the saints that had accompanied the Lord, but to the saints ‘who had been found
the voice of the Beloved will inwrath rebuke the things of heaven and the things of earth and the mountains and the hills and the cities and the desert and the forests and the angel of the sun and that of the moon, and all things wherein Beliar manifested himself and acted openly in this world, and there will be [a resurrection and] a judgement
in the body.’ The awkwardness of the clause ‘ will turn themselves upward’ belongs to the text. It could also be translated ‘will return above’; but this could not be said of those who had not yet been above, Or again, if instead of AQ(\; ‘ above’ we read HAOA« ‘from above,’ as in ix. 9, the first half of the sentence could be rendered: ‘And afterwards they will be transformed in their garments from above.’ With this we might compare Phil. iii. 21, ‘who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation that it may be conformed tothe body of His glory’: also 1 Cor. xv. 52, 53, ‘We shall all be changed ... for this corruptible must put on incorruption.’
18. Angel of the sun. Cf. Rev. xix. 17, ‘An angel standing in the sun.’ See Eth. En. lx. ra-21, on the angels or spirits of the thunder, hoar-frost, mist, rain, &c. : Ixxv, xxx, on the angels of the stars. Also Rev. vii. 1, 2, on the angels of the winds; xiv. 18, the angel of fire ; Jubilees, ii, on the angels fire, hail, hoar-frost, thunder, &c.
That of the moon. So be. a reads ‘the moon.’
Beliar manifested himself. The Antichrist reveals or manifests himself (2 Thess. ii. 3) just as the Christ.
The second resurrection and the judgement of the wicked.
There will be [a resurrection and] a judgement in their midst. This statement, if genuine, is peculiar. It seems to identify the resurrection with the raising of wicked men to judgement. The righteous dead have already been raised; for they accompanied the Lord at His parusia, iv. 14-16: the living righteous have been transformed and removed from this world, iv. 15-17. Accordingly, if the text is authentic, there is taught in iv. 14-17 a resurrection to life in which only the righteous have part, and in iv. 18 a resurrection to condemnation which does not take place till all the risen and glorified
in their midst in those days, and the Beloved will cause fire to go forth from Him, and it will consume all the godless, and they will be as though they had not been created. 19. And the rest of iy, 19-v. 14 the words of the vision is written in the vision ~ditorial ~ addition. of Babylon. 20. And the rest of the vision regarding the Lord, behold, it is written in the parables according to my words which are written in the book which I publicly prophesied. 21. And the descent of the Beloved into Sheol, behold, it is
righteous have been raised to heaven. Such a view of the first and second resurrections would be unique. It does not agree with Rev. xx. 4, 11-13, the only passage where these two resurrections are mentioned in the New Testament. For in Revelation the first resurrection is that in which only the martyrs participate, and the second is the general resurrection, in which the rest of the departed righteous and all the wicked dead are raised to judgement. Nor does it harmonize with the interpolated (?) verses in John v. 28-29, where the general resurrection is spoken of as a resurrection of life to the righteous, and a resurrection of judgement to the wicked. Nor, again, does it agree with the Pauline doctrine of the resurrection, though the writer has undoubtedly assimilated some of the chief elements of that doctrine, as we have seen above. I have therefore bracketed the words ‘a resurrection and.’ The text then would deal only with the judgement of the wicked.
Will cause fire to go forth, &c. Cf. 2 Thess. i. 8, ii. 8; Is. xi. 4; 4 Ezra xii. 33, xiii. 38, 49: see my Apoc. Baruch xxix, 3, note. The Ethiopic is literally ‘will cause fire to ascend.’ I have taken it to be an awkward rendering of dvjce nip.
As though they had not been created. From Job x. 19 (Dillmann),. The text seems to teach annihilation.
19. The vision of Babylon. Of. Isa. xiii. 1 (LXX) Spacis jy eldev *Hoalas vids ’Apds xara BaBvAdvos.
2x. The descent of the Reloved into Sheol... is written in the section, where the Lord says: ‘Behold, my Son will understand.’
written in the section, where the Lord says: ‘Behold, my Son will understand.’ And all these things, behold they are written [in the Psalms] in the parables of David, the son of Jesse, and in the Proverbs of Solomon his son, and in the words of Korah, and Ethan the Israelite, and in the words of Asaph, and in the rest of the Psalms also which the angel of the Spirit inspired, 22. (Namely) in those which have not the name written,
This quotation is taken from Isa. lii. 13, where the LXX has "180d ouvfioe 6 mais pov. Tais has been rendered ‘son’ by the Ethiopie translator. It is hard to recognize in Isa. lii. 13-liii. any reference to his Descent in Hades. Perhaps it isin the LXX of liii, 8 dwd tév dvopi@v. Tod Aaod pou HxOn cis Odvarov. The last three words imply myab 22, which Cheyne accepts as the original text over against. the Mass. 105 you. The LXX phrase may have been interpreted in this way by early Christians.
[in the Psalms] in the parables. ‘In the Psalms’ may be regarded as an explanatory marginal gloss on ‘in the parables’ (& rais napaBodais), which was subsequently incorporated in the text ; mapaBorn goes back of course to wD and must bear in such cases the meaning of the latter. In the present instance ‘parable’ ( wD) means ‘song’ or ‘poem,’ as in Pss, xlix. 4 ; Ixxviii. 2; Job xxvii. 1; xxix. 1.
Dillmann, on the other hand, takes the words ‘in the Psalms’ as a general title embracing ‘the parables of David’ and ‘the proverbs of Solomon.’
Ethan, the Israelite. Here the text shows dependence on the LXX. See titles of Pss. lxxxviii. and lxxxix, where Ethan is called 7 "IopanAciry ; and 1 Kings iv. 27, where he is surnamed tov "ECpanhirny (A, Zapeirnv B).
Inspired literally = caused to speak,
22. In those which have not the name written. I.e. the Psalms to which no author’s name is prefixed. For ‘in those’ (bc), a reads ‘and in those.’
and in the words of my father Amos, and of Hosea the prophet, and of Micah and Joel and Nahum and Jonah and Obadiah and Habakkuk and Haggai and Zephaniah and Zechariah and Malachi, and
in the words of Joseph the Just and in the words of Daniel.
My father Amos. See note on i. 2.
Amos, and of Hosea, dc. We have here a list of the twelve Minor Prophets, The order in which they are enumerated is neither that of the Hebrew nor of the LXX, but comes nearer to the latter. The list of these prophets in 4 Ezra i. 39, 40 follows the order of the LXX. It is remarkable that there is no mention of Isaiah and Jeremiah in our text. The prophecies of the former, it is true, have been referred to elsewhere (see iii, 31, iv. 19, vi. 1), and as the writer claims to be Isaiah, such an omission may seem natural. The same peculiar phenomena, however (as Nitzsch has remarked), are attested by 4 Ezra i. 39, 40, where not only are Isaiah and Jeremiah omitted but also Daniel.
Words of Joseph the Just. This book is probably with Dillmann to be identified with the pseudepigraph Ipocevx?) rod Iwanp (see Fabricius, Cod. Pseud. V. T. i. pp. 761-769; Schiirer, Gesch. d. Jiidischen Volkes, iii. 265, 266). It appears on several lists of extra-canonical books and is said to have consisted of 1100 o7rixor. Marshall (Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, ii. 778) has drawn attention to its antichristian character. The only existing fragments of this work, for the preservation of which we are indebted almost exclusively to the writings of Origen, clearly betray this animus. See In Joan. tom. ii. c. 25 (Lommatsch, i. 147, 148), Fragm. Comment. in Genes. tom. iii. ¢. 9 (Lommaitsch, viii. 30, 31) Philocalia, ¢. 23 (Lommatsch, xxv. 223, 224), In all these passages it is not Joseph, however, but Jacob who is the speaker. Jacob claims in these to be ‘an angel of God,’ ‘the first servant in God’s presence’ (6 év mpoawmg Set Aerroupyos mpHTos), whereas the angel who wrestled with Jacob and who was identified by Christians with the Messiah was only eighth in rank. But, most remarkable of all, Jacob declares himself to be the ‘first-begotten of every creature animated by God’ (mpwréyovos mavrds (wou (wov-
Martyrdom of Isaiah =v.
v. 1. On account of these visions, therefore, Beliar was wroth with Isaiah, and he dwelt in the heart of Manasseh and he sawed him in sunder with a wooden saw. 2. And when Isaiah was being sawn in sunder Balchira stood up, accusing him, and all the false prophets stood up, laughing: and rejoicing because of Isaiah. 3. And Balchira, with the aid of Mechémbéchtis, stood up ‘before Isaiah, [laughing] deriding; 4. And Balchira said to Isaiah: ‘Say: “I have lied in all that I have spoken,
pévov b1d Geov). This phrase undoubtedly recalls Col. i. 15 mpuwrdétokes Taans erigews,
On the other hand, Nitzsch (Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1830, pp. 228, 229) thinks that the Joseph referred to in the text is Joshua the son of Josedek, mentioned in Sir. xlix. 12, or Joseph the husband of Mary, Matt. i. 19 (@v Siatos),
v. 1. And he sawed him in sunder. With these words the martyrdom of Isaiah is resumed which broke off at ii. 12.
3. Balchird, with the aid of Mechémbéchis. So allMSS. There is no asyndeton as Beer supposes. So Zohak acts with the aid of Ahriman. See Introd. pp. xlvii-xlviii. Dillmann emends into ‘Belchira and Mechémbéchis,’ because the verbs ‘stood up’ and ‘deriding,’ are in the plural. We must rather change the verbs into the singular. Balchira is the tool of Beliar, and is identified with him in verse 9. This identification appears also in Ambrose: see on verse 4. For Mechémbéchis see ii. 5.
[Laughing] deriding. ‘Laughing’ is a doublet: there is no copula in ab. It is added in the late MS. c.
4-8. Balchira (0. Beliar ac) tempts Isaiah.
4. Say: ‘I have lied in all that I have spoken.’ These words and | part of verse 8 are quoted (as Laurence, p. 148, discovered) in the Commentary of Ambrose on Ps. exviii (ed. Bened. vol. i. 1124): ‘Fertur prophetae cuidam, et plerique ferunt, quod Esaiae, in carcere posito, cum mole imminentis urgeretur exitii, dixisse diabolum; Dic quia non a Domino locutus es, quae dixisti, et omnium in te mentes affectusque mutabo, ut quiindignantur injuriam absolutionem in te conferant,’
CHAPTER V. I-II 41
and likewise the ways of Manasseh are good and right. 5. And the ways also of Balchiré and of his associates are good.”’ 6. And this he said to him when he began to be sawn in sunder. 7. But Isaiah was (absorbed) in a vision of the Lord, and though his eyes were open, he saw them (not). 8. And Balchira spake thus to Isaiah: ‘Say what I say unto thee and I will turn their heart, and I will compel Manasseh and the princes of Judah and the people and all Jerusalem to reverence thee. g. And Isaiah answered and said: ‘So far as I have utterance (I say): Damned and accursed be thou and all thy powers and all thy house. 10. For thou canst not take (from me) aught save the skin of my body.’ 11. And they seized and sawed in sunder Isaiah, the son of Amoz, with a wooden
7. Saw them (not). The negative must be supplied as in vi. Io.
8. Balchiré. So be. a ‘Milchirdés.’ See notes on ii. 12, v. 3. Balchira, the tool of Beliar, again proceeds to tempt Isaiah. See quotation from Ambrose in note on verse 4.
9. So far as I have utterance (I say): Damned and accursed. So b. ais secondary: ‘So faras I am concerned, accursed—that is to say—.’ The curse is directed against the false prophet as a man: hence ‘all thy house,’ and also against him as a plenipotentiary of Satan: hence ‘all thy powers.’ Both these aspects are recognized in the Greek Legend: nardOepd oo, Medxia pevdonpopijra, 5idBore.
11, With a wooden saw. Greek Legend, iii. 16 év mpiom fvdivy mpiobjva ai’rév. Hence the passage in Justin Mart. cum Tryph. CX. 14, 15 wept rdov Odvarov ‘Hoalov, dv mpion fvdivw éenpicare, is all but certainly derived from our text. Cf. also Tertullian, De Patientia, 14 ‘His patientiae viribus secatur Esaias et de domino non tacet’ ; also Scorpiace, 8; Ps.—Tertullian, Adv. Mare, iii. 177.
saw. 12. And Manasseh and Balchira and the false prophets and the princes and the people [and] all stood looking on. 13. And to the prophets who were with him he said before he had been sawn in sunder: ‘Go ye to the region of Tyre and Sidon; for for me only hath God mingled the cup.’ 14. And when Isaiah was being sawn in sunder, he neither cried aloud nor wept, but his lips spake with the Holy Spirit until he was sawn in twain.
v. 15, 16= 15. This Beliar did to Isaiah through Balchiraé and
oditerial Manasseh ; for Sammael was very wrathful against Isaiah from the days of Hezekiah, king of Judah, on account of the things which he had seen regarding the Beloved, 16. And on account of the destruction of Sammael, which he had seen through the Lord, while Hezekiah his father was still king. And he did according to the will of Satan.
Tur VISION WHICH ISAIAH THE SON OF AMOS SAY.
vi-xir-4o Vi. 1. In the twentieth year of the reign of bran Hezekiah, king of Judah, came Isaiah the son of Amoz, and Josab the son of Isaiah to Hezekiah to
For later references see Otto’s note on Justin Mart. cum Tryph. cXX. 15. On the legend see Introd., pp. xlv-xlix.
12. Balchiré. So bc. a reads Melachira. See note on ii. 12.
[And]. I have bracketed ‘and’ as it seems an intrusion.
13. The cup. On the meaning of the phrase cf. Matt. xx. 22,
14. Neither cried aloud nor wept. See quotation from Tertullian on the endurance of Isaiah in note on v. 11.
vi. Title. I have with S connected the words ‘in the twentieth year . . . king of Judah’ with what follows, rather than with what precedes as E and L’*,
CHAPTERS V. I2—VI. 5 43
Jerusalem "from Galgal4™ 2. And (having entered) he sat down on the couch of the king, "and they brought him a seat, but he would not sit (thereon)". 3. "And when Isaiah began to speak the words of faith and truth with King Hezekiah" all the princes of Israel were seated and the eunuchs and the councillors of the king. And there were there "forty" prophets and sons of the prophets: they had come from the villages and from the mountains and the plains when they had heard that Isaiah was coming from Galgalé to Hezekiah. 4. "And they had come"to salute him "and to hear his words. 5. And that he might place his hands upon them," and that they might prophesy and that he might
1. From Galgaléd. These words are supported by Greek Legend, i. 3, but omitted by S L?.
2. (Having entered). I have restored these words since they are found in Greek Legend, ii. 1, S and L’,
And they brought him a seat, but he would not sit (thereon). Though these words are omitted by SL’, they are no doubt genuine, since they have the support of the Greek Legend, i. 5, see p. 141. Isaiah chooses the couch of the king and not a stool orseat torecline on. Isit because he is going to have a vision?
3. And when Isaiah. So ab. c ‘And then.’
All the princes. MSS. insert ‘and’ before these words after a Semitic idiom; but if reading of « above is followed, the ‘and’ must be read.
Forty prophets. ‘Forty’ is omitted by S L’, but Greek Legend, i. 3, supports text.
Villages. I take the Ethiopic to be a rendering of «dupa in accordance with S L?.
Galgaié. On the various forms of this proper name see Critical Notes, 8, 12, 17, p. ror.
4, 5. These verses are very much curtailed in S L?.
That they might prophesy and that he might hear their prophecy. This reading of ac is supported by SL’: ‘annunciare ei
hear their prophecy: "and they were all before Isaiah." 6. And when Isaiah was speaking "to Hezekiah" the words of truth and faith, they all heard ta door which one had opened and f the voice of the Holy Spirit. 7. And the king summoned all the prophets and all the people who were found there, and they came. And Micaiah and the aged Ananias and Joel "and Josab" sat on his right hand (and‘on the left), 8. And it came to pass when they had all heard the voice of the Holy Spirit, they all worshipped on their knees, and glorified the God Tof truth", the Most High "who is in the upper world and who sits on High the Holy One and" who rests among His holy ones. g. "And they gave glory to Him™+ who had thus bestowed a door in an alien
quae ventura erant.’ 0’s text is therefore secondary: ‘that he might prophesy, that they might hear his prophecy.’
6. A door which one had opened. According to verse 9, this door is in the world. Hence Liicke’s idea that it is in heaven— as in Rev. iv. r:—seems to be wrong. E seemscorrupt. See note on verse 9, S runs: ‘ When he was speaking [all] the words of truth, the Holy Spirit came upon him and all heard and saw the words of the Holy Spirit.’ L? is practically the same, see
q. And they came. b omits, but SL? support a.
Aged. LI? and S connect this adjective also with Micaiah.
And Josab. Omitted by S L*.
(And on the left), Added from 8; cf. L*.
8. The Most High... who rests among His holy ones. So LXX of Isa. lvii. 15 "Yynoros év dyiow dvanavépevos. The words that immediately precede in’ the LXX may have been in the mind of the writer: 6 tiioros éy ipndois xaroumdy tov aidva* dytos év dyios dvopa aitG. See on x. 6.
9. Who had thus bestowed... onaman. Text corrupt. Read
world, had bestowed (it) on a mant. 10. And as he was speaking in the Holy Spirit in the hearing of all, he became silent "and his mind was taken up from him™ and he saw not the men that stood before him, 11. Though his eyes indeed were open. Moreover his lips were silent "and the mind in his body was taken up from him.” 12. But his breath was in him; "for he was seeing a vision, 13. And the angel who was sent to make him see was not of this firmament, nor was he of the angels of glory of this world, but he had come from the seventh heaven." 14. And the people who stood near did (not) think, but jthe circle of the prophets (did)}, that the holy Isaiah had been taken up.
‘who had bestowed such an excellence of words on a man in the world.’ See Critical Note.
10. And his mind was taken up from him. Omitted by SL*. The passage however is genuine. It was before the writer of the Greek Legend, i. 14 7p0n 6 &taroyopes abrov.
Saw not. See v. 7.
11. And the mind... from him. This is practically a repetition of the clause in verse 10. Though S L’ omit, it is probably genuine ; for the three versions contain the repetition : ‘he became silent’ (verse 10), ‘his lips were silent’ (verse 11).
12. His breath was in him. L? gives: ‘inspiratio sancti spiritus erat cum illo.’ So S but that it omits sancti. But the Greek Legend, ii. 2, supports our text and rendering. It reproduces this clause: fv év airé éuptonpa (whs. “Eupionpya is used by Symmachus in Job xxxvii. ro to render now. The text of L? is secondary. It is an explanatory gloss on the other meaning of éuptonpa =‘ inspiration.’
14. The people... did (not) think. Negative is restored in accordance with S L?.
+ The circle... (didyt. Read with SL’: ‘the prophets recognized.’
15. And the vision which the holy Isaiah saw was not from this world but from the world which is hidden. from the flesh. 16. And after Isaiah had seen this vision, he narrated it to Hezekiah, and to Josab his son "and to the other prophets who had come. 17. But the leaders and the eunuchs and the people did not hear, but only Samna the scribe, and + {jéaqém, and + Asaph the recorder; for these also were doers of righteousness, and the + sweet smellt of the Spirit was upon them. But the people had not heard; for Micaiah and Josab his son had caused them to go forth, when the wisdom of this world had been taken from him and he became as one dead.
Had been taken up. E gives ‘had been taken away.’ By, changing the vocalization of one letter we get the proper sense which is attested by SL’.
15. The flesh, E, which I have rendered idiomatically ‘the flesh’ means more usually ‘his flesh.’ S$ L? give ‘all flesh,’
16. Andafter Isaiah had seen this vision. Morefully inSL?*. See inloc.
Josab his son. From these words to their recurrence in vii. 1, SL’ are wanting through homoioteleuton.
17. Samna. See note oni. 5.
Ejéagém, that is Joaqem or Joachim. Is this Joah (MN) LXX ‘Iwax) the son of Asaph mentioned in Isa. xxxvi.3? If so, we should emend the text and read: ‘Zjoaqém the son of Asaph.’ Dillmann identifies him with Eliakim mentioned in the same passage, but the form of the word is slightly more in favour of the former view.
These also were doers of righteousness. According to be ‘These also had deeds of righteousness.’
The +sweet smell}. E here = eiwdia, which may be a corruption of edSoxia. The same corruption is found in the Greek MSS. of Ecclesiasticus xliii.26, Thus we should have: ‘The good pleasure of the Spirit was upon them,’ Or is edwiia corrupt for evodia ?
And he became. a omits,
CHAPTERS VI. 15—VII. 7 47
vii. 1. And the vision which Isaiah saw, he told to Hezekiah and Josab his son" and Micaiah and the rest of the prophets, (and) said: 2. * At this moment*, when I prophesied according to the (words) heard which ye heard, I saw a glorious angel not like unto the glory of the angels which I used always to see, but possessing such glory and tpositiont that I cannot.describe "the glory" of that angel’. 3. And having seized me by my hand * he raised me on high *, and I said unto him: ‘ Who art thou, and what is thy name, and whither art thou raising me on high? for strength was given me to speak with him.’ 4. And he said unto me: ‘When I have raised thee on high [through the (various) degrees| and made thee see the vision, on account of which I have been sent, then thou wilt understand who I am: but my name thou dost not know: 5. Because thou wilt return into this thy body, but whither I am raising thee on high, thou wilt see; "for for this purpose have I been sent.” 6. And I rejoiced because he spake courteously to me. 7. And he said unto me: ‘ Hast thou rejoiced
vii. 2, *At this moment*, Emended. See Critical Note. Text = ‘and this was.’
2. +Position+. E, which = function, administration or order (rafts), seems corrupt, How is this to be reconciled with the reading of the L?and S: which is ‘lumen’? L! has ‘sanctam (claritatem).’ See, however, Greek Legend, ii. 6.
3. * He raised me on high*. Emended. See Critical Note,
5. Whither. See verse 3. Land S have ‘ quando.’
For for this purpose have I been sent. Observe that L' has these words, though S L? omit them. :
7. This verse appears at much greater length in the S L’, but our text agrees with L',
because I have spoken courteously to thee?’ And he said: ‘And thou wilt see how a greater also than I am will speak courteously and peaceably with thee. 8, And +His Father also who is greater thou wilt see; for for this purpose have I been sent from the seventh heaven in order to explain all these things unto thee.’ 9. And we ascended to the firmament, I and he, and there I saw Sammael and his hosts, and there was great fighting therein and the *angels* of Satan were envying one another. zo, And as above so on the earth also; for the likeness of that which is in the firmament is here on the earth. 11. And I said unto the angel (who was with me): ‘(What is this war and) what is this envying?’ 12, And he said unto me: ‘So has it been since this world was made until now, and this war (will continue) till He, whom thou shalt see will come
Will speak. SL? = ‘wish to speak.’ Cf. note on verse 5.
8, +His Father also who is greatert. Corrupt. L'=eminentiorem ipsius majoris. So practically S save that it has a doublet. Hence read: ‘One more eminent than the greater Himself.’
9. The firmament, dc. See x. 29-31, where the domain of the evil angels embraces two provinces, the firmament and the air.
Sammael.and his hosts. So also Li, S L? agree in presenting a slightly different text, and apparently less original. These two versions together with Greek Legend, ii. 9, give Satan instead of Sammael. For the presence of evil beings in the heavens or on their outskirts see my edition of the Slavonic Enoch, Introd. pp. xxx-xlvii.
Angels*, E has ‘words’ =Adyot, which I take to be a corruption of dyyeAo, which is the reading presupposed by L',
11. (What is this war and). Supplied from Li, SL? = ‘What is this war and envying and battle?’ See x. 29.
12, So it has been since this world was made. S L’ avoid this state-
and destroy him. 13. And afterwards he caused me to ascend (to that which is) above the firmament: which is the (first) heaven. 14. And there I saw a throne in the midst, and on his right and on his left were angels. 15. "And (the angels on the left were) not like unto the angels who stood’ on the right", but those who stood on the right had the greater glory, and they all praised with one voice, "and there was a throne in the midst", and those who were on the left gave praise after them ;
Destroy him. Of. x. 12. S L? add ‘with the breath of His power.’
1g. (To that which is), Here we have exceptionally to follow L? § against E L', and insert these words.
(First). Omitted by L' E : inserted from L’ S.
14. A throne, i.v. an angel belonging to the order called ‘Thrones,’ @pévor, mentioned in Col. i. 16; Test. Lev. 3; and in vii. 15, 21, 27, viii. 8 and xi. 25 of our present text, and Greek Legend, ii. 40. So the text of E L', and Greek Legend, ii. 12, in the present passage. S L’ on the other hand, require the term to be construed in its ordinary sense; for they add ‘and on it there sat an angel in great glory.’ These words may belong to the original text; for they recur in vii. 19, 27, 29, 31, 33,
15. The angels on the right are superior to those on the left. Cf. vii. 29, 30, 33, 34. This difference prevails till the sixth heaven : see viii. 6-7.
(The angels on the left were). These words are supplied from L', L? S omit the words ‘ And (the angels on the left were) not like unto the angels who stood on the right.” The omission seems due to homoioteleuton.
And there was a throne in the midst. The throne here may be an angel as in the preceding verse. The entire clause is omitted by S L’, but L' supports our text,
And those who were on the left gave praise after them. Here E, which reads ‘and they praised him and those who were on the left after them,’ has inverted the order of the words.
E
but their voice was not such as the voice of those on the right, nor their praise like the praise of those. 16. And I asked the angel who conducted me, and I said unto him: ‘To whom is this praise sent?’ 17, And he said unto me: ‘(It is sent) to the praise of (Him who sitteth in) the seventh heaven: to Him + who rests in the holy world f, and to His Beloved, whence I have been sent to thee. [Thither is it sent.] 18. And again he made me to ascend to the second heaven. Now the height of that heaven is the same as from the heaven to the earth [and to the firmament]. 19. And (I saw there, as) in the first heaven, angels on the right and on the left, "and a throne in the midst, and the praise of the angels in the second
The true order is preserved in L' which I have followed in text. L' is here supported by S. LL? is corrupt.
17. To the praise of (Him who sitteth in) the seventh heaven. I have emended the text. See Critical Note 3, p. 107. See also vi, 8. The subject is revived in x. 2.
tWho rests in the holy world}. So a. 0b gives ‘who rests among the holy ones of the world.’ Both are certainly wrong. L' has ‘qui est perpetui saeculi.”’ L?S omit. The word ‘rests’ may have been borrowed from vi. 8, Lis here to be preferred. The original may have been 70d xaroxodvros Tov aidva = ‘who inhabiteth eternity.’ See Isa, lvii. 15 quoted on vi. 8.
18. Of that heaven. L'S omit ‘that,’ which is probably a rendering of the Greek Article, as is frequently the case, Better therefore render ‘of the heaven’ as in L' §,
(And to the firmament]. Though this phrase goes back to G, for it is found in L', I have bracketed it as it is against the sense and is omitted by L’ S.
19. (I saw there, as). Supplied from L! L? §.
19-20. And the praise of the angels ... in the second heaven. Though .L! is wanting from this verse forwards, our text has the support
heaven; and he who sat on the throne in the second heaven was more glorious than all (the rest)" 20, And there was great glory in the second heaven, and the praise also was not like the praise of those who were in the first heaven. 21. And I fell on my face to worship him, but the angel who conducted me did not permit me, but said unto me: ‘ Worship neither throne nor angel which belongs to the six heavens—for for this cause I was sent to conduct thee—until I tell thee "in the seventh heaven", 22. For above all the heavens and their angels has thy throne been placed, and thy garments and thy crown which thou shalt see.’ 23. And I rejoiced with great joy, that those who love the
of Greek Legend, ii, 14. On the words ‘ he who sat on the thronein the second heaven,’ see note on vii. 14. ar. I fell on my face to worship him. See Rev. xix. 10, xxii,
Worship neither throne nor angel. See vii. 14 note.
Which belongs to the six h s. L’, ‘ofthat heaven’: S, ‘from heaven.’
For for this cause. Text reads ‘whence.’ But since the angel is from the seventh heaven (cf. vi. 13, vii. 8, 27), this cannot be right. The right text is supplied by L? ‘ propter hoe,’ and S ‘nam propter hoc.’ All three renderings can be explained as equivalents of 8ev, as Dillmann conjectured.
Uniil I tell thee. The text could also be rendered, ‘except Him whom I tell thee of.’ This would agree with L’, ‘sed tantum quem ego dixero tibi.’ On the other hand, Greek Legend, ii. 22, appears to support the rendering given above.
22. § L? (see p. 109) are clearly inferior to Ein this verse. E alone gives the sense required by the next verse.
Thy throne. See viii. 26 note.
Thy garments. See iv. 16 note.
23. See the somewhat different version of S L’, p. 110.
Most High and His Beloved will afterwards ascend thither by the angel of the Holy Spirit. 24. And he raised me to the third heaven, and in like manner I saw those upon the right and upon the left, and there was a throne there in the midst; but the memorial of this world is there unheard of. 25. "And I said to the angel who was with me ;" for the glory of my 2 appearance was undergoing trans-_ formation as I ascended to each heaven in turn : ‘Nothing Tof the vanity" of that world is here named.’
26. And he answered me, and said unto me: ‘ Nothing is named on account of its weakness, and nothing is hidden there of what is done.’ 27." And I wished to learn how it is known, and he answered me saying: ‘When I have raised thee to the seventh heaven whence I was sent, to that which is above these, then thou shalt know that there is nothing hidden from the thrones and from those who dwell in the heavens and from the angels.” And the praise wherewith they praised and the glory of him who
24. There was a throne there in the midst. So b. ac add against b and L’S, ‘and one who sat.’
Memorial: practically =‘ name,’ as in Prov. x. 7, Eccles. ix. 5.
Is there unheard of: lit.‘is named.’ This sense of évopa{w is found in Eph. v. 3.
25-27. The more remote each heaven is from the earth, the smaller is the impression made upon it by the things of earth. Yet none of the things of earth can escape the knowledge of the inhabitants of the heavens.
25. Slightly different order in L?S.
Glory of my appearance. S L? ‘glory of my spirit.’
a7. SL’ are very defective here. Greek Legend, ii. 17, supports our text, See also ix. 19-23.
sat on the throne was great, "and the glory of the angels on the right hand and on the left was beyond that of the heaven which was below them™. 28. And again he raised me to the fourth heaven, and the height from the third to the fourth heaven was greater than from the earth to the firmament. 29. And there again I saw those who were on the right hand and those who were on the left, "and him who sat on the throne was in the midst", and there also they were praising. 30. And the praise and glory of the angels on the right was greater than that of those on the left. 31. And again the glory of him who sat on the throne was greater than that of the angels on the right, and their glory was beyond that of those who were below. 32. And he raised me to the fifth heaven. 33. And again I saw "those upon the right hand and on the left, and him who sat on the throne possessing greater glory than those of the fourth heaven". 34. And the glory of those on the right hand was greater than that of those "on the left [from the third to the fourth]. 35. And the glory
29. Him who sat on... midst. These words may be interpolated by a scribe who did not understand the technical meaning of ‘throne.’ See Greek Legend, ii. 18, also L’S.
29-30. Omitted by L? through homoioteleuton.
32. He raised me. SL?=‘TI ascended.’
32, 33. Cf. fragment of Zephaniah Apocalypse in Clem. Alex. Strom. v. 11. 77 «al dvédaBév pe mvedyua kat dvqveyrév pe eis obpavdy méuntov Kat ePedpouw dyyédous Kadoupévous xupious .. . ipvodvras Ody dppyrov tynorov.
g2-36. Very defective in SL’, verse 35 being wholly omitted.
34. [From the third to the fourth]. A disturbing gloss,
of him who was on the throne was greater than that of the angels on the right hand". 36. And their praise was more glorious than that of the fourth heaven. 37. "And I praised Him, who is not named and the Only-begotten" who dwelleth in the heavens, whose name is not known to any flesh, who has bestowed such glory on the several heavens, "and who makes great the glory of the angels, and more excellent the glory of Him who sitteth on the throne™.
viii. 1. And again he raised me into the air of the sixth heaven, and I saw such glory as I had not seen in the five heavens. 2. *For I saw* angels possessing great glory. 3. And the praise there was holy and wonderful. 4. And I said to the angel who conducted me: ‘ What is this which I see, my lord?’ 5. And he said: ‘Iam not thy
36. See Slav. En. evi 9, on the singing of the angels in the
fifth heaven.
37. SL’ give a widely divergent text from the above. See
Who is not named =dppyros. See quotation from Clem. Alex.
The Only-begotten. This phrase, though not here in SL’, is found in viii. 7 of S and viii. 25 of both S and L?. Our text
Such glory on the several heavens. L?S=‘such glory on the angels over the several heavens.’
viii. 1. Glory. SL*=‘ great glory.’
In the five heavens. SL?=‘in the fifth heaven.’
2. *For Isaw*. For this emendation under guidance of S and L’, see Critical Note. MSS. give ‘when I ascended’ and connect these words with verse 1. At the close of this verse S L? add an additional clause: see p. 113.
5. I am... thy fellow servant. The word rendered ‘fellow
CHAPTERS VII. 35—VIII. 9 35
lord, but thy fellow servant.’ "6, And again I asked him, and I said unto him: ‘Why are there not angelic fellow servants (on the left)?" 7. And he said: ‘From the sixth heaven there are no longer *angels* on the left, nor a throne set in the midst, but (they are directed) by the power of the seventh heaven, where dwelleth He that is not named "and the Elect One, whose name has not been made known, and none of the heavens can learn His name. 8. For it is He alone to whose voice all the heavens and thrones give answer. T have "therefore been empowered and" sent to raise thee here that thou mayest see this glory, 9. And that thou mayest see the Lord of all those heavens
servant’ more usually means ‘ companion,’ but occasionally it is a rendering of cdvdovAos (Matt. xviii. 28, 31) as here. Of. Greek Legend, ii. 11, where these words are found: obm éya Kiptos, dAAG odviovdds cou cipi. See Rev. xix. 10, xxii. 8, 9. j
6. Angelic fellow servants. Literally =‘ fellow servants of the angels.’ ;
q. *Angels*. See note 10, p. 113. MSS.=‘and upward.’
(They are directed). I have supplied these words under guidance of L?S. The former gives ‘ordinationem habent’; the latter =‘administrati sunt.’
Where dwelleth He that is not named 8nov éoriv 6 dppnros. This appears to be correct. L?S, which are corrupt, may in part be explained from it. S‘ubiest celeber ille’dzov éoriy 6 pyrés. L?‘ubi est dives.” ‘Dives’ may represent dp@ovos, corrupt for dppnytos (?). oa
And the Elect One. S =‘ et unigenitus filius ejus.’ L? has merely ‘filius Dei.’ The ‘unigenitus’ in S does not seem to be primitive, though the term occurs in vii, 37 of our text. See note
8. Thrones. S L? give ‘angels '—a general for a specific term.
g-10. See SL’, which omit 10 and give another turn to 9. Verse 10 anticipates what is recounted in x. 8 sqq.
' and these thrones, 10. "Undergoing (successive) / transformation until He resembles your form and
likeness? “11. I indeed say unto thee, Isaiah; No man about to return into a body of that world has ascended or"seen what thou seest or perceived what thou hast perceived and what thou wilt see. 12. For it has been permitted to thee in the lot of the Lord to come hither [and from thence comes the power of the sixth heaven and of the air]. 13. And I magnified my Lord with praise, in that through His lot I should come hither. 14. And he said: "Hear, furthermore, therefore, this also from thy fellow servant"; when from the body by the *will of God* thou hast ascended hither, then thou wilt receive the garment "which thou seest, and like-
11. See viii. 23. E=‘Noman...hasseen this or ascended or perceived what thou seest and what thou wilt see.’ I have transposed ‘has seen’ and ‘ascended’ under guidance of Greek Legend, ii. 29. Next from S we see that the clause ‘ what thou seest’ should follow after ‘seen’ and ‘what thou wilt see’ after ‘ perceived.’
12. In the lot of the Lord=through sharing in the lot of the Lord. Seei.1g. Eadds against S L? ‘in the lot of the cross,’ which I have taken to be a marginal explanatory gloss subsequently embodied in the text.
Hither, i.e. the seventh heaven.
[And from thence &c.]. I have bracketed these words as the interpolation of an Ethiopic scribe, based on viii. 7, not quite rightly apprehended.
13. Should come hither. S‘am departing, L?‘am walking.’
14. Hear. . . fellow servant. SL? omit.
From the body by the *will of God*. Emended. See Critical Note, p. 115. ac‘from the alien body by the angel of the spirit thou hast ascended.’ b ‘in an alien body the God of the spirit has made thee to ascend.’
Which thou seest .. . wilt see. L?S omit.
CHAPTER VIII. 10-21 57
wise other numbered garments laid up (there) thou wilt see", 15. And then thou wilt become equal to the angels of the seventh heaven.’ 16. And he raised me up into the sixth heaven, and there were no (angels) on the left, nor a throne in the midst, but all had one appearance and their (power of) praise was equal. 17. And (power) was given to me also, and I also praised along with them and that angel also, and our praise was like theirs. 18. And there they + all named the primal Father + and His Beloved, "the Christ” and the Holy Spirit, all with one voice. ig. And (their voice) was not like the voice of the angels in the five heavens, 20. [Nor like their discourse] but the voice was different there, and there was much light there. 21. And then, when I was in the sixth heaven I thought the light which I had seen in the five
16. No (angels) on the left. SL? have ‘no angels on the right or on the left,’ but our text is correct: see above, viii. 7.
All had one appearance. This statement appears to be derived from Slav. En. xix. 1, ‘There is no difference in their countenance,’ where the angels of the sixth heaven are described.
17. See S L? for slight variations of the text.
18. + All named the primal Father}. So ab. c omits ‘primal.’ We should emend and read with S L’, ‘they praised the Father of all.’
Christ. This title, which goes back to G' and possibly to G (see x. 7 note), is found likewise in ix. 5, 13, 17, X. 7, in all of which passages it is absent from L’S.
His Beloved. So a, be ‘the Beloved.’
19. The five heavens. S L? preferably ‘in the fifth heaven.’
20. [Wor like their discourse]. A doublet. S L? omit.
21. The light. Text could be translated ‘that light,’ but the Greek article is frequently rendered by the demonstrative in Ethiopic.
heavens to be but darkness. 22. And I rejoiced and praised Him who hath bestowed such lights on those who wait for His promise. 23. And I besought the angel who conducted me that I should not henceforth return to the carnal world. 24. I say indeed unto you," Hezekiah and Josab my. son and Micaiah" that there is much darkness here. 25. And the angel who conducted me discovered what I thought and said: ‘If in this light thou dost rejoice, how much more wilt thou rejoice, when in the seventh heaven thou seest the light, where is the Lord and His Beloved [whence I have been sent, who is to be called “Son” in this world. 26. Not (yet) hath been manifested He who shall be in the corruptible world] and the garments, and the thrones, and the crowns which are laid up for the righteous, "for those who trust in that Lord who will descend in your form. For the
Five heavens. L?S=‘ fifth heaven.’
22. Such lights. L? ‘such joy,’ S ‘such things.’
Wait for His promise. & L'=‘ receive His mercy.’
23. See viii. rz.
24. SL? omit the proper names.
25. Discovered what I thought and. L?S omit.
The Lord... in this world. SL?=‘the heavenly Father and His Only-begotten Son.’
25, 26. I have bracketed the words ‘whence I have been sent... in the corruptible world.’ They are omitted by SL? and introduce confusion into the context. By excising them we restore unity to these verses. The interpolation is most probably due to an Ethiopic scribe. The unusual form of the Ethiopic in verse 26 supports this suggestion. In ix. 5, 13, 17, &c., the kindred phrases are derived from the Greek.
Who is to be called ‘Son’ in this world. Cf, ix. 5.
CHAPTERS VIII. 22—IX. 5 59
light which is there is great and wonderful 27. And as concerning thy not returning into the body thy days are not yet fulfilled for coming here.” 28. And when I heard (that) I was troubled, and he said: ‘Do not be troubled.’
ix. 1. And he took me into the air of the seventh heaven, and moreover I heard a voice saying: ‘How far will he ascend that dwelleth *in the flesh *?’ and I feared and trembled. 2. And "when I trembled, behold” * I heard * from hence another voice "being sent forth, and" saying: ‘It is permitted to the holy Isaiah to ascend hither; for here is his garment.’ 3. And I asked the angel who was with me "and said": ‘Who is he who forbade me and who is he who * permitted * me to ascend?’ 4. And he said unto me: ‘He who forbade thee, this is he * who is over* the praise-giving of the sixth heaven. 5. And He who * permitted * thee,
ix. 1. *In the flesh*, E here reads ‘among aliens,’ which’ I have taken to be corrupt as S L’ give in carne and Greek Legend, ii. 23, év capxi.
2. And when I trembled, &c. Eis corrupt, but admits easily of emendation. See Critical Note, p.118. As it stands, it runs: ‘And he said unto me when I trembled: Behold, from hence another voice has come, being sent forth, and it says.’
From hence. This gives the wrong sense. Greek Legend, ii. 23, has é¢ vv dyw. This is right in meaning, for the second voice is from the seventh heaven, the first voice being from the sixth: see verses 4, 5.
3. Who *permitted*. E has here ‘turned to,’ which gives a wrong sense of 6 émtpérav. The verse is found in Greek in Greek Legend, ii. 24.
4. * Who is over*, Unemended text‘on whomis.’ A slight change gives ‘who is over’6 égeoras éni, Greek Legend, ii. 25.
5. *Permitted*, See on verse 3.
this is "thy Lord God, the Lord Christ, who will be called “ Jesus” in the world", but His name thou canst not hear till thou hast ascended out of thy body.’ 6. And he raised me up into the seventh heaven, and I saw there a wonderful light and angels innumerable. 7. And there I saw all the righteous "from the time of Adam. 8. And there I saw the holy Abel and all the righteous. 9. And there I saw Enoch and all who were with him, stript of the garments of the flesh, and I saw them -in their garments of the zpper world, and they ware "Tike angels", standing there in great glory.
Thy Lord. So a. c¢ gives ‘our Lord.’ Greek Legend, ii. 25, has 6 Kupios, L?S ‘filius Dei.’
God, the Lord Christ . . . world. In deference to Dillmann’s opinion I formerly regarded these words and certain phrases in ix. 13, 17, X. 7 as interpolations, on the ground of the statement that follows: ‘His name thou canst not hear,’ &c. Inow think that they go back to G. For in the first place they spring not from the Ethiopic scribe, but existed already in G’. Thus x. 7 is found in the Gk. Leg. ii. 37. In the next, the words ‘His name,’ &c., do not refer to the earthly name of Christ, but to some secret name known only to the blessed. Cf. vii. 7. A similar idea is found in Rev. xix. 12 ‘He hath a name written which no one knoweth but He Himself.’
Thy body. SocandS. band L? give ‘body,’ and a‘ this body.’
q-10. We should observe that though all the righteous from the time of Adam are already possessed of their spiritual or resurrection bodies (see notes on iv. 16) as in Rev. vi. 11, they are represented as not yet enjoying perfect blessedness. They are not as yet crowned, nor have they as yet sat down on their thrones. These verses are very defective in L?S, which speak only of certain righteous individuals being already in heaven. That our text goes back accurately to the older Greek recension is proved by the Greek Legend, ii, 27, which reproduces the clauses which are missing in LS,
g. Like angels. Cf. Eth. En. li. 4 (see note in my edition),
1o. But they sat not on their thrones, nor were their crowns of glory on them. 11. And I asked the angel who was with me: ‘ How is it that they have received the garments, but have not the thrones and the crowns?’ 12,13. And he said unto me: ‘Crowns and thrones of glory they do not receive, till the Beloved will descend in the form in which you will see Him descend "[will descend, I say] into the world in the last days the
phrase.
11. Who was with me. L?S give instead ‘and I said.’
Thrones. Cf. Rev. iii. 21; Luke xxii. 29, 30; Matt. xix. 28;
viii. 2, 3. The idea is derived from the custom of crowning the victors in the games, as in 1 Cor, ix. 25; Phil. iii. 14; 2 Tim. ii. 5; 1 Pet. v. 4. It is the reward for martyrdom,
Have not the thrones, &c. Text is very doubtful here, but the sense is as clear as in SL,
12-13. The angel replies that the righteous in the seventh heaven will not receive their thrones and crowns till the Beloved descends and becomes man on earth. From verse 18 it appears that it is not till Christ reascends into heaven that they receive them. See note on verse 18.
The text of E is almost unintelligible as it appears in the MSS. and in Dillmann’s text. This is owing to a simple blunder on the part of a scribe, who transferred the words ‘Nevertheless they see and know whose will be the thrones and whose the crowns’ from their right position at the close of the sentence ‘till the Beloved will descend in the form in which you will see Him descend [will descend, J say] into the world in the last days the Lord, who will be called Christ’ to an impossible position immediately preceding it, That this restoration is right is established by S: see p. 120. L? is here corrupt though also helpful. :
Will see Him descend .. . into the world in the last days, These words
Lord, who will be called Christ". Nevertheless they "see and™ know whose will be thrones, and whose the crowns when He has descended, and been made in your form, "and they will think that He is flesh and is a man™ 14. And the god of that world will stretch forth * his hand against the Son,* and they will crucify Him on a tree, and will * slay * Him not knowing who Heis. 15. And thus His descent, "as you will see, will be hidden even from the heavens, so that it will not be known who He is%. 16. And when He hath plundered the angel of death, He will ascend on the third day,
are wanting both in L? and 8; but they are original; for they appear in Greek Legend, ii. 25; see p. 143. |
Will think that He ts flesh and is a man. ‘Is flesh’ and ‘is a man’ are parallel expressions, His divine nature will not be recognized.
14. * His hand against the Son*. So Dillmann rightly emends text. See Critical Note.
Wiil * slay* Him. So I have emended text with the guidance of SL, MSS. = ‘and will lay hands upon Him,’ and transpose these words before ‘and will crucify Him.’ See Critical Note.
15-17. The above verses in E vary so widely from those in L’ and §, that it is impossible to reconcile them save in a few phrases. L? ‘And He will descend into Hades and make it and the phantoms (visiones gavrdopara) of hell desolate. 16. And He will seize the prince of death, and will plunder him, and will crush all his powers, and He will rise the third day, 17. Having certain righteous persons with Him, and He will sénd forth His preachers into the whole world and will ascend into the heavens,’ § in the main agrees with L’, but is very corrupt.
16. Plundered the angel of death. These words are found alsoin L*, They have to do with the rescue of certain souls out of the hand of the angel of death. Christ holds the keys of it, Rev. ix. 1. The angel of death is again referred to in x. 8, xi. 19. The next verse states explicitly the deliverance of righteous
[and he will remain in that world five hundred and forty-five days]. 17. And then many of the righteous will ascend with Him, whose spirits do not receive their garments till the "Lord Christ" ascend
souls from Hades. See Ignatius, ad Magn. ix; Matt. xxvii. 52, 53; Evang. Nicodemi, i. 1, xi. 1 (ed. Tischendorf). The above statement confirms the genuineness of the mention of the descent into Hades in ix. 15 of L?S. Sheol, where the angel of death abides (x. 8), is thus an intermediate abode; Haguel or Abaddon (x. 8) is the final abode of the lost.
[Remain in that world five hundred and forty-five days). This clause is wanting in SL*. It is of course no creation of Ethiopic seribes. The Ethiopic translator found it already in his Greek text. The idea is a Gnostic one. It was held by the Valentinians and the Ophites (see Irenaeus, adv. Haer. i. 3. 2, 30. 14) as Liicke has already remarked (Einleitung in d. Offenbarung, i. 290). It was, nevertheless, an intrusion in the Greek text; for the many righteous mentioned in verse 17 are none other than the souls delivered from Hades, and the ascent mentioned in that verse is the ascent from Hades. This is clear from S L’, which bring the resurrection of Christ and the deliverance of the souls from Hades together : 1x. 16. ‘surgettertiadie. 17. habens quosdam iustos secum.’
17. And then many of the righteous will ascend with Him, i.e. from Hades, as I have shown in the preceding note. Yetthe present form of the Ethiopic implies that the ascension here designed is not from Hades but from earth to heaven after the resurrection,
Whose spirits do not receive their garments, &c. Soa. b omits negation against ac. c=‘ who in their spirit have not received their garments.’ L’S omit. Sinceallthe righteous according toix. 7(E), and according to ix. 7 (L?S) a certain class of righteous men, are already in the seventh heaven arrayed in their garments or spiritual bodies, the spirits delivered from Hades can only have been the imperfectly righteous. As such they do not receive their spiritual bodies till Christ’s ascent to the seventh heaven.
SL? add at the close of this verse: ‘et mittet suos praedicatores in universum orbem terrarum et ascendet in coelos.’ The former statement is made elsewhere in our text; see iii,
and they ascend with Him. 18. Then indeed they will receive their[ garments and ]thrones and crowns, when He has ascended into the “seventh” heaven. 19. And I said unto him that which I had asked him in the third heaven: 20. ‘*Show me how * everything which is done in that world is here made known.’ 21. And whilst I was still speaking with him, behold one of the angels who stood nigh, more glorious than the glory of that angel, who had raised me up from the world, 22. Showed me a book, [but not as a book of this world] and he opened it, and the book was written, but not as a book of this world. And he gave (it) to me and I read it, and lo! the deeds of the children of Israel were written therein, and the deeds of those whom
18. Then indeed they will receive their [garments and] thrones and crowns, ‘Garments and’ should be omitted with SL%2 The class mentioned here are really the righteous already referred to in ix. 11-13, who, though clad in their garments, do not as yet possess their thrones and crowns. According to this verse they attain to these on the ascension of Christ.
Then. This mark of time is explained by the concluding clause of the verse.
19. See vii. 27. See p. r22 for slightly different and fuller forms of L? and S.
20. * Show me how*. Emended in accordance with SL? See Critical Note. MSS. = ‘And he said unto me.’
22, [But not as a book of this world). SL? omit. A doublet. E ‘books.’ See two lines later.
On the heavenly books see my note on Eth. En, xlvii. 3.
Children of Israel. SL? = ‘Jerusalem.’
Of those whom * I* know (not). MSS. = ‘whom thou knowest.’ I have emended in accordance with S ‘quos ego non scivi.’ The negative is not infrequently lost in Ethiopic MSS. L? and Greek Legend, ii. 31, speak of all men being judged.
I* know (not), my son Josab. 23. And I said: ‘In truth, there is nothing hidden in the seventh heaven, which is done in this world” 24. And I saw there many garments laid up, and many thrones and many crowns. 25. And I said to the angel: ‘Whose are these garments and thrones and crowns?’ 26. And he said unto me: ‘These garments many from that world will receive, believing in the words of That One, "who shall be named” as I told thee, Tand they will observe those things, and believe in them, and believe in His cross: for them are *these* laid up™’ 27. And I saw a certain One "standing, whose glory surpassed that of all," and His glory was great "and wonderful. 28. And after I had seen Him’, all the righteous whom I had seen Tand also the angels whom I had seen™ came to
23. This world. Greek Legend, ii. 32, ‘that world’; SL? ‘world.’ SL? add after ‘this world,’ ‘And I asked the angel : who is he yonder who excels all (S omit) the angels in his glory?’ And he answered and said unto me: ‘He yonder(S ‘the preeminent angel yonder’) is the great angel Michael ever praying on behalf of humanity.’ These words go back to the second Greek recension. SL? again refer to Michael in ix. a9.
26, Will receive. L? ‘ammittunt’: S = ‘destituuntur.’ If the reading implied by SL? is not an error, the editor of G? meant the verse to refer to the Antichrist. But in that case verse 26 would be no answer to verse 25.
AsI told thee. Better in SL?: ‘regarding whom I told thee.’
These*. Emended. ac read ‘but for them are laid up’; b ‘which for them are laid up’ or ‘for whom they are laid up.’
27-32. Vision and worship of the Second Person of the Godhead.
27. See S L’ for a shorter version.
28, And the angels... Abel, Seth, and. SL’? omit. Adam‘and Abel have already been mentioned in ix. 7.
F
Him. "And Adam and Abel and Seth, and all the righteous first drew near” and worshipped Him, and they all praised Him with one voice, "and I myself also gave praise with them", and my giving of praise was as theirs. 29. And then all the angels drew nigh and worshipped and gave praise. jo. And *I* was (again) transformed and became like an angel. 31. And thereupon the angel who conducted me, said to me: ‘ Worship this One, and I worshipped and praised. 32. And the angel said unto me: ‘This is the Lord of all the praisegivings which thou hast seen.’ 33. And whilst *he* was still speaking, I saw another Glorious One who was like Him, and the righteous drew nigh and
My giving of praise was as theirs. S ‘their giving of praise was as that of those.’ L? ‘the voice was as that of those.’
29. All the angels drew nigh. SL? = ‘and then (L? omit them) Michael approached and worshipped and with him all the angels.’
30. *I* was (again) transformed, According to vii. a5 Isaiah underwent transformation as he ascended into each heaven in turn. Accordingly he was transformed on entering the seventh heaven, :and before he joined in its worship, ix. 28. When, however, he was brought before the Second Person of the Godhead, he was again transformed and became like an angel.’ I have accordingly with SL? emended E, which read : ‘He (i.e. Christ) was transformed.’ On the other hand, the text of ES L? on verse 33 supports E in verse 30. But as we shall see, they are all corrupt in that passage.
gi. Worship. L?’S add, and no doubt rightly, ‘and praise.’
33-36, Vision and worship of the Third Person of the Godhead.
33. *He*. SoS. Ewrongly, ‘I’; for it is the angel that has been speaking. L? omits clause.
Like Him. L?S add ‘in all things.’
worshipped and praised, and I praised together with them. But * my * glory was not transformed into accordance with their form. 34. And thereupon the angels drew near and worshipped Him. 35. And I saw the Lord and the second angel, and they were standing. 36. And the second whom I saw was on the left of my Lord. And I asked: ‘Who is this?’ and he said unto me: ‘ Worship Him, for He is the angel of the Holy Spirit, who
I praised. L?S = ‘he praised.’
My * glory was not transformed into accordance with their form. E reads ‘ His’ instead of ‘ my,’ and has the support of SL’, We have here, however, a primitive error. In verse 30 Isaiah was transformed into the likeness of the angels and could thereby enjoy certain visions, but he was not transformed into the likeness of the righteous, and was on that account excluded from steadfastly beholding the ineffable vision in verse 37, which angels could not behold but only the righteous, verse 38,
34. At the close of this S adds : ‘and the angel said unto me: “Worship Him and praise.” And I worshipped Him and praised.’ L? contains only the last sentence.
35-36. These verses were used by the heretic Hieracas. They are drawn dan6 70d ’AvaBarixod ‘Hoatov according to Epiphanius, Haer. lxvii. 3. In this work the quotation appears as follows : *Edaté pot 6 dyyedos mepimaray Eumpooder pov, kal eke por, rat ele, Tis éoriy 6 év 5efG Too Oeod" nal elma, Sb ofbas, Kipie; Aéyer, Obrés éorw 6 dyanntés. xal ris éorw 6 dAdos 6 Gpoos ait 2 dprorepav €rAGdv ; Kat daa, Sd ywuoreas, Trouréote 7d Gyov mvedua 7d Aadody év oot, nat év Tois mpopyrais. It will be observed that this account is much fuller than that which is given in E or L’S, and that it preserves details which are only found separately in E and L7S. Thus E speaks of the Holy Spirit being ‘on the left,’ and this statement discovers itself in the above quotation. On the other hand the word ‘ambulantem’ in S (‘ ambulans’ in L’*) has its counterpart in wepirarav in the quotation. Thus the above text is more primitive than either E or S L’, and may in some respects represent the lost archetype G.
speaketh * in thee and the rest of the righteous.’ 37. And I saw the great glory, the eyes of my spirit being open, and I could not thereupon see, nor yet could the angel who was with me, nor all the angels whom I had seen worshipping my Lord. 38. But I saw the righteous beholding with great power the glory of that One. 39: And my Lord drew nigh to me and the angel of the Spirit Tand He said: ‘See how it is given to thee to see God, and on thy account power is given to the angel who is with thee. 40. And I saw how my Lord and the angel of the Spirit" worshipped, and they both together praised "God". 41. And thereupon all the righteous "drew near and" worshipped. 42. And the angels "drew near and" worshipped and all the angels praised.
x. 1. And thereupon I heard the voices and the
ix. 36. *Speaketh*, SoS L’ andi. 7, Greek Legend, ii. 13, instead of ‘ has spoken ’ as in E.
37-42. Vision and worship of the First Person of the Godhead.
37. Isaiah says that he saw and that forthwith he did not see. That is, he beheld for a moment but could not steadfastly behold. SL’ give quite another idea. They declare that Isaiah did not see God at all, but this is against verse 39. Neither Isaiah nor the angels could steadfastly behold God : ef, Eth. En. xiv. a1, ‘None of the angels could... behold the face of the Honoured and Glorious One, and no flesh could behold Him.’ Only the glorified righteous could steadfastly behold Him, verse 38; Rev. xxii.4. The Divine Being is so named in Eth, En. xiv. 20, ‘The Great Glory sat thereon,’ and x.
41-42. After ‘all the righteous drew near and worshipped ’ ac add ‘and all the righteous.’ § L? insert a reference to Michael as in verse 23.
giving of praise, which I had heard in each of the six heavens, ascending * and being heard * there: 2. And all "were being sent up to that Glorious One” whose glory I could not behold. 3. "And I myself was hearing and beholding the praise (which was given) to Him. 4. And the Lord and the angel of the Spirit were beholding all and hearing all™ 5. And all the praises which are sent up from the six heavens are not only heard but seen. 6. And "T heard" the angel "who conducted me and" he said: ‘This is the Most High of the high ones, dwelling in the holy world, and resting in His holy ones, who will be called by the Holy Spirit through the lips of the righteous "the Father of the Lord™’ 7, And I heard the voice of the Most High "the Father of my Lord” saying to my Lord "Christ who will be
X. 1. Ascending * and being heard* there. Emended with L?, E = ‘which I had heard ascending hither’ (6) or ‘when ascending hither ’ (ac).
Whose glory, dc. ix. 37.
6. And I heard... said. L?S = ‘And the angel said unto me,’
The Most High of the high ones... holy ones. Based on Isa. Ivii. 15 6 tioros év bymAois xaroKav Tov aldva...év ayios dvanavdpevos. See on vi. 8. S L? which give a different form of the earlier clauses (see p. 128) = efs aldmios Tov iynAdv aldiva xaroKdy.
Called. L?S = praised.
q. Christ who will be called Jesus. Though this and similar expressions in ix. 5, 13, 17 are omitted by SL’, there are no valid grounds for regarding them as interpolations, as I have shown in the note on ix. 5. They go ‘back to’ G!. This follows from the fact that the excised words are found in the Greek Legend, ii. 37, where indeed all this verse is found : see
7oO ASCENSION OF ISAIAH
called Jesus": 8. ‘Go forth and descend through all the heavens, and thou wilt descend to "the firmament and" that world: to the angel in Sheol thou wilt descend, "but to Haguel thou wilt not go" 9. And thou wilt become.like unto thelikenessof all who are in the five heavens. 10. "And thou wilt be careiil to become like the form of the angels of the firmament [and the angels also who are in Sheol]. iz. And none of the angels of that world shall know "that Thou art Lord with Me of the seven heavens and of their angels. 12. And they shall not know that Thou art with Me, * till * with a * loud
8. Angel in Sheol. This is the angel of death already referred to in ix. 16. The angels in Sheol are mentioned in x, 10, and the ‘angels’ of death in x. 14. We might compare the expression in Rev. ix. 11, ‘the angel of the abyss.’
Haguel = Abaddon or Gehenna in the sense of being the final abode of the lost. Cf. ‘the abyss’ in Rev. ix. 1, 2, xi. 7, xvii.
g-10. His descent was not to be concealed from the sixth heaven, x. 19, but from the five lower heavens and from the angels of the firmament, and from the angels in Sheol. This last statement I have bracketed, as the release of the souls in Sheol could not have been effected without a recognition of Christ on the part of the angels of Sheol.
11. None of the angels of that world shall know, dc. Evidently based on 1 Cor. ii, 8, ‘which none of the rulers of this world knoweth ; for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.’
That thou art Lord, &e. L?S omit, but Greek Legend, ii. 40, reproduces these words ; see p. 146.
12. The angels of that world (i.e. the earth) will not learn that Christ is with God till the final judgement. For the emendation of this verse see p. 129. The text as it stands is unintelligible: ‘And when with the voice of the heavens
CHAPTER X. 8-15 vi!
voice I have called (to) the heavens, and their angels and their lights, (even) unto the sixth heaven, in order that you mayst "judge "and destroy” the + princes + and angels "and gods" of that world, and the world that is dominated by them: 13. For they have denied Me and said: “We alone are and there is none beside us.” 14. And afterwards from the *angels* of death Thou wilt ascend to Thy place, and Thou wilt not be transformed in each heaven, but in glory wilt Thou ascend and sit on My right hand. 15. And thereupon the princes and powers
T have called both to their angels and their lights: and when I have made great the sixth heaven (or to the sixth heaven).’ Soa. 6 omits ‘and’ before ‘when’ (twice) and inserts ‘thee’ after both verbs. L?S omit this passage.
Called (to) the heavens. Cf. Ps. 1. 4, where these words are used with reference to judgement as here.
Mayst judge ... the +princes+ .. . of that world. For ‘princes’ read ‘prince,’ as in SL?, L?=‘ wilt judge the prince of that world and his angels.’ Cf. John xvi. 11, ‘the prince of this world is judged.’
Destroy. Of. vii. 12.
Gods of that world. 2 Cor. iv. 4, ‘God of this world.’
And the world that is dominated by them. L?S omit, but the elause is implied by Greek Legend, ii. 38 rév wécpoy éxeivov Tov bd Tay eiddAwy . . . kuptevdpevov.
1g. Alone are. Greek Legend, ii. 38, adds ‘ gods,’ but L? S support text. See note on iv. 6. ‘
14. * Angels* of death. See on x.8. Emended from ‘gods of death’ by a slight change of vocalization. See Critical Note. The converse change was required in vili. 14.
From the * angels* of death Thou wilt ascend. Soac. b= ‘and when Thou hast died and risen Thou wilt ascend.’ L? omits clause but S gives ‘quando e terra elevaberis.’
15. Princes and powers... will worship Thee. Cf. Phil. ii. 10; Heb. i. 6: see also Deut. xxxii. 43 (LXX).
Princes and powers + of that world +. From a comparison of L?S and Greek Legend, ii. 40 (see p. 144), it is clear that our text is
tof that world + will worship Thee. 16. These/ commands I heard the Great Glory giving to my Lord. 17. And +sot+ I saw my Lord go forth from the seventh heaven into the sixth cages 18, And the angel who conducted me [from thi
world was with me and] said unto me: ‘Under
stand, Isaiah, and see how the transformation and descent of the Lord * will appear *. 19. And I saw, and when the angels saw Him, "thereupon thos
in the sixth heaven" praised and lauded Him ; for He had not been transformed after the shape o
the angels there, "and they praised Him™ and I also praised with them. 20. And I saw when He: descended into the fifth heaven, that in the fifth heaven He made Himself like unto the form of the angels there, and they did not praise Him (nor worship Him); for His form was like unto theirs.
defective and the words ‘of that world’ are corrupt. We should read in their stead, ‘and angels and all principalities,’ So far we have the support of Greek Legend, ii. 39, and L? S, that is of G! and G? and therefore of the archetype. L?S add ‘ which are in heaven and on earth and under the earth.’
16, These commands. So Greek Legend, ii. 41 Tatra, S read rotrov or rather éxeivov.
The Great Glory. The text here (which is that of bc and L’S and Greek Legend, ii. 41) upholds our rendering on ix. 37.
17. +Sot. L?S ‘then’; Greek Legend, ii. 41 ‘after these things.’
18. From this world, was with me and. I have bracketed these words : they are omitted by S L’.
How the transformation .. . of the Lord * will appear *. Emended ; a reads ‘in order that thou mayst see the transformation of the Lord.’ Soa. 6 ‘in order that thou mayst know, &.’ SL? ‘ quae (or quid) est transfiguratio eius.’
20. (Nor worship Him). I have added these words because being
21. And then He descended into the fourth heaven, and made Himself like unto the form of the angels there. 22. And "when they saw Him", they did not praise "or laud Him"; for His form was like unto their form. 23. And again I saw when He descended into the third heaven, "and He made Himself like unto the form of the angels in the third heaven. 24. And those who kept the gate of the (third) heaven demanded the password, and the Lord gave (it) to them in order that He should not be recognized. And when they saw Him, they did not praise or laud Him; for His form was like unto their form. 25. And again I saw when He descended" into the second heaven, "and again He gave the password there; those who kept the gate proceeded to demand and the Lord to give. 26. And I saw when He made Himself like unto the form of the angels in the second heaven, and they saw Him and they did not praise Him; for His form was like unto their form. 27. And again I saw when He descended" into the first heaven, Tand there also He gave the password to those who kept the gate, and He made. Himself like unto the
found in Greek Legend, ii. 42, they go back to G’ and should therefore appear in E. S L? likewise attest them.
23-28, These verses are shortly summarized in L?S. With the exception of a few phrases Greek Legend fails us from this point forward.
aq. b omits.
Password, or ‘passport.’ Since L? gives ‘character’ as the equivalent of the rare Ethiopic word here we may perhaps assume that yapaxryp stood inthe Greek. S = ‘signa.’ Possibly the word ‘sign’ would best represent the sense.
form of the angels who were on the left of that throne", and they neither praised nor lauded Him; for His form was like unto their form. "28, But as for me no one asked me on account of the angel who conducted me". 29. And again He descended into the firmament "where dwelleth the ruler of this world", and He gave the password "to those on the left," and His form was like theirs, and they did not praise Him there ; "but they were envying one another and fighting ; for here there is a power of evil and envying about trifles" 30. And I saw v when He descended "and made Himself like” unto the angels of the air, and He was like one of them. 31. And He gave no password ; "for one was plun- - dering and doing violence to another."
xi. 1. After this "I saw, and" the angel "who spoke with me, who conducted me", said unto me: ‘Understand, Isaiah son of Amoz; for for this purpose have I been sent from God.’ 2. "And I indeed saw
29. Where dwelleth the ruler of this world. So also S, but L? omits.
go. The angels of the air are distinguished here from those of the firmament in verse 29. It is otherwise in vii. 9-10.
gt. Everything is in disorder inthe air. Hence no guardians of the gates.
One was plundering... another. So Greek Legend, ii. 9.
xi. 1. Who spoke with me, who conducted me. L?S omit. One of the phrases (if not both) seems to be a marginal gloss.
2-22, These verses, save a clause of verse 19, are wanting in L?S, which omit all reference to Mary and Joseph and the birth of Christ, His work and crucifixion, and speak only of His life on earth. See pp. 133-135. This section, nevertheless, goes back to G. See Introd. pp. xxii-xxiv.
z. Of the family of David... Mary. Whether Mary as well as
CHAPTERS X. 27—XI. 4 5
a woman of the family of David the prophet, named Mary, a Virgin, and she was espoused to a man named Joseph, a carpenter, and he also was of the seed and family of the righteous David of Bethlehem Judah. 3. And he came into his lot. And when she was espoused, she was found with child, and Joseph the carpenter was desirous to put her away. 4. But the angel of the Spirit appeared in this world, and after that Joseph did not put her away, but kept Mary and did not
Joseph was descended from David as is here asserted it is impossible to establish conclusively from the New Testament. Several passages, however, could lend themselves to this inter- 8. However this may be, it can be proved that the belief was early established. Thus Julius Africanus (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. i. 7.17) and Tertullian (Adv. Jud. g) at the beginning of the third century taught it : Irenaeus (Haer. iii. 21. 5) in the latter half of the second century : Justin Martyr (Dial. c. Tryph. chaps. 43) 45, 67, 100, 120) at the close of the first half, and Ignatius (Ad Ephes. xviii. 2) at its beginning. It was thus an accepted fact in the first half of the second century. But this evidence, eombined with that of the apocryphal Nativity of Mary and the very early Protevangel of James, is sufficient to make it very probable that this view prevailed towards the close at all events of the first century. The evidence of the Testaments of the XII Patriarchs cannot be adduced here as the date of the passage in question is still undetermined.
3. Came into his lot, C£. Protev. Iacobi, ix. 1 wat elwev 6 iepets 78 ‘Iwahp' ob rexdAfpwoa tiv mapSévov Kuplov mapadaBeiv els rapyow éau7r® ; xix. 1 éxAnpwodpny adriy yuvaira.
4. Appeared in this world, Soac. b reads ‘appeared to him.’
Kept Mary. Cf. Protev. Iacobi, ix. 3, xiii. 1, for the use of this word in regard to Mary: in xiv. 2 we have an exact parallel to our text. There it is told that after the angel of the Lord had appeared to Joseph, the latter ‘arose from his sleep and
reveal this matter to any one. 5. And he did not approach Mary, but kept her as a holy virgin, though with child. 6, And he did not live with her for two months. 7. And after two months of days while Joseph was in his house, and Mary his wife, but both alone, 8. It came to pass that when they were alone that Mary straightway looked with her eyes and saw a small babe, and she was astonied. g. And after she had been astonied, her womb was found as formerly before she had conceived. 10. And when her husband Joseph said unto her: ‘What has astonied thee?’ his eyes were opened and he saw the infant and praised God, because into his portion God had come. 11. And a voice came to them: ‘Tell this vision to no one.’ 12. And the story regarding the infant was noised abroad in Bethlehem. 13. Some said: ‘The Virgin Mary hath borne a child, before she was married glorified the God of Israel, who had given him this grace and kept her’ («at épvaacoey airqy).
And did not reveal this matter to any one. In Protev. xv-xvi Joseph refuses to answer the questions of the priest regarding Mary’s condition: Kat ‘Iwahp éotynoev (xv. 4).-
q- His house. Soa. be read ‘the house.’
His wife. Soc. b reads ‘his espoused wife’—evidently a correction.
8. A somewhat less marvellous though kindred account is found in Protev. Iacobi, xix. 2.
9. Her womb was found. Soa. be read ‘she found her womb,’
Conceived. a adds ‘Him.’
10. Her husband Joseph. 6 omits for the same reason that it corrected verse 7. In a ‘her husband’ is erased.
11, This verse is undoubtedly related to Protev. Iacobi, xx. 4 wat idod pwr?) Aéyouta Zardpy, Zarmpy, ph dvaryyelays doa eldes napadofa,
two months.’ 14. And many said: ‘She has not borne a child, nor has a midwife gone up (to her), nor have we heard the cries of (labour) pains.’ And they were all blinded respecting ‘Him ‘and they all knew regarding Him, though they knew not whence He was. 15. And they took Him, and went to Nazareth in Galilee. 16. And I saw, O Hezekiah and Josab my son, and I declare to the other prophets also who are standing by, that (this) hath escaped all the heavens and all the
14. This verse is practically cited in the Actus Petri, ch. xxiv. (p. 72, ed. Lipsius): ‘Et alter propheta dicit honorificatum patrem: Neque vocem illius audivimus neque obstetrix subit.’
15. In Galilee. b omits.
16. (This) hath escaped, dc. What escaped the princes of this world is the virginity and the child-bearing of Mary. This being so, it is hard to avoid concluding that our text is the source of Ignatius, Ad Ephes, xix wat Aabev tov dpxovra Tov aigvos rovrov 4 mapSevia Mapias nal 6 roxerds abrijs, dpuotws nal 6 Oavaros tov Kupiov. Throughout x. 8-xi. 19 the concealment of the real nature of Christ is the entire theme, and as a subordinate factor of this the concealment of Mary’s virginity. In the Epistle of Ignatius, on the other hand, the subject is introduced abruptly and obviously forms part of a received doctrine, such as is presented in our text. While Ignatius’ words summarize admirably the teaching of our text, paragraph 9 of his letter to the Romans forms a protest against the Docetic tendency which was already at work and could perhaps appeal to xi. 17 of our author in supporting its claims.
The source of the above speculation is to be traced no doubt to zr Cor. ii. 7, 8, ‘The wisdom of God... which none of the rulers of this world knew; for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.’ This statement involves the application made by our author to the Incarnation. The words of Ignatius formed a favourite quotation with the Fathers. Thus it is cited by Origen (Hom. in Luc., Op. iii. p- 938 A; Eusebius, Quaest. ad Steph, i., Op. iv. p. 88t; Ambrose
princes and all the gods of this world. 17. And I saw: In Nazareth He sucked the breast as a babe and as is customary in order that He might not be recognized. 18. And when He had grown up He worked great signs and wonders in the land of Israel and of Jerusalem. 19. And after this the adversary envied Him and roused the children of Israel against Him", not knowing who He was, Tand they delivered Him to the king, and crucified Him, and He descended to the angel (of Sheol). 20. In Jerusalem indeed I saw Him being crucified on a tree: 21. And likewise after the third day rise again and remain days. 22. And the angel who conducted me said: ‘ Understand, Isaiah :’ and I saw when He sent out the Twelve Apostles and ascended 23. And I saw Him, and He was in the firmament, but He had not changed
on Luc. i, 27, Op. i. 1281 (‘Non mediocris quoque causa est ut virginitas Mariae falleret principem mundi’). For other references see Lightfoot on the Ignatian Epistles,
Ig. Descended to the angel (of Sheol). The words ‘of Sheol’ I have supplied from Greek Legend, ii. 39, where the words are quoted: xaraByoy nal mpds Tov ayyeAov Tod qdou év “TepovoaAqp. The last two words form the beginning of the next verse, See also x. 8, 10 (ix. 16), For ‘descended to the angels’ (a), be read ‘made him descend to the angels.’
21. Days. ab have simply ‘days,’ c ‘forty days.’ Dillmann is of opinion that originally the number 545 stood here, as in ix, 16 (see note), The phraseology at all events is the same. ;
2a, The sending forth of ‘The Twelve’ is recounted also in 8,9. There is a further mention of ‘The Twelve’ in our text
23, Saw Him. Soa, bc ‘Saw.’
Himself into their form, and all the angels of the firmament "and the Satans™ saw Him and they worshipped. 24. And "there was much sorrow there, while" they said: ‘How did our Lord descend *in our midst *, and we perceived not the glory [which has been upon Him], which we see has been upon Him from the sixth heaven?’ 25. And He ascended into the second heaven, and He did not transform Himself, but all the angels who were on the right and on the left and the throne in the midst 26. Both worshipped Him and praised Him and said: ‘How did our Lord escape us whilst
And worshipped. b omits.
23, 24. There is some difficulty connected with these verses. They ought to contain an account of the ascent through the firmament and the first heaven, for verse 25 describes the ascent into the second heaven. Our text confines the events to the firmament, whereas L? could be interpreted as referring only to the first heaven, for it speaks of ‘the angels above the firmament.’ Sis doubtful. In any case the text of all three is defective. See L?S, p. 135.
24. *In our midst*, Emended with L?(S). See Critical Note. E=‘upon us.”
[Which has been upon Him]. Bracketed asa doublet. The verbs translated ‘has been’ differ in the Ethiopic.
Which we see... from the sixth heaven. Christ possessed the divine glory in His descent through the five heavens, i.e. from the sixth downward, though it was concealed, For ‘we see’ c reads ‘thou seest,’ an easier reading.
25, 26. Ascent into the second heaven.
25. And He ascended into the second heaven. L?S=‘And from the first heaven He ascended more glorious.’ The comparative in L?S seems inconsistent with the context.
Who were on the right and on the left... midst. So S save that for ‘the throne’ it reads ‘he that sat on the throne.’ L?
wrongly omits.
descending, and we perceived not?’ 27. And in like manner He ascended into the third heaven, Tand they praised and said in like manner." 28. And in the fourth heaven and in the fifth "also they said precisely after the same manner. 29. But there was one glory, and from it He did not change Himself. 30. And I saw when He ascended" into the sixth heaven, "and they worshipped and glorified Him" 31. But in all the heavens the praise increased (in volume). 32. And I saw how He ascended into the seventh heaven, and all the righteous and all the angels praised Him. And then I saw Him sit down on the right hand of that Great Glory whose glory I told you that I could not behold. 33. And also the angel of the Holy Spirit I saw sitting on the left hand. 34. And this angel said unto me: ‘Isaiah, son of Amoz, * it is enough for thee *; "for these are great things"; for thou hast seen what no child of flesh has seen.
26. Perceived not. L?S add ‘nor worshipped.’
27. L?S both err in adding ‘into the second and’ before ‘into the third’
27-30. Since both these versions compress verses 27-30 into three lines, it is clear that herein they represent exactly G’ or the second recension of the Greek. Our text represents G1.
32. All the angels. L?S add: ‘et omnes virtutes.’
And then... Glory. Soalso8. L? wrongly omits.
The Great Glory. So b. ac omit, but S supports. See also ix. 37 (note), x. 16 where it rightly appears in the text,
I told you that. L?S omit.
34. *Iiis enough for thee*, Emended with L?S. Text corrupt = ‘I preserve thee.’
No child of flesh has seen. After these words L’S (see p. 137)
35- And thou wilt return into thy garment (of the flesh) until thy days are completed. Then thou wilt come hither. 36. These things Isaiah saw and told unto all that stood before him, and they praised. And he spake to Hezekiah the King "and said": ‘I have spoken these things.’ 37. Both the end of this world; 38. And all this vision will be consummated in the last generations. 39. And Isaiah made him swear that he would not tell (it) to the people of Israel, nor give these words to any man to transcribe. 40....*Such things * ye will read. And watch ye in the Holy Spirit in order that ye may receive your garments and thrones and crowns of glory which are laid up in the
Tgeventh” heaven. 41. On account of these visions Se = edltoria.
give what is really 1 Cor. ii. 9. Jerome, as we know, writes in naan.
his Comment. in Isaiam, Ixiv. 4 (Vallarsi iv. 760): ‘Ascensioenim Isaiae et apocalypsis Eliae hoc habent testimonium.’ Since this passage is attested by L? and §, it therefore goes back to G’, and it was a MS. of G? most probably that Jerome used. But since it is absent from E, it does not belong to G@. Thus the textual evidence confirms Zahn’s judgement, Gesch. der Neutestamentlichen Kanons, ii.801-810. The passage runs: ‘What eye hath not seen nor ear heard, nor hath it entered into the heart of man, how great things God hath prepared for all (S om. ‘ all’) that love Him.’
35. Thy days are fulfilled. See viii. 27.
36. These things Isaiah saw and told. I have emended text in accordance with L?S. The text=these things I saw. And Isaiah told.
And they praised, L?S=‘ And hearing these (L? omit ‘ these’) wonderful things they all praised and glorified.’
40. * Such things * ye will read. Emended with S from reading of ac, which=‘and then ye will read.’ Before these words such a clause as thatin S is lost: ‘quantumcumque intellegitis a rege dicta in prophetis.’
G
and prophecies Sammael Satan sawed in sunder Isaiah the son of Amos, the prophet, by the hand of Manasseh. 42. And all these things Hezekiah delivered to Manasseh in the twenty-sixth year. 43. But Manasseh did not remember them nor place these things in his heart, but becoming the servant of Satan he was destroyed.
Here endeth the vision of Isaiah the prophet with his ascension.
OCTT: FALL:
TO ANABATIKON HCAIOY ASCENSIO ISAIAE
OCTT: AALLM: WL:
I. wht 0n2I"t: PROF: NavyIyr"E: AAPL: Few: LVS: AP200; ANLLD: DAL: APR: WL: ONPLav: ALA? MAL: KALLD: haw: COGS: PAT: 2b: HAA: FP: CAL: 3. OFBLTE HAMS OP PLTE HUF: OHovie WH: WI: MHA DLUs OHNANGIUs OHILALU: 4. OF44: TLE NG2C: HAAUs Cat: 04a TL OE: 077 EY ALB: 5, DavmMP; PAT: Fh4h? HAh!s’s 17'S BAS: WAAL: OVO: AALL: OAL: APR: OFV4LLTL: nav: 2&hss Ohad: LPG: Ls HOA: AGT TH: CA? ATT: WH: olan: ONATT: TLPACE AH: IAI: ONATT: ANAT: APSA ORR Fa04 ONT: ToOAmMtar;® ONL: OOCTE AGC: 6. AFa0T:
2 be. aH. 2 b. a AL (PM: such generally or APTN: 5 We should expect genitives dependent on #A'T: instead of accusatives: see however Gk. Leg. i. 2 for a similar construction. 4 a, be HH: 9A9": 5 Em. by Din. from WHITH: be. a WP RT: 5 &c.aHAGAI™: 7 Sobsave that I have omitted fi before av}: a NGa0T: a0}7"K:; Nrwoe: Atovt: aI": 5 ac.b Rd4ath: 9a. b AEST: © @ omits. 16a NTE:
o7y7PrE: AdhHPLN: CAS: AALS: PATH: TIA: waomy: MAS: AAALLD: 7. Lie? AALLD: AdhneL: TH: WAN: NaLE: APL; P40: HL: hlos ATHANHC: HATO: feo: AH: AI": Ohlo: Eb? NATHALY: Oho: avzé2: *Aho-d: A>’ 8. OLTAAR: ATTRA: aPAnds 09°S0: wirde:® 692 LING: ODA: Lnw-}: TAU: ANALE! AIRE: 9. ONT: NARA: ONLUA: Lbwo-Pav, AP7LIIPT: REP: ONALCE LEC: WA: PS: ONALBV: Ai ATOACH ro. MACLP: MHPLA: HTT: PA: Ahk: ON: 2.242: owmm: AANA: OOLE: aeot: ONT: CA: OO.LP: VIR 11. OLMbie: 12. ONHRE: OAT! HAG HAPLA: OAK: hav: 2LE Tie: ASH: DAS: 13. OL: ANLLN: AMNPLM: ARC: GC: AIPAC: AGG! Ab ATodds” Il, OME AT724: PT: DUPLA: Wi7w: GN: OMFATHNE: TAHA: MAPLE: AUVs AA: 2dPav+ wld: ATTA: AOA: PCA: OMI: WKF: 2. OFLT: PS: THI: NATHANMC: HAUS OTP: AALM): ObarMntu: wove *AP UPL: PAM: OTP: AAT!
4. o72m: AM: 7° Gb: hav; Gruzx Fragment rrom AMHERST LTPL: AAS Ce! Alav; oon Barrer = GF, OVE: NACC:” Hla: ami ‘i airs sa
nh: O8-AE: Led: NARZA | IL. 4. (.. Myavacoq, cat xare- OF: AOA: F°CO: OLELM:® | (8v)\vduov abrov ey | (77) droord-
1 b.a ALM: such generally or A.M: 2 be. a WLI: 7 ¢. ab ANCLA: 5 ac. b ONCLA: ® Em. from (HE: OAT: @ of be: cf. Gk. Leg. i. 12 év cxeivy 88 rH Spa StedoyiCero, 7d. 2a. beAaTeedi “aom. “abe TAHH: * 6. a OMIM: 6 Supplied in accordance with Gk. Leg. iii. 3. 7 ¢, ab NCLA: 18 Em. by Din. from ©2320: so G? kare(Sv)udpov. ;
CHAPTER NARA: 5. ONE: *A
TA: OF 622 OTMLC: wAT PPP wort: Odea Nat: NAL]? OAL: R2H% NAL: PC: (ONAL: ANné:]* on ALY MILs niGP: ONAL: Sch WO: HAP ASE: ONAL: HAP? VL: 6. OTe4T: TIC: YP: She Aor TE: O-AT: Bh 6: YIP! LUA: OANA: 7. DANLL: OAL: APR: AN: Gat: 0009;° HLTING: NAL4 AA: Ord: NAL: OH OP F740; ATARI: OMd OT:" Ads": HLA: OTP? AF* bt: Adwg?:4 2:5 wt: ANC: Naval: TEP 2 9, MOLL: WL: *MADIE: ACIB” WALPAA® MAING: DALAM” DAR: ones oT: SNC: 10, tie
la. b ONHD:
8 a. be YEO. reads (lt: for Hh:
B a. bc WiNd:
8 g. b WALHM: 21 has an active sense here.
Xetppapavacon,
oat” kat 77 | (dv)opia, ris” éordpn
ev | (TepovoaAnp. 5. Ka(t) érdij- Ouver | (4) Pappaxeta cal 7 palyeta kat % pavreta Kat | of kAnSoviopol Kat | 4 wopveta Kat 6 Swwypos | rév dixatwy év | xepot™ Mavacoy | Kat év xepoty tod Tov|Bi tod Kavavirov | kat év xepolv “Iwvav | rod Nad nat év xeploiy Zadmx Tod elzt Trav zpaypate|av. 6. Kal of Aovrot dd|-you iSod yeypappé|vor cio(ty ev tots Bi| BAows Tay (B)ao(tAdwv | “Tov8a xal *I(cpayaA) J. «+ 04| (Kat Thy ropary(y ad)rod | dvexopyoev da(d ‘T(epovoaA)ihp | kat éxdOicey év B(yO)Ac|eu ris Tovdaias. 8. (kat) | éxet 8& fv dvop{ia m)oA|Ay, Kal dvaywpyoa(s) | dard ByOActu éxa(O)|cev év T@ pet ev Td|7w Epypw. Q. Kal Mixdlas 6 rpopyrys xat *Alvavias 5 yépov kai CI)w|}A Kat “ApBakovp kat |*I[c]lacovd 6 vids adtov | kal 7oAAol ray mio | Tov TOV motevdr|rwv™ eis odpavors dva-| Bivar dvexdpycay, Kai é|kdOicav
2 a, b NIN: Wanye; because wanting in G? and Gh. Leg. iii. 3 cause wanting in G: name appears first in ii. 12.
2 Em. with E from os.
Em. by Grenfell and Hunt from morwv ovtwr.
els 76 pos, 10. wdv|re{s) odKKov
3 Bracketed
Bracketed beb reads NANG: 7 Em. from HAS: of be. a HAP;
° a adds NH: against be and Gh. Leg. iii. 8. " a, bc Abt: 8 a. be OTT chv:
2 gq, btrs. and
4 ae. b ARZANI": Y a. be DATED: ACDL:
apy Fy; 2024: wlirars) LT: AoOKYE: FUL: AY: AANav: PAAWavrs: AA? OG an; Aah E; witivaes 2AM: *Ad: 008 NATH: hath: an GhAH 1. WA: AANo: He QAO: HATA: hI°A: T4I": LET APRANC: OPN trav: BAAS: FAA: AALLI: TOL: ws oO: ALAC: wo oi: A0-7C: DAR Ga0t: R25 Nad: NAV: Hier: NA nda? AP°RHIVR: NASPLN: w AL: NGAk HAIL: Hav Ng: NOT: Ads ORLA oA ONarPon: Ahel: Feo: ANd AA: OD F°YCav«? w-A'E: AGM. LT: HAI: OW-AE: AGP: O8 Ade? AoDned: WAL: AF7R:* Anan: OTOL ODD Ln wt: Ped PAA: ALPLD: ULL: UA@.: FAA: An-HL: = wdAL;
7 oNAne:
fer) mrepiBeBAnpevor, | kal révres Hoay mpopirat, | ovdey zxovres pet’ ad- TOV | GAAG yupvol Hoar, revOodv-| tes wévOos péya wept THs 7A(A)-| vys tov “lopoyA. II. Kat ovror odk jo|Acov et py Bordvas TiAdov- 2628 pera "Hoa(io)u™ *oixodv-| tes. kal ée(t) joav® ev z(o)is dpeloww Kat év tois Bovvois (8)u(o 2)rn | qepav™ 12. Cert) tod e(Z)var abrovs (év) | rots épnu(o)es KL nsins 4|va'sived aise va aris ev Japapig 3 (6)vopa | jv Bedrxeip éx ris | ovyyevias Zedexiov| viod Xavavitot — Yev|Sorpopyrov 8s Fv | KaTouxdy €v Bybalvig™. Kat Sedexias vids | Xavavi ds qv ddeA|hds Tod ratpds ail|rod, év 88” rais pugpaus|’AxadB Bacidéwst0d| "Iopaya jv™ dddo-| kaXdos Tay Tetpa|kooiwy zpopyTav | tot Bada, kai aird(s) | épdarucev kal BBpilcev tov Meyalay vidy leupada Tov mpopyryv’ 13. Kal adtos 8 bBp(ic)|On bad *AxaaP xal | €BryOn Mixatas | cis pudakiy. Feat Fv" | u(e)ra. Zedexdov rod | pev- On the various forms of this
name of which the most, primitive form appears to be that in the
text, see note, p. 13.
® See exegetical note, p. 14.
9 @ avUCav:
6 om. be WRACr: 2 a. cf. G?"leupadd. 6 AOD: * bom. ™ Add WUA@: in accordance with G? kai fv. For Ab-HE: (6), a reads ANH&: ’ E&pavres érpépovro. ™ E adds 6 mpopnrns. ®% Ekal olxoivres foav. 19 Es adds kat pera TovTO. 20 B= ByOnecu. 1 Above the line in MS. 2 MS.
topanindnv. Grenfell and Hunt explain 7A as a dittography of yA.
ANTZ SI”: ANAVAD-::)
14, OAALN: LL: H “EA? HAI Ade: LAA: Adn- He:* wo nner Ce:*o* O-aAE: THe: AAT: AnH: hoo: *0I7A AN: LEU. 2oow-t; *ONT7CL: Nal: vA a: GAC: TroOUN: a hoo: PA: eT: AT aA: F°NA: Abe H.e:7 WAL: Anal: *wav PVCas ALACLAE aAPLened: AA: G1)? VEU ANLDL?
' For ANAM (a), b reads NNAws
Sorpogyro(v)| dvros’*- joav pers |
’Oxolelov viov "ANA(w)" | ev Beu-
paopia. 14. kat’Hyelas (6 mpodileys & colar)" ...|[ kal THv Zapapiav,
kal aids émpody|revev mept Oxolelov ore ev khivy dp|pworias daro~ Oavetlrax cai 4 Sapapia eis | xeipas “AAvacdp ma|padoOycerat avO dv| eddvevev Tors | tpopy- (xa)t dxotcayres of apopyrat + (o)i pera ’Oyolfefov viod "Ady kat | (6) S8doxados abrév | “IadAapias™ é& dpous + Io|Aad t® 16. xai abrés Fv [o |
Fragment or THE First Lari Version = Lt.
(See Introd., pp. xxi, xxix-xXxXxi.)
14. (pro)fetas Dei. ‘15. Et cum audissent pseudoprofetae qui erant cum Ochodiam filium Achab, *qui fuerat doctor eorum Gamarias” de monte Efrem, 16. Et ipse fuit frater Sedeciae,
The phrase A” NN” is
clearly a transliterationAlamerem balala’aw. Alam in the first word’Ayé§; for’Axd@ is so written in ii.1g of G2. Again balala’aw was probably basala’aw (i.e. BacvAéws), since M and fi are sometimes confused in Ethiopic. Thus we have ‘Ahab... king.’ The intervening letters érém may be corrupt and defective for <v Seppo, itself corrupt for év Sapapig: cf. 1 Kings xxi. 1 ‘ Ahab, king of Samaria.’ 2 @ om. 3 be ‘HOt: “6 om. Fa AP Aah: NAP: 6 Em. with G: E wrongly Af.
7 6 Ane: 8 T have with L bracketed this word: 6 reads anh: 2 a AAPL: 10 MS. wevdorpodnro ovres. 1 See note! above. 12 Remainder of this line and the next two undecipherable. 3 E adds airov. 4 EL! = pevdorpopirat.
6 EH =Jalergés, L! Gamarias. 16 Corrupt possibly for Iopayr. In that case Efrem would be simply an equivalent in thought though not in letter. J6él or {j6él of E could arise from Iona. 17 Should be et Gamarias qui fuerat doctor eorum.
AAaD yp:
fod Pav. AawHe: TE:
PCht oO NoLnLa:
III. 1. ONAne? AN Or OCA: avn: 4.4 LON: OHI HAN: PRA: Alia: w-4F; Tt: Ad: OTAIP Ks: APC oOw-AE: 2 Be: HAT: NAk4-A ASSAM AN: PS PAV: Dwo-wWE: APACE: OWE: anic: HDC: FR: AACE: w20FP; Nhe? Ck: O14: TOYEU: mH: 029; owhse
1b AIO: abe ONNARSE:
aman:
% Defective and corrupt.
G Bexerp(a)]7 ddeAdds tov | Sedexiov, dxovcay|(r)es® perémecay tov | Oxo€eiay Bacirca.| Topudppwy «at édpd-| (v)evoay tov Muxai-| (av. TIT. 1. xai Bexeipa eyvo, | (K)at edev tov 76|(r)ov tod *"Hoaiov | (kat 7a)y mpody|(tav tav) per” ai|(Tov. otro)s yap jv oi|Kav év TH xopa Bybrcép, Kat éxodAy-| On TG Mavacop. Kai | aitos fv Wevdorpo|pytevwv ev ‘Tepovoal|Ajp, kai oAAot é& “Ilepovcod ékoddy|Oyoav mpos aurdv. | Kal attos 8¢ Fv dad | Sapaplas. 2. Kat éyévelro év TO edOeiy AX yacdp *Agovpiny Baci|d€a kal aixpadwrilra. THY Sapapiay | cal daBely Tas év|(ve)a tyuov®
PvAds ély aixpadwoia
Add rt: with GL. LPNALC: (a vow nulla). b OfdyC:
® So Li
suasit’® Ochodiam regem Gomorrae, et occidit ® Micheam.
ITI. 1. Et cognovit Bechira, et vidit locum Eseiae et profetarum qui cum illo erant ; ipse enim habitabat in Beth-
||Jem™ ; tet abiit Hie-
rosolima, ett? conjuncti sunt et *ipse a Samaria“. 2, Et factum est cum venisset Salmanassar rex Assyriorum, et accepisset Samariam, et abduxisset novem™ et dimidia(m) tribus in captivitatem et per-
3 Em, with G? L' from 5 Em. with G? from a 6 Em. from a @ Hi: * Is an intrusion, though supported by E: see exegetical ® So EB. Lom. be in plural as in EG?
E om. ” Should
1 MS. Beclem. EG?=regione Bethlehem.
EG = et conjunctus est Manassi
et ipse prophetabat mendacium in Hierosolyma et, multi ex
Hierosolyma. from nomen.
% Em. by Nitzsch from ipsi Asamaria.
CHAPTERS II, 16—III. 5
ave wT: NAW-CT: BEE OAGAT OEY? 3. HOWE: DoH: T STA: WavKA: ALLA 07°:* NavPod: mH PLA: Vw: LU-R: wo ahd: AEST: AV: Hd°7CeL: Ada: mH PELNTILECU: 4.0 tTZnl: Narvon: mh ped: AW: LYTIC: LP: Ob: MUPLI: OTrita: Idd Ot:
kat | darevéyxat adtods | eis 6pn® Myduv xat | rorapav ? [xai] 4! To-| fdv, 3. obros Hy veld- Tepos, Kal épuyev | Kai WrVeveis Te(pov)|caAjp nep)as — (Efe) |xéou Bao(tréus"I)|ovSa. kali obk élrdre?t+* eis Sapapilay ev 686+ tod7a-| tpos airov™, dri Toy “Efexiay épofeiro. | 4. kal eipéOn ev 76|xpove ‘Efexiov dalAGv Adyous dvo|uias ev ‘Iepovca- Phy | 5: kat KaTyyopnOy [76 Tay zaiSur | “E€exiou Kat epvyer | eis tiv x@pov By|6- Ace. Kal erecav™. |
duxisset eos in montem Medorum et ad flumen Gozan: 3. Bechira fuit juvenior, et fugit et pervenit Hierosolymam in diebus Ezeciae regis Judeae: non ambulabat in via Samaritani © patris sui, quoniam timebat Ezeciam. 4. Et inventus est in tempore Ezeciae loquens v(erba) injustitiae in Hierusalem, 5. Ht spretus est a pueris Ezeciae et fugit in regione(m) Beth-
' Ga (?). Ifso, this may be a corruption of épy as in G? (and L’); if not, then our text agrees with the Massoretic text of
2 Kings xvii. 6 (1Y) against LXX which imply
on G? in loc.
§ Text defective. Better read pl. with G’.
loc.
(e)warets.
gives: in via Samariae patris sui.
matpos avrov.
© Corrupt for worapous.
1 Should be excised. 8 Corruption can be understood from L!} which: Thus L'=év 686 ev Sapapia tov Since this was unintelligible, some scribe of G?
5 6 HavCe; E alone is right here: see note 7b O@ AT: AAT: OLLLP: LP:
» See note on E in
transposed év 686 and é Sapapig (cis Zapapiavy being probably his correction). From E we see that ¢v Sayapia should be Sapapetrov. The error can be explained by the Hebrew: &v 686 ev Sapapia rod marpos atrov= YIN DWI TIA where “v3 is corrupt for
ww. Thus the Greek should be: ey 686 rod Sapapeirov marpis avrov. 4 Text defective. See exegetical note in loc. ® MS. . Samariae. See note ™ above. 16 —xarehpovndy corrupt for xary-
yopnén as contempsit (ver. 6) = xareppdrncev (Turner).
6. MANTPLE? OA nés AAALLA: wont LT: *AA: FAA? ATH: 2A: AAL LD: MAN: FAV: LTS NF: AOA: FLSA": MANA: AVEC: LUA: nap; LOVAG?? ON LI°%: hav: &dho-C: AZP: MANNE: 47 ATAT: Oa Pe ht: Acme TEN: hAt: 21s Ot: AANGAA: we. 9. Darth: 2th: Ad O: NAt: H2oAt:
abrov.
Kvpie Bacided Sri. u ED =eni.
3 MS. Beclem. but G? om. 18 MS. Beniami-. 21 MS. galea grec. with EG’,
Corrupt for videre.
6. kal Karyydpyoer | MeAxeipa tov "Hoallov kal tov mpody|rav® Aéywr ért "Hoalias cat * ot apopyrat® | of pe- 7a. ’"Hoaiov™ zpolpyrevovow émt ‘Ielpovea- Ajp Kat éxt | (ra)s 176 Aes “Tovda® | (xa)i Be(vi)apety dru | (zo)- pev(co\vrar® év -yare-| (dy)p(a1s xa)t ev rédars| dareXevoy,| 7. Kat airol wevdo|rpopyret~ hs + a, NA ovow | kat” roy "lopar kat | rév "Tovdav * Fxat tov | Bertapely adrot | pucotow, Kat 6 ddlyos aitay Kaxds | émt tov a ff XN si. > Tovday | kat tov “IoayAT?. 8. Kat | airs "Hoadas etrev|[atrots], Brera mAKLlov Mavoyj 70d rpo|pyrov. Q. elev ‘ fal Lf a yap | Mavoyjs dru ob
2 G om. but L' supports. 5 EL! add rév per’ adrod. 5 G? om. through hmt. the following words: ére épnpwOngovrat Kal emt rods viods “Tovda, ® Here G? is again defective.
So Li
E om. «ai ém.. Add with E L! aiypddore: kai eri oe,
lem*. 6. Et contemsit'* Bechira Eseiam et profetas * qui cum eo erant', dicens, quonia(m) Eseias et profetae, qui cum illo sunt, profetabant in Hierusalem et a(d) civitatis Judeae, *quoniam deserentur® *et in filios Judeae” et Benjamin", quoniam captivi® ducentur™: *et in te”, *domine rex, quoniam * *galeagra et” per ferrum deduceris, 7. Ipsi profetaverunt” in Istrahel et in Juda * et in Hierusalem™. 8, Et ipse Esaias dixit se plus quam Moysen profetare™. 9. Dixit enim Moyses quo-
7ELD=
E om.
- Tovda.
1 The missing word may be éécptos,
2 EF om., L' gives only et in Hierusalem. ™ See note on preceding page. 16 So E, but G2 om. MS. deseruntur.
MS. ducuntur. Niebuhr em.
8 So also E, Y EG? om.
20 MS. et inde. G? om. 2 Read pseudoprofetaverunt 3% Eom. G? has a large divergent addition.
AATHANAC: Och ak CAnP: AAT aC:O4F: hlOs Abs
Aah TE? OAALS-AN | dy(s)
4: ASI": Havl: wo
AarAant: LUAL: @ | (
ARZAGI": HO: 77° é: ZAP: ON: ATPL? AAALL PG: m1. wind: NMALC: oft: AN: PG: owit: AN: wnant: £04: on Hao Ped: VRP s wad: AsALLA: 13. Adov; NALC:* *lovSt: ONL: Utes’ NOA: AALLI: AI
ANTP LES:
cum. 18 MS, consiliario.
% Added from EG’. Mai em.
dlWerar dvOpwros | tov Gedy Kat Lacerta), *Hoaias 5é eter ef[Sov tov (Bedv) K(a)t ib | Ca. ro. Bacr{A)ed (yi)vo(o)|Ke bre ev- H(s) éolrw. Kal rH ‘I(e)pov|cadjpy 3d80- pa e|kdAccev, (at tous) |dpxovra(s’lovda.| cal IopayX! (Aadv To-)| péppas mp(oo7ys)|pevcev. (x)a(t oAdée | Karrpydpet emt Tod | Mavacon® Kal TaY 7Tpodyrov. II. Kat é|xd- Oicey Bersdp ev | rH xap(8)ia. rod Malvacoy kat év TH Kap|dia Tov 2 Ca FS 4 he apxovTwv | *TovSa Kai Bentapety | kat rv edvotyov | kat rOv coupe Bod|Awv* rod BacrAé-| ws? I2. kal jpecav ad-| 7@ of Adyou TOD Bed-| xerpa. kal dméoredey | kal éxpdrycey Tov | *Hoaiav. 13. qv yap 5 Bel\cap ev Oupe
mo lAG (é)ri ’Hoaiav
2 Since L? has mendax est the text is corrupt; we should read hAG: OAT: 4 ab NCLA: 7 BL! =‘lepovoadty rightly: cf. Isa. i. 9 MS. rév Baotréov.
2 Should be excised. 16 MS. Beliac. 1 EG? give sing.
10 Add
5b NAnds:
8 Add rod ’Hoaiov from
13 MS. nominavit.
niam homo non po-
), || test videre Deum” ;
dixit autem Eseias Vidi. Deum et ecce vivo. 10, Tu, rex, intellige quoniam mendax est: et ecce™ Hierusalem Sodomam dixit, et pri(n)cipes [ejuset] Judeae et Hierusalem populum Gomorrae nominavit™, Et coram™ (Manasse)* in multis detradixit Eseiae et profetis, 11. Et supersedit Beliar “in corde Manasse, et corde” principum Joudaee et Benjamin et spadonum et consiliariorum™ regis. 12.Etplacueruntei(s] sermones Bechire, et mandavit rex et adprehenderunt” Eseiam. 13. Fuit enim Beliar’® bilem habens in Eseiam
and G? wevd9(s) éorey 3 be
et vivere with EG’. WY MS. corda.
AL: DAIMLT: Hh vet: ANTA: wha; QATEAU: ANTCAY: PRE? AGRO AI® OE? OCVE: OA APT! GAe: OA: ONZE: HLAL2: w OP CTLs Hie Lbs: ANGAA: LIP L9:5 OPRAT: LOCACK 4s OTPUCT:’ On av}: UAS: Pan: (F OFAN: OLM: 7M Ct: 0a09; LAPA: wo nov: \ooP-Nci;: 2T PIC:
14 OLMS* AN: PHU: LO 4: OE: wo OPAT” AM: WOPH:
'¢ PRAT: So L' adventum. ANTCA: could be translated actively = revelavit. 4 ac OP PLOT
TtoOAmys:
3b wL-TBAT: ° 6 ODLAPLS: VAP:
° Em. from a Atty. bc read ATH: a manifest correction.
dar6 | rijs (6pd)oews Kat dxé | to(d 8et)yparicpod | dre (e)derypdrice | tov (S)apaya, cal 6|(rx 8 a)érod eave|(pwOy 4) e€éAcvots | Tov dya)ayrod ék | (rod €88)dp0u oipa-| (vod kal 4) perapdp-| gucis avrov, kal 7 tA > cel ® katéBaows airod, Kat | 4 da Hv Sel aibrér | petapoppobfvar | ev <iSer dvOpwrrov, | Kat 6 Stwypds by diwlyOyoe- Tat, Kal at KoAd|oes als def rods vilods 70d *Io- ‘ aN Z payrA abrév | KoAdcat, kal 4 Tov dadexa pa- Onreia™, wat | ds Set atrov™ pera | dvdpav Kaxoroilav cravpwh7- vat, | kat Ore ev pvy- 3 ta pe(2)o | rapjoerat,
propter (visionem et propter)® quod *in se“ ostenderit Samael, et quoniam ipse nuntiavit™adventum dilectissimi de septimo caelo et transfigurationem™ ejus et discensum et for-
|}mam in qua trans-
figuraretur esse hominis, et persecutionem, quam passurus est, et contumeliam quam patere(tur)
da|Sexa of per’ a{d)-
tod | bx adtot oxavdal\ucOyoov-
tat, ka(t) | 7 TApyots” Toy 7(y)-| pytav rod prypolveiov,
7 be OT PVCT:
from ab OPATL: in accordance with G?,
paénreia.
rupt for ostensione(?),
a verb that = revelatus est or revelavit.
quem. Dn. em.
7 See note » above.
E shows leanings to text of L':
2 ac
NE =zapovoia cal 7
® Add with E mpd rod coBBdrov oravpabivas emi EvAov. * Lost by hmt. Supplied from EG’. * G? has a passive construction.
4 Cor- E has 6 MS. transfigurati
CHAPTER
HOT: ACOELE Att: ANCL tT: 6.0: PLA: WTOLARA: *avAAn:4 amnant: P2071: navy MIAN: Gav CORA: OL44: TOS ACS4.U: 18. OLBU4: ther: Ahn: otic: AA: ATYIA: GC: WAN: Thook: NoviPas: LE OTP A010: hav; VAM. 1K: Ad: LTA ov: WE: Nav: PS. LTS Face? Lnw-r: Nw-ak: ave S427: ACKAU TPUCT: H IWEHPCLT: OF LAVP+a04
@hap; atnd Wave Add A:
1 @ wrongly AJ”.
wav tnd: Tapia. 8 E adds 8ddexa.
15. kal &s 4 K(ardéBa)|ois tod dyye(Aov ris) | éxxAnoias 75(s ev oipa)|vG .... pe Tos év Tals 6 dyyedos tod Tvetpatos | Tov dyiov Kal Muyalir apxwv tov pet eee tov dyiov | ore Ty TpiTy Hpue|pa abrod dvot~ov-| ow TO pyynpovetov, | 17. Kat 6 dyarntés xalPicas émt trois dp-| ous abrav eeAe| vera, kal as droote|Aet tovs"® —prabytas | airod 18. Kal pabyted|covow mdvra, te GOvn Kal wacav yAdo-| cay eis rHv dv(d)otalow Tod dyaa()rob, | Kat of (2)ioredoar|res (9) cravpd ailrod cwO(4)covtat kal | ev 7H dvaBdoet ail (r)od eis tov EBSopor | (0)d(p)avov dOev (Aoi x)ai oAAot (7) Gr | (xreore)vdytov eis | (airov) ev rd dyi Ivevpari|(AaAjoour)w, 20. Kai dis | TOAAG onpeta Kal | tépata. &o)- ror év | Tails Hucpas éxetvais, ar. cal” éy 7h éyyilew | adr(d)v. (d)pyoovew ot (p)aPnral airod Thy mpodyteiay tov bade|Ka dro ordAwv abrod™ | Kal tiv rior
enecone
3 q@ avPo: ® So be. a aDP4{IC: Sa Ach: a0 2 & wNhoo: UAw-:
4 g adds N@?: a vow nulla.
kal | viv dydaryy airév | cal rhv ‘bm.
> 6 wrongly a wrongly a wrongly om.
® 6 HAC LAU:
7 Grenfell and Hunt supply lacuna with
19 E adds pera ravra. 2 Eom.
21 6 adds atrav. Possibly the atrod in the preceding phrase should
be read as atray after rior.
no}; Mad: Nit: (AT RAE: OPAPEOE: 23. ONW-A'F: ap POA: NHI: AA: L6.P42 "Lot: NO MEI ASST: 009°: wPirt: *140b: AN2Pav« wL. nwo: wm: *NAcn.Otrav: & OHI Ble: dNirravs *VeP S.A MANAT: EPL OCP:
OLNO-): PLA: T9: NHR” low- AE: ar POA: WOPGbe4 *HNC: |...
ew all... ev éxeivy | 7B xpdvy
OO6k: HNc:” A“b2at: AT HA: O27 7TH: ovIZR: PF2: APM: 27. OALZAG:
ORAM: LTS, *R IT: At HA? SEN Nanas: 28. NAT: ond: dah Tt:” wHoe-t: OH
VAw*T? Thek *07An: 2 TOU :" ADNICH AHhs OAAA:
cee He)|va
' dyvelay airav. | 22. Kal érovrar _ aipéoets | roAAal év To éyyi|fev
airdv, 23. Kab écor|ra éy Tals Heépats élxeivars moddol 6édov-|
tes Gpxew kat xevol | codias.
24. Kal €covra: woAlAot apecBu- Tepot dvo|pou a(t) croupéves | ddixou e(x)t 7a zpoBara | atrav....... pévas ayvous.. 25. Kali aires éy-:
HAD 2 were cveee |
of dulAotvres THY dd€(av)|Tod Kéopou Tovrov. | 26. kal évovrat KataXa|\al zoAdal Kal xelvodogia mokAy ev | 7B eyyiLew Tov Kvpov, | Kal dvaxwpyoe TO | wved-: oy > 4 cal a pa TO ayov dad | Tov ToAdGv.
27. Kat od|« éoovra: év éxeivais | tails hucpars rpopy|rar aodAol
AaAodr|res ioyupa H efs kal ei(s) | N Jf. og , XN tL
kal els év téros Kal | Térots 28.
dd. 76 aveDpo. | ris wAdvys K(at
t)Rs | wopveias kat Tis KelvoSogias
N7Aieav; *RAA: ONL” NP |, cai rhs | drrapyup({)a(s .. .* |
1@ om. 2 6 om. 3 A manifest doublet. Cf. G?. 7 Em. with G from a NMaOnNtor: Pir: PEA: For these words 6 offers a mere correction: a0C¢T: P$.0h Aw” is a vox * bane: © chav-t; an alternative(?) form of dh7ZT: as hPL:
of ch®:; if not then it must be changed into h?Zt: a reads MhUMVLL};
fest doublet.
y wd: BoA. 4b wath: > 6 RANA: ONL:
27 E adds oie oi.
4 A mani- 6B WOES: a wrongly
3 @ adds AOE: ° Read (dpraynod)peva.
8 Here several lines are lost.
er: ONASOH-Ft: NNLG LV ave: AL756: avPOA: Aloo: tak: HA GTP: APLav; ROLL: LTS LT: HAA: AF°P.27R: OGAL TOL: AA? £2C0* nav: BA Obs Alors VCE: IV. w® LAWLE: HHPLA: OAL ON: w AL: AAS AST TE: aeons’ +% Té.200: COCR: MALC: awa AZ hav: 12: OLOCL: AIR 50+ AGAg: Mat: Tho Oav4; WE: 3 thd: 3 Hind: Iweh PCLT: Eec: LNA LT AT°LME NAS: L2YOVN: 4. Har An? AGAg Hae: F227": av RA: OLa%i PN: ti: LATHE! AF": OLNF OP: Nit: HPL:
30. (f)fiAdos yap éorau| oaelh é&v Tals, éoxalrais Hpepats , Exac|ros yap 70 dperrov ev Tots bpGanpots | abrod dakioe. 3I. kal -| é~adyoovow” tas [mpoyretas Tov mpo|dyrév Tay ™po eluod Kal ras épdoes ; pov Tatras cw ”)-| covow iva, a. (6)péyp(a)r(a) Vs kapdias atrav Aadjowow..
kat vilv | “E(e)xéa kat secon u(i)|€ plov) abraf iow ad(e) (ipé)pa() tis tAnp(d)|(cew)s Tov ey cider) | dvOparov Baoré-| ws dyépou pntpa.|Agou domes ards” | 6 Pacrreds ob70s | 3- Tv gur(e)iav 7 nv | ureicovow ot 8a-| deka dardorohou | rod dyamyrod: Sui Ee(c) kal (r)av 8ddexa, | (cis) tats xepoly avrod | (7)apado64-- cera. 4. od|ros (6 dp)xwv ev rH i\Sea rod BaotAéws elkeivou éded-- cerat | (x)at af dvvdues aca. | (2A)evo(or)rax t(o)dr(ov) | (7)od
kd(o,
5. "DONS: LwCh: OAL: NANT: OOC4L: LTC: hap;
Afi: a mere scribal correction.. 5 a@om. 5 Em. from Af:
Tedécews ? G? has probably wAnpaceas.,
7 Em. from appoa: an unusual form of #'00-9:(?) krqoeus. Otherwise correct *W% into W&A: ‘completion.’ © ab NCLA:
? Em. with G? from Af: 6 gives AM: instead of
Is this corrupt for
6 adds
3 Em. from 6 FRO: HF: 909°: wrah: For wt’ ac read. @tna: I regard the corruption as due to the phrase YEw'H:
509": two lines before. with c. 6 be DLaDKA:
19 E = kcarapyjoovew,
7 6 DLAT: UTE: 20 MS. pytpodaou,
® ab add MGA; but G? ae
OODLE ATT: CAC 6. wot: H2b2: LINC: *19AI1 LINC? OF LTCIG: VIN? EC: OLA: Ah O-VE: ATLA: DATEL: KUN: DK.OOLZ:: 7. ORI: Has Oa: * O90": fid-C: OHAMAUs AA: NOLn* 9. WaP-NHyravs NAA: PN Peap; 12s Nits AVEC 12, OLATH: want. Got: oo Onot:® oC worPdh: FOZ: 13. ONS): a7 LI°G): OPS}: AN: Caf: How rE: £04.01: ATAPA: AO: ATH: acith: 24d: CAP: A BALD: (AH: TAA: OOCT:) WAN Z:? CAF: CE: 48a: AoE tals AO-WE: aPPOA: LTS: aE? A7NCE? AW: LP” AF°IAI: OO: TAI’: AW LR: PRAT: 14. DAP Lach: *iO"EZ*wawe aor: Lav%a: ATA: FA: aAAntUs OF AA: FLAT PEAT: AF°AN00: hove: PAA: Port: 10: ACT 2: OLA: NALCZ: wt: THF: ODLAEU LE” 15. DLOCRaP: Aah: £2nNavs 0747; Aw-NTH: WAI": AcPAnLh wTe: [wOALM: L-76.C:]* 16. Ottivaves AA: OAT! FLAPPER ZIPP” ANALG ONDE: OPEAT: FAA: ATA: Lav%hs FAA: ANNU avs: H40A: LEC: with: 400: A°7L1 FAA: ATLA: LopRis Ad: APSA: OLTAAnOD: ATHA: AAA: O00: O@-NTH: GA9%s 17. DAPLACH: L£rackar: w-Nt: AANA avs 1A: OL THL7: PIPam: ONT: AF: 18. AZ: Pls AGC: LLR: Nave: *AH: 0°72:" DAH: G2: OAAGNCL: ONAW-7CL: OAAVECL: ONILw-+L; ONNID-1:* *wOhardah: BALL OAHOCAL:® OAT
‘6mLaLmon, °F. 7 Bracketed as an Ethiopic interpolation. a ° 6 APNCTUS © be LPL " be
Mai: ” Added totext. Cfiiv.12. “bc H¥. “a RAK! € may be corrupt for B as Din. supposed. “ 6 BLATT: 6 ab MCLAZ: “Yaom. * AnEthiopicinterpolation. 672079: 2 ab add AN before this word. 2 a4 ANCeA: Here be uphold right orthography. 2b OLAPar; % Em, from a WH: N97 2; and c AHAN®7L: 5b reads ANPTL: % So be. a@ reads
CHAPTERS Iv. 6—Vv. 8 97
AZ? (HN: ANTCAL: WATVL: NALC? Aw-WVH: 9099: OLhnw-}: (THA: @)) Hi: Nw-tt-tor: AHh: oP POA: OER CH OC: *AOT: ATAU WO LNAI: He: CAI OLN: nav: HATES: 19. OTE4T: 112: GAL: RHE AowOTE wrt: GA ALTE 20. OTé4&T: GAY ATWA: HP: &dh&h Kooy: *OP-AALT: OPATE: AH: Fah: wot: awRhE: WI7LE TL: — 21. OCLELY AGRC: wot: (aA: IP: Raa: AowTE: w-t: ao F-E CT: NH: NA: ATHA: TP: LAO” OAS: Ole HE HY RAE ONT: FUP CT: APAALT APT: OAL: aANL: DAXYPAALT: AT: OAS: ONE: do: OFF" ANEAAP: MONET: ANG: *o'w-At: Té"444: OUPCTL: HoPARh: a0'3é.0: OTR: AGL: OVAO: 10.2: OHOneA: OHALAA: OHI: OUTSH: OHARA: OHAINGI®: OHA: *OHAE LL: OHHA CLM? DHF ARLAY ONet: COE: A2E: OAV: KAAS V. OATH: ATE: Ath: GALT TIO: NCLA AOA: 4.42.00: wind: wit: Ad: °C: Mowe: AAALLA: NPwCr: Ob: 2. DAA LC: ATH: 2Taowl: av; Ar P2e:2 NA: oer: attr: Hivos: bon: ATH: LAE: OLE ds Wl: FALL: 3. ONAN: 1F°RF Mh: bav:* PL-a0; .ANL CN: a TH: | LNaheb:]* Laas” 4. O20: AAnd:*® AAALCA: AA: dhiw-n” Bie: ATSIC: OESRUL: APSA: WS lt: OCF” AF7TE: 5. E6804; ANA: wS2*Ts! OAF OHAA FOU: 6. OHI: £0*t:' AN: ATH: L2rowls: 7. OAALLA: Ule: NGA: ATLA: Dav FT: AOL TEU: O(A.)"L0*A' For: 8. ONA née® WT: TTIC: AKALLT: NA: HaNAn: WALT: Afavs: DaLNC:* APC: whardant: £04: OAH: ONT: 484
1b OAUAZ: 2 ab NCLA: 3 Bracketed as an interpolation : see exegetical note, p. 36. ‘6b om. 5 be §9C7: 10 Em. by Din. from ac o0F°¢ CT: b avHarcrT: 1 6 £obtr: 2 @ PHP CT: 0FALT: Bh OCF 4b ANN: 8 be FIG: ° 5 OHF-AnELN: a GALT: 1 abe.
2B conTPet 3 ONAN: *}b PRI Onl: % Em. from a0; ™ Bracketed asa doublet. 7 Em. from nit: 3 ac MALL: * & repeats this word. » 6 OCEOT: 3B @HAIA: * Must be supplied asin vi. 10. 8 « OOLARED: “6 @MALNCOD; © a adds ONISA:
H
ARF? hav: LAM: Ans 9. WhO: KAL LH: O20: Aovh: AIF Ch: *O-AE: VLA: OFH: OCIS Arh: Os FLAT: ort: Btn: 10. Alav: AMM: 6.2428: ATA: APVAN: PDEs Il. OWTHF: OMOWCP:; AKALLI: OAL: APR: ATwWCT: O8# 12. O9°Gh: ONAnE:* OWE: hot: wahaAnt: On: HAINA: Lrowe: bf. Add: aLCh: WILLS: Adov: Ach: Ana@ert: Tod: *aA7HANAC: HPOnS 14. OAALLI: ATH; LToOwl: ARCH: O40: 4A: APU LISP: Nave: PSD: adh: towd: AnAA: 15. HYt: Td: NMALC! AAALLD: NAL: OAnd: ONAL: 7°90: Ahao: Var: ATA: NOLL: avers? AOA: FALL: Aeon: HULA: The: LUG: OATH Yet: HCAt: NATH: GRC: 16. OAATT: UPA: ATTA: HCAS: NATILA:
OGALA: HCAS: AAC: OAL: APRs
PE ADAP LO: YEO: LUG: Fh” ANS Tin: OAL: aAAe Ot: FN: HHPLN: AL EAAP ATOINTA
Taz Srconp Latin Vursion (= L?), VI—XL (See Introd., pp. xviiixxvii.)
Visto, QUAM VIDIT Ysaras "propHeE- TA" Frnrus Amos”.
VI. Anno XX regnante Ezechia, rege Judae, venit Ysaias [prophetal, _filius
‘Amos, ad Ezechiam
in Hierusalem™, 2. Et intrans sedit
So be. a OF>Aes 5° g dav; *ba00T: AMA: © a warKE:
om. Gk. Leg. i. 3 supports text.
SL’.
Latin TRansuaTIon OF THE Suavonic VERSION, BY Prorrssor Bonwersca. .
VI—xI. (See Introd., pp. xxiv— XXvii.)
VIsIo QUAM VIDIT Tsancrus! Isaras "Propoera™ Fr- Lius Amos.
VI. Anno XX regnante Ezechia, rege Judae, venit Isaias filius Amos, ‘et Jasus, filius Isaiae! ad Ezechiam in Hierusalem. 2. Et cum
3b. a OH: AO-AE: WV:
7 ab NCLA: 1 ab AF°TAA: S L?
® Added from Gh. Leg. ii. 1; 8 The following late title prefixed to the above appears
in the printed edition of the lost MS.: Visio mirabilis Isaiae prophetae in raptu mentis, quae divinae trinitatis arcana et lapsi
generis humani redemptionem continet.
Defect. here. See note.
CHAPTERS ‘V. 9—VI.
aNd: APRA: WF: 3. MAN: AH: AOL LA: VLESIC: FUN: MHPLD: FHP: V1: Wivavs avAant: Al PF}: woP hdd: YE Ps: DUAGL: Ul: FH0, Li: OO-WL: LT: OR APRLLI: DAP ELEN OAT" adea: AY A705 hav: ZALCN: aR A: AJPINTAS "HO: MAPLD: 4. WoVR He LNT 0: Pdeks9 whoo: OPAC: aAkU: AOMV ar: whan; * Zz TI0-ba;” witirars UAa@.: Pea0; RAL
supra lectum regis. 3. Et omnes principes Israel et consiliarti regis et eunuchi stabant ante illum. 3-4. Veneruntque ex omnibus villis et agris et montibus prophetae, et filii prophetarum audientes quod Ysaias venerat a Galgatha” ad Ezechiam, salutare eum, 5. Et annunciare ei, quae ventura erant.' 6. Tune” loquebatur verba veritatis. Spiritus Sanctus super-
5. | venit in eum, et om-
intrasset sedit supra lectum regis. 3. Et omnes principes tJerusalemit’ et consiliarii regis et eunuchi stabant ante illum. 3-4. Veneruntque ex omnibus villis® et “ex! agris et montibus prophetae et filii prophetarum, cum audivissent, quod Isaias venerat a Galgal’® ad Ezechiam, salutare ” eum, 5. [Simul autem! et annuntiare™® ei [de iis] quae venturaerant. 6.Cum”® loquebatur -verba Tomnial veritatis, Spiritus Sanctus supervenit in eum et
AOL LI: PON: hb PLA? Ft: RAP:
ayer: ® Corrupt for Galgal as in S. 8 Should be cum
as in SE, and full stop after veritatis should be comma.
4 Corrupt for Israel as in L? E. vjs’=-omnis and vicus.
tavit. but L? tune.
8 Ot vsi ch: viizvésjai w: iT? Galgatha. ® Blgovéstiti : blgovéstit [annuntiat] u, ch.
MY y et salu-
wieaws +044: HA Cio: +@nvA: av? teow: wit: dH: UT2al: 0%; wave a> MOLNLD: WAT Lt: ACDL: OAL AA: OALAN:* WEN: AI°O: Hivavs® APA: a7: PL: ARs dtiram: (Chav: oOnh?: AAT°An: LP: AACA: AHoth: WAH: APSA): £0 Io. OATH: L2TGIC: Noord: PA: AH: a: AT°A0NU:® wo- AEL: ALAR aD: A
1b Pat:
a WALT TMN: b adds MAR:
7 Seems corrupt.
Corrupt for enim ?
® Corrupt. S right = E. " L? ex iis inventi sunt. 70 T? adds in.
trs. wrongly.
verborum.
nes videbant et audiebant verba Sancti Spiritus. 7. Convocavit eum® rex [et] prophetas, et omnes introierunt, quotquot inventi sunt ibi, insimul. Erant autem Micheas et Ananias senes, Joel Tet quotquot ex eis inventi sunt” a dextris eius "et a sinistris". 8. Cum autem audierunt vocem SanctiSpiritus, flexerunt genua et cantaverunt deo altissimo requiescenti in sanctis, 9g. Et talem virtutem verborum"” in mundo donanti. to. Loquente vero eo'in'SpirituSancto in auditu omnium statim tacuit, et exinde +videbant stantem quendamt” ante
ab om. but SL? support. L? talem virtutem verborum in mundo donanti. ” Less corrupt text in S. 3 prorocy: MSS. proroci. — E om., and no doubt rightly. 18 L? adds ejus. | J? videbant stantem quendam.
omnes videbant audiebantque verba Sancti Spiritus. 7. Convocavit ‘enim! rex [et] prophetas™ *omnes et introierunt, quotquot eorum inventi sunt ibi, insimul. ‘ Erant autem Micheas et Ananias senes ‘et? Joel “et quotquot™® sederunt”™ a dextris® “et asinistris™, 8, Et cum audierunt vocem Sancti Spiritus flexerunt genua et cantaverunt Deo altissimo requiescenti in sanctis, 9. Et talem virtutem *in verbo” in mundo donanti. Io. Loquente vero eo” Spiritu Sancto in auditu omnium statim tacuit, et exinde 'non' *videbat stantes” ante eum.
® § originally=
CHAPTER VI. 6-17
PLR 11. DAOL FIO: Dw: ATT TPR: APAAU: 12. ONE: Alriry4 Afiao: GAG: Looks 13. Mav) AD HTEO;: nav: 2CAT:! Anh: HAs: 9°X90: WADE Aodant: haere H2E?o-7: HAt Ad: ahh: WLeT: HCA&: *PS.0: AAR 2? Ani: AIH: GOI: AA: AI°9NI?: 16. DANLL AF &: WEP: Ach” HW Pen: ONAL AN? OAS: O ANOSTZ: LT: aN:
eum. 11. Oculi autem eiuserant aperti,
os vero clausum, 12. Sed _ inspiratio (Sancti |Spirituserat cum illo. 14. Etnon extimabant, quod elevatio accepisset Ysaiam, prophetae vero cognoscebant, quod revelatio” erat. 15. Visio, quam videbat, non erat de seculo hoc, sed de abscondito "omni" carni. 16, Et cum cessavit a visione, Treversus* "notificavit [visionem] Ezechiae et filio tejus Nasonit”,
S
11. Oculi autem ejus erant aperti, os vero clausum, 12. Sed inspiratio spiritus erat cum illo 14. Et non _ existimabant fomnes! quod elevatus esset Isaias, prophetae vero cognoscebant, quod * in revelatione™ erat. 15. Visio’ vero'quam videbat non erat de saeculo hoc, sed de absconditoab" omni" carni. 16, Et cum cessavit a visione "et?! reversus est in se, [et] notificavit Ezechiae et filio tejus Nasonit™.
APG” BhS: DALAL MANAG: AE: THAC: Aloo:
) @ repeats. 3
5b AAaht:
a &FNA: in accordance with SL? non existimabant.
PAN: % @ DALPRI:
in se from S.
2 onat in:
6 a Aché,: 7 Corrupt for suo Jasobi: so E.
b ANTI40: ® dom.
3 6 many rith: ” § in revelatione.
30 L? revelatio. ch reads Nasudi for Nas.
4b OCAT: 7 Em. from 6 reads 4 6 AOLGD:
w’ Add After
Jasobi S L? i.e. G? om. through homoioteleuton vi. 16°, 17; vii. 1%
aowWTEZ: WC! RSP: twa00k:? +o0Id: Nad wmWAh: A970: Ahov: AD-RAPaOS? oLneth: OFFA: DAR: An: TIA: PAA: HIF: AF'4U: On? hao: HPT:
VIL. wé-A8h: HCAGAAL LI: LO AHAP LI: ONAL AN: oA Rs ONOLLN: MANDAL: 10. Lr: of: ON: TiNLh: A ne® adah: 2 Ke: OFAN th an: PN: aeda mt: HHAd: & BARD; KA: pnd: On8:" @wryLavt:” +0
(See Introd., pp. xviii-xxi.)
VII. Filio. suo et Michaeae et reliquis profetis, dicens: 2. Ineo in quo*profetiam meam audistis", vidiangelum _gloriosum nonsecundum gloriam angelorum, quos ego semper videbam, sed claritate(m) magnam et sanctam habentem, quam
VII. et Micheae caeterisque prophetis dicens: 2. Quando prophetavi auditum,quem [vos] +vidistist“ vidi angelum gloriosum non se cundum glorum, quos semper vidi, sed quandam *magnam gloriam” ‘et! lumen haben-
angelor-,
VIL. et Micheae et ceteris prophetis dicens: 2, Quando prophetavi [in] auditum quem audistis, vidi angelum gloriosum, non secundum gloriam angelorum quos semper vidi; sed quandam *gloriam magnam™ lumen” habentem, quod non possum" noti-
"F: HAk AA: | ego claritatem | tem, quod non Ht: 21%: | exponere non | possum __ noti-
1 be PNT: 2 6 aPQHT: Text seems corrupt. See exegetical note. 3b A@-Riav: 4b woth: 5 a om. 6 Em. from 6 &f: acom. Cf. L'L?S ‘dicens.’ 7 Em. from
ont: Cf. Lt in ‘eo. In ab whtr: Hh: are marked off by punctuation from what precedes and connected with what follows. 5 6 HCANs Ah: @. ° 6 adds MNS: 0b PooAt av; UB trs. dpyny (cf. iii. 23) corrupt(?) for dyiavx, ™ Fuller and more original text in ES L?, 4 Corrupt for audistis as in SE. 6 § trs. 6 L? magnam gloriam et. 7 = svet :. uw sto sanctum: ch stu sanctam. 8 ch mogu: u mogoch potui.
CHAPTERS VI.
AH: = oPAah: 3. WAOLTL:! AN: AHL: 0A RE: WABI: ao ki ATT: wav}; O-AE: AI-n: wo Aho: 5LA: *“to-on: Acre hop; ATTIC: LOL: AN: AO DAChLirh: & av}. Ari wong CA: ATAIPCS 5. allan: UAm@h:
ruption in viii. 1.
36 tw-UNi:
5b &TIPC: (sic).
possum. 3. *+Et accessitt et tenuit manum meam'’, et *dixi ei°: Quis es tu, et quod tibi nomen est, et quo me tolles? Accepi enim viris loquendi cum eo. 4. Etdixit mihi : *Cum te imposuero” et ostendero tibi | visionem, prop: | ter quod ad te missus sum, tune intelliges quisim, nomen autem meum non dicam tibi", 5. Eo quod revertaris in carnem. Cum” enim
a reads CAs SL? support emendation. 4 L' om., also SL*. Hence bracketed. Is et accessit =
cipiens** me manu duxit me in altum, et ego dixi: Quis es? quo modo tibi nomen est? et quo [modo] tave™+ superfers? Virtus enim data est mihiloquicum illo. 4. Tune Trespondens" dixit ‘mihi’: Quando te feram in altum®, ostendam tibi visionem, pro qua missus sum [ego, et] tune scies, quis sum ego. Et nomen meum nescis, 5. Ideo quia vis iterum reverti in
ficare.
ficare. 3. Et! cum accepisset memanu duxit me in altum”™. Egoque dixi: Quis es 'tu’? quomodo tibi nomen est ? et quo me superfers? virtus enim mihi data est loqui cum illo. 4. Tunc "cum respondisset" dixit’”: Quando *feram te® in altum ‘et! ostendam tibi visionem pro qua missus sum, tuncscies, quis sum ego. Et nomen meum nescis. 5. Quia” vis iterum reverti in
Contrast the cor-
2 ab TOCTL: 5b ATZ7:
kat dvjdbe corrupt for «ai dynyaye? S preserves true text: et cum accepissit me manu duxit me in altum = kal AaRov pe xeupt dviryayev
S (= E) is literal.
with SE. 8 ch alta.
where the last word is corrupt for dvaydyo, 2 SoSL?, E=quo. ™ Corrupt for me. 7 EL? add mihi.
% TL? trs.
Gray oe évaydyo
1A free rendering. 3 Read et accipiens %% Add et with SE.
INA: WN: A OCTa: TAs *allan; A: Té. Phas 6. oT é%7chns Ahao: Uovr T7 chu 7. OL0 A: Téa Allan; &?U;? F FIChnioO LO: @AH: {O-NRLZ: TdoAs nav; & "toh: Aha: AH: T2i0-nA PONY: NATL: nao: ACU: An: Htt: irs og. woe? w-tt:
sustolero te,
tune videbis, *Tpropter hoe
Quoniamn’ simpliciter mihi responait mihi: (*Gavisus es, quia hilariter respondi tibi ? et ait mihi)° et majorem” me videbis. Hilariter et simpliciter loquetur" tecum. 8, *Et eminentiorem ipsius majoris” videbis. Propter hoe enim missus sum a septimo caelo ut omnia tibi ostendam. 9. [Et
SL? om. but L) supports.
majus.
% Add mihi with S E,
phrase in S.
rupt for majorem as in L?,
nat cddpova,
> b MANUEL: sum lost by hmt. before quoniam. clause lost through hmt.
% Za ne=S.
corpus tuum, et quando te elevabo, ‘postea' videbis. 6. Et gavisus sum, quia mansuete respondit®. 7. Et dixit mihi: Gavisus es, quia humiliter™ respondi tibi, et majorem me videbis fet] *humilioremet sapientiorem® volentemloquitecum 8. ™Meliorem et: dulciorem™; in hoc enim missus sum, ut notificem tibi omnia _haee. g. Ascendimus
6 Sok. SL? om. 8 MS. respondet.
I have restored from E. MS. loquitur.
corpus tuum. Et quando te elevabo videbis, 6, Et gavisus sum quia mansuete __respondit! mihi. 7. Kt dixit mihi: Gavisus es quia’ mansuete” respondi tibi? Ett melioremt® me videbis humiliorem et sapientiorem” volentem loqui tecum. 8, "Et Majorem majoris, 'lucidiorem et modestiorem™; in hoc enim missus sum, ut notificem tibi *haec omnia”, g. Ascendi au-
3b SPD; 7 Et gavisus ® This
2 E = patrem ipsius majorem.
4 SE mansuete. W [2 humiliter. Mistranslations (?) of rarewéppova
» Seems corrupt. L? = et meliorem et dulciorem. 7 So E. Ltrs,
% See note on 8 Cor-
IRC: *k: w O-AE: wnve: CanP: Ane?
L:PTA0N00 us tweet: ALO FE Aa AAs 2ASOOL: ro. onan: 4A I°LCh: Ala: I°RGZO: HE: wD ic: AavaAaAn: ort: OWE: LOA: hav'H: AE AT hav;
CHAPTER
sustulit me]? et ascendi ego (et)* ipse in primum]® solidamentum, et ibividi Samael et fortitudinem ejus: et fuit in eo bellum grande, et angeli satanae simul invidentes. 10. Sicut enim susus(s)ic et in terra (formaeenim ejus, quod in firmamento, hic sunt in terra)”, tr, Et dixi angelo, "qui fuit mecum™"; Quid est bellum hocet quae invidia haec? 12, Et dixit mihi : "Sie est *ex quo secu-
egoetillesuper firmamentum, et vidi ibi proelium magnum sathanae et virtutem ejus Tresistentem honorantiae” dei", et unus erat praestantior alio invidendo;10.Quia sicut est in terra tanto" estin firmamento, formae enim firmamenti hic sunt in terra. 11. Et dixi angelo: Quid est hoc bellum et invidia "et proe- "respondens" dixit mihi:
= «ali Adyor, where Adyot corrupt for dyyedo.
6 reads Wilé: exegetical note.
as a doublet of et ascendi ego.
° ESL? om.
S here agrees with E L} against L’. though lost in E.
4 L? virtutem. 6 L? erat praestantior alio invidendo. dens dixit mihi.
as in S. Dei.
5 a MAAS
® Text defective.
tem let] ego et ille super firmamentum. Etvidiibi proelium magnum satanae et virtutes“ ejus [et] “resistentem pietati*™ et unus *alium invidentes*, Io. (Quia)sicut est in terra ita est et in firmamento. Formae enim eorum in firmamentohic sunt in terra. II. Et dixi angelo: Quid est hoc bellum et invidia "et proe- Tyespondit mihi et" dixit”:
So L! angeli.
7 ESL? om. I have bracketed the words 8 Supplied from ES L’. Lost through hmt, and restored from E.
" Found in Gk. Leg. ii. 10 12 onoranza auctoritas, = blagoéjstiju.
18 Read ita L? honorantiae 7 L? respon-
tin: 2Alb: OH ra; Ath: 2 TCAL: O22 aviifis:! 13.0 214? aOAOAT: PECO: Waa One: Cane avind: An @NeDar; avA ant: vUAda® Jad«;)° hap; aD hs 2dbo.go?
1g o2£Lavnn:
as in SL?
lum" factum estusquenunc"™ {est]™*, sic erit bellum quoad usque veniat quem visurus es ef emundabit*eum. 13. Et postea posuit me super solidamentum; *et fuit™ eaevidi ibi sedem in medio, et ad dexteram ejus etadsinistra(m) angeli erant. tales erant angeli ad_ sinistra(m)'”quales® ad dextra(m),
L
‘istud bellum
"diaboliest,et™ non quiescet donec veniet, quem vis videre, et interficiet eum" spiritu _ virtutis tea levavit me: in ea, quae sunt super firmamentum, quod est “primum" coelum. 14, Et vidi thronum inmedio, "desuper sedebat angelus in magna gloria", et a dextris ejus sedebant angeli et a sinistris. 15. Aliam habebant — glor-
istud bellum Test diaboli”et™ non quiescet donec veniet quem vis videre et interficiet (eum)”! "spirit virtutis suae “7, 13. Postea elevavit me in ea quae sunt super firmamentum, quod est "primum" caevidi ‘ibi’ thronum in medio "*et in eo” sedebat angelus in magna gloria "eta dextris ejus sedebant* et a sinistris angeli. 15 Aliam® vero
2 We should add wTH: = in id quod 4a ott: 8’ bom. this and next three words.
° I have
added these words in accordance with L! (the context requires
them), and changed the preceding verb from hh to nk: 8 MS. ex qua oculum.
8 = xabapice: corrupt for xabapyoer ‘ will
6 Should be quod est primum as in SL’.
“ Here Lt supplements E by supplying
1b wah:
destroy.’
with ESL? be excised. So ES L?,
E = quod est caelum.
4 Should
its lost clause ‘angeli ad sinistram.’ MS. reads talis for tales. SL’ agree in a different text.
suae as in S. % L? desuper.
yy sedens.
8 MS. qualis.
2. Added from L' L? E'. % wy et majorem.
® Should be 2 TL? ejus.
Ach: iravs: 0 *hhS? PA: @wav7NC: Vir: Wn: One Us 20fidhe wo LALolP ad+; WP frao(): Ani: hh av: PA; Ad: Nt o7y; MANA tan: hav: ill At: AAE: 16.0TNAADP: Ace A: H LoD Chi: WADir: Avs HAT: LTEPs 17.0 LAL: o-ft: ant: (Hn)> FF; LO CE: ONG: Aap
with L.
ad dextram enim claritatem magna(m) habuerunt: et laudabant omnes una voce: Tet sedes erat in medio, eta sinistra postea benedicebant. Fuit autem vox a sinistro non sicut(adextro)’ "nec hymnus® erat illis simigavi angelum qui me ducebat, "et dixiei™: Cuimittuntangeli hymnos"*? 17. Et dixit mihi: Gloriae sedentis septimi caeli, "qui est perpetui saeculi," et dilecto ejusaquo missus sum ad posuit me (in) secundum cae-
® Bracketed since L'S L? om.
from iymnus.
canticum in both cases. 1 Corrupt for cantabant as in S.
iam, qui erant
a dextris, et’
cantabant una voce, et illi qui
erant a sinis-.
tris post illos tcum eis? canticum eorum non erat sicut dextrointerrogavi angelum ducentem me: Cui canticum istud missum est ? 17. Et" respondens" dixit mihi: "Magnae® gloriae Dei, qui est super septimum coelum, et filio ejus dilecto, unde Tego] missus sum ad te, 18 Et iterum elevavit me in
gloriam habebant”, qui
erant a dextris, et cantabant una voce; et illiqui erant a sinistris post illos cantabant, eanticum autem™ eorum non erat sicut dextrorum. 16, Interrogavi autem angelum ducentem me: Cui canticum _istud missum est ? respondisset" dixit mihi: "Magnae "gloriae Dei quae est super septimum caelum et filio ejus
dilecto, unde missus sum
iterum elevavit me in se-
3 Supplied in accordance
7 Supplied from E. Cf. next verse where hymnos appears.
SL? give
20 MS. hymnus.
BT? om.
L: ONOASU-A: Aw-AE: Ae 2: Lho-}: hoo; *APrieTe!: A (Cans UG h av; wit: & av:* *aphaht: @MaviNd:’ 7 na: w*inr tT: aqAantry HNA77"; fez f&: *OHEPAIC: AIF": NATL: OF AP hh”
lum, et fuit altitudo caeli qualis a caelo usque ad terram [et ad firmamentum]™. 19. Et vidi ibi quomodo videram in primo caelo angelos dextros et sinistros et sedes media,
secundo coelo®, *altitudo ejuserat™sicut a primo coelo usque ad tervidi ibi, sicut in primo coelo, dextros et sinistros angelos.
cundum caelum; *altitudo autem caeli erat® sicut a primo caelo usque ad terdi autem ibi, sicut in prime caelo dextros et sinistros
angelos™.
20. ON: DNC: Ul 20. Et *gloria isto-(20. Et (gloria istote: w-T: £29": Ne7| rum angelorum™ et|rum angelorum et)" &: oll-rtao4;" 4%} canticum excelsiora|canticum excelsius
> GAP LC: NAVEL:
in L' must be excised. SL? rightly om.
accordance with context, L'S L?,
wone77”;
owing to change made in preceding line.
5 b OVAnA: before 0°F:
excised from both.
> be MNT: 16 ONNATL:
> Though found also
‘ Supplied in § ber:
7 These words in nom. in MSS. but put in acc.
ac om, apa”.
0 6 AI"4WPav: which it reads ® So also E, but should be
8 Should be ace. as in LS. *® S wrongly om.
of L'(E). L? defective: altitudo ejus erat.
addition of et ad firmamentum in L' BE.
38 § defective.
4 See
= et fuit altitudo caeli
1 Obs. wrong
what is required by text in E(L'). ‘Throne’ should be mentioned -as in EL’ and probably he that sat on it, as in E, for the former is referred to in ver. 21 of S L? and the latter probably in same ver. in L? adorarem eum, ” Supplied from L?,
Ti: hav: DAT: AA Q7TRT naw: ANIL: ie: OAL: ad aa: H&ooCdi: 44: AAa NC: DA.AaA ah? AH: AF°OASTE: ATL: AIPM! T23 On: APéth: HAT AA: Ai AI7Ch: 04 ap: aA0AT: itt: A972: warMaAnlLv ane aoNCh: WC: MAAN: OARAA hi: H0A@h: TCAL: 23. wFé"lhne’ GP” hi O08: Allan: AA: LEPCP: NAGA: OA
translation of dev. 5 6 mANDHL:
2 a trs.
erant quam primorum. 21. Et cecidi in faciem meam, ut
adorarem eum’, Et non dimisit® me
angelus, qui me instruebat, *et dixit mihi®: Noli adorare angelum, neque thronum istius coeli*; *propter hoc” missus sum instruere te, *sed tantum, quem ego dixero tibi”, [Adora similitereum quiest |". 22. Super omnes ‘angelos ', thronos et super vestes et coronas, quas videbis deinceps*. 23, Et gavisus sum gaudio magno valde, quia talis est consummatio
So L?, but S upholds 8.
§ a OTE ch:
erant quam primotum; 21. Et *cum cecidissem in faciem meam adoravi eos” et non dimisit® me angelus, qui me instruebat” : Noli adorare *neque thronum neque angelum *e caelo”,nam™” propter hoc missus sum instruere te; *quem tibi ego dixero” tantum —22. Super omnes thronos et vestes et coronas, quem videbis deinceps. 23. Et gavisus sum gaudio magno valde, quia talis” est consummatio scientibus
3 A mis- 4 6 mavPADATV ar:
7 So E. S inferior text.
3 =dgixe, which, however, the translator should have rendered by
permisit.
%3 Interpolated.
® S wrongly om. which E renders ‘ whence.’
2 Agrees with E. 4 Verse corrupt : E= nam supra omnes coelos
1 So S = déev S corrupt.
eorumque angelos thronus tuus positus est, et vestes quoque tuae
et corona tua quae videbis. Y Add et dixit mihi with L? E.
neque thronum. qui e sex caelis. sounder text.
2 Taka: ta ch.
1% a = cum cecidissem.
6 See 8 I? angelum
1 L? istius caeli. But E alone seems right =
L’ gives
Eko! L6tar: 0 Oct: wit: Wd: ON Si: aD NC: 77 aE: Hats: WH: 3A a”: ALNae: 0 G3 25, DADir: hap Aah: HIPAA: Aloo: LTBATY aNd: 12%: TL AZURE: FAI": nF: NWN LA e.:: AL AAQ: HEfove:; H2TINA: *NUe: H? Lh: aANne?: AG: & ThorC: Wiw-PrKi: ath 2A: AN: wnn” wit: HavaAd "ht: Ads ALY: TK
1b ONGC: * ac OHLENC: SE from angeli. add et.
onogo u, togo ch.
5 b LravkP; BSE trs. % Si tamo: L? is largely supported by E. corrupt for yécor (?) as in E. So E. L’ trs.
scientibus _altissimumetaeternalem"
et™ dilectum filium ejus, "quia sicut® *(ab) angelo” Sancti Spiritus sic hi ascendunt in illum. 24. Et elevavit me super tertium coelum, et similiter vidi parvum thronum, et dextros et sinistros angelos. Memoria autem istius mundi illic non nominabatur. 25.Sedtransformabatur gloria mei spiritus, cum ascendebam in coelum, et dixi: de illo mundo nihil *nominatur hic®. 26. Et respondens mihi angelus
‘ait: nihil nominatur
propterinfirmitatem ejus, et nihil absconditur “illic de illis, quae“ facta sunt.
ch sila.
7b AO’TL: 1S om.
14 So E. See note ™.
7 L? better : ascendunt in illum.
altissimum et "aeternalem™® dilectum filium ejus: "et sicut "abangelo Sancti Spiritus hi illic’ exeunt”. 24, Et elevavit me super tertium caelum,et illic™® similiter vidi parvum" thronum et dextros et sinistros angelos. Memoria tamen mundi istiusillic non nominabatur. 25. Sed transformabatur gloria Spiritus” mei, cum ascendebam in caelum et dixi: nihil de illo™ mundo *hic nominatur”? 26. Et respondit mihi angelus et ait mihi: nihil nominatur propter infirmitatem ejus nihilque ~ hic® absconditur *de illis quae illic” facta sunt”,
2 Em. with
© So L? puxpdy E faciei or formae.
8 L? (E) illic de illis quae.
Greater part of vii. 27 in E is wanting in SL?.
#°C: hav: FAQ: HLT Na: AawGACT: OA
Hever? w*A2Aavh
ants: obaaAt! H LONd: Ons: AH Gon: = whordant: nON: AOZTL: wit: GU AFAR Aen: N72: LLL A PLC ala FF wah: N0D7"; DHL
27. Et canticum *cantabant, et glorificabant sedentem®, et iste” angelus erat major secundo. 28. Et iterum elevavit me in quartum coelum, Altitudo *tertii coeli” usque ad quartum coelum major erat. 29. Et
‘ibi vidi thronum et
dextros et sinistros angelos”;
31. Gloria vero se-
27. Canticumque ‘quod’ cantabant et glorificatio sedentis et angelus major erat secundo. 28. Et iterum elevavit me in quartum caelum. *Altitudo autem a tertio usque ad quartum caelum Tmulto] major erat", 29. Et ibi iterum”™ vidi thronum et dex-
_|tros et sinistros an-
gelos et hi iterum cantabant. 30, Et gloria et cantus angelorum (dextrorum) major erat eorum a sinistris'™, 31. Et
NC: *£0: avyNC:’|dentis melior erat | gloria sedentismajor Ute: F7AnA:? ONVEL:| quam angelorum,|erat quam angelo- Ont: wPNc: H
® Corrupt. See 8. 0S om. 1 § E=a tertio. 12 Verses 29%, 30 lost through hmt(?). They are found in S. 3 y% om.
4S L? defective. mentum.
8 So E. .L? wrongly om.
I have supplied dextrorum from E.
E supplies omission: quam a terra ad firma- © L? om. through hmt (?).
LGL: AaDNMAnT: ThE 32. OHO" Te: ot: BIN: ATF Ls 33. wrndn:? IF"; OHLPNC: £0: A7PAN: NOII": (AF WAR: ath: df0:)°
36. OP-Arrars *hnN Nibhh- AH: 4.2Nave; ONdyt: HAY A77e T: LPNC: Hhevs AT Om-P:? Ait: HD: AH: hov'H: Dnd: wou 0: AF°AeVL: AAT &: *oW lon: nnd:
1 6 AaPNAdT:
qui erant a dextris, et gloria eorum similiter superabat gloriam inferorum. 32. Et ascendi in quintum coelum. 33. Et ibi vidi "angelosinnumerabiles", 34. Et gloria eorum 36. Et canticum gloriosius erat quarti coeli®. 37. "Et ego miratus sum, tantam multitudinem angelorum videns diversis bonitatibus ordinatorum™, et singuli gloriam habentes glorificabant™ existentem inalto,cujus nomen non est revelatum omni carni, quia tantam gloriam dat angelis super singulos coelos. "Et respondens angelus dixit mihi: quare
3b thIL:
rum, qui erant a dextris”, gloriaque eorum similiter superans (gloriam) eorum qui infra. 32. Et ascendi in quintum = caelum. 33. Et ibi iterum™ vidi "angelos™ innumerabiles", 34. et gloria eorum 36. et canticum gloriosius® quarto caelo. 37. "Egoque miratus sum, tantam magnam* multitudinem cum vidissem angelorum diversis bonitatibus ornatorum", singuligloriam suam ™ habentes, et® glorificabant™ existentem in altitudinibus cujus nomen non” est revelatum omni carni, quia tantam gloriam dat angelis super singulos caelos. "Et cum respondisset angelus dixit mihi: quare
Thave bracketed these words with Din. For Adh: b reads WAN:
(Gesenius). torum. ” ch om.
© Mistranslation of tod rerdprov odpavod. 4 § ornatorum. u legiones.
8b AL TOM?
Should be quarto caelo ® Sustich: suich a sinistris ch. 8 TL? adds erat.
6 L? ordina-
CHAPTER VII. 3I—VIIL. 7
mndant: *wnnd: LELGC AH: 24
wit: A&C: HAG: AeVe: wo’ CAs: 2 At: WAR CAs: w-0 tT: 27 rR hee; 2. *aflav: Cin ap AAT: NO0L: PAC: Ue: wa0?[nlC1’ 4. WAlb* i: AaAA hn: Hoh: J3r 5H: Hada: ATILASs 5. OLGA: ANT ah ATHAn: AA: 0% Ane? MARY: FFT BAS LA: ONMRT: 7. OL0: APALD: ODF": AACE AFL Alb: WA.00 NE: VAR
miraris de hoc, quod non sunt unius speciei? non enim vidisti insuperabiles virtutes et” millia millium angelorum." VIII. Et postea assumpsit me in aérem sexticoeli,et vidiibi™® gloriam "magnam"™, qualem non vidi in quinto coelo. 2. Et aspexi angelum™ in gloria magna, 3. "Et facta virtutum erant honorabilia et praecedentia", canticum eorum sanctum et mirabile erat. 4. Et dixi ad angelum ducentem me : Quidest quod video, domine
mi? 5. Et dixit mihi: Non sum tibi dominus, sed con-
siliator®. 7. Et dixit mihi: De sexto coelo, et hic jam thronus
2b Whi.
5 Em. with S nam aspexi from Afb: 027:
accordance with S L. 4 Read angelos with S
ouvdovdos which E rightly represents: see note on p. 54. 7 So also E. L# et postea assumpsit. 8 So also HE. L? et.
adds quod.
6 Em. from wapMant:
° b adds Al 1 6 DANCE: E.
I
miratus es de hoc,* non isti unius speciei? Non enim vidisti insuperabiles virtutes millia millium angelorum.” VIII. *Iterum vero elevavit” me in aé- rem sexti caeli, et vidi gloriam "magnam" [super id]*, qualem non _ vidi in quinto caelo, 2. Nam” aspexi angelos” in gloria magna, 3. "Ordines virtutum horrendarum et praeterfluentes", canticum vero” eorum sanctum et mirabile erat. 4. Et dixi angelo me ducenti: Quid est, quod video, domine mi? Non sum tibi dominus, sed consiliator™. 7. Et [iterum] dixit mihi de sexto caelo*: Thronus non est
Contrast corruption in Em. from WAON:; in ® TL? and S=ovpBovdos a corruption of
by Din. from av 7NC: 8 SE om.
So also E. L? angelum. * L? adds et hic jam.
ANTE ATORLA: LONG: HaALAave: o-b;? wa.tivas 177 LT: NI: AATPHC: AL nahi 8.ANav: 0-A'F: Pt: ivavs A727: MOGICT: LO As THAR: Al ore. nov; TCAL: At: OAT: 9. OTCAL: ATH. AG0: \* hae PE; A°7 Lr: *tdeavs MH 3H: L£Teayr: ah: Lho-}: Vhav: GAL. ov; ONnav: AJ°AN. hoo: rr. Ah: anan: AALL: Aa LIN: *WOK.0CT: © ACA? wanda: Hatt: Afiw-n: wo *HUAOh” TCAL:
5b AOCT:
non est, nee sinistri angeli, sed de virtute septimi coeli ordinationem habent, ubi esttdives” tfilius dei. 8. Et omnes coeli et angeli ejus audiunt eum, et ego missus sum assumere te hue, ut videas gloriam istam 9g. Et dominum omnium coelorum et angelos eius et virtutes. 11. Dico autem tibi, Ysaia, nemo in carne illius mundi volens converti, vidit, quae tu vides, neque videre potest, quae™ tu vidisti™,
2 be KL-TOMP; 5b oni: wn.
nec sinistri angeli, sed de virtute septimi caeli * administrati sunt® ubi est celeber™ lille et unigenitus |” filius ejus® 8. Et omnes caeli et angeli ejus audiunt (eum). Egovero missus Sum assumere te hue, ut videas glorjam istam 9g. Et dominum omnium caelorum et angelos® et virtutes. 11. Dico” tibi, Isaia, nemo in carne *mundi illius” volens converti homo” +visionem, quamt® tu vides neque videre potest quod tu *visurus es”,
§ T have
trs. HA.CA&: WA.0C7: as above, changing H into @ after Gk. Leg.
ii. 29 oddcls... dvéBn ob8e elder. 6 0m. H before ACAT:
» Should
be trs. to beginning of verse 12 and take the place of @.
© b Teoh: cChn 4 badds98: See note,p.54. ™ Ed. Ven. que. S quod. ™ § (E) visurus es. © L? ordinationem habent. * ch imenityi: u imenimyi. L? dives. ” L? om, 8 L? Dei. 1° L? adds ejus. 2° TL? adds autem. | TL? Ei trs. 22 So also E. L? om. 3 Read vidit quae with L? E. 4 So
also E. L? vidisti.
CHAPTER VIII. 7-16
12. Aap: UA@h: Nao néAt:? ATA: [0 HY: [WAI VUE: W-A'E: OnLnP: ANAT: AATILAS: Aflav: Nao NEAT: HAU= ‘HE: AJ: On: AN: *AIOUN: 7D: A *AOZ7: AAA: THA: Hatt! TA: ond YL ENP EY UE: *Maphant: * AH: *AANnd: ACVL: 16. OAOZT: OAT ALT: ACT 2: DAAC: HN: and: &4: iirav: ahS.:" GAPae: wo
1a MnéAT: (sic). tory gloss. standing of viii. 7.
1OoT
12, Ideo quia tibi est in sorte domini venire hue. 13. *Et ego magnificavi mecantans domino”, quia in sorte ejusambulo, 14. Et dixit mihi : quando reversus fueris per voluntatem patris, tunc vestem tuam recipies, 15. Et tunc eris aequalis angelis, qui sunt in sexto™ coelo. 16. Et assumpsit me in sextum coelum, et thronus jam non erat illic necdextri™ nec sinistri angeli, sed habebant omnes unam speciem et
2b ATHAAC: CORA:
12. Ideo quia tibi
est in sorte
domini venire huc. 13. *Magnificavi autemdominum meum cantans", quia in sorte ejus abeo™. quando*ecarne huc’® reversus fueris per voluntatem patris, tune *recipies vestem”, 15. Et tunc [tul eris aequalis angelis, qui sunt in septimo caelo, 16. Et assumpsit me in sextum caelum. Et thronus illic jam non erat "nee dextri™”° nec sinistri angeli, sed omnes habebant unam speciem
3 An explana-
5 A gloss based on misunder- 7 Em. from YC: AI°Ah:
av72.0i: ( alieno Deus Spiritus) of 6 in accordance with S L? per voluntatem Dei. a reads Mn.C: AaPAAh: av'3é.0: ( alieno ab angelo Spiritus). The form of the middle word of a is secondary, due to a wrong insertion of ov'}é.0: ( Spiritus). 5 6 AOLT: 96 nao: TPA HIT: WH. Ma PAP: b PA: This and the adjoining words should be in the acc. as the object of TAs 16970: 6%. ™ SE have the better text. ™ Corrupt for septimo. Interpolated(?). See note So also E. 1 T? ambulo. % So also E. L? om. 19 E = vestem accipies quam tuvides. ™ Interpolated(?). Eom. rightly. See viii. 7.
17. OFO-VNE: wna chins AYZ: PAA a: OUD: oAAn: On: yk: hav; LAP avn §=18. ONUE: ti drav: LAI": APR O78: Fo: PONG EE3 NaOH aoe tee
: PSD: ivads 0*% NE Mhap; Sivan: AH: ot: 1PVE Ae7L TiaPAAnT:> 20. [wo Ue: ws: NC7h? Ur: Ves 21. OAT: 41H: Uirh: o-itt: FAL: NOT 2:9 Ag Aan: At: Whe NC7¢b: HCAs wtr: FPR: OTT: chins AH: hoo: 1G
1b woah tTe:
glorificabant patrem omnium of S L?.
canticum aequale. 17. Et datum est mihi, ut ego canerem cum eis, et angelus, "qui erat mecum”, et ego fuimus tales, sicut gloria eorum, "et gloria eorum erat una". 18. Et glorificabant patrem omnium et dilectum filium ejus et Sanctum Spiritum. Omnes uno ore tg. "Cantabant, " sed non tali voce quali in quinto coelo, 20. Sed alia voce, et lumen magnum erat “ibi, 21. Et quando eram in sexto coelo, existimabam lumen, quod erat! in quinto coelo, tenebras esse. 22. Gavisus sum valde et
et canticum eorum™ aequale. 17. Et datum est mihi ut et” ego caneremcum eis, et angelus, "qui erat mecum", (et ego)? fuimus® sicut gloria eorum, "(et gloria eorum)* erat una", 18. Et glorificabant patrem omnium et dilectum filium® et Sanctum Spiritum. Omnes uno _ ore 19. "Cantabant,” sed non tali’® qualem habebant in *quinto caelo”, 20. sed alia voce et lumen magnum erat’, 21. Et quandoeram in sexto caelo, existimabam lumen, quod in quinto caelo, tenebras esse. 22. Et” gavisus sum valde et
? The passage obelized seems corrupt for
b trs.
ihtrad; ZAI Es We
should with c om. APS77@:: next for LAI: read LAMde: and placing térav: after ffl: we should read 2O-Mds NAN: Hirao:
‘they praised the Father of all.’
as in ix. 5, on which see exegetical note.
before (1H: and prefixes A.
10.” b reads 3NNav+: but E supports.
™ Supplied from L?. 6 TL? adds voce. with L? E.
” Supplied from L’.
Lost through hmt. 7 E has ‘five heavens.’ 9 L? om. against S E.
3 be ONGC:
‘ Interpolated 8 A doublet? For u T? om. 3 T? adds tales. 8 L? adds ejus.
%8 Add ibi
CHAPTER VIII. 16-26
ANTALODP: NavrdAd am: H&avCchi: hav; AP LAW: ALINA:?! ONT: FAI9: HDs: 24. afithomn: dH Pe: OATON: oA LE: OOLnen: hav: NH: RAavrTP: Vir: HLovCahi: Kaavd: SP Ft: OAL: OLA: Maa F2dhh': Tk: NCTC: FO: ATLA: Ui: OG] RE! [Am HO: Teton: H Ot: LAVA: wT: Tht: HU: Lh: ot: HLA: FA I”:)? MAAN: wav GNCt?! oAnar:? *HIOGT: ARGH: AAA: 2 riavks Hh:
2 a ALTNAL: a slip of the scribe.
(sic). an loc.
rupt for septimi caeli as in L*. © HE = Dominus et Dilectus ejus.
cantavi donanti*tale gaudium”™ recipientibusmisericordiam"™ ejus. 23. Etrogavi angelum instruentem me, ut exinde non reverterer ad mundum illum carnalem. 24. Dico autem vobis, quod multae tenebrae sunt hic. 25. Angelus vero instruens me dixit mihi: Quod es gavisus de isto lumine, quanto magis gaudebis et exultabis, quando videbis lumen septimi coeli, in quo sedet coelestis pater et unigenitus filius ejus, 26. Ubi exercitus”? et throni
2 a adds WRAaT: Nis: 5b MCTET: Aé: after the verb it introduces is found in Mt. vi. 23. b reads T4.chin: We should emend into TT46.% ch:
® Bracketed as an interpolation. ® badds kL. 3 T? tale gaudium.
0S = talia.
4 @’to jako. E lumen in septimo caelo. 7 orddoe corrupt for
cantavi donanti talia® —_recipientibus
misericordiam ejus. 23. Et rogavi angelum instruentem me, ut exinde non reverterer in mundum istum carnalem. 24. Dico autem vobis, quod multaetenebrae sunt hic. 25. Angelus vero instruens me dixit mihi: Quod ™ es gavisus de isto lumine, quanto magis gaudebis et exultabis quando videbis lumen teaeli justorum+® ubi _ sedet *caelestis pater et unigenitus ejus filius®, 26. Ubi exercitus” et throni et
§ This order of For Té.” 7b ONGC: 0 Ed.Ven. miam. 8 Cor-
oroal = vestes as in E. See ix. 2. (So already Gesenius.)
ATILA: AH: 1é6A27 wmavyac: 27. on ALATA: w-0b: 2 OL0: ATHHTs
IX. owhei: wort: atc; HON: Ac7e: At: THA? Ath: AL:)° AN: COR: Ths IP: AFUS:® *HAAT: TTZ?: OLNA: LT
See exegetical note in loc. being against S L? and context. See exegetical note in loc.
et coronae jacent justis. 27. Et de
illo te non reverti in carnem tuam, non est tempus expletum veniendi hue. 28. Et: audiens haec tristatus sum valde”.
IX. Et assumpsit me in aérem septimi coeli, et audivi vocem dicentem "mihi": Usque quo volens in carne vivere *venis hoc"? Et timui valde et tremefactus sum. 2."Iterum "que audivi'-vocem dicentem: noli prohibere eum, ut intret, "dig-
2b Pola:
Bracketed as an interpolation, 6 Text gives wrong sense.
7 MSS. RAAT: PA:
coronae jacent justis 27.Et *de illo te non reverti® in carnem tuam, nondum™* est tempus expletum™® veniendi hue. diens” tristatus sum valde. ‘Et dixit mihi: Ne tristaris'® [neve sis morosusl. IX. Et assumpsit’ me in aérem septimi caeli. Et audivi vocem dicentem "mihi": *Usque quo in carne volens vivere ascendit™”? Et timui valde et tremefactus sum. 2. Et iterum" Taliam | vocem audivi dicentem: Nolite prohibere (eum)”
8 Em. with
SL? audivi from av%A't: Cf. for this and next three words
Gh. Leg. ii. 23 yrovoa pavijs .. . wepmopérns Kat Neyovons. See S in loc. owing to interpolation of preceding mihi. dvaBaive &3e of Gk. Leg. ii. 23. against L? Gk. Leg. ii. 23.
10 T? defective here.
Tov oe py avedOetv. catisja u.
but see L?.
© Added from L? E. 8 So E but that it om. mihi.
1 Venis corrupt for venit Venit huc goes back to Thus SE here agree together © Add aliam from S E. 8
= rept
%® konéasja: expleri kon-
Vv L? trs. 19 viiznese : 2 4Aded from L?,
E om. haec. wzved ch. » —H,
CHAPTERS VIII. 26—IX. g
a: AA2.eR: Ana: Hi: @AE: Alte: 3. OTHAADP: AavdA an: HFA: DAD: ov}; * OWE: WNAAL: @av}y) O-AFH: HT aemi:? nav: Ad HnAan? Ho-A'F: H £0: DAT: NEVE: NeVL5 5. w*Htap Lan: Ho-AE: Az Hah: [A7WANdC: ATHLA! nCOTA: HU a: LTAUA: *w-At: GA: KLE]. on OCA: NU: C7 avynad: wahanti: HANA: “PAD q. ONVE: Cé.ns &2 Pr irae: HATA CARP: NADA: PRD: ONitivravh: AGPIy 9. ONVE: CADP: AZ Pa: ONitirae: Ah: PRU: AA: OC:
3 6 HhAnAh:
ii. 25 6 éfeotas trav Tyrer.
nus est enim gloria dei," hie enim est stola. 3. Et interrogavi angelum, qui erat mecum: Quis est prohibens mihi? et quis est praecipiens mihi ascendere? 4. Et dixit mihi: Prohibens’ est, qui est super cantantes angelos sexticoeli,"angelus". 5. Et praecipiens® est filius Dei, et nomen ejus non potes audire, donec de carne’ exibis. 6. Quando nos ascendimus in septimum coelum, vidi ibi lumen mirabile "et inenarrabile" et angelos innumerabiles. 7. Etjustosvidi quosdam. g. Exutos stolis
2 A false rendering of 6 émrpérov. 4 Em. from HROU: 5 An interpolation: see exegetical 5 a reads R29: and
note in loc. 6b trs. AZHLAN: A7HANALC:
trs. after Hirav+:
® Add tua from S E. 11 Added from L’, according to EH.
7 Add tibi from E. © See longer form in L’. We should have tibi est
33 'T? exutos.
ut intret, "“dignus Deo"; hic enim est stola. 3. Et interrogavi angelum, qui erat mecum: Quis est prohibens mihi ? (et) quis estliterum | praecipiens mihi ascendere? 4. Et dixit mihi: Prohibens igitur”, qui(est)" super cantantes (angelos)" sexticaeli,"angelus," 5 Et praecipiens tibi iste! est filius Dei, et nomen ejus non potes audire, donee de carne [tual exibis 6. "Et! ut ascendimus in septimum caelum, ‘et! vidi ibi lumen mirabile "et inenarrabile™ et angelos innumerabiles, 7. Et iustos vidi quosdam g.*Exeuntes e™ stolis
See Gk: Leg. Cf. Gk. Leg.
8 Add tibi from S E. Cf. Rev. iii. 4.
aPAMAT: 2); OCAnPar:; NANAT oo: HAOK: waar} "FA: UAM: hav; a4 ant: at: Vt: £boao: NONAT: ONL: Io. ONE: o-trb: aeGNCrar:? Ass oOAn.At? Alert an Fie: WAP avs: 11. OTNAADP: Nava an: HIPAA: AE: HA ANA: Aa *oNavg NCTA: oONAnAAVT: LOA: ANOLAT: wo GACT: ANGE a4 PA: LAY Alh: LOCA: ERC: 6A £2; HTGAC: ATH: LOC LL: [LOCLh: *ot: WF a2 36: PPOA: [ATHLA: HU&: 2TAVA: ACH Thi] ONGE: LAC: OLAPS: aGnctr: &2: LAPao: wah
NAT ALYMARP O42:
OZL:" wn Mhan;
2 a@om. ? be OGNCTVar-(): 56 HAMA:
carnalibuset existentes in stolis excelsis, et erant in gloria magna stantes. to. Sed in thronis suis non sedebant, coronae autem gloriae™ non erant super eos. Ir. Et interrogavi angelum "et dixi": quare stolas receperunt? et thronos et coronas Tgloriae” non rece- Dixitque mihilangelus!: Non receperunt” modo, donec* filius hic primum tistos introducet thronos
] | et coronas, quando+
> be MARA: °b @OGNCTH: OARAAT: AU: AAWor: ® After there follows in the MSS. -- MFNAAT: AL: but wrongly as this sentence has its
carnalibus et existentes in stolis excelsis, et erant in gloria magna stantes: to, Sed in thronis suis non sedebant, coronae autem gloriae ‘eorum' non™ erant super eos. IT. Et interrogavi angelum "et dixi™: Quare stolas receperunt, et thronos "gloriae" et coronas non recipidixit mihi: Non recipiunt eos nune, donec descendet filius Dei hic primum: sciunt tamen quorum sunt throni eorum et cujus” coronae quando descen-
4b adds £.
right place after £TNUA: ACHTN: In the above text I have
restored it to its right position.
See exegetical note for details.
The bracketed clauses are interpolations. ©} om. u Add eorum from SE. 22 § recipiunt. 8 Add descendet from SE. “ Corrupt and defective. See S and E. by om. 16 H=receperunt. 7 koego: koe u, ch.
CAL; wo Lahr P: PD: ONNA: O-A Fs 14. OLAGH: *OLOCk: [ALP ov; AOMU:]|* *ATH: ALAI Ss: adh: OA LE: Nav: AFT: Te A: ANV LTE: CPA oo: hav: ALTOOP: : A2#: AaPAAN: MLPNC: wot: Whe FAP: (PRT: PAT: DACA Ort: ]* aoPOAl 17. WAZ: {OCH APRLPI: 123k: SHOU: Hay é.fiaps> *KANA: &.’
erit in specie vestra, 14. Et princeps mundi illius extendet manum suam in filium 'dei!, [et occidet illum)’ et suspendet illum in ligno et occidet nesciens, qui sit. 15. Et descendet "in infernum, et eum desertum ponet et omnes visiones inferni, 16. Etapprehendet™ principem mortis, et depraedatum eum ponet, "et conteret omnesvirtutesejus", et surget tertia die, 17. Habens quosdam justos secum, Tet mittet suos praedicatores in univer-
2 Em. by Din. from Naf: WAR:
det et erit in specie vestra". 14. Et princeps mundi illiust propter filium ejus extendet manus suas in eumt” et suspendent® illum in ligno, et* occidet eum nesciens* qui sit. 15. Et descendet in infernum et nuda et deserta ponetur visio, 16. Apprehendetque™* principem mortis captivum'’® "et conteret omnem virtutem ejus" et surget tertia die, 17. Habens quosdam justos *secum "et mittet suos praedicatores
4 I have trs. these words from their place in the MSS. before OLNPAP: £0: 06: to their right place after it, as in SL? Further LOCK: = exrevodor (cf. 2 Kings vi. 7; Ecclus. xxxiv. 18), a manifest corruption of sxrevodor: cf. SL? occidet. Whether ALB av: ANU: was added by the Ethiopic translator or already found interpolated in G' we cannot say. 5 b BYWHE. An interpolation : see exegetical note in loc. ° a Hav'}é-Fad+: be HNavyé.av; 7} WAAL av (sic), c AANAGDs &. * An obvious
interpolation. ® Gives excellent sense. Visiones= davtdcyara.
10 Ed.Ven. conterret. seems right: cf. E. implied by E.
depraedatum eum ponet.
L? here correct: cf. E.
1 See fuller form in E of verses 12-13.
15 'L? suspendet.
Plural
4 Better read occident eum nescientes as
1 Very corrupt. L? very superior. This is right: cf.
E. Vy om.
Thi £4 Aa [AANA am; @}aoGN Ctra? MARAATWar:; § AN: Abi: HThANn?: war: WAd: Ae e:
20. TOL OAL Pid:
AG: OH: L£TOOP: *S91C: FOUOU: FP: AhS.5 Aon: A 6L4L: APUNAE: Ath: opAAa: AH: APINF?: KOZIL: 22. DACARL: aPAh® tT: [WAn; hav; aA chavs MOE HAET: RavG, Ul’ WAT: nav; aoRhE-TH: In 2 OOUNL WAI ANnAFE? wiP: J°7
1 Interpolated: see exegetical note in loc.
"EW av; mihi quomodo.
a doublet : hence bracketed. 1 ¢ OFO-ONL:
14 Should be cum eo or illo. to in iii. 17 and xi. 22 of E though not here.
See S.
sum orbem terrarum" et ascen-
det in coelos; 18. Tune recipient isti thronos suos et coronas. 19. Et "post haec verba" dixi illi: De quo te interrogavi in primo coelo, 20. Ostende mihi, "hoc enim mihi promisisti™*. 21. Adhuc me loquente secum™, ecce quidam angelus de astantibus, gloriosior ducente me "omnibusque angelis", 22. Et ostendit mihi librum et aperiens dedit [eum] mihi, et vidi scripturam non sicut istius saeculi, et legi eam, et ecce actus Hierusalem
° 6 adds AIPA:
This should be tertio as in E.
° a adds Ut:
in universum orbem terrarum™® et ascendet [iterum]'® in caelos: 18. Tunc recipient isti thronos suos et coronas. 19. Et "post haec verba" dixi illi: De quo te interrogavi in primo” caelo, 20. Ostende mihi, Thic enim promisisti mihi ostendere" Tquomodo quae in illo mundo fiunt hic sciuntur'. 21. Adhucme loquentecum illo ecce quidam angelus de stantibus gloriosior multo ducente me "et omnibus angelis", 22. Et ostendit mihi librum et cum aperuisset dedit mihi, et vidi scripta, erant non sicut istius saeculi. Et legi eam, et ecce actus Hieru-
2 6 Mog NC
Corrupt. Read AMNLPL: AG: with S L? = ostende Ver. 21 shows that it was Isaiah was speaking.
10a aDAmEt: 18 L? defective.
%® This subject referred
%6 Tnterpolated.
ANGAA: *U% UAP? Rat: OF°INCa Q: *HALAPC! od LE ALAM: 23. HETINC: *o-2+ an: A0e: AAQM: 1 Wk: *t0d: wooo tT: er WARAAT: aan: Hav}: HAA Ah: OnGACT: wi nOoATs 26. O20 AL: HM: AANO: VAG:
et coronae with S E.
erant ibi scripti, tet omnium hominum opera erant ibi, de quibus et ego eramt®, 23. Vidi in veritate, quia nihil absconditur in septimo coelo, quod est in mundo factum. "Et interrogavi angelum: Quis est iste praeeminens omnes’ angelos in gloria sua? Et respondens dixit mihi: Iste est magnus angelus Michael deprecans semper pro humanitate * et humilitate”. 24. Vidi stolas multas et thronos et coronas® jacentes. 25. Etdixi angelo: Istae stolae et coronae quibus servantur *et throni®? 26. Et dixit mihi: Istas coronas
salem” erant ibi scripti et quorundam hominum vidi opera, quos ego non scivi. 23. *Cognovi iterum in veritate, quia nihil absconditur™ in septimo caelo *eorum quae in mundo fiunt”. "Et interrogavi angelum: Quis igitur™ est iste praeeminens angelos in gloriasua? Et cum respondisset _dixit mihi: Praeeminens angelus iste est magnus archangelus Michael deprecans semper pro humanitate." 24. Vidi ‘autem! stolas multas et thronos et coronas ‘multas!' jacenangelo: Istae stolae *et thronietcoronae quibus® servantur ?
2 Em. from HIAIC: Cf. S quos ego non scivi. 5 a adds H&avCaAh: 8 SE add multas.
0 E = filiorum Israel.
® Trs. before 1 Here
SL? agree against E which = Et dixi: Re vera, nihil est quod
abscondatur. So also Gk. Leg. ii. 32 xai.. 2 — Gk. Leg. ii. 32 rev eis... Tov kéopov mparro-
AavOdver x.7.A, pévov. “4 Added from L’E. 16 kim; tém w, ch.
L? = quod est in mundo factum est.
. cimov *AAnOGs obdev
% I? wrongly trs. after servantur.
Ned: ATH: 4A MP: Al Lhe Th ne = Hnao? AGA: [L£hare:|* worn 7’ OLTha: N av’ ML av}; av Ob: A494? wave WCs 27. OCA ahbS2 AH: £Po. 7: * WANA LT AyEU: ONL: O-A'F:” CADP Hirao: 2.2: 2h: AN: Cine wavA Ant! AN: Cane ODP hs FU: WARSI": WADA: OUT: witir aD: ROP); Pe-ap:8 PCO: ONS: te: @OONh?: Hiravs 0
multi ammittunt de illo mundo credentes verba illius, de quo locutus sum tibi. 27. Et "conversus" vidi dominum in gloria magna," et expavi valde". 28. Et appropinquaverunt ad eum omnes justi et adoraverunt eum una voce cantantes, et erat vox" sicut illorum. 29. Et* "Michael appropinquans adoravit, et cum eo” omnes angeli adoraverunt et cantaverunt. 30. Et
Istarum stolarum multi destituuntur “ de illo mundo credentes verbo illi*, de quo locutus sum tibi. 27. Et "conversus" vidi dominum in gloria magna" et expavi valde";
28, Et appropinqua-
veruntad eum omnes quos vidi! justi” et cantantes una voce, fet ille erat similis eis! et *erat gloria” eorum sicut illorum. 2g. Et tune "Michael appropinquavit et adoravit et cum eo” omnes angeli adoraverunt et cantave-
AhRS: PA: ONAL: runt. 30. Et trans- UAo-hs FAW av: Abo: ont Mth JER hav: LAPD: Nant: itiravs oli Ts Odea: 30.0T
1 BN: LavRKs w. 2 be NSA: 3} Mhan; ‘ Interpolated: see exegetical note on ix. 5. 56 wOPN: TAH: 46 ANHTE: ® Should be gloria mea. 6 Add tunc with SE. “ L? Istas coronas multi ammittunt. Destituuntur
= lisajutsja. SL? both wrong; for the context requires the
mention of those who receive the garments. 8 L7H illius. *° L? vox: better gloria mea as in E,
multi accipient. in E.
E = Has vestes
Observe large addition
OATh: onthe: hav: LAL: aaah: HE ON1eh: wltidh: 32. DLGAL: avn: HO-WE: ATHA: *H? wa: hat: ACA 1CH Cans AAA: AO ah’ HLaviie: we: $i: FOU: FCO: oh 18 Of Ndy: OAL: Man: FAdGWas: OONATe:® AToOA M:; (hav; Catron": 34. OAL; SCO: av Naat: ONTR« bok:
1 Em. in accordance with SL? from wtwdm: whi: 3 badds ('E: L2T& io
getical note in loc.
from A'T¢7C: in accordance with S.
See exegetical note in loc. ° SE use sing.
M1 See notes 1? and *.
angelus.
transfiguravime' iterum", et fui sicut angeli®. 31. Tune qui me ducebat: Hunce adora et canta. Et adoravi eum et cantavi. 32. Et dixit mihi angelus, [qui me ducebatl: Iste est dominus *omnium gloriarum, quas® vidisti. 33. Et” vidi alium gloriosissimum similem ejus Tin omnibus et justi appropinquaverunt Tad eum! et adoraverunt "eum" et cantaverunt, et tille cantabatt™ cum eis et non ttransfiguravit set" in visu illorum. 34. tCum eis, ett venerunt angeli et adoraverunt eum," et ego adoravi eum et
we should read ego cantabam with E. for transfiguravi me. Cf. ver. 30, and see exegetical note on ix. 33.
4 po vidom: w po vidomy. E = kai pera raira.
kal,
figuravi me" iterum™ et fui sicut angelus gi. Tune dixit mihi angelus qui me ducebat: Hune adora et canta; Et adoravi eum et cantavi. 32. Et dixit mihi angelus: Iste est dominus omnis gloriae, quam vidisti. 33. Et Tadhue illo dicente! vidi alium gloriosissimum similem ejus Tin omnibus", et justi appropinquaverunt et adoraverunt fet] "eum™ et cantaverunt; ettille cantabat +"cum eis et non ttransfiguravit set* secundum visum™ illorum, 34. Et +ceum eot” venerunt angeli et adoraverunteum. [Et dixit mihi angelus: Adora eum et canta. | TEt adoravi eum et
See exe- § Km. from
10 Add illo dicente with 2 So also L? but in both
3 A primitive error
16 TL? cum eis et = pera trovray
35-OCA-DP: NATHLA: ONS7I": AAT OA oo FE*Z; UNG: PM. Als OThAAn: ah: ONAL: ALPh Cih: ONT: O18: THLE: AV LIT: av? DA: ACAL:? wWA.cd AAD: HIPAA: wrA! iva: aAAnt: At: ars AATHAS: 38. ONdE: *Cain: ALLH): VELA: O *A52: AVH: 2dcoaks
is strange.
It might be emended OADY: ONT: OM: Ther:
cantavi. 35. Et Titerum” vidi alium "in gloria magna". 36. Et "ambulans™ interrogaviTangelum": Quis est? et dixit mihi: Adora eum; iste enim est angelus Sancti Spiritus loquens in te et in omnibus justis. 37. Et "post haec™ alia quideminenarrabilis [et ineffabilis] revelabatur gloria, quam ego apertis oculis mei spiritus non poteram videre, nec qui me ducebat Tangelus', neque omnes angeli, quos videram adorantes dominum. 38. Nisi tantummodo justos vidi in gloria magna aspicientes gloriam®.
cantavi". 35. Et Titerum” alium "in gloria magna" vidi. 36.Et" ambulantem™ interrogavi' "angelum": Quis iste est? et dixit mihi: Adora eum ; iste enim est angelus*SanctiSpiritus” loquentis™ in te et in omnibus iustis, 37. Et" post haec"alia quaedam"” = inenarrabilis revelabatur gloria *quam ego apertis oculis spiritus mei non poteram videre™ nec qui me ducebat (angelus)" neque omnes angeli quos videram adorantes dominum, 38. Nisi tantummodo justos vidi in gloria magna aspicientes gloriam
3 Text
HA: THLE: AOL TH: oI: AVA: ACAL:= ‘And thereupon the Great Glory was revealed which, though the eyes of my spirit were open, I could not see.’ This would agree with SL*, But text is no doubt right and SL? wrong. For av'}é.0%; a reads 10%; and 7 See note *. 8 Add illius with E or ejus with S. ° Part. Pret. u,chaddet. L? reads ambulans, but wrongly: see quotation from Epiphanius in exegetical note on ix. 35-36. 10 angel’ stago: angel’skago w, ch. [vel Popov errore typograph. | a 6 loquens. % T? quidem. ® See different idea expressed in E. “ Added from L?S.
CHAPTERS IX. 35—X. I
at: AAhe MOPCa: 408: ATTA *@; wWarPAéh; av} TOVAN: TCA: AA MLANHC! ONAL an: AcoAan: HIP Ah: Tw-U0: FLAS
39. | 39. Et appropinqua-
vit "primum" dominus meus et angelus spiritualis®, 40. Et et cantaverunt seeundo“insimul, 41. Tune omnes _ justi 42. Et "cum eis
Aa&h:' HavtZi:® w)| Michael et™ angeli Ofidhs RAZWa: 4|/ omnes adoraverunt Od: AATHANdCrlet cantaverunt. LP OCH: OTR CO: O178. witirao: mnaAat: Ade: X. wfB7: 0970n+|X. Postea audivi PAT: OPNAIT: HA | vocem™ibi", et*canti-
o70n-: Nhe7eT: Ha
26 AATHANAC: 5 be NATHLAR: WAoPA A:
cum, quod” audivi tin sexto coelot™, ascendehat et ‘audie-
® @ adds
3 bBadds CNRch: He: 4
Tejus’. 39. Et appropinquavit Feist. "primum" dominus meus et angelus spiritualis®, 40. Et adoraverunt et cantaverunt duo” aetune omnes justi adoraverunt 42. Et "cum eis Michael et” angeli omnes adoraverunt et cantaverunt.
X. Postea audivi vocem “ibi" et cantica, quae™ audivit in caelo ascendentia in
@om. 7 a wttivav:
RPE: oO. 5 ¢ om. 9 6 adds HA°72: which I take to be a corruption of @£N%0O: removed by an error from the following clause where it followed 8005: a reads HAC70nPav+
a mere correction, which however points to 2°70: ° Ed.Ven. specialis. So note * for passage lost by hmt. here. 1 Corrupt. Read duo with SE. 2 S cantica quae. 8 Corrupt
for in singulis sex caelis. See E and S. 4 L?om. E= mihi. % SL? om. through hmt. et dixit: Vide ut tibi permissum sit aspicere Deum et propter te angelo qui tecum, datum est robur. Et vidi quod adoravit Dominus meus et angelus spiritualis. On the other hand this passage may be peculiar to G' and therefore not goback toG. SoalsoE. L? corruptlysecundo. ™ tiikimo. L? insimul which is better. So E. 18 ize: ze u, eze quod ch,
2. wittraes AHhs ANtOch: HAVA: 0 Nar: CAk LEP: 3. WAAS: ANIO: ANA: WAbiil 4. DATA: *wtavA Po: ott: LAs 5. ods: DT: HH LTEP: APREVE: AV, Cr: Ah: hav; WL 6. ONF7nP: Narr an: H2avCAhh: oF O: HoO-AE HAGA: ELL: APA: OPSDAY FAI: HEI NC: ONPLAT: LOC &: HU: LZTAUA: Aare: P22: ARE: RLPY: AU: AAT. AU: AATHLAS: ATH: L-Nlde: AATILAL: [AC Ota: HUd: £AUA:
a doublet.
5 a@ repeats. text, reading ibi however for in septimo caelo. ° Since E = in caelis sex caelorum ascendentia,
batur in septimo coelo”, 2. Etomnes
glorificabant illum, cujus ego gloriam non poteram videre. 5. Et omnium. sex coelorum canticum non solum audiebatur sed videbatur. angelus: Hic est lvivusl unus_ aeternus in excelsa aeternitate vivens, et in sanctis requiescens, Tcujus nec nomen nec visionem possumus sufferre", qui *est laudatus a Sancto Spiritu. in ore {sanctorum |* justorum. 7. Et "post haec" audivi vocem aeterni dicentem
? See note ® on preceding page.
sextum caelumt+’. 2. Et omnes glorificabant illum cujus non poteram ego gloriam videre. 5. Omnium autem sex caelorum canticum non solum audiebatur sed ‘et! videbatur. 6. Et Hic est *unus aeternus” in excelso saeculo" vivens et in sanctis requiescens, cujus nec nomen *nec donum”™ possumus*® sufferre; qui *cantatusest'aSancto Spiritu in ore justorum. 7. Et "post haec™ audivi vocem aeterni dicentis®
5b CAL:
7 S om., but E supports
8 Bracketed as
it is probable that in caelo and in sextum caelum are corrupted from some expression like that in E. Hence text = ‘ which I had
heard ascending in each of the six heavens.’ 0 E = altissimus altorum. See exegetical note on x. 6.
and E. aeternitate in L?
See fuller text in L? n = aidan. So
S = ofze déow corruption(?) of o&re spaow, which is the reading
tur.
ch potest quis. © L? dicentem.
“4 L? = est laudatus.
E = vocabi-
ods Hot: (LAA: TOCS: ond: an MmAHPEA;: A-b*dh'w- Cx go. OTTZhA: hav: Cattav: (ap THIPN: TTeZAA: [wmdalant*L: an: wt: Laat]? xr. DLAI ® ira: omnt: HHh: 70
PRE: HONOLU:? hover: w* Hanan tari 12. OLA 9h nao; AIT: J? OAS: *A0: AXA: AT £5: 2POh: wharAA ntVar: OANCTSLE Wars AN: AONL |"
: Interpolated. See exegetical note on ix. 5.
CHAPTER X. I-I2
domino filio: 8. Exi et descende de omnibus coelis et sis in mundo etvade usque ad angelum, qui est in infernum™; 9. Transfigurans te secundum formam illorum. 11. Et non cognoscent te, neque angeli neque principes seculi illius: 12. Et judicabis principem ‘illius seculi! et angelos ejus ettmundirectorest™:
domino filio: 8. Exi et descende de omnibus caelis et sis in mundo et vade® usque ad angelum, qui est in inferno, g. Cum transfigurasses te secundum formam illorum. ir. Et non cognoscent te neque angeli neque principes saeculi illius: 12. Et judicabis principem”™ et angelos ejus et mundum regnatum ab iis:
"HGAZ": Text follows a save that AJ": is corrected into $(Aa0:
ec reads PRGA: Hhe FAI":
For Ati: b reads Hi:
an loc,
0 ge DALAaDhs
Adh: 00: APA: AONLD: APOR: ANCTLT: war” wn’. QM; of b, a reads twice AN: 13 Read inferno. regnatum ab iis as in SE. See Greek on p. 71 note. 16 Add illius saeculi from L? E.
daze i wu.
46 Haina:
7 Interpolated. See exegetical note
u Text very corrupt.
6 adds
K
5 a DALAI 44
I emend as follows: n after both verbs.
4 Corrupt for mundum
a; Terr oT 27° Qt: Noe? TTF; wha NAVE: *ONATNaT: Hh? FAI": OAT": HAI"4W ar: 2 ravh a 13. Allav: ah Ri: OLO0: hk: noo: MHAINAE WH. avhZ: 14. DAIL: 4é: sooner?! Pr: TOC?: Aarnth: wh. he e2: Ad: ANAT: TOC?: OTENC: NI27 82 Nn: av KTrh: Oo SOOT: WAN: WAP: LAH: VATA? ha: wb: *AI°AN0: Ne7 2: ATHLAG:? o-N wovhan: HOA: [AFP H: FAI: PAA:
from AF°ATADT:
? be ONKOTANE: WH: Cf. x. 8. See exegetical note im loc. For
13. Ideo quia" negaverunt me et dixerunt: Nos sumus et sine nobis nemo est. 14. Postea Iverol non transfigurabis te per coelos in magna gloria ascendens et sedebis a dextris meis; 15. Tune adorabunt te prinetpes et virtutes et [omnes] angeli et omnia initia coelorum et terrae et infernorum"™, 16. Et”
raudivit magna gloria
praecipiendot™* domino meo. 17. ‘Et! tune exivit dominus de septimo coelo et descendit in sextum coelum. 18. Et angelus instruens me
3 a wToaAn
13. Ideo quia™ negaverunt me et dixerunt: Nos sumus et *praeter nos® nemo est [aliusl. 14. "Et quandoautem e terra elevaberis'*, postea” non transfigurabis te per caelos, “sed! in magna gloria ascendes et sedebis a dextris meis. 15. "Et? tune adorabunt te principes et virtutes,
et angeli et omne initium eorum in caelis et in terra et in infernis"®, 16. Istam™audivimagnam gloriam praecipientem dominomeo, 17. Tunc” exivit dominus de septimo caelo_ et descendit in sextum caelum. 18, Et angelus instruens me
APA” PT: of a, b reads Tn: OTPIAN: an arbitrary(?) change.
be ATH: THs peyadns.
See S. a
ascendens.
should have ista. LL? et.
5 $ L? = ‘then’ which is right. is a mistranslation of peré raira. 1 Kd. Ven. id qa (sic). za ne. See different text of E.
§ So bc and Gk. Leg. ii. 41 radra iovov ris ddéns 2 SE istam. % Or sine nobis. Y ktomu, doerdy, % Tnitium dpyq ‘ principality.’ 4 TL? et tune rightly.
Here hav'H: ? bce H&avCchh:
” siju. We
ANLLA: OCK: nav: AATHA: OCLE 19. OCAn: MOAN: C ALP: aoNAant: OD): Hat: AG Ase: ONdh?: OM LAP: Ad av; ATOM: Mao: Cath*ao; Aavdan T: HVS: DANY: w a¥Z: Adan: AAW OAT: 3FN:> ATL: /*('nav: CARrars A anant: HUE: WA. Oacdh?: Afao: Ca SE: nao: WaAWPao::7 apf: Ahoo: Catt am: Aavdant: HVE: NMhP: OAMDLAP: A
1 An interpolation ? 2 Em. from TCAL: twAm: of a.
CHAPTER X. 12-22
dixit mihi: Intellige® et vide, quae® est _transfiguratio ejus et descensio? Ig. Cum viderunt Teum! angeli, laudaverunt et glorificaverunt eum, non enim transfiguravit se in
figura eorum, et ego
cantavi cum eis. 20. Cum descendisset in quintum coelum, ibi statim transfiguravit se secundum formam angelorum illorum, et non cantaverunt ei et non adoraverunt eum, erat enim forma sicut illorum. 21. Et descendit in quartum coelum, et apparuit illi(s)" secundum formam illorum, 22. Et non cantaverunt ei, erat enim forma sicut
SL? om.
S dixit™: Intellige, . Isaia', et vide quae fit transfigurationem. et descensionem ejus, 1g. Cum viderunt” angeli, cantaverunt Teum! et laudaverunt eum ; non enim transfiguravit se *secundum figuram”™ eorum, et ego autem cantavi cum eis. 2o. 'Et' cum descendisset in quintum caelum, et* transfiguravit se secundum formam angelorum illorum, et non cantaverunt ei etnonadoraverunt”, erat enim ejus forma sicut illorum. in quartum caelum et apparuit illis *secundum formam”™ illorum 22. Et non cantaverunt ei, erat enim *sicut secun-
b reads H before J>NA®: 6 reads FAI": TOAM;:
Perhaps for TCA: we might read £2ofL: = ‘He accomplishes, &c.’
See S L?.
7 a CAStav; with S E. with L’?E. 4 T? ibi statim.
3 MSS. OCA: Gk, Leg. ii. 42 and SL? support 0. 9 Ed.Ven. q. 10 Ed.Ven. illi.
2 Add eum with L’E.
1 T? add eum. See note on p. 72.
obrazu: po viizoru [sec. visum] w.
5 Add Isaia n Add mihi 3 LT? in figura.
dav; CaF: fav: avin: Anav: Catt @; Naodant: *H’ow- GOPK: AIPA: N97 2: "ww DATILA: OU Ooo: nov; i.LTAaD Ci wan: CALP: AA ADP: DADLAP: A fav: CATE: nav; CA
23. Venit autem in tertium in secundum et in primum transfigurans se in singulos eorum. Ideo non cantabant ei”, nec adorabant, apparebat enim illis” similis eorum, ostendebat enim characterem per singulos coelos custodibus portarum.
illorum.
dum formam™ illorum. 23. Venit autem in tertium caesecundum et in primum, transfigurans se in singulos eorum. Ideo non cantabant nec adorabant eum", apparebat enim similis eorum, ostendebat autem signa’ per singulos caelos custodibus _portarum.
ACPA: CP Py OATILA: LUA 26. OCA: AN: TapAn: Nha; CAattar; Noohanit: AH: 08°79": 972: OCALP: DAN: Alav: CATE Nhav:’ CARtoo: 27. O98: CARP: ON: O22: wont: P27P: NOVL: OAV: OU: 74AGT: AAA: OPO: AGPR: MavAd: Vhav: CALrar: AaAAnT: AA: 062a00: ‘Hh: aN: OAONAP: DAMWLNP: Aloo: CATE: Nnav;? CAttao: 28. oneeh: 4A0; HTNAAL: QA4?T: oPAdn: Hoa:
WHE FAI: LENCE *o'oun: T74Agh:’ AAA: 08DI7"; OCAL *F: hav: HAWad: w
in firmamentum ® et ibi dedit signa, et forma erat ejus sicut
in firmamentum! ubi princeps saeculi istius sedet' et ibi dedit signum, et forma erat ejus sicut
AONHY: AVE" AA:
§ 6 adds han; AL-TAaoC; 7 6 Hhap; 8 ¢ PHS: WH: °b 2bNSG a TWANG: " be trs. To AVE: 6 adds 4. 2S om. 8 Add with SE ubi princeps saeculi istius sedet. “4 L? forma sicut. 6 LT? om. © gnamenija.
L? characterem.
> OHV:
CHAPTERS X. 23—XI. 3
ADS to LPT a: Ahan: *Ue: Vie? 9 LAY AN L: OLR: Cin: Al: O22: oF avid: NarAant: At ahha’ aAPotnrert
T4AGT: Aloo: 4 aS Nth S:|
XL WAP ZACH: C an: @av\An: HTS 12: PUNE: Haw Cah: Lt: WAL: APR: AN ao: AH: T2.Pns: AF 710: ATHANMCH 2. WAL: Cine ag? TOAL! KOT: 10, 2:9 Natt: ath: a LVN: OTTec7ic: ANAC: Hlavs SAG: "EZ: ATPHCA: WAI"
TOALS SET: LP: HATO: AdvI?: HLA:
illorum, et non glorificaverunt eum", "et non cantaverunt ei." 30. Et descendit ad angelos, qui erant in hoe aére, sicut unus ex eis. 31. Et non dedit "eis" signum [etnon cantaverunt].
XI. Et post haec Intellige, Ysaias fili Amos; in hoc missus sum adeo" omnia tibi ostendere. Nec enim ante te quis vidit, nec post te poterit videre, quod® tu vidisti et audisti. Et vidi similem filii hominis, etcum hominibus habitare et in mundo,”
illorum et non glorificaverunt*" ne-
que ei cantaverunt". et ad angelos *aéris hujus” et erat! sicut unus ex eis. 31. Ht non dedit "eis" signum [neque interrogaverunt enim eum|/®.
XI. Et post haec Intellige, Isaia, fili Amos! inhoc' enim! missus sum a domino” "omnia tibi ostendere. Nee enim ante te quis vidit, nec post te videre poterit, sicut™ tu vidisti et audivisti. Et ecce” vidi similem *ut filium” hominis ; et cum hominibus*cum habitasset in mundo"
Non2AT: WAR ohh: TEhCT: Tren: OWT OLLPL:
M09; tah: HAZ OT: eum with L? BE. represent G?.
quite a different version. 2 TL? filii.
2 ac om. 7 The clause DAA: . . Leg. ii. g but not in SL’,
4S om. 7 TL? qui erant in hoc aére. L?=et non cantaverunt. ’ L?E deo.
1 OFLA: . 0O£.1G0; is found in GA. 56 OLOML:
6 Add
8 This may
S sicut.
G (E and Gk. Leg.) give
I34 ASCENSION OF ISAIAH
TOE: R2NG? L42I31 4, wavdan: avI2l:? CNTCA: OH: 5AF9; MATH: ALIZD: SALE: OLOPNY ATICLIW: wow: AO: AH: 2h": HET 1d 5. OALPCO: AG7TCLI™: MOON: hav; 277A: BENT: ONdE: OF: AIH: VE: 6. OALPIC PRAY: *AD-Ceh: DABBLE J DAP? 42: DAA Aw-d7h: aPoan:’ OTAE: 220s wit: GEE | DOT Ce I: NAF: ONcrE: nA ao: Ndhtto; 8. OLhw-r: AN: LAG: AhEta; OTE: TICLP: NOLL: AGT: OFA: 49: Vad: OF L170: 9. WA PLA LYCT: THEA” nF: hav: Laos” HATA: TOW” AOLTLU OLA: ATE OLN” AATHANdC: Ada: *QavndNE: avehi® ATWA: 1. OPA: Lhw-?:; trove HTT: GAR: ae ATG 12. DETKIC: PA: NATT: 49h AGT: Adz? 3. MAN: Lh: OAL: AVIA: F7CLI°: $L-a0; nha:” hook: Htroanr 7 14. ONHDI: Lh: AwNLT: OA0CTH: WODALT:? OAR bP ENV: OLA: ihivavs; niflart OLKI°%s* ivads WE: ORLA PS: APALE O-AE:: 5. WLI AP; OLa0 es *ATHST: HILAL 16. OCA aiden: SRR HN: OVAL8: DANORTZ: WT: AI7C: AAA: L£Po0-00% hav: PNA: Hee: AOVlT: wie: av RATTh: w* tir: AF°An:! HH: GAF98s 17. OCAhs AGHST: Vir:® &mos hao; AV: oNhav: PCI: be: noo: %.LTAaPC: §§=618. WAN: AVE: LINC: T4I°S: ONL: Wav Yad: 079. Ge: ANA: *O"ALZANIP
1 6 OGM: 2 6 adds PSN: 3 So be. Soa read, but the first three letters are erased and the fourth almost wholly. 7 bom. 8 be (bt: ® ¢ and also originally a but the word is erased save the first letter: 6 reads @4C'F: ” be T2N: be HPLav4 2g TR: 8 ¢. a originally had this phrase twice, but subsequently 99%: was erased in both instances. 6 omits phrase. 4 bo PUT: © be OL Tw Tt: 6B adds ATILG: 1 6 MLA: 8b NE LavRA: 9 be trs. 0b &. 2 Erased in a, but two first letters decipherable: all erased but first in 0. 2 @ aoMAL: (sic). % % 40.4: Perhaps we should read @PMA: 7 @ om. => bAT: ™ b adds Wha; CTT: Vie: Ont: ° 6 ONLT:
19. DAP LACH: LP Pfa0y, Aw- 2: Ale A: VOU ATH: AL L°2P OP; AYE: w LAPAP: *OLO0CL: BRAD h: Zin: WANT: OAT: Lr A: OLPNC: arPon::3 H2acCai: At: 44 Leh: OCA: A: é47an;* *AOWCE: ondi't: A4C%a:> wo OCT: 23. WA CA @A-tonm: na; C altar: OCALP: i dro: aPAAnT: HI? abo}: Di: NUE: ATH: MA: TWanit:®
Ig. Et non cognoverunt eum.
23. Et vidi ascendentem in firmamentum, qui’ non erat secundum formam transfiguransse. Et videntes omnes angeli, qui erant super firmamento, "expaverunt et” adorantes 24. Dicebant: Quomodo” fascendistiin
ig. Et non cognoverunt eum.
23. Et vidi ascendenteminfirmamentum, *etjam™ non erat secundum formam' eorum!" transfigurans se. Cum autem vidissent eum omnes angeli * qui erant super firmamento” "expaverunt et” adorantes 24. Dicebant :- Quomodo *latuit nos
At: (HUA@T: 400.| medio nostri domi-|dominus in medio” Us]? Hidés HT2hN: | ne?t” et non cogno-/et non cognovimus
4 be 24m: 56 YWEACLAE: ATA: 5 be CAN 76 @MNLOi: 8 Em. in accordance with L? in medio nostri from 100: ® A doublet. 0 =etis. Ed. Ven. q. Ed. Ven. quo. 2 Corrupt. If second sing. is retained, we must read descendisti. 8 L? qui (q). “ L? om.
b y om.
16 T? corrupt here.
NAN: A277AL: A ATOAM: AA: tira: onedg”: wav: *Manh: AED 26. OLNIS? bE: OLiNah?: O21: AG: ATA‘: PN A AH: LOGS: wo Us OCT: wit: WAR: on: Ofidhe® o£ ATH: AcdhSa’ O-A'FE: *DAI°.U: ATOAN OCT: MONIES: wE: wo ANhPi 21. ona: Anat: L2TBMax: 32. OCANP: AG: OC MUN ch?: Hivavs 2.2: Ph Oltivav: ahah
1 6 VAN ira: sed. throno sedet.
porro. note on xi. 27.
8 Ed. Ven. qué.
Corrupt. S (=E) preserves true text. “ E in secundum caelum.
vimus regem glorjae? 25. Et *primo coelo® +gloriosiort” ascendebat et non transfigurabat se. Porro" omnes angeli? 26. Adoraverunt, et cantaverunt dicentes: Quomodo® transisti per nos domine? et non vidimus, "neque ado- Ita ascendit [in secundum coelum et |* in tertium et in quartum et in quintum et insextum 31.+Usque ad omnes coelos, et gloriae suae conjungebat set™. 32. Quando " ascendit in septimum coelum, cantaverunt ei om-
2b OHTA .
1 Corrupt or interpolated. ® Add with SE et dextri et sinistri et is qui in medio ™ Wrong addition.
® Corrupt or interpolated. * Both SL? err in adding these words. L? adds caelum after sec.
regem gloriae? 25. Et *ex primo caelo” ascendebat +gloriosior +, et non transfigurabat se. Sed” omnes angeli Tet dextri et sinistri et is qui in medio throno sedet' 26. et cantaverunt dicentes : Quomodo transisti praeter nos, domine,et non cognovimus "neque adora- Et! ita ascendit [in secundum et in tertium et in quartum et in quintum et in sextum caelum. 31. In omnibus tamen caelis gloria ejus adjecta est. 32. "Et? ut ascendit in septimum caelum cantaverunt ei om-
See exegetical
Tr OAD: CaN: h OAnav: hav: AnVA he OMA CAR? 33. Wand Ani: Hav} at: P80: Chins *h 34. *woavAtin: *H LAL: AALLA: OA 2: APR: AA all apy? ONET: ANTE: Alan: meP: HAM: MA: oT: dnih: adn: cPO0Ah: LTE, Al av 20: AALLN: Aiticavs AA: 24o0-
1a HnNAT:
2 be CALL:
nes justi et omnes angeli "et omnes virtutes™, quas® non potui videre. 33. Angelum _mirabilem™ vidi sedere a sinistris [ejusl, 34. Qui dixit mihi: Sufficit tibi Ysaia ; vidisti ‘enim,' quod nemo falius] vidit carnis filius, "quod nec oculus vidit, nec auris audivit, nec in cor hominis ascendit, quanta praeparavit deus omnibus diligentibus se™. 35. Dixitque mihi:" Revertere in stolam tuam, donec tempus dierum tuorum adimpleatur "et" tunc venies huc. 36. Haec videns Ysaias dixit circumstantibus se, et "audientes mira-
nes justi et omnes angeli et omnes virtutes". "Et tune vidi eum ut sedit a dextris Magnae Gloriae |, quam non potui vigelum Spiritus vidi sedentem a sinistris, 34. Et dixit mihi: Sufficit tibi, Isaia! cognovisti® quod nemocognovit* e carnis filiis, "nec™ oculusvidit nec auris audivit nec in cor hominis ascendit, quanta praeparavit Deus _ diligentibus eum”™.—35. Et dixit mihi": Revertere in stolam tuam, donec tempus dierum tuorumadimpleatur™ et" tune venies [mihil hue. 36. Haec cum vidisset Isaias dixit circumstantibus eum, "et cum audis-
4aom. ‘ce. adli.
6 Em. in accordance with SL? sufficit tibi from 4.@4%n: - Din.
proposes &h-Th:
2 Should be quam;
3 Should be spiritualem. SE = spiritus (gen.).
8 L? (E) vidisti.
7 be Ah: 10 Em. from Gé&in in accordance with S L?. crept into be two lines later.
8a LTERI:
nT? defective.
9 a ATT:
The same error has See S.
change due to loss of preceding words.
this passage see exegetical note on xi. 34.
7 L? quod nec. On
dhe: OL-TS1C: AH PL: FP: OL) nao; ANtT? TTICh: 37. OTE2ZES AT: tt: GAL: TERI: *NL6T: TOAL: 39. DAI" hi: KALL HO: ANGAA: W1.AN yr: PAT: nav: *48U f: AAOAP: WANA:
OPI MATa: UV Ad: Navid: bE: hao; 134s AANA
c Wahir:
bilia = cantaverunt omnes et" glorificaverunt "dominum’ dantem talem gratiam hominibus". Et dixit Ezechiae regi: 37. Consummatio seculi hujus, 38. Et topera implebunturt* in novissimis generationibus. 39. Et prohibuit eis, ut non annunciarent populo Israel, nec verba haee darent ad scribendum omni homini. 40. Sed tquanta intelligentur a rege et dicta® in prophetist®. *Ita et vos estote™ in Sancto Spiritu, ut recipiatis stolas vestras et thronos et coronas gloriae in coelisjacentes. "Cessavit autem loqui et
° Em. in accordance with S talia intelligite from @ WATT; TPP: (JPOP: c; LEMP: 5). See S for right version. Corrupt and defective. Better in S. ® L?E populo.
sent haec” mirabilia glorificaverunt et” cantaverunt "Deum, dantem talem gratiam hominibus® Dixit autem Ezechiae regi: 37. Consummatio —saeculi hujus, 38. Et omnis haec visio implebitur in novissima § generatione. 39. Et prohibuit eos, he annunciarent filiis* Israel, nec verba haec darent ad scribendum omni homini, 40. Sed tquantumcunque _intelligitis a rege dicta in prophetist, talia intelligite omnes. Vos autem vigilate“* in Sancto Spiritu, ut recipiatis stolam vestram et thronos et coronas gloriae in caelis jacentes. "Et cessavit loquens et
ce Airit: 5b ALUN:
7 S deum. 9 Ed. Ven. dca.
" Corrupt. See note ™. + “So E. L? corrupt.
L? Ss an: MOGACT: MAN|exivit ab LEzechia|exivit ab Ezechia AAT: HAOAT: HO: rege.7 rege", [Ipsi autem 0: A972: OCs Deo nostro gloria Explicit visio Ysaiae|nunc et semper et prophetae. in saecula saeculo-
rum. Amen. |® 4I. NATH: Ad? GALT? OTIATT? Owe: AWA: Nea: OAL: P90: AKALLD: OAL: APR ULL 42. OTT: hie: OVUM: HHPLA: APG: Atak: FOR 43. OATHNE: PCA: DELOLL: ODT: Ads *NAA A: TELE: ANLO: TURN:
Té.Ra00: HE: *HAAL LN: LL: FA: OCTE:S
“beom. *¢GA&: © 60m. entire subscription. 7 Possibly this sentence belonged to original form of Vision. 8 An
addition of the Slavonic scribe.
APPENDIX
Tur Use of THE Names ‘Tur Benoven,’ ‘Briar,’ AND ‘SAMMAEL,’ IN THE VARIOUS CONSTITUENTS OF THE ‘ ASCENSION.’
The Beloved. This title of the Messiah is peculiar to the the Vision of Isaiah vii. 17, 23; viii. 18, 25; ix.12. Its presence in i. 4, 5, 7,13 in the Martyrdom of Isaiah is due to the editor of the Ascension, as well as in iv. 21.
Beliar. This designation is wholly absent from the Vision of Isaiah. It is found both in the Martyrdom of Isaiah and in the Testament of Hezekiah, but in two quite different meanings. Thus in the Testament he appears as the Beliar Antichrist manifested in the flesh in the form of Nero iv. 2, 14, 16, 18, whereas in the Martyrdom he is a purely Satanic immaterial being i. 8, 9; ii. 4; ili. rr. In this latter sense he is introduced in his editorial
Sammael. This name is absent from the Testament of Hezekiah. It is also absent from the Vision of Isaiah; for in vii. 9 it is due to the editor of the Ascension, since it is wanting in SL? (see p. 105). It was, therefore, peculiar to the Martyrdom i. 8, 11; ii. 1, but appears also in the editorial additions, iii. 13%; v. 15,
To sum up, the name ‘Sammael’ was originally peculiar to the Martyrdom, Beliar to the Testament of Hezekiah in one sense, and to the Martyrdom in another, and the title ‘ Beloved? common to the Testament and the Vision, but absent from the Martyrdom.
It is needless to add that these facts confirm our critical analysis of the Ascension.
IIpopnreia, amoxaduiis Kat paprupioy Tod aylov cal edddfou Kal peylatov tv mpopytav
Hoatov rod apodirov.
[See Introd. pp. vee)
"Eyévero év To wéumty Kal eikoore Eret Baowhedovros j iyi
“Eleion ev ‘lepovoadiy kahéoat Mavacahy Tov vidy adroé,
dvta érav evSexa,, Eumpoobev “Hoatou tod mpopyrou kat “lacodp.
Too uiod abtou. 2. Kal éAGdyros airod mapéduxer abte ods i. Bs Néyous ris mpopyreias ods adrds 6 paxdptos ‘Hoaias efSev, kat Thy x. 8 (iii. xaTéBaow kat é&Aevow Tod dyamnrod ék 10 EBSdpou odpavod 13)
eis Tov Gdqy, Kal Thy perapdppucr F iv HeTepopaby Eumpoobey iii. 13; x. Trav padntav abrod, kat Tods Aéyous ols adrds 6 Baordeds 18 "E&exias eidev ev 7H dppwotig abroG. 3. Kal ds qrovoen Zopvas | i Shh, 6 “Ypoppareds kat “Agodp 6 Srropynparoypddos épxdpevov Tov 17. eae péyay “Hoatay dé Tadydduv els ‘lepougad tp, kal per adrod vi. 1, 3. teooepdxovra uiods mpopyTav kat “lacodp tov uidy adtod, dmizyyerkav r@ "E€exia epi tis édetoews airév, 4. ‘O d€ Baaihevs "Bexias dkxovoas tadra éxdpn xapav peyddAnv oddédpa,
kat eferddv els ouvdyrnow Tov paxapiov ‘Hoaiov érehdBero Tis
xetpos avrou kat elonyayev avrov eis Tov otkoy Tis BaoiXeias abroi,
5. Kat éxedevoev Tebfivar adto Bidpov" obk éxdOtoev Sé eri vi. 2. tov Sidpov, GAN émt thy Kdlvqv Tob Baowdws. 6. Tére emthaBépevos "Eexias 6 Baoiheds Mavacony tov vidy adrov
Fyayev abroy mpos tov paxdptoy ‘Hoaiav roy mpoparny, tva emOijon Tas xetpas abtoo én’ adrdv Kai eddoynon airdv, ds Vi. 5.
i. x. Instead of dvra éraiv évdexa, Gebhardt proposes éyra atte éa as in Ethiopic. ‘“Iagotp LXX. "IacovB. Ethiopic = Jéséb, Joséb or Jdsab. 2. cdev twice iiev in MB. 3. “Acovp corrupted from ’Acd¢: see note on vi.17.
08 eldey 6 péyas mpoyrns “Hoalas tov Mavacany, éyéhacey én’ aire kat eimev 76 "Eexigr Od Sivapat eiAoyjoa Tov Mavaooyp Tov “paddovrd pe Typwpeiv peydhats Bacdvous kal mxpais. 7. Kai eimev "Efexias rp dyin mpopitn * Hoaia’ Ethbynaoy, mdrep, Mavacaip rév vidy pov. 8, “O dé elzev' Zi KUpios 6 Oeds pou Kal é vids abrod 6 dyamntés Kal 73 mea Td Nadoiv év enol, ru év Tals xepol Mavacoy Tod vi0d cou Bagdvors mxpais rot Cay drahhayfropat, 9. Karorxyjoet yap 6 garavés ev Th xapdia Mavacoy Tov viod cov, Kat improbjcopor b bn’ abtod mpiwvt udivy did kepadjijs ews moddv eis BUo, Kal amoddods ef ‘lepovoadyp Kat @& *lodda amocrice dd Oeod Cavros kat mpookvynoovow eldddos. 10, "AxoUoas Sé taita “EfLexias 6 Bacieds édumnby oddpa Kat Eoxicev TA ipdtia adtod Kat éxXaucev miuxpas, Kal EBadev xoov emt thy kepadty adtod Kal cdkkov Kat onodév bmectrpdoaro, Kal emevey ent mpodcwmov adtod doel vexpés, 1. Kat elwev 6 péyas rod Geod mpopyrns ‘Hoatas rG Baoidel "Efexia’ Odn dhedjoes ceauTdv obdév KAaiov xal ddupdpevos’ det yap wAnpwOfvar thy Boudhy Tob catava, év TO vid cov To Mavacoy. 12. Ev éxetvy S€ 7H Spa StedoyiLeto “ELextas 6 BaowAevs too droxreivar Tov uldv abrod Mavacoyy. 6 5¢ Sopvas 6 tropynparoypddos cimev rh dyio mpo pnt ‘Hoaia ore ’Efextas 6 Bacthebds Bodderat dmoxreivar roy vidv airod bid oé. 13. Kat etrev 6 péyas “‘Hoatas ampés "ELexiav rév Baoihéa’ Karipynoev xiptos 6 beds xal & dyamnrés
. abrot Thy Boudhy cou ob ph ydp Zotar rodro. Set ydp pe ek
mavros éy Taig xepot Mavacoy Tov viod cov tipwpybévra é€eOelv did rod Biov rovrov.
14. “Opvgev Sé 6 peéyas ‘Hoaias év ‘Iepovoahip év th yR oikeiats xepoin, kat edpev Bap wodt, kat emavdpacev adrd mryyy Zodp, 6 épunveverat ameoraApevos,
ji, Mera d€ raira mpookaheadevos "Efexias 6 Bacihets Top dyioy *Hoaiay rov mpoprrny els 7a Baoidea elo Oev Tmpos adtéy’ Kai KabeLopevou Tov peyddou mpoijrou * Hoaiov émt thy Kdivny 700 Bacidéws cyévero ev exordcet, kai ApOy 6 Sradoyiopas adtoé dé Tod kdopou Tovtov. 2. Kai as rovro yéyouev, iipbaro déyew Sopvas 6 irropynparoypages 6 Gre dméObavev 6 dytos Heaias.
Eira eiceAOav "Efexlas 6 Baotheds kai Kparnoas airov tis
vi. 14. xetpos eyo Ste otk dméGaver, add’ dvedyhbn, iyow peréory’ vi. 12. ru fy ev aire eutonna Luis. 3. Ezoinoey d€ obras xeipevos emt
tis Kdivns tod Bacthéws ev rj cxotdoet adrod jucpas rpeis Kab
vixtas tpeis. 4. Kat dre eldev 6 péyas mpopyrns ‘Hoalas ra
é€aiota kai dearavéyta Kai mapddo£a tod pidavOpamov Geod epya
év rois ovpavois, Thy Te marpiyy Sdfav Kai Tov ayarnTod viod
xal Tod mveiparos, thy te Trav dyiov dyyéAwy rdafw Kal xopo-
otagiay’ qeovcev 8é Kal ra ppyta kal dadppyta Tov Ocov pyyara®
tére énéorpeypev Kat 4) Wuxi) adtod évy ré oapart airov. 5. Kal
ToUrou ‘yevouevou exddecey 6 péyas ‘Hoatas “lacodp tov uidy adtod vi. 16, 17. xai Lopvay tov ypappardéa kat *ELeriay roy BactAéa Kai mavras
rods mept(e)aT@ras, oirwes Kai Hoav d£toe Tov dovoat dmep cidey
6 dyos “Hoaias 6 mpopyrns. 6. "Eyévero, yciv, év TO vii. 2; iv. Tpodytevew pe Thy Spacw thy ént BaBudGva, kat eldov Gcod 19; Vii. 2 Gyyedov Se8ofacpevov’ of Kata rhy rdf Sé Tay dyyédwv dv
eldov téte eyh EBderov viv, GNAG TAelova Kal mepiccorépay
elyev S6fav. 7. Kai elev mpds pe’ “Axovody pov, ‘Hoaia vie
"Apas’ ets ToUTo yap dweotdéAny Tod dveveyKat ve ws EBdduov vii. 4, 5. ovpavod, Eras tdys ra pvornpia Tov Oeod Kal rov Kiptov ris ddEns
kai toy vidy adtod tov dyamyrdy. 8. Kat edppdvOnv mavu tt vii. 6, o. mpatws édadyoev por. 9. Kal AaBdv pe cdOdws dvijyayev év
TO oTepedpatt tov obpavod. al elBov exet tov cuTavév
nade Coy év TG orepedpart Tov odpavod, kal OédpuBov troddv
wept adrdv, cat dxaracraciay peyddnv’ els yap Tov éva, dpwdLeww X- 31.
wat &Siceivy €Sovrero, rov KaOnevov xaipovros mavy emi rais xaxonpaylais ravras. 10. Kat eltrov 1H Oeig dyy€hw 7G pret’ pod vii. rr. Bvt Kopue, tis oti obtos bs xalper emt ro POdve kai 7H ddicig
kat 7G dondvde wohéu@ ; 11. Kal elev mpés pe’ Odk ey Kuptos, viii. 5 GAAS advBoudds cou eipl. obros 8é cori 6 KpaTioas TOG Kdopou, iy, 2, év xaraBadel éx rod orepedparos rovrov kai els drwdeias Exrémrper iy. 4. Buddy 6 peddAwy xaraBaivew ee rov odpavay Kai tots dvOpdmos SL?xi, 1(?) cuvavacrpépeobar kata Tas Hpetépas eiddas, 6 vids rod Ged, viii. 10, 26, 12. Kai wédw dvijyayér pe els rév mprov odpavév, kat eidov éxet vii, 13, 14. kata 7d péoov Tov odpavod Opdvov, Seftods te kal dpiorepots
€otGtas Oclovs dyyéAous cal Gpvoivras dovyjro wri. 13. vii, 15, 16, Kat elwov 7G Ocig dyy&Xo 7O Svre per’ epod Tie & tuvos 17.
otros dvamréparerat; Kat elmév pour Obros 6 duvos eis Bdgav
kat Tipsy dvaréprerat Tod KabeLoudvou év TG EBSduw odpavd,
peyddou kal dxaradnrov Oeod. 14. Kal ef6 otras dvijyayév pe vii, 18, 19. eis Tov Sevrepov obpavdv, kai eiSov exet Opdvov Kard 73 pécov
rod odpavod, Seftods Te Kat dprotepods dowpdrous, ipvoivras
vii. ar.
exeivoy rév péyav xat dxatddywrov Oedv. Kat whetos fy 6 Spvos év 7O Seutépw obpavd Swép tov mpOrov. 15. Kat perd radra dvityayéy pe eis Tov Tpirov odpardy, kal eldov Kdxet Opdvov kara TS péoov rod olpavod Kat mA_Oos dvapiOunrov adyyéhov kat dpxayyéhwv tuvotvrear exeivov Toy péyav Kal dkatdAnmrov’ Kat 5 tpvos 6 ev te tpire oipavg peilav iv brép robs Aouvois. 16."Ere 3é dvros pou év TS Tpity oUpavg cdoyoduny év éaurg@ Kal eto" 7Apd te Sbvarat yruoOivar Gde tav ev TEKdTH Kdopw ywopevar épywv ind trav avOpdrav movnpéy Te Kat dyabav 3 17. Kat elev & Ocios dyyedos 6 pet’ En0d dv" "Eyvav ti edoyiow év rf Siavoig cov, ‘Hoaia. apes viv Srav yap dvevéyxw oe eis Tov EBSopor obpavdy, téTe yvdon dxpiBas Ste obBev NavOdver 76 Ociov éx THY ev ekxelve 7O pOapTd Kéopo ywoprdvev. 18. Kal addy évityayév pe cis Tov Téraptov obpavey, Kal elSov Kdxel Kara pécov Tod odpavod Opdvoy, Kal Kix rod Opdvou ayyeor Kai dpydyyedot Guvoivres ekeivoy rév péyay Kat dxardywrov Kat Tov vidv airod rév povoyeri, Tov KUptoy nudv "Incotv Xpiordy, 19. Kat «if obras dvipyayév pe els tov méparov odpavdv, kai eldov kdxel Opdvov xara 7d pécov rod odpavod Kai whHOos dvapiOyntov dyyé\ov kal dpxayychov. 20, "Hoay 8¢ eis rév wéprrov obpavdy Kai trobpéma (Ga dvapeptypéva peta tev dyyéhov, bpvobvra éxeivoy TOV péyav kai dkatddqrrov, 21. Kat déviyayev pe eis Tov Extov obpavév, kat obxért nOuvduny tmoorjvar THY AaympéryTa Kal Ta Para’ Kai epoBnOnv mdvu Kat éwecov ért mpdcwmov, 22. Kat etmrév poe 6 Oeios &yyedos 6 per’ pod dv* “Axovoor, ‘Hoaia mpopijra, vie "Apas" p} mpookurjoys pyre Gyyédous pire dpxayyédous pire Kupid- TyTas pate Opdvous, Ews dv eyd cou etw. cal xparjoas pe ek Tis xeipds évicxvoe Td myeipa TO év enol, 23, Kat dvepyouéver huav év th EBSSpo odpave Heovoa gwviis ek tav Kéro TepL- Tropévns kat Neyovons’ “Ews wéte ro mvedpa TS péANov depiy év capki oixety dvaBatver Ode; Kat pera taira madd iKovea govis érépas ck trav ava eyotons’ *ApeOtw dvaBaivew 6 Bixatos “Hoatas’ Se yap Kai 6 Opdvos avrov, Hde xal 6 arépavos avrod, &de kal } dvdmavots aitod éoriv, 24. Kat etwov 10 beip dyyého Th per” nod vt Adouai cov’ tis éoTw 6 KwAdwv pe 1) avaBatvew, Kal ris dorw 6 emitpémwy por dvaBatvew ; 25. Kat elev pou 6 dyyedos 6 per cuod dv’ “O pév kwddous oe dvaBaivew Eotw 6 ayyedos 6 épeotas ent tdv uve tov wévte odpavay, & Sé emitpémwy cor dvaBaive ~otw 6 Kbpios tis
d6£qs, 5 vids rod Bcod rod LGvros, bv kal i8€o0ar Eyes KaTEpXsix. 12, 13. Pevov ek Tév obpavay év TH yi] Kata Tas tpepas exeivas, Toitov ix. 31. rote mpogkuvygoy Kal Guvycov Kal ddgacov, 26. Kal ds dvityayey pe cis tov EBSopoy odpavdv fovea ovrijs érépas ix. 6. Aeyovans pou "Evicyuooy, “Heaia, vie ’Apads, nai dOéas evicyvoer
He TO myedpa Td Aadodv ev cuol. 24, Kal elBov éxet mdvras ix. 7, 8. Tods Bixaious dd Tod "Addy: “ABed Tov Sixaiov Kal EHO rdv ix. 28, Bixacov, “ldped rav Sixatov Kad Evdy tov Sixcuov, kat mévras Tod's ix. 9.
€& exelvwv trav Stxatwy yeyevynpévous. 28. Kat eldoy ds Tpocexivouy, Kai Erecov Kayo pet adrav Kal mpocekdvyca. ix. 28. kai dvéorqy émi rots médas pov. 29. Kal dre ray detAouermy mpookiynow dmédaxay, cxdOyro 6 Kipios ex dekiav, Kal mpooKane-
odpevds pe cimév por’ “Axouoov d4, ‘Haata, vié Apds, kat Zoo viii. 11. cidds ds obdeis Sde tov avOpdmav dvéBy, olde elBev Erepos &
od eles, pANNov Groorpépew eis 7d ZvSupa THs capKds. 30.
Kai mpés rotrous 28axe BiBdiov ev rais xepaiv pov, kat elev por ix. 20. Acar roiro kat dvdyvott & édoyiow év 7G .tpitw odpavd, dvepix. 19, 20. XGpevos evOdde, kat yrdon Ste ob8ev AavOdver é« Tov ywopevav
Epyav ev exeiva tH Kdopw movmpdv te Kai dyabdy. 31, Kat (vii. 27.) EhaBov 75 BiBAlov ek ris xetpds adrod Kat dvéyywv" Kal 80d maca ix. 22. drroypady mavrés dvOparov did aidvos ws alévos fv év adta, Tay Te
dyabéy Kal rdv rovnpay, pexpi kal adray rév évOupjoear. 32. Kat ix. 23. dvayvous 76 BiBAlov etmov' “Ay Gas, Séomora, ob8éev avOdver dd_
Tav eis éxetvov Tov Kéopov mpaTTopevwy. 33. Kal 26’ obras elev Xi. 35 (viii. 6 xipios mpds pe’ ‘Yadotpede adéis, ‘Hoaia, eis 73 ris capkds cou 1) evBupa" dei ydp ce Tov THs Lwfs cou xpdvor ev 7h HOaprd kdopp _ TAnpGoa, 34. Kaya EerOnv airod Aéyov' A€omora, ph doduviii. 23. ons pe eis tov kéopoy exetvoy Tov pdratov. 6 dé mddw droxpibeis
cirev* Tlopevou éxeioe’ ol yap 6 Tis Lats cou xpdvos memArpwxi, 353 TAL, 35. Kai éreca cis ros wddas abrov Seduevos pu) Grootahivat viii. 27. pe eis tov Kéopov. Kal ere mpoobeis 6 Kiptos elpneey por Ti viii. 23. kNaies, “Hoaia; ide 6 réros cou, iSe 6 Opdvos aov, ie 5 créhavds
gov, ie kat Ta evBupypatd cou mdvra & mponroipacd oo, 36. ix. a.
Aci ydp ce thy paprupiay év KAnpe Eddov rehécavta dvaBnvat Bde. mpicovow ydp ce of mapdvopor év piri Eudivy Kai Sixdcoucw CV: It.) did Kepadijs fos roddv eis BUo. 37. Kal ds raira édéyerd por
kouca Tis puvijs tod peydAou xal emnppdvou Oeod Kat matpds ¥- 7:
700 Kuptou pay ‘Incot Xpiorod, 06 Thy Ségav yd odk ABur|Oqv x. 2. iSeiv, Aeyovons TE Kuplw pou Kal Xpiorg, 5 KAnOxjoeran ix. 5; x. 7.
L
x Er,
ii. x,
noois év 7G Kéopw toute’ 38.”EfeNOe, rékvov, kat KaTd yO kat’ olpavdy Kal obpaviv jpéya. KataBhon 8& Kai eis Tov kéopov éxetvov tov bd Tov elSddwv Exmada Kupreudpevov Kat Tay WpookuvodvTwy aitois, oiTwes ApyicavTd pe Kat elmov’ “Hpets éopev Oeot, kat why fuav odx Zotw dAdos Oeds. 30. ‘Qoaites KataByjon Kat mpds Tov &yyedov Tod adou év ‘lepoucadyp mAjy ews Tod TedeuTigai oe py dwedevon. 40. Kai gorac év 75 Oavarwliival oe in’ aitav dvoPjon be. tére Kabhoy éx Sefav pou, Kal mpookuvygoucl ce mdvres Gyyedor, dpydyyehor, Opdvot, kupidrytes, dpxat, éfouctat, cai maoat tev olpavey ai Suvdpers, kal yvdoovta. maga: ai ray otpavéy otpariai Stu ob et KUpLos peT nod Tav érrd odpavav Tovrev Kal wdons Ths Suvduews. 41. Taira HKovov THs Sdéy5 THs peyddys Aeyodons Te Kupiw pou Kal Xpiorg. kal perd Taira KaTHAGev 6 KUpios Ex Tol EBSdpou odpavod, Kai HAGev eis tov Exrov otpardy’ Kael €d6facav, Spvnoay, mpovexivycay macat T&v ovpavay ai duvdpets roy Kuptov. 42. Kat etdov ds c&p\Gev 6 Kiptos ék rod [ékrov] odpavod, kai HAOev eis tov mréymrov odpavdy. kei otk eddfacay, ody Turnoav obd€ mpocexivycay' iv yap % cidda abtol ds H abtav. dyivero yap ev dyyéAos yyedos, év dpyayyédous dpydyyedos kai év duvduece Sivapis. 43. Kai otras bipdOev npéua xabefis Kat rods Aotrods odpavots év TotoiT@ oXjpart, Kal KaTiAGey eis Tov yivov Kal Ovyrdv Kéopov eidoxia rod mwatpéds, &s adrds pdvos 6 Kiptos OeAnoer.
lii. "Erededrycev 82 "ELexias 6 Bacideds Kal mpocerébn mpds robs marépas abrod, Kat Mavacays 6 vids airod mapédaBey Thy Baovdelay abtoG. 2. ‘O d& BaciAeds Mavaccis obk épyhoby tav évtohGv Tob tmatpds adtod, GAN’ émeddbeto mdvrav. Kat Gbijkey thy Natpetay tod Oeod Kai emoincey xara 1d OéAnua abot cidwda xpvoa Kal dpyupa, kal éddrpeucey TO caTava Kat tots Gyyédous adtoi kat tats Suvdpeow adrod. 3. Kat eféxdwve mdvra toy olkov Tod watpds adrod ard ris Too Oeod Aatpeias kal mpookwyceas. kai éddtpeucav 7 SiaBédo xat Tois dyyéAous abrod pera kal ray BeBnhov Kal dkabdprav ciddrav, kat érdyOuvOn ev abrois f dappakia Kai 4 mopvela Kal i enaoBia Kal & KySovopds cai 7d weidos, Kal eSidKovTo mdvres ot edoe Bas LOvres kara Gedy, 4. Tére obv mpoepijreucev
iii. 3. xAvdwnopéds MS. It is to be observed that the writer uses éraoidia instead of pavreia,
6 péyas “Hoatas wept tis médews “lepoucadthp Aéyor Tade Reyes xdptos 6 Oeds* ‘H wédus arn 7 iryamnpevn Kal ékdexrH , alee TwapadoPycerat els xetpas Lahpavaccdp Bacthéws BaSvdavos, i. 14. kal Mavagonjs 6 Bagheds kal 7 yur) abrod Kal of viol abrod kal iii. 6. of dpxovres abrod dx Oyjcovras aixudAror eis BaBvddva. 5. Kat as iikovoev Medxias 6 WevSonpopyrns Taira mpopyrevovros Tod peyddov ‘Hoaiov kai Aéyovros mepi Tis ‘IepovaaAnu Kal Tay év aitj KatouKovvtav cimev tH Bactkei Mavacoj 6. Bacrded, xadrera kat mavu Sewa mpopyteter 6 “Hoaias emt ‘lepovoadtyp iii. 6. Kai wdcas Tas médets “lovda, Aéywr Sti 7 wéALS adTn mapadobyaerat eis xeipas BaBvAdvos, kai Mavacojs 6 Bacideds kal 7 yur) abrod kat of viot adtod Kat mdvres of dpxovres abrov aixpddaro: dxOjoovrat eis BaSvAGva év wédats Kal yadedypais, kai orau 6 Bacideds Mavacons Séopios ev TG otk TaY BaBudavior. 4. Tére Gupod modAod kai dpyis wAnoOels 6 BactAeds Mavaco's iii. ra. dxotcas raira éxéhevoev MeAxiav rov Wevdorpogyrny cuhdaPéobar tov péyay “Hoatay, didre mpoedyrevcev Sewd kai yarena emi ‘Iepovcahip. 8. "Hv Sé 6 péyas mpoparys ‘Hoatas dvaxwpijoas ii. 7. nd ‘lepoucadyp, 81d 73 uy dmopepety adrév épav thy ywopévny dvopiay év airy Kat doutiav, kal rhy mpookivnow kai Natpetav tod carovad. Kat dmeOdv éxdOyto dmwévavtTe ByOdeep. 9. Kéxet 82 Fv dvopia woAdh d6er dvaxwpyoas mad éxeiBer ii. 8. éxdroev é& Sper tut, Tome fotxe kat xabapg, Bokaton adiarelrres rév pirdvOpwrov Ody. Kai ob pdvov airéds, GAAG Kai Mixatas 6 mpodiirys Kat "ApBaKodp kai “lacodp 6 vids adrod 11. 9. kat “Avvas & yépwy, kat moddot erepoe Tay moTeudvTuw eis odpavods dvehOetv, 10. "Exeioe ovy Aourdy avehOdvres MeAxias kai Bexeipas of yrevdorpopirat auvéXaBov tov yiov ‘Hoaiay rév (iii. 12.) mpopirny, 1. Kal dyaydvres adrov mpds Mavacoiy rév Bacthéa, elev mpas airév' “Hoaia, Stari mpopyrevers rovmpa emt lepovoadnp, kai émi eu kal r& réeva pov; 12. Kai etwev 6 péyas mpopnrns Heaias r@ Mavacoy BaaiAeu, ¢y@ ob mpodntréva movnpa rept tis médews tavrns, GANG Ta péAdovra airf cupBaivety Aadd. 13. Zi yap Kipios 6 Beds pou kal & dyamnrés adrod vids Kat i. 7. 75 TveGpa adrod Td Aadody ev pol, dre adry H modus fj KaAAoTH kai peydAn mapadobycetat els xelpas dvOpdmev duapraddy cai ii. 14. dvaday 31d ras dvopias Tod Aaod rod Karouxodvtos ev airy, Kal Ge ili. 6.
iii, 6. yadatdypus MS, 8 éed&70 MS. 13, dmevév MS.
v. IT.
8é, Backed Mavaccy, év wéSaig Kal yadedypats dmdgovew aixpddwrop cis BaBvddva. 14. Tére Oupabeis opddpa 6 Bacideds
_Mavacoys ep ols ifeovoev mpois pnuaow éxéhevocey mapevdd
apicOivat rév dyov ‘Hoaiav év mpiwve otdypd. 15. Kat rovrov éy rdxet ywouevov Kai mpifouevou adrod enti Spas txavds, od® ddas Frreto adrod 6 cidnpos. 16. Tdre Aéyet 6 dyos ‘Hoaias 6 mpopatys 76 Mavacaf Baotded, Zon cldds Sri eyo ev mplwn Evrive ékAnpoOny mpioOqva, kal Gdws todo yevérOar ddvvarov. tére 6 Baoweds Mavacois mpocéragey ev mpiwn gvdive mprcOijvor adtév. 17. Kat mpilopdvou adrod éorn MeAxlas 6 yevdorpopytns Kata mpdowmoy attod Aéywy' Eime dre ovk érpogpyrevoa taira repli ‘lepovoaAnp, kat dpOncovrar dad cod ai Bdoavor abrat, 18. Kat eivev ait 6 dywos ‘Hoaias’ Karddepd got, Medyia pevdorpopira, diaBore’ Zi yap Kvpwos 6 Beds pov kat bi 7d mvedpa a’rod Td Nadody ev epol, dre ‘epovoadnp airn peyddn médts Kal evpixwpos Tédeov epnpwljcetar, Kal Mavacots Kal ra réxva adrod Kal 9 yur) avrod Kal of dpxovres atrod kal 6 dads THs wédews TavTHS aiypddwro. dyOnoovra év BaBvAGu, 19. Kai raira elroy 6 paxdpios “Hoaias émpicoy abtav Six mpion Evdrivg.
iii, 13. yaAaudypars MS. 16, éxAnpwén MS.
INDEX I
Passages from the Scriptures and other ancient books directly connected or closely parallel with the Text.
Exopvs. ASCENSION OF 1 THESSALONI- ASCENSION OF TsataH. ANS. IsartaH. Jos. 2 THESSALONI- a . 2 CORINTHIANS. 2 Kines. 1 Trmorny. 2 GampNILEs . 1 PETER. xxxili, 18. ii. 6. REVELATION. Matruew. ii, 1. iii. 15. Beloved). i. 4. ears ae MAINS ED: iif. 18. Ascension or — Ienattvs. Isaran. Ad Ephes. LUKE. . , és PRorEVANGELI- JouN. um Lacost.
150 INDEX I
Ascension oF JusTIN Martyr. ASCENSION oF Rest or Worps Isaran. Dial. c. Tryph. TsalaH. or Barucn.
Aorus Perri VERCELLENSES. TERTULLIAN.
Note 1. For references to later writers see ‘Ambrose,’ ‘ Epiphanius,’ ‘Jerome,’ ‘Origen’ in Index IT.
Note 2. From the echoes of the New Testament in the Testament of Hezekiah we may safely conclude that the writer of the latter was acquainted with Matthew, Luke, and 2 Corinthians, and probably with 2 Thessaloniansand Revelation. The writer of the Vision of Isaiah was acquainted with Revelation or some portion of it.
Names and Subjects.
Actus Petri Vercellenses, pp. xxiii, xxxii, xliv, 77.
Advent, the Second, iii. 23,
Aguarén, corrupt for Gomor-
The Ascension of Isaiah. London, 1900. Hermetic Cloud, https://hermeticcloud.com/library/charles-ascension-of-isaiah/. Public-domain text reproduced in full; markup only.
Machine-read text of the Internet Archive scan cu31924014590529; the reading is uncorrected apart from the removal of page numbers, running heads, line-end hyphens and the scan's own marks.