19th August 2024: digital purchasing is currently unavailable on Cambridge Core. Due to recent technical disruption affecting our publishing operation, we are experiencing some delays to publication. We are working hard to restore services as soon as possible and apologise for the inconvenience. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 June 2011
In the West, the best known Armenian Canon lists are those transmitted by Mechitar of Ayrivank˓, an Armenian savant of the thirteenth century (1222-1307 C.E.). The translation of these lists, which was first publicised in Europe by Theodor Zahn, has been reprinted in various works.
1 Zahn, Theodor, Forschungen zur Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons, 5.1 (Erlangen & Leipzig: Deichert, 1893) 115–57.Google Scholar He bases his study on the French rendering by Brosset, M., Mémoires de l'académie de St. Petersbourg, sér. VIII, vol. 13, Nr. 5 (1869) 22–23Google Scholar (non vidi). Zahn makes a number of often speculative emendations to Brosset's rendering.
2 See, e.g., James, Montague Rhodes, Lost Apocrypha of the O. T. (London: S.P.C.K., 1920) xiii–xiv;Google ScholarRussell, D.S., The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic (London: SCM, and Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964) 394–95Google Scholar. There are further examples, all based upon Zahn's publication.
3 The Chronicle of Mechitar of Ayrivank˓, ed. Patkanian, K. (St. Petersburg: 1867) 33–36.Google Scholar
4 Access to this work proved exceedingly difficult, and a copy of the relevant pages was supplied by the authorities of the Matenadaran. Their kindness is much appreciated.
5 See Eganyan, S., Zeyt˓unyan, A., and Ant˓abyan, P., C˓uc˓ak Jeragrac˓ Maštoc˓i Anvan Matenadarani [Catalogue of the Manuscripts of the Maštoc˓ Library] I (Erevan: Armenian Academy of Sciences, 1965) col. 568.Google Scholar
6 Akinian, N., “M. Ayrivanec˓ woy Čarêntiri Noragiwt Yišatakaraně (The Newly-Discovered Colophon of the Collection of Writings of Mechitar of Ayrivank˓),” Agōs, No. 13 (1946) 120–26Google Scholar. This manuscript was written between 1309 and 1387 C.E., and the colophon occurs on fols. 349v–351r.
7 The texts published are given only insofar as they refer to the Old Testament or the apocrypha of the Old Testament. The same lists also contain material relating to the New Testament — the focus of Zahn's interest — as well as to the Church Fathers.
8 Zahn, Forschungen, 117–20.
9 A work relating to the Sibyls is preserved, unpublished, in Erevan, Matenadaran 526 entitled Names and Deeds of the Ten Sibyls. This does not seem to contain parts of the commonly known Sibylline Oracles.
10 Those works which have been published may be found in English translation in Issaverdens, J., The Uncanonical Writings of the Old Testament (2d ed.; Venice: Mechitarist Press, 1934).Google Scholar The History of Moses (ibid., 130–40) bears no relation to the extant Testament (or Assumption) of Moses surviving in Latin. The various minor Solomonic works (ibid., 158–70) in no respect resemble the Psalms of Solomon — on one of these see Stone, Michael E., “The Apocryphal Literature in the Armenian Tradition,” Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities 4 (1969) 69–72.Google Scholar Issaverdens also published a narrative text about Elijah entitled A Short History of the Prophet Elias (pp. 172–84), which appears to be a mediaeval Armenian composition. The Prayer of Joseph (see Smith, Jonathan Z., ‘The Prayer of Joseph,” Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memory of Erwin Ramsdell Goodenough [ed. Neusner, J.; Supplements to Numen 14; Leiden; Brill, 1968] 253–94)Google Scholar is equally distinct from Joseph and Asenath, of which many Armenian copies exist, see Burchard, Christoph, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth (WUNT 8; Tübingen: Mohr, 1965) 7–13Google Scholar, 24–34. No work in Armenian relating to Eldad and Modad is known to the writer. On the Armenian Enoch book, see below, § 2, List Attributed to John the Deacon, n. on 1. 31.
11 See Burchard, Christoph, “Zur armenischen Überlieferung der Testamente der zwölf Patriarchen,” Studien zu den Testamenten der Zwölf Patriarchen (BZNW 36; Berlin: Topelmann, 1969) 1–29Google Scholar, and Jonge, M. de, “Recent Studies on the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” SEÅ 35 (1971) 78–80Google Scholar, and additional bibliography there. The various fragments of apocryphal works preserved in ancient sources were gathered together and brought into relation with the lists of apocrypha by James, Lost Apocrypha.
12 In line 3 of that note read: “… generally follows the Book of Ezra. III Ezra …”
13 See. Yovsēp˓ianc˓, G., Mxit˓ar Ayrivanec˓i (Jerusalem: 1931) cols. 3–4;Google ScholarBogharian, N., Hay Grolner [Armenian Authors] (Jerusalem: 1971).Google Scholar
14 The unpublished texts of portions of the Lives of the Prophets from this and certain other manuscripts will be published in the writer's forthcoming Armenian Apocryphal Writings relating to the Patriarchs and Prophets Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities).
15 See Akinian, , Agōs, 1946, 123;Google ScholarZarbhanalian, G., Matenadaran Haykakan T˓ argmanut˓ eanc˓ Naxneac˓ [Library of Ancient Armenian Translations] (Venice: Mechitarist Press, 1896) 667–68.Google Scholar
