No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
An Armenian Epitome of Epiphanius's De gemmis
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 June 2011
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Notes and Observations
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1989
References
2 Blake, Robert P., Epiphanius de Gemmis (Studies and Documents 2; London: Christophers, 1934)Google Scholar.
3 , Blake, De gemmis, xl–xlixGoogle Scholar, deals with all the following matters. We follow his information in all details.
4 (L. Alishan), “
,” Bazmavep 10 (1856) 46–50.
5 Barsel Sarghissian, 
(Venice: Mechitarists, 1914) 2. cols. 683–98.
6 , Blake, De gemmis, xliiiGoogle Scholar.
7 Ibid., 214-23.
8 Blake published its text on the topaz, the only part he had copied, on pp. 216-17.
9 Ibid., 224-31.
10 Ibid., xlvi-xlvii.
11 ibid., xlvi. He quotes the MSS as Etchmiadzin, old no. (Kareneance) 1630, § 17, and Etchmiadzin, old no. (Kareneance) 1637, § 10. On the current numbers of these MSS, see below.
12 See Stone, Michael E., “Concerning the Seventy-Two Translators: Armenian Fragments of Epiphanius, On Weights and Measures,” HTR 73 (1980) 331–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The edition of these texts is still under active preparation.
13 The short Catalogue of the Matenadaran is referred to in n. 1 above. This contains titles only for most of the works in all the MSS of the Matenadaran. Only the first volume of the full catalogue, listing complete details, including incipits and explicits, has reached our hands: Eganyan, O., Zeyfunyan, A. and Ant'abyan, P., General Catalogue of the Armenian Manuscripts of the Mastoce Matenadaran, Vol. 1 (in Armenian; Erevan: Academy of Sciences, 1984)Google Scholar. The catalogue of the Catholicossate in Amelias is the following: Danielian, A., Catalogue of the Armenian Manuscripts in the Collection of the Catholicossate of Cilicia (in Armenian; Amelias: Armenian Catholicossate of Cilicia Press, 1984)Google Scholar. There are, of course, numerous other catalogues of Armenian MSS that could have been consulted. However, our desire is merely to indicate the potential richness of the tradition in order to assess the weight of the new text we are publishing. It remains for a future editor of the De gemmis in Armenian to assemble a full listing, and evaluate the total textual tradition.
14 Such uncertainties as these, we may add, were very much in our mind when we decided to publish this list, claiming no more than indicative value for it.
15 I owe to Dr. J. J. S. Weitenberg the information that a form of De gemmis was included in the Chronicle of Arak'el of Tabriz. The Armenian text may be found on p. 155 of The Book of History Compiled by Arak'el vardapet of Tabriz (in Armenian; ed. Oskan Erevanc'i; Amsterdam: St. Echmiadzin and S. Sargis Press, 1669)Google Scholar. A French translation may be found in Brosset, M. F., Collection d'historiens armeniens (St. Petersburg: 1874-76; reprinted Amsterdam: Philo Press, 1979) 542–47 = Chap. 53. The text opens: 
…Google Scholar.
16 Schermann, Th., Prophetarum Vitae Fabulosae, Indices Apostolorum discipulorumque Domini (Leipzig: Teubner, 1907)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The lists of names of Apostles start on p. 107. Usually the lists start Peter, Andrew, John, James.
17 The word has been obliterated, except for the first letter and some surviving marks, which are consonant with this reading.
18 On the spelling of “John” see “Linguistic Features” above.
19 The phrase seems corrupt. In Epitome A (p. 196) of the sardion (cornelian), it says 
This is translated by Blake as “it has the power of healing…it is a transparent stone.” The sense of the phrase in MS no. 9100 remains obscure as it stands. 
is probably corrupt for 
The second part of the phrase may refer to a jewel considered effective in counteracting magical spells. See The Hours of the Day and Night Di where there is a similar use of um (M. E. Stone, Armenian Apocrypha Relating to Patriarchs and Prophets [Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1982] 58).
20 
—The first letter is erroneously an O 
in Armenian, distinguished from the 
only by a horizontal stroke. We have emended the text and translation.
21 
“Tpazion”—This gem name is not to be found in the Armenian dictionaries. It is a slightly corrupt transliteration of Greek τοπασιον. The continuation of the passage makes it likely that it is a topaz, as it is an exact translation of the Greek text. In this word, the o is written over an i, prima manu.
22 This word does not occur in the other Armenian Epitomes here.
23 
“Mattathias”—See “Linguistic Features” above. In ANB, Ačaŕyan noted a number of by-forms of 
and 
, but none of them is identical to that found here.
24 So Blake. The form is 
in Epitome A and Epitome B.
25 This translation assumes an emendation of 
, to 
: this name occurs in § 1 above.
26 
“Pork'omos”—This river name occurs more or less thus in Epitome A. The original was “Thermodon”; see the discussion by , Blake, De gemmis, xliiiGoogle Scholar.
27 This stone does not occur in the other Armenian versions.
28 
“blue”—The spelling is notable, with the final aspirate; see “Linguistic Features” above.
29 
“greater Scythia”—This is the name of a country. It is the provenance of the seventh gem in some of the parallel texts, but that gem is the liguron in those texts.
30 
“Amethyst”—Literally “false eye.” The equivalations upon which the translation is based are given in AJB. The Greek is given in NBH as ανøπασ and Latin equivalents are given as carbunculus (Gen 2:12) and amethyst (Exod 22:19). It is identified with the “ligure” stone here, which is odd. The ligure has lost its own description. The reason for this is the unparalleled introduction of the turquoise preceding (§7), which left the Epitomator with one superfluous gem.
31 NBH gives 
as alternative spellings for 
, with Greek equivalents (and origin) λιλκονπιολιλλοπιν as Latin equivalents it offers lyncurium (another transliteration), electrum.
32 Interestingly, Epitome A has the graphically similar 
, “linen” (Blake). The intention of the text is unclear.
33 Upper Ethiopia in Epitome A. In the Venetian Epitome, the Amazons occur with the seventh stone, associated with the Germans and the Scythians.
34 On the forms of these names, see “Linguistic Features” above.
35 This word is unkown to the dictionaries, nor do the other Armenian texts throw any light on it. Other versions say it to be “lion-colored,” but gold is mentioned in the Venetian Epitome.
36 
“hyacinth”—This name is not found in the dictionaries, but it is clearly a transliteration from Greek. At this point in the other Armenian sources the amethyst occurs. The hyacinth is mentioned under the “ligure,” the seventh gem in the other Armenian sources. Babylon is mentioned in the text for the tenth gem in the other Armenian versions, but that gem is the chrysolith.
37 This seems to have been written here originally; see n. 17 above. The eleventh and twelfth stones are in the reverse order in the other Armenian texts. The apostle associated with the onyx in the Venetian Epitome is Mattathias.
38 This name is corrupt, but the form 
is clearly to be restored on the basis of the other versions.
39 
“<Mt. Taurus>”—This mysterious word is in a corruption of Mt. Taurus or Mt. Toros which is mentioned here by the other Armenian versions. The origin of the initial “s” is unclear, so we have refrained from reconstructing the Armenian.
40 This is presumably Andrew of Caesarea (sixth - seventh century) who wrote a commentary on Revelation, in which he cites Epiphanius in some detail (PG 107); see particularly chap. 10 on the sardion.
41 “Gems of examination”—Precious stones used for divination; presumably the Urim and Thummim.
42 There is a variation of number referring to these two gems throughout §§14-18.
43 
“red”—Reading as 
.
44 “John”—That is, John the Baptist. For Armenian traditions on this individual and the con-founding of various Zechariahs, see , Stone, Patriarchs and Prophets, 146-47, 170–71Google Scholar. Cf. also the text in , Schermann, Vitae Prophetarum, 23–24Google Scholar, where a similar confusion is to be found. The explicit tradition about the gems is not related to him, though that text does refer to his giving oracles in the sanctum sanctorum.