Hen 33(1/2011) THE FIGURES OF THE WATCHERS IN THE ENOCHIC TRADITION (1-3 ENOCH) IDA FRÖHLICH, Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Hungary The basic text for the Watchers is 1 En 6-11, containing a story on the rebellion of a group of heavenly beings, which is the origin of further sins and serves as a basis for the punition of the flood. 1 Scholarship generally considers the story as an interpretation of Gen 6:1-4. 2 Questions of dependency between the two texts cannot be solved with philological methods but rather with a systematic analysis for the message and meaning of the story of 1 En 6-11, and an examination of the use of the elements of the story’s later works might be helpful in solving some of the mysteries of the narrative in 1 En 6-11 and might shed some light on the relationship between the two texts. Our following presentation is targeted to one important element of the story, the figure of the Watchers in 1 Enoch and in later Enochic literature. The story in Qumran manuscripts and literary tradition Four preliminary remarks are in order before our analysis: a) Manuscript tradition: Paleographic data show that 1 En 6-11 is represented in the oldest manuscript tradition in Qumran. Thus the narrative on the Watchers belongs to the earliest textual layer of the Enochic collection, and it represents the earliest narrative tradition in the collection. Seven copies of the work were ____________________ 1 The Enochic collection was preserved in a shorter Greek and a longer Ethiopic (ge’ez) translation. For the Greek text: J. Fleming – L. Radermacher, Das Buch Henoch, Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte (Helsingfors: J.C. Hinrichs, 1901). The Ethiopic text was first edited by R.H. Charles, The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch: Edited from Twenty-Three Mss. Together with the Fragmentary Greek and Latin Versions (Anecdota Oxoniensia; London: Clarendon Press, 1906). Its modern edition: M.A. Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments. Vol. 1: Text and Apparatus; Vol. 2: Introduction, Translation and Commentary (London: Clarendon Press, 1978). 2 The text of 1 Enoch 6-11 is generally considered an interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4; see G.W.E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1-36; 81- 108 (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001), p. 166. Milik argues on the basis of the similarities of the vocabulary of 1 Enoch 6-11 and Gen 6-9; see J.T. Milik, The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumrân Cave 4 (London: Clarendon Press, 1976). Verbal similarities do not in themselves prove the dependency; they may reflect also an acknowledgement of both sources with a common tradition on the flood. Similarly, the length of texts is not a decisive factor concerning dependency. Thus, questions as to the relationship between the two texts need a different approach than sylistics and textology.