Mover el Dial de Atracción #2 Belleza y estilo masculinos

Annianus of Alexandria was a critic of Eusebius and the author of a Paschoualion,1 _a

perpetual Paschal table of 532 years. His work has not come down to us in its full form. All our information regarding Annianus derives from his dependants: George Syncellus,2

Agapius of Mabbug, Elias of Nisibis, Michael the Great and Chron. 1234.3 _{Written around}

the turn of the fifth century, his work, which probably covered the period between Creation and AD 412, was an adaptation of the Chronicle of Eusebius, with whom he often disagreed. It has been suggested that Annianus also relied on the – also lost - Chronicle of his almost contemporary and fellow-townsman Panodorus, but the exact nature of the relationship between these two texts is still debated.4

Annianus’ Chronicle is generally believed to have never been fully translated into Syriac.5 _Fragments6 _{in Syriac that have so far been identified are:}

1 _{Mosshammer 2008, 198-203.} 2 _{Mosshammer 2008, 198-203, 368-84.}

3 _{Gelzer 1898, 400-1 suspected Ann.’s influence on Chron. Zuqn.. Keseling 1927a, 225 seems to have doubted}

this.

4 _{Comp. Mosshammer 2008, 359-62 and Treadgold 2013, 54-5.}

5 _{For Ann.’s possible influence on a seventh-century anonymous Armenian chronicle, see Greenwood 2008,}

217-9 and 222-5.

6 _{Witakowski 1999-2000, 434-5 identified a fragment entitled “The Chronicle of Eusebius of Caesarea from the}

1) Annianus’ chronological computation of the biblical patriarchal7 _{and the}

antediluvian8 _{and postdiluvian Chaldean,}9 _Assyrian,10 _{and Median}11 _royal

successions (possibly also those of the Persians,12 _Ptolemies13 _{and the Roman}

emperors until the twentieth year of Constantine,14

2) an adaptation15 _{of a tradition from Jubilees 4:1-2, 7, discussing the chronology}

between the birth of Adam and the birth of Seth,

3) a passage16 _{on the descent of the Bnay Elohim, the sons of Seth, from mount}

Hermon in year 40 of the life of Yared (= AM 1000),

4) possibly also a fragment from 1 Enoch 6:1-617

The testimony of Jacob of Edessa,18 _{who mentions Annianus among other chroniclers}

such as Eusebius, Hippolytus and Andronicus, shows that Annianus was known to Syriac historians at least as early as the turn of the eighth century. Whether Jacob had access

based on Annianus. However, the fragment only offers a patriarchal chronology from Adam until Shelah, which does not mention Qainan and completely agrees with the Eusebian computation.

7 _{El. Nis. Op. Chron., vol. 1, 16-7T, 7-8V. From Adam until Abraham, also in Chron. 1234.}

8_{Mich. Syr. Chron. I 8 (7T; vol. 1: 12V), on which, see Gelzer 1894. Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 97-8 preserves them}

also, but attributes them to Africanus.

9 _{Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 98-9 attributes them to Africanus.}

10 _{Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 99-100; El. Nis. Op. Chron., vol. 1, 26-8T, 15-6V.} 11 _{Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 100; El. Nis. Op. Chron., vol. 1, 28-9T, 16-7V.} 12 _{Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 100-1.}

13 _{Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 101.} 14 _{Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 101-2.}

15 _{On which, see Gelzer 1898, 254-61, Brock 1968, and the chapter on Jubilees and 1 Enoch in this volume.} 16 _{On which, see Gelzer 1898, 254-61, Brock 1968, and the chapter on Jubilees and 1 Enoch in this volume.} 17 _{Mich. Syr. Chron. I 4 (3-4T; vol. 1: 7-8V), on which, see Brock 1968.}

to Annianus, directly, via an intermediary or via excerpts in Greek or Syriac is impossible to determine, as his letters do not preserve any fragments of Annianus.

The earliest evidence for Syriac fragments of Annianus appears in the middle of the tenth century, ironically in Arabic translation in the chronicle of Agapius.19 _{Given the}

evidence for Agapius’ reliance on Syriac rather than Arabic chronicles, there is no doubt in my mind that this information too came from a Syriac chronicle, and that thus, fragments of Annianus must have been translated into Syriac between the early fifth century and the 940s. Dating this transmission of information more precisely is not possible.

Recently, some scholars have argued for a connection between the Greek and Syriac transmission of fragments of Annianus. Adler and Tuffin have suggested the possibility that George Syncellus knew Annianus (and Panodorus) through a Syriac collection of excerpts.20 _{If this highly speculative theory is correct, Syriac fragments of Annianus}

must have existed before 808, but there is no evidence to support this theory apart from the fact that the Chronographia of Theophanes the Confessor is to some (unknown) extent based on material collected by Syncellus as well as on one or more Semitic (Syriac and/or Arabic) sources. Warren Treadgold identified Theophilus of Edessa’s

Chronicle (d. 785) as Syncellus’ source for Annianus (not Panodorus), but this theory is

even more unlikely.21 _{First of all, nothing suggests that Theophilus wrote a chronicle.}

Dionysius of Tell-Mahre uses the term “narratives resembling ecclesiastical histories,” clearly distinguishing Theophilus’ work from chronological canons and (developed) chronicles.22 _{In addition, the East-Syrian chronicler Elias of Nisibis (d. 1046) also knew}

fragments of Annianus, but there is no evidence for his use of any of Theophilus’ writings. Also, if Syncellus had access to Panodorus in Greek, as Treadgold goes on to

19 _{Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 97-102.}

20 _{Adler/Tuffin 2002 [= Georg. Sync. Chron.], lxviii-lxix.} 21_{Treadgold 2013, 56ff.}

suggest, it is equally plausible that he disposed of a copy of Annianus, whom Treadgold believes to be later than Panodorus.23

Annianus is only cited once by the Anonymous Chronicler, in the preface, as “Annianus, the Alexandrian monk.”24 _{His influence on Chron. 1234 emerges in three}

instances. Firstly, Annianus’ main influence on Chron. 1234 lies in the computation of the succession of biblical patriarchs from Adam until Abraham, they are identical. The Anonymous Chronicler never explicitly refers to Annianus but he was probably one of the “three chronographers” who were the sources for the dates of the birth of Enosh, Kenan, Mahalalel, Yared and Shem.25 _{The Anonymous Chronicler also cites “three}

chronographers” as the sources for the date of the birth of Qahath in year 46 of Levi, but since Syncellus26 _{has 48, it is unclear of Annianus can also be counted as one of these}

three authors.

Eusebius Annianus Andronicus Chron. 1234

Adam fathers Seth 230 230 230 230

Seth fathers Enosh 205 205 205 205

Enosh fathers Kenan 190 190 190 190 Kenan fathers Mahalalel 170 170 170 170 Mahalalel fathers Yared 165 165 165 165 Yared fathers Enoch 162 162 162 162 Enoch fathers Methuselah 165 165 165 165 Methuselah fathers Lamech 167 167 187 167 Lamech fathers Noah 188 188 182 188 23 Treadgold 2013, 59.

24 _{Chron. 1234, vol. 1, 27.8T. On Annianus, see Witakowski 1999-2000, 434-5.}

25 _{Mich. Syr. Chron. I 3 (2T; vol. 1: 4V) cites Annianus and Africanus for the same date of the birth of Kenan.} 26 _{Georg. Sync. Chron. 126 (trans. 158).}

Noah fathers Shem 500 500 500 400 (for 500) The Flood 2242 2242 2256 2242 Shem fathers Arphaxad [102] 102 102 102 Arphaxad fathers Qainan Arphaxad fathers Shelah at the age of 135 135 135 135 Qainan fathers Shelah 130 139 130 Shelah fathers Heber 130 130 130 130

Heber fathers Peleg 134 134 134 130 (for 134)

Peleg fathers Reu 130 130 130 130

Reu fathers Serug 135 132 132 132

Serug fathers Nahor 130 130 130 130

Nahor fathers Terah 79 79 79 29 (for 79) Terah fathers Abraham 70 70 70 70 Total: 3184 3314 3337 332627

The second instance is the previously discussed adaptation of Jubilees 4:1-2, 7 concerning the chronology from the birth of Adam until the birth of Seth. In the chapter on Jubilees I have already mentioned the presence of similar entries in the chronographies of George Syncellus and Michael the Great and discussed its contents, so I shall not go into much detail here. It is, however, worth pointing out that, while Michael refers to Annianus as a source, the Anonymous Chronicler simply refers to “the chronographers,” suggesting that he may have been thinking of the original source (Annianus) as well as the intermediary, which he unfortunately does not identify. This passage probably reached the Anonymous Chronicler via the same Syriac chronicler as Michael had access to.

The third fragment from Annianus’ Chronicle is a narrative on the descent of the Benai

Elohim, the sons of God, or Watchers, from Mount Hermon in year 40 of Yared (= AM

1000). This is an adaptation of apocryphal traditions including 1 Enoch 6:1-6. Again, it is

also extant in Michael, so probably came from the same intermediary source as the one that transmitted the adaptation of that Jubilees’ tradition. Their dependence on Annianus has already been shown by Heinrich Gelzer and Sebastian Brock.28 _{Even more}

interestingly however, from the attribution of this third passage to Annianus follows the attribution of other entries in Michael and Chron. 1234 at least to the unknown Syriac intermediary, but possibly as far back as Annianus.

In his commentary29 _{on the Cave of Treasures, Su-Min Ri noted the presence of a}

virtually identical passage on the origin and identity of the Benai Elohim in Michael and in Chron. 1234.

Mich. Syr. Chron. I.3 (2T; vol. 1: 4V) Chron. 1234, vol. 1, 34.14-25T In the time of Seth, when

his sons

remembered the good life in Paradise,

they decided to please God in their

actions.

They went up Mount Hermon and settled

There, in holy actions, abstaining from marriage.

Therefore, they were called Benai Elohim and Watchers.

Then, in the time of Seth, when (certain) people from his sons and from the members of his generation remembered the good life of Paradise, from which their

parents had fallen, they were urging each other to return to it again. They wanted to please God in pure and saintly

actions and therefore they separated themselves from their brethren. They went up Mount Hermon,

which is the mountain of God, and settled on it and lived monastically there, abstaining from marriage and from all manners of life in sensual pleasure. Therefore, they

were called Watchers and Benai Elohim, which (means)

‘Sons of God’, as if by praise.

Apart from this passage, one other fragment can be attributed to Michael’s and Chron. 1234’s unknown common source. The fragment describes how Enosh behaved among the Sethites.

28 _{Gelzer 1898, 254-61 and Brock 1968.} 29 _{Ri 2000, 73.}

Mich. Syr. Chron. I.3 (2T; vol. 1: 4V) Chron. 1234, vol. 1, 35.13-6T Enosh (…) decided to invoke the name of the Lord and

zealously performed holy actions.

Enosh (…) invoked the name of the Lord better than

anyone of this time and zealously performed holy

actions with these Bnay Elohim who went up Mount

Hermon.

Despite the small variants between both accounts – the Anonymous Chronicler consistently preserves long accounts – Michael and the Anonymous Chronicler clearly had access to the same source. Considering the similarities in contents and language between the two discussions of the origin and identity of the Bnay Elohim and the account of their descent, they probably originated in the same text. Unfortunately, because Syncellus has no comparable entries, it cannot be determined whether these indeed go back to Annianus, or if they were created by Michael’s and the Anonymous Chronicler’s common source. The latter remains the most likely possibility, but the

argumentum e silentio does not constitute sufficient evidence for this assumption.

A few words regarding the transmission history of material from Annianus’ Chronicle to the Anonymous Chronicler will conclude this chapter. All of this material in Chron. 1234 likely reached him via a Syriac chronicler who was used by Michael as well. It is difficult to determine whether this unknown intermediary was also Agapius’ source.

That Andronicus, who also influenced Agapius,30 _{was responsible for this information}

is unlikely, because the same chronicler probably also passed on Annianus’ reconstruction of the Chaldean royal succession to Michael. Since Annianus’ king list only fits into a scheme which dates the Flood in AM 2242, not into Andronicus’ according to whom the flood occurred in AM 2256, it is highly unlikely that Andronicus played a role in the transmission of materials from Annianus’ Chronicle into Syriac. The combination of material from Annianus and Andronicus in Syriac is probably due to a Syriac chronicler who was writing after Andronicus in the sixth century and before

30 _{See chapter 15.}

Agapius in the tenth. John of Litharb is a possible candidate, but we do not know the extent of his chronicle, only that it contained chronological canons.31

31 _{Suggested by Brock 1968, 629. Mich. Syr. Chron. X 20 (377T; vol. 2: 357V) includes Joh. Lith. between Jac. Ed.}

and Ign. Mel., indicating that the former wrote a chronicle, not a historiographical text composed of longer narratives. Dion. TM [= Mich. Syr. Chron. X 20 (378T; vol. 2: 358V)] groups together Jac. Ed. and Joh. Lith., saying that they wrote down “the successions of years,” which suggests that they both wrote chronological canons, staying very close to the Eusebian way of chronicle writing.

Chapter 10 Socrates of Constantinople (c. 380 – c.