Replies

I've got a very good source for an Enoch Astronomy fragment carbon-date:

Radiocarbon dating of scrolls and linen fragments (pdf)

Page 14 dates fragment 4Q208, Paleographic age 200, at calibrated 166-102 BC and 186-92 BC.

Again, the context is that the Greeks proposed orbits at 150 B.C. and the Qumran text is a copy in Aramaic from an orginal of unknown antiquity but seemingly originating from Judea.

I'm pinging others who may be following the discussion and thus, might want to check out the link.

As you look into this, remember that the timing of our "orbit man," ARISTARCHUS OF SAMOS (fl. 320 - 250 BC), is not fixed with certainty. That "fl." before the dates for his name is scholar-talk for "flourished," and it means that they can narrow down the dates when he was actively working to a specific period. Usually this is because he's mentioned by contemporaries, or because he may mention some specific battle he was in, or some king he knew, or something like that. Those are not necessarily dates you can take to the bank.

Also, that same website (my only source of info at the moment) says he "lived in Alexandria (288-277 BC), where he made a series of astronomical observations." Also "He was the chief exponent of the heliocentric system." So it may not have been his original idea, but perhaps something that was being discussed in Alexandria while he was there. This is not an unreasonable notion, and it would put the first mention of the heliocentric system back a bit, and therefore Enoch seems less remarkable. Anyway, carbon-dating of the Enoch manuscript will be good evidence of something, but (unless it's wildly ancient) it would not necessarily make it certain that Enoch anticipated something that he couldn't possibly have known or heard at the time he wrote. We shall see.