This article is dedicated to an encomium on Saint George which was only partially published in the 97th volume of Migne’s Patrology. It was translated into Russian in the 16th century by Andrey Kurbsky who used the Latin translation from the Surius’s collection De probatis sanctorum historiis. A critical text of the missing part together with a translation into Russian is given and some questions concerning the text and the authorship are considered.

The publication is a translation into Russian of «Passio of Julius the Veteran» (BHL 4555). Julius was executed on May 27, 303 in the Durostorum in Lower Moesia (now Silistra, Bulgaria). Commentary discusses some aspects of this text, related to the circumstances of the Julius’ martyrdom, the history of early Christianity in the Balkans, and the attitude of Christians to military service. We think that the cause of the martyr’s death was a test of the loyalty of the legion’s soldiers that was connected with the imminent visit of Diocletian (he was in the Durostorum on June 8, 303 — CJ 5.73.4).

Most Christian exegetes of the 1st–5th centuries in their interpretations of the Book of the Prophet Jonah concern the confrontation between Nineveh and Israel, interpreting it in such a way that the Ninevites are the prototype of the Gentiles who believed in Christ, while the Jews rejected Him. The present publication focuses on the question of whether the exegetes juxtapose this spiritual confrontation with real, military confrontation between the Ninevites and the Jews — Assyria’s conquest of the Northern Kingdom of Israel (722/721 BCE). In sum, only two exegetes of the 4th century — the Syrian theologian Ephraim the Syrian and the Greek exegete Theodore of Mopsuestia concern these historical events. It makes clear that two theologians in their interpretatio ns of the Book of the Prophet Jonah use a similar tool of historical exegesis, despite the difference in genres. However, two exegetes demonstrate an opposite approach to the historical events. For Ephraim, the destruction of the Northern Kingdom is a result of the wicked behavior of the Jews compared to the righteous repentance of the Ninevites. The Syriac exegete examine the conquest as an illustration of theology of supersessionism, according to which the pagan peoples replaced the chosen people of Jews. Unlike St. Ephraim the Syrian, the Greek theologian Theodore of Mopsuestia evaluate the Assyrian conquest of Israel very negatively, emphasizing 
that the Ninevites subsequently endure appropriate punishment for their sinful deeds. The paper at
tempts to present that such a difference in opinions could be a result of a different attitude of two 
theologians towards the Jews. St. Ephraim the Syrian interprets the biblical story of Jonah and the 
Ninevites within the framework of his sharp anti-Jewish polemics, while Theodore of Mopsuestia 
with his doctrine of «mitigated supersessionism» is distinguished by some sympathy for the Jews. 

The article continues the series of publications on the phenomenon of knowledge in the first two parts of the Old Testament canon, the Pentateuch and the Prophets. It focuses on the process of the transmission knowledge in the form of tradition. The first part of the article deals with the history of development of the canon of the Hebrew Bible and with the major social groups in ancient Israel that played a key role in the creation, transmission, and trans formation of the tradition. It also sums up the available data on the forms of learning in ancient Israel. The second part of the article is devoted to the concept of Law, its main characteristics in the Deuteronomy and in the so-called «priestly» tradition. One of the sections deals with the relationship between «law» and «the knowledge of God» in Hosea.

The study of apocryphal literature, old and new testamentical, and also gnostic, is important for theology, biblical studies and the history of religions. Even in ancient times it was recognized that the apocrypha contain the material of tradition, but their character of mixing orthodoxy with heterodoxy did not allow the Church fathers to include them in the canon, and therefore their reception was carried out through the selection of motifs in oral tradition, painting, etc. At present, these written documents serve as a source for both church tradition and the history of heresies and non-Christian religious movements. The scientific journal «Apocrypha» has been published in the Belgian publishing house «Brepols» (Turnhout) since 1990. The task of establishing this periodical was, according to the editors, «to transform the old object of erudition into a new subject for historical reconstruction». The first two issues of the journal present the mate rials of the symposium on apocryphal narrative in honor of the centenary of the Religious Studies Section of the École pratique deshautes études, held in Paris in 1986. These issues in general set the main coordinates of the study of apocryphal literature in the review of the history of the issue, in a selection of topics (separate, but leading to a broad perspective), in the system of terms, names and sigla.

Boris A. Turaev as a historian and philologist significantly expanded the source base of Ethiopian studies all over the world. At the turn of the XIX–XX centuries he became an innovator in this highly conservative field of humanitarian knowledge. He continued the tradition of teaching the Geez language established by B. A. Dorn at the Faculty of History and Philology of St. Petersburg University. Boris A. Turaev was known as a connoisseur of liturgy and a deeply religious person. Ethiopia attracted him, first of all, as one of the most ancient Christian countries, which preserved the faith in Christ throughout all its documented history. The scientist focused his research on the liturgical and hagiographic literature of the Ethiopian Church. An overview of his works, in whole or in part touching on the topic of Ethiopia and its studies is here presented. The most part of these works are still relevant.

The only available translation of The Wisdom of Ben Sira into Russian based on Greek and Hebrew sources was made more than one hundred years ago. This publication remains the only one Russian edition with academic commentaries and notes. The article presents a new translation of The Wisdom of Ben Sira with notes and commentaries into Russian. The authors provide a short survey on the sources on Greek and Hebrew sources used for the new translation and brief review of available for the Russian readers translations into Russian and Church Slavonic as well as the main goals of the project, translation principles and some results of source analysis achieved while working on the project.