Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 252










The paper in this book meets the guidelines for permanence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Garcia Martinez, Florentine. Qumran and Apocalyptic: studies on the Aramaic texts from Qumran / by F. Garcia Martinez. p. cm.-(Studies on the texts of the desert of Judah, ISSN 0169-9962; v . 9) Includes bibliographical references and indexes. ISBN 9004095861 (cloth: alk. paper) 1. Dead Sea scrolls-Criticism, interpretation, etc. 2. Apocalyptic literature-History and criticism. I. Title. 11. Series. BM487.C325 1992 296.1 '55-dc20 91 -46425 CIP

ISSN 0 169-9962 ISBN 90 04 09586 1

0 Copyright 1 9 9 2 by E.]. Brill, Lndcn, 7hc Netherlands

AN ngho rtsmcd. .No part of this book may bc rcproduccd or hamIalcd in any fonn, by pnnt, photoprint, microfilm, minofiche or any other means hut wn'ttm pmnisswnfrom the publisher Authoriratwn to photocopy ifemfor infernal or personal we is granted by E.]. Brill provided that the appropriateJccs arc paid direct& b Copyright CLorance C w , 2 7 Congress Shrcl, SALEM U4 01970, USA. Fccs arc subject to change.

Pour Annie

CONTENTS Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l.4QMess Ar and the Book of Noah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4QMess Aramaic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TheBookofNoah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Noachic materials in 1 Enoch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Noachic materials in Jubilees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Noachic materials in Qumran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Outline of the lost Book of Noah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Contribution of the Aramaic Enoch Fragments to our understanding of the Books of Enoch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The AstronomicaI Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Book of Watchers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TheBookofDreams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Epistle of Enoch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. The Book of Giants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Copies of the Book of Giants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Manichean Book of Giants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other elements of the Book of Giants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Order of the elements of the Book of Giants . . . . . . . . . Origin and Date of the Book of Giants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . The Prayer of Nabonidus: A New Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . 4QPrayer of Nabonidus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reconstructed Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relation with other texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relation with Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relation with Nab H . 2A/B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relation with 4QpsDan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relation with Job . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Literary genre and Origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . 4QPseudo Daniel Aramaic and the Pseudo-Danielic Literature




4QPseudo Daniel Aramaic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aramaic Texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pseudo Danielic Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arabic Pseudo-Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Armenian Pseudo-Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coptic Pseudo-Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Slavonic Pseudo-Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Greek Pseudo-Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Apocalypsis of the Profet Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The monk Daniel on the 'Seven Hills' . . . . . . . . . . . . Visions of Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Daniel Diegesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hebrew Pseudo-Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Persian Pseudo-Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Syriac Pseudo-Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. The eschatological figure of 4Q246 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Q246 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transcription of the text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Milik's Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fitzmyer's Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flusser's Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An Eschatological Saviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4QpsDan Ar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4QTestimonia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1QH 111.7.18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11QMefcllisedek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Q'Amram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jerusalemn and the future temple of the 7. The <<New manuscripts from Qumran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The City Plan of NJ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Description of the New Jerusalem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NJ and the Future Temple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Indexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

137 138 139 140 147 149 150 150 151 152 153 153 154 154 155 156 157 158 160 162 162 163 163 164 167 168 169 170 172 173 174 175 176 177 180 186 193 202 215

FOREWORD The congress on Apocalypticism held in Uppsala in 1979 undoubtedly marked an important stage in the study of this complex phenombf Disilenon'. It was the end of what I have defined as <<The-Era lusionment,, and it started a new era, one which I have defined as <<TheEra of ~ecu~eration,>*. If the publication of the first Qumran manuscripts gave rise to the idea that in them would be found the key to such problems as the determination of the *essence,, of Apocalypticism, the elucidation of its origins, its Sitz im Leben, the relation between Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism and the influence of Jewish Apocalypticism on the origins of Christianity, further study has brought the specialists to the conclusion adaB dieser "Wunderschliissel" nicht pa~t,,3. Perhaps the best expression of this disillusionment is H. STEGEMANN contribution to the Uppsala congress4. In it he not only denies that the Qumran manuscripts have provided the solutions hoped for5, but attempts to explain why in Qumran there was no special interest i c ~maintains that the scanty apocalyptic elements to in ~ ~ o c a l y p tand be met within the text are foreings bodies, to which it is impossible to
Apocalypicism in rlte MediIerraneott World artd the Near Emt. Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Apocalypticism, Uppsala, August 12-17, 1979, editcd by David HELLHOLM (Tiibingen 1983) (second edition enlarged with Supplementary Bibliography 1989). Cf. F. GARCIAM A R ~ ~ K E ~ *Encore ., I'Apocalyptiquc*, IS/ 17 ( I T ) , 224-232. In a forschungsberichr on the theme -Apocalyptic and Qumran*: -La Apocaliptica y Qumrin-, V. C a m n o - V. V~LLAR (eds.), N Sintposio BIblico E s p i a l (Valencia - C6rdoba 1987). 603-613. K. RUDOLPH, rApokalyptik in der Diskussionm, in: Apocal).pricisnr, 783. H. SIEGFMANN,*Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde fiir die Erforschung der Apokalyptikm, in: Apoca3pricism, 495-530. "Was speziell die Erforschung der Apokalyptik anbctrifft. so besleht gcgenwkrtig eine crhebliche Dikrepanz mischen der Erwartung, die Qumranfundc konnten wenigstens fiir diescn Forschungsgegcnstand immer noch eine A ~ c Wundermcdizin sein, und der Tatsache, daD die biihcrigcn AN;itzc zur Einbeziehung der Qumranfundc in die Apokalyptik-Dikussion so gut wic gar kcine allgemein anerkannten oder auch nur weiterfiihrenden Ergebnisse erbracht habcn", *Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde*, 495. "Nur ganz knapp will ich mi& abschlieknd nod, zur Exhatologie der Qumrangmeinde i u k r n , weil deren Eigenart wcnigstens teilweisc zu erklaren vermag, warum man in dieser Gruppe des nachexilischen Judentums kcin sonderliches fntcresse an Apokalyptik hatte", .Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde*, 521.




assign any central position in the life or the organisation of the has still further radicalised his Qumran goup7. H. STEGEMANN position in a later studys and his ideas have had a lot of influence during the last decade. Nevertheless I am convinced that the Qumran manuscripts have provided us with key elements for the understanding of the phenomAnd ~. enon which, for want of a better name, we call ~ ~ o c a l y p t i c more: each of the two - Qumran and Apocalyptic - throws light on the other. In my view, the study of Apocalyptic is necessary for an understanding of the origins and the development of the ideas which end by bein characteristic of the group we know as <<the Qumran community*''. And the study of the Qumran manuscripts is equally necessary for a proper understanding of Apocalyptic and of a good number of Apocalypses, not only those which may be considered as the creation of the Qumran community itself, but others which have come down to us by way of the community, including Apocalypses written after the disappearance of the Qumran community but in which appear ideas in whose transmission the community has played an

"'Apokalyptikcr' blciben hicr im Grunde 'Frcmdkorpcr', dcncn man ehcr mit eincr gewissen Reserve begegnet sein mag und auf die man bestimmt fiur keincn ~entralcn Lebens- odcr Funktionsbercich dcr Gcmcinde angewiesen war", *Die Bcdcutung der Oumranfundc*, 524. H. STEGEMANN, "Some Aspects of Eschatology in Texts from the Qumran Community and in the Teachings of Jesus*, in: Biblical Archaeolog~ Today (Jerusalem It 1s imposstble to attempt here a satisfactory definition of this phenomenon. I have lately expressed my own understanding of the term as follows: -La apocaliptica es una corriente de pensamicnto que nacc en el conteao religiose y cultural concreto del judaismo posexilico, quc se dcsarrolla durantc un largo period0 de tiempo reilccionando interacrivamente con otras corricntcs de pensamicnto del medio amhicntc judio, como la tradicibn profttica o la tradici6n sapiencial, y que se plasma en las distintas obras que designamor como "apocalipsis"., cf. F. GARCIA MARTINEZ, aiLa apocaliptica judia como matriz de la teologia cristiana?., A. PIIC'ERO (ed.), On'getres del crisrianisttto. Attrccedettresy ptittteros pasos (C6rdoba-Madrid 1991), 195. lo A group whose ideological roots lie precisely in the Apocalyptic Tradition, as I think I have proved, cf. F. GARCIAMARTINEZ, ~ L e straditions apocalyptiques B QumrBn-, C. KAPPI.ER (ed.), Apocabpses er voyages datw I'au-deld (Paris l W ) , 201235; -Esdnisme OumrBnicn: Origines, caracttristiques, heritage*, B. CHIF~A (ed.), Comtrti culnrmli e movitttenri rrligiosi del Giudaistno (AIG - Testi c Studi 5) (Roma 1987). 37-57; -Qumran Origins and Early History: A Groningen Hypothesis*, Folio Orienralia 25 (1989), 113-136.


1985d. 4q8-426.



important role1'. In my opinion, the study of the Qumran manuscripts has completely transformed the way in which we nowadays understand the most ancient Apocalypses, those composed within the Enochic tradition, has had a profund effect on the study of the origins and the development of the apocalypse of Daniel and has indicated a number of new factors demonstrating the variety and the ideological richness of the apocalypses written within the Qumran community itself. This conviction has arisen and has continued to develop throughout the last ten years. It is based on the findings of a series of studies I have carried out and published during this period. The present volume contains a selection of these studies. The selection is determined by three elements common to all the studies: they all examine Aramaic texts from the Library of Qumran; they were all originally published in Spanish; they all demostrate some of the contributions made by the Qumran manuscripts to the study of the Apocalyptic. The first three papers collected here are concerned with apocalyptic texts belonging to the Enochic Tradition; these texts are certainly pre-Qumranic but the elements supplied by the fragmentary copies found at Qumran have radically altered the way in which we understand them. The next two studies deal with two texts which were previously unknown and which stem from the Danielic Tradition; the Qumranic or extra-Qumranic origin of these texts cannot with certainty be established, but they both notably enrich our knowledge of the traditions incorporated in the apocalypse of Daniel. The last two studies here included discuss two apocalypses which are very different from each other, but which are both products of the Qumran community itself and which reveal the richness and the diversity of the theological conceptions circulating within the Apocalyptic Tradition. 5 a4Q 1. a4QMes Ar and the Book of Noalzm [originally published a Mes. Aram. y el libro de Noh, R. AGUIRRE - F. GARCIA~ P E Z (eds.), Escritos de Biblia y Onente. Misceldnea conrnemoraliva del 25 aniversario del Imtituto Espariol Bihlico y Arqueolbgico de Jewalrin ( = Salmanticen.uk 28, 1981), 195-2321, examines a manuscript found in Cave 4, originally published as a horoscope of the Messiah, and
" For example 4 Ezra, cf. F. GARCIAMARTINEZ, =Traditions eammunes dans le IVe Esdrac et dans les MSS de Qumrin-, E. PUECE* - F. GARCIAhRTINE% (eds.) Mdmoriol/ean Sfarcky. Vol. 1 (Paris 1991), 287-301.



considers it as part of the oldest apocalypse known - the Book of Noah. An analysis of the material from this lost book incorporated in later works such as I Enoch, Jubilees, IQupGn and 1Q20, together with the traces of this apocalypse to be found in other Qumranic manuscripts such as 1Q19 and 6Q8 permits us to construct a general outline of the lost apocalypse, incorporating in it the elements provided by 4QMess Ar. 2. <<Contribution of the Aramaic Enoch Fragments to our understanding of the Books of Enochw [originally published as pan of ccEstudios Qumrfinicos 1975-1985: Panorama Critico (I),, Es&ios Biblicos 45 (1987), 127-1731, offers a complete and systematic presentation of the contributions of the different Aramaic fragments of Enoch to our knowledge of the Astronomical Book, the Book of Watchers, the Book of Dreams and the Epistle of Enoch, together with a critical evaluation of the many studies on the different components of I Enoch which have appeared since the publication of the Aramaic fragments. Book of Giants* [originally published as part of ctEstudios 3. <<The Qumrfinicos 1975-1985: Panorama Crltico (I),,, Estudios Bfblicos 45 (1987), 175-1921, analyses the material of the Book of Giants recovered from the different copies found in Qumran, puts the material in order of sequence and, with the help of the elements preserved in the Manichean Book of Giants, gives a general outline of its contents. 4. aThe Prayer of Nabonidus: A New Synthesis,, [originally published as a4Q Or Nab. Nueva sintesisa, Sefarad 40 (1980), 5-25], examines the remains of a work which preserves a version of the traditions contained in Dan 4 distinct from and earlier than that of the canonical book and compares it with other known traditions both biblical and extra-biblical. 5. a4QPseudo Daniel Aramaic and the Pseudo-Danielic Literature* [published originally as *Notas al margen de 4QpsDaniel arameo*, Aula Orientalis 2 (1983), 193-2081, analyses the fragments of various copies of a pseudo-Danielic composition from Cave 4, containing an apocalypse with a clear periodisation of history and a description of the eschatological age, but without the recourse to the metaphors of other apocalypses. A survey of the wide range of pseudo-Danielic literature surviving in various languages shows that there was no contact between these compositions and the pseudo-Danielic apocalypse from Cave 4.




6. *The Eschatological Figure of 4Q246s [originally published as a4Q 246: iTipo del Anticristo o Libertador escatolbgico?s, V. COLLADO - E. ZURRO(eds.), El Mirterio de la Palabra Homenaje a L. Afonro Schbkel (Cristiandad, Madrid 1983), 229-2441, discusses an apocalypse originating in Qumran, known only from fragment 40246 and offers an interpretation of this fragment in the light of other Qumran texts, entailing the consideration that the text in question refers not to Alexander Balas (as stated by MILIK), not to the assumes), nor messianic heir to the throne of David (as FITZMYER maintains), but that the mysterious yet to the Antichrist (as FLUSSER personage designated ason of God, is none other that the eschatological liberator of angelic character who appears in the other Qumran texts. 7. .The "New Jerusalem" and the future temple of the manuscripts from Qumran* [originally published as ((La "Nueva Jerusalbn" y el templo futuro de 10s Mss. de QumrAns. D. MUNOZ LEON(ed.), Salvacibn en la Palabra Targum Derash Berith. En memoria del profesor A. Dlez Mucho (Cristiandad, Madrid 1986), 563-5901, examines

another apocalypse, preserved in several copies, originating in Qumran, and analyses the conception of the New Jerusalem and of the New Temple reflected in this work, placing these conceptions in the line which runs from the prophet Ezechiel's vision of the "New Jerusalem" to the description of the "heavenly Jerusalem" in the Apocalypse of John. All these studies have been more or less thoroughly revised with a view to their appearance in English, taking into account the most recent publications on the various manuscripts in question. Abbreviations of periodicals, series and biblical books follow the style of the JBL, except for RQ, here used to designate the Revue de Qumrrin, not the RbmiscIte Quartakchn'ji f i r christliclle AQertumslauuie und Kirchengeschichte. Abbreviations of the Dead Sea Scrolls follow my own aLista de MSS prodecentes de ~umrdnnl*.It has not



appeared necessary to add a bibliography of the works quoted, since it would duplicate the systematic bibliographies I have already published on most of the topics involvedu. Ten years after the Uppsala congress the very idea of the genetic influence of Apocalyptic on the origins of the Qumran community (an idea which is one of the pillars of the ccGroningen Hypothesis of the Origins and Early History of Qumran* is far from being commonly admitted, but the general scepticism of the *Era of Disillusionmentu seems to have been overcome and the represented by H. STEGEMANN close relations between Qumran and Apocalyptic are coming to be recognised. J.J. COLLINS, in a lucid study14 in which he analyses the invoking of a special revelation, the periodisation of history, the dualism and the eschatology of the CD, concludes:
The affinities of CD with the apocalypses are not so great as to require that all these compositions derived from the same group. They do, however, strongly support the opinion that the Dead Sea sect originated in the same general milieu as the apocalyptic movements.

And summing up the findings of research on Apocalyptic since ~ ~ ~ s a in l aa ' symposium ~ at the Society of Biblical Literature meeting in Anaheim on November 19,1989, which marked the tenth anniversary of the Uppsala Colloquium on Apocalypticism, COLLINS himself concludes:
A movement or community might also be apocalyptic if it were shaped to a significant degree by a specific apocalyptic tradition, or if its world-view could be shown to be similar to that of the apocalypses in a distinctive way. The Essene movement and Qumran community would seem to qualify on both counts.

l3 On the Enochic materials in F. GARCIA JMARTINU. - EJ.C. TIGCWELAAR, *I Enoch and the Figure of Enoch. A Bibliography of Studies 1970-1988*,RQ 14/53 (1989), 149-176; on the NJ and their relationship with llQTetnple in F. GARCLA bhRTINE7, -El Rollo dcl Templo (11QTcmple): Bibliograffa sistem&ticam,RQ 12/47 (1986). 425-440 and *The Temple Suoll: A Systematic Bibliography 1985-1991. (forthcoming in the Pnxeedit~gsof the Madn'd Congress on rite Dead Sea ScrdLr; on all the other Qumran Aramaic Texts in the ~Bibliographie-which since 1982 I have been ublishing in the RQ. "JJ. Cows$ *Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Movement ?*, L.H. S C H I ~ (ed.), N Anhaedo~y and Histoty in h e Dead Sea Scrolls (JSPS 8 ) (Shefield 1990 25 51. J, C O W , -Genre, Ideology and Social Mowments in Jewish Apodypticism-, J J . COLLINS - J.H. CWARESWORTH (cds.), Mysteries and Revelations. Apoca(JSPS 9) (Shefield 1991), 11-32. lyptic Shrdies since the Uppsala Cdloqui~rn~




The present volume makes no claim to illuminate all aspects of the relation between Qumran and Apocalyptic. Since its scope is confined to the study of some of the Aramaic texts found at Qumran it ignores the community's most important and most characteristic texts, such as IQS, IQM or I Q H . Since it consists of detailed studies of particular manuscripts it offers neither a synthetic view nor a systematic solution of the problems that arise. Nor does it make any claim to be completely original. Every study in detail owes a debt to many other researchers, with whom it keeps up a dialogue, to those whose opinions it shares and perhaps even more to those with whom it disagrees. The references provided in each case will serve, I hope, to make clear the contribution of each researcher. I should like to express here my gratitude to them all. Thanks are also due to the editors of the periodicals and collected volumes where the Spanish articles were originally published. All of them have graciously agreed to the re-use of the materials in its present form. The revision of the original articles was carried out during a sabbatical leave spent at the Departamento de Filologia Bfblica y Oriental, Institute de Filologia, Consejo Superior de lnvestigaciones Cientificas de Madrid. 1 should like to take this opportunity to express my thanks to the DGICYT of the Spanish Ministerio de Educacibn y Ciencia, the Director of the Institute, Professor N. FERNANDEZ MARCOS, and the colleagues of the Department of Biblical and Oriental Philology for all the friendship and the most congenial working atmosphere they have provided. Thanks are also due to Mr Alasdair MACKINNON and Dr A. HILHORST. The first has overseen the English version of each one of the original articles, and the second has critically read the complete draft in its final form. Both have notably contributed to the quality of the volume without being responsible for the imperfections that still remain. But the most special word of thanks must go to Professor A.S. VAN DER WOUDE. The stimulating research climate he has been able to create in his Qumran Instituut at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen provided the atmosphere in which the original Spanish articles grew during the last ten years. Each one of these articles owes as much to his knowledge of the Qumran literature and of Apocalyptic as to his critical insight. Moreover, his was the idea of collecting the articles in a volume, and of publishing the collection. It is thus to a great extent



due to him if the present volume, within its modest limits, is able to make a contribution to the understanding of Qumran and of the Apocalyptic. Florentino Garcia Martinez



Among the peculiarities of Essene practice mentioned by Flavius Josephus, divination plays an important role. In Bell I1 8.12 Ej 159 we read':
There are some among them who profess to foretell the future, being versed from their early years in holy books, various forms of purification and apophthegms of prophets; and seldom, if ewr, do they err in their predictions.

Hippolytus (Elenchus 9,27) asserts the same, and Josephus quotes several examples of these predictions in his ~ n t ' and presents the Essenes as interpreters of dreams3. It is therefore only natural to seek for suggestions of divinatory practices in the manuscripts of the library from Qumran. Among the divinatory documents particular importance has been assigned to 4QMess Ar because the first editor thought that this ms. had preserved a horoscope of the btessiah4. The first commentaTranslation of T ~ i n c l u in i~ The ~ ~Loeb Classical Library, Josepltus I I , 385. If one adopts the interpretation of A. DUFO~T-SOMMER, Les kcrifs esskniens, d8couwfls p& de la Mer Mofle (Paris 1959), 45, note 2, the power of divination of the Essenes would result from intimate knowledge of the complete biblical text: .Le texte grec porte: kai diaphorois agneiais -el par des purifications diverse*; mais que viennent faire ici les *purificationsn, entre les =liwes saints* et les rsentences des prophttes*? Avec M. lsidore Uvy, nous donnons ici A diaphorois Ie sens d'uecrits*, attest6 dans quelques textes, et nous corrigeons agneiais en agiair usacrb; ales Livres saints. sont sans doute la Bible canonique, tandii que les -6crits sacrks* et les rsentences des Prophttes* dksignent des ouvrages religieu propres B la xcte. On pourrait put-ttre aussi comprendre que sles Liwes saints* dksignent ici seulement les cinq liwes de la TIM,tandis que sles emits sacrCs* dksigncraient les Kecoubitn (Hagiographes) et les "sentences des Prophttes-, les Nebi'im.. See, for example, Atre. XIII, 311-13; XV 5 371-79; XVIl $ 345-48. i Bell 1 1 7. 3. J. STARCKY, *Un texte messianique aram&n de la Grotte 4 de Qumrin*, in


Mkmorial &I cirrquantenaire de I'Ecole des langues oriencales de I'Insfitue Cafhdique de Paris (Paris IW), 51-66 (with two plates). S ~ A R C Khas Y published a photograph of better quality in the article sLe Maitre de Justice et J&us*, Le Monde de la Bible 4

(1978), 53-55, in which he modifies his first interpretation of the text and accepts the and G R E Ito ~ the effect that the text does not refer to the suggestions of m~~~~ Messiah but to Noah. Another good quality photograph of thc second column was


tors5 also interpreted the text in this way, but in later studies, although the divinatory character of the text is maintained, its messianic content is denied6.

Only scanty parts of this previously unknown Aramaic text have been preserved. The editor was able to recover part of two successive columns by grouping together several fragments, all of them in a very bad state. This implies that the reconstruction of almost all sentences includes some hypothetical elements, especially in col. ii, where the fragments offer no joint and only isolated words can be read. From col. i remnants of 11 lines have been preserved, as well as some isolated letters of the end of lines 12 to 17. The upper margin and the two intercolumnar margins are visible, and the scribe has left blank part of lines 2, 4 and 11 to indicate major divisions in the text. The ms. has been copied in a Herodian script classified by CROSS^ as <<round semiformalw, which would yield a rough dating of 30 B.C. to A.D. 20. In his paleographic study of the mss. J. CARMIGNAC concludes that the ms. was most likely copied by the scribe also responsible for the mss. 4QpPs 37, 4QpIse and 4Qp0sb8. We can

printed in the catalogue of the Smithsonian Institution, sec F.M. CROSS, Scrolls from [he Wilderness of the Dead Sea (London 1969, Plate 11. A. DUPOW-SOMMER, aDeux Documents Horoscopiqucs cs&niens*, CR41 1965, 239-253; .--La S ~ d dcs c W n i e n s et les Horoxopcs dc Qoumr&n*,Archdolo@e 15 (1%7), 24-31; J. CARMIGNAC, -Les horampes de Qumrgn-, RQ 5 (1%5), 199217; J. I-laff, *Legs as signs of election*, Tarbiz 35 (1965-66), 18-26 (Hebrew). JA. FrrLWYER, =The Aramaic Elect of God Text from Qumran Cave 4*, CBQ 27 (1%5), 349-372 and P. GRfiLOT, uHCnoch et ses Ecriturcsr, RB 82 (1975), 481-500. The only execption is M. DEIXOR, who in his article *QumrHnn in DBSupl 51 (1978), col. 956, maintains the messianic character of the text. The latest study published denies its messianic character: -Cc ne peut gukre etrc un des personaages awquels les h i t s de Qumrln conRrent le titre de umessie-, c a r il n est pas question ici de royautC ou dc sacerdoces, and proposcs a ncw interpretation which wc will discuss later, sec A. CAOUOT, a4QMess Ar 1 i 8-11n, in E. PUECH - F. GARCIA MARTINEZ (edsi), Mkmorial Jean Starcky. Vol. 1 (Paris 1991). 145-155. F.M. CROSS, -The Development of the Jewish Saipts*, in The Bible and Ihe Ancient Near East. Essays in honour of W.F. Albrighf (Garden City 1x1). 138. J. CARMIGNAC, rLes horoxopw*, 207-210.


approximately date the copy of 4QMesr Ar in the first half of the first century A . D ~

]?[']I'oIw ianiw

C o i .i

vaccu [

[...]a'>..~i> 77 10 1 1 1'1w '1 ]?Y [lY O]Ylo K > '1 W 1[3K3

'1 p[ I . T7n?n K T ' '1 1 1% ? ' n ! ~ i ' ? u [ i ] ~ ~ ?2~ w I ? [ ] a n 3 i 7 >Y 7 7 ' ~ i i1 o i w i 3

JW'.?. il l a > an lo"lY3

] ~ ' 1 nn7n 9 ~ Y?I['] ]n3i3i~ >Y a7 anltn'? l l i n ?w[ 1 . W vl31o?y7l'lx[3] K J > n 7[11]il? a 1 3 Y i13117i1 7'n[ ] 'a l n f l 3 ~ 1 3 1? a 1 3 K 3 1 a p 101Y 1 313 'il 'li7i I a n K'nov > i 1 3 a n n 3 i n i K w J K v i y l y l l K -n K l a n K71W K " i l 713 n l D 0 1 1!JlD7 ' a l > Y ~1;1'313Wn >1[31] ?ainw:7 n i l 1 a i ' 7 i n K i a K ~ > K 171-13'13 'a 1313w[n ] v m t [ j T'n>Y> i l i a > 'ai113w[n 1 I?'>[ I...[ 1s '1 K [ 1 11i 3 w n n[ 1

VUC~ [

6 7

10 11 12


'a 11


" ; i .I

. I

I 14 1 15 I 16 1 17
1-l 1

C o l . ii

a i n3 7 I [ p I..? Knrli 17U W'K3 Kn..[

1 2

]an a[ K l p 1 3 ... 1 181

I...[ 1 3
I 4 1 5 110 6

'ainyu] n i i i

I. '1 .3n7 ?>.3.[ ? i ] ~ aI ' > K 5 1 3 1 3 i n ' I n 2 lo[


]7'13>Y3 8 (lost 9.10.11) I..]131131 12 1.n 7 1 3 7 n ' i 13 1 7 1 9 1 ~ 7'0 ~ 14

The date of the original cannot be ascertained. The composition is certainly f Watchers because it prior to Jub. it is even possible that it predates nte Book o presents a previous stage in the development of the legend of the fallen angels and because I h m h 10.1-3 seems to incorporate a reference to it (on the level of the Aramaic original, or on the level of thc later Greek Version?).


B. Translation CoL i
1 of the hand, two[...]...[...I a mark; is red 2 his hair [and he has] moles on... [...I Vacat 3 And small marks on his thigh [...I different one from another. He will know ... [...I 4 In his youth he will be ... [... like a m]an who does not know anything, [until] the moment in which 5 he will know the three books. Vacar 6 Then he will acquire wisdom and will know [.. I ... of visions, in order to come to the sphere[ ..I 7 And with his father and with his forefathers [.. I life and old age. Counsel and prudence will be with him, 8 and he will know the secrets of man. And his wisdom will reach all the peoples. And he will know the secrets of all living things. 9 And all their plans against him will come to nothing, although the opposition of all living things will be great, 10 [.. I his plans. Because he is the elect of God, his birth and the spirit of his breath 11 [:..I his plans shall be forever. Vacut 12 [...I which [...I ... 13 [...I the plan 14 [...I... 15 [...I... 16 [...I... 17 [...I...

1 [...]which[..] fell in old times. The sons of the pit.


2 [...]evil. The mole[ ..I

3 4 5 6 7 8 [...I...[...] [...I to go[. .I [...]fle[sh...] ...[...I and the spirit of his bre[ath . .I forever[. .I (9.10.1 1 lost) 12 and cities[. .I 13 and they will destroy [...I... [...I 14 waters will cease [...I will destroy [...I from the high places; all of them will come[...I 15 [...I Vacat. 16 [...I and all of them will be rebuilt. His deed will be as the one of the Watchers. 17 Instead of his voice[ . .I will base upon him its foundation. Its sin and its guilt 18 [.. ]. .[. .I Holy One and the Watchers[ . .I saying 19 [... they have sploken against him. 20 [...]...[...I...[..] 21 [...]...[...I

C. Notes
Col. i

Line 1
r)l7 ' 1 . These words undoubtedly form part of a sentence begun in a previous column. We surmise, together with the editor, that lwn? refers to a substantive that has been lost, perhaps 70 lw,which reappears at the end of the line. Something like .<[and he has] two [marks on the back] of the handpi should be reconstructed. presents ilcJ The editor reads: ; l n J [ l F .black*. F ~ Z M Y E R ahown, as a possibility. Both interpretations are admissible, but the state of the ms. does not enable us to draw any definite conclusion. A n is all that can be made out of the eroded patch.

1'7~ l\u. The reading is uncertain. The parchment was found in a

tom and shrunken state and its first words have practically vanished.
The editor reads
;?n[,7li?\U (a

form that appears in 4QNor Ar), joins it


to a n l ~ w , his reading of line 2, and translates: $chis hair is red*. FITZMYER would rather read: In [l7]3\v .It left a mark from>>. This alternative would certainly avoid the problem of the grammatical agreement as ;'3v then becomes a verb, but this reading is paleographically impossible. P. GRELOTreads pn 1\u and attaches it to an ?w. He offers the following translation: ccune tache rouge [sous (?)I sa chevelures, but here again, as with the reading of the editor, the grammatical agreement is impossible for the simple reason that an l\v is obviously feminine. reading and interpretation; the form We adopt CARMIGNAC'S 7'1~0 1x1 frequently appears in later Aramaic as 1 ' 1 7 0 lolo. The final 7 is partially visible on the photographs, and the editor himself recognises the possibility of this reading. Line 2
K71Y\U. This reading was suggested by CARMIGNAC because it is the most sensible from a paleographical point of view and the one which best agrees with j771?1w. The editor reads a]nl~ .chevelure>,. F~ZMYER reads ~ T Y W<<barley*,influenced by the use of 7 'fl9 I ~ U [literally alentils>>]in the same line, but he does not succeed in making this reading fit the context. His best argument is a parallel text taken from the Elephantine papyri (COWLEY 2.4.5; the other text is nothing but a reconstruction based on this quoted by FITZMYER one). But, apart from the contextual difference, the link between ~ T Y Wand lnriyu in the Elephantine text is secured by the structure of the sentence. Such is not the case in our text. Another weighty interpretation is the continual presence argument against FITZMYER'S of s&u/scirut <chair* in the Babylonian physiognomic treatises, as proved by the texts collected by KRAUS".
17nri15U. Literally *lentils*. Our translation is based on the fact that all evidence seems to indicate that cclentilsw is used here to designate spots or marks on the whole surface of the body; these same marks

'O In Middle Aramaic the original W is always written D, but Qumran Aramaic offers a different picture; some mw. (such as llQ@ob and 4QEn) use indifferently D and W to represent the original consonant, while others (such as 1QopGn) use consistent1 W for the same purpose. F.R. KRAUS, TCIIC LUI brrbylonischen Phpiognmik (Berlin 1939). He has himself published a very good study of these texts: -Die physiognomischen Omina der Babylonicr*, MdVAG Band 40,Heft 2 (Lei1935), 60-100.




are called <<grains of wheatr or ccolivest>in the Babylonian treatises. It seems obvious that the text does not refer to nrlentilsn here as vegetables, because of the use of the singular in col. ii, 2 and because, in this instance, it is followed by ...>.This interpretation is favoured by most commentators. CARMIGNAC goes even further and proposes to give a symbolic value to the use of the cclentils* and @redhair*. Like Esau, whose hair was red and who sold off his primogeniture for a dish of lentils, ale futur chef &Israel possedera ces lentilles jusque dans sa chair, comme le precise la suite du texten. This interpretation seems unconvincing. In the above-named treatises body marks are essential for predicting future life and in them red hair appears as a special omen of good luck. In the text number LXXXI of KRAUS' collection we find the sentence: w h e n his hair turns red, he will grow into a godlor be trustworthy,,'*. As it appears, a good portion of the line was left blank, so that only one word is lost. The editor and CARMIGNAC read shinnfn and translate: ~ [ b i e nranglees seront les dents les unes par rapport a w autresu. FITZMYER prefers to read shenfn: A f t e r two years he knows this from that*. We would prefer to read shrinayin, the participle of >l'u at0 be different*, attached to the following expression -3 >n ;? (with DUPONT-SOMMER and GRELOT).The first ' 7 has been added on top of the line. the end of the line is illegible. Many conjectures have been proposed: 8"7n ;1vl 1 ccet (sa) science sera elevee,t (STARCKY); ; I7'lg;1 Y 3 ccil saura parler distinctementtt (CARMIGNAC); i17%i_l ~ 1 a(i1 1 aura) une intelligence parfaiten (DUPONT-SOMMER). GRELOTproposes to consider 'll' as a participle ~Connaisseur [de..I *, a solution which does not take us any further either, especially because there is apparently still another illegible word after The state of the text does not enable us to be more accurate.
; 1 7 > . . ~ 7 ' .Unfortunately,

Line 3

,.) I J ,. A.


See also numbers LIX and LXlX and page 10 of the book by KRAUS.

' ?


Line 4 ,,I. L . ,. This word is read as w'U" dike (something) sharpened* by the editor who follows a suggestion of J. STRUGNELL. This reading seems possible, although the objection raised by CARMIGNAC (lack of space for the u) is apparently well founded, but I do not see how it could fit into the context. The editor himself doe not offer a translation. The reading put forward by CARMIGNAC \ U 7 ' > 3 ncomme un lions is paleographically unacceptable, apart from the unusual form with two ''. The first stroke preserved is neither vertical nor does it show the typical hood-like heading of the '. The reading 1 la31 of FITZMYER is impossible and his translation: <<he will become like*, does not solve anything either. Among the possible roots with the preserved letter none apparently fits into the context. Line 5
K " 9 9 n r - 7 . These are unquestionably three specific books well known to the readers, for whom the reference was apparently clear, since the author does not feel obliged to mention the title of the writings, but their identification poses many problems for us. The editor holds the view that they were three eschatological, and perhaps even astrological, books but he does not explain his opinion. CARMIGNAC finds here a reference to the three fundamental books of the Qumran community: <{The book of meditation* ( l g o '~iiii of IQSa I,7; CD X6; XIII,Z), The Rule of the Community (1QS) and The Damarcus Document (CD). But this would entail that 4QMess Ar is a text written by the Sect and, also, that these three books constituted a sort of unity different from the rest of the sectarian writings. None of these conjectures seems to be right. FITZMYER asumes that the three books are aprobably apocalyptic, and not specific, real books)), somewhat like the <(Books of the Livinga (1 Enoch 47,3), the <<Book of Man's Deeds* (Psalm 56,9; Dan 7.10; I Enoch 90,17) and the ccheavenly tablets* (Jub 30,22; 1 Enoch 81,l-2). But, as pointed out by GRELOT, the content of these nbookss is known by revelation, not by study. And, although the text does not allow us positively to exclude the possibility that the content of the three books is revealed, the phrasing seems rather to point to a knowledge acquired through the reading or the perusal of these three books and not by revelation of their content. Although any hypothesis that may be favoured will unavoidably depend on the particular overall idea one has of the contents of the


text, GRELOT'S suggestion that these three books represent the primitive works of the Enochian literature (The Ashonomical Book, the Book of Watchers and the Book o f Dreams) seems the most plausible to me. These three books, according to Juh 4,1743, summarise Enoch's literary activity and constitute an abstract of ancient wisdom. This hypothesis has been accepted by J.T. M I L I K ~who sees a reference to this same trilogy in the section devoted to Enoch in the Samaritan Kitdh al-'Asair: aIn 7 years he (Noah) learned the three Books of Creation: the Book of the Signs, the Book of Astronomy (Arab nugmah, 'star'), the Book of the Wars which is the Book of the Generation of darn*'^.

1.w.Only the first letter has been preserved. The editor reconprefers to read IJV, and structs K 'pw ccmuch~.DUPONT-SOMMER seems to make reconstructs n>>]3w(<thepaths,. Finally, FITZMYER The text permits any reconout an 1 and reads K>3]lW <<discretion,,. struction, since the only letter preserved is the w. Although the text that follows is preserved almost in its entirety, it presents a number of difficulties: - Is i13 an <(ethicaldative* (STARCKY) or a udirectional dative),
mean <<knees,, ? (The meaning of the sentence, in adore, to venerate*, or else to recognise that case would be either <<to somebody as a son by placing him on one's knees). Or could it be a geographical term used in a mystical sense (GRELOT)? How does this tie up with the previous and the subsequent contexts ?
(CARMIGNAC) ? - Does In3 l 3 3 K

Line 6


J.T. MII.IK, rEcrits prCesdniens de QumrPn: d'Htnoch il Amrams, in M.

DELCOR (ed.),Qumdm, so pi&&, so rhdolqgie el son milieu (BETL XLVI) (Paris/

Lcuven 1978), 94. Translation of J.T. MIl.IK, The Bodcr of Enach. Aramaic Fmgmenfs of QumrrOn Cma 4 (Oxford 1976), 66. For MILIKthe three earlicst compositions attributed to Enoch would be the sacred calendars, the Astronomical Book and the Visions of Enoch: *It is to Enoch, rather than to Adam, that - according to the information provided by the Kitib al-'Asiktir- we should ascribe the authorship of the three antediluvian works transmitted to posterity by Noah: the Book of the Signs, of the Heavenly Bodies, and of the Wars. We can recognise in these without much difficulty the earliest compositions attributed to E n d the sacred calendars, the most comprehensive of which conccrns the cyde of seven Jubilees, the astronomical treatise (En 72-82), and she Visions of Enoch (En. 6-19)- (pp. 67-68).




Our interpretation is based on the reading n J 3 l K 7 'i iK 1 of lQapGn II,23 put forward by MIL~K" who explains the meaning of the word as referring to the third of the celestial spheres where Enoch is dwelling when visited by Larnech. As pointed out by GRELOT, the word K J ~ ~ in K the Talmud of Babylon designates the highest of the three dikes marked in a field. We understand 8 3 as a directional 'i with an anticipatory suffix. The text thus becomes coherent with the rest, which explains the changes experienced by the main character once he knows the contents of the three books, and his bond with his ancestors who are resting, as he does, in the paradise that according to 1 Enoch is located in the third celestial sphere. Line 7
-2 in;l[~xjr i : - 2 1 3 x 3 I. CARMIGNAC reads ' 2 in21 I3 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 apendant la croissance, pendant ses [--Is.We follow the editor's reading tends to reading, which is far more convincing. ~ R M I G N A C ' S differentiate four stages in the life of the personage after his young years: <(Pendant la croissance, pendant ses [--I, (pendant) [--I et (pendant la ) vieillesse,>. But to arrive at this understanding of the text he has to overlook 'il[ , whose reading is certain, and is forced to fill up within brackets the assumed life stages which, in my opinion, do not exist. 3 x 3

Line 8
' 7 1 . The word il is used in different senses in the Book of Enoch: to designate the secrets revealed to mankind by the Watchers and those which God reveals to Enoch. Its concrete meaning is quite difficult to ascertain in this context. The expression can be understood as the secrets men have, or as the secrets concerning men and all the living creatures. Generally speaking, it appears more than 50 times in the Qumran writings published so far16. In lQS III,23; IQpHab vii,8; lQM III,9; XVI,ll it refers to God's secrets ('ix ?il). But in our text the most logical understanding is that ((secrets of menw and ((secrets of all living), are two synonymous expressions to cover all the secrets

See E. VOGT, -Mysteria in Tcaibus Qumran*, Biblico 37 (1956), 247-257, and R. E. BROWN, *The Prc-Christian Semitic Concept of Mystery-, CBQ 20 (1958), 417443.

' ntc B o o b of Enoch, 41, note 1.



concerning humanity. If we link these *secrets* of men and of all living things with the three books mentioned in line 5, one may accept the hypothesis of G R E L o T according to which they reflect the contents of the Books of Enoch: *La connaisance des secrets des hommes et des secrets de tous les vivants peut donc s'appliquer au contenu des livres transmis par HCnoch sa posteritt*. As pointed out by the editor, the theme of the wisdom which extends to all peoples recalls Solomon's wisdom ( 1 Kgs 10.2; 5,9-14), although this does not necessarily imply that the text has a messianic character. Line 9
1 l a - 3 13Wn. The word appears again in lines 10, 1 1 and 13. The primary meaning is that of mathematical or commercial calculation. STARCKY thinks that the word in this case refers to astronomical calculation. In Qumran it only appears three times in Hebrew texts. In one of them (IQS VI,20), it maintains its traditional meaning: ain his account,. In the other two (IQH I,29; 1Q27 1 ii 2) it appears associated with 71,just as in our case. Although in the other three Aramaic texts of Qumran where it is found (4QEnC 1 xii 2 4 ; 4 ~ ~ n a .25,3 d and 26,7), it has the sense of astronomical calculation, the context here seems to request a sense very much like <<projects, plans*, a meaning that is sufficiently well attested in later Aramaic. CAQUOT prefers to retain the meaning ~ c o m p t e gives ~ , an objective value to the suffix and interprets ? 19 10' in a positive way17; as a result he asserts that the 'secret' known by the 'elect of God' is precisely the exact number of men. But his understanding of the sentence depends on the particular meaning he gives to the word n l o n , based on the supposed existence of a second root 1313 11, equivalent to the Hebrew 77C. This assumption seems to be unnecessary; in any case a root

-Ce parall&lenous invite b considkrer que la 'fin' dknotkc par le verbe sdf n'est pas un khec, mais au contraire un accompliisement. Les calculs faits au sujet des hommes arriveront b leur terme ' ; I 1>Y .... L'Elu est ainsi donnk cornme cclui qui peut faire un calcul exact concernant 'tous les vivants'. C'est la precision qu'on pouvait attcndre au sujet des 'secrets' qu'il dbtient, il s'agit d'un dCcompte exact concernant les 'vivants'-, a40Mess Arm, 149.





11~~ 11 3is not attested elsewhere in Qumran Aramaic or in the older levels of the language18.

Line 10
ti i i l ti i l>E( 1'n 3. The expression uthe elect of God* does not appear as such in the Old Testament. The most similar expression would be i ll a 7 1 7 n 3 (2 Sam 21,6) which is generally considered a umy corruption, instead of athe mount of Yahweh*. In Isa 42, 'T'RII chosen one# is found, applied to the Sewant of Yahweh. The expression is also applied to Moses (Psalm 106.23). David (Psalm 89,4) and, in a collective sense, to the people of Israel (Isa 43,20; 45,4). In the Qumran writings the idea of welection>> follows the main lines of the Old Testament, though phrased in expressions like ccthe chosen of Goodwill* (lQS VIII,6), ccthe chosen of the time* (lQS IX, 14), athe chosen of men* (lQS XI,16), ccthe chosen of Thy holy (IQM XII,S), athe people), (lQM XII,l), athe chosen of the heavens>> chosen of justices (lQH I1,13; 4Q184 i 14), ccthe chosen of Israeb (CD IV,3; 1Q37 i 3; 4Q165 6,l; 4Q171 ii 2; 4Q174 i 19). A title similar to ours occurs once again in Qumran, although in Hebrew and in the plural: >ti ' l ' n 3 (IQpHah x, 13). In this case, it applies to the members of the Community. This confirms the impression that 1 7 n 3 may be better interpreted as a substantive than as a participle, but, of Rom 8,33; Col 3,12; just as with the expression *chosen of God>> Titus 1,l etc., its use in the plural does not help greatly in clarifying our text, in which it certainly refers to an individual. The use of 17.n3 in singular, in expressions such as i i ' n 3 nly (4Q164 i 3; 4Q171 ii S), or even the use of l l 7 i l r : <<His elect)>,referring to the Teacher of Righteousness, does not help either, because of the different formulation and the non titular character of the expression. The expression is not found as such in intertestamental literature. Elect,, is In the Parables of Enoclt (1 Enoclz 37-71) the title <<The frequently used, alternating with ccSon of Man>>and ccAnointedn, referring to the Messiah. But this title is not identical to our express-

CAOUOT translates the sentence: eet si grand que soit le nombre de tous Ics vivants*, following the interpretation of Z. BEN-HAYIM of *massoram with the help of Samaritan Aramaic. -Plusieurs rtKrcnces du dictionnairc traditionnel (le Melis), dcs targoums et des homtlics de Marqah montrent que I'aramCEn MSR rend I'htbreu PQD et font admettre qu'il a exisst un verbe arambn MSR, different de son homophone signifiant 'livrer', et prbntant les divers sens que I'htbreu attribuc & POD, 'visiter', 'passer en revue', 'dtnombrer', 'appointer'e -4QMss Ar*, 1%.





ion and, above all, the composition of this work is the subject of lively discussions, as is also its possible Christian influencelg. We cannot, therefore, conclude, without any further ado, that the title of our text has a messianic connotation. The assessment of the concrete meaning turns out to be even more complicated because of the many possible interpretations of the other elements of this line and the different ways in which one can divide the sentence. CARMIGNAC insists that we should give to '"2 a participial mea113as the subject of the phrase: gparce que sa ning, and considers i1l > naissance est choisie de Dieu,,. DUPONT-SOMMER takes i l l ' ! li? as an attribute and identifies the Chosen of God with the Messiah: ccparce que 1'Elu de Dieu sera son engendrk*. GREL~T and FITZMYER prefer to consider the sentence as a nominal clause, depending on the precedent clause [aparce qu'il est I'Clu de Dieun]. It would explain why the machinations of the Elect's enemies and the opposition to him of all living things are doomed to failure. We, with the editor and CAQUOT, consider the causal sentence as a nominal clause, <&muse he is the elect of God*, but one which precedes the principal sentence. ;lT> i n and lo\rJj n l ? would then be two characteristic elements about which something is said, but this is unfortunately lost in the blank of line 11. This division of the sentence is obviously dependent on the general comprehension of the text and on the sense which is given to 87'7 10. The word may be interpreted as a participle or as a substantive. The first interpretation (past part. Xfel of l>?) is insistently supported by

Especially since the publication of the provocative positions of MMK, 7he Bwkr o f Enoch, 89-98. According to MlLIK 7he Pombles of Enoch would be of Christim origin and not earlier than 270 A.D. His views have been generally rejected, see J.C. G W ~ A E I D - M .SIY)NE, -The Enochic Pentateuch and the Date of the Similitudes-, HTR 70 (1977), 51-65; MA. KMBB, -The Date of thc Parables of Enoch: A Critical Review, NTS 25 (1979), 345-359; CI(.L. MWIRS, -Dating the Similitudes of Enoch-, NTS 25 (1979), 360-369; M. DFLCOR,*LC liwe dw Paraholes d'HCnoch Ethiopien. LC probltme de son origine h la lumitre dm dCcQuvertes r h n t c s r , EstBfbl 38 (1979-80)' 5-33; M. BUCK, .The Composition, Character and Date of the 'Second Vision of Enoch'., in Tet?, Won, Gloube. Feslcchrifi K. Alund (Berlin 1980), 19-30, D.W. S m R , *Weighed in the Balance: The Similitudes of Enoch in Recent Dixussion-, Reli@ous Studies Review 3 (1981), 217-221; G. BAMPPYU>+ *The Similitudfs of Enoch: Historical Allusionsn, JSI 15 (1984), 9-31.




DUPONT-SOMMER, who sees in it an Essenic anticipation of the . reading of Christian idea of the divine origin of the ~ e s s i a h ~ 'This the passage would imply that the Elect of God is begotten by God, and that he is His son2'. This idea of the divine origin of the <<Elect of God* is by no means odd in a Qumranic context as evidenced by IQSa II,ll-12: *When God begets the Messiah among them,,=. But the context does not seem to support this thesis and a parallel expression is not attested in Aramaic. The case of i l l ' l l o as a substantive is quite different. It is well attested both in Hebrew and in Aramaic with the meaning ccbirth, moment of birth, and especially in the astrological sense (<themede gknitureu. It is used with this last technical meaning in the astrological document published by ALLEGRO (4Q186 ii 8)23. This is the meaning which, in our view, must be also adopted here.

inw 3 n l ~ The . phrase as such does not present any difficulty. The redundancy of the expression, quite common in the Qumran writings, may be understood in the light of the biblical expressions by which it is inspired (see Gen 7,22, Job 34.14). For STARCKY, it would be an equivalent of a > n 11 (from a still unpublished ms. of Cave 4) or of 13 n 11of 4Q186 ii 7, iii 5. In both cases it refers to the spirit of the personage as opposed to his body and, above all, to his proportional participation in light and in darkness. DUPONT-SOMMER goes even further. He refers the pronoun to God and reads the sentence as if it were a parallel to O-n now3 of Gen 2,7. Consequently he supplements it with a l a n i2193K3 or illiln 23. He translates the sentence: uparce que ... I'esprit de Son souffle [sera dans ses n a r i n e s ] ~ As ~ ~ .a the result, our text would anticipate, according to DUPONT-SOMMER, Ebionite christology. The text would refer not only to the Messiah,
*Dew Documents Horoscopiquew, 249-251.

His translation -sera son engendrC- is difficult to accept because of the future meaning given to X 1il . See M. S M ~ -God's , Begetting the Messiah in 1Q Sa-, NTS 5 (195&59),218224; R. G o m a , *The Begotten Messiah in the Qumran Scrolls*, M 7 (1957), 191194, H. RICHARDSON, *Some Notes on 1 0 Sam, JBL 76 (1957). 108-122. CAouoT has published a sentence, communicated to him by DUPONT-SOMMER, from one as yet unpublished 4Q ms., in which the word 3 7 5 1 1 3 occurs again with this technical meaning: n 3 i - I ~Y l n iK1 l 7 l > l 0 W l l l i17;13 i13: uchcrche ses gbnitures dans le My~ttre de I'avenir et alors tu sauras ce dont il htriterav, see *4QMess. Arm, 152, note 21. -Dew Documents Hor05~0piques-,252.




but to the Messiah as a new Adam. Or, to use its own words: As Adam, the Chosen of God shall possess in himself the breath of God Himself, that is, the Spirit of God, which will be his own breath of life. In my view, there is nothing in the text to support this view. If the l o w I n 13 meaning proposed for ;ll?l o is correct, the meaning of is <<the breath of his respiration*, that is, his very life, which is mentioned here in association with his birth. This induces us to fill the blank found in line 11 with a sentence such as uthey will be perfect or blessedw. Line 11 Although the blank starts immediately after ? ' n > ! ' ? , the end of the line has been preserved and no signs of writing are apparent. This leads us to infer the existence of a partition, as in lines 2 and 5. Unfortunately, the words preserved in the four following lines do not allow us to draw any conclusion about the contents of the new section.

CoL ii. Line 1

l'nl173 393. FITZMYER translates afell to the East,,, because the second word appears in the absolute state. We prefer the interpretation given by the editor, which is better attested in Imperial Aramaic, d r . DISO 251. An adverbial sense would also be possible = upreviously,,, a meaning l ' f i l ; ? also has when preceded by a lamed (COWLEY 30, 8.10). In that case, the allusion to the fall of the angels (Gen. 6,l-4 and I Enoch 15,11) would be less justified.
; Ii n w ' I 13. This is the only time ; Ii n w appears in the Aramaic texts published so far. It is apparently equivalent to the Hebrew nnw. IIQtgob XIII, 1 translates nnw by K>]3n in the only place in which the correspondence has been preserved. In this case, the Rabbinic Tg (ed. IAGARDE,Job 33,24.28) uses ~ n n l l w Nevertheless, . in Job 17,14, translates nnw by K I inw, thus confirming the equivalence. This would enable us to accept the suggestion of the editor who finds in the sentence of our text the equivalence of the expression nnw 'UIIK, frequently attested in IQS, IQM and CD.

16 Line 2


~ n I?U. g Although the singular could be taken as a collective noun and could refer to the -lentils* as food, the same use of the singular leads us to give to it the derived meaning of ccmole*, as in col. i 2.

Line 7 We follow the reading of Fnww~, which repeats the expression of col. i 10. STARCKY reads K l l w 3 fll? 1, and the spirit of the flesh, dr. 1 Enoch 15,8 and lQH XIII,13 and XVII,25. In fact, the only part of the second word preserved is a horizontal stroke which, at first sight, seems to be far too long for a 2, but which in view of the script used in the document can be read perfectly as a 1. Line 8
1 ' 0 W 3 . We read ? " o ' / ~ > as in col. i 1 1 , not ] l ' >(so ~ the > editor). There is sufficient space for a o. ? I Q Y is not found as an absolute term in the Qumran texts, but always in the expression

Il7?Y >K.

Line 14
: m l o ? . With RTZMYER, we read the word as a form of 710. STARCKY prefers to derive it from YD ', <<increase)), and sees here a reference to the pouring down of the waters of the deluge. This derivation is morphologically disputable and his argument that the root q l o would make less sense here is not convincing in view of the uncertain meaning of the sentence as a whole. The editor himself l o and recognises interprets 119 l o 7 in col. i 9 as a derivation from I that the stopping of the waters is also an apocalyptic motif.
I n 3 . RTZMYER'S reading 133 seems to me paleographically impossible. His transcription ? 3 3 [ ]lo, which surmises a non-existent blank, is likewise unjustified. We must however admit that our interpretation is problematic because the only attested plural of ;lo3 is K n 103,M no3. In contradistinction to the editor we consider ]o'/K '1 13 as the subject of the following verb 7 l l ~ i l ' , not of 731n7. But the meaning of the whole sentence remains uncertain because an equally acceptable reading could be 7 lJil1, or 13lfl1, which would force us to divide the sentence in a different way.



Line 16 The editor reads i l l 3 IK as a direct object of the verbal form 1 i m l , which he derives from 7'3. As for us, we would rather derive it from K 13, and consider the rest of the line as a new sentence. ?7?7~2 In . the literature of the period in question, the Watchers are identified as beings of a somewhat angelical nature, see Dan (which not only uses the plural, but also the singular), Jub 4.15: 10.5; Test. h b e n 56-7; Test. Naphtali 3.5. In I Enoch they are identified sometimes with the Archangels (12.2.3; 20,l; 39. 12.13; 40.2; 61,62; 71,7) and sometimes with the fallen angels (1,5; 10,9.15; 12.4; 13,lO; 14,1.3; 15,2; 16.1.2; 91,15). In Daniel, the LXX translate the term by ccangelsn while Aquila and Syrnmachus translate it by I r P ~ v o p o t ,as the Greek text of I Enoch, since they derive the term from the Semitic root 1 l v , thus giving rise to the customary translation of cwatcherss, those who keep awake.

v 1117. In Dan 4,10.14.20, there appears the same couple: SaintWatcher. But in the three cases, both elements appear, either in singular or in plural, the same as in lQapGn 11, 1. The fact that here w 177 is in singular and 1 > ?' Y in plural, leads us to consider 11: as a divine title, frequently used in I Enoch, and not as another angel.
D. Commentary

Line 18

If the preceding analysis is accepted, the text refers to a personage whose name has not been preserved. The first part of co1.i describes the physical features of the hero, possibly at the time of his birth. since another of the extant copies of the same work25 has revealed to us even the child's weight: ax0 n'7n l ' V n >;7n[0 ahe weighs 300 shekels*. The marks he presents are of different types, distributed over various parts of his body. A fundamental fact concerns the future
25 See J.T. MIl,iK, 7he B& o f Enoch, 56. In hi forthcoming publication, rLes moddes aramkns du liwe &Esther daas la grotte 4 de QumrL*, in E. PvEcti-F. GARCIAMARTINEZ, MCmoriol Jean Stonky, Vol. 2 (Paris 1992), 321-406, MIUK gives a transcription of ~ Q N O ~ S JaN fragment ~, of a -colophon, inail, d'un manwcrit de 4Q qui relate la naissanee de N&, reeoupC par quelques mots d'un autrc m t , siglc: e* (p. 357).



development of his character: the knowledge of the three books. Before that knowledge, his life will evolve normally. Thereafter, everything will change: he will obtain wisdom, experience visions, know the hidden secrets, and, although a strong opposition will rise against him he will remain unaffected because he is 'the Elect of

After this summary of the hero's life, co1.i could have started a detailed exposition of the facts, although the fragmentary state of the text prevents us from drawing any firm conclusions. The mention of the ccmole* in col. ii 2 seems to suggest that in each of the marks discovered in the child there lies a clue for the interpretation of the future facts of his life, in much the same way as is the case in the physiognomic treatises, in which all possibilities are systematically imagined and given a meaning that will materialise in the future. But, in contrast to those treatises, in the part of the text that has been preserved, this future is not dependent on the body marks, but on the knowledge of the 'three books', a development which fully places our text within the literature of i n i t i a t i ~ n ~ ~ . In fact, the rest of the material preserved in column ii. apparently refers to the deluge, and the material of col. ii, after the Vacut of line 15, to the story of the Watchers - which would lead us to the story of Noah. J.A. F I T Z M Y E R ~ was ~ the first author to suggest this way of reading the text and P. G R E L O T ~developed this idea placing the fragment within the perspective of the Enochic literature. J.T. MILIK has acce~tedthe identification of the main character with ~ o a and h ~ ~ evens the editor of the text. J. STARCKY~'. has subscribed to this new
CAQUOT has proposed a different interpretation. After excluding the view that the mysterious personage could be one of the messianic
26 4Q186, on thc contrary, remains fully within the physiognomic literature. Acfording to MIUK, this Hebrew tea would also concern Noah and his horoscope, but in my opinion it has no relation at all with 4QMess Ar. rr *The Aramaic 'Elect of God's, 371. eHCnoch ct ses Ccriturw, 493-496. 29 7he Books o f Enoch, 5 6 and -Enits prC&nienw, 94-95. uLe Maitre de Justice*, 56. J.C. G R E F ~ E L D has proposed to identify the 'elect of God' f w r e with Melchizcdek, but without giving any argument for t h i s identitieation, see hi PloIego m n o n to the reprint of H. ODEBERG, 3 Enoch o r fhe Hebrew Book of Enoch (New York 1973),XXI.




figures expected by the Qumran community because ccil n'est pas question ici de royaute ou de sacerdocen, and suggesting that the best *, finally concludes that the candidate seems to be ~ n o c h ~ CAOUOT text announces the coming of an Enoch redivivu, whose si ns should be recognised and whose career as a diviner is predicted3'. But this identification of the 'elect of God' with the figure of Enoch is dependent on his understanding of the expressions e c r e t s of man* and *plans,, as ccle nombre de tous les humains qui doivent venir au monde avant la consommation du monde* and on his finding of this ~~. as we have already stated in the Notes, idea in 2 Enoch 2 3 , ~ But, this understanding of the Aramaic expressions is problematic and is unattested elsewhere. In fact, more than on a formal proof, the identification of the mysterious personage with Noah rests on a series of indications. None of them is conclusive as such, but, if they are taken together, the cumulative evidence seems convincing. The most important indications are the following:
1. The knowledge of the three hooks

The fundamental change in the life of the main character occurs at the time when he acquires the knowledge of the three books. As we saw in the Notes, the most likely explanation would be to consider these books as the three primitive works of the Enochic literature. Jub 4,17-22 explains how Enoch was the very first man on earth who learned the art of writing and that he wrote in a book:

32 *Si I'on x rappelle qu'aux termes mSmes dc cetlc partic dc I HLnuch Ie personnage appelt *Elu*, *Fils d'homme* ou *Messie* n ' autre ~ qu'Htnoch luimEmc, on pourrait pcnser, en effet, que le htros dont park @Mess Ar, au moins en son dltbut, n'est autre qu'Htnoch que les ~Parabolcsrprtsentmt w m m e un dttentcur et un rCvClaleur dc mysttrcs divins (46.3; 51.3).-, -4QMess Ar-, 155. eLe texte annonce plut& la venue d'un personnage qui sera p u t - i t r c un Henoch r e d i v i w mais qu'il s'agit dc rcwnnaitre dcs signes (que Ie debut dc 4QMess A r devait Cnumtrer) et dont on prtvoyait . . la carribre de devin*, f f 4 0 M w

Ar, 155.

~Ecris toutcs les Hmes des hommes, tous ccux aui ne son[ pas nCs. et Ies d a m s qui leur sont prtpartcs A jamais. Car toutcs lcs h e s sont p r t p a r h avant la formation tenestre-, in the translation d A. VAILLANT, Le lim dw s e c r e f s dlHknoch (Paris 1976*), 97.



The signs of the heaven according to the order of their monlhs, so that the sons of man might know the (appointed) times of the ycan according to their order, with resped to each of theiu months (4,17) (Asmomicol E d ) . This one was the f m (who) wrote a testimony and tded to the children of men throughout the generations of the earth. And thcu weeks according to jubilees he recount4 and the days of the years he made known. And the months he set in order, and the sabbaths of the years he reutunted, just as we made it known to him. And he saw what was and what will be in a vision of his deep as it will happen among the children of men in their generations until the day of judgement. He saw and knew ewqthhg and wrote h i s testimony and deposited the testimony upon the earth against aU the children of men and their generations (4,1&19) (Bookof Dnomc) And he was therefore with the angels of God six jubilees of years. And they showed h i everything which i s on earth and in heavens, the dominion of the sun. And he wrote everything, and bore witness to the Watchers, the ones who sinned with the daughters of men because they began to mingle themselves with the daughters of men so that they might be polluted. And Enoch f Wotchers). bore witness against all of them (4, 21-22) (Bodc o

According to 1 Enoch 82,l3' Enoch transmitted the books to Methuselah.

Now, Methuselah, my son, I shall reeount all these. things to you and write them down for you. I have revealed to you and given you the book concerning all these things. Preserve, my son, the book from your father's hands in order that you may pass it to the generations of the world.

Methuselah transmitted them to Lamech, who passed this legacy to Noah.

Because, thus, Enoch, the father of your father, commanded Methuselah, his i s son. And Lam& commanded son, and Methuselah (commanded) Lameeh, h me everything which his fathers commanded h i (Jub 7,38).

Noah, then, according to this tradition, is presented as the repository of the Enochic wisdom, of the digest of the antediluvian wisdom which is summarised in the athree booksw.

2. To come to the sphere

As we have also seen in the Notes, the best way to understand the

Aramaic expression in question is to relate it to Lamech's trip to paradise, where Enoch resided and was consulted about Noah's birth.


also I Enoch 76.14; 83,1.9; 85.2; 91.1.2; 107.3; 108.1.



The Ethiopic text corresponding to IQapGn, I Enoch 106, uses the same expression. Curiously, in one of the fragments considered as coming from the Book of Noah which are incorporated in the Pambles of Enoch (I Enoch 6 ~ , 2 )it~ is ~ expressly , said that Noah <<took off from there and went unto the extreme ends of the earth. And he cried out to his grandfather, Enoch*, using the same expression which I Enoch 106,8 uses for Methuselah's journey. 3. And with his faher and with his forrfafhers... life and old age Noah is, in fact, the last of the long-lived patriarchs: he became 950 years (Gen 9,29). After him, the ages of men will progressively decrease as they turn away from God. This longevity is denied to the contemporaries of Noah. The Watchers claim it for their descendants (I Enoch 13.6) but their request is turned down:
They will beg you everything for their fathers on behalf of themselves because they hope to live an eternal life and that each one of them will live a period of five hundred years... but they will die together with them in all their defilement ( I Enoch 10.10-11).

4. He will know the secrets of man

This knowledge is the result of his reading the three books, something which befits the Noachic hypothesis. All secrets were revealed to Enoch: the secrets of the holy ones (1 Enoch 106,19), those of the sinners ( I Enoch 104,10), sin of all kinds on earth (I Enoch 83,7), the secrets that the fallen angels reveal to men (I Enoch 7.1; 8.1-3; 9,6; 10,7; 16,3), the secrets of God (I Enoch 103,2; 104.12). The expressions used make us think of texts such as I Enoch 81,2:
So I (Enoch) looked at the tablet(s) of heaven, and read all the writing (on them), and came to understand everything. I read that book and all the deeds of humanity and all the children of the flesh upan the earth for aU the gencrations of the world.

It also reminds us of the already quoted text of Jub 4,18 where Enoch records in a book the secret of each man's fate until the day of the last judgement. These are the secrets which are passed to Noah through the reading of the three books.



A confused text, which is certainly redactional and which seems to come from a Noachic insertion in the Book of the Pambles ( I Enoch 68,l) takes up the same idea:
After that, my grandfather, Enoch, gave me instructions in all secret things in the book and in the parables which were given to him; and he put them together for me in the words of the book of the parables.

5. His wisdom will reach all the peoples

The expression perfectly suits Noah inasmuch as he is the conveyor of the antediluvian wisdom which, thanks to his mediation, is transmitted to later generations. If the sentence in question is understood as an allusion to his reputation among his contemporaries, it may be equally applied to him, since Wisdom 10,4 implies that Noah was rescued from the deluge precisely because of his wisdom. 6. Elect of G o d As we have already mentioned, the titulary use of the phrase is only found in the Parables of Enoclt, where it has a clear messianic meaning. The appropriateness of its application t o Noah may be suggested in different ways: - in terms of his election to continue human existence on earth after the deluge; - because Josephus confers on him the title of <<God's loved ones, which makes it possible to understand the use of a similar title in &amaiS7; - the reason why he is chosen to be rescued from the deluge is man recorded in Gen 7,1, where it is said that Noah is the only <<just* of his generation, and this is the title by which Noah is remembered: 1 7 1 u in the mss. of Ben Sira of the Genizah and Masada, ~ ( r a r o c in the Greek version; Jub 10,17 says that eon account of his righteousness in which he was perfected, his life on earth was more excellent than (any of) the sons of men except Enochw. Now, in the Enochian writings the notion of justice and election are intimately bound together (see I Enoch 1,l: ~rexro'uc ~ t x a i o u c in the Greek text,

37 So ~

R -The ,

Aramaic 'Elect of God'*, 371.



heruydn wasddeqdn in the ~ t h i o ~ i I c Enoch ~; 93, 10: heruydn sadeqdn. In the same way as in the Parables of Enoch the messianic title

of 1 Enoch 53,6, ccthe Just and the Elect,,, is reduced to the most frequent and simple one <<TheElects (I Enoch 40,s; 45,3; 49,2.4; 51.3.5; 52,6.9; 53,6; 55,4; 61,5.8.10; 62.1). it is also possible to understand the transition of Noah's traditional title *The Just* to *The Elece as influenced by that same Enochic literature where the two of them are united. In this first column there are two elements whose application to Noah is not obvious: the opposition of all living things to the hero, and the red colour of his hair. The first one appears only in belated stories and may be easily reduced to a folkloristic element39. The problem disappears if one 1 3 as meaning rebellion accepts the interpretation of the root ' (against God?) with GRELOT~', and understands the sentence as a first allusion to the corruption prevailing on earth which would ultimately bring about the deluge. But even if one discards this interpretation, the phrase is sufficiently broad to permit its being included among the scarce data of Noah's history known to us. The colour of his hair poses a greater problem, because in I Enoch 106,2.10 and in the corresponding Latin text respectively, it is specified that Noah's hair was ccas white woolw and ccwhiter than the snow,. This detail appears neither in IQapGn nor in IQ19 3. But in view of the parallel elements collected in the physiognomic treatises, the red colour of the hair seems to be original. Its change to white according to the later tradition could be perfectly explained by the influence of the Book of Dreams of 1 Enoch, where the colour white is constantly used in the zoomorphic stories to designate the just, and is particularly applied to Noah, a white bull which adopts a human shape to build the ark ( I E n d 89,l.Y). Column ii does not contain any complete line. But the scattered words that have been preserved perfectly fit the Noachic story: 751, which is reminiscent of the fall of the Watchers, the Nephilim of the biblical text; the allusion to the fact that the awaters will cease*.
This title is very common in the Parables of Enoch, see; 39,6.7; 48.1; 58 12.; 70.3. ' "'see L . GINZBERG, The Legends offhe Jews. Vol. I , and the book of J.P. Lnvrs,
A Study of rhe Infetpretafionof Noah and the Flood in Jewish and Christian Lilemhrnt

(Leiden 1968).
rHCnoch e l ses kritures*, 496.



which are, perhaps, the waters of the deluge, the reference to asin and guilt*, conjuring up the state of the overall corruption which prevails, the double mention of ~ l f l ,*to destroyn, which makes one think of punishment and of a devastated earth, etc. As it is the case with column i, none of these elements offers a find proof. But the accumulation of all of them makes the Noachic interpretation appear not only the most probable one, but the only one which can integrate all the preserved elements. Would it be possible to be more accurate and place this fragment within a specific literary work ? I guess it is. In my opinion, 4QMes.s Ar has preserved a part of the lost Book of Noah. In order to justify this assertion, it is necessary briefly to present the scattered materials of this lost work.

Opinions about the Book of Noah are far from being uniform: some4' think that it can be recovered thanks to the traces it left in other later works, while others4* are hesitant and even sceptical about its very existence. The fact is that this lost book emerges through the ages as a literary river whose original source eludes us. The first fact worth mentioning is that the book is not found in any of the old catalogues of the Apocryphal books43. Nevertheless, its existence is attested by two explicit allusions in Jubilees:
And Noah wrote everything in a book just as we taught him according to every kind of healing (Jub 10,13). Because thus I have found written in the books of my forefathers and in thc words of Enoch and in the words of Noah (Jub 21,10).

E.g. LEWIS,A Study of the Interprrtntiion of Nooh, 14-l5: *Without an a priori judgement that a Noah book lay back of Enoch, it is diieult to see how more than We must conclude that as folklore is needed to explain the source of these fragments... yet we do not haw the book of Noah and actually beyond conjecture, we know wry little about it nor are we at all certain that such a book ever existed*. 43 See the lists in A.-M. D m s , Introduction mu Pseudcpigmphes grim d'Ancicn Testument ( S W 1) (Leiden 1970). XIV-XV.

'' E.g. M ~ U K ~Ecrits prkssCniens*, 94-95.




A reference, perhaps even older, is found in a Greek rns. of Mount ~ t h o which s ~ ~ includes two long additions to the Test. Levi 11.3 and XVII,2, parallel to the Aramaic Levi of urnr ran^^ and the Geniza of Cairo: uThat is what my father Abraham ordered me, because that is what he found written in the book of Noah on the blood*. The last reference, Abydeno's, apparently more uncertain ( w c +=OW), is found in the Chronography of ~ ~ n c e l l u which s ~ ~ , reports on the partition of the earth among Noah's sons: aUpon making these partitions and his will once engraved, as they say, he handed his sealed testament to them*. The rest of the later allusions, collected in the inexhaustible source of information on Apocryphal writings which is the work of FABRICIUS~~ discloses , no data of interest for the knowledge of the book, either because they are merely hints at its existence ( ~ u ~ u s t i n u s ~ ) , or because they are purely a product of imagination (Pseudo-Berosius, Annius of ~ i t e r b o ~Others, ~). such as G. Pastellus and Th. Bangius,

Ms. Athos Koutloumous 39, ms. e in the critical edition of M. DE JONGE, The Tesiameni of ihe Twelve Pam'mhs (Leiden 1978). " Preliminary publication by J.T. MILIK, -Lc Testament de Uvi en aramCen. Fragment de la gottc 4 de QumrBn*, RB 62 (1955), 398-406. For the Aramaic text from the Genizah, see J.C. GREENFIELD - M. STONE, -Remarks on the Aramaic Testament of Len from the Geniza~,RB 86 (1979), 214-230. For a study of the relationships bctwecn the Qumran text and the Aramaic text of the Geniza, see M. DE JONGE, -The Testament of Levi and 'Aramaic Lev?*, in F. GARCIAh"LnrRnNm E. Pumi (eds.), Mkrnoriol Jean Cormignac (Paris 1988). 367-385. The Greek text was edited, together with the Aramaic text from the Geniza, by R.H. CHAR= in the f ;he Twelw Pafnmhs, 245Appendix 111 of his The Greek Version of the Tesiamenfs o 256,and again by DE JONGE,77ie Testaments of the T w l w Pambnhs, 47. 46 AA. MOSSIiAMMER (ed.), Geatgius Syncellus. EcIogo Chronqpcphica (Bibliotheca Scriptorum Graewrum et Romanorum Teubneriana) (Lcipzig l W ) , 47. 47 J A . FABRICIUS, C& Pseudepipphus Veferis Tesiamenfi. Vol. I (17U). 245-Quorum wripta (of Noah and E n a h ) ut et apud judaeas et npud nos in audoritate non assent, nimia fecit antiquitas, propterquam vidcbantur habenda cssc suspceta, ne proferantur falsa pro verism, L)e Civiiaie Dei XVIII, 38 (CSEL XL, 328). 49 eLibros plenissime illis wnscriptos relinquit*, and earlier, * T u x senissimus omnium patcr Noa, iam antea cdodos thedogiam - ct sacros ritos, coepir etiam eos erudire humanam sapicntiam. Et quidem mulla naturalium rerum secreta mandavit litteris auae solis saccrdotibus Sfythac Armenii commendant*. An Italian translation, done by'p. Lawo Modonese, and published in Venicc in 1550, 276, gives the same text with small variants.



who talk about an Ethiopic Noah in their Coelum 0rientisS0, seem to mix it up with I Enoch. The first references, however, not only attest to the existence of the work, but also describe its most important features: - according to Jub 10,12, it would contain a medicinal treatise, and more precisely, according to the preceding verse, a herbarium: *And the healing of all their illnesses together with their seductions we told Noah so that he might heal by means of herbs of the earth,,. - according to Jub 21.10 it would equally contain a series of Halakhic prescriptions, particularly on the drinking of blood, as shown do not eat any blood of beast or cattle or any bird in Jub 21,6-7: <<And which flies in the heaven. And if you slaughter a sacrifice as an acceptable burnt offering of peace, slaughter it, but pour out its blood on the altar*. - this would be one of the main aspects, according to the Test. h i , which summarised it in the title. - it would also contain a testament, according to Syncellus, that would justify the partition of the earth among Noah's sons. If our knowledge of the lost work were restricted to these references, we would be bound to assert that it was a complex work, including different elements, but all efforts to recover it would be seemingly doomed to failure. Fortunately, most of the researchers agree that some pans of the lost book have been incorporated into I Enoch and Jub, and that some mss. of Qumran preserve some traces of it. A. Noachic materials in I Enoch If we tabulate the results of a survey of the most representative authors that have dealt with the Noachic elements incorporated in 1 Enmh, we obtain the following listS1:

50 *Bangius (Caelum Orientis) mentionne un volume de N& en tthiopien. 11 cst possible en effct quc parrni les h i t s apourphes pcu connus encore qui circulent en Abyssinie, il en est qui portent le nom de ec patriarehe*, M I C m Dictionnaire des Apoc hes, Vol. Il, col. 640. '%e prescnt the final opinion of DILLWNW and CHARLES. Both have frequently changcd their views as to the extent and localition of the Noachic interpolations in I Enoch.



As this list clearly shows, these Noachic insertions in I Enoch are of

three types: a) those made in the Book of Watchers:6,3-8; 8,l-3; 9,7; 10,l-3; 1719. b) those made in the Parables of Enoch: 39,1-2; 54,7-55,2; 60; 6569,25. c) chs. 106-107. We will deal separately with the three sections.
a ) Chs. 106-107

These chapters are clearly an insertion. They have no connection with the previous section (I Enoch 91-105) and obviously represent a later addition. They are already included in the third copy of I Enoch found at Qumran, 4QEnC 5 i, and in the Greek translation which served as model for the copy found in the Chester-Beatty papyrus57. An independent Latin version has also been preserved".

A. DILIUW, Dm Buch Henoch O b m c m und erklarl (Leipzig 1853). XXXVI11-XLIII. 53 H. EWALD, Abhandlturg Ober des llthiopischcn Buches Hmokh Entstehung. Sinn und Zusammensekung (Giirtingen lW), 56-61. sfR.H. CHARLES, The Book of Enoch (Oxford 1912), XLVI-XLVII. F. MARTIN, Le tiwe d ~ n o c h (Paris 1 9 0 6 ) , UUUIVIII. 56 J . T .MIUK,h e Books of Enoch (Oxford 1976). 55. C. BONN% - H.C. Y O W E , The Last Chapters of Enoch in Greek (London



1 9 3 7 $ .


Published by M.R. JAMES, Apocrypha Anccdoca. Tutr end Studies, Vol. 11/3 (Cambridge 1 8 9 3 ) , 136-150, and reedited by CHARLES, h e Book of Enoch, W 2 6 8 .



The chapters in question give a somewhat detailed account of Noah's marvellous birth: Lamech's doubts as to Noah's origins, his consultation of Methuselah, and the latter's trip to the limits of the earth to ask Enoch. Enoch's response evokes the fall of the watched9 and the deluge, its consequences and punishment; he then reassures Methuselah as to the paternity of the child, and tells him that he should give him the name of Noah, the one who will be saved from destruction and will give comfort to the earth. Methuselah returns to disclose the news to Lamech and impose the name upon the child. We have here, in an apparently summarised and abridged form, the beginning of the Book of Noah, from his birth until the imposition of his name. It is evident that this is the beginning of the book not only because the main character is just born and the actors are his ancestors, but also because the allusions refer to other things which will happen during Noah's adult life. In m y opinion, the redactor who has incorporated this summary at the end of the Epicrle of Enoch added 106,19-107,1~~ in order to present the future history in which evil would reappear once the c a generation of deluge had come to an end and would grow until c righteous ones shall arise, wickedness shall perish, sin shall disappear from upon the earth, and every good thing shall come upon hem. This insertion is demarcated by the classical procedure of repeating at the end the verse which precedes the interpolated material: 106.18 and 107.2. It seems also evident that this narrative is nothing but a summary. This is shown by the more developed form in which it appears in IQapCn and by a comparison of the Latin and the Ethiopic versions. But there is an important detail worth to be emphasised: in the description of the evil which precedes the deluge and which is a result of the watchers' fall, no allusion is made to the latter's revelation of the secrets to men, but only to their union with the daughters of men and the birth of the giants, so that the narrative materially corresponds with the biblical data.

59 This element is absent from the Latin version, which adds several chronological details: age of Lamech, the time when the deluge will occur, e t c These verses can help us to establish the date and the reasons for the addition of thcst chapters to the Enochic Pentateuch.


b) Book of Watchers
The assumption that 1 Enoch 6,3-8 and 9.3 are insertions into the Book of Watchers is based on the fact that they introduce Semihaza as chief of the Watchers. 8.1-3 transforms the fallen angels into instructors who teach mankind, in conformity with the function assigned to them in Jub 4,15, a function which is, however, totally absent from the summary of chapter 106. Chapters 17-19 relate the first journey of Enoch, and chapter 20 deals with the roles of the seven archangels. None of these texts makes any reference to Noah and, although they probably formed part of the oldest elements incorporated in the Book of w&chers61, it seems impossible to attribute them to the lost Book of Noah. The text of 10,l-3 is a different case. Here Noah suddenly appears as a personage already known, and the whole passage is an announcement of the deluge which has no connection with what precedes or follows it:
And then spoke the Most High, the Great and Holy One! And he sent Asuryal to the son of Lamcch, (saying), *Tell him in my name, 'Hide yourselfl' and reveal to him the end of what is coming; for the earth and everylhing will be destroyed. And the Deluge is about to come upon all the earth; and all that is in it will be destroyed. And now instrud him in order that he may flee, and his seed will be preserved for all generations..

I think that MARTIN is right when he identifies this pericope as a Noachic interpolation62.It is difficult to specify its date of composition. Noah's name is lacking in the Ethiopic mss., a fact that is probably characteristic of the difficulties that the introduction of the name entailed and which were felt already by the translators. The name appears in the two Greek recensions preserved in the Chronography of Syncellus. In contradistinction to what happens in chapters 106-7, which were already added to the Enochic corpus at the time when 4QEna 1 was copied, in this w e the evidence of Qumran is inconclusive. According to MILIK,4QEna 1 v would have preserved I Enoch 10.3-4, although he himself recognises that of the three fragments available only fragment I can be identified with a relative degree of certainty, the only assured reading in it being a>jr I > 1. This
See the detailed dlrcussion in ch. 2, pp. 61-67.
d%ltnoch, W I X - W 0 0 ( .


* Le L.ivre



offers too small a basis for identification of this fragment, so that nothing can be concluded with certainty, the more so because the correspondence of ; l ? Y l ? with the verb used by Syncellus cannot be dem~nstrated~~. Therefore, from the interpolations of the Book of Wcztchers allegedly derived from the lost Book of Nouh only the reference to the angelic communication, following God's command, that Noah should find a shelter and be preserved from the disaster caused by the deluge, can be considered as stemming from this writing. The wording of this element as preserved by Syncellus, which is more complete than the Ethiopic version, runs as follows:
Then the Almighty spoke. and the Great Holy spoke, and sent Uriel to the son of Lamcch, saying: Go to Noah and tell him in my name: 'hide!', and revcal to him the end that is approaching, bccausc the whole carth is about to perish. Tell him that a catadysm will come down upon the earth and that all its surface will disappear. Tell the just what he must do, to the son of Lamech, and he will protect his soul for the life and will escape for centuries to come; a branch shall be brought forth from him, that will stand for all generations forever.

c) 7Xe Book o f Parubla

The problem of the insertions that were allegedly incorporated into the Book of Parables is more complex. Without going into the difficult problem of the Anal composition of the Parables and their dating, I think it can be substantiated that the fragments that have been uniformly considered as interpolations are indeed pericopes that were reused and incorporated, in a more or less felicitous way, by the final redactor. All of them are in contradiction to the context in which they appear, follow a different chronology from the rest of the work,

The readings and restorations of MlLlK here present other additional problems: is certain, and the space bctwecn the 4 and the 17- is too in the second line only illarge to be filled with a simple -'(photograph PAM 42.228); the expression, as reconstructed by MIUK on line 4, does not match the parallel which closes ch. 10 on 4QEng 1 iv 18; cvcn so, MIUK is forced to invcrt the order of the text of Syncellus. The only base for the localisation of the fragment is the assumed wrrespondcncc of i l ? Y I? with a u v r q p ~ o e t .But auvrqpdo, which is a very common vcrb in the Greek version of Ben Sirah, translates there the Hebrew vcrb TOW, or even 1U 3. The other occunrnccs of the vcrb in I Enoch (for example 1,8) have not been prcscrvcd.



e t ~ Whether . ~ ~ these insertions derive from the Book of Noah is, of course, quite another question. I Enoch 39,l-2 does not mention Noah at all. CHARLES correctly identifies these verses as an interpolation coming from the Book of Watchers. In fact, 39,l depends on 1 Enoch 6,l-2 and 39,2 on I Enoch 13,6-14.3. It is striking that the interpolator placed the verbs of 39,l in the future tense to make them fit into the context, but forget to do the same in 39,2, keeping the verb in a past form, despite the fact that the contents of the books received by Enoch refer to the punishment of a fault that will supposedly be committed in the future. I Enoch 54,7-55,2 deals with the deluge and the Noachic covenant, topics that do not appear in the Book of Watchers (except in the interpolated passage 10.1-3). One could think that these verses are simply an elaboration of the biblical text, since they show the same conception of a deluge caused by the overflowing of the waters in the heavens above, and the fountains of water which are on earth (I Enoch 54,7). But the characterisation of the waters from heaven as masculine and of the waters from the earth a! feminine6', induces me to assume that the text must be considered as an independent witness of an old narrative of the deluge, in other words as an imponant element of the lost Book of Noah. I Enoclt 60. In the case of this chapter, things are quite different. It contains three clearly distinct elements. According to 641-6.25 Noah (the Ethiopic text speaks about Enoch, although the date in the year 500 taken from Gen $32 shows that the character is clearly Noah; Enoch spent only 365 years on earth) sees a vision of judgement which recalls I Enoch 1,6; 14.14, etc. in 60,7-10.24 Behemoth and Leviathan, the two great monsters, male and female, are taken apart and respectively placed in the desert and in the ocean to serve as food for the just of the messianic era. In 60,ll-23 an unnamed angel shows Noah the secrets of heaven and earth, just as in I Enoch 17-18, though here most of the natural phenomena have their own angel: the rain, the hail, the frost, the dew, etc. This summary of the contents of the chapter clearly shows that its ascription to the Book of Nodl is far from self-evident.

64 See 7l1c Book o f Enoch, 106-107, where ~ ( A R L E S gives a series of reasons why these passages can be considered as interpolated. *That which is from the heavens above is masculine water, (whereas) that which i s underneath the earth k feminine*, I Enoch 54,s.



The first element (60.16.25) contains a series of details which suggest a later interpolation. It is not clear, as suggested by CHARLES, that it was incorporated in order to compensate for the lack of references to the first judgement in the Book o f Parables, because no allusions to it can be traced. It seems impossible to identify the celestial earthquake of the text with the deluge. According to Gen 7,11 Noah was at the time of the deluge 600 years old, whereas the 500 years at which the vision is dated correspond to the period when he, according to Gen 5,32, begot his progeny. The way in which the vision is introduced with a precise date [aIn the year five hundred, in the seventh month, on the fourteenth day of the month*] is quite unique in the whole book of I Enoch and indicative of a later origin66 (and the possible influence of Jub), as is the presence, together with the Ancient of Days, of the angels and the just. We cannot, therefore, consider these verses as belonging to the Book of Noah. The same goes for 60,ll-23. Their contents agree with those of chapters 41.3-8; 43; 44 and 59. In fact, they may be read as the logical continuation of 59,3. Not even the mention of athe angel who was going with me,, disturbs the sequence, since it frequently appears in contexts in which the main character sees or hears6'. As for the angels who are presiding over natural phenomena or are identified with them, we also come across them in other sections of the Book of Patables: angels of the water (61,10), angels of the lead and the tin (65,8), of the celestial luminaries (43,2), of the winds (69,22), etc. Nothing, thus, in these verses demands that we ascribe them to the Book of Noah. The case of 60,7-10.24 is more complex. These verses are an meteorite of old days. Later tradition, 4 Ezra 6,49-52, 2 Bar 29,4, has connected the tradition of the two monsters with the story of the creation. Both monsters would have been created on the fifth day. But, in spite of this (the expression aon that day* of 60,7 could allude to this 5th day), I think the tradition of the two monsters is connected with the story of the fallen angels and the deluge and it can be considered as a profitable element when it comes to recovering the
Leaving aside the interpretation of C H A W (7hc Book of Enoch, 113, note I), who sees here an allusion to the feast of the Tabernacles, or that of MIUK, who prefers to see here an allusion to the Christian feast of Easter, The B& of Enoch, 97. 67 See 40.2; 43.3; 46.2; 52.3; 62.3. In 40.8; 52,S; 53.4; 54.4 and 56,2 an Angel of peace- fulfii the same function of interpreter and guide.




lost Book of ~ o a h Several ~ . arguments may be put forward in favour of their provenance in Noachic literature. 1) The identity between the place where Asa'el is cast, Daduel [ = The breasts of El in I Enoch 1 0 . 4 ~ .and Dundayin, the place where Behemoth dwells6 This identity has been proved by MILIK~' on the basis of the Aramaic term underlying both toponyms: K l l , *the breasts*. This toponym links together the myth of Leviathan and Behemoth with that of the fallen angels. 2) The relation between the story of the fallen angels and the deluge is also secured by the very name of Leviathan, whose fight against Raphael has left some echoes in the Manichaean Book of the Giants: ~Ohya, Leviathan and Raphael wounded each other and disappeared*. From this text, which has been preserved in two interpretation, that copiesn, we learn, according to HENNING'S *Ohya killed Leviathan but was, in turn, killed by Raphael*. The same connection appears in the title of the work condemned by the Gelasian Decree: Liber de @a nomine gigante qui post diluvium cum dracone ab haereticis pugnasse perhibetur, apoctyphus. 3) Also suggestive of its Noachic origin is the allusion to Enoch's residence in the paradise of the just, and his designation ccthe seventh from Adam, the first man,,. We thus consider these verses as an insertion coming from the Book of Noah. I Enoch 65.1-69,25. This block is not a homogeneous composition, although it is presented as a vision of Noah included in Enoch's third parable. As a matter of fact, it is composed of three distinct units: - 65,l-67,3, which deals with the deluge and Noah's salvation.

68 Mlt.i& 7he Bwks of Enoch, 91, assumes that the fragment has been taken from the Book of Giants, but his hypothesis does not seem to bc well grounded. *Bind Azaz'el hand and foot (and) throw him into the darkness! And he ma& a hole in the de.scrt which was in Duda'el and cast him there*. See 60,s .who holds hi chest in an invisible dcsen whose name i s Dundayin, cast of the garden of Eden, wherein the elect and the righteous ones dwell, wherein my grandfather was taken, the seventh from Adam, the first man whom the Lord of the S irits created* ~ ~ 7 7 Bwks te of E n a h . 30.The identity was already suggested by L GINZEERG, 73e Legendr of the Jews, Vol. V, 127, and has been accepted by A. CsOUoT, uleviathan et Bthemoth dans la troisitme parabole d'Htnoch-, Semitica 25 (1979, 111-122. , Book of Giants+, BSOAS 11 (1943-46). 71Published by W.B. H E ~ N G *The



- 67,4-13, which treats of the punishment of the angels and their relationship with the kings and the mighty ones. - 68,l-69.25, an angelological and magical text. J.T. M I U K ~ suggests that the third unit (1 Enoch 68.1-69.25) should be entitled <<Words of Michael,, a title that its author would have taken from the Greek translation of an Aramaic work of which two or three copies have been preserved at Qumran. MIUKeven goes so far as to state that the contents of the work were unknown to the author, and that he was aware of the title only from hearsay. I myself rather think that the title is preserved in 1 Enoch 68.1 and is none other than the aBook of the Secrets*. This title corresponds to the magical section of the work, a part of which is included in 69,16-21.25: <<These are the secrets of this oath*. Apart from this magical part, the unit contains a dialogue between the archangels Michael and Raphael on the judgement of the angels and a treatise on the names and the functions of these angels, as well as two interpolations: one (69,22-24) which is intended to facilitate the incorporation of the work into the Book of Parables introducing material parallel to 41,3-8; 43; 44; 59; 60,ll-13, and another (69,2-3), taken from the Book of Watchers (1 Enoch 6,7), introduced by a corrector after the Book of Parables had been incorporated into the Enochic Pentateuch in order to match the names of the fallen angels with those of 1 Enoch 6-7. Nothing in this unit suggests a Noachic origin, with the exception of 68,1, which is clearly redactional and presents the whole as a series of teachings of Enoch to Noah to justify the insertion. Nor does the second unit, 67,4-13, seem to require a Noachic origin. The contents of 67,4-7 conflict with the contents of the previous block (65,l-67,3) and are directly connected with chapters 62-64, which describe the punishment of the kings and the mighty and also that of the fallen angels. Although the whole unit uses to a great extent a vocabulary and expressions drawn from the Book of Para b l e ~it ~ shows ~ , a composition that can be ascribed to a later period and which has a precise purpose: to explain why the waters coming from the site where the fallen angels are punished and where the
The Books of Enoch, 90-91. kings and rulers (38,5; 621.3.6.9; 63J.2.12); valley which burn under the earth (54,l-2). where the angels are punished (54,1-6), as well as the kings and rulers (62-63); they have denied the Lord of the Spirits (38,2;45,2; 46,7; 48,lO; 657); before the Lord no nonsensical talk can be uttered (49,4; 623).
" The



kings and the mighty ones will be punished (Gehenna and its continuation beyond the limits of the Dead Sea) serve, during the interpolator's days, for the corporal solace and the healing of those same kings and mighty. The waters, hot and sulphurous, which serve today for the healing of their bodies, are a testimony to the punishment endured by the angels, a punishment which will, one day, fall also upon them.
Then I heard Michael responding and saying, -This verdict by which the angels arc being punished is itself a testimony to the. kings and the rulers who control the world-. For thu: waters of judgcmeot are poison to the bodies of the angels as well as sensational to thcii flesh, (hence) thcy will neither see nor belien that these waters become transformed and become a fire that burns forever ( I Enoch 67,12-13).

Not even 65.1-67,3, the first of the three units composing this block, can in my opinion be attributed to the Book of Noah. A whole series of details speaks against it. The text introduces Noah as the main character of the story. Seeing the situation of the earth and the imminence of its destruction, Noah is frightened and escapes to its outer boundaries to consult Enoch on a journey which shows a peculiar similarity to the journey of Methuselah in 1 Enoch 106 and lQapGn 11 and whose account seems to be secondary in relation to the latter. The question addressed to Enoch in 65,3 precedes the appearance of the patriarch in 65,s and is introduced in the narrative by an unjustified change from the third to the first person. The account of 65.4 in preparation for Enoch's theophany-like appearance is inspired by 1 Enoch 14,13-14. The reason underlying the destruction of the earth is the revelation to men of the secrets of the angels, an element which is absent from the primary stages of the myth and points to a more developed phase, that of the Book of Wutchers, in which the myth of the fall of the angels is already entwined with that of the teaching angels who are the revealers of the secrets. Consequently, Noah remains protected not because he is just, but on account of his ignorance of the secrets (1 Enocll 66.11). According to 67.1-4 the ark is built by the angels. They hold back the waters while waiting for a more appropriate time, according to 62,l-12. These details suggest an angelology far more developed than in the older tradition. Moreover, a whole series of elements of vocabulary, apparently taken from the Purubles, indicates that the composition of the insertion in question is of later date: the secrets of the angels, the violence of Satan, the practice of magic, the angels of the lead and



the tin, the angels of punishment, the powers of the waters, the b r d of the spirits, etc. In conclusion, in my opinion of all the fragments of 1 Enoch that have been identified as originating from the Book of Noah, only the following should be retained: I Enoch 106-107 (except the insertion of 106,19-107,2), which deals with the birth of Noah and with Enoch's announcement of the future salvation of Noah from the deluge which would be brought about by the evils consequent on the union of the angels with the daughters of men. I Enoclz 10,l-3, the announcement by the angels of the deluge and of Noah's salvation. I Enoch 54,7-55,2, an account of the deluge. I Enoch 60,7-10.24 (?), Leviathan and Behemoth.

B. Noacttic matenah in Jubilees Apart from the two explicit references to the Book of Noah already have preserved two mentioned, Jubilees would, according to CHARLES, long extracts75 from this writing, one of which would be a literal quotation, as proved by the abrupt change of the narrative to the first person (Jub 7,26). In the first, Jub 7.20-39, Noah gives a series of instructions and orders to his children. Jub 7,21-25 summarise the story of the Watchers and its outcome, the deluge, without alluding to their function as instructors (mentioned in their presentation in Jub 4,15), but attributing to them three types of descendants: the Nephilim, the Giants and the Elyo @ktot;b in a fragment preserved by Syncellus). This information is not drawn from 1 Enoch 7,l since the three types of descendants do not appear in the Aramaic, Ethiopic or Greek text of Akmin, although a veiled reference to them is made in the Book of Dreams, in the zoomorphic story (1 Enoch 86,4; 87,4; 88,2; 89,6), in which the progeny of the Watchers are represented as elephants, camels and asses. In the next verse, Jub 7,26, after recalling the
75 Not one of them appears in the Jub fragments found at Qumran, see J.C. VANDERKAM,-The Jubilees Fragments from Qumran Cave 4s in Proceedings o f the Madrid Congress on h e DSS (forthcoming).



entrance in the ark, the narrative changes suddenly to the first person. Jub 7.27-33 contain a series of prescriptions dealing with the blood and Jub 7,34-37 present the law of the first fruits. The final two verses, Jub 7,38-39, establish a chain of tradition: from Enoch to Methuselah, to Lamech, to Noah, transmitting all the prescriptions to their sons:
Because, thus, Enoch, the father of your father, commanded Methuselah, his his son. And Lameeh commanded son, and Methuselah (commanded) Lam* v e r y t h i n g which his fathers commanded him. And I am commanding you, me e my song just as Eaoch commanded his son in the first jubilees. While he was alive in hi seventh generation, he wmmanded and bore witness to hi s o w and his grandsons until the day of his death.

The second text, Jub 10,l-15 deals with actions after the deluge and immediately before the death of Noah. The demons begin to lead astray the descendants of the patriarch who therefore rush to their father. In response to Noah's prayer the Lord gives orders to his angels to fetter the demons. But as a result of the intervention of their leader Mastema, a tenth of them are not bound. To prevent them from harming Noah's sons, the angels explain to the Patriarch the remedies extracted from herbs against all sorts of ailments. Noah writes them down and hands his book to Sem, his oldest son. In contradistinction to Jub 7,20-39 in which a literary factor enables us to distinguish the interpolation, the vocabulary, the style and the ideas of this second passage contain no literary features different from the rest of the book. The wording of the action of these demons against Noah's descendants, -leading astray and binding and killing his grandchildren*, recalls the action of the Watchers in I Enoch 15.11, a text to which an allusion is made in Jub 10,s: *And you know that which your Watchers, the fathers of these spirits, did in my days*. Expressions such as 'children of perdition', 'evil spirits', 'spirits of the living', are characteristic of Jub. Mastema, the leader of the spirits, reappears in the history of Abraham, (Jub 11.5.11; 17.16; 18,9.12), of Jacob (Jub 19,28), of Moses (Jub 48,2.9.12), although the texts fluctuate between the reference to Mastema, as the leader of the demons, and the allusion to the leader of the Mastemoth, the Demons. The only reason to attribute the fragment to the Book of Noah is its correspondence with the Sefer Noah (or, to be more accurate, with



the Book of Asaf the Jew, which, together with the Book of Faziel, and the Book o the Mysteries, forms the trilogy edited as Sefer Noah by 76 JELLINEK ), a late midrash that is connected with the Hekhaloth literature and whose dependence on the text of Jub seems to me evident. Once the knowledge of the Book of Noah by the author of Jubilees has been established because of the reference made to it in 21,lO and its literal quotation in 7,20-39, it seem. correct to postulate its influence in those cases in which the origin of the Noachic traditions in Jubilees cannot otherwise be traced. Such a case is the text of Jub 5,6-11, which narrates the damnation of the Watchers and their progeny. The pericope is not influenced by I Enoch because there ( I Enoch 1412-13) it is precisely stated that the watchers and their progeny will be chained for 70 while here it is said that they will be chained for ever. Nor is Jub 5,8, where their age is limited to 120 years, dependent on I Enoch. A similar limit to their age appears in a fragment preserved by Syncellus, purportedly taken from athe first book of Enoch on the ;but the correspondent text is not found in I Enoch, Watchers, ' neither in the Ethiopic version nor in the Greek one, and MIUK, in whose opinion the quotation has been taken from the Book of ~iants?~ has , demonstrated that Syncellus could include works of different origin in one and the same colophon. Both in Syncellus and in Jub the age limit refers exclusively to the descendants of the Watchers, while in Gen 6.3, it refers to all men; therefore, a direct provenance of the tradition found in Jub 5,s from the biblical text must be excluded. In my opinion, its origin may very well go back to the Book of Noah. Jub 5.24-28 seems to constitute a similar case. After a typical digression on the Heavenly Tablets and the Judgement, and the continuation of the biblical narrative that had been interrupted by placing it in the chronological context proper to Jubilees, there appears a description of the deluge in Jub $24-28. That this passage is not a simple poetical extension of the text of Genesis seems to be proved

" A. JEUINEY Beth ho-Midrash, Vol. 1V (1857), 155-156. C!. the eramaic text of Q Q E iv ~ 10-11 ~ for v. 12 and 4(/=FnC v 1 fpr v. 13. er rou x p d r o u $ t $ ~ i o u 'EvGX s s p \ r;v 'Eypqyopov, MOSSIJAMMER's edition, 11. 79 1 7 1 ~ Books of Enoch, 319.



by the mention of Mount Lubar, one of the mountains of Ararat, as the site where the ark comes to rest. This mount reappears again as the site where Noah resides and plants his vineyard (Jub 7,l) and as a place near which Ham, Japhet and Shem build up their cities (Jub 7,17). The mention of Lubar does not appear in the fragmentary text of 1QapGn col. X, but it daes in col. XII, which implies the existence of a common tradition. The same could be said about Jub 6,2-4, which describes the sacrifice of Noah when he leaves the ark in terms which are only paralleled in IQupGn X13: ccand I atoned for the whole earth*, X,15 *and I burned frankincense on the altar,,. Jub 8,lO-9,15 is a more complex case. The text deals basically with the partition of the earth among the sons of Noah. The muddled state of the text and the uncertainty as to a great many of the geographical names prevent us obtaining a clear idea of the territories assigned to each of the sons of Noah and of their later distribution among their progeny. But the reference of Syncellus which makes the partition of the earth an important part of the Noachic work, and the remnants of col. XVI and XVII of ZQapGn, which have preserved part of the same partition, lead us to attribute these chapters of Jub to the influence of the Book of A'oaltsu. If our identification hypothesis is correct, the Book of Noah must, according to the traces left in Jubilees, among other items have dealt with: - the fall of the Watchers, without making any allusion to their task as instructors (Jub 7,21-24) - the punishment of the Watchers and their descendants (Jub 5.611) - the deluge (Jub 5,24-28) - the sacrifice of Noah (Jub 6,2-4) - prescriptions concerning blood (Jub 6,lO-14 and 7,27-33) - prescriptions concerning the first fruits (Jub 7,34-37) - the partition of the earth among Noah's children (Jub 8,9-9.25).

A detailed study of lQapGn XlX,ll-12.15-19, where we find a description of the territory promised to Abraham, could show that these ideal frontiers of the promised land correspond with the territory allotted to Arpachshad in Jub 9,4, the most important part of Shem's portion in Jub 8,12-16.21.





C. Noachic materials at Qumran From the use made of IQapGn to check the traditions of Jubilees it is clear that in my opinion the text of the Genesir Apocryphon cols. IXVII contains a summary of the lost Book of Noah which is independent of Jubilees. Considering that the majority of the investigators believe that IQupGn is dependent on /ub8', I find it necessary to present a brief justification of m y opinion. A first elementary, but essential observation is that our knowledge of IQupGn I-XVII is very limited and selective, since the editors, given the reading difficulties, with the exception of col. 11, only produced a transcription of those passages whose reading and understanding were facilitated by precise parallels in Jub and I ~ n o c h ~ . Therefore the dependence of IQapGn upon Jub cannot be established on the basis of these selected elements. But these partial elements indicate also that both writings depend on a common source, which is more reliably reproduced in IQupGn than in Jub. Let me give an example: when speaking about the partition of the earth among the sons of Noah, Jub mentions in 8,21 Mount Asshur, in the North, together with Mount Senir and Amanus, and in 9,s it refers to Mount Asshur and the land of Ararat. In both cases, the mountains of Asshur can only be Mount Taurus: K l i n 7 lu of IQapGn XVI1,lO. This mistake, considered as such, could be attributed to the translator, but is difficult to understand when taking the Hebrew (the original language of Jub) as a point of departure. It is quite clear, though, if we assume that the mistake must have originated during the translation of an Aramaic source, because in Aramaic 1 i n K is a late form of Asshur. In my opinion, this mistake was made by the author of Jub, who had misinterpreted the source from which he drew his inspiration for writing these chapters, the Aramaic Book of Noah. This is not the w e of IQupGn, which also preserves the archaic forms in other geographical terms, such as 1 lwx and 717in,in column XVIIB.

This is the position strongly defended by JA. RTLMYER, 771e Genesis Apoctyp 19712),16-19, who summarises the opinions of others and the relevant bibliographical references. See N. AVIGAD-Y. YADIN, A Genesis Apocryphon: A S c d fmm the Wilderness o f Judaeo (Jerusalem 1956). 18-22.
hon o f Qummn Cow I (Roma



Another example of a different nature: IQqpGn VI/7 and XII.17 use the divine title K 7 n W iI15 which never appears in Jub, although it shows a great variety of divine titles. Among them God of Heaven (Jub 12.4; 20.7) and Lord of the World (Jub 2523) are the most similar ones to the Lord of Heaven. This title, however, is found in I Enoch 106,11, in a summary of the Book o f Noah, not elsewhere in I Enoch. In the same line, the elaborations of IQupGn I1 relative to the birth of Noah are not simple embellishments of its author but are drawn from the source used, as prwed by the parallel I Enoch 106. Jub 4,223, which mentions Noah's birth in conformity with the text of Gen 5.29, knows the same source, since it gives Noah's mother the same name (Bitenos) as IQapGn 113.8.12. a name which does not appear in the summary of I Enoch. In conclusion, I think that in the case of IQapGn I-XVII one may postulate the use of the Book of Noah as a source of inspiration for all traditions that have no other parallel than Jub, since both go back to a common source. Col. I, or those which preceded it, must have described Noah's birth, since col. I1 gives us a detailed account of Lamech's doubts regarding the paternity of the child, his appeal to Methuselah and the consultation of Methuselah with Henoch in order to dispel those doubts. Columns 11-Vcontained Enoch's response and its transmission to Larnech by Methuselah. Col. VI would have narrated the life of Noah before the deluge, since he already appears there as the main character and the narrative takes an autobiographical turn that is maintained at least until col. XII. Columns VII-IX described the deluge, which finishes in col. X with Noah's sacrifice. Col. X I referred to God's covenant with Noah and to the prohibition on drinking blood. Col. XI1 must have enumerated Noah's progeny, as indicated by the remnants of lines 10-11. The episode of the vineyard and the vine starts in line 13 and is narrated in the first details that are not present in Gen 9.20-21 or in J u bzrson, . Theygiving must have been followed by Noah's instructions to his sons in columns

83 The text of lines 13 to 19 of this col. XI1 has been published and studied for the fmt time by M. KISIER, *Some Aspects of Qumranic Halakha-, forthcoming in the P n x e e o ~ f the Y W Congnss on the DSS. For KIstER, Jubikcs and the Genesis Aporryphon unquestionably stem from a common source-.



XIII-XV, which end with the distribution of the land between them (col. XVI-XVII). Before ending the enquiry as to the traces left by the Book of Noah in other writings, it seems advisable to include three small manuscripts of Qumran related to this literature: IQ19, lQ20 and IQ19. The editor, MILIK,entitles this Hebrew manuscript ccLivre de N&r and organises the fragments according to a hypothetical order in four groups which would respectively deal with the description of the moral state of men (fragment 1); the mediation by the four archangels (fragment 2); the birth of Noah (fragments 3-11)@ and the canticle of Methuselah (?) (fragments 1 2 - 2 1 ) ~ ~ . Of all the fragments only numbers and 15 have a certain length. lheir contents perfectly match the data collected on the Book of Noah: Fragments 1 and 2, with the description of the fall of the Watchers brought about by the deluge ( I Enoch 106,13-15; Jub 7,2124; 5,6-11); fragment 3 with the birth of Noah ( I Enoch 106 and IQapGn 11); fragments 13 and 15 seem to bring the last part of col. i of 4QMes Ar to a happy end. IQ20. The manuscript is certainly a part of IQapGn and at least fragment 1 preceded the actual col. 11. Unfortunately the text preserved is so brief and presents so many reading problems that one cannot be sure of its contents. The two legible phrases which make sense in col. i of fragment 1: ccla fureur de ton indignation, (line 2). ccEt maintenant, voici: j'ui opprimt les prisonniersu (line 3). and line 2 of fragment 2, ccet frapp6s par derriere...^, suggest the existence of a text dealing with punishment which could be linked with the fallen angels. This would indicate that in the summary of IQapGn, the description of the punishment of the angels was also included and preceded the wonderful birth of the hero.


MIurt, 77te Book o f Enoch, 269, has connected frag. 8 and 3, adding in this way the mention of Methuselah (flag. 8,2) to the description of the birth of the hero. 8 6 For my part, I propose to separate frag. 14 from frag. 13, erroneously l i e d by the editor, as shown by the interlinear space of 14,l which does not correspond to the one of frag. 13. I would place howcver frag. 15, recanstmeting l i . 3 as follows: 113 13 > K '3 ' 1 '[fl3] 1In3 1 3 3 '1, -he will be glorified with the cboscn ones, because God r e a l m . The fragments so liked together offer a good parallel and complement to 4QMess Ar i, 10-13.

" Published in DID I, 84-87. 152, PI. XVI-XVII,and DJD 111, 116-119, PI. XXIV.




6Q8. To these two manuscripts should be added, in my opinion,

6Q8, an Aramaic text of which 33 fragments have been preserved, although only the first is of a certain length. M I L I K ~pretends to see in it a copy of the Book of Giants, but it is difficult to accept his reading of lines 1 and 5. The contents of fragment 1 speak well for its

Noachic ascription, as it describes a marvellous birth; this thesis is

also favoured by the mention of Baraki'el, brother of Methuselah and

father of Bitenos, the wife of Lamech according to Jub 4.28, as well as the mention of Jared (see 1 Enoch 106.3; 1QapGn In,13) in fragment 18, and the mention of Lubar (a possible although uncertain reading) in fragment 26. In any case, we cannot learn much from the text, apart from the presence of Baraki'el at the side of his daughter Bitenos when Noah is born.

Summarising all the collected data, I think that the approximate scheme of the lost Book of Noah contained the following elements in this order: 1) A description of the fall of the Watchers and of its disastrous consequences for mankind at the mythical level of Gen 6'1-4 (i.e. prior to the introduction of the motif of the angels who instruct humanity) although much more developed and probably including the myth of Leviathan and Behemoth. See Jub 7,21-24; 5,6-11; fragment of the Chronography of Syncellus; 1Q19 1.2; 1Q20; 1 Enoch 60.7-10.24. 2 ) A description of Noah's marvellous birth, the doubts it gives rise to, the resolution of these doubts thanks to the appeal to Enoch, who foretells Noah's future and his salvation from universal punishment. See 1 Enoch 106-107; 1QapGn I-V; 6Q8 1; 1Q19 3-11. 3) An autobiographical account of Noah's life before the deluge, which included the angels' prediction of the flood. See IQapGn VI; 1
Emit 10,l-3. 4) The narrative of the deluge and the salvation of Noah. See Jub 5,24-28; IQapGn VII-IX.

* The Bwkc of Enoch, 300-301.309,



5) Noah's sacrifice after the deluge and his covenant with God, of which an important part is devoted to the prescriptions concerning blood deriving from this covenant and other instructions of Noah to , ! I his sons. See Jub 6,2-4; 6.10-14; 73-37; IQapGn X-XV. Test. & Mount Athos. 6) The work came to an end with the partition of the earth among the sons of Noah. See Jub 8,9-9,15; IQapGn XVI-XVII; Chronography of Syncellur. It possibly also included a reference to another Noachic writing, a medical treatise on the healing properties of some herbs. See Jub 10,12-14. Within this general scheme 4QMa Ar can be seen in a new light and a new perspective. As long as the other manuscripts of the work remain unpublished, it will be impossible to ascertain whether this ms. is an actual copy of the lost Book o f Nouh or a summary of it, as are the other texts studied; but, in any case, it does contribute a new element that was missing in the other witnesses of the work: Noah's initiation into the ancestral wisdom through the reading of the uthree books* and the influence of this initiation on his later life. 4QMa Ar is spontaneously placed before the beginning of the autobiographical account since even the hero's youth and all the events related to him are presented in a future perspective. The fragment places himself after the description of the wonderful birth of the hero, since the child is already present and all his bodily marks can be observed. This is not part of the birth itself, because the doubts as to paternity and the consultation with Enoch would then have no sense. Therefore, a new element must be added between elements 2 and 3 of the scheme of the lost book. An. unknown character (perhaps Methuselah, after disclosing the result of his embassy to Henoch ? Or Lamech, the father, once he has been appeased as to the origin of the child and has been informed of his future destiny ?) gives a detailed description of the newborn and predicts his future life: his initiation into the ancestral wisdom, his knowledge of the secrets of men and his election by God who will foil all the attacks on him (co1.i) (see also 1Q19, 13 and 15) and, of course, the essential fact of his salvation from the deluge brought about by the sins and faults of the angels (col. ii).


CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE ARAMAIC ENOCH FRAGMENTS TO OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE BOOKS OF ENOCH After a long period of waiting on the part of the researchers, whose interest had been stimulated by the partial publication of some fragments', the Aramaic texts of the Books of Enoch of Qumran Cave 4 were edited by MILIKin 1976'. Despite the criticisms which MILIK'S publication did not fail to arouse3, this edition of the Enochic texts from the Qumran library has given a great impetus to the study of apocryphal literature and has given rise to a flood of publications on this theme4. The 135 introductory pages to the edition of the texts in which MIUK studies the problem of the origin, formation and devel-

Grotte 4 de Qumrh*, RB 65 (1958), M n , aProbl&mesde la litttraturc hCnochique la lum2re des fragments aramtens de Qumrbnr, HTR 64 (1971), 333-378. J.T. MlUy with the coUaboralion of M. BLACJC, 7hc Bwkc of E n d . Ammaic Fragyus of Qurnndn Cave 4 (Word 1976). The most signiicant a i t i d reviews are the following: J. BARR,in ITS 29 (1978), 517-530, A.M. DmS, in Lc Mu~Con90 (19T7). 462-469, P. GRfXOT, in RB 83 (1976), 605-618; G.W.E NICKEUBURG, in CBQ 40 (1978), 411-419; R. S n m e L , in ByMttinaclavica 39 (1978). 63-67; E. ULLeFlWRFP and M. W m , in BSOAS 40 601-602. To these reviews a certain number of studies, which arc pradicaiiy "review-articles",need to be addcd: JA. F~ZMYER, *Implications of the New Enoch Literature from Qumran*, TS 38 ( l w , 332-345; J.C. GREEWFlELD M.E. STONE, -The Books of Enoch and the Traditions of En&. Nwnen 26 (1979), 89-1M; M. SOKOLOPP, *Notes on the Aramaic Fragments of Enocb from Qumran Cave 41, Maarav 1 (19778-79). 197-U4, M. STOW, -The Book of Enoch and Judaism in the Third Century BCE*, CBQ 40 (1978), 479-492; J.C. VANDERKAM, &me Major Issues on the Contemporary Study of 1 Enoch: Reflections on J.T. M i l i s 7he B& I$ Enodtr, M m 3 (I=), 85-97. The criticism of these studies concerns the way in which the Aramaic evidence has been prwcntcd as well as the hypothetical character of some of the presuppositions that underlie MIUK'Spresentation of the evidence: low valuation of the Uhiopic translation, late origin of the Boo&o j Pomblu, dependence o f Gen 6,14 upon 1 E m h 6-19, relationship of the Enochic material with the late Jewish literature, Me. See F. G A R ~hA h R 7 l N E 7 . EJ.C. TlGoreLAAR, *1 E n d and the F i e of Eaocb. A Bibliography of Studies 1970-19%. RQ 14/53 (1989). 149-176. For a m WOUDE, *Fiinkbn Jahre synthetic review of the literature, see A.S. VAN D Oumraaforscbung (1974-1988)*, Thedogirche Rwrdrchau 54 (1989), 250-2.59.

3 2 (1951), 393-100, aHtnoch au Pays des Aromates. Fragments arameens de la

' J.T. MIUK, *The Dead Sea Scrolls Fragments of the Book of Enoch*, Biblica





opment of the Enochic literature, its different versions and, even, the evolution of this literature up to the Middle Ages, have influenced the particular interests of researchers during the last fifteen years and have brought about a new approach to the study of apocalyptic literature. In the following pages I will try to present systematically the most important contributions of the Aramaic fragments to our understanding of the literary components (or rather originally independent Books of E n o c h ~ or 1Enoch, surveying at works) that constitute <<The the same time, the most significant publications on this topic?. The Enochian manuscripts found in Qumran Cave 4 are eleven. Four of them are designated with the symbols l ~ E n a r t P ~ because ~*"~ their contents bear upon chs.71-82 of the Ethiopic Enoch, which has for a long time been considered as an independent work6. The other ~ corre* ~ ~ ~ ~ seven manuscripts are known by the sigla 4 ~ ~ n ~and spond to the other parts of the Ethiopic Enoch, with the exception of chs. 37-71, the Book of Parables, of which no remnants have been found in Qumran. The approximate dates when those manuscripts were copied range from the beginning of the 2nd century B.C. to the first half of the 1st century A.D., the period to which the latest manuscript of the Astronomical Book, 4QEn&, may be dated. As it seems, 4QEn0 and 4QEnb, from the beginning and the middle of the 2nd century B.C., ori 'nally contained only the first Book of Enoch, the Book of Watchers . 4QEnC,dating from the end of the 1st century AD., is the longest manuscript and the one from which most elements have reached us. It apparently contains remnants of the Book of WutcIters (chs. 1-5, 6, 1012, 13-14, 18, 30-32 and 35-36), the Book of Dreams (ch. 89) and the

For a critical assessment of the latest translations and commentaries of I Enoch published after MIUK's book in the light of the Aramaic fragments, see F. GARCIA MAR~NEZ - EJ.C. T l c i C i t E t ~ ~ R *The , Books of E n & (1 Enoch) and the Aramaic Frapents from Qumran*, RQ 14/53 (1989), 149-174. Sice R.H. C H A W me Book o f Enoch or I Enoch (Word 1912). xli-1 and 147-lM, who gave these chs, the title r b k of the Heavenly Luminaries*. According to MIUK (me B o d u of Enoch, 6 and 1 3 9 ) , 4QEna would have preserved remnants of chs. 1-12; as a matter of fact, the fragments permit us to reconstruct only part of chs. 1-9. The traces corresponding to ch. 10 are very uncertain, and tbose corresponding to ch. 12 are practically non-existent. 4 ~ ~according n ~ , to MIUK (me Books of Enoch, 6 and 164), would contain remnants of chs. 1-14, but the elements actually presemd only permit us to remnstrud parls of chs. 6-10.





of Enoch (chs. 104-107), together with another Enochic work that was formerly unknown: the Book of Giants. 4 Q ~ n and ~ 4QEne, from the end and the beginning, respectively, of the 1st century B.C., contain, both of them, remnants of the Book of Watchers and the Book of Dreams (chs. 22-23, 26 and 89 in 4 Q ~ n ~ , and of chs. 22, 29, 31-34, 88 and 89 in 4QEne). 4 Q ~ d consists of only one fragment, with remnants of ch. 86, but this is a manuscript dating back to the middle of the 2nd century B.C. which makes it particularly interesting as evidence of the date of composition of the Book of Dreams. 4QEng, from the middle of the 1st century B.C., has left us substantial remnants of chs. 91-94, including the ccApocalypse of Weeks* which is part of the the Epistle of Enoch. Despite the fact that each of these manuscripts (except 4 ~ ~ d ) consists of a great number of fragments, almost always of a very small size, it is possible briefly to describe its contents in comparison with the Ethiopic version, the only one which has transmitted to us a complete text of the different works associated with the figure of the patriarch Enochs. We start our discussion with the Astronomical Book9, since the fragments recovered suggest that this composition is the oldest to have sought refuge under the mantle of the patriarch and circulated under the cover of his name.

A single reading of chs. 72-82 of the Ethiopic Enoch is sufficient for us to understand that we have before us something quite different from the rest of the writings ascribed to Enoch. The Ethiopic text (the

Besides MILIK'S edilion, the Aramaic fragmcnts haw been edited and translated A Mmuol o f Palestinian Ammaic T c r l s by JA. FKZUYeR - DJ. HARRINGTON, ( S a d Certtury B.C. - Second Century A.D.) (Biblica et Orientalia 34) (Roma 1978), 64-79 and in K. B w e q Die mmUiscItetl Ture wm Torrn Meer (Gatingcn lW), ?32-258. They have also been separately translated into Spanish by E. MARTINEZ BOROBIO, -Fragmcntos aramcar de Henac*, in: A. D l a U s a i o (ed.), Apbcrifm dcl Anu'gw Tesrummto. Vol. IV (Madrid 1984). 295-325, and into Italian by L. Rosso UBIGW,aFrammenti aramaia di Henoeh-, in P. SACCHI (ed.), Apourp &ll*Antico Testamento (Torino 1981). 671-723. A handy study edition of the Aramaic fragments of the &tronomicd Bodc is the one prepared by U. GurssMeq -Das astronomische Henochbuch ah Studienobjehr, Biblirche Notizen 36 ( 1 9 8 1 ) ,69-129.



Greek version has practically disappeared1') consists of a mixture of astronomical and geographical elements and of moral and apocalyptic insights. Enoch passes on to his son Methuselah the revelations disclosed to him by Uriel as to the sun, the moon, the stars, the winds, the cardinal points and the heavenly orbit. Those instructions are followed by chs. 80-81, of a clearly apocalyptical character, which are also presented as Uriel's revelations transmitted by Enoch to Methuselah. The incomplete and muddled character of the Ethiopic text had already been recognised and emphasised by the scholars before the discovery of the Aramaic fragments. CHARLES" upholds the view that the Astronomical Book or Book of the Courses of the Heavenly Luminaries was originally composed of chs. 72-79 and 82, in the order 72-78, 82 and 79, with two clearly different interpolations, chs. 80 and 81. To this opinion, which is to prevail among the corn men tat or^'^, MARTIN will add that ch. 77, whose geographical contents appear odd to him within an astronomical context, is also an interpolation13. The Aramaic manuscripts have not justified MARTIN in this point, d and 4QEna.stf 1 ii contain remnants of since, although 4 ~ ~ n a .23 ch. 77, they have strengthened the suspicion that the Ethiopic text is not precisely a reflection of the original work. A recent study of the astronomical chapters of 1 Enoch has led NEUGEBAUER'~ to surmise that the extant Ethiopic text is composed of two different and modified versions of the same material, with the addition of several other fragmentary pieces. Chs. 72-76 and 77-79,l would represent these two versions, with remnants of other additional versions in chs. 79.2-80,l and of another different source in ch. 82. The fact that chs.

(1971), 321-343, has identified the papyrus Oxy. XWI 2609 frag. 3, as containing the remains of a Greek translation of I Enoch n,7-78.1 (verso) and 1Enoch 788 (recto). The B w k of Enoch, 148-149. l2 See F. CORRIEKIE and A. P~@Ro, ~Libro 1 de Henow, in: A. Drez ~ ~ A C H O (ed.), Apbcrifos del Antiguo Testamento IV, 18-19 and S. UHUG, Das dwu'opische Henochbuch (JSHRZ V/6) (Giitersloh 1984),635-637. l3 F. MARTIN, LC Liwe d'HPnoch (Paris 1906). bmiv.

J.T. MlU& -Fragments grecs du iivre d'HCaoch-, Chmnique d' Egypfe 92


" ' 0 . NPNGEBAUER, The 'RFlronomical' Chapters of the Ethiopic h o k of E n d (72-82). Tmnsliuion and CMvnmmry. W i l h Additional Notes on rhe Aramoic Fnrg m e n u by M. Black (KDVS @lo) (Copenhagen 1981) 45. This book has been reproduced without significant variations as Appendix A, in hi. BUCK, Thc Boo& o f Enoch or I Enoch. A New En$irh Edition (SVTP 7 ) (Leiden 1985). 3 1 9 [refercnccs on pp. 386-387). This edition being the most easily accessible, we will refer to it in the following pages.




80.2-82,3 have no link whatever with the Astronomical Book is, in NEUGEBAUER'S opinion, so obvious that he does not bother either to translate or to discuss these chapters in his work, and confines himself to defining them as an "intrusion of non-astronomical material: apocalyptic"1S. NEUGEBAUER deems that the Astronomical Book is not the result of an author's or a redactor's work, but the accumulation, through several generations of scribes, of different versions of the teachings on the structure and the laws of the cosmos prevailing in their community. But this conception of the Ethiopic text has not prevailed in spite of the fact that NEUCEBAUER is a well reputed authority on astronomical themes, and the latest study on the subject" conceives the original work as that of an author who is familiar with the previous Enochic traditions, whether oral or written. This original work would be contained in chs. 72-78; 82,9-20; 78 and 82,143 of I Enoch. In other words, when it comes to understanding the original form of the Astronomical Book, one returns to CHARLES'S theory, with the modification introduced by BEER and MARTIN, who see in 82,l-8 the conclusion of the Astronomical Book; this would imply that the contribution of the Aramaic texts is, in fact, less significant and clarifying than was at first believed. As a matter of fact, the elements common to the Astronomical Book preserved in Ethiopic, and the Aramaic fragments that supposedly contain parts of the original composition of the work, are relatively few. Most of the fragments recovered contain remnants of a synchronistic 364-day calendar, which details the phases of the moon and its synchronism with the solar movements, as well as the passage of both heavenly bodies from one "gate" to the next one. This d e n dar is not found as such in the Ethiopic text. Day after day and month after month, the phases of the moon are described in a stereotyped manner, according to the intensity of the light and the movements of the sun. In view of the method of description adopted and the triennial cycle meant to be covered, the calendar must have been exceedcalculates a minimum ingly long. For the first 12 months only, MILIK

Cfr. 0 . NEUGERAUER, op. cir.. 388. The same in p. 411: "intrusion of nonastronomical material: apocalyptic and again concluding words to Methuselah". I6 J.C. VANDERKAM, Enoch and tlte Growth o f on Apocofyplic Trodition (CBQ Monograph Series 16) (Washington I%), 105. Ch. IV of this book, ~Enochand Astronomical Revelationt. (pp. 76-109) is completely dcdicatcd to thc Asrmomiurl Book.




of 27 columns in 4Q~nasd'. All fragments of 4 Q ~ n C u t f "and ~ a sizable number of the fragments of 4QEnastP correspond to the description of the calendar, with no parallel in the Ethiopic text. The and 4QEnastf correspond to different texts of chs. rest of ~ Q E M ~ P 76-79 and 82 of the Ethiopic text, although they frequently have a longer and more intricate text which is evidence of the synoptic preserves P remnants of character of the Ethiopic version. # Q E ~ ~ three columns which should continue the text of ch. 82,20, that is, the end of the Ethiopic Enoch. The Ethiopic version describes only spring and summer, while the first column of 4QEnu.d contains a description of the winter and proceeds with the movement of the stars. Although the common elements are very few and the correlations not always accurate, they are indeed convincing enough to force the acceptance of the identification made by the editor. But MILIK goes beyond a simple identification of the fragments showing a harmony between the Ethiopic and the Aramaic texts. According to him, there is no doubt that both the elements preserved in Aramaic but absent from the Ethiopic text (at the beginning and the end of the work) and those extant in the Ethiopic version but of which no remnants have been found in the Aramaic fragments (chs. 72-75 and, above all, 8081) belong to one and the same work, the first of the Enochic Pentateuch. This primitive work is supposed to have contained all the astronomical material as well as the narrative framework in which Enoch received the astronomical knowledge from an angel and transmitted that knowledge to Methuselah. Basing himself on the testimony of the Book of Jubilees (4,1718)18, which would contain, according to him, a summary of the
l7 Thew fragments of the oldest ms. have not yet been published. The only information MIUK givcs concerns the paleographic daling, a general description of the contents, and some observations concerning their orthography, 7he Baokr o f

Enoch, 273.
Of the 14 copies of Jub found at Qumran only 1lQJuh has preserved the beginning of thii text dearly separated from the preceding unit, see A.S. VAN DER W o u n e ~Fragmcntedes Buches Jubilaen aus Qumran Wohle XI (llQJub)*, in: G . JEREMIAS, H.W. KUIIN, H. STEGIIMANN (eds.), Tradition wrd GIaube. Dm friihe Christenaim itr seiner UtrrwN (Giittingcn 1971), 140-146, Plate Vllf. For a complete list of the Jrrb materials found at Qumran, see J.C: VANDERKAM, *The Jubilees Fragments from Qumran Cave 4*, forthcoming in the Proceedit~gsof tlte Ma&d C o n p s s an the Dead Sea Sc&. The text is attested in one of the Syriae fragments published by E. TISSERANT, *Fragments syriaques du Livre des J u b i l h , RB 30 (IMl), 58-86, 206-232. For a study on the Enoch traditions of thii fragment, see J.C. VA~DERKAM, *Enoch Traditions in Jubilees and Other Second-Century Sources*, in




Astronomical Book presented as the first of the Enochic works known

to the author, MILIK incorporates within this textual framework both the new elements stemming from the Aramaic texts and those recorded in the Ethiopic version. The text of Jubilees reads as folIOWS'~:

This one was the first who learned writing and knwledgc and wisdom, from (among) the sons of men, from (among) those who were born upon earth. And who wrote in a book the signs of the heaven according to the order oZ their months, so that the sons of man might know the (appointed) times of the years according to their order, with resped to each of their months. T h i s one was the first (who) wrote a testimony and testified to the children of men throughout the generations of the earthm. And their weeks according to jubilees he recounted; and the days of the years he made known. And the months he set in order, and the sabbaths of the years he recounted, just as we made it known to him.

According to this description, the first part of the work would consist of a detailed calendar, partially recovered in ~ramaic". This would be followed by a description of the movements of the sun and the moon, based on this calendar (chs. 72-75 of I Enoclz from which nothing has been preserved in Aramaic, and chs. 76-79, which do have a correspondence). The testimony would correspond, according to MILIK, to the ethical and apocalyptic part, that is, to chs. 80 and 81, of which nothing has appeared in Qumran. In the last part of the quotation MILIK is inclined to see an allusion to a series of works of Cave 4, but it would not be impossible to trace a remnant of it in ch. 82 and in the continuation of this chapter, as attested in the fragments of 4 ~ ~ i t a r r P . MILIK recognises that ch. 81 was written significantly later than the date of composition of the calendar and the other astronomical and geographical elements, and points out its possible dependence on the

SBL 1978 Sentittar Popen. Vol. I (Misoula 1978), 228-251. l9 In the translation of O.S. W~NIERWU~:, *Jubilees*, in: J.H. C~-tnru.wwo~n~ (ed.&771r Old Tescama~c Pseudepigmpha. Vol. 2 (Garden City 1985). 62. The translation of CW. RABIN, .Jubilees*, in: H.F.D. SPARKS(ed.), The Apocwhol Old Tesconte~~r (Oxford 1984), 23, is more explicit at this point: "And he was the first to write a testimony, and he warned the sons of men about what would hap~n in future generations on the earth". According to MlLIK (77le Books of Enoch, 273), 1 Enoch 72.1 - 74,9 would contain a summary of this calendar. 40317, published partially by MlUK on pp. 68-69 of the same work, offers a nice parallel to this sort of calendar in Hebrew, see F. GARCIA MARTIXD; -Panorama Critico (I)*, EsfBibl45 (1987). 201-202.



Book of D r e w , which leads him to uphold the view that this chapter was written a little later than the year 164 B.C. In any case, in MILIK'S opinion, it was already incorporated in the copy of the Astronomical Book which the author of the Book of Jubilees used as a basis for its description. Thus, according to MILIK, an Enochic apocryphal text would have existed at least at the end of the 3rd century B.C., possessing an astronomical and geographical character to which the apocalyptic part would already have been added by the middle of the 2nd century B.C. The first version of the work could have had a Samaritan originn, and would have been known to the author This author attests not only to the known as pseudo-~u~olemus~~. existence of the work and its astronomical contents, but also to its narrative background: Enoch receives his astronomical learning from an angel and transfers it to Methuselah so that the latter may reveal this knowledge to posterity. The later version, which includes the apocalyptic elements, would have been used by the author of the Book of Jubilees. This last version would have been drastically revised and abridged by a Greek translator who would, thus, have laid the foundations of the Ethiopic version as known to us. At the opposite pole to this conception of the Astronomical Book as a homogeneous and complete work, stands the opinion of M. BLACK% who, on the basis of the analysis of the data provided by the Aramaic texts and of the interpretation of the Ethiopic text made by NEUGEBAUER, comes to the conclusion that the Astronomical Book of Enoch never existed as an independent work in Aramaic. According to him, the only material actually circulating at that time would have been a mass of astronomical, geographical, calendrical, and similar documents, parallel to the three extant Enochic works: the Book of Watciters, the Book of Dreams and the Epistle of Enoch. A subsequent Greek redactor would have summarised and adapted different elements of these materials and put them together, working out an Astronomical Enocii which he would have incorporated in the
Cfr. J.T. MII.IK, ntc Badtr o f Enoch, 9-10, but su: Ihc ohsetvations of J.C. GREEN~EW) M. STONE, 4 T h ~Books of Enoch and the Traditions of Enoch*, Numm 26 (1977), 95-98. Z3 Cfr. B. 2 . W A C I ~ O ~ E *'Pseudo R, Eupolemus': Two Greek Fragments on thc Life of Abraham*, in: Essays an Jcwirh Chrmdqey and Chmtqgmphy (New York 1976), 75-105. MIUK'Sintegration of the tcxt of Pseudo-Eupolcmus has been d i s c u s sed and discarded by GREFNRELD and S"TONE, art. cil., 92-95. 2.1 M. BLACK,7hc Book o f Enoch or I Enoch, 10-11.



corpus of the Enochic literature since Enoch was traditionally considered as the inventor of the calendar and the father of Astronom?. These two positions cannot be reconciled. The opposite results reached by the two authors are a consequence of their different treatment of the available data. MILIKbelieves that Pseudo-Eupolemus and the Book of Jubilees provide the framework within which the elements contributed by the Aramaic texts and those preserved in the Ethiopic version could have been integrated, and considers the evidence provided by Jub and Pseudo-Eupolemus as proof that both elements once indeed coexisted in a literary work. BLACKdenies the existence of such a work and considers the evidence offered by the Ethiopic version and the separate fragments found in Qumran as distinct elements without any connection. Since the Aramaic fragments correspond to the Ethiopic version only to a very limited extent, the theory of an Asrronomicai Book written in Aramaic could be easily disproved, so that the best explanation for the coexistence of common elements in Aramaic and Ethiopic would be to identify the former as independent material used by the editor responsible for the final redaction of the work. These two opposite positions stand as evidence that the task of analysing and assessing the testimony of the astronomical fragments and their connections with the Enochic literature is far from complete. In spite of this, I think that a number of sound conclusions have been reached in certain areas, and some of them have been properly emphasised in the studies published during the last decade. Other elementj may be deduced with relative certainty from the available data. In some cases, the insight gleaned from the manuscripts of Cave 4 permits us to clear up the items under discussion. In other cases, the new manuscripts have made us aware of new problems whose final solution is still outstanding. a) The first elements that the Aramaic fragments have stressed are the existence and the antiquity of a Enochic work of an astronomical
LS The position of BIACKis as clear cut as that of MIIJK:"It [the Asuunomicol Bwk] is manifestly an artificial, originally Greek, versional creation, translated and

extraded from a mass of original Aramaic material. There newr existed in Aramaic a third astronomical 'Book of En&, all that we in fad have is an abridged selection of calendrical and 'astronomical' translation pieces put together from the vast Aramaic corpus of such teas by some later editor", The Book oJ Enoch or I Enoch,




and geographical character. Its antiquity is directly deduced from the date of the oldest copy preserved (from the early 2nd century B.C.). The existence of the work as such seems to be demonstrated by the references made in Pseudo-Eupolemus and the Book of Jubilees. It is significant that BLACKdoes not even mention the text of PseudoEupolemus or Jub 4,17-18 in relation to the Astronomical Book. In fact, these two references would invalidate his hypothesis concerning the composition of the Astronomical Book as a recensional activity of Greek origin based on an informal mass of astronomical and geographical texts in Aramaic, or, at least, would compel us to accept that this recensional activity had already been carried out at the end of the 3rd century B.C. In other words, even if neither all details of MILIK'S reconstruction (and some of them are rather questionable) nor the complete form in which this author reshapes the lost original version are accepted, his basic postulate about the existence of a Enochic work of an astronomical character by the end of the 3rd century B.C. is correct and is confirmed by both testimonies%. Although Enoch's name does not appear in the Aramaic fragments that have been preserved, there are no solid grounds on which to conclude that this work was not attributed to him, in view of the similarity of the Ethiopic version and Pseudo-Eupolemus in this respect. b) Both the Ethiopic version and Pseudo-Eupolemus present the contents of the Astronomical Book as a revelation to Enoch that he transmits to his descendants. In the Ethiopic version, it is Uriel who passes on this revelation, whereas in Pseudo-Eupolemus this task is assumed by the angels. In both cases, the narrative context which prompts the astronomical and geographical elements is a revelation. The harmony of the two versions in this respect leads us to assume that such an element was a component of the original work, in spite of the fact that this narrative context appears only to a limited extent in the Aramaic fragments preserved to our daysZ7.
26 Although GREENFIELD and STONE question the opportuneness of using the Pseudo-Eupolemus argument, its pertinency has been demonstrated by VANDERKAM, op. cir., W8I. 27 The sentence of 76,14 has been reconstructed, both in 4QEnmt# 1 ii 14 and in 4 ~ ~ 23.2. n In d '78.10 the name of Uriel has not been preserved, and the syntax of the sentence is anything but clear, although the verb "he showed me" can indicate this narrative context. The only dear cut example in the Aramaic text of the context according to which the revelations are transmitted to Methuselah is 4Q~nacrP%,6:



c) The astronomical contents of the original work have their roots in the Mesopotamian traditions. VANDERKAM,who maintains that the geographical texts found in the Astronomical Book do not present the affinities with the well-known Babylonian world map2' that were has , gathered many clues all of suspected by GRELoT and M I L I K ~ ~ which purport to show that the astronomical erudition present in the Enochic book reflects but a primitive level of Mesopotamian astronconomy; those clues would, moreover, confirm NEUGEBAUER~ clusion that "the linear patterns for the variation of the length of daylight a. well as the ratio 2:l at its extrema suggest an early Babylonian backgroundw. A problem posed, but not solved, by NEUCEBAUER and by VANDERKAM results from the fact that the texts containing this body of astronomical knowledge (astrolabes, E m m a Anu Enlil, ""'$in) come from a period far earlier than the composition of the Astronomical Book, while the Babylonian texts of the Persian and Seleucid periods reflect a much mare sophisticated and complex knowledge. The reason the author of the Astronomical B w k resolved to use this archaic level of astronomical knowledge, and omitted the far more advanced and accurate systems proper to his period, constitutes one of the key questions raised by the Aramaic fragments that have remained as yet unresolved. d) Another element already fairly well demonstrated is that the original work included a synchronic calendar of 364 days in a far more elaborate and complete system than could be reasonably expected from the isolated references made in the Ethiopic text. The & ' ~ ~ ,contains both the key element in this respect is ~ Q E I Z ~ S ~ which remnants of the calendar and other texts corresponding to elements preserved in chs. 76-79 and 82 of the Ethiopic text. This calendar, eventually to be adopted by the Qumranic community, is the element
"And now, my son, I will show you", corresponding to 79.1. In the Qumran fragments, as in a good part of the Ethiopic mss., the name of Methuxlah has been omitted. J.C. VANDEWAM,-1 Enwh and a Babylonian Map of the World*, R Q 1 1 (1982-EM), 271-278. P. GWtDT, *La gbographie mythique d'HCnoch et ses sources orientalesm, RE 65 (1958). 33-69, and J.T. MIIJK, 7'he Books of Enoch, 15-18. 0. NEUGEBAUER, op. cil., 387. 31 This ms. has not been fully published yet. MIIJK asserts that most of its fragments belong to the synchronic calendar (rite Bodrr o f Et~oclt, 274), and, indeed, on P A M 42.234, 42.235 and 42.236 a good number of frags. of this synchronic calendar are preserved. Of these calendric frags. numbers 6 and 7 have been published; frags. 23, 25, 26 and 28, a h published, correspond to other sections of the Ethiopic Enoch.

" "



that has drawn the keenest attention from the researchers3*. Such a calendar is prior to and independent of the Qumran sect, a fact well established by the date of dQEnart?', the oldest copy of the calendar. the , data available do not allow us to According to V A N D E R K A M ~ ~ determine whether the calendar is sectarian or not. BECKWITH", on the contrary, believes that in view of its date of composition the calendar originated, no doubt, within the Essene or, to be more accurate, within the pre-Essene movement. Whatever hypothesis may be right, this detail is significant when it comes to analysing the motives that led the Qumranic community to sever its ties with official ~udaism~~. e) It is equally clear that the end of the original work has been cut off in the Ethiopic version. This circumstance had already been pointed out by the critics, since the Ethiopic text, after dealing with the four seasons of the year and the angels that rule them, considers only two of them in deeper detail, spring and summer. 4 ~ ~ n a s t 4 , with its winter description, has confirmed the critics' suspicions, and has, moreover, proved that such a description of the four seasons did not represent the very end of the work, as the reference made to
Specially of J.C. VANDERK~M who has dedicated scvcral publications to the calendric problems: *The Origin, Character and Early Hislory of the 364-Day Calendar: A Reassessment of Jaubert's Hypothcb, CBQ, 41 (1979), 390-411; a2 Maccabees 6,7a and Calcndrical Change in Jerusalem-, JSJ 12 (1981), 52-74; *The 364-day Calendar in the Enochic Literature*, in: SBL 1983 Seminor Papen (Chico 1983), 157-165.VANDERKAM'S central hypothesis has been criticiced by P.R. DAVIES, -Calendrical Change and Qumran Origins: An Assessment of VanderKam's Theory-, CBQ 45 (1983). 80-89. From a different pcrspcctive and with different results, the calendric problem has also been studied in a series of artides by R.T. B E C K W , -The Significance of the Calendar for Interpreting Esscne Chronology and Exhatologp, RQ 10 (1980-a), 167-202; -The Pre-History and Relationships of the Pharisees, Sadducecs and Esscnes: A Tentative Reconstruaionr, RQ 11 (1982-M), 3-46, *The Earliest Enoch Literature and its Calendar: Marks of their Origin, Date and Motivation*, RQ 10 (1980-82). 365-403. 33 "One cannot determine whether this calendar differed from the one employed in Jerusalem or whether it (with intercalation) was itself the one uscd there", -The %Day Calendar in the Enoehic Literature-, 163. Such circles could only be Essenc or pre-Esenc, and in view of the early date have to be pre-Essene", *The Earliest Enoch Literature and its Caicndatr, 385. Such a calendar appears, according to the editors, even in one of the copies of QQMMT,a text which explains the reason why the group separated from the rest of - J. S~UGNEU, 4 n Unpublished Halakhic Letter from Judaism. See E. QIMRON Qumran-, in: Biblical Arcl~aedqyToday (Jerusalem 1985), 400-407, and my study of these texts, ~Nuevostcxlos no b i b l i c ~procedentu dc Qumrkn ((I)-, EslBlbl 50 (1992) (forthcoming).





winter is followed by remnants of another two columns that seemingly delineate the movements of the stars and describe the vault of ~ fragment alone, without any heaven. But, since 4 ~ ~ n u .isw one correspondence with the other Aramaic fragments or with the Ethiopic version, and has, apart from its mention of the winter, no further links than its correlative position to ch. 82, it is quite impossible to view76, in which this fragment demondecide if VANDERKAM'S strates that 82,9-20 is out of place and should therefore be relocated before ch. 79, is correct or if, on the contrary, MILIK is right in assuming that the fragment contained the conclusion of the Astronomical Book that would finish with the description of the vault of heavenn. f ) It seems equally obvious that the original astronomical work did not contain chs. 80-81 of a strong apocalyptic flavour. Curiously enough, no scholar has drawn attention to the absence of these chs. in the Aramaic manuscripts of Cave 438. It is quite true, though, that, all things considered, this would only represent a purely negative proof, and that this omission may be perfectly well attributed to the accidents of transmission and to the deplorable condition in which the Aramaic fragments have reached us. But, in any case, this absence compels us to view the problem of these chapters in a new light and to abstain from extrapolating the testimony of the Qumranic fragments when it comes to dating the actual composition of the Astronomical Book, as it has become known to us through the Ethiopic version. The fact that 4QEnmt? must be dated at the end of the 2nd century B.C. is not a sufficient reason for automatically identifllng the Astronomical Book as the oldest Apocalypse, since neither this nor any of the other Qumranic manuscripts of later periods have presented any chapters that would justify the characterisation of the Astronomical Book as an apocalyptic work. As a matter of fact, we are facing here two different problems that should be clearly separated: the debatable apocalyptical character of the original work on the one hand, and the date of incorporation of chs. 80-81 in that work on the other.

J.C. VANDERKAM, Etroch and tlte Growh ojatt Apocalyptic Tradition, 82. J.T. MILIK,rite Books o j Ettocll, 8 and 297. Na even VANDERKAM, who amply discusses the influence of these chapters in the relationship of the Asrrortor?tical Book and the apocalyptic in Enoch and the Growrh of an Apoca&pfic Tradirion, 106-109.



Nobody has any doubts that the Astronomical Book preserved in Ethiopic is a true apocalypse39. It is quite another matter to ascertain whether the original work, known to us now in its broad outlines, deserves to be labelled as an apocalypse before the addition of chs. 80-81. The only author who has carefully studied this problem is VANDERKAM, and his conclusion seems to be, in my opinion, correct: the original work would contain many ingredients typical of any apocalypse, so that it could easily have been transformed into a genuine apocalypse by the subsequent editor who added chs. 80-81; considered in itself, though, the original version cannot be qualified as a true apocalypse, at least not in the sense in which this genre was defined by COLLINS~' in Semeia 14. As far as the date of the addition of chs. 80-81 is concerned, both MILIK and VANDERKAM surmise that they were incorporated after the composition of the Book of Dreams, whose influence on ch. 81 is demonstrable, and before the composition of Jubilees, at which date the book was already known in its complete form4', so that the chapters in question would have been composed in the middle of the 2nd century B.C. In my opinion, the first part of their argument is convincing, but the second part seems weaker. In other words, these chapters would not have been composed before the middle of the 2nd century B.C., but the exact date of composition after this limit is impossible to ascertain; given our current knowledge of the theme, it would appear impossible to fix, between that date and the 1st century A.D., the exact time of their composition. The absence of any references to the apocalyptic elements in the citation of Pseudo-Eupolemus attests that these were not incorporated in the primitive work at the end of the 3rd century B.C.; the dependence of these chapters on the Book of Dreams is an actual proof that their composition is later
j9 On the scientific interests of the "cosmic" apacalypses, see M.E. STONE, *Lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literaturem, in: F.M.CROSS, W.E.LEMKE, and 9 7 6 ) , 414P.D. MII.LER(cds.), Mapraiia Dei. 77re Mighty Acts of God (Garden City 1 452. On the narrative framework within which the revelations are transmitted as a characteristic of the apacalypses, see JJ. COLI.INS (cd.), Apocalypse. Tlte Morphology of a Genre (Scrneia 14) (Missoula 1979), 9. 40 "It is advisable not to label the original AB an apocalypse, though its scientific, non-eschatological contents include several traits that would later be found in apocalypses",J.C. VANDERKAM, Enoch and the Growtlr of an Apoca&ptic Tradition,

4' J.T. Mtt.1~.nie Bwks of Etroclt, Growlh of on Apocalypic Tradition, 107.

13-14 and J.C. VANDERKAM,Enoch and thc



than this Enochic work, i.e., that they could not have been composed and, still less, incorporated in the Astronomical Book before the middle of the 2nd century B.C. It would seem to me still more doubtful whether the author of Jubilees cited above had already known these chapters (this would fix their date of composition). The text of Jubilees we have mentioned may be interpreted and, in fact, has been interpreted in several ways4*. In any case, it would appear to me extremely difficult to deduce that the simple phrase: ((he was the first who wrote a testimonyn refers, as postulated by MILIK, precisely to the chapters in question. The author of Jubilees clearly alludes to the Book of Dreams in 4.19, where he repeats that Enoch *wrote his testimony,,, in the same manner as in 4.21-22 where he refers to the Book of Watchers, expressly stating that he did write everything and testified against the Watchers; this is, in my view, simply a proof that the author of Jubilees considers the three Enochic works he knows as a cctestimony,,, without the text being particularly informative as to whether the ~testimonys (the Astronomical Book) did or did not contain the apocalyptic chapters. In other words, it is impossible to prove that the incorporation of these chapters into the work had already been made during the period when Jubilees was composed. An indication that would allow us to establish a date prior to which the relevant chapters were already incorporated into the Astronomical Book would be the reference made to ch. 80 in the Letter of Jude found by O S B U R N ~ ~ But . this reference would take us into a period in which the Enochic texts were reinterpreted in Christian circles, and is not very useful as a dating element. All the above leads us to conclude that the dating of chs. 80-81 and their insertion into the Astronomical Book constitute an outstanding problem, not yet resolved by the new manuscripts where these chapters are not found. But, just as in the case of the calendar and of the Qumranic origin, the future importance of the elements put forward by the new manuscripts for detecting the transformation of the original Astronomical Book into a genuine apocalypse should not

42 Compare, for example, the interpretation offered by P. (;RELOT in his =Henoch et ses Ccritures-, RE 82 (1975), 451-500, with the one put forward by VANDEKKAM in hii eEnoch Traditions in Jubilees and Other Second-Century Sources*, 229-


C.D. OsBrw, -1 E n d

803-8 (765-7) and Jude

12-13-. CBQ 47 (1%).





be disregarded when the time comes for clarifying the intricate problem of the origins of apocalyptic.

In contrast to what happened with the Astronomical Book, the fragments of Cave 4 indicate that the contents, structure and extent of the Book of Watchers were substantially the same in Aramaic as in the Greek and Ethiopic versions. Nevertheless, the contribution of the new manuscripts may be considered essential because they have helped to demonstrate that this Enochic work, the oldest apocalypse, i s independent of and prior to the Antiochene crisis, even in the form in which it has become known to us through the Greek and Ethiopic versions. Following MILIKand in agreement with most of the scholars, we us~~ he name the work using the title assigned to it by ~ ~ n c e l l when quotes <con the first book of Enoch on Watchers,, a title which reflects the contents of the oldest element incorporated into it. All scholars agree that the book, as it has reached us, incorporates elements of different origin, although opinions are divided as to which these elements are and as to their provenance. Views are also divided on whether these different elements proceed from separate "sources" or if they simply represent traditional material incorporated by the redactor. In order to facilitate the following discussion, we tabulate here the major units inta which the Book of Watchers has been divided by different scholars:

44 In his ChronqpmpI~io (ed. A A . MOSSHAMMER).Over the "Watchers" (&p~$yopo~ in Greek, ] " l ' Y in Aramaic), see L. D t a MERINO, -h "Vintcs" en la literatura intertestamentaria*, in: Sintposio Blblico EspOnol (Madrid 1984). 575609. On the origins of the word, found in Aramaic for the first time in the *Book of the Watchers*, see R. MURRAY, .The Origin of Aramaic 1 ' V , Angel*, Orientalia 53 (1984),303-317.



An element on which all scholars (both ancient and modern) agree, is that chs. 1-5 form in themselves an introductory unity. According to the ancient scholarss1, these chapters constituted an introduction to all the books of Enoch. Modern commentators consider them as an introduction to the Book of Watchers. The elements contributed by the Qumranic manuscripts are definitive in this sense. 4QEna and 4QEnb, which, apparently, only contained the Book of Watchers and so testify to its circulation as an independent work, already incorporate these introductory chapters, and both 4QEna 1 iiiii and 4 Q ~ n 1 ii ~ act as a link between the end of ch. 5 and the beginning of ch. 6. This clearly shows that in the Qumranic recension of the work, those chapters sewed only as an introduction to the Book of Watchers. Indeed, they have been the object of a complete and detailed study by L HART MAN^^, who stressed the reutilization of and the dependence on biblical materials, the inner structure of the

CHARLES, The Book of En&, xlvii-xlviii; NICXELSBURG,Jewish Literature & w e n fhe Bible and the Mislvrnh (Philadelphia 1981),48-55; CORRIENIE/PI&ERO, &bro 1 de Hen-, 17; VANDFRKAM, Enoch and rite Growth of an Apaculyptic Tmditim, 110. a D. DIMANT, The Falfert Angels in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in Apocryphal and Pseudepipphical Books Related l o them (Dm. Jerusalem 1974) (in Hebrew), 23-72, a1 Enoch 6-11: A Methodological Perspective*, JBL I978 Semirtar Papers. 323. " P. SACCHI, Apocn'fi dell'Antico Tesrarntenfo,423. F. MAmN, L . e Liwe dtHtnoch, xvi and kxviii-lrai. 49 S. UHUG,Das ffthiopische Henochbuch, 495; J J . COLUNS, lltc Apocalyptic Imllginatim (New York 1984), 36-46, M. BLACK, The Book of Enoch o r I Enoch, 12-


J.T. MILIK,ntc Books of Enoch, 25. For example, CHARLES, xlviii, and MARTIN, tarviii. They even found in these chapters allusions to several elements of the different parts of 1 Enoch (with the only cxee ion, in the case of CHARLES, of chs. 72-82). L. H . a m N , A ~ n for g a Meaning. A S a h of 1 Ertoch 1-5 (CB New Tutament Series 12) (Lund 1979).




text, and its function as an introductory element to the Book of Watchers. As for MILIK,these introductory chapters would supposedly have been written by the final redactor responsible for the Book of Watchers as it has been transmitted to us. This same author would have equally composed, out of his own head, chs. 26-36, as well as 2025, drawing inspiration, for the latter, from a pre-extant work bearing which the author would have the supposed title uVisions of Enoch~, incorporated, practically unmodified, into his work (chs. 6 - 1 9 ) ~ ~ . These <<Visions of Enochs contained basically the epic of the fallen angels and their relations with Enoch. The author described the fall of the angels, the birth of the giants and the propagation of evil throughout the world as a consequence of the teachings of the fallen angels. Their misdeeds on earth were opposed by the faithful angels in Heaven, who interceded with the Almighty, whereupon He resolved to chastise the culprits through the intermediacy of the four archangels. Then Enoch appears as the link and mediator between the two parties. The fallen angels entreat him to plead for them. But in a series of visions and journeys the faithful angels reveal to him the punishment kept in store for the culprits, and charge him with announcing this to them. The work concludes with Enoch's great journey round the world, as far as the place where the fallen angels will be doomed for their transgression. The redactor added some introductory chapters to these *Visions of Enoch,,, in which the angels reveal to Enoch the fate of the world. He then proclaims the order of the whole creation, probably drawing his inspiration from the closing chapters of the Astronomical Book and, as opposed to this order, expounds the disorder deriving from Sin, which will bring about destruction. After reproducing the <<Visions of Enoch)), the author incorporates a new version of Enoch's journeys, westbound (chs. 21-25), which correspond to the journey recorded in chs. 17-19. He then adds Enoch's new journey to the West (chs. 26-32), which starts from the centre of the Earth, Jerusalem, and follows quite a precise itinerary across the land of spices until he reaches Paradise. The work concludes with a circular journey, correof Enochr sponding to one such journey as described in the <<Visions (chs. 18,l-5). In fact, this would be a reference to the Astronomical

s3 J.T.

MIIJK,77te Books of Enocit, 25-30.



Book, from which the author borrows the themes and the expressions (the gates of the stars and the winds). The work ends with a doxology. of Enochw, In MILIK'Sopinion, the oldest element, the <<Visions would have been composed even before the definitive composition of the Pentateuch since the priestly redactor of Gen 6.1-4 would supposedly have known and already made use of these *Visions of ~ n o c h , , ~As . for the date of incorporation of this work into the Book of WafcIters, MILIK places it towards the middle of the 3rd century B.C. in an attempt to bridge the distance between the date provided by the paleographic dating of the oldest Qumranic copy of the Book of Watchers (4QEna, first half of the 2nd century B.C.) and of Enochs (in the supposed date of the composition of the <<Visions MILIK'S opinion, in the 5th or 4th century B.C.), by resorting, for the task, to an analytical assessment of the geographical data contained in the parts assembled by the final redactor and to a comparison with the terminology used in the Zenon papyri for the description of the journeys of the commercial agent of Apollonius. This dating of the final work in the 3rd century B.C. has received wide acceptance, although not always for the reasons alluded to by MILIK. On the contrary, his assumption that Gen 6,1-4 depends on the <<Visionsof E n o c h ~ has been, quite rightly, almost unanimously rejecteds5. The existence of a literary relationship between the two texts is undeniable. But it was not Genesis which borrowed from I Enoch, but the opposite: the equivalence c3;l'h';l ' : I ! (Gen) watchers/ angels ( I Enoch) indicates this point quite obviously, as shown by the same tendency reflected in the LXX, which translates it, according to the manuscripts, by giants or by angels. The short biblical mention of the fall of the angels seems to form the point of departure for the development of the narrative about the watchers that constitutes the oldest nucleus incorporated into the Enochic work. For MILIK, on the other hand, the oldest expression of the myth of the fallen angels would be found within a Enochic work equally comprising a cycle of visions and heavenly journeys. But, apart from

124-125) (who concludes that Gen 6.1-4 is an Hebrew summary of thc Aramaic narrative, introduced by the priestly redactor of the Pentateuch to give a mqthological basis to Noah's saga), and P.R. DAVIB, *Sons of Cainm, in: A Ward in Seasan (JSOTS 42) (Sheffield 1986)- 35-56, have accepted without reservations this hypothesis of MIUK.

" MILIK,7lte Bookc of Enach, 50-32. ''J.T. T o my knawledge, only M. BLACK(nre Book o f Enoch o r I Enoch, 14 and



chapters 6-10, which apparently contain two versions of the myth of the fallen angels with no mention of Enoch, the greatest difficulty for the understanding of the Book of Warehers, as fostered by MILIKand broadly outlined above, is the lack of arguments supporting the unity of chs. 6-19. This unity, according to MILIK,is obvious56; this assertion does not weaken, though, the solid literary arguments accumulated over the years, which demonstrate that the block is, in fact, composed of elements of different sources and dates of creation. An article by NEWSOM, devoted exclusively to the study of the develop ment of these chapters and their composition, fully acknowledges this factS7. MILIKapparently transfers the redactional unity which the block already has in Aramaic to the composition of the different elements, though without taking into account that the unity also incorporates the introduction and the chapters following. It is true that ch. 20 brings about a literary rupture, since it is nothing more than a list with the names and functions of the archangels, but this evidence (which MILIK does not emphasise) is, in itself, insufficient to delimit the preceding material as a separate unit, since it may be perfectly understood as an interpolation in the unit formed by Enoch's different journeys. As a matter of fact, some scholars58 confine the oldest element incorporated in the Book of Watclzers to chs. 6-16, and consider Enoch's journeys (chs. 17-36) as the work of a redactor; this redactor is regarded by some (COLLINS, UHLIG) as the author of the whole, as a simple compiler of two different versions and by others (BLACK) of one and the same journey and of other elements. This division of the text goes back to MARTIN^, who clearly comments, however, that the block made up of these chapters is incomplete, while suggesting that chs. 20-36 could well have their origin in the same source as C~S 6-16. . If analysed in this light, the oldest Enochic work would only contain the story of the fall of the angels and Enoch's vision relevant to them. In contrast with MIUK'S hypothesis, Enoch's heavenly jour"We can accept as obvious, however, the fact that the author of the Book of Watchen used an early written source which he incorporated without any great m his own work (En. 6-19)', me Bookr o f Enoch, 25. C : NEWSOU, #The Development of 1 E n a h 6-19 Cosmology and Judgement*. CB 42 1980,315-323. SLh &HUG, COUNS and ,B to mention only the most representative. 59 LC L i w d'Htnoch, lacix and Ixaci.




neys, which will constitute one of the most characteristic elements of the later Enochic tradition, would not have appeared in that older unit. Such a division of the text, however, seems to be based on no more than the homogeneity of its contents (chs. 6-16, in fact, deal only with the fallen angels and their punishment revealed to Enoch during his vision). This view seems to be contradicted by the clearly redactional character of the beginnings of chapter 12, whose Function consists in introducing Enoch by uniting the anonymous tradition of chs. 6-11 and the Enochic tradition found in chs. 12-16:
Before these things (happened) Enoch was hidden, and no one of the children of the people knew by what he was hidden and where he was. And his dwelling place as well as hi activities were with the Watchers and the holy ones; and (so were) h s i days*.

The same supporters of this hypothesis are obliged to recognise that the story of the fallen angels is pre-enochic: SUTERconsiders chs. 1216 as a commentary on chs. 6-11; COLLINS identifies them as transitional chapters, and BLACK recognises: ccthat this legend probably circulated in written form independently of its present contexts in I Enoch seems highly probable*61. In fact, the most general opinion affirms that the chronologically oldest elements of the Book of Watchers are found in the block formed by chs. 6-11, where the figure of Enoch does not appear at all, although there is no unanimity as to how to determine these elements or understand their links with the rest of the Book of Watchers. CHARLES considers these chapters as a block proceeding from a lost apocalypse of Noah., an idea which, despite MARTIN'S objecMost tion~~ sporadically ~, reemerges in recent co~nmentaries~~.

Imaginulion. 38, says: T h e second section, chaps. 6-16, is an elaboration of the story s o n s of God' in Genesis 6. The main story is in chaps. 6-11; chaps. 12-16 are of the ' transitional chapters that inlroduce Enoch and provide the point of departure for his revelatory journey^. D. SLTf:R, *Fallen Angel, Fallen Priest: The Problem of Purity in 1 Enoch 616*, HUC4 50 (1979). 115-135,considers the whole section as an attack against the priesthood of Jerusalem. t e Livre d'~e+toch, fix.

st: of) Enoch*, in J.H. C)IARI~F5WOR'l'tI (ed.), 7lte Old Teslatr~etrrPseudepigropltu. Val. 1 (Garden City lm),19. hi. BLACK, h e Book of Ettoch or 1 Ettoc/t, 14. COLI.INs, h c Apocalyptic

* 1 Ettoch 12, 1, according to the translation of E. ISAAC,

-1 (Ethiopic Apcxalyp



modem scholars recognise, nevertheless, that these chapters contain several narrative plots intertwined for better or for worse, and connected with the following chapters. It is normal to distinguish between the cycles of Shemihaza and 'Asa'el, the respective angelic heroes, and to view these cycles as two different reelaborations of Gen 6,l-4; some others differentiate between two traditions which either place the sources of evil in the union of the fallen angels with women or in their revelation of the heavenly secrets to mankind. These two cycles or traditions would plainly have been put together by a redactor. A more sophisticated way of viewing the inner relationship of this double element is represented by N I C K E U B U R G ~ ~ ,who sees the story of Shemihaza as the original formulation, deeply influenced by the Greek myths and having good parallels in the apocalyptic literature; the elements concerning 'Asa'el would constitute secondary interpolations with the apparent aim of revising the underlying story in the light of the myth of Prometheus and the revelation of secrets motif. HANS ON^^ understands the development of chs. 6-11 as an organic growth through a successive broadening of the interpretations of an original nucleus. This nucleus would consist of the Shemihaza narrative, supposedly incorporating the oriental myth of the rebellion in Heaven and the conflict between the gods as an explanation for the origin of evil. A first reinterpretation of these themes would have been made by means of the incorporation of the extant materials on 'Asa'el, which establish a link between the meaning of the Shemihaza narrative and the expiatory function of the yom kipppw traditions of Lev 16. Another interpretation worked out at a later date and imposed upon the two preceding levels would have been motivated by the introduction of the theme of the revelation of secrets.

For example, in SACCHI, op. cir, 432, and in CORRIE~TF~-PIIC.ERO, op. cir, 17. In u4QMes. Aram. y el Libro de N d * , Sabtta~trice~rris 28 (1981), 217-218, 1 think I have demonstrated that the only Noachic element in these chapters is 10,l-3. Cfr. the synthesis of A. DlfZ MCHO, Apdcrifos del Atttiguo Tesratttenro. Val. 1: Introducci6n General (Madrid I N ) , 228-220, and supra pp. 28-29. G.W.E. NICKELSBURG, -Apocalyptic and Myth in 1 Enoch 6-11*, IBL % ( 1 9 9 , 383-405, and Jewish tireranire behvrett the Bible and tlte Mishnah, 49-52. P.D.HANSON, -Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel, and Euhemeristic Heroes in 1 Enoch 6 - I S - , jBL % (1977), 195-233.



As for D. DIM ANT^^, she believes that chs. 6-11 would have been drawn from an independent midrashic source, of which remnants would have been preserved at Qumran (IQI9 and lQl9bis), apparently incorporated so as to provide the necessary background to the development of the Book of Watchers. This midrashic source, in its turn, shows three different strata, corresponding to the story of Shemihaza (not related, originally, to the narrative of the deluge), the story of the angels revealing secrets (independent of the former and linked to the deluge) and the tradition concerning 'Asa'el (equally independent and related also to the deluge), which was the last one to be added to the midrashic compound and contaminated the two former sources. SAC CHI^^, who sustains the pivotal idea of the impossibility that different ideologies could be embodied in one and the same person, and also pays attention to structural elements, recognises in chs. 6-11 three successive sections whose central ideas are: the origin of evil is to be sought in the fall of the angels (chs. 6-7), these angels cause irreparable harm to mankind through their revelation of the heavenly secrets (ch. 8) and, finally, evil originates in the revelation of the heavenly secrets (chs. 9-1 1). Despite their different approaches, all these studies concur in considering chs. 6-11 as a pre-Enochic block consisting of mixed elements of different provenance. There are even studies that concentrate on one element of the block, such as the use of the biblical texts in the whole unita or in one of its parts69, or on the respective use of Shemihaza and 'Asa'el within the block7'; there is even a Hubilitu-


and Apocnfi dell'Anrico Teslamenm, 432, where he recognises only two independent parts in chs. 6-11 (6-8 and 9-11); but in aRiflessioni sull'wsenza dell'apocalittica: Peecato d'origine e libcrta dell'uomom, Henoch 5 (1983), 31-61, SACCHI admits the independence of ch. 8, which he understands now as a development of chs. 6-7. Mon of the writings of S A C ~ on ~ the I apocalyptic arc now handily collected in L'apocalitrica giudaica e la nra storia (Biblioteca di cultura rcligiosa 5) (Brescia 1990). 68 J.H. LE ROUX, -The Use of Scripture in 1 Enoch 6-11.. Neorestamenrica 17 (19832, 28-39. L. HARTMAN,*'Comfort of the Scriptures'. An Early Jewish Interpretation of Noah's Salvation-, SEA 41-42 (1976-n), 87-%, -An Example of Jewish Exegesis: 1 En& 10,16-11,2s, Neoresranrenrica 17 (1981). 16-27. C. MOLENBERG, *A Study of the Roles of Shemihaza and Asael in 1 Enoch 6l l v , JJS 35 (1984), 136-146.

'' P. SACCHI,all 'Libro dei Vigilanti' e I'apocalitticam, He~roclr 1 (1979), 42-92,

D. D t . w ~ r The , Fallor Attgels, 23-72.



tiomchn'fi, recently published, devoted to the eschatology of one of the documents incorporated in the block (chs. 9-11)~'. Still more interesting in m y opinion are the works devoted to showing how the elements of chs. 6-11 are reused, duly transformed and incorporated into the following chapters (12-16)~,into the rest of the Book of watchersn, into the complete Enochic corpus74, or into the overall apocalyptic literature7'. Precisely these studies have enabled us to go beyond the stage of the analyses of the sources and to concentrate on the comprehension of the work as transmitted to us. It appears certain that there existed in the old Jewish literature an autonomous genre of narrative on the fallen angels, and it would seem probable that such a narrative (devoid of the complexities of the themes dealt with by 1 Enoclr) had already been incorporated into the of Noahw. It is also possible that lQ19 may have preserved lost <<Book of Noah*. But, apart from the version scanty remnants of this <<Book of the Book of Watctters that has reached us, there is no proof confirming the existence of an Enochic work in which such a narrative would have been associated with Enoch's vision of the punishment of the Watchers (chs. 6-16) or with his heavenly vision and journey (chs. 6-19). All these elements are already met, perfectly assembled, in Jubilees 4.2 1-22:
And he was therefore with the angels of God six jubilees of years. And they showed him everything which is on earth and in heavens, the dominion of the sun. And he wrote ewrything, and borc witness to the Watchers, the ones who sinned with the daughters of men because they began to mingle themselves with the daughters of men so that they might be polluted. And Enoch borc witness against all of them.

EW Escha~ologie ~ ~ ~ ~ vort Henoch 9-11 urtd dm Neue Tcsramenr R. R U R I ~ ~ K IDie (Osterrcichische Biblische Studien 6) (Klosterneuburg 1 W ) . G.W.E. NICKELSBURG, ~ E n w h ,Lcvi, and Peter: Recipients of Revelation in Upper Galileem, JBL 100 (1981),575-600. Such as the studies already quoted of P. SACCHIand J.C. TNOM, *Aspects of 7 the Form, Meaning and Function of the Book of the Watchers*, Neofeslamenfica 1 (l?), 40-49. M. BARKER, *Some Reflections upon the Enoch Myth*, JSOT 15 (1980), 7-29; The Older Teslante~tl: 77te Sunival o f 77trt~tes from the Ancienl Royal Cull in SrcIarian Judaisttt and Early Cltrisfiattiry (London 19887). " M. DELCOR, sLc Mythe de la chute dcs anges et de I'origine des g h t s comme explication du ma1 dans le monde dans i'apocalyptique juive: Histoire dcs traditions+, RHR 19 (1976), 3-53, and lately HS. KVANVIG, 7hr R w ~ o rf Apocalyptic. 7he Mesopolominn Backpund o f the Enoch Figure and the Son o f Man (Ncukirchcn





It is, nevertheless, evident that this text, just like 4 ~ 2 2 7 is ~ nothing ~, but a summary of our *Book of Watchersn, and bears witness that the different elements were already associated in it, so that it serves no purpose as evidence of preceding redactional stages. The study of chs. 6-11, isolated from their present context in the h k of Watchers, may be justified if we want to clarify the sources has that generated the myth of the fallen angels, but, as COLLINS rightly objectedn, if we are trying to understand its function, these chapters cannot be considered apart from the context in which they have reached us. a) As a matter of fact, one of the most interesting contributions from the qumranic manuscripts has been precisely the proof that, in the oldest stage represented by the Aramaic version, the text of the Book of Watclters contained -already integrated and structured- all the redactional elements appearing in its later versions. That is the reason why the Aramaic texts do not seem to be very useful when they are employed to explain the redactional story of the text or of its previous stages; in contrast with what happened with the Astronomical Book, they bequeath to us an already complete work, provided even with its introductory chapters. Those texts are, nevertheless, extremely valuable as they help us to establish that the tormented unit we know from the Ethiopic version is the same once composed by the final redactor of the Aramaic text. All doctrinal developments that may be perceived in the Book of Watchers are previous to the writing of the Aramaic version. b) Another important element of the qumranic manuscripts is the strong suggestion that, once upon a time, this unit of the Enochic literature circulated as an independent work. This fact, suspected and advanced by the critics on the basis of literary criteria, has been conn ~ apparently , firmed by the discovery of 4QEna and 4 ~ ~ which
T h i s text has not yet been fully published, but MIUK refers frequently to it (?he B& of Enoch, 12: transcription of the fragment; 14: dependency of Jub 4,24; 25: translation of linscs 1-4; 60: allusion to thc literary activity of Enoch). Apparently it is a Hebrew ms. of which only a fragment with the remains of six lines has been preserved. The protagonist seems to be Enoch (although the name is partially reconstrucred). According to MII.IK, the first four lines, which correspond to Jub 4,17-24, can be read as a summary of the Book of Warchcrs, and the last two lines as a summary of the A s m m i c a l Book, although, in my opinion, the second asurtion is less sure, d r . *Panorama CrRico (I)-, EsfBibl 45 (1989). 1%-197. JJ. COLLINS, -Methodological Issucs in the Study of 1 Enoch*, SBL 1978 Seminar Papers. Vol. 1, 311-322.



contained only the Book of Watchers. The evidence in this case is, obviously, negative, because no complete manuscripts but only fragments have been preserved; therefore it would be theoretically possible that the chances of transmission have deprived us of part of the manuscript containing other Enochic works. But the presence in ~ and ~ 4QEne, n which ~ have preserved Qumran of two later copies, 4 elements of the Book of Dream together with remnants of the Book of Watchers, and the existence of another copy, 4QEnC, which preserves parts of the Book of Watchers, the Book of Dreams and the Epirrle of Enoch, justify the opinion that the oldest copies quoted confined themselves to the Book of Watchers. c) Despite the fact that the redactional stage of the Aramaic work was substantially the same as that of later versions, the new manuscripts incidentally enable us to solve some of the problems that worried the critics for quite a long time. We have already mentioned the older opinion that chs. 1-5 constituted the introduction to the complete Enochic collection, and pointed out how the data contained in the new manuscripts had enabled us to settle the question by bringing forward evidence according to which they constituted the at a time when this composition introduction to the Book of Watcl~ers was still circulating as an independent unit. Another duly clarified element is that the surgery to which CHARLES submitted chs. 12-16 is unnecessary78. In 4QEnC 1 vi 9, the would-be beginning (14,l) appears in its right place, directly after 13,10 and before 14.2, and in this same fragment, in the remnants of the preceding column preserved in the lower part, the presence of 12,l is attested in the expected place. The traditions incorporated may seem confusing, but, in any case, the order of these chapters was already established in the Aramaic version. Another interesting element, although less certain owing to the difficulties posed by the uncertain readings of 4 ~ ~ 1 nii * 26, is that the Aramaic text only knows an angelic name in 6,7 and 8,l: 'Asa'el. In other words, in the Aramaic version, the hero of ch. 8
CXAIUB, 771e Book of Enm11, xlvi, postulates as the original order of these chapters: 14,l; 13,l-2; 13.3; 12.3; 13,410; 14,2-16.2; 12.4-6. This order would have been rearranged by the editor of the collection, who would also have added as an introduction 163-4 and 121-2. This opinion, incidentally, still appears in some later commentators: "Probablemente, Charles riene razcln a1 considerar que el orden prirnitivo debia ser ... Aunque parezca inverosimil tal trastueque, con estos cambios se obtiene un orden 16gico de acontecirnientos", C O R R I ~ ~ - P I ~ ~ 'aLibro E R O ,1 de Henoc-. 12.




is one of the angels appearing in the list of the fallen angels shown in ch. 6. Both in the Greek and in the Ethiopic versions, the names are different in the two cases? although Syncellus considers them identical: ccAzael, the tenth of the chiefs)>.This identity of the name of the angelic hero considerably weakens the significance of HANSON'S remarks about Azazel's influence (Lev 16) on the forming of 'Asa'el tradition, and shows that this constitutes a late development that appears clearly in the Ethiopic version. In the Aramaic version, 'Asa'el is nothing but a particularly important angel within the Shemihaza cycle. d) The most significant element brought to light by the new manuscripts is the antiquity of this independent Enochic work. The quotation found in Jubilees would, in itself, compel us to postulate an earlier date of composition, towards the middle of the 2nd century B.C. The paleographic dating of 4QEna leads us to identify the early years of that 2nd century as the latest possible limit. Nevertheless, the orthography peculiar to this manuscript would strongly suggest tracing the composition of the original work on which this copy depends back to at least the 3rd century B.C. The endings of the pronominal and verbal forms of the second and the third person of the masculine plural, always written defectively (with no other parallel within the Aramaic dialects than the Hermopolis papyri), is a particularly determinant point in this respectm. The dating of the work in the 3rd century B.C. is of decisive importance for the study of apocalyptic8', as it demonstrates that its origins are previous to and independent of the Antiochean crisis, and underlines the priority of the cosmic apocalypses over the historical ones. But it also implies that the text of the ideological elements reflected in the work must be

79 The Greek version of Syncellus read azolz&I in 6.7 and azatl in 8.1; the version of Codex Panopolitanus read aseal in 6,7 and orall in 8.1; the Ethiopic version o f i r s 'drc9Vl in 6.7 and '6zdzeVI in 8,:. On the orthography of this ms.. see the indications of MIIJK, 77re Boob 4 Enoclr, 22-23 and 140-141. MILIK underlines the archaism in the use of the mafnrs lecrimis and the dependence of an older original. This aspect appears clearly in the examples uscd by K. B~YERin the grammatical section of his Die amnraisclren T a e

vom T ~ e Meer. n

As 1 have shown in -Encore I'Apacalyptique*, JSJ 17 (19%). 224-232 and in *Les Traditions Apocalyptiques A Qumrin*, in: C. KAPPLEH (ed.), Apoca&pses el Voyoges dans I'cnc-deld (Paris 1987), 201-235. See also M. Srolrl~"Enoch and Apocalyptic Origins* in Scriptures, Sects and Ksions. A Profile of Judacsnr /nun Ezra to the Jewish Revolts (London 1980), 37-47.




placed in a period prior to the hellenisation of Palestine. The eschatology of ch. 22 appears, in that light, as a development detached from the body of problems typical of the 2nd century B.c.'* The vision of the heavenly throne in ch. 14, which serves to reinforce Enoch's authority and to validate his message to the Watchers, equally shows that the roots of the mystical current that will thrive in subsequent rabbinic Judaism, the Merkavah mystic, can somehow be connected with speculations already attested in the 3rd century B . c . , ~while ~ the parallelism between this Enochic text and Dan 7 is a proof that these mystical speculations are not completely absent from the historical apocalypsesM. The task of analysing the Book of Watchers in the Palestinian context of the 3rd century B.C., to which we are bound by the new dating of the text, is still far from completed. Nevertheless, the results of this new perspective are already considerable8'. The covert controversy between Qohelet and the Book of Watchers that ROSS0 UBlGLl has uncovereds6, and the use made by M. STONE'^ of the new evidence to ascertain the origins of sectarianism are excellent examples.

The Book of Dreams derives its title from its contents. Chs. 83-90 were already recognised in antiquity as an autonomous unit within I ~noch'~ Its . author relates two dreams / visions of Enoch: the first

Cfr. the study of M.T. W A ~ RWel~ordnung , und Gerichl. Shcdien zu I Henoch 22 (Forschung zur Bibcl 45) (Wiirzburg 1982). See C. ROWLAND, -The Visions of God in Apocalyptic Literature*, JSI 10 Apocalyptic (1979). 137-154; although the direct link postulated by I. CRUEMVAIB, and Merkavah Mysricism (AGAJUC 14) (Leiden 1979) seems to be off the mark. See H.S. KVANVIG, nHenoch und der Mcnschensohn. Das Vcrhsltnis von Hen . Srudia 7 7 1 e o l ~ c a 38 (19M), 101-133, and his Roofs of Apocafyptic. 14 und Dan 7 The Mcsoporarttio~tBackgmund of the E~rocltFigure and rite Son of Man (Neukirchen 1988k And best exemplified by thc works of P. SAC^^ collected in his L'opocalinicn giudaica e la sua storio. L. ROsX) UBIGLI,*Qohclet di fronte all'apocalittiur~,Henoch 5 (1983), 209-


mb7 M %ONE, *Enah, Aramaic Levi and Sectarian Origins*. JSI 19 (1988). lS9-

88 There is no difiiculty about the critical structure of this Scction. It i s the most complete and sclf-consistent of all Sections, and has suffered least from the hand of the interpolator", R.H. CFhRIES, The Book of Enoch, 179. M R L E S acknowledged



(chs. 83-84) refers to the deluge, the second, the famous <<Apocalypse of Animals* (chs. 85-90), presents a panorama of the history of the world from beginning to end in which human characters are represented by all sorts of animals, while the angels are symbolised by humans beings. Two of the animals (Noah and Moses) are momentarily transformed into humans beings for the accomplishment of their most significant feats: the construction of the Ark (89,1.9) and that of the sanctuary (89,36.38). The first dream is explained to Enoch by his grandfather Mahalalel. This detail embodies the genealogy of Gen 5,15ss, although it adds a new element: the name of Enoch's wife, Edna ("Paradise"). In Jub 4,20 she is named Edni ("My Paradise"), while Edna stands for Methuselah's wife (Jub 4.27), this being one of the many different elements which show the relationship between the two works. Once the meaning of the dream has been disclosed to Enoch, he addresses a prayer to the Lord in which he briefly relates the sin of the angels (84,4) and entreats Him that his offspring be preserved and transformed into a plant of eternal justice. In the second dream, the author follows the thread of the biblical history from its beginning down to his own time, based on the canonical books, although adding details drawn from other sources. He starts with the story of Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel (the white, black and red bulls) and their descendants. The new elements encountered are Cain's wifesg, who accompanies him in his pilgrimage, and the weeping of Eve for Abel, her search for the lost son until Adam consoles and quietens her. These elements are found only in our author, although Jub 4,7 tells us that both Adam and Eve mourn for Abel. In the following chapters, the author sums up the Book of w&hersgO or, at least, surmises a form already "enochised" of the

only one interpolation and, with M A R ~ N ( h postulated ) , two dislocations within the tea: 89.49 should have been before 80,48, and 90,19 before 90.14. Hc also asserted that 90,13-15 was just a duplicate of 90,16-18. But J.C. VANDERKAM, Elloch and the Gmwh of an Apocotypic Tradition, 162-163, has demonstrated that thc form of the passages transmitted by the Ethiopic version can be correctly interpreted without C H A ~ < explanations. ~'S 89 Awan, according to Jub 4,l; Themach, according lo Pseudo-Philo's AnrBibl 2,2. gO See A.F.J. KLUN, *From Creation to Noah in the Second Dream-Vision of the W.C. VAN UNNIK (eds.), MisceIlanea Ethiopic Enoch-, in: T. BAARDA,A.F.J. KLIJN, Neofesfame~rtica I (Lciden 1978). 147-150.



story of the fall of the angels. These, designated as stars that are transformed into bulls, mix with the sons of man and give origin to three types of descendants: elephants, camels and asses (86,4; 87,4; 88.2; 89.6). This detail is not found in the Book of Watchers, neither in the Aramaic original nor in the Ethiopic version, but is present in the s~ well ~ , as in Jub 7,22 (but not in Jub Greek summary by ~ ~ n c e l l uas 4,1522; 5,1, etc., where the story is only about watchers or giants). Afterwards follows the story of the deluge, which includes the destruction of the descendants of the fallen angels, previously cast down into the abyss (89,3). The author marks the main events of the patriarchs' history down to Moses, adding that, after the outbreak of the plagues, "the sheep cried aloud" (89,19). He then continues with Exodus, with the one peculiarity of the desire for conversion, through Moses' vision, expressed by the people (89,34) after they had gone astray, a tradition unattested by other texts, and the indication that the people looked for the body of Moses after his death (89,38), which is common to numerous midrashim. The narration proceeds with the story of Judges and Kings, which is reported accurately until the exile. From then onwards (89,59ss) the author incorporates 70 shepherds who conduct the flock successively, and represent 70 angels, each ruling over the people for a certain period of time. This entails a division of history in 70 periods, echoing the 70 generations of the Book of Watclten (10,ll-l2)~*.As is the case with Dan 9,24-27, where the 70 years of Jer 25 are transformed into 70 weeks, this historical division based on the figure of 70 reaches back ultimately to that same prophetic text, a text which finds relative success in Qumran, as demonstrated by its use in 4Q180-181 (70 weeks), 4QpsDan Ar (70 years), in an unpublished papyrus (70 periods)93, and in 4Q390, the newly published text formerly known a s 4QSecond Ezekiel and now designated as 4QPseudo Moses, where this division of history is

91 The text of Syncellus says: "And they bare unto them three kinds (of offspring); first, great giants. And the giants begot the Nephilim and to the Ncphilim were born the Eliud. And they grew according to their greatness". 92 AS noted by MIUK, Tile Books o f Et~och, 43 and 254. 93 According to MIUK ( 7 7 1 ~ Books o f Et~ocA,252) this papyrus would contain remains of the Aramaic original of the *Book of the Periods* whose Hebrew pesher has been preserved in 4QlRO-181.



expressed in a mixed form of jubilees, weeks of years and 70 year periods94. But the most interesting element of this division is the combination of the 70 periods in a quaternary schemegs which runs parallel to the scheme of the four danielic empires. Such a division of history is clearly marked by the presentation to the Almighty of the book where the deeds of the shepherds (89,70-71; 89,77 and 90,17) are recorded, and the symmetrical distribution of the number of shepherds in each period: 12 + 23 + 23 + 12. The first period concludes with the return from exile (89,672); the second one extends to Alexander the Great (89,72-77), the third goes well into the period of the Maccabees (90,l-5), while the fourth runs until the beginning of the messianic age (90.6-17). The work concludes with the judgement on the fallen angels, of the 70 shepherds and the disloyal sheep (90,14-27), followed by the rebuilding of the new Jerusalem (90.29) and the arrival of the new Adam (90,37), in a still more glorious state than the first one, since his horns are biggerM. Despite the different character of the two dreams and the two versions of the deluge contained in the work, one of which constitutes the basis of the first dream, while the other is properly included in the zoomorphic history, the whole book seems to be the work of only one author. In both dreams it is insisted that Enoch composed them before his marriage (83,2; 85,3), both are presented as teachings to his son Methuselah (83,1.10; 85.1-2). and the final summary (90,42) makes reference to the first horn. Although these elements might have a redactional character and be designed to incorporate different elements in a whole, nothing in the text implies that this is the case or

See D. DI'w~T, -New Light on the Pseudcpigrapha: 40390.., forthcoming in the Madrid C0ngres.r on flte Dead Sea Scrolls. 95 This x h e m a of the four kingdoms is also found in other qumranic works: in 4QpsDarr Ar the 70 years of the exilc arc thc "first kingdom", and in an unpublished t e n of STARCKY'S lot (quoted by MII.IK in his article ePric)re de Nabonidc et autres h i t s d'un cycle de Daniel: Fragments a r a m k n s de Oumrdnm, RE 63 (1956). 407-415) we find four trees (the first named Babylon, and the second Persia) which talk and which represent the four classical empires. % The only general study of the Book oj Dreams known to me is M. BLACK, *The Composition, Character and Date of the "Second Vision" of Enoch*, in: M. B K C t m (ed.). Tur, Wor?, Glaztbe (Arbeiten zur Kirchengcschichte 50) (Berlin 1980). 19-30.



that the book was not composed as such by its author. BLACK^^ points out that the chapters of the first dream also show every sign of a semitic origin. This conclusion as to the unity of the work has an importance of its own, since no text was preserved either in Aramaic or in Greek that would correspond to the first dream. Its absence from the fragments recovered in Qumran may, thus, be accounted for -given their shortness- as purely accidental and easily understandable. It would appear more difficult to invoke arguments which might demonstrate the independent circulation of the work, before its incorporation into the Enochic collection. Of the four Qumranic manuscripts in which it is represented, three ( 4 Q ~ n contained ~ ~ ~ ~ ) also other Enochic works and only attest the stage at which the work had already been incorporated in the collection. Only a fragment with remnants of 83,l-3 has been preserved from the other copy, 4 ~ ~ na f very tiny proof to warrant the adoption of any sound conclusions. But the early date at which this manuscript was copied (between 150 and 125 B.C), is very significant and clearly differentiates this text from the other copies which are identified as belonging to the beginning ( 4 Q E n e ) or the end ( 4 Q ~ n " ~ of ) the 1st century B.C. This detail suggests an inde endent period of circulation, while the allusion found in Jub 4,19 apparently confirms this conclusion:


And he saw what was and what will be in a vision of his sleep as it will happen among the children of men in their generations until the day of judgement. H e saw and knew evewhing and wrote his testimony and deposited the testimony upon the earth against the children of men and their generations.

This excellent summary of the book follows that of the Astronomical Book and comes before the summary of the Book of Waichers of 4.2122. This indicates that the author of Jubilees was acquainted with the different Enochic works as distinct units not yet embodied in the later collection.

97 "Probably no significance can be attached to the absence of any fragment of the First Dream-Vision in the Aramaic manuscripts, speeialiy as its text has every mark of semitic origin", rite Book oJ Enoch or I Enoch, 20. Which does not mean that the Book oJ Dream depends upon Jubilees. The more precise character of some of the details of Jub, such as the already mentioned name of the wife of Cain or the specification of the three sorts of descendants of the fallen angels, shows the contrary.



Both this citation of Jubilees and the paleographic dating of the older copy mark the latest limit of the composition of the work. The earliest limit is f i e d by the composition of the Book of Watchers, which the author of the Book of Dreams knows and resorts to. Fortunately, it is possible to narrow the space between these two ends following the same method as was used for dating the book of Daniel and the other historical apocalypses, that is, through the identification of the historical circumstances alluded to immediately before the beginning of the eschatological projection. The breaking point between what is an ex eventu prophecy and the prophetic announcement of the future determines the period of composition of the work. The different authors agree nowadays that 90.6-16 narrates the troublesome years of the Maccabean uprising and that the description of the eschaton starts in 90.17. 90,6-7 would allude to the years preceding Antiochus Epiphanes's oppression, and 90.8 to the deposition and death of Onias 111, while 90,9 would incorporate the figure of Judas Maccabeus, a lamb with a big horn, the following verses describing the ups and downs of the revoltP). Since the text goes on to narrate the end of times and the divine intervention without mentioning the lamb's death, it is obvious that the work was composed before the death of Judas, which occurred in 161 B.c.'~. MILIK is still more precise and fiies the exact date of its composition during the first months of 164 B.C., precisely in the weeks that followed the great victory of Bethsurl". That battle would have been described in 90.12-15, and 90,16 would show the next development, the alliance of the neighbouring peoples to oppose Israel's rising power, as demonstrated by the parallel texts of 2 Macc 11,6-12 and 1 Macc 5. While

99 DIUMANNand other ancient commentators attempted to identify the last historical protagonist with John Hyrcanus, an opinion flatly rejected by CHARLES: T h e interpretation of Dillmann, Kostlin, Schurer, and others, which takes the 'great horn' to symbolize John Hyreanus, does violence to the ten, and meets with thc insuperable objection that thus there would not be even the faintest reference to Judas, the gcatw( of all the Maccabees', nte Book of Enmh. 208. la, This eondusion is independcnt of the intcprctation of 90.31. For MIUK (me Baokr of Enoch, 45) the lamb which goes with Enoch would be the same Judas Maccabeus, indicating that for the author thc cnd of times was expected during the life of Judas. The traditional interpretation sces in this figure Elijah, and M. BLACK objects to MILJK'S interpretation that in this case it would be impossible to explain how Judas would have becn elevated to the "tower' in which Enoch is located in 87.3 and to which Elijah is elevated in 89.52. 'O' m e Baokr of Enoch, 43-45.



not trying to be so accurate in our calculations, we may recognise in MILIK'Sarguments support for the opinion -prevailing nowadays- that the composition of the work is to be situated between the beginning of the Maccabean revolt and Judas's death. It would be more difficult to determine the origin of this apocalypse. The traditional interpretation ascribes its origins to the Asidean circles favourable to the Maccabean uprising in its primary stages, and interprets 90,6-7 as a reference to the origin of the h i d i m . Lately, DIMANThas tried to prove in a series of articleslo2 that the Book of Dreams is a Qumranic work reaching back to the first times of the sect, and that the group whose birth is reported in 90,7 is none other than the Qumranic group. Despite the close relationship between that work and the Qumran writings, clearly underlined by DIMANT,and the fact that the apocalypse could be attributed, considering that date of composition, to the period of foundation of the sect, I feel that its strong pro-Maccabean character would rather suggest a non-sectarian origin and I will place it, just like the Book of Daniel, in the bosom of the apocalyptic tradition in which the Qumranic community has its roots 03. The contribution that the new manuscripts have made to the general understanding of this work is less noteworthy than is the case with the Astronomical Book or the Book of Watciters. Firstly, the work does not present the problems of the other two and, secondly, it is unfortunate that the verses most passionately discussed by the critics have not been preserved in Aramaic. The paleographic dating of the oldest copy makes it very difficult now to broaden the historical panorama of the Apocalypse of Animals and to set the subsequent date of the composition of the work in the time of John Hyrcanus. The new manuscripts have put forward the proof that the original work was, undoubtedly, written in Aramaic. But the most interesting contribution is that we now have a possible witness to the indepen-

lo2 D. DIMANI., -Jerusalem and the Temple in the Animal Apocalypse (1 Enoch 85-90) in the light of the Dead Sea Serolls Thought*, Shnaron 5 6 (1981-82), 177-183 (Hebrew); rHiitary According to the Viion of the Animals*, Jerusalem Smdies in Jewish ntoughr 2 (1982). 18-27 (Hebrew); .;Qumran Sectarian Literature-, in: Compendia I1 2,544-547. F. GARCLA MARTIAtZ, =&senisme Qumranien: Orynes, oraa6riuiques, hbritage-, in: B. Q i 1 w( 4 . Movimenti ) . e conenti nrltumli nel Giudaismo (Roma 1987), 37-57; *Qumran Origins and Early History: A Groningen Hypothesiw, Fdia OrienlaIia 2 5 . (1988). 113-136.




dent circulation of the work in the middle of the 2nd century B.C., and considerable evidence that this apocalyptic work was already incorporated into the Enochic collection at the beginning of the 1st century B.C.

One of the longest and best preserved Enochic manuscripts of Qumran (4QEng) has transmitted to posterity sizeable parts of the beginning of the last of the works which form the Ethiopic Enoch: the Epiktle of ~ n o c i t '-~to be more accurate, of one of its component of Weeksa. parts, the so-called <<Apocalypse The title of the Epistle of Enociz was first found in the Greek version, in the colophon of the Chester Beatty papyrus, which has preserved chs. 97,6-107, with the exception of ch. 105. M I L I K " ~ thinks that the whole work would have been composed in the form of a true e istle, according to the model of the Aramaic letters, whereas Bual' feels that the original .Epistle,, would have been reduced to 92,2-5 or, at most, to chs. 91-93. Other element5 would have been incorporated in this brief .Epistle* (with the inclusion, perhaps, of the ccApocalypse of Weeksw). The designation of the whole as the Epirtle of Enoch would be simply an idea of the Greek author, influenced by the mention of "epistle" in 100.6. But BLACK'S understanding of the "epistle" is based on a very problematic reconstruction of 93,1, forgets that the "epistle" in 100,6 cannot refer to the brief unit he designates, and disregards the fact that the unit presents no special features justifying its definition as a letter, while leaving without explanation the elements underlined by MILIK,such as the allusion to the letter of Enoch included in the Book of Watchers with the expression athey shall have no peace. (in 94,6; 98,11.15; 99,13;

lW The exact limits of this part of the Ethiopic Enoch are different for the , Epistle of Etroch comprises chs. 91-104, NIQ(F?diierent authors. For C t i ~ i u mthc BURG considers that the Epistle comprises chs. 92-105 and excludes ch. 91 as redactional, a supplement added at the moment the Epistle was incorporated in the resf of the Enochic material to give the whole the character of a testament; UHLIG equally exdudes dt. 91, but because it would belong to the Book of D m 7 r r . Wc, with MARTINand most of the commentators, consider the Epistle of Etroch as comprising &. 91-105.As to chs. 106-107 cfr. p t e a . All agree that ch. 108 is a later addition. IM J.T. MIUK, 7he Bods of EnotIr, 51-52. lM M . BLACK, 7he Book o f Eltoch o r I Etroclt, 11-12, 283285.




101,3; 102,3; 103,8), or the elements of an epistolary style which first appear in 94,l. On the other hand, it seems obvious that these epistolary elements are not so characteristic as to constitute a significant structure to the work which, apart from its apocalyptic sections, is mainly composed of exhortations and imprecations that somehow evoke other testamentary compositions. interpretation is that the composThe problem posed by BLACK'S ite character of the work is immediately taken for granted, this being a decisive question when it comes to determining the origin and the date of composition of the Epble of Enoch. This composite character is admitted by most scholars, although opinions are divided as to which elements compose the work and as to their respective starting and finishing points. Morever, BLACK'Sexplanations are not very coherent. On the one hand, he labels the following elements as independent pieces having a different origin: the brief "epistle" of 92,2-5, a poem on Nature in 93,ll-14, the ((Apocalypse of Weeksw, the parenetic central section, the remnants of the ((Book of Noahw in chs. 106-107, and ch. 108, clearly of a later datelo7. But when it comes to determining the history of the text known in Ethiopic, he considers that there were only two Aramaic recensions, the first formed by an independent ccApocalypse of Weeks*, while the second would have been the source of the present text, with all the elements (except ch. 108) already linked together1''. NICKEUBURConly indicates the apocalypse of Weeksa as a traditional piece re-used by the author of , he considers chs. 91,l-10 as a rethe Epistle of ~ n o c t s ' ~although dactional element independent of the Epistle which had been incorporated, like chs. 81-82, at the time of the insertion of the Epistle in pays ~ attention only to the the Enochic c o r p ~ s " ~ .D E X I N G E R ~ ~

lo' M . BLACK, The Book of Enoch or I Enoch, 285 (Epistle of Enoch), 286 (-'A Nature Poem': bur once again the unity of subjcct matter and literary form -the rcpcatcd rhetorical questions- ncatc a certain presumption in favour of thc 'intcrpolation' theory-), 2 8 & B (Apoca&pse qf Week), 23 (-Book of Noah*) and 323 (ch.

M. BLACK, ;Ihr Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch, 289. G.E.W. NICKELSBURG, *The Epistlc of Eaocb and the Qumran Literature-, ISS 33 (1982), 340:"a traditional picce, rc-used by this author'. "O G.W.E. NICKEUBURG, Icwish Lilerolure bemeen the Bible curd the Mishnah, 151. S . UHuG, Dm dthiopische Henochbuch, 673-674, 708, considers thcm part of the


Book of Dreantr.




aApocaiypse of Weekw but, when determining the evolution of chs. 91-93, he distinguishes a first stage in which there would have existed an apocalypse of Methuselah* (91.1.3b-10 and 92,3-5) and an apocalypse of Weeks* independent of each other. These two works would have been united later into one through the incorporation of redactional elements, and the whole divided at a third sta e giving origin to the text known to us in the Ethiopic versiod12. But. because the union of both apocalyptic elements would have occurred before the writing of the Aramaic text, we according to DEXINCER can consider him as another supporter of the independent origin of the ccApocalypse of Weeks*. In conclusion, the ccApocalypse of Weeks* is the only element that most modern scholars agree in recognizing as a previous and independent piece incorporated into his work by the redactor of the Episle of E n d , a hypothesis which is traditional among former commentators113. But when we examine the arguments that support this hypothesis, both among old-time commentators and recent authors, we are puzzled by their lack of consistency. The arguments are indeed varied, but can hardly be considered convincing. The only one adduced by MARTIN"^ is the apparent contradiction between the contents of 91,9 and 9 1,14.CHARLES confines himself to asserting this without introducing any argument. DOEVE'" exclusively relies on the use of the expression <<plantof justice,, (93,2.5.10), common in lQS, I Q H and CD, for asserting the Qumranic origin of the <<Apocalypse of Weeks* and its difference from the rest of the Epistle. But the same sentence appears also in 84.6 and 10.16. M. BUCK, in his commentary (p. 288), confines himself to reaffirming the antiquity of the .Apocalypse of Weeks,, as a proof that it could not have been the work of the Epistle's author who supposedly
11' F. DEXINGER, Henochs Zcltn~xrhe~rapokalypsc und oflene Probteme der Apoka&ptikfonchung (SPB 29) (Leiden 1911). 106-107. For a critical discussion of DEXINGCR'S hypothesis see J.C. VANDERK~M, -Studies in the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 E n d 931-10; 91: 11-I?)-, CBQ 46 (1984).


'I3 CHARLES, nrc Book of Enoclt, li, 128 and 218; MARTIN, Le Livre d'Hinoch, Loavii xciv-xcv and 237. ~iwd e~b,, M i . ' 1 J . W .DOEVE, -Dc ticn-wckcn-Apokalyps (I Henoch 931-10; 91:12-17): ecn Qumrandocument*, in: Vruct~te~r w r de Uithof. Studies opgedmgcn aan dr. H A . B m g e n (Utrecht 1974). 7-27.




wrote later, although, in an article expressly devoted to the problem, he claims to have found remnants of the recensional activity deriving from the insertion of the pre-extant aApocalypse of Weeks* into the Epktle of Enoch116. The parenesis of 91,l-10 would depend on 91,1 1 , the verse that, in a shorter form, brings to an end the seventh week in the Aramaic text. BLACK considers even 91,5-10 as a sort of pesher of 91,11, and sees in it a proof that the ccApocalypse of Weeks* is a composition older than and independent of the ~ ~ i r r l e "But ~ . it is equally possible to see the parallel and interrelated expressions of 91,8 and 91,ll as a proof of the author's identity. Besides, the differences between the Aramaic and the Ethio ic texts as an in 91.11 have been convincingly expounded by KNIBB"' effort made by the Ethiopic redactor to soften the problems presented by the dislocation of the text and to adapt the description of the last three weeks to the context of ch. 91. The other example of recensional activity pointed out by BLACKis still less convincing. BLACK claims to have found the end of the Aramaic version of the <<Apocalypse of Weeksm in the lines (most of them lost) preceding 91,19 in 4QEng 1 ii 13-16, lines that MILIK tries to identify with 91,10"~. But this is simply impossible. Without going into a discussion of the ri ht or wrong of his reading and reconstruction of the extant texlkm, it should suffice to indicate that, while all the elements of the .Apocalypse of Weeks,) preserved


M. BLACK, aThe Apocalypse of Weeks in the Light of WEnm, VT 28



"Such a hypothesis of a recension of the Apocalypse of Weeks presupposes what has long been argued, that the Apocalypse itself is an older composition, embedded in the revised and re-written ten of the Epistle of Enoch, but also expanded as well as expounded by the final editor of the Epistle... In the light of such observations, in particular with regard to recensional activity in a primitive wpy of the Apocalypse of Weeks, the views of earlier editors that this Apocalypse represented an older source incorporated in Ch. 91,1-10 may be held to be substantiated", -The Apocalypse of Week*, m. cir., 466 and 468. M A . KNIBB, nte Etlriopic Book o f Ettoclr. A ttcw ediriott itr the light of the Amtnoic Dead Sea Frapnents I (Oxford 1978). M. BLACK, *The Apocalypse of Week in the Light of WE&, VT28 (1978), 466-467: "We have, in faa, an exad parallel to the situation discussed above for xci.11, i.e. the fragmentary text between xci, 17 and 18 conceals, in this case, the wnduding lines of the Apocalypse of Weeks". l M J.C. VANDERKAM,*Studies in the Apocalypse of Week-, CBQ 46 (1984). 518, n. 24, correctly notes that the published plate "does not support Black's different readings in ii 14-15".





in Aramaic are written on the same fragment of a continuous scroll in the form of four consecutive columns, the lines in question belong to another fragment showing remnants of two columns. Since there is no direct link between the two fragments, the latter, with the remnants of 91,lO. could have been placed before or after the larger fragment which contains the aApocalypse of Weeks*, i.e., after ch. 94 where the fragment ends, or before ch. 92 where it starts; but in no case can it be located between the two ends, as inferred by BLACK'S hypothesis. The ending of the Aramaic a apocalypse of Weeks* has been lost at the top of the fifth column, but it seems materially unfeasible to locate there the relevant lines and the beginning of ch. 92. It is also impossible to know with certainty whether these lines, practically lost, had a proper correspondence in the Ethiopic version, although it is seemingly true that, in the Aramaic text, they formed part of the brief (<Apocalypseof Methuselah*, and in no way did they belong to the *Apocalypse of Weeks*. N I C K E L S B U R C , ~has ~ ~ put forward an argument of another type in his attempt to prove that the apocalypse of Weekst, has a different origin from the rest of the Epistle: the fact that the idea of election - pivotal in the apocalypse of Weeks), - is missing in the rest of the Epistle. But this difference can be explained by the fact that the *Apocalypse of Weeks,, offers a panorama revolving around the history of Salvation, in which election plays a central role, whereas this idea is less useful in the parenetic sections or in the admonitions. On the other hand, the polarity ((wise-erring opponentss, that NICKELSBURG considers essential in his article, is present through the whole work, including the aApocalypse of weeks,,lu, a fact that would rather suggest a unity of origin. It is true that the *Apocalypse of Weeks. constitutes a complete and consistent unit, but this does not imply that it could not have been created by the author of the rest of the epistle,,. An analysis of the contents, vocabulary and phraseology used would rather point to
12' G.W. E. NlW:LSBURG, -The Epistle of E n d and the Qumran Litcraturc*, JJS B(1982), 340, n. 2, According to NICKUSBURG (ibi&tit, 334), this polarity is to be found concentrated in three places: They arc the primary focus of one major section (89:9-=lo), where they are repeated and emphasized and bclaboured. Moreover, they occur at the cnd of thc book (104:9-105:2). Finally, the giving of wisdom to the wise is celebrated as the major eschatological event in the sewnth week in the Apocalypse of Weeks (9310 91:ll)".



an opposite conclusion. The distinction between the just and the sinners, and the contrast between the two, is common to the ~Apocalypse of Weeks. and the rest of the Epirlle of ~ n o c h ' ~ and ~ , we have already pointed out how the contrast between the wise and their erring opponents, indicated by NICKELSBURG as capital, may be found in both parts. And what is more, even the theme of riches that, opinion, is essential in the ~pirtle", may be in NICKELSBURG'S found in the Aramaic form of the ~Apocalypsen: aAt the end of it (the eighth week), they will acquire riches with justicealZ. Both parts allude to the fall and punishment of the Watchers (91,s-100.4). Not only the ccApocalypsen (93,l) but the Epistle as well (100,6; 104,12-13) refer to the <<books of Enochu and in both parts mention is made of the heavenly tables as a warrant for the truth of what has been said (93,2-103,2-3; 106,9). The expressions common to both parts are very frequent: <<paths of justiceu (91,14; 92,3-91,18; 94,1), rgreat eviln (93,4-106,3), agreat judgement>> (91,lS-100.4; 104,5), etc. In brief, I feel that, for want of evidence to the contrary, the surmise must be upheld of only one and the same author for the ccApocalypse of Weeks), and the rest of the Epistle of Enoch. All thin considered, MILIK'S position seems the most correct in that respect . The author of the Epistle of Enoch has composed his work in a sensible way. After the usual introduction, which provides the literary framework and presents the composition as a body of revelations that Enoch transmits to Methuselah, he offers us a panorama of the history of the world in the apocalypse of Weeks,. The history is divided into ten weeks: seven weeks cover the period running from Enoch to the time of the composition of the work, described in 93,310, while the other three, described in 91,ll-17, cover the time from the present of the author till the end of time. The fact that the Ethiopic text had been broken apart at that stage, as assumed by all


An element underlined by J.C. VANDERKAM, Enoch and rlte Growth of an Apocalyptic Tmdirion, 145, where the pertinent referenus are given. I" G.W.E. NICWISBURG,-The Apocalyptic Message of 1 Enoch 92-105-, CBQ 39 (1977), 309-328, *Riches, the Rich, and God's Judgement in 1 Enoch 92-105 and the Gaspel According to Luke*, NTS 25 (1978-79), 324-344. 4QEd 1 iv 17. The Ethiopic text speaks in 93.13 of acquiring "houses".
MlUK does not give any argument, but his assertion: "No serious evidence exists to disprove that the author of this Apocalypse of Weeks is the same authqr that composed the r u t of the Epistle" (7he Books of Enoch, 255-256), has not been diiproved by the later efforts of BLACK and NICKELSBURG. J.C. VANDERKAM, Enoch and (he Growtlt o f an Apocalyptic Tmdirion, 146, reachcs the same wnclusion.



editors, was eventually demonstrated by 4 Q E d 1 v, which has presewed in one fragment pan of the description of the seventh week (93.9-10) immediately followed by the 8th to 10th week (91,ll-17). Each week is marked by a peak event or by a central personage: 1st Enoch; 2nd the deluge; 3rd Abraham; 4th the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai; 5th the construction of the Temple of Solomon; 6th the exile; 7th the election of the just as a aplant of justicew. But the most interesting element is that, from that moment until the agreat eternal judgement,,, three further weeks will still elapse, so that, for the first time, there is introduced a periodicity of the eschatological era that will conclude in the creation of a new heaven and the elimination of evil, to be followed by "numberless weeks, eternal both in goodness and justice". The author then expresses his ideas on good and evil, justice and ill-obtained riches, on the final outcome of a just or an impious life quite beyond the apparent failure of the just, etc. in a series of curses and blessings and in the description of what will happen at the end of times. The work concludes (ch. 105) with an exaltation of the Enochic writings that will illuminate the just at the end of the world's history. An important element within the scheme of periodicity of history of Weeks,, is the determiapplied by the author of the <<Apocalypse nation of the moment when the description of the past (awen& prophecy) is replaced by the announcement of the future, since this transition fixes the time during which the author lived and composed his work. The general opinion1*' situates this break at the end of the seventh week, and considers the author as a member of the group of those elected as a plant of justice, whose appearance marks the beginning of the eschatological era. Among modern scholars, it was mainly D E X I N G E R ' ~ who suggested that the time of the author coincides with the beginning of the eighth week, and that the <<swords therein mentioned would constitute a historical allusion to Judas Maccabeus. But VANDERKAM has rightly stressed the central character of the number seven and the structuring of the ccApocaiypse of Weeksu around that figure129. He has further demonstrated that
' 2 1 Of the older commentators, for example, CHARLES, liii, and h f A R n N , xfiv-xcv. This opinion is shared by the majority of the modern commentators: UHUG, 713; C~RR1~~-PISiTiRo, 127; SACCHI, 639; VANDERKAM, 149. F. DBXINGER, Hcnochs ZEhnwochmapokalypsc, 136-110. J.C. VANDERKAM, *Studies in the Apocalypse of Weeks., CBQ 46 (I*), 518-521.




the inner arrangement of the apocalypses justifies the view 'xing the break between the present and the future at the end of the seventh week. The allusion to the esword>> with which the just are armed in order to execute judgement, refers to the eschatological battle and the final victory over the wicked. It is quite significant that in the Animal Apocalypse (90,19) the same idea and the same expression are used in the description of the final battle, and that in an apocalypse partially preserved in Qumran, 4Q246, the conclusion of of the eschatological battle is precisely characterised by the <<resting the sword^'^^. On account of the accuracy with which the author divides the complete history of the world in weeks, the attempt to determine whether the term is used as a schematic designation of an uncertain duration, or with a precise chronological meaning (a meaning apparently reinforced by the author's allusion on one occasion to the seventh part of the last week), should not be considered surprising. The Ethiopic commentators, as indicated by MILIK'", ascribe a duration of 700 years to each week, bringing the estimated duration of the world up to 7000 years. On the other side, THORN DIKE^^^, who considers the ~Apacalypseof Weeks* as a secret history of the Qumranic community, affirms that "week" means, as in Dan 9.24-27. a week of years or a period of seven years, and that the first seven weeks give us, in a sort of code, 49 years of the history of the Qumranic community. More recently (and more seriously) K. KOCH has tried to determine the chronological value of shabua'. In his first article on this topic133 he concludes that weeks four to seven represent units of 490 years; in the last work devoted to the subject134, KOCH extends the same figure to the first three weeks. According to him, the author of the aApocalypse of Weeks*, or the teachings of the Ten Periodsn as he prefers to call it, relies on a "short" chronoSee F. GARCIAMARTINEZ, 4 2 2 4 6 iTipo del Anticristo o Libenador escatol6gico?*, in: V. COLLAW- E. ZURRO (eds.), El Misrerio de la Palabm (Madrid 1983 229 244, and posteo ch. 6, pp. 162-179. J.T. MlLtK, 7l1eBooks of E!toch. 2%. J.P. THORNDIKE, *The Apocalypse of Wccks and the Qumran Sect*, RQ 2 (1%!$2), 163-184. K. K M , *Die mysteriosen Zahlen der judaischen Konige und die apokalyg tixhen Jahrwochens, M 21) (1978), 433-441. K. K M , ~Sabbatstructurder Geschichte. Die sogennante Zehn-WochenApokalypse (I Hen 93,l-19; 91,ll-17) und das Ringen um die alttestamentlichen Chronologien im spaten Israeli~entum-, ZAW 95 ( l w ) , 403-430.

' '"





logy, different from the "medium" chronology of the masoretic text and from the "long" one of the Greek translation, with the ultimate purpose of refuting the chronological calculations of the Maccabean party that would seemingly have led to the chronological modifications apparent in the present masoretic text. These modifications intended to consecrate the year 164 B.C., the year of the purification of the temple and of the establishment of the feast of hanukkah, as the summit of history and the beginning of the messianic era. KWH'S hypothesis seems interesting, but too artificial because it involves a certain manipulation of the chronological data in an effort to adapt them to his presupposition. The positive side of this theory would be the emphasis laid by the author on the sabbatic structure of history and metahistory. The antimaccabean bias of the work seems, though, more problematic; this cannot be deduced from the total absence of references to the Maccabean revolt or to the purification of the temple without producing previous and independent evidence that the work is subsequent to those events, an assumption that KOCH takes for granted and as a point of departure for his theory, but whose reality is, in my opinion, far from being proved. P. SACCHI has chosen sounder ground when analysing the mndifications of the apocal tical ideas of the work in relation to the former Enochic literat~re~~' The reaction against the idea of the early apocalyptic, which upheld the theory of angelic origins of evil, is obvious in the Epistle:
I have sworn unto you, sinners: In the same manner that a mountain has never turned into a servant, nor shall a hill (cver) become a maidservant of a woman; likewise, neither has sin been expartcd into the world. It is the people who have themselves invented it. And those who commit it shall come under a great curse. (98,4)

The emphasis laid on the freedom of man and on the responsibility derived from it seems equally clear. Less clear is the other element of

Cfr. P. SACCHI, A p l i f i dell'Antico Tcstanrcnro, 451; 4 1 'Libra dei Vigilanti e l'apocalittica-, Henoclt 1 (1979). 44-92; *L'apocalittiea c il problema dcl male-. P d 5 di VirP 25 (1980), 325-334, -Ordine m m i c o c prospc~tivaultraterrena nel postesilio. II problem dcl male c l'origine dcll'Apocalittica-, RivBib 30 (1982), 11-33; aRiflessioni sull'cssenza dell'Apocalittica: peccato d'origine e liberta dell'uomom, Henoch 5 (1983), 31-58. Sce now his wllccted articles L'opocolifficagiudaica e la st15 stm'a.




evolution pointed out by SAC CHI'^^ in 91,15: the progressive introduction of the figure of a mediator implying the idea that the judgement will not be made directly by God,but through the intermediacy of the watchers. Although this interpretation remains possible, the absence of support in the Aramaic version, the internal variants of the Ethiopic tradition in the paragraph under study, and the fact that this idea is not apparent in 91,7-9 or in 100,4 lead us to consider it questionable. One thing seems evident, namely that the author of the ccEpistleu remains within the Enochic tradition and maintains a continuous dialogue with the previous Enochic works. The epistolary character conferred on his work draws its inspiration from the letter of Enoch incorporated in the Book of Watcllers (ch. 14-19), to which he alludes with the expression (you shall have no peace,,. The double allusion to the fallen angels is a further sign of knowledge of the Book of Wachers, whose pivotal thesis he modifies by insisting on the intrahuman origin of evil. The same scheme of periodicity of history which underlies the <<Apocalypseof Weeksu is paralleled in the seventy generations through which the fallen angels will remain imprisoned. Enoch's final allusion apparently refers to the Enochic wisdom in whose tradition the c<Epistle,,is rooted:
And again another secret I know, that my books shall be given to the rightwus and the ious and the wise to become a cause of joy and uprightness and much wisdom1'. (104.12)

It seems equally true that the author of the ecEpistlew adopts the stance of a pone-parole of a group whose formation is considered as the pivotal point of the seventh week. MILIK'S opinion138, which places the origin of the work against the background of a hellenised city where the Jews would be a minority (and specifically in some of the Palestine coastal towns on the basis of the general atmosphere that the work reflects and the fact that the description of the captain's or the navigator's fears in 104,4-9 reveals a familiarity with a maritime

(19S5k 257-269.

P. SACCHI, *Enoch Ethiopico 91,15 c il problema della mediazione-, Henoch 7

BUCK'S translation, The Book o f Enuch or 1 Enoch, 99. E. ISAACtranslates: "to the righteous and the w i s e shall be givcn the Scriptures of joy, but the context makes dear that the author is talking of Enoch's own writings. IJ8 J.T. MILIK, ~ w ko s f ~ n o c h24wmi. ,



atmosphere), does not seem conclusive, and ignores the essential element we have mentioned above. Equally unconvincing are the attempts by CHARLES and other oldtime xholarsU9 to identify this group with the Pharisees and to qualify the author as a Pharisee and a denouncer of the Sadducean party. As MILIK points out, the accusation of idolatry made against the enemies (99,6-9; 91,9; 104,9) can in no way be applied to the Sadducees. Both DOEVEand THORNDIKE identify the group in which the apocalypse of Weeks* would have been generated, as the Qumran community". It is true that the description of the appearance of the community of the just in the seventh week offers an excellent parallel, as regards contents and language, to the description of the origins of the Qumran community in CD i,7-9 and, above all, in l Q S viii, 4-10, a parallel so close that NICKEUBURG goes so far as to refer to a triple testimony of one and the same tradition14'. It is also a fact that the Epistle makes no mention at all of the post-exilic Temple, and that this could be related to the controversy over the temple, as known through the Qumranic writings. But it is equally true that all specific polemic against the Temple, the cult or priesthood, is lacking in the Epistle, as are also the specific exegetic traditions of the Qumranic community and its characteristic ideas, such as dualism. These arguments lead NICKEUBURG rightly to refute the hypothesis of a Qumranic origin of the composition. As for ourselves, we could add that a text like 98,4, quoted above, is incompatible with the characteristic determinism of Qumran, according to which the portion of light or darkness inherent to each man determines his fate. N I C K E ~ B U R opts14*, G as regards the apocalypse of Weeks,,, for a source in the Hasidic circles, and sees an indication of this origin in the allusions to the ujust and good*, made in 103,9 and in 104,12, and in those references to the ccjust/piousu in 100,4-5 and 102,4. He himself recognises, nevertheless, that our knowledge of

ntt?Boo& of Enoch, liii-liv; MARTIN, Le Liw d ' f i o c h , xcvi-xcvii. J.W. DowF aDe tien-weken-Apokalyps: een Qumrandocument- and J.P. THORNDIKE, *The Apocalypse of Weeks and the Qumran Seam. 1 4 ' "Almost certainly we have three testimonies to a common tradition about the rise of the righteous community in the end-time", *The Epistle of Enoch and the Qumran Literature*. 345. j4' G.W.E. N~cKuseuRo, on. cir. 347-348.
ln C H A W ,



Hasidim is very limited, and that the terms used may equally have a merely descriptive value without reference to any specific group. In my opinion143, the sources of the work must be sought, as in the case of the Book of Dreams and the Book of Watchers, in the apocalyptic tradition. The references to the other Enochic works and the fact that, in 4QEnC,the Epktle was incorporated in them, allow us to identify it as a product of the same tradition. The Qumranic parallels are perfectly explainable taking into account that the Qumranic community has its ideological roots in that same apocalyptic tradition. The problem of dating the Epistle of Enoch is closely related to that of the origin and the unity of the work. A first fixed "ante quem" element is provided by the paleographic dating of the copy 4QEng, which MILIK situates in the middle of the 1st century B.c.'~~. Another important element is that of the orthographical characteristics of this same manuscript emphasised by MILIK, which postulate a date prior to that demanded by the paleographic dating of the copy for the composition of the original on which it depends. The alternation of plene forms with the same words defectively written, the relative pronoun ' 5 corrected to ' 1 ,the presence of -1,the inconsistency in the dissimilation of dentals, etc., lead MILIK to place the composition of the original on which the Qumranic copy depends at about the year 100 B.C. This conclusion is compatible with the traditional opinion according to which the composition of the Epiktle dates from the beginning of the 1st century B.C., although in itself it would not entail anything other than the lower and later limit of dating. Moreover, MILIK'Sconclusion clearly contradicts the dating he himself proposes for the original on which 4QEnC is based, that is, the manuscript in which the Epistle of Enoch already appears inte rated within the Enochic corpus. As far as MILIK is con~erned'~', the original of this manuscript would belong to the end of the 2nd century B.C., a logical conclusion on account of the similarity of its orthography to that of lQIso and IQS. But, in view of the dating of the orthographical features of the original on which 4 Q E d depends, and
See the artictes quoted in note 103. J.T. MIUK, n ~ B cO O ~ SOJ E ~ I O C 246. ~~, 14' J.T. MILIK, rite Bookc o f Enoch, 183 asserts that the orthographic characterisa s made tics of 4QEnC "justify a fairly definite conclusion that the copy of 4Q EnC w from an old manuscript, doubtless belonging to the last quarter of the second century B.C. (date of 1 0 Isa and 1 0 S)".



considering that MILIKthinks anyhow that the Epbrle circulated as an independent work for some time before its incorporation in the Enochic complex represented by 4QEnC and that he dates this incorporation in the last quarter of the 2nd century B.C., it makes no sense to date the original of the independent work at a simultaneous or a later period. The dating of the Epktle's incorporation into the Enochic corpus at the end of the 2nd century B.C. automatically requires a earlier dating for the original of the independent work. The traditional opinion that dates the Epirlle in the 1st century B.C is conditioned by the recognition of the apocalypse of Weeks* as an independent and older block incorporated by the author of the Epistle, while the same authors who propose a dating in the 1st century B.C. for the Epistle, postulate a premaccabean time for the <<Apocalypse of Weeks>>. MILIKvindicates the unity of the work but, convinced as he is that "literary analysis of the work will scarcely provide us with the chronological details which it was thought could be found in he postulates the minimal dating for the whole work, while basing his theory on the orthographical features of the Qumranic copy of the independent work. But if one demonstrates that the traditional opinion situating the aApocalypse of Weeks>>in a premaccabean epoch is correct, and if it is taken for granted that both the apocalypse of Weeks, and the rest of the Epistle are the work of one and the same author - as we consider sufficiently proved -, the unavoidable conclusion must be that the whole work has a premaccabean dating. A s to the dating of the -Apocalypse of Weeks., the traditional opinion seems the only correct one, once it has been admitted that the transition from the past to the future, from the ex eventu prophecy to the prediction, or in other words, the time when the author composed his work, takes place in the seventh week. This is the dating method used for all historical apocalypses, from Daniel's to the later apocalyptic compositions. The last concrete and recognisable historical facts presented as a prophecy provide the description of the time contemporary with the author, which is the point of departure for the vague and indeterminate prediction of the future. In the <<Apocalypse of Weeks,,, the last events clearly described are the destruction of Jerusalem and the exile of the people in the sixth week, as well as the

lJ6 J.T. MILIK,l l t t .

Books of Ettoch, 49




election of the <<plantof justice*, the group with which the author identifies himself at the end of the seventh week. According to the author, the exile extends till the emergence of his community. The time when this community is elected ccas a witness of justice* is characterised by the predominance of a wicked generation. 4 Q M has demonstrated that 91,11 (considered as redactional by former scholars) pertains to the description of the seventh week and follows immediately after 93,10, which implies that the ccrooting out of the foundations of violence and the structure of falsehood therein to execute judgement,,, a task that devolves upon the ccplant of justice*, has not been completed yet, and belongs already to the future predicted by the author, which will be accomplished through the uswords entrusted to them in the eighth week. Since, as proved by K N I B B ' ~the ~ , omission of the return from exile and of the period of restoration is current in the literature of that time, the only really characteristic element which might indicate the period when the plant of justice appears, is the complete absence of any allusion to the persecution by Antiochus IV and the consequent Maccabean revolt. The traditional opinion, which sees in this absence the proof that the ccApocalypse of Weeks, was composed before the outbreak of the persecution, seems to me the only plausible explanation of this silence. This is, certainly, an argument ex silentio, but a weighty one, if compared to the treatment that these fateful events are given in the ccApocalypse of Animalss and in the Book of Daniel, both of which were composed after the outbreak of the crisisla. The fact that Jubilees seems to know and quote the Epistle of Enoch, together with the other Enochic writings149, is yet another argument .that confirms this premaccabean dating of the -Epistle,,, in view of the date of the Jubilees composition nowadays generally admitted1%. Though far from dramatic, the contributions made by the new manuscripts to a proper understanding of the Epistle of Enoch, are,
' 4 1 M. A. WIBB,*The Exile in the Literature of the Intertestamental Period*, Heyihrop Jounral 17 (1976), 255272. The same conclusion is reached by J.C. VANDERKAM, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition, 142-149. ' 4 1 J.C. VANDERKAM,*Enoch Traditions in Jubilees and Other Second Century Sources-, 231-241. This is the argument employed by N I C K ~ F B U R Jewish G , Litemrum b e m e n the Bible and rhe Mishnah, 150, to suggest a date earlier than usually accepted.



none the less, interesting and varied, albeit, given the fragmentary character of the testimonies available, not always decisive. a) The first contribution consists in the clarification of the beginning of the work. It is well known that the oldest Ethiopic manuscript available's1 sets the beginning of the Epirlle of Enoch at 92,1, with to the designation of *Fifth (book),,. This has prompted U H L ~ C ' * ~ consider 91.1-10.18-19 as the termination of the Book of Dream. Such a division of the material enables him to interpret Enoch's exhortations to Methuselah and his descendants as part of the narrative framework that embodies the Book of Dreams in a perfect correspondence to the reference to Methuselah in 83,1, at the beginning of the Book of D r m s . But this position does not seem correct to me. The breaking apart of the Ethiopic text in chs. 91-93, quite obvious now in the light of the new Qumranic manuscripts, is certainly previous to the copy of this Ethiopic manuscript which already contains it, and implies that the manuscript situates part of the <<Apocalypseof Weeks,, within the Book of Dreams. This manifest error prevents us from allotting an excessive value to the division it indicates and, in fact, E. ISAAC, who has opted for this manuscript as a basis for his translation, abides by the traditional division. In any case, 4 Q E d 1 ii completely disavows that hypothesis, since 92,l is located there, right after 91,18-19~~~, both being preceded by the remnants of 91,lO. Considering that only a couple of letters have been presented from the first column of 4 Q E d , it is impossible to know the beginning of the Epistle in Aramaic, although it seems certain that it did not start at 92,l. b) We-have already clearly stated our interpretation of the work as a unity of which the apocalypse of Weeks, is an integral pan, and placed an emphasis on some elements, such as the mention of the riches in the Aramaic text, that vindicated such an interpretation. The fact that 4QE# has preserved parts both of the apocalypses and of

Is' The one described by E. HAMMERSCI~MI~T, A I / I ~ O & C ~ C HandccI~~if~len vonr T&&e (Wicsbaden 1973), 107-108, from the XVth century. This manuscript is designated as ms. TS2 (=TBn& 9a) in the translation of UHuG, 476, and as ms. A (= Kebrh 9/11) in the translation of ISAAC, 6. "2 S. UHLIG, Dm Utiiiopische Henochbtrcli, 673-674. UHLlc's assertion: "wird naeh xc 19 und vor xcii 1 ein vacat markiert: Es ist auf Tafel XX1 zu sehen', is incomprehensible to me. The wcaf only exists in MILIK'S reconstruetion on the left part of the column, while the preserved text, reproduced in plate XXI, only shows the right part of the column, in which there is no wcaf.




the rest of the Epistle does not, obviously, exclude the possibility that they may have a different origin but does, indeed, facilitate the comprehension of the work as a unity, and demonstrates that, anyhow, this unity already existed about the year 100 B.C. c) An element where the contribution of the new manuscripts appears to be decisive is the correction of the dislocation undergone by the apocalypse of Weeks* in the Ethiopic translation. 4 Q E d has justified the critics who rearranged the order of the Ethiopic text and placed the tenth week in the natural order. d) 4 Q E d has, morover, demonstrated that 91,ll does not constitute a redactional addition, but forms part of the description of the seventh week, since it immediately follows 93,lO in the manuscript, and precedes with no interruption the description of the eighth week of 92,12. This allows a more accurate determination, within the seventh week, of the historical time during which the author actually lived, as well as the date of composition of the complete work. e) The characteristics of 4 Q E d suggest that the Epistle circulated as an independent work because the manuscript apparently contained that work onlyw. Just as in the case of the other Enochic works, this opinion, although most reasonable in principle, may not be unreservedly asserted in this instance, because neither the beginning nor the end of the manuscript have been preserved. f) What indeed may undoubtedly be affirmed, thanks to 4QEnC, is that the Eptrrle of Enoch had already been incorporated in the corpus of the Enochic literature by the end of the 2nd or at the beginning of the first century B.C. g) Thanks also to this manuscript, it has become manifest that ch. 105 formed part of the original Aramaic text of the ccEpistle,). The critics used to consider it as a strange addition, a position that was reinforced by its absence from the Greek translation, which jumps directly from ch. 104 to ch. 106. Although sufficient to prove the existence of the chapter in Aramaic, the testimony of the manuscript is too scanty for a possible resolution of the problem posed by 105.2, in which the critics clearly saw a Christian interpolation. MILIK eliminates it in his reconstruction, but BL~CK"' deems that the manuscript has sufficient space for the sentence under discussion to be reconstructed, and interprets it as a continuation of Enoch's speech

'" See J.T. MIUK, The Books of E n d , 146-147.


M. BUCK, The Book of Etioclt


I Etaoch, 318-319.



in ch. 104, after discarding the reference <<so says the Lorda of verse 1. Nothing may be concluded with certainty because of the state of the manuscript. h) Equally interesting are the contributions of 4QEne in relation to chs. 106-107. The main problems posed by these chapters are the following: are these chapters part of the Epbtle, or are they a supplement to it?; in the latter case, what is their origin?; were they incorporated by the author of the Epirtle, or by the author of the final Enochic compilation? The traditional opinion is unanimous in asserting that the chapters constitute a supplement whose source is the lost <<Bookof Noah,,, but is divided on the question of whether the incorporation was carried out by the author of the Episle or by the final compiler. The new manuscripts do not contribute any new element for the resolution of the first two queries, which should be analysed within the field of literary criticism. On the other hand, the consensus on their additional character and their provenance from the ccBook of Noah* seem to me fully justified1%. Admitting, therefore, that they are an addition from the *Book of Noah,,, it remains to be determined if the agent responsible for such an insertion was the author of the %Epistle%of the premaccabean period or the later compiler of the Enochic corpus. i) The fact that the elements of the copy of the Epistle of Enoch preserved as an independent work ( 4 Q E d ) conclude in ch. 94, has deprived the supporters of the theory that these chapters were added, as a supplement, by the author of the Episle, of the possibility of indicates that, in the verifying such a hypothesis. V A N D E R K A M ' ~ ~ Aramaic form of the Epistle, these chapters constitute a literary inclusion together with ch. 91, a fact that would entail the insertion's havin been made by the author of the Epistle. But MILIK'Sargumen& that the figure of Noah. added to the complete Enochic compilation, has the same literary function as the designation of Moses' successor at the end of the Pentateuch, offers another alternative explanation that is equally possible. The testimony of 4QEnC, the only manuscript which has preserved these chapters, is not fully conclusive, but vindicates, in my opinion, the thesis that this addition

lS6 See supm ch. 1, pp 27-28. ' s I J.C. VANDERKAM. Eftoch artd rite Growflt of art


Trodifion, 174-

ISB J.T. MII.lK, rite Baoks of E~toclt.183-184.



should be considered as a colophon or an appendix to the complete Enochic corpus. The first sign in that sense is precisely the fact that the addition was preserved only in one of the copies which testify to the joint composition of the Enochic material. The second and most significant one is that there is a two-line vacat in this copy (4QEnC5 i 24-25) that separates ch. 106 from 105 preceding it. It is true that the copyist of 4QEnC makes a full use of the vacat for marking the paragraphs. But this is the only w e of a double vacat within the whole preserved text, and would suggest a major division and a system of separating these chapters from the preceding text of the Epistle. If, as proposed by MILIK, the compilation of the Enochic writings as a unit was made at Qumran, it would be easier to ascribe the addition of the chapters to the Qumranic redactor, since the Book of Noah was well known and very frequently used in the Qumran scriptorium, as demonstrated by the numerous works originating there in which we may discover its traces. In any case, there is evidence in 4QEnc that the incorporation had already been made at the end of the 2nd century B.C. and that, ever since then, these remnants of the Noachic work have survived firmly anchored in the Enochic tradition.


THE BOOK OF GIANTS In contrast to the other Enochic works, whose publication by MILIKin 1976 has resulted, as already noticed1, in an ovewhelming flood of studies, the Book of Giants, edited together with the other Enochic fragments, has not yet attracted the attention it really deserves2. This is understandable in view of the fact that only a part of the material preserved and identified as belonging to this work has so far been published, which induces us to wait for the complete publication of the material available before venturing to study its fragments. This compels us, anyhow, to treat the material differently from the other Enoch fragments when it comes to introducing the material published so far. Although the only manuscript of the Book of Giants of Cave 4 published 50 far (4QEnGiantf) forms part of the scroll that contained

See the references given supra, chapter two, note 3, and F. GARC~A ~AR'IINEZ EJ.C. TIGCIIELAAR, -1 E I I O C ~ and the Figure of Enoch. A Bibliography of Studies 1970-I-, RQ 14/53 (1989), 149-176. To my knowledge the only specific paper dedicated to the ~ B o a k of Giants* is the one published by H J . K L I M W ~ ; *Der Buddha Henoch: Qumran und Turfan*, ZciIscMff IW.Religions- w d Geistespschichte 32 (1980). 367-377. KLIMWIT postulates a direct line of transmission from Qumran to Nani through the Elchasaite community and seeks iconographic parallels to the figure of Noah and his three sons in the f the tree with three branches. The article of A. Manichaean representations o DUWN~-SOMMER, *EsSCnisme et Bouddhismc~,Acadd~niedes lnscrip~ionrn BellesLettres. Compfes Rendus des skances de 1980 (Paris 1981). 698-715, dacs not take into consideration the Book of Giants. The most important contribution has bcen the new edition of the Aramaic fragments by K. BEYER, Die amntliisclrerr Teae w;vn Toten Meer, 258-268, with numerous different readings and an ordening of the fragments different from the one of the editor. Another German translation can hc found in S. UHUG, Dac bllriopisclre He~toclrbuch,755-760, and an English translation, together A with an edition of the Aramaic fragments in JA. FTZh4Yti.R - DJ. HARRIKGTON, Manual of Palestinian Aramaic T u u . 68-79. A monograph of J.C. REEVES,Jewish Lon irr Maniclraear~Cosmoga,ry: Snrdies in the ' B w k of Giants' Tmditioiw (Monographs of the Hebrew Union College) has been announced, but it has not appeared p t . For a synthetic presentation of the problems involved, see A.S. VAN UER WoUDE, "Fiinfzehn Jahre Oumranforschung (1974-1985)*, n t e o l ~ c h e Rwdrchau 54 (lw), 259-261.





other Enochic works ( 4 ( 2 ~ n ' ) ~none , of the elements preserved in it appears in the Enochic compilation transmitted in Ethiopic (1 Enoch). This is, therefore, a different work, of Enochic character undoubtedly, since it was copied together with other Enochic works, but lost as a consequence of not having been included within the Ethiopic Enoch. All the credit for the identification of this lost work and for its partial recovery goes to MILIKwho, showing as much intuition as erudition, succeeded in following through many different literary works the trail of the elements that proved necessary to unify the scanty Qumranic fragments and give them their proper significance4. MILIK'S intuition consisted in surmising that the Qumranic fragments were the remnants of the lost work that, some centuries later, served as a basis for Mani in composing the work whose title in Middle-Persian is Kawrin, 'The Giants". There prevailed the reasonable supposition that a Book of Giants had seen the light prior to Mani, following Syncellus's assertion that ccin the year 2585, while roaming in the fields, Kainan came across the manuscript of the giants and put it away*'. This surmise was confirmed by the Gelasian Decree which cites a Liber d e Ogia n o m i n e
gigunte apocryphur.

qui post diluvium c u m dracone ab haereticis pugnacse perhibetur, It was also a well-known fact that Mani had carnposed a
~ i a n t s and ~

Book of

the suspicion had been growing, since as early

This conclusion of MIIJK, 7 l ~ c Books of Et~och, 310, is to be accepted without reserve. It is based on the form of the letters, the quality of the leather, the ordering " . thus of the t e n and the orthography, identical in 4QEnC and in 4 ~ E n ~ i a n u We accept not only that the other Enochic compositions included in 4QEnC were copied by the same scribe that copied 4QEnGiantsu, but also that these four texts were copied in one and the same manuscript, which has received two sigla in order only t o distinguish their contents. MII.IK published the first results of his investigations in two papers that appeala lumitre des red simultaneously: ~Problbmes de la IittCrature htnochique fragments aramtens de UumrBn-, HTR 64 (1971), 333-378, and -Turfan et Q u m r h . Livre d w GCants juif et manichtkn*, in: G. JEREMIAS, H.W. KUHN and H. SIEGEMANN (eds.), Tradition und Glaube. Das fnlhe Christenrum in seiner Un~welr(G&tingen 1971), 117-127. AA. MoSSt(AMMER, Georgius SynceNus, Eclogo Clrronogmphica (Bibliotheca S a i torum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana) (Teubner, Leiprig I W ) 90. , ypa*: r;v y i y a v r ~ v according to the title given in the list of Timotheus of B antium collected by JA. FABRICIUS in his Coder ApacrypI~usN.T. (Hamburg 1 7 6 Vd. 1-11, 139. To this hook there are many references in the Manichean compositions, which give it as title: Sifr a/-jabobimh in Arabic, Kawffn in MiddlePersian, Book of tl~e Giants in Coptic, etc.





as the 18th century7, that the sources from which Mani had drawn his inspiration, had been the Enochic works and the y p a + i ~ " o v v{uavr"o already mentioneds. But nothing could be unreservedly affirmed because not only the supposedly Pre-Manichean Book of Giants but the Manichean version had been lost. Fortunately, among the Manichean manuscripts unearthed at ~urfan', a series of fragments were spotted containing translations or citations from the book of Mani. It was their publication by HENNING" which enabled MILIK, by resorting to the names of the giants, whose Aramaic form is preserved in the translation into Middle-Persian, to identify the Qumranic fragments as remnants of the Book of Giants that had been lost. Once the identification had been confirmed, the remaining elements of the Manichean K a w h enabled MILIKto recognise some Qumranic fragments, previously published, as well as other still unknown manuscripts, as copies of the same lost Book of Giants.

The previously published copies that have now been identified as remnants of the Book of Giants are the following:

In the Histoire critique de Manicltke et du ManichCisme by Isaac de h a s a b r e , quoted by W.B. HENNING, -The Book of thc Giants*., BSOAS 11 (194346). 52. 'Whcreas ALFARIC,Les Ecrifures Manich4ennes, 11, 32 (quoted by HENNING) identifies the Libro de Ogio with thc Book of the Giants to which Syncellus refers, MtLtK considers the rcfcrcncc of the Gclasian Decree as a proof of thc Latin translation of the Manichean composition, an idea already expounded by M.R. JAMES, ITS 6 (190.5). 563-564. See W. L F eFiinfirig Jahre Arbeit in den iranixhcn Handschriften der dcutschen Turfan-Sammlunp, ZDMG 106 (1956), 5-22, W. SUNDERMANN, -Stand und Aufgabcn dcr iranistischen Turfanforschung*, Mitteil~rngert &s Im~iarts fur Otienrfmchung 15 (1%9), 127-1137; M. B O Y A ~ Catalogus of the Iranian Manusuipu br the Manicltcan Scripl itt the Geman TUrfm CoIIection (Dcutxhe Akadcmic der W i n s c h a f t e n zu Berlin, Iauitut fur Oricntforxhung, Ver~ffentlichungNr. 45) (Berlin 1960). 'O W.B. HENNING, -The Book of the Giants-, BSOAS 11 (1943-46), 52-74. HENNINGhad previously published a Turfan manuscript, M 625 c, as a proof that Mani was familiar with the Book of Enoch: ~ E i nmanichiiisches Henochbuch-, Siwgsberichre der preussisclten Akadetnie der Wusenschaffen(1934), 27-35.



This was originally edited by MILIK himself together with lQ24 as "Deux Apocryphes en Arameen" in DJD I, 97-99, PI.XIX-XX. 31 fragments have been preserved from the manuscript, which I would date back to the middle of the 1st century B.C., although with so few letters preserved that MILIK felt bound to point out in the editio princeps: "Le peu de mots conserve ne permet pas une identification, mCme titre d'hypothese". The only fragments showing a certain amount of text are fragment 1, in which MIUK now incorporates fragments 6 and 23, and fragment 9, to which he adds fragments 14 and 15. The contents of the first correspond to one of Kavh's fragments, the second page of fragment I, which apparently describes the situation of abundance and prosperity that would follow the deluge". The second grouping of fragments refers to the knowledge of the mysteries and the destruction of many of them, followed by a mention of the giants ( i 7 1 3 1 ) in 9.3, family scenes in the history of the giants and in that of the watchers. To these two new groups of fragments assembled by MrUK we could add that of fragments 16 and 17, taking into account the upper part of the l m e d of 17,1, which could correspond to the remnants preserved in 16,3, and the fact that both fragments belong to the beginning of a column, as well as the group of fragments 24 and 15 taking into account the interlineary addition and the spacing of lines common to both. But these groupings do not augment the quantity of the comprehensible text nor do they permit the location of the fragments in the Book of Giants. Still more important is fragment 27, that preserves a reference to Mahaway m lo), Baraq'el's son, one of the giants whose name appears both in the Kawcin and in other Qumranic copies of the work, according to which IQ23 is just another copy of the Book of Giants that had been lost12.

" See HEWING, -The Book of the Giants*, 57 and 61. If the order in which the facts are narrated in 1 Enoch can be used as an indication, the order in wbieh HENNING prints the two pages of frag. I should be changed. The first preserves elements which can be related to 1 Enrrch 12, 13 and 14, and can be found in 4~~~:Cran 13, l . whereas r~ the elements of the second page seem to correspond to 1 Etroch 10,17-19. l2 K. BEYER, Die am~?tdrscherl Texre,259. 267-68, also considers as a copy of the Book o f the GIUJIIS lQ24 (DJD I, 99, PI. XX), a work of which 24 fragmenrs have been preserved and which is identified by the editors as eprabablement une apocalyg


It has only one fragment of the Herodian period with four lines as a text. It was originally published by BAILLETin DJD 111, pages 90-91, PI. XVII, as "Fragment de Rituel (?)". The fragment repeatedly mentions the immersion of a tablet in the water, no doubt with the intention of erasing what was written on its surface. This corresponds to the second page of fragment j of the Kuwcin, which renders a dream of Ohyah (Sam in Middle-Persian) in which a tablet bearing three mysterious signs is cast into water. In the midrash of Shemihaza and Azazel, each of Shemihazah's sons, 'Ohyah and Hahyah, have a dream. One sees a stone tablet covered with writing and an angel with a knife who scrapes all lines until only one, with four words, is left. The other son sees a forest and another angel who brandishes an axe and fells all the trees, leaving only one with three branches. Both dreams are interpreted in connection with the deluge and the saving of Noah and his three sons. The first dream appears as a simple transposition, concealing a positive interpretation, of 'Ohayah's dream which, in 2Q26 and in the fragment corresponding to the Kuwcin, implies the destruction of the giants. The second dream has its equivalent in 608 2.

This is a papyrus copied in the second half of the 1st century B.C, of which 33 fragments have been preserved but only 2 are actually fit far use. It was published by BAILLET in DJD 111, 116-119, PI. XXIV, as "Un Apocryphe de la Gentsen. Fragment 1 contains part of a conversation between the giants 'Ohyah and Mahaway. The second has a vision while playing with his father Baraq'el, who, apparently, announces a catastrophe. But 'Ohyah

sc, apparentbe au liwe d'HCnochn. The only element 1 can find to justify this ascription is the use of the expression h ' > U 3 1 K 1UC' I 1 (in the emphatic state) in frag. 5, common with 4QEnGianfs0 I t ii 2, whereas in all the other Enochic fragments the expression is 1UO 1 > U > (in the absolute state) ( 4 ~ E n ' 1 xiii 26 and 4QEnastf 1 ii 8). If K '7 1I ]% 1 (frag. 1, 7) could be read as an orthographic variant of 3K1713 instead of the emphatie plural of 713, the identification could be accepted. But, in any ease, the different fragments do not bring new elements. MIUK'S statement qualifying 1Q24 as *too poorly reprrsented to allow a suffieirntly certain identification of the fragment* ( ? perfectly @ reflects I ) ,the situation.



gives no credit to what he hears, and replies with a series of rhetorical questions: d.ook here, I have heard wonders; if a non-pregnant woman gave birth...* of the sort of those recorded in Jub 37,2023. The joint mention of 'Ohayah, Mahaway and Baraq'el in this text ensures its belonging to the Book of Giants, and leads MILIK to relate it to the fragment c of the Kawbn, in which these three names appear together with Shemihazah. The second fragment, with the remnants of only three lines, seems to have preserved part of Hahyah's dream mentioned in the midrash, although the three-branched tree gives way here to a three-rooted tree, the only one which remains safe and healthy at the time of the destruction of the whole garden13. Apart from the identification of these three copies of the Book of Giants in texts that had been published previously, MILIK provided us in 1976 with a full edition of a new manuscript, 4QEnGiantP, as well as with a transcription and a translation of some parts from other four lot, which he designates as 4QEncopies pertaining to STARCKY'S Giantficae.

As already indicated, the manuscript containing this copy of the Book of Giants is the same which has given us part of the Book of Watchers, the Book of Dreams and the Epirrle of Enoctr. The manuscript was copied in the middle of the 1st century B.C. but its original text (if we are to judge by the spelling) would date back, according to MILIK, to the end of the 2nd or the beginning of the 1st century B.C. This manuscript presents, therefore, the Book of Giants as an Enochic work, already associated with the other three Enochic works we know". 13 fragments, all of them published'5, have been rescued
l3 BEYER, Die arantiiicchen Teue, 268, suggests that 6Q14 would have preserved another copy of 7he Book of (he Gimu. This text, copied in the 1st century A.D. of which only two fragments have survived, was edited by B A I W in ~ DID 111, 127-128, PI. XXVI, as a uTexte apocalyptiquem. For BWER, the text relatcs to -die Ankiindigung der Sintflut-, because frag. 1 talks about des~ructionand mentions *the beastw, but the elements preserved do not permit its identification. The testimony of 4 Q h e as to the inclusion of the Book of Gionfs within the Enochic corpus is less conclusive than the one of 4 ~ E n ' .The small size of its preserved fragments and the faa that neither 4 ~ E n nor ~ 4QE1tGianfs~, which partially overlap, contain any charaaeristic elements, preclude all certain attribution. Is By J.T. MIUK, 7he B w k r o f Enoch, 310-317, Pk. XXX-XXXI. Only the photograph of frag. 1 is missing in the edition.





from this copy. The contents of the fragments may be summarised as follows (following the order allotted by MILIK): Fragments 1-3 contain the names of Baraq'el, number nine on the list of the watchers (4QEna 1 iii 8), that of his son Mahaway, and those of another two giants, Hobabish and Adk. Since not only Baraq'el but Hobabish and Adk as well appear in the first page of fragment j of the Kawdn, MlLIK compares the two texts and sees in them a reflection of the disputes between the giants, because the fragment of the ffiwdn states precisely that Hobabish robs Adk of his wife, and all giants and creatures begin to kill each other. Fragment 4 records a conversation between 'Ohayah and Hahyah, the two sons of Shemihazah, and indicates that they prostrate themselves on the ground and start crying. MILIK reconstructs the name of Enoch in the lacuna and relates this fragment to the Sogdian translation of the Kmuhn, in which the giants, stricken with fear, gather before Enoch. But this context, if one overlooks MILIK'Sreconstruction, does not fit with the contents of fragment 5, in which the talk is about violence and death. Fragment 7 has preserved remnants of two columns. The first continues (?) the conversation between 'Ohyah and Hahyah, who are kept prisoners, while mention is made of the punishment already endured by Azazel. The remnants of the second column relate the handing over of two tablets to Mahaway, and specify that athe second one has not yet been read.. The contents of this second tablet have been disclosed by fragment 8, the most extensive of those preserved in this manuscript, which served as an introduction to a new paragraph, as revealed by the remnants of the title, separated by a blank line. This is a second tablet written by Enoch and addressed to Shemihazah and his comrades (who, apparently, are already chained, as suggested by the fact that they must be released before starting their prayers). These shackles remind them of their misdeeds and their wives' and children's against all creatures before Raphael's involvement. A baneful interpretation is given ~u 'h'3 3) and the giants are summoned to pray and repent lest they are doomed to perdition. Fragments 9-10 contain the remnants of a prayer (Enoch's?). Not very much can be obtained from fragments 11-13.




According to MILIK'S indicationsf6, 4 ~ ~ n G i a would d have been copied in the years 110-50 B.C and would be composed of six fragments that would make possible the recovery of three continuous columns of text. MILIKtranscribes and translates lines 3-16.20-23 of col. ii and lines 3-11 of col. iii. The contents of the parts made known may be identified as the description of Hahyah's and 'Ohyah's double dream that they themselves narrate before the other giants, and Mahaway's messsage to Enoch asking him to give them an interpretation of those dreams. Hahyah dreams of a garden full of trees and shoots that is destroyed by fire once irrigation has ceased. The only passage published of 'Ohyah's dream is the vision of the Lord of Heavens (x7n\tl :uW) who comes down onto the Earth; but, according to MILIK'Sindications of the contents of the following lines, the purpose of this descent is to execute the judgement described after the fashion indicated in Dan 7,9-10, and depending on this passage. The reaction of the Giants who, obviously, are holding a meeting, is one of fear, and they resolve to despatch Mahaway to consult Enoch for the second time, so that the latter may expound to them the meaning of the two dreams. Mahaway aflew with the help of his hands like an eaglew across the deserts until he came to Enoch, requesting his interpretation, which should be recorded in the still unpublished remainder of the column. MILIKmentions at another point17 one line of this same manuscript that corresponds to I E n d 9,10 and may be translated as follows: <<(andthe souls) of the victims are amking their suit against their attacks and cry for help>>, a circumstance that proves thdt the outcry of the Earth, mentioned in the Book of Watchers, is also present in the Book of Giants.

Out of the second copy of STARCKY'S lot MILIKhas transcribed two fragments, one of which should come from the beginning of the manuscript18. This fragment describes the ruling of the giants and the

" 7he Bwkr Is z e B &

The Bookc of Enocl~, 303-307. of Enocl,, 230,when commenting upon :'J -0 1 of 4QEnC 1 h i 4.
of Enoch, 307-309.



nephilim over the Earth, and how they destroy it, a theme which is recurrent in the Book of Wutchers. The second fragment collects a conversation between Shemihazah and his son 'Ohyah in which Shemihazah avows his powerlessness to stand up against his heavenly accusers, while 'Ohyah confesses his fears following one of his dreams. In the still unpublished part of this same fragment one of the giants answers to the name of Gilgamesh and another one to the name of ,4hirarnl9.

MILIKmentions a third manuscript of STARCKY'S lotm, but does not give any details of its contents.

When editing 4QEnC 2 and 3, MILIKmentions and transcribes one fragment of three lines of this manuscript21. Two of these lines partially cover lines 19 and 20 of 4QEnC 3. Since 4QEnC 2 and 3 has no correspondence in the other Enochic works, it is only logical to attribute it to the Book of Giants. Its context is parallel to the first fragment of 4QEnGiartfsCand describes the Earth's destruction at the hands of the giants as well as the resulting bloodshed. The last line of 4QEnGiantse adds an interesting detail, as it expressly mentions cca deluge upon the Earth,,, thus establishing a direct relationship between the heavenly punishment and the giants' misdemeanours, as is the w e in the Book of Watchers. But the fragments of 4QEnc are too small to exclude other alternative locations and their contents too familiar to consider it as characteristic. Therefore neither the attribution of 4QEnC 2-3 nor that of 4QEnGiantse, which depends on it, may be deemed as certain.

l9 W > n l ' ? l on 4QEntiianrsC. The same name appears, written D " l l ' l 1 , in 4~~ntiianls* see , 77te Bwks of Dtoch, 313. On the appearance of O l 7 n h : in 4QEntiimrsc, see 77te Books o f E~toclt, 29. The Books o f Enoch, 309. Tlte Bwks of Enoclz, 235-23.



Since the identification of the Qumranic texts as copies of the Book of Giants is based on the traces this work left in the Manichean composition on the giants, a brief description of the contents of the fragments recovered from the k w & seems necessary. consists of remnants of seven The material published by HENMNG copies and two abstracts of the work. Two of the manuscri ts had been previously published, although not identified as suchg. The other five were first made known to the public in the article referred to by H E N N I N G ~ . They are written in Middle-Persian and in Sogdian, as translations from the original composed by Mani in an Aramaic dialect quite similar to Syriac. One of the Sogdian abstracts says, at the end of a chapter entitled <<The Comming of the two hundred Dernonsu:
-... and what they had seen in the heavens among the gods, and also what they had seen in hell, their native land, and furthermore what they had seen on earth, - all that they began to teach to the men. T o Shahmizid two (?) sons were borne by ... One of them he named "Ohya"; in Sogdian he is called "Slihm, the giant". And again a second son [was born) to him. H e named him "Ahya"; its Sogdian (equivalent) is "Pit-SBhm". As for the remaining giants, they were born to the other demons and ~ a f t s a s * ~ .

The first part of this quotation can be easily related to the disclosures 10,7-8). The made in the Book of Watchers (I Enoclz 7,l;8, 1-3;9,6-7; second one gives us the original names of the two sons of Shahmizad (Shemihazah), the chief of the watchers, as well as the equivalent names in Sogdian, a fact which enables us to follow their doings and adventures in the other texts.
One of them, written in Uygur (MS B), was published by A. VON LE COO, *Manichakche Erziihler-, Le Mtcsdon 44 (1931), 1-36, PI. 1-11 (text and German translation on pp. 13-14). The other (MS D) M 625 c, written in Middle-Persian, was published by HWNING, rEin manichaixhes Henochbuch* (text and German translation on p. 29). According to KLIMKEIT,*Der Buddha Henach*, 371, note 21, the material published by H w n h ' o should be completed with the material published by W. SUM)ERMANN, Mittelpecsische und po~hischekosmogonische tcmd PombeIf&e dcr Manidtiier (Schriften zur Geschichte und Kultur des Alten Orients 8. Berliner Turfantexte IV Berlin 1973), 77-78, a work which has not been available to me. '$ranslation of H ~ I N G 70. ,


1 0 7

The longest manuscript of the k w h published by HENNING (ms. A) consists of 15 fragments in Middle-Persian of a book which contained several treatises. The editor ascribes six to the k w h . In the first one (frag. c), there is a narrative about a conversation between 'Ohyah and his father Shemihazah about Mahaway. Fragment j mentions Baraq'el, Hobabish and Adk, alludes to the battle between the giants, and tells about 'Ohyah's dream of the tablet thrown in the water and Hahyah's of the garden full of trees. Fragment 1 records Enoch's message to the fallen angels on their destruction and that of their progeny, as well as a description of the general happiness which will come after the deluge. Fragment k preserves a dialogue between 'Ohyah and Hahyah, which apparently continues in the first page of frag. g. The second page of this fragment describes the places where the fallen angels are doomed to endure punishment. The last fragment (i) mentions Enoch's ascent into Heaven, the union between the women and the angels and the ordeals these impose on mankind. Manuscript B, in the Uygur language, describes the flight of Baraq'el's son in search of Enoch and how Enoch's voice and recommendations prevent him from suffering Icarus's fate. Manuscript C, in Sogdian, relates the battle between the giants 'Ohya and Mahaway. Manuscript D, in Middle-Persian, abides by Enoch's explanation of Hahyah's dream, according to which the trees would represent the watchers and the giants. Manuscript G describes, in Sogdian, the descent of the angels to fight the *demons,> (the watchers and the giants) and how the angels separate men from their adernons*, take them to the foot of Mount Sumeru, and eventually settle them in towns prepared for the purpose. The manuscript ends with the fight of the 200 ccdemonse and the angels who swoop down from Heaven to punish them. Just as in the case of the Qumranic texts, the fragments of the Manichaean work have reached us only in bits and pieces, thus making it impossible to obtain an accurate idea about the proper order and correct linking together of the different elements preserved*. HEWING avows that it is impossible to determine the

ZS The quotations of or allusions to the Manichean work collected by HENMNG are also too general to give us a precise idea. The most significant, in my opinion, are the following:



primitive order of the loose sheets found in the longer manuscript of ~ . arranging of the fragments is based on the posithe ~ a w & n ~ His tion occupied by the parallels they show with the Book of Watchers. But this principle seems somewhat questionable to me. Both the Manichean and the Aramaic fragments show clear evidence that the author of the Book of Giarus knows and makes full use of the Book of Watchers in its already aEnochised* form. Even more, he summarises it as a point of departure for his own narrative. In my opinion, the Book of Giants was not a simple extension of the Book of Watchers, but developed, together with their story, the story and the adventures of their progeny, the giants, as its own peculiar and specific theme. The title and the summary of the book which presents the quotation from the Gelasian Decree is quite illustrative to that effect, since it includes, as a characteristic feature, 'Ohyah's duel against the dragon, an element which, in the light of one of the allusions to the ~ a w c i n ' ~ , may be more accurately defined as 'Ohayah's battle

Frag. O in Arabic (a quotation from Al-Ghadanfar): -The Book o f the Gimrs, by Mani of Babylon, is filled with stories aboul these (antediluvian) giants, amongst whom Sfm and NarimBn*. Frag. P in Coptic (from Kepltolaro 93, 23-28): *On account of the malice and rebellion that had arisen in the watch-post of the Great King of Honour, namely the Egriigoroi who from the heavens had descended to the earth, - on their account the four angek received their orders: they hound the EgrCgoroi with eternal fetters in the prison of thc Dark (?), their sons were destroyed upon the earth-. Frag. S in Coptic (from Kepl~aloio117, 1-9): *Before the Egrigoroi rebelled and descended from heaven, a prison had been built for them in the depth of the earth beneath the mountains. Before the sons of the giants were born who knew not Righteousness and Piety among themselves, thirty-six towns had been prepared and erected, so that the sons of the giants should live in them, they that come to beget .... who live a thousand years*. (Translations of HENNING. -The Book of the Giants*. 72-It has proved impossible, so far, to re-establish the original order of the pages. On purely technical grounds (size of the fragments, appearance of the margins, relative position of tears, stains, ete.), I first assumed the following sequenee: I-j-k-g-ic-e-b-h-f-a-d-m-M 911-n. Being unable to estimate the cogency of these technical reasons now, because of the absence of any photographic material, I have decided to change the order of the first six fragments in the following way: c-j-I-k-g-i, in view of their contents .... It must be borne in mind that whole folios may be missing between apparently successive pages.., -The Book of the Gianls*, 56. " A fragment in Parthian of a treatise entitled 'rdltng M r ' s = Commentary on (Mani's opus) Ardohortg, published by HENNING,.The Baok of the Giants*, 71-72, which gives as an example *(the fight in which) Ohya, Lewyftin ( = Leviathan) and Raphael lacerated each other, and they vanished*, which means that Ohya killed Leviathan, but was killed by Raphael.




against the monster Leviathan. This conclusion would be reinforced by admitting, together with MIL~K~', that the Manichaean book had left recognisable signs in the late rabbinic writings and that these are considered as a point of departure for the reconstruction of the lost original. But, quite apart from this hypothesis, which should be discussed elsewhere, the principle according to which the Book of Giants did not develop in parallel to the history of the watchers, but rather contained, at the beginning, a summary of the latter's history as a basis of its own theme -the history of the watchers' progeny- seems well-founded and accounts for the arranging of the Manichaean This materials in a manner different from that proposed by HENNING. also allows us to locate some of the Qumranic fragments preserved, which apparently belong to this summary of the Book of Watchers, at the beginning of the work.

The question as to whether the fragment of the curse uttered at Mount Hermon and an the reduction of human life to 120 years belonged to the Book of Giants, which Syncellus (ed. MOSSHAMMER pages 26-27) ascribes to <<The Book of Enoch on the Watcherss, but which is not found either in the Ethiopic or the Greek texts, or in the Aramaic fragments preserved, remains open. MILIK'S argument is indeed suggestive, but the fact is that there is nothing in the Aramaic fragments recovered from the Book of Giants or in the fragments of the Manichean Kawrin that may correspond to Syncellus's text. The allusion made to the *dew and the frost), of 4QEnGiantP 11 ii 2 on which MlLlK bases his arguments, originates from a very uncertain reading and the sentence can also be read, as BEYER does, sthe dew and the rain*29.
2s nte Books of Enoch, 317-339. For MII.tK there is a direct line connecting the medieval midrashim and the Manichean book which goes through the incantation texts and the allusion found in the magical bawls. For this reason he considers the Shemihaza midrash as an abbreviation, contaminated with other stories, of the f Gionu now attested at Qumran. Manichean book, and consequently of the Book o 29 For MIt,IK, this quotation by Syncellus would establish that the Book of Giants was translated into Greek together with the other Enochic compositions and till the fourth century A.D. was a part of the Enochic Pentateuch, and only later was replaced by the Book of the Pmbles: *I attempt to prove that the last of the quorati011s 'from the first book of Enoch on the Watchers' found in the Chronography of George Syncellus ... comes in reality from the Book of the Giants. In other words, in



The impossibility of deciding for or against this interpretation of Syncellus's fragment as belonging or not to the Book of Giants is another proof of our limited knowledge concerning the contents of the specific elements of the Book in its original version. Despite the numerous copies available, the new Aramaic fragments have only provided us with a minimal part of the specific contents where nothing is said about 'Ohyah's battle against Leviathan, or against Mahaway, or about the other encounters between the giants. Moreover, no record is found about their final destruction at the hands of the angels, or the separation of men from the giants before the destruction or about their transfer to towns designed for them, etc., these being elements that, if we are to believe the Manichean book, should have occupied a significant place in the original work. If we were to judge only by the elements preserved in Qumran and made known so far, our only conclusion as regards the contents of the lost book is that it consisted of a summary of the Book of Wachers, a detailed description of their progeny, a distinction between the punishment inflicted on Azazel and that resewed for Shemihazah, a narrative of some deeds of the giants, prior to their confinement in prison, and a minute account of the discussions between Shemihazah and Hahyah that gave way to a double message from Mahaway to Enoch, in which he begged him to interpret his dream, as well as Enoch's response in which he rebuked the giants and praised G o d . Although these elements are not many, much progress has been made as to the knowledge of the lost book because before the publication of the Qumranic fragments we only knew about the existence of the book and its probable title.

We are not sure about the order of these elements in the original which has been lost, although a series of small signs relating to the published fragments enables us at least to identify three consecutive

the codex of the fourth century A.D. which the Christian historians of Alexandria had available, the Book of the Giants followed immediately on the Book of Watchers. It was thus only at a subsequent date that our document w a s rejected from the Christian Enoch corpus (perhaps by reason of its popularity with the Manichaeans) and was replaced by the Book of Parables*, The B w k r o f Enitoch, 58.



parts in the original work, and to rearrange the different fragments in it according to their mutual relation. It may be inferred from some elements that the most significant fragments of 4QEnGiantsa, frags. 7 and 8, pertained to an advanced period of the history of the giants. Azazel has already been punished, and Shemihazah and the giants are in prison (frgs. 7,6-7; frg. 8,5.14), but the final destruction at the hands of Raphael still lies ahead (frag. 8,12). From the indication at 4 ~ ~ n ~ i a n iii ts7 b in the sense that Mahaway's message constitutes a second communication to Enoch, we may deduce that Ohyah's and Hahyah's dreams contained in this same manuscript occurred later than those related in 4QEnGiantsa and Enoch's answer recorded in the second tablet. In other words, the tsb so far should be situated after material from 4 ~ ~ n ~ i a npublished fragments 7-8 of 4QEnGiantf. Fragments 1-6 of this last manuscript apparently refer to the giants' activities before being imprisoned, and should precede fragments 7-8. The same may be said about the first fragment of 4QEnGiantsC.The second fragment of this copy reminds us of a vision or a dream by 'Ohayah and of Shimhazah's previous intervention, and should be related to fragments 7-8 of 4QEnGiantsa, which it possibly precedes. If one admits the strength of the parallel of fragment c of the Kawbn, 6Q8 1 should be situated in the same context. In the Kawbn text, which reports the conversation between 'Ohyah and Mahaway, as well as in 6Q8 1, Shemihazah's intervention leads us to suppose that at least some of the watchers have been punished, and even that the conversation takes place in the place where the giants are imprisoned. 6Q8 2, for its part, is apparently t s should, ~ thus, be placed after fragments related to 4 ~ ~ n ~ i aiinand 7-8 of 4QEnGiantsa. Fragments 9 + 14 +15 of lQ23 seemingly correspond to the summary of the Book of Watchers and would, therefore, have their origin at the beginning of the work. The same applies to fragments 1 + 6 + 22 of the same manuscript. Their parallel with I Enoch 10,19 suggests that we should place them equally at this point, as well as 4QEnGiuntf 13, whose third line links it with I Enoch 13,l. If 4QEnGiantsa 9-10 are remnants of Enoch's prayer and blessing (his name does not appear in the remnants preserved), they could be related to either of the patriarch's two interventions following Mahaway's double message. If they are remnants of a prayer of Raphael, for example, they could be situated at the end of the work, once the angels have fulfilled their mission of exterminating the giants. The same location should be allotted if they



are to be considered as Enoch's concluding prayer, much in the same way as I Enoch 36,4ss, which terminates T h e Book o f Watchers with a blessing, or as I Enoch 90,40ss, which equally brings the Book o f Dreams to an end. The elements we have mentioned enable us to arrange the different Qumranic fragments in a relative order while surmising that the lost original consisted of three parts at least. The first consisted of the summary of the Book o f Watchers. The other two are characterised by the fact that, in one of them, the giants are at liberty and may freely perform their deeds while, in the other, they remain together, confined in prison. The most interesting elements preserved, such as the giants' dreams, Mahaway's messages and Enoch's answers would, all, emanate from this part. The whole would end in a prayer and a blessing given by Enoch (?). The tabulation of the results obtained concerning the respective positioning of the fragments known from the different manuscripts and their allotment to each of the supposed parts of the original work give the following scheme3':
1. Summary of the Book of Watchers: IQ23 9 + 14 + 15 I Q 2 3 1 + 6 + 22 4QEnGiantso 13

2. Activities of the giants before their imprisonment: 4 Q E n G i a n t f 1-6 4QEnGiantsc 1

It may be of some interest to compare this schema with the way BEYER organises the fragments unach ihrem Inhalt in eine vermutete Abfolge gebracht und entsprechend geahlt*: 1) *Die Riesen verheeren die Erde* (4QEnGiantsC;IQ23 9. 14. 15); 2) ~Liigeund BlutvergieBenn (4QEtrGianrsC,4~EnGiarrts~); 3) *Die beiden beschriebenen Tafelnr (4~EnGiants" 7 ii 4); 4) uDer zweite Brief Henochs an die gefallenen Engel. (4QEnGiatrtsa 8. 5); 5) uDas Gesprach Uhja mit Mahawi iiber das Gesprach des Semiasa mit seinem drohende Unheiln (6Q8 1; 1Q23 29. 6); 6 ) ~ D a s Sohn Uhja* ( 4 ~ ~ 1 t G i o n r 7) s~) uGesprkhe ; der Riesenm (4QEnGimrsa 1-4.7 i 13: 4 ~ ~ 1 r G i a r t t 9-10) s ~ ) ; *Die Trlume der Riesen Hahja und Uhja und der Hug des Mahawai zu Henoch* (4~EtrGiants~); 11) uDer Traum vom Baum mit den drei Wurzelnn (6Q8 2); 12) ~ D e Traum r von der abgespiilten Tafel* (2Q26); 13) uDas Gebet Henochsw (4~EnGicutts' 9-10); 14) ~Segensweissagung Henochsw (1Q23 1. 6 ) , Die aramifisclren Teute, 259-268.




3. Dreams and speeches of the imprisoned giants and Mahaway's messages to Enoch: 6Q8 1 4QEnGiantS 2 4QEnGiantf 7 + 8 4~~nGiantsb 2026 6Q8 2
4. Enoch's prayer (?): 4QEnGiantf' 9 + 10

It would seem to me sufficiently evident that the Book of Giants circulated as an independent work, considering the number of copies that apparently do not contain any other Enochic material: at least 1Q23, 6 Q 8 , 4 ~ ~ n G i m &and ' 4QEnGiantsc. On the other hand, The Book of Giants is the only Enochic work that Mani seems to have known. It is true that, in 1934, HENNINGpublished an article in which he ascribed the manuscript M 625 c to the Book of ~ n o c h ~ but ' , he himself attributed this text, at a later date, to the Book of The other two texts referred to by HENNING are not at all c o n c l ~ s i v e ~ ~ . The mention of the 200 demons is understandable within the context of the Book of Giants or in the summary of the Book of Watchers included in it, while the astronomical text shows more divergences from than similarities to the Astronomical Enoch. Nor does PHILONENKO'S attempt to demonstrate the existence of a quotation from 1 Enoch 90,41 in a Greek papyrus of Mani's life appear more successf d 4 . The quotations do not tally, and the reference to 2 Enoch makes this all the more improbable. On the other hand, 4QEnGiantsa demonstrates that, at least in a Qumranic copy of the middle of the 1st century B.C. the Book of

33 The one which menlions 200 demons, and T iii 260, published by ANDREASHWNG, -Mittcliranische Manichaica aus Chincsisch-Turkestan. I*, Sirzungsberichf der Preussischen Akadenrie der WLssenschaften (1932), 175-222, PI. 1-11, M. PHIWNFWKO,~ U n e citation manichknne du livre d'Ht5nochm, RHPR 52

" In hi -The Book of the Giants*, 66.


In the already quoted article -Ein manichiixhes Henoehbuchm.

(1972), 337-340.




Giants had already been incorporated in the other Enochic works already known35. For the redactor who assembled them, these Enochic compositions therefore contained certain common features. From the elements preserved we have inferred that the author of the Book of Giants knew and drew his inspiration from the Book of Watchers, and nobody should be surprised if the compiler included it in the Enochic corpus precisely as a continuation and a complement of the Book of Watchers. But nothing in the fragments published indicates that the author knew or made use of the other Enochic compositions, the Book of Dreams and the Epistle of Enoch, alongside which the Qumranic redactor placed his work. This ignorance is, on the other hand, reciprocal, because neither the Book of Dreams nor the Epistle of Enoch (both certainly familiar with the Book of Watchers) apparently know anything of the Book of Giants. The elements recovered so far do not allow us adequately to face the problem of the origin of the work. There are no precise indications to help us in this respect. The abundance of names of the fallen angels and of the giants is a logical consequence of the theme of the work, and cannot necessarily be attributed to the interest aroused by the names of the angels characteristic of the Essene movement. The presentation of Enoch as an interpreter of dreams, which is another Essene characteristic, does not seem to have sufficient strength to assign an Essene origin to the work, nor does the Hobabish and Gilgamesh quotation compel us to postulate that the composition is of Babylonian origid6. The fragments recovered do not contribute many elements that would enable us to fix the date of composition of the original work. We may indeed assert that the work was in circulation together with the other Enochic works by the middle of the 1st century B.C (when 4QEnGiantsa was copied) or even at the end of the 2nd century or at the beginning of the 1st century B.C. (as suggested by the spelling of the manuscript for the original on which 4QEnC and 4QEnGiantsa depend). A date very close to the latter is the one pleaded already by the oldest of the copies of the independent work, 4 ~ ~ n G i a n t s ~ , pertaining to the first half of the 1st century B.C. M I L I K ~tries ~ to

On the testimony of ~ Q E I and I ~ 4~~1tGiartts~, see the reservations expressed in note 14. 36 As assumed by BEYER, Die arar?tZiiscltenTeute, 259. 37 Tile Books of E~roclr, 57-58.



bridge the difference between this last date and the older limit provided by the dating of the Book of Watchers, on which our c a m p sition depends, and he suggests the years 128-115 B.C. as the period of composition of the original of the Book of Giants. But his arguments are very hypothetical. The date of 128 B.C is claimed by MILIK because of the absence of any reference to the Book of Giants in the list drawn up by Jubilees of the Enochic works and because of his dating of Jubilees in that period, a dating that is not generally accepted. The date of 115 B.C is conditioned by the dating of CD, which MlLlK places towards this year, and by the supposition that CD ii 19 contains a quotation from the Book of Watclrers. This latter argument seems to me quite improbable. The first part of the CD text is a reference to Amos 2.9, as recognised by MILK himself; the second part may be nothing more than a simple poetic extension of the first and, in any case, is not found among the elements recovered from the Book of Giants, so that the hypothetical dependence cannot be proved at all. B E Y E R ~surmises that the work was written (in Hebrew!) at the end of the 3rd century B.C., but does not contribute any argument in support of his assertion. It is true that this dating would be compatible with the maximum absolute limit imposed by the dating of the Book of Watchers, but it does seem to me quite early. A very valuable element in determining the date of composition of the original is, in my opinion, the indication given by MILIKto the W !17-19) a effect that in the part still unpublished of ~ Q E ~ G ~ U (ii description of the judgement dependent on Dan 7,9-10 would have been preserved. If this element advanced by MILIKis confirmed by fragments, we would then have an the publication of STARCKY'S upper limit by the middle of the 2nd century B.C. and this would allow a sufficient margin of time for the actual circulation of the Book of Giants as an independent work before its being incorporated into the Enochic compilation at the end of the 2nd century B.C.


Die orantdischert Tw, 259.



In 1956 J.T. MILIKpublished in the RB a series of Aramaic fragments from Qumran Cave 4, with which he had succeeded in reconstructing a considerable part of a column and a few additional lines of a work until then unknown'. This work, which the editor provisionally entitled u4Q Pritre de Nabonide* ( = 4QPrNab) immediately aroused great interest, above all because of the relations to be found between its text and the canonical Book of Daniel. Thus, for example, D.N. FREEDMAN, as early as February 1957, devoted a study to the comparison of the two documents2. He comes to the conclusion that 4QPrNub conserves a tradition more original than Dan. Although he rejects the idea of a direct dependence, he uses the data supplied by 4QPrNab to clarify the problems presented by Dan: date of composition, composite character, Babylonian origin of the traditions contained in it, etc. Others, such as H.M.I. GEVARYAHU, in a collective work in hombegan to study the text in the historical perspective age to SUKENIK.', provided by the documents known on Nabonidus as well as the Jewish legends about the kings converted to Judaism and the missionary Jews. Some studies have concentrated on the philological aspects of the text. Among these are S. SEGERT'Sin Arcliiv 0rient&lnt4 and DUPONT-SOMMER'S article in GLECS'. DUPONT-SOMMER uses the conclusions of this study, and in particular the analysis of the term


' J.T.


-Pribre de Nabonide et autres h i t s d'un cycle de Daniel-, RE 63

H.M.1. GEVARYAHU, rTbc Prayer of Nabonidus of the manuscripts of the Desert o f Judah-, in: J. I - ~ (ed.), R Studies an the MSS of the Dcrm of Ju&h (Jerusalem 1957) 12-23 (Hebrew). S. SEGERT, wSprachliche Bemerkungen zu einigen aramaixhen Texten von Qumran-, Arclrfv Orientdlnl 33 (1%5), 190-206. A. DUPONT-SOMMER, *Remarques linguistiques sur un fragment aramkn de Qoumriin (Pribre de Nabonide)., Comptes Rendus du Gmpe Linguistique dlEnult.s

* D.N. FREEDMAN, <ThePrayer of Nabonidus*,MSOR 145 (1957),31-32.


Chmito-Stmitiipes (GLECS) 8 (1958d0), 48-56.



?i~ to , establish an interpretation of the first part of 4QPrNah noticeably different from that of the editor, an interpretation which he presented fully and in detail in his contribution to the Old Testament studies congress at Oxford in 1959~. The major impulse to the study of this text was given by the lucky find and publication of three stelae which throw new light on the life of the last neo-Babylonian king. The greater part of the documents - hitherto known7 - concerning this king are frankly hostile to him, presenting the opinion of the Babylonian priesthood after the conquest of Cyrus and some are frankly propagandist8. In contrast, the new stelae from Harran, discovered the same year as the publication of 4QPrNab and published in 1959 by J. G A D D ~ , present a completely different picture and provide a series of details which allow a better understanding of the situation of the time, and of the origin of the many legends created around the figure of Nabonidus.

A. DUPO~T-SOMMER, eExorcisrnes et guerisons dans Ics Ccrits de QoumrPn*, in: JA. EMERTON (ed.), Oxford Con&nss Volume (VTSuppl 7 ) (Leiden 1960), 246. 261., The documents originating in the Chancellery of Nabonidus are collected in S. LANGWN, Die Neubobylonischen KBnigsimchri/len (Vorderasiatische Bibliothek IV) (Lcifdg 1912). 218-297. For example, the so-called -Verse Account of Nabonidus*, originally published by S. SMITH in Babylonian Histotic01 Tars (London 1924), Plates V-X, pp. 83 89. CJ. GADD, -The Harran Inscriptions of Nabonidus*, Anoldiota Sntdie5 8 (1958). 35-92. There are three stelae disuwcred by D.S. RICE in the ruins of the Harran mosque. One of them (H 1 B) is a copy of a stele d i i r e d not far from Harran, as early as 1906, by H. PAGANand known as the stele of the mother of Nabonidus since the study of E. DHORMEin RE 5 (1908), 130-135. T h i s stele, called H 1 A, has been studied by J. W,.The Late Assyro-Babylonian Cult of the Moon and its Culmination in the Time of Nabonidus-, HUGS (1946). 405-489, and by B. LAYDSBER, *Die Basaltstele Nabonids von Eski-Harran* in Holil Edhem Hiatim Kifubi (Ankara 1947). The other two stelae have the same text. Following GADD, we will designate them as H 2 A\B. The three stelae were re-used to paw the new mosque with the inxribed face downwards, which has helped to preserve the writing. Among the artidcs dedicated to the study of these stele, see W.L. MORkhl, -Notes on the New Nabonidus Inscriptions*, Orientalio 28 (1959), 130-140, E. VOGI; -Novae Inscriptiones Nabonidi*, Biblico 40 (1959), 8 8 - l a and W. RBuG, *Env@ngen zu ncuen Slelen Nabonids*, ZAVA 22 (1964), 218-260.



This new material was used by R. MEYER in a first study" and above all in his monograph Das Gebet des ~abonid". This last is a great work of synthesis using all the data published, presents clearly the problems raised by the small fragment and suggests a line i f interpretation. Other subsequent studies investigate one of the themes indicated by MEYER: the relation between 4QPrNab and the legend of ~ o b l ~ . It would not seem necessary, after all these investigations to concentrate once more on this small fragment if two important studies, recently brought out, had not once again questioned the acquired data, suggesting an understanding of the text different from that generally admitted. In the first of these,13 A.S. VAN DER WOUDE presents new critical options on some of the points most discussed, to offer a solution to the "cruces interpretum" of this difficult text. In the second,14 P. GRELOToffers a general reconstruction of the text based on a new understanding of it. Lately, F.M. CROSS'^ has attempted a new reconstruction of the text whose ccprimary intent ... is to demonstrate, with the aid of a facsimile, the proper placement of the fragment)), and which results in a different line-length16. His point of departure is that io7nr! [ K W ' K ] 3 K I f l W l l , on line 6 should form a
R. MEYER, aDas Qurnranfragment Gebet dw Nabonid*, TLZ 85 (1%0), 831-


" R. MEYER,Das Gebn des Naborlid Eirle in de~tQ u m m t r - H a t c h wiederenfdeckte Weisheitsed~ltrrtg (Sitzungberichte der SHchsischen Akadernie dcr Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Band 107, Heft 3) (Berlin 1962). G. FOHRER, *4Q Or Nab, 110 tg Job und die Hioblegendes, Z 4 W 75 (1963). 93-97; M. DELcoR, =Le Testament de Job, la priEre de Nabonide et les traditions targourniquesm, in Bibel rttid Qttntmrt. Fesfschn'frBadkc (Leipig 1968), 57-75. l3 A.S. VAN DER WOUDE, 43ernerkungen zurn Gebet des Nabonid*, in M. DWOR (ed.) Qt~rndr:. So pitft, sa fhPologic, son milieu (Paris-Gernbloux 1978), 120129. l4 P. GRELOT, -La pribrc de Nabonide (40Or Nab). Nouvel Essai de restauralion- RQ 9 (1978), 483-495. F.M. C~oss, *Fragments of the Prayer of Nabonidus*, 1 U 34 (1984), 260-264. l6 Already GRELOThas envisaged this method, but with a cautionary note as to the results: -Si I'on tenait h une plus grande rigucur, il faudrait d'ailleurs ex&uter, h parti des dichCg une rnaquette du texte oh les lacunes seraient cornblks en utilisant I'bcriture des fragments subsifitants. Mais cette kcriture, trbs personnelle, est passablernent irrkguliEre, tant pour la largeur des lcttres que pour leur espacernent. En consCquencc, la rnaquette donnerait une simple idCe des possibilitks existantes; rnais clle nc permettrait pas de r h u d r e h coup siir toutes les questions pendant-,, op. cit. 485.





continous text, and accordingly fragments 2a and 2b must be moved much closer to Fragment 1 than in Milik's and his followers' reconstruction,,. The problem is that his surmise is nowhere proven, and that some of the reconstructions following from this assumption are is forced to assume that there is no lacuna in line implausible. CROSS 4, and reads only " 1 i l " although Dan 2,15 and 5,13 favour the expression ' 1 l i l > ' 3 1 . For the same reason he prefers 1 3 - 1 1 - - in line 5, although Dan 5,8 suggests reconstructing 1 1 i l I 1 3 1 I --?''. The same shortening of the lines forces CROSS to leave unexplained the traces after 1'0 in line 1 :<<The blot, if one ignores the smearing below, has a head which could be the beginning of a bet, medial kaf, or possible a dalet; one must recognise a scribal lapse here in any w e , and it is simplest to suppose that the text copied by the scribe read > I 3 l ? l m . In line 2, CROSS is forced to reject the reconstruction K['>Y K i l > ] x , the most logical and the one he himself would have preferred, in favour of only K [ J : ] K , adding: *It is also possible that the scribe here has committed a haplography and that the original reading was X''Y K ~ ~ Y K All - these artificial explanations are unnecessary if his presupposition about the contiguity of the fragments is left aside, and, taking into account the irregularities of the script, one assumes a different relative position of the fragments in which they occur to accommodate the proposed reconstructions. In this paper our aim is to examine all the material and to offer a synthesis in which, together with our own opinion, the relevant contributions, both new and old, will be assembled.

A. Reconstructed t a t
-23: " 7 ~ >T x n j ' 7 p ' > R 1 [Klil w7n3 K l n W 3 . J J 3 ; i ! K j I07f13 K1'15' h'il>]K ? 1 R S 3 K W ' K J K 3 n ' U 3 2

t i 3 1 ] K 3 > ! >3[3' 1KY~IK 1%

K ; ~ > K017



;1:~ ' i t : [K'\L13K] 71?1 IjJ\ii j ' j V

inx ~

l i l Kl n 1 > 1

3 [K 7 7 L ' Jy? ' ? 1 i 1 7 [ l : l j ~ l i l l ? ; i ;1?7 3 t : ' N u n 1 4

Ik'\L' '(3 : : ' l a V-n:!

16 (1985). 303.




li3jil ?'il>K ' 7

1[JV n ' l i l ]


]lo KrlVn K 33K KYK 8

1 Words of the prayer which Nabonidus, king of the la[nd of Babyjlon, [the great] king, pralyed when he was afflicted] 2 by an evil inflammation, by the decree of God the All-Highest, in Teiman. [I, Nabonidus] was afflicted [with an evil inflammation] 3 for seven years and was banished far from [men until I prayed to God the All-Highest] 4 and an exorcist pardoned my sin. He was a Jewish [man] of the [exiles, and he said to me:] 5 Proclaim and write to the glory, exal[tation and honour] of the name of Go[d the All-Highest. And I wrote as follows: When] 6 I was afflicted with an evil inflammation and I stayed in Teiman p y the decree of the All-Highest God, I] 7 prayed for seven years [to all] Gods of silver and gold, [of bronze, of iron], 8 of wood, of stone, of clay, for [I thought] they were Gods[



Line 1 The '7 of K n > s has disappeared although the editor claims to be able to see traces of it. In any case the reading may be considered reliable. The noun Kn>r is not known in Biblical Aramaic but it is frequent in Targumic Aramaic in the full form Ki?1'1r. The same may be said of the form Pa'el "is, although this may already be found attested in Elephantine Aramaic, see COWLEY, 30, 5.26.
-312. Nabunuy. The identification with the Babylonian king Nabonidus was proposed with every reason by the editor. The Akkadian form of the name is Nabd-na'id. The abbreviated form preserved by



our text may be explained as an assimilation to the final -ai typical of Aramaic names, especially when abbreviating names which were originally longer (see DAW, Grammatik, 178), or, as CARMIGNAC proposes, as an error in reading NABND, read as NABNI'~. 7313 '3 ~ l y ( l > R . The editor and the majority of commentators reconstruct 7313 1 1lny( 1719, but in none of the surviving documents on Nabonidus is he given the title of King of Assyria and Babylon. The normal title is that of King of Babylon, a-na-ku i'na-bi-um-na-did sar babilll", see S. LANGDON, O.C. 219; 2225, 227, 231, 234, 245, 246, 251, 253, 263, 295, 297. Identical in Nab H 1 I, 2.7; 11, 27.35; 111, 8; Nab H 2 I, 2. The union of the two countries in the royal title and the preeminence of Assyria seem out of place. The reconstruction we propose was already suggested by DUPONT-SOMMER in GLECS, 48. ti330. Editor's reconstruction. The title .The Great King,, in Akkadian s h m rabli, is one of the royal titles most commonly usedI9.

Line 2 K W 'K3 ti 3flW 3. The expression is the Aramaic equivalent of 7 'n~dt'll Y 3 of Job 2,7 and Deut 29,35. I7flw is the term used to designate the boils of the sixth plague of Egypt in Exod 9,8-11, and Deut 28,27 speaks of o'irn ?'nwJ, the botch of Egypt. Given that the term derives from a root I ~ W ,to be hot, the translation ccinflammationn seems to me more appropriate than *ulcer*. In the rabbinic tradition 17flW indicates a skin condition of which the rabbis managed to distinguish 24 varieties. ti["?t' t i i l > ] ~ K 1n133. mitor's reconstruction. The last letter seems to be a medial and not a final mem, as shown by the final mem partially preserved in W2J'l. The expression occurs in Dan 3,26.32; 5,18.21. It could also be reconstructed ti17nw ~il'lyc,as proposed by J.D. AMUSIN, since the formula occurs frequently in Dan and in Ezra, although the argument he adduces that this title would better express
On the personality and life of this King in the light of the latest discoveries, see P. GARELU,DBSup VI, 268-286. See MJ. SEUX, EpitI~tfttes Royoies Akkodie~ese l Surndticnnes (Paris 1%7),



Nabonidus' religious conceptions is invalid, given the polemic character of the work, precisely against these religious conceptions. Less likely still in my view is GEVARYAHU'S reconstruction: ?[ i K j l ilj]Et. I prefer that of MILIK on the basis of the frequency of that title in the Aramaic writings from Qumran. P. GRELOT introduces a new element in his reconstruction of the lacuna. For him the text should indicate whether the king was attacked in Teiman by the malady or was there because of the malady itself. H e reconstructs: x[?W K i l ' l ] ~ n l n 9 3 . This element, which I reconstruct in the body of the text (line 6), seems to me unnecessary in the actual title of the work, where the collocation of the divine title seems more appropriate.
l n 7 n 3 . The Akkadian form of the name of the city in the Nabonidus documents is "'te-ma-'a or "te-ma-a indifferently. In the Old Testament it appears in the form xnn in Job 9,19 and K n 7 n Gen 25,15 and 1 Chr 1,30; Isa 21,14; Jer 25,23. Its identity with Teima in Arabia is certain, though the commentators differ in their explanations of the distinct forms: ln7n/Knn. For MILIK it could be a contamination from ]n7n of Edom or a confusion of the two towns. For MEYER it is a question of a local variant adding -an to the root. I am more inclined to see in ]i?'n the oldest form because the Septuagint always translates xnn as 6atpav, and because the I has been preserved in the gentilicious x71n7n,where it is protected by the ending2'. At the end of the line the editor and the majority of the cornmentators propose the reconstruction Etn 1>1n] l o 7 n ] , in the city of Teiman, or ;un1733] 107n3, in the fortress of Teiman. But as GRELOT indicates, it would be odd to begin the account immediately after the title, without any introductory formula and without specifying the subject. On the basis of the parallel with Dan 4,1, which begins with an autobiographical account of the same kind, he proposes to reconstruct the name of the king: '13 1 2 3Et.

Line 3
Y ~ W y 7 ~ wOur . text speaks clearly of a period of seven years. Dan 4, 39 too alludes to the same duration while Nab H specifies that the absence from Babylon lasted ten years. This discrepancy presents no

See the extensive note on K n n / l n ? n in J.

LEW, <The Assyro-Babylonian

Cult of the Moons, HUG1 19 (1945-46), 443-445.



major difficulty, given the symbolic character of the number seven. What is more interesting is the fact that while 4QPrNab uses l':~, Dan 4.29 designates the seven years with the word ]'Ilk', periods, and Nab H 2, 11, 11; 111, 4 uses both expressions in a single phrase: eat the end of the ten years the period came*, expressing *period* by a-da-nu,from which derives 7 ' J TY.
In 1. The text presents problems in reading, complicated by the way in which each interpreter fills the subsequent lacuna according to his own general idea of the contents. The most important interpretations are the following: a) ; lI];u ' 1V [P 1';l K T I : ! 1 *and I was transformed into a beast,), this is the interpretation of GEVARYAHU and of AMUSIN, who rely on Dan 4,13 and 5,21 to justify this reading. But this interpretation is paleographically impossible. Even if the letter in question could be read as a -3, the sequence -:3 is not viable. It is enough to compare it with the traces of 7 - 3 in the next line. b) Relying likewise on Dan 4 VAN DER WOUDEproposes, albeit hesitantly, [ I ' 1n Ti) in 1 nund irgendeinem Tier glich ichn. c) Equally unacceptable paleographically is the reconstruction proposed by DUPONT-SOMMER, who translates, also hesitantly ccet [mon] vi[sage] (?) n'Ctait plus semblable 3 celui des fils d'homme (?)* The dubious letter can hardly be a -9,and the vertical trace clearly visible remains unexplained. d) VOGT~' translates man hominibus similis fui,,. He retains the same reading as the editor but changes the meaning of '12 owing to the different interpretation of ' l\t'. The problem is that to retain the most obvious meaning of lw he changes the meaning of the preposition 13. Although VOGT refers to BDB s. v. 7,6 (b), 585, where examples are given of this usage in Hebrew, he himself in his Aramaic Dictionary does not include any example of this usage in Aramaic. All these opinions are based on the reading of I'L* as a participle Pe'al, and in Pe'd the meaning of ' lL' is uto be similar*. But in Pa'el and in the later Aramaic ' l t i it often means aplace, put, leaven, already found in the form PiW of the same verb in Biblical Hebrew

E. VOGT, -Precatio Regis (1956). 532-541.


Nabonid in



ludaica (40)-, Biblica 37




and in the Hitpa'el of Biblical Aramaic. Hence the word may equally be read as a form Pa'el. e) This idea is the basis of MILIK'S reconstruction: i1IY( 7 iw [ K > WI K ] 1 0 1, ccand I was placed far from menu and of MEYER'Sii~Y( 1W [ 7 > ~ 1 3 1 ] 0 1, <<and I was far from my throne*. In MILIK'S reading, the king, as in the story of Daniel, is removed from contact with men. In MEYER'S, it is a question of removal from the capital and consequently from the throne. f) GRELOT proposes a new way of reading 7 l w as a third person singular perfect of the intensive form. Based on the frequent use of ' 3 IK as standard phrases in the verb with the complements 3 3 and 1 Targumic Literature, his reconstruction is: '>Y ' i i l r i ~ K ~ ) > K ?iw ( a 3 1 in3) In 1. <<After this, God turned his face towards me,,. In essence all this range of opinions may be reduced to the three possible interpretations of ' 1W.In my view the oldest hypothesis, that of the editor, remains the most correct. Apparently the basis of the whole story is the absence of the king for a period of time in his residence in the oasis of Teiman on the borders of the Empire. Whether this was owing to an illness (our text) or to madness (Babylonian documents) or to having become like the beasts (Daniel), the fact is that the origin of all the legends is his having been separated from his people. This is why it seems to me necessary to retain this element in the story. Nor does this interpretation offer major grammatical problems. An excellent parallel to the meaning I give to the phrase can in my opinion be found in one of the inscriptions from Beth Shearim, catacomb 13, 12 0 ' 1 ~ 1 133wn ~ ( - lw) ' 1 W 'a2, -May his restingplace be set (?) in peace,,22. At the end of the line the editor reconstructs ccand when I confessed my sins*. But the introduction of this new element seems to me hypothetical in the extreme. The mention in line 7 of the prayer to the false gods and the very title of the work suggests that what brought an end to the punishment was precisely the invocation of the true God. Hence the reconstruction partly in common with DUPONTSOMMER and VAN DER WOUDE.


N. AVIGAD,*Excavations at Beth ~hdarirn,1953-, I U 4 (1954),





Line 4 The difficulty with the beginning of the line lies in the different interpretations which may be given to 2'3 according to how the sentence is divided. According to whether the break comes after K'U~ 1 , ;,3w, a>, or l i 3 , completely different meanings are possible. 1) MILIK supposes that x'un;ll is connected with the lacuna in line 3 and translates [[[Mais, quand j'eus confess? mes @chks] et mes fautes, (Dieu) m'accorda un devinu. This hypothesis presupposes giving i ) j \ U the meaning of *to grant* and reading "finstead of a>. Neither of these suppositions is necessary. 2) VAN DER WOUDEends the sentence after :2\LI. T i 1 a': would be a noun phrase in which the suffix of ;l> would refer to God, subject of the verb 1'3i?'. Hence his translation, aEr hatte einen Weissager,,. 7-1 is presented as a kind of functionary of the Almighty. But, as GRELOT indicates, it would be difficult to have started the sentence with a complement followed by the subject without using the verb > .l; 3) For GRELOTthe sentence must have ended after A>, connecting with his reconstruction of line 3. God would be the subject of ;i3w and ;l> would repeat at the end of the sentence the complement placed before the verb. He translates, ccDi[eu] dirigea [sa face vers moi et il me gutrit,] et mon pkcht, il le remit*. Even though the sentence is thus logical and complete, the figure and the action of the 17 1 remain deprived of all significance. The view which seems to me best founded is that which considers 171 ; I> , T ~~W ' u 1 n as a single sentence, defined by the two 1 which who precede K ?un1 and K 1i1I. 11-was proposed by DUPONT-SOMMER considers i1'7 as a kind of daivus etlticus. It is certain that in the other texts, up to the New Testament, only God forgives sins and that even in the other two Qumran texts which speak of cure or expulsion of demons (1QapGen XX, 28-29 and lQS 111-IV) there is no reference to any man, seer, exorcist, or whatever translation we wish to give to T ? ,. i who forgives sins. It is equally certain that in a parallel sentence in IlQtgJob XXXVIII,2 it is God himself who forgives the sins ubecause of himu (;1>'13) [of Job], and not Job himself. But the structure of the sentence seems here to demand this interpretation. The function that the 1 7 3 fulfils in the narrative, the fact that he is presented as a Jew who orders the king to bear witness to what happened and that the king obeys, all seem to demand that his action should be something more than exhorting the king to write an order




to his subjects to give glory to God. That his function in the narrative is not confined to this seems equally to be shown by the fact that he is called 172,a name which in Dan 2,27; 4,4; 5,7.11 indicates one in the series of seers, fortune-tellers, astrologers, magicians, etc., who are incapable of interpreting the king's dreams. The objections which as to his understanding of have been raised against DUPONT-SOMMER the sentence and his translation of T i 3 as exorcist rest more on the presupposition of the impossibility of sins being pardoned by a man than on a refutation of his arguments. This is my reason for supporting his trans~ation~~. For the end of the line I accept the reconstruction by the editor who finds an excellent parallel in Dan 2,25 and explains the appearance of a Jew in a place so far from Judea. If space permitted it could be reconstructed: ccamong the exiles of Babylon),, but it is preferable to add instead of 3211, 7 3 K 121 which introduces the following verbs. Line 5
I n 1 I >1ni1. The lacuna in line 4 makes the reading of these two verbs equally uncertain. What is meant: a third person singular perfect, or a second person singular imperative ? Commentators disagree. The first reading, which is proposed by the editor, is supported by the absence of a complement, generally present in Dan with the verb. The second is supported by the meaning of ccproclaim,, conveyed by '1ni1 in Dan 3,32 and the fact that it would make no sense for the lil (and not the king) to write the letter ordering the glorifying of God. I therefore choose to read them as imperatives. This justifies the reconstruction of the end of line 4 and makes the rest of the fragment a part of the letter sent by the king to his subjects. This option also dictates the reading of n 7 12 in the following lines as first person singular.

Line 6
n 7 1 i l . I read this as first person singular. Here too commentators choose to read it as a second disagree. MILIK,MEYER,and GRELOT person singular. The grammatical arguments are irrelevant, given the frequency of defective forms in Qumran and specifically in 4QPrNab.

23 Cf. W. KIRCHXHLAGER, uExorcismus in Qumran ?*, Kairos 18 (1976), 135-




This is shown by IlQigIob where n ' lil is clearly first person in XIV, 8 and XV,2, while it is certainly second person in XXX.2. For this reason the use of ii7 IJ as first person in line 3 is not decisive. If I choose to read it as first person it is above ail because of the context, since I see these lines as part of the king's autobiographical narrative and not as a continuation of the Gezer's statement. Since the discovery of the small fragment which helped to put together fragments 2 and 3 in MILIK'Seditionz4, there is still a space ) ~almost , certain reconstruction, and 7n7n3. MILIK between X U ~ K of proposes ~n 2'1133, but the -3 of 7n'n seems to rule that out. With GRELOT I reconstruct n-7'0 1. Lines 7-8 These lines present no major difficulties. The list of items is identical to Dan 5,423, if we except day,, which of course is mentioned in Dan 2.35.45. The reconstruction ' 3 e l ? of line 7 was proposed by GRELOT on the basis of Dan 6.11. To ' 1 lo in line 8 we give the causal value which it has in Dan 3.22 and Ezra 5,12.

The first two lines have preserved the title of the work. This is interesting because the aPrayerm proper has not been prlserved, although we must presume that it occupied the major part of the manuscript. If the proposed reconstructions are accepted, the title itself would already contain the principal elements: protagonist, setting, motif, theology, etc. The development of the prayer might be similar to the development of the Prayer of Manasselt, an apocryphal writing dependent upon 2 Chr 33,lO-13 and found in some of the manuscripts of the Septuagint and as an appendix in the editions of the vulgatezs.
Cfr. -Addendum-, RB 63 (lo%), 415. Cfr. L. GRAY. =Le Roi Man& d'aprts les ltgendes midrashigues-, in Mklonges E. Podechard (Lyon 1945), 147-157; the studies of P. BOGAERTin L'Apucatypse synioquc de Bamclr (Sources ChrCtiennes 144) (Paris 1 9 6 9 ) , 269-319; R. LE D e ~ u rT , a w des Chroniqrres I (Roma 1971), 169, nos. 54, and the versions of the text published by E. O W A I D , Das Geber Manasses (JSHRZ IV/l), and J.H. CHAR24




Following the title, in lines 2-4, we have a summary of the facts in autobiographical form: sickness of the king, retreat to Teiman, useless invocation of the false gods, invocation of the true God, forgiveness of sin by an exorcist. In the text preserved we are not actually told of the king's cure, only of the forgiveness of his sins, but the two things must have gone together. In m y opinion explicit mention of this cure can be found in fragment 4, on which I do not comment here and which, given the characteristics of the leather, must belong to another column of the manuscript. In that fragment occurs the word nn?ntc, which I derive from 0'7n Ir *to be healthy, to recover strength*, based on o?nnlc of IQapGn XXI1,S. Be this interpretation as it may, the sequence of events on which the narrative is based seems clear to me. Lines 4-5 present the figure and the action of the exorcist. This exorcist remains anonymous. Of him we are told only that he pardons the king's sin and orders him to proclaim the facts in writing, so that the event may serve as an example and the king's subjects may arrive at the same recognition of the true God as the king has already reached thanks to the intervention of the exorcist. Although we must be careful not to read into our text the facts known from the narrative of Daniel, I believe we may presume that the action of the exorcist was not confined to what the manuscript has preserved. It must have led to the recognition of the cause of the royal sickness, of the uselessness of praying to false gods and the need to invoke the true God. From the detail that he was a Jew of the exile I believe we can also conclude that his action followed on those of other magicians, fortune-tellers and such-like, consulted previously without success. The same may be said of his intervention, of the cure, of the forgiveness of sins, and of the written proclamation. y interpreThe rest of the preserved narrative, lines 6-8, which in m tation resumes its autobiographical character after the action of the exorcist, contains the beginning of the letter addressed by the king to his subjects following the orders of the exorcist. This begins to relate the events in detail. The rest of the text has perished apart from the few words of fragment 4, but the summary in lines 2-4 allows us to deduce its contents. It would have included the prayer of Nabonidus to the true God which gives the work its title and an exhortation to abandon the worship of false gods to adore the Almighty.
LESWORTIi, *Prayer o f Manassch-

in l7te Old Testament Pseudepigmpho. Vol. 11, 625-




A. Relation with Daniel

What conclusions may be drawn from this text, so understood? The first thing that comes to mind is Dan 4. It may be said that we are confronted with a literary duplicate of the same theme, especially if we ignore in Daniel the account of the most obviously legendary elements (the theme of the royal hubris, the theme of the tree that covers the universe, etc.). In 4QPrNab, Nabonidus, in his sickness, spends seven years in the desert until his sin is pardoned and his sickness cured by a Jew. The king recognises the uselessness of the false gods and gives thanks to the one true God. In Dan 4 Nebuchadnezzar after a premonitory dream interpreted by Daniel becomes as a beast and is absent from Babylon for seven years, at the end of which he invokes the true God, who cures him and lets him return to his royal city. Apart from the common story the aim of the two narratives is identical, to show the recognition of the uselessness of the false gods and the power of the true God. But when the two narratives are analysed in detail it may be seen that relations between the two are not quite so simple. If we presume that the book of Daniel is dependent on the narrative of 4QPrNab it is not clear why the author of Daniel should have suppressed the figure of the Jewish T i 1 or the diatribe against the false gods, elements so consistent with the aim of the story. The opposite dependence, that of 4QPrNab on Daniel, is even more difficult to understand since the Qumran text is lacking in many of the legendary elements which colour Dan 4 and has preserved authentic elements which do not appear in Dan, such as the name of Nabonidus and the name of the oasis of Teiman in the Arabian desert. Moreover, the exorcist is anonymous and it is hard to imagine that the author would have eliminated Daniel if it was he who should have appeared in the story. On the other hand a complete mutual independence of the two writings clashes with the profound similarities between them. Even if the afflictions are different, it is hard to attribute to mere chance the fact that the durations are the same. And both narratives use the



phrase: the ods of silver, of gold, of bronze, of iron, of wood, of stone, of cia$, which is found nowhere else in the whole Bible. For F.M. CROSS^, cc.. there is every reason to believe that the new document preserves a more primitive form of the tale. It is well known that Nabonidus gave over the regency of his realm to his son B e l s h a ~ a rin order to spend long periods of time in Teima; while Nebuchadnezzar, to judge from extrabiblical data, did not give up his throne... It is not necessary to think of the Prayer of Nabonidus as a literary source of the canonical Daniel, or even to give the prayer priority in terms of its written composition. The prayer may simply derive from a parallel, but more conservative line of orally transmitted materia1.a A similar opinion is expressed by F. ALTHEIM and R. STIEHL~', although I believe that the priority of 4QPrNab is beyond all doubt. The problem of the connection between the two documents must be examined in a broader context in the light of the other documents known. B. Relation with Nab. H.2 A\B Fortunately these two parallel narratives can now be contrasted with the data provided by the new Nabonidus In essence, these new documents tell us: - that Nabonidus, at the command of the god Sin, expressed in a dream, decides to rebuild the temple of Ehulhul in ~ a r r a n ~ ' . - this arouses great opposition among his subjects3'.
26 4QPrNab A 1,743 and Dan 5,4.23. F.M. CROSS, The Ancient Librory of Q ~ ~ m r u(Garden n

City, 1958), 123-124. F. ALTHEIM R. S n E W L , Die Amber in der alten Welt V/2 (Berlin 1%9), 3-23. 29 Edited by CJ. GADD, *The Harran Inscriptions of Nabonidus*, Ana!dian Studies 8 (19%). 35-92. 30 H 2 A: 47) 1 (am)Nabonidus, (8) who have not the honour (?) of (being a) somebody, and kingship (9) is not with me, (but) the gods and goddesses prayed for (10) me, and Sin to the kingship (11) called me. In the night season he caused me to behold a dream (12) (saying) thus "E-hul-hul the temple of Sin which (is) in Harran quickly (13) build, (seeing that) the lands, all of them, to thy hands (14) are verily a m mitted".. 3' H 2 A col. I: ~ ( 1 4 )(But) the sons of Babylon, Borsippa, (15) Nippur, Ur, Erech, Larsa, priests (and) (16) people of the capitals of Akkad, against his great (17) divinity offended, whenever (?) they sought after (anything) they did wickedly, (18) they knew not the




- so that the king leaves the capital for Teiman and other cities in Arabia, where he stays for ten years32. - at the end of which he returns to ~ a b ~ l o n ~ ~ . Comparing this with the account of 4QPrNab the common elements immediately stand out34. - Nabonidus is a pious king who worships his gods. - He leaves his capital for a considerable period of time. - During this period he lives in Teiman. - A favourable intervention of God allows him to return to his kingdom. There is also a fundamental difference: in H 2 A\B Nabonidus expressly attributes his preservation and restoration to the action of the
wrath, (the resentment), of the king of the gods, (even) Nannar, (19) they forgot their duty, whenever (?) they talked (it was) treason (20) and not loyalty, like a dog they devoured (21) one another; fever and famine in the midst of them (22) they caused to be, it minished the people of the land*. On the religious and political divisions at Babylon and their influence both in the rising of Nabonidus and in his temporary retreat, see H. LEWY, -The Babyionian Background of the Ky Kaus Legends, Arciriv Orienuibai 17 (1049). 28-109, specially 71-78 and 94-97, and R.P. DOUGHERTY, Nabatlidus m d Belshorror (Yale Oriental Series Researchs 15) (New Haven 1929). 71-81 and 156-157. 32 H 2 B -1. I ~(23) But I hid myself afar from my city of Babylon (24) (on) the road to Teima', Dadanu, Padakkula], (25) HibrO, Iadihu, and as far as Iatribu, (26) ten years I went about amongst them, (and) to (27) my city Babylon I went not in*. The identification of Teima' with the oasis of Tcima in Arabia was already advanced by R.P. DOUGFiER7Y. JAOS 41 (1921). 458-459 and JAOS 42 (1922), 305316, and was confirmed by the later publication of the -Verse Account of Nabonidus* by S. SMmr. Less convincing now seem the reasons advanced to justify the absence of the king [to avoid the celebration of the annual festival]. Thanks to 1.3 2 A\B we have now a reasonable explanation, see GADD,88-89, 33 H 2 B col. If ~(11) (In) ten p a r s arrived the appointed time (12) the days were fultilled which Nannar, king of the gods, had spoken; (13) on the 17th day of the month Tasritu, the day when Sin vouchsafes (14) his revelation, Sin, lord of the gods...* H 2 B col. 111 -(I) with diviners (2) and interpreters I instructed myself (in) the way, I laid (my hands to it ?) (3) In the night season a dream was disturbing, until the word ... (4) Fulfilled was the year, came the appointed time which ... (5) From the city of Tcma' I (returned ?) ... (6) Babylon, my seat of lordship (I entered)-. The text on both stelac is badly damaged in these lines. The rccanstrudions are in A N E T uncertain, and several interpretations are possible. See L. O P P ~ I I E I M Suppl. 562-563 for which is not Nabonidus who returns to Babylon, but a messager, although to mantain this translation he is forced to change the certain reading of line 10 *kissed my fret- into .kissed his fret*. Cfr. thc parallel tables elaborated by R. MEYER, Das Gebrr, 65-66.




god Sin, whereas in IQPrNab, as in Dan 4, to recover his health and his throne he must acknowledge the uselessness of the idols and the supremacy of the one true God of Israel. This apologetic presentation of 4QPrNab shows us that the Qumran text, though making use of a series of historical records, still belongs to the literature of propaganda or edification rather than to what we understand by history. C. Relation with 4QpsDm Ar The undoubted relationship between 4QPrNub and the canonical book of Daniel and the fact that the editor MILIK~' suggests recon"as you were like structing in 4QPrNab B 4 >K311]'2anliu K O 1 Daniel*, proposing to identify the <<angel* in the dream of Nabonidus (in his interpretation) with Daniel, forces us to examine the possible connections between 4QPrNab and 4QpsDm Ar, a collection of Aramaic texts from three manuscripts from Cave 4, published in a transcription by MILIKat the same time as 4QPrNab. The figure of Daniel as a just person has already been known to us since the Ugaritic textsx. In Ezek 14.14.20 and Ezek 28,3 he appears in company with Noah and Job as a prototype of wisdom and justice3'. The fact that in Ezek 28.3 the wisdom of the King of Tyre is compared with that of Daniel makes it very probable that this is a reference to the same person as in the Canaanite mythM. This leads MEYER~ to ~ suppose that the protagonist of the book of Daniel may be a cchistoricisation,, of the same person. This would allow us to group together the elements in the cycle of Daniel (including 4Qp s D m Ar) with QQPrNub, just as the canonical book of Daniel includes elements of an apocalypse of the Maccabean era (chs. 10-12) together with pre-exilic traditions (ch. 4). But close reading of these texts makes clear the difference in character compared with 4QPrNab.

J.T. MILIK, 411. I1 Aqht, V, 5-8. Text and translation in CH. VIROUEAUD, L a l&n& PhCnicienne de Danel (Paris 1936), 201-203 and C.H. GORDON, U g a r i f i cManual (Roma 1955 183. Scc M. NOW, .Noah, Daniel und Hiob in Ez X I V . . V T 1 (1951). 251-260, and SH. SPEIGEL, nNoah, Danel and Job. Touching on Canaanite Relics in the Legends of the Jews* in: L. G i n & % Jubilee, Vol. I (New York 1945), 305-335. Y1 See VIROLLEAUD, 121-122. R. METER, Das Gebet, 84 ff.



No feature in 4QmDan Ar allows us to assimilate it to the narrative genre of our manuscript. It is rather a discourse on history of the type of Dan 11, clearly apocalyptic and probably later than the canonical book of Daniel. In 4QpsDan Ar it is Daniel who speaks before the king and the courtiers4'. The identity of this Daniel with the figure of the seer, in other words the pseudoepigraphic identification, seems to me obvious: Daniel appears in the canonical book as an interpreter authorised by God not only of dreams41, but in particular of the grand apocalyptic visions of history42. Hence he is the ideal figure to give authority to one of these visions. Certainly the figure of Daniel as miracle worker like ~ is i not i in question. In the canonical book Daniel appears as the subject on whom God works his wonders43, not as God's chosen agent for carrying them out. Without entering into the discussion as to whether the figure of Daniel in the canonical book is a continuation of the figure of Daniel in the Ugaritic documents and in Ezek 14,14-20; 28,3, the reconstruction of his name in 4QPrNab seems to me in no way necessary. For the propaganda aims of the book the simple introduction of a Jew who leads King Nabonidus to the recognition of the true God is quite enough. D. Relation with Job
A comparison with the book of Job and with the legend of Job in general is for many reasons natural. The first point of comparison is that both protagonists lead a happy life, of which they are deprived for a time4+$,by an illness of divine origin4', but to which they are finally restored.

Ms. a: ] ? X ' j 7 ?OX[ ]h'3?0 '33131 0 1 171 M S . ~ 01117 : '?K'I~[ ]inn> >x'J~~ ' K W 41 Dan 2.21-30, 4,6.15-24. 42 Dan 7-11. 43 Dan 1.8-16: 6,17-25; 14,31-42. 44 In the case of Nabonidus, seven years. In the case of Job, the time is not defined, but it is specified (Job 511) that hi friends stay with him for seven days and seven nights and in one of the manuscripts of the Testament o f Job his illness is also said to last seven years. Cfr. M. DELLOR,62. 45 This is clearly stated in 4QPrNob A 2. In Job it is Satan who provokes the illness with the divine permission (Job 2.6-I), but it is commonly accepted that this is a secondary development and that in the original story Job's illness was caused by




Another important point is the identity of the illness of the two protagonists. In 4QPrNab the king is afflicted with an illness referred to as K W > X J x l n W 3 . In Job 2,7, Job's illness is referred to as 1 WWJ Y 1,an expression which the Targum translates with precisely the same term as in our text KW 'K 3 x l l n w J&. Another point of similarity is the common origin of the two personages. Job comes from Ur, one of the traditional centres of the lunar cult, together with Harran. Nabonidus, also a native of Babylon, seems to be of Assyrian and Aramaic origin47. Undoubtedly one of his most characteristic features is his dedication to extending the cult of Sin, the Moon God of Harran and Ur. This common Aramaic origin is also indicated by the mention of Job's friends Eliphaz, from Teiman, and Bildad, from Dedana. Both cities are mentioned in the list in Nab H. 2 A\B 1,24 and Teiman plays an important role in 4QPrNab. These similarities have led F O H R E R ~ and ~ D E L C ~ R " to affirm that 4QPrNab preserves the same legend as the book of Job in an older form than that known to the writer of the canonical book. This conclusion seems to me exaggerated. For one thing it forgets the fundamental differences between the two texts: whereas Job is presented as just so that the illness is a trial sent by God (Job 1.21). Nabonidus is seen adoring false gods and for him the illness is a call to conversion, to adore the true God. So while his story may be used as apologetic literature and propaganda directed at non-Jews, the character of the book of Job is different; all its exhortations are directed at the adorers of the true God. For another, while Job remains a figure in the world of legend (and the text quoted in Ezek 14 is a good proof of this), 4QPrNab tells us of a definite known person. Comparison with Nab H 2 shows us that there is no need to bring in any other element to understand our
God himself. 46 On 4Qrdob and IlQ~globthe tea in question has not k e n preserved. Tg On elos Dcut 28.38 also translates the MT expression as X W 'K 3 K 3 n W 3. j7 On the origin of Nabonidus w e H LEW, 71-TI. and the article by P. G ~ v r u in the DBSup. VI, 268-286, specially 111, 4 x 5 origines de Nabonidem. R. MEYER sees in them diaspora Jews from Arabia, Dm Geber, 99-100, note 2 49 G . FOHRER, 95: -So bleibt wohl nur die SchluOfolgerung, daO die auf die Formung von 4Q Or Nab cingcwirkt hat.. So M. DELCOR, 63. *La tradition rapport& par la priere de Nabonide montre, en tout cas, qu'il existait dans le nord de I'Arabie une legende de Job sous une forme plus andenne que celle du livre canonique*.




manuscript. On the basis of a real but puzzling event, such as the sojourn of Nabonidus in Teiman, it is easy to construct a story at the same time edifying and apologetic, which accounts for the facts and simultaneously serves the purposes of the author.


The same helps us to appreciate the literary genre of the account. 4QPrNab is a wisdom and apologetic story stemming from the historical fact of the years spent by Nabonidus in Teiman and giving an explanation of this fact with the aim of establishing the efficacy of the action of the true God and the inefficacy of the false gods. R. MEYER" sees its origin in the Jewish community of Teiman. According to him it is a local tradition developed to explain the content of the inscriptions, once the people, who spoke Aramaic, could no longer understand the cuneiform inscriptions on the stelae. Hence he places its origin in the 5th century B.C. on the basis of certain signs of universalism he claims to see in the work. But, even if the relation of the contents with Nab H 2 A\B is undoubted, literary dependence need not necessarily be assumed. The possible connection has been lost and we have no knowledge of the intermediate stages. What is certain is the difference in intention between the two documents, and in the underlying theology. Moreover, the combination of the sojourn in Teiman with a sickness of the king need have nothing to do with the Jewish worlds2. Besides, even if the incomplete nature of the text prohibits the drawing of definite linguistic conclusions, the most ancient features of the language found in 4QPrNab still do not suggest an origin in the and 5th century B.C. For example, the use of the pronouns .'i~;l ; I n X and the relative '1, the typically Aramaic plural - > ; iare '~ fully attested in Biblical Aramaic and continue to be used sporadically right up to the Palestinian Targum. Nor is the 5th century suggested by the alternation of forms with full or with defective orthography, nor yet by the use of X - for the determinate state.

R. MEYER, Dos Geber, 101-104. This is one of the objections to MEYER's conclusions raised by P. GREU).~ in RQ 4 (1%3), 120. In Nab H 2 A/B 1, 27-31, according to ~ R M I G N A c , can even be deteded an allusion to this illness, Les Tcnes de Qiot~rdinIt, 2 8 9 .



The copy preserved may paleographically be dated between 50 and 25 B.C., written as it is with a hand transitional between Hasmonean and Herodian, a characteristic Jewish Semicursivev. The original may have been written about the third century B.C., before the composition of Dan 4. Even if no direct dependence is admitted and we postulate that the two accounts derive from a common source, the priority of 4QPrNab seems to me clear. This gives us the limit for the composition of the work. As for the background from which it originated, it must be placed in oriental Jewry. More specifically: the idea that a 1il should relieve Nabonidus of his sickness and of its cause, that is his sins, brings us to the tradition which attributes this kind of power to the ~ s s e n e s ~ ~ . This would account for its presentation among the works of the library of Qumran.

See G. VERMES, -The Efymology of the Esscnew, RQ 2 (1960), 427-443 and -Essenes and Therapeutaia, RQ 3 (1%2), 495-504.



In 1956 J.T. MIUK published a few fragments of three Aramaic mss. of the Herodian period pertaining to a cycle of Daniel, which he provisionally designated as 4QpsDana, 4 ~ s ~ and a n 4~ Qpshc1. Unfortunately, instead of publishing the photographs of the manuscripts in their entirety, MILIK confined himself to transcribing some isolated fragments from the three mss. arranged according to the sequence of events of the sacred history. That is perhaps the reason why the texts have not aroused much attention among researchers2. Nevertheless, despite their fragmentary and incomplete character, the texts do contain elements of interest. A detailed discussion would, obviously, be out of place, owing to the absence of all the texts preserved. Therefore we had better limit ourselves to some marginal notes on the fragments published by MILIK,placing them within a Qumranic perspective and following the thread of the pseudo-Danielic literature of a later period. We reproduce the texts published by MILIK, indicating in the margin the manuscripts from which each fragment comes, while giving them a continuous numbering to facilitate the references. In order to make it quite clear that we are not dealing with a continuous text, we are separating each fragment in the translation by a dotted line.

J.T. MILK, -'Pric?re de Nabonide' et autres h i t s d'un cycle dc Daniel. Fraynents aramkns de Qumrfn 4-, RB 63 (1956), 407-415. To my knowledge, the only commentators to concern themselves with it are A. MERTENS,Dm Buch Daniel im Lichte der Tu?e wm Toten Meer (SBM 12) (Stuttgart 1971), 42-50, and R. MNER, Dar Gebet des Nabonid, 85-94.




Ms b

Ms b

I?..[ 1 y i > i 3 n ?nJ ?a[ 2 K T i u ] 1 3 1'7 ?O n i[3 3 ] l [ 4 iln]l?~?ll0~ 5[

J>W 1 K ?120 >[Y 7 ] '333 i l l [ 8 1.0.1 9 [ I.. ilKO Y3[1X 1'3W 1 10 K la 10 1 i n ' i 112>13[ ].'I ? [ l a ].n7 11 [K]>3l 7 K 111' 1 lill3Y0 l a > 1 1.1'3 ?>l!ii'I 12 [ 1. ] l a ' 3 3 1 [ 1 13 I 1.n '.[ I 14 [?'ill>K '93K] 10 1 lil"3lX > K l W ' '33 11n3[ ] 1 5 ~iil'> il ~l 1 K n w u ? i > w > ? l a 3 3 3 17[n37 i i a ? ] 1 6 1n1n? [ w y i i 1'3 i > ~ 111130 ?lit[ 1. ?nK>l >3[3 3% lY313313 1'3 113K 17 ] . x n i h 'xi.[ I 18 11 13K 113 1[ 1 9 1. 7'1W 1'PJlJW Y7K[ 20 7113~ ~ ~ 1~ 'n 1 3 ill 1 [ K ~ I J ? 2 1~ K ~ ~ n Oi 3 Y 3 n i 173wn[ n ~ n ' n ] l pxn 1330 K" [ 23 1 . 7'3v 1% [ 24 ]013>3 ..[ 25 ]an.[ 2 6 1.. 7 ' 3 p 27 113 0 lill[ 28 in 7 ' 1 ~UI[ 29 ];l??0 '[ 30 1 .1 Y U K [ K p p 1 31 1. ' K 7 l I 7 11W33n7ill7 [KJlY3 32 Pl' 1 1 2 illil>l K'IIOY ('370 33 w7anv 73?n 1 ?'W[77p 41 11311 KOl' 7 Y 7'13[Y 35 1.1 36 KYw]l q05[> 37 1YU' 1lY3 ]?K[ 38 l I [ K 39 113 i n 7 i K [ ~ '107 W 40 [ yiYWl.[ 4 1

I.. [

Ms a

Mss a + b

Ms b MS a Ms a Msa ?


Ms a


B. Translation

1 I...[ 2 ]after the flood[ 3 Nolah from [mount] Lubar[ 4 I.. a city[

5 ]a tower, its hei[ght

6 7 8 9
I...[ albove the tower and...[ to] view the sons of [ I...[

10 folur hundred [years]...[ 11 he ... them and [...]them all and brought them out of the midst of 12 Egypt by the hand of ... [...I and led them to cross the river Jordan 13 ]and his sons[ 14 I...[ 15 ]the sons of Israel preferred his presence to that [of God] 16 [and sacrifilced their sons to the demons of error. And God's anger was kindled against them and he delivered them 17 into the hands of Nelbuchadnezzar King of Balbylon and ... [...I from among them, from the hands of ...[ 18 [...I... the exiled...[ 19 ]and scattered them[ 20 ]oppressed seventy years...[ 21 ]this great [kingdom, and will save them] 22 ]strong, and a kingdom of peoples[ 23 ]This is the first kingdom[

140 27 yelars...[ 28 IRHWS, son of[ 29 ]ws, ... years [ 30 I.. speak[



31 32 33 34 35

of inliquity, made to err[ in] that [time] the called shall be reunited[ the kings of] the peoples and it shall be from that day[ the holly ones and the kings of the peoples[ sllaves until the day[


36 I...[ 37 to] put an end to iniquity 38 ]those who shall err in their blindness 39 thlose who shall arise 40 the holly ones and shall return 41 ... iniquity [.. I

C. Notes
Lines 1-4 The narrative of which this fragment formed part certainly dealt with the deluge, mentioned in line 2. The reference to Mount Lubar in line 3 directs us not to the biblical text but to Jubilees 5, just as does the mention of "a city" in line 4. Jub 7.14-17 records, in fact, the building of three cities in the vicinity of Mount Lubar by the three sons of Noah. In the Old Testament there is no identification of the exact location where the ark came to rest. Ar'arat is the geographical name of a region: "the ark came to rest upon the mountains of Ar'arat" (Gen 8,4). Although among the Jub texts found in Qumran there is none corresponding to the four mentions of Lubar in the Ethiopic text3, its mention here and in the narrative of the deluge in IQupGn XII, 10-

Jub 5,B; 7J.17; 10,15. For a complete list of the Jub materials found at Qumran, see J.C. VAWERKAM, -The Jubilees Fragments from Qumran Cave 4-, forthcoming in the Proceedings o f the MaMd Congrss on the Dead Sea Scrolls.




13, gives the impression that it constitutes a Qumranic tradition4. Outside the locations mentioned5, this tradition is attested only in Epiphanius, Adv. Haer. I i 4.

Lines 5-9 The mention of the "tower" in rnss. a and b sets the two fragments in a mutual relationship and justifies placing them, as MILIKdoes, in the context of the narrative of the tower of Babel. Quite unaccountably, the editor translates i11,73> by rpunirn6. I see no reason why it should not be given its normal meaning, cfr. 4QEne 3 i 1. The Hebrew text of Gen 11.5 uses DKl?: the Lord comes the city and the tower, which Neoph. I translates as down to <<seen 'nnn3. Perhaps MILIKhas let himself be influenced by the expression in Onq and PsJon, which paraphrase the biblical text: K y m n > X > K > ~ in I 1~ n ? ;1 ? I I Y 3Y 7 1;1?13, ccto avenge himself on them because of the building of the city and the tower,. Lines 10-14 Although because of the fragmentary character of the text nothing can be stated with certainty, the author seems to take the line of philo7 and Flavius ~ose~hus',in believing that the Israelites stayed 400 years in Egypt. Then he accepts the statement in Genesis 15,13, without pretending to square it with the figure of 430 years given in Exod 12,4041 in the manner of the LXX,the Samaritan Pentateuch, PsJon or later rabbinic interpretations9.Jub 14,13 takes up the text of Genesis 15,13, but, when calculating the years, he uses Exod 12 which gives a period of 430 years between Isaac's birth and the departure from ~gypt".
~ 3 1" 3 The word was not previously attested in Aramaic. The men-

tion of the Jordan does not leave any doubt as to its meaning. In

h b a r appears also in 6Q8 26.1, though without context and of uncertain reading. Including the quotation from Jub in Syncellus. J.T. MILIK,*P&re dc Nabonidem, 412: .pour punir Ics fils dc-. puis nr. div. her. 54. *An& If. viii, 2; Bell. Jud V. ix 4. But in Ant 11. xv, 2 he gives 434 years. Sce P. G m , ~Quatre cent trente ans (Ex XI1.34): Du Pentateuquc au Tcstament aramten de M r . in: Hommages d Duponl-Sommer (Paris 1971), 383-394. 'O Jub 16,13 and 50,4.





biblical Aramaic it appears in three different forms: '73 1 ' (Jer 17,8), 53' (IS 30,25; 444) and '73 1K (Dan 8,2.3.6), but always with the same basic meaning derived from the root ' 7 3 ' : alead, transport,,, attested in Aramaic. Lines 15-19 The text, which results from two fragments of the mss. a and b which overlap, is concerned with the sin of Israel and its exile, as confirmed by the mention of the ccexiledn in line 18, and their being given into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar. The suffix in line 15 must refer to the idols, as is normal in deuteronomistic summaries, see Septuagint Judges 2,1123, or in the speeches, such as the one in 2 Kgs 17,743, which follow on the narrative of the downfall of the northern kingdom. The crime referred to in line 16 is, no doubt, the Moloch sacrifice": the immolation of children in the Tophet of the Hinnom valley, close to the Temple. This rite must have exerted a certain attraction on Israel, as indicated by the prohibitions in Lev 18.20: 20,2-5 and Deut 12.31; 18,19, and the repeated allusions to it during the latter period of the monarchy, cfr. 2 Kgs 16,3; 17,3; 21,6; 23,lO. The novelty of our text is that it makes of this rite, together with the practice of idolatry, one of the main reasons leading to the exile. This is due, perhaps, to the importance it gained in Jehoiachim's time, immediately before the exile, as demonstrated by Jeremiah's denunciations (7,31-33; 19'4-6 and 32,35)12, and by the influence of Psalm 106, 36-37, from which our text draws direct inspiration.

rin IYU

'1'~. As far as I know, the expression, as such, is not attested in any other text. The nearest expression is the one used by Neoph. I for the translation of Deut 32,17: ii77w niiyu 077 in37 <<they sacrificed to the idols of the demons*. In our text, the sacrifice is a direct offering to the demons. The shgdu, which were Assyrian domestic spirits, had already acquired a negative connotation in the biblical

" On tbis sacrifice, see J. W R I E ~ L ~ , E s a de i reconstitution du sacrifice molekr, loumol Asiatique 248 (1960), 167-187 and 0 . EISSFWDT, M d k ais Opfr6egnfl im h i s c h e n und Hebriiischen und dm Ende &s G m M&h ( H d e 1935). See now the important study of J. DAY, Mdech: A God of Human Sacrifice in the Old Tesmenf (University of Cambridge Oriental Publications 41) (Cambridge 1989). "See also Ezek 16.20-21 and 20,31.



language13, and 7 1 ~ / will 1 ~be the normal designation of demons in the targumic and rabbinic literature. In Qumran, the term does not appear in other Aramaic writings, but it is found in Hebrew, in 4Q.510 1,5 as o " 1 ~ . a designation meant to underline the terrifying character of these demons14, as well as in llQPs@ 1.3 and frag. A,9, a Psalm of exorcism attributed to King avid''.

l n ~ I. ? According to the editor, this would make a complete word, although he does not translate it. The context makes it improbable that it could be read as lamed + inf. mi? (as used in targumic Aramaic). One could think of giving to the lamed a temporal meaning and rendering it ain the future., as in an Aramaic inscription from Nerab edited by C ~ K (Ner E II,8). If the blank occurs straight after the word, it would be more sensible to reconstruct some other verb, such as i13]lni??l, inf. afel, in parallel with ?n3fl>: *he ordered to deliver them into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon and to destroy their ...n. The reconstruction of line 17 is based on CD 1.6.
Lines 20-23
? ' l \ u ?'yI\li. The number is taken, no doubt, from Jer 25,ll-12 and 29,lO. These 70 years of Jeremiah are related to the sabbatical years of Lev 26,33-35 in 2 Chr 36.21, and transformed into the famous 70 weeks of Daniel, who also cites the 70 years of Jeremiah (Dan 9,2). As in Jeremiah, the figure serves here to indicate the whole period of exile. It becomes even more obvious that the period alluded to is that stretching from the time of the destruction of Jerusalem to the return is the from exile, if we consider the expression used in line 23: <<this first kingdom,,. Daniel knows and uses the scheme of the four kingdoms embracing the history of the world. In Dan 2.31-45, Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the different metals which make up the statue symbolise the four

l3 See 0 ' 1 W in Deut 32.17 and Psalm 10657, cases in which LXX already translates by .demons*. " M. BAIUET, DJD VII, 217. Is Published by J.P.M. VAu DER PLOEG, -Un petit rouleau de psaumes apocryp hcu, in: Trodifion und Glaube. Fesr. K G . ffihn (Gottingen 1971), 128-139. On the interpretation of the Psalm as a Psalm of exorcism, see E. PUECH, ~IIQPsApa:un rituel d'exordsmes. h i de reconstruction-, in: F. GARCIAMAR'IKNEZ (ed.), 7he T ~ ~4 T Qvnmn s and fhe History o f rhc Cornmunip, Vol. 2 (Paris 1990), 373-408.



kingdoms. In Dan 7,l-27, the four beasts coming out of the sea represent the four consecutive kingdoms. D. FLUSSER has proved, in a brilliant articlez6, that the basic scheme is of Persian origin. In it, the millennium which elapses from %roaster's revelation till the eschaton, is divided into four periods symbolised by the four branches, made of different metals, of a tree. These periods are later represented by kings or kingdoms, thus giving way to the concept found in Daniel and in our text. The original order of these kingdoms, as shown in the N t h Book of the sibyl17,is Assyria - Media - Persia - Macedonia Daniel substitutes Babylon for Assyria, because Babylon is the place of residence of both Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar. And this is equally the first of the kingdoms in our text, as specified in the allusion to Nebuchadnezzar in line 17. Since in Daniel this first kingdom lasted until the return from exile and our text depends on Daniel, the duration of this first kingdom must be the same as in the biblical book. Lines 24-30 If the hypothesis, based on lines 20-23, that the author of the Aramaic pseudo-Daniel follows Daniel's scheme of the four kingdoms, is correct, these two fragments must be connected with the fourth. In the same way as the canonic Daniel devotes a couple of chapters to a thorough account of the fourth kingdom (the Greek one, chs. 10-12). the author of the Aramaic PsDan treats this last period preceding the eschatological era in greater detail. The scarcity of the elements available prevents us from drawing firm conclusions, but the multiplication of proper names, apparently those of kings (lines 24, 27 and 29), would lead us to believe that the historical period under study was treated more thoroughly than the rest. We may confidently assume that this is precisely the hellenistic period on the basis of the o 1 endings of the three names preserved. Milik goes even further and proposes to identify two of these personages: 0 13 3 '7 3 , B&os,~~ would be the complete name in its
l6 D. FLUSSEX, -The Four Empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel-, Ismel Oriental Sbldies 1 (1972). 148-175. I' Which adds a fifth empire, that of Rome, though without integrating it in the sehema, see FLUSSEX, 150-fit. A name relatively frequent in the hellenistic era, as indicated by MILIK, see W. PAPE & G.E. BENSLER, WMett~uch der Griechischen Eigennmen (reprint Graz 1959). According to J. and L. ROBERT B o h p s is a typical Maeedonian name, 6, Fouillrr




long form of Alexander Balas, the third of the successors of Antiochus Epiphanes following the struggle with Demetriu~'~. The name of Baias by which he is known to us would be, in his view, no more than a hypocoristic, that is, an abbreviation of the full name. The problem lies in the fact that this assertion is absolutely gratuitous and nothing can compel us to think that the full name of Alexander Balas was different from that found in the sources. His identification of the second personage, o l;Il[ (suggested as a mere possibility, just like the former one), with Demetrius poses similar problems, as he must postulate the use of il in order to render the peculiar sound of the Greek d B ; Demet]r(h)is, or the vocalic passage i > o : ~emetlri~os. The difficulty is that the name of this king is one of the few represented in the Mss. of Qumran by a grapheme which makes all MILIK'Slucubrations unnecessary, and shows the difference from the name preserved in our text: o 1 1 n [ ~ n 1 cfr. 4Q169 3-4 i 2. Nevertheless, despite the fact that the personages in uestion must retain their anonymity and remain wrapped in myste , the mere circumstance of their mention by name is quite interesting, and differentiates our texts from the other mss. of Qumran, in which allusions of an actual historical character are extremely rare21.

Line 31-41 Line 33: 8 1 >a>. Although the most frequent form, both in Biblical and in Qumran Aramaic, is K 123 (which we have reconstructed in I~il?can be found in Biblical and in Qumran Aramaic, cfr. line 12), ; Dan 4.22 and ~ Q E I1I ix ~ 2. Line 38: 3 1y1. We translate the text as transcribed by MIUK, in spite of the fact that his translation cccomme un aveugles would suggest the reading 1 JY2.

4 en ~ Coric ~ I (Paris 1983), 323 1 . See 1 Mace 10.45-60. Flavius Joxphus AM XIII, ii, 4. 20 A series of checks on names in Pcrscpok, Phoenieia, Palmyra, Elephantine and in Jwephus, which all have good indices, has yielded no results. Together with the mention of Demetrius already noted, the other single hiiorical allusions in real and not symbolic terms are contained in a calendar from ' Y l i l > \ l l (Alexandra Salome), Cave 4, as yet unpublied, which mentions 7 1 Hyrcanus and the Roman governor of Syria, Aemilius Scaurus, cfr. J.T. MIUK, Ten Years of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judaea (London 1%3), 73. ;



These two fragments correspond to the description of the eschatological era Despite the very few elements that have been preserved, I feel this can be confidently asserted about the first fragment (line 3135) taking into consideration the themes of the headings: the reuniting of the chosen (line 32). the end of the slavery (line 3 5 ) . and the reference to the day, which can be no other than the day of YHWH, all commonplaces in every apocalyptic description of the last days. The eschatological character of the second fragment (lines 36-41), which preserves the end of the last column of Ms c, apparently corresponding to the end of the worku, is, in my opinion, still clearer. In it the course of history comes to an end with the destruction of iniquity (line 3 3 , the return of the holy ones (line 40) and, above all, the affirmation of the resurrection (line 39). This last assertion is particularly important in the light of the discussions and the contradictory evidence concerning the current belief in resurrection in Qumran and in the Essene movement in generd2'. Although in view of the dependence of our text on Dan, it would be logical to surmise the existence of an influence of Dan 12,2, the different formulation and utilisation in our text of the technical expression 1 in 117' make them stand out as quite distinct from each other. As far as can be inferred from the elements preserved, our text affirms only the resurrection of the just, like Isa 26, which is the basis of Dan 12,2, and not the double resurrection, asserted in the canonical Daniel. This may be deduced from the double ? > K which contrasts the wicked with the blessed ones: the former will go astray in their blindness, whilst the latter will be raised (again). The inference that this clear assertion of the resurrection in 4@sDun Ar is in no way unique or exclusive - which would lead us to characterise the work as of non-Qumranic origin - is proved by comparison with IQH IV 29-34 and, above all, by a new text from

Even according to MlUK it is not cornpleieiy sure that it forms part of the same work, uPri6rc dc Nabonidem, 411. Zj See G.W.E. NlClCELSBURG, Resumtion, Immorrolily, ond Eternol Life in Intetratomentoi Judoirm (HTS 26) (Cambridge 1972); H.C. CAVAUIN, Life After Death. Paul's A v e n t for the Resumction of the Deod in I Cor 15.1. An Inquby into the Jewish Backgraund (Conicttanea Biblica 2 1 ) (Lund 1974), and L. Ross0 U e l c u , *La concuionc della vita futura a Qumran*, Ri&a Bibliccr 30 (1982). 35-49.



Cave 4 of STARCKY'S lot, provisionally published by PUECH". Its reading can leave no doubt as to the well-founded affirmations of Hippolytus in his Refutatio omnium Haeresium 1x.18-2925. D. Commentary In addition to the published fragments, the editor26 has made known a series of expressions drawn from parts still unpublished which dispel all doubts as to the pseudo-epigraphic nature of the work. ]>K 7 11 i n K [ <<Daniel said* ]X 2 >L? J 7 3 1 o 7 l : [ abefore the ministers of the Kings 011 1 : >X ' IT[ <<Daniel befo[re~ I 7 M I " l K '11 '77K\U[ ccthey ask Daniel sayings The narrative, then, is taken to be directly spoken by Daniel. The formal aspects of the presentation will only be clearly perceived once the texts have been completely published. Nevertheless, the alternation of verbal forms in the pan already published seems to suggest that, rather than a vision, the text presents a survey of the course of history written down in an ancient document, read by Daniel to the King and his nobles. What is indeed now clear is that this is an apocalyptic composition in which, as opposed to the other ancient apocalypses, things were called by their real names. We do not come across the metaphors or allusions which form the nucleus of the ancient apocalypses, from the zoomorphic history of I E n d through Daniel's and John's apocalypses to the visions of 4 Ezra. This fact should enable us to fix the date of the composition of the original work with relative accuracy since, just as in the other apocalypses, it jumps from the description of the author's times to that of the last days. Unfortunately, we have not been able to identify the personages mentioned, so that we must confine ourselves to a general dating some time during the hellenistic period, after the appearance of the canonical Daniel. The absence of allusions to the Roman period, if
a 4Q521, see E. PUECW, -Lcs EssCniens et la Vie Future*, Le Monde de la Bible 4 ( l z g ) , 38-40, See M. BUCK, *The Account of the Ersenes by Hippotyrus and Josephusm, in: The Bockground o f the New Testament and its Eschatdogy (Cambridge 1954), 172-175 and M. SMmi, *The Description of the Essenes in Josephus and the Philosophoumena*, HUG4 29 (1958). 273-293. 26 J.T. MILIK,*Pri&rede Nabonidem, 441-442.



not due to a mere accident in the preservation of the corresponding part, compels us to conclude that the copies we possess (all of them of the Herodian period) come from a much later period than the lost original. Still greater are the problems posed by the original background. The mere fact that the mss. appeared in Cave 4 of Qumran does not prove that the work was composed by people from Qumran. On the other hand, nothing in it positively excludes a sectarian origin. CD 11.17-III,20 gives us a good example, within a purely sectarian document, of a summary of history from its origins until the exile, in the manner of our document. The Danielic scheme of the four kingdoms outlining human history until the last days, although not frequently attested, is not unknown in Qumran. Two systems are basically used in the mss. for giving a historical synthesis: - one is based on the number 70: 70 weeks 4Q180-181). 70 periods (one fragment of papyrus still unpublished24), 70 shepherds (1 Enoch 89,59-90,25 and the correspondent Aramaic texts of 4Q), 70 generations (1 Enoch 10,ll-12 and 4 ~ 1 iv~8-11); n ~ - another is based on the number 10: 10 jubilees (IlQMelch; 4~384-39d8).10 weeks (1 Enoch 93,3-10 + 91.1 1-17 and the correspondent Aramaic texts). But an unpublished text of STARCKY'S of which two copies have been preserved, clearly contains this scheme of the four kingdoms. It mentions a seer who finds four trees which speak. To his is your name?,, the first tree replies: ctBabylon*. The question: <<What answer to the second question has not been preserved but is apparis you, then, who ently *Persian, since the seer says to the three: <<It
According to M I U The ~ Books of Enoch, 252, this papyrus would contain the Aramaic original of the Hebrew -Book of the Periodu, interpreted in 4QI8&18I. The Second Ezekiel texts of S'RUGNUL'S lot described by MIUY The Books of Enoch, 254-2.55, and partially published by J. STRUGNELL and D. DIMANT,r4QSecond Ezekiel (4Q385)*, in F. GARCIAW i t T i m - E. PUEflI (eds.), M ~ o n o n o l Jean Camignac (Paris 1988), 45-58 and *The Merkabah Vision in Second Ezekiel (40385 4)*, in F. GARCIAMARTINU (ed.), The Tau of Qwnmn ond the Hirtory of the Community, Vol. 11 (Paris 1990). 331-3448. The fragments more directly prwenting the history within the schema of 10 jubilees (@3W 1 and 2) have been presented by D. D I M at the Madrid Congress as part of a -Pseudo Moses* composition, and will appear in the Proceedings of the congress, see D . DIMANT, *New Light from Qumran on the Jewish Pseudepigrapha - 4039% (forthcoming). 29 Quoted by MILIK,-Prit?re de Nabonide*, 411, note 2.

'' "



rule over Persian. Moreover, 1 Enoch 89,59-90,25 divides the 70 shepherds into four periods which coincide with Daniel's four empires. We have already pointed out in the notes how, in contrast to the general opinion ascribing the belief in resurrection to the Pharisaic group but denying it to the Essenes, there exist typically Qumranic texts in which the resurrection of the just is strongly asserted. We have also indicated that the tradition that identifies Lubar as the place where the Ark comes to rest, is peculiar to the writings of the sect and to Jubilees. M y conclusion, then, in view of the compatibility of all the elements and of the absence of any indication to the contrary, is that 4QpsDan Ar may possibly be added to the list of the Qumranic pseudo-epigrapha. At least, this clearly apocalyptic composition should be counted as one of the products of the apocalyptic tradition in which the Qumran sect has its roots, which wauld account for its preservation among the works of the library of Qumran. The fact that its author has sheltered under the patronage of Daniel's name is only logical, since in the biblical book Daniel is presented not only as the authorised interpreter of dreamsw, but particularly of the great apocalyptic visions of histo#. This is equally the distinctive feature of the numerous pseudo-epigraphical compositions which have used his name in later periods. In order to assess what similarities and what differences from the Qumranic text are shown by these pseudo-Danielic compositions and to discover whether this apocalyptic composition has left any traces in the literature of later periods, it is necessary to treat, however cursorily, this peculiar corpus of literature.

Pseudo-Danielic compositions are numerous and varied, but it cannot be claimed that they are generally known. It may be useful therefore to present them summarily. Given their number and the similarity of their titles, the most convenient way to do this is by grouping them according to the languages in which they have been preserved.

30 Dan 527-30; 4,6.







A. Arabic Pseudo-Daniel This has come down to us in two Mss. G O T T H E I L ~ published ~ the beginning and the end of one of them, although he identified it wrongly. The other one, a Ms. of the 17th century, was published in fit11 by U ~ C L E R ~ ~ . According to the editor, this is a Christian apocalypse, composed towards the 9th century and translated from the Greek. In it, Daniel relates to his disciple Ezra the content of a vision and the develop ment of history which he sees written on a scroll. Taking different animals as symbols, this describes the battles between Byzantium and Persia, and the conflicts originating in the Arabic conquest embodied in a certain number of persons with mysterious names. The work ends with a description of the coming of the Antichrist, who is greeted by the Jews as the expected Messiah and performs wonders and miracles, carrying the crowds with him to Jerusalem until the arrival of Enoch and Elijah, who stand up against him only to perish at his hands. This gives way to God's intervention and to the end of the world. The work is closely related to the Syriac apocalypse of ~ z r a a~ ~ , Christian work, in which Ezra explains to his disciple Qarpos the expansion of Islam. B. Armenian Pseudo-Daniel Going back to a lost Greek original and existing in a good number of seventh vision of Mss., we find a composition bearing the title: <<The Daniel,, and the subtitle (at least in two of the manuscripts): ccOn the end of the world,,. The work is already mentioned in the lists of apocryphal works of Mechithar of Airivank, of the 13th century and,

R.J.H. GmlHElL, *An Arabic Version of the 'Revelation of Ezra'., Hebmico 4 (1887-88). 15-17. 33 F. MACLER, rL'Apocalypse arabe de Daniel, publick, traduite et annot&*, RHR 37 (18%). 37-55. 163-176. 2 . 3 1 9 . Known by two Ms., one published by F. BAETI~GEN, ~Beschreibung der syrischen Handschrift 'Sachau 131' aus der Konigfichen Bibliothek m Berlin*, Z4W 6 (1886), 193-211, and the other, Ms. Paris Syr. 326, published by J.B. W O T , -L'apodypsc &Esdras touchant le royaume des A r a b , Revue Sdmirique 2 (1894), 243-250. 333-346.



15 1

according to the editor KALEMKIAR~', it would have been written in the 7th century. The title is based on the fact that in the Armenian Bible the book of Daniel is divided into six visions, so that the pseudo-epigraphical addition is inevitably designated as uthe seventh*. In this vision, the archangel Gabriel appears to Daniel to reveal to him the course of history and to show to him what will happen (both in Rome and in Byzantium) in the period from Constantius to Heraclius (?), as well as the subsequent appearance of the Antichrist. This ((prediction-, which uses without problems proper names such as Emperor Theodosius or Marcianus, or detailed and unmistakeable descriptions such as that of constantinex, is extremely vague and confused during the period following the reign of a certain Arian and preceding the appearance i x with any accuracy the of the Antichrist. It is therefore not easy to f date of its composition but, in any case, it would seem to precede the emergence and the expansion of Islam, to which no allusion is made, but which plays a significant role in the remaining pseudo-Danielic compositions. C. Coptic Pseudo-Daniel Although the Coptic biblical mss. adopt, in general, the division into <<Visions* of the canonical book of Daniel of the Alexandrian Codex, they split into two parts the story of Be1 and the Dragon narrative, which they designate respectively Visions 12 and 13. The title <<The
P.G.KALEMKIAR, -Die siebente %ion Daniels*, Wiener Zeiuchrifr fir die
Morgcnlan&s 6 (1892). 109-132 (Armenian ten), 227-240 (German translation). There is an English translation based on other mss. different from the 3 used by KA~.EMKIAR in the work of J. ISAVERDENS, 7he Uncanonical Writings of h e Old Testament (Venice 1901), 249-265; there is also a French translation of the tex~ published by KALEMKIAR by J. MACLER, Les Apocalypses apocryphes & Daniel (Paris 189 60-88. ~Und er wird ihn ein Wundcrmann wiederauhaucn, der w n einem f r a m c n Wcibc gcboren is:, und in seiner Zeit wird der Wunsch seines Hencns erfult, und er wird das Holz des labens aufinden, und sein Stab wird gross, und cr wird die Nagel fmden, wclche in demselben Zeichen waren, und cr wird sie in seine Ziigcl legen rur Besiegung in ijfteren Kriegen, und sein Horn wird hoch und stark und sein Name unter allen Sprachen, und es wird dieser Stadt ein ewigcs Andenken gegeben werden*, K A ~ K I A *Die R , Siebente Vision Daniels*, 229-230. On the tradition about the fucing of the nails of the Cross on the hoofs of Constantine's horse, see John Chrysostom, *Sermon on the Death of Theodosius*, MIGNE, Parr. LOL XVI, 1399. Kunde &s




fourteenth Vision of Daniel,, used to designate the pseudo-epigraphic composition following them in the Ms. is thus logical37. This tells a story that starts with the vision of the four kingdoms of Dan 7, and in which the fourth empire corresponds to the Arab rule, and is divided into 19 kingdoms. The author then deals with those kingdoms, beginning with the tenth. The last one will be destroyed by Pihugos (The Turk = Saladin ), giving way to the dominion of Rome, the invasion of Gog and Magog, and the appearance of the Antichrist of Man*. and his destruction by the @Son The geographical horizon of the work is clearly Egyptian. For BECKER, its historical background corresponds to the fall of the Umayyad dynasty. For MACLER, it would coincide with the fall of the Fatimid dynasty. What seems most probable (and this is the opinion of MEINARDUS)is that a composition based on the Umayyad period was adapted to the situation of the Fatimid era, implying that the work which clearly stems from the Coptic church of Egypt, must have been adapted in a period no earlier than the 11th century. D. Slavonic Pseudo-Daniel Old Church Slavonic has preserved for us, at least, one pseudoDanielic work unknown in any other language. This is a uVision of Daniel*, a translation of a lost Greek original probably composed in the 9th century. It consists of a detailed discourse on History in which one may recognise a series of Byzantine emperors up to Michael 11, as well as of a description of the Conquest of Sicily by the Arabs in the years 827-828, followed by the customary eschatological section. The work has been published many times38 and partially translated

" The Coptic text was published by C.G. WO~DE, Appendix ad editionem Novi Testamenti gmeci e codice monuscriplo a l m d r i n o . Lk wrsione biblionun aegbpliaca Ill. Lk fibris ppatyphic uegptiacis V. n N.T. (Oxford 1799), 141-148.French translation by MACLER, La A-ses pparphes de h i e l , 38-55. The most complete

study is the one by 0 . MHNARDUS, rA Commentary on the XlVth V i o n of Daniel according to the Coptic Version-, OrChrPer 32 (1966), 394-499.There exists an Arabic version of the work, published by C.H. BuxER, -Das Reich dcr Ismaeliten im Koptischen Danielbuchm, NAWG (1916), 6-57. T8 P.S. STRECHOWC, ~Zbornik Popa Dragoti*, Spomenik 5 (1890). 11-12; V. Isnun, -0tkrovcnie Mefodii Patarskago i Apokrificheskii Videnia Daaiela V i t i islti i Slaviano-Rdoi Literaturakhr, Chteniia 191/193 (1897), 156-158, PA. LAVROV, MApokrifidheskie Teks* Sbomik 67 (1899). 1-5.



into English by ALEXANDER~~. Together with this work, others have been preserved that seem to be nothing more than Slavonic translations of pseudo-Danielic works already known. Thus the work edited by S P E R A N S W ~ ~entitled *Vision of the Prophet Daniel on the last days and on the end of the world* is apparently a translation of the work of the same title, published in Greek by VASSILIEV~~. E. Greek Pseudo-Daniel
As was to be expected, a whole series of pseudo-Danielic compositions have been preserved in Greek. Although their precise mutual relations have not been sufficiently established, it seems certain that they cannot be reduced to a common archetype. We shall indicate the most important.

1. Apocalypse of the Prophet Daniel on the end of the world42 or The Lart Vrrion o f the Prophet ~ a n i e p ~ .

This work contains a series of imprecations directed against the whole world and others especially directed against Constantinople. Together with them, there appears a description of the evils that will precede the coming of the Antichrist. In florid and confused language a whole

39 P J . At.EXMWER, -Medieval Apocalypxs as Historical Sourws-, AmHistR 7 (19688,997-1018. M. SPERANSKIJ, Chteniia 150 (1889), 58-64. 'l Cfr. postea. A.-M. DEWS, Intmdtrction mu Pseudkpiigmphes Grecs d;.tncien Testament (SVTP 1) (Leiden 1970), 312, note 13, wrongly mentions a translation of the Armenian Pseudo Daniel into Old Church Slavonie, with a reference to BONW E T x H . In the same way K. BERGER in hi Daniel-Diegesis (SPB 27) (Leiden 1976), XV and XXIII, distinguishes a Slavonic Daniel I and 111 which are really the same work. Nevertheless, the uistencc of several pseudo-Danielic compositions in Old Church Slavonic is proved, although their aetual contents arc not know. This is the title which appears in the Ms. Veneto Marc. Col. 11, ud. CXXV and with this title it was partially published by C. T l s c H m W , Apoca/psis oponypha (Leipzig 186(5),and integrally by E. K L O ~ R M A N N Anolecta , nrr Sepruogint4 Herapla und Pohistik (Leipdg 1895), 115-123. " This is the title given in 4 mss. and the one used by A. VASSIUEV, Anecdota Gmeco-Byzantina (Moscow 1893), 43-47; V. IsrWN op. cit 135-139, and H. SCHMOLDT, Die Schn'fi 'Vom Jungen Daniel' und 'Daniels Lcme Viim'. Hemuspbe und Interpntation nwicr apkafyprischer T@e (Hamburg lm), 122-145. Four other mss. attribute the work to Methodius of Patara, a certainly secondary development.





series of calamities are heralded, brought about by the occupation of Constantinople by the " white race", the invasion by the northern peoples, the emergence of the " great Philip", the reign of the "impious woman" etc. This will be followed by the kingdom of the Antichrist, the destruction by fire and the last judgement. Rather than an apocalypse proper, we have here a collection of oracles - as such difficult to date, but, in any case, medieval, if one accepts the identification of the " great Philip" with Philip I and the era of the Crusades.
2. The monk Daniel on the 'Swen Hills' and on the klands and their future.

This work was published by I S T R I N ~ ~ Its . first part was also published by K L ~ S T E R M A N N ~on ~ the basis of a ms. where it appears under the title aThe first oracle of Daniel on the 'Seven Hills' and on the isle of Crete and others and of their future,,. It was reedited by S C H M O L D T ~with ~ the variants of chapter I of the KL~STERMANN edition. The work is closely related to the Apocalypse of the Prophet Daniel with which it shares common themes and expressions: the sleeping serpent, the massacre of Constantinople, the finding, description and coronation of a man carried to the Temple by the angels47, the presentation of the sword by the angels, the period of prosperity, his four sons, the journey to Jerusalem to offer his kingship to God, etc. The work does apparently preserve a more original form and is better organised than the Apocalypse. It has a clear oracular flavour, and its final part, very brief, on the Antichrist and the Second Coming, seems to depend upon Pseudo ~ e t h d i w ~ ~ . 3. Another two Greek works of similar form and contents were ~ the titles of Vtions of Daniel on the published by V A S S I L I E V ~under

" ~Qtkrovenie*,145144.
4s 46

AnalECIO, 121. Die SchfiJ?, 190-199.

47 Six mss. give the name of John, as the text of -The Monk Daniel*; the rest of the mss. do not give any name. CY., H. SUERMANN, rDer byzantinische Endkaiser hei Pseudo-Methodiw, OrChr 71 (1987), 140-155, and G J . REIMNK, -Der edessenixhe 'Pseudo-Mcthodiusl*, Byzanfinisdte Zeifschrifl 83 (19W), 31-45. 49 Analecro,




larr times and on the end of the world and Discourses of the Holy Father John Chrysostom on the Viiion of Daniel. The first half of the latter corresponds closely with Pseudo-Methodi~,as does the end of both works, which deals with the Antichrist and the Second Coming. The rest is a disquisition on Byzantine history and the Arab conquest, with a description that may correspond with the Arab invasion of Sicily.
4. DamanrefDiegese

The three mss. which have preserved it, give different titles to this *Narrative of Daniel,,, as it is normally known. ISTRIN~Oedited the text of Ms.B. in which it is attributed to Methodius: Discourse of Our Holy Father Methodius on the last days and on the Antichrist. U ~ C L E R ~ translated ' the part of the Montpellier manuscript related to the Antichrist. In that ms. the work was entitled: (<Onthe times of the Antichrist and on the last daysu. BERGER~* has published a critical edition, and printed, separately, the text of the Venice manuscripts3 which offers a version quite different from the other two, and is the only one that expressly ascribes the work to Daniel: <<First vision of Daniel. Vision and Apocalypse of the Prophet Daniel*. The work consists of two clearly distinct parts: the first one centres on Byzantine history and on the Arab invasion and is not earlier than the 9th century; the second one is of an eschatological nature, giving a detailed description of the Antichrist and of the end of the world, and is clearly substantially earlier than the first part. Considering that in the second part, the Arabs do not play any role, and because of the break between chs. 9 and 10, BERCER postulates an independent existence for the two units and traces the eschatological part back to at least the 3rd. century A.D. The historical part has several elements in common with other pseudo-Danielic works and with pseudo-Methodius: an allusion to Leo 111, the reign of a woman in Constantinople, the destruction of the city, etc. The eschatological part manifests itself in a much fuller and more developed form than in the work previously referred to, although still quite distant from the midrashic connotations of the Persian Pseudo-Daniel. *Otkroveniern,145-150.

'' LEs Apocabpses apocryphes de Daniel, 108-110.

52 '3

K. BERGER,Die G&chisc/~e Daniel-Diegese (SPB 27) (Leiden 1976). Venice Marc. Craec. VII. 27.



5. Apart from these works, there exist in Greek other similar compositions, either published or available in rnss. Two of them: (<Onthe isle of Cyprus, of the same Danieln, published by KLOSTERUANN~~, and c& oracle of Theophilus, a presbyter of Rome,, published b ISTRIN~~, form part in other mss. of the famous Oracle of Leo52' . Another, also published by I S T R I N ~ ~ which , deals with <<The visions of Daniel and other holy men),, contains a series of prophecies about the future, just as do two other compositions mentioned by SCHMOLDT~~: <<TheOracle of the Prophet Daniel on Byzantium,, and the <<Visions of Danieb, which exist only in manuscript form.

F.Hebrew Pseudo-Daniel
Of the works that medieval literature attributes to ~ a n i e l perhaps ~~, the most interesting is that contained in a fragment from the Geniza of Cairo published by GINZBERG~' under the title of <<Vision of Daniel)), a title which appears on the manuscript itself, explaining that it is ccthe fourteenth vision revealed to Daniel in the days of Cyrus, king

4 ,Analecta,


" notkrovenier, 321. This work appears in the ms. Athos Koutloum. 220, fol. 2 0 1

as <Visions of the Prophet Daniel*. Cf. E. LEGRAND, Leo M Sapiens. Les oracles de LPon Le Sage (Collection de monographies pour servir A I'ttude de la langue nto-hellenique, N.S. 5) (Paris-Athens 1875), and the study of A. DEISSER,nLes oracles de U o n VI le Sage*, Kemos 3 (19909, 135-145. uotkrovenie*, 318-319. Die Schrifl, 243-244. ' 9 One of this compositions is the fragment Ms. Hebr. 2646 of the Bodleian Library, published by S. WERTHEIMER in his Bane Midrashot 11, 30 with the title u'Aggadat yemoth hammeshiah*, and by I. LEVi as *Une Apocalypse Judto-arabe*, REI 67 (1914), 178-182. But the tea is a simple fragment of the Arab history, seen from a Jewish perspective. 60 L. GINZBERG, Geniur Studies in Memory of S. Schechter, I (Texts and Studies of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America VII), (New York 1928), 313-323. S. KRAU~S has published a French translation *Un nouveau texte pour I'histoire judtobyzantine*, REJ 87 (1929), 11-27. A. SHARPhas dedicated several studies to this composition: rThe Vision of Daniel as a Source for the history of Byzantine Jewry, Bar Ilan 41.5 (1%7), 197-208 (Hebrew); HA Source for Byzantine Jewry under the Early Macedonians,, Byzantinisch-Nargriechische Jah&dcher 20 (1970), 320-328, and has included an English translation as Appendix in h i s book Bylantine Jewry from Justinian to the Fourth Crusade (London 1971), 201-204.

" '



of persias6'. Daniel, who is beside the river Quebar (!), has a terrible vision and Gabriel (!) *the commander in chief of the Almighty's troopsexplains to him the course of history and the last days. The work contains, as usual, a historical part (first page) in which the emperors Michael 111, Basil I and Leo the Philosopher are mentioned, followed by other personages *The Cusite~ and *The Arab* whose identification poses problems. The second page contains the apocalyptic section; B o N n L L has convincingly demonstrated6* that this is nothing more than a centon, that is a mosaic of expressions perfectly corresponding to the other pseudo-Danielic works of Greek origin. Thus we cannot see in this work - in contrast to what GINZBERG suggested - the evidence of a Jewish apocalyptic tradition that would have emerged after a millennium of silence. It is rather a specimen of the Byzantine apocalyptic tradition, mainly to be found in the Greek works. G. Persian Pseudo-Daniel Two Pseudo-Danielic works have been preserved in the literary production of Persian Judaism. Both were written in Persian, but are known only in a transcri tion in Hebrew characters. The most interesting and ancient one6' is a prose work entitled <<TheHistory of Daniel*, Qkayi Ddn&&, published by ZOTENBERG~~.The work

TWOphotographs of the Geniza fragment haw been included in the article of R. BOMIU, *The Vision of Daniel als historical and literary document-, Zion 44 (197d9, 111-147 (Hebrew). *The Vision of Daniel*, 138-143. a The work, whose title is DltnjBI-nhb, .Book of Daniel*, is a wrse composition which paraphrases the biblical text. It is very late. It was composed in the year 1606, corrected in the year 1704, and has reached us in a Ms. of the year 1816, as indicated in his colophon, scc R. Lwu, -Danial-Nam. A Judco-Persian apocalypse^, in: Jewish Studies in Mcmoty of G.A. Kohcu (New York 1935), 423-428, A. N ~ R , -DdniflI dim&.An Exposition of Judw Persian-, in: Islam and lu CuImml Diwrgrncc (Chicago 1970), 145-161; uD&niy&l n h P and its linguistic Feature-, I s m 1 Orientd Sfudies 2 (1972), 305-314. 64 H. Z~TENBERG *Geschichtc Daniels. Ein Apokryphonm, in A. MERX. Anzhiv pir W~(senschofilihe Elforchung dcs Altcn Twtomentes I (Hallc 1867-69). 385-427. The apocalyptic section was also published by J. D A R M ~ R L'Ajwco&pse , pcmm & W c l (Biblioth~ucdc I'Ecole des Hautes Etudes. F e x 73) (Paris 1887). 405420. There exists also a Hebrew translation by A. CoHEv KAPLW, published in A. JeLLlNey Bef Hommi&ush V (Jerusalem 1%7) 117-130 (reprint).



Syriac Ms. of the 12th century65 under the title: ccFrom the young Daniel on our Lord and the end,. A photocopy of the Ms. with a German transcription and translation has been published by SCHMOLDP, who has also analysed its contents and its connections with other pseudo-Danielic writings. The author presents his work as a continuation of the history of Susannah which in the ms. appears after the history of Be1 and the Dragon and is then followed by his own narrative. That the author is evident from the fact that he pictures Daniel as refers to S u s a ~ a h a ccyoung* man and that he quotes the last sentence67: <<Daniel enjoyed from that day onward great prestige among the people)), at the beginning of his narrative. Unlike the other pseudo-Danielic writings, the history of Byzantium or the Arab invasion play no role whatsoever here. Also unlike the previous writings this one has no sign that might suggest the existence of a Greek original as a source of the Syriac text. This is a work composed partly in prose and partly in verse and is, as demonstrated by SCHMOLDT, made up of two different documents: one purely Jewish (chs. 3-5; 7-8) and another one (chs. 1-2) possibly of Jewish origin too, but with evident Christian touches. The first text is essentially a description of the last days, presented as a revelation made to Daniel: ccAs I, Daniel, was in Persia and Elam, in the years of King Darius, the Holy Ghost revealed to me what will happen in future times)) (ch. 3.1). There follows a rather confused description of a series of battles and confrontations betdeen different peoples, and an enumeration of calamities. A king from the East, peoples from the North, as well as a series of symbols, the goat, the bull, the lion's cub, the horn of the West, are presented, accompanied by a series of cosmic phenomena, commonplaces in all apocalyptic descriptions of the last days: famines, earthquakes, darkness, floods, fire from heaven, flight to the desert, rule over the Earth by serpents; and the conclusion : ccwhen thou hast seen all these things, thou shalt know that the end is near),. This document concludes with a chapter that describes the Antichrist and his ccsigns),, as well as another parallel figure, ccthe son of damnationa, born of a serpent, who will proclaim himself the Messiah, and his appropriate ccsignst). Brit. Mus. Cod. Add 18715 fol. 23%-241v. Die Schrift, 25-27. 67 In the version of Theodotion.



The other document (chs. 1-2;6), which shows clear signs of a Christian readaptation, centres on the uson of manu, his acceptance and his rebuke (ch. 1 reinterpreted in the light of John 1,11), the cult (ch. 2, with reference to the Eucharist) and the temple (ch. 6, with a possible allusion to the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem). The work in itself does not present elements enabling us to date it with accuracy. If one admits the hypothesis that the cclittle Daniel* ~ ~ , have been a subject of comwho, according to Ebed ~ e s u would ment by Hippolytus, is our uyoung Daniel* in his present form, it would be necessary to trace back the union of the two documents and their Christian modification to the 2nd century. But it is possible that Ebed Jesu is confusing the commentary on the rlittel Danieln with the well-known Commentary on Daniel of Hippolytus. And even in the case that they are two different works, it would be impossible to prove that the text alluded to is the same as the one preserved in Syriac. In any w e , the Syriac Pseudo-Daniel dates from a much earlier period than the rest of the pseudo-Danielic compositions mentioned. The Jewish work (or works) on which it is based, perfectly concur with the apocalyptic writings of the first centuries.

A series of conclusions as regards 4lZpsDan Ar may be drawn from

this rapid survey of the pseudo-Danielic literature. All the works examined offer the same basic apocalyptic scheme: a discourse on history in the form of an oracle, vision, reading of a text, etc., followed by an eschatological section in which the figure of the Antichrist plays a leading role. All these works emerge from the need to clarify the present situation which is reflected more or less in detail, in the light of the final conflagration. All of them (with the exception of the Syriac and Persian PseudoDaniel) are very late Christian works in which, together with the influence of Daniel, elements originating from the New Testament are clearly seen.

A Nestorian theologian of the beginning of the XIVth century.



All (with the same exceptions) were originally written in Greek. All (with the same exceptions) deal with Byzantine history and/or the problems brought about by the expansion and the conquests of Islam. Of the two works of Jewish origin, the Persian Pseudo-Daniel is very late and is clearly influenced by the Byzantine pseudo-Danielic apocalypses while the Syriac Pseudo-Daniel reflects an old tradition, but without contacts with 4QpsDan Ar. Apart from the basic apocalyptic scheme and the common necessity of illuminating the present with the hope of the happy end, the only thing that these works share with 4QpsDan Ar is the scheme of the four kingdoms. There is no other point of contact. Both the basic scheme and the scheme of the four kingdoms originate in all of them from the book of Daniel, from which they draw their inspiration. There exists, then, no relation between the Qumranic pseudoDanielic composition and the later pseudo-Danielic compositions. The pseudo-Danielic text of Qumran, the oldest of the pseudoDanielic texts known, did not have any apparent progeny. Its field of influence was limited to the readers of the works found in the Library of Qumran.


THE ESCHATOLOGICAL FIGURE OF 40246 1. 40246 Like so many other manuscripts from Qumran, 40246 has been the object of rumours and speculation' in spite of the fact that its full text has not yet been published. It consists of a beautiful Aramaic fragment of a small manuscript of just nine lines, acquired in 1958. Unfortunately only two columns have been preserved, and because the manuscript was vertically torn, only one half of the first column has reached us. In 1972, J.T. MILIK, to whose lot it belongs, made public a transcription and a translation in a lecture given at Harvard University. Although he announced its publication in HTR, the text has not yet seen the light. On the basis of the data advanced by Milik in that lecture, J.A. FITZMYER published three lines of the first column and four of the second in a study on the Aramaic language Later . on, in his edition of used in Qumran and the New ~ e s t a m e n t ~ the Enoch fragments from Cave 4, MILIK briefly described the manuscript and quoted some of the expressions contained in it3. He likewise furnished it with its final numbering -the one we are using nowdifferent from that mentioned by FITZMYER (40243) and from the previous references designating it as 4QpsDnAa. The manuscript has been copied using a Herodian writing typical of the last third of the 1st century B.C. Lately, D. FLUSER has published a provocative study
For example, JA. m~~~~ in TS 25 (1964), 429; R.E. BROWN, TS 33 (1972), 32, note 9 6 ,E. SCHURER, 771eHistcuy of the Jewirh People in the Age of Jesus Chrisl, G . VERMES, F. MIUAR, M. BLACK (eds.), Vol. I1 (Edinburgh 1979), 542, note 148, Vol. 111.1 (Edinburgh 1986), 442, note 1. JA. FTZMYER, *The Contribution of Qumran Aramaic to the Study of the New Testament*, NTSl 20 (1974), 382-401, especially 391-394. 1 will quote this artidc as reprinted in JA. RlutYER, A Wandering Amnrean. Collec~ed Essays (SBL Monograph Series 25) (Missoula 1979), 85-113, because the author has added an important -Addendum: Implications of the 40 "San of God" Text*, 102-107. mzhtYtrR has reiterated his interpretation of the text in *The Aramaic Language and the Study of the New Testament*, JBL 99 (1980), 14-15. J.T. M I U The ~ Books of Enoch. Aramaic Frupnenls of Qunrmn Caw 4 (Oxford 1976), 60.213. 261.





of the text, based on F I ~ Y E R 'transcription, S but offering quite a different interpretation4. Although it may seem somewhat premature to venture an interpretation of an as yet not fully published text, I feel there already exist sufficient elements to shape a hypothesis for the comprehension of the text and to place it in the context of the Qumranic writings. I shall accordingly examine the hypothesis put forward by other scholars and match them against m y own, with the ultimate purpose of making the most of the few but significant elements that have been preserved.
A. Transcription of the t a t

K'D?3 O?? '793 n 1 W -11b"lP . .I 1 ...7 " 1'8 I...[...] 2 ...J ~ ...I...] K 3 ..I "313[1...) 4 0 7 i r o ...i i n 1 ~ ' 7 0 ...[...I 6\5 KYlK 5 Y 1 1 la'! 3111...I 7 K 3 1 1 ' . .I 8 ;133n7 iinw31 xl:n7 ~ 3 [ 1 , . 1 9

Xi7"i3 113117' 11''7Y 1 3 1 10Kn' >K '1 1173 '!Y ~ I J > I ? ( 1 " 1 7 1 ~ a i d n ? ; l n i ~ > 73 n t i n i i n '1 il[I']lO'7 113'10 1 W 11' OY? OY I W l ' K>31 K Y l K 3lfl 70 n 1 1 ~ ~ 5 > 3K 1O Y O ~ ; , ' ~ L ' ..II>Y n13'7n ani3'7n ... ..fl?W 13Y' K33 1.. ..X 37 '7X ... ...10' Kb'lK ?i? 31n ...

2 3

6 7

B. Translation

Coi. i
1 [.. I dwell upon him, and fell before the throne 2 [.. I. . and your years ...
D. FLUSSER, *The Hubris of the Antichrist in a Fragment from Qumran*,
Immatruel 10 (IMK)), 31-37.



3 [...I... you ... 4 [... the grleat ones... 516 [...I ... King of Assyria ... Egypt 7 [.. he shall be glreat upon the earth 8 [..I they shall make, and all shall serve 9 [... glreat shall be called and by his name shall he be designated.
Col. ii
1 He shall be named the son of God and they shall call him son of

the Most High. Like a spark 2 of a vision, so shall be their kingdom; they shall reign for some years upon 3 the earth and shall trample everything; people shall trample upon people, and city upon city, 4 Vucuf until there arises the people of God and everything rests from the sword. 5 ... his kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom... 6 ... and everybody shall make peace ... 7 ... Great God ... ? ... the sword shall disappear from the earth...

Col. i Line 1 *He fell before the throne*. MILIK, the scholar who made public this line and the following ones5, is of the opinion that the words refer to the throne of God, just as in I Enoch 14,18-25, although he expressly states that the seer was not necessarily Enoch, as he could perhaps be Levi, Elijah, Daniel or even an angel. But the citations of ?.-?W1 and ;IRK, contained in the next lines, lead us to support the idea of a king's throne. Such an expression is not found in the Bible, neither in relation to God's nor to the king's throne6, while the equivalent of K 7 0 ? 3 in Hebrew may denote both the throne of God

The Books o f Enoclt, 60. The only similar expression is 1 Sam 4.18 ehr fell backwards from his throne-.



and that of a king (whether Jewish or pagan), although the most frequent use links it to the throne of David. Line 4
?>313[1.Pointed out by FITZMYER'. Despite the fact that it is presented as a modification of ? ' ~ \ u ,reconstructed by MILIK[numerous yean], we give it the normal meaning it has in Aramaic; cfr. 1QapGn XIX,24; IlQtglob XIV,3; XXV,l.

Lines 516 The exact distribution of the text in the correspondin lines is not known. The name of Assyria appears in its late form! It is worth mentioning that both the Kittim of Assyria and the Kittim of Egypt appear at the beginning of lQM I,2-4. Lines 7-8
F I T Z M Y E R holds the view that the king to whom the text is addressed is Jewish, a Hasmonean, and that this would mark the beginning of the change in the situation as promised to the king. Consequently, he proceeds to fill the gap in line 8: p>'i! t i > 3 h';>n 11111. He translates as follows: *[But your son] shall be great upon the earth. [0 king! All (men) shall] make [peace], and shall serve [him]*. FLUSSER considers 7 1 7 3 ~ 1 as ' a hebraism and prefers the translation *[all] will worshipn9. But this interpretation, essential for his hypothesis, seems impossible, since the same verb is used in column II,6 with the typical Aramaic meaning in a sentence which raises no doubt.

Line 9 The subject of the sentence has unfortunately got lost. That is why the identity of the person to whom the text refers and to which the titles preserved in the following line apply must necessarily be hypothetical and dependent on the general idea drawn out from the meaning of the text. Cfr. posten as regards the three basic hypotheses advanced and the subsequent reconstructions of the gap.

'-The Contributionm 111, note 41.

Compare IQopCn XVII 8 which u s e s the older form 11DK. *The Hubris o f the Antichrist-, 32, note 2.



Col. ii Line 1 The most striking features of the line are, no doubt, the two titles points outlo, quite apart from the hypothesis chosen. As FITZMYER that may eventually be adopted, the fact that they are used in a Palestinian text of the 1st century B.C., probably applied to a human being, is of capital importance for discussing the titles of Jesus in the New Testament. This has been duly dealt with by FITZMYER~~, who underlined their parallelism with the expressions used by Luke 1,3235, thus doing away with the need for any new treatment. Suffice it only to add that the form of the divine name is >K (col. ii,1.4.6), identical to the form used in 11QNJ 14,112, as distinct from the usual Aramaic form ~ I ? Kor K i1'7ti. Lines 1-2 The expression dike a spark of a vision,, is quite unique. It is extremely expressive and is used to indicate the fleeting character of the hostile kingdoms. That reign, that only lasts a few years, does not refer to the mysterious person's but to <<theirs*,as demonstrated by the suffixes used in a plural form. Who these may be is not stated in the fragmentary text available. It is difficult to assert that we are dealing with the same subject as that of the verbs appearing in line 8, which is simply indicated by the word walls. What is quite clear is the contrast of the passage with the reign of the people of God in line 5: [chis kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom,,. Line 3 The expressions used are quite common in the apocalyptical writings and date back to the biblical language. See, for instance, the commentaries to Isa 19,2 or Matt 24,7. For a typical example of their use in the extracanonical literature one may consult 4 Ezra 13,31 or 3 Sibyl 635-636.

lo *The


Especially in the *Addendum*, op. cit. 102-107. l2 Cf. IQapGn XII.17; XX.12.16; XXI.2.20; XXI1,15.16.21, where 1 1 >Y > K i s

Contribution*, 93.

also used.



Line 4 A Vacar at the beginning of the line divides the following text from what is written before. Although the phrase shows a grammatically coherent continuation, we have already reached quite a different plane. The expression <<and everything will rest from the sword* is completed by the parallel expression to which MILIK refers, although without specifying from which line it comes: <<the sword will disappear from the Earth)). Both may have their origin in similar expressions found in Isa 2,4 and Mic 4,3 and have good parallels in Jer 14,13.15. MILIK reconstructs: 3:n 713 K\![lh' R 1331 1 in 4QEng 1 ii 16 as an extension of Enoch 91,lO. But a closer parallel would be the expression used in 1 Macc 9.73 in order to describe the result of the pact between Jonathan and Bacchides: (<Thesword rested in Israel)). Line 5 The phrase is found literally in Dan 7,27 and brings this final part of the manuscript into relation with Daniel's vision of the Son of Man.

adds a In his description of the contents of the fragment, FITZMYER couple of elements that are apparently found in the text, although not in the part that has been published:

- the king to whom the speech at the beginning is addressed is apparently terrified by the forthcoming evils (described in lines 4-8 of col. i); - in the description of the reign (either of the mysterious person or the people of God) (col. ii 5-9), apart from the elements tramcribed, the text runs aIts/his rule is then extolled: respite from war, everlasting rule, paths of truth and peace with all cities in submission. For the Great God is/has been with it/him, and He will now subject all enemies to it/him,,13.


JA. F ~ ~ Y E .The R , Contribution-, 91.



Simply by linking these elements with those appearing in the translation of the text known, we may describe the contents of 4Q246 as follows: The text indicates that someone (a seer ?) falls before the throne of a king and addresses him. He announces to him all the evils looming ahead, among which significant reference is made to the King of Assyria and to Egypt. Still more important will be the appearance of a mysterious personage to whom the titles of uson of God,) and ccson of the Most High, will be given, who will be *great on earth, and whom ccall will serve,). His appearance will be followed by tribulations, but these will be transient as a spark and will last only ccuntil the people of God arises. The result will be the end of the war and an eternal reign during which everybody will be devoted to peace-making, the cities will be subdued, because the Lord will sustain him (His people ?) and lay all his enemies prostrate at his feet. The text, so understood, indeed contains elements that are obscure and uncertain. The three most important ones, which must be clarified for a correct understanding of the text, are apparently the following: - the uncertainty of the historical or apocalyptical character of the description of the future evils narrated to the king; - who is the mysterious personage to whom those titles are applied? Is he presented in a positive or a negative light ? - does the suffix of the third person singular from col. 4.5 onwards refer to the people of God or to the mysterious personage ? The answer that will be given to these three basic questions will determine the overall understanding of the text and the implications it will entail. So far, three hypotheses have been put forward which may give either a direct or an indirect answer to the questions raised.

Although MILIKhas not yet published his interpretation of the text, his view may be ascertained by the elements he himself has made known and, above all, through his opinions made public by FrrzMYER. According to MILIK, a seer, moved by the spirit14, kneels down before the throne of God and gives a historical description of
l4 According to F ~ M Y E(<The R Contribution*, 111, note 43), MlLIK would reconstruct ilfl 11 at the beginning of line 1, u[and H i s spirit] rested upon him*.



the Seleucid period, which goes as far as col. ii 4. From that point onwards, the eschatological peace would be first described. The narrative of the coming evils would, thus, have a historical character'' and the mysterious personage involved would be none other than Alexander Balas, son of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and successor to Demetrius I Soter. Those titles would suit him admirably since he appears as "Deo Patre Natus" and ~eorol'ropon the coins. MILIK reconstructs column i 9 as follows16: ~ 3 3 0ng7n ;I>] lwow' K > J 1 KJ[T and translates: cc... and all of them will serve [him. Successor of the Glreat [King] he will be called and with his name will he name himself>>. That king would be no other than Alexander the Great, and Alexander Balas bore, in fact, his very name. I have already expressed my reservations as to the appropriateness of considering the athrones as the throne of God. A description of the course of the story before the king is perfectly in line with prophetic conduct and with the Book of Daniel, whose influence in col. ii is obvious. Of a still more serious character and with no textual basis is the introduction of the mention of the great King and of the idea of ccsuccessionn. On the other hand, the incorporation of this new element into the text does not help us completely to answer the second question. Even if one admits that the mysterious personage referred to is Alexander Balas, what is the meaning of the titles applied to him in our text? We do know that Balas bestowed the high priesthood on ~onathan", but are we to conclude from this that the author of the text was a member of the Maccabean party and that he was therefore satisfied with the pagan titles of the Seleucid king, or rather that he is an opponent of the Maccabeans and the Seleucids and his inclusion of the titles has no other purpose than that of identifying the enemy ?

~ T Z M Y E Rhas presented his hypothesis as an alternative to the interpretation of the text put forward by MILIK. For him, the text has

Always according to ~ Y E (*The R Conlributiona, 111, note 41), MIUK would even translate 3 1 n K by Syria and he would understand the texr as describing the fi t between the Seleucids and Ptolemies. 'PhSee mmYLR, *The Contribution*.92. "See Josephus, Ant. Bib.,XIII, 1.1-2.




a clear apocalyptical character from beginning to end. The mention of Assyria and Egypt would have no other historical value than the one it has in IQM I,2-4. As we have already pointed out, the description starts, according to him, in col. i 7, with the reference to a davidic heir to whom the titles in question are attributed in a very positive 1 1 3 K 13 1 331 and sense. He reconstructs column i, 9: K l p n 7 ~ 3 [ 7K He shall be called the son of the [Glreat [God],,. translates: <<[him. But this interpretation is also fraught with problems: - it implies a link between the emergence of the mysterious personage and the pacification, which is not found in the text preserved'8; - line 9, reshaped in such a way, would be simply an unnecessary duplicate of col. ii 1, in which the titles are explicit; - it seems incomprehensible that, after an apparent peace-making arrangement, according to his reconstruction, the text continues to talk of one people crushing another people and one city another one. raises it directly19, but As for the third basic question, FITZMYER does not give a direct answer. Nevertheless, I believe there is not much doubt left to him that the suffixes of the third person singular refer not to the people of God, but to the mysterious personage, heir to David's throne. Only in such a manner can one interpret the strict parallelism he establishes between the two expressions of col. i 7, col. ii 1 and the sentence of col. ii 5, to the corresponding texts of Luke2', or his sentence: <<The context of the fragmentary text deals with a political strife, in which the 'son of God' figure is hailed as the harbinger of peace and everlasting dominion, as a bearer of those things associated with the restoration of Davidic kingship,,*'.

In FLUSSER'S as well as in FITZMYER'S opinion, our text is apocalyptical from beginning to end. FLUSSER also gives a straight answer to our third question: ccthe hero of the period of redemption is not a Messiah, but Israel, the people of God who will be then the guarantor

l8 See his already quoted reconstruction of col. i 7-8: "[But your son] shall be great upon the earth, [0 King! All (men) shall] make [peace], and all shall serve [him$. <<The Contribution,*, 91-92. -The Contribution*, 93. *The Contributiona, 106.




of world As outspokenly as before, he asserts his position as regards our second query: (<Thusthe man, described in the fra ment can be only the king or the leader of this horrible kingdomw . As a consequence, the negative shade cast upon this personage is and is representative of the quite undeniable according to FLUSSER, figure that will develop into a very significant entity in Christian circles (2 Thess 2.1-12; Rev 11-13), and to whom the letters of John will give the name of the Antichristu. FLUSSER reached that conclusion on the basis of the parallel existing between our text and the classical texts that contain a description of the Antichrist: 2 Thess 2,l-12; Rev 13,8-12; the Ascenrion of Isaid 4, 2-16; Didaclre 16.4 and, above all, the Oracle of Hystaspes, partially preserved in the Divinae Institutiones of Lactantius VII, 17,24. Nonetheless, a sizeable part of the correspondence with these texts rests on their incorrect comprehension of 11?3L" as a hebraism. Anyway, the biggest failure noticeable in this argumentation is that it ignores the obvious Christian elements of the texts used, which indeed condition the formulations and give a different content to the expressions used. This is quite clear in the text of the Ascension of lsaiuh which forms part not of the original substratum of the work but of the Christian addition made at a later stage. This is equally clear in the Diduche, in which the designation "son of G o d regarding the Antichrist is nothing but a reflection of the confession of Jesus as the Son of God. The same may be asserted of the aforementioned text of L.actantiusZ. Even allowing for the high probability that the Oracle

-The Hubris of the Antichrist*, 33. 1 John L18-Q 4,l-4; 2 John 7. On the figure of the Antichrist see the fundamental work by W. BoussFr. Der Attfichrisr in der aerlieferung des Judentums, des Neuen Tesforttettu trnd &r ulren KircIte (Gbttingen 1895). Also important is the work of B. RIGAUX,L'Anfdchrisl er I'Opposifio~tuu Royortme Messiu~tiqueduns I'Ancien er le Noriveuu Tesruntenf (Gembloux-Paris 1932). In 1967 two studies on the topic simultaneously appeared, both of them with good bibliographies, CH.H. GmuN, The

" *The Hubris of the Antichrist*, 33.

Threat to Faith. An Eregeticol and nteologicol Re-ct-antittatiotr of 2 77te.rsal~mians2

(Analeeta Biblica 31) (Roma 1967), and J. E m s , Die eschatol@chen Gegenspieler in den Schripen des Neuett Tesrutnenr (Biblische Untersuchungen 3 ) (Regensburg 1%7). On pp. 283-292 of his work ERN= summarises the synthesis of B o u s s r ? and
25 The complete text is: -Rex vero ille teterrimus erit quidem et ipse, sed mcndaciorum prophets, el se ipstr~n cottslinin uc vocubir deum, er se coli jubebir ur dei Plium: et debitur ei potestas, ut faciat signs et prodigia, quibus visis irretiat homincs, ut adorent eumm (the passage in italics is the only one quoted by iTusssR).



of H p p e s is an old Jewish apocalypse26, the text in question does not belong to those which Lactantius ascribes to Hystaspes. It may be possible that Lactantius uses part of the old material without putting in an explicit citation, but the incorporation of that text: "Sed planius, quomodo id eveniet, exponam", leads us rather to embrace the view that, in this case, the words are pronounced by Lactantius himself. The New Testament influences are so evident that it appears futile to me to search further for the remnants of an ancient tradition. In brief, although it appears quite logical to look in Qumran for the roots of ideas or expressions which appear in the New Testament, it would be risky, from a methodological standpoint, to project into ancient texts conceptions that are only known to us at the later stage of their full development without discarding the elements that have been presumably added throughout the process. We will therefore choose a different alternative and try to give a satisfactory answer to the three basic questions posed, taking as a point of departure the conceptions and expressions attested to in other Qumranic texts.

If we tabulate the results obtained by a comparison of the three hypotheses proposed with the three questions raised at the beginning, we may obtain the following picture:

Historical or eschatological character hist. eschat. eschat. of the text Identification and character of the mysterious personage Balas Dav. heir antich. The suffixes refer to the mysterious --personage people personage or to the people

2 6 The most complete study on the Oracle of Hysraspes remains the work of H. WINDIXN,Die Omkel des Hysfaspes (Amsterdam 1929). The Greek and Latin texts L e s Mages Hellknires. Vol. 11 are conveniently collected in J. BIDFZ and F. CW~orur, (Paris 1938). 357-377. The latest study I am aware of is G. WIDENGREN, *Iran and Israel in Parthian Times- in B A . PWWN (ed.), Religious Syncretism in Antiquiry (Missoula 1975), 85-129. The study by FLUSSER ~Hystaspesand John of Patmoss, announced as forthcoming in his article, has not been available to me.



To these hypotheses I will oppose m y own. Its answers to the three main queries are the following: the text is eschatological from beginning to end. - the mysterious personage has a positive character and an angelic nature, and may be identified with Melchisedek, Michael, the Prince of Ugh6 etc., these being names which designate one and the same reality in the Qumran writings. - the reign of everlasting peace is that of the people of God.

The variety of opinions is hardly surprising in view of the fragmentary character of the text. M y own interpretation is based on a series of data provided by other Qumranic texts that should be succinctly expounded.

J.T. M I L I K ~published ~ parts of three Aramaic fragments of the Herodian period, containing a description of the holy history, from the time of the deluge to the eschatological era, given by Daniel to the King and his noblemen. The text shows remarkable parallels in its structure to other apocalyptical texts such as the zoomorphic story of 1 Enoch 85-90, although it lacks the metaphors characteristic of this vision and of the apocalyptical visions of the canonical Daniel. The narrative lingers in more detail on the description of the Hellenistic period and even the mentioning of proper names, such as o 11322 and u ?ill[, and goes over immediately to describing the eschatological era. Other Qumranic texts could be selected, but this is sufficient to demonstrate that 4Q246 may be perfectly interpreted as a description of the course of the story, made the vehicle of an apocalyptical description that culminates in the eschatological peace.

J.T. MIUK, ePPri&re de Nabonide' el autres *ts d'un cyde de Daniel. Fragments aramCens de Qumr&n 4s, RB 63 (1956) 407-415. The l e a has been studied by R. MEYER,Dm Gebet dcr Nabonid (Berlin 1956) and again by A. MERTehis, Dm Bwh Daniel im Lichte der T m e vom T m M w (StutBM 12) (Wiirzburg 1971), 42SO. See F. GARCIA MARTINEZ, -Notas a1 margen de 4Q ps Daniel arameo*, Ada O~alis 1 (1983), 193-208, and wpm, eh. 5, pp. U7-161.



This is an important text for the history of Qumranic m e ~ s i a n i s m ~ ~ . The Qumranic sect believed that a series of messianic figures of human appearance would emerge at the end of times, a hope which finds its classical expression in the famous text of IQS IX,11: "...until the arrival of the Prophet and of the messiahs of Aaron and Israel". 4QTestimonia applies Deut 5,28-29 and 18.18-19 to the emergence of a prophet like Moses; Num 24,15-17 to the royal Messiah, and Deut 33,8-11 to the priestly Messiah. Moreover, and this interests us more directly, this anthology of messianic texts continues with the quotation of Josh 6,26, followed by a part of the apocryphal Psalms of ~oshualz~~:
And behold, an accursed man, a Belial, has risen to become a fowler's snare to his people, and destruction to all his neighbours. And he shall arise I...] the two of them being instruments of violence. They shall rebuild [the city and will] x t up for it a wall and towers to make of it a refuge of ungodliness [...I in Israel, and horror in Ephraim and in Judah I... They shall] cause abomination in the land, and great contempt among the children [of Jacob. And they shall shed bljood like water upon the ramparts of the daughter of Zion and within the precincts of Jerusalem. (40175 23-30)

The text has been and will continue to be the subject of endless discussions. But the joining of the translated part and the previous quotations applied to the different messianic figures is a proof, in my opinion, that, together with these messianic figures of a positive character, the intervention was expected at Qumran, of one or two antagonists or antimessiahsM, also of a human character, but pos-

28 A discussion of the problems raised by the different expressions of Qumranic messianism is here out of the question. The basic work remains the monograph of A.S. VAN DER WOUDE, Die rnessianiscl~enVontellungen der Gemeinde von Qumdn ( A w n 1957). A select bibliography on the topic can be found in JA. F~RMYER, 7he &ad Sea Scmlls. Major Publications and T d s for Study. Revised Edition (SBL Resources for Bibical Study 20) (Atlanta 1990), 161167. 29 From thes Psahtr ofJoslua two other copies have been recovered in Cave 4, a 3 7 8 379. The two of them have been published by CA. NEWSOM *The 'Psalms of J d u a ' from Qumran Cave 4m, JJS 39 (1988), 56-73. For an introduction to these texts, see F. GARCIA MARTINEZ, -Panorama Critico ( V ) . , EsrBIbl47 (1989), 105-11. See H. BURGMANN, -Antichrist-Antimessias. Der Makkabbr Simon ?*, Judaica 36 (1980), 152-174, who sees in this text a reference to Simon Maccabeus as type of the Antichrist.




sessing quite negative features. What does interest us in this context is the existence of this belief, as well as the terminology used to define this antagonist who is described as a destructive agent, both of his ~ I?K \I)'x own people and of the neighbouring people: >Y > > J ? n 1 aan accursed man. a Belial*.

Another important text, though subject to controversy because of its muddled characte?', seems to present in an eschatological perspective the conflict between a messianic (?) figure and his eschatological antagonist. Although the text seems to be eschatological rather than messianic, the contrast between the two pregnant figures and their respective offspring is clearly stated. One bears a marvellous Mighty Counsellorn, the other, who is pregnant by a viper, brings forth wickedness*:
And she who bears a male shall be distressed by her pains, for amid the throes of Death she shall bring forth a man, and amid the pains of Shwl therc shall spring from her child-bearing crucible a Marvellous Mighty Counselor... And she who is pregnant 'by a viper' shall be prey to terrible anguish... and they shall shut the gates of Shwl upon her who conceives wickedness, and the everlasting bars upon all the spirits of Naught (IQH 111.9-10. 12 and 18).

What really interests us is the presence of this antagonist in a clearly eschatological context. It cannot be ascertained with precision whether this antagonist is given a human or a demonic nature, although the use of ;ll/t~Kto designate him and the reference to the ilYllK 'rill seems rather to indicate a demoniac nature. This leads us directly32 to the discussion of two other texts which are most significant for the interpretation of 4Q246.

3' -La succession d'images barques agrCmentee de doubles ententes, les reminiscences bibliques divergentes, la syntaxe trop complexe pour ne pas reveler la confusion de la pens&, tout cela nous interdit de d66nir ce que recouvrent les images dc la femme en couches, de son rejeton et de son antagoniste... Le textc des Hodayot est done trop tquivque pour que nous I'invquions-, A. CAOUOT, -Le mwianisme qumrfnien*, in M. D u r o (ed.), ~ Qrrttrrc91i. Sa pihfh, sa fltddogie ef soti milieu (BETL 46) Gembloux 1978), 244. At first sight IQM XI 7-9 could offer a good parallel to this situation. We can read therc: *By the hand of Thine anointed... by levelling the hordes of Bclial~.But the parallel is only apparent, the context is not the eschatological battle, and it3 ' i l ' W D simply designates the prophets, as in CD I1 12 and Vl 1.





This is a clearly eschatological Hebrew fragment that was already defined as such by its first editor AS. VAN DER W O U D E ~ ~ In . the best preserved column of the manuscript we are offered a good example of a thematic pesher or an eschatological midrash - to use the editor's expression - based on Lev 25, Deut 15 and Isa 61. Within the framework of the tenth and last jubilee of human history, the remission of the debts of the biblical text is interpreted as an eschatological release. The liberator, that is, the leader of the heavenly spirits (literally *gods))) is Melchizedek, identified with the archangel Michael and presented as the one who will judge the holy ones and lead them to participate in his heritage. This liberation will be preceded by the battle between Melchizedek and Belial and their respective angelic armies34, corresponding to that described in l Q M XVII,5-9 between Michael and the prince of the impious power, or to that which - on a strictly personal level 4Q'Arnmm presents between Milki-resha' and ~elchizedek?'. What does interest us in this text is the fact that this battle, in which ctMelchizedek will execute the vengeance of the judgement of God [...I and he will save them from the hand of Belial and from the hand of all the spirits of his lot. And all the gods [...I will come to his aid* (IlQMelch 13-14), is followed by the eschatological peace described in the words of Isa 52,7 and 61.2-3, as well as the nomenclature used in the description of the angelic liberator, which is derived from Psalm 82,1, quoted in line 10. In his battle, Melchizedek not only is of assisted by <<allthe gods)) (7% >13, line 14) and by the <<sons god^ ( > K '31, line 14), but is himself designated as <your god* (1'i1 I > K , line 25) in the interpretation of Isa 52,7: aand 'your God' is (Melchizedek, who) will save them from the hand of Beliab (lines 2526), and the familiar Old Testament expression %God's heritage* has

33 A.S. VAN DER WOUDE, -Melchikedck afs himmlische Erlbsergestalt in den neugefundcnen eschatologischen Midraschim aus Qumran Hohfe XI*, Oudresfamentischc Swdiin 14 (I%'), 354-373. *Belial and the spirits of his lot- (lin. 12) on one side, and Mclchizcdek with -all the gods who will come to h i s aid to attend to the destruction of Belial* (lin. 14) on the other. 3s The name of Melchivdek does not appear in the prcsemd tea, but his identification as the opponent of Mefki-resha' seems certain, see F. GAR^ MARTINEZ, e4Q'Amram B 1,14: Melki-resha' o Melki-sedcq?* RQ 12 (1985), 111-114.




This nomenclature is been transformed into ccMelchizedek's heritage>>. in line with the angelic designations customary in the Qumran writings, but it is never used when dealing with the fallen angels, the demons or the spirits of Belial's gang.

On the other hand, one of the fragments of 4 ~ i l m r a m 4QAm~~, ramb 1,13-14, which contains a description of Melki-resha', Melchizedek's eschatological antagonist, depicts him as follows37:
And I lifted my eyes and saw one of them. His looks were frightening like those of a viper, and his garment was multicoloured and was extremely dark ... and his face was like that of a viper and he was covered with ...

Nor does the other text, 4Q280 2,2-3, in which Melki-resha' is mentioned, give us a more positive image3':
Be cursed, Melki-resha', in all your I.. ]. May God deliver you up for torture at the hands of the vengeful Avengers. May God have no pity...

The text continues with a series of curses which correspond to the well-known maledictions cast against Belial in IQS I1,7ss; IQM XIII, 4-6, and 4QBerakotlz These texts enable us to see clearly that the human antagonist, the Antimessiah of 48175, is presented, just as is the antagonist of IQH II1,12-18, with the same features as the angelic eschatological antagonist: Belial, Melki-resha', Mastema, Prince of Darkness, Prince of the Impious Power, etc., or with the other names used to designate the angelic opponent within the Qurnranic dualism, and that none of the texts which talk about human or angelic antagonists in an eschatological context, uses positive language to describe or refer to them. These texts enable us to ascertain the degree of credibility of each has unreservedly of the hypotheses previously expounded. FLUSSER

Only two of the five preserved manuscripts of this work have been partially published by J.T. MILIK, u 4 Q Visions de 'Amram et une citation d'origbnem, RB 97 (1972 ,n 97 ' 1 f i l o k here the reading of the editor. The Aramaic text admits other readings which do not substantially modify its interpretation. 38 Published by J.T. MILIK, rMilki-sedeq et Milki-resha' dans les anciens tcrits juifs et chrttiensu, IIS 23 (1972), 127.



recognised that the suffix of Col. ii 5 refers to the people of God, to the people of Israel, although, contrary to what he actually did, it would have sufficed to refer to texts suchs as lQM XII.16 and XIX.8 which complete the reference to Obad 21, sovereignty shall be to the Lord*, with ccand everlasting dominion to Israel*, or l Q S b V,2021, where the Prince of the Congregation has as function to ctestablish the kingdom of his people for evera. On the other hand, his identification of the mysterious personage as the Antichrist is quite out of place and is only possible if one takes as a point of departure the Antichrist's claim to a divine affiliation. Although the figure of the eschatological antagonist of the Messiah is certainly Jewish and preChristian, his self-proclamation as God and as Son of God is Christian and a result of new-testamental influence. In Qumran's language, just as in the Old Testament from which he draws his inspiration (see Psalm 82,1.6), the titular use of the expressions does not admit a negative interpretation. RIZMYER is correct in recognising the positive character implied in the titles of col. ii 1 and has emphasised the eschatological character of the whole text. Nevertheless, his identification of the mysterious personage with an heir to David's throne is gratuitous and deprives the text of a considerable part of its resonance^^^. These Qumranic resonances are clearly manifest in our interpretation, according to which the text should be divided into three sections: - i 1-6: apocalyptic prediction of the course of history, in the manner of Daniel's discourses and 4QpsDan Ar. The mention of the Assyrian and the Egyptian kings is perfectly clear in the light of 1QM I 2-4. - i 7 - ii 3: intervention of the mysterious personage designated in other texts as Michael, Melchizedek, Prince of Light (IQM XI11 10 ) and proclaimed in this text as (<Sonof God, and <<Son of the Most High*. His intervention unleashes the final stages of the eschatological confrontation, during a short period of which the hostile reigns bring about chaos. This fight is minutely described in l Q M , which sets its duration at forty years, with the heavenly beings (as in our text), led by Michael and Belial, as decisive protagonists.

39 ~ Z M Y Ecorrcctiy R points out that the t e a is not a messianic one, closing the door to a possible Qumranic explanation of his own hypothesis in the line of lQSa 11 11-12: *When God begets the messiah-.



- ii 4-9: this eschatological battle ends in a final and definitive period of peace and in the eternal reign of Israel, just as in IlQMelch, the release from the claws of Belial and his spirits' through Melchizedek's intervention, is followed by the messianic age. Seen in that light, 4Q246 appears as a typical product of the sect's theology, and its contents, far from unveiling an Essenic Antichrist, may be summarised in the sentence of IQM XVII.5-8:
T h i s is the day he has set to humiliate and to bring low the Prince of the
dominion of wickedness. He has sent an everlasting help to the lot whom he has redeemed through the might of the majestic angel; by the authority of Michael in everlasting light he will cause the covenant of Israel to shine in joy Peace and blessing to the lot of God! - HE will exalt over the gods the authority of Michael and the dominion of Israel over all flcsh.


THE <<NEW JERUSUEM* AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE OF THE MANUSCRIPTS FROM QUMRAN The reason for looking again into the work known as *The Description of the New Jerusalem* ( = NJ ), an Aramaic composition of which several copies were discovered at Qumran1,is to be found in
Several copies have already been published: 1Q32 : J.T. MIUK, DID 1, 134-135, PI. XXXI. 2Q24 : M. BAILLET, -Fragments aramhns dc Qumran 2: description de la Jtnualcm Nounllem, RB 62 (1955), 222-245, PI. 1-11, and DID 111, 84-89, PI. XVI. 4QNJ : J . S~ARCICY, photograph and translation of col. ii in JCrusalem et les manuscrits de la Mcr Mortem, Lc Mmrde de fa Bibb 1 (1977), 38-40. 5Ql5 : J.T. MILIK, DID 111, 184-193, PI. XL-XLI. IlQNJ : B. JONGELING, *Publication provisoire d'un fragment provenant de la grotte 11 de Qumrhn (IlQJtr Nouv ar),, JSI 1 (1970), 5&61 and rNote additiomcllem, JSI 1 (1970). 18.5-186. J.T. MIIJK,nte Books of Enoch. Ammajc Fmgmenrs of QwnnOn Cave 4 (Oxford 1976), 59, discloses that *a tiny fragment of 40 (to be given the number 4Q232 in DID) sccms to provide us with a specimen of the Hebrew version of the Aramaic work cditcd under the title "Dexription of the New Jerusalem"r, but nothing more is known about this fragment. Although in DJD 1, 143 and in JSJ 1 (1970), 185 is alluded to another copy of NJ, belonging, according to JONGEUNG, to STRUGNEIL's lot, this copy does not exist. The manuscript, which indeed contains a description of the gates common to llQTemple and to N J is thus described by Prof. STRUGNEU in a personal letter: *The material common to IlQTentple and to 4Q364-365 does nor come from a roll of the New Jerusalem (uniquely found in Aramaic My fgg, are in Hebrew). My mss. of which only a bit was published by Yadin in his supplementary Volume, is a Middle Hasmonean copy of a wildly aberrant t e a of the whole Pentateuch containing m r a l nonBiblical additions, some identical with Samaritan Pcntateuchal pluses, others unattested elsewhere (c.g. a song of Miriam at the Red Sea). It is more likely that these additions were copied by IlQTen~ple from an expansionist t e a of the Pentateuch rather than that my biblical scroll incorporated excerpts from the Temple Scroll. Whether the Aramaic (and probably pre-Qumranian) -New Jerusalem* exurptcd and translated its list of the gates from the Biblical T e a type of 4Q364-365 or from IlQTentple, or per contra was itself the source of the Hebrew, is unclear but since the phenomenon of such pluses is characteristic of 40364-365 1 find the dependency of N J and IlQTentple more likely.. Photographs of part of this manuscript arc included in the Supplementary Volume of Y. YADIN'Sedition of llQTemple, )U ?;)nit-n 3 ' 1 0 - 771e TempIe S c d l (Israel Exploration Society-The Hebrew 8 ' 5 and 39. 1-2. University, Jerusalem 1977). 3 All published copies of N J are conveniently collected in J A . F ~ ~ . U Y E DJ. R HARRINGMN, A Manital of Palestittian Aramaic T a s (Second Century B.C. - Second




some strange assertions made by B.Z. WAC HOLDER^. According to the American scholar, the correspondence between a great number of the measurements found in the nNew Jerusalema and those recorded e ~such ) that it forces us to in the ccTemple Scrolb ( = l l ~ ~ e r n n p l is admit a close relationship between the two works. WACHOLDER believes that NJ would depend on l l ~ ~ e m p and l e ~that its author was motivated by the desire to assure his readers that, at the end of days, the temple would be located nowhere else than in ~erusalem'. 1lQTemple would be rather resewed on this point while NJ would attempt to fill this gap6. These assertions are rather surprising and do not seem to correspond to the real state of things. The long commentary devoted by Y. YADIN to llQTemple contains only three references to N J ~and a

Cenrury A.D.) (Biblica et Orientalia 34) (Roma 1978), 46-55 and in K. BEYER, Die cucuniiirchen Terte vom Tote11Meer (Gottingen 1984). 214-222 B.Z. W~niol.DEqnre Dawn OJ Qumra~r.rite Sectan'an Tomh and the Teacher OJRI reousness (Monographs of the Hebrew Union College 8) (Cincinnati 1983). <in= YADIN'S edifio princeps. and especially Yncc the publication of the EngSLh translation [The Temple Scroll (Jerusalem 1983)], the number of studies of 1lQTemple has enormously grown. For a bibliography sec F. GARCIA MARTI= *El Rollo del Templo (IlQTemple): Bibliografia sistem6tica*, RQ 12/47 (1986), 425-440 and Id, -The Temple Scroll: A Systematic Bibliography 1985-1991w, forthcoming in the Proceedings oJ rlte Madrid C a n p s on the Dead Sea Scrolls. For a compact review of the most relevant literature on IlQTetnple, see F. GARCIAMARTINFZ, &studios Qumrhicos 1975-1985: Panorama Critico (II)., Esmdios Blblicos 45 (1987), 361-402 and A.S. VAN DER WoUDE, ~FunfzchnJahre Qumranforschung (1974-1988)*, ThR 54 227-249. -In other words, since coincidence between the corresponding standards is to be exdudcd, an interdependence between the accounts of the future sanctuary in the JlQTomh [WACHOI.DER'S designation for IIQTe~nple)and in the fragments of the New Jrmsolem seems certain*, op. cif. %. *New Jerusalem assures the reader that the future temple at the end of days will be located nowhere else except in the chosen city and that the dimensions of both wiU correspond to a similar architectural design-, Ibidem, 96. *It is necessary to postulate that he author of the New Jerusalem modeled hi Aramaic version of the holy city after the dimensions of the sanctuary in IIQTomh, a work that provides minimal information concerning the city in which the eternal sanctuary will be located. In fad it does not even mention Jerusalem by name.. Ibidem, 96. Y. YADIN,W l ~ ~ n i ? - R > ' l D ,MI. I, pp. 174, 181 and 189, according to the Index of quotations. In fact, there are more references to N J not recorded in the Index, c.g., pp. 167-168 and 246. On p. 181 YADIN transcribes three fragments of IQ32 (frat& 14, 1 and 5, on l h i order) as part of one block. But t h i reconstruction is simply impossible. Frag. 14 is the lower part of a column which has preserved a large margin, and frag. 5 has dearly





detailed comparison of the two documents led J. LICHT to discard IlQTemple as a writing that could clarify NP.The supposed intention of the NSs author compels us completely to disregard cols. XLV-XLVIII, LII,19-31 and many other paragraphs of IlQTemple that deal with Jerusalem and call it ccmy cityn, ccthe city of the temple*, athe city of my templea, etc., as well as the many deuteronomistic expressions referring to it. Nothing can be deduced from the fact that the name of Jerusalem does not appear in IlQTemple, because this name is found neither in the NJ fragments published so far nor (what is equally relevant) in chapters 40-48 of Ezekiel, which culminate in the revelation of the name of the city: <<TheLord is theres. It would seem unnecessary to insist upon the differences between 1lQTemple and NJ, were it not for the fact that the excellent book of M.O. WISE, recently published9, has reopened the question, inverting the position of WACHOLDERand making IlQTemple dependent on WISE asserts that ccthe NJ NJ. Reacting to LICHT'S concl~sion'~, reflects an ideological program fundamentally identical with that of the Temple Source [one of the sources used by the author/ compiler of 1lQTemple]*. The elements in which NJ and llQTemple are c~programmatically relatedw according to WISE", are: - the use of the number seven as a basic element in the plans of NJ and of 11QTemple;

traccs of a line, not transcribed by YADIN, whose remains do not seem to be com atiblc with the letters prcscwed on linc 2 of frag. 1. J. LICHT, -An Ideal Town Plan from Qumran. The Description of the New Jcrus;llcm-, IEJ 29 (1979), 45-59: -Now that the Temple Scroll has been published, it is clear that it contains no dues to the obscurities of the NJ, for it is concerned with contingent, but not identical subjects*, 46. M.O. WISE, A Critical Sntdy of the Temple ScmN from Qumran Caw 11 (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilhtion 49) (Chicago 1990). WISE studies NJ on pp. 64-86. For a critical assessment of his work, cf. my review in I S . 22 (1991), 155-161; for an different view of the redactional history of IlQTemple, cf. F. GARCIA MARTINEZ, -Sources et rCdaction du Rouleau du Temple*, Henoch 13 (1991) (forthcoming). .But it seems to me that important details may have escaped Licht's attention, and that the t e a s do sometimes describe the same s u b j a u , op. cit. 64. *The argument that the NJ and the Temple Source are programmatically related rests on several considerations. First, the hvo works r e f l a in their measurements an identical ideology of numbers. Second, they dcscribc in several places similar, perhaps identical, structures and rituals. Third, the two haw certain general phenomena in common*, op. cit., 66.




- the presence in both of the same general phenomena, such as the change in the pattern for indicating length and width, the use of numerous pillared structures, the common use of certain terms such asY3ln /Y3llfl insteadof~131,etc. In my view, these common <<generalphenomena,,, to the extent that they are really present in the texts1*, are devoid of significance. I do not think either that the presence of some measurements based on the number seven and its multiples, together with others that are clearly not based on this number, is significant in a text which uses as measure a seven cubit reed. The only element that, in my opinion, could prove that NJ and IIQTemple are programmatically related would be the presence in both texts of structures or rituals that are not attested in other compositions. This would be the case according to WISE: aIn at least three instances, the Temple Source and the NJ describe either identical structures or aspects of identical rituals peculiar to these two texts.,,'3 But a careful perusal of the four instances WISE analyses does not seem to lend support to his conclusion. In one case the parallel does not exist, in two others the possible relationship is too thin and complicated to lead to any conclusion, and the third, the only real one, can be interpreted otherwise than WISEdoes. The first instance is the assumed parallel between 1lQTemple XXXVII, 4 and 2Q24 8, 7-8. According to WISE both texts deal with an enclosure distinct from and within the inner court of the Temple, whose existence is attested by Josephus and whose presence in l l Q Temple was inferred by YADINon the basis of two oblique allusions14. WISE concludes: aBased on terminology and the identical measurements of 120 cubits, 2Q24 8 may well be describing the inner court of the Temple ~ource.,,'~ But neither the specific terminology nor the concrete measurements have been preserved in 2024 and he is forced to admit that they are only one of the possible reconstructions of the fragmentary evidence.

- the description of the same structures and rituals in both works;

l2 WISE refognises that NJ is *about midway between the Bible and the Temple Source* regarding the shifting of the pattern width-length to length-width, op. cif.,80. l3 A Cn'ficol Sfudy of rite Tentple Scroll, op. cir. 71. l4 IlQTentple XXXV,&9 and XXXV119, see the comments of YADIN, op. cif., vol. 1 158-160. Op. cir., 71.




The second instance is more complicated. It involves a combination of 2Q24 4,7-16 with IlQNJ and aseveral heretofore problematic passages of the Temple Source*, namely IlQTemple XXXVIII, 9. This text only says: ccand to the right of this gate,,, after having mentioned in the preceding lines *the wood that will be brought into,, and aupon it frankincense and...w. WISE supplies a whole context: <<By line 8 the topic has apparently shifted to another type of offering, that to which frankincense is added. Evidently the priests are to eat this offering, also, near the western gate [mention in line 61. Then in line 9, the description rotates south of that gate, i.e., to the southwest of the sanctuary. What would the priest eat at that location? Taking col. 38 as a whole, it stipulates that the offerings of similar types should be enjoyed in the same general area. Since the shewbread involved frankincense, it follows that in the Temple Source schema the priest would eat the bread in the same vicinity as other offerings involving the spice. In other words, line 38:9 probably commands the consumption of the shewbread .to the south* of the western gate.*16 I have quoted the passage at length to show the chain of suppositions that are necessary to arrive at WISE'S conclusion. A similar chain of suppositions is involved in his reading of the N J text. The combination of the two copies gives for lin. 9-10 athey will exit from the sanctuary to the south-west, and they will divide*, and WISE must supply the statement that the action involved is the change of the courses of the priests, with the division of the shewbread among the incoming and outgoing, and the eating of the bread to the south of the western gate. But if we look at the preserved texts, without the suppositions of WISE, we realise that the the right,. only common element between them is the mention of <<to The third instance of so-called agreement is even more tenuous. It involves the same combination of texts of NJ and ZlQTemple XLV, 2. After having postulated that the eighty-four priests mentioned in the N J text are the High Priest and his deputy, the twelve <<heads* of the priestly courses who were permanently present in the temple and were thus treated as a group, and seventy priests representing part of a priestly course, WISE interprets the isolated mention of the number seventy in IlQTemple XLV, 2 (which YADINreads as part of the
l6 Op. cci, 74. His reading of IIQTemple is even more problematic when one takes into aecount the overlapping text of STRUGMXL'S manuscripts 4Q3M365, PAM 43.366, which permit the completion of the fragmentary text of IlQTempie.



number 270, the number of chambers allotted to the priests and levites) as a reference to the same seventy priests, part of a priestly course, and postulates an agreement between IIQTemple and the NJ regarding the courses. The only real instance of agreement between the two texts is the well-known correspondence of the names of the gates of the temple in IIQTemple with those of the city in NJ. But this agreement is not exclusive. The fact that this tradition about the gates is found also in forbids us to establish a an apparently biblical scroll, 4~364-36517, direct link between 1lQTemple and NJ. It rather points to the existence of an independent tradition which both NJ and 1lQTemple could have used. WISE postulates a genetic relationship between the two texts because of a common element, but, theoretically, it is always also possible to postulate a common dependence on a third source. When, as is the case here, this third source is present, and is attested in a manuscript much older than all the copies of NJ and of the Temple Scroll, this theoretical possibility becomes the most plausible hermeneutical way to interpret the relationship at this point between NJ and the Temple Scroll. So the origin and the objective of NJ must be different from WACHOLDER'S and WISE'Sassumptions, but it does not seem to be easy to offer a different explanation. A careful perusal of the different copies of NJ published so far brings to light quite a number of distinct problems and queries raised by this work1'. What are its origins ? Which literary genre does it belong to ? What kind of a city and of a temple are described in it ? It is far from our intention to give an answer here to all these queries, still less to submit a full and detailed treatment of the work under consideration. Our only aim is to clarify

" See note 1 above.

l8 NJ, unlike other compositions found in the library of Qumran, has not generated much research. Except for the already quoted article by J. LICHT and the corresponding chapter in the book of WISE, the only other important treatments Small Caves of Qumran*, known to me are the review article of J. GREENnELD <<The JAOS 89 (1969). pp. 130, 132-135, which offers valuable corrections to some suggestiDiss.: The Temple nleologv of lhe Qumran ons of MILIK'Sedition, and S. F'UJITA'S Sect and the Book of Ezekiel: nzeir Relatiorzslzip to Jewish Literahire of the Last Two Cenhtries B.C. (Princeton Univ. 1970, distributed by University Microfilms). K. BEYER (op. cif.,216) refers to the Diss. of W. BERNHARDT, Die kulhrr- und religionsgeschichtliche Bedeumng des Qlinirarz-Fmg?zetzts5Q15, defended at the University of Jena in 1970, which has not been available to me.



its origin by placing this missing link in its correct place within the chain of tradition that ends up in the Apocalypse of the New Testa ment.

Before summarising the contents of the fragments, it seems necessary briefly to discuss some points that condition my own comprehension of the text. The first item is whether NJ is or is not dependent on Ezekiel as regards the general blueprint of the town plan. It is quite evident that NJ depends on Ezekiel and should there be any doubt as to the validity of this assertion it entirely vanishes on the basis of FUJITA'S detailed analysis of the terminology NJ uses19. There is, nevertheless, one point in which the author of NJ diverges from Ezekiel: the layout of the city plan. Ezekiel's ideal layout consists of a square of small dimensions, whereas, in NJ, the city is planned as an immense rectangle. This can be established on the strength of the measurements of the city wall preserved in the copy of NJ from 4Q, col. i and ii, 1-5: a rectangle of 140 x 100 res or stadia. This conclusion had already been reached by M I L I K ~ ~It . would seem unnecessary to insist upon it if LICHT had not formally opposed this assertion2' and if MLIK'S presentation did not conceal a characteristic vagueness which lends itself to ambiguous conclusions and leads him to postulate that the city consisted of a rectangle of only 35 x 100 stadia. In MILIK'Sopinion, in fact, the wall, which is mentioned in the fragments of 4Q, would enclose the city and the Temmah, that is the part devoted to YHWH. The city, located to the south of the Temmah, would seemingly occupy one of the four strips of land in which the large avenues divide the whole, and make up a rectangle which represents, in fact, a quarter of its total area. The other three strips would form a square of approximately 105 x 100 stadia, equivalent to the Temmah of Ezekiel. The northern strip would be inhabited by the
" Op. cil., pp. 306-315.

In his editio princeps of SQlS, DJD 111, 185. J. L I C I ~OH. , cit. 49-50: *But the most obvious acsumption an interpreter may make is that the author of the NJ based his plan on Ezekiel's vision of a square city... A far safer hypothesis is that the 'great wall' of the unpublished portion of the text is not the city wall, and that the author of the NJ adhered to Erskiel's specifications quite closely*.



Levites, the central part by the Priests, with the temple standing at its northernmost end; the southern strip would separate the city or residence of the laymen from the sacred space, reflecting the purity concerns characteristic of the Qumran ~ e c t a r i e s ~ ~ . Thus both MILIK and LICHT assert that the city and the temple were set apart from each other. In LICHT'Sopinion, the city would spread out at the northern side of the temple, cut off from it by the avenue that forms a son of square at the south end of the c i t p . As for MILIK,he supports the theory that the city was separated from the temple by a strip of land equal to that of the city itself, i.e. 35 x 100 stadia. As has already been indicated, LICHT'Sassumption is contradicted by the text from Cave 4, which reveals the measurements of the outer wall as being those of a rectangle -not a square- of a size far superior to that of Ezekiel's city as postulated by LICHT.Nor does it seem that MILIK'Shypothesis is in accord with the data found in the text. Indeed, he perfectly understood the relation between the 12 gates of the wall and the six avenues that divided the city into squares and led to the wall gates, but his view that the city area should be reduced and confined to the lower part of the resulting square seems arbitrary. The text specifies that the avenues cross the city: aand that of the middle in the centre of the city...)) (5Q15 i,5, 4QNJ ii.15-16 ). It is quite true that this is the only case in which the author indicates that he is dealing with the streets of the city, but the expressions used with respect to the other avenues compel us to give the same interpretation to the text in the other cases. In fact, the measurements of the streets and avenues are given in the context of the description of the block of the houses; the author has just given the overall measurements of each block and indicates that the blocks are separated by

uLe Temple ttait donc au centre de la bande central de la 'Part consacrke' mais touchant a sa limite nord. Ainsi il se dressait dans le territoirc des pritres, comme la Temple d'Ez 45,2-4 et 48.9-12, et il eommuniquait a travcrs I'avcnuc avec la partie nord de la Tenmtalt, habitte par les ltvites; cfr. Ez 45.5 el 48.13. 11 est dificile d c devincr la destination dc la bande situCe entre celle dcs prbtrcs et cellc de la Ville, mais servant de tampon entre la partie sacro-sainte et la partie la~que,elle trahit Ie souci de Purett cultuelle si caraatristique des sectaires de OumrBn*. DJD 111, 185. See hi diagram on p. 49. LICKI. designates this avenue with the letter E and speafies: street E was thus evidently intended as a kind of plaza or place for assembly adjoining the Temple and lying to the south side of the street network. In other words, the dectrmattus nrarimtrs has been shifted to the south because of the sacred character of the city. The other two east-west streets (D) run through the heart of the e i t p , art. cii., 48.



streets; he further gives the measurements of these streets and then singles them out from the six large avenues, adding, when referring to one of these avenues, that it runs alongside the northern part of the temple, and, when further mentioning the other one, that it crosses the centre of the city. MILIK'S assertion that only the avenues running North-South cross the city, not those running East-West, is, in my opinion, arbitrary, for the simple reason that all of them had been related to the streets separating the blocks that made up the c i p . It thus appears an unavoidable conclusion that for the author of NJ the city occupies the whole rectangle of 140 x 100 res, which is surrounded by the walls already described, and further, that the temple is situated within its enclosure. The city is divided as if it were a chessboard by the six large avenues linking the gates and forming 16 big blocks in which are located the insulae with the houses, each inrula separated from the others by their respective streets. The Nl's author holds the view that the city is something quite different from the small square located in the middle of the southern strip of Ezekiel's Terumah, although its dimensions are still far smaller than the immense square city with a length, at each side, of 3.000 stadia, which we find in the Apocalypse. Another point worth clarifying is the meaning of the term K 7 W g \ U (5Ql5 1 i 8) on account of its importance for a proper comprehension of the city plan. The term was quite unknown. MILIK compares it with \11'3\US, a noun used in Aramaic, Syrian and Mishnaic Hebraic, and ~ ~ ,suggests the with wo ~ W O ,which appears twice in the ~ a b l i and meaning of "postern", i.e. small gates carved in the city wall where the streets of the city come to an end. This meaning, the only possibl 22' correct one in my opinion, has been contested by GREENFIELD ,
An additional argument against MII.IK'S hypothesis can hc extracted from the fact that the direction of the description of the city wall runs North-South and ends in the North. The heavenly topographer starts with the gate of Simeon, at the NorthEast side, and ends with the gate of Asher, in the North side, and then he e n r m the city (4QNJ ii,S), where he describes the blocks of houses. The most logical deduction is to conclude that these blocks of houses are located in the North part of the city, and that the heavenly topographer enters the city by the same gate. But MILIK'S hypothesis requires that he descends again to the South in order to enter into the aty by the gates of Reuben, Joseph or Benjamin, the only ones with direct access to the city if the city occupies only the lower band of the square. b. Zeb 82b and b.Mett 2%. On both places is used the expression 111 W'3 1\110, although some mss. have other readings. 26 J.C. GREF,VFTELD. =The Small Caves from Qumran*, ort. cir., 134.



who himself prefers that of *a small door in a gate* (a sort of sidedoor within the city gates), this being the sense of W g w g in Syriac, where it is used to designate a wicket gate. It is true that in the two w e s in which i v g 1wn is used in the Talmud, its meaning is far from obvious27, as is recognised by G R E E N ~ E L D but , in our case the context leaves no doubt that the interpretation he postulates for KW~'.LI is not the most appropriate. Our text defines K \ L I ~ \ Uas a gate QrTn), since line 9 states precisely that "there will be two stone panels in each gate", and, further, that these gates are nothing else but the posterns mentioned in line 8, as evidenced by the measurements of the panels: one reed or seven cubits each, making up a total width of 2 reeds, fourteen cubits for both posterns. We are thus dealing with small doors in tile wail and not with wickets. GREENFIELD'S definition is also incompatible with the measures of the city gates stated in the text and with their numbers. These city gates, structures flanked by towers on both sides, are three reeds wide and have two panels of one reed and a half each, that would hardly admit one-reed wide wickets, and, because they are twelve, in no case could they accommodate more than 24 wickets, a figure that cannot been reconciled with the number partially preserved in 5Q15: [4]80. MILIK'S conclusion is correct, and the meaning he postulates for x 7 i u g \ u is the only one that fits the context28. A 5 he himself indiI Um. ~ Tamid ~ 3:7 and m. cates, that same meaning suits also C ~ W ~ in Middot 4:2. This conclusion concerning the meaning of ti''^?;^' is important, although the number of 80 posterns that MILIK assumes, seems wrong to me and would appear to be conditioned by his erroneous conjecture that the city occupies only the southern strip of land of the whole

27 The expression of b. Zeb is translated by H. FIEEDMAN in the Soncino edition as ua circuitous route- and explained in a foot-note: -he enters the innermost sanctuary by way of a roof or through upper chambers, avoiding the hekal altogether-. E. CASHDAN, in the same edition, translates the same expression in b. Men by -entering by the side- and explains: -any entry into the Holy of Holies not ma& in the ordinary way through the door on the east with the fact looking westward; e.&, by breaking through the north wall or the south wall of the Holy of Holies and entering thereby, or by entering through the door on the east but with the face looking either northward or southward-, dr. I. E P ~ (ed.), N The Babylonian Talmud. Seder Kodashim (London 1948) Vol. 11, 392 (Zcb) and Vol. 1, 178 (Men). K. BEYER avoids the problem; he reconstructs 'W9W[Zl, but gives to W 9 W 9 not the meaning of wicket, but the general one of ~Pfortem,d r . Die m i i i s c h e n Talr, op. cit., 217 and 672.




complex. Much in line with MILIK,we conclude that the posterns are the openings or gates carved in the wall that correspond to the small streets separating the house blocks, parallel to the twelve gates of larger dimensions that correspond to the six large avenues. But, unlike MILIK,we do not think that the text confines itself to indicating the number of posterns on the three outer sides of the lower strip, hut takes for granted that these posterns are distributed all along the full perimeter of the city, i.e., of the rectangle formed by the walls: (140 x Unfortunately the text of 5QI5 is muti2) + (100 x 2) = 480 d9. lated at that point and the corresponding part does not appear in 4QNJ either, so that both MILIK'Sreading (80 posterns) and our own (480 posterns) are bound to remain hypothetical. Both readings can be fitted into the dimensions of the missing textM, but our reconstruction avoids the complicated calculations and the arbitrary reductions of measurements that MILIKis compelled to make in order to offer a satisfactory explanation of number 8d1, is confirmed by the number of towers, to which we shall refer later on, and gives a rational basis to the calculation of the absolute measures of the city imagined in NJ. All this leads us to give a brief account of the measurements system recorded in NJ. Of the seven measures of length that are used in the biblical system of measurement, only two appear in NJ: a l l 7 , the reed, and a 0 K , the cubit. Another measure used is the res (also employed in IIQTemple LII,18), written D l or K O 1 in singular, ? ' D - or I 7 0 K 1 in the ~ , facultative use of alef indiplural. As pointed out by M I L I K ~ cates that the word was pronounced res and not ris, as in mishnaic Hebraic, where it appears frequently, a pronunciation still known to Jerome, who identifies it with the stadium. GREENFIELD points out correctly33 that res was also the pronunciation of the Targumic vocalization and that the use of aief to indicate \e\ comes from the

29 Thii seems also to be the conclusion of STARCKY: uSi je lis correctement ce chiffre mutilt, il rkpond aux 480 stades de I'enceinte, chaque stade rkpondant h un ilot, wmme I'a vu J.T. Milik*, rJCrusalem et les manuserits de la mer Mone*, an. cit., 39. MILIK is forced to intraduce in the gap the verb >J;Y > i R K 1 in order to adapt his reconstruction to the space available. His reconstruction has been adopted by FTIZWER-HARRINGTON (56-57) and by BEYER (217). 31 D/D 111, 1 8 6 . DJD 111, 188. 33 J.C. GREEM.1ELD. *The Small Caves from Qumran*, art. cit., 134.



Aramaic pronunciation of words such as K i n (mar\e\), T I K ? (y\e\mar), DK 1 (r\e\s) etc. In NJ, the measures are rendered in reeds, and are always followed by the equivalent in cubits, the proportion being 7 cubits to a reed (the manuscript 4QNJ designates the measures in figures). In this respect, NJ turns away from the biblical system which considers the reed as measuring six (short) cubits, and even from Ezekiel, who also c a six-cubits reed, each of which applies a reed of six (long) cubits: c increased by a span" (Ezekiel 40,5), this being equivalent, in actual practice, to a reed of seven short cubits. The system is, therefore, clear and consistent. Problems arise when it comes to determining the accurate value of the cubit on the basis of our metric system, because no model or standard has been preserved. According to the rabbinic tradition, those standards were lodged in the outbuildings of the temple, a possibility already suggested by 1 Chr 23, 29, after which the Levites would have been commissioned with control functions. A double system has been worked out in order to identify the absolute value of these measures: 1) a method based on comparison with the Egyptian and Mesopotamian metric system, which values are accurate and are precisely known, aiming at finding out the equivalent values in the biblical system; 2) a method based on current measurements of monuments, which measures are recorded in the biblical system, such as the Siloam tunnel, or the gates of excavated cities like Megiddo, Hazor or Gezer, or, in more recent times, of a hypogeum of the first century at Wady en-~a?. Without lingering over technical details and taking for granted the hypothetical nature of whatever solution is adopted, it may be stated that the usual values are 0,52 m. for the long cubit and 0,45 for the short one35. No strong arguments have been brought forward that would lead me resolutely to adopt either the 0.45 m. or the 0.52 m. cubit alternative in our text, but I would rather abide by the 0.52 m. choice for the cubit recorded in NJ and this for three reasons which
MIUK arrives by this way to f u the value of the cubit at 0.56 m (DID 111, 186), a value adopted by A. t3kN DAVID in his Talmudische Okmomte I (Hildesheirn-New York 1974), 344. Cfr. J. TRINQUFT, DBS V, cols. 1212-1250, Y. SCOn; *Weights and Measures of the Bible-, BA 22 (1959), 22-40, and E. PUEa, *Evaluation de la w u d k Israelite-, RB 81 (1974), 208-210.




although none of them is decisive taken by itself, do justify my option when considered jointly. The first one is its similarity to the Roman cubirus that had been introduced already in the year 129 B.C. as an official measure in the Province of the second is that it stands closer to the Wady en-NSr standard; and the third reason is that a cubit of 0,45 m. would render, as an equivalence for the reed of seven cubits, certain measures that are hardly different from those of a reed of six cubits of 0.52 m.; the continuous insistence of the author that his reed measures seven cubits seems to suggest a dissimilarity with respect to Ezekiel's reed (six long or seven short cubits). Anyhow, this is a secondary problem. It would seem more important to determine the number of cubits contained in a res, since this would be the only way to establish the absolute values of the three measures used in the text. The word res is of Persian origin and, as we have already indicated, it had been assimilated to the stadium since the time of Jerome. In the Talmudic system37, the most frequent equivalence is the following: 1 parasang = 4 miles = 30 rk, which leads KRAUSS to lend the res a value of 266 cubits. M I L I K ~brands ~ this value as ccchimericaln and is more inclined to accept the equivalence given by Rashi: 1 res = 30 reeds. S T A R C K Y ~accepts ~ 1 res = 60 reeds as the most probable equivalence. I myself believe that NJ contains an indication that enables us to determine the value that the author gave to the res. As pointed out above, he reckoned the perimeter of the outer city wall to be 480 res and, if our reconstruction is accurate, it appears that such a perimeter comprised 480 posterns, that is, one for each res. We have noted as well that those posterns made up the terminal points of the streets separated by the house blocks, so that the determination of the measures of the blocks would reveal the distance separating one postern from the next and, hence, the measurement in cubits of the res. Fortunately, the dimensions of the blocks have been partially preserved in SQ15 1 i 1-2 and completely in 4QNJ ii 5-7: the
On the Greek and Roman measures dr. the entry *Stadion (Mctrologie)- by


F l E a f n ? R on the PAULY-WlssoW~,Real-Encyclopddie &r classischen Alferlumswissenschafr. Neuc Bearbeitung, 2c Reihe, 111 (Stuttgart 1929), cols. 1930-1973. 37 Sec S. KRAUSS,Tialmudische Arrhdol+e (reprint Hildesheim 1966), "01. 11, 391-392; BEN DAVID,op. cif.., 344, gives the same value, although he makes the n s

equivalent to 149 m. on the base of the value of 056 m. for a cubit. 2 1 3 DJD 111, 187-188. d6ntsalem et les manuserits de la mer Morte*, cur. cit., 39.



blocks measure 51 reeds or 357 cubits, to which 6 reeds or 42 cubits must be added (three for each of the two sidewalks) as well as another 6 reeds, which correspond to the two halves of the two streets that separate the blocks from each other, this making up a total of 63 reeds or 441 cubits*.

Following up the clarification of the previous points, we now summarise the contents of the texts by combining the data recorded in the different manuscripts, without attempting for the moment to restore the order of the fragments of the different copies in the original work?' NJ is a work that was originally written in ~ r a m a i c and ~ ~composed following the literary scheme of the so-called Torah of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 40-48)". Just as in Ezekiel, NJ describes how an angel
40 STARCKY follows a similar line of reasoning, but, following MILIK, he indudes only one of the two halves of the two streets, obtaining a 1 res = 60 reeds equivalence. If we tabulate the different systems we obtain the following equivalences: KRAUSS/BEN DAVID: 1 res = 38 reeds = 266 cubits = 149 m. 1 res = 30 reeds = 210 cubits = 117 m. MIUK: STARCKY: 1 res = 60 reeds = 420 cubits = 190 m. 1 rcs = 63 reeds = 441 cubits = 229 m. GARCIAMARTINEZ:
41 WISE, taking as a lead the direction of the movement, arrives at the following ordering of the fragments: 4QNJ col. i [outside the Templc City] // 4QNJ col. ii-iii / 5Q15 i / 2Q24 i [within the Temple City] // 4QNJ col. iv-v / SQIS ii-iii [within the Templc City] // 1032 xiv-xv [the inner court] // 2Q24 iii [the table of incense, within the inner court] // 2Q24 iv / lJQNJ [the ritual of the shcwbread, in the inner court] // 2024 v-viii [the altar and its sanctum, the dimensions of the inner court (?)I, d r . op. cif., 66. 42 It is impossible to ascertain the exact relationship of 4Q232 with our NJ, but according to MII.IK the as yet unpublished text is a Hebrew translation of the Aramaic original. In any case, nothing in the Aramaic text indicates that we are dealing with a composition translated from a Hebrew original. The Hebraism 1R lW, noted by MIUK (DJD 111, 88). has been correctly explained by G m e t o (en.crr., 132-133) as a qocol realiiation for the qtrfl pattern in Hebrew and Aramaic. The only dear Hebraism, already noted by BAILLFT(DID 111, 88) and by BEYER (op. cif. 216), is the use of 1Y '7'K in 2024 4.18 instead of the expected ?Y 131 (scc It' '7 131,~ Q E 2~i I 26, ~ iii 29, 4 ~ E n ' 4 ii 12-13, for example). For other possible Hebraisms see note 47. 43 NJ imitates the structure of Ezekiel's Torah, but subtly transforms the contents: *Cette oeuvre, compos& d a m le sillage de la Torah d'hkchiel, imite la structure de son modele au point de pouvoir nous faire pcnscr que nous nous trouvons devant un



leads the seer round the city and makes all the measurements, which are accurately recorded by the author. According to the first col. of 4QNJ, this heavenly topographer, carrying a measuring rod of seven cubits, takes the author to the exterior walls of the city. These walls are divided by twelve gates - three in each of the four sides - which bear the names of the twelve patriarchsM. The wall is thus divided into 16 stretches that are duly measured. The southern and the northern sides are composed of four stretches of 35 res each. As a result, the wall that surrounds the city forms a rectangle with a surface of 140 x 100 res and a perimeter of 480 res (an area of some 32 x 23 krns. and a perimeter of about 110 kms. according to our assessments). Having thus measured the city wall, the guide leads the seer into the inner enclosure. The city is divided into house blocks, square-shaped and of equal size, which measure 51 x 51 reeds = 357 cubits (some 185 m.) on each side and are surrounded, all of them, by an open space4' or a sidewalk of 3 reeds (21 cubits) or, according to MILIK~~ by , a gallery or a porch. This structure separates the house blocks from the streets. These streets, which divide the whole city into squares, are twice as wide as the sidewalks: 6 reeds or 42 cubits. There are, moreover, 6 large avenues ( K ' 3 - 1 3 1 K'IT IW), three of which run from east to west and the other three from south to north. Their width has been carefully recorded and two of the east-west avenues measure 10 reeds or 70 cubits, while the third one, that runs at the northern part of the temple, is 18 reeds or 126 cubits wide.

calque plutirt que devant une extgbse ....Et pourtant, une analyse plus dCtaiU6e permet de constater que dans ce cas aussi le texte qumrsnien ne se limite pas 2 compltter la Torah d'k&chiel mais il la rtinterprkte et r6emploie ses tlements pour en transmettre une conception difftrente.u, cfr. F. GARCIA MARTINEZ, ~L'interprttation de la Torah d'&&chiel dans les mss. de Qumrlnn, F. GARCIA MARTINEZ - E. PUECH (eds ) Mt+morialJean Can?aignac (Paris 1988),448-449. gThe copy of Cave 4 has preserved the names of Simeon, Joseph and Reuben, and Naphtali and Asher for the gates located respectively on the east, south, and north sides. Both the number of the gates and their names agree with the gates of the cour ards of the temple in IlQTemple. See the discussion supra. "This seems to be the meaning of the term employed, Kl1713, cfr. GREENFIELD (art cit., 133). L I C m finds *that a free space adjoining the exceedingly broad 'Street' E on the south end of the city does not make sense. Hence the statement about a free space running around the blocks of houses does not mean on ail four sidesn (art. cit., 51-52), but this speculation is contradicted by the text. 46 Who translates K n ' 1 3 as apkristyle*, ngalerie, portique longeant la ruea, DJD 111, 187.



The avenues that run from south to north, are somewhat narrower: two of them measure 9 reeds and four cubits, i.e. 67 cubits, while the central one which runs right across the middle of the town, measures 13 yards and one cubit, i.e. 92 cubits. The author states that "all the streets and the city" are paved with "white stones", while the other elements, whose description has been lost, are made of alabaster and onyx47. The text continues with a description of the posterns, which we have already mentioned, and an indication of their measures as well as with a reference to their stone panels. Unfortunately, the text then becomes very fragmentary. From the remnants that have reached us, it may be deduced that they provided a description and a recording of the measures of the entrance gates to the city, whose names have been previously stated. Just like the posterns, the gates are also provided with two panels of one and a half reeds or 10 cubits wide kach, and have a total width of 3 reeds or 21 cubits. These gates are flanked by two square towers of 5 reeds and have a 5, cubit staircase structure for access to the towers (on the city side of the wall, to the right of the towers), which equals a measure of 40 cubits to each side of the gate. The text continues with the description of a typical block of houses, starting with the elements of access, that is, the gate complex which serves as entrance to the block. The author depicts only one of these doorways, although in full detail, and this has enabled LICHTto draw a full plan by putting all the existing elements together4'; they result in a gate of a type common at the end of the iron age, provided with three doors of an identical size: 4 cubits wide by seven cubits high, each formed by two panels. One of these doors opens out onto the street; the opposite door opens into the inner part of the block; the third one is situated at the right hand and faces the access to the staircase located at the left side of the compound and with direct
47 The term used is 0 3 i 1 7 . To my knowledge the word is not attested in Aramaic. It is found in Hebrew (Exodus 28,18; 39,ll and Ezekiel 28,13) and both the origin and the precise meaning are uncertain. Tg Onq translates by 0 l'iil3 in all three cases, while Neofiti 1 uses in Exodus the curious expression il > l Y 1 3 ' . The usual translation by -diamond* does not seem to be correct (the stones in Exodus are engraved). MIUK translates the word by wjaspe*, but we prefer to translate as onyx, f following DJ. HARRIS,*An Introduction to the Study of Persanal Ornaments o Precious, Semi-precious and Imitation Stones used through Biblical Histo*, ALUOS 4 (lg2-63),62-&1. Cfr. his excellent discussion on pp. 54-58 and the drawing on p. 56 of hi article.



access from the inside. The inner part of the gate structure consists of the hallway or vestibule49 that serves as a passage between the doors. The staircase is also the object of a minute description. In contrast to the stairs leading to the towers of the city gates, represented by a simple 5 cubit wide ramp built in the outside, this is a winding staircase or, to be more precise, a staircase of the known Nabatean typeS0 where the 4-cubit ramps turn around a square pillar measuring 6 cubits in each side5'. Those stairs supposedly led up to the roof of the houses lined along both sides of the gate complex, but the detail can not be ascertained since the key word has not been preserved. Before turning to the description of the houses which occupy the perimeter of the blocks, the guide takes the visitor to the inner part of the block and shows him the alignment of the houses, from one gate to the next. There are 15 houses between two successive gates, distributed in such a way that 8 are situated between the first gate and the street corner and the other 7 between the street corner and the next gate, thus making for each block a total of 60 houses with a length of 3 reeds, that is 21 cubits, by 2 reeds wide or 14 cubits. The houses possess two floors of identical dimensions: the ground floor, which the text identifies as houses ( K 7 n 3 and 7 ' n 3 S 2 ) , and the upper ( K V i n ) . The total structure is 2 stories which are termed ccchambers>> reeds or 14 cubits high. In other words, the measurements of the

49 For this translation of the word K l i D K , see the discussion of GREEhWELD (a. cit., 133). Mit.1~interprets the word as -scuil-, door-sill, but the sentences -he measured the width of every K l i D K : 2 reeds or 14 cubits., -and he measured inside

the K 9 0 K : its length was 13 cubits and its width was 10 cubits* of 3Q15 1 i 16-17 and -and before this gate there was an il'?>i'1 D K - of 3Q15 1 i 19 exdude his translation. Although the measurements do not exactly tally with any one of the excavated Nabatcan staircases, there can be no doubt that we are dealing with the same structure studied by A. Neccv, *The staircase-tower in Nabatean architecture-, RE 80 (j?), 364-383. In JIQTe~tlpleX M - X X X I a very similar staircase is specified for the access to the upper storey of the Temple, with the same structure and wry similar measure1 0 ,op. tit., 163-168, who gives a detailed ments, see Y. YADIN, wl~'O;l-fl> ' drawing of the staircase of JIQTe~ttple(p. 165) as well as the staircase of the NJ (p. 168). IJQTetttple LXII, 7-9 describes also a very similar structure, a free-standing square staircase tower to give access to the various storeys, but their measures are not specifid and their placement, to the right of the gates according to YADIN, is as awkward as the staircase of NJ, located to the left of the gates. SZ This is the way the word is written in 5Q15 1 ii 6.




buildings making the perimeter of the block may be considered not but as rather modest, only as <<realistic>> The author goes on to describe the inside of one of those houses, although the gaps and the obscurity of the text make its description rather incomprehensibles3. He starts with the following by no means their door (that of the houses) is in the astonishing statement: <<And middle*. Nevertheless, the measures of such a door (2 reeds or 14 cubits) seem excessive for a house of only 3 reeds, which leads the editor MILIKto consider that the author makes the mistake of repeating here the dimensions of the porches of access to the blocks. Be that as it may, the author proceeds to describe the inside of the house. The first element described is 4 cubits wide. In MILIK'Sopinion, this would refer to the dimensions of all rooms of the houses, both on the ground and on the upper floor, and with this element the author would put an end to the description of a typical house. This would be rather surprising for an author who accumulates details when he describes the other elements of the block. In fact, I think that he starts by simply expounding one of the elements that make up the compound, the first he comes across when going into the house; this could easily be the staircase leading to the upper floors4. In any case, I do not think that the measures following refer to structures different from the houses located inside the blocksS; in my opinion they are part of the description of the upper floor which stands out as a large hall, simply termed in the text ccthe place* (KIT), of 19 x 12 cubits, with windows and 22 beds, alongside which runs the

53 MILIKassumes that both storeys consisted of eight rooms, placed, four by four, at both sides of a central corridor measuring 5 cubits, although he honestly adds: rTous ces dCtails sont malheureusement laissds sous-entendus par I'auteurr, (DID 111, 187). It seems wise to confess our ignorance, as does LICHT: utoo obscure for my w m rehensionn (art. cif., 46). The measurements of this structure are a reed and a half high and a reed deep, which allow us to imagine the stair as a four-cubits ramp (precisely the measurements of the winding staircase of the entrance to the block), similar to the ram s located near the towers. L i i MI, who thinks they are triclinia, bcause of the presence of the 22 7 'W 1 Y . The problem with this interpretation is that the expression he reconstructs, K 3 3 D n73, is not attested, that we are dealing not with several structures, but with only one (K J l ) , and that T'W 1 Y (or 1' D l Y , which is the normal form in targumic Aramaic) is only employed for the bed, the cradle (cfr. KRAUSS, op. cit., MI. I, 65 and 394) or the funerary bed (DISO, 222), but not for the triclinium wuch.




outer canals6. After detailing the measures of the windows57, which have been lost, he concludes by describing the <thighplatform,) (XI> 11) which has the same size as the hall (19 x 12 cubits) but the text appears, here, rather patchy so that nothing definite may be concluded, and the possibility cannot be ruled out that this ccplatformn was, after all, the flat roof of the houses. Nothing in the text preserved indicates that we have moved to another place58. The logical conclusion would be to suppose that the whole text 5Q15 1 ii 6-15 contains the description of typical house, the model of all houses aligned along the four sides of the block. We can only speculate on the possible existence of other buildings within the blocks because no description of them has been found so fag9. The text available

The only assumption of my hypothesis is that the walls of the houses are a cubit thick. The outer and inner measurements must necessarily be different, once the thickness of the walls is taken into account. The author gives as outer measurements of the houses 21 x 14 cubits, and, once inside, he gives the measurements of "the place,, 19 x 12. That the author is aware of the necessary difference between the outer and inner measurements is proved by the fact that when he gives the measurements of the windows, he indicates their depth as the thickness of the wall. 57 7 0 'UX 1' 12, literally uobstructed windows*. It is the same expression as employed by Ezekiel when describing the temple windows, n lnUX n 1 3 > f l (Ezekiel 40,16 and 41,16), translated by Tg Pdon as 7fl'nU 7 ' 13, and by the LXX 0upfbec rcpvxser\. The expression comes, of course, from the description of the Solomonic temple (1 Kgs 6,4), although nobody knows exactly what sort of windows are referred to (see KRAUSS, op.cif. 42-43 and 346-351 for the different sorts of windows, and G. MOLIN, uHalonoth 'atumoth bei Ezekieb, BZ 15 (1971), 250-2.53, for the windows of Ezekiel). Jerome understood them as a sort of lattice windows, Our text has not ufenestrae quoque erant factae in modum retis instar cancellorumr~. preserved the measurements, but seems to record two measures, for the inside and the outside, which give us ground for imagining them as a sort of loophole. In IlQTer?rpIe XXXIII, 1 1 appears a similar sort of windows, the windows of the house for altar utensils, but they seem to be blind windows: 0 '0 1UX 1 1 1 3 '3Cl C] '3 1>a, cfr. YADIN,op. cit., vol. I, 174175. As against the preceding expressions: uhe showed men ahe brought me intor, etc., which punctuate the change of the object and the movements of the protagonists. 59 The only possible allusion: rand all the houses that are in the insiden (SQIS 2,2), is not conclusive because of the lack of context and the different possible interpretations. Nevertheless, this small fragment is quite interesting because of its mention of the vestibule (of the houses ?) and, especially, of the columns. The measurements given, 12 cubits, can correspond to the height of the columns of to the distance between the columns: 1 1 0 Y 1 1 0 Y 7[0 (lin. 5). This reference, together with the ones in lQ31 1,l.Z; 5,2, and the indication of JONGELING that columns are equally present in the unpublished fragments of IIQNJ, lead us to think that these columns or pillars are important architectural elements in the city, and their function is not restricted to the staircases.




would rather suggest that the block is conceived as a large courtyard in the middle, surrounded by the aligned houses, looking like an oriental caravanserai. Owing to their patchy character, nothing, except isolated measures, can be elucidated from the rest of the fragments of 1Q32, 2Q24 and 5Q15, which continue the description of the city. But according to STARCKY, 4QNJ returns, after a gap, to the description of the outer wall of the city. Its height reaches 7 reeds, the same as the wall at the outer court of the temple, according to 1lQTernple XL, 9-10. The wall is built of precious stones, among which sapphires and rubies stand out, just like the wall of the Apocalypse, following the ancient Old Testament tradition of the Hymns to Zion (Isa 54,ll-12; Tob 13,17), and is protected by ccone thousand four hundred and thirty two towers,, that is, ccthree towers for each small stretch,, of wall formed by the distance separating the 480 posterns from each other6'. As with the large entrance gates, two towers flank each postern, and the third one soars up in the middle of the stretch between the adjoining towers. This significant detail about the number of the towers validates our conclusion concerning the number of posterns, the rectangular shape of the city and its inner structure. STARCKY himself provided another exceptional piece of information drawn from fragments still unpublished: ccLe bas de la colonne suivante mentionne la grande guerre finale oii interviennent les KittCens et Babel, mais aussi les voisins: Edom, Moab et les fils d'~mmonn~l. If the only manuscript preserved had been 5Ql5, we might think that the author's interest was confined to the city and that it offered the precedent of the celestial city of the Apocalypse in which there is no temple. But that is not the case. The fragments of 2Q24 and 1lQN.I are evidence that the city description was followed by that of the temple within, and that even the seer witnesses and describes the cult performed in that temple. As a matter of fact, more elements of the description of the cult than of the temple itself have been safely kept until our days. Gleaning from the different fragments, we may

60 The author has been precise enough in his calculation not to indude the towers of the four corners, nor the 28 towers that flanked the 12 main gates of the town previously mentioned. 61 J. STARCKY, ddrusalem et les manuscrits de la mer Mortem, art. cil., 39.




mention the following ones as making a direct reference to the temple: nmn and 7 3 ' 2 which, according to JONGELING, repeatedly appear in the fragments of 11QNJ together with T71]7and 1' O K . - 2Q24 3: ccand measured up to the sapphire gate>> ...ccwhich is beforen ... ccthe walb ( ' l n 13). Since the other gates mentioned are made of stone, one may reckon that this sapphire gate does not belong, like the others, to the city but to the temple. - 2Q24 7 : (<andits width, ...ccand the whole altar*. The mention of the altar is certain, and the preceding line assures us that, in this case, we are dealing with measurements, and not with the description of a ritual. - The longest fragment dealing with the description of the temple is 2Q24 8, which gives a series of measurements and mentions a wall ( K T lu), partitions ( 7 5 n 13) of white stone and the courtyard of the temple ( x n i i v , compare Megillat TaCanit 19). Then the angel shows the seer something else whose name has been lost, but which is situated outside the courtyard and measures 110 or 120 (cubits ?). The harvest is not abundant but sufficient as evidence that in the original work there was also a description of the temple, although we are unable to define either the shape, the dimensions or the exact situation of the temple within the city. The texts that have fortuitously come down to us have disclosed more details of the ritual description witnessed by the seer, although to an extent insufficient to enable us to obtain a clear idea about its development. The most important text is fragment 4 of 2Q24, completed by the published fragment of 11QNJ that partially coincides with it. This text contains several elements of a priestly ritual whose development is witnessed by the seer. The priests, once purified, bring the loaves into the temple and arrange them in two rows on the table as a memorial on the seventh day. The seer witnesses how they are taken out of the temple, on the right of its western side, and are distributed. Mention is made of 84 priests, of ccthe seven divisions of the tables,,, of ccthe aged among them*, and of 14 priests, although we do not know exactly what these different characters are doing in the ceremony. The text then deals with ((the two loaves on which lies the incensen, and the seer notes how one of them is handed to the High Priest and the other to his deputy, ahis second,. The last element of the ritual preserved is the distribution of a piece of the sacrificial ram to wevery one,.


20 1

All these elements of the ritual have a parallel in the traditional cult of the temple, but not so the number of priests. Unfortunately, the state of the text does not permit us either to draw a conclusion or to interrelate the different elements and characted2. The only point that may be asserted is that the ritual described could very well incorporate the ritual of the shewbread. It may be concluded from this presentation of the NJ contents that what the work contained was not a description of the Heavenly Jerusalem or of the Celestial ~ e m ~ in l e the~ sense ~ of an ideal Jerusalem beyond the concept of time, ccUrbild und Abbilda, but of the city, the temple and the cult such as they will exist at the time of the final struggle against the Kittim, Babel, Edom, Moab and Ammon, i.e. a Jerusalem, a temple and a cult that we may term eschatologicalM. Owing to the state in which the work has been preserved, we cannot ascertain whether this Jerusalem and this temple, as revealed in a vision to the author of the work, were presented as descending from heaven or as a reconstruction of the earthly city and the temple, or if that reconstruction was presented as a human or a divine work. The author of NJ has, undoubtedly, idealised the regular plan of the hellenistic cities that proliferated in the Seleucid empire and were inspired by the geometrical principles of Pythagoras, although their
It k possible to imagine, with the editor (DID 111, 87). that the High Priest and

hi -second* are counted among these 14 priests, that all of them together form the
-elders among them*, that all of them are included in the 84 priests, that t h u e 84 priests farm the 7 groups designated as -the seven divisions of the tables*, etc. But the only basis for all these speculations consists of xanty and problematic parallels. For WISE'S understanding of this ten, see arpro. a Against R. MEYER, ~ D e gegenwiirtige r Stand der Erforschung der in Palihtina neu gefundenen hebrakchen Handschriften. Die sogenannten 'kleinen Hiihlen'=, TLZ 90 (1965), 331-342, who, after remembering that Nineveh in Assyrian thought represents edas irdixhe Abbild der entsprechenden himmlischen Metropole*, concludes: 4%scheint mir daher passender, 5015 und die zugehiirigen Fragmente unter dem weniger prajudizierenden Titel 'Beschreibung des h i m m l i h e n Jerusalem' tusammenzufasscn-. About the ideal Jerusalem, see K.L. SCIiMIUT, -Jerusalem als Urbild und Abbild-, Emnos Jahrbtbrtch 13 (1950), 207-248. In spite of the ambiguities of the term, cfr. J. ORUIGNAC, *La notion d'exhatologie dans la Bible et P Oumrdn*, R Q 7 (1969-71). 17-31. CARMIGNAC mistakenly places the construction of the New Jerusalem in the period which will follow the final war of liberation: ~ C ' e s td'ailleurs P ce moment-la, que sera bfitie la Jtrusalem nouvelle, dont parlent plusieurs documents partiellement 6dit&, *La future intervention d c Dieu sclon la pcnsCe de Qumran*, in: M. D E ~ O R (ed.), Qumran. So piktk, Sb thlologe et son n~ilieu(BETL 46) (Paris-Gemblou 1978), 227.



two broad perpendicular avenues are reminiscent of the "cardo" and the "decumanus" of the Roman cities6'. But the dimensions of the city, obviously utopian, and the parallels with the idea of the new temple created directly by God, lead us to consider that the complex will have been presented as a divine work. 3. NJ AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE In my opinion, these ideas, as summarised above, give us a rather accurate picture of the contents of the work that have been preserved, and make possible an objective analysis of the problem posed by its origin. Is it a product of the Qumranic community and a result of its own ideology ? Or is it one of the apocalyptic works collected and kept safely in the bosom of the community, but coming from circles that had a previous existence or were foreign to the community ? This is not an important question for the publishers of the texts who, influenced as they are by the abundance of copies and by their distribution among the different caves, consider the Qumranic origin remarks to that effect are quite revealing66. as evident. BAILLET'S The argument of the multiplicity of the copies is quite a significant point and is a proof of the popularity of the work in Qumran, but could hardly be reckoned as decisive in view not only of the numberless biblical texts (which nobody, in spite of their numbers, would even dream of ascribing to the Qumran community), but of works such as The Books of Enoch or The Book of Jubilees which are more abundantly represented in Qumran than NJ. A more solid argument could be drawn from the paleographic dating of the manuscripts. In contrast to The Books of Enoch, whose pre-Qumranic origin has been demonstrated by the antiquity of one of J have been made at a late period. From its copies, all the copies of N a paleographic standpoint the copies known may be ascribed to two groups: lQ32, 4QNJ and 5Q15 (which have been copied in an early Herodian hand) belong to the first, and 2024 and IIQNJ (which have been copied in a later hand prevailing at a somewhat later period, in the first half of the 1st century A.D.) to the second; both of them can

A forthcoming paper of M. BROSHIproves that the architectural model behind the descriptions of NJ cannot be older than the Hellenistic period. 66 in the preliminary publication, -Fragments aramCens de OumrHn 2: description art. cii., 245. de la J6rusalem Nouvelle~,



be considered as relatively late within the corpus of Qumran mss. The absence of older copies would favour the Qumranic origin of the work, although this should not be considered either as a decisive argument. Nor are the conclusions to be drawn from a linguistic analysis determinant. Both the spelling and the grammar of NJ are similar to IQapGn and other Aramaic texts of Qumran. The use of afel rather than hafel, and of the demonstrative pronoun 17 instead of 231, would be suggestive of a date of composition later than Daniel's, but not necessarily by many years, as it may be verified that the author still maintains the difference of states and that the spelling varies between the plene and the defective forms. The only conclusions that may be drawn from the linguistic analysis of the characteristic elements is that the NSs language does not show noteworthy differences in comparison with the other texts of Qumran; further, that all of them, as proved by KUTSCHER~', represent cca language in transition from 'Reichsaramaisch' to Middle Aramaicn, and that athe language of the scroll is later than B.A., but earlier than M.A.,,, a conclusion that does not prejudge the Qumranic or extra-Qumranic origin of the work. Therefore, if these objective criteria do not provide us with sufficient elements to determine the origin of NJ, we must resort to comparing the NJ's contents to what are known to us as characteristic features of Qumranic and extra-Qumranic thought to ascertain into which line of thought the data of NJ may fit more easily. Despite the queries that this methodology would necessarily raise, I consider it the only sound system in looking for a solution to the problem. In Qumran, the subject of the cit of Jerusalem, is a secondary one, and only appears incidentally$ while, on the contrary, the themes of the temple and the cult are essential and fortunately present at least two elements which are peculiar and exclusive to the


'' E.Y. KUBCtiER, *The Language of the Genesis Apocryphon. A Preliminary Scripca HicroroIynifana 5-23.
4 (1965)).

'~xccpt, perhaps, in 4QMMT, where Jerusalem is identified with the holy camp of the wilderness: \L11172 illni? i l K ' i l C Y ? ' J 117 -11, and set apart from all thc other cities of Israel: ?til\L" Pllnilr?WK' K ' ? 07?\L'1" '3. See J. STUUGNELL and E. QIMRON, *An Unpublished Halakhie Letter from Oumran*, in: Biblical Archaeology Today (Jerusalem 1985), 400-407.Most of the preserved text of 4QMMT can be found in the notes of Y. SUSSMANN, "The History of the Halakah and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Preliminary Observations on Miqsat Ma'x ha-Torah (WMMT)", Tarbiz 59 ( 1 9 8 9 W ) 11-76 , (Hebrew).



thought of the sect, and in which the Qumran group stands out against all other contemporary groups. The first conception of the temple, which is characteristic of and exclusive to the Qumranic thought, is reflected in 11~~entple69. Unlike MAIER~', who sees in the description of the temple and of the cult of IlQTemple a utopian and ideal portrayal of the second who favours the view that temple, and in opposition to WACHOLDER, these descriptions refer to the construction of a new temple - the

69 The Qumranic origins of IIQTemple have been a hot issue in the field over the last ten years. YADIN,in his edition, considers the sectarian origin as self-evident and uses this assumption as one of the more important elements for the interpretation of the text. Only later, after the attacks of BA. LWINE (-The Temple SaoU: Aspcds of its Historical Provenance and Literary Character*, BASOR 232 (1978), 5-23) and L.H. SCHIFFMAN(-The Temple Scroll in Literary and Philological Perspective*, in: W.S. GREEN (ed.), Approaches to Anciettf Judaism I1 (BJS 9 ) (Chico 1980), 143-158) did he deem it necessary to defend systematically this assumption in an article published in K7;1 iU:i7'lii i l ' 1 1 1 3 Oh'il*, in: ntiriy Years of Hebrew (-?r>nn'z 1 . Y . Anhaedqp in Em12 Israel (Jerusalem 1981), 152-171) and in English (-1s the Temple Scroll a Sectarian Docummt?n, in: Huntanizing America's Iconic Baak (Chiw 1982), 153-169), using specially the parallels fflth CD and other Qumran writings. Most of the commentators have accepted the position of YADIN,and some of them, such as B.Z. WAaiou)ER, have gone even further, making of IlQTemple a cornerstone of the Qumran community. The last attack on this growing consensus has been launched by H. S-WSFWANN in a provocative essay -The Origins of the Temple Scroll* in: Congress Volrime Jemsalenr 1986 (SVT 40) (Leiden 1988) and in a later artide: -The Literary composition of the Temple Saoll and its Status at Qumran*, in: G J . BROOKE (ed.), Tentple Scroll Sftidies (JSPS 7) (Shefield 19891, 123-148. STEGFNANN advocates an impossibly early dating for the original cornpasition and tries to sever all connection with the Qumran community. For a renew of the discussions see the already quoted summaries of A.S. VAN DER WOUDE, ~FiinlzehnJahre Qumranforschung*, arl. cil., 231-249, and F. GARCIAMARTINEZ, &studios QumrAnicos-, a . cif., 390-396. I still remain convinced that IIQTe~npleis a work originating during the formative years of the community, that it contains legal positions characteristic of the later Qumran community, and that it has played an important role in the process leading to the formation of the sect. See my articles -El Rollo del Templo y la Halak6 sectaria., in: Simposio B(b1ico Espaffd (Madrid I%), 611-622, and *Qumran Origins and Early History: A Groningen Hypothesis-, Folio Orientalia 25 (I%), 113U6.An important element in my conviction is the correspondence of several halakhot of llQTemple with others appearing in 4QMMT, an element that has led S ~ I M N to recognise now that .concerning the eating of shelamint sacrifices, rejection of the t m l yam, impurity of skins of animals, and the apportionment of the fourth year produce and animal tithes to the priests, these texts I4QMMT and IlQTemple) are in virtually complete agreement*, efr. L.H. SCHIRMAN, ~MiqsatMa'se Ha-Torah and the Temple Saoll*, RQ 14/55 (1990), 456. t m t Tofe~t Meer (UTB 829) (Miinchen 1978), 67-68. J. M I E R , Die Tet~tpelrolle



eternal temple that will be erected by ~ o d -~ I' understand the temple and the cult described there, as YADIN doesT2, as a normative temple and cult, a blueprint of the temple and the cult such as they must be according to the true revelation of God to Moses, such as it is conceived within the sect. The manuscripts of Qumran speak about Jerusalem and the temple contemporary with the life of the sect as about something defiled in which the faithful may have no part whatsoever. In my opinion this is due to the fact that the existing temple and cult are considered as inadequate in the light of the normative temple revealed in IlQTemple. The temple and the cult described there are the proof of the inadequacy of the existing situation. On the other hand, this normative temple, that has been revealed, is not the definitive temple, the final and eschatological one, but a temple that shall only last <<untilthe day of the creationn, when I shall create My temple and establish it for ever,) (IlQTemple XXIX, 9-10) - although this does not prevent the prescriptions concerning this temple and cult from being a divine Torah, as normative and compulsory for the members of the sect as the rest of the mosaic the day of the creationn. Torah, at least <<until This conception of the temple and the cult, peculiar to the community of Qumran, has two important consequences. First, that its rupture with the temple and the existing cult in Jerusalem, although expressed in a similar way in the writings of the sect (v.g. lQpHab and CD) and in other texts of the apocryphal and pseudepigraphic ~iterature~ becomes ~, in Qumran more radical and will result in guiding the sectaries to the desert. For the members of the Qumran community, participation in the cult of the existing temple is out of the question, not only because the priesthood is unworthy, the calen-

" Although in order to be able to maintain this interpretation he is forced to give to 7Y in IlQTemple XXIX9 the meaning of adurinp instead of *until., cfr. The Dawn o f Qwt~mn, op. cir., 22-24. Cfr. the chapter on the status of the Temple Scroll (vol. 1, 289-300) and the chapter on the relationship of the temple of IlQTemple and the temple of the last vol. 1, 140-144). Reading il 13 instead of the 23 13 o f the edrio p"nceps. with E Qruaoa W1170il n ? ' l n >W ilW 123, Leshmenu 42 (1978), 142 and A.S. VAN DER WOUDE, uDe Tempelrol van Qumran (I))., N77 34 (1980),2 8 4 ,n . 9 . 74 1 Enoch 89.73-74; 91,12-17; 93,9-14; Test. Levi 10,14-16;Asc. Isaiah, 3; Psalnrc of Solomon, passim, to mention only some of the examples. For the position against the existing Temple and cult, see R.G. HAMERTON-WUY, -The Temple and the Origins of Jewish Apocalyptio, W 2 0 (1970), 1-15.



dar false and the cult defiled, but, more radically, because the existing temple and cult do not correspond to the norm revealed in IlQTemple, and this makes any compromise impossible. The second consequence is even more important: the separation of the cult and the temple does not constitute for the Qumran community a denial of the principle of the temple and the cult, but a transient and temporary situation, whose end is ardently expected. Just because in the current circumstances of the community, it becomes impossible to adapt oneself to the divine standards ruling the temple and the cult, as revealed in IlQTemple, the community feels compelled to create a temporary substitute for this temple and this cult, while waiting to be capable of properly fulfilling these divine requirements in the future. This takes us into the second conception of the temple, which is characteristic of Qumranic thought: the spiritualization of the cult and the temple which leads members to consider the community as the only place where expiation and adoration are now possible, that is, the transfer of the notion of temple to the community, and the conception of community as if it were the temple. This idea, with no actual parallel in Judaism before the NT, is particularly conspicuous in lQS V,4-7, VIIIP-10 and IX,3-6, although it is also found in other texts, such as CD and 4Q511 fragment 35, and has been widely studied, making any further considerations u n n e ~ e s s a r y ~ The ~ . only aspect that should be stressed is that this conception of the templecommunity is nothing but a consequence of the inadequacy of the existing temple in comparison with the normative one, which will only last up to the time when the normative temple may become the real one, that is, as long as the historical circumstances do not allow the community to raise the temple and introduce the cult of IlQTemple in Jerusalem.

" J.M. BAUMGARTEN, *Sacrifice and Worship among the Jewish Sectarians of the Dead Sea (Qumran) Saolls~, HTR 46 (1953), 141-159 and *The Essenes and the Temple. A Reappraisal*, in his Shrdies ut Qunrmn Low (SILA 24) (Brill, Lciden 1977). 57-74, B. GARRVER, The Temple and the Community in Qumran and in the New Testament. A Compamtiw Study in the Temple Symbolism of the Q u m Tutc and the New Tesfoment (Cambridge 1965); RJ. MCKELVEY, 77te New Temple. 7%e Churrh in the New Testament (Oxford 1%9). The most complete study 01 the theme is G. KUKWNG'SDie Umdeuning des Kultus in der Qwrtmngenreinde und im NT (SUNT 7 ) (G6ttingen 1971), with the necessary corrections of E. SCWOSSLER-ROREKU\, *Cultic Language in Qumran and in the NTw, CBQ 38 (1976), 159-171.



J in no way reflects this Qumranic conception of It is evident that N the community as a temple; even more, it is only compatible with it if its temporary and vicarious character is brought more into focus. It is J are different also quite obvious that the temple and the cult of N l e ~ ~ ,it from the normative temple and cult of l l ~ ~ e m ~although cannot be asserted that the two conceptions are mutually incompatible because, as a last resort, the biblical prescriptions about the temple were no hindrance to the prophetic description of a new city and a new temple by Ezekiel, and because the same ZlQTemple announces another temple which shall be erected by God Himself in the future. These considerations nevertheless do not definitely exclude the possibility that NJ may have been written within the community of Qumran, because, in the sectarian writings, we find other conceptions of the temple which are different from the two quoted as typical of the community. One of these conceptions is the reference to the final temple (and by extension to Jerusalem), that will be erected directly by God at the end of times, and will replace the temple then existing. This conception is linked with the idea of the existence of a celestial model of the temple and the city ccwhich is engraved in the palms of God,,, reported by Isaiah 4 9 , 1 6 ~ an , idea already present in the Old Testament (Exod 25,8-9; 1 Chr 28,19) and lying behind Ezek 40-48, Zech 2,s-9 and Tob 13,16-18. This idea is further developed in the apocryphal literature, both as a development of the biblical concept (I Enoclt 9,28-29; Jub 1,17.26-29; 25.21) and as a reaction to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (2 Bar 4,l-6; 6,7-9; 32,2-4; 4 Ezra 7,26; 10,25-28.40-~8)~'.This idea will strike roots and thrive within rabbinic Judaism although, perhaps because of the Christian interpretation of the idea of a celestial Jerusalem descending from heaven,
7 6 The correspondence of some architectonic elements is inevitable in two verbal blueprints dealing with similar topics and are compensated for by other, equally significant differences. The most telling similarity, the number and the names of the gates, depends, as we have seen, on a previous source and on the profound influence of Ezekiel 48.31-34 both in NJ and in 11QTernple. The expression quoted in 2 Bar 4,2, when contrasting the prcsent Jerusalem and the present temple with the Jerusalem and the temple of the final age. For the *La mythe de la nouvelle JCrusalem du development of this idea, see A. CAUS~F! DeutCro-Esaie ; 1 la IllCme Sibyllem, RHPhR 18 (1938), 377-414. Cfr. M. STON+ *Reaction to Destruction of the Second Temple,, JSJ 12

(1981), 195-204.



this concrete image will be excluded from the subsequent literaturew. This idea, which is different from the conception of the heavenly realm as a temple,s0 is unequivocally rendered in two texts of Qumran: the first text is the one already mentioned of IIQTemple XXIX, 9, according to which, God Himself will create his definitive temple; the second is 4~~lon'legium~'. Although this text has sometimes been interpreted as an expression of the Qumranic conception
A. A ~ W T Z E R ,d i 3 > l'nY> il>yn O Y > W ~ w17n;l ~ T ~ n 7 3 . , 2 (1931-32), 137-153; 257-272. 'O The vitality of the conception of God's abode as a heavenly temple within the Qumran community is evident in works such as the Shim OIat ha-Shabbat ( 4 Q W 406, IlQShirShab and Mas.ShirShab). There we find many references to the heavens as a temple or temples expressed within the typical vocabulary of the cult. There are 9 , 73]DD,W l l ' D , 7'31, mixed with references to the plenty of allusions to the 73 ' architectural elements of this heavenly temple: gates, pillars, walls, vestibule, ete. Not only are the seven heavens described as seven temples, but also the titles of the angels are expressed as priestly titles (31 1 ; ' 'Jil 13,0'33 132 WK?, etc.) and their service in each one of the seven sanctuaries is structured according to the priady senice in the temple. Although some of the elements of this "Angelic Liturgy. are paralleled only in later mystic literature, the conception of God's abode as temple is not characteristic of the Qumran literature, but can already be found in the literature of the same epoch, such as Tesl. Levi 3,6, which develops the biblical theme of the praise of the angels under the influence of Isaiah 6. The locus classicus within the rabbinic literatuDie himmlische Welt im Umhrisrentum und re is b. Hag'go 12b, see H. BIEIENHARD, Spiirjudent~rn~ (WUZNT 2) (Tiibingen 1951). 123-142. But this idea of the heavenly temple does not seem to have any influence on the temple of NJ and does not explain the origins of the composition. Originally published by J.M. AiUXiRO, *Further Messianic References in Qumran Literature*, JBL 75 (195tr), 174-178, and *Fragments of a Qumran Scroll of Eschatological Midrashim*, JBL 77 (1958), 350-354, included in DJD V, 53-57, PI. XIX-XX as number 4Q174. It has elicited numerous studies; the most characteristic are: W.R. LANE,*A New Commentary Structure in 4Q Florilegium*, JBL 78 (1959), 343-346, Y. YADIN, uA Midrash on 2 Sam vii and Ps. i-ii ( 4 0 Florilegium)*, IEJ 9 (1959), 95-98; D. FLUSSER, *Two Notes on the Midrash on 2 Sam vii-, IEJ 9 (1959), 96-109 [reprint in his Judaist?~ and the Origitrr of Christianity (Jerusalem 1988). 88-98]; B. GARTNER,The Temple and The Community in Qumran cmd in the New Testament, ~ , Exclusion of Netinim and Proselytes in 4Q op. cit., 30-42; J.M. B A U M G A R*The Florilegium*, RQ 8 (1972-75), 87-% [reprint in h i s Studies in Qummn Lmu (Lciden l g , 75-87]; A. MCNICOL, *The Eschatological Temple in the Qumran Pesher 4QFlorilegium 1:l-7., Ohio Journal of Religious Studies 5 ( l g , 133-141; D.R. SCHWAR-~, *The Three Temples of 4 0 Florilegiums, RQ 10 (1979-81), 83-91; G J . BROOKE,Exegesis at Qummn. 4Q Florilegium in its Jewish Conrexi (JSOT Supplement Series 29), (Sheffield 1985); D. DIMANT,-4QRorilegium and the Idea of the Community as Temples, in: A. CAOUOT er. al. (eds.), Hellenica et Judaica. Hommage d Valentin Nikiprowetzky (Paris I%), 165-189, M.O. WISE, ~QOFlorilegiurnand the Temple of Adam-, Mhnorial Jean Stazky (Paris 1991), 103-132.






of the community as a temple8*, the commonest opinion sees in it a clash between the present defiled temple, (line 5-6: .as they previously83 defiled the temple of Israel with their sins,,) and the final temple (line 2-5: aThis is the house that will be raised at the end of times, as it is written in the book of the Torah: 'The sanctuary, Adonay, that your hands founded. Yahweh will reign for ever and ever' (Exod 15,17). This is the house whose threshold the uncircumcised shall never trespass on nor the Ammonite, the Moabite, the bastard, the foreigner or the proselyte, because their saints are there for ever and ever,,)84. In the more questionable expression, c l x 'Yl-3 of line 6, SCHWARTZ is inclined to see a reference to the Solomonic temple. which would imply that three temples - the Solomonic temple, the present temple, now defiled, and the final temple, to be built by God Himself at the end of times - are represented in 40174. In the light of what we have pointed out about the Qumranic conceptions expressed in IIQTemple, the first of these temples should rather be the normative one so that, in our view, the only aspect that makes this conception different from that of 1lQTentple is that this does not allude at all - due to its particular perspective - to the existing temple which is considered as defiled. Be that as it may, it is quite obvious that the idea of the definitive and final temple, built directly by God, as taken up by the apocalyptic literature, was already known and used in Qumran. Is this the temple that was revealed to the author of NJ ? I believe that the interpretation of NJ offered permits us confidently to give a positive answer. But before expounding the reasons that lead us to identify the temple of NJ with the temple that God shall erect aat the end of times,,, it would be necessary to present the Qumranic text which, in my view, reflects an identical conception and constitutes the bond between the NJ and the temple of 40174 and IlQTetnple. We are referring to IQM 11.1-6, an extremely important text and the only one
82 SO, for example, by GARTNERand B A U H C ~ A R but ~~N see , the criticism of this idea by MCKUVEY, KLINZJNG and, specially, SCI1WAR1Z and Wlse. ill 1W >ti 13. It is a clear allusion to 2 Sam 7,10. All thc commentaries recognise that 4Q174 has preserved part of a "commentary* to the prophecy of Nathan, 2 Sam 7,s-16,and the beginning of another -commentary* to Psalms 1-2. Our translation follows some of the reconstructions of YADIN,but in general -Notes en marge du volume V dcs 'Discovefollows the readings of J. STUUGNELL, ries in the Judaean Desert of Jordan'., RQ 7 (1969-71),220-221.



which describes the temple and the cult in which the sectaries will That ~ . this is the same participate during the War of ~ i b e r a t i o n ~ temple and the same cult as described in NJ is proved by the allusion in NJ to the final War with the participation of the ccKittim, Edom, Moab and the sons of Ammons, a perfect parallel to the expressions used in lQM 1,l-2. And to my mind there is no doubt that the temple alluded to in lQM I1,l-6 is the same eschatological temple that should be erected by God, as mentioned in IlQTempIe and 4QFIonIegium. The usual interpretation of lQM II,1-6, simply suggests that, at the beginning of the War, the sectaries will gain control over Jerusalem and the temple, which will enable them to perform the cult in accord with their particular conception of it. In the light of IlQTemple, it would be theoretically possible to view the temple and the cult of IQM II,l-6 (and, thus, of NJ) as a purely human achievement, an implementation by the sectaries of the normative temple and cult propounded in lIQTemple, which would differentiate this temple from the definitive one, an exclusively divine work. That this theoretical possibility is not something purely speculative is demonstrated by 2 Bar 32,2-4:
For after a short time, the building of Zion will be. shaken in order that it will be rebuilt. That building will not remain; but it will again be uprooted after some time and will remain desolate for a time. And after that it is necessas that it will be renewed in glory and that it will be perfected into etermty.

According to BOGAERT,the first destruction and the subsequent ruin refer to the destruction of 70 A.D., which the author, as in the rest of
85 See Y. YADIN,Tire Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light against & h e Sons of Darkrress (Oxford 1%2), 198-208. Both YADINand KLINZING, op. cit., 34-35 see in this text a description of the situation during the war, when the sectarians will participate in the cult of the Jerusalem temple according to t h e t own norms and consequently discard R O S S opinion (TLZ 80 (1955), 205-208), which uses this text as an ar ment to prove the non-sectarian character of IQM. #Translation by A . F J KLUN ' 2 (Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch-, in J.H. CHARLESWORTH (ed.), Tile Old Testart~ent Pseudepipplta Vol. I, 631. This idea comes forth more clearly in the French translation by P. BOGAERT:uCar, aprbs un court moment, I'Cdifice de Sion sera ebranlC pour &tre ensuite reconstruit. Ce (nouvel) Edifice n'en sera pas moins provisoire. Lui aussi, aprbs un temps, il sera rasC jusqu'au sol, et il demeurera en ruine jusqu'au temps (prkw). Ensuite, il faudra qu'on le restaure dans la gloire, et il sera acheve pour toujoursa. Cf. Apocalypse de Bamch. Infroduction. Traduction er Conrnrentaire (Sources Chrttiennes 144) (Paris 1969). Tome I, p. 484



the work, does not distinguish from that of 586 B.C. The first reconstruction, a provisional one, would be that of the Messianic age. From the Qumranic perspective, this reconstruction would possibly be the same as the one referred to in NJ and IQM, because it is mentioned against the background of the final War. The second destruction would indicate the end of the Messianic age and correspond to the death of Jesus and of all human beings in 4 Ezra. The second reconstruction or full renewal would be related to the building of the celestial Jerusalem of the future world87, which, within the Qumranic context, would correspond to the final temple erected by God, as mentioned in 11QTemple and 4QFlonlegium. But this theoretical possibility of interpreting the texts is discounted by the accurate contribution made by 4QFlonIegium in the sense that this temple that God Himself will build, which meither Moabites nor Ammonites), will enter, shall exist *c7a7a n ? - n K h (40174 i,2)s8. Although the phrase does raise problems89 and is not found in lQM, the identity of the period so named in 4QFlorilegiwn with the period of war of lQM has been testified to in numberless textsg0 and is unanimously admitted. This, in my opinion, is a sufficient proof of the identity of the temple and the cult alluded to in lQM 11.1-6 (and consequently in NJ) with the final temple quoted in 4QFlon1egregrum. At the same time this characterisation of the temple revealed to the author of NJ as the final temple which God himself should build at the end of times (a conclusion that was gradually taking shape through the analysis of the superhuman measures and the description of the building materials of the city) allows us to conclude that NJ, though it does not reflect the most peculiar and exclusive conceptions of the temple of Qumranic thought, is perfectly compatible with the sectarian writings where it has some good parallels. It could, there-

P. BOGAERT,op. cir., 424 and Tome 11, 67-68. According to JIQTentpk *in the day of the creation-, but the phrase involves too many problems (of reading and of interpretation) to help us precisely to T i the meaning of *the end of times*. 89 See the contrasting interpretations of J . CARMIGNAC, -La notion d'Cschatalagie dans la Bible et Oumrtn., RQ 7 (1969-71), 17-31, -darts la suite des joursn, and F. DU T. LAUBSCI~ER, 'Aharil Itajjariiil in die QtoitrB~t-Geskriijrc (Diss. Univ. Stellenboxi~, 1972) *die laaste dae*. The following texts expressly connect the War of Liberation with the End of times: 4Q174 ii.18; 4Q161 6-8,17; 4Q162 ii.1; IQpHab k,6 and 11QMelch ii,4.




fore, have been perfectly possible for NJ to have been composed by the Qumran community. The presence of NJ in the library of Qumran and the abundance of the copies discovered are a guarantee, at least, that the community understood the ideas reflected in the text and deemed them to be compatible with its own ideology. This would be tantamount to saying that, should the work not come directly from the sect, it must have had its origins either in the Essenic movement from which the Qumranic community derives, or in the apocalyptic tradition in which that movement has its roots. These three categories (Qumranic, Essenic and apocalyptic) indeed allow us to classify the whole of the nonbiblical works found at Qumran. The Old Testament roots of the conception reflected by NJ and the parallels found in the apocalyptic literature would allow us to classify the work as an apocalypse written within the apocalyptic tradition before the foundation of the Qumran community, as a preQumranic apocalypse91, if the date of composition of the original could certainly be placed before the second half of the 2nd century B.C. But they would equally allow us to classify this apocalypse as an original creation of the Qumran community in spite of STEGEMANN'S opinion denying the apocalyptic character of the Qumran community92 if the composition of the original is later than the founding of the community. After all, we cannot forget that the manuscripts of Qumran have also bequeathed to us Apocalypses of their own crea t i ~ n As ~ ~ we . have already stated, although the multiplicity of the copies, the absence of older copies and the late paleographical dating of all the copies preserved would favour a Qumranic origin of the work, the only criterion that can help us in establishing the date of

91 B.Z. WACHOLDER, op. cit., % and 255, n. 394 refers to a private communicaasserting the pre-Qumranic origins of the NJ. STRUGNELL tion of J. STRUGNELL states, although not categorically, this position in the letter quoted arpra, n. 2, but without giving any reasons. 92 Forcefully stated in his contribution to the Uppsala Congress on Apocalypticism. See H. STEGEMANN, uDie Bedeutung der Qumranfunde fiir die Erforschung der Apokalyptikn, in D. HELLHOLM (ed.), Apocalypicisr71 irt tlte Medite~+mteanWorld and in tlte Near Eust (Tubingen 1983), 495-530. But see my criticism of this position in F. GARCIA MARTINEZ,uLes Traditions Apocalyptiques 21 Qumrln,>, in: C. KAPPLER (ed.), Apocalypses ef tFo)'agesdarls I'au-deld (Paris 1987), MI-235, and *La Apocaliptica y Qumran,, in: V. COLLADO - V. VlLLAR (eds.), II Siritposio Biblico Espariol (Valenci$C6rdoba 1987), 603-613. 93 Such as 4QArttrant and 4QpsDan Ar.



composition of the original is to ascertain what line of thought the data of NJ may more easily fit. As our analysis has demonstrated, the contents of NJ perfectly fit within the thought of the Qumran community. The relatively late date of composition of the extra-Qumranic Apocalypses which introduce the idea of the eschatological Jerusalem and temple as a substitute for the existing temple, and the minor importance of this matter within the <(listof revealed things* in the equally ~, plead for a Qumranic origin of this apocalyptic ~ i t e r a t u r e ~ specific apocalypse which is NJ. The different line of development that the idea of the heavenly temple will take within the apocalyptic tradition, as evidenced by the already quoted text of 2 Baruclt and by the description of the New Jerusalem of the N T Apocalypse, a work where there is no temple and which is but a symbolic expression of a life close to God, is another indication that points to a Qumranic origin of the NJ. But the element that, in my opinion, forces us to consider NJ as a product of the Qumran community is the parallel with such a characteristic Qumranic text as IQM II,l-6, a text which permits us to identify the temple of NJ as the eschatological temple which God shall erect at the end of times and which provides the bridge linking NJ with IlQTernple and 4Q174 - which proves that the data of NJ perfectly fit into the line of thought characteristic of the Qumran community, and enables us to conclude that the NJ is an apocalypse written within the Qumran community.

See M. STONE,*Lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature&, in: F.M. CROSSet al. (eds.), Magnolia Dei. Essays on file Bible and Archaeology in (Garden City 1976), 414-452. The only two examples STONE menroy of G.E. Wng111 quotes are 2 Bar 59,4 and LAB 19,lO. He concludes: *It seems to be significant that this tradition is not included in the revealed materials in 5-11, nor anywhere else in the list. Indeed, this interest in the 'measures of Zion' seenis curiously unstressed in the Apocryphal and Rabbinic Literature., 415.



Aguirre, R. xi Alexander, P J . 153 ALfaric 99 Allegro, J.M. 14, 208 Altheim, F. 130 Amusin, J.D. 121, 123 Aptowitzer, A. 208 Avigad, N. 40, 124 Baarda, T. 73 Baethgen, F. 150 BaiUet, M. 101, 102, 143, 180, 193, 202 Bampfylde, G. 13 Barker, M. 68 Barr, J. 45 Baumgarten, J.M. 206, 208, 209 Becker, C.H. 152 Beckwith, R.T. 56 Beer, G. 49 Ben David, A. 191-193 Ben-Hayim, 2. 12 Bensler, G.E. 144 Berger, K. 153, 155 Bernhardt, W. 185 Beyer, K. 47, 71, 97, 100, 102,
109, 112, 114, 115, 180, 185, 189, 190, 193

2 , 6-10, 135, 201,211 Cashdan, E. 189 Causse, A. 207 Cavallin, H.C. 146

Carmignac, J.

U, 121,

Chabot, J.B. l50 Charles, R.H. 25-27, 31, 32, 36, 46, 48, 49, 61, 65, 70, 72, 77, 79,81,85, 89, 171 Charlesworth, J.H. xiv, 51, 65,

Chiesa, B. x, 78 Cohen Kaplan, A. 157 Collado, V. ix, xiii, 86, 212 Collins, J J . xiv, 58, 61, 64, 65, 69 Cooke, GA. 143 Corriente, F. 48, 61, 65, 70, 85 Cowley, A. 6, 15, 120 Cross, F.M. 1 , 2, 58, 118, 119, UO, 213 Cumont, F. 172 Dalman, G. 121 Darmester, J. 157 Davies, P.R. M,63 Day, J. 142 Deisser, A. 1% Delcor, M. 2, 9, 13, 68, 118, 133,
134, 175, 201

Bietenhard, H. 208 Black, M. 13, 45, 48, 52-54, 61,

63-65, 75-77, 79-84, 88, 94, 147, 162 Bogaert, P. 127, 210, 211 Bonfill, R. 157 Bonner, C. 27 Bonwetsch, N. 153 Bousset, W. 171 Boyce, M. 99 Brecht, M. 75 Brooke, GJ. u)4, 208

Denis, A. M. 24, 45, 153 Dexinger, F. 80, 81,85 Diez Macho, A. 47, 48, 65 Diez Merino, L. 60 Dillmann, A. 26,27,77 Dimant, D. 61, 67, 75, 78, 148,

Broshi, M. 202 Brown, R.E. 10, 162 Burgmann, H. 174 Caquot, A. 2, 11-14, 18, 19, 33,

Doeve, J.W. 81,89 Dohrme, E. 117 Dougherty, R.P. 130, 131 Dupont-Sommer, A. 1 , 2, 7, 9,
13, 14, 97, 116, 117, 121, 123-126

4 B 175, 2

Eissfeldt, 0. 142 Emerton, A. 117 Epstein, I. 189

INDEXES Emst, J. 171 Ewald, H. 27 Fabricius, J A . 25, 98 Femhdez Marcos, N. xv FtSvrier, J. 142 Fiechter 192 Fitzmyer, J A . xiii, 1 , 2, 5-9, 13, 15, 16, 18, 22, 40, 45, 47,
97, 162, 163, 165, 166-170, 174, 178, 180, 190 Flusser, D. xiii, 144, 162, 163, 165, 170-172, 177, u ) 8 Fohrer, G. 118, 134 Freedman, D.N. 116, 189 Fujita, S. 185, 186

Henning, W.B. 33, 99, 100, 106109, 113

Hilhorst. A. xv Isaac, E. 65, 88,93 Issaverdens, J. 151 Istrin, V. 152-156 James, M.R. 27, 99 Jelliinek, A. 38, 157 Jeremias, G. 50, 98 Jonge, M. de 25 Joogeling, B. 180, 198, uW3 Kalemkiar, P.G. 151 Kappler, C. x, 71, 212 Kirchschlager, W. 126 Kister, M. 41 Klijn, A.F.J. 73 Klimkeit, H J . 97, 106 Klinzing G. 206,209, 210 Klostermann, E. 153, 154, 156 Knibb, MA. 13, 45, 82, 92 Koch, K. 86, 87 Kraus, F.R. 6, 7 Krauss, S. 156, 192, lM, 197, 198 Kuhn, H.W. 50,98 Kutscher, E.Y. 203 Kvanvig, H.S. 68, 72 Lagarde, P. de 15 Landsber, B. 117 Lane, W.R. 208 Langdon, S. 117, 121 Laubscher, F. du T. 211 Lawov, PA. 152 Le Coq, A. von 106 Le DtSaut, R. 127 Legrand, E. 156 Lemke, W.E. 58 Lentz, W. 99 Levi, I. 156 Levine, BA. 204 Levy, R. 134, 157 Lewis, J.P. 23, 24 Lewy, J. 117, 122, 130 Licht, J. 2, 182, 185-187, 194,
195, 197

Gadd, C J . 117, 130, 131 Garcia Martinez, F. ix, x, xi, xiii, xiv, 2, 17, 25, 45, 46, 51, 78, 86, 97, 143, 148, 173, B , 204, 174, 176, 181, 1

Garcia L6pez xi Garelli, P. 121, 134 Giirtner, B. 206, 208, 209 Gevaryahu, H.M.I. 116, 122, 123 Giblin, C.H. 171 Ginzberg, L. 23, 33, 156, 157 Glessmer, U. 47 Gordis, R. 14 Gordon, C.H. 132 Gottheil, RJ.H. 150 Gray, L. 127 Green, W.S. 204 Greenfield, J.C. 13, 18, 25, 45,
52, 54, 185, 188-190, 193, 194, 1% Grelot, P. 1 , 2, 6-11, 13, 18, 23, 45, 55, 59, 118, 122, 124127, 135, 141 Gruenwald, 1. 72

Hamerton-Kelly, R.G. 205 Hammerschmidt, E. 93 Hanson, P.D. 66,71 Harrington, D J. 47,97, 180, 190 Harris, D J . 195 Hartman, L. 61, 67 Hellholm, D. ix, 212

Liver, J. 116

INDEXES Macler, J. 150-152, 155 Maier, J. 204 Martin, F. 27, 29, 48, 49, 61, 64, 65, 72, 79, 81, 85, 89 Martinez Borobio, E. 47 McKelvey, R J . 206,U)9 McNicol, A. 208 Mears, C.L. 13 Meinardus, 0. 152 Mertens, A. 137, 173 Merx, A. 157 Meyer, R. 118, 122, 124, 126, 131, 132, 134, 135, 173, 201 Migne 26, 151 Milik, J.T. xiii, 9, 10, 13, 17, 18, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30, 32-34, 38, 4 2 43, 45, 46, 47-55, 57-64, 69, 71, 74, 75, 77-79, 82, 84, 86, 88-91, 93, 94, 95-10, 102-105, 109, 114-116, 122, 124-127, 132, 137, 141, 144148, 162, 164, 165, 167-169, 173, 177, 180, 185-197 Millar, F. 162 Miller, P.D. 58 Molenberg, C. 67 Molin, G. 198 Moran, W.L. 117 Mosshammer, A.A. 25, 38, 60, 98, 109 Mufioz Le6n, D. xiii Murray, R. 60 Negev, A. 1% Netzer, A. 157 Neugebauer, 0. 48,49,52,55 Newsom, C. 64, 174 Nickelsburg, G.W.E. 45, 61, 66, 68, 79, 80, 83, 84, 89, 92, 146 Noth, M. 132 Odeberg, H. 18 Oppenheim, L. 131 Osburn, C.D. 59 Osswald, E. 127 Pagan, H. 117 Pape, W. 144 Pauly-Wiwa 192 Pearson, BA. 172 Phionenko, M. 113 Piero, A. x, 48, 61,65, 70, 85 Ploeg, J.P.M. 143 Puech, E. xi, 2, 17, 25, 143, 147, 148, 191, 193 Qimron, E. 56,203,205 Rabim, C. 51 Reeves, J.C. 97 Reinink, G J . 154 Rice, D.S. 117 Richardson, H. 14 Rigaux, B. 171 Robert, J. 144 Robert, L. 144 Rolling, W. 117 Rosso-Ubigli, L. 47, 72, 146 Rost, L. 210 Roux, J.H. le 67 Rowland, C. 72 Rubinkiewitcz, R. 68 Rudolph, K. ix Sacchi, P. 47, 61, 65, 67, 68, 72, 85, 87, 88 Schiffman, L.H. dv, 204 Schmidt, K.L. 201 Schmoldt, H. 153, 154, 156, 159 Schiirer, E. 162 Schussler-Fiorenza, E. 2C6 Schwartz, D.R. 208, 209 Scott, Y. 191 Segert, S. 116 Seux, MJ. 121 Sharf, A. 156 Smith, S. 14, 117, 131, 147 Sokoloff, M. 45 Sparks, H.F.D. 51 Speigel, S. 132 Speranskij, M. 153 Starcky, J. 1, 7, 9, 11, 14, 16, 18, 75, 102, 104, 105, 115, 147, 148, 180, 190, 192, 193, 199 Stegemann, H. ix, x, xiv, 50, 98, 204,212 Stichel, R. 45


Stiehl, R. 130 Stone, M. 13, 25, 45, 52, 54, 58, 71. n. 207.213 ~trechovic,.~.~. 152 Stmgnell, J. 8, 56, 148, 180, 184, 203,209,212 Sukenik, E.L. 116 Sundermam, E. 99, 106 Sussmann, Y. 203 Suter, D.W. 13,65 Thackeray, H.S.J. 1 Thorn, J.C. 68 Thorndike, J.P. 86, 89 Tigchelaar, E.J.C. xiv, 45, 46, 97 Tischendorf, C. 153 Tiserant, E. M Trinquet, J. i91 Uhlig, S. 48, 61, 64, 79, 80, 85, 93,97 Ullendorff, E. 45 Umik, W.C. van 73 Vaillant, A. 19 VanderKam, J.C. 36, 45, 49, 50, 54-59, 61, 72, 81, 82, 84,

Wachofder, B.Z. 52, 181, 182, 185, 204, 212 Wacker, T.M. 72 Wertbeimer, S A . 156 Widengren, G. 172 Widisch, H. 172 Wintermute, O.S. 51 Wise, M.O. 182-185, 193, 208, 209 Woide, C.G. 152 Woude, A.S. van der xv, 45, 50, 97, 118, 119, 123-125, 174, 176, 181, 204,205 Yadin, Y. 40, 180, 181, 183, 184, 196, 198, 204, 205, 208-210 Youtie, C.H. 27 Zotenberg, H. 157 Zurro, E. xiii, 86

Gen 2,7 14 5,15 73 5,29 41 5,32 32 6 65 41-4 15, 43, 63, 66 6,3 38 6,14 45 7,l 22 7,22 14 8,4 140 9,U)-21 41 9,29 21 11,s 141 15,13 141 25,15 122

6,26 174

2,ll-23 142 1 Sam 4,18 164 2 Sam 7 208 7,lO 209 7,516 209 21,6 12


2,4 167 6 208 19,2 166 21,14 122 26 146 3 0 , s142 42 12 4 3 3 12 44,4 142 45,4 12 49,16 207 52,7 176 5411-12 199 61 176 61,2-3 176

16 71 18,20 142 20,2-5 142 25 176 26.33-35 143

Num 24,15-17 174

Deut 5,28-29 174 1531 142 15 176 18,18-19 174 18.19 142 28,27 121 28,38 134 29,35 121 32,17 143 33,&11 174

7,31-33 142 14J3.15 167 17,8 142


Ezek 14 132, 134 14,1420 132 14,14-20 133 16,20-21 142 2031 142 28,3 132, 133 28,13 195 403 191 40,16 198 40-48 182, 193, 207 41,16 198 45,2-4 187 453 187 48,9-12 187 48,13 187 48,31-34 207
Amos 2,9 115

Obad 21 178
Mic 4,3 167 Zech 2,s-9 207

1,21 134 2,6-7 133 2,7 121, 134

1,8-16 133 2,15 119 2,25 126 227 126 &27-30 133, 149 221-45 143 535.45 127 3,22 127 3,26.32 121 332 126 4 xii, 129, 132 4,l 122 4,4 126 4,6.15-24 133, 149 4,10.14.20 17 4,13 1 2 3 4,29 12.3 4,39 122 5,423 127, 130 $7.11 126 5,8 119 5,ll-29 149 5,13 119 5,18.21 121 5,21 123 6,11 127 6,17-25 133 7 72 7,l-27 144 7,9-10 104, 115 7,lO 8 7,27 167 7-11 133 7-12 149 8,2.3.6 142 9,2 143 9,24-27 74, 86 10-12 132 11 133 152 146 14,3142 133

Luke 132-35 166

Rom 8,33 12

3,12 12 1 Macc

s n

9,- 167 10,4560 145 2 Macc 6,7 56 ii,6-12

1,l 12 1 John 518-22 171 4,l-4 171 2 John 7 171

Tob 13,16-18 207 U,17 199 Wisdom 144 22 New Testament Matt 24,7 166

Jude 12-13 59
Rev 11-13 171

CD xiv, 8, 15, 81, 115, 205, 206 1,6 143 I,7-9 89 II,12 176 II,17-III,M 148 II,19 115 1V,3 12 VI,1 176 X,6 8 XIII,2 8

lQapGn xii, 6, 21, 23, 28, 40, 42, 203 1 41 I-v 43 I-XVII 40,41 11 35, 41, 42 II,1 17 II,3.8.12 41 II,23 10 11-V 41 III,U 43 VI 41,43 VI1,7 41 VII-IX 41, 43 X 39,41 X,lO-11 41 X,13 39 X,15 39 X - x v 44 XI1 39.41 XII,lO-11 41 XII.10-13 140 XII,13 41 XII,13-19 41 XII,17 41, 166 XIII-XV 42 XVI 39 XVI-XVII 39,42, 44 XVII 39 XVII,8 40, 165 XVII,lO 40 XIX,ll-12.15-19 39 X q 2 4 165 xy2.20 166 XX,12 166 XX,16 166 m28-29 125

1QH xv, 81 I,29 1 1 II,13 12 III,7-18 175 III,9-10.12.18 175 III,12 175 III,12-18 177 III,18 175 JS',29-34 146 XIII,13 16 XVII.25 16 1 ~ 1 s a90 ~ IQM xv, 15, 178, 210, 211 I,1-2 210 I,2-4 165, 170, 178 IIJ-6 209-211, 213 III,9 10 VII,5-9 176 N,7-9 176 XII,l 12 XII,5 12 XII,16 178 XIII,~-6in XII,lO 178 XIX,8 178 XVI,11 10 XVII,5-8 179 XVII,5-9 176

IQS xv, 8, 15, 81, 90 II,7 1?7 III,23 10 111-IV 125 v,4-7 206 VI,m 11 VIII,4-10 89, 206


2Q24 180, 183, 199, U)2 3 200 4 200 4,7-16 184 4,18 193 7 200 8 183,200 8,8-9 183 9-10 184 i 193 iii 193 iv 193 v-viii 193


4Q Aramaic Levi 25 4QBerakoth 177

4QEnastrc SO l i i 48 l i i 8 100 l i i 1 4 54

4QEng 47, 79, 82,90, 92-95 l i i 93 1 ii U-16 82 1 ii 16 167 1 iv 17 &t 1 i v 1 8 30 1 v 85 ii.14-15 82

4QEnb 46,61,69 l i i 61 1 ~ 2 6 70 iv 10-11 38



180, 187, 190, 191, 194, 199, 202 i 186, 193 iii4-5 186 ii,5 188 ii,5-7 192 ii,l5-16 187 ii-iii 193 iv-v 193

4QMess Ar xi, xii, 1-3, 8, 18, 19, 24 1,lO-13 42 1,12-17 2 i 4,24, 42,44 i1 5 ill 2 i 2 2, 6, 15, 16 i3 7 i4 2 8 i 5 8, 11, 15 i6 9 i 7 10 i 8 10 i 8-11 2 i 9 11, 16 i 10 12, 16 i 10.11.U 1 1 i 11 13, 15, 16 ii 2, 4, 7, 23, 44 i i l 15 ii 2 16, 18 ii7 16 ii 8 16


4Q Pseudo Moses 148 4Q Second Ezekiel 148


1lQTemple xiv, 180-185, 194, 1%, 204-207, 209-211, 213 XXIXQ 208 XXIX,9-10 205 XXX-XXXI 1% XXXIII,11 198 XXXV,8-9 183 XXXVII,4 183 XXXVIIQ 183 XXXVII1,6 183 XXXVIl1,S 183 XXXVIIIQ 184 XL,9-10 199 XLV,2 184 XLV-XLVIII 182 LII,18 190 LII,19-31 182 LX11,7-9 1%

Ascension of Isaiah 171 3 20.5 4,2-16 171 2 Bar 213 4,16 207 4 2 207


Book of Giants x i j 33, 38, 43, 47, 97-100, 102, 104, 105,108-110,113-115

Book of Noah xi, xi., 1, 21, 24, 28-33, 35-44, 68, 80, 95,

Didache 171 16,4 171

1 Enoch (Books of Enoch) xii, xiv, 10, 17, 19, 26, 35 36, 38, 40, 41, 45, 46, 48,63, 97,98, 100, 113, 147, 202 1 Enoch (Book of Watchers) xii, 3, 9, 20, 27, 29-31, 34, 35, 46, 47, 52, 59-64, 67-70, 72-74, 76-79, 88, 90, 102,104-106,108-115 1,l 22 1,5 17 1,6 31 1,8 30 1-5 46, 61, 70 1-9 46 1-12 46 1-14 46 4,17 20 4J8-19 20 4,21-22 20 5 61 6 46,61,71 6,l-2 31 6,3-8 27, 29 6,7 34, 70, 71 6-7 34,67 6-10 46,M 6-11 61,65-69 6-11,l 27 6-16 61,64,65,68 6-19 9,45,61,62, M,68 7,l 21,36, 106 8 67,70


1 Enoch (Book of Parables) 12, 19, 21-23,27, 30,32, 34,35,45,46,109 37-71 12, 46 38,2 34 38,2.3.4 23 383 34 39,l 31 39,l-2 27, 31 39,2 31 39,12.13 17 39,6.7 23 402 17, 32 403 23 40,8 32 41,3-8 32, 34 43 32,34 43,2 32 43,3 32


1 Enoch (Astronomical Book) xii, 9, 20, 46-49, 51-55, 57-60, 62, 69, 76, 78, 113

72-75 50, 51 72-76 48 72-78 48, 49 72-79 48 72-82 9, 47,61 76,14 20, 54 76,5-7 59 76-79 50,51, 55 77 48 77,7-78,l 48 77-79,l 48 78 49 78,lO 5 4 78,8 48 79 48,57 79,l 54 79,2-80,1 48 80 48,51, 59 80,2-8 59 80.2-82,3 49 80-81 48, 50,57-59 81 48, 51,58 81,l-2 8 81,2 21

1 Enoch (Book of Dreams) xii, 9, 20, 23, 36, 46, 47, 52, 58, 59, 70, 72, 75.76, 78,79,90, 93, 102, 112, 114 83,1.10 75 83,1.9 20 83,l-3 76 83,2 75 83,7. 21 83-84 73 83-90 72 84,4 73 84,6 81 85,l-2 75 85,2 20 85,3 75 85-90 73, 173 86 47 86.4 36,74 87,3 77 87,4 36, 74 88 47 88,2 36, 74 89 46,47 89,1.9 23, 73 89,3 74 89,6 36, 74 89,19 74 89,34 74 89,3638 73 89,38 74 89,48 72 89,49 72 89,52 77 89,59-W,25 148, 149 89,59ss 74 89,65-72 75 89,70-71 75 89,72-77 75 89,73-74 205 89,n 75 89,9-99,lO 83 90,l-5 75 90,616 77 90,6-17 75


1 Enoch (Epistle of Enoch) xii, 28, 4 7 ,5 5 70,79-84,87, 89-95, 102,1 1 4


2 Enoch 113 235 19 3 Enoch 18 4 Ezra xi, 147,211 6,49-52 32 7,26 207 10,s-28.40-58 207 U,31 166 Jub xii, 3, 24, 26, 32, 36-41, 50, 52-54, 58, 59, 71, 76, 77, 92, 115, 140, 149, 202 1J7.26-29 207 4,l 73 4,7 73 4,15 17, 29, 36 4,1522 74 4,17-18 50, 54 4,17-22 19 4,17-23 9 4,17-24 69 4,18 21 4,19 59, 76 4,20 73 4,21-22 59, 68, 76 4,24 69 4,27 73 4,28 41, 43 5 140 5,l 74 5,6-11 38, 39, 42, 43 5,s 38 5,2428 38, 39, 43 5,28 140 6,2-4 39, 44 6,lO-14 39, 44 7,l 39 7,1.17 140 7,1417 140

LAB 19,10 213 2,2 n

NJ xiii, xiv, 180-186, 188, 190,

191, 193, 1%, 201-203, 207-213

INDEXES Oracle of Hystaspes 171, 172 Prayer of Manasseh 127 Psalms of Joshuah 174 Psalms of Solomon 205 Pseudo-Daniel Apocalypse 154 Arabic Pseudo-Daniel 150 Armenian Pseudo-Daniel 1% Coptic Pseudo-Daniel 151 Daniel-Diegese 155 Greek Pseudo-Daniel 153 Hebrew Pseudo-Daniel 156 Last Vision 153 Persian Pseudo-Daniel 157 Slavonic Pseudo-Daniel 152 Syriac Pseudo-Daniel 158, 161 The monk Daniel 154 Vision of Daniel 155 Visions of Daniel 154


Sib. Or. 144 635-636 166

Test. Levi 26, 44 3,6 208 10,1416 205 113 25 XVII.2 25 Test. Naphtali 3,s 17 Test. Ruben 5.6-7 17 Test. of Job 133




5 6

7 8 9 10 II 12 17

14 l5

Ib .Zlanual 01 Ihwiphnr I ranrla~rtl 'in11 .hnotated, with Introdurtlon 1957 ISBN 90 04 02195 7 PIDEG, J V.L! DER I r m u h u dr la fim Tradu~tet annotc, a\cc une tntroductlon 1959 ISBN'JO 04 021% 5 .CflLYSOOR, M 7hr 1 7 r a n k c p q Iftmnr I ranrlatrci and .\nnotatcd with an Iutroductron 1961 ISBN 90 04 02197 3 KOFFhlAHN. E L)u I w ~ 1 u r k u n d mo w der II'uiir 7uda Rci ht untl P r a t r d r r 1ud1when Papvn de\ 1 und 2 Jalirhunderts n Chr wrnt Cv1wrtrafl~nK tler rextc rind 1)rutrxher t ' l x ~ . r ~ e t ~ u 1968 r i ~ ISBN '90 04 03148 0 KYrSCHER, E Y 7k Ianquqe and lmguutz Bac&ound b/ fhc I ~ a d i. h N (I Qlrd I rnnsl firom the hnt I9591 t-lrbrcw cd \I tth nn obltunn tn W B R o s s 1974 ISBN 90 04 040 I9 6 KI'I SCHER, E: Y Ihe I a q t ~ and v L q u i ~ h rNackound of rhc Itatah Snoll (1 QA8) Iridlcrs and C~orrcrr~ortc b\i 1, Q r ~ n o *Introductron h\ S X~ORAG 197'1 ISBN 90 0-1 05974 1 ur the Iktcrl of 7u&, 1958 1969 JON(;E,I,IN<;, B .1 ( lar.fwd &b/tnprffphj of fhr 1'971 ISBN 90 04 02200 7 hlF,RRILI, E H @mran Nld &e&slinahon A rlrcolo@cnl Stuch 01 the I hankrgn~trg Hvmrlc 1975 ISBN 90 0.1 042652 <;AR<:IA MARTINEL. F (lumran and .4pocalyphr Studes on thr Aramaic I'extr, lrom Qumran Second c-dttion 1994 ISBN W) 04 09586 1 I)lblA\vI, 1 ) & U RAPPAPORT (cds I 17re I)uad )l.o kroNs F o m Yearz o f rrlearch 19'32 ISBN 90 04 09679 5 ~REBO1.I.E BARRERA. 1 & I, \'E<;AS X1Oh"l .LVER iedc 77,t .\/&id (lumran (,onpss Procecdrnqs of the Irrtcn~at~onal (:onqrcx$ on thc Dead Sea Scrolls, Xfadnd 18-21 hlarch 1991 2 bolt 199'3 ISBN 'K) 04 0977 1 6 set NITZAN, B &nrran Ruver ond & & u NKh. 1994 ISBR' 9U 0-1 09658 2 STELDEI,, A Ur ,tfufrarch rur L c h a h l o p aur drr Q u m r q m n d e (4Qtfidrffrchata htatcneflc Rekonstrnkt~on, I'exttxstand, <;attunq und tradluonsgt-sch~htltchc E,tno d n u n q de.j durch 44174 ,,Flonlequm" und 4Q177 i,,Carena A") reprmnt~rnerr Werke~ nu$ den Qummnfunden 1904 ISBN 'Kt 0-1 09763 5 S\Z'AYSON. D D 77u Iemplr ,kmN and rhr Btblr I'he h l c t h t x t o l t ~ of XIQI ISBN 90 04 09849 b BROOKE, <; J led 4m e n t r a n 7esb and Studus Proc ecdlnp of tire kimt Mecttng o f tibe Intcntatlonal Or~;lnl/attonlor Qumran Stud~rs,Pan3 I ' M \I.rtli F (;arcla Maninrz I994 ISBN 90 04 10093 8
\\ CRYBER<; hlOI.I.ER. P

BOYCE, J hf 7k foch) of fhr Iktmarnri Lkxumml C;ARC:IrZ hfAR'IINEZ, F .4n fnhodurhon t a tht Idtrafurr /ram Qgmun (;.\K(:fr\ Xt%RTiNI;L, F .4 Ciu.w/i~d BtbIaopRp~ o j the bids ur h- h r s n l of 7u&, 1970 1991