Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
QUMRAN
AND APOCALYPTIC
STUDIES O N THE
ARAMAIC TEXTS FROM QUMRAN
LEIDEN
EJ. BRILL
NEW YORK
1992
KOLN
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.
ISSN 0 169-9962
ISBN 90 04 09586 1
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
...
Vlll
CONTENTS
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
'
'
FOREWORD
'
1985d. 4q8-426.
FOREWORD
xi
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.
1. a4QMes Ar and the Book of Noalzm [originally published a5 a4Q
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.
xii
FOREWORD
FOREWORD
...
Xlll
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
xiv
FOREWORD
'
FOREWORD
xv
xvi
FOREWORD
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
CHAPTER ONE
'
Translation 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 11 7. 3.
J. STARCKY,*Un texte messianique aram&n de la Grotte 4 de Qumrin*, in
(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 <<roundsemiformalw, 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
approximately date the copy of 4QMesr Ar in the first half of the first
century A . D ~
A.
Tea
Coi. i
]?[']I'oIw
ianiw
vaccu [
[...]a'>..~i> 77 10 1 1 1'1w
'1 ]?Y [lY O]Ylo K > '1 W 1[3K3
JW'.?.
il l a > an lo"lY3
VUC~
[
] ~ ' 1 nn7n
9 ~ Y?I[']
] n 3 i 3 i ~>Y a7 anltn'? l l i n ?w[ 1.W v l 3 1 o ? y 7 l ' l x [ 3 ]
K J > n 7[11]il? a13Y 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
'a 11
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
I 14
1 15
I 16
1 17
7.1
.I
";i .I
Col. ii
a i n3 7
I [ p
I..?
Knrli 17U W'K3 Kn..[
]an a[
K l p 1 3 ... 1
181
1-l 1
1 2
I...[ 1 3
I 4
1 5
110 6
'ainyu] n i i i
p[
]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
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...
[...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.
The editor reads: ; l n J [ l F .black*. F ~ Z M Y E Rpresents ilcJ
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.
tom and shrunken state and its first words have practically vanished.
The editor reads
;?n[,7li?\U(a
'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,TCIICLUI 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.
@MESS
AR AND
,.)
I J ,.
A . 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.
; 1 7 > . . ~ 7 ' .Unfortunately,
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.
l2
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: <<hewill 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
' ~ i i i iof 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 <<Bookof 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
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
out an 1 and reads K>3]lW <<discretion,,.The text permits any reconstruction, 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),
(CARMIGNAC) ?
- Does In3 l 3 3 K
l3
''
10
Line 8
'71. 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
11
''
-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.
12
4QMESS AR AND
11~~
11 3is not attested elsewhere in Qumran Aramaic or in the older
levels of the language18.
Line 10
ti iil ti il>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 ill 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
people), (lQM XII,l), athe chosen of the heavens>>(IQM XII,S), athe
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,
just as with the expression *chosen of God>>of Rom 8,33; Col 3,12;
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 : <<Hiselect)>,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.
In the Parables of Enoclt (1 Enoclz 37-71) the title <<TheElect,, is
frequently used, alternating with ccSon of Man>>and ccAnointedn,
referring to the Messiah. But this title is not identical to our express-
'*
CAOUOTtranslates 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%.
4QMESS AR AND
13
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 meaning, and considers i1l >113as the subject of the phrase: gparce que sa
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*.
G R E L ~ Tand 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
''
14
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 10 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 5 113 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.
'*
15
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 <<thebreath 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'fil;? 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
reads K l l w 3 fll? 1, and the spirit of the flesh,
of col. i 10. STARCKY
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 11, 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
interprets 119 l o 7 in col. i 9 as a derivation from Il o and recognises
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.
17
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 ~ 2In. the literature of the period in question, the Watchers
are identified as beings of a somewhat angelical nature, see Dan
4.10.14.20 (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.
Line 18
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
18
God'.
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
"
19
Ar, 155.
~Ecristoutcs 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 secrefs dlHknoch
(Paris 1976*), 97.
20
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 fm (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 his 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 is 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
bore witness against all of them (4, 21-22) (Bodc of Wotchers).
S,
21
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).
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.
22
37 So ~
R -The,
23
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
accepts the interpretation of the root '13 as meaning rebellion
(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 38.2.3.4; 39,6.7; 48.1;
58 12. 61.12.13.15; 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.
24
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.
2. THEBOOK OF NOAH
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).
OF NOAH
25
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
Appendix 111 of his The Greek Version of the Tesiamenfs of ;he Twelw Pafnmhs, 245256,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.
26
27
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
'*
''
''
1937$.
Published by M.R. JAMES, Apocrypha Anccdoca. Tutr end Studies, Vol. 11/3
(Cambridge 1893), 136-150,and reedited by CHARLES,h e Book of Enoch, W 2 6 8 .
28
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..
61
* Le L.ivre
d%ltnoch, W I X - W 0 0 ( .
30
The readings and restorations of MlLlK here present other additional problems:
in the second line only il-is certain, and the space bctwecn the 4 and the 17- is too
large 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.
31
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. CHARLEScorrectly
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 of Enoch, 106-107, where ~ ( A R L E Sgives 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 is underneath the earth k feminine*, I Enoch 54,s.
32
BOOK OF NOAH
33
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
34
35
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
36
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.
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 of the
Madrid Congress on h e DSS (forthcoming).
37
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*
me everything which his fathers commanded him. And I am commanding you,
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
38
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
Watchers, ';but the correspondent text is not found in I Enoch,
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
39
40
*MESS
AR AND
41
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-.
42
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
wp.
" Published in DID I, 84-87. 152, PI. XVI-XVII,and DJD 111, 116-119, PI. XXIV.
"
MIurt, 77te Book of 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.
86 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.
43
44
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
his sons. See Jub 6,2-4; 6.10-14; 73-37; IQapGn X-XV. Test. &,!I
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 of 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).
R TWO
' J.T. MIUK, *The Dead Sea Scrolls Fragments of the Book of Enoch*, Biblica
(lm,
'
46
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
works) that constitute <<TheBooks of E n o c h ~or 1Enoch, surveying at
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
* ~ ~ ~ ~ d
seven manuscripts are known by the sigla 4 ~ ~ n ~and~ correspond 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
'
47
Epistle
Besides MILIK'Sedilion, the Aramaic fragmcnts haw been edited and translated
by JA. FKZUYeR - DJ. HARRINGTON,A Mmuol of Palestinian Ammaic Tcrls
( 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 (1981),69-129.
48
(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,~Libro1 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.
"
ARAMAIC
49
''
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 of 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.
50
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
51
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. This 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
52
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 of 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 discussed and discarded by GREFNRELD and S"TONE, art. cil., 92-95.
2.1 M. BLACK,7hc Book of Enoch or I Enoch, 10-11.
53
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,
10-11.
54
ARAUAlC
55
"
"
56
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.
, data available do not allow us to
According to V A N D E R K A M ~ ~the
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
Judaism. See E. QIMRON- J. S~UGNEU, 4 n Unpublished Halakhic Letter from
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).
"
ARAMAIC
57
58
109.
4' J.T. Mtt.1~.nie Bwks of Etroclt,
Growlh of on Apocalypic Tradition, 107.
59
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-
z1.43
303.
C.D. OsBrw, -1 E n d
296-
60
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,
is 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
u s ~ ~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:
61
"
17.
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).
62
s3 J.T.
63
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.
In MILIK'Sopinion, the oldest element, the <<Visionsof Enochw,
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
the supposed date of the composition of the <<Visionsof Enochs (in
MILIK'Sopinion, 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
"''J.T.
MILIK,7lte Bookc of Enach, 50-32.
T o my knawledge, only M. BLACK(nre Book of Enoch or I Enoch, 14 and
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.
64
'
65
-1 (Ethiopic Apcxalyp
Imaginulion. 38, says: T h e second section, chaps. 6-16, is an elaboration of the story
of the 'sons of God' in Genesis 6. The main story is in chaps. 6-11; chaps. 12-16 are
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,f i x .
66
67
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-
66
D. D t . w ~ r The
, Fallor Attgels, 23-72.
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, SACCHIadmits 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.
68
EW
Escha~ologie
~ ~ ~ ~ vort Henoch 9-11 urtd dm Neue Tcsramenr
R. R U R I ~ ~ K IDie
(Osterrcichische Biblische Studien 6) (Klosterneuburg 1W).
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
the Form, Meaning and Function of the Book of the Watchers*, Neofeslamenfica 17
(l?), 40-49.
M. BARKER, *Some Reflections upon the Enoch Myth*, JSOT 15 (1980), 7-29;
The Older Teslante~tl:77te Sunival of 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 ~ orf Apocalyptic.
7he Mesopolominn Backpund of the Enoch Figure and the Son of Man (Ncukirchcn
"
1988).
69
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
This 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.
70
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
introduction to the Book of Watcl~ersat a time when this composition
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 ~ ~ 1nii *
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.
71
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
'
72
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
~ n o c h ' ~Its
. author relates two dreams / visions of Enoch: the first
''
mb7
M %ONE, *Enah, Aramaic Levi and Sectarian Origins*. JSI 19 (1988). lS9-
170.
88 There is no difiiculty about the critical structure of this Scction. It is 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
73
(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
74
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 as 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 of Et~och,43 and 254.
93 According to MIUK ( 7 7 1 ~
Books of 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.
75
76
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:
88
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.
77
78
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. Qi1w(4.
Movimenti
).
e conenti nrltumli nel Giudaismo (Roma
1987), 37-57; *Qumran Origins and Early History: A Groningen Hypothesiw, Fdia
OrienlaIia 25. (1988). 113-136.
'
79
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
parts, the so-called <<Apocalypseof Weeksa.
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 of Eltoch or I Etroclt, 11-12, 283285.
80
ARAMAIC
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.
108).
lW
Book of Dreantr.
81
"*
511-523.
'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~rwr de Uithof. Studies opgedmgcn aan dr. H A .
B m g e n (Utrecht 1974). 7-27.
82
"6
(1978),
464-469.
"'
"'
83
84
lg
85
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
applied by the author of the <<Apocalypseof Weeks,, is the determination 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
'21 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.
'"
86
'
'"
'"
87
'3
88
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.
BUCK'S translation, The Book of Enuch or 1 Enoch, 99. E. ISAACtranslates:
"to the righteous and the wise 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 k osf ~ n o c h24wmi.
,
89
90
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 ~ BcO O ~ SOJ E ~ I O C
246.
~~,
14' J.T. MILIK,rite Bookc o f Enoch, 183 asserts that the orthographic characteristics of 4QEnC "justify a fairly definite conclusion that the copy of 4Q EnC was made
from an old manuscript, doubtless belonging to the last quarter of the second century
B.C. (date of 10 Isa and 1 0 S)".
'43
91
lJ6
J.T. MILIK,l l t t .
Books of Ettoch, 49
92
BOOKS OF ENOCH
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,
'41
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.
'41 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.
93
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
the designation of *Fifth (book),,. This has prompted U H L ~ C ' * ~to
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
"'
94
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
or
I Etaoch, 318-319.
95
in ch. 104, after discarding the reference <<sosays 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
verifying such a hypothesis. V A N D E R K A M ' ~ ~indicates that, in the
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
175.
ISB J.T. MII.lK, rite Baoks of E~toclt.183-184.
Apocalyptic
Trodifion, 174-
96
CHAPTER THREE
'
See the references given supra, chapter two, note 3, and F. GARC~A
~AR'IINEZEJ.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 kof 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
Manichaean representations of the tree with three branches. The article of A.
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 eRwdrchau
54 (lw),
259-261.
98
THE
BOOK OF GIANTS
apocryphur.
Book of
~ i a n t sand
~
'
'
99
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.
1. COPIES O F THE BOOKO F GIANTS
'
" 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 ~ ~ ~ : C r a n13,
l . whereas
r~
the elements of the second page seem to correspond to 1
Etroch 10,17-19.
l2 K. BEYER, Die am~?tdrscherlTexre,259. 267-68, also considers as a copy of the
Book of 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 BAILLETin 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.
102
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 nnor~ 4QE1tGianfs~,which partially
overlap, contain any charaaeristic elements, preclude all certain attribution.
Is By J.T. MIUK, 7he B w k r of Enoch, 310-317, Pk. XXX-XXXI. Only the
photograph of frag. 1 is missing in the edition.
''
THE
BOOK OF GIANTS
I03
104
THE
BOOK OF GIANTS
l6
of Enoch, 307-309.
105
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.
l9 W > n l ' ? l on 4QEntiianrsC. The same name appears, written D " l l ' l 1 , in
4 ~ ~ n t i i a n l s *see
, 77te Bwks of Dtoch, 313. On the appearance of O l 7 n h : in
4QEntiimrsc, see 77te Books of E~toclt,29.
The Books of Enoch, 309.
Tlte Bwks of Enoclz, 235-23.
''
T H E BOOK O F GIANTS
The first part of this quotation can be easily related to the disclosures
made in the Book of Watchers (I Enoclz 7,l;8, 1-3;9,6-7;10,7-8).The
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 G70.
,
107
108
T H E BOOK OF GIANI'S
n).26
-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.
T H E BOOK OF GL4NTS
109
110
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 was 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 of Enitoch, 58.
111
112
"
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
drohende Unheiln (6Q8 1; 1Q23 29. 6); 6 ) ~ D a sGesprach des Semiasa mit seinem
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) ~SegensweissagungHenochsw (1Q23 1. 6 ) ,
Die aramifisclren Teute, 259-268.
113
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
31
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 ecitation manichknne du livre d'Ht5nochm, RHPR 52
"
(1972), 337-340.
114
115
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
the publication of STARCKY'Sfragments, we would then have an
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.
38
CHAPTER FOUR
' J.T.
MlUr<,
(1956).407-415.
H.M.1. GEVARYAHU,
rTbc Prayer of Nabonidus of the manuscripts of the
Desert of 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
"
117
?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. This 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.
118
lo
834.
" 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*, 1U 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.
'*
''
119
A. Reconstructed t a t
t i 3 1 ] K 3 > ! > 3 [ 3 '1 K Y ~ I K1%
-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
71)
K ; ~ > K017
inx ~
n-?Y
7~
l i l Kl n 1 > 1
Ik'\L' '(3
: : ' l a V-n:!
3
[ K 77L'
Jy? ' ? 1 i 1 7 [ l : l j ~ l i l l ? ; i ;1?7 3 t : ' N u n 1 4
1'""
16 (1985). 303.
120
1[JV n ' l i l ]
'7
C.
Notes
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
121
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~tfttesRoyoies Akkodie~esel Surndticnnes (Paris 1%7),
298-300.
122
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: ?[iK
jl
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
123
''
Nabonid in
pia
narrationr
ludaica (40)-,
Biblica 37
PRAYER OF NABONIDUS:
124
NEW SYNTHESIS
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 ] 10 1, ccand I was placed far from menu and of MEYER'Sii~Y(
1W [ 7 > ~ 1 3 1
] 0 1, <<andI 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
the verb with the complements 3 3 and 1'3 IK as standard phrases in
Targumic Literature, his reconstruction is: '>Y ' i i l r i ~ K ~ ) > K ?iw
( a 3 1 in3) In 1. <<Afterthis, 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) ' 1W '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 DUPONTSOMMERand VAN DER WOUDE.
See
98-99.
PRAYER OF NABONIDUS:
NEW SYNTHESIS
125
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
171 remain deprived of all significance.
The view which seems to me best founded is that which considers
1 7 1 ;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
126
PRAYER OF NABONIDUS:
A NEW SYNTHESIS
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
disagree. MILIK,MEYER,and GRELOTchoose to read it as a second
person singular. The grammatical arguments are irrelevant, given the
frequency of defective forms in Qumran and specifically in 4QPrNab.
153.
127
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
GRELOTI 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 GRELOTon
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 1969), 269-319; R. LE
D e ~ u r T, 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
25
128
637.
129
130
''
131
- 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
~ ( 2 3 )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
~ ( 1 1 )(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
uncertain, and several interpretations are possible. See L. O P P ~ I I E I Min A N E T
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.
"
132
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,
UgarificManual (Roma
1955 183.
Scc M. NOW, .Noah, Daniel und Hiob in Ez XIV.. VT 1 (1951). 251-260, and
SH. SPEIGEL, nNoah, Danel and Job. Touching on Canaanite Relics in the Legends of
the Jews* in: L. Gin&%
Jubilee, Vol. I (New York 1945), 305-335.
Y1 See VIROLLEAUD, 121-122.
R. METER, Das Gebet, 84 ff.
36
133
134
PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A
NEW SYNTHESIS
"
135
3. LITERARY
GENREAND ORIGIN
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
5th century B.C. For example, the use of the pronouns .'i~;land
; 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.
136
''
'
138
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
i l n ] l ? ~ ? l l 0 ~5[
Ms b
I.. [
Ms a
Mss a + b
IW
Ms b
MS a
Ms a
Msa ?
Ms a
'l'n
B. Translation
1 I...[
2 ]after the flood[
3 Nolah from [mount] Lubar[
4 I.. a city[
I...[
albove the tower and...[
to] view the sons of [
I...[
140
27 yelars...[
28 IRHWS, son of[
29 ]ws, ... years [
30 I.. speak[
--------------------------*------------------------------------
31
32
33
34
35
---------------*---**---*--------------------------------------
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 of the MaMd Congrss on the Dead Sea Scrolls.
141
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
down to <<seenthe city and the tower, which Neoph. I translates as
'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
'
'
142
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 '73': 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.
'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
rin IYU
143
l3 See 0'1W 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 ~ ~4T Qvnmn
s
and fhe History of rhc Cornmunip, Vol. 2 (Paris 1990), 373-408.
144
kingdoms. In Dan 7,l-27, the four beasts coming out of the sea
represent the four consecutive kingdoms. D. FLUSSERhas 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~uchder Griechischen Eigennmen (reprint Graz 1959).
According to J. and L. ROBERT B o h p s is a typical Maeedonian name, 6,
Fouillrr
''
145
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
line 12), ;I~il?can be found in Biblical and in Qumran Aramaic, cfr.
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
Cave 4, as yet unpublied, which mentions 7 1'Ylil>\ll (Alexandra Salome),
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.
146
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 35). 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.
147
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 of 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.
148
''
"
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. STRUGNELLand 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.
149
Dan
7-12.
15-24;5,ll-29.
150
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
Mss., we find a composition bearing the title: <<Theseventh vision of
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,
"
15 1
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~.EMKIARin 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.
~ U n der 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
'
152
" 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
153
"'
154
PSEUDO
DANIEL ARAMAIC
" ~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,
33-34.
155
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.
156
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 <<Thevisions
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 <<Visionof 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,
121-123.
" notkrovenier, 321. This work appears in the ms. Athos Koutloum. 220, fol. 201
"
'
157
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
159
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
refers to S u s a ~ a his evident from the fact that he pictures Daniel as
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.
65
160
3. CONCLUSIONS
161
CHAPTER SIX
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
'
'
163
2
3
4
s
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.
164
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
165
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
FITZMYER
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]*.
FLUSSERconsiders 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.
166
Col. ii
Line 1
The most striking features of the line are, no doubt, the two titles
chosen. As FITZMYERpoints outlo, quite apart from the hypothesis
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
Contribution*, 93.
I'
also used.
167
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 <<andeverything will rest from the sword* is completed by the parallel expression to which MILIK refers, although
without specifying from which line it comes: <<thesword 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:
l3
JA. F ~ ~ Y E.The
R , Contribution-, 91.
168
169
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 ?
170
THE
In FLUSSER'S
as well as in FITZMYER'S
opinion, our text is apocalyptical from beginning to end. FLUSSERalso 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$.
<<TheContribution,*, 91-92.
-The Contribution*, 93.
*The Contributiona, 106.
T H E ESCHATOLOGICAL FIGURE OF
40246
171
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
172
26 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
are conveniently collected in J. BIDFZ and F. CW~orur,Les Mages Hellknires. Vol. 11
(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.
173
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.
174
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-
"
175
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.
p/
176
THE ESCHATOLOGICAL
FIGURE OF 40246
4~246
177
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...
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.
178
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-.
179
CHAPTER SEVEN
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
'
181
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'Sedifio 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. GARCIAMARTI=
*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 NJ 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
(IT),
'
182
'
183
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.
'
184
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: <<Byline 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
NJ 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
only common element between them is the mention of <<tothe right,.
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
NJ 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.
185
186
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.
187
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
188
189
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 Dbut
, 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. A5 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 MILIKassumes, 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
"
190
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
~ , facultative use of alef indiplural. As pointed out by M I L I K ~the
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. GREENFIELDpoints out
correctly33 that res was also the pronunciation of the Targumic
vocalization and that the use of aief to indicate \e\ comes from the
191
"
MIUK arrives by this way to fu the value of the cubit at 0.56 m (DID 111, 186),
a value adopted by A. t3kN DAVIDin 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.
192
36
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
193
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 cand
~ ~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 STARCKYfollows 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 I26,~ 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
194
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
M I L I K ~ ~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.
195
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,
following DJ. HARRIS,*An Introduction to the Study of Persanal Ornaments of
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.
196
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
stories which are termed ccchambers>>( K V i n ) . The total structure is 2
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 measurements, see Y. YADIN, wl~'O;l-fl> '10,op. tit., 163-168, who gives a detailed
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.
THE NEW
197
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 Jl), 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.
'
198
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 70 '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,
ufenestrae quoque erant factae in modum retis instar cancellorumr~.Our text has not
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, 11 appears a similar sort of windows, the windows of the house
for altar utensils, but they seem to be blind windows: 0 '0 1UX 1113 '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.
>
199
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.
200
THE NEW
20 1
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.
202
203
'' E.Y.
KUBCtiER, *The Language of the Genesis Apocryphon. A Preliminary
Scripca HicroroIynifana
5-23.
Stud
4 (1965)).
'~xccpt, perhaps, in 4QMMT, where Jerusalem is identified with the holy camp
of the wilderness: \L11172 illni? ilK'il 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 (1989-W)
11-76
, (Hebrew).
204
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
temple, and in opposition to WACHOLDER,who favours the view that
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
il'1113 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.
J. M I E R , Die Tet~tpelrolletmt Tofe~tMeer (UTB 829) (Miinchen 1978), 67-68.
205
206
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.
207
(1981), 195-204.
208
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
>w
T&u
''
209
210
which describes the temple and the cult in which the sectaries will
~ . this is the same
participate during the War of ~ i b e r a t i o n ~That
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.
85 See Y. YADIN,Tire Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light against &he 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~entPseudepipplta 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
211
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-
212
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.
213
''
INDEX OF AUTHORS
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
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
Broshi, M. 202
Brown, R.E. 10, 162
Burgmann, H. 174
Caquot, A. 2, 11-14, 18, 19, 33,
175, 24B
Carmignac, J.
2, 6-10,
135, 201,211
Cashdan, E. 189
Causse, A. 207
Cavallin, H.C. 146
U, 121,
M
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
Eissfeldt, 0. 142
Emerton, A. 117
Epstein, I. 189
INDEXES
Emst, J. 171
Ewald, H. 27
Hilhorst. A. xv
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
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
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
INDEXES
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,
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
Josh
Lev
Isa
6,26 174
Judg
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
30,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
Jer
7,31-33 142
14J3.15 167
17,8 142
INDEXES
Dan
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
Job
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
4,13 123
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
Col
3,12 12
1 Macc
s n
9,- 167
10,4560 145
2 Macc
6,7 56
ii,6-12
Tit
1,l 12
1 John
518-22 171
4,l-4 171
Tob
13,16-18 207
U,17 199
2 John
7 171
Wisdom
144 22
Jude
12-13 59
New Testament
Rev
11-13 171
Matt
24,7 166
1QH xv, 81
I,29 11
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
INDEXES
INDEXES
4Q Aramaic Levi 25
4QBerakoth 177
4QEnastrc SO
l i i 48
l i i 8 100
l i i 1 4 54
4QEnb 46,61,69
l i i 61
1 ~ 2 670
iv 10-11 38
INDEXES
4QNJ
INDEXES
INDEXES
INDEXES
Didache 171
16,4 171
INDEXES
INDEXES
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 54
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
INDEXES
INDEXES
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
233
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
2
3
5
6
Go
7
8
9
10
II
12
17
14
l5