O f Porcine and Polluted Spirits:

Reading the Gerasene Demoniac

(Mark 5:1-20) w ith the Book of
Watchers (7 Enoch 1-36)

NICHOLAS A. ELDER
Marquette University
Milwaukee, W l 53233

Abstract: Mark 5:1-20, the pericope of the Gerasene demoniac, presents the reader
with a number of enigmatic features that have been variously interpreted with refer
ence to differing intertexts. No single intertext, however, has been able to explain
multiple puzzling features of the text. The thesis of this article is that the Book of
Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36), and the myth that underlies this textual tradition, can best
explain the pericope’s enigmas. The Book of Watchers was extraordinarily influential
in Second Temple Judaism and, therefore, should be interpreted as the formative
conceptual framework for this Marcan demonological narrative. To demonstrate this
thesis, I argue that Mark 5:1 -20 shares at least five strong conceptual and verbal affin
ities with the Book of Watchers.

Keywords: M ark5:l-20 • Book of Watchers • Gerasene demoniac • intertextual-

ity • 1 Enoch 1-36 • unclean spirits

M a r k 5:1-20 pr e s e n t s the interpreter w ith a num ber o f interesting, enig

m atic features. Oddly, to describe the afflicted m an here M ark uses the phrase
“unclean spirit” (7TV£upcm cucaOdpTcu), rather than the w ord “dem on” (Scupoviov),
w hich he uses elsew here.1 M ark ’s vocabulary in 5:3-5 is unique and offers a vivid
description o f the dem oniac, w hich is atypical o f M ark ’s norm al m ode o f charac
terization.2 D espite the M arcan secret, the unclean spirit possesses know ledge

1Cf. Mark 1:34, 39; 3:15, 22; 6:13; 7:26, 29; 9:38; [16:9, 17].
2 The words Ka-roiKr|at<;, akuau;, neSr|, Siamtav, 6apd(eiv are all Marcan hapax legomena. See
Robert A. Guelich, Mark 1-8:26 (WBC 34A; Waco, TX: Word, 1989) 276.

430
 MARK 5:1-20 AND THE BOOK OF WATCHERS 431

about Jesus’ identity, which he expresses in 5:7 (’Iqaou uie t o u 0eou t o u u\|ncrrou).
Finally, in a manner uncharacteristic of ancient exorcistic practices, the adjuration
formula is spoken by the demon rather than by the exorcist himself. Different
methodologies have attempted to resolve the pericope’s oddities using their respec
tive interpretive toolboxes. The redaction and form critics resolved many of the
text’s interpretive puzzles on the basis of a multistage development of the tradition.
Recently it has been more common to take a piecemeal approach and offer solu
tions to each oddity from various intertexts, whether Greco-Roman or Jewish. Few
scholars, however, have attempted to solve the multiple interpretive problems by
evoking a single tradition or intertext.3 I argue that there is a tradition that can
effectively explain the pericope’s multiple enigmas—the watchers tradition.
I contend that the watchers tradition, as primarily represented by 1 Enoch
6-16, is the formative conceptual framework within which the Marcan demono
logical narrative can be interpreted. What is more, the extant textual witnesses to
the watchers tradition are the most effective intertexts for interpreting the Gerasene
demoniac pericope in its Marcan form. I begin with an overview of the Book of
Watchers, that tradition’s etiology of evil and evil spirits, and the myth’s popular
ity in the Second Temple period. I will then demonstrate the verbal and conceptual
affinities that Mark 5:1-20 shares with this tradition, before drawing conclusions
about the significance of these affinities for both the Book of Watchers and Mark.

I. An Overview of the Book of Watchers

The Book of Watchers (7 Enoch 1—361 is the first extant text representing the
fallen angels tradition. In this myth, angels descend from heaven and participate
in illicit relations with human women, who subsequently birth angelic-humanoid
half-breeds. The angels also illicitly teach humans various cultural and pharma
ceutical skills, before they are bound and await the consummation of the ages. The
watchers’ half-breed children, who have begun to destroy the earth by their raven
ous appetite, are ultimately destroyed by Yhwh’s archangels. Wandering evil spir
its that constantly seek to inhabit earthly bodies are the result of this destruction.
As is the case with 7 Enoch generally, the Book of Watchers is most strongly
represented by the Ethiopic, or Gecez, tradition. While the Ethiopic version(s) of
the Book of Watchers are most numerous, the scholarly consensus has long been

3 Joel Marcus is a significant exception. Taking up a suggestion originally offered by

J. Duncan M. Derrett, Marcus has proposed that the pericope has strong conceptual and verbal
parallels to the crossing of the Red Sea in LXX Exodus 14-15 and its related texts. Marcus concludes,
“[0]ur passage, then, seems to cast Jesus in a Moses-like role as an incomparable conduit of divine
power, while at the same time hinting at the extension of the divine sovereignty beyond the Israel
that Moses founded” (Mark: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary [AB 27; New
York: Doubleday, 2008] 348). See J. Duncan M. Derrett, “Contributions to the Study of the Gerasene
Demoniac,” JSNT 3 (1979) 2-17.
 432 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 78,2016

that the Ethiopic recension(s)— whose manuscript tradition(s) mostly date between
the fifteenth and nineteenth centuries—are translated from a Greek version that
represents a Semitic Vorlage. Thus, the following linguistic chain has been offered
and is most often accepted: Aramaic (with possible Hebrew variations) Greek-
Ethiopic.
Given the voluminous and complex textual tradition of the Book of Watchers,
it was once common to approach these Enochic chapters from a redaction-critical
perspective and determine the varying social groups and potential provenances that
lie behind each textual stratum. The result of that approach is the recognition that,
in whatever form the Book of Watchers first existed, the myth concerning the “fall
of the angels” constituted the oral or textual core that was later expanded. It is this
portion of the “final” form of the text, namely, 1 Enoch 6-16, that contains the
formative myth of the evil spirits’/demons’ origins. Though the redaction-critical
approach to the text has fallen out of favor in recent years, the thesis that this
textual core exemplifies, and is representative of, the Enochic etiology of evil that
began as early as the fourth century b .c .e .— and continued to develop into the first
few centuries c.E.— is widely accepted.4
There can be no doubt that this tradition was highly influential and held a
great deal of cultural and mythic currency in Mark’s context. Both retellings of the
myth and allusions to it appear in a broad swath of Second Temple-period texts:
in the Enochic tradition, the myth is attested in the Book of Watchers, the Animal
Apocalypse in the Dream Visions of 1 Enoch (chaps. 85-90), in 2 Enoch, 3 Enoch,
and in Jubilees. Outside the Enochic corpus there are allusions and echoes to the
myth in Bar 3:26; Sir 16:7; 2 Macc 2:4-8; 1 Pet 3:19-20; 2 Pet 2:4; Jude 14-15;
T. Reuben 5:6-7; Philo De Gigantibus; Josephus A.J. 1.3.1 §§72-74; Justin Martyr
2 Apol. 5; Athenagoras Leg. 24-26; Irenaeus Haer. 1.10; 1.15.6; the Pseudo-
Clementine Homilies (8.12-18) and Recognitions (4.26); the Kephalaia o f the
Teacher (92.27-28; 93.24-28; 117:2; 171.1) from the Manichaean writings; and
Ap. John 19.16-20.11 from Nag Hammadi.5 In some of these texts, the myth is

4 The redaction-critical approach was interested in finding the provenance of the different
textual strata of the Book of Watchers. It is now more common to recognize the polyvalence of the
watchers myth. Michael A. Knibb writes, “[M]yths like that of the fall o f the Watchers had the
capacity to be applied to different circumstances that were perceived in a negative light, whether
the horrors of violence and warfare, or concerns over purity, or the spread of false teaching” (Essays
on the Book o f Enoch and Other Early Jewish Texts and Traditions [SVTP 22; Leiden: Brill, 2009]
34). John J. Collins similarly argues, “[T]he Sitz im Leben of the Book of Watchers cannot be
specified with any historical precision, but its allegorical language is such that it can be applied to
various situations. We have noted that even apocalypses which reflect a specific situation were, in
fact, frequently reapplied by virtue of their polyvalent imagery” (“The Apocalyptic Technique:
Setting and Function in the Book of Watchers,” CBQ 44 [1982] 91-111, here 110).
5 For the allusions and echoes to the watchers tradition in varying contexts, both Jewish and
Christian, see Rick Strelan, “The Fallen Watchers and the Disciples in Mark,” JSP 10 (1999) 73-92;
and James C. VanderKam, “ 1 Enoch, Enochic Motifs, and Enoch in Early Christian Literature,” in
 MARK 5:1-20 AND THE BOOK OF WATCHERS 433

retold, indicating its popularity in the Second Temple period. In other texts, the
myth is merely alluded to, signifying that authors often worked under the assump
tion that their audiences were well acquainted with the story. Perhaps most signifi
cantly, Philo’s De Gigantibus goes to great lengths to reject the myth altogether.6
This indicates that the narrative was popular and influential enough for Philo to
compose a response to it.
The sheer volume of parallel themes, allusions, citations, and echoes to the
watchers myth(s) leads Rick Strelan to conclude, “[Tjhat the canonical gospel
writers must have known these myths is almost indisputable.”7 It is surprising,
then, that the relationship between the demonological narratives in the Synoptic
Gospels and the Book of Watchers, with few exceptions, has been left unexplored.8
In view of this lacuna, in the remainder of this article I will demonstrate that Mark
5:1-20 shares strong conceptual and verbal affinities with the Book of Watchers,
and that reading the former as a “broad interplay” with the latter explains a
number of the interpretive issues in the Marcan text.9 I will take up five topics

The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity (ed. James C. VanderKam and William Adler;
CRINT 3.4; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1996) 33-101.
6 On Philo’s treatise as a different mode for constructing the problem of evil in Second Temple
Judaism, see A. T. Wright, “Some Observations on Philo’s De Gigantibus and Evil Spirits in Second
Temple Judaism,” J S J 36 (2005) 471-88.
7 Strelan, “Fallen Watchers and the Disciples in Mark,” 75.
8 Some exceptions include Strelan, “Fallen Watchers and the Disciples in Mark,” 75; A. T.
Wright, “Evil Spirits in Second Temple Judaism: The Watcher Tradition as a Background to the
Demonic Pericopes in the Gospels,” Henoch 28 (2006) 141-59; and Amy E. Richter, Enoch and the
Gospel o f Matthew (Princeton Theological Monograph Series 183; Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2012).
9 “Broad interplay” is an echo of Richard B. Hays’s influential work Echoes o f Scripture in
the Letters o f Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989) 20.1 am not making an argument for
any one kind of intertextual relationship between the pericope in Mark 5:1-20 and the Book of
Watchers, whether it be a citation, allusion, echo, or something else. I use the nomenclature “inter
text” more broadly here. Though Mark 5:1-20 does seem to share some peculiar lexemes with the
Greek form(s) of the Book of Watchers, I do not suggest that this is necessarily because Mark is
working from a written text of the Book of Watchers. We are not, then, dealing with direct, literary
dependence; Mark never quotes the Enochic corpus (text A, in the Haysian model), much less the
Book of Watchers. Mark does, however, demonstrate strong conceptual parallels with the Enochic
template, especially in the demonological pericopae. Mark does indeed intend for his audiences to
understand the demonological pericopae “in light of a broad interplay” with the watchers tradition,
but he does not accomplish this interplay by quoting any text in the tradition directly. Rather, he
works within and alludes to a conceptual and mythic framework that was common parlance in his
context. This is quite sensible: if Mark were to utilize Enochic material anywhere in his Gospel, the
demonological narratives would be the most fitting locus, as the watchers myth was a (if not the
most) prominent explanation for the origin of evil spirits in the Second Temple period. James C.
VanderKam has remarked, “No other document in the early Enoch tradition proved more important
for later use and adaptation than the BW” {Enoch: A Manfor All Generations [Studies on Personalities
of the Old Testament; Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1995] 31). By simply speaking
of unclean spirits (ra nveupara dKaGapra), Mark would likely recall the watchers tradition in the
 434 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 78,2016

before drawing conclusions: (1) the use o f e v TTveupcm &Ka0dpxu> rather than
Scupoviov; (2) the evil spirits’ recognition o f Jesus as Son o f the Most High God;
(3) the significance o f the demoniac’s dwelling in tombs; (4) the theme of swearing
on a mountain; and (5) the theme o f binding.

II. Use of e v t t v £i3|k i t i dKaOdptcp in Marks Gospel

Though Mark surely knows the term ficupoviov, he uses the dative preposi
tional phrase e v nveupaxi aKaOdpxu) to describe the two spirits/demons with which
Jesus has significant interactions in his Gospel (1:24-27; 5:1-20).10 But why is the
term “unclean spirit” preferred when Mark narrates these exorcisms? And what
exactly makes the spirits unclean? The Gospel traditions are silent here; they
merely assume that the audience understands the spirits’ uncleanness. The most
likely explanation is that Mark is recalling the watchers tradition, wherein the
watchers become unclean because o f their illicit relations with human women. The
results o f these illicit relations are the mixed-formed giants (watcher-human hybrids),
who are, like the watchers themselves, unclean beings. The Greek text o f 1 Enoch
7:1 narrates the watchers’ encounter with human women that would lead to their
uncleanness: “And they took women for themselves— they each chose women for
themselves. And they began to enter into them and to be defiled [piaiv£a0ai] in
them.” 11The verbal root used here, pialvco, is repeated a number o f times through
out the Book o f Watchers, always in connection with the watchers’ illicit relations
with women (1 Enoch 9:8; 10:8, 11; 12:4; 15:3, 4). Unfortunately, the Aramaic
here is not extant, though Siam Bhayro conjectures that it would be equivalent to
the Hebrew NftO (“to be unclean”) used in Lev 18:24, where bestiality is discussed.12
The use o f the Greek term with the dative prepositional phrase “in uncleanness”
( e v ctKaOapcnq) in 1 Enoch 10:11 is significant here. In this passage, the Lord

mind of his audience. This presupposition is in line with James H. Charlesworth who writes, “[T]he
documents in the Pseudepigrapha are not primarily important because they are cited by the new [sic]
Testament authors; they are significant because they reveal the Zeitgeist of Early Judaism and the
Matrix of Earliest Christianity” (The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and the New Testament:
Prolegomena fo r the Study o f Christian Origins [SNTSMS 54; Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1985] 78). The Book of Watchers, then, reveals something quite significant about the matrix
of the Synoptic Gospels: namely, where demons, evil spirits, and unclean spirits originate and how
they meet their ultimate end. In this way, mine is an intertraditional, ratherthan strictly intertextual.
approach.
10 See the use of Scupoviov in Mark 1:34, 39; 3:15, 22; 6:13; 7:26, 29; 9:38; [16:9, 17],
11 All translations of the Greek Book of Watchers are my own based on Greekpan. Greeksyncis
noted when it is significant. Aramaic fragments will also be noted when they are extant for a given
passage.
12 Siam Bhayro, The Shemihazah and Asael Narrative o f l Enoch 6-11: Introduction, Text,
Translation and Commentary with Reference to Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Antecedents
(AOAT 322; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2005) 138-39.
 MARK 5:1 -20 AND THE BOOK OF WATCHERS 435

speaks to Michael, saying, “Go and declare to Shemihaza and the rest of those with
him who mixed with women to be defiled in their uncleanness . . . [|aiav0fjvcu ev
autalc; ev aKctOapaia currdrv].”13 The phrase “to be defiled in their uncleanness” is
redundant—it is tacked on to an already elongated dative indirect object. It serves
to make absolutely clear that the watchers’ illicit sexual behavior has caused them
to become defiled, and this defilement is specifically connected with uncleanness—
a mark that now indelibly characterizes the watchers.14
The watchers’ illicit relations with human women not only caused their
own defilement; it also destined their offspring to a similar unclean constitu
tion. Regarding this, Clinton Wahlen has written:
While the giants themselves are nowhere explicitly called “unclean,” they are the
product of a sexual union which defiled the watchers and presumably their “seed.” An
analogous circumstance is the HB ’s declaration that some animals are unclean because
physically they do not fit certain criteria. . . . Similarly, the giants are a physical
anomaly, fitting none of the established heavenly or earthly categories of being. 15

Moreover, the actions of the giants and the watchers have led to the uncleanness
of the earth— an uncleanness that the Lord must purge through his angelic inter
mediaries.16 Here, 1 Enoch 10:11-22 is especially relevant:
Go and declare to Shemihaza and the rest of those with him who mixed with women
to be defiled in their uncleanness. And when their sons slay one another, they shall see
the destruction [cuTuAeiav] of their beloved ones. And bind them for seventy genera
tions in the valleys of the earth until the day of their judgment and completion—until
the eternal judgment is completed. Then they will be lead into the chasm of fire and
into torment and into the prison of eternal confinement. And whoever shall be burned

13 Significantly, both Codex Panopolitanus and Syncellus have the prepositional phrase,
though Syncellus adds an additional definite article: piavOrjvai ev auralc; ev xf] aKaOapala auuSv.
14 There have been various reasons proposed concerning what exactly defiled the watchers
with reference to their sexual acts. A. T. Wright overviews four of these: the angels had sex with
menstruating women; the angels had sex with virgins; the angels had sex with adulterers; or the
angels crossed the mortal-spiritual divide, mixing things that ought not be mixed (The Origin o f
Evil Spirits: The Reception o f Genesis 6:1-4 in Early Jewish Literature [WUNT 2/198; Tubingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 2005] 130-31). Wright opts for the fourth option. He writes, “The angels were defiled
because they crossed the line between immortal beings and ‘flesh and blood’ (2:1; 15:4-7). 1 Enoch
10:22 states the earth shall be cleansed from all dKaOapala, perhaps describing the result of the
union of the angels and humans. The act of fornication not only defiled the angels, but brought
dKaOapala upon all creation” (ibid., 131).
15 Clinton Wahlen, Jesus and the Impurity o f Spirits in the Synoptic Gospels (WUNT 2/185;
Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004) 32 n. 44. Wright has similarly written, “The death of the giants
perhaps reveals a characteristic of the nature of their spirits. They are considered evil spirits because
they were bom of the earth: a mixed product of a spiritual being (Watcher angel) and a physical and
a somewhat undefined human” (“Evil Spirits in Second Temple Judaism,” 145).
16 See also Jub. 7:21, wherein the earth is made unclean by the angels’ intercourse with
women.
 436 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 78,2016

up and destroyed at present will be bound [SeGij crovrai] with them until the completion
of that generation. Destroy [dTtoXeaov] all the adulterated spirits and the sons of the
watchers because of the harm they have caused humans. And destroy [c u io Xec t o v ] all
unrighteousness from the earth and dispense of every evil work. And let the plant of
righteousness and truth appear forever—it will be planted with great joy. And now all
the righteous shall escape, and they shall live until they bear a thousand generations,
and all the days of their youth, and all their weeks will be filled with peace. And then
all the earth will be worked in righteousness and a tree will be planted in it, and it will
be filled with blessing. And all the trees of the earth will rejoice. And they all will plant
vineyards, and the vines will be planted and they will make a thousand jugs of wine,
and the seed will produce according to its measure, the olives will produce ten mea
sures. And you will cleanse [KaO&pioov] the land from every uncleanness [atto ndapc;
aKaOapmac;], and from every injustice, and from every sin and impiety, and you will
wipe out all the uncleanness that has come about on the earth [ttdcrac; rac; dicaGapcrlai;
rac, yivopevac; erti xrjc; yrjc;]. And all the people will be worshiping, blessing, and serv
ing me. And all the land will be cleansed [KaGapiaBijoETai] from every defilement,
and from every uncleanness [tiaar|c; dKaSapalcu;] and wrath and suffering. And 1 will
no longer send upon them into all the generations of the age.

This portion of text “constitutes the climax and conclusion of the story of the rebel
lion of the watchers.” 17 It strikes a celebratory, eschatological tone, as those who
have condemned the world to uncleanness are bound [eSe0r|aav] and condemned.
The myth also looks forward, however, to the final destruction of the forces that
cause impurity in the world—a destruction that sends the spirits into the abyss.18
In this sense, the deluge and destruction of the watchers and their offspring are
proleptic; they anticipate a final, end-time destruction. This is the point of depar
ture Mark takes for his treatment of the unclean spirits in both 1:24-27 and 5:1-20
and is likely the reason that he prefers the term “unclean spirits” in these pericopae.
It is probably also significant that the unclean spirits' destruction comes as they
enter into the unclean porcine herd.

III. The Evil Spirits Recognize Jesus as Son of the Most High God
In Mark 5:7, the unclean spirits immediately recognize Jesus’ identity. They
cry out, “What to me and what to you, Jesus Son of the God Most High?” (Ti epoi
k c u CToiflqaou uife xou Oeou t o u m|/icrrou;). In the Gospel of Mark, it is no secret
that Jesus’ identity is often concealed from characters in the narrative world, while
it is more clearly known, or at least being formed, at the level of the implied audi
ence. One of the ingenious literary techniques the author of Mark uses to evoke a

17 George W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters

1-36; 81-108 (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001) 224.
18It is significant, then, that, in Luke 8:31, Legion begs Jesus not to send them into the abyss
(tijv apuaaov). It may be that Luke recognizes the watchers tradition in Mark’s narrative.
 MARK 5:1-20 AND THE BOOK OF WATCHERS 437

response of belief from his audience is this motif of secrecy. When characters in
Mark’s narrative properly recognize Jesus’ identity, they are typically commanded
to be silent. One character group that consistently possesses knowledge concerning
Jesus’ identity is the unclean spirits and the demons.19 Why this is the case, how
ever, has not been adequately explained. Commentators typically rationalize this
knowledge on the basis of the spirits’ otherworldly constitution: precisely because
the spirits are not human, they have an understanding of who Jesus is that has been
concealed from their humanoid counterparts. This supposition is clearly expressed
by Adela Yarbro Collins. She writes, “[T]he words of the spirit also suggest that
he has special knowledge, concealed from human beings who surround Jesus.. . .
The demons recognize Jesus because of their knowledge of heavenly matters, but
his identity is not grasped by the human beings in the narrative.”20 Because the
secrecy motif is so readily apparent in Mark’s Gospel, there must be a better expla
nation for the spirits’ knowledge of Jesus’ identity than that they are spiritual
beings— ergo they must possess knowledge that human characters do not. The
watchers myth can fill in the gap here.
If an etiology of evil spirits is assumed from the watchers tradition, the audi
ence of Mark knows that the watchers and unclean spirits have already had inter
actions with mediatorial figures in their past and that these interactions did not
bode well for them: the watchers and their offspring were either bound or were
destroyed by these mediatorial figures. Moreover, from 1 Enoch 10:6, a first-century
audience would also know that the watchers and their offspring are awaiting a final,
eschatological judgment.21 In the narrative world, then, the watchers and evil

19 This is the case here and in Mark 1:24, where the spirit states, “I know who you are: the
holy one of God” (olSct oe ric; el, 6 aycoc; t o u 0eou). This title is appended to Jesus only after the
spirit(s) ask if Jesus has come to destroy them, likely evoking the theme of the watchers’ (and their
offspring’s) destruction in 1 Enoch 10, where nominal and verbal forms of destruction (anoAAupi,
drtcbXeia) are prominent. Further, the title “the holy one of God” (6 aytoc; t o u Oe o u ), evokes the use
ofholy (aytoc;) as Yhwh’s title throughout the Book ofWatchers (see 1 Enoch 1:2; 9:4; 10:1; 14:1;
25:3). This phrase also builds on the uncleanness of the spirits, as aytoc; was often synonymous with
KaOapoc; (“clean”) and thereby antonymous with dxaOapToc;. In a sense, then, Jesus is interpreted
typologically vis-a-vis Yhwh in the Book ofWatchers: he is the holy one, like Yhwh, who has no
share in the watchers’ impurity—he is the one who will ultimately destroy their uncleanness
altogether.
20 Adela Yarbro Collins, Mark: A CommerctaryTHermeneiajMinneapolis: Fortress, 2007) 170,
172. So also Francis J. Moloney writes, “Both detailed descriptions of encounters between Jesus
and the possessed (cf. 1:21-28) are marked by the demonic recognition of Jesus’ relationship with
God. The demonic is not limited to this world, and thus has access to truths that the characters in
the story do not know. The reader o f the story, however, has been well prepared by the prologue
(1:1-13). In a very real sense, for Mark (and the rest of the ancient world) demons belong to the
sphere of the supernatural” (The Gospel o f Mark: A Commentary [Peabody, MA: Hendrickson,
2002] 102-3; italics original).
21 Although the Matthean form of this pericope is abbreviated, in Matt 8:29, the demoniac
asks Jesus a significant question that is not found in the Marcan version: “Have you come here before
 438 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 78,2016

spirits possess a knowledge of what a mediator from Yhwh is likely to do to them.

This was an intrinsic aspect of the watchers myth that could not be cast off when
Mark reappropriated the myth for his own purposes. Therefore, if the watchers
myth is assumed by the author and audience of Mark, then it comes as no surprise
that the spirits and demons recognize Jesus, the mediatorial figure in Mark’s Gos
pel.
The watchers tradition not only fills in a gap regarding demonological epis
temology but also informs the title that Jesus is given by the unclean spirit(s) in
Mark 5:7: “Son of God Most High” (u Ie t o u 0 e o u t o u u\|/iaTou). The title “Most
High” (u\|/icrroc;) has often been interpreted in light of the gentile context of the
pericope in two differing ways: (1) as a reflection of a “gentile” title for Yhwh/
TP^V that utilizes a tradition present in the Hebrew Bible/LXX;22 and (2) as a title
reserved for Zeus in the Greco-Roman context.231 might add a third possibility:
that the term alludes to a Jewish apocalyptic milieu, and specifically to the Book
of Watchers. The word is used in the Book of Watchers as a title for Yhwh in two
different pericopae, and both are relevant to the demonological texts in Mark.24
The title “Most High” (u \|/ic jt o c ;) is used for Yhwh in 1 Enoch 10:1 with 6
|i£yac; ayioc; (“the Great Holy One”) in apposition. We should be reminded that “the
Holy One of God” (6 ayioc; t o u 0 e o u ) was the title attributed to Jesus by the first
unclean spirit in Mark 1:24. Thus, we have the two unclean spirits in Mark’s Gos
pel naming Jesus as “the Holy One of God” (6 ayioc; t o u 0 e o u ) and “Son of God
Most High” (u Ie t o u 0 e o u t o u urjnoTou), and in 1 Enoch 10:1 the same two terms
are used appositionally as titles for Yhwh: “Then the Most High, the Great Holy
One spoke concerning these things” ( t o t e uv|ncrroc; e It t ev TtEpi t o u t c u v , 6 piyac;
ayioc;). In 1 Enoch 10, the Most High goes on to commission three of his four
archangels against the watchers and their offspring; the archangels will cleanse
and renovate the earth from its pollution (1 Enoch 10:11-15). It is significant in
this regard that, in Mark 5:7, the Son of the Most High ( u ie t o u 0 e o u t o u uij/lcrrou)
takes on different tasks that are similar to those of the angels: Jesus destroys the
spirits who are present in the bound man, and, as a result, the man becomes clothed
and in his right mind.
“Most High” (u\|/ioroc;) is also used in 1 Enoch 9:3-4. In this text, the afflicted
human souls make their plea, requesting that the angels bring their appeal before

the time to torment us?” (f|X0ec; d)6e Ttpo Kaipou |3aaaviaat f)|iac;;). This question indicates that
Matthew understood the pericope in terms of eschatological judgment on the spirits that inhabited
the demoniac, likely because Matthew himself was well acquainted with the watchers tradition and
understood it to be the conceptual framework for the story of the Gerasene demoniac.
22 See Guelich, who cites Gen 14:18-20; Num 24:16; Isa 14:14; and Dan 3:26, 42 to support
his position (Mark 1-8:26, 279).
23 See A. Y. Collins, Mark, 268; Marcus, Mark, 343.
24 It is also used frequently throughout 1 Enoch: 9:3,4; 98:7; 99:3, 10; 100:4; 101:1,6.
 MARK 5:1-20 AND THE BOOK OF WATCHERS 439

the Most High ( u \|/l g t o c ;).25 The title is then used again in 9:4, but only in the
Greeksync text, which, in summary fashion, narrates Yhwh’s command to the
angels, who are commanded to bind and throw the leaders of the watchers into the
abyss.26 Thus, the second manifestation of this title is connected with Yhwh’s abil
ity to give life and to command binding and eschatological destruction.
The unclean spirit’s use of the title for Jesus in Mark 5:7, then, reflects the
spirit’s recognition that Yhwh has commanded its binding in the past and that
Jesus, being the Son of the Most High, likely possesses the ability to accomplish
its rebinding or, worse yet, its final destruction, which was promised to occur in
the coming age. And this is precisely what happens: Jesus does not merely rebind
the unclean spirits, as the angels do in 1 Enoch; rather, he takes on a more substan
tial role by outwitting the spirits and sending them into the pigs to their ultimate
destruction in the sea.

IV. Dwelling in Tombs

One of the first things the audience learns about the Gerasene demoniac in
Mark 5 is that he comes out of the tombs (ek t cov pvqpEtcov) because the tombs
were his dwelling place (oc; xqv Ktrrou<qoiv efyev ev role; pvf|paoiv). The fact that
the man is a grave-dweller has frequently been connected to his uncleanness.27 To
be sure, tombs are a fitting abode for an unclean spirit, but we should not assume
that this is the only reason the narrative detail is given here. It is important to
recognize that tombs were most often dug out of or into mountains, which leads
the audience to fill a narrative gap and conclude that the unclean spirit dwells in
or upon a mountain, which is confirmed by Mark 5:5, where the text bluntly states,
“and night and day he was crying out and cutting himself with stones in the tombs
and in the mountains” (ev t o u ; opeotv qv Kpa(o)v).28
There are two pertinent echoes of the Book of Watchers here. The first regards
the hapax legomenon KaToucqorv (“dwelling”) in the phrase “who had a dwelling

25 It is perhaps significant that the Greeksr,ic text states that both the spirits and the souls (rd
nveupaTa xai ai t|/uxal) make their appeal.
26 “Then the Most High commanded the holy archangels, and they bound their leaders and
threw them into the abyss, until the judgment” (t o t e 6 ut|/i0To<; e k e Xe u o e t o R crylou; ap^ayyiXoic,,
Kat eSrioav t ouc ; e^ap^ouc; airrtuv Kai eflaAov auTouc; sic; Trjv a|3uaaov, ecoc; Tfjc Kploeux;). See Matthew
Black and Albert-Marie Denis, eds., Apocalypsis Henochi Graece (PVTG 3; Leiden: Brill, 1970), 23.
27 Marcus, Mark, 342; Camille Focant, The Gospel according to Mark: A Commentary (trans.
Leslie R. Keylock; Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2012) 202; Guelich, Mark 1-8:26,277.
28 On tombs, Robert G. Bratcher and Eugene A. Nida state, “People were often buried in
cave-like openings dug into the rock, big enough for a person to enter on foot, and usually high
enough inside to allow a person to stand upright” (A Translator's Handbook on the Gospel o f Mark
[Helps for Translators 2; Leiden: Brill, 1961] 55). See also Focant, Gospel according to Mark, 202.
 440 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 78,2016

in the tombs” (oq tf)v KaxoiKT]aiv ev xotq pvr|paaiv).29 Although the term itself
occurs in the LXX, the texts that contain the word do not seem to have any bearing
on its use in Mark.30 Commentators have therefore offered phrases and verbal
forms that are in the near semantic range of the word from other Septuagintal texts
in an attempt to elucidate its use here.31 There is, however, a better alternative
found in the Book of Watchers.
The word KaxoiKpaiq is used four times in 1 Enoch 15:7-10. The entire context
of these verses is significant for the word’s use in the Gospel of Mark. In this
section of 1 Enoch, Yhwh is recounting the words that Enoch will speak to the
watchers, who have asked him to petition the Lord on their behalf.32 Yhwh then
redescribes their transgressions, emphasizing their illicit behaviors and the corrup
tion they brought upon themselves and their offspring by mixing themselves with
human women and their (menstrual) blood. In 1 Enoch 15, the watchers’ original
heavenly constitution and their offsprings’ earthly constitution are explicitly con
trasted: spiritual beings have a dwelling in heaven, but the giant offspring of the
watchers are not purely spiritual beings and so their dwelling will be in the earth
(kcu ev xfj yr] f) Kaxoixpaiq auxcov eaxai).33 The section concludes by describing

19 This is the first of five hapax legomena in vv. 3-5: KcrroiKriaic;, akumc;, TteSrj, Siaanav,
Sapcc(eiv. See Guelich, Mark 1-8:26, 276.
30 See Gen 10:30; 27:39; Exod 12:40; Num 15:2; 2 Sam 9:12; 1 Kgs 8:30; 2 Kgs 2:19; 2 Chr
6 :21 .
31 Juan Mateos and Fernando Camacho have offered Ps 67:7 as an intertext here, which uses
the participial phrase k c it o ik o u v t c u ; ev xd<poi<; (El Evangelio de Marcos: Analisis lingulstico y
comentario exegetico [2 vols.; En los origenes del cristianismo 11; Madrid: El Almendro, 2000]
1:434). Rudolf Pesch argues that Isa 65:3-4, 7 is the “foundation text” for Mark 5:2-5 (Das Markus-
evangelium [4th ed.; 2 vols.; HTKNT; Freiburg: Herder, 1984] 1:286).
32 1 Enoch 15:4-10 reads: “[Go and say to the watchers ofheaven,] ‘You were holy ones and
spirits, living forever. With the blood of women you have defiled yourselves, and with the blood of
flesh you have begotten, and with the blood of men you have lusted, and you have done as they
do— flesh and blood, who die and perish. Therefore I gave them women, that they might cast seed
into them, and thus beget children by them, that nothing should fail them on the earth. But you
originally existed as spirits, living forever, and not dying for all the generations of eternity; therefore
1did not make women among you.’ The spirits ofheaven, in heaven is their dwelling [q KaxotKpoic;];
But now the giants who were begotten by the spirits and flesh— they will call them evil spirits on
the earth, for their dwelling [r| KaToiKqaic;] will be on the earth. The spirits that have gone forth from
the body of their flesh are evil spirits, for from humans they came into being, and from the holy
watchers was the origin of their creation. Evil spirits they will be on the earth, and evil spirits they
will be called. The spirits of heaven, in heaven is their dwelling [q KdToiKqaii;]; but the spirits
begotten on the earth, on the earth is their dwelling [q KaxoiKqou;].” Translation from George W. E.
Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, 1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation (Minneapolis:
Fortress, 2012) 36.
33 Nickelsburg helpfully summarizes, "In short, the watchers have violated the created order,
transgressing the boundary between the spheres ofheaven and earth, spirit and flesh, and in so doing
they have defiled their holy state. It is this combination that evidently makes their sin unforgivable
 MARK 5:1 -20 AND THE BOOK OF WATCHERS 441

the malicious activity that the spirits of the giants will inflict upon humanity.
Nickelsburg summarizes well:
Because they were begotten on earth, these spirits must remain on earth. Here they
constitute an empire of evil spirits who wreak all manner of havoc on the human race,
as the author describes in w 11-12. The presupposition of this passage is a belief in
such a demonic realm. Its Junction is to explain the origins of that realm. The author
employs the story in [1 Enoch] chaps. 6-11 to this end, and he uses the generational
metaphor to explain the proliferation and continued existence of malevolent spirits.34

Mark, then, echoes the idea represented in this text: namely, that the spirits have
their dwelling inside the earth and that these spirits wreak havoc on all God’s
creation—humans included. In a manner identical to the spirits of the giants in
1 Enoch, the unclean spirits in Mark 5:1-20 quite literally have their dwelling (f)
KaToiKpoie) inside the earth (ev rfj yfi) and are maliciously afflicting a member of
the human race.
The second echo from the Book of Watchers to the man with the unclean spirit
living in the tomb is found in 1 Enoch 10:5. Here, Yhwh commands Raphael to
throw Asael into the desert of Dadouel, where he will dwell (oiKpadtcu) and wait
for a “resurrection to judgment.”35 Though the term lj KatoiKqaic; (“dwelling”) is
not used here, the verbal form o l k e u ) shares the same root and no doubt carries the
same idea. Most significant about this text and Asael’s dwelling, though, is not the
verbal resonance. Rather, it is that Yhwh commands Raphael to place (u t t o Oe O
rough and sharp rocks (\i0ouc; xpaxeR teal oijelc;) upon Asael, which will cover him
in darkness. Little significance has been given to the fact that the Gerasene demo
niac had the habit of cutting himself with rocks (KcnrctKOTiTcov eairrov \I0otc;), as
indicated by Mark 5:5. This detail is typically regarded as inconsequential. It is
often characterized as narrative information that functions only to portray the
man’s insanity more vividly.36 This is a bit surprising, given Mark’s typical prefer
ence for brevity. It seems prudent, especially since we lack any other compelling
reasons for the inclusion of this element in the text, to associate this detail about
the Gerasene demoniac, who dwells in dark, mountainous, rocky tombs cutting

(12:5; 16:4). No atonement can remove that uncleanness derived from an act that was not only
forbidden but that violated the created order of the universe” (1 Enoch 1, 272).
34Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch l, 273 (italics original).
35 Ibid., 221.
36 John R. Donahue and Daniel J. Harrington write, “These verses convey not only the horror
that the man evoked among those who dwelt nearby but also his self-destructive behavior” (The
Gospel o f Mark [SacPag 2; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2002] 164). Likewise, A. Y. Collins
remarks, “[T]he vivid description shows that the man is out of his senses and isolated” (Mark, 267).
Guelich writes, “[T]his verse graphically describes the terrible state of the man’s mind through the
use of the imperfect periphrastic (ijv Kpd(cov Kcd KaTaKOJTTtev). His screams accompanied by his
self-destructive behavior (KataKOTmov eaurov \i0oic;) rang through the tombs and the hills day and
night” (Mark 1-8:26, 278).
 442 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 78,2016

himself with stones, with the details given about Asael’s covering, which is in
darkness under rough and sharp stones.37

V. Swearing on a Mountain
Just as the watchers swear an oath on a mountain, so also the unclean spirit
adjures Jesus on a mountain. In l Enoch 6, the watchers’ oath figures prominently:
in the extant Aramaic of 1 Enoch 6:5-6, the verbal form IDinX is used on two
occasions. In the Greek text, a dative form of opxoc; (“oath”) is used to describe
the intention of the watchers to swear together that they will go through with their
illicit sexual endeavors. 1 Enoch 6:5 then reports, somewhat redundantly, though
emphasizing that the swearing did indeed occur, the pact the watchers make.38
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the name of the mountain where the watch
ers’ oath took place, Hermon Cpain), is a wordplay on the root Din (“to swear”).39
Mount Hermon itself is literarily and historically connected to oath taking, swear
ing, and devotion.40 It is relevant, then, that the unclean spirit adjures Jesus in Mark
5:7 using the verb 6pid(u). Not only is this verb related to the nominal form used
in the Greek of 1 Enoch, but the sense of this verb is “to give a command to some
one under oath.”41 This verb and its synonym, opKoco, are both used frequently in
exorcistic texts outside the NT by the exorcist, but not usually by the one who is
exorcised.42 This inversion in the Marcan text has not been adequately explained
by commentators, who merely note its oddity. In view of this lacuna, I propose that
Mark places the verb on the lips of the unclean spirit, rather than on Jesus’ lips,
because it recalls the pledge the watchers themselves made on Mount Hermon.

VI. The Theme of Binding

It is often noted that the descriptive characterization of the demoniac’s chains
and their ineffectiveness in Mark 5:3-4 is out of character for Mark’s Gospel;

37 This is not to imply that there is a one-to-one correspondence between Legion and Asael in
Mark 5. Rather, Mark is recalling prominent details about the watchers myth so that his audience
might recognize the conceptual framework within which he is working.
38 Using subjunctive forms: 6|roau)|r£v and ava0£gcmou)p£v.
39 See the use ofthis verb in 4Q201 1 iii.3: [mb in fim nxi m ro [nbb, “And all ofthem swore
an oath [together].”
40 Regarding Mount Hermon in the Book of Watchers, Nickelsburg notes that “the . . .
wordplay is an explicit and typical etymologizing of the name of Mount Hermon . . . possible in
both Hebrew and Aramaic” (1 Enoch 1, 177).
41 BDAG, 723, s.v. opid(u).
42 Josephus A.J. 8.2.5 §47. See Dietrich-Alex Koch, Die Bedeutung der Wundererzahlungen
fu r die Christologie des Markusevangeliums (BZNW 42; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1975) 58; Marcus,
Mark, 342; A. Y. Collins, Mark, 268.
 MARK 5 :1-20 AND THE BOOK OF WATCHERS 443

nowhere else does Mark provide such vivid details concerning any of his charac
ters, much less any of his minor characters. Not only are the verses out of charac
ter for Mark, but they also “break with the normal pattern of an exorcism story by
detailing the man’s condition.”43 The inclusion of these details in Mark has been
variously explained. It has been interpreted as a midrashic expansion of the
original text based on Isa 65:4-6 and LXX Ps 67:7/44 A. Y. Collins suggests that it
is an effort to demonstrate that “the man is out of his senses and isolated.”45 John R.
Donahue and Daniel J. Harrington note that this displays Jesus’ struggle with
death’s power.46 Joel Marcus writes that it gives the impression that the demoniac
is “a person who has lost control of himself and is at the mercy of the destructive
outside forces.”47 Robert H. Stein avers that it demonstrates the great strength of
the demoniac and, thus, the greater strength of Jesus.48 Finally, it could be “engen
dering pathos for [an individual] in need.”49 None of these interpretations is ter
ribly convincing. The first interpretation posits an intertextual reading based on
loose verbal resonances and weak conceptual parallels.50 The other suggestions do
not fall in line with Mark’s typical modus operandi, which is to “show” his char
acters by their actions rather than to “tell” about them. There must, then, be a more
significant reason that leads Mark to break his typically taciturn mode of charac
terization. That Mark is recalling the watchers tradition— a tradition in which bind
ing figures prominently—provides us with this significant reason and also with a
more satisfying exegetical conclusion.
In the Book of Watchers, the watchers’ punishment is meted out by Yhwh’s
archangels, who bind the watchers as they await their eternal judgment. This is
narrated in 1 Enoch 10, after the watchers’ destructive deeds have been reported
and the archangels have brought the earth’s supplication to Yhwh. Yhwh then
addresses, for the first time, what is to happen to the watchers. Yhwh first addresses

43 Guelich, Mark 1-8:26, 277.

44 Ibid.; Cyril Hayward Cave, “Obedience of Unclean Spirits,” NTS 11 (1964) 93-97, here
96; John F. Craghan, “Gerasene Demoniac,” CBQ 30 (1968) 522-36, here 529; Pesch, Das Markus-
evangelium, 1:285.
45 A. Y. Collins, Mark, 267.
46 Donahue and Harrington, Gospel o f Mark, 163.
47 Marcus, Mark, 350.
48 Robert H. Stein, Mark (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament; Grand
Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008) 251-52.
49 T. Calpino, “The Gerasene Demoniac (Mark 5:1-20): The Pre-Markan Function of the
Pericope,” BR 53 (2008) 15-23, here 17.
50 According to Stein, “The different terms for ‘tombs’ in 5:2 (cf. Ps. 67:7 LXX) and ‘swine’
in 5:11 (cf. Isa 65:4) are unlikely to have triggered in the readers’ (or previous editors’) minds the
recollection of these OT passages, where the term ‘swine’ does not even appear. And in these
passages, we do not find any reference to ‘fetters’ and ‘chains’ and the inability to bind the demon-
possessed man. If Mark or an earlier redactor were greatly influenced by these OT texts, they would
have left more distinct terminological clues than those suggested” (Mark, 251).
 444 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 78,2016

Asael, who had become the watchers’figurehead in most traditions, and his punish
ment. The very first word that Yhwh speaks concerning the watchers and their
illicit behaviors in 10:4 is the imperatival command drjcrov (“bind”). In 10:11-13,
Shemihaza and all the watchers who participated in the illicit sexual relations meet
the same fate as Asael, though this time at the hands of Michael. Michael, like
Raphael, is commanded by Yhwh to bind the watchers for seventy generations in
the valleys of the earth, where they will await final and eternal judgment. At this
judgment, Yhwh informs Michael that the watchers will be led into the abyss of
fire (elt; t o xdoq t o u Ttupoq), into torment (e’u; Tqv (3a0avov), and into the prison of
eternal confinement (sic; t o SgapotTripiov auvKXdaEax; aitovoc;).51 If the watchers
were first characterized by their illicit actions, they have come to be characterized
by their boundedness in 1 Enoch 10, and this is the distinctive trait that continues
to characterize the watchers and those associated with them not only throughout
the Book of Watchers but also throughout 1 Enoch as a whole.
In 1 Enoch 13, the watchers draft a petition for their release (acpeau;) that
Enoch takes to the high heaven for Yhwh’s review. Not surprisingly, this petition
is rejected, and in 1 Enoch 14:5 Enoch gives the watchers the final report of their
fate: “no longer shall you ascend into heaven, but it has been decreed to bind you
by the chains of the earth for all the generations of eternity.” After this point in the
narrative, all of Enoch’s encounters with the watchers are in this bound form. Their
binding has become an intrinsic element of their characterization. 1 Enoch 54:1-5
gives telling insight into the shackles with which the watchers are bound:
And I looked and turned to another part o f the earth, and I saw there a deep valley
with burning fire. And they brought the kings and the mighty and threw them into that
deep valley. A nd there my eyes saw them making their instruments, iron chains o f
immeasurable weight. And I asked the angel o f peace who went with me, “For whom
are these chains being prepared?” And he said to me, “These are being prepared for
the host o f Azazel, that they might take them and throw them into the abyss o f com
plete judgm ent, and with jagged rocks they will cover their jaw s, as the Lord of
Spirits commanded.”52

Though the massive chains will contain the watchers for a limited time, this is only
the temporary solution to the plight that the watchers have caused the world. The
Book of Watchers is quite explicit that this binding will contain the watchers only
until the great day of judgment—it is a temporary, neutralizing solution.53
Mark takes up the theme of binding from the Book of Watchers, using four
rare and distinctive lexemes used only here in the NT. We have already dealt with

51 The nominal lexeme pdoavov is surely related to the demoniac’s request in Mark 5:7, pf|
pe (5aoavicTr|c;.
52 Translation from Nickelsburg and VanderKam, I Enoch, 68.
53 This is further demonstrated by the fact that “in ancient times, imprisonment served less as
punishment than as detention until trial” (Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch l, 222).
 MARK 5:1-20 AND THE BOOK OF WATCHERS 445

one of these— k c c t o ik t ig iv (“dwelling”)— in Mark 5:3-5, and the other four are
directly related to the theme of binding: aXuatc; (“chain”), rredr) (“shackle”),
SictGTTdv (“to tear apart”), and 6apa(eiv (“to control”). Here, the emphasis is on the
chains’ futility and the impossibility ofbinding the man, as three ofthe seven words
in Mark 5:3b are negatives: Kai o u S e aXuact o u k e t i o u 5 e 'u ; Efluvato arrrov flijaat.
A. Y. Collins and Guelich have both noted that the overall syntax of the passage
vividly describes the man’s condition.54 Moreover, it is commonly noted that the
uses of the passive (5E6ea0cu; SieairdaOcu; auvreTpicpOai) with the prepositional
phrase (u t t ’c iu t o u ) used for personal agency is a bit odd—the phrase could quite
easily be constructed actively. The striking syntax draws attention to the fact that
the man had been bound but the binding is ultimately ineffectual.55
In 1 Enoch 10, binding was intrinsically associated with the earth’s healing:
because Yhwh’s angels had bound the watchers, the earth had respite from the
damage that the watchers’ illicit actions had caused. This, however, was only a
temporary solution. Eventually the source of evil would be eradicated when the
watchers came to their final judgment. At this final judgment they would be sent
into the abyss and eternal torment. For Mark, Jesus brings this new mode of heal
ing. This is indicated by Jesus’ expulsion ofthe spirits in Mark 5. After Jesus grants
the spirits permission to enter into the herd, they rush into the sea and drown.56 In
the Book of Watchers, the origins of evil spirits are explained as the result of the
giants drowning in the flood. Mark then provides the Endzeit typology that cor
responds to the Book of Watchers’ Urzeit typology: just as the spirits have their
origins by drowning, so also their destruction comes by drowning. This destruction
leads to healing: Mark 5:15 indicates that the man formerly possessed became
clothed and of sound mind (ipcmapEvov Kai atocppovouvra). Jesus’ exorcism and
healing thus reverse the very categories of the watchers’ original actions: being
clothed and of sound mind are the converses to illicit sexual relations and illicit
teaching.

54 A. Y. Collins, Mark, 267; Guelich, Mark 1-8:26, 275.

55 Contra Marcus, who argues, “Mark chooses the passive because the man is not in control
of his life but [is] the victim of external forces. We might speak of ‘demonic passives’ here, the
mirror image of the divine passives employed elsewhere in the Gospel” (Marcus, Mark, 343). The
field of discourse analysis is helpful here. Discourse analysts have argued that Greek verbal and
syntactical forms are more or less “marked.” Odd uses of syntax and certain verbal forms highlight
what an author wants to draw his audience’s attention to. The use of the perfect (SeSeaGai)—the
most “highly marked” form—and the odd syntax highlight the fact that the spirit is too strong to be
bound any longer.
56 It is surely important that the sea has often been interpreted typologically as the abyss.
Moreover, as previously noted, Luke explicitly uses the term “abyss” (t i) v a(3uaaov) in his version
of this pericope (see Luke 8:31).
 446 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 78,2016

VII. Conclusion
In this article, I have shown that the Book of Watchers is an effective tradition
that both explains and resonates with Mark 5:1-20. It has explanatory power
regarding the enigmatic features of the Marcan text. I first overviewed the popular
ity and influence of the watchers tradition in Mark’s first-century context. I then
demonstrated five verbal and conceptual affinities that Mark 5:1-20 shares with
this tradition. First, the designation of the “man in an unclean spirit” (ev Ttveupcm
ctKaOapTO)) was interpreted in light of the watchers’ and giants’ uncleanness. Sec
ond, the spirits’ recognition of Jesus as “Son of the Most High God” was inter
preted in light of the watchers’ knowledge of Yhwh’s power and the power that is
given to mediatorial figures in Second Temple Judaism. Third, the details concern
ing Legion’s dwelling and cutting himself with rocks was related to the watchers’
punishment and Asael’s being placed under sharp rocks. Fourth, I demonstrated
that the adjuration by the demoniac was related to the watchers’ oath taken on
Mount Hermon. Fifth, the odd syntax and unique vocabulary concerning the demo
niac’s binding in Mark 5 were interpreted as a reappropriation of the binding theme
that is prominent in the Book of Watchers.
Having elucidated the verbal resonances and the conceptual parallels between
the Book of Watchers and Mark 5:1-20,1 can now draw conclusions regarding the
significance of these resonances and parallels. First, as has been demonstrated
throughout this article, the watchers tradition helps to explain a number of the
puzzling features of Mark’s pericope, rendering it unnecessary to utilize multiple
different intertexts and traditions to interpret the text. Second, I have shown that
Mark makes use of a prominent Second Temple Jewish tradition that is non-
canonical. This study thus situates Mark in Second Temple Judaism more gener
ally. Since the watchers tradition underlies Mark 5:1-20, we ought to look for other
pericopae where this tradition or other Second Temple Jewish traditions might
shed light on Mark and other biblical canonical authors. Third, in this pericope
Jesus shares an ability that is typically reserved for Yhwh in Enochic Judaism,
namely, to judge and cause the destruction of the unclean spirits and the watchers.57
Fourth, and finally, this article has demonstrated that the watchers myth has exerted
influence on another Second Temple-period text. Mark 5:1-20 can be added it to
an ever-growing list of texts that presume knowledge of the watchers tradition.

57 Significantly, in the preceding pericope, Mark 4:35-41, Jesus has power over the sea that is
similar to Yhwh’s power over the sea in the Hebrew Bible/Septuagint.