Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Qumran and Apocalyptic - Studies On Aramaic Texts - Florentino García Martinez
Qumran and Apocalyptic - Studies On Aramaic Texts - Florentino García Martinez
EJ. BRILL
LEIDEN NEW YORK KOLN
1992
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
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
' Apocalypicism in rlte MediIerraneott World artd the Near Emt. Proceedings of
the International Colloquium on Apocalypticism, Uppsala, August 12-17, 1979, editcd
by David HELLHOLM (Tiibingen 1983) (second edition enlarged with Supplementary
Bibliography 1989). Cf. F. GARCIAM A R ~ ~ K E ~ *Encore
., I'Apocalyptiquc*, IS/ 17
( I T ) , 224-232.
In a forschungsberichr on the theme -Apocalyptic and Qumran*: -La Apocalipti-
ca y Qumrin-, V. C a m n o - V. V~LLAR(eds.), N Sintposio BIblico E s p i a l (Valen-
cia - C6rdoba 1987). 603-613.
' K. RUDOLPH, rApokalyptik in der Diskussionm, in: Apocal).pricisnr, 783.
H. SIEGFMANN,*Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde fiir die Erforschung der
Apokalyptikm, in: Apoca3pricism, 495-530.
"Was speziell die Erforschung der Apokalyptik anbctrifft. so besleht gcgenwkrtig
eine crhebliche Dikrepanz mischen der Erwartung, die Qumranfundc konnten
wenigstens fiir diescn Forschungsgegcnstand immer noch eine A ~ cWundermcdizin
sein, und der Tatsache, daD die biihcrigcn AN;itzc zur Einbeziehung der Qumranfun-
dc in die Apokalyptik-Dikussion so gut wic gar kcine allgemein anerkannten oder
auch nur weiterfiihrenden Ergebnisse erbracht habcn", *Die Bedeutung der Qum-
ranfunde*, 495.
"Nur ganz knapp will ich mi& abschlieknd nod, zur Exhatologie der Qumran-
gmeinde i u k r n , weil deren Eigenart wcnigstens teilweisc zu erklaren vermag,
warum man in dieser Gruppe des nachexilischen Judentums kcin sonderliches fntcres-
se an Apokalyptik hatte", .Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde*, 521.
x FOREWORD
' "'Apokalyptikcr' blciben hicr im Grunde 'Frcmdkorpcr', dcncn man ehcr mit
eincr gewissen Reserve begegnet sein mag und auf die man bestimmt fiur keincn
~entralcn Lebens- odcr Funktionsbercich dcr Gcmcinde angewiesen war", *Die
Bcdcutung der Oumranfundc*, 524.
H. STEGEMANN,"Some Aspects of Eschatology in Texts from the Qumran
Community and in the Teachings of Jesus*, in: Biblical Archaeolog~Today (Jerusalem
1985d. 4q8-426. ,
'
S C H I ~ (ed.),
1990 25 51.
N Anhaedo~yand Histoty in h e Dead Sea Scrolls (JSPS 8 ) (Shefield
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.
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. CARMI-
GNAC concludes that the ms. was most likely copied by the scribe also
responsible for the mss. 4QpPs 37, 4QpIse and 4Qp0sb8. We can
printed in the catalogue of the Smithsonian Institution, sec F.M. CROSS, Scrolls from
[he Wilderness of the Dead Sea (London 1969, Plate 11.
A. DUPOW-SOMMER, aDeux Documents Horoscopiqucs cs&niens*, CR41
1965, 239-253; .---La S ~ d dcs
c W n i e n s et les Horoxopcs dc Qoumr&n*,Archdolo-
@e 15 (1%7), 24-31; J. CARMIGNAC, -Les horampes de Qumrgn-, RQ 5 (1%5), 199-
217; J. I-laff, *Legs as signs of election*, Tarbiz 35 (1965-66), 18-26 (Hebrew).
JA. FrrLWYER, =The Aramaic Elect of God Text from Qumran Cave 4*, CBQ
27 (1%5), 349-372 and P. GRfiLOT, uHCnoch et ses Ecriturcsr, RB 82 (1975), 481-500.
The only execption is M. DEIXOR, who in his article *QumrHnn in DBSupl 51 (1978),
col. 956, maintains the messianic character of the text. The latest study published
denies its messianic character: -Cc ne peut gukre etrc un des personaages awquels
les h i t s de Qumrln conRrent le titre de umessie-, car il n est pas question ici de
royautC ou dc sacerdoces, and proposcs a ncw interpretation which wc will discuss
later, sec A. CAOUOT, a4QMess Ar 1 i 8-11n, in E. PUECH - F. GARCIAMARTINEZ
(edsi), Mkmorial Jean Starcky. Vol. 1 (Paris 1991). 145-155.
F.M. CROSS, -The Development of the Jewish Saipts*, in The Bible and Ihe
Ancient Near East. Essays in honour of W.F. Albrighf (Garden City 1x1). 138.
J. CARMIGNAC, rLes horoxopw*, 207-210.
@MESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH 3
approximately date the copy of 4QMesr Ar in the first half of the first
century A . D ~
A. Tea
Coi. i
]?[']I'oIw ianiw '1 p[ I. T7n?n K T ' '1 1
vaccu [ 1% ? ' n ! ~ i ' ? u [ i ] ~ ~ ?2~ w
[...]a'>..~i> 77 10 1 1 1'1w I ? [ ] a n 3 i 7 >Y 7 7 ' ~ i i1 o i w i 3
'1 ]?Y [lY O]Ylo K > '1 W 1[3K3 il l a > an lo"lY3
JW'.?. 4
[
VUC~ ] ~ ' 1 nn7n
9 ~ Y?I['] 5
] 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 ] 6
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 7
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 8
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] 9
?ainw:7 n i l 1 a i ' 7 i n K i a K ~ > K 171-13'13 'a 1313w[n ] 10
v m t [ j T'n>Y> i l i a > 'ai113w[n 1 11
I?'>[ I...[ 1s '1 K [ 1 12
11i 3 w n n[ 1 13
I 7.1 I 14
'a 11 1 15
.I I 16
";i .I 1 17
Col. ii
a i n3 7 I [ p 1 1-l 1
I..?
Knrli 17U W'K3 Kn..[ 1 2
I...[ 1 3
]an a[ I 4
K l p 1 3 ... 1 1 5
181 110 6
'ainyu] n i i i 7
]7'13>Y3 8
(lost 9.10.11)
I..]131131 12
I. '1 .3n7 ?>.3.[ p[ 1.n 7 1 3 7 n ' i 13
? i ] ~ a I' > K 5 1 3 1 3 i n ' I n 2 lo[ 1 7 1 9 1 ~ 7'0~ 14
B. Translation
CoL 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.
1'7~ l\u. The reading is uncertain. The parchment was found in a
tom and shrunken state and its first words have practically vanished.
The editor reads ;?n[,7li?\U(a form that appears in 4QNor Ar), joins it
6 4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
to a n l ~ w ,his reading of line 2, and translates: $chis hair is red*.
FITZMYER would rather read: In [l7]3\v .It left a mark from>>.This
alternative would certainly avoid the problem of the grammatical
agreement as ;'3v then becomes a verb, but this reading is
paleographically impossible. P. GRELOTreads pn 1\u and attaches it to
an ?w. He offers the following translation: ccune tache rouge [sous (?)I
sa chevelures, but here again, as with the reading of the editor, the
grammatical agreement is impossible for the simple reason that an l\v
is obviously feminine.
We adopt CARMIGNAC'S reading and interpretation; the form
7'1~01x1 frequently appears in later Aramaic as 1 '170 lolo. The final
7 is partially visible on the photographs, and the editor himself
recognises the possibility of this reading.
Line 2
K71Y\U.This reading was suggested by CARMIGNAC because it is
the most sensible from a paleographical point of view and the one
which best agrees with j771?1w. The editor reads a]nl~ .chevelure>,.
F~ZMYER reads ~ T Y W<<barley*,influenced by the use of 7 'fl9 I ~ U
[literally alentils>>]in the same line, but he does not succeed in
making this reading fit the context. His best argument is a parallel
text taken from the Elephantine papyri (COWLEY 2.4.5; the other text
quoted by FITZMYERis nothing but a reconstruction based on this
one). But, apart from the contextual difference, the link between
~ T Y Wand lnriyu in the Elephantine text is secured by the structure
of the sentence. Such is not the case in our text. Another weighty
argument against FITZMYER'S interpretation is the continual presence
of s&u/scirut <chair* in the Babylonian physiognomic treatises, as
proved by the texts collected by KRAUS".
'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 consis-
tent1 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 (Lei- 1935), 60-100.
@MESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH 7
are called <<grainsof wheatr or ccolivest>in the Babylonian treatises. It
seems obvious that the text does not refer to nrlentilsn here as veg-
etables, because of the use of the singular in col. ii, 2 and because, in
this instance, it is followed by ...>.This interpretation is favoured by
most commentators. CARMIGNAC goes even further and proposes to
give a symbolic value to the use of the cclentils* and @redhair*. Like
Esau, whose hair was red and who sold off his primogeniture for a
dish of lentils, ale futur chef &Israel possedera ces lentilles jusque
dans sa chair, comme le precise la suite du texten. This interpretation
seems unconvincing. In the above-named treatises body marks are
essential for predicting future life and in them red hair appears as a
special omen of good luck. In the text number LXXXI of KRAUS'
collection we find the sentence: w h e n his hair turns red, he will grow
into a godlor be trustworthy,,'*.
As it appears, a good portion of the line was left blank, so that
only one word is lost.
Line 3
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.
l2 See also numbers LIX and LXlX and page 10 of the book by KRAUS.
8 4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
Line 4
L . ,. This word is read as w'U"
,,I. '?
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 transla-
tion. 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
@MESS AR AND THE BOOK O F NOAH 9
text, GRELOT'S suggestion that these three books represent the
primitive works of the Enochian literature (The Ashonomical Book,
the Book of Watchers and the Book of Dreams) seems the most
plausible to me. These three books, according to Juh 4,1743, sum-
marise Enoch's literary activity and constitute an abstract of ancient
wisdom. This hypothesis has been accepted by J.T. M I L I K ~who
sees a reference to this same trilogy in the section devoted to Enoch
in the Samaritan Kitdh al-'Asair: aIn 7 years he (Noah) learned the
three Books of Creation: the Book of the Signs, the Book of Astron-
omy (Arab nugmah, 'star'), the Book of the Wars which is the Book
of the Generation of darn*'^.
Line 6
1.w.Only the first letter has been preserved. The editor recon-
structs K 'pw ccmuch~.DUPONT-SOMMER prefers to read IJV, and
reconstructs n>>]3w(<thepaths,. Finally, FITZMYER seems to make
out an 1 and reads K>3]lW <<discretion,,.The text permits any recon-
struction, since the only letter preserved is the w.
Although the text that follows is preserved almost in its entirety, it
presents a number of difficulties:
- Is i13 an <(ethicaldative* (STARCKY)or a udirectional dative),
(CARMIGNAC) ?
- Does In3 l 3 3 Kmean <<knees,,? (The meaning of the sentence, in
that case would be either <<toadore, to venerate*, or else to recognise
somebody as a son by placing him on one's knees). Or could it be a
geographical term used in a mystical sense (GRELOT)? How does
this tie up with the previous and the subsequent contexts ?
Line 7
- 2 i n ; l [ ~ x j ri : - 2 1 3 x 3 I. CARMIGNAC
reads ' 2 in21 I3 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 3 x 3
apendant la croissance, pendant ses [--Is.We follow the editor's
reading, which is far more convincing. ~ R M I G N A C ' Sreading tends to
differentiate four stages in the life of the personage after his young
years: <(Pendant la croissance, pendant ses [--I, (pendant) [--I et
(pendant la ) vieillesse,>. But to arrive at this understanding of the
text he has to overlook 'il[ , whose reading is certain, and is forced
to fill up within brackets the assumed life stages which, in my opinion,
do not exist.
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
Line 9
1 l a - 3 13Wn. The word appears again in lines 10, 1 1 and 13. The
primary meaning is that of mathematical or commercial calculation.
STARCKYthinks that the word in this case refers to astronomical
calculation. In Qumran it only appears three times in Hebrew texts. In
one of them (IQS VI,20), it maintains its traditional meaning: ain his
account,. In the other two (IQH I,29; 1Q27 1 ii 2) it appears associ-
ated with 71,just as in our case. Although in the other three Aramaic
texts of Qumran where it is found (4QEnC 1 xii 2 4 ; 4 ~ ~ n a .25,3d
and 26,7), it has the sense of astronomical calculation, the context
here seems to request a sense very much like <<projects,plans*, a
meaning that is sufficiently well attested in later Aramaic. CAQUOT
prefers to retain the meaning ~ c o m p t e gives
~ , an objective value to
the suffix and interprets ? 19 10' in a positive way17; as a result he
asserts that the 'secret' known by the 'elect of God' is precisely the
exact number of men. But his understanding of the sentence depends
on the particular meaning he gives to the word n l o n , based on the
supposed existence of a second root 1313 11, equivalent to the Hebrew
77C. This assumption seems to be unnecessary; in any case a root
''-Ce parall&lenous invite b considkrer que la 'fin' dknotkc par le verbe sdf n'est
pas un khec, mais au contraire un accompliisement. Les calculs faits au sujet des
hommes arriveront b leur terme ';I 1>Y .... L'Elu est ainsi donnk cornme cclui qui
peut faire un calcul exact concernant 'tous les vivants'. C'est la precision qu'on
pouvait attcndre au sujet des 'secrets' qu'il dbtient, il s'agit d'un dCcompte exact
concernant les 'vivants'-, a40Mess Arm, 149.
12 4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
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
corruption, instead of athe mount of Yahweh*. In Isa 42, 'T'RII umy
chosen one# is found, applied to the Sewant of Yahweh. The express-
ion 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 formula-
tion 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 THE BOOK OF NOAH 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 mea-
ning, 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
'' Especially since the publication of the provocative positions of MMK, 7he
B w k r of Enoch, 89-98. According to MlLIK 7he Pombles of Enoch would be of
Christim origin and not earlier than 270 A.D. His views have been generally rejected,
see J.C. G W ~ A E I D - M .SIY)NE, -The Enochic Pentateuch and the Date of the
Similitudes-, HTR 70 (1977), 51-65; MA. KMBB, -The Date of thc Parables of
Enoch: A Critical Review, NTS 25 (1979), 345-359; CI(.L. MWIRS, -Dating the
Similitudes of Enoch-, NTS 25 (1979), 360-369; M. DFLCOR,*LC liwe dw Paraholes
d'HCnoch Ethiopien. LC probltme de son origine h la lumitre dm dCcQuvertes
r h n t c s r , EstBfbl 38 (1979-80)' 5-33; M. BUCK, .The Composition, Character and
Date of the 'Second Vision of Enoch'., in Tet?, Won, Gloube. Feslcchrifi K. Alund
(Berlin 1980), 19-30, D.W. S m R , *Weighed in the Balance: The Similitudes of
Enoch in Recent Dixussion-, Reli@ous Studies Review 3 (1981), 217-221; G. BAMP-
PYU>+ *The Similitudfs of Enoch: Historical Allusionsn, JSI 15 (1984), 9-31.
14 4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
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 supple-
ments 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
result, our text would anticipate, according to DUPONT-SOMMER, the
Ebionite christology. The text would refer not only to the Messiah,
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 sec-
tion.
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 interpreta-
tion given by the editor, which is better attested in Imperial Aramaic,
d r . DISO 251. An adverbial sense would also be possible = uprevi-
ously,,, a meaning l'fil;? also has when preceded by a lamed (COW-
LEY 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. IIQ-
tgob 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 40ME5S AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
Line 2
g Although the singular could be taken as a collective noun
~ n I?U.
and could refer to the -lentils* as food, the same use of the singular
leads us to give to it the derived meaning of ccmole*, as in col. i 2.
Line 7
We follow the reading of Fnww~, which repeats the expression
of col. i 10. STARCKY reads K l l w 3 fll? 1, and the spirit of the flesh,
dr. 1 Enoch 15,8 and lQH XIII,13 and XVII,25. In fact, the only part
of the second word preserved is a horizontal stroke which, at first
sight, seems to be far too long for a 2, but which in view of the script
used in the document can be read perfectly as a 1.
Line 8
1 ' 0 W 3 . We read ? " o ' / ~ > as in col. i 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.
Line 18
v 1117. In Dan 4,10.14.20, there appears the same couple: Saint-
Watcher. 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
25 See J.T. MIl,iK, 7he B& of Enoch, 56. In hi forthcoming publication, rLes
moddes aramkns du liwe &Esther daas la grotte 4 de QumrL*, in E. PvEcti-F.
GARCIAMARTINEZ, MCmoriol Jean Stonky, Vol. 2 (Paris 1992), 321-406, MIUK gives
a transcription of ~ Q N O ~ S JaNfragment
~, of a -colophon, inail, d'un manwcrit de
4Q qui relate la naissanee de N&, reeoupC par quelques mots d'un autrc m t , siglc:
e* (p. 357).
18 &MESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
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 them-
selves 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).
Now, Methuselah, my son, I shall reeount all these. things to you and write
them down for you. I have revealed to you and given you the book concerning
all these things. Preserve, my son, the book from your father's hands in order
that you may pass it to the generations of the world.
As we have also seen in the Notes, the best way to understand the
Aramaic expression in question is to relate it to Lamech's trip to
paradise, where Enoch resided and was consulted about Noah's birth.
3. And with his faher and with his forrfafhers... life and old age
Noah is, in fact, the last of the long-lived patriarchs: he became 950
years (Gen 9,29). After him, the ages of men will progressively
decrease as they turn away from God. This longevity is denied to the
contemporaries of Noah. The Watchers claim it for their descendants
(I Enoch 13.6) but their request is turned down:
-
They will beg you everything for their fathers on behalf of themselves -
because they hope to live an eternal life and that each one of them will live a
period of five hundred years... but they will die together with them in all their
defilement ( I Enoch 10.10-11).
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 express-
ions 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 gencr-
ations 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 4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
A confused text, which is certainly redactional and which seems to
come from a Noachic insertion in the Book of the Pambles ( I Enoch
68,l) takes up the same idea:
6. Elect of God
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 4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK O F NOAH
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).
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, 245-
256,and again by DE JONGE,77ie Testaments of the T w l w Pambnhs, 47.
46 AA. MOSSIiAMMER (ed.), Geatgius Syncellus. EcIogo Chronqpcphica (Biblio-
theca Scriptorum Graewrum et Romanorum Teubneriana) (Lcipzig l W ) , 47.
47 J A . FABRICIUS,C& Pseudepipphus Veferis Tesiamenfi. Vol. I (17U). 245-
a ) Chs. 106-107
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.
4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
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 instruc-
tors 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 announce-
ment 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..
Then the Almighty spoke. and the Great Holy spoke, and sent Uriel to the son
of Lamcch, saying: Go to Noah and tell him in my name: 'hide!', and revcal to
him the end that is approaching, bccausc the whole carth is about to perish.
Tell him that a catadysm will come down upon the earth and that all its
surface will disappear. Tell the just what he must do, to the son of Lamech,
and he will protect his soul for the life and will escape for centuries to come; a
branch shall be brought forth from him, that will stand for all generations
forever.
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.
%MESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH 31
. ~ ~ these insertions derive from the Book of Noah is, of
e t ~ Whether
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 impon-
ant 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 judge-
ment 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 &MESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
The first element (60.16.25) contains a series of details which
suggest a later interpolation. It is not clear, as suggested by CHARLES,
that it was incorporated in order to compensate for the lack of re-
ferences to the first judgement in the Book of Parables, because no
allusions to it can be traced. It seems impossible to identify the
celestial earthquake of the text with the deluge. According to Gen
7,11 Noah was at the time of the deluge 600 years old, whereas the
500 years at which the vision is dated correspond to the period when
he, according to Gen 5,32, begot his progeny. The way in which the
vision is introduced with a precise date [aIn the year five hundred, in
the seventh month, on the fourteenth day of the month*] is quite
unique in the whole book of I Enoch and indicative of a later ori-
gin66 (and the possible influence of Jub), as is the presence, together
with the Ancient of Days, of the angels and the just. We cannot,
therefore, consider these verses as belonging to the Book of Noah.
The same goes for 60,ll-23. Their contents agree with those of
chapters 41.3-8; 43; 44 and 59. In fact, they may be read as the logical
continuation of 59,3. Not even the mention of athe angel who was
going with me,, disturbs the sequence, since it frequently appears in
contexts in which the main character sees or hears6'. As for the
angels who are presiding over natural phenomena or are identified
with them, we also come across them in other sections of the Book of
Patables: angels of the water (61,10), angels of the lead and the tin
(65,8), of the celestial luminaries (43,2), of the winds (69,22), etc.
Nothing, thus, in these verses demands that we ascribe them to the
Book of Noah.
The case of 60,7-10.24 is more complex. These verses are an
meteorite of old days. Later tradition, 4 Ezra 6,49-52, 2 Bar 29,4, has
connected the tradition of the two monsters with the story of the cre-
ation. Both monsters would have been created on the fifth day. But,
in spite of this (the expression aon that day* of 60,7 could allude to
this 5th day), I think the tradition of the two monsters is connected
with the story of the fallen angels and the deluge and it can be
considered as a profitable element when it comes to recovering the
Leaving aside the interpretation of C H A W (7hc Book of Enoch, 113, note I),
who sees here an allusion to the feast of the Tabernacles, or that of MIUK, who
prefers to see here an allusion to the Christian feast of Easter, The B& of Enoch,
97.
67 See 40.2; 43.3; 46.2; 52.3; 62.3. In 40.8; 52,S; 53.4; 54.4 and 56,2 an Angel of
peace- fulfii the same function of interpreter and guide.
&MESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH 33
lost Book of ~ o a h Several
~ . arguments may be put forward in
favour of their provenance in Noachic literature.
1) The identity between the place where Asa'el is cast, Daduel [ =
The breasts of El in I Enoch 1 0 . 4 ~ .and Dundayin, the place where
Behemoth dwells6 This identity has been proved by MILIK~' on
the basis of the Aramaic term underlying both toponyms: K l l , *the
breasts*. This toponym links together the myth of Leviathan and
Behemoth with that of the fallen angels.
2) The relation between the story of the fallen angels and the
deluge is also secured by the very name of Leviathan, whose fight
against Raphael has left some echoes in the Manichaean Book of the
Giants: ~Ohya, Leviathan and Raphael wounded each other and
disappeared*. From this text, which has been preserved in two
copiesn, we learn, according to HENNING'Sinterpretation, that
*Ohya killed Leviathan but was, in turn, killed by Raphael*. The
same connection appears in the title of the work condemned by the
Gelasian Decree: Liber de @a nomine gigante qui post diluvium cum
dracone ab haereticis pugnasse perhibetur, apoctyphus.
3) Also suggestive of its Noachic origin is the allusion to Enoch's
residence in the paradise of the just, and his designation ccthe seventh
from Adam, the first man,,.
We thus consider these verses as an insertion coming from the
Book of Noah.
I Enoch 65.1-69,25. This block is not a homogeneous composition,
although it is presented as a vision of Noah included in Enoch's third
parable. As a matter of fact, it is composed of three distinct units:
- 65,l-67,3, which deals with the deluge and Noah's salvation.
68 Mlt.i& 7he Bwks of Enoch, 91, assumes that the fragment has been taken
from the Book of Giants, but his hypothesis does not seem to bc well grounded.
* *Bind Azaz'el hand and foot (and) throw him into the darkness! And he ma&
a hole in the de.scrt which was in Duda'el and cast him there*.
See 60,s .who holds hi chest in an invisible dcsen whose name i s Dundayin,
cast of the garden of Eden, wherein the elect and the righteous ones dwell, wherein
my grandfather was taken, the seventh from Adam, the first man whom the Lord of
the S irits created*
~ ~ 7 7 Bwks
te of E n a h . 30.The identity was already suggested by L GINZEERG,
73e Legendr of the Jews, Vol. V, 127, and has been accepted by A. CsOUoT, ulevia-
than et Bthemoth dans la troisitme parabole d'Htnoch-, Semitica 25 (1979, 111-122.
Published by W.B. H E ~ N G *The, Book of Giants+, BSOAS 11 (1943-46). 71-
R
34 4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
- 67,4-13, which treats of the punishment of the angels and their
relationship with the kings and the mighty ones.
- 68,l-69.25, an angelological and magical text.
J.T. M I U K ~suggests that the third unit (1 Enoch 68.1-69.25)
should be entitled <<Wordsof Michael,, a title that its author would
have taken from the Greek translation of an Aramaic work of which
two or three copies have been preserved at Qumran. MIUKeven goes
so far as to state that the contents of the work were unknown to the
author, and that he was aware of the title only from hearsay. I myself
rather think that the title is preserved in 1 Enoch 68.1 and is none
other than the aBook of the Secrets*. This title corresponds to the
magical section of the work, a part of which is included in 69,16-21.25:
<<Theseare the secrets of this oath*. Apart from this magical part, the
unit contains a dialogue between the archangels Michael and Raphael
on the judgement of the angels and a treatise on the names and the
functions of these angels, as well as two interpolations: one (69,22-24)
which is intended to facilitate the incorporation of the work into the
Book of Parables introducing material parallel to 41,3-8; 43; 44; 59;
60,ll-13, and another (69,2-3), taken from the Book of Watchers (1
Enoch 6,7), introduced by a corrector after the Book of Parables had
been incorporated into the Enochic Pentateuch in order to match the
names of the fallen angels with those of 1 Enoch 6-7. Nothing in this
unit suggests a Noachic origin, with the exception of 68,1, which is
clearly redactional and presents the whole as a series of teachings of
Enoch to Noah to justify the insertion.
Nor does the second unit, 67,4-13, seem to require a Noachic
origin. The contents of 67,4-7 conflict with the contents of the previ-
ous block (65,l-67,3) and are directly connected with chapters 62-64,
which describe the punishment of the kings and the mighty and also
that of the fallen angels. Although the whole unit uses to a great
extent a vocabulary and expressions drawn from the Book of Par-
a b l e ~it~ shows
~ , a composition that can be ascribed to a later period
and which has a precise purpose: to explain why the waters coming
from the site where the fallen angels are punished and where the
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, appar-
ently 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 @MESS AR AM) THE BOOK OF NOAH
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
mentioned, Jubilees would, according to CHARLES, have preserved two
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).
40MESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH 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
son, and Methuselah (commanded) Lam* his son. And Lameeh commanded
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 descen-
dants, -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 @MESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
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
JELLINEK 76), 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 influ-
ence 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 con-
tinuation 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
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 @MESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH
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.
IQ19. The editor, MILIK,entitles this Hebrew manuscript ccLivre
de N&r and organises the fragments according to a hypothetical
order in four groups which would respectively deal with the descrip-
tion of the moral state of men (fragment 1); the mediation by the
four archangels (fragment 2); the birth of Noah (fragments 3-11)@
and the canticle of Methuselah (?) (fragments 1 2 - 2 1 ) ~ ~ .
Of all the fragments only numbers 1.2.3.14 and 15 have a certain
length. lheir contents perfectly match the data collected on the Book
of Noah: Fragments 1 and 2, with the description of the fall of the
Watchers brought about by the deluge ( I Enoch 106,13-15; Jub 7,21-
24; 5,6-11); fragment 3 with the birth of Noah ( I Enoch 106 and
IQapGn 11); fragments 13 and 15 seem to bring the last part of col. i
of 4QMes Ar to a happy end.
IQ20. The manuscript is certainly a part of IQapGn and at least
fragment 1 preceded the actual col. 11. Unfortunately the text pre-
served is so brief and presents so many reading problems that one
cannot be sure of its contents. The two legible phrases which make
sense in col. i of fragment 1: ccla fureur de ton indignation, (line 2).
ccEt maintenant, voici: j'ui opprimt les prisonniersu (line 3). and line 2
of fragment 2, ccet frapp6s par derriere...^, suggest the existence of a
text dealing with punishment which could be linked with the fallen
angels. This would indicate that in the summary of IQapGn, the
description of the punishment of the angels was also included and
preceded the wonderful birth of the hero.
" 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.
&MESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH 43
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).
C W R TWO
' J.T. MIUK, *The Dead Sea Scrolls Fragments of the Book of Enoch*, Biblica
32 (1951), 393-100, aHtnoch au Pays des Aromates. Fragments arameens de la
Grotte 4 de Qumrh*, RB 65 (1958), M n , aProbl&mesde la litttraturc hCnochique
la lum2re des fragments aramtens de Qumrbnr, HTR 64 (1971), 333-378.
* J.T. MlUy with the coUaboralion of M. BLACJC,7hc Bwkc of E n d . Ammaic
Fragyus of Qurnndn Cave 4 (Word 1976).
The most signiicant a i t i d reviews are the following: J. BARR,in ITS 29
(1978), 517-530, A.M. DmS, in Lc Mu~Con90 (19T7). 462-469, P. GRfXOT, in RB 83
(1976), 605-618; G.W.E NICKEUBURG, in CBQ 40 (1978), 411-419; R. SnmeL, in
ByMttinaclavica 39 (1978). 63-67; E. ULLeFlWRFP and M. W m , in BSOAS 40
(lm, 601-602.To these reviews a certain number of studies, which arc pradicaiiy
"review-articles",need to be addcd: JA. F~ZMYER, *Implications of the New Enoch
-
Literature from Qumran*, TS 38 ( l w , 332-345; J.C. GREEWFlELD M.E. STONE,
-The Books of Enoch and the Traditions of En&. Nwnen 26 (1979), 89-1M; M.
SOKOLOPP, *Notes on the Aramaic Fragments of Enocb from Qumran Cave 41,
Maarav 1 (19778-79). 197-U4, M. STOW, -The Book of Enoch and Judaism in the
Third Century BCE*, CBQ 40 (1978), 479-492; J.C. VANDERKAM, &me Major
Issues on the Contemporary Study of 1 Enoch: Reflections on J.T. M i l i s 7he B&
I$ Enodtr, M m 3 (I=), 85-97. The criticism of these studies concerns the way in
which the Aramaic evidence has been prwcntcd as well as the hypothetical character
of some of the presuppositions that underlie MIUK'Spresentation of the evidence: low
valuation of the Uhiopic translation, late origin of the Boo&o j Pomblu, dependence
of Gen 6,14 upon 1 E m h 6-19, relationship of the Enochic material with the late
Jewish literature, Me.
' See F. G A R ~hA -
h R 7 l N E 7 . EJ.C. TlGoreLAAR, *1 E n d and the F i e of
Eaocb. A Bibliography of Studies 1970-19%. RQ 14/53 (1989). 149-176. For a
synthetic review of the literature, see A.S. VAN Dm WOUDE, *Fiinkbn Jahre
Oumraaforscbung (1974-1988)*, Thedogirche Rwrdrchau 54 (1989), 250-2.59.
46 ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH
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 litera-
ture.
In the following pages I will try to present systematically the most
important contributions of the Aramaic fragments to our understand-
ing 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
seven manuscripts are known by the sigla 4 ~ ~ n ~and~ corre- * ~ ~ ~ ~
spond to the other parts of the Ethiopic Enoch, with the exception of
chs. 37-71, the Book of Parables, of which no remnants have been
found in Qumran.
The approximate dates when those manuscripts were copied range
from the beginning of the 2nd century B.C. to the first half of the 1st
century A.D., the period to which the latest manuscript of the Astro-
nomical 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 . P
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, 10-
12, 13-14, 18, 30-32 and 35-36), the Book of Dreams (ch. 89) and the
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 Studienob-
jehr, Biblirche Notizen 36 (1981),69-129.
48 ARAMAIC ENOCH AM) THE BOOKS OF ENOCH
Greek version has practically disappeared1') consists of a mixture of
astronomical and geographical elements and of moral and apocalyptic
insights. Enoch passes on to his son Methuselah the revelations
disclosed to him by Uriel as to the sun, the moon, the stars, the
winds, the cardinal points and the heavenly orbit. Those instructions
are followed by chs. 80-81, of a clearly apocalyptical character, which
are also presented as Uriel's revelations transmitted by Enoch to
Methuselah.
The incomplete and muddled character of the Ethiopic text had
already been recognised and emphasised by the scholars before the
discovery of the Aramaic fragments. CHARLES" upholds the view
that the Astronomical Book or Book of the Courses of the Heavenly
Luminaries was originally composed of chs. 72-79 and 82, in the order
72-78, 82 and 79, with two clearly different interpolations, chs. 80 and
81. To this opinion, which is to prevail among the corn men tat or^'^,
MARTIN will add that ch. 77, whose geographical contents appear odd
to him within an astronomical context, is also an interpolation13.
The Aramaic manuscripts have not justified MARTIN in this point,
since, although 4 ~ ~ n a .23d and 4QEna.stf 1 ii contain remnants of
ch. 77, they have strengthened the suspicion that the Ethiopic text is
not precisely a reflection of the original work. A recent study of the
astronomical chapters of 1 Enoch has led NEUGEBAUER'~ to sur-
mise that the extant Ethiopic text is composed of two different and
modified versions of the same material, with the addition of several
other fragmentary pieces. Chs. 72-76 and 77-79,l would represent
these two versions, with remnants of other additional versions in chs.
79.2-80,l and of another different source in ch. 82. The fact that chs.
'' Cfr. 0 . NEUGERAUER, op. cir.. 388. The same in p. 411: "intrusion of non-
astronomical 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 ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS O F ENOCH
l7 Thew fragments of the oldest ms. have not yet been published. The only
information MIUK givcs concerns the paleographic daling, a general description of
the contents, and some observations concerning their orthography, 7he Baokr of
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
ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH 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
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., pos-
sessing 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
known as pseudo-~u~olemus~~. This author attests not only to the
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 discus-
sed and discarded by GREFNRELD and S"TONE, art. cil., 92-95.
2.1 M. BLACK,7hc Book of Enoch or I Enoch, 10-11.
ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH 53
corpus of the Enochic literature since Enoch was traditionally con-
sidered as the inventor of the calendar and the father of Astron-
om?.
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-Eupole-
mus 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 frag-
ments 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 com-
plete. 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
"And now, my son, I will show you", corresponding to 79.1. In the Qumran fragments,
as in a good part of the Ethiopic mss., the name of Methuxlah has been omitted.
J.C. VANDEWAM,-1 Enwh and a Babylonian Map of the World*, R Q 11
(1982-EM), 271-278.
" P. GWtDT, *La gbographie mythique d'HCnoch et ses sources orientalesm, RE
65 (1958). 33-69, and J.T. MIIJK, 7'he Books of Enoch, 15-18.
" 0. NEUGEBAUER,op. cil., 387.
31 This ms. has not been fully published yet. MIIJK asserts that most of its frag-
ments belong to the synchronic calendar (rite Bodrr of Et~oclt,274), and, indeed, on
P A M 42.234, 42.235 and 42.236 a good number of frags. of this synchronic calendar
are preserved. Of these calendric frags. numbers 6 and 7 have been published; frags.
23, 25, 26 and 28, a h published, correspond to other sections of the Ethiopic Enoch.
56 ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS O F ENOCH
that has drawn the keenest attention from the researchers3*. Such a
calendar is prior to and independent of the Qumran sect, a fact well
established by the date of dQEnart?', the oldest copy of the calendar.
According to V A N D E R K A M ~ ~the
, data available do not allow us to
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
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 doubt-
ful 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 Chris-
tian 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 outstand-
ing 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
z1.43 C.D. OsBrw, -1 E n d 803-8 (765-7) and Jude 12-13-. CBQ 47 (1%). 296-
303.
60 ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH
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 suppos-
edly have known and already made use of these *Visions of
. for the date of incorporation of this work into the
~ n o c h , , ~As
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 consti-
tutes 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
"We can accept as obvious, however, the fact that the author of the Book of
Watchen used an early written source which he incorporated without any great
m his own work (En. 6-19)', me Bookr of Enoch, 25.
-C:
Before these things (happened) Enoch was hidden, and no one of the children
of the people knew by what he was hidden and where he was. And his dwelling
place as well as hi activities were with the Watchers and the holy ones; and
(so were) hs
i days*.
For example, in SACCHI, op. cir, 432, and in CORRIE~TF~-PIIC.ERO, op. cir, 17. In
u4QMes. Aram. y el Libro de N d * , Sabtta~trice~rris 28 (1981), 217-218, 1 think I have
demonstrated that the only Noachic element in these chapters is 10,l-3. Cfr. the
synthesis of A. DlfZ MCHO, Apdcrifos del Atttiguo Tesratttenro. Val. 1: Introducci6n
General (Madrid I N ) , 228-220, and supra pp. 28-29.
G.W.E. NICKELSBURG, -Apocalyptic and Myth in 1 Enoch 6-11*, IBL %
( 1 9 9 , 383-405, and Jewish tireranire behvrett the Bible and tlte Mishnah, 49-52.
P.D.HANSON, -Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel, and Euhemeristic Heroes in 1
Enoch 6 - I S - , jBL % (1977), 195-233.
ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH 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), apparent-
ly 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 con-
sidering 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.
'' P. SACCHI,all 'Libro dei Vigilanti' e I'apocalitticam, He~roclr 1 (1979), 42-92,
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'apocalitri-
ca 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 6-
l l v , JJS 35 (1984), 136-146.
68 ARAMAIC ENOCH AM> T H E BOOKS O F ENOCH
And he was therefore with the angels of God six jubilees of years. And they
showed him everything which is on earth and in heavens, the dominion of the
sun. And he wrote ewrything, and borc witness to the Watchers, the ones who
sinned with the daughters of men because they began to mingle themselves
with the daughters of men so that they might be polluted. And Enoch borc
witness against all of them.
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 reconstruc-
red). 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 ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH
contained only the Book of Watchers. The evidence in this case is,
obviously, negative, because no complete manuscripts but only frag-
ments 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
Qumran of two later copies, 4 ~ and ~4QEne,
n which
~ have preserved
elements of the Book of Dream together with remnants of the Book
of Watchers, and the existence of another copy, 4QEnC, which pre-
serves 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 manu-
scripts 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 pre-
served 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.
ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH 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 iden-
tical: 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 Shemi-
haza cycle.
d) The most significant element brought to light by the new manu-
scripts is the antiquity of this independent Enochic work. The quota-
tion 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 apocalyp-
tic8', as it demonstrates that its origins are previous to and indepen-
dent of the Antiochean crisis, and underlines the priority of the
cosmic apocalypses over the historical ones. But it also implies that
the text of the ideological elements reflected in the work must be
79 The Greek version of Syncellus read azolz&I in 6.7 and azatl in 8.1; the version
of Codex Panopolitanus read aseal in 6,7 and orall in 8.1; the Ethiopic version o f i r s
'drc9Vl in 6.7 and '6zdzeVI in 8,:.
On the orthography of this ms.. see the indications of MIIJK, 77re Boob 4
Enoclr, 22-23 and 140-141. MILIK underlines the archaism in the use of the mafnrs
lecrimis and the dependence of an older original. This aspect appears clearly in the
examples uscd by K. B~YERin the grammatical section of his Die amnraisclren T a e
vom T ~ e Meer.
n
' As 1 have shown in -Encore I'Apacalyptique*, JSJ 17 (19%). 224-232 and in
*Les Traditions Apocalyptiques A Qumrin*, in: C. KAPPLEH (ed.), Apoca&pses el
Voyoges dans I'cnc-deld (Paris 1987), 201-235. See also M. Srolrl~"Enoch and
Apocalyptic Origins* in Scriptures, Sects and Ksions. A Profile of Judacsnr /nun Ezra
to the Jewish Revolts (London 1980), 37-47.
72 ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH
The Book of Dreams derives its title from its contents. Chs. 83-90
were already recognised in antiquity as an autonomous unit within I
. author relates two dreams / visions of Enoch: the first
~ n o c h ' ~Its
M %ONE, *Enah, Aramaic Levi and Sectarian Origins*. JSI 19 (1988). lS9-
mb7
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
ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH 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 repre-
sented by all sorts of animals, while the angels are symbolised by
humans beings. Two of the animals (Noah and Moses) are momentar-
ily 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 Maha-
lalel. 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 canoni-
cal 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
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
Greek summary by ~ ~ n c e l l uas ~ , as in Jub 7,22 (but not in Jub
s ~well
4,1522; 5,1, etc., where the story is only about watchers or giants).
Afterwards follows the story of the deluge, which includes the destruc-
tion 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 Qum-
ran, 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.
ARAMAIC ENOCH AND T H E BOOKS OF ENOCH 75
expressed in a mixed form of jubilees, weeks of years and 70 year
periods94. But the most interesting element of this division is the
combination of the 70 periods in a quaternary schemegs which runs
parallel to the scheme of the four danielic empires. Such a division of
history is clearly marked by the presentation to the Almighty of the
book where the deeds of the shepherds (89,70-71; 89,77 and 90,17)
are recorded, and the symmetrical distribution of the number of
shepherds in each period: 12 + 23 + 23 + 12. The first period
concludes with the return from exile (89,672); the second one
extends to Alexander the Great (89,72-77), the third goes well into
the period of the Maccabees (90,l-5), while the fourth runs until the
beginning of the messianic age (90.6-17).
The work concludes with the judgement on the fallen angels, of
the 70 shepherds and the disloyal sheep (90,14-27), followed by the
rebuilding of the new Jerusalem (90.29) and the arrival of the new
Adam (90,37), in a still more glorious state than the first one, since
his horns are biggerM.
Despite the different character of the two dreams and the two ver-
sions of the deluge contained in the work, one of which constitutes
the basis of the first dream, while the other is properly included in the
zoomorphic history, the whole book seems to be the work of only one
author. In both dreams it is insisted that Enoch composed them
before his marriage (83,2; 85,3), both are presented as teachings to his
son Methuselah (83,1.10; 85.1-2). and the final summary (90,42)
makes reference to the first horn. Although these elements might
have a redactional character and be designed to incorporate different
elements in a whole, nothing in the text implies that this is the case or
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 frag-
ments 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
88
found in Jub 4,19 apparently confirms this conclusion:
And he saw what was and what will be in a vision of his sleep as it will happen
among the children of men in their generations until the day of judgement. H e
saw and knew evewhing and wrote his testimony and deposited the testimony
upon the earth against the children of men and their generations.
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: Compen-
dia 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.
ARAMAIC ENQCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH 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.
lW The exact limits of this part of the Ethiopic Enoch are different for the
diierent authors. For C t i ~ i u mthc
, Epistle of Etroch comprises chs. 91-104, NIQ(F?-
BURG considers that the Epistle comprises chs. 92-105 and excludes ch. 91 as redactio-
nal, 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 ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH
101,3; 102,3; 103,8), or the elements of an epistolary style which first
appear in 94,l.
On the other hand, it seems obvious that these epistolary elements
are not so characteristic as to constitute a significant structure to the
work which, apart from its apocalyptic sections, is mainly composed of
exhortations and imprecations that somehow evoke other testamen-
tary compositions.
The problem posed by BLACK'Sinterpretation is that the compos-
ite character of the work is immediately taken for granted, this being
a decisive question when it comes to determining the origin and the
date of composition of the Epble of Enoch. This composite character
is admitted by most scholars, although opinions are divided as to
which elements compose the work and as to their respective starting
and finishing points. Morever, BLACK'Sexplanations are not very
coherent. On the one hand, he labels the following elements as
independent pieces having a different origin: the brief "epistle" of
92,2-5, a poem on Nature in 93,ll-14, the ((Apocalypse of Weeksw, the
parenetic central section, the remnants of the ((Book of Noahw in chs.
106-107, and ch. 108, clearly of a later datelo7. But when it comes
to determining the history of the text known in Ethiopic, he considers
that there were only two Aramaic recensions, the first formed by an
independent ccApocalypse of Weeks*, while the second would have
been the source of the present text, with all the elements (except ch.
108) already linked together1''. NICKEUBURConly indicates the
apocalypse of Weeksa as a traditional piece re-used by the author of
the Epistle of ~ n o c t s ' ~although
, he considers chs. 91,l-10 as a re-
dactional element independent of the Epistle which had been incor-
porated, like chs. 81-82, at the time of the insertion of the Epistle in
the Enochic c o r p ~ s " ~ .D E X I N G E R ~ ~pays
~ attention only to the
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 'intcrpo-
lation' theory-), 2 8 & B (Apoca&pse qf Week), 23 (-Book of Noah*) and 323 (ch.
108).
la, M. BLACK,;Ihr Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch, 289.
lW G.E.W. NICKELSBURG, *The Epistlc of Eaocb and the Qumran Literature-,
ISS 33 (1982), 340:"a traditional picce, rc-used by this author'.
"O G.W.E. NICKEUBURG, Icwish Lilerolure bemeen the Bible curd the Mishnah,
151. S . UHuG, Dm dthiopische Henochbuch, 673-674, 708, considers thcm part of the
Book of Dreantr.
ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH 81
'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 ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH
I have sworn unto you, sinners: In the same manner that a mountain has never
turned into a servant, nor shall a hill (cver) become a maidservant of a woman;
likewise, neither has sin been expartcd into the world. It is the people who
have themselves invented it. And those who commit it shall come under a great
curse. (98,4)
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
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 Qum-
ranic 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 characteris-
tics 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 alter-
nation of plene forms with the same words defectively written, the
relative pronoun ' 5 corrected to '1,the presence of -1,the inconsist-
ency 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 orthogra-
phy to that of lQIso and IQS. But, in view of the dating of the ortho-
graphical features of the original on which 4 Q E d depends, and
J.T. MILIK,l l t t .
lJ6 Books of Ettoch, 49
92 ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE 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 pre-
dicted 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,
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 consti-
tute 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
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 supple-
ment to it?; in the latter case, what is their origin?; were they incor-
porated by the author of the Epirtle, or by the author of the final
Enochic compilation? The traditional opinion is unanimous in assert-
ing 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'Sargu-
men& 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 alterna-
tive 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
' See the references given supra, chapter two, note 3, and F. GARC~A ~AR'IINEZ-
EJ.C. TIGCIIELAAR, and the Figure of Enoch. A Bibliography of Studies
-1 E I I O C ~
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 Belles-
Lettres. 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
with an edition of the Aramaic fragments in JA. FTZh4Yti.R - DJ. HARRIKGTON, A
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 (Mono-
graphs 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
other Enochic works ( 4 ( 2 ~ n ' ) ~none
, of the elements preserved in it
appears in the Enochic compilation transmitted in Ethiopic (1 Enoch).
This is, therefore, a different work, of Enochic character undoubtedly,
since it was copied together with other Enochic works, but lost as a
consequence of not having been included within the Ethiopic Enoch.
All the credit for the identification of this lost work and for its partial
recovery goes to MILIKwho, showing as much intuition as erudition,
succeeded in following through many different literary works the trail
of the elements that proved necessary to unify the scanty Qumranic
fragments and give them their proper significance4.
MILIK'S intuition consisted in surmising that the Qumranic frag-
ments were the remnants of the lost work that, some centuries later,
served as a basis for Mani in composing the work whose title in
Middle-Persian is Kawrin, 'The Giants".
There prevailed the reasonable supposition that a Book of Giants
had seen the light prior to Mani, following Syncellus's assertion that
ccin the year 2585, while roaming in the fields, Kainan came across the
manuscript of the giants and put it away*'. This surmise was con-
firmed by the Gelasian Decree which cites a Liber d e Ogia n o m i n e
gigunte qui post diluvium c u m dracone ab haereticis pugnacse perhibetur,
apocryphur. It was also a well-known fact that Mani had carnposed a
Book of ~ i a n t sand
~ the suspicion had been growing, since as early
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 frag-
ments were spotted containing translations or citations from the book
of Mani. It was their publication by HENNING" which enabled MI-
LIK, 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.
" 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
l . whereas
4 ~ ~ ~ : C r a n13, 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
THE BOOK OF GIANTS
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 frag-
ments 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 THE BOOK O F GIANTS
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 Ankiindi-
gung 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 preser-
ved 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.
I THE BOOK OF GIANTS I03
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
-... and what they had seen in the heavens among the gods, and also what they
had seen in hell, their native land, and furthermore what they had seen on
earth, - all that they began to teach to the men. T o Shahmizid two (?) sons
were borne by ... One of them he named "Ohya"; in Sogdian he is called
"Slihm, the giant". And again a second son [was born) to him. H e named him
"Ahya"; its Sogdian (equivalent) is "Pit-SBhm". As for the remaining giants,
they were born to the other demons and ~ a f t s a s * ~ .
The first part of this quotation can be easily related to the disclosures
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 Ma-
nidtiier (Schriften zur Geschichte und Kultur des Alten Orients 8. Berliner Turfantex-
te IV Berlin 1973), 77-78, a work which has not been available to me.
'$ranslation of H ~ I N G70.,
THE BOOK OF GIANTS 107
The longest manuscript of the k w h published by HENNING(ms.
A) consists of 15 fragments in Middle-Persian of a book which con-
tained several treatises. The editor ascribes six to the k w h . In the
first one (frag. c), there is a narrative about a conversation between
'Ohyah and his father Shemihazah about Mahaway. Fragment j
mentions Baraq'el, Hobabish and Adk, alludes to the battle between
the giants, and tells about 'Ohyah's dream of the tablet thrown in the
water and Hahyah's of the garden full of trees. Fragment 1 records
Enoch's message to the fallen angels on their destruction and that of
their progeny, as well as a description of the general happiness which
will come after the deluge. Fragment k preserves a dialogue between
'Ohyah and Hahyah, which apparently continues in the first page of
frag. g. The second page of this fragment describes the places where
the fallen angels are doomed to endure punishment. The last frag-
ment (i) mentions Enoch's ascent into Heaven, the union between the
women and the angels and the ordeals these impose on mankind.
Manuscript B, in the Uygur language, describes the flight of Bara-
q'el's son in search of Enoch and how Enoch's voice and recom-
mendations prevent him from suffering Icarus's fate.
Manuscript C, in Sogdian, relates the battle between the giants
'Ohya and Mahaway.
Manuscript D, in Middle-Persian, abides by Enoch's explanation of
Hahyah's dream, according to which the trees would represent the
watchers and the giants.
Manuscript G describes, in Sogdian, the descent of the angels to
fight the *demons,> (the watchers and the giants) and how the angels
separate men from their adernons*, take them to the foot of Mount
Sumeru, and eventually settle them in towns prepared for the pur-
pose. The manuscript ends with the fight of the 200 ccdemonse and
the angels who swoop down from Heaven to punish them.
Just as in the case of the Qumranic texts, the fragments of the
Manichaean work have reached us only in bits and pieces, thus
making it impossible to obtain an accurate idea about the proper
order and correct linking together of the different elements pre-
served*. HEWING avows that it is impossible to determine the
2s nte Books of Enoch, 317-339. For MII.tK there is a direct line connecting the
medieval midrashim and the Manichean book which goes through the incantation
texts and the allusion found in the magical bawls. For this reason he considers the
Shemihaza midrash as an abbreviation, contaminated with other stories, of the
Manichean book, and consequently of the Book of Gionu now attested at Qumran.
29 For MIt,IK, this quotation by Syncellus would establish that the Book of Giants
was translated into Greek together with the other Enochic compositions and till the
fourth century A.D. was a part of the Enochic Pentateuch, and only later was
replaced by the Book of the Pmbles: *I attempt to prove that the last of the quorati-
011s 'from the first book of Enoch on the Watchers' found in the Chronography of
George Syncellus ... comes in reality from the Book of the Giants. In other words, in
110 THE BOOK OF GIANTS
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.
THE BOOK OF GIANTS 111
" 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:
s ~ ) ; *Die Trlume der Riesen Hahja und Uhja und der Hug des
4 ~ ~ 1 r G i a r t t 9-10)
Mahawai zu Henoch* (4~EtrGiants~); 11) uDer Traum vom Baum mit den drei
Wurzelnn (6Q8 2); 12) ~ D e rTraum von der abgespiilten Tafel* (2Q26); 13) uDas
Gebet Henochsw (4~EnGicutts' 9-10); 14) ~SegensweissagungHenochsw (1Q23 1. 6 ) ,
Die aramifisclren Teute, 259-268.
THE BOOK OF GIANTS 113
* I ~ 4~~1tGiartts~,
On the testimony of ~ Q E I and see the reservations expressed in
note 14.
36 As assumed by BEYER,Die arar?tZiiscltenTeute, 259.
37 Tile Books of E~roclr,57-58.
THE BOOK OF GIANTS 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 argu-
ments 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
effect that in the part still unpublished of ~ Q E ~ G ~ U (ii
W !17-19) a
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.
A. Reconstructed t a t
71) 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
Ik'\L' '(3
K ; ~ > K017 n-?Y 7~ ; 1 : ~' i t : [K'\L13K] 71?1 IjJ\ii j ' j V : : ' l a V-n:! 3
[ K 77L'
inx ~ l i l Kl n 1 > 1 Jy? ' ? 1 i 1 7 [ l : l j ~ l i l l ? ; i ;1?7 3 t : ' N u n 1 4
1'""
li3jil ?'il>K ' 7 1[JV n ' l i l ] '7 ]lo KrlVn K 33K KYK 8
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.
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.
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 PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS
Nabonidus' religious conceptions is invalid, given the polemic charac-
ter 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.
Line 3
Y ~ Wy 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
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(
] 0 1, <<andI was far from my throne*. In MILIK'S read-
1W [ 7 > ~ 1 3 1
ing, 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 separ-
ated 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 resting-
place be set (?) in peace,,22.
At the end of the line the editor reconstructs ccand when I con-
fessed 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 DUPONT-
SOMMERand VAN DER WOUDE.
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
have been raised against DUPONT-SOMMER as to his understanding of
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 support-
ing 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 appear-
ance 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 sup-
ported 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 sub-
jects. 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.
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
between X U ~ K of ) ~almost
, certain reconstruction, and 7n7n3. MILIK
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 men-
tioned 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 develop-
ment 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.
LESWORTIi, *Prayer of Manassch- in l7te Old Testament Pseudepigmpho. Vol. 11, 625-
637.
PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS 129
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), 305-
316, 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 PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS
J.T. MILIK,411.
36 I1 Aqht, V, 5-8. Text and translation in CH. VIROUEAUD, L a l&n& PhCni-
cienne 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.
PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS 133
No feature in 4QmDan Ar allows us to assimilate it to the narrative
genre of our manuscript. It is rather a discourse on history of the type
of Dan 11, clearly apocalyptic and probably later than the canonical
book of Daniel.
In 4QpsDan Ar it is Daniel who speaks before the king and the
courtiers4'. The identity of this Daniel with the figure of the seer, in
other words the pseudoepigraphic identification, seems to me obvious:
Daniel appears in the canonical book as an interpreter authorised by
God not only of dreams41, but in particular of the grand apocalyptic
visions of history42. Hence he is the ideal figure to give authority to
one of these visions.
Certainly the figure of Daniel as miracle worker like ~ is i not
i in
question. In the canonical book Daniel appears as the subject on
whom God works his wonders43, not as God's chosen agent for
carrying them out. Without entering into the discussion as to whether
the figure of Daniel in the canonical book is a continuation of the
figure of Daniel in the Ugaritic documents and in Ezek 14,14-20; 28,3,
the reconstruction of his name in 4QPrNab seems to me in no way
necessary. For the propaganda aims of the book the simple introduc-
tion of a Jew who leads King Nabonidus to the recognition of the true
God is quite enough.
A comparison with the book of Job and with the legend of Job in
general is for many reasons natural.
The first point of comparison is that both protagonists lead a happy
life, of which they are deprived for a time4+$,by an illness of divine
origin4', but to which they are finally restored.
God himself.
46 On 4Qrdob and IlQ~globthe tea in question has not k e n preserved. Tg
On elos Dcut 28.38 also translates the MT expression as X W 'K 3 K 3 n W 3.
j7On the origin of Nabonidus w e H LEW, 71-TI. and the article by P. G ~ v r u
in the DBSup. VI, 268-286, specially 111, 4 x 5 origines de Nabonidem.
" R. MEYERsees in them diaspora Jews from Arabia, Dm Geber, 99-100, note 2
49 G . FOHRER,95: -So bleibt wohl nur die SchluOfolgerung, daO die auf die
Formung von 4Q Or Nab cingcwirkt hat..
So M. DELCOR, 63. *La tradition rapport& par la priere de Nabonide montre, en
tout cas, qu'il existait dans le nord de I'Arabie une legende de Job sous une forme
plus andenne que celle du livre canonique*.
PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS 135
manuscript. On the basis of a real but puzzling event, such as the
sojourn of Nabonidus in Teiman, it is easy to construct a story at the
same time edifying and apologetic, which accounts for the facts and
simultaneously serves the purposes of the author.
3. LITERARY
GENREAND ORIGIN
'' See G. VERMES, -The Efymology of the Esscnew, RQ 2 (1960), 427-443 and
-Essenes and Therapeutaia, RQ 3 (1%2), 495-504.
4QPSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC AND THE
PSEUDO-DANIELIC LITERATURE
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
Ms b i l n ] l ? ~ ? l l 0 ~5[
I.. [ 6
J>W 1 K ?120 >[Y 7
] '333 i l l [ 8
1.0.1 9
Ms a [ I.. ilKO Y3[1X 1'3W 1 10
K la 10 1 i n ' i 112>13[ ].'I ? [ l a ].n7 11
[K]>3l 7 K 111' 1 lill3Y0 l a > 1 1.1'3 ?>l!ii'I 12
[ 1. ] l a ' 3 3 1 [ 1 13
I 1.n '.[ I 14
Mss a + b [?'ill>K '93K] 10 1 lil"3lX > K l W ' '33 11n3[ ] 15
~ i i l ' >i l~l 1 K n w u ? i > w > ? l a 3 3 3 17[n37 i i a ? ] 16
1n1n? [ w y i i 1'3 i > ~
IW 'l'n 111130 ?lit[ 1. ?nK>l >3[3 3% lY313313 1'3 113K 17
] . x n i h 'xi.[ I 18
Ms b 11 13K 113 1[ 19
1. 7'1W 1'PJlJW Y7K[ 20
MS a 7 1 1 3 ~~ ~ 1~ 'n 13 ill 1 [ K ~ I J ?21~
K ~ ~ n Oi 3Y3 n i 173wn[ n
~ n ' n ] l pxn 1330 K" [ 23
Ms a 1. 7'3v 1% [ 24
]013>3 ..[ 25
]an.[ 26
Msa ? 1.. 7 ' 3 p 27
113 0 lill[ 28
in 7 ' 1 ~UI[ 29
];l??0 '[ 30
Ms a 1. 1YUK [ K p p 1 31
1. ' K 7 l I 7 11W33n7ill7 [KJlY3 32
P l ' 112 illil>l K'IIOY ('370 33
w7anv 73?n 1 ?'W[77p 41
11311 KOl' 7Y 7'13[Y 35
1.1 36
KYw]l q05[> 37
1YU' 1lY3 ]?K[ 38
l I [ K 39
113 i n 7 i K [ ~ '107 W 40
[ yiYWl.[ 41
PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC
B. Translation
1 I...[
2 ]after the flood[
3 Nolah from [mount] Lubar[
4 I.. a city[
6 I...[
7 albove the tower and...[
8 to] view the sons of [
9 I...[
27 yelars...[
28 IRHWS, son of[
29 ]ws, ... years [
30 I.. speak[
--------------------------*------------------------------------
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.
PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC 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 I Y 3Y 7 1;1?13, ccto avenge himself on them because
I 1~ n ? ;1
of the building of the city and the tower,.
Lines 10-14
Although because of the fragmentary character of the text nothing
can be stated with certainty, the author seems to take the line of
philo7 and Flavius ~ose~hus',in believing that the Israelites stayed
400 years in Egypt. Then he accepts the statement in Genesis 15,13,
without pretending to square it with the figure of 430 years given in
Exod 12,4041 in the manner of the LXX,the Samaritan Pentateuch,
PsJon or later rabbinic interpretations9.Jub 14,13 takes up the text
of Genesis 15,13, but, when calculating the years, he uses Exod 12
which gives a period of 430 years between Isaac's birth and the
departure from ~gypt".
~ 3 1"3 The word was not previously attested in Aramaic. The men-
tion of the Jordan does not leave any doubt as to its meaning. In
' h b a r appears also in 6Q8 26.1, though without context and of uncertain
reading.
Including the quotation from Jub in Syncellus.
J.T. MILIK,*P&re dc Nabonidem, 412: .pour punir Ics fils dc-.
' puis nr. div. her. 54.
*An& If. viii, 2; Bell. Jud V. ix 4. But in Ant 11. xv, 2 he gives 434 years.
Sce P. G m , ~Quatrecent trente ans (Ex XI1.34): Du Pentateuquc au Tcsta-
ment aramten de M r . in: Hommages d Duponl-Sommer (Paris 1971), 383-394.
'O Jub 16,13 and 50,4.
142 PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC
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 deute-
ronomistic 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 sacri-
fice": 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 denunci-
ations (7,31-33; 19'4-6 and 32,35)12, and by the influence of Psalm
106, 36-37, from which our text draws direct inspiration.
rin IYU '1'~. As far as I know, the expression, as such, is not attested
in any other text. The nearest expression is the one used by Neoph. I
for the translation of Deut 32,17: ii77w niiyu 077 in37 <<they
sacrificed to the idols of the demons*. In our text, the sacrifice is a
direct offering to the demons. The shgdu, which were Assyrian domes-
tic spirits, had already acquired a negative connotation in the biblical
Lines 20-23
?'l\u ?'yI\li. The number is taken, no doubt, from Jer 25,ll-12
and 29,lO. These 70 years of Jeremiah are related to the sabbatical
years of Lev 26,33-35 in 2 Chr 36.21, and transformed into the famous
70 weeks of Daniel, who also cites the 70 years of Jeremiah (Dan
9,2). As in Jeremiah, the figure serves here to indicate the whole
period of exile.
It becomes even more obvious that the period alluded to is that
stretching from the time of the destruction of Jerusalem to the return
from exile, if we consider the expression used in line 23: <<thisis the
first kingdom,,.
Daniel knows and uses the scheme of the four kingdoms embrac-
ing the history of the world. In Dan 2.31-45, Nebuchadnezzar's dream
of the different metals which make up the statue symbolise the four
l3 See 0'1W 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 PSEUDO DANIEL ARAh4AIC
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 repre-
sented 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 sub-
stitutes 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 Nebuchad-
nezzar 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 multipli-
cation 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
PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC 145
long form of Alexander Balas, the third of the successors of Antiochus
Epiphanes following the struggle with Demetriu~'~.The name of
Baias by which he is known to us would be, in his view, no more than
a hypocoristic, that is, an abbreviation of the full name. The problem
lies in the fact that this assertion is absolutely gratuitous and nothing
can compel us to think that the full name of Alexander Balas was
different from that found in the sources.
His identification of the second personage, o l;Il[ (suggested as a
mere possibility, just like the former one), with Demetrius poses
similar problems, as he must postulate the use of il in order to render
the peculiar sound of the Greek d B ; Demet]r(h)is, or the vocalic
passage i > o : ~emetlri~os. The difficulty is that the name of this
king is one of the few represented in the Mss. of Qumran by a
grapheme which makes all MILIK'Slucubrations unnecessary, and
shows the difference from the name preserved in our text: o 1 1 n [ ~ n 1
cfr. 4Q169 3-4 i 2. Nevertheless, despite the fact that the personages
in uestion must retain their anonymity and remain wrapped in mys-
te 3 , the mere circumstance of their mention by name is quite
interesting, and differentiates our texts from the other mss. of Qum-
ran, in which allusions of an actual historical character are extremely
rare21.
Line 31-41
Line 33: 8
1 >a>. Although the most frequent form, both in Biblical
and in Qumran Aramaic, is K 123 (which we have reconstructed in
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.
d ; 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 PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC
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 Intetrato-
mentoi 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 Back-
graund (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.
PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC 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
'' 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,r4Q-
Second 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 prwen-
ting 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.
PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC 149
rule over Persian. Moreover, 1 Enoch 89,59-90,25 divides the 70
shepherds into four periods which coincide with Daniel's four
empires.
We have already pointed out in the notes how, in contrast to the
general opinion ascribing the belief in resurrection to the Pharisaic
group but denying it to the Essenes, there exist typically Qumranic
texts in which the resurrection of the just is strongly asserted. We
have also indicated that the tradition that identifies Lubar as the
place where the Ark comes to rest, is peculiar to the writings of the
sect and to Jubilees.
My conclusion, then, in view of the compatibility of all the
elements and of the absence of any indication to the contrary, is that
4QpsDan Ar may possibly be added to the list of the Qumranic
pseudo-epigrapha. At least, this clearly apocalyptic composition should
be counted as one of the products of the apocalyptic tradition in
which the Qumran sect has its roots, which wauld account for its
preservation among the works of the library of Qumran.
The fact that its author has sheltered under the patronage of
Daniel's name is only logical, since in the biblical book Daniel is
presented not only as the authorised interpreter of dreamsw, but
particularly of the great apocalyptic visions of histo#. This is
equally the distinctive feature of the numerous pseudo-epigraphical
compositions which have used his name in later periods.
In order to assess what similarities and what differences from the
Qumranic text are shown by these pseudo-Danielic compositions and
to discover whether this apocalyptic composition has left any traces in
the literature of later periods, it is necessary to treat, however cursor-
ily, this peculiar corpus of literature.
A. Arabic Pseudo-Daniel
B. Armenian Pseudo-Daniel
C. Coptic Pseudo-Daniel
Although the Coptic biblical mss. adopt, in general, the division into
<<Visions*of the canonical book of Daniel of the Alexandrian Codex,
they split into two parts the story of Be1 and the Dragon narrative,
which they designate respectively Visions 12 and 13. The title <<The
P.G.KALEMKIAR,
-Die siebente %ion Daniels*, Wiener Zeiuchrifr fir die
Kunde &s 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
189 60-88.
by J. MACLER, Les Apocalypses apocryphes & Daniel (Paris
D. Slavonic Pseudo-Daniel
Old Church Slavonic has preserved for us, at least, one pseudo-
Danielic work unknown in any other language. This is a uVision of
Daniel*, a translation of a lost Greek original probably composed in
the 9th century. It consists of a detailed discourse on History in which
one may recognise a series of Byzantine emperors up to Michael 11,
as well as of a description of the Conquest of Sicily by the Arabs in
the years 827-828, followed by the customary eschatological section.
The work has been published many times38 and partially translated
" The Coptic text was published by C.G. WO~DE,Appendix ad editionem Novi
Testamenti gmeci e codice monuscriplo a l m d r i n o . Lk wrsione biblionun aegbpliaca
Ill. Lk fibris ppatyphic uegptiacis V. n N.T. (Oxford 1799), 141-148.French translati-
on by MACLER, La A-ses pparphes de h i e l , 38-55. The most complete
study is the one by 0 . MHNARDUS, rA Commentary on the XlVth V i o n of Daniel
according to the Coptic Version-, OrChrPer 32 (1966), 394-499.There exists an
Arabic version of the work, published by C.H. BuxER, -Das Reich dcr Ismaeliten
im Koptischen Danielbuchm, NAWG (1916), 6-57.
T8 P.S. STRECHOWC, ~Zbornik Popa Dragoti*, Spomenik 5 (1890). 11-12; V.
Isnun, -0tkrovcnie Mefodii Patarskago i Apokrificheskii Videnia Daaiela V i t i -
islti i Slaviano-Rdoi Literaturakhr, Chteniia 191/193 (1897), 156-158, PA. LA-
VROV, MApokrifidheskie Teks* Sbomik 67 (1899). 1-5.
PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC 153
into English by ALEXANDER~~.
Together with this work, others have been preserved that seem to
be nothing more than Slavonic translations of pseudo-Danielic works
already known. Thus the work edited by S P E R A N S W ~ ~entitled
*Vision of the Prophet Daniel on the last days and on the end of the
world* is apparently a translation of the work of the same title,
published in Greek by VASSILIEV~~.
E. Greek Pseudo-Daniel
2. The monk Daniel on the 'Swen Hills' and on the klands and their
future.
This work was published by I S T R I N ~ ~Its. first part was also pub-
lished by K L ~ S T E R M A N N ~on
~ the basis of a ms. where it appears
under the title aThe first oracle of Daniel on the 'Seven Hills' and on
the isle of Crete and others and of their future,,. It was reedited by
S C H M O L D T ~with
~ the variants of chapter I of the KL~STERMANN
edition.
The work is closely related to the Apocalypse of the Prophet Daniel
with which it shares common themes and expressions: the sleeping
serpent, the massacre of Constantinople, the finding, description and
coronation of a man carried to the Temple by the angels47, the
presentation of the sword by the angels, the period of prosperity, his
four sons, the journey to Jerusalem to offer his kingship to God, etc.
The work does apparently preserve a more original form and is better
organised than the Apocalypse. It has a clear oracular flavour, and its
final part, very brief, on the Antichrist and the Second Coming, seems
to depend upon Pseudo ~ e t h d i w ~ ~ .
" ~Qtkrovenie*,145144.
4s AnalECIO, 121.
46 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.
PSEUDO DAMEL ARAMAIC 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. Damanref-
Diegese
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 manu-
scripts3 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-Metho-
dius: 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 previous-
ly referred to, although still quite distant from the midrashic connota-
tions of the Persian Pseudo-Daniel.
*Otkroveniern,145-150.
'' LEs Apocabpses apocryphes de Daniel, 108-110.
52 K. BERGER,Die G&chisc/~eDaniel-Diegese (SPB 27) (Leiden 1976).
'3 Venice Marc. Craec. VII. 27.
156 PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC
5. Apart from these works, there exist in Greek other similar compo-
sitions, 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
4,Analecta, 121-123.
" notkrovenier, 321. This work appears in the ms. Athos Koutloum. 220, fol. 201
as <Visions of the Prophet Daniel*.
" Cf. E. LEGRAND, Leo M Sapiens. Les oracles de LPon Le Sage (Collection de
monographies pour servir A I'ttude de la langue nto-hellenique, N.S. 5) (Paris-Athens
1875), and the study of A. DEISSER,nLes oracles de U o n VI le Sage*, Kemos 3
(19909, 135-145.
' uotkrovenie*, 318-319.
Die Schrifl, 243-244.
' 9 One of this compositions is the fragment Ms. Hebr. 2646 of the Bodleian
Library, published by S. WERTHEIMER in his Bane Midrashot 11, 30 with the title
u'Aggadat yemoth hammeshiah*, and by I. LEVi as *Une Apocalypse Judto-arabe*,
REI 67 (1914), 178-182. But the tea is a simple fragment of the Arab history, seen
from a Jewish perspective.
60 L. GINZBERG, Geniur Studies in Memory of S. Schechter, I (Texts and Studies
of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America VII), (New York 1928), 313-323. S.
KRAU~S has published a French translation *Un nouveau texte pour I'histoire judto-
byzantine*, REJ 87 (1929), 11-27. A. SHARPhas dedicated several studies to this
composition: rThe Vision of Daniel as a Source for the history of Byzantine Jewry,
Bar Ilan 41.5 (1%7), 197-208 (Hebrew); HA Source for Byzantine Jewry under the
Early Macedonians,, Byzantinisch-Nargriechische Jah&dcher 20 (1970), 320-328, and
has included an English translation as Appendix in his book Bylantine Jewry from
Justinian to the Fourth Crusade (London 1971), 201-204.
PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC 157
of persias6'.
Daniel, who is beside the river Quebar (!), has a terrible vision
and Gabriel (!) *the commander in chief of the Almighty's troops-
explains 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 identifica-
tion poses problems. The second page contains the apocalyptic
section; B o N n L L has convincingly demonstrated6* that this is noth-
ing 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
3. CONCLUSIONS
1. 40246
Like so many other manuscripts from Qumran, 40246 has been the
object of rumours and speculation' in spite of the fact that its full
text has not yet been published. It consists of a beautiful Aramaic
fragment of a small manuscript of just nine lines, acquired in 1958.
Unfortunately only two columns have been preserved, and because
the manuscript was vertically torn, only one half of the first column
has reached us. In 1972, J.T. MILIK, to whose lot it belongs, made
public a transcription and a translation in a lecture given at Harvard
University. Although he announced its publication in HTR, the text
has not yet seen the light. On the basis of the data advanced by Milik
in that lecture, J.A. FITZMYER published three lines of the first
column and four of the second in a study on the Aramaic language
used in Qumran and the New ~ e s t a m e n t ~
Later
. on, in his edition of
the Enoch fragments from Cave 4, MILIK briefly described the manu-
script and quoted some of the expressions contained in it3. He like-
wise furnished it with its final numbering -the one we are using now-
different from that mentioned by FITZMYER (40243) and from the
previous references designating it as 4QpsDnAa. The manuscript has
been copied using a Herodian writing typical of the last third of the
1st century B.C. Lately, D. FLUSER has published a provocative study
' For example, JA. m~~~~ in TS 25 (1964), 429; R.E. BROWN, TS 33 (1972),
32, note 96,E. SCHURER, 771eHistcuy of the Jewirh People in the Age of Jesus Chrisl,
G . VERMES, F. MIUAR, M. BLACK (eds.), Vol. I1 (Edinburgh 1979), 542, note 148,
Vol. 111.1 (Edinburgh 1986), 442, note 1.
* JA. FTZMYER, *The Contribution of Qumran Aramaic to the Study of the
New Testament*, NTSl 20 (1974), 382-401, especially 391-394. 1 will quote this artidc
as reprinted in JA. RlutYER, A Wandering Amnrean. Collec~edEssays (SBL Mono-
graph Series 25) (Missoula 1979), 85-113, because the author has added an important
-Addendum: Implications of the 40 "San of God" Text*, 102-107. mzhtYtrR has
reiterated his interpretation of the text in *The Aramaic Language and the Study of
the New Testament*, JBL 99 (1980), 14-15.
' J.T. M I U The
~ Books of Enoch. Aramaic Frupnenls of Qunrmn Caw 4 (Oxford
1976), 60.213. 261.
THE ESCHATOLOGICAL FIGURE OF 40246 163
A. Transcription of the t a t
B. Translation
Coi. i
Col. ii
1 He shall be named the son of God and they shall call him son of
the Most High. Like a spark
2 of a vision, so shall be their kingdom; they shall reign for some
years upon
3 the earth and shall trample everything; people shall trample upon
people, and city upon city,
4 Vucuf until there arises the people of God and everything rests
from the sword.
5 ... his kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom...
6 ... and everybody shall make peace ...
7 ... Great God ...
? ... the sword shall disappear from the earth...
Col. i
Line 1
*He fell before the throne*. MILIK, the scholar who made public
this line and the following ones5, is of the opinion that the words
refer to the throne of God, just as in I Enoch 14,18-25, although he
expressly states that the seer was not necessarily Enoch, as he could
perhaps be Levi, Elijah, Daniel or even an angel. But the citations of
?.-?W1 and ;IRK, contained in the next lines, lead us to support the
idea of a king's throne. Such an expression is not found in the Bible,
neither in relation to God's nor to the king's throne6, while the
equivalent of K 7 0 ? 3 in Hebrew may denote both the throne of God
Line 4
?>313[1.Pointed out by FITZMYER'. Despite the fact that it is
presented as a modification of ? ' ~ \ u ,reconstructed by MILIK[numer-
ous yean], we give it the normal meaning it has in Aramaic; cfr. 1Q-
apGn XIX,24; IlQtglob XIV,3; XXV,l.
Lines 516
The exact distribution of the text in the correspondin lines is not
known. The name of Assyria appears in its late form! It is worth
mentioning that both the Kittim of Assyria and the Kittim of Egypt
appear at the beginning of lQM I,2-4.
Lines 7-8
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 hypoth-
esis, 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 hypo-
thetical 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.
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 1,32-
35, 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 writ-
ings 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.
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 com-
pleted 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 express-
ion 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.
l3 JA. F ~ ~ Y E.The
R , Contribution-, 91.
168 THE ESCHATOLOGICAL FIGURE OF 40246
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 charac-
ter'' 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 pro-
phetic 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 ?
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
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.
THE ESCHATOLOGICAL FlGURE OF 40246 173
To these hypotheses I will oppose my own. Its answers to the three
main queries are the following:
- the text is eschatological from beginning to end.
- the mysterious personage has a positive character and an angelic
nature, and may be identified with Melchisedek, Michael, the Prince
of Ugh6 etc., these being names which designate one and the same
reality in the Qumran writings.
- the reign of everlasting peace is that of the people of God.
The variety of opinions is hardly surprising in view of the fragmentary
character of the text. My own interpretation is based on a series of
data provided by other Qumranic texts that should be succinctly
expounded.
J.T. M I L I K ~published
~ parts of three Aramaic fragments of the
Herodian period, containing a description of the holy history, from
the time of the deluge to the eschatological era, given by Daniel to
the King and his noblemen. The text shows remarkable parallels in its
structure to other apocalyptical texts such as the zoomorphic story of
1 Enoch 85-90, although it lacks the metaphors characteristic of this
vision and of the apocalyptical visions of the canonical Daniel. The
narrative lingers in more detail on the description of the Hellenistic
period and even the mentioning of proper names, such as o 11322
and u ?ill[,and goes over immediately to describing the eschatological
era. Other Qumranic texts could be selected, but this is sufficient to
demonstrate that 4Q246 may be perfectly interpreted as a description
of the course of the story, made the vehicle of an apocalyptical
description that culminates in the eschatological peace.
J.T. MIUK, ePPri&rede Nabonide' el autres *ts d'un cyde de Daniel. Frag-
ments aramCens de Qumr&n 4s, RB 63 (1956) 407-415. The l e a has been studied by
R. MEYER,Dm Gebet dcr Nabonid (Berlin 1956) and again by A. MERTehis, Dm
Bwh Daniel im Lichte der T m e vom T m M w (StutBM 12) (Wiirzburg 1971), 42-
SO. See F. GARCIA MARTINEZ, -Notas a1 margen de 4Q ps Daniel arameo*, Ada
O~alis 1 (1983), 193-208, and wpm, eh. 5, pp. U7-161.
174 THE ESCHATOLOG1CAL FIGURE OF 4Q246
The text has been and will continue to be the subject of endless dis-
cussions. 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-
And she who bears a male shall be distressed by her pains, for amid the throes
of Death she shall bring forth a man, and amid the pains of Shwl therc shall
spring from her child-bearing crucible a Marvellous Mighty Counselor...
And she who is pregnant 'by a viper' shall be prey to terrible anguish... and
they shall shut the gates of Shwl upon her who conceives wickedness, and the
everlasting bars upon all the spirits of Naught (IQH 111.9-10. 12 and 18).
3' -La succession d'images barques agrCmentee de doubles ententes, les reminis-
cences bibliques divergentes, la syntaxe trop complexe pour ne pas reveler la confusi-
on 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) p/ 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.
176 THE ESCHATOLOGICAL FIGURE OF 40246
Nor does the other text, 4Q280 2,2-3, in which Melki-resha' is men-
tioned, 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 THE ESCHATOLOGICAL FIGURE OF 40246
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-.
THE ESCHATOLOGICAL ITGURE O F 40246 179
- ii 4-9: this eschatological battle ends in a final and definitive
period of peace and in the eternal reign of Israel, just as in IlQMelch,
the release from the claws of Belial and his spirits' through Melchize-
dek's intervention, is followed by the messianic age.
Seen in that light, 4Q246 appears as a typical product of the sect's
theology, and its contents, far from unveiling an Essenic Antichrist,
may be summarised in the sentence of IQM XVII.5-8:
This is the day he has set to humiliate and to bring low the Prince of the
dominion of wickedness. He has sent an everlasting help to the lot whom he
has redeemed through the might of the majestic angel; by the authority of
Michael in everlasting light he will cause the covenant of Israel to shine in joy -
Peace and blessing to the lot of God! - HE will exalt over the gods the author-
ity of Michael and the dominion of Israel over all flcsh.
CHAPTER SEVEN
The reason for looking again into the work known as *The Descrip-
tion of the New Jerusalem* ( = NJ ), an Aramaic composition of
which several copies were discovered at Qumran1,is to be found in
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 1lQTem-
ple 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
(IT), 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
182 T H E NEW JERUSALEM AND T H E FUTURE TEMPLE
'
traccs of a line, not transcribed by YADIN, whose remains do not seem to be
com atiblc with the letters prcscwed on linc 2 of frag. 1.
J. LICHT, -An Ideal Town Plan from Qumran. The Description of the New
Jcrus;llcm-, IEJ 29 (1979), 45-59: -Now that the Temple Scroll has been published, it
is clear that it contains no dues to the obscurities of the NJ, for it is concerned with
contingent, but not identical subjects*, 46.
M.O. WISE,A Critical Sntdy of the Temple ScmN from Qumran Caw 11 (Studies
in Ancient Oriental Civilhtion 49) (Chicago 1990). WISE studies NJ on pp. 64-86.
For a critical assessment of his work, cf. my review in I S . 22 (1991), 155-161; for an
different view of the redactional history of IlQTemple, cf. F. GARCIAMARTINEZ,
-Sources et rCdaction du Rouleau du Temple*, Henoch 13 (1991) (forthcoming).
.But it seems to me that important details may have escaped Licht's attention,
and that the t e a s do sometimes describe the same s u b j a u , op. cit. 64.
*The argument that the NJ and the Temple Source are programmatically
related rests on several considerations. First, the hvo works r e f l a in their measure-
ments an identical ideology of numbers. Second, they dcscribc in several places
similar, perhaps identical, structures and rituals. Third, the two haw certain general
phenomena in common*, op. cit., 66.
THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE 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 NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE
The second instance is more complicated. It involves a combina-
tion 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 loca-
tion? 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 conclu-
sion. 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 pre-
served 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.
THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE 185
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
2) + (100 x 2) = 480 d9. Unfortunately the text of 5QI5 is muti-
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 recon-
struction avoids the complicated calculations and the arbitrary reduc-
tions 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 mea-
surements 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
plural. As pointed out by M I L I K ~the ~ , facultative use of alef indi-
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
" 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 Israeli-
te-, RB 81 (1974), 208-210.
192 THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE
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 Alferlumswis-
senschafr. Neuc Bearbeitung, 2c Reihe, 111 (Stuttgart 1929), cols. 1930-1973.
37 Sec S. KRAUSS,Tialmudische Arrhdol+e (reprint Hildesheim 1966), "01. 11,
391-392; BEN DAVID,op. cif.., 344, gives the same value, although he makes the n s
equivalent to 149 m. on the base of the value of 056 m. for a cubit.
213 DJD 111, 187-188.
d6ntsalem et les manuserits de la mer Morte*, cur. cit., 39.
T H E NEW JERUSALEM AND T H E FUTURE TEMPLE 193
O F T H E NEW JERUSALEM
2. T H E DESCRIPTION
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 He-
braisms 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 T H E NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE
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 transmet-
tre 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. GREEN-
FIELD (art cit., 133). L I C m finds *that a free space adjoining the exceedingly broad
'Street' E on the south end of the city does not make sense. Hence the statement
about a free space running around the blocks of houses does not mean on ail four
sidesn (art. cit., 51-52), but this speculation is contradicted by the text.
46 Who translates K n ' 1 3 as apkristyle*, ngalerie, portique longeant la ruea,
DJD 111, 187.
THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE 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 record-
ing 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
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, repre-
sented 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 pi-
llar measuring 6 cubits in each side5'. Those stairs supposedly led
up to the roof of the houses lined along both sides of the gate com-
plex, 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 translati-
on.
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 measure-
ments, 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 JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE 197
buildings making the perimeter of the block may be considered not
only as <<realistic>>
but as rather modest,
The author goes on to describe the inside of one of those houses,
although the gaps and the obscurity of the text make its description
rather incomprehensibles3. He starts with the following by no means
astonishing statement: <<Andtheir door (that of the houses) is in the
middle*. Nevertheless, the measures of such a door (2 reeds or 14
cubits) seem excessive for a house of only 3 reeds, which leads the
editor MILIKto consider that the author makes the mistake of repeat-
ing here the dimensions of the porches of access to the blocks. Be
that as it may, the author proceeds to describe the inside of the
house. The first element described is 4 cubits wide. In MILIK'Sopin-
ion, this would refer to the dimensions of all rooms of the houses,
both on the ground and on the upper floor, and with this element the
author would put an end to the description of a typical house.
This would be rather surprising for an author who accumulates
details when he describes the other elements of the block. In fact, I
think that he starts by simply expounding one of the elements that
make up the compound, the first he comes across when going into the
house; this could easily be the staircase leading to the upper floors4.
In any case, I do not think that the measures following refer to
structures different from the houses located inside the blocksS; in
my opinion they are part of the description of the upper floor which
stands out as a large hall, simply termed in the text ccthe place* (KIT),
of 19 x 12 cubits, with windows and 22 beds, alongside which runs the
53 MILIKassumes that both storeys consisted of eight rooms, placed, four by four,
at both sides of a central corridor measuring 5 cubits, although he honestly adds:
rTous ces dCtails sont malheureusement laissds sous-entendus par I'auteurr, (DID 111,
187). It seems wise to confess our ignorance, as does LICHT: utoo obscure for my
w m rehensionn (art. cif., 46).
The measurements of this structure are a reed and a half high and a reed
deep, which allow us to imagine the stair as a four-cubits ramp (precisely the
'
measurements of the winding staircase of the entrance to the block), similar to the
ram s located near the towers.
L i i MI, who thinks they are triclinia, bcause of the presence of the 22
7 'W 1 Y . The problem with this interpretation is that the expression he reconstructs,
K 3 3 D n73, is not attested, that we are dealing not with several structures, but with
only one (K 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 NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE
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 measure-
ments 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.
THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE 199
would rather suggest that the block is conceived as a large courtyard
in the middle, surrounded by the aligned houses, looking like an
oriental caravanserai.
Owing to their patchy character, nothing, except isolated measures,
can be elucidated from the rest of the fragments of 1Q32, 2Q24 and
5Q15, which continue the description of the city. But according to
STARCKY, 4QNJ returns, after a gap, to the description of the outer
wall of the city. Its height reaches 7 reeds, the same as the wall at the
outer court of the temple, according to 1lQTernple XL, 9-10. The wall
is built of precious stones, among which sapphires and rubies stand
out, just like the wall of the Apocalypse, following the ancient Old
Testament tradition of the Hymns to Zion (Isa 54,ll-12; Tob 13,17),
and is protected by ccone thousand four hundred and thirty two
towers,, that is, ccthree towers for each small stretch,, of wall formed
by the distance separating the 480 posterns from each other6'. As
with the large entrance gates, two towers flank each postern, and the
third one soars up in the middle of the stretch between the adjoining
towers. This significant detail about the number of the towers valida-
tes our conclusion concerning the number of posterns, the rectangular
shape of the city and its inner structure.
STARCKYhimself provided another exceptional piece of informa-
tion drawn from fragments still unpublished: ccLe bas de la colonne
suivante mentionne la grande guerre finale oii interviennent les
KittCens et Babel, mais aussi les voisins: Edom, Moab et les fils
d'~mmonn~l.
If the only manuscript preserved had been 5Ql5, we might think
that the author's interest was confined to the city and that it offered
the precedent of the celestial city of the Apocalypse in which there is
no temple. But that is not the case. The fragments of 2Q24 and
1lQN.I are evidence that the city description was followed by that of
the temple within, and that even the seer witnesses and describes the
cult performed in that temple. As a matter of fact, more elements of
the description of the cult than of the temple itself have been safely
kept until our days. Gleaning from the different fragments, we may
60 The author has been precise enough in his calculation not to indude the towers
of the four corners, nor the 28 towers that flanked the 12 main gates of the town
previously mentioned.
61 J. STARCKY, ddrusalem et les manuscrits de la mer Mortem, art. cil., 39.
200 THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE
mention the following ones as making a direct reference to the temple:
- nmn and 7 3 ' 2 which, according to JONGELING, repeatedly
appear in the fragments of 11QNJ together with T71]7and 1' O K .
- 2Q24 3: ccand measured up to the sapphire gate>>...ccwhich
is beforen ...ccthe walb ( ' l n 13). Since the other gates mentioned are
made of stone, one may reckon that this sapphire gate does not
belong, like the others, to the city but to the temple.
- 2Q24 7 : (<andits width, ...ccand the whole altar*. The mention of
the altar is certain, and the preceding line assures us that, in this case,
we are dealing with measurements, and not with the description of a
ritual.
- The longest fragment dealing with the description of the temple
is 2Q24 8, which gives a series of measurements and mentions a wall
( K T lu), partitions ( 7 5 n 13) of white stone and the courtyard of the
temple ( x n i i v , compare Megillat TaCanit 19). Then the angel shows
the seer something else whose name has been lost, but which is
situated outside the courtyard and measures 110 or 120 (cubits ?).
The harvest is not abundant but sufficient as evidence that in the
original work there was also a description of the temple, although we
are unable to define either the shape, the dimensions or the exact
situation of the temple within the city.
The texts that have fortuitously come down to us have disclosed
more details of the ritual description witnessed by the seer, although
to an extent insufficient to enable us to obtain a clear idea about its
development. The most important text is fragment 4 of 2Q24, com-
pleted by the published fragment of 11QNJ that partially coincides
with it. This text contains several elements of a priestly ritual whose
development is witnessed by the seer. The priests, once purified, bring
the loaves into the temple and arrange them in two rows on the table
as a memorial on the seventh day. The seer witnesses how they are
taken out of the temple, on the right of its western side, and are
distributed. Mention is made of 84 priests, of ccthe seven divisions of
the tables,,, of ccthe aged among them*, and of 14 priests, although we
do not know exactly what these different characters are doing in the
ceremony. The text then deals with ((the two loaves on which lies the
incensen, and the seer notes how one of them is handed to the High
Priest and the other to his deputy, ahis second,. The last element of
the ritual preserved is the distribution of a piece of the sacrificial ram
to wevery one,.
T H E NEW JERUSALEM AND T H E FUTURE TEMPLE 20 1
All these elements of the ritual have a parallel in the traditional
cult of the temple, but not so the number of priests. Unfortunately,
the state of the text does not permit us either to draw a conclusion or
to interrelate the different elements and characted2. The only
point that may be asserted is that the ritual described could very well
incorporate the ritual of the shewbread.
It may be concluded from this presentation of the NJ contents that
what the work contained was not a description of the Heavenly
Jerusalem or of the Celestial ~ e m ~ inl ethe~ sense ~ of an ideal
Jerusalem beyond the concept of time, ccUrbild und Abbilda, but of
the city, the temple and the cult such as they will exist at the time of
the final struggle against the Kittim, Babel, Edom, Moab and Am-
mon, i.e. a Jerusalem, a temple and a cult that we may term eschatol-
ogicalM.
Owing to the state in which the work has been preserved, we
cannot ascertain whether this Jerusalem and this temple, as revealed
in a vision to the author of the work, were presented as descending
from heaven or as a reconstruction of the earthly city and the temple,
or if that reconstruction was presented as a human or a divine work.
The author of NJ has, undoubtedly, idealised the regular plan of the
hellenistic cities that proliferated in the Seleucid empire and were
inspired by the geometrical principles of Pythagoras, although their
It k possible to imagine, with the editor (DID 111, 87). that the High Priest and
hi -second* are counted among these 14 priests, that all of them together form the
-elders among them*, that all of them are included in the 84 priests, that t h u e 84
priests farm the 7 groups designated as -the seven divisions of the tables*, etc. But
the only basis for all these speculations consists of xanty and problematic parallels.
For WISE'S understanding of this ten, see arpro.
a Against R. MEYER, ~ D e gegenwiirtige
r Stand der Erforschung der in Palihtina
neu gefundenen hebrakchen Handschriften. Die sogenannten 'kleinen Hiihlen'=, TLZ
90 (1965), 331-342, who, after remembering that Nineveh in Assyrian thought
represents edas irdixhe Abbild der entsprechenden himmlischen Metropole*,
concludes: 4%scheint mir daher passender, 5015 und die zugehiirigen Fragmente
unter dem weniger prajudizierenden Titel 'Beschreibung des h i m m l i h e n Jerusalem'
tusammenzufasscn-. About the ideal Jerusalem, see K.L. SCIiMIUT, -Jerusalem als
Urbild und Abbild-, Emnos Jahrbtbrtch 13 (1950), 207-248.
In spite of the ambiguities of the term, cfr. J. ORUIGNAC, *La notion
d'exhatologie dans la Bible et P Oumrdn*, R Q 7 (1969-71). 17-31. CARMIGNAC
mistakenly places the construction of the New Jerusalem in the period which will
follow the final war of liberation: ~ C ' e s td'ailleurs P ce moment-la, que sera bfitie la
Jtrusalem nouvelle, dont parlent plusieurs documents partiellement 6dit&, *La
future intervention d c Dieu sclon la pcnsCe de Qumran*, in: M. D E ~ O R(ed.),
Qumran. So piktk, Sb thlologe et son n~ilieu(BETL 46) (Paris-Gemblou 1978), 227.
202 THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE
Stud
'' E.Y. KUBCtiER, *The Language of the Genesis Apocryphon. A Preliminary
Scripca HicroroIynifana 5-23.
4 (1965)).
'~xccpt, perhaps, in 4QMMT, where Jerusalem is identified with the holy camp
of the wilderness: \L11172 illni? 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. STUUG-
NELL 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) , (Hebrew).
11-76
204 T H E NEW JERUSALEM AND T H E FUTURE TEMPLE
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
Hebrew (-?r>nn'z 1 . Y . K7;1 iU:i7'lii il'1113 Oh'il*, in: ntiriy Years of
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 Qumranfor-
schung*, 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%), 113-
U6.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.
THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE 205
eternal temple that will be erected by ~ o d -~ I' understand the
temple and the cult described there, as YADIN doesT2, as a norma-
tive temple and cult, a blueprint of the temple and the cult such as
they must be according to the true revelation of God to Moses, such
as it is conceived within the sect. The manuscripts of Qumran speak
about Jerusalem and the temple contemporary with the life of the
sect as about something defiled in which the faithful may have no part
whatsoever. In my opinion this is due to the fact that the existing
temple and cult are considered as inadequate in the light of the
normative temple revealed in IlQTemple. The temple and the cult
described there are the proof of the inadequacy of the existing situ-
ation. On the other hand, this normative temple, that has been
revealed, is not the definitive temple, the final and eschatological one,
but a temple that shall only last <<untilthe day of the creationn,
when I shall create My temple and establish it for ever,) (IlQTemple
XXIX, 9-10) - although this does not prevent the prescriptions con-
cerning this temple and cult from being a divine Torah, as normative
and compulsory for the members of the sect as the rest of the mosaic
Torah, at least <<untilthe day of the creationn.
This conception of the temple and the cult, peculiar to the com-
munity of Qumran, has two important consequences. First, that its
rupture with the temple and the existing cult in Jerusalem, although
expressed in a similar way in the writings of the sect (v.g. lQpHab
and CD) and in other texts of the apocryphal and pseudepigraphic
~ i t e r a t u r e ~becomes
~, in Qumran more radical and will result in
guiding the sectaries to the desert. For the members of the Qumran
community, participation in the cult of the existing temple is out of
the question, not only because the priesthood is unworthy, the calen-
dar false and the cult defiled, but, more radically, because the existing
temple and cult do not correspond to the norm revealed in IlQTem-
ple, and this makes any compromise impossible. The second conse-
quence 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 temple-
community is nothing but a consequence of the inadequacy of the
existing temple in comparison with the normative one, which will only
last up to the time when the normative temple may become the real
one, that is, as long as the historical circumstances do not allow the
community to raise the temple and introduce the cult of IlQTemple
in Jerusalem.
" J.M. BAUMGARTEN, *Sacrifice and Worship among the Jewish Sectarians of
the Dead Sea (Qumran) Saolls~,HTR 46 (1953), 141-159 and *The Essenes and the
Temple. A Reappraisal*, in his Shrdies ut Qunrmn Low (SILA 24) (Brill, Lciden
1977). 57-74, B. GARRVER,The Temple and the Community in Qumran and in the
New Testament. A Compamtiw Study in the Temple Symbolism of the Q u m Tutc
and the New Tesfoment (Cambridge 1965); RJ. MCKELVEY, 77te New Temple. 7%e
Churrh in the New Testament (Oxford 1%9). The most complete study 01 the theme is
G. KUKWNG'SDie Umdeuning des Kultus in der Qwrtmngenreinde und im NT (SUNT
7 ) (G6ttingen 1971), with the necessary corrections of E. SCWOSSLER-ROREKU\,
*Cultic Language in Qumran and in the NTw, CBQ 38 (1976), 159-171.
T H E NEW JERUSALEM AND T H E FUTURE TEMPLE 207
It is evident that NJ in no way reflects this Qumranic conception of
the community as a temple; even more, it is only compatible with it if
its temporary and vicarious character is brought more into focus. It is
also quite obvious that the temple and the cult of NJ are different
from the normative temple and cult of l l ~ ~ e m ~although l e ~ ~ ,it
cannot be asserted that the two conceptions are mutually incompat-
ible because, as a last resort, the biblical prescriptions about the
temple were no hindrance to the prophetic description of a new city
and a new temple by Ezekiel, and because the same ZlQTemple
announces another temple which shall be erected by God Himself in
the future.
These considerations nevertheless do not definitely exclude the
possibility that NJ may have been written within the community of
Qumran, because, in the sectarian writings, we find other conceptions
of the temple which are different from the two quoted as typical of
the community.
One of these conceptions is the reference to the final temple (and
by extension to Jerusalem), that will be erected directly by God at the
end of times, and will replace the temple then existing. This concep-
tion is linked with the idea of the existence of a celestial model of the
temple and the city ccwhich is engraved in the palms of God,,,
reported by Isaiah 4 9 , 1 6 ~ an
, idea already present in the Old Testa-
ment (Exod 25,8-9; 1 Chr 28,19) and lying behind Ezek 40-48, Zech
2,s-9 and Tob 13,16-18. This idea is further developed in the apocry-
phal literature, both as a development of the biblical concept (I
Enoclt 9,28-29; Jub 1,17.26-29; 25.21) and as a reaction to the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem and the temple (2 Bar 4,l-6; 6,7-9; 32,2-4; 4 Ezra
7,26; 10,25-28.40-~8)~'.This idea will strike roots and thrive within
rabbinic Judaism although, perhaps because of the Christian interpre-
tation of the idea of a celestial Jerusalem descending from heaven,
which describes the temple and the cult in which the sectaries will
participate during the War of ~ i b e r a t i o n ~That
~ . this is the same
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. CHAR-
LESWORTH(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
T H E NEW JERUSALEM A N D T H E FUTURE TEMPLE 211
the work, does not distinguish from that of 586 B.C. The first recon-
struction, 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 recon-
struction or full renewal would be related to the building of the
celestial Jerusalem of the future world87, which, within the Qumra-
nic 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 dis-
counted 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 4QFlorile-
giwn with the period of war of lQM has been testified to in number-
less 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-
91 B.Z. WACHOLDER, op. cit., % and 255, n. 394 refers to a private communica-
tion of J. STRUGNELL asserting the pre-Qumranic origins of the NJ. 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 Apocalypti-
cism. 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.
THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE 213
composition of the original is to ascertain what line of thought the
data of NJ may more easily fit. As our analysis has demonstrated, the
contents of NJ perfectly fit within the thought of the Qumran com-
munity.
The relatively late date of composition of the extra-Qumranic
Apocalypses which introduce the idea of the eschatological Jerusalem
and temple as a substitute for the existing temple, and the minor
importance of this matter within the <(listof revealed things* in the
apocalyptic ~ i t e r a t u r e ~equally
~, plead for a Qumranic origin of this
specific apocalypse which is NJ.
The different line of development that the idea of the heavenly
temple will take within the apocalyptic tradition, as evidenced by the
already quoted text of 2 Baruclt and by the description of the New
Jerusalem of the N T Apocalypse, a work where there is no temple
and which is but a symbolic expression of a life close to God, is
another indication that points to a Qumranic origin of the NJ.
But the element that, in my opinion, forces us to consider NJ as a
product of the Qumran community is the parallel with such a charac-
teristic Qumranic text as IQM II,l-6, a text which permits us to
identify the temple of NJ as the eschatological temple which God
shall erect at the end of times and which provides the bridge linking
NJ with IlQTernple and 4Q174 - which proves that the data of NJ
perfectly fit into the line of thought characteristic of the Qumran
community, and enables us to conclude that the NJ is an apocalypse
written within the Qumran community.
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 Wachofder, B.Z. 52, 181, 182,
Sussmann, Y. 203 185, 204, 212
Suter, D.W. 13,65 Wacker, T.M. 72
Wertbeimer, S A . 156
Thackeray, H.S.J. 1 Widengren, G. 172
Thorn, J.C. 68 Widisch, H. 172
Thorndike, J.P. 86, 89 Wintermute, O.S. 51
Tigchelaar, E.J.C. xiv, 45, 46, 97 Wise, M.O. 182-185, 193, 208,
Tischendorf, C. 153 209
Tiserant, E. M Woide, C.G. 152
Trinquet, J. i91 Woude, A.S. van der xv, 45, 50,
97, 118, 119, 123-125,
Uhlig, S. 48, 61, 64, 79, 80, 85, 174, 176, 181, 204,205
93,97
Ullendorff, E. 45 Yadin, Y. 40, 180, 181, 183, 184,
Umik, W.C. van 73 196, 198, 204, 205,
208-210
Vaillant, A. 19 Youtie, C.H. 27
VanderKam, J.C. 36, 45, 49, 50,
54-59, 61, 72, 81, 82, 84, Zotenberg, H. 157
Zurro, E. xiii, 86
Gen Josh
2,7 14 6,26 174
5,15 73
5,29 41 Judg
5,32 32 2,ll-23 142
6 65
41-4 15, 43, 63, 66 1 Sam
6,3 38 4,18 164
6,14 45
7,l 22
7,22 14 2 Sam
8,4 140 7 208
9,U)-21 41 7,lO 209
9,29 21 7,516 209
11,s 141 21,6 12
15,13 141
25,15 122
Lev Isa
16 71 2,4 167
18,20 142 6 208
20,2-5 142 19,2 166
25 176 21,14 122
26.33-35 143 26 146
30,s142
Num 42 12
24,15-17 174 4 3 3 12
44,4 142
Deut 45,4 12
5,28-29 174 49,16 207
1531 142 52,7 176
15 176 5411-12 199
18,18-19 174 61 176
18.19 142 61,2-3 176
28,27 121
28,38 134 Jer
29,35 121 7,31-33 142
32,17 143 14J3.15 167
33,&11 174 17,8 142
INDEXES
Dan
Ezek 1,8-16 133
14 132, 134 2,15 119
14,1420 132 2,25 126
14,14-20 133 227 126
16,20-21 142 &27-30 133, 149
2031 142 221-45 143
28,3 132, 133 535.45 127
28,13 195 3,22 127
403 191 3,26.32 121
40,16 198 332 126
40-48 182, 193, 207 4 xii, 129, 132
41,16 198 4,l 122
45,2-4 187 4,4 126
453 187 4,6.15-24 133, 149
48,9-12 187 4,10.14.20 17
48,13 187 4,13 123
48,31-34 207 4,29 12.3
4,39 122
Amos 5,423 127, 130
2,9 115 $7.11 126
5,8 119
Obad 5,ll-29 149
21 178 5,13 119
5,18.21 121
Mic 5,21 123
4,3 167 6,11 127
6,17-25 133
Zech 7 72
2,s-9 207 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
Job 14,3142 133
1,21 134
2,6-7 133
2,7 121, 134
Luke
132-35 166
Rom
8,33 12
Col
3,12 12
1 Macc
s n
9,- 167
10,4560 145 Tit
1,l 12
2 Macc
6,7 56 1 John
ii,6-12 n 518-22 171
4,l-4 171
Tob
13,16-18 207 2 John
U,17 199 7 171
Wisdom Jude
144 22 12-13 59
4Q Aramaic Levi 25
4QBerakoth 177
4QEnb 46,61,69
l i i 61
1 ~ 2 670
iv 10-11 38
INDEXES
2 Bar 213
4,16 207
4 2 207
INDEXES
Didache 171
16,4 171
2 Enoch 113
235 19
3 Enoch 18