See also:Book of
See also:Enoch, or, as it is sometimes called, the Ethiopic Book of Enoch, in contradistinction to the
See also:Slavonic Book of Enoch (see later), is perhaps the most important of all the apocryphal or pseudapocryphal Biblical writings for the
See also:history of religious thought . It is not the
See also:work of a single author, but rather a
See also:conglomerate of
See also:literary fragments which once circulated under the names of Enoch, Noah and possibly
See also:Methuselah . In the Book of the Secrets of Enoch we have additional portions of this literature . As the former work is derived from a variety of Pharisaic writers in
See also:Palestine, so the latter in its
See also:form was written for the most
See also:part by Hellenistic Jews in
See also:Egypt . The Book of Enoch was written in the second and first centuries B.C . It was well known to many of the writers of the New Testament, and in many instances influenced their thought and diction . Thus it is quoted by name as a genuine production of Enoch in the
See also:Epistle of
See also:Jude, 1.4 sq., and it lies at the
See also:base of Matt. xix . 28 and
See also:John v . 22, 27, and many other passages . It had also a vast indirect influence on the Palestinian literature of the 1st century of our era . Like the
See also:Pentateuch, the Psalms, the Megilloth, the Pirke Aboth, this work was divided into five parts, with the critical discussion of which we shall
See also:deal below .
With the earlier Fathers and Apologists it had all the
See also:weight of a canonical book, but towards the close of the 3rd and the beginning of the 4th century it began to be discredited, and finally fell under the
See also:ban of the
See also:Church . Almost the latest reference to it in the early church is made by
See also:Syncellus in his Chronography about A.D . 800 . The book was then lost sight of till 1773, when
See also:Bruce discovered the Ethiopic version in
See also:Abyssinia .
See also:Original Language.—That the Book of Enoch was written in Semitic is now accepted on all hands, but scholars are divided as to whether the Semitic language in question was
See also:Hebrew or Aramaic . Only one valuable contribution on this question has been made, and that by Halevy in the Journal Asiatique, Avril-
See also:Mai 1867, pp . 352-395 . This
See also:scholar is of opinion that the entire work was written in Hebrew . Since this publication, however, fresh evidence bearing on the question has been discovered in the Greek fragment (i.-xxxii.) found in Egypt . Since this fragment contains three Aramaic words transliterated in the Greek, some scholars, and among them Scharer, Levi and N .
See also:Schmidt, have concluded that not only are chapters i.-
See also:xxxvi. derived from an Aramaic original, but also the
See also:remainder of the book . In support of the latter statement no evidence has yet been offered by these or any other scholars, nor yet has there been any attempt to meet the
See also:positive arguments of Halevy for a Hebrew original of
See also:xxxvii.-civ., whose Hebrew reconstructions of the text have been and must be adopted in many cases by every editor and translator of the book .
A prolonged study of the text, which has brought to
See also:light a multitude of fresh passages the majority of which can be explained by retranslation into Hebrew, has convinced the present writer'. that, whilst the evidence on the whole is in favour of an Aramaic original of vi.-xxxvi., it is just as conclusive on behalf of the Hebrew original of the greater part of the
See also:rest of the book . Versions—Greek, Latin and Ethiopic.—The Semitic original was translated into Greek . It is not improbable that there were two distinct Greek versions . Of the one, several fragments have been preserved in Syncellus (A.D . 800), vi.–x . 14, viii . 4–ix . 4, xv . 8–xvi . 1; of the other, i.-xxxii. in the Giza Greek fragment discovered in Egypt and published by Bouriant (Fragments grecs du livre d'Enoch); in 1892, and subsequently by Lods, Dillmann,
See also:Charles (Book of Enoch, 318 sqq.), Swete, and finally by Radermacher and Charles (Ethiopic Text, 3-75) . In addition to these fragments there is that of lxxxix . 42-49 (see Gildemeister in the ZDMG, 1855, pp .
621-624, and Charles, Ethiopic Text, pp . 175-177) . Of the Latin version only i . 9 survives, being preserved in the Pseudo-Cyprian's Ad Novatianum, and cvi . 1-18 discovered by
See also:James in an 8th-century MS. of the
See also:British Museum (see James, Apoc. anecdota, 146-150; Charles, op. cit . 219-222) . This version is made from the Greek . I The evidence is given at length in R . H . Charles' Ethiopic Text of Enoch, pp. xxxii-xxxiii . The Ethiopic version, which alone preserves the entire text, is a very faithful
See also:translation of the Greek . Twenty-eight
See also:MSS. of this version are in the different
See also:libraries of
See also:Europe, of which fifteen are to be found in England .
This version was made from an ancestor of the Greek fragment discovered at Giza . Some of the utterly unintelligible passages in this fragment are literally reproduced in the Ethiopic . The same wrong
See also:order of the text in vii.-viii. is
See also:common to both . In order to recover the original text, it is from
See also:time to time necessary to retranslate the Ethiopic into Greek, and the latter in turn into Aramaic or Hebrew . By this means we are able to detect dittographies in the Greek and variants in the original Semitic . The original was written to a large extent in
See also:verse . The
See also:discovery of this fact is most helpful in the
See also:criticism of the text . This version was first edited by Laurence in 1838 from one MS., in 1851 by Dillmann from five; in 1902 by Flemming from fifteen MSS., and in 1906 by the present writer from twenty-three .
See also:Translations and Commentaries.--Laurence, The Book of Enoch (
See also:Oxford, 1821); Dillmann, Das Buch Henoch (1853); Schodde, The Book of Enoch (1882) ; Charles, The Book of Enoch (1893) ;
See also:Beer, " Das Buch Henoch," in Kautzsch's Apok. u . Pseud.
See also:des A.T . (1900), ii . 217-310; Flemming and Radermacher, Das Buch Henoch (1901) ;
See also:Martin, Le Livre d' Henoch (1906) .
Critical Inquiries.—The bibliography will be found in Scharer, Gesch. d. jiidischen Volkes 3, iii . 207-209, and a
See also:short critical account of the most important of these in Charles, op. cit. pp . 9-2I . The different Elements in the Book, with their respective Characteristics and
See also:Dates.—We have remarked above that the Book of Enoch is divided into five. parts—i.-xxxvi., xxxvii.-lxxi., lxxii. lxxxii., lxxxiii.-xc., xci-cviii . Some of these parts constituted' originally
See also:treatises . In the course of their reduction and incorporation into a single work they suffered much mutilation and loss . From an early date the compositeness of this work was recognized . Scholars have varied greatly in their critical analyses of the work (see Charles, op. cit . 6-21, 309-311)• The analysis which gained most acceptation was that of Dillmann (Herzog's Realencyk.2 Xii . 350-352), according to whom the present books consist of—(I) the groundwork, i.e. i.-xxxvi., lxxii.-cv., written in the time of John
See also:Hyrcanus; (2) xxxvii.-lxxi., xvii.-xix., .before 64 B.C.; (3) the Noachic fragments, vi . 3-8, viii . I-3, IX .
7, X . I, II, XX., XXXiX . I, 2a, liv . 7-IV . 2, IX., lxv.-lxix . 25, cvi.-cvii.; and (4) cviii., from a later
See also:hand . With much of this analysis there is no reason to disagree . The similitudes are undoubtedly of different authorship from the rest of the book, and certain portions of the book are derived from the Book of Noah . On the other hand, the so-called groundwork has no existence unless in the minds of earlier critics and some of their belated followers in the present . It springs from at least four hands, and may be roughly divided into four parts, corresponding to the present actual divisions of the book . A new critical analysis of the book based on this view was given by Charles (op. cit. pp . 24-33), and further
See also:developed by Clemen and Beer .
The analysis of the latter (see Herzog, Realencyk.3 xiv . 240) is very complex . The book, according to this scholar, is composed of the following separate elements from the Enoch tradition:—(I) Ch. i.-v.; (2) xii-xvi.; (3) xvii.-xix . ; (4) xx.-xxxvi.; (5) xxxvii.-lxix . (from diverse
See also:sources); (6) lxx.-lxxi.; (7) lxxii.-lxxxii.; (8) lxxxiii.-lxxxiv.; (9) lxxxv.-xc.; (Io) xciii., cxi . I2-17; (II) XCi . I-II, 18, 19, xcii., xciv.-cv.; (12) cviii., and from the Noah tradition; (13) vi.-xi.; (14) xxxix. i-2a, liv . 7–lv . 2, lx., lxv.-lxix . 25; (15) cvi.-cvii . Thus while Clemen finds eleven separate sources, Beer finds fifteen . A fresh. study from the hand of Appel (Die Composition des athiopischen Henochbuchs, 1906) seeks to reach a final analysis of our book .
But though it evinces considerable insight, it cannot
See also:escape the
See also:charge of extravagance . The original book or ground-work of Enoch consisted of i.-xvi., xx.-xxxvi . This work called forth a
See also:host of imitators, and a number of their writings, together with the groundwork, were edited as a Book of Methuselah, i.e. lxxii.-cv . Then came the final redactor, who interpolated the groundwork and the Methuselah sections, adding two others from his own
See also:pen . The Similitudes he worked up from a series of later sources, and gave them the second place in the final work authenticating them with the name of Noah . The date of the publication of the entire work Appel assigns to the years immediately following the
See also:death of Herod . We shall now give an analysis of the book, with the dates of the various sections where possible . Of these we shall deal with the easiest first .
See also:Chap. lxxii.-lxxxii. constitutes a work in itself, the writer of which had very different
See also:objects before him from the writers of the rest of the book . His
See also:sole aim is to give the
See also:law of the heavenly bodies . His work has suffered disarrangements and interpolations at the hands of the editor of the whole work . Thus Ixxvi.-lxxvii., which are concerned with the winds, the quarters of the
See also:heaven, and certain
See also:geographical matters, and lxxxi., which is concerned wholly with ethical matters, are
See also:foreign to a work which professes in its title (lxxii .
I) to deal only with the luminaries of the heaven and their
See also:laws . Finally, lxxxii. should stand before lxxix.; for the opening words of the latter suppose it to be already read . The date of this section can be partially established, for it was known to the author of
See also:Jubilees, and was therefore written before the last third of the 2nd century B.c . Chaps. lxxxiii.-xc.—This section was written before 161 B.C., for " the
See also:horn," who is Judas the Maccabee, was still warring when the author was writing . (Dillmann,
See also:Schurer and others take the great horn to be John Hyrcanus, but this
See also:interpretation does violence to the text.) These chapters recount three visions: the first two deal with the first-
See also:judgment; the third with the entire history of the world till the final judgment . An eternal Messianic
See also:kingdom at the close of the judgment is to be established under the
See also:Messiah, with its centre in the New Jerusalem set up by
See also:God Himself . Chaps. xci.-civ.-In the preceding section the Maccabees were the religious champions of the nation and the friends of the I3asidim . Here they are leagued with the
See also:Sadducees, and are the declared foes of the Pharisaic party . This section was written therefore after 134 B.C., when the
See also:breach between John Hyrcanus and the
See also:Pharisees took place and before the savage massacres of the latter by Jannaeus (95 B.C.) ; for it is not likely that in a book dealing with the sufferings of the Pharisees such a reference would be omitted . These chapters indicate a revolution in the religious hopes of the nation . An eternal Messianic kingdom is no longer anticipated, but only a temporary one, at the close of which the final judgment will ensue . The righteous dead rise not to this kingdom but to spiritual blessedness in heaven itself—to an immortality of the soul .
This section also has suffered at the hands of the final editor . Thus xci . 12-17, which. describe the last three
See also:weeks of the Ten-Weeks Apocalypse, should be read immediately after xciii . 1-1o, which recount the first seven weeks of the same apocalypse . But, furthermore, the section obviously begins with xcii . " Written by Enoch the
See also:scribe," &c . Then comes xci . 1-to as a natural sequel . The Ten-Weeks Apocalypse, xciii . 1-10, xci . 12-17, if it came from the same hand, followed, and then xciv . The attempt (by Clemen and Beer) to place the Ten-Weeks Apocalypse before 167, because it makes no reference to the Maccabees, is not successful; for where the history of mankind from
See also:Adam to the final judgment is despatched in sixteen verses, such an omission need cause little embarrassment, and still less if the author is the determined foe of the Maccabees, whom he would probably have stigmatized as apostates, if he had mentioned them at all, just as he similarly brands all the Sadducean priesthood that preceded them to the time of the captivity .
This Ten-Weeks Apocalypse, therefore, we take to be the work of the writer of the rest of xci,-civ . Chaps. i.-xxxvi.—This is the most difficult section of the book . It is very composite . Chaps. vi.-xi. is apparently an
See also:independent fragment of the Enoch Saga . It is itself compounded of the Semjaza and Azazel myths, and in its present composite form is already pre-supposed by lxxxviii.-lxxxix . 1; hence its present form is earlier than 166 B.C . It represents a
See also:primitive and very sensuous view of the eternal Messianic kingdom on
See also:earth, seeing that the righteous beget woo
See also:children before they die . These chapters appear to be from the Book of Noah; for they never refer to Enoch but to Noah only (x . I) . Moreover, when the author of Jubilees is clearly
See also:drawing on the Book of Noah, his subject-
See also:matter (vii . 21-25) agrees most closely with that of these chapters in Enoch (see Charles' edition of Jubilees, pp . Ixxi. sq .
264). xii.-xvi., on the other hand, belong to the Book of Enoch . These represent for the most part what Enoch saw in avision . Now whereas vi.-xvi. deal with the fall of the angels, their destruction of mankind, and the condemnation of the fallen angels, the subject-matter now suddenly changes and xvii.-xxxvi. treat of Enoch's journeyings through earth and heaven escorted by angels . Here undoubtedly we have a series of doublets ; for xvii.-xix. stand in this relation to xx.-xxxvi., since both sections deal with the same subjects . Thus xvii . 4=
See also:xxiii.; xvii . 6=xxii.; xviii . 1 =xxxiv.-xxxvi.; xviii . 6-9 =
See also:xxv., xxxii . 1-2; xviii . II, xix.=xxi . 7-1o; xviii .
12-16 =xxi . 1-6 . They belong to the samecycle of tradition and cannot be independent of each other . Chap. xx. appears to show that xx.-xxxvi. is fragmentary, since only four of the seven angels mentioned in xx. have anything to do in xxi.-xxxvi . Finally, i.-v. seems to be of a different date and author-
See also:ship from the rest . Chaps. xxxvii.-lxxi.—These constitute the well-known Similitudes . They were written before 64 B.C., for Rome was not yet known to thewriter, and after 95 B.C., for the slaying of the righteous, of which the writer complains, was not perpetrated by the Maccabean princes before that date . This section consists of three similitudesxxxviii.-xliv., xlv.-Ivii., lviii.-lxix . These are introduced and concluded by xxxvii. and lax . There are many interpolations—lx., lxv.–lxix . 25 confessedly from the Book of Noah; most probably also liv . 7–lv .
2 . Whence others, such as xxxix . 1, 2a, xli . 3-8, xli ii. sq.,
See also:spring is doubtful . Chaps . 1, lvi . 5–lvii . 3a are likewise insertions . In R . H . Charles's edition of Enoch, Ixxi. was bracketed as an
See also:interpolation . The writer now
See also:sees that it belongs to the text of the Similitudes though it is dislocated from its original context .
It presents two visits of Enoch to heaven in lxxi . 1-4 and lxxi . 5-17 . The extraordinary statement in lxxi . 14, according to which Enoch is addressed as " the Son ofMan," is seen, as Appel points out, on examination of the context to have arisen from the loss of a portion of the text after verse 13, in which Enoch saw a heavenly being with the
See also:Head of Days and asked the
See also:angel who accompanied him who this being was . Then comes ver . 14, which, owing to the loss of this passage, has assumed the form of an address to Enoch : " Thou
See also:art the Son of Man," but which stood originally as the angel's reply to Enoch: " This is the Son of Man," &c . Ver . 15, then, gives the
See also:message sent to Enoch by the Son of Man . In the next verse the second
See also:person should be changed into the third . Thus we recover the original text of this difficult
See also:chapter . The Messianic
See also:doctrine and
See also:eschatology of this section is unique .
The Messiah is here for the first time described as the pre-existent Son of Man (xlviii . 2), who sits on the
See also:throne of God (xlv . 3; xlvii . 3), possesses universal dominion (lxii . 6), and is the
See also:Judge of all mankind (lxix . 27) . After the judgment there will be a new heaven and a new earth, which will be the abode of the blessed . The BOOK OF THE SECRETS OF ENOCH, Or Slavonic Enoch . This new fragment of the Enochic literature has only recently come to light through five MSS. discovered in Russia and
See also:Servia . Since about A.D . 500 it has been lost sight of . It is cited without
See also:acknowledgment in the Book of Adam and
See also:Eve, the Apocalypses of Moses and Paul, the Sibylline Oracles, the Ascension of Isaiah, the Epistle of
See also:Barnabas, and referred to by
See also:Origen and
See also:Irenaeus (see Charles, The Book of the Secrets of Enoch, 1895, pp. xvii-xxiv) .
For Charles's editio
See also:prince'ps of this work, in 1895,
See also:Professor MorfiIl translated two of the best MSS., as well as Sokolov's text, which is founded on these and other MSS . In 1896 Bonwetsch issued his Das slavische Henochbuch, in which a German translation of the above two MSS. is given side by side, preceded by a short introduction . Analysis.—Chaps. i.-ii . Introduction:
See also:life of Enoch: his dream, in which he is told that he will be taken up to heaven: his admonitions to his sons. iii.-xxxvi . What Enoch saw in heaven. iii.-vi . The first heaven: the rulers of the stars: the great
See also:sea and the treasures of
See also:snow, &c. vii . The second heaven: the fallen angels. viii.-x . The third heaven:
See also:Paradise and place of punishment. xi.-xvii . The
See also:fourth heaven: courses of the
See also:sun and
See also:moon: phoenixes. xciii . The fifth heaven: the watchers
See also:mourning for their fallen brethren. xix . The
See also:sixth heaven: seven bands of angels arrange and study the courses of the stars, &c.: others set over the years, the fruits of the earth, the souls of men. xx.-xxxvi . The seventh heaven .
See also:Lord sitting on His throne with the ten chief orders of angels . Enoch is clothed by Michael in the raiment of God's
See also:glory and instructed in the secrets of nature and of man, which he wrote down in 366 books . God reveals to Enoch the history of the creation of the earth and the seven
See also:planets and circles of the heaven and of man, the
See also:story of the fallen angels, the duration of the world through 7000 years, and its
See also:millennium of rest. xxxviii.-lxvi . Enoch returns to earth, admonishes his sons: instructs them on what he had seen in the heavens, gives them his books . Bids them not to swear at all nor to expect any intercession of the de-parted
See also:saints for sinners . Ivi.-lxiii . Methuselah asks Enoch's blessing before he departs, and to all his sons and their families Enoch gives fresh instruction. lxiv.-Ixvi . Enoch addressed the assembled
See also:people at Achuszan. ixvii.-lxviii . Enoch's translation . Rejoicings of the people on behalf of the
See also:revelation given them through Enoch . Language and Place of Writing.—A large part of this book was written for the first time in Greek . This may be inferred from such statements as (1)
See also:xxx .
13, " And I gave him a name (i.e . Adam) from the four substances: theEast, the West, the
See also:North and the South." Thus Adam's name is here derived from the initial letters of the four quarters: avaroXii, bbais, tips-
See also:roc, µevriµ(3pia . This derivation is impossible in Semitic . This context is found elsewhere in the Sibyllines 24 sqq. and other Greek writings . (2) Again our author uses the chronology of the Septuagint and in 1, 4 follows the Septuagint text of
See also:Deuteronomy xxxii . 35 against the Hebrew . On the other hand. some sections may wholly or in part go back to Hebrew originals . There is a Hebrew Book of Enoch attributed to R . Ishmael
See also:ben Elisha who lived at the close of the 1st century and the beginning of the 2nd century B.C . This book is very closely related to the Book of the Secrets of Enoch, or rather, to a large extent de-pendent upon it . Did Ishmael ben Elisha use the Book of the Secrets of Enoch in its Greek form, or did he find portions of it in Hebrew ? At all events, extensive quotations from a Book of Enoch are found in the rabbinical literature of the
See also:middle ages, and the provenance of these has not yet been determined .
See Jewish Encyc. i . 676 seq . But there is a stronger
See also:argument for a Hebrew original of certain sections to be found in the fact that the Testaments of the XII . Patriarchs appears to quote xxxiv . 2, 3 of our author in T . Napth. iv . 1, T . Benj. ix . The book in its present form was written in Egypt . This may be inferred (I) from the variety of speculations which it holds in common with Philo and writings of a Hellenistic character that circulated mainly in Egypt . (2) The Phoenixes are Chalkydries (ch. xii.)—monstrous serpents with the heads of crocodiles—are natural products of the
See also:imagination . (3) The syncretistic character of the creation account (xxv.-
See also:xxvi.) betrays Egyptian elements .
Relation to Jewish andChristian Literature.—The existence of a kindred literature in Neo-Hebrew has been already pointed out . We might note besides that it is quoted in the Book of Adam and Eve, the Apocalypse of Moses, the Apocalypse of Paul, the
See also:anonymous work De montibus Sina et
See also:Sion, the Sibylline Oracles ii . 75, Origen, De princip. i . 3, 2 . The authors of the Ascension of Isaiah, the Apoc. of
See also:Baruch and the Epistle of Barnabas were probably acquainted with it . In the New Testament the similarity of matter and diction is sufficiently strong to establish a close connexion, if not a literary dependence . Thus with Matt. v . 9, " Blessed are the peacemakers," cf. lii . 11, " Blessed is he who establishes peace ": with Matt. v . 34, 35, 37, " Swear not at all," cf. xlix . 1, " I will not swear by a single
See also:oath, neither by heaven, nor by earth, nor by any other creature which God made—if there is no truth in man, let them swear by a word yea, yea, or
See also:nay, nay." Date and Authorship.—The book was probably written between 30 B.C. and A.D . 70 .
It was written after 30 B.C., for it makes use of Sirach, the (Ethiopic) Book of Enoch and the Book ofWisdom . It was written before A.D . 70; for the
See also:temple is still
See also:standing: see lix . 2 . The author was an orthodox Hellenistic
See also:Jew who lived in Egypt . He believed in the value of sacrifices (xlii . 6; lix . 1, 2, &c.), but is careful to enforce enlightened views regarding them (xlv . 3, 4; lxi . 4, 5.) in the law, lii . 8, 9; in a blessed immortality, I . 2; lxv .
6, 8-10, in which the righteous should be clothed in " the raiment of God's glory," xxii . 8 . In questions
See also:relating to cosmology, sin, death, &c., he is an eclectic, and allows himself the most unrestricted freedom, and readily incorporates Platonic (xxx . 16), Egyptian (xxv . 2) and Zend (lviii . 4-6) elements into his
See also:system of thought . Anthropological Views.—All the souls of men were created before the foundation of the world (xxiii . 5) and likewise their future abodes in heaven or
See also:hell (xlix . 2, Iviii . 5) . Man's name was derived, as we have already seen, from the four quarters of the world, and his
See also:body was compounded from seven sub-stances (xxx . 8) .
He was created originally
See also:good: freewill was bestowed upon him with instruction in the two ways of light and darkness, and then he was
See also:left to
See also:mould his own destiny (xxx . 15) . But his preferences through the
See also:bias of the flesh took an evil direction, and death followed as the wages of sin (xxx . 16) . (R . H .
VISCOUNT BUYO ENOMOTO (1839-1909)
There are no comments yet for this article.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.
Links to articles and home page are encouraged.