Qumran and Apocalyptic: Studies on the Aramaic Texts from Qumran (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah) (Studies of the Texts of Thedesert of Judah) (English, Aramaic and Aramaic Edition) [2 ed.] 9004095861, 9789004095861

Citation preview

QUMRAN AND APOCALYPTIC

STUDIES ON THE TEXTS OF THE DESERT OF JUDAH EDITED BY

F. GARCiA MARTINEZ A. s. VAN DER WOUDE

VOLUME IX

q;,ll~tG'/)1'

~

'"

..()

.

7'

I··

.:-

..::

r-

";

~

"68'"

'"

QUMRAN AND APOCALYPTIC STUDIES ON THE ARAMAIC TEXTS FROM QUMRAN BY

FLORENTINO GARCIA MARTINEZ SECOND EDITION

. DUPONT-SOMMER takes ill') lfJ as an attribute and identifies the Chosen of God with the Messiah: «parce que l'Elu de Dieu sera son engendre». GRELOT and FITZMYER prefer to consider the sentence as a nominal clause, depending on the precedent clause [«parce qu'il est l'elu de Dieu»]. 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, «because he is the elect of God», but one which precedes the principal sentence. ill') llJ and ' illlJ'lJ J n II would then be two characteristic elements about which something is said, but this is unfortunately lost in the blank of line II. This division of the sentence is obviously dependent on the general comprelrension of the text and on the sense which is given to ill') llJ. The word may be interpreted as a participle or as a substantive. The first interpretation (past part. 'Atel of l')') is insistently supported by

19 Especially since the publication of the provocative positions of MILlK, The Books of Enoch, 89-98. According to MILIK The Parables of Enoch would be of Christian origin and not earlier than 270 A.D. His views have been generally rejected, see J.C. GREENFIELD-M. STONE, «The Enochic Pentateuch and the Date of the Similitudes», HTR 70 (1977), 51-65; MA. KNIBB, «The Date of the Parables of Enoch: A Critical Review», NTS 25 (1979), 345-359; CH.L. MFARS, «Dating the Similitudes of Enoch», NTS 25 (1979), 360-369; M. DELCOR, «Le livre des Paraboles d'Henoch Ethiopien. Le probleme de son origine a la lumiere des decouvertes recentes», EstBfbl 38 (1979-80), 5-33; M. BLACK, «The Composition, Character and Date of the 'Second Vision of Enoch'», in Text, Wort, Glaube. Festschrift K Aland (Berlin 1980), 19-30; D.W. SurER, «Weighed in the Balance: The Similitudes of Enoch in Recent Discussion», Religious Studies Review 3 (1981), 217-221; G. BAMPFYLDE, «The Similitudes of Enoch: Historical Allusions», lSI 15 (1984), 9-31.

4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH

14

DUPONT-SOMMER, who sees in it an Essenic anticipation of the Christian idea of the divine origin of the Messiah20. This reading of the passage would imply that the Elect of God is begotten by God, and that he is His Son21 . This idea of the divine origin of the «Elect of God» is by no means odd in a Qumranic context as evidenced by lQSa 11,11-12: «When God begets the Messiah among them»22. But the context does not seem to support this thesis and a parallel expression is not attested in Aramaic. The case of ill'J llJ as a substantive is quite different. It is well attested both in Hebrew and in Aramaic with the meaning «birth, moment of birth» and especially in the astrological sense «theme de geniture». It is used with this last technical meaning in the astrological document published by ALLEGRO (4Q186 ii 8)23. This is the meaning which, in our view, must be also adopted here. ~illlJ\lJ J n ll. 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 il'J n II (from a still unpublished ms. of Cave 4) or of 1'J n II of 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 D"n nlJ\lJ J of Gen 2,7. Consequently he supplements it with illiln iill~Jl'{J or illiln ilJ, He translates the sentence: «parce que ... l'esprit de Son souffle [sera dans ses narines] »24. As a result, our text would anticipate, according to DUPONT-SOMMER, the Ebionite christology. The text would refer not only to the Messiah,

«Deux Documents Horoscopiques», 249-25l. His translation «sera son engendre,> is difficult to accept because of the future meaning given to l'{ 1il. 22 See M. SMITH, «God's Begetting the Messiah in 1Q Sa», NTS 5 (1958-59), 218224; R. GORDlS, «The Begotten Messiah in the Qumran Scrolls», JIT 7 (1957), 191194; H. RICHARDSON, «Some Notes on 1Q Sa»,IBL 76 (1957), 108-122. 23 CAQUOT has published a sentence, communicated to him by DUPONT-SOMMER, from one as yet unpublished 4Q ms., in which the word ill'J llJ occurs again with this technical meaning: n 'In J Yl n il'{ 1 l'l 'J llJ \lJ III il ~ il J i l J: «cherche ses genitures dans Ie Mystere de l'avenir et alors tu sauras ce dont i1 heritera», see «4QMess. Ar», 152, note 2l. 24 «Deux Documents Horoscopiques», 252. 20 21

4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH

15

but to the Messiah as a new Adam. Or, to use its own words: As Adam, the Chosen of God shall possess in himself the breath of God Himself, that is, the Spirit of God, which will be his own breath of life. In my view, there is nothing in the text to support this view. If the meaning proposed for ill J 10 is correct, the meaning of ' il lOW J n 1l is «the breath of his respiration», that is, his very life, which is mentioned here in association with his birth. This induces us to fill the blank found in line 11 with a sentence such as «they will be perfect or blessed». Line 11 Although the blank starts immediately after pOJYJ, the end of the line has been preserved and no signs of writing are apparent. This leads us to infer the existence of a partition, as in lines 2 and 5. Unfortunately, the words preserved in the four following lines do not allow us to draw any conclusion about the contents of the new section.

Col. ii. Line 1 pOl PJ J!J J. FITZMYER translates «fell to the East», because the second word appears in the absolute state. We prefer the interpretation given by the editor, which is better attested in Imperial Aramaic, efr. DISO 251. An adverbial sense would also be possible = «previously», a meaning poV also has when preceded by a lamed (CowLEY 30, 8.10). In that case, the allusion to the fall of the angels (Gen. 6,1-4 and 1 Enoch 15,11) would be less justified. il 1nW ' J J. This is the only time il 1n\lJ appears in the Aramaic texts published so far. It is apparently equivalent to the Hebrew nnw. llQtglob XIII, 1 translates nnw by K JP n in the only place in which the correspondence has been preserved. In this case, the Rabbinic Tg (ed. LAGARDE, Job 33,24.28) uses Knn 1 lW. Nevertheless, in Job 17,14, translates nnw by K 11n\lJ, 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 'W JK, frequently attested in lQS, lQM and CD.

16

4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH

Line 2 Kn!J 1JU. Although the singular could be taken as a collective noun and could refer to the «lentils» as food, the same use of the singular leads us to give to it the derived meaning of «mole», as in col. i 2.

Line 7 We follow the reading of FITZMYER, which repeats the expression of col. i 10. STARCKY reads KJl\l.iJ n lll, and the spirit of the flesh, efr. 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 J, but which in view of the script used in the document can be read perfectly as a J. Line 8 l'I.JJYJ. We read l'I.JJYJ as in col. i 11, not 11'JYJ (so the editor). There is sufficient space for a IJ. 11'JY is not found as an absolute term in the Qumran texts, but always in the expression 11'JY JK.

Line 14 11!J 1D'. With FITZMYER, we read the word as a form of ~ 1 D. STARCKY prefers to derive it from ~ D ~, «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 ~ 1D would make less sense here is not convincing in view o~ the uncertain meaning of the sentence as a whole. The editor himself interprets 11!J 1D' in col. i 9 as a derivation from ~ 1D and recognises that the stopping of the waters is also an apocalyptic motif. lIJJ. FITZMYER'S reading lJJ seems to me paleographically impossible. His transcription lJJ[ )11J, which surmises a non-existent blank, is likewise unjustified. We must however admit that our interpretation is problematic because the only attested plural of ilI.JJ is Kn l/.JJ/Kn/.JJ. In contradistinction to the editor we consider lJK J 1J as the subject of the following verb I1Pi1', not of pln'. But the meaning of the whole sentence remains uncertain because an equally acceptable reading could be IlJill, or lJln 1, which would force us to divide the sentence in a different way.

4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH

17

Line 16 The editor reads illJ 1?{ as a direct object of the verbal form llJ n " wbich he derives from p J. As for us, we would rather derive it from ?{ JJ, and consider the rest of the line as a new sentence. pVYJ. In the literature of the period in question, the Watchers are identified as beings of a somewhat angelical nature, see Dan 4,10.14.20 (which not only uses the plural, but also the singular), Jub 4,15: 10,5; Test. Ruben 5,6-7; Test. Naphtali 3,5. In 1 Enoch they are identified sometimes with the Archangels (12,2.3; 20,1; 39, 12.13; 40,2; 61,62; 71,7) and sometimes with the fallen angels (1,5; 10,9.15; 12,4; 13,10; 14,1.3; 15,2; 16,1.2; 91,15). In Daniel, the LXX translate the term by «angels» while Aquila and Symmachus translate it by \yp~yopO\, as the Greek text of 1 Enoch, since they derive the term from the Semitic root lW, thus giving rise to the customary translation of «watchers», those who keep awake. Line 18 VJ IIp. 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 1QapGn II, 1. The fact that here VJ 1l P is in singular and p l"Y in plural, leads us to consider VJ II P as a divine title, frequently used in 1 Enoch, and not as another angel.

D. Commentary If the preceding analysis is accepted, the text refers to a personage whose name has not been preserved. The first part of coLi describes the physical features of the hero, possibly at the time of his birth, since another of the extant copies of the same work25 has revealed to us even the child's weight: il?{fJ n'Jn p'Ji7 n 'Jpn[fJ «he weighs 300 shekels». The marks he presents are of different types, distributed over various parts of his body. A fundamental fact concerns the future 25 See J.T. MILIK, The Books of Elloch, 56. In his forthcoming publication, «Les modeles arameens du livre d'Esther dans la grotte 4 de Qumran», in E. PUECH-F. GARCIA MARTINEZ, Memorial Jeall Starcky, Vol. 2 (Paris 1992), 321-406, MILIK gives a transcription of 4QNaissNoti, a fragment of a «colophon, inedit, d'un manuscrit de 4Q qui relate la naissance de Noe, recoupe par quelques mots d'un autre ms., sigle: e» (p. 357).

18

4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH

development of his character: the knowledge of the three books. Before that knowledge, his life will evolve normally. Thereafter, everything will change: he will obtain wisdom, experience visions, know the hidden secrets, and, although a strong opposition will rise against him, he will remain unaffected because he is 'the Elect of God'. After this summary of the hero's life, coLi could have started a detailed exposition of the facts, although the fragmentary state of the text prevents us from drawing any firm conclusions. The mention of the «mole» in col. ii 2 seems to suggest that in each of the marks discovered in the child there lies a clue for the interpretation of the future facts of his life, in much the same way as is the case in the physiognomic treatises, in which all possibilities are systematically imagined and given a meaning that will materialise in the future. But, in contrast to those treatises, in the part of the text that has been preserved, this future is not dependent on the body marks, but on the knowledge of the 'three books', a development which fully places our text within the literature of initiation26. In fact, the rest of the material preserved in column ii. apparently refers to the deluge, and the material of col. ii, after the Vacat of line 15, to the story of the Watchers - which would lead us to the story of Noah. J.A. FITZMYER27 was the first author to suggest this way of reading the text and P. GRELOT28 developed this idea placing the fragment within the perspective of the Enochic literature. J.T. MILIK has accepted the identification of the main character with Noah 29 and even the editor of the text, J. STARCKy30, has subscribed to this new interpretation31 . CAQUOT has proposed a different interpretation. After excluding the view that the mysterious personage could be one of the messianic 26 4Q186, on the contrary, remains fully within the physiognomic literature. According to MILlK, this Hebrew text would also concern Noah and his horoscope, but in my opinion it has no relation at all with 4QMess Ar. 27 «The Aramaic 'Elect of God'», 371. 28 «Henoch et ses ecritures», 493-4%. 29 The Books of Enoch, 56 and «Ecrits preesseniens», 94-95. 30 «Le Maitre de Justice», 56. 31 J.C. GREENFIELD has proposed to identify the 'elect of God' figure with Melchizedek, but without giving any argument for this identification, see his Prolegomenon to the reprint of H. ODEBERG, 3 Enoch or the Hebrew Book of Enoch (New York 1973), XXI.

4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH

19

figures expected by the Qumran community because «il n'est pas question ici de royaute ou de sacerdoce», and suggesting that the best candidate seems to be Enoch32, CAQUOT finally concludes that the text announces the coming of an Enoch redivivus, whose si~ns should be recognised and whose career as a diviner is predicted3 . But this identification of the 'elect of God' with the figure of Enoch is dependent on his understanding of the expressions «secrets of man» and «plans» as «Ie nombre de tous les humains qui doivent venir au monde avant la consommation du monde» and on his finding of this idea in 2 Enoch 23,5 34• But, as we have already stated in the Notes, this understanding of the Aramaic expressions is problematic and is unattested elsewhere. In fact, more than on a formal proof, the identification of the mysterious personage with Noah rests on a series of indications. None of them is conclusive as such, but, if they are taken together, the cumulative evidence seems convincing. The most important indications are the following: 1. The knowledge of the three books

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

32 «Si l'on se rappelle qu'aux termes memes de cette partie de 1 Henoch Ie personnage appele «Elu», «Fils d'homme» ou «Messie» n'est autre qu'Henoch luimeme, on pourrait penser, en effet, que Ie heros dont parle 4QMess Ar, au moins en son debut, n'est autre qu'Henoch que les «Paraboles» presentent comme un detenteur et un revelateur de mysteres divins (46,3; 51,3).», «4QMess Ar», 155. 33 «Le texte annonce plutot la venue d'un personnage qui sera peut-etre un Henoch redivivus mais qu'i1 s'agit de reconnaitre ii des signes (que Ie debut de 4QMess Ar devait enumerer) et dont on prevoyait la carriere de devin», «4QMess Ar»':w155. «Ecris toutes les ames des hommes, tous ceux qui ne sont pas nes, et les places qui leur sont preparees ii jamais. Car toutes les ames sont preparees avant la formation terrestre», in the translation of A. VAILlAN"l', Le livre des secrets d'Henoch (Paris 19762), 97.

20

4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH The signs of the heaven according to the order of their months, so that the sons of man might know the (appointed) times of the years according to their order, with respect to each of their months (4,17) (Astronomical Book). This one was the first (who) wrote a testimony and testified to the children of men throughout the generations of the earth. 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. 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. He saw and knew everything and wrote his testimony and deposited the testimony upon the earth against all the children of men and their generations (4,18-19) (Book of Dreams) 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 everything, and bore witness to the Watchers, the ones who sinned with the daughters of men because they began to mingle themselves with the daughters of men so that they might be polluted. And Enoch bore witness against all of them (4, 21-22) (Book of Watchers).

According to 1 Enoch 82,1 35 Enoch transmitted the books to Methuselah. Now, Methuselah, my son, I shall recount all these things to you and write them down for you. I have revealed to you and given you the book concerning all these things. Preserve, my son, the book from your father's hands in order that you may pass it to the generations of the world.

Methuselah transmitted them to Lamech, who passed this legacy to Noah. Because, thus, Enoch, the father of your father, commanded Methuselah, his son, and Methuselah (commanded) Lamech, his son. And Lamech commanded me everything which his fathers commanded him (Jub 7,38).

Noah, then, according to this tradition, is presented as the repository of the Enochic wisdom, of the digest of the antediluvian wisdom which is summarised in the «three books». 2. To come to the sphere As we have also seen in the Notes, the best way to understand the Aramaic expression in question is to relate it to Lamech's trip to paradise, where Enoch resided and was consulted about Noah's birth.

35

See also 1 Enoch 76,14; 83,1.9; 85,2; 91,1.2; 107,3; 108,1.

4QMESS AR AND THE BOOK OF NOAH

21

The Ethiopic text corresponding to 1QapGn, 1 Enoch 106, uses the same expression. Curiously, in one of the fragments considered as coming from the Book of Noah which are incorporated in the Parables of Enoch (1 Enoch 65,2)36, it is expressly said that Noah «took off from there and went unto the extreme ends of the earth. And he cried out to his grandfather, Enoch», using the same expression which 1 Enoch 106,8 uses for Methuselah's journey. 3. And with his father and with his forefathers ... life and old age

Noah is, in fact, the last of the long-lived patriarchs: he became 950 years (Gen 9,29). Mter him, the ages of men will progressively decrease as they tum away from God. This longevity is denied to the contemporaries of Noah. The Watchers claim it for their descendants (1 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 (1 Enoch 10,10-11).

4. He will know the secrets of man

This knowledge is the result of his reading the three books, something which befits the Noachic hypothesis. All secrets were revealed to Enoch: the secrets of the holy ones (1 Enoch 106,19), those of the sinners ( 1 Enoch 104,10), sin of all kinds on earth (1 Enoch 83,7), the secrets that the fallen angels reveal to men (1 Enoch 7,1; 8,1-3; 9,6; 10,7; 16,3), the secrets of God (1 Enoch 103,2; 104,12). The expressions used make us think of texts such as 1 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 upon the e\lrth for all the generations 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. 36

Cfr. postea, pp. 30-35.

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 Parables (1 Enoch 68,1) takes up the same idea: After that, my grandfather, Enoch, gave me instructions in all secret things in the book and in the parables which were given to him; and he put them together for me in the words of the book of the parables.

5. His wisdom will reach all the peoples

The expression perfectly suits Noah inasmuch as he is the conveyor of the antediluvian wisdom which, thanks to his mediation, is transmitted to later generations. If the sentence in question is understood as an allusion to his reputation among his contemporaries, it may be equally applied to him, since Wisdom 10,4 implies that Noah was rescued from the deluge precisely because of his wisdom. 6. Elect of God As we have already mentioned, the titulary use of the phrase is only found in the Parables of Enoch, where it has a clear messianic mean-

ing. The appropriateness of its application to Noah may be suggested in different ways: - in terms of his election to continue human existence on earth after the deluge; - because Josephus confers on him the title of «God's loved one», which makes it possible to understand the use of a similar title in Aramaic37,. - the reason why he is chosen to be rescued from the deluge is recorded in Gen 7,1, where it is said that Noah is the only >. This has prompted UHLId52 to consider 91,1-10.18-19 as the termination of the Book of Dreams. Such a division of the material enables him to interpret Enoch's exhortations to Methuselah and his descendants as part of the narrative framework that embodies the Book of Dreams in a perfect correspondence to the reference to Methuselah in 83,1, at the beginning of the Book of Dreams. But this position does not seem correct to me. The breaking apart of the Ethiopic text in chs. 91-93, quite obvious now in the light of the new Qumranic manuscripts, is certainly previous to the copy of this Ethiopic manuscript which already contains it, and implies that the manuscript situates part of the «Apocalypse of Weeks» within the Book of Dreams. This manifest error prevents us from allotting an excessive value to the division it indicates and, in fact, E. ISAAC, who has opted for this manuscript as a basis for his translation, abides by the traditional division. In any case, 4QEw 1 ii completely disavows that hypothesis, since 92,1 is located there, right after 91,18_19 153, both being preceded by the remnants of 91,10. Considering that only a couple of letters have been preserved from the first column of 4QEw, it is impossible to know the beginning of the Epistle in Aramaic, although it seems certain that it did not start at 92,1. b) We -have already clearly stated our interpretation of the work as a unity of which the «Apocalypse of Weeks» is an integral part, and placed an emphasis on some elements, such as the mention of the riches in the Aramaic text, that vindicated such an interpretation. The fact that 4QEw has preserved parts both of the «Apocalypse» and of

151 The one described by E. HAMMERSCHMIDT, Alhiopische Halldschriftell vom TlJnasee (Wiesbaden 1973), 107-108, from the XVth century. This manuscript is designated as ms. TS2 (=Tanasee 9a) in the translation of UHLIG, 476, and as ms. A ( = Kebran 9/11) in the translation of ISAAC, 6. 152 S. UHLIG, Das iilhiopische Hellochbllch, 673-674. 153 UHLIG's assertion: "wird nach xc 19 und vor xcii 1 ein vacat markiert: Es ist auf Tafel XXI zu sehen", is incomprehensible to me. The vacal only exists in MILlK's reconstruction on the left part of the column, while the preserved text, reproduced in plate XXI, only shows the right part of the column, in which there is no vacal.

94

ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH

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. 4QEw has justified the critics who rearranged the order of the Ethiopic text and placed the tenth week in the natural order. d) 4QEw has, morover, demonstrated that 91,11 does not constitute a redactional addition, but forms part of the description of the seventh week, since it immediately follows 93,10 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 4QEw suggest that the Epistle circulated as an independent work because the manuscript apparently contained that work only154. 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 Epistle 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 «Epistle». 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 BLACK155 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 154 See J.T. MILIK, 17le Books of Elloch, 146-147. 155 M. BlACK, 17le Book of Elloch or 1 Elloch, 318-319.

ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH

95

in ch. 104, after discarding the reference «so says the Lord» of verse 1. Nothing may be concluded with certainty because of the state of the manuscript. h) Equally interesting are the contributions of 4QEn e in relation to chs. 106-107. The main problems posed by these chapters are the following: are these chapters part of the Epistle, or are they a supplement to it?; in the latter case, what is their origin?; were they incorporated by the author of the Epistle, or by the author of the final Enochic compilation? The traditional opinion is unanimous in asserting that the chapters constitute a supplement whose source is the lost «Book of Noah», but is divided on the question of whether the incorporation was carried out by the author of the Epistle 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 «Book of Noah» seem to me fully justified 156. 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 (4QEw) conclude in ch. 94, has deprived the supporters of the theory that these chapters were added, as a supplement, by the author of the Epistle, of the possibility of verifying such a hypothesis. VANDERKAM 157 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 having been made by the author of the Epistle. But MILIK's argument 158 that the figure of Noah, added to the complete Enochic compilation, has the same literary function as the designation of Moses' successor at the end of the Pentateuch, offers another alternative explanation that is equally possible. The testimony of 4QEn c , the only manuscript which has preserved these chapters, is not fully conclusive, but vindicates, in my opinion, the thesis that this addition

156 157

See supra ch. 1, pp 27-'253. J.e. VANDERKAM, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition, 174-

158

J.T. MILIK, The Books of Enoch, 183-184.

175.

96

ARAMAIC ENOCH AND THE BOOKS OF ENOCH

should be considered as a colophon or an appendix to the complete Enochic corpus. The first sign in that sense is precisely the fact that the addition was preserved only in one of the copies which testify to the joint composition of the Enochic material. The second and most significant one is that there is a two-line vacat in this copy (4QEn c 5 i 24-25) that separates ch. 106 from 105 preceding it. It is true that the copyist of 4QEnc makes a full use of the vacat for marking the paragraphs. But this is the only case of a double vacat within the whole preserved text, and would suggest a major division and a system of separating these chapters from the preceding text of the Epistle. If, as proposed by MILIK, the compilation of the Enochic writings as a unit was made at Qumran, it would be easier to ascribe the addition of the chapters to the Qumranic redactor, since the Book of Noah was well known and very frequently used in the Qumran scriptorium, as demonstrated by the numerous works originating there in which we may discover its traces. In any case, there is evidence in 4QEn c that the incorporation had already been made at the end of the 2nd century B.c. and that, ever since then, these remnants of the Noachic work have survived firmly anchored in the Enochic tradition.

CHAPTER THREE

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

In contrast to the other Enochic works, whose publication by MILIK in 1976 has resulted, as already noticed!, in an overwhelming flood of studies, the Book of Giants, edited together with the other Enochic fragments, has not yet attracted the attention it really deserves 2. This is understandable in view of the fact that only a part of the material preserved and identified as belonging to this work has so far been published, which induces us to wait for the complete publication of the material available before venturing to study its fragments. This compels us, anyhow, to treat the material differently from the other Enoch fragments when it comes to introducing the material published so far. Although the only manuscript of the Book of Giants of Cave 4 published so far (4QEnGiants a ) forms part of the scroll that contained

1 See the references given supra, chapter two, note 3, and F. GARCIA MARTINEZ EJ.e. TlGCHELAAR, «1 Enoch and the Figure of Enoch. A Bibliography of Studies 1970-1988», RQ 14/53 (1989), 149-176. 2 To my knowledge the only specific paper dedicated to the «Book of Giants» is the one published by HJ. KLIMKEIT, «Der Buddha Henoch: Qumran und Turfan», Zeitschrift fUr Religions- WId Geistesgeschichte 32 (1980), 367-377. KLIMKEIT postulates a direct line of transmission from Qumran to Mani 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. DUPONT-SOMMER, «Essenisme et Bouddhisme», Acadbnie des Inscriptions et BellesLettres. Comptes Rendus des seances de 1980 (Paris 1981), 698-715, does not take into consideration the Book of Giallts. The most important contribution has been the new edition of the Aramaic fragments by K. BEYER, Die aramiiischen Texte vom 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 be found in S. UHLIG, Das iithiopische Henochbuch, 755-760, and an English translation, together with an edition of the Aramaic fragments in J.A. FrrzMYER - OJ. HARRINGTON, A Manual of Palestinian Aramaic Texts, 68-79. A monograph of J.e. REEVES, Jewish Lore in Manichaean Cosmogony: Studies in the 'Book of Giants' Traditiolls (Monographs of the Hebrew Union College) has been announced, but it has not appeared yet. For a synthetic presentation of the problems involved, see A.S. VAN DER WOUDE, «Fiinfzehn Jahre Qumranforschung (1974-1988}», Theologische Rundschau 54 (1989), 259-261.

98

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

other Enochic works (4QEn C )3, 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 MILIK who, showing as much intuition as erudition, succeeded in following through many different literary works the trail of the elements that proved necessary to unify the scanty Qumranic fragments and give them their proper significance4. MILIK'S intuition consisted in surmising that the Qumranic fragments were the remnants of the lost work that, some centuries later, served as a basis for Mani in composing the work whose title in Middle-Persian is Kawfm, "The Giants". There prevailed the reasonable supposition that a Book of Giants had seen the light prior to Mani, following Syncellus's assertion that «in the year 2585, while roaming in the fields, Kainan came across the manuscript of the giants and put it away»5. This surmise was confirmed by the Gelasian Decree which cites a Liber de Ogia nomine gigante qui post diluvium cum dracone ab haereticis pugnasse perhibetur, apocryphus. It was also a well-known fact that Mani had composed a Book of Giants 6 and the suspicion had been growing, since as early

3 This conclusion of MILIK, 17le Books of Enoch, 310, is to be accepted without reserve. It is based on the form of the letters, the quality of the leather, the ordering of the text and the orthography, identical in 4QEn c and in 4QEnGiantsa. We thus accept not only that the other Enochic compositions included in 4QEn c were copied by the same scribe that copied 4QEnGiantsa, but also that these four texts were copied in one and the same manuscript, which has received two sigla in order only to distinguish their contents. 4 MILIK published the first results of his investigations in two papers that appeared simultaneously: «Problemes de la litterature henochique a la lumiere des fragments arameens de Qumran», HTR 64 (1971), 333-378, and «Turfan et Qumran. Livre des Geants juif et manicheen», in: G. JEREMIAS, H.W. KUHN and H. STEGEMANN (eds.), Tradition lind G/allbe. Das friihe Christentllm in seiner Umwe/t (Gottingen 1971), 117-127. 5 AA. MOSSHAMMER, Ge01gills Synce/llls, Ec/oga Chronographica (Bibliotheca Scrigtorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana) (Teubner, Leipzig 1984), 90. YPIX4>~ 'twv ylyIXv't'wv according to the title given in the list of Timotheus of BF'lntium collected by JA. FABRICIUS in his Codex Apocryplllls N.T. (Hamburg 171~), Vol. I-II, 139. To this book there are many references in the Manichean compositions, which give it as title: Sitr a/-jababirah in Arabic, Kawan in MiddlePersian, Book of the Giants in Coptic, etc.

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

99

as the 18th century7, that the sources from which Mani had drawn his inspiration, had been the Enochic works and the ypu4>~ 'twv y(yuv't~v already mentioned8. 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 Turfan9, a series of fragments were spotted containing translations or citations from the book of Mani. It was their publication by HENNING 10 which enabled MIUK, 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 Kawan enabled MIUK to recognise some Qumranic fragments, previously published, as well as other still unknown manuscripts, as copies of the same lost Book of Giants.

1. COPIES OF THE BOOK OF GIANTS

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

7 In the Histoire critique de Manicllee et du Manicheisme by Isaac de Beasobre, quoted by W.B. HENNING, «The Book of the Giants», BSOAS 11 (1943·46), 52. 8 Whereas ALFARIC, Les Ecritures Maniclleennes, II, 32 (quoted by HENNING) identifies the Libro de Ogia with the Book of the Giants to which SynceUus refers, MILIK considers the reference of the Gelasian Decree as a proof of the Latin translation of the Manichean composition, an idea already expounded by M.R. JAMES,

ITS 6 (1905), 563-564.

9 See W. LENTZ, «Fiinfzig Jahre Arbeit in den iranischen Handschriften der deutschen Turfan-Sammlung», ZDMG 106 (1956), 5-22; W. SUNDERMANN, «Stand und Aufgaben der iranistischen Turfanforschung», Mitteilungell des Instituts fUr Orientforschullg 15 (1969), 127-1137; M. BOYCE, A Catalogus of the Iranian Manuscripts in the Mallichean Script ill the Gemlan Tuifall Collectioll (Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Institut fiir Orientforschung, Veroffentlichung Nr. 45) (Berlin 1960). 10 W.B. HENNING, «The Book of the Giants», BSOAS 11 (1943-46), 52-74. HENNING had previously published a Turfan manuscI'ipt, M 625 c, as a proof that Mani was familiar with the Book of Elloch: «Ein manichliisches Henochbuch»,

Sitzullgsbericllte der preussiscllell Akademie der Wissellscllaftell (1934), 27-35.

100

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

a) lQ23 This was originally edited by MILIK himself together with lQ24 as "Deux Apocryphes en Arameen" in DID I, 97-99, PI. XIX-XX. 31 fragments have been preserved from the manuscript, which I would date back to the middle of the 1st century B.c., although with so few letters preserved that MILIK felt bound to point out in the editio princeps: "Le peu de mots conserve ne permet pas une identification, meme a titre d'hypothese". The only fragments showing a certain amount of text are fragment 1, in which MILIK now incorporates fragments 6 and 23, and fragment 9, to which he adds fragments 14 and 15. The contents of the first correspond to one of Kawdn's fragments, the second page of fragment I, which apparently describes the situation of abundance and prosperity that would follow the deluge l l. The second grouping of fragments refers to the knowledge of the mysteries and the destruction of many of them, followed by a mention of the giants (l'lJJ.) in 9,3, family scenes in the history of the giants and in that of the watchers. To these two new groups of fragments assembled by MILIK we could add that of fragments 16 and 17, taking into account the upper part of the lamed of 17,1, which could correspond to the remnants preserved in 16,3, and the fact that both fragments belong to the beginning of a column, as well as the group of fragments 24 and 15 taking into account the interlineary addition and the spacing of lines common to both. But these groupings do not augment the quantity of the comprehensible text nor do they permit the location of the fragments in the Book of Giants. Still more important is fragment 27, that preserves a reference to Mahaway (' lillJ), Baraq'el's son, one of the giants whose name appears both in the Kawan and in other Qumranic copies of the work, according to which 1Q23 is just another copy of the Book of Giants that had been 10st12•

11 See HENNING, «The Book of the Giants», 57 and 61. If the order in which the facts are narrated in 1 Elloch can be used as an indication, the order in which HENNING prints the two pages of frag. I should be changed. The first preserves elements which can be related to 1 Elloch 12, 13 and 14, and can be found in 4QEIlGialltsa 13, whereas the elements of the second page seem to correspond to 1 Elloch 10,17-19. 12 K. BEYER, Die aramiiischell Texte, 259. 267-68, also considers as a copy of the Book of the Giallts lQ24 (DID I, 99, PI. XX), a work of which 24 fragments have been preserved and which is identified by the editors as «probablement une apocalyp-

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

101

b) 2Q26

It has only one fragment of the Herodian period with four lines as a text. It was originally published by BAILLET in DID III, 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 Kawan, 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 Kawan, implies the destruction of the giants. The second dream has its equivalent in 6Q8 2. c) 6Q8

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 for use. It was published by BAILLET in DID III, 116-119, PI. XXIV, as "Un Apocryphe de la Genese". 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

se, apparentee au livre d'Henoch». The only element I can find to justify this ascription is the use of the expression l{)U)1 l{ lUrJ) 1 (in the emphatic state) in frag. 5, common with 4QEnGiantsO 11 ii 2, whereas in all the other Enochic fragments the expression is lUrJ 1 )U) (in the absolute state) (4QEn c 1 xiii 26 and 4QEnast,c 1 ii 8). If l{ 'P l J)1 (frag. 1, 7) could be read as an orthographic variant of )l{PlJ instead of the emphatic plural of plJ, the identification could be accepted. But, in any case, the different fragments do not bring new elements. MILlK's statement qualifying lQ24 as «too poorly represented to allow a sufficiently certain identification of the fragment» (309), perfectly reflects the situation.

102

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

gives no credit to what he hears, and replies with a series of rhetorical questions: «Look here, I have heard wonders; if a non-pregnant woman gave birth ... » of the sort of those recorded in Jub 37,20-23. The joint mention of 'Ohayah, Mahaway and Baraq'el in this text ensures its belonging to the Book of Giants, and leads MILIK to relate it to the fragment c of the Kawan, in which these three names appear together with Shemihazah. The second fragment, with the remnants of only three lines, seems to have preserved part of Hahyah's dream mentioned in the midrash, although the three-branched tree gives way here to a three-rooted tree, the only one which remains safe and healthy at the time of the destruction of the whole garden13. Apart from the identification of these three copies of the Book of Giants in texts that had been published previously, MILIK provided us in 1976 with a full edition of a new manuscript, 4QEnGiantsa, as well as with a transcription and a translation of some parts from other four copies pertaining to STARCKY's lot, which he designates as 4QEnGiantsb,c,d,e. d) 4QEnGiantsa As already indicated, the manuscript containing this copy of the Book of Giants is the same which has given us part of the Book of Watchers, the Book of Dreams and the Epistle of Enoch. The manuscript was copied in the middle of the 1st century B.C. but its original text (if we are to judge by the spelling) would date back, according to MILIK, to the end of the 2nd or the beginning of the 1st century B.c. This manuscript presents, therefore, the Book of Giants as an Enochic work, already associated with the other three Enochic works we know14. 13 fragments, all of them published 15, have been rescued 13 BEYER, Die aramiiischell Texte, 268, suggests that 6Q14 would have preserved another copy of The Book of the Giants. This text, copied in the 1st century A.D. of which only two fragments have survived, was edited by BAILLEf in DID III, 127-128, PI. XXVI, as a «Texte apocalyptique». For BEYER, the text relates to «die Anktindigung der Sintfiut», because frag. 1 talks about destruction and mentions «the beasts», but the elements preserved do not permit its identification. 14 The testimony of 4QEll e as to the inclusion of the Book of Giallts within the Enochic corpus is less conclusive than the one of 4QEll c• The small size of its preserved fragments and the fact that neither 4QEll e nor 4QEIIGialltse, which partially overlap, contain any characteristic elements, preclude all certain attribution. 15 By J.T. MILIK, The Books of EIIOCh, 310-317, PIs. XXX·XXXI. Only the photograph of frag. 1 is missing in the edition.

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

103

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

104

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

e) 4QEnGiant!

According to MILIK'S indications16, 4QEnGiantjJ would have been copied in the years 110-50 B.C and would be composed of six fragments that would make possible the recovery of three continuous columns of text. MILIK transcribes and translates lines 3-16.20-23 of col. ii and lines 3-11 of col. iii. The contents of the parts made known may be identified as the description of Hahyah's and 'Ohyah's double dream that they themselves narrate before the other giants, and Mahaway's messsage to Enoch asking him to give them an interpretation of those dreams. Hahyah dreams of a garden full of trees and shoots that is destroyed by fire once irrigation has ceased. The only passage published of 'Ohyah's dream is the vision of the Lord of Heavens (K ~1J'll 10 'JW) who comes down onto the Earth; but, according to MILIK's indications of the contents of the following lines, the purpose of this descent is to execute the judgement described after the fashion indicated in Dan 7,9-10, and depending on this passage. The reaction of the Giants who, obviously, are holding a meeting, is one of fear, and they resolve to despatch Mahaway to consult Enoch for the second time, so that the latter may expound to them the meaning of the two dreams. Mahaway «flew with the help of his hands like an eagle» across the deserts until he came to Enoch, requesting his interpretation, which should be recorded in the still unpublished remainder of the column. MILIK mentions at another point17 one line of this same manuscript that corresponds to 1 Enoch 9,10 and may be translated as follows: «(and the souls) of the victims are amking their suit against their attacks and cry for help», a circumstance that proves thJ.t the outcry of the Earth, mentioned in the Book of Watchers, is also present in the Book of Giants. f) 4QEnGiantsC

Out of the second copy of STARCKY's lot MILIK has transcribed two fragments, one of which should come from the beginning of the manuscript 18. This fragment describes the ruling of the giants and the

16 17 18

The Books of Enoch, 303-307. The Books of Enoch, 230, when commenting upon The Books of Enoch, 307-309.

i7 Y IIJ 1 of 4QEn e 1 xxii 4.

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

105

nephilim over the Earth, and how they destroy it, a theme which is recurrent in the Book of Watchers. 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 Ahiram19. g) 4QEnGiantsd

MILIK mentions a third manuscript of STARCKY's 10t20, but does not give any details of its contents. h) 4QEnGiantse

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

19 \li 'IJJ JJ on 4QEnGiants'. The same name appears, written \J 'IJJ JJ, in 4QEnGianti, see 17le Books of Enoch, 313. On the appearance of Dvm\, in 4QEnGiantsC , see The Books of Enoch, 29. 20 17le Books of Enoch, 309. 21 17le Books of Enoch, 235-238.

106

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

2.

THE MANICHEAN BOOK OF GIANTS

Since the identification of the Qumranic texts as copies of the Book of Giants is based on the traces this work left in the Manichean composition on the giants, a brief description of the contents of the fragments recovered from the KaWt2n seems necessary. The material published by HENNING consists of remnants of seven copies and two abstracts of the work. Two of the manuscrif:ts had been previously published, although not identified as such 2. The other five were first made known to the public in the article referred to by HENNING 23 . They are written in Middle-Persian and in Sogdian, as translations from the original composed by Mani in an Aramaic dialect quite similar to Syriac. One of the Sogdian abstracts says, at the end of a chapter entitled «The Comming of the two hundred Demons»: «... 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. To Shahmizad two (?) sons were borne by... One of them he named "Ohya"; in Sogdian he is called "Siihm, the giant". And again a second son [was born] to him. He named him "Ahya"; its Sogdian (equivalent) is "Piit-Siihm". As for the remaining giants, they were born to the other demons and Yaksas»24.

The first part of this quotation can be easily related to the disclosures made in the Book of Watchers (1 Enoch 7,1; 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. 22 One of them, written in Uygur (MS B), was published by A. VON LE COO, «Manichiiische Erziihlef», Le Museoll 44 (1931), 1-36, PI. I-II (text and German translation on pp. 13-14). The other (MS D) M 625 c, written in Middle-Persian, was published by HENNING, «Ein manichiiisches Henochbuch» (text and German translation on p. 29). 23 According to KLIMKEIT, «Der Buddha Henoch», 371, note 21, the material published by HENNING should be completed with the material published by W. SUNDERMANN, Mittelpersische Wid partlzische kosmogollische Wid Parabeltexte der MalIichiier (Schriften zur Geschichte und KuItur des Alten Orients 8. Berliner Turfantexte IY) (Berlin 1973), 77-78, a work which has not been available to me. Translation of HENNING, 70.

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

107

The longest manuscript of the Kawan published by HENNING (ms. A) consists of 15 fragments in Middle-Persian of a book which contained several treatises. The editor ascribes six to the Kawan. In the first one (frag. c), there is a narrative about a conversation between 'Ohyah and his father Shemihazah about Mahaway. Fragment j mentions Baraq'el, Hobabish and Adk, alludes to the battle between the giants, and tells about 'Ohyah's dream of the tablet thrown in the water and Hahyah's of the garden full of trees. Fragment 1 records Enoch's message to the fallen angels on their destruction and that of their progeny, as well as a description of the general happiness which will come after the deluge. Fragment k preserves a dialogue between 'Ohyah and Hahyah, which apparently continues in the first page of frag. g. The second page of this fragment describes the places where the fallen angels are doomed to endure punishment. The last fragment (i) mentions Enoch's ascent into Heaven, the union between the women and the angels and the ordeals these impose on mankind. Manuscript B, in the Uygur language, describes the flight of Baraq'el's son in search of Enoch and how Enoch's voice and recommendations prevent him from suffering Icarus's fate. Manuscript C, in Sogdian, relates the battle between the giants 'Ohya and Mahaway. Manuscript D, in Middle-Persian, abides by Enoch's explanation of Hahyah's dream, according to which the trees would represent the watchers and the giants. Manuscript G describes, in Sogdian, the descent of the angels to fight the «demons» (the watchers and the giants) and how the angels separate men from their «demons», take them to the foot of Mount Sumeru, and eventually settle them in towns prepared for the purpose. The manuscript ends with the fight of the 200 «demons» 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 preserved25 . HENNING avows that it is impossible to determine the

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

108

THE BOOK OF GIANTS

primitive order of the loose sheets found in the longer manuscript of the Kawtm26• His arranging of the fragments is based on the position occupied by the parallels they show with the Book of Watchers. But this principle seems somewhat questionable to me. Both the Manichean and the Aramaic fragments show clear evidence that the author of the Book of Giants knows and makes full use of the Book of Watchers in its already «Enochised» form. Even more, he summarises it as a point of departure for his own narrative. In my opinion, the Book of Giants was not a simple extension of the Book of Watchers, but developed, together with their story, the story and the adventures of their progeny, the giants, as its own peculiar and specific theme. The title and the summary of the book which presents the quotation from the Gelasian Decree is quite illustrative to that effect, since it includes, as a characteristic feature, 'Ohyah's duel against the dragon, an element which, in the light of one of the allusions to the Kawcm 27 , may be more accurately defined as 'Ohayah's battle

Frag. 0 in Arabic (a quotation from Al-Ghadanfar): «The Book of the Giants, by Mani of Babylon, is filled with stories about these ( antediluvian) giants, amongst whom Sam and Nariman». Frag. P in Coptic (from Kepha/aia 93, 23-28): «On account of the malice and rebellion that had arisen in the watch-post of the Great King of Honour, namely the Egregoroi who from the heavens had descended to the earth, - on their account the four angels received their orders: they bound the Egregoroi with eternal fetters in the prison of the Dark (?), their sons were destroyed upon the earth». Frag. S in Coptic (from Kep/ta/aia 117, 1-9): «Before the Egregoroi rebelled and descended from heaven, a prison had been built for them in the depth of the earth beneath the mountains. Before the sons of the giants were born who knew not Righteousness and Piety among themselves, thirty-six towns had been prepared and erected, so that the sons of the giants should live in them, they that come to beget.... who live a thousand years». (Translations of HENNING, «The Book of the Giants», 7273). 26 «It has proved impossible, so far, to re-establish the original order of the pages. On purely technical grounds (size of the fragments, appearance of the margins, relative position of tears, stains, etc.), I first assumed the following sequence: l-j-k-g-ic-e-b-h-f-a-d-m-M 911-n. Being unable to estimate the cogency of these technical reasons now, because of the absence of any photographic material, I have decided to change the order of the first six fragments in the following way: c-j-l-k-g-i, in view of their contents .... It must be borne in mind that whole folios may be missing between apparently successive pages.», «The Book of the Giants», 56. 27 A fragment in Parthian of a treatise entitled 'rdJlIIg wyfr's = Commentary on (Mani's opus) Ardahallg, published by HENNING, «The Book of the Giants», 71-72, which gives as an example «(the fight in which) Ohya, Lewyi\tin (= Leviathan) and Raphael lacerated each other, and they vanished», which means that Ohya killed Leviathan, but was killed by Raphael.

THE BOOK OF GL> The dubious letter can hardly be a -Q, and the vertical trace clearly visible remains unexplained. d) VOGT21 translates «non hominibus similis fui». He retains the same reading as the editor but changes the meaning of 11] owing to the different interpretation of '1W. The problem is that to retain the most obvious meaning of ' lVJ he changes the meaning of the preposition 11]. Although VOGT refers to BDB s. v. 7,6 (b), 585, where examples are given of this usage in Hebrew, he himself in his Aramaic Dictionary does not include any example of this usage in Aramaic. All these opinions are based on the reading of ' lVJ as a participle Pe'al, and in Pe'al the meaning of j TV is «to be similar». But in Pa'el and in the later Aramaic ' lW it often means «place, put, leave», already found in the form Pi'el of the same verb in Biblical Hebrew

21 E. VOGT, «Precatio Regis Nabonid in pia narratione Iudaica (40»>, Biblica 37 (1956), 532-534.

124

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

and in the Hitpa'el of Biblical Aramaic. Hence the word may equally be read as a form Pa'el. e) This idea is the basis of MILIK's reconstruction: il J]x" '1\lJ [X" '\lJ Jx"] IIJ 1, «and I was placed far from men» and of MEYER's il J]x" '1\lJ ["DlJ] IIJ 1, «and I was far from my throne». In MILIK's reading, the king, as in the story of Daniel, is removed from contact with men. In MEYER'S, it is a question of removal from the capital and consequently from the throne. f) GRELOT proposes a new way of reading '1\lJ as a third person singular perfect of the intensive form. Based on the frequent use of the verb with the complements J';I and 1'!J JX" as standard phrases in Targumic Literature, his reconstruction is: '';Iy 'ill!J JX" X" il) ';IX" '1\lJ (il Jl lnJ) IIJ 1. «After this, God turned his face towards me». In essence all this range of opinions may be reduced to the three possible interpretations of ' 1\lJ. In my view the oldest hypothesis, that of the editor, remains the most correct. Apparently the basis of the whole story is the absence of the king for a period of time in his residence in the oasis of Teiman on the borders of the Empire. Whether this was owing to an illness (our text) or to madness (Babylonian documents) or to having become like the beasts (Daniel), the fact is that the origin of all the legends is his having been separated from his people. This is why it seems to me necessary to retain this element in the story. Nor does this interpretation offer major grammatical problems. An excellent parallel to the meaning I give to the phrase can in my opinion be found in one of the inscriptions from Beth Shearim, catacomb 13, 12 O';ll'VJ lJJ'V1J (' 1'V) '1\lJ 'il" «May his restingplace be set (?) in peace»22. At the end of the line the editor reconstructs «and when I confessed my sins». But the introduction of this new element seems to me hypothetical in the extreme. The mention in line 7 of the prayer to the false gods and the very title of the work suggests that what brought an end to the punishment was precisely the invocation of the true God. Hence the reconstruction partly in common with DUPONTSOMMER and VAN DER WOUDE.

22 See N. A VIGAD, «Excavations at Beth Shecarim, 1953», IE! 4 (1954), 98-99.

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

125

Line 4 The difficulty with the beginning of the line lies in the different interpretations which may be given to il ';J according to how the sentence is divided. According to whether the break comes after I'PU n 1, pJ'V, il ';J, or l D., completely different meanings are possible. 1) MILIK supposes that K 'unill is connected with the lacuna in line 3 and translates «[Mais, quand j'eus confesse mes peches] et mes fautes, (Dieu) m'accorda un devin». This hypothesis presupposes giving P J\lJ the meaning of «to grant» and reading '';J instead of il ';J. Neither of these suppositions is necessary. 2) VAN DER WOUDE ends the sentence after PJ\lJ. lD. il';J would be a noun phrase in which the suffix of il ';J would refer to God, subject of the verb 17 J'V. Hence his translation, «Er hatte einen Weissager». l D. is presented as a kind of functionary of the Almighty. But, as GRELOT indicates, it would be difficult to have started the sentence with a complement followed by the subject without using the verb il'il. 3) For GRELOT the sentence must have ended after il';J, connecting with his reconstruction of line 3. God would be the subject of PJ'V and il ';J would repeat at the end of the sentence the complement placed before the verb. He translates, «Di[eu] dirigea [sa face vers moi et il me guerit,] et mon peche, il Ie remit». Even though the sentence is thus logical and complete, the figure and the action of the l D. remain deprived of all significance. The view which seems to me best founded is that which considers l D. il ';J PJ'V K 'U n 1 as a single sentence, defined by the two 1 which precede K 'un 1 and K lill. It was proposed by DUPONT-SOMMER who considers il';J as a kind of dativus ethicus. It is certain that in the other texts, up to the New Testament, only God forgives sins and that even in the other two Qumran texts which speak of cure or expulsion of demons (lQapGen XX, 28-29 and lQS III-IV) there is no reference to any man, seer, exorcist, or whatever translation we wish to give to l D., who forgives sins. It is equally certain that in a parallel sentence in 11 QtgJob XXXVIII,2 it is God himself who forgives the sins «because of him» (il ';J ' l J) [of Job], and not Job himself. But the structure of the sentence seems here to demand this interpretation. The function that the l D. fulfils in the narrative, the fact that he is presented as a Jew who orders the king to bear witness to what happened and that the king obeys, all seem to demand that his action should be something more than exhorting the king to write an order

126

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

to his subjects to give glory to God. That his function in the narrative is not confined to this seems equally to be shown by the fact that he is called l D, 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 l D as exorcist rest more on the presupposition of the impossibility of sins being pardoned by a man than on a refutation of his arguments. This is my reason for supporting his translation23• For the end of the line I accept the reconstruction by the editor who finds an excellent parallel in Dan 2,25 and explains the appearance of a Jew in a place so far from Judea. If space permitted it could be reconstructed: «among the exiles of Babylon», but it is preferable to add instead of )JJJ, ") llJl{ l{ lill which introduces the following verbs. Line 5 JnJ 1 "lnil. The lacuna in line 4 makes the reading of these two verbs equally uncertain. What is meant: a third person singular perfect, or a second person singular imperative ? Commentators disagree. The first reading, which is proposed by the editor, is supported by the absence of a complement, generally present in Dan with the verb. The second is supported by the meaning of «proclaim» conveyed by "1 nil in Dan 3,32 and the fact that it would make no sense for the l D (and not the king) to write the letter ordering the glorifying of God. I therefore choose to read them as imperatives. This justifies the reconstruction of the end of line 4 and makes the rest of the fragment a part of the letter sent by the king to his subjects. This option also dictates the reading of n" 1il in the following lines as first person singular.

Line 6 n" lil. I read this as first person singular. Here too commentators disagree. MILIK, MEYER, and GRELOT choose 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.

23

153.

Cf. W. KIRCHSCHLAGER, «Exorcism us in Qumran ?», Kairos 18 (1976), 135-

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

127

This is shown by 11 QtgJob where n" III 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 n' 1il as first person in line 3 is not decisive. If I choose to read it as first person it is above all 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's edition24, there is still a space between l{'l.Pl{P, of almost certain reconstruction, and 11J'nJ. MILIK proposes l{ n ] 'lIJJ, but the -J of 11J 'n seems to rule that out. With GRELOT I reconstruct n' l'll 1. Lines 7-8 These lines present no major difficulties. The list of items is identical to Dan 5,4.23, if we except «clay», which of course is mentioned in Dan 2,35.45. The reconstruction ';JJ OlP of line 7 was proposed by GRELOT on the basis of Dan 6, II. To ' l 11J in line 8 we give the causal value which it has in Dan 3,22 and Ezra 5,12.

D. Commentary The first two lines have preserved the title of the work. This is interesting because the «Prayer» proper has not been preserved, although we must presume that it occupied the major part of the manuscript. If the proposed reconstructions are accepted, the title itself would already contain the principal elements: protagonist, setting, motif, theology, etc. The development of the prayer might be similar to the development of the Prayer of Manasseh, an apocryphal writing dependent upon 2 Chr 33,10-13 and found in some of the manuscripts of the Septuagint and as an appendix in the editions of the Vulgate25 . Cfr. «Addendum», RB 63 (1956), 415. Cfr. L. GRAY, «Le Roi Manasse d'apres les legendes midrashiques», in Melanges E. Podechard (Lyon 1945), 147-157; the studies of P. BOGAERT in L'ApocaIypse syriaqlle de Barnell (Sources Chretiennes 144) (Paris 1969), 269-319; R. LE DEAlJf, Targum des Chroniqlles I (Roma 1971), 169, nos. 3-4, and the versions of the text published by E. OSSWALD, Das Gebet Mallasses (JSHRZ IV/I), and J.H. CHAR24 25

128

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

Following the title, in lines 2-4, we have a summary of the facts in autobiographical form: sickness of the king, retreat to Teiman, useless invocation of the false gods, invocation of the true God, forgiveness of sin by an exorcist. In the text preserved we are not actually told of the king's cure, only of the forgiveness of his sins, but the two things must have gone together. In my opinion explicit mention of this cure can be found in fragment 4, on which I do not comment here and which, given the characteristics of the leather, must belong to another column of the manuscript. In that fragment occurs the word no ':J n({, which I derive from o':Jn II «to be healthy, to recover strength», based on o':Jnn({ of lQapGn XXII,S. Be this interpretation as it may, the sequence of events on which the narrative is based seems clear to me. Lines 4-5 present the figure and the action of the exorcist. This exorcist remains anonymous. Of him we are told only that he pardons the king's sin and orders him to proclaim the facts in writing, so that the event may serve as an example and the king's subjects may arrive at the same recognition of the true God as the king has already reached thanks to the intervention of the exorcist. Although we must be careful not to read into our text the facts known from the narrative of Daniel, I believe we may presume that the action of the exorcist was not confined to what the manuscript has preserved. It must have led to the recognition of the cause of the royal sickness, of the uselessness of praying to false gods and the need to invoke the true God. From the detail that he was a Jew of the exile I believe we can also conclude that his action followed on those of other magicians, fortune-tellers and such-like, consulted previously without success. The same may be said of his intervention, of the cure, of the forgiveness of sins, and of the written proclamation. The rest of the preserved narrative, lines 6-8, which in my interpretation resumes its autobiographical character after the action of the exorcist, contains the beginning of the letter addressed by the king to his subjects following the orders of the exorcist. This begins to relate the events in detail. The rest of the text has perished apart from the few words of fragment 4, but the summary in lines 2-4 allows us to deduce its contents. It would have included the prayer of Nabonidus to the true God which gives the work its title and an exhortation to abandon the worship of false gods to adore the Almighty. LFSWORTH, «Prayer of Manasseh» in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. II, 625637.

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

129

2. RElATION WITH OTHER TEXTS A Relation with Daniel

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

130

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

phrase: the gods of silver, of gold, of bronze, of iron, of wood, of stone, of clay26, which is found nowhere else in the whole Bible. For F.M. CROSS27, «... there is every reason to believe that the new document preserves a more primitive form of the tale. It is well known that Nabonidus gave over the regency of his realm to his son Belshazzar in order to spend long periods of time in Teima; while Nebuchadnezzar, to judge from extrabiblical data, did not give up his throne ... It is not necessary to think of the Prayer of Nabonidus as a literary source of the canonical Daniel, or even to give the prayer priority in terms of its written composition. The prayer may simply derive from a parallel, but more conservative line of orally transmitted material.» A similar opinion is expressed by F. ALTHEIM and R. STIEHL28, although I believe that the priority of 4QPrNab is beyond all doubt. The problem of the connection between the two documents must be examined in a broader context in the light of the other documents known. B. Relation with Nab. H. 2 A \B

Fortunately these two parallel narratives can now be contrasted with the data provided by the new Nabonidus stelae29 . In essence, these new documents tell us: - that Nabonidus, at the command of the god Sin, expressed in a dream, decides to rebuild the temple of Ehulhul in Harran30 . - this arouses great opposition among his subjects31 . 264QPrNab A 1,7-8 and Dan 5,4.23. F.M. CROSS, The Ancient Library of Qumran (Garden City, 1958), 123-124. 28 F. ALTIIEIM - R. STIEHL, Die Araber ill der altell Welt V /2 (Berlin 1969), 3-23. 29 Edited by C.J. GADD, «The Harran Inscriptions of Nabonidus», Anatoliall Studies 8 (1958), 35-92. 30 H 2 A: «(7) I (am) Nabonidus, (8) who have not the honour (?) of (being a) somebody, and kingship (9) is not with me, (but) the gods and goddesses prayed for (10) me, and Sin to the kingship (11) called me. In the night season he caused me to behold a dream (12) (saying) thus "E-hul-hul the temple of Sin which (is) in Harran quickly (13) build, (seeing that) the lands, all of them, to thy hands (14) are verily committed"». 31 H 2 A col. I: «(14) (But) the sons of Babylon, Borsippa, (15) Nippur, Ur, Erech, Larsa, priests (and) (16) people of the capitals of Akkad, against his great (17) divinity offended, whenever (?) they sought after (anything) they did wickedly, (18) they knew not the 27

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

131

- so that the king leaves the capital for Teiman and other cities in Arabia, where he stays for ten years32. - at the end of which he returns to Babylon33. Comparing this with the account of 4QPrNab the common elements immediately stand out34• - Nabonidus is a pious king who worships his gods. - He leaves his capital for a considerable period of time. - During this period he lives in Teiman. - A favourable intervention of God allows him to return to his kingdom. There is also a fundamental difference: in H 2 A \B Nabonidus expressly attributes his preservation and restoration to the action of the wrath, (the resentment), of the king of the gods, (even) Nannar, (19) they forgot their duty, whenever (?) they talked (it was) treason (20) and not loyalty, like a dog they devoured (21) one another; fever and famine in the midst of them (22) they caused to be, it minished the people of the land». On the religious and political divisions at Babylon and their influence both in the rising of Nabonidus and in his temporary retreat, see H. LEWY, «The Babylonian Background of the Ky Kaus Legend», Archlv Orienta/IIi 17 (1949), 28-109, specially 71-78 and 94-97, and R.P. DOUGHERTY, Nabonidus and Belshazzar (Yale Oriental Series Researchs 15) (New Haven 1929), 71-81 and 156-157. 32H2Bcol.I «(23) But I hid myself afar from my city of Babylon (24) (on) the road to Teima', Dadanu, Padakku[a], (25) Hibra, 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 Teima in Arabia was already advanced by R.P. DOUGHERTY, JAOS 41 (1921), 458-459 and JAOS 42 (1922), 305316, and was confirmed by the later publication of the «Verse Account of Nabonidus» by S. SMITH. Less convincing now seem the reasons advanced to justify the absence of the king [to avoid the celebration of the annual festival]. Thanks to H 2 A \B we have now a reasonable explanation, see GADD, 88-89. 33 H 2 B col. II «(11) (In) ten years arrived the appointed time (12) the days were fulfilled 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. III «(1) 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 Tema' I (returned ?) ... (6) Babylon, my seat of lordship (I entered)>>. The text on both stelae is badly damaged in these lines. The reconstructions are uncertain, and several interpretations are possible. See L. OPPENHEIM in ANET 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 feet» into «kissed his feet». 34 Cfr. the parallel tables elaborated by R. MEYER, Das Gebet, 65-66.

132

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

god Sin, whereas in 4QPrNab, as in Dan 4, to recover his health and his throne he must acknowledge the uselessness of the idols and the supremacy of the one true God of Israel. This apologetic presentation of 4QPrNab shows us that the Qumran text, though making use of a series of historical records, still belongs to the literature of propaganda or edification rather than to what we understand by history.

C. Relation with 4QpsDan Ar The undoubted relationship between 4QPrNab and the canonical book of Daniel and the fact that the editor MILIK35 suggests reconstructing in 4QPrNab B 4 )l{ 1 J lj'J il n Jl{ l{ I] l ill] ] «as you were like Daniel», proposing to identify the «angel» in the dream of Nabonidus (in his interpretation) with Daniel, forces us to examine the possible connections between 4QPrNab and 4QpsDan Ar, a collection of Aramaic texts from three manuscripts from Cave 4, published in a transcription by MILIK at the same time as 4QPrNab. The figure of Daniel as a just person has already been known to us since the Ugaritic texts 36• In Ezek 14,14.20 and Ezek 28,3 he appears in company with Noah and Job as a prototype of wisdom and justice37. The fact that in Ezek 28,3 the wisdom of the King of Tyre is compared with that of Daniel makes it very probable that this is a reference to the same person as in the Canaanite myth 38 • This leads MEYER39 to suppose that the protagonist of the book of Daniel may be a «historicisation» of the same person. This would allow us to group together the elements in the cycle of Daniel (including 4QpsDan Ar) with 4QPrNab, just as the canonical book of Daniel includes elements of an apocalypse of the Maccabean era (chs. 10-12) together with pre-exilic traditions (ch. 4). But close reading of these texts makes clear the difference in character compared with 4QPrNab.

J.T. MILIK, 411. II Aqht, V, 5-8. Text and translation in CH. VIROLLEAUD, La tegende Phenicienne de Dallel (Paris 1936), 201-203 and C.H. GORDON, Ugaritic Manual (Roma 35

36

1955:fi 183.

See M. NOTH, «Noah, Daniel und Hiob in Ez XIV», IT 1 (1951), 251-260, and SH. SPEIGEL, «Noah, Danel and Job. Touching on Canaanite Relics in the Legends of the Jews» in: L. Gillzberg Jubilee, Vol. I (New York 1945),305-335. 38 See VIROLLEAUD, 121-122. 39 R. MEYER, Das Gebet, 84 ff.

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

133

No feature in 4QpsDan 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 courtiers40 . 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 l D is not in question. In the canonical book Daniel appears as the subject on whom God works his wonders43, not as God's chosen agent for carrying them out. Without entering into the discussion as to whether the figure of Daniel in the canonical book is a continuation of the figure of Daniel in the Ugaritic documents and in Ezek 14,14-20; 28,3, the reconstruction of his name in 4QPrNab seems to me in no way necessary. For the propaganda aims of the book the simple introduction of a Jew who leads King Nabonidus to the recognition of the true God is quite enough. D. Relation with Job A comparison with the book of Job and with the legend of Job in general is for many reasons natural. The first point of comparison is that both protagonists lead a happy life, of which they are deprived for a time 44, by an illness of divine origin45, but to which they are finally restored. 40 Ms. a: PI'{' Jl llJl'{[

)I'{])IJ' JJlJl DllP[ Ms. b: D)lli' )1'{' Jl[ )l1J1J))I'{' Jl ) 'I'{'ll 41 Dan 2,27-30; 4,6.15-24. 42 Dan 7-11. 43 Dan 1,8-16: 6,17-25; 14,31-42. 44 In the case of Nabonidus, seven years. In the case of Job, the time is not defined, but it is specified (Job 2,11) that his friends stay with him for seven days and seven nights and in one of the manuscripts of the Testament of Job his illness is also said to last seven years. efr. M. DELCOR, 62. 45 This is clearly stated in 4QPrNab A 2. In Job it is Satan who provokes the illness with the divine permission (Job 2,6-7), but it is commonly accepted that this is a secondary development and that in the original story Job's illness was caused by

134

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

Another important point is the identity of the illness of the two protagonists. In 4QPrNab the king is afflicted with an illness referred to as 1\'>lP10 1\ In'llJ. In Job 2,7, Job's illness is referred to as l'n'llJ Yl, an expression which the Targum translates with precisely the same term as in our text I\'ll 'I\J 1\ In'llJ 46• Another point of similarity is the common origin of the two personages. Job comes from Ur, one of the traditional centres of the lunar cult, together with Harran. Nabonidus, also a native of Babylon, seems to be of Assyrian and Aramaic origin47. Undoubtedly one of his most characteristic features is his dedication to extending the cult of Sin, the Moon God of Harran and Ur. This common Aramaic origin is also indicated by the mention of Job's friends Eliphaz, from Teiman, and Bildad, from Dedan48 . Both cities are mentioned in the list in Nab H. 2 A\B 1,24 and Teiman plays an important role in 4QPrNab.

These similarities have led FOHRER49 and DELCOR50 to affirm that 4QPrNab preserves the same legend as the book of Job in an older form than that known to the writer of the canonical book. This conclusion seems to me exaggerated. For one thing it forgets the fundamental differences between the two texts: whereas Job is presented as just so that the illness is a trial sent by God (Job 1,21), Nabonidus is seen adoring false gods and for him the illness is a call to conversion, to adore the true God. So while his story may be used as apologetic literature and propaganda directed at non-Jews, the character of the book of Job is different; all its exhortations are directed at the adorers of the true God. For another, while Job remains a figure in the world of legend (and the text quoted in Ezek 14 is a good proof of this), 4QPrNab tells us of a definite known person. Comparison with Nab H 2 shows us that there is no need to bring in any other element to understand our God himself. 46 On 4QtgJob and llQtgJob the text in question has not been preserved. Tg On,\elos Deut 28,38 also translates the MT expression as I\'ll '1\ J 1\ J n'll J. 7 On the origin of Nabonidus see H. LEVY, 71-77, and the article by P. GARELLI in the DBSup. VI, 268-286, specially III, «Les origines de Nabonide». 48 R. MEYER sees in them diaspora Jews from Arabia, Das Gebet, 99-100, note 2. 49 G. FOHRER, 95: «So bleibt wohl nur die SchluBfolgerung, daB die auf die Formung von 4Q Or Nab eingewirkt hat». 50 M. DELCOR, 63. «La tradition rapportee par la priere de NaboiJide montre, en tout cas, qu'il existait dans Ie nord de l'Arabie une legende de Job sous une forme plus ancienne que celie 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 GENRE AND ORIGIN The same helps us to appreciate the literary genre of the account. 4QPrNab is a wisdom and apologetic story stemming from the historical fact of the years spent by Nabonidus in Teiman and giving an explanation of this fact with the aim of establishing the efficacy of the action of the true God and the inefficacy of the false gods. R. MEYER51 sees its origin in the Jewish community of Teiman. According to him it is a local tradition developed to explain the content of the inscriptions, once the people, who spoke Aramaic, could no longer understand the cuneiform inscriptions on the stelae. Hence he places its origin in the 5th century B.c. on the basis of certain signs of universalism he claims to see in the work. But, even if the relation of the contents with Nab H 2 A \B is undoubted, literary dependence need not necessarily be assumed. The possible connection has been lost and we have no knowledge of the intermediate stages. What is certain is the difference in intention between the two documents, and in the underlying theology. Moreover, the combination of the sojourn in Teiman with a sickness of the king need have nothing to do with the Jewish world52. Besides, even if the incomplete nature of the text prohibits. the drawing of definite linguistic conclusions, the most ancient features of the language found in 4QPrNab still do not suggest an origin in the 5th century B.C. For example, the use of the pronouns 11IJil and ilnJK and the relative 'l, the typically Aramaic plural l'il':JK are fully attested in Biblical Aramaic and continue to be used sporadically right up to the Palestinian Targum. Nor is the 5th century suggested by the alternation of forms with full or with defective orthography, nor yet by the use of K - for the determinate state.

51 R. MEYER, Das Gebel, 101-104. 52 This is one of the objections to MEYER's conclusions raised by P. GRELOT in RQ 4 (1963), 120. In Nab H 2 AlB I, 27-31, according to CARMIGNAC, can even be detected an allusion to this illness, Les Textes de Qumrall II, 289.

136

PRAYER OF NABONIDUS: A NEW SYNTHESIS

The copy preserved may paleographically be dated between 50 and 25 B.c., written as it is with a hand transitional between Hasmonean and Herodian, a characteristic «Jewish Sernicursive». The original may have been written about the third century B.C., before the composition of Dan 4. Even if no direct dependence is admitted and we postulate that the two accounts derive from a common source, the priority of 4QPrNab seems to me clear. This gives us the limit for the composition of the work. As for the background from which it originated, it must be placed in oriental Jewry. More specifically: the idea that a l iJ. should relieve Nabonidus of his sickness and of its cause, that is his sins, brings us to the tradition which attributes this kind of power to the Essenes53 . This would account for its preservation among the works of the library of Qumran.

53 See G. VERMES, «The Etymology of the Essenes», RQ 2 (1960), 427-443 and «Essenes and Therapeutai», RQ 3 (1962), 495-504.

CHAPTER FIVE

4QPSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC AND THE PSEUDO-DANIELIC LITERATURE

1. 4QpSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

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

J.T. MILIK, «'Priere de Nabonide' et autres ecrits d'un cycle de Daniel. arameens de Qumran 4», RB 63 (1956), 407-415. To my knowledge, the only commentators to concern themselves with it are A. MERTENS, Das Buch Daniel im Lichte der Texte yom Toten Meer (SBM 12) (Stuttgart 1971),42-50, and R. MEYER, Das Gebet des Nabonid, 85-94. Fra~ents

138

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

A. Aramaic Texts ]1 .. [ ]1{'J1JrJ lnJ lrJ[ I{llU] lJ 1'J lrJ n l[J ]iI' ljl.[ ilrJ]lll{'JlJ.rJl{[

Ms b

Msb

]... [

Msa

)JWll{'JlJ.rJ 'J[y ) 'JJJ illjlJ['J ].0.[ [ ] .. ill{rJYJ[ll{ 1'JW ] I{ n lrJ lln' 1 llil'J1J[ ].' 1 l[lil ].n' [I{)JJ 1'1{ Jll' llillJYrJ [I{ lil'Jl ). l'J 1'l::lrJ [ ]. llil'JJ 1 [ ] [

Mssa+b

Ms b Msa

Ms a

Ms a ?

Ms a

Ms c

].n '.[

]

[l'ill'Jl{ '!JJI{] lrJ llil'!JJI{ 'Jl{lW' 'JJ nnJ[ ] llil''JY IJ.lll{n lYU 'l'W'J llilJJ'J 1'[nJl llill) lnJrJ'J [lrJ]l{ 1 1'ill'Jl{ ]W 'l'rJ llilJrJ llil[ ]. lnl{'Jl 'JJ(J l'JrJ l::l JlJJ)J l'J llJI{ ].I{n 1'J:;, 'JJ.[ ] ]11 JI{ llJ l[ ]. l' JW 1'[Y)J\lJ \"I{[ l]lJI{YW1'll{nJlill[l{nlJ'JrJ I{ ']rJrJY n lJ'JrJ 1 l' J 'on [ I{n 'rJ]ljl I{n lJ'JrJ I{ 'il [ ). l' JW l 'JrJ [ )0 lJ'JJ .. [ ]iln.[ ]..

l' J(\lJ

]lJ Olill[ )n l' JW Ol[ ]iI'J'JrJ '[ ). lYUI{ [I{)Y [W l ]. 'I{'ljl llW JJn' ilJl [I{ JlYJ ]0 l ' lrJ illil'Jll{ 'rJrJY ['J'JrJ ]1{ 'rJrJY 'J'JrJ 1 1'W['ljl ilJl] I{rJ l ' lY 1'lJ[Y ).[ I{Y[W]l ~OrJ['J lYU' llYJ l'JI{[ llrJ ljl' llJI{ l'J[1{ llJ In' 11{[']W 'l[jI [ ]I{YW l.[

1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

27 28

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

139

B. Translation 1 ]... [ 2 ]after the flood[ 3 No]ah from [mount] Lubar[ 4 ]... a city[

5 ]a tower, its hei[ght 6 7 8 9

]... [ a]bove the tower and ... [ to] view the sons of [ ]... [

10 fo]ur hundred [years] ... [ 11 he ... them and [... ]them all and brought them out of the midst

of 12 Egypt by the hand of ... [... ] and led them to cross the river Jordan 13 ]and his sons[ 14 ]... [

15 ]the sons of Israel preferred his presence to that [of God] 16 [and sacrifi]ced their sons to the demons of error. And God's anger was kindled against them and he delivered them 17 into the hands of Ne[buchadnezzar King of Ba]bylon and ... [... ] from among them, from the hands of ... [ 18 [... ]... the exiled ... [ 19 ]and scattered them[ 20 21 22 23

]oppressed seventy years ... [ ]this great [kingdom, and will save them] ]strong, and a kingdom of peoples[ ]This is the first kingdom[

24 ]reigned ... years[

25 ]... BLKRWS[ 26 ]... [

140

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

27 ye]ars ... [ 28 ]RHWS, son of[ 29 ]ws, ... years [ 30 ]... speak[ 31 32 33 34 35

of in]iquity, made to err[ in] that [time] the called shall be reunited[ the kings of] the peoples and it shall be from that day[ the ho ]ly ones and the kings of the peoples[ sl]aves until the day[

36 ]... [

37 38 39 40 41

to] put an end to iniquity ]those who shall err in their blindness th Jose who shall arise the ho ]ly ones and shall return ... iniquity [... ]

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 lQapGn XII, 10-

3 Jub 5,28; 7,1.17; 10,15. For a complete list of the Jub materials found at Qumran, see J.e. VANDERKAM, «The Jubilees Fragments from Qumran Cave 4», forthcoming in the Proceedings of the Madrid Congress on the Dead Sea Scrolls.

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

141

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

Lines 5-9 The mention of the "tower" in mss. a and b sets the two fragments in a mutual relationship and justifies placing them, as MILIK does, in the context of the narrative of the tower of Babel. Quite unaccountably, the editor translates illj7J') by «punir»6. I see no reason why it should not be given its normal meaning, efr. 4QEne 3 i 1. The Hebrew text of Gen 11,5 uses mn'): the Lord comes down to «see» the city and the tower, which Neoph. I translates as 'IJnlJ'). Perhaps MILIK has let himself be influenced by the expression in Onq and PsJon, which paraphrase the biblical text: l\Yl~n'l\') l\ ') lJ- llJ 1 l\ n l j? l 1 JY ')Y 11 il JIJ, «to avenge himself on them because of the building of the city and the tower». Lines 10-14 Although because of the fragmentary character of the text nothing can be stated with certainty, the author seems to take the line of Phil07 and Flavius Josephus8, 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 12,40-41 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 EgyptlO. The word was not previously attested in Aramaic. The mention of the Jordan does not leave any doubt as to its meaning. In

l\ ') J 1'.

4 Lubar appears also in 6Q8 26,1, though without context and of uncertain reading. S Including the quotation from lub in Syncelius. 6 J.T. MILlK, «Priere de Nabonide», 412: «pour punir les fils de». 7

Quis rer. div. her. 54.

8 Ant. II. viii, 2; Bell. Iud. V. ix 4. But in Ant II. xv, 2 he gives 430 years. 9 See P. GRELOT, «Quatre cent trente ans (Ex XII,34): Du Pentateuque au Testa-

ment arameen de Levi», in: Hommages 10 /ub 16,13 and 50,4.

a Dupont-Sommer (Paris 1971), 383-394.

142

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

biblical Aramaic it appears in three different forms: JJ,' (Jer 17,8), JJ' (Is 30,25; 44,4) and JJ 1K (Dan 8,2.3.6), but always with the same basic meaning derived from the root JJ': «lead, transport», attested in Aramaic. Lines 15-19 The text, which results from two fragments of the rnss. a and b which overlap, is concerned with the sin of Israel and its exile, as confirmed by the mention of the «exiled» in line 18, and their being given into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar. The suffix in line 15 must refer to the idols, as is normal in deuteronomistic summaries, see Septuagint Judges 2,11-23, or in the speeches, such as the one in 2 Kgs 17,7-23, which follow on the narrative of the downfall of the northern kingdom. The crime referred to in line 16 is, no doubt, the Moloch sacrifice l l : 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, efr. 2 Kgs 16,3; 17,3; 21,6; 23,10. The novelty of our text is that it makes of this rite, together with the practice of idolatry, one of the main reasons leading to the exile. This is due, perhaps, to the importance it gained in Jehoiachim's time, immediately before the exile, as demonstrated by Jeremiah's denunciations (7,31-33; 19,4-6 and 32,35)12, and by the influence of Psalm 106, 36-37, from which our text draws direct inspiration.

nwu ' l ''l.i. 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: ii' l'l.i n, wu 0 V , nJ l «they sacrificed to the idols of the demons». In our text, the sacrifice is a direct offering to the demons. The shedu, which were Assyrian domestic spirits, had already acquired a negative connotation in the biblical

?{

11 On this sacrifice, see J. FEVRIER, «Essai de reconstitution du sacrifice molek», Journal Asiatique 248 (1960), 167-187 and o. EISSFELDT, Molk als Opferbegriff im Punischen und Hebriiischen und das Ende des Gottes Moloch (Halle 1935). See now the important study of J. DAY, Molech: A God of Human Sacrifice in the Old Testament (University of Cambridge Oriental Publications 41) (Cambridge 1989). 12 See also Ezek 16,20-21 and 20,31.

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

143

language 13, and ' l'li /l'J) will be the normal designation of demons in the targumic and rabbinic literature. In Qumran, the term does not appear in other Aramaic writings, but it is found in Hebrew, in 4Q510 1,5 as D'K l'li, a designation meant to underline the terrifying character of these demons 14, as well as in llQPsApa 1,3 and frag. A,9, a Psalm of exorcism attributed to King David15. According to the editor, this would make a complete word, although he does not translate it. The context makes it improbable that it could be read as lamed + info lnK (as used in targumic Aramaic). One could think of giving to the lamed a temporal meaning and rendering it «in the future», as in an Aramaic inscription from Nerab edited by COOKE (Ner 11,8). If the blank occurs straight after the word, it would be more sensible to reconstruct some other verb, such as ilJjlnKJ1, info afel, in parallel with lnJrJJ: «he ordered to deliver them into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon and to destroy their. .. ». The reconstruction of line 17 is based on CD 1,6. lnKJ1.

Lines 20-23 l' J'li 1'YJ'li. The number is taken, no doubt, from Jer 25,11-12 and 29,10. 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: «this is the first kingdom». Daniel knows and uses the scheme of the four kingdoms embracing the history of the world. In Dan 2,31-45, Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the different metals which make up the statue symbolise the four 13 See D' l'li in Deut 32,17 and Psalm 106,37, cases in which LXX already translates by «demons». 14 M. BAILLET, DID VII, 217. 15 Published by J.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG, «Un petit rouleau de psaumes apocryphes», in: Tradition und Glaube. Fest. KG. Kuhn (Gottingen 1971), 128-139. On the interpretation of the Psalm as a Psalm of exorcism, see E. PUECH, «l1QPsAp a: un rituel d'exorcismes. Essai de reconstruction», in: F. GARCIA MARTINEZ (ed.), The Texts of Qumran and the History of the Community, Vol. 2 (Paris 1990), 377-408.

144

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

kingdoms. In Dan 7,1-27, the four beasts coming out of the sea represent the four consecutive kingdoms. D. FLUSSER has proved, in a brilliant article 16, that the basic scheme is of Persian origin. In it, the millennium which elapses from Zoroaster's revelation till the eschaton, is divided into four periods symbolised by the four branches, made of different metals, of a tree. These periods are later represented by kings or kingdoms, thus giving way to the concept found in Daniel and in our text. The original order of these kingdoms, as shown in the Wth Book of the Siby z11, is Assyria - Media - Persia - Macedonia. Daniel substitutes Babylon for Assyria, because Babylon is the place of residence of both Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar. And this is equally the first of the kingdoms in our text, as specified in the allusion to Nebuchadnezzar in line 17. Since in Daniel this first kingdom lasted until the return from exile and our text depends on Daniel, the duration of this first kingdom must be the same as in the biblical book. Lines 24-30 If the hypothesis, based on lines 20-23, that the author of the Aramaic pseudo-Daniel follows Daniel's scheme of the four kingdoms, is correct, these two fragments must be connected with the fourth. In the same way as the canonic Daniel devotes a couple of chapters to a thorough account of the fourth kingdom (the Greek one, chs. 10-12), the author of the Aramaic PsDan treats this last period preceding the eschatological era in greater detail. The scarcity of the elements available prevents us from drawing firm conclusions, but the multiplication of proper names, apparently those of kings (lines 24, 27 and 29), would lead us to believe that the historical period under study was treated more thoroughly than the rest. We may confidently assume that this is precisely the hellenistic period on the basis of the \) 1 endings of the three names preserved. Milik goes even further and proposes to identify two of these personages: \) 1lJ'JJ, Balakros,18 would be the complete name in its 16 D. FLUSSER, «The Four Empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel», Israel Oriental Studies 1 (1972), 148-175. 17 Which adds a fifth empire, that of Rome, though without integrating it in the schema, see FLUSSER, 150-151. 18 A name relatively frequent in the hellenistic era, as indicated by MILIK, see W. PAPE & G.E. BENSLER, Worterbuch der Griechischen Eigennamen (reprint Graz 1959). According to J. and L. ROBERT Balagros is a typical Macedonian name, cf., Fouilles

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

145

long form of Alexander Balas, the third of the successors of Antiochus Epiphanes following the struggle with Demetrius19. The name of Balas 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, D 1ill[ (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 rhO; Demet]r(h)is, or the vocalic passage i > 0 : Demet]rihos. 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's lucubrations unnecessary, and shows the difference from the name preserved in our text: D nn['fJl efr. 4Q169 3-4 i 2. Nevertheless, despite the fact that the personages in question must retain their anonymity and remain wrapped in mysterra, the mere circumstance of their mention by name is quite interesting, and differentiates our texts from the other mss. of Qumran, in which allusions of an actual historical character are extremely rare21 . Line 31-41 Line 33: il1ilJ. Although the most frequent form, both in Biblical and in Qumran Aramaic, is ?{ 1ilJ (which we have reconstructed in line 12), il1il'J can be found in Biblical and in Qumran Aramaic, cfr. Dan 4,22 and 4QEnd 1 ix 2. Line 38: llYJ. We translate the text as transcribed by MILIK, in spite of the fact that his translation «comme un aveugle» would suggest the reading l lY J.

d~mr.0n en Carie I (Paris 1983), 323 f. 1 See 1 Mace 10,45-60; Flavius Josephus Ant XIII, ii, 4. 20 A series of checks on names in Persepolis, Phoenicia,

Palmyra, Elephantine and in Josephus, which all have good indices, has yielded no results. 21 Together with the mention of Demetrius already noted, the other single historical allusions in real and not symbolic terms are contained in a calendar from Cave 4, as yet unpublished, which mentions 11 ~y fJ 'JVJ (Alexandra Salome), Hyrcanus and the Roman governor of Syria, Aemilius Scaurus, cfr. J.T. MILIK, Ten Years of Discovery ill the Wilderness of Judaea (London 1963), 73.

146

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

These two fragments correspond to the description of the eschatological era. Despite the very few elements that have been preserved, I feel this can be confidently asserted about the first fragment (line 3135) taking into consideration the themes of the headings: the reuniting of the chosen (line 32), the end of the slavery (line 35), and the reference to the day, which can be no other than the day of YHWH, all commonplaces in every apocalyptic description of the last days. The eschatological character of the second fragment (lines 36-41), which preserves the end of the last column of Ms c, apparently corresponding to the end of the work22, is, in my opinion, still clearer. In it the course of history comes to an end with the destruction of iniquity (line 37), the return of the holy ones (line 40) and, above all, the affirmation of the resurrection (line 39). This last assertion is particularly important in the light of the discussions and the contradictory evidence concerning the current belief in resurrectio~ in Qumran and in the Essene movement in general 23 • Although in view of the dependence of our text on Dan, it would be logical to surmise the existence of an influence of Dan 12,2, the different formulation and utilisation in our text of the technical expression "1 11J 1P' make them stand out as quite distinct from each other. As far as can be inferred from the elements preserved, our text affirms only the resurrection of the just, like Isa 26, which is the basis of Dan 12,2, and not the double resurrection, asserted in the canonical Daniel. This may be deduced from the double f)K which contrasts the wicked with the blessed ones: the former will go astray in their blindness, whilst the latter will be raised (again). The inference that this clear assertion of the resurrection in 4QpsDan Ar is in no way unique or exclusive - which would lead us to characterise the work as of non-Qumranic origin - is proved by comparison with lQH IV 29-34 and, above all, by a new text from

22 Even according to MILIK it is not completely sure that it forms part of the same work, «Priere de Nabonide», 411. 23 See G.W.E. NICKELSBURG, Resurrection, Immortality, and Etemal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (HTS 26) (Cambridge 1972); H.C. CAVALLIN, Life After Death. Paul's Argument for the Resurrection of the Dead in 1 Cor 15. 1. An Inquiry into the Jewish Background (Coniectanea Biblica 7:1) (Lund 1974), and L. Rosso UBIGLI, «La concezione della vita futura a Qumran», Rivista Biblica 30 (1982), 35-49.

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

147

Cave 4 of STARCKY's lot, provisionally published by PUECH24• Its reading can leave no doubt as to the well-founded affirmations of Hippolytus in his Refutatio omnium Haeresium IX,18-29 25 . D. Commentary

In addition to the published fragments, the editor26 has made known a series of expressions drawn from parts still unpublished which dispel all doubts as to the pseudo-epigraphic nature of the work. ]'JK ' J l l/JK [ «Daniel said» ]K J ';l/J ' J l J lOll P[ «before the ministers of the King» D]lli7 ';lK' Jl[ «Daniel befo[re» ]l/J/J ';l ';lK' J l ';l 'K\[) [ «they ask Daniel saying» The narrative, then, is taken to be directly spoken by Daniel. The formal aspects of the presentation will only be clearly perceived once the texts have been completely published. Nevertheless, the alternation of verbal forms in the part already published seems to suggest that, rather than a vision, the text presents a survey of the course of history written down in an ancient document, read by Daniel to the King and his nobles. What is indeed now clear is that this is an apocalyptic composition in which, as opposed to the other ancient apocalypses, things were called by their real names. We do not come across the metaphors or allusions which form the nucleus of the ancient apocalypses, from the zoomorphic history of 1 Enoch through Daniel's and John's apocalypses to the visions of 4 Ezra. This fact should enable us to fix the date of the composition of the original work with relative accuracy since, just as in the other apocalypses, it jumps from the description of the author's times to that of the last days. Unfortunately, we have not been able to identify the personages mentioned, so that we must confine ourselves to a general dating some time during the hellenistic period, after the appearance of the canonical Daniel. The absence of allusions to the Roman period, if 24 4Q521, see E. PUECH, «Les Esseniens et la Vie Future», Le Monde de la Bible 4 (1978), 38-40. 25 See M. BlACK, «The Account of the Essenes by Hippolytus and Josephus», in: The Background of the New Testament and its Eschatology (Cambridge 1954), 172-175 and M. SMITlI, «The Description of the Essenes in Josephus and the Philosophoumena», HUCA 29 (1958), 273-293. 26 J.T. MILlK, «Priere de Nabonide», 441-442.

148

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

not due to a mere accident in the preservation of the corresponding part, compels us to conclude that the copies we possess (all of them of the Herodian period) come from a much later period than the lost original. Still greater are the problems posed by the original background. The mere fact that the mss. appeared in Cave 4 of Qumran does not prove that the work was composed by people from Qumran. On the other hand, nothing in it positively excludes a sectarian origin. CD II,17-III,20 gives us a good example, within a purely sectarian document, of a summary of history from its origins until the exile, in the manner of our document. The Danielic scheme of the four kingdoms outlining human history until the last days, although not frequently attested, is not unknown in Qumran. Two systems are basically used in the mss. for giving a historical synthesis: - one is based on the number 70: 70 weeks (4Q180-181), 70 periods (one fragment of papyrus still unpublished 27), 70 shepherds (1 Enoch 89,59-90,25 and the correspondent Aramaic texts of 4Q), 70 generations (1 Enoch 10,11-12 and 4QEn d 1 iv 8-11); - another is based on the number 10: 10 jubilees (llQMelch; 4Q384-390'28), 10 weeks (1 Enoch 93,3-10 + 91,11-17 and the correspondent Aramaic texts). But an unpublished text of STARCKY'S lot29, of which two copies have been preserved, clearly contains this scheme of the four kingdoms. It mentions a seer who finds four trees which speak. To his question: «What is your name?» the first tree replies: «Babylon». The answer to the second question has not been preserved but is apparently «Persia», since the seer says to the three: «It is you, then, who

27 According to MILIK, The Books of Enoch, 252, this papyrus would contain the Aramaic original of the Hebrew «Book of the Periods», interpreted in 4Ql80-181. 28 The Second Ezekiel texts of STRUGNELL's lot described by MILIK, The Books of Enoch, 254-255, and partially published by J. STRUGNELL and D. DlMANf, «40Second Ezekiel (4Q385)>>, in F. GARCIA MARTINEZ - E. PUECH (eds.), Memorial Jean Cannignac (Paris 1988), 45-58 and «The Merkabah Vision in Second Ezekiel (403854}>>, in F. GARCIA MARTINEZ (ed.), The Texts of Qumran and the History of the Community, Vol. II (Paris 1990), 331-3448. The fragments more directly presenting the history within the schema of 10 jubilees (4Q390 1 and 2) have been presented by D. DlMANT at the Madrid Congress as part of a «Pseudo Moses» composition, and will appear in the Proceedings of the congress, see D. DlMANT, «New Light from Qumran on the Jewish Pseudepigrapha - 40390» (forthcoming). 29 Quoted by MILIK, «Priere de Nabonide», 411, note 2.

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

149

rule over Persia». 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 would 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 dreams 3O, but particularly of the great apocalyptic visions of historl 1. This is equally the distinctive feature of the numerous pseudo-epigraphical compositions which have used his name in later periods. In order to assess what similarities and what differences from the Qumranic text are shown by these pseudo-Danielic compositions and to discover whether this apocalyptic composition has left any traces in the literature of later periods, it is necessary to treat, however cursorily, this peculiar corpus of literature. 2. PSEUDO-DANIELIC LITERATURE

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

30 Dan 2,27-30; 4,6. 15-24; 5,11-29. 31 Dan 7-12.

150

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

A. Arabic Pseudo-Daniel This has come down to us in two Mss. GOTIHEIL32 published the beginning and the end of one of them, although he identified it wrongly. The other one, a Ms. of the 17th century, was published in full by MACLER33. According to the editor, this is a Christian apocalypse, composed towards the 9th century and translated from the Greek. In it, Daniel relates to his disciple Ezra the content of a vision and the development of history which he sees written on a scroll. Taking different animals as symbols, this describes the battles between Byzantium and Persia, and the conflicts originating in the Arabic conquest embodied in a certain number of persons with mysterious names. The work ends with a description of the coming of the Antichrist, who is greeted by the Jews as the expected Messiah and performs wonders and miracles, carrying the crowds with him to Jerusalem until the arrival of Enoch and Elijah, who stand up against him only to perish at his hands. This gives way to God's intervention and to the end of the world. The work is closely related to the Syriac apocalypse of Ezra34, a Christian work, in which Ezra explains to his disciple Qarpos the expansion of Islam. B. Armenian Pseudo-Daniel

Going back to a lost Greek original and existing in a good number of Mss., we find a composition bearing the title: «The seventh vision of Daniel» and the subtitle (at least in two of the manuscripts): «On the end of the world». The work is already mentioned in the lists of apocryphal works of Mechithar of Airivank, of the 13th century and,

32 R.J.H. GOTIllEIL, «An Arabic Version of the 'Revelation of Ezra'», Hebraica 4 (1887-88), 15-17. 33 F. MACLER, «L'Apocalypse arabe de Daniel, publiee, traduite et annotee», RHR 37 (1896), 37-55. 163-176.288-319. 34 Known by two Mss., one published by F. BAETIlGEN, «Beschreibung der syrischen Handschrift 'Sachau 131' aus der Koniglichen Bibliothek zu Berlin», ZAW 6 (1886), 193-211, and the other, Ms. Paris Syr. 326, published by J.B. CHABOT, «L'apocalypse d'Esdras touchant Ie royaume des Arabes», Revue Semitique 2 (1894), 243-250. 333-346.

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

151

according to the editor KALEMKIAR35, it would have been written in the 7th century. The title is based on the fact that in the Armenian Bible the book of Daniel is divided into six visions, so that the pseudo-epigraphical addition is inevitably designated as «the seventh». In this vision, the archangel Gabriel appears to Daniel to reveal to him the course of history and to show to him what will happen (both in Rome and in Byzantium) in the period from Constantius to Heraclius (?), as well as the subsequent appearance of the Antichrist. This «prediction», which uses without problems proper names such as Emperor Theodosius or Marcianus, or detailed and unmistakeable descriptions such as that of Constantine36, is extremely vague and confused during the period following the reign of a certain Arian and preceding the appearance of the Antichrist. It is therefore not easy to fix with any accuracy the date of its composition but, in any case, it would seem to precede the emergence and the expansion of Islam, to which no allusion is made, but which plays a significant role in the remaining pseudo-Danielic compositions. C. Coptic Pseudo-Daniel Although the Coptic biblical mss. adopt, in general, the division into «Visions» of the canonical book of Daniel of the Alexandrian Codex, they split into two parts the story of Bel and the Dragon narrative, which they designate respectively Visions 12 and 13. The title «The

35 P.G. KALEMKlAR, «Die siebente Vision Daniels», Wiener Zeitschrift fUr die Kunde des Morgenlandes 6 (1892), 109-132 (Armenian text), 227-240 (German translation). There is an English translation based on other mss. different from the 3 used by KALEMKlAR in the work of J. ISSAVERDENS, The Uncanonical Writings of the Old Testament (Venice 1901), 249-265; there is also a French translation of the text published by KALEMKlAR by J. MACLER, Les Apocalypses apocryphes de Daniel (Paris 189~ 60-88. «Und er wird ihn ein Wundermann wiederaufbauen, der von einem frommen Weibe geboren ist, und in seiner Zeit wird der Wunsch seines Herzens erfiilt, und er wird das Holz des Lebens auffinden, und sein Stab wird gross, und er wird die Nagel finden, welche in demselben Zeichen waren, und er wird sie in seine Ziigel legen zur Besiegung in Ofteren Kriegen, und sein Horn wird hoch und stark und sein Name unter allen Sprachen, und es wird dieser Stadt ein ewiges Andenken gegeben werden», KALEMKlAR, «Die Siebente Vision Daniels», 229-230. On the tradition about the fIXing of the nails of the Cross on the hoofs of Constantine's horse, see John Chrysostom, «Sermon on the Death of Theodosius», MIGNE, Patr. Lat. XVI,

1399.

152

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

fourteenth Vision of Daniel» used to designate the pseudo-epigraphic composition following them in the Ms. is thus logical37. This tells a story that starts with the vision of the four kingdoms of Dan 7, and in which the fourth empire corresponds to the Arab rule, and is divided into 19 kingdoms. The author then deals with those kingdoms, beginning with the tenth. The last one will be destroyed by Piturgos (The Turk = Saladin ), giving way to the dominion of Rome, the invasion of Gog and Magog, and the appearance of the Antichrist and his destruction by the «Son of Man». The geographical horizon of the work is clearly Egyptian. For BECKER, its historical background corresponds to the fall of the Umayyad dynasty. For MACLER, it would coincide with the fall of the Fatimid dynasty. What seems most probable (and this is the opinion of MEINARDUS) is that a composition based on the Umayyad period was adapted to the situation of the Fatimid era, implying that the work, which clearly stems from the Coptic church of Egypt, must have been adapted in a period no earlier than the 11th century. D. Slavonic Pseudo-Daniel

Old Church Slavonic has preserved for us, at least, one pseudoDanielic work unknown in any other language. This is a «Vision 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 II, 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 times 38 and partially translated

37 The Coptic text was published by C.G. WOIDE, Appendix ad editionem Novi Testamenti graeci e codice manuscripto alexandrino. De versione bibliorum aegyptiaca. III. De libris apocryphis aegyptiacis V. et N.T. (Oxford 1799), 141-148. French translation by MACLER, Les Apocalypses apocryphes de Daniel, 38-55. The most complete

study is the one by O. MEINARDUS, «A Commentary on the XIVth Vision of Daniel according to the Coptic Version», OrChrPer 32 (1966), 394-499. There exists an Arabic version of the work, published by C.H. BECKER, «Das Reich der Ismaeliten im Koptischen Danielbuch», NAWG (1916), 6-57. 38 P.S. STRECHOVIC, «Zbornik Popa Dragolia», Spomenik 5 (1890), 11-12; V. ISTRIN, «Otkrovenie Mefodiia Patarskago i Apokrificheskiia Videnia Daniela Vizantiiski i Siaviano-Russkoi Literaturakh», Chteniia 191/193 (1897), 156-158; P A. LAVROV, «Apokrifidheskie Teksty» Sbomik 67 (1899), 1-5.

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

153

into English by ALEXANDER39• 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 SPERANSKU40 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 VASSILIE01.

E. Greek Pseudo-Daniel As was to be expected, a whole series of pseudo-Danielic composi-

tions have been preserved in Greek. Although their precise mutual relations have not been sufficiently established, it seems certain that they cannot be reduced to a common archetype. We shall indicate the most important. 1. Apocalypse of the Prophet Daniel on the end of the world42 or The Last VlSion of the Prophet Daniez43.

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

39 P J. ALEXANDER, «Medieval Apocalypses as Historical Sources», AmHistR 7 (I968J' 997-1018. 4 M. SPERANSKIJ, Chteniia 150 (1889), 58-64. 41 Cfr. postea. A.-M. DENIS, Introduction aux Pseudepigraphes Grecs d'Ancien Testament (SVTP 1) (Leiden 1970), 312, note 13, wrongly mentions a translation of the Armenian Pseudo Daniel into Old Church Slavonic, with a reference to BONWEfSCH. In the same way K. BERGER in his Daniel-Diegesis (SPB 27) (Leiden 1976), XV and XXIII, distinguishes a Slavonic Daniel I and III which are really the same work. Nevertheless, the existence of several pseudo-Danielic compositions in Old Church Slavonic is proved, although their actual contents are not known. 42 This is the title which appears in the Ms. Veneto Marc. Col. II, cod. CXXV and with this title it was partially published by C. TISCHENDORF, Apocalypsis apocrypha (Leipzig 1866), and integrally by E. KLOSfERMANN, Analecta zur Septuaginta, Hexapla und Patristik (Leipzig 1895), 115-123. 43 This is the title given in 4 mss. and the one used by A. VASSILIEV, Anecdota Graeco-Byzontina (Moscow 1893), 43-47; V. IsrRIN op. cit 135-139, and H. SCHMOLDT, Die Schrift 'Vom Jungen Daniel' und 'Daniels Letzte Vision'. Herausgabe und Interpretation zweier apokalyptischer Texte (Hamburg 1972), 122-145. Four other mss. attribute the work to Methodius of Patara, a certainly secondary development.

154

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

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

This work was published by ISTRIN44. Its first part was also published by KLOSTERMANN45 on the basis of a ms. where it appears under the title «The first oracle of Daniel on the 'Seven Hills' and on the isle of Crete and others and of their future». It was reedited by SCHMOLDT46 with the variants of chapter I of the KLOSTERMANN 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 angels 47, 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 Methodius 48 . 3. Another two Greek works of similar form and contents were published by V ASSILIEV49 under the titles of Visions of Daniel on the

44 «Otkrovenie», 45 Ana/ecta, 12l.

143-144.

Die Schrift, 190-199. Six mss. give the name of John, as the text of «The Monk Daniel»; the rest of the mss. do not give any name. 48 Cf., H. SUERMANN, «Der byzantinische Endkaiser bei Pseudo-Methodius», OrChr 71 (1987), 140-155, and G.J. REININK, «Der edessenische 'Pseudo-Methodius'», B)'ZIJI}.tinische Zeitschrift 83 (1990), 31-45. 49 Ana/ecta, 33-34. 46 47

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

155

last times and on the end of the world and Discourses of the Holy Father John Chrysostom on the VISion of Daniel. The first half of the latter corresponds closely with Pseudo-Methodius, 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. Daniel-Diegese

The three mss. which have preserved it, give different titles to this «Narrative of Daniel», as it is normally known. ISTRINSO edited 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. MACLER51 translated the part of the Montpellier manuscript related to the Antichrist. In that ms. the work was entitled: «On the times of the Antichrist and on the last days». BERGER52 has published a critical edition, and printed, separately, the text of the Venice manuscript53 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, BERGER postulates an independent existence for the two units and traces the eschatological part back to at least the 3rd. century A.D. The historical part has several elements in common with other pseudo-Danielic works and with pseudo-Methodius: an allusion to Leo III, the reign of a woman in Constantinople, the destruction of the city, etc. The eschatological part manifests itself in a much fuller and more developed form than in the work previously referred to, although still quite distant from the midrashic connotations of the Persian Pseudo-Daniel.

50

«Otkrovenie», 145-150.

51 52

Les Apocalypses apocrypIJes de Daniel, 108-110. K. BERGER, Die Griechische Daniel-Diegese (SPB 27) (Leiden 1976).

53

Venice Marc. Graec. VII. 27.

156

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

5. Apart from these works, there exist in Greek other similar compositions, either published or available in mss. Two of them: «On the isle of Cyprus, of the same Daniel», published by KLOSTERMANN54, and «An oracle of Theophilus, a presbyter of Rome», published ISTRIN55, form part in other mss. of the famous Oracle of Leo . Another, also published by ISTRIN57, which deals with «The visions of Daniel and other holy men», contains a series of prophecies about the future, just as do two other compositions mentioned by SCHMOLD~8: «The Oracle of the Prophet Daniel on Byzantium» and the «Visions of Daniel», which exist only in manuscript form.

1'l

F. Hebrew Pseudo-Daniel Of the works that medieval literature attributes to Daniel59, perhaps the most interesting is that contained in a fragment from the Geniza of Cairo published by GINZBERG60 under the title of «Vision of Daniel», a title which appears on the manuscript itself, explaining that it is «the fourteenth vision revealed to Daniel in the days of Cyrus, king

54 Anaiecta, 121-123.

«Otkrovenie», 321. This work appears in the ms. Athos Koutloum. 220, fol. 201 as «Visions of the Prophet Daniel». 56 Cf. E. LEGRAND, Leo VI Sapiens. Les oracles de Leon Le Sage (Collection de monographies pour servir a l'etude de la langue neo-hellenique, N.S. 5) (Paris-Athens 1875), and the study of A. DEISSER, «Les oracles de Leon VI Ie Sage», Kemos 3 (1990), 135-145. 5 «Otkrovenie», 318-319. 55

58 Die Schrift, 243-244.

One of this compositions is the fragment Ms. Hebr. 2646 of the Bodleian Library, published by S. WERTIIEIMER in his Batte Midrashot II, 30 with the title «'Aggadat yemoth hammeshiah», and by I. LEVI as «Une Apocalypse Judeo-arabe», REf 67 (1914), 178-182. But the text is a simple fragment of the Arab history, seen from a Jewish perspective. 60 L. GINZBERG, Geniza Studies in Memory of S. Schechter, I (Texts and Studies of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America VII), (New York 1928), 313-323. S. KRAUSS has published a French translation «Un nouveau texte pour l'histoire judeobyzantine», REf 87 (1929), 11-27. A. SHARF has dedicated several studies to this composition: «The Vision of Daniel as a Source for the history of Byzantine Jewry», Bar lIan 4/5 (1967), 197-208 (Hebrew); «A Source for Byzantine Jewry under the Early Macedonians», Byzantinisch-Neugriechische Jahrbilcher 20 (1970), 320-328, and has included an English translation as Appendix in his book Byzantine Jewry from Justinian to the Fourth Crusade (London 1971), 201-204. 59

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

157

of Persia»61. 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 III, Basil I and Leo the Philosopher are mentioned, followed by other personages «The Cusite» and «The Arab» whose identification poses problems. The second page contains the apocalyptic section; BONFILL has convincingly demonstrated62 that this is nothing more than a centon, that is a mosaic of expressions perfectly corresponding to the other pseudo-Danielic works of Greek origin. Thus we cannot see in this work - in contrast to what GINZBERG suggested - the evidence of a Jewish apocalyptic tradition that would have emerged after a millennium of silence. It is rather a specimen of the Byzantine apocalyptic tradition, mainly to be found in the Greek works. G. Persian Pseudo-Daniel Two Pseudo-Danielic works have been preserved in the literary production of Persian Judaism. Both were written in Persian, but are known only in a transcriftion in Hebrew characters. The most interesting and ancient one6 is a prose work entitled «The History of Daniel», Qissayi Daniyiil, published by ZOTENBERG64. The work

61 Two photographs of the Geniza fragment have been included in the article of R. BONFILL, «The Vision of Daniel als historical and literary document», Zion 44 (1979), 111-147 (Hebrew). 6 «The Vision of Daniel», 138-143. 63 The work, whose title is Ddniydl-ndmd, «Book of Daniel», is a verse composition which paraphrases the biblical text. It is very late. It was composed in the year 1606, corrected in the year 1704, and has reached us in a Ms. of the year 1816, as indicated in his colophon, see R. LEVY, «Danial-Nam. A Judeo-Persian Apocalypse», in: Jewish Studies in Memory of GA. Kohut (New York 1935), 423-428; A. NEI'ZER, «DaniyaI nama. An Exposition of Judeo Persian», in: Islam and Its Cultural Divergence (Chicago 1970), 145-164; «Daniyal nama and its linguistic Features», Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972), 305-314. 64 H. ZoTENBERG «Geschichte Daniels. Ein Apokryphon», in A. MERX, Archiv fUr Wissenschaftliche Erforschung des Alten Testamentes I (Halle 1867-69), 385-427. The apocalyptic section was also published by J. DARMESI'ETER, L'Apocalypse persane de Daniel (BibliotMque de I'Ecole des Hautes Etudes. Fasc. 73) (Paris 1887), 405420. There exists also a Hebrew translation by A. COHEN KAPLAN, published in A. JELLINEK, Bet Hammidrash V (JerLisalem 1967) 117-130 (reprint).

158

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

presents Daniel as a descendant of king Jehoiachim and as a witness in the Jerusalem of the last years of king Sedecias of Jeremiah's preachings and the events prior to the exile. The narrative contains a number of marvellous stories. That same type of haggadot on Solomon's throne, the sacred garments, etc. colour Daniel's deeds in exile and his relationship with Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus and Darius. Finally, God despatches an angel to Daniel to reveal the course of History and the last days. This apocalypse, which covers one half of the work, shows the same basic scheme as the other pseudo-Danielic compositions. A series of descriptions of kings, in more or less accurate terms, follows, up to the time of the composition of the work, concluded by a description of the last days. The fifth of the 24 personages described is clearly Mohammed «who will call himself a prophet and will come, riding on a camel, from Teiman (the south), reign for 11 years and die in Teiman». He is succeeded by several personages who may be identified with different caliphs. The series ends with the description of Godfrey of Bouillon, «a king of the Romans, dressed in red, who will wage war as far as Damascus .. , demolish the minarets, destroy the mosques ... prohibit the sabbath, the reading of the Torah, .. kill many Israelites.. reign for nine months and die». He will be followed by a false Messiah, who will rule over the whole Earth and give way to the Antichrist, the Messiah, son of Joseph. His rule is described with all sorts of details and many haggadoth. He will last until the coming of the Messiah, the son of David, who will summon together the living and the dead to the blast of Elijah's trumpet. This will be followed by the rebuilding of the Temple and the reign of the Messiah for 1300 years. The work ends with an evocation of the Last Judgement and a detailed description of the seven divisions of hell. The «History of Daniel» is clearly a Jewish composition. The historical part is not earlier than the 11th century, and the similar use of haggadic elements throughout the whole work makes it impossible to trace any remnants of a more ancient work in the apocalyptic part.

H. Syriac Pseudo-Daniel The most important, most ancient and least known of the pseudoDanielic compositions is a work which has been preserved only in a

PSEUDO DANIEL ARAMAIC

159

Syriac Ms. of the 12th century65 under the title: «From the young Daniel on our Lord and the end». A photocopy of the Ms. with a German transcription and translation has been published by SCHMOLDTXi, who has also analysed its contents and its connections with other pseudo-Danielic writings. The author presents his work as a continuation of the history of Susannah which in the ms. appears after the history of Bel and the Dragon and is then followed by his own narrative. That the author refers to Susannah is evident from the fact that he pictures Daniel as a , lSI 1 (1970), 58-64 and «Note additionnelle», lSI 1 (1970), 185-186. J.T. MILIK, The Books of Enoch. Aramaic Fragments of Qumran Cave 4 (Oxford 1976), 59, discloses that «a tiny fragment of 4Q (to be given the number 4Q232 in DID) seems to provide us with a specimen of the Hebrew version of the Aramaic work edited under the title "Description of the New Jerusalem"», but nothing more is known about this fragment. Although in DID I, 143 and in lSI 1 (1970), 185 is alluded to another copy of NI, belonging, according to JONGELING, to STRUGNELL's lot, this copy does not exist. The manuscript, which indeed contains a description of the gates common to llQTemple and to NI is thus described by Prof. STRUGNELL in a personal letter: «The material common to llQTel1lple and to 4Q364-365 does not come from a roll of the New Jerusalem (uniquely found in Aramaic - My fgg. are in Hebrew). My mss. of which only a bit was published by Yadin in his supplementary Volume, is a Middle Hasmonean copy of a wildly aberrant text of the whole Pentateuch containing several nonBiblical additions, some identical with Samaritan Pentateuchal pluses, others unattested elsewhere (e.g. a song of Miriam at the Red Sea). It is more likely that these additions were copied by llQTemple from an expansionist text of the Pentateuch rather than that my biblical scroll incorporated excerpts from the Temple Scroll. Whether the Aramaic (and probably pre-Qumranian) «New Jerusalem» excerpted and translated its list of the gates from the Biblical Text type of 4Q364-365 or from llQTel1lple, or per contra was itself the source of the Hebrew, is unclear but since the phenomenon of such pluses is characteristic of 4Q364-365 I find the dependency of NI and llQTel1lple more likely». Photographs of part of this manuscript are included in the Supplementary Volume of Y. YADIN's edition of llQTemple, \lllPlJi1-n~J'J.rJ - The Temple Scroll (Israel Exploration Society-The Hebrew University, Jerusalem 1977),38* 5 and 39* 1-2. All published copies of NI are conveniently collected in JA. FrrzMYER - OJ. HARRINGTON, A Manual of Palestinian Aramaic Texts (Second Century B.C. - Second

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

181

some strange assertions made by B.z. WACHOLDER2. According to the American scholar, the correspondence between a great number of the measurements found in the «New Jerusalem» and those recorded in the «Temple Scroll» (= 11 QTemple 3 ) is such that it forces us to admit a close relationship between the two works. WACHOLDER believes that NJ would depend on 11 QTemple 4 and that its author was motivated by the desire to assure his readers that, at the end of days, the temple would be located nowhere else than in Jerusalem5. 11QTemple would be rather reserved on this point while NJ would attempt to fill this gap6. These assertions are rather surprising and do not seem to correspond to the real state of things. The long commentary devoted by Y. YADIN to 11 QTemple contains only three references to Nf and a

Century A.D.) (Biblica et Orient alia 34) (Roma 1978), 46-55 and in K. BEYER, Die aramiiischen Texte yom Toten Meer (Gottingen 1984),214-222. 2 B.Z. WACHOLDER, The Dawn of Qumran. The Sectarian Torah and the Teacher of Righteousness (Monographs of the Hebrew Union College 8) (Cincinnati 1983). 3 Since YADlN's editio princeps, and especially since the publication of the English translation [The Temple Scroll (Jerusalem 1983)], the number of studies of llQTempIe has enormously grown. For a bibliography see F. GARCIA MARTINEZ, «El Rollo del Templo (llQTemple): Bibliograf£a sistematica», RQ 12/47 (1986), 425-440 and Id., «The Temple Scroll: A Systematic Bibliography 1985-1991», forthcoming in the Proceedings of the Madrid Congress on the Dead Sea Scrolls. For a compact review of the most relevant literature on llQTemple, see F. GARCIA MARTINEZ, «Estudios Oumranicos 1975-1985: Panorama Critico (II}», Estudios Biblicos 45 (1987), 361-402 and A.S. VAN DER WOUDE, «Fiinfzehn Jahre Oumranforschung (1974-1988}», ThR 54 (1989), 227-249. 4 «In other words, since coincidence between the corresponding standards is to be excluded, an interdependence between the accounts of the future sanctuary in the llQTorah [WACHOLDER'S designation for llQTemple] and in the fragments of the New Jerusalem seems certain», op. cit. 96. 5 «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 will correspond to a similar architectural design», Ibidem, %. 6 «It is necessary to postulate that the author of the New Jerusalem modeled his Aramaic version of the holy city after the dimensions of the sanctuary in llQTorah, a work that provides minimal information concerning the city in which the eternal sanctuary will be located. In fact it does not even mention Jerusalem by name.» Ibidem, 96. 7 Y. YADlN, \lJ lPrJil-n ';I 'JJJ, vol. 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, e.g., pp. 167-168 and 246. On p. 181 YADIN transcribes three fragments of 1Q32 (frag, 14, 1 and 5, on this order) as part of one block. But this reconstruction is simply impossible. Frag. 14 is the lower part of a column which has preserved a large margin, and frag. 5 has clearly

182

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

detailed comparison of the two documents led J. LICHT to discard 11QTemple as a writing that could clarify N/'. The supposed intention of the NJ's author compels us completely to disregard cols. XLV-XLVIII, LII,19-31 and many other paragraphs of 11QTemple

that deal with Jerusalem and call it «my city», «the city of the temple», «the city of my temple», etc., as well as the many deuteronomistic expressions referring to it. Nothing can be deduced from the fact that the name of Jerusalem does not appear in 11QTemple, because this name is found neither in the NJ fragments published so far nor (what is equally relevant) in chapters 40-48 of Ezekiel, which culminate in the revelation of the name of the city: «The Lord is there». It would seem unnecessary to insist upon the differences between 11QTemple and NJ, were it not for the fact that the excellent book of M.O. WISE, recently published9, has reopened the question, inverting the position of WACHOLDER and making 11QTemple dependent on NJ. Reacting to LICHT'S conclusion lO, WISE asserts that «the NJ reflects an ideological program fundamentally identical with that of the Temple Source [one of the sources used by the author/compiler of 11QTempleJ». The elements in which NJ and 11QTemple are «programmatically related» according to WISE l l, are: - the use of the number seven as a basic element in the plans of NJ and of 11 QTemple;

traces of a line, not transcribed by YADIN, whose remains do not seem to be comfatible with the letters preserved on line 2 of frag. 1. J. LICIIT, «An Ideal Town Plan from Qumran. The Description of the New Jerusalem», lEI 29 (1979), 45-59: «Now that the Temple Scroll has been published, it is clear that it contains no clues to the obscurities of the NI, for it is concerned with contingent, but not identical subjects», 46. 9 M.D. WISE, A Critical Study of the Temple Scroll from Qumran Cave 11 (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 49) (Chicago 1990). WISE studies NI on pp. 64-86. For a critical assessment of his work, cf. my review in lSI 22 (1991), 155-161; for an different view of the redactional history of 11QTemple, cf. F. GARCIA MARTINEZ, «Sources et redaction du Rouleau du Temple», Henoch 13 (1991) (forthcoming). 10 «But it seems to me that important details may have escaped Licht's attention, and that the texts do sometimes describe the same subjects», op. cit. 64. 11 «The argument that the NI and the Temple Source are programmatically related rests on several considerations. First, the two works reflect in their measurements an identical ideology of numbers. Second, they describe in several places similar, perhaps identical, structures and rituals. Third, the two have certain general phenomena in common», op. cit., 66.

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

183

- the description of the same structures and rituals in both works; - the presence in both of the same general phenomena, such as the change in the pattern for indicating length and width, the use of numerous pillared structures, the common use of certain terms such as YJlrJ / YJ llrJ instead ofy lJl, etc. In my view, these common «general phenomena», to the extent that they are really present in the texts 12, are devoid of significance. I do not think either that the presence of some measurements based on the number seven and its multiples, together with others that are clearly not based on this number, is significant in a text which uses as measure a seven cubit reed. The only element that, in my opinion, could prove that NJ and 11 QTemple are programmatically related would be the presence in both texts of structures or rituals that are not attested in other compositions. This would be the case according to WISE: «In at least three instances, the Temple Source and the NJ describe either identical structures or aspects of identical rituals peculiar to these two texts.»13 But a careful perusal of the four instances WISE analyses does not seem to lend support to his conclusion. In one case the parallel does not exist, in two others the possible relationship is too thin and complicated to lead to any conclusion, and the third, the only real one, can be interpreted otherwise than WISE does. The first instance is the assumed parallel between 11 QTemple XXXVII, 4 and 2Q24 8, 7-8. According to WISE both texts deal witp an enclosure distinct from and within the inner court of the Temple, whose existence is attested by Josephus and whose presence in 11QTemple was inferred by YADIN on the basis of two oblique allusions l4. WISE concludes: «Based on terminology and the identical measurements of 120 cubits, 2Q24 8 may well be describing the inner court of the Temple Source.»15 But neither the specific terminology nor the concrete measurements have been preserved in 2Q24 and he is forced to admit that they are only one of the possible reconstructions of the fragmentary evidence.

12 WISE recognises that NJ is «about midway between the Bible and the Temple Source» regarding the shifting of the pattern width-length to length-width, op. cit., 80. 13 A Critical Study of the Temple Scroll, op. cit. 71. 14 llQTemple XXXV,8-9 and XXXVII,9, see the comments of YADIN, op. cit.,

vol.

Is 158-160.

lOp. cit., 71.

184

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

The second instance is more complicated. It involves a combination of 2Q24 4,7-16 with llQNJ and «several heretofore problematic passages of the Temple Source», namely llQTemple XXXVIII, 9. This text only says: «and to the right of this gate», after having mentioned in the preceding lines «the wood that will be brought into», and «upon it frankincense and ... ». WISE supplies a whole context: «By line 8 the topic has apparently shifted to another type of offering, that to which frankincense is added. Evidently the priests are to eat this offering, also, near the western gate [mention in line 6]. Then in line 9, the description rotates south of that gate, i.e., to the southwest of the sanctuary. What would the priest eat at that location? Taking col. 38 as a whole, it stipulates that the offerings of similar types should be enjoyed in the same general area. Since the shewbread involved frankincense, it follows that in the Temple Source schema the priest would eat the bread in the same vicinity as other offerings involving the spice. In other words, line 38:9 probably commands the consumption of the shewbread «to the south» of the western gate.»16 I have quoted the passage at length to show the chain of suppositions that are necessary to arrive at WISE'S conclusion. A similar chain of suppositions is involved in his reading of the NJ text. The combination of the two copies gives for lin. 9-10 «they will exit from the sanctuary to the south-west, and they will divide», and WISE must supply the statement that the action involved is the change of the courses of the priests, with the division of the shewbread among the incoming and outgoing, and the eating of the bread to the south of the western gate. But if we look at the preserved texts, without the suppositions of WISE, we realise that the only common element between them is the mention of «to the right>~. The third instance of so-called agreement is even more tenuous. It involves the same combination of texts of NJ and llQTemple XLV, 2. Mter 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 llQTemple XLV, 2 (which YADIN reads as part of the 16 Op. cit., 74. His reading of llQTemple is even more problematic when one takes into account the overlapping text of STRUGNELL's manuscripts 4Q364-365, PAM 43.366, which permit the completion of the fragmentary text of llQTemple.

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

185

number 270, the number of chambers allotted to the priests and levites) as a reference to the same seventy priests, part of a priestly course, and postulates an agreement between 11 QTemple and the NJ regarding the courses. The only real instance of agreement between the two texts is the well-known correspondence of the names of the gates of the temple in 11QTemple with those of the city in NJ. But this agreement is not exclusive. The fact that this tradition about the gates is found also in an apparently biblical scroll, 4Q364-36517, forbids us to establish a direct link between 11QTemple and NJ. It rather points to the existence of an independent tradition which both NJ and 11 QTemple could have used. WISE postulates a genetic relationship between the two texts because of a common element, but, theoretically, it is always also possible to postulate a common dependence on a third source. When, as is the case here, this third source is present, and is attested in a manuscript much older than all the copies of NJ and of the Temple Scroll, this theoretical possibility becomes the most plausible hermeneutical way to interpret the relationship at this point between NJ and the Temple Scroll. So the origin and the objective of NJ must be different from WACHOLDER'S and WISE's assumptions, but it does not seem to be easy to offer a different explanation. A careful perusal of the different copies of NJ published so far brings to light quite a number of distinct problems and queries raised by this work18. What are its origins ? Which literary genre does it belong to ? What kind of a city and of a temple are described in it ? It is far from our intention to give an answer here to all these queries, still less to submit a full and detailed treatment of the work under consideration. Our only aim is to clarify

See note 1 above. NJ, unlike other compositions found in the library of Qumran, has not generated much research. Except for the already quoted article by J. LIClIT and the corresponding chapter in the book of WISE, the only other important treatments known to me are the review article of J. GREENFIELD «The Small Caves of Qumran», JAOS 89 (1969), pp. 130, 132-135, which offers valuable corrections to some suggestions of MILlK's edition, and S. FUJITA'S Diss.: The Temple Theology of the Qumran Sect and the Book of Ezekiel: 77leir Relationship to Jewish Literature of the Last Two Centuries B.C. (Princeton Univ. 1970, distributed by University Microfilms). K. BEYER (op. cit., 216) refers to the Diss. of W. BERNHARDT, Die klIltllr- und religionsgeschichtfiche Bedeutung des Qumran-Fragments 5Q15, defended at the University of Jena in 1970, which has not been available to me. 17 18

186

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

its origin by placing this missing link in its correct place within the chain of tradition that ends up in the Apocalypse of the New Testa ment. 1. THE CITY PLAN OF NJ

Before summarising the contents of the fragments, it seems necessary briefly to discuss some points that condition my own comprehension of the text. The first item is whether NJ is or is not dependent on Ezekiel as regards the general blueprint of the town plan. It is quite evident that NJ depends on Ezekiel and should there be any doubt as to the validity of this assertion it entirely vanishes on the basis of FUJITA'S detailed analysis of the terminology NJ uses 19. There is, nevertheless, one point in which the author of NJ diverges from Ezekiel: the layout of the city plan. Ezekiel's ideal layout consists of a square of small dimensions, whereas, in NJ, the city is planned as an immense rectangle. This can be established on the strength of the measurements of the city wall preserved in the copy of NJ from 4Q, col. i and ii, 1-5: a rectangle of 140 x 100 res or stadia. This conclusion had already been reached by M ILIK20. It would seem unnecessary to insist upon it if LICHT had not formally opposed this assertion21 and if MILIK'S presentation did not conceal a characteristic vagueness which lends itself to ambiguous conclusions and leads him to postulate that the city consisted of a rectangle of only 35 x 100 stadia. In MILIK'S opinion, in fact, the wall, which is mentioned in the fragments of 4Q, would enclose the city and the Terumah, that is the part devoted to YHWH. The city, located to the south of the Terumah, would seemingly occupy one of the four strips of land in which the large avenues divide the whole, and make up a rectangle which represents, in fact, a quarter of its total area. The other three strips would form a square of approximately 105 x 100 stadia, equivalent to the Terumah of Ezekiel. The northern strip would be inhabited by the 19 Op. cit., pp. 306-315. 20 In his editio princeps of 5Q15, 21 J. LICHT, al1. cit. 49-50: «But

DJD III, 185. the most obvious assumption an interpreter may make is that the author of the NJ based his plan on Ezekiel's vision of a square city... A far safer hypothesis is that the 'great wall' of the unpublished portion of the text is not the city wall, and that the author of the NJ adhered to Ezekiel's specifications quite closely».

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

187

Levites, the central part by the Priests, with the temple standing at its northernmost end; the southern strip would separate the city or residence of the laymen from the sacred space, reflecting the purity concerns characteristic of the Qumran sectaries22. Thus both MILIK and LICHT assert that the city and the temple were set apart from each other. In LICHT's opinion, the city would spread out at the northern side of the temple, cut off from it by the avenue that forms a sort of square at the south end of the ciry23. As for MILIK, he supports the theory that the city was separated from the temple by a strip of land equal to that of the city itself, i.e. 35 x 100 stadia. As has already been indicated, LICHT'S assumption is contradicted by the text from Cave 4, which reveals the measurements of the outer wall as being those of a rectangle -not a square- of a size far superior to that of Ezekiel's city as postulated by LICHT. Nor does it seem that MILIK'S hypothesis is in accord with the data found in the text. Indeed, he perfectly understood the relation between the 12 gates of the wall and the six avenues that divided the city into squares and led to the wall gates, but his view that the city area should be reduced and confined to the lower part of the resulting square seems arbitrary. The text specifies that the avenues cross the city: «and that of the middle in the centre of the city... » (5Q15 i,5, 4QNJ ii,15-16 ). It is quite true that this is the only case in which the author indicates that he is dealing with the streets of the city, but the expressions used with respect to the other avenues compel us to give the same interpretation to the text in the other cases. In fact, the measurements of the streets and avenues are given in the context of the description of the block of the houses; the author has just given the overall measurements of each block and indicates that the blocks are separated by

22 «Le Temple etait donc au centre de la bande central de la 'Part consacree' mais touchant a sa limite nord. Ainsi il se dressait dans Ie territoire des pretres, comme la Temple d'Ez 45,2-4 et 48,9-12, et il communiquait a travers I'avenue avec la partie nord de la Ternmah, habitee par les levites; efr. Ez 45,5 et 48,13. II est difficile de deviner la destination de la bande situee entre celle des pretres et celle de la Ville, mais servant de tampon entre la partie sacro-sainte et la partie lai"que, elle trahit Ie souci de Purete cultuelle si caracteristique des sectaires de Qumran», DID III, 185. 23 See his diagram on p. 49. LICHT designates this avenue with the letter E and specifies: «Street E was thus evidently intended as a kind of plaza or place for assembly adjoining the Temple and lying to the south side of the street network. In other words, the decumallus maximus has been shifted to the south because of the sacred character of the city. The other two east-west streets (D) run through the heart of the city», art. cit., 48.

188

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

streets; he further gives the measurements of these streets and then singles them out from the six large avenues, adding, when referring to one of these avenues, that it runs alongside the northern part of the temple, and, when further mentioning the other one, that it crosses the centre of the city. MILIK'S assertion that only the avenues running North-South cross the city, not those running East-West, is, in my opinion, arbitrary, for the simple reason that all of them had been related to the streets separating the blocks that made up the ciry24. It thus appears an unavoidable conclusion that for the author of NJ the city occupies the whole rectangle of 140 x 100 res, which is surrounded by the walls already described, and further, that the temple is situated within its enclosure. The city is divided as if it were a chessboard by the six large avenues linking the gates and forming 16 big blocks in which are located the insulae with the houses, each insula separated from the others by their respective streets. The Nl's author holds the view that the city is something quite different from the small square located in the middle of the southern strip of Ezekiel's Terumah, although its dimensions are still far smaller than the immense square city with a length, at each side, of 3.000 stadia, which we find in the Apocalypse. Another point worth clarifying is the meaning of the term ?{ ~'JJ!J'JJ (5Q15 1 i 8) on account of its importance for a proper comprehension of the city plan. The term was quite unknown. MILIK compares it with 'JJ!J'JJ!J, a noun used in Aramaic, Syrian and Mishnaic Hebraic, and with 'JJ!J l'JJiJ, which appears twice in the Babli25, and suggests the meaning of "postern", i.e. small gates carved in the city wall where the streets of the city come to an end. This meaning, the only possil~2' correct one in my opinion, has been contested by GREENFIELD ,

24 An additional argument against MILIK's hypothesis can be extracted from the fact that the direction of the description of the city wall runs North-South and ends in the North. The heavenly topographer starts with the gate of Simeon, at the NorthEast side, and ends with the gate of Asher, in the North side, and then he enters the city (4QNI ii,S), where he describes the blocks of houses. The most logical deduction is to conclude that these blocks of houses are located in the North part of the city, and that the heavenly topographer enters the city by the same gate. But MILIK's hypothesis requires that he descends again to the South in order to enter into the city by the gates of Reuben, Joseph or Benjamin, the only ones with direct access to the city if the city occupies only the lower band of the square. 25 b. Zeb 82b and b.Mell 27b. On both places is used the expression J I I 'JJ!J 1\lJ iJ, although some mss. have other readings. 26 J.C. GREENFIELD, «The Small Caves from Qumran», 011. cit., 134.

THE

NEW

JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

189

who himself prefers that of «a small door in a gate» (a sort of sidedoor within the city gates), this being the sense of \lJ!]\lJ!] in Syriac, where it is used to designate a wicket gate. It is true that in the two cases in which \lJ!] l\lJrJ is used in the Talmud, its meaning is far from obvious27, as is recognised by GREENFIELD, but in our case the context leaves no doubt that the interpretation he postulates for K\lJ!J\lJ is not the most appropriate. Our text defines K\lJ!]\lJ as a gate (Yln), since line 9 states precisely that "there will be two stone panels in each gate", and, further, that these gates are nothing else but the posterns mentioned in line 8, as evidenced by the measurements of the panels: one reed or seven cubits each, making up a total width of 2 reeds, fourteen cubits for both posterns. We are thus dealing with small doors in the wall and not with wickets. GREENFIELD'S definition is also incompatible with the measures of the city gates stated in the text and with their numbers. These city gates, structures flanked by towers on both sides, are three reeds wide and have two panels of one reed and a half each, that would hardly admit one-reed wide wickets, and, because they are twelve, in no case could they accommodate more than 24 wickets, a figure that cannot been reconciled with the number partially preserved in 5Q15: [4]80. MILIK's conclusion is correct, and the meaning he postulates for K '\lJ!]\lJ is the only one that fits the context28. As he himself indicates, that same meaning suits also 0 '\lJ!]\lJ!] in m. Tamid 3:7 and m. Middot 4:2.

This conclusion concerning the meaning of K '\lJ!]\lJ is important, although the number of 80 posterns that MILIK assumes, seems wrong to me and would appear to be conditioned by his erroneous conjecture that the city occupies only the southern strip of land of the whole

27 The expression of b. Zeb is translated by H. FREEDMAN in the Soncino edition as «a circuitous route» and explained in a foot-note: «he enters the innermost sanctuary by way of a roof or through upper chambers, avoiding the hekal altogether». E. CASHDAN, in the same edition, translates the same expression in b. Men by «entering by the side» and explains: «any entry into the Holy of Holies not made in the ordinary way through the door on the east with the face looking westward; e.g., by breaking through the north wall or the south wall of the Holy of Holies and entering thereby, or by entering through the door on the east but with the face looking either northward or southward», cfr. I. EpSTEIN (ed.), The Babylonian Talmud. Seder Kodashim (London 1948) Vol. II, 392 (Zeb) and Vol. I, 178 (Men). 28 K. BEYER avoids the problem; he reconstructs '\lJ!]\lJ [!J, but gives to \lJ!J\lJ!J not the meaning of wicket, but the general one of «Pforte», cfr. Die aramiiischen Te.xte,op. cit., 217 and 672.

190

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

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, but 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 res 29 . Unfortunately the text of 5Q15 is mutilated at that point and the corresponding part does not appear in 4QNJ either, so that both MILIK's reading (80 posterns) and our own (480 posterns) are bound to remain hypothetical. Both readings can be fitted into the dimensions of the missing text30, but our reconstruction avoids the complicated calculations and the arbitrary reductions of measurements that MILIK is compelled to make in order to offer a satisfactory explanation of number 8031, is confirmed by the number of towers, to which we shall refer later on, and gives a rational basis to the calculation of the absolute measures of the city imagined in NJ. All this leads us to give a brief account of the measurements system recorded in NJ. Of the seven measures of length that are used in the biblical system of measurement, only two appear in NJ: il J p, the reed, and ilfJ?{, the cubit. Another measure used is the res (also employed in llQTemple LII,18), written Ol or ?{Ol in singular, POl or PO?{l in plural. As pointed out by MILIK32, the facultative use of alef indicates that the word was pronounced res and not ris, as in mishnaic Hebraic, where it appears frequently, a pronunciation still known to Jerome, who identifies it with the stadium. GREENFIELD points out correctl~3 that res was also the pronunciation of the Targurnic vocalization and that the use of alef to indicate \e\ comes from the

29 This seems also to be the conclusion of STARCKY: «Si je lis correctement ce chiffre mutiIe, il repond aux 480 stades de l'enceinte, chaque stade repondant a un ilot, comme l'a vu J.T. Milik», «Jerusalem et les manuscrits de la mer Morte», art. cit., 39. 30 MILIK is forced to introduce in the gap the verb ' J?{ , i n?{ 1 in order to adapt his reconstruction to the space available. His reconstruction has been adopted by FITzMYER-HARRINGTON (56-57) and by BEYER (217). 31 DID III, 186. 32 DID III, 188. 33 J.e. GREENFIELD, «The Small Caves from Qumran», art. cit., 134.

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

191

Aramaic pronunciation of words such as KllJ (mar\e\), lIJK' (y\e\mar), OK l (r\e\s) etc. In NJ, the measures are rendered in reeds, and are always followed by the equivalent in cubits, the proportion being 7 cubits to a reed (the manuscript 4QNJ designates the measures in figures). In this respect, NJ turns away from the biblical system which considers the reed as measuring six (short) cubits, and even from Ezekiel, who also applies a reed of six (long) cubits: «a six-cubits reed, each of which increased by a span" (Ezekiel 40,5), this being equivalent, in actual practice, to a reed of seven short cubits. The system is, therefore, clear and consistent. Problems arise when it comes to determining the accurate value of the cubit on the basis of our metric system, because no model or standard has been preserved. According to the rabbinic tradition, those standards were lodged in the outbuildings of the temple, a possibility already suggested by 1 Chr 23, 29, after which the Levites would have been commissioned with control functions. A double system has been worked out in order to identify the absolute value of these measures: 1) a method based on comparison with the Egyptian and Mesopotamian metric system, which values are accurate and are precisely known, aiming at finding out the equivalent values in the biblical system; 2) a method based on current measurements of monuments, which measures are recorded in the biblical system, such as the Siloam tunnel, or the gates of excavated cities like Megiddo, Hazor or Gezer, or, in more recent times, of a hypogeum of the first century at Wady en-Nar34. Without lingering over technical details and taking for granted the hypothetical nature of whatever solution is adopted, it may be stated that the usual values are 0,52 m. for the long cubit and 0,45 for the short one35 . No strong arguments have been brought forward that would lead me resolutely to adopt either the 0.45 m. or the 0.52 m. cubit alternative in our text, but I would rather abide by the 0.52 m. choice for the cubit recorded in NJ and this for three reasons which 34 MILIK arrives by this way to fix the value of the cubit at 0.56 m (DID III, 186), a value adopted by A. BEN DAVID in his Talmlldische Okonomie I (Hildesheim-New York 1974), 344. 35 efr. J. TRiNQUEf, DBS V, cols. 1212-1250; Y. SCOTI, «Weights and Measures of the Bible», BA 22 (1959), 22-40, and E. PUECH, «Evaluation de la coudee Israelite», RB 81 (1974), 208-210.

192

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE FUTURE TEMPLE

although none of them is decisive taken by itself, do justify my option when considered jointly. The first one is its similarity to the Roman cubitus that had been introduced already in the year 129 B.C. as an official measure in the Province of Asia36 ; the second is that it stands closer to the Wady en-Nar standard; and the third reason is that a cubit of 0,45 m. would render, as an equivalence for the reed of seven cubits, certain measures that are hardly different from those of a reed of six cubits of 0,52 m.; the continuous insistence of the author that his reed measures seven cubits seems to suggest a dissimilarity with respect to Ezekiel's reed (six long or seven short cubits). Anyhow, this is a secondary problem. It would seem more important to determine the number of cubits contained in a res, since this would be the only way to establish the absolute values of the three measures used in the text. The word res is of Persian origin and, as we have already indicated, it had been assimilated to the stadium since the time of Jerome. In the Talmudic system37, the most frequent equivalence is the following: 1 parasang = 4 miles = 30 ris, which leads KRAuss to lend the res a value of 266 cubits. M1LIK38 brands this value as «chimerical» and is more inclined to accept the equivalence given by Rashi: 1 res = 30 reeds. STARCKy39 accepts 1 res = 60 reeds as the most probable equivalence. I myself believe that NJ contains an indication that enables us to determine the value that the author gave to the res. As pointed out above, he reckoned the perimeter of the outer city wall to be 480 res and, if our reconstruction is accurate, it appears that such a perimeter comprised 480 posterns, that is, one for each res. We have noted as well that those posterns made up the terminal points of the streets separated by the house blocks, so that the determination of the measures of the blocks would reveal the distance separating one postern from the next and, hence, the measurement in cubits of the res. Fortunately, the dimensions of the blocks have been partially preserved in 5Q15 1 i 1-2 and completely in 4QNJ ii 5-7: the

36 On the Greek and Roman measures cfr. the entry «Stadion (Metrologie)>> by FIECHfER on the PAULY-WISSOWA, Real-Encyclopiidie der classischen Altenumswissenschaft. Neue Bearbeitung, 2e Reihe, III (Stuttgart 1929), cols. 1930-1973. 37 See S. KRAUSS, Talmudische Archiiologie (reprint Hildesheim 1966), vol. II, 391-392; BEN DAVID, op. cit., 344, gives the same value, although he makes the res equivalent to 149 m. on the base of the value of 0.56 m. for a cubit. 38 DID III, 187-188. 39 (