[1] Eberhard Schrader, _Die Keilinschriften und das A.T._, 3rd ed.,
pp. 540 f.
ENOCH, BOOK OF. The _Book of Enoch_, or, as it is sometimes called, the
_Ethiopic Book of Enoch_, in contradistinction to the _Slavonic Book of
Enoch_ (see later), is perhaps the most important of all the apocryphal
or pseudapocryphal Biblical writings for the history of religious
thought. It is not the work of a single author, but rather a
conglomerate of literary fragments which once circulated under the names
of Enoch, Noah and possibly Methuselah. In the _Book of the Secrets of
Enoch_ we have additional portions of this literature. As the former
work is derived from a variety of Pharisaic writers in Palestine, so the
latter in its present form was written for the most part by Hellenistic
Jews in Egypt.
The _Book of Enoch_ was written in the second and first centuries B.C.
It was well known to many of the writers of the New Testament, and in
many instances influenced their thought and diction. Thus it is quoted
by name as a genuine production of Enoch in the Epistle of Jude, 14 sq.,
and it lies at the base of Matt. xix. 28 and John v. 22, 27, and many
other passages. It had also a vast indirect influence on the Palestinian
literature of the 1st century of our era. Like the Pentateuch, the
Psalms, the Megilloth, the Pirke Aboth, this work was divided into five
parts, with the critical discussion of which we shall deal below. With
the earlier Fathers and Apologists it had all the weight of a canonical
book, but towards the close of the 3rd and the beginning of the 4th
century it began to be discredited, and finally fell under the ban of
the Church. Almost the latest reference to it in the early church is
made by George Syncellus in his Chronography about A.D. 800. The book
was then lost sight of till 1773, when Bruce discovered the Ethiopic
version in Abyssinia.
_Original Language._--That the _Book of Enoch_ was written in Semitic is
now accepted on all hands, but scholars are divided as to whether the
Semitic language in question was Hebrew or Aramaic. Only one valuable
contribution on this question has been made, and that by Halevy in the
_Journal Asiatique_, Avril-Mai 1867, pp. 352-395. This scholar is of
opinion that the entire work was written in Hebrew. Since this
publication, however, fresh evidence bearing on the question has been
discovered in the Greek fragment (i.-xxxii.) found in Egypt. Since this
fragment contains three Aramaic words transliterated in the Greek, some
scholars, and among them Schurer, Levi and N. Schmidt, have concluded
that not only are chapters i.-xxxvi. derived from an Aramaic original,
but also the remainder of the book. In support of the latter statement
no evidence has yet been offered by these or any other scholars, nor yet
has there been any attempt to meet the positive arguments of Halevy for
a Hebrew original of xxxvii.-civ., whose Hebrew reconstructions of the
text have been and must be adopted in many cases by every editor and
translator of the book. A prolonged study of the text, which has brought
to light a multitude of fresh passages the majority of which can be
explained by retranslation into Hebrew, has convinced the present
writer[1] that, whilst the evidence on the whole is in favour of an
Aramaic original of vi.-xxxvi., it is just as conclusive on behalf of
the Hebrew original of the greater part of the rest of the book.
_Versions--Greek, Latin and Ethiopic._--The Semitic original was
translated into Greek. It is not improbable that there were two distinct
Greek versions. Of the one, several fragments have been preserved in
Syncellus (A.D. 800), vi.-x. 14, viii. 4-ix. 4, xv. 8-xvi. 1; of the
other, i.-xxxii. in the Giza Greek fragment discovered in Egypt and
published by Bouriant (_Fragments grecs du livre d'Enoch_); in 1892, and
subsequently by Lods, Dillmann, Charles (_Book of Enoch_, 318 sqq.),
Swete, and finally by Radermacher and Charles (_Ethiopic Text_, 3-75).
In addition to these fragments there is that of lxxxix. 42-49 (see
Gildemeister in the _ZDMG_, 1855, pp. 621-624, and Charles, _Ethiopic
Text_, pp. 175-177). Of the Latin version only i. 9 survives, being
preserved in the Pseudo-Cyprian's _Ad Novatianum_, and cvi. 1-18
discovered by James in an 8th-century MS. of the British Museum (see
James, _Apoc. anecdota_, 146-150; Charles, _op. cit._ 219-222). This
version is made from the Greek.
The Ethiopic version, which alone preserves the entire text, is a very
faithful translation of the Greek. Twenty-eight MSS. of this version are
in the different libraries of Europe, of which fifteen are to be found
in England. This version was made from an ancestor of the Greek fragment
discovered at Giza. Some of the utterly unintelligible passages in this
fragment are literally reproduced in the Ethiopic. The same wrong order
of the text in vii.-viii. is common to both. In order to recover the
original text, it is from time to time necessary to retranslate the
Ethiopic into Greek, and the latter in turn into Aramaic or Hebrew. By
this means we are able to detect dittographies in the Greek and variants
in the original Semitic. The original was written to a large extent in
verse. The discovery of this fact is most helpful in the criticism of
the text. This version was first edited by Laurence in 1838 from one
MS., in 1851 by Dillmann from five, in 1902 by Flemming from fifteen
MSS., and in 1906 by the present writer from twenty-three.
_Translations and Commentaries._--Laurence, _The Book of Enoch_
(Oxford, 1821); Dillmann, _Das Buch Henoch_ (1853); Schodde, _The Book
of Enoch_ (1882); Charles, _The Book of Enoch_ (1893); Beer, "Das Buch
Henoch," in Kautzsch's _Apok. u. Pseud. des A.T._ (1900), ii. 217-310;
Flemming and Radermacher, _Das Buch Henoch_ (1901); Martin, _Le Livre
d'Henoch_ (1906). _Critical Inquiries._--The bibliography will be
found in Schurer, _Gesch. d. judischen Volkes_^3, iii. 207-209, and a
short critical account of the most important of these in Charles, _op.
cit._ pp. 9-21.
_The different Elements in the Book, with their respective
Characteristics and Dates._--We have remarked above that the _Book of
Enoch_ is divided into five parts--i.-xxxvi., xxxvii.-lxxi.,
lxxii.-lxxxii., lxxxiii.-xc., xci-cviii. Some of these parts constituted
originally separate treatises. In the course of their reduction and
incorporation into a single work they suffered much mutilation and loss.
From an early date the compositeness of this work was recognized.
Scholars have varied greatly in their critical analyses of the work (see
Charles, _op. cit._ 6-21, 309-311). The analysis which gained most
acceptation was that of Dillmann (Herzog's _Realencyk._^2 xii.
350-352), according to whom the present books consist of--(1) the
groundwork, i.e. i.-xxxvi., lxxii.-cv., written in the time of John
Hyrcanus; (2) xxxvii.-lxxi., xvii.-xix., before 64 B.C.; (3) the Noachic
fragments, vi. 3-8, viii. 1-3, ix. 7, x. 1, 11, xx., xxxix. 1, 2a,
liv. 7-lv. 2, lx., lxv.-lxix. 25, cvi.-cvii.; and (4) cviii., from a
later hand. With much of this analysis there is no reason to disagree.
The similitudes are undoubtedly of different authorship from the rest of
the book, and certain portions of the book are derived from the _Book of
Noah_. On the other hand, the so-called groundwork has no existence
unless in the minds of earlier critics and some of their belated
followers in the present. It springs from at least four hands, and may
be roughly divided into four parts, corresponding to the present actual
divisions of the book.
A new critical analysis of the book based on this view was given by
Charles (_op. cit._ pp. 24-33), and further developed by Clemen and
Beer. The analysis of the latter (see Herzog, _Realencyk._^3 xiv. 240)
is very complex. The book, according to this scholar, is composed of the
following separate elements from the Enoch tradition:--(1) Ch. i.-v.;
(2) xii-xvi.; (3) xvii.-xix.; (4) xx.-xxxvi.; (5) xxxvii.-lxix. (from
diverse sources); (6) lxx.-lxxi.; (7) lxxii.-lxxxii.; (8)
lxxxiii.-lxxxiv.; (9) lxxxv.-xc.; (10) xciii., cxi. 12-17; (11) xci.
1-11, 18, 19, xcii., xciv.-cv.; (12) cviii., and from the Noah
tradition; (13) vi.-xi.; (14) xxxix. 1-2a, liv. 7-lv. 2, lx.,
lxv.-lxix. 25; (15) cvi.-cvii. Thus while Clemen finds eleven separate
sources, Beer finds fifteen. A fresh study from the hand of Appel (_Die
Composition des athiopischen Henochbuchs_, 1906) seeks to reach a final
analysis of our book. But though it evinces considerable insight, it
cannot escape the charge of extravagance. The original book or
ground-work of Enoch consisted of i.-xvi., xx.-xxxvi. This work called
forth a host of imitators, and a number of their writings, together with
the groundwork, were edited as a Book of Methuselah, i.e. lxxii.-cv.
Then came the final redactor, who interpolated the groundwork and the
Methuselah sections, adding two others from his own pen. The Similitudes
he worked up from a series of later sources, and gave them the second
place in the final work authenticating them with the name of Noah. The
date of the publication of the entire work Appel assigns to the years
immediately following the death of Herod.
We shall now give an analysis of the book, with the dates of the
various sections where possible. Of these we shall deal with the
easiest first. _Chap. lxxii.-lxxxii._ constitutes a work in itself,
the writer of which had very different objects before him from the
writers of the rest of the book. His sole aim is to give the law of
the heavenly bodies. His work has suffered disarrangements and
interpolations at the hands of the editor of the whole work. Thus
lxxvi.-lxxvii., which are concerned with the winds, the quarters of
the heaven, and certain geographical matters, and lxxxi., which is
concerned wholly with ethical matters, are foreign to a work which
professes in its title (lxxii. 1) to deal only with the luminaries of
the heaven and their laws. Finally, lxxxii. should stand before
lxxix.; for the opening words of the latter suppose it to be already
read. The date of this section can be partially established, for it
was known to the author of Jubilees, and was therefore written before
the last third of the 2nd century B.C.
_Chaps. lxxxiii.-xc._--This section was written before 161 B.C., for
"the great horn," who is Judas the Maccabee, was still warring when
the author was writing. (Dillmann, Schurer and others take the great
horn to be John Hyrcanus, but this interpretation does violence to the
text.) These chapters recount three visions: the first two deal with
the first-world judgment; the third with the entire history of the
world till the final judgment. An eternal Messianic kingdom at the
close of the judgment is to be established under the Messiah, with its
centre in the New Jerusalem set up by God Himself.
_Chaps. xci.-civ._--In the preceding section the Maccabees were the
religious champions of the nation and the friends of the Hasidim. Here
they are leagued with the Sadducees, and are the declared foes of the
Pharisaic party. This section was written therefore after 134 B.C.,
when the breach between John Hyrcanus and the Pharisees took place and
before the savage massacres of the latter by Jannaeus (95 B.C.); for
it is not likely that in a book dealing with the sufferings of the
Pharisees such a reference would be omitted. These chapters indicate a
revolution in the religious hopes of the nation. An eternal Messianic
kingdom is no longer anticipated, but only a temporary one, at the
close of which the final judgment will ensue. The righteous dead rise
not to this kingdom but to spiritual blessedness in heaven itself--to
an immortality of the soul. This section also has suffered at the
hands of the final editor. Thus xci. 12-17, which describe the last
three weeks of the Ten-Weeks Apocalypse, should be read immediately
after xciii. 1-10, which recount the first seven weeks of the same
apocalypse. But, furthermore, the section obviously begins with xcii.
"Written by Enoch the scribe," &c. Then comes xci. 1-10 as a natural
sequel. The Ten-Weeks Apocalypse, xciii. 1-10, xci. 12-17, if it came
from the same hand, followed, and then xciv. The attempt (by Clemen
and Beer) to place the Ten-Weeks Apocalypse before 167, because it
makes no reference to the Maccabees, is not successful; for where the
history of mankind from Adam to the final judgment is despatched in
sixteen verses, such an omission need cause little embarrassment, and
still less if the author is the determined foe of the Maccabees, whom
he would probably have stigmatized as apostates, if he had mentioned
them at all, just as he similarly brands all the Sadducean priesthood
that preceded them to the time of the captivity. This Ten-Weeks
Apocalypse, therefore, we take to be the work of the writer of the
rest of xci.-civ.
_Chaps. i.-xxxvi._--This is the most difficult section of the book. It
is very composite. Chaps. vi.-xi. is apparently an independent
fragment of the Enoch Saga. It is itself compounded of the Semjaza and
Azazel myths, and in its present composite form is already presupposed
by lxxxviii.-lxxxix. 1; hence its present form is earlier than 166
B.C. It represents a primitive and very sensuous view of the eternal
Messianic kingdom on earth, seeing that the righteous beget 1000
children before they die. These chapters appear to be from the Book of
Noah; for they never refer to Enoch but to Noah only (x. 1). Moreover,
when the author of Jubilees is clearly drawing on the Book of Noah,
his subject-matter (vii. 21-25) agrees most closely with that of these
chapters in Enoch (see Charles' edition of Jubilees, pp. lxxi. sq.
264). xii.-xvi., on the other hand, belong to the Book of Enoch. These
represent for the most part what Enoch saw in a vision. Now whereas
vi.-xvi. deal with the fall of the angels, their destruction of
mankind, and the condemnation of the fallen angels, the subject-matter
now suddenly changes and xvii.-xxxvi. treat of Enoch's journeyings
through earth and heaven escorted by angels. Here undoubtedly we have
a series of doublets; for xvii.-xix. stand in this relation to
xx.-xxxvi., since both sections deal with the same subjects. Thus
xvii. 4 = xxiii.; xvii. 6 = xxii.; xviii. 1 = xxxiv.-xxxvi.; xviii.
6-9 = xxiv.-xxv., xxxii. 1-2; xviii. 11, xix. = xxi. 7-10; xviii.
12-16 = xxi. 1-6. They belong to the same cycle of tradition and
cannot be independent of each other. Chap. xx. appears to show that
xx.-xxxvi. is fragmentary, since only four of the seven angels
mentioned in xx. have anything to do in xxi.-xxxvi. Finally, i.-v.
seems to be of a different date and authorship from the rest.
_Chaps. xxxvii.-lxxi._--These constitute the well-known Similitudes.
They were written before 64 B.C., for Rome was not yet known to the
writer, and after 95 B.C., for the slaying of the righteous, of which
the writer complains, was not perpetrated by the Maccabean princes
before that date. This section consists of three
similitudes--xxxviii.-xliv., xlv.-lvii., lviii.-lxix. These are
introduced and concluded by xxxvii. and lxx. There are many
interpolations--lx., lxv.-lxix. 25 confessedly from the Book of Noah;
most probably also liv. 7-lv. 2. Whence others, such as xxxix. 1,
2a, xli. 3-8, xliii. sq., spring is doubtful. Chaps. 1, lvi. 5-lvii.
3a are likewise insertions.
In R.H. Charles's edition of Enoch, lxxi. was bracketed as an
interpolation. The writer now sees that it belongs to the text of the
Similitudes though it is dislocated from its original context. It
presents two visits of Enoch to heaven in lxxi. 1-4 and lxxi. 5-17.
The extraordinary statement in lxxi. 14, according to which Enoch is
addressed as "the Son of Man," is seen, as Appel points out, on
examination of the context to have arisen from the loss of a portion
of the text after verse 13, in which Enoch saw a heavenly being with
the Head of Days and asked the angel who accompanied him who this
being was. Then comes ver. 14, which, owing to the loss of this
passage, has assumed the form of an address to Enoch: "Thou art the
Son of Man," but which stood originally as the angel's reply to Enoch:
"This is the Son of Man," &c. Ver. 15, then, gives the message sent to
Enoch by the Son of Man. In the next verse the second person should be
changed into the third. Thus we recover the original text of this
difficult chapter. The Messianic doctrine and eschatology of this
section is unique. The Messiah is here for the first time described as
the pre-existent Son of Man (xlviii. 2), who sits on the throne of God
(xlv. 3; xlvii. 3), possesses universal dominion (lxii. 6), and is the
Judge of all mankind (lxix. 27). After the judgment there will be a
new heaven and a new earth, which will be the abode of the blessed.
THE BOOK OF THE SECRETS OR ENOCH, or _Slavonic Enoch_. This new fragment
of the Enochic literature has only recently come to light through five
MSS. discovered in Russia and Servia. Since about A.D. 500 it has been
lost sight of. It is cited without acknowledgment in the _Book of Adam
and Eve_, the _Apocalypses of Moses and Paul_, the _Sibylline Oracles_,
the _Ascension of Isaiah_, the _Epistle of Barnabas_, and referred to by
Origen and Irenaeus (see Charles, _The Book of the Secrets of Enoch_,
1895, pp. xvii-xxiv). For Charles's _editio princeps_ of this work, in
1895, Professor Morfill translated two of the best MSS., as well as
Sokolov's text, which is founded on these and other MSS. In 1896
Bonwetsch issued his _Das slavische Henochbuch_, in which a German
translation of the above two MSS. is given side by side, preceded by a
short introduction.
_Analysis._--Chaps. i.-ii. Introduction: life of Enoch: his dream, in
which he is told that he will be taken up to heaven: his admonitions
to his sons. iii.-xxxvi. What Enoch saw in heaven. iii.-vi. The first
heaven: the rulers of the stars: the great sea and the treasures of
snow, &c. vii. The second heaven: the fallen angels. viii.-x. The
third heaven: Paradise and place of punishment. xi.-xvii. The fourth
heaven: courses of the sun and moon: phoenixes. xviii. The fifth
heaven: the watchers mourning for their fallen brethren. xix. The
sixth heaven: seven bands of angels arrange and study the courses of
the stars, &c.: others set over the years, the fruits of the earth,
the souls of men. xx.-xxxvi. The seventh heaven. The Lord sitting on
His throne with the ten chief orders of angels. Enoch is clothed by
Michael in the raiment of God's glory and instructed in the secrets of
nature and of man, which he wrote down in 366 books. God reveals to
Enoch the history of the creation of the earth and the seven planets
and circles of the heaven and of man, the story of the fallen angels,
the duration of the world through 7000 years, and its millennium of
rest. xxxviii.-lxvi. Enoch returns to earth, admonishes his sons:
instructs them on what he had seen in the heavens, gives them his
books. Bids them not to swear at all nor to expect any intercession of
the departed saints for sinners. lvi.-lxiii. Methuselah asks Enoch's
blessing before he departs, and to all his sons and their families
Enoch gives fresh instruction. lxiv.-lxvi. Enoch addressed the
assembled people at Achuszan. lxvii.-lxviii. Enoch's translation.
Rejoicings of the people on behalf of the revelation given them
through Enoch.
_Language and Place of Writing._--A large part of this book was written
for the first time in Greek. This may be inferred from such statements
as (1) xxx. 13, "And I gave him a name (i.e. Adam) from the four
substances: the East, the West, the North and the South." Thus Adam's
name is here derived from the initial letters of the four quarters:
[Greek: anatole, dusis, arktos, mesembria]. This derivation is
impossible in Semitic. This context is found elsewhere in the Sibyllines
iii. 24 sqq. and other Greek writings. (2) Again our author uses the
chronology of the Septuagint and in 1, 4 follows the Septuagint text of
Deuteronomy xxxii. 35 against the Hebrew. On the other hand, some
sections may wholly or in part go back to Hebrew originals. There is a
Hebrew Book of Enoch attributed to R. Ishmael ben Elisha who lived at
the close of the 1st century and the beginning of the 2nd century B.C.
This book is very closely related to the Book of the Secrets of Enoch,
or rather, to a large extent dependent upon it. Did Ishmael ben Elisha
use the Book of the Secrets of Enoch in its Greek form, or did he find
portions of it in Hebrew? At all events, extensive quotations from a
Book of Enoch are found in the rabbinical literature of the middle ages,
and the provenance of these has not yet been determined. See _Jewish
Encyc._ i. 676 seq.
But there is a stronger argument for a Hebrew original of certain
sections to be found in the fact that the Testaments of the XII.
Patriarchs appears to quote xxxiv. 2, 3 of our author in T. Napth. iv.
1, T. Benj. ix.
The book in its present form was written in Egypt. This may be inferred
(1) from the variety of speculations which it holds in common with Philo
and writings of a Hellenistic character that circulated mainly in Egypt.
(2) The Phoenixes are Chalkydries (ch. xii.)--monstrous serpents with
the heads of crocodiles--are natural products of the Egyptian
imagination. (3) The syncretistic character of the creation account
(xxv.-xxvi.) betrays Egyptian elements.
_Relation to Jewish and Christian Literature._--The existence of a
kindred literature in Neo-Hebrew has been already pointed out. We might
note besides that it is quoted in the Book of Adam and Eve, the
Apocalypse of Moses, the Apocalypse of Paul, the anonymous work _De
montibus Sina et Sion_, the Sibylline Oracles ii. 75, Origen, _De
princip._ i. 3, 2. The authors of the Ascension of Isaiah, the Apoc. of
Baruch and the Epistle of Barnabas were probably acquainted with it. In
the New Testament the similarity of matter and diction is sufficiently
strong to establish a close connexion, if not a literary dependence.
Thus with Matt. v. 9, "Blessed are the peacemakers," cf. lii. 11,
"Blessed is he who establishes peace": with Matt. v. 34, 35, 37, "Swear
not at all," cf. xlix. 1, "I will not swear by a single oath, neither by
heaven, nor by earth, nor by any other creature which God made--if there
is no truth in man, let them swear by a word yea, yea, or nay, nay."
_Date and Authorship._--The book was probably written between 30 B.C.
and A.D. 70. It was written after 30 B.C., for it makes use of Sirach,
the (Ethiopic) Book of Enoch and the Book of Wisdom. It was written
before A.D. 70; for the temple is still standing: see lix. 2.
The author was an orthodox Hellenistic Jew who lived in Egypt. He
believed in the value of sacrifices (xlii. 6; lix. 1, 2, &c), but is
careful to enforce enlightened views regarding them (xlv. 3, 4; lxi. 4,
5.) in the law, lii. 8, 9; in a blessed immortality, I. 2; lxv. 6, 8-10,
in which the righteous should be clothed in "the raiment of God's
glory," xxii. 8. In questions relating to cosmology, sin, death, &c, he
is an eclectic, and allows himself the most unrestricted freedom, and
readily incorporates Platonic (xxx. 16), Egyptian (xxv. 2) and Zend
(lviii. 4-6) elements into his system of thought.
_Anthropological Views._--All the souls of men were created before the
foundation of the world (xxiii. 5) and likewise their future abodes in
heaven or hell (xlix. 2, lviii. 5). Man's name was derived, as we have
already seen, from the four quarters of the world, and his body was
compounded from seven substances (xxx. 8). He was created originally
good: freewill was bestowed upon him with instruction in the two ways of
light and darkness, and then he was left to mould his own destiny (xxx.
15). But his preferences through the bias of the flesh took an evil
direction, and death followed as the wages of sin (xxx. 16).
LITERATURE.--Morfill and Charles, _The Book of the Secrets of Enoch_
(Oxford, 1896); Bonwetsch, "Das slavische Henochbuch," in the
_Abhandlungen der koniglichen gelehrten Gesellschaft zu Gottingen_
(1896). See also Schurer _in loc._ and the Bible Dictionaries.
(R. H. C.)