Assumption of Moses: Which AND Emended Form
Assumption of Moses: Which AND Emended Form
Assumption of Moses: Which AND Emended Form
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
TRANSLATED FROM THE LATIN SIXTH CENTURY MS., THE UNEMENDED TEXT OF WHICH IS PUBLISHED HEREWITH, TOGETHER WITH THE TEXT IN ITS RESTORED AND CRITICALLY EMENDED
FORM
EDITED
R. H.
CHARLES,
M.A.
pfi
TO
PREFACE
WKITTEN
in
Hebrew
the Christian era, this book was designed by its author to protest against the growing secularisation of the Pharisaic party through its fusion with
political ideals
beliefs.
Its
party to the old paths, which they were fast forsaking, of simple unobtrusive obedience to the
his
Law.
accordingly, the old ideals cherished and pursued by the Chasid and Early Pharisaic party, but which the Pharisaism of the first century B.C. had begun to
glorifies,
He
which
had
been
life
nation.
his
He
doom
to
which
country was hurrying under such a shortsighted and unspiritual policy, and laboured with
all
his
power
to stay its
downward
progress.
But
all in vain.
He
Cassandra.
The
viii
PREFACE
went on apace, and the
movement thus
It
Romans
in
70
of
A.D.
adds no
it
little
to
that
our
Lord,
possibly
contemporaneously
all
with
His
to
public ministry.
At
events,
it
was known
vii.,
ii.
and most
10-11 and
features
Matthew
It
xxiv.
29 (Luke
xxi.
25-26).
indicate
may
be well here
to
the
in
of
which
the Assumption.
critical
and more
of the
Greek and Semitic background which it pre supposes (2) in an exegesis of the text at once
;
detailed.
The Latin
Text.
critically edited
Ger
many.
But three
The fourth
Schmidt-Merx
is
but oftener arbitrary, alike in its emendations and With a view to carrying forward the restorations.
criticism of the Latin text, the present editor has
it
contains,
and
PREFACE
compared them with
Latin
like
ix
MS.
of
the Gospels,
and
s
also given
the
Itala
und Vul-
The
idiosyncrasies of
carefully summarised,
and
its
in
many
respects new.
At
the next stage of the investigation I have been obliged to part company with all scholars but
advocacy of a Hebrew original. That the book was derived from a Semitic original, it is no longer possible to doubt. That the language
Eosenthal in
my
in
of
it
question was Aramaic is, owing to the advocacy Schmidt-Merx, now generally accepted, but, as for I appears to me, on inadequate grounds
;
have shown, I believe, that it is possible to explain, from the standpoint of a Hebrew original, most of
the crucial passages adduced by Schmidt-Merx in
favour
an
Aramaic, and
that
at
issue.
have
shown
further,
hope,
that
whereas
many
of the passages
admit
of explanation
on either hypothesis, there are several which are explicable only on that of a Hebrew original.
II.
The
has
Exegesis.
in this direc
studies, very inadequate. from time to time, have appeared in indeed, and Germany England, but these have in every
tion
been
Short
PREFACE
of the book.
The occasional explanatory notes in the editions of Volkmar, Hilgenf eld, and Schmidt-Merx are, though
often
to
the
same
This exegetic meagreness of past on the subject has made the task of scholarship more editor arduous than might have the present It has, however, been beneficial in been expected.
necessitating a first-hand study of all the questions
As
have been obliged to differ from all preceding scholars on the interpretation of several of the
most important facts and chapters With what success I must leave
determine.
in
to
the
book.
to
others
a help to the reader, I should add that the exegetical notes are placed under the English trans
lation
As
and the
critical
is
text.
This
practice, however,
Finally, I wish here to express my deep grati tude to Dr. Cheyne for his revision of my proofs of a Hebrew original, and for suggestions connected
the entire
numerous
17
corrections.
CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION
1.
xiii-lxv
2.
Short Account of the Book (pp. xiii-xiv). Other Books of Moses (pp. xiv-xvii).
3.
Ceriani, Hilgenfeld,
Critical
Inquiries
Ewald, Langen,
Philippi,
Hilgenfeld,
Carriere,
Haupt,
Rb nsch,
Geiger,
Colani,
Wieseler,
Heidenheim, HausReuss,
rath,
Stahelin,
Drummond,
Dillmann,
Deane,
Rosenthal,
Schiirer,
Baldensperger,
Thomson, De Faye, Briggs (pp. xxi-xxviii). 5. The Latin Version of the Assumption Its
:
Linguistic Character
and
Critical
Worth
Version
xxviii-xxxvi).
6.
The
Greek
(2)
Latin
:
Translation
from
the
;
for (1)
(3)
we
must
misrendered
by
the
Latin
translator
(4)
through retranslation into Greek, the source of the incoherencies of the Text can, in some cases,
be
discovered
;
Fragments of the
7.
Greek
still
The Greek
:
from the Hebrew Original for Hebrew idiomatic Phrases survive in the Latin
;
(1)
(2)
;
Hebrew
syntactical
Idioms probably
survive
xii
CONTENTS
PAGE
(3)
we must
it
at times
translate,
Hebrew presupposed by
is
(4)
frequently
Hebrew that we
Paronomasias
them
(5)
appear
on
retranslation
8.
into
Hebrew
Book
(pp.
xxxviii-xlv).
original Assumption preserved only in a few Greek quotations (pp. xlv-1). 9. Dislocation of Chapters VII I. -IX. in the Latin Text from
their original position after Chapter Y. (p.
10.
li).
The Author
The Date
(pp. lv-lviii).
12.
Views of the
Author on Moses, Israel, the Messianic Kingdom, Good Works (pp. Iviii-lxi). 13. New Testament and later Writers acquainted with the Assumption
(pp. Ixii-lxv).
THE LATIN VERSION OF THE ASSUMPTION OF MOSES CRITICALLY REVISED AND EMENDED, TOGETHER WITH THE UNEMENDED LATIN TEXT OF THE SIXTH CENTURY MS. IN THE MILAN LIBRARY
.
.
.
53-101
SURVIVING ONLY IN A
103-110
.
. .
Ill
INDEX I. PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES AND OTHER ANCIENT BOOKS DIEECTLY CONNECTED OR CLOSELY PARALLEL WITH THE TEXT
INDEX
II.
113
114-117
INTRODUCTION
1.
Moses was, in all probability, a composite work, and consisted of two originally distinct books, of which the first was really the
Testament
Moses, and the second the Assumption. The former was written in Hebrew, between 7 and
of
THE Assumption
29
A.D.,
latter.
Greek
version of
in the first
Of
this
Matt. xxiv. 2 9
(?),
Acts
35;
St.
Jude
9,
16, 18
the Apocalypse of
of Alexandria, Origen,
and other
the
The fragments
in
Greek
printed
The
later
nearly forty years ago, when a large fragment of it was discovered by Ceriani in a sixth-century MS. in the Ambrosian Library in Milan.
xiii
xiv
INTRODUCTION
The book was written by a Pharisaic
Quietist,
and
forms a noble but ineffectual protest against the grow Its author was a ing Zelotic spirit of the party.
learned Jew, well versed in the Scriptures, and inti mately acquainted with the history of his nation
He was full subsequent to the close of the canon. of patriotism; thus he looks for the return of the
ten tribes, the establishment of the theocratic king
of
and
its
heaven, whence
should see
its
enemies weltering in the fires of gehenna. But though a patriot, he is not a Zealot the duty of
;
the faithful
is
God
in their behalf.
2.
There
literature
has
and
of
bearing
the
name
to
very Moses.
diverse
As
it
furnishes little or no
help
shall
the explanation of
content myself here present with a simple enumeration of the various Apocry phal books of Moses that have appeared in Jewish, Christian, and Gnostic literature.
the
book,
I
I.
In Jewish
(c) in
literature
(a)
In Hebrew,
(b)
in
Greek,
INTRODUCTION
(a)
xv
myn
in
(Paris,
1714 by
J.
1840
Two
71-78.
Some
see.
of these
books I
On
these legends,
1863); Bene-
(b)
Philo
Vita Mosis,
iv.
p.
39
and Josephus,
This book
Ant.
8. 4,
48.
Bi/3\osA6<ywvMva-Ti,Kwv
Mwvaecos.
is distinguished from the Assumption in the Acts of the Nicene Council, II. 18, where,
Kal ev {3i{3\(p
Aoywv M.vcmKwv
irpoetire Trepl
Mcovo-ecoS)
auro?
Ma)fO"7J9
avrov
r
060?
Kal
7Ti,o nJijLr)v
7r\TJpr]
avTos
OLKO^OfJirjO et,
have
INTRODUCTION
classed this book
as a Jewish
work, but
(c)
the evidence tells neither way. Dr. Leitner has translated into In Arabic.
German
pp.
184-212) from
of
Apocalypse
(d) In
Moses.
have found
it
use
Slavonic,
as
Mr.
there
of
Morfill
is
informed
"
me,
book
or
The Exodus
The
Moses,"
more
"
Prophet Moses, and how he ruled among the Saracens, and how he resisted King Pharaoh and Balaam the
Life of the holy
Wizard, and how he brought the People out of Egypt," Tichonravov, Pamiatniki
otrechennoi russJcoi literaturi,
i.
p.
233
sqq.
This writing has no connection (1863). with our Assumption. It is very rabbinic
in
character,
in
and possesses
many such
Josephus
s
features
common
with
account of Moses.
In Christian
literature.
s "Apocalypses
apocryphae Monument.
Sacr.,
(1866), V.
pp.
i.
1-23;
Ceriani,
pp.
2124.
An
also
been published in
INTRODUCTION
xvii
by the Mechitarists at Venice, pp. 1-23 (see James s Apocrypha anecdota, ii. 158, 159,
whence
have derived
really
belongs to the Adamic literature (see Eonsch, Das Buch der JubiThis book
laen,
pp.
xii.
470-474
Dillmann,
Herzogs
E.-K,
Mcovaecos).
to
Euthalius
monumcntorum
Photius
561),
(Amphil.
p.
and
Paul
earnv
48),
TrepiTOfjuj
OVT
this
aKpo/Bvaria
a\\a
fcaivrj
KTicris,
from
doubt
Apocryph.
this
There can be no
is
and that
composition,
of
the
general
contents
of
James s Apocrypha
literature.
anecdota,
ii.
p.
160).
III.
In Gnostic
See Epiphanius, Hcer. XXXIX. 5, where it is said that the Sethites used certain Books of
Moses
in addition to others
attributed to
Abraham and
xviii
INTRODUCTION
3.
Ceriani,
fasc.
i.
Monumenta
pp.
sacra
et
profana,
vol.
i.
(1861),
55-64.
To
this
scholar
belongs the honour of discovering and identifying these fragments of the lost Assumption of Moses.
In
this
edition
of
the
text
Ceriani
contented
himself with
This he did
with
such
passages, failed
to
lead
to
any material
edition
(see
Novum Testamentum
ed.
extra
canonem
ed.
(1866),
pp.
93-115; 2nd
(1876), pp.
107-135.
textual
To
we
owe the
finest
permanent and many of his emendations are accepted His contention, however, that the book as final.
Much
was written
way
But
fault-finding
is
ungracious
done the best work within his self-limited province, but has also been the first to do it. Ceriani,
indeed,
was
the
first
to
publish
the
text,
but
INTRODUCTION
xix
"Antonio
Hilgenfeld the book, as he himself rightly claims non M. Cerianio codicis latini,
: . .
libri
ipsius
"
(Mess.
273309,
(1869), pp. 435-468, Hilgenfeld has retranslated the Latin into Greek, and on the whole with
admirable
success.
On many
with him.
of these,
passages
have
found occasion to
reader will find a
differ
number
where the
critical
ground diverging from that supplied by Hilgenfeld. Volkmar, Mose Prophetic und HimmelfaJirt, eine
Quellefiir das
herausgegeben
im
Zusammenhang
uberliaupt
der
Apokrypha
1867).
und
der
Christologie
(Leipzig,
emendation
and occasionally
is
to its interpretation.
But
his
work
disfigured
many
errors,
by His
well-known partiality
him
to
wrest facts
Schmidt and Merx, Die Assumptio Mosis, mit Einleitung und erkliirenden Anmerkungen heraus
"
"
gegeben
ivissenscliaftliclie
I. ii.
Er-
(1868), pp.
Ill-
xx
INTRODUCTION
In this learned study Schmidt-Merx have rightly shown that the original of our book must have been written not in Greek, but in Semitic
152).
according to their view, in Aramaic. They were the first to recognise a Semitic not, indeed, but they were the first to apply this original,
hypothesis
consistently
arguments in favour
an
Aramaic
as
against a
Hebrew
How,
we
to explain
the correction of
faciem facientes, by editors who are That Hilgenfeld, advocating a Semitic original ? remove this and Fritzsche should Volkmar,
meaning
in
Hebraism
intelligible
from
correction
is
but
on
of
what
these
principle
editors
?
can
Their
is
we
as
explain
the
of
action
text
treatment
the
It
in
other
must be con just arbitrary. passages ceded, however, that their work, though often un trustworthy, is always stimulating and suggestive.
Fritzsche, Libri apocryphi Vet. Testamenti graece
In this
very serviceable
INTRODUCTION
originally published
xxi
by Ceriani, and facing it, on the opposite page, an emended text with critical footnotes. This work is based mainly on the labours of Hilgenfeld,
To
their con
added some
own.
It is a saner text
than
4.
CRITICAL INQUIRIES
of each of the
following writers
Assumption,
his
Ewald,
pp. des
Gfottinger gelehrte
Anzeigen (1862),
vol.
i.
110-118,1416-1429;
vol.
vi.
Gesch.
5161
It
(Eng.
trans.).
as derived
from a Semitic
(Hebrew or Aramaic).
Gaulonite.
The
"
slaves, sons of
slaves,"
Maccabean high
Langen, Das
pp.
priests,
is
Judenthum in
s
Paldstina (1866),
102-111
3.
Keusch
No.
written in Palestine in Hebrew, and shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
xxii
INTRODUCTION
Hilgenfeld, Zeitschr. f. ivissenscJi. Theol (1867), pp. 217-223; Messias Judaeorum (1869), Prolegom.
Ixx.
Ixxvi.
name on
in
A.D.
pp. xviii-xix.
West
circa
4445
work
to be interpreted of the
Herodian
princes.
is
The exegetical
"
side of Hilgenfeld s
weak compared with the textual. Haupt, Bemerkungen zu der editio princeps der
Moses,"
Himmelfahrt des
Latin text.
Z.f.W.T. (1867),
p.
448.
of a
few emendations
of the
to
the
Some
the
of
these are of
Version
purely
from
linguistic
side.
to the
emendation
of the
xiv.
In
pp.
and changes
Hilgenfeld s retranslation into various names under which the Assumption has
appeared
are
discussed
in
Z.f.W.T.,
pp.
542562,
INTRODUCTION
to the
xxiii
emendation
of the text.
by these, his
later
cannot be said to be
much
I emendations, only one or two appear probable. For the wellhere append a specimen of his work.
known
8,
Eonsch
proposes laetabimus or litabimus, or adjutabimus, or si lutabimus, or exaltabimus, but ultimately prefers Eonsch returned once again to this perpotabimus.
same Zeitschrift (1885), For further 102-104. references to this book, pp. see his Das Buck der Jubilaen, 273, 380, 480-482. Philippi, Das Buck Henoch (1868), pp. 166-191.
subject in vol. xxviii. of the
Colani,
L Assomption
de
Moi se
"
made
it
doubt the Aramaic origin of the book. any With Volkmar, he regards chap. VIII. as historical
and concerned with the tragic history of the Jews under Hadrian, and IX. as a veiled account of the
Jehuda ben Baba, who, after ordain seven of his ing disciples in a narrow gorge near This Usha, was put to death by the Eomans.
action of Eabbi
rabbi
is
1.
xxiv
INTRODUCTION
Usha.
c.
137138.
Jeru
As
salem in 70
quite immaterial.
of a writer
who
its
felt
its
it
could find
satis
which were
most inconclusive, treatise concludes with the words Toute difficult^, je crois se trouve levee
!
"
Carriere,
Moise"
Note sur
le
Taxo de
Assumption de
94-96).
See
(Revue de
Commentary, p. 35. Die jiingst aufgefundene Aufnahme Wieseler, Moses nach Ursprung und Inhalt untersucht
"
my
"
(Jahrbucher fur
648).
Varus.
by a Zealot, in Hebrew (?), shortly after the war of His interpretation of chap. VII. will be
p.
found on
24
in
my
notes,
and
of
Taxo on
p.
35.
Geiger, Judische Zeitschrift fur Wissenschaft und Leben, vol. vi. (1868), pp. 41-47. Geiger takes
chap.
VII. to be
a description of
the Sadducees,
adducing such phrases as regnabunt de his homines In pestilentiosi and tanquam principes erimus.
docentes se esse justos (D pns) there
is
a play on
INTRODUCTION
their
xxv
name.
The words
"
noli
me
tangere
empha
Heidenheim,
der Ascensio
Beitriige
zum
bessern Verstandniss
Moysis" (
Vierteljahrschrifl
fur
deutsch-
und
iv.
englisch-theologische
Forschuny und
Kritik, vol.
This is the most un (1871), pp. 63-102). trustworthy work it has been my duty to read in
all
Occasionally a few
ed.,
pp.
7680.
Hausrath
is
of
opinion
of
that the
Domitian
St&hQlm,Jakrbucherfur deutsche Theologie (1874), The book preaches not a Messiah pp. 216218.
Michael
is
to
new
Drummond,
48 4.
We
of
"
the Assumption.
is
Drummond
thinks that,
as there
no
sufficient
Hebrew
the
or
Aramaean
book, notwithstanding
Hebraic colouring,
dis
A.D.
was composed in Greek." Then follows an able cussion on the date, which he holds to be about 6
Beuss, Geschichte der h. Schriften des Alien Testa This writer does not ments (1890), pp. 738-740. commit himself to a definite date. He thinks that
xxvi
INTRODUCTION
words in VI.
beget succeeding him will rule for shorter do not necessarily determine the date.
(i.e.
the
7,
"He
Herod)
will
children,
periods,"
who
it
is
true,
reign longer
Der Verfasser konnte auch an Archelaus und Agrippa denken die ja allein fur
than their father.
"
hatten."
Dillmann,
Real-Encyc.
art.
Pseudepigraphen,"
2nd
ed., xii.
352, 353.
in
withEwald, Wieseler,andDrummond in assigning the composition of this book to the first decade after the
death of Herod.
whom
he
assails in
chap.
VII.
in Aramaic.
Bosenthal, Vier apocryphische Bilcher (1885), pp. This is a very interesting and fresh study 13-38.
of our book.
The writer
ascribes
fall of
it
to
the years
the temple.
The
He
the removal
of obscurities or corruptions
In only one or two cases, however, is it possible to admit that he is successful. On his view of chapter VII.
see
my
Schiirer,
We
Time of Christ (1886), II. iii. pp. 73-83 (Eng. trans.). have here an admirable account of this book.
INTRODUCTION
Schiirer refers its composition
after the death of Herod.
to the
first
xxvii
decade
Zealot,
Its writer
was a
and the
"
homines
pestilentiosi
in
is
VII.
are
the
Pharisees, to
whom
every word
unmistakably ap
plicable."
Baldensperger, Das Selbsfbewusstsein Jesu (1888), This writer regards the Assumption pp. 25-31.
as a Jewish manifesto, with
an apologetic, or rather
This aim
is
secret, polemical
aim.
to
glorify
Moses, the Law, and Judaism over against Christi The attributes ascribed to the Founder of anity.
Christianity are here, in large measure, assigned to
Moses.
(I.
He is the
"
mediator
"
man
who
is
intercedes daily on
(XL
16).
The Law
(XII. 4).
XII. 13), and Israel always to be pre-eminent The book was not written before 50 A.D.
Its author
was a
Quietist,
is
to be
Koman
procurators.
Deane, Pseudepigraplia (1891), pp. have here a very full and readable account
literature of the subject.
Its author
95-130.
We
of our
he takes to be
a Zealot.
century.
was written very early in the first Chap. VII. is directed against the Herodian
It
ivhich
Thomson, Books
Influenced
xxviii
INTRODUCTION
His Apostles (1891), pp. 14, 321-339, 440-450. We have here a scholarly treatment of the Assump
tion.
Its
date
is
fixed at 6 A.D.,
and
its
original
language as Aramaic.
strange.
It is
His interpretation
of
VII.
of
is
regarded as
a description
the
Pharisees, Sadducees,
and Publicans.
Juives (1892), pp.
Dillmann, Schiirer,
Taxo
the righteous kernel of the nation. Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles (1895), pp.
5-7, 18.
against
The Assumption
Its
is
a secret
title
polemic
as
Christianity.
Its author
A.D.
very
Zealot,
his
betrays
much.
to
was a
who wrote
sons
prior
in
70
Taxo and
seven
are
antithesis to Jesus
disciples,
and
them
in self-sacrifice.
Its fulfilment
The law
is
is
of perpetual obligation.
5.
THE LATIN VERSION OF THE ASSUMPTION ITS LINGUISTIC CHARACTER AND CRITICAL WORTH
:
The
in the
solitary
MS.
of this version
was discovered
Ambrosian Library at Milan by Ceriani, and published by him in his Mon. sacr. et prof., I. i.
INTRODUCTION
55-64,
on both
in
xxix
1861.
This
MS.
is
a palimpsest of the
sixth century.
sides.
page, and from twelve to eighteen letters in each line. There is no division of words, and the punc
which but rarely occurs, is above the line, not on it. Occasionally whole verses are inde
tuation,
cipherable.
originally from
the
that in this
MS.
we have the
of the
work
of the original
translator
Latin Version, but I shall show presently that this is not so. It is, in fact, only a fragmentary
It is not the original version,
it;
text
at
contains
renderings
and
attempts
better
which must primarily have been merely marginal glosses, but were afterwards introduced by
a copyist into the text.
this is to be
found in V.
six
lines
extends
to
The
graphies will be
(&) Again, in
found in VI.
2
VIII.
5,
XL
13.
of
XL
we
find
an actual correction
the copyist. The text reads, et hortatus est but the context requires et hortatus est Monse,
Monses.
to be
c,
Here,
first of all,
and
so,
to be impossible,
is
emended Monses
Eum
twice taken
xxx
INTRODUCTION
cum
in
as
(c)
the Bobbio
MS.
k,
in Mt.
9),
ix.
1, xiii.
48,
to
Ab
(XL
must be due
in
style
and orthography
to
I
century.
chief characteristics
can be paralleled from the old fifth-century Bobbio MS. k edited in 1886 by Wordsworth, Sanday, and
White.
I
s
have drawn
my
examples
of
k from Dr.
This N.T.
k.
Sanday
MS.
simply as
I
des
have
Der Vokalismus
Vul
gar -Lateins, and Konsch s Itala und which I refer the reader occasionally.
Vidgata, to
We
heads
worth.
shall
(i.)
now
under two
Its critical
(i.)
Linguistic Character.
:
palaeography and
Of the vowel
in
this
and
consonantal changes
occurring
MS.,
found
for a in profetiae,
I.
I.
cf. k,
Mt.
xii. 31,
blasfemiae.
ae for e in quaerella,
10
INTRODUCTION
XL
16; praeces, XI. 17;
:
xxxi
faciae,
cf.
XL
18.
This
is
of
;
frequent occurrence in k
xiii. 46,
Mt.
iii.
10, saecuris
praetiosus, etc.
:
a for e in ad
a for
i
(et),
X. 6
cf. k,
;
Mt.
iii.
3,
parata (parate).
XL
XL
for a in
cf.
Mt.
clabunt (dabant). cf. k, Mt. viii. 2, b for p in scribtura, I. 16 clibsis, III. 7 cf. lebrosus Schuchardt, Vokalismus des Vulgar ;
: ;
c for e in
cum,
c for s in
XL celares, XL
susu).
Lateins, 2
i.
:
125-126.
k,
cf.
Mk.
x. 10,
:
cum
k,
(eum).
4,
for Solaris
cf.
Mk.
i.
xv.
38, acutu (a
See Schuchardt,
:
op. cit.
cf. k,
Mk.
xiii.
ch for c in chedrio,
I.
17.
for t in
ad
(et),
73.
XL
12
cf. k,
i.
Mt.
viii.
19,
quod
(quot);
e for
cf.
Schuchardt,
:
op. cit.
125, 126,
cf. k,
Mk.
ix. 1,
quideni (quidain).
e for
ae in
scene,
I.
7; liena,
III.
XL
xi.
i.
4; Amorrei,
XL
Schuchardt, op.
cit.
226-235.
IX.
3,
e for
in contegerunt,
XII.
7: cf. k,
etc.
Mt.
x.
22,
odebiles
Mk.
ii.
ix. 32,
temebant,
:
See Schuchardt,
op. cit.
1 sgq.
XI.
4, for Solaris
cf. k,
Mt.
vi. 28,
quemodo,
etc.
XII.
6, et (ut).
forph always in
16); profetiae, I. 5 (III. 11, fynieis, I. 3 blasfemare, VIII. 5. So always in allolilorum, IV. 3 k, as Farisaei, blasfemare, etc.
; ;
XL
f for
tin ferrum
(?),
II. 4.
ge for qui in ingenationibus, V. 3. i for e in transio, I. 15; dimittes (demittes), II. 2; liena, III. 4; ducit (-et), III. 3, and passim scalciati, XL 12 cf. k, Mt. vii. 23, recidite (recedite), etc.
; :
for
in allofilorum, IV. 3
op. cit.
ii.
acrobistiam, VIII. 3
sqq.
i.e.
cf.
Schuchardt,
256
m for
o for
cohortes), VI. 8.
xiii.
Mt.
27,
zozania (zizania)
Mk.
C
xiii. 13,
hoc
(hie).
xxxii
INTRODUCTION
:
cf. k,
Mk.
Schuchardt,
r for
ii.
149
sqq.
pa for au in palam (?), II. 4. b in regnarunt (?), VII. 3. The converse change of b into found in k, Mt. xii. 14, exiebunt (exierunt).
s
r is
for ex in scalciati,
XL
12
cf.
Ronsch,
k,
s for
s for
for concelabunt
cf.
VII.
4.
Mk.
ix. 1,
adstans (adstant),
etc.
in tune, I. 15 cf. k, Mt. x. 11, digtus (dignus). t for s in eminent, IX. 2 cf. k Mt. ii. 4, scribit (-is), etc.
t for
: :
cunt, exegunt,
et, etc.
coguntur, VII. 2 ; ut, VII. 7; cresXII. 10 cf. k, Mk. xii. 32, ut for
:
for o in
cf.
k,
Mk.
op.
ix.
22,
ix. p.
41,
putaverit
;
(potaverit).
cit.
See
ii.
Ronsch,
cit.
465
cf.
Schuchardt,
91 sqq. v for b in intravit and oravit, IV. 1 acervus, VI. 5, X. 4 putav imus, VII. 8; suscitavit, VIII. 1 vindicavitur, IX. 7 (X. 2); conturvavitur, X. 5 altavit, X. 9 provata,
;
;
XII. 9
z for di in
exivit,
XII. 13
cf.
k,
Mt.
39,
i.
21,
salvavit
damnavit
cf.
(-abit), etc.
xiii.
Zabulus, X.
k,
Mt.
Ziabolus.
:
This
change
is
cf.
Ronsch,
of
k,
26
Eonsch,
op.
cit.
462-463.
note):
op.
cf.
cit.
The insertion
k
t
of
in
Monses
;
(III. 11,
cf.
Mt.
vi.
19, thensaurus
t
see Eonsch,
:
458-459.
Mt. xv. 31
;
Of
in Istrahel, III. 8, X. 8
see Eonsch,
460.
The omis
and
sion of one of
two doubled
IV. 9
alii
in profetis, IV.
11:
fili
where
ali
;
filii
are
usually
written
and
also
Mk.
INTRODUCTION
ix.
cit.
xxxiii
see
Schuchardt,
of
op.
464-466.
8.
The duplication
a vowel in
patruum, IV.
Another peculiarity
VIII. 2
etc.
tradibit
(?),
tremebit, X. 4
cf.
Je,
Mt.
ii.
6, prodibit,
Cf.
Eonsch,
op. cit.
291.
(&)
Syntax.
We
some peculiar
in
I.
Iste
ego, et
is
is,
used frequently
or et
ix.
ii,
Qui = et
X.
2.
6,
14,
it
III.
ille.
14,
Cf.
Mk.
10, where
= et
used as a passive, II. 3 judicare governs a dative, VI. 2 so also miser eor, XL 10. But the greatest departures from classical usage
is
; ;
Dominari
ace.,
X.
3.
For
Eonsch, Itala
ace.,
De
In XL 13 it takes the ace. also with the gen. where it has its ordinary meaning. For this usage In III. 10 elsewhere, see Eonsch, op. cit. p. 410.
it
= eW
with
dat.).
In
used
6,
V. 4
In
ace.,
is
it
should be the
IX.
ace.
where
it
it
should be the
ablat.,
In VIII. 4
xxxiv
INTRODUCTION
agent.
Secus occurs eight times as a preposition with the ace., I. 10, II. 2, 5, etc. Sine takes the
10.
p.
ace., I.
For
Kbnsch,
op.
cit.
412.
As regards conjunctions, nam is always used in a non-natural meaning, i.e. as a rendering for Se
for the instances, see
p.
xxxvii.
Enim
is
used in
same way, V.
5.
Finally, the ablative of the gerund is used for the For present participle in I. 9, V. 5, XT. 17.
432-
433.
list
is
far
For a discussion
sec. 6
and
sec. 7.
(ii.)
Critical
Worth.
This Version
is
very
to
literal.
when we come
is
the next
two
sections, in
which we
This, of course, is due frequently Hebrew in idiom. to the almost servile faithfulness of the Greek,
no
less
than
of
At
times,
careless,
We extremely trustworthy. shall now proceed to point out its defects under the following heads
as a general rule
it is
:
INTRODUCTION
(a)
xxxv
II.
Omissions.
Similitudinem, in
9,
after
omnem
Naue
in
through
X. 1
in
1
,
homoioteleuton.
15
;
Filius
before
originated
the
Greek, where
VII.
rov
omitted
9,
XII.
These
may
Others, such
as those in
in the
(&)
may
be due to defects
35
seem
to
have been
originally marginal glosses from a Greek hand. We have a most interesting (c) Dittographies. case of this nature in V. 6, where six lines of the
MS.
it
are
repeated
twice.
The
slight
differences
make
attempt, on the part of the Latin translator, to improve on his first But the scribe of our MS. incorporated rendering.
we have here an
3,
XI. 13,
Transpositions.
In addition to transpositions
I.
of such as ut et for et ut in
et testans in IV. 12, etc., of
8,
and
we have
the transposition
nostris
the
phrase
cum
infantibus
from the
very com In 5.
of
there is a transposition of the verb to the end the clause such as we find not infrequently in
xxxvi
INTRODUCTION
vii.
k: cL Mt.
remarkable transposition of all is the removal of chaps. VIII.-IX. from their right position after V.
to their present place.
be met
(e)
Enoch
Iviii.
Ixxxii., xci.
xciii.
These are
can
of
very frequent
occurrence.
Many
be dealt with
when we
confusions incidental to
understand the character of the language and the it. There are some cases of
sheer blundering.
But many
either in
sec. 6
Greek Version or
sec. 7.
in
the Hebrew.
and
(/)
Carelessness.
We
have instances
of careless
renderings in III. 11, 13 (see crit. notes, in loc.). The translator at times also renders the thought
cf.
meant.
?)
was made
its
and
restora
tion
by Hadrian
as
Eoman
name
Aelia Capitolina.
G.
Of the derivation
INTRODUCTION
transliterated, as chedrio,
III. 7,
I.
xxxvii
from 6\ltyis\ heremus, III. 11, from acrobistia, VIII. 3, from aKpo/Svarrla.
(2)
Thus
I.
= rfj
crKrjvfj
and
in scenae,
I.
ev
rfj o-Krjvfj
and in IV. 2, plebem hanc esse tibi plebem hanc exceptam, the second hanc is the Greek article thus the text = TOZ; \aov TOVTOV elvai aoi TOV \abv
:
TOV
cf.
K\KTOV.
For instances
of this
usage elsewhere,
Finally,
420-421.
quia, V.
= OTL
recitantis
we have an
TOV
rjfjLcis
al^fjiaXcoTicrOrivat,.
(3) Not infrequently we must translate, not the Latin text, lut the Greek which it presupposes, lut
which was misrendered ly the Latin nam must not be rendered by for
"
translator.
"
Thus
in the following
passages [I. 3], II. 4, 5, VIII. 2, 4, X. 11, XL 8, XII. 11, 12, for in all these instances it is a render
In ing of Se and must be translated accordingly. like manner enim, V. 5 = Se. Again, in VII. 7, we must render ab oriente usque ad occidentem, not
"
from east to
a</>
west,"
but
"
from sunrise
to
sunset,"
i.e.
rj\iov
is
amreXXoi To?
^XP
Svo/ievov.
The
Greek
XL
11,
we
presupposes
xxxviii
INTRODUCTION
For other instances, see
7.
day."
critical
notes
on
XL
of
be
into
can,
discovered.
;
Thus finem in
II.
opov, corrupt
for opicov
and adcedenfc
"
= TrapafB^crovTcu
will
transgress."
him, and followed a meaning of it inappropriate to the = a^O^aovrai, context. Again, in III. 4, ducent se
corrupt for a^Oiaovrai] and in V.
6, in
campo
= eV
In these passages I See the have corrected the Latin text accordingly.
dypw, corrupt for eV apyupw.
critical notes, in
loc.
still
pre
p.
107-
110.
7.
THE GREEK
The
original
others.
derivation
of
our
text
from
Semitic
was stoutly
Volkmar
But
It is
it
is
56, 57).
tained.
grounds
(Mess.
Thus Hilgenfeld
of
Jud., p.
urges
the absence
the
INTRODUCTION
xxxix
pronoun in the accusative after Deus creavit, in XII. 4 of the pronominal suffix after magistri In in V. 5, as reasons against a Semitic original.
;
my
critical
note
on IV.
6,
have
of
Greek
sionally
and
Latin
translators
suffix
shown Hebrew
that
occa
omitted
the
in
their
translation.
Hilgenfeld
other arguments do
for
consideration.
The
difficulties
he
discovers,
original,
own
imagination.
is
still
now
favour
an Aramaic or
of a
Hebrew
source.
Schmidt-
Merx, Colani, Hausrath, and Carriere decide for the former, and Rosenthal for the latter. Ewald
apparently
(G-ottinger
held
gelelirtc
both Anz.
,
views
at
different
times
1862,
pp.
4-7
1867,
pp.
110118).
Of the above scholars, minor degree it is only Schinidt-Merx, and in a Eosenthal, that have seriously treated the subject.
probable, but not certain.
In the Arcliiv
I.
ii.
f. ivissenschaftl.
of
111-152, Schmidt-Merx show, in a variety passages, how readily the text admits of rebut this proof in itself translation into Aramaic
,
is
wholly
xl
INTRODUCTION
Hebrew.
In two
the
however,
of
they
urge
that,
whereas
idiosyncrasies
Hebrew
found in
original.
The
first
instance
is
to
be
I. 10, where, according to these editors, the order of the Latin text can only be accounted
for
my
it
critical
note
is
possible to
But even,
to
the
other,
it
is
not
;
necessary
resort to the
argue with order of the original source. This is clear from I. 14, where, the and Latin Versions Greek though
are preserved and agree verbally, they do not agree
as
to order.
Hence
the
order
in
question
is
probably due to the carelessness of the translator. Moreover, other undoubted transpositions of the
text do occur
(cf.
III. 4, 5,
X.
5, crit. notes).
That
the Latin translator did not observe the order of the Greek before him,
in
we
see in
k,
numerous instances
pp.
the Codex
Bobbiensis,
see
xxxv xxxvi.
is
of alleged
Aramaic order
INTRODUCTION
the position of
xli
omnia
is
omnia in the phrase sancta vasa conformable to Aramaic, but not to Hebrew,
This
is
syntax.
justify the
For even in
made
directly
from the
Hebrew, and not as in the case of our text, which is derived from the Hebrew through the Greek,
this
in the
LXX.
1.
Genesis,
i.e.
in
xiv.
11,
xxviii.
15,
;
14
Now
in a careful translation
this
made
order
directly
non-Hebrew
can appear three times in one book, it shows that no value is to be attached to its single
in
occurrence
version
that
is
not immediately
is
often
careless
be,
to
boot.
Our
verdict
therefore
must
that
nished no adequate grounds for their thesis that the Assumption is derived from an Aramaic, and
not from a Hebrew original. It is now time to advance the grounds for a Hebrew original. These have gradually discovered
themselves in the course
of
long and
I
careful
study
of
this
book.
Whether
shall
be more
successful in
my
to
contention than
my
predecessors
must be
left
Rosenthal
(Vier apocryphische
xlii
INTRODUCTION
me
in in advocating this view.
preceded
of
One
or
two
been
his
restorations
are
good,
and
have
the
sequel, with
of his
suggestions I
The grounds, then, for a Hebrew original are (1) Hebrew idiomatic phrases survive in the text.
Thus
in
respectu
quo
respiciet,
;
I.
18
tribus
sanctitatis, II.
circumibo, II. 7
terrain patriae
;
suae, III.
homo de proximo
;
suo
testans
1
invocabat
testes, III. 1 2
;
de
isto, III.
dividen-
tur ad veritatem, V. 2
in sacerdotes vocabuntur
1
;
and facient
X.
2, are
implebuntur manus, pure Hebraisms. The Hebrew equivalents will be found in the critical notes on the various
facientes, VI.
passages.
of these
sions,
Now it is quite true that the majority could be paralleled by Aramaic expres but not all. Thus circumibo, II. 7 = I
"
will
protect,"
i.e.
miDS
(cf.
be explained from the Aramaic nor yet in sacer dotes vocabuntur, VI. 1 = D OPD l&np (cf. 1
11
5>y
Chron.
xxiii.
14).
(2) Syntactical
circumstantial
e.g.
the
4.
In
VIII.
2,
torquebit
there
may
;
be an
also in
(3)
In some
cases
we must
Latin
INTRODUCTION
text,
xliii
but
the
Hebrew
presupposed
mb>
successor
"
^dSo^o^ =
in
I.
must
"
ly be
it.
Thus,
rendered
minister,"
= ^&on
&6,
must be rendered by
it
pleased."
(4) Frequently
that
is
only
the
through
we can understand
source of corruptions in
the text,
Thus, in
IV.
9,
the
(MS. apud impossible tribum for in tribuum writes (MS. tempore natos) = Here the D onc? njn D*I:Q nv. genitive, cf. III. 5) two
corruptions
that
devenient
nationes
destroy
the
sense IIT
is
of
the
corrupt
is
and D^np
into
for
onutr.
harmony not only with itself, but brought also with similar statements in Josephus, 4 Ezra, and Philo. This restoration would be impossible
on the assumption of an Aramaic original. In V. 5, the equally impossible text, qui enim
magistri sunt doctores
ol
eorum
ol
= (with
Hilgenfeld)
$e
Bi$a(TKa\oi,
ovres,
/caBrjyrjral
avrwv
L^mm. Now the context of these words is against any mention of the rabbis or teachers here.
DrTHVD
But we
this
Hebrew
means
"
most appropriate sense. In the some are false in this preceding verse, priests verse, many are venal judges. Hence we see
gives
"
"
"
xliv
INTRODUCTION
nmiD
is
here merely a marginal but mistaken gloss that was later incorporated in the text. In X. 4 (see crit. note, p. 86) we can restore
sanity
to
that
the
text
through
retranslation.
In
X. 10
we have
In
inimicos
tuos
in
terram,
we have an
final
impossible
Israel s
statement.
After the
longer
enemies can no
torment, and
sight
of glorified Israel.
Now
on
^2.
But the
Din
was some
how
lost,
literated eV 7$,
and VQ was partly rendered partly trans and this in turn by in terram. ij is
adduce one more passage.
.
. .
In XII.
7,
contegerunt
we have an
inadmissible text.
of the corruption
comes
to light
avve/Br)
if
we
retranslate.
Thus the
words = eTTieiK&s
topi
JJLOL
eXeo? avrov
JD
= non
TIIN
^Nin.
before non, and with this simple change we get an He was pleased to call me unexceptionable text
"
in His
compassion."
See pp.
is
discovers itself
on retransla-
INTRODUCTION
tion into
xlv
Hebrew
in VII. 3,
where
it
is
said of the
p nv.
Sadducees (n^pm), dicentes se esse justos, i.e. D This has already been pointed out by Geiger.
recurs in VII. 6 (see
p.
It
27).
it
On
is
no longer possible
It
of this book.
may
from what precedes, that that original was in Hebrew and not in Aramaic.
How
far
Hebrew was
say.
is
impossible to
generally
My
retranslations
presuppose
such
a
is
character,
8.
OF MOSES.
THE PRESENT BOOK IN REALITY A TESTAMENT THE ORIGINAL ASSUMPTION PRE SERVED ONLY IN A FEW QUOTATIONS.
lists of
In the
of
Testament
Moses
In
(AiaOrjicri
Mcovaeax;)
l
Avd\r)fyis
Mwvo-ews).
in
the
"
Books,"
1
and
the
Synopsis of
List
of
This book is so named in the Ada, tiynodi Niceen, ii. 18, 20 ; the Stichometry of Nicephorus and the Synopsis of Athanasius as the Adsccnsio Mosis in Origen, cU Printip. iii. 2. 1; as the Assumptio Mosis in Didymns Alex, (sec p. 108 for quotation); as
; :
p.
108).
xlvi
INTRODUCTION
of stichoi in these
is
number
ascribed
two books
is
not given,
Nicephorus,
which
assigns
to
them
respectively
stichoi.
In this con
made by
come down
of
to us is in point of fact
Testament
(will)
it is
already seen,
of Niceea
under the title Ava\r)tyis Mcovaews, it may be assumed that both these designations were the
two separate divisions of one and the same work, the first of which has been preserved, whereas
titles of
belong to the second." My study of the Latin Version and the Greek fragments has led me to accept this
all
Assumption mentioned in the above lists are to be regarded not as two separate divisions of one and
"
"
Before
we adduce
the
owing
to
scanty amount of
cannot be
many
we must
the above
first
"
identification of
Testament
with the
pp.
Book
of
Jubilees
is
(Das
Buck der
Jubilaen,
480, 481)
contrary
to existing
evidence.
We
INTRODUCTION
xlvii
1100
Now,
this
"
Testa
in the
same
if
list,
4300
s
are assigned
is
to
Genesis.
Hence,
Eonsch
identification
Genesis should be nearly four times larger But since, as a matter than the Book of Jubilees.
right,
of fact, it is
considerably smaller,
it
is
needless to
Having disposed
sion
of
this
objection,
we
now
Ver
and
the
Greek
fragments
in
the
Fathers
originally independent which were works, subsequently edited together. This conclusion is probable from the following
facts
:
The book quoted by St. Jude, by Clement of Alexandria, and later Greek writers, was wholly con
(i.)
cerned with the Assumption of Moses and incidents This we take to have been the connected with it.
original
(ii.)
is
in
of
reality a
Moses."
Testament,"
and not an
to
"
Assumption
for
(i.e.
Indeed,
it
appears
the
"),
be quite opposed
;
to this claim
(a)-
made on Moses s
to
behalf
According Testament
"
Latin
Version
to die
the
Moses was
in
I.
an ordinary
"I
death.
Thus
am
passing
away
to sleep
with
my
fathers even
xlviii
INTRODUCTION
in
In presence of all the people." III. 13 the tribes speak of Moses s death
the
"I
original sense.
"
From
my
assumption
times."
We
shall touch
of the intruded
word
(b)
"
assumption."
description
of
the
conclusion
of
the
Testament appears to have been preserved in a Catena on the Pentateuch edited by Franc. Zephyrus, and quoted in Fabricius
in his
"
Cod. Pseud. V. T.
ii.
Est
quidem
in
Apocrypho
Mysticoque
ut
nullus neque morientem legislatorem neque locum videre potuerit, ubi cadaver conder-
Here no Assumption seems to be implied, but only an extraordinary disap pearance of Moses s body, such as is
etur."
recorded in
writer
Deut.
xxxiv.
5,
6.
If
this
had
been
acquainted
with
the
original Assumption, in
of
which the
details
re-
Moses
ascension to
heaven were
INTRODUCTION
xlix
(iii.)
Moses
this
Assumption of were subsequently edited in one book. Of From my editing we find a trace in X. 12:
"
"
"
and the
"
death
assumption
"
until
"
His advent/
etc.
Here
the word
assumption
i.e.
the Assumption.
of
In
the
thirteenth
section
Yassiliev
Anecdota Graeco-Byzantina, entitled Palaea historica, an O.T. history of events from Adam to Daniel,
of
of
"
Moses, part seems to be ultimately derived from the Testament," and part from the Assumption
"
"
properly so called.
The following
close to the
lines (pp.
"
257
"
Testament
KCLI
T?}?
Te\evrf)s
^Irjo-ovv
MwvaewsJ]
elirev
Trpos
real
TOV
Navi
Ave\0(0/jLev
V
Trjv
TO) opei.
J}? <f7ra77eA/a9
Trpos avrov.
Kdr6\0e
Mcovcrfjs
TOV
\aoi>,
tcai
avayyetXov a^TOt?
TOV j3[ov
on
Be
MCOVO-TJS
ra
re\7j
K7ijcraTO.
Here
Moses dismisses Joshua, and dies apparently an But according to the Assumption ordinary death.
proper (see quotation from Clement Alex.
p.
107),
INTRODUCTION
Joshua
of
both
and Caleb were present when the Moses took place. The words that
ulti
teal eTreiparo
(
= o-rcrfvco/jba)
avrov
6
Ta>
\da) iva
6eo7roir)0a)cri,v
dp^io-Tpdrrjyo^
irpovrd^ei,
avrbv Kal
o-vv(TTel\at, KOI
avdla-raro avra)
KOI Sie/jbd^ovTO.
7r6TlfJL7JO-eV
dyava/crrjo-as ovv o
ETTlTlfJia (76
CLVTOV elTTCOV
OVTft)? r)TTr)07J 6
KVplOS,
{3d\.
Kal
o
dvTlK6lfj
Be
dp^dyyeXos Mt^arj\
cruvecrreiXev TO
XpiaTov
(v.)
rj/jicov.
This editing of the two books in one was probably done in the first century, as St. Jude
draws upon both in his Epistle (see p. Ixii). The statement of Josephus (Ant. iv. 8. 48) is interesting: vetyovs al<f)Vi8iov vjrep avrov o-rdvros, d^av
"
Kara TWOS
(frdpayyos.
Feypafa
firj
Se avrov
eV
$1 V7rep/3o\rjv rrjs
avTov aper?}? Trpo? TO Oelov avrbv dva%copr)crai, elTrelv." It holds fast to Deut. ToXfjirja-tocTiv
is
aware
of
the
new
claims
made on Moses
the
Does
account of the
Transfiguration
point in
any
?
Moses
Assumption
INTRODUCTION
9.
li
The interpretation
of
these
two chapters
will
remain an impossibility so long as scholars attempt I to deal with them in their present position.
have given, in the notes on pp. 28-30, the grounds which necessitate this new departure in the exegesis
of the book.
10.
determining the religious party in Judaism to which the author First of all, however, it is clear that he belonged.
difficulty
There
some
in
for (1)
he looks forward to
behalf of Israel,
God on
dwells
of a
theocratic
kingdom on
the future
(3)
3-8).
(2)
He
on
He
attacks
the
Sadducean party
in
the most
bitter
terms (VII.).
Secondly.
He was
it
not a Zealot.
--
But
is
which
precedes; for (1) the writer s complete silence as to the Maccabean rising forms an emphatic censure
lii
INTRODUCTION
to arms.
of their appeal
This
writer
silence
is
all
the
thoroughly Thus acquainted with the Maccabean movement. his text shows an intimate acquaintance with Books
I.
more impressive
as
the
was
and
II. of
facts
will
fail to
perusal an accurate
and detailed knowledge of Maccabean history. have here, in fact, to deal with the work, not
We
of a
popular enthusiast, but of an accurate scholar. (2) he thus shows his whilst aversion to the aims And,
and method
of
the Maccabees,
in other words, to to
a militant Judaism,
he
is
careful
indicate his
own
flesh.
admirations.
He
will not
is
trust in
an arm
of
Thus
not one
who
takes up
arms on behalf
most
faithful unto
bitter persecution
no hand in
self-
See notes defence, committed his cause unto God. on pp. 3238. (3) The aim of such a description
as appears in IX.
is
to indicate
one
growing corruption of the Pharisaic party by pol See notes on pp. 34, 35. itical aims and methods. is X. 3-10 (4) wholly against the idea of a Zealot
author.
This passage, in
fact,
confirms
all
that has
INTRODUCTION
been
said
is
liii
above.
to
The theocratic
or
Messianic
be introduced not by the militant acts kingdom of the saints, but through the direct intervention of
God.
Thirdly.
He was
have supposed. (1) The entire book is interpene See trated with national hopes and aspirations. The ideal of the Essene was indi especially X. 8.
vidualistic
and
ethical,
is
and not
by God
national.
(2)
The
greatest interest
temple.
Thus
and
it
was
frequent
V.
3,
profanations
are
its
dwelt upon
(II.
4,
VI.
1),
destruction by Varus
an
Essene,
its
courts
(Joseph. Ant.
carefully
Thus
it
is
At
a later period they are said to be imperfect (IV. 8). It is observed in II. 8 that sacrifices were offered
to idols,
and
in V.
that,
Now
is
the temple
Essene, who disapproved wholly of animal sacrifice wa KaraOvovres), and esteemed (Philo, ii. 457, ov
their
sacrificial
meals
as
far
transcending
any
liv
INTRODUCTION
sacrifice
temple
blessed
in
worth (Ant.
xviii.
1.
5).
(4)
According
is
but the
Essene heaven was beyond the ocean (Bell. Jud. ii. 8. 11). Again, Gehenna is the place of punish
ment
of
We
know
14) implies a disbelief in the Essene doctrine of the pre-existence of all souls
(Bell Jud.
ii.
8. 11).
remains no further difficulty in determining the religious party to which he belonged. He was clearly
a Pharisaic Quietist.
This is shown by the facts which we have enumerated above in the refutation
of the preceding views.
He was
a Pharisee of a
While
political
his
party was
interests
voice to recall
fast committing itself to and movements, he raised his them from the evil ways on which
they had entered, and besought them to return to the old paths, but his appeal was made in vain, and so the secularisation of the Pharisaic movement in
fall of
Jerusalem.
INTRODUCTION
11.
It
is
Iv
THE DATE
Volkmar and
Colani,
Their only ground for so doing is to be found in the historical character of chaps.
A.D.
137138
,
VIII. IX., which, they allege, is a veiled narrative of the persecution under Hadrian. The reader will
see that, like these writers, I too have accepted the
historicity of these chapters,
Antiochus Epiphanes. See notes on pp. 2838. If this has been proved satisfactorily, as I hold it
no longer possible to advocate a But even should the proof second-century date.
to be,
then
it is
be deemed inadequate, insuperable difficulties still confront the upholders of such a view. For, from
internal evidence,
appears that the book must have been written before 70 A.D. This we shall
it
now proceed
temple
is
to show.
A.D.
stand
till
the
establishment of the
theocratic
kingdom (I. 17). See note on p. 7. (2) The temple was still standing when the book was
This
if
written.
tion that
is
to be inferred
fallen,
it
had
in silence.
have
Ivi
INTRODUCTION
;
been passed over for all the fortunes of the temple, even its temporary profanations by a faithless priest
hood, are carefully recorded. V. 3, 4, VI. 1, 9, VIII. 5.
fall, it left
See
II. 4, 8, 9, III. 2,
When
subsequent Jewish literature, but particularly in that of the next sixty years cf. the later portions of the Apoc. Bar. and 4 Ezra. The views, therefore, of Volkmar,
:
an ineffaceable mark on
Colani,
other scholars are agreed as to its com position before 70 A.D., but differ with each other
Now,
all
which
it
should be assigned
of
between 4
ences
of
2,
l
B.C. arid
70
A.D.
Many
these differ
and may therefore be at once discounted. So far we have determined only the latest limit
composition,
i.e.
of
70
A.D.
is
There
3
B.C.
is
;
no
for
difficulty
as to its earliest.
This
0),
Herod
is
/-
of
Varus already
(VL
9).
(VIII.
1).
B.C.
Thus the
and 70
A.D.
limits of composition
lie
between 3
Thus Hilgenfeld assigns the book to the years 44-45 A.D. Schmidt-Merx to 54-64 Fritzsche to 50-60.
1
;
INTRODUCTION
for a nearer determination.
"
Ivii
ment,
And
succeeding him, will rule for shorter periods," was for Philip and Antipas true of Archelaus alone Hence the book their father. than reigned longer
;
must have been written before these princes had 1 reigned for thirty-four years, i.e. before 30 A.D.
Thus the date
and 30
A.D.
of
composition
limits
lies
between 3
be defined
B.C.
But the
may
still
more
sons
closely.
should
For the prediction, that Herod s rule for shorter periods than their
from the general expectation that
father,
may
:
siderations
the sons of such a wicked king could not long pre serve their authority but still more (6) from the
;
actual deposition of Archelaus after a short reign of ten years 4 B.C. 6 A.D., an event which would
naturally be construed by our author in the light of a divine judgment, and suggest to him the pre
diction
which appears in the text as to the impend and Antipas. Hence, however,
interpret
we may
it
the
"
four
hours
that
"
in
VII.
of
may
1
be
fairly
concluded
part
these
Ewald, Wicseler, Drummond, Dillmann, and Schiirer refer the composition of the book to the first decade after 4 B.C. This conclusion they arrive at by pressing the words "the times will
be ended
in VII. 1. For the way in which Reuss, followed by Baldensperger and Rosenthal, seeks to evade the conclusions that naturally follow from VI. 7, see the note on that verse (p. 22).
"
Iviii
INTRODUCTION
the
earliest
limit
of
composition
is
7 A.D.
7-30
A.D.
12.
VIEWS OF THE AUTHOR ON MOSES, ISRAEL THE MESSIANIC KINGDOM, GOOD WORKS
Moses was prepared, from
before
Moses.
the
mediator of
14, III.
12).
(I.
he was Israel
intercessor with
God
(XL
at
11, 17)
many
things
hands in Egypt, the lied Sea, and the When about to die, he chose wilderness (III. 11).
their
Joshua in his stead (X. 15), apparently as the His death prophet promised in Deut. xviii. 15.
was an ordinary one (I. 15, III. 13, X. 12, 14); but no single place was worthy to mark the place of his burial, for his sepulchre was from the rising
to
the
setting sun,
to
the
But
;
to Israel
God
to
(XII. 6).
Israel.
is
God
own
people
(I.
(I.
:
12): the
12)
and Moses
INTRODUCTION
lix
His people
the
(I.
14),
in like
establishment of
Israel s history
is
kingdom
then shortly summarised (I. 17). from the time of the Exodus to the split between
the two
kingdoms.
From
this
time
the writer
tribes
"
two
and
the
ten.
"
tribes
is
(II. 4),
Judah
captivity
5).
is
attributed to the
In due
time
but grieve over their imperfect sacrifices (IV. 8) imperfect, apparently, because the ten tribes are not
with them, though they are increasing and multi But plying in the land of their captivity (IV. 9).
the history of restored Judah becomes an evil one,
namely, owing to the Sadducean priesthood (V.), but a righteous kernel still survived who were faithful
to the
law (IX.
4).
of
Antiochus (VIIL), and the withdrawal of the Chasid party from political alliances (IX.). The Maccabean
king-priests
are
alluded
his
to,
and
their
successor
Herod
(VI.).
With
death, and
probably the
deposition of Archelaus,
own
period.
Ix
INTRODUCTION
that of prediction.
history to
The
theocratic or
repentance
Moses,
1
(I.
17).
of
i.e.
God
be
will
it
of
Israel,
observed,
8).
not
of
(X.
in
the
mind, discovers
As they
were made
9),
to the twelve
all
collectively (III.
and
8).
they should
be
glorified
together
(X.
Thus
when
the
theocratic
tribes
were to be restored.
national
During were to be
to
this
kingdom
Israel s
8).
destroyed (X.
be exalted to heaven (X. 9), whence they should see their enemies in Gehenna
Finally, Israel
was
(X. 10).
The Messianic or
preceding paragraph
1
Theocratic
Kingdom.
In the
various
in X. 12 (see note).
This seems to be the period meant by the 250 times spoken of As \ve have no means of determining the
length of the interval between the death of Moses and the Christian era, according to our author, we cannot determine the date of the
expected advent of God, which was to take place 1750 years after If we may accept Josephus s chronology for this s death. period, then the date of the Divine Advent was to be in the year
Moses
as
75 or 88 or 107, according as we regard 1675 years (Ant. xx. 10. 2) having elapsed between Moses s death and the Christian era, or
xi. 1. 1
4. 8).
Bell.
Jud.
s
vi.
4.
10. 1), or
(See
Herzog
R.E.
xvii. p. 460.)
INTRODUCTION
references to this
Ixi
in
our
7,
author.
There
is
Indeed, in X.
the
author
:
will
Gentiles
to
(see
note,
in
loc.).
This
may
of
be
due
the
a
fact
that
of
the
conception
the
Messiah, as
man
war,
was gaining
more and more acceptance amongst the Pharisees, and was thus of a nature to promote the grow Now, it is ing secularisation of Pharisaism.
against the latter evil that the author
directed.
s
writing
is
Good Works.
On
s
man s
righteousness, which bulks so largely in Jewish See my edition of literature from 50 A.D. onwards.
9, notes.
So far
from representing man s righteousness as involving an undoubted Pharisaic merit over against God, doctrine of the first century of our era, our author
represents
declaring
:
but in
Not
pleased to
(XII.
It is
declares to Joshua
(XII.
8).
Ixii
INTRODUCTION
13.
NEW
Jude unquestionably was acquainted both with the Testament of Moses and with the Assump
St.
tion,
complete book.
Thus
p.
St.
Jude
9 is derived
from the
of
latter
see
107.
From
to
is
borrowing
we proceed
evidence
very strong.
VII.
of several clauses
St.
Jude 16
is
stance with V.
5,
of
We
shall here
parallel
from
our
text.
Ovrol
elcn
joyyvcrral,
losi),
fjLefjL^rLfjLoipoi
(Ass.
Kara ras
liridvfJLta^
(TTOfjia
avT&v XaXet
et
vTrepoy/ca (VII.
et
eorum
et
os
manus eorum
loquetur ingentia), Oavud^ovres TrpoercoTra, ax^eXeta? Xdpiv (V. 5, mirantes personas locupletum et accipientes rnunera).
In
St.
Jude
18
the
"
mockers
"
homines
pestilentiosi
loc.).
The
"
ungodly
men
"
who
in
Now,
we should observe
INTRODUCTION
that
Ixiii
the
accounts in
both
The classes of evil-doers nominally prophetic. in the last dealt with are those who shall be
time,"
are
"when
the times
The writer
our text.
or
have used
Thus
are
10, 11
both
equally
dependent
on
the
original
latter-
Assumption.
alternative.
rjyovjjLevoi,
Some
Thus
ev
rjSovrjv
TTJV
^epa
rpvtyijv,
and
avrwv
suis
affluentes, in conviviis
8,
Habebimus
2 Peter
Compare
also
3 with VII.
6.
There are some remarkable parallels between St. The Stephen s speech in Acts vii. and our text.
most remarkable
is
"Who
suffered
many
Eed
Sea,
and
in
the wilderness
verbally
TroiricrcLs
during forty
years,"
for
the
most
part
ev
with
rf)
repara KCU
6a\dcro"y,
arjijiela
Al yvirrw KCU
errj
EpvOpa
Kovra.
ical
is
ev
rfj
epijfjLqy
reacrapd-
The
likeness
We
36
is
derived
is
from our
e
or
that III.
1 1 b
of
our text
Ixiv
INTRODUCTION
The evidence
l
interpolated.
is
of
word
"
suffered."
Again, in III.
the words,
that
we should not
transgress (God s)
command
us,"
to
the
them
is
implied, and
whom
:
they came,
facts
"
is
expressly stated.
in
.
Now,
Acts
vii.
these two
are
is
distinctly given
38, 39
This
he that was
spake
to
who
received
to
whom
III.
our fathers
is
would not
prediction
be
of
obedient."
Finally,
there
the
the
captivity
in
citation of the
prophecy of
Amos
to
that effect in
VII. 43.
29
(cf.
Mark
xiii.
24-25;
5
of
Luke
xxi.
2526)
is
is
either dependent on X.
common
xxiv. 2 9
&a)(Tl,
:
This
clear
if
we compare Matt.
T)
0-6\1]V7}
.
0V
TO
^7709
ol darepes
rwv ovpavwv
G-a\ev9iicrovTai, with X. 5
1 This idea of Moses s suffering in connection with Israel is found in the Jalkut (translated by Heidenheim, Deutsche Vicrteljahr-
schrift
otfenbar
Herr der Welt, Moses sagte meine Mlihe und mein Leiden, das ich mit ihnen (den Israeliten) zu erleiden hatte, bis ich ihnen die Lehre eingepragt hatte."
"
(1871),
p.
217).
und bekannt
.
1st dir
INTRODUCTION
(Sol) in tenebras convertet se,
Ixv
with Matt. xxiv. 21, see notes on pp. 80, 81. On the above grounds we conclude that this book
was known
to
and
of
and most probably to the writers 2 Peter and Matt. xxiv. 29 (Mark xxii. 24-25
of
Acts
vii.,
Luke
It
xxi.
also
to
Ixxxiv.
25:
see notes in
(pp.
12, 13).
For
etc.,
107-110.
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
(And
it
came
to pass in the
life
of
Moses),
That
is,
1.
See
crit.
note.
five
2.
Two thousand
hun
dredth year. This date of Moses death is of great importance in Jewish chronology. If we com pare it with the various dates assigned to this event in the Massoretic text, the Samaritan, the Book of Jubilees, and Josephus,we shall find that no two of these authorities agree. Thus the death of Moses is variously dated according to
that the Massoretic chronology, which sets it down to 2706, either did not exist at the be ginning of the Christian era, or else was only one of the many
Anno
Assumption of Moses
.
Book of Jubilees
Josephus, Ant.
,,
viii. 3. 1
or
viii. 3. 1
com
.
soretic chronology was wholly wanting in traditional authority as late as 50-100 A.D. a cir cumstance that is incompatible with its assumed ancient origin. Thus according to Exod. xii.
LXX
From
40 (Mass, text), Israel is said to 430 years in Egypt alone whereas, in the
have sojourned
;
these variations among authorities before and after the Christian era, it appears
Samaritan, this period embraces also the sojourn of the patri archs in Canaan before their
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
the
two thousand
five
and
of
of Nun, a man approved of the That he might be the minister of the people the tabernacle of the testimony with all its
Here the descent into Egypt. Samaritan is supported by the LXX., and substantially also by the Pharisaic Book of Jubilees. This reckoning, further, is fol
lowed by
St. Paul, Gal.
ii.
Onom.
Amman
iii.
17,
2.
15.
urbs Arabiae nobilis, in qua habitaverunt olim Rafaim, gens Anrmon antiqua ; and 92, 2 trans Jordanem in tribu Gad. Haec est Amman de qua supra
:
a later date
in the
Targum
xii.
of
Jonathan on
illus-
Some
Massoretic reckoning Philo, Quis rcr. div. 54 (i. 511) Josephus, Ant. i. 10. 3 ; Bell. Jud. v. 9. 4; Acts vii. 6 but all these pas
;
"
note.
sages are either directly drawn from or based upon Gen. xv. 13, where 400 years are spoken of, except that in Bell. Jud. v. 9. 4, where the context is indecisive either way. The MS. inserts here 3. "But according to the reckon ing of the East ... of the de parture of the Phoenix." This verse was interpolated by the Greek translator in the West. It may originally have been a
:
6. Called to him Joshua the son of Nun. These words are drawn from Deut. xxxi. 7. For Approved of the Lord. phrase cf. Acts ii. 22; 2 Tim. ii.
15.
7.
critical
56).
This
rvpiov,
"
nnyn
?nx,
as
would
"
Greek marginal
note (p. 54).
4.
gloss.
See
crit.
inserts here the people went forth after the exodus which was made by Moses to Amman across the See crit. note. The Jordan." Amman here mentioned ap pears, as Ronsch(^./. W. 7*. 1884, pp. 555, 556) points out, to be a town in the tribe of Gad. See
:
The MS.
"When
appear from the words follow with all its holy things. ing These holy things were the ark and the tables of testimony. Only for the addition of this clause the Hebrew might have been ijno VnK="tent of meet
:
where God spoke to Moses, Exod. xxxiii. 7-11, etc., and to Moses and Joshua in Deut. xxxi. 14-23. These two differing names of the tabernacle were derived from the two different purposes which it served.
ing,"
CHAPTER
holy things,
8.
I.
6-12
And
That
it
should be given to them according to the covenant and the oath, which he spake in the tabernacle to
give
by Joshua saying to Joshua these words 1 0. (Be strong) and of a good courage according to thy might so as to do what has been commanded
(it)
:
"
God."
11. So
Lord
of
the world.
12. For
He
hath
And
that he
might bring
;
the oath.
to Joshua by God, but in Deut. xxxi. 6, 7 it is Moses that first uses them. 12. Created the world on be
This
a favourite expression of the writer, cf. III. 9, 17, XII. 13. We must restore it also in II. 7. See crit. note in loc. (pp.
XL
62, 63).
Which He spake in
half of His people. This is the prevalent view of Judaism from the first century of the Christian era onwards. Cf. 4 Ezra vi. 55, 59, vii. 11, and my note on
the taher-
18.
These Saying to Joshua. words are to be connected "He immediately with ver. 6 called to him Joshua
:
saying to
Joshua."
The
inter
vening words are of the nature of a parenthesis. 10. (Be strong] and of a good See crit. note (pp. courage.
These words go back 56, 57). immediately to Deut. xxxi. 7, from which also part of ver. 6
is
behalf of the righteous in Israel, expressed in Apoc. Bar. xiv. This con 19, xv. 7, xxi. 24. ception reappears in the Shep herd of Hernias in a form adapted to its Christian en vironment. There it is the Christian Church to which the world owes its creation Vis.
is
:
ii.
derived.
also
Vis.
i.
r
,
1.
6,
iv., v.
The
Blameless unto God. See crit. note (pp. 57, 58). For the phrase cf.Deut. xviii. 13;2Sam.xxii. 24. 11. So saith the Lord. Moses here declares God to be the of the words Be speaker strong, etc. In Josh. i. 7 ; Deut. xxxi. are addressed 23, they directly
larger view that the world was created on account of mankind, is found in Apoc. Bar. xiv. 18
4
Ezra viii.
xii.
1,
Mand.
eveKa TOV avdpu-rrov, and is the prevalent one in post- apostolic writers. Cf. Justin Mart. Apol.
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
created the world on behalf of His people.
13.
But
He was
not pleased to manifest this purpose of creation from the foundation of the world, in order
that the Gentiles might thereby be convicted, yea
own
10,
;
41
Alexandrian Judaism not as the prerogative of one or more favoured souls, but as the com
Contra
13.
mon
pleased. (See crit. note, p. 58.) The sense of the verse appears to be God was unwilling to reveal the fact
:
Was
not
See Slav. En. xxiii. 5. This was the prevailing doctrine of later Judaism.
From
world.
the
that the world was created on behalf of Israel in order that the Gentiles might be put to a com
in their reasonings on this subject. Whatman could not discover (Eccles. iii. 11, viii.
17),
See
crit.
Mediator.
of
The word
arbiter
is is
yuecri TTjs,
mon shame
God
which
translation,
Greek
verse is quoted by Gelasius of Cyzicum in his Com ment. Act. Syn. J\7 ic. ii. 18 (Fab ric. Cod. Pseud. V.T. i. 845;
(Polybius, Lucian, and once only in the LXX., Job ix. 33. This designation of Moses as a mediator does not occur in
the O.T. or in the Apocrypha, though his mediatorial functions appear clearly in Deut. v. 2, 5 ;
Man si,
Concil.
ii.
p. 844): /xeXXwv
Manxes
Mwucrewr,
OVI>
e^ievai rov
Trpocr/caAe-
Exod. xx. 19. It was, however, a recognised title of his in the first century of the Christian era. This is clear (1) From
the present work, I. 14, III. 12. (2) From the N.T. Gal. iii. 18, 19, where Moses is said to be the mediator through whom 5iacame the law 6 ^6/xos
.
.
vibv
6
Naw?
Kal 8ia-
Trpbs
poededcraro
fj.e
v elval
Prepared
is
me
raycis
xii.
ev
is
%etpt
viii.
fieffLrov.
Pre-existence here ascribed to Moses, as it was also to the Son of Man in Eth. En. xliii. 2 (where see But about the beginning note). of tlie Christian era such preexistence came to be regarded in
Again in Heb.
24 there
over
6,
ix.
15,
an obvious allu
where
better
covenant."
(3)
From
CHAPTER
and devised me, and
foundation
of
I.
13-17
He
prepared
that
15.
I
me
before the
the
world,
should be the
I declare
life
And now
to sleep
my
is
and
am
passing
away
with
my
fathers
even in the presence of all the people. 16. And receive thou this writing that thou mayst
to
know how
preserve the
:
17.
And
them with
of cedar
Mays.
iii.
19
(4)
ola
From
the Talmud, where Moses is fre quently spoken of as a mediator, see Levy, Neuhebr. i.e. as und Chald. Lex. iii. 595, 590. See also Shem. rab. on Exod. iii. 13 Bam id. rab. xi. 3. See Schottgerj, llor. pp. 738,
"iiono
; ;
way
1.
16.
XL
17.
cedar.
as
739
Wetstein, N. T. ii. p. 224. 15. Sleep with myfathers. Cf. III. 13; X.12,14; Deut.xxxi.16. Moses makes no reference here
;
"fragrant
with
myrrh."
From the beginning of the See crit. creation of the world. note on I. 14 (p. 58, 59).
etc., i.e. Jeru In Jorna 54&, Sifre 76&, the world is said to have been created with Zion as a startingSee Weber, pp. 199, point. In Ezek. 63-65 (2nd ed.). xxxviii. 12, v. 5, Zion is said to cf. earth of the be the centre Jubi Eth. En. xxvi. 1, xc. 26
to his
"
Assumption.
The words,
In
the place,
in the presence of all the if they are the true people," text, refer clearly to his bodily decease. These words disagree both with the account in Deut. xxxiv. 5, 6, according to which no man witnessed his death, and with the Greek fragments of the
Even
salem.
Assumption
(see pp. 107-110), according to which Joshua and Caleb were witnesses, but none
lees viii.
Is there
"stone
any reference
foundation,"
here to
of
other.
With
this verse
compare
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
world,
until the
name should be
them
in the
called
upon where
consummation
end
of the days.
will go
He
day of repentance.
be
wrought
by
Elijah.
repentance, that in Pesikta 163& it is said If all Israel together repented for a single day, re demption through the Messiah would follow (see Weber, 333,
"
"
book to a time when Jerusalem was rebuilt as a Roman colony with a heathen temple and sacrifices, and no Jew was permitted to
(Jolani,
which assigns
this
2nd
The In the visitation, etc. visitation here spoken of is one of mercy in relation to Israel.
The word
visit (eTrtcr/ceTrreo-^at
approach
i.
it.
Cf.
Justin, Apol.
47
Tert.
Adv.
Jud.
13
Div. I. vol. ii. 294, 306-308, 315 sqq. (Bug. trans.). The day of repentance. Taken in connection with the following words, this phrase refers to the great national repentance that was to precede the establish ment of the Messianic or, as here, the theocratic kingdom. This national repentance was a precondition of the coming of the kingdom. "If Israel prac tises repentance, it will be re deemed if not, it will not be redeemed, "Sanh. 976. This re pentance was called also the
Schurer,
;
nps) has generally in the O.T., and always in the N.T., a good
sense. In the Apoc. Bar. and 4 Ezra it is almost always used in a bad sense of the penal
visitation of
God
(see
"
my
note
cf.
"Israel will great repentance. not fulfil the great repentance before Elijah comes," Pirke de R. Eliezer, xliii. According to
Mai.
iv.
and Luke
i.
16, 17,
Messianic time is denoted by the phrase "the consummation of the times." The same phrase is used also of the last judgment see Apoc. Bar. xxx. 3. II. Deut. xxxi. 7, 1. Cf. 21-23.
;
CHAPTERS
to
I.
i8II.
2.
give to their
fathers,
to
shalt bless
and give
firm unto
for
them
their inheritance in
me and
establish
shalt appoint
them
pleasure of their
3.
And
(it
they pass) enter into the land, that thereafter they shall be
ruled by chiefs and kings for eighteen years, and during nineteen years the ten tribes will be
apostates.
2.
come
to
in
the
sixth
year after
4.
And
down
the
inheritance in me. a peculiar phrase, but Ronsch supports it by 2 Sam. xx. 1: "Neither have we in heritance in the son of Jesse"
Tlieir
is
and
kings"
are
This
judges and the three kings, Saul, David, and Solomon. And during nineteen years the
fifteen
221); but his later suggestion on this pas sage is possibly better, in which he takes the Latin in me to be a corruption of "in earn." See crit. note on II. 2.
(Z.f.W.T. 1869,
p.
ten tribes will be apostates. These are the nineteen kings of Israel from Jeroboam to Hoshea. In
"
"
obscure.
(p. 60).
"appoint
We might
them
magis trates." These might be the anas? mentioned in Deut. xvi. 18 1 Chron. xxiii. xxvi. 4,
;
local
See
crit.
note
(p. 61).
Cf. iv. 4,
29.
3.
In
the
sixth
year.
The
;
conquest
of
Canaan
This expression, which is found in Gen. xxiv. 7, was a favourite one amongst the postexilic Jews, Ezra v. 11, vi. 9, Dan. ii. 18, 10, vii. 12, 21, 23
;
etc.
Tre/JWTTOv
7J07)
Xapaj
cutoi
/ecu
XetTTTO.
The Cod of heaven will make, etc. The building of the temple under Solomon is here referred to. The court of His tabernacle.
See
crit.
note
(p. 62).
io
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
of the testimony.
l
Then
His
God
of
of
two holy
the ten
5.
But
kingdoms
ordinances.
for
6.
them
own
And
:
they will offer sacrifices throughout twenty years 7. And seven will entrench the walls, and I will
protect nine, but (four) will transgress the covenant
of the Lord,
And
sons to strange gods, and they will set up idols in the sanctuary, to worship them.
9.
And
in
the
house
of
the
Lord they
See
etc.
will
7.
will
entrench
Hie
note
And
(p. 62).
the
two holy
tribes
tribes,
seven
Only two
will
remain
faithful to the temple so built. This calls for a reference to the action of the ten tribes, which is given in the text verse. 5. This statement relative to the ten tribes is really parenthetical. It was called out by
of Judah-Eehoboam, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, Ahaziah, Athaliah. I iirill protect nine, i.e. nine kings will enjoy the divine
sperity Abijah,
the prediction that (only) the two tribes would preserve their allegiance to the temple. 6. The writer, after the parenthetical reference to the ten tribes in ver. 5, returns here to the history of the two.
Offer sacrifices throughout twenty years. The twenty years the designate twenty sovereigns of Judah from Kehoboam onwards, including Athaliah.
Amaziah, Joash, protection Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amoii, Josiah. (Four) will transgress, i.e. Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah.
crit.
See
etc.
8.
2 Kings xvi. 3 ; Ps. cvi. 37, 38 ; Ezek. xvi. 20, xx. 26 ; Hos.
xi. 2.
Set
9.
up
idols in
the,
sanctuary.
This verse
is
clearly based
CHAPTERS
II.
III.
ii
many abomina
III.
And
2.
And
3. And he will carry away all the holy vessels. he will cast forth all the people, and he will take
them
he will take
tribes
hungry and
"
And
Eighteous
on Ezek. viii. 9, 10. Thus "in the house of the Lord they will work impiety," is derived from viii. 9, and the remaining words from viii. 10. See crit. note for
the restoration of the text.
III. 1. A king from the east. Nebuchadnezzar, 588-586 B.C. 2. Colony. This word is due either to the Greek or Latin
that on the destruction of Solo mon s temple the holy vessels were concealed by angels (Apoc. Bar. vi. ) or by Jeremiah (2 Mace, ii. 4-8) in order to preserve them for the future Messianic king dom. See also Bammidbar rab, 15. The writer of this book
See
Bar.
65).
Hungry
was made Jerusalem had been rebuilt by Hadrian as a Roman colony under the name Aelia
Capitolina. See also V. 6, VI. 9. The original may have used or "place" cf. IV. 7. "city" All tlic vessels. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 7. According to Dan. L 2, part of these had been carried away in the reign of
;
and
Apoc.
hol>/
Kal oaios, and Vulgate, et sauctus. Justus Dominus Dan. ix. 14. Pss. Sol. x. 6
.
.
Righteous
is
the Lord,
for inasmuch
Jehoiakim
20.
first
cf. Jer. xxvii. 19, tradition current in the of our era recounts century
;
Bar. in the Apoc. Bar. the calamities of Judah are said to be due to the In the wickedness of Israel.
12
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
is
and holy
sinned,
the Lord,
for,
inasmuch as ye have
we
away with you, together with our children." 6. Then the ten tribes will mourn on hearing the
"
reproaches of the two tribes, 7. And they will say What have we done unto you, brethren ? Surely this tribulation has not come on all the house of
:
Israel
?"
8.
And
all
God
the
of Isaac
and God
of
mourn crying God of Abraham Jacob, remember Thy make with them, and
9.
them by
in
fail
the
land which
them."
10.
Then
Jer.
the Apocryphal Bar. ii. 26, these are attributed to the wickedness of both Israel and Judah. Together with our children. These words are found at the end of ver. 4 in the MS., but there they are impossible. See
crit.
7.
seed should never fail in the land. Gen. xvii. 8 ; cf. for phraseology Pss. Sol. xvii. 5 airw irep rov avTOv els rbv aiCova rov /JLTJ
:
Keireiv
(SaffiXeiav
avrov
also Test. XII. Patriar., Jud. 22. 10-13. These verses are either
note
(p. 65).
the source of Apoc. Bar. Ixxxiv. 2-5, or both passages are derived
from a common
original.
The
bewusstsein Jcsu,
30,
note)
thinks that if we could admit the date of the book to be after 70 A.D. the word "tribulation" here might hint also at a re
cently experienced calamity.
8. Unto heaven. Heaven seems here to be used as equi valent to God. This usage ap It is pears first in Dan. iv. 23. Cf. Matt. v. 34. frequent later. 9.
passage in Baruch is: 2. "Re member that formerly Moses as suredly called heaven and earth
to
and said
law,
ye shall be dispersed but if ye keep be 3. And shall it, ye kept. other things he used to say unto
If ye transgress
you when
tribes,
4.
And
The
oath
that
their
after his death ye cast them away from you on this account there
CHAPTER
III.
6-14
13
they will remember me, saying, in that day, tribe 11. unto tribe and each man unto his neighbour
:
"
unto us in prophecies, who suffered many things in Egypt and in the Eed Sea and in the wilderness
during
forty
years
1 2.
And
assuredly
called
to
we
should not transgress His commandments, in the 13. Behold which he was a mediator unto us?
these
things
have
befallen
us
after
his
death
according to his
tion, as
to his declara
he declared to us at that time, yea behold these have taken place even to our being carried
into the country of the
east."
away captive
predicted.
5.
14.
and earth
And now
Moses
used
you,
before they befell they have befallen I have italicised the poryou." tions which are undoubtedly of close kin. Cf. Dan. ix. 11-13.
to tell
you
!
to witness. See crit. note (pp. 66, 67). Dent. iv. 26, xxx. 19, xxxi. 28; Apoc. Bar.
and
lo
xix. 1, Ixxxiv. 2.
Mediator.
See
I.
14, note,
11.
In Egypt and in
the
Red
Sea
and
the
wilderness forty
years.
exactly as they stand here, and likewise in reference to Moses in Stephen s speech in Acts vii.
36: ovros e^rjyayev avrovs,
trotr/cras
Tepara
/cat
eprjfj.(j)
/cat
a-rj/j.e ca
iv EpvdpS.
behold these things. See crit. note (p. 67). his See crit. death. After note (p. 67). Yea behold, etc. See crit. note. Into the country of the cast. See crit. note. 14. Seventy and seven years.
And
try TeaaapaKovra.
The
of their having a partial parallel in Apoc. Bar. Ixxxiv. 3 (see above) seems to preclude the possibility of their being an interpolation here.
fact
12.
Assuredly
called
heaven
This refers back, no doubt, to Jeremiah s prophecy of seventy years captivity, Jer. xxv. 11, This prophecy 12, xxix. 10. is referred to in Dan. ix. 2, and interpreted in ix. 24 to mean How seventy weeks of years.
14
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
will be also in
Who
who
is
over them,
and he
his
"
knees
and pray on
all,
their
behalf
2.
King on the lofty throne, who rulest the world, and didst will that this people should be Thine elect people, then (indeed) Thou didst will
Lord of
that
Thou shouldst be
3.
the
fathers.
And
into
another
yet they have gone in captivity land with their wives and their
of strange peoples
4.
children,
great vanity.
Eegard and
heaven."
Lord
of
5.
Then God
will
of the
covenant which
He made
the limits of this period arc to be determined, it has hitherto been impossible to define. That the same impossibility attaches to the present time-determiiiation is therefore not strange. If seventy-seven years be taken
iv.
cf.
xi.
17, note.
Thine
elect people.
weeks of years (as in Daniel), This the total is 539 years. from when subtracted 588, Jerusalem was destroyed, gives
as
49 B.C.
gible.
play on seven in
crit.
Observe the contrast 3. 2, existing between Israel s reasonable expectations and their actual lot God s chosen covenanted people the slave of an idolatrous human power,
3.
crit.
4.
note.
See Vanity, i.e. idolatry. note (pp. 68, 69). Cf. Dan. ix. 18, 19 Apoc.
;
CHAPTER
He
also.
IV. 1-8
15
will manifest
6.
put it into the mind of a king to have compassion on them, and he will send
And He
them
to
off to their
7.
Then some
will
up and they
will
come
tribes
and they
8.
entrench
the
will
place renewing
(it).
And
the
two
continue
in
their prescribed
cf.
faith,
sad and
6.
king,
i.e.
Cyrus
23
;
Chron.
i.
xxxvi.
22,
Ezra
1-4.
because they 8. Lamenting will not be able to offer sacrifices, etc. Worship in the second temple during the Persian period and later was discredited by several writers in different cen turies and no doubt on different
the spirit of those that offer them. That in the Apoc. Bar. may not amount to anything more than a reflection on the lesser glory of the second temple as compared with that of the first, such as we find in Hag.
ii.
"
Who
?
is
left
among you
also
grounds.
writes
:
Thus Malachi
offer polluted
(i.
7)
it
now
"
Cf.
Ezra
bread "ye upon Mine altar." Next, in the Eth. En. Ixxxix. 73 the sacrifices are declared to be unclean under "all the the symbolical words bread on it was polluted and not Our next reference to pure." the low estimation in which the worship of the second temple was held is found in the Apoc. "And at that Bar. Ixviii. 5, 6 time, after a little interval, Zion will again be builded, and its offerings will again be restored and the priests will return to their ministry, and again the
: : ;
12.
in our text It implies an imperfection attaching to the validity of the entire temple
seems to go deeper.
There is, indeed, no objection to sacrifice as such in this book hence no Essenic tenet is to be sought for here. The writer s views may possibly
service.
;
Gentiles will
come
to glorify
it.
Nevertheless, not as fully as in the beginning." The passages from Malachi and the Eth. En. seem to arraign only the imper fect character of the victims, and
be explained on the ground that he regarded it as impossible for Israel to render perfect worship so long as they were subject to heathen powers. From these powers God alone could deliver them. They were not, as we gather from IX., to attempt this task themselves. God Himself would achieve it for them when
I.
17.
The
a Pharisaic quietist.
i6
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
offer
Lord
of their fathers.
9.
And
the
Gentiles during the time of their captivity. V. And when the times of chastisement draw
nigh and vengeance arises through the kings who share in their guilt and punish them, 2. They themselves also will be divided as to the truth.
3.
Wherefore
it
hath come
to
"
pass
They
will
See crit. note (pp. 70, 71) for the grounds for this emendation, for the passages from con temporary writers supporting the present statement. V. 1. Vengeance arises through
and
Here as in our text the writer regards the persecution under the Seleucidae, especially Antiochus, as a judgment on the Hellenising and apostasies of the leaders of the nation. 2. They will be divided as to the truth. The enormities of
.
the kings
who share in
their guilt.
The writer shows that there was a special Nemesis in the instru ments of their chastisement for the very people, whose manners
;
the Sadducean priesthood pro moted in the way of reaction a religious awakening among the
was
is
so eager to adopt to the destruction of Hebrew religion and character, became in due course the actual
party.
The origin of this party symbolically described in the Eth. En. xc. 6, 7 as taking place
(See
at this time.
my
edition
Schmidt-Merx wrongly describe these two parties as the war party of the Maccabeans and the stricter Chasids. Hilin
loc.
)
calamity came upon them for they had them to be their enemies and avengers whose customs they followed so eagerly,
:
and unto
be like in
rets
whom
all
/ecu
they desired to
(&v ^rjXovv
TroAe/a ous
Ka.Qa.irav ijdfXov
things"
genfeld strangely interprets these words as referring to the disper sion (diaairopd) under the Seleucids, and the preceding verse to the Persian kings. The two verses refer to the period of the Seleucid domination. There is no question of the Maccabees as
yet.
3. It is impossible to trace this quotation, but portions of it
ayuyas
TOVTOVS
CHAPTERS
IV. 9
V. 4
turn aside from righteousness and approach iniquity, and they will defile with pollutions the house of
their
worship,"
gods."
and
4.
strange
at
least
they will go a whoring after For they will not follow the
"
their phraseologymay be found in the O.T. For turn aside from righteousness, cf. Ezek. iii. 20 for "they will defile the house of their
;
.
sprung from Joiarib or Jehoiarib who returned from the Captivity. 1 Chron. ix. 10 1 Mace. ii. 1
; :
Neli.
xi.
10,
xii.
6,
19.
iii.
worship,"
"Ye
cf.
Ezek.
xliv.
have
brought
in
aliens
"
...
to be in
My
sanctuary, to
;
profane it, even My house "her Zeph. iii. 4 priests have profaned the sanctuary"; see also Pss. Sol. i. 9, where of the
:
book the statement that the Maccabees should be succeeded by one who was "not of the race of the i.e. Herod, shows that priests," the writer regarded the Macca
Finally, in vi. 2 of this
priesthood it is said i ra ayia Kvpiov ev and viii. 26 e^iavav /ecu ra i)yi.a0-/j.ei>a TOV Beou. The clause "will go a whoring after strange is found in Dent. xxxi. It!, gods" j, 4. All previous writers have,
: :
T<
Jewish
bees as being of priestly descent. But the very facts that make against the application of these verses to the Maccabees make it clear that they can only be
rightly explained as descriptive of the high priests who held office previous to the Maccabees, together with their Sadducean
i. There was every following, ground for charging the pagan ising high priests Jason and Menelaus with "going a whor
them as referring to the early Maccabean high priests and their Sadducean supporters. But there are certain statements here which make such an inter
pretation
impossible.
i.
The
after
words
"
will go a
whoring
strange gods" cannot possibly be applied to the Maccabean In ii. high priests, 160-103. no case could the latter be de scribed as those "who are no No such charge is priests."
ing after strange gods." Thus, not to dwell upon the contri bution Jason sent to Tyre to be expended in a sacrifice to Hercules in that city, 2 Mace, iv. 19, 20, he set up a palaestra under the citadel, in which the young nobles of Jerusalem prac tised the Greek games, and even the priests, forsaking their ser vice at the altar to do so. This Jason also, called in 2 Mace. iv. 13 "that ungodly wretch, and
brought against them in all Jewish literature, whereas they are everywhere acknowledged to be of true priestly descent see 1 Mace. ii. 1-5 Joseph. Ant. xii. 6. 1. They were
;
;
manners,"
"put
down
the in
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
truth of God, but
some
the Lord,
who
The
"
above facts will amply account for such words also as they will approach iniquity, and they will defile with pollu tions the house of their worship,"
in ver. 3, and lute the altar
gifts
4.
"some
It was his aim, not only to outrage the Jewish Law, but to procure its entire aboli tion. Although this is the only authenticated instance of the high priesthood being held by one who was not of priestly Grimm and other descent,
Antiochus.
with
scholars are right in concluding that the occurrence of similar irregularities in appointments to the high priesthood is implied in 1 Mace. vii. 14. There the Asi-
which they
otter,"
in ver.
For similar charges against the priesthood, cf. the quota tions given on ver. 3. But the words conclusive ii. some for our interpretation are
: . . .
daeans declare, on the appoint ment of Alkimus to the high that they could priesthood, suffer nothing at the hands of
the
who
are
not priests
of
slaves."
but
slaves,
sons
"who
We
the
have
clause
shown above
that
against them, because "one that is a priest of the seed of Aaron is come with the army." These Slaves, sons of slaves. words have been referred to the
Maccabean
high priests
and
We
it
have now
show that
applies to the
not of priestly extraction at all, but was of the tribe of Ben In 2 Mace. iv. 23 he is jamin. called the brother of Simon. This Simon, a Benjamite, was a Hellenising governor of the temple, 2 Mace. iii. 4. Josephus represents Menelaus as a brother of Onias in., Ant. xii. 4. 10, 5.1; but wrongly, as is univers This illegiti ally admitted.
support of this view, where, at a banquet given by Hyrcanus, a Pharisee named Eleazar requested Hyrcanus to lay dow n the high priesthood, on the ground that his mother had been a captive during the reign of Antiochus.
T
This statement, which Josephus declares to be false, is repeated in the Talmud. But, (1) as we
have already seen in the preced ing notes, there can be no refer ence here to the Maccabean high priests ; and (2) the first reference to them is found in
vi. 1.
If v. 4 already referred to the Maccabean high priests, we should not find in vi. 1 the
CHAPTER
V. 5-6
5. And are not priests but slaves, sons of slaves. many in those times will respect the persons of the
rich
and receive
gifts,
G.
receiving presents].
called
themselves high priests The phrase "slaves, of God. sons of slaves," then, is to be in terpreted, not of the Maccabees, but of their predecessors. In
this regard it is full of signifi cance, and points to the condition of complete degradation in which the holders of this office stood tinder Antiochus ; for they were the nominees and absolute tools
shalt
.
Receive gifts
judgment.
also crit.
a dittography.
See
crit.
note
of that despot, being made and unmade by him at pleasure. Thus Onias in. was deposed to
(pp. 73, 74), where I have shown that, if it is genuine, as it may be, we should probably be right
make room
for Jason,
and Jason
in turn to make room for Menelaus, 2 Mace. iv. 7-9, 23-29. o. And many in those times. The Latin text here is, qui eniin
illis
doctores eorum In the crit. note (pp. 72,73)1 have shown that an incorrect is doctores eorum marginal gloss in the Hebrew MS. on the preceding words D mm, which are here wrongly rendered by qui enim magistri These "many" were the sunt.
magistri
stint
greedy of gain (cf. Prov. xv. 27), and accordingly render the whole verse: "And many in
will respect the of the rich, and be greedy of gain, and wrest judg ment on receiving presents." In this case 1 Sam. viii. 3 was clearly before the mind of the writer: "And his sons walked not in his ways, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes,
temporibtis.
those
times
persons
Sadducean party who supported the Hellenising high priests. Probably the reference may be more specific, and the "many may signify the large Hellenising Sadducean majority in the San hedrim in Jerusalem. The San hedrim was the chief court for the administration of civil and See p. 26. criminal justice.
"
Win
money,
(p. 75).
ready
(p. 74). to
judge for
crit.
See
note
Respect
rich.
the
See
crit.
persons note
of
(p.
the
73).
VIII. IX. The persecution of the the Jews under Antiochus breach between the Chasids and the early Maccabees, and the resumption by the former of
;
20
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
colony and the borders of their habitation will be filled with lawless deeds and iniquities they will
:
they
will be impious
judges
they will be
wish.
ready
there
to judge for
money
as each
may
VI. Then
will
These
be raised
up unto them
to the text, their
Now, according
chapters should be read immedi ately after V., where they be For the longed originally. grounds for this conclusion see notes in loc. VI. 1. Kings bearing rule, and they will call themselves See crit. note. high priests. Previous scholars have referred these words to Antigonus as sumption of the title of king in
assumption of the high priest hood is regarded as subsequent to their assumption of the office of supreme military and civil rulers of the nation. Hence, as the
office of high priest was usurped as early as 153 B.C. by Jonathan, and this usurpation made legiti
104 B.C. It is true, no doubt, that Antigonus was the first to do so but, on the following grounds, it seems clear that the line of kings mentioned in the text begins, not with Antigonus, but with Jonathan or Judas. For (1) the name "king" is
;
mate, and the office declared to be hereditary in the Maccabean line in 141 B.C. by a council of the nation (1 Mace. xiv. 41),
11
rulers previous,
to
at
all
events,
141 B.C. Hence this verse (vi. 1) embraces the entire Mac cabean dynasty from Judas, 165
B.C., to
Antigonus, 37
B.C.,
who
The
it used loosely in this book does not necessarily mean any thing more than commander or prince. Thus the Roman general
:
sacer-
Varus king
title
is
called
vi.
8.
"a
powerful
this
"
in
Hence
who
Jews
and on still better grounds who was invested by Alexander Balas of Syria with princely rank through the symbols of the purple robe and diadem in 153 and on the most
of Jonathan,
;
dotes summi Dei, "priests of the Most High God," I have, in my critical text, necessarily emended into summos sacerdotes Dei (see crit. note, p. for such a title 75) (1) would be unparalleled in con nection with the Maccabees. In 1 and 2 Mace., and in the An tiquities and Jewish Wars of
;
adequate grounds of Simon, who was the first independent Maccabean ruler of his nation. (2)
or
"high
priests of the
nation."
(2)
The
CHAPTER
Kings bearing
high
priests
rule,
VI. 1-3
will
call
21
and they
:
themselves
of
God
they
will assuredly
2.
work
And an
insolent
king will succeed them, who will not be of the race of the priests, a man bold and shameless, and
he will judge
Jewish
them
as
was
they shall
deserve.
3.
high
priesthood
High God.
divine
title
High,"
Most
according to universal Biblical usage, Dei stimmi or altissimi or excels! (cf. Gen. xiv. 18, 19, 20, 22; Ps.
iii.
of Idumea, and not of Jewish descent, according to Joseph. Ant. xiv. 1. 3 Bell. i. 6. 2. Our text does not go so far. Its silence seems to concede the Jewish origin of Antipater, and thus to agree with the statement of Nicolas of Damascus to that
;
Ivii. 2, Ixxviii.
56; Dan.
v.
26,
v.
18,
21
Mark
Luke
viii.
28
Heb.
vii. 1),
and
not summi Dei. (4) Summi sacerdotes is in many instances a Vulg. rendering of dpxiepets
(cf.
Mark
;
"
xiv.
47,
53,
54,
60,
(5)
61, 63, 66
Acts
xxiii. 4).
The phrase "the high priest of God is found in Acts xxiii. 4. The Maccabees had no wish
to differentiate themselves
from
the high priests that preceded them. Their claim to this oiiice,
so far as they had any, rested on their Aaronic descent.
Will assuredly work iniquity. this Hebraism see crit. note. 2. This verse refers to Herod the Great, who reigned from 37 He could not assume to 4 B.C. the high priest s office, as he was not even a full-born Jew, much
On
effect (Ant. xiv. 1. 3). See Sehurer, i. i. 314, 315, notes. Judge them as they deserve. The persons here declared to be deserving of punishment may be (a) the surviving members of the Maccabean family, all of whom were ultimately cut off by Herod (&) the Sadducean aristocracy forty-five of whom he had exe cuted on becoming king (Ant.xv. 1.2; Bell. i. 18. 4). To the Phari sees, on the other hand, Herod was on the whole favourable. Even when they refused to take the oath of allegiance, they were spared at the intercession of Pollio and Sameas. The Essenes were also excused, but not the rest of the people. See Ant. xv. 10. 4. (c) Or else the nation at
;
less
of priestly descent.
2, calls
Jose-
Out
men,
i.e.
him
See pre
Not of the race of the priests. Herod was the son of Autipater
Murders of
22
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
he will cut
off
And
their
chief
men
with the
sword, and will destroy (them) in secret places, so that no one may know where their bodies are. 4.
He
will not
spare.
Then the
their
him
them
in
land.
And he
execute
judgments on them as the Egyptians executed upon them, during thirty and four years, and he will
he will beget children, succeeding him will rule for shorter periods.
punish them.
7. reported
10. 4
:
And
who
8.
in
fts
Joseph.
/ecu
Ant.
xv.
dvacue<-
years,
TroXXot re
(fiavep&s /ecu
v, e/ce?
\e\Tjd6Tws
OeipovTo.
TO
(fipovpiov
Perhaps, as Hilgenfeld and suggest, we should omit the et before non and translate: "He will slay the old, and the young he will not
4.
Volkmar
spare."
Of. Jer.
li.
3.
and Philip thirty-seven. From these facts we must con clude that, as Herod died 4 B.C., this book must have been written earlier, at all events, than 30 A.D. Reuss, on the other hand (Die Geschichte der h. Schriften A.T., 1890, pp. 738-740), does not agree that these words necessarily determine the date. Philip and Antipas did indeed
reign longer than their father, but our author, he urges, was thinking only of Archelaus and
die allein ftir einen Agrippa, Jerusalemer Interesse hatten." In this view Reuss is followed by Rosenthal and Baldensperger.
8.
5.
Cf. for
phraseology 2 Mace.
vi. 3.
Bell.
i.
33. 8.
. . .
See
who will 7. Children rule for shorter periods. See crit. note. Although there is some corruption in the text, there is no difficulty as to the
sense. Herod s sons, it states, are to reign for shorter periods than their father. this was true of Archelaus alone ; for Antipas reigned forty-three
10,
11.
Bell.
ii.
5.
1-3.
Now
Burn a part of their temple. The temple was set fire to, not by Varus, but by the soldiers
CHAPTERS
Into their parts cohorts
the west will come,
VI. 4
VII. 3
of
9.
who
conquer them
he will take them captive, and burn a part of temple with fire, (and) will crucify some around their colony.
their
And
VII.
ended,
And when this is done the times in a moment the (second) course
2.
3.
will be
will be will
They
be forced
under his lieutenant Sabinus. See Joseph. Ant. xvii. 10. 2 Bell. ii. 3. 3. The injuries done to the temple on this occasion were not made good till as late as Xero s reign, though 18,000 men were employed in the re See Ant. xx. 9. 7. storation. Will crucify some, etc. 2000 were crucified by Yarns (Ant.
;
And,
in
the time of
to restore
it,
lorn attempts
made
VII.
1.
And when
this is
done
evidently contemporaries. picture is drawn from life. And yet there is the greatest di versity of opinion among scholars as to the class designed by the writer. They have been taken to
The
With
be
these words the actual history recounted by our author, as Ewald, Wieseler, Dillmann, and Schiirer have recognised, comes to a close. have arrived at the date at which he is writing.
(i.) The Her odian princes, by Hilgenfeld, Mess. Jud. 464, 465. But there are many objections
to this identification.
(ii.)
The
Pharisees,
(a)
in
We
Up
to this point his historical allusions have been easy to in series of predictions terpret. follow, couched by their author in enigmatical symbols to begin
with, and afterwards corrupted by translators or transcribers beyond the possibility of restora
tion.
2. It is worse than idle to attempt to deal with this verse till we know something about its actual wording. On the for
decade after Herod s death, by Ewald, History of v. Israel, 367, note 5 (Eng. Dillmann. tr.), Drummond, Schiirer, II. iii. 79, 80; (b) be tween 54-64 A.D., by SchmidtMerx (Merx, Archiv.f. Wissenschaftl. Erforschung des A.T.,
the
first
i. p. 121, 1868). Though cer tain traits in these verses seem to favour this view, the prevailing tone of the entire passage makes
vol.
it
impossible. The persons here arraigned are unblushing Epi cureans, gluttonous men and
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
these, scornful
winebibbers.
Now,
me,"
nearly every other vice has been 1 aid to the charge of the Pharisees, even their worst enemies have not accused them of open glut tony and drunkenness. Indeed, the Pharisees were decidedly
ascetic in character, according to the testimony of Josephus ; he writes, "the Pharisees," make little of the pleasures
"
and do not sur render themselves to the com of the forts (Ant. body"
of the table,
xviii.
rrfv
els
1.
o i re
yap
^aptcrcuoi
ovdej>
diairav
eevTe\iov(rLi>,
the people of the land. He points out, further, that the words dicentes se haec facere propter misericordiam are to be explained by a decree of the Sanhedrim in that period, which forbade a man to give more than ^th of his fortune to the poor. Colani s views are decidedly ingenious, and might win our assent if he could likewise con vince us of the late date he assigns to the book, i.e. after 136 A.D. But that a Jew, writ ing the history of his people in
its
all
and excess
"
(e
apirayTJs
/ecu cl/cpacrta?).
But this ascetic tone was not universally characteristic of the Hence Pharisees after 70 A.n.
this objection will not tell against
the views of Philippi (Das Buch 176) and Colani p. (Revue dc Thcol. 1868, 2nd part, pp. 73-79), who interpret the passage as referring to the Pharisees in the earlier half of the second century. Colani, in particular, identifies the class assailed in the text with the Jewish doctors at Jabne and Usha. At the head of the Sanhedrim at these places was a
ffenoch,
indeed simply im this date of Colani is dealt with elsewhere. (iii. ) The Pharisees and the Sadducees, (a] in 4 B.c.-6A.r>. This view was first advocated by Wieseler (Jahrb. f. deutsche
Jerusalem,
possible.
is
But
Thcol. 1868, pp. 642, 643), who referred vers. 3, 4 to the latter, arid 6-10 to the former, (b) Soon after the fall of Jerusalem, 70 A.D.
is urged by Rosenthal (Vicr Apocryph. Biichcr, 1885, pp. 20, 21, 25-30), who follows Wieseler in attributing vers. 3, 4 to the Sadducees, and 6-10 to the Pharisees. But this two
This view
president ( = Nasi), who lived in princely luxury, and enjoyed immense authority over the Jews of the Dispersion. Such phrases,
he urges, as
princes,"
"we
"we
shall be as
shall
have
feast-
The attempt
to one class,
ings
to
"do
to assign vers. 3, 4 and 6-10 to another, can only proceed from a super-
CHAPTER
for if ficial study of the passage the persons denounced in ver. 4 are charged with gluttony, this if in 3 is no less true in 8
;
;
VII.
they are said to hold high office, if in 3 they do so also in 8 they proclaim their justice, in if 10 they assert their purity in 3 and 4 they are declared
;
to be
"deceitful,"
"impious,"
"treacherous,"
bewusstsein Jesu, 1888, p. 31). is a very attractive inter pretation, and several of the charges made in the text, such as those of gluttony, drunkenness, and murder, could be amply substantiated against the Roman On the other hand, governors. there are phrases that cannot
This
denounced
"
as
"deceitful,"
"
We have therefore one and the same class of persons to deal with in the entire passage, and these are not Pharisees prior to to 70 A.D., as we have already seen under ii. (&). But, accord ing to Rosenthal, the classes 6-10 in are the vers. designed Pharisees, 70-90 A.D., i.e. R.
Jochanan ben Sakkai and his companions and pupils, who for
sook Jerusalem during the siege
pious,
with any propriety be applied to them; i.e. "do not touch me, lest thou shouldst pollute
me"
(ver. 10),
and
"concealing
(v.)
The Sadducees.
(a) in
the
and established themselves at Jabne. That a small body of learned men, whose main pur suit was the study and applica
tion of the law, who alone in the time of universal prostra tion held on high the standard of national hope and faith, could be so described by any thoughtful and learned Jew of that period (a Zealot, as Rosenthal supposes), this is, I confess, simply in credible. Besides, there is not a shred of evidence to show that the rabbis of Jabne (70-90) could with the faintest approach to truth be described as gluttons,
time of Nerva and Trajan, by Yolkmar (p. 105). This view may be at once dismissed. The Sadducees were nobodies at this (b) Between 15-70 A.I). period, It is This is my own view. likewise advocated by Lucius (Der Essc.nismus, 1881, pp. 116119)
and by Geiger
(Jiidlnche
homines
pestilentiosi,
and
In principes erimus. dicentes se esse justos, he points to the play on the words D pnx and D pns. These Sadduqim or Sadducees cover themselves with the mantle of priestly holiness. They emphasise their special
tanquam
drunkards, traitors, hypocrites, and murderers. Other argu ments, on the ground of chron ology, etc., might be advanced against the hypothesis of Rosenthai, but no more are needed.
priestly purity, and keep the In the people afar from them. notes that follow, this passage will be dealt with verse by verse, and the chief charges which it brings against the Sadducees justified by parallels from the
I
s
quote
edition.
26
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
4.
And
wrath
of their
It will be suficient to premise here that from tlio deposition of Archelaus in 6 till 70 A.D. the government of Judea lay practically in the hands of the
nearly related
ii.
to
the scorn
;
cf.
Pss.
Sanhedrim, which was almost Josephus, wholly Sadducean. Ant. xx. 10, describes the form
of government as aristocratic, as opposed to the monarchical rule of Herod and Archelaus
(see
Pharisee.
Will
rule.
Cf. ver.
8:
"we
Schiirer,
:
I.
ii.
72).
T-TJV
His
shall be as princes." have shown in the preceding column that the government of Judea was
We
words are
,
/zero,
de
TOVTUV
practically
dpiaroKpaTia
rr/v
La,
^v 77 de irpoffracriav rov
jj.ev
edvovs
oi
dp^tepas
priests
eireiriffTevvro.
The high
iv.
ivarL
often the willing tools of the Roman governors. Every abuse in the government would natur ally be traced to those who were the actual though not nominal
and
crit.
government.
in the time of these. here supposing that de his is a rendering of eVt rovrwv. It may, however, be a rendering of 6K rovrwv. have here an Scornful. instructive instance which illus trates the necessity of translat ing, not the Latin before us, but the Greek or Hebrew which
3.
I
4.
Conceal
And
See
note.
wrath,"
Text
etc.
56Xtot.
reads
am
"rouse
the
Treacherous,
i.e.
The
We
it
presupposes.
The Latin
is
homines
pestilentiosi a.v6pwiroi ? cox. This Hebrew \oLiJ.oL pis in is found Prov. xxix. phrase 8 Is. xxviii. 14 and the Greek in 1 Mace. x. 61. Xot^,6s is a
;
the Latin should prob of the read ably "pleasers We See crit. note. mighty." should then have in some measure a parallel to the de
Self-pleasers. sibi placentes.
So
We
Ps.
signation so frequently applied to the Sadducees in Pss. Sol. iv., of "Pleasers avOpwirapeffKOL. the mighty" would best be applied to the Sadducees owing to their subservient attitude to
The
The
which may be
CHAPTER
pleasers,
VII. 4-7
27
dissemblers in
all
their
own
affairs
and
gourmands
goods
*
....
5.
...
6.
Devourers of the
of
ground
lest
them, complainers, deceitful, concealing themselves they should be recognised, impious, filled with
sunrise
to
sunset
spoken of as living
Lovers
of
ev vTTOKpicrei..
banquets at every
Cf. ver. 8.
hour of
the day.
The Gluttons, gourmands. text is devoratores, gulae. Pre vious editors take gulae as a genitive or dative in connection with devoratores.
the poor.
The text thus recovered agrees well with the statement in ver. 3 "saying that they are just," and this second reference to the professed justice of the Sadducee repeats the play upon the name. The Sadducees,
:
see Pss.
Sol.
iv.
2, 3.
Devourers of the goods of A similar charge is brought against the Sadducees in Pss. Sol. iv. 23 T}p7]^u<rav
0.
:
severe, as the
Oi /COUS
dri/jiiq.
7TO\Xoi)j
/ecu
;
dvfjila
cf.
ev
eirt.-
Deceitful.
Sol.
:
Cf.
like state
15,
TJ
y\Coacra.
xii. 2, 4.
avrou ^evdrjs
aSiKov
:
12.
ei s
ot
\6yoi avrou
the
by
misericordiam
5i
eXerjfj.oavv riv,
Concealing themselves lest they should be recognised. For this also we iirid an excellent parallel in a similar accusation of the Sadducees in Pss. Sol. iv. 5
:
disappears when we call to mind that this word is a not infre quent rendering in the LXX. of np-is. Thus we are here to
translate. not misericordiam,
ev VVKTL Kal
ei>
ravei
<i>s
oi>x
but
the
Hebrew word
it
presupposes.
28
8.
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
"
Saying
We
shall
we
be as
princes."
9.
And though
their
hands
and their minds touch unclean things, yet their mouth will speak great things, and they will say
furthermore:
10.
"Do
not
touch
me
lest
"
thou
.
.
shouldst pollute
me in
VIII.
And
there will
of the Sadducees in the Pss. of (See Ryle and James s ed. Introd. xlv-xlviii.) In iv. 3, moreover, of that book there is a like accusation against the Sadducees to that in our text aVTOS ?1>OXOS V TTOi/CiX/Ct a/JLapTLUV
Sol.
:
cean priesthood
is
also
viii.
dwelt
13
:
upon
dwo d0e5py
Pss.
i.
in
Pss.
Sol.
(TTO.TOVV
rb
dvaiacrrripiov
Kvpiov
iv aKadapffias /ecu a 1/j.aros rds efj.io.Lvov Bvaias ws /cpea (3t(3ri\a. See also
7rd0"r)S
/ecu
ev
d/cpacricu?.
:
Cf.
Matt.
xxiii.
25
"filled
from extortion
10.
Do not touch me =
is
"
8, ii.
and
text
excess."
From
is
sunrise
to sunset.
The
^XP
1 -
dvofifvov.
The
"from
to west" (cf. xi. 8), or sunrise to sunset." The context requires the latter mean Thus "from sunrise to ing. sunset is the equivalent of at every hour of the day," in ver.
"
probably derived from Come not near to am holier than thou," me, and the jnrrW here may be a corruption of the K jrrW in Isa. VIII.-IX. We have now come to one of the most difficult questions in this difficult book. How are we to regard VIII.-IX. ? Two interpretations have been
Is.
This
Ixv. 5
for I
"
4.
8.
Cf. ver. 4.
crit.
offered. Volkmar, Philippi, and Colani contend that they are a record of what is already past, and constitute in fact a
Yea we
See
9.
fill.
and
.
A.I).
their
ye.
minds
yet
crit.
note.
things. 9, 10.
Dan.
vii. 8, 20.
All other scholars agree in re garding them as a forecast of what is yet to be the final woes that are immediately to precede the advent of the theo
cratic
CHAPTERS
visitation
VII. 8
VIII.
29
He
century (see p. xiii. ). The second view is equally impossible for VIII. -IX. are not a prophecy of
;
They
are clearly
designated as "the second visi tation that is to befall Israel The first (see VIII. 1, note). visitation was the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. The last woes could not be de scribed as "the second visita tion." Other facts that support this conclusion will be dealt with in the sequel. If, then, "the second visita tion is not to be explained as the last woes, how are we to in terpret it ? Clearly as that which actually befell the Jews
"
our author not already taken account of it in its proper chronological sequence ? These questions lead to the final solu tion of the problem. For on re viewing the past chapters we are unable to discover a single reference to the persecution by Antiochus and the desecration of the temple, and as we study the context we further discover that such an omission is im For as we proceed we possible. find on investigation the facts to be as follows. A gap in the history
exists between V. and VI.; ori ginally there was no such gap : its place was filled by VIIL-IX. For () in V. the history is bro light dowr n to the Hellenis-
under
Antiochus
Epiphanes.
ing high priests under Antiochus, and VI. opens with a clear refer ence to the Maccabean princes, beginning with Jonathan. Thus there is not even an allusion to the severities of the Antiochian persecution and the horrors that accompanied it, or to the dese cration of the temple ("the abomination that maketh deso late and its subsequent reconan event that was secration, kept green in the national re membrance by the yearly "Fes tival of the Dedication." That one of the most tragic and
")
The
was that in which Jerusalem was destroyed under Nebuchadnezzar. That VIII.-IX. are to be re garded as an account of the per secution under Antiochus is to be inferred from the fact that they furnish an accurate descrip
first visitation
tion
of that
accuracy
cannot
We
yond the
tion.
But the question now natur ally arises, How comes it that we
an accurate description of the Antiochian persecution at a period in our book where it is
find
chronologically impossible
Has
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
will stir
up
against
of
the kings of
And
those
who who confess to their circumcision: who conceal (it) he will torture and
Such as
lias not befallen, etc.
;
are closely followed throughout this book, but even the minor injuries inflicted on it are re
From Dan.
7
;
4,
3,
8,
9; III.
;
2;
9.
VI.
1,
xii. 1 cf. Jer. xxx. Mace. ix. 27 Matt. xxiv. 21 Rev. xvi. 18. On the re semblance between Matt. xxiv.
there
21 and our text, see crit. note. The phrase was clearly a current
one.
over in silence. (c) But the moral certainty that there was no such gap originally, is resolved into scien tific conviction when, in addi tion to the former facts, we ob serve, that in VIII.-IX. we have not only an accurate account of the Antiochian horrors, but also the very fragment that is needed to fill up the gap between V. and VI., and one that harmon ises perfectly with that context. This transposition of the text For is due to the final editor. other transpositions the reader can consult the Introduction
(p.
of the Icings of the earth. used of Nebuchad nezzar in Ezek. xxvi. 7 Dan. ii. 37 and of Artaxerxes in Ezra vii. 12. It is a title peculiar to Oriental despots. Hence it is aptly used here of Antiochus iv.
Kiny
This
title is
Crucify those
their
u ho
confess to
e/orAeucre
5e
/ecu
:
/ZTJ
TrepLTe/jt.ve<.v
avrovs ra reKva
who
VIII. 1. A second visitation. It will be seen through reference to the critical notes that the
xxx v).
disobeyed hurled headlong from the city 1 Mace. i. 60, 61 2 Mace. wall, From 1 Mace. vi. 10, viii. 4. ii. 46, and Joseph. Ant. xii. 5. 4,
;
word for "second" is partially restored. That this restoration of Schmidt- Merx is right is clear from IX. 2, where it is referred to
again as
"a
second.
visitation."
already remarked (p. 29) that the final woes prelud ing the theocratic kingdom could never have been so described. This "second visitation" is the
We
have
is clear that this edict was to a large extent obeyed till the Maccabean rising. But Josephus, Ant. xii. 5. 4, writes that the best and noblest amongst the Jews refused to obey this and similar commands of the king, and were accordingly tortured it
and
(it}.
is
So doubt
ful.
CHAPTER
deliver
3.
VIII. 2-4
prison.
them up
their
to be
And
wives will
the
gods
among
young sons
will be
operated on by the physicians in order to bring 4. And others amongst forward their foreskin.
3.
Ami
their
wives
will
be
cision were
tion.
given
cult
the
of Venus, as Colani has observed. According to 2 Mace;. vi. 4, the abominations peculiar to this goddess were carried on even in the temple and its courts. Antioch was a centre of this worship especially its notorious suburb Daphne. Many women were, no doubt, as stated in the text, transported to An tioch and elsewhere to serve these purposes. Josephus, Ant. xii. 5. 4, says that upwards of
Neu-
hebrdisches Lex. iii. 275, 276. Cf. 1 Cor. vii. 18, where this Wetoperation is referred to stein and Lightfoot on 1 Cor.
:
vii.
18,
and
Sclioettgen,
;
Hor.
Heir. i. 1157, 1177; Celsus, De Medic, vii. 18 Winer, Rcalworterbuch licalHerzog, Schenkel, Bib. Lex. Encycl.
; ;
10,OOU men, women, and chil dren were carried away captive
sons will lie operated on by the physicians, etc. Some years before Antiochus adopted ultimate measures in dealing with the Jews, many of the latter of noble birth volun
tarily underwent this operation in order to appear like Greeks
Josephus, Ant. xii. 5. 4, says of those who refused to obey the commands of Antiochus, that Kara ira.a a.v rj/mcpav at
Kal TriKpas fiacrdvovs vircKpt also 2 Mace. u.Tre6vriffKQv
;
vi.
28, viii.
And
11.
idols.
fire.
Cf.
Mace.
vi.
reference is made to xlvi. 7, Israel having voluntarily carried idols in the wilderness, and later. Cf. also Epist. Jcr. 4 Secede iv evr &JLLOLS KafiuXuvi. deous
:
aipo/~Levovs
and
ver. 26.
In the
"YA\r]ves.
But,
dren who were already circum cised, the traces of the circum
the king resorted to sures. not only was circumcision forbidden, as we bave seen above, but in the case of young chil
passages we have parallels in expression, but in 2 Mace. vi. 7 we have a parallel in fact yevo/j-tv-r/s 51 kLovvcriuv
preceding
eoprfjs
rjvayKai. ovTO
TTOfj^reveiv
KICTCTOVS
ZXOVTCS
TU
Acovvcrw.
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
them
their
will
be punished by tortures and fire and to bear in public are idols, (which as) polluted as are the
contain them.
5.
And
they will
likewise be forced
by those
who
torture
them
to
enter
their
inmost sanctuary,
and
they will
be
name, finally after these things the laws and what they had above their altar.
IX. Then in that day there will be a
to observe his birthday by join ing in the Dionysiac festival. Polluted as arc, etc. This is the best I can make of this obscure clause. 5. Enter their inmost sanctuary, i.e. the ddvTov of the heathen
man
of the
xxiii.
the
18.
sacrifice.
Cf.
Matt,
temples. According to Josephus, Ant. xv. 5, 4, the Jews were compelled to "build temples
and
city
1
raise
idol
altars
in every
and village, and offer swine Cf. npon them every day."
Mace.
i.
Interpretation and his source of this chapter. This chapter belongs closely to the preceding one. It is at once historical and parenetic. It is historical, (a) Its historical root is to be found in 1 Mace. ii. 2938, where we are told of a large body of men who, with their wives and children, forsook all
IX.
torical
47.
. .
Blaspheme
Diy.TnN
npj,
the
name,
"
i.e.
that they had and took refuge in the caves in the wilderness in order to worship there. When
xxiv. 11. fear Israel was commanded to the name," and one of "the seven precepts of the children of Noah enjoined Israel to "sanc tify the name," ci?n ro-a (Sanh. 566). 2 Mace. viii. 4 speaks of the
"
Lev.
Antioclms
of this
officers
were informed
blasphemies committed against God s name during the Antiochian persecution yevo^vuv
:
eis
TO
6vofj.a
avrov
The
laics, etc.
caves where the Jews had taken demanded that they should submit to the king s com mands. When the refugees re fused they wr ere put to the sword, offering no resistance because it was the Sabbath. Their words : Let us all die in our innocency
37), correspond perfectly in sense with the words in our text, ver. 6 Let us die rather than
(ii.
"
What
they
had above
appears
their altar.
(or
upon)
and
mean
transgress."
CHAPTER
Ant.
slain were, accord ing to Josephus, xii. 6. 2, in number about
38,
IX.
33
Let 1000, but many escaped. us next try and determine the religious affinities of this body of zealous adherents of the law in the wilderness. In the first
place,
they
were
not
fol
lowers
of Mattathias
and
his
party ; for it was not till after the massacre that its survivors became adherents of Mattathias, Ant. xii. 6, 2. In the next, it is most probable that they belonged to the Chasid party. For the
survivors of this church in the wilderness, Ant. xii. 6. 2, as well as the Chasid party, 1 Mace,
In addition to 1 Mace. ii. 29which w e have dealt with above, our author has drawn upon other materials such as we find in 2 Mace. vi. 18-vii., where we have an account of the mar tyrdom of Eleazar and of the mother and her seven sons under Autiochus. Thus ver. 6: "Let us die rather than transgress the commands of ... the God of our fathers," is obviously the same as 2 Mace. vii. 2 erot^uoi
r :
yap
a.irodvf]a Kciv
ecr/nev
?)
Trapa-
i>6fj.ovs.
This
many
42, gave in their adhesion to Mattathias after, and, without doubt, owing to the massacre In 1 Mace. ii. just mentioned. 42 the Chasids join Mattathias
ii.
just after the latter had resolved henceforth to fight in self-de fence on the Sabbath a new line of action adopted in conse quence of the murder of their
reproduced For a similar in 4 Mace. ix. 1 expression of Eleazar s feeling, see 2 Mace. vi. 19. Again, in ver. 7 the strong assurance that God will avenge the blood of His servants is likewise found in 2 Mace. vii. 14, 17, 19, 34-36. Finally, the visitation is called an "unclean" one, ver. 2. This epithet better than any other would describe the Antiochian persecution from a Jewish stand
.
latter statement
is
In brethren, 1 Mace. ii. 41. Josephus, Ant. xii. 6. 2, the only fresh adherents gained by Mattathias at this period are the survivors above mentioned.
"These,"
pointtheir holy
with the
altar polluted
he says,
"appointed
Sabbath
day."
Thus
this
mas
sacre, which is the historical fact at the root of our text, con tributed to two results. (1) It
unclean ani mals, the temple and its courts profaned by the indecencies of the Venus cult, and the faithful adherents of the law forced to eat swine s llesh and to join in the Dionysiac revels. This martyrdom of the mother and her seven sons was a very favourite subject both with Je\v and Christian. It forms the theme of 4 Mace, It is alluded
sacrifice of
to
in
Heb.
xi.
:
35,
and Origen
iv.
10)
atum,
retold
xi.,
it
recount
has been
irepi
(1
Mace.
ii.
42
Ant.
xii. 6. 2).
by Prudentius,
are-
34
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
commendation of its character. Thus while some of the Phari saic party of his own time were
seeking to give a political char
acter to religion, and so to follow Maccabean precedents, others, as our author, were as vigorous ly upholding the old traditions of quietude and resignation, and while the former urged, "Let us war," the latter, with equal de
x., and Maiius Victorinus. Augustine was so fascinated with it that lie thought (de Civ. Dei, xviii. 36) that the books of the Maccabees should on account of these chapters be regarded as
canonical.
(6) But the character of this chapter appears to be not only historical, but also parenetic. Its
purpose is to indicate tne line of action which the Chasids or Pharisaic party of his own time should ?mrsue. Thus he ignores the temporary coalition of the Chasids with Mattathias and Judas Maccabteus. This coali tion lasted, as wo know, but a few years. Very early the aims of the Maccabean party began to change with their successes
in arms,
termination, rejoined: "Nay rather, let us die." But let us return for a mo ment to the history of the
When
and public
life,
that they
are practically unknown to his tory till the reign of J. Hyrwhen they reappear canus, under their new name of Phari sees. This characteristic aver sion of the Pharisees to patriotic aspirations began to disappear towards the close of the next century a change that is in part attested by the Psalms of Solomon. About this time a fusion took place between their traditional doctrine of Law and
that
is
actuality. cident in
is
became
more than an
political
precedent and It pre scribes the duty our author would enforce on the Pharisaism of his own time. Just as his complete silence as to the Maccabean up
It is likewise a
ments
example
for some, like our author, clung to the old attitude of non-resist
ance.
But he protested in
of
patriotism
vain.
The leavening
with
Pharisaism
earthly
and
rising forms an emphatic censure of its aims, so his vigorous state ment of the opposed and Chasid line cf action is designed as a
political ideas, and its corruption through success, went on apace, and became the fruitful mother
of
national
disasters.
These
CHAPTER
culminated in the
salem.
1.
IX.
35
fall
of Jeru
In that day
crit. note.
See
A man
The
Chasid movement thus sprang from or was associated with the priestly tribe, according to our author. He was probably thinking of Eleazar, who, in 2 Mace. vi. 18, is called one of
the principal scribes, and in 4
hypothesis of a Semitic original. iii. Colani (Revue de Theologie, 1868, pp. 90-9-1) takes Taxo to be a corruption of rd^wv, This last = ordaining = ny. 340. So also does p ,m,T Hence R. Jelmda ben N3X Baba is the great Taxo, "the
iv.
"
Nm
Mace.
v. 3 a priest.
Whose name
will be
Taxo.
have here the crux of the Scholars have to no pur book. pose wasted their ingenuity
We
who, before he was slain in 137 A.D., ordained the seven last disciples of Aqiba as rabbis. At the close of this explanation Colani adds:
ordainer,"
nil
upon
it.
The various
:
pretations are as follows Next, genfeld takes it rd^w. he suppresses the second letter, and supposes the last to be cor = rupt, and thus arrives at r^y 363. But rrsron ( - the Messiah) 363. Hence Taxo is the Messiah. It is needless to criticise this further than to add, that if it is allowable to change without some external documentary evi dence two letters out of four,
it is
inter i. Hil-
bien entendu, est qu un jeu and we agree with him but his pleasantry is finer than the seriousness of his two prede
cela,
Tout
jeu,
rien
"-
cessors.
Carriere (Revue de TheoL pp. 94-96), like his predecessor, believes in an Ara
iv.
iv.
1868,
maic
possible to make what we please out of anything. Volkmar takes it = rd^w, ii.
which = ordinance, etc. was wrongly taken to be a proper name by the Greek translator. v. Hausrath (Neutestamentl.
,
Zeit<je*ch.
(Rabbi Aqiba) = 431. Hence Taxo is Rabbi Aqiba. But. unhappily for Volkmar, }m is an impossible form, and Aqiba was never writ ten without the yod. There are
further objections into
which we
iv. p. 77, note) thinks that here by the method Ath Bash r\h*v was transposed into can. The Greek translator took ni v here is for the the D as D. Messiah. We might say here with Colani in reference to Hil-
need not enter. These last two attempts at solution proceeded on the hy
pothesis of a Greek original but if the original was Semitic, no interpretation arrived at on that hypothesis could in any
;
genfeld s interpretation: "This passage has as much to do with the Messiah as with the
Em
peror
Barbarossa."
Other
attempts
have
been
of u
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
vi.
Wieseler (Jahr. f.
d.
Th.
1868, p. 629 ; p. 193) thinks goes back to This like one. to be explained dwell to having the earth cf. 2
;
ZDMG,
1882,
e>nn,
Er wiirde in drei Tagen auferstehen ohne Recht." This passage appears to be very cor rupt, and to be derived partly from our text, partly from N.T.
igen.
history.
The
. .
Mann Name
"ein
sollte sein
"
tv
rols
cnn]\aloiS Orjpiuv
rpljirov
Gemeinde
^CTOLV
ve[j.6/j,voi.
Hilgenfeld re
:
marks on
this
nomen
erit
U tin am
vii.
Taxo, which = Kopn 101? -IS^N, the last word is corrupt for Njpn =
"the
sisset.
zealous."
"A
Apoc. Biic/icr, 31, 32) pp. adopts llausrath s idea. He points out that nyp is numerically equal to ne-D, and thinks that in isan, which, as Hausrath has sug
gested, corresponds to n^w, we have a mystical reference to a second Moses who was to rise He appeals to Detit. again. xviii. 18 in support of his con tention. None of these solutions is The person re satisfactory. ferred to is, as we have seen, not one living in the future, but one who was a contemporary of
Rosenthal
(Tier
will be,
of the tribe of Levi whose name will be the zealous one." This person will be zealous for the law only, and
man
show
death
his zeal
by submitting
than
to
rather
transgress
From
the
the commandments. Cf. vers. 4, The writer regards the 6, 7. person here described as repre senting those who were truly xealous for the law, over against the Maccabean party who claimed to be so. Zeal for the law Avas the most conspicuous as well as the most essential charac teristic of the religious move ment which opposed Antioehus. Cf. the words of Mattathias,
1
standpoint of this interpretation I offer the following suggestion. In the Samaritan Legends of from the translated Moses," Arabic into German by Dr. Leitner (Viertcljahrschrift f.
TJieol. dcutsch - und cnglisch Forschung, iv. 1871, p. 210), the following passage occurs, which seems to be to some degree de pendent on our text: "AngeMann zeigt wurde dass ein auferstehen wurde Levi und
Mace.
ii.
27, ?ras 6
tfXuv r$
This comes out still /JLOV. more clearly in the words attri buted to Mattathias in Joseph. Ant. xii. 6. 2, ei TIS ^XWTT/S ian TUV TTOLTpiuV 60UV Kal T7/S TOU Qeov prjff Keias (f)7]fflv,
oTriffu
,
e7recr#ct>,
efJLoi
sons,
reKva, ^Xwcrare
v6fji.it}
Kal Sore
Siatf^KT/s
rds
virtp
sein
Name
sollte
sein
Eiferer
der Gemeinde/ und er die Ebraer und das Hans des "VVeines heil-
Seven sons. The reference here can only be to the seven sons of the widow in 2 Mace.
CHAPTER
tribe of Levi,
IX. 2-6
37
whose name
will be Taxo,
who having
:
"
2. seven sons will speak to them exhorting (them) ruthless second a (and) Observe, my sons, behold
who
have done
great
are impious towards the Lord, who many abominations, have suffered as
us
4.
Now
therefore,
my
sons, hear
me
for observe
and know
tempt God, so as
to transgress
is
His commands.
5.
And
we
vii.
ye
know
do.
that this
6.
will
Let us
and
4 Mace.
See notes on
p. 33.
2.
The
III.,
first
Second unclean visitation, has been described in which they endured at the
;
had existed
hands of Nebuchadnezzar the second is that which they suffer under Antiochus. This latter
far exceeds the first," writer proceeds to say.
And
this
we will
do,
i.e.
the
Why
visitation
as our fathers. Cf. Dan. vi. IS, ix. 6. Fast. 3 Apoc. Bar. v. 7, ix. 2, xii. 5, 4 Ezra v. 20, xxi. 1, xlvii. 2
;
;
3.
What
nation,
etc.
"VVe
Let us go into a cave in the When the persecution field. became severe in B.C. 168, 167, those who still clung to the law took refuge in caves, 1 Mace.
i.
53, ev Kpvcfiiois.
These hiding-
wilderness
"
/care/3 -rjaav
ei s
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
days and on the fourth
is
let us
in the field,
and
let
gress the
commands
of
Lord
if
of
lords,
the
God
die,
of
our fathers.
For
we do
this
and
our blood will be avenged before the Lord. X. And then His kingdom will appear through
out
all
His creation,
Mace.
ii.
our text.
36, 41. for the
Cf.
also 1
Those who were zealous law fled with their wives and children, and finding conceal
ment in these caves lived there, Joseph. Ant. xii. 6. 2 ^erd rCjv T^KVWV /cat yvvaLK&v etyvyov as
:
originated with the persecution It gives a char acteristic and true note of the temper of the persecuted. It stereotypes the attitude of the faithful, as well of those who
of Antiochus.
TT]V epri^ov
8i7jyov.
Mace.
x.
: :
fj.er
.
ijyov
T/^epas 6/crw vevovres wy irpb /xi/cpou -^povov TT,V T&V GKf]vQ)V OpTl]V if TOiS
. . .
endured death passively as of those who rushed to arms in defence of their religion. These words are almost exactly those that were used by one of the seven martyrs in 2 Mace. vii. 2 yap airo6vqffKei.v ecr^v 7}
:
Cf.
Mace.
ix.
1.
They
are
crTT^Xatots
r)<ra.v
ve^b^voL.
But these hiding - places were betrayed to the Syro- Macedonian governor, and many Jews slain or burnt, 2 Mace. vi. 11 ere/sot
:
the same as those uttered by the 1000 that were martyred in the wilderness, 1 Mace. ii. 37 a.Troddvw^ev oi
essentially
:
d7r\6T7?Tt
7]/u.u>i>.
thought
xii.
cruve(f>\oyia
is
6.
d r]a
ai>,
(Ha TO ev
VTTfp
r)
eauro?s Kar
T-^S (Te/jLvoTaTrjs rj/j,epas.
^r/v
Mace.
7.
vi. 19.
Our
resolved to be so likewise, lest they transgress the commands of their fathers God. The ex pression, "let us die rather than
transgress," etc.,
This assurance that God will avenge is frequently found in the history of the seven mar tyred brethren, 2 Mace. vi. 14,
etc.
appears to have
X. 1-10. These
verses
form
CHAPTERS
And And
2.
IX. 7
X. 2
39
And And
enemies.
a
of ten stanzas of three It falls into three sections. The first constitutes the introduction, and consists of
hymn
tiating
lines each.
those
two stanzas.
Merx, as will appear below. 1. His kingdom will appear, etc. This seems to promise a
third consist of four stanzas each. The two last sections open with words almost identical. It will be observed that every stanza has a triple movement or paral lelism at all events, the greater number. This i act makes it
earth,
but this is not the case if ver. 10a is right. Satan will be no more. Does Satan mean here the head of the kingdom of evil or the
adversary of Israel ? The follow ing line makes for the former
view.
Cf. Sorrow, etc. Rev. xxi. 4.
;
highly probable that where this triple parallelism is not observed the error is due to corruption of the text. The error may be of the nature either of defect or
Isa.
xxxv.
10
le
2.
redundancy.
Tims
vers. 3
and
filled,
the
"
angel
will
and
4, 5,
10
may
be redundant.
be delegated, appointed. The phrase T N^D = to fill one s hand means, to deliver the priest hood to him. Cf. Exod. xxviii. Lev. xxi. 10 Test. 41, xxix. 9
; ;
marginal glosses.
Lev.
8,
Tr\ripw<rav
^f/x/a/aaros
axrre
i.e.
hymn
and
is
stanzas. in ver. 3
begins with ver. therefore only of eight They regard the enim
as =
3
Michael the
Cf.
Israel.
Dan.
introductory. They point out that the subject of ver. 3 is "God," but that is the subject in ver. 2. angel" Hence they suppose that the
"
And
tutus =
or
is
"
The
"
sunmio consti-
hymn
is
of earlier
and
is
line,
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
3.
And He will go forth from His holy habitation And His wrath will burn on account of
His
4.
sons.
:
to its confines
will it be
shaken
made low
fall.
whereas the parallelism requires, in the second line, the statement of a fresh fact which will modify or develop the statement which
II. 4,
to belongs IV. 4.
our
From His royal throne. The Latin a sede regni sui = NDa JD
miDta
Hence appears in the first line. for est I have read erit and taken as in 6. I. In sumnio qui Kim,
He
3
;
tfN 1
or
i?K-a,
or
.
something
avenge, etc.
From
The
text
Deut. xxvi. 15
. .
And His
is
Michael will avenge Israel. But since Michael is not so much as once referred to again in this hymn, and as it is God Himself
that destroys the Gentiles and avenges Israel (vers. 7, 8), it is probable that 1, 2, and 3-10 are not from the same author. This conclusion gains confirma tion if we compare the picture of perfect goodness and perfect
cum
indigna-
tionem
et iram.
But the
and not an adverbial phrase depending on "will go forth." The corruption seems to have
arisen in the Greek.
Cum
in-
dignatione et ira
Kal opyrj,
which
/ecu
"
dv/mf re I take to be a
fli
= eV
corruption of
= isx
^uxrercu
6/3777
mm,
will
happiness throughout all crea tion depicted in ver. 1, and compare it with vers. 4-6, and particularly with ver. 10, if the text is there right. Vers. 3-10 are, I believe, native to the text, but not 1, 2.
3-6. Second section. which will accompany
burn."
The text
"with
as it stands
f]Ni
pirn,
indignation and
wrath."
4.
And
i.
the
6.
high mountains
low.
Isa.
xl.
will be
made
Eth. En.
And
and
shaken
Signs
God
coming.
3.
This
The text, which was fall. corrupt, I have emended by means of Eth. En. i. 6 (Greek See crit. note. Version).
CHAPTER
5.
X. 3-7
And
And
and he
the
moon
circle
and
And
6.
the
of
the
stars
will
be
dis
turbed.
the fountains of
w aters
r
will fail,
7.
the Eternal
God
alone,
will
And He And He
5.
. . .
And
into blood.
by themselves.
Deus aeternus,
X.T. are
Circle of the stars will be dis turbed. Of. Mark xiii. 25.
Cf. fail. Pss. Sol. xvii. 21, Tnrjyal avveffxfdfjo o-v aluvtoi Test. Levi 4 Ezra 4, \>5a.rwv ^pa.ivofj.evwi vi. 24, et venae fontium stabunt.
.
.
as
Sa certainly
is
from
Fountains
29 of
verse.
Alone. The text solus = vn^. The meaning seems to be God alone will come to punish the Gentiles and exalt Israel, and
:
viii.
10, xvi. 4.
7-10.
their
Third
section.
God
them
7.
Cf.
This is said clearly in 4 Ezra, where, to the question in v. 56, Dernonstra servo tuo per quern visitas creaturam tuam ? God answers in vi. 6, Finis per me et non per alium. Thus this forms another argu ment against 1, 2 and 3-10
not
a Messiah.
more
will
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
8.
Then
And
thou, Israel, wilt be happy, thou wilt mount upon the neck[s and
9.
8.
And (the days of thy mourning) will be And God will exalt thee,
triumph over
its
ended.
Israel s
of eagles,
Then
thou,
Israel, wilt le
and was derived from Isa. xl. 31. So the Targ.-Jon. interprets Isa.
pa>j
would be
Thou
necks
iv iU
mount upon
It
the
polation.
the text is right, it recalls Dent, xxxiii. 29, -pin iO jii!23-Sj,, and gives the interpretation of that verse that was current for some time before and long after the Christian era.
and.
If exalted tone of the passage. this be so, there is, of course, no reference to Rome in the text.
Thus, whereas modern scholars render "Thou shalt tread upon their high places," the LXX., Syr., Vulg., Targ.-Onk., Targ.Jon., Jarchi translated "Thou shalt tread upon their necks," or
The days of thy mourning. So the lacuna is supplied by See crit. note. Dr. Cheyne.
On
many
wings,
This rendering was probably due to Joshua x. 2-J, Put your feet upon the necks
"neck."
"
to
stars.
of these
calls
kings."
Our text
re
Dent, xxxiii. 29, but does not agree exactly with it or any of the Versions. In Bar. iv. 20, eVi Tpaxtf\ovs avr&v eVt/S^crrj is derived directly from it. If our text is trustworthy, the refer ence is clearly to Israel s triumph over Rome. The plural "necks ought in that case to be written
"
guage might be metaphorical. For other examples, cf. Pss. Sol. i. 5, v^uOtjcrav e ws r&v ttarpuv Jer. li. (LXX., xxviii.) 9, #%>ev
;
cos
TtDi>
(SiffTpwv.
Instead
stars"
of
"the
heaven of the
"the
we
in
have
stars of
heaven"
13 (LXX.), eiravw TUV affTepwv TOV ovpavov (^N 3313) rbv dpbvov /J.QV. These
Isa. xiv.
Qri<r<j)
"neck
it
is
"
"stars
of
God"
("of
heaven,"
-
usage, be rendered singular or plural as the context But it is not at all requires. impossible that the text is cor rupt, and that it ran originally,
to
ja-^y
Hebrew
in this passage by "the people of God," and thus re garded as a metaphor. But the language seems not to
n^?n,
"thou
wilt
and
glorified
CHAPTER
And He
heaven
X. 8-10
43
approach to the
And He
them.
10.
will establish
And
thou wilt look from on high and wilt see thy enemies in Ge(henna), thou wilt recognise them and rejoice, thou wilt give thanks and confess thy
And And
Creator.
after the Israel not
final judgment to in the body, but in In this case we should
civ.
2,
"Ye
take
be of D
Cf.
the spirit.
establish."
text.
Eth. En.
will shine as the stars of heaven, . and the portals of heaven will be opened to you civ. 6, ; "Ye will become companions of the hosts of heaven." The words, "Thou wilt see thy enemies in Ge(henna)," in the
"
10.
See
thy
enemies
in
Ge(henna] videbisinimicostuos in Ge(henna). So I emend and restore the corrupt text vides inimicos tuosin terram. Previous
editors have merely changed this text into videbis inimicos tuos in terra. But the sense thus If arrived at is impossible. the words in terram are not corrupt, it is difficult to take
next
verse
favour
this
inter
And He will establish tJi ij habitation among them. The text is here, loco habitations eorum=:C3E iD Dip.tn, and is be
yond question corrupt
;
pretation.
for (1)
the parallelism is wanting, and (2) we expect here a statement as to the place of Israel s habi tation and not that of the stars.
= "their Hence we regard habitation as defective for en -pens = thy habitation among them," the ~3 being omitted owing to the copyist s eye passing from the first 3 to the second. In the next place, cips3 = loco, is, as the structure of the rest of the stanza shows, a corruption of some transitive
ciw\z>
"
them otherwise than literally but if we do so, how are we to Israel s them ? If explain enemies are on the earth, and Israel beholds them from on must be Israel high, then But that already in heaven.
;
the final
"
Hence
it is
corrupt, or rather,
44
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
11.
And
words
of)
these
and
this
book;
until
12. For
death
will be
defective. to Israel
;
(my) assumption
CCL
s
times.
13.
And
Israel
both
torments for Israel rejoices over the plight of the latter. They are, moreover, in sight of Israel. These two facts at once suggest the thought of Gehenna here, and that the original was
DJH
J3
:3.
and their enemies were on and Israel had just earth, triumphed over the latter, this statement would be absurd. But if they are respectively in heaven and gehenna, the recogni tion is full of point, and just
cause for rejoicing. 11. This book. Cf. 12. My death
I.
But
njn
was
lost
and
rendered ev 777, and this in cjma un is turn by in terrain, twice rendered tv yfj Beevvd/ut, in 2 Chron. xxviii. 3 and in xxxiii.
6.
16,
XL
1.
(my]
as
777 or
:
;
or
16 1 Sam. xiii. 18 1 Chron. iv. 14 2 Chron. xxxiii. 6 Ezek. xxxix. 11,15; Eth. En. xxvii. 2. Hence I take the true text to be, "Thou wilt see thy enemies
; ;
in
Gehenna,
and
thou
wilt
recognise them and rejoice." portrays faithfully the expectations of the Jews as to the future life. In early times
This
(Isa. Ixvi.
2, 3,
24
1,
liv.
xc.
26,
27)
The word "assump was not in the original here, which told only of Moses death. Cf. ver. 14 and I. 15. It was introduced by the final one editor, who combined in work the two distinct books, The Testament of Moses and "The Assumption of Moses." Our present book is what sur of vives "The Testament of Moses," which knew nothing of Moses "Assumption." His Advent, i.e. God s advent for judgment. COL times. Each time =
sumption.
tion"
"
"
"
"
wicked generally, who were to be tormented within view of the blessed. Cf. 4 Ezra vii. 36,
250 times = 1750 years. from the creation (see I. 2) to the final judgment was to be a period of 4250 years, or 85 This estimate is found jubilees. elsewhere, I think, only in Sanhedrin 97b but there the goal is the coming of the Messiah.
;
7 years, or a year-week.
Thus Hence
Et apparebit locus tormenti, et contra ilium erit locus requietionis clibanus gehennae ostendetur, et contra eum jucunditatis
;
14.
shall go
to
sleep, etc.
paradisus.
CHAPTERS
which they
14.
will
X.
ii.
XI. 7
45
pursue
till
And
I shall
to sleep
(for)
my
successor in the
same covenant.
heard the words of
XI.
cast himself at
Moses
feet.
2.
forted him and wept with him. answered him and said 4. AVhy dost thou com
"
fort
And how shall I be me, (my) lord Moses ? comforted in regard to that which thou hast spoken
word which has gone forth from thy mouth, which is full of tears and lamentation, in that thou departest from this people ? 5. And
the
bitter
now what
6.
Or what
?
will
7.
Or
The
2,
tions
on
Baruch
is
departure,
44.
xii.
word
Bar.
etc.
,
"depart"
used in Apoc.
an
5-8.
No
single
locality
is
XL
1.
His
writing.
.
. .
Of.
I.
16,
X. 11.
4.
Comfort me
worthy enough to become the burial. The place of Moses whole earth is his sepulchre.
7.
be
com-
crit. note.
from
this
is directed polemically against the Christians, since the of Christ was moved from body the cross to the sepulchre.
this verse
46
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
will dare
who
a
to
man from
place to place
on earth
they die have according to their age their sepulchres but thy sepulchre is from the rising to
;
the north
lord,
?
My
people
all the world is thy sepulchre. 9. thou art departing, and who will feed this 10. Or who is there that will have com
:
passion on
way
them and who will be their guide by the 11. Or who will pray for them, not omitting
may
?
lead
them
into
12.
How
therefore
am
is
I to control this
son, or
as
being
prepared
will
be
handed
while
she
over
to
the
husband she
guards person from the sun and (takes care) that her feet are not unshod for running upon the ground.
8.
revere,
her
is
thy scpul-
elsewhere,
we
must
translate
chra.
original of these words is, as Ronsch recognised, to be found in Thuc. ii. 43,
dvdpuiv
The
yap
eiri.(t>a.v&v
Tracra
777
not the text but the Hebrew, or, as it is here, the Greek presupposed by the text, See crit. note. Trapieis.
ou<5e
As with a very slight change these words become Greek iambics, it is possible that they were popular expressions,
rd0oy.
12.
and thus reached Palestine as did those of Aratus, Menander, and Epimenides. Cf. Acts xvii. 1 Cor. xv. 33 28 Tit. i. 12. 11. Who will pray for him. See XII. 6. Not omitting. The text is nee patiens ; but here, as frequently
; ;
note. mistress her virgin See crit. note, daughter. To be, given to the husband.
crit.
See
Or as a
See
crit.
allels
She will revere. See crit. note and from Ecclus. parallels Guarding her person. (p. 93).
Cf. Ecclus. vii. 24, dvyartpes
etVt
;
crol
Trpocrexe
r<f
06part avruv.
CHAPTER
1 3.
XI. 8-17.
47
And how
shall I supply
1 4-. For according to the pleasure of their will ? of them there will be 600,000 men, for these have
multiplied to this degree through thy prayers, (my) 15. And what wisdom or understand lord Moses.
ing have I that I should judge or answer by word 16. And the kings of in the house of the Lord?
the
then
be
emboldened
is
to
attack us
no longer
of
the word,
who was
God s
teacher in
say
Let us go against
17.
crit.
If the
note.
See
= 6^
16.
is,
in tuis oratiouibus.
3.
The The
A Hebrew
per orbem
That there is no longer amongst them. See crit. note. Sacred spirit manifold. vii. Wisd. Cf. Trvev/ma 22,
. .
. .
.
God,"
etc.
the
The text
in
is
ayiov
7roXi;/x.epes.
matum
Wisd.
C^i>
saeculo
consuniiloctorem
:
Cf.
5, 6 6eos eTreipaffev avrovs /ecu ous eavrov. eupei/ O.VTOVS Lord of the word. I cannot
dt
Num.
iii.
xii.
7,
"Moses
Thy house"
was Heb.
Cf. ver. 14. This office of praying on behalf of Israel is frequently ascribed to Jeremiah. Cf. 2 Mace. xv. 14, where Jeremiah with appeared along Onias in a vision to Judas
48
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
impiously against their Lord, they have no advocate to offer prayers on their behalf to the Lord, as did
Moses the great messenger, who every hour day and night had his knees fixed to the earth, praying and
looking for help to
Him
with compassion and righteousness, calling to mind the covenant of the fathers and propitiating the
He
them
us go therefore and destroy from off the face of the earth. 19. What
:
will then
become
of this people,
my
lord
Moses
"
XII.
finished
(these)
words, he cast himself again at the feet of Moses. 2. And Moses took his hand and raised him into
the seat before him, and answered and said unto
him
3.
"
thy mind
the latter as
at ease,
is
thyself, but
set
4.
my
Sifri
words.
described by 6 TroXXd irpoa-evxbfJievos wepi rov Xaou /ecu T?)s dyias TroXews Iepe/j,[as 6 rov 6eov 7rpo0?7T7;s. Rest of words of
:
Maccabaeus, and
installation of Joshua in
place.
Moses
ovros
e<m
Num.
may
question,
Baruch
ii.
3,
8rai>
-rmdpravev 6
.
. .
judgment,
lest after
Xads ... 6 lepe/ads rjvx TO virep rov Xaou, e ws See also Apoc. Bar. d/mapria. ii. 2, and the Talmudic passages cited in the notes.
&i>
d(f>e6fj
avru>
rj^
Him
See
that
crit.
on this
difficult passage,
the Israelites may say During the lifetime of his teacher he did not give judgment, but now he does. Thereupon (Moses) raised him (Joshua) from the ground and placed him beside himself on the chair." Quoted by Heidenheim, Deutsche Viertcljahrschrift, 1871, p. 102.
4.
also parallels are given. XII. 2. Took his hand and raised into the seat before
where
Mm
him.
hands.
The
destinies
likewise
CHAPTERS
He
XI.
XII.
49
God hath
hath
us,
He
us from the beginning of the creation of the earth unto the end of the age, and nothing has been
neglected by
things
forth.
He
5.
even to the least thing, but all hath foreseen and caused all to come
all
Him
(Yea)
earth
the
they
are
6.
of
^Vhateve^
befalls
on behalf of
disaster to Israel or exaltation to the Gentile has been fore seen even to the smallest detail, and nothing can set at nought or hinder God s original purpose in creation for the world was created on Israel s behalf, I. 12. However glorious the fortunes of the Gentile and depressed those of the Jew, there is no reason for downheartedness or
;
Israel by the right eous forefathers of the nation these intercessions of the de parted saints of Israel were to be the second of the three chief means for the restoration of their descendants, De Extcrat. ix.
:
devrepaide
rrj
rdoi>
TOV edvovs
oaihTfjTi., 6 rt
God s pur despair (see ver. 3), pose standeth sure, and will ultimately assert itself. Foreseen and caused to come,
forth.
6.
Trpos
TOV
dpxpvra,
viu>i>
deparrelav
rds
inrp
/cat
t/ceret aj
LfLffdcLL,
ou/c
a.Te\eis
See
crit.
note.
to
p a ll for their sins. This was a genuinely Jewish conception, and not bor rowed from Christianity. Thus, as we have already seen in the note on XL 17, Jeremiah was held to discharge this office in the spiritual world, 2 Mace. xv. 14. Enoch also (Slav. En. (MSS. AB) Ixiv. 5) was conceived of as "one removes the sins of men." Philo speaks of the
intercessions
Appointed me
ytpas aurots TOV ?rarp6s rb eirrjKooy Ill Joseph. Ant. i. 13. 3, Abraham is described as to Isaac, when on saying the point of sacrificing him
:
yuer
5e
/cat
fj.ol
/cat
iepovpylas
TTfV
ffrjl
~(pv-)(T]V
ov
liii.
In the Slav. En. doctrine is denied. See my note in loc., where a his tory of this doctrine is sketched
1
this
and prayers
offered
briefly.
5o
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES
The Lord) hath on their behalf appointed me to pray for their sins and make intercession for them.
7.
in
to
For not for any virtue or strength of mine, but His compassion and longsuffering was He pleased it is 8. Fur I say unto you, Joshua call me.
:
not on account of the godliness of this people that 9. The lights of thou shalt root out the nations.
the heaven, the foundations of the earth have been
are
under the
commandments of God fore, 11. But those will increase and be prospered: who sin and set at nought the commandments will
who do and
fulfil
the
be
without
the
blessings
before
mentioned,
and
the
many torments by
12.
But wholly
to root out
and destroy
7.
. .
virtue, vie.
Cf.
pleased to call me, See crit. notes. Just as in Rom. ix. 11, 12, the selection of Jacob rather than Esau is declared to be due not to works, Imt to the divine purpose, so also here,
.
He
Ezek.
xxxvi.
22,
32.
By
This election
privilege
is
an election to
to eternal
life,
and not
As regards the latter, it is written in the Tanchuma Pikkude 3, God does not determine beforehand whether a man shall be
righteous or wicked, but puts this in the hands of the man See Slav. En. xxx. 15, only. note.
8.
writer who so frankly recognises the wickedness of his nation and its need of frequent chastiseraent, its selection as the people of God could not well be ascribed to its merits, but must be traced back to the divine And yet he holds purpose. that the world was created on behalf of Israel, i. 12 and in
;
xii.
4,
5,
13,
it
is
God
s fore-
knowledge, and not His predetermining purpose, that is dwelt upon. 9. See crit. notes. 12. Destroy. See crit. note.
Not
on
account
of
the.
CHAPTER
not permitted. forth who has foreseen
is
XII. 7-13
51
them
13. For
all
God
for
will
go
things
ever,
and
which
CENTURY
MS. IN
THE LATIN VERSION OF THE ASSUMPTION OF MOSES CRITICALLY REVISED AND EMENDED
Words included within round
Editor
;
brackets
[ ]
are
to be
When the text is corrupt, but the corruption is not tcrpolations. native to the Latin but to the Greek or the Hebrew, then the text is corrected accordingly, and attention is drawn to the correction
by an asterisk
*
I.
et
vigesimo),
nam
.
numerus
miis* et
4.
mus
et
inns
profectionis
fynicis.
Cum
per
exivit
plebs
post
profectionem
trans
quae
fiebat
5.
Moysen usque
fetiae
I.
Amman
which
is
1.
verso,
is
vicesimo
by Ronsch
Liber
supplied
Deut. xxxi. 2, by Schmidt-Merx, save that I have written Moysi instead of Mosis, as this is the form of the genitive used by the Latin translator
;
anno
3. With Volkmar and SchmidtMerx I have omitted nam secus .... mus as a marginal gloss,
byHilgenfeld: AssumptioMoysis
quae facta
est
Cmo
et
XXmo; by Volkmar:
Liber
scripsit
MS.
The figures in clarendon in the margin denote the folio in MS., and the letters a and b in the margin denote respectively beginning of the first and second columns in a folio.
the
the
mus
. .
et
mus
profec
et
mus
4
2
tionis fynicis
cum
profectionem quae
fiebat per
mosysen
nam
jordanem profetiae
quae facta
est a
moy
pro-
DCCL
4.
CCLV mus
as
an
nam
et
sunt
numeros [MM]
mus
et
[CC] mus
fectionis
Z.f.
[XXXXX] mus
pro-
Ronsch phoenicis. 1874, p. 556, regards cum exivit qui est bis plebs as a parenthesis and thus restores vcr. 3 nam secus qui in oriente sunt numeros mus et
could not have spoken of Amman as across the Jordan only a dweller in Jerusalem could have so described it.
:
W.T.
5. Schmidt-Merx rightly re In a ject this verse as a gloss. book of Hebrew origin the phrase libro Deuteronomio could not
MM
have been
original.
56
nomio],
filiuin
sit
Nave,
successor
sanctis illius,
Et ut inducat plebem
9.
eorum,
Ut
detur
illis
(Confortare) et
tuam
oinnia quae
:
mandata
Qui;
Kim.
Of.
III. p.
14
X. 2
see
Introd.,
xxxiii.
lesum
mbv Latin was derived directly from the Greek. If it had been directly from the Hebrew, these words would have been Josue
filium
7.
er/7
often means the chief minister or servant thus in Exod. xxiv. 13 ; xxxiii. 11 ; Num. xi. 28 Josh. i. 1, Joshua is described par excellence as Moses servant, ntyD me D. It is also used of service in the tabernacle ; cf.
;
Num.
text
viii.
26, etc.
1
Hence the
In
is
Nun.
sit successor
r<2
x.
Ut
plebi
iva
the
sible
same
that
meaning
It
to
15 be
cannot mean
as
"a
successor"
here,
et
violent remedy. 8id5oxos means also (1) a court official of the second rank in the
is, of course, pos Siddoxos here may represent ~\y, as in 2 Chron. xxvi. 11. But this would not differ materially from the sense we have reached above. 8. I read et ut instead of ut ct, and patribus instead of ex
followed.
tribus,
9.
with Schmidt-Merx.
Egyptian
papyri (see Steph. Thesaurus); (2) the chief minister of the king LXX. 1 Chron. xviii. 17 2 Chron. xxvi. 11, xxviii. 7; Ecclus. xlvi. 1. This 7iieaning is found in Joseph. Ant. xv. 10, and is frequent in
: ;
;
exactly what the context requires "that he be the of the minister might
Philo.
this
is
:
And
After illis Schmidt-Merx adds ut dens illis, and for quod tv read quondam. In scenae rr) just as scene in I. 7 Dare de lesum rrj 0-K-rjvrj. seems interpolated. De is used in the sense of by means also in V. 1, de reges, "by means of the kings."
-
<rKf)vy,
"
of,"
have now to dis people." cover the Hebrew behind didThis we learn from ooxos. Ecclus. xlvi. 1, where it is a rendering of rny;?. This word
"We
ct
Verbum hoc, (confortare) The text here is te. verbum hoc, ct promitte. Now
10.
firma
Moses address to Joshua cannot Some verb has begin with et. fallen out between hoc and et.
TEXT OF
sen in libro deute
6
MS.
CHAPTER
9
I.
6-10
57
tribus
eorum ut de
per testamen
tur
turn
illis
et per jusjuran
dum quod
locutus
cum omnibus
8
in terram
sanctis illius
ut et inducat plebem
datam ex
present text into Hebrew we shall discover the source of the corruptions and at the same The time the original text.
argue on this ground against the Hebrew original in favour The Aramaic of an Aramaic.
nDNi
nm
verb
et promitte
would admit of this order, and Dr. Neubauer assures me the But it is later Hebrew also.
its
n:nn.
Now
the
the
i
missing
before
is
;
clearly pm, as suggested above for this could readily fall out after nm, and IDN is an easy cor ruption of fCN as Rosenthal has Hence the text already seen. ran This pDNi pm nm 131 n
:
the Hebrew. Thus "be strong, and hold fast according to thy might to all that is commanded to be done" would represent
niB yS
D Tipan
"?:n
restoration
confirmed by X. 15. See note in loc. Hilgenfeld emended the above words into verbum hoc ait pro mitte. Volkmar took vTrotrxov promitte to be a corruption
is
:
4,
sin
The
ideo
of vwocrx^
facias.
"undertake."
my
xvnt translation
ut,
quemadmodum
The Hebrew
58
sunt ut facias
Deo."
quemadmodum
dicit
11.
Haec
initio orbis
arguantur
ar-
guant qui ab
facio
se.
invenit me,
initio
15. Et
vitae
meae
et
transio
in
dormitionem
16. (Tu) autem plebem. ad hanc scribturam percipe recognoscendam tutationem librorum quos tibi tradam 17. Quos
:
meorum
palam omnem
incepit, Z.f.
W. T.
1874, p. 557
a.irapx nv
is
air^p^aro KTicews.
sea.
OLVTOV
TTJS
Volkmar
wholly at
inserts
Ab
may
initio.
The MS.
Humiliter
He meaning of *?K\ should have rendered OVK epovXero. Hence render "He was Merx was the not pleased." tirst to discover the real meanpriate
be corrupt for humilitate. In my translation I have sought to only to give the sense:
their
own"
(or
"common") "hu-
miliation."
Hilgenfeld emends
ing here.
1
He
retranslation N ?.
ns>
Inceptionem = "design." So Schmidt-Merx. Hilgenfeld has missed the sense of the passalso
This verse is found in the See exeg. note, p. 6. Ab initio orbis terrarum. This phrase has already occurred
14.
Greek.
in
I.
13.
4,
age,
as
his
XII.
in the form
likewise
coepit
to
Ronsch
Of this turae orbis terrarum. verse the Greek (see I. 14, exeg. note) is happily preserved irpb = nnoiD J3 ? /caraj3oX^s Kb<r^ov
:
1
TEXT OF
ut facias
MS.
CHAPTER
rum
I.
11-17
59
quemad
quae ideo baec
ter
modum
11 rellam
dicit
sine
est
dominus orbis
15 menti
tune
rarum
12
Creavit enim orbem
palam
terrarum propter
13 plebem suam
et
non
meae
et tran
dormitionem
nem
creaturae
initio orbis ter
lllaet ab
pie
rarum palam
face
bem
autem
re ut in earn gentes
percipe scribturam
argnantur et humi
liter inter se
bane ad recognos
dispu
cendam tutationem
librorum quos tibi &17tradam quos ordina
bis et chedriabis et
back to the same Greek as the former, for our Latin translator is far from being consistent or
accurate.
tationibus arguant
14
se itaque excogitavit
et invenit
me
qui ab
It is to be observed that the Vulgate renders Heb. ix. 26 Rev. xiii. 8, a-rro K ara/3oA?)s Koff/j-ov by ab origine mundi, similarly as in our text, but elsewhere in the N.T. Matt. xiii. 35, xxv. 34 Luke xi. 50 Heb. iv. 3 Rev. xvii. 8
by a constitutione mundi.
The.
into I d,7raAXdw. pellam follow Rb nsch in taking it as a proposition, but the text is doubtful. 16. recognoscendam tuta
Ad
apX^s Kriaeus
TOV
xiii.
Kocr/mov
Mark
Snnn
it
is
x.
6,
19)
= rrc x-iD
;
(cf.
tionem librorum.
The obscurity
"
rus nn.
On
quite
of this phrase disappears when re translated into Hebrew, jnn jyoS nnsD.TnN met? mayst know
how
to
preserve."
60
ordinabis
libus in
ab
18. Ut invocetur nomen illius usque in diem paenitentiae in respectu quo respiciet illos Dominus in consummatione exitus dierum.
terrarum,
II.
(Et
nunc)
tu
intrabunt
quam
2.
decrevit et promisit
In
qua
et
benedices
sort em
et
unicuique, et
eis
stabilibis
eis
in
me
constabilibis
illis
regnum,
secus
quod placebit 3. (Fiet) autem postquam intrabunt in terram suam anno s(exto), et postea dominabuntur a principibus
et
Domino eorum
in judicio et justitia.
tyrannis per
abrumpent
tribus X.
Nam
Ronsch
in earn
descendent tribus
(Z.f.
18. Diem poenitentiae. Rosenthai supposes an error on the part of the Greek translator, i.e. that lie took rnie nn cv to mean the day of repentance, whereas it incant "the day of the return," or of the coining again," and refers to the return of the people to Palestine.
"
W. T.
iv y
1874, p. 558),
.
.
back to in qua,
X"
Magisteria locorum roirap1 *Probably roTrapxtas is corrupt for Toirapxas. Dimities. This is corrupt,
ev cu rjy.
In respectu quo
T7)
respiciet
ev
a eTriaKoirrj y e7ri(T/cei//ercu familiar Hebraism, ic x mpsn nn ~\ps\ Cf. Test. Lev. iii., iv. ; Pss. Sol. xi. 2. In consummatione exitus di-
Schmidt- Merx emend it into dimetieris, but their reference to Pss. Sol. xvii. 30 gives no support to their suggestion,
Dimittes
Kadrjaeis.
erum
II.
Q
1.
DM
genfeld.
2.
be for demittes = may be a corruption of Kadicreis or /faratrr^creis "thou wilt In any appoint." case the sense required is clear.
may
This
The
Schmidt-Merx bracket
original may have been Tp?fi D 1p9, "thou wilt appoint local Cf. Gen. xli. 34. magistrates."
3.
Fiet.
So Schmidt-Merx
;
qua.
Volkmar, dat
Hilgenfeld,
illi.
TEXT OF
reponis in vasis
MS.
CHAPTERS
in
I.
18
II.
61
fie
me
et constabi
libis eis
regnum
illis
ab
initio crea
et magisteria loco
11
rum
bit
dimittes
18 rum ut invocetur
nomen
in
illius
usque
3
domino eorum
in ju
diem paenitentiae
quo dominus
dicio et justitia
in respectu
respicit illos
in
consummatio
intrabunt
ne exitus clierum
II.
dominabi
tur a principibus et
per te in terrain
quam
2
decrevit et
promisit dare pa
tribus eorunr in
abrumpens
4
tib
x
tri
qua tu benedicis et da
bis
nam
descendent
unicuique et sta
Anno
xiv. 10
it
s(exto}.
From
v.
Tribus.
4.
MS.
tib.
appears that the spent five years in the conquest of Canaan. Hence the above emendation. Hilgenfeld, annos (quinine); Merx, annos(eptiino).
19, Israelites
Nam.
Nam
Duodecim.
rightly
2
So Schmidt-Merx
duae. the chosen
emend from
vi. 1, 2,
In
Sam.
men
of Israel and
Judah accompanied
David. The corruption arose in the Greek ai ifi (pvXai by the L falling out, or else in the Hebrew.
TranferenL
MS. transform! t.
62
duodecim
Tune
turrem
Deus
5.
caelestis faciet
et
Nam X
:
suas regna
7.
Et VII
et
circumvallabunt muros,
circumibo
VIIII
et
jusjurandum polluent quern fecit Dominus cum eis. 8. Et immolabunt natos suos diis alienis, et
ponent
idola
scenae,
servientes
illis
9.
Et
in
domo Domini
III.
omnem
illis
(Et)
illis
temporibus
Tribus
veniet
sanctitatis.
ab
Scenam testimonii. MS. scenae testimonmm. So I emend Faciet aulam. from fecit palam with HilgenChron. feld, who compares 2 The phrase aulam scenae xx. 5. is found in Exod. xxvii. 9. For
the various uses of -ran see the new Hebrew Lexicon in loc.
= irnpn
7.
i.e.
Hebraism
auty.
miDiS
Rb nsch,
Merx,
figet fecit
palum palam
I
Schmidt(zelum)
;
Turrem.
So
emend from
ferrum. In a similar description of the future in Eth. En. Ixxxix. 50, 67, 73, the temple is spoken of as a tower. Hilgenfeld,
adcedent ad testamentum Do mini et iinem polluent. First of all, iinem = opov, which, as we see from the context, is corrupt for opKov. Hence for finem we should read jusjurandum. This combination of testamentum
forum, comparing 2 Mace. x. 2 Schmidt-Merx, fervorem. Volkmar gives the whole passage thus fecit palam (locum) scenae suae et terram sanctuarii sui ;
; :
jusjurandum occurs four other times in this book I. 9, III. 9, XL 17, XII. 13, and thus confirms our emendation.
arid
1867, p. 448, faciet palam (portam) scenae suae et forem sanctuarii sui.
Z.f.
Haupt,
W.T.
is familiar in the O.T. Cf. C4en. xxvi. 28 Deut. xxix. 12, 14 Ezek. xvi.
;
place,
adcedent
TEXT OF
caelestis fecit
MS.
pa
CHAPTERS
II.
III.
adcedent ad testa
et finem
ferrum sanctua
sur et ponentur
dominus cum
eis et
im
molabunt natos
suos diis alienis* et
nam
*x tribus sta
ordinationes suas
bQ regna et adferent
victimas per annos
7
domo domini
s
faci
ent sceleste et
xx
et *vir
circumval
temporibus
TO.
auTWf
iv
TOJ
oi /cy
ou
iv
is
TTK\r]drj TO
aimo
lies in therefore corruption adcedent, and is easy to discover. Adcedent = 7rpo<r/3?7cro; Tcu, corrupt for irapa-^rjaovTai.. rty 5i.a9 qK7]v Trapaftrjvai. is the actual phrase in Ezek. xvi. 59, xvii. Iti, 18, 19. Hence for adcedent read
animalium. Similitudinem fell out after omnern through homoioteleuton. Hilgenfeld and Yolkmar changed omnem into om nium, but the text thus arrived
at
is
intolerable.
They
"
failed to
is
based
on Ezek. viii. 10, Every form of ... abominable beasts and all the idols graven upon the
.
accept adeedent jusjurandum. For et finem, Volkmar reads sed in fine finem ; SchmidtMerx, et (iv) fidcm. Hilgenfeld accepts the words as they stand. 8. Scenae I take as a dative, "in the Sanctuary." Rb nscli (Z.f.W.T. 1874, p. 558) in to read idola geniously proposes obscena, comparing
Idola mitlta,
i.e.
sipty.
The word
piy
is
used immedi
ately after ncnn in Ezek. viii. The whole verse = 10, as here.
Veniet
.
.
LXX.,
Jer.
MS. veuient
equitatu. equitatus.
.
64
incendet
coloniam
Domini, et
eorum 2. Et eorum igne cum aede sancta sancta vasa omnia toilet 3. Et omnem
:
:
et
plebem eiciet, et ducet illos in terrain patriae suae, duas tribus ducet secum. 4. Tune invocabunt
duae tribus
X
"
tribus, et
indignabunt, ut liena in
esurientes
vos
peccastis,
et
nos
pariter
nostris."
abducti
6.
sumus
plor-
Tune
tribus
audientes
7.
inproperia
"
verborum
tribuum duarum,
vobis fratres
?
Et dicent
in
"
Quid fecimus
Istrahel
plor-
Nonne
?
omnem domum
8.
Et omnes tribus
MS. colonia. Coloniam. 2. Sancta vasa omnia. SchmidtMerx point out that onmia after sancta vasa is not Hebraic but
Aramaic order, prta N JKD *rt?np. This is quite true, but it is impossible, on this ground only, to argue back to an Aramaic; for the Greek and original
;
we can attach but little value to this argument in itself, and when we consider that our Latin
Version is but a careless rendering of the original, it ceases to
all.
Terrain patriae suae els ri]v yrjv TTJS yevtatus avrov = imSio px.
translators frequently to observe the Hebrew order when it was possible to do so. Thus, though ^o in Hebrew
failed
Latin
LXX.
Gen.
Indigndbuntur. The MS. se. These words cannot be right. Observe et ducent Tune invocabunt se et clamabunt. The ten tribes cannot address the two, then march or be marched about, and then proceed with
4.
gives ducent
LXX.
Zod6fj-wi
01
LTTTTOV
troLffav
TTJV
1.
14, D Vvn-^3
LXX.
ffwafiavTes TraWey.
*?a
23, N^N
LXX.
LXX.
words of rebuke. Hence, instead of ducent se, we expect a verb expressive of anger, and this all the more because of the words immediately subsequent
ut
liena
in
campis.
Now
TEXT OF
venient
illis
MS.
CHAPTER
entes
5
III.
2-8
ab
ori
cum
infantibus
nostris et
clamabunt
Justus et sanctus
dominus
eorum
colonia
et incendet
eorum
ig
sumus vobis
tune plora
x* tribus
109&domini
3
et sancta vasa
om
cum
bunt
tes
nia toilet et
omnem
du
7
audien
plebem
eiciet et
improperia ver
et dicent
rum
secum
4 Tune invocabunt
duae tribus x tribus
et ducent se ut liena
nonne in
omnem
ad
domum
istrahel
in campis pulverati
omnes
tribus plora
esurientes et
siti
bunt clamautes in
the children of the two tribes cannot be called children of Moses and Joshua. 5. Alducti. So Fritzsche MS. Schmidt-Merx, deducti.
;
ducent
se,
if
retranslated into
Greek =dx(?Tj(r0vTatj and as this word is confounded in MSS. with axOfoovrai, the latter most
probably stood originally in the
adducti.
Could ducent
se be
a corruption of succensebunt ? MS. pulverati. Pulrfiratis. Schmidt-Merx omit. Here the MS. adds SUientes. This cum infantibus nostris.
There arc
acro-
bystia (VIII.
2),
(I.
3),
cathedra (XII.
eremus
66
9.
Deus
Abraham
et
Deus Isaac
et
Deus
lacob, reminiscere
factasti
cum
eis, et
jusjurdeficiat
andum quod
unquam
illis."
semen eorum a
et
terra
quam
illo
:
dedisti
10.
Tune
Nonne hoc
est
quod
passus est in Aegypto et in mail rubro et in heremo 1 2. Et testans invocabat nobis testes annis XL
:
caelum
in
et terram,
tionem
illis,
ipsius,
quomodo
9.
Reminiscere
5te/3e/3atoCTo,
lies
and
10.
Homo
os CTTL
this in turn,
quomodo
So Schmidt-Merx.
<5ta/3e/3cu
11.
Turn.
w0-ti
diej3ej3aLovro.
MS. cum.
This name is written Moyses. thus in XL 1, and the interpolated passage I. 5. In I. 4
Mosyses.
It is due to the carelessness of the Latin translator that he used tester as a rendering of
Elsewhere, in XL 2, 4, 14, 17, 19, XII. 1, 2, it is written as if from a .Nom. Monses. For a similar insertion
Mt. vi. Moyses is the Coptic form of this name. The Hebrew form Moses = Mwo-?5s = nu D, which Schmidt-Merx give
of n,
cf.
Bobbio MS.,
etc.
q.
19, thensaurus,
=5iaima.pTvp6/j.evos die/j.apTvpeTo
vyn
lyrr,
in
nym. pK.vnNi DWn-nN 133 This statement is found, letter for letter, in the Apocalypse
"pyn
here "he
It represents
of Baruch Ixxxiv.
2,
"Moses
TEXT OF
caelum
9
et dicentes
MS.
CHAPTER
III.
9-13
67
quod testabatur no
bis
cum moyses
in
niscere testamen
turn
85a passus
fac
et in
jus
in
heremo annis xl
et
jurandum quod ju
ne urn
12 testatus
invoca
quam
deficiat
semen
him
et terrain
ne prae
eorum a
dedisti
terra
quam
13
teriremus
manda
illis
10 Tune reminiscentur
me
tribus
ad tribunr et
homo de proximo
1 1
mationem
ipsius
followed by Hilgenfeld, emend quae into vae ; Volkmar resolves it into et ea.
DC
e
isto.
This
is
taken to
mandata praeteriremus Illius. These words, also in a slightly different form, follow immediately on those just quoted from Apoc. Bar. Ixxxiv. 2, i.e. if ye transgress the law." 13. Ecce ca advenerunt nobis. So I have emended from quae
"
Ne
titelvov (xpbvov).
compari
son of the parallel passage in Apoc. Bar. Ixxxiv. 4, "And after his (i.e. Moses ) death ye
cast also
them away from you (see XIX. 3), on this account they came upon you," appears to show that de isto = ririK =
"after
him,"
i.e.
"after
his
death."
Cf.
Bar. Ixxxiv. 5, "And now Moses used to tell you before they
befell
Ecce ca.
ct
quae.
See above.
Dip
In partem
TTJS
d.i>aro\r)S
you, and
you."
lo
they have
= et s fj.pos pN n^p 7K
befallen
Schmidt- Merx,
Cf.
Exod.
xvi. 35.
68
partem
orientis
LXXYII.
IV. Tune intrabit
est,
et
et orabit pro
dicens
2.
"
in alta sede,
qui dominaris saeculo, qui voluisti plebem hanc esse tibi plebem hanc exceptam, tune voluisti invocari
eorum deus secus testamentum. quod fecisti cum 3. Et ierunt captivi in terrain patribus eorum.
alienam
cum
Respice
5.
miserere
reminiscetur
fecit
eorum, Domine
cum
6.
Et mittet
in
animam
14.
Merx
this
Plebem
here
article
:
verse in
pa>
thinks that a play on the words = = idolatry), = ( 77)also .TTjrn!3y. ( as this latter phrase was often simply denoted by the initial
"ly
jnay n pjx
"ly
Jianc exceptam. Hanc the Greek represents rbv \abv rbv K\eKr6v
there
is
vmn
oyn.
is
Ex-
ceptam
here
an
"
letters.
Thus,
idolatry through the If this play was inyears." tended by the author, it proves
practise
The MS. reads majestas. This is corrupt. Hilgenfeld and Merx emend it into maestitia Fritzsche into moles;
We
unhappy
have
should
an Aramaic original against a Hebrew, as mi mny is good Hebrew also. IV. 1. For intrabit, expannothing
for
(let,
ruption
Latin.
i.e.
is
Majestas
/u.eya\(i6Tr)s,
"
vanity,"
Nothing im-
Domine omnis
Heb.
*?3
Ktipie
TOU
vrds
NHD.
jriN
Aram,
pressed the Jews so much in their captivity among the Gentiles as the idolatry of the latter.
TEXT OF
quomodo
est nobis
MS.
CHAPTERS
III.
14
IV. 6
69
testatus
cisti
cum
patribus
bus
illis
eorum
et ierunt
captivi in terram
alienam
cum
uxori
14
et servient circa
lorum
et ubi est
annos Ixxvir
IV. Tune intravit unus qui supra eos est
et expandit
et ponit b
majestas inagna
manus
Tune remi
eorum
genua sua
niscitur deus
propter testamen
turn quod fecit
cens
Domine omnis
cum
SQa patribus
palam
6
illorum et
dominaris saeculo
qui voluisti
faciet
mise
plebem
ricordiam suanr et
hanc esse
tibi
tes
eorum
illos in
et dimittit
tamentum quod
cf.
fe
terram eorum
for
:
an
6.
Miscratur.
Dimittet.
etc ra judrcuct, is frequent in this sense. Cf. 2 Kings xvii. 15 Jer. ii. 5,
Ps.
xxxi.
6,
ator.
x. 3.
5.
an
iscitur.
eorum after the regionBut the Greek and Latin translators of Hebrew omitted
em.
in
1
Suam
et.
Hilgenfeld
et.
and
the suffix
Cf.
their
rendering.
;
Schmidt-Merx delete
LXX.
Chron. xxviii. 11
70
in terrain
eorum
et regionem.
7.
Tune ascendent
locum con-
aliquae
stitutum
8.
suum
et circumvallabunt
locum renovantes.
in
Duae autem
sua,
tristes
tribus
et
permanebunt
praeposita
fide
referre
Et
in
arguendi, et
vindicta
de
2.
reges
participes scelerum et
punientes eos,
Vulg. Gen.
xl.
;
Et
18
8.
xli. 8 Exod. xii. 9, Neh. iii. 3, 6, 13, 14, 15. Sua. VolkmarandSchmidt;
Merx emend
into sed.
Poterint. Sehmidt-Merx emend into poterunt. 9 Multiplicantur apud nation es in tempore captivitatis suae. So
.
have emended the very corrupt devenient apud iiato.s in tempore tribum. Hilgenfeld accepts tlie text, but changes tribum into tribulationis, and takes these words as prophecy of
I
text
The right word in such a case would be ascendent (see ver. Volkmar emends deveni 7). ent apud natos in tempore tribuum. But there is no meaning in the expression in tempore tribuum. Further, it is an un paralleled phrase. Schmidt-Merx emend devertent apud nationes But the in tempore turbarum.
:
sense
is
poor,
"they
amongst the
Gentiles
time of troubles," and Fritzsche and Eosenthal rightly reject it. Rosenthal emends devenient apud natos in tempore judici:
absolutely impossible.
iorum.
to speak of the incredible change of tribulationis into tri bum, there are other insuperable difficulties. If apud natos could stand here at all, we should re And quire suos to be added.
Not
genfeld s emendation we have already shown devenient apud natos in the sense of a return to Palestine to be impossible. Some interest, however, attaches to his restoration in tempore judicioruin.
devenient could not be used of going up to Jerusalem. great Songs of the As cents" would, in that case, be called "Songs of the Descents."
finally,
he
D
The
"
The time
TEXT OF
7
MS.
CHAPTERS
IV. 7
V. 2
71
molationes domino
patruum suorum
9
1}
partes tribuum et
et *x
tribus cres
venient in locum
cons tit utum
cent et devenient
suum
apud natos
in tern
et circumvallabiuit
V. pore tribum et
locum renovantes
8
cum adpropiabunt
temper a arguendi
et vindicta surgit
permanebunt
tristes et
in
geinen
2
tes quia
rint
dividentur ad ve
previous
have now discussed all emendations of this text, and been obliged to reject them. My own restoration is
as follows.
We
crescent
et
multiplicantur
apud
nationes. Next, we see that something is wrong with devenient. It is coupled with crescent, and not improbably has a kindred meaning. Now devenient = /careXei;(j-oz rcu = nv, which is clearly a corruption
of
Now this agrees exactly with the statement of Joseph. Ant. xi. 5. 2, At de dtxa 0uXcu -rrepav tlaiv e ws Seupo, /u;ptd5cs atrapoi, Kal
Eu</>pdroi
dpidfjiw yvwffdrjvai.
p,r)
ovvd/J.evai,
36-48
(ii.
ad Caium, 31
de O.VTOV
UT=: multiplicantur.
text
runs,
Thus
the
multiplicantur
We
in
apud
have
now
louSatwv Karexo/J.evas.
Surget.
rC>v
tempore tribum is a
tribum.
This
here = per, as in
De regcs = did
V.
1.
MS.
I. 9,
surgit.
.
jSacriXew*
De
de lesum.
tribuum
D onty
B3B>
nyn.
Here
njn
text
nyn
is
corrupt for
So Rbnsch and Hilgcnfeld. Schmidt-Merx, not observing the above sense of tie, propose to emend de reges participes into ad participes regis, and punientes into puriientis.
2.
crrnB^in tempore
suae.
ca})tivitatis
Dividentur ad veritatem =
72
3.
et
Propter quod factum f uit "Devitabunt justitiam accedent ad iniquitatem, et contaminabunt in:
quinationibus
"
domum
deos
servitutis
alirnos."
suae,"
et
quia
fornicabunt post
4.
Non enim
sequentur
veritatem
Dei,
sed
quidam altarium
inquinabunt
de ipsis muneribus quae imponent Domino, qui non sunt sacerdotes, sed servi de servis 5. Qui enim magistri sunt [doctores nati. eorum]
6eiav
= r\EKi
irpbs
rr\v
O\T\-
xvi. 21,
?p0
In
of the division of the people into two factions as here. In the Talmud it is frequently used in reference to difference of opinion.
Cf.
nnn=
Chag.
"the
xvi.fr,
^ru
ipSn:
dionep.
not merely the original text, but also a most interesting case in Avhich what was at first an
incorrect
Hebrew marginal
:
gloss
incorporated in the text. To proceed qui enim magistri sunt doctores eorum =
later
was
mar and Hilgenfeld, from inSchmidt - Merx genationibus. (and later Hilgenfeld also), in nationibus.
4.
(with
Hilgenfeld)
oi
de
diSda-
KCL\oi ovTeSj oi Kad ijyrjTal OLVT(JOV err-no D mni (cf. John i. 39). Now, first of all, we
De
ipsis
muneribus.
that
either
mn,
"the
which
can
or
know mean
"the
have here followed Rb nsch, in supplying the lacuna of six letters with ipsis. Hilgenfeld Volkmar, omnibus ; gives iis Schmidt-Merx, donis et. 5. Qui enim magistri sunt If we study [doctores eorum]. this clause in connexion with the rest of this verse and that which follows, it will become obvious that there is some cor For whereas ruption here. doctores eorum are masristri
;
Rabbis"
many,"
the
meaning in this context, as we have seen above and in we see that the next,
meaning,
"the
latter
many,"
harmonises perfectly with the For where rest of the context. as in ver. 46 it is said that some who are not true priests will defile the altar of God, it is here said that many w ill ad
r
the
TEXT OF
3 ritatenv propter
MS.
CHAPTER
V. 3-5
73
quod factum
fuit
inquinabunt de
78$
ad iniquitatem et contaminabunt in
genationibus
domum
enim
ma
servitutis suae
et quia fornicabunt
res
eorum
illis
tern
suggestion of locupletext.
own
Schmidt-Merx
or SwpoX^Trrets.
So
rer, cliv.
ii.
vol.
i.
187),
and was
at this period a body representa tive of the nobility, and not an association of learned men ( cit. p. 174), as the Rabbins and the glosser on our text conceived it later. Having now deter mined the meaning of Q mn to
</>.
emend acceptiones munerum. The corruption may have arisen in the Greek by cJwpoATjTrrets be
I
coming
dwpo\T)\f/La s.
Pervertent.
So
Wieseler
The
be not
many,"
"
the
"
Rabbis,"
but
"
the
see
mun
or
many,"
we now
that DITTID
(i.e.
doctores eorurn)
must originally have been a Hebrew gloss inserted in the margin to explain D mn. That
the glosser misapprehended the sense of the word is now obvious. Hence we should translate, "and many in those times will respect the persons of the rich," etc.
erum, and pervertent justitias are drawn from Deut. xvi. 19. Pervertent justitias is based on t2-:ra nan N^, thou shalt not wrest judgment." Erunt miran tes ITT3D vrr justitias
"
Bsa io
lorn ins?
Q npi
?!
Tfyn
MS.
Accipiendo poewis
Locupletum. cupiditatum.
The MS.
I
gives
have adopted
tes poenas. Tliis ablative of the gerund for the present participle is characteristicof this Latin version. Cf. XL
accipienuse, of the
74
illis
et accipientes
munera,
6.
piendo poenas].
fines
et
habitationis
eorum
sceleribus et iniquitatibus.
Domino
argento judicare quomodo quisque volet. VI. Tune exurgent illis reges imperantes, et in sacerdotes summi Dei vocabuntur facient
:
2.
Et
succedet
illis
sacerdotum,
1 7.
homo
This usage is frequently found the oldest biblical transla tions. See Ronsch, Z.f. W. T. 1868, pp. 96, 97. As these words are simply a repetition of the
in
habita
fines habita
tiories
eorum
et
ini-
tionis
sceler
see
ibus
et
leribus
iniquitat
phrase accipientes munera, I have bracketed them as a clittogrMphy. The only other alter native is to regard accipientes
ibus
a
domino qui
faciunt
munera
as
representing
j/
\riTTTovi>Tes
2:i
Q i?ii3
= greedy
owpo-
erunt
impii judices
in
inerunt
campo
after gain (Prov. xv. 27). There will then be no tautology in the
will respect the persons of the rich and be greedy of gain, and will wrest judgment
verse:
"They
on receiving presents." This form of the text would imply a of 1 Sam. viii. 3. knowledge r 6. A\ e have here a remarkable in which six lines of dittography, the MS. are repeated twice with
variations. The slightly more correct. Th" scribe no doubt intended to delete the former, but forgot.
campo
A Domino deficient. So I emend from the corrupt twofold text a deo ut qui facit and a dno
Hilgenfeld reads qui faciunt. Volkmar adeo jus qui faciunt. and Schmidt-Merx connect a domino and a deo respectively
:
some
slight
is
second
tions side
by
side.
TEXT OF
tiones
et
MS.
CHAPTERS
V. 6
VI. 2
75
munerum
1}
et iniquitatibus
pervendent
justitias accipien
do poenas* et ideo
implebitur colo nia et finis habita
tiones
campo
judicare
quomodo
illis
eorum
see
exurgent
re
leribus et iniquita
ges imperantes et
in sacerdotes
sum
erunt impii ju
mi
dei vocabuntur
facient facientes
impietatem ab sancto
2
iVn
numbered
judices erunt in ea iripost ( posterum), etc. Erunt in argenfo judicare. So I emend erunt in campo judi care. In campo = v aypw, cor
= in
among
the tribe of Levi." But the Niphal xnp has here a middle
sense, as in Isa. xlviii. 2 : will number themselves
"they
among
call
"will
Thus the
els
rupt
for ev apyup(})=t}33i.
Erunt
non-Greek expression
from
iepels
jndicare is either corrupt for erunt judicantes or else it is to 1)0 referred back to the Hebrew. ess? ? r,T= "they will be intent
1
or ready
f>.
construction
iv
TredLif),
cf.
is to be explained a Hebrew background. Instead of summos sacerdotes in the clause in summos sacerdotes Dei vocabuntur, the text reads For the sacerdotes summi.
corrupt for fy-rredoi, but the resulting sense is bad. VI. 1. In summos sacerdotes Dei vocabuntur. This emended text (see below) eis dpxtepe?s TOV
1
pp. 20, 21. Fritzsche unjustifiably changes in into qui. Facient facientes the well:
grounds
emendation
known Hebraism
and
ibjr
mby
Ocov K\rj6 f](rovTai- C 3nDrr hy isopn c n -x ? o^n^n. With this con struction cf. LXX., 1 Chron.
xxiii.
H,
(KXrjdrjcrav
eis
(f>v\rii>
TOU
Aei t
Massoretic,
Sy
ijop
2.
Succcdet.
MS.
succedit.
76
illis
3.
Qui
elidet principales
ignotis
stinguet
corpora
:
illorum, ut
4.
5.
nemo
sciat
Tune timor
:
erit illius
acerbus [in
in
eis
eis] in
terram
eorum
et
6.
Et
illis
faciet
judicia,
quomodo
(qui
fecerunt in
punibit
Aegyptii, per
7.
XXX
et IIII annos,
eos.
Et
(p)roducet
natos
8. su)ccedentes sibi breviora tempora dominarent. In partes eorum cohortes venient et occidentis rex
9.
Et ducet captivos
Ex quo
facto finientur
tempora,
momento
2.
Co-
Is this to
be
dominarent.
tempora So Hilgenfeld and Fritzsche, emending donarentof MS. into dominarent. Volkmar,
(p)roducet natos, (qi d)ecedentes
;
denies
sibi
Ireviora
Elidet.
MS.
et.
elidit.
Stinguet.
So Ronsch,
from
MS.
breviora
tempora
donee
pares.
re-
pora
illorum]
pente. 8. Partes.
hortcs.
MS.
Co-
intrusion,
4.
Occidet.
genfeld and
et
before
5.
non:
he will
MS.
occidentes.
young."
Qui.
quia.
9.
So Schmidt-Merx, from
Ducet.
MS. ducent.
incendit.
In-
MS.
Crucifiget.
MS.
crucifigit.
TEXT OF
rex petulans qui
MS.
CHAPTERS
VI. 3
VII. 2
77
illis
non
erit
de genere
et iiir
annos
et
.
.
pu
rodw
sacerdotunr
homo
7 niunt eos et
cit
temerarius et im
natos
ec^den
probus et judicabit
illis
quomodo
1
dig
8 pora donarent in
pares eorum
tis
mor
eorum
venient et occi
singuli et corpo
ra illorum ut ne
ducent captives
mo
et
77 corpora illorum
4 occidit majores natu et juvenes
5
et
rum
aliquos crucifigit
circa coloniam
I
eorum
non
parcet* tune
erit illius
timor
nomen
cervus in
6
eis in ter
ram eorum
et faci
et in eis judicia
quo
modo
VII.
omit.
fecerunt in
1.
pos
Facto.
Schmidt-Merx
(Fini)etur.
Volkmar,
Merx and
A(lter).
Colani.
We cannot discover attempt. the actual words of the writer even if we knew them, their in terpretation would be difficult, as
:
2. Though it is quite im possible to restore this verse, many scholars have made the
Volk
bolical.
Yet certain
or sym scholars
mar,
veniant.
presume they know the hidden meaning of the writer, and re-
78
gentur secun
his
Et regnabunt de
homines
4.
justos.
qui
erunt
omnibus
suis
omni hora
5
diei
amantes convivia,
6.
devoratores, gulae.
(Paupe)rum
bonorum
misericordiam suam
quaeru(losi),
start from, they can easily read their own ideas into it, and they so man age their restorations as to make
With
tres
tertia,
duae eractae.
.
quo
facto
momento
a(lter)
.
the text attest the period they have settled beforehand. Hilgenfeld restores as follows
:
guntur
tempor)a e(jus)
initiis
.
pos(trema)
ab
tribu-
Ex quo
.-
momento
prop
.
se
cunda
in tertia
thn)as
tria
Volkmar,
Ex quo
.
facto finien(fini)etur
h(o)ra(e p)er-
tur tempora
momento
actae.
3. Regndbunt. Hilgenfeld and Schmidt-Merx, from MS. regnarunt. Is et regnarunt a Heb
cursus, q(ando) horae IIII veniant. Coguntur secun(da, medi)a, e(t sic) pos(tuma in) initiis tribus ad exitus. VIII propter initium
.
raism
i.e. iScbi.
tres
tria.
(e ws)
septimae.
Secunda
in tertia
duae (p)eractae.
.
Cogentur secun(do septiman)ae VIIII, pos(tumae ab) initiis tribulationis ad exitus VIIII pro
.
pter
(fort,
tempora)
iuitium,
Hilgenfeld, from docentes. 4. Concelabunt. The MS. reads suscitabunt. But the following word dolosi and ficti seem to show that not the rous ing of their anger, but its sup pression or concealment, is the thought here required.
Dicentes.
MS.
TEXT OF
....
initiis tribus
MS.
CHAPTER
s
VII. 3-7
79
ad
exitus
vim propter
tria
.
.
nus
diis
timae secunda
in tertia duae
3
li
ra
ae et regnarunt
den
rum
bo
noruin comesto
res dicentes se haec
facere propter
justos"
et hi susci
mi
. . .
sericordiam qu
7
se et
rum suorum
losi sibi
ficti
extermina
tores
quaeru
fallaces celantes se
in
omnibus
suis
ne possent cognos
ci
et
omni hora
diei
impii in scelere
amantes convivia
devoratores gulae
This does not Sibi placentes. appear to give the right sense, coming as it does between dolosi
pleni et iniquitate
ab orient e usque ad
mar, emends into eorum; Hilgenfeld, quare. 7. tied ut.
MS.
se et.
and
be
ficti.
yolk;
mar,
si
et
Hilgenfeld, sicut
. .
traceable
riNjn
Sibi placentes
= CD:y
"ppuD.
Here Dosy
be corrupt for D Disy, i.e. the mighty." Hence we should render pleasers of the mighty." 5. This verse, consisting of seven lines, is undecipherable.
may
"
Fritzsche, sed et. Quacru(losi). MS. quaeru VolkHilgenfeld, quaeru(nt) mar, quaeru(nt qui); Fritzsche,
.
;
quem(li
Of.
et).
"
XL
d0
rj\iov
6.
(Paupe)rum.
So
.
VolkVolk-
[Aevov.
mar.
mean
MS. qu
"
"from
east to
west"
or
Suam.
from sunrise to
sunset."
So
Dicentes
"
Habe-
bimus discubitiones
et
Et manus eorum
os
"
eorum loquetur ingentia, et superdicent 10. Noli (tu me) tangere, ne inquines me loco in quo
VIII. Et (al)te(ra) veniet in eos
ultio
et
ira,
(ego) s(to)
quae
talis
non
fuit
in
illis
saeculo usque ad
illis
illud tempus, in
quo suscitabit
regem regum
qui con-
terrae et potentatem a
tit en tes
potentia magna,
Nam
in
celantes
tradidit
duci
vinctos
mutavimus
If
Ron sell,
perpot-
abimus.
with Fritzsche we
emend putavimus into putabimus, we should expunge erimus and render we shall esteem our
selves as princes." 9. Mentes. Hilgenfeld emends The sentence et into dentes.
Quae talis non fuit in illis a saeculo usque ad illud tempus oia OVK eyfrero Iv avrols euro rod ai&vos ews faelvov rov Kaipov. This clause is based on Dan. xii. 1. Cf. Jer. xxx. 7. It will be observed that a saeculo usque ad illud tempus does not agree with
the
TTJS
LXX.
a(f>
ov gyevrjOrjaav e ws
^KeLvrjs,
i]/j.epas
nor
with
mentes im munda tractantes et os eorum loquetur ingentia is thoroughly Hebraistic, beginning with a circumstantial clause. Cf. 1 Sam.
manus eorum
et
ix.
239.)
c jna
yeyevrjrai eOvos ev rfi yrj e ws rov Kaipov is nearer tKeivov. to the It a diebus saecuSyriac, which lorum, which is defective here. Instead of the Massoretic nvno
d,0
-^s
Theodotion,
mSia nar n.rsi. * 10. Noli (tu me) tangere. So Volkmar. VIII. 1. Et (al)te(ra) veniet. So Schmidt-Merx restore. Cf. IX. 2. Hilgenfeld and Volk
nn nyn iy u, our text and the Syriac imply N nn nyn iy -\y nio-D.
Now it is remarkable that, in Mt. xxiv. 21, where this verse from Daniel recurs, w e have
r
mar
et cito adveniet
Fritzsche,
same text as that presupposed by the Syriac of Daniel and by our text. Mt.
practically the
xxiv. 21 runs,
d\1\j/is /u.eyd\ij, o ia,
TEXT OF
MS.
CHAPTERS
VII. 8
VIII. 2
81
8 occidentem dicen
tes
in re
. . . .
habebimus
dis
ram ....
s
. .
cubitiones et luxu
riam edentes
bibentes
et
a.
et
Et ^mtavimus nos
1}
quae
talis
non
tanquam
eorum
et os
piincipes
erimus* et
et
maims
mentes
inmunda, tractantes
regem regum
eorum loque
terrae et potesta
tern a potentia
tur ingentia et su
mag
na qui confitentes
67 a circumcisionem
in cruce suspendit
s ...
d
.
Nam
necantes tor
su
us
quebit et tradidit
So Ro nsch, from Potentatem. Yet potestatcm. potestatem = may rbv ^ovffid^ovra = ^ y\iyn. Potestatem a potentia niagna
{
ov ytyovev d?r apxys KOCT/JLOV e ws rov vvv. Here air dpx?}s /cocr/zou is probably a free rendering of
In Isa. xliii. 12, d?r dpx^s is the LXX. rendering of era. CUWPOS would have been a better rendering of the Semitic original of Mt. than KOCT/UOU. Thus there seems some connec tion between our text and Mt. xxiv. 21. On the other hand, we have in Rev. xvi. 18 an in dependent rendering of the
ny niD
D.
may
rbv
^ov<yi.a^ovTa
e^ovcriq.
8us2)cndct. suspendit. Illud. MS. ilium. Huscitabit. suscitavit. 2. Gelantes. So I emend necantes of MS. Hilgenfeld,
MS.
MS.
negantes
Schmidt-Merx,
non
Hebrew
similar xxx. 7
ix. 27.
;
of
Dan.
xii.
1.
cf.
;
For
Jer.
Mace.
Those who conceal negantes. their circumcision are set over against those who openly confess it. Or should we read (circum)secantes, or possibly secantes
82
custodiam.
(in)
Et uxores eorum
et
filii
dels
donabuntur
gentibus,
eorum
pueri
illis.
secabuntur a
4.
Nam
et
illi
in
et
punientur
in
tormentis
baiulare
et
igne
ferro,
cogentur
palam
quomodo sunt
torquentibus
pariter
illos pariter
locum
eorum,
et
tribu
filios
Levi,
dicet
nomen
erit
:
ad eos rogans
in
2.
Videte,
filii,
inmunda
sine
Quae
eniin
scelesta
fecerunt,
tanta
only,
Of.
it
those
who circumcise."
i.
Mace.
61,
where
Haupt, disdonabuntur
d^a-ovTai) gentibus.
= 5ia8opueri,
who
Medicis.
MS.
adds
which
tradidit.
Et
If the text is
Merx and
add
we have here an instance of strong vav with the Nam celantes torqueperfect. bit et tradidit ruy D Tnoon-nw Previous editors emend fnri. tradidit into tradet. If we
correct,
et venabuntur. Inducere acrobistiam. MS. inducere acrosisam. 5. Novissime post haec. These
must change, we should probably read tradibit(?). 3. Deis donabuntur (in) gentibus. MS. diisdonabuntur genSo Merx, but that lie tibus.
two expressions may have arisen from two alternative renderings of the same Hebrew word or
phrase.
is
TEXT OF
MS.
CHAPTERS
VIII. 3
IX. 3
b stimulis
blasfema
todiam et uxores
re
verbum contu
1
eorum
Et
diis
donabun
meliose novissime
post haec et leges
tur gentibus*
filii
eorum pueri
quod haberent su
pra altarium suum IX. tune illo dicente ho
secabantur a medicis
pueri inducere ac 4 rosisam illis nam
illi
mo
de tribu leuui
in eis punientur in
cujus
nomen
erit
dicens ad eos
filii
rogans videte
eorum
iniqui
immunda
et
traductio sine
sericordia et
mi
emi
gentur intrare in
nent principatum
3 quae enim gens aut
abditum locum eo
rum
see,
et
cogentur
MS.
14,
Traductio
Wis
5
emends
dom
2.
ii.
xviii.
(Rcrnsch).
Emincns principatum
ap-)(j}v.
vire-
Schmidt-Merx would
et legis
pe^wz/ TT]v
Fritzsche reads et
dementia
principa-
tuum.
3. Dominum. So Hilgenfeld. MS. domum.
edicenti
Hilgenfeld, ducente.
84
mala passi sunt, quanta nobis contegerunt ? Nunc ergo, filii, audite me videte enim et
;
scite,
temptan(te)s Deum, nee parentes (nostri), nee proavi eoruni, ut praetereant mandata Illius. 5. Scitis enim quia haec sunt vires nobis.
quia
nunquam
Et hoc faciemus.
die intremus in
6.
Jejunemus
triduo. et quarto
est in agro est, et
speluncam quae
quam praetereamus mandata Do 7. mini Domimorum, Dei parentum nostrorum. Hoc enim si faciemus et moriemur, sanguis noster
moriamur
potius,
illius in
omni creatura
Labi.- bit,
Et
2.
tristitia
cum
eo abducetur.
nuntii,
summo
constitutus,
3.
Qui protinus vindicabit illos ab inimicis eoruin. (Exur)get enim Caelestis a sede regni sui,
Et
4.
NunquamtemptantesDeum,
tavimus
nee parentes (nostri}, nee proavi eorum. I have here added iiostri
and
is
context.
The speaker
is
urging
with Schmidt-Merx, and emended temptans of the MS. into temptantes, as Volkmar. The
construction
is
The clause = the Hebrew crx CHUN DJ irnnx D3 D nVx nx n oao. The Aramaic is similar, pan ?
1
purely Semitic.
his sons to do as their fathers before them, who never tempted God nor transgressed His cornmandments. And so, in ver. 7, he urges them to die rather
Hilgenfeld
PDJD.
Hilgenfeld
TEXT OF
domum
MS.
CHAPTERS
IX. 4
X. 3
populus impiorum
in
qui mul
fa
ta scelesta fecerunt
mur
b
coram domino
me
videte enim et
scite quia
ant mandata
5
scitis
illius
cum
2
eo adducetur
summo
cons
nemus
nus vindicavit
illos
quae in
3
ab inimicis eorum
get enim caeles
mur
potius
quam
cum
Vindicabitur.
MS.
vindi-
cavitur.
X. 1. Zabulus, i.e. diabulus. This form is frequent in the Latin lathers. Of. Lactant. De mort. pers. XVI., a te Zabulus
victus est.
Tristitia. MS. tristitiam. Abducdur. So Hilgenfeld and
from adducetur. Volkmar, Schmidt-Merx, deducetur. The 2. Implebuntur manus. phrase T K^D means, to give full powers to.
Erit. MS. est. Vindicabit. MS. vindicavit.
3.
Cum
iram.
86
Cum
suos
filios
4.
Et tremebit
cutietur,
terra,
usque ad
fines
suas con-
Et
alti
montes humiliabuntur
Et
5.
convertet
se,
et tota convertet se
Et
6.
Et flumina exarescent
this corrupt text, see exegetical note on X. 3. 4. Schmidt-Merx bracket con-
8pi)
v\[/f]\a
Kal
fSovvol
v-^rjKoi
(Greek Version),
is
cutietur
et.
we
Et
alti
montes humilicibuntur
should be
= Kal ra v\f/-r)\a Ta-n-eivudrjafTai. This phrase is ultimately derived fromlsa. xl. 4, probably through Eth. En. i. 5. Et colles concutientur et cadent.
The MS.
is here impossible et concutientur et convalles cadent. In the first place, it would be absurd to speak of the moun:
Kal ireaovvrai.
This
corruption might possibly have arisen in the Latin. It is easy to explain it as a confusion of
rnypn with mjn;i.
5.
in
had
already been brought low and in the next, the valleys cannot be described as falling. Convalles is clearly wrong, and if we turn to Isa. xl. 4, irav opos Kal fiowbs Ta.irfi.vudr)ffTa.L, and
san-guinem. The MS. reads, sol non dabit lumen et in tenebris convertent se cornua lunae et eonfringentur et tota convertit
se in sanguine,
which Hilgenfeld
clearly
corrupt.
Fritzsche
Eth. En.
i.
6,
/ecu
<rei<r0ri<roi
Tai
diaXvOtfcroi Tai
TEXT OF
indignationem et iram propter filios
MS.
CHAPTER
5
sol
X. 4-6
et in tenebris
4 suos
et tremebit
fi
vertent se cornua
terra usque ad
montes
6
in sanguine et
humiliabuntur
2a
et concutientur et convalles
to convertet,
turvavitur et
re usque
ma
cadent
et before
ad abyssum
and omits
Schmidt-Merx confringentur. deal drastically with the text. They omit et in tenebris convertent se and et tota convertit se
in sanguine as marginal glosses
failed to
20. But they ii. remark that Joel ii. 31 is the source of these phrases, and
from Acts
not Acts
ii.
20.
They
further
Hence we have vi. 12, ix. 2. good grounds for connecting it with the sun in this passage, against the MS., which relates it to the moon. Secondly, the phrase non dabit lumen is not used of the sun, but of the moon Mt. only. Cf. Ezek. xxxii. 7 xxiv. 29 Mk. xiii. 24. This may be due to the paranomasia nv in the phrase in Hebrew
; ;
:
ITIN
1WNV.
cornua solis confringentur et It is luna non dabit lumen. not necessary, however, to de lete the above phrases. They are well-known O.T. expres
sions.
This, indeed, might favour the idea of their being glosses, but the fact that their removal would destroy the vigour of the text makes for their re tention. Hence the text requires to be dealt with differently. First of all, in tenebras convertet se is a phrase nearly alw ays used of the sun. Cf. Eccles. xii. 2 Joel ii. 31, iii. Isa. xiii. 10 15 Mt. xxiv. 29 ; Mk. xiii. 24 ; Lk. xxiii. 45 Acts ii. 20 Rev.
r ;
;
vertet se in sanguinem is only used of the moon Joel ii. 31 Acts ii. 20 Rev. vi. 12. Finally, I accept Merx s view that cornua confringentur must be connected with sol. Hence the passage should read (Et) cornua solis confringentur
;
;
et
se
in
tenebras
convertet
Et
luna
guinem.
Conturbabitur, vavitur.
6.
MS. contur-
Dccedet.
Etjontcs. Exarcscent.
iv.
MS. expavescent.
vddruv
i;
88
7.
solus,
Tune
aquilae,
Et
altabit te Deua,
faciet te herere caelo stellarum,
t
:
Et
f
10.
Et
surnmo
et
videbis inimicos
tuos in Ge(henna),
et gaudebis,
Nam
tu,
hunc librum.
13.
Jesu Nave, custodi verba haec et 12. Erunt enim a morte receptione
illius
tempora
CCL quae
(erit) horum quern con 14. Ego autem ad venient donee consummentur. 15. Itaque tu, dormitionem patrum meorum earn.
Et hie cursus
Jesu Nave, (confortare, et) firma te (nam te) elegit Deus esse mihi successorern ejusdem testamenti.
Sclimidt-Merx transpose after deus in ver. 9. 8. Implebuntur. In the lacuna already recognised by Merx
7. Exurget. Aeternus solus.
MS.
exurgit.
9.
Faciet
i.e.
16).
and Fritzsche, following Dr. Cheyne s apt suggestion, I have supplied dies luctus tui from Lsa. Ix. 20, where the context, as he points out, deals with Israel s glorious future on earth,
For
my
emendation of this
cor-
rapt text, see exegetical note on X. 9. Schmidt-Merx think the words are transposed, and write
them
as
follows
et
videbis
TEXT OF
decedit ad fontes
MS.
CHAPTER
X. 7-15
89
aquarum
7
deficient
et flumina
expaves
aeternus
con
summus deus
solus et
palam ve
tuo
nam
tu jesu na
ue custodi verba
om
nia idola 8
eorum
Time
felix eris tu is
trahel et ascendes
supra cervices et
alas aquilae et in
I 9
tempora
ccl
quae
13
fiunt
. . .
et
hie cursus
rum
10
nis
loco habitatio
et cons
eorum
pi#es a surnmo et vi
feld,
Merx,
rrjs
6fJ.7)S
Fient.
So Hilgenfeld, from
MS.
fiunt.
rupt text terrain. See exegetical note on X. 10 for the grounds for
MS. agis. Ages. Hilgenfeld. jam. 12. morte receptions m(ea). Volkmar and Fritzsohe,a rnorte et receptione mea Hilgen
so doing.
11.
Nam.
13. Convenient. MS. con This is a peculiar use veniunt. of this word. Ronsch thinks that it represents Fritzsche emends into conticient. 14. Earn. So all editors, from eram.
[J,e0ode6ov<ri.i>.
15.
(Confortare
et}
Jlnna
90
XI. Et
cum
audisset
Monse.
2.
Et hortatus
eum Monses
et ploravit
:
cum
"
eo.
3.
Quid
me
Solaris,
de ore tuo, quae est plena lacrimis et gemitibus, 5. (Sed ec)quis quia tu discedis de plebe ist(a) ?
locus recipiet (jam) te
?
7.
ut
6. Aut quod erit monuAut quis audebit corpus homo de loco in locum ?
nam
omnis
(Quam}.
orbis
terrarum
So I have restored te}. with Schmidt-Merx. For firma the MS. reads forma. The text here unquestionably goes back
(nam
have added quam Schmidt-Merx and Fritzsche add it after omnia. Hilgenfeld makes no addition,
I
after scriptura
addressed Joshua in Dent. xxxi. See Josh. i. 6, 7. 6, 7, 23 This critical note on I. 10. phrase is of frequent occurrence later, 1 Chron. xix. 13. xxii. 13, 2 Chron. xxxii. 7 ; xxviii. 20 Dan. x. 19, xi. 1 1 Mace. ii. 64 ;
;
Praedixerat.
erant.
MS.
gives
;
praedix-
Monse.
MS.
meos.
For forma Hilgenfeld reads presumably meaning firmare Volkmar, firma te. XI. 1. Moysi = Volkmar adds dicta Tarn.
firma,
;
M.<avffij.
quam.
but see Schmidt-Merx, Mose crit. note on III. 11. Volkmar, Moysis Hilgenfeld, Mosis. 2. Hortatus est = Trape/cdAecre. Eum. So Ronsch, Hilgenfeld and Schmidt-Merx, from cum. Monses. MS. Monse. Fritzsche Moyses. So solabor. 4. Solaris Schmidt-Merx and Hilgenfeld, celabor. from MS. celares
;
TEXT OF
lOO&tu
MS.
CHAPTER
XI. i-S
successor em ejusdem
plebe
ist
XL testamenti
et
cum
5
6
quod
erit
mo
numentum
7
vit corpus
sepul
om
nia
scidit sibi
ferre in eut
ta et procidit
de loco in locum
3 Et respondit
et
ae sunt in terris
ce
me
nam
tua sepultura
domine monse
quae
est plena la
.
pulcrum
.
est
tuum
;
zelabor.
restore.
solabor =
Hilgenfeld ist(a modo) Volkmar, ist(a multa) SchmidtMerx, ist(a et jam) Fritzsche,
;
ND ?
1
ist(a
verum).
llecipiet (jam}.
So
restore
re-
De quo.
Es.
Volkmar, Schmidt-
re-
cipiet (mine).
7.
MS.
est.
Audebit.
ut.
MS.
audevit.
Inde
So Gutschmidt, from
in eut.
92
sepulcrum
nutriet
tuum.
istam
?
9.
Domine,
10.
abis, et
quis
plebem
illis,
Aut
quis
est
?
qui
11.
miserebitur
et quis eis
dux
erit in via
Aut
quis
orabit
pro
eis,
nee
patiens
in
ne
unum
ata-
illos
terrain
vorum
filiarn
12.
Quomodo
ergo potero
plebem hanc
quem
timebit,
eorum
14.
Nutriet.
11
.
MS.
nutrit.
= ovde Now
"
Nee patiens ne
Trapieis 7rapie/s
unum diem
rj/J-epav.
=
"
ovdefj-iav
hvo in the LXX., and in 1 Chron. xvi. 21 and Dan. xi. 4 governs an accusative. Here, as in ver. 11, we have to render not the Latin word before us, but
the Greek, which it presupposes. In ver. 17 we have to resolve the difficulty similarly.
first
"permitting"
meaning.
Hence
for
read praetermittens. patiens Hence there is no need to sup pose a confusion of TCO.G-XWV and
irap7]ffwv
with
Fritzsche,
or
ergo potero, Hilgeufeld suggested regere potero, then He also suggests ego potero. that potero may be corrupt for Volkmar thinks that procure.
For
Schmidt-Merx.
dwijaofj-ai,
Tjyrjcro{ji,ai
which
(Z.f.
is
cor
or
65~r]yr)(rofjLai.
For unum, MS. reads uno. and Diem. Hilgenfeld into Schmidt-Merx change
die.
1868, p. 105), potero = 5 vvarrio-u or dwaarevcrw, (Z.f. W.T. 1869, or 5w?7cro/zcu 226-228), pp.
According to Ronsch
W. T.
rendering
of
Domina filiam virginem. So emend filiam dominam virgi nem. Volkmar took Kvplav = begotten of his own body, Merx but this is impossible. reads filia dominam virginem. Fritzsche, tiliam domina virgiI
TEXT OF
9
MS.
CHAPTER
XI. 9-14
93
domine ab
his
dominam virginem
quae paratur
tali vi
est
il
et
quis
eis
dux
erit
99
nee pati
13 rendtim supra
ram
de vo
luntatem eorum
praestabo
illis ci
12 borunr quomodo
ergo potero plebem
haiic
ter
eorum
14
b erant
enim illorum C
milia*
nam
nem.
Syr.
Vers.
The sense corruption of upaiav. then would be admirable, as a father (his) only son or his
"
(Etqui).
-
So Volkmar and
tali
Ovyartpa
/cat
avopl avver(2
These words dupr/aac avrrjv. were most probably before the writer, as he has clearly drawn
upon
vii.
24, Trpocrex
T V o w^uari
(nup)t(i)-
O.VTUV.
ali viro
;
;
Volkmar reads
Schmidt-Merx, thalamo viri Rbnsch, tradi viro. Quern timebat. So Rbnsch, from quae timebat, comparing Ecclus. xxvi. 28 (MSS. H., 248
;
the supply lacuna Hilgenfeld, quid. I have [De voluntate eorum]. bracketed this phrase as a dittograph y. vul untatis tfcctis I olupiatem co? w?;z- = cjiin Cf. Ephes. snD. i. 5. MS. secus voluntatem voluntatis eorum. Other editors read secus voluntatem voluptatis eorum. So Hilgenfeld 14. \Viri\ supplies the lacuna, comparing
;
Schmidt
Merx
94
(Viri)
enim illorum
erunt (D)C
tiiis
milia,
nam
isti
in
tantum increverunt in
15.
orationibus, domine
Mouse.
Et quae
?
est
mihi
verbis
sapientia
aut
intellectus in
domo (Domini)
aut judicare
aut
respondere
Amorreorum
jam
verbi,
non
esse t
multiplicem et incompraehensibilem,
fidelem
in
dominum
omnia, divinum
in
profetem,
consummatum
in
eis,
non
17.
esse
Si
dicent
Eamus
semel
inimici
impie
fecerunt
adhuc
in
erant.
Non esse semet. Hilgenfeld takes semet = cavrov, corrupt for Hence non esse semet eavruv. derived from oike n dvai is
eavruiv
(D)
have supplied
from
Exod.
xii. 37.
them."
Increverunt.
from
qui
= avT6v,
Moses.
into semel,
15. (Domini). So, rightly, former editors supply the lacuna in the MS. 16. Turn audebunt expugnare nos. So I emend cum audierint
emends it Schmidt-Merx into semen, and Ronsch into senem. Schmidt - Merx supply in eis before semen. Semet is corrupt, I think, for secum = avrols,
<rvv
miswriting
of
avv
O.VTOIS.
expugnare nos. This, I think, gives the right sense to expug nare nos, making nos the object of expugnare. This thought is put into the mouths of the Amorites at the close of the
verse
:
Thus non esse cum eis is the same practically as the phrase at the close of the verse, non
esse in eis.
Schmidt-
brackets.
Dicent.
MS.
Merx
audierint
cum
audierint aude
17. Inimici. Schmidt-Merx, enim ei. Mouses Quomodo ferebat magnus nuntius. So I emend quomodo Monse erat magnus
TEXT OF
isti
MS.
CHAPTER
XI. 15-17
95
multiplicem et in
orationibus domine
mon
conpraehensibilem
15
se
et
quae
est
mihi
dominum
in
verbi fidelem
omnia divinum
domo ....
aut respondere
16 sed
et reges
amor
Eamus ad
17
os si inimici impie
sacrum
fecerunt semel ad
Intuens potentem omnis orb is terrarum cum misericordia. The
nuntius for the reading of the MS. does not give the sense re The quired by the context.
words
quomodo
:
Moses
"they
erat
either with
have
:
Moses";
MS. gives the corrupt text, intuens homini potentem orbem terrarum cum misericordia. First of all, cum misericordia is an adverbial phrase clearly
qualifying
or with qui ferat pro eis praeces "to olfer prayers for them as
Moses
the
offered."
If
we pursue
must course, we emend erat into ferebat. Then quomodo Mouses ferebat praeces it^n. This will ?sn NBO
latter
=m
nts>D
But the
be
prefer
Moses"
latter
able.
is
may
advocate like
more suitable to the context. Hence the error originated with the Greek translator, who
misrendered unto "like
messenger."
Vmn
either oninem orbem terrarum or omnis orbis terrarum. The text thus runs intuens poten tem omnis orbis terrarum cum misericordia ^/tj8X^7rwi els rbv dwaarevovTa wavrbs TOV /c6cr/xou
:
ev
e\v)[j,oavi>r}
= Whon
Vy
nyw
See note on
have
failed to
remark
this
diffi
culty.
96
qui ferat
diebus
et
intuens
potentem omnis
et
justitia,
orbis
terrarum
5
cum
18.
et
misericordia
reminiscens testamentum
et jurejurando
:
placando Dominum.
Non
est
cum
?
eis
eamus itaque
19.
confundamus eos a
net plebi
isti,
facie
terrae.
"
Quod ergo
domine Monse
XII. Et postquam finivit verba Jesus, iterum 2. Et Monses prendit procidit ad pedes Monsi.
manum
respondit et dixit
3.
sed praebe te
securum
et
Omnes
cf.
3 Mace.
7,
rQ>
TTJS
;
aTrdfftjs
KTto-ews dwacrrevovTi
..
.
v.
7,
rbv
7rdo"r]S
5vvd/j.eii)s
Ezra
viii.
13,
(9eos.
dwaaTevovra; ra iravra
SwaareiW
ways
the intuens
many
orbem
Placando
critical
placans.
See
note on poenas in V. 5.
18.
accipiendo
omnipotentem
Confundamus.
We
must
terrarum, which, he thinks, implies eiaopCov TOV iravra KparIs this conovvra TOV Koff^ov. ceivable ? Schmidt-Merx, intuens omni potent(ia tenent)em
here translate, not the Latin word, but the Greek (rvyxeufAev,
which
it
implies.
Facie.
MS.
faciae.
orbem terrarum
ffdevei
1
arevio-as TTO.VTL
"733
KDn KT\ Aramaic, ^n It is possible KD^V nnx m ?. that omnem does not belong to It may have the text at all.
ne. ne.
ore.
Schmidt-
Orbe.
nos.
MS.
So
Ut
Rb nsch, from
TEXT OF
hue
in
MS.
CHAPTERS
XI. 18
XII. 4
et
97
dominum suum
b
eamus itaque
fundamus
con
non
illis
est defensor
eos a fa
eis
plebi isti
quomodo monse
erat
us*
magnus nunti
Et monse prendit
orans
manum
dra ante
ipsius et e
et intuens
homini
Et
res
illi
pondit et dixit
3 iesus et ne contem
reminiscens
testamentum pa
rentunr et jure
jurando placando
1
4 de verbis meis
om
non
et et
est ille
cum
eis
nos. nos.
Schmidt-Merx,
Hilgenfeld
(illos)
connects
So
Gutschmidt,
promovit ciwictct. So I emend praevidit et provovit cum eis for in connection with praevidit we require another verb expressive of action, as
;
Schmidtpronovit cum eis Merx, praenovit et providit cunctis Hilgenfeld, praevidit et pronovit cunctis,
; ;
98
creavit
ut
nos, praevidit
illos
et
nos
ab
initio
minus
(Et)
Doorbe
6.
in
hoc
pro
ut
pro
eis.
peccatis
7.
in(plorare(m) pro
Non
meam
virtutem
aut
[injfirimtatem,
contegerunt mihi.
8.
Dico enim
tibi,
Jesu
Non
Lumina caeli fundamenta orbis facta et probata Deo et sub annulo dexterae Illius sunk 10.
Over against
virtutem aut
:
Temperantius.
non propter
meam
Dominu)s, So I supply the lacuna, but there seems to be a large gap here in the work,
.
firmitatem we expect an expression of God s will or purpose not my worth, but God s purNow, if we repose or call.
translate ur text into Hebrew, shall find that the Hebrew thus arrived at furnishes the meaning we are in search of. First of all, temperantius =
we
Hilgenfeld (itaque
(sic (is
Dmn)s
Volkmar
6.
dmfi)s.
^Trteu ws. Now, in the only two passages in the canonical books of the LXX. where ^TneiKwj occurs, it is a translation of W\
1
Sam.
xii.
22,
^Trtei/cws
Kijpiot
\a6i>
Volkmar
7.
in(pr)ecare(r).
I
[Iii] firmitatem.
have
and
2 Kings vi. 3, /cal elirev 6 efy ^TneiKws 5eOpo = NJ Win nnwn nDK i
1
Schmidt
mea.
Merx,
in
firmitate
?!.
Thus temperantius
,
niiseri-
cordiae ipsius
contigerunt
TEXT OF
praevidit illos et
MS.
CHAPTER
XII. 5-10
99
vir
propter
meam
rum
97 a ab
ut ad exitum
eo neglectum us
mihr
dico
enim
ti
bi iesu*
non propter
cum
I 9
eis
jus exterminabis
firmamenta
orbis
ta ut provata a
fac deo
......
.
me
consti
tuit
pro
eis et
.
pro pec
.
10 Facientes itaque
et con
catis
. .
eorum
.
.
summantes manda
. .
et in
eis*
ccare
ta ei crescunt et bo
pro
non enim
JJ.OL
nam viam
from omnia.
exigunt
avrov
"\~iDn
YIIN Nipi
*?
Nin.
Here
Hilgenfeld,
we must
either change mpi into Nnpn, and translate "He was pleased to make his compassion light upon me," or else insert 3 or D before non, and then we have, "He was pleased to call me in His compassion dignatus est vocare me in misericordia ipsius.
"
Schmidt- Merx read, omnia enim fundamenta orbis. Et probuta. MS. ut provata. So Gutschmidt, Annulo.
fr<jm
nullo.
xxii.
eiri
Ronf- ch
24,
L
compares
T7? s
Jer.
&irocr^>pdyi<rfj.a
Se^ids
Schmidt-
PaUenlia.
ipsius.
9.
We
should
add
.
Crescent
Schmidt -Merx,
So
Hilgenfeld,
,
from
So exigent. crescunlf
Lumina.
exigunt,
ioo
Facientes itaque
crescent
et
consummantes mandata
vitam
exigent:
11.
Dei
bonam
et
Nam
peccantibus et neglegentibus
12.
Nam
extinguat eos
fieri
non
13. Exibit
enim
est
Deus qui praevidit omnia in saecula, et stabilitum testamentum Illius et jusjurandum quod
11.
Fritzsche,
12.
(Ut).
Added by Volkmar
So
I
and Schmidt-Merx.
Extinguat.
emend
relin-
TEXT OF
11
MS.
CHAPTER
XII. 11-13
fieri
101
nam
peccantibus et
quat eos
non
neglegentibus
man
data carere
bonam
om
tormen
mentum
illius
et
tis
*nam in toturn ex
jurejurando quod
terminet et relin
quat, which has after exterminet. 13. Exibit. So
no meaning
Jusjurandum
jurando.
MS.
jure-
Volkmar and
exivit.
Schmidt-Merx, from
have already seen in the Introduction (pp. xlv-1) good grounds for regarding the Latin Fragment, i.e. the so-called Assumption of Moses, as constituting originally not "The Assumption," but "The Testament of Moses." We further learnt that this Fragment shows traces of
WE
by means of which this Testament was adapted and combined with another document. For the leading characteristic of this latter document we are already prepared through the insertion in X. 12, which shows that it was the editor s intention to add to the "Testa ment" thus edited The Assumption of Moses." Of this
editing,
to
"
original Assumption of Moses, thus foreshadowed in X. 1 2, not a single line has survived in the Latin Fragment ; but it is not entirely lost to us, for some of its most remark
able passages have been preserved in Greek in St. Jude and several of the patristic writers. From these scattered quotations and references we are able in some degree to restore the order of its thought, and in part its actual phraseology in one or more of its most important
sections.
106
is commissioned to bury Moses Satan opposes his burial, and that on two grounds (a) First, he claims to be the lord of matter (hence the body rightfully should be handed over to him).
Michael
ii.
To
for
it
this claim
Michael rejoins
s
"
thee,
was God
mankind."
Spirit that created the world and all (Hence not Satan, but God was the Lord
(b)
of matter.)
Secondly, Satan
brings
the charge of
is
proceeds to charge
to
tempt
iv.
Adam and
Finally, all opposition having been overcome, the Assumption takes place in the presence of Joshua and
twofold presenta Caleb, and in a very peculiar way. tion of Moses appears one is Moses living in the which is carried to heaven the other is the ; spirit," up
"
is
founded, as
we have
in
St.
quent writers.
i.
We
shall
now
opa
reproduce
in the actual
Mwvo-ews
d/o^ayyeAos
Mt^a^X
ii.
"
(a)
O ovv Sia/3oAo5 avT^i^f. ^eXoov aTrar^crat, Xeyan> art* 6 Se EjuoV eori TO o-oj/xa, obs TT)S v\r)$ <5eo-7rooi/Ti."
T<3
ap^ayyeXo?
o~ot
Sia/3oXa>
SiaKpivoyueyos tiire
Kvptos* aTTO
yap
Tov
eov tf)\0e TO
TTi/cv/xa
avrov,
6 Kooyxos
eyei/eTO."
107
TOV
TOV
Marucrr/s*
ecrriv 6 AtyuTiTtov <ovov, (Aeycov) Sta TOVTO ov o-vyxcopeirai avrw Tir^etv r^s evvo/xov
<ovei>s
iii.
etTrev
Tore o dp^ayyeAos Mi^ar/A Sta/3oAa) StaAeyo/xevos wore amov yevecr$ai r^s eveTTvevo-as TOV
TO>
"]$-u
o<tv
vrapayScxcrecos
IV.
TT^S
Eva?.
cTSev
op>;
e^rt TO,
Tas
<apayyas
I^o-ovs T^/V
TavT-rjv
KaTW Trvev/xaTi evrap^ei? o~vv /cat TW XaAe/3. The passages from which we have constructed this sketch
After each passage I enclose in brackets to what part of the above recon
Be
are as follows.
Jude
9.
Mt^a^X
6 d/^ayyeAos,
SiaK/nvojuevos
/cptcrtv
SieAeyeTO Trepl
CTreveyKetv
TOV
Mwo"ews
/
OVK
erdA^cre
/?Aacr077/xt a5,
dAA
E7rtTi/xr;o-at
o-ot
190-203
A.D.),
Strom.
vi.
Mwvaea
dvaAa/x^8avo/>tevov
fj.lv
SITTOV etSev
fj.fr
dyyeAcov,
TOV Se
e?rt
Trepl TO,?
K^Seta? atotyx,evov.
eTrapOels
eTSev 8e
"I^erovs
TT)V
$eav ravr-^v
KCLTCO, vrvev/xaTt
XaAe/3 dAA ov^ o/xot oos a/x^xo ^eoovTat. dAA 6 Kat Oarrov KarrjXOev, TroAu TO /3pWov eTrayo/xevos 6 Sc
vcTTepov TT/V oo^av Si^yerro, ^v e@ea.TO 8ta^p^o~at
/xaAAov Oarepov,
.
8^Aoi;o-r/5,
OLfJLOil,
TT}?
TrdvTtov
etvat
T-^V
yvtocrtv (iv.).
Adumbrat.
Clementinum,
in
p.
Ep.
84).
Judae
"
cum
Hie contirmat Assumptionem Moysi (ii.). Origen (185-254 A.D.). Prindp. iii.
>e
(Lorn-
loS
ORIGINAL ASSUMPTION
OF"
MOSES
Et primo quidem in Genesi matzsch, xxi. 303, 304). Evam seduxisse describitur, de quo in Adscensione serpens
Mosis, cujus libel li meminit
in
epistola
sua apostolus
Michael archangelus cum diabolo disputans de corpore Mosis ait, a diabolo inspiratnm serpentem causam
Judas,
exstitisse praevaricationis
Adae
et
Evae
(iii.).
(Lommatzsch, xi. 22). Denique et in libello quodain, licet in canone non habeatur, Kefertur enim mysterii tamen hujus figura describitur. quia duo Moses videbantur, unus vivus in spiritu, alius mortuus in corpore. In quo hoc est nhnirum quod adumii.
In Josuam
horn.
bratur, quia
si intuearis literam legis inanem et vacuam omnibus quae superius memoravimus, ipse est Moses mortuus in corpore. Si vero potes removere legis vela-
ab
iis
men, et intelligere, quia lex spiritualis est, iste est Moses, qui vivit in spiritu (iv.). Didymus Alex. (309-394). In Epist. Judae Enarratio
(Gallandi,
to
BiUiotheca Patrum,
vi.
307).
In reference
et
Jude
9,
Didymus
writes
plationis
praescribunt
praesenti
Moyseos
factuni
Assumptioni propter
Archangeli de
(ii.(a)).
eum locum
corpore
Moyseos ad diabolum
Evodius, contemporary of Augustine. Epist. ad ugustin. 258, vol. ii. p. 839, Ben. ed. 1836. Quanquam et in
apocryphis et in secretis ipsius Moysi, quae scriptura caret auctoritate, tune cum ascenderet in montem ut
moreretur, vi corporis efficitur, ut aliud esset quod terrae Sed mandaretur, aliud quod angelo comitanti sociaretur.
non
illis
satis
urget
me apocryphorum
praeferre sententiam
(Cramer,
eos rots
109
ev rrj
rov
cover
eo>9
ra(j)fj
<fravr)vat
VTT
6<f>6aX-
7reptcrToXr)T>
rov
tv rrj
rov Trovrjpbv
Kat avrLirpdrrovra
ayyeXov
ovra
7rpoo"V7ravT^crat
Kai TOVTW rov Mt^aiyX ayaOov Kat ytxry Kat d7rocro/3f)O a.i
roiv oXcav Trapacrot
evrtTt/x^o-at,
dXXa TW Kvptw
KptVeo>9,
Kar
tKetvov
Kvpto?
(i.
and
ii.).
II.
20 (Fabricius,
d?ro
i.
8e
844). d
Ev
8taA.eyop,evo<?
rw Sia^SoXw Xeyet
(ii.(a)).
yap
Trycv/zaros
i.
col.
1313).
j3L/3X.oi,
at
vw
et(Tti/
aTTOKpvcfiOL,
OTTOTJ
StSacrKet
009
Kat Trept
Kat
ry
TOI;
fjLfj.vrjraL
CK 7raXata9
rpa^9,
iSou K^pto9
are
^et
Kat TO
from Cramer
P. 160.
6
pp.
160-163.
Se
r^X 6
ycro
TTtpt
dp^dyyeXo9, ort rw Sta^oXw StaKpu/o/xevo9 SieXerov Ma)vcrea)9 o-w/xaro9 Kat ra e^9. AetKv^o-t
t<^
Kat TT)V TraXataj/ a-v/JL^wvovcrav rrj KainrJ, Kat eov evo9 6 $eX<ov 8eSo/>uva9 aTrar^crat, ort yap 8td/3oXo9 dvret^e
e/xov
TO
o-aijaa
0)9
T^9
X )79
SCO-TTO^OVTI
TOV dyyeXov TO
P.
cTrtTt/xr^crat
7racr>79
o-ot
Kvpto9
o-apKO9 (ii.(a)).
161.
AeyeTat 6
vat
Mt^a^X
Ta</>r;v
Trept
TT;V
TOV
Mwvo-a)9
TOVTO
TOI)
8ta/?oXou
7rpo9
(i.
ii.).
ej/
TO>
P. 163. TXeuTTyo-avT09
a7roo~TeXXerai
w,era^7o"oov
opa
Ma)vo-ea)9,
6 Mt^ar/X
KO.TO.
TO
a"o).a
rov
TO
TraTtt^at
TOV
AtyvTTTiOK,
OUK
evyKa>v
Tryv
KaT*
io
(3\ao-(f>r)fjLiav
eVmjU/tyo-at CTOL 6
"
eos
Trpos TOV
Sia/SoAov
(?>)).
first
printed by
239), the
Aerat
first
cravTos ev TCO
from D, an llth century MS. TeAomjopa Majvcrew? 6 ap^ayyeXos Mt^ar^X avroo TeATO
o"w/xa.
yaera^7yo"Ci)v
6 ovV StdjSoX
o-co/x,a
aTrar^crai,
T/TOI
Aeywv
ort e/xov TO
wg
TT}?
oia TO TraTa^at TOV AtyuTTTtov /?Aao~<j6 )y/xoi)vTos KaTa TOV ou Kat cxyi dvayopevo-avTOS, /AT) vey/cwv TT/J/ KaT* awoi)
<^>ovea
j3\.acr(^r]/jLLav
o ayyeAo?
(i.
"
ETTiTi/x^crat o~ot o
eos,"
Trpos rov
SiafioXov
first
^77
and
ii.
(a) + (&)).
It
drew attention to this and the next scholion. The second scholion is from (Ecumenius (in. Epist. Jud., circ. 990), which Matthaei (I.e.) edited from a 12th or 13th century MS. H. AeyeTcu 6 Mt^a^A rrj TOV
evai
Ta<f>fj,
TOIJTO
and ii.). (i. Finally, (Ecumenius (Comm. in Ep. Jud., p. 340, cited by Volkmar). 17 8e Trepc TOV Mwuo-eoj? crw/xaTos KptVt?
avrrj
AeycTai TOV
TT;
TOV
Ta<f>fj
o$ir)Kovr)Kvai.
aAA
TOV yap 8ta/?oAov TOVTO /x,^ 8ta TOJ/ TOV Aiyvvre7rt<^>epovTos ey/cA^/xa
Tiov
<f>6vov,
to?
amov
(i.
(so Hilgenfeld,
p,7^
at Sta TOVTO
o~vy^wpLO~Oai
TV^CIV T^S
and
ii.()).
It will be observed that in all these passages there is not a single important statement which has not been incorporated in our sketch on p. 106.
APPENDIX ON
I.
HAVE
I.
8,
ut inducat
plehem
fcOSn HPIS
pNrrta
Tiirgum
enter,"
LXX., and
"
Onkelos,
its
"
which
and
cause to enter
in."
in
INDEX
PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES AND OTHER ANCIENT BOOKS DIRECTLY CONNECTED OR CLOSELY PARALLEL WITH THE TEXT
s ed.), p. Ixx.
INDEX
II
Amorites,
XL
DANIEL, IV.
,,
1.
11, 16.
Antioclms Epiphanes, VIII. 1. Antiochian persecution, VIII. 1-5. Apollinarius, quotation from the
of, IV. 2-4. Deane, p. xxvii. De Faye, p. xxviii. Didymus, quotation from
prayer
the
Assumption
in, p. 109.
Assumption
in, p. 108.
Ivii,
23.
Drummond,
BALDENSPERGER,
12, 25.
pp. xxvii,
Ivii,
restorations
of
Black,
J. S., p. x.
p. xxviii.
Gutschmidt,
to
CALAMITIES
of
Judah ascribed
XL
Israel, III. 5.
VII.
Canaan, conquest
of, II. 2.
XL
2,
11,
12;
IX. XII.
Carriere, pp. xxiv, 35. Ceriaui, pp. xiii, xviii. Chasids, rise of the, V. 2, note. Cheyne, pp. x, 42, 88. Chronology of Book, p. Ix ; I. 2,
Schmidt-Merx,
III. 4;
12, 15;
XL
4, 9, 17.
;
Volkmar, V. 3
XII.
6.
VII.
6,
10;
note.
pp.
xxiii-xxiv,
Iv,
24,
Colony, i.e. Jerusalem, III. 2, note V. 6 VI. 9. Covenant of the Lord, I. 9, note, 14; II. 7; III. 9; IV. 5; XL XII. 13. 17 Cyrus, IV. 6.
;
;
Wieseler, V. 5. the Editor, I. 10; II. 3 9; HI. 12, 13; V. 6; VI. 1; VII. 4, 7; VIII. 2; X. 5; XL 12, 16, 17; XII. 4. of the Latin through re-
XL
11.
114
INDEX
Emendations or restorations of the Latin through retranslation into Hebrew by
Rosenthal,
9(?)].
I.
II
HAUPT,
p. xxii.
10 [18
(?)
IV.
the Editor,
9
;
V.
3, 4, 9, 10.
High
from
the
priests, Hellenising,
under
Evodius,
quotation
Assumption
in, p. 108.
5, 7, 10.
Hilgenfekl,
pp.
xviii-xix,
xx,
ISRAEL,
6.
,,
God s elect people, pp. Iviii-lx ; IV. 2. solidarity of, pp. Iviii-lx.
world created on
of, I. 12.
,,
behalf
9.
8.
GEHENNA, X.
10.
I.
,,
Israel s
13
IV. 9
VIII. 3
X. God,
7.
titles of
Creator, X. 10. Eternal God, X. 7. God, I. 10 IV. 2, 5 V. 4 X. 9 XL 16 IX. 4 XII. 4, 9, 10, 13.
; ;
71.
Joshua,
of
Abraham,
Isaac,
and
6.
Judah
,,
6,
1,
6,
III. 2, 5;
XL
Lord Lord Lord Lord Lord Most
18 II. 2, V. 6; IX.
;
7,
3,
KEIM,
p. Ivi.
7;
15, 16, 17. of all, IV. 2. of their fathers, IV. 8. of heaven, IV. 4. of the world, I. 11. of lords, IX. 6.
LAW,
of
life,
High, X.
7.
MACCABEAN high
priests,
VI.
1.
INDEX
Maccabees,
First,
;
II
referred
1, 6.
to,
passim
3-4
,,
;
quoted on V.
referred
to,
IX.
;
Moses, the Assumption of, the Greek, a translation from the Hebrew, pp. xxxviiixlv.
,, ,,
, ,
Second,
,, ,,
.
its
New
Merx,
liii,
pp.
xix-xx,
xxxix-xli,
,,
the Original Assumption of, preserved only in Greek quotations, pp. 1, 105-110. the Original Assumption, of, otherwise called Adscensio Mosis, note.
p.
Moses,
p.
Iviii
1,
I.
III
17,
XL
,,
XII. the death of, an ordinary one in the Latin, i.e. the
"Testament,"
2, 4, 14, 1, 2.
11 19
xlv,
,,
pp. xlvii-
xlviii
III.
I.
15,
note
12,
,,
other
xvi.
books
of
Jewish
13;
X.
14,
,,
or advo
other books of
pp. xvi-xvii.
Christian,
XL
17
and
,,
other books of
pp. xvii-xviii.
Gnostic,
,,
the mediator,
III. 12.
14,
note
,,
the
XL
,,
great
17.
messenger,
prophet,
NEBUCHADNEZZAR,
Neubauer,
III. 1.
the
16.
chief
XL
New Testament
p. 57.
use
of the
As
,,
XL
,,
the pre-existence
note.
quotations
in,
from
the
,,
Assumption
pp. 107-108.
ment
,,
of,
pp. xlv-1.
,,
the the Assumption of, Latin Version, pp. xxviiixxxvi. the the Assumption of, Latin Version, a transla tion from the Greek, pp. xxxvi-xxxviii.
liii
IV. 9
13, 14
XII.
7,
RED
SEA, the, III. 11. Repentance to preach the Mes sianic kingdom, I. 18, note.
INDEX
Resurrection of the spirit only, X. 9, note.
22. Renss, pp. xxv-xxvi, Riinsch, xxii-xxiii, xxx, pp.
Ivii.
II
117
Patriarchs
Ivi,
SADDUCEES,
Sanday,
p.
xxx.
1.
Satan, X.
Schmidt-Merx.
xxxix,
xlvi, li, Ivii, 23, etc. Seleucidre, persecution under the, V. 1-2, notes.
VARTJS, VI.
I.
18, note.
xxxviii,
Solomon, Psalms of (Ryle and James, ed.), quoted on, III. 9 VII. 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 X. 5, 9.
;
WIESELER, pp. xxiv, li, 23 sq., 36. Wisdom, Book of, quoted on,
XL
16.
p. Ixi.
Stahelin, p. xxv.
the, I. 7, 9 ; II. 4. Taxo, IX. 1, notes. Temple, the, II. 4, 8, 9 III. 2
Works, good,
World
TABERNACLE,
V.
behalf
of
YEAR
symbol
for
reign
or
3,
4; VI.
1,
9; VIII.
5.
THEOLOGICAL WORKS
PUBLISHED BY
SOHO
SQUARE
LONDON, W.
BY THE LATE
W.
ROBERTSON SMITH,
LECTURES ON
M.A., LL.D.,
Demy
Demy
EIGHTH CENTURY,
With Introduction and
additional Notes
BY THE REV. T. K. CHEYNE, M.A., D.D., ORIEL PROFESSOR OF THE INTERPRETATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE AT OXFORD, CANON OF ROCHESTER.
New
Edition.
CHEYNE,
M.A., D.D.,
Demy
NOLDEKE.
TRANSLATED HY
M.A., LL.D.
WELLHAUSEN.
Third Edition.
Crown
With an Introductory Essay on the Organisation of the Early Church and the Evolution of the Reader.
BY THE REV.
Demy
JOHN OWEN.
sanction,
by
BAILEY SAUNDERS,
Crown 8uo,
price
6d. net.
ERNST HAECKEL.
J.
German by
price
D. F.
6d. net.
GILCHRIST.
Crown 8uo,
1s.
ARCHIBALD DUFF,
Demy
8uo, price 10s.
M.A. LL.D.
6d.
MANUAL OF THEOLOGY.
BY
THOMAS
Crown
B.
STRONG,
M.A.
NATURAL THEOLOGY
(THE GIFFORD LECTURES, 1891,
1893).
BY PROFESSOR SIR
Two
Vols.
GEORGE
G.
STOKES,
BART.
PASSAGES OF THE
Chosen
for their literary
BIBLE.
interest.
beauty and
BY
J.
G.
FRAZER,
A.
R.
T.
MONUMENTS.
In the Press.
DICTIONARY
OF THE
BIBLE.
Edited by the Rev. T. K. CHEYNE, M.A., LL.D., Oriel Professor of the
Interpretation of
Balliol
College,
assisted
Holy Scripture at Oxford, and formerly Fellow of Canon of Rochester; and J. S. BLACK, M.A.,
:
LL.D,
ABBOTT (Rev. Dr. E. A.). ADDIS (Rev. W. E.). BENNETT (Prof.), Hackney. BENZINGER (Dr.), Tubingen. BEVAN (Prof.), Cambridge.
KING
Museum.
KOSTERS
BROWN (Prof.
BUDDE
BURKITT CHARLES
BOUSSET
MEYER (Prof. ED.), Halle. MOORE (Prof. G. F.), Andover. MULLER (Prof. W. M.), Phila
delphia.
Leyden. LEAN (N.), Cambridge. MARTI (Prof. KARL), Basel. MASSIE QOHN), Oxford.
(F. C.),
Cambridge.
CONE (Dr. O.), Buchtel College. COOK (S. A.), Cambridge. COWLEY (A. E.), Oxford. CREIGHTON (Dr. C.)
DAVIDSON (Prof. A. B.), Edinburgh. DAVIES (Prof. T. W.), Nottingham. DRIVER (Prof.), Oxford. GASTER (Dr. M.), London.
),
GRAY (G. B.), Oxford. GUTHE (Prof.), Leipzig. HAUPT (Prof.), Johns
University.
SCHMIEDEL (Prof.) Zurich. SHIPLEY (A. E.), Cambridge. SMITH (Prof. G. A.), Glasgow. SMITH (the Late Prof. ROBERTSON).
SOCIN
(Prof.), Leipzig.
Hopkins
SODEN
S PITT A
(Prof.
VON),
Berlin.
JAMES
Leyden.
JEREMIAS JULICHER
(Dr.), Leipzig.
(Prof.),
KAMPHAUSEN (Prof.), Bonn. KAUTZSCH (Prof.), Halle. KENNEDY (Prof. A. R. S.), Edin
burgh.
Marburg.