The Oath and The Name in 1 Enoch 69 PDF

Journal of Semitic Studies LX/1 Spring 2015
doi: 10.1093/jss/fgu030
The author. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the University of Manchester.
All rights reserved.
The Oath and the Name in 1 Enoch 69

Jonathan Ben-Dov and Eshbal Ratzon
University of Haifa
Abstract
Chapter 69 of 1 Enoch is a peculiar literary text in many respects.1

Not only does it contain the only cosmogonic account in 1 Enoch,
1This
paper was presented at the 2012 meeting of the BAJS. We thank Michael
Miller (University of Nottingham) for his helpful remarks. Tamar Zewi offered
good advice about Geez grammar, and Atar Livne suggested helpful bibliography.
Loren Stuckenbruck is a constant source of information and advice about Ethiopic
manuscripts. The initial idea for this article was conceived together with Yehoshua
Granat, whose dissertation (Granat 2009) paved new paths for understanding the
19
Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015
The paper offers a new explanation for the traditions preserved in

1Enoch 69:225 in the framework of a comprehensive discussion of
the entire Third Parable (1 Enoch 5869). A new translation is supplied for vv. 1325, alongside detailed textual and exegetical notes,
based on the collation of eleven Geez manuscripts of group I, five of
which are not previously studied. Much of the discussion proceeds
from form-critical marks within chapters 649, as well as within chapter 69 itself. The need for small-scale analysis arises from the fact that
in the Third Parable many themes are inextricably woven together.
The demarcation of Enochic and Noachic passages in the Book of
Parables is discussed anew. A central theme of the Third Parable, the
instruction of angelic knowledge, appears both in the Noachic passages (chapters 658) and in the Enochic chapter 69 and is discussed
here in particular. The unit 69:214 (except for 2b which is a late
duplication of the list of angels from 6:78) comprises six angels with
extraordinary names, mostly unknown elsewhere, with Kesabel, the
prince of the Divine Name concluding the list. A second tradition in
vv. 1525, focusing on the angel Michael, discusses the role of the
Divine Oath in the creation and sustenance of the world. Parts of
v.14 are a late attempt to bridge the gap between the two traditions.
Several notorious cruxes in vv. 225 are explained on the basis of
Ethiopic scribal practices, leaving little place for speculation about
their meaning. Finally, several later Jewish sources from the Cairo
Genizah reflect knowledge of the chapter in its final form, with the
two angelic traditions joined together.
the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69
chapter. Translations of 1 Enoch were made by us for the present article. The commentaries on 1 Enoch used here, and sometimes referred to below by author only,
are Dillmann 1853, Flemming 1902, Charles 1912, Knibb 1978, Uhlig 1984, Black
1985, Olson 2004, Nickelsburg and VanderKam 2012.
2See especially Fossum 1985 and already Gry 1939. For the theme of the role
of angels in creation in Jewish and Christian traditions see Kister 2006. For the
connection with Hekhalot and magical literature see Suter 1979: 1923; for the use
of the oath and other efficacious speech in Hekhalot see Janowitz 1989; Janowitz
1993; Lesses 1998a.
3The study of Geez Enoch manuscripts has immensely benefitted lately from
the work of Loren Stuckenbruck, who has discovered and catalogued numerous new
MSS, hitherto not studied by scholars. We are grateful to Professor Stuckenbruck
as well as to his collaborator Ted Erho, for their enormous help in accessing these
new manuscripts and classifying them. For their work see provisionally Stuckenbruck
and Erho 2012.
20
but also this account in and of itself is quite unique compared to

what is found in other Second Temple literature. In chapter 69 the
creation is depicted as achieved by means of an Oath, with the
involvement of a secret divine name and perhaps the agency of various angels. While these features appear elsewhere in Jewish literature,
the present chapter puts strong emphasis on angelology, even demonology, in an unprecedented way, apparently also with little mention
of God himself as creator. Some of these features resonate with the
themes of other late antique literature, whether Jewish, Samaritan,
Gnostic or the esoteric doctrine common to the above.2 Much has
been achieved by earlier commentators on 1 Enoch in terms of
the chapters inner coherence and with regard to its place within the
composition of the Book of Parables (henceforth: BP). In addition,
scholarly attention to the chapter has focused on the use of language
as an efficacious medium, especially the Divine Name and the
Oath, which became a central part of religious discourse in Late
Antiquity.
In the present paper, we seek to present a new understanding of
the development of the two concepts of the Oath and the secret
name, through a fresh diachronic reading of the chapter. Much of
our contribution is based on a close reading of Ethiopic manuscripts
of 1 Enoch and on acquaintance with Ethiopic scribal practices.3
It should be stressed that the argument depends on the present state
of the Ethiopic manuscripts known to us and on the unusual difficulties in the manuscript tradition for this particular chapter. Another
prominent part of our approach is the endeavour to determine the
composition history of 1 Enoch 69:1325 based on formal markers
in the text and using form-critical methods.4 In turn, this effort may
enhance our understanding of the theological message. A thorough
investigation of the section on the Oath and the Name in chapter 69
will reveal the existence of two originally distinct traditions in this
chapter: a Michael tradition and a Kasbel tradition. This new constellation yields meaningful results for understanding the provenance
of the Name and Oath traditions (1 Enoch 69:1315, 1625) in
particular, and elucidating the background to the unique traditions
of chapter 69 in general.
In the first part of the article we present a new translation of 69:13
25 with textual notes. The second part discusses exegetical, form-
critical, compositional and theological issues arising from this text.
The text of the BP is known only by means of its Ethiopic translation. 1 Enoch was translated into Ethiopic from Greek during the
fourthsixth centuries together with other biblical books. This pristine translation, however, remains largely unreachable, since it can
only be accessed through various recensions along the Ethiopic chain
of transmission. During the fourteenthsixteenth centuries the Ethiopic Bible went through a recension influenced by Arabic and Syriac
versions, while a second recension, sometimes called an academic
recension, took place during the fifteenthseventeenth centuries.5
Unfortunately, no manuscript of 1 Enoch from the time before the
first recension is extant. The group of MSS from the first recension
is called Eth I, while the other, later MSS are called Eth II. The
former group carries greater text-critical value and will be given most
attention here. We do not aim here to present a critical edition but
rather an annotated text, and thus we do not encompass all possible
evidence, nor do we comment on all pertinent variants. The work on
a critical edition of 1 Enoch requires an extensive methodological
4For the composition of BP see Knibb 2007 and Nickelsburg 2007, with
responses by Stuckenbruck and Wright (Boccaccini, 2007: 6578).
5This plot of the reworking of the Ethiopic Bible is widely accepted, with variations concerning the dates of the recensions and concerning the role of Aramaic,
Syriac and Hebrew in the process. See Knibb 1999: 23, 2240, and earlier P
olotsky
1964, Ullendorff 1968. For a more specific outline of this process with regard to
1Enoch see Uhlig 1984: 48890, Piovanelli 1987, VanderKam 1987, repr. 2002:
38095.
21
1. Text and Comments
6For
a list of all the Ethiopic MSS of the Book of Enoch and their dates see
Flemming 1902: viiix) Charles 1912: xxixxiv, Knibb 1978: II, 2:237, Uhlig
1984: 4736, Tiller 1993: 1423, Nickelsburg 2001: 17, Stuckenbruck 2007:
207; Erho and Stuckenbruck 2013. The latter presents the most comprehensive
list. Abbreviations and notations follow Knibb 1978. Additional abbreviations not
mentioned by Knibb are: EMML manuscripts are quoted by number only; MS
Gunda Gundi 151 is quoted as GG.
7The main importance of MS IES 392 lies in the fact that its text is particularly
close to that of the old but idiosyncratic MS Tana 9, and thus serves for monitoring
the unique readings of that ms. While E. Isaac (Isaac 1983) viewed Tana 9 as the
most important MS of 1 Enoch, it now seems that Tana 9 and IES 392 represent
an idiosyncratic branch, ancient as they are.
8As Loren Stuckenbruck informed his audience in a public lecture at the Orion
Center in Jerusalem, the original MS is lost.
9Emanuel Tov especially underscores the importance of MT as a basis of diplomatic editions of the Hebrew Bible, due to the meticulous preservation of that
22
investigation which cannot be covered here. In general, the present

work seeks the original Aramaic or Hebrew text, whether or not it
corresponds with the Ethiopic.
About fifteen Eth I MSS of 1 Enoch are known today.6 Here we
collate variants from eleven of them: BM 491, BM 485, Abb 35, Abb
55 and Tana 9 that are included in Knibbs critical apparatus, as well
as the additional following MSS: EMML 1768, EMML 7584, IES
392 and Gunda Gundi 151.7 Tana 9 was also newly collated for this
purpose. All of the above MSS are proven to be significant text witnesses, relying on substantial text traditions. Many peculiar readings
for chapter 69 appear in MS Berlin (dubbed Berl in Knibbs apparatus), a sixteenth century Eth I manuscript whose readings, however,
are quite often based on corrections and linguistic peculiarities rather
than on primary readings. We shall therefore mention here MS Berl
only in cases of extraordinary importance. MS EMML 2080 is an
important Eth I witness originating from a renowned monastery in
Ethiopia, and copied in the sixteenth century. However, it was thoroughly corrected at a later date towards the Eth II recension. Collating this MS requires a close scrutiny of low quality photos, since the
original is, to the best of our knowledge, no longer accessible.8 Thus
the occasional readings quoted from 2080 below usually agree with
Eth II and should be taken with a grain of salt.
We base our translation below on an eclectic text rather than on a
copy-text in the form of a single manuscript, since no single Geez
manuscript can be considered to reproduce a faultless, or even a
preferred, tradition throughout.9 When several options were equally
Translation of 69:1325
(13) This is {the number of}11 Kasbel, the head of the Oath, which he
revealed to the holy ones, when he was dwelling on high in glory,
and his12 name is Biq.
(14) This is the one who said to Michael that they should show the secret
name,13 so that they would mention that secret name, and so that
they would mention it in the Oath, so that they would quake before
textual branch and its ongoing canonical status (Tov 2008: 24770). None of these
criteria pertain to the Ethiopic 1 Enoch.
10Tov 1974. For the translation technique, see in detail Knibb 1999: 55112.
11This word is probably to be omitted. See below, p. 37.
12The translation of the third person relative pronoun is ambiguous. It should
either be rendered His if it refers to God, or its if it refers to the Oath.
13The phrase sm bu is usually translated as the hidden name (e.g. Charles,
Black). The word bu appears several times in this chapter, as in the rest of BP, as
a noun which means a secret in the sense of a hidden place for heavenly phenomena. The translation adopted here the secret name retains the polyvalency of the
Ethiopic word.
23
possible, they were assigned to the critical apparatus. The considerations for choosing the reading in each case are not easy to determine,
especially in such an elaborate text as 1 Enoch. One general guideline,
following the accepted stemma, sees a preferred reading as the one
that is least likely to be the product of the academic recension II,
based on our fairly extensive knowledge of that recension.
The textual notes below do not discuss variants that pertain to style
and grammar, because those variants usually do not reflect an original
reading in the old Ethiopic text. Due to the elaborate translation
process of 1 Enoch and the multiple corrections it accumulated
within the Ethiopic tradition, many small-scale changes with minor
text-critical value are to be expected. Moreover, not only the innerEthiopic transmission but also the translation from Greek produced
many technical variants that do not attest to the parent Greek version, nor to its Hebrew or Aramaic predecessor. In addition, the type
of changes dubbed Pseudo-variants by M.H. Goshen-Gottstein and
E. Tov is exceptionally common in 1 Enoch.10
Lemmata in the critical apparatus are quoted in English translation. Transliterations of the Geez are given only when they are necessary for the discussion. Unless otherwise indicated, all MSS agree
with the Lemma except for those listed in the ensuing entry.
14We
follow here the exact order of the Ethiopic, preserved also in the translations by Dillmann and Charles. Other translators (Knibb, Uhlig, Nickelsburg), no
doubt in order to improve the comprehensibility of the verse, interpreted they in
they would quake as those who revealed to the sons of men all that is in secret.
While their exegesis may be true, it distorts the order of the text. We prefer leaving
the order of v. 14 as it is, especially because the last phrase in it stands in a pivotal
place and marks an inclusio with 64:2 (see below). On the reading of Tana 9 at the
beginning of this statement see the notes below.
15All previous commentators beginning with Dillmann and Charles translate
and as its foundation, he set for it the sand, quoting the myth of the sea in Jer.
5:22 et al. However, the word maarat does not appear to take the dative case (as
foundation) assigned to it. In fact, Charles (p. 139) surmised that this word should
be amended. In addition, in the biblical myth the sand was not placed as foundation
for the sea but rather as barrier (See also Nickelsburg). We thus prefer to see the
word foundation as continuing the earlier sentence.
16The exact translation is elusive due to the ambivalence of Hebrew and Aramaic and the Ethiopic nafs, nafs and manfas. See Nickelsburg and VanderKam
2012: 2278.
24
that name and the Oath. They revealed to the sons of men all that
is in secret.14
(15) And this is the power of this Oath, for it is might and strong. And
he placed this Oath, Ak, in the hands of Michael.
(16) And these are the secrets of the Oath, and they became strong. And
through his Oath heaven was suspended from before the world was
created and forever.
(17) And through it the earth was founded upon the water, and from the
secrets of the mountains living water come, from the creation of the
world and forever.
(18) And through that Oath the sea was created and its foundation. At
a time of wrath he set the sand for it,15 so it could not pass over,
from the creation of the world and forever.
(19) And through that Oath the abyss became firm, and stood, and shall
not move from its place from eternity and forever.
(20) And through that Oath the sun and the moon complete their
course, and do not transgress their command from eternity and
forever.
(21) And through that Oath the stars complete their course, and he calls
their names, and they answer him from eternity and forever.
(22) And in like manner, the spirits of the water, of the winds, and of all
the souls,16 and their paths, from all the groups of the spirits.
(23) There are preserved the voice of thunders and the light of lightning,
and there are preserved the treasury of hail and the treasury of snow
and the treasury of fog and the treasury of rain and dew.
(24) And all these trust and bless before the Lord of the Spirits, and
praise him with all their might, and their food is in all blessing, and
they bless and praise and glorify in the name of the Lord of the
Spirits forever and ever.
(25) And over them the might of the Oath, and they are preserved by it,
and their paths are preserved, and their course will not be destroyed.
Textual Notes
17The
first letter is illegible in IES 392 due to a fold in the page. The text of
IES 392 is similar to that of Abb 55 in several other readings in this chapter.
18If this reading can be taken to represent an original Hebrew or Aramaic word,
that word might have been the rabbinic Hebrew .
25
69:13

This] Most Eth II add And.

This is {the number of} Kasbel] The word translated as number is
the result of faulty scribal transmission; see in detail below, p. 37.
One Eth II MS (Ullendorf) gives a double reading: This is the
number the name of Ksbel.
Kasbel Tana 9, 7584, 1768] BM 491, Abb 35, Ryl1, Ull, other Eth
II MSS Ksbel. Abb 55, IES 392(?)17 Ksbel. GG Kassbel. 2080
Ryl2 Ksabel.

the head of the Oath] Berl the head of days and the head of the
Oath.

when] BM 491 and who.

on high in glory balul basbat] 2080 Eth II lul basbat (high
above in glory). Berl baluln18 basbat. Abb 35 balul sbat in
glorious elevation?

Biq] Eth II, Tana 9 Beq.
14
This is the one who zntu] BM 491 znta in acc. According to this
reading, this word refers to the content of what Kasbel said to
Michael, and not to Kasbel himself.

to Michael] Eth II to the holy Michael.

they should show yryu (subj.)] Eth II he should show them
(yryomu).

the secret name] BM 491, Tana 9 (but not IES 392), Ull her secret
name. Abb 35 his secret name.

mention (that secret name)[ Eth II see.

that secret name[ Tana 9 his secret name. IES 392 in the Oath
that secret name. BM 491 that secret and evil name.

so that in the Oath] BM 485, Berl present a shorter text, leaving
out the duplication: so (Berl and so) they would mention it in
the Oath. Abb 35 so they would mention that secret name.
Charles 1906: 125, followed by many commentators, prefers the
shorter text. We find the alternative, namely that the shorter versions are corrections of the longer one, equally probable.
19IES
3921 kkuy, corrected into kkay, but the meaning remains the same.
26
who revealed lla aryu] Berl lla araya (sg.). Tana 9 arayu llu
(they revealed). According to this reading, v. 14b is an independent
sentence and does not continue the previous sentence. Taking into
account that this very sentence forms an inclusio with the similar
words in 64:2, we prefer reading with Tana 9. In contrast, the relative pronoun who in other MSS connects with the pronoun they
earlier in this verse. See note 14 above.

all that is in secret kwllo zababu] Abb 35, GG1 most Eth II
kwllo zabu (all that is hidden). Berl zaba bu kwllo. See note
on 64:1 below.
15 strong nu] Tana 9, IES 392, GG strength n. Note that the
previous word (yl) also indicates the noun might rather than the
adjective mighty.

Ak] GG, 1768 Ak. 7584 Aka. Berl lku (inscribed) usually
spelled lku. Tana 9, IES 39219 kkuy (evil). See above on that
secret name in v. 14 (BM 491).

of Michael[ Eth II of the holy Michael.
16
The secrets of buatihu] BM 491 buatika (your secrets of).
And they became strong waanu BM 491 Abb 35 IES 392 2080]
Many orthographical variants exist for this word, which may reflect
differences in meaning. BM 485 Abb 55 and it is strong wanu.
Tana 9, 7584, GG, 1768 wanu (and its strength, pace Black,
[1985: 248]). Black (ibid.) suggested reconstructing here the term
nu lasamy, firmament, thus the verse would read bamalhu
nu lasamy tasakala, through his oath the firmament was
suspended.
And through his Oath heaven was suspended] Vv. 1621 present
an Oath poem, in which each line commences with the anaphoric
phrase and through that Oath, ends with from eternity and forever or an equivalent phrase, and details the creation of a component of the universe in the middle. The anaphora is less clear in 16b
and 17, where variant readings obscure it. For verse 17 see below.
In 16b, most MSS (except for the generally unreliable MS Berl and
one Eth II MS) read wasamy and the sky, thus implying that this
word begins a new phrase, and in addition the punctuation markers
of several prominent MSS show that the words through his Oath
belong with the previous sentence. Thus the manuscript tradition
almost unanimously reflects a reading without the anaphora through
his Oath. However, this must be a mistaken reading which crept
into the manuscript tradition at an early stage. The anaphora must
have prevailed throughout the Oath poem in vv. 1621. While
20See
Flemming and Radermacher 1901: 89 and others, detailed in Nickelsburg

and VanderKam 2012: 3045.
21Ms Berl adds the accusative a after mdr but this reading is unwarranted.
22If these changes bear a different meaning, they may attest to reflection on the
hydrological cycle, with the Eth I MSS depicting a common source for the waters
of the abyss and those coming from the mountains. This topic is known from later
Jewish texts, which consider the Aristotelian model: 3 Bar 4:67 and b. Taan. 9:2
(cp. Qoh 1:4).
23We follow here Blacks suggestion that both versions were originally living
waters , as in Gen. 21:19 where LXX reads , and the Ethiopic
translates my eum tasty/sweet water. Cf. 1 Enoch 17:4 and Ratzon 2012: 64.
24The reading of the entire verse in Abb 55 and IES 392 seems awkward and
requires further study. Most commentators construe the preposition la as denoting
purpose and the word ywn as a noun, i.e., the waters come for the living (creatures). Thus Dillmann 1853: 39, Charles 1912: 139, Black 1985: 248. However,
the preposition could also denote direction, and the word ywn could be the
adjective describing the word myt. The disagreement in gender between the noun
and its adjective is common in Geez. In addition, the placement of the adjective
27
several scholars suggest that some words are missing from v. 16,20
we consider our translation to reflect a reasonable reading of the
original verse, with no need for additional emendations.

was created yfttar] The imperfect form denotes an act that was
coming into being in the past (Dillmann, 1907: 171). Abb 55 gives
the perfect tense albeit with a metathesis: afara (roofed over).
17 And through it the earth wabotu mdr Tana 9 2080 Eth II Berl21]
All other Eth I MSS give an awkward reading, by which botu
(through it) continues the previous verse and thus obstructs the
anaphoric structure of the Oath poem (see especially BM 491:
through it. And also the earth botu :: wamdrni).

The earth was founded upon the water, and from the secrets of the
mountains beautiful waters come from the creation of the world]
This is the Eth II version, which is very smooth. Eth I MSS place
the punctuation marks :: (GG, IES 392, 1768, BM 485) and the
conjunction particle wa (Tana 9, Abb 35, Abb 55, BM 491, 7584)
in a less coherent way.221768 duplicates the words and come
(waymau).

living water *ywt myt] most Eth I read beautiful waters
layn myt. BM 491, Tana 9 laayn myt. Most probably the
original verse read living water based on the Semitic original
. Confusion was caused on graphical grounds with the Geez
layn, beautiful, or, as Black surmises, the change is not a graphic
corruption but a translational decision.23 The confusion of living
with beautiful brought about such readings as 7584 Abb 55 IES
392 layw(n) myt (to/for living waters),24 or the conflated
reading lhyt laywn myt in several Eth II MSS.

from the creation] Tana 9, IES 392 and from the creation.
18
before the noun is rare in Ethiopic, but possible in cases of an emphasis on the
adjective; see Lambdin 1978: 69.
25The formula from and forever is occasionally cut short in one manuscript
or another in the present chapter. This is seemingly a routine formulaic variant.
However, in the present case (v. 20), with regard to the luminaries, it could be suggested that the word forever was omitted by one of the recensions with an eye
towards the foreseen irregularity of the luminaries at a time of cosmic sin: in the
Book of Watchers (henceforth BW) (18:15, 21:6) and in The Astronomical Book
(henceforth AB) (chapter 80).
28
The entire v. 18 is omitted in GG due to homoioteleuton (the words

and through at the beginning of v. 19 are doubled). In contrast,
MS Berl preserves highly peculiar readings throughout this verse,
which depart from the rather stable manuscript tradition. Overall,
the rendering in MS Berl seems less lucid than the other MSS.

and its foundation. At a time wamaarat lagize] Tana 9 wamaarata
lagize and the foundation of time.

and forever] 7584 omits.
19
abyss (sg.)] several Eth II qalyt (abysses). The variant is a correction due to the plural form of the following verbs. Nickelsburg
(2011: 305) accounts for the plural verbs by suggesting that they
had originally referred to the pillars of the earth (assuming an original Aramaic text < >which was later shortened).

and shall not move] BM 485 and move.

and forever] 7584 omits.
And through that wabawtu] Abb 55 wabawsta (and in the), a
20
graphic corruption.
Complete yfemu] Berl ytfeamu, are completed.

from eternity and forever] BM 491 omits. BM 485, Abb 35, Abb
55, IES 392, 1768 omit and forever.25
21
the stars kawkbt] BM 485 adds the accusative demarcation
kawkbta, which has no sense, as this word is the subject of the
sentence.
complete yfemu] IES 392 yfenu send.

answer him waywawo] Tana 9, IES 392 answer them
(waywawommu).
22
And in like manner wakamaz] IES 392 wamz (and from there).

of the winds lanafst] Tana 9, IES 392 omit. BM 485 lanafst (of
the spirits).

and all] Eth II and of all.

the parts abrt(a)] IES 392 the secrets buata.
23
the voice] Eth II the treasuries of the voice.

and the treasury of snow] Eth II and of snow.

and the treasury (of rain)] GG omits.

and dew[ BM 491 omits.
24
And all these (Tana 9 wa) kwllu llontu] Abb 35 These are (llu
muntu). Many other stylistic variants appear in the MSS.

and their food is in all blessing and they bless wasisayumu bakwellu
akwatet yti wayakwatu] Tana 9, IES 392 (similarly 7584)
waysessyummu bakwllu waakwatet yti yakwatu (IES 392 yakwatu
yti) (and they eat it with all blessing, and the blessing they bless).

in the name[ Tana 9 omits. Berl the name.

forever and ever] Berl omits and ever.
25
the might] 1768 omits.
preserved waytqabu] Berl revealed (waytawaq).

their paths fnwihomu] 1768 fnwemo their path (sg.).

their paths are preserved] Berl their paths they preserve. GG omits
the verb.
In its present setting, chapter 69 is placed towards the end of the BP,
one of the booklets which together comprise the book we call today
1 Enoch. The BP is the only section of 1 Enoch which is not represented in the Aramaic fragments from Qumran. Nor is it represented
in any Greek witness, although it is almost unanimously accepted
that such a version did exist. Some extraordinary theological views
expressed in the BP relate to the mediating role of the human agent,
the Son of Man, whose image in the BP resonates with early Christology.26 One may further note in BP the unique divine epithet
Lord of the Spirits, the regular appellation of God in BP, as well as
unique conceptions on cosmology and cosmography, the role of the
Messiah, and many others. Scholars usually date the BP to the first
century ce or bce, based mainly on some historical allusions in it.27
Chapter 69 is part of the third (and last) parable, which begins in
chapter 58. This last parable is the most complicated of the three in
terms of its inner coherence and structure. The great variety of material included in it, which might have been the product of intricate
editing or of a series of insertions, is all unmistakably stamped with
the stylistic and thematic stamp of the BP, rendering the customary
tradition-historical work in this parable exceptionally difficult. Some
would say that the difficulties are insurmountable and preclude any
attempt to outline the structure of this parable, let alone its
26Literature
in this aspect is vast. See the summary in the essays in Boccaccini

2007: 153249, 299342, further Boyarin 2010.
27The various essays in Boccaccini 2007: 41591. Further Knibb 2009, Erho
2009, 2011, Ratzon, 2012: 224.
29
2. The Third Parable: A Form-critical Analysis
28Knibb
2007: 58.
1912: 645.
30The great judgment theme arises in chapters 623, in what Nickelsburg
(Nickelsburg and VanderKam 2012: 37) considered to be the dramatic climax of
the BP, together with the salvation of the righteous. Cf. Chial 1997: 7781, 243.
The theme is taken up again in 69:269, at the conclusion of the parable. A great
bulk of material lies in between, and is connected with the main theme by association. The eschatological judgment of the kings and the mighty is connected with
paradigms of judgment from the mythical past: the punishment of the Watchers by
imprisonment, and the judgment of the entire humanity by means of the flood.
Both these themes are present already in the Book of the Watchers: the former in
29Charles
30
composition history. We present minimalistic claims about the parable in general, and attempt to posit a somewhat stricter framework
for chapter 69.
The title of the third parable (58:1) announces the rather general
theme concerning the righteous and concerning the chosen, but the
parable goes into further intricacies, which are only marginally connected with the title. The conclusion of the third parable in 69:269
discusses the world judgment administered by the Son of Man, with
the material in between indulging a wide variety of themes: reports
of cosmological visions (5960); visiting the places of judgment of
the Watchers (66:12, 67:112); the enthronement of the Chosen
one (613); the judgement of the kings and the mighty (63); a narrative report by Noah (in the first person) about events at the time
of the Flood (65, 67); traditions about the sins of the Watchers in
revealing forbidden wisdom to mankind (65, 69). Within this variety,
it is hard to distinguish the original parable from what was appended
to it in later redactions (as much as this kind of process might be
discernible at all in BP). Michael Knibb, to take one instance, is
rather minimalistic in this respect: The core of the parable consists
of an introductory speech from Enoch (chapter 58), two vision
reports (59:13; 61:15) and a concluding statement (69:269).28
Other scholars are more optimistic, allowing additional themes into
the original content. Charles, for instance, sees more or less the entire
material as original, except for what he identifies as Noah additions,
on which see immediately below.29 These are not the sole two options,
as the scale between Knibb and Charles is occupied by other scholars
who raise various possibilities. Among the themes that have been part
of the core of the third parable we would mention: 1) the theme of
the Great Judgment both in the primordial Urzeit at the time of
the Flood and the expected judgment of the kings and the mighty in
the near future; and 2) the theme of cosmological revelations.30
3. Chapters 659
10:415 and the latter in 10:13. They are thus quite naturally reproduced in BP,
which in many ways constitutes a rewriting and updating of the BW. The fundamental Enochic correspondence of Urzeit and Endzeit is reproduced here, as the
eschatological judgment (chs 623) is juxtaposed with the paradigmatic judgment
from the mythical past (see Newsom 1980). As Knibb (2007: 60) cogently notes,
the punishment of the kings and mighty has already been linked with that of the
Watchers in 54:16 + 55:34; Charles 1912: 135 points that the association is
possibly related also to the word play . See also Black 1985: 239.
The theme of cosmological revelations is also prominent in the third parable but
its compositional background is hard to determine. This theme cuts across the entire
BP and comes to the fore in chapters 60 and 69. See VanderKam 2007: 919, BenDov 2007, Ratzon 2012: 11655.
31See Dillmann 1853: 1779, 181, 2001, Charles 1912: 1067, and most
recently Hillel 2010. Hillel has essentially confirmed the earlier theories of Charles,
with only slight corrections with regard to their level of integration within the BP.
32Assuming an independent Book of Noah in recent years (where one will find
further bibliography) are Garca-Martnez 1992: 2444, Steiner 1995, Hillel 2010.
The objection to the existence of the Book of Noah is consistently voiced by
Devorah Dimant (Dimant 2002, 2006). Quite recently a response was published
by Stone 2010, esp. pp. 1820. Upon reading the most recent formulations of both
sides of this debate, it seems that they take more moderate positions than had been
previously conceived. Dimant now agrees that the Noah passages in 1 Enoch should
be distinguished from their surroundings on literary grounds and that they may
stem from a different literary source (Dimant 2006: 2334). Her main objection is
that it would be overly optimistic to identify this hypothetical literary source with
a single Book of Noah, from which also all other Noachic fragments from
Jubilees, 1QapGen, and elsewhere were excerpted. Given the rich variety of
imagined books in the DSS and related literature (see Schiffman 2010), her argument has much merit. Moreover, the arguments by Vered Hillel are more tuned to
the literary distinctness of the fragments than to the positivistic claim about a single
Book of Noah; it seems to us that she would agree to the formulations in Dimant
2006.
31
The three themes Watchers, Flood and Cosmology are bundled together in their present garb within a literary account put in
the mouth of Noah and transplanted in the Enoch narrative. Already
Dillmann and Charles have noted that the flow of the text in BP
usually a first-person account by Enoch is often interrupted by
accounts in which the speaker or protagonist is Enochs great grandson, Noah.31 Charles went even further by distinguishing Noah fragments not only by their narrative voice, but also by their special
content, which differs from the ideas and the wording of BP. Whether
or not these Noah fragments are taken from a pristine Book of Noah
is not of our immediate concern here.32 The Noah fragments in the
Book of Parables, however, are admittedly more difficult than Noah
33See
Nickelsburg and VanderKam 2012: 295. This insight was formulated

already by Dillmann (Dillmann 1853), who declares that the Noah passages are not
external insertions but were rather created in order to be included in the BP.
34To quote Hillel (2010: 43), When removed from their context, the text flows
smoothly from chapter 63 to chapter 70.
35Laurence and Hoffmann, as quoted by Dillmann (Dillmann 1853) concluded
that the Noachic passage ends in 68:1, with subsequent material in chaps 689
belonging in the core of the Parable. More recently Nickelsburg 2007: 41, and in
Nickelsburg and VanderKam 2012: 18 expressed a similar view about 69:412,
which in his view is part of the core BP, based on the continuation of this material
with 64:12 (see also below). Uhlig (1984: 621) moves the ending of the Noah
fragment further back, placing it in 67:3, since the end of chapter 67 and the next
mention of Noah in 68:1 belong to different traditions. He does not clarify, however, what his view is about the authenticity of the material in chs 689. In contrast
to the above scholars Charles (1912: 1067) bases his diagnosis of the Noachic
fragments not only on the explicit assignment to Noah, but also on the unique
content of the fragments (see also Dillmann 1853: 208); for example he claims that
the Noah fragments reflect a different demonology than the rest of BP. He thus
classifies as such the whole stretch of text 65:169:25. Knibb (2007: 61) and Hillel
(2010: 425) each on different grounds adopt an intermediate position.
While they both acknowledge that formally speaking a division should be placed at
67:4 and/or 68:1, they do point to the continuity between the strictly Noachic
passage and the subsequent sections. Thus they define chapters 659 as a collection
of late material, which consists of two blocks: a Noah text in 657 and a later collection in 689. Their idea seems plausible: after all, the peculiarities pointed out
by Charles in his Noah fragments are not necessarily the product of a single literary
source, but may rather belong to different backgrounds. Interestingly enough, the
sins of the Watchers are mentioned both in the strictly Noachic fragment (ch. 65)
and in the subsequent additional material (ch. 69). If both come from the Noah
source why would that source need duplicate accounts?
32
fragments elsewhere, since their content is so efficiently enmeshed

within the fabric of the BP that one must admit at least that they
were extensively edited before being incorporated in their present
place.33
Leaving aside the other Noachic passages, we now turn to the more
immediate context of chapter 69. This context is often seen as a Noah
fragment, spanning as much as 65:169:25, together with the short
introduction in chapter 64.34 However, scholars disagree as to the
extent of the Noah passage, since, strictly speaking, the passages
explicitly assigned to Noah begin in 65:12 and end in 68:1.35 This
Noah fragment is concerned mainly with the sins and punishment of
the Watchers, with special emphasis on their sins in revealing illicit
knowledge to humanity. What was introduced as a vision report by
Enoch (64:2) continues in a narrative about Noah, whether in the
first or in the third person (65:168:1). In fact the sequence
These are the angels who descended to earth,37 and what is in

secret38 (zababu) they revealed (kaatu) to the sons of men39, and led
the sons of men astray (asatwommu) so that they committed sin .
This opening statement finds continuation in 69:412, where the

phrase leading astray (asata) features prominently (see esp. vv. 4,
5, 6, 9).40 In addition, the phrase reveal what is in secret (kasata
babu) connects 64:12 with 69:414. The passage then ends in
69:14b:
who revealed (aryu) to the sons of men all that is in secret
(zababu)
36For
a similar claim, although in a much more intricate and elaborate work of

art, see Newsom 2003: 331 which explains the mimetic role of Jobs friends. More
on mimesis in the Book of Job see Hoffman 1996.
37Eth II, 75842 from heaven to earth.
38Geez babu can either mean secretly, in secret, or in the secret. The first
option means that the angels revealed something secretly; however, this meaning
makes little sense: did they hide from God while revealing? The third option would
entail that the word bu is used here in a similar way to its use in the rest of BP,
with the spatial (cosmological) meaning hidden places, storehouses. This term is
often used with regard to cosmological phenomena, but possibly denotes also more
spiritual phenomena, such as spirits, righteousness etc. (39:4?, 49:2, 71:3).
And what is in secret they revealed wazababu kaatu] Some Eth II MSS read
wazabu kaatu (and revealed what was hidden). Tana 9 wazababu kut (and
that which is in secret- revealed). In IES 392 something was erased between waza
and babu, probably a word-separator (:).
39Abb 55 omits. Berl mankind.
40In fact the opening statement finds some continuity in 65:6b see Knibb
2007: 60, but the verbal resonance with 64:2 there is minimal.
33
alternates quite freely between the narrative which is clearly about

Noah and the vision reports, which usually in this book refer to
Enoch. The reader gets the impression that, at least in the present
case, the Noachic voice is not a foreign intrusion into the text, but
rather a deliberate effort to supply an additional authorial voice and
thus enrich the mimetic effect of the account. The literary need for
the voice of Noah arose with the mention of the flood as a prototypical punishment.36
Nevertheless, even within the redactional jungle of the Third Parable we may point out some formal markers that would allow the
detection of compositional units in the large block 659. Taken
together, these verbal ties constitute a dense net of frameworks which
delineate the various literary units. One such prominent marker
begins in 64:2.
Following the lead by Nickelsburg (2007: 41) we therefore suggest

that 69:214 is the direct continuation of chapter 64, interrupted by
the sequence of Noachic material and whatever else came in between.41
4. The Structure and Themes of Chapter 69
After a long digression, the theme of angelic revelation is resumed in
69:1. This verse both ends the digression and opens the next section
69:225.42
And after this judgment they terrify and enrage them,43 for they have
shown this to those who dwell on the earth.
41The
abrupt start of 64:1 remains a crux, since the reference of the pronoun
in that place is unclear. It seems as if 64:12 is out of place; see Charles 1912:
129. Uhlig (1984: 618) following Charles claimed that chapter 64 belongs in the
Second Parable together with chapters 545, and that the pronoun that place refers
to the place of the judgment of the Watchers. However, it might equally be the case
that the pronoun refers to the place of judgment of the Kings and Mighty, reported
beforehand in chapter 63. Altogether, as Nickelsburg (2007: 39) concludes, chapter
64 is not unexpectable in its present place, taking into account the often awkward
order of material in the BP. In addition, the vocabulary used in this verse connects
quite well with subsequent chapters, both within the Noachic fragment and outside
it, and is thus well anchored in its present context.
42Knibb 2007: 61. Textual notes on 69:1: this judgment] 7584 his judgment. they terrify] Abb 55 and he terrifies. enrage them] The original read
probably in Aramaic, or in Hebrew, a verb which means enrage them
as well as make them tremble (Hallvi 1867: 382). Berl omits. BM 485, IES 392
(as well as 3 Eth II MSS) enrage him. Abb 35 enraged him. this zanta] Abb
55 omits. Several MSS use the feminine form. Berl zti kwnane (this judgment).
those who llla] Berl lasab lla (to the men who).
43The impf. aspect does not allow to differentiate between the present and the
future tenses. Hence, this verse can either be a prophecy on the time after the last
judgment or a description of the present time of the author, following the first
judgment, namely the Flood.
44See note 42 above. For the corrupt text in 69:1 see already Dillmann 1853:
210.
34
Note that although the Ethiopic translation diversifies its use of verbs,
one of the verbal expressions terrify and enrage them (ydanagwomu
waymwomu) in 69:1 originally corresponded to the verb quake
(yradu) in 69:14, both stemming from a single Aramaic verb, .44
This correspondence reinforces the connection between 69:1 and the
subsequent section.
The structure of chapter 69 is thus:
69:1 Catch line about the punishment of the Watchers

69:2a
Opening formula behold the names of those angels45

69:2b3 a late angel list (based on the list in 6:78)46
69:414 The angel list headed in 69:2a, with names unknown from
elsewhere and detailed accounts of each angels deeds
69:1525 An account of Michael and the cosmological force of the Oath
69:269 Epilogue for the entire third parable.
45What seems like a redundancy in 69:2, with a double opening formula for
the list of angels, is in fact a conflation of two different formulae: the one original
in chapter 69, the other copied from 6:7 with the rest of the list. See the following
note.
46Since the present context calls for a list of angels who disclosed knowledge to
humanity, there seems to be no place here for the list of angels in vv. 2b3. Indeed,
most scholars take this list to be a late expansion, even very late, based on the nearly
parallel list from the Book of Watchers, 6:78 (for the minor differences between
these two lists see Nickelsburg and VanderKam 2012: 298. Black (1985: 245) goes
so far as claiming that the text of 69:3 is based on the late (Eth II) version of 6:8.
Suter (1979: 74) raises the intriguing analogy between the two lists (onomastica) in chapter 69 and the two angelic accounts in chapters 68: a first list only
gives the names of angels, while the second one imbues to them the sins of revealing
knowledge. While this analogy is indeed intriguing, it probably does not indicate
that the two lists were originally included in chapter 69, but rather gives a reason
why 69:2b3 was appended to the chapter.
47Knibb 1978: II, 162, following Caquot and Geoltrain 1963.
48Knibb (2007: 61), in a cogent analysis, acknowledges that v. 13 continues the
list of the names of angels, but states that there is an abrupt transition in the verse,
and vv. 1325 forms an independent section. Cf. Black 1985: 247 The list of
35
The difficult verses 1314 convey a vague myth concerning Kasbel,

the head of the Oath, and his revealing of the secret name. The difficulty is strengthened by the cumbersome syntax of these verses and
the numerous textual variants preserved in them. In terms of content,
however, the most important question about vv. 1314 is the question where they stand in the composition of the chapter: Should they
be taken in conjunction with the preceding unit (vv. 412)? With the
next (vv. 1525)? Or possibly as an independently formed unit? This
question has direct bearing on the meaning of the Oath: is it one of
the mysteries disclosed by the angels or an element of creation?
If vv. 1314 were indeed brought here from their original context
by the author of 69:414, then their earlier meaning could have
related the primordial Oath of the watchers, reported in 6:36 (BW).
In this case Kasbel should be identified with Shemihaza, the leader
of the watchers.47 This idea of viewing vv. 414 as one unit runs
counter to most commentators, who define a long section in
vv.1325.48 The break after v. 14 is supported by the inclusio formed
between 64:2, 69:1 and 69:14b, as described above. In addition, the

limits of the next section in vv. 1525 are conspicuously marked by
the phrase the power/might of the Oath aylu la/ana zamahala49
at v. 15 and v. 25. In terms of formal markers, therefore, vv. 414
are clearly distinct from vv. 1525.
The formal demarcation of paragraphs leads us to a distinction
between two separate traditions contained in this chapter: the Kasbel
tradition and the Michael tradition. Each of these traditions uses the
word Oath in a different manner. The grounds for distinguishing
the traditions, on top of the formal distinctions described here, are as
follows:
According to our analysis, vv. 414 convey a list of six angels who
disclosed forbidden knowledge to mankind, or, more generally, who
Satans breaks off independently at v. 12 A new chapter might well have been
made at this point. David Suter (1979: 21) considered the continuity of vv. 1314
with the preceding list in vv. 412, but ultimately rejected it because of the mention
of Michael in v. 14. We address this argument below.
49Once again, with the alternation of the nouns hayl and an we see how the
Ethiopic translation is characterized by the inconsistency of translational equivalents
vis--vis the Hebrew or Semitic Vorlage. See Knibb 1999: 10512.
50This proposal solves the difficulty raised by Suter 1979: 74 and mentioned
above n. 48.
51Once again it was Michael Knibb who noticed the incongruity of the two
traditions (Knibb 1978: II, 1623); cf. Fossum 1985: 258. Knibb 1978 sees the
first account as relating to the Oath taken by the Watchers in the days of Jared,
corresponding to 6:36, while the second Oath he sees as a positive, cosmological
one.
36
1. Who is the Head of the Oath? Is it Kasbel, as verse 13 states, or

is it Michael, as verse 15 implies? Verse 14 secondarily bridges
the two possibilities: Michael had been the master of the Oath,
but Kasbel approached him, seemingly taking it over.50 Accordingly, while vv. 1525 speak about the angel Michael, who is
very well known from elsewhere, vv. 414 mention previously
unknown names such as: Penemua, Kesdaya, and Kasbel.
2. While the tradition in verses 1525 is clearly cosmological, the
one in vv. 1314 is hardly so; the main effect of the Oath in
these verses is to frighten and make others tremble. It is hard to
reconcile the malevolent revelation of the Oath in v. 1314 with
the positive role of the Oath as part of creation in vv. 1525.51
3. Name or Oath? The self-contained unit in vv. 1525 does not
mention the Name but rather solely the Oath. Verses 1314, in
contrast, connect the two efficacious entities together.
52The
list includes six, not five angels, since Kasbel is counted with the previous angels in vv. 414. Black (1985: 245) makes a point of counting five angels in
the list, by connecting the number 5 with the calculation of the heads of angels
in 69:3. However, it was proven above that v. 3 is not part of the same list. The
numbers in it reflect the calculations of 6:8, from which they were taken, and are
irrelevant for the structure of chapter 69 (cf. Dillmann, 1853: 210).
53On the various traditions of sin in BW see Dimant 1974: 5268, Newsom
1980, Nickelsburg 2001: 16572, Segal 2007: 10915. Interestingly, the theme of
revealed knowledge is obliterated from the accounts of sin in the Book of Jubilees;
see Dimant 1974: 92103, Reed 2005: 8795.
54Curiously, there has been an attempt in past research to identify seven angles
in the list, reaching a suggestive typological number. This was proposed by Schmidt
1908. According to Schmidt, the name in v. 12 represents the sixth angel,
while Kasbel (in his reconstruction )is the seventh.
55The original meaning of , task, was confused with the meaning census, number (Hallvi 1867: 383). The word matter, issue was confused with
count: (Charles 1912: 139). Beer suggested also (apud Uhlig 1984: 627) that
the wording involved a confusion of with , but this is even less likely.
56Dillmann 1853: 213, Caquot and Geoltrain 1963: 534.
57The present proposal endorses a possibility brought forth by Nickelsburg
(Nickelsburg 2001: 306). He does note, however, that even if this proposal is right,
the word for name is still missing from the usual formula the nth, his name is .
37
sinned with regard to mankind.52 Some of the angels (numbered

12) sin with violence and illicit relations with women, while those
later in the list sin in the disclosure of knowledge. A quite similar
situation pertains in BW: violence and lust (chapter 7) in contrast to
illicit knowledge (chapter 8). However, while in BW the various sins
originate with distinct literary traditions that were subsequently fused
together,53 in 69:414 the traditions were fused already as the list was
composed, since vv. 414 constitute a homogenous unit.
The first five angels are ordered 1 to 5 using ordinal numbers.
Kasbel, the prince of the Oath in verse 13, should be the sixth in the
list,54 but instead of the ordinal number sixth all text witnesses attest
to the term hwlq number, as part of the construct phrase hwlqu
laKasbel the number of Kasbel. The word number does not make
much sense here, since there is nothing in the subsequent verses that
mentions a host of angels or numbers of any kind. Scholars explain
this word either as the product of a corruption in the Aramaic,
Hebrew, or Greek the original word being either ( Hallvi)
or ) Charles),55 or as a deliberate use implying that Kasbels
sin involved the secrets of Gematria, the numerical values of letters
and words.56 In contrast, we suspect that this word is no more than
a phantom; it designates the lacuna left by an author, who expected
to complete there the number 6.57 It is often the case in Ethiopic
This word was supplemented (probably secondarily) in MS Ullendorf (an eighteenth

century Eth II MS).
58See McDonough 1999: 129. For primitivism in Enochic writings see Reed
2005: 389 and the bibliography adduced there.
38
scribal practice that numbers are written in red ink by the scribe after
finishing the sequence of black-ink words; sometimes the scribe
neglects to fill the lacuna, and either leaves it blank or somebody else
completes it according to his own understanding. We are thus allowed
to see Kasbel as the sixth angel in the list, and obliterate the difficult
phrase Number of Kasbel.
The distinction between the two traditions leads us to a different
understanding of Oath I mentioned in vv. 1314 and Oath II
described in vv. 1525. We suggest that verse 14a which mentions
Michael alongside Kasbel is a late attempt to reconcile the divergent traditions, explaining how Kasbel got hold of the Oath from
Michael. Indeed the presence of Michael in v. 14 is out of place in
the context of the present list, in which none of the senior angels
Michael, Gabriel etc. plays any part. Since the angels in vv.
412 are often characterized as Satans (thus Charles, Black and others), one could hardly expect to find Michael as a member of this lot!
In v. 14 (sans the Michael interpolation) we read how Kasbel made
known the secret name in order to enhance the power of Oath I. In
the context of vv. 414, this verse seemingly records the disclosure of
the name and the Oath to mankind, after it had been revealed to the
Watchers in v. 13. The effect of Oath I, when buttressed by the secret
name, is that they will quake before the combined effect of the name
and Oath I. The reference of the indeterminate pronoun they could
be the following clause, who revealed to the sons of men all that is
in secret, that is the watchers, if it is not to be regarded as an ending
to the entire passage. The idea that a revelation of the secret name
and Oath I to humanity makes the watchers tremble, implies a magical use of the Oath. In its immediate context it is part of a chain of
items that were illicitly revealed to mankind, some of them directly
involving technology and magic, such as the heritage of the fourth
and fifth angels in the list the art of writing with ink and paper
as well as maladies and incantations. In that case, the art of using the
secret name in an Oath is an example for verbal or written knowledge, the kind of things that the author of 69:414 opposes quite
strongly.58 Perhaps human beings were taught how to control the
angels by using their names. In the garbled tradition preserved in
69:14, the identity of they, i.e., those who quake before the Oath,
is impossible to determine: Angels (good), Watchers (bad) or other
human beings.
Excursus: beqa and ak in vv. 1314
59Usually scholars consider both names to represent either the Oath or the
angel. For the Oath see Fossum 1985: 258, Nickelsburg and VanderKam 2012:
306. For the name see Caquot and Geoltrain 1963: 54, Dillmann 1853: 213.
60Dillmann 1853: 213, Black 1985: 2478; also seen favorably by Nickelsburg
and VanderKam 2012: 307. It was recently argued that the numerical value of the
Tetragram functioned already in the construction of hymns and Psalms within the
MT of the Hebrew Bible; see Knohl 2012.
61For these sources see in much detail Fossum 1985, McDonough 1999.
62Nickelsburg and VanderKam 2012: 306.
63Caquot and Geoltrain 1963: 54.
64Olson 2004: 2703.
39
Two notorious cruxes remain in vv. 1315 in the form of the enigmatic words beqa and ak. Initially one may wonder whether these
two words purport to give a name for the angel, or for the Oath.
While Beqa in v. 13 seems to designate the angel, ak in v. 15 seems
to designate the Oath.59 It is common to see these words as some
form of a code for the Tetragram, reading the words as calculations
of gematria related to the Divine Name. Thus Black suggested, following Dillmanns initial insight, that ( 91) corresponds to
, and ( 117) to .60 The use of the Tetragram
seems highly suggestive, since it accords quite well with numerous
later textual sources, which record the role of the Divine Name, particularly the Tetragram, in Creation. These sources include Jewish
apocalyptic, Jewish rabbinic, Christian, Samaritan, Gnostic and many
other texts, from the second century bce until much beyond Late
Antiquity.61 This remains the dominant explanation, alongside the
other possibilities that were raised: that AKA is a corrupted version
of Greek BHKA (although this does not explain the presence of the
letter and the vowel i in the former name);62 that stands as a
gematria replacement for ( but what did mean originally, and why and not ;)?that is a corruption of
the Tetragram written in paleo-Hebrew script (but the graphic derivation is unclear); that ( 26) equals ( but this requires a
change of spelling);63 that Biqa stands for in you, referring to a
later Zoharic midrash (on Isa. 26:13) about the twenty-two letters
and the name of God (although the word is consistently written with
qop rather than kap);64 that is a corruption of second,
65Knibb
1978: II, 163.

reading in Tana 9 is an attempt to harmonize the benevolent character
of vv. 1525 with the evil deeds in the previous unit. Note that in MS IES 392, a
fifteenth-century manuscript which is very often identical with Tana 9, the reading
is kay , a meaningless word which is probably derived from the reading in
Tana 9. (It seems that the horizontal bar after k was deleted in IES 392, hence the
somewhat long gap between this letter and the next.)
67See Midr. Gen.R. 12:10 (ed. Theodore-Albeck, p. 108); and the references
for in Maagarim: the Historical Dictionary of Hebrew (http://hebrew-treasures.
huji.ac.il/).
68Bohak 1990 has suggested several Hebrew-Greek gematrias, some plausible
and some less so. However, all of his gematrias turn out to produce a recognized
Hebrew or Greek word, in contrast to the unintelligible and .
66The
40
other, stating the fact that v. 15 records a different Oath than the
one represented in vv. 1314;65 or that the reading ekkuy evil in
Tana 9 should be preferred to ak.66 We could add suggestions of
our own, such as that Biqa could be considered to have come from
BIA, a quite common Greek word meaning power, authority, which
has entered both Aramaic and Syriac, and is used extensively in magical texts to denote the divine power.67 Or that Biqa is a corruption
of Bacchus (), the other name of the Greek god, Dionysus,
penetrating Hellenistic Judaism as an angel, in the same way for
instance that Helios and Zeus did. However, all these suggestions are
speculative. None of the above explanations makes good sense of the
words in their context. The suggested gematria for the Ethiopic words
remain problematic, as it also remains unclear why, if the Tetragram
was intended, do the calculations include also the names and
. We are highly sceptical whether one can detect a genuine
angelic name here, after the long and winding transmission road that
the Book of Parables went through: all the more so explaining these
hypothetical angels using gematrias.68 We have reasons to believe that
Beqa and ak are scribal products rather than actual names. As indicated above, the word hwelq number earlier in v. 13 is suspected of
being a scribal product. All in all, we are reluctant to speculate on a
single occurrence of an enigmatic name with such an unstable chain
of transmission.
It is now time to discuss the next unit of vv. 1525. Heading the
section is v. 15, which presents the power of the Oath that was placed
in the hands of Michael. Vv. 1621 form a poetic unit, or as Black
puts it Has an older poetic source on the Oath, an Oath poem,
been incorporated by the author within his description of the Satans?.
Each of the items in the list commences with the anaphoric line and
through that Oath (an exception being verses 223, which are
69For
early attestations of this list in the apocalyptic tradition see Stone 1976.
Primary early examples are the Prayer of the Three Youths in the LXX additions to
Daniel, and the Prayer of Manasseh (Suter 1979: 1920). For the analysis of poetry
and prose in BP, esp. in chapter 69, see Suter 1979: 1369.
70On the use of biblical verses in Second Temple hymns, and on the hermeneutical meaning of the original context within the new composition, see Chazon
2003, Newman 1999.
71A similar mechanism is operative in the Songs of the Maskil (4Q5104Q511);
see Nitzan 1994: 2378.
72As is quite often with fixed liturgical formulas, also this formula (forever and
ever) is fraught with variants in the MSS evidence, which either represent only a
part of it or rather prolong it in one or more of its occurrences.
73Ford and Ten-Ami 2012: 228.
41
themselves a typical BP redactional insertion). The list of created

things is a more or less standard list of natural phenomena, which
appears in many other cosmological texts of various periods.69 The
units framework (vv. 15, 25) stresses the steadfastness of the elements, which was no doubt required against the forces opposing
them. The image selected for the creation of heaven in v. 16 is,
accordingly, not the usual simile of the creation of heaven depicted
as stretching a tent (Isa. 40:22), but rather that of its suspension
(tasaqala); this choice is taken from Job 26:7, who stretched out
Zaphon over chaos, who suspended (saqala) earth over emptiness
(NJPS), a context which stresses the potential instability of creation.70
The Oath is conceived as a powerful device, which serves to reinforce
the fragile suspension of heaven. It is being praised in order to validate its power vis--vis the opposing forces.71 The repetition of the
phrase from the creation of the world and onto eternity stresses
the unchangeable cosmic order.72 This background can also be seen
from the mention (v. 18) of sand as a barrier to block the sea, based
on Jer. 5:22 and related traditions; this verse is quoted for magical
use in Late Antique incantations, where the demons are blocked
using a limit, , just as the sea was blocked at creation.73
Within the Oath poem (69:1621) creation is described in the
passive voice, with no specific agent depicted as using the Oath. The
creator in this poem is thus obviously God, as he is also the one who
set the sand for it (i.e. for the sea) (69:18, see Jer. 5:22 et al.) and
calls their (i.e. the stars) names (69:21, see Isa. 40:26). However,
in its present context it is introduced by verse 15, which seems to
assign the Oath to the angel Michael, rather than to God himself.
We need to ask, according to the continuous text as it is now, what
exactly the role of Michael was: did he protect the Oath after the
creation of the world to prevent destructive use of it? Or did he
74See Kister 2006; Granat 2009: 17589. Kisters article supplies further references which cannot be discussed in detail here, as for example 2 Enoch and the
writings of Philo. For a wider view of the question of angel veneration in Judaism
and Christianity see Stuckenbruck 1995.
75For angels and creation in Jubilees and the Psalms Scroll see Sollamo 2006.
76While winds are not explicitly identified with angels in the BW, the identification of winds/spirits with angels occurs in the BP; see Ratzon 2012: 2078,
21415.
77Charles 1912: 89, Stone 1987: 298308, Nickelsburg 2001: 1525 with
additional bibliography adduced there; Ben-Dov 2007: 149. For this subject within
1 Enoch see Ratzon 2012: 2626.
78The LXX version of the relevant passages differs greatly from MT. Jer.
31:357 appears in a different order, and the entire passage 33:1426 is not represented in the LXX.
42
himself use the Oath when creating the elements? The cluster of
traditions about the use of the Oath at creation brings to mind the
central theological question of angelic agency in the act of creation.
69:1525 is quite intriguing, since other traditions in Second Temple
literature and rabbinic writings quite explicitly oppose the idea of
angelic involvement in creation.74 Thus Ben Sira (42:21) states that
From everlasting he is one and he needeth none to give council
(trans. Yadin). In this manner, Jubilees 2:2 stresses polemically that
the angels too were created, and thus could not have participated with
God in the act of creation. The apocryphal Hymn to the Creator in
11QPsa XXVII as well as 1QHa V, 28, both convey a poetic version
of Jubilees 2:2 to the same thematic extent.75 In the BW (18:1),
however, the winds or spirits do participate in the creation of the
world and its stabilization, but no angel is mentioned.76 If 1 Enoch
69 assigns a role to Michael in creation, it might echo Gnostic and
other heterodox traditions, which are known to us from Late Antiquity. However, a straightforward reading of 1 Enoch 69 does not
unequivocally support this interpretation. Rather, while the angels are
entitled to guard the Oath, it is not clear that they actually participate
in creation.
The ideas of a stable world and a permanent cyclic motion of the
luminaries, as encountered in 69:20, are widespread in biblical writings and Second Temple literature.77 A more specific theme of a
divine fiat imposed on the luminaries originates in Jeremiahs prophecy, where the prophet extols the Lord, who bound the luminaries to
their course by means of , laws (31:356) or , covenant
(33:20, 25).78 The oath enforced on the luminaries, however, is a
novelty of BP. It is elaborated further in chapter 41, which merits
some discussion in the present context, as it shares many common
themes with chapter 69.79 The heart of the matter lies in 41:5,
according to which the sun and moon stick to their original course
according to the oath that they had taken:
And they do not leave the course, and they neither extend nor diminish
their course. And they keep faith with one another according to the
oath that they had sworn.80
5. Later Readings of 1 Enoch 69

After establishing the two distinct traditions of the Oath, one cannot
ignore the fact that in the present text they do stand side by side.
79For
other comparisons of these two chapters see Knibb 1978: II, 129, Suter
1979: 21, Stone 1987: 303, Ratzon 2012: 2645. Verses 41:12, 9 are stamped
with the idea of universal judgment, similarly to chapters 659. Pace Nickelsburg
and VanderKam 2012: 136, these verses do belong in chapter 41, since the authority of the luminaries over human judgment is not foreign to ancient Jewish literature
(see Ratzon 2012: 121). The secrets or treasuries of meteorological phenomena are
detailed both in 41:34 and in 69:223. The praise given by cosmological entities
to the Lord of the Spirits is emphasized both in 43:57 and 69:24.
80Trans. Nickelsburg and VanderKam 2012: 142. The last word in 41:5 is
difficult. Eth I MSS give the difficult reading according to the oath which they
dwelt (adaru). The equally problematic Eth II MSS read nabaru (sat), a verb
which sometimes translates the Hebrew ( cf. Isa. 14:14 as I have purposed, so
it will happen, , kamhu ynabbr). Charles 1912: 82 locates
the origin of both versions in the reading of a rather late Eth II MS (BM 490):
abru (were tied). Hallvi (1867: 65) reconstructs the original as according to the
Oath in which they stand from the Rabbinic Hebrew phrase ( remains
under oath). This translation, however, requires the verb to be in impf., which is
found only in Tana 9. Flemming (1902: 46, followed by Nickelsburg) believes this
version is a corruption of a Greek (impose an Oath) to . However,
since is a transitive verb, its use would entail also specifying who imposed
the Oath on the luminaries, which is absent from the present versions. We tentatively suggest that a corruption occurred already in the original Hebrew or Aramaic
text: the first letter of the original word ( swore) had been omitted, yielding
the word ( dwelt), as in Eth I.
81See Ben-Dov 2007: 1489.
43
In this verse, as in 43:2, the luminaries keep faith with one another
in what seems to be a mutual oath they had taken towards each other.
In contrast, chapter 69 reports an Oath that had been imposed on the
sun and the moon as well as on other elements of the created
world by God or his agent at the time of creation.81 The tradition
on the use of the Oath at the creation of the luminaries resonates with
the cosmological character of 69:1525, less so with 69:1314.
Now I will make you swear with the great oath because there is no
oath which is greater than it, by the praiseworthy, illustrious, and great,
splendid, marvelous, powerful, and great name which made the heavens
and the earth and everything together
Although several connections exist between this verse and the traditions in 1 Enoch 69, Jubilees does not depict the creation as a magical
act achieved by means of the name, and in addition the oath is an
entirely innocent act by the offspring of Isaac with no cosmological
connection. Moreover, the drama in the angelic realm is absent. In
Jubilees, the potency of the Name and the oath is not a cosmological
authority over heaven and earth, but rather a legal authority over
human beings, as in the everyday use of oaths. Jubilees thus contains
a rather sublimated and non-mythological version of the myth.83
Flusser has demonstrated that, in the context of Isaacs testament
in Jubilees 36 fearing God and loving the neighbour the direct
presence of God is required rather than His mediation by means of
angels.84 The author of Jubilees relies on an ancient midrash, which
connects these duties under the aegis of Deut. 6:13, Revere the Lord
your God and in his name you should swear. Hence the strong
emphasis in this specific testament on the oath by the divine Name.
At the opposite end of the spectrum we shall present two Jewish
texts from Late Antiquity in which the mythical aspect was quite
82VanderKam
1989: 238.
this kind of move in Jubilees see recently Hanneken 2012.
84Flusser 1988; cp. further Livneh 2011: 1878.
83On
44
Whether the link was made intentionally, or associatively with the

mention of the Oath, later readers see the two traditions as one continuous text. We are not walking on solid ground here, due to the
brevity and fragmentariness of the material, but it seems safe to say
that the unified passage links angelic stories with a mythical, even
magical environment, which resonates with the rich tradition of the
m ha-mepora in later Jewish magical texts. Taken together as they
appear now, vv. 1325 comprise a powerful myth on angelology,
cosmogony and the ongoing conduct of the world. Later compositions echo the combined theme, rather than the distinct traditions.
An early and important combination of the oath, the name, and
creation occurs in Jubilees 36:7, in the words of Isaac to his sons
prior to his death (trans. VanderKam):82
vivified. In a magical text from the Cairo Genizah (T.S. K1.15) we

read:85
,
.... ...
,
...
> [] <
In this text we encounter the angel Kabiel (note the similarity with ]?[ from 1 Enoch 69:14), under whose feet the earth
was subdued. The task of subduing the evil forces was done using
those names that sit on the spirits and subdue them so that they do
not exit and perturb the world. This image may also remind us of a
role the angels had before the flood in the Noachic fragment in 66:1
2: they hold the waters with their hands to prevent them from demolishing the people dwelling on earth. This source exploits the full
angelic potential of the tradition together with a strong connection
to creation and cosmology, but does not acknowledge the force of the
Oath. Instead it focuses on names only. In contrast, a more developed
tradition appears in a long and hitherto unidentified Genizah passage
which bears a close resemblance with Hekhalot literature. The passage, T.S. K.21.95A,86 recounts the angelic encounters of Moses at
Sinai, a common theme in rabbinic and Hekhalot literature. The text
begins (col. 1b) with a curious but extensively broken statement on
letters in the Divine name and their use in Creation. It then narrates
how, when Moses was confronted by the angels at Sinai, and after
85Naveh
and Shaked 1993: 14752. On the Late Antique roots of this magical
prescription and more interpretations of it see Bohak 2008: 2623; 2009. Our
predecessor in identifying hekhalot parallels to the Oath doctrine in 1 Enoch 69 was
Suter 1979: 21.
86The text was first published in Schfer 1984: 17181. For an initial discussion with regard to the present themes see Granat 2009: 17489. Most recently a
fuller treatment was suggested by Bohak 2014.
45
Just as God subdued the world under his hand, and the threshold of
the earth under the heaven, so shall all those who speak against me
be subdued before me, in the name of these names. These are the
names that sit over the winds and subdue them so that they should not
come out and shake the world, so shall all those of speak evil against
me And may those who speak evil against me be subdued before me
in the name of Kabiel Kabiel Kabiel, who subdued the world under
his feet.
Moses had deterred them, they succumbed to Moses and revealed to

him all the different Oaths that were in their dominion. Up to
70,000(?) Oaths ( )[] were revealed to him on
that day. Subsequently, God himself revealed to Moses:
...
Afterwards YHWH YH HYH Living one of the world spoke with him
and revealed to him an Oath of three mysteries (tentative translation)
6. Conclusion
Much effort was dedicated in the present paper to preparing the
ground for dealing with the difficult material in chapter 69. The
textual notes at the beginning of the article indicate that the Geez
textual tradition in this chapter is not a very stable one, particularly
in the central questions of divisions of verses and paragraphs, and
may thus leave some compositional questions open. Caution should
also be practiced with regard to individual enigmatic words, such as
biqa and the number of Kasbel in v. 13. In addition, multiple
duplications and other compositional problems in BP make it difficult to distinguish sources from redaction and original from inserted
materials, if this kind of division is applicable at all in the BP.
In the present paper we have claimed that 69:125 is not part of
the Noachic section, which is usually considered to range between
chapters 659, but more probably ranges between 657 or 68. Some
formal markers corroborate the consistency of chap. 69 with the core
of BP, such as the fact that 69:12 correspond with the earlier statement in 64:12. Chapters 64 and 69 thus overarch the Noachic section, although one cannot deny that their themes (such as the
46
Then God and the angels reveal to Moses further mysteries and
Oaths. Unfortunately the text is incomplete and so it is impossible to
tell how the narrative connects with the letters of the name of God,
and how these letters were used in the process of creation. Yet it
stands to reason that the above noted elements Name, Oath, Creation were connected together in a new narrative setting, together
with the magical hue which is so characteristic in the hekhalot. The
angelic revelation in this case was not granted to Enoch, but rather
to Moses, who functions in the narrative in a similar way to an apocalyptic seer known from the various ascension visionary narratives.
With the longer text of this Hekhalot tradition now made available
by Bohak 2014, its relation with 1 Enoch 69 must be studied afresh.
87Orlov
2005; Bttrich 2012: 478.

47
revelation of knowledge by angels) are echoed within the purportedly

older Noachic section. The fact that both source and redaction
layers use the same themes and phraseology makes it difficult to draw
an unequivocal and reasonable sequence of events for the production
of the conglomerate we now call the Book of Parables.
Formal markers are also helpful within chapter 69. The opening
line in 69:2 forms an inclusio with 69:14, and 69:15 echoes with
69:25. It is thus one of our main claims here, in contrast to most
previous writers, that the angelic tradition in vv. 1314, recounting
the discovery of the divine Oath and Name, belongs with the list of
angelic teachings in vv. 212. The protagonist of this tradition is the
angel Kasbel, whose otherwise unrecognized name accords with other
exotic names in the previous list. Michael in v. 14 is a later insertion,
meant to normalize the otherwise unorthodox previous tradition.
Thus the list in 69:414 includes six, not five, angels. Verses 1525,
in contrast, are linked with the subsequent tradition by association
only. They convey a poetic passage, slightly expanded, about the
power of the Oath (the Name not mentioned here) in the creation
of the world.
Both passages 1314 and 1525 appear here as snippets of
far wider traditions. While the background to the Name and the
Oath traditions is difficult to trace within the early Enoch literature,
it is much more easily recognizable in later cosmogonic traditions,
notably in magical texts from Late Antiquity and in the Hekhalot
tradition. This thematic correspondence raises the question of provenance for chapter 69, as also of the Book of Parables in general: does
it reflect the Jewish beliefs around the turn of the era, or was it written later? Or possibly an older composition was augmented by magical-mystical material at a later stage? Similar questions arise with
regard to the famous theme of the Son of Man in BP and need not
be repeated here. More pertinent to the present discussion is that
analogous questions arise with regard to mystical material in the Book
of 2 (Slavonic) Enoch. While Andrei Orlov generally claims that this
book represents an early prototype of Metatron traditions going back
to the first century ce, Christfried Bttrich recently claimed that
some passages in 2 Enoch can only be understood as later Jewish
mystical insertions, stemming from the late antique Hekhalot and
Shiur Qoma traditions.87 Given the considerable similarity of
chapter69 with later Jewish magical traditions, we would not rule

out both of the above possibilities for the provenance of the traditions
contained in chapter 69.
Addresses for correspondence: jonbendov@gmail.com
REFERENCES
48
Ben-Dov, J. 2007. Exegetical Notes on Cosmology in the Parables of Enoch, in

G. Boccaccini, (ed.), Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man. Revisiting the Book of
Parables (Grand Rapids, MI). 14350
Black, M. 1985. The Book of Enoch, or, I Enoch: a New English Edition. (Leiden)
Boccaccini, G. (ed.). 2007. Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: Revisiting the Book
of Parables. (Grand Rapids, MI)
Bohak, G. 1990 Greek-Hebrew Gematrias in 3 Baruch and in Revelation, JSP 4,
11921
2008. Ancient Jewish Magic: A History. (Cambridge and New York)
2009. The Jewish Magical Tradition from Late Antique Palestine to the Cairo
Genizah, in H.M. Cotton (ed.), From Hellenism to Islam; Cultural and Linguistic Change in the Roman Near East (Cambridge). 32442
2014. The Hidden Hekhalot: Towards Reconstructing an Unknown Hekhalot
Composition from The Cairo Genizah, Tarbiz 82, 40746 (Hebrew)
Bttrich, C. 2012. The Book of the Secrets of Enoch (2 En): Between
Jewish Origin and Christian Transmission. An Overview, in A.A. Orlov and
G.Boccaccini, (eds), New Perspectives on 2 Enoch: No Longer Slavonic Only (Leiden). 3767
Boyarin, D. 2010. Beyond Judaisms: Metatron and the Divine Polymorphy of
Ancient Judaism, JSJ 41, 32365
Caquot, A. and P. Geoltrain. 1963. Notes sur le texte thiopien des Paraboles
dHnoch, Semitica 13, 3954
Charles, R.H. 1912. The Book of Enoch: or 1 Enoch. (Oxford)
Chazon, E.G. 2003. The Use of the Bible as a Key to Meaning in Psalms from
Qumran, in S.M. Paul et al (eds), Emanuel: Studies in Hebrew Bible, Septuagint,
and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honor of Emanuel Tov (Leiden). 8596
Chial, S. 1997. Libro delle parabole di Enoc: testo e commento. (Brescia)
Dillmann, A. 1907. Ethiopic Grammar. Enlarged and Improved by Carl Bezold.
(London)
1853. Das buch Henoch: bersetzt und erklrt von dr. A. Dillmann. (Leipzig)
Dimant, D. 1974. The Fallen Angels in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic Books Related to them (in Hebrew), Hebrew University of Jerusalem
2002. Noah in Early Jewish Literature, in M.E. Stone and T.A. Bergren,
(eds), Biblical Figures Outside the Bible (Harrisburg, PA). 12350
2006. Two Scientific Fictions: The So-Called Book of Noah and the
Alleged Quotation of Jubilees in CD 16: 34, in P.W. Flint, E. Tov and
J.C.VanderKam, (eds), Studies in the Hebrew Bible, Qumran, and the Septuagint
Presented to Eugene Ulrich (Leiden). 23049
49
Erho, T.M. 2009. The Ahistorical Nature of 1 Enoch 56: 58 and Its Ramifications upon the Opinio Communis on the Dating of the Similitudes of Enoch,
JSJ 40, 2354
2011. Historical-Allusional Dating and the Similitudes of Enoch, JBL 130,
493511
Erho, T.M. and L. Stuckenbruck. 2013. A Manuscript History of Ethiopic Enoch,
JSP 23, 87133
Flemming, J. 1902. Das Buch Henoch: thiopischer Text. (Leipzig)
Flemming, J. and Radermacher, L. 1901. Das Buch Henoch. (Leipzig)
Flusser, D. 1988. A New Sensitivity in Judaism and the Christian Message, in
D.Flusser (ed.), Judaism and the Origins of Christianity (Jerusalem). 46989
Ford, J.N. and A. Ten-Ami. 2012. An Incantation Bowl for Rav Mearia Son of
Qaqay (Hebrew), Tarbiz 80, 21930
Fossum, J.E. 1985. The Name of God and the Angel of the Lord: Samaritan and Jewish Concepts of Intermediation and the Origin of Gnosticism. (Tbingen)
Garca-Martnez, F. 1992. Qumran and Apocalyptic: Studies on the Aramaic Texts
from Qumran. (Leiden)
Granat, Y. 2009. Before In the Beginning. Preexistence in Early Piyyut against
the Background of its Sources. Ph.D. Dissertation, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (in Hebrew)
Gry, L. 1939. Mystique gnostique (juive et chrtienne) en finale des Paraboles
dnoch, Le muson 52, 33778
Hallvi, J. 1867. Recherches sur la langue de la rdaction primitive du livre
dnoch, Journal Asiatique, 35295
Hanneken, T.R. 2012. The Subversion of the Apocalypses in the Book of Jubilees.
(Atlanta)
Hillel, V. 2010. A Reconsideration of Charles Designated Noah Interpolations
in 1 Enoch 54:155:1; 60 65:169:25, in M.E. Stone, A. Amihay and V.Hillel
(eds), Noah and His Book(s) (Atlanta). 2745
Hoffman, Y. 1996. A Blemished Perfection: The Book of Job in Context. (Sheffield)
Isaac, E. 1983. New Light upon the Book of Enoch from Newly-Found Ethiopic
Mss, JAOS 103, 399411
Janowitz, N. 1989. The Poetics of Ascent: Theories of Language in a Rabbinic Ascent
Text. (Albany)
1993. Re-Creating Genesis: The Metapragmatics of Divine Speech, in
J.A.Lucy (ed.), Reflexive Language. Reported Speech and Metapragmatics (Cambridge and New York). 393405
Kister, M. 2006. Some Early Jewish and Christian Exegetical Problems and the
Dynamics of Monotheism, JSJ 37, 54893
Knibb, M.A. 1978. The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments. (Oxford)
1999. Translating the Bible: the Ethiopic Version of the Old Testament. (Oxford)
2007. The Structure and Composition of the Parables of Enoch, in
G.Boccaccini (ed.), Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man. Revisiting the Book of
2009. The Date of the Parables of Enoch: A Critical Review, in Anonymous,
Essays on the Book of Enoch and Other Early Jewish Texts and Traditions (Leiden).
14360
Knohl, I. 2012. Sacred Architecture: The Numerical Dimensions of Biblical
Poems, VT 62, 18997
50
Lambdin, T.O. 1978. Introduction to Classical Ethiopic (Geez). (Missoula, MT)

Lesses, R.M. 1998a. Ritual Practices to Gain Power: Angels, Incantations, and Revelation in Early Jewish Mysticism. (Harrisburg, PA)
1998b. Ritual Practices to Gain Power: Angels, Incantations, and Revelation in
Early Jewish Mysticism. (Harrisburg, PA)
Livneh, A. 2011. Love Your Fellow as Yourself: The Interpretation of Leviticus 19:
1718 in the Book of Jubilees, DSD 18, 17399
McDonough, S.M. 1999. YHWH at Patmos: Rev. 1: 4 in its Hellenistic and Early
Jewish Setting. (Tbingen)
Naveh, J. and S. Shaked. 1993. Magic Spells and Formulae: Aramaic Incantations of
Late Antiquity. (Jerusalem)
Newman, J.H. 1999. Praying by the Book: The Scripturalization of Prayer in Second
Temple Judaism. (Atlanta)
Newsom, C.A. 1980. The Development of Enoch 619: Cosmology and Judgment, CBQ 42, 31029
2003. The Book of Job: A Contest of Moral Imaginations. (Oxford and New
York)
Nickelsburg, G. and J.C. VanderKam. 2012. 1 Enoch 2. (Minneapolis)
Nickelsburg, G.W.E. 2001. 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch.
(Minnesota)
2007. Discerning the Structure(s) of the Enochic Book of Parables, in
G.Boccaccini (ed.), Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man. Revisiting the Book of
Nitzan, B. 1994. Qumran Prayer and Religious Poetry. (Leiden)
Olson, D. 2004. Enoch. A New Translation. (North Richland Hills, TX)
Orlov, A.A.,. 2005. The Enoch-Metatron tradition. (Tbingen)
Piovanelli, P. 1987. Sulla Vorlage aramaica dellEnoch etiopico, Studi Classici e
Orientali 37, 54594
Polotsky, H.J. 1964. Aramaic, Syriac, and Geez, JSS 9, 110
Ratzon, E. 2012. The Conception of the Universe in the Book of Enoch, Ph.D.
Dissertation, Tel-Aviv University
Reed, A.Y. 2005. Fallen Angels and the History of Judaism and Christianity: The
Reception of Enochic Literature. (Cambridge)
Schfer, P. 1984. Geniza-Fragmente zur Hekhalot-Literatur. (Tbingen)
Schiffman, L.H. 2010. Pseudepigrapha in the Pseudepigrapha: Mythical Books in
Second Temple Literature in F. Garca-Martnez (ed.) Qumran and Jerusalem:
Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the History of Judaism (Grand Rapids, MI).
38392
Schmidt, N. 1908. The Original Language of the Parables of Enoch, in R.F.Harper,
F. Brown and G.F. Moore (eds), Old Testament and Semitic Studies in Honor of
William Rainey Harper (Chicago). 32949
Segal, M. 2007. The Book of Jubilees: Rewritten Bible, Redaction, Ideology and Theology. (Leiden)
Sollamo, R. 2006. The Creation of Angels and Natural Phenomena Intertwined in
the Book of Jubilees (4QJub a): Angels and Natural Phenomena as Characteristics of the Creation Stories and Hymns in Late Second Temple Judaism, in
C. Hempel, (ed.), Biblical Traditions in Transmission. Essays in Honour of Michael
A. Knibb (Leiden). 27390
51
Steiner, R.C. 1995. The Heading of the Book of the Words of Noah on a Fragment of the Genesis Apocryphon: New Light on a Lost Work, Dead Sea
Discoveries 2, 6671
Stone, M.E. 1976. Lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature, in
F.M.Cross, W.E. Lemke and P.D. Miller (eds), Magnalia Dei the Mighty Acts
of God; Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. Ernest Wright (Garden City, NY). 41452
1987. The Parabolic Use of Natural Order in Judaism of the Second Temple
Age, in S. Shaked, D. Shulman and G.G. Stroumsa (eds), Gilgul. Festschrift
R.J.Z. Wervlowsky (Leiden). 298308
2010. The Book(s) Attributed to Noah, in M.E.Stone, A. Amihay and
V.Hillel (eds), Noah and His Book(s) (Atlanta). 725
Stuckenbruck, L.T. 2007. 1 Enoch 91108. (Berlin)
1995. Angel Veneration and Christology: A study in Early Judaism and in the
Christology of the Apocalypse of John. (Tbingen)
Stuckenbruck, L.T. and T.M. Erho. 2012. The Book of Enoch and the Ethiopian
Manuscript Tradition: New Data, in A.M. Maeir, J. Magness and L.H.Schiffman
(eds), Go Out and Study the Land (Judges 18:2). Archaeological, Historical and
Textual Studies in Honor of Hanan Eshel (Leiden). 25767
Suter, D.W. 1979. Tradition and Composition in the Parables of Enoch. (Missoula,
MT)
Tiller, P.A. 1993. A Commentary on the Animal Apocalypse of I Enoch. (Atlanta)
Tov, E. 2008. Hebrew Bible, Greek Bible and Qumran: Collected Essays.
(Tbingen)
1974. On Pseudo-Variants Reflected in the Septuagint, JSS 20, 16577
Uhlig, S. 1984. Das thiopische Henochbuch. (Guetersloh)
Ullendorff, E. 1968. Ethiopia and the Bible. (Oxford)
VanderKam, J.C. 1987. The Textual Base for the Ethiopic Translation of 1 Enoch,
in D. Golomb (ed.), Working with no Data: Semitic and Egyptian Studies Presented to Thomas O. Lambdin (Winona Lake, IN). 24762
1989. The Book of Jubilees. (Leuven)
2002. From Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second
Temple Literature. (Leiden)
2007. The Book of Parables within the Enoch Tradition, in G. Boccaccini
(ed.), Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man. Revisiting the Book of Parables (Grand
Rapids, MI). 8199

The Oath and The Name in 1 Enoch 69 PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

The Oath and The Name in 1 Enoch 69 PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Journal of Semitic Studies LX/1 Spring 2015

The Oath and the Name in 1 Enoch 69

Chapter 69 of 1 Enoch is a peculiar literary text in many respects.1

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

The paper offers a new explanation for the traditions preserved in

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

but also this account in and of itself is quite unique compared to

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

1. Text and Comments

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

investigation which cannot be covered here. In general, the present

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Flemming and Radermacher 1901: 89 and others, detailed in Nickelsburg

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

The entire v. 18 is omitted in GG due to homoioteleuton (the words

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

in this aspect is vast. See the summary in the essays in Boccaccini

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

2. The Third Parable: A Form-critical Analysis

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Nickelsburg and VanderKam 2012: 295. This insight was formulated

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

fragments elsewhere, since their content is so efficiently enmeshed

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

These are the angels who descended to earth,37 and what is in

This opening statement finds continuation in 69:412, where the

a similar claim, although in a much more intricate and elaborate work of

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

alternates quite freely between the narrative which is clearly about

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Following the lead by Nickelsburg (2007: 41) we therefore suggest

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

69:1 Catch line about the punishment of the Watchers

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

The difficult verses 1314 convey a vague myth concerning Kasbel,

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

between 64:2, 69:1 and 69:14b, as described above. In addition, the

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

1. Who is the Head of the Oath? Is it Kasbel, as verse 13 states, or

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

sinned with regard to mankind.52 Some of the angels (numbered

the oath and the name in 1 enoch 69

This word was supplemented (probably secondarily) in MS Ullendorf (an eighteenth

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on March 19, 2015

Journal of Semitic Studies LX/1 Spring 2015