The Assumption 
 OF Moses 
 
 R.H.Ghar' 
 
I oLiN ;:- 
 
 IpLIBRAKY'^J' 
 
CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
 3 1924 058 585 773 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tliis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924058585773 
 
PRESS OPINIONS. 
 
 THE APOCALYPSE OF BARUCH. 
 Translated from the Syriac. 
 
 By Rev, R. H. CHARLES. 
 
 Crown Svo, cloth, price "js. 6d. net. 
 
 ' ' Mr. Charles's last work will have a hearty welcome from students 
 of Syriac whose interest is linguistic, and from theological students who 
 have learned the value of Jewish and Christian pseudepigraphy ; and 
 the educated general reader will find much of high interest in it, 
 regard being had to its date and its theological standpoint." — Record. 
 
 "Mr. Charles has in this work followed up the admirable editions 
 of other pieces of apocalyptic literature with an edition equally 
 admirable. Some of the notes on theological or other points of special 
 interest are very full and instructive. The whole work is an honour to 
 English scholarship. . . . The work before us is one that no future 
 student of the apocalyptic literature will be able to neglect, and 
 students of the New Testament or the contemporary Jewish thought 
 will find much to interest them in it." — Primitive Methodist Quarterly 
 Review. 
 
 "As is intimated in the title-page, the Syriac text, based on ten 
 MSS., from which the Epistle of Baruch is translated, is included in 
 the volume. The learned footnotes which accompany the translation 
 throughout will be found most helpful to the reader. Indeed, nothing 
 seems to have been left undone which could make this ancient writing 
 intelligible to the student." — Scotsman. 
 
 ' ' To say that this is the edition of the Apocalypse of Baruch is to 
 say nothing. Let us say that it is an edition which alone would give 
 an editor a name to live." — Expository Times, 
 
 "It is a book that should be mastered by every student of the New 
 Testament. " — Westminster Review. 
 
 " Mr. Charles's new work, ' The Apocalypse of Baruch,' which he is 
 the first to edit from the Syriac in a form accessible to English readers, 
 is the best example that English literature has ever had of the modern 
 analysis of ancient books ; and those to whom such criticism is still 
 obscure cannot do better than study the way in which the artist 
 unravels the tangled skein of authorship in the most beautiful of all the 
 Apocalypses that have come down to us. He has certainly written a 
 very valuable work, for which the students of apocalyptic literature will 
 give him their hearty thanks." — Expositor, 
 
THE 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
OTHER WORKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 
 THE APOCALYPSE OF BAHUCH.— Translated from the 
 Syriac : Chapters I.-LXXVII. from the Sixth Centiuy 
 MS. in the Ambrosian Library of Milan, and Chapters 
 LXXVIII.-LXXXVII. — rj¥£ EPISTLE OFBARUCH. 
 — From a New and Critical Text based on Ten MSS. and 
 published herewith. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and 
 Indices. 7s. 6d. net. 
 
 London: A & C. BLACK. 
 
 THE BOOK OF ENOCN. —Translated from Dillmann's 
 Ethiopic Text (emended and revised in accordance with 
 hitherto uncoUated Ethiopic MSS. and with the Gizeh and 
 other Greek and Latin Fragments), with Introduction, 
 Notes, and Indices. 8vo, i6s. 
 
 TI/E ETHIOPIC VERSION OF THE HEBREW BOOK 
 OF JUBILEES.— Kdited from Four MSS. and critically 
 revised, emended, and restored in accordance with the 
 Hebrew, Syriac, Greek, and Latin Fragments of this Book. 
 4to, I2s. 6d. 
 
 THE BOOK OF THE SECRETS OF ENOCH.— Trans- 
 lated from the Slavonic by W. R. MoRFILL, M.A., and 
 edited, with Introduction, Notes, and Indices, by R. H. 
 Charles, M.A. 8vo, 7s. 6d. 
 
 Oxford: THE CLARENDON PRESS. 
 
THE 
 
 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 
 WITH INTRODUCTION, NOTES, AND INDICES 
 
 BY 
 
 R. H. CHARLES, M.A. 
 
 TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN, AND EXETER COLLEGE, OXFORD 
 
 LONDON 
 
 ADAM AND CHARLES BLACK 
 
 1897 
 
[Al/ Rights Reserved'] 
 
TO 
 MY FATHER AND MOTHER 
 
PREFACE 
 
 Written in Hebrew shortly after the beginning of 
 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 and popular Messianic beliefs. Its 
 author, a Pharisaic Quietist, sought herein to recall 
 his party to the old paths, which they were fast 
 forsaking, of Simple unobtrusive obedience to the 
 Law. He glorifies, accordingly, the old ideals 
 which had been cherished and pursued by the 
 Chasid and Early Pharisaic party, but which the 
 Pharisaism of the first century B.C. had begun to 
 disown in favour of a more active role in the life 
 of the nation. He foresaw, perhaps, the doom to 
 which his 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 but played afresh the part of 
 Cassandra. The leavening of Pharisaism with 
 
viii PREFACE 
 
 earthly political ideals went on apace, and the 
 movement thus initiated culminated finally in the 
 destruction of Jerusalem by the Eomans in 70 a.d. 
 
 It adds no little to the interest of the book 
 that it was written during the early life of our 
 Lord, or possibly contemporaneously with His 
 public ministry. At all events, it was known to 
 the writers of Jude 9, 16 and Acts vii., and most 
 probably to the writers of 2 Peter ii. 10—11 and 
 Matthew xxiv. 29 (Luke xxi. 25-26). 
 
 It may be well here to indicate the features 
 in which this edition differs from previous editions 
 of the Assumption. These consist (1) in a fuller 
 and more critical treatment of the Latin text, and 
 of the Greek and Semitic background which it pre- 
 supposes ; (2) in an exegesis of the text at once 
 more comprehensive and detailed. 
 
 I. The Latin Text. — The Latin text has been 
 critically edited and emended four times in Ger- 
 many. But three of these editions have failed to 
 recognise the Semitic background of the Latin text, 
 and have thus limited their horizon. The fourth 
 —that of Schmidt-Merx — which has shown ample 
 recognition of this fact, is often brilliant indeed, 
 but oftener arbitrary, alike in its emendations and 
 restorations. With a view to carrying forward the 
 criticism of the Latin text, the present editor has 
 tabulated the peculiar Latin forms it contains, and 
 
PREFACE ix 
 
 compared them with like forms in the fifth-century 
 Latin MS. of the Gospels, k, and also given the 
 appropriate references to Eonsch's Itala und Vul- 
 gata and Schuchardt's VoJcalismus des Vulgdr-Zateins. 
 The idiosyncrasies of the text have likewise been 
 carefully summarised, and its derivation from the 
 Greek exhibited on grounds in many respects new. 
 At the next stage of the investigation I have been 
 obliged to part company with all scholars but 
 Eosenthal in my advocacy of a Hebrew original. 
 That the book was derived from a Semitic original, 
 it is no longer possible to doubt. That the language 
 in question was Aramaic is, owing to the advocacy 
 of Schmidt-Merx, now generally accepted, but, as 
 it appears to me, on inadequate grounds ; for I 
 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 of an Aramaic, and that the remaining 
 passages have no evidential value on the question 
 at issue. I have shown further, I hope, that 
 whereas many of the passages admit of explanation 
 on either hypothesis, there are several which are 
 expUcable only on that of a Hebrew original. 
 
 II. The Exegesis. — The work done in this direc- 
 tion has been very inadequate. Short studies, 
 indeed, from time to time, have appeared in 
 Germany and England, but these have in every 
 
X PREFACE 
 
 instance confined themselves to one or more of the 
 salient features and main statements of the book. 
 The occasional explanatory notes in the editions of 
 Volkmar, Hilgenfeld, and Schmidt-Merx are, though 
 often most helpful and suggestive, open to the 
 same criticism. This exegetic meagreness of past 
 scholarship on the subject has made the task of 
 the present editor more arduous than might have 
 been expected. It has, however, been beneficial in 
 necessitating a first-hand study of all the questions 
 involved in the text. As a result of this study, 
 I have been obliged to differ from all preceding 
 scholars on the interpretation of several of the 
 most important facts and chapters in the book. 
 With what success I must leave to others to 
 determine. 
 
 As a help to the reader, I should add that the 
 exegetical notes are placed under the English trans- 
 lation and the critical under the Latin text. This 
 practice, however, is occasionally broken through. 
 
 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 
 therewith, and also to Dr. Sutherland Black for his 
 revision of the entire book in proof, as well as 
 for numerous corrections. 
 
 17 Bradmoke Eoad, Oxford, 
 April 1897. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Introduction xiii-lxv 
 
 § 1. Short Account of the Book (pp. xiii-xiv).— 
 § 2. Other Books of Moses (pp. xiv-xvii). — § 3. 
 Editions of the Latin Text — Ceriani, Hilgenfeld, 
 Volkmar, Schmidt and Merx, Fritzsohe (pp. xviii- 
 xxi). — § 4. Critical Inquiries — Ewald, Langen, 
 Hilgenfeld, Haupt, Eonsch, Philippi, Colani, 
 Carriere, Wieseler, Geiger, Heidenheim, Haus- 
 rath, Stahelin, Drummond, Eeuss, Dillmann, 
 Rosenthal, Schurer, Baldensperger, Deane, 
 Thomson, De Faye, Briggs (pp. xxi-xxviii). — 
 § 5. The Latin Version of the Assumption : Its 
 Linguistic Character — Palseogi'aphy and Syntax, 
 and Critical Worth (pp. xxviii-xxxvi). — § 6. 
 The Latin Version — a Translation from the 
 Greek : for (1) Greek Words are transliterated ; 
 (2) Greek Idioms survive in the Latin ; (3) we 
 must at times translate, not the Latin Text, but 
 the Greek which it presupposes, but which was 
 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 Greek still 
 survive (pp. xxxvi-xxxviii). — § 7. The Greek — 
 a translation from the Hebrew Original : for (1) 
 Hebrew idiomatic Phrases survive in the Latin ; (2) 
 Hebrew syntactical Idioms probably survive ; 
 
xii CONTENTS 
 
 PAOE 
 
 (3) we must at times translate, not the Latin 
 Text, but the Hebrew presupposed by it ; (4) 
 frequently it is only through retranslation into 
 Hebrew that we can understand the source of the 
 corruptions in the Text and remove them ; (5) 
 Paronomasiae appear on retranslation into 
 Hebrew (pp. xxxviii-xlv). — § 8. The present 
 Book in reality a Testament of Moses. The 
 original Assumption preserved only in a few 
 Greek quotations (pp. xlv-1). — § 9. Dislocation 
 of Chapters VIII.-IX. in the Latin Text from 
 their original position after Chapter V. (p. li). — 
 § 10. The Author — not a Sadducee, Zealot, or 
 Essene, but a, Pharisaic Quietist (pp, li-liv). — 
 § 11. The Date (pp. Iv-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 Assumption of Moses — Translation and Exe- 
 
 GETioAL Notes 1-51 
 
 The Latin Version of the Assumption of Moses 
 
 CRITICALLY REVISED AND EmeNDBD, TOQBTHEK 
 WITH THE UnEMENDED LaTIN TexT OF THE SiXTH 
 
 Century MS. in the Milan Library . . . 53-101 
 
 The Assumption of Mosbs — Surviving only in a 
 
 FEW Greek Fragments 103-110 
 
 Appendix on L 8 . Ill 
 
 Index I. — Passages from the Scriptures and other 
 . Ancient Books directly connected or closely 
 
 PARALLEL WITH THE TbXT 113 
 
 Index II, — Names and Subjects .... 114-117 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 § 1. Short Account of the Book 
 
 The Assumption of Moses was, in all probability, 
 a composite work, and consisted of two originally 
 distinct books, of which the first was really the 
 Testament of Moses, and the second the Assumption. 
 The former was written in Hebrew, between 7 and 
 29 A.D., and possibly also the latter. A Greek 
 version of the entire work appeared in the first 
 century A.D. Of this a few phrases and sentences 
 have been preserved in St. Matt. xxiv. 29 ; Acts 
 vii. 35; St. Jude 9, 16, 18 (?), the Apocalypse of 
 Baruch, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and other 
 Greek writers. The fragments in the Greek 
 writers are printed below (pp. 107-109). The 
 Greek version was translated into Latin not later 
 than the fifth century. That such a Latin version 
 ever existed was unknown to the modern world till 
 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, 
 
xii CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 (3) we must at times translate, not the Latin 
 Text, but the Hebrew presupposed by it ; (4) 
 frequently it is only through retranslation into 
 Hebrew that we can understand the source of the 
 corruptions in the Text and remove them ; (5) 
 Paronomasiae appear on retranslation into 
 Hebrew (pp. xxxviii-xlv). — § 8. The present 
 Book in reality a Testament of Moses. The 
 original Assumption preserved only in a few 
 Greek quotations (pp. xlv-1). — § 9. Dislocation 
 of Chapters VIII.-IX. in the Latin Text from 
 their original position after Chapter V. (p. li). — 
 § 10. The Author — not a Sadducee, Zealot, or 
 Essene, but a Pharisaic Quietist (pp, li-liv). — 
 § 11. The Date (pp. Iv-lviii).— § 12. Views of the 
 Author on Moses, Israel, the Messianic Kingdom, 
 Good Works (pp. Iviii-lxi). — § 13. Kew Testament 
 and later Writers acquainted with the Assumption 
 (pp. Ixii-lxv). 
 
 The Assumption op Moses — Translation and Exe- 
 
 GETioAi Notes 1-51 
 
 The Latin Version op the Assumption of Moses 
 critically Ebvised and Emended, tooether 
 with the Unemended Latin Text op the Sixth 
 Century MS. in the Milan Library . . . 53-101 
 
 The Assumption op Moses — Surviving only in a 
 
 FEW Greek Fragments ... . 103-110 
 
 Appendix on L 8 Ill 
 
 Index I. — Passages from the Scriptures and other 
 . Ancient Books directly connected or closely 
 
 parallel vi'iTH THE Text 113 
 
 Index IL— Names and Subjects .... 114-117 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 § 1. Short Account of the Book 
 
 The Assumption of Moses was, in all probability, 
 a composite work, and consisted of two originally 
 distinct books, of which the first was really the 
 Testament of Moses, and the second the Assumption. 
 The former was written in Hebrew, between 7 and 
 29 A.D., and possibly also the latter. A Greek 
 version of the entire work appeared in the first 
 century A.a Of this a few phrases and sentences 
 have been preserved in St. Matt. xxiv. 29 ; Acts 
 vii. 35 ; St. Jude 9, 16, 18 (?), the Apocalypse of 
 Baruch, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and other 
 Greek writers. The fragments in the Greek 
 writers are printed below (pp. 107-109). The 
 Greek version was translated into Latin not later 
 than the fifth century. That such a Latin version 
 ever existed was unknown to the modern world till 
 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, 
 
xiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 The book was written by a Pharisaic Quietist, and 
 forms a noble but ineffectual protest against the grow- 
 ing Zelotic spirit of the party. Its author was a 
 learned Jew, well versed in the Scriptures, and inti- 
 mately acquainted with the history of his nation 
 subsequent to the close of the canon. He was full 
 of patriotism; thus he looks for the return of the 
 ten tribes, the establishment of the theocratic king- 
 dom, the triumph of Israel over its foes, and its 
 final exaltation to heaven, whence it 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 not to resort to arms, but simply to 
 keep the law and prepare, through repentance, for 
 the personal intervention of God in their behalf. 
 
 § 2. Other Books of Moses 
 
 There has been a large and very diverse 
 literature bearing the name of Moses. As it 
 furnishes little or no help to the explanation of 
 the present book, I shall content myself here 
 with a simple enumeration of the various Apocry- 
 phal books of Moses that have appeared in Jewish, 
 Christian, and Gnostic literati^re. 
 
 I. In Jewish literature — (a) In Hebrew, (V) ii\ 
 Greek, (c) in Arabic, {d) in Slavonic. 
 
INTRODUCTION xv 
 
 (a) Midrash Tanchuma Deharim, translated into 
 German by Wiinsche (1882). 
 Fetirath Moshe (HE'D nTDS), ed. by Gilb. Gaul- 
 myn (Paris, 1629), with a Latin translation. 
 This translation was subsequently published 
 in 1714 by J. A. Fabricius, and in 1840 
 by Gfrorer, Prophetae veteres pseudepigraphi, 
 pp. 303, 304. Two other recensions of this 
 Midrash have been published by Jellinek, 
 Beth - ha - Midrash (1853), i. 115-129; 
 (1877), vi. 71-78. Some of these books I 
 have not been able to see. On these legends, 
 see also Beer, Leben Moses nach Auffassung 
 der jiidischen Sage (Leipzig, 1863); Bene- 
 detti, Vita e Morte di Mose (Pisa, 1879); 
 Zunz, Gottesdienstliche Vortrdge, p. 146. 
 
 (6) PhUo's Vita Mosis, p. 39; and Josephus, 
 Ant. iv. 8. 4, 48. 
 Bi.^o<;A6ycovMvi7ri,KS)v Mwva-ewi. This book 
 is distinguished from the Assumption in the 
 Acts of the Nicene CouncU, II. 18, where, 
 after mentioning the latter, these proceed : 
 Kal iv BilSXa Aoymv MvariKtov Mcova-eav, 
 avTO'i Matvarj'} irpoei-Tre irepl tov Aa0lS Kal 
 Sdkofi&vTO'i, ouTQ)? irpoeiTre' Kal StaSo^ei/ffet 
 el<s avTov 6 0eo<} crocptav Kal hiKaioavvqv 
 Ka\ etnaTrjfi'qv irXijpTj' ayro? oiKoSofi'^crei 
 rov oiKov TOV Qeov Kal to, e^rj^. I have 
 
xvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 classed this book as a Jewish work, but 
 the evidence tells neither way. 
 
 (c) In Arabic. Dr. Leitner has translated into 
 German {Deutsche Vierteljahrschrift (1871), 
 pp. 184-212) from the Arabic, a Samaritan 
 Apocalypse of Moses. I have found it use- 
 ful in the explanation of IX. 1 of our book. 
 
 {d) In Slavonic, as Mr. Morfill has kindly 
 informed me, there is a book entitled 
 " The Exodus of Moses," or more fully, 
 " The Life of the holy Prophet Moses, and 
 how he ruled among the Saracens, and how 
 he resisted King Pharaoh and Balaam the 
 Wizard, and how he brought the People 
 out of Egypt," Tichonravov, Pamiatnihi 
 otrechennoi russlcoi literaturi, i. p. 233 sqq. 
 (1863). This writing has no connection 
 with our Assumption. It is very rabbinic 
 in character, and possesses many such 
 features in common with Josephus's 
 account of Moses. Mr. Morfill will shortly 
 publish the translation of this work. 
 
 II. In Christian literature. 
 
 Apocalypsis Mosis, in Tischendorf's "Apocalypses 
 apocryphae" (1866), pp. 1-23; Ceriani, 
 Monument. Sacr., V. i. pp. 21—24. An 
 Armenian version has also been published in 
 
INTRODUCTION xvii 
 
 the Uncanonical Boohs of the Old Testament, 
 by the Mechitarists at Venice, pp. 1-23 (see 
 James's Apocrypha amcdota, ii. 158, 159, 
 whence I have derived this last reference). 
 This book really belongs to the Adamic 
 literature (see Eonsch, Das Buch der Juhi- 
 Iden, pp. 470-474 ; Dillmann, Herzog's 
 R-K, xii. pp. 366, 367). 
 
 Apocryphum Mosis ( Air6Kpv<^ov Moavaeax;). 
 According to Euthalius (Zaccagni's Gol- 
 lectanea monumentorum veterum (1698), 
 p. 561), Photius (Amphil. 183), and 
 Syncellus (ed. Bonn, i. p. 48), St. Paul 
 derived Gal. vi. 16, oiire irepiro/Mj] ri icmv 
 ovre aKpo^vaTia uXKa xaivr) ktlcti';, from 
 this Apocryph. There can be no doubt 
 that the borrowing is just the other way, 
 and that this Apocryph is a Christian 
 composition, of the general contents of 
 which we have no knowledge. 
 
 Story of Moses. This is found in Armenian 
 (see James's ^^"""'J'i'^^ anecdota, ii. p. 160). 
 
 III. In Gnostic literature. 
 
 See Epiphanius, Seer. XXXIX. 5, where it is 
 said that the Sethites used certain Books of 
 Moses in addition to others attributed to 
 Abraham and other Old Testament worthies. 
 
xviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 § 3. Editions of the Latin Text 
 
 Ceriaui, Monumenta sacra et profana, vol. i. 
 fasc. i. (1861), pp. 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 reproducing the text. This he did 
 with such accuracy that subsequent inquiries, 
 conducted by Volkmar, relative to the reading of 
 certain passages, failed to lead to any material 
 improvement on Ceriani's printed edition (see 
 Appendix C, Volkmar's edition). 
 
 Hilgenfeld, Novum Tesfamentum extra canonem 
 receptum, 1st ed. (1866), pp. 93-115; 2nd ed. 
 (1876), pp. 107-135. To this great scholar we 
 owe the finest textual work that has been pro- 
 duced on this book. Much of it is of permanent 
 value, and many of his emendations are accepted 
 as final. His contention, however, that the book 
 was written originally in Greek, has, of necessity, 
 limited the range of his vision, and barred the way 
 to further progress. But fault-finding is ungracious 
 where such high services have been rendered, and 
 particularly in the case of one who has not only 
 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 
 
 Hilgenfeld the book, as he himself rightly claims : 
 "Antonio M. Cerianio . . . codicis latini, non 
 libri ipsius primam editionem debemus " (Mess. 
 Jud., Proleg. p. Ixx, note). 
 
 In the Zeitschrift fur wissenschaftl. Theol. (1868), 
 pp. 273-309, 356, and in his Messias Judaeorum 
 (1869), pp. 435-468, Hilgenfeld has retranslated 
 the Latin into Greek, and on the whole with 
 admirable success. On many passages I have 
 found occasion to differ with him. In the sequel the 
 reader will find a number of these, where the critical 
 treatment of the text presupposes a Greek back- 
 ground diverging from that supplied by Hilgenfeld. 
 
 Volkmar, Mose Prophetic und Himmelfahrt, eine 
 Quelle fiir das Neue Testament, zum erstenmale deutsch 
 herausgegehen im Zusammenhang der Apolcrypha 
 und der Christologie uherhaupt (Leipzig, 1867). 
 This writer has made some undoubted contribu- 
 tions to the emendation of the book, and occasionally 
 to its interpretation. But his work is disfigured by 
 many errors, and at times by gross ignorance. His 
 well-known partiality for a certain period of history 
 intervenes here also, and leads him to wrest facts 
 into accordance with his preconceived theories. 
 
 Schmidt and Merx, " Die Assumptio Mosis, mit 
 Einleitung und erklarenden Anmerkungen heraus- 
 gegeben " (Merx, ArcMv fiir wissenschaftliche Ur- 
 forschung des Alten Testaments, I. ii. (1 8 6 8), pp. 1 1 1 - 
 
XX INTRODUCTION 
 
 152). 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 — 
 according to their view, in Aramaic. They were 
 not, indeed, the first to recognise a Semitic 
 original, but they were the first to apply this 
 hypothesis consistently and continuously in the 
 interpretation of the Latin text. For some review 
 of their arguments in favour of an Aramaic as 
 against a Hebrew original, see p. xxxix. 
 
 Their emendations and restorations of the Latin 
 are not unfrequently happy, but at times they are 
 wholly beside the mark and unreasonable. How, 
 for instance, are we to explain the correction of 
 the Semitic idiom, facient facientes, into the un- 
 meaning in faciem facientes, by editors who are 
 advocating a Semitic original ? That Hilgenfeld, 
 Volkmar, and Fritzsche should remove this 
 Hebraism from their texts by correction is 
 intelligible from their standpoint ; but on what 
 principle can we explain the action of these 
 editors ? Their treatment of the text ia other 
 passages is just as arbitrary. It must be con- 
 ceded, however, that their work, though often un- 
 trustworthy, is always stimulating and suggestive. 
 
 Fritzsche, Zibri apocryphi Vet. Testamenti graece 
 (1871), pp. 700-730. In this very serviceable 
 edition, Fritzsche prints on one page the text as 
 
INTRODUCTION xxi 
 
 originally published by Ceriani, and facing it, on the 
 opposite page, an emended text with critical footnotes. 
 This work is based mainly on the labours of Hilgen- 
 feld, Volkmar, and Schmidt-Merx. To their con- 
 tributions to the recovery of the text Fritzsche has 
 added some of his own. It is a saner text than 
 that of Schmidt-Merx, but not half so briUiant. 
 
 § 4. Ceitical Inquiries 
 
 Under the head of each of the following writers 
 on the Assumption, his most characteristic con- 
 tributions or views are briefly given. 
 
 Ewald, QottiTiger gelehrie Anzeigen (1862), vol. i. 
 pp. 4-7, (1867), pp. 110-118,1416-1429; Gesch. 
 des Volhes Israel, vol. vi. 51—61 (Eng. trans.). 
 Ewald regards our book as derived from a Semitic 
 original (Hebrew or Aramaic). It was written by 
 a Zealot a few years after the death of Herod the 
 Great, and subsequent to the rising of Judas the 
 Gaulonite. The " slaves, sons of slaves," are the 
 Maccabean high priests, and chap. VII. is directed 
 against the Pharisees. 
 
 Langen, Das Judenthum in Palastina (1866), 
 pp. 102-111 ; Eeusch's Theolog. ZiteraturU. (1871), 
 No. 3. Langen holds that the Assumption was 
 written in Palestine in Hebrew, and shortly after 
 the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. 
 
xxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 Hilgenfeld, Zeitschr. f. wissensch. Theol. (1867), 
 pp. 217-223 ; Messias Judaeorum (1869), Prolegom. 
 lxx.-lxxvi. See also the books quoted under his 
 name on pp. xviii-xix. The Assumption was written 
 in Greek by a Eoman Jew in the West circa 44—45 
 A.D. Chap. VII. is to be interpreted of the Herodian 
 princes. The exegetical side of HUgenfeld's work 
 is weak compared with the textual. 
 
 Haupt, " Bemerkungen zu der editio princeps der 
 Himmelfahrt des Moses," Z.f.W.T. (1867), p. 448. 
 These remarks consist of a few emendations of the 
 Latin text. 
 
 Eonsch has made many contributions to the 
 study of the Assumption. Some of these are of 
 great value, especially those which deal with the 
 Latin Version purely from the linguistic side. 
 Others, which are devoted to the emendation of the 
 text, are less good, though occasionally his restora- 
 tions are very felicitous. These subjects are treated 
 of in the Z.f.W.T., vol. xi. (1868), pp. 76-108, xiv. 
 (1871), pp. 89-92. In vol. xi. pp. 466-468, he 
 suggests certain corrections and changes to be made 
 in Hilgenfeld's retranslation into Greek. The 
 various names under which the Assumption has 
 appeared are discussed ia Z.f.W.T., vol. xii. 
 (1869), pp. 213-228. In the 17th volume of the 
 Zeitschrift, pp. 542-562, he addresses himself to 
 the exegesis of this book, and then again returns 
 
INTRODUCTION xxiii 
 
 to the emendation of the text. The exegesis could 
 hardly be more unsatisfactory, and the impression 
 left by these, his later attempts at emendation, 
 cannot be said to be much better. In six pages of 
 emendations, only one or two appear probable. I 
 here append a specimen of his work. For the well- 
 known corrupt word putavimus in VII. 8, Eonsch 
 proposes laetabimus or litabimus, or adjutabimus, or 
 si lutabimus, or exaltabimus, but ultimately prefers 
 perpotabimus. Eonsch returned once again to this 
 subject in vol. xxviii. of the same Zeitschrift (1885), 
 pp. 102-104. For further references to this book, 
 see his Das Buck der Juhilaen, 273, 380, 480-482. 
 
 Philippi, Das Buck Henoch (1868), pp. 166-191. 
 This writer assigns the composition of this book to 
 the second century of our era, and interprets chap. 
 VII. of the Pharisees. 
 
 Colani, " L'Assomption de Moise " {Revue de 
 TMologie, vol. iv. (1868), pp. 65-94). This scholar 
 thinks that Schmidt-Merx have made it impossible 
 any longer to doubt the Aramaic origin of the book. 
 "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 
 action of Eabbi Jehuda ben Baba, who, after ordain- 
 ing seven of his disciples in a narrow gorge near 
 Usha, was put to death by the Eomans. This 
 rabbi is the Taxo in IX. 1. Chap. VI. contains an 
 
xxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 indictment of the Jewish Doctors of Jabneh and 
 Usha. Hence the book was written c. 137-138. 
 As for its silence regardiag the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem in 70 A.D., he thinks this quite immaterial. 
 This book was the work not of an Essene, nor a 
 Zealot, but was the manifesto of a writer who felt 
 that Israel could do alike without the temple or its 
 national independence, since it could find its satis- 
 faction in those elements of the cult which were 
 independent of the temple. This very clever, but 
 most inconclusive, treatise concludes with the words : 
 " Toute difficulte, je crois se trouve levee ! " 
 
 Carriere, " Note sur le Taxo de I'Assumption de 
 Mdiae" (Bevue de ^A^oZ. (1868), pp. 94-96). See 
 my Commentary, p. 35. 
 
 Wieseler, "Die jltngst aufgefundene Aufnahme 
 Moses nach Ursprung und Inhalt untersucht " 
 (Jahrbiicher fiir deutsche Theologie (1868), pp. 622— 
 648). Wieseler thinks that our book was written 
 by a Zealot, in Hebrew (?), shortly after the war of 
 Varus. His interpretation of chap. VII. will be 
 found on p. 24 in my notes, and of Taxo on p. 35. 
 
 Geiger, Judische Zeitschrift fiir 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 
 pestilentiosi and tanquam principes erimus. In 
 docentes se esse justos (O'pns) there is a play on 
 
INTRODUCTION xxv 
 
 their name. The words noli me tangere empha- 
 sise their priestly purity. 
 
 Heidenheim, " Beitrage zum bessern Verstandniss 
 der Ascensio Moysis" (Vierteljahrschrift fiir deutsch- 
 und englisch-theologische Forschung und Kritik, vol. 
 iv. (1871), pp. 63-102). This is the most un- 
 trustworthy work it has been my duty to read in 
 all the literature of this book. Occasionally a few 
 helpful references to Jewish literature are given. 
 
 Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, 2nd ed., 
 iv. pp. 76—80. Hausrath is of opinion that the 
 book was written at Eome in the reign of Domitian 
 in Aramaic. 
 
 Stahelin, JaArMcAer/wr deutsche Theologie (1874), 
 pp. 216—218. The book preaches not a Messiah 
 kingdom, but an O.T. theophany. Michael is to 
 introduce the new order of things. 
 
 Drummond, The Jewish Messiah (1877), pp. 74—84. 
 We have here a very clear and but too brief account 
 of the Assumption. Dr. Drummond thinks that, 
 " as there is no sufficient reason for supposing a 
 Hebrew or Aramaean original, we may assume that 
 the book, notwithstanding its Hebraic colouring, 
 was composed in Greek." Then follows an able dis- 
 cussion on the date, which he holds to be about 6 A.D. 
 
 Eeuss, Geschichte der h. Schriften des Alien Testa- 
 ments (1890), pp. 738-740, This writer does not 
 commit himself to a definite date. Pie thinks that 
 
xxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 the words in VI. 7, "He (i.e. Herod) will beget 
 children, who succeeding him will rule for shorter 
 periods," do not necessarily determine the date. 
 Philip and Antipater did, it is true, reign longer 
 than their father. " Der Verfasser konnte auch an 
 Archelaus und Agrippa denken die ja alleia fiir 
 einen Jerusalemer Interesse hatten." 
 
 Dillmann, art. " Pseudepigraphen," in Herzog's 
 Beal-Encyc. 2nd ed., xii. 352, 353. Dillmann agrees 
 with Ewald, Wieseler,and Drummond in assigning the 
 composition of this book to the first decade after the 
 death of Herod. The writer was a Zealot and was 
 hostile to the Pharisees, whom he assails in chap. 
 VII. The book was probably written in Aramaic. 
 
 Eosenthal, Vier apocryphische Biicher (1885), pp. 
 13—38. This is a very interesting and fresh study 
 of our book. The writer ascribes it to the years 
 immediately succeeding the fall of the temple. The 
 author was a Zealot, and wrote in Hebrew and not 
 in Aramaic. He attempts to prove this thesis by 
 the removal of obscurities or corruptions from the 
 text through retranslation into Hebrew. In only 
 one or two cases, however, is it possible to admit 
 that he is successful. On his view of chapter VII., 
 see my notes, pp. 24, 25. 
 
 Schiirer, A History of the Jewish People in the 
 Time of Christ (1886), II. iii. pp. 73-83 (Eng. trans.). 
 We have here an admirable account of this book. 
 
INTRODUCTION xxvii 
 
 Schiirer refers its composition to the first decade 
 after the death of Herod. Its writer was a Zealot, 
 and the homines pestilentiosi in VII. are the 
 " Pharisees, to whom every word is unmistakably ap- 
 plicable." A very valuable bibliography is appended. 
 
 Baldensperger, Bas Selhsthewusstsein Jesu (1888), 
 pp. 25-31. This writer regards the Assumption 
 as a Jewish manifesto, with an apologetic, or rather 
 a secret, polemical aim. This aim is to glorify 
 Moses, the Law, and Judaism over against Christi- 
 anity. The attributes ascribed to the Founder of 
 Christianity are here, in large measure, assigned to 
 Moses. He is the " mediator " between God and man 
 (I. 14, 17), the high priest who intercedes daily on 
 bended knee (XI. 11), the divine prophet and perfect 
 teacher (XI. 16). The Law is to abide for ever (IV. 
 2, XII. 13), and Israel always to be pre-eminent 
 (XII. 4). The book was not written before 50 a.d. 
 Its author was a Quietist, and chap. VII. is to be 
 regarded as descriptive of the Eoman procurators. 
 
 Deane, Pseudepigrapha (1891), pp. 95-130. We 
 have here a very full and readable account of our 
 book, which shows a large acquaintance with the 
 literature of the subject. Its author he takes to be 
 a Zealot. It was written very early in the first 
 century. Chap. VII. is directed against the Herodian 
 princes and the Pharisees. 
 
 Thomson, Boohs which Influenced Our Lord and 
 
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. His interpretation of VII. is 
 strange. It is regarded as a description of the 
 Pharisees, Sadducees, and PubUcans. 
 
 De Faye, Les Apocalypses Juives (1892), pp. 
 67—75. De Faye agrees with Dillmann, Schurer, 
 and others as to the date and the interpretation of 
 chap. VII. The author was a Zealot, whose hopes 
 for Israel were wholly confined to this world. Taxo 
 is the righteous kernel of the nation. 
 
 Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles (1895), pp. 
 5—7, 18. The Assumption is a secret polemic 
 against Christianity. Its very title betrays as 
 much. Its author was a Zealot, who wrote prior 
 to 70 A.D. Taxo and his seven sons are in 
 antithesis to Jesus and His twelve disciples, and 
 are represented as excelling them in self-sacrifice. 
 The law is of perpetual obligation. Its fulfilment 
 is the preparation for the divine advent. 
 
 § 5. The Latin Version of the Assumption : Its 
 Linguistic Chaeacter and Critical Worth 
 
 The solitary MS. of this version was discovered 
 in the Ambrosian Library at Milan by Ceriani, and 
 published by him in his Mon. sacr. et prof., I. i. 
 
INTRODUCTION xxix 
 
 55-64, in 1861. This MS. is a palimpsest of the 
 sixth century. It consists of eight folios, written 
 on both sides. There are two columns on each 
 page, and from twelve to eighteen letters in each 
 line. There is no division of words, and the punc- 
 tuation, which but rarely occurs, is above the line, 
 not on it. Occasionally whole verses are inde- 
 cipherable. The palimpsest came originally from 
 the Abbey of Bobbio, near Pavia. 
 
 Some scholars have supposed that in this MS. 
 we have the actual work of the original translator 
 of the Latin Version, but I shall show presently 
 that this is not so. It is, in fact, only a fragmentary 
 copy of that version. It is not the original version, 
 but only a copy of it ; for (a) our text contains 
 duplicate renderings and attempts at a better 
 translation, which must primarily have been merely 
 marginal glosses, but were afterwards introduced by 
 a copyist into the text. The clearest example of 
 this is to be found in V. 6, where the dittography 
 extends to six lines in the MS. Other ditto- 
 graphies will be found in VI. 3, VIII. 5, XI. 13. 
 (&) Again, in XI. 2 we find an actual correction of 
 the copyist. The text reads, et hortatus est cum 
 Mouse, but the context requires et hortatus est eum 
 Monses. Here, first of all, the copyist took e in eum 
 to be c, and so, finding cum Monses to be impossible, 
 emended Monses into Mouse. Eum is twice taken 
 
XXX INTRODUCTION 
 
 as cum in the Bobbio MS. k, in Mt. ix. 1, xiiL 48, 
 (c) Ab his, corrupt for abis (XI. 9), must be due to 
 a Latin copyist, and not to the Latin translator. 
 
 The Latin belongs in style and orthography to 
 the fifth century. In order to make this clear I 
 will show that nearly all its chief characteristics 
 can be paralleled from the old fifth-century Bobbio 
 MS. k edited in 1886 by "Wordsworth, Sanday, and 
 White. I have drawn my examples of k from Dr. 
 Sanday's Introduction, pp. xcix-clxvi. This N.T. 
 MS. I shall henceforth refer to simply as k. 1 have 
 likewise used Schuchardt's Ber Vokalismus des Vul- 
 gar -Lateins, and Eonsch's Ifala und Vulgata, to 
 which I refer the reader occasionally. 
 
 We shall now treat of the Latin text under two 
 heads — (i.) Its linguistic character, (ii.) Its critical 
 worth. 
 
 (i.) Linguistic Character. — This can best be dealt 
 with under two divisions : {a) its palaeography and 
 orthography, (&) its syntax. 
 
 (a) PalmograpJiy and Orthography. — Of the vowel 
 and consonantal changes occurring in this MS., 
 some are due to errors of sight, others to errors of 
 sound, while others represent the pronunciation of 
 the time. 
 
 ae is found for a in profetiae, I. 5 : cf. k, Mt. xii. 31, blasfemiae. 
 ae for e in quaerella, I. 10; quisquae, VI. 1; inconpraehensibilis, 
 
INTRODUCTION xxxi 
 
 XI. 16 ; praeoes, XI. 17; faciae, XI. 18. This is of 
 
 frequent oocunence in k : cf. Mt. iii. 10, saecuris ; 
 
 xiii. 46, praetiosus, etc. 
 a for e in ad (et), X. 6 : cf. k, Mt. iii. 3, parata (parate). 
 a for i in timebat, XI. 12 ; erant, XI. 14. 
 a for u in seoabantur, VIII. 3. Conversely, u for a in & : cf. Mt. 
 
 xiii. 8, dabunt (dabant). 
 b for p in soribtura, I. 16 ; clibsis, III. 7 : of. k, Mt. viii. 2, 
 
 lebrosus ; cf. Sohuchardt, Vokalismus des Vulgar- 
 
 Lateins, i. 125-126. 
 c for e in cum, XI. 2 : cf. k, Mk. x. 10, cum (eum). 
 c for s in celares, XI. 4, for Solaris : cf. k, Mk. xv. 38, acutu (a 
 
 susu). See Soliuohardt, op. cit. i. 163, cimul (simul). 
 for t in turn, III. 11 : cf. k, Mk. xiii. 21, devocasti (devotasti). 
 cli for c in ohedrio, I. 17. For other instances of this usage see 
 
 Sohuchardt, op. cit. i. 73. 
 d for t in ad (et), X. 6 ; tali(dari), XI. 12 : cf. k, Mt. viii. 19, quod 
 
 (quot) ; cf. Sohuchardt, op. cit. i. 125, 126. 
 e for a in fecit (faciet), II. 4 : of. k, Mk. ix. 1, quidem (quidam). 
 e for ae in scene, I. 7; liena, III. 4; herere, X. 9; que (quae), 
 
 XI. 4; Amorrei, XI. 16: cf. k, Mt. x. 9, es (aes); 
 
 xi. 21, facte (factae), etc.: cf. Sohuchardt, op. cit. 
 
 i. 226-235. 
 e for i in contegerant, IX. 3, XII. 7 : cf. k, Mt. x. 22, odebiles ; 
 
 Mk. ix. 32, temebant, etc. See Sohuchardt, op. cit. 
 
 ii. 1 sqq. 
 c for o in celaris, XI. 4, for Solaris : cf. k, Mt. vi. 28, quemodo, etc. 
 e for u, XII. 6, et (ut). 
 f forph always in fynicis, I. 3 ; profetiae, I. 5 (III. 11, XI. 16); 
 
 allofilorum, IV. 3 ; blasfemare, VIII. 6. So always in 
 
 k, as Farisaei, blasfemare, etc. 
 f for t in ferrum (?), II. 4. 
 ge for qui in ingenationibus, V. 3. 
 i for e in transio, I. 15 ; dimittes (demittes), II. 2 ; liena, III. 4 ; 
 
 scaloiati, XI. 12 ; ducit (-et), III. 3, and passim : 
 
 of. k, Mt. vii. 23, recidite (recedite), etc. 
 i for y in allofilorum, IV. 3 ; acrobistiam, VIII. 3 : cf. Sohuchardt, 
 
 op. cit. ii. 256 sqq. 
 m for CO in mortes (for coortes (?), i.e. cohortes), VI. 8. 
 for i in forma, X. 15 : cf. k, Mt. xiii. 27, zozania (zizania) ; 
 
 Mk. xiii. 13, hoc (hie). 
 C 
 
xxxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 o for u in misereator, IV. 6 : cf. k, Mk. viii. 38, Alios (filius), etc. ; 
 ScliuohaTdt, ii. 149 sqq. 
 
 pa for au in palam (?), II. 4. 
 
 r for b in regnarunt (?), VII. 3. The converse change of b into r is 
 found in k, Mt. xii. 14, exiebunt (exierunt). 
 
 s for ex in scalciati, XI. 12 ; of. Eonseh, op. cit. 469. 
 
 s for n in suscitabunt (corrupt for concelabunt (?)), VII. 4. 
 
 s for t in abrumpens, II. 3 : cf. k, Mk. ix. 1, adstans (adstant), 
 etc. 
 
 t for n in tunc, I. 15 : cf. k, Mt. x. 11, digtus (dignus). 
 
 t for s in eminent, IX. 2 : cf. /.-, Mt. ii. 4, scribit (-is), etc. 
 
 u for e in transferunt, II. 4 ; coguntur, VII. 2 ; ut, VII. 7; cres- 
 cunt, exegunt, XII. 10 : cf. k, Mk. xii. 32, ut for 
 et, etc. 
 
 11 for in putavimus (potabimus), VII. 8 : cf. k, Mk. ix. 22, 
 piites (potes) ; ix. 41, putaverit (potaverit). See 
 Ronsch, op. cit. p. 465 ; cf. Schuchardt, op. cit. ii. 
 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 ; exivit, XII. 13 : cf. k, Mt. i. 21, salvavit 
 (-abit); xii. 42, damnavit (-abit), etc. 
 z for di in Zabulus, X. 1 : cf. h, Mt. xiii. 39, Ziabolus. This 
 change is frequent in the Latin fathers : of. Ronsch, 
 op. cit. p. 457. 
 
 Other noteworthy points of orthography are — 
 the prefixing of the aspirate : heremo, III. 11: cf. k, 
 haestis (estis), Mt. viii. 26 ; see Eonseh, op. cit. 
 462-463. The insertion of n in Monses (III. 11, 
 note): cf. h, Mt. vi. 19, thensaurus ; see Eonseh, 
 op. cit. 458-459. Of t in Istrahel, III. 8, X. 8 : 
 cf. h, Mt. XV. 31 ; see Eonseh, 460. The omis- 
 sion of one of two doubled letters in tribum, III. 6, 
 IV. 9 ; in profetis, IV. 11: cf. k, where filii and 
 alii are usually written fili and ali ; also Mk. 
 
INTRODUCTION xxxiii 
 
 ix. 50, fa turn (fatuum), etc.; see Schuchardt, of. 
 cit. ii. 464-466. The duplication of a vowel in 
 patruum, IV. 8. 
 
 Another peculiarity of style Consists in the use of 
 irregular futures in bo, stabilibis, II. 2 ; tradibit (?), 
 VIII. 2 ; tremebit, X. 4 : cf. 7c, Mt. ii. 6, prodibit, 
 etc. Cf. Eonsch, op. cit. 291. 
 
 (h) Syntax. — "We shall here notice some peculiar 
 usages and constructions. Iste is used frequently 
 for is or ille. Qui = et ego, et is, or et ii, in I. 6, 
 14, III. 14, X. 2. Cf. k, Mk. ix. 10, where 
 it = et ille. 
 
 Dominari is used as a passive, II. 3 ; judicare 
 governs a dative, VI. 2 ; so also misereor, XI. 10. 
 
 But the greatest departures from classical usage 
 are to be found in connection with the prepositions. 
 Thus cum takes the ace, X. 3. For this usage else- 
 where, see Eonsch, Itala uTid Vulgata, 409—410. 
 De twice takes the ace, I. 9, V. 1, where it is used 
 of the agent, being here perhaps a rendering of Std 
 with the gen. In XI. 13 it takes the ace. also 
 where it has its ordinary meaning. For this usage 
 elsewhere, see Eonsch, op. cit. p. 410. In III. 10 
 it takes the dat. or ablat. ( = eVi with dat.). In 
 V. 4 it takes the ablative of instrument. In is used 
 with the ablat. where it should be the ace, IX. 6, 
 X. 5 ; and with the ace. where it should be the 
 ablat., VI. 5. In VIII. 4 it takes the ablat. of the 
 
xxxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 agent. Secus occurs eight times as a preposition 
 with the ace, I. 10, II. 2, 5, etc. Sine takes the 
 ace, I. 10. For this usage elsewhere, see Eonsch, 
 op. cit. p. 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 
 present participle in I. 9, V. 5, XI. 17. For 
 instances of this idiom, see Eonsch, op. cit. pp. 432— 
 433. 
 
 But the above list is far from exhausting the 
 peculiarities of the text. It is replete with Graec- 
 isms and Hebraisms. For a discussion of these the 
 reader should consult sec. 6 and sec. 7. 
 
 (ii.) Critical Worth. — This Version is very literal. 
 This will be apparent when we come to the next 
 two sections, in which we shall find that our text, 
 though Latin in diction, is occasionally Greek, and 
 frequently Hebrew in idiom. This, of course, is due 
 to the almost servile faithfulness of the Greek, 
 no less than of the Latin, translation. At times, 
 indeed, the translation is careless, very careless, but 
 as a general rule it is extremely trustworthy. We 
 shall now proceed to point out its defects under the 
 following heads : — 
 
INTRODUCTION xxxv 
 
 (a) Omissions. — Similitudinem, in II. 9, after 
 omnem through homoioteleuton. FiUus before 
 Naue in X. 11, 15; but this omission may have 
 originated in the Greek, where o tov may have 
 fallen out before Navr}. Suffixes are occasionally 
 omitted : see IV. 6, note ; VII. 9, XII. 7. These 
 may be due to the Greek translation. Others, such 
 as those in I. 10, X. 10, 15, may be due to defects 
 in the Hebrew copy used by the Greek translator. 
 
 (5) Interpolations. — I. 3-5 seem to have been 
 originally marginal glosses from a Greek hand. 
 
 (c) Dittographies. — We have a most interesting 
 case of this nature in V. 6, where six lines of the 
 MS. are repeated twice. The slight differences 
 existing between these duplicate renderings make 
 it clear that we have here an attempt, on the part 
 of the Latin translator, to improve on his first 
 rendering. But the scribe of our MS. incorporated 
 both. Other dittographies occur in VI. 3, XL 13, 
 and probably in VIII. 5. 
 
 {d) Transpositions. — In addition to transpositions 
 of such as ut et for et ut in I. 8, and testatus et for 
 et testans in IV. 12, etc., we have the transposition 
 of the phrase cum infantibus nostris from the 
 close of verse 5 to that of verse 4. A very com- 
 plicated case of transposition occurs in X. 5. In 
 I. 1 there is a transposition of the verb to the end 
 of the clause such as we find not infrequently in 
 
xxxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 k: cf. Mt. vii. 10, 14, xv. 23, etc. But the most 
 remarkable transposition of all is the removal of 
 chaps. VIII.— IX. from their right position after V. 
 to their present place. Similar transpositions are to 
 be met with in the Eth. Enoch Iviii.-lxxxii., xci.— xciii. 
 
 (e) Corruptions. — These are of very frequent 
 occurrence. Many can be dealt with when we 
 understand the character of the language and the 
 confusions incidental to it. There are some cases of 
 sheer blundering. But many of the present corrup- 
 tions of the text are not native to it, but originated 
 either in Greek Version or in the Hebrew. See 
 sec, 6 and sec. 7. 
 
 (/) Carelessness. — We have instances of careless 
 renderings in III. 11, 13 (see crit. notes, in loc). 
 The translator at times also renders the thought 
 and not the word: cf. colonia, III. 2, V. 6, VI. 9, 
 where Jerusalem is meant. This poiats to the fact 
 that the Latin (or Greek ?) translation was made 
 after the destruction of Jerusalem, and its restora- 
 tion by Hadrian as a Eoman colony under the 
 name Aelia Gapitolina. 
 
 § 6. The Latin Version — a Translation from 
 THE Greek 
 
 Of the derivation of our Latin text from the Greek 
 there can be no question. Thus (1) Greek words are 
 
INTRODUCTION xxxvii 
 
 transliterated, as chedrio, I. 17, from KeSpSm; clibsis, 
 III. 7, from 6Xiy}ri<;; heremus, III. 11, from iprjfio<; ; 
 acrobistia, VIII. 3, from aKpo^vajia. 
 
 (2) Greeh forms and idioms survive in the Latin. 
 Thus scene, I. 7 = tj? aKrjvfi ; and in scenae, I. 9 = ev 
 tt) (TK'Tfvfi ; and in IV. 2, plebem banc esse tibi plebem 
 banc exceptam, the second banc is the Greek article : 
 thus the text = tov Xaov tovtov eivai aoi tov \aov 
 Tov eKXeKTov. For instances of this usage elsewhere, 
 cf. Eonsch, Itala u. Vulgata,T^^. 420—421. Finally, 
 quia, V. 3 = on recitantis ; and in usque nos duei 
 captivos. III. 1 3, we have an imitation of the Greek, 
 60)? rov rjfidi; al-x^fiaXccTiadrivai. 
 
 (3) Not infrequently we must translate, not the 
 Latin text, hut the Greeh which it presupposes, hut 
 which was misrendered hy the Latin translator. Thus 
 nam must not be rendered by " for " 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- 
 ing of Se and must be translated accordingly. In 
 lik e manner enim, V. 5 = 8e. Again, in VII. 7, we 
 must render ab oriente usque ad occidentem, not 
 " from east to west," but " from sunrise to sunset," 
 i.e. d(f) ffKiov avareXKovra f^expi' Svofiivov. The 
 Greek is susceptible of either meaning. Again, in 
 XI. 11, we must translate, not nee patiens ne unum 
 quidem diem, but the Greek which it presupposes : 
 ovBe Trapieli; ovBe/xiav ■^/j-epav, " not omitting a single 
 
xxxviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 day." For other instances, see critical notes on 
 XL 12, 18, XII. 7. 
 
 (4) Through retranslation into Greek the source 
 of the incoherencies of the text can, in some cases, 
 he discovered. Thus finem in II. 7 = opov, corrupt 
 for opKov ; and adcedent = irpocr^rjcrovTai, corrupt for 
 irapa^rjaovTai = " will transgress." It is possible 
 that the Latin translator had Trapa^ijaovrai before 
 him, and followed a meaning of it inappropriate to the 
 context. Again, in III. 4, ducent se = a')(dr)a-ovTai,, 
 corrupt for ajddeaovrat,; and in V. 6, in campo = ej' 
 a7/3w, corrupt for iv apyvpo). In these passages I 
 have corrected the Latin text accordingly. See the 
 critical notes, in loc. 
 
 (5) Fragments of the Greek Version are still pre- 
 served. See the notes on p. 6 ; see also pp. 107- 
 110. 
 
 § 7. The Greek — a Translation from a Hebrew 
 Original 
 
 The derivation of our text from a Semitic 
 original was stoutly denied by Hilgenfeld and 
 others. Volkmar is doubtful {Mose Prophetic, pp. 
 56, 57). But this view can no longer be main- 
 tained. It is surprising, indeed, on what slender 
 grounds it has been advanced. Thus Hilgenfeld 
 {Mess. Jud., p. Ixxiii) urges the absence of the 
 
INTRODUCTION xxxix 
 
 pronoun in the accusative after Deus creavit, in 
 XII. 4 ; of the pronominal suffix after magistri 
 in V. 5, as reasons against a Semitic original. In 
 my critical note on IV. 6, I have shown that 
 Greek and Latin translators of Hebrew occa- 
 sionally omitted the suffix in their translation. 
 For instances in the LXX. and Vulgate, see the 
 note referred to. Hilgenfeld's other arguments do 
 not call for consideration. The difficulties he 
 discovers, which make against a Semitic original, 
 are mainly the offspring of his own imagination. 
 
 But although a Semitic original is now generally 
 conceded, it is still a matter of debate whether 
 the balance of evidence preponderates in favour 
 of an Aramaic or of a Hebrew source. Schmidt- 
 Merx, Colani, Hausrath, and Carriere decide for 
 the former, and Eosenthal for the latter. Ewald 
 apparently held both views at different times 
 (Gottinger gelehrte Anz., 1862, pp. 4-7; 1867, 
 pp. 110—118). Schlirer thinks a Semitic original 
 probable, but not certain. Of the above scholars, 
 it is only Schmidt-Merx, and in a minor degree 
 Eosenthal, that have seriously treated the subject. 
 In the Archiv f. wissenschaftl. Erforschung des A.T., 
 I. ii. 111-152, Schmidt-Merx show, in a variety 
 of passages, how readily the text admits of re- 
 translation into Aramaic ; but this proof in itself 
 is wholly inadequate, for the same passages can 
 
xl INTRODUCTION 
 
 just as easily be rendered into Hebrew. In two 
 cases, however, they urge that, whereas the 
 idiosyncrasies of the Latin text can be explained 
 on the hypothesis of an Aramaic original, no such 
 explanation is possible on the hypothesis of a 
 Hebrew original. The first instance is to be 
 found in I. 10, where, according to these editors, 
 the order of the Latin text can only be accounted 
 for by an Aramaic original. In my critical note 
 on that verse, I have shown that it is possible to 
 interpret the text in two ways. According to one 
 of those, the present order of the text can be 
 explained as derived from the Hebrew. But even, 
 according to the other, it is not necessary to 
 resort to the Aramaic hypothesis ; for we cannot 
 argue with certainty from our text as to the 
 order of the original source. This is clear from 
 I. 14, where, though the Greek and Latin Versions 
 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, we see in numerous instances 
 in the Godex Bohiiensis, h, see pp. xxxv— xxxvi. 
 The second instance of alleged Aramaic order is 
 that in III. 2. Here Schmidt-Merx point out that 
 
INTRODUCTION xli 
 
 the position of omnia in the phrase sancta vasa 
 omnia is conformable to Aramaic, but not to Hebrew, 
 syntax. This is quite true, but does not thereby 
 justify the conclusion they seek to draw from it. 
 For even in translations made directly from the 
 Hebrew, and not as in the case of our text, which 
 is derived from the Hebrew through the Greek, 
 this same phenomenon recurs three times in the 
 LXX. of Genesis, i.e. in xiv. 11, xxviii. 15, 
 1. 14 (in several MSS.). See also Lev. xx. 23; 
 2 Chron. xxi. 18. Now if, in a careful translation 
 made directly from the Hebrew, this non-Hebrew 
 order can appear three times in one book, it 
 shows that no value is to be attached to its single 
 occurrence in a version that is not immediately 
 from the Hebrew, but only mediately, and that is 
 likewise often careless to boot. Our verdict 
 therefore must be, that Schmidt-Merx have fur- 
 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 a long and careful 
 study of this book. Whether I shall be more 
 successful ia my contention than my predecessors 
 must be left to the reader to decide. Eosenthal 
 {Vier apocrypldsche Bucher, pp. 34—38) has already 
 
xlii INTRODUCTION 
 
 preceded me in advocating this view. One or two 
 of his restorations are good, and have been 
 adopted in the sequel, with due recognition, but 
 the bulk of his suggestions I cannot accept ; they 
 are frequently wild and quite beside the mark. 
 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. 4 ; circumibo, II. 7 ; terram patriae 
 suae, III. 3 ; homo de proximo suo ; testans . . . 
 invocabat testes. III. 1 2 ; de isto, III. 1 3 ; dividen- 
 tur ad veritatem, V. 2 ; in sacerdotes vocabuntur 
 and facient facientes, VI. 1 ; implebuntur manus, 
 X. 2, are pure Hebraisms. The Hebrew equivalents 
 will be found in the critical notes on the various 
 passages. Now it is quite true that the majority 
 of these could be paralleled by Aramaic expres- 
 sions, but not all. Thus circumibo, II. 7 = " I 
 will protect," i.e. aaiDX (cf. Deut. xxxii. 10), cannot 
 be explained from the Aramaic ; nor yet in sacer- 
 dotes vocabuntur, VI. 1 = D''3n3 h)l isip'' (cf. 1 
 Chron. xxiii. 14). 
 
 (2) Syntactical idioms prolably survive, e.g. the 
 circumstantial clause in VII. 9 and IX. 4. In 
 VIII. 2, torquebit et tradidit, there may be an 
 instance of perfect with the strong vav ; also in 
 VII. 2, 3, cogentur . . . et regnarunt. 
 
 (3) In some cases we must translate, not the Latin 
 
INTRODUCTION xliii 
 
 text, hut the Hebrew presupposed hy it. Thus, 
 successor = BidSo^oi; = me'D, must be rendered 
 " minister," in I. 7 ; and non coepit = ovk fjp^aro 
 = i)''Sin ah, must be rendered by " He was not 
 pleased." 
 
 (4) Frequently it is only through retranslation 
 that we can understand the source of corruptions in 
 the text, and remove them. Thus, in IV. 9, the 
 impossible text, devenient apud nationes (MS. 
 natos) in tempore tribuum (MS. writes tribum for 
 genitive, cf. III. 5) = d'D3B' nya D^Wa ni''. Here the 
 two corruptions that destroy the sense of the 
 context at once become apparent — ini* is corrupt 
 for ms and QiDaB' for nnuc'. Thus the text is 
 brought into harmony not only with itself, but 
 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 eorum = (with Hilgenf eld) 
 oi Se ZihaaKaXoi ovTe<;, ol KaOiryrjTal avrwv = 
 DiT'llD amnv Now the context of these words is 
 against any mention of the rabbis or teachers here. 
 But we see that the Hebrew does not necessarily 
 refer to them, but also means " the many." And 
 this gives a most appropriate sense. In the 
 preceding verse, " some " are false priests ; in this 
 verse, " many " are venal judges. Hence we see 
 
xliv INTRODUCTION 
 
 that Dn''"i1D 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 the text through retranslation. In 
 X. 10 we have a most interesting restoration. In 
 the words said of Israel triumphant in heaven, — 
 videbis inimicos tuos in terram, — we have an 
 impossible statement. After the final judgment, 
 Israel's enemies can no longer be on the earth. 
 The context implies that they are in torment, and 
 in torment in the sight of glorified Israel. Now 
 these two facts suggest at once Gehenna, and that 
 the original was D3n "^ii- But the D3n was some- 
 how lost, and ija was partly rendered partly trans- 
 literated iv <yfj, and this in turn by in terram. >i is 
 frequently so transliterated (see notes, pp. 43, 44). 
 
 I shall only adduce one more passage. In XII. 7, 
 temperantius misericordiae ipsius . . . contegerunt 
 mihi, we have an inadmissible text. But the source 
 of the corruption comes to light if we retranslate. 
 Thus the words = eVtet/cco? crwi^rj fioi e\eo<; avrov 
 = nDn Tiix Nipi ^'Nin. Here we should read D 
 before non, and with this simple change we get an 
 unexceptionable text : " He was pleased to call me 
 in His compassion." See pp. 98, 99 for details. 
 This restoration also is impossible on the Aramaic 
 hypothesis. 
 
 (5) A play upon words discovers itself on retransla- 
 
INTRODUCTION xlv 
 
 tion into Hebrew in VII. 3, where it is said of the 
 Sadducees (D''P'nv), dicentes se esse justos, i.e. D''pnv. 
 This has already been pointed out by Geiger. It 
 recurs in VII. 6 (see p. 27). 
 
 On the above grounds, I hold, therefore, that it 
 is no longer possible to doubt the Semitic original 
 of this book. It may reasonably also be concluded 
 from what precedes, that that original was in Hebrew 
 and not in Aramaic. 
 
 How far the character of classical Hebrew was 
 preserved in the original it is impossible to say. 
 My retranslations presuppose generally such a 
 character, but the cogency of the restorations is 
 not bound up with such a presupposition. 
 
 § 8. The present Book in reality a Testament 
 OF Moses. The original Assumption pke- 
 
 SEEVED only IN A FEW QUOTATIONS. 
 
 In the lists of apocryphal books we find mention 
 of a Testament of Moses {AtadriKi] M<ova-ico<;) 
 followed immediately by an Assumption of Moses ^ 
 {'AvaXTji^K Mtova-eox;). In the " List of Sixty 
 Books," and in the Synopsis of Athanasius, the 
 
 1 This book is so named in tlie Acta Synodi Nican, ii. 18, 20 ; 
 the Stichometry of Nicephorus ; and the Synopsis of Athanasius : 
 as the Adscensio Mosis in Origan, de Frincip. iii. 2. 1; as the 
 Assumptio Mosis in Didymus Alex, (see p. 108 for quotation); as 
 Secreta Moysi in Evodius (see ji. 108). 
 
xlvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 number of stichoi in these two books is not given, 
 but this desideratum is supphed by the Stichometry 
 ascribed to Mcephorus, which assigns to them 
 respectively 1100 and 1400 stichoi. In this con- 
 nection an excellent suggestion has been made by 
 Schiirer to the following effect : " Seeing that the 
 writing that has come down to us is in point of fact 
 a ' Testament (will) of Moses,' though, as we have 
 already seen, it is quoted in the Acts of the Council 
 of Nicsea under the title 'AvaXrjyjrK Mcono-eo)?, it may 
 be assumed that both these designations were the 
 titles of two separate divisions of one and the same 
 work, the first of which has been preserved, whereas 
 the quotations in the Fathers almost all belong to 
 the second." My study of the Latin Version and 
 the Greek fragments has led me to accept this 
 suggestion in a modified form. The Testament and 
 Assumption mentioned in the above lists are to be 
 regarded not as " two separate divisions of one and 
 the same work " with Schiirer, but as two originally 
 independent works subsequently put together and 
 edited in one. 
 
 Before we adduce the grounds for this theory — 
 owing to the scanty amount of materials these 
 cannot be many — we must first show that Eonsch's 
 identification of the above " Testament " with the 
 Book of Jubilees (Das Buck der Juhilaen, pp. 
 480, 481) is contrary to existing evidence. We 
 
INTRODUCTION xlvii 
 
 have seen above that in the Stichometry of Nice- 
 phorus, 1100 stichoi are ascribed to this "Testa- 
 ment." Now, in the same list, 4300 are assigned 
 to Genesis. Hence, if Eonsch's identification is 
 right, G-ehesis should be nearly four times larger 
 than the Book of Jubilees. But since, as a matter 
 of fact, it is considerably smaller, it is needless to 
 consider further this identification. 
 
 Having disposed of this objection, we now 
 return to our thesis that the present Latin Ver- 
 sion and the Greek fragments in the Fathers 
 belong respectively to two originally independent 
 works, which were subsequently edited together. 
 This conclusion is probable from the following 
 facts : — 
 
 (i.) The book quoted by St. Jude, by Clement of 
 Alexandria, and later Greek writers, was wholly con- 
 cerned with the Assumption of Moses and incidents 
 connected with it. This we take to have been the 
 original Assumption of Moses. 
 
 (ii.) The book preserved in the Latin Version is in 
 reality a " Testament," and not an " Assumption of 
 Moses." Indeed, it appears to be quite opposed 
 to this claim made on Moses's behalf ; for 
 
 (a) According to the Latin Version {i.e. the 
 
 " Testament "), Moses was to die an ordinary 
 
 death. Thus in I. 15, Moses says: "I am 
 
 passing away to sleep with my fathers even 
 
 d 
 
xlvili INTRODUCTION 
 
 in the presence of all the people." In 
 III. 13 the tribes speak of Moses's death 
 In X. 14 Moses again declares : " I shall 
 go to sleep with my fathers." In X. 12 
 this was clearly the original sense. " From 
 my death — assumption — imtil His advent 
 there will be CCL. times." We shall touch 
 presently on the explanation of the intruded 
 word " assumption." 
 (&) A 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. pp. 121, 122. 
 "Est quidem in Apocrypho Mysticoque 
 codice legere, ubi de creatis rebus subtiHus 
 agitur, nubem lucidam, quo tempore mor- 
 tuus est Moses, locum sepulchri complexam 
 oculos circumstantium perstrinxisse ita, ut 
 nuUus neque morientem legislatorem neque 
 locum videre potuerit, ubi cadaver conder- 
 etur." Here no Assumption seems to be 
 implied, but only an extraordinary disap- 
 pearance of Moses's body, such as is 
 recorded in Deut. xxxiv. 5, 6. If this 
 writer had been acquainted with the 
 original Assumption, in which the details 
 of Moses's ascension to heaven were re- 
 
INTRODUCTION xlix 
 
 corded, he could not have written in these 
 vague terms. 
 
 (iii.) The " Testament " and the " Assumption of 
 Moses " were subsequently edited in one book. Of 
 this editing we find a trace in X. 1 2 : " From my 
 death — assumption — until His advent," etc. Here 
 the word " assumption " can best be explained as an 
 insertion of the editor in order to adapt the text of 
 the Testament to the main subject of the second 
 work which he incorporates, i.e. the Assumption. 
 
 (iv.) In the thirteenth section of Vassiliev's 
 Anecdota Graeco-Byzantina, entitled Palaea historica, 
 — an O.T. history of events from Adam to Daniel, 
 — of the portion which deals with the death of 
 Moses, part seems to be ultimately derived from the 
 " Testament," and part from the " Assumption " 
 properly so called. The folloiving lines (pp. 257— 
 2 5 8) would form a fittiing close to the " Testament": — 
 
 [Ilepl T7JS TeXevTrj'; Mtai/Vewj.] koI el/irev 
 Mcovcrfj<; ttjOo? 'Ir]<7ovv tov Navl. 'AveKQaifiev iv 
 rca opei. koI aveXdovrav avTcov eiBev Mwvarji; ttjv 
 yr]v Trji i'TTO/yyeXia^ Kal elirev tt/dos avTov. KdreXde 
 TToo? TOV \aov, Kai avayyeiXov avTol'i on Maivaii<; 
 eTeXevTrjcrev. Kal KarrjXdev Irjcrow tt/so? tov Xaov, 
 6 Be McoiJarj'} to, TeXr) tov ^iov eKTrjcraTO. Here 
 Moses dismisses Joshua, and dies apparently an 
 ordinary death. But according to the Assumption 
 proper (see quotation from Clement Alex. p. 107), 
 
1 INTRODUCTION 
 
 both Joshua and Caleb were present when the 
 assumption of Moses took place. The words that 
 follow on the above in Vassiliev are based ulti- 
 mately on the Assumption proper. koI iirecparo 
 !$afJbovT)X a)? ap Kara^dar) to crKvvcofia ( = crK'^vcofia) 
 avTov Tft) Xaft) iva deoiroirjdcaaiv avrov. Mi'^a'^X 8e 
 6 ap'^iaTpa.TTjjo^ irpoa-Ta^ei Qeov ?jK6ev Xa^elv 
 avTov Kol crvv(7TeTX.ac' kol avdiaraTO avra ^afioxrtfK, 
 Koi Biep-d'^ovTO. dyavaKT-^aai; ovv o ap')(i,aTpdTrj'yo<; 
 iirsTip/qaev avrov elirtov 'EiriTifia ere Kvpia, Btd- 
 l3oXe. KoL ouTco? rjrTr]drj o dvTlKel[ievo<; Koi ^vjfjv 
 e^pycruTO' 6 Be dp'^dr/yeXo<; M.ij(arfS, a-weareiXep rb 
 aKvvcofia Mtovarj oirov irpoaerd'^Or) irapa Qeov tov 
 XpiaTOV r]iMS)v. 
 
 (v.) 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: 
 " vecpovi altpviBiov virep avrov ardvTO'i, dcpavi^eTai 
 Kara Tt,vo<; (j)dpajyo^. Teypa^e he avrov iv Tal<; 
 lepaK /8t/SX.ot9 redvecora, Seicra<i jMrj Bl v7rep^o\r]v ttj? 
 rrepl avrov dperrj'; tt/oo? to Oecov avrov dva-ympfjaai 
 ToXfiijamaiv elrrelv." It holds fast to Deut. 
 xxxiv. 5, 6 and the account in the Testament, but 
 shows that the writer is aware of the new claims 
 made on Moses's behalf in the Assumption. Does 
 the account of the Transfiguration point in any 
 respect to popular belief in Moses's Assumption ? 
 
INTRODUCTION li 
 
 § 9. Dislocation of Chapteks V1II.-IX. in the 
 Latin Text fkom their Original Position 
 AFTER Chapter V. 
 
 The interpretation of these two chapters will 
 remain an impossibility so long as scholars attempt 
 to deal with them in their present position. I 
 have given, in the notes on pp. 28—30, the grounds 
 which necessitate this new departure in the exegesis 
 of the book. 
 
 § 10. The Author a Pharisaic Quietist 
 
 There is some difficulty in determining the 
 religious party in Judaism to which the author 
 belonged. First of all, however, it is clear that he 
 was not a Sadducee; for (1) he looks forward to 
 the direct intervention of God on behalf of Israel, 
 and the establishment of a theocratic kingdom on 
 earth (X. 3-8). (2) He dwells on the future 
 blessedness of the righteous (X. 10, 11). (3) He 
 attacks the Sadducean party in the most bitter 
 terms (VII.). 
 
 Secondly. He was not a Zealot. This view has 
 been advocated by Wieseler, Dillmann, Schiirer, and 
 others. But it is just as impossible as that which 
 precedes; for (1) the writer's complete silence as 
 to the Maccabean rising forms an emphatic censure 
 
lii INTRODUCTION 
 
 of their appeal to arms. This silence is all the 
 more impressive as the writer was thoroughly 
 acquainted with the Maccabean movement. Thus 
 his text shows an intimate acquaintance with Books 
 I. and II. of the Maccabees, or, at all events, with the 
 facts on which these are based ; and the reader will 
 fail to appreciate the allusions and nuances of the 
 narrative unless he brings to its perusal an accurate 
 and detailed knowledge of Maccabean history. We 
 have here, in fact, to deal with the work, not of a 
 popular enthusiast, but of an accurate scholar. (2) 
 And, whilst he thus shows his aversion to the aims 
 and method of the Maccabees, — in other words, to 
 a militant Judaism, — he is careful to indicate his 
 own admirations. He will not trust in an arm of 
 flesh. Thus his hero (IX.) is not one who takes up 
 arms on behalf of Israel, but one who, amid the 
 most bitter persecution that ever befel Israel, was 
 faithful unto death, and, lifting no hand in self- 
 defence, committed his cause unto God. See notes 
 on pp. 32—38. (3) The aim of such a description 
 as appears in IX. is to indicate the line of action 
 which the Pharisaic party should pursue, i.e. one 
 of non-resistance. The writer protests against the 
 growing corruption of the Pharisaic party by pol- 
 itical aims and methods. See notes on pp. 34, 35. 
 (4) X. 3—10 is wholly against the idea of a Zealot 
 author. This passage, in fact, confirms all that has 
 
INTRODUCTION liii 
 
 been said above. The theocratic or Messianic 
 kingdom is to be introduced not by the militant acts 
 of the saints, but through the direct intervention of 
 God. 
 
 Thirdly. He was not an Essene, as Schmidt-Merx 
 have supposed. (1) The entire book is interpene- 
 trated with national hopes and aspirations. See 
 especially X. 8. The ideal of the Essene was indi- 
 vidualistic and ethical, and not national. (2) The 
 greatest interest is taken in all the fortunes of the 
 temple. Thus it was built by God (II. 4), its frequent 
 profanations are dwelt upon (II. 8, 9, V. 3, 4, 
 VI. 1), and its complete destruction by Nebuchad- 
 nezzar (III. 2) and its partial destruction by Varus 
 (VI. 9). Such an interest could not be natural in 
 an Essene, who was excluded from its courts 
 (Joseph. Ant. xvui. 1.5). (3) The pure or polluted 
 character of the sacrifices in the temple is carefully 
 recorded. Thus it is said that they are (rightly) 
 offered during a long period of history (II. 6). 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. 4 that, though offered to God, 
 they were polluted. Now such a concern in the 
 sacrifices of the temple is likewise unnatural in an 
 Essene, who disapproved wholly of animal sacrifice 
 (Philo, ii. 457, ov ^wa Karadvovre^), and esteemed 
 their sacrificial meals as far transcending any 
 
Hv INTRODUCTION 
 
 temple sacrifice in worth (Ant. xviii. 1. 5). (4) 
 According to our author, the future abode of the 
 blessed is the heaven of the stars (X. 9), but the 
 Essene heaven was beyond the ocean (Bell. Jud. iL. 
 8. 11). Again, Gehenna is the place of punish- 
 ment for Israel's national foes (X. 10). We know 
 of no such conception among the Essenes. (5) The 
 fact that pre-existence is ascribed to Moses as a 
 special distinction (I. 14) implies a disbelief in the 
 Essene doctrine of the pre-existence of all souls 
 (Bell. Jud. ii. 8. 11). 
 
 As we have now shown that our author was 
 neither a Sadducee, a Zealot, nor an Essene, there 
 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 
 fast-disappearing type, recalling in all respects the 
 Chasid of the early Maccabean times, and uphold- 
 ing the old traditions of quietude and resignation. 
 While his party was fast committing itself to 
 political interests and movements, he raised his 
 voice to recall 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 
 due course culminated in the fall of Jerusalem. 
 
INTRODUCTION Iv 
 
 § 11. The Date 
 
 It is impossible to deal seriously with the late 
 date assigned to this book by Volkmar and Colani, 
 137—138 A.D. Their only ground for so doing is 
 to be found in the historical character of chaps. 
 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, and shown, by a minute 
 investigation of every phrase, that they recount, not 
 the calamities of the Jews under Hadrian, but under 
 Antiochus Epiphanes. See notes on pp. 28—38. 
 If this has been proved satisfactorily, as I hold it 
 to be, then it is no longer possible to advocate a 
 second-century date. But even should the proof 
 be deemed inadequate, insuperable difficulties still 
 confront the upholders of such a view. For, from 
 internal evidence, it appears that the book must 
 have been written before 70 a.d. This we shall 
 now proceed to show. 
 
 The book was written before 70 a.d. For (1) the 
 temple is to 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 
 written. This is to be inferred from the considera- 
 tion that if it had fallen, such an event could not 
 have been passed over in silence. It could not 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. See II. 4, 8, 9, III. 2, 
 V. 3, 4, VI. 1, 9, VIII. 5. When the temple did 
 fall, it left an ineffaceable mark on all 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, 
 Colani, Keim, Hausrath, and Eosenthal, who date 
 the composition of the Assumption after 70, are 
 untenable. 
 
 Now, all other scholars are agreed as to its com- 
 position before 70 a.d., but differ with each other 
 as to the exact period to which it should be assigned 
 between 4 B.C. and 70 a.d. Many of these differ- 
 ences ^ are due to the purely arbitrary restorations 
 of the unintelligible fragments of numbers in VII. 
 2, and may therefore be at once discounted. 
 
 So far we have determined only the latest limit 
 of composition, i.e. 70 a.d. There is no difficulty 
 as to its earliest. This is 3 B.C. ; for Herod is 
 already dead (VI. 6), and the war of Varus already 
 past (VI. 9). After this war, the writer declares, 
 the times will be ended, and " the four hours will 
 come" (VIII. 1). Thus the limits of composition 
 lie between 3 B.C. and 70 a.d. But there are data 
 
 'Thus Hilgenfeld assigns the book to the years 44-45 a.d.; 
 Schmidt-Mei-x to 54-64 ; Fritzsche to 50-60. 
 
INTRODUCTION Ivii 
 
 for a nearer determination. In VI. 7 the state- 
 ment, " And he (Herod) will beget children, who, 
 succeeding him, will rule for shorter periods," was 
 true of Archelaus alone ; for Philip and Antipas 
 reigned longer than their father. Hence the book 
 must have been written before these princes had 
 reigned for thirty-four years, i.e. before 30 a.d.^ 
 Thus the date of composition lies between 3 B.C. 
 and 30 A.D. But the limits may be defined still 
 more closely. For the prediction, that Herod's 
 sons should rule for shorter periods than their 
 father, may be reasonably explained from two con- 
 siderations : (a) from the general expectation that 
 the sons of such a wicked king could not long pre- 
 serve their authority ; but still more (J) 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- 
 ing fate of Philip and Antipas. Hence, however, 
 we may interpret the " four hours " in VII. 1 ; 
 it may be fairly concluded that part of these 
 
 ' Ewald, Wieseler, 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 
 
 have already elapsed when the author writes, and 
 that the earliest limit of composition is 7 a.d. 
 Thus the book was composed between the years 
 7-30 A.D. 
 
 § 12. Views of the Author on Moses, Israel 
 THE Messianic Kingdom, Good Works 
 
 Moses. — Moses was prepared, from before the 
 foundation of the world, to be the mediator of 
 God's covenant with His people (I. 14, III. 12). 
 During his life he was Israel's intercessor with God 
 (XI. 11, 17) ; for forty years he suffered many things 
 at their hands in Egypt, the Eed Sea, and the 
 wilderness (III. 11). When about to die, he chose 
 Joshua in his stead (X. 15), apparently as the 
 prophet promised in Deut. xviii. 15. His death 
 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 stm, and from the south to the 
 confines of the north — yea the entire world was 
 his sepulchre (XL 8). But his relation to Israel 
 did not cease with death ; he was appointed by 
 God to be their intercessor in the spiritual world 
 (XII. 6). 
 
 Israel. — Israel is God's own people (I. 12): the 
 world was created in their behalf (I. 12) : and Moses 
 
INTRODUCTION lix 
 
 prepared, from before the foundation of the world, 
 to establish the covenant relation between God and 
 His people (I. 14), and Jerusalem prepared, in like 
 manner, to be the centre of the worship of Jehovah 
 till the establishment of the theocratic kingdom 
 (I. 1 7). Israel's history is then shortly summarised 
 from the time of the Exodus to the split between 
 the two kingdoms. From this time the writer 
 carefully distinguishes between the two tribes and 
 the ten. The former constitute the two " holy 
 tribes " (II. 4), yet the solidarity of the twelve tribes 
 is never lost sight of; for Judah's captivity is 
 attributed to the sins of Israel (III. 5). In due 
 time the two tribes return from their captivity, 
 but grieve over their imperfect sacrifices (IV. 8) — 
 imperfect, apparently, because the ten tribes are not 
 with them, though they are increasing and multi- 
 plying in the land of their captivity (IV. 9). But 
 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). Then ensues the persecution of 
 Antiochus (VIII.), and the withdrawal of the Chasid 
 party from political alliances (IX.). The Maccabean 
 king-priests are alluded to, and their successor 
 Herod (VI.). With his death, and probably the 
 deposition of Archelaus, we arrive at the writer's 
 own period. Herewith we pass from the region of 
 
Ix INTRODUCTION 
 
 history to that of prediction. The theocratic or 
 Messianic kingdom will be ushered in by a day 
 of repentance (1. 17). 1750 years after the death 
 of Moses,^ i.e. between 75 and 107 a.d. (?), G-od 
 will intervene on behalf of Israel, — of Israel, be 
 it observed, not of Judah and Benjamin alone 
 (X. 8). Here, again, the solidarity of the nation, 
 in the writer's mind, discovers itself. As they 
 suffered vicariously for each other's sins (III. 5), 
 so likewise the promises were made to the twelve 
 tribes collectively (III. 9), and they should all 
 be glorified together (X. 8). Thus when the 
 theocratic kingdom was established the ten tribes 
 were to be restored. During this kingdom Israel's 
 national enemies were to be destroyed (X. 8). 
 Finally, Israel was to be exalted to heaven (X. 9), 
 whence they should see their enemies in Gehenna 
 (X. 10). 
 
 The Messianic or Theocratic Kingdom. — In the 
 preceding paragraph we have given the various 
 
 ^ This seems to be the period meant by the 250 times spoken of 
 in X. 12 (see note). As we 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 
 Moses's death. If we may accept Josephus's chronology for this 
 period, then the date of the Divine Advent was to be in the year 
 75 or 88 or 107, according as we regard 1675 years (Ant. xx. 10. 2) 
 as having elapsed between Moses's death and the Christian era, or 
 1662 years [Ant. x. 9. 7 ; xi. 1. 1 ; Bell. Jiid. vi. 4. 8 ; 10. 1), or 
 1643 years {Bell. Jiid. vi. 4. 8). (See Herzog's R.E. xvii. p. 460. ) 
 
INTRODUCTION Ixi 
 
 references to this kingdom which are found in our 
 author. There is no Messiah. Indeed, in X. 7, 
 the author seems to be really inimical to this 
 expectation : " The Eternal God alone . . . will 
 punish the Gentiles " (see note, in loc). This 
 may be due to the fact that the conception 
 of the Messiah, as a man of war, was gaining 
 more and more acceptance amongst the Pharisees, 
 and was thus of a nature to promote the grow- 
 ing secularisation of Pharisaism. Now, it is 
 against the latter evil that the author's writing is 
 directed. 
 
 Good Works. — On the doctrine of merit, or good 
 works, our author's views are allied to O.T. concep- 
 tions, rather than to the rabbinic doctrine of man's 
 righteousness, which bulks so largely in Jewish 
 literature from 50 a.d. onwards. See my edition of 
 the Apocalypse of Baruch xiv. 7, xxi. 9, notes. So far 
 from representing man's righteousness as involving 
 merit over against God, — an undoubted Pharisaic 
 doctrine of the first century of our era, — our author 
 represents even the greatest hero of Judaism as 
 declaring : " Not for any virtue or strength of mine, 
 but in His compassion and long-suffering, was He 
 pleased to call me " (XII. 7). Similarly Moses 
 declares to Joshua : " It is not on account of the 
 godliness of this people (Israel) that thou shalt root 
 out the nations " (XII. 8). 
 
Ixii INTRODUCTION 
 
 § 13. New Testament and latek Writers 
 acquainted with the assumption 
 
 St. Jude unquestionably was acquainted both 
 with the Testament of Moses and with the Assump- 
 tion, properly so-called, which together compose the 
 complete book. 
 
 Thus St. Jude 9 is derived from the latter : see 
 p. 107. From this indubitable case of borrowing 
 we proceed to deal with another, for which the 
 evidence is very strong. St. Jude 16 is composed 
 of several clauses which agree verbally or in sub- 
 stance with V. 5, VII. 7, 9 of our Latin text — 
 the original Testament of Moses. We shall here 
 give the Greek text of Jude, inserting after each 
 clause its parallel from our text. Ovroi elai 
 lyoyyvarral, fLefiy^ifLoipov (Ass. Moys. VII. 7, quaeru- 
 losi), KaTo, Ta<; eVt^u/it/a? ainwv -rropevofievof Koi to 
 aTOjxa avrwv \aXel inrepoyKa (VII. 9, et manus 
 eorum et mentes immunda tractantes, et os eorum 
 loquetur ingentia), Oavfid^ovreii Trpoacoira, ux^ekeLat; 
 Xtiptv (V. 5, mirantes personas locupletum et accipi- 
 entes mmiera). In St. Jude 18 the "mockers" 
 {ifjLTralKTai) appear to be the homines pestilentiosi 
 (VII. 3) (see note, in loc). The " ungodly men " 
 who are mentioned in St. Jude 4 appear twice in 
 chap. VII. 3, 7 (impii). Now, lest the full force of 
 these parallels should escape us, we should observe 
 
INTRODUCTION Ixiii 
 
 that the accounts in both books are actually or 
 nominally prophetic. The classes of evil-doers 
 dealt with are those who shall be " in the last 
 time," according to Jude 18, and "when the times 
 are ended," in our text. 
 
 The writer of 2 Peter also appears to have used 
 our text. Thus II. 10, 11 are based on Jude 9, 
 or both are equally dependent on the original 
 Assumption. Some passages support the latter 
 alternative. Thus with 2 Peter ii. 13, rjSovrjv 
 Tjiyov/Mevoi Tr)v ev ^(Mepa Tpv<f)r]v, compare Ass. 
 Moysi, VII. 5, omni bora diei amantes convivia ; 
 and with evTpv<j)covTe<; ev rat? dyaTrac'i aiiT&v 
 avvevcc'^ovfievoi, {Vulg., affluentes, in convivHs suis 
 luxuriantes vobiscum), compare VII. 8, Habebimus 
 discubitiones et luxuriam. Compare also 2 Peter 
 ii. 3 with VII. 6. 
 
 There are some remarkable parallels between St. 
 Stephen's speech in Acts vii. and our text. The 
 most remarkable is that in III. 11, "Who suffered 
 many things in Egypt, and in the Eed Sea, and in 
 the wilderness during forty years," which agrees 
 verbally for the most part with Acts vii. 36, 
 TTOi'^aa'; repara koX atj/Mela ev rfi AlyvirT^ Kav ev 
 'EpvOpa OaXdaarj, Koi ev rrj ep^fim erq recnrapa- 
 Kovra. The likeness is too close to be accidental. 
 We must either assume that Acts vii. 36 is derived 
 from our text, or that III. 1 1 & of our text is 
 e 
 
Ixiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 interpolated. The evidence of Apoc. Bar. Ixxxiv. 3 
 is against the latter supposition : likewise also the 
 word " suffered." ^ Again, in III. 2, in the words, 
 " that we should not transgress (God's) command- 
 ments in the which he was a mediator to us," the 
 fact that they did transgress them is implied, and 
 the fact that Moses was the mediator through whom 
 they came, is expressly stated. Now, these two 
 facts are distinctly given in Acts vii. 38, 39 : 
 " This is he that was . . . with the angel which 
 spake to him on the Mount Sinai . . . who received 
 living oracles to give unto us ; to whom our fathers 
 would not be obedient." Finally, there is the 
 prediction of the captivity in III. 13, and the 
 citation of the prophecy of Amos to that effect in 
 VII. 43. 
 
 Again, Matt. xxiv. 29 (cf. Mark xiii. 24-25 ; 
 Luke xxi. 25-26) is either dependent on X. 5 of 
 our text, or else both are derived from a common 
 source. This is clear if we compare Matt. xxiv. 2 9 : 
 ■^Xto? (TK0Tia6rjaeTai Koi r) (reKrjvq ov Scocret to 
 06770? avrrj'i, /cat ol aoTepe'; . . . rwv ovpav&v 
 aaXevdijcrovrai, with X. 5 — 
 
 '■ This idea of Moses's suffering in connection with Israel is found 
 in the Jalkut (translated by Heidenheim, DciUsche Vierteljahr- 
 schrift (1871), p. 217). Moses . . . sagte : " Herr der "Welt, 
 offenbar und bekannt ist dir meine Muhe und mein Leiden, das 
 ich mit ihnen (den Israeliten) zu erleiden hatte, bis ich ihnen die 
 Lehre . . . eingepragt hatte, " 
 
INTRODUCTION Ixv 
 
 (Sol) in tenebras convertet se, 
 Et luna non dabit lumen. . . . 
 Et orbis stellarum conturbabitur. 
 
 It is noteworthy that in the parallel passage in 
 Luke xxi. 25 there is a reference to the sea also, 
 as there is in X. 6 of our text. 
 
 For another close parallel of our text, VIII. 1 
 with Matt. xxiv. 21, see notes on pp. 80, 81. 
 
 On the above grounds we conclude that this book 
 was known to the writers of the Epistle of Jude 
 and of Acts vii., and most probably to the writers 
 of 2 Peter and Matt. xxiv. 29 (Mark xxii. 24-25 ; 
 Luke xxi. 25-26). 
 
 It was known also to the writer of Apoc. Bar. 
 Ixxxiv. 2—5: see notes in loc. (pp. 12, 13). For 
 the citations in Clement of Alexandria, Origen, etc., 
 see pp. 107-110. 
 
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 TRANSLATED FROM THE LATIN 
 
 I. (And it came to pass in the one hundred and 
 twentieth year of the Hfe of Moses), 2. That is, 
 
 1. 1. See orit. note. 
 
 2. Two thousand five 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 Jos- 
 ephuSjWe shall find that no two 
 of these authorities agree. Thus 
 the death of Moses is variously 
 dated according to — 
 
 Anno 
 Mundi. 
 Assumption of Moses . 2500 
 Book of Jubilees . . 2450 
 Josephus, Ant. viii. 3. 1 2550 
 ,, or viii. 3. 1 com- 
 bined with xx. 10 2530 
 Samaritan Pentateuch . 3309 
 
 LXX 3859 
 
 From these variations among 
 authorities before and after 
 the Christian era, it appears 
 
 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 
 systems competing for popular 
 acceptance. I shall return to 
 this question in my Commentary 
 on the Book of Jubilees, where 
 the subject necessarily demands 
 to be treated at some length. I 
 shall, however, add here another 
 fact which shows that the Mas- 
 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. 
 40 (Mass. text), Israel is said to 
 have sojourned 430 years in 
 Egypt alone ; whereas, in the 
 Samaritan, this period embraces 
 also the sojourn of the patri- 
 archs in Canaan before their 
 
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 the two thousand five hundredth year from the 
 creation of the world, 6. That he called to him 
 Joshua the son of Nun, a man approved of the 
 Lord, 7. That he might be the minister of the people 
 and of the tabernacle of the testimony with all its 
 
 descent into Egypt. Here the 
 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. iii. 17, 
 and Josephus, Ant. ii. 15. 2. 
 It reappears also at a later date 
 in the Targiim of Jonathan on 
 Exod. xii. 40. Some writers 
 have cited as testimonies to the 
 Massoretic reckoning Philo, Quis 
 rer. div. § 54 (i. 511) ; Josephus, 
 Ant. i. 10. 3 ; Bell. Jud. v. 9. 4; 
 Acts vii. 6 : but all these pas- 
 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. 
 
 3. The MS. inserts here : 
 " 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 
 Greek marginal gloss. See crit. 
 note (p. 54). 
 
 4. The MS. inserts here : 
 "When the people went forth 
 after the exodus which was made 
 by Moses to Amman across the 
 Jordan." See crit. note. The 
 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 
 
 Onom. Sacr., ed. Lag., 88, 31 : 
 Amman quae nunc Filadelfia, 
 urbs Arabiae nobUis, in qua 
 habitaverunt olim Eafaim, gens 
 antiqua ; and 92, 2 : Ammon 
 trans Jordanem in tribu Gad. 
 Haec est Amman de qua supra 
 diximus, Filadelafi, civitas illus- 
 tris Arabiae. 
 
 5. The MS. inserts: "In the 
 prophecy which was made by 
 Moses in the book Deuteronomy. " 
 See crit. note. 
 
 6. Called to him Joshua the 
 son of Nun. These words are 
 drawn from Deut. xxxi. 7. 
 
 Approved of the Lord. For 
 phrase cf. Acts ii. 22; 2 Tim. ii. 
 15. 
 
 7. Minister of the people. See 
 critical note on this verse (p. 
 56). 
 
 Tabernacle of the testimony. 
 This is the o-kt/xt; toC iiap- 
 Tvplov, i.e. nnvn Snu, as would 
 appear from the words follow- 
 ing : " with aU its holy things." 
 These holy things were the ark 
 and the tables of testimony. 
 Only for the addition of this 
 clause the Hebrew might have 
 been lyiD '7nN="tent of meet- 
 ing," 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. 
 
CHAPTER I. 6-12 5 
 
 holy things, 8. And that he might bring the people 
 into the land given to their fathers, 9. That it 
 should be given to them according to the covenant 
 and the oath, which he spake in the tabernacle to 
 give (it) 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 
 that thou mayst be blameless imto God." 11. So 
 saith the Lord of the world. 12. For He hath 
 
 8. And that lie might bring 
 the people, etc. Deut. xxxi. 7 ; 
 cf. also xxxi. 21. 
 
 9. The covenant and the oath. 
 This is a favourite expression of 
 the writer, cf. III. 9, XL 17, XII. 
 13. We must restore it also in 
 II. 7. See crit. note in loc. (pp. 
 62, 63). 
 
 Which He spake in the taier- 
 7iacZe,i.e.inDeut. xxxi. 14, 20, 23. 
 
 Saying to Joshua. These 
 words are to be connected 
 immediately with ver. 6 ; " He 
 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 
 courage. See crit. note (pp. 
 56, 57). These words go back 
 immediately to Deut. xxxi. 7, 
 from which also part of ver. 6 
 is derived. 
 
 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 
 speaker of the words ' ' Bestrong, " 
 etc. In Josh. i. 7 ; Deut. xxxi. 
 23, they are addressed directly 
 
 to Joshua by God, but in Deut. 
 xxxi. 6, 7 it is Moses that first 
 uses them. 
 
 12. Created the world on be- 
 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 
 Apoo. Bar. xiv. 18. 
 
 A still more limited view, i. e. 
 that the world was created on 
 behalf of the righteous in Israel, 
 is expressed in Apoc. Bar. xiv. 
 19, XV. 7, xxi. 24. This con- 
 ception reappears in the Shep- 
 herd of Hermas in a form 
 adapted to its Christian en- 
 vironment. There it is the 
 Christian Church to which the 
 world owes its creation : Vis. 
 ii. 4. 1, 5(i ravTTjv { = t7]P iKKKTj- 
 crLav) 6 KdafJ-os KaTT)fyrltj6T]. Cf. 
 also Vis. i. 1. 6, iv., v. The 
 larger view, that the world was 
 created on account of mankind, 
 is found in Apoc. Bar. xiv. 18 ; 
 4 Ezra viii. 1, 44 ; Hermae Pastor, 
 Mand. xii. 4, ^Krure rbv Koffnov 
 ^vEKd Tov d.vdpdxjrov, 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 
 to their own humiliation might by (their) arguments 
 convict one another. 14. Accordingly He designed 
 
 i. 10, ii. 4, 5 ; Dial. c. Try ph. 
 41 ; Irenaeus, v. 29. 1 ; Tertul- 
 lian, Adv. Ma/rc. i. 13; Origen, 
 CoTiira Cels. iv. 23. 
 
 13. Was not pleased. (See 
 crit. note, p. 58.) The sense 
 of the verse appears to be : God 
 was unwilling to reveal the fact 
 that the world was created on 
 behalf of Israel in order that the 
 Gentiles might be put to a com- 
 mon shame in their reasonings 
 on this subject. Whatman could 
 not discover (Ecoles. iii. 11, viii. 
 17), God revealed through Moses 
 (ver. 14). 
 
 14. This verse is quoted by 
 Gelasius of Cyzicum in his Com- 
 ment. Act. Syn. Nic. ii. 18 (Fab- 
 ric. Cod. Pseud. V.T. i. 845; 
 Mansi, Condi, ii. p. 844): fxiWav 
 b irpo^irfp-rjs Mwuc^y ^^t^j^at tov 
 ^iov, tjjs y^ypa-TTTat 4v ^i^Xip 
 'AvaKrjfeins Mavcriois, irpotTKaKe- 
 (rdpi€vos^l7}(rovv vldv Nau^ Kal dta- 
 Xeyd^evos irpds avrbv ^(pyj' Kai 
 Trpoededaard /te 6 Qebs irpb Kara- 
 jQoX^s Kbtr^ov ehai /ie ttjs diad-^KTjs 
 aOrou ixe(TlTT}V. 
 
 Prepared me lefore the founda- 
 tion of the world. Pre-existeuce 
 is here ascribed to Moses, as it 
 was also to the Son of Man in 
 Eth. En. xliii. 2 (where see 
 note). But about the beginning 
 of the Christian era such pre- 
 existence came to be regarded in 
 
 Alexandrian Judaism — not as 
 the prerogative of one or more 
 favoured souls, but as the com- 
 mon characteristic of all souls. 
 See Slav. En. xxiii. 5. This 
 was the prevailing doctrine of 
 later Judaism. 
 
 Frmn the foundation of the 
 world. See crit. note on I. 14 
 (pp. 58, 59). 
 
 Mediator. The word ixetxhTjs, 
 of which arbiter is clearly a 
 translation, is found only in later 
 Greek (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 ; 
 Exod. XX. 19. It was, however, 
 a recognised title of his in the 
 first centmy 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 
 came the law 6 cijiios . . . 5ia- 
 Ta7ets . . . ^v x^'-P^ fieixiTou. 
 Again in Heb. viii. 6, ix. 15, 
 xii. 24 there is an obvious allu- 
 sion to this designation of Moses, 
 where over against the O.T. 
 legislator, Christ is described as 
 a "Mediator of a new (or 
 'better') covenant." (3) From 
 
CHAPTER I. 13-17 7 
 
 and devised me, and He prepared me before the 
 foundation of the world, that I should be the 
 mediator of His covenant. 15. And now I declare 
 unto thee that the time of the years of my life is 
 fulfilled and I am passing away to sleep with my 
 fathers even in the presence of all the people. 
 16. And receive thou this writing that thou mayst 
 know how to preserve the books which I shall 
 deliver unto thee : 17. And thou shalt set these in 
 order and anoint them with oil of cedar and put 
 them away in earthen vessels in the place which 
 He made from the beginning of the creation of the 
 
 PMlo, Vit. Mays. iii. 19 : ola 
 /iecrirTjs Kal SioXAdxTT;!. (4) From 
 the Talmud, where Moses is fre- 
 quently spoken of as a mediator, 
 i.e. as niono ; see Levy, Neuhebr. 
 und Chald. Lex. iii. 595, 696. 
 See also Shem. rab. on Exod. 
 iii. 13 ; Bamid. rab. xi. 3. 
 See Sohiittgen, Hor. pp. 788, 
 739 ; Wetstein, N. T. ii. p. 224. 
 15. Sleep with my fathers. Gf. 
 III.13; X.12,14; Deut.xxxi.16. 
 Moses makes no reference here 
 to his Assumption. The words, 
 " Even in the presence of all the 
 people," if they are the true 
 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 
 Assumption (see pp. 107-110), 
 according to which Joshua and. 
 Caleb were witnesses, but none 
 other. With this verse compare 
 
 Apoc. Bar. xliv. 2: "Behold I 
 go unto my fathers according to 
 the way of all the earth." 
 
 16. This writing. Cf. X. 11, 
 XI. 1. 
 
 17. Anoint them with oil of 
 cedar. The sacred heavenly 
 books shown to Enoch (Slav. 
 En. xxii. 12) are described as 
 "fragrant with myrrh." 
 
 From the beginning of the 
 creation of the world. See crit. 
 note on I. 14 (p. 58, 59). 
 
 In the pla^e, etc., i.e. Jeru- 
 salem. In Joma 54J, Sifre 76J, 
 the world is said to have been 
 created with Zion as a starting- 
 point. See "Weber, pp. 199, 
 63-65 (2ud ed.). In Ezek. 
 xxxviii. 12, V. 5, Zion is said to 
 be the centre of the earth : cf. 
 Eth. En. xxvi. 1, xc. 26 ; Jubi- 
 lees viii. Is there any reference 
 here to "stone of foundation," 
 K'ntJ pN, mentioned in the Targ. 
 Jon. on Exod. xxviii. 30 ? 
 
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 world, 18. That His name should be called upon 
 until the day of repentance in the visitation where- 
 with the Lord shall visit them in the consummation 
 of the end of the days. 
 
 II. (And now) they will go by means of thee 
 into the land which He determined and promised 
 
 18. UntUtheday of repentance. 
 The temple was thus expected 
 to stand till the establishment 
 of the theocratic kingdom. As 
 Hilgenfeld remarks, no Jew could 
 have so written after the de- 
 struction of the temple in 70 
 A.D. StiU more impossible is 
 the later date of Yolkmar and 
 Colani, which assigns this book 
 to ". time when Jerusalem was 
 rebuilt as a Roman colony with 
 a heathen temple and sacrifices, 
 and no Jew was permitted to 
 approach it. Cf. Justin, Apol. 
 i. 47 ; Tert. Adv. Jud. 13 ; 
 Schiirer, Div. I. vol. ii. 294, 
 306-308, 315 sqq. (Eng. trans.). 
 
 The day of repentance. Taken 
 in connection with the following 
 words, this phrase refers to the 
 gi'eat 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 
 great repentance. ' ' Israel will 
 not fulfil the great repentance 
 before Elijah comes," Pirke de 
 R. Eliezer, xliii. According to 
 Mai. iv. 6 and Luke i. 16, 17, 
 
 this moral reformation was to 
 be wrought by Elijah. So 
 strongly were the Rabbins im- 
 pressed with the value of this 
 repentance, that in Pesikta 163S 
 it is said : " If all Israel together 
 repented for a single day, re- 
 demption through the Messiah 
 would follow " (see Weber, 333, 
 334, 338, Isted.; 348, 353, 2nd 
 ed.). 
 
 in the visitation, etc. The 
 visitation here spoken of is one 
 of mercy in relation to Israel. 
 The word visit {iTncrK4irTea-8M= 
 ips) 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 
 on Apoc. Bar. xx. 1). "The 
 time of visitation" (/caip6s iina-- 
 Kowrjs, Wisd. iii. 7) is the 
 establishment of the kingdom ; 
 of. Luke xix. 44. 
 
 Them, Israel. 
 
 In the consummation of the end 
 of days. Similarly in the Apoc. 
 Bar. xxvii. 15, xxix. 8, the 
 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. 1. Cf. Deut. xxxi. 7, 
 21-23. 
 
CHAPTERS I. 18-II. 4 9 
 
 to give to their fathers, 2. In the which thou 
 shalt bless and give to them individually and con- 
 firm unto them their inheritance in me and establish 
 for them the kingdom, and thou shalt appoint them 
 prefectures according to the good pleasure of their 
 Lord in judgment and righteousness. 3. And (it 
 will come to pass) in the sixth year after they 
 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. 4. And the twelve tribes will go down 
 
 2. Their inheritance in me. 
 This is a peculiar phrase, but 
 Ronsch supports it by 2 Sam. 
 XX. 1 : " Neither have we in- 
 lieritanoe in the sou of Jesse" 
 (Z.f.W.T. 1869, p. 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 eam." 
 See crit. note on II. 2. 
 
 Appoint them prefectures. The 
 text is obscure. See crit. note 
 (p. 60). We might render also : 
 "appoint them local magis- 
 trates." These might be the 
 moB' mentioned in Deut. xvi. 
 18 ; 1 Chron. xxiii. 4, xxvi. 
 29. 
 
 3. In the sixth year. The 
 conquest of Canaan occupied 
 fire years. Cf. Josh. xiv. 10 ; 
 Joseph. Ant. v. 1. 19 : Itos Sk 
 iri^acrov ■f)5r\ Trape\iri\i6eL Kal 
 'Kavayaiojy o^Kh-i oiidels vir6\4- 
 J^enrro. 
 
 For eighteen years. Each year 
 signifies a reign or ruler. The 
 
 "chiefs and kings" are the 
 fifteen judges and the three 
 kings, Saul, David, and Solomon. 
 
 And during nineteen years the 
 ten tribes will be apostates. These 
 are the nineteen kings of Israel 
 from Jeroboam to Hoshea. In 
 these two statements the writer 
 anticipates for the moment the 
 course of history. In the next 
 verse he turns back to record 
 the removal of the ark by David 
 to Jerusalem. 
 
 4. And the twelve tribes will 
 go down, etc. 2 Sam. vi. 1, 2, 
 17. See crit. note (p. 61). 
 
 The Ood of heaven. Cf. iv. 4, 
 X. 3. This expression, which is 
 found in Gen. xxiv. 7, was a 
 favourite one amongst the post- 
 exilic Jews, Ezra v. 11, vi. 9, 
 10, vii. 12, 21, 23 ; Dan. ii. 18, 
 etc. 
 
 The Ood of heaven will make, 
 etc. The building of the temple 
 underSolomon is here referred to. 
 
 The court of His tabernacle. 
 See crit. note (p. 62). 
 
10 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 and transfer the tabernacle of the testimony. Then 
 the God of heaven will make the court of His 
 tabernacle and the tower of His sanctuary, and the 
 two holy tribes will be (there) established: 5. But 
 the ten tribes will establish kingdoms for them- 
 selves according to their own ordinances. 6. 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 profane the oath which the Lord 
 made with them. 8. And they will sacrifice their 
 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 will work impiety and 
 
 Tower of His sanctuary. See 7. Seven mil entrench the 
 
 crit. note (p. 62). walls, i.e. seven kings ■will 
 
 And the two lioly tribes, etc. advance the strength and pro- 
 Only two tribes will remain "sperity of Judah-Rehoboam, 
 faithful to the temple so built. Abijah, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Je- 
 This calls for a reference to the horam, Ahaziah, Athaliah. 
 action of the ten tribes, which / will protect nine, i.e. nine 
 is given in the text verse. kings will enjoy the divine 
 
 5. This statement relative to protection — Joash, Amaziah, 
 the ten tribes is really paren- Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Heze- 
 thetical. It was called out by kiah, Manasseh, Anion, Josiah. 
 the prediction that (only) the (Four) will transgress, i.e. 
 two tribes would preserve their Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoia- 
 allegiance to the temple. chin, Zedekiah. 
 
 6. The writer, after the par- Transgress . . . oath. See 
 enthetical reference to the ten crit. note (pp. 62, 63). 
 
 tribes in ver. 5, returns here to 8. Sacrificed their sons, etc. 
 
 the history of the two. 2 Kings xvi. 3 ; Ps. cvi. 37, 38 ; 
 
 Offer sacrifices throughout Ezek. xvi. 20, xx. 26 ; Hos. 
 
 twenty years. The twenty years xi. 2. 
 
 designate the twenty sovereigns Set up idols in the sanctuary. 
 
 of Judah from Eehoboam on- Cf. Ezek. viii. 8-16. 
 
 wards, including Athaliah. 9. This verse is clearly based 
 
CHAPTERS 11. 5— III. 5 
 
 II 
 
 engrave every (form) of beast, (even) many abomina- 
 tions. 
 
 III. And in those days a king from the east will 
 come against them and cover their land with (his) 
 cavalry. 2. And he will burn their colony with 
 fire together with the holy temple of the Lord, and 
 he will carry away all the holy vessels. 3. And 
 he will cast forth all the people, and he will take 
 them to the land of his nativity, yea he will take 
 the two tribes with him. 4. Then the two tribes 
 will call upon the ten tribes, and will be indignant 
 as a lioness on the dusty plains, being hungry and 
 thirsty. 5. And they will cry aloud : " Kighteous 
 
 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 E.o. 
 
 2. Colmvy. This word is due 
 either to the Greek or Latin 
 ti'anslator, and points to the 
 fact that when the translation 
 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 
 "city" or "place"; of. IV. 7. 
 
 All the holy vessels. 2 Chron. 
 xxxvi. 7. According to Daii. 
 i. 2, part of these had been 
 carried away in the reign of 
 Jehoiakim ; of. Jer. xxvii. 19, 
 20. A tradition current in the 
 first century of our era recounts 
 
 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 
 was not apparently acquainted 
 with this tradition. 
 
 3, 4. JVill be indignant. See 
 crit. note (pp. 64, 65). Hungry 
 and thirsty. Cf. Apoc. Bar. 
 Ixxvii. 14. 
 
 5. Righteous and holy is the 
 Lord. Ps. cxlv. 17, Slxaios xiipios 
 . . . Kal Sa-ios, and Vulgate, 
 Justus Dominus et sanotus. 
 Pss. Sol. X. 6 ; Dan. ix. 14. 
 
 Mighteous . . . is the Lord, 
 for inasmuch as, etc. Cf. Apoc. 
 Bar. Ixxvii. 3, 4. Both here and 
 in the Apoc. Bar. the calamities 
 of Judah are said to be due to the 
 wickedness of Israel. In the 
 
12 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 and holy is the Lord, for, inasmuch as ye have 
 sinned, we too, in like manner, have been carried 
 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 the tribes will mourn crying 
 unto heaven and saying : 9. " God of Abraham 
 God of Isaac and God of Jacob, remember Thy 
 covenant which Thou didst make with them, and 
 the oath which Thou didst swear unto them by 
 Thyself, that their seed should never fail in the 
 land which Thou hast given them." 10. Then 
 
 latter book, however, Ixxvii. 10, seed should never fail in the 
 
 Jer. xi. 17, Dan. ix, 7, and land. Gen. xvii. 8 ; of. for 
 
 the Apocryphal Bar. ii. 26, these phraseology Pss. Sol. xvii. 5 : 
 
 are attributed to the "wickedness av d/wjas outiJ wepl toO a-n-4p- 
 
 of both Israel and Judah. /mros ai^roO eis rby alSiva. rov /xtj 
 
 Together with our children. iKkelireiv . . . /SatriXeiav airrov ; 
 
 These words are found at the alsoTest. XII. Patriar., Jud. 22. 
 
 end of ver. 4 in the MS., but 10-13. These verses are either 
 
 there they are impossible. See the source of Apoc. Bar. Ixxxiv. 
 
 crit. note (p. 66). 2-5, or both passages are derived 
 
 7. Baldensperger {Das Selbst- from a common original. The 
 bewusstsein Jesu, p. 30, note) passage in Baruch is : 2. " Se- 
 thinks that if we could admit member that formerly Moses as- 
 the date of the book to be after suredly called heaven and earth 
 70 A.D. the word "tribulation" to witness against you, and said : 
 here might hint also at a re- 'If ye transgress the law, ye 
 cently experienced calamity. shall be dispersed ; but if ye keep 
 
 8. Unto heaven. Heaven it, ye shall be kept.' 3. And 
 seems here to be used as equi- other things he used to say unto 
 valent to God. This usage ap- you when ye, the twelve tribes, 
 pears iirst in Dan. iv. 23. It is weretogetherm&crfeseri. 4. And 
 frequent later. Of. Matt. v. 34. after his death ye cast them away 
 
 9. The oath . . . that their from you ; on this account there 
 
CHAPTER III. 6-14 13 
 
 they will remember me, saying, in that day, tribe 
 unto tribe and each man imto his neighbour : 11. 
 " Is not this that which Moses did then declare 
 unto us in prophecies, who suffered many things in 
 Egypt and in the Eed Sea and in the wilderness 
 during forty years: 12. And assuredly called 
 heaven and earth to witness against us, that we 
 should not transgress His commandments, in the 
 which he was a mediator unto us? 13. Behold 
 these things have befallen us after his death 
 accordiag to his words and according to his declara- 
 tion, as he declared to us at that time, yea behold 
 these have taken place even to our being carried 
 away captive into the country of the east." 14. 
 
 came upon you what had been and earth to witness. See crit. 
 
 predicted. 5. And now Moses note (pp. 66, 67). Deut. iv. 26, 
 
 used to tell you before they befell xxx. 19, xxxi. 28 ; Apoc. Bar. 
 
 you, and lot they have befallen xix. 1, Ixxxiv. 2. 
 you." I have italicised the por- Mediator. See I. 14, note, 
 tions which are undoubtedly of That we should not trans- 
 
 close kin. Gf. Dan. ix. 11-13. gress His commandments. Apoc. 
 
 11. In Egypt and in the Eed Bar. Ixxxiv. 2. 
 
 Sea and the wilderness forty 13. And behold these things. 
 
 years. These words are found See crit. note (p. 67). 
 
 exactly as they stand here, and After his death. See crit. 
 
 likewise in reference to Moses note (p. 67). Yea behold, etc. 
 
 in Stephen's speech in Acts vii. See crit. note. 
 
 36 : oCtos i^Tiyayev avrois, iroiiiiras Into the country of the east. 
 
 ripara Kai a-qiieia. iv t^ Alyi-rrTif, See crit. note. 
 
 KoX iv 'EpvBp^ edKaaa-a, Kai iv riy 14. Seventy and seven years. 
 
 ipiliif ir-q Teaaapa-KovTa. The This refers back, no doubt, to 
 
 fact of their having » partial Jeremiah's prophecy of seventy 
 
 parallel in Apoc. Bar. Ixxxiv. years' captivity, Jer. xxv. 11, 
 
 3 (see above) seems to preclude 12, xxix. 10. This prophecy 
 
 the possibility of their being an is referred to in Dan. ix. 2, and 
 
 interpolation here. interpreted in ix. 24 to mean 
 
 12. Assuredly called heaven seventy weeks of years. How 
 
14 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 Who will be also in bondage for about seventy and 
 seven years. 
 
 IV. Then there will enter one who is over them, 
 and he will spread forth his hands, and kneel upon 
 his knees and pray on their behalf saying: 2. 
 " Lord of all, King on the lofty throne, who rulest 
 the world, and didst wUl that this people should be 
 Thine elect people, then (indeed) Thou didst will 
 that Thou shouldst be called their God, accordiug to 
 the covenant which Thou didst make with their 
 fathers. 3. And yet they have gone ia captivity 
 into another land with their wives and theii* 
 children, and around the gates of strange peoples 
 and where there is great vanity. 4. Regard and 
 have compassion on them, Lord of heaven." 5. 
 Then God wUl remember them on account of the 
 covenant which He made with their fathers, and 
 
 the limits of this period are to the 0. and N.T. (of. Gen. iv. 
 
 be determined, it has hitherto 24 ; Mt. xviii. 22). 
 
 been impossible to define. That IV. 1. One, i.e. Daniel; cf. 
 
 the same impossibility attaches Dan. ix. 4-1 9. 
 
 to the present time-determina- 2. BnUst the world. See xi. 
 
 tion is tlierefore not strange. 17, note. 
 
 If seventy-seven years be taken Thi/ne elect people. Cf. Isa. 
 as weeks of years (as in Daniel), xlii. 1, xliii. 20, Ixv. 15, etc. 
 the total is 539 years. This 2, 3. Observe the contrast 
 subtracted from 588, when existing between Israel's reason- 
 Jerusalem was destroyed, gives able expectations and their 
 49 B.C. But this is not intelli- actual lot — God's chosen cove- 
 gible. Merx thinks there is a nanted people the slave of an 
 play on the words seventy- idolatrous human power, 
 seven in the. Semitic. See 3. Vanity., i.e. idolatry. See 
 orit. note. Can seventy and crit. note (pp. 68, 69). 
 seven signify here an indefinite 4. Cf. Dan. ix. 18, 19 ; Apoo. 
 number, as it actually does in Bar. xlviii. 18. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 1-8 
 
 15 
 
 He will manifest His compassion in those times 
 also. 6. And He wUl put it into the mind of a 
 king to have compassion on them, and he will send 
 them off to their land and country. 7. Then some 
 portions of the tribes will go up and they wUl come 
 to their appointed place, and they will entrench 
 the place renewing (it). 8. And the two tribes 
 will continue in their prescribed faith, sad and 
 
 6. A king, i.e. Cjtus ; cf. 2 
 Chron. xxxvi. 22, 23 ; Ezra 
 i. 1-4. 
 
 8. Lamenting because they 
 will not he 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 
 grounds. Thus Malaohi (i. 7) 
 writes : "ye offer polluted bread 
 upon Mine altar." Next, in the 
 Eth. En. Ixxxix. 73 the sacrifices 
 are declared to be unclean under 
 the symbolical words : " all the 
 bread on it was polluted and not 
 pure." Our next reference to 
 the low estimation in which the 
 worship of the second temple 
 was held is found in the Apoc. 
 Bar. Ixviii. 5, 6 : " And at that 
 time, after a little interval, Zion 
 wUl again be builded, and its 
 offerings will again be restored ; 
 and the priests will return to 
 their ministry, and again the 
 Gentiles wiU 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 
 
 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. 3 : "Who is left among you 
 that saw this house in its 
 former glory ? and how do ye 
 see it now ? " Cf. also Ezra 
 iii. 12. 
 
 But the passage in our text 
 seems to go deeper. It implies 
 an imperfection attaching to the 
 validity of the entire temple 
 service. 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 
 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 
 they duly repented, I. 17. The 
 writer is a Pharisaic quietist. 
 
i6 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 lamenting because they will not be able to offer 
 sacrifices to the Lord of their fathers. 9. And the 
 ten tribes will increase and multiply among 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 
 
 9. Multiply among the Gentiles 
 during the time of their captivity. 
 See crit. note (pp. 70, 71) for 
 the grounds for this emendation, 
 and for the passages from con- 
 temporary writers supporting the 
 present statement. 
 
 V. 1. Vengeaiice arises through 
 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 
 and customs they were so eager 
 to adopt to the destruction of 
 Hebrew religion and character, 
 became in due course the actual 
 means through which a righteous 
 vengeance overtook them. We 
 find the same thought expressed 
 in reference to the HeUenising 
 priests of Jason's time in 2 Mace, 
 iv. 16: "By reason whereof sore 
 calamity came upon them : for 
 they had them to be their 
 enemies and avengers whose 
 customs they followed.so eagerly, 
 and unto whom they desired to 
 be like in all things " (&v i^-fj\ovv 
 Tas dyd/yhs kclI KaOdirav -^deXov 
 i^ofj.O(.ov(rdaL, roiiroys iroXefiious 
 Kal TLfiuprfrks ^(Txov). 
 
 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 . , . mil be divided as 
 to the truth. The enormities of 
 the Sadducean priesthood pro- 
 moted in the way of reaction a 
 religious awakening among the 
 scribes, and gave birth to what 
 was later known as the Pharisaic 
 party. The origin of this party 
 is symbolically described in the 
 Eth. En. xc. 6, 7 as taking place 
 at this time. (See my edition 
 in loc. ) Schmidt-Merx wrongly 
 describe these two parties as 
 the war party of the Maccabeans 
 and the stricter Chasids. Hil- 
 geufeld strangelyinterprets these 
 words as referring to the disper- 
 sion (SiairTTopd) under the Selen- 
 cids, 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 
 
CHAPTERS IV. 9— V. 4 
 
 17 
 
 turn aside from righteousness and approach iniquity, 
 and they will defile with pollutions the house of 
 their worship," and " they will go a whoring after 
 strange gods." 4. For they will not follow the 
 
 — at least their phraseology — 
 may be found in the O.T. For 
 ' ' turn aside from righteousness, ' ' 
 of. Ezek. iii. 20 ; for "they will 
 defile . . , the house of their 
 worship," cf. Ezek. xliv. 7 : 
 ' ' Ye have brought in aliens 
 ... to be in My sanctuary, to 
 profane it, even My house " ; 
 Zeph. iii. 4 : "her priests have 
 profaned the sanctuary"; see 
 also Pss. Sol. i. 9, where of the 
 Jewish priesthood it is said : 
 i^e^TiXojcrav ra dyia Kvplov iv 
 fie^yiXdaei, and viii. 26 : i/iiavav 
 'lepovaaKrjfx. Kal ra Tf/io^u^ha tQ 
 6v6/xa,Ti ToO BeoO. The clause 
 "will go a whoring after strange 
 gods" is found in Deut. xxxi. 16. 
 3, 4. All previous writers have, 
 I believe, -wrongly interpreted 
 these verses. They have taken 
 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 
 words "will go a whoring after 
 strange gods" cannot possibly 
 be applied to the Maccabean 
 high priests, 160-103. ii. In 
 no case could the latter be de- 
 scribed as those "who are no 
 priests." No such charge is 
 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 
 
 sprung from Joiarib or Jehoiarib 
 who returned from the Captivity, 
 1 Mace. ii. 1 ; 1 Chron. ix. 10 ■ 
 Neb. xi. 10, xii. 6, 19. iii. 
 Finally, in vi. 2 of this book the 
 statement that the Maccabees 
 should be succeeded by one who 
 was "not of the race of the 
 priests," i.e. Herod, shows that 
 the writer regarded the Macca- 
 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 
 following, i. There was every 
 ground for charging the pagan- 
 ising high priests Jason and 
 Menelaus with ' ' going a whor- 
 ing after strange gods." Thus, 
 not to dwell upou 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 
 no high priest," encouraged 
 ' ' Greek fashions ' ' and ' ' heathen 
 manners," "put down the in- 
 stitutions that were according 
 to law, and brought up new 
 
i8 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 truth of God, but some will pollute the altar with 
 the very gifts which they offer to the Lord, who 
 
 customs against the law," 2 
 Mace. iv. 11. Jason is finally 
 declared in 2 Maco. v. 8 to be 
 "hated as a forsaker of the 
 laws, and being had in abom- 
 ination as an open enemy of 
 his country and countrymen." 
 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 ' ' some will pol- 
 lute the altar with the very 
 gifts which they offer," in ver. 
 
 4. For similar charges against 
 the priesthood, of. the quota- 
 tions given on ver. 3. 
 
 ii. But the words conclusive 
 for our interpretation are : " some 
 . . . who are not priests but 
 slaves, sons of slaves." We 
 have shown above that the 
 clause ' ' who are not priests " 
 cannot in any case be referred to 
 the Maccabees. We have now 
 to show that it applies to the 
 Hellenising high priests under 
 Antiochus Epiplianes. Amongst 
 these we have undoubtedly in 
 Menelaus a high priest who was 
 not of priestly extraction at all, 
 but was of the tribe of Ben- 
 jamin. In 2 Mace. iv. 23 he is 
 called the brother of Simon. 
 This Simon, a Benjamite, was 
 a Hellenising governor of the 
 temple, 2 Maco. iii. 4. Josephus 
 represents Menelaus as a brother 
 of Onias iii.. Ant. xii. 4. 10, 
 
 5. 1 ; but wrongly, as is univers- 
 ally admitted. This illegiti- 
 mate appointment was exactly 
 in keeping with the policy of 
 
 Antiochus. 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 
 descent, Grimm and other 
 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- 
 daeans declare, on the appoint- 
 ment of Alkimus to the high 
 priesthood, that they could 
 suffer nothing at the hands of 
 the army which was marching 
 against them, becavise "one that 
 is a priest of the seed of Aaron is 
 come with the army." 
 
 Slaves, sons of slaves. These 
 words have been referred to the 
 Maecabean high priests ; and 
 the passage in Josephus, Ant. 
 xiii. 10. 5, has been quoted in 
 support of this view, where, at 
 a banquet given by Hyreanus, a 
 Pharisee named Eleazarrequested 
 Hyreanus to lay down the high 
 priesthood, on the ground that 
 his mother had been a captive 
 during the reign of Antiochus. 
 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 Maecabean 
 high priests ; and (2) the first 
 reference to them is found in 
 vi. 1. If V. 4 already referred to 
 the Maecabean high priests, we 
 should not find in vi. 1 the 
 
CHAPTER V. 5-6 
 
 19 
 
 are not priests but slaves, sons of slaves. 5. And 
 
 many in those times will respect the persons of the 
 
 rich and receive gifts, and wrest judgment [on 
 
 receiving presents]. 6. And on this account the 
 
 special record that the Maccabees 
 called themselves high priests 
 of God. The phrase "slaves, 
 sons of slaves," then, is to be in- 
 terpreted, not of the Maccabees, 
 but of their predecessors. In 
 this regard it is full of signiii- 
 cance, and points to the condition 
 of complete degradation in which 
 the holders of this office stood 
 under Antiochus ; for they were 
 the nominees and absohite tools 
 of that despot, being made and 
 unmade by him at pleasure. 
 Thus Onias iii. was deposed to 
 make room for Jason, and Jason 
 in turn to make room for Mene- 
 laus, 2 Mace. iv. 7-9, 23-29. 
 
 5. And many in those times. 
 The Latin text here is, qui enim 
 magistri sunt doctores eorum 
 illis temporibus. In the crit. 
 note (pp. 72, 73) I have shown that 
 doctores eorum is an incori'ect 
 marginal gloss in the Hebrew 
 MS. on the preceding words 
 nmni, which are here wrongly 
 rendered by qui enim magistri 
 sunt. These "many " were the 
 Sadduoean 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 
 criminal justice. See p. 26. 
 
 Respect the persons of the 
 rich. See crit. note (p. 73). 
 
 Deut. xvi. 19 is the som'ce of 
 this and the two following 
 clauses: "Thou shalt not wrest 
 judgment ; thou shalt not re- 
 spect persons ; neither shalt 
 thou take a gift." 
 
 Receive gifts and . . . wrest 
 judgment. See preceding note ; 
 also crit. note (p. 73). 
 
 [On receiving present.^']. I 
 have bracketed this j)hrase as 
 a dittography. See crit, note 
 (pp. 73, 74), where I have shown 
 that, if it is genuine, as it may 
 be, we should probably be right 
 in regarding accipientes niunera 
 in the preceding line as = 
 SojpoXTjtrTovvres = ll)i2 D'V^n = 
 greedy of gain (cf. Prov. xv. 
 27), and accordingly render the 
 whole verse: "And many in 
 those times will respect the 
 persons 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, aiid took bribes, 
 and perverted judgment. ' ' 
 
 5, 6. Will forsake the Lord. 
 See crit. note (p. 74). 
 
 Will he ready to judge for 
 money, etc. See crit. note 
 (p. 75). Cf. Isa. v. 23. 
 
 VIII. IX. The persecution of 
 the Jews under Antiochus ; the 
 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 
 forsake the Lord : they will be impious judges : 
 they will be ready to judge for money as each may 
 wish. 
 
 VI. Then there will be raised up unto them 
 
 their quietistic attitude. These 
 chapters should be read immedi- 
 ately after V., where they be- 
 longed originally. For the 
 grounds for this conclusion see 
 notes m loc. 
 
 VI. 1. Kings hearing rule, 
 and they will call themselves 
 high priests. See crit. note. 
 Previous scholars have referred 
 these words to Antigonus' as- 
 sumption of the title of king in 
 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 
 used loosely in this book : it 
 does not necessarily mean any- 
 thing more than commander or 
 prince. Tims the Roman general 
 Varus is called ' ' a powerful 
 king " in vi. 8. Hence this 
 title could be used even of Judas, 
 who was the de facto ruler of the 
 Jews ; aud on still better grounds 
 of Jonathan, 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 
 adequate grounds of Simon, who 
 was the first independent Mac- 
 cabean ruler of his nation. (2) 
 
 Now, according to the text, their 
 assumption of the high priest- 
 hood is regarded as Kubsequeni to 
 their assumption of the office, of 
 sujireme military and civil rulers 
 of the nation. Hence, as the 
 office of high priest was usurped 
 as early as 153 B.C. byJonathan, 
 and this usurpation made legiti- 
 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), 
 the words "kings hearing rule" 
 must he referred to the Maccabean 
 rulers previous, at all events, 
 to 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 
 was succeeded by Herod. 
 
 High priests of God. The 
 Latin, which is here sacer- 
 dotes summi Di'i, "priests of 
 the Most High God, I have, 
 in my critical text, necessarily 
 emended into summos sacer- 
 dotes Dei (see crit. note, p. 
 75) ; for (1) such a title 
 would be unparalleled in con- 
 nection with the Maccabees. In 
 1 and 2 Mace, and in the An- 
 tiquities and Jevyish Wars of 
 Josephus, they are simply de- 
 scribed in their sacred character 
 as "high priests," or "high 
 priests of the nation." (2) The 
 
CHAPTER VI. 1-3 
 
 Kings bearing rule, and they will call themselves 
 high priests of God : they will assuredly work 
 iniquity in the holy of holies. 2. 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 them as they shall deserve. 3. 
 
 Jewish high priesthood was 
 never, so far as I can discover, 
 called a priesthood of the Most 
 High God. (3) Again, if the 
 divine title were here " the 
 Most High," we should find, 
 according to universal Biblical 
 usage, Dei summi or altissinii or 
 excelsi (cf. Gen. xiv. 18, 19, 20, 
 22; Ps. Ivii. 2, Ixxviii. 56; Dan. 
 iii. 26, V. 18, 21 ; Mark v. 7 ; 
 Luke viii. 28 ; Heb. vii. 1), and 
 not summi Dei. (4) Summi 
 sacerdotes is in many instances 
 a Vulg. rendering of dpxi-epets 
 (cf. Mark xiv. 47, 53, 64, 60, 
 61, 63, 66 ; Acts xxiii. 4). (5) 
 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 office, 
 so far as they had any, rested 
 on their Aaronio descent. 
 
 Will assuredly work iniquity. 
 On this Hebraism see crit. note. 
 
 2. This verse refers to Herod 
 the Great, who reigned from 37 
 to 4 B.C. He could not assume 
 the high priest's office, as he was 
 not even a full-born Jew, much 
 less of priestly descent. Jose- 
 phus, Ant. xiv. 15. 2, calls him 
 7]fuiovdaios. 
 
 Not of the race of the priests. 
 Herod was the son of Antipater 
 
 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 
 eil'ect {Ant. xiv. 1. 3). See 
 Schtirer, 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 out off by Herod ; 
 (i) the Sadduoean aristocracy 
 forty-five of whom he had exe- 
 cuted on becoming king {Ant. xv. 
 1.2;BeU.i.lS.i). 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 
 PoUio and Sameas. The Essenes 
 were also excused, but not the 
 rest of the people. See Ani. xv. 
 10. 4. (c) Or else the nation at 
 large, as in VI. 1. We should 
 observe that VI. 4, 5 support 
 the last interpretation. 
 
 3. Cut off their chief men., i. e. 
 the Sadduoean nobles. See pre- 
 ceding note. 
 
 Destroy {them) in secret places. 
 Murders of this secret sort are 
 
22 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 And he will cut off 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 slay the old and the young, and he will not 
 spare. 5. Then the fear of him will be bitter unto 
 them in their land. 6. And he will execute 
 judgments on them as the Egyptians executed upon 
 them, during thirty and four years, and he will 
 punish them. 7. And he will beget children, who 
 succeeding him will rule for shorter periods. 8. 
 
 reported in Joseph. Ant. xv. 
 10. 4 ; TToXXoi re kclI c^tavepQs Kal 
 \e\rjd6Tw^ eis t6 (ppoijpioj^ di'a- 
 ydfievoL, tt]v 'TpKafiav, ^/ce? 5te0- 
 BeipovTO. 
 
 4. Perhaps, as Hilgenfeld and 
 Volkmar suggest, we should 
 omit the et before non and 
 translate : "He will slay the 
 old, and the young he will not 
 spare." Of. Jer. li. 3. 
 
 5. Cf. for phraseology 2 Mace, 
 vi. 3. 
 
 6. Thirty and four years. 
 Herod reigned thirty-four years 
 after the death of Antigonus, 
 and thirty-seven after he had 
 been declared king by the 
 Romans. Cf. Joseph. Ant. xvii. 
 8. 1 ; Bell. i. 33. 8. 
 
 7. Gkildren who . . . will 
 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. Now this 
 was true of Archelaus alone ; 
 for Antipas reigned forty-three 
 
 years, 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. Eeuss, 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 
 Agrippa, ' ' die allein fur einen 
 Jerusalemer Interesse hatten." 
 In this view Reuss is followed 
 by Rosenthal and Baldensperger. 
 
 8. Into their parts, cohorts, etc. 
 See crit. note. 
 
 A powerful king. Varus, 
 governor of Syria, who sup- 
 pressed a rebellion of the Jews 
 against the Roman authority in 
 4 B.C. See Joseph. Ant. xvii. 
 10. 9, 10, 11. 1 ; Bell. ii. 5. 
 1-3. 
 
 Burn a part of their temple. 
 Tlie temple was set fire to, not 
 by Varus, but by the soldiers 
 
CHAPTERS VI. 4— VII. 3 
 
 Into their parts cohorts and a powerful king of 
 the west will come, who will conquer them : 9. 
 And he will take them captive, and burn a part 
 of their temple with fire, (and) will crucify some 
 around their colony. 
 
 VII. And when this is done the times will be 
 ended, in a moment the (second) course will be 
 (ended), the four hours will come. 2. They wUl 
 be forced 3. And, in the time of 
 
 under his lieutenant Sabinus. 
 See Joseph. Ant. xvii. 10. 2 ; 
 £eU. ii. 3. 3. The injuries done 
 to the temple on this occasion 
 were not made good till as late 
 as Nero's reign, though 18,000 
 men were employed in the re- 
 storation. See Ant. xx. 9. 7. 
 
 fVill crucify some, etc. 2000 
 were cruoiiied by Yarns {Ant. 
 xvii. 10. 10). 
 
 VII. 1. And when this is done 
 the times will be ended. With 
 these words the actual history 
 recounted by our author, as 
 Ewald, Wieseler, Dillmann, and 
 Schiirer have recognised, comes 
 to a close. "We have arrived at 
 the date at which he is writing. 
 Up to this point his historical 
 allusions have been easy to in- 
 terpret. A series of predictions 
 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 
 tm we know something about 
 its actual wording. On the for- 
 
 lorn attempts made to restore it, 
 by Hilgenfeld, Volkmar, Merx, 
 Colani, and Wieseler, see crit. 
 note (pp. 77, 78). 
 
 3-10. Who were the persons 
 aimed at by the writer ? They 
 are evidently contemporaries. 
 The 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 
 be — {{.) The Herodian princes, by 
 Hilgenfeld, Mess. Jud. 464, 465. 
 But there are many objections 
 to this identification. 
 
 (ii.) The Pharisees, (a) in 
 the first decade after Herod's 
 death, by Ewald, History of 
 IsroM, V. 367, note 5 (Eug. 
 tr. ), Drummond, Dillmann, 
 Schurer, II. iii. 79, 80 ; (b) be- 
 tween 54-64 A.D., by Schmidt- 
 Merx (Merx, Archiv. f. Wissen- 
 schaftl. Erforschwng des A.T., 
 vol. i. p. 121, 1868). Though cer- 
 tain traits in these verses seem to 
 favour this view, the prevailing 
 tone of the entire passage makes 
 it impossible. The persons here 
 arraigned are unblushing Epi- 
 cureans, ghittonous men and 
 
24 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 these, scornful and impious men will rule, saying 
 
 touch mo," oto., in their relation 
 to " the people of the land." He 
 points out, further, that the 
 words dicontes so liaec faoero 
 propter miscricordiani are to bo 
 explained by a decree of the 
 Sanhedrim in that period, which 
 forbade a man to give more than 
 Jth of his fortune to the poor, 
 (iolani's views are decidedly 
 ingimioua, and mi;^ht win our 
 asHput if he, could likewise con- 
 viiioe us of the late date ho 
 assigns to the book, i.e.. after 
 lyo A.ii. But that a. Jew, writ- 
 ing the history of his iii'ople in 
 its main outlines, should omit 
 all mention of the final and 
 fnmplcted destruction of Jern- 
 M.dcjn under Titus, and jiass on 
 at a bound to the national 
 troubles which were oonsum- 
 Tnated by the erection of Aelia 
 CJapitolina on this sacred site of 
 Jerusalem, is indeed simply im- 
 poHKible. But this date of 
 Oolani is dealt with elsowboro. 
 
 (iii.) The Phariseescmdlli,e Sad- 
 duceea, (a) in -J d.c.-Sa.d. This 
 view was first advocated by 
 Wicseler {Jahrb. f. deuLsalie 
 Thcol. 1868, pji. G12, U?,), who 
 referred vers. ;!, ■! to the latter, 
 and 6-lOto the former. (A) Soon 
 alter the fall of Jerusalem, 70 A. D. 
 This view is urged by ]'.()M(mthal 
 {Vier Apocryph. Uilcher, 1885, 
 
 winobibbers. Now, although 
 nearly every other vice has been 
 laidtotheehargt^ofthePharisees, 
 oven their worst enemies have 
 not accused them of open glut- 
 tony and drunkenness. Indeed, 
 the Pharisees were decidedly 
 ascetic in chnractcr, according 
 to the testimony of Josephus ; 
 "the Pharisees," he writes, 
 " make little of the pleasures 
 of the taljle, and do not sur- 
 render themselves to the com- 
 forts of the body " (Ant. 
 xviii. 1. y : o'i re ykp 'iapuraXoi 
 rijv dtatrav ^f c ureX/f oftriv, oiiSh 
 eh rh imXaKiirepov ivSiSbvTei. In 
 Mutt, xxiii. 2.'i, indeed, they are 
 accused of secre/! profligacy, but 
 within they are full from ex- 
 tortion and excess " {{^ &prayrJ5 
 ical iKpacrlas). 
 
 But this ascetic tone was not 
 universally characteristic of the 
 Pharisees after 70 A.i). Ifcncc 
 this objection will not tnllagainst 
 the views of Philippi {Van Buch 
 Jleaoah, p. 176) and Colani 
 (/.■.rvuede Theol. 1868, 2nd i)art, 
 pp. 7-'i"7!0, who interpret the 
 ])a8sag6 as referring to the 
 i'harisocs in the earlier half of 
 tlie second oeutury. Colani, in 
 particular, identifies the class 
 assailed in the text with the 
 Jewish doctors at .fabne and 
 Usha. At the head of the 
 Sanhedrim at these places was a 
 president ( = Nasi), who lived in 
 princely luxury, and enjoyed 
 immense authority over the Jews 
 of the Dispersion. Such phrases, 
 he urges, as "we shall bo as 
 princes," "we shall have feast- 
 ings and luxury," would apply 
 to him and his ; likewise "do not 
 
 pp. 20, 21, 25-30), who follows 
 Wicseler in attributing' vers. 8, 
 4 to the Saddueees, and 6-10 
 to the Pharisees. But this two- 
 fold interpretation is just as un- 
 tenable as those that precede. 
 The attom])t to assign vers. 8, 4 
 to one class, and 6-10 to another, 
 can only proceed from a super- 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 25 
 
 fioial study of the passage ; for if 
 the persous denounced in ver. -1 
 are charged with gluttony, this 
 is no less true in 8 ; if in 3 
 they are said to hold high ofSce, 
 they do so also in 8 ; if in 3 
 they proclaim their justice, in 
 10 they assert their purity ; if 
 in 3 and 4 they are declared 
 to be "deceitful," "impious." 
 " treacherous," iu 6-10 they are 
 denouno'd as "deceitful," "im- 
 pious," "filled with lawlessness." 
 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 i.D., as we have already 
 seen under ii. (5). But, accord- 
 ing to Rosenthal, the classes 
 designed iu vers. o-lO are the 
 Pharisees, 70-90 a.d., i.(. R. 
 Jochanan ben Sakkai and his 
 companions and pupils, who for- 
 sook Jerusalem during the siege 
 and established themselves at 
 Jabne. That a small body of 
 learned men, wliose main pur- 
 suit was the study and applica- 
 tion of tile law, who alone in 
 the time of universal prosti"a- 
 tion held on high the standard of 
 national hope and faith, could be 
 so described by any thoughtful 
 and learned Jew ot that period (a 
 Zealot, as Rosenthal supposes), 
 this is, I confess, simply in- 
 credible. Besides, there is not 
 a shred of eN-idence t'i show that 
 the rabbis of Jabne (70-90) could 
 with the faintest approach to 
 truth be described as gluttons, 
 drunkards, traitors, hypocrites, 
 and murderere. Other argu- 
 ments, on the ground of chron- 
 ology, etc., might be advanced 
 ai^aiust the hypothesis of Rosen- 
 thal, but no more are needed. 
 
 (iv.) TTi!- Ryinan procurators, 
 by Baldensperger {Das Sclbsi- 
 iewusstsein Jcsu, ISSS, p. 31). 
 This 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 
 governors. On the other hand, 
 there are phrases that cannot 
 with any propriety be applied 
 to them ; i.e. "do not touch 
 me. lest thou shouldst pollute 
 me" (ver. 10), and "concealing 
 themselves lest they should be 
 recognised." 
 
 (v.) The Saddi'^-\-s, (a) in the 
 time of Korva and Trajan, by 
 Yolkmar (p. 105). This view 
 may be at once dismissed. Tlie 
 Sadducees were nobodies at this 
 period. (J) Between 15-70 a.d. 
 This is my own view. It ia 
 likewise advocated by Lucius 
 (Dcr £ss<'»isnius, ISSl, pp. 116- 
 119) and bv Geiger (Judisehe 
 Zciisehrift, '1S6S, pp. 45, 46), 
 though thfy assign no date to 
 the book. The latter adduces 
 such phrases as regnabunt di- 
 his homines pestilentiosi, and 
 tanquara principes erimus. In 
 dicentes se esse justos, he poiut-s 
 to the play on the w-ords c'p~:s 
 and C'pni-. These Sadduqim or 
 Sadducees cover themselves with 
 the mantle of priestly holiness. 
 They emphasise their special 
 priestly pmity, and keep the 
 people afar from them. In the 
 notes that follow, this passage 
 ■niU be dealt with verse by verse, 
 and the chief charges which it 
 brings against the Sadducees 
 ju^tified by parallels from the 
 Psalms of Solomon. I quote 
 from Ryle and James's edition. 
 
26 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 that they are just. 4. And these will conceal the 
 ■wrath of their minds, being treacherous men, self- 
 
 It will be suficient to premise 
 here that from the detiosition 
 of Arehelaus in 6 till 70 a.b. 
 the government of Judea lay 
 practically in the hands of the 
 Sanhedrim, which was almost 
 wholly Sadducean. Josephus, 
 Ant. XX. 10, describes the form 
 of government as aristocratic, 
 as opposed to the monarchical 
 rule of Herod and Arehelaus 
 (see Schiirer, I. ii. 72). His 
 words are : fierd, 5^ T-qv to^toiv 
 TeXevriJ;', dptfTTOKparia fj^v ijv tj 
 TToXLTcla, Tqv dk irpo<TTa(rtav toO 
 edvov^ oi dpxtepets eTeiriarevvTO. 
 The high priests were but too 
 often the willing tools of the 
 Roman governors. Every abuse 
 in the gt)vernment would natur- 
 ally be traced to those who were 
 the actual though not nominal 
 government. 
 
 3. And in the time of these. 
 I am here supposing that de his 
 is a rendering of eVi To-irrav. It 
 may, however, he a rendering 
 
 of iK TO&r(tiV. 
 
 Scornful. We have here an 
 instructive instance which illus- 
 trates the necessity of translat- 
 ing, not the Latin before us, 
 but the Greek or Hebrew which 
 it presupposes. The Latin is 
 homines pestilentiosi = S.vBpuTroi 
 Xoi/xoi = psS 'c':,s-. This Hebrew 
 phrase is found in Prov. xxix. 
 S ; Is. xxviii.1-1 ; and the Greek 
 in 1 Mace. x. 61. Xoi/ios is a 
 frequent rendering of [■?. Cf 
 Ps. i. 1 ; Prov. xix. 25, xxi. 24, 
 xxii. 10, xxiv. 9. 
 
 The inreprj<papia ascribed to 
 the Sadducees in the Pss. Sol. 
 
 is nearly related to the scorn 
 spoken of in the text ; cf. Pss. 
 Sol. ii. 1, 35, iv. 28. 
 
 Impious. A natural descrip- 
 tion of the Sadducees from the 
 standpoint of a. Pharisee. It 
 could not, however, be used of a 
 Pharisee. 
 
 Will rule. Cf. ver. 8 : "we 
 shall be as princes." T\'e have 
 shoi\Ti in the preceding ooliunn 
 thatthe government of Judea was 
 practically an aristocracy from 
 6-70 A. D. This aristocracy ruled 
 through the Sanhedrim, which 
 was mainly composed of Saddu- 
 cees. Cf. Pss. Sol. iv. 1 : IvarL 
 ai) KaBrffTat., ^^jS7?Xe, iv (rvvedpicp. 
 
 Vicentes se essejustos. Geiger 
 has rightly recognised here a 
 play on the words cpiis, "Saddu- 
 cees,'' and c-pns, "righteous." 
 
 4. Conceal the wrath, etc. 
 See crit. note. Text reads 
 "rouse the WTath,'' etc. 
 
 Treacherous, i.e. SAXiot. The 
 Sadducees are so described in 
 Pss. Sol. iv. 27 : air6 avSpiiiroiy 
 doXiuv Kal CLfJupTuAwv. 
 
 Self-pleasers. So the Latin 
 sibi placentes. "We should prob- 
 ably read "pleasers of the 
 mighty." See crit. note. We 
 should then have in some 
 measure a parallel to the de- 
 signation so frequently applied 
 to the Sadducees in Pss. Sol. iv., 
 dvOpuTrdpecTKoi. "Pleasers of 
 the mighty" would best be 
 applied to the Sadducees owing 
 to their subservient attitude to 
 Rome and her Roman governors. 
 
 Dissemblers. The text gives 
 ficti, which may be = uiroK/nfl^v- 
 
CHAPTER VII. 4-7 
 
 27 
 
 pleasers, dissemblers in all their own affairs and 
 lovers of banquets at every hour of the day, gluttons, 
 gourmands .... 5. . . . 6. Devourers of the 
 goods of the poor saying that they do so on the 
 ground of their justice, but (in reaUty) to destroy 
 them, eomplainers, deceitful, concealing themselves 
 lest they should be recognised, impious, filled with 
 lawlessness and iniquity from sunrise to sunset : 
 
 res ; of, 2 Maco. v. 25, vi. 21, 
 24, or else = TrXaiTTo^ In Pss. 
 Sol. iv. 7 the Sadducees are 
 spoken of as living iv iiroKpltrei. 
 
 Lovers of taiiquets at every 
 hour of the day. Cf. ver. 8. 
 
 Gluttons, gourmands. The 
 text is devoratores, giilae. Pre- 
 vious editors take gulae as a 
 genitive or dative in connection 
 with devoratores. 
 
 6. Devourers of the goods of 
 the poor, A similar charge is 
 brought against the Sadducees 
 in Pss. Sol. iv. 23 : r)pri/j.ia(rap 
 otKovs iroWoifS 6.vdptjiiro3v 4v 
 drifiig, Kai iaK6pTn,aav I ev iin- 
 dv/j-lg. ; of. also iv. 11, 13, 15, 
 xii. 2, 4. 
 
 Saying that they do so on 
 the ground of their justice. I 
 have rendered miserioordiam in 
 the text by justice. Propter 
 miserioordiam = di' i\e-qiJ,o(Tivriv. 
 Si i\eitiJ.o<T6vTiv, however, taken 
 in its usual sense is hardly in- 
 telligible. But the difficulty 
 disappears when we call to mind 
 that this word is a not infre- 
 quent rendering in the LXX. 
 of npix. Thus we are here to 
 translate, not miserioordiam, but 
 the Hebrew word it presupposes. 
 
 The text thus recovered agi'ees 
 well with the statement in ver. 
 3 : "saying that they are just," 
 and this second reference to 
 the professed justice of the 
 Sadduoee repeats the play upon 
 the name. The Sadducees, 
 though profligates in secret, 
 were stern administrators of 
 justice ; see Pss. Sol. iv. 2, 3. 
 They were proverbially severe, 
 Joseph. Ant. xx. 9. 1, as the 
 Pharisees were proverbially 
 merciful in judgment. Aid. 
 xiii. 10. 6. 
 
 7. Deceitful. Cf. like state- 
 ments regarding the Sadducees 
 in Ps. Sol. iv. 4 : r; yXCiircja. 
 avTOu ^euSiJs : 12. oi \6yot airroO 
 irapdXoyio'fiol eU irpci^LV iirldv- 
 jxlas dSUov : 14. TapE^ayiaaTO iv 
 \6yois. 
 
 Omwealing themselves lest they 
 should be recognised. For this 
 also we find an excellent parallel 
 in a similar accusation of the 
 Sadducees in Pss. Sol. iv. 5 : 
 iv vvktI Kal iv AiroKpO^ois a/aap- 
 rivei ujs odx opibixevos : I. 7. ai 
 afMipriaL airrCiv iv diroKpiH^ots. 
 
 Impious, filled with lawless- 
 ness and iniquity. Trapdvo/ioi and 
 a.p.apT0i\ol are standing epithets 
 
28 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 8. Saying : " "We shall have f eastings and luxury, 
 eating and drinking, yea we shall drink our fill, we 
 shall 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 the place where I stand " . . . . 
 VIII. And there will come upon them a second 
 
 of the Sadducees iu the Pss. of 
 Sol. (See Eyle 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 : 
 airrb^ ^voxos ev TToiKikiq. afiapriCiv 
 Kai iv d.KpafflaLs. Cf. Matt, 
 xxiii. 25 : "filled from extortion 
 and excess." 
 
 From sunrise to sunset. The 
 text is ah oriente usque ad occi- 
 dentem, which = dc^' TJKlovavaTiX- 
 \ovTos (li^xpt duopL^vov, The 
 Greek can mean either ' ' from 
 east to west" (cf. xi. 8), or 
 ' ' from sunrise to sunset. " The 
 context requires the latter mean- 
 ing. Thus "fi-om sunrise to 
 sunset " is the equivalent of " at 
 every hour of the day," in ver. 
 i. 
 
 8. Cf. ver. i. 
 
 Yea we shall drink our Jill. 
 See crit. note. 
 
 9. Though their hands and 
 their minds touch, etc. . . . yet 
 ye. For the Hebraism see crit. 
 note. 
 
 ' Their mouth will speak great 
 things. Dan. vii. 8, 20. 
 
 9, 10. This combination of 
 inward uncleanness and outward 
 
 sacerdotal holiness in the Saddu- 
 cean priesthood is also dwelt 
 upon in Pss. Sol. viii. 13 : 
 iirdrovv rd dvcnaarT^piOV Kvpiov 
 dwd TTc.tjfis aKadapirias Kal iv 
 dcpidpi}} aXpjiTQS ifj.iaLVOv tcls 
 dvcrias <hs Kpia ^i^ijXa. See also 
 Pss. i. 8, ii. 14,15, xvii. 17. 
 
 10. Do not touch ine = '3"yjn"^K, 
 This is probably derived from 
 Is. Ixv. 5 : " Come not near to 
 me, for I am holier than thou," 
 and the yjn-'?N here may be a 
 corruption of the mn-hit 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 
 offered. Volkmar, Philippi, 
 and Colani contend that they 
 are a record of what is already 
 past, and constitute in fact a 
 short history of the persecution 
 under Hadrian after the re- 
 bellion of Bar Cochba, 136 a.d. 
 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 kingdom. 
 
 Both views are untenable on 
 
CHAPTERS VII. 8— VIII. i 
 
 29 
 
 visitation and wrath, such as has not befallen them 
 from the beginning until that time, in which He 
 
 the following grounds. The 
 former, which regards VIII. -IX. 
 as a record of the persecution of 
 136-138, is impossible ; for the 
 book was written in the first 
 century (see p. xiii. ). The second 
 view is equally impossible ; for 
 VIII.-IX. are not a prophecy of 
 the final woes. They are clearly 
 designated as "the second visi- 
 tation" that is to befall Israel 
 (see VIII. 1, note). The first 
 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 
 under Antiochus Epiphanes. 
 The first visitation 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- 
 tion of that persecution. Its 
 accuracy cannot be gainsaid. 
 We shall prove it presently be- 
 yond the possibility of refuta- 
 tion. 
 
 But the question now natur- 
 ally arises. How comes it that we 
 find an accurate description of 
 the Antiochian persecution at a 
 period in our book where it is 
 chronologically impossible ? Has 
 
 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- 
 possible. For as we proceed we 
 find on investigation the facts to 
 be as follows. A gap in the history 
 exists between V. and VI.; ori- 
 ginally there was no siich gap : its 
 place was filled hy VIII.-IX. 
 For (a) in V. the history is 
 brought down to the Hellenis- 
 inghighpriestsunder Antiochus, 
 and V I. opens with a clear refer- 
 ence to the Maccabean princes, 
 beginning with Jonathan. Tims 
 there is not even an allusion to 
 the severities of the Antiochian 
 persecutiou and the horrors that 
 accompanied it, or to the dese- 
 cration of the temple ("the 
 abomination that maketh deso- 
 late ") and its subsequent recon- 
 secration, — an event that was 
 kept green in the national re- 
 membrance by the yearly "Fes- 
 tival of the Dedication." That 
 one of the most tragic and 
 never-to-be-forgotten periods in 
 Jewish history should be whoUy 
 unrecorded is therefore highly 
 improbable. (&) But is more 
 than improbable. It becomes a 
 matter of moral certainty when 
 we further observe that not only 
 the main fortunes of the temple 
 
3° 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 will stir up against them the King of the kings of 
 the earth and one that ruleth with great power, who 
 will crucify those who confess to their circumcision: 
 2. And those who conceal (it) he will torture and 
 
 are closely followed throughout 
 this book, but even the minor 
 injuries inflicted on it are re- 
 corded ; cf. II. 4, 8, 9 ; III. 2; 
 IV. 7, 8 ; V. 3, 4 ; VI. 1, 9. 
 Its greatest desecration, there- 
 fore, could not have been passed 
 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 
 is due to the final editor. For 
 other transpositions the reader 
 can consult the Introduction 
 (p. xxxv). 
 
 VIII. 1. A second visitation. 
 It will be seen through reference 
 to the critical notes that the 
 word for "second" is partially 
 restored. That this restoration 
 of Schmidt-Merx is right is clear 
 from IX. 2, where it is referred to 
 againas "asecond . . . visitation." 
 
 We have already remarked 
 (p. 29) that the final woes prelud- 
 ing the theocratic kingdom could 
 never have been so described. 
 This "second visitation" is the 
 Antiochian persecution, of which 
 we have a faithful description in 
 the subsequent verses. 
 
 Such as has not iefallen, etc. 
 From Dan. xii. 1 ; cf. Jer. xxx. 
 7 ; 1 Mace. ix. 27 ; Matt. xxiv. 
 21 ; Rev. xvi. 18. On the re- 
 semblance between Matt. xxiv. 
 21 and our text, see crit. note. 
 The phrase was clearly a current 
 one. 
 
 King of the kings of tlie earth. 
 This title is 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. 
 
 Crucify those who confess to 
 their circumcision. Antiochus 
 forbade circumcision, 1 Mace. i. 
 48 ; Joseph. Ant. xii. 5. 4 : 
 iKi\evffe 5^ Kcti /at; irept.r4/j-vetv 
 airoiis to. r^Kva : certain women 
 who disobeyed this edict were 
 hurled headlong from the city 
 wall, 1 Maco. i. 60, 61 ; 2 Mace, 
 vi. 10, viii. 4. From 1 Mace, 
 ii. 46, and Joseph. Ant. xii. 5. 4, 
 it 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 
 and crucified alive — iJ,a<myoij- 
 fievoi Kal TCI, trti/iara Xvfj.aLv6^voLj 
 ^Qivres ^tl Kal i/j.Trv^ovT€s d^e- 
 aravpovvTO. 
 
 2. Those who conceal (it). So 
 I emend, but the text is doubt- 
 ful. See crit. note. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 2-4 
 
 deliver them up to be bound and led into prison. 
 3. And their wives will be given to the gods 
 among the Gentiles, and their young sons will be 
 operated on by the physicians in order to bring 
 forward their foreskin. 4. And others amongst 
 
 3. And their wives will he 
 ffiven to the gods, etc., i.e. for the 
 cult 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 
 10,000 men, women, and chil- 
 dren were carried away captive 
 by the king. 
 
 Their young sons will he 
 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 
 when they undressed and took 
 part in the Hellenic games es- 
 tablished in Jerusalem — 1 Mace. 
 i. 15; Joseph. Ant. xii. 5. 1: 
 T7)i' tGiv aldolwv trepLTOfiriv iireKd- 
 \mj/av, lbs &v elev Kal rd, irepl ti)c 
 aTrddva-tv "EWr]ve!. But, when 
 the king resorted to final mea- 
 sures, not only was circumcision 
 forbidden, as we have seen above, 
 but in the case of young chil- 
 dren who were already circum- 
 cised, the traces of the circum- 
 
 cision were removed by an opera- 
 tion. To hring forward their fore- 
 skin = iTrLffTrav dKpo^varLav aOroiS 
 = Dn'^iv iro'?. See Levy's IVeu- 
 hebrdisches Lex. iii. 275, 276. 
 Cf. 1 Cor. vii. 18, where this 
 operation is referred to : Wet- 
 stein and Lightfoot on 1 Cor. 
 vii. 18, and Schoettgen, Hor. 
 Hehr. i. 1157, 1177 ; Celsus, Dc 
 Medic, vii. 18 ; Winer, Reiil- 
 worterhuch ; Herzog, JReal- 
 JEncycl. ; Schenkel, Bih. Lex. 
 under article " Besohneidung. " 
 
 4. Will he punished hy tortures. 
 Josephus, Ant. xii. 5. 4, says 
 of those who refused to obey the 
 commands of Antiochus, that 
 /card Trdffav ij^ipav alKi'^bp^evoi 
 Kal TTLKpds ^aadvovs virotp^popres 
 a-rridyijcrKov ; also 2 Mace. vi. 
 28, viii. 
 
 And fire. Cf. 2 Mace. vi. 
 11. 
 
 Forced to hear in public their 
 idols. In Amos v. 26, Isa. 
 xlvi. 7, reference is made to 
 Israel having voluntarily carried 
 idols in the wilderness, and later. 
 Cf. also Epist. Jer. 4 : 6\p€a6e ev 
 'Qa^vKdvL Beoiis . . . eir' &/J.OLS 
 aipo/i^vovs ; and ver. 26. In the 
 preceding passages we have 
 parallels in expression, but in 
 2 Maoc. vi. 7 we have a parallel 
 in fact : ycvofjiAvris bh Aiovvcioiv 
 ^oprrjs TivayKa^ovTO Kiffffoijs 
 ^Xovres TTO^ireiGiv rip AtovOirip. 
 Antiochus compelled the Jews 
 
32 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 them will be punished by tortures and fire and 
 sword, and they will be forced to bear in public 
 their idols, (which are as) polluted as are the 
 (shrines) that contain them. 5. And they wUl 
 likewise be forced by those who torture them to 
 enter their inmost sanctuary, and they will be 
 forced by goads to blaspheme with insolence the 
 name, finally after these things the laws and what 
 they had above their altar. 
 
 IX. Then in that day there wUl be a man of the 
 
 to observe his birtliday by join- 
 ing in the Dionysiac festival. 
 
 Polluted as are, etc. This is 
 the best I can make of this 
 obscure clause. 
 
 5. Eiitertheir inmost sanctuary, 
 i.e. the &Svtov of the heathen 
 temples. According to Josephus, 
 Ant. XV. 5, 4, the Jews were 
 compelled to "bnild temples 
 and raise idol altars in every 
 city and village, and offer swine 
 upon them every day." Cf. 
 1 Mace. i. 47. 
 
 Blaspheme . . . the name, i.e. 
 Dtrn-nn Dp:, Lev. xxiv. 11. 
 Israel was commanded to ' ' fear 
 the name," and one of "the 
 seven precejits of the children of 
 Noah " enjoined Israel to "sanc- 
 tify the name," Dijn nDin (Sanh. 
 566). 2 Mace. viii. 4 speaks of the 
 blasphemies committed against 
 God's name during the Anti- 
 ochian persecution : yevojxivuv 
 els t6 6vo^a aOroG ^\a(T(pr}fuG}V. 
 
 The laws, etc. See erit. note. 
 
 What they had above (or upon) 
 their altar. This clause = nE'trriN 
 Dn3iD3, and appears to mean 
 
 the sacrifice. Cf. Matt, xxiii. 
 18. 
 
 IX. Interiiretation and his- 
 torical 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. 29- 
 38, where we are told of a large 
 body of men who, with their 
 wives and children, forsook all 
 that they had and took refuge 
 in the caves in the wilderness in 
 order to worship there. When 
 Antiochus' officers were informed 
 of this movement they went in 
 pursuit, and, coming up to the 
 eaves where the Jews had taken 
 refuge, they demanded that they 
 should submit to the king's com- 
 mands. When the refugees re- 
 fused they were put to the sword, 
 offering no resistance because it 
 was the Sabbath. Their words : 
 " Letusalldiein our innocenoy" 
 (ii. 37), oon-espond perfectly in 
 sense with the words in our text, 
 ver. 6 : " Let us die rather than 
 transgress." Those that were 
 
CHAPTER IX. I 
 
 33 
 
 Blain were, accord ing to Josephus, 
 Ant. xii. 6. 2, in number about 
 1000, but many escaped. Let 
 us next try and determine the 
 religious affinities of this body 
 of zealous adherents of the law 
 in the ivilderness. 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 
 many survivors of this church in 
 the wilderness, Ant. xii. 6. 2, as 
 well as the Chasid party, 1 Mace, 
 ii. 42, gave in their adhesion to 
 Mattathias after, and, without 
 doubt, owing to the massacre 
 just mentioned. In 1 Mace. ii. 
 42 the Chasids join Mattathias 
 just after the latter had resolved 
 henceforth to iight in self-de- 
 fence on the Sabbath — a new 
 line of action adopted in conse- 
 quence of the murder of their 
 brethren, 1 Mace. ii. 41. In 
 Josephus, Ant. xii. 6. 2, the 
 only fresh adherents gained by 
 Mattathias at this period are the 
 survivors above mentioned. 
 "These," he says, "appointed 
 Mattathias to be their ruler, and 
 he taught them to fight on the 
 Sabbath day." Thus this mas- 
 sacre, which is the historical 
 fact at the root of our text, con- 
 tributed to two results. (1) It 
 was the direct cause of a new 
 line of action as to the legitimacy 
 of defensive warfare on the Sab- 
 bath (1 Mace. ii. 40, 41 ; Ant. 
 xii. 6. 2). (2) It secured for 
 Mattathias and his party the 
 temporary support of the Chasids 
 (1 Maoc. ii. 42 ; Aiit. xii. 6. 2). 
 
 In addition to 1 Mace. ii. 29- 
 38, which we have dealt with 
 above, our author has drawn 
 upon other materials such as we 
 find in 2 Mace. vi. 18-vii., where 
 wc have an account of the mar- 
 tyrdom of Eleazar and of the 
 mother and her seven sons under 
 Antiochus. Thusver. 6: "Let 
 us die rather than transgress the 
 commands of . . . the God of 
 our fathers," is obviously the 
 same as 2 Mace. vii. 2 : froi/ioi 
 yap aTTodv^cKeiv iufj.^v ij irapa- 
 {SaivGLv ro^is Trarplovs v6/j.ovs. This 
 latter statement is reproduced 
 in i Mace. ix. 1 . For a similar 
 expression of Eleazar's feeling, 
 see 2 Maec. vi. 19. Again, in vcr. 
 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 Antiochiau 
 persecution from a Jewish stand- 
 point — their holy altar polluted 
 with the sacrifice of 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 ilesh and to join in 
 the Dionysiac revels. 
 
 This martyrdom of the mother 
 and her seven sons was a very 
 favourite subject both with Jen- 
 and Christian. It forms the 
 theme of 4 Mace. It is alluded 
 to in Heb. xi. 35, and Origen 
 (Exhortatio ad-Martyrium, 22- 
 27 ; Comment, in Epist. ad Rom. 
 iv. 10) and Cyprian (ad Fortun- 
 atum, xi., and Testim. iii. 17) 
 recount it at length. It has been 
 retold by Prudentius, irepl are- 
 
ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 (pivwi' X., and Marius Victorinus. 
 Augustine was so fascinated with 
 it that he thought {de Oiv. Dei, 
 xviii. 36) that the books of the 
 Maccabees should on account of 
 these chapters be regarded as 
 canonical. 
 
 (J) But the character of this 
 chapter appears to be not only 
 historical, but also yareneiic. Its 
 purpose is to iTidiccde the lirie 
 of action which the Chasids or 
 Pharisaic party of his own time 
 should pursue. Thus he ignores 
 the temporary coalition of the 
 Chasids with Mattathias and 
 Judas Maccahffius. This coali- 
 tion lasted, as we know, but a 
 few years. Very early the aims 
 of the Maccabean party began 
 to change with their successes 
 in arms, and their strife, at first 
 nothing more than a life and 
 death struggle to maintain the 
 faith of their fathers, soon re- 
 solved itself into a war for the 
 independence of the nation. 
 When this phase of the conflict 
 appeared, the Chasids withdrew 
 from all further share in it. 
 Their attitude was quietistic. 
 Their sole duty was to obey the 
 law, and leave the rest to God. 
 It is this conception of duty 
 that is depicted in historical 
 actuality. But the actual in- 
 cident in our author's hands 
 is more than an historical event. 
 It is likewise a precedent and 
 example for after ages. It pre- 
 scribes thedutyour authorwould 
 enforce on the Pharisaism of his 
 own time. Just as his complete 
 silence as to the Maccabean up- 
 rising foryns an emphatic censure 
 of its aims, so his vigorous state- 
 ment of the opposed and Ckasid 
 line if action is designed as a 
 
 commendation of its cliaractcr. 
 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- 
 termination, rejoined : ' ' Nay 
 rather, let us die." 
 
 But let us return for a mo- 
 ment to the history of the 
 Chasids after 164 B.o. "When 
 their coalition with Judas, which 
 we have already mentioned, 
 came to an end, they forsook 
 so completely the field of pol- 
 itical and public life, that they 
 are practically unknown to his- 
 tory till the reign of J. Hyr- 
 oanus, when they reappear 
 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 
 popular Messianic beliefs, and 
 thus the bulk of the Pharisaic 
 party became committed to 
 political interests and move- 
 ments — the bulk, but not all ; 
 for some, like our author, clung 
 to the old attitude of non-resist- 
 ance. But he protested in vain. 
 The leavening of Pharisaism 
 with^ patriotism and earthly 
 political ideas, and its corruption 
 through success, went on apace, 
 and became the fruitful mother 
 of national disasters. These 
 
CHAPTER IX. I 
 
 35 
 
 culminated in the fall of Jeru- 
 salem. 
 
 1. In that day tlure will he. 
 See ci'it. note. 
 
 A man of the tribe of Levi. 
 The Ghasid movement thus 
 sprang from or was associated 
 with the priestly tribe, according 
 to our author. He was probably 
 thinking of Eleazar, who, in 
 2 Maco. vi. 18, is called one of 
 the principal scribes, and in 4 
 Mace. V. 3 a priest. 
 
 Whose name will be Taxo. 
 We have here the crux of the 
 book. Scholars have to no pur- 
 pose wasted their ingenuity 
 upon it. The various inter- 
 pretations are as follows : — i. Hil- 
 genfeld takes it =Tafw. Next, 
 he suppresses the second letter, 
 and supposes the last to be cor- 
 rupt, and thus arrives at t^j — 
 363. But n'E'Dn( = 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 possible to make what we 
 please ont of anything. 
 
 ii. Volkmar takes it = rd^io, 
 which, he assumes, wascorrupted 
 from Ta|io = 431. But N^pv pan 
 (EabbiAqiba) = 431. Hence Taxo 
 is Rabbi Aqiba. But, unhappily 
 for Volkmar, p3T is an impossible 
 form, and Aqiba was never writ- 
 ten without the yod. There are 
 further objections into which we 
 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 
 
 sense he right. Later scholars 
 have essayed the problem on the 
 hypothesis of a Semitic original. 
 
 iii. Colani {Revue de Theologie, 
 iv. 1868, pp. 90-94) takes Taxo 
 to be a corruption of t6,^oii>, 
 " ordaining " = Dj!'. This last = 
 340. So also does p min' mil 
 N33. Hence K. jehuda ben 
 Baba is the great Taxo, "the 
 ordainer," who, before he was 
 slain in 137 a.d., ordained the 
 seven last disciples of Aqiha 
 as rabbis. At the close of 
 this explanation Colani adds: 
 "Tout cela, bien entendu, est 
 un jeu, rien qu' un jeu " — 
 and we agree with him ; but 
 his pleasantry is finer than the 
 seriousness of his two prede- 
 cessors. 
 
 iv. Carriere (Jieviie de Theol. 
 iv. 1868, pp. 94-96), like his 
 predecessor, believes in an Ara- 
 maic original. The words cujus 
 nomen eritTaxo retranslated into 
 Aramaic = ND3B riDii? n, which is 
 corrupt, for -Nora D'b';i = ' ' who 
 will promulgate a decree," i.e. 
 trace a line of conduct. kD3d, 
 which=" ordinance," etc., was 
 wrongly taken to he a proper 
 name by the Greek translator. 
 
 v. Hausrath (Neutestamenil. 
 Zeitgesch. iv. p. 77, note) thinks 
 that here by the method Ath 
 Bash n'7'ir was transposed into 
 iDDn. The Greek translator took 
 the D as D. rih'i/ here is for the 
 Messiah. We- might say here 
 with Colani in reference to Hil- 
 genfeld's interpretation : "This 
 passage has as much to do with 
 the Messiah as with the Em- 
 peror Barbarossa." 
 
 Other attempts have been 
 made on the hypothesis of a 
 Hebrew original. 
 
36 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 vi. Wieseler (Jahr. f. d. Th. 
 1868, p. 629; ZBMa, 1882, 
 p. 193) thinks that that Taxo 
 goes back to "li'nn, the hadger- 
 like one. This designation is 
 to be explained from the pious 
 having to dwell in the caves of 
 the earth ; cf. 2 Maeo. x. 6 ; Kal 
 Ev rois (nr7}l\aioLS OTjpi(t)v rpiiirov 
 ficrav vsfj.6/j,£Poi.. Hilgenfeld re- 
 marks on this interpretation : 
 Utinam melis Wieseleriana e 
 spelunca sua nunquam prorep- 
 sisset. 
 
 vii. Rosenthal (Vier Apoc. 
 Biicher, pp. 31, 32) adopts 
 Hausrath's idea. He points out 
 that nVe is numerically equal 
 to nc'D, and thinks that in man, 
 which, as Hausrath has sug- 
 gested, corresponds to n'7'rt', we 
 have a mystical reference to a 
 second Moses who was to rise 
 again. He appeals to Deut. 
 xviii. 18 in support of his con- 
 tention. 
 
 None of these solutions is 
 satisfactory. The person re- 
 ferred to is, as we have seen, 
 not one living in the future, but 
 one who was a contemporary of 
 Judas the Maocabee. From the 
 standpoint of this interpretation 
 I offer the following suggestion. 
 In the Samaritan "Legends of 
 Moses," translated from the 
 Arabic into German by Dr. 
 Leitner ( Viertcljahrschrift f. 
 deutsch - uiid engliscli - Theol. 
 Forschiing, iv. 1871, p. 210), the 
 following passage occurs, which 
 seems to be to some degree de- 
 pendent on our text : ' ' Ange- 
 zeigt wurde dass ein Mann 
 auferstehen wurde 'Levi' und 
 sein Name soUte sein ' Eiferer 
 der Gcmeinde, ' und er die Ebriier 
 und das Haus des Weines heil- 
 
 igen. Er wiirde in drei Tagen 
 auferstehen ohne Eecht." This 
 passage appears to be very cor- 
 rupt, and to be derived partly 
 from our text, partly from N.T. 
 history. The phrases "ein 
 Mann . . . Levi " and ' ' sein 
 Name sollte sein ' Eiferer der 
 Gemeinde ' " seem to be drawn 
 from our text. Hence we con- 
 jecture that in cujus uomen erit 
 Taxo, which = NDpn ids' nu-N, the 
 last word is corrupt for tapn — 
 " the zealous. " Hence the text 
 will be, "A man of the tribe of 
 Levi whose name will be the 
 zealous one." This person will 
 be zealous for the law only, and 
 show his zeal by submitting to 
 death rather than transgress 
 the commandments. Cf. vers. 4, 
 6, 7. The writer regards the 
 person here described as repre- 
 senting those who were truly 
 zealous for the law, over against 
 the Macoabean party who 
 claimed to be so. Zeal for the 
 law was the most conspicuous as 
 well as the most essential charac- 
 teristic of the religious move- 
 ment which opposed Antiochus. 
 Cf. the words of Mattathias, 
 1 Mace. ii. 27, ttSs 6 fTJXuv tQ 
 pifufi Kal IffTuv diaBriKTiv ^feXWru 
 diria-u fiov. This comes out still 
 more clearly in the words attri- 
 buted to Mattathias in Joseph. 
 Ant. xii. 6. 2, il tis fijXurTfs ^itti 
 Twj' TraTploiv iBuii Kal tt/s toO 
 Qeou Bp-qiTKelai, tV^o-flw, (prjclv, 
 dfiol ; also in his address to his 
 sons, 1 Mace. ii. 50, Kal vSv, 
 TiKva, i-qKiha-aTe Tifi vb/iif Kal Sore 
 tAs i/'uxas i/jLuv virip Siafl^Ki/s 
 iraripwv iifjiCov. 
 
 Seven sons. The reference 
 here can only be to the seven 
 sons of the widow in 2 Maoc. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 2-6 37 
 
 tribe of Levi, whose name will be Taxo, who having 
 seven sons will speak to them exhorting (them) : 2. 
 " Observe, my sons, behold a second ruthless (and) 
 unclean visitation has come upon the people, and 
 a punishment merciless and far exceeding the first. 
 o. For what nation or what region or what people 
 of those who are impious towards the Lord, who 
 have done many abominations, have suffered as 
 great calamities as have befallen us ? 4. Now 
 therefore, my sons, hear me : for observe and know 
 that neither did (our) fathers nor their forefathers 
 tempt God, so as to transgress His commands. 5. 
 And ye know that this is our strength, and thus 
 we will do. 6. Let us fast for the space of three 
 
 vii. and 4 Maoo. See notes on in many of the Psalms. Our 
 
 p. 33. author must have supposed that 
 
 2. Second unclean msitation. a faithful remnant had existed 
 The first has been described in at all times. 
 
 III., which they endured at the To transgress His commands. 
 
 hands of Nebuchadnezzar ; the Cf. ver. 6. 
 
 second is that which they suffer 5. And this we will do, i.e. 
 
 under Antiochus. This latter as our fathers. 
 
 "far exceeds the first," the 6. Fast. Cf. Dan. vi. 18, ix. 
 
 writer proceeds to say. Why 3 ; Apoc. Bar. v. 7, ix. 2, xii. 5, 
 
 this visitation was called un- xxi. 1, xlvii. 2 ; 4 Ezra v. 20, 
 
 clean we have shown above in vi. 35, ix. 26, 27, xii. 51. 
 
 the notes on p. 33. Let us go into a cave in the 
 
 3. What nation, etc. We field. When the persecution 
 might compare Josephus' words became severe in B.C. 168, 167, 
 in reference to the sufferings of those who still clung to the law 
 the Jews during the wars between took refuge in oaves, 1 Mace. 
 Ptolemy Philopator and Antio- i. 53, iv Kpv<plois. These hiding- 
 chus Epiphanes, Ant. xii. 3. 3. places are described in 1 Mace. 
 
 4. Neither did (our) parents ii. 31 as "secret places in the 
 nor their forefathers tempt Ood. wilderness " (Kari^-qaav . . . ds 
 See crit. note. This absence of Toiis Kpvipois iv r-jj ip^i'.if) — a very 
 the sense of demerit appears close parallel to the phrase in 
 
38 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 days and on the fourth let us go into a cave which 
 is in the field, and let us die rather than trans- 
 gress the commands of the Lord of lords, the 
 God of our fathers. 7. For if we do this and 
 die, our blood will be avenged before the Lord. 
 X. And then His kingdom will appear through- 
 out all His creation. 
 
 our text. Cf. also 1 Maoo. ii. 
 36, 41. Those who were zealous 
 for the law fled with their wives 
 and children, andfindingconceal- 
 ment in these oaves lived there, 
 Joseph. Ant. xii. 6. 2 : ^era ru>v 
 T^KVojy Kai yvvaiKOJv ^(pvyov els 
 TTjv ^pjifxov Kai iv TOts (jivrfKa-loLS 
 Siriyov. Heb. xi. 38 points to 
 this period. In these also they 
 observed the religious festivals, 
 2 Mace. x. 6 : /hct' ei(ppoa-ivT)S 
 ijyov 7)iiipat 6ktoj . . . ^vqiio- 
 veiovr^s tlis irpb pCLKpou xp^^ov rrjv 
 rOiV (TK1]VC3V eopTTji/ . , . ^v Tols 
 airriXaiois . . . ^aav ve^dpr-evoL. 
 But these hiding - places were 
 betrayed to the Syro-Macedonian 
 governor, and many Jews slain 
 or burnt, 2 Mace. vi. 11 . erepoi 
 dk ifK-qaiov (rvvSpapLdvTES cis to. 
 (77nJXaia XeX7;^6rajs dY^t*' rriv 
 e^dofMOiSa., fX7)vv8^vre^ rQ ^iXiiririp 
 (rvv€(p\oyitr97j(7av, dta rb eu\a^ws 
 ^X^'-^ PoT)driffaL eaurois Kara dS^av 
 
 TTJS (TeflVOTdTTjS TJpL^paS, 
 
 Let us die rather than trans- 
 gress, etc. As their fathers 
 had been faithful to the law, 
 Taxo and his seven sons are 
 resolved to be so likewise, lest 
 they transgress the commands 
 of their fathers' God. The ex- 
 pression, "let us die rather than 
 transgress," etc., appears to have 
 
 originated with the persecution 
 of Antiochus. 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 
 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 martyr's in 2 Mace. vii. 2 : 
 ^TOtpLot yd,p airo9v^(TK€iV ^ap.kv 7) 
 irarpi^ovt vbp-ovs irapa§alvuv. 
 Cf. 4 Mace. ix. 1. They are 
 essentially the same as those 
 uttered by the 1000 that were 
 martyred in the wilderness, 
 1 Mace. ii. 37 : 6.iro6civtaii€v oi 
 irdvT^s iy TTJ airXbTTjTt i]/j,wv. Their 
 thought is echoed in Mattathias' 
 address to his children. Ant. 
 xii. 6. 1 : KpeiTTov aurois elpat 
 ijir^p Tuiv Tarpiiov vbpLojv dirodavelt/ 
 ■!) tv" ofirws d56f us ; and the re- 
 solve they express is ascribed 
 also to the martp-ed Eleazar, 2 
 Mace. vi. 19. 
 
 7. Our blood will be avenged, 
 etc. Tliis assurance that God 
 will avenge is frequently found 
 in the history of the seven mar- 
 tyred brethren, 2 Mace. vi. 14, 
 17, 19, 31, 35-37. 
 
 X. 1-10. These verses form 
 
CHAPTERS IX. 7— X. 2 
 
 39 
 
 And then Satan will be no more, 
 And sorrow will depart with him. 
 Then the hands of the angel will be filled 
 And he will be appointed chief, 
 And he will forthwith avenge them of their ' 
 enemies. 
 
 a, hymn of ten stanzas of three 
 lines each. It falls into three 
 .lections. The first constitutes 
 the introduction, and consists of 
 two stanzas. The second and 
 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 fact makes it 
 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 
 redundancy. Thus vers. 3 and 
 9 are defective in this respect, 
 and i, 5, 10 may be redundant. 
 If there are redundancies in these 
 verses, they may be due to dup- 
 licate renderings or incorporated 
 marginal glosses. 
 
 Schmidt-Merx are of opinion 
 that the hymn begins with ver. 
 3, and is therefore only of eight 
 stanzas. They regard the enim 
 in ver. 3 as = '3 introductory. 
 They point out that the subject 
 of ver. 3 is "God," but that 
 "angel" is the subject in ver. 2. 
 Hence they suppose that the 
 hymn is of earlier and different 
 authorship than the rest of the 
 book. 
 
 There are grounds for differen- 
 
 tiating 1, 2 and S-10 other than 
 those mentioned by Schmidt- 
 Merx, as will appear below. 
 
 1. His kingdom will appear, 
 etc. This seems to promise a 
 new heaven and a new earth, 
 but this is not the case if ver. 
 10a is right. 
 
 Satan will he no mm-e. 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. 
 
 Sorrow, etc. Cf. Isa. xxxv. 
 10 ; Eev. xxi. 4. 
 
 2. The hands of the angel ivill 
 ie filled, i.e. the angel will 
 be delegated, appointed. The 
 phrase Ti<SD="tofill one's hand ' ' 
 means, to deliver the priest- 
 hood to him. Cf. Exod. xxviii. 
 41, xxix. 9 ; Lev. xxi. 10 ; Test. 
 Lev. 8, 4ir\ifjpa(Tav rhs xeipcis fiov 
 dv/xia/MLTOS Ciare lepare^ietv jue; 
 Job XXX ii. 3. 
 
 The angel, i.e. Michael the 
 patron saint of Israel. Cf Dan. 
 xii. 1. 
 
 ^711^ he will be appointed chief. 
 Michael will lead Israel. The 
 text, qui est in summo consti- 
 tutus= ''whois placed supreme," 
 or " appointed chief," cannot be 
 right. This clause, as it stands, 
 is a mere epithet of "angel" 
 (nuntii) in the preceding line. 
 
4° 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 4. 
 
 For the Heavenly One will arise from His 
 
 royal throne, 
 And He will go forth from His holy habitation 
 And His wrath will burn on accoimt of 
 
 His sons. 
 And the earth will tremble : to its confines 
 
 will it be shaken : 
 And the high mountains will be made low 
 And the hills will be shaken and fall. 
 
 whereas the parallelism requires, 
 in the second line, the statement 
 of a fresh fact which will modify 
 or develop the statement which 
 appears in the first line. Hence 
 for est I have read erit and taken 
 qui=mni, as in I. 6. In summo 
 = att-[h or tPNii, or something 
 equivalent. 
 
 And he vnll . . . avenge, etc. 
 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 
 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. Signs 
 which will accompany God's 
 coming. 
 
 3. The Heavenly One. This 
 
 designation belongs to our 
 author. Of. II. 4, IV. 4. 
 
 From Sis royal throne. The 
 Latin a sede regni sui = NDD |D 
 iniD'^D. Gf Dan. \. 20. 
 
 He will go forth, etc. Mic. i. 
 8 ; Isa. xxvi. 21 ; Eth. En. i. 3. 
 
 From Mis holy habitation. 
 Deut. xxvi. 15 ; Isa. Ixiii. 15. 
 
 And His wrath will burn. 
 The text is here cum indigna- 
 tionem et iram. But the paral- 
 lelism requires a finite sentence, 
 and not an adverbial phrase 
 depending on ' ' will go forth. " 
 The corruption seems to have 
 arisen in the Greek. Cum in- 
 dignatione et ira = f>' 8v/j.tfi re 
 Kai 6pyri, which I take to be a 
 corruption of /cai dvixiiaerai dpyrj 
 =13N mm, " and His wrath will 
 burn." The text as it stands = 
 f]Ni |nn3, " with indignation and 
 math." 
 
 4. And the high mountai7is 
 will be made low. Isa. xl. 4 ; 
 Eth. En. i. 6. 
 
 And the hills will be .ihaken 
 and fall. The text, which was 
 coiTupt, I have emended by 
 means of Eth. En. i. 6 (Greek 
 Version). See orit. note. 
 
CHAPTER X. 3-7 
 
 41 
 
 And the horns of the sun will be broken 
 and he will be turned into darkness ; 
 
 And the moon will not give her light, and 
 be turned wholly into blood. 
 
 And the circle of the stars will be dis- 
 turbed. 
 
 And the sea will retire into the abyss, 
 
 And the fountains of waters will fail, 
 
 And the rivers will dry up. 
 
 For the Most High will arise, the Eternal 
 God alone, 
 
 And He will appear to punish the Gentiles, 
 
 And He will destroy all their idols. 
 
 5. Avd the horns of the sun 
 . . , into Hood. On this restor- 
 ation of the text see crit. notes 
 (pp. 86, 87), where the parallel 
 passages from the O.T. and the 
 Jf.T. are cited. 
 
 Circle of the stars vnll he dis- 
 turbed. Cf. Mark xiii. 2o. 
 
 Fountains . . . fail. Cf. 
 Pks. Sol. xvii. 21, TTiyal 
 <xvvEcrx^OTj<rav aliiivioL ; Test. Levi 
 4, vSdTiiiv ^TipaLvo^^vwv ; 4 Ezra 
 vi. 24, et venae fontium stabunt. 
 
 Fountains . . . and rivers. 
 For this cullocation, cf. Rev. 
 viii. 10, xvi. 4. 
 
 7-10. Third section. God 
 punishes the Gentiles, destroys 
 their idols, makes Israel to 
 triumph over Rome, and exalts 
 them finally to heaven. 
 
 7. The Most High will arise. 
 Cf ver. 3, "The Heavenly One 
 will arise. " 
 
 Hie Eternal God. Previous 
 
 editors have wrongly connected 
 Summns and Deus. Ver. 3 
 shows that Summus here, as 
 Coelestis there, are to be taken 
 by themselves. Deus aeternus, 
 moreover, is in all probability 
 derived from Deut. xxxiii. 27, 
 mp 'nSx, as 8a certainly is from 
 ver. 29 of the same chapter, 
 and 86 probably from the same 
 verse. 
 
 A lone. The text solus = na^". 
 The meaning seems to be : God 
 alotie will come to punish the 
 Gentiles and exalt Israel, and 
 not a Messiah. Tliis is said 
 more clearly in 4 Ezra, where, to 
 the question in v. 56, Demoustra 
 servo tuo per quern visitas crea- 
 turam tuam ? God answers in vi. 
 6, Finis per me et non per aliuni. 
 Thus this forms another argu- 
 ment against 1, 2 and 3-10 
 being from one and the same 
 author. 
 
42 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 8. Then thou, Israel, wilt be happy. 
 
 And thou wilt mount upon the neck[s and 
 
 wings] of the eagle. 
 And (the days of thy mourning) will be ended. 
 
 9. And God will exalt thee. 
 
 S. Israel's triumph over its 
 enemies in this world. 
 
 Then thou, Israel, wilt he 
 happy. This is taken directly 
 from Deut. xxxiii. 29. 
 
 Thou loilt mount upon the 
 necks and. If the text is 
 right, it recalls Deut. xxxiii. 29, 
 •ynn iD'niDn-'jj;, and gives the 
 interpretation of that verse that 
 was current for some time before 
 and long after the Christian era. 
 Thus, whereas modern scholars 
 render ' ' Thou shalt tread upon 
 their high places," the LXX., 
 Syr., Vulg., Targ.-Onk., Targ.- 
 Jon., Jarchi transLited "Thou 
 shalt tread upon their necks," or 
 "neck." This rendering was 
 probably due to Joshua x. 24, 
 ■'Put your feet upon the necks 
 of these kings." Our text re- 
 calls Deut. xxxiii. 29, but does 
 not agree exactly with it or any 
 of the Versions. In Bar. iv. 2B, 
 €Tvl rpax^^oiis avrCiv eiri^'i^a'Yi 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 
 "neck" ; for Dnxis, from which 
 it is derived, can, according 
 to Hebrew usage, be rendered 
 singular or plural as the context 
 requires. But it is not at all 
 impossible that the text is cor- 
 rupt, and that it ran originally, 
 maij 'JUD-'?!) n'7j;n, " thou wilt 
 
 mount on the wings of eagles," 
 and was derived from Isa. xl. 31. 
 So the Targ.-Jon. interprets Isa. 
 xl. 31. pnijj 'BiJ Sv P''7D. Thus 
 cervices et would be a later inter- 
 polation. This figure of Israel 
 "mounting on eagles' wings" 
 would harmonise well with the 
 exalted tone of the passage. If 
 this be so, there is, of course, no 
 reference to Rome in the text. 
 
 The days of thy moiirning. 
 So the lacuna is supplied by 
 Dr. Cheyne. See crit. note. 
 
 On the vision of the three- 
 headed eagle with many wings, 
 see 4 Ezra xi.-xii. 
 
 9. Israel's exaltation toeternal 
 blessedness in heaven. 
 
 Cause thee to approach the 
 heaven of the stars. This lan- 
 guage might be metaphorical. 
 For other examples, ef. Pss. Sol. 
 i. 5, v\pibdT](TCLV Iw? ruv &,(XTpu3v ; 
 Jer. li. (LXX., xxviii.) 9, i^iipev 
 ^w? tCjv darpcov. Instead of 
 "the heaven of the stars" we 
 have "the stars of heaven" in 
 Isa. xiv. 13 (LXX.), 4irdvu tCiv 
 a(7T^p(jiv ToO oipavou (^K '3D1D) 
 ^Tjfftu rdv OpbvQV fiov. These 
 "stars of God" ("of heaven," 
 LXX. ) are rendered by the Targ. - 
 Jon. in this passage by "the 
 people of God," and thus re- 
 garded as a metaphor. 
 
 But the language seems not to 
 be metaphorical, but to relate to 
 Israel transfigured and glorified 
 
CHAPTER X. 8-IO 
 
 43 
 
 And He will cause thee to approach to the 
 
 heaven of the stars, 
 And He will establish thy habitation among 
 them. 
 10. And thou wilt look from on high and wilt 
 see thy enemies in Ge(henna), 
 And thou wilt recognise them and rejoice, 
 And thou wilt give thanks and confess thy 
 Creator. 
 
 after the final judgment — to 
 Israel not in the body, but in 
 the spirit. In this case we should 
 compare Eth. En. civ. 2, "Ye 
 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 lieaven." The 
 words, "Thou wilt see thy 
 enemies in Ge(henna)," in the 
 next verse favour this inter- 
 pretation. 
 
 ATid He will establish thy 
 habitation among them. The 
 text is here, loco habitationis 
 eorum = Dau'iD mpD2, and is be- 
 yond question corrupt ; 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. 
 Hence we regard D3i5'id = " their 
 habitation " as defective for 
 D3 -\2ma = " thy habitation 
 among them," the 13 being 
 omitted owing to the copyist's 
 eye passing from the first 3 to 
 the second. In the next place, 
 DipDa = loco, is, as the structure 
 of the rest of the stanza shows, 
 a corruption of some transitive 
 
 verb preceded by vav, — I take 
 it to be of D'pni= "and He will 
 establish." Hence the above 
 text. Cf. Eth. En. civ. 2, 4, 6. 
 10. See thy enemies in 
 Oe{h£nna) = videbis inimicos tuos 
 in Ge(henna). So I emend and 
 restore the corrupt text vides 
 inimicostuosinterram. Previous 
 editors have merely changed this 
 text into videbis inimicos tuos 
 in terra. But the sense thus 
 arrived at is impossible. If 
 the words in terram are not 
 corrupt, it is difficult to take 
 them otherwise than literally ; 
 but if we do so, how are we to 
 explain them? If Israel's 
 enemies are on the earth, and 
 Israel beholds them from on 
 high, then Israel must be 
 already in heaven. But that 
 could only be after the final 
 judgment, and after that event 
 the enemies of Israel could no 
 longer be upon earth. Hence 
 we must take the phrase ' ' on 
 the earth " metaphorically, or 
 regard it as corrupt. But to 
 take it metaphorically as = " in 
 the depths is not possible. 
 Hence it is corrupt, or rather. 
 
44 
 
 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 11. And do thou, Joshua (the son of) Nun, keep 
 these words and this book; 12. For from my 
 death — (my) assumption — until His advent there 
 will be CCL times. 13. And this is their course 
 
 defective. The context points 
 to Israel's enemies being in 
 torments ; for Israel rejoices 
 over the plight of the latter. 
 They are, moreover, in sight of 
 Israel. These two facts at ouce 
 suggest the thought of Gehenna 
 here, and that the original was 
 Din ':2. But Djn was lost and 
 ':3 rendered iv yy, and this in 
 turn by in terram. Din-ji 'j3 is 
 twice rendered iv yy BeevvS/i in 
 2 Chron. xxviii. 3 and in xxxiii. 
 6. 7^ or 7oi is likewise merely N'j 
 or 'J transliterated in Josh, xviii. 
 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." 
 This portrays faithfully the 
 expectations of the Jews as to 
 the future life. In early times 
 (Isa. Ixvi. 24 ; Eth. En. xxvii. 
 2, 3, liv. 1, 2, xc. 26, 27) 
 Gehenna was regarded as the 
 place of punishment for faithless 
 Jews, who should there suffer in 
 the presence of the righteous ; 
 but in N.T. times it had be- 
 come the future abode of the 
 wicked generally, who were to 
 be tormented within view of the 
 blessed. Cf 4 Ezra vii. 36, 
 Et apparebit locus tormenti, et 
 contra ilium erit locus requie- 
 tionis ; clibanns gebennae osten- 
 detur, et contra eum jucunditatis 
 paradisus. 
 
 Jtecogiiise them, etc. If both 
 Israel and their enemies were on 
 earth, and Israel had just 
 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. Thisbook. Cf. I. 16, XI. 1. 
 
 12. My death ■ — (mi/) as- 
 sumption. The word ' ' assump- 
 tion" was not in the original 
 here, which told only of Moses' 
 death. Cf. ver. 14 and I. 15. 
 It was introduced by the final 
 editor, who combined in one 
 work the two distinct books, 
 "The Testament of Moses " and 
 "The Assumption of Moses." 
 Our present book is what sur- 
 vives of "The Testament of 
 Moses," which knew nothing of 
 Moses' "Assumption." 
 
 Sis Advent, i.e. God's advent 
 for judgment. 
 
 dCL times. Each "time'' = 
 7 years, or a year-week. Thus 
 250 times = 1750 years. Hence 
 from the creation (see I. 2) to 
 the final judgment was to be a 
 period of 4250 years, or 85 
 jubilees. This estimate is found 
 elsewhere, I think, only in San- 
 hedrin 97i; but there the goal 
 is the coming of the Messiah. 
 
 14. I shall go to sleep, etc. 
 Moses here looks forward to an 
 ordinary death, and to joining 
 his fathers in Sheol, as also in 
 I. 15 (see note) and X. 12 (note). 
 
CHAPTERS X. II.— XI. 7 45 
 
 which they will pursue till they are consummated. 
 14. And I shall go to sleep with my fathers. 15. 
 Wherefore, Joshua thou (son of) Nun, (be strong 
 and) be of a good courage; (for) God hath chosen 
 (thee) to be my successor in the same covenant. 
 
 XI. And when Joshua had heard the words of 
 Moses that were written in his writing as well as 
 all that he had before said, he rent his clothes and 
 cast himself at Moses' feet. 2. And Moses com- 
 forted him and wept with him. 3. And Joshua 
 answered him and said : 4. " Why dost thou com- 
 fort me, (my) lord Moses ? And how shall I be 
 comforted in regard to that which thou hast spoken 
 the bitter word which has gone forth from thy 
 mouth, which is full of tears and lamentation, in 
 that thou departest from this people ? 5. And 
 now what place will receive thee ? 6. Or what will 
 be the sign that marks (thy) sepulchre ? 7. Or 
 
 In XI. 4, 9 also, an ordinary tions on Baruch's departure, 
 
 death seems to be implied. See also 4 Ezra xii. 44. The 
 
 15. {Be stroTig and) be of a word " depart " is used in Apoo. 
 
 good courage. See crit. note. Bar. xiv. 19, xv. 1, xliii. 2, 
 
 Successor. See I. 7, note. etc. , in the sense of dying an 
 
 .Joshua is the prophet promised ordinary death. That seems to 
 
 in Dent, xviii. 15, according to be implied here, and in ver. 9 
 
 our author. Thus no Messianic also. 
 
 interpretation is here given to 5-8. No single locality is 
 
 this passage by the Jews. worthy enough to become the 
 
 XI. 1. Jlis loriting. Of. I. 16, place of Moses' burial. The 
 
 X. 11. whole ejrth is his sepulchre. 
 
 4. Oomfort ine . . . he com- 7. Baldensperger thinks that 
 
 forted ? See crit. note. this verse is directed polemically 
 
 Departest from this people, against the Christians, since the 
 
 Cf. Apoc. Bar. xxxiii. 3, body of Christ was moved from 
 
 Ixxvii. 12, for similar lamenta- the cross to the sepulchre. 
 
46 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 who will dare to move thy body from thence as 
 a man from place to place ? 8. For all men when 
 they die have according to their age their sepulchres 
 on earth ; but thy sepulchre is from the rising to 
 the setting sun, and from the south to the confines 
 of the north : all the world is thy sepulchre. 9. 
 My lord, thou art departing, and who will feed this 
 people? 10. Or who is there that will have com- 
 passion on them and who will be their guide by the 
 way ? 1 1. Or who will pray for them, not omitting 
 a single day, in order that I may lead them into 
 the land of (their) forefathers ? 1 2. How therefore 
 am I to control this people as a father (his) only 
 son, or as a mistress (her) virgin daughter, who 
 is being prepared to be handed over to the 
 husband she will revere, while she guards her 
 person from the sun and (takes care) that her 
 feet are not unshod for running upon the ground. 
 
 8. All the world is thy scpul- elsewhere, we must translate 
 
 chre-. The original of these not the text but the Hebrew, or, 
 
 words is, as Ronsch recognised, as it is here, the Greek pre- 
 
 to be found in Thuo. ii. 43, supposed by the text, ovSi 
 
 dvSpwi^ yb.p ^TTLipavGiv iraaa yij irapiets. See crit. note. 
 
 Td(pos. As with a, very slight 12. Am I to control this people. 
 
 change these words become See crit. note. 
 
 Greek iambics, it is possible that Or as a mistress her virgin 
 
 they were popular expressions, daughter. See crit. note, 
 
 and thus reached Palestine as To he. given to the hitsband. 
 
 did those of Aratus, Menander, See crit. note, where also par- 
 
 and Epimenides. Of. Acts xvii. allels from Ecclus. will be found. 
 
 28 ; 1 Cor. xv. 33 ; Tit. i. 12. She ivill revere. See crit. note 
 
 11. Who loill pray for him. and parallels from Ecclus. 
 
 See XII. 6. (p. 93). Guarding her person. 
 
 Not omitting. The text is nee Of. Ecclus. vii. 24, Ovyaripes <ro(. 
 
 patiens ; but here, as frequently clcn ; Trpocrexe ri} a-ib/mn airSv. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 8-17. 47 
 
 1 3. And how shall I supply them with food and drink 
 according to the pleasure of their will? 14. For 
 of them there will be 600,000 men, for these have 
 multiplied to this degree through thy prayers, (my) 
 lord Moses. 15. And what wisdom or understand- 
 ing have I that I should judge or answer by word 
 in the house of the Lord? 16. And the kings of 
 the Amorites also will then be emboldened to 
 attack us ; (and) believing that there is no longer 
 amongst them the sacred spirit who was worthy of 
 the Lord, manifold and incomprehensible, the lord 
 of the word, who was faithful in all things, God's 
 chief prophet throughout the earth, the most perfect 
 teacher in the world, (yea) that he is no longer 
 among them, they will say : ' Let us go against 
 them. 17. If the enemy have but once wrought 
 
 13. See crit. note. God's chief prophet throughout 
 
 14. 600,000 men. See crit. the earth. The text is divinum 
 note. Cf. Exod. xii. 37. per orbem terrarum profetem. 
 
 Through thy prayers. The A Hebrew superlative underlies 
 
 text is, in tuis orationibus. The this phrase. It = rbv detov Sii 
 
 in = ^i' = 3. Tou K6(rfj,ou irpofp^TTjv = K*33 
 
 16. That there is no longer pN3 D'n'jNn = "the prophet of 
 
 amongst them. See crit. note. God," etc. 
 
 Sacred spirit . . . irmnifold. The most perfect teacher in the 
 
 Cf. Wisd. vii. 22, iri-eC/ta world. The text is : consum- 
 
 . . . SryMv . . . TToXv/jieph. matum in saeculo doctorem — 
 
 Worthy of the Lord. Cf. Wisd. another Hebrew superlative = 
 
 iii. 5, 6 debs iTreipairev airois nal D71V3 D^Dnn miDn. 
 edpev a&rods dfious iavrou. 17. Noadvocatctoofferprayers, 
 
 Lord of the word. I cannot etc. Cf. ver. 14. This office of 
 
 suggest the origin of this phrase, praying on behalf of Israel is 
 
 Faithful in all things. Cf. frequently ascribed to Jeremiah. 
 
 Num. xii. 7, "Moses . . . was Cf. 2 Maco. xv. 14, where Jere- 
 
 faithful in all Thy house " ; Heb. miah appeared along with 
 
 iii, 2, 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 that ruleth all the world 
 with compassion and righteousness, calling to mind 
 the covenant of the fathers and propitiating the 
 Lord with the oath.' 18. For they will say: 'He 
 is not with them : let us go therefore and destroy 
 them from off the face of the earth.' 19. What 
 will then become of this people, my lord Moses ? " 
 
 XIT. And when Joshua had 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. " Joshua do not despise thyself, but set 
 thy mind at ease, and hearken to my words. 4. 
 
 Maccabaeus, and is described by installation of Joshua in Moses' 
 
 the latter as : oStSs iari. b ttoXXA place. Cf. Sifri Piska 140 on 
 
 Trpo<yevxt>fJ-eyo! ivepl tov XctoO koI Num. xxvii. 28 : " Give Joshua 
 
 TTJs arylas irbXeas 'lepefiia's 6 tov a teacher that in thy lifetime he 
 
 6eov irpoKJyriTTji. Best of words of may question, expound, give 
 
 Barucii ii. 3, Srax Tjiidpravev 6 judgment, lest after thy death 
 
 Xafis ... 6 'Jepe/xids . . . ijiIxeto the Israelites may say : ' During 
 
 iiTr^p TOV XaoD, las &ii d(p46TJ avrip the lifetime of his teacher he 
 
 i) ap-apria.. See also Apoc. Bar. did not give judgment, but now 
 
 ii. 2, and the Talmudic passages he does.' Thereupon (Moses) 
 
 cited in the notes. raised him (Joshua) from the 
 
 Looking for help to Him that ground and placed him beside 
 
 ruleth all the earth. See crit. himself on the chair." Quoted 
 
 note on this difficult passage, by Heidenheim, Deutsche Vier- 
 
 where also parallels are given. teljahrschrift, 1871, p. 102. 
 
 XII. 2. Tooh his hand and i. Both the Gentile and the 
 
 raised him into the seat be/ore Israelite are the work of God's 
 
 him. This verse refers to the hands. The destinies likewise 
 
CHAPTERS XI. i8— XII. 
 
 49 
 
 All the nations which are in the earth God hath 
 created as He hath us, He hath foreseen them and 
 us from the beginning of the creation of the earth 
 unto the end of the age, and nothing has been 
 neglected by Him even to the least thing, but all 
 things He hath foreseen and caused all to come 
 forth. 5. (Yea) all things which are to be in this 
 earth the Lord hath foreseen and lo ! they are 
 brought forward (into the light 6. 
 
 of both are of His making. 
 Whatever befalls — whether 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 
 despair (see ver, 3), — God's pur- 
 pose standeth sure, and will 
 ultimately assert itself. 
 
 Foreseen and caused to come 
 forth. See crit. note. 
 
 6. Appointed me to pray 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 XI. 17, Jeremiah was 
 held to discharge this office in 
 the spiritual world, 2 Mace. xv. 
 14. Enoch also (Slav. En. 
 (MSS. AB) Ixiv. 6) was conceived 
 of as "one removes the sins 
 of men." Philo speaks of the 
 intercessions and prayers offered 
 
 on behalf of Israel by the right- 
 eous forefathers o^ 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 Ex&crat. ix. 
 (ii, 436) : rpialxp'O'^^IJ^voi -n-apa- 
 K\i}TOis ruif Trpbs rbv trar^pa 
 KaraXkaydv , . , devripijjS^ t^tuiv 
 dpxTjy^TOJv Tou ^Ovovi otndr'rjTLf 6rL 
 Tats d<petfj,4ifat^ ffui/xdroiv ^pv/su^ 
 HirKaffTov Kal yu^v^v dinduK- 
 vvp.^vais irpbs rhv dpxoyra 
 depair^Lav ras vTr^p vlGjv Kal 
 duyar^puj/ tKereias ovk dreXets 
 elibdaai TTOteiadatf yipas auroU 
 irapixo^ros tov Trarpbs rb iir-qKoov 
 iv eixats. In Joseph. Ant. i. 
 13. 3, Abraham is described as 
 saying to Isaac, when on 
 the point of sacrificing him : 
 /Aer' eiixHiv d^ Kal iepovpyias 
 ^Keivov TTjy ^J/vxw rT]v a^v 
 irpocrSe^Ofji^vov Kal Trap avric Kadi- 
 ^ovTos ^arj fj.ol ets KTjdefidva . 
 Kal yripoKbixov. In the Slav. En. 
 liii. 1 this doctrine is denied. 
 See my note in loc. , where a his- 
 tory of this doctrine is sketched 
 briefly. 
 
50 ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 The Lord) hath on their behalf appointed me to 
 pray for their sins and make intercession for them. 
 7. For not for any virtue or strength of mine, but 
 in His compassion and longsuffering was He pleased 
 to call me. 8. For I say unto you, Joshua : it is 
 not on account of the godliness of this people that 
 thou shalt root out the nations. 9. The lights of 
 the heaven, the foundations of the earth have been 
 made and approved by God and are under the 
 signet ring of His right hand. 10. Those, there- 
 fore, who do and fulfil the commandments of God 
 will increase and be prospered: 11. But those 
 who sin and set at nought the commandments will 
 be without the blessings before mentioned, and 
 they will be punished with many torments by the 
 nations. 12. But wholly to root out and destroy 
 
 7. Fornot for any virtve, etc. godliness of t!ie people, etc. Cf. 
 . . . was He pleased to call me. Ezek. xxxvi. 22, 32. By a 
 See crit. notes. Just as in Rom. writer who so frankly recognises 
 ix. 11, 12, the selection of Jacob the wickedness of his nation and 
 rather than Esau is declared to its need of frequent chastise- 
 1)6 due not to works, but to the ment, its selection as the people 
 divine purpose, so also here, of God could not well be 
 This election is an election to ascribed to its merits, but must 
 privilege and not to eternal life, be traced back to the divine 
 As regards the latter, it is written purpose. And yet he holds 
 in the Tanehuma Pikkude 3, that the world was created on 
 God does not determine before- behalf of Israel, i. 12 ; and in 
 hand whether a man shall be xii. 4, 5, 13, it is God's fore- 
 righteous or wicked, but puts knowledge, and not His prede- 
 tliis in the hands of the man termining purpose, that is dwelt 
 only. See Slav. En. xxx. 15, upon. 
 
 note. 9. See crit. notes. 
 
 8. iVo^ on account of the 12. Destroy. See crit. note. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 7-13 51 
 
 them is not permitted. 13. For God will go 
 
 forth who has foreseen all things for ever, and 
 
 His covenant has been established and the oath 
 which . . . 
 
ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI 
 FRAGMENTA 
 
 THE LATIN VERSION OF THE ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 CRITICALLY REVISED AND EMENDED 
 
 TOQETUER WITH 
 
 THE UNEMENDED LATIN TEXT OF THE SIXTH 
 CENTURY MS. IN THE MILAN LIBRARY 
 
ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 
 THE LATIN VERSION OF THE ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 CRITICALLY REVISED AND EMENDED 
 
 Words included within round brachets ( ) are supplied by the 
 Editor ; words within square brackets [ ] are to be regarded as in- 
 terpolations. When the text is corrupt, but the corruption is not 
 native to the Latin but to the Greek or the Hebrew, then the text 
 is corrected accordingly, and attention is drawn to tlie correction 
 by an asterisk * placed in the margin. 
 
 I. (Et factum est anno aetatis Moysi centesimo 
 et vigesimo), 2. Qui est bis millesimus et quin- 
 gentesimus annus a creatura orbis terrae, [3. nam 
 secus qui in orients sunt numerus . . . mus" et' . . 
 mus et* . . . . mus" profectionis fynicis. 4. Cum 
 exivit plebs post profectionem quae fiebat per 
 Moysen usque Amman trans Jordanem, 5. pro- 
 fetiae quae facta est a moysen in libro deutero- 
 
 I. 1. This verse, which is vicesimo ; by Ronsoh : Liber 
 wanting in the MS., is supplied receptionis Moysi factae anno 
 as above, of. Dent. xxxi. 2, by vitae ejus Cmo et XXmo. 
 Schmidt-Merx, save that I have 3. With Volkmar and Schmidt- 
 written Moysi instead of Mosis, as Merx I have omitted nam secus 
 this is the form of the genitive .... mus as a marginal gloss, 
 used by the Latin translator ; Such a remark is impossible in 
 byHilgenleld: AssumptioMoysis a book of Hebrew or Aramaic 
 quae facta est anno vitae ejus origin. Profectionis fynicis are 
 Cmo et XXmo ; by Volkmar : also to be omitted with Volkmar, 
 Liber profetiae Moysis, quem though Schmidt - Merx retain 
 soripsit ano aetatis centesimo them, inserting before them the 
 
 54 
 
ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI PRAGMENTA 
 
 TEXT OF THE SIXTH CENTURY LATIN MS. 
 m THE MILAN LIBRARY 
 
 The figures in clarendon in the margin denote the folio in the 
 MS. , and the letters a and h in the margim denote respectively the 
 beginning of the first and second columns in a folio. 
 
 112« 
 
 2 qui est bis inQlesi 
 mus et quingente 
 simus annus a crea 
 tura orbis terrae 
 
 3 nam secus qui in ori 
 ente sunt numerus 
 
 word quadragesimo. Hilgenfeld, 
 who holds the book to be of 
 Greek origin, regards the entire 
 verse as genuine and restores as 
 follows ; nam secus qui in oriente 
 sunt numeros [MM] mus et 
 [CO] mus et [XXXXX] mus pro- 
 feotionis phoeniois. Ronsch 
 Z.f. W. T. 1874, p. 556, regards 
 
 qui est bis cum exivit 
 
 plebs as a parenthesis and thus 
 restores ver. 3 : nam secus qui in 
 oriente sunt numeros MM mus et 
 
 . . . mus' et' . . mus 
 et" . . . . mus' profec 
 
 4 tionis fynicis' cum 
 exivit plebs post 
 profectionem quae 
 fiebat per mosysen 
 usque amman trans 
 
 5 jordanem profetiae 
 quae facta est a moy 
 
 DCCL mus, et CCLV mus pro- 
 fectionis Phcenices. 
 
 4. I have bracketed this verse 
 as an interpretation. Moses 
 could not have spoken of Amman 
 as across the Jordan : only a 
 dweller in Jerusalem could have 
 so described it. 
 
 5. Sohmidt-Merx rightly re- 
 ject this verse as a gloss. In a 
 book of Hebrew origin the phrase 
 libro Deuteronomio could not 
 have been original. 
 
 55 
 
56 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 nomio], 6. Qui vocavit ad se lesum filium Nave, 
 hominem probatum Domino, 7. Ut sit successor 
 plebi at scene testimonii cum omnibus Sanctis illius, 
 8. Et ut inducat plebem in terram da tarn patribus 
 eorum, 9. Ut detur illis per testamentum et per jus- 
 jurandum, quod locutus est in scenae dare de lesum 
 dicendo ad lesum verbum hoc : 10." (Confortare) et 
 firma te secus industriam tuam omnia quae mandata 
 
 6. Qui = Km. Cf. III. 14 ; 
 X. 2 ; .see Introd., p. xxxiii. 
 lesum filium Nave, i.e. Ii/o-oO;/ 
 vibf Naui}. This shows that the 
 Latin was derived directly from 
 the Greek. If it had been 
 directly from the Hebrew, these 
 words would have been Josue 
 filium Nun. 
 
 7. Ut sit successor plebi = tva 
 et-q StdSoxos Ti^ \aip. What is 
 the meaning^of SidSoxos? It 
 cannotmean ' 'a successor" here, 
 as Schmidt-Merx recognise when 
 they propose successor (sibi et 
 antecessor). But there is no need 
 of such a violent remedy. 
 SiiSoxos means also (1) a court 
 official of the second rank in the 
 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 
 meaning is found in Joseph. 
 Ant. XV. 10, and is frequent in 
 Philo. And this is exactly what 
 the context requires : "that he 
 might be the minister of the 
 people." We have now to dis- 
 cover the Hebrew behind Sia- 
 doxos. This we learn from 
 Ecclus. xlvi. 1, where it is a 
 rendering of n^ifip. This word 
 
 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 i^^es' servant, 
 nti/a ruaa. Ife isi'.Sso used of 
 service in ths^f tabernacle ; cf. 
 Num. viii. 26,' etc. Hence the 
 text = DViT Tcwa Twrh. In x. 15 
 the same meaning is to be 
 followed. It is, of course, pos- 
 sible that S1.&S0XOS here may 
 represent t*", 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 
 et, and patribus instead of ex 
 tribus, with Schmidt-Merx. 
 
 9. After illis Schmidt-Merx 
 adds ut deus illis, and for quod 
 read quondam. In scenae = iv 
 rfi CTKTiyy, just as scene in I. 7 
 = TTJ crKT]iirj. Dare de lesum 
 seems interpolated. De is used 
 in the sense of " by means of," 
 also in V. 1, de reges, "by 
 means of the kings." 
 
 10. Verbum hoc, (confortare) 
 et firma te. The text here is 
 verbum hoc, et promitte. Now 
 Moses' address to Joshua cannot 
 begin with et. Some verb has 
 fallen out between hoc and et. 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER I. 6-10 
 
 57 
 
 sen in libro deute 
 
 6 ronomio qui voca 
 vit ad se jesum filium 
 naue hominem pro 
 
 7 batum domino ut sit 
 successor plebi et 
 
 b scene testimonii 
 cum omnibus Sanctis illius 
 
 8 ut et inducat plebem 
 in terram datam ex 
 
 Thus there was probably here 
 the oft-repeated phrase addressed 
 to Joshua in Deut. xxxi. 6, 7, 
 23 ; Josh. i. 6, 7, 9, 18, pin 
 p'SNi. Now if we retranslate the 
 present text into Hebrew we 
 shall discover the source of the 
 corruptions and at the same 
 time the original text. The 
 words verbum hoc et promitte 
 = iDNi nin nmn. Now the 
 missing verb before the 1 is 
 clearly pm, as suggested above ; 
 for this could readily fall out 
 after nin, and idn is an easy cor- 
 ruption of pn as Rosenthal has 
 already seen. Hence the text 
 ran : }'D.^i pin nin nann This 
 restoration is confirmed by X. 
 15. See note in loc. 
 
 Hilgenfeld emended the above 
 words into verbum hoc ait : pro- 
 mitte. Volkmar took vTrScrxov 
 = promitte to be a corruption 
 of iirocrxis = "undertake." 
 
 Omnia quae mandata sunt ut 
 facias. In my translation I 
 have supposed ut facias to be 
 wrongly transposed to their 
 present position. The Hebrew 
 
 9 tribus eorum ut de 
 tur niis per testamen 
 tum' et per jusjuran 
 dum quod locutus 
 est in scenae dare 
 de jesum" dicendo ad jesum 
 10 verbum hoc et pro 
 mitte secus indus 
 triam tuam omnia 
 quae mandata sunt 
 
 order requires us to place them 
 before omnia. But since such 
 faulty transpositions of the Latin 
 text are frequent we cannot 
 argue on this ground against 
 the Hebrew original in favour 
 of an Aramaic. The Aramaic 
 would admit of this order, and 
 Dr. Neubauer assures me the 
 later Hebrew also. But it is 
 possible to regard the text in 
 its present order as derived from 
 the Hebrew. Thus ' ' be strong, 
 and hold fast according to thy 
 might to all that is commanded 
 to be done" would represent 
 nii?!;^ DMipsn ^d3 in3j j'Dni pm. 
 This construction is found in 
 2 Chron. xxxi. 4, ipin- [ya'? 
 " min3. 
 
 Que7nad7)iodumsine quaerellam 
 sis deo, I have here emended 
 est ideo into sis deo. The ideo 
 cannot stand here, as ver. 11 
 refers to ver. 10. In Luke xxi. 
 14 of the Vulgate, praemeditari 
 quemadmodum respondeatis re- 
 presents fir) irpofieXeTav diroKo- 
 ■yqBrjvai. The text = D'on inrn^ 
 D^rhvh. Sine has often the 
 
S8 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 sunt ut facias quemadmodum sine quaerellam sis 
 Deo." 11. Haec dicit Dominus orbis terrarum. 12. 
 Creavit enim orbem terrarum propter plebem suam. 
 13. Et non coepit earn inceptionem creaturae ab 
 initio orbis terrarum palam facere, ut in, ea gentes 
 arguantur et humiliter inter se disputationibus ar- 
 guant se. 14. Itaque excogitavit et invenit me, 
 qui ab initio orbis terrarum praeparatus sum, ut 
 sim arbiter testamenti illius. 15. Et nunc palam 
 facio tibi quia consummatum est tempus annorum 
 vitae meae et transio in dormitionem patrum 
 meorum et palam omnem plebem. 16. (Tu) autem 
 percipe scribturam banc ad recognoscendam tuta- 
 tionem librorum quos tibi tradam : 17. Quos 
 
 accusative in the Itala. Schmidt- incepit, Z.f. W.T. 1874, p. 557 : 
 
 Merx emend est ideo into est iirtfip^aro airiv airapxnv r^s 
 
 deo. KTlaeuis. Volkmar is wholly at 
 
 13. Non coepit. The text here, sea. 
 non coepit =oiK -^/jfaro = n9 Ab initio. The MS. inserts 
 
 9'Nin. But the Greek translator et before these words, 
 has here followed the inappro- Humiliter inter se. Humiliter 
 
 priate meaning of ^x'. He may he corrupt for humilitate. 
 
 should have rendered oiJk ^jSoi;- In my translation I have sought 
 
 "Keto. Hence render ' ' He was only to give the sense : "to 
 
 not pleased." Merx was the their own "(or "common") "hu- 
 
 tirst to discover the real mean- miliation." Hilgenfeld emends 
 
 ing here. He did so through humiliter into similiter. 
 I'etranslation into Aramaic, 14. This verse is found in the 
 
 na" Si'?. Greek. See exeg. note, p. 6. 
 
 Inceptionem = "design." So Ah initio orbis terrarum. 
 
 also Sohmidt-Merx. Hilgenfeld This phrase has already occurred 
 
 has missed the sense of the pass- in I. 13. It recurs twice, I. 17, 
 
 age, as his reproduction of XII. 4, in the form ab initio crea- 
 
 the Greek shows : oi)/c ijp^aro turae orbis terrarum. Of this 
 
 Tainjv TTjv a.vapxf]v t^s KTldews: verse the Greek (see I. 14, exeg. 
 
 likewise Eonsch taking non note) is happily preserved : irpb 
 
 coepit to be a corruption of (cara/SoX^s k6ctixox) = nnoiD 'JS*? 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER I. 
 
 59 
 
 ut facias quemad 
 modum sine quae 
 
 11 rellam est ideo haec 
 dicit dominus orbis ter 
 rarum 
 
 12 Creavit enim orbem 
 terrarum propter 
 
 13 plebem suam et non 
 coepit earn inceptio 
 nam creaturae 
 
 lllaet ab initio orbis ter 
 rarum palam face 
 re ut in earn gentes 
 arguantur et humi 
 liter inter se dispu 
 tationibus arguant 
 
 14 se itaque excogitavit 
 et invenit me qui ab 
 
 D'^iyn or D^iyn ipirrip. It is to be 
 observed that the Vulgate renders 
 Heb. ix. 26 ; Rev. xiii. 8, diri 
 KaTapoXijs /cicr/xou 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 constitutions mundi. The 
 phrase in 1. 17, XII. 4, ab initio 
 creaturae orbis teri'aruni = dir' 
 dpxv^ KTiaebis rod Khfffiov (cf. 
 Mark x. 6, xiii. 19) = ri'ij^xno 
 Sann nxni. On the other hand, 
 it is quite possible that the 
 latter form of the phrase goes 
 
 initio orbis terra 
 rum praeparatus sum 
 ut sim arbiter testa 
 
 15 menti illius et tunc 
 palam facio tibi quia 
 consummatum est 
 tempus annorum 
 vitae meae et tran 
 sio in dormitionem 
 patrum meorum" 
 
 et palam omnem pie 
 
 16 bem autem 
 percipe scribturam 
 banc ad recognos 
 cendam tutationem 
 librorum quos tibi 
 
 Z>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. 
 
 15. Nunc. MS. tunc. 
 Palam. Hilgenfeld emends 
 
 into pellam = dTraXXciJu. I 
 follow Ronsch in taking it as 
 a proposition, but the text is 
 doubtful. 
 
 16. Ad recognoscendam tuta- 
 tionem librorum,. The obscurity 
 of this phrase disappears whenre- 
 translated into Hebrew, vin jvoh 
 DnsD.TnK niDB'="mayst know 
 how to preserve.'' 
 
6o ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 ordinabis et chedriabis et repones in vasis ficti- 
 libus in loco quern fecit ab initio creaturae orbis 
 terrarum, 18. Ut invocetur nomen Ulius usque in 
 diem paenitentiae in respectu quo respiciet illos 
 Dominus in consummatione exitus dierum. 
 
 II. (Et nunc) intrabunt per te in terram, 
 quam decrevit et promisit dare patribus eorum: 
 
 2. In qua tu benedices et dabis unicuique, et 
 stabilibis eis sortem in me et constabilibis eis 
 regnum, et magisteria locorum dimittes illis secus 
 quod placebit Domino eorum in judicio et justitia. 
 
 3. (Fiet) autem postquam intrabunt in terram suam 
 anno s(exto), et postea dominabuntur a principibus 
 et tyrannis per annos XVIII, et XVIIII annos 
 abrumpent tribus X. 4. Nam descendent tribus 
 
 18. Diem poenitentiae. Eosen- Ronseh {Z.f. W. T. 1874, p. 558), 
 
 thai supposes an error on the in earn where the in earn goes 
 
 part of the Greek translator, i.e. back to in qua, ev ri . . . iv ain-^. 
 
 that he took nniirnn dv to mean Magisteria locorum = rowap- 
 
 the day of repentance, whereas it x'«s- Probably Toirapxias is cor- 
 
 meant " the day of the return," rupt for Toirapxa-s. 
 
 or " of the coming again, " and Dimittes. This is corrupt, 
 
 refers to the return of the people Schmidt- Merx emend it Into 
 
 to Palestine. dimetieris, but their reference 
 
 In respectu quo respiciet = iv to Pss. Sol. xvii. 30 gives no 
 
 TJj iTTia-KOTrrj 5 iinaKiftTai. — a support to their suggestion, 
 
 familiar Hebraism, -\m mpsa Dimittes may be for deraittes= 
 
 r\2 nps'. Cf Test. Lev. iii. , iv. ; KaB-^aets. This may be a cor- 
 
 Pss. Sol. xi. 2. ruption of Kadi<rei.s or KaracrT-Zjo-eL! 
 
 In consummatione exitus di- = "thou wilt appoint." In any 
 
 crum = D-D'n {'p ni'^DD. rase the sense required is clear. 
 
 II. 1. {Et nunc). So Hil- The original may have been TpM 
 
 genfeld. Volkmar, ecce nunc. onp?, "thon wilt appoint local 
 
 2. Schmidt-Merx bracket et magistrates." Cf. Gen. xli. 34. 
 
 stabilibis eis as spurious. 3. Fiet. So Schmidt-Merx ; 
 
 In me. Hilgenfeld, in qua. Volkmar, dat ; Hilgenfeld, ilU. 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTERS I. i8— II. 4 
 
 61 
 
 reponis in vasis fie 
 tilibus in loco quern 
 fecit ab initio crea 
 turae orbis terra 
 
 18 rum ut invocetur 
 nomen illius usque 
 in diem paenitentiae 
 in respectu quo 
 respicit illos dominus 
 in consummatio 
 ne exitus dierum 
 
 II. intrabunt 
 
 per te in terram 
 quam decrevit et 
 promisit dare pa 
 2 tribus eoruni' in qua 
 tu benedicis et da 
 bis unicuique et sta 
 bilibis eis sortem 
 
 in me et constabi 
 libis eis regnum 
 et magisteria loco 
 110ft rum dimittes illis 
 secus quod place 
 bit domino eorum in ju 
 dicio et justitia 
 
 3 autem postquam 
 intrabunt in terram 
 suam annos 
 
 et postea dominabi 
 tur a principibus et 
 tyrannis per annos 
 xviii" et xviiii' annos 
 abrumpens tib' x' 
 
 4 nam descendent tri 
 bus duae et transfe 
 runt scenae testi 
 monium' tunc deus 
 
 Anno s{ei:to). From Josh, 
 xiv. 10 and Joseph. Ant. v. i. 19, 
 it appears that the Israelites 
 spent five years in the conquest 
 of Canaan. Hence the above 
 emendation. Hilgenfeld, annos 
 (quinque); Merx, annos(eptimo). 
 
 Dominabuntur. So Hilgen- 
 feld and Schmidt-Merx. MS. 
 dominabitur. 
 
 Abrumpent. So Hilgenfeld, 
 Volkmar, and Fritzsohe. Ab- 
 rumpentes, Schmidt-Merx ; MS. 
 abrumpens. 
 
 Tribus. MS. tib. 
 
 4. Nam. Nam and enim are 
 frequently used in this version 
 to render 5^. 
 
 Descendent. Schmidt-Merx, 
 discedent. 
 
 Buodecim. So Schmidt-Merx 
 rightly emend from duae. In 
 2 Sam. vi. 1,2, the chosen men 
 of Israel and Judah accompanied 
 David. The corruption arose in 
 the Greek al ip' (pvKal by the i 
 falling out, or else in the Hebrew. 
 
 Tranferent. MS. transferunt. 
 
62 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 duodeeim et transferent scenam testimonii. Tunc 
 Deus caelestis faciet aulam scenae suae et turrem 
 sanctuarii sui, et ponentur duae tribus sanctitatis. 
 5. Nam X tribus stabilient sibi secus ordinationes 
 suas regna: 6. Et adferent victimas per annos XX: 
 7. Et VII circumvallabunt muros, et circumibo 
 Vim et (IV) transgredientur testamentum Domimi, 
 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 facient sceleste, et sculpent omnem 
 (simUitudinem) animalium idola multa. 
 
 III. (Et) illis temporibus veniet illis ab 
 
 Scenam testimonii. MS. scenae 
 testimonium. 
 
 Faciet aulam. So I emend 
 from fecit palam with Hilgen- 
 feld, who compares 2 Chron. 
 XX. 5. The phrase aulam scenae 
 is found in Exod. xxvii. 9. For 
 the various uses of isn see the 
 new Hebrew Lexicon in loc. 
 Eonsch, iiget palum ; Schmidt- 
 Merx, fecit palam (zelum) ; 
 Fritzsche, faciet palum. 
 
 Turrem. So I 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, 
 forum, comparing 2 Mace. x. 2 ; 
 Schmidt-Merx, fervorem. Volk- 
 mar gives the whole passage 
 thus : fecit palam (locum) scenae 
 suae et terram sanctuarii sui ; 
 Haupt, Z.f. W.T. 1867, p. 448, 
 faciet palam (portam) scenae 
 suae et forem sanctuarii sui. 
 
 Tribus sanctitatis. Hebraism 
 
 7. Circumibo= I will protect, 
 i.e. 331DK. Of. Deut. xxxii. 10 ; 
 Jer. xxxi. 22. 
 
 -Bi!(/;^. I have added the(IV). 
 
 Transgredientur testamentum 
 Domini et jusjurandum, polluent. 
 So I emend the corrupt text : 
 adcedent ad testamentum Do- 
 mini et iinem polluent. First 
 of all, finem=3/joj', which, as we 
 see from the context, is corrupt 
 for SpKov. Hence for finem we 
 should read jusjurandum. This 
 combination of testamentum 
 and jusjurandum occurs four 
 other times in this book — I. 9, 
 III. 9, XI. 17, XII. 13, and 
 thus confirms our emendation. 
 Tlie same combination is familiar 
 in the O.T. Cf. Gen. xxvi. 28 ; 
 Deut. xxix. 12, 14 ; Ezek. xvi. 
 59, xvii. 16, 18, 19. In the next 
 place, adcedent testamentum 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTERS II. 5— III. i 
 
 63 
 
 caelestis fecit pa 
 
 lam scenae suae 
 
 at ferrum sanctua 
 
 rii sui' et ponentur 
 
 duae tribus sanctita 
 5 tis' nam 'x- tribus sta 
 
 bilient sibi secus 
 
 ordinationes suas 
 66 regna et adferent 
 
 victimas per annos 
 7 XX" et ■vii' circumval 
 
 labunt muros et 
 
 circumibo 'viiii' et 
 
 and jusjurandum poUuent are 
 clearly parallel expressions, and 
 as the latter is obviously right 
 according to the context, the 
 former must be wrong. The 
 corruption therefore lies in 
 adcedent, and is easy to discover. 
 Adcedent= irpo(r/3^(rovTai,coiTupt 
 for wapa^'/jfTovTaL, t^v diad'/jKTjv 
 irapapTjvai is the actual phrase 
 in Ezek. xvi. 69, xvii. 16, 18, 
 19. Hence for adcedent read 
 transgredientur . 
 
 On this passage previous 
 editors are wholly at sea. They 
 all accept adcedent jusjurandum. 
 For et finem, Volkmar reads 
 sed in fine finem ; Schmidt- 
 Merx, et (iv) fidem. Hilgenfeld 
 accepts the words as they stand. 
 
 8. Scenae I take as a dative, 
 "in the Sanctuary." Ronsch 
 (Z.f.W.T. 1874, p. 558) in- 
 geniously proposes to read idola 
 obscena, comparing LXX., Jer. 
 
 adcedent ad testa 
 mentum domini' et finem 
 poUuent quern fe 
 
 8 cit dominus cum eis' et im 
 molabunt natos 
 
 suos diis alienis" et 
 ponent idola scenae 
 servientes illis' 
 
 9 et in domo domini faci 
 ent sceleste' et s 
 culpent omnem ani 
 malium idola multa 
 
 III. illis temporibus 
 
 xxxii. (xxxix.) 34, koI iBriKav to, 
 ficdafiara aiirlav iv rQ otKOi o5 
 iiveKMidT) Th 6i>ofid ixov 4t' airCo iv 
 aKadapirlaLS avrujv. 
 
 9. Omnem [similitudinem) 
 animalium. Similitudinem fell 
 out after omnem through homoi- 
 oteleuton. Hilgenfeld and Volk- 
 mar changed omnem into om- 
 nium, but the text thus arrived 
 at is intolerable. They failed to 
 recognise that this verse is based 
 on Ezek. viii. 10, " Every form 
 of . . . abominable beasts and all 
 the idols . . . graven upon the 
 wall." Thus omnem similitud- 
 inem animalium = nofiD n-iirrh^. 
 
 Idola multa, i.e. D'm D'sipEJ. 
 The word xpv is used immedi- 
 ately after 7idt\i in Ezek. viii. 
 10, as here. The whole verse = 
 n':3n-'?D ipni nnvin le-y nin' n'nai 
 Dm D'sipE* nonz. 
 
 III. 1. Veniet . . . eguitatu. 
 MS. venient . . . equitatus. 
 
64 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 oriente rex, et teget equitatu terrain eorum : 2. Et 
 incendet coloniam eorum igne cum aede sancta 
 Domini, et sancta vasa omnia toilet : 3. Et omnem 
 plebem eiciet, et ducet illos in terram patriae suae, 
 et duas tribus ducet secum. 4. Tunc invocabunt 
 duae tribus X tribus, et indignabimt, ut liena in 
 campis pulveratis, esurientes et sitientes. 5. Et 
 clamabunt : " Justus et sanctus Dominus, quia enim 
 vos peccastis, et nos pariter abducti sumus 
 vobiscum cum infantibus nostris." 6. Tunc plor- 
 abunt X tribus audientes inproperia verborum 
 tribuum duarum, 7. Et dicent : " Quid fecimus 
 vobis fratres ? Nonne in omnem domum Istrahel 
 advenit clibsis haec ? " 8. Et omnes tribus plor- 
 
 2. Coloniam. MS. colonia. 
 
 Sancta vasa omnia. Schmidt- 
 Merx point out that omnia after 
 sancta vasa is not Hebraic but 
 Aramaic order. )inSD n'jnd N'ts-np. 
 This is quite true, but it is im- 
 possible, on this ground only, 
 to argue back to an Aramaic 
 original ; for the Greek and 
 Latin translators frequently 
 failed to observe the Hebrevi' 
 order when it was possible to do 
 so. Thus, though hh in Hebrew 
 always precedes its noun, it is 
 placed after it, as here, in the 
 LXX. in the following passages : 
 Gen. xiv. 11, did ij'Dr'jD-nn— 
 LXX. TTjc linrov iraaav ttjv 
 ZoSbiiwv. 1. 14, D'^vn-SD— LXX. 
 oi (rvva^dvres irdvret. Lev. xx. 
 23, n'jk ^2 — LXX. TaOra TrdnTa. 
 2 Chron. xxi. 18, nm-'?^ 'nnn— 
 LXX. /Aerct Tavra vdvra. Hence 
 
 we can attach but little value to 
 this argument in itself, and 
 when we consider that our Latin 
 Version is but a careless render- 
 ing of the original, it ceases to 
 have any weight at all. 
 
 3. Terram patriae suae=eh 
 TT]v yijv r-^9 yev^aeojs aOrov = 
 im'^iD f IN. 
 
 4. iTidigndbuntur. The MS. 
 gives ducent se. These words 
 cannot be right. Observe — 
 Tunc invocabunt . . . et ducent 
 se . . . et clamabunt. The 
 ten tribes cannot address the 
 two, then march or be marched 
 about, and then proceed with 
 words of rebuke. Hence, in- 
 stead 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 MS. CHAPTER III. 2-8 
 
 6S 
 
 venient illis ab ori 
 ente rex et teget 
 equitatus terram 
 
 2 eorum et incendet 
 colonia eorum ig 
 ne cum aede sancta 
 
 lOQadomini et sancta vasa om 
 
 3 nia toilet et omnem 
 plebem eiciet et du 
 cet illos in terram 
 patriae suae et duas 
 tribus ducit secum 
 
 4 Tunc invocabunt 
 duae tribus x' tribus 
 et ducent se ut liena 
 in campis pulverati 
 esurientes et siti 
 
 entes cum infantibus 
 
 5 nostris et clamabunt 
 Justus et sanctus dominus 
 quia enim vos peceas 
 
 tis et nos pariter ad 
 ducti sumus vobis 
 
 6 cum tunc plora 
 bunt 'x- tribus audien 
 tes improperia ver 
 borum tribum dua 
 
 7 rum et dicent' quid 
 faciemus vobis fra 
 tres' nonne in omnem 
 
 h domum istrahel ad 
 venit clibsis haec 
 
 8 et omnes tribus plora 
 bunt clamantes in 
 
 duoent se, if retranslated into 
 Gi6e\'i=d,x6'/i<TovTai, and as this 
 word is confounded in MSS. 
 with dx^^Tocroi, the latter most 
 probably stood originally in the 
 Greek Version. Hence my cor- 
 rection of ducent se into indig- 
 nabuntur. Could ducent se be 
 a corruption of succensebunt ? 
 
 Pulveratis. MS. pulverati. 
 Schmidt-Merx omit. 
 
 Sitientes. Here the MS. adds 
 cum infantibus nostris. This 
 phrase I have, with Schmidt- 
 Merx, transposed after vobiscum 
 in ver. 4. Ifretained here, nostris 
 must be changed into suis ; for 
 
 the children of the two tribes 
 cannot be called children of 
 Moses and Joshua. 
 
 5. Ahducti. So Fritzsche ; 
 Schmidt-Merx, deducti. MS. 
 adduoti. 
 
 Cum infantibus nostris. See 
 note on ver. 4. 
 
 6. Inproperia verborum = 
 ni3Din. 
 
 7. Fecimus. So I emend with 
 Hilgenfeld from faciemus. 
 
 Clibsis, i.e. dXiif/is. There are 
 several other Greek words — acro- 
 bystia (VIII. 3), cathedra (XII. 
 2), eremus (III. 11), chedriabis 
 (I. 17), allofyli (IV. 3). 
 
66 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 abunt clamantes in caelum et dicentes : 9. " Deus 
 Abraham et Deus Isaac et Deus lacob, reminiscere 
 testamentum tuum quod factasti cum eis, et jusjur- 
 andum quod jurasti eis per Te, ne unquam deficiat 
 semen eorum a terra quam dedisti illis." 10. Tunc 
 reminiscentur me, die illo dicentes tribus ad tribum 
 et homo de proximo suo : 1 1. " Nonne hoc est quod 
 testabatur nobis tum Moyses in profetiis, qui multa 
 passus est in Aegypto et in mari rubro et in heremo 
 annis XL : 12. Et testans invocabat nobis testes 
 caelum et terram, ne praeteriremus mandata Illius, 
 in quibus arbiter fuit nobis : 13. Ecce ea advenerunt 
 nobis de isto secus verba ipsius et secus adfirma- 
 tionem ipsius, quomodo testatus est nobis temporibus 
 illis, ecce ea convenerunt usque nos duci captives in 
 
 9. Reminiscere — avafuixviiaKov. 5ie/3e^aioCro, and this in turn, 
 
 10. Homo de proximo suo= Tan or anin. The same diction 
 dvOpuTTos iirl T(J5 ■w'K-qalov avToO= lies behind adfirmationem ipsius 
 injn'? isi-N. quomodo testatus est (III. 13) = 
 
 11. Tum. So Schmidt-Merx. Sui,pe§aliii<nv KnSibs Sie/Se/SaioOro. 
 MS. cum. It is due to the carelessness of 
 
 Moyses. This name is written the Latin translator that he 
 
 thus in XI. 1, and the interpo- used testor as a rendering of 
 
 lated passage I. 5. In I. 4 two distinct Greek verbs. 
 
 Mosyses. Elsewhere, in XI. 2, Profetiis. MS. profetis. 
 
 4, 14, 17, 19, XII. 1, 2, it is 12. Et testans invocabat nobis 
 
 ■\vritten as if from a Nom. testes caelum et terram. For et 
 
 Monses. For a similar insertion testans the MS. reads, testatus 
 
 of n, cf. Bobbio MS., q. Mt. vi. et, but wrongly; for clearly 
 
 19, thensaurus, etc. Moyses is testans invocabat . . . testes 
 
 the Coptic form of this name. =Siaij.apTvp6/j.e!'os Si(/jiapTipeTo= 
 
 The Hebrew form Moses = Mua-rjs Tyn ivn, and the whole phrase = 
 
 = nEiD, which Schmidt-Merx give cnnn-nm D'aain-nn m ^jjn ^y,^, 
 
 in I. 1, is not found in this MS. This statement is found, letter 
 
 Testabatur. This word means for letter, in the Apocalypse 
 
 heTe"he declared." Itrepresents of Banich Ixxxiv. 2, "Moses 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER III. 9-13 
 
 67 
 
 caelum et dicentes 
 9 deus abraham" et deus 
 ac' et deus Jacob remi 
 niscere testamen 
 turn tuum quod fac 
 tasti cum eis et jus 
 jurandum quod ju 
 rasti eis per te ne um 
 quam deficiat semen 
 eorum a terra quam 
 dedisti illis 
 
 10 Tunc reminiscentur 
 me die illo dicentes 
 tribus ad tribum' et 
 homo de proximo 
 
 11 suo nonne hoc est 
 
 quod testabatur no 
 isa bis cum moyses in 
 
 profetis qui multa 
 85a passus est in aegypto 
 et in mari rubro" et 
 in heremo annis 'xl' 
 
 12 testatus et invoca 
 bat nobis testes cae 
 lum et terram ne prae 
 teriremus manda 
 
 ta illius in quibus arbi 
 
 13 ter fuit nobis quae 
 advenerunt nobis 
 de isto secus verba 
 ipsius' et secus adfir 
 mationem ipsius 
 
 assuredly called heaven and 
 earth to witness against you." 
 Cf. Deut. iv. 26, xxx. 19, 
 etc. 
 
 Ne praeterii-emus iiwmdata 
 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 ea advenerunt nohis. 
 So I have emended from quae 
 advenerunt nobis. That this is 
 right is clear from the exactly 
 parallel passage in Apoc. Bar. 
 Ixxxiv. 5, "And now Moses 
 used to tell you before they 
 befell you, and lo ! they have 
 befallen you." Schmidt-Merx, 
 
 followed by Hilgenfeld, emend 
 quae into vae ; Volkmar resolves 
 it into et ea. 
 
 De isto. This is taken to = 
 i^ iKelvov (xP^'""j)- -A- compari- 
 son of the parallel passage in 
 Apoc. Bar. Ixxxiv. i, ' ' And 
 after his {i.e. Moses') death ye 
 cast them away from you (see 
 also XIX. 3), on this account 
 they came upon you," appears 
 to show that de isto = rins = 
 "after him," i.e. "after his 
 death." Cf. Job xxi. 21. 
 
 Hcce ea. So I have emended 
 et quae. See above. 
 
 In partem orientis = els /iipos 
 T^s dvaTokTJs = Dip fiN nap"7N 
 Cf. Exod. xvi. 35. 
 
68 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 partem orientis 1" 14. Qui et servient circa annos 
 LXXVII. 
 
 IV. Tunc intrabit unus qui supra eos est, et 
 expandet manus et ponet genua sua, et orabit pro 
 eis dicens : 2. " Domine omnis, rex in alta sede, 
 qui domiuaris saeculo, qui voluisti plebem banc esse 
 tibi plebem banc exceptam, tunc voluisti invocari 
 eorum deus secus testamentum, quod fecisti cum 
 patribus eorum. 3. Et ierunt captivi in terram 
 alienam cum uxoribus et natis suis et circa ostium 
 allofylorum et ubi est vanitas magna. 4. Eespice 
 et miserere eorum, Domine caelestis." 5. Tunc 
 reminiscetur Deus eorum propter testamentum quod 
 fecit cum patribus illorum, et palam faciet miseri- 
 cordiam suam et temporibus illis : 6. Et mittet in 
 animam regis ut misereatur eorum, et dimittet illos 
 
 14. Merx reproduces this Plebem hanc exceptam. Hanc 
 
 verse in Aramaic : [nny n pin here represents the Greek 
 
 piEi "ly yn, and thinks that article : tIiv \a&v rbv iK\eKT6i'= 
 
 there is a play on the words "iv Tnnn avn. Cf. Isa. xliii. 20. Ex- 
 
 ( = 77)also = m4,Tiij;( = idolatry), ceptam is here an unhappy 
 
 as this latter phrase was often rendering. AVe should have 
 
 simply denoted by the initial electam. 
 
 letters. Thus, " they shall also 3. Fanitas. The MS. reads 
 practise idolatry through the majestas. This is corrupt. Hil- 
 ycars." If this play was in- geufeld and Merx emend it into 
 tended by the author, it proves maestitia ; Fritzsohe into moles- 
 nothing for an Aramaic original tia. Volkmar supports the text 
 against a Hebrew, as mi may is but without success. The cor- 
 good Hebrew also. ruption is not native to the 
 
 IV. 1. For intrabit, expan- Latin. Majestas = ii.eyaku6Tm 
 
 det, ponet, MS. reads intravit, corrupt for /laraioTri^, ' ' vanity '' 
 
 expandit, ponit. i.e. "idolatry." Nothin" un- 
 
 2. Domine omnis = Kipie toO pressed the Jews so much in 
 
 Travrds = Heb. hj [UN ; Aram, their captivity among the Gen- 
 
 hj KID. tiles as the idolatry of the latter 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTERS III. 14— IV. 6 69 
 
 quomodo testatus 
 est nobis tempori 
 bus illis et quae conve 
 nerunt usque nos 
 duci captivos in par 
 
 14 tem orientis qui 
 et servient circa 
 annos 'Ixxvii" 
 
 IV. Tunc intravit unus 
 qui supra eos est 
 et expandit manus 
 et ponit genua sua 
 i et oravit pro eis di 
 2 cens Domine omnis 
 rex in alta sede qui 
 dominaris saeculo 
 qui voluisti plebem 
 banc esse tibi plebem 
 banc exceptam tunc 
 voluisti invocari 
 eorum deus secus tes 
 tamentum quod fe 
 
 cisti cum patribus 
 
 3 eorum et ierunt 
 captivi in terram 
 alienam cum uxori 
 bus et natis suis et 
 circa ostium allofi 
 lorum et ubi est 
 majestas magna 
 
 4 respice et misere 
 
 re eorum domine cao 
 
 5 lestis Tunc remi 
 niscitur deus eorum 
 propter testamen 
 turn quod fecit cum 
 
 86a patribus illorum et 
 palam faciei mise 
 rioordiam suam" et 
 
 6 temporibus illis et 
 mittit in animam re 
 gis ut misereator 
 eorum et dimittit 
 illos in terram eorum 
 
 For this use of fmrawTris for an 
 idol, cf. Ps. xxxi. 6, etc : rd 
 fidraia is frequent in this sense. 
 Cf. 2 Kings xvii. 15 ; Jer. ii. 5, 
 X. 3. 'jan is the Hebrew. 
 
 5. Eeminiscetur. MS. remin- 
 iscitur. 
 
 Suam et. Hilgenfeld and 
 Schmidt-Merx delete et. 
 
 6. Miseratur. MS. misere- 
 ator. DimitUt. MS. dimittit. 
 
 Terram eorum et region- 
 em. Semitic syntax requires 
 an eorum after the region- 
 em. But the Greek and Latin 
 translators of Hebrew omitted 
 the suffix in their rendering. 
 Cf. LXX. 1 Chron. xxviii. 11 ; 
 
70 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 in terrain eorum et regionem. 7. Tunc ascendent 
 aliquae partes tribuum et venient in locum con- 
 stitutum suum et circumvallabunt locum renovantes. 
 8. Duae autem tribus permanebunt in praeposita 
 fide sua, tristes et gementes, quia non poterint 
 referre immolationes Domino patrum suorum. 9. 
 Et X tribus crescent et multiplicantur apud nationes 
 in tempore captivitatis suae. 
 
 V. Et cum adpropiabunt tempora arguendi, et 
 vindicta surget de reges partieipes scelerum et 
 punientes eos, 2. Et ipsi dividentur ad veritatem. 
 
 A^ulg. Gen. xli. 8 ; Exod. xii. 9, 
 xl. 18 ; Neh. iii. 3, 6, IS, 14, 15. 
 
 8. Sua. VolkmarandSohmidt- 
 Merx emend into sed. 
 
 Poterint. Schmidt-Merx emend 
 into poterunt. 
 
 9 . Multiplicantur apudnationes 
 in tempore captivitatis suae. So 
 I have emended the very corrupt 
 text devenient apud nates in 
 tempore tribum. Hilgenfeld 
 accepts the text, but changes 
 tribum into tribulationis, and 
 takes these words as prophecy of 
 the return of the tribes to their 
 descendants in Jerusalem. But 
 this is absolutely Impossible. 
 Not 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- 
 quire suos to be added. And 
 finally, devenient could not be 
 used of going up to Jerusalem. 
 The great " Songs of the As- 
 cents" would, in that case, be 
 called "Songs of the Descents." 
 
 The right word in such a case 
 would be ascendent (see ver. 
 7). Volkmar emends : deveni- 
 ent apud natos in tempore tri- 
 buum. But there is no meaning 
 in the expression in tempore 
 tribimm. Further, it is an un- 
 paralleled phrase. Sohmidt-Merx 
 emend : devertent apud nationes 
 in tempore turbarum. But the 
 sense is poor, "they will stay 
 amongst the Gentiles in the 
 time of troubles," and Fritzsche 
 and Rosenthal rightly reject it. 
 Rosenthal emends : devenient 
 apud natos in tempore judiei- 
 iorum. In the criticism of Hil- 
 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 judici- 
 orum. In tempore tribuum is, 
 he shows = D'B^B'n ny3, where 
 D'taiE'n is corrupt for D'uss'n. 
 The time of the judgments is 
 that of the final judgment ofGod. 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTERS IV. 7— V. 
 
 71 
 
 7 et regionem" tunc 
 ascendent aliquae 
 partes tribuum et 
 venient in locum 
 constitutum suum 
 et circumvallabunt 
 locum renovantes 
 
 8 duae autem tribus 
 permanebunt in 
 praeposita fide swa 
 tristes et gemen 
 tes quia non pote 
 rint referre im 
 
 molationes domino 
 patruum suorum 
 9 et "x" tribus cres 
 h cent et devenient 
 apud natos in tern 
 V. pore tribum- et 
 cum adpropiabunt 
 tempora arguendi 
 et vindicta surgit 
 de reges participes 
 scelerum et puni 
 2 entes eos et ipsi 
 dividentur ad ve 
 
 We have now discussed all 
 previous emendations of this 
 text, and been obliged to reject 
 them. My own restoration is 
 as follows. First of all, I accept 
 the emendation apud natos into 
 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-— /crareXeiio-oj'Tai = m', 
 which is clearly a, corruption 
 of i3T=multiplicantur. Thus 
 the text runs, crescent et 
 multiplicantur apud nationes. 
 We have now to deal with 
 in tempore tribum. This 
 tribum is a frequent fifth- 
 century equivalent of tribuum. 
 The phrase, then, in tempore 
 tribuum = D'Bai!' nvn. Here 
 D'ajJEJ nv3 is corrupt for nyi 
 Dn'3i!'=in tempore captivitatis 
 suae. Thus our emended text 
 
 = crescent et multiplicantur 
 apud nationes in tempore cap- 
 tivitatis suae. Now this agrees 
 exactly with the statement of 
 Joseph. Ant. xi. 5. 2, Ai Si 
 d^Ka (pvKal ir^pav ^lalv '^ixpparov 
 ^ots SeOpo, fjivptddes diretpoi, Kal 
 dptOfM^ yvua-dTJvac firj dwdf^evaL^ 
 and with the view expressed in 
 4 Ezra xiii. 36-48 ; Philo, Leg. 
 ad Caium,, 31 (ii. 578, Mangey), 
 itpb^ovv dk aOrbv Kal at ir^pav 
 Eu0/>drou dwd^^is' ijdeL ydp'SajSv- 
 \uiva Kal TToXXas d\\as rCiv (rarpa- 
 ireiGiv iirh 'lovdaiojv Karexof^^vas. 
 
 V. 1. Surget. MS. surgit. 
 
 Dereges=Si.aTS>v ^acrCKiuv. De 
 here = per, as in I. 9, de lesum. 
 So Rtinsch and Hilgenfeld. 
 Schmidt-Merx, not obser ving the 
 above sense of de, propose to 
 emend de reges participes into 
 ad participes regis, and puni- 
 entes into punientis. 
 
 2. Dividentur ad veritatem=: 
 
72 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 3. Propter quod factum fuit : "Devitabunt justitiam 
 et accedent ad iniquitatem, et contaminabunt in- 
 quinationibus domum servitutis suae," et quia 
 "fornicabunt post deos alipnos." 4. Non enim 
 sequentur veritatem Dei, sed quidam altarium 
 inquinabunt de ipsis muneribus quae imponent 
 Domino, qui non sunt sacerdotes, sed servi de servis 
 nati. 5. Qui enim magistri sunt [doctores eorum] 
 
 naturally to be regarded as 
 forming the class of teachers, 
 their functions in the text 
 are of quite a different nat- 
 ure. They are judges, and 
 their justice is venal. Now if 
 we retranslate into Greek and 
 thence into Hebrew we shall 
 be put in the way of discovering 
 not merely the original text, 
 but also a most interesting case 
 in which what was at first an 
 incorrect Hebrew marginal gloss 
 was later incorporated in the 
 text. To proceed : qui enim 
 magistri sunt doctores eorum = 
 (with Hilgenfeld) oi Si dtdd<T- 
 KaXoL bfres, ol KadijyrjTCil avrwv 
 = DnniD Dmm (ef. John i. 39). 
 Now, first of all, we know 
 that D'nin, which can mean 
 either "the Rabbis" or "the 
 many," cannot have the former 
 meaning in this context, as 
 we have seen above ; and in 
 the next, we see that the 
 latter meaning, "the many," 
 harmonises perfectly with the 
 rest of the context. For where- 
 as in ver. ib it is said that 
 some who are not true priests 
 will defile the altar of God, it is 
 here said that niany will ad- 
 minister justice corruptly, the 
 
 Sia^epi.ad'qaovTO.L irpbs Trjv dX??- 
 Seiaj' = nDKa ip^n'.. In 1 Kings 
 xvi. 21, p'yn is used in the Niphal 
 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 Chag. xvi. 5, 'Sn: ni ip'^nj 
 nnii= "the greatest Rabbis were 
 divided on this point," quoted 
 in Levy's Lex. ii. 65. 
 
 Propter quod = didirep. 
 
 Factum.Vo\kma.r emends into 
 dictum, and Schmidt-Merx into 
 fatum. 
 
 3. Inquinationibiis. So Volk- 
 mar and Hilgenfeld, from in- 
 genationibus. Schmidt - Merx 
 (and later Hilgenfeld also), in 
 nationibus. 
 
 4. De ipsis muneribus. I 
 have here followed Ronsch, in 
 supplying the lacuna of six 
 letters with ipsis. Hilgenfeld 
 gives iis ; Volkmar, omnibus ; 
 Schmidt-Merx, donis et. 
 
 5. Qui enim magistri sunt 
 [doctores eoruni]. If we study 
 this clause in connexion with 
 the rest of this verse and that 
 which follows, it will become 
 obvious that there is some cor- 
 ruption here. For whereas 
 magistri doctores eorum are 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER V. 3-5 
 
 73 
 
 3 ritatem' propter 
 quod factum fuit 
 devitabunt justi 
 tiam et accedent 
 ad iniquitatem et 
 contaminabunt in 
 genationibus domum 
 servitutis suae 
 
 et quia fornicabunt 
 post deos alienos 
 
 4 non enim sequen 
 tur veritatem dei 
 
 "some " and the "many" be- 
 longing alike to the Sadducean 
 party, to the Sanhedrin, the 
 chief council of the nation. 
 The Sanhedrin possessed civil 
 and criminal jurisdiction (Schu- 
 rer, div. ii. vol. i. 187), and was 
 at this period a body representa- 
 tive of the nobility, and not an 
 association of learned men {op. 
 cit. p. 174), as the Rabbins and 
 the glosser on our text conceived 
 it later. Having now deter- 
 mined the meaning of D'mn to 
 be not "the Rabbis," but "the 
 many,'' or "many," we now see 
 that nmiD {i.e. doctores eorum) 
 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. 
 
 LocupUtum. The MS. gives 
 cupiditatum. I have adopted 
 
 sed quidam altarium 
 iiiquinabunt de 
 78a muneribus quae 
 
 iuponent domino qui 
 non sunt sacerdo 
 tes sed servi de ser 
 5 vis nati' qui enim ma 
 gistri sunt docto 
 res eorum illis tern 
 poribus erunt miran 
 tes personas cupi 
 ditatum' et accep 
 
 Fritzsche's suggestion of locuple- 
 tam, though he edits nobilitatum 
 in his own text. Schmidt-Merx 
 propose (cupidi) cupiditatum. 
 
 Accipientes munera = dwpo- 
 XtjirrovvTes or SiapoK-qirTets. So 
 I emend aceeptiones munerum. 
 The corruption may have arisen 
 in the Greek by SwpoX^Trreis be- 
 coming BapoXij^las. 
 
 Pervertent. So Wieseler 
 emends from pervendent. The 
 three chief statements in this 
 verse, that men will be mirantes 
 personas, and acceptores mun- 
 erum, and pervertent justitias 
 are drawn from Deut. xvi. 19. 
 Pervertent justitias is based on 
 asm nm n^, "thou shalt not 
 wrest judgment." Erunt miran- 
 tes .. . justitias = D'TDD V.T 
 
 Accipiendo poenas = accipien- 
 tes poenas. This use of the 
 ablative of the gerund for the 
 present participle is character- 
 isticof this Latin version. Cf. XI. 
 
74 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 illis temporibus, erunt mirantes personas locupletum 
 et accipientes munera, et pervertent jusbitias [acci- 
 piendo poenas]. 6. Et ideo implebitur colonia et 
 fines habitationis eorum sceleribus et iniquitatibus. 
 A Domino deficient, erunt impii judices, et erunt in 
 argento judicare quomodo quisque volet. 
 
 VI. Tunc exurgent illis reges imperantes, et 
 in sacerdotes summi Dei vocabuntur : facient 
 faeientes impietatem ab saneto sanctitatis. 2. Et 
 succedet illis rex petulans, qui non erit de genere 
 sacerdotum, homo temerarius et improbus.et judicabit 
 
 17. This usage is frequently found 
 in the oldest biblical transla- 
 tions. See Rbnsch, Z.f. W. T. 
 1868, pp. 96, 97. As these words 
 are simply a repetition of the 
 phrase accipientes munera, I 
 have bracketed them as a ditto- 
 graphy. The only other alter- 
 native is to regard accipientes 
 munera as representing Sdipo- 
 \TjTrToOvTes=ii^2 D'y:in = greedy 
 after gain (Prov. xv. 27). There 
 will then be no tautology in the 
 verse: "They will respect the 
 persons of the rich and be greedy 
 of gain, and will wrest judgment 
 on receiving presents." This 
 form of the text would imply a 
 knowledge of 1 Sam. viii. 3. 
 
 6. We have here a remarkable 
 dittography, in which six lines of 
 the MS. are repeated twice with 
 some slight variations. The 
 second is slightly more correct. 
 The scribe no doubt intended 
 to delete the former, but forgot. 
 I here append the repeated por- 
 tions side by side. 
 
 finis habita 
 tiones eorum 
 
 see 
 leribus et ini- 
 
 quita 
 tibus a deo ut 
 
 qui fa 
 cit erunt impii 
 
 J" 
 dices erunt in 
 earn post 
 
 fineshabita 
 
 tionis sceler- 
 ibus 
 
 et iniquitat- 
 ibus 
 
 a domino qui 
 faciunt 
 
 erunt impii 
 judices 
 
 inerunt in 
 eampo 
 
 If we compare the eonclading 
 words of each column, it is clear 
 that erunt in earn post in the 
 first is corrupt for erunt in 
 eampo et. I have given above 
 the text presupposed by the 
 twofold text. 
 
 A Domino deficient. So I 
 emend from the corrupt twofold 
 text a deo ut qui facit and a diio 
 qui faciunt. Hilgenfeld reads : 
 adeo jus qui faciunt. Volkmar 
 and Sohmidt-Merx connect a 
 domino and a deo respectively 
 with what precedes, and proceed : 
 Volkmar, (quae) qui faciunt 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTERS V. 6— VI. 2 
 
 75 
 
 tiones munerum 
 et pervendent 
 justitias accipien 
 6 do poenas" et ideo 
 implebitur colo 
 nia et finis habita 
 tiones eorum see 
 leribus et iniquita 
 tibus a deo ut qui fa 
 cit erunt impii ju 
 dices erunt in earn 
 post fines habita 
 tionis sceleribus 
 
 erunt impii judices ; Schmidt- 
 Merx, ut qui faetarunt impie, 
 judices erunt in ea inpost (=in 
 posterum), etc. 
 
 Erunt in argento judicare. So 
 I emend erunt in campo judi- 
 care. In campo = ^j' aypu, cor- 
 rupt for if &py6pij!=^03X Erunt 
 jiidicare is either corrupt for 
 erunt judioautes or else it is to 
 hi; referred back to the Hebrew. 
 aztt/'? vn'=" they will be intent 
 or ready to judge." For this 
 construction cf. 2 Chron. xxvi. 
 fi. Hilgenfeld takes in oampo= 
 ev veSlifi, corrupt for l/iireSoi, but 
 the resulting sense is bad. 
 
 VI. 1. In summos sacerdotes 
 Dei vocabuntur. This emended 
 text (see below) = els dpx^epeh toC 
 eeov K\T)8-ncroiiTa,i=:a'in2n hil ixipji 
 d'h^n'? D'SnJn. With this con- 
 struction cf. LXX., 1 Chron. 
 xxiii. 14, eK'MjB'qtTav els (pvXrjv 
 roO Aei;i=iMassoretio, hv i«ip" 
 
 et iniquitatibus 
 b a domino qui faciunt 
 
 erunt impii judices 
 
 inerunt in campo 
 
 judicare quomodo 
 VI. quisquae volet tunc 
 
 exurgent illis re 
 
 ges imperantes et 
 
 in sacerdotes sum 
 
 mi dei vocabuntur 
 
 facient facientes 
 
 impietatem ab sancto 
 2 sanctitatis' et succedit illis 
 
 n*?:! 031?= " were numbered 
 among the tribe of Levi." But 
 the Niphal mp has here a middle 
 sense, as in Isa. xlviii. 2 : " they 
 will number themselves among 
 the priests," i.e. "will call 
 themselves priests." Thus the 
 non-Greek expression els lepels 
 KXrjSTJvai is to be explained 
 from a Hebrew background. 
 Instead of summos sacerdotes in 
 the clause in summos sacerdotes 
 Dei vocabuntur, the text reads 
 sacerdotes summi. For the 
 grounds for this emendation 
 see exegetical note, pp. 20, 21. 
 Fritzsche unjustifiably changes 
 in into qui. 
 
 Facient facientes : the well- 
 known Hebraism = iB-y nii^y ; 
 yet Schmidt-Merx emend it into 
 in faciem facientes ! Volkmar 
 and Hilgenfeld omit facient, 
 while Fitzsche omits facientes ! 
 
 2. Succedet. MS. succedit. 
 
76 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 illis quomodo digni erunt : 3. Qui elidet principales 
 eorum gladio, et locis ignotis stinguet corpora 
 illorum, ut nemo sciat ubi sint [corpora illorum] : 
 
 4. Occidet majores natu et juvenes, et non parcet. 
 
 5. Tunc timor erit illius acerbus [in eis] in terram 
 eorum : 6. Et faciet in eis judicia; quomodo 
 fecerunt in illis Aegyptii, per XXX et IIII annos, 
 et punibit eos. 7. Et (p)roducet natos (qui 
 su)ccedentes sibi breviora tempora dominarent. 8. 
 In partes eorum cohortes venient et occidentis rex 
 potens, qui expugnabit eos : 9. Et ducet captivos 
 et partem aedis ipsorum igni incendet, (et) aliquos 
 cruciflget circa coloniam eorum. 
 
 VII. Ex quo facto finientur tempora, momento 
 (fini)etur cursus a(lter) horae IIII venient. 2. Co- 
 
 Jiidicabit illis. Is this to be denies sibi Ireviora tempm-a 
 
 explained by ana pi (of. Ps. ex. dominarent. So Hilgenfeld and 
 
 6), or should we correct illis into Fritzsehe, emending donarent of 
 
 illos 1. MS. into dominarent. Volkmar, 
 
 3. Elidet. MS. elidit. (p)roducet natos, (qi d)ecedentes 
 Stinguet. So Ronscb, from sibi duriora tempora donarent ; 
 
 MS. singuli et. Hilgenfeld, Schmidt-Merx, (p)roducet natos 
 
 sepeliet ; Schmidt-Merx, jugul- succedentes sibi et punientes eos 
 
 abit. Stinguet = extinguet. [Cor- breviora tempora doneo re- 
 
 pora illorum] I have, with pente. 
 
 Schmidt-Merx, bracketed as an 8. Pa/rlas. MS. pares. Co- 
 intrusion, hortes. So Volkmar, from MS. 
 
 4. Occidet. MS. oocidit. Hil- mortes. Gutschmidt, hostes ; 
 genfeld and Volkmar omit the Ronsoh, martiales. 
 
 et before non : " and he will Occidentis. MS. occidentes. 
 not spare the young." Qui. So Schmidt-Merx, from 
 
 5. Acerbus. MS.acervus. With quia. 
 
 Schmidt-Merx I bracket in eis. 9. Ducet. MS. ducent. In- 
 
 6. Punibit. Hilgenfeld and cendet. MS. incendit. St I 
 Volkmar, from puniunt. have added with Schmidt-Merx. 
 
 7. {P)roducet nMos (qui su)cce- Grucifiget. MS. crucifigit. 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTERS VI. 3— VII. 2 77 
 
 rex petulans qui 
 non erit de genere 
 sacerdotum" homo 
 temerarius et im 
 probus et judicabit 
 illis quomodo dig 
 
 3 ni erunt" qui elidit 
 principales eorum 
 gladio" et locis igno 
 tis singuli et corpo 
 ra illorum ut ne 
 mo sciat ubi sint 
 
 77a corpora illorum 
 
 4 occidit majores 
 natu et juvenes 
 
 5 et non parcet" tunc 
 timor erit iLlius a 
 cervus in eis in ter 
 
 6 ram eorum' et faci 
 et in eis judicia quo 
 modo fecerunt in 
 
 VII. 1. Fado. Sclimidt-Merx 
 omit. 
 
 {Fini)etur. So Hilgenfeld, 
 Volkmar, Wieseler. Schmidt- 
 Merx and Colani read (sequ)etur. 
 
 A{lter). So Schmidt-Merx, 
 Colani. Volkmar, quando : Hil- 
 genfeld, a(evi). 
 
 Venient. So Hilgenfeld, Volk- 
 mar, Schmidt-Merx, from MS. 
 veniant. 
 
 illis aegypti per "xxx 
 et •iiii' annos et pu 
 
 7 niunt eos 'et . . rodit 
 cit natos . . . eceden 
 tes sibi breviora tem 
 
 8 pora donarent ia 
 pares eorum mor 
 tis venient et occi 
 dentes rex potens 
 quia expugnabit eos 
 
 9 et ducent captivos 
 et partem aedis ipso 
 rum igni incendit 
 aliquos crucifigit 
 circa coloniam eorum 
 
 h VII. ex quo facto finien 
 tur tempora nomen 
 to ... . etur cursus 
 a . . . . horae 'uii' ve 
 2 niant coguntur secu?i 
 ae . . . . pos 
 
 2. Though it is quite im- 
 possible to restore this verse, 
 many scholars have made the 
 attempt. "We cannot discover 
 the actual words of the writer : 
 oven if we knew them, their in- 
 terpretation would be difficult, as 
 they are enigmatical or sym- 
 bolical. Yet certain scholars 
 presume they know the hidden 
 meaning of the writer, and re- 
 
78 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 gentur secun 3. Et regnabunt de 
 
 his homines pestilentiosi et impii, dicentes se esse 
 justos. 4. Et hi concelabunt iram animorum suorum, 
 qui erunt homines dolosi, sibi placentes, ficti in 
 omnibus suis et omni hora diei amantes convivia, 
 
 devoratores, gulae. 5 6. (Paupe)rum 
 
 bonorum comestores, dicentes se haec facere propter 
 misericordiam suam 7. sad ut exterminarent eos, 
 quaeru(losi), fallaces, celantes se ne possent cog- 
 nosci, impii, in scelere pleni et iniquitate ab (sole) 
 
 store'the text accordingly. With 
 such a defective text to start 
 from, they can easily read their 
 own ideas into it, and they so man- 
 age their restorations as to make 
 the text attest the period they 
 have settled beforehand. Hilgen- 
 feld restores as follows : Ex quo 
 facto finientur tempera .'memento 
 (fini)etur cursus a(evi) . horae IIII 
 venient. Coguntur seous (sep- 
 tim)as 'VII' pos(tumas) initiis 
 tribus ad exitus. Villi propter 
 initium, tres septimae secunda, 
 tria in tertia, duae quartae. 
 Volkmar, Ex quo facto finien- 
 tur tempera . memento (fini)etur 
 oursus, q(ando) horae 'IIII' veni- 
 ant. Coguntur secun(da, medi)a, 
 e(t sic) pos(tuma in) initiis tribus 
 ad exitus. VIII propter initium. 
 tres (?us) septimae. Secunda 
 tria. in tertia duae (p)eractae. 
 Schmidt-Merx, Ex quo finientur 
 tempera memento . (sequ)etur 
 cursuSalter ; horae ■IIII" venient. 
 Cogentur secun(do septiman)ae 
 Vim, pos(tumae ab) initiis tri- 
 bulationis ad exitus . Villi pro- 
 pter (fort, tempera) initium, 
 
 tres septim(an)ae secunda, tria 
 tertia, duae eractae. Colani, Ex 
 quo facto finientur tempera 
 memento . (sequ)etur cursus 
 a{lter) . horae IIII venient . co- 
 guntur seou(Ii tempor)a e(jus) 
 pes(trema) ab initiis tribu- 
 (lationi)s ad exitus Villi . prop- 
 ter initium tres septimae . se- 
 cunda tria . in tertia duae (p)er- 
 actae. Wieseler, Horae IIII ven- 
 ient: cogentur seeul(i septim)ae 
 (dirae ?) pos(tumae in) initiis 
 tribus ad exitus Villi ; propter 
 initium tres septimae, secunda 
 tria(s),intertiaduae h(o)ra(e p)er- 
 actae. 
 
 3. Regnabunt. Hilgenfeld and 
 Schmidt-Merx, from MS. reg- 
 narunt. Is et regnarunt a Heb- 
 raism ? i. e. iSEici. 
 
 Dicentes. Hilgenfeld, from 
 MS. 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. 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER VII. 3-7 79 
 
 .... initiis tribus ad 68a s . . . n . . . ca . . . . 
 
 exitus 'vim propter mis diis .... 
 
 initium tres sep .... omnis .... 
 
 timae secunda tria 
 
 in tertia duae h. .ra.. .... u .... ... . 
 
 3 t&e et regnarunt roe elen 
 
 de his homines pes 6 tes rum bo 
 
 tilentiosi et impii norum comesto 
 
 docentes se esse res dicentes se haec 
 
 4 justos' et hi susci facere propter mi 
 tabunt iram animo sericordiam qu . . . 
 rum suorum qui 7 se et extermina 
 erunt homines do tores quaeru . . . 
 losi sibi placentes fallaces celantes se 
 ficti in omnibus suis ne possent cognos 
 et omni hora diei ci impii in scelere 
 amantes convivia pleni et iniquitate 
 devoratores gulae ab oriente usque ad 
 
 SiM placentes. This does not 
 appear to give the right sense, 
 coming as it does between dolosi 
 and iicti. The corruption may 
 be traceable to the Hebrew. 
 Sibi placentes = eavrois apia-Kovres 
 =DDxy DMjn 'B^isaD. Here DDsy 
 may be corrupt for D'Disv, i.e. 
 ' ' the mighty. " Hence we should 
 render "pleasers of the mighty." 
 
 5. This verse, consisting of 
 seven lines, is undecipherable. 
 
 6. {Paupe)rum. So Volk- 
 mar. 
 
 Svam. MS. qu . . . Volk- 
 
 mar, emends into eorum; Hilgen- 
 feld, quare. 
 
 7. Sed ut. MS. se et. Volk- 
 mar, si et ; Hilgenfeld, sicut ; 
 Fritzsche, sed et. 
 
 Quaeru{losi). MS. qiiaeru . . . 
 Hilgenfeld, quaeru(nt) ; Volk- 
 mar, quaeru(nt qui); Fritzsche, 
 queru(li et). 
 
 A b oriente usque ad occidentem. 
 Of. XI. 8. Observe that thi3= 
 d0 ijXiov dvariWovTos M^pt Svo- 
 /iiivov. Thus it can equally well 
 mean "from east to west" or 
 "from sunrise to sunset." 
 
Bo ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 oriente usque ad oecidentem, 8. Dicentes : " Habe- 
 bimus discubitiones et luxuriam, edentes et bibentes, 
 et potabimus nos, tanquam principes erimus." 9. 
 Et manus eorum et mentes immunda tractantes, et 
 OS eorum loquetur ingentia, et superdicent : 10. 
 " Noli (tu me) tangere, ne inquines me loco in quo 
 
 (ego) s(to) 
 
 VIII. Et (al)te(ra) veniet in eos ultio et ira, 
 quae talis non fuit in illis a saeculo usque ad 
 illud tempus, in quo suscitabit illis regem regum 
 terrae et potentatem a potentia magna, qui eon- 
 fitentes circumcisionem in cruee suspendet, 2. Nam 
 celantes torquebit et tradidit duoi vinctos in 
 
 8. jatpotabimus. So Hilgenfeld, 
 from et putavimus. Volkmar, 
 si mutavimus ; Ebnsch, perpot- 
 abimus. If with Fritzaohe we 
 emend putavimus into putab- 
 imus, we should expunge erimus 
 and render ' ' we shall esteem our- 
 selves as princes." 
 
 9. Mentes. Hilgenfeld emends 
 into dentes. The sentence — et 
 manus eorum et mentes im- 
 munda tractantes et os eorum 
 loquetur ingentia is thoroughly- 
 Hebraistic, beginning with a 
 circumstantial clause. Cf. 1 Sam. 
 ix. 11. (See Driver, pp. 238, 
 239.) niNDt33 D'JJJJ 033^1 Dn<Tl 
 mhll 13T D.TSl. 
 
 1 0. Noli (tv, me) tangere. So 
 Volkmar. 
 
 VIII. 1. Et [al)U{ra) veniet. 
 So Schmidt-Merx restore. Cf. 
 IX. 2. Hilgenfeld and Volk- 
 mar ; et cito adveniet ; Fritzsche, 
 ec(ce) ta(nta) veniet 
 
 QiMe talis non fuit in illis a 
 saeculo usque ad illud tempus 
 = ota ouK ^yivero iv airdis d7r6 
 Tov aibjvos ^ojs iKcivou Tov Katpou. 
 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 LXX. dtp' oS iyev/idTjaav ^ojs 
 TTjs ■ij/j.^pas iKelvTjs, nor with 
 Theodotion, d<p fjs yeyivyiTai 
 ^dvos iv T-Q yii ^ciJS TOV Kaipov 
 iKeLvav. It is nearer to the 
 Syriac, which = a diebus saecu- 
 lorum, which is defective here. 
 Instead of the Massoretic nvnD 
 N'nn nj)n ny <u, our text and the 
 Syriac imply N'nn nyn nv njj niD'a. 
 Now it is remarkable that, in 
 Mt. xxiv. 21, where this verse 
 from Daniel recurs, we have 
 practically the same text as that 
 presupposed by the Syriac of 
 Daniel and by our text. Mt. 
 xxiv. 21 runs, e\T^i.s fieyd^T), oila 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTERS VII. 8— VIII. 2 
 
 81 
 
 8 occidentem dicen 
 tes habebimus dis 
 cubitiones et luxu 
 riam edentes et 
 bibentes 
 
 M putavimvLS nos 
 b tanquam principes 
 
 9 erimus' et manus 
 eorum et mantes 
 inmunda, tractantes 
 et OS eorum loque 
 tur ingentia et su 
 
 10 per dicent noli . . . . 
 tange ne inquin«s 
 me loco in quo . . . s . . 
 
 ... is d 
 
 su us ... . 
 
 m 
 
 re ... . ravi .... 
 
 VIII. in plebem quae s . . a. 
 illis et . . ta . . ve 
 niet in eos ultio et 
 ira quae talis non 
 fuit in illis a saeculo 
 usque ad ilium tem 
 pus in quo suscita 
 vit illis regem regum 
 terrae et potesta 
 tem a potentia mag 
 na qui confitentes 
 
 67a circumcisionem 
 in cruce suspendit 
 2 Nam necantes tor 
 quebit et tradidit 
 
 ToO vOi'. Here ot dpxv^ Khaptov 
 is probably a free rendering of 
 i]3 niD'a. In Isa. xliii. 12, air 
 ipxv^ is the LXX. rendering of 
 Di'D. aldvos would bave been a 
 better rendering of the Semitic 
 original of Mt. than Kia-ftov. 
 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 
 Hebrew of Dan. xii. 1. For 
 similar phraseology, cf. Jer. 
 XXX. 7 ; Dan. ix. 12 ; 1 Maoc. 
 ix. 27. 
 
 Potentatem. So Ronsch, from 
 potestatem. Yet potestatem 
 may = rbv ^^ouiridf oyra = a'jiisn. 
 Potestatem a potentia magna 
 may = Thv ^^ovaid^ovra i^ovaiq. 
 fjieydXTj. 
 
 JSuspendet. MS. suspendit. 
 
 Illud. MS. ilium. Suscitabit. 
 MS. suscitavit. 
 
 2. Oelantes. So I emend 
 necantes of MS. Hilgenfeld, 
 negantes ; Schmidt-Merx, non 
 negautes. Those who conceal 
 their circumcision are set over 
 against those who openly confess 
 it. Or should we read (circum)- 
 secantes, or possibly secantes 
 
82 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 custodiam. 3. Et uxores eorum deis donabuntur 
 (in) gentibus, et filii eorum pueri secabuntur a 
 medicis inducere acrobistiam illis. 4. Nam illi in 
 eis punientur in tormentis et igne et ferro, et 
 cogentur palam baiulare idoJa eorum inquinata, 
 quomodo sunt pariter continentibus ea. 5. Et a 
 torquentibus illos pariter cogentur intrare in abditum 
 locum eorum, et cogentur stimulis blasfemare 
 verbum contumeliose, novissime post haec leges et 
 quod haberent supra altarium suum. 
 
 IX. Tunc illo die erit homo de tribu Levi, 
 cujus nomen erit Taxo, qui habens VII filios dicet 
 ad eos rogans : 2. " Videte, filii, ecce ultio facta est 
 in plebe altera crudelis inmunda et traductio sine 
 misericordia et eminens principatum. 3. Quae enim 
 gens, aut quae regio, aut quis populus impiorum 
 in Dominum, qui multa scelesta fecerunt, tanta 
 
 only, = ' ' those who circumcise. " reads dominis instead of deis. 
 
 Cf. 1 Mace. i. 61, where Haupt, disdonabuntur ( = SiaSo- 
 
 it is recorded that those who d-qaovTai) gentibus. 
 
 did this operation were put to Medicis. MS. adds pueri, 
 
 death. which I omit, with Schmidt- 
 
 Et tradidit. If the text is Merx and Fritzsche. 
 
 correct, we have here an in- Secabuntur. Schmidt -Merx 
 
 stance of strong vav with the add et venabuntur. 
 
 perfect. Nam celantes torque- Inducere acrobistiam. MS. 
 
 bit et tradidit =n3j)' DTnoCTnui inducere acrosisam. 
 
 in:i. Previous editors emend 5. Novissime post haec. These 
 
 tradidit into tradet. If we two expressions may have arisen 
 
 must change, we shoirld prob- from two alternative renderings 
 
 ably read tradibit(?). of the same Hebrew word or 
 
 3. Deis donabuntur [in) gen- phrase. 
 
 tibus. MS. diisdonabuntur gen- Leges et. MS. et leges. This 
 
 tibus. So Merx, but that he is the simplest and, so far as I 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTERS VIII. 3~IX. 3 
 
 83 
 
 duci vinctos in cus 
 
 3 todiam et uxores 
 eorum diis donabun 
 tur gentibus' 
 
 Et filii eorum pueri 
 secabantur a medicis 
 pueri inducere ac 
 
 4 rosisam illis nam illi 
 in eis punientur in 
 tormentis et igne 
 
 et ferro" et cogen 
 tur palam bajulare 
 idola eorum iniqui 
 nata quomodo sunt 
 pariter continen 
 
 5 tibus ea et a torquen 
 tibus illos pariter co 
 gentur intrare in 
 abditum locum eo 
 rum' et cogentur 
 
 b stimulis blasfema 
 re verbum contu 
 meliose' novissime 
 post haec et leges 
 quod haberent su 
 pra altarium suum 
 IX. tune illo dicente ho 
 mo de tribu leuui 
 cujus nomen erit 
 taxo" qui habens "vii" 
 filios dicens ad eos 
 
 2 rogans videte filii 
 ecce ultio facta est 
 in plebe altera cru 
 delis immunda et 
 traductio siue mi 
 sericordia et emi 
 nent priucipatum 
 
 3 quae enim gens aut 
 quae regio aut quis 
 
 see, the most satisfactory emen- 
 dation of the text. Hilgenfeld 
 emends leges into legis, and 
 takes it as genitive dependent 
 on quod. Volkmar changes quod 
 into quas. Schmidt-Merx would 
 omit et leges or read et legis 
 (latorem et). Fritzsche reads et 
 leges et. 
 
 IX. 1. Die erit. So Schmidt- 
 Merx, from dicente. Volkmar, 
 edioenti ; Hilgenfeld, ducente. 
 
 Dicet. MS. dicens. 
 
 Traductio = 'i\€yxot. Cf. Wis- 
 dom ii. 14, xi. 8, xviii. 5 
 (Rbnsch). 
 
 2. l}minensprincipalum=iwe- 
 p4x(ov TTjv dpx^v. So Ronsch and 
 Hilgenfeld, from eminent prin- 
 cipatum. Schmidt-Merx and 
 Fritzsche, dementia prinoipa- 
 tuum. 
 
 .3. Dominum. So Hilgenfeld. 
 MS. domum. 
 
84 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 mala passi sunt, quanta nobis contegerunt ? 4. 
 Nunc ergo, filii, audite me; videte enim et scite, 
 quia nunquam temptan(te)s Deum, nee parentes 
 (nostri), nee proavi eorum, ut praetereant mandata 
 Illius. 5. Scitis enim quia haec sunt vires nobis. 
 Et hoc faciemus. 6. Jejunemus triduo, et quarto 
 die intremus in speluncam quae est in agro est, et 
 moriamur potius, quam praetereamus mandata Do- 
 mini Domimorum, Dei parentum nostrorum. 7. 
 Hoc enim si faciemus et moriemur, sanguis noster 
 vindicabitur coram Domino. 
 X. Et tunc parebit regnum illius in omni creatura 
 Illius 
 
 Et tunc Zabulus finem habeljit, 
 
 Et tristitia cum eo abducetur. 
 
 2. Tunc implebuntur manus nuntii, 
 Qui erit in summo constitutus. 
 
 Qui protinus vindicabit illos ab inimicis eorum. 
 
 3. (Exur)get enim Caelestis a sede regni sui, 
 Et exiet de habitatione sancta sua 
 
 4. NunqumntemptantesDeutn, tavimus is a strong measure, 
 
 nee parentes (nostri), nee proavi and is likewise against the 
 
 eorum. I have here added nostri context. The speaker is urging 
 
 with Schmidt-Merx, and emend- his sons to do as their fathers 
 
 ed temptans of the MS. into before them, who never tempted 
 
 temptantes, as Volkmar. The God nor transgressed His com- 
 
 construction is purely Semitic, mandments. And so, in ver. 7, 
 
 The clause = the Hebrew ayx he urges them to die rather 
 
 Dnnx DJ ij'niN dj D'n'jN-nN d'djd. than transgress. 
 
 The Aramaic is similar, pan''? 5. Faciemus. Hilgenfeld 
 
 "iriT j'OiD. Hilgenfeld's emeu- emends into faciamus. 
 
 dation of temptans into temp- 6. Speluiicam. MS. spelunca. 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTERS IX. 4— X. 3 
 
 85 
 
 populus impiorum 
 in domum qui mul 
 ta scelesta fecerunt 
 tanta mala passi sunt 
 91a quanta nobis contegerunt 
 
 4 Nunc ergo filii audite 
 me videte enim et 
 scite quia nunquam 
 temptans deum nee pa 
 rentes nee proavi 
 eorum ut praetere 
 ant mandata illius 
 
 5 scitis enim quia haec 
 sunt vires nobis 
 
 6 et hoc faciemus jeju 
 nemus triduo" et 
 quarto die intremus 
 in spelunca quae in 
 agro est et moria 
 mur potius quam 
 praetereamus man 
 
 data domini dominorum dei 
 
 parentum nostro 
 
 7 rum- hoc enim si fa 
 ciemus et morie 
 mur sanguis nos 
 ter vindicavitur 
 
 b coram domino 
 X. Et tunc parebit reg 
 num illius in omni 
 creatura illius 
 Et tunc zabulus finem 
 habebit et tristitiam 
 cum eo adducetur 
 
 2 Tunc implebuntur 
 manus nuntii qui 
 est in summo cons 
 titutus' qui proti 
 nus vindicavit illos 
 ab inimicis eorum 
 
 3 get enim caeles 
 
 tis a sede regni sui 
 et exiet de habita 
 tione sancta sua cum 
 
 7. Vindicahitur. MS. vindi- 
 cavitur. 
 
 X. 1. Zabulus, i.e. diabulus. 
 This form is frequent in the 
 Latin fathers. Of. Lactant. De 
 mart. pers. XVI., a te Zabulus 
 viotus est. 
 
 Tristitia. MS. tristitiam. 
 
 Abducetur. So HUgenfeld and 
 
 Volkmar, from adducetur. 
 Schmidt-Merx, deducetiir. 
 
 2. Implebuntur manus. The 
 phrase T vho means, to give full 
 powers to. 
 
 £lrit. MS. est. 
 
 Vindicabit. MS. vindicavit. 
 
 3. Gum, indignationem et 
 iram. For the emendation of 
 
86 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 t Cum indignationem et iram t propter filios 
 suos : 
 
 4. Et tremebit terra, usque ad fines suas con- 
 
 cutietur, 
 Et alti montes humiliabuntur 
 Et coUes concutientur et cadent. 
 
 5. (Et) cornua solis confringentur et in tenebras 
 
 convertet se, 
 Et luna non dabit lumen et tota convertet se 
 
 in sanguinem, 
 Et orbis stellarum conturbabitur. 
 
 6. Et mare usque ad abyssum decedet, 
 Et fontes aquarum deficient, 
 
 Et flumina exarescent ; 
 
 this corrupt text, see exegetioal Spij if-rjXci. koI mTreLvoid-fiaovTai, 
 
 note on X. 3. ^omol v\jjri\ol (Greek Version), 
 
 4. Schmidt-Merx bracket con- on which the present passage is 
 
 cutietur et. based, we shall see that convalles 
 
 Et alti montes humiUabwntur should be colles, and that con- 
 
 = Kal rd. v\l/Tj\a Tdireivtadiiaerat,. cutientur should be connected 
 
 This phrase is ultimately derived with cadent. So Eth. En. i. 6, 
 
 from Isa. xl. 4, probably through (xei.crB'^aovTai Kai weffovvTat. This 
 
 Eth. En. i. 5. corruption might possibly have 
 
 JSt colics concutientur et cadent. arisen in the Latin. It is easy 
 
 The MS. is here impossible : et to explain it as a confusion of 
 
 concutientur et convalles cadent. niupa with niynj. 
 In the first place, it would be 5. (Bt) cornua solis . . , in 
 
 absurd to speak of the moun- sanguinem. The MS. reads, sol 
 
 tains being shaken after they had non dabit lumen et in tenebris 
 
 already been brought low ; and convertent se cornua lunae et 
 
 in the next, the valleys cannot confringentur et tota convertit 
 
 be described as falling. Con- se in sanguine, which Hilgenfeld 
 
 valles is clearly wrong, and if follows, merely changing con- 
 
 we turn to Isa. xl. 4, irdv 6pos vertit into convertet. This verse 
 
 Kal pombs TaTreivud-fjaerai, and is clearly corrupt. Fritzsche 
 
 Eth. En. i. 6, /cai a€i(rd-/)(T0VTa.i. emended tenebris convertent into 
 
 Kai veaovvTM Kal SiaKvBijaovTai, tenebras convertet, convertit in- 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER X. 4-6 
 
 87 
 
 indignationem et 
 iram propter filios 
 4 suos et tremebit 
 terra usque ad fi 
 nes suas concutie 
 tur" et alti montes 
 humiliabuntur 
 92a et concutientur 
 et conYalles cadent 
 
 to convertet, and omits et before 
 eonfringentur. Schmidt-Merx 
 deal drastically with the text. 
 They omit et in tenebris conver- 
 tent se and et tota convertit se 
 in sanguine as marginal glosses 
 from Acts ii. 20. But they 
 failed to remark that Joel ii. 31 
 is the source of these phrases, and 
 not Acts ii. 20. They further 
 object (and I believe rightly) 
 to the expression cornua lunae, 
 and think that cornua belongs 
 to sol. Hence they read : et 
 cornua solis eonfringentur et 
 luna non dabit lumen. It is 
 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 always used 
 of the sun. Cf. Eccles. xii. 2 ; 
 Isa. xiii. 10 ; Joel ii. 31, iii. 
 15 ; Mt. xxiv. 29 ; Mk. xiii. 24 ; 
 Lk. xxiii. 45 ; Acts ii. 20 ; Rev. 
 
 5 sol non dabit lumen 
 et in tenebris con 
 vertent se cornua 
 lunae et confringen 
 tur et tota conver 
 tit se in sanguine et 
 orbis stellarum con 
 
 6 turvavitur" et ma 
 
 re usque ad abyssum 
 
 vi. 12, ix. 2. Hence we have 
 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 
 only. Cf. Ezek. xxxii. 7 ; Mt. 
 xxiv. 29; Mk. xiii. 24. This 
 may be due to the paranomasia 
 in the phrase in Hebrew : m" 
 niK tn'-n'?. Thirdly, tota con- 
 vertet se in sanguinem is only 
 used of the moon : Joel ii. 31 ; 
 Actsii. 20 ; Eev. vi. 12. Finally, 
 I accept Merx's view that cornua 
 eonfringentur must be connected 
 with sol. Hence the passage 
 should read — 
 
 (Et) cornua solis eonfringentur 
 et in tenebras convertet 
 se 
 
 Et luna non dabit lumen 
 et tota convertet se in san- 
 guinem. 
 
 Conturlaiitur. MS. contur- 
 vavitur. 
 
 6. Decedet. MS. decedit. 
 
 Etf antes. MS. ad fontes. 
 
 Bxarescent. So Haupt, from 
 MS. expavescent. Cf. Test. Levi 
 iv. iSdruv l,'ripa{,voiUvav. 
 
88 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 7. Quia exurget Summus, Deus aeternua solus, 
 Et palam veniet ut vindicet gentea, 
 
 Et perdet omnia idola eorum. 
 
 8. Tunc feUx eris tu Istrahel, 
 
 Et ascendes supra cervices [et alas] aquilae, 
 Et implebuntur (dies luctus tui). 
 
 9. Et altabit te Deus, 
 
 Et faciet te herere caelo stellarum, 
 t Loco habitationis eorum t : 
 
 10. Et conspicies a summo et videbis inimicos 
 
 tuos in Ge(henna), 
 Et cognosces illos et gaudebis, 
 Et ages gratias et confiteberis creatori tuo. 
 
 11. Nam tu, Jesu Nave, custodi verba haec et 
 hunc librum. 12. Erunt enim a morte — receptions 
 — m(ea) usque ad adventum illius tempora CCL quae 
 fient. 13. Et hie cursus (erit) horum quern con- 
 venient donee consummentur. 14. Ego autem ad 
 dormitionem patrum meorum eam. 15. Itaque tu, 
 Jesu Nave, (confortare, et) firma te (nam te) elegit 
 Deus esse mihi successorem ejusdem testamenti. 
 
 7. Exurget. MS. exurgit. 9. Altabit. MS. altavit. 
 Aeternus solus. Schmidt-Merx Faciei te herere. Herere, i.e. 
 transpose after deus in ver. 9. liaerere = KoWacrBai, which may 
 
 8. Implebuntur. In the la- be a rendering of y:j or i^:: (Job 
 cuna already recognised by Merx xli. 16). 
 
 and Fritzsche, following Dr. 9-10. Loco habitationis eorum. 
 
 Cheyne's apt suggestion, I have For my emendation of this oor- 
 
 supplied dies luotus tui from rupt text, see exegetical note on 
 
 Isa. Ix. 20, where the context, X. 9. Schmidt-Merx think the 
 
 as he points out, deals with words are transposed, and write 
 
 Israel's glorious future on earth, them as follows : et videbis 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER X. 7-15 
 
 89 
 
 decedit ad fontes 
 aquarum deficient 
 et flumina expaves 
 
 7 cent' quia exurgit 
 summus deus aeternus 
 solus et palam ve 
 
 niet ut vindicet gen 
 tes et perdet om 
 nia idola eorum 
 
 8 Tunc felix eris tu is 
 trahel et ascendes 
 supra cervices et 
 alas aquilae et in 
 
 h 9 plebuntur et alta 
 
 vit te deus et faciet te 
 herere caelo stella 
 rum loco habitatio 
 
 10 nis eorum' et cons 
 pi^es a summo et vi 
 
 des inimicos tuos 
 in terram et cognos 
 ces illos et gaudebis 
 et agis gratias et con 
 fiteberis creator! 
 
 11 tuo nam tu jesu na 
 ue custodi verba 
 haec et hunc librum 
 
 12 erunt enim a morte 
 receptionem usque 
 ad adventum illius 
 tempora 'ccl" quae 
 
 13 fiunt et hie cursus 
 . . . horum quern 
 conveniunt donee 
 consummentur 
 
 14 Ego autem ad dormi 
 tionem patrum me 
 
 100a 15 orum eram itaque 
 
 inimicos tuos in terra et con- 
 spicies a summo locos habita- 
 tionis eorum. 
 
 10. Conspicies. MS. oonspiges. 
 Videbis. MS. vides. Oe{henna). 
 So I emend and restore tlie cor- 
 rupt text terram. See exegetical 
 note on X. 10 for the grounds for 
 so doing. Ages. MS. agis. 
 
 11. Nam. Hilgenfeld, jam. 
 
 12. A morte — receptione — 
 m{ea). VolkmarandFritzsche,a 
 morte et receptione mea; Hilgen- 
 
 feld, a morte mea ; Schmidt- 
 Merx, a receptione mea = d7rd 
 
 Fient. So Hilgenfeld, from 
 MS. fiunt. 
 
 13. Convenient. MS. con- 
 veniunt. This is a peculiar use 
 of this word. Ronsoh thinks 
 that it represents neSodeiovinv. 
 Fritzsche emends into confident. 
 
 1 i. Sam. So all editors, from 
 eram. 
 
 15. {Oonfortare et) firma tc 
 
90 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 XI. Et cum audisset Jesus verba Moysi tam 
 scripta in sua soriptura (quam) omnia quae prae- 
 dixerat, scidit sibi vestimenta et procidit ad pedes 
 Monse. 2. Et hortatus est eum Mouses et ploravit 
 cum eo. 3. Et respondit illi et dixit Jesus : 4. 
 " Quid me Solaris, domine Monse ? et quo genere 
 solabor de qua locutus es voce acerba quae exivit 
 de ore tuo, quae est plena lacrimis et gemitibus, 
 quia tu discedis de plebe ist(a) ? 5. (Sed ec)quis 
 locus recipiet (jam) te ? 6. Aut quod erit monu- 
 mentum sepulturae ? 7. Aut quis audebit corpus 
 tuum transferre inde ut homo de loco in locum ? 
 8. Omnibus enim morientibus secus aetatem sepul- 
 turae suae sunt in terris ; nam tua sepultura ab 
 oriente sole usque ad occidentem et ab austro 
 usque ad fines aquilonis : omnis orbis terrarum 
 
 {nam te). So I have restored (Quam). I have added quam 
 
 with Schmidt-Merx. For firma after soriptura ; Schmidt-Merx 
 
 the MS. reads forma. The text and Fritzsche add it after omnia, 
 
 here unquestionably goes hack HUgenfeld makes no addition, 
 
 to the phrase with which Moses but takes tam = oiiriii. 
 
 addressed Joshua in Deut. xxxi. Praedixerat. MS. praedix- 
 
 6, 7, 23 ; Josh. i. 6, 7. See erant. 
 
 critical note on I. 10. This Monse. MS. gives meos. 
 
 phrase is of frequent occurrence Schmidt-Merx, Mose ; but see 
 
 later, 1 Chron. xix. 13, xxii. 18, erit. note on III. 11. Volkmar, 
 
 xxviii. 20 ; 2 Chron. xxxii. 7 ; Moysis ; Hilgenfeld, Mosis. 
 
 Dan. X. 19, xi. 1 ; 1 Maco. ii. 64 ; 2. Hortatus est = Trap£K(i\€ae. 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 13. Bum. So Ronsch, Hilgenfeld 
 
 For forma Hilgenfeld reads and Schmidt-Merx, from cum. 
 
 firma, presumably meaning fir- Monses. MS. Monse. Fritzsche ; 
 mare; Volkmar, firma te. 
 
 XI. 1. Moysi = 'M.uv(XTj. i. Solaris . . . solabor. So 
 
 Tam. Volkmar adds dicta Schmidt-Merx and Hilgenfeld, 
 
 quam. from MS. celares . . . eelabor. 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER XI. i-8 
 
 91 
 
 100a tu jesu naue forma te 
 elegit deus esse mihi 
 successorem ejusdem 
 
 XL testamenti" et cum 
 audisset jesus verba 
 moysi tam scripta 
 in sua scriptura om 
 nia quae praedixerant 
 scidit sibi vestimen 
 ta et procidit ad pe 
 
 2 des meos et horta 
 tus est cum monse 
 et ploravit cum eo 
 
 3 Et respondit illi et 
 
 4 dixit iesus' quid me ce 
 lares domine monse 
 
 et quo ^enere cela 
 bor de qua locutus 
 est voce acerva que 
 exivit de ore tuo 
 quae est plena la 
 
 Volkmar, zelaris . . . zelabor. 
 Quid me Solaris . . . solabor= 
 tL fjie TrapeKaXeh ical tIvl rpdwtt} 
 irapa/cXijff-^cro/iai = TNI 'jnonj nd'? 
 Dn:ni<. 
 
 De quo. Volkmar, Schmidt- 
 Merx, and Fritzsohe emend into 
 de qua. 
 
 M. MS. est. 
 
 Acerba quae. MS. aoerva que. 
 
 5. IsHa. Sed ecjquis. So I 
 
 crimis et gemitibus 
 quia tu discedis de 
 h plebe ist 
 
 5 quis locus recipi^ .... 
 
 6 te aut quod erit mo 
 numentum sepul 
 
 7 turae aut quis aude 
 vit corpus tuum trams 
 ferre in eut homo 
 de loco in locum 
 
 8 Omnibus enim mori 
 entibus secus aeta 
 tem sepulturae su 
 ae sunt in terris 
 nam tua sepultura 
 ab oriente sole usque 
 ad occidentem" et 
 
 ab austro usque ad fi 
 nes aquilonis omnis 
 orbis terrarum se 
 pulcrum est tuum 
 
 restore. Hilgenfeld ist(a modo) ; 
 Volkmar, ist(a multa) ; Schmidt- 
 Merx, ist(a et jam) ; Fritzsohe, 
 ist(a verum). 
 
 iiecipiet {jam). So I restore 
 with Fritzsohe. Hilgenfeld, re- 
 cipiendi ; Schmidt-Merx, re- 
 cipiet (nunc). 
 
 7. Audebit. MS. audevit. 
 Inde ut. So Gutsohmidt, from 
 in eut. 
 
92 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 sepulcrum est tuum. 9. Domine, abis, et quis 
 nutriet plebem istam ? 1 0. Aut quis est qui 
 miserebitur illis, et quis eis dux erit in via? 11. 
 Aut quis orabit pro eis, nee patiens ne unum 
 quidem diem, ut inducam illos in terrain ata- 
 vorum ? 12. Quomodo ergo potero plebem banc 
 tanquam pater unicum filium, aut tanquam domiaa 
 filiam virginem, quae paratur dari viro, quern timebit, 
 corpus custodiens ejus a sole et ne (sint) scalciati 
 pedes ejus ad eurrendum supra terram. 13. (Et 
 qui) [de voluntate eorum] praestabo illis ciborum 
 et potui secus voluptatem voluntatis eorum ? 14. 
 
 9. Ahis. So Schmidt-Merx 
 and Hilgenfeld, from ab his. 
 Nutriet. MS. nutrit. 
 
 11. Nee patiens ne unum diem 
 = oCd^ TTapieh ovde/iiav rifx^pav. 
 Now Trapiek = ' ' permitting " 
 or "omitting." The Latin 
 translator wrongly followed the 
 former meaning. Hence for 
 patiens read praetermittens. 
 Hence there is no need to sup- 
 pose a confusion of Trdaxoiv and 
 irapTjaoiv with Fritzsche, or 
 regard patiens as a corruption 
 of fatiscens with Schmidt-Merx. 
 I"or unum, MS. reads uno. 
 
 Diein. Hilgenfeld and 
 Schmidt-Merx change into 
 die. 
 
 Atavorum. So Ronsch, from 
 araborum. Cf I. 8. Schmidt- 
 Merx, abavorum ; Ewald, 
 Amorreorum. 
 
 12. Fotero pleiem, hanc. This 
 I take to he~Svvao'T€6(roj rdv 
 Xabv TovTov = nin DSI3 ^m«. 
 Swaareiav is a rendering of 
 
 b^D 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. 
 
 For ergo potero, Hilgenfeld 
 first suggested regere potero, then 
 ego potero. He also suggests 
 that potero may be corrupt for 
 procure. Volkmar thinks that 
 potero = SwiJ(ro/icw, which is cor- 
 rupt for 7]rff}(70^ai or bd-ryyTjcropuiL, 
 According to Rbnsoh {Z.f. W. T. 
 1868, p. 105), potero = 5iiniT7i(j-M 
 or Svva.(TTei<jui; {Z.f.W.T. 1869, 
 pp. 226-228), dvvijaonai. or 
 SvvaaTeiiTO}. 
 
 Domina fiUam virginem. So 
 I emend filiam dominam virgi- 
 nem. Volkmar took Kvpiav = 
 begotten of his own body, 
 but this is impossible. Merx 
 reads filia dominam virginem. 
 Fritzsche, filiam domina virgi- 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER XI. 9-14 
 
 93 
 
 9 domine ab his 
 
 Et quis nutrit plebem 
 
 10 istam aut quis est 
 qui miserebitur il 
 lis et quis eis dux erit 
 
 99a in via" aut quis ora 
 bit pro eis' nee pati 
 ert.' ne uno quidem 
 diem ut inducam il 
 los in terram ara 
 
 12 borum" quomodo 
 ergo potero plebem 
 banc tanquam pa 
 ter unicum filium 
 aut tanquam filiam 
 
 dominam virginem 
 quae paratur tali vi 
 ro quae timebat cor 
 pus custodiet ejus 
 a sole et ne scalcia 
 ti pedes ejus ad cur 
 
 13 rendum supra ter 
 
 ram de vo 
 
 luntatem eorum 
 praestabo illis ci 
 borum et potui se 
 cus voluntatem 
 voluntatis eorum 
 
 14 enim illorum 
 
 h erant 'c milia" nam 
 
 nem. If we could reject the 
 second tanquam, we might then 
 take dominam to be a rendering 
 of Kvplav, and this in turn to be a 
 corruption of Cipalav. The sense 
 then would be admirable, " as a 
 father (his) only son or his 
 comely virgin-daughter. " 
 
 Dari mro. So I emend tali 
 viro. Of. Ecclus. vii. 25, IkSov 
 dvyar^pa . . . /cat djfdpl avverc^ 
 SiipTiffcu air^v. These words 
 were most probably before the 
 wi'iter, as he has clearly drawn 
 upon vii. 24, irpoffex^ tc^i ctijuart 
 airCiv. Volkmar reads (nup)t(i)- 
 ali viro ; Schmidt-Merx, thalamo 
 viri ; Ebnsch, tradi viro. 
 
 Quern timebat. So Eonsoh, 
 from quae timebat, comparing 
 Ecclus. xxvi. 28 (MSS. H., 248 ; 
 
 Syr. Vers, and Arab.), which 
 seems to have been in the mind 
 of the writer: Bvyirrip Si eia- 
 Xr^t^wv Kal rbv&vdpa ^z/rpaTriJtrerat. 
 Rbnsch thus restores the Greek 
 Trapdhov TrapaffKeva^oiUvqv ^kSo- 
 dijvaL dvSpl 8v ^vrpairiiaeTai, 
 
 13. {Etqui). So Volkmar and 
 Schmidt - Merx supply the 
 lacuna ; Hilgenfeld, quid. 
 
 \_De voluntate eorum]. I have 
 bracketed this phrase as a ditto- 
 graphy. 
 
 Secus voluptatem voluntatis 
 «or«m = DJisn j'Dn^. Cf. Ephes. 
 i. 5. MS. secus voluntatem 
 voluntatis eorum. Other editors 
 read secus voluntatem voluptatis 
 eorum. 
 
 14. [Firil So Hilgenfeld 
 supplies the lacuna, comparing 
 
94 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 (Viri) enim illorum erunt (D)C milia, nam isti 
 in tantum increverunt in tuis orationibus, domine 
 Monse. 15. Et quae est mihi sapientia aut 
 intellectus in domo (Domini) verbis aut judicare 
 aut respondere? 16. Sed et reges Amorreorum 
 turn audebunt expugnare nos, (et) credentes jam 
 non esse t semet t sacrum spiritum dignum Domino, 
 multiplicem et incompraehensibilem, dominum verbi, 
 fidelem in omnia, divinum per orbem terrarum 
 profetem, consummatum in saeeulo doctorem jam 
 non esse in eis, dicent : ' Eamus ad eos. 
 17. Si inimici impie fecerunt semel adhuc in 
 
 Exod. xii. 37 ; Volkmar, oopia ; 
 Schmidt-Merx, numerus. 
 
 Erunt. So Fritzsche, from 
 erant. 
 
 (D) I have supplied from 
 Exod. xii. 37. 
 
 Increverunt. So Hilgenfeld, 
 from qui creveruut. Ronsch 
 emends qui into quidera. Hence 
 in tantum quidem = els toitovtov 
 
 TL. 
 
 15. (Domini). So, rightly, 
 former editors supply the lacuna 
 in the MS. 
 
 16. Turn audebunt expugnare 
 nos. So I emend cum audierint 
 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 : eamus ad eos. Schmidt- 
 Merx add audebunt after 
 audierint : cum audierint aude- 
 bunt expugnare nos. 
 
 Non esse semet. Hilgenfeld 
 takes semet = iavrov, corrupt for 
 iavTuv. Hence non esse semet 
 is derived from oiJk^ti elvat. 
 eavTuv = ' ' was no longer amongst 
 them." Volkmar regards semet 
 = avT6v, corrupt for airrdv, i.e. 
 Moses. Wieseler emends it 
 into semel, Schmidt-Merx into 
 semen, and Ronsch into senem. 
 Schmidt - Merx supply in eis 
 before semen. Semet is corrupt, 
 I think, for secum = (riv avroU, 
 a miswriting of criv aiiroU. 
 Thus non esse cum eis is the 
 same practically as the phrase 
 at the close of the verse, non 
 esse in eis. 
 
 Jam non esse in eis. Schmidt- 
 Merx brackets. Dicent. MS. 
 dicena. 
 
 17. Inimici. Schmidt-Merx, 
 enim ei. 
 
 Quomodo Monses ferebat mag- 
 nus nuntius. So I emend quo- 
 modo Monse erat magnus 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER XI. 15-17 
 
 95 
 
 isti in tantum qui 
 creverunt in tuis 
 orationibus domine mon 
 
 15 se" et quae est mihi 
 sapientia aut intelle 
 lectus in domo .... 
 verbis aut judicare 
 aut respondere 
 
 16 sed et reges amor 
 reorum cum audie 
 rint expugnare nos 
 credentes jam non 
 esse semet sacrum 
 
 nuntius ; for the reading of the 
 MS. does not give the sense re- 
 quired by the context. The 
 words quomodo Moses erat 
 must be connected either with 
 non est defensor: "they have 
 no advocate like unto Moses" ; 
 or with qui ferat pro eis praeces : 
 "to oifer prayers for them as 
 Moses offered." If we pursue 
 the latter course, we must 
 emend erat into ferebat. Then 
 quomodo Mouses ferebat praeces 
 will = ni'7sn nb-j nttia -im:i. This 
 I have done above. But the 
 latter course may be prefer- 
 able. ' ' No advocate like Moses" 
 is more suitable to the context. 
 Hence the error originated 
 with the Greek translator, who 
 misrendered ^lun iN^nn nt!'D3 = 
 "like unto Moses the great 
 messenger." Previous editors 
 have failed to remark this diffi- 
 culty. 
 
 spiritum dignum domino 
 multiplicem et in 
 conpraehensibilem 
 dominum verbi fidelem 
 in omnia divinum 
 per orbem terra 
 rum profetam con 
 summatum in sae 
 culo doctorem jam 
 non esse in eis di 
 98a cens Eamus ad e 
 17 OS si inimiei impie 
 fecerunt semel ad 
 
 Intuens potentem omnis orhis 
 terrarum cum misericordia. The 
 MS. gives the corrupt text, 
 intuens homini potentem orbem 
 terrarum cum misericordia. 
 First of all, cum misericordia is 
 clearly an adverbial phrase 
 qualifying potentem. Hence 
 potentem is to be regarded as a 
 participle governing orbem and 
 qualified by cum misericordia. 
 It is thus obvious that homini 
 cannot be compounded with it. 
 It can only then belong to orbem 
 terrarum. Hence we must read 
 either omnem orbem terrarum 
 or omnis orbis terrarum. The 
 text thus runs : intuens poten- 
 tem omnis orbis terrarum cum 
 misericordia = iij,§\iiruv eh rbv 
 dwaaredovra iravrbs roO Kdtrfiov 
 iv 4\ei]iiO(njvri = hman hil nviBi 
 D'Dmi nViyn ^j-nx. See note on 
 potero in XI. 12. For Greek 
 expressions justifying the above, 
 
96 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 Dominum suum, non est defensor illis qui ferat 
 pro eis praeces Domino, quomodo Monses ferebat 
 magnus nuntius, qui singulis horis, diebus et 
 noctibus, habebat genua sua infixa in terra, orans 
 et intuens potentem omnis orbis terrarum cum 
 misericordia et justitia, reminiscens testamentum 
 parentum et jurejurando plaoando Dominum.' 18. 
 Dicent enim : ' Non est cum eis : eamus itaque et 
 confundamus eos a facie terrae.' 19. Quod ergo 
 fiet plebi isti, domine Mouse ? '' 
 
 XII. Et postquam finivit verba Jesus, iterum 
 procidit ad pedes Monsi. 2. Et Monses prendit 
 manum ipsius et erexit ilium in cathedra ante se, et 
 respondit et dixit illi : 3. " Jesu, te ne contemnas, 
 sed praebe te securum et adtende verbis meis. 4. 
 Omnes gentes quae sunt in orbe terrarum Deus 
 
 cf. 3 Maco. ii. 7, tcJ t^s aTcicn]! arisen from the corruption of (ly 
 
 KTiffeios Svvao-TeOovTt ; v. 7, rdv into ho. 
 
 . . . T!-dtn]s SwdfieuK dwaareiovTa ; Reminiscens = dva/iifiv-^a-Koiv. 
 
 Ezra viii. 13, 6 rd irdpra So Ebnsch points out (.^./. IF. T. 
 
 dvva(rT€ijo)v deos, 1874, p. 662). 
 
 Previous editors tried many Placando = plaoaus. See 
 
 ways of emendation, of which critical note on accipiendo 
 
 the best are : Hilgenfeld, poenas in V. 5. 
 intuens omnipotentem orbem 18. Confundamus. We must 
 
 terrarum, which, he thinks, here translate, not the Latin 
 
 implies elaopwv rbv wivra Kpar- word, but the Greek a-vyx€io/u,ei/, 
 
 ouvra Tbv KbtTp^v, Is this con- which it implies, 
 ceivable? Schmidt-Merx, in- Facie. MS. faciae. 
 tuens omni potent(ia tenent)em XII. 2. Monses. MS. Mouse, 
 orbem terrarum = dTe»'(cras irai-ri 3. lesu te ne. So Hilgenfeld j 
 
 aOipei. kt\ = Aramaic, h'n Vdh ncn from lesus et ne. Sohmidt- 
 
 Kohu nnN mS. It is possible Merx, lesu, set ne. 
 that omnem does not belong to 4. Orbe. MS. ore. 
 the text at all. It may have Ut nos. So Eonsoh from 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTERS XI. i8— XII. 4 97 
 
 hue in dominum suum 
 non est defensor 
 illis qui ferat pro 
 eis praeces domino 
 quomodo mouse 
 erat magnus nunti 
 US" qui singulis horis 
 diebus et noetibus ha 
 bebat genua sua in 
 fixa in terra orans 
 et intuens homini 
 potentem orbem 
 terrarum cum mi 
 sericordia et jus 
 titia reminiscens 
 testamentum pa 
 rentunr et jure 
 jurando placando 
 1 8 dominum dicent enim 
 non est ille cum eis 
 
 eamus itaque et con 
 b fundamus eos a fa 
 
 19 ciae terrae quod 
 ergo fiet plebi isti 
 
 XII. domine mouse et post 
 quam finivit ver 
 ba iesus iterum pro 
 cidit ad pedes monsi 
 
 2 Et mouse prendit 
 manum ipsius et e 
 rexit ilium in cathe 
 dra ante se" Et res 
 pondit et dixit illi 
 
 3 iesus • et ne contem 
 nas sed praebe te 
 securum et adten 
 
 4 de verbis meis om 
 nes gentes quae sunt 
 in ore terrarum 
 deus creavit et nos 
 
 et nos. Schmidt-Mevx, (illos) 
 et nos. Hilgenfeld connects 
 nos with praeyidit, Sehmidt- 
 Merx omit the following illos 
 et nos. 
 
 Usque ad. So Gutschmidt, 
 from ut ad. 
 
 Fraevidit et promovit cuncta. 
 So I emend praevidit et provovit 
 cum eis ; for in connection with 
 praevidit we require another 
 verb expressive pf action, as 
 
 7 
 
 in the preceding words, creavit 
 . . . praevidit, and in the clause 
 immediately subsequent, provi- 
 dit et ecce aiifertur (i.e. affertur). 
 Foreknowledge and action, or 
 thought and actuality, are one 
 in the divine mind. 
 
 Volkmar reads praevidit et 
 pronovit cum eis ; Sehmidt- 
 Merx, praenovit et providit 
 cunctis ; Hilgenfeld, praevidit 
 et pronovit cuncti§. 
 
98 ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 creavit ut nos, praevidit illos et nos ab initio 
 creaturae orbis terrarum usque ad exitum saeculi, 
 et nihU est ab eo neglectum usque ad pusillum, sed 
 omnia praevidit et promovit cuncta. 5. (Et) Do- 
 minus omnia quae futura essent in hoc orbe 
 terrarum providit et ecce affertur (in lucem. 6. 
 Dominu)s me constituit pro eis ut pro peccatis 
 eorum (orarem) et in(plorare(m) pro eis. 7. Non 
 enim propter meam virtutem aut [injfirmitatem, 
 sed temperantius misericordiae ipsius et patientia 
 contegerunt mihi. 8. Dico enim tibi, Jesu: Non 
 propter pietatem plebis hujus exterminabis gentes. 
 9. Lumina caeli fundamenta orbis facta et probata 
 a Deo et sub annulo dexterae Illius sunt. 10. 
 
 5. (El). Volkmar and Hil- Tenvperwritius. Over against 
 genfeld supply the lacuna with non propter meam virtutem aut 
 deus ; Fritzsohe, with ut. firmitatem we expect an expres- 
 
 Affertur. So Volkmar, from sion of God's will or purpose : 
 
 aufertur. not my worth, but God's pur- 
 
 5-6. {In IvAxra . . . Dmninu)s, pose or call. Now, if we re- 
 
 i.e. in lucem dfis. So I supply translate our text into Hebrew, 
 
 the lacuna, but there seems to we shall find that the Hebrew 
 
 be a large gap here in the work, thus arrived at furnishes the 
 
 though the MS. gives no hint of meaning we are in search of. 
 
 it. Hilgenfeld (itaque Dmnjs ; First of all, temperantius = 
 
 Volkmar (sic ds dmii)s. ^TrieiKws. Now, in the only two 
 
 6. Ut. Volkmar, from et. passages in the canonical books 
 (Orarem). So supplied by of the LXX. where iinei.KGis 
 
 Volkmar. occurs, it is a translation of Sn'. 
 
 Jm(pl)orare{m). So Ronsch. 1 Sam. xii. 22, iirieiKws Kipiot 
 
 Volkmar in(pr)ecare(r). Trpoa-eXd^ero vims iavri} eh Xo6j' 
 
 7. [Inyirmkatem. I have =Dv^ i"? DDno nitj'y'? " ^"Nin ; and 
 bracketed the in as an intrusion: 2 Kings vi. 3, Kal eTirev 6 eh 
 the context requires this. ^irieiKws 5e0po=N] '^Nin inun iDH'i 
 Schmidt - Merx, in firmitate i?\ Thus temperantius miseri- 
 mea. cordiae ' ' ... 
 
 ipsius . . , contigenint 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER XII. 5-10 
 
 99 
 
 praevidit illos et 
 nos ab initio crea 
 turae orbis terra 
 rum' ut ad exitum 
 saeculi et nihil est 
 97a ab eo neglectum us 
 que ad pusillum" 
 sed omnia praevidit 
 et provovit cum 
 
 5 eis . . dns omnia quae 
 futura essent in hoc 
 orbe terrarum pro 
 vidit et ecce aufer 
 
 tur 
 
 6 ... s me consti 
 
 tuit pro eis et pro pec, 
 catis eorum . . . 
 . . . et in . . ccare . . 
 
 7 pro eis" non enim 
 
 propter meam vir 
 tutem aut infirmi 
 tatem' sed tempe 
 rantius misericor 
 diae ipsius et pati 
 entia contegerunt 
 8 mihi' dico enira ti 
 bi iesu" non propter 
 pietatem plebis hu 
 jus exterminabis 
 
 b 9 gentes" omnia caeli 
 firmamenta ovbisfac 
 ta ut provata a deo 
 et sub nullo dexte 
 rae illius sunt 
 
 10 Facientes itaque et con 
 summantes manda 
 ta ei crescunt et bo 
 nam viam exigunt 
 
 mihi = ^leiKus <rvvi^r] iwi IXeos 
 aiTov = Man 'niN unpi '7'Nin. Here 
 we must either change Nipi into 
 it'ipn, 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 " = dig- 
 natus est vooare me in miseri- 
 oordia ipsius. 
 
 Patientia. We should add 
 ipsius. 
 
 9. Lumina. So Hilgenfeld, 
 
 from omnia. Fimdamenta. So 
 Hilgenfeld, from firmanenta. 
 Schmidt-Merx read, omnia enim 
 fundamenta orbis. 
 
 Et probata. MS. ut provata. 
 
 Annulo. So Gutschmidt, 
 from nullo. Ebnsch compares 
 Jer. xxii. 24, dTro<T(ppdyi(7fui 
 (Dnin) iwl T^s x"?^' ■'■^s Jefias 
 liov, Ecclus. xlix. 11. Schmidt- 
 Merx propose umbra. 
 
 10. Crescent . . . exigent. So 
 Schmidt-Merx, from crescunt 
 . . . exigunt, 
 
:oo ASSUMPTIONIS MOYSI FRAGMENTA 
 (Emended and Revised Text) 
 
 Facientes itaque et consummantes mandata Dei 
 crescent et bonam vitam exigent: 11. Nam 
 peccantibua et neglegentibus mandata carebunt bona 
 quae praedicta sunt, et punientur a gentibus multis 
 tormentis : 12. Nam (ut) in totum exterminet et 
 extinguat eos fieri non potest. 13. Exibit enim 
 Deus qui praevidit omnia in saecula, et stabilitum 
 est testamentum Illius et jusjurandum quod 
 
 11. Carebunt bona. So 12. (Ut). Added by Volkmar 
 Fritzsche, from oarere bonam. and Schmidt-Merx. 
 Volkmar, carent bona ea. Extinguat. So I emend relin- 
 
TEXT OF MS. CHAPTER XII. 11-13 
 
 lOI 
 
 11 nam peccantibus et 
 neglegentibiis man 
 data carere bonaw 
 quae praedicta sunt 
 Et punient?^r a gen 
 tibus multis tormen 
 
 12 tis "nam in totum ex 
 terminet et relin 
 
 quat eos fieri non 
 13 potest' exivit enim 
 deus qui praevidit om 
 nia in saecula et sta 
 bilitum est testa 
 mentum illius" et 
 jurejurando quod 
 
 quat, -whicli has no meaning 
 after exterminet. 
 
 13. Exihit. So Volkmar and 
 Schmidt-Merx, from exivit. 
 
 Jusjurandum. 
 jm'ando. 
 
 MS. 
 
 jure- 
 
ORIGINAL ASSUMPTION 
 
 OF MOSES 
 
ORIGINAL ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 Wb 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 
 editing, by means of which this Testament was adapted 
 to 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 
 original Assumption of Moses, thus foreshadowed in X. 12, 
 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. 
 
 Now, judging from the surviving Greek fragments, 
 which we shall give in extenso presently, the order of 
 
 105 
 
io6 ORIGINAL ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 the action in the original Assumption was probably as 
 follows : — 
 
 i. Michael is commissioned to bury Moses : 
 
 ii. 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). 
 
 To this claim Michael rejoins : " The Lord rebuke thee, 
 for it was God's Spirit that created the world and all 
 mankind.'' (Hence not Satan, but God was the Lord 
 of matter.) (b) Secondly, Satan brings the charge of 
 murder against Moses. (The answer to this charge is 
 wanting.) 
 
 iii. Having rebutted Satan's accusations, Michael then 
 proceeds to charge Satan with having inspired the serpent 
 to tempt Adam and Eve. 
 
 iv. Finally, all opposition having been overcome, the 
 Assumption takes place in the presence of Joshua and 
 Caleb, and in a very peculiar way. A twofold presenta- 
 tion of Moses appears : one is Moses " living in the 
 spirit," which is carried up to heaven ; the other is the 
 dead body of Moses, which is buried in the recesses of 
 the mountains. 
 
 This sketch is founded, as we have observed, on quota- 
 tions and references occurring in St. Jude and subse- 
 quent writers. We shall now reproduce it in the actual 
 phraseology of these writers. 
 
 i. TcXcvTijo-avTO? Iv TO) opcL Mtoutrca)? 6 dp^^ayycXos 
 Mip^a^X d7ro(rreA.A.£Tai ii,era.6rj(Tii>v to (rZ/xa. 
 
 ii. 'O ovv StdySoXos avT£i)(£ ^cAwv aTraTYJcrai, kiyaiv on' 
 (a) "'EfjLov l<TTi TO crw/jia, ujs Tij9 vXrjs Secriro^ovTi." 6 8c 
 apxdyytXo^ rep StaySoXo) SiaKpivofj-evos eiTrev* " 'E'jriTijU.iJtrai 
 (TOi Kvpios" OLTTO yap Trv(.vp,aTO<; ayiov avTov iravTES iKTio'dt)- 
 p,£V KaL OiTTO irpoiTioTrov ToS ®eov i^rjXOt to Trvev/xa avTOV, Koi 
 6 Koa-pLOi iyiviTO." (6) (Tore) o Sta/3oXos eir-qviyKe 'iyKKr]p,a 
 
ORIGINAL ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 107 
 
 8ta Tov Tov 'AiyvirTiov cj}6vov, (Xeytoj/)" (jiovevi ecrrtv o 
 MffiuoTjs' Stct rovTO ov (Tuy^MpeiTai aircS tux^'I' ttJs ewo/iou 
 
 iii. Tore o dpii^ayyeXos Mi;^a^\ tm SiaySoXo) StaXeyd/ievos 
 eiirei'" "Sw evcTTveucras tov o(^tv (uorre airtov yevicrOai t^s 
 7rapay8ao"£0)S Toi) 'ASolju, Kai T^s Evas. 
 
 iv. Kai TOV Mcowcrca avaXaix^avofxevov Sittov etSev 'Irycrous 
 6 ToC Naui;, Kat tov /jlIv fiCT dyyeXojv, tov Se em Ta opr; Trepl 
 Tas ^dpayyas KijSet'as df tov/itvov. elScv 6 'Itjo'oSs t^v 5eav 
 TttT^v KctTO) TTvev/JLari iTrapOel'S (Tvv koI tu XaXejS. 
 
 The passages from which we have constructed this sketch 
 are as follows. After each passage I enclose in brackets 
 numbers which show to what part of the above recon- 
 struction the passage in question belongs. 
 
 St. Jude 9. 6 Se Mi;;^a^X o dpp^dyyeXos, ore t(3 Sia- 
 jSdXo) hia.Kpiv6fx.evo<s SitXeytTO Trcpi tov Mwctcws o'cOjU.aTos, 
 ovK iToX/Jirjcri Kpicriv eTrevey/ceiv pXacnpr^fiia^, dXX' eiirev, 
 'EirLTifjL-qo'ai (tol Kvptos (ii.(a)). 
 
 Clement of Alexandria (Flor. 190-203 a.d.), Strom. 
 vi. 15. 'EtKOTcos apa Kai tov Mo)UO-ca a.va\aix,pavoit,ivov 
 SiTTOV EtSev 'It^o-oBs o toC Nai)^, /cat tov /acv ^£T dyycXajv, 
 TOV Se liri TO. opt} irepl Tcts ^dpayya? KTjSei'as d^tov//,£VOV. 
 ctSev 8c 'Itjo-oCs t^v 6eav TavTijv kcitu), irvivp.aTi eirapBtii 
 avv Kat TO) XaXe/3" dXX' ov;^ o/j-oiwi a/xijio) BeZvrai. dXX 6 
 /xev Kat ^Sttov kot^X^ev, iroXv to PpWov eTrayd/x.evos' 6 Se 
 «7rtKaTeX6o)v vCTepov Trjv Sdfav StijyetTO, ^v c^eaTO Sta^p^o-ai 
 8wi;6ets /iSXXov Owrepov, a.Ti Kat Ka6aptaT€po^ yevo/ievos 
 . . . 8i;XoiJcri7S, ot/^at, t^s to-Toptas, ;u.rj TravTtov etvat rrjv 
 yvSxTiv (iv.). 
 
 Adumhrat. in Ep. Judae (Zahn's Supplementum 
 Clementinum, p. 84). "Quando Michael archangelus 
 cum diabolo disputans altercabatur de corpore Moysi." 
 Hie confirmat Assumptionem Moysi (ii.). 
 
 Origen (185-254 a.d.). De Princip. iii. 2. 1 (Lom- 
 
io8 ORIGINAL ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 matescli, xxi. 303, 304). Et primo quidem in Genesi 
 serpens Evam seduxisse describitur, de quo in Adscensione 
 Mosis, cujus libelli meminit in epistola sua apostolus 
 Judas, Michael archangelus cum diabolo disputans de 
 corpora Mosis ait, a diabolo inspiratum serpentem catisam 
 exstitisse praevaricationis Adae et Evae (iii.). 
 
 In Josuavi Jiom. ii. 1 (Lommatzsch, xi. 22). Denique 
 et in libello quodam, licet in canone non liabeatur, 
 mysterii tamen hujus figura describitur. Eefertur enim 
 quia duo Moses videbantur, unus vivus in apiritu, alius 
 mortuus in corpore. In quo hoc est nimirum quod adum- 
 bratur, quia si intuearis literam legis inanem et vacuam 
 ah lis omnibus quae superius memoravimus, ipse est Moses 
 mortuus in corpore. Si vero potes removere legis vela- 
 men, et intelligere, quia lex spiritualis est, iste est Moses, 
 qui vivit in spiritu (iv.). 
 
 DidymusAlex. (309-394). In Epist. Judae Enarratio 
 (Gallandi, Bihliotheca Patrum, vi. 307). In reference 
 to Jude 9, Didymus writes : Adversarii hujus contem- 
 plationis praescribunt praesenti eisistolae et Moyseos 
 Assumptioni propter eum locum ubi significatur verbum 
 Archangeli de corpore Moyseos ad diabolum factum 
 (ii.(a)). 
 
 Evodius, contemporary of Augustine. Epist. ad Augustin. 
 258, vol. ii. p. 839, Ben. ed. 1836. Quanquam et in 
 apocryphis et in secretis ipsius Moysi, quae scriptura 
 caret auctoritate, tunc cum ascenderet in montem Ut 
 moreretur, vi corporis efficitur, ut aliud esset quod terrae 
 mandaretur, aliud quod angelo comitanti sociaretur. Sed 
 non satis urget me apocryphorum praeferre sententiam 
 illis superioribus rebus definitis (iv.). 
 
 Severus, Patriarch of Antioch (512-519). (Cramer, 
 Gat. in Epist. Cathol., p. 160). BodAo;u,€vos 6 ®eos toZs 
 viol's 'lo'parjX. Kol tovto VTrooel^ai 8ia o"(0/iaTtKo5 rvwov tivos. 
 
ORIGINAL ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 109 
 
 Trapta-Kivaa-tv iv ttJ tov M(i)V(re<os Ta<^^ ipavrjvaL vtt" 6^9aX- 
 fiovi avTots irpos Trjv inpurToXyjv tov crol/AaTOS koX ttjv Iv Ty 
 yrj viii.oii.L(Tix€vr}v KaraOecriv, dvOKTrd/Jievov cotnrep tov irovripov 
 BaifJLOva Koi OLVTiTrpaTTOvra' kol tovto) tov M.i)(arj\ iLyaOov 
 ayyEAov ovra TrpocruTravr^o'at koX a.7ro<70;8^o-ai" Kat p,rj 
 i^ov(Tia(TTiKS)^ iTTiTLfXTJaai, dWa Tw Kvpita tSiv oXuiv irapa- 
 )((i)prj(raL ttj'; xaT iKCivov Kpttreo)?, kol etTrev iiriTip.'qcrai trot 
 Kvptos (i. 1 and ii.). 
 
 Acta Synodi Nicaen. II. 20 (Fabrioius, i. 844). 'Ev 
 yStySXi'o) Sk ' AvaX-qij/ews 'M.tavacws Mi;(o^A. o dp;!^ayyeA.os 
 SiaXeyo/Aevos T<3 Siaj36\m \eycL' (Xtto yip 7rveijp.aT0S dyt'oi 
 airov Travrt? iKTicrBrjixev (ii.(a)). 
 
 Apollinarius {Catena Niceph. i. col. 1313). 'S,-qixui»Tiov, 
 oTi KaL iv Tois p^povots Ma)VO'£<DS yjirav koX dWai /St'/SXot, ax 
 vvv eicrtv atroKpv^oi, is Si^Xoi Kai 17 toB 'louSa etticttoX^' 
 oirov StSdo-KEi Kai Trcpt toC Mojuo-e'cos awp.aTO'; Kal evOa 
 fjLi/jLVTjTai, u)S e/c iraXatas Vpa(f>r]';, 'iSoii Kuptos ^^€t Kat to 
 €^^S (i.-iv.). 
 
 The following anonymous writings are from Cramer's 
 Catena in Epist. Cathol., pp. 160-163. P. 160. 6 Zl 
 Mt^a^X 6 dp;^dyyeXos, OTt to! Sta^oXo) SiaKpivop.evo'S SicXc- 
 yeTO 7r£pt tov M(ouo"e<i)S cru>fji,aTOs kol to. c^^s. AeUvvcri 
 KOL TTjV TraXatav crup.^ojj'oCo-av T^ Kaivrj, kol v<j> ivo<s ®eov 
 BeSofxevai' 6 yap StdySoXos dvT£t;!(€ ^eXtov diraTrju-ai, ort 
 e/xoi' TO am/jia is T^s vXijs Sco-Tro^oi/Tf /cat ijKovae Trapa 
 TOV dyyeXov to eiriTt/Aijo-at o-ot Kvptos' TovnarTi 6 Kvptos 
 Tcui' irvevpaTWV Koi Trdo-q's o-apKos (ii.(a)). 
 
 P. 161. AeyCTai 6 Mt^a^X Trcpt t^v tow Mu)i;o"€a)S 
 cu/xaTos 8ir]KovrjK€vaL Tatjji^v' tov StajSoXov Trpos toCto 
 di/^to-raiotevov (i.— ii.). 
 
 P. 163. TtXevTr;o-avTos €v T(3 opa Mojvo-eoJS, o Mt;)^a^X 
 dTTOO-TeXXeTai jatTa^j^o'tov to aZ/xa, etra tov Sta^SoXov KaTO. 
 TOV Mwvo-e'cus jSXao-^T/p,ovvTos, /cat <j>ovia dvayopevovT e'S Sta. 
 TO TraTa^ot tov Atyvjrrtov, ovic IviyKUiv Trjv Kar avTov 
 
no ORIGINAL ASSUMPTION OF MOSES 
 
 PXa(T^r)ixiav 6 ayyeXos, " cTTiTt/Aijo-at (Tol o 0eos ' irpos rov 
 Sia/SoXov €4>y] (i. and ii.(&)). 
 
 The next two scholia on Jude 9 were first printed by 
 C. P. Matthaei (Sept. Epp. Cathol., Riga 1782, pp. 238, 
 239), the first from D, an 11th century MS. TeX^vrri- 
 (TavTO^ iv T<3 opei Ma)u<7€o)s 6 dp^^ayytA.os Mi^a^X aTrcxTTe\- 
 Xtrai ii,era6rj(Tii>v to arS>ixa. 6 o5i' Sid^oXoi avTei)(e 6e\(av 
 dirOT^frat, Xeycor oti e/toj/ to crUfxa a)S T^s vA.iys SecTTro^oi'Ti' 
 ^Toi 8ta TO •jroTafat Tor Klyv-KTiov /3\a(r(j>r]ixduvTO's Kara toS 
 dyiou /cat (fxsvea dvayopevtravro's, /xi] iveyKiav rrjv Kar avToO 
 l3Xa(T(j)rjiJ.iav o dyycXos " 'ETrtTt/u.'^crat trot 6 ©eos," wpos Tov 
 SiajSoXov €<^i; (i. and ii.(a) + (&)). It was Eonsch that 
 first 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. XeycTat 6 Mt;^a^X Trj rov Mwucreus 
 aiL/jLaro'S SiaKoviKevai ra<f>rj, tow Sta^dXou irpos Tovro avOicrra- 
 fjievov (i. and ii.). 
 
 Finally, CEcumenius (Comm. in Ep. Jud., p. 340, cited 
 by Volkmar). rj Se ■;repi rov Mwucrctos (TiijuaTos Kpicri'; 
 icTTiv avTT]' XcycTttt Tov Mi)(a.rj\ Tor ap)(ayy€X.oi' ry rov 
 Mmvo-£(us ra(l>rj BiSiyjKovrjKivai. rov yap Sta/3oXov toijto p.^ 
 KaTaSe)(op,ivov, dXX' iiTKJiipovTO^ tyK\r]p,a 8ta rov rov AtyuTr- 
 Ttou <f>6voi', 0)9 alriov (so Hilgenfeld, from MS. airou) ovtos 
 rov Ma)W(r€a)s, Kal Std Tovro p,rj crvyxtopeio'Oai air<5 rvT(€LV t^s 
 ivvop,ov ra(j>^s (i. 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. 8 
 
 I HAVE just discovered that the text in I. 8, ut inducat 
 plebem in terrain, agrees with the Samaritan text, the 
 Syriac and Vulgate Versions of Deut. xxxi. 7, K''3n nns 
 pxrri'K ntn Oyn-nx, against the Massoretic, LXX., and 
 Targum of Onkelos, -which have NUn = " thou shalt 
 enter," and its equivalents, instead of N^3n, " thou shalt 
 cause to enter " or " thou shalt bring in," 
 
 in 
 
INDEX I 
 
 PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES AND OTHER 
 ANCIENT BOOKS DIRECTLY CONNECTED OR 
 CLOSELY PARALLEL WITH THE TEXT 
 
 Deuteronomy. 
 xxxi. 7. 
 7. 
 7. 
 xxxiii. 29. 
 
 
 Assumption 
 OF Moses. 
 
 I. 6. 
 
 I. 8. 
 
 I. 10. 
 
 X. 8. 
 
 Assumption 
 
 OF Moseh. 
 
 III. 5. 
 
 VIL 6. 
 
 7. 
 
 9. 
 
 Psalms of 
 Solomon.* 
 X. 6. 
 iv. 23. 
 3, 4, 5. 
 viii. 13. 
 
 1 Samuel. 
 viii. 3. 
 
 
 V. 5. 
 
 III. 10-13. 
 
 Apocalypse of 
 
 Baruch. 
 Ixxxiv. 2-5. 
 
 Pbalms. 
 
 cxlv. 17. 
 
 
 IIL 5. 
 
 
 
 EZEKIEL. 
 
 viii. 9, 10. 
 
 
 II. 9. 
 
 X. 4. 
 
 EthiopicIEnoch. 
 i. 6. 
 
 Daniel 
 xii. 1. 
 
 
 VIII. 1. 
 
 XL 16. 
 
 Wisdom. 
 • vii. 22. 
 
 ECCLEStASTICUS. 
 
 vii. 24. 
 
 25. 
 
 xxvi. 28. 
 
 
 XL 12. 
 
 ) > 
 ) 1 
 
 
 
 St. Matthew. 
 xxiv. 21. 
 29. 
 
 
 viir. 1. 
 
 X. 5. 
 
 XL 8. 
 
 Thucydides. 
 ii. 43. 
 
 Acts. 
 vii. 36. 
 
 
 III. 11. 
 
 
 
 2 Peter. 
 ii. 10-11. 
 
 Greek Fragment. 
 
 V. 3. 
 
 Source of 
 Quotation 
 Unknown. 
 
 Jude. 
 9. 
 16. 
 
 18. 
 
 Greek Fragment. 
 
 V. 5 ; vii. 7, 9. 
 vii. 1, 3. 
 
 
 
 * See Psalms of Solomon (Ryle and James's ed.), p. Ixx. 
 8 113 
 
INDEX II 
 
 NAMES AND SUBJECTS. 
 
 Advent of God, X. 12. 
 Amorites, XI. 11, 16. 
 Antiochus Epiphanes, VIII. 1. 
 AntiocMan persecution, VIII. 1-5. 
 ApoUinarius, quotation from the 
 
 Assumption in, p. 109. 
 Aramaic, alleged, original of the 
 
 Assumption, pp. xxxix-xli. 
 
 Baldenspergbk, pp. xxvii, Ivii, 
 
 12, 25. 
 Baruch, Apocalypse of, quoted on, 
 
 III. 10-13 ; IV. 8. 
 Black, J. S., p. X. 
 Briggs, p. xxviii. 
 
 Calamities of Judah ascribed to 
 
 Israel, III. 5. 
 Caleb, pp. 106, 107. 
 Canaan, conquest of, II. 2. 
 Carriere, pp. xxiv, 35. 
 Ceriani, pp. xiii, xviii. 
 Chasids, rise of the, V. 2, note. 
 Cheyne, pp. x, i2, 88. 
 Chronology of Book, p. Ix ; I. 2, 
 
 note. 
 Clement of Alexandria, quotations 
 
 from the Assumption m, p. 107. 
 Colani, pp. xxiii-xxiv, Iv, 24, 
 
 28, 35. 
 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; XI. 
 
 17 ; XII. 13. 
 Cyrus, IV. 6. 
 
 Daniel, IV. 1. 
 
 ,, prayer of, IV. 2-4. 
 Deane, p. xxvii. 
 De Faye, p. xxviii. 
 Didymus, quotation from the 
 
 Assumption in, p. 108. 
 Dillmann, pp. xxvi, Ivii, 23. 
 Drummond, pp. xxv, Ivii, 23. 
 
 Egypt, III. 11. 
 
 Emendations or restorations of 
 the Latin Version by — 
 Cheyne, X. 8. 
 Fritzsche, V. 5. 
 Gutschraidt, XI. 7 ; XII. 9. 
 Hilgenfeld, II. 4 ; VI. 6, 7 ; 
 VII. 1, 3, 8 ; X. 1 ; XI. 
 14 ; XIL 9. 
 Ronsch, VI. 3 ; VII. 1 ; IX. 
 2; XL 2, 11, 12; XIL 
 6. 
 Schmidt-Merx, I. 8 ; II. 4 ; 
 IIL 4; VIII. 1; IX. 1;X. 
 12, 15; XL 4, 9, 17. 
 Volkmar, V. 3 ; VII. 6, 10 ; 
 
 XII. 6. 
 Wieseler, V. 5. 
 the Editor, I. 10; II. 3, 4, 
 9; III. 12, 13; V. 6; VI. 
 1; VII. 4, 7; VIIL 2; 
 X. 5 ; XI. 12, 16, 17 ; 
 XII. 4. 
 ,, of the Latin through re- 
 translation into Greek, II. 7 ; 
 III. 4; IV. 3; VII. 7; XL 
 11. 
 
 114 
 
INDEX II 
 
 IIS 
 
 Emendations or restorations of 
 the Latin through retranslation 
 into Hebrew by — 
 
 Rosenthal, I. 10 [18 (?) ; IV. 
 
 9(?)]. 
 the Editor, I. 7, 10, 13 ; IV. 
 9 ; V. 5 ; VII. 4 (?) ; X. 
 3, 4, 9, 10. 
 Enoch, Ethlopic, quoted on, X. 
 
 4,9. 
 Evodius, quotation from the 
 
 Assumption in, p. 108. 
 Ewald, pp. xxi, Ivii. 
 Ezra, 4, quoted on, X. 5, 7, 10. 
 
 Fabrioius, p. xlviii. 
 Fast of three days, IX. 6. 
 Fritzsohe, pp. xx-xxi, Ivi, 73. 
 
 Gehenna, X. 10. 
 
 Geiger, pp. xxiv-xxv. 
 
 Gelasius of Cyzicum quoted, I. 
 
 14, note. 
 Gentiles, I. 13 ; IV. 9 ; VIII. 3 ; 
 
 X. 7. 
 God, titles of — 
 
 Creator, X. 10. 
 Eternal God, X. 7. 
 God, I. 10 ; IV. 2, 5 ; V. 4 ; 
 IX. 4; X. 9; XL 16; 
 XII. 4, 9, 10, 13. 
 God of Abraham, Isaac, and 
 
 Jacob, IIL 9. 
 God of our fathers, IX. 6. 
 God of heaven, II. 4. 
 Heaven, III. 8. 
 Heavenly One, X. 3. 
 King on the lofty throne, 
 
 IV. 2. 
 Lord, I. 6, 18 ; II. 2, 7, 9 ; 
 IIL 2, 5; V. 6; IX. 3, 7; 
 XL 15, 16, 17. 
 Lord of all, IV. 2. 
 Lord of their fathers, IV. 8. 
 Lord of heaven, IV. 4. 
 Lord of the world, I. 11. 
 Lord of lords, IX. 6. 
 Most High, X. 7. 
 
 Haupt, p. xxii. 
 
 Hausrath, pp. xxv, 35. 
 
 Hebrew original of the Assump- 
 tion, pp. xxxviii-xlv. 
 
 Heidenheim, pp. xxv, 48. 
 
 Hennas quoted, p. 5. 
 
 Herod the Great, VI. 2-7. 
 
 High priests, Hellenising, under 
 AntiochusEpiph., V. 3-4, notes. 
 
 High priests, Maccabean, VI. 1, 
 notes. 
 
 Hilgenfeld, pp. xviii-xix, xx, 
 xxii, xxxviii, Ivi, 23, 35, etc. 
 
 IsiiAEL, God's elect people, 
 pp. Iviii-lx ; IV. 2. 
 ,, solidarity of, pp. Iviii-lx. 
 ,, world created on behalf 
 
 of, I. 12. 
 ,, exalted into heaven, X. 9. 
 Israel's triumph over Rome, X. 8. 
 
 James, pp. xvii, 25. 
 Josephus, referred to, 
 passim. 
 „ quoted, p. I ; IL 3 ; VI. 3 ; 
 VIL3-10; VIILl, 3, 4, 
 5; IX. 6; XII. 6; p. 
 71. 
 Joshua, I. 6, 9 ; X. 11, 15 ; XI. 
 
 1, 3 ; XII. 1, 3, 8. 
 Judah carried into captivitv, 
 IIL 1-3. 
 ,, persecuted by the Seleu- 
 
 oidse, V. 1. 
 ,, persecuted by Antiochus 
 Epiph., VIII. 1. 
 Judgment, final, X. 3-8. 
 
 Keim, p. Ivi. 
 
 Law, the keeping of the, the end 
 
 of life, IX. 6. 
 Langen, pp. xxi. 
 Latin Version of the Assumption, 
 
 pp. xxviii-xxxvi. 
 
 Maccabean high priests, VI. 1. 
 
ii6 
 
 INDEX II 
 
 Maccabees, First, referred to, 
 
 passim ; quoted on V. 
 
 3-4 ; IX. 1, 6. 
 
 ,, Second, referred to, 
 
 passim ; quoted on, V. 
 
 1, 3-4 ; VIII. 4, 5 ; IX. 
 
 6 ; XI. 17. 
 
 Mediator, doctrine of a, I. 14, note. 
 
 Merit, no, belonging even to 
 
 Moses, XII. 7. 
 Merx, pp. xix-xx, xxxix-xli, 
 
 liii, Ivi, 23, etc. 
 Messianic kingdom, pp. Ix-Ixi. 
 Michael, X. 2. 
 MorfiU, p. xvi. 
 
 3, p. Iviii ; I. 1 ; III 11 ; 
 
 XI. 1, 2, 4, 14, 17, 19 ; 
 
 XII. 1, 2. 
 the death of, an ordinary 
 
 one in the Latin, i.e. the 
 "Testament," pp. xlvii- 
 xlviil ; I. 15, note ; 
 III. 13; X. 12, 14, 
 notes. 
 
 the intercessor or advo- 
 cate, here and hereafter, 
 XI. 17 ; XII. 6, note. 
 
 the mediator, I. 14, note ; 
 III. 12. 
 
 the great messenger, 
 XL 17. 
 
 the chief prophet, XL 
 16. 
 
 the most perfect teacher, 
 XL 16. 
 
 the pre-existenoe of, I. 14, 
 note. 
 
 the Assumption of Moses 
 preserved in Latin, 
 originally the Testa- 
 ment of, pp. xlv-1. 
 
 the Assumption of, — the 
 Latin Version, pp. xxviii- 
 xxxvi. 
 
 the Assumption of, — the 
 Latin Version, a transla- 
 tion from the Greek, 
 pp. xxxvi-xxxviii. 
 
 Moses, the Assumption of, — the 
 
 Greek, a translation from 
 
 the Hebrew, pp. xxxviii- 
 
 xlv. 
 , , , , its author, pp. li-liv. 
 , , , , its date, pp. Iv-lviii. 
 , , , , its relations to the New 
 Testament, pp. Ixii- 
 Ixv. 
 ,, the Original Assumption 
 
 of, preserved only in 
 
 Greek quotations, pp. 1, 
 
 105-110. 
 ,, the Original Assumption, 
 
 of, otherwise called Ad- 
 
 scensio Mosis, p. xlv, 
 
 note. 
 ,, the Original Assumption 
 
 of, otherwise called 
 
 Secreta Moysi, p. xlv, 
 
 note. 
 ,, other books of — Jewish 
 
 and Samaritan pp. xv- 
 
 xvi. 
 , , other books of — Christian, 
 
 pp. xvi-xvii. 
 ,, other books of — Gnostic, 
 
 pp. xvii-xviii. 
 
 Nbbtjchadnbzzak, III. 1. 
 Neubauer, p. 57. 
 New Testament use of the As- 
 sumption, pp. Ixii-lxv. 
 
 (EctrMENius, quotation from the 
 
 Assumption in, p. 110. 
 Origen, quotations from the 
 
 Assumption in, pp. 107-108. 
 
 Philipi'i, p. xxiii. 
 
 Philo, quoted on, p. liii ; IV. 9 ; 
 
 XIL 6. 
 Predestination, I. 13, 14 ; XII. 7, 
 
 Red Sea, the. III. 11. 
 Repentance to preach the Mes- 
 sianic kingdom, I. 18, note. 
 
INDEX II 
 
 117 
 
 Resurrection of the spirit only, 
 
 X. 9, note. 
 Reuss, pp. xxv-xxvi, Ivii. 22. 
 Eonsch, pp. xxii-xxiii, xxx, 
 
 xxxii, xlvi-xlvii, 9, etc. 
 Rosenthal, pp. xxvi, xxxix, Ivi, 
 
 24, 25, 36, 57. 
 
 Saduucebs, the, VII. 3-10, notes. 
 Sanday, p. xxx. 
 Satan, X. 1. 
 
 Schmidt-Merx. See Merx. 
 Schuohardt, pp. xxx sq. 
 Sohurer, pp. xxvi-xxvii, xxxix, 
 
 xlvi, li, Ivii, 23, etc. 
 Seleucidae, persecution under the, 
 
 V. 1-2, notes. 
 Severus of Antioch, quotation 
 
 from the Assumption in, p. 
 
 108. 
 Solidarity of Israel, pp. Iviii-lx. 
 Solomon, Psalms of (Ryle and 
 
 James, ed.), quoted on, III. 9 ; 
 
 VII. 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 ; X. 5, 9. 
 Stahelin, p. xxv. 
 
 Tabernacle, the, I. 7, 9 ; II. 4. 
 Taxo, IX. 1, notes. 
 Temple, the, II. 4, 8, 9 ; III. 2 ; 
 V. 3, 4 ; VI. 1, 9 ; VIII. 5. 
 
 Testaments XII. Patriarchs 
 
 quoted on, X. 2, 5. 
 Thomson, pp. xxvii-xxviii. 
 Thuoydides, quoted on, XI. 8. 
 Times, the COL., X. 12. 
 Transpositions of the text, 
 
 pp. xxxv-xxxvi. 
 Tribe of Levi, IX. 1. 
 Tribes, the ten, II. 3, 5 ; III. 6, 
 7 ; IV. 9. 
 ,, the twelve, II. 4. 
 ,, the two, II. 4 ; III. 3, 4, 
 5, 6 ; IV. 7, 8. 
 
 Vaeits, VI. 8, note. 
 
 Vassiliev's Anec. QrcBco-Byzant. , 
 
 pp. xlix-1. 
 Visitation of Israel, I. 18, note. 
 Volkmar, pp. xix sq., xxxviii, 
 
 Iv, 8, 25, 28, 35, etc. 
 
 WiESELEE, pp. xxiv, li, 23sg'., 36. 
 Wisdom, Book of, quoted on, 
 
 XI. 16. 
 Works, good, p. Ixi. 
 World created on behalf of 
 
 Israel, I. 12, note. 
 
 Year — symbol for a reign or 
 ruler, II. 3, note. 
 
 PRINTED BY 
 MOREISON AND QIEB LIMITED, EDINBURGH 
 
THEOLOGICAL WORKS 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 ADAM & CHARLES BLACK 
 
 SoHo Square 
 
 London, W. 
 
BY THE LATE 
 
 W. ROBERTSON SMITH, M.A., LL.D., 
 
 PROFESSOR OF ARABIC IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 LECTURES ON 
 
 THE RELIGION OF THE SEMITES. 
 
 THE FUNDAMENTAL INSTITUTIONS. 
 
 New Edition. Revised throughout by the Author. 
 
 Demy 8uo, price 16s. net. 
 
 THE OLD TESTAMENT IN THE JEWISH 
 CHURCH. 
 
 A COURSE OF LECTURES ON BIBLICAL 
 CRITICISM. 
 
 Second Edition. Revised and much Enlarged. 
 Demy 8uo, price 10s. 6d. 
 
 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL, 
 
 AND 
 
 THEIR PLACE IN HISTORY TO THE CLOSE OF THE 
 EIGHTH CENTURY, B.C. 
 
 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. 
 Post 8uo, price lOs, 6d. 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF 
 ISAIAH. 
 
 WITH AN APPENDIX CONTAINING THE 
 
 UNDOUBTED PORTIONS OF THE TWO 
 
 CHIEF PROPHETIC WRITERS 
 
 IN A TRANSLATION. 
 
 By the Rev. T. K. CHEYNE, M.A., D.D., 
 
 ORIEL PROFESSOR OF THE INTERPRETATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 
 
 AT OXFORD, AND FORMERLY FELLOW OF BALLIOL 
 
 COLLEGE, CANON OF ROCHESTER. 
 
 Demy 8uo, price 24s. 
 
 SKETCHES FROM EASTERN HISTORY. 
 
 By Professor T. NOLDEKE. 
 
 Translated by 
 
 JOHN SUTHERLAND BLACK, M.A., LL.D. 
 
 Demy 8uo, price 10s. 6d. 
 
 HISTORY OF ISRAEL AND JUDAH. 
 
 By Professor JULIAN WELLHAUSEN. 
 
 Third Edition. 
 Crou/n 8uo, price 6s, 
 
SOURCES OF THE APOSTOLIC CANONS. 
 
 By Professor ADOLF HARNACK. 
 
 Translated by LEONARD A. WHEATLEY. 
 
 With an Introductory Essay on the Organisation of the 
 Early Church and the Evolution of the Reader. 
 
 By the Rev. JOHN OWEN. 
 Demy 8uo, price 7s. 6d, net. 
 
 BY THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 
 CHRISTIANITY AND HISTORY. 
 
 Translated, with the Author's sanction, by 
 
 T. BAILEY SAUNDERS, with an Introductory Note. 
 
 Crown 8vo, price Is, 6d. net. 
 
 MONISM; OR, THE CONFESSION OF 
 FAITH OF A MAN OF SCIENCE. 
 
 By Professor ERNST HAECKEL. 
 
 Translated from the German by J. D. F. GILCHRIST. 
 
 Crown 8uo, price Is. 6d. net. 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 
 
 By ARCHIBALD DUFF, M.A. LL.D. 
 Demy 8uo, price 10s, 6d. 
 
 MANUAL OF THEOLOGY. 
 
 By THOMAS B. STRONG, M.A. 
 Crown 8uo, price 6s, 
 
NATURAL THEOLOGY 
 
 (THE GIFFORD LECTURES, 1891, 1893). 
 
 By Professor Sir GEORGE G. STOKES, Bart. 
 
 Two Vols, crown 8uo, price Ss. 6ct, each. 
 
 A SHORT HISTORY OF SYRIAC 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 By Professor W. WRIGHT. 
 Crown 8uo, price 6s. net. 
 
 PASSAGES OF THE BIBLE. 
 
 Chosen for their literary beauty and interest. 
 By J. G. FRAZER, 
 
 FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 Crown 8uo, price 6s. 
 
 HANDBOOK TO CHRISTIAN AND 
 ECCLESIASTICAL ROME. 
 
 By H. M. and M. a. R. T. 
 Part I.-THE CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS. 
 
 Crown 8uo, bound in bucliram, limp, with rounded corners, 
 Illustrated, price 7s. 6d. 
 
In the Press. 
 
 A DICTIONARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 BIBLE. 
 
 Edited by the Rev. T. K. Cheyne, M.A., LL.D., Oriel Professor of the 
 Interpretation of Holy Scripture at Oxford, and formerly Fellow of 
 Balliol College, Canon of Rochester; and J. S. Black, M.A., 
 LL.D, assisted by the following Contributors : — 
 
 Abbott (Rev. Dr. E. A. ). 
 
 Addis (Rev. W. £.). 
 
 Bennett (Prof.), Hackney. 
 
 Benzinger (Dr.), Tubingen. 
 
 Bevan (Prof.), Cambridge. 
 
 BOUSSET (Lie. W.), Gbttingen. 
 
 Brown (Prof. Francis), NewYork. 
 
 Bruce (Prof. A. B.), Glasgow. 
 
 Budde (Prof.), Strassburg. 
 
 BuRKiTT (F. C), Cambridge. 
 
 Charles (Rev. R. H.), Oxford. 
 
 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. 
 
 Caster (Dr. M.), London. 
 
 Gray(G. B.), Oxford. 
 
 Guthe (Prof.), Leipzig. 
 
 Haupt (Prof.), Johns Hopkins 
 University. 
 
 Headlam (Rev. A. C), Oxford. 
 
 Hogg (Rev. H. W.), Oxford. 
 
 James (Dr.), Cambridge. 
 
 jASTROW(Prof.), Pennsylvania Uni- 
 versity. 
 
 JEREMIAS (Dr.), Leipzig. 
 
 JiJLlCHER (Prof.), Marburg. 
 
 Kamphausen (Prof.), Bonn. 
 
 Kautzsch (Prof.), Halle. 
 
 Kennedy (Prof. A. R. S.), Edin- 
 burgh. 
 
 King (L. W.), British Museum. 
 
 KOSTERS (Prof.), Leyden. 
 
 M'Lean (N.), Cambridge. 
 
 Marti (Prof. Karl), Basel. 
 
 Massie (John), Oxford. 
 
 Meyer (Prof. Ed.), Halle. 
 
 Moore (Prof. G. F.), Andover. 
 
 Muller (Prof. "W. M.), Phila- 
 delphia. 
 
 Noldeke (Prof.), Strassburg. 
 
 RiDGEWAY (Prof.), Cambridge. 
 
 Robinson (Prof. J. A.), Cambridge. 
 
 Rogers (Prof. R. W.), Madison. 
 
 Sanday (Prof.), Oxford. 
 
 Schmidt (Prof. N.), Cornell Uni- 
 versity. 
 
 Schmiedel (Prof.) Zurich. 
 
 Shipley (A. E.), Cambridge. 
 
 Smith (Prof. G. A.), Glasgow. 
 
 Smith (the Late Prof. Robertson). 
 
 SociN (Prof.), Leipzig. 
 
 SoDEN (Prof. VoN), Berlin. 
 
 Spitta (Prof.), Strassburg. 
 
 Stade (Prof.), Giessen. 
 
 Thiselton - Dyer (Dr. W. T.), 
 Director, Royal Gardens, Kew. 
 
 Tiele (Prof.), Leyden. 
 
 Toy (Prof.), Harvard. 
 
 Wellhausen (Prof.), Marburg. 
 
 Whitehouse (Prof.), Cheshunt 
 College. 
 
 WooDHOUSE (W. J.), Oxford. 
 
 ZiMMERN (Prof.), Leipzig.