Calendrical data, social groups and animosity in early Jewish apocalyptic texts
ABSTRACT
Modern researchers do not have much information about the social contexts in which early Jewish apocalyptic texts originated and flourished, and have to rely on the texts themselves to try and recreate the circumstances in which the texts functioned. Within apocalyptic texts of the fourth to the second centuries BCE, undercurrents of animosity can be isolated, and in this article the way calendrical data is used by different texts to determine the important days of religious feasts is used to define such undercurrents. In this way it becomes possible to show how the respective apocalyptic books have nuances showing patterns of difference with other groups. These groups are not necessarily mutually exclusive and their differences are in many cases not incompatible. The books of Enoch, Daniel, Jubilees and Qumran literature share symbolism, ideas, genre, and literary techniques that distinguish it from other books. While the books of Enoch and Daniel each have distinctive emphases, they were not engaged in ideological warfare with each other, but rather with the temple hierarchy and Seleucid menace which was brought to a crisis point with the hellenisation process introduced by Antiochus Epiphanes IV.
1. INTRODUCTION
Systemic analysis of apocalyptic literature of the fourth to the second centuries BCE suggests that the groups responsible for the Enochic and Qumran literature, although distinct social groups, were all part of the same trajectory of thought (Boccaccini 2005:423). Ancient historians like Pliny, Dio of Prusa and Philo apply the name “Essene” to this movement. What does the movement consist of?
Apocalyptic texts are dramatic narratives that originate in crisis times when a group of people in the community become dissatisfied with the status quo or an aspect thereof, and start fighting it or react by withdrawing from the community. Apocalyptic groups yearn for a new order, a new world, and in their writings they find new rest and meaning (Davila 2005:36). The writings compensate for what they (as yet) do not have. The authors believe “that their own lives and the life of the community were part of the ongoing struggle between good and evil, that God had revealed to them the approaching end of the struggle, that they were preparing themselves for an active participation in the final climax, and even that they were already living somehow in the final phase” (García Martínez 2003:89).
In studying apocalyptic texts from this period, as part of second temple literature, a methodological question surfaces: How does one move from “texts” to “people,” and from “communities of texts” to “communities of people”? In the words of Nickelsburg, “texts are historical artefacts, created in time and space, by real human beings” (Nickelsburg 2001:2).
Ancient documents are the equivalent of ruins in archaeology, showing that a family of books indicates a family of people who handed them down (Kvanvig 2005:81). Books do not introduce readers to “intellectual phenomena” but to the lives and behaviour of people. The historian’s task is to take note of the plurality of philosophies and many voices in texts representing social groups in which the texts emerged, and which change people. Intellectual movements and social groups do exist behind and intertwined in texts, even though they are hard to detect.
Scholars today recognise the presence of an intellectual tradition since the period before the Maccabean revolt that was at odds with the priestly establishment in Jerusalem, sometimes called Enochic Judaism, the result of the politico-theological fervour of a social entity, the Enoch group, and that both Essene and Qumran origins are largely hidden in the Enochic literature (Boccaccini 2005:417).
It is necessary to make a clear methodological distinction between intellectual movements and social groups in order to reconstruct the history of Jewish thought. The different parts of the First Book of Enoch, Jubilees, the Temple Scroll, the Halakhic Letter, and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs are the product of a large intellectual movement, even though each set of documents was the product of a single social group. Thus the Enoch group and the Qumran group were components of the same intellectual trend (Collins 2003:77).
David Hellholm describes the function of apocalypses as “intended for a group in crisis with the purpose of exhortation and/or consolation, by divine authority” (Hellholm 1986:18). The appeal for divine intervention is necessitated because the world is believed to be in the grip of hostile powers.
In this article a single aspect in different documents, the use of calendrical data to determine dates for religious feasts, will be discussed with the aim of distinguishing between different social groups and their unique purposes and identifying undercurrents of animosity existing between the groups (Cross 1961:56).
2. APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE OF THE FOURTH TO THE SECOND CENTURIES BCE
The First Book of Enoch is a collection of traditions and writings composed between the fourth century BCE and the turn of the era, primarily in the name of Enoch, the son of Jared, mentioned only once in the Hebrew Bible, in Genesis 5:21-24 (VanderKam 1995:15; Boccaccini 2005:39).
The book is extant only in a Ge’ez (ancient Ethiopic) translation (Charles 1912:xci-xcii) of a Greek translation of the Aramaic originals which are attested by manuscript fragments from Qumran (Olson 2004; Nickelsburg &.VanderKam 2004). The corpus is supposed to be revelations given to Enoch, seventh after Abraham, and transmitted to his son Methuselah for the benefit of the righteous living in the end times. Enoch is introduced in the first book of the Tanakh as a man who “walked continuously with God [or the godly beings]; then he was no more, for God took him” (Gen 5:23-24). Enoch lived for 365 years (Gen 5:23) (Charlesworth 2005:443). The subjects discussed are the nature of the created structure of the cosmos and the origins, nature, consequences, and final judgment of evil and sin. Enoch is variously pictured as seer, sage, scribe, priest (or mediator), and eschatological judge. Charles (1893:vi) states, “To the biblical scholar and to the student of Jewish and Christian theology 1 Enoch is the most important Jewish work written between 200 BC and 100 AD”.
1 Enoch is governed by two myths. The primary myth is derived from Genesis 5 and its supposed Mesopotamian sources, that Enoch undertook journeys to the heavenly throne room and through the cosmos, and describes the wisdom he acquired in the revelations given during these excursions. The second myth concerns a primordial heavenly revolt with evil consequences for the human race. The prevailing assumption is that human beings are accountable for their conduct as well as their response to the revelations given in the book (Nickelsburg 1992:490-491).
The oldest part of the book is the Book of the Heavenly Luminaries or the Astronomical Book (chapters 72-82), stemming from the third century BCE (Black 1985:387). Enoch recounts to Methuselah his journey through the heavens and over the earth during which Uriel, the angel in charge of the luminaries, interpreted what Enoch was seeing (76:14; 79:1). The movement of the stars is described in order to establish the true calendar, which was a major cause of sectarian division in ancient Judaism (Collins 2003:69). The Astronomical Book is the first extra-biblical documentation for Enoch and includes far more information than the scanty reference in Genesis 5:21-24 to Enoch. Its eleven chapters assume to reproduce and explain the data given in Genesis 5, but they virtually explore one aspect of it, the reference that Enoch lived for the unusual number of 365 years. 1 Enoch 72-82 then presents extended heavenly revelations concerning astronomical matters related to the length of the year and assert that all these revelations were disclosed to Enoch by an angel. Most scholars accept that more material existed when the Priestly writer (P.) wrote Genesis 5, material that the editor chose not to use but applied by the author of 1 Enoch, or else that major developments occurred between the sixth and third centuries (VanderKam 1995:17).
The Book of the Watchers (chapters 1-36) dates from the second half of the third century but refers back to traditions stemming from the fourth century. As an introduction to the book it describes Enoch as a righteous man who saw heavenly visions interpreted by angels and now transmitted as a blessing to “the righteous chosen” living in the end time of eschatological judgment.
Later additions to the First Book of Enoch is Enoch’s Two Dream Visions (chapters 83-90); two pieces of Testamentary Narrative (81-1-82:3; 91); the Epistle of Enoch (chapters 92-105) schematising human history from the days of Enoch to the eschaton; an account of Noah’s birth (chapters 106-107); another book of Enoch (chapter 108) of uncertain origin and date, presenting a brief vision of the place of punishment as evidence of the coming judgment, calling on the suffering righteous to endure in anticipation of their glorification; the Book of Parables (or Similitudes) (chapters 37-71), the longest of the books and containing three parables dating from the last half of the first century BCE or the first three quarters of the first century CE; and the Book of Giants which is not part of the Ethiopic version but represented in fragments of six copies of the work among the Qumran Aramaic fragments and dating from the early first century BCE.
All the major sections of 1 Enoch are represented among the Qumran Aramaic manuscripts, with the exception of the Parables and chapters 83-84 and 108. Researchers conclude that the indication is that all component parts, including the Parables, were composed in Aramaic.
Literary genres represented in 1 Enoch as a forerunner of the Targum and Midrash with its rewriting of biblical narrative are apocalypse (chapters 17-36; 81:1-82:3; 85-90; 91:11-17; 93:1- 10; 108), as well as testament and testimony.
An important development in 1 Enoch from biblical literature is the dualism of the phenomenal world as a reflection of a hidden world whose complex realities can only be known if they are revealed (Collins 2003:70). Revealed knowledge of the hidden world of luminaries is necessary for right conduct, also in the cult. Correct calendrical practice thus played an enormous role in the exposition of the Enochic Torah in order to ensure that the phenomenal world is in line with the hidden world.
Another part of the dualism is that a significant part of the evils in this world can be attributed to a hidden demonic world. Human beings are responsible for their own actions, but the Enochic traditions refer to an angelic rebellion that took place in the heavenly realm and the primordial past.
A last part of the dualism lies in the remedy given by the authors for the present world in a hidden future when divine judgment will usher in a new age, when the Creator’s original intention with the earth would be realised and evil eradicated. In this way the two contradictory concepts of human responsibility and human victimisation coexist between absolute determinism and absolute anti-determinism. “The Enochic corpus explains the origin and presence of sin and evil on earth in two ways: (1) sin and evil are the function of a primordial heavenly revolt whose results continue to victimise the human race; (2) responsibility for sin and evil lies with the human beings who transgress God’s law” (Nickelsburg 2001:46).
These writings were created and transmitted from the fourth to the first centuries BCE in Jewish circles that are otherwise unknown but probably were continued in a way in the early Qumran circles, as indicated by the presence of many Enoch manuscripts at Qumran and the allusion to this literature in Qumran sectarian documents as well as a substantial number of similarities between 1 Enoch and various sectarian texts (Charlesworth 1980:227; Collins 1997:35-36; Boccaccini 1998:129-131). One of these similarities is important for the argument in this article, a common solar calendar.
In the last two decades, the most important development in Enochic studies is that “the emphasis has shifted from the study of the Enoch texts to the study of the intellectual and sociological characteristics of the group behind such literature” (Boccaccini 2002b:9). Consensus amongst researchers is that the texts in 1 Enoch were the core of a distinctive movement of thought in second temple Judaism (e.g., as reflected in the works of Sacchi 2000;Grabbe 2000; Boccaccini 2002a; Nickelsburg 2003). The boundaries of this movement overlapped yet did not coincide with the broader corpus of Jewish apocalypses, some of which might have belonged to different, and even opposite, parties (Boccaccinni 2005:3-4). Enochic Judaism is described as a nonconformist, anti-Zadokite, priestly movement of dissent, active in Israel since the late Persian or early Hellenistic period, with at the centre neither the temple nor the torah but a unique concept of the origin of evil that made the “fallen angels” or “sons of God” (in Gen 6:1-4) ultimately responsible for the spread of evil and impurity on earth (Boccaccini 2005:6). “The myths assert, deterministically on the one hand, that human beings are less the perpetrators than the victims of sin, which had its origin in the divine realm. On the other hand, they maintain that sin and evil originated not with God’s permission, but as the result of a rebellious conspiracy that was hatched behind God’s back” (Nickelsburg 2001:47). If either of these extremes is emphasised, the Enochic system would collapse into condemnation of God as the unmerciful source of evil or as the unjust scourge of innocent creatures (Boccaccini 2005:5).
Nickelsburg’s work led to insights regarding the sociology of the Enoch group. “… the 108 chapters of 1 Enoch provide little explicit information about an Enochic community … some textual evidence points in the direction of a community or group. Collective terms like ‘the righteous, the chosen, the holy’ indicate a consciousness of community” (Nickelsburg 2001:46). The strongest evidence for this is that the Enochic literature developed in stages, over three centuries, from a core narrative about the Watchers. Channels of transmission are supposed for this evolving tradition, and the texts themselves indicate a process of developing composition in the name of Enoch (Nickelsburg 2001:46). One can thus speak of “a community or communities who believed that their possession of the divinely given wisdom contained in the Enochic texts constituted them as the eschatological community of the chosen, who are awaiting the judgment and the consummation of the end time” (Nickelsburg 2001:64). What this movement was called or what it called itself is not known, but “Enochic Judaism” seems appropriate and satisfactory as modern label (Boccaccini 2005:5).
The Enochic authors might have been “scribes” and “it is possible, though not altogether certain, that at least some of the authors of the Enochic literature were also priests, indeed, disaffected members of the Jerusalem priesthood” (Nickelsburg 2001:67; cf. Boccaccini 2002a: 89-92). Enochic traditions possibly originated in Upper Galilee (Nickelsburg 2001:119, 238-247; Suter 2003:187-202).
The Enochic party was not a closed conventicle but had manifestly a large influence, and generated a broader movement of thought focused on the idea of the demonic origin of evil, as can be seen in the citations and allusions to 1 Enoch in second temple Jewish documents such as Jubilees; the Testament of Moses; the Testament of Simeon (5:4); the Testament of Levi (10:5;
14:1; 16:1); the Testament of Dan (5:6); the Testament of Jude (18:1); the Testament of Zebulon (3:4); the Testament of Naphtali (4:1); the Testament of Benjamin (9:1); the Testament of Reuben (5:1-6); 2 Baruch; the Life of Adam and Eve; 2 Enoch; the Apocalypse of Abraham; 4 Ezra; and Barnabas (4:3; 16:5-6) (Charlesworth 2005:442). Enochic Judaism also shaped emergent Christianity, with the Letter of Jude mentioning the writings of Enoch as part of Scripture, a view supported by many church fathers, while becoming increasingly alien to Jewish traditions trying to consolidate their religion after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE (Nickelsburg 2001:1).
3. CALENDAR IN APOCALYPTIC TRADITIONS
3.1 Solar calendar in the Astronomical Book of Enoch
The Astronomical Book (1 Enoch 72-82) originated during the third century BCE, and deals with „those who fail to reckon the four intercalary days in the [solar] year ..., not with those who use the moon in their calendrical calculations” (VanderKam 1981:57). The question is: what is the view of the Ethiopian Enoch tradition about the two solar calendars which existed and led to conflict? (VanderKam 1995:20).
The angel Uriel, guide of all the lights in the firmament, reveals to Enoch the unchanging calendar of the universe, „the nature of the years of the world unto eternity, till the new creation which abides forever is created” (72:1). The sun moves through the six eastern gates of the heavens to the six western gates and back again, so that the years consist of 364 days. The structure of this calendar corresponds to that used at Qumran, as well as with the first century CE 2 Enoch (VanderKam 2001:156). The sun takes 42 days to get out of the first gate, 35 days to get out of the second, third, fourth and fifth gate, and 42 days out of the sixth gate, before going in reverse order (2 Enoch 13:3-4), giving a total of 364 days (VanderKam 1995:23-24).
The Astronomical Book explains the contents of the astronomical revelations claimed for Enoch:
A solar year of 364 days, divided into four seasons with 91 days each, and twelve months, with eight having 30 days each and the third, sixth, ninth and twelfth having 31 days each. The sun in its annual course rises from six gates in the east, and sets in six gates in the west. The variation of daylight and darkness during the days at the solstices is 2:1. The chief error in regard to the calendar is that people forget to add the four days (Black 1985:393-394).
A lunar year of 354 days. The movements of the moon and sun are correlated, but ten extra days are needed to bring the lunar year into harmony with the solar year (354 + 10 = 364). Six of the lunar months have 30 days, and six have 29. The lunar surface is dark before the new moon and has a fourteenth of its surface lighted for each day of its waxing; it loses a fourteenth for each day of its waning. The moon of the sun is a seventh of that of the sun.
The writer does not evaluate solar and lunar calendars. He simply presents schematic accounts of both, using numbered months (he never names them) and correlates them. He does not even bring them into a Jewish cultic context of festival cycles or the rotations of priestly groups within the calendar. No reference to the Sabbath is made in the Book.
What is important for the author is that the revealed laws will be operative until the new creation. All of the laws are revealed by an angel, and nature is governed and run by angels on behalf of God (80:1) (Milik 1976:273; VanderKam 1995:25).
The writer emphasises that the astronomical description of the years corresponds to the real structure of the months, with the year consisting of four seasons, each having two 30-days months and one 31-days month, and each season having thirteen weeks.
What is unique to the 1 Enoch 72-calendar is the role played by the equinoxes and solstices, at the end of each season, resulting in each third, sixth, ninth and twelfth month being a day longer (72:14, 20, 26, 32). The spring equinox marks the end of the year (72:32). The book does not give any indication how the calendar is adjusted for the astronomical year of 365 and a quarter days while still being based on the Sabbath calendar. Such a mechanism is necessary for a calendar based on equinoxes and solstices.
In 1 Enoch 73-74 the cycle of the moon’s twelve lunar months of 354 days is compared to the sun calendar’s twelve solar months, in an ideal year where the sun and new moon appear together at the beginning of the first month. Here the year consists of 360 days, and the solar year is only six days longer than the lunar year (74:11). But then it is added that „when it is completed, it turns out to be 364 days” (74:11-12), and the difference is always ten days a year (74:13-17). Each month has thirty days, as if the four 31-days months do not figure. And the text continues that additional times are necessary to complete the year, with four additional days which are like the leaders of the captains of a thousand who do not leave their fixed stations according to the reckoning of the year. These four days are not counted in the reckoning of the year (75:1). „On this account, people err in them” if they do not acknowledge that „the year is completed scrupulously in 364 fixed stations of the cosmos” (75:2). The text contradicts itself here and confuses the modern reader. This revelation is authorised by Uriel himself, which the God of glory has appointed for ever over all the lights of the heavens, in the heaven and in the world (75:3). Isaac thinks this section is „meaningless” because of its contradicting detail about the calendar (Isaac 1983:31). Sacchi (1997:135) explains that the text reflects two clearly different layers, an older tradition representing a 360 days-calendar and a more recent calendar consisting of 364 days, with the last as the more correct calendar. But what is rather happening in the text is that the four equinoxes and solstices are not discussed but they are reckoned into the calendar for a year. In the old solar calendar the solstices and equinoxes are not days but special times causing the division of the seasons, while the Astronomical Book counts these times as separate days. Thus the calendar that the Book of Enoch wishes to change was not based on a 360-days non-sabbatical year, but on a 360+4-days’ sabbatical calendar consisting of twelve months with thirty days each, and with four intercalary times between the seasons.
If seen from this perspective, the Astronomical Book is logical, because the difference between the twelve solar months and the twelve lunar months is six „days” over a year, while 2 Enoch stresses that the solar year needs four additional times counted as days. In this way the difference between the solar and lunar year is thus ten „days”, with the error if the solstices and equinoxes are not counted as „days”.
2 Enoch 82 confirms this when it sums up 2 Enoch 72-75 and announces, “Blessed are those who walk in the street of righteousness and have no sin like the sinners in the computation of the days in which the sun goes its course in the sky” (82:4). 2 Enoch 82:4 explains how the 360+4- days’ calendar works, with the solar months consisting of thirty days, together with four additional times which divides the year into four parts or seasons. The text reaffirms (as in 2 Enoch 75:2) that the solstices and equinoxes are not additional times, but real days, as explained by Uriel (82:5-8).
The Astronomical Book targets neither the lunar calendar consisting of 354 days nor the Mesopotamian calendar consisting of 360 days, but another solar calendar consisting also of 360+4 days which recognises the existence of intercalary times between seasons, but does not reckon them as „days of the months”. The dispute is not about the length of the solar calendar, which is in any case 364 days, and it is not about the sabbatical structure of the solar calendar, which is 52 weeks in every case, but about the nature of the year - whether or not the equinoxes and solstices are counted as days of the year, or are considered as merely „divisions of the year”.
3.2 Solar calendar in the Book of Daniel
Daniel 7:25 mentions: “He will defy the Most High and wear down the holy people of the Most High. He will try to change their sacred festivals and laws, and they will be placed under his control for a time, times, and half a time” (NLT). The text refers to Antiochus IV Epiphanes’ hellenisation programme in Jerusalem, and his forced changes of the Sadokite solar-based calendar to the Hellenistic lunar-based calendar, to suppress Jewish rebellion (VanderKam 1979:390-411; 1981:52-74).
Which calendar did the Book of Daniel use? The implication is that it used the Sadokite solar calendar, but nothing whatsoever is mentioned in the book of a change to the lunar calendar or the antiquity of the solar calendar, popular themes in Jewish documents from this period. Perhaps the chronological references in Daniel are purposefully obscure because the writer does not want his/her readers to know which calendar he/she is using (Collins 1990:37; 1997b:84). Daniel 9:27 refers to a “half-week”; 7:25 and 12:7 to „a time, times, and an half”, referring to symbolical times; while 8:14 refers to “two thousand and three hundred days”. These numbers are different from those mentioned in Daniel 12:11-12.
None of these numbers support the solar or lunar calendar, but researchers cite three reasons why the Book of Daniel probably used the sun calendar (Boccaccini 2001:312).
The first consideration is the remark in Daniel 6:8(7), 13(12) which suggest that „thirty days” refer to some kind of standard period. This period is the standard length of a month according to the solar calendar. The thirty day period mentioned here in Daniel 6 however does not refer necessarily to a month but could be any arbitrary period decided upon by the counsellors, or it may refer to a month according to the Mesopotamian calendar, without any connection to the Jerusalem temple calendar.
A second consideration refers to the only date mentioned in the book, the “twenty-fourth day of the first month” in Daniel 10:4. The practice to date events with the counting of the months is typical in priestly literature after the Babylonian exile, and most researchers accept that the sun calendar is used here. In any case, 24 Nisan does not have any meaning in the moon calendar whilst the twenty- fourth day of the first month in the sun calendar refers to a Friday, the day before the Sabbath and in Jaubert’s view the ideal time for a vision. Daniel 10:4 thus proves that the writer knew the Sabbath calendar of the Second Temple period. The Sabbath calendar divided the year into 52 weeks in order that a specific day would fall on the same day each year, in order to regulate religious feasts.
Lastly, in Daniel 12:1-2 the difference between 1 290 days and 1 335 days is 45 days. This number is senseless unless the month consists of thirty days, referring to a month and a half. The implication is that the author uses a calendar in which the months are not reckoned according to the moon, with its succession of months of thirty and 29 days. Daniel 12:5-13 gives „half a week” (v 7), „1 290 days” (v 11) and „1 335 days” (v 12) as a series, and the implication is that the same relation exists between half a week and 1 290 days. According to the calendar consisting of 364 days used in Jubilees and at Qumran, three and a half years consist of 1 274 days. When sixteen is added, one gets 1 290, and an addition of 45 brings one to 1 335. But these additions are meaningless. Why does Daniel refer to “half a week”?
The only text that enlarges on these numbers is the Book of Revelation, where the time of persecution is 42 months (Rev. 11:2; 13:5); 1 260 days (11:3; 12:6); or “a time, times, and an half” (12:14). According to Revelation’s reckoning it is clear that Daniel uses the sun calendar in which a year consists of twelve months of thirty days each, giving a total of 360 days a year (Boccaccini 2005:43).
When the researcher accepts that Daniel uses the solar calendar, the three references in Daniel 12 makes sense. „Half a week” or three and a half years consist of 1 260 days, with the addition of a month of thirty days adding up to 1 290 days, with the addition of a further month and a half adding up to 1 335 days. This led to the argument of Marti as well as Beckwith that Daniel uses the Mesopotamian calendar of 360 days, and the numbers added in Daniel 12:11-12 are the addition of intercalary months (Marti 1901; Beckwith 1981:365-403). The Jews knew this calendar, as can be seen from the Flood narrative, where the period from „the seventeenth of the second month” to „the seventeenth of the seventh month” adds up to 150 days, consisting of five months of thirty days each (Gen 7:11, 24; 8:3-4).
The calendar used in the early Second Temple period was based on the movements of the sun calendar, with the result that every day of the year occurs on the same day of the week for each year, which was not the case in the Mesopotamian calendar. The chronological reference in Daniel 10:4 also makes sense only when “the twenty-fourth day of the first month” refers to a Friday, as is the case in the Sabbath calendar used in the temple. But how could it be possible for Daniel to use a 360 day-calendar as well as a calendar based on the Sabbath?
The confusing way in which the Book of Daniel repeats dates in the last chapter has been the subject of repeated research since Gunkel (1895:43) formulated the theory that additions were made to the text to justify the „delay of the end” and to encourage believers when salvation did not occur. This hypothesis is not supported by any textual variants or versions and Porteous (1979:172) is correct in asking how urgent corrections could have been added to a book that had recently been issued, with the information being updated within less than 45 days. “That both vv. 11 and 12 should be permitted to remain in the text is sufficient commentary on this rather unadroit explanation” (Anderson 1984:153). There is no good reason to talk of later additions (Boccaccini 2001:321). Chronological indications rather show skilful planning, with references to Antiochus’ persecution consequently indicated as „half a week of years” (Dan 9:27) or „a time, times and a half” (Dan 7:25; 12:7). In the frame around Daniel 9, different chronological indications occur, with „2 300 evenings and mornings” (Dan 8:14) and „1 290” or „1 335 days” (Dan 12:11-12). It is clear that the author(s) expected that something important was going to happen before and immediately after the foretold death of Antiochus (Collins 2003:75).
Why are two different numbers given side by side? The second figure is probably given after the first number of days had passed. The phenomenon of recalculation is well-known in later apocalyptic movements (Festinger, Riecken & Schachter 1956:12-23). Daniel is also not certain what will happen when the number of days has passed, or else does not give any indication of what he is thinking. The days are calculated from the time that the Temple was desecrated and the cult disrupted, and the expected „end” might refer to the restoration of that cult. This is the implication of Daniel 8:14. But, according to 1 Maccabees 1:54; 4:52-54, Judas purified the Temple three years to the day after its pollution. Both dates in Daniel 12 thus point to a date after that restoration. The last date (Dan 12:12) was at least added after the purification of the Temple. Another consideration is that the numbers in Daniel 12:11-12 follow the prophecy of the victory of Michael and the resurrection of the dead, and in Daniel 12:13 Daniel is given the assurance that he will rise from his rest, at the end of days. „The end” is then the time when the archangel Michael intervenes and the resurrection takes place, at the time indicated by later tradition as the end of the world (Collins 2003:76).
Collins argues that Daniel 8 focuses primarily on the restoration of the temple cult, while Daniel 10-12 describes the end in terms of the resurrection of the dead (Collins 1990:163). Daniel does not consider the temple impure, as Enoch does, and Daniel 8 predicts that the offerings in the temple would be restored, implying that the temple cult is legitimate. Daniel also rejects the Enochic doctrine that the sins of angels have deprived humans of their freedom and responsibility, and distinguishes between the judgment of individuals and collective Israel, causing the lengthening and synchronising of chronological indications in Daniel 12. The judgment of the nations (Dan 7) and the judgment of individuals (Dan 12) do not occur synchronically.
The extra 30 and 45 days added to the end of the seventy year weeks cannot be intercalary months, but how the 360+4 days’ calendar added intercalary days is unknown.
The “2 300 evenings and mornings” (Dan 8) are too precise to be symbolical, and LaCocque (1979:250) reckons that it refers to an actual period counted after the events. According to Daniel’s calculation the fall equinox of 167 BCE is in the middle of the last week of years, when Antiochus started his persecution of the Jews. From this date, 2 300 evenings and mornings should be counted. When 1 150 days are reckoned to this, one gets to the twenty seventh day of the first month of 164-163. The Megillat Ta’anit, a list composed between the two Jewish Wars of lucky days, calls the twenty seventh day of the eighth month an important day. Zeitlin (1922:78-79) is of the opinion that this date refers to something happening during the feast of Hanukkah in the time of the Hasmoneans. 1 and 2 Maccabees use the lunar calendar so that their twenty fifth day of Kislev, the ninth month, refers to the twenty seventh of the eighth month of the Sadokite solar calendar, with the effect that Daniel and the Books of Maccabees probably refer to the same event (VanderKam 1981:63). Josephus (Ant. 12 §320) agrees with the Book of Maccabees’ chronology and takes the day of the rededication of the temple as the fulfilment of the “three and a half years” predicted by Daniel (1 §32).
Daniel expected that the end of the final week would be later, during the spring equinox of 163 BCE. He predicted that Antiochus would lead a successful campaign against Egypt that did not take place, and is vague about the time and circumstances of Antiochus’ death, implying that the Book of Daniel originated in its present form shortly after the cessation of the daily sacrifices. Thus the only real predictions of the book did not realise, but that is no problem because in apocalyptic literature predictions usually do not realise (Boccaccini 2001:325).
3.3 Zadokite and Enochic calendar, and Jubilees
The Book of Jubilees assigns just like Enoch’s calendar the four additional times to days. After the Maccabean rebellion new developments occur in Enochic Judaism (Boccaccini 1998:86-98) and Jubilees uses the same 364 days-calendar as the Astronomical Book with the solstices and equinoxes having no independent interest. The first days of each season is emphasised as „the days of remembrance ... in the four parts of the year ... on the first of the first month and on the first of the fourth month and on the first of the seventh month and on the first of the tenth month” (Jub 6:23). Noah was the first to celebrate these days as feasts for eternal generations (Jub 6:24). And in the heavenly tablets it is described that these days should be celebrated for ever (Jub 6:28-29), implying that God has decreed it. In the Jubilees calendar these days replaced the four additional times of the 364-days calendar by parting the year into four periods of thirteen weeks each (Jub 6:29), with the result that the completed year exists of 52 weeks of 364 days (Jub 6:31-32). In the Astronomical Book this function was fulfilled by the solstices and equinoxes (Enoch 72:32).
The more ancient rendering of the calendar can be seen in Jubilees 29:16 where Isaac sends his mother, Rebecca, four times a year all kinds of food – between the appointed times of the months, between ploughing and reaping, between fall and the rainy season, and between winter and spring. The four appointed times „between the seasons” are no longer part of the 364 days-calendar. Jubilees 5:17 calculates the period of the Flood according to the 360+4 days’ calendar where the intercalary times are not reckoned as „days”, when it explains that the water stayed on the earth for five months, that is 150 days. According to the Enoch-calendar five months consist of 152 days.
The earliest researchers of the Astronomical Book realised that these texts use a Sabbath calendar with twelve unchangeable months of thirty days each with four intercalary days between the seasons, a solar calendar where the two solstices and two equinoxes are not reckoned in the months, but are counted as additional, extra-monthly days (Bacon 1891-1892:79-88; 124-131; Morgenstein 1924:13-78).
The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm the existence and antiquity of the solar calendar and shed more light on its structure and meaning (Cross 1961:76). The calendar used at Qumran counts the four additional times as days in the third, sixth, ninth and twelfth months without explaining that it developed from a more ancient Sabbath calendar where these times were not reckoned as days. The redactor of the Astronomical Book, working while the Zadokite high priests ruled over the temple, knew about the new developments in the calendar and described it as an error (1 Enoch 75:2; 82:5). The 360+4-days’ calendar predates the Astronomical Book, and was authoritative in the third century. This calendar was used by the Zadokite House and regulated temple practice, not the 364-days calendar of the Enochic tradition (Boccaccini 2001:319-320).
At the time Jubilees was written down the conflict existing between the Zadokite and Enochic calendars was forgotten. Now a new conflict arose, where the new lunar calendar replaced the solar calendar of the Second Temple, described by Jubilees 6:32-38 as the “calendar of the heathen.” Antiochus IV established the new calendar to introduce his hellenisation process within the Jerusalem temple.
The difference between the Zadokite and Enochic calendar was theoretical, with both based on the Sabbath week with the result that the order of feasts never changed (Milik 1976:62). The introduction of the lunar calendar was, however, a „temple-quake” (Boccaccini 2001:320). Now it became impossible to celebrate the feasts at the appointed times. Onias III died at the beginning of the Maccabean revolt and Onias IV fled to Egypt, with the result that the Zadokites lost all influence. The Enochic movement tried to restore the Zadokite calendar and maximise their influence. The newly established Hasmonean high priesthood was not interested in accepting Enochic leadership and rejected all Zadokite institutions. The Enochic movement lost its influence, which led to the emergence of the Essene community as organised opposition and an alternative to the Jerusalem temple leadership.
4. CONTEXT OF THE ENOCHIC MOVEMENT
What is the sociological context in which the Enochic revelations were received and which led to the dispute about calendars, showing patterns of animosity between groups in the social organisation of pre-Maccabean Judea? Collins (1998:73) is of the opinion that the Astronomical Book does not seem to have been generated by a conflict within the Jerusalem temple. “It is difficult to see how the authors of this book could have functioned in a temple regulated by a lunar calendar”. His solution is to suggest that the Astronomical Book was composed in the eastern Diaspora, where actual use of the temple was not an immediate issue. Collins does not provide reasons for his argument that the Enochic literature does not presuppose conflict within the Jerusalem establishment, while I think that it is probable that the literature originated from such a conflict.
Judea was ruled by Seleucid Syria as a part of the province of Coele-Syria, with the high priest and his fellow priests acting as imperial agents and local leaders (Tiller 2005:23.) High priestly rule led to rivalry, with Joseph the Tobiad gaining the right at one stage to collect imperial taxes for the Ptolemaic rulers of Egypt, as reported by Josephus (Ant., XII, 2; Brueggemann 1997:10). In the second century, when Antiochus IV ruled over Judea, high priestly rule was recognised, as can be seen by the plots and counterplots to obtain the position (Cantor 1994:56). The high priest presided over a gerousia, a council of elders, but no more is known about the functioning or powers of this council.
The Syrian rulers supported the high priest with military might, but the high priest also had his own soldiers, if the information provided in 2 Maccabees 4:40 and Josephus (Ant. 12.239-240) is correct. The Book of Sirach provides a picture of the politico-social structure of Seleucid Syria, even though it is clearly biased in its description. The picture is of an orderly society with the high priest ruling, and sages like Ben Sira serving as teachers of the people, along with advisers, judges, diplomats, and other positions. This is confirmed by Antiochus III’s decree as preserved by Josephus (Ant. 12.138-144), which describes Jerusalem as the centre of the temple state led by a council of elders, with priests, scribes and temple singers forming the privileged aristocracy (Taylor 1979:170).
This portrait of Judea as a harmonious society does not reflect the whole situation. Seleucid rule was characterised by establishing competing authorities, each reporting directly to the king. In this way the king polarised Judean society to the benefit of defusing the rebellious attitude for which the Judean population had become famous. In this way Antiochus III appointed the gerousia as the most important factor in the Jerusalem hierarchy, while Antiochus IV negotiated exclusively with the high priest. Provincial officials reported directly to the king and not to some local chief, as illustrated by the Scythopolis Inscription (Taylor 1979:108-168).
Sages/scribes were members of the privileged aristocracy created by the imperial rule and dependent on it for their position and stature in society (Tiller 2005:24). They were loyal to their patrons, and when the patrons had conflicting interests, the loyalties of the sages/scribes would also conflict. The context of sages/scribes formed the social setting in which 1 Enoch (as well as the dream visions of the Book of Daniel) were produced. The visions themselves do not give clear evidence of the social location of their setting, but some hints are available. For instance, the Animal Apocalypse places itself within a group of elect Judeans around the beginning of the second century BCE. This group developed their own version of piety in clear distinction from the corrupt temple, and with time they engaged in armed resistance to established religion in Jerusalem (Tiller 1993:109-126). The differences between the books of Sirach (especially book 5) and 1 Enoch show that Ben Sira and the sages responsible for 1 Enoch were in conscious opposition to each other, with Ben Sira advocating the high priestly rule (Wright 1997:189-222). The authors are pictured in both books as sages and teachers, but each in another tradition and representing another ideology. The Enochic sages opposed high priestly rule in the strongest terms and wished to change the structure prescribed by Antiochus III (Collins 2003:80; Jewish War 6.312).
What kind of community produced the Enochic literature? The question depends on whether 1 Enoch was inscribed performances of oral tradition, or whether it originated directly as writings. If an oral tradition existed before it was penned down, political and ethnic groupings linked to villages or larger populations can probably be considered, as sociologically identifiable communities with boundaries and rules of their own, like the community associated with the Qumran documents (Charlesworth 2005:448).
The Enochic literature itself does not give evidence for such a community, and the idea formed when reading the revelations is rather that it was produced by an aggregate of individuals with similar interests, without an organised social structure with defined boundaries and constraints.
„We should not think that 1 Enoch 92-105 is the product of a movement or group any more than we would understand the text of Sirach as testimony to Ben Sira heading a social movement” (Horsley 2000:115). Neither Ben Sira nor Enoch made an exclusive claim to election or advise their readers to withdraw from the larger society.
The wise function as teachers for others who are not among the wise and their teaching is based on revealed wisdom, as implied in the Animal Apocalypse (Nickelsburg 1982:333-348). To what extent these teachers succeeded in gaining followers is unknown, and we do not know whether any social groups formed in adherence to the teachings of Enoch. Grabbe warns that there is no necessary connection between apocalypses and apocalyptic communities (Grabbe 1989:27- 47). What happens probably is that the sages or teachers who produced the Enochic literature were members of a larger social group and that their teachings reflected the ideals of the group, making them the spokespersons (Tiller 2005:26).
What is the relation between the different interpretations of the solar calendar in terms of sociological contexts, and what does it reflect of Judean society of the third and second centuries BCE?
5. MOVEMENTS AND WORLDVIEWS OF CONFLICT AND ANIMOSITY
What has become evident is that different movements existed within the Jewish religion and political world, leading to patterns of division and animosity. On the one hand the temple hierarchy existed, and on the other hand opponents of the hierarchy (VanderKam & Flint 2002:275).
The producers of visionary literature understood themselves to function as teachers and sages, and are connected to wisdom literature (Smith 1978:74; Collins 1998:30; Grabbe 1989:27-47). The question is: do we encounter one apocalyptic movement or a multiplicity of small conventicle- like apocalyptic groups (Collins 1999:43-58)? Apparently, the authors of apocalyptic texts like 1 Enoch and Jubilees understood themselves as part of elect groups (Collins 2003:85).
Traditionally, the same group, the Hasidim, was held responsible for the Enochic, Danielic and Jubilees apocalypses, which were identified with the so-called New Covenant, and which formed the parent group of the Essenes (Hengel 1974:175-180; Collins 1999:44). Collins differs from this viewpoint and shows that more differences than parallels can be found in descriptions of groups in the Enochic and Danielic apocalypses (Collins 1999:44-49, 55-58; Boccaccini 2005:39). But the self-designations of authors and tradents of the apocalypses in question are different, and so is their attitude towards the Mosaic torah. In Enochic literature, involvement in politics has a military component while Daniel is pacifist. And pseudepigraphy is absent in the Essene texts from Qumran while it is abundant in Enochic and Danielic literature (Collins 2003:68). Thus Collins argues for a multiplicity of small conventicle-like apocalyptic groups (Collins 1999:55-58).
How did these groups relate to each other? Did some groups share a common worldview (Boccaccini 2005:28-31)? Almost no sociological data has been preserved, and the answer can only be based upon an analysis of the imagery and visionary techniques employed by the different apocalypses (Lange 2005:28-31). Lange comes to the conclusion that Danielic and Enochic conventiclers share an apocalyptic worldview, and from their shared interpretation of allegoric dreams he places the domain of these conventiclers amongst the sages. Next to the wisdom influence there also exists a prophetic influence on apocalypticism.
Jubilees is from the same period as Daniel and some parts of Enoch, like the Two Dream Visions and the Book of Giants. It is not an apocalypse but rewritten Bible (Lange 2005:32). And it comes from a priestly background, as can be seen from its discussion of Sabbath laws, the sacred calendar, properly celebrated festivals, sacrificial regulations, the prohibition of consuming blood, circumcision, and the avoidance of impurity and uncleanness (VanderKam 1992:1030-1032). Jubilees does not share the same apocalyptic milieu as Daniel and Enoch, as can be seen from the different use of the calendar. The priestly circles in which Jubilees originated have less interest in sapiential and prophetic traditions.
However, Collins warns against the tendency to easily polarise the different groups that were active in the third to first centuries BCE. No evidence of intense polemic exists between the Enochic and Danielic tradition, as later found in the Dead Sea Scrolls between sectarian groups. At least some of the Enochic writings share with Daniel the same common enemy, the Seleucid king. They also share beliefs about the way the world functions, assuming that human life is influenced by angelic and demonic forces and that history runs a predetermined course, and that it will be interrupted by divine intervention, to be followed by a universal judgment and the transformation of the elect (Collins 2005:59-66). The common elements in the two books include shared beliefs and symbols, which find expression in a shared literary genre. Does this require a common social milieu? Evidence is inadequate to answer the question, and we do not know whether the authors or tradents associated in any way with each other. Both writings became part of the Essene library, implying that they were not regarded as incompatible with each other (Collins 2005:65).
6. SYNTHESIS
From the discussion of the use of calendars the conclusion is that respective apocalyptic books have nuances showing patterns of difference with other groups. These differences are in many cases not incompatible because the books share symbolism, ideas, and literary techniques that distinguish it from other books. While the books of Enoch and Daniel each had distinctive emphases, they were not engaged in ideological warfare with each other, but rather with the temple hierarchy and Seleucid menace which was brought to a crisis point with the hellenisation process introduced by Antiochus Epiphanes IV (Collins 2005:66).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson, RA 1984. Signs and wonders. A commentary on the book of Daniel. ITC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. Bacon, BW 1891-1892. “Chronology of the Account of the Flood in P: A Contribution to the History of the Jewish Calendar,” Hebraica 8:79-88.
Bacon, BW 1891-1892. “The Calendar of Enoch and Jubilees,” Hebraica 8:124-131.
Beckwith, RT 1981. “The Earliest Enoch Literature and Its Calendar: Marks of their Origin, Date and Motivation,” Revue de Qumran 10/39:365-403.
Black, M 1985. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch: A New English Edition with Commentary and Textual Notes, SVTP 7. Leiden: Brill, 1985.
Boccaccini, G 1998. Beyond the Essene Hypothesis: The Partings of the Ways between Qumran and Enochic Judaism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Boccaccini, G 2001. “The Solar Calendars of Daniel and Enoch,” in Collins, JJ & Flint, PW. The Book of Daniel. Composition and Reception. Boston, Leiden: Brill, 2:311-328.
Boccaccini, G 2002a. Roots of Rabbinic Judaism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Boccaccini, G 2002b ed. The Origins of Enochic Judaism. Turin: Zamorani.
Boccaccini, G ed 2005. Enoch and Qumran Origins. New Light on a Forgotten Connection. Grand Rapids, Mi: Eerdmans.
Brueggemann, W 1997. Cadences of home. Preaching among exiles. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox.
Cantor, NF 1994. A modern history of the Jews. New York: P Lang.
Charles, RH 1893. The Book of Enoch translated from Professor Dillmann’s Ethiopic Text emended and revised…edited with Introduction, Notes, Appendices, and Indices. Oxford: Clarendon.
Charles, RH 1912. The Book of Enoch, or 1 Enoch, Translated from the Editor’s Ethiopic Version, and Edited with the Introduction, Notes, and Indexes of the First Edition Wholly Recast, Enlarged, and Rewritten. Oxford: Clarendon.
Charlesworth, JH 1980. “The Origins and Subsequent History of the Authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Four Transitional Phases among the Qumran Essenes,” Revue de Qumran 10:211-229.
Charlesworth, JH 2005. “The Books of 1 Enoch or 1 Enoch Matters: New Paradigms for Understanding Pre- 70 Judaism,” in Boccaccini, G ed. Enoch and Qumran Origins. New Light on a Forgotten Connection. Grand Rapids, Mi., Cambridge: Eerdmans, 424-448.
Collins, JJ 1990. “The Meaning of the End in the Book of Daniel,” in Attridge, HW, Collins, J & Tobin, T eds. Of Scribes and Scrolls: Studies on the Hebrew Bible, Intertestamental Judaism and Christian Origins. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 37-169.
Collins, JJ 1999. “Pseudepigraphy and Group Formation in Second Temple Judaism,” in Chazon, EG &. Stone, ME eds. Pseudepigraphic Perspectives: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls, STDJ 31. Leiden: Brill, 43-58.
Collins, JJ 1997. Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls. London: Routledge.
Collins, JJ 1998. The Apocalyptic Imagination. An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. Second Edition
Collins, JJ 1999. “Pseudepigraphy and Group Formation in Second Temple Judaism,” in Chazon, EG & Stone, ME eds. Pseudepigraphic Perspectives: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls, STDJ31. Leiden: Brill, 43-58.
Collins, JJ 2003. From Prophecy to Apocalypticism: The Expectations of the End, in McGinn, B, Collins, JJ & Stein, SJ eds. The Continuum History of Apocalypticism. New York, London: Continuum, 64-88.
Collins, JJ 2005. “Response: The Apocalyptic Worldview of Daniel,” in Boccaccini, G ed. Enoch and Qumran Origins. New Light on a Forgotten Connection. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 59-66.
Cross, FM 1961. The Ancient Library of Qumran. New York: Anchor.
Davila, JR 2005. “The Animal Apocalypse and Daniel,” in Boccaccini, G ed. Enoch and Qumran Origins. New Light on a Forgotten Connection. Grand Rapids, Mi., Cambridge: Eerdmans, 31-48.
Festinger, L, Riecken, HW & Schachter, S 1956. When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group That Predicted the Destruction of the World. New York: Harper.
Grabbe, LL 1989. “The Social Setting of Jewish Apocalypticism,” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 4:27-47.
Grabbe, LL 2000. Judaic Religion in Second Temple Judaism. London: Routledge.
Gunkel, H 1895. Schöpfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Hellholm, D 1986. “The Problem of Apocalyptic Genre and the Apocalypse of John,” Semeia 36:1-32.
Hengel, M 1974. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period. Philadelphia: Fortress.
Horsley, R 2000. “Social Relations and Social Conflict in the Epistle of Enoch,” in Argall, RA, Bow, BA & Werline, RA eds. For a Later Generation: The Transformation of Tradition in Israel, Early Judaism, and Early Christianity. Harrisburg, Pa: Trinity, 96-119.
Isaac, E 1983. “1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse of) Enoch,” in Charlesworth, J H ed. Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. New York: Doubleday, 1:5-89.
Kvanvig, HG 2005. “Jubilees – Read as a Narrative,” in Boccaccini, G ed. Enoch and Qumran Origins. New Light on a Forgotten Connection. Grand Rapids, Mi., Cambridge: Eerdmans, 79-93.
LaCocque, A 1979. The book of Daniel. Tr. by David Pellauer. London: SPCK.
Lange, A 2005. “Dream Visions and Apocalyptic Milieus,” in Boccaccini, G ed. Enoch and Qumran Origins. New Light on a Forgotten Connection. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 28-31.
Marti, K 1901. Das Buch Daniel. HKAT 18. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck.
García Martínez, F 2003. “Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in McGinn, B, Collins, JJ & Stein, SJ eds. The Continuum History of Apocalypticism. New York, London: Continuum, 89-111.
Milik, JT 1976. The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumran, Cave 4. Oxford: Clarendon.
Morgenstein, J 1924. “The Three Calendars of Ancient Israel,” Hebrew Union College Annual 1:13-78. Nickelsburg, GWE 1982. “The Epistle of Enoch and the Qumran Literature,” Journal of Jewish Studies 33:333- 348.
Nickelsburg, GWE 1992. “Enoch, First Book of,” in Freedman, D N ed. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell, 1:490-491.
Nickelsburg, GWE 2001. 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1-36; 81-108. Hermeneia, Minneapolis: Fortress.
Nickelsburg, GWE 2003. Ancient Judaism and Christian Origins: Diversity, Continuity, and Transformation. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Nickelsburg, GWE & VanderKam, JC 2004. The Book of Enoch. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Olson, D 2004. Enoch: A New Translation. North Richland Hills, Tex.: BIBAL.
Porteous, N W 1979. Daniel: A Commentary. OTL. Second, revised edition. London: SCM.
Sacchi, P 1997. Jewish Apocalyptic and Its History. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Sacchi, P 2000. History of the Second Temple Period. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Smith, JZ 1978. Map is not Territory: Studies in the History of Religions. SJLA 23. Leiden: Brill.
Suter, D 2003. “Why Galilee? Galilean Regionalism in the Interpretation of 1 Enoch 6-16,” Henoch 25:167- 212.
Taylor, JE 1979. Seleucid Rule in Palestine. Ph.D. dissertation, Duke University.
Tiller, PA 1993. A Commentary on the Animal Apocalypse of 1 Enoch. EJL 4. Atlanta: Scholars.
Tiller, PA 2005. “The Sociological Context of the Dream Visions of Daniel and 1 Enoch,” in Boccaccini, G ed. Enoch and Qumran Origins. New Light on a Forgotten Connection. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 12-28.
VanderKam, JC 1979. “The Origin, Character, and Early History of the 364-Day Calendar: A Reassessment of Jaubert’s Hypotheses,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 41:390-411.
VanderKam, JC 1981. “2 Maccabees 6:7a and Calendrical Change in Jerusalem,” Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period, 12:42-74.
VanderKam, JC1992. “Jubilees, Book of,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David N. Freedman (New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell), 3:1030-1032.
VanderKam, JC 1995. Enoch. A Man for All Generations. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
VanderKam, JC 2001. An Introduction to Early Judaism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
VanderKam, JC & Flint, P 2002. The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls. New York: HarperSanFrancisco.
Wright, BG 1997. “Fear the Lord and Honor the Priest: Ben Sira as Defender of the Jerusalem Priesthood,” in Pancratius, C B ed. The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research: Proceedings of the First International Ben Sira Conference. BZAW Supplement Series 255. Berlin: De Gruyter, 189-222.
Zeitlin, S 1922. Megillat Ta’anit as a Source for Jewish Chronology and History in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods. Philadelphia: Dropsie College.
KEY WORDS
Calendars, Religious feasts, Apocalyptic texts, Animosity, Social groups
TREFWOORDE
Kalenders, Godsdienstige feeste, Apokaliptiese tekste, Vyandigheid, Sosiale groeperinge
KONTAKBESONDERHEDE