having done so, he desired him to observe the writing of the heavenly tablets, and mark every particular.' Enoch states that he did so, and read the book and all its contents, all the deeds of men, and all born of the flesh who shall be upon the earth until the remotest generations.' When he had praised the Lord, those three holy ones brought him and set him on the earth before the door of his house, and told him that he should be left for a year, during which time he was to teach Methuselah and all his children. In lxxxii., which might, I think, be as appropriately reckoned in the next division, Enoch begins an address to Methuselah, which he opens by desiring him to keep the writings which he gives him, and hand them down to coming generations; and then, in connection with the writings, he returns once more to the heavenly bodies. This last circumstance furnishes a plausible reason for connecting this chapter with those which have preceded; but its ambiguous position confirms our remark that there is no real pause in the narrative at this place.

6

The fourth division (lxxxiii.-xci. 53-67) describes two visions which Enoch saw before he took a wife,' and which he relates in continuation of his address to Methuselah. This part part also may be divided into three sections. The first two chapters (lxxxiii., lxxxiv. 53-55) contain the first vision, in which he saw the earth swallowed up in a great deep, and Enoch's prayer that some of his posterity might be spared. Chapters lxxxv-xc. (55-65) contain the second vision, in which the world's history is symbolically described down to its great consummation. As the question of date depends largely on the interpretation of this vision, we need not dwell further upon it at present. A third section is formed by xci. 1–11, and contains a hortatory address of Enoch to his children,

founded on the previous visions. The rest of this chapter, unless we except the last two verses, which may belong to the previous passage, refers to the eighth and succeeding weeks of the world's history, and seems evidently to have been misplaced,-unless, indeed, this remark should be applied rather to its preceding context, which is found in xciii.

The fifth division (xcii.-cv. 67-77) is said to be 'written by Enoch the writer,' and to contain the doctrine of wisdom, and is mainly hortatory in its character. He predicts the resurrection of the just and the disappearance of sin; but after a very short chapter, xciii. states that Enoch began to give an account out of the books,' and to relate what had appeared to him in the heavenly vision, and what he had learned out of the tablets of heaven. Then follows the description of the world's weeks, to which the fragment in xci. obviously belongs. Next come the admonitions, in which at first he alternately exhorts the righteous and denounces woe upon the wicked (xciv.-xcvii. 68-71). He then addresses himself to the sinful (xcviii.-cii. 71-75), and finally in words of advice and consolation to the righteous (cii. 4cv. pp. 75-77). In the last-mentioned section he swears in the most solemn manner that he knows the secret of which he speaks, and has seen the book of the holy ones, and thereon it was written that all good and joy and honour were prepared for the spirits of those who have died in righteousness, and therefore the righteous were to have no fear. For a moment near the end he turns to warn the sinners that light and darkness, day and night, see all their sins. His last secret is that 'to the righteous and wise will the books be given for joy and righteousness and much wisdom; to them will the books be given, and they will believe on them and rejoice in them, and

all the righteous who have learned therefrom all the ways of righteousness shall receive the reward.' A few lines put into the mouth of the Lord close the section. In these are the words, for I and my Son will join ourselves with them for ever and ever.'

The book might seem now to have reached its close; but unexpectedly Enoch proceeds to relate the circumstances attending the birth of Noah, and to describe the supernatural appearance of the infant and his own prediction of the deluge (cvi., cvii. 78, 79). Lastly comes ' another writing which Enoch wrote for his son Methuselah, and for those who shall come after him, and observe the law in the last days.' Here he seems to be again on his journey with the angels, and he sees a place of burning fire destined for the spirits of the sinful, of those who do evil and alter all that God spoke through the mouth of the prophets about future things.' He is also told of the blessings of the righteous; and with a brief contrast between the shining of the righteous and the darkness into which the wicked shall be thrown the book closes.

From the above survey of the contents it is apparent that, while our opinion about the date of the work depends mainly on our interpretation of the fourth division (including the fragment about the world's weeks in the fifth), the most important Messianic passages are contained in the second; and therefore our first question is whether the second and fourth parts proceed from the same author, and if not, whether there is anything to prove that the second is earlier than the fourth. Now, in regard to the authorship of the whole work, three distinct views may be entertained. It may be supposed that the book is the production of a single author, and has been preserved in its integrity down to our own time; or, secondly, that

it is substantially from one author, but has been more or less corrupted by later interpolations; or thirdly, that it consists of a series of tracts from different hands, pieced together into one work by a compiler.

The first view is maintained by Philippi.1 This writer bases his conclusion upon the unity of plan which pervades the several parts of the work; but I cannot think that he contributes much to the criticism of the subject, or adequately meets the difficulties which stand in the way of his theory; and as his volume has left no permanent impression upon the literature of the question, we need not further consider it.2

Of the second view we may take Dillmann as the representative. He also infers the substantial unity of authorship from the unity of plan, and from the fact that there is throughout a natural progress and an inartificial transition from one part to another; and he endeavours to establish this view by a careful analysis of the contents, and by tracing the relation of each part to the general aim of the writer. He seeks, however, to distinguish from the original work some considerable interpolations. First, he classes together as 'historical additions,' which he ascribes collectively to the same later author, the following passages:-vi.-xvi. relating to the fall of the angels and subsequent events, which he thinks have taken the place of a rejected section of the original work; xciii. and xci. 12-17, describing the weeks of the world's history;

1 Das Buch Henoch, scin Zeitalter und sein Verhältniss zum Judasbriefe. 1868.

2 Philippi was preceded by Hofmann in the ascription of the book to a Christian author. See Schürer's Lehrbuch der neutestamentlichen Zeitgeschichte, 1874, S. 525. Hofmann's views are expressed in an article in the Zeitschr. der deutschen morgenländ. Gesellsch. Bd. vi. 1852, S. 87-91 (Schürer, S. 521).

3 Das Buch Henoch, Einleitung, S. i.-xxxiv. For a summary of his arguments, see S. v. vi. xxxiii. xxxiv.

and cvi., cvii., about the birth of Noah.1 He believes that
a still later interpolator inserted the 'Noachic additions,'
liv. 7-lv. 2, lx., and lxv.-lxix. 25, relating to the flood. To
the same author he attributes lxx., and either to the
same author, or at least to the same circle of thought,
xx., upon the names of the angels; lxxxii. 9-20, re-
lating to the regulation of the stars and the seasons; and
lxxv. 5, about the winds and dew. Finally, he ascribes
cviii. to yet another hand. It is not necessary for us to
follow him through the details of his argument. We may
admit at once that a general survey of the work brings
before us a sufficient unity of plan to suggest a prevailing
identity of authorship. But, on the other hand, the con-
catenation of thought is not so close that it is impossible
to leave out any considerable section without rendering
the remainder of the book unintelligible. Dillmann him-
self admits that the work has been subject to serious
tampering in the way both of interpolation and of
omission. We may remark also that compositions of this
kind, which are really anonymous, though flung upon
the world in the name of some ancient worthy, and
which are designed, not to win a literary reputation, but
to accomplish some political or religious purpose, are much
more likely than literature of a higher class, and published
with the author's name, to be dealt with freely, and
altered to suit the wants of successive times. The fact,
moreover, that Georgius Syncellus quotes from the first
book of Enoch,' a passage which is not contained in the
Æthiopic translation, is an external evidence that the work
was not secure against serious variations in its trans-
mission. We must, therefore, judge each section upon
its own merits; and if we find traces of different dates or
conflicting opinions, we shall hardly feel that the general
1 S. vii., viii. and xxxiv.-xxxviii.

6

2 S. viii. ix. and xxxviii-xl.