The Composition of JubileesI would like to suggest that the composition is not a homogeneous
book composed by one author. Rather, it is possible to identify internal con
tradictions, doublets, tensions, and discrepancies, both in details and in ref
erence to the biblical stories in general. This situation attests to the variety of
traditions that can be found side by side within the same book. The redactor
sometimes relied upon the Pentateuch itself, but often adopted other com
positions, along the lines of the examples of rewritten Bible known to us
from the second temple period. Such rewritten texts were common in Jewish
literature in antiquity, as exemplified by compositions such as l Enoch, the
Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, and the Genesis Apocryphon. The ideas
embedded in these written traditions did not always agree with the views of
the redactor, thus creating the internal problems to be described below. The
final product, as known to us today, is not the work of one individual, but a
combination of different traditions, sources, and authors. I suggest that the
redactor's contribution can be found in the chronological framework
throughout the book, in the legal passages juxtaposed to the rewritten sto
ries, and in those passages that contain the unique terminology of the legal
passages (such as chaps, l, 2, 6, and 23:9-32).
To describe this process I have coined the terms "chronological redac
tion" and "halakic redaction." As noted above, these two themes are com
bined in the opening chapter of the book, and this combination is also
found at its conclusion (50:13 — "as it was written in the tablets which he
placed in my hands so that I could write for you the laws of each specific time
in every division of its times"). Therefore, while I have distinguished between
these two redactional processes in order to emphasize the unique elements
of each aspect, both are ultimately the work of the same editor responsible
for the composition of Jubilees, and therefore belong to the same redactional
layer.
The following list presents ten examples of contradictions within Jubi
lees, which I suggest lead to the conclusion that it could not be the exclusive
work of a single author. The list is divided into two sections: the first half de
tails those differences between the rewritten narratives and the chronologi
cal framework, while the second section outlines the tensions between the
rewritten narratives and the legal passages.