The Composition of Jubileesthese two dates fits a period of 120 years, and reflects the second interpretive
approach to Gen 6:3.
In this case, the process of literary development that led to the combi
nation of these interpretive traditions can be identified. The rewritten narra
tive in Jub 5 parallels the version of events presented in 1 En 10—11. This can
be demonstrated, for example, by the presence of two judgments of the an
gels in the Jubilees account, both before and after their offspring kill each
other in internecine warfare, corresponding to the judgments of Asael and
Shemihazah in the 1 Enoch version, with the punishment for the giants in
between. In the latter text (which is chronologically earlier), the presence of
separate judgments for each figure is due to the combination of at least two
separate traditions within the Book of the Watchers.^18 However, the double
judgment in Jubilees both prior to and following the death of the giants
through civil war is redundant and must therefore be the result of the de
pendence of Jub 5 upon the 1 Enoch material. This dependence explains the
inclusion of the interpretive approach to Gen 6:3 as a limitation on human
life span. This same notion is found in the precisely parallel place in 1 En
10:9-10, and was included in Jubilees when the entire passage was incorpo
rated into the later book. The dating of the story in Jubilees' chronological
framework to approximately 120 years prior to the flood was then superim
posed upon the rewritten version of the story that was adopted from
1 Enoch, thus leading to the juxtaposition of both interpretive approaches.
B. Contradictions between the Rewritten
Narratives and the Legal Passages- The date of the entry into the Garden of Eden. According to Jub 3:17, which
is part of a rewritten narrative, Adam was exiled from the Garden of Eden on
the seventeenth of the second month, exactly seven years after he entered.
Thus, one can conclude that he arrived in the Garden on that same calendar
date. The legal passage embedded within this rewritten story (3:8-14) con-
18. For analyses and suggested divisions of the traditions and sources combined in
1 En 6-11, see, e.g., G. Beer, "Das Buch Henoch," in Die Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des
Alten Testaments, ed. E. Kautzsch, 2 vols. (Tubingen, Freiburg, and Leipzig: J. C. B. Mohr
[Paul Siebeck], 1900), 2:217-310 (here 225); D. Dimant, "'The Fallen Angels' in the Dead Sea
Scrolls and in the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic Books Related to Them" (in Hebrew)
(Ph.D. diss., Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1974), 23-72; G. W. E. Nickelsburg, "Apocalyp
tic and Myth in Enoch 6-11," JBL 96 (1977): 383-405.