b.c.e.Epistle of Enochat1 Enoch104:10-11, a passage preserved in Ethiopic
and Greek texts:Ethiopic Greek
(10) And now I know this mystery,
that many times the sinners will alter
and pervert the word of truth; and
they will speak evil words, and lie,
and make big works and write my
books in their own words.(10)...]oftruththeywillalter;
and the sinners co[py] and
change many things, and lie and
fashion great works and w[rit]e
down books in their own names.(11) And would that they would write
down all the words accurately in their
languages and neither pervert nor
omit (anything) from my words, but
accurately write down everything
which I have testified before concern-
ing you.(11) An[d] would that [they
wou]ld write all my words accu-
rately in their names and
[nei]ther omit nor change these
words, but write all things accu-
rately which I testify to them.It has argued by some, especially on the basis of the Greek version, that
the writer of this passage is engaged in a defense of his own work as a
pseudepigraphon. If this is so, the possible charge of writing under some-
one else’s name is met by reversing the accusation: those who write “in
their own names” are the ones who perpetrate falsehood and corrupt the
truth. It is not clear, however, that this reading reflects the sense of the text
in its entirety. The emphasis in both versions on “my words” in verse 11
suggests that the writer’s attack is predominantly concerned with those
who, from his point of view, have subverted or misrepresented the Enoch
tradition they have all received. The writer, in using Enoch’s name, claims
to be the authentic interpreter and transmitter of Enochic revelation and
shows that he is aware of others who have deliberately taken it upon them-
selves to make improper use of it. While the polemic here may be directed
against the construals of the figure of Enoch in works such as Ben Sira,Ju-
bilees,orPseudo-Eupolemus,the fictive character of theEpistle of Enoch
momentarily gives way to an admission that the real author is not, in fact,
Enoch himself. If this admission is sufficiently plain, then the text assumes
a reception among its readers as a pseudepigraphon.
One should, of course, be cautious in regarding1 Enoch104:10-11 as
paradigmatic for how other pseudepigraphal authors understood what195Apocrypha and PseudepigraphaEERDMANS -- Early Judaism (Collins and Harlow) final text
Tuesday, October 09, 2012 12:04:02 PM