Jonathan Ben-Dov
Both statements are connected with l En 106:15: "And there will be great
wrath upon the earth and a flood... for a year" (= 4QEnc 5 ii 20). In a way,
both Jubilees and 4Q252 supply calendrical ramifications for this statement
in 1 Enoch. However, it is essential to note what qualifies in each of the com
positions as a "full year." While in 4Q252 II 2-3 the sufficient condition is the
number of 364 days, in Jub 6:29-30 the condition is an edifice consisting of
four quarters of thirteen weeks each. Jubilees' conception of the year is thus
more subtly structured than the plain 364DCT.
III. The Division of the Year into Months
While two elements of the year — quarters and weeks — are considered cru
cial in 6:29-30, the division of the year into 12 months is entirely ignored. In
deed, while 364 divides neatly into 4 and 7, it is not easily divided into 12
months. Better results could be achieved for the ideal year of 360 days, with
12 schematic "months" of 30 days each, but since the 4 cardinal days are now
counted within the year, they render the division into months complicated.
In AB (chap. 72) the problem was solved by counting the additional days as
number 31 at the end of months III, VI, IX, and XII. This solution was ap
plied to the year of the flood in 4Q252 I 20, where a record of the date 31/XII
is partially extant.^44 However, the author of Jubilees is reluctant to acknowl
edge this reckoning, possibly because in his view a month can only be a per
fect and schematic unit of 30 days.
As noted by Ravid, Jubilees often refers to "the middle of the month,"
most notably in month III, which should have contained 31 days according
to Jaubert.^45 This phrase is inapplicable in a 31-day month, and its use re
veals that Jubilees had in mind a schematic 30-day month even in month III.
A similar contention may rise from Jub 5:27, where a period of 150 days is
equated with 5 months, against the rules of the standard 364DY, according to
which at least 1 month of 31 days must occur in the sequence.
How far can we go when interpreting this data? A cautious view would
see the figures of 5:27 as an innocent recapitulation of scripture, denying any
practical calendrical significance to what seems like a sequence of five 30-day
- Cf. the reconstruction by G. Brooke, "4Q252: Commentary on Genesis A," in
Qumran Cave 4.XVII: Parabiblical Texts, Parti, ed. G. Brooke et al., DJD 22 (Oxford: Claren
don, 1996), 194. - Ravid, "The Book of Jubilees," 381.