The earliest of such apocalypses is the canonical book of Daniel, in which an old seer in the Chaldean captivity is employed to portray the oppressions of the Jews under Antiochus Epiphanes. This was the model for all later ones. The literature in question was not confined to the Jews. Christians not only used the productions in which the Messiah was described after the Jewish fashion, but composed similar ones themselves,—Jewish Christians in particular. Here the Apocalypse of John is the noblest example, and deserves the honour of naming the entire range of literature.

The most obvious division of apocalyptic works is that founded upon authorship, Jewish or Christian. This, however, cannot be carried out with exactness because of later interpolations, proceeding from Christians who used the Jewish prophecies with the object of making them more suitable. But it is not easy to trace the extent of subsequent elaborations; and we have only to rely on probable conjecture.

I. Jewish Apocalyptic.

1. Enoch.— Under the name of this antediluvian patriarch a book exists which is quoted in the epistle of Jude. After it had disappeared, except the fragments preserved by ecclesiastical writers, it was found in Ethiopia among the Abyssinians, and published by Laurence in 1821; subsequently by Dillmann in 1851, to which the latter scholar added a German translation in 1853. The book has been divided into five parts, exclusive of an introduction and a conclusion. The first contains an account of the fall of the angels, and their intercourse with the daughters of men producing a race of giants, with the consequences of such apostacy; followed by a description of Enoch’s travels through heaven and earth under the guidance of holy angels, who explain to him the mysteries of the visible and invisible world (chapters vi.-xxxvi.) The “second vision of wisdom” is occupied with a description of the mysteries belonging to the heavenly kingdom, the angel-world, the Messiah, the growth and completion of His kingdom, the blessedness of the elect, and the condemnation of the unbelieving (xxxvii-lxxi.) The third part is astronomical and physical,including an account of the movements of the stars, the sun, and the moon; of the four winds, and various earthly objects (lxxii.-lxxxii.) The fourth part describes two dream visions shadowing forth the history of man, from his origin to the completion of the Messianic kingdom (lxxxiii-xci.) The fifth contains a series of admonitory discourses addressed by Enoch to his own family in the first place, and then to all inhabitants of the earth (xcii·-cv.) Several appendices are subjoined containing a narrative of the wonders which happened at Noah’s birth, and a writing of Enoch’s about the future retribution of the just and unjust (cvi.-cviii.)

The work contains much curious matter about the secrets and powers both of the visible and invisible world. Besides its historical views which relate mainly to the past, present, and future of the Jewish people, as also to heathen kings and potentates, much of the legendary and hagadic is interspersed. Daniel’s seventy weeks, reaching down to the Messianic age, are changed into seventy periods of heathen rulers. The writer has withal a religious spirit. He is a strict moralist, warning and threatening. His imagination is vivid, but incapable of sublimity. The sweep of his prophetic vision is extensive. He has poetic force and rigour. The work is an interesting product of pre-Christian Judaism, multifarious, artificial, rabbinising.

The document consists not only of the prophecy of Enoch, but of extracts from a Noah-prophecy interspersed. The latter are found in places often unsuitable, consisting of chapters liv. 7-lv. 2, lx., lxv.-lxix. 25; perhaps also of xx. and lxx. In cvi, cvii. ·the same hand may be partly traced. Setting aside these insertions, the book of Enoch itself seems to be composed of three documents, the oldest of which is chapters xxxrii.-lxxi. The other two are not easily collected, but the chapters xci. 3-cv. have the clearest claim to belong to the second, and xxxiii,-xxxri., lxxxv.-xc. to the third. The rest is all uncertain. The first was written about 144 b.c. as Ewald acutely remarks; the other two fall some years later, i.e., within the reign of John Hyrcanus (136-106 b.c. ) The Noah-document is posterior, belonging perhaps to the first century; and all were subsequently put together, forming the present heterogeneous composition. Hilgenfeld contends that chaptersxxxvii.-lxxi. proceed from a Christian Gnostic, but his arguments are insufficient. Still more improbable is the hypothesis of Volkmar, that the entire Apocalypse was written 132 a.d. We believe, however, in opposition to Dillmann, that they have been interpolated by a Jewish Christian, since the christology is higher than what Judaism produced; while the eschatology and angelology are developed in a manner which savours of Christianity. Thus, in the 51st and 62d chapters the Messiah is described as sitting on the throne of His glory and taking part in the judgment, while He is also called the Son of woman, the Son of man. To make Messiah the judge of mankind, either as the delegate of the Father, or together with Him, is not a Jewish, but a Christian idea. This differs from the representation in the 90th chapter, where he is symbolised by a white bull with great horns, whom all the beasts of the field and all the birds of heaven feared and entreated at all times. All races are to be changed into white bulls; the first among them became a great animal; and the Lord of the sheep rejoiced over them and all the bulls. Here Messiah is simply the chief of God’s people, elevated above the rest, but still of the same nature with them, haring no share in the judgment, or in founding the new church of God. He comes into the description by way of appendix, as it were, as though the author could not well omit all notice of Him. His part is entirely subordinate. In the 105th chapter, which, with the next three, show traces of Christian influence, the Messiah is called Son of God,— an appellation which seems to carry the idea of His person beyond Judaism, especially in connection with that in the 62d chapter, Son of woman, for the two come very near the idea of an incarnation. The whole work presents no trace of Rome as a power dangerous to Israel, so that the latest parts cannot be brought down far into the 1st century. The book had a very limited circulation among the author’s countrymen. They do not quote it. It proceeded from a private individual, who may have belonged to a small circle or sect such as the Essenes. But Jude cites it. It has been translated into English by Laurence; into German, but chiefly from Laurence’s English, by Hoffmann; and much more correctly by Dillmann in 1853. The translation of the last mentioned scholar has superseded those of his predecessors. See also Ewald’s Abhandlung, u.s.w.; Lücke’s Versuch einer vollständigen Einleitung in die Offenbarung des Johannes, u.s.w., zweyte Auflage, § 11; Koestlin, “Ueber die Entstehung des Buches Henoch” in the Tübingen Journal of Baur and Zeller for 1856; Ξilgenfeld’s Die Jüdische Apokalyptik ; Davidson in Kitto’s Cyclopaedia, article “Enoch;” Hilgenfeld’s Zeitschriftfürwiss. Theologie, 1860, 1861, 1862.

2. Another apocalyptic production is the so-called Fourth Book of Esdras, or The Prophecy of Ezra, originally written in Greek, but known now only in versions,—Latin, Ethiopie, Syriac, Arabic, and Armenian. The whole consists of a series of visions, which Ezra, who is put unchronologically into the 30th year of the Babylonian captivity, is supposed to have had. The questions that troubled the seer arose out of the state in which the Jews were at the time. They were deeply oppressed and afflicted. The heathen had trodden them down to the ground. Why had the promises of God to His own people been unfulfilled? Was not Israel still the chosen race, though often sinning? Were they not better than the heathen? The Romans had destroyed Jerusalem, and the Jews were scattered to the four winds; so that the writer was deeply perplexed by the establishment of a heathen power over the Jews, involving an indefinite delay of the Messianic kingdom, or an apparent hopelessness as to its inauguration. Heathenism triumphed over Judaism, rending it to pieces. What had become of the divine faithfulness? The first vision (ch. iv.-v. 20) contains an angelic answer to the questions which the seer had painfully pondered, as in the 3d chapter. After being reminded of his inability to comprehend God’s ways, the signs of the end are given. The second vision (v. 21-vi. 34) is similar. The third vision (vi. 35-ix. 25) and the fourth (ix. 27-x. 59) refer to the Messianic future. The fifth, relating to an eagle coming up out of the sea (x. 60-xii. 59), describes the Roman empire, its destination and period of duration; the sixth (ch. xiii), the setting up of Messiah’s kingdom; and the seventh (ch. xiv.), an account of Ezra’s re-writing the holy books. It is very difficult to discover the date of this singular book, and the question is not yet satisfactorily settled, though many critics have investigated it. One thing is pretty clear, that the destruction of Jerusalem had taken place, and that Christianity had passed its incipient stage, exercising some influence even upon Judaism. Original sin, a dying Messiah, a general resurrection, <fcc., point to a Christian origin; so that the passages in which these features appear, and others too, were probably interpolated. Hilgenfeld even thinks that vi. 18-vii. 45 were interpolated by a Christian at the commencement of the 3d century, but his arguments are not cogent, as Langen has shown. As the data for determining the time lie chiefly in the interpretation of the eagle’s wings and heads, the diversity of opinion is,increased. Perhaps the 30th year after the ruin of the city (iii. 1) points to the like time after the Roman conquest of Jerusalem. The six wings of the eagle on the right side are the six Julian emperors; the six on the left, are Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vindex, Nymphidius, Piso; and the three heads, the Flavian emperors. Either Titus’s or Domitian’s reign should be fixed upon; probably the latter, about 96 a.d. Hilgenfeld assigns 30 B.C.; Volkmar seems nearer the truth who gives it to 97 a.d., though some of his ingenious interpretations are far fetched. It is impossible to tell whether the author lived at Rome or in Egypt. The few internal evidences bearing on the point favour the latter.

The poetic excellence of this production is much greater than that of Enoch It is, indeed, below the Apocalypse of Daniel; but its merit is considerable. In modern times Messrs Frere and Irving gave it a place beside Daniel and St John,—strangely combining the prophecies of the three into one, as though all were formed upon the same plan, and referred to the same events. Chapters i., ii., and xv., xvi., which need not be separated, seem to have been written by Egyptian Christians; the first two chapters about 201 a.d ; the last two about 263 a.d., according to Gutschmid. Like the Fourth Book of Esdras, these were also written in Greek, but exist only in a Latin translation.

The literature and numerous opinions about the date may be seen in the Prolegomena to Hilgenfeld’s Messias Judoeorum, ; the same work contains the different texts of it. The Latin text alone is presented by Fritzsche in his Libri Apocryphi Veteris Testamenti Groece, 1871; and by Volkmar in his Handbuch der Einleitung in die Apocry-phen, 2 Abtheil., 1863. It is in the English Apocrypha, translated, no doubt, from the Vulgate. Luther left it out of his version, and De Wette followed him. The chief writers on the book in recent times are Volkmar and Hilgenfeld; but the list since Whiston and Sender is very copious.

3. The Boole of the Jubilees, or the Little Genesis, ή λeπτη γeveσις, parva Genesis.— This work is apocalyptic only in part, though called the Apocalypse of Moses in the notices of it by George Syncellus and George Cedrenus. In the form of a revelation made to Moses during his stay on Mount Sinai, it professes to be intended for future races, and to contain prophetic admonitions relating to coming times. It is predominantly historical and chronological, beginning with the old histories of the creation. From the commencement of the world till the entrance into Canaan is divided into 50 jubilee years; and every event is arranged according to jubilees, years of weeks, and years. Later Jewish ideas are transferred to earlier times, especially to the patriarchal; and difficult questions connected with the ancient worship are solved. Traditional views and hagadic materials appear with Jewish ritual and exclusiveness. The author was an energetic Palestinian Jew, conversant with the history of his people, and conservative, who meant to confirm them in attachment to the faith, by narrating their past fortunes over again, and keeping them alive to their principles. Amid the multifarious contents it is not easy to trace the precise origin of the book, though it is easy to see that the author was a patriotic Jew, whose object was to keep his countrymen firm in their religion at a time when it was in great peril both from without and within. It has been assigned to an Alexandrian, an Essene, and a Samaritan source, none of which opinions can be maintained. The writer has respect to different sects and parties in Judaism, to the various tendencies existing within the old religion when he wrote; and he endeavours to mediate between them by making concessions in this direction and that,—to conciliate and blend them together, that they may be more united against anti-Jewish influences. Hence Samaritan, Essene, Sadducean, and Pharisean peculiarities are found in the work. There is little doubt that he was an orthodox Jew, who had in view the consolidation of Judaism against heathenism and Christianity—the uniting of all sects and shades of belief in the common faith of Levitical monotheism. It is worthy of remark that the Hebrew text he used agrees with the Samaritan more than the Masoretic, though he himself was not a Samaritan, else he would not have mentioned Zion among the four holy places, to the exclusion of Gerizim. The date is the 1st century of our era; and before the destruction of the temple, as may be inferred from the first chapter. The writer seems to have used the book of Enoch, for he speaks in the fourth chapter of Enoch writing out the signs of heaven according to the order of their months. There are also coincident passages which go to prove the same thing. And there is evidence that the writer of the Testaments of the patriarchs employed our book; though this does not necessarily take the latter’s origin into the 1st century. So, too, the Fourth Book of Esdras was used, as we infer from what is said in relation to Abraham, Esdras iii. 14, &c., and Jubilees xii. The date cannot be fixed nearer than about 50 a.d. The Little Genesis was soon forgotten, and no trace of it appears among the Jews, except perhaps in the title of Bereshit Rabba. Yet its Midrash is of an older type than the other Midrashim; mystic and supernatural in its tendency; its angelology less developed. Jerome refers to it twice by name, and Syncellus thought highly of it. It had been rendered into Greek before the time of Jerome. Dillmann has published the Ethiopie version from two MSS., and translated it into German. The original was Hebrew or Aramaean, as all critics allow, except Frankel, who is refuted by Langen. A Greek version existed early, and was subsequently lost. From it the Ethiopie was made. In 1861, Ceriani published from a palimpsest in the Ambrosian library at Milan, considerable fragments of an old Latin version. This has been reprinted in a revised state by Roensch, together with a Latin version of Dillmann’s text. The work of this meritorious scholar is accompanied with learned notes and exhaustive dissertations; and Dr Sal. Rubin has taken the trouble to translate it into Hebrew, with an introduction and notes, Wien. 1870. See Treuenfels in the Literaturblatt des Orients, 1846; Beer’s Das Buch der Jubiläen und sein Verhaltniss zu den Midraschim, 1856; Jellinek, Bet ha-Midrasch Sammlung kleiner Midraschim und vermischter Abhandlungen aus der älteren Jüdischen Interatur, 1853-1855; Frankel in the Monatschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums, 1856; Roensch, Das Buch der Jubiläen oder die kleine Genesis, u.s.w., 1874.

The Life of Adam, adduced by Syncellus three times with the words ό λεγόμενος Βιος Άδάμ, seems to have been identical with the book of Jubilees, or perhaps a part of it. If the latter, it may have been another recension, enlarged and modified in various respects.

The Book of Adam's Daughters, Liber (qui appellatur) de filiabus Adae sive Leptogeneseos, mentioned in Gelasius’s decree about authentic and apocryphal books, also appears to be the same as the Jubilees.

4. The Assumption or Ascension of Moses, Ανάληψή Mωυσεως, is a prophecy of the future relating to Israel, put into the mouth of Moses, and addressed to Joshua just before the great lawgiver died. Founded upon the book of Deuteronomy, it is brief and unpoetical. But it seems to have been large at first, for according to Nicephorus, it consisted of 1400 stichs, while the Jubilees had only 1100. The work is an appropriate sequel to the Jubilees, but it seems to have proceeded from a different writer, though he lived at the same time. Internal evidence points to its composition after the death of Herod the Great, and before the destruction of Jerusalem. In the third chapter Pompey the Great is clearly depicted; but there is no trace of Jerusalem’s overthrow. The author was a Jew who wrote in Hebrew or Aramaean, and his production was afterwards translated into Greek and Latin. We need not assign him to any other place than Palestine, though Fritzsche conjectures that Rome was his abode. Fragments of the Latin version were first edited from a palimpsest at Milan by Ceriani. The version is by the same hand as that of the Jubilees, for both are found in one MS. and agree in character. The translator may have, therefore, taken the two for the work of the same author. After Ceriani, it has been published by Fritzsche. Hilgenfeld has tried to put it into Greek. The same has been done by Volkmar, Schmidt, and Merx. The ancients believed that Jude borrowed from this work his statement as to the dispute between Michael and the devil about the body of Moses. See Ceriani, Monumenta Sacra et Profana, tom. i. fascic. 1; Hilgenfeld, Novum Testamentum extra canonem receptum, fascic. i. 1866; Messias Judoeorum, 1869; Volkmar, Handbuch zu den Apokryphen, Band 3, 1867; Schmidt and Merx in Archiv für wissenschaftl. Erforschung des A. T, 1868; Fritzsche, Libri Apocryphi Veteris Testamenti Greece, 1871.

5. Apocalypse of Moses, whose proper title is Δι77γj7σις και τroλιτeιa , Aδaμ, άποκαλυφθεΐσα πapa θεoυ Mωυ<n∕ τω θεράποντι αυτόν, διδαχϋεΐσα παρά του αρχαγγέλου Μιχαήλ, contains an account of the formation of Adam and Eve, their fall, Seth’s dialogue with his mother about Adam, and the disposal of the latter’s body beside that of Abel. This work was first published in Greek by...