The Parables of Enoch (1Enoch 37-71): Provenance
and Social Setting
Abstract: The Book of the Parables of Enoch has left no external traces, and few
internal clues, regarding its origins. To add to this obscurity, there is a gap in our
knowledge of the social structures and settings that could have brought it to light. In
this study, we re-examine the main biographical, social, historical and geographical
characteristics of the text for clues to its provenance and social setting. With the help
of Josephus in particular, we arrive at a cave-village in the cliffs of Mt. Arbel,
overlooking the Plain of Ginnosar in Eastern Galilee. After a thorough investigation
of the ‘brigands’ who occupied the caves during the Civil War (40-37 BCE), we
identify a social crisis of sufficient gravity to explain the main concerns of the Book
of Parables. The site and its surroundings are presented in another article.
Introduction
More often than not, the crime detective does not discover a ‘smoking gun’ and no
witnesses are forthcoming. Instead, small clues are found here and there which have
little evidentiary significance on their own, but whose cumulative weight can lead to
‘conviction’. This situation is common to different areas of research, but especially in
piecing together the jig-saw puzzle of the ancient past. Clues from archaeology,
historical narratives and contemporary literature must be assessed and assembled in
order to build up a picture whose detail becomes clearer and more certain with each
new discovery.
The para-biblical writing called the Parables of Enoch,1 which comprises the central
and largest section of 1Enoch (chs. 37-71), has left little or no external trace of its
origin. Although careful study has identified a Semitic (Aramaic or Hebrew) original,
which was subsequently translated into Greek, “the Parables are attested only in an
Ethiopic (Ge’ez) version, which is an integral component in the Ethiopic Bible; there
are no fragments of the Semitic original or an intermediate Greek translation”.2 More
significantly, there was no trace of it among the Dead Sea Scrolls discovered near
Qumran, despite the finding of fragments of text, in Aramaic, from most of the other
parts of 1Enoch.3 A direct connection between the Book of Parables and the Qumran
community cannot therefore be assumed or upheld.
1The ‘Parables of Enoch’, ‘Book of Parables’, ‘Parables’ and ‘Similitudes of Enoch’ are the most
commonly used titles for the text of 1Enoch 37–71. However, the real title, according to ancient
Hebrew tradition, corresponds to the first word or words of the text, which are “The Vision of
Wisdom that Enoch saw” (1En 37:1). The translation used and quoted in our study is that of
Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation, Minneapolis, MI: Fortress Press,
2012.
2Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2: A Commentary on the Book of Enoch Chapters 37-82,
Hermeneia Series, Minneapolis, MI: Fortress Press, 2021; 4.
34Q 201,202,204-212.
1
The Book of Parables, then, can be seen as one piece of the ancient jig-saw puzzle,
whose place in the existing reconstruction has not yet been found.4 To make matters
worse, there is a lack of specific detail, internal to the Ethiopic text, which might help
scholars find a place for it in the existing picture. This is not just because
biographical, social, historical and geographical features have been generalized, in
order to maintain the appearance of Enochic origin, but also that these features do not
fit into any familiar pattern. In terms of the jig-saw puzzle metaphor, we have so far
been unable to identify the provenance of the Book of Parables because the
neighbouring pieces of the picture, which form its immediate context, are also
missing. In other words, there is currently a sizeable ‘lacuna’ in this part of the
picture.
If this diagnosis of the situation is accurate, there can be no resolution unless we find
and assemble the pieces of the puzzle into which the Book of Parables can then be
fitted. We simply have to look harder for the historico-geographical setting, the actual
sticks and stones, in which the author of the Book of Parables lived and wrote. Only
then, having found and assembled the adjacent pieces, will it be possible to match and
insert the Book of Parables into the emerging picture.
We therefore have a double, though mutually interdependent, task before us: not only
to clarify the main biographical, social, historical and geographical characteristics of
the Book of Parables, so as to know where it may fit, but also to identify the actual
physical location where it was written, which has so far escaped detection. The first
part of this task will be presented below, in the knowledge that the careful
contextualization of the Parables will help in the search for the physical abode of its
author. The second part of the task will follow in a separate article.
The Author of the Book of Parables
Study of the text of the Book of Parables finds that although it draws from a variety of
literary sources, these have been shaped by a firm compositional hand, to produce a
text that has been artfully constructed on a literary and oral level.5 It is therefore
justified to consider it as the product of a single author, with the interpolation of some
additional material from other hands.6
The author of the Book of Parables identifies himself pseudonymously with the
ancient patriarch Enoch (Gn 5,19), as he records what is revealed to him during his
heavenly ascent and journey (cf. Gn 5,24). His work conforms fully to the definition
of a Jewish apocalypse, of the type written in the Land of Israel from the mid to late
4Nickelsburg epitomizes this when he writes: “Thus, the text’s communal and geographical
provenance remain a mystery”, 1 Enoch 2, 66.
5Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2, 34.
6According to Darrell Hannah, most scholars today would agree that the Parables contains
interpolations from a Noah apocryphon, although the precise delineation of these interpolations is
still debated. Hannah has proposed 1En 54:7–55:2; 60:1-10, 24-25; and 65:1–69:25 as certain, and ch
64 as likely, cf. Darrell D. Hannah, ‘The Book of Noah, the Death of Herod the Great and the Date of
the Parables of Enoch’, in Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: Revisiting the Book of Parables, ed
Gabriele Boccaccini, Grand Rapids, MI/Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2007; 473.
2
second temple period.7 The author’s revelation is written in three sections he calls
“parables” (1En 37:5; 38:1; 45:1; 58:1), in which he describes the preparations for
eschatological judgment and salvation with increasing detail and urgency. His book
immediately follows the Book of the Watchers (1En 6–36), which he frequently
returns to, and develops. From this, it is evident that the author of the Parables had a
good knowledge of the Book of the Watchers and crafted his book as a sequel to it.
The origin of evil in the world, through the descent of the rebel angels on to Mt.
Hermon, is a major theme in the Book of the Watchers, and the imminent judgment of
those fallen angels, together with the judgment of the kings, the mighty, the
landowners and the sinners is the main concern of the Book of Parables. Without
going into further detail, it is clear that the author of Parables was continuing a
tradition that began with the Book of the Watchers, and that Mt. Hermon was an
important point of reference for both (1En 6:6; cf. 1En 39:1-2; 64:1-2).
Apart from the flashbacks to the rebellion of the angels, there is another important
link between these two Enochic texts: The Book of Parables repeats, with some
variation, the names of the angels, both good angels (1En 40:9; 54:6; 71:8-9) and
rebel angels (1En 69:2-15), as they appear in the Book of the Watchers (1En 9:1;
20:1-8; and 1En 6:3-8; 8:1-4). Loren Stuckenbruck informs us that, apart from the
Book of Giants, and “despite the influence of the Enochic accounts, the names of the
chief angelic perpetrators of evil are conspicuously absent outside the earliest Enoch
tradition”.8 This means that the repetition of the traditional list of angelic names in the
Parables of Enoch (1En 69:2-15) is a singularity—a unique occurrence that requires
an explanation.
The matter would probably rest there if we knew nothing more about this tradition.
However, in his description of the countrywide Essene movement, Flavius Josephus
informs us that on entering a community, each member swore an oath to “preserve in
like manner both the books of their sect and the names of the angels” (Jewish War
2.142).9 The repetition of the names of the angels, in a traditional form, within a work
attributed to Enoch, evokes this particular aspect of Essene piety.10 The somewhat
awkward inclusion of the list of the names of the rebel angels in the Book of Parables,
7It is a typical example of the genre ‘apocalypse’, whose definition is now well known and widely
used, thanks to the work of John J. Collins, in ‘Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre’, Semeia, 14,
Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979.
8Loren T. Stuckenbruck, The Myth of the Rebellious Angels: Studies in Second Temple Judaism and
New Testament Texts, Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge UK: Eerdmans, 2017; 82.
9A reference to oath-taking on joining the community can be found in 1QS 5:8-9, though Josephus
does not appear to have been dependent on this (cf. Jewish War 2.137-142). Given that most of his
material would have been inaccessible to outsiders, the detail he gives is exceptional. The best
explanation is the one given by him in Life 9-11, that at the age of 16 (53/54 CE) he was a guest at an
Essene community for a few months. His recollection of the details of the admission oaths indicates
that he may have studied them carefully with a view to becoming an Essene himself. By referring to
them as “awesome oaths”, he gives the impression he was intimidated by them, and by the
consequences of transgression, thus indicating why he decided not to join. In all his writings, he
retains the highest regard for the Essenes.
10 No attempt will be made here to try to explain why the lists of angels were important to the
Essenes, or for what purpose they may have been used.
3
with an updated description of their transgressions (1En 69:2-15)11 and modelled on
the original list in the Book of the Watchers (1En 6:3-8; 8:1-4), suggests that the
author of the Parables was indeed fulfilling an obligation to ‘preserve the names of the
angels’, which in turn would ensure the preservation of his book. This is significant as
it would identify him as a full member of an Essene community. As no part of the
Book of Parables has been found at Qumran, he could not have been a member of the
Essene community at Qumran. Nevertheless, Philo, Josephus and Hippolytus all
describe the Essene movement as disseminated throughout the country, in cities and
villages, and as more diverse than the Qumran community.12 It would seem justified,
then, to describe our author, by exclusion, as a ‘non-Qumranic Essene’.
This suggestion receives further clarification from an examination of the literary
characteristics of the Book of Parables. Although its terms, expressions, themes and
technical formulations exhibit many similarities to those of the Dead Sea scrolls, the
substantial differences argue against its origin in the same community. At the end of
her recent study, Devorah Dimant sums up the complex literary relationship as
follows: “In consequence, the Book of Parables should be viewed as having been
created by circles close but not identical to the Qumran group, or by those who have
drawn upon its legacy”.13
Similarly, John J. Collins notes: “In view of the absence of the Similitudes from
Qumran, we may safely conclude that they were not composed there. (…) It is
sufficient that the authors of the Similitudes were well versed in the earlier Enoch
books and adapted some of their conceptions and terminology. Nonetheless it is quite
possible that the Similitudes originated in a closed circle somewhat analogous to
Qumran. The quasi-technical terminology and the distinctive faith in ‘that Son of
Man’ support the idea that the authors of Similitudes belonged to a group apart”.14
Although these distinguished scholars do not specifically identify the author of
Parables as a non-Qumranic Essene, their observations would appear to be entirely
consistent with this suggestion.
11 For a thorough literary analysis, see Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2, 297-303.
12 Josephus, Antiquities 18.20, Jewish War 2.124; Philo, Every Good Man 75-6, Hypothetica 11: 1,8;
Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, 9.15,21.
13 The quotation is from Devorah Dimant, ‘The Book of Parables (1 Enoch 37–71) and the Qumran
Community Worldview’, From Enoch to Tobit: Collected Studies in Ancient Jewish Literature, Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 2017; 155. In the same study, Dimant gives examples of the ‘contiguity between
certain formulations in the Book of Parables and the content and terminology of the Qumran
community literary output’, From Enoch to Tobit, 139-155. Examples of common terms and
expressions are also given by Jonas Greenfield and Michael Stone, ‘The Enochic Pentateuch and the
Date of the Similitudes’, Harvard Theological Review, vol 70, no. 1/2 (Jan-Apr 1977), 51-65; and
common themes are outlined by Ida Fröhlich, ‘The Parables of Enoch and Qumran Literature’, in
Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, 348-349.
14 John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature, 2nd
ed, Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge UK: Eerdmans, 1998; 191-2.
4
Social Setting
1. The Protagonists
The suggestion the author may have been the member of an Essene community, other
than that of Qumran, receives further support from a simple reconstruction of the
social context represented in the text. The author writes for, and appears to identify
himself with, the faithful people of God, to whom he refers numerous times as the
“righteous”, the “chosen” or the “holy”, and in various combinations of these worthy
qualities. Part of this faithful community are already in heaven, while the rest are on
earth, where they assemble in local communities and suffer persecution at the hands
of the kings and the mighty, up to the shedding of their blood:
“And they [the kings and the mighty] persecute the houses of his congregation, and the
faithful who depend on the name of the Lord of Spirits.
In those days, there had arisen the prayer of the righteous, and the blood of the righteous
one, from the earth into the presence of the Lord of Spirits.
In these days the holy ones who dwell in the heights of heaven were uniting with one
voice, and they were glorifying and praising and blessing the name of the Lord of Spirits,
and were interceding and praying in behalf of the blood of the righteous that had been
shed, and the prayer of the righteous, that it might not be in vain in the presence of the
Lord of Spirits; that judgment might be executed for them, and endurance might not be
their (lot) forever.”
(1En 46:8–47:2)
From the text of the Parables, George Nickelsburg extrapolates the following
information about the ‘houses of his congregation’: “They saw themselves as the
“chosen,” that is the true Israel, who were also the “the righteous”, thus faithful to the
commandments of “the Lord of Spirits.” (…) That they gathered for purposes of
worship is indicated by the liturgical echoes that are scattered through the book. The
repetitive formulations of and references to angelic worship in 39:6–40:10 and 61:6
13 perhaps indicate that the members of the congregation saw their worship as in
concert with the praise that the heavenly choruses directed to the Lord of Spirits and
the Chosen One”.15 This last point is supported by the common terminology, the
“holy ones”, for the angelic host in heaven and for the faithful on earth.16
The text goes on to describe the preparations for divine judgment and the dramatic
eschatological reversal that will follow. In summary, the author appears to be closely
associated with a congregation of righteous, chosen and holy people, who worship
God in communion with the angels and with their own resurrected members in
heaven, and who live in small communities on earth, where they suffer persecution
from the kings and the mighty, and look forward to a reversal in their condition at the
divine judgment. This congregation is the intended recipient of the wisdom revealed
in the Book of Parables.17
15 Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2, 65.
16 For a useful survey, see Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2, 100.
17 Aptly summed up by Pierluigi Piovanelli: “The entire text is a hymn to the glory of “the children and
the chosen ones” of the Lord of the Spirits (62:11), an invitation to take courage and not abandon the
5
This profile of the author’s community should be sufficient to identify it among the
various groups in existence in the second temple period and beyond, but the scholars
who have tried to do this have had no success. Although it is strongly reminiscent of
the Qumran community that worshipped with Hymns, Psalms and special
compositions such as the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, it does not share the same
halachic or cultic interests, nor the same sectarian concern for separation, a concern
that became extreme and ‘introversionist’ at Qumran. The point has been made again
and again, most notably by Pierluigi Piovanelli18 and George Nickelsburg,19 not to
mention the survey of Lester Grabbe, who works systematically through a check list
of possible groups that might have produced this writing, ending with a profile that
does not fit any known group, including those of the Pharisees and Sadducees.20
Along the way he discounts the Qumran community and the Essenes, although he
admits “The Book of Parables has much in common with Qumran (though it is not
certain that any of the Enochic writings are the products of Qumran)”, and “As with
Qumran (which is often identified as Essene in some way), the Book of Parables
seems to be compatible with what we know of the Essenes, who are said to have been
interested in esoteric books”. Nevertheless, he finally dismisses an Essene connection
by noting: “there seems to be nothing specifically Essene in the Parables”,21 a remark
that echoes the lack of those specifically sectarian interests and concerns noticed by
other scholars. So, to sum up, although the Book of Parables has much in common
with Qumran, and is compatible with what we know of the Essenes, no connection
can be asserted because of the non-sectarian and universal character of this book.
At this point, we should remember that there were differences as well as similarities
between the Essenes at large and the Qumran community in particular, and that it was
probably because of these differences that the Book of Parables, along with several
other works, never found their way into the collection of Dead Sea Scrolls.22 If our
definition of what is Essene, and what is not, is based solely on the content of the
Dead Sea Scrolls, then our definition will fail to take account of those other Essene
writings that were excluded from Qumran for whatever reason. There will be, as
indeed there is, a sizeable ‘lacuna’ in our understanding of the non-Qumranic Essenes.
The non-Qumran Essenes have, nevertheless, left a significant mark in the Dead Sea
Scrolls, in those passages of the Damascus Document (CD) that allude to the division
which occurred among the Essenes after they had united into, and defined themselves
hope (cf. 104: 4)”, in ‘”A Testimony for the Kings and the Mighty Who Possess the Earth”: The Thirst
for Justice and Peace in the Parables of Enoch’, Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, 371.
18 Pierluigi Piovanelli, ‘A Testimony’, Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, 373-375.
19 Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2, 66.
20 “These characteristics seem to describe a messianic group with its own identity but that has not
necessarily withdrawn from Jewish society. Members are pacifist, or at least aiming to let God be the
active one in their salvation, and are certainly not seeking to establish God’s kingdom by military
means. The group includes intellectuals (whether priests or scribes) with a strong interest in
cosmology, though no evidence of knowledge of Greek exists”, Lester Grabbe, ‘The Parables of Enoch
in Second Temple Jewish Society’, Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, 402.
21 The three quotations are from Grabbe, ‘The Parables’, Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, 399.
22 These works include the Epistle of Enoch, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, and others.
6
by, a ‘new covenant’. It was a division within the Essene household that effectively
became permanent.23
After expressing several stern warnings to those who fail to live up to the demands of
the new covenant, which they entered in the land of Damascus, “who again betray it
and depart from the fountain of living waters” (CD [B] I,1),24 the Damascus
Document gives the impression that a further departure of the followers of the
Teacher of Righteousness had already occurred, because, among other things, “they
returned again to the way of the people in small (or ‘a few’) matters” (CD [B] II,23
24).25 Here the departure of “the house of Separation (Heb: Peleg)”, as the parting
members are called, is still fresh, for these individuals are invited to appear before the
council and be reconciled or judged, before the Glory of God returns to Israel and it
will be too late (CD [B] II,23-27). The reasons given for the recent internal division
are various: failing to perform the duties of the upright, having idolatrous desires,
‘walking in stubbornness’, rejecting or criticizing the precepts of righteousness, and
despising the Covenant and the Pact – the New Covenant – which they made in the
land of Damascus. Above all, in the context of so much emphasis on disengagement
from the surrounding society,26 the charge against those who “returned again to the
way of the people” is redolent with disagreement on matters of purity and avoidance
of fellow Israelites (the people). Ironically, “the house of Separation” was the name
given to those Essenes—for they were also members of the ‘new covenant’—who
resisted the command to separate completely from their fellow Jews. Gabriele
Boccaccini states it thus: “The Damascus Document also reveals that the catalyst of
the schism between the parent movement and the teacher of righteousness was his
decision to call for stricter segregation from the rest of Israel, whom he considered
under the dominion of Belial”. 27
The internal division and hostility attested by the Damascus Document increases in
intensity in the later works of the Qumran sectarians (Pesher Nahum 4Q169 4:1,
Psalms 4Q 171 2:14-15 and Habakkuk 1QpHab 2:1-4; 5:8-12), accompanied by
23 We adopt here the basic tenet of the Groningen hypothesis of F. García Martínez (1988), further
developed by Gabriele Boccaccini (1998), that there was a division within the parent movement, the
‘new covenant’ community known as ‘Essene’, and that this division is indeed reflected in the Dead
Sea Scrolls mentioned in what follows.
24 All quotations and references are from The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, fiftieth anniversary
edition, trans and ed by Geza Vermes, London: Penguin Group, 2011; 134-137.
25 Gabriele Boccaccini explains this as follows “In other words, the house of Peleg is a group of people
who share the Enochic view of the contamination of postexilic Judaism, but are now accused by the
teacher of righteousness of being inconsistent with their own positions and too ready to
compromise”, Beyond the Essene Hypothesis: The Parting of the Ways between Qumran and Enochic
Judaism, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998; 151-2.
26 The process of disengaging is expressed in a variety of ways, e.g., “departing from the people”,
“separating from the sons of the Pit”, “distinguishing between the clean and unclean, the holy and
profane”, “keeping apart from every uncleanness according to the statutes relating to each one”.
27 Boccaccini, Beyond the Essene Hypothesis, 150. There may be some terminological confusion
because the parent group are here called ‘Enochians’. They should really be identified as Essenes at
this stage, because they are also members of the new covenant community known by that name.
There is no historical record of a group who were called ‘Enochians’ or ‘Enochic Jews’.
7
increasing divergence in religious, theological and eschatological points of view.28
The main difference, however, remained the issue of separation from the surrounding
society. Although both groups continued to abide by the rules and discipline of the
Essene ‘new covenant’, and both groups can therefore be regarded as Essene, the
Qumran Essenes were essentially a marginal sect, closed to the people of Israel and
divorced from the Temple, whereas the non-Qumran Essenes, while maintaining some
degree of doctrinal secrecy, became more open to dealing with fellow Jews, and even
participated to a limited extent in the Temple cult. In brief, unlike the extremely
sectarian Qumran Essenes, the non-Qumran Essenes were not sectarian in the strict
sense of the word.29
In the context of this internal division, and of the divergence of the two Essene
factions, the lack of sectarian characteristics in the Book of Parables, along with its
more universal and tolerant character, are no longer barriers to recognizing it as the
work of an Essene author, living in a non-Qumranic community, somewhere in or
near the Land of Israel. In fact, the Book of Parables now becomes a unique source of
information about this branch of the Essenes, which can be called ‘mainstream’ to all
intents and purposes.
2. The Antagonists
The discussion of the social setting of the Book of Parables is not complete without
considering the chief human antagonists, those who rebelled against the Lord of
Spirits and persecuted his people (1En 46:8), who are mentioned in the text at least 15
times in similar, though not identical, expressions. They are called ‘the kings, the
mighty (the strong or exalted) and those who possess the land’. In addition to the
rebellious angels and the unrepentant sinners, ‘the kings, the mighty and those who
possess the land’ are all selected for eternal condemnation at the impending judgment.
“And the son of man whom you have seen—he will raise the kings and mighty from their
couches, and the strong from their thrones. He will loosen the reins of the strong, and he
will crush the teeth of the sinners. He will overturn the kings from their thrones and their
kingdoms, because they do not exalt him or praise him, or humbly acknowledge whence
the kingdom was given to them.
The face of the strong he will turn aside, and he will fill them with shame. Darkness will
be their dwelling, and worms will be their couch, and they will have no hope to rise from
their couches, because they do not exalt the name of the Lord of Spirits.
These are they who judge the stars of heaven, and raise their hands against the Most High,
and tread upon the earth and dwell on it.
All their deeds manifest unrighteousness, and their power (rests) upon their wealth. Their
faith is in the gods they have made with their hands, and they deny the name of the Lord of
Spirits.
28 Boccaccini, Beyond the Essene Hypothesis, 150-156. The magnitude of the difference can be
grasped by comparing, or rather contrasting, the eschatological prophecy represented in the Parables
of Enoch with that of the War Scroll (1QM) produced contemporaneously by the Qumran community
29 Secret society perhaps, but not a ‘sect’. For a practical and verifiable criterion for what constituted
a sect in second-temple Judaism, see Richard Bauckham, ‘Parting of the Ways: What happened and
Why’, Studia Theologica 47, (1993); 135-151.
8
And they persecute the houses of his congregation, and the faithful who depend on the
name of the Lord of Spirits.” (1En 46:4-8)
Pierluigi Piovanelli has captured the author’s intense irritation with these elites at the
top of ancient Jewish and Greco-Roman societies and contrasts the unprecedented
focus of his attack with Enoch’s previous literary targets. “This explicit and
uncompromising attack against the political leaders of the day is a novelty in the
Enochic tradition. Thus, for example, even if some scholars interpret the myth of the
fallen angels in the Book of the Watchers (1En 6-11) as a metaphoric response to
persecution by the Hellenistic kings, the text never suggests such identification. On
the other hand, even if the Epistle of Enoch contains many woes against the rich
(94:6–95:3; 96:4; 97:7-10) that cruelly oppress the righteous (103:9-15), kings and
mighty ones are never accused of being guilty of such a crime. (…) …such a shift
from economic to political injustice demonstrates that some changes had occurred in
the social world of the circle that produced the Book of Parables”. 30
Condemnation falls on the kings and mighty for their denial of God, for their
persecution of the people of God and for their idolatrous conduct, raising the
suspicion that they were pagan rulers, Greek or Roman, or Jewish kings, such as the
Hasmoneans or Herodians, who compromised with pagan rulers and adopted their
practices and customs. The ‘mighty’ most probably refers to the military commanders
in the service of the kings.
If indeed the author was a member of the Essenes, who returned to the Land of Israel
from exile around 100 BCE, and settled in multiple communities around the country
during the reign of one of the later Hasmoneans (Alexander Jannaeus, Salome
Alexandra, Hyrcanus II, Aristobulus II, Antigonus), it is fair to assume that they
would have been persecuted by these ‘kings and their mighty men’. Not only had the
Essenes refused to recognize the high priestly legitimacy of the Hasmoneans from the
time of Jonathan in 152 BCE, for which reason they had withdrawn from the temple
cult and taken themselves into exile, but they had also more recently prophesied and
actively supported the ascent of Herod to the throne, to replace them.31 The
Hasmoneans and their mighty henchmen had accumulated decades of resentment
against the Essenes, so the Essenes’ return to the Land of Israel, from exile in the
‘land of Damascus’, would more than likely have triggered the urge to punish and
persecute them.
The final group of antagonists, ‘those who possess the land’, is a new group, never
previously singled out for condemnation. First, however, we should allow George
30 Pierluigi Piovanelli, ‘A Testimony’, Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, 372-3.
31 The Essenes supported Herod before, during and after the Civil War, and received royal
prerogatives in return. Their support dates from Herod’s childhood, when an Essene prophet told him
he would be ‘King of the Jews’, apparently basing himself on the interpretation of an ancient
prophecy (Gen 49,10). After Herod became king, the Essenes were given the Essene Quarter in
Jerusalem, located behind Herod’s Palace, and the whole community was exempted from the loyalty
oath that Herod imposed upon other religious groups. Josephus sums up the relationship as follows:
“…Herod had these Essenes in such honour, and thought higher of them than their mortal nature
required” (Antiquities 15.372, trans William Whiston). There is little doubt that the Essenes were
Herod’s greatest supporters among the Jews, for they saw his reign as divinely sanctioned.
9
Nickelsburg to explain the complexities of translating this expression from Ge’ez.
There are several options, depending on the choice of subject, verb and object. Either
the antagonists are mighty kings who have seized control of the inhabited earth which
they now rule over (general reference to the political and military leaders of the time),
or they are local kings, military officials and wealthy individuals who have come, by
foul means or fair, to possess much of the Land of Israel and its produce (local
interpretation). Because the expression occurs at least seven times in a context of
injustice towards the righteous, Nickelsburg decides for the local option: ‘those who
possess the land’ refers to the wealthy owners, legitimate or illegitimate, of the local
agricultural land.32
In Hasmonean and Herodian times, ‘those who possess the land’ applies especially to
members of the wealthy landowning aristocracy, the lay nobility, the leading families,
who lived and thrived in Jerusalem. These were the descendants of the heads of the
families (the elders) who returned from exile and, together with the high-priests,
assumed a leading role in the government of the post-exilic community. With the
Levites, they accompanied the daily liturgy from the Court of Israelites. The services
they undertook for the temple, such as the regular provision of firewood, show that
they were landowning families. They also formed the economic backbone of the
Sadducean party and commanded a small majority in the Sanhedrin.33 Later, they
were given the responsibility of collecting the taxes due to Rome as tribute, making
up any shortfall with their own wealth. They acquired the best land in the country,
transported its produce to Jerusalem and made a handsome profit from selling it at
Jerusalem’s inflated prices. This is illustrated by the account of ‘the three men of
great wealth’, who, at the beginning of the first Jewish Revolt, pledged to provide
food and wood for Jerusalem for twenty-one years. Even though their political power
started to decline with the last of the Hasmonean rulers, it appears their wealth
continued to grow well into the first century CE. Joachim Jeremias sums them up as
follows: “Thanks to their ties with the powerful priestly nobility, the rich patrician
families were a very influential factor in the life of the nation. Especially under the
Hasmoneans, up to the beginning of Queen Alexandra’s reign (76 BCE), was political
power in their hands. Together with the leading priests they made up the Sanhedrin,
and consequently they, together with the sovereign, possessed judiciary power and
authority to govern. The decline of their power dates from the time of Alexandra;
under her the Pharisees gained a foothold in the Sanhedrin, and the mass of people
rallied more and more to them”.34
Adding these wealthy landlords to the kings and the mighty, and repeating this triad in
a list of criminals awaiting judgment, suggests that the rich landlords also had a role
in persecuting the righteous. In the context sketched above, of the return of the
Essenes from exile at the start of the first century BCE, it is conceivable that the
Essene project of establishing agricultural communities in rural areas was blocked or
32 Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2, 103-6.
33 Most of the information about the rich landowners comes from Joachim Jeremias, Jerusalem in the
Time of Jesus: An Investigation into Economic and Social Conditions during the New Testament Period,
1st US edition: Fortress Press, 1969; reprint by Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2016; 92-99, 222-232.
34 Op. cit. 232.
10
frustrated by the rich landlords, because their interests collided. These rich landlords
may also have been acquiring land in the areas where the Essenes wanted to settle. In
some areas, large amounts of land had already been seized by the king and by his
household, so the kings could and should be included in the category of ‘those who
possess the land’. Undoubtedly the ‘mighty’, referring to the military officers, should
be included too, as their services were often rewarded by the king with the gift of
estates and land in rural areas. So, between ‘the king, the mighty and the wealthy
landlords’ a large proportion of the best agricultural land in the country had been
taken out of the control of traditional homestead farmers, who were then re-employed
as tenant farmers or day-labourers on land that was now owned by powerful, wealthy
and often absentee landlords. The nationwide ‘land grab’ of the wicked triad
impoverished many traditional farmers and forced them into a form of servitude. It
was a process that appears to have continued across the country, throughout the first
century BCE and well into the first century CE.
According to James Charlesworth, the factors leading to this disenfranchisement of
the traditional peasant farmer, such as onerous taxation and land seizure under the
royal patronage system, became more severe during King Herod’s reign, mainly due
to the cost of his foreign and domestic building projects, and this alone could account
for the social injustice represented in the Book of Parables.35 He then argues that the
author’s concern with the socio-economic decline of peasant farmers helps to date his
book to the reign of Herod, and this has been largely endorsed by Nickelsburg in his
commentary.36
More recently, however, doubts have been expressed about this assertion: some
historians claim that conditions for the peasant farmers were not much worse during
Herod’s reign, than during the antecedent rule of the Hasmoneans.37
David Fiensy seems to strike the right balance when he writes: “Doubtless Herod had
considerable personal estates from which to draw but he also evidently increased
taxes to afford all of his activity. We know this because after Herod’s death, the Jews
of Palestine sent delegates to Rome to report his misdeeds. On the list of his crimes
was that he had decorated surrounding non-Jewish cities at the expense of the
Palestinian ones. He had impoverished the entire Jewish nation with his building
programs both inside Palestine and outside (Josephus, Ant 17.307; J.W. 2.285)”.38
In summary, under Herod, the average Jewish farmer would have found it more
difficult to make ends meet, but the extra tax burden did not cause widespread social
35 ‘Can we Discern the Composition Date of the Parables of Enoch?’, Enoch and the Messiah Son of
Man, 459-468, with updates in James H. Charlesworth, ‘The Date and Provenience of the Parables of
Enoch’, in Parables of Enoch: A Paradigm Shift, eds. Darrell L. Bock and James H. Charlesworth, T&T
Clark, Jewish and Christian Texts Series, London: Bloomsbury; 2013; 48-53; and ‘Did Jesus Know the
Traditions in the Parables of Enoch’, op. cit. 180-184.
36 Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2, 63-64.
37 Cf. P. Richardson and A. M. Fisher, Herod: King of the Jews and Friend of the Romans, 2nd Edition,
London/New York: Routledge, 2018; 321-324.
38 David Fiensy, ‘Assessing the Economy of Galilee in the Late Second Temple Period: Five
Considerations’, The Galilean Economy in the Time of Jesus, eds. David Fiensy and Ralph Hawkins,
Atlanta: SBL, 2013; 181.
11
crisis or unrest. On its own, it does not explain the stark condemnations of the ruling
elite in the Book of Parables, nor the allusions to grave social injustice in that book.
There was indeed a severe social crisis during Herod’s reign, and although it was
perpetuated, even exacerbated by, the land grab of the powerful and wealthy, the main
geopolitical causes lay elsewhere, as we will see at the end of this paper. In contrast to
the author of the Parables of Enoch, who blames the ruling elite, Josephus
unsympathetically refers to the perpetrators of this crisis as “brigands”.
The Date of Authorship
Until about a decade or two ago, the dating of the Parables was one of the most
contentious issues in the study of this book. Suggestions varied from c.70 BCE (R.H.
Charles) to c. 270 CE (Joseph Milik) and everything in between. However, at the
Enoch Seminar held at Camaldoli, Italy, in 2005, a consensus crystallized among the
majority of scholars, for a date towards the end of the reign of King Herod the Great,
which is to say around the end of the first century BCE. A minority argue for a later
date, in the second half of the first century CE, but this could also reflect a later stage
in the composition. As there is no early manuscript history to guide the dating, and
since the uniform literary style is not that of the author or authors, but of the 4th
century translator from Greek into Ge’ez, the matter is still debated, but without any
new evidence to challenge the consensus.39
Paolo Sacchi summarizes several avenues for research on dating: “As is well known,
the dating of the Parables can be made only by internal criteria, because we have no
external evidence from ancient sources about the Parables. This research can proceed
in many different ways: (1) we can look for quotations in the patristic literature to
obtain a terminus ante quem; (2) we can look for literary sources that could provide a
terminus a quo; (3) we can analyze the ideology of the book itself to establish some
ideological links between the Parables and other literary documents, which then help
us determine what time period best fits the text; and (4) we can explore possible
historical allusions in the text. This last approach is in my opinion the most secure, if
and when it is possible. This method of dating has been applied to many other texts,
such as the book of Daniel and the book of Dream Visions, whose dating is
reasonably deduced from the last known event recorded in each respective
narrative”.40
39 In brief, the present state of the question is whether the Book of Parables was written a generation
before the public ministry of Jesus Christ (c. 20-1 BCE), a generation after (50-70 CE), or whether the
earliest part was written before and the latest part was added after. For useful reviews on dating and
analysis, see the contributions of David Suter, ‘Enoch in Sheol: Updating the Dating of the Book of
Parables’, in Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, 415-443; Michael Stone, ‘Enoch’s Date in Limbo; or
Some Considerations on David Suter’s Analysis of the Book of Parables’, op. cit. 444-449; and Paolo
Sacchi, ‘The 2005 Camaldoli Seminar on the Parables of Enoch: Summary and Prospects for Future
Research’, op. cit. 499-512.
40 Sacchi, 'The 2005 Camaldoli Seminar’, Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, 505-6.
12
Since avenues (1), (2) and (3) have not so far produced a solid basis for dating the
Parables, the present consensus is built upon two identifiable historical allusions (4),
and probably a third.41
The first of these is an allusion to the final illness of King Herod in 4 BCE. Josephus
Flavius relates that, shortly before his death from complications of diabetes (Fournier
gangrene and end-stage renal failure), Herod visited his villa at Callirrhoë, on the
northeastern shores of the Dead Sea, where there were thermal baths, well known
throughout the Empire for their healing properties. In his case, however, the waters
did not help and Herod died a few days later in severe pain, interpreted by some as
divine punishment for his sexual immorality (Jewish War 1.656-58; Antiquities
17.168-72). Due to Herod’s international fame, the circumstances of his death became
widely known, so it should cause no surprise to find echoes and allusions in
contemporary literature.
In the Book of Parables, the fiery valley in which the rebellious angels were
incarcerated to await judgment is identified with the valley that generates the thermal
springs to which ‘the kings and the mighty and the exalted’ resort for healing. But
because they have believed in satisfying their own pleasure and have denied the name
of the Lord of Spirits, the place where they seek healing will also become the place of
their judgment (1En 67:4-12). The allusion to Herod’s judgment and death becomes
even more evident when we discover that it was written as an update by the author of
the Parables, and that this same author describes the punishment as a judgment for
seeking (sexual) pleasure, a known fault of Herod, but a slight deviation from the
reason stated in the rest of the text, namely, for persecuting and oppressing the
righteous. This can therefore be understood as a specific allusion to Herod’s terminal
illness, in the light of his recent death in 4 BCE.42
The second of the historical allusions in the text is to the Civil War (40–37 BCE), and
especially to its three crucial phases: (1) the invasion of the Parthians in 40 BCE to
remove Hyrcanus II from the throne in Jerusalem and replace him with his nephew
Antigonus; (2) the internecine strife and murder between the Hasmonean supporters
of Antigonus and those of his main rival, Herod, whom the Roman Senate had
meanwhile appointed as king; (3) the arrival of Roman troops from Syria to assist
Herod in removing Antigonus and installing himself on the throne in Jerusalem.
Josephus has given us a detailed account of these and many other aspects of the Civil
War (Jewish War 1.288-358 and Antiquities 14.392-491).
In the Parables of Enoch, the author refers to the same three phases of the Civil War
(1En 56:5-7; 56:7-8; 57:1-3), but instead of describing them in the past, he projects
them into the future, and presents them as stages of the eschatological war leading to
the triumph of the righteous. The author appears to have modelled his prophecy of the
eschatological war between good and evil on these developments in the Civil War
(40-37 BCE), in a way that suggests that he had personally witnessed them and they
41 The third is an intensification of the social problem described by Charlesworth (see note 35), to be
described later (“Charlesworth plus”).
42 For the full exposition, see Darrel Hannah, ‘The Book of Noah’, Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man,
469-477.
13
were still fresh in his memory. This establishes the date of the Book of Parables to the
generation immediately following the Civil War, i.e., from 35 to 20 BCE. If another
period of dire suffering and social inequality was the impetus for writing, one would
have to look no further than the regional drought and famine of 25/24 BCE (Josephus,
Antiquities 15.299-326).
So far as the dating of the Parables is concerned, then, we arrive at a period from 35 to
4 BCE, which is to say, sometime during the reign of King Herod the Great.
The Geographical Setting
The passages in the Book of Parables that betray the author’s personal experience of
the Civil War (1En 56:5-8; 57:1-3) not only allow us to date the work, but to locate it
to a place that was deeply affected by that event. It was somewhere north of
Jerusalem, as armies are seen moving south on their way to that city (1En 56:7; 57:1).
For the purpose of identifying the author’s location, the account of the Civil War by
Josephus provides a wealth of information, though somewhat slanted toward Herod,
due to his dependence on the writings of Nicholas of Damascus.43 Besides Jerusalem,
Josephus’s account highlights Eastern Galilee as a major hub of conflict in the Civil
War, so this would seem to be a good place to look for the home of our author.
Situated on the northwestern shore of the Sea of Galilee, Magdala (Taricheae in
Greek) had been a stronghold of Hasmonean support since its foundation by
Hasmonean officials around 100 BCE and it soon became the administrative centre
(toparchy) and most densely populated polis in the region.44 After the crushing defeat
of the Roman army by the Parthians in Mesopotamia in 53 BCE, many of the pro
Hasmonian Jews who had supported Aristobulus II against Hyrcanus II turned to the
Parthians for help in restoring their independence from Rome. They found a leader
in the Jewish general Peitholaus, hypostrategos of Jerusalem (Jewish War
1:162,172,180; Antiquities 14.93), who started to plot a revolt against the Romans.
This provoked a Roman military invasion under general Cassius, who executed
Peitholaus in or near Magdala and enslaved 30,000 local men (Josephus, Jewish War
1.180-182; Antiquities 14.119-122). In 43 BCE, Cassius signed off a letter to Cicero
with ex castris Taricheis, i.e., from the Roman military camp at Magdala (Taricheae),
indicating ongoing military activity at that place.45
In 40 BCE, the pro-Hasmonean forces from Parthia swept past Magdala, led by their
general Barzaphranes, on their way to Jerusalem to depose Hyrcanus II and enthrone
his nephew Antigonus (Jewish War 1.248-249; Antiquities 14.330-332). Soon after,
Herod managed to escape to Rome, where the Senate recognized him as King of the
43 Cf. ‘Nicholas of Damascus’ by Menachem Stern in Encyclopaedia Judaica, 2nd Edition, eds. Fred
Skolnik and Michael Berenbaum, Thomson Gale, MI/Keter Publishing House, Jerusalem, 2007, Vol 15,
252.
44 See Richard Bauckham, in Magdala of Galilee: A Jewish City in the Hellenistic and Roman Period,
Bauckham (ed), Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2018; 17-21, for a clear and concise account of
what is known about the origins and early history of Magdala.
45 Cicero, Epistulae ad Familiares XII,11.
14
Judaeans and promised him Roman military support. In late 40 BCE, after only a
week in Rome, Herod returned to his homeland and immediately raised an army.
Josephus relates how, a year later (in winter 39/38 BCE), Herod took Sepphoris, the
capital of Galilee, in a snowstorm, without a fight (Jewish War 1.303), before moving
his entire army to Arbel, a mere 2-3 kms west of Magdala, in order to confront his
enemy directly. After defeating a surprise attack on his camp on Mt. Arbel, Herod
decided to eject the hostile cave-dwellers nearby, whom Josephus calls ‘brigands’:
“he… then started on a campaign against the cave-dwelling brigands, who were
infesting a wide area and inflicting on the inhabitants evils no less than those of war”
(Jewish War 1.304). Little by little over subsequent months, and not without losses,
Herod’s army whittled down the scattered opposition in various ways: in open battle,
through aggressive pursuit, by search and destroy, with military siege and by the
imposition of heavy fines (Jewish War 1.304-316; Antiquities 14.415-433). Shortly
before the Civil War ended, the Sea of Galilee at Magdala witnessed the drowning of
some of Herod’s leading men by Hasmonean supporters (Jewish War 1.326;
Antiquities 14.450).
Finally, in 37 BCE, Magdala was on the path of the Roman forces swooping down
from Syria to remove Antigonus and install Herod on the throne in Jerusalem (Jewish
War 1.327.345; Antiquities 14.447, 468-469). From this brief outline, it should
evident that the residents of Arbel, Magdala, and the surrounding region of Eastern
Galilee, witnessed precisely the same three pivotal aspects of the Civil War that are
alluded to in the Parables of Enoch. The author may indeed have been resident in this
area.
Further precision can be obtained by examining the text itself, in its three basic parts:
Part 1
“In those days, the angels will assemble themselves,
and hurl themselves toward the East against the Parthians and Medes.
They will stir up the kings, and a spirit of agitation will come upon them,
and they will shake them off their thrones.
They will break out like lions from their lairs,
and like hungry wolves in the midst of their flocks.
They will go up and trample the land of my chosen ones,
and the land of my chosen ones will be before them like a threshing floor and a (beaten)
path;
but the city of my righteous ones will be a hindrance to their horses” (1En 56:5-7).
Part 2
“They will begin (to make) war among themselves,
and their right hand will be strong against them(selves),
a man will not acknowledge his brother,
nor a son, his father or his mother.
Until the number of corpses will be enough due to their slaughter,
and their punishment will not be in vain.
In those days Sheol will open its mouth,
and they will sink into it.
And their destruction will be at an end;
15
Sheol will devour the sinners from the presence of the chosen”
(1En 56:7-8).
Part 3
“After that I saw another host of chariots and people riding in them,
and they came upon the winds from the East and the West toward the South,
and the noise of the rumbling of their chariots was heard.
When this commotion took place,
the holy ones took note from heaven,
and the pillars of the earth were shaken from their bases.
It was heard from one end of heaven to the other in one moment,
and they all fell down and worshipped the Lord of Spirits.
This is the end of the second parable”
(1En 57:1-3).
The vivid images described in each part of this vision (in italics) indicate not only the
author’s memory of the experience, but also his specific location overlooking the
Plain of Ginnosar in Eastern Galilee:
1) In Part 1, the author recalls seeing the trampling of the agricultural crops in the
Plain of Ginnosar by the Parthian cavalry, on their way south to take
Jerusalem and place the Hasmonean Antigonus on the throne in 40 BCE
(Josephus, Jewish War 1.248-249; Antiquities 14.330-332).
2) In Part 2, he remembers the brutal violence between the local supporters of the
Hasmonean Antigonus and the local supporters of Herod, Jews against Jews.
Josephus mentions several violent episodes in the area, starting with the attack
on Herod’s army camp on the plateau near the town of Arbel, Herod’s
aggressive pursuit of the attackers up to the Jordan river, his forceful removal
of the hostile cave-dwellers occupying the Arbel caves, the ambush and
murder of Herod’s general Ptolemy, and the drowning of the Herodian
collaborators by their Hasmonean subordinates in the Sea of Galilee near
Magdala (Josephus, Jewish War 1.305-316,326; Antiquities 14.415-430,450).
3) In Part 3, the author relives the thundering advance of the Roman army
chariots under the command of Sosios, the governor of Syria, racing south
across the Plain of Ginnosar, to retake Jerusalem in 37 BCE and place Herod
on the throne instead of Antigonus (Josephus, Jewish War 1.327.345;
Antiquities 14.447, 468-469).
Since the eschatological war in the Parables (1En 56-57) reads like a memorized
version of the most dramatic and pivotal moments of the Civil War from 40-37 BCE,
the text can provide geographical as well as historical details about the author. Most
significantly, it reads as if it is being recalled by an observer who was stationed high
up in the Arbel cliffs, overlooking the Plain of Ginnosar, and seeing with his own
eyes the most momentous events take place from his lofty vantage-point. In other
words, the author witnessed the Civil War unfold from his residence high up in the
cliffs of Mt. Arbel.
At this location, there is indeed a dense collection of caves in the cliffs of Mt. Arbel,
which show evidence of occupation from 100 BCE to around 250 CE, and they would
16
certainly match the author’s literary viewpoint. The archaeologists have called it a
cave village,46 but Josephus names it more specifically as the ‘village of the Cave of
Arbel’ (Life 188, cf. Jewish War 2.573). The reason for this term is the existence of a
great cave at the site, which was fortified in Hasmonean times and refortified by
Josephus before the first Jewish revolt in 66-67 CE. A detailed archaeological and
historical presentation of this site will follow in a separate paper.47
In order to strengthen these literary impressions and forestall the charge of
overinterpreting the ancient text, supporting evidence can be summoned from a
variety of other topographical allusions in the Book of Parables.
It has already been observed that the author of Parables was developing a tradition
that began with the Book of the Watchers, and that Mt. Hermon was an important
point of reference for both. So, it is probably no coincidence that from the cliffs of
Mt. Arbel, the author would also have enjoyed magnificent views of the Hermon
massif, which lies 70 kms to the north. Although the Book of Parables refers only
fleetingly to the descent of the rebel angels on to this mountain, and does not even
mention Mt. Hermon by name (1En 39:1-2; 64:1-2), the names of these angels, the
consequences of their evil action, their punishment and their imminent judgment are
described in such graphic terms and images that Enoch’s initial vision of their descent
on to Mt. Hermon (1En 6:6) is always in mind. Mt. Hermon was not just a powerful
symbol for the origin of evil, but also a majestic physical landmark arousing petitions
for divine judgment. The excellent views of Mt. Hermon are an indelible piece of
evidence uniting the Book of Parables to an author living high up in the cliffs of Mt.
Arbel.
A third ‘localizing sign’ in the text is the author’s description of the heavenly
dwellings, or resting places, of the righteous (1En 39:4-5; 41:2; 48:1), which appears
to have been modelled on the cave-dwellings of the author’s community. In the earlier
Book of the Watchers, the righteous were seen awaiting the final judgment as a crowd
gathered together, around a bright fountain of water, in a deep, smooth hollow that
had been carved out of a “great and high mountain of hard rock” (1En 22:1,9).
Although the rocky mountainous setting can be assumed to be the same, the
eschatological dwelling-place of the righteous described in the Parables is no longer a
single collective abode as in 1En 22:1,9, but a collection of many individual dwellings
(1En 39:4-5), a concept which has been carried over into the Fourth Gospel (cf. Jn
14,2).48 It is possible that this change in the author’s conception of the afterlife was
inspired by the arrangement of the caves in his cave-village, in which case it is likely
that the residents of the cave-village considered the caves of their community to be an
anticipation, or foretaste, of the heavenly dwellings of the righteous mentioned in the
Book of Parables. This would be consistent with the fact that they saw themselves,
individually and as a community, as the representatives of the righteous on earth. This
46 Zvi Ilan, ‘Reviving a 2,000-Year-Old Landmark’, Eretz Magazine, Winter 1988/1989; 66-67.
47 ‘The Cave-Dwellers of Mt. Arbel’ at
https://www.academia.edu/50153535/The_Cave_Dwellers_of_Mt_Arbel.
48 “… there are many abodes (μοναὶ πολλαί) in my father’s house” (Jn 14,2). In Hebrew, the
equivalent words would be mishkenot (dwelling places) or menuḥot (resting places), both of which lie
behind the Ge’ez text, in parallel, at 1En 39:4-5.
17
association of the cave-dwellings with the heavenly dwellings may also partly explain
why the community chose to inhabit this rocky location.
The fourth and most intriguing localizing sign in the text is the use of the metaphor
‘ropes of the righteous’ (1En 61:3, cf. 46:8). In the same way as the individual rock
cut cave-dwellings became symbols for the dwellings of the righteous in heaven, it
appears that the ropes used by the cave-dwellers became symbols for the strong faith
that binds the righteous to the ‘name of the Lord of the Spirits’. Ropes would have
been a vital accessory in the daily lives of the cave-dwellers, as many of them lived
high up in the cliff face, in caves that could have been reached only by means of
ropes. The lives of these cave-dwellers relied so heavily upon the strength of the rope
that it is easy to see how the rope itself came to be understood as a symbol of faithful
dependence on the name of God:
“And the angel who went with me said to me, “These will bring the measurements of the
righteous, and the ropes of the righteous to the righteous; so that they may rely on the
name of the Lord of Spirits forever and ever” (1En 61:3).
Having presented the reasons for linking the Essene author of the Parables of Enoch
to the village of the Cave of Arbel, it only remains to find archaeological evidence of
contemporary writing media or materials in these caves, in order to prove the point. If
this search is ever undertaken, it will take time. In the meantime, we can only
speculate on the writing media that was used by this and other scribal communities in
the area. This is aided by the fact that the largest natural habitat of papyrus outside
Egypt was found at Lake Semechonitis (Lake Huleh), a mere 40 kms from the caves.
It would be surprising if a scribal community living in the locality, like that of the
Essenes at Arbel, did not exploit this readily available resource for its writing media.
On the other hand, if papyrus scrolls were prepared at Arbel in antiquity, it would be
the first time that papyrus manufacture has been identified beyond Egyptian borders.49
Of relevance to this topic is the following passage in the Book of Parables:
“And the name of the fourth [rebel angel] is Penemue. This one showed the sons of men
the bitter and the sweet and showed them all the secrets of their wisdom. He gave humans
knowledge about writing with ink and papyrus, and therefore many went astray from of
old and forever and until this day. For humans were not born for this purpose, to confirm
their trustworthiness through pen and ink. For humans were not created to be different
from the angels, so that they should remain pure and righteous. And death, which ruins
everything, would not have laid its hand on them. But through this, their knowledge, they
are perishing, and through this power it devours us” (1En 69:8-11).50
The disclosures of this rebel angel refer to the bitter and sweet sides of human
wisdom (Gen 3,1-7; cf. 1En 69,6), with the added bonus of instruction on how to
write with ink on papyrus—a surprisingly negative comment in a book (1Enoch)
whose written character is emphasized (1En 82:1-3; 104:12-13) and whose author is
an esteemed scribe (1En 13:4-6; 15:1; 40:8, 92:1; 83:2). One wonders if this damning
judgment about the origin of writing is not a specific criticism of the increasingly
49 Cf. Alan Millard, Reading and Writing in the Time of Jesus, Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press,
2000; 25.
50 See Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2; 301-2, for full discussion of this passage.
18
common use of papyrus in civil and legal matters. Regardless of meaning or motive,
however, this curious passage is clear confirmation of the use of papyrus in the place
where the book was composed.
New Light on the Social Setting
Thanks to the writings of Josephus and the findings of a recent archaeological survey
of Eastern Galilee, conducted by Prof. Uzi Leibner of the Hebrew University in
Jerusalem,51 the identification of the author’s location can be pressed to reveal a more
comprehensive view of the social setting of the Book of Parables, than the one
proposed above (Social Setting: Antagonists). There, behind the expression “the
kings, the mighty and those who possess the earth”, we outlined a nationwide
situation in which the wealthy landowners, acting in league with the kings and
mighty, oppressed the righteous and became wealthier by taking possession of the
best agricultural land in the country and forcing traditional peasant farmers to work
for them as tenant farmers or day-labourers.
In Galilee, however, at the place and at the time the Book of Parables was written, the
social situation appears to have been rather more dire and complex. It starts with the
Herod’s campaign against the hostile occupants of some of the Arbel caves—the
people whom Josephus calls ‘brigands’ (λῃστής). The personal involvement of the
author of the Parables, as a neighbouring cave-dweller and eye-witness to this violent
campaign, may well explain the social tension implicit in his condemnations.
In order to grasp who these ‘brigands’ were, some local history is needed. Josephus
had previously related how Herod, as governor of Galilee in 47 BCE, had captured
and summarily executed a leader of these brigands called Hezekiah, along with a band
of his men, because they were raiding villages on the other side of the Syrian border
(Jewish War 1.204–211, Antiquities 15,158–167). For this action, Herod was praised
by the Roman governor of Syria, as these men had sorely afflicted his people, but for
this same action, Herod found himself under judgment before the Sanhedrin in
Jerusalem and avoided punishment only through the intervention of the Syrian
governor. Clearly the brigands had powerful allies among the authorities in Jerusalem.
However, it appears that in every other respect they were outlaws, living in wild
locations, surviving by robbing and pillaging the property of others, as the name
suggests. Referring to the time of Herod’s campaign in 38 BCE, Josephus says “they
infested a wide area” in the vicinity of Arbel (Jewish War 1.304). In fact, these
brigands were causing such a problem in Eastern and Northern Galilee that Herod
committed a large military force, based at Mt. Arbel over several months, to deal with
it (Jewish War 1.314–316, 326; Antiquities 14.431–433, 450). Without doubt, ‘social
brigandage’ was the main social problem facing Herod in Galilee during his long
reign.52
Since ancient times, the deserted areas of Gaulanitis, Trachonitis and Batanaea, to the
north and east of the Sea of Galilee, had sheltered brigands, who survived by robbing
51 Published as Uzi Leibner, Settlements and History in Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine Galilee, Texts
and Studies in Ancient Judaism 127, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009.
52 For a summary of Herod’s operations against the brigands, see Richardson and Fisher, Herod, 341.
19
merchants traveling on the desert routes between Damascus and Arabia. But these
brigands were not Jews. The Galilean brigands, on the other hand, were Jews residing
within Jewish territory and having allies among the ruling elite in Jerusalem.53 The
profile drawn by Josephus shows they were rebellious, often violent, anti-Herodian,
anti-Roman Jews. More significantly, they appear to have been destitute and
dispossessed of home and land, and for this reason they had installed themselves and
their families in the caves of Mt. Arbel, and probably in many other caves in the
region. Apart from identifying them as supporters of the last Hasmonean ruler,
Antigonus (40–37 BCE), and as forerunners of the extremist Zealot party, which
formed around Judas, the son of Hezekiah, at the turn of the era, scholars have
puzzled over their origin. As the problem began several years before Herod’s reign,
Herod’s taxation and land patronage systems cannot be held responsible.
Richard Horsley, an expert on Galilean ‘brigandry’, or ‘banditry’ as he calls it,
describes it as a symptom “of the difficult economic conditions and the impact of
political military violence in the mid-first century BCE and the mid-first century
CE… Oppressive economic pressures could leave desperate peasants no alternative
but to ‘rob the rich’ in order to survive”. So, referring to the situation during Herod’s
reign, he writes “repeated military invasion and destruction appear to be what
produced the banditry in Galilee that Herod suppressed… such “brigands” were
indigenous Galilean villagers waging guerilla warfare”.54 There can be little doubt
that difficult economic conditions could have led to desperate conduct such as
‘brigandage’, but to suggest that Herod’s ‘repeated military invasion and destruction’
intensified the ‘brigandry’ ignores the fact that Herod’s military campaign against the
‘brigands’ was relatively successful, in Galilee at least. Following his military
interventions, there is evidence of a gradual reduction in ‘brigandry’.55
The origin of Jewish brigandry lies elsewhere, evidently, and can be traced through
the findings of the comprehensive archaeological survey conducted by Uzi Leibner in
this part of Eastern Galilee.56 Leibner carefully documents a doubling of the estimated
population, settlement area and number of settlements in the period between 50–1
BCE.57 Although more accurate dating is difficult, Leibner stresses that small
amounts of late Hellenistic pottery were found in the new settlements he surveyed,
indicating that they were established right at the start of, or even slightly before, the
formal onset of the Early Roman period in 50 BCE.58 It is doubtful that this sudden
rise in the population between 60–50 BCE could be explained by a natural rise in
53 Seán Freyne suggests that the leaders were members of noble Hasmonean families, cf.
Galilee from Alexander the Great to Hadrian 323 BCE to 135 CE, Edinburgh: T&T Clarke, 1998; 63.
54 Quotations are from Richard Horsley, ‘Social Movements in Galilee’, in Fiensy and Riley Strange
(eds.), Galilee in the Late Second Temple and Mishnaic Periods, Vol 1: Life, Culture, and Society,
Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2014; 167-8.
55 Cf. Freyne, Galilee 66-67; Richardson and Fisher, Herod, 340-342.
56 “The area selected for research is located in the northern part of the Eastern Lower Galilee,
between longitude 185–200 and latitude 242–261, an area of some 285 square kilometers. It extends
from the Tiberias–Sepphoris route in the south to the foothills of the Upper Galilee in the north, and
from the Sea of Galilee basin in the east to the eastern margins of the large Central Galilee valleys in
the west”, Leibner, Settlements and History, 1.
57 Settlements and History, 307-338.
58 Settlements and History, 332.
20
birth rate and/or infant survival, for which a gradual and continual rise over the
previous 50 years would be expected, dating from the first Jewish influx and
settlement around 100 BCE.
Instead, the dramatic rise in population around 50 BCE is best explained by second
wave of Jewish immigrants from outside the area. The date coincides precisely with
the humiliating geopolitical changes imposed after 63 BCE, by Pompey, the Roman
governor of Syria, and by Gabinius, his successor, which effectively restored pagan
Greek rule and identity to the predominantly pagan cities and lands that had been
forcefully conquered and colonized by the Hasmoneans half a century before.
All of a sudden, under the terms of Pompey’s ‘Judaean land settlement’, the Jewish
state lost: 1) the whole coastal zone, with its fertile plains and access to the sea,
including all its Greek cities (such as Gaza, Ascalon, Azotus, Apollonia, Strato’s
Tower, Dora), even those with large Jewish populations, such as Joppa and Jamnia, 2)
the western part of Idumaea with Marisa, 3) the city of Samaria and surrounding
toparchies 4) the town of Gaba and the royal estates in the Jezreel valley, 5) the five
Greek cities in the northern Transjordanian region, which formed the Decapolis
(Scythopolis, Gerasa, Hippos, Pella, Dium) with another five towns, 6) Panias,
Gaulanitis and Lake Huleh (Lake Semechonitis). Jerusalem was made to pay tribute,
her walls were demolished and Judaea was confined to her pre-Hasmonean
boundaries with the addition of Galilee, and parts of Idumaea and Peraea, thus
shrinking to about a third of her former size.59
As Seán Freyne observes “Such a settlement of the Jewish question was not likely to
be accepted without a struggle and resistance crystallized around the ousted
Aristobulus and his sons, Antigonus and Alexander”.60 Some early signs of resistance
can be seen in the Roman military invasion of Magdala (Taricheae as it was called in
Greek) in 53 BCE, when the pro-Hasmonean Jewish general, Peitholaus, was
executed for plotting with the Parthians and, according to Josephus, 30,000 local
people were sold into slavery (Jewish War 1:180-2; Antiquities 14.119-22).
Scholars differ over the immediate social effects of the Judaean land settlement, but
some do speak of widespread expulsion of peasants from the areas that were given
back to the newly restored Greek cities.61 Uzi Liebner’s archaeological survey in
Eastern Galilee offers objective evidence of the influx of displaced Jews at precisely
this time, 50–1 BCE, when “numerous settlements were established; unsettled or
sparsely settled areas, such as the eastern portion of the region or hilly areas with
59 Cf. E. Gabba, ‘The Social, Economic and Political History of Palestine 63 BCE–CE 70’, in William
Horbury, W.D. Davies, and John Sturdy (eds.), The Cambridge History of Judaism, Vol 3, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1999; 95-98.
60 S. Freyne, Galilee, 59.
61 This is the position taken by Shimon Applebaum and Richard Horsley among others. It is
summarized by Morten Hørning Jensen as follows “According to Applebaum, Pompey’s decision to
strip Jerusalem of its many conquered city-states was nothing less than a game-changer that must
have meant the creation of a very considerable class of landless Jewish peasants” , quoted from ‘The
Political History in Galilee from the First Century BCE to the End of the Second Century CE’, in Fiensy
and Riley Strange (eds.), Galilee in the Late Second Temple and Mishnaic Periods, Vol 1: Life, Culture,
and Society, Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2014; 57.
21
limited agricultural potential, experienced a wave of settlement; and the size of the
settled area doubled. During this period the number of sites reached its height. This
settlement map remained stable until about the mid-third century when an
abandonment of sites and decline in settlement began”.62
Leibner’s data shows that a peak of settlement was reached from 50–1 BCE, which
extended into areas of ‘limited agricultural potential’ and remained at the same level
for the next 250 years. In other words, the data indicate that rural settlement reached a
‘saturation level’ soon after 50 BCE. If, as we suggest, this was mainly the result of
migration from the surrounding areas of Gaulanitis, Ituraea, northern Transjordania
and Scythopolis, and from further afield, then it is quite possible that, at the same
time, the flow of migrants exceeded the capacity of rural Galilee to absorb them. A
social crisis would have developed, with destitute, dispossessed migrant families
unable to find shelter, food or income.63 These are precisely the conditions leading to
the kind of brigandage that Josephus describes in Galilee, in the period 47–38 BCE
and beyond.
After listing Herod’s many operations against the ‘brigands’ in and around Galilee,
Richardson and Fisher conclude: “The disparate accounts cohere in viewing Herod’s
problems as ‘social brigandage’ at the beginning of his reign, in the unsettled days of
the 40s and 30s BCE. The brigands had families, close connections with towns, and
religious or upper-class support. The descriptions are mainly of uprooted peasants
who maintained connections with neighbors and social superiors, those who suffered
social dislocation from economic change and consequent hardship. The dispossessed
survived by preying on those who had more, maybe the same persons who had taken
the little they had”.64 Richardson and Fisher’s conclusion requires only one
qualification: that the socio-economic change leading to brigandage was the
displacement caused by the land settlement imposed by the Romans during the 50s
BCE, and leading to a massive influx of uprooted Jewish landowners and peasants
into Eastern Galilee. They rightly continue “Herod was not the cause of the social
problems, but it is no surprise that he sided with Judean upper-class needs and Roman
political aims”.65 Herod therefore had little sympathy for the plight of these ‘social
brigands’, whose experience of dislocation and religious indignation had turned them
against his authority and against Rome, and then into militant supporters of the
Hasmonean resistance.66
62 Settlements and History, 333.
63 Although the numbers may be exaggerated, the event mentioned above, of the Roman invasion of
Magdala in 53 BCE, and the enslavement of 30,000 inhabitants (Jewish War 1:180-2; Antiquities
14.119-22), followed in 40 BCE by Antigonus’ promise of 1000 talents and 500 Galilean women to the
Parthians in exchange for their military support against the Romans (Jewish War 1.248-249,257;
Antiquities 14.331,343), both point to overcrowding at this time and an attempt by both sides to
reduce the population by trafficking with lives.
64 Richardson and Fisher, Herod, 341.
65 Ibid.
66 For insight into the spiritual and religious distress provoked by the Judaean land settlement, see D.
Mendels, The Rise and Fall of Jewish Nationalism: Jewish and Christian Ethnicity in Ancient Palestine,
Grand Rapids, MI/Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1997; 246–247. Historical evidence suggests that their
resistance developed, around the turn of the era, into the formation of the Zealot party.
22
The final piece in this puzzle concerns the negative role of the wealthy landlords. As
we described earlier, the caves of Mt. Arbel overlooked the Plain of Ginnosar, 12
square kilometres of well-watered gardens and orchards, renowned for the quantity,
quality and rich variety of its produce (cf. Josephus, Jewish War 3:506-521). The
water for these fields entered the Ginnosar Plain via two streams: Wadi Amud to the
north and Wadi Zalmon in the centre. Irrigation from Wadi Zalmon was controlled
from the town of Ginnosar (Abu Shusheh), centrally located on a low-lying hill at the
western edge of the plain.67
More significantly, Leibner’s survey shows that this particular township neither
sprung up nor increased in size around 50 BCE, like the other settlements in this area
(Magdala, Arbel, Khirbet Hamam). In fact, its size remained unchanged from 50 BCE
right up to 150 CE, when it did finally expand in the wake of the second Jewish revolt
(132-135 CE). Furthermore, in the period following the massive influx of migrants in
60-50 BCE, there were no new settlements in the Plain of Ginnosar, despite the
pressing need for new settlements and productive land. It is therefore reasonable to
conclude that settlement expansion and construction were blocked because the entire
Plain was owned by private landlords, who did not live locally and had no interest in
sharing their land or its produce with the destitute and dispossessed newcomers. For
lack of other options, the new immigrants found shelter in the Arbel caves nearby and
resorted to ‘brigandage’ to feed themselves, seizing what they needed from the
orchards of the wealthy and from the caravans of produce on their way to markets in
Jerusalem.68
For the author of the Book of Parables the contrast must have been too much to bear:
in the caves on one side, homeless Jewish families were starving because of the
unavailability of land and food, while on the other side wealthy Jewish landowners
were transporting the delicious produce of the Plain of Ginnosar to Jerusalem and
selling it there for a huge profit.
The plight of the destitute families must have reminded him of the situation of his
own community when they returned to the Land half a century before, and suffered
privation on account of the same triad of ‘the kings, mighty and wealthy landlords’.
The author incessantly warns of their impending judgment, for they wilfully ignore
the plight of the Galilean refugees, whose poverty and landlessness were precipitated
by the new Roman overlords, but were later perpetuated and exacerbated by the greed
and self-interest of these wicked people. As a concerned neighbour to these refugees,
67 For the identification of the ruins of Abu Sheshar with Gennesar (Ginnosar), which, in the Hellenistic
period, gave its name not only to the surrounding Plain but also to the Sea of Galilee, Lake
Gennesaret, see Leibner Settlements and History, 180-185.
68 Evidence of private ownership and trade is indirect, but indisputable, cf. bT Eruvin 7:13; m.
Masseroth 2:3, respectively. Furthermore, the early Rabbis derived the name Gennesar, or Ginnosar,
from ganei-sar, translated “gardens of the prince” (Gen. Rabbah 99:21), implying ‘princely’
ownership. David Flusser understood this to refer to Hasmonean dynastic control of the area in the
2nd century BCE, before the official annexation of Galilee around 100 BCE. Leibner is inclined to see
the Rabbis’ etymology as word play, without any historical basis (Settlements and History, 186-189).
However, as the first appearance of the name ‘Gennesar’ in the literature refers to the site of the
camp of Jonathan Maccabee and his army “by the waters of Gennesar” (1 Macc 11,67), around 145
BCE, Flusser’s view should be taken seriously.
23
whom he would not likely have insulted by calling them ‘brigands’, and as a critical
onlooker over the Plain of Ginnosar, the author of the Book of Parables was so moved
by the injustice of the situation around him that the restoration of justice became the
main theme of his book. He may have sensed that the scale of this injustice was
leading to greater conflict in the future, and with divine insight he may even have
foreseen how it would undermine, eventually, the continued Jewish presence in the
Land of Israel.69
Summary
The findings of our study can be summarized in one sentence: the author of the Book
of Parables was a member of a non-Qumranic community of Essenes, writing from
his cave in the cliffs of Mt Arbel, sometime during Herod’s reign. He had just
witnessed some brutal events in the Civil War (40-37 BCE) from close quarters, and
at the time of writing he found himself in the midst of a social crisis caused by grossly
unjust land and food distribution. The result was ‘brigandage’ on a wide scale.
Although these details are not stated openly in the text, they are supported by a stream
of circumstantial evidence gathered from the text itself, from the Damascus
Document, the writings of Josephus and from Leibner’s archaeological survey of
Eastern Galilee.
Another source of confirmation has been mentioned in passing: the remains of a cave
village carved into the Mt. Arbel cliffs and corresponding precisely to the location of
the author of the Book of Parables as determined above. We have presented this site
in another article, and will only mention here that it does indeed show distinctive
signs of Essene occupation.70 All that needs to be said is that if the hypothesis of an
Essene presence is confirmed by further archaeological investigation, the existence of
this Essene cave village is indeed the material proof, the ‘smoking gun’, that would
clinch the findings of this study and open the gates for further research on the
community, their literary activities and their relationship to the early Christian
movement.
John Ben-Daniel,
Jerusalem, July 2021
69 Put simply, the ‘brigands’ became politically organized into the Zealot party around the turn of the millennium, and, according to Josephus, it was these Zealots who brought about the destruction of
the temple and Jerusalem in the first Jewish revolt. Their influence persisted after the first revolt and
may have contributed to the second Jewish revolt and its even more catastrophic outcome. 70 ‘The Cave-Dwellers of Mt. Arbel’ at
https://www.academia.edu/50153535/The_Cave_Dwellers_of_Mt_Arbel.
8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
Abstract
Following previous research, in which we argued from historical and literary cues that the author of the Parables of Enoch was a member of the Essene congregation that lived at the Arbel Cave Village, an ancient cave village carved into the cliffs of Mt. Arbel, 2 kms west of Magdala, Eastern Galilee, the present study moves on to consider how this messianic prophecy may have influenced the Jesus movement and the Early Christian Church. After showing the plausibility of direct contact between the Parables of Enoch and John the Baptist, Jesus of Nazareth and John of Patmos, we consider them one by one, together with evidence from modern scholarship, and conclude that each, individually, had "a unique and direct relationship" with this prophetic text. This allows us, then, to postulate how and where their personal contact with this prophecy may have developed. In the case of John of Patmos, cumulative evidence concurs with the tradition that identifies him with John the apostle. In the next part, we follow the trajectory of the Book of Parables through the first century CE and examine some of the opposition that it met in the course of its fulfilment by John the Baptist and Jesus of Nazareth, and its eventual replacement by the Revelation given to John. In the final section, we attempt to explain why the Book of Parables suddenly disappeared from the Synagogue and the Early Church, to be followed by the slower decline in the status of the Enoch writings in most areas, except Egypt and North Africa. From the time of its composition to the time of its replacement by the Book of Revelation, almost a century had passed, in which repentance was preached, the Messiah Son of Man appeared, the New Covenant community was established (the Church), and Jerusalem and her Temple were destroyed. We conclude with an affirmation of the importance of the text for the Jesus movement and the Early Christian Church during the first century CE.
Key takeaways
- From this broad overview, it is theoretically feasible that the messianic prophecy of the Parables of Enoch prepared the public for the missions of the Baptist, Jesus, and the Early Christian Church, offering the lens through which to understand and welcome their activities.
- Whether it is the messianic significance of the "Son of Man" title, or the judicial elements of its context, the Parables of Enoch is the unique background for the eschatological use of "Son of Man" by Jesus of Nazareth.
- As with the ministries of John the Baptist and Jesus of Nazareth, the same method of establishing a 'direct and unique relationship' to the Parables of Enoch can be applied to the Book of Revelation.
- Towards the end of his life, at the end of the first century, he was granted a revelation that brings the messianic prophecy from the Parables of Enoch to fulfilment, in the light of the exalted Messiah Son of Man, along with many other parts of Scripture as well.
- With its persistent emphasis on salvation and judgment, mediated by Messiah Son of Man and witnessed by the Gospels, it becomes evident that the Parables of Enoch contributed substantially to the inner consistency, motivation and goal-driven advance of the messianic movement that became Christianity.
John Ben-Daniel