The book of Enoch : translated from Professor Dillmann's Ethiopic ...

General Introduction. 1
(4) Book IV, the Noah book. vi. 3-8 ; viii. 1-3 ; ix. 7
x. 1-3, 11, 22 b ; xvii-xix; liv. 7-lv. 2; lx. 1-10, 24, 25;
lxiv-lxix. 16. Somewhat later than the former.
(5) Finally the editing, compressing, and enlarging of the
former books into one vol.
Weisse, Die Evangelien-Frage, 1856, pp. 214-224. Weisse
agrees with Hofmann and Philippi in maintaining a Christian
authorship of the book, but his advocacy of this view springs
from the dogmatic principle that the entire idea of Christianity
was in its pure originality derived from the self-consciousness
of Christ.
Kostlin, ' Ueber die Entstehung des Buchs Henoch ' (Theol.
Jahrb. s 1856, pp. 240-279; 370-386). Kostlin, as we have
already remarked, contended against Ewald that the book of
Enoch did not arise through the editing of independent works,
but that by far the larger part of Enoch was the work of one
author which through subsequent accretions became the
present book. Though this view must be speedily abandoned,
it must be confessed that the Articles in which it is advocated
are masterly performances, and possess a permanent value for
the student of Enoch.
Hilgenfeld, Die judische Apokalyptik, 1857, pp. 91-
1 84. This work like that of Kostlin is of lasting worth and
indispensable in the study of Enoch. We cannot, however,
say so much for the conclusions arrived at. Many of these
are, in fact, demonstrably wrong. According to Hilgenfeld,
the groundwork consists of i-xvi ; xx-xxxvi ; lxxii-cv written
not later than 98 b. c. The later additions, i. e. xvii-
xix ; xxxvii-lxxi ; cvi-cviii are the work of a Christian
Gnostic about the time between Saturninus and Marcion.
There are no Noachic interpolations.
There is no occasion to enter on the, for the most part,
barren polemic between Hilgenfeld and Volkmar on the inter-
pretation and date of Enoch, to which we owe the following
writings of Hilgenfeld :
f Die judische Apokalyptik und die