Enoch and Qumran Origins: New Light on a Forgotten Connection (review)

This volume of collected essays is the product of the second Enoch Seminar held in Venice in July 2003. Fifty-three scholars gathered to discuss their research surrounding a particular set of questions. "How do the Dead Sea Scrolls affect our knowledge of Enoch literature? And how does the Enoch literature affect our understanding of Qumran? In particular, how does the study of Enoch challenge or modify the Essene Hypothesis, and to what extent does it support or dismiss alternative hypotheses, such as García Martínez's Groningen Hypothesis and Boccaccini's Essene-Enochic Hypothesis? These questions were the subject of the Venice meeting of the Enoch Seminar, and are the subject of the present volume" (p. 12).

The volume is divided into five parts, each of which is followed by a bibliography. Parts One and Two explore the relationship of the Enoch literature to two other texts, Daniel (especially the Visions of Daniel) and Jubilees, because all three texts have been used by some scholars to shed light on the pre-history or generative ideas of the Qumran community. Part Three is focused specifically on the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:1–10; 91:11–17) because this Enoch text is closest to the actual time of Qumran origins. Parts Four and Five are then devoted to the aforementioned Groningen and Essene-Enochic hypotheses, respectively.

An interesting feature of this five-part arrangement is that a leading expert in each of the areas responds to the papers and arguments presented by colleagues in the seminar; namely (and in order), John J. Collins, James C. VanderKam, George W. E. Nickelsburg, Florentino García Martínez, and Gabriele Boccaccini. The result is some very informative and engaging reading. Finally, the volume concludes with a thoughtful essay by James H. Charlesworth.

The questions this book seeks to address are exceedingly complex, given the realities of the composite nature of the Book of Enoch, the rich diversity of the Qumran library and the historical and religious turmoil of the second century B.C.E. The seminar papers offer interpretations of particular documents, discussions of similar ideologies present in different texts, and suggestions about reform movements and social groups that preserved this literature. The result is not that definitive answers are reached; rather, various scholarly proposals are clarified and, most importantly, new avenues of research are suggested.

Perhaps the best a short review can seek to convey is something of the excitement generated by a community of scholars who have discovered that there is more work to be done. Allow me to attempt this. John J. Collins argues that the Mosaic covenant does not provide the context for the apocalyptic theology of Enoch or Daniel as it does for the book of Jubilees and the Dead Sea Scrolls and notes that "[t]he manner in which that shift came about is a major issue in the religious and intellectual history of Judaism in the second (or early first) century B.C.E., which awaits further exploration . . ." (p. 62). James C. VanderKam responds to a paper on the mode and transmission of revelation in 1 Enoch and Jubilees by stating, "I find such observations challenging and hope to pursue them in future research" (p. 165). George W. E. Nickelsburg interacts with several papers that analyze texts dealing with the notion of revealed wisdom and concludes, "What I think needs to be sorted out among these texts, and others in the sapiential tradition, are the content and nature, and the claimed or unclaimed source of revealed wisdom and knowledge, and the continuum along which the positing of such knowledge brings with it its foil: deceit and deceivers, lies and liars" (p. 237). Florentino García Martínez tells us that if he ever puts forth a systematic argument for the Groningen Hypothesis, he will need to take into account points made by two of his seminar colleagues regarding the "Man of...