Editionx.'—Ihe fii-st eight books in the original Greek text were published in 1,S45 at Basel, and subsequently bv others up to Angelo Mai (1S19 and 1S28, Milan). The first complete edition is that of Alexandre (1S41, and again 186(i). Recent critical editions by Rzach (1891), C.eflcken (1902), and Heitz (1903).
Tramlations.— Latin : Sebastian Castalio (1540). Angelo Mai (1817).— English : Flover (prose, 1731), JI. S. Terrv (metrical, 1890). — French : Bouch6 - Leclereq in nrnie tie I'Histoire des Religions, vols. ra. 1883, pp. 236-24S ; viii. lsi*3, pp. 619-i"i35 ; ix. 1884, pp. 220-233 Oeft incomplete).— German : Friedlieb (1862), Blass (of III. IV. and V. in Kautzsch's Pseudepigr. 1900) "
LiTER^TtRE— (See Englemann BM oti era 'i iptoium Clas siconm ISso i p 528) Bleek lb d Entstehun„ u Zusam mensetz d Stb\l Or m Theol /e tv hr hen « ^J 1 1 r
macher de W ette u Lucke i 1 1 » n 1 ^ 1-2 J!9 llil^enfeld 1 211 Th I'^m pp 313 31 lunq ub Ent':tehi a 1 Laroque Sur la date d \ olog 1869 1 p 2C I ~0 F
ni (u 1 pp 441-4 3 li ) I r 1 I I Jahrbb f Class rh i isil pj ' Iso ) , <
Fnedlander La ''ib\ lie Tu e m rE ' 1 4 1 1 1 1 Harnack Geirh d iltcl r t Lift i u ^bl 11
Schurer HJP it ui 1 9
i The Assumption of Moses— Tlieie ts -oma Aigueness in the eailj Patnstu lefeicnce'i to tlie Ai'iu nption of Moses. Syncellus (ed. Dind. i. 4S) mentions an Apocalypse of Moses. Clement of Alexandria (Adumb. in Epist. Jud. \fip. Zahn, SupjiUnuntmn Clementinum, 84]) and Didynius (Epist. Judm Enarratio [in Gallandi, Bib. 'Patr. vi. 307]), allude to an Assumptio Moysi. Origen (dc Princ. III. ii. 1) refers to an Adsccnsio Mosis. In the Acts of the Nicene Sjmod (IMansi, Sacror. Codicil., Nova Collect io, ii. 18, 20) there is mention again of an Assumption of Moses. In other lists of apocrj-pha, a Testament {Atae-qKi}) of 3foses is mentioned (SticJiomefry of Nicephorus and Synopsis of pseudo-Athana.sius). It has been argued (by Sehiirer, followed by Charles) that these two titles represent two separate divisions of one and the same book, or two Ixjoks fused together in one. The work was lost during the Middle Ages, and recovered by Ceriani in an old Latin version in the Ambrosian Library at Milan in 1861.
Contents. — Moses calls to himself Joshua, the son of Nun, and directs him to preserve his writ- ings (1). He then forecasts tlie apostasy and distress of the twelve tribes of Israel and their divi- sions into the ten and two (2), their awakening to consciousne.ss of their sin, their repentance (3), the restoration of the two tribes and the preservation of the ten among the Gentiles (4), their repeated backslidings (.■)), the tyianny of Herod (6), the pre- valence of wicked leaders over them (7), the oppres-
sion by the Romans (8), the advent of the LeWte Taxo,* wMio was destined to restore a better state of things among them (9). At tliis point the author inserts a P.salm of Hope and adds a few concluding words closing the discourse of Moses (10). Joshua then laments over the course of events revealed to him, and refuses to be com- forted (11); but Moses urges him to take up his work, and conquer and destroy the Gentiles (12). At this point the book breaks oft" rather abruptly.
Moses identify the words of Jude^ as from this book : but as the extant text dees not contain the words, it c^n only be that it is either (1) wrongly entitled, or (2) that the quotation is made from the second part of it which is lost (Sehiirer), or (3) that two separate works entitled respec- mption (Ascension)
velvTAf Trslnm. if mioses were fus
used into one (Charles). The last position is most convincui'_'l.\ supported by its advocate, and seems the most prohaljlc. Ttip i-ro^fnt sn-calied .■ifi.'ntmptum of Moses is then the Tc.^tam.-nt of Mnscs. bearing within It tracts of the addition to it of the original A.^.-^lnnptiun of Moses.
The text of the book exists in a single Latin manuscript of the .')th (Uth) cent. A.n. This is undoubtedly a translation from a tircek text. It has been further conjectured that the Greek it-^tlf was ;i tr:in~latiHii of a ll.brcw <ir .\raniaic original; hut
tlv-'-b T''- "■' '.-.nf rn.^i, rf T !i - -" 'i Tv_-tn:re=. as also of thc
c:i- 'I' :• ■ .1 . i-ii 1. - i..'^':i..n, in the absence of
• ! , :.-. ri.,1 cm the point.
n -.-.,..;. nnuiii.al; Ewald
;u. ■ ; , ^ '■ :'',M II. 1.1. .,\ ..r \i-aiiiali.) ; Wieseler and
The author of the work was probably a devout Jew, a Pliarisec, and a mystic who does not share but rather aims to defeat the purposes of the Zealots (so Charles, but it has been streimously maintained that he was a Zealot). The date of the composition is fixed by the allusion to Herod the Great. At the earliest, it must be 44, but various dates down to 138 have been advocated. The design of the author seems to be to teach the lesson that God has foreseen and foreshadowed all things ; hence Israel should entertain no fear A deliverer is to come.