RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Apocrypha
also the Syriac text of Tobit i-xii. The rest of the book is from the Peshito.
IV. Origin and Contents of the Individual "Writings.
1. The Apocryphal Ezra (I Esdras; for II Esdras
8ee PsEUDEPIGRAPHA, OLD TESTAMENT, II, 7):
In the Greek Bibles this book is called II Ezra; in the Latin, III Ezra (Nehemiah = II Ezra) . The whole is a worthless compilation, the main part of which is identical with the canonical Ezra. The mutual relations may be seen from the following:
Chap. i = IIChron. xxxv-xxxvi: The restoration of the temple worship under Josiah (639-609 B.C.), and the history of Josiah's successors till the destruction of the Temple (588). Chap, ii, 1-14 = Ezra i: Cyrus in the first year of his reign (537 B.C.) allows the exiles to return, and restores to them the vessels of the Temple. Chap, ii, 15-25 = Ezra iv, 7-24: In consequence of an accusation against the Jews, Artaxerxes (465-425 B.C.) forbids the continuation of the building of the Temple and the walls of Jerusalem. Chap, iii-v, 6, independent: Zerubbabel obtains the favor of Darius (521-485 B.C.), and secures permission to lead the exiles back. Chap, v, 7-70 = Ezra ii, 1-iv, 5: List of those who returned with Zerubbabel, the activities of Zerubbabel, and the interruption of the building of the Temple during the time of Cyrus (536-529 B.C.) and till the second year of Darius (520 B.C.). Chap, vi-vii = Ezra v-vi: Resumption and completion of the building of the Temple in the sixth year of Darius (516 B.C.). Chap, viii-ix, 36 = Ezra vii-x: Ezra returns with a caravan of exiles in the seventh year of Artaxerxes (458 B.C.); the beginning of Ezra's activities. Chap, ix, 37-55 = Neh. vii, 73-viii, 13: Ezra proclaims the Law.
The apocryphal differs from the canonical Ezra in the following four points: (1) The passage iv, 7-24 of the canonical Ezra is placed first; (2) the passage iii-v, 6 of the apocryphal Ezra is inserted from an unknown source; (3) II Chron. xxxvxxxvi serves as a preface; (4) Ne,h. vii, 73-viii, 13 is added at the end. In the canonical Ezra, iv, 6-23 is in the wrong place;- it belongs to a later period and treats not of thf interruption of the building of the Temple but of the interruption of the building of the walls. The redactor of the apocryphal Ezra has indeed taken it out of its wrong surroundings, but he has increased the confusion by locating the passage wrongly and by adding as supplement the account of the interruption of work on the Temple. Not satisfied with this he inserted also the piece iii-v, 6, which transfers the action into the time of Darius, whereas in v, 7-70 events in the reign of Cyrus are discussed. Thus the history goes backward; first (ii, 15-25) Artaxerxes, then (iii-v, 6) Darius, finally (v, 7-70) Cyrus. And in the last passage it is told very ingenuously how Zerubbabel had already returned with the exiles under Cyrus (cf. v, 8, 67-70), after the statement has been made expressly that Zerubbabel through a special favor of Darius obtained permission to return. The opinion of Howorth that the apocryphal Ezra is more original than the canonical is a reversal of the actual state of the case, as is sufficiently shown by Kosters. -^Concerning the sources used by the compiler two facts appear: (a) The canonical Ezra which he used was not that of the Septuagint, but was the Hebrew- Aramaic original (cf. Nestle, Marginalien und Materwlien, Tubingen, 1893, pp. 23-29) ; (b) the portion iii-v, 6 he certainly found ready to hand, since it stands in the directest opposition to the rest 01 the narrative. It seems to be from a Greek
original, not a translation from the Hebrew. The purpose of the entire compilation was correctly stated by Bertholdt (Historisch-kritische Einleitung in die Biicher des Alten Testaments, 6 vols., Erlangen, 1812-19, hi, 1011) in the following words: "He intended to compile from older works a history of the Temple from the last epoch of the legal worship to its rebuilding and of the reestablishment of the prescribed divine service." The compiler evidently purposed to quote further from Nehemiah; for the abrupt close can not possibly have been intended. As to the date of compilation all that can be said is that the book was used by Josephus {Ant., mi, 1-5).
2. Additions to Esther (The Rest of Esther): The Book of Esther narrates how Esther, the fosterdaughter of a Jew named Mordecai at the court of King Ahasuerus (Xerxes) in Shushan, becomes the wife of the king; how Haman, the prime minister who intended to destroy Mordecai and all Jews, is himself brought to the gallows; and how by her intercession Esther finally induces the king to revoke the edict issued under Haman's influence, and thus saves her people. Into this narrative the following pieces are inserted in the Greek Bible: (a) Before i, 1, Mordecai's dream of the miraculous deliverance of his people; (b) after iii, 13, the text of the first edict of Artaxerxes (thus the king is named in this section) which decrees the extermination of the Jews; (c) after iv, 17, the text of the prayers of Mordecai and Esther for the salvation of their people; (d) in place of v, 1-2, the reception of Esther by the king; (e) in place of viii, 13, the text of the second edict of Artaxerxes, which recalls the first; (f) after x, 3, Mordecai perceives the significance of his dream. It is difficult to decide whether these pieces were interpolated by the translator of the Septuagint version of Esther or by a later hand. There is no reason for assuming for them a Hebrew original. It is true that Hebrew and Aramaic texts exist, but they are late in origin, and most likely were made directly or indirectly from the Greek, as were other Hebrew and Aramaic texts of the Apocrypha. For these additions Josephus is the oldest witness {Ant., VI, vi, 6 sqq.), since the annotation to Esther according to which Dositheus and his son Ptolemy brought the book (to Egypt) in the fourth year of the reign of King Ptolemy and Cleopatra, refers to the book as a whole and can not be used as testimony for the antiquity of the interpolated passages. Moreover, this testimony is very indecisive, since there were no less than four Ptolemies, each of whom had a wife named Cleopatra. In this book, especially interesting is the text-recension which is extant in Codices 19, 93A, 108B, the latter two containing both texts, the common and the revised. The revision of the common text, which on the whole characterizes the readings of these manuscripts, is more radical in Esther than is usual, on which account Fritzsche published both texts side by side in his edition of 1848 as well as in his collection of the Apocrypha. Lagarde did the same in his edition of the Septuagint (i, 1883).
3. Additions to Daniel: (a) The Song of the Three Children : In the third chapter of Daniel it
Apocrypha