Pseudepigrapha
Adam and Eve, Life of Adam and Eve
As. Mos., The Assumption of Moses
Asc. Isa., Ascension of Isaiah
2 Bar., 2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch
3 Bar., 3 (Greek Aposcalypse of) Baruch
1 En., 1 (Ethiopic) Enoch
2 En., 2 (Slavonic) Enoch
3 En., 3 (Hebrew) Enoch
Ep. Arist., Epistle of Aristeas
4 Ezra, 4 Ezra
Jub., Jubilees
3 Macc., 3 Maccabees
4 Macc., 4 Maccabees
Mart. Isa., The Martyrdom of Isaiah
Pss. Sol., Psalms of Solomon
Sib. Or., Sibylline Oracles
T. 12 Patr., Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
T. Reub., Testament of Reuben
T. Sim.,Testament of Simeon
T. Levi, Testament of Levi
T. Jud., Testament of Judah
T. Iss., Testament of Issachar
T. Zeb., Testament of Zebulun
T. Dan., Testament of Dan
T. Naph., Testament of Naphtali
T. Gad, Testament of Gad
T. Ash., Testament of Asher
T. Jos., Testament of Joseph
T. Ben., Testament of Benjamin

sōō’ də pĭg’ rə fə ψευδεπίγραφα). A name given to a large body of Jewish writings that are not included in either the canon of the OT or in what Protestants refer to as the Apoc. (q.v.); written originally in Heb., Aram., and Gr. c. 200 b.c.-a.d. 100.

1. Meaning of the designation. The term “pseudepigrapha” arises from the fact that many of the writings gathered together under this heading bear the names of famous personalities from the OT (e.g. Enoch, Moses, Solomon, Isaiah, Baruch) but certainly did not come from their pens. The lit. is, however, much more extensive in scope than this and includes a large body of anonymous, rather than pseudonymous, lit. in addition. This fact, coupled with the uncertainty as to whether any of these writings were given in the names of OT personalities in the attempt to deceive their readers (see D. S. Russell, The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic, 127-139), has led many scholars to question the practice of continuing to refer to the lit. concerned as “the Pseudepigrapha,” and to adopt the terminology of C. C. Torrey (The Apocryphal Literature), who grouped all extracanonical Jewish writings of the period under the heading “Apocrypha.” This is the term used by Roman Catholic writers, though they do not include under this heading those writings thus designated by Protestants. (The Protestant “Apocrypha” is called “the deuterocanonical writings” by Roman Catholics and are in a special category; see Apocrypha.)

2. List of the writings. There is no definitive list of writings known as the Pseudepigrapha, nor are all that would be so classified available in a single collection (though R. H. Charles, ed., The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, is reasonably comprehensive). The discovery of the DSS (q.v.) has further complicated the matter, since this has multiplied the number of extracanonical Jewish writings that are available, and has also provided scholars with new MSS (and even edd.) of works already known.

The following list includes the majority of these writings (excluding the newly discovered ones associated with the DSS; for these see Dead Sea Scrolls). No attempt has been made to classify the various documents by age, literary type, or origin (cf. section 3, below; see also the individual articles in this dictionary for the following writings).

Abraham, The Testament of

Adam, The Apocalypse or Testament of

Adam and Eve, The Life of

Aristeas, The Letter of

Baruch, The Greek Apocalypse of

Baruch, The Syriac Apocalypse of

Enoch, The Ethiopic Book of (1 Enoch)

Enoch, The Slavonic Book of (2 Enoch)

2 (4) Ezra

Isaiah, The Martyrdom and Ascension of

Jeremiah, The Paralipomena of

Job, The Testament of

Joseph and Asenath (The Prayer of Asenath)

Jubilees, The Book of

Lives of the Prophets, The

3 Maccabees (sometimes included in the Apocrypha)

4 Maccabees

Moses, The Assumption of

Psalm 151

Sibylline Oracles, The

Solomon, The Odes of

Solomon, The Psalms of

Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, The

Most of these writings exist in fragmentary form; some of them are extremely fragmented. Many are available only in trs. (sometimes even trs. of trs.). Similar books have been lost and are known only by name (see M. R. James, The Lost Apocrypha of the Old Testament).

3. The problem of classification. No single method of classifying these documents has gained general acceptance among scholars. The most common approach is to divide them into two groups, determined by their probable provenance. Thus the majority of the writings can be classified as Hebrew-Aramaic or Palestinian (Test XII Pat, Jub, Mart Isa, Pss Sol, As Moses, Syr Apoc Baruch, Test Job, Paralip, Life of Adam and Eve, Lives of the Prophets) on the one hand, or as Greek or Alexandrian in origin (L. Aristeas, Sib Oracles, 3 and 4 Macc, 2 Enoch, Gr. Apoc Baruch) on the other hand; but there is some uncertainty regarding the original language of some, and it is not at all certain that those written originally in Gr. were all composed in Alexandria.

A more helpful system of classification would be to group the writings according to at least five genres: (1) narrative books, e.g. Jubilees, Life of Adam and Eve, The Paralipomena of Jeremiah, etc.; (2) testaments, e.g., Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Testament of Job, etc.; (3) liturgical writings, e.g., Psalms 151, Psalms of Solomon, the Hodayoth of the DSS; (4) apologies, e.g., Letter of Aristeas, 3 and 4 Maccabees, Sibylline Oracles; and (5) apocalypses, e.g., Enoch, As Moses, Apocalypse of Baruch. There is extensive overlapping in these designations also, since many of the books contain features of two or more literary forms.

4. Christian preservation of the Pseudepigrapha. One factor neglected by the two abovementioned systems of classification is the Christian influence on these extracanonical writings. Although the majority of them are Jewish in origin, they have been preserved by Christian scribes. Before the discovery of the DSS the knowledge of these writings was practically limited to a variety of Greek, Latin, Syriac, Ethiopic, Coptic, Armenian, and other MSS and trs. that had been produced and handed down in Christian circles, often with definitely Christian interpolations and additions. There is a relative lack of MSS stemming from Jewish circles because the Pseudepigrapha, along with all other books of the period outside of the twenty-two books of the Heb. canon, were rejected by the rabbis. This was influenced by the destruction of Jerusalem, which drastically dimmed the eschatological hopes prevalent at that time. The leaders who led the restructuring of Judaism, which centered in Jamnia (q.v.), purged the apocalyptic element from their theology. But these writings had become popular among Christians and were adapted for Christian apologetic and devotional purposes. Because of Christian interpolations and additions it is difficult to determine whether some of these writings were originally Jewish or Christian. Not only were Jewish noncanonical writings read and adapted by Christians, but they also became models for Christian noncanonical writings (see [http://biblegateway/wiki/XI. The New Testament Apocrypha. NEW TESTAMENT APOCRYPHA]), though the newer genres of gospel, acts, and epistle provided additional models. The ideas and images of some of these OT pseudepigraphal books not only influenced the thinking of the postapostolic church, but also found a place in the art and popular piety of the Middle Ages.

5. The significance of the Pseudepigrapha. Along with the Apoc., DSS, Josephus, and Philo, the extracanonical writings of the Pseudepigrapha are primary sources for understanding intertestamental Judaism and the theological milieu of early Christianity. The lit. of the Hebrews did not end with the final book of the OT. Strictly speaking, Judaism as such came into existence at the end of the OT period. Although all Jewish thought of the intertestamental and early Christian periods presupposes the OT (as does the thought of the early Christians), one must turn to the Pseudepigrapha to understand the development that had taken place in the theology of Judaism after the close of the OT canon.

Various new features are prominent in these writings. Among them are: a highly elaborate system of angelology; a concentration on the apocalyptic (the Pseudepigrapha has been called “the literature of apocalypticism”; cf. article on Apocalyptic Literature); speculation concerning the coming of Messiah and the nature of the Messianic age; and a strong doctrine of the resurrection of the body. In addition, there is a common body of religious ideas and terminology (e.g. the doctrine of the two ages, the Son of man, etc.) that the Pseudepigrapha writings share with the NT writings.

Although it is difficult to demonstrate that a particular NT writer made use of a specific pseudepigraphal writing, it is not an overstatement that it is impossible to understand the theological background of the NT apart from the study of these and other pre-Christian, Jewish writings.

Bibliography R. H. Charles, ed., The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, II (1913); G. H. Box and W. O. E. Oesterley, edd., “Translations of Early Documents,” Series I and II (1917ff.); C. C. Torrey, The Apocryphal Literature (1945); D. S. Russell, The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic (1964); O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction (Eng. tr. 1965), 571-573, 603-637; A.-M. Denis, Introduction aux Pseudepigraphes Greces d’Ancien Testament (1970).