ESDRAS
537
ESDRAS
posed as fairly expressing its contents. Should these
books be regarded as independent, or as parts of a
larger work? There is little discussion as to the union
of I and II Esd., which may well be considered as a
single book. As to the opinion holding Esd.-Neh. and
Par. to be only one work, although it seems gaining
ground among Biblical students, yet it is still strongly
opposed by many who deem its arguments unable to
outweigh the evidence in the opposite direction. We
should not expect to find in I Esd., any more than in
II Esd., a complete account of the events connected
with the Restoration, even a complete record of the
lives of Esdras and Nehemias. The reason for this
lies in the author's purpose of simply narrating the
principal steps taken in the re-establishment of the
theocracy in Jerusalem. Thus, in two parallel parts,
our book deals (1) with the return of the Jews under
the leadership of Zorobabel ; (2) with the return of an-
other band commanded by Esdras. In the former,
with the decree of Cyrus (i, 1-4) and the enumeration
of the most prominent members of the caravan (ii),
we read a detailed account of the rebuilding of the
Temple and its successfvil completion, in spite of bitter
opposition (iii-vi). The events therein contained
cover twenty-one years (.536-515). The latter part
deals with facts belonging to a much later date (458 or
397). Opening with the decree of Artaxer.xes (vii)
and the census of the members of the party, it briefly
relates the journey across the desert (viii), and gives
all the facts connected with the enforcement of the
law concerning marriages with foreign women (ix-x).
I Esd. is a compilation the various parts of which differ in nature, in origin, and even in language. At least three of the parts may be recognized: (1) the per- sonal memoirs of Esdras (vii, 27-Lx, 15); (2) lists very likely taken from public documents (ii, 1-70; vii, 1-5) ; (3) .\ramaic writings (iv, 7-vi, 18;\"li, 12-26), supposed with some probability to be a portion of " a more com- prehensive history of the restored community " (Stade). These the compiler put together into the present shape, adding, of course, now and then some remarks of his own, or some facts borrowed from sources other- wise unknown to us. This compilatory character does not, as some might believe, lessen in any way tlie high historical value of the work. True, the compiler was very likely not endowed with a keen sense of criticism, and he has indiscriminatingly transcribed side by side all his sources "as if all were alike trustworthy" (L. W. Batten) ; but we should not forget that he has pre- served to us pages of the highest value; even those that might be deemed of inferior trustworthiness are the only documents availal)le with which to reconstruct the history of those times; and the compiler, even from the standpoint of modern scientific research, could hardly do anything more praiseworthy than place within our reach, as he did, the sources of information at his disposal. The composition of the work has long been attributed without discussion to Esilras iiimself. This view, taught by the Talmud, and still admitted by scholars of good standing, is, however, abandoned by several modern Biblical students, who, although their opinions are widely at variance on the question of the date, fairly agree, nevertheless, that the book is later than 330 b. c.
// Esdras. — See Nehemias.
/// Esdras (Clr. Esdras A; Prot. writers, I Esdras). — Although not belonging to the Canon of the Sacred Scriptures, this book is usually found, ne prorsus in- tereal. in an appendix to the editions of the Vulgate. It is made up almost entirely from materials existing in canonical books. The following scheme will show sufficiently the contents and point out the canonical parallels: —
III Esd., i=II Par., XXXV, xxxvi.— History of the Kingdom of Juda from the great Passover of Josias to the Captivity.
Ill Esd., ii, 1-15 (Greek text, 14) =1 Esd., i.
— Cyrus's decree. Return of Sassabasar. Ill E.sd., ii, 16 (Gr. 15)-31 (Gr. 25) = I Esd., iv, 6-
24. — Opposition to the rebuilding of the Temple. Ill Esd., iii, 1-v, 6. — Original portion. Story of
the three pages. Return of Zorobabel. Ill Esd., V, 7^6 (Gr. 45) = I Esd., ii.— List of
those returning with Zorobabel. Ill Esd., V, 47 (Gr. 46)-73 (Gr. 70) =1 Esd., iii,
1-iv, 5. — .\ltar of holocausts. J'oundation of
the Temple laid. Opposition. Ill Esd., vi, vii=I Esd., v, vi. — Completion of the
Temple. Ill Esd., viii, 1-ix, 36=1 Esd., vii-x. — Return of
Esdras.
III Esd., ix, 37-56 (Gr. 55) =11 Esd., vii, 73- viii, 12. — Reading of the Law by Esdras.
The book is incomplete, and breaks off in the middle of a sentence. True, the Latin version completes the broken phrase of the Greek; but the book in its en- tirety probably contained also the narrat ive of the feast of Tabernacles (II Esd., viii). A very strange feature in the work is its absolute disregard of chronological order; the history, indeed, runs directly backwards, mentioning first Artaxerxes (ii, 1(3-31), then Darius (iii-v, 6), finally Cjtus (v, 7-73). All this makes it difficult to detect the real object of the book and the purpose of the compiler. It has been suggested that we possess here a history of the Temple from the time of Josias down to Xehemias, and this view is well sup- ported by the subscription of the Old Latin version. Others suppose that, in the main, the book is rather an early translation of the chronicler's work, made at a time when Par., Esd., and Xeh. still formed one contin- uous volume. Be this as it may, there seems to have been, up to St. Jerome, some hesitation with regard to the reception of the book into the Canon; it was freely quoted by the early Fathers, and included in Origen's " Hexapla ". This might be accounted for by the fact that III Esd. may be considered as another recension of canonical Scriptures. Unquestionably our book cannot claim to be Esdras's work. From certain par- ticulars, such as the close resemblance of the Greek with that of the translation of Daniel, some details of vocabulary, etc., scholars are led to believe that III Esd. was compiled, probably in Lower EgjTJt, during the second centurj' B. c. Of the author nothing can be said except, perhaps, that the above-noted resem- blance of style to Dan. might incline one to conclude that both works are possibly from the same hand.
HowoRTH, The Real Character and the Imparlance of the Firsl Book of Esdras in The Academy, Jan-June. 1S93; Calmkt. Dis- sertation sur le troisihne Hire d'Esdras in Commenlaire hlleral (Paris. 1724), III; SchCrer. Aookniphen dex A.T. in Rcalen- cyklopadie fur prot. Theol. und Kirche (Leipzig, 1896).
IV Esdras. — Such is the title of the book in most Latin MSS.; the (Prot.) English .\pocrypha, however, give it as II Esd., from the opening words: "The sec- ond book of the prophet Esdras". Modern authors often call it also the Apocalypse of Esdras. This re- markable work has not been preserved in the original Greek text; but we possess translations of it in Latin, SjTiac, .\rabic (two independent versions), Ethiopian, and Armenian. The Latin text is usually printed in the appendix to the editions of the Vulgate; but these editions miss seventy verses between vii, 35, and vii, 36. The missing fragment, which was read in the other versions, was discovered in a Latin MS. by R. L. Bensly, in 1874, and has been since repeatedly printed. In the Latin the book is divided into sixteen cliapters. The two opening (i, ii) and the two concluding (xv, xvi) chapters, however, which are not to be found in the Eastern translations, are unhesitatingly reganled by all as later additions, foreign to the primitive work.
The body of the Fourth Book, the unity of which appears to be unquestionable, is made up of seven vis- ions which Esdras is supposed to have seen at Baby-
