RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS:

THE CASE OF THE DISAPPEARINGANGELS AT QUMRAN*

ANDY M. REIMER
CanadianBible College

I. Introduction
The Dead Sea ScrollsafterFifty Years,a two-volumecollectionof essays to celebratethe jubilee of the discoveryof the Dead Sea Scrolls,
promisesthe readera combinationof comprehensivesurveysof where
the last fifty years of scholarship on the Scrolls of Qumran have
brought us and "cutting edge articles" that indicate "directionsfor
futurestudy."'Withinthat context, P. Alexander'scontributionon the
demonology of the Dead Sea Scrolls clearly fits the latter category.2
One will search in vain to find any sort of summaryof the present
state of affairsin scholarshipon Qumrandemonology.Perhapsthis is
just a byproductof his opening statementon how "little attentionhas
been paid specifically to their demonology."3At any rate, what is
offered in place of a summaryor extensive interactionwith predecessors is rather a straightforwardnew vision for the demonology and
implicitly the angelology of the Dead Sea Scrolls.4It is a vision fully
deserving of both careful considerationand preliminarycritique.
* I would like to thankW. John Lyons for getting me startedin Qumranstudiesin
the first place and for extensive discussionand critiqueon the contentof this articleany flaws, however, remain in my possession alone. I also need to thank Philip
Alexanderfor his willingnessto assist two graduatestudentsfrom SheffieldUniversity
to get startedin the whole area of exorcism,demonology,and the DSS.
I TheDead Sea ScrollsafterFiftyYears:A Comprehensive
Assessment(eds P. Flintand
Brill, 1998-99).Directquotationsare takenfrom
J.C.VanderKam;Leiden/Boston/Ko6n:
the dustjacket, but the expectationis also raisedby the introductionsof bothvolumes.
2 P.S. Alexander,"TheDemonologyof the Dead Sea Scrolls,"The Dead Sea Scrolls
after Fifty Years, 2.331-53. Some of the content in this article also appearsin more
abbreviatedform in P.S. Alexander,"'WrestlingAgainstWickednessin High Places':
Magic in the Worldviewof the QumranCommunity,"The Scrolls and the Scriptures:
Qumran Fifty Years After (eds S.E. Porter and C.A. Evans; JSPSup 26; Sheffield:
SheffieldAcademic Press, 1997) 319-30.
Alexander,"Demonology,"331.
discussionof angelology(includingin thattermdemonology)
The mostcomprehensive
? Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2000

Dead Sea Discoveries 7, 3

RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS

335

Alexanderopens by stating that "the Scrolls presenta coherentand

sophisticateddemonologywhich shouldbe taken with the utmost seriousness in understandingthe outlook of the Qumransect."5There can
demonology
be no doubt that Alexander's reconstructionof Qumnran
portraysnot just a coherent and sophisticated(at least theologically
speaking) demonology, but a wholly consistent one as well. At the
core of this consistencyis a thoroughgoingdistinctionbetween demons
and angels.Alexanderclaims that while
accordingto some authoritiesdemonsare to be identifiedwith fallen angels[,J...
the demonology of the Scrolls seems to envisage a clear distinction drawn
between demons and angels, whetherfallen or otherwise. In Qumranthought a
demon is a non-corporealbeing which is neitherhuman nor angelic, but which
causes harm and mischief to humansin a variety of ways.6

Stated simply, there are no evil or fallen angels in the Scrolls. In

Alexander'sreconstructionthey have strangelydisappeared,or should
we say, almost disappeared?
II. An Enochic Demonology

it is necessaryto see the methodTo makesense of this disappearance,

ological path that takes one to this intriguingconclusion. Alexander
begins with what he defines as a "standard,formulaicinventoryof the

at Qumranremains M.J. Davidson's Angels at Qumran:A ComparativeStudy of 1

Enoch 1-36, 72-108 and the Sectarian Writingsfrom Qumran(JSPSup 11; Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1992). Anothersignificantmonograph-lengthtreatmentof
at least some aspects of Qumran angelology and demonology is P.J. Kobelski,
Mechizedekand Melchirela' (CBQMS 10; Washington,DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1981). Other articlesthat tackle the matterof demonologyeither
A. Lange,"TheEssenePosition
directlyor indirectlyincludeAlexander'sown"Wrestling";
on Magic and Divination,"Legal Texts and Legal Issues: Proceedingsof the Second
Meeting of the InternationalOrganizationfor QumranStudies, Cambridge,1995 (eds
M. Bernstein,F. Garcia Martinezand J. Kampen;STDJ 23; Leiden and New York:
Brill, 1997) 377-435; B. Nitzan, "Hymnsfrom Qumran-4Q5104Q51 1," The Dead
Sea Scrolls: Forty Years of Research (eds D. Dimant and U. Rappaport;STDJ 10;
Leiden: Brill, 1992) 53-63; and D.L. Penney and M.O. Wise, "By the Power of
Beelzebub:An AramaicIncantationFormulafrom Qumran[4Q560],"JBL 113 (1994)
627-50. Frequentlyangelology and demonology are treated in passing by scholars
interestedin the larger apocalypticor eschatologicalframeworkof the DSS (e.g., F.
in theDeadSea Scrolls,"TheEncyclopediaof ApocalypGarciaMartinez,"Apocalypticism
in Judaismand Christianity
ticism,vol. 1, The Originsof Apocalypticism
[ed. J.J.Collins;
New York: Continuum,1999] 166-72).
Alexander,"Demonology,"331.
6 Alexander,"Demonology,"331-32.

336

ANDY M. REIMER

demonic world,"namely4Q510 1 5. In this exorcistichymn, the Sage

declares the grandeurof God to frightena host of beings, including
k -lo onrrDr:
-1
("all the
mnnnlt,n Denl 'Mri
[... C"-3JC'MRn
spirits of the angels of destruction and the spirits of the bastards,
demons [or 'fearsome demon'], Lilith, howlers, and [yelpers.. J").1
The expression "bastardspirits"(-nton mm) here and elsewhere in
the Scrolls suggests to Alexanderan Enochic aetiology of demons.9In
both 1 Enoch 1-36 and Jubilees, the demons that still hauntthe earth
are the ghosts of the gigantic offspring of heavenly Watcherswho
have intercoursewith humanwomen.'"In the case of the latter,technically only a tenth of these remainas demons (Jub. 10:7-14).In both
texts the "fallen angels"are the Watchersand in both they are safely
imprisoned in a subterraneanprison awaiting final judgment." Of
course, the discoveryof numerouscopies of both 1 Enoch (or at least
the critical portionsthereof) and Jubilees in several differentcaves is
taken by Alexanderas evidence of the sect's familiaritywith Enochic
demonology.'2To this base of evidence one could legitimatelyadd the
I As transcribedby M. Baillet, QumrdnGrotte 4.111(DJD 7; Oxford:Clarendon
Press, 1982) 216.
* Baillet suggests readingthe two words DI n7 as one word-namely the plural
formof iS ("demon")as found in Deut. 32:17 and Ps. 145:11(Baillet, DJD 7.216-17).
In a footnote, Alexander rightly draws attention to the possibility put forwardby
Baillet of readingthis as 0itt IT or "fearsomedemon"(Baillet, DJD 7.217; Alexander,
"Demonology,"333 n. 7). Alexander ("Demonology,"333-35) follows B. Nitzan's
translationof 0'"Y DTtrk as "howlers and yelpers" (QumranPrayer and Religious
Poetry [STDJ 12; Leiden:Brill, 1994] 240). F. GarcfaMartinezopts for "translating
these as animal terms (as per typical English translationsof Isa. 13:21) choosing the
terms "owls and jackals" (The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated:The QumranTexts in
English [trans. W.G.E. Watson; Leiden: Brill, 19962] 371). Even if the terms are
applicableto these creatures,surelyNitzan's termscapturethe sense in which they are
being used here for demoniccreaturesof some sort. Baillet's statementon O^9applies
equally to both-"le sens est impr6cis"(217).
9 4Q511 35 7, 4Q511 48 2-3, 4Q511 182 i I and 4Q444 2 4 where F. Garcia
Martinezand E.J.C. Tigchelaarreconstructthe text as i-rniM rm- int-[a nnn1 1:z
(The Dead Sea Scrolls StudyEdition[Leiden:Brill, 1998] 2.924). The termDnrrYDalso
can be found in IQH' 24:12 (frag. 9) and also col. 24 frag. 6 line 3 where it may well
be modifying inri. And in a linked notion, 4Q511 2 ii 3 speaks of the "congregation

of bastards" (0flt1n

mlhi). Alexander ("Demonology") offers his reading of the Eno-

chic aetiology of demonson pp. 337-41. Nitzan also suggests this expressionis an explicit link to the aetiology of demons in I Enoch and Jubilees(QumranPrayer,237).
1 I Enoch 6-16, esp. 15:8-16:1;Jubilees5:1-11; 7:21-27; 10:1-14.
I Enoch 10:12, Jub. 5:6-7. On this "two stage"judgmentsee also J.1. Collins,
"MethodologicalIssues in the Study of I Enoch: Reflectionson the Articles of P.D.
Hanson and G.W. Nickelsburg,"SBLSP 1978 (ed. P.J. Achtemeier;Missoula, MT:
ScholarsPress, 1978) 317-19.
12 Alexander."Demonology,"337. Among the fragmentsof an Aramaicversion of

RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS

337

fragmentsof an Aramaicversion of The Book of Giants, referencesto

the angelsproducinggiganticchildrenandespeciallytheWatcher'Azaz'el
in 4Q180 1 7-10, a tale of a suspect pregnancyin lQapGen 2, and a
passing reference to the story of the fall of the Watchers and their
giant offspringin CD-A 2:17-19.'3
The notion that the demonology of the Scrolls as a corpus is
founded exclusively on this Enochic story is what gives Alexander's
demonological reconstructionits unique flavor.'4One need only look
at M.J. Davidson's Angels at Qumran:A Comparative Study of I
Enoch 1-36, 72-108 and the Sectarian Writingswhere the apparent
differencesbetween the angelology and demonology of the Enoch literatureand the sectarianscrolls are emphasizedto realize how much
rests on this startingpoint. It ought to be stressedfurtherthat it is not
just a case of Alexanderusing 1 Enoch as the key to Qumrandemonological aetiology, but a particularreading of 1 Enoch and Jubilees.
Alexanderhas effectively banishedthe fallen angels of I Enoch into
subterraneanirrelevance in terms of direct ongoing oppression of
humanity.The sect's membersaccordingto Alexanderwould have no
reason to fear these fallen angels. This suppositionis reasonable,but
other opinions on the matterexist.
M. Black in his translationand commentaryon 1 Enoch follows the
Greek of the Gizeh text for 19:1 and translatesUriel's statementto
Enoch on the judgmentof the Watchersas follows:
the Books of Enoch are 4Q201-2, 4Q204-12. lQ17-18, 2Q19-20, 3Q5, 4Q176 frags
19-21, 4Q216, 4Q219-24, and 1lQ12 have all been identifiedas containingbits and
pieces of the Book of Jubilees.
1 IQ23-24, 4Q203, 4Q206 frags 2-3, 4Q530-533 and 6Q8 have all been identified
as belonging to a Book of Giants. On the Book of Giants and 4Q180 and its relationship to the Enoch corpus see J.T. Milik, The Books of Enoch:AramaicFragments
of QumranCave 4 (Oxford:ClarendonPress, 1976) 249-56, 298-317. A convenient
summaryof both 4Q180 and the Book of Giantsand theirconnectionto the Enoch literaturecan also be found in J.C. VanderKam'sEnoch: A Man for All Generations
(Columbia,SC: Universityof South CarolinaPress, 1995) 123-28. On the correlation
of 'Asa'el/'Azaz'el, see M. Black (ed.), in consultationwith J.C. VanderKam,appendix by 0. Neugebauer,The Book of Enoch or I Enoch: A New English Translation
with Commentaryand Textual Notes. With an Appendix on the "Astronomical"
Chapters(72-82) (SVTP 7; Leiden: Brill, 1985) 121. On lQapGen 2 and its relationship to the Enochic literaturesee J.A. Fitzmyer,The Genesis Apocryphonof Qumran
Cave 1: A Commentary(Rome: Biblical InstitutePress, 19712) 16-17, 78-80.
14 The contentionthat the writers of the Scrolls were familiar with and used the
Book of Watchersis in itself not a particularlycontroversialpoint and one generally
conceded by writers describing the "apocalypticism"of the Scrolls, e.g. F. Garcia
Martinez("Apocalypticism,"167-68) and J.J. Collins (Apocalypticismin the Dead Sea
Scrolls [London:Routledge, 1997] 18-26).

338

ANDY M. REIMER

"Here the angels who had intercoursewith women will abide, and their spirits,
taking on many forms, will harm men and lead them astray, to sacrifice to
demons as to gods, until the great judgement, in which they will be finally
judged. And the wives of the angels who transgressedshall become sirens."

Black then claims that

the "spirits"of the watchersare evidently to roam the earth as the tormentors
and corruptersof [hulmankindtill the judgement,the r6le at 15.8-16 of the "evil
spirits" of the giants, the bastardoffspring of the watchers. Presumablytheir
bodies "abide"in the "greatabyss,"while theirspiritsare free to haunt[hu]mankind,just as it is the "spirits"of the giants which corrupt[hu]mankindaftertheir
bodies have been slain (cf. 10. 12, 15.8f).'5

Black's reading of 1 Enoch and the present status of the fallen

Watchersstands in rathersharpcontrastto that offeredby Alexander.
However, it is the very ambiguityof the text and the uncertaintyof
the referentimplied by "theirspirits"which allows for such divergent
interpretations.Furthermore,if one were to follow the Ethiopic rendering of 19:1, with its simplified"The spiritsof the angels who were
promiscuous with the women will stand here; and they, assuming
many forms, made men unclean . ,"'' the ambiguity only grows.
Both the Gizeh and especially the Ethiopic reading allow for Alexander's suppositionthat it is only the ghosts of the Giants, here spoken of as the "spiritsof the angels,"who oppresshumanity.'7But given
these multiple possibilities, uncertaintywill persist in how 1 Enoch
understandsthe present role of the Watchers, quite apart from its
appropriationby the Qumransectarians.
And the difficultiesof Enochicdemonologyare furthercompounded
by the referenceto the wives of the Watchersin the next sentenceas
sirens. What makes this even more significantis the fact that the LXX
" Black, The Book of Enoch, 161. Black is clearly following R.H. Charlesin this
interpretationof chap. 19. Charlesclaims that "this chapterdisagreeswith xv.l2-xvi,
as here the spiritsof the fallen angels are free to seduce men to sacrificeto demons.
In fact the fallen angels here have the functionof temptingmen which is elsewhere
assigned to the demons"(APOT2.200).
16 Translationfrom Black, The Book of Enoch, 161. This is the text of choice for
E. Isaac as well who translated19:1 as "And Uriel said to me, 'Here shall stand in
many differentappearancesthe spiritsof the angels which have unitedthemselveswith
women. They have defiled the people and will lead them into errorso that they will
offer sacrificesto the demons as unto gods, until the great day of judgmentin which
they shall be judged till they are finished"'(OTP 1.23).
" Charlessuggests that given the apparentdiscrepancybetweenchap. 19 and chaps
10-16 on the identityof the demons, the translationof chap. 19 is possibly defective.
In this case "'Theirspirits'should be followed by 'of the giants,' which would be an
Aramaic idiom likely to be misunderstoodby a Greek translator"(APOT 2.200).
Unfortunately,1 Enoch 19:1 has not turnedup in the extant Aramaicfragmentsfrom
Qumran.

RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS

339

offers us a a&tpiv in Isa. 13:21 for rnwnin.18This verse is also the

likely sourceof v'nmandthereconstructedon; of 4Q510 1 5. Alexander's
observationthat it is puzzling the Qumranlist borrowsonly these two
from the list of possible terms for demonic beings in 13:21 becomes
even more pointed.9 Is 1 Enoch presentinganotherclass of demons
here, and if so, are these or are these not picked up by the Qumran
sectarians?Here too one encountersthe vexation of textual variants
that threaten any attempt to make concrete statements on Enochic
demonology.20Alexander's reading of 1 Enoch is possible, perhaps
even plausible, but may in the end prove to be less than assured.
If one grantsAlexander'sreadingof the Enochicliterature,the most
obvious obstacle to Alexander's particular reading of the Scrolls
demonology is the ongoing references to "angels" as evil beings
within the sectarianScrolls. One need only look at the demon "list"
of 4Q510 1 5, which providedthe referenceto the "bastardspirits"to
find a reference to evil angels: tzn Dxrn 'm iv. Alexanderargues
that the most likely sense of %:n':&tn mm is to take Dri :)tW as
standingin appositionto nim- and takes the whole as "the spiritswho
are the angels of destruction."'"
This is a particularlyinterestingmove

18 Both Charles (APOT2.201) and Black (The Book of Enoch) adopt a readingof
19:2 that has the wives of the transgressingangels becoming sirens. Black suggests
that the LXX oetpiv typically is used to translatethe Hebrewf12.7 ("desert-owl";Mic.
1:8, Jer. 27:39 [50:39 MT], and Isa. 13:21).This deservesfurtherinvestigation.In particular the expression in the Hebrew Bible is always some form of rur nz (Lev.
11:16; Deut. 14:15; Isa. 13:21; 34:13; 43:20; Jer. 50:39; Mic. 1:8; Job 30:29). In listings of uncleanbirdsthe LXX uses the termicopaE("raven";Lev. 11:16)and atpov00o;
("ostrich"?;Deut. 14:15, copaE,has alreadybeen utilizedin 14:14 to translateZw). In
Isa. 34:13 and 43:20 it appearsit is O'371
("jackal")that is being translatedby the term
actpIive;while 7l11V'nt:b and nmr nmi2:are being translatedby atpozBGvand cdl
arpouOCdv
respectively.Job 30:29 follows the Isa. 34:13 pattern.Jer. 27:29
9tryacrnpeq

(MT 50:29) and Mic. 1:8 translate using the expression Ouya-rpov a?tp'vWv. No doubt

the connectionbetween these "daughters"and the "daughtersof humans"of Gen. 6:2

ought to be furtherexplored.Clearlythe presenceof afetpivE in Isa. 13:21 and other
desolationpassages like Isa. 34:13; 43:20; Jer 50:39, and Mic. 1:8 where other desert
creatures/demonsare listed suggests the possibilitythat I Enoch 19:2 views the wives
of the Watchersamong the demonicbeings listed in passages like Isa. 13:21. The use
of Isa. 13:21 then in 4Q510 1 5 becomes even more fascinatingand perhapsproblematic given that a 7i1 i: is not to be found among the fragmentsof 4Q510 or
4Q511. As Charles suggests if "the women too become female demons here," this
stands in contrast to 15:12-16 where demons are the ghosts of the giants (APOT
2.200).
19 Alexander,"Demonology,"334 n. 10.
20 Isaac in translating19:2 opts for "theirwomen... will be peaceful ones," again
following the Ethiopic ratherthan the Greek text (OTP 1.23; see especially the explanatoryfootnote;see also Charles,APOT 2.201).
21 Alexander,"Demonology,"333-34.

340

ANDY M. REIMER

because reading it in a strictly genitival sense, that is, as "the spirits

of the angels of destruction,"would allow him to rule out this inclusion of angels in a demon list immediately.The angels would simply
be a reference to the long imprisonedWatchersof 1 Enoch and the
"spirits"their "bastardoffspring"still runningabout the earth.22This
could be matchedto a reading of 1 Enoch 19:1 in which the "spirits
of the angels"thereare simply the ghosts of the giganticoffspringand
the argumentwould be rathertidy. But as Alexander rightly notes,
there are other Qumran texts in which apparentlydemonic figures
have the label b-l n
attachedto them (IQM 13:10-12;IQS 4:12).
Hence, when the Qumrantexts refer to demons using the term jxzn,
Alexander suggests revertingto "the basic lexical sense of 'messenger' or 'agent'."23Now one might well quibbleover the potentialconfusion that could occur with Alexander'schoice of terms.After all, if
the Qumransectariansused both the term"spirit"and "angel"in interchangeablesorts of ways for both good and evil supernaturalbeings,
creating a dichotomy using the terms "angel"and "demon"is problematic. However, Alexanderdoes carefullyqualify his terms, and the
argumentproceedswithout this becoming any obstacle to clarity.24
III. A Coherent Demonology

Alexander'sreconstructionof the demonologyof the Qumrantexts

does underscorehis contentionthat "the Scrolls presenta coherentand
The explanatorypower of his model is
sophisticateddemonology."25
apparenton several fronts. Fundamentallyit answers the question of
Alexander,"Demonology,"333.
Alexander,"Demonology,"334, so also 344. The use of &yyeXo;in Acts 12:15
where it may well be referringto Peter's "ghost"might also open the possibilitythat
a spiritof the dead may be referredto as an "angel,"althoughmost commentatorssuggest that this ought to be read as a "guardianangel"which bearsuncannyresemblance
to its earthlycounterpart(e.g., C.K. Barrett.The Acts of the Apostles[ICC;Edinburgh:
T. & T. Clark, 1994] 1.585; F.F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: Greek Text with
Introduction
andCommentary
[GrandRapids,MI:Eerdmans,199Q1]
286;andE. Haenchen,
The Acts of the Apostles [trans.B. Noble and G. Shinn; rev. trans. R.McL. Wilson;
Oxford:Blackwell, 1971] 385).
24 See for example Alexander,"Demonology,"
331-32, 334. Alexander'sdistinction
is actually one broadlyin line with post-BiblicalHebrewusage generally.S.A. Meier
claims that "in Semitic texts, the word mal'dk... tends to become the word of choice
to designateall supernatural
beings who do God's work... [and]if it appliesto supernaturalcreaturesopposedto God, it usually is qualifiedby an adjectivesuch as 'evil"'
("Angel II," DDD 89).
25 Alexander,"Demonology,"331.
22
23

RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS

341

how Qumrandemonology finds itself situatedsomewherebetween the

apparentlymuted interest in matters demonological in the Hebrew
Scripturesand the more elaborateand extensive demonologiesof later
Jewish and Christianwritings.26Indeed, the fixation with discovering
the names and natures of various angels and demons that one finds
in texts such as Sepher ha-Razim or the Testament of Solomon is
certainly not evident in extant Qumrantexts.27On the other hand,
Qumransectariantheology, with its deterministicbent, is well served
by the carefully constructedsimplicity of the demonology offered by
the Enoch literature.
Alexander suggests that books such as 1 Enoch actually served to
limit demonologicalspeculationand development.
Faced almost certainlywith a multiplicityand diversityof evil spiritsin the religion of the day, the authoror authorsof this [EnochicWatcher's]myth tried to
bringorderinto the anarchicand chaoticdemonicrealm,and to integratedemons
into their theological worldview. The first thing they did was to assert that all
demons belong to only one species of being: all are the spirits of the Nephilim.
In otherwords, the differentepithetsand nomenclatureused for demons indicates
not differentorders of being, but ratherthe differentactivities or behaviourof
beings which belong to the same species. This already involves a significant
rationalizationof the demonic world.28

It is a rationalizationthat sees the demonic hybrid "as originating

from a perversionof the naturalorder."29
As such, "they representthe
eruptioninto this world of the forces of chaos which God subduedby
his creative fiat; their ultimate punishmentwill involve being cast
back into the abyss and sealed there forever."30This Enochic myth
lends sensibility to the exorcistic hymns found in 4Q510-11 and
26 Alexander,"Demonology,"336. The demonologyof the HebrewBible
remainsa
vexing problemin that, on the basis of contemporaryreligious practiceselsewhere in
the ANE, one would expect popularbelief in demonicforces and means of protecting
or riddingoneself of this threat,but the survivingHebrewtexts shed very little light
on the subject.For a survey of the HebrewBible terrainon the subjectof demons see
C. Fontinoy,"Les anges et les demonsde l'ancien testament,"Anges et demons:Actes
du Colloquede Liege et de Louvain-la-neuve,25-26 novembre1987 (eds H. Limet and
1. Ries; Louvain-la-neuve:Centred'histoiredes religions, 1989) 117-34.
27 On these texts see particularly P.S. Alexander, "Incantations and Books of
Magic," in E. Schurer,The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ
(175 B.C.-A.D.135) (rev. ed.; eds G. Vermes,F. Millarand M. Goodman;Edinburgh:
T. & T. Clark, 1973) 3.347-49, 372-75. See also D.C. Duling's translationand introduction to Testament of Solomon (OTP 1.935-87) and M.A. Morgan's Sepher HaRazim:The Book of Mysteries(SBLIT 25; Chico, CA: ScholarsPress, 1983).
28 Alexander,"Demonology,"339.
29 Alexander,"Demonology,"340.
30
Alexander,"Demonology,"341. It is worth noting that IQM 17:4, in describing
the enemies of the sons of light, says of this collection of a chief evil supernatural

342

ANDY M. REIMER

11Q11. Here one finds both declarationsof God's creativepower and

final judgment as threatsagainst demonic forces.3'Indeed, B. Nitzan
notes this as a uniquefeatureof 4Q510-11 and suggests this points to
She claims that the apocalypan Enochic demonology in particular.32
tic traditionas found in I Enoch 16:1 and Jub. 10:1-11 in which "the
activity of evil spirits is permitted and legitimate till the 'Day of
Judgment"'fits well with the eschatologicalframeworkof the Qumran
sectarians generally.33 More specifically, this notion of demonic activ-

ity as legitimate until the final judgment clarifies why the exorcistic
Sage banished the demonic beings "not for an everlastingdestruction
[but ra]ther for the era of the humiliation of sin" (4Q510 1 7-8).34

Other sectarian texts such as 1QM 13:1-16, 1QH"11:18 and IIQMelch 2:12-13 also appear to share a theology of demonic activity
until the finaljudgmentin which these beings are foreverentrappedor
destroyed.The judgmentof the Watchersand the partialdestruction
of the Giants (theirbodies even if not theirghosts destroyed)function
as a symbol of future and final judgmenton the forces of evil that
remain.35
The notion of presentdemonic activity and futurejudgmentis not
the only bit of Enochic demonologythat is picked up by the sectarian
Scrolls. Alexander also explores the Belial/Satan/Mastemacharacter
and the relationship this individual has to the hoard of demonic
hybrids.Here too Jubilees in particularappearsto providethe necessaryclues for integratingthischaracterintoa largerQumrandemonology.
Accordingto Jubilees 10, afterGod ordersthe round-upof the demons
in response to Noah's prayer,Mastemarequeststhat a tenth of these
be left to him as assistantsin his task of corruptingand leading astray
humanity(esp. 10:8).Mastema/Belialis neitherfallenWatcher,norGiant
ghost, but anotherentity entirely,one with a divinely appointedtask.36
Alexanderclaims that texts such as IQS 3:15-26, 1QM 13:10-12,and
being, his demonic cohorts,and evil humansthat "theirdesire goes towardschaos and
emptiness"(1lZm1 171Wtflrr)--a clear allusion to the 7:1 i*nnof Gen. 1:2.
31 4Q510 1 3-4; 2 4; 4Q511 2 ii 3; 10 12; 28/29; 30; 35 1-2; IIQlI 2:9-12; 3:112; 4:3-12. Alexander,"Demonology,"341.
32 Nitzan, "Hymns,"53-63.
" Nitzan, "Hymns,"56, 58, 60.
PO fnnnIsn rpb O[h ID] OtIP nt%5 I1? (Baillet, DJD 7.216). See also 4Q51 1
8 5; 10 5; 35 7-9. Translationfrom Garcia Martinezand Tigchelaar,The Dead Sea
Scrolls StudyEdition, 2.1031.
3" CD 2:17-19, for example, uses the story of the fall of the Watchersand the
destructionof the Giants as an object lesson in the necessity for obedience.
.36Alexander,"Demonology,"342-43.

RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS

343

one may add lQHS 9:7-9, suggest that this adversarialfigure ultimately operatesunderdivine authorityand the demons are subservient
to him. This allows the Qumrancommunity a dualistic angelology/
demonology while remaining "within the bounds of theism, and...
avoid[s] falling into an absolute dualism."3"The demons, while a
chaotic disruptionwithin the createdorder,are placedundera divinely
ordained figure who ultimately serves God's purposes even as an
opponent.In the end, both chief adversaryand his minions meet with
divinely appointedjudgment and destruction.Alexanderstates rather
succinctly that the author of the myth of the Watchers with his
Genesis 6 aetiology of demons "found a place for them in the narrative of sacred history, and... related them to his theology of creation... [and] these ideas were taken up by the Qumran sect and
totally integratedinto their dualistic view of the world."38Alexander
has certainlyput forwarda strong case in favor of a coherent demonology in the Scrolls.
IV. OutstandingQuestions
The relative ease with which Alexanderuses the Enochic literature
to create a seamless demonology for the DSS does make for a convincing case. This same ease, however, masks several issues, and
certainoutstandingquestionsmust be raisedbefore Alexander'sreconstructionstands as the new "orthodoxy"for Qumrandemonology.
What counts as a demonologyof the Dead Sea Scrolls?
First, what counts as a demonology "of the Dead Sea Scrolls"?
Alexanderoffers us a largely synchronicreadingwith primaryemphasis falling on the Enochic literature.Davidson's methodology,which
we mentioned above, offers a somewhat divided synchronicreading
with the Enochic corpus offering one sort of angelology and demonology, the sectariantexts another.P.R. Davies, long a championof
redactioncriticismas a means of stratifyingtexts and creatinga more
nuanceddevelopmentalhistory of the Qumransectarians,would have
us follow a much more diachronicapproach.Using a quite restricted
definitionof dualism Davies claims that
3' Alexander, "Demonology," 343.
38 Alexander, "Demonology," 351.

344

ANDY M. REIMER

the theology of the liturgy in 4QMa is not dualistic;the notion of a period of

Belial's dominantactivity is perfectlyconsistentwith a nondualisticunderstanding of humanityand history, as exemplifiedin CD 4:12b-13 or Jubilees, whose
mgtmhis not to be equatedwith the dualistic"angel of darkness,"althoughthe
noun mgtmhis his attributein IQM 13:4, 11-a fully dualisticpassage.The mere
mentionof the name of a satanic figure is not by itself indicativeof a dualistic
theology. If his activity is not opposed to an equally powerfulangelic counterpart in a divinely orderedstruggle,the essential componentof dualism is lacking.39

Clearly what Davies would envision as a properScrolls demonology

would be one in which variousdevelopmentallayers would be peeled
apartand not confused. This may well be an admirabletask, and no
doubta useful one, but if the last hundredyears of biblical studieshas
taught us anything,it is that there is a value both in diachronicand
synchronic readings of a supposedly fragmented text or group of
texts.40
In many ways, Alexander's choice of approachis what makes it
such a useful exercise. It is surely the case that whenever a community gathers a set of religious texts that come to define them in some
way, these are read with a heavy dose of uncriticalintertextuality.4'
That is to say, technically"later"texts are read in light of assumptions createdby "earlier"texts. Likewise, "earlier"texts are read with
the spectacles of "later" texts and concepts from those later texts
transportedback into the earlier ones. It seems highly likely, for
instance,that the Qumransectarianswould read the HebrewBible expression 1Yfl ": not as contemporary translatorsand historical
critics do, but as a reference to human forces aligned with an evil

19P.R. Davies, "Eschatologyat Qumran,"JBL 104 (1985) 50-51.

I Collins' plea for a holistic readingof 1 Enoch 1-39 alongsidesource-criticalones
is an excellent and relevantcase in point in terms of our argument("Methodological
Issues,"315-16).
41 Davies claims that "[tJointerpret
the scrolls as if they offereda synchroniccrosssection of an isolated community is to imply an entity slumbering in a historical
cocoon... nor can the literarycorpus be treatedas if it were a Qumrancanon, the
definitive statement of what the community 'always and everywhere believed"'
("Eschatology,"41). Thatstatementis no doubttrue.However,given any readingstrategy applied to the DSS is ultimatelypremisedon some hypothesisof text production
and preservation,surelythereis room for a sort of "canonicalcritical"approachwhich
asks the question of how they might be read as a definingcorpus of religious texts
withoutimplyingnecessarilythat this is a definitivestatementof what the community
always and everywherebelieved. Ratherit is a speculativestatementof what the final
communitypreservingthese Scrolls might have believed at the time of storage.And it
must be stated given our presentinterestthat in this readingstrategy I Enoch potentially has as much of a voice as any so-called "sectarian"document.

RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS

345

angelic figure.42If one assumes that the religious texts of the Qumran
caves were all somehow "owned"or at the very least respectfullyread
by the sectarians,it is strainedto suggest that an Enochic aetiology of
demons is not implied when the Qumransectariansspeak of evil spiritS.43 Even conceding Davidson's argumentthat there are not a lot of
direct references to the Watchersmyth, this is still the case.44Space
must be created for the sort of integrated synthetic reading of the
"finalcorpus"suggestedby Alexanderas a criticalelement in describing the "demonologyof the Dead Sea Scrolls."
Whyallow only one fallen angel?
Above all else, however,standsone troublingfeature-a loose end as
it were that threatensthis finely knit fabric of coherentdemonology.
Mastema, Belial, Satan, Melchiresha,or whatever name one chooses
for this figure is by Alexander's admission an angel and, furthermore,
an evil angel.45 It would be advantageous to his argument for a strict

distinctionbetween "angels"and "demons"if one could reclassify this

entity. Again, the issue of how one is to read 1 Enoch and Jubilees
comes to the fore. There is no explicit requirementto read "Mastema/
Satan"in Jub. 10:7-12 as an "angel.""He is simply describedas the
"chief of the spirits"(10:8). G.L. Davenport,for example, appearsto
Y
42 Deut. 13:14; Judg. 19:22; 20:13; 1 Sam. 1:16
n 2:12; 10:27; 25:17; 1
nl);
Kgs 21:10, 13; 2 Chron. 13:7; 4QBera7 ii 6. One may observethe same phenomenon
when Christianreadersread Job, for instance,and have a great deal of difficultynot
importing a NT construct of "Satan"into 1=71 in Job. Likewise, I have observed
Christianreadersattemptto bring the role and descriptionof lpi-n in Job back into
play in their interpretationof the NT. The LXX translatorsof Sir. 21:27 have also
appearedto have alteredthe originalsense of the verse in choosing to transliteratethe

original "adversary" as

IOv OaTavav.

Davidsoncertainlyappearsto ignore intentionallyor otherwisethe possibilityof

an Enochic aetiology for the origins of evil supernaturalbeings (see for example,
Angels at Qumran,156 esp. n. 2, 157-58, 178, 219-20).
44 Angels at Qumran,179-80. Davidson will concede only CD 2:17-21 and 4Q180
I 1-10 as the only "two certainreferencesto the fallen angels in the sectarianwriting
found at Qumran"(179). Surely Alexanderis correctin readingthe referenceto "bastard spirits"as a referenceback to the gigantic offspringof the Watchersand these
mayrightfullybe addedto the"certainreference"to theEnochmythof thefallenWatchers.
4S Alexander,"Demonology,"341. Alexanderis somewhatmore hesitantin assigning this figureto the class of angels in "Wrestling,"but eventuallydoes so by default
since Belial does not fit his definitionof a "demon"(327-28).
46 It appears,for instance,thatCollins (Apocalypticism,
25) is readingMastemasimply as the leader of the unclean spirits of the giants. So too Nitzan (QumranPrayer,
232 n. 20) althoughlater she speaks of the demons as "messengersof Mastemah,the
angel of the spirits"(251). GarciaMartinezon the other hand seems to be suggesting
43

346

ANDY M. REIMER

read Mastemaas chief among the spirits.However,this is done at the

expense of distinguishingbetween Mastemaand Satanand so does little to solve our problemof eliminatingall angelic beings.4' Given an
equation between the two figures, surely the more naturalreading of
the passage, perhapsone could argueMastema/Satanis presentedhere
simply as the leading demonic figure. It is not beyond the bounds of
reason that referencesto this creatureas a ljrn as we find in CD-A
16:5 (iintr3i- jm5n), lQS 3:20-21 (vic jmbn),and IQM 13:11 (jmtn
nvon) could be read as "messengers'or "agent"as Alexander proposes for the plural form when applied to demons.
When all the evidence is considered,however, Alexander'sadmission of at least this one evil "angel"does the mostjustice to the texts
underconsideration.In the texts with a thoroughgoingJewish monotheistic dualism (as defined by Davies),48there is a certain rationality in viewing the leading heavenly figures of good and evil as
ontologically balanced. In other words, this is a battle between two
"angelic" figures under the auspices of the one God until the final
judgment. In the case of IQS 3:20 and CD-A 5:17-19 this takes on
the languageof a "Princeof Light"versus an "Angel of Darkness"or
"Belial."49One could furthersuggest that the Qumranhabit of speaking of a leading evil supernaturalfigure and his underlingsmight be
that Jubilees presents Mastema as the leader of an army of "fallen angels" who
"obtainsfrom God that a tenth of the fallen spiritswill not be directly destroyedbut
will be left under his command in order to harass, mislead, and destroy humanity"
("Apocalypticism,"167). It is not entirely clear whetherGarcia Martinezis implying
two groups(i.e., "armyof fallen angels"and "fallenspirits")or whetherhe is employing two terms for stylistic reasons. Later he uses the languageof "angelic forces as
organizedarmies underan angelic leader"to describeJubilees,suggesting the former
is the case (168).
47 Davenportdoes not elaboratebut simply states, "Satanis the overseerof the evil
spirits-the spirits of the childrenof the Watchers-who remainon earth. A distinction is implied between Satan and Mastema,the chief of the evil spirits (x, 7-8)" (The
Eschatologyof the Bookof Jubilees[SPB 20; Leiden:Brill, 1971] 39 n. 1). J.C. VanderKam offers a more interestingand nuanced readingof mastemasuggesting the distinct possibility that Jubilees used the term as a descriptiveabstractnoun ratherthan
a proper name (Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees [HSM 14;
Missoula, MT: ScholarsPress, 1977] 257-58).
4 Davies defines "dualistic"as "two equal and opposinginfluences,conceivedcosmologically and/orethically, and, in a Jewish context,subordinatedto the sovereignty
of one God" ("Eschatology,"50). Collins takes exception to the restrictivenatureof
this definition, but it does have a heuristic value for our present argument(Apocalypticism,44).
49 Davidson commentingon the CD 5:18-19 passage suggests that "herethe Prince
of Lights correspondsto Belial and it is logical to regardboth as angels" (Angelsat
Qumran,164).

RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS

347

a productof a demonology construedas Alexandersuggests-that is,

a divinely appointedbut evil angel with the ghosts of the Giants as
his assistants. In the sectarian texts some form of the expression
"Belial and the spirits of his lot" is found in 1QM 13:2, 4, 11-12, as
well as llQMelch 2:13 and 4QBera 7 ii 1-3, while IQS 3:21-24
effects a similardichotomywith its "Angel of Darkness. . . and all the
spiritsof his lot."50So too the psalmist's requestin 1IQPsa 19:15 that
neitherSatan nor an evil spirit be allowed to rule over them (m'=nLR
iin r7r
min
':) certainlywould lend some credence to Alexander's
forces
ontologicaldistinctionbetweenthisevil leaderandthe supernatural
under his direction.5'It does certainly seem to be the case that the
roots of this characterare in the Satan figureof the HebrewBible and
certainly there it is an angelic heavenly court figure even if a good
deal of transformationhas taken place by the writing of the Scrolls.52
It seems that thereis little room to maneuverBelial by whatevername
out of the class of "angel."
But this raises a very serious question about the inconsistencyof
Alexander'sconstructin which demons cannotbe angels but the chief
of the demons is. Given that Alexanderhas put togethera solid case
for understandingthe "bastardspirits"(-iron nrnmr)of 4Q510 1 5 as
the ghosts of the Giants, does it necessarily follow that the "spirits
cannotreferto anotherclass of demonic
who arethe angelsof destruction"
opponents?If thereis one fallen angel, is it not possible there are others in this categoryas well? This is not to suggest thatwe must return
to a state of affairsin which the spiritsin subjectionto Belial are routinely and uncritically read as "fallen angels."53 Rather, one must con-

sider the possibility that several aetiologies co-exist simultaneously

without all the potentially conflicting tensions between them worked
50 Translationdrawn from Garcia Martinezand Tigchelaar,The Dead Sea Scrolls
StudyEdition, 133, 135, 1207, 1209, 75, 77, respectively.
s' One of the distinctionsthat Alexandersuggests is more dubious-specifically his
insistencethat angels cannot possess a humanbeing while a demon or evil spirit can
(Alexander,"Wrestling,"327-28; "Demonology,"339). This assumptionplays into a
numberof questionsand assertionshe makes in both articles.It is, however,an arguan argumentthatfailsto takeaccountof laterdemonolomentfromsilence,andfurthermore
gies in which demons are fallen angels and as such do possess humanbeings. So too
argumentson the non-reproductivenatureof angels and demons fail to do justice to
the ease with which this apparent"rule"is regularlybreachedin demonologicalmyths,
not least the fall of the Watchersstory in 1 Enoch (Alexander,"Demonology,"336).
52 See C. Breytenbach,
"Satan,"DDD 1369-78.
S3 This habit of assumingratherthan arguingfor an aetiology of demon as "fallen
angels" occurs in otherwise responsible scholarly works (e.g., Davidson, Angels at
Qumran;Kobelski,Melchizedek,17-18; GarciaMartinez,"Apocalypticism,"167-68).

348

ANDY M. REIMER

out. This paper began with an observationI made while teaching a

New Testamentreligious"backgrounds"
courseto undergraduate
Bible
and Theology students.After having these studentsread and discuss
the fall of the Watchersstory from 1 Enoch and Jubilees, I asked if
any recognizeda tension between this accountof the fall of the angels
and the story of the fall of the angels they were familiarwith, which
I knew to be some hazy Miltonianaccountof a heavenlyrebellionby
Satan and his angels. In fact, they failed to see any tension until I
sketched out both accounts on one "timeline"drawn from the narrative of Genesis 1-6. Only once it was visualized in this mannerdid
the discrepanciesbecome apparentto them. If the sociology of knowledge has taught us anything it is to be aware of these unrecognized
"gaps" and unresolved tensions in the constructionof worldviews.54
The very fact that so many scholarscan speak to the issue of demons
and final judgmenton Belial and his minionswithoutever addressing
the issue of aetiology is perhaps indicative of how the sectarians
themselvesfunctioned.
As we noted above, Alexandermakes the plausiblesuggestionthat
theEnochliteratureis a significantrationalization
of the demonicworldbringingan orderedsimplicity to the otherwise"anarchicand chaotic
demonic realm."55Other scholars too have noted the various streams
that are forced togetherwithin the telling of the myth of the Watchers
in 1 Enoch 1-36 and Jubilees.56However,this implies a ratherbroad
streamof existing ideas about the origins of supernaturalevil beings.
This is really one of the most significantadvancesof the sociology of knowledge,
and one not taken up nearly often enough. M. Douglas, summarizingthe effect E.E.
Evans-Pritchard's Witchcraft, Oracles, and Magic among the Azande has had on schol-

arship regardingwitchcraftsince its original publicationin 1937, states that EvansPritchard'swork as "first and foremost... a book about the sociology of knowledge... [showing] how the Azande, clever and sceptical as they were, could tolerate
discrepanciesin their beliefs and could limit the kinds of questionsthey asked about
the universe" ("Introduction: Thirty Years after Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic" Witchcraft Confessions and Accusations [ed. M. Douglas; London: Tavistock Publications,

1970] xiv). This is echoed by E. Gillies' introductionto an abridged versionof

Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande (E.E. Evans-Pritchard, Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande [abridged and intro. by E. Gillies; Oxford:

ClarendonPress, 1976] xxvii-xxviii). In a delightfulbit of irony, Douglas lamentsthe

fact that subsequentanthropologistswho actuallyuse Evans-Pritchard's
work have exhibiteda similar social restraintupon perceptionand naturalcuriosity(xiv).
" "Demonology,"339.
S6 See particularly the following oft-cited works: P.D. Hanson, "Rebellion in
Heaven, Azazel, and EuhemeristicHeroes in I Enoch 6-11" JBL 96 (1977) 195-233;
G.W.E. Nickelsburg,"Apocalypticand Myth in I Enoch6-11,"JBL 96 (1977) 383-405
and Collins's response ("Methodological Issues"); D. Dimant, "I Enoch 6-11: A

RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS

349

While 1 Enoch may have synthesized a new simplicity, it may well

be that this new constructsimply rejoined the existing broad stream
of ideas rather than authoritatively redefining demonic aetiology.
Certainly,later Christianwriters such as Lactantiusdemonstratethat
one can hold an Enochic aetiology for demons alongside a myth of
angels who fell from heavenly glory and who also enter the class of
demonic beings.57
The difficultyis finding a clear "fallen angels" myth that is quite
separatefrom the Enochic interpretationof Genesis 6. A story of the
fall of Satan and the angels prior to humanity's fall, the account
largely embracedas "orthodox"after the fourth century in Christian
circles,58is not clearly attestedbefore the firstcenturyCE.59Wis. 2:2324, with its statementthat it is "throughthe devil's envy deathentered
the world"(NRSV), hints at the sort of story one finds in The Life of
Adam and Eve, but in itself is a vague referenceand the book at any
rate is likely a first century CE document.' The Life of Adam and
Eve offers an accountof the fall of Satan and a host of angels under
his commandon the basis of his failureto worshiphumanity(but here
only in the Latin, Armenian and Georgian, not in the Greek and
Slavonic versions).61 2 Enoch 29:4-5 offers a more complete descripMethodologicalPerspective,"SBLSP1978, 323-39; and C.A. Newsom, "The Development of I Enoch 6-19: Cosmology and Judgment,"CBQ 42 (1980) 310-29.
57 E.g., Lactantius,The Divine Institutes2.15. It was Alexander'sarticle that first
suggested the Lactantiusparallel ("Demonology,"339 n. 24). An excellent summary
of Lactantius' demonology can be found in E. Schneweis, Angels and Demons
According to Lactantius (CUASCA 3; Washington, DC: Catholic University of
America Press, 1944) 92-109. For a thoroughsurvey of early Christianappropriation
of the Enoch literatureincluding a descriptionof the shift from an Enochic demonology based on Genesis 6 to a demonologyof angels involved in a heavenlyrebellion
and a rejectionof the Enochic interpretationof Genesis 6, see J.C. VanderKam,"1
Enoch, Enochic Motifs, and Enoch in Early Christian Literature," The Jewish
ApocalypticHeritagein Early Christianity(eds J.C. VanderKamand W. Adler;CRINT
3.4; Minneapolis:FortressPress, 1996) 62-88.
S8 See VanderKam,"1 Enoch,"84-87.
59Alexandermentions 1 Enoch 54:6 in passing as an example of Satan leading a
group of fallen Watchersand roaming the world. As he rightly notes, this passage
comes from the Similitudesand is notoriouslydifficultto date with any definiteness.
Its absence from Qumranis particularlytelling in terms of its later status.
I J. Geyer suggests"thisis the earliestknownreferenceto the devil as the tempter"
(The Wisdomof Solomon [TBC; London: SCM Press, 1963] 67). On the date see
D. Winston,"Solomon,Wisdom of," ABD 6.122-23, and E.G. Clarke,The Wisdomof
Solomon (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1973) 1-3.
61 See M.D. Johnson'sintroductionand translationin OTP 2.249-95 esp. 262. See
also G.A. Anderson and M.E. Stone's, A Synopsis of the Books of Adam and Eve
(SBLEJL5; Atlanta:ScholarsPress, 1994) 10-13.

350

ANDY M. REIMER

tion of a creationweek fall by Satanailand his angelic underlings,but

this is only in the longer recension and is perhapsa Christianinterpolation.62Later Jewish possibilities are also brought forward by
Nitzan in her investigationsof 4Q510-11.63 These include stories of
demons originatingwith "a primaevalconnectionbetween Adam and
Lillith" or demons as restrainedsince the days of Moses but breaking out of their subterraneanhiding place duringtimes of supernatural
tension. Nitzan herself appears to remain convinced of an Enochic
demonology based on Genesis 6 for the Scrolls.' Gen. Rab. 24:6
which Nitzan cites as an early form of the Lilith legend actually has
both Adam and Eve producingdemonic childrenwhile this same text
offers the possibility that demons are spirits who had the misfortune
of not having a body made before the arrival of the creation week
Also problematic because of its later date is a
Sabbath (7:5).65
Mishnaic accountof evil spiritsas entities creatednear the end of the
sixth day (m. Avot 5:6).'1Given the first centuryCE or later date for
all of this evidence obviously one must treadlightly in suggestingany
of these accountswere in circulationat the time of the writing of the
Scrolls. However, the very fact of later variety along with the references to demonic creaturesas "angels"on a numberof occasions in
the sectariantexts of Qumranought to keep alive the possibility of
another demonic aetiology existing alongside of the ghosts of the
Giants version given by I Enoch.

See F.I. Anderson'stranslationand footnoteson the matterin OTP 1.148.

A convenient summaryof Jewish demonologyand especially aetiology can be
found in E. Ferguson, Demonology of the Early Christian World (Lewiston, NY:
Edwin Mellen Press, 1984) 69-104.
i QumranPrayer, 231-32; "Hymns,"56. A possible early account of Adam and
Lilith can be found in Gen. Rab. 24:6. The latteraccountcan be found in Num. Rab.
12:3.
65 In commentingon the descendantsof Adam the following is stated: "Another
These are descendants,but earlierones were not [human]descendants.
interpretation:
What then were they? Demons. For R. Simon said: Throughoutthe entireone hundred
and thirtyyears duringwhich Adam held aloof from Eve the male demonswere made
ardentby her and she bore, while the female demonswere inflamedby Adamand they
bore.. ." (Gen. Rab. 24:6 as translated in Midrash Rabbah [trans. H. Freedman;
Londonand New York: Soncino Press, 1983] 1.203). See also Gen. Rab. 20:11. It is
noteworthythat the "sons of God" of Genesis 6 are not read as "angels"(Gen. Rab.
26:5). Given the reference to Lilith in 4Q510 1 5 and possibly male and female
demons in texts such as 4Q510 and 4Q560 (see below), perhapsthese do deservefurther investigationas to the possibilityof these being aroundat the time of the writing
of these Qumrantexts.
I So also b. Pes. 54a.
62
63

RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS

351

Must consistency lie in aetiology?

It might also be the case that the Qumransectarianshad little interest
in a clearly articulatedaetiology of demons-that quite frankly they
were fuzzy on the issue because pragmatically the origins of the
demon, and indeed the type of demon, were relativelyunimportantin
their coping strategies.Contemporaryparallelsto a phenomenonsuch
as this can certainlybe found.674Q510 and 511 deal with the varieties
of demonic creaturesthey list in an identicalfashion-all are terrified
in the apotropaichymn through the declarationof the grandeurand
power of God.68Indeed, declaring the creative power of YHWH as a
means of exorcising demons is the pattem of 1IQl1 as well.69Here
too one finds a variety of terms used to describe demonic opponents
but one basic formula which is effective for all, a pattem one finds
especially in Psalm 91 which is includedin this collection of exorcistic psalms.70 4Q560 likewise gives a series of evil supematural crea-

tures listed on the basis of their activity and gender and appearsto

67 L.G. McClung Jr, describing Pentecostal and CharismaticChristianexorcistic

practices, states that "no clarified doctrinal statementon demonology and exorcism
exists among the major Pentecostal bodies.... Like many themes in Pentecostal/
charismaticbelief and practice,exorcism has been practicedbut not formally theologized" ("Exorcism,"Dictionaryof Pentecostaland CharismaticMovements[eds S.M.
Burgess and G.B. McGee;GrandRapids, MI: Zondervan,1988] 290-91).
68 4Q510 1 4-5. The term "apotropaic"
to describethese hymns was suggestedby
Alexander,"Wrestling,"320. For an excellent analysisof the meansby which the Sage
banisheddemonic beings, see Nitzan, "Hymns."
69 Lange, "The Essene Position,"379-82. The specific importanceof retainingthe
name YHWH in this text is taken up by t. Puech ("Les deux derniers Psaumes
davidiquesdu rituel d'exorcisme,II QPs' IV 4 - V 14," The Dead Sea Scrolls: Forty
Yearsof Research,82-89). While Puech believes the use of the divine name excludes
this from being a "sectarian"documentproper,Nitzan remainsopen to other alternatives (QumranPrayer, 235-36) while Alexanderargues it is indeed a sectariandocument ("Wrestling,"328).
70 Though fragmentary,1IQ11 2:3-4 (11Q11 1:4-5 in Puech's numberingscheme)
offers the following:

Garcla Martinez and Tigchelaar offer "[...

the spirlits and the demons,

[...]/[...1

These are [the delmons, and the Pri[nceof Animosi]ty"as a reconstructionand translation (The Dead Sea Scrolls StudyEdition,2.1200-1). t. Puech speculatesrathermore
boldlyandoffers"pourqu'ildelivrede toutfldaudesesp]ritset des demons,[les liliths,]/[les
hiboux et les chats sauvages (?)], ceux-ci [sont les demons,et le pr[inced'hostili]t6"
RevQ 14 [1990] 386("II QPsApa: Un rituel d'exorcismes.Essai de reconstruction,"
88). Psalm 91 within the context of these other exorcistic psalms offers a classic example of a list of various demonic oppressorsall dealt with simultaneouslywith a
blanketprotectionfrom YHWH.

352

ANDY M. REIMER

offer a "blanket"solution to all of these.7'4Q444 is somewhatmore

fragmentarybut appearsto list demons without being clear on what
exactly each might specificallybe, and this would fit the patternof an
all-encompassingcure as well.72Perhapsthe key to this lack of interest in fleshing out specific demonologicalaetiologies is linked to M.
Kister's hypothesisthat entry into the communityimplied a degree of
freedom from demonic control.73The exorcistic hymnodythen serves
to reinforcethis blanketprotection-a mode of operationthat does not
requireextensive investigationof various types of demons and cures
applicableto each in particular.The consistencyof the demonologyof
the DSS is perhapsbetterfound in their communitypracticesfounded
on a particulartheology of theircommunityand a specific belief about
the ultimateend of the demons plaguingpresentexistence. Asking the
sectarians also to have a carefully fleshed out aetiology of demons
may be asking too much.
V. Conclusion
It remainsto be seen whetherAlexander'sbanishmentof the fallen
angels from the DSS will be an eternal imprisonmentin terms of
'M
The list here is ratherdramatic(4Q560 I i 2-5):
pD li;' ni-i-n mnn-*n [ ...]
tmD-wnn~ss tnt-i 1m@: fXV [..j
kkmpz n,"Mnl
[-j r1 @9n

1-b roRl

rr-wl

rtum MUVD
In jmw

1q

n"Mro ttnrp) r l -7- I-D ^

-i[...]
"] the midwife,the chastisementof girls. Evil visitor,de[mon... .... .1 entersthe flesh,
the male penetratorand the female penetrator/[...]... iniquity and guilt; fever and
chills, and heat of the heart J... 1 in sleep, he who crushes the male and she who
passes throughthe female, those who dig" (transcriptionand translationdrawn from
GarciaMartfnezand Tigchelaar,The Dead Sea Scrolls StudyEdition,2.1116-17, with
the exceptionof the final dalet on line 2 which is suggestedby Penneyand Wise, "By
the Powersof Beelzebub,"631, 637. Penneyand Wise take the beginningof line 4 as
the completionof a quotationfrom Exod. 34:7 or Num. 14:18 and carryon translating 4-5 as, "O Fever and Chills and Chest Pain... [and forbiddento disturbby night
in dreams or by daly in sleep, the male Shrine-spiritand the female Shrine-spirit,
breacherdemons (?) of." Howeverit is to be finally understood,that one has a list of
demonic figures and maladiesis clearly evident.
72 4Q444 2 4 is reconstructed
by GarciaMartinezand Tigchelaaras bn wro ...1
.
-iM-o nni O'ntn[mrnnmr
those who inspirehim [sic] fear, all the spiritsof the
("[...
b3astardsand the spirit of uncleanness")at least partiallyon the basis of a perceived
link with 4Q511 (The Dead Sea Scrolls StudyEdition, 2.924-25).
73 M. Kister,"Demons,Theology,and Abraham'sCovenant(CD 16:4-6and Related
Texts)," The Dead Sea Scrolls at Fifty: Proceedingsof the 1997 Society of Biblical
LiteratureQumranSection Meetings (eds R.A. Kugler and E.M. Schuller; Atlanta:
ScholarsPress, 1999) 167-81.

RESCUING THE FALLEN ANGELS

353

of Qumrandemonology.Thosewho wouldseek
scholarlyreconstructions
to rescue these fallen angels must contend with the consistent and
coherent case Alexanderhas made for reading the Scrolls' demonology and angelology against a purely Enochic background.We certainly cannot returnto an uncriticalequationof Qumrandemons with
"fallen angels." That stated, if we are going to use 1 Enoch and
Jubilees to reconstructthe demonologyof the Scrolls (either in a synchronicor diachronicfashion), there is clearly a need for furtherwork
to generate a consensus or at least several well argued positions on
the demonology of the Enochic literatureitself. And in this task of
reconstructingdemonologies,one must seek to hold a tension between
an integratedand consistentreadingof a text or body of texts and an
awareness of the sociology of knowledge "gaps" in any religious
sect's worldview.The history of demonologyhas certainlyshown that
attemptsby texts such as 1 Enoch to rationalizeentities that are by
definition chaotic, irrationaland typically open to all-out speculation
are bound to fail. Scholarlyattemptsto reconstructany sort of ancient
demonology will always have to work in the midst of this chaos.