A pseudepigraphic work in which Baruch narrates his experiences during the periods just before and after the destruction of the Temple, and gives an account of the revelations received by him concerning the future. With the exception of a small fragment, chapters lxxviii.-lxxxvi., the work has become known only recently. It has been preserved in Syriac. In 1866 Ceriani published a Latin translation of the Syriac text ("Monumenta Sacra," I. ii. 73-98), the Syriac text itself in ordinary type in 1871, and in facsimile in 1883. Following is an outline of the contents of the work:

Chapters i.-v.:

God reveals to Baruch the impending destruction of Jerusalem, and bids him leave the city along with all other pious persons, since their presence there would preserve it from destruction. Baruch, at first hopeless over the sad tidings, is comforted by God, who assures him that Israel's woes will not be permanent, but that after the nation's chastisement a glorious heavenly Templewill arise for it. Then Baruch, Jeremiah, and all other pious ones go to the brook Kidron, where they await the sad event.

Chapters vi.-viii.:

On the following day the Chaldeans surround the city; and while Baruch stands sorrowing at the fate of the people, a wind carries him up to the walls of Jerusalem. He sees four angels with torches firing the walls, but not before another angel has consigned the sacred vessels of the Temple to the earth, which swallows them up till the latter days.

Chapters ix.-xii.:

Seven days after the capture of Jerusalem, Baruch again receives a revelation. He is told that Jeremiah should accompany the captives to Babylon, but that he himself must remain at the ruins of Jerusalem, where God will reveal to him what shall happen at the end of days. Then Baruch sings a dirge on the destruction of Jerusalem and the sorrows of Israel, beginning "Happy he that was not born, and he that, being born, hath died" (compare Job iii. 11).

Chapters xiii-xv.:

After fasting seven days, Baruch receives a revelation concerning the future punishment of the heathen and of all godless persons; and he is told that he will live until the consummation of the time, that he may bear witness in the hour of their punishment against those nations who now prosper.

Chapters xvi.-xx.:

God cuts short Baruch's reflections on the just course of history by referring to the end of days soon to come, and promising to reveal it.

Chapters xxi.-xxx.:

After another seven-day fast and long prayers the heavens open and Baruch hears a heavenly voice. First he is blamed for the doubt and timidity expressed in his complaints and prayers, and then he learns that the "future time" will come only when the earth shall have brought forth all her fruit; that is, when all the souls destined to be born shall have seen the light of day. He is told of the twelve divisions of the time of oppression, and of the following Messianic era of joy and glory.

Chapters xxxi-xxxiv.:

Baruch assembles the elders of the people and tells them that Zion will soon be restored, but destroyed once again, then to be rebuilt for all eternity.

Chapters xxxv.-xli.:

Baruch, while sitting in the ruins of the Temple lamenting, receives a new revelation in the form of the following vision: In his sleep he sees a wood surrounded by rocks and crags, and, opposite the wood, a growing vine, beneath which flows a spring. The spring runs quietly as far as the wood, where it waxes to a mighty stream, overwhelming the wood and leaving only one cedar standing. This cedar, too, is finally swept away and carried to the vine. God explains the meaning of the vision to Baruch. The wood is the mighty fourth power (Rome); the spring is the dominion of the Messiah; and the vine is the Messiah Himself, who will destroy the last hostile ruler (of Rome) on Mt. Zion.

Chapters xlii.-xlviii. 24:

Baruch is directed to warn the people and to prepare himself for another revelation, which he does.

Chapters xlviii. 25-lii.:

In this revelation Baruch is told of the oppressions in the latter days, of the resurrection and final destiny of the righteous, and of the fate of the godless.

Chapters liii.-lxxiv.:

A second prophetic vision follows, whose meaning is explained by the angel Ramiel. A cloud which arises from the sea rains down twelve times alternately dark and bright waters. This indicates the course of events from Adam to the Messiah. The six dark waters are the dominion of the godless—Adam, Egypt, Canaanitic influence, Jeroboam, Manasseh, and the Chaldeans. The six bright waters are Abraham, Moses, David, Hezekiah, Josiah, and the time of the Second Temple. After these twelve waters comes another water still darker than the others and shot with fire, carrying annihilation in its train. A clear flash puts an end to the fearful tempest. The dark cloud is the period between the time of the Second Temple and the advent of the Messiah, which latter event determines the dominion of the wicked, and inaugurates the era of eternal bliss.

Chapters lxxv.-lxxxvii.:

After Baruch has thanked God for the secrets revealed to him, God bids him warn the people, and keep himself in readiness for his translation to heaven, since God intends to keep him there until the consummation of the times. Baruch admonishes the people and, besides, writes two letters: one to the nine and one-half tribes; the other to the two and one-half tribes exiled in Babylon. The contents of the first letter only are given. In it Baruch justifies the deeds of God concerning the kingdoms of Samaria and Judah, and reveals God's judgment on Israel's oppressors. His call to the people to repent before God and His Law ends the letter and the book.

Haggadah of the Apocalypse.

Many parallels exist between the Apocalypse and rabbinical literature, a consideration of some of which will throw light upon certain misunderstood passages in the former, and, at the same time, be of material assistance in forming a judgment upon the whole work.

'Arakin 17a, in which the last king of Judah is said to be pious, while his people are godless, corresponds to i. 3 of the Apocalypse. Pesiḳ. R. 26 (ed. Friedmann, 131a), in which God causes Jeremiah to leave Jerusalem, since his presence would preserve it from destruction, corresponds to ii. 1, 2; and the rabbinical passages in which the heavenly Temple (Sifre, Deut. 37; for details, compare Ginzberg, "Die Haggada bei den Kirchenvätern," p. 13) is revealed to Adam and Abraham in the night during the "covenant between the pieces" (Gen. R. xvi. 8; xliv. 20, 22) correspond to iv. 3, 4, 5. Of the persons mentioned in v. 5 of the Apocalypse, Seraiah is a prophet, according to Sifre, Num. 78; Seder 'Olam R. xx.; Gedaliah, a righteous man ("ẓaddiḳ"), according to R. H. 18b; and Jabez (probably ), one of those who reach paradise alive (Derek Ereẓ Zuṭṭa i.; Kohler, in "Jew. Quart. Rev." v. 418; for the correct reading here see Tawrogi's ed., Königsberg, 1885, and Epstein, "Mi-Ḳadmoniyot ha-Yehudim," p. 111, note). The account of the destruction of Jerusalem by angels in vi.-viii. of the Apocalypse is in parts almost word for word the same as in Pesiḳ. R. (l.c.). Here, also, the destruction is wrought by four angels with torches in their hands, while another angel invitesthe "haters" ("soneim") to enter the house deserted by its inmate. The difference between this Midrash and the Apocalypse in regard to the utterance of the angel is to be explained by the variant of a single word. The Midrash has , while the Apocalypse reads . The sacred objects which the earth swallowed, mentioned in vi. 7, are correctly given in rabbinical literature. "Holy Ark" should be substituted for "holy ephod"— is the later Hebraic term (compare, for instance, II Chron. xxxv. 3; Ket. 104a)—because also signifies "coffin." In fact, it is probable that originally only those articles were mentioned in this passage of the Apocalypse which were missing in the Second Temple (Yoma 21b), and for whose disappearance (Sheḳ. vi. 1) an explanation had to be given, but compare also the later Midrash "Masseket Kelim," in Jellinek's "B. H. ii.," which treats of the numerous sacred objects hidden in the earth. Zeb. 88b affords an explanation of the forty-eight gems. These are to be taken as the thirty-six bells bordering the hem of the priestly robe ("me'il") and the twelve stones in the breastplate of the high priest; and an explanation of x. 2 is provided by the Haggadah in which Jeremiah accompanies the exiles a part of the way to Babylon, but then returns (Pesiḳ R. 26 [ed. Friedmann, 131b]; Introduction to Lam. R. xxxiv.).

A comparison of x. 9-16 with the last Mishnah of Soṭah; B. B. 60b; Tosef., Soṭah, xiv. 11, shows that the Apocalypse alludes to facts. What is given as a poetic fancy in x. 18 is treated in rabbinical literature as an actual occurrence; e.g., in Ta'anit 29a; Lev. R. xix. 6; Pesiḳ. R. l.c.; Ab. R. N. [i.] iv. [ii.], vii. In the last passage an eye-witness of the catastrophe of the year 70 testifies that certain noble young priests threw the keys of the Temple toward heaven and exclaimed: "Here are Thy keys! We have been found untrustworthy guardians of Thy house." Likewise, a clear understanding of the following verse (x. 19) can be obtained only by a comparison of it with Pesiḳ. R. l.c. The virgins who "weave linen and silk threads with gold from Ophir, and who are bidden now to cast their work into the flames," are the women who made the hangings ("paroket") for the Temple (Ket. 106a), and who are mentioned, for this reason, along with the priests. The promise that Baruch should not die (xiii. 3) and his translation to paradise in his mortal body (in chap. xxv.) are suggested by the combination of Sifre, Num. 99 and Derek Ereẓ Zuṭṭa i. The vast size of Sennacherib's host, given in lxiii. 6, 7, accords with the description in Sanh. 95b; and the miracle of the burning of their bodies while their garments remained unconsumed (lxiii. 8) is given in Sanh. 94a. The list of the wicked deeds of Manasseh, set forth in lxiv. 2-4, agrees with the catalogue of his sins in Sanh. 103b. Likewise, the legend of the brazen horse, given in lxiv. 8, occurs in as early a work as the Pesiḳta de-Rab Kahana (xxv. 162), from which it was borrowed by various Midrashim. The sorrow of the angels over Zion and Israel (lxvii. 2) is a favorite theme of the Midrash; for instance, in Pesiḳ. R. 28 [ed. Friedmann, 134a]. The passage in the Apocalypse (lxxvii. 25) in which the messenger-bird of Solomon is mentioned should be compared with Eccl. R. to ii. 25.

Theological Standpoint.

The Apocalypse, it is important to note, has also many points of agreement with the Pharisaic doctrines, especially in regard to sin and the Law. It assumes that the world was created for Israel's sake; that is, for those Israelites who fulfil the Law; and Baruch even thought that with the extinction of the Jewish state the world would end (iii. 7, xiv. 18, xv. 7, xxi. 24; Tan., ed. Buber, Bereshit v.; Pesiḳ. R. 28 [ed. Friedmann, 135b]; a full discussion by Ginzberg, "Haggada bei den Kirchenvätern," pp. 8-10). The views of the Apocalypse on the relations of sin and death, of the first man and his descendants, seem to be contradictory: and for this reason some scholars consider the Apocalypse to be the work of more than one author. But a consideration of the rabbinical theories will throw light upon these apparent inconsistencies. The fall of the first human pair brought death upon them, though it had not been intended that they, being the creatures of God's own hands, should be mortal (Eccl. R. iii. 14). Their descendants, though they may have no direct claim upon immortality, may nevertheless gain it if they are wholly free from sin (Tan., ed. Buber, Emor, and the passages given there by Buber). But the primal sin produced such conditions that it is almost impossible for the very noblest of men to win immortality.

Adam, then, is responsible for the death of the pious on account of the trivial offenses ("'aberot ḳallot") which are caused by the present state of things. The pious would not have had to suffer death if Adam had not brought it into the world; and the only way to avoid death, when its dominion is once established, is to lead an absolutely blameless life (Tan., ed. Buber, Ḥuḳḳat, xxxix.; compare Abraham, Testament of, in which the same views are expressed). The same idea occurs in the Apocalypse in xviii. 2, xix. 8, xxiii. 4, liv. 15, lvi. 6. The following ideas are common to the Apocalypse and the Rabbis: In consequence of the corruptibility of the world since the fall of Adam, the soul of man hesitates to enter it. "We come not voluntarily into the world, and we depart not of our own will" (xiv. 11, xlviii. 15; Ab. iv., end; Tan., Peḳude, ii. [ed. Vienna, 127b]). A certain number of souls must be born before the advent of the Messiah can occur (xxiii. 4, 5; Yeb. 62a). The souls of the pious are kept in a storehouse ("oẓar," xxx. 2; Sifre, Num. 139; Ab. R. N. xii. [ed. Schechter, p. 50]; Shab. 152b). The departed, though they are susceptible of pain and pleasure, live in a world of their own, and know nothing of the events on earth (xi. 5, 6; Ber. 18b). It is, therefore, erroneous to stigmatize this passage (xi. 5, 6) as Sadducean, as some critics have done.


The same inconsistency has been ascribed to the eschatological views of the Apocalypse as to its theological. In reality they combine standpoints which contradict one another because derived from divergent sources, but such contradiction is found in many works. In the very beginning of the Apocalypse (iv. 2-7) mention is made of the heavenly Temple which will appear in the future time, and shortly after (vi. 7-9) it is said that the sacred objects of the Temple, swallowed by the earth, willreappear at the reconstruction of Jerusalem. Now, a tanna about the middle of the second century speaks in one and the same sentence of the heavenly Temple and of the fact that it will be sent down to Jerusalem in order that sacrifices may be offered in it (Suk. 41a; see especially Rashi's explanation of the passage. Concerning other relations between the earthly Temple [] and the heavenly one [], which in the future time will in certain respects be one, compare Yalḳ., Isaiah, 472; Ta'anit 5a).

There are no grounds for the belief that the Apocalypse unites contradictory views on the Messianic era and the future world, and that, therefore, it must have been written by more than one person. It is true that it contains various revelations, independent of each other, on the Messianic era, the Messiah, and the future world; but a Pharisaic work, eschatological in character, and written at the time of Jesus or even some decades before, must have treated of these three subjects. In some passages one point is more strongly dwelt upon; in other passages another point. The reconstruction of Jerusalem (xliv. 7, lxxi. 1), the gathering together of the Ten Tribes ("Ḳibbuẓ Galuyot," lxxviii. 7, lxxxiv. 10), and the doom of the heathen (lxxxii. 2-9, lxxxv. 9) form only one side, the national side, of Jewish eschatology. The hope of national redemption was connected with the hope of individual redemption. The Messianic era will not only bring Israel to its rights, but in the future world ("'olam ha-ba") reward or punishment will be meted out to the individual according to his deeds. The description of the Resurrection in the Apocalypse is significant for the agreement of its eschatological doctrines with those of the rabbinical authorities. "The earth will give up her dead as she received them, . . . for it is necessary to show those who live that the dead have arisen, and that they have returned who had departed" (l. 2-4). This same idea and the same reasons for it are given in "Milḥamot Melek ha-Mashiaḥ" (Jellinek, "B. H." vi. 119).

The words of the Apocalypse concerning the pious in the future world are also noteworthy. "They will shine with a varying glory, their countenances will glow with a new beauty, so that they may partake of the immortal world" (li. 3). This glory ("ziw") is frequently referred to in rabbinical eschatology; for example, in Ber. 17a, and Gen. R. xi. 2; and, as can be seen from these passages, the "varying glory" of the Apocalypse shows the degree of piety of the righteous (Sifre, Deut. 10, 47).

Composition of the Apocalypse.

Modern critics who doubt the unity of the Apocalypse do not agree as to the authorship of its parts. Two theories have been advanced concerning the various sources of this Apocalypse. Kabisch (in "Jahrbücher für Protestantische Theologie," xviii. 66, 107) considers the groundwork to be i.-xxiii., xxxi.-xxxiv., xli.-xlvi. 7, lxxv.-lxxxvii. In addition to this there are three old documents: (1) the fragmentary Apocalypse, xxiv. 3.-xxix. 8; (2) the vision of the wood, cedar, and vine, xxxvi. 1-xl. 4; and (3) the vision of the clouds, lii. 8.-lxxiv. 4. Besides these elements there are certain shorter sections, the work of a final redactor. Kabisch's theory is in part supported by De Faye ("Les Apocalypse Juives," 1892, p.195). But De Faye goes further and divides the groundwork into two parts, the "Assumption of Baruch" and the "Baruch Apocalypse." Charles, however ("The Apocalypse of Baruch," London, 1896), though basing his theories on similar analyses, considers the Apocalypse to be the work of six or seven authors. He ascribes those parts which do not speak of a personal Messiah to three or four authors whom he calls (Baruch) B 1, 2, 3, and S. B 1 is a Pharisee who expects the reconstruction of Jerusalem and the return of the Diaspora, and who hopes for a Messianic era, but no Messiah. He is the author of i.-ix. 1, xliii.-xliv. 7, xlv.-xlvi. 6, lxxvii.-lxxxii., lxxxiv., and lxxxvi. B 2 also is a Pharisee; but he expects nothing more of this wicked world, and bases his hopes entirely upon the future world, where the pious, risen from the dead, will be rewarded, and the godless will be punished. He is the author of ix.-xii., xiii.-xxv., xxx. 2-xxxv., xli.-xlii., xliv. 8-15, xlvii.-lii., lxxv., and lxxxiii. B 3 is the author of lxxxv. The chief difference between him and the other authors lies in the fact that he wrote in exile, while they wrote in Palestine. S is the author of x. 6-xii. 4. He is possibly a Sadducee, but perhaps identical with B 2. All these sections, according to Charles, date from the period after the destruction of the Temple; but the Apocalyptic parts, xxxvi.-xl. and liii.-lxxiv.—as to which Charles agrees with Kabisch in assigning them to two authors (xxxvi.-xl. to A 2; liii.-lxxiv. 1 to A 3)—date from the time of the existence of the Temple. To this period, but to another author called A 1, Charles ascribes also xxvii.-xxx. 1. These three apocalypses, the work of A 1, A 2, and A 3, have one point in common; namely, they express Messianic beliefs, though they disagree as to the characteristics of the Messiah. It is this Messianic tendency which distinguishes these parts from the other constituents of the work. The various elements of the Apocalypse, according to Charles, were united by a redactor who was himself the author of the shorter sections.

Though it is true that the Apocalypse consists of some dissimilar elements, the divisions of the work made by Charles are hardly justifiable. It is Clement ("Theologische Studien und Kritiken," 1898, pp. 227 et seq.) who has most fully shown that many supposed contradictions are not wholly such. The section x. 6-xii. 4, which Charles ascribes to a Sadducee, not only has its parallels in rabbinical literature, as shown above, but is based on Pharisaic institutions. Nor is it in conflict with this view that the author should have used some old material, such as the vision of the cedar, which dates from before the destruction of the Second Temple, while the greater part of the work originated in the time following this catastrophe.

Its Integrity.

The integrity of the Apocalypse is also disputed by some scholars who believe that originally it was longer than at present. The missing parts are the cosmic revelations promised to Baruch in lxxvi. and the letter to the two and one-half tribes spoken of in lxxvii. 9. Now, it is probable that the authordid not mean to give a full account of the cosmic revelations, but merely mentioned them because, according to a wide-spread opinion (Sifre, Num. 136; compare Ascension), every pious man before his death obtained a view of the world and its doings, and the experience could not fail to be ascribed to Baruch. In regard to the letter to the two and one-half tribes, Charles (ib., Introduction, p. 65) has propounded a very likely theory. He suggests that a part of the Book of Baruch—namely, iii. 9-iv. 29—is a recast of the letter to the two and one-half tribes mentioned in the Apocalypse of Baruch, and that i. 1-3 of the Book of Baruch was originally the introduction to the letter. But it is not impossible that both letters—the one to the two and one-half tribes and that to the nine and one-half tribes—originally formed one work, from which both the Book of Baruch and the Apocalypse of Baruch were derived. Details concerning the destruction of the Temple, which were merely touched upon in the letters, were added; and, with the addition of other kindred material, each letter gave rise to a new book.

The Apocalypse and IV Esdras.

If it be granted that with the exception of a few additions the Apocalypse is the work of one writer, the question arises as to the time of its authorship. The earliest possible date is 70; for though the author is silent concerning the overthrow of the Temple, and seeks to convey the idea that Baruch is the real author, he betrays the fact that the destruction has taken place (xxxii. 2-4). There is only one datum for a decision of the latest possible date, and that is derived from an investigation of the relationship of IV Esdras and the Apocalypse. That some relationship does exist between them is indubitable. The mode of expression, the line of thought, and the arrangement agree in a number of instances (these are enumerated by Charles, ib. pp. 170 et seq.). It is difficult to determine which is the earlier work, since there are no internal evidences to judge by. The fact that the author of IV Esdras was a far better stylist than the author of the Apocalypse is not to be disputed; but the deduction made by Gunkel (Kautsch, "Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen," ii. 351), that IV Esdras is the earlier work, is not necessarily to be drawn from it: a better style does not bespeak originality. Wellhausen ("Skizzen und Vorarbeiten," vi. 249) argues no better for the opposite view, that the Apocalypse is the earlier work. He bases his opinion on the choice of the name "Baruch": since Baruch preceded Ezra in time, having actually witnessed the destruction of Jerusalem, therefore the work bearing his name should be the earlier. But that Ezra lived after the destruction of the city is no argument for the later date of the Ezra Apocalypse. In rabbinical literature Ezra holds a position similar to that of Moses (Sifre, Deut. 48 [ed. Friedmann, 84b)]; while Baruch is not generally recognized as a prophet (compare Baruch ben Neriah in Rabbinical Literature). Ezra, as the more important person, might naturally have been first thought of as the author of an apocalypse. The name once adopted, the situation had to be in accordance with it; and, therefore, in the Baruch Apocalypse the period of the destruction of Jerusalem is described, and, immediately after, Baruch sees his visions; while Ezra gives his revelations thirty years after the destruction. Consequently, the exact date can not be determined; but it is probable that it was written between the years 70 and 130. Though there is no evidence that Papias, the disciple of the apostles, used the Baruch Apocalypse, yet, since there are no allusions to the persecutions of Hadrian, the Apocalypse was in all likelihood written before Bar Kokba's revolt.

There is no doubt that the present Syriac form of the Apocalypse was derived from the Greek; but that language is scarcely to be regarded as the one in which it was originally written. Though the many Hebraisms do not necessarily indicate a Hebrew original, certain passages distinctly point to a Hebrew source. For instance, verse 13 of chapter x. can not be fully understood unless it is assumed that the Neo-Hebrew stood originally in the passage. The betrothed men are told not to marry ( ); and the Syriac "enter" could have come only from with its double meaning of "marry" and "enter a house." A translation into Hebrew of xxi. 14 would read ; and this affords a pretty example of the favorite Neo-Hebraic paronomasia. In the same chapter the "holy beings," who elsewhere can not be identified with angels, are properly the "Ḥayyot ha-ḳodesh" of Jewish angelology. This expression was rendered by the Syrians and before them by the Greeks as "holy beings" instead of "holy animals." In. lvi. 6 it is said that the fall of man brought mourning, sorrow, misery, and boastfulness into the world. The term "boastfulness" is evidently inappropriate: the translator may have mistaken the Hebrew ("pangs") for ("nothings," "vanity"), which would then easily suggest "boastfulness."

Language and Locality.

It is noteworthy that the Apocalypse contains many idiomatic expressions peculiar not to the Hebrew of the Bible, but to Neo-Hebrew, especially to the old liturgy. "The righteous who sleep in the earth," in xi. 4, is a phrase occurring in the "Shemoneh 'Esreh"; and the exaggerated figure in liv. 8 is remarkably like similar phrases in the Nishmat prayer. The expression in xli. 4, "have taken refuge under Thy pinions," is modeled after the Neo-Hebraic "to run away from the pinions of the Shekinah" (Sifre, Deut. 306 [ed. Friedmann, 130b], but comp. Ruth ii. 12).

Another proof that Hebrew was the original language of the Apocalypse is its almost literal agreement with the Pesiḳta Rabbati in several passages. There is no reason to suppose that the author—or, to be more exact, the redactor—of the Pesiḳta used the Apocalypse in its present form; and the agreement is to be explained on the ground that the old Midrash upon which the Pesiḳta drew in describing the destruction of the Temple was derived from a time when the Apocalypse was still read by the Jews. The poetical parts of the Apocalypse are especially Hebraic in character. Following is a specimen taken from Baruch's lament over the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple; it is one of the few existing specimens of Hebrew poetry from the period immediately following Scriptural times:

(x. 6-8)

"Happy he who is not born, or he who was born and has died! But wo unto us who live and have seen thy distress, O Zion, thy fate, O Jerusalem !

I will call the sirens from the sea; and you, ye Liliths, come from the desert,

And ye demons and jackals, come forth from your forests;

Arise, gird your loins to lament; let us sing our sad lay and make moan".

The Apocalypse is full of truly poetic passages, occurring in the visions and prophecies as well as in the laments. It shows that the Pharisees were not so narrow-minded as the New Testament books, written at the same time, represent them. There were still among them those who could bewail their sorrows with poetic fire, and portray the future in a strain of holy inspiration.

  • R. H. Charles, Apocalyptic Literature (the Apocalypse of Baruch), in Encyclopœdia Biblica, i. 215-220, ii. 1368-1370;
  • Dillmann, in Protestantische Realencyklopädie, 2d ed., xii. 357 et seq.;
  • Drummond, The Jewish Messiah, 1877, pp. 117-132;
  • Ewald, History of Israel, viii. 57-61;
  • Hilgenfeld, Messias Judœorum, 1869, pp. 63 et seq.;
  • Kneucker, Das Buch Baruch, 1879, pp. 190-198;
  • Langen, De Apocalypsi Baruch, 1867;
  • Rosenthal, Vier Apokryphische Bücher aus der Zeit und Schule Akibas, 1885, pp. 72-103;
  • Schürer, Geschichte, iii. 223-232, in pp. 231-232, where a full bibliography is given;
  • Thomson, Books Which Influenced Our Lord and His Apostles, 1891, pp. 253-267, 414-422.
T. L. G.