https://doi.org/10.1177/09518207XXXXXXXX Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 2025, Vol. 34(3) 206–224 © The Author(s) 2025 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI:https://doi.org/ 10.1177/09518207251317665 journals.sagepub.com/home/jsp Jude’s use of a kaige edition of Enochic scripture Timothy A. Lee University of Cambridge, UK Abstract The citation from the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1.9) in Jude 14–15 is, I argue, from a previously unidentified Greek edition of Enoch. This is quite likely a revision of an earlier Greek edition to align it closer to the Aramaic original. This article addresses the variation in text-types cited by the New Testament to establish the options available for authors to cite. It then compares our earliest manuscript of the Greek translation of Enoch with the citation in Jude. In light of my work on kaige revision of the Septuagint, I suggest the text in Jude reflects a revision of an Old Greek translation similar to Codex Panopolitanus and this revision shares kaige characteristics. This has implications for comprehending the popularity of Enochic scripture as authoritative scripture in early Judaism and Christianity. Keywords 1 Enoch, canon, Jude, kaige, scribal revision, Septuagint revisions Introduction The citation from the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1.9) in Jude 14–15 differs from the Greek text of 1 Enoch as preserved in our only ancient Greek translation of the chapter, a sixth-century manuscript known as Codex Panopolitanus (P. Cair. 10759). 1 Few scholars have gone beyond Richard Bauckham’s work in 1981 where he lists four options for the difference: first, Jude may have made his own translation from the Aramaic; second, he could have adapted the text to suit his own purpose; third, Codex Panopolitanus could be corrupt; fourth, Codex Panopolitanus could be a late translation by a Christian who knew Jude. 2 In this article, I suggest a fifth option; namely, the text in Jude reflects a revision 1. While I refer to 1 Enoch throughout this article, I am not making a claim of the composition known today as 1 Enoch in the Ethiopic tradition. I only focus on the first chapter of the Book of the Watchers. 2. Richard Bauckham, “A Note on a Problem in the Greek Version of 1 Enoch i. 9,” JTS 32 (1981): 136–38, 138. Cf., Richard Bauckham, Jude-2 Peter (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983), 94–96. Corresponding author: Timothy A. Lee, University of Cambridge, Emmanuel College, St Andrew’s St, Cambridge, CB2 3AP Cambridge, UK. Email: tal50@cam.ac.uk Article