¹ “5 Ezra” is used here to designate the writing that has been prefixed in Latin Vg editions to the Ezra-Apocalypse proper (“4 Ezra”). In modern English translations of the Apocrypha, 5 Ezra usually comprises the first two chapters of “2 Esdras.” (“6 Ezra” refers to the similarly brief writing appended to 4 Ezra in the Vg editions; i.e., “2 Esdras” 15–16.)

² Modern general studies examined for this article are listed below in an Appendix. A classified computer based bibliography for 4–5–6 Ezra compiled by Theodore Bergren has proved most useful. Nevertheless, because of space considerations, footnoting in the present article will be minimal. One of the most intelligent general treatments of 5 Ezra, especially for its awareness of text-critical issues, is that by Stanton, although I cannot agree with some of his assumptions or with the main thrust of his article. A separate fascicle on 5–6 Ezra by H. Stegemann has been announced for the series Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit 3 (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1973-), but it does not seem to be available yet.

³ The most complete Latin edition of this material is the Biblia Sacra: iuxta vulgatam versionem (ed. Weber, Robert, Fischer, Boniface et al.; 2 vols.; Stuttgart: Würtembergische Bibelanstalt, 1975)Google Scholar, which is based on SA and admits to being selective about MEC readings included in the apparatus to 5 Ezra. The appendix to Bensly's edition (TextsS 3.2, 1895) gives the complete text of MS C, with variant readings of M noted in the apparatus, but does not include this material in the “main text” which is based on SA. Violet's GCS editions of 4 Ezra proper do not include 5 Ezra, but do discuss the various Latin MSS of 4–5–6 Ezra. Additional textual material is noted by D. de Bruyne, “Quelques nouveaux documents pour la critique textuelle de l'Apocalypse d'Esdras,” RBén 32 (1920) 43–47. The main Latin MSS are listed here (full collations of E and L are not, to my knowledge, available):

⁴ See my “Reassessing the ‘Recensional Problem’ in Testament of Abraham,” in Nickelsburg, George W. E. Jr, ed., Studies on the Testament of Abraham (SBLSCS 6; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976) 121–37.Google Scholar

⁵ Ball's notes include occasional references to presumed Semitic readings behind the preserved Latin.

⁶ “Fragments d'une Apocalypse perdue,” RBén 33 (1921) 97–109. He compares 5 Ezra with a 9th (?) century Liber Responsalis from Gaul that is published in PL 78. 726–852. See also Daniélou.

⁷ “Ein bisher unbeachtetes Zitat aus dem fünften Buche Esra,” ConNT 11 (1947) 179–95.

⁸ ibid., 180.

⁹ Concern about the “two peoples” (see Gen 25:23) is evidenced in early Judaism and early Christianity. See the comments on Barn. 13.2 in my Barnabas and the Didache (ed. Grant, R. M.; The Apostolic Fathers: A New Translation and Commentary 3; New York: Nelson, 1965) and in Pierre Prigent's edition of Barnabas (Épître de Barnabé [SC 172; Paris: Cerf, 1971]). Oepke's connection of the passage with concepts of the “third race” (Christians) is unnecessary. Elsewhere in 5 Ezra there are also a few plural general references to “the nations”: 1.11 (SA), 2.7, 28.Google Scholar

¹⁰ See my “‘Ezra’ Materials in Judaism and Christianity,” ANRW II.19.1 (1969) 119–36.