That the book was originally written in Hebrew admits of no doubt; no part of this has come down to us, however. The Greek version, made from the Hebrew, exists only in fragments found in the writings of some ancient authors. The Ethiopic version, which was made from the Greek, exists almost in its entirety; of the Latin version, also made from the Greek, about one-fourth is extant. The importance of the book, in the words of Charles, lies in the fact that it is “not only indispensable to students of the New Testament, and of the history of the Pharisaic movement: it is likewise of first-class importance as a witness to the readings of the Hebrew text of Genesis about the beginning of the Christian era” (_Encycl. Bibl._, I, 230). As we incline, however, to the belief in its Sadducæan authorship, we regard it as important for the history of the antagonism between the Pharisees and Sadducees, and their respective teaching, rather than merely for the history of the Pharisaic movement. (_f_) THE ASSUMPTION OF MOSES [LITERATURE.—Schürer, II, iii. pp. 73-83, German ed., III, pp. 294-305; Clemen, in Kautzsch, II, pp. 311-331; Charles, _The Assumption of Moses_ (1897), and in _The Apocr. and Pseudep. of the O.T._, II, pp. 407-424; Leszynsky, _Op. cit._, pp. 267-273.] The numerous references in early Christian literature to apocryphal books of Moses makes it clear that several well-known books of the kind must once have been in existence. The different titles of these books which are mentioned are a little confusing; we have just seen that the “Apocalypse of Moses” was one of the names given to the Book of Jubilees; we shall see below (§ _j_) that an “Apocalypse of Moses” is more or less parallel with the “Life of Adam and Eve.” Mention is made of a “Book of secret words of Moses” and of the “Assumption of Moses” in the commentary of Gelasius Cyzicenus on the acts of the council of Nicæa; Origen (_De princip._, III, ii. 1) speaks of the book called the “Ascension of Moses,” and Didymus, in writing on the epistle of Jude, refers to the “Assumption of Moses”; and more than once the “Testament of Moses” is mentioned. It is probable that these two latter are both included in the book we are considering, but that they were originally distinct and of different authorship. The book as a whole was written at the very beginning of the first century A.D.; this is the opinion of most authorities, based upon fairly clear indications in the book itself (see Charles in the _Encycl. Bibl._, I, 235). The author, according to Charles, “was a Pharisee, and a Pharisee who was the antithesis of the Zealot exactly in those respects in which Pharisaism differed from Zealotism. His book was designed as a protection against the growing secularization of the Pharisaic party through its adoption of political ideals and popular Messianic beliefs”; elsewhere Charles says[298]: “He was a Pharisee of a fast-disappearing type, recalling in all respects the Chasid