Tobit

A Second Temple Jewish story preserved in the Septuagint and later Catholic and Orthodox canons. Most Protestant Bibles do not print it among the 66.

Tobit is the account of a righteous Israelite among the Assyrian exiles in Nineveh, preserved in Greek in Septuagint manuscripts such as Codex Vaticanus and received in Catholic and Orthodox Bibles. Carthage in 397 names it among books to be read in church. Trent in 1546 lists it among the Catholic canonical books. Luther’s 1534 Bible prints it in the Apocrypha and ranks it below Holy Scripture. The Protestant column therefore does not treat it as one of the sixty-six. It is not a book of the Tanakh. Greek manuscript survival and Catholic canonical status are both true, and they are different facts.

Catholic Bibles receive Tobit as deuterocanonical. Luther and later Protestant confessions placed it with the Apocrypha or omitted it from the 66. Survival in Greek manuscripts is not the same as later Protestant canonical status.

Date

Set among the Assyrian exiles (8th–7th century BCE)

Confidence

medium

Languages

Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek

Traditional authorship

Tobit (the book's own account)

Authorship note

The book presents Tobit's own account; received as Scripture by Catholic and Orthodox churches

• B · Codex Vaticanus

  4th century CE · Greek · Greek Tobit in the Old Testament block

  Codex Vaticanus, Vat. gr. 1209, is a fourth-century Greek parchment Bible long held in the Vatican Library. Its designation is B. The Old Testament follows a Septuagint-shaped collection. This dataset links Greek Tobit, Wisdom of Solomon, and Sirach to that Old Testament block, and it notes lacunae elsewhere in the codex, so “present in Vaticanus” is not a claim that every leaf survives. The find spot is not known in the way Sinaiticus’s monastery is known. What the manuscript shows is that these Greek writings were copied inside a fourth-century Christian Bible of the Septuagint type. Catholic reception later names overlapping books as deuterocanonical at Trent. Protestant confessions later deny them equal canonical status. Vaticanus itself is the copy, not those later rulings.

• 4Q196–4Q200 · Qumran Tobit

  2nd–1st centuries BCE (medium confidence) · Aramaic and Hebrew · Aramaic and Hebrew fragments

  Five Cave 4 manuscripts, 4Q196 through 4Q200, preserve Tobit in Aramaic and in Hebrew. They are fragmentary, and the dates are paleographic, so the range here is the second to first centuries BCE at medium confidence. They show that Tobit was copied in more than one Semitic language before the Greek copies in Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus. Qumran copying is Jewish manuscript evidence. It does not place Tobit in the later rabbinic Tanakh, and it does not settle the Catholic or Protestant arguments of the sixteenth century.

• א · Codex Sinaiticus

  Mid-4th century CE · Greek · Greek Tobit

  Codex Sinaiticus is a Greek parchment pandect from the middle of the fourth century, associated with Saint Catherine’s Monastery on Sinai and now shared by the British Library and partner libraries. Its designation is aleph. After the New Testament it copies the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas in full enough form for this dataset to link both writings. That binding is a fact about one great Bible manuscript: early Christian scribes put those books in the same codex as the New Testament. Athanasius, in Festal Letter 39, still treats the Shepherd as a book appointed to be read for instruction and not as part of his canon list. Later twenty-seven-book New Testament lists generally leave both Barnabas and Hermas outside the closed canon. Preservation in Sinaiticus is manuscript evidence. The canonical decision is a separate witness.

• A · Codex Alexandrinus

  5th century CE · Greek · Greek Tobit

  Codex Alexandrinus is a fifth-century Greek parchment Bible, shelfmark Royal MS 1 D V–VIII in the British Library. Its Old Testament is Septuagint-shaped and includes books that later Western lists call deuterocanonical, among them Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, 1 Esdras, and 1–4 Maccabees, plus the Prayer of Manasseh among the Odes. The New Testament includes Jude. After the biblical books the codex copies 1 Clement. A fifth-century binding shows what one scriptorium copied. It is not the Council of Trent and not the Westminster Confession.

• mentions

  Hebrew canon / Greek-speaking Jews

  Tobit is not a book of the Tanakh. Josephus, near the end of the first century, describes twenty-two Jewish books his people trust and sets later writings in a lower rank. The later rabbinic Bible, counted as twenty-four books, likewise leaves Tobit outside Torah, Nevi'im, and Ketuvim. Cave 4 copies show Semitic texts of Tobit in use before the Greek uncials. That is Jewish manuscript reception, not a place in the twenty-four-book Hebrew Bible. Jewish copying or quotation, where it exists, is reception. It is not the same fact as a place in the Hebrew canon, and it is not a Christian council’s decision.

• lists canonical

  Council of Carthage

  The Council of Carthage in 397 includes Tobit among the books to be read in church. The reception kind is lists canonical. The same African canon, numbered 36 in some editions and 47 in others, also names Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1–2 Maccabees. This card is the Tobit witness only. It records Latin North African reception in 397. It is not the Council of Trent. Trent, on 8 April 1546, later lists Tobit among the Catholic canonical books, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate. Carthage is the earlier regional act. Trent is the later Catholic decree.

• uses liturgically

  Greek and Latin churches

  Greek-speaking churches met Tobit in Septuagint Bibles. Fourth- and fifth-century pandects copy it beside other Old Testament books. Early lists do not all use the same boundary. Athanasius in 367 keeps a shorter Old Testament and still names some of these books as useful to read. Hippo in 393 is reported to have approved a wider list, and Carthage in 397 names several of them among books to be read in church. Carthage in 397 names Tobit among books to be read in church. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus copy the Greek book. Those are early Christian acts. Trent, Luther’s Apocrypha, and Westminster are later and stay on the councils list.

• ProtestantRelated literature

  Tobit is a Second Temple Jewish narrative. Most Protestant 66-book canons exclude it; some Reformation Bibles printed it in an Apocrypha section.

• CatholicDeuterocanonical

  Tobit is a Second Temple Jewish narrative. Listed among the Catholic canonical books at Trent (1546).

• OrthodoxCanonical

  Tobit is a Second Temple Jewish narrative. Received in typical Eastern Orthodox Old Testament collections via the Septuagint tradition.

• EthiopianCanonical

  Tobit is a Second Temple Jewish narrative. Present in the broader Ethiopian Orthodox biblical collection.

• TanakhNot applicable

  Not part of the Jewish Tanakh.

• LXXCanonical

  Tobit is a Second Temple Jewish narrative. Transmitted in the Greek Old Testament corpus.

• Early ChristianDisputed

  Tobit is a Second Temple Jewish narrative. Used in some late-antique church lists (for example Carthage 397) while other writers preferred the Hebrew list.

• Second TempleRelated literature

  Tobit is a Second Temple Jewish narrative. Jewish work circulating beside a later closed rabbinic canon.

• 367 CE · Canon list · Alexandria

  Athanasius, Festal Letter 39

  Athanasius lists 22 Old Testament books and the 27-book New Testament, and names some other writings as useful to read but not canonical.

  Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, wrote Festal Letter 39 for Easter 367. The public-domain text in the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers preserves his reminder of which books the church accepts as divine Scripture, written because some readers were mixing other books in with them.

  He counts twenty-two Old Testament books, the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet as he had heard it handed down. In that count, several familiar writings share one entry: the two books of Samuel and the two books of Kings are two books of Kings, the two books of Chronicles are one, Ezra and Nehemiah are one, the twelve prophets are one, and Jeremiah is counted with Baruch, Lamentations, and the epistle. He then names the New Testament as the four Gospels, Acts, seven Catholic epistles, fourteen Pauline epistles including Hebrews, and the Revelation of John.

  He also names books that are outside that canon and still appointed to be read by newcomers who want instruction in godliness: the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. He calls the first list the books in which the doctrine of godliness is proclaimed, and the second list books that are read.

  Read the letter as one bishop’s Easter list from Alexandria. It belongs on Councils & Lists because it names books and draws a line around them. It is an influential episcopal list, especially for the twenty-seven-book New Testament, and it is a single letter rather than a council minute that bound every church on that date.

  Why it matters. An influential episcopal list, not a claim that every church already agreed or that earlier Jewish collections were identical.

  Follow-up questions

  Where does Athanasius place Esther, Judith, and Tobit?

  In this letter they stand with the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd: appointed to be read for instruction, and outside the twenty-two-book Old Testament list. That is his classification in 367. Later Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant lists do not all copy it.

  How does he reach twenty-two Old Testament books?

  He pairs some English Bible books into one entry. Samuel and Kings become two books of Kings, Chronicles are one book, Ezra and Nehemiah are one book, the twelve prophets are one book, and Jeremiah is one book together with Baruch, Lamentations, and the epistle.

  Is Festal Letter 39 a church council?

  It is an Easter letter from the bishop of Alexandria. Corpus Witness files it as a canon-list on this tab because it names books. A council minute and a bishop’s letter are different kinds of evidence, and both can still be read side by side.

  Source: Athanasius, Festal Letter 39 (367), lists 22 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books and names some other writings as useful but not canonical.

• c. 390–405 CE · Historical witness · Bethlehem / Latin West

  Jerome’s Vulgate prefaces and the Hebrew list

  Jerome’s Prologus Galeatus distinguishes books in the Hebrew canon from other church-read writings.

  Around 390 to 405, in Bethlehem, Jerome wrote prefaces for his Latin translation that became the Vulgate. The Prologus Galeatus, the helmeted preface to Kings, draws a line between books he finds in the Hebrew canon and other writings the church was reading, the books later often called Apocrypha. Reformation arguments for a shorter Old Testament often appeal to that distinction. Jerome still translated some of the church-read books so Latin Christians could use them. The preface is a church father’s classification, not a council, which is why it sits on the timeline beside the lists rather than inside the Councils & Lists type. Catholic status for the deuterocanonical books is defined later, at Trent.

  Why it matters. Later Protestant arguments often appeal to this Hebrew-canon distinction. Jerome still translated some church-read books for Latin use.

  Source: Jerome, Prologus Galeatus, distinguishes Hebrew-canon books from other church-read writings later often called Apocrypha.

• 393 CE · Council · Hippo Regius, North Africa

  Council of Hippo

  A North African council is reported to have approved a scriptural list that includes books later called deuterocanonical in the West.

  In 393 a council at Hippo Regius, in North Africa, is reported to have approved a scriptural list. As later reports give that list, it includes books Western churches afterward call deuterocanonical.

  The source for this event says the original acts survive only in later reports, summarized through later Carthage recensions. The date, the place, and the report of a list are the claim this page is willing to make. A free-standing copy of the Hippo minutes is not what the source provides.

  Use Hippo as regional conciliar reception in Latin North Africa. Carthage in 397 is the next North African list on this tab, and Trent in 1546 is the much later decree that defines the modern Catholic canon. Each of those has its own source.

  Why it matters. Regional conciliar reception, known mainly through later reports—not a universal “removal” or addition by one person.

  Follow-up questions

  Why does this page say the Council of Hippo is reported?

  The source record says the original acts survive only in later reports, summarized through later Carthage recensions. The word “reported” matches that limit. The date and the idea of a list belong to that received tradition.

  What does the reported Hippo list include?

  Books later called deuterocanonical in the West, inside a scriptural list the council is said to have approved. Because the wording comes through later reports, this page keeps the summary and does not paste a reconstructed decree.

  How should I read Hippo next to Carthage and Trent?

  Hippo in 393 and Carthage in 397 are North African reception. Trent in 1546 is the decree that defines the modern Catholic canon, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate. Read them as three dated events, each with its own source.

  Source: The Council of Hippo (393) is reported to have approved a scriptural list that includes books later called deuterocanonical in the West.

• 397 CE · Council · Carthage, North Africa

  Council of Carthage

  The Carthage list includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1–2 Maccabees among books to be read in church.

  The Council of Carthage in 397 left a canon in the African canonical collection, the Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Africanae. Editions number that canon as 36 or as 47. The curated source names Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1–2 Maccabees among the books to be read in church, together with the books that later form the widely received Protestant sixty-six.

  “Read in church” is the council’s category: liturgical and canonical reception in Latin North Africa. Carthage documents that reception in 397. The modern Catholic definition of overlapping books comes later, at Trent on 8 April 1546. Reformation rankings, including Luther’s 1534 Apocrypha section, come later as well. Those further events stay on this tab with their own sources.

  Why it matters. Documents Western liturgical/canonical reception of books later disputed in the Reformation.

  Follow-up questions

  Why do references say canon 36 and canon 47?

  The same African list is numbered both ways in the Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Africanae. The source title records “canon 36 / 47” so either numbering still points at this 397 Carthage list.

  Which books does the Carthage list name beyond the later Protestant sixty-six?

  The curated source names Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1–2 Maccabees among the books to be read in church, alongside the books later counted in the Protestant sixty-six.

  Does “read in church” mean the same thing as Trent’s canonical list?

  Carthage’s phrase is North African reception in 397: these books are to be read in church. Trent’s decree of 8 April 1546 lists the books the Catholic Church receives as canonical, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate. The two documents belong to one broad story and remain two different acts.

  Source: The 397 Carthage list includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, 1–2 Maccabees among the books to be read in church, alongside the widely received Protestant 66.

• 1534 CE · Reformation · Wittenberg

  Luther Bible prints a separate Apocrypha

  Luther’s 1534 German Bible printed selected Old Testament books in a separate Apocrypha section and said they were useful to read but not equal to Holy Scripture.

  Martin Luther’s complete German Bible, printed at Wittenberg in 1534, gathered selected Old Testament writings into a section titled Apocrypha. The preface to that section says the books are useful and good to read, and that they are not held equal to Holy Scripture.

  Tobit is one book this dataset ties to that preface. The reception note says Luther printed Tobit in the Apocrypha section and ranked it below Holy Scripture. The 1534 edition is a decision about order and rank inside one vernacular Bible. The writings were already being copied and read: Tobit, for example, is already named on the Carthage list of 397.

  Catholic, Orthodox, and Ethiopian collections continued to receive their own overlapping sets. The Westminster Confession of 1646/1647 later states the sixty-six-book canon in English Reformed form and says the Apocrypha are not part of the canon of Scripture. Luther’s printing and Westminster’s confession are two dated steps on this tab.

  Why it matters. This is placement and ranking, not a claim that Luther uniquely invented the books or erased them from every Bible on earth.

  Follow-up questions

  What did Luther’s 1534 preface say about these books?

  They are useful and good to read, and they are not held equal to Holy Scripture. The reception note for Tobit uses that same preface: Tobit is printed in the Apocrypha section and ranked below Holy Scripture.

  Did these books first appear in the 1534 Bible?

  The 1534 Bible places and ranks writings already in circulation. In this dataset Tobit is already named among the books to be read in church at Carthage in 397, and Trent later lists Tobit among the Catholic canonical books.

  Which later entry states the Protestant sixty-six as a confession?

  The Westminster Confession of 1646/1647, also on this tab. It names the sixty-six books and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  Source: Luther’s 1534 Bible printed selected Old Testament books in a separate Apocrypha section, calling them useful to read but not equal to Holy Scripture.

• 8 April 1546 · Council · Trent

  Council of Trent, Session IV

  Trent listed the Catholic canonical books, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate.

  On 8 April 1546, Session IV of the Council of Trent published its decree on the canonical Scriptures. The decree lists the books the Catholic Church receives as canonical, including the deuterocanonical writings already received in the Latin Vulgate. In this dataset, Tobit is one book tied directly to that decree.

  Trent answers sixteenth-century disputes about which books count as Scripture. Luther’s 1534 Bible had already printed selected Old Testament books in a separate Apocrypha section and ranked them below Holy Scripture. Trent’s list is the Catholic definition of canonical status for the books it names.

  The decree dates that ruling. Composition dates and manuscripts for each writing stay on the writing’s own page. Trent describes the church’s canonical list in 1546, and it leaves the earlier existence of those books to the other evidence on this site.

  Why it matters. Defines the modern Catholic canon in response to Reformation disputes. It does not describe a single ancient moment when those books first existed.

  Follow-up questions

  What did Trent’s Session IV decide?

  On 8 April 1546 it listed the books the Catholic Church receives as canonical, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate. In this dataset Tobit is one of the books attached to that decree.

  What dispute is the decree answering?

  Reformation arguments about which books count as Scripture. The Luther Bible of 1534 had already printed selected books in a separate Apocrypha section and said they were useful to read but not equal to Holy Scripture.

  Does Session IV tell me when Tobit was written?

  The decree dates a Catholic canonical ruling in 1546. Tobit’s composition, language, and manuscripts are earlier evidence, kept on Tobit’s own Canon page rather than inside the conciliar date.

  Source: Council of Trent, Session IV (8 April 1546), lists the Catholic canonical books including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate.

• 1611 CE · Bible edition · London

  King James Bible of 1611 includes an Apocrypha section

  The 1611 Authorized Version printed an Apocrypha section between the Old and New Testaments, including Tobit and 2 Esdras among others.

  The 1611 Authorized Version, printed in London, placed an Apocrypha section between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The curated source names Tobit and 2 Esdras among the writings in that section.

  Printing a section inside the volume is an edition fact: contents and order in one London Bible. Canonical rank is a different kind of claim. About thirty-five years later, the Westminster Confession says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture. Many later Protestant printings leave the section out. The 1611 volume still contains it.

  Read the 1611 entry beside Luther’s 1534 Apocrypha section and beside Westminster. One prints the books in a separate section, one ranks them below Holy Scripture in German, and one refuses them a place in the Reformed canon. Edition placement and confessional status stay side by side on this tab.

  Why it matters. Edition placement is not the same as later Anglican or Reformed confessional statements that deny those books equal canonical status.

  Follow-up questions

  What is the Apocrypha section in the 1611 Bible?

  A printed block between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The source names Tobit and 2 Esdras among the writings included there, and it treats that placement as an edition fact.

  Does including those books give them the same status as the sixty-six?

  The 1611 fact on this page is edition placement. Equal canonical status is a separate claim. The Westminster Confession later says the Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  Why do many later King James Bibles omit that section?

  Later Protestant printing followed confessional statements such as Westminster, which refuse those books a place in the canon. The 1611 volume itself still prints the Apocrypha between the Testaments.

  Source: The 1611 King James Bible printed an Apocrypha section between the Old and New Testaments. That placement is an edition fact, not a claim that those books were canonical for every later Anglican confession.

• 1646/1647 CE · Reformation · Westminster, London

  Westminster Confession names the 66-book canon

  The Confession lists the 66 books and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  The Westminster Assembly’s Confession of Faith, chapter I, was finished in London in 1646/1647. Sections I.2–3 name the sixty-six books of the Protestant canon. They say the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  This is a Reformed confession. It sits on Councils & Lists because it is a dated canon list with a church-document source. It explains why many later Protestant editions leave the Apocrypha out of the printed Bible.

  Set it next to the other Protestant-tradition entries on this tab. Luther’s 1534 Bible still printed selected books in a separate section and called them useful to read, while ranking them below Holy Scripture. The 1611 King James Bible still included an Apocrypha section. Westminster’s wording refuses those books a place in the canon.

  Why it matters. A defining Reformed statement of the modern Protestant 66. It explains later omission from many Protestant printings.

  Follow-up questions

  What does Westminster Confession chapter I say about the canon?

  It names the sixty-six books and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture. That wording is the source citation for this event.

  How is Westminster different from Luther’s 1534 Bible?

  Luther printed selected books in a separate Apocrypha section and called them useful to read, while ranking them below Holy Scripture. Westminster refuses them a place in the canon. Both are Protestant-tradition events, and they use different wording.

  How is Westminster different from the Council of Trent?

  Trent in 1546 defines the Roman Catholic list, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate. Westminster in 1646/1647 is a Reformed confession that names the sixty-six and excludes the Apocrypha from the canon of Scripture. They are different bodies and different lists.

  Source: Westminster Confession I.2–3 names the 66-book Protestant canon and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

• 1947–1956 CE · Manuscript · Qumran, Judean Desert

  Dead Sea Scrolls come to light

  Caves near Qumran yielded Jewish manuscripts, including Aramaic fragments of 1 Enoch such as 4Q201.

  From 1947 to 1956, caves near Qumran yielded Jewish manuscripts of the Second Temple period, including Aramaic fragments of 1 Enoch such as 4Q201. The find shows that Enochic books were being copied in Judea in the second century BCE, long before the Ge'ez manuscripts that preserve the book in full. Discovery is manuscript evidence. The scrolls are not a Christian canon list, and they are not a table of contents for the Ethiopian, Catholic, or Protestant Bibles. They belong with the Second Temple column and with the existence of 1 Enoch. Canonical status for each later tradition stays on that tradition’s own witnesses.

  Why it matters. Shows that Enochic books were copied in Second Temple Judaism. Discovery is not a statement that the scrolls were a Christian canon list.

  Source: 4Q201 is an Aramaic 1 Enoch manuscript from Qumran Cave 4, commonly dated to the second century BCE.

• Possible allusion · Tobit 4–7 ↔ Patriarchal narratives

  Medium confidence — a common reading, with some uncertainty.

  Tobit urges marriage within the kindred and tells a family story in a patriarchal key. That echoes Genesis. This dataset does not claim that Tobit quotes a Genesis verse.

1. 367 CE — Athanasius, Festal Letter 39
2. c. 390–405 CE — Jerome’s Vulgate prefaces and the Hebrew list
3. 393 CE — Council of Hippo
4. 397 CE — Council of Carthage
5. 1534 CE — Luther Bible prints a separate Apocrypha
6. 8 April 1546 — Council of Trent, Session IV
7. 1611 CE — King James Bible of 1611 includes an Apocrypha section
8. 1646/1647 CE — Westminster Confession names the 66-book canon
9. 1947–1956 CE — Dead Sea Scrolls come to light

• Westminster Confession I.2–3 names the 66-book Protestant canon and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.
• Council of Trent, Session IV (8 April 1546), lists the Catholic canonical books including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate.
• Brenton’s public-domain Septuagint translation includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, the Additions, and Maccabees as part of the Greek Old Testament corpus.
• The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church publishes an 81-book list that includes 1 Enoch, Jubilees, and the Meqabyan books.
• Josephus, Against Apion 1.8, speaks of 22 Jewish books and distinguishes later writings as not equally trusted.
• The 397 Carthage list includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, 1–2 Maccabees among the books to be read in church, alongside the widely received Protestant 66.
• Codex Vaticanus is a fourth-century Greek Bible whose Old Testament contents follow a Septuagint-shaped collection, with some lacunae.
• Qumran caves preserved Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek fragments of biblical and parabiblical books, published in Discoveries in the Judaean Desert.
• Codex Sinaiticus preserves a fourth-century Greek Bible and, after the New Testament, includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas.
• Codex Alexandrinus is a fifth-century Greek Bible. It includes a Septuagint-shaped Old Testament, the New Testament, and 1 Clement.
• Luther’s 1534 Bible printed selected Old Testament books in a separate Apocrypha section, calling them useful to read but not equal to Holy Scripture.
• Genesis is the first book of the Torah and is canonical across Jewish and historic Christian canons.
• Athanasius, Festal Letter 39 (367), lists 22 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books and names some other writings as useful but not canonical.
• Jerome, Prologus Galeatus, distinguishes Hebrew-canon books from other church-read writings later often called Apocrypha.
• The Council of Hippo (393) is reported to have approved a scriptural list that includes books later called deuterocanonical in the West.
• The 1611 King James Bible printed an Apocrypha section between the Old and New Testaments. That placement is an edition fact, not a claim that those books were canonical for every later Anglican confession.
• 4Q201 is an Aramaic 1 Enoch manuscript from Qumran Cave 4, commonly dated to the second century BCE.