There has been much speculation regarding the original language of the Book of Giants. It was generally believed to have had a Semitic origin. Indeed, the discovery of this text at Qumran led scholars, such as C. P. van Andel and Rudolf Otto, to believe that while these ancient Aramaic compositions of the book were the earliest known, the work probably had even earlier Hebrew antecedents. It was of course the great R. H. Charles, translator and publisher in 1906 of "The Book of Enoch", who asserted that Enoch was "built upon the debris of" an older Noah saga than that in Genesis which only cryptically refers to the Enoch myth. But Milik himself offered his own hypothesis that Enoch's 'creation story' and law of God account "naturally predate" the Mosaic Sinai accounts in Genesis: He saw Genesis 6:1-4 — long a puzzling passage to biblical scholars — as a "quotation from" what he believed ultimately to have been the "earlier" Enoch source. More recent scholarship, such as that of Klaus Beyer, indicates that the "Book of Giants" (parts of which have been found in Hebrew at Qumran) was ""originally composed in" Hebrew during the 3rd century BCE, while the names of the giants Gilgamesh and Hobabish betray a Babylonian provenance" — which Babylonian-origins claim based on the name appearances, however, is refuted by Martínez (Stuckenbruck pp. 5 note 22, 30, 208 note 273, 220 note 27; Martínez [2018/1992, p. 114). But whatever the reality, one thing remains certain: the Qumran books and their fragments are now the oldest known Enochic manuscripts in existence.