The New York Times 15 Augusr, "Archaeologists Challenge Link Between Dead Sea Scrolls and Ancient Sect," by John Noble Wilford: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/15/science/15scroll.html And a related NYT video (thanks to Joseph Lauer for the link): http://video.on.nytimes.com/ifr_main.jsp?nsid=a2079ba3e:10d1134909d:-6b7f&fr_story=2fb8f6f982ce987fcdcc44a71948903e53222e9f&st=1155637880192&mp=WMP&cpf=true&fr=081506_061739_2079ba3ex10d1134909dxw705e&rdm=572670.5397135776
Unfortunately, the New York Times article and video both include mistakes. The NYT report is based largely on an article by Y. Magen and Y. Peleg in the Brown Universiry Qumran Conference volume. They also have an article in the Sept/Oct BAR. Unfortunately, the Brown article by Magen and Peleg, as well as some other contributions to that volume, include significant mistakes. I have written a journal review of the Brown volume, which is not yet in print, that will list some of these errors and unreliable assertions (though some of the chapters are helpful), and may write on some of these here, if there's interest The New York Times article ends with the sentence: "Despite the rising tide of revisionist thinking, other scholars of the Dead Sea Scrolls continue to defend the Essene hypothesis, though with some modifications and diminishing conviction." In my case, that is false; my conviction that Essenes wrote several of the Scrolls and that Essenes lived at Qumran has not diminished but increased, because the evidence for that association has increased. best, Stephen Goranson http://www.duke.edu/~goranson _______________________________________________ g-Megillot mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
