Several last items of interest worth noting ...
 
Jehon Grist,
"The 'Home of the Scrolls'--A Tour of Qumran"
http://www.lehrhaus.org/online/scrolls/scrolls_4.html 
 
"Phase Ib was certainly the era when some of the Dead Sea
Scrolls were written, whether at Qumran or elsewhere ...
 
"Phase II saw the village [Qumran] rebuilt more or less along
the same lines as Phase IB. There is no question that the
population of Phase II was Jewish, although a few noteworthy
changes in one or two of the buildings hint that their
practices may have been slightly different ...
 
"One interesting point about the dining hall: After its
destruction in Phase Ib, it was rebuilt in Phase II along the
same lines as its predecessor. De Vaux reported one interesting
set of differences: the opening for the water channel was
blocked off, the floor no longer sloped down toward the west,
and the southern door (where wash water could exit the
room) was blocked off. Whoever built the later phase of
the dining hall did not feel that the absolute ritual cleanliness
of the Phase IB dining hall had to be maintained in the same
way. This mysterious change is a critical issue the
scholarly community has not addressed. ...
 
"Rebuilt anywhere from a few to about twenty-five years later,
the village [Qumran] resumed life along similar (although
not identical) lines to that of its predecessor. One noteworthy
exception is the dining hall of Phase II, whose rebuilding
shows changes suggesting that the new population was
not as concerned with cleanliness and purity in this room
as the preceding phase. Does this suggest a slightly different
Jewish group in Phase II from that which resided at Qumran
in Period IB?..."
 
(Note: Grist is conventional in about everything else.
It is his questioning of de Vaux's interpretation of the 
same group between Ib and II, allegedly required on 
archaeological grounds, that is of interest here.)
 
*****
 
James Charlesworth, _The Pesharim and Qumran History_ 
(Eerdmans, 2002), claims the following summary is not
only his own view but an attempt to write a consensus
for what leading Qumran scholars generally agree upon 
(e.g. p. 66).
 
Charlesworth unfortunately renumbers de Vaux's periods causing 
confusion, i.e. de Vaux's Ia becomes for Charlesworth Phase I;
de Vaux's Ib becomes for Charleworth "Phase II"; a period of
abandonment between Ib and II becomes for Charlesworth
"Phase III"; de Vaux's II becomes for Charlesworth "Phase IV";
and de Vaux's III becomes Charlesworth's "Phase V". (Whew!
Is that clearer now?)
 
Charlesworth writes of his "Phase II", i.e. Qumran Period Ib:
 
   "It seems relatively certain that virtually all the pesharim
   and related commentaries were composed during this period 
   ["Phase II", that is, Period Ib]....
   What seems evident is the conclusion that the Qumran sectarian
   documents were composed, and in almost all cases received
   final editing, before the end of Phase II [Period Ib]. This widely
   affirmed consensus results from five decades of intensive
   research ..." (p. 49)
 
   "... we are confronted with many unknowns. For example, we 
   do not know what percentage of those who fled Qumran ca. 40 [BCE],
   or later, returned to Qumran and lived there until the destruction
   of 68 C.E...." (p. 65)
 
***
 
Finally, consider the following question in light of the quotations
which follow.
 
Question: Did the Sect at Qumran control Jerusalem and the
temple during Qumran Period Ib? And was Hyrcanus II, the
leading Hasmonean ruler during most of this period, the
leading figure of the Qumran sect?
 
 
Magness (2002: 66): "the presence of miqva'ot (ritual
baths), the pantry containing more than 1000 dishes (L86),
and possible evidence for animal bone deposits outside
the buildings in pre-31 B.C.E. contexts indicate that the
settlement [at Qumran] was sectarian from the beginning."
 
Bar-Nathan (2002:5): the finds from Qumran (Period Ib)... are,
in fact, identical to those exposed in the Hasmonean palace
complex at Jericho."
 
Bar-Nathan (2002: 198): "the strict observation of the Jewish
laws of cleanliness and urity [by the Hasmoneans], as expressed
by the abundance of ritual baths (miqvaot), found in almost
every unit of their lavish palace complex at Jericho ..."
 
Bar-Nathan (2002: 198): "... the use in Jericho of locally produced
pottery with a continuous Judean tradition, the lack of imported
pottery, and the profusion of bowls and their relationship to
the miqvaot, might all be related to unwritten Sadducean laws and
customs ... the great resemblance of the pottery in Hasmonean
Jericho to that of Qumran Period Ib is notable ..."
 
Bar-Nathan (2002: 186): "it is known that the Hasmonean rulers, 
with the exception of Queen Alexandra, who leaned toward the 
Pharisees, belonged to the Sadducean sect, especially Alexander 
Jannaeus". 
 
Jutta Jokiranta, " 'Sectarianism' of the Qumran 'Sect': Sociological Notes",
_Dead Sea Discoveries_ (yr. and vol. missing on my photocopy, 
but c. 2001 or so), pp. 223-239. (An important article.)
 
     "the term 'sect'--if insisted--[used] of a group behind the Scrolls
     should be free of presuppositions such as that this group had a
     very marginal position ... or that it protested against the Temple 
     establishment ..." (Jokiranta, 239 n. 48).
 
Just something to think about... 
 
Greg Doudna
 

_______________________________________________
g-Megillot mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot

Reply via email to