[Megillot] history

[philip davies]

Title: history

In reply to Stephen's comment below:

I have written elsewhere about the relationship between 1QH and the pesharim, concluding that data in the latter about the life of the Teacher and of his opponents are not reliable. I do accept that there are a (very) few references in the DSS to historical events, but none that we can safely translate into sectarian history.

        We can of course recreate a sectarian history from D, but only with the use of redaction criticism, which not all scholars accept. But I think we can posit a sequence of events involving an expected teacher, a claimant, a rift, the teacher's death and subsequent dismay among followers. Purely on the basis of that document the 'Liar' can be identifies as the leader of the movement that rejected the claims of the 'teacher'.

        But I can't find any basis for identification here or even for dating. And since D has been filtered via the yahad, or at least through followers of the teacher, it needs careful analysis. I see no basis for a wicked priest, or persecution of the Teacher, or indeed any external opposition. D suggests the teacher was involved in an internal exercise and only retrospectively, in the eyes of his followers, became the victim of a 'wicked priest', a figure possibly confused with the liar in some pesher texts.

        I could go on.It is frustrating that if they were not Essenes, this apparently major group (?) is unmentioned elsewhere. I dare say they did not call themselves Essenes, however. I wish I knew what name they did use.

Philip

Philip and list,

Progress in Qumran history is possible. After all, you helped, along with John
Kampen and Fergus Millar and others in warning against the old saw that Essenes
derived from the 1, 2 Maccabees Hasidim. That mistake is tied into the wrong
proposal of the too early Jonathan as wicked priest. (Speculation: 1 Maccabees
was written in Jannaeus' time, and harmonious with some of his changes?)

Philip, I see the starting place (already passed anyway) differently than you.
But perhaps you could take your first paragraph, with its I would have thought
difficult mention of intention, and answer for us your own two-part question.
Do some texts qualify, pass your proposed text, in your view? Plainly, I think
some texts can be used, with care, for history. (Example. pNah does refer to an
88 BCE event.) Do you?

best,
Stephen Goranson

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

-- 

Professor Philip R Davies
University of Sheffield