----- Original Message ----- From: "philip davies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 9:17 AM Subject: Re: [Megillot] J. Post on Qumran (problematic)
> The key problem is, and always has been, the connection between site > and scrolls. We have a few pieces of evidence in favour: > > 1. inkwells (this is to keep Stephen happy) > 2. leather tabs from cave 8 > 3. Pliny Philip, here a variation of the theme: 1. usual tools of a branch office, part of a perfume production facility and/ or date and/or balsam plantage - herein belongs the flushing bassins (?; German: "Schlemmbecken") for the fine clave, suggested already earlier by Zangenberg and others as well as a fair chance for a smithy. 2. uncertain; was cave 8 in fact sealed? and if not - what does a tab actually prove? 3. Pliny's Natural History is a nice work with touristy ambitions, without being qualified for historical authenticity; cf. Bob Kraft's article on Essenes and Jews in Pliny, DSD 8/2001 (to be uploaded if required). I think the all-important question is: "how did the yahad understand the term exile". It's hardly enough to camp in paramilitary fashion in the neighbor's garden to call such a protest action "exile into the wilderness of nations" - for neither is the garden wild per se, nor is the neighbor an alien, his garden abroad. Please think twice please... Not by chance I've referred to the Isaiah-Trail doctrine (Is 40.3) of the apparently widespread "Threat Song against Assur"-roadmap (Is 10.5-12.6) to the exile of "the rest that returns". Be that as it may, we are contemporary witnesses of the first true schism in the DSS research. All I can see in the moment is a retreat of the old "mother faction" on all sides - but this could be a mere temporary phenomenon. However, I do not share Zangenberg's excessive optimism _Dierk _______________________________________________ g-Megillot mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
