Dave,
I'm sorry, but the below argument (from silence) sounds farfetched - what is not there could have been there and alike. And we have never ever started with e.g. the military interpretation of the Bar Kochba letters first to make an approach to 1QM, if memory serves. Both are two different shoes.
It is interestingly to see, however, that non-qumranic material comes into play exactly when non-qumranic themes are to be sold as qumranic via inductive argument. That is at least my impression.
However, we might start with a thread on the yahad - no problemo.
But before we have to redline the (apparently parallel running) precursor- or non-sectarian material.
Then and not before a review of the remaining material to discuss things that sound inhomogenous is possible.
_Dierk
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Washburn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Megillot] Jonah in the DSS
Dierk,
There are several problems with your comments below, as well as one from your
previous post.
For starters, in your previous post you said "The book of Jonah is not used by
the yahad." But the whole "Yahad" question is still one of the hot buttons
in DSS research, and as tenuous as the purported connections between the
scrolls and Qumran are, it's not a good idea to just breeze by them like
this. For myself, I don't buy the idea that there was some separatist
"yahad" that produced the so-called "sectarian scrolls," but that's a matter
for another thread. Suffice to say that the comment about Jonah and the
Yahad is a bit of an overstatement.
In general parlance, "Dead Sea Scrolls" refers to any of the scrolls found at
sites on or near the Dead Sea. This includes Murraba`at, Nahal Hever, Masada
and several others. It is even more misleading to refer to these scrolls as
"material from abroad," since all the sites are within reasonable proximity
to each other. This is why I didn't include the CD documents in my book;
regardless of what may have been found that's similar, Cairo isn't on the
Dead Sea so its material really is "from abroad." But these other sites are
on the Dead Sea, and so it is common and acceptable to refer to them as part
of the Dead Sea Scrolls corpus. If you are using the term in a more narrow
sense, you need to make that clear; you can't just arbitrarily say "this is
how we're going to use the term" because others' usage may vary and their
usage is at least as legitimate as yours.
To answer the original question regarding Jonah's preservation, see my book.
There are no surviving peshers, but given that we are dealing with the
accident of preservation, that doesn't necessarily mean there were none.
Except for a couple of very small scraps, the only attestation for Job is in
a Targum. Does that mean that whoever produced and hid the scrolls only (or
primiarily) used Job in Aramaic? We can't say, because all we have is what
happened to survive the desert.
To sum up, this statementDSS - Dead Sea Scrolls (material exclusively of cave 1-11 from Kh. Qumran)may be true in your parlance, but it certainly is not accurate or representative of general usage in the field.
On Monday 21 February 2005 07:30, Dierk van den Berg wrote:Guiseppe,
I've just clarified that both quotations do NOT belong to the DSS corpus.
And it is indeed misleading to intrude cross-refs of material from abroad,
so that a starter might believe that Jonah quotations are present even if
there are none.
DSS - Dead Sea Scrolls (material exclusively of cave 1-11 from Kh. Qumran)
_Dierk
----- Original Message ----- From: "Giuseppe Regalzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 2:25 PM Subject: Re: [Megillot] Jonah in the DSS
> Dierk van den Berg wrote:
>> One might add that MurXII and 8HevXIIgr have nothing to do with the >> DSS.
>
> Scrolls from both Wadi Murabba`at and Nahal Hever are included in the
> _The Dead Sea Scrolls on Microfiche_, in _The Dead Sea Scroll's
> Catalogue_ by Reed, and so on.
>
> Perhaps Jeffrey B. Gibson meant "DSS" in the narrower (equally
> legitimate) sense of "Qumran Scrolls", but even in this case there was
> nothing wrong, IMHO, in giving two more references that someone else,
> maybe, could find of
> interest.
>
> Giuseppe
>
> -----------------------------------------
> Giuseppe Regalzi, PhD
> Rome, Italy
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://regalzi.port5.com/
> http://www.orientalisti.net/
> _______________________________________________
> g-Megillot mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
_______________________________________________ g-Megillot mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
-- Dave Washburn http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur "No good. Hit on head." -Gronk _______________________________________________ g-Megillot mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
_______________________________________________ g-Megillot mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
