Dear colleagues
I hope to have found a proof that the Qumran scrolls cannot belong to one
and the same collection (see the abstract below). and started to *speculate*
about an explanation for this "fact." 
Since the article will still take some time to get published in print, I
would like to share the discovery with other interested scholars in the
field, in the hope to stimulate, already now, further attempts to embed this
new problem and its possible ramifications in the discussion. 

Please excuse therefore my boldness to invite you to take a look on an
abbreviated version currently located on my (improvised) website
(http://www.geocities.com/shunrata). It will soon be also available at the
Nordic Qumran Network <http://www.helsinki.fi/teol/hyel/nnqs/>  website to
whose organizers I am most grateful.
I would also like to thank the editor of the journal where a long version of
this article is currently under review for the permission to prepublish the
short version on the web. 
Daniel Stoekl Ben Ezra
 
ABSTRACT: Old Caves and Young Caves: Two Qumran Collections?
 
An examination of the average age of the scrolls of each of the Qumran caves
shows a huge gap between the "old" caves 1 and 4 (average age between 37 and
44 BCE) and the "young" caves 2, 3, 5, 6 and 11 (average age between 5 and
25 CE). A statistical analysis proves that the manuscripts from caves 1 and
4 cannot come from the same collection as those found in caves 2,3,5,6 and
11 (p<0.0001 for a Kruskal-Wallis test, similar numbers for a series of
T-Tests), at least not as random samples. The scenario that all or most
caves served as emergency hiding places for the Qumran collection around 68
CE has therefore to be discarded or fundamentally modified. 
         Devorah Dimant has shown that the caves are intimately connected by
genre and "Sectarianism." Most probably, therefore, the "old" caves 1 and 4
represent the manuscript collection of the same group as the "young" caves
2,3,5,6,11 but at an earlier point in history. Assuming Qumran was destroyed
by fire around 4 BCE, caused most probably by an attack (Jody Magness), I
try to address the question how manuscripts older than that fire survived. 
        I therefore suggest the following scenario: cave 4 was an emergency
hiding / library / depository around 4 BCE, and the mss from cave 1 were
hidden also at that time. The young caves 2,3,5,6,11 represent the Qumran
library at the second attack and fire around 68 BCE. Cave 4 either served as
"stacks" during period II or was a kind of Geniza, therefore we find some
but not many CE mss in cave 4. If the old manuscripts from cave 4 were
already mutilated around 4 BCE, this could explain why they remained in that
cave during period II.


Daniel Stoekl Ben Ezra, Ph.D.
Mandel Scholar
Scholion - Interdisciplinary Research Center in Jewish Studies
Rabin Building 1112
Hebrew University, Mount Scopus
91905 Jerusalem
ISRAEL

+972-2-58.80081

website: http://www.geocities.com/shunrata 

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to