David,
I read carefully and do not agree.
best,
Stephen
Quoting David Stacey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
If you read carefully you will see that, far from denying that
Essenes lived at Qumran, I suggest that they may well have done but
under the auspices of the Royal estate in Jericho. As an industrial
suburb Qumran had too great a strategic and utilitarian value for it
to be a 'closed theological society'.
David
----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 12:16 PM
Subject: [Megillot] Hasmoneans, control and not
Quoting David Stacey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[....]
(Hasmoneans would not have tolerated any sort of 'independent'
Qumran not under its control).
[....]
Statements such as the above are not rare. But, I suggest, such
statements may
be more asserted than demonstrated. Hasmoneans did not prevent, among other
things, sectarianism. Various realities existed without Hasmoneans
necessarily
wishing for such realities. Saying that Jannaeus could have attacked
them there
is not equivalent to saying that he did so. And his wife and
successor: is there
good reason to assert that during her rule "independent" communities
("of any
sort") cannot have existed? And some of this calculus depends,
doesn't it, on
the date the Hellenistic period settlement began? That a community
of Essenes
lived on the northwest shore of the Dead Sea, I suggest, was not among the
greatest of the Hasmoneans' (nor Herod's) worries.
Stephen Goranson
http://www.duke.edu/~goranson/jannaeus.pdf
_______________________________________________
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
