Dear Greg Doudna,
To my mind, a title "Messiah of Aaron and Israel" -- referring to a
single individual -- makes no sense. It just seems unintelligible and
self-contradicting, on a common sense level. Where, in the HB or the Qumran
corpus (excluding the phrase in question) is Aaron synonymous or
interchangeable with Israel? I just don't consider it a serious possibility,
but perhaps this is a mistake on my part - my approach here is somewhat
superficial (as I indicated in my original posting).
In 1QSa we have references to both a Messiah (ii 12) -- the priestly
Messiah? -- and a "Messiah of Israel" (ii 14, 20). It seems to me first of
all that if a high priest who is "Messiah of Aaron and Israel" were to have
his title foreshortened, it would be to "Messiah of Aaron"; it is difficult
to understand a foreshortening in the other direction. Secondly, in 1QSa ii
13-15 we first have "the chief priest of all the congregation of Israel" who
enters, with his colleagues, and "After", the Messiah of Israel. Again, in
ii 17-21, first the priest blesses firstfruit of bread and wine, and
"Afterwards" the Messiah of Israel. In both cases these read best as
distinct actions by different figures IMO, the text regulating the sequence
of events.
If I may correct you on a factual point, you argue that "The warriors are
subject to the authority of, are led by, the 'sons of Aaron' (1.23) and the
'sons of Zadok, the priests' (1.24)." In the first case, the warriors are
more accurately led by "the sons of Aaron... under the direction of the
chiefs of the clans of the congregation"; in the second case, the "sons of
Zadok, the priests, and the chiefs of the clans of the congregation." The
clan chiefs are easily glossed over here, especially since Qumran studies
tends to emphasize the Zadokite leadership of the Qumran "sect" and overlook
the military organization (which figures prominently in 1QSa). The clan
chiefs in 1QSa have accordingly been almost invisible to Qumran studies.
Tribal chiefs are also mentioned alongside priests at 1QM ii 1-3. 1QM iii
14-15 refers to banners of the twelve tribes, of the "camp chiefs of the
three tribes", and of the tribes. Yadin considers the tribal organization to
be especially important in conscription (also prominent in 1QSa i), whereas
the legionary organization (by 1000s, 500s, etc.) was used in the field. 1QM
has roles for both priests and lay commanders, and I think we see the same
thing going on in 1QSa.
To return to 1QSa, at ii 14-17 we read, "After, [the Me]ssiah of Israel
shall ent[er] and before him shall sit the chiefs [of the clans of Israel,
each] one according to his dignity, according to their [positions] in their
camps and in their marches. And all the chiefs of the cl[ans of the
congre]gation with the wise ... shall sit before them, each one according to
his dignity." [Garcia Martinez trans.] So the Messiah of Israel appears
specially associated with the lay commanders of the field camps, as opposed
to the high priest mainly associated with the sons of Aaron, his brother
priests in the preceding lines (although this is not to deny that priests are
also given a military role in both 1QSa and 1QM).
The context of the "assembly of famous men" (or "men of name") in 1QSa
appears to be a periodic national assembly (which includes on its agenda a
"convocation for war" - i 26). 1QM ii 6-8 similarly refers to "the famous
men called to the assembly" each year, along with the "chiefs of the fathers
of the congregation" who oversee conscription. This assembly took place in
Jerusalem, which was under the control of the sons of light, the high priest
presiding over the temple (ii 1-4). There is an allusion to the Maccabean
restoration of the temple in the land sabbath year of 163 BCE at ii 6, but we
need not get into specific historical context here. The main thing is that
1QSa has very strong affinities with 1QM ii-ix, especially column ii, and
should be interpreted in that light. And in 1QM ii-ix there appears a
separation of powers between the high priest now presiding in Jerusalem's
temple and the army commanders in the field. I think 1QSa also reflects this
partial separation of temple and military command and that the Messiah of
Israel of 1QSa to refer to the lay military commander.
Best regards,
Russell Gmirkin
PS to answer Barb Leger's query, a Messiah can refer to various
individuals anointed for office, Messiah simply meaning anointed. For
instance, the Talmud refers to the "priest anointed for battle." Kings were
also anointed. One has to take into account the context whenever this term
is encountered. Maskil is a technical term occasionally used in Qumran texts
(and in Daniel) to refer to the "wise". (I see Doudna has responded more
fully to your questions.)
For private reply, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
message: "unsubscribe Orion." Archives are on the Orion Web
site, http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il.
(PLEASE REMOVE THIS TRAILER BEFORE REPLYING TO THE MESSAGE)
