The Dead Sea Scroll (A Review)

The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Perspective
Author(s): NORMAN GOLB

Reviewed work(s):
Source: The American Scholar, Vol. 58, No. 2 (Spring 1989), pp. 177-207
Published by: The Phi Beta Kappa Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41211664 .
Accessed: 05/01/2013 14:24
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Phi Beta Kappa Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
American Scholar.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Dead Sea Scrolls
A New Perspective
NORMAN GOLB
CHANCE DISCOVERY OF SEVEN ANCIENT SCROLLS in 1947

withina cave nearWadi Qumran,notfarfromthe northwestern
shoreoftheDead Sea, provedtobe anything buta uniquefind.Instead
additionalrevelationsin the wildernessof Judaeafollowed.Besides
sitesthatthe late Rolandde Vaux and Yigael Yadin unearthedand
describedso well,thediscoveries includedmanymoreHebrewmanu-
scriptsfoundin theQumrancavesbetween1949and 1956,textsofthe
secondcentury a.D. uncoveredin Wadi Muraba'atand nearEn-Gedi
(1951-55,1960-61),andstillothermanuscripts, ofthesamecharacter as
thosefoundatQumran, whichwere discovered between 1963 and 1965
at Masada,the site of the last standof the PalestinianJewsagainst
Romanforcesin 70-73a.d.
Therearecompelling reasonswhyscholars engagedintheprocessof
discovery and obligedto formulate hypotheses- no matterwhattheir
-
fieldsofknowledge shouldconcernthemselves withthesefindsand
thebodyofinterpretation thathas grownup aroundthem.Duringthe
pastfour decades, most authors undertaking thestudyoftheQumran
scrollshaveclaimedthatthdiscoveries madein 1949andafter, either
whollyorat leastin largepartoffer supportforthefirst
theory oftheir
proposedin 1948whenonlysevenscrollswereknown.
origininitially
Thistheory heldthattheJewishsectoftheEsseneswrotethescrolls.In
thefirstcenturya.D.Josephus FlaviusandPhiloofAlexandria described
thisgroup,bothwritersplacingtheirnumberat approximately four
thousand soulsspreadthroughout Palestine.On thebasisofa statement
ofPlinytheElder(23-79a.D.),andafter briefstudyofone oftheseven
originalQumrantexts,the firstQumranscholarsinferred thatthese
Esseneshadhadtheirmainhomeatthesiteknownas Khirbet Qumran -
NORMAN GOLB is the Ludwig RosenbergerProfessorofJewishHistoryand Civili-

ofChicago.His mostrecentworkis Les Juifsde Rouenau Moyen
zationat the University
Age: Portraitune Cultureoublie (1985).
177

THE AMERICAN SCHOLAR
lyingbelowthearea ofthecaves on theeasternside oftheQumran

escarpment - thatmembers ofthesecthadwritten thesescrolls,andthat
then,duringtheperiodofthewarwithRome(67-73 a.D.),theyhad
hiddenthemawayin thecave in whichthescrollswerefound.When
additional scrollsandfragments ofhundreds ofothermanuscripts were
foundin thisand nearbycaves in ensuingyears,theQumran-Essene
hypothesis was expandedand developed:theEssenes had composed
and copiedoverthemanynon-biblical Qumrantextsat a scriptorium
saidtobe locatedwithin theKhirbet Qumransite;moreover, manyorall
ofthebiblicaltextshad also been copiedthere;and all ofthesetexts
together had been hiddenawayin thevariouscavesnearQumranjust
beforetheRomansstormed thesettlement.
Thisview,whichthegreatpreponderance ofscholars currentlyholds
alongwiththatportion ofthelaypublicawareofthediscoveries, was
encouraged on a popular level in America particularlyby Edmund
Wilsonin TheScrollsfromtheDead Sea (1955),basedupona seriesof
articlesthathad appearedearlierin The New Yorker.Wilsonwas of
coursenota scholarofancientHebrewtexts, buthisenthusiasm forthe
discoveries, his fascinationwith scholars involvedin them, and hisown
keenintelligence combined togenerate inthefindsas well
greatinterest
as widespread andsolidsupport fortheoriginal theorycreatedtoexplain
them.In 1969Wilsonpublishedan updatedandexpandedversionofhis
bookwhosebasic effect was to investtheoriginalhypothesis withan
even greaterdegreeof authority. The widespreadpopularity of this
interpretation, fortyyearsafterfirst beingproposedin the infancy of
Qumranresearch, has resulted in its treatmentas accepted truth in a
widebodyofliterature.
Yetdespiteitspopularity, theoriginal theoryhasbynowcometobe
confounded bya massofanomaliesrequiring theadditionofa number
ofqualifications- theeffect ofwhichis tomakethetheory appearfarless
convincing todaythaninthepast.The anomaliesstrongly suggesta new
interpretation ofthediscoveries, onenotonlyconsonant withpreviously
knownhistorical events,butalso requiring none ofthe specialargu-
mentstheoriginaltheory nowneeds.Whatis in factbecomingclearis
thatthephenomenon ofthescrolls'unearthing andsubsequent scholar-
shipduringthepastforty yearsmustnowbe treated, howeverreluc-
tantly,as a normalchapter inthehistory ofdiscovery- a chaptersimilar
to manyin which,as KarlPopper,ThomasKuhn,and,morerecently,
HansKohnhaveconvincingly argued,so manyinitially assertedhypoth-
eses, despitefervent and sometimes diehardendorsement, eventually
beginto relinquish theircogencyas new evidencecomesto light.By
merelyfollowing thediscoveries one byone in chronological order,it
becomesobviouswhythisis so. Withoutspecialpleadingor forced
178

THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS
exegesis,all current evidenceleads to theconclusionthatthe scrolls

in
originated Jerusalem andweretakentohidingplacesin theJudaean
wilderness forsafekeeping eitherbeforeorduringtheRomansiegeon
Jerusalem of 70 a.d.
Thefirst discoveries - sevenparchment scrollsofvarying lengthsand
-
contentswere made by bedouinof the Ta'amirehtribeduringthe
springof 1947 in the cave now knownas QumranCave 1, located
approximately one kilometer northof the KhirbetQumransite and
approximately two kilometers fromtheclosestpointon theDead Sea
shore.These scrollsincludedtwotextsofthebiblicalBookofIsaiah;a
workofreligioushymns, in a stylesimilartothatofthebiblicalpsalms,
of whicheighteencolumnsand varioussmallfragments have been
preserved; a shortcommentary on theBookofHabakkuk whichthe
in
anonymous commentator attempted torelatethewordsofthisprophet to
eventsof his own timeand the impendingfuture;an embellished
retelling oftheearlystoriesof Genesis,particularly thoserelatingto
NoahandAbraham, whichunliketheotherscrollsis written inAramaic
ratherthanHebrewandwhichhas cometobe knownas the"Genesis
Apocryphon"; an imaginative description ofa warto takeplace in an
apocalyptic erabetweenthegoodandeviltroopsofmankind, knownas
the"WaroftheSonsofLightagainsttheSonsofDarkness";anda work
of eleven surviving columns,some paragraphs of whichdescribea
gigantic initiationceremony to be undergone by individuals endowed
withthepowertochooseandfollowa lifeofvirtue.
This last workis knownas the "Manualof Discipline"because
severalcolumnsof textfollowing the description ofthe ceremony of
initiation for
setouta procedure gaining admission tothe group,as well
as a modeofbehaviorforall itsfull-fledged members. The members are
describedas eschewingpersonalwealth,leadinga communallifeof
radicalspiritual andphysical purity inwhichceremonial mealsaretaken
together, andparticipating bothinstudysessionsgiven over toexpound-
ing"secrets"ofthePentateuch andinmeetings meantfordiscussing the
group's laws and behavior.
Severalmonths afterthebedouin'sdiscovery ofthesesevenscrolls -
-
thatis, late in 1947 or veryearlyin 1948 theywere examinedin
Jerusalem by Eliezer Sukenik.In his firstpublication on thesetexts
(MegillotGenuzot,1948), he states that, while the question of their
origin still requiredinvestigation, he had found one indication that
encouraged himtooffer a hypothesis. the
Whenexamining scrolls, then
inthehandsoftheAssyrian Metropolitan inJerusalem, "I foundin one
ofthema kindofbookofregulations fortheconductofmembersofa
brotherhood or sect." He inclinedto hypothesize thatthiscache of
manuscripts belongedoriginally to the sectof the Essenes,"for,as is
179

knownfromdifferent literary sources,theplace of settlement of this

sectarian on
groupwas thewestern sideof the Dead Sea, in thevicinity
ofEn-Gedi."Sukenikwasherereferring tothe"ManualofDiscipline,"
andwithhisstatement wasborntheidea thathasbecomeso notablein
thehistory ofmodernscholarship, thatthisworkand theotherscrolls
foundby thebedouinin 1947all camefroma community ofEssenes
livingnearthewesternshoreoftheDead Sea.
Otherscholarsin France,America,and elsewheresoon tookup
Sukenik'sview,butall whowroteon thescrollsin thoseearlydaysof
discovery thought onlyofseventextsemanating froma smallgroupof
pious believers. That the ancient Essenes had had books,even secret
writings,of their own was a reasonable supposition, supportedby a
specificstatement of Josephus;and as a numberof ideas akin to
Essenism(forexample,communalliving,radicalpurity,sobrietyof
couldbe discerned
spirit) inthe"ManualofDiscipline,"therewaslittle
reasonnottoconcludethatthiswasindeedan Essenework,emanating,
alongwithbiblicaltextsanda fewotherpreviously unknown writings,
from thecommunity of
spoken byPliny.
To locatethecavewherethebedouinhaddiscovered thesetexts, an
expedition was mounted in lateJanuary of1949,andaftera fewdaysit
was foundto thenorthoftheKhirbet Qumransite,at thetimenotyet
excavated. WheninFebruary andearlyMarchofthesameyearthiscave,
whichlaterwouldbeartheidentifying number 1Q (thatis,Qumran Cave
1),wasexplored andexcavated itwasfoundtocontainfragments - more
thanseventyin number - ofmanymoreancientHebrewmanuscripts
(but no otherfull-fledged scrolls).Finallypublishedin 1955,these
fragments includedvariousremnants ofbiblicaltexts, suchas partsofthe
Pentateuch, the books of Judgesand Samuel,those of Isaiah and
Ezekiel,thePsalmsand Daniel; therewereeven a fewfragments of
Leviticusin thepalaeo-Hebrew (thatis, old Canaanite)script, attesting
tothegreatage ofthesetexts.Amongthenon-biblical textsweresmall
fragments of commentaries on Michah,Zephaniah,and the Psalms,
similarin generalstyletotheone on Habakkuk foundearlier.
Fragments oftheApocryphal were
writings identified, includingtwo
from theBookofJubileesandonefrom theTestament ofLevi. Someof
thesefragments werefromapocryphal and apocalyptic writingsprevi-
ouslyunknown, themoderneditorsin thesecasesoccasionally supply-
ingsuchtitlesas "BookofNoah,""Apocalypse ofLmech,""Sayingsof
Moses,"and "BookofMysteries." Otherfragments wereso smallas to
remainunidentified; butsomewerelargeenoughtoallowanalysis, and
theeditorshaveidentified sixoftheseas fragments ofreligioushymns
andliturgical texts.
Among themostimportant ofthediscoveries madein
thiscavewereadditional fragments both ofthe"War"scrollandofthe
180

"ManualofDiscipline."A fewfragments ofthelatterwererelatively

smallpiecescontaining benedictions, buttherewas one longfragment
apparently fromthe "Manual"consisting oftwoalmostcompletecol-
umnsoftext, anditwasofgreatimportance. Foritbeganwiththewords,
"Thisis theruleforall thecongregation ofIsraelin theend ofdays."
Since these two columnsmayoriginally have been attachedto the
"Manual"nearitscurrent beginning, thenew fragment hintedat the
possibility thatthe "Manual" had been altogether an apocalyptical
writing whoseceremonies anddisciplineweremeantforall Israelites,
notonlyEssenes, at a future Messianictime.Indeed,the"Messiahof
Israel"is mentioned inthefragment; he is tobe presentata feast, clearly
in apocalyptical times,along with"the leadersof the thousandsof
Israelites,each accordingto his honor... in theirencampments and
accordingto theirjourneys."In the firstcolumnof the fragment the
statement is made,withreference totheeschatological timesspokenof
in thetext,thatan Israeliteis to be allowedtohavesexualintercourse
onlyattheage oftwenty, aftera ten-year periodofstudyofunidentified
bookscalledthe"BookofHago" andthe"Statutes oftheCovenant."
Thesestatements andothers inthefragment seemtoconflict withthe
specific Essene -
identification with
particularly Pliny's assertion in
chapterfiveofhis NaturalHistorythattheEssenes of the Dead Sea
shorewere celibate.But scholarsin thoseearlydays of manuscript
discovery, firedbyzeal forfurther knowledge ofwhattheythought was
a long-lost and now recovered sectarian that
community might have
influenced earlyChristianity,insteadproposeda morecomprehensive
view of Essenism:all the textsof QumranCave 1 belongedto this
ancientgroupthathad promulgated and possessedsecretwritings as
wellas otherliterary texts- more thanmight have been suspected - and
thevariety ofideasinthetextsshowedtheseEssenesindifferent stages
oftheirsectarian development.
Withtheexcavation ofthefirst Qumrancavecompleted, archaeolog-
ical exploration in the Judaeanwildernessappearedto stop. The
Ta'amirehbedouin,however, continued theirclandestine digging, and
eventually began to find more manuscript fragments in a few caves
located in a gorgecalled Wadi Muraba'at,approximately eighteen
kilometers southofQumran.FromOctober1951through January 1952,
the fruitsof theirefforts - bothpapyrusand parchment - were
texts
broughtin small lots fromthe site to Jerusalem, wheretheywere
purchased on behalfof the Rockefeller Museum. Further finds,primarily
ofcoinsandartifacts, were made byarchaeologists who were led tothe
siteinJanuary 1952andinthatandthefollowing month explored itsfour
caves.The Hebrew,Aramaic, andGreekmanuscripts wereforthemost
partnotofthesameperiodas thosefoundatQumran, butdatedmainly
181

fromthe Second JewishRevoltagainstRome (132-135 a.D.); they

includedpersonalandadministrative - thatis,autograph
letters texts-
oftheleadersofthatrevolt, including Simonben Kosiba(BarKokhba)
himself,and cast important new lighton the conductof the war,
particularlyin the area of theJudaeanwilderness. These textswere
hailedforthefurther testimony they offeredof thehitherto unsuspected
literary
fecundity oftheJudaeandesert;but,as theyhadlittletodo with
first-centuryJudaismand Essenes, theyfailedto arouse the same
universalenthusiasm thattheQumrandiscoveries had.The bearingof
theMuraba'atfindson thequestionoftheactualphysicalnatureofthe
Qumrantextswas neverpubliclydiscussed,and thefindsapparently
gave no pause to investigators benton seekingthelosthistory ofthe
EssenesoftheDead Sea shore.
WhiletheTa'amirehwerepursuing theirhuntat Muraba'at, archae-
ologistsinJerusalem haddecidedtoundertake theexcavation ofKhirbet
Qumran.This site was long thought to have been a fortress of the
Judaeanwilderness; butafterthe discoveriesinthefirst Qumrancave,it
cametobe considered thepossiblehomeofthesectdescribedbyPliny.
Soundings at Qumranbeganlatein 1951,andtheexcavation ofthesite
was thenpursuedin fourseasonsbetween1953and 1956.
The completeddig revealeda once highlydevelopedsite,with
well-builtstoneconstructions, interconnected reservoirsforthestorage
of a verylargesupplyof water,workrooms, stables,and a pottery,
remnants of a surrounding wall, and a fortifiedtower. The site had
clearlybeenstormed byRomansoldiersafter a prolonged battleshortly
beforeorafter 70 ad.- a factshownbynumerous arrowheads, Romanas
wellas Jewish coinswithdates,andtheclearindications ofundermining
oftheencircling wallsandburning ofthecomplex.Khirbet Qumranhad
obviously been ofa military nature, defendedbyan armedforceat the
timeitwasstormed bytheRomans.AndyetPhilosaidthattheEssenes
were the mostpeacefulof men and bore no arms,while Josephus
describedthemonlyas carrying defensive armsin thecourseoftravel.
Pliny,on theotherhand,saidnothing abouthiscelibateEssenesofthe
Dead Sea shoreforming an armedtroop,butthattheyhad "onlythe
for
palm-trees company."(Pliny'sotherstatement, thatthe townof
En-Gedilay "below" the Essenes' habitation, did notlocalizethem
precisely.)Despitethearchaeological revelations,thosepursuingthe
digandworking on themanuscripts in Jerusalem raisedno questionat
the timeregarding the continuedsuitability of the Qumran-Essene
hypothesis.
This entireperiodwas characterized by startling new manuscript
discoveriesin further caves in the vicinityof the site.The bedouin,
havingcededthesearchatMuraba'at tothearchaeologists earlyin 1952,
182

returnedto the area of Qumran,and in Februaryof thatyear found

additionalHebrew manuscriptfragments in a cave less than* two hun-
of
dred metersto the south Qumran Cave 1. These texts included
eighteenbiblical fragments as well as some fromthe Book of Jubilees
and otherapocryphalwritings.When these findsreachedthe Jordanian
sectorof Jerusalem,it dawned upon the archaeologiststherethatthe
Qumranarea mightcontainmanymoremanuscript-laden caves, and an
expedition consisting of several archaeological teams was immediately
organized and set to work in March 1952. That month theyexplored
morethantwohundredcaves in the vicinityofQumranand discovered
potteryin morethana score ofthem.Then, on March 14, theyentered
thecave now knownas Qumran3 (3Q), and a searchofitbroughtto light
threebiblical fragments and eleven fragments of previouslyunknown
non-biblicalHebrew writings, includingfragments ofa commentary on
Isaiah and pieces ofseveralunknownapocryphaltexts.Most surprising
ofall, two sectionsofa copperscrollwere foundin Cave 3. The scroll's
contentswhen decipheredseemed to consistof descriptionsofhidden
artifactsand treasureswith geographicalindicationsof the places of
hiding.Later on it became evidentthatthe described itemsincluded
manuscriptsas well.
Not until 1956 was the Copper Scroll successfullyopened (by the
processofsawingitintoeighteenverticalsections).Whilethediscovery
metwithgreatinterestaroundtheworld,thoseworkingon the Qumran
findsin Jerusalemfounditto be a disturbing and enigmatictext:forthe
view had alreadytakenhold thatthefindsofQumranwere all relatedto
theEssene sect,who had had theirmotherhouse at KhirbetQumran,and
yet the great treasuresdescribed in the Copper Scroll could hardlyhave
belonged to a single,relativelysmall sect in ancientJudaism.In their
reportto the Acadmiedes Inscriptionset Belles Lettres,read thereon
June1, 1956,the partiesin chargeofthe workat Qumranstated:
tounderstand
It is difficult whytheEssenesofQumran wereso concernedwith
and
thesestoriesofhiddentreasures, especiallywhythey saw fit
to engrave
themon copper,whichat thattimewas a costlymetal.... Atall events,this
guidetohiddentreasure is themostancientdocument ofitskindtohavebeen
found, tothehistorian
andis ofinterest offolk-lore.
The late AndrDupont-Sommerquotes Roland de Vaux as havingalfco

statedthatthe Copper Scrollwas the "whimsicalproductofa deranged
mind." (See the citationin A. Dupont-Sommer,Les Ecrits essniens
dcouvertsprs de la mer Morte,Paris: Payot,1959, p. 397.) By thus
castingdoubton the authenticityofwhatto all indicationsis a precious
HebrewtextoftheperiodoftheFirstRevolt,researchersmissedanother
183

important opportunity to reconsiderthe Qumran-Essene hypothesis,

whichinsteadtookon newdimensions as thediscoveries proceeded.
The archaeological teamsfoundno further manuscript caves in the
areatheywereinvestigating, and so terminated theexpedition (spring
1952).This,however, onlygavetheTa'amirehbedouinopportunity to
return tothevicinity ofQumran.Theybegantoexplorethemarlcaves
lyingjusttothesouthofthesettlement, andinthesummer ofthesame
yearpenetrated intowhatlaterbecameknownas QumranCave 4. Here
theymadea sensational discovery: approximately onemeterbeneathfhe
surfacewas a hugenumberoffragments fromwhathad been several
hundred Hebrewmanuscripts. WhenwordofthisreachedtheJordanian
sectorofJerusalem, another expedition wasmounted (September 1952),
and the archaeologists were able to findfragments of at least one
hundredadditional manuscripts in thesamecave.
The findsof Cave 4 were and remainthe high-water markof
manuscript discoveryin theJudaean wilderness.The fragments, intheir
thousands, were sortedand classified in Jerusalem, and then portionsof
thematerial wereassignedtoa teamofscholars foreventualpublication.
Three volumescontaining fragments of the Cave 4 manuscripts, in
additionto variousindividualfragments in
published journals, have so
farseen the light,and fromthem,as well as fromdescriptions of
still-unpublished material,it is possibleto gainan impression ofthe
striking varietyof textscomingfromthis cave: commentaries and
on
paraphrases many books of the Bible,apocalyptic visions,liturgical
works,apocryphal writingsbothknownand previously unknown, wis-
dom texts(in the styleof the Book of Proverbs), interpretationsof
Pentateuchal laws, messianic speculations, and even horoscopes and
puzzles.Thereis, in brief,everytypeand genreofliterature thatone
wouldhaveexpectedto be in thehandsofthePalestinian Jewsin the
periodbeforetheFirstRevolt,andmuchmorethatwas notexpected.
Yet,evenwhenthecontents ofCave 4 becameknown, thetheory of
Esseneorigindidnotseemtosuffer. Instead,scholars usedthenewtexts
to showthatEssenismhadbeen a yetmorecomprehensive movement
thanhadbeen supposedafterthediscovery ofthefirst cave.
Archaeologists working at the4Q site in Septemberof 1952 soon
foundanothermanuscript cave, 5Q, close by; and stillanotherone
nearby,6Q, whichthe bedouinhad exploredsome timeearlierand
emptiedof manuscript remains,was identified at approximately that
time.In addition toa totaloffifteen biblicalfragments, thetextsofthese
twocavesincludedvariousnewapocryphal andapocalyptic fragments as
well as a fewwritings ofsectarian character, notablyfragments ofthe
DamascusCovenant(discussedfurther in PartII ofthisessay).
Threeyearsafterthesediscoveries, in thespringof1955,archaeol-
184

ogistsdiscovered fourmorecavesin theareaofQumran(7Q-10Q),but

they contained onlya smallnumberofminusculefragments (including
a few in Greek).In Februaryof 1956 the indefatigable Ta'amireh,
however, locatedanother manuscript cave nearCave 3, to thenorthof
KhirbetQumran.This cave, 11Q, held some of the mostimportant
treasures discovered atQumran, including completescrollssuchas had
been foundin QumranCave 1. Amongthesefindswere an ancient
Aramaictranslation of a largeportionof the Book of Job; a scroll
containing extractsfrom the Book of Psalmsand otherdevotional
literature,bothfrom knownandunknown sources;a copyoftheBookof
Leviticusinpalaeo-Hebrew script;andotherwritings thathaveyettobe
published.
It is possiblethattheTempleScroll,thelatestoftheQumrantextsto
be foundand published,originally camefromthiscave,butitsactual
provenance continues to be cloaked in secrecy.Sixty-six columnsin
the
length, longest of the so
scrolls far discovered, it is a description of
a future Templein Jerusalem, Whoseanonymous authorhas theLord
rendertheimaginative descriptions in thefirstperson.The workis the
productof the fertilemind of an apocalypticist who attempteda
completedescription of ritualand group conduct in the days of the
envisionedTemple. While this scrollas well was assignedto the
Essenes,recentcriticalopinionhas risento challengethisview.(The
salientemerging viewshave been discussedby MichaelWise of the
University of Chicagoin his dissertation, to be publishednextyear,
"The TempleScroll:ItsComposition, Date,PurposeandProvenance.")
Withthediscovery ofQumranCave 11,theworldoflearning thought
thatthegreatperiodofdiscovery intheJudaeanwilderness hadcometo
an end.Butthiswas notthefinalchapterofthestory. In 1960and 1961
Israeliarchaeologists conducted a searchofthecavesinthewadislying
betweenMasadaahdEn-Gedi,andincavesofthewadiknownas Nahal
Hevertheydiscoveredstillmoreautograph documents oftheperiodof
BarKokhbaalongwithothermanuscripts, legal documents as well as
literary texts,ofthelatefirst andearlysecondcentury a.d.The discovery
of these textsprovedconclusively thatthe Jewshad takencare to
preserve their personal documents in antiquity,and thatthesewere
-
capable of survivalin the Judaeanwildernessbut once again no
connection wasmadebetweenthisfactandthenatureofthetextsfound
at Qumran.
After thisperiodofdiscovery in theBar Kokhbacaves,the Israeli
archaeologists turned theirattention toMasada,thegreatrockfortress in
the desertfirstbuilt in the days of AlexanderJannaeus,and then
developedbyHerodtoward theendofthefirst century b.c.Here,intwo
seasonsofdigging(Octoberto May 1964and November1964to April
185

1965)thearchaeologistsuncovered theentireareaofMasada,including
theportion ofitusedbythesicariiandrefugees from Jerusalem during
thefinalyearsofresistance
totheRomans(70-73a.D.),In theruinsofthe
lastresistancewerefound,besidesmanyartifacts oftheperiod,frag-
mentsoffourteen morescrolls,includingbiblicaltexts,partofEccle-
a fragment
siasticus, ofJubilees,and,mostremarkably, a portionofthe
so-called"Songs of the SabbathDay," knownalso as the "Angelic
Liturgy"- a workofa mystical
natureofwhichoverlapping portionshad
been foundin QumranCave 4 morethan a decade earlier.The
handwritings containedin thesescrollswereofthesamecharacter as
thosein the scrollsfoundat Qumran - but theyhad been foundat
Masada,quitefarawayfrom Qumrananda fortressneverknowntohave
beena placewhereEsseneslived.YigaelYadinandhiscolleagueswere
infactnowlookingatthedecisiveevidencepointing tothetruehomeof
the manuscript findsof the Judaeanwilderness,but withoutfully
comprehending whattheyhadfound.
II
When,earlieron, someof the Qumranfragments of the "Angelic

Liturgy" werepublished, itwasinferredthattheworkimplieda special
calendardividing theyearintotwelvemonths ofthirtydays.Previously,
writers hadheldthatsucha calendarwas usedbytheEssenesclaimed
to be livingat Qumran,and thatit was peculiarto this sect. This
explanation, however,wouldhavebeendestroyed bytheunobstructed
recognition thatthevery same work was also found at Masada,manyof
whosedefenders camefrom Jerusalembeforeandfollowing theRoman
captureofthecityin 70 a.D.The discovery ofQumran-like fragmentsat
Masadacouldbythesametokenobviously damagetheQumran-Essene
hypothesis as a whole.
a
Thus, specialexplanation wasonceagainintroduced: thisparticular
scroll,and possiblyothersfoundat Masada,had a peculiarhistory -
eitherit alone,or withothers,was brought thereby noneotherthan
QumranEssenes,who, itwas claimed,joinedup withthedefenders in
the last fewyearsof the revolt.Whenoffering thisexplanation,its
proponents refrained
entirely from as muchas mentioning Jerusalem.
Yetthereis noevidenceeitherinJosephus orelsewherethatEssenes
in smallor largenumberjoined the Masada defenders; and forthis
reasonYigaelYadin,theeminent directoroftheexpedition, offered
the
defensethatJosephus hadwritten thatthecommander ofanothersector
during therevoltwasa certain JohntheEssene.The questionwasasked
whetherotherEssenes mightnot also have joined the revolt - and
186

answeredaffirmatively by reference to the fragment of the "Angelic

Liturgy" found at Masada.
This explanation, however,whileprotecting the theoryof special
connection betweentheQumrancavesand nearbysettlement, moved
against the known factofcapture ofMasada byJudaean sicarii and the
augmentation of theforcetherebyrefugees from thesiegeofJerusalem.
Moreover, it had theeffect ofpromoting thestandard hypothesis to a
pan-Qumran for
theoryaccounting virtually all of the finds of first-
century Hebrewmanuscripts in Palestine:findsnearJericho first
men-
tionedby Origen(see below pages 191-192)were said to be earlier
discoveries ofmanuscripts thattookplace at Qumran, thefragments of
eight hundred scrolls
found at Qumranalso,according to this theory,
originated there,and nowthe"AngelicLiturgy" fragment andperhaps
stillotherMasadatextswerelikewiseclaimedtocomefrom Qumran.By
thisviewtheHebrewliterature offirst-centuryPalestinian Jewsother
thanEssenes had virtually disappeared, while that of the (claimed)
QumranEsseneswas represented through thecenturies byat leastfour
discoveries thatcouldnotpossiblyhaveconsisted, all together, ofless
thana thousand manuscripts.
To acceptsuchproposalsseriatimand conjointly clearly,on careful
reflection, becomesdifficult. And yetwithoutthem,the one cogent
inference thatmaybe drawnfrom thepresenceoffirst-century Hebrew
manuscripts at Masada is that Jewish sicariiwho inhabited that site
possessedscrollsthattheyhadbrought thereaftertakingthefortress in
66 ad., whileotherJewstookscrollswiththem(in additionto basic
possessions)whentheywithdrew fromJerusalem to thatsite.In the
Masada excavations, surviving remnants of these possessionswere
discovered,includingeven such textsas the "AngelicLiturgy"that,
beforetheMasadadiscoveries, wereerroneously believedtohavehada
unique connection with Qumran.
Withoutrecourseto the special explanationof a bond between
Masada and Essenes fromQumran,the discoveriesat Masada thus
forcefully implytheactofremoval ofmanuscripts from Jerusalem during
the revolt.They indicatethatHebrew literary textswere deemed
preciousenoughtowarrant rescueduringperiodsofdanger.
It is notdifficulttoperceivewhythisnowobviousexplanation forthe
discovery of Hebrewmanuscripts in theJudaeanwildernesswas not
arrivedat whenthefindswerefirst uncovered. The potentforceofthe
Qumran-Essene hypothesis derives from theorder in whichthediscov-
eriesweremade.The seed oftheoriginalconceptwas plantedin the
veryfirst fewyearsofdiscovery immediately aftersomecolumnsofthe
"ManualofDiscipline"hadbeenread,andwasthereupon cultivated by
eminentscholars;subsequentfindsin thewilderness led to thetheory
187

beingnourished rather thanabandoned, andithasbynowtransformed

itselfintoa deeplyrootedtreeof manyfruitful branches.Only by
removing oneself to a of
plateau judgment distant from theexcitement
andsweepofeventsthatprevailedduring theyearsofdiscovery, andby
considering the totalityof findswithoutrespectto theiraccidental
chronological sequence,canonefullyappreciate theproblems inhering
in thetraditionalhypothesis orresolvethemwithan alternate explana-
tionoftheevidence.
The firstgravedifficulty has to do withidentification of Khirbet
Qumran as the main settlement ofEssenes in Palestine.The identifica-
tionwas first madeprimarily on thebasisofrulescontained in butone
ofthesevenoriginalscrolls,the"ManualofDiscipline."Laws ofthis
scrollhavingan Essenic flavorwere then connectedwith Pliny's
statementthatthesolitary andcelibateEsseneslivedwestoftheDead
Sea withonlythepalmtreesforcompany, andthatlyingbelowthemwas
En-Gedi.
Atfirst
itseemedlogicaltoinfer thattheKhirbet Qumransettlement,
locatednearthecaves,wasjustthissite,andthatEsseneslivingthere
hadhastily hiddenthe"ManualofDiscipline,"alongwithotherwritings
oftheirs,beforethearrivalofRomantroopsat the settlement. When
Khirbet was
Qumran excavated, however, variouselementsofa fortress-
likecomplexwererevealed,and thearchaeologists working at thesite
determined thatit had been stormed by Roman soldiers aftera hard-
fought battlethat included the undermining ofthe wallsand settingat
leastpartofthesiteon fire.The resisters wouldthushave had to be
members ofan armedtroop - preciselyunliketheEssenesas theyare
describedin theclassicalsources.
Thisfactdidnotdeterthearchaeologists from identifyingthesiteas
an Essene settlement. Theyinsteadproposedthatthe Essenes were
reallymoremilitaristic thantheyhadbeenportrayed; Josephus, afterall,
does describethatsameJohntheEssene as havingservedin thewar
againstRomeas a generalinchargeofoneofthefronts. Thislonelyand
exceptionalstatement was coupledwitharchaeological evidenceob-
tainedfrom an otherwise unidentified sitetorejectan essentialfeature
oftheclassicaldescription oftheEssenes- namely, theirpeace-loving
andnon-military nature.
In retrospect,thisprocessillustrates howtextscan be bentto the
needsofa rampant hypothesis. Butatthetime,theurgetofindthetraces
ofthelong-lost Essenicsect,whosemystique andreligious appealhave
been enhancedby a tradition of learnedand semi-learned writing
stretchingbacktothenineteenth century andearlier, waswhatmattered
most.
Thus,when- contrary to earlyexpectations - gravesof womenas
188

wellas menwerefoundin theancientcemetery lyingtotheeastofthe

ruinsofthe settlement, theexplanation was immediately offered that
Josephus(War,II, paragraph161) had describednot onlycelibate
Essenesbutalsoonegroupthatwasnotcelibate.CouldnottheQumran
sitehavebeen thatofsucha group,orat all eventsa kindofcomplex
community perhapswithcelibateEssenesat itscoreand non-celibate
Essenes livingin surrounding areas?Such was the idea thatleading
Qumran scholars in France and Americaproposedas earlyas 1958and
as lateas 1973.In championing thisview,theydidnotdeal withthefact
thatnoneoftheQumrantextswhatsoever espousedstrictcelibacy - a
problemwhoseburdenincreaseddramatically as thenumberoftexts
discovered rosefrom a mereseventomorethaneighthundred.
Withnosolidtextual basistosupport it,theideaofsucha community
or communities livingall together - so muchat variancewiththe
statement ofPlinyandso different fromthetheory first
propounded - did
cause a certainhesitation. Some writersbegan eschewingthe term
Essene,but,ratherthanrejectingthe fundamental hypothesis, they
maintained thatthegroupinhabiting thesitewas nevertheless a sectar-
ian one closelyrelatedto theEssenes.Others,whobecameawareof
passagesinQumrantextsnotinharmony withtheEsseneidentification,
beganfavoring newterms, characteristicallymaintaining on thebasisof
ideascontainedin certainofthescrolls,however, thattheQumransite
couldat all eventscontinuetobe calleda settlement ofsectarian Jews.
Thisseemingly leftintacttheconceptthattheQumranscrollshadbeen
written bymembers ofa singlesectlivingcloseto,orevenin,thecaves
wheretheyhadbeen found.
This new idea,however,createdstillanotherproblem.For,ifthe
inhabitants ofKhirbet Qumran hadbeenanother sectinancientJudaism
activelyengaged in the and
literary contemplative life,andifPlinywas
indeeda reliablesourceofinformation on theDead Sea area,whythen
wouldhe,in describing it,havementioned onlythecelibateEssenesto
theexclusionofall othersuchsectarian groups?
Another majordifficulty inthetraditional hypothesis derivesfrom the
factthatbetween1949and 1956thousands offragments from morethan
eighthundredadditionalHebrewscrollswere foundin caves above
Khirbet Qumran.The "ManualofDiscipline"andthesixotheroriginal
scrollsturned outtobe buta fewamongthesemanytexts - a fewthathad
by accident been found at the beginning of the periodof discovery.
Manyof the newlyfoundmanuscripts consistedof biblicalwritings,
remnants ofancientJewish literaturealreadyknowninGreektranslation
in the apocrypha and pseudepigrapha of the HebrewBible,writings
similartotheselatter, andstillothergenresofold Hebrewliterature not
previously known.Onlya smallfraction ofthetotality of scrollscon-
189

tainedlawsordoctrines thatmight be termed notoriously heterodox,let

aloneEssenic- evenwhencompared withtextsofearlyrabbinicJuda-
ism(suchas theMishnahand Tosefta), whichpost-dated theQumran
scrollsby as muchas twoto threecenturies. A largenumberof the
non-biblical textsare akinto- in factsometimes identicalwith - well-
known books of the apocryphalliterature, which have never been
demonstrated tohavebeenwritten bymembers ofa singlegrouporsect
withinancientpre-rabbinic Judaism.Amongthose Qumranscrolls
whose doctrinesmay be consideredheterodoxin comparison with
rabbinic Judaism ofthesecondandthirdcenturies a.D., two ofthemost
important are the "Manualof Discipline"and the "DamascusCove-
nant,"thelatter describingthemigration ofa groupofearlybelieversto
in
Damascus, Syria^ There areremarkable contradictions betweenideas
of the one scrolland the other,and theseconflicts alone disturbthe
conceptofa singlehomogeneous sectlivingin antiquity attheQumran
site.
Besidestheexplanation thatdifferent groupswithconflicting doc-
trinesmayhavebeen livingside by side at Qumran, severalproposals
have been offered to explainthisdifficulty. For example,it has been
claimedthattheevidencethatEsseneswrotethescrollsandwereliving
at theQumransiteis otherwise so strong thatitmustnowbe takenfor
granted thatitwastheywhoweremainly responsible forthewriting and
copying of the Jewishapocalyptic literature.Another proposal oftenput
forward is thata groupsuch as the one reflected in the "Damascus
Covenant"represented an offshootoftheQumransectorviceversa,the
contradictory doctrines being the result of innerdevelopments made
overcenturies. Stillanotherexplanation, which arose soon it
after was
realizedthatfragments ofthe "Damascus Covenant" were located at
Qumran,is thatthe wordDamascus,occurring in passages of the
"DamascusCovenant"thatdescribethemigration thereofa partyor
sect, is not to be taken atitsfacevalue but is rather a veiled metaphor for
Qumranitself. A morerecentexplanation, offered onlyafter manyyears
ofinvestigation ofthemanuscripts, is addressedprimarily to theques-
tionofthevariety andmutualcontradictions ofthetexts - namely, that
whileonemaypositthatitwastheEsseneswhowerelivingatQumran
and writing booksthere,theymayverywell also have copiedscrolls
whoseideastheydidnotthemselves accept,andmaywellhavebrought
in such scrollsfromoutsidetheirsettlement. All theseexplanations
assumethatthe"ManualofDiscipline"was thefundamental doctrinal
work of at least the main of at
body Jewsliving Qumran.
On carefulreflection, theseproposalsarenevertheless mostdifficult
to accept.No one has yet cogentlyexplainedwhyancientHebrew
writers shoulduse thegeographical termDamascus- whichin ancient
190

Hebrew and Greek literaturenever stands for any other place but
Damascus- forthe KhirbetQumransite located in the Judaeanwilder-
ness. Yet once it is admittedthatthe"Damascus Covenant"and some of
theotherscrollswere writtenelsewherethanat Qumran,itbecomes the
obligationof proponentsof thisview to demonstratethatcertainother
scrollswere indeed composed there- and forthis thereis no internal
evidence whatsoeverwithinthe textsthemselves.If,moreover,sectari-
ans havingconflicting doctrineswere indeed livingnextto one another,
did theythensharethesame "scriptorium" fromwhichthetextsclaimed
to have originatedat Qumranare said to have emanated?This cannotbe
seriouslybelieved. Norcan thesuggestionthattheEssenes, said byboth
Josephusand Philo to have numberedno morethanfourthousandsouls,
were the veryones responsibleforthe outpouring* of imaginativetexts
constituting theapocryphaland apocalypticliteratureofthe Palestinian
Jews.This is too vasta literature, withtoo manycontradictory outlooks
and pointsofview,to allow theidea ofitsoriginwithinanyone circleof
sectarians.The proposal that the ideas of the sect that migratedto
Damascus eitherderived fromor developed into those found in the
"Manual ofDiscipline" is likewiseextremely difficult toharmonizewith
thestriking contradictions betweenthesetwotexts.In the"Manual," for
example, there is much emphasis on the defilingpower of money,
whereasin the "Covenant"the possessionofwealthis notdiscouraged
but on the contrary assumed to be appropriate.The "Covenant" places
no emphasis on communal living, whereas this is ordained in the
"Manual." The sectsrepresentedbythesetwowritingsare thusfarmore
likelyto have been entirelyseparateones thanoffshoots ofeach other.
The troublingquestion thatthus arises is this: Insofaras Pliny's
descriptionof Essenic celibacy is notechoed in the "Manual of Disci-
pline" and not matchedby archaeologicaldiscoveriesat KhirbetQum-
ran, and since there are contradictory doctrinesin other heterodox
Qumran texts- which are themselves outweighedin numberby texts
that cannot be demonstratedby their contentsto be heterodoxor
sectarianat all- why must the "Manual of Discipline," accidentally
foundamongthefirst seven scrollsin 1947,stillbe assumedtohave been
theverydoctrinalworkwhose ideas were espoused bythepeople living
at the Qumransite?
A furthermajor difficulty with the traditionalhypothesisarises
because in 1949- thatis, almost immediatelyafteremergenceof the
theorywithits emphasison centrality of the site in the propagationof
-
Essenism OttoEissfeldtobservedthat,in a Syriacletter,the Nestorian
PatriarchTimotheus I of Seleucia (Baghdad, circa 800 a.d.) makes
referenceto the contemporary discoveryof Hebrew manuscriptsin a
cave "near Jericho."Timotheusstates thathe learned this factfrom
191

"trustworthy Jews"whohadconverted; theytoldhimthatthedogofa

hunting Arab had entered a cave and not come out."His master followed
himandfounda dwellingwithintherocks, in which weremanybooks.
The hunterwentto Jerusalem and informed theJews.Theycame in
throngs and found books of the Old Testament and othersin Hebrew
. . ."
script. Among these finds were "more than two hundredpsalmsof
-
David" thatis, othersbesides thosefoundin the biblicalBook of
Psalms.
Almostat thesametime,otherwriters pointedoutthattheprolific
ChurchauthorOrigen,in themiddleofthethirdcentury a.D.,had said
thattheGreekBibletranslation usedbyhimforthesixthcolumnofthe
Hexaplahadbeen"foundtogether withotherHebrewandGreekbooks
in a jar nearJericho"duringthe reignof Caracallasome fifty years
earlier.
Thustwoold sources,one ofthethirdcentury and theotherofthe
ninth, had called attention to the discoveryof Hebrew manuscripts near
Jericho, and at least thelarger of thesecaches had been foundin a cave.
After thesestatements becameknown,Qumranscholarsproposedthat
theyimpliedtherehad been earlierdiscoveriesat Qumranitself.
Timotheusas well as Origenhad only spokenimprecisely of the
discoveries havingtakenplace "nearJericho." In thisexplanation, the
apparent underlying reasonforthefinding ofhundreds ofscrollsin the
sameareaovera millennium laterwas thattheJewsofJerusalem who
hadcometothecavesitehadsimplynotdiscovered all themanuscripts
hiddenin varioussurrounding caves.
However,thenewsofthefindhad,according toTimotheus's infor-
mants, moved "throngs" to come tothe site,and these were nothunting
bedouinbutbelievingJews.The idea thattheywouldhaveoverlooked
the possibility of finding otherancientand,to them,perhapssacred
Hebrewscrollsin thenearbycaves is thusdifficult to credit.Neither
Origen nor Timotheus statesthat thefindshad been made neartheshore
oftheDead Sea, whichis muchclosertoQumranthanJericho is- and
Origenin particular, who lived forsomeyearsin Palestineand was
intimately acquainted withitsgeography, knewthisfactwell.Thereare,
on theotherhand,cavesmuchnearertoJericho thanthoseat Qumran.
If one refrains fromsubjecting thewordsoftheseauthorsto a special
exegesis,itnowappearsmuchmorelikelythatoverthepastseventeen
centuries Hebrewmanuscripts werediscoverednotonlyin thesingle
area of Qumran,but in at least threehidingplaces in the wider
neighborhood of Jericho.This in turnadverselyaffects the claimof
organic connection betweentheQumran settlement andthemanuscripts
ofthenearbycaves,insteadpointing toanother causeforthehidingof
manuscripts in theJudaeandesertin antiquity.
192

Some of these problemswith the theorymust have been at least

consideredin passing as researchersinvestigatedthe manuscriptsand
the Qumransite duringthe firstdecade of discovery.To be sure, the
hypothesishad an intrinsicattraction* and so it was naturalforarchae-
ologistsworking at KhirbetQumran seek corroborating
to evidence for
the identification among the ruinstheywere uncovering.Being con-
vinced thatthe manuscriptshad actuallybeen composed at Qumran,
theysoughtto answerthe inevitablequestion,Wheremightthe textsof
thisEssene settlement have been produced?They discovereda roomof
thirteen-by-four metersthathad supporteda second storyof the same
dimensions,and in the debris of the lower room survivingfromthe
destructionof the second storywere the remainsof three mud-brick
tables covered with plasterand two inkwells.This no longer extant
second story,theyproposed,had been a scriptorium - thatis, a writing-
room of scribes such as is known to have been located in certain
medievalabbeys- wheretheQumranscrollswerewrittenorcopied. An
officiallysanctioned sign containingthe word Scriptoriumis today
stakedintothe groundat the site.
But considerthatsome writershave shown thattables of this kind
could have been used forcopyingscrollsonlywithgreatdifficulty, and
thatancientdepictionsofscribesdo notshowthemsittingat suchtables.
No fragment of parchmentor papyruswas foundin the debris of that
room, nor any tools of scribes,such as stylusesor line-markers. More-
over,unlike medieval scriptoria, the roomand debris are not situated
amongchambersor halls demonstrably showingsignsofacademic use.
In a communitywhose characteristics included a militarytower and
siege-walls, such a chamber seems far more likely to have been
meeting room or office,insofaras it was located adjacent to, and
extendingsouthwardfrom, thetower.The idea ofa scriptorium is hardly
warrantedeitherby the findsthatwere made in thatroom or by its
position.
Archaeologistsdid, however,findjars at the settlementof the same
kindas thosein whichscrollshad been storedin thcaves--a discovery
thatseemed to offerstrongsupportforthe Qumran-Essenehypothesis,
regardlessof its weak-aspects. And yet otherdiscoverieswere taking
place that,ifexaminedretrospectively in the lightofthe Masada finds,
would appear permanently to disqualifythathypothesisas a satisfactory
explanationofthephenomenonthat,stepby step,has now been brought
to light.
The firstof the new discoverieshad in factbeen initiatedin 1951,
with the findingof second-centuryBar Kokhba documentsat Wadi
Murabba'at.These texts,as those foundten years later in the wadis
inlandfromEn-Gedi, are original,documentary autographsratherthan
193

scribalcopies ofliterary texts.The differencein thehistoricalqualityof

the Bar Kokhba manuscriptsand that of the texts fromQumran is
demonstrated bythereferencesin theformer to genuinelocalitiesin the
Judaeanwilderness(forexample,BethMashko,En-Gedi,Herodes [that
is, Herodion], Jerusalem,Masada, Mead Hasidn [Fortressof the
Hasidim],!r Nahash,Qiryath'Arabaya,Mahoza and Petra),whereasthe
Qumranliteraryscrollscontainstatements onlyabouta fewwell-known
cities (i.e., Jerusalemand Damascus), never about Qumran or even
Jerichoor En-Gedi.
Thus, the Bar Kokhbadocumentsmade clear- or shouldhave made
clear- thatoriginalHebrewautographsofa documentary character, such
as personal and administrative lettersor deeds and contracts,could
indeed survivefromantiquityin the Judaeanwilderness.In this way
theyput a potentialspotlighton the factthatno substantiveparchment
or papyrustextof avowedlydocumentary characterhad been foundat
Qumran. This constitutes a graveembarrassment fortheQumran-Essene
hypothesis: if the scrolls were from Qumran and if,when it was heard
thatRomantroopswere approaching,these scrollswere gatheredup in
hastefromchambersofthesiteand fromitsscriptorium - whereone may
assume thatofficiallettersand otherdocumentsof the sect were also
produced- how could such documentshave been so carefullyexcluded
fromthe hidingprocess?One cannotthinkit likelythatthoseleadinga
laura or motherhouseof the Essenes, as KhirbetQumran has been
called, would have leftthedeeds and recordsofthe sectto perishin the
ruinswhile takingcare to hide away hundredsofliterarywritings.The
"Manual of Discipline," for example, speaks of 4he importanceof
recordingin writingthe spiritualrankand positionof each memberof
the orderdescribedin thattext,but no such list has ever been found
amongthe Qumranscrolls.
In addition,ifone assumesthatfora periodofbetweenone and two
hundred years the Qumran site was indeed the main settlementof
PalestinianEssenes and thattheyhad an organicconnectionwiththe
cave manuscripts, it is also highlyremarkablethatno documentsof a
personalnatureshould have been foundthere.Did notthe individual
Essenes writelettersto one another,and would theynothave wantedto
preservethemtothesame extentthattheJewsoftheBar-Kokhbaperiod
hoped to? And how can it be thatduringfourdecades of investigation
scholarsadheringto thetraditional hypothesishave notpointedoutthis
difficulty?
Moreover,amongthe severalintactparchmentscrollsand morethan
eight hundred fragmentary textsbelieved to have originatedat the
KhirbetQumran settlement,not one can be described as a literary
autograph.These textsare withoutexceptionscribalcopies of literary
194

works,sometimestwo or morestepsremovedfromthe originalauthors'

texts,now vanished, upon which they are based. A cardinal rule of
manuscriptinvestigation holds thatat the outsetone mustask whether
theworkbeing studiedis a copyor theauthor'soriginal - and itmustbe
treatedas a copy unless investigation demonstratesbeyondreasonable
doubt that it is the autograph. This has always been my practicein
studyingHebrew manuscripts, and to thebest ofmyknowledgeit is the
practice ofall otherswho make Hebrew historicalmanuscriptinvestiga-
tiontheirchiefpursuit.(In fact,the applicationof thisprincipleto the
studyoftheQumrantextsfirst led me to questionthetraditional view of
theirorigin.)
That no Qumran text on parchmentor papyrus has ever been
demonstratedto have autographicfeatures,while no otherhard evi-
dence existsto supporttheidea ofactivityofauthorsat KhirbetQumran,
directlycontravenesthe notion that the site was a motherhouseof
Essenes or any othersectarianswheretheirsalientideas were suppos-
edly created. On the basis of architectureof the scriptsand related
pieces of evidence, all thatmay be fairlyinferredis thatthe scrolls
constituteremnantsof librariescontainingscribal copies of literary
works,some ofwhichwere hiddenawayinjars furnished by inhabitants
ofthe region.
There is, in addition,one special Qumrantextthatcontainsinforma-
tionhighlydamagingto the Qumran-Essenehypothesis,and thatis the
manuscriptwrittenon coppermentionedearlier.This textis composed
ofinventoriesofpreciousitemshiddenawayin variousplaces in Judaea.
It containsa total of twelve columns,about five inventoriesto each,
writtenin ordinaryfirst-century Hebrew idiom- unlike most literary
Qumrantexts,whose language is earlier.That it is writtenon copper
indicates the authorsattachedimportanceto it. The writers(several
handwritings have been identifiedby the late David Wilmot)were not
professionalscribes,and the inventoriesare given withoutembellish-
ment.As in the Bar Kokhba documents,here also one findsgenuine
toponymsof the Judaean wilderness,includingJericho,Masada, the
Qidrongorge,the Achorvalley,and stillothernames.
Of decisive importanceis the factthat,in at least eightpassages of
this work,scrollsare mentionedas being buried adjacent to the trea-
sures.Whatis more,at the end ofthe Copper Scroll,one reads that"in
a pit ... to the northof Kohlat ... is hidden a copy of this writing
togetherwithitsexplanation."This showsclearlythattheCopper Scroll
was an autographtextwhose contentswere themselvescopied down,
apparentlywithaugmentations, into anotherscroll,and thatthe latter
was in turnhidden away forsafekeeping.
This textthushas salientfeaturesof a documentary character-but
195

the wealth-eschewingEssenes, said to have numberedno more than

fourthousandsouls, could hardlyhave had treasuresof the size de-
scribedin it. The palpable place oforiginofthe treasures,artifacts,
and
books referredto in the Copper Scroll is Jerusalem.The surmiseis
reasonable that,beforeand duringstages of the siege on the capital
between 68 and 70 a.D.,steps were takento removeat least partofthe
valued belongingsoftheinhabitants and ofthesizable treasuresthathad
accumulatedin the Temple by virtueofcontributions ofa largeJewish
diasporathatexistedeven then.
The dangerforthestandardhypothesisposed bythistextis manifest.
Thus,manywritershave feltobligedto rejectitsauthenticity altogether,
claimingthat,while ancient,it is an imaginaryand fictitiouswriting.On
the otherhand,almostall who accept it as genuine,while at the same
timecontinuingto holdto theQumran-Essenehypothesis, have claimed
thatthistextsimplyhad no connectionwiththe otherscrolls.That is,
while upholdingtheclaim ofa livingbond betweenthe parchmentand
papyrustextsand thesettlement below,thosein thislattercategorydeny
the possibilityof such a bond between the Copper Scroll and the
settlement.The formergroup,on the contrary, in orderto perseverein
the convictionthatthe site was inhabitedby Essenes, has to claim that
thestatements givenin theCopperScrollare untrue.Yetthenon-literary
natureofthistext,thedrycatalogingofthedeposits,and thefactthatthis
scrollwas foundin one oftheQumrancaves and in thesame first-century
ad. contextas theotherscrollsmakeeitheroftheseproposalsextremely
difficult
to accept.A fewwritersclaimthedescriptionsare authenticbut
thattheyreferonly to treasuresof the Essenes themselves - an idea,
however,contradictedby everytextso farknownrelatingeitherto the
numbersor the wealthofthissect.
What is more, the proposal to disregardthe Copper Scroll as a
significanttextforthe problemofQumranoriginscannotbe considered
in isolation,but must ratherbe seen in the contextof the totalityof
proposalsand assumptionsthathave been broughtforwardto support
the traditionalhypothesis.These include (but are not limitedto) the
following:
That peace-lovingEssenes guardeda militarysite and foughtas

warriorsthere.
ThatcelibateEssenes lived at ornearKhirbetQumraneven though
thereis no generalendorsementofcelibacytobe foundanywherein the
Qumranmanuscripts.
That two types of Essenes, marryingand non-marrying, both
inhabitedareas nearthe KhirbetQumransite at the same time,and that
Plinysimplymentionedonlythe celibate ones.
196

That the fourthousandEssenes describedby Josephusand Philo

were in realitya muchmoreimportant sectthanhad been thought,being
the authorsofat least mostofthe apocalypticliteratureofthe Jews.
That in the Qumranfortress therewas a manuscript-writing room
whereEssene monkscomposedand copied texts,althoughnone ofthe
autographmanuscripts thatmightattesttothisliterary has ever
creativity
been found,and althoughthe roomidentifiedas this"scriptorium" was
notfoundto containa single scrapofparchmentwhen excavated.
That the Qumransettlementwas the "laura" or "motherhouse"of
theEssene movement, even thoughno legal deeds, letters,orotherbona
fidedocumentary evidenceattesting tothishave everbeen discovered-
and thatthe "Manual of Discipline" was the rule of conduct at the
motherhouse,even thoughtextsdescribingothermodes of heterodox
conducthave been foundamongthe Qumranscrolls.
That the mentionof "Damascus" in a manuscriptdescribingthe
migrationfan ancientsect to thatcityis reallyan allusion to Qumran,
and thatdescriptionsofthediscoveryofmanuscripts nearJerichoduring
the firstmillenniuma.d. were in factallusions to such discoveriesin
earliertimesalso at Qumran.
That the singleQumranscrollinscribedon copperand describing,
in straightforward bookkeepingfashion,the burial of treasuresand
scrollsin theJudaeanwildernessis eithera mendaciousor an irrelevant
document - while scrollsfoundat Masada did notnecessarilycome from
Jerusalemat all but rather,at least in part,fromQumran,being brought
thereby Essenes seekingrefugefromthe Romanonslaught.
Taken collectively,these claims constitutean impossiblecombina-

tion of ideas severelydamagingto the traditionaltheoryof Qumran
origins.Whatis more,theCopper Scroll,once itscontentsare takeninto
considerationin thelightofthe Masada discoveriesand otherevidence,
makesthe mentalgymnastics requiredto sustainthe traditional
hypoth-
esis unnecessaryand obsolete,whileat thesame timepointingclearlyto
the Jerusalemoriginofall ofthe finds.
One of the most strikingpassages in the Copper Scroll is the
statement(firstseven lines of Column VII) thatone is to dig at the
northernopening of the "Cave of the Pillar" threecubits downward,
wherean amphoracontaininga book will be foundand, underneathit,
forty-two silvertalents.This passage,strikingly,followsupon anotherto
theeflFectthatthirty-two talentsare in a tomblocatedat the"Brookofthe
Dome ... as [one is] comingfromJerichoto Sekhakha."The Cave ofthe
Pillar was evidentlysituatedbetween Jerichoand Sekhakha,an other-
wise unknownplace thatcould hardlyhave been more than several
kilometersfromJericho.The passage clearlyrefersto the hidingof a
197

book in a cave near Jericho,but at the same timeit was not one of the
caves above Qumran,as the lattersite is too farfromJerichoto be
identifiablewith Sekhakha. Moreover^there is a statementat the
beginningof Column VIII of the Copper Scroll thatbooks are hidden
along with ritualvessels at an aqueduct also apparentlylocated near
Jericho.
These documentary statementsremarkably parallel those of Origen
and TimotheusregardingthediscoveryofHebrew manuscripts nearthe
same city- butbecause theplaces mentionedin theCopper Scrollmust
be muchcloserto JerichothanQumranis, theymake the interpretation
thatthe findsreportedby Origenand Timotheuswere earlierdiscover-
ies ofmanuscripts at Qumranmoredoubtfulstill.Whatemergesis that,
at sometimein thefirst century, Hebrewmanuscripts werehiddenaway
not only in the Qumran caves but in various places in the Judaean
wilderness and the plain of Jericho;the burial of artifactsof great
materialvalue quite obviouslyemanatingfromJerusalemtookplace in
the same area at the same time.The statementsof Origen,Timotheus,
and the anonymousauthorsofthe Copper Scrollthusall togethershow
the arbitrary and untenablenatureof the hypothesisthatthe scrolls
foundin thecaves at Qumranbelongeduniquelyto sectariansostensibly
occupyingthe nearbysettlement.On the contrary, when broughtto-
getherthese statementsnecessarilygeneratethe conclusion thatthe
Qumranmanuscriptswere partof a yetlargercollectionof scrollsand
thattheirconcealmentwas owingto a cause entirelydifferent fromthe
one proposed by supportersof the Qumran-Essenehypothesis.This
cause is clearlyrevealedby the Masada discoveries.
At least fromthe time of the subjugationof Galilee, manyof the
inhabitantsofJerusalemmusthave made efforts to sequesterthe city's
wealthas well as literatureand otherpossessionsof a spiritualnature.
They would have acted no differently thanhave othercitiesundersiege
orsoon tobe attacked.As we knowfromJosephus(WarIV.121-128),the
Jerusalemites had ample warningoftheintentions oftheRomans.In the
intervalbetweenthefallofGalilee (Nov. 67 ad.) and theopeningstages
ofthesiege on thecapital,however,Jerusalemites werefreetocomeand
as
go theywished, and even during the siege had access to territories
outside the walls. (For this reason Titus decided to build a new
siege-wallentirelysurrounding the cityin the springof70 a.D.). Those
chargedwithhidingartifacts ofimportance would clearlyhave soughtto
do so in areas the Romansdid not yet control;but by the summerof
68 a.D. theonlysuchterritory was thatportionofJudaealyingto theeast
and southof the city- thatarea, in otherwords,where Hebrew scrolls
were discoveredin the third,ninth,and twentiethcenturies.
The configuration of details thatthusemergesis the following:On
198

the one hand therewas the pressingsituationofthe Jewsin Jerusalem

in 69 and 70 a.D., while on the otherthereexiststhe phenomenonof
discovery,and thus of priorhiding,of manuscriptsin caves both near
Jerichoand Wadi Qumran.In addition,the Masada manuscriptdiscov-
eries ineluctblylead back toward the capital. The Copper Scroll
describes the hiding of various treasuresin certain specificplaces,
mentionedby name,thattheauthorlocatedwithinand nearsome ofthe
wadis leading out fromJerusalemintothe Judaeanwilderness.
Thus we see thattheveryphenomenathatconstitute graveanomalies
in theQumran-Essenehypothesisare thosefactsthatpointemphatically
to the scrolls' Jerusalemorigin.The reason no autographsof literary
worksbut onlycopies have been foundat Qumranis thatthe writings
came fromlibraries;the greatnumberofscrollremnantspointsto their
originin a largecenteroflearningand studyin Hellenisticand Roman
Palestine, such as only Jerusalemwas before 70 a.d. Timotheus's
ninth-century description("a dwelling withinthe rocks ... in which
were manybooks") likewiseindicatesthatthescrollsfoundnearJericho
were froma libraryor librariesoriginatingin a spiritualcenter.That
these collections do not derive fromany one sect is shown by the
conflicting doctrinesand because scrollshavingno demonstrably sec-
tarian bias far outweigh those that do. If original lettersand legal
documentshave not been foundat Qumran- in contrastto the discov-
eries of the Bar Kokhbaperiod- it is forthe verysame reasonthatthe
Qumran scrolls derive fromlibrariesratherthan fromarchives.The
archivesofJerusalemhad been destroyedby firein 66 a.D.,duringthe
inter-factional striferaging there at that time- which Josephus has
describedin vividdetail.Because oftheloss ofthesearchivalrecords,no
documentarytextsof the years immediatelybefore 70 a.D., but only
remnantsofthe librariesthatevidentlyabounded in thecity,have been
foundsubsequentlyin the Judaeanwilderness.
Thus,thetotalevidence,accumulatedafterfourdecades ofdiscovery
and investigation, no longerwarrantsacquiescence in thetheoryformu-
lated at the very outsetofthe Qumrandiscoveriesthatthe manuscripts
belonged to a sect,whetherof Essenes or others,livingat the Khirbet
Qumran site. Rather,the evidence now indicates the much wider
phenomenonof concealmentof manuscriptsin caves throughoutthe
Judaeanwilderness,as well as the removalofothersuch manuscripts to
Masada, duringthewarwithRomeof 67-73 a.d. The greatabundanceof
hidden books and treasuresas well as the geographicalconfiguration of
discoveriesare factsthatpointdirectlyto Jerusalemas the centerofthe
activityofconcealment,and thatrequirean explanationforthatconceal-
mentin consonancewithhistoricaleventstakingplace thereat thetime.
The one major event that could possibly have impelled the Jerusa-
199

lemitesto conceal theirbooksand treasureswas theRomansiege on the

cityand the circumstances thatpreceded it.
There is no reason to believe thatthe writingshidden away were
createdby any one sect in ancientJudaism.Rather,it becomes evident
bythediversityoftheirideas thatthescrollsrepresentvariousaspectsof
the actual state of Judaismat that time- with all its sectarianand
heterodoxcomplexities;and theyprovethatthe Hebrew authorsat the
turnof the era had become greatlyconcernedwitheschatologicaland
messianicthemes.The scrollswere writtena centuryand morebefore
the age of the Tannaiticmasterswho molded rabbinicJudaismin the
wake ofthe destructionofthe Second Temple, and thusreflectaspects
of religiousand social thinkingnot characteristicof rabbinicJudaism.
This thinking findsitsecho in some ofthewritingsoftheapocryphaand
pseudepigraphacreated by intertestamental Judaismduringthe two
centuriesbeforethe war withRome,but it now emergesas a farmore
complex,richlytextured, and subtlephenomenonthanwhatwas known.
The ideas preservedin thesetextsshowclearlythatthescrollscould not
have been mereliterary relicsofa smallfringesect,butratherrepresent
writings of the Jewishpeople as a whole in an age when Judaismwas
undergoingchange,rethinking, and oftenturbulentdevelopment.They
are an integralpartofthe literaryheritageofthatpeople in itsperiodof
developmentbeforetheriseofChristianity, and,as such,are manifestly
offargreatervalue forknowledgeofthe historyofculturethanwriters
have been wontto suggest.
Ill
In the decade thathas passed since I began publishingmyviews on

the Qumran-Essenehypothesisand the Jerusalemoriginofthe scrolls,
guardiansofthetraditional theoryhave expendedlittleeffort to respond
to criticismor to resolvethe contradictionsinheringin thattheory.It is
as thougha need were being met throughinsistencethatthose many
writings came fromthatsmallband ofdevoutsectarians,as if- to borrow
an apt metaphorfromE. R. Dodds's discussionof "Orphism"in The
Greeksand the Irrational- unrealizedspiritualaspirationswere in our
own time being projected,unconsciouslyor not, onto the screen of
antiquity.So deeply is the belief in the Essene originof the scrolls
embedded in contemporary scholarlyconsciousness,and so widely
circulatedin print,thatit seems notto standin need ofprotectionfrom
criticalinquiry.Even when, as has been happeningwith increasing
frequency,the termEssene is, subtlyor otherwise,changed to "sec-
tarian"in scholarlytreatment ofthescrolls'origins,theunderlying view
thatall of these textsemanated froma single heterodoxcommunity
200

livingin a remoteoutpostoftheJudaeanwildernessremainsunchanged,
the contradictions in thisview being metmainlywithsilence.
This may be seen, for example, in the treatmentof a recently
published Qumran text of great importance,the so-called "Angelic
Liturgy"or "Song oftheSabbathSacrifice."Publicationofthistext,as of
a considerable number of other non-biblicalQumran writings,was
entrustedmorethanthirty yearsago to JohnStrugnell.Mostofthetexts
in his jurisdictionhave yetto appear,but some have been entrustedto
studentsofhis forpublicationin the formofdoctoraldissertations, and
the "Angelic Liturgy"is one of these. (We leave aside the question
whetherthese unpublishedtextsshould appropriatelyhave been as-
signedto doctoralcandidatesofanyoftheoriginalteammembers,when
to thisday productivescholarswho by chance had no connectionwith
thatoriginalteamare notallowed to studythem.)The "AngelicLiturgy"
was published only a few years ago by Carol Newsom (Songs of the
Sabbath Sacrifice:A CriticalEdition,1985). It was thisscroll,ofwhich
a fragmentary copywas discoveredalso at Masada,thatled Yigael Yadin,
shortly afterthediscovery,to suggestthatEssenes fromQumranbrought
at least this fragment there,but perhaps also othersfoundat Masada.
Edmund Wilson then seconded and developed this idea in The Dead
Sea Scrollsy1947-1969. NeitherYadin norotherscholars,norWilson,as
much as hinted at the possibilitythatrefugeesfromJerusalem,who
formedthemaingroupofMasada's defenders,broughtthesescrollswith
themto Masada. In fact,use ofthetermJerusalemis studiouslyavoided
by all adherentsof the traditionalhypothesiswhen dealing with the
Masada texts.
Now in Carol Newsom's studyofthe "AngelicLiturgy"she poses a
revealing question. "One must ask of every manuscriptfound a
Qumran," she states, "whether it is a compositionof the Qumran
community itselfor a pre-Qumrancompositioncopied and preservedin
the Qumranlibrary."
Newsom thus excludes fromconsideration,and refrainsfrommen-
tioning,the hypothesisofJerusalemoriginofthe scrolls.The important
question provoked by the discovery of fragmentsof the "Angelic
Liturgy"at Masada is relegatedby Newsomto a note (page 74, note 11)
where,referring to the view ofYadin,she statesthatthe "presence ofa
copy of the ['AngelicLiturgy']at Masada is perhapsbest explainedby
assumingthatitwas takentherebya memberoftheQumrancommunity
who participatedin the revoltagainstRome. . . ." The salientquestion,
necessarilyrequiringextensiveexaminationin a chapteron the prove-
nance ofthistext,is thusrelegatedto a footnote, again withoutmention
of
oftheproblem Jerusalem;yet with an endorsement oftheexplanation
offered by Yadin thatpuzzlinglylacksenthusiasm. ofthishas caused
All
201

so notablea Qumranologist as F. Garcia-Martinez toraisethequestionof

adequacy of the author's treatment of this problem(see Bblica 69
[1988],pages138-146).Garcia-Martinez himself claimsthatsatisfactory
answersin responsetotheJerusalem hypothesis, andcogently explain-
ingon another basisthepresenceofQumranfragments at Masada,are
available,buthe has yettoputthemintoprint.
Garcia-Martinez is one ofthebandofscholarsthatattendeda new
kindofconference on theDead Sea scrollsheldin thespringof 1987
underthesponsorship ofthePolishAcademyofSciencesin Cracow.
Unlikeanypreceding conference ofwhichI amaware,thisonedaredto
setasidethetreatment oftheQumran-Essene hypothesis as an axiomatic
truth andtoconsiderat lengththetheory ofJerusalem origin.It willbe
followedbyanotherconference underthesamesponsorship laterthis
year,whenthefundamental problemwillbe further explored.Atleast
somescholarshavebeguntotalkwithoneanother aboutthisissue,and
it is ofgreatinterest thatit shouldbe in Poland,ofall theEuropean
countries,thatthedebateis nowencouraged.
A mainthemeoftheforthcoming conference in Cracow - whichwill
focuson the personality of a charismatic figuredescribedin several
Qumrantexts-bearsthetitle"The TeacherofRighteousness and His
Role in theQumranTexts."Noticing thelastwordofthetitle - which
impliesa certaindistancing fromthetraditional notionthatthetexts
necessarilyoriginated in a singlesectarian community - theorganizers
ofanother Europeanconference (tobe heldat theQumranInstitute in
Groningen) nowrespondwitha titleoftheirown:"TheTextsofQumran
and the Originsof the Community." This title,and the Groningen
thus
conference, themselves turnintoan effort tobolsterthetraditional
hypothesis.The debatewillfocus,according totheannouncement from
Groningen, onlyon whether the"Community" ultimately originated in
Palestineor (as one writer has nowcometo believe)in Babylonia;its
existenceis tenaciously clungtoas a foregone conclusion.
On theotherhand,in France - so oftena crucibleofnewideas- the
onlyQumranologist to breakhis silencein the faceof the emerging
problemhas up to nowbeen E. M. Laperrousaz, a studentofthelate
AndrDupont-Sommer andoneofthelastsurviving Frenchscholarsto
havetakenpartin theoriginalexcavations. Laperrousaz, responding to
my French study ofthe subject(Annales:Economies, Socits,Civilisa-
tions,Sept.-Oct.1985,pages1133-1149),attempts toprotect thetradi-
tionalhypothesis onlywithtraditional explanations- andvirtually with-
out considering the theoryofJerusalem originas its alternative. His
defenseandmyreplytohimhaveappearedrelatively recently{Annales,
Nov.-Dec.1987,pages1305-1320),andinterested readerswill-beable
tojudgeforthemselves whether hiseffortstoprotect thetraditional view
havebeen successful.
202

The recentFrenchtranslation ofintertestamental writingspublished

in the Pliade series (La Bible. Ecrits Intertestamentaires, NRF-
Gallimard,1987) presents those not
writings according to theirvarious
themesor genresbut ratheras two distinctgroups:thosediscoveredat
Qumranand those knownbeforehand - an awkwardnessarisingsolely
fromthe editors'fundamentalbelief in the special, sectariannatureof
Qumranand themanuscripts foundin thecaves. Some ofthewritingsof
the apocryphaand pseudepigraphahave (as mentionedabove) turned
up, fragmentarily, amongthe Qumranscrolls,and forthe editorsthese
themselvesbecome Essene writings, even thoughshowingno affinities
withEssene doctrinesas describedin theclassical sources.The authors
do notas muchas raise the possibilitythatthe claimed sectariansmight
have had otherbooks in theirpossession besides theirown heterodox
writings.The failureofthe editorsto deal in theirintroduction withthe
hypothesisof Jerusalemoriginhas been bravelyqueried by a recent
reviewer(J.-L.Schlegel in Le Monde, Dec. 25, 1987,page 13), but the
manyreadersofthe Ecrits Intertestamentaires who are unawareofthe
reviewand thedebate inAnnaleswill,in effect, be inducedtoassimilate
a no longertenablehypothesisofQumranorigins,presentedin theform
of a serious and beautifullyprintedtranslationof the intertestamental
writings.
A similartreatmentcharacterizesthe new edition of G. Vermes's
English translationof the Qumranwritings(The Dead Sea Scrolls in
English, Penguin,1987).Vermesin his introduction continuestoportray
the existenceofa sectariancommunity at Qumranas a givenfact.Atthe
same timehe avoids dealing withmostofthe substantiveproblemsfor
thishypothesisnow broughtintothe open. In fact,the authorrefrains
even fromincludingin his worka translation ofthe Copper Scroll. He
does discuss thistextin a briefappendix,but claims,in explainingits
non-appearancein his book,thatit "does notfallwithinthe scope ofthe
presentbook since it is a non-religiousdocument"(page 308). This is a
mostsurprisingexplanation,since Vermesnowherein his introduction
speaks of an intentto publish only the religious writingsfound at
Qumran,and indeed muchofthe introduction is givenoverto historical
ratherthan strictlyreligiousquestions. Mightnot readers have been
allowed tojudge forthemselves,by studyofan Englishrenderingofthis
scroll,what its significancemightbe forthe question of why so many
writingswere hidden in the Judaeanwildernessjust at the timeof the
war withRome?
Duringthe past fewyears,anothermanuscriptofhighlyinteresting
contenthas been adduced to bolsterthe traditionalview of Qumran
origins.This manuscript,"Some of the Deeds of the Torah," or MMT
afterthe initialsofits Hebrew title,is anotherofthe groupentrustedto
203

John Strugnell.The text is not yet published, but it is clear from

descriptionsso faravailable thatthe basic claim of the editors,to the
effectthat it fitssatisfactorily into the frameworkof the traditional
hypothesis,is withoutfoundation. This maybe seen fromthediscussion
appearing in theJerusalem Post magazineofJune14, 1985. The article
states,"Amongthe mass of materialfromQumran,no letterhas ever
before been identified.This has led one scrolls scholar to question
whetherthe documentswere in factfroma local Qumranarchive,since
suchan archivemightbe expectedtoincludecorrespondence.However,
[theeditorsofthetext]maintainthattheuse ofthesecondpersonclearly
establishestheirdocumentas a letter."
Readers followingthe controversy over the originsof the Qumran
scrolls would of course be led to understandthis as referring to my
explanationoftheirorigin,and bythewordingofthestatement mightbe
easilypersuadedto believe thatthe new Qumrantextin some wayputs
an end to the problem.The new text,however,is no more a genuine
"document"or "letter"thanare anyofthe otherQumrantexts.While a
fulleditionof the new manuscriptfragments is not yet available, it is
evident, from both the article'sdescription and an accompanyingpho-
tograph of a partof the text,thatthe editorshave simplyidentifieda
literaryepistle,such as those foundforexample in the Apocryphaand
theNew Testament - and nottheoriginalepistlebutfragments ofscribal
copies of it.
My criticism,however,has been unambiguousfromthe beginning.
No original legal instruments, personal letters,or other autograph
documents - such as those discoveredof the Bar Kokhba period- nor
anyautographs(as opposed to scribalcopies) ofliterary textshave,with
theexceptionoftheCopper Scroll,everbeen foundat Qumran;and that
includesthesenew fragments as well (whichone oftheeditorswas good
enough to show me severalyearsago at the RockefellerMuseum).The
lack of such autographtextscontinuesto jeopardize the hypothesisof
Qumran-Esseneorigins.If the site were indeed the motherhouseof a
sectarianmovementfortwo hundredand moreyearswhereEssene (or
other)sectarianscreateddoctrinesand literature oftheirmovement,one
would expect to findsome specificindicationof such originalactivity
amongthehundredsofmanuscript finds.The new fragments are merely
scribalcopies ofa literarytext,as are all oftheotherQumrantextsso far
knownexceptthe Copper Scroll.
What is more, the effortsof the editorsof the new fragments to
harmonizethe contentsof the epistle specificallywith the Qumran-
Essene hypothesisraise puzzling new questions. For example, the
articlestatesthatthetext"is astonishingless foritscontentsthanforits
writerand addressee"- but laterstatesthatthe "opening salutationis
204

missing.This presumablyincluded the identitiesof both sender and

addressee." Thus it is onlythe hypothesisofthe text'seditors(namely,
thatthe writerwas the Teacher ofRighteousnessand the addressee the
"WickedPriest"mentionedin otherpassages ofthe Qumrantexts)that
may legitimatelybe called astonishing.No personalitiesat all are
mentionedby name in the new text.The articlealso assertsthatthe
authorof the text"spells out the religiousrules . . . followedby the
breakawaysectat Qumran,"and yetlateron statesthat,accordingto the
curatorof the Shrine of the Book, "the [twenty]specificdifferences
listedare all new [myitalics]butno moresignificant thanthedifferences
already known." How is one to fathomthis conclusion? If notone ofthe
religious rules of the new manuscript is identical with those in other
Qumrantexts,ifthe identityofneitherthe "sender" northe "recipient"
ofthe epistle is actuallyknown,and ifin additionthereis no geograph-
ical termin the textthatwould localize eitherof them,then by what
legitimacyis the conclusiondrawnthatthe textis doctrinally relatedto
otherscrollsofa heterodoxcharacterfoundin theQumrancaves, or that
itoriginatedat theQumranfortress? Thatat leastthreeofthelaws in the
new textare, as the articleitselfsomewhatobtuselyadmits,identical
withlegal positionsheld by the Sadducees, while none whatsoevercan
be comparedwith legal rules specificallyattributableto the Essenes,
clearly points to a conclusion much different than that urged in the
JerusalemPost article.Without forcedexegesis, the new manuscript
simplyillustratesthe doctrinaldiversityofthe scrolls.
The articlein theJerusalemPostdeals withthetraditional hypothesis
as a series of facts,notas a hypothesis.Thus it states:"The archaeolo-
gistswould in timerecognizethatQumranhad been theheadquartersof
the sect which wrote the scrolls.. . . Cave Four had been the sect's
library.. . ." The fairnessof these assertionsis doubtful.There is
obviouslya greatdifference between attributing a theoryto a groupor
even a preponderanceof scholars,and treatingit as thoughit were an
established fact.For this reason particularly, it is surprisingthatthe
curatorof the Shrine of the Book- where many of the scrolls are
housed- appears in the JerusalemPost article not as an objective
observerbut as one activelysupportingthe editorsof the new textin
theirparticularand, at the least,questionableposition.While museum
curatorsare fullyentitledto theirviews as individuals,this obviously
does notabsolve thedirectorsoftheIsrael Museum,ofwhichthe Shrine
is a part,ofthebasic responsibility ofdescribingthe Dead Sea scrollson
exhibitin an objectivewayand,contrary to thepresentpractice,without
portraying any particulartheory Qumranoriginsas a given fact.The
of
museologicalspilloverofthe currenttreatment is obviousin the catalog
of the recentexhibitionof Hebrew manuscriptsand books held at the
205

New YorkPublic Library(A Sign and a Witness - 2000 Years ofHebrew

Books and IlluminatedManuscripts,1988). The public can hardlybe
said to be well servedby the factthatthe chapterin thisworkdevoted
to thescrollskeeps thequestionoftheirJerusalemorigina secret,while
treatingthe traditionaltheoryas an uncontestedtruth.
Whythistreatment has untilnow almostuniversallybeen accorded
the Qumran-Essenehypothesisis notdifficult to fathom.In the preced-
ing pages, the unfoldingprocess of discoveryhas been tracedthatled
scholarsfirstto createthe hypothesisand then,withtheirstrongassent
frozenintoprint,to seek to enhance it even as contradictory evidence
beganemerging.The doctoraldissertations, learnedessays,and booksof
maturewritersforwhichthathypothesishas servedas the fundamental
axiomare now legion,and acquiescence in itapproachesthatofa virtual
articleoffaith.Scholarsin generalare no different thanothermen and
women in being loath to change theirideas, particularly if theyhave
garneredfame or recognitionfor having expressed them; they are
equally loath to see those ideas challenged.And when generalagree-
ment to a particulartheorysolidifies,one cannot but gain a certain
comfortthroughjoining in its acclaim. All the more is this trueof the
ideas created in the wake of discoveryof the Qumranscrolls- manu-
scriptsfoundin the land ofthe Bible and imposingthemselves,by the
new factoftheirbeing,on traditionalstructures ofbeliefthathad been
worked out and monumentalizedin the Western world's religious
traditionsoverthe long course ofcenturies.
The accumulateddiscoveriesofrecentdecades now beat againstthe
walls protectingthose structures. All serious studentsof the scrolls-
hidden away, it will be remembered,in approximately 69 a.d.- know
thatnotone fragment ofanyofthe Gospels is foundamongthem.They
likewiseknowthatnotone rabbinicdictum - thatis, ofthekindthought
to have been popularby the turnof the era- is representedin any of
those texts. If early Palestinian Christianityand rabbinic Judaism
already existed as movementsbefore the destructionof the Second
JewishCommonwealth in 70 a.D.,as is commonlybelieved,thereis at all
eventsnotthe least snatchofa sayingattributable to eithermovement
amongtheQumranscrolls.This obliges one to ask whethertheabsence
is because all ofthe newlyfoundscrollswere createdby a small group
of celibate monkslivingin the desertwho neitherwantednorhad the
need to read the wordsand sayingsofthesenew movements-or (ifnot
foran as yet unfathomedreason) because they did not yet exist as
movementsorwereonlythencomingintobeing,as thesacrificial cultof
ancient Judaismcrumbledunder the weight of the Roman military
success.It is fairto saythatbothbyinstinctand training thevastmajority
ofscholarsdealingwiththe Qumrantextswould,ifpressed,opt forthe
206

firstalternative,which is in factwhathas happened. Yet thisdoes not

mean thatthe scientificpalatabilityofthatoptionhas been accordingly
enhanced. Faith and historicalinvestigationdo not always work in
harmonywithone another.
Whatthescrollsdo contain,amongothercompositions, are manynew
worksin Hebrew thatstronglyresemble the Jewishintertestamental
writings- writingsthateventuallylosttheirpopularityamongtheJews,
are not even taughtin manyinstitutions ofJewishlearning(surprising
and regrettableas that may be), and have in the main survivedin
translationsappended, paradoxically,to Christianbut not to Jewish
Bibles. These and othernew textsfromQumranhave made possible a
muchfullerreconstruction oftheJudaismofthatperiod,whichin many
ways was radicallydifferent frombothits biblical predecessorand the
rabbinicJudaismthatfollowed.The ideas ofthisintermediate Judaism
are notalwaysfamiliarorcomforting, and sometimestheyeven startle,or
inspirerepugnance.But theyare therenevertheless,and the existential
realityofthatJudaismis beyondquestion.Whetheruniversityscholars
will continueindefinitely to makethecontentsofthosetextsseem to be
the corpusofbeliefsofa minority sect isolatedin the barrenreachesof
the Judaeanwildernessis a questionwhose answeris stilltoo earlyto
venture.It is, however,becomingobviousthatwhile the problemsand
contradictions inheringin the traditionalhypothesiscontinueto fester,
traditionalQumranologistshave yet to offera cogentrefutation of the
theoryof Jerusalemorigin.And much depends on the outcome- our
understandingof Christianorigins and of ancient Judaismand its
evolution,how we mighthenceforth view and treattheintertestamental
writings, the mannerin whichthe Bible came to be whatit is, and still
otherissues that,forthoseconcernedwiththe questionofwho we are,
matterprofoundly.Thus, as the fifthdecade of Qumranresearchgets
underway,itwill be ofinterestto observein whichdirectionthedebate
proceeds.
BarbaraTuchman
1912-1989
Member,The American Scholar Editerai Board,
1979-1985
207


The Dead Sea Scroll (A Review)

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

The Dead Sea Scroll (A Review)

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Perspective

Author(s): NORMAN GOLB

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

CHANCE DISCOVERY OF SEVEN ANCIENT SCROLLS in 1947

NORMAN GOLB is the Ludwig RosenbergerProfessorofJewishHistoryand Civili-

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

lyingbelowthearea ofthecaves on theeasternside oftheQumran

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

exegesis,all current evidenceleads to theconclusionthatthe scrolls

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

knownfromdifferent literary sources,theplace of settlement of this

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

"ManualofDiscipline."A fewfragments ofthelatterwererelatively

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

fromthe Second JewishRevoltagainstRome (132-135 a.D.); they

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

returnedto the area of Qumran,and in Februaryof thatyear found

The late AndrDupont-Sommerquotes Roland de Vaux as havingalfco

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

important opportunity to reconsiderthe Qumran-Essene hypothesis,

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

ogistsdiscovered fourmorecavesin theareaofQumran(7Q-10Q),but

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

When,earlieron, someof the Qumranfragments of the "Angelic

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

answeredaffirmatively by reference to the fragment of the "Angelic

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

beingnourished rather thanabandoned, andithasbynowtransformed

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

wellas menwerefoundin theancientcemetery lyingtotheeastofthe

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

tainedlawsordoctrines thatmight be termed notoriously heterodox,let

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

"trustworthy Jews"whohadconverted; theytoldhimthatthedogofa

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

Some of these problemswith the theorymust have been at least

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

scribalcopies ofliterary texts.The differencein thehistoricalqualityof

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

works,sometimestwo or morestepsremovedfromthe originalauthors'

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

the wealth-eschewingEssenes, said to have numberedno more than

That peace-lovingEssenes guardeda militarysite and foughtas

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

That the fourthousandEssenes describedby Josephusand Philo

Taken collectively,these claims constitutean impossiblecombina-

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

the one hand therewas the pressingsituationofthe Jewsin Jerusalem

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

lemitesto conceal theirbooksand treasureswas theRomansiege on the

In the decade thathas passed since I began publishingmyviews on

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

so notablea Qumranologist as F. Garcia-Martinez toraisethequestionof

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

The recentFrenchtranslation ofintertestamental writingspublished

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

John Strugnell.The text is not yet published, but it is clear from

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM

missing.This presumablyincluded the identitiesof both sender and

This content downloaded on Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:24:00 PM