[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: orion-list Pliny Qumran analysis
That is an assumption. Qumran was not known nor is it yet
today (waiting for a good published excavation report
before I will be convinced of anything). Qumran was not
"known". Certainly it was on someones field survey. Glueck
may have even mentioned it. But it was as common as all the
other settlements in the area, and it was not yet
investigated to suggest when it was occupied. And if so
chances would be it would be considered Roman, at that time.
And it is an assuption that every one (other than the most
die hard archeologist) heard of Qumran.
Brad Harrison
> Then why didn't he? The ruins of Qumran were known at that time,
> correct? So it would seem to me that if he were inclined to identify
> the place as an Essene site, he would have done so. The fact that
> he apparently didn't seems significant. It seems to me that this is
> evidence supporting Greg's subtle contention that, were it not for
> the discovery of the scrolls, Qumran would not have been so
> identified.
>
> Dave Washburn
----------------------
blh198
blh198@soton.ac.uk
For private reply, e-mail to blh198 <blh198@soton.ac.uk>
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to majordomo@panda.mscc.huji.ac.il with
the message: "unsubscribe Orion." For more information on the Orion Center
or for Orion archives, visit our web site http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il.