[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: orion-list Essenes, Zias article, etc.

Dear Leo Abrami,

	I do not ignore the copper scroll; I have written (in JJS and
elsewhere) that is is an Essene list, including items for a future temple.
	Not everything at Masada, or Massadah, if you prefer two s's  :-) ,
was brought there by zealots; no S, Essene pesharim, nor MMT was found
there.
	You are of course free to believe as you choose, yet you presented
nothing that will erase Essene presence at Qumran.
	Indeed not all Qumran texts have one place of origin. Can we agree,
then, that Golb's claim that they all have a Jerusalem origin is dogma?

Dear David Suter,

	Thanks for your observation about de Vaux. Mr. Abrami may have
missed my point that de Vaux was a latercomer to the Essene realization,
after Sukenik, Brownlee, Dupont-Sommer, and many others. Also, was de Vaux
relying on his anthropologist rather than making such determinations
himself? Unfortunately, there are false myths and assumptions about the
history of Qumran scholarship. There never was a simple Christian vs.
Jewish split on such questions. Furthermore, temporary alliances of
conflicting ideological methodologies (types of Biblical minimalisms,
Biblical chauvinisms, feminisms, etc.) come and go. Qumran research has
benefited unquestionably from scholars Jewish, Christian, and other.

Dear Christophe Batsch,

	Alas, your pronouncement about Essene peacefulness being a recent
invention is false, as a rereading of the ancient sources (and ancient
archaeology) will suffice to show. The one mere apparent exception is John,
a single former Essene, who, Josephus said, joined the war; notice this was
no Essene batallion. Many, IMO, fled east of the Jordan. I agree with
Allegro that zealots had probably taken Qumran, which was then clearly not
a fort, before the Roman army arrived there. The War Scroll war never
happened; though its thought-world resembles Daniel and Revelation of John,
moreso than 1,2 Maccabees.
	On the other hand, I found very useful, thank you, your posts on
4Q448, with bibliography and notes on E. Main's fine article. Would that G.
Doudna had make more use of your indications. Instead, even recently, he
wrote on orion that "of course" Qumran was Jannaeus's place. Not only is
there no evidence for that, but 4Q448 (among other things) is plainly
against it--even if one accepted (which I don't) a minority view of a shin
rather than an ayin as first letter of col. B. Doudna ignored your help.
This is all the more curious, among other reasons, in that Doudna himself
had earlier written on orion that 4Q448's praise (he brought 1QH as a
parallel) was more appropriate taken as directed toward God than to a king.
Jannaeus, after all, is the most plausible candidate for the Qumran ms
wicked priest, as seen by the Essenes, the self-described observers of
torah, linked by Philo with osios, inclination to observe God's law, and
therapeutae theou, those who wait on God and do his will.

best wishes,
Stephen Goranson


For private reply, e-mail to Stephen Goranson <goranson@duke.edu>
----------------------------------------------------------------
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.