Response to Prof Kraft:
Pliny's text merely uses west to indicate he will describe that side of the
Dead Sea. Pliny (his source) does not say Essenes are high (supra), merely
that they avoid the bad water (as Qumranites did, with their water system),
which is unlike Jordan's good water, flowing south. No fumes, exhalations,
Sodom, or the like are in Pliny on the Judaea side of the Dead Sea. These
sites, Essene place, Ein Gedi, Masada, moving South/downsteam/further
along, are all within Judaea, as the boundry is yet another step
South/downstream/further along. "Infra" here is a usage within Judaea, and
has no reference to Judaea vis-a-vis Samaria or other lands. "Infra" here
is used as elsewhere in Pliny, including sections which mention the source
Marcus Agrippa. Pliny does not specify Essenes as having a land, else he
might need to say this was other than Judaea. It would be a peculiar way of
locating a settlement, Ein Gedi, to say it was (had been, before c.40 BCE
destruction) lower (altitudewise) than a non-mentioned land, rather than
below (South, downstream, next in order) from the Essene locus. And Masada
is still anomolously high for your proposal. Again, Ginsburg, de Saulcy,
and Strack read it they way I read it, before Qumran discoveries. The Loeb
translation is merely amphibolous with "below." Again, Qumran
archaeologically fits, in time, in place, in usage; Yizhar's site does not.
By the way, on Machaerus. It was destroyed by Gabinius (57 BC?) and rebuilt
by Herod the Great (but when in that long reign?). Machaerus, I think, has
not yet been excavated sufficiently to determine the date Herod rebuilt it.
It is possible that it being destroyed is another indication that Pliny in
this case is using an old source. Certainly most of his sources, and
probably much of his research, date before the war with Rome. One cannot
properly assume Pliny was up to date an rerecorded on all this as the
Vesuvius fumes overtook him. Nor is it proper--as Cornell professors
evidently decided--to insist on single generation of the texts, mostly the
moment before a dramatic last moment, with up-to-date details, suddenly
sealed--hypothesis become fixation.
Response to Ian H.:
I have already responded to many of your subjects. For explanation and
supporting evidence for "Essenes" from 'asah, see orion archives and DSS: A
Comprehensive Account vol. 2 and Jim VanderKam's Introduction to Early
Judaism; etc.
On Gezer paleography. Again, their date(s) is disputed. Three IEJ articles
take three different views. The excavators of Gezer, in fact, date these
bedrock inscriptions in the final excavation volumes (citing potery) in
accord with Cross; in Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East (Oxford,
2000) vol. 2, page 400 Dever dates these to "the early-mid-Roman period."
It is one thing to refuse an Essene association with Qumran, but why write
that I have not given my reasons for accepting historicity of Essenes at
Qumran and elsewhere?
Here is a quotation from an abstract by Ian H, scheduled to speak at SBL
Rome meeting (due to invitation by Philip Davies) to present the 63 BCE
"depositation" proposal, though it has not appeared in peer-reviewed
publication, and, as far as I know, no scholar supports it. For the full
text (and full meeting schedule) see
http://www.sbl-site.org and click on Congresses, International, etc.
Ian H. wrote, for example, mimicing N. Golb, of Qumran: "...nor any trace
of a scribal school."
Again, what is the evidence. The locus 30 designation as "scriptorium" has
been challenged, Yet the triclinium alternate proposal has been widely
rejected. While all to my knowledge agree that some mss came from elsewhere
(plural elsewheres, if I may), some apparently were written or copied at
Qumran. Indications of a scribal school include repeated hands, including
in sectarian texts, texts which match the archaeology (frequent use of
miqvaot, for example). As repeatedly pointed out, Qumran has a greater
concentration of inkwells--tools of the trade of scribes--than any other
site in the area of comparable size--an extraordinary evidence of scribal
activity in this place, where an extrordinary manuscript find offers
important history of these Essenes. Last but not least, please see the
numerous careful, well-informed publications of Emanuel Tov, which give
multiple indications or "traces" of a Qumran scribal school, for example:
Tov, "Scribal Practices and Physical Aspects of the Dead Sea Scrolls" in
The Bible as Book: The Manuscript Tradition (1988, John Sharpe, ed.), pages
9-33.
best,
Stephen Goranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For private reply, e-mail to Stephen Goranson <[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.
