|
|
9 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A good alternative theory to the scrolls' origins, July 16, 2004
The party line on the Dead Sea Scrolls (that is, the most commonly accepted explanation) is that most of the scrolls were produced by a sect of Essene separatists who lived in the recently excavated settlements at Qumran, near the Dead Sea. This explanation has many merits, including independent reference to the Essenes in this area by Josephus and Philo, an historian and a philosopher contemporary with the sect, and by Pliny. Qumran, according to this theory, was a monastic settlement, and one of the primary activities of the residents was the production of scrolls in a scriptorium. The scrolls provide a record of the beliefs and some of the practices of this sect.However, not all subscribe to this point of view. Some, starting with various interpretations of the scrolls like to see proto-Christians and radical scenarios. Unfortunately, some have done this simply because it grabs the headlines. However, there are other dissenters, perhaps more likened to a loyal opposition, who have both the credentials and the credulity to make alternative cases of interpretation. Norman Golb is one such scholar, whose ideas of an alternative theory of the Qumran settlement and the origins of the scrolls is significant enough to merit mention in many of the latest Dead Sea Scrolls general surveys as a minority view that still has plausibility in some respects. Golb, in his introduction, talks about his hopes and frustrations with trying to work with the established Scroll hierarchy. Suffering from the same sorts of issues that made access and interpretation such highly politicised topics, Golb felt he was not only an outsider, but sometimes a bit of an outcast, among the Scroll scholarly community. Golb's main thesis here, presented after giving an overview of the history of the scrolls and the archaeological digs at Qumran (complete with maps, drawings and photographs), is that this is not a monastic community, and not really a scriptorium. Drawing information from an early article by Rengstorf, who thought that the Qumran settlement was anything but an Essene community, he developed the idea of Khirbet Qumran as a fortress, developed in part because of inconsistencies between the archaeological finds and the supposed activities of Essenes that would have required different architecture and different arrangements. This Hasmonean fortress is located in an admittedly strategic location, particularly for the various events and travel routes of the area during Hasmonean times. Furthermore, Golb felt that the scrolls had far too many variations and contradictions to all be the product of one particular sect, or one particular community of people. Golb contends that the scrolls were actually the accumulated writings of many groups and sects from across ancient Judea, and were most likely the library of the Temple - these were then hidden in the caves in the vicinity of the known fortress at Khirbet Qumran, outside of Jerusalem, but not too far away, to protect the writings in the face of an imminent Roman destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. Golb has data to support his theories. One primary archaeological find is pottery - however, pottery of the sort found at Qumran has been found in other locations in the Judean wilderness, too. Second, there were no manuscript scraps or fragments found at Qumran, an unlikely scenario for a scriptorium, in Golb's assessment. Pliny's location of the sect is rather vague (above Ein Gedi), and might not point to Khirbet Qumran. No coin finds locate the scroll writers with the Qumrani remains. Romans had captured the site about the time of the fall of Jerusalem, perhaps even before. The Essenes were known to espouse celibacy (one of the reasons for their low numbers, and, rather like the Shakers in America, their recruitment didn't allow them to replenish their numbers, particularly in the aftermath of the fall of Jerusalem, when Judaism as a whole was forced into a reorganisation along what would become normative Rabbinic Judaic lines). Golb traces the history of the research, translation and controversy surrounding the scrolls during the presentation of his alternative theory. The reader gets an overview of the discoveries from 1947/48 to more recent discoveries, the archaeological progress at the Qumran site, and the reconstruction and translation efforts over time. This is a story of political intrigue, involving international politics, academic politics, and controversies that fueled rumour mills and gossips for decades. Golb has a perspective that is more insider than most; and he discusses the personalities involved in a good amount of detail. He also includes the perspective of being a scholar on the outside of accepted dogma - how the idea of freedom of expression, open research and free exchange of views often gets squelched in the name of the integrity of a discipline; how careers become invested in a particular point of view, such that any opposing viewpoints can run the risk of gettiing their supporters exiled from the mainstream of the community. Rather like church and politics! Golb includes a useful glossary of terms at the conclusion of the book, worthwhile regardless of the theory of origins of the scrolls one subscribes to, and a selected bibliography, topically arranged. Golb's book is an interesting overview of the scrolls from a unique perspective, plausible and intriguing, a good alternative book to read from the more mainstream scroll texts.
|