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

Re: yahad ostracon

>From RGmyrken:

>My contact from the Manchester conference tells me that the ostracon
>contained a
>date, "Year 2".
>First, can you confirm this datum?  And doesn't this indicate the ostracon
>probably dates to 68 CE, i.e. the second year of the revolt?
That is one good possibility, though not certain. It fits withe the
palaeographical analysis of Cross and Eshel (which she says is independent,
but I don't entirely regard her opinion as independent of Cross!) But no
matter, really.

>Then this may indicate a link between Qumran and the texts ca. 68 CE, i.e.
>coincidentally about the time the scrolls may have been deposited, but what
>does this really imply about the history of Qumran or of the sectarians'
>connection with this site  in earlier archaeological periods?
Nothing. It still remains possible that the site was previously occupied by

Philip R Davies
Department of Biblical Studies
University of Sheffield