[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
orion Pliny /Hirschfeld/etc.
The discussion about the best translation of Pliny is interesting. Can I ask
a question? I am using Rackman as a translation.
Book V. xv. 73 begins: "Ab occidente litora Esseni . . . ." This is
translated: "On the west side of the Dead Sea, . . . is the solitary tribe of
The next paragraph begins: "Infra hos Engada . . . ." This is translated:
"Lying below the Essenes was formerly the town of Engedi."
The word Essene(s) does not appear in this second sentence. Why isn't the
correct translation something like: "Lying below that part of the west side of
the Dead Sea . . . ."
In Book V, xxi. 89: "Infra Palmyrae solitudines Stelendena . . . " is
translated as " Below the Desert of Palmyra is the district of Stelendena. . .
In Book VI, xxiii. 73: "Infra solitudines Dari . . . " is translated "below
the deserts at a distance of. . . ."
In Book VI, xxxi. 132: "Infra est Susiane . . ." is translated "below is
Susiane . . . "
Why wouldn't it be more correct to translate Pliny as refering to an area on
the map - i.e., the upper part of the west shore - rather than a specific
place or the Essenes?
Is Hirschfeld's site necessarily inconsistent with the area of tents Eshel and
Broshi contend existed closer to Qumran. Doesn't a tent area imply non-
permanent visitors using the stone structures as a central meeting place?
P.S. Again, I'm sorry about the legal message that was supposed to go to
another net of college and unviersity attornies. Maybe I should send them
something about the DSS to even it up.