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

Re: orion-list Evolution of the Sadducees and Pharisees? - RE: 4Q448

George Brooks writes:

>  Russell and others:  
>  ... I'm wondering what kind of academic treatment there might be on the
>  EVOLUTION of the Sadducees and the Pharisees from groups that
>  USED to be strongly affiliated with the Hasidim/Maccabee matrix, to
>  groups that... have very little in common with the interests
>  of the Essene/DSS/"Doers of Torah"/"Doers of War" matrix?

There are of course a number of books on the origins and development of both 
Sadducees and Pharisees.  The basic problem is the lack of source material on 
the emergence of Sadducees, Pharisees and Essenes in the period after the 
Maccabean revolt.  1/2 Maccabees mention only the Hasidim who formed the core 
of the Maccabean army in 166-163 BCE (and possibly later).  The reference to 
a delegation "scribes" who sought peace terms with Bacchides and Alcimus at 1 
Macc. 7:12 has spawned a great deal of analysis over the years, mostly 
centered on theories that these developed into the later Pharisees.  (In 
actuality, the term scribe refers to army officer here as in 1 Macc. 5:42.)  
The next mention of religious parties is in Josephus.  First there is the 
dubious reference to the three Jewish sects of Essenes, Sadducees, and 
Pharisees already existing under Jonathan; then historical incidents 
involving these groups c. 100 BCE.  So there is a gap in the 
historiographical evidence from c. 160-100 BCE.  

The best evidence for bridging this gap appears to be the Dead Sea Scrolls 
themselves.  These certainly include older documents of the Hasidim, notably 
the Animal Apocalypse (a sub-document of 1 Enoch which includes a history of 
the Hasidim down to 163 BCE), Jubilees (also arguably Hasidic), and also the 
War Scroll (as I have argued from the military and historical data) and IMO 
related documents such as CD, 1QS (based on parallels in legislative content 
and sectarian language with 1QM). But the Qumran scrolls are a library of a 
later period.  That this library included Hasidic texts presents an 
opportunity for tracing Hasidic influences in later periods.

The affinities between 1QS and the practices of the Essenes in Josephus 
suggest the Essenes as a candidate for the owners of this library.  But such 
texts as 4Q448, 4QMMT, 4QMish and perhaps the Copper Scroll suggest the 
library was the possession of Sadducean partisans of Jannaeus and his son 
Aristobulus II.  So it seems to me both Essenes (from Josephus) and Sadducees 
(from the later Qumran scrolls) may have utilized the older literature.  
Others may view the evidence differently.

Best regards,
Russell Gmirkin
For private reply, e-mail to RGmyrken@aol.com
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.