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

Re: orion-list Kuhn and Popper (archaeology)

Jurgen Zangenberg writes:

> Of course, there may be other sets of evidence that still do support the 
>  Essene character of the settlement (but I have my doubts): the ceramic 
>  spectrum, the water installations etc. I have the notion (it is still a 
>  notion yet) that the deeper you get into the archaeological evidence, the 
>  less probable it gets to positively claim that Khirbet Qumran has Essene 
>  origins.

    You might find interesting (if you haven't read it already) G. Doudna's 
"Redating the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran:  the case for 63 BCE", Qumran 
Chronicle 8.4 (1999) 26-61.  He specifically argues that the absence of 
certain ceramic types at Qumran, rather than showing occupation of the site 
by Essenes who purposely avoided from these classes of wares (as Magness 
concludes), instead signifies a break in occupation during the period when 
such wares were in common use.  He also points out that there is no evidence 
connecting the "scroll jars" with scrolls.  Rather, they are apparently grain 
storage jars, while the one jar containing a scroll (as reported by Muhammed 
edh-Dheeb) was of a different (smaller) type.  It will be interesting to read 
the reactions of Magness and others to Doudna's challenging observations 
(which have great value independent of his hypothesis of a 63 BCE scrolls 

    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.