11736Re: [ANE-2] Two Qumran articles
- Dec 8, 2009My statement was that "The few scrolls that are dated to the first century
BCE -- contemporary with the site of Qumran -- on unambiguous internal
evidence... contain no sectarian language." Pesher Nahum is not one of these.
While Qumran scholars agree almost unanimously that it refers to
crucifixions in the first century BCE, this consensus view happens to be dead wrong,
based on a bad restoration of a key lacuna in the text by means of
entirely circular historical arguments premised on a first century date. I've
written two excellent, well-reasoned articles showing that the pesher was in
fact written in spring 160 BCE (namely "Temporal Patterns in the Pesharim
and the Restoration of 4QpNah 3-4 i 2-3" and "Demetrius I and Pesher Nahum").
I submitted them to a prominent journal on the scrolls a couple years
back, but unfortunately they were rejected in peer review, not because of any
technical problems in the articles, but because the reviewer amateurishly
opined that their content was too controversial. This is the sort of
unconscious academic censorship that happens when you have an entrenched
Eventually I plan to have my articles on Pesher Nahum, the Damascus
Document and a few others published in book format. With the complete argument
presented in a single volume, it should become clear that the true
historical background of the scrolls is the Hellenistic Crisis and Maccabean War.
Until then the scrolls field will have to limp along in its current dismal
state, where Pesher Nahum is virtually the only text for which scholars
imagine the historical issues have been satisfactorily resolved.
1) Russell Gmirkin made (on 4 Dec 2009) some mistaken assertions. For
> [....] (1) The fewsite
> scrolls that are dated to the first century BCE -- contemporary with the
> of Qumran -- on unambiguous internal evidence, such as the Mishmarot andGmirkin's claim is mistaken; for example, 4QpesherNahum is surely a
> the Alexander Jannaeus text, contain no sectarian language. [....]
text, and Qumran scholars agree almost unanimously-text, an
refers to crucifixions in the first century BCE, all (but one) specifying
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic