It's an expansion of her earlier article, "Writings, Ruins, and Their
Reading: The Dead Sea Scrolls as a Case Study in Theory Formation and
Scientific Interpretation," Social Research 65.4 (Winter 1998) 839-70.
Frankly, I was somewhat ambivalent about the article. Generally I
found it fascinating, indeed I confess it's what first got me
interested in these issues. On the other hand, she seemed to have
herself made an assumption that the underlying preassumptions could
never be defeated. That was before Hirschfeld, Magen and Peleg, Bar-
Nathan and others came out with works that basically destroyed what
remained of the "evidentiary" underpinnings of the Qumran-Essene
theory. A major Israeli scholar once told me that fifty years from
now the sectarian theory will be remembered as a blunder. So it's an
interesting idea but at this point I think it's a bit rash to assume
that the old theory will simply continue to reign despite advances in
research. From what I understand, the French scholar Andre Caquot
virtually abandoned his support for the theory shortly before he
died. And right here on ANE we seem to be witnessing a growing
impatience with the convoluted reasoning used to justify erroneous
conclusions of fifty years ago.
Paul Kessler (New York)
--- In ANEfirstname.lastname@example.org, "K L Noll" <KLNoll@...> wrote:
> I don't want to intrude too deeply into this discussion, but I read
this volume recently, found it enlightening, and want to share it
with listers who are interested in the topic. (Also, I'd welcome
critical comments on this book from anyone who has read it.)
> Edna Ullmann-Margalit
> Out of the Cave: A Philosophical Inquiry into the Dead Sea Scrolls
> Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006.
> Happy New Year to all.
> K.L. Noll
> Brandon University
> Brandon, Manitoba
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]