Last Thursday I announced that coming this coming Thursday, Jodi Magness, he Kenan Distinguished Professor for Teaching Excellence in Early Judaism at the University of North Carolina’s Religious Studies department, will make two presentations on Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls which includes her assessment of the Robert Cargill’s Digital Qumran Project. I will hopefully be available for the 11:00am session, but a course on Michel Foucault keeps me from attending the 7:00pm lecture. Magness’s work includes The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls. I have done very little work with the texts about Qumran, so I have asked my friend Dustin to do a review, so, here it is:
“Dustin M. Naegle is a Ph.D. Student at Brite Divinity School (Texas Christian University) in Fort Worth, Texas studying biblical interpretation with an emphasis in Hebrew Bible. He holds a B.S. degree from Utah State University in Philosophy, and an M.T.S. degree from Brite Divinity School. His academic interests include Qumran/Dead Sea Scrolls studies, biblical canon, feminist hermeneutics, apocryphal/deuterocanonical literature, and ancient languages (among others).
Jodi Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 2002). 238 pgs. $20.00
Jodi Magness’ work The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls provides a useful reference work to students, scholars, and readers interested in Qumran studies. In chapter one, Magness provides a brief survey of the interpretation of the archaeological evidence at Qumran. Particularly helpful are her introduction to the different methodologies among archaeologists, how experts date different remains, and some of the more relevant debates that have ensued concerning the remains at Qumran. Chapter two chronicles the topography of Qumran and past explorations (pre-Dead Sea Scrolls discoveries) of Qumran. This chapter is helpful in that it shows how people were interpreting the ruins apart from the scrolls, an issue that is still alive among Qumran scholars today.
Chapter three introduces the history behind the discovery of the scrolls, a brief discussion about the prevailing Essene-Qumran theory (one that Magness concurs with), and the artifacts that arguably connect the scrolls with the Qumran settlers, chief of which is the proposal that the style of jars found at Qumran as well as the DSS caves are identical. Chapter four provides an account of Roland De Vaux’s proposed chronology. Most noteworthy in this chapter are two main proposals submitted by Magness. First, that De Vaux’s “period Ia” did not in fact exist and thus the Qumranite founding of the settlement need not be dated any earlier than 100 BCE, and second, that the settlement was not abandoned due to the earthquake of 31 BCE, but was destroyed around 9/8 BCE and reoccupied about 4 BCE by the same group.
Magness’ fifth chapter furthers her argument that the Qumran settlers were Essenes and that they are in deed connected to the scrolls. Among her arguments are that the Qumran settlers manufactured their own unique “scroll jars,” and that due to differences with other contemporary sites, Qumran was not (contra several other scholars) a villa rustica. Chapter six focuses on sacred and profane space at Qumran. Included are discussions concerning dining and bathroom use (a particularly interesting chapter).
Chapters 7 and 8 provide introductions to two of the more discussed (and somewhat controversial) aspects of Qumran archaeology, proposed Jewish ritual baths, or miqva’ot, and the skeletons that are thought by some to be female discovered in the adjacent cemetery. Magness is primarily concerned with two main issues in these chapters. First, whether or not the large number of miqva’ot suggest a sect with a high concern for purity (Magness answers in the affirmative) and second, the obvious challenges that female skeletal remains would bring to the long held belief that the Qumranites were celibate (Magness argues that the skeletons were either not female or too late to be connected with the Qumran settlement).
Chapter 9 proposes that the “coin hoards” found at Qumran are to be connected with the contemporaneous half-shekel temple taxes going on in Jerusalem as well as the proposal that the settlement held a negative collective attitude towards Hellenism. Finally chapter 10 proposes that while it is possible to identify the near-by Dead Sea settlements of Ein Feshkha and Ein el-Ghuweir as sectarian establishments, the archaeological evidence in her opinion discourages such a conclusion.
Magness’ work is to be commended on its well-written prose as well as its concise yet informative and relatively thorough (it is an introduction) treatment of the issues and debates surrounding the archaeology of Qumran. Particularly strong points to this work are Magness’ incorporation of the literary evidence (i.e. the Dead Sea Scrolls) in interpreting the ruins (if one does connects the two), and her separate, chapter length treatment of some of the more pertinent issues surrounding Qumranology (e.g. female skeletal remains). Also worth mention is the collection of high quality photographs included immediately after the table of contents (a must for those wondering where a certain locus at Qumran is), and her helpful narrative-style “bibliographical notes” at the end of each chapter. As a point of critique, while I believe that Magness’ attempt to utilize the Dead Sea Documents as a lens for interpreting Khirbet Qumran is laudable, she tends to ignore the possibility that the scrolls may have disparate dates as well as the well maintained argument that the documents she cites liberally from do not present just one religious/theological view but several.
All in all, one would be hard pressed to provide any reason why anyone from a seasoned Qumran scholar to an interested amateur would not want this eloquent work on her or his bookshelf.
thanks for getting this and sharing it, rod
No problem, Mike.