About Me

Graduate student at Missouri State University working on an M.A. in History. I am also working on a second B.A. in Religion and Cultural Studies with a minor in Anthropology at University of Central Florida.

I currently have a Bachelor of Arts in History/Minor in Judaic Studies from the University of Central Florida and an Associate of Arts in History from Pensacola State College. I have completed a one year certification course in Biblical Hebrew through the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Certificates in Eastern Christian Traditions and Sacred Scripture from Newman Theological College.

I have studied French to the Intermediate level and am currently studying Biblical Hebrew, Koine Greek, and Turkish.

Tuesday, December 7, 2021

The Many Faces of Israel: Exploring the Historical Israel from Exodus to Judges

 





The Many Faces of Israel:

Exploring the Historical Israel from Exodus to Judges

 

 

 

 


John C. Haynes, Jr.

JST-3401: Jewish People in Antiquity

Dr. Kenneth Hanson

December 5, 2021


 



                                                                                                                                                          1

Israel

            The name Israel has many connotations for many different people, but for most it suggests the people who developed a nation in the land of Canaan and would come to produce the religious group known as Jews. This is an extremely simplistic view of the long and varied history of people of Israel, but one that suffices for a quick rendering of the modern view of Israel. But who or what exactly is Israel? How do we define the term and can find a definitive point in history where there was a united group known as Israel? When reading the Hebrew scriptures, or the Old Testament in Christian terminology, many people quickly assume that Israel has always been one united people, politically and culturally, that acted in unison. However, at least up until the time of United Monarch, and likely not until the reign of King David, “Israel” was perhaps more a loose term for various tribes that were linked to varying degrees by religion, culture, ethnicity, and history. While they had much in common, they did not move or act as one united body.

            Modern readers of the Bible encounter historical events portrayed in the books of Exodus through Judges as though the entire nation of Israel acted homogenously. From the migration into Egypt, through the Exodus, the settlement of Canaan, and wars with the Philistines and Canaanites, the Bible refers to all these events as being a series of single acts by a people called Israel. In this paper, I argue that there is relevant evidence to show that most often, what the Bible refers to as Israel was at times no more than a small group within one of the Israelite tribes to perhaps no greater than a few of the tribes acting in unison. The assumption, when reading the Bible, is that all twelve tribes of Israel acted together in a unified, coordinated effort. However, a textual analysis of many of the events will reveal that this is not the case. I will argue that the

                                                                                                                                                          2

term Israel, when used to refer to the entirety of the tribes, is not proper until the time of the United Monarchy under King David. Further solidifying this argument is the fact that even under King David, large factions within the tribes were still acting independently of each other and against each other.

History and Theology

            What do we mean when we use the name Israel? A political body? A religious group? A social class? An ethnic group? These questions become more obfuscated because the true answer to all these questions is “yes.” Israel is all these things, and yet they never act as one unified body. Throughout their history they have been divided politically, theologically, socially, and ethnically. The name Isra’el was given to the patriarch Jacob, son of Isaac, who was the son of Abraham. Jacob had twelve sons who would become the nation that has taken the name Israel. The history of Israel is contained within the totality of the Hebrew scriptures and is bound up in the history of their relationship to God. We cannot separate the history of Israel from her theology. However, we can find clues as to how the people acted and reacted to historical events by analyzing the biblical text.

            The background into which the people of Israel make their appearance is a complex one. We do not have a clear picture of who the Israelites descended from. The Book of Genesis tells their pre-history, much of it mythical, becoming mythic in nature. What we know from archaeology is that there were a collection of peoples known as ‘apiru or Habiru in the land of Canaan prior to the settlement by Israelites. Another historical term for the Israelites is Hebrews. Scholars agree that Hebrew is a cognate of ‘apiru but neither term designates ethnic origin.

                                                                                                                                                          3

Instead, it appears to be an indicator of social class; identifying a group as “outsiders” or possibly even “outlaws.”[1] Like the ‘apiru, the early Hebrews were not nomads, but they were a landless people. They instead belonged to a floating population, what has been described as “unsettled” elements of society.[2] These people would have been semi-nomadic pastoralists, equally at home in the Canaanite hillsides as well as in the urban centers. It has also been conjectured that the Hebrews descended from the Amorites (Ammuru). The Hebrew scriptures present the Amorites as a pre-Israelite people associated with the hill country and the Transjordan region. The Book of Ezekiel also mentions the Amorites as being ancestors of the Israelites. The names of many Amorites are Northwest Semitic, the same as the Hebrew language, however, it is different in structure from Akkadian. Mesopotamian texts refer to them as MAR.TU.[3] The first extra-biblical reference to the name Israel is found on the victory stele of the Egyptian pharaoh Merneptah, dated to 1220 BCE. On this stele is found several Canaanite city-states that the Egyptian forces were victorious over. Also listed, is the following curious line: “Israel is laid waste, his seed is not.” The other nations listed had the designation of a city-state. Here, Israel is given the designation of a “people.”[4] This would indicate that the “Israel” which Merneptah had encountered were not associated with a specific city-state but were rather a group of people.

                                                                                                                                                          4

The identity of a societal group who can collectively be called Israel begins in the Book of Exodus. In fact, today, Jews generally regard their identity as a religious body as beginning with the Passover in Egypt. Prior to this were the quasi-mythical Patriarchs. After leaving Egypt, the people of Israel passed out of “mythical” time and entered into qualifiable (even if not documentable) history. And yet, even through the Exodus events, the wandering in the Sinai, the entrance into Canaan, the establishment of twelve tribes, the evolving into two regions known as Israel and Judah, and even the first Monarch, Saul, we never really have a clear idea of who Israel is or what Israel is. The Exodus from Egypt served to order and organize the former Hebrew slaves into a unified community of God.[5] It has been proposed that until the sojourn in the Sinai, the Israelites lacked the consciousness of identity, the commitment to a common way of life, and the shared history which constitute a people.[6] Here also in the Sinai was found a new name for their God, YHWH.

The Promised Land

            The timeline of events in the Book of Numbers from Sinai into Canaan runs roughly: Israel is encamped at Sinai, the journey from Sinai to Qadesh, Israel is encamped at Qadesh, the journey from Qadesh to Moab, and finally, Israel is encamped on the plains of Moab. From this point, many scholars, and the archaeological record as well, disagree on exactly what occurred or how it occurred. What we do know is that the people of Israel became over several hundred years the dominant people in the land of Canaan. The biblical text gives a picture of conquest by the

                                                                                                                                                          5

“Israelites” over the Canaanites over a short period of time. But who were the Israelites that moved into the area? Scholars generally fall into three camps regarding this issue:

1.      Agreement with the biblical text that Joshua and the Israelite army conducted major military operations in the area, destroying entire cities and overcoming the Canaanites.

2.      View the increasing Israelite population as having already been in the countryside and rose up in a sort of “peasants” revolt.

3.      View the increasing Israelite population as a gradual settlement in the area of peoples from outside of Canaan.[7]

It has been proposed by historian John Bright that scholars should consider all three as having occurred, both simultaneously and over time.[8] Bright believes that Hebrews already in the area may have joined with others coming from out of the desert, rising up against Canaanites in both small skirmishes as well as several large military operations. Out of this uprising emerged the tribal confederation known as Israel.[9]

            There are several pieces of evidence that would indicate there were tribes of Hebrews already in Canaan when the Egypt-Israel group arrived. West Semitic groups, like the Hebrews had been moving into Canaan for some time. These groups had common origins and were interrelated. They shared memories, traditions, as well as the same mythic ancestors. They retained a common identity that was within the structure of a tribal system which was quite

                                                                                                                                                          6

ancient.[10] Many of these tribes held on to their family gods, but gradually, the concept of a national God began to take root. This God would come to be identified with the Sinai and the Exodus as YHWH.[11] In addition, The Amarna letters indicate that a large number of the inhabitants of Canaan who were related to the Hebrews that went into Egypt, never left Canaan. One reference is to a Labaya of Shechem who caused great difficulties for the Egyptians. There is as well an implication in the Bible that Shechem remained in Hebrew/Israelite control throughout the sojourn into Egypt and the subsequent Exodus. Upon return to Canaan, the Hebrews who had been in Egypt rejoined their “brethren” in Shechem and celebrated a covenant renewal. Therefore, to say that “Israel” went into Egypt, then through God was released from bondage to reclaim Canaan is not as clear-cut as it would appear.[12]

            One final circumstantial note that Johnson relates is the practice of circumcision. This was a requirement given to Abraham by God as a sign of their covenant. Circumcision is not a widely practiced ritual in the ancient world, however it appears that the Edomites, the Moabites, and the Ammonites all performed it.[13] If we look at familial ties as a source for this shared ritual, by biblical tradition, the Edomites were descended from Jacob’s brother Esau, the Moabites were descended from Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and the Ammonites were descended from one of Lot’s sons. These “cousins” of the Israelites were all in the region upon the return of the group out of Egypt. In his book Understanding the Old Testament, Bernard Anderson notes that the “Leah tribes,” that is Jacobs six sons by his wife Leah, were already settled in the region of Canaan.[14]

                                                                                                                                                          7

Revisiting Joshua

            We now turn our attention back to Joshua, who according to Hebrew scriptures, is about to wage a major campaign against the Canaanites. As we have seen, the large military operations described may not have occurred exactly as reported. Certainly, there may have been a few. But who was the campaigner and who were they campaigning against? It is likely that the group out of Egypt, who we refer to as Israelites due to their relationship with Jacob, were not the only Israelites. I have stated earlier that the body known as “Israel” likely took shape in the Sinai. However, some scholars have arrived at a different conclusion. It is argued that Israel did not truly form until the arrival at Qadesh. The sojourn at Qadesh undoubtedly had a tremendous effect upon the people who were there. Unfortunately, however, it is difficult to determine what groups where there, where they all came from, and how long they stayed.[15] When the Egypt group arrived at Qadesh, they may have encountered other Hebrews already in the land who had come down into Canaan separately or who had left Egypt at other times and by other means.[16] In fact, it may be at Qadesh that their basic community life, administration of law, and style of worship were established.[17] Johnson takes this idea even further to argue that many of the tribes may have already been in Canaan with the last two pushing in at a later date: Joshua and his party pushing in from Egypt and Levites coming in from Qadesh.[18] If this is true, Joshua likely did not command all or even most of the armies of the tribes. The multitude of large battles

                                                                                                                                                          8

would not have occurred, although many small-scale skirmishes are likely. What really occurred was a re-introduction of small groups of tribes into an area that was already predominantly occupied by related Hebrew tribes.[19]

The Judges

            There is biblical evidence that during the time of the judges, the various tribes of Israel were still not as cohesive a unit as we might think them to be. Even though the Bible often makes reference to “all of Israel,” the fact is “all of Israel” rarely did anything as one group. The final “conquest” of Canaan likely took around two hundred years, from around 1200-1000 BCE.[20] During the time of the judges, different tribes acted independently of each other and often fought against each other. They would also have been busy battling other Canaanite tribes as well as the Philistines who were pushing in from the Mediterranean coast. Each “judge” had to build a military coalition based on their individual character. It is also possible that each judge only operated within their local jurisdiction.[21] Charisma likely played as much into building an army as national identity or familial fidelity. By the time of Saul, a Benjamite guerilla captain, the tribes had already begun a dipole separation into those from the north and those from the south. Judah being predominant in the south with the smaller tribe Benjamin. The remaining ten tribes constituted the northern sphere. Each tribe descended from Jacob’s sons had its own leaders. Any unity maintained during this period probably had more to do with ethnic ties than any other

                                                                                                                                                          9

factor.[22] The Book of Joshua describes a unified military force under one commander. However, the Book of Judges seems to indicate military operations along tribal lines. For example, it was the tribe of Judah that captured Jerusalem in Judges 1:8), Hebron and Debir was subdued under Judah and Simeon according to Judges 1:9-20, and Bethel, which is not mentioned in Joshua, was conquered by the house of Joseph (Judges 1:22-26).[23] In Judges chapter 1, it is Israel that fights the remaining Canaanites. However, in ancient poetic form, we can see how tribal armies acted not as one nation, but independently. We see this in the Song of Deborah from Judges 5. At first, as in Judges chapter 1, it is the “princes of Israel” who take the lead. However, the text goes on to say:

            14 Some came from Ephraim, whose roots were in Amalek;

                        Benjamin was with the people who followed you.

From Makir captains came down,

                        from Zebulun those who bear a commander’s[c] staff.

15 The princes of Issachar were with Deborah;

                        yes, Issachar was with Barak,

                        sent under his command into the valley.

In the districts of Reuben

there was much searching of heart.

16 Why did you stay among the sheep pens[d]

                        to hear the whistling for the flocks?

In the districts of Reuben

                        there was much searching of heart.

                                                                                                                                            10

17 Gilead stayed beyond the Jordan.

And Dan, why did he linger by the ships?

                       Asher remained on the coast

                       and stayed in his coves.

18 The people of Zebulun risked their very lives;

                      so did Naphtali on the terraced fields.

 

And finally, in Judges 7:22, it is the “Israelites” who ask Gideon to rule over them all. However, Judges 7:23-24 describes the conflict as a more localized issue where Israelites from Naphtali, Asher, and all Manasseh were called out to pursue the Midianites, then word was sent out and all of Ephraim were called out to pursue the Midianites.[24]

           

Conclusion

            While the Hebrew scriptures from Exodus through Judges often refer to “all of Israel,” it is apparent that seldom was there a single, unified entity that can effectively be called Israel. Certainly, there were the components of the group known as Israel. It is likely that groups of Hebrews moved into Egypt while others stayed in Canaan. When those Hebrews in Egypt journeyed back to the Canaan, they adopted a set of religious laws that was posited by the God YHWH, who says he “found” Israel in the wilderness. Upon returning to Canaan, this group battled and merged with the local inhabitants, many of whom were distantly related Hebrews to

 

                                                                                                                                                        11

form a tribal confederation that still acted independently of each other. Even into the period of the United Monarchy, there was likely not a unified Israel, as such.

           

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                                                        12

Bibliography

Anderson, Bernard. Understanding the Old Testament, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,

            1986.

Grabbe, Lester. Ancient Israel: What Do We Know and How Do We Know It? Revised Edition.

London: Bloomsbury Publishing, Plc., 2017

Hill, Andrew and John Walton. A Survey of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan

            Publishing House, 1991.

Jewish Publication Society, The Jewish Study Bible, Tanakh Translation, 2nd ed. Oxford:

            Oxford University Press, 2004.

Johnson, Paul. A History of the Jews. New York:  Harper & Row Publishers, 1987.

Josephus, Flavius. Josephus, The Essential Writings. Trans. Paul L. Maier. Grand Rapids:

            Kregel Publications, 1988.



[1] Grabbe, Lester. Ancient Israel: What Do We Know and How Do We Know It? Revised Edition.

London: Bloomsbury Publishing, Plc., 2017. 52.

[2] Anderson, Bernard. Understanding the Old Testament, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,

1986. 111.

[3] Grabbe, Lester. Ancient Israel: What Do We Know and How Do We Know It? Revised Edition.

London: Bloomsbury Publishing, Plc., 2017. 50-51.

[4] Anderson, Bernard. Understanding the Old Testament, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,

1986. 115.

[5] Hill, Andrew and John Walton. A Survey of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan

Publishing House, 1991. 133.

[6] Ibid. 134.

[7] Anderson, Bernard. Understanding the Old Testament, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,

1986. 140.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid. 22-23.

[13] Ibid. 37.

[14] Anderson, Bernard. Understanding the Old Testament, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,

1986. 144.

[15] Anderson, Bernard. Understanding the Old Testament, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,

1986. 114.

[16] Ibid. 115.

[17] Ibid.

[19] Johnson, Paul. A History of the Jews. New York:  Harper & Row Publishers, 1987. 22-23.

[20] Ibid. 45.

[22]Hill, Andrew and John Walton. A Survey of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan

Publishing House, 1991.175.

[23] Anderson, Bernard. Understanding the Old Testament, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,

1986. 134-135.

[24] All quotations of Scripture in this paper have been taken from The Jewish Study Bible, Tanakh Translation, 2nd Edition. Jewish Publication Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Khirbet Qumran: A New Interpretation of Purpose

 

 


Khirbet Qumran:

A New Interpretation of Purpose

 

 

 

 

John C. Haynes, Jr.

JST-3144: Dead Sea Scrolls

Dr. Kenneth Hanson

December 4, 2021

                                                                                                                                                          1

Khirbet Qumran

Since the initial discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947, scholars have offered and debated numerous theories as to the purpose of the location of the main concentration of scrolls and the center of what appears to be a sect of Judaism, Khirbet Qumran. Qumran is located on the west bank of the Jordan River near the Dead Sea, giving the popular name to the scrolls found in the caves nearby the Qumran site. The structures located at Qumran are varied in size and formation and have led to varying ideas about their purpose. Recent archaeological evidence along with historical and textual analysis have led to the theory that the Qumran structures themselves were not used to house a large sectarian community but was employed primarily as a meeting place for annual covenant renewals and festivals for all the scattered members of the sect to converge upon. While there may have been a small number of members who remained at the site year-round, and larger numbers who lived in nearby caves, the majority of sectarians were scattered across the Judaean countryside in what were referred to as “camps.”

Initial archaeological excavation of the Qumran site was completed between November 24 and December 12, 1951, by Father Roland de Vaux of the Ecole Biblique.[1] Initial findings included pottery fragments and jars that linked the structures at the site to the nearby caves where the scrolls were found. The site itself would prove to be much more complex as well as controversial and would result in numerous theories as to its purpose. Controversy and complexity would arise because Fr. De Vaux died before publishing his complete findings. This left scholars with incomplete data and analysis to use when looking at De Vaux’s theories. A

                                                                                                                                                          2

summary of what was found at Qumran included a few structures that could be identified as living areas,[2] several large public buildings that could have been used as dining areas (these contained large amounts of serving vessels) and one that de Vaux identified as a scriptorium, several large Mikva’ot, or ritual purity baths (sing. Mikveh), a large open  plaza, and several cemeteries.[3] The dining areas, Mikva’ot, and plaza could well serve thousands of individuals. One of the largest cemeteries contains the graves of over 1,100 individuals. Noticeably absent in the complex, however, are large numbers of living quarters.

            Some of the popular theories that have been suggested include the ruins of a fortress, proposed by Norman Golb of the University of Chicago. Fr. De Vaux initially agreed with this analysis, however upon further research decided against this.[4] Husband and wife archaeologists Robert Donceel and Pauline Donceel-Voute concluded that the Qumran site was a wealthy villa with a large dining room,[5] although this theory seems unlikely and does not have many supporters. Other theories include that of an agricultural community and a perfume factory. None of these ideas fully match the complete archaeological and historical data of the time.

Archaeological Evidence and Analysis

            None of the proposed theories for the purpose of the Qumran site have gained significant consensus over the other since the beginning of the archaeological excavation.[6] Although lacking

                                                                                                                                                          3

a final report, the theory that stands on firmest ground is that of the original excavator, Father Roland de Vaux. Recently, new expansions on De Vaux’s archaeological findings, based on textual analysis of the Dead Sea Scrolls themselves, have led to a slight revision of original theories. When analyzing the archaeological data, De Vaux identified the following periods of construction:[7]

            -Phase Ia: a few remains from early occupation from the period c. 140 BCE.

-Phase Ib: beginning around the reign of the Hasmonean ruler and high priest John Hyrcanus, 134-104 BCE, and included a small number of accommodations that were destroyed by either fire or an earthquake and subsequent fire.

-Phase II: after the earthquake, the site was abandoned until the time of the death of King Herod, 4 BCE, and remained occupied until 68 CE.

-Phase III: Brief Roman occupation.

De Vaux viewed the site beginning with Phase II as a communal site but not for permanent residence. The structures included communal dining and meeting areas, but he thought that residents would live in makeshift shelters on the surrounding grounds.[8]

            Jodi Magness, in her book The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls, largely agrees with Father de Vaux’s findings, although she does disagree with and modifies his phases of construction:

                                                                                                                                                          4

1.      She finds that there was no period corresponding to Phase Ia.

2.      Magness believes that the site was sectarian from the beginning and began between 100 and 50 BCE.

3.      She does not believe there was such a significant gap in settlement between Phase Ib and Phase II. Also, she finds evidence for a separate earthquake and a fire. An earthquake in 31 BCE led to a partial abandonment of the site, and a subsequent fire led to a second abandonment with a reoccupation the same as De Vaux’s, after the death of Herod in 4 BCE.[9]

Magness notes that the Qumran site is particularly devoid of residential quarters. Of those that could have been residences, they have instead been purposed for some specific use: workshops or communal purposes.[10] As with all other scholars who accept the basic premise of De Vaux, Magness is at a loss as to where the sectarians would have slept, noting like others that, except for those who lived in the nearby caves, the rest likely slept in tents and other makeshift shelters.[11]

            Daniel Vainstub, archaeologist with Ben Gurion University, has recently proposed a new theory as to the purpose of the Qumran site. Agreeing with the De Vaux/Magness archaeological analysis, Vainstub incorporates textual analysis of the Dead Sea Scrolls to theorize that Khirbet Qumran, while maintain no more than a couple dozen permanent residents, was used primarily as an annual gathering site for all the community members when they held their required Covenant

                                                                                                                                                          5

Ceremony. Prior to Vainstub’s work, some scholars had made tentative steps in that direction by suggesting that the site was used as “a study center for all members” or a “ritual purification center.”[12] However, Vainstub goes a step further to make specific claims about the purpose of the site. It also reveals more about the structure of the sect and how it operated.

            Key to Vainstub’s analysis is taking a look at what the scrolls themselves have to say about the sect. He argues that both the Community Rule scroll and the Damascus Document[13] scroll both reveal an annual requirement for members of the sect to gather together for a renewal of their covenant vows.[14] Along with the annual gathering, chief among the clues found in the scrolls are the pronouncements to the people in the “camps.”

The Dead Sea Scrolls

            The primary source for understanding the annual Covenant Renewal requirement is found in the Community Rule, both in the fragment found in Cave 1, but mostly the fragments found in Cave 4. The text reveals this solemn covenant as sealing the relationship between God and His chosen “Sons of Light” and is viewed by the sectarians as a continuation of the covenants made by the people of Israel with God.[15] According to Vainstub, the annual renewal was a halakhic obligation and failure to do so would constitute expulsion from the community.[16] According to

 

                                                                                                                                                          6

the Community Rule, each member would renew this covenant on a yearly basis for “this is the time for the preparation of the way into the wilderness.”[17]

            The Damascus Document reveals that not all members of the community lived at Qumran. Indeed, full members of the sect lived in “camps” throughout Judea, and all were connected by the same covenant and the yearly covenant renewal. In fact, it seems likely that there were some modifications of the rules for those that lived in the “camps.” Vainstub believes this to be the case and states that not only do these members come from various places, but that they also follow different types of rules and different social codes.[18] The Damascus Document provides a section entitled “This is the Rule for the Assembly of the Camps.”[19] These rules call for groups of at least ten men, led by a “Guardian.”[20] This is the extent to which the Cairo Document goes into detail about the camps.[21] The scroll fragments from Cave 4 give further instructions and information.

            The Damascus Document gives instruction for all “[the] holy in their camps…” to gather for the annual meeting in the month of Sivan.[22] Implicit in these instructions is the idea that most members of the sect lived outside of Khirbet Qumran, in camps of 10 or more men, and were required annually to travel to Qumran to partake in the annual covenant renewal ceremony. The

                                                                                                                                                          7

Dead Sea Scrolls refer to these as “the assembly of the camps,” that is מושב הרבים. The word Moshav, מושב (my transliteration) is used in terms of an “assembly” here, while having an original connotation as an “agricultural community.” The term Ravim, הרבים (again, my transliteration, here it is Ha-Ravim)[23] remains untranslated even with several sources, but is given as “the camps.”[24] The numbers of sectarians making the trip to Qumran may have numbered in the several hundreds to even the thousands and would need provisions for anywhere from a few days to even a week.[25] Vainstub argues that these sectarians would have to arrive in time for Shabbat, followed by the Shavuot festival. The covenant renewal ceremony would then follow.[26]

Conclusion

            Before continuing on to concluding remarks, I need to make a statement regarding sources used. More specifically, sources not used. I have not alluded to or referenced Flavius Josephus in this paper. This is not to say that I find his work to have no historical significance. However, I have attempted to work within the confines of verifiable data from archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls themselves. The only item of significance that Josephus would provide for this work is his identifying of the Qumran group as the Essenes. Whether the sectarians at Qumran were themselves Essenes or related to a branch of Essenes is still an unverifiable piece of information. Daniel Vainstub identifies the Qumran group as the yachad sect. Whether the

                                                                                                                                                          8

Essenes or some other group, I have focused only on the purpose of Khirbet Qumran as can be determined from archaeological data and analysis provided by De Vaux and Magness and textual analysis by Daniel Vainstub as well as my own (limited) ability.

            From archaeology, we can see that the site at Qumran comprised several buildings which included large areas intended to feed significant numbers of people. In addition, assembly rooms and Mikva’ot present would not be necessary for small groups. A large plaza (or esplanade as some call it) would serve as grounds for thousands of individuals to make temporary encampments and the numbers of serving vessels found would indicate the need to feed these people. The Dead Sea Scrolls themselves, particularly the Community Rule and the Damascus Document provide insight into the requirement of the Qumran sect to gather annually for a renewal of their covenant vows. The Damascus Document also makes clear that many, if not most, members of the sect lived scattered across the Judaean countryside in small groups called “camps.” While there is no direct evidence to date, it is likely that a small core group of sectarians lived at Qumran, seeing to the grounds, and preparing for the meeting. Many likely may have been involved in copying of scrolls. A significant number likely lived in the nearby caves around the Dead Sea and were also involved in copying and studying Torah. The structural and textual data point to the use of the site as a gathering place for large numbers of the community on an annual basis to celebrate the festival of Shavuot followed by the necessary renewal of their “new” covenant with God.

 

 

Bibliography

Boccaccini, Gabriele. Beyond the Essene Hypothesis. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans

“Community Rule Transcripts from Cave 4.” The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls. Trans. By Geza

Vermes. London: Penguin Books, Ltd., 1962Publishing Co., 1998

“The Damascus Document.” The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls. Trans. By Geza Vermes. London:

Penguin Books, Ltd., 1962

Magness, Jodi. The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.

Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2002

Vainstub, Daniel. “The Covenant Renewal Ceremony as the Main Function of Qumran.”

Religions, 2021:12(8), 578

Vanderkam, James. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing

Co, 1994



[1] Vanderkam, James. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1994. 15.

[2] These living quarters would support no more than perhaps a dozen sectarian members living there full-time, as agreed upon by most scholars (see also Nathan Steinmeyer, “Qumran’s True Purpose Discovered?” in Bible History Daily. September 20, 2021. Biblical Archaeological Society.

[3] Vanderkam, James. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1994. 25-26.

[4] Ibid. 27.

[5] Ibid. 28-29.

[6] Boccaccini, Gabriele. Beyond the Essene Hypothesis. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998. 3.

[7] Vanderkam, James. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1994. 21-22. (This includes all of the phases of construction data that follows).

[8] Ibid. 24.

[9] Vanderkam, James. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1994. 26-27.

[10] Magness, Jodi. The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2002. 55.

[11] Ibid.

[12]   Boccaccini, Gabriele. Beyond the Essene Hypothesis. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998. 3.

[13] The portions related to the covenant renewal are missing in the Cairo document, but the relevant texts are contained in the fragments found at Qumran, 4Q266, 4Q269, and 4Q270.

[14] Vainstub, Daniel. “The Covenant Renewal Ceremony as the Main Function of Qumran.” Religions,

2021:12(8), 578. 2.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid, 3.

[17] “Community Rule Transcripts from Cave 4.” The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls. Trans. By Geza Vermes. London: Penguin Books, Ltd., 1962. 121.

[18] Vainstub, Daniel. “The Covenant Renewal Ceremony as the Main Function of Qumran.” Religions,

2021:12(8), 578. 2.

[19] “The Damascus Document.” The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls. Trans. By Geza Vermes. London: Penguin Books, Ltd., 1962. 143.

[20] Ibid. 144.

[21] See Footnote 13.

[22] Vainstub, Daniel. “The Covenant Renewal Ceremony as the Main Function of Qumran.” Religions,

2021:12(8), 578. 4.

[23] הרבים is Ha-Ravim, that is “The” Ravim. The root is Resh-Bet-Yodh-Mem.

[24] Vainstub, Daniel. “The Covenant Renewal Ceremony as the Main Function of Qumran.” Religions

2021:12(8), 578. 5.

[25] Ibid.

[26] Vainstub, Daniel. “The Covenant Renewal Ceremony as the Main Function of Qumran.” Religions

2021:12(8), 578. 4.

A Tale of Two Islands: Colonialism and Slavery in the Caribbean

                                                                                                                                            ...