DSS.950223 Class Minutes #12 (23 Feb 1995), Dead Sea Scrolls
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Recorders: Kathleen Hoffman with Christine Boulos

1. Administrative Stuff

--The Garcia Martinez translation textbooks (red books) are finally in the
Bookstore. It is important for members of the class to obtain these $30
texts because the remainder of the course will focus heavily on reading
the original source materials in English. 

--Dr.Bob is going to create an index of the CD-ROM material so that the 
class will be able to access specific texts and other information easily.

--Dr.Bob is toying with the suggestion of inviting Larry Schiffman, 
esteemed DSS scholar and local cult hero, to visit the class.

--A reminder that book reviews are due, if possible, before Spring break
(March 3). Conceptually, a review should include two types of information: 
(1) a balanced summary of what the reviewed book attempts to do, and (2)
an evaluation of the results, especially in comparison to other sources we
have used, specifically Fitzmyer and VanderKam. These aspects may be
intertwined, or kept separate, as suits the reviewer.  The book review
need not exceed 800 words (about 4-5 screens of information) and should be
emailed to Dr.Bob.  Hard copy is undesirable; we can save a tree! Finished
reviews will go to the electronic distribution list, and the gopher. 

--Another reminder.  Sign up for a second session of minute taking, or 
you will be assigned some unnamed substitute task by Dr.Bob.  This could 
entail anything [within reason, of course!].

2. Questions from the class

--How is the "Masoretic Text" related to the Pentateuch and other 
biblical texts extant at the time of the DSS?

The "Masoretic Text" (MT) is the most widely read and disseminated version
of the Jewish Bible. It was standardized from the Hebrew tradition around
800-1000 CE by the "Masoretes" in Palestine/Israel (especially Tiberias)
and in Babylonia. "Masoretes" is not a sect name, but rather refers to an
"activity" concerned with recording "tradition" (masorah) associated with
the biblical text. It is likely that Karaites were active among the
Masoretes. 

Prior to the emergence of the vocalized MT, the extant texts were
"unpointed" or "consonantal," meaning that they lacked vowels except
occasionally as placeholders ("matres lectiones").  The MT tried to
eliminate vowel ambiguity in the written form by recording the tradition
of the words' pronunciation. This was done by marking the consonants by
one of two systems, the Tiberian and the Babylonian.  The cadence and
stress were marked along with the vowels, facilitating reading the text
aloud. The MT also recorded traditional differences between
groups/regions, by noting where the oral reading ("qere") differed from
what was written ("katav" or "katab"). The special case of the
tetragrammaton is an example of this; the MT would indicate that "Adonai"
was to be spoken although "YHWH" was written. 

Here, the question arises as to how we know how the Hebrew text was
pronounced at the time.  Obviously, the written symbols could easily
represent different sounds to modern readers.  One clue comes from the
Hexapla, a 6-columned work by the Christian scholar Origen, issued early
in the 3rd century CE.  The first column contained the Hebrew/Aramaic text
in semitic characters, the second gave the same text in Greek
transliteration (thus giving some idea of pronunciation), and the other 4
provided various Greek translations, including some text critical markings
to indicate where the Hebrew and Greek versions differ.  Additionally,
proper names and place names that are transliterated into various
languages may help indicate the Hebrew pronunciation. Finally, there exist
specific descriptions of the articulatory characteristics of sounds (and
their representations) from the time of the Masoretes. 

However, Hebrew did have some dialectical differences which could have
affected pronunciation of the texts. Jewish communities flourished in the
Persian Gulf area (Babylon) as well as in Palestine/Israel, for example, 
widely distant from each other. These similar but distinct "local" 
traditions are reflected in the two extant versions of the Talmud -- the
Babylonian Talmud, which is what one normally thinks of as the classical
rabbinic version, and the Palestinian (or "Jerusalem") Talmud. 

The DSS provide evidence of the situation with the earlier unpointed
consonantal texts.  Indeed, they have pushed our knowledge of the Jewish
scriptures back 1000 years, through layers and layers of copies.  One
reason why the unwritten tradition of the texts could be preserved for
centuries without recorded standardization was that in antiquity texts
were generally read aloud, and thus pronounced.  Even in silent reading,
the lips were generally moving.

--What is the significance of the Murabba'at caves?

	The Murabba'at caves are located south of Qumran on the west coast
of the Dead Sea. The DSS discoveries of the 1940's encouraged the Bedouin
and scholars to search among the Dead Sea cliffs for other valuable
remains.  Findings from other sites of discoveries in the Judean desert
are generally included under the broad heading of DSS, although they may
not be related to the Qumran group at all.  These sites include: 

--Khirbet Mird 
--Wadi Murabba'at (a wadi is a dry riverbed, in case you were wondering) 
--Nahal Hever 
--Nahal Mishmar 
--Nahal Se'elim 
--Masada (site of the fortress that was the last outpost of the 1st 
    revolt)  

--Wadi ed-Daliyah -- its inclusion in this group is questionable.  The
site is in the Samaritan area, NW of the Dead Sea [Fitzmyer p.1 is in
error on the location] and most of the material found there dates much
earlier than the DSS and is not related to it.

For specific information about these sites and their materials, you need 
to consult a source such as the <t>Anchor Bible Dictionary</> in addition 
to the Fitzmyer (e.g. p.26) and VanderKam texts. Some important remnants 
from the "second revolt" (by Bar Kokhba/Cochba) have been recovered from 
the Murabba'at and Nahal Hever caves. 

3. Calendars and the DSS

Pliny, Philo and Josephus never mention the calendar of the Essenes as a
distinctive feature, aside from their use of the typical Jewish 7-day week
concluding with the "sabbath" rest day. However, Philo suggested that the
Theraputae had some unusual calendar-related practices (On the
Contemplative Life 64ff). He said they placed special importance on a
cycle consisting of a "week of weeks," or 7 weeks of 7 days apiece = 49
days, followed by a festive 50th day. It is not clear whether he means to
suggest cycles of 50 days throughout the year, or a specific yearly
festival in accord with the traditional Jewish holiday of Shavuot (from
which the Christian celebration of Pentecost derives).

Various unusual calendric emphases are found in the DSS texts. Even prior
to the DSS discoveries, the "pseudepigraphic" books of Jubilees and "1
Enoch" (Astronomical Book) provided glimpses of a calendar different from
what became traditional in rabbinic Judaism. Jubilees gets its name from
its arrangement of the history of Israel from the Garden of Eden until
Moses' reception of the Law on Mt. Sinai in terms of "Jubilees" -- 49 year
periods (see Leviticus 25.8ff). The presence of these texts, and others 
similar to them, among the DSS is striking.

Note that in the middle ages, some Islamic and Jewish authors also refer
to an ancient Jewish group that followed a "different" calendar, and
called them "cave dwellers" (Magharians). These reports may have been
influenced by discoveries of DSS in the 8th century or even earlier.

References are found in the DSS to the celebration of the following
festivals otherwise not known to classical Judaism (see VanderKam p. 115): 

--New Wine Festival
--Wood Festival
--New Oil Festival (Jake cleverly pointed out the incongruence of an oil 
festival with a culture that considered oil a means of spreading impurity)

Notably absent are the "newer" (non-biblical) holidays of Rosh Hashanah
(civil new year) and Hannukah (Hasmonean/Maccabean revolt).  Rosh Hashanah
was probably not observed because it was developed to mark the beginning
of the civil year in the fall (in distinction to the more traditional
"religious" new year, in the spring), and was presumably not accepted by
the DSS people as legitimate or appropriate, if they even knew about such
an observance. Hannukah, of course, is the celebration of the recovery of
the Temple by the Jews in the Hasmonean Revolt.  This occured in 165 BCE,
roughly contemporaneous with the founding of the DSS community, but
the DSS people were not supporters of the Maccabees. In fact, they may
have founded their outpost in the desert partly because of the upheaval
connected with the revolt, and in reaction to its results.

The traditional Jewish rabbinic calendar, commonly referred to as
luni-solar, consists of 354 days per year (thus 11 1/4 days short of a
solar year), with an extra month added every 3rd year to bring it back
into sycronization with the agricultural seasons it reflects. The Muslim
calendar is strictly lunar consisting of 354 days without adjustment to
the solar cycles. Thus a solar century is approximately equal to 103 lunar
years. 

The DSS people followed a solar calendar consisting of 12 months of 30
days each = 360 days, plus 4 extra days inserted between each 90 day (3
month) season = 364 days, which divides neatly into 52 weeks of 7 days. 
This calendar is consistenly symmetrical and predictable. Each annual
festival always is held on the same day(s) of the week, year in and year
out. It is likely that they somehow adjusted for the 1 1/4 days per year
not accounted for, although we do not know how.  Perhaps they invoked a
mini-jubilee at appropriate intervals (an extra month would be needed
every 24 years, which is about half a jubilee). 

The fact that early Jewish communities had such differing calendars, has
been used to explain a curious inconsistency in the Christian traditions
about Jesus' last days. The Gospel of John reports that Jesus was
crucified when the passover lamb was being slaughtered, whereas the
synoptic gospels place that event prior to the crucifixion. Some
commentators suggest that Jesus and his followers used the solar calendar
for their celebration of Passover, as reported in the synoptics, while the
Gospel of John reflects the luni-solar reckoning which was used by most
Jews (including Jesus' main enemies). This is a clever solution, although 
it does not solve all the problems of the discrepant accounts.

//end dss.950223//