Books in Brief

006

Discoveries in the Judaean Desert, Vol. XII, Qumran Cave 4—VII: Genesis to Numbers

Eugene Ulrich, Frank Moore Cross, James R. Davila, Nathan Jastram, Judith E. Sanderson, Emanuel Tov, John Strugnell

(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994 [published May 1995]) 272 pp., 48 plates in black and white, 1 color plate, $120.00

Vol. XIII, Qumran Cave 4—VIII: Parabiblical Texts, Part I

Harold Attridge, Torleif Elgvin, Jozef Milik, Saul Olyan, John Strugnell, Emanuel Tov, James VanderKam and Sidnie White

(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994 [published May 1995]) 470 pp., 43 plates in black and white, $130.00.

Dead Sea Scroll editiones principes are rolling off the Clarendon Press with such rapidity that it has become tedious to remark on the extraordinary care and exceptional quality of the scholarly work that these volumes reflect.

The salutary principle now guiding the official team’s publication is to present the texts without commentary, but with descriptions of the physical characteristics of the fragments, paleographic (the shape and form of the letters) and orthographic (spelling) analyses, studies of the textual character, and transcriptions and translations with technical notes—what is known as a “diplomatic” edition. This is in contrast to previous volumes, such as Jozef Milik’s publication of the Book of Enoch and Elisha Qimron and John Strugnell’s publication of MMT, which included extensive commentaries.

DJD 12, as one of the two most recent volumes will be called, contains 26 fragmentary manuscripts of the tetrateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers) by the first six authors listed above, under the editorial direction of Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore Cross. John Strugnell’s contribution was more general but doubtless equally pervasive.

The attention to detail here is extraordinary. Even a “fleck” of a letter is noted. Some of the fragments are mere bits. Two of the manuscripts include over a hundred fragments each. A number of fragments, even of comparatively large pieces, are beaten and battered almost beyond recognition.

This volume includes a rare example of the use of red ink at Qumran. Only three of the more than 800 manuscripts contain red ink. Here it appears on a manuscript of Numbers that is the best-preserved scroll of Numbers in the entire Qumran corpus. Each instance of red ink in this manuscript extends for at least one line, but never for more than a line and a half. The purpose of the red ink is unclear, though Nathan Jastram speculates that it was used for the openings of early pericopes (passages selected for liturgical readings) whose designations as such have been lost. A remarkable color plate illustrates the red ink.

The photographs are in the main of extremely high quality. There is little doubt that much more can be seen on the photographs—with up-to-date filters, films and digital readings—than in the fragments themselves (though scholars will still need to consult the fragments, if only to make sure nothing more can be learned from them). In many cases, the fragments have deteriorated beyond recognition. Occasionally, a fragment has been lost; more often, letters have broken off around the edges.

One fragment from the Book of Leviticus contains the tetragrammaton (the four-letter name of God) in Paleo-Hebrew script, which was the script in general use before the Babylonian Exile. This is unusual in a Biblical manuscript from Qumran. In general, the tetragrammaton in Paleo-Hebrew is found at Qumran in non-Biblical manuscripts. When we now speak of this phenomenon, we must say that the tetragrammaton in Paleo-Hebrew appears mainly in non-Biblical manuscripts. The other exceptions are a manuscript of Exodus from Cave 2 and a manuscript of Isaiah from Cave 4.

Cross and Davila suspect that one of the Genesis manuscripts they studied came, not from Qumran, but from a nearby cave (in the Wadi Murabba‘at) that contained manuscripts from the mid-second century C.E. (The latest of the Qumran finds is dated 68 C.E., when the settlement was destroyed by the Romans on their way to Jerusalem). Cross and Davila base their suspicions not only on a paleographical analysis of the script, but on the fact that the leather is coarse and poorly prepared, unlike the Qumran manuscripts. 008Davila tells us that the Bedouin may have inadvertantly mixed up this manuscript with their Cave 4 finds. In this connection, a recent carbon-14 test indicates that a piece of linen that supposedly came from Qumran Cave 1 actually came from the Wadi Murraba‘at;^a so it would be interesting to have this manuscript carbon-dated as well. What else did the Bedouin mix up?

In general, these manuscripts reflect such a multiplicity of text-types (proto-Masoretic, Samaritan, proto-Septuagint and others) as to indicate that the Biblical text was not yet standardized in the early first century C.E. By the mid-second century C.E., that was no longer true. Biblical manuscripts from the later period found in nearby caves are consistently proto-Masoretic, the textus receptus of Jewish tradition. The manuscript of Genesis mentioned above that may have come from the Wadi Murraba‘at, for example, is “virtually identical with the Masoretic Text.”

DJD 13, on the other hand, contains 20 parabiblical texts; that is, texts closely related to those of the Hebrew Bible, but sufficiently different that they cannot be characterized as Biblical—basically reworkings, rewritings or paraphrases. This is the first of three projected volumes of parabiblical texts.

Some parabiblical texts were previously known, while others are new. Of the 20 texts in this volume, 12 relate to Jubilees, which had been known in an Ethiopic translation. DJD 13 also contains formerly unknown texts that have been denominated Reworked Pentateuch, Paraphrase of Genesis and Exodus, Parabiblical Kings and Prayer of Enosh.

Of the non-Biblical texts from Qumran, only nine were previously known. The nine include Jubilees, 1 Enoch, Ben Sira, Tobit and the Testaments of Naphtali and Levi. As Devorah Dimant has observed elsewhere,^b with one exception (The Book of Giants) all of these previously known non-Biblical texts were transmitted through Christian, not Jewish, channels. What does that tell us about the nature of the Qumran library and its relationship to early Christianity? Something to think about.

Early Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan

Piotr Bienkowski, ed.

(Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Archaeological Monographs 7, J. R. Collis, 1992) 216 pp., 30 pounds (sterling)

The Biblical kingdoms of Edom and Moab lie in modern Jordan—Moab just east of the Dead Sea and Edom in the hills southeast of the Dead Sea. Except for a few recent excavations, archaeological research in the area has been limited to surface surveys. This collection of articles summarizes both surveys and excavations through May 1991.

The contributors to this volume, who include most of the foreign surveyors and excavators presently working in southern Jordan, attempt to revise the ideas of the great explorer Nelson Glueck, who surveyed Transjordan in the 1930s. After discovering and examining pottery and other remains at hundreds of sites, Glueck theorized that there was little or no occupation in southern Jordan (Edom and Moab) during the Middle Bronze Age (c. 2000–1550 B.C.E.) and most of the Late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 B.C.E.). He argued that settlement recommenced with the arrival of Moabites and Edomites (much like the arrival of Israelites in the Holy Land) toward the end of the Late Bronze Age, slightly before the Israelites arrived, corroborating the Biblical record of their presence on the Israelite journey northward (Numbers 20; Deuteronomy 2, etc.). According to Glueck, the Moabites and Edomites established effective monarchies and built fortified cities and fortresses to guard their borders.

The results of recent surveys and excavations in Moab, however, have raised serious questions about Glueck’s synthesis. A survey during the 1970s and 1980s led by Max Miller uncovered many sites with Late Bronze Age pottery but little evidence of an early Moabite monarchy or of border fortresses. Indeed, some of the most heavily fortified 010sites date to later in the Iron Age than Glueck theorized and seem to be far from major road systems and borders. E.A. Knauf suggests that, in the Late Bronze Age and early Iron Age, Moab and Edom were the names of territories inhabited by tribal groups and only became states in the middle to late Iron Age II (eighth century B.C.E.). During the Iron Age, according to Knauf, territorial names began to be used to identify the ethnic (tribal-affiliated) groups who inhabited them.

The revision of Glueck’s synthesis for Edom is even greater. All twelve authors writing on Edom agree that extensive settlement began late in the Iron Age, around the eighth century B.C.E., long after Glueck’s suggested date of 1200 or 1250 B.C.E. They acknowledge that groups of nomads probably inhabited the region before that, but the painted pottery Glueck thought was Late Bronze or early Iron Age turns out to be from the eighth or seventh century B.C.E., in a distinctive style limited to the region of Edom.

Several authors address critics like James Sauer, Israel Finkelstein and others who have argued that evidence of earlier settlement exists in Edom but has not yet been found. For this reviewer, however, the arguments in the papers in this volume seem strong, and scholars who suggest earlier occupation in Edom must make their arguments more persuasive to be convincing. Nevertheless, all the authors agree that much more work must be done before their theories can be confirmed.

All the authors underscore the desperate need for large-scale excavations in southern Jordan. Fortunately, surveys, excavations and especially publication of sites in Edom are increasing. The results of investigations of three major Edomite sites, Umm el-Biyara, Tawilan and Buseirah, excavated by the late Crystal Bennett in the 1960s and 1970s, are steadily being processed for publication. Gary Pratico has published the results by Piotr Bienkowski of Glueck’s excavation at Tell el-Kheleifeh, near the beach at the tip of the Gulf of Aqaba. Recent surveyors in Edom have found several mountaintop villages near Petra, but these are minor settlements dating to the time of other known Edomite sites or later.

The territory of Moab, however, according to Miller’s survey, is rich in Bronze and Iron Age sites and holds great potential for Biblical and archaeological studies. Only a few excavations were undertaken there during the 1970s and 1980s, but the pace is slowly accelerating.

The most glaring problem with this volume is the absence of Jordanian scholars, like Fawzi Zayadine, whose hometown is in Moab and whose studies of Moab and Edom span three decades. Also missing are other important figures, like James Sauer, a longtime investigator in Jordan, and Udo Worschech, who has conducted excavations at Balua in Moab. Most of the included authors cite their work, however.

This book is not intended for the average lay archaeologist. Many of the technical arguments and illustrations will make sense only to professionals. Some of the articles, however, like those by Miller, Knauf and Dearman, are more programmatic and, although they too are highly professional, they contain insights that will appeal to enthusiastic, educated amateurs. The article by Manfred Lindner on the mountaintop Edomite sites even conveys a sense of the romance of discovery.

This volume, combined with the work of the major missing scholars, comprises the latest, most complete picture of what we know, what we don’t know and what we need to do in order to know more about biblical Edom and Moab.

Discoveries in the Judaean Desert, Vol. XII, Qumran Cave 4—VII: Genesis to Numbers