We have been dealing so far with the question of how the manuscripts came to be collected in the Qumran caves, the character of the collection itself, its undoubted antiquity, and finally the connection between the caves and the buildings. Attempts have been made, however, to explain these points by a different hypothesis, one that does not envisage a special religious community established in the area. According to K. H. Rengstorf, the documents have nothing to do either with the Essenes or with any other sect. They comprise part of the library of the temple at Jerusalem which was stored in a safe place at the time of the Jewish Revolt…The presentation of this theory, which is personal to Rengstorf himself, is preceded by a critique of the ‘Essene’ theory in the form in which it has often been presented, and the author rightly emphasizes the weakness or ambiguity of certain lines of argument. But his own explanation entails great difficulties. – Roland de Vaux, 1959
(from de Vaux, Roland, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Schweich Lectures 1959, rev. ed., (London: Oxford University Press, 1973), p. 105-6.)
question for review: who first proposed a theory stating that the dead sea scrolls had nothing to do with qumran, but were part of a library that came from jerusalem?
in related news, the son of norman golb has accused a nyu scholar of plagiarizing the thoughts and ideas of norman golb and passing them off as his own. golb’s son, raphael, has since been arrested.
have a nice day.
Filed under: archaeology, dead sea scrolls, qumran | Tagged: aggravated harassment, criminal impersonation, day, forgery, identity theft, karl rengstorf, lawrence schiffman, norman golb, oriental institute, plagiarism, quote, raphael golb, roland de vaux, unauthorized use of a computer, university of chicago |