Re: DSS personalities & historical persons
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2017 4:29 pm
Thanks Maryhelena,
I did not have those articles.
DCH
I did not have those articles.
DCH
Investigating the roots of western civilization (ye olde BC&H forum of IIDB lives on...)
https://earlywritings.com/forum/
Quelle coincidence! I have been blogging about a couple of those very articles by Doudna and Stacey lately -- though new to this topic as I am I doubt I have much to offer some of the long-time specialists here....DCHindley wrote:Thanks Maryhelena,
I did not have those articles.
DCH
DCHindley wrote:Thanks Maryhelena,
I did not have those articles.
DCH
Hasmonean History. |
Greg Doudna' interpretation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. |
Josephus: Antiquities: Book 20. ch.9. |
Comment |
---|---|---|---|
37 b.c. Antigonus, the last King and High Priest of the Jews, bound to a cross, flogged and slain. Cassius Dio. | Angigonus II is the Wicked Priest. | Josephus: 62/63 c.e. The High Priest, Ananus and James story. 100 year Anniversary of the execution of Antigonus. | |
High Priest Ananelus, removed. 37/36 b.c. | High Priest Joseph Cabi ben Simon, removed. | ||
High Priest, Aristobulus III drowned (plot of Herod the Great) brother of Mariamne I. (36 b.c.) | High Priest, Ananus ben Ananus, removed; “a bold man in his temper, and very insolent”. James stoned, brother of Jesus, called Christ. | ||
Ananelus (restored) 36-30 b.c. | Jesus, son of Damneus, made High Priest. | ||
Herod the Great executed former High Priest, Hyrcanus II in 30 b.c. 7 years after the execution of Antigonus. (After the Battle of Actium). | The DSS Teacher of Righteousness is Hyrcanus II. | High Priest, Ananus ben Ananus, killed 7 years later at the siege of Jerusalem in 70 c.e. | |
After 37 b.c. Hyrcanus continued to be regarded - as both King and High Priest. | Ananus, after being removed in 62/63 c.e.continued to be regarded as former high priest and was involved in the war of 70 c.e., in which he was killed. | The Josephan account of Ananus in 'War' is of a 'good guy'. In Antiquities, Ananus is a 'bad guy'. The account in 'War' deals with the period up to 70 c.e., and the death of Ananus. If the account in Antiquities is a Josephan 'novel' - then the account of Ananus, assumed to be a historical figure, in 'War' is the correct account. An account that can be compared with that of Hyrcanus II after his removal from being High Priest. ie both figures, Ananus and Hyrcanus, remain historically relevent after removal from office. Different context, different perspectives, allowing for, as it were, a switch in characterization...and providing points to ponder.... | |
Antiguities: Book 15. When Hyrcanus was brought into Parthia king Phraates treated him more fairly, being already aware of what an illustrious family he came from, and so he set him free from his chains and gave him a residence in Babylon, where there was a large numbers of Jews. These honoured Hyrcanus as their high priest and king, as did the whole Jewish nation as far as the Euphrates, which was gratifying to him. ........He was of a mild and gentle character, who generally left the state to be administered by others under him, being reluctant to mix with the public, and without the shrewdness to govern a kingdom. | War. book 4. I would not be wrong in saying that the death of Ananus was the beginning of the destruction of the city and in dating the destruction of her wall and her total ruin from the day which saw their high priest, the guarantor of their safety, killed in the heart of the city. For the rest, he was a good and holy man, and despite the grandeur of the noble dignity and honour he possessed, he had shown a sense of equality, even with regard to the lowest of the people. He was a great lover of liberty and an admirer of a democracy, always preferring the public good over his own advantage and loving peace above all things, knowing well that the Romans could not be defeated. He also foresaw that a war would surely follow and that the Jews would be destroyed unless they quickly made peace with them. | The Josephan story of 62/63 c.e. has the High Priest, Ananus, ordering the death of the James ( the Teacher of Righeousness). The DSS does not, as far as I’m aware, have the Wicked Priest executing the Teacher of Righteousness. Historically, the Wicked Priest of the DSS, (Antigonus according to the reconstruction by Greg Doudna) was executed 7 years prior to the execution of the DSS Teacher of Righteousness, Hyrcanus. However, historically (re Josephus) Antigonus did ‘kill’ Hycransus in 40 b.c. - he ‘killed’ Hycransus from being a High Priest - by biting off his ears – thereby disqualifying him from ever being High Priest in Jerusalem. The Josephan writer has reflected this history in his Antiquities interpretation of the DSS documents regarding a Teacher of Righteousness and a Wicked Priest. War: Book 1.ch.13 | |
This came up in another thread, and I wrote that this is arguably in 1QpHab col. 11, which is translated by Vermes as:The DSS does not, as far as I’m aware, have the Wicked Priest executing the Teacher of Righteousness.
The word that Vermes translates as "confuse" is the same word in Hab. 1:13 that is often translated as "swallow" and has the sense of destroying.This concerns the Wicked Priest who pursued the Teacher of Righteousness to the house of his exile that he might confuse him with his venomous fury.
This is how "swallow" is understood by Kalimi and Eshel (and spin) as well:The Wicked Priest ... rose up against the Teacher of Righteousness that he might put him to death because he served the truth and the Law, for which reason he laid hands upon him. But God will not abandon him into his hand and will not let him be condemned when he is tried. And God will pay him his reward by delivering him into the hand of the violent of the nations, that they may execute upon him the judgments of wickedness.
Its meaning concerns the Wicked Priest, who pursued the Righteous Teacher - to swallow him up (i.e., to kill him) with his poisonous vexation....
https://books.google.com/books?id=CwE8I ... st&f=false
And while Eshel sees this as only an attempt on the life of the Teacher of Righteousness, the Damascus Document refers to the "gathering in" of the Teacher of Righteousness, and Lim notes that:The text [1QpHab] is clearly concerned with an attempt by the Wicked Priest on the lives of the Teacher of Righteousness and his followers.
https://books.google.com/books?id=t05ok ... st&f=false
The phrase "to gather in" (to his family) is a common expression of death (e.g., Gen 25.8, 17). It is, therefore, widely held that the Teacher of Righteousness died...
https://books.google.com/books?id=Ar7UA ... ss&f=false
Matt C., I have wondered based on the polemic against niece marriage in the Damascus Document (D) if that text could be as late as the end of the reign of Herod the Great and indeed allude to the niece marriages and polygamy of Herod and his extended family, and if: the figure of the Liar is none other than Herod himself; and the destruction of the congregation of the Liar, and of the Men of War who betrayed the Teacher and followed the Liar in D, and Pesher Nahum with its crucifixions, date as late as Varus of ca. 4 BCE. The “head of Greek kings” of D who exercises wrath upon the congregation of the Liar would become Roman emperor Augustus Caesar, ruler of the world, via his agent Varus who would become the Lion of Wrath of Pesher Nahum. The fact that first century CE Herodians continued to practice niece marriage would be true but irrelevant. In this reconstruction the final composition of the Damascus Document and the latest pesharim would postdate the death of the Teacher by a little, which on independent grounds I believe was Hyrcanus II, executed by Herod in 30 BCE. Earlier halakhic texts among the Qumran finds have strictures against niece marriage such that the stricture itself appears ancient, but the Damascus Document applying that stricture in such a prominent and polemical manner may be directed against its polemical target, the Liar figure and regime, a regime situated contemporary with the end of the Qumran texts.
http://vridar.org/2017/02/12/dead-sea-s ... ewish-war/
Although the Qumran community and the early Christians were certainly not the only Jews to focus their hopes on the Isaianic picture of the way ... they are the only two groups we know to have applied the image of this way to their own way of life.
https://books.google.com/books?id=U7-Qe ... re&f=false
...the [DSS] sectarians and early church were the only ones to have used the concept of “the new covenant” from the prophecy of Jeremiah. Other Jews did not comment on “the new covenant” nor did they use it in their writings.
http://www.christianorigins.div.ed.ac.u ... t-seventy/
Re Greg Doudna's identification of the Teacher of Righteousness as Hyrcanus II and Antigonus as the 'wicked priest'. Historically, re Josephus, Antigonus denied Hyrcanus the High Priesthood via cutting off his ear (i.e. he 'killed', if you will, any hope Hyrcanus had of ever reclaiming the High Priesthood.) Antigonus, viewed as the 'wicked priest', does not literally kill The Teacher Righeousness - that job was left to Herod in 30 b.c.e. Thus, the DSS Teacher of Righeousness, Hyrcanus, survived the 'wicked priest', Antigonus, by about 7 years.John2 wrote: <snip>
And while Eshel sees this as only an attempt on the life of the Teacher of Righteousness, the Damascus Document refers to the "gathering in" of the Teacher of Righteousness, and Lim notes that:
The phrase "to gather in" (to his family) is a common expression of death (e.g., Gen 25.8, 17). It is, therefore, widely held that the Teacher of Righteousness died...
https://books.google.com/books?id=Ar7UA ... ss&f=false
Don't forget, James the Just had other names as well,...Oblias, Zaddick and Ozleam...(Euseibus' Ecclesiastical History, Book2 chapter 23).DCHindley wrote:But is that the same thing as identifying J t J as the Teacher of Righteousness mentioned in several of the scrolls?John T wrote:The "Curse of the Scrolls".
In my opinion, the Teacher of Righteous was a title that got passed to the most senior member of the Qumran community.
...
... the Eisenman theory; James the Just held the title of the Teacher of Righteousness, remains plausible.
I agree that in early Christian lore, J t J was a super righteous dude, as was probably the T o R, but how many others were similarly considered amazingly just by their disciples or the local population, only we have no literary remains that mention them?
IMHO, John T, the whole James the super Just legend, which seems to have been promoted by Clement of Alexandria and especially Hegesippus the story-teller, was fabricated whole cloth, probably by Hegesippus himself, from various Judean legends he had recorded in his notebooks during his travels. The trapping of the T o R into violating his own Sacred Sabbath (Day of Atonement) sounds nothing like what early Christians thought had happened to J t J.
Dinner time!
DCH
Doudna ties all this to a particular reading of 1QpHab col. 11.Re Greg Doudna's identification of the Teacher of Righteousness as Hyrcanus II and Antigonus as the 'wicked priest'. Historically, re Josephus, Antigonus denied Hyrcanus the High Priesthood via cutting off his ear (i.e. he 'killed', if you will, any hope Hyrcanus had of ever reclaiming the High Priesthood.) Antigonus, viewed as the 'wicked priest', does not literally kill The Teacher Righeousness - that job was left to Herod in 30 b.c.e. Thus, the DSS Teacher of Righeousness, Hyrcanus, survived the 'wicked priest', Antigonus, by about 7 years.
I'm fine with the calendar issue either way, but I agree that there may not have been a calendar dispute. As Doudna puts it elsewhere:The two sentences in the pesher of 1QpHab 11.4-8 almost certainly allude to two distinct events in the world of the text, not one as commonly supposed. The first is a murderous pursuit by the Wicked Priest of the Teacher driving the Teacher to a place of exile. The second takes place in the temple in Jerusalem, where the Wicked Priest appears in glory on the Day of Atonement and casts the righteous (who also are in the temple in Jerusalem on this day) into disarray. The issue, from the point of view of the text, is a usurpation of the high priesthood by the Wicked Priest. The Wicked Priest drives the Teacher into exile, and then the Wicked Priest assumes the office of high priest now vacated by the Teacher. 1QpHab 11.4-8 therefore has nothing to do with a calendar dispute. Rather than being a calendar dispute, 1QpHab 11.4-8 is a legitimate high priest and usurpation dispute. The real significance of 1QpHab 11.4-8 has been lost by the mistaken reading. The real significance is a glimpse of a dramatic scene of the Wicked Priest appearing as high priest in the temple on the Day of Atonement, an allusion to a usurper who has driven out the Teacher, the legitimate high priest. It is an image of a usurper assuming the office of high priest formerly held by the Teacher—a traumatic and shocking event to the righteous in the world of the text.
Here is the Habakkuk Pesher passage in question again (using Vermes for convenience):...any assumption that the people of the Qumran texts practiced a different calendar than that of the 1st century BCE Hasmonean high priests, and therefore the Teacher could not have been a high priest of the 1st century BCE temple for that reason, or the priests of the Qumran texts could not have supported a high priest of the 1st century BCE for that reason, is no better founded than the non-Zadokite Hasmonean notion—since there is no independent knowledge of the calendar ideology of the priests of the temple in the era of the Hasmoneans, and therefore no basis for assuming that a regime of priests of the temple held views different than those of priests of the Qumran texts, as opposed to the same or compatible views.
So while Doudna agrees with the sense of swallow/destroy over Vermes' "confuse" (since he says, "The first is a murderous pursuit by the Wicked Priest of the Teacher driving the Teacher to a place of exile"), he sees the Teacher of Righteousness as having escaped death at this point only to be killed later by Herod/the Liar by tying the latter to the reference to the gathering in (i.e., death) of the Teacher in the Damascus Document.Interpreted, this concerns the Wicked Priest who pursued the Teacher of Righteousness to the house of his exile that he might confuse [or "swallow"] him with his venomous fury. And at the time appointed for rest, for the Day of Atonement, he appeared before them to confuse them, and to cause them to stumble on the Day of Fasting, their Sabbath of repose.
The portrayal of the Teacher as alive in the present of Pesher Psalms A could suggest, by analogy, that the likely contemporary text Pesher Habakkuk should be read similarly. But the Damascus Document, or at least the B text of the Damascus Document, does allude to the Teacher’s death. That allusion in the Damascus Document is set in the very recent past, in the authors’ personally known recent past, in the picture implied in the world of the text.
And it is mentioned in an interpretation of Psalm 37:32-33 that refers to killing and a trial:Because of the blood of men and the violence done to the land, to the city, and to all its inhabitants.
Interpreted, this concerns the Wicked Priest whom God delivered into the hands of his enemies because of the iniquity committed against the Teacher of Righteousness and the men of his Council, that he might be humbled by means of a destroying scourge, in bitterness of soul, because he had done wickedly to His elect.
The wicked watches out for the righteous and seeks [to slay him. The Lord will not abandon him into his hand or] let him be condemned when he is tried.
Interpreted, this concerns the Wicked [Priest] who [rose up against the Teacher of Righteousness] that he might put him to death [because he served the truth] and the Law, [for which reason] he laid hands upon him. But God will not abandon [him into his hand and will not let him be condemned when he is] tried. And [God] will pay him his reward by delivering him into the hand of the violent of the nations, that they may execute upon him [the judgments of wickedness].
What Greg Doudna has done is reference Hasmonean history i.e. he sees allusions within the DSS that fit, as it were, the historical situation between two fractions of the Hasmonean dynasty: The family of Hyrancus and the family of his brother Aristobulus. A family squabble that brought the dynasty to an end.John2 wrote:maryhelena wrote:
Doudna ties all this to a particular reading of 1QpHab col. 11.Re Greg Doudna's identification of the Teacher of Righteousness as Hyrcanus II and Antigonus as the 'wicked priest'. Historically, re Josephus, Antigonus denied Hyrcanus the High Priesthood via cutting off his ear (i.e. he 'killed', if you will, any hope Hyrcanus had of ever reclaiming the High Priesthood.) Antigonus, viewed as the 'wicked priest', does not literally kill The Teacher Righeousness - that job was left to Herod in 30 b.c.e. Thus, the DSS Teacher of Righeousness, Hyrcanus, survived the 'wicked priest', Antigonus, by about 7 years.
I'm fine with the calendar issue either way, but I agree that there may not have been a calendar dispute. As Doudna puts it elsewhere:The two sentences in the pesher of 1QpHab 11.4-8 almost certainly allude to two distinct events in the world of the text, not one as commonly supposed. The first is a murderous pursuit by the Wicked Priest of the Teacher driving the Teacher to a place of exile. The second takes place in the temple in Jerusalem, where the Wicked Priest appears in glory on the Day of Atonement and casts the righteous (who also are in the temple in Jerusalem on this day) into disarray. The issue, from the point of view of the text, is a usurpation of the high priesthood by the Wicked Priest. The Wicked Priest drives the Teacher into exile, and then the Wicked Priest assumes the office of high priest now vacated by the Teacher. 1QpHab 11.4-8 therefore has nothing to do with a calendar dispute. Rather than being a calendar dispute, 1QpHab 11.4-8 is a legitimate high priest and usurpation dispute. The real significance of 1QpHab 11.4-8 has been lost by the mistaken reading. The real significance is a glimpse of a dramatic scene of the Wicked Priest appearing as high priest in the temple on the Day of Atonement, an allusion to a usurper who has driven out the Teacher, the legitimate high priest. It is an image of a usurper assuming the office of high priest formerly held by the Teacher—a traumatic and shocking event to the righteous in the world of the text.
Here is the Habakkuk Pesher passage in question again (using Vermes for convenience):...any assumption that the people of the Qumran texts practiced a different calendar than that of the 1st century BCE Hasmonean high priests, and therefore the Teacher could not have been a high priest of the 1st century BCE temple for that reason, or the priests of the Qumran texts could not have supported a high priest of the 1st century BCE for that reason, is no better founded than the non-Zadokite Hasmonean notion—since there is no independent knowledge of the calendar ideology of the priests of the temple in the era of the Hasmoneans, and therefore no basis for assuming that a regime of priests of the temple held views different than those of priests of the Qumran texts, as opposed to the same or compatible views.
So while Doudna agrees with the sense of swallow/destroy over Vermes' "confuse" (since he says, "The first is a murderous pursuit by the Wicked Priest of the Teacher driving the Teacher to a place of exile"), he sees the Teacher of Righteousness as having escaped death at this point only to be killed later by Herod/the Liar by tying the latter to the reference to the gathering in (i.e., death) of the Teacher in the Damascus Document.Interpreted, this concerns the Wicked Priest who pursued the Teacher of Righteousness to the house of his exile that he might confuse [or "swallow"] him with his venomous fury. And at the time appointed for rest, for the Day of Atonement, he appeared before them to confuse them, and to cause them to stumble on the Day of Fasting, their Sabbath of repose.
The portrayal of the Teacher as alive in the present of Pesher Psalms A could suggest, by analogy, that the likely contemporary text Pesher Habakkuk should be read similarly. But the Damascus Document, or at least the B text of the Damascus Document, does allude to the Teacher’s death. That allusion in the Damascus Document is set in the very recent past, in the authors’ personally known recent past, in the picture implied in the world of the text.
But if someone could have written the Damascus Document (or a version of it) after the death of the Teacher of Righteousness (and after the Psalms Pesher), I don't see why someone couldn't have also written the Habakkuk Pesher then too. And since the other times the death of Teacher of Righteousness is mentioned is in association with the Wicked Priest, I tend to suspect that his death that is mentioned in the Damascus Document was because of the Wicked Priest.
Whatever the "iniquity" or "wickedness" was that the Wicked Priest did to the Teacher of Righteousness, it was seen as being worthy of divine retribution and is mentioned in an interpretation of Hab. 2:8 that refers to blood and violence:
And it is mentioned in an interpretation of Psalm 37:32-33 that refers to killing and a trial:Because of the blood of men and the violence done to the land, to the city, and to all its inhabitants.
Interpreted, this concerns the Wicked Priest whom God delivered into the hands of his enemies because of the iniquity committed against the Teacher of Righteousness and the men of his Council, that he might be humbled by means of a destroying scourge, in bitterness of soul, because he had done wickedly to His elect.
The wicked watches out for the righteous and seeks [to slay him. The Lord will not abandon him into his hand or] let him be condemned when he is tried.
Interpreted, this concerns the Wicked [Priest] who [rose up against the Teacher of Righteousness] that he might put him to death [because he served the truth] and the Law, [for which reason] he laid hands upon him. But God will not abandon [him into his hand and will not let him be condemned when he is] tried. And [God] will pay him his reward by delivering him into the hand of the violent of the nations, that they may execute upon him [the judgments of wickedness].
This seems like harsh punishment for the Wicked Priest if he did not kill the Teacher of Righteousness.