Pub Date : 2021-02-09DOI: 10.1163/15685179-02801007
S. W. Crawford
{"title":"Khirbet Qumrân and Aïn Feshkha IVa: Qumrân Cave 11Q; Archaeology and New Scroll Fragments, by Jean-Baptiste Humbert and Marcello Fidanzio (eds.)","authors":"S. W. Crawford","doi":"10.1163/15685179-02801007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-02801007","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42669,"journal":{"name":"Dead Sea Discoveries","volume":"28 1","pages":"122-124"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41592251","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-09DOI: 10.1163/15685179-02801009
J. Jokiranta
{"title":"History and Memory in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Remembering the Teacher of Righteousness, by Travis B. Williams","authors":"J. Jokiranta","doi":"10.1163/15685179-02801009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-02801009","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42669,"journal":{"name":"Dead Sea Discoveries","volume":"28 1","pages":"128-130"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47947477","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-09DOI: 10.1163/15685179-20201000
Henryk Drawnel
Although the Visions of Levi (so-called Aramaic Levi Document) is a Jewish priestly composition written in the second or third century BCE, the largest part of its text comes from the trove of Jewish medieval manuscripts found in the Genizah of the Ezra synagogue in Old Cairo. Among the Genizah scrolls housed at the University of Manchester Library, Gideon Bohak found a new fragment (P 1185) of the pseudepigraphic document dedicated to Levi and his life. The present study contains a new edition of P 1185, including its paleographic description, notes on the readings, comments and photographs of the manuscript.
{"title":"The Cairo Genizah Fragment of the Visions of Levi from the University of Manchester Library","authors":"Henryk Drawnel","doi":"10.1163/15685179-20201000","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-20201000","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Although the Visions of Levi (so-called Aramaic Levi Document) is a Jewish priestly composition written in the second or third century BCE, the largest part of its text comes from the trove of Jewish medieval manuscripts found in the Genizah of the Ezra synagogue in Old Cairo. Among the Genizah scrolls housed at the University of Manchester Library, Gideon Bohak found a new fragment (P 1185) of the pseudepigraphic document dedicated to Levi and his life. The present study contains a new edition of P 1185, including its paleographic description, notes on the readings, comments and photographs of the manuscript.","PeriodicalId":42669,"journal":{"name":"Dead Sea Discoveries","volume":"28 1","pages":"75-108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47411909","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-09DOI: 10.1163/15685179-02801010
Matthew P. Monger
{"title":"Dead Sea Media: Orality, Textuality, and Memory in the Scrolls from the Judean Desert, by Shem Miller","authors":"Matthew P. Monger","doi":"10.1163/15685179-02801010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-02801010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42669,"journal":{"name":"Dead Sea Discoveries","volume":"28 1","pages":"131-133"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47832056","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-09DOI: 10.1163/15685179-02801004
Jessi Orpana
{"title":"Scribal Practice, Text and Canon in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Essays in Memory of Peter W. Flint, by John J. Collins and Ananda Geyser-Fouché (eds.)","authors":"Jessi Orpana","doi":"10.1163/15685179-02801004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-02801004","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42669,"journal":{"name":"Dead Sea Discoveries","volume":"28 1","pages":"119-121"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46345627","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-09DOI: 10.1163/15685179-20201001
E. Tigchelaar
Two of the unidentified Cave 4 fragments preserving text of the Damascus Document which were mistakenly associated with 4Q269 should instead be assigned to 6Q15, since they join to 6Q15 fragment 1. This is the first case of a join between fragments claimed to have come from different caves. Also PAM 41.734 does not clearly distinguish between all Cave 4 and Cave 6 fragments.
{"title":"Two Damascus Document Fragments and Mistaken Identities","authors":"E. Tigchelaar","doi":"10.1163/15685179-20201001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-20201001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Two of the unidentified Cave 4 fragments preserving text of the Damascus Document which were mistakenly associated with 4Q269 should instead be assigned to 6Q15, since they join to 6Q15 fragment 1. This is the first case of a join between fragments claimed to have come from different caves. Also PAM 41.734 does not clearly distinguish between all Cave 4 and Cave 6 fragments.","PeriodicalId":42669,"journal":{"name":"Dead Sea Discoveries","volume":"28 1","pages":"64-74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43966925","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-18DOI: 10.1163/15685179-BJA10005
L. Quick
In the Genesis Apocryphon, Lamech worries that his son is illegitimate and accordingly confronts his wife about her fidelity. Bitenosh answers these accusations with a surprising response: she asks her husband to recall the sexual pleasure that she experienced during their intercourse. Scholars have clarified this rhetorical strategy by connecting the episode to Greco-Roman theories of embryogenesis, in which a woman’s pleasure during intercourse was taken to indicate conception. While this provides a convincing explanation for Bitenosh’s argumentation, in this essay I argue that rather than deriving these ideas from the Greco-Roman world, the conception theory which informed the Genesis Apocryphon is in fact consistent with notions that can already be found in the Hebrew Bible and the wider ancient Near East. By exploring the concept of conception in biblical and ancient Near Eastern texts, I uncover a belief in the necessity for female pleasure during intercourse as well as the existence of female “seed.” These ancient authors were able to develop and promote significant reflections upon medical issues such as conception, and this is recalled in Bitenosh’s speech. This essay therefore has significant implications for understanding concepts of sex and conception in the Genesis Apocryphon, as well as in the Hebrew Bible and the wider ancient Near East more generally.
{"title":"Bitenosh’s Orgasm, Galen’s Two Seeds and Conception Theory in the Hebrew Bible","authors":"L. Quick","doi":"10.1163/15685179-BJA10005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-BJA10005","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In the Genesis Apocryphon, Lamech worries that his son is illegitimate and accordingly confronts his wife about her fidelity. Bitenosh answers these accusations with a surprising response: she asks her husband to recall the sexual pleasure that she experienced during their intercourse. Scholars have clarified this rhetorical strategy by connecting the episode to Greco-Roman theories of embryogenesis, in which a woman’s pleasure during intercourse was taken to indicate conception. While this provides a convincing explanation for Bitenosh’s argumentation, in this essay I argue that rather than deriving these ideas from the Greco-Roman world, the conception theory which informed the Genesis Apocryphon is in fact consistent with notions that can already be found in the Hebrew Bible and the wider ancient Near East. By exploring the concept of conception in biblical and ancient Near Eastern texts, I uncover a belief in the necessity for female pleasure during intercourse as well as the existence of female “seed.” These ancient authors were able to develop and promote significant reflections upon medical issues such as conception, and this is recalled in Bitenosh’s speech. This essay therefore has significant implications for understanding concepts of sex and conception in the Genesis Apocryphon, as well as in the Hebrew Bible and the wider ancient Near East more generally.","PeriodicalId":42669,"journal":{"name":"Dead Sea Discoveries","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41627657","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-14DOI: 10.1163/15685179-BJA10001
Årstein Justnes, J. Rasmussen
In the course of the last eighteen years more than 75 new “Dead Sea Scrolls” fragments have surfaced on the antiquities market. These are commonly referred to as post-2002 Dead Sea Scrolls-like fragments. A growing number of scholars regard a substantial part of them as forgeries. In this article, we will discuss four more dubious fragments, but this time from the 20th Century—or at least from pre-2002. Two of the fragments have been known since the late nineties and are published in the DJD series. One was published in Revue de Qumran (2003), and one in Gleanings from the Caves (2016). All four are today accepted as part of the Dead Sea Scrolls dataset even though they are unprovenanced and have made-up—or at least very adaptable—lists of previous owners. In this article, we will critically review their provenance and discuss the lack of proper interest in provenance on the part of the collector who owns them and the scholars who published them.
在过去的18年里，超过75个新的“死海古卷”碎片出现在古物市场上。这些通常被称为2002年后死海卷轴状碎片。越来越多的学者认为其中很大一部分是伪造的。在本文中，我们将讨论另外四个可疑的片段，但这一次是来自20世纪——或者至少是2002年之前。其中两个片段自90年代末以来就已为人所知，并在cd系列中出版。一篇发表在2003年的《昆兰评论》(Revue de Qumran)上，另一篇发表在2016年的《洞穴里的拾取》(Gleanings from the Caves)上。今天，这四本古卷都被接受为死海古卷数据集的一部分，尽管它们是未经证实的，并且是拼凑的——或者至少是非常适应的——前主人的名单。在本文中，我们将严格审查它们的出处，并讨论拥有它们的收藏家和出版它们的学者对出处缺乏适当的兴趣。
{"title":"More Dubious Dead Sea Scrolls","authors":"Årstein Justnes, J. Rasmussen","doi":"10.1163/15685179-BJA10001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-BJA10001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In the course of the last eighteen years more than 75 new “Dead Sea Scrolls” fragments have surfaced on the antiquities market. These are commonly referred to as post-2002 Dead Sea Scrolls-like fragments. A growing number of scholars regard a substantial part of them as forgeries. In this article, we will discuss four more dubious fragments, but this time from the 20th Century—or at least from pre-2002. Two of the fragments have been known since the late nineties and are published in the DJD series. One was published in Revue de Qumran (2003), and one in Gleanings from the Caves (2016). All four are today accepted as part of the Dead Sea Scrolls dataset even though they are unprovenanced and have made-up—or at least very adaptable—lists of previous owners. In this article, we will critically review their provenance and discuss the lack of proper interest in provenance on the part of the collector who owns them and the scholars who published them.","PeriodicalId":42669,"journal":{"name":"Dead Sea Discoveries","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43903733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-12DOI: 10.1163/15685179-bja10017
Femke Siebesma-Mannens
In this article an overview is given of the verbal valence patterns of the verb נתן in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Four patterns are distinguished for this verb: 1. נתן + OBJECT to produce; 2. + נתן OBJECT + RECIPIENT to give to; 3. נתן + OBJECT + LOCATION to place; 4. נתן + OBJECT + 2ND OBJECT to make into. All occurrences of the verb in the DSS corpus used, consisting of 1QHa, 1QS, 1QM, and 1QpHab, are discussed and divided into one of these patterns. This study shows that pattern 3 occurs most, followed by pattern 2, and that it can be argued that pattern 1 and 4 also occur in our DSS corpus, though the evidence is scarce. In some cases, translations, differing from the translations in the editions of the texts, are proposed that better reflect the verbal valence patterns used in the clause.
{"title":"Double Object Constructions in DSS Hebrew","authors":"Femke Siebesma-Mannens","doi":"10.1163/15685179-bja10017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-bja10017","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In this article an overview is given of the verbal valence patterns of the verb נתן in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Four patterns are distinguished for this verb: 1. נתן + OBJECT to produce; 2. + נתן OBJECT + RECIPIENT to give to; 3. נתן + OBJECT + LOCATION to place; 4. נתן + OBJECT + 2ND OBJECT to make into. All occurrences of the verb in the DSS corpus used, consisting of 1QHa, 1QS, 1QM, and 1QpHab, are discussed and divided into one of these patterns. This study shows that pattern 3 occurs most, followed by pattern 2, and that it can be argued that pattern 1 and 4 also occur in our DSS corpus, though the evidence is scarce. In some cases, translations, differing from the translations in the editions of the texts, are proposed that better reflect the verbal valence patterns used in the clause.","PeriodicalId":42669,"journal":{"name":"Dead Sea Discoveries","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48322256","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-12DOI: 10.1163/15685179-bja10012
Aaron Hornkohl
The most authentic portrait of Second Temple Hebrew is afforded by the Dead Sea Scrolls, especially by those texts actually composed in Hellenistic and Roman times. On salient linguistic points Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew agrees with the vocalization of the Tiberian reading tradition against the testimony of the written, i.e., consonantal, tradition of Masoretic Classical Biblical Hebrew material. This article presents a case study. On the one hand, these Dead Sea-Tiberian vocalization affinities are evidence of the relatively late character of their respective linguistic traditions and of the secondary character of the developments in the Tiberian reading tradition vis-à-vis the classical biblical written tradition. On the other hand, these same affinities demonstrate that the Tiberian pronunciation tradition is plausibly regarded as one that crystallized in the Second Temple Period, rather than in Byzantine or medieval times. Lastly, since joint Dead Sea-Tiberian reading departures from the classical biblical consonantal tradition constitute a tiny minority of their relevant linguistic data, most of which are characterized by historical continuity and/or linguistic heterogeneity of comparable historical depth, it is clear that the Second Temple crystallization of Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew and the Tiberian reading tradition in no way preclude their routine preservation of authentic Iron Age features.
{"title":"The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Tiberian Reading Tradition","authors":"Aaron Hornkohl","doi":"10.1163/15685179-bja10012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-bja10012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The most authentic portrait of Second Temple Hebrew is afforded by the Dead Sea Scrolls, especially by those texts actually composed in Hellenistic and Roman times. On salient linguistic points Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew agrees with the vocalization of the Tiberian reading tradition against the testimony of the written, i.e., consonantal, tradition of Masoretic Classical Biblical Hebrew material. This article presents a case study. On the one hand, these Dead Sea-Tiberian vocalization affinities are evidence of the relatively late character of their respective linguistic traditions and of the secondary character of the developments in the Tiberian reading tradition vis-à-vis the classical biblical written tradition. On the other hand, these same affinities demonstrate that the Tiberian pronunciation tradition is plausibly regarded as one that crystallized in the Second Temple Period, rather than in Byzantine or medieval times. Lastly, since joint Dead Sea-Tiberian reading departures from the classical biblical consonantal tradition constitute a tiny minority of their relevant linguistic data, most of which are characterized by historical continuity and/or linguistic heterogeneity of comparable historical depth, it is clear that the Second Temple crystallization of Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew and the Tiberian reading tradition in no way preclude their routine preservation of authentic Iron Age features.","PeriodicalId":42669,"journal":{"name":"Dead Sea Discoveries","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44862589","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：