Update on the TIME Dead Sea Scroll Story
One thing that surprised me about the Time story on the Dead Sea Scrolls and the non-existence of the Essenes is that Prof. James Charlesworth is quoted, and indeed he tells me that he talked at length with the reporter, but his input seemed to have little or no influence on the shape of the piece. Surely the reporter must have sensed, in talking to Charlesworth, that the bedrock of his views on the Essenes were hardly shattered by Prof. Elior’s well known position in the matter. The only person who seemed to think what Elior was saying was something new and earthshaking was Mr. McGirk, the reporter, as those in the field have discussed every aspect of the “Essene” matter in the exhaustive detail. Anyway, Charlesworth wrote me today about his interview and gave me permission to quote:
The journalist quoted me: “One proof of Essene authorship of the Dead
Sea Scrolls, he says, was the large number of inkpots found by
archaeologists at Qumran.”I said one proof that Qumran was not a fort is the evidence that scrolls
were probably copied at Qumran since numerous inkwells were found in a
locus that most of us consider a scriptorium, as the signs placed by the
Israelis point out at the Khirbet, or ruin. Furthermore, the only way to
many of the caves is through the area now defined by the ruins.I also told the reporter that Philo and Pliny clearly refer to the
“Essenes;” and they both antedate Josephus and could not have been
influenced by his writings. Philo called one of his publications
“Concerning the Essenes.” Josephus did not create the noun “Essene.” We
should not expect to find the word “Essene” in documents clearly
composed at Qumran since they assiduously avoid any Greek or Latin word.
The reporter correctly reported my statement that the Qumranites called
themselves “Sons of Light.”
One update. Yesterday I was informed by a senior editor of Time that the on-line story would not be appearing in the printed magazine this coming week, nor anywhere else for that matter. I have no ill regard for Mr. McGirk, but I do think the story was very misleading and ill advised, so it is best that it be retired.
