Chapter 8 - Divination, Magic and Miscellaneous
The texts in this section represent a cross section of the remaining unpublished
corpus. Some present an interesting glimpse into everyday life 2,000 years ago.
Though astrology, amulets, magic and the like were frowned upon by the Rabbis
and in theory forbidden, it is clear from other sources too that they played
some role in the day-today life of the people. The material we have here bears
this out.
How widespread this was or how serious people really were about these
things is difficult to assess. In Graeco-Roman antiquity, astrology and
divination counted among their devotees the best minds of the age. The foremost
philosophical school in Rome, the Stoics, were astrology’s strongest advocates.
Among Jews, too, astrological ideas had penetrated to the very heart of the
Temple in Jerusalem. Josephus informs us that the seven branches of the menorah
there symbolize the seven planets then known (among which were counted the sun
and the moon).
He adds that the twelve loaves of the bread of the Presence
embody the signs of the zodiac. Some Jewish writers of the period, such as Artapanus and Pseudo-Eupolemus, went so far as to ascribe the discovery of
astrology to the patriarch Abraham. Likewise 1 Enoch makes Enoch himself the
discoverer and revealer of this kind of knowledge. Thus it should come as no
surprise that among the texts from Qumran one finds a number of astrological
writings.
Amulets too were certainly widespread despite the ban on them, though these do
not differ in kind from Jewish phylacteries which were and still are widely
used. There is one reference to amulets playing a role, albeit negative, among
warriors in the Maccabean period (2 Macc. 12:40). Magical incantation bowls and
items of this kind from this period and later also seem to have been widespread.
Magical incantations sought to prevent various calamities. Magical incantations
against evil spirits were certainly a very significant part of popular religion
in Graeco-Roman antiquity.
Everyone believed in such spirits, and it was thought
prudent to take steps to ensure one’s protection. For a slight fee the local
magician or scribe would write out a spell or two, often on a bowl, less
frequently (so our meagre evidence indicates) on a piece of leather or metal
that could be rolled up and kept in a protective case. The inscribed object
would then be buried under one’s house or somehow affixed at an appropriate
location, perhaps near the door. Sometimes people would keep these items
indoors.
Texts such as the Brontologion and the Physiognomic ones represented
here are almost unique from this era and milieu. This fact alone probably
testifies to the somewhat limited nature of their use, but it is surprising that
they existed at all among what otherwise seem to be zealous holy warriors. This
shows that they must have played a role in the everyday life of the people, as
indeed they did in the Roman Empire generally, and as they do today.
Like
astrological systems, the genres represented by these texts sought to divine the
future, the first by searching the Heavens and the astrological signs for
thunder and rain; the second by inspecting a person’s physical characteristics.
It is not clear whether the interests they illustrate were proscribed at Qumran
to the extent that they were in Rabbinic circles, though their existence seems
to testify that they were not.
In this regard, one should note Qumran’s interest
in ‘Secret Mysteries’, ‘Eternal Secrets’, discourses in cryptic script and other
tendencies towards esoterica. The kinds of astrological designations present in
the Brontologion are also present in Ibn Gabirol’s work of medieval Jewish
mysticism, The Crown of the Kingdom.
The two texts on sectarian discipline and the Paean for King Jonathan actually
mention historical people - the disciplinary text quite literally, the Paean or
Holy Poem as a dedication anyway or panegyric. With the Priestly Courses III -
Aemilius Kills text also mentioning historical personages, these passages are of
profound historical interest. The Paean to King Jonathan is perhaps a missing
link in solving crucial historiographic problems relating to the Community’s
attitude towards Jerusalem. It certainly puts to rest previous theories of
Qumran origins envisaging this individual as the Wicked Priest of Qumran
allusion.
Why this remained buried for so long, like so many other texts, is difficult to
comprehend. Bringing it to light now is final testimony to the felicitous effect
unlimited and free access to all individuals can have on the progress of human
knowledge. It provides a unique witness to the mindset of the movement we have
before us, in perhaps an earlier formative period and its attitude towards a
principal establishment figure of that period.
The disciplinary text which we entitle after an allusion found in the text, ‘He
Loved his Bodily Emissions’ is also of some import. Related to some of the
Halakhic texts above, it too provides a unique insight into the everyday life of
the Community. That the people involved in such activities were serious, and
this was not simply an ideal to be followed at some future utopian era, is
graphically and vividly attested to.
The form of ‘Judgement’ or ‘reproof being
referred to is stark. It is, however, definitely mentioned in the Damascus
Document as among those the Mehakker or ‘Bishop’ was actually instructed not
only to make and carry out but also to record. Clearly we have such a record
here.
Back to Contents
45. Brontologion (4Q318) (Plate 23)
The present work in Aramaic is perhaps the most intriguing divination text found
at Qumran, for it is simultaneously a brontologion, a selenedromion and,
apparently, a thema mundi. Each of these terms requires some explanation. A
brontologion is a text that attempts to predict the future based upon where
within the heavens one hears the sound of thunder (the Greek brontos means
‘thunder’, hence the name).
Examples of such works date back many centuries
before the period of the Qumran writings. A selenedromion is a text that plots
the movement of the moon (Greek selene) through the sky and makes predictions
based upon those observations. This Qumran text records the movements of the
moon with respect to the signs of the zodiac and combines that approach with the
hearing of thunder.
Thus the scheme stipulates that if the moon is in a certain
sign of the zodiac (and it will be in that sign several times during the year)
when one hears thunder, then a certain event of importance to the entire nation
will happen.
But the text goes beyond this already interesting combination of divinatory
methods in that it regards
Taurus rather than Aries as the first sign of the zodiac. It is possible to
ascertain this fact simply by
noting the regular pattern of the text as preserved and then projecting the same
pattern backwards to
Nisan, the first month. What does this change in the usual order mean?
The
reason that Aries is listed
as the first sign even in contemporary newspapers and books is that during the
Hellenistic period
(roughly the fourth through the first centuries BC), when astrology developed
essentially into its
modern (Western) form, the sun rose in Aries at the vernal equinox. By the year
125 BC, however, a
Greek astronomer had discovered the phenomenon of the precession of the zodiac -
that the zodiac
was slowly moving in relation to the sun. This discovery indicated that over a
period of some 2,100 years the sun would move from sign to sign across the
zodiac. Thus it would not always rise in the sign of Aries and, long ago, it had
not.
From about 4500 to 2100 BC, the sun had risen in Taurus. By assigning
Taurus the first place in the list of signs, this Qumrân work is advocating an
astrological system based on the Creation. According to the system of Biblical
chronology to which the author of this work adhered, God had created the world
and the heavenlies some time during the period of Taurus’ prominence.
Probably
he believed that the Creation occurred in the fifth millennium BC. Astrological
texts that attempt to build up a sort of horoscope for the world itself are
known by the term thema mundi - perhaps an appropriate term for the work at
hand. We have used here the familiar Latin equivalents to the names of the
months and signs in Aramaic. The last lines of the preserved text from Fragment
2 Column 2 contain some interesting textual information.
Even in this genre of
literature, the nationalistic and xenophobic sentiments so characteristic of
Qumran as a whole are discernible: ‘If it thunders on a day when the moon is in
Gemini, it signifies fear and distress caused by foreigners’, or the line
preceding it ‘nations will plunder one another’ (italics ours). Though Greek
texts of this genre express themselves in a not unsimilar manner, it is helpful
to look at some of these allusions in a broader context. The use of the word
‘aural in Line 7 is an interesting one. Here and elsewhere we translate it as
‘suffering’.
It is an important concept at Qumran. It is also important in early
Christianity, because it occurs in the pivotal ‘suffering servant’ passage of Isa. 53 - referred to in relation to the Messianic Leader Text in Chapter 1 and
elsewhere - i.e. the ‘aural of his soul (nephesh - see the use of this word tied
to Ebion in the Hymns of the Poor and elsewhere above)... and by his
Knowledge will my servant, the Righteous One, justify the Many and bear their
sins.’
The term is also used in the Habakkuk Pesher, viii.2 in the
eschatological exegesis of ‘the Righteous shall live by his faith’ (Hab. 2:4),
which is so important both to Qumran and in Pauline theology (cf. Gal. 3:11
which also mentions Gen. 15:6). Since it is also used thereafter to describe the
‘empty’ effect of the ‘worthless service’ and ‘works of Lying’ with which ‘the
Spouter of Lies’ leads the Community astray in x.12, we have tried to emphasize
this eschatological dimension by translating it as ‘suffering works’.
The emphasis on thunder in this eschatological scheme is also of interest in
view of the many notices to ‘rainmaking’ connected in the literature. This
includes the early Honi the Circle-Drawer, who operated as a ‘rainmaker’ in the
period of Aristobulus, the son of Alexander Jannaeus, just prior to Pompey’s
storming of the Temple in 63 BC. This Honi, Josephus revealingly also calls
Onias the Just.
As Josephus records it, Honi refused to condemn the partisans of
Aristobulus, who, demonstrating their zeal and opposition to foreign rule, were
holding out against the Romans in the Temple; he rather condemned the
Phariseeizing collaborators of his brother Hyrcanus (Ant. 14.22-5). These, the
reader will recall, support both the coming of the Romans and by consequence,
the rise of the Herodian family that ensues.
As we have seen in our consideration of Priestly Courses III Aemilius Kills -
this is an archetypical
moment for the definition of the Qumran mindset and ethos, and crucial
historiographically for an
understanding of their development. The reference in 2.2.8 of the Brontologion
to ‘Arabs’ is also
interesting and complements the reference in the Aemilius text, also to ‘Arabs’.
But James the just (note the parallel to Honi’s cognomen) was also reckoned as
one of these primordial rainmakers. This is described in a notice from the
fifth-century AD historian Epiphanius, probably based on a lost work about James
which he mentions - the Anabathmoi Jacobou (The Ascents of James; Haeres. 78:14.
Note too the possible allusion to the Mysticism of Heavenly Ascents). Also the
letter ascribed to James’ name abounds with the imagery of ‘rainmaking’ in its
apocalyptic and climactic final Chapter, evoking one of the first archetypes in
this tradition connected to apocalyptic ‘Judgement’, Elijah (Jas. 5:7-18).
This evocation of rain and its connection with eschatological judgement is
strong as well in the War Scroll from Cave 1 at Qumran, where it is again
connected to the exegesis of ‘the Star Prophecy’ and combined with the famous
eschatological allusion from Dan. 7 of ‘the Son of Man coming on the clouds of
Heaven’.
The ‘clouds of Heaven’ here, as we have seen, are the Heavenly Hosts or
all the Kedoshim / ‘Holy Ones’ - the ‘rain’ being the judgement they bring (see
Eisenman, ‘Eschatological Rain Imagery in the War Scroll from Qumran and the
Letter of James’, JNES, 1990). Josephus, perhaps sums the situation up very
incisively when he observes that it was ‘Imposters and magicians’ of this type
who were more dangerous even than the violent revolutionaries, because they were
scheming to bring about both ‘innovation’ (religious reform) and ‘change in
government’ (War 2.259).
One should also note the relationship of ‘thunder’
symbolism to the two ‘twins’, John and James, called in the New Testament
‘Boanerges’ / ‘Sons of Thunder’ (Mark 3:17). Whether this epithet has any
relevance to the issue we are discussing is difficult to assess, but since the
same two apostles were represented as having asked Jesus to be allowed to sit on
his ‘right hand’ (Matt. 20:21; see too Mark 14:62’s ‘sitting on the right hand
of Power and coming with the clouds of Heaven’), one can assume that it does.
The supernatural aspects of the ‘sons of Zadok’ or ‘the Elect of Israel’ have
also been discussed at length in this work. There is no doubt that these have a
role to play in the Last Judgement. The Messiah himself has ‘Heaven and Earth’
at his disposal in the text by this title with which we begin the work. The
Zaddikim were ‘the Pillars’ that upheld the earth; so were presumably ‘Pillar’
apostles like James (Gal. 2:9).
‘The Son of Man’ was to come ‘on the clouds of
Heaven’ and the Heavens were ‘to rain down Judgement’. Elijah, referred to in
the Letter of James, and Phineas, apparently too, before him, were archetypical
rainmakers; so was Honi, called ‘the Circle-Drawer’, because of the circles he
drew to bring the rain. James, too, was to bring the rain – ‘rain’ taken both in
its mundane sense and eschatologically.
The zodiacal dimension of the notation ‘twins’ is in a certain sense reinforced
by the name in Aramaic of one of the astronomical zodiacal signs mentioned in
this text, Thomiah, i.e. Gemini. This in turn relates to the name of another of
the disciples of Jesus, with regard to whom the ‘brother’ signification is
prominent as well, Judas Thomas / ‘Thomas the Twin’. The ‘brother’ signification
with regard to either or both of the two James mentioned above is also clear.
Translation
Fragment 1
(5) [and on the 7th Sagittarius. On the eighth and the ninth
Capricorn. On the tenth and the eleventh Aquarius. On the twelfth and the]
thirteenth and the [four]teenth (6) [Pisces. On the fifteenth and the sixteenth
Aries. On the seventeenth and the eighteenth Taurus. On the nineteenth, the
twentieth and the twenty-[first (7) Gemini. On the twenty-second and the
twenty-third Cancer. On the twenty-fourth and the twenty-fifth Leo. On the
twenty-sixth], the twenty-seventh and the twentyeighth (8) [Virgo. On the
twenty-ninth, thirtieth and thirty-first Libra.] (9) [Tishri On the first and
second Scorpio. On the third and fourth Sagittarius. On the fifth, sixth and
seventh Capricorn. On the eighth...
Fragment 2
Column 1
(1) and on the thirteenth and the [fo]urteenth Cancer. On
the fi[ft]eenth and the sixteenth L[e]o. On the seventeenth [and] the eighteenth
(2) Vi[r]go. On the [ni]nteenth, the twentieth and the twenty-first Libra. On
the twenty-[second and the twenty-third Scorpio. On the twenty-fourth (3) and
the twenty-fifth Sagitt[arius]. On the twenty six[th], the twenty-seve[nth] and
the twentyeig[ hth Capricorn. On the twenty-n[inth] (4) and the thirtieth
Aquari[us]. Shevat On the first and the second [Pisc]es. On [the third and the]
fourth (5) [Aries. On] the fifth, [the sixth and the seventh Taurus. On the
eig[hth and ninth Gemini.] On the tenth (6) [and eleventh] Cancer. On the
twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth Leo. [On the fifteenth and sixteenth [Virgo].
(7) On the seventeenth and eighteenth Libra. On the nineteenth, [twentieth and
twenty-first Scorpio. On the twenty-second (8) [and] twenty-third [Sagitta]rius.
On the twentyfourth and twenty-fifth Capricorn. On [the twentysixth],
twenty-seventh and twenty-e[i]ghth, (9) Aquarius. On the twenty-ninth and
thirtieth Pisces.
Column 2
(1) Adar On the first and the second
Aries. On the third and the fourth Taurus. On the fif[th, sixth and seventh
Gemini]. (2) On the eighth (and) ninth Canc[er. On the tenth and eleventh L]eo.
On the twelfth, thir[teenth and fourteenth] (3) Vi[r]go. On the fifteenth and
six[teenth Libra. On the seventeenth (and) eight[eenth Scorpio]. (4) On the
[nin]eteenth, twentieth and twentyfirst Sagitt[arius. On the twenty-second] and
twenty-thi[rd Capricorn. On the twenty-[fourth and twenty-fifth] (5) Aquarius.
On the twenty-sixth, twenty-[seventh and twenty-eighth Pis[ces]. On the
twenty-ni[nth, thirtieth and thirty-first] (6) Aries. [If] it thunders [on a day
when the moon is in Taurus], (it signifies) [vain] changes in the wo[rld (?)...] (7) [and] suffering for the cities, and destru[ction in] the royal [co]urt
and in the city of dest[ruction (?)...] (8) there will be, and among the
Arabs... famine. Nations will plunder one ano[ther...] (9) If it thunders
on a day when the moon is in Gemini, (it signifies) fear and distress caused by
foreigners and by [...]
Back to Contents
46. A Physiognomic Text (4Q561)
This text belongs to a widespread type of divination especially well known from
Graeco-Roman examples. Writers infer a person’s character from movements,
gestures of the body, colour, facial expressions, the growth of the hair, the
smoothness of the skin, the voice, idiosyncrasies of the flesh, the parts of the
body, and the body as a whole. Ancient medicine in particular valued
physiognomic signs.
Physiognomy was more important in the Middle Ages and the
Renaissance than it was in antiquity, and has not yet fully died out. The Qumran
text is unfortunately so fragmentary that it is impossible to specify how many
individuals it describes or whether its evaluations are ultimately positive or
negative.
Enough remains, however, to get some feel for the text’s concerns. It
is apparently related to another, previously published, Hebrew work from Qumran,
4Q 186.
Translation
Column 1 (Fragments 1-4)
(1)... his... will be mixed and not numerous. Hi[s] eyes (2) will be intermediate between light and dark. His nose will be
long (3) and attractive and his teeth will be even. His beard (4) will be sparse
[and] not luxuriant. His limbs (5) will be [b]lotch[y, partially mal]formed and
partially thick... (7) (his) elbows strong... (8) broad and his thighs
[will be neither thin] (9) nor thick. The soles of [his] feet... (10) to[ng].
His foot... (12) [to] finish... (14) his shoulder... his [sp]irit (15)... they will be... narrowness (16)... and will not be large... thick
hairs
Column 2
(1) [His] voice will be... (3) will [n]ot be extended...
(4) The hair of his beard will be lu[xuriant]... (5) will be neither thick
nor [thin...] (6) And they will be small... (7) His nails will be somewhat
thick... (8) As for his height...
Fragment 6
(2)... be reddish... (3) [cl]ear and will [be] round... (4)
the hair of his head...
Back to Contents
47. An Amulet Formula Against Evil Spirits (4Q560)
The discovery of this text among the Dead Sea Scrolls is significant not least
because it is the earliest known Jewish example, antedating its closest rivals
for that honour by several centuries. It is not clear whether this text was part
of a larger scroll used as a kind of ‘recipe book’ by a scribe or magician, or
whether it was wrapped up and placed in a case.
The reader will also note the
several uncertainties in the Translation. In part the difficulties arise from
the genre of these texts - they intentionally use strange or unusual vocabulary.
Many such texts use previously unknown words. The other major difficulty of this
text is its broken condition; if we had more context we could gain an improved
understanding of several points.
This kind of conjuring or incantation is known in apocryphal literature like the
Book of Tobit (Chapters 6, 8, and 11) and the Book of Enoch (Chapter 7), both of
which are extant in fragments at Qumran. The Mishnah (San. 7:7), like the Old
Testament, specifically condemns it. We have already seen how Josephus
considered the magicians, imposters and religious frauds (among whom he would
clearly include some of the ‘prophets and teachers’ pictured in Acts) more
dangerous even than the revolutionaries.
Apparently, in his time, this kind of knowledge and activity was ascribed, like
so much bearing on the provenance of Secret Wisdom, to Solomon, and he actually
gives us a picture of such a person (Ant. 8.45-9). He describes how a
‘countryman’ of his named Eleazar in ‘the presence of Vespasian and his sons’
cured men possessed of demons by putting a ring having under its seal roots
prescribed by Solomon under their noses ‘and reciting that he (Solomon) had
composed it’.
To prove to Vespasian, who according to Suetonius was very
susceptible to these kinds of superstitions, that he had this power, he
instructed the demon to turn over a basin of water which he had left a little
way off for this purpose when it departed. It did.
It was a group of people like this around Vespasian, including Josephus and
interestingly enough Philo’s nephew, Tiberius Alexander, who seem to have
convinced Vespasian by ‘signs and wonders’ of this kind - particularly curing
the lame and making the blind see - that he was the real ‘Star’ called from
Palestine to rule the world. For Acts 4:6 Tiberius Alexander appears as a
persecutor of so-called ‘Christians’.
Josephus describes him as a turncoat and
an apostate from Judaism (War 2.220), and Vespasian left him behind to help his
somewhat impetuous son Titus as general in charge of the siege that ended in the
destruction of the Temple.
Exorcisms and conjuring of this kind were also very popular activities in the
Gospels and the Book of Acts.
Translation
Fragment 1
Column 1
(1)... heart... (2) a new mother, the punishment of
those giving birth, a command (of) evil... (3) the male poisoning demon and
the female poisoning-demon (is forbidden) [to] enter the body... (4) [(I
adjure you) by the Name of He who for]gives sins and transgression, O fever and
chills and heartburn (5) [...and forbidden to disturb by night in dreams or by
day] in sleep, the male PRK-demon and the female PRK-demon, those who breach (?)... Fragment 1 Column 2 (2)... before h[im...] (4) before him and...
(5) and I adjure you, O spirit...
(6) 1 adjure you, O spirit ... (7) upon the earth, in the clouds...
Back to Contents
48. The Era Of Light Is Coming (4Q462)
This narrative evidently takes as its starting point the prophecy given by Noah
in Gen. 9:25-27:
‘Cursed be Canaan; he shall be his brothers’ meanest slave... Blessed by the
Lord my God be Shem... May God make space for Japheth, and let him live in
the tents of Shem.’
Shem, of course, was understood as the ancestor of the Jews,
while his brothers were regarded as the ancestors of neighbouring peoples.
Noah’s words, which were read as prophecy, probably relate to the Davidic
period. They predict the ultimate supremacy of the Jews over their neighbours,
an inspiring thought in any time of oppression.
The text could have been placed in Chapter 2 under Prophets and Pseudo-Prophets,
but because of its unclear attribution, we place it here. It should be read as a
kind of ‘Holy History’. Beginning with prophecy, it moves on to judgement, a
judgement centred, it seems, on Jerusalem. Lines 6-8, ‘The Lord is the Ruler... to Him alone belongs the sovereignty’, are noteworthy in the light of similar
slogans attributed by Josephus to ‘Zealot’ revolutionaries who proliferated
before and during the period of the uprising against Rome (AD 6670).
As Josephus describes them, these refused to call any man ‘Lord’ and seem to
have rallied to a cry that can be characterized by the words ‘no king but God’,
i.e. ‘God rules here, not man’ (Ant 18.23). As a result, they refused to submit
to the rule of distant Caesars or, for that matter, to pay the tax required of
them, which, as we saw in relation to the Testament of Kohath in Chapter 5,
consequently became a burning issue throughout the whole of the first century.
Needless to say, they would probably not have deigned to call any Messianic
leader ‘Lord’ either.
In this text, we find the usual imagery of ‘Light’ and ‘Darkness’, (the former
now tied to the coming, obviously, of the Eternal ‘Kingdom’), ‘Glory’,
‘Judgement’, etc. If the reconstruction is correct, the Noahic prophecy is
fulfilled with Israel (Jacob) subjecting the Canaanites to forced labour (5),
whatever may have been meant by this. The reference from Line 13 onwards to a
second captivity in or by the hand of Egypt, coupled with Jerusalem’s downfall,
is puzzling, particularly as it seems also to relate to ‘Philistines’.
Technically, the text seems aware that Egyptians were considered ‘sons of Ham’
and that the Philistines, though they were also reckoned as ‘sons of Ham’ in
Gen. 10, were actually ‘sons of Japhet’ or ‘Mycenean Greeks’. This is borne out
by archaeological data. In this regard, the text does allow ‘the Kittim’ of
Qumran usage as sons of ‘Javan’ (Greece) too.
It is therefore possible that the
history we have before us relates to the pre-Maccabean suppression of Jerusalem
by Ptolemies from Egypt and Seleucid Greeks from Syria. On the other hand, we
may have a veiled reference, of the kind in the War Scroll to ‘the Kittim of
Egypt’ and ‘the Kittim of Assyria’, to Roman legions from Egypt and Syria at the
time of siege of Jerusalem.
However these things may be, the text ends with the usual promise, certainly
comforting to the nationalistically minded, that God would not forget Jerusalem
and that her humiliation would be manifoldly repaid. This is directly paralleled
in texts like the last columns of the Habakkuk Pesher or the Hymns of the Poor
above.
While envisaging the probable destruction of Jerusalem by the Kittim,
Hab. xii.2-4 concludes that ‘on the Day of judgement (.sic) God would destroy
from off the earth all idolators (i.e. the nations) and Evil People’.
Translation
Fragment 1
(1) Ham and Japheth... (2) to Jacob and he said... And he
remembered... (3) [to give to Israel... Then they said... (4) They went
[dress]ed in fine raiment because... (5) [And He gave the sons of Canaan] to
Jacob as slaves. In love... (6) [He] gave it (the land) to the Many for an
inheritance. The Lord is the Ruler... (7) His Glory which (comes) from (the)
One fills the waters and the [land.]... (8) To Him alone belongs the
Sovereignty. With Him was the Light; with them (the Angels of Darkness?) and
upon us was [the Darkness.]... (9) [He will end the Er]a of Darkness, and the
Era of Light is coming, when they (the Angels of Light?) will reign forever.
Therefore, [they] said... (10) to Israel, because He was in our midst. In the
spring Jac[ob went down to Egypt...](11) [upo]n them, and they were put to
forced labor, but they were preserved. They cried out to the Lord... (12) And
behold, they were given unto Egypt a second time, at the end of the Kingdom, but
they were preserv[ed... (13) And He gave the Holy City into the hand of the
inhabit]ants of Philistia and Egypt to spoil and ruin her. [They tore down] her
pillars... (14) [She (Jerusalem) ex]changed (her loyalty), exalting Evil, so
she will receive the poll[ution of her sins]...(15) and her defiance, so she
was hated. In her beauty, her jewelry and her clothing... (16) that which she
did to herself. A son of the pollution of Ev[il...] (17) her hatred as she
was before she was rebuilt .... (18) But God remembered Jerusalem...
Back to Contents
49. He Loved His Bodily Emissions (A Record of Sectarian Discipline - 4Q477)
(Plate 24)
This text was evidently meant to be the kind of record the Mebakker
or Bishop was supposed to keep, as mentioned in the last column of the Damascus
Document above, and columns in the extant text, which no doubt preceded it,
concerning disciplinary actions and such like ‘in the camps’. The presence of
one of these records here among the corpus from Qumran not only proves such
records were kept, but provides an astonishingly vivid eye-witness testimony to
the life that was led in these desert communities preparing for ‘the last days’
or the ‘time of the end’.
Also impressive is the consistency of its vocabulary
with what we have been witnessing throughout these texts. The mindset is fixed,
the vocabulary certain, even in mundane or trivial texts and records of this
kind.
For these purposes the reference to ‘soul’ in Line 1.2 has its implications. We
have already analysed allusions to this important notation, both in the last
Chapter and in this one. It is, of course, widespread in the published Hymns and
the Hymns of the Poor above. It is usually used in conjunction with allusions to
the Ebionim, ‘Anavim and Zaddikim - ‘the Poor’, ‘the Meek’, and ‘the Righteous’.
It is also used in the Habakkuk Pesher to describe the retribution visited on
the Wicked Priest for his destruction of the Righteous Teacher and members of
his community. It is used in the last column of the Damascus Document with
regard to the person who has not confirmed his attachment to ‘the Torah of
Moses’ and ‘rejected the Foundations of Righteousness’.
Its use in a crucial
section of the Damascus Document to delineate an attack on ‘the soul of the
Righteous’/’Righteous One’ and his associates is particularly important. In
life-threatening situations like these, and probably related ones in the two
collections of Hymns, it probably meant something like ‘inner being’ or ‘being’
- even the very life of the individual or individuals involved.
In the
disciplinary text before us - and it is only a disciplinary text, not an
expulsion one - we have the usual allusion to ‘rebellion’ in Line 1.4, no doubt
against ‘the Laws of Moses’. The allusion to ‘rebellion’, of course, is as
always a negative one. We have seen it in relation to Hyrcanus’ ‘rebellion’ -
probably against his brother Aristobulus - in the Aemilius/ Priestly Courses
text above.
We have seen it throughout these texts when considering the
rebellion of ‘the sons of Darkness’; we have seen it, too, in the rebellion
against God highlighted at the beginning of both the Habakkuk Pesher and the
Damascus Document, and it is no doubt seen as including the rebellion of
individuals like the Lying Spouter against the Law.
There is even in this
context the usual allusion to ‘Light’, and in Line 2. 1 the implication that
what we have to do with here is a ‘knowing’ infraction of some kind, not an
inadvertent one of the kind alluded to at the beginning of the last column of
the end of the Damascus Document and at length in Column vii of the Community
Rule.
The allusion to ‘the camps of the Many’ (1. 3) is also of moment in tying this
text to the last column of the Damascus Document and the activities of the
Mebakker or ‘Bishop’ there, who is described as record such infractions and who
controls these wilderness ‘camps’ generally. The reference to ‘the Many’ with
regard to these camps also happens to solve another problem raised above. This
is why having all the texts at our disposal was so imperative for the critical
historian, though perhaps not for the philologist, i.e. someone concerned with
the Translation of a single manuscript only.
It will be recalled that the term ‘Many’ was also used to describe ‘the Priest
commanding the Many’ in the last column of the Damascus Document. But the
Mebakker or Bishop is clearly described in Columns xiii-xiv of the published
Cairo Damascus Document as being in absolute charge of ‘the camps’; therefore
our problem concerning the identity of the two is solved. If the desert ‘camps’
are ‘the camps of the Many’ alluded to in passing in this text, then the Priest
Commanding the Many and the Mebakker / Bishop commanding the camps are the same.
Again, the references in early Church literature to James as ‘Bishop of the
Jerusalem Community’ and ‘high priest’ are not irrelevant. It is also vivid
testimony of the fact of the existence of the ‘camps’. Here are actually two
people who lived in them the ‘inhabitants of the camps’ so vividly alluded to in
the last column of 4QD, ‘Hananiah Nitos’ and ‘Hananiah ben Shim’...
(presumably Shim’on or Shemaiah). Moreover, the rank and file of these ‘camps’
were actually referred to as ‘the Many’. This is extremely moving, absolutely
immediate testimony.
Again we have an allusion to ‘the Spirit of Radiance’ of the kind seen in more
ecstatic texts like the Son of Righteousness (Proverbs), the Chariots of Glory,
and the Mystery of Existence in Chapters 5 and 7. The allusion in Line 6 of the
second column to ‘turning aside’ is also common in documents like the Damascus
Document or the Community Rule, particularly when it comes to ‘turning aside’
from the Law or ‘wandering astray in a trackless waste without a Way’. Such
references are omnipresent.
The allusion to ‘reproved’ in Line 9 (‘reprove’ in Line 2 Column 1) is not the
same as ‘expel’ in more serious excommunications pronounced in 4QD above, the
Community Rule, ii and the Chariots of Glory. The offenses treated in this
record are not capital or excommunicable ones, but rather more in the nature of
those listed in 1QS, vii or CD, xii-xv, presumably preceding 4QD.
The allusion
recapitulates one already encountered in Jacob’s ‘reproving’ Reuben in the
Genesis Florilegium’s presentation of Reuben’s violation of his father’s bedroom
arrangements. This is a record of ‘picayune’ disciplinary ‘acts’ kept by the
Mebakker in his role presumably as ‘Priest commanding the camps’ in the last
days.
In Latin usage, the word ‘acts’ related to real administrative records kept by
officials like governors, procurators and the like. Eusebius, for instance, in
Ecclesiastical History 1.9.3 reveals that he knows about ‘acts’ circulating
under Pontius Pilate’s name in his own time - the 300s - purporting to be the
real administrative records of that individual’s procuratorship. The ‘acts’ or
records we have before us in this disciplinary text are real administrative
proceedings in contradistinction to some others of this genre, hence their
thoroughly pedestrian and mundane tone.
Finally the allusion to loving one’s ‘bodily emissions’ recapitulates material
about mourning and sexual matters in Purity Laws Type A in Chapter 6. It is
completely in accord with the Qumran ethos as we have been following it.
Reuben’s ‘reproval’ also had to do with sexual indiscretions. It is in accord
with the Qumran concern not to ‘mix’ with such individuals, because ‘the Holy
Angels were with them in their camps’ - again the reason for the camps
themselves.
The allusion to the ‘Holy Angels being in the camps’ is to be found,
as we have noted, in both the War Scroll and the Damascus Document - the former
particularly with regard to keeping such impurities from the camp ‘from the time
they (the Holy Ones of the Covenant) leave Jerusalem and march out to war until
they return’.
Anyone who thought this scenario was a figment of the imagination of these
writers must now think again. The finding of such a fragment here makes it
undeniably real. The allusion to ‘mixing’ is of course interesting as well. It
recapitulates allusions of this kind already discussed in the First Letter on
Works Reckoned as Righteousness. In that document, this allusion primarily
relates to Gentiles and ‘mixing’ with them, but in the War Scroll and Damascus
Document it relates to mixing with ‘the sons of the Pit’ as well.
Of course all
of these expressions relate to the ‘separation’ ideology we have encountered so
repeatedly in these texts - ‘separating pure from impure’, part of the general
‘Temple pollution’ accusation, but also the general instructions to ‘separate
from the sons of the Pit’ or ‘the majority of the people’ and ‘go out into the
wilderness’ camps.
Translation
Column 1
(1)... the men of the... (2) their soul, and to reprove (3)...
the camps of the Many,
concerning (4)... rebellion
Column 2
(1) to... (2) which... the Light, knowing[ly...] (3) the Many... Johanan ben... (4) he
was short-tempered... his name... And also the Spirit of radience with... . (5) he...And
Hananiah Nitos they reproved because he... (6) turned aside the Spirit of the
Commun[ity from the
Way], and also to mix the... (7) they repr[oved] [be]cause he... and also
because he was not... (8)
Furthermore, he loved his bodily emissions... (9) Hananiah ben Shim[...
they reproved because...]
(10) Furthermore, he loved...
Back to Contents
50. Paean Forking Jonathan (Alexander Jannaeus - 4Q448) (Plate 25)
This text completely disproves the Essene theory of Qumran origins at least as
classically conceived. It was known for some 30 years, but once again
mistranslated and misinterpreted. What is more incomprehensible, the dedication
‘to King Jonathan’ was missed completely. Once again, it demonstrates the need
for open access to all texts and the deleterious effects of opening archives
only to a small circle of people.
There were really only two King Jonathan’s in the history we have before us.
These were Jonathan the brother of Judas Maccabee (c. 15 5 BC), and Alexander
Jannaeus (d. 76 BC), whom we have referred to in various contexts above. Since
the first probably never even was ‘king’ in the true sense and was never
addressed in this manner, we are probably in the realm of the second. We have
had occasion to speak of him throughout these texts, but particularly with
regard to the Priestly Courses III/Aemilius Kills text in Chapter 4.
To have a text like this Paean, introduced by a dedicatory invocation or
panegyric to him - in the words of the Paean itself, a Shir Kodesh or ‘Holy
Song’/’Poem’ - is an historical treasure of high magnitude for the study of the
Scrolls. Therefore we close our work with it and its interpretation. The fact
that it was buried for so long, with the consequence that much of the debate
concerning the state of affairs it addresses was misguided and misinformed,
cannot be considered anything but reprehensible.
Ten years ago, one of the editors of this volume observed that Qumran had to be
considered pro- Maccabean, i.e. pro Alexander Jannaeus or Jonathan and not anti.
He concluded from 2 Macc 5:27’s picture of Judas and his nine companions out ‘in
the hills’ eating nothing but plants ‘to avoid contracting defilement’, that the
settlement might have been founded by the Maccabees to honour this ‘wilderness’
experience, not (as in normative Qumran scholarship, which in his view exhibited
a definite anti-Maccabean bias) in opposition to them.
It should be noted that both Maccabee Books present the celebration they seem
written to commemorate, Hanukkah, as a new Feast of Booths or Tabernacles in the
wilderness when the Law was either first revealed or rededicated. This editor
also noted Alexander Jannaeus’ second wilderness sojourn thereafter, when the
latter and about 6,000 of his partisans fled to ‘the hills’ surrounding
Jerusalem to resist Demetrius. This Graeco-Seleucid King had been invited into
the country by the presumable party opposing Alexander, the Pharisees (War
1.92-5).
This invitation by the Pharisaic opponents of Alexander Jannaeus has to be
considered a prototypical
one for this party and the establishment Sadducees they eventually control.
Later it is the Pharisee
supporters of Hyrcanus II, presumably referred to disapprovingly in the text on
Priestly Courses
above, who sided with Pompey and the Scaurus mentioned in that text.
They are
also presumably
involved with Herod’s father Antipas, who aided the Roman troops in overwhelming
Aristobulus’
supporters in the Temple. Josephus comments on the awe-inspiring impression that
the zeal of these supporters of Aristobulus made on the Romans as they
steadfastly went about their priestly duties in the Temple even as they were
being slaughtered there. He also notes that it was the Pharisaic collaborators
of the Romans who killed more of these priestly partisans of Aristobulus in the
Temple than the Roman troops themselves (War 1. 148-50).
Josephus also describes two rabbis in the next generation, obviously meant to
represent persons of the stature of Hillel and Shammai in Rabbinic tradition. He
calls them ‘Pollio and Sameas’. During the events of 37 BC, they had advised the
people to ‘open the gates to Herod’, when the latter supported by Mark Antony
returned to Jerusalem and again stormed it, finally taking control for himself
and his family (Ant. 15.2-3).
For this, Herod never stopped bestowing favours on
Pollio and Sameas and their Pharisee supporters, while he had the other members
of the previous Sanhedrin (i.e. the Sadducee dominated one) executed (Ant.
14.175-6). Contrary to popular notion, fostered by the heirs to that tradition
over the first millennia, the Pharisee position they represented was not the
popular one. Rather the people ignored it, as they seemed to do all such advice
and typically supported the more nationalist one; so the popular position was
pro-Maccabean, not vice versa, a position also exemplified in this Song of
Praise to King Jonathan we have before us.
Finally, at the time of the uprising
against Rome, led presumably by the kinds of forces exemplified in this
literature, Josephus specifically notes that it was ‘the principal men of the
Pharisees, the chief priests (i.e. Herodian Sadducees), and the men of power
(the Herodians and their confederates - the intermediary for whom was a
mysterious individual he refers to as ‘Saul’), who invited the Romans into the
Jerusalem to put down the uprising, thus making the momentous events that
subsequently transpired and the destruction of the Temple inevitable (War
2.411-18).
Josephus and Philo’s nephew Tiberius Alexander, among others, even
presided over this destruction! There is another text at Qumran referring to
these events, the Nahum Pesher from Cave 4. This text, whatever it may be
interpreted to mean, was obviously written after the coming of ‘the Kittim’ into
the country. It appears to refer to Demetrius, mentioned above, as well as
‘Antiochus’ (probably Epiphanes) at the time of the celebrated events of Judas
Maccabee’s struggle with him, noting that ‘the Kittim’ came after the ‘Greeks’.
Therefore it must have been written in the Roman period, and the conclusion
would appear to be that in this text, as in the Habakkuk and Psalm 37 Peshers
related to it, ‘the Kittim’ refer to the Romans.
In traditional theories of Qumran origins, i.e. the Essene theory and its
variations, Alexander Jannaeus is often considered perhaps the most likely
candidate for the role of Wicked Priest referred to in these pesharim - either
him or one of his equally zealous Maccabean predecessors, like Judas, Judas’
father Mattathias, his brother Jonathan, or even Alexander’s son Aristobulus,
who was apparently mentioned in the Aemilius text. It was the aim of Maccabees,
Zadokites, Christians and Qumran to gainsay this approach. The Paean to King
Jonathan now vindicates this position, and supports the opposite.
Since the existence of this Paean came to light, as a result of the efforts of a
young Israeli scholar,
comments have been made attempting to come to grips with it, like, ‘a Sadducee
must have joined the
Community at Qumran’ or the like, mostly from persons trying to salvage the
traditional Essene
theory. Similar kinds of comments were made in earlier research about the War
Scroll, that it was
imaginary or allegorical; or about the Copper Scroll for similar reasons, that
it was not a real list of the hiding places of Temple treasure. These are
preposterous and completely miss the true ethos of the group we have before us.
This group is ‘Sadducee’, or perhaps even better (to get the nuance of the
Hebrew) ‘Zadokites’. These are not Sadducees like those portrayed in the New
Testament or Josephus. They are of a different stripe altogether. This is also
borne out by texts like the two Letters on Works Righteousness in Chapter 6, as
well now as the disciplinary text preceding this Paean above. This group was
actually living out in the wilderness camps.
It is possible to call this group ‘Essenes’, but to do so one must redefine what
one means by ‘Essenes’ to take into account its militant, nationalist, and
resistance-minded ethos, which some would call ‘Zealot’. As we have been
emphasizing, this group cannot have been anti-Maccabean; if anything it was
pro-Maccabean.
The movement behind the literature at Qumran most likely
commemorated the Maccabean ‘camp’ tradition (the ‘booths’ of the new Feast of
Tabernacles in the wilderness). Alexander Jannaeus or other wilderness-fighting
characters in the Maccabean tradition cannot have been ‘the Wicked Priest’. This
is a contradiction in terms, and shows a complete failure to grasp the import of
the materials before us.
Only an individual with Phariseeizing tendencies, like
his more accommodating son Hyrcanus lI, discussed in some detail above, could
have been referred to in such a manner. The few lines of this splendid little
poem prove this proposition as nothing else can. The poem has some interesting
characteristics. First it is a poem. We have called it a ‘Paean’ to take into
account its laudatory praise of a great figure, as well as the ‘Holiness’ of the
address, signalled in the first dedicatory line. Secondly, it is very old.
There
is an apocryphal psalm on the top left of Plate 25 above it, which is in
different handwriting and distinct from it. At the top of the Plate, too, to the
right of this psalm is the scrawled term, again in different handwriting,
‘Hallelujah’ (praise the Lord). This phrase is found in later portions of the
traditional Psalms, and its presence here further increases the sense of
religious awe of the document.
The apocryphal psalm at the top of the document is usually referred to as Psalm
154. It is known in Syriac tradition and interestingly enough was attached to
the psalms from Qumran found in Cave 11. However it is not found in the Bible.
It is a panegyric, glorifying ‘the Many’, thoroughly in keeping with the Paean
to King Jonathan attached on this parchment below it, and repelete with
Qumranisms like ‘Hassidim’, ‘Zaddikim’, ‘the Upright’, ‘the Meek’, ‘his soul’,
‘a pleasing fragrance’ and anew formulation, ‘the Simple’, just encountered in
the disciplinary text above.
A parallel to ‘the Poor’, it is found in similarly
important contexts in the Habakkuk and Nahum Peshers. It is also probably
paralleled in the Gospels’: ‘these little ones’ (Matt. 10:42, Mark 9:52, etc.).
Whatever the role this psalm was to have played in this document, its familiar
apocalyptic nationalism is completely in harmony with the ethos of Qumran and it
may even have been composed there.
But it is upon the material at the bottom that our attention must focus. There
the handwriting is
informal and cursive, and the sense laudatory. The dedication comes in an actual
nine-line poem in the
margin at the right of the main body of material, set forth as Column 1 of our
transcription. Each line
contains two phrases, though a few contain three, and one evoking ‘Israel’,
contains one. It appears to
be complete and totally original, almost like Haiku poetry, except instead of 17
syllables, it contains 20 phrases.
This is followed by material in the lower half of Column 2 in the same hand.
What we have here may have been some important collection of ‘poems’ or ‘Holy
Songs’. They may even have been sung or sent as part of a laudatory dedication
to King Jonathan himself. Or they may simply have been a private copy of
something someone wanted to keep. It should be observed, however, that the
Community shows not reticence in addressing this Alexander as ‘King’.
Many coins
minted in this period bear the logo, ‘Jonathan the High Priest of the Jews’
(Yehudim). Those bearing the logo ‘King’ are generally in Greek and bear his
Greek name ‘Alexander’. A few others bear the logo ‘the King Jonathan’, but
reversed from this poem.
The reference in Line 3 of the first column to ‘the whole Community of Your
People’ is interesting in that it reflects the similar terminology Qumran
applies to itself, i.e. ‘the Community’. So is the fact that Line 5 recognizes
the Jews as a diaspora people, inhabiting ‘the four winds’ as it were. However,
the two references in Lines 8 and 9 with which the laudatory dedication closes
are perhaps most interesting.
The reference to ‘perfection’ in Line 8, of
course, recapitulates this terminology as we have been following it in this
work. Strictly speaking, it is not exactly the word ‘Perfect’, but rather a
parallel vocabulary allied to it meaning something like ‘complete’. The word Hever at the end of Line 9 is used on numerous Maccabean coins from this period,
particularly those minted under Alexander Jannaeus.
It derives from the Hebrew
root, ‘friend’, or, if one prefers, ‘brotherhood’. Jonathan is almost always
saluted on coins using this phraseology as ‘the High Priest and Head of the
Brotherhood (or Council or Sanhedrin) of the Jews’. We have chosen to render
this word ‘Commonwealth’. Its presence in this text, coupled with fulsome praise
for Alexander, accords with the coins from this period and increases the sense
of the historical authenticity of the poem itself.
If the laudatory sense of the first column were not sufficiently clear, the
laudatory sense of the second column, and, of course, the apocryphal poem above
it, makes it even more so. It is difficult to imagine that at some point this
group could have become disenchanted with King Jonathan, and the editors reject
this position.
This column, as the reader can see, is more obscure, because less has survived.
There is a reference to ‘love’, but the Translation of the word at the end of
Line 2 ‘wine’ is puzzling in the context of the rest of the extant paean. The
word could also be translated ‘Greece’, but this too would be difficult to
understand in the context we have. Without further data, little more can be said
about it. The ‘Commonwealth’ reference in the first column is repeated in Line 6
of the second, including an adulatory reference to ‘Kingdom’, presumably
Jonathan’s. The constant reiteration of ‘name’, intended for the good of the
monarch and a blessing is noteworthy.
In this context, the allusion in Line 2.4 to ‘visit’ is of interest. This is a
term we have been following
throughout the corpus from Qumran. We have seen it in the Messiah of Heaven and
Earth text,
referring to God ‘visiting the Hassidim’ or ‘calling the Zaddikim by name’.
Here, too, whether by
accident or intent, we have the ‘naming’ signification again. The allusion to
‘visiting’ also occurs, as
we have seen, in i.6-7 of the Damascus Document.
There it relates to the
evocation of the ‘root of Planting out of Aaron and Israel’, which God appears
to have caused to grow ‘to inherit His land’. In the context of CD, the notion
of ‘visiting’ can be taken to imply this first Messianic figure with roots in
both the Davidic and the priestly traditions or backgrounds, who would then be
the similar figure who ‘stands up’, ‘arises’, or ‘returns’ at the end of the
document. It could also be taken to mean the Community itself. However this may
be, the occurrence of this ‘visiting’ terminology in this Paean to Alexander is
striking.
Finally there is the important reference in 2.7 to the ‘Joiners in the war’ or
‘joining the war’. Again the terminology is striking. It is used in a most
important context in the exegesis of the Zadokite Covenant from Ezek. 44:15 in
Column iv of the Cairo Damascus Document. It is possible to read the allusion in
that prophecy to ‘the priests, the Levites, the sons of Zadok’ as a construct
phrase with the sense of ‘the priests who were the Bnei-Zadok Levites’.
But the
Damascus Document deliberately breaks this open in favour of its preferred
exegesis. ‘Ands’ are added, so the prophecy now reads: ‘the priests and the
Levites and the sons of Zadok’, all distinct categories, not descriptive of each
other. This prepares the way for the exegesis to follow, which then identifies
‘the priests’ as ‘the penitents of Israel who went out in the wilderness’ and
the ‘sons of Zadok’ in the well-known manner.
But the category ‘the Levites’ is
not mentioned in the exegesis. Rather another word, our ‘Joiners’ (Nilvim) here
evidently playing on the word ‘Levites’, is inserted. The interpretation then
reads: ‘and the joiners with them’ - ‘them’, it will be remembered, being ‘the
penitents of Israel... in the desert’. This is the term that reappears in
this Paean to King Jonathan, but it is now tied to an additional phrase, missing
in the Damascus Document, namely ‘the joiners in the war of or ‘those joining in
the war of’. ‘In the war of is a significant addition, evoking at once the
war-like ethos of this group and that war Jonathan seems to have been involved
in against Demetrius, mentioned in the Nahum Pesher.
As it turns out, a
variation of this terminology also appears in the Nahum Pesher, i.e. the verbal
usage ‘join’. There it is attached to the ‘Simple’ notation just encountered,
and linguistically linked to the expression ger-nilveh (‘resident alien’) -
another variation of this usage - in the underlying text. The word ‘Nilvim’
actually appears in Esther 9:27, where it is used to refer to ‘Gentiles’
connecting themselves in some manner to the Jewish Community - therefore the
sense of ‘join’/ ‘joining’, which plays on the word ‘Levites’ in the Damascus
Document.
In this, it may even refer to some ‘associated’, albeit lesser,
status, i.e. a cadre of God-fearing Gentiles associated with the Community.
However this may be, the presence of this allusion in this Paean to King
Jonathan, the nationalist sentiments of which are patent, with the additional
evocation of being connected to war, is of no mean import.
Translation
Column 1
(1) A sacred poem (2) for King Jonathan (3) and all the Congregation of
Your people (4)
Israel, (5) who are (spread) in every (6) direction under Heaven, (7) may they
all be well, (8) Perfect
before You, (9) and a Commonwealth in Your Name
Column 2
(1) In Your love do I exalt... (2) in the day and in the evening,
from wine (also possibly
'Greece')... (3) to draw near so as to be... (4) Visit them for a
blessing, to... (5) upon Your Name
which is proclaimed... (6) a Kingdom for Your Commonwealth... (7) the
joiners in the war/joining
the war of... (8) Your Name for a memorial...
Back to Contents
Notes
(45) Brontologion (4Q318)
Previous Discussions: Milik, Years, 42; idem, Books, 187; J. C. Greenfield and
M. Sokoloff,
'Astrological and Related Omen Texts in Jewish Palestinian Aramaic', Journal of
Near Eastern Studies
48 (1989) 202.
Photographs: PAM 43.374, ER 1368.
(46) Physiognomic Text (4Q561)
Previous Discussion: J. Starcky, 'Les quatre étapes du messianisme à Qumran',
Revue Biblique 70
(1963) 503 note 66.
Photographs: PAM 43.598, ER 1545.
(47) An Amulet Formula Against Evil Spirits (4Q560)
Previous Discussions: None. The DSSIP lists the text as 'Proverbs? at', but the
text is certainly an
incantation.
Photographs: PAM 43.574 and 43.602, ER 1522 and 1549.
(48) The Era of Light is Coming (4Q462)
Previous Discussion: M. Smith, '4Q462 (Narrative) Fragment 1: A Preliminary
Edition', Revue de
Qumran 15 (1991) 55-77.
Photographs: PAM 43.546, ER 1495.
(49) He Loved his Bodily Emissions (A Record of Sectarian Discipline 4Q477)
Previous Discussion: None.
Photographs: PAM 43.562, ER 1510.
(50) Paean for King Jonathan (Alexander Jannaeus) (4Q448)
Previous Discussion: A. Rabinovich, 'A Prayer for King Yonaton', Jerusalem Port
Magazine (1992) 8,
9-11.
Photographs: PAM 41.371 and 43.545, ER 266 and 1494.
Back to Contents
