Zdzislaw J. Kaperaa
Many ancient manuscripts were discovered around Khirbet (“the ruins of”) Qumran in the Judean Desert at the end of the 1940’s and the beginning of the 1950’s.1 So far scholars have fought two battles around them. The first battle was over the authenticity of the scrolls. This was settled by the mld-1950’s when the antiquity of the scrolls was proved with overwhelming evidence for dating them in the period from about 150 BC to AD 70. A working hypothesis that they were compiled in the Essene Monastery at Khirbet Qumran continued to be generally accepted until the 1980’s.2
The second battle was over attempts to “Christianize the Scrolls” or to “Essenize Christianity.” It started with a famous article in the New Yorker published by an eminent American journalist, Edmund Wilson, in May 1955.3 This battle was practically over by the beginning of the 1960’s, with most scholars rejecting the idea of a direct connection between the scrolls and early Christianity. Both battles were based mostly on published manuscripts of Qumran Cave I.4
After the long and frustrating expectation of the publication of several hundred scrolls from Qumran Cave 4, without results, it seems that scholars have now started a new, third battle. This time they are urging the publication of the remaining scrolls. If they are successful, the next decade should be marked by quick progress in publication.
A number of scholarly meetings in 1989,5 dozens of articles and inter-
BSP 3:3 (Summer 1990) p. 91
views in newspapers and weeklies, are evidence of the beginning of the new battle. In this report I present some events of the last five months of 1989.
The Groningen Conference
In August 1989, a meeting of Qumran scholars was held in the Netherlands to end the celebration of the 375th anniversary of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. The main subject of the conference was “The Texts of Qumran and the History of the Community.” Numerous important papers were connected with the presentation of new texts.6
The great news, announced by Professor E. Ulrich on August 21, was that the Biblical texts of Qumran Cave 4 which he received after the death of Father P. Skehan in 1980 are nearly ready for publicatlon.7 Ulrich released “for private use only,” two charts giving full data on the progress in publication. Since some American newspapers (see below) have made the news public, I feel free to offer a few details here.
Chart No. 1 gives a list of “The Biblical Manuscripts from Qumran Cave 4, ” the volume number of the Discoveries in the Judean Desert (DJD) series in which the text will be published, and the name of the editor. 127 manuscripts are listed which will appear in volumes 9, 10, and 12.
The diskettes of volume 9, in which 35 manuscripts will be presented are ready. According to the promise of E. Ulrich, the volume should be brought out by the Oxford University Press before the end of 1990. In this way, interested scholars will shortly have manuscripts available for study of Isaiah, Exodus, Deuteronomy and Leviticus.
Volume 10 of the DJD series will present 46 manuscripts, and Volume 12 will have 52 manuscripts. They are about three-fourths ready. The promised date of publication of all Biblical texts, 1993, looks realistic (If Oxford University Press does its best).
The second important announcement, made at the end of the Groningen conference, concerned a plan to create an “International Association of Dead Sea Scrolls Research,” and an organizing committee was appointed.
The September 1989 Mogilany Colloquium
The Second International Colloqium of the Dead Sea Scrolls was organized in memory of the Rev. Professor Jean-Carmignac who cooperated in such a friendly way, toward the end of his life, with the Oriental Committee of the Cracow Branch of the Polish Academy of Sciences.8 The main subjects of the conference were the following: The Teacher of Righteousness in the Qumran Texts, Qumran and the New Testament, general studies on the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the present state of Qumranology as a new branch of scholarly research.
Proposals for improving Qumranology presented by this writer were fully discussed. For the first time in the history of the discipline, the participants unanimously approved an appeal to all interested people and institutions to stop obstructing progress in Dead Sea Scrolls studies, to give free access to unpublished scrolls by printing photographs of the manuscripts even before publishing translations and commentaries of the texts, and to improve international cooperation in the field. Other suggestions concem the necessity of the publication of a new, full Qumran bibliography, and fin-
BSP 3:3 (Summer 1990) p. 92
ishing the Qumran dictionary project. The text of the Mogilany 1989 Resolution was released unofficially in mid-October in order to give people time to express their opinions prior to publication.9
Only a few people sent us their comments, but I think that was connected with another important event which took place in the USA in mid-November 1989, when the leading people in charge of the publication of the Qumran scrolls met their opponents in Princeton. That fact drew the attention of interested scholars away from the Mogilany Resolution, but the purpose of the Resolution remains valid and more people will certainly sign it.10
The Princeton Meeting
On November 14th 1989 an evening meeting was organized in Princeton, NJ, by Ephraim Isaacs, Director of the young (four years old) Institute of Semitic Studies at the University of Princeton. This put an end to the unpleasant situation that had arisen in the last few years, when critics of the present state of Qumran studies spoke with members of the scrolls team only through letters or the media. The indefatigable Hershel Shanks has played a great role in this year’s events as he has published some impressive articles in Biblical Archaeology Review, directly or indirectly attacking the people and institutions involved in publishing the Scrolls.11 Even though this writer does not always agree with his main emphasis, and the attacks themselves are sometimes based on illusory authorities,12 he and his journal have played a significant part in turning public attention to the problem. His continuous attacks have made a strong impact first in the American and, later, on the European press. After many years of silence, dozens of articles concerning the problem of the Dead Sea Scrolls have come to the front pages of the leading newspapers and weeklies of the world.13
In view of all this, it is not surprising that nearly 200 people met in Princeton, among them not only scholars and people directly involved, but also many Journalists. During the meeting, Professor J. Strugnell of Harvard University and Prof. E. Ulrich of the University of Notre Dame disclosed a schedule under which much of the material found at Qumran ~ill be published over the next 10 to 12 years.”14 In the ensuing dispute, the editors of the Dead Sea Scrolls faced two of the critics who have denounced the secrecy surrounding hundreds of still unpublished texts from the scrolls. Prof N. Golb, of the University of Chicago, and H. Shanks, editor of BAR, repeated their well-known arguments concerning the obstructive role played by their opponents. They pointed out that quick publication of the remaining scrolls is a must for the development of Qumran studies and that without it the so-called hypothesis of Jerusalem origins of the Dead Sea Scrolls can not be verified. A critic of the present situation, Prof. N. Golb, rightly stressed that “a generation of scholars will never get a chance to study the documents.”15
Besides the Biblical documents which are to be present in the DJD series Volume 9, Prof. J. Strugnell announced the publication soon of the so-called “Letter of the Teacher of Righteousness.” However, this document, which may become one of the key documents from Qumran, was comp/ete/y unknown unt//1985, when It was presented in a preliminary way at the Congress of Biblical Ar-
BSP 3:3 (Summer 1990) p. 93
chaeology in Jerusalem.16 Thirty-six years after the discovery of Qumran Cave 4, 25% to 50% of the documents found there will remain unknown, under the present schedule, for another decade! Even if new Biblical manuscripts will finally become available in two or three years, the non-Biblical texts will remain a primary interest of scholars and a subject of dispute. Every Qumran scholar wili agree with Prof. N. Golb when he says that “our understanding of early Judaism and early Christianity hinges on publication of the non-Biblical scrolls.”17 As Mr. J. Noble Wilford of the New York Times put it, “Liberating” of the Dead Sea Scrolls from the Qumran-Essene hypothesis, Dr. Golb believes, would open the way for a new appraisal of the ferment 2, 000 years ago when Christianity took root and most Jews turned away from Judaism dominated by the priesthood and began to evolve the rabbinical Judaism that has survived in history …”18
The Princeton meeting had no immediate positive effects, apart from throwing new light on the arguments of the opposing sides and giving even more publicity to the scrolls themselves. The main argument against publication of photographic plates alone is the negative attitude of the Oxford University Press, who would not be amenable to such a plan. But to tell the truth, the Oxford Press has never made any official statement concerning the problem. What we know, in fact, is the information given by Prof. G. Vermes in 1987 that the experienced editor of the DJD has been retired for a few years. What I can add is that one of the members of the Qumran scrolls team, whom I met in August 1989, after a long conversation, finally agreed that publication of the plates of the manuscripts is possible. He then showed me original plates with his transliterations and philological comments. All Qumran scholars would be very grateful to him if he would decide to publish his manuscripts without waiting for the decision of his colleagues. Other scholars may not be ready to reveal the present state of their work, but some of them could certainly decide to print plates and their readings.
The Princeton meeting again exposed a great moral crisis in the discipline. E. Isaacs is certainly right in saying that the conference was a success: “It’s always better for people to speak directly to each other,”19 That has now happened for the first time. Will it be a turning point in the battle? In a time of political solidarity and pluralism spreading in the world, the narrow
Qumran circle remains as selfish as the Amazonians are in cutting tropical forests, not heeding the consequences of their policy. Do they not understand that they are not owners of the documents. Father de Vaux, excavator of many of the scrolls, would certainly not have liked their policy. The manuscripts belong to everyone as they are connected with the roots of Western religion, culture and civilization.
[The writing of this short article would not have been possible without the help of participants of the Mogilany colloquia, Prof. R. Eisenmann, Prof. N. Golb and H. Shanks, who have kindly supplied me with the texts of articles appearing in the United States. I should like to express by deep gratitude to all of them. January 16, 1990. Cracow, Poland.]