lower level and the initiation of the higher one. And, since this explanation is in accordance with the his-
torical data, it acquires that degree of certainty with which a historian of antiquity often has to be content. It
is in this sense that I consider it certain that Khirbet Qumran was destroyed by the Romans in June 68 of
our era” (R. de Vaux, 738 Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 41).
de Vaux’s Period Ia dates from ca. 130 B.C.E. to 100 B.C.E.; his Period Ib from ca. 100 B.C.E. to 31
B.C.E.; his Period II from 4-1 B.C.E. to 68 C.E. Recently Jodi Magness has proposed disregarding Period
Ia entirely, and re-dating Period Ib to span from ca. 100-50 B.C.E. to 9-4 B.C.E., claiming that the site was
not abandoned after the earthquake of 31 B.C.E. For this chronology see J. Magness, Archaeology of Qum-
ran, 63-69. This proposal has found support from other scholars. For example, Hirschfeld agrees that de
Vaux’s Period Ia should be abandoned, and says that Period Ib began no later than 100 B.C.E. He has also
suggested that the earthquake damage at the site was not necessarily sustained in 31 B.C.E., a view sup-
ported by the geo-spatial and topographical analysis of K. Lönnkvist and M.P. Lönnkvist, "Spatial Ap-
proach to the Ruins of Khirbet Qumran at the Dead Sea," Proceedings of the XXth ISPRS Congress, 12-23
July 2004 Istanbul, Turkey, Commission V (vol. 35, 2004) 558-63. Hirschfeld basically agrees with Mag-
ness that there is little or no break in the inhabitation of the site during Period Ib (see Y. Hirschfeld, Qum-
ran in Context: Reassessing the Archaeological Evidence [Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004]
54-55). Davies has also argued that de Vaux’s dating of Period Ia to the mid-second century B.C.E. is
symptomatic of his desire to parallel the period given in CD for the establishment of the ‘Damascus’ com-
munity, and thus locate that community at Qumran. On this see P.R. Davies, "How Not to Do Archaeology:
The Story of Qumran," Biblical Archaeologist 51, 4 (1988) 203-7, reprinted in P.R. Davies, Sects and
Scrolls (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996) 79-87. In addition, Hutchesson has suggested that de Vaux’s Period
Ib came to an end in 63 B.C.E., when Aristobulus was forced to hand over the fortresses of Judea to Cnaeus
Pompeius Magnus (I. Hutchesson, "63 B.C.E.: A Revised Dating for the Depositation of the Dead Sea
Scrolls," The Qumran Chronicle 8, 3 [1999] 188). Hutchesson’s dating of the end of Period Ib is chiefly
based on Josephus (Ant. 14.52), but he also draws attention to uncertainties in de Vaux’s reading of the
numismatic evidence. He argues that the coins found at Qumran do not necessarily prove any inhabitation
during de Vaux’s Period Ib after 76 B.C.E. That is, the period dating from 76 B.C.E. to 31 B.C.E. (the end
of Period Ib according to de Vaux) is represented by only ten coins. “Such a small number can easily be
absorbed into the category of coins which circulated long after the reign of the king who minted them” (I.
Hutchesson, "63 B.C.E.," 186). Against this Hirschfeld notes that most rulers issued coins bearing their
own image when they came into power, so coins can usually be associated with the period of the ruler they
represent (Y. Hirschfeld, Qumran in Context, 55). Doudna, after initially suggesting the year 63 B.C.E. as
the date for the deposit of the scrolls, has revised this date to ca. 40 B.C.E., based on textual evidence. On
this see G. Doudna, "Redating the Dead Sea Scrolls Found at Qumran: The Case for 63 B.C.E.," The Qum-
ran Chronicle 8, 4 (1999), 4Q Pesher Nahum, 683-754, most recently reiterated in G. Doudna, "The Leg-
acy of an Error in Archaeological Interpretation: The Dating of the Qumran Scroll Deposits," Qumran -
The Site of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Archaeological Interpretations and Debates: Proceedings of a Confer-
ence Held at Brown University, November 17-19, 2002 (eds K. Galor, J. Humbert, and J. Zangenberg;
STDJ 57; Leiden: Brill, 2006) 147-58.
backadmin
(backadmin)
#1