Jonathan Ben-Dov
moon in AB. On the other hand, a reasonable solution for this problem was
reached in the scroll 4Q317, which presented for the first time a fully devel
oped concept of the three-year cycle, thus paving the way for a regular inclu
sion of the moon in calendrical calculations. Carbon 14 tests show that
4Q317 was penned "in the second half of the second century BCE," i.e., not
long after the composition of Jubilees.^55 At that early stage, therefore, the
dispute was settled against the view of Jubilees, and the moon was accepted
as a standard object for speculation in sectarian documents.
Jubilees' solar orientation is therefore partly due to a disposition toward
solar religion, and partly due to an early second century B.C.E. calendrical de
bate. This debate was eventually resolved in a different way than the one sug
gested in Jubilees, leaving the author of Jubilees in glaring isolation.
V. The Provenance of Jubilees' Calendar
A possibility raised in research long ago, and recently mentioned again by
Ravid, is an Egyptian origin for the calendar of Jubilees.^56 This idea will be
disputed below. In fact, Egyptian lore could have been a source for the entire
364DCT, especially the famous Egyptian civil calendar of 360 + 5 days. The
insistence of Jubilees on schematic months of 30 days makes it an especially
favorable place for spotting Egyptian influence. However, several basic facts
argue against this hypothesis. First and foremost, the Egyptian civil year is
divided into three seasons, not four, and the months are traditionally named
according to their serial number within the three seasons.^57 The fourfold
division of the year is so fundamental in the 364DCT, and in Jubilees especially,
- For the present purposes it will be assumed that Jubilees was written around the
mid-second century. For the dating of 4Q317, see S. J. Pfann in P. Alexander et al., eds., Cryp
tic Texts. Miscellanea, Parti: Qumran Cave4. XXVI, DJD 36 (Oxford: Clarendon, 2000), 523. - To be precise, since Ravid denies that Jubilees' calendar is a solar one, the Egyptian
connection serves her for other purposes than those suggested by earlier authors. For earlier
attestations of the Egyptian connection, see M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, trans.
J. Bowden (London and Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974), 1:235; 2:158; H. Stegemann, The Library
of Qumran: On the Essenes, Qumran, John the Baptist, and Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans;
Leiden: Brill, 1998), 166-69. - See R. A. Parker, The Calendars of Ancient Egypt (Chicago: Oriental Institute,
!95°)> 45, with special emphasis on the persistence of this practice in the Persian period and
beyond. In general the treatment of ancient Near Eastern calendars in Ravid's article is not
sufficiently informed. Against the Egyptian origin of the 364DCT, see Albani, Astronomie
und Schbpfungsglaube, 161-69; A. Loprieno, "II modello egiziano nei testi della letteratura
intertestamentaria," RivB 34 (1986): 205-32.