Full Text

An Archaeological History of Qumran:
With an Explanation of Archaeological Techniques
Presented by Christy Connell
To
Dr. David L. Snead

Committee Chair
And
Dr. J. Randall Price

Committee Member
Liberty University History Department

May 2017
2
Table of Contents
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..3
Chapter 1: A Brief History of Archaeological Methods and Techniques……..…………………10
Chapter 2: An Early History of Archaeology at Khirbet-Qumran ………………...…………….30
Chapter 3: Qumran Excavations in the 21st Century……………..……………………………...57
Chapter 4: The People of Qumran……………………………………………………………….80
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….95
Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………..98
3
Introduction
Khirbet Qumran is an archaeological site located on a plateau in Qumran National Park
near the Dead Sea in Israel. Although it is a site rich in archaeological history and has been
visited by tourists since the early nineteenth century, it only recently became a household name
in the mid-twentieth century with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the caves surrounding
the plateau. While the Dead Sea Scrolls are generally the area of focus for most scholars, much
archaeology has been done in Qumran focusing on the community and its ruins as well. This
thesis focuses on the archaeology of Qumran, examining the buildings and material remains as
opposed to the Dead Sea Scrolls, which is generally the more popular area of scholarship. There
is also a chapter detailing the history of archaeology as a whole in order to familiarize the reader
with the archaeological process. Qumran’s archaeology is topic of some controversy among
scholars, as some think that it was not inhabited by the communal Essenes, as generally believed,
but another different Jewish sect. Others think it was a Herodian or Roman country villa or
fortress. Some of the most well known scholars that have worked on the Qumran plateau
disagree about who lived there and what purpose the buildings served, though most can agree
that it was some kind of Jewish sectarian community.
Using field notes, published and unpublished, the works of ancient scholars, and many
other sources, it is clear to see that the Qumran plateau was once inhabited by a Jewish sectarian
settlement, possibly the Essenes. Many archaeological discoveries on the plateau confirm this.
Hopefully in the future, DNA analysis will also further confirm the connection between the
community that lived on the plateau, and the Dead Sea Scrolls found in the surrounding caves.
The first chapter of the thesis discusses different archaeological techniques that have been
and, in some cases, are still used by archaeologists. This analysis goes back to the nineteenth
4
century with Heinrich Schliemann, and the techniques he developed and used. It focuses on how
archaeology has changed, how these changes in technique effect how a site is interpreted, and the
accuracy of modern methods. Schliemann, and other archaeologists of the nineteenth century,
used a technique similar to tunneling called the trench method, which destroyed much of the
archaeological remains.1 The main focus of this section will be the Wheeler-Kenyan
archaeological method, which was perfected by Dame Kathleen Kenyon in her excavation of
Jericho. Her careful stratigraphy-centric method has been incorporated into almost every modern
archaeological excavation. In this method the soil is taken down layer by layer (about 10 cm per
layer) until one comes into contact with an anomaly or an artifact.2 Then those artifacts are
carefully cataloged and removed so that archaeologists can then dig further to the next layer.
While this method also destroys the layers as they go down, all of the information from those
layers is preserved for analysis.
This chapter also focuses on how archaeology has incorporated technology in modern
times, such as radio-carbon dating. While some have questioned how reliable this method is, it
still has proved invaluable to archaeologists.3 Another more modern archaeological method is
Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), in which a device is drug over the ground in a grid pattern in
order to send pulses through the earth, allowing archaeologists to develop a picture of the
subsurface. It was originally popular with marine archaeologist to map the ocean floor before
having to dive down with a crew. However, it is now possible to use this technology on terra
1
Heinrich Schliemann, Troy and Its Remains: A Narrative of Researches and Discoveries Made
on the Site of Ilium, and the Trojan Plain (New York: B. Blom, 1968).
2
William G. Dever and H. Darrell Lance, eds., A Manual of Field Excavation: Handbook for
Field Archaeologists (New York: Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion, 1978), 5.
3
Colin Renfrew and Paul Bahn, Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, and Practice
(London: Thames & Hudson Ltd., 2007), 125.
5
archaeology as well. This technique increases the accuracy of digs helping to determine the dig
location, and sometimes even the density of the substance that is buried.4
While focusing on the recent history of archaeology at Qumran, this work delves into
some early explorations and minor excavations of the Qumran plateau that took place in the
nineteenth century before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. It continues into modern
archaeological efforts, ending with Dr. J. Randall Price and Dr. Oren Gutfeld’s current project
with Operation Scroll, the last season of which concluded in January of 2017.5 It is impossible
to discuss every archaeologist who has excavated in Qumran without having a much lengthier
work; therefore, the excavations of Roland de Vaux and Randall Price will be the centers of
focus as they have excavated most extensively on the plateau. Chapters two and three attempt to
give an overall picture of these digs and determine what was discovered in their excavations.
The final chapter addresses those who lived in the Qumran community, and how the
archaeological discoveries provide evidence that this community was a Jewish sectarian
settlement, possibly Essene. This chapter also discusses some of their practices. The excavation
of human remains in Qumran’s cemeteries is important to this chapter as the discovery of women
and children at the site has changed some scholar’s interpretations.6 Also, alternate theories of
the Qumran community are discussed, as some claim that Qumran was a manor house destroyed
by the Romans during the Great Revolt.7
4
Ibid., 87.
5
“A National Plan to Excavate the Judean Desert Caves and Save the Scrolls from Being
Robbed,” Israel Antiquities Authority, accessed April 2, 2017,
http://www.antiquities.org.il/Article_eng.aspx?sec_id=25&subj_id=240&id=4200.
6
Brian Schultz, “The Qumran Cemetery: 150 Years of Research,” Dead Sea Discoveries 13, no.
2 (2006): 194-228.
7
Yizhar Hirschfeld, “Early Roman Manor Houses in Judea and the Site of Khirbet Qumran,”
Journal of Near Eastern Studies 57, no.3 (July 1998): 161.
6
The intent of this thesis is to survey of the history of the archaeology of Qumran,
including the largely unpublished discoveries made on the plateau.8 While there is some
discussion of the scrolls, this is not the main focus as this thesis covers more of the history of the
archaeology at the site. It is not meant to be a complete history, but simply to add to the
scholarship already published on Qumran.
One work that is vital for any scholar studying the Dead Sea Scrolls or the history of
Qumran is The Dead Sea Scrolls, A Full History Volume I by Weston W. Fields.9 This book is a
detailed history of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls from the years 1947 to 1960 in
chronological order. It is so precise that it includes individual days and months when events
occurred pertinent to the scrolls and their discovery. Fields is extremely thorough in his research
and provides pictures of the people involved. He relies heavily on primary sources. For those
interested in a history of Qumran, focusing on the Dead Sea Scrolls, his work is the essential
starting point.
Fields went to great pains to personally interview everyone involved in the discovery of
the Dead Sea Scrolls, or the archaeology in Qumran when he was compiling his research. There
are only a few scholars or persons of importance that he missed because they passed away before
he could interview them. He includes excepts of these interviews, as well as personal notes and
letters of the archaeologists and scholars involved in the discovery of Qumran and the Dead Sea
Scrolls. The endnotes are critical for anyone researching Qumran as they include many personal
sources that are either inaccessible, or are now lost to time.
8
Weston W. Fields, The Dead Sea Scrolls: A Full History (Boston: Brill, 2009). The second
volume of this work is due to be published later in 2017.
9
Ibid.
7
Archaeology Essentials, Theories, Methods, and Practice by Colin Renfrew and Paul
Bahn is another excellent book. It discusses different modern archaeological methods that are
used during digs, as well as how to interpret what is found at different archaeological sites.10
This book gives a general overview on the subject in the introduction, while later going into
detail as it takes the reader through the thought process necessary to determine different
questions that must be answered when conducting an archaeological excavation.
This book is extremely helpful for trying to understand the work of archaeology, as it is
an excellent reference work for the more technical aspects of the modern archaeological methods
used when excavating Qumran. This works also includes excellent descriptions of radiocarbon
dating, thermoluminescence, and GPR, as these technological advancements of the last century
have aided in improving the accuracy of the modern archaeological method.
The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls by Jodi Magness is another
excellent source for studying the archaeological history of Qumran.11 In her opening chapter she
addresses many of the problems that archaeology at Qumran has presented. For example,
although leading archaeologists have interpreted the remains found in Qumran to be a Jewish
sectarian community responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls, others have interpreted it to be a
country villa, a fort, a manor house, or a commercial enterprise.12 She also discusses different
archaeological excavation and dating methods, but is not as detailed in her explanation as
Renfrew’s book.
Throughout her book Magness constantly challenges de Vaux’s opinions and analysis of
the Qumran community. She differs with him on so many points that she created a chart about
10
Renfrew, Archaeology Essentials.
11
Jodi Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls (Grand Rapids: William
B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2002).
12
Ibid., 2.
8
where they disagree with the timeline alone.13 As she participated in a dig in 1995 on the Roman
siege works at Masada, Magness is very familiar with the time period.14 While her analysis is
controversial, she is still considered one of the leading experts in the field.15 She also discusses
the different occupation levels of Qumran, and some of the early European and American
explorers who traveled to Qumran in the nineteenth century.
Much effort was put into this thesis using as many primary sources as possible. Though
language and time were sometimes a challenge, especially when working with de Vaux as his
work is in French, other secondary sources who quote his manuscripts have been translated into
English. Another complication is that Price has yet to publish his findings from his time on the
plateau. Thankfully, one of de Vaux’s publications on his work at Khirbet-Qumran has been
translated into English and Price made his unpublished works on his excavations on the Qumran
plateau available to me for the purpose of this thesis. These were both excellent sources as they
both contain information on the excavations of the plateau that has rarely been accessed.
While these sources are invaluable, another unique feature of this thesis is that I
participated in the excavation of Dead Sea Scroll Cave 12 in 2016 and 2017. My firsthand
involvement in the archaeological dig offers unique and previously undiscussed insights into the
study of Qumran. Much of the information in chapter three regarding Operation Scroll and
events surrounding the excavation, come from my personal experiences and help shape my
assessments of the current state of archaeology at Qumran, as well as who probably lived there.
13
Ibid., 68.
14
Ibid., back cover.
15
Despite her expertise, Magness has never excavated Qumran for herself. Therefore her views
are limited by the data and interpretations made available to her by others.
9
My interpretations, as well as those of other scholars as to the identity of those who
inhabited Qumran, rely heavily on Flavius Josephus’s The Jewish War.16 His work describes the
practices of the first-century Essenes. The book offers an excellent comparison between the
Essenes, and the archaeological remains of the Qumran plateau. He is not the only source on the
practices of the ancient Essenes, but as he studied with them for a short time in his youth he is
the most descriptive.17 Other ancient sources that describe the Essenes were Pliny the Elder and
Philo of Alexandria.
Though this thesis is not a complete history on the archaeology of Qumran, it advances
the historiography by incorporating studies of recent excavations using previously inaccessible
sources. Some examples of this would be the unpublished works from Price’s excavations on the
plateau, and my experience excavating Cave 12, which adds significantly to the historiography
since the official publication of archaeological field notes can sometimes take decades. The use
of many of the ancient sources on the Essenes not only adds clarity to the lifestyle of those who
possibly lived at Qumran, but also counters those who claim that the plateau was not a Jewish,
sectarian settlement.
16
Flavius Josephus, The Jewish War (New York: Penguin Books, 1970).
17
Ibid., 133.
10
Chapter 1
A Brief History of Archaeological Methods and Techniques
When studying archaeology, it is important to understand what methodologies and
techniques have been used in the past, and are currently being used by modern archaeologists to
grasp a complete understanding of the historical information that is presented. Field archaeology
is a discipline that has been developing for over 250 years.18 As some methods are more efficient
and accurate than others, understanding which archaeological method was used on a dig can help
determine the accuracy of the archaeologist’s conclusions. These techniques have changed much
over time as new ways of unearthing artifacts, with less damage to archaeological data, have
been developed.
When archaeology first became an area of interest, it was essentially what would be
referred to today as treasure hunting, and was not used to gain historical knowledge, but acquire
valuables and spread curses to one’s enemies. The Egyptians often collected relics from times
they considered ancient and valued them.19 In medieval period the residents of Siena unearthed a
statue of Venus made by the ancient Greek, Lysippus. A great feast was held in its honor before
it was smashed to pieces and the slivers were buried in the fields of the Florentines, their eternal
enemies, in order to bring them bad luck.20 Many monarchs in Medieval Europe would carefully
collect valuable, ancient pottery, idols, bones from prehistoric animals, and exotic corals, which
were often kept in strong rooms or safes. One excellent example of such a collection was in a
town near Innsbruck in Upper Austria and dates back to the sixteenth century.21 This unique
18
Joseph M. Holden and Norman Geisler, The Popular Handbook of Archaeology and the Bible:
Discoveries that Confirm the Reliability of Scripture (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2013), 179.
19
John Romer, The History of Archaeology: Great Excavations of the World (New York:
Checkmark Books, 2001), 66.
20
Ibid.
21
Ibid.
11
treasure chamber was designed to hold the eclectic collection of the Duke of Tyrol during the
Renaissance, and held both rare and various artifacts, such as assorted busts of Roman Emperors
and bronzes from Benin.22 The possessor of the artifacts, accumulated through smuggling or
trade, did not value them for their historical importance, but for the power and prestige that they
gave. The literate Europeans of later centuries revered archaeological remains of ancient
architecture. Rome, in particular, was venerated with its standing ruins and what they represented
for Christendom.23 However, excavation was not something that was considered at this time, and
these historic sites were often only interpreted in context of the Bible or some other ancient
manuscript.
Towards the end of the eighteenth and beginning of the nineteenth century, tumultuous
wars on the European continent created a shift in the interpretation and importance of ancient
artifacts, statuary, and architecture. In 1789, while vying for control of the Mediterranean,
Napoleon and his French army invaded Egypt. They fought several battle against the
Mamelukes, who had ruled Egypt cruelly since the Medieval era.24 However, the decisive battle
was The Battle of the Pyramids, though ten miles away from the Great Pyramids, in a fields of
Embabba, just outside of Cairo.25 At this battle Napoleon’s forces overwhelmed the Mamelukes,
and upon their entrance into Cairo, the French forces set aside three of the grandest houses for
the “Scientific and Artistic Commission.”26 Institut d’Egypte was then created where French
scholars were able to study and examine every aspect of Egypt that could be considered
beneficial in any way to Napoleon’s Empire. While their focus was not on history but on many
22
Ibid.
23
Ibid., 67.
24
Ibid., 76-77
25
Bob Brier, “Napoleon in Egypt: The General’s Search for Glory Led to the Birth of
Egyptology,” Archaeology 52, no. 3 (May/June 1999), 47.
26
Ibid., 47-48.
12
other branches of science and art, it is impossible to study these things in Egypt without
including the ancient artistic structures and buildings.27 Thus a branch of archaeology,
Egyptology, was born and Egyptian archaeology was initiated.28 While this did not include
anything that could be considered excavation, a valiant attempt was made by these scholars to
record the architectural and statuary remains of Egypt in a methodical and measured manner.29
In the mid-nineteenth century archaeology became something more similar to what one
might be familiar with today. Instead of simply measuring and recording structures that were
already visible above ground, digging tunnels and trenches through archaeological mounds (also
known as tells in Israel) became the common practice. Unfortunately, this resulted in the damage
and disposal of untold amounts of archaeological data. The cataloging of information was also
sporadic and inconsistent. As time went on, the destructive nature of this method was realized,
and slowly a careful and precise methodology was developed. In modern times technology has
also been added into this methodology to increase accuracy and to cut down on the length of
time spent on a dig. Despite all of this development, the techniques archaeologists can differ due
to their preferences and what best suits the environment in which they work. Archaeology,
though it is a science, is not the most exacting or precise branch. While every artifact must be
cataloged and have its measurements, color, material, form, technique, and maybe chemical
composition recorded, each archaeologist must take notes that best suit their needs, adding great
diversity to an imprecise science.30
In the early development of what is now the historical-science of archaeology, it more
closely resembled treasure-hunting and chasing epic myths instead of the fairly precise
27
Romer, The History of Archaeology, 79.
28
Ibid., 78-79.
29
Ibid., 80.
30
Sir Leonard Woolley, Digging Up the Past (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1961), 6.
13
methodology it has become.31 The German archaeologist, Heinrich Schliemann (1822-1890),
who is famous for his excavations in modern-day Turkey and Greece, is an excellent example of
this mythological treasure-hunting. Schliemann, inspired by the Homer’s epics the Iliad and the
Odyssey which he read as a youth, used these stories as a guide to find the lost city of Troy (or
Ilium) at his own expense and for his personal pleasure, not to make a profit.32 After a few digs
that failed early on at other sites, his archaeological partner, Frank Calvert, led him to Hiserlick,
in modern Turkey. The excavation proceeded in 1870.33
Since there were no visible structures or monuments at the Hiserlick, as there had been at
previously excavated archaeological sites (like Nimrud, an Assyrian palace34), Schliemann
decided to attempt his own tunneling and trenching method.35 Instead of digging
indiscriminately, Schliemann planned to cut into the archaeological mound transversely in an
attempt to lay open the various strata simultaneously.36 Large trenches were cut into the strata,
reaching nearly the entire depth of the archaeological mound. The main goal of this method was
to uncover as much archaeological information as possible, in order to contribute to the
knowledge of the site, and confirm that this was the Troy of Homer’s Illiad by uncovering the
remains of a temple that Schliemann thought to be resting on the “native soil” (meaning the
bottom layer of the mound.)37
31
Holden, The Popular Handbook, 179.
32
Schliemann, Troy and Its Remains, v., and Ibid., 14.
33
Susan Heuck Allen, Finding the Walls of Troy: Frank Calvert and Heinrich Schliemann at
Hisarlik (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999), 7-8.
34
Tim Murray, Milestones in Archaeology: A Chronological Encyclopedia (Oxford: ABC-CLIO,
2007), 194-195. Nimrud was excavated by the Englishman Austen Henry Layard beginning in 1845 and
ending around 1850. While digging tunnels and trenches was still the archaeological method used, there
were architectural remains visible on top of the archaeological mound before excavation began, unlike
Hiserlick. Nimrud was the second capital of the Assyrian Empire, after Nineveh.
35
Schliemann, Troy and Its Remains, vii.
36
Ibid.
37
Ibid., v and 61.
14
From this perspective, the dig was partially a success. Schliemann and his company
unearthed over 100,000 objects from various archaeological strata.38 Also, Schliemann and his
dig partner, Frank Calvert, identified several geographical features of the site that correlate with
Homer’s Illiad. For example, how there are springs near the base that run hot and cold, as
described by Homer.39 However, even though they removed a great diversity of artifacts from the
mound, they were not always cataloged with accuracy.40 The depth at which they were found,
which is imperative in order to determine what time period they came from and their age, was
not always cataloged.41 Removing an artifact from its context, and improperly documenting
where it was found gives an incomplete recreation and understanding of the excavation and
civilization for those who are not at the site while the dig is in progress.
Also, when digging these trenches into Hiserlick, Schliemann and his crew carried away
baskets and carts full of what they called “rubbish.”42 In modern archaeological methods this
rubbish would be carefully sifted through, looking for any miniscule artifact or fragment that
could have escaped notice, but still could add to the understanding of the site. Schliemann, on the
other hand, dumped this archaeologically rich soil “a long way off” in order to get it out of his
way.43 Another oversight occurred while digging the initial trench when they unearthed a
building “which appear[ed] to belong to the first century after Christ… about 59 feet in length,
and 43 feet in breadth.”44 However, 100 years after Christ (approximately 200 A.D.) was much
38
Ibid.
39
Susan Heuck Allen, Finding the Walls of Troy: Frank Calvert and Heinrich Schliemann at
Hisarlik (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999), 72.
40
Mark Rose, “What did Schliemann Find- and Where, When, and How Did He Find It?,”
Archaeology 46, no. 6 (November/December 1993), 33.
41
Schliemann, Troy and Its Remains, vi.
42
Ibid., 60.
43
Ibid.
44
Ibid., 61.
15
too late for the happenings of the Trojan War, which would have approximately been the same
time as the Mycenaean civilization; therefore, Schliemann had the entirety of the building,
foundation included, removed, as “they were of no use and would only have been in the way.”45
In this way Schliemann destroyed layer after layer without much documentation, because he
deemed them “unimportant” in his quest for Troy.46
Archaeology will always be destructive. Every time an archaeologist uncovers a building,
or excavates down to the next line of strata, the traces made by ash, fallen brickwork, or the
scattering of pottery remnants are gone and can never be replaced. Any evidence in the soil, or in
the placement of a building or artifact that was not recorded is gone forever, along with all
historical data it could have contained. This is less of a travesty if archaeologists properly record
and preserve for posterity the recovered objects.47 However, Swedish archaeologists, among
others, soon found Schliemann’s methodology to be inefficient and inaccurate, as they began to
develop careful excavation and classification techniques.48
Despite the problems with his method, Schliemann did a good job of attempting to get a
sketch or photograph of each object which his crew removed from the mound which he valued of
importance.49 He then organized the photographs and drawings by type and pattern into his book,
Troy and its Remains, A Narrative of Researches and Discoveries Made on the Site of Ilium, and
in the Trojan Plain. For the time in which they were created, the pictures and drawings are in
45
Ibid.
46
Ibid., 62.
47
Woolley, Digging Up the Past, 40.
48
Murray, Milestones in Archaeology, 215. The Swedes were forced to develop this
archaeological method, instead of another European nation, because their archaeological remains did not
consist of monumental Roman and Medieval architecture.
49
Schleimann, Troy and Its Remains, vii, and David A. Traill, “Schliemann’s Mendacity: A
Question of Methodology,” Anatolian Studies 36 (1986), 91-92.
16
crisp detail, and evenly distributed throughout the book, therefore, despite his primitive
techniques, Schliemann still made some beautiful discoveries.
Though Schliemann’s work was destructive and caused a substantial loss of information,
the fame of his excavations and volume of artifacts that he found often inspired the work of
future archaeologists whose methodology was a bit more progressive. One such archaeologist
was the Englishman, Sir Leonard Woolley (1880-1960).50 According to Woolley, the aim of field
archaeology is to “discover and illustrate the course of human history.”51 At this time
archaeologists no longer funded by themselves or private investors for personal gain. Instead
museums, universities, and institutions who were looking for artifacts to fill their shelves or
prestige to add to their name sponsored digs.52 The method and purpose of raising funds for an
excavation was not the only thing that changed between Schliemann and Woolley.
At the beginning of Woolley’s career as a field archaeologist his methodology was still
rather informal in comparison with his practices later on in his career.53 As a young man he
worked on archeological digs in England without ever having studied the subject. His only
experience was handling antiquities in a museum for a few months.54 However, he quickly
learned the importance of planning and surveying a dig site, and laying out a grid in order to get
the most useful and accurate results.55 There was now a more interpretive element, which
involved the elements of observing and recording, in order to acquire as much knowledge as
possible about the site.56 Archaeologists at this time, especially Woolley, began to appreciate
50
Sir Leonard Woolley, Spadework (New York: Philosophical Library, Inc., 1953), 11.
51
52
Ibid., 39.
53
Woolley, Spadework, 15-16.
54
Ibid.
55
Ibid.
56
17
archaeological context. Woolley says, “[a great] extent [of] the historical value of an object
depends on our knowledge of the conditions in which it was found.”57 When artifacts are
removed from their context and sold, there is nothing but the item itself to judge country of
origin and age. While this does not damage the item itself, it destroys all historical value.58
Towards the end of Woolley’s career, archaeology had become an established science.59
Field archaeology became “the application of scientific method to the excavation of ancient
objects… and [was] based on the theory that the historical value of an object depends not so
much on the nature of the object itself as on its associations.”60 Instead of the emphasis being on
the digging, archaeology became more about elaborate note-taking and delicate fine-motor
skills.61 Digging is still a large part of the process, but this is begun by local, unskilled laborers
that are hired from the area. Then, the skilled staff with archaeological experience (in Woolley’s
case, generally brought with him from England) removed artifacts. On small scale digs at this
time, archaeologists would often get into the dirt and dig with their men. However, this did not
often happen as most excavations in the Middle East became much more elaborate, and were on
a grander scale in order to make them more cost effective.62 The head archaeologist, like
Woolley, would then take a more hands-off approach, directing the foreman and supervising,
while meticulously cataloging each fragment and artifact that was discovered, only digging when
a particularly fragile artifact demanded attention.63
57
Ibid., 19.
58
Ibid.
59
Ibid., 38.
60
Ibid., 18.
61
Ibid., 42.
62
Ibid., 42-44.
63
Ibid., 42-48.
18
Near Woolley’s retirement in the 1960s, several technological advances were applied to
the practice of field archaeology. One of these technologies, aerial photography, allows
archaeologists to easily map the overall structure of the site.64 Before this time dig sites would
have to be mapped and diagramed by hand. Aerial photography allows these maps to be made
more quickly and easily than in the past. They also give a more complete view of the site, and
allow the archaeologist to see features that normally would not be discernable from the ground.
Another new development was the use of dendrochronology (also known as tree ring dating) to
date wooden objects or structures.65 While this scientific process can be used to determine the
age of a tree using its tree rings, in the field of archaeology it is used to determine when the
timber was felled, transported, processed, or used for the construction of wooden artifacts.66 It is
also a component of radiocarbon dating.
Radiocarbon dating, which is also known as C-14 dating, is another practice that was
integrated into archaeology at this time.67 It is called C-14 dating because this type of test
measures the amount of Carbon found in an object that has a molar mass of fourteen. C-14 is a
slightly radioactive isotope that is a part of all organic matter and decays incrementally over
time.68 Samples of organic materials are collected and taken to a lab, where the remaining
amount of C-14 isotopes are measured. This allows the archaeologist to determine a more precise
date for organic materials, no matter the climate.69 Before radiocarbon dating, dates were
64
Ibid., 5.
65
Ibid.
66
Henri D. Grissino-Mayer, “Principles of Dendrochronology,” The Science of Tree Rings, last
updated November 2016, accessed on December 11, 2016, http://web.utk.edu/~grissino/principles.htm.
67
68
Mallory Warner, “Carbon-14 is 75+0 Years Old,” Smithsonian, last updated February 27, 2015,
accessed December 12, 2016, http://americanhistory.si.edu/blog/carbon-14.
69
Renfrew, Archaeology Essentials, 125.
19
relative, and determined by layers and pottery.70 While C-14 dating can still be a bit subjective
and does not always work, especially if the sample has been contaminated, it still greatly
impacted the field of archaeology.71
The ability to test for thermoluminescence is another technological advance in the field of
archaeology from the mid-20th Century. This is a dating method that can be used to determine the
age of buried objects that were heated in the past, like cooking pots. However, this dating
method has not received as much attention as radiocarbon dating, because the conditions must be
very precise in order for thermoluminescence to be present. The pottery shards, or other
geological remains, must have been buried for at least two-thirds of their burial time at a depth of
at least thirty centimeters.72 Each sample taken must have at least six shards, and these pieces can
be no smaller than twenty-five by twenty-five by five millimeters.73 These samples cannot be
exposed to any moisture or radiation, including ultra-violet radiation from sunlight, before they
are tested.74 Samples of the surrounding soils and materials must also be taken.75 As this dating
method requires very particular conditions it is not used much, and radiocarbon dating has
received the most attention. These technological developments cannot be performed while
working in the field on an excavation, but samples must be sent to a lab for experimentation and
analysis. It shows a transition from archaeology being all field work and analysis, to some time
spent in the science lab as well. The methods mentioned above are all fine examples of how
archaeological methods change and improve with the assistance of developing technology.
70
Ibid., 124.
71
Ibid.
72
Dever and Lance, eds., A Manual of Field Excavation, 20.
73
Ibid.
74
Ibid.
75
Ibid.
20
Just because there were technological advances that assisted archaeology around the
middle of the twentieth century does not mean that more traditional dating methods were not still
used on an excavation. One of the most popular dating methods that is still in use today, and
probably the most cost effective as it does not required experimentation in a lab, is ceramic
typology.76 This is the daily analysis of pottery from each layer of excavation. All pottery is
washed and dried, and then immediately reviewed and dated.77 Each layer is then dated by the
latest pottery it contains. The use of ceramic typology is a useful check for those digging using
stratigraphy, but only if the period and origin of the pottery being excavated can be exactly
determined; therefore, great care must be taken when processing the pottery, so that it does not
get mixed with something from another layer.78
Generally, the procedure is to take the pottery from each operation (or square) and place
it in a bucket which is tagged for that particular operation.79 Archaeologists never place pottery
from other operations in that bucket. Loose shards are not collected elsewhere to be deposited
into the bucket later. They all go directly into the bucket. If a loose shard falls from the edge of a
trench or balk and into the area being excavated it is thrown away.80 This is because any pottery
or shards that end up in a layer where they did not originate, contaminate that layer and risk
misdating the strata, which can throw off the timeline for the whole site. However, when done
properly, this technique has been found to be quite useful even to modern archaeologists, and can
keep dig expenses lower than other dating methods, that often require lab fees.
76
Ibid., 5.
77
Ibid.
78
Ibid.
79
Ibid.
80
Ibid.
21
During the later years of Woolley’s career, and after his death, methodologies continued
to develop. It was during this time that Dame Kathleen Kenyon refined what is now known as,
the Wheeler-Kenyon method, at her excavation at Tell es Sultan (also known as Old Testament
Jericho) in the 1950s.81 Her many discoveries at Jericho made her famous. She also had many
digs all over the Holy Land. However, it was her meticulous archaeological methods that gave
her lasting recognition as one of Great Britain’s foremost field archaeologists.82 The
archaeological method she developed actually began with the earlier work of Sir Mortimer
Wheeler, but Kenyon is the one who became famous because of her development of this
methodology. She acquired more attention from the archaeological method that bears her name
than from any dig to which she ever contributed.83
While he is not the archaeologist who made it famous, Sir Mortimer Wheeler initially
began the development of the Kenyon-Wheeler method. Much like Woolley, he initially began
his archaeological work in England around the turn of the twentieth century, before working on
digs in various English colonies, such as Sudan and India. He believed that field archaeology
was a science, therefore, he approached a dig with scientific inquiry and imposed this view on all
working with him. He saw this as imperative for the progression of field archaeology.84 He
expected his crew to have discipline and patience, as his method was meticulous and required
much technical precision in recording and much forward planning.85
81
Philip J. King, American Archaeology in the Mideast: A History of the American Schools of
Oriental Research (Winona Lake, IN: The American School of Oriental Research, 1983), 125.
82
Miriam C. Davis, Dame Kathleen Kenyon: Digging Up the Holy Land (London: Left Coast
Press, 2010), 12.
83
Ibid.
84
Sudeshna Guha, “Imposing the Habit of Science: Sir Mortimer Wheeler and Indian
Archaeology,” Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 13, no. 1 (May 2003): 4.
85
Ibid.
22
One large component of Wheeler’s excavations that differentiated them from earlier digs
was his use of “the geological principles of stratigraphy [and how they] held meaning in the
production of archaeological knowledge.”86 This archaeological method requires the careful
removal of dirt one layer at a time. It also pays close attention to each soil layer and its
relationship to the surrounding soil layers, and features within the grid that differentiate from
surrounding materials.87 It is important to use vertical balks (places in the soil where one can see
the stratigraphy) to tell where one is going, and where one has already been in the soil.88 While it
sounds fairly simple, this method can be complicated, especially when the archaeological mound
being excavated is ancient and has many layers.89 It is important that the site first be surveyed
and marked off in grid units small enough for a slow and controlled excavation.90 While this
method still destroys layers of archaeological data, Wheeler’s meticulous recording techniques
and carefully documentation of each artifact meant that the historical data was not lost as each
layer was removed. While archaeological sites will never be the same after a dig, the information
that they contained can be preserved for future generations. Although his conclusions about his
findings were not always correct, his excellent record keeping and methods allowed Wheeler to
lay the ground work for future archaeologists.
Kenyon became familiar with Wheeler’s slow, but precise, methods while she was
studying under him in England and working on several of his digs. While she is not the only one
of Wheeler’s students to qualify as a professional archaeologists, she is probably the most
86
Ibid., 3.
87
Davis, Dame Kathleen Kenyon, 47. Some examples of these differentiating materials would be
a layer of ash, a change in substance, or even a darkening of the soil.
88
Dever, A Manual of Field Excavation, 4.
89
Guha, “Imposing the Habit of Science,” 3.
90
23
famous of his students.91 She had a special aptitude for stratigraphy, earning the nickname
“Mistress of Stratigraphy” while in school.92 She was the first person to use this archaeological
method in Israel.93 Before this point, the primitiveness of previous archaeological field
techniques and excavations in the Holy Land did not yield much in the way of results.94 Tell
Jericho, the city for which she is known for excavating, had previously been excavated by
Charles Warren, who completely missed the significance of what he found when he dug a large
trench through the archaeological mound, in the style of Heinrich Schliemann.95 This made it
difficult to separate the different layers of occupation debris, and did not yield great results. He
did not think any further excavation of Jericho would yield anything of historical significance.
Kenyon proved him wrong by using Wheeler’s debris analysis techniques and
stratigraphy. She laid out a grid and started digging in squares that were (usually) five by five
meters, leaving large baulks between the squares in order to make the stratigraphy more visible.96
What made Kenyon’s dig in Jericho different from Wheeler’s previous methodology is she could
not adhere to his rigid grid system of extended squares because the topography did not allow for
it.97 Instead, she made the methodology much more flexible by adapting the squares to what the
circumstances required.98 Using this adaptive version of Wheeler’s technique Kenyon proved
Warren wrong, as it produced structures, pottery, and objects from many different layers of Tell
Jericho.
91
Guha, “Imposing the Habit of Science,” 3.
92
Davis, Dame Kathleen Kenyon, 47.
93
94
Davis, Dame Kathleen Kenyon, 55.
95
Ibid.
96
Ibid., 106.
97
Ibid.
98
Ibid.
24
Most modern archaeological methods are some variation of the Kenyon-Wheeler method,
allowing for small discrepancies and preferences that differ depending on the archaeologist.
However, archaeologists have now added modern technology to this method in order to cut down
on dig time and increase productivity. Also, some of the limits of previous technological
advances have been discovered. Denochrology and radiocarbon dating have found their limits.
Advances have been made in these fields. Scientists now use smaller samples of organic material
than ever before, which means grains, seeds, and small precious objects can be dated.99
However, there is now a certain amount of error now associated with radiocarbon dating.100
Generally, this inaccuracy is due to contamination. This can happen before the sample is
taken if the site is waterlogged, but this is unlikely and can usually be handled in the
laboratory.101 Contamination can also happen during or after a sample is taken. Any organic
material that comes into contact with a sample can contaminate it. Sometimes organic materials,
such as roots, are difficult to avoid, but this can also be corrected in the lab.102 Date of context
can also be a problem with radiocarbon dating. Too often it is assumed that the date given from a
radiocarbon sample is straightforward, and the test results are the date of burial. However, if one
is testing the charcoal from a building in a burn layer, radiocarbon dating is not the best method.
This is because it will be testing the age of the wood when it was harvested and put into use,
which could be hundreds of years before it was burned.103
99
100
David A. Dewitt, Unraveling the Origins Controversy (Lynchburg, VA: Creation Curriculum,
2007), 133.
101
Ibid.
102
Ibid., 124-125.
103
Ibid., 125.
25
One of the most common reasons for errors in radiocarbon dating is because of a
misunderstanding in the context of deposition.104 This happens with the archaeologist, or
excavator taking the sample, does not understand how the organic material in question came to
be at the site. The excavator must have some understanding of how the organic material found its
way to the position in which it was found, and how it came to be buried. Without this
information exact interpretation of the radiocarbon dating is impossible.105
Despite its long-term use in the field of archaeology, there are some who still question the
accuracy of radiocarbon dating, even when the sample has not been contaminated. Radiocarbon
dating only works if the decay rate (or half-life) of C-14 is known and constant.106 RATE (which
stands for Radioisotopes and the Age of The Earth) scientists believe that they might have
evidence that the decay rates of radioisotopes was much faster in the past than it is now.107 This
would mean that using half-life to determine the length of time that has passed is much too slow.
It also means that the actual measurements of the amount C-14 is correct, but the inferred time
that has passed is not.108 All of this would culminate in the sample of organic material appearing
to be much older than it actually is. Other scientists counter this argument and claim that the
amount of carbon in the atmosphere has varied over time, not the decay rate, and different
environmental factors could contribute.109 For example, there is something called a “marine
reservoir” effect. Carbon from the sea ages differently and could be read as older than it actually
104
Ibid.
105
Ibid.
106
Ibid., 133.
107
Ibid., 134. RATE is a team of physical scientists assembled to conduct research on radiometric
dating methods.
108
Ibid.
109
Jim Grant, Sam Gorin, and Neil Fleming, The Archaeology Coursebook: An Introduction to
Themes, Sites, Methods, and Skills (New York: Routledge, 2008), 102-103.
26
is. This means that test results from Radiocarbon dating where the results were based off of
populations that ate a lot of marine life might be inaccurate.110
Even Willard Libby, winner of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1960 who essentially
invented radiocarbon dating, claimed the that half-life of the carbon-14 isotope lasted thousands
rather than millions of years. He also claimed that C-14 “was continuously formed in the
atmosphere by cosmic radiation... [and] freshly formed isotopes were added to the carbon
contained in all living plants and animals until their death.”111 Libby estimated that because of
the decay rate, radiocarbon dating is only accurate on material approximately 5,000 years old or
younger.112 While it is still common practice to have bones and food remains tested with
radiocarbon dating, archaeologists are finding it to be untrustworthy due to the fairly large
margins for error mentioned above, especially when it comes to items crafted out of wood.
Instead of being seen as a definitive date, the test results for Radiocarbon dating are now seen as
approximate by some archaeologists.
Radar is something else that has recently been added to an archeologist’s bag of tools,
specifically SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar).113 This is a process in which multiple radar images
“are processed to yield extremely detailed high-resolution results which can provide data for
maps, databases, land-use studies” and other things of that nature.114 This technology has
replaced aerial photography for many archaeologists, especially those excavating in difficult
climates and conditions, because it yields results whether in the day or the night, and regardless
110
Ibid., 103.
111
Justin Wintle, ed., New Makers of Modern Culture: Volume 2, s.v. “Libby, Willard Frank,”
(New York: Routledge, 2007), 908-909.
112
Willard F. Libby, Radiocarbon Dating (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1955), 10,
34-35.
113
114
Ibid.
27
of weather.115 It can also save a great deal of time because when combined with multispectral
data from satellites, archaeologists can use it to make an inventory of archaeological sites in the
area. This is a better alternative to a surface survey, which can be slow and can destroy historical
data.116
LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) has also become increasingly useful to
archaeologists in the past few years. This is “a new laser scanning technique which can
accurately map whole landscapes, even beneath tree cover.”117 Using GPS to get an exact
position, an aircraft carries a laser scanner that rapidly pulses a series of beams to the ground.
Through measuring the time that it takes for these beams to return to the aircraft, an accurate
picture of the ground can be created in the form of a digital elevation model (or digital surface
model.)118 Recently, this technology was used to find more ruins in the international Greater
Angkor Project in Cambodia. Because the site is located in dense jungle and surrounded by land
mines, the area was previously extremely difficult to map. However, because of LIDAR,
archaeologists discovered that this 1000 year old temple complex may cover up to 11,500 square
miles, and was most likely a large, ancient city, not just a temple.119 It also helped archaeologists
discover ancient canals surrounding the city, that were most likely used for irrigating rice fields,
feeding pools and moats, and probably to transport the large stones that were used to build this
massive complex.120
While archaeologists use the aforementioned technologies in mapping sites, there are also
technologies that help probe the soil of excavation sites as well. The older and more traditional
115
Ibid.
116
Ibid.
117
Ibid., 78.
118
Ibid.
119
Ibid., 77-78.
120
Ibid.
28
methods of probing involves shoving a metal rod with a handle into the ground to see where is
strikes solids or hollows and to attempt to collect small core samples.121 Unfortunately, when
using this method one runs the risk of damaging a fragile artifact or a feature of the site, and it
can cause much disturbance. Thankfully, there are a few methods for the modern archaeologist
that are more advanced and pose less of a risk to the site.122 One of these methods is ground
penetrating (or probing) radar (GPR). It sends short radio pulses through the soil and echoes back
changes in the soil and different sediment conditions, such as graves, filled ditches, and walls
that could be present in the strata. What makes this method really useful to archaeologists is that
it can also determine the depth at which these changes occur.123 This means that archaeologists
can learn a great deal about a site without disturbing it at all, and ensure the safety of all of the
data within. It also saves dig time that would have been spent looking for subterranean
structures or anomalies, which cuts down on expenses. As the technology has developed and
computers have become more commonplace, archaeologists who use GPR can create three-
dimensional datasets called “time-slices” or “slice-maps.”124 These datasets can be “sliced”
multiple times horizontally at specific depths to reveal the general shape and location of buried
features that may have archaeological significance.125
One example where GPR was recently benefited archaeologists involved was at the
Forum Novum, which is an ancient Roman marketplace located approximately sixty miles north
of Rome.126 British archaeologist from the University of Birmingham and the British School of
121
Ibid., 86.
122
Ibid., 86-87; and Colin Renfrew and Paul Bahn, eds., Archaeology: The Key Concepts (New
York: Routledge, 2005), 294.
123
124
Ibid., 88.
125
Ibid.
126
Ibid., 89.
29
Archaeology in Rome needed a more complete picture of an unexcavated area. Aerial
photography and other techniques proved futile. However, a series of GPR slices revealed “a
whole series of walls, individual rooms, doorways, courtyards,” essentially the architecture of the
entire site.127 Not only did this allow these archaeologists to concentrate their future excavations
on a representative sample of the structures, it also saved the time and money it would have
taken to excavate the entire area.
The historical science of field archaeology has come a long way in the last 150 years. As
archaeologists became more knowledgeable about what to expect in an archaeological mound,
they adjusted their methods in order to be able to extract as much historical data as they could.
Older archaeological methods of digging trenches through mounds destroyed a lot of historical
information for many sites, including Jericho and Hiserlick, but as time progressed
methodologies became more efficient and precise. Woolley, Wheeler, and Kenyon all realized
the importance of stratigraphy and careful documentation in order to get the best understanding
of the historical context. Technological advances also greatly assisted archeologists in
understanding the scale of the site on which they were working as well as its composition.
Different methods of dating archaeological sites have also arisen thanks to technology, but the
precision of some of these methods is still debated. While each archaeologist tailors their
methods to their site and their own personal preferences, it is certain that over time these
methods have become more precise and less destructive than ever before.
127
Ibid.
30
Chapter 2
An Early History of Archaeology at Khirbet-Qumran
The 150-year history of archaeology at Khirbet-Qumran is in many ways parallel to the
history of archaeology elsewhere, especially when it comes to the plateau. Various
archaeological techniques and methods have been used in their progression at the site, much like
many other sites in Israel. However, what makes this archaeological site unique is the Dead Sea
Scrolls that were found in caves that surround the area, starting in the mid-twentieth century.
Despite the ruins that are present on the Qumran plateau, it is doubtful that the site would be as
popular as it is today without the archaeologically rich caves surrounding the area. Even before it
was first excavated, Khirbet-Qumran was a popular destination for the more adventurous
American and European tourists. At the time it was not as easily accessible as it is today, nor was
it as safe, with warring Bedouin sheiks competing for valuable grazing land. Even in more
modern times it has been considered a tumultuous area as Israel and Jordan had ongoing border
disputes.128 Since Jordan and Israel are now on much more cordial terms with the peace treaty of
1996, the archaeological community has been able to take full advantage of this archaeologically
rich area, without the looming threat of war or violence.
Before excavations of Qumran began in the 1840s, some American and European tourists
enjoyed visiting the site for scholarly and recreational purposes, but not necessarily
archaeology.129 They came for historic and scientific research, to observe and document the
topography, and sometimes just for the adventure associated with the arduous terrain and the
128
David Schenker, “Twenty Years of Israeli-Jordanian Peace: A Brief Assessment,” The
Washington Institute for Near East Policy, October 23, 2014, accessed February 25, 2017,
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/twenty-years-of-israeli-jordanian-peace-a-brief-
assessment.
129
Joan E. Taylor, “Khirbet Qumran in the Nineteenth Century and the Name of the Site,”
Palestine Exploration Quarterly 134, no. 2 (July, 2002): 144.
31
tumultuous tribesmen. At this time, various Bedouin tribes used the Qumran area for seasonal
grazing and crop farming, but the various tribes were often at war with one another.130 One tribe
around this time, called the Ta’amireh (which is a significant tribe for later discoveries at
Qumran), was led by the sheik Abu Dahuk. They were at war with the Ottoman Empire, who
controlled Qumran at the time, over some issues with tax payments, and therefore were wary of
attacks from Turkish soldiers or other tribes. Even when things were going smoothly between the
Bedouins and the Ottomans, Qumran was still not a safe place. The terrain is steep and rocky,
making transportation difficult and sometimes deadly. Many tourists and early explorers
succumbed to these harsh physical conditions, and did not survive their trip to the Dead Sea.131
Despite the dangerous conditions, Khirbet-Qumran was still a fairly popular location for
nineteenth century explorers and archaeologists, and much of what is known about the site pre-
excavation is from their records.132 Starting in May of 1838, Biblical scholar Edward Robinson
mentions that on his way to Jordan he saw some archaeological ruins. He wrote “Near the
fountain are the foundations of a small square tower and of other small buildings; whether
ancient or not we could not tell.”133 The way Robinson worded his notes sounds like he was
describing the ruins of Ain Feshkha; however, according to a later archaeologist, Roland de
Vaux, those ruins were very hard to distinguish at the time of Robinson’s visit as they were
mostly buried under the desert sands. The only other site in that area with a square tower would
have been the remains on the Qumran plateau, which were much more exposed.134
130
Ibid.
131
Ibid. Thanks to technological advancements, such as running water and air conditioning, as
well as relative peace with Jordan and the Bedouins, the trip to Khirbet-Qumran is much safer than it was
150 years ago. However, away from the buildings and marked paths it is still a very treacherous place and
readers are advised to be aware of their surroundings and drink plenty of water when visiting.
132
Ibid., 148.
133
Quoted in Ibid.
134
Ibid.
32
It is hard to define exactly when excavations began at Khirbet-Qumran, because many of
the explorers who came were also considered archaeologists of their day, though their techniques
were primitive and their documentation substandard. Despite their reputations for archaeology,
many of them did not attempt to excavate anything at the site. One example of this is the Flemish
archaeologist Louis-Félicien Caignart de Saulcy, who arrived at Khirbet-Qumran in 1851
looking for the lost “cities of the plain” mentioned in the nineteenth chapter of Genesis, better
known as Sodom and Gomorrah.135 From his description and the location in which he was
traveling, it is evident that he was describing Qumran, although he believed that it was the
ancient city of Gomorrah.136 While he did not excavate while in Qumran, he toured the site and
took extensive notes of the ruinous structures and the area. These notes have proved invaluable
for the excavations that took place later in the twentieth century. Another French archaeologist,
Emmanuel Guillaume-Rey, visited Qumran around the same time in 1858.137 He too did not
excavate the site, but his notes also assisted future generations in doing so.
While many archaeologists visited Khirbet-Qumran in the nineteenth century, the first
man to actually excavate on the plateau was Henry Poole in 1855.138 His excavation was very
limited in a modern sense of the word. It was more of a general survey done by a curious
explorer, instead of a carefully planned and executed archaeological dig. In his notes, Poole
135
Ibid., 145 and 148. See Genesis 19: 23-25.
136
Jodi Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls (Grand Rapids:
Eerdman’s Publishing Co., 2002), 22.
137
Taylor, “Khirbet Qumran in the Nineteenth Century,” 145 and 148.
138
Henry Poole, “Report of a Journey in Palestine,” The Journal of the Royal Geographical
Society of London 26, (1856): 69; and Schultz, “The Qumran Cemetery,”195. In Poole’s notes some
scholars brought attention to the fact that Poole spells Qumran, the modern English spelling, Ghomran or
Oumran. However, this is not a separate site, like a few contrary scholars have argued, but is Poole’s
transliteration of the Arabic pronunciation as he had nothing else on which to base his spelling. The
English spelling was later standardized into Qumran, but when traveling in Israel the conflicting spellings
can still be noticed in some publications and on some road signs.
33
described a tomb which he surveyed, but it does not fit the description of anything that was later
excavated or currently known as part of Qumran’s cemetery. It did not provide any skeletal
remains.139 He wrote, “there were a number of graves. One of them I had opened and was 6 ft.
long by 3 ft. wide, and 4 ft. 10 in. deep: it was built up on all four sides with rough stones and
square corners; there were no osseous remains traceable.”140 Poole’s description sounds like the
type of tombs that were used in Jerusalem around the first century, where bodies were only
deposited for a few years after burial. Later, the bones would be removed and placed into
ossuaries, also known as “bone boxes,” and buried. While it was a very modest dig, this was
technically the first archaeological excavation that took place at Khirbet-Qumran. Unfortunately,
due to the nature of Poole’s notes, the precise location of this tomb is still unknown.
Charles Simon Clermont-Ganneau conducted another dig that took place on the plateau in
1874. He had much archaeological experience elsewhere in Palestine before coming to Khirbet-
Qumran and was considered one of the best archaeologists working in the country by the late
nineteenth century.141 However, much like Poole, he only excavated one tomb during his time on
the plateau.142 In his writings about his survey of the cemetery, Clermont-Ganneau made an
important assertion that the site could not be Muslim, even though the area was controlled by an
Islamic government of the Ottomans at the time, and had been for several hundred years.143 This
is because all of the graves in the cemetery (Clermont-Ganneau guessed there to be about 1,000
people buried there) were all oriented north/south instead of east/west, which is the normal
practice for Muslims, as they orient their graves towards Mecca.144 While this does give a better
139
Schultz, “The Qumran Cemetery,” 195.
140
Poole, “Report of a Journey in Palestine,” 68.
141
Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 23.
142
143
Quoted in Schultz, “The Qumran Cemetery,” 195.
144
Ibid.
34
picture of the people who once inhabited the plateau, Clermont-Ganneau did not discover much
material culture.145 Much like the tomb from Poole’s dig, he never mentioned the precise
location of the tomb he excavated.146 Because of the lack of grave goods or any other type of
archaeological material Clermont-Ganneau described the site as insignificant ruins, “consisting
of some dilapidated walls of low stones and a small birkeh [pool] with steps leading to it…If
there ever existed there a town properly so called, it must have been a very small one.”147 Little
did he know that those remains would later be associated with one of the greatest archaeological
finds of the twentieth century, the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Although a few other archaeologists and explorers visited the site in the late nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries, their findings revealed nothing new about Khirbet-Qumran, until a
German explorer, named Gustaf Dalman, visited the site in February 1914.148 Dalman was
technically a theologian, but he served as the first director of the German Protestant Institute of
Archaeology in Jerusalem.149 He took extensive notes of the site, mostly citing heaps of stones.
However, what makes Dalman’s notes unique is his mention of a water channel (aqueduct)
running from Wadi Qumran to the site.150 It was because of this aqueduct that Dalman assumed
that Qumran was a Roman fortress. His writings led many others, including archaeologists like
145
146
Schultz, “The Qumran Cemetery,” 195. In later digs three different cemeteries were identified
on the plateau, which further complicates identifying the location of Poole and Ganneau’s tombs as it is
unknown which cemetery they were referencing.
147
Quoted in Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 23.
148
Ibid., 24.
149
Ibid.
150
Ibid. A wadi is a place where the water runs down from the mountains east of Jerusalem when
it rains, creating a kind of wash-out. As Khirbet-Qumran is in the desert, this water channel was probably
vital for the community.
35
Michael Avi-Yonah, to also believe that this was a military fort, either from the Roman Period or
from the Crusades.151
Due to the unfruitful efforts of the first minor excavations, the inhospitable environment,
and political unrest, the ruins of Khirbet-Qumran remained mostly buried for almost one hundred
years after archaeologists first visited the site. It was only in 1947, after scrolls were found in
some of the caves that surround the area, that biblical scholars and the archaeological community
renewed their interest in the Qumran area.152 The first Dead Sea Scrolls were accidentally
discovered during the late 1930s or early 1940s when a Bedouin shepherd, Muhammed edh-Dhib
was looking for his goat and wandered far from his companions.153 He came across a cave
situated to the north-west of the Dead Sea, and thinking his goat had been scared inside, threw
some stones into the opening of the cave. Instead of hearing his goat like he expected, he heard
the the noise of breaking pottery. In an interview with Dr. Randall Price, a modern expert in the
history of the Dead Sea Scrolls, edh-Dhib claims that when he lowered himself into the cave he
saw forty-seven jars. Investigating the jars with matches and candles he had in his pocket, he
found mostly debris, which was the remains of scrolls that had been destroyed by insects.154 He
was joined later that day by five other shepherds, and together they went through the jars.
151
Ibid.
152
153
Randall Price, Secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1996),
37. I purposely keep the exact date here vague, because conflicting dates have been given by the
Bedouins. They are not necessarily lying, but keep track of time differently than we do. They keep time
like the ancients, and associate time in connection with other events. So when interviewed about the exact
date, Muhammed edh-Dhib said that he found Cave 1 “before Harding came to the country and before I
was married.” This puts the time of the discovery of Cave 1 in either 1935 or 1936. However, other
sources might interpret this differently.
154
Ibid., 35. Muhammaed edh-Dhib, whose formal name was Muhammad Ahmed edh-Hamed,
changed his name to Abu-Dahoud (which means David’s father), as is customary with Bedouins on the
birth of their first son. This name change did not take place until the 1960s, well after the discovery of the
scrolls, but he is referred to by both names in different sources.
36
According to edh-Dhib, “only one jar contained intact Scrolls, and all five of them were
somehow stuffed into the jar. There was in another jar one Scroll that was so brittle it broke into
pieces [as it was picked up].”155 Unfortunately, the shepherds tossed the pieces outside of the
cave.156 All of the surviving scrolls were made of leather, and some were wrapped in linen
cloth.157 At the time, edh-Dhib did not think that he had found treasure, or anything of value.
However, he still took the scrolls home with him, hoping to find some use for them.158
Initially, edh-Dhib thought of making the scrolls into sandal straps. Thankfully, he held
them in his tent in a bag, where they remained for more than two years.159 Since it appeared to
him that no one was interested in purchasing the “old leather scrolls,” the children of his tribe
“played with one like a toy until it broke into pieces.”160 These pieces then either blew away with
the wind or were discarded.161 After this time, he gave the remaining scrolls to his uncle. These
scrolls exchanged hands many times until they made their way to two antiquities dealers in
Bethlehem. One was Feidi Salahi, who received the scrolls only after another transaction went
sour. The other, who is probably the more famous of the two due to his still existing antiquities
shop and its association with the Dead Sea Scrolls, was Jalil Iskander Shahin Kando.162
According to edh-Dhib, Kando only paid sixteen Jordanian pounds for the first four of the
155
Ibid.
156
Ibid.
157
Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 26. The seven scrolls found in this cave are probably
some of the most widely recognizable today. These scrolls are: one complete and one partial copy of the
book of Isaiah, the Community Rule (also known as the Manual of Discipline), the Pesher (Commentary
on) Habakkuk, the War Scroll, the Thanksgiving Hymns or Hymn Scroll (Hebrew Hodayot), and the
Genesis Apocryphon.
158
Price, Secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 30.
159
Ibid., 35.
160
Ibid.
161
Ibid.
162
Ibid., 36.
37
scrolls.163 While it might seem like a paltry sum, when word got back to edh-Dhib’s tribe, the
Ta’amireh that the scrolls had sold for a price, it motivated the whole tribe to search for more.164
The main occupation of many of the tribesmen for the next twenty years was scouring the
mountains and caves surrounding Cave 1 (which is the moniker given to the original cave in
which edh-Dhib found scrolls) for other scrolls. Because of their efforts, Bedouins discovered
more of the Dead Sea Scrolls than any professional archaeologists.165
The scrolls were originally sold to Kando not only because he was an antiquities dealer,
but because he was a member of the Syrian Orthodox Church in Jerusalem, and the scrolls were
originally thought to written in Syriac.166 He was then put in touch with Athanasius Yeshua
Samuel, who was a metropolitan167 of that church and purchased one lot of four scrolls for
twenty-four British pounds.168 These four scrolls were the larger Isaiah scroll, the Community
Rule, the Pesher Habakkuk, and the Genesis Apocryphon. According to Weston Fields, who is a
modern expert on the history of the Dead Sea Scrolls, “Samuel thought [the scrolls] must be
important, for no one had lived in that area, he thought, since “early Christian times,” so the
“scrolls might go back to those times.””169 He had some background knowledge and experience
in recognizing and evaluating manuscripts, as he spent much time in Syrian Christian
163
Ibid.
164
Ibid. This is also the tribe previously mentioned that provided guides for the early American
and European explorers of Qumran. They are very familiar with the area, and it is difficult to find a cave
in the area of which they are unaware.
165
Ibid.
166
167
The title of metropolitan is used in various orthodox churches and is a diocesan bishop or
archbishop of a metropolis or metropolitan area.
168
169
Fields, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 28.
38
monasteries, specifically the Monastery of St. Malky, where many ancient manuscripts were
hidden during World War I.170
Kando sold the three remaining scrolls to Eleazar Lippa Sukenik, who was a biblical
scholar and archaeologist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Sukenik was very anxious to
acquire them as he was one of the first scholars to realize that they were authentic and dated
them to the time of Jesus.171 According to Jodi Magness, who is a leading expert on the history
of Qumran and its archaeology, “[Sukenik] was the first to suggest a connection with the
Essenes mentioned in ancient sources.”172 He went to Bethlehem to collect the scrolls on
November 17, 1947, which was very dangerous as this was the same day that the United Nations
passed the resolution allowing the creation of the State of Israel.173 However, for Sukenik, the
risk seemed worth the scholarly reward.
Samuel took these scrolls to the American School of Oriental Research (now the W.F.
Albright Institute of Archaeological Research), where researchers and faculty asked permission
to publish them. John Trevor, a fellow at the School who was filling in as director, then took the
first photographs of the four scrolls, all of which were published by the school by 1956.174
Samuel, still unaware of exactly what he had, eventually moved to the United States where he
tried to sell the scrolls by advertising them in the Wall Street Journal on June 1, 1954.175 This
advertisement was brought to the attention of Yigael Yadin, the son of Sukenik, who happened
to the in the United States at the time. Though Samuel would not sell to him directly, Yadin
170
Ibid.
171
172
Ibid.
173
Ibid; and Fields, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 40-50. See also, Eran Kaplan and Derek J. Penslar,
eds., The Origins of Israel, 1882-1948: A Documentary History (Madison, WI: The University of
Wisconsin Press, 2011).
174
175
Ibid., 27.
39
eventually purchased the scrolls for the then young State of Israel for $250,000.176 They can now
be seen on the grounds of the Israel Museum in Jerusalem in a special building called the Shrine
of the Book.177
Meanwhile, the Bedouins discovering more archaeologically rich scroll caves goaded the
Palestine Archaeological Museum, the American School of Oriental Research at Jerusalem, and
the École Archéologique Française to lead a systematic search of the rocky cliffs above Qumran
in 1952 in order to be able to find scrolls in situ.178 Shortly afterwards, but still in the same year,
the Bedouins opened up a new cave and found a marl terrace, which encouraged the
archaeologists from the institutions previously mentioned to return to Qumran.179 During this
time, in the 1950s, Scroll Caves 2 through 4 were discovered. While all of the these caves
contained manuscripts pertinent to the Qumran community, or of biblical importance, Cave 4
contained the largest quantity of material and is the cave that most tourists associate with the
site.180 Inside this cave were fragments constituting over 500 scrolls and it was the first man
manipulated cave to be discovered.181 Unfortunately, since the scrolls were stored on shelves or
lying on the floor rather than in jars, most of them had greatly deteriorated and only survived in
fragments.182
176
Ibid. As Samuel originally paid only twenty-four British pounds for the scrolls (only $100
American at the time), it is safe to say that he made a considerable return on his investment. Also, Yadin
used a middle man, named “Mr. Green,” who was really the Hebrew scholar, Harry Orlinsky.
177
“Shrine of the Book,” The Israel Museum, Jerusalem, last updated 2014, accessed February
25, 2017, http://www.english.imjnet.org.il/page_899.
178
Roland de Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls (London: Oxford University Press,
1973), viii. In situ means that the artifact is situated in its original, natural place, where it was left by those
who originally used it. When an artifact is taken out of situ, it is taken out of its historical context, and
therefore is much harder to identify and date, if not impossible.
179
Ibid.
180
181
Ibid.
182
Ibid.
40
After the initial discovery of the scrolls, there was a considerable delay before scholars
were able to access the caves from which they came. This was because after the end of the
British Mandate and the creation of the state of Israel, war erupted, making it impossible for
scholars to travel to the area.183 Finally, De Vaux, of École Biblique, and G. Lankester Harding,
who was the chief inspector of antiquities in Jordan, began conducting an excavation of Cave 1
in February and March of 1949.184 They found pottery, pieces of linen cloth, manuscript
fragments, and other artifacts, some of which matched the scrolls that the Bedouins had removed
from the cave, confirming that this was Cave 1.185 It was their work on this cave that qualified
them to be the directors of the excavations taking place on the plateau. They then did a survey of
Qumran and excavated two graves in the cemetery. However, at this time they found nothing to
connect the caves to the settlement, and agreed with Dalman’s earlier assessment that the site
was a Roman fort from the third or fourth century A.D.186
It was only due to growing interest in the scrolls that Harding and de Vaux returned to
the plateau in November of 1951 to conduct what was initially supposed to be a short excavation
in order to determine “whether or not there was any direct connection with the Dead Sea Scrolls
[and the caves].”187 While it was very limited as far as scale because they were not expecting to
find anything promising, when they excavated a few of the main buildings, they made some
important observations that effected the way scholars began to look at the site. One of the first
things that they noted was the poor quality of the construction for the time, with walls made of
unhewn field stones or rubble and mud plaster.188 They then claimed, “this is no way resembles
183
See Leslie Stein, The Making of Modern Israel, 1948-1967 (Cambridge: Polity, 2009).
184
Ibid., 27.
185
Ibid.
186
Ibid.
187
Fields, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 128.
188
Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 27. This is part of the layer later known as Period Ib.
41
that of a Roman fort which we first took it to be.”189 Another notable discovery they made during
this digging season was “sunk into the floor of one of the rooms was a jar identical with most of
those found in the Scroll cave [Cave 1]… We thus, even in the small area so far excavated have a
connection with the scrolls.”190 This observation prompted further excavation of the plateau,
which de Vaux, and sometimes Harding, undertook for almost a decade. The excavations
continued for over four digging campaigns, eventually laying bare the remains at Qumran and
the spring of Ain Feshkha by 1958.191
By modern standards, it was a remarkably quick excavation, especially since it was
technically two sites that were excavated in their entirety. However, the stratigraphically centric
excavation methods that were being developed and refined at this time ensured that de Vaux’s
findings were fairly precise and accurate. Unfortunately, it has been approximately sixty years
since the cessation of their excavation, and yet de Vaux’s findings still remain unpublished. 192
Therefore, many of the specifics of his dig are frequently up for debate, as peers attempt to
review his findings from his other publications and not official dig reports. De Vaux’s findings
and their interpretation are still hotly debated amongst the archaeological community.
189
Quoted in Ibid.
190
Quoted in Ibid., 27-28; and Torleif Elgvin, Kipp Davis, and Michael Langlois, eds., Gleanings
from the Caves: Dead Sea Scrolls and Artefacts from the Schøyen Collection (New York: Bloomsbury
T&T Clark, 2016), 361-372.
191
De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls., viii and 58. Ain Feshka is another ancient
site near Qumran that was also excavated at this time. The reason for also uncovering Ain Feshka was
because of its close proximity to Qumran. The two sites were suspected to be related. However, very little
was found at Ain Feshka. There were some artifacts near the surface that date from a time similar to the
later periods of Qumran’s habitation, but those are few and were likely left by traveling Qumran residents.
The artifacts that had contact with the ancient floor indicate that the site was early Israelite.
192
Philip R. Davies, “Commentary: How Not to Do Archaeology: The Story of Qumran,” The
Biblical Archaeologist 51, no. 4 (December 1988), 204. De Vaux has a good reason for not publishing his
findings. He passed away not long after his excavations at Qumran ceased.
42
Due to the period in which he excavated de Vaux used a method similar to the Kenyon-
Wheeler method in his excavation of Qumran. He references stratigraphy, loci, and balks all
throughout his Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, which is the only primary source on his
excavation in English.193 These terms indicate that his method was organized, and took the site
down layer by layer. When looking at his mapping of the site it is still quite clear where things
were found, and in what specific layers.194
According to de Vaux, “The first human settlement at Khirbet Qumran goes back to the
Iron Age.”195 The lower levels of some of the foundations are embedded in a layer of ash that
contained numerous pottery sherds from Iron Age II.196 An important characteristic of these
loci197 in this layer is the fact that they contained Israelite pottery only. One noteworthy piece of
pottery was a jar-handle upon which was stamped the word lammek (meaning ‘to the king’) in
palaeo-Hebrew characters.198 De Vaux claims that through the locations of pottery remains, and
the alignment of some of the foundational walls (which sometimes were reused for later walls),
he was able to “reconstruct a coherent plan” of some of the features of the Israelite structures.199
193
This is only a translation, as all of the originals are in French.
194
De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, Plate XXXIX.
195
Ibid., 1. This was actually the last level excavated, but in order to get a better chronological
understanding of the site I decided to start with the earliest period of occupation, until the community’s
destruction, instead of the reverse.
196
Ibid.
197
Loci (or locus when plural) in archaeology refers to the smallest definable unit of stratigraphy.
When a site is excavated it is broken up into smaller pieces, or grids, depending on the shape and method
of the archaeologist. Each piece or square on the grid is given a locus number. The pottery that is found
within the designated area is assigned that number so that in the future it is easy to remember where
pieces were found. Each locus number on the site is unique. If there is a soil change in the designated
area, or some other differing factor, then the locus number changes again.
198
Ibid., 2; and Megan Bishop Moore and Brad E. Kelle, Biblical History and Israel’s Past: The
Changing Study of the Bible and History (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman Publishing Company,
2011), 156. Most of the jars with lammeck stamped on them were found in northern Jerusalem, which
makes sense as the stamp indicates that the contents of the jar are for the king. However, they have been
found all over the parts of Israel that were the kingdom of Judah. Scholars think that these vessels are
evidence of a royal supply chain established by King Hezekiah of Judah in the late eighth century.
199
Ibid.
43
He claims that the evidence shows a rectangular building that consisted of a large courtyard, and
a row of rooms running along its eastern wall with one that projected outwards on the north-east
corner. This level also has a large, round cistern with a water collection system. It is the deepest
cistern at Qumran, as well as the only one that is round.200 Though no sherds were found in the
cistern, it is almost certain that it dates back to this period because of its similarities with other
cisterns from the time. The absence of sherds can be explained by it having been cleaned out and
reused in later periods.201
There were also other less identifiable features against the northern and southern walls.202
According to de Vaux, this plan is comparative “to the plans of the Israelite strongholds which
have been explored in the Plain of the Buqei‘a, on the plateau which dominates Qumran, as well
as in the Negeb [Negev], at ‘Ain Qedeirat.”203 The fact that these ruins are from the Iron Age
help to place the lowest ruins on the Qumran plateau during this time. Another way which these
foundations can be identified as Iron Age is because the masonry is different than that of later
periods, consisting of large, bulky blocks.204 However, the main way that the date of this
settlement was established was from the pottery sherds. According to de Vaux, “Nothing here is
earlier than the eighth century B.C., and the latest date which can be assigned to the settlement as
a whole is at the end of the seventh century [B.C.]. This date is confirmed by the stamped
inscription lammeleck, belonging to the final period of the monarchy, as well as by the ostracon,
for the lettering on this belongs to a period not much earlier than the Exile.”205 Since there were
200
Ibid. It was the only large, round cistern found at the time of de Vaux’s excavations. One was
found in Price’s excavations on the southern end of the plateau.
201
Ibid., 3.
202
Ibid., 2.
203
Ibid.
204
Ibid., 3.
205
Ibid; and Moore, Biblical History and Israel’s Past, 156. The Exile referenced here by de
Vaux is from the Old Testament, when the southern kingdom of Judah was conquered by the
44
hundreds of years that the site lay abandoned until it was inhabited, and Israelite sherds from this
layer are frequently found with ashes, it is safe to assume that this settlement suffered a violent,
fiery destruction during the downfall of the Kingdom of Judah, mentioned in the Old
Testament.206
De Vaux references the next layer that was unearthed as Period Ia. According to him,
“Khirbet Qumran had been in ruins for a very long time period when a fresh group [of
Hasomnean Jews] came to settle there.”207 This occupation is so separated from its predecessor
that no connection can be established between the two. The beginnings of this level of
occupation were small and modest, utilizing what remained of the previous Israelite buildings as
a foundation for their own.208 However, they did expand the site by adding some buildings of
their own. These occupants added a more efficient means of collecting water, and therefore
added two rectangular cisterns while still utilizing the round cistern from the previous level of
occupation.209 A few corners were enclosed in order to provide a few more covered buildings,
and to the north of the containing wall for the cistern some rooms were added. This is also when
two kilns are believed to have been built.210 However, for the most part, it appears that the new
settlers contented themselves with building off of, or reconstructing, remains from the previous
period of occupation.
This layer is more difficult to date in comparison to the previous and following layers of
occupation. Only a few pieces of sherds and pottery remained beneath the southern area of the
Babylonians, and most of the Jews were removed from their homeland and forced to live elsewhere in the
Neo-Babylonian Empire. Also, ostracon is pottery that was found with writing on it.
206
Ibid. It is also during the Iron Age that the caves with marl entrances were constructed.
207
Ibid.
208
Ibid., 4; and Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 49.
209
De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 4.
210
Ibid.
45
main building.211 The pottery found is indistinguishable from that of the next period of
occupation (Period Ib), and there were no coins found in this settlement.212 According to de
Vaux, “For this reason the chronology [of Period Ia] can be established only approximately by its
relation to the better documented period which follows.”213 Because of coins found in Period Ib,
it is evident that it was definitely occupied under the rule of Alexander Jannaeus, who was the
second king of Judea during the Hasmonean Period from 103 to 76 B.C. This means that Period
Ia was most likely constructed during the reign of his father, John Hyrcanus, who ruled from 135
to 104 B.C., as this period of occupation was of short duration and immediately followed by the
complex of buildings constructed in Period Ib.214
Period Ib is the period of time in which Khirbet Qumran took its definitive form, and is
the scale and shape to which the ruins have been reconstructed for visitors at the modern site.215
The scope of buildings constructed at this time obliterated the remains of the ancient Israelite
ruins from the Iron Age and are an enlargement of the building of Period Ia.216 During this period
Qumran residents constructed the tower, the ruins of which are mentioned by almost every early
explorer and archaeologist who has visited the plateau.217 There are three entrances to the
complex from this time. One comes from the north and goes across the plain from an earlier
shoreline of the Dead Sea, up to the plateau.218 Another, smaller gate is on the north-west side of
211
Ibid., 5. In this sentence the difference between sherds and pottery is that sherds are pieces,
and pottery means a whole piece. However, the terms can sometimes be used synonymously.
212
Ibid; and Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 49-50.
213
214
Ibid.
215
“Qumran Park: Archaeology and History,” Israel Nature and Parks Authority, accessed March
1, 2017, http://www.parks.org.il/sites/English/ParksAndReserves/qumran/Pages/default.aspx#arch.
216
217
Ibid., 5-6.
218
Ibid., 5. This path goes from where the Dead Sea once was because the Sea is shrinking every
year and has shrunk exponentially from the time of de Vaux.
46
the complex and its path proceeds along the foot of the cliff in one direction, or ascends to the
plain of Buqei‘a and on to Jerusalem. This path is probably ancient, and perhaps dates from the
period of habitation from Old Testament times. It climbs up the rocky formation by a series of
very tight turns to the north of Wadi Qumran.219 The third entrance, is on the eastern side of the
community, near one of the potter’s kilns.220
The tower is a characteristic feature of Period Ib. At two stories tall, it was the highest
building in the community and guarded the main point of entry into the settlement.221 According
to de Vaux, it was “massive.”222 He surmises that, “The various rooms of the lower story opened
into each other but there was no door leading to the outside… they could only have served as
store-rooms, and the way into them would have been down a spiral staircase.”223 It is evident,
even on the other floors, that this tower was made for defense. There was only one way into the
tower, and no real windows. The tower was isolated, and separated from the rest of the buildings
by open spaces.224 To the south of the foot of the tower there is a gateway that leads into a little
court, which gives access to the rooms on the south-west section of the community. One of these
rooms is important to the history of not only those who lived in Qumran, but the scrolls found in
the surrounding caves.225 Archaeologists found a bench that ran along the walls. According to de
Vaux, “[the room] has the appearance of being an assembly room.”226 This is the room where it
is believed that the different panels of the scrolls were assembled and sewn together.227
219
Ibid., 6.
220
Ibid.
221
222
223
Ibid.
224
Ibid., 6-7.
225
Ibid., 7.
226
Ibid.
227
Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 43-44, 52. Period Ib is the time of scroll production
and of bone deposits mentioned in the next chapter.
47
Another striking feature of the construction of Period Ib is the number and obvious
importance of cisterns. Cisterns had been key features of earlier periods, which is not surprising
because of Khirbet Qumran’s location in a desert. However, water collection and preservation
exponentially increased at this time.228 This makes sense, because the entire complex had greatly
expanded at this time, meaning an increase in the number of people living at Qumran and an
increase for the need of safe, clean water. In order to accommodate the influx in people, not only
were new cisterns constructed, but this is when the aqueduct was built to catch winter rains
coming into Wadi Qumran.229 The aqueduct and cisterns were part of a water collection and
distribution system that is remarkably complex, using channels to feed various cisterns, ritual
baths, basins, and purification systems.230
De Vaux determined that the Qumran community was centered around communal
activities. He states, “this water system is only one element in a plan which is remarkable chiefly
for its qualities of unification and organization. Khirbet Qumran is not a village or a group of
houses; it is the establishment of a community. We must be still more precise: this establishment
was not designed as a community residence but rather for the carrying on of certain communal
activities.”231 For example, there are not many buildings that could have served as dwelling
places, especially when compared with those that were designed for group activities to be
pursued.232 If de Vaux’s interpretations of the site are assumed to be correct, it makes sense that
there are many store-rooms, several workshops, and several assembly rooms. However, there is
228
229
Ibid.
230
Ibid., 8-10; and Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 54-55.
231
232
Ibid.
48
only one kitchen, a single large washing-place, and one stable, which are features that are to be
expected in individual homes.233
One of these assembly rooms seems to have been a place of importance in the
community. What makes it unique from the other assembly rooms on the site are the cupboards
recessed into the walls and a small basin carved out near the door that was able to be filled from
the outside.234 According to de Vaux, this gives the impressions that this room was “designed for
closed sessions in which those taking part did not wish to be disturbed, and thus as a kind of
council chamber.”235 Beside this was a larger room, which was equipped with a broad entrance,
possibly to accommodate large numbers of people.236
However, according to de Vaux, “the most important feature of all” is the largest room in
the whole ruins, that is oriented east and west (which is generally intentional and significant, as
seen in the cemetery).237 De Vaux says, “it is clear that it was a meeting-place,” which was also
probably used for daily meals as it is next to the kitchen. 238 Towards the western side of the
room there is a circular area that stands out because it is paved, where as the rest of the floor is
plaster. De Vaux notes, “This seems to mark the place where the president of the assembly
would have taken his stand.”239 Another interesting characteristic of this room is that the floor
slopes gently from the west to the door, and rises slightly to the east. There is a conduit leading
out of the main channel of water that opens into the room near the north-western door, which
could easily be opened or closed. The way that the water could easily enter into the room, added
233
Ibid; and Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 53.
234
235
Ibid., 10-11; and Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 51.
236
237
Ibid.
238
Ibid.
239
49
with the slope of the floor, means that this room could be cleaned easily and routinely, with
water flowing from the conduit to the lowest point through the south-western door.240 Between
all of the ritual and purification pools, and a room that was routinely cleaned and purified, it is
evident that this community put great stock in ritual cleanness.241
Adjoining this area is another room which assists in the understanding of “the most
important feature of all.”242 Though it was destroyed in the earthquake that ended Period Ib, de
Vaux found underneath the collapsed ceiling and debris a reserve of more than one thousand
vessels.243 There were 709 bowls, arranged in piles of a dozen or so each, twenty-one small jars
of two different types, thirty-eight dishes, eleven jugs, and seventy-five beakers. Other pieces of
pottery were scattered all over the floor.244 Not only is this evidence of the massive earthquake
that ended Period Ib, but it also indicates that the aforementioned room might have been some
kind of dining room, since this is no where near a potter’s shop or kiln.245 Also, artifacts like oil
lamps, large jars with lids, and pots that are found elsewhere at the site, were not here, so it could
not have been a storage room for a potter’s workshop. However, all of the vessels necessary for
meals are present. De Vaux surmises that, “This, then, was the crockery, stored near the
assembly-room, because that room must also have been used as a dining room.”246
Some of the meals that took place in this dining room seem to have had some kind of
religious significance for the community. This is because de Vaux and his team found, “In the
free spaces between the buildings or round them the excavations have laid bare animal bones
240
Ibid.
241
242
De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls,11.
243
Ibid.
244
Ibid., 12.
245
There was an earthquake that went through the area in 31 BC.
246
De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls,12.
50
deposited between large sherds of pitchers or pots… or sometimes placed in jars left intact with
their lids on.”247 Universally, these deposits have barely been covered with any dirt, and are
found flush with the level of the ground. Some of them even seem to have been simply placed on
the ground, with no signs of attempted burial according to de Vaux. Found in various places
throughout the community, these deposits are at their most numerous in a group of about thirty,
between a secondary building and a large decantation basin.248 Using the pottery in which they
were discovered and a few coins that were recovered from their immediate vicinity, de Vaux
determined that a majority of these bone deposits are from Period Ib, although there are some
from the following time period, Period II, as well.249 De Vaux believes that these bones were the
remnants of ceremonial religious meals, as most of the bones are clean, but some of them are
charred, which means they have been roasted. Also, there are not enough deposits for these
bones to account for every meal eaten by the community.250 The care with which these bones
were set apart after the meat was consumed, along with their quantity, indicate a sacred purpose
for these remains. De Vaux believes that it is possible for bones to be the remnants of sacrificed
animals that were then eaten in a ceremonial meal, especially since the animals eaten were the
same kind that were sacrificed by law in the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.251 Though found
elsewhere on the plateau, these deposits are quite unusual.
The next period in the history of Qumran that was excavated by de Vaux and his team is
known as Period II. There was only a short period of abandonment after the earthquake that
247
Ibid.; and Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran, 55.
248
Ibid., 13. A decantation basin is a pool where the water was stilled in order to allow the silt
and debris carried by the flood waters to settle, before the water entered into a pool or cistern for use. In
other words, it is a place where the water was cleaned.
249
Ibid.
250
Ibid., 14.
251
Ibid. The bones were identified as being sheep, goats, lambs, kids, cows, and oxen.
51
severely damaged or destroyed parts of Period Ib, as the community was quickly cleared,
repaired, and modified before being reoccupied.252 Some believe that some of those who
inhabited Khirbet Qumran would have stayed, and camped in the ruins while waiting for it to be
repaired. However, de Vaux thinks this is unlikely as a damaged water system would have made
living there temporarily impossible.253 While there were ten Herodian coins that were found that
could date from a time when it was uninhabited, it is possible that these were left here at a later
time, during Periods II or III as Herod’s coins continued in circulation after his death.254 Other
than repairs and clearing a few of the damaged rooms, there were only a few minor
modifications made to the buildings from Period Ib.255
Period II is the last major period of occupation at Khirbet Qumran, though it was
occupied at later times.256 However, because of this, it is easier to interpret the use of some of the
rooms because more material remains have been found. One example of this is in the long room
in which the benches were found from Period Ib. From the end of Period II the room had been
filled with debris from the upper floor, which had the same floor plan, and had fallen in.257 The
debris included fragments of structures made of mud-brick that were carefully smoothed over
with plaster. De Vaux and his team collected them and took them to Jerusalem where, according
to de Vaux, “they were painstakingly re-assembled.”258 As it turns out, it was a table, fifteen feet
(five meters) in length, forty centimeters in breadth, and only fifty centimeters tall. Before falling
through the ceiling it had been parallel to the eastern wall and “had been used there in
252
253
254
Ibid., 24 and 34.
255
Ibid., 24-25.
256
Ibid., 27.
257
258
52
association with a low bench fixed into the wall.”259 While to modern readers it seems to
compose a dining room, it has already been clarified that those were located elsewhere in the
complex. The discovery of two inkwells, one bronze and the other earthenware (one of which
still contained some ink), that date from the Roman Period, clarify the purpose of the building. It
was most likely a scriptorium.260
Many coins found in Period II help to assign this period with a more precise date. Ninety-
one of the coins were of the Procurators, thirty-three of which were struck under Nero, and
seventy-eight coins bearing the image of Agrippa I. The timeline of coins continues through the
period of the First Jewish Revolt, although the coins are only from the first two or three years.261
This, coupled with the evidence of a violent destruction for Period II, means that this period of
occupation likely ended somewhere between A.D. 66 and 73 at the hands of Vespasian and the
Tenth Roman Legion.262 Because the coins only come from the first few years of the Jewish
Revolt, the bronze Roman arrowheads found in the layer, and evidence of the roofs being
burned, point to the destruction of the settlement during the war at the hands of the Romans in A.
D. 69.263
The last layer of occupation uncovered by de Vaux and his team is Period III. Though
most of the community remained in ruins, the Romans reconstructed and occupied Qumran for a
259
Ibid.
260
Ibid., 29-30.
261
Ibid., 34-36.
262
Ibid., 36; and Josephus, The Jewish War, 272-273, 468. While Josephus does not mention
Qumran specifically, he makes several mentions of various sectarian groups, one of which inhabited a
colony in the Judean desert. Many scholars consider this desert sect to be the community at Qumran.
Though the 10th Roman Legion, under the command of Vespasian, destroyed the community, Josephus
does not mention this as it was presumably too small for him to mention. However, he does mention
going to the Dead Sea in A.D. 68 after the destruction of Jericho. This is most likely when Qumran’s
Period II was destroyed and correlates with the timeline left by the coins.
263
53
short period in order to monitor the Dead Sea, probably while waiting for Masada to fall in April
of A.D. 73.264 The main buildings and large tower were reused by the Romans, and the walls
extending east were doubled in thickness.265 The Romans replaced the well organized rooms of
Period II with small rooms arranged in no particular order, and the destruction they wrought was
made level with the ground throughout the site, in order to clear the ground for a military
establishment.266 These were the only areas of the settlement that were inhabited at the time, and
most of the artifacts and coins from this time were found in this area.267 These coins are also how
it is known that Qumran was occupied by Roman soldiers, and the dates in which it was
occupied. Of the coins found nine of Caesarea and four from Dora are from the reign of Nero
and were minted in A.D. 67 or 68.268 These are coins which could only have been brought in by
Roman soldiers, as this is what they would have received for their pay.269 The coins also help
pinpoint a more accurate date for the Roman destruction of Qumran, which must have been A.D.
68 or later.270
The Romans implemented some major changes into the arrangements for the collection
and keeping of water. After the destruction of Period II, major repairs would have been
necessary to fix the complex water system.271 Also, the water provided would have been out of
proportion for the needs of the small Roman garrison; therefore, the soldiers used a few of the
264
De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 41-42.
265
266
De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 42; and Josephus, The Jewish War, 468.
267
268
Ibid., 37.
269
Ibid., 41.
270
Ibid. This year is able to be pinpointed because of the dates on the coins found by de Vaux.
271
Ibid., 43.
54
cisterns to collect the debris they removed while creating their new living quarters, keeping only
the large cistern to the south-east in use.272
For de Vaux, the most radical transformation was that “There are no longer any places of
collective assembly, or any workshops, and the potter’s kiln now serves as a store for lime.”273
To meet the needs of the garrison, there was one bread oven set up at the foot of the tower.274 In
contrast with the continuity between Periods Ib and II, Period III broke away from the pattern as
community life no longer existed at Qumran.275 It was the quarters of a Roman military
detachment.
It is unknown exactly when the Romans stopped their occupation of Khirbet Qumran,
however numismatic evidence and the history of the surrounding area led de Vaux and Magness
to believe that the Romans abandoned the site in A.D. 73 or 74.276 Aside from the previously
mentioned coins, Period III contained one undated coin from Antioch, during the reign of Nero,
therefore before A.D. 68, one coin with the names of Claudia, Nero’s daughter and Poppaea his
wife, which belong to A.D. 65 at the earliest, one silver coin from Antioch from the reign of
Vespasian and Titus, which is from A.D. 69 or 70, two coins from Ashkelon minted in A.D. 72
or 73, and four undated coins with the Judean Capta ascribed to Titus.277 The latest coin found in
this layer is of Agrippa II minted in the year A.D. 87, but since it was found outside of a building
it is doubtful that it is from Period III; however, since it was found in this layer, the possibility
that Qumran was occupied until this time cannot be ruled out. This possibility is unlikely as there
272
273
274
275
276
277
55
are no coins from the long stretch of time between A.D. 73 until 87. Also, since Masada fell in
A.D. 73, there was no longer a need for a Roman garrison after this date.278
While de Vaux uncovered evidence of life from the time of the Second Jewish Revolt in
A.D. 132 to 135, no actual building work can be attributed to this time and little was found.279
The coins from this layer come either for the Second Revolt, or the Imperial reigns of Vespasian,
and Trajan. Most belong to the Second Year of the Revolt, while the rest of the coins are undated
but seem to be from only a few years later because of the Romans depicted.280 Judging from the
lack of fortification, the types of coins found, the time period in which this occupation took
place, and the short period of time that it was inhabited, it may be assumed that those who lived
here were some of the insurgents who were being hunted down by the Roman legions and
attempted to find refuge in the Judean dessert.281 This is the final layer of any occupation at
Khirbet Qumran. There were a few coins found by de Vaux and his team on the surface, the date
of which extend from the third century A.D. to the Turkish period, but this can be explained by
passing travelers dropping the occasional coin.282 This is the extent of de Vaux’s excavation.
While de Vaux and his team uncovered and accomplished a lot at Khirbet Qumran and in
some of the surrounding caves, there was still much left on the plateau to be discovered.
However, as the modern state of Israel was in its infancy and war with neighboring countries was
often looming, further excavations could not take place until the 1990s with Yitzhak Magan and
278
Ibid., 44.
279
This revolt is also known as the Bar Kohkba Revolt and took place under the reign of the
Roman Emperor Hadrian after he erected a temple to Jupiter on the site of the Jewish Temple that was
destroyed in the First Revolt. After the Second Revolt, Hadrian renamed Jerusalem, Aelia Capitolia, and
Judea, Palestina.
280
Ibid., 45.
281
Ibid.
282
56
Yurall Peleg. As they discovered no artifacts differing from those found by de Vaux the next
excavations discussed will be those of Dr. Randall Price.

57
Chapter 3
Qumran Excavations in the 21st Century
Dr. J. Randall Price began excavating at Khirbet Qumran in the summer of 2002 on the
southern portion of the plateau. After de Vaux, he has conducted the most extensive
archaeological dig on the plateau to date. His dig was longer the de Vaux’s as well, digging for
eight seasons instead of five.283 There were two Israeli archaeologists, Yitzhak Maagen and
Yuval Peleg, and one foreign archeologist, Professor James Strange, who excavated on the
plateau between the digs of these two archaeologists; however, none of them uncovered as much
or dug for as long as either de Vaux or Price. Of all of the archaeologists mentioned in this work,
Price has incorporated the most modern technology into his digs. Not only has he used balloons
to take pictures, but his more recent excavation has employed drones equipped with cameras to
take pictures at the end of an excavation. He has also used satellite scans, seismic surveys, and
GPR before and during his excavations on the plateau. Price has also been a part of recent
excavations for Operation Scroll, an initiative of the Civil Administration for Judea and Samaria,
the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA), and the National Park Authority (NPA) to excavate the
caves surrounding Qumran in order to find other possible Dead Sea Scrolls before local
looters.284 These digs will be continuing for the foreseeable future, but as always with modern
digs, funding and politics can sometimes impede progress.
283
These numbers are higher if Price’s cave excavations and de Vaux’s excavation of Ain
Feshkha are included. Either way, Price has excavated for a longer period of time. In all, Price excavated
for ten years on the plateau.
284
Robbed,” Israel Antiquities Authority, accessed April 2, 2017,
58
Price first became interested in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Qumran when he was a graduate
student in Semitic languages and archaeology at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem in 1979.285
Though he had a professional interest in the Scrolls, his initial contact with them came not
through archaeology, but because he needed a job since his wife was expecting their second
child.286 With the help of a neighbor Price ended up working at the Shrine of the Book, Israel’s
Museum of the Dead Sea Scrolls, renting self-guided audio tours and selling slide sets about the
Scrolls.287 He spent many days and nights working in the museum becoming familiar with their
history, and meeting the many scholars and archaeologists involved in the history and
deciphering of the Scrolls.288
In 1989 Price was again involved in graduate studies when the scrolls came back into
public prominence due to controversy over the forty year delay in the publication of the contents
of the Dead Sea Scrolls. In the summer of the following year he attended the Second
International Congress on Biblical Archaeology in Jerusalem.289 As there was a session on the
Dead Sea Scrolls, according to Price “most of the known universe of Scroll scholarship was
present.”290 Many of his former professors at the Hebrew University were now part of an Israeli
contingent of scholars translating the Scrolls, one of whom encouraged those present to add to
the research already done on the Scrolls, and to go back to the original texts of the Bible and
study the primary sources.291 It was this admonishment that encouraged Price to work more
closely with the scrolls themselves, and write several books about their validity, content, and
285
Price, Secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 12.
286
Ibid.
287
Ibid.
288
Ibid.
289
Ibid.
290
Ibid.
291
Ibid., 12-13; and Hershel Shanks, “Absorbing Archaeology at the Jerusalem Congress,”
Biblical Archaeology Review 16, no. 6 (November/December 1990).
59
history.292 Eventually, though not until 2002, he was also inspired to excavate on the Qumran
Plateau.
During his first dig season at Khirbet-Qumran in the summer of 2002, Price’s excavation
was small. Only two squares were opened at this time.293 One was referred to as the Western
Square, and another was called the Eastern Square.294 The Western square is directly in line with
Cave 4, which is on the opposite, facing plateau.295 This location was chosen because the 1996
probe revealed an anomaly at this location. The excavation’s purpose was to “locate and identify
subsurface anomalies previously discerned on the seismic survey at a depth of 16 [meters].”296
The depth where the anomaly was discovered is also the approximate elevation of the entrance to
Cave 4 across the plateau.297 A drop in pressure also indicated that there was “a subsurface
paleo-chamber.”298 These initial surveys made it an encouraging place to excavate, as these
readings indicated that something similar to Cave 4 might have existed in ancient times.
Price and his team initially excavated this square to a depth of 1.5 meters. In that space
they located sparse potsherds and a jar handle in the topsoil, a shaped stone (probably a grinding
stone) found in some pebble fill below the topsoil, some isolated bitumen deposits, and several
292
Price, Secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls,13. In March of 1996 Price was invited to participate in
a drilling survey on the plateau, referenced later, directed by Professor Strange, which led to an
excavation that summer. Though he was not able to participate in the excavation (which only lasted a few
days), he was invited by Strange to conduct the follow-up excavation. It took six years for Price to obtain
the license and permit to do so.
293
This was in order to complete an excavation that was begun by Dr. Jim Strange of the
University of Central Florida, who originally found the anomalies in the soil in 1996. When he was
unable to complete the dig, Dr. Price was asked to step in his place because of his qualifications and
experience.
294
Randall Price, “Excavation on the Qumran Plateau 2002-2006,” Unpublished manuscript in
author’s possession, 1.
295
Ibid.
296
Ibid.
297
Ibid.
298
Ibid. This basically means that the probe noticed a difference from the sediment here,
compared to the surrounding areas. This means that either something manmade was buried here, or it is
just an anomaly in the soil.
60
bone deposits in a sandy layer below the pebble fill.299 No material remains were found after this
depth, but the team continued to record geophysical features to a depth of 17 meters.300 Since no
subsurface paleo-chamber was found, concentrated lines of natural stones found in layers above
and below the targeted levels were determined to be the source of the seismic anomalies.301 Price
proposes, “that the drop in pressure during the probe resulted from air in the surface pumps that
became trapped in a sandy layer at the target depths.”302 While this square did not reveal much
about the historical context of the site, it was helpful for future seismic surveys of the Qumran
area and how they should be read in reference to subsurface anomalies.
The Eastern Square of Price’s 2002 excavation of the plateau yielded much more
interesting archaeological information. Located at a slightly lower elevation than the other
square, it had been explored with GPR in the 1990 by the Tel-Aviv University Department of
Geophysics, revealing small anomalies. Then Price’s team excavated it to a depth of 1.2 meters,
and discovered a beaten-earth floor.303 In a sand layer that was on top of the beaten-earth floor
they found, in situ, two storage jars approximately two meters apart.304 One was chalk colored,
containing pebbles and wadi stones as well as the rim and handles of another storage jar, though
its own rim and handles were missing.305 The second storage jar was a reddish color, with thin
walls and no rim, and was filled with the surrounding sand layer. The desiccated condition of this
299
Ibid. Bitumen is a dark, viscous, organic liquid, similar to asphalt. However, it burns like a
fossil fuel, which was probably its use at Qumran. For more information on bitumen, see Dwijen
Banerjee, Oil Sands, Heavy Oil, & Bitumen: From Recovery to Refinery (Tulsa: PennWell Corporation,
2012).
300
Ibid.
301
Ibid.
302
Ibid.
303
Ibid.
304
Ibid. A probe was inserted beneath this layer, but there were no anomalies that gave the
appearance of material remains. All formations under the floor were naturally occurring, geological
formations.
305
Ibid., 1-2.
61
jar prevented it from being removed from the square.306 A tabun oven was also found in the
north-eastern corner of the square, constructed of fieldstones and containing ash deposits, a piece
of worked stone, and a small bird bone.307 From the way it was situated, it is evident that this
tabun was associated with intense heat, and was used as a part of a cooking installation.308 The
discovery of a grinding stone and the base of a small bowl in the general area solidified this
assumption.309 Although not conclusive, it appears that Price and his team had uncovered a small
kitchen.310
In this square there were also four large cooking pots, filled with ash and sheep bone
fragments, several centimeters below the topsoil.311 Their location so close to the surface
indicates that these pots and bones were intentionally buried at a date later than the tabun, and is
reminiscent of de Vaux’s excavations, which yielded many similar vessels filled with bones and
ash.312 Analysis of the pottery from this square, particularly these cooking pots, when compared
with de Vaux’ finds, indicates that these were from Period II, and are consistent with his
findings.313 This also indicated to Price that “ritual bone burials occurred on this area of the
306
Ibid., 2. It is likely that this jar was originally placed in the ground with its opening just above
ground level. This helped keep its contents, such as water or wine, cool.
307
A tabun is a clay oven that sometimes has a cone-like shape. It can be used for other things,
but was mostly used for baking bread. For more info, see Rainer Albertz, Family and Household Religion
in Ancient Israel and the Levant (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012).
308
Ibid.
309
Ibid.
310
Randall Price, “New Discoveries at Qumran: A Special Report,” World of the Bible Ministries
Newsletter 6, no. 3 (Fall/Winter 2004), 1.
311
Price, “Excavation on the Qumran Plateau 2002-2006,” 2.
312
Ibid. These are the jars in Chapter 2 that are thought to have some sort of ritualistic
significance within the Qumran community.
313
Ibid. The analysis mentioned here does not necessarily require lab analysis. While some of the
material that the pots are made of might be analyzed, the main way this pottery analysis is done is by
comparing the style, shape, and composition of these pots with those found by de Vaux. For more
information, see Marcello Fidanzio, ed., The Caves of Qumran: Proceedings of the International
Conference Lugano, 2014 (Boston: Brill, 2017).
62
plateau and need to be investigated as to their concentrations and extent on the plateau.”314 In
other words, Price and his team found enough archaeological remains that they were convinced
of the necessity to come back at a later season and further excavate the southern area of the
Qumran plateau.
Price and his team returned to Khirbet Qumran in the summer of 2004 and continued to
excavate on the southern area of the plateau. Every year the members of Price’s team differ,
depending on how many volunteers are available and how much digging needs to be done.
During the 2004 season he had fourteen volunteers.315 The GPR surveys conducted in 1990 by
the Tel-Aviv University Department of Geophysics were used in this excavation as well,
however, they were also supplemented with another GPR survey conducted by the Geophysical
Institute of Israel in 2002.316 There were six squares excavated during this digging season, some
of which were left untouched or were opened solely for the propose of further calibrating radar
data. However, several of these squares had relatively rich archaeological yields, including the
first coins found in one of Price’s excavations at Qumran.
In line with the Eastern Square from the previous dig season, two new squares were
excavated. In these squares, labeled 2 and 3, there was a layer of habitation discovered sixty
centimeters below the topsoil. Price dates this surface to the sometime during the first-century
B.C./A.D., because there were three coins found: Alexander Jannaeus, Pontius Pilate, and a
lepta.317 This would have been during the early Roman occupation of Qumran or de Vaux’s
314
Ibid., 3.
315
Price, “New Discoveries at Qumran,” 1.
316
Price, “Excavation on the Qumran Plateau 2002-2006,”3.
317
Ibid. These were all popular coins during mid-first century Judea. For more information, see
David Hendin and Herbert Kreindler, Guide to Biblical Coins (St. Louis: Amphorae Publishing Group,
2010).
63
Period III.318 Just two centimeters below this layer in square 2 was the top of a bowl lid of an
ovoid store jar. Upon further excavation, it was discovered that the whole ovoid store jar was
intact and still sealed.319 Using the ceramic typology dating method, this jar was dated to the
first-century B.C. Its contents were then removed for analysis by Jan Gunneweg of the Hebrew
University’s Institute of Archaeology.320 The jar, titled Jar 25, was found to have held fermented
grape wine. Another similar jar was found on the same level, however, it was toppled over due to
tectonic activity.321 Due to the pottery that was found in this layer can be equated with Period Ia
from de Vaux’s excavation. Also, these jars were the same type in which some scrolls have been
found in the surrounding area.322
There was a layer of clay under the jars that differed from the grayish sediment in which
the jars were found. The removal of this clay revealed an uneven surface which was “punctuated
by gaps cut into the clay layer and filled with dune sand.”323 Removal of the balk between square
2 and square 1 revealed a large, shaped limestone covered in worm-burrows set in a
depression.324 Next to this, and underneath the previously mentioned tabun that was excavated in
2002, were the remains of a fallen construction of mud and straw.325 Price considers this to be
the “remains of the outer structure of the tabun or of a small wall in association with the shaped-
stone and depression.”326 The dune sand filling the gaps in the clay surface was then removed to
318
319
Price, “Excavation on the Qumran Plateau 2002-2006,” 3. This sealed storage jar contained the
evaporated remnants of wine. Those present said that when the jar was opened you could smell the
presence of wine, though there was none left in the jar.
320
Ibid.
321
Ibid. This tectonic activity might have been the earthquake that ended Period Ib.
322
323
324
Ibid.
325
Ibid.
326
Ibid.
64
reveal a repository, or storage complex approximately six feet (two meters) below.327 This
complex consisted of “a large opening in the western side connected by a tunnel to an area in the
east which contained a hole cut in the floor.”328 In this hole was a large body pottery shard, and
an opening in the eastern wall.329 There was also a marl bench, which was later removed, that
had uneven steps descending partially into the floor, which allowed access into the repository.330
In this repository the archaeological team found “two cut bone objects, a piece of slag glass, the
rim of a burnished red-slip Iron Age crater, a jug rim, a jar handle and base, ash, and charred date
pits.”331 Due to what was found, this repository was clearly meant to hold storage jars.332
However, some speculate that it could have possibly housed jars containing Dead Sea Scrolls.333
Square 3 produced what Price considers to be the most important discovery of the 2004
excavation.334 Eight or nine animal bone burials and deposits like the ones found by de Vaux and
Price in his 2002 excavation of Qumran, were discovered.335 These bones were found with and
without pottery fragments, unlike the other deposits.336 However, when pottery was present it
served as a cover for the bones, much like with the deposits found by de Vaux.337 The bone
deposits found in square 3 consisted of various types of animal bones, including birds, and the
larger deposits even included the jawbones of some of the animals.338 All of the bones were
327
Ibid.
328
Ibid.
329
Ibid.
330
Ibid; and Price, “New Discoveries at Qumran,” 1.
331
332
333
Ibid.
334
Ibid., 3.
335
Price, “Excavation on the Qumran Plateau 2002-2006,” 4; and Price, “New Discoveries at
Qumran,” 3.
336
337
Ibid.
338
Ibid.
65
collected so as to avoid contamination and DNA analysis is going to be conducted by the
Weitzman Institute of Science.339 Price notes that, “[s]ince most of the Dead Sea Scrolls were
made of parchment (sheep skin) and have had DNA analysis, our intention is to compare our
bones with the scrolls to reveal genetic matches in sheep families and therefore, a connection
between the site and the scrolls.”340 This is important because it would indisputably confirm that
Qumran is the community responsible for the creation and preservation of the Dead Sea Scrolls,
and that Qumran was not a Roman villa or rural plantation, and that not all of the scrolls came
from Jerusalem.341 In addition, since squares 2 and 3 were adjacent, it was now clear that the
intact stone jar was part of the bone deposits.
Price and his team returned in July of 2005 for another season of excavation on the
Qumran plateau. According to Price, this is the season that “marked a new turning point” in his
excavations.342 This is probably because this excavation was larger than any that he had
conducted before on the plateau, with ten new squares opened during the season, and the
extensive mapping of the site.343 In order to map the site his team used computer technology to
create a composite of images that were taken using aerial photography.344 This puts Price’s
excavation in context with the entire ancient community that de Vaux excavated in the 1950s,
and will benefit scholars for generations.345
339
340
Ibid.
341
Ibid; and Hirschfeld, “Early Roman Manor Houses in Judea and the Site of Khirbet Qumran.”
One who claims this is Yizhar Hirschfeld. Some of his claims will be explored later in chapter four.
342
Randall Price, “Qumran Yields New Secrets: 2005 Dig Report,” World of the Bible Ministries
Newsletter 7, no.2 (Winter 2005), 1.
343
344
Price, “Qumran Yields New Secrets,” 1. As drones were not yet something accessible or
practical for civilian use in 2005, these aerial photographs were taken by a camera suspended by a blimp.
345
Ibid.
66
This excavation uncovered more of the animal bone deposits in various places throughout
the site. They found in one square two bulls, two goats, and several sheep.346 The bull bones
showed signs of butchering, some which were still in articulation, and each of the goat deposits
contained a set of horns (those were detached from the skull and buried separately.)347 Almost all
of the bone deposits found at Qumran were covered with pottery vessels of various sizes, which
were broken, but archaeologically complete.348 The bone deposits were the most extensive in
another area of the excavation, towards its southern extremity. Thirty-seven bone deposits were
found in Hasmonean pottery, most of which was later restored.349 Some of the deposits seem to
have been marked by travertine slabs that were purposefully shaped and set upright above the
deposits.350 While the purpose of these is unknown, they were intentionally placed where they
were found as travertine does not occur naturally at Qumran, but was imported from the Judean
desert.351 These deposits seem to have the same ritual significance as the other bone deposits on
the plateau. However, they were found aligned north to south and exclusively on the eastern side
of the plateau.352 This might also imply ritual orientation towards the east and have some ritual
significance with the community that lived at Qumran.353
346
347
Ibid., and Rob Kugler, “Making All Experience Religious: The Hegemony of Ritual at
Qumran,” Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Period 33, no. 2
(2002): 137. The appearance of the butchering on the bull bones indicates that these animals were eaten
and probably part of a ritual meal.
348
349
Ibid. The Hasmonean period was from 135 to 63 B.C. and was a period of Jewish rule that
followed the victory of the Maccabees over the oppressive Selucid dynasty. The Hasmonean rulers failed
to distinguish the difference between priestly and political offices, and because of this many Jewish sects
arose that opposed their practices and sought to restore a purer religion. It is thought that the residents of
Qumran were one such sect.
350
Ibid.
351
Ibid.
352
Ibid., 5-6. This north to south alignment matches that of those buried in Qumran’s cemeteries.
353
Ibid., 6.
67
These deposits were found to one side of the eastern wall that separated the Qumran
community from its largest cemetery, with over 1,000 graves.354 This wall was also partially
excavated, but the section of the wall where Price and his team were digging, the wall had
collapsed before being buried.355 The reason for this collapse was a man-made circular pit that
was underneath the wall and had been abandoned and filled during the time of the
Hasmoneans.356 This compromised the structural integrity of the wall in antiquity, causing it to
collapse. The fill of the circular pit was archaeologically rich. According to Price, “Uncovering
this… pit… required careful skill on behalf of our team.”357 However, the original purpose of the
pit still remains a mystery.358
In a layer above the pit and close to the wall, the team found a Hasmonean coin, most
likely bearing the likeness of Alexander Jannaeus, and some pottery, which assisted in discerning
the date it was filled. There was a Hasmonean period cooking pot lid and coin, and an iron nail
found approximately 1.5 meters below the topsoil.359 The circular pit itself was also filled with
Hasomnean era pottery sherds and sand brought up from the wadi, approximately 4.5 meters
deep, which means that it was most likely filled during the Hasomnean period.360
During the summer of 2006, Price’s team returned to Qumran because all of the
anomalies in the GPR data from 2002 had not yet been explained and all the squares from 2005
were not yet finished.361 This dig season, over forty volunteers opened twelve squares, some of
354
Price, “Qumran Yields New Secrets,” 1.
355
Ibid.
356
Ibid. This was approximately the first century B.C.
357
Ibid.
358
Ibid.
359
Price, “Excavation on the Qumran Plateau 2002-2006,” 4-5.
360
Ibid., 5-6.
361
Price, “Qumran Yields New Secrets,” 3.
68
which were left over from the 2005 dig.362 During the 2006 excavation they continued to
excavate more extensively near the partially collapsed eastern wall of the settlement from the
2005 excavation.363 However, this time they excavated all the way from the farthest southern end
of the wall to where it collapsed, which was a distance of approximately fifty feet.364
There were many anomalies in the GPR data in this area, which was thought to be a
heavy concentration of large boulders, some of which Price thinks to be shaped stones (meaning
they are not naturally occurring.)365 One of these stones bears chisel markings, has semi-circular
rounded sides, and has a chiseled socket hole on a flat surface.366 Price believes that this stone
provides evidence for his theory that “some sort of wall or fence must have once separated these
two areas [of the eastern and western sides of the plateau]… with [the stone’s] socketed hole
holding one of the wooden posts.”367 Price provides some reasons why those in antiquity would
have wanted to divide the plateau. He says, “The difference in elevation between the lower
eastern side and the higher western side would seem to have required a dividing fence or wall if
cultivation of crops was attempted in the area.”368 Since the metal tips of ploughs or picks were
found during this excavation, there is evidence of agricultural activity to support this theory.369
Though the structures that were unearthed from this excavation were later reburied due to safety
concerns from the park authorities, the shaped stone with the socket was removed from the
362
Price, “Excavation on the Qumran Plateau 2002-2006,” 6; and Randall Price, “The Continuing
Quest of Qumran: 2006 Dig Report,” World of the Bible Ministries Newsletter 8, no.6 (Fall/Winter 2006),
1.
363
Ibid.
364
Ibid.
365
366
Ibid.
367
Price, “The Continuing Quest of Qumran,” 3.
368
Price, “Excavation on the Qumran Plateau 2002-2006 6.
369
Ibid.
69
ground and placed on the surface above the position of its discovery so that other scholars will be
able to study it in context to the rest of the site.370
The most rare and extraordinary find of this season of excavation was an oil lamp found
completely intact in a gravel layer, covering a layer of boulders.371 This was the only intact oil
lamp found in any of Price’s excavations of Qumran, and there is only one other known lamp in
this style in existence.372 De Vaux found one in his excavations of Cave 1 as well and dated it to
the first century B.C.373 This type of oil lamp is now known as a “Qumran-style” oil lamp, as this
type of oil lamp has only been found on the Qumran plateau.374 In addition, Neutron Activation
Analysis (NAA) showed the lamp to have been produced at Qumran.375 According to Price, “the
lamp showed no signs of use and may have been buried in relation to other pottery… and five
bone deposits covered with pottery.”376 According to the pottery surrounding the lamp, it is
believed that it corresponds with de Vaux’s date of the first century B.C., during the Hasmonean
period.377
More of the previously mentioned bone deposits were found in this excavation. They are
of similar construction and composition to the deposits found in previous excavations. The main
difference being that some of the deposits that were found without pottery were surrounded
within rings of stones.378 The reason for the stones is unclear, although they might have served as
370
Ibid.
371
Ibid.
372
Ibid.
373
Ibid.
374
Ibid.
375
Neuron Activation Anaylsis is a nuclear process used for determining the concentrations of
elements in a vast amount of materials. For archaeological purposes it is used to determine where an
object came from based on the composition of the materials of which it is made.
376
Price, “Excavation on the Qumran Plateau 2002-2006 6.
377
378
70
a marker for the bone deposits. However, it is clear that there is a continuance of the ritual
significance. These deposits were a continuation of ones found in an adjacent squares, and are
thought to be in line with several similar deposits that were found in 2005.379
Several fire pits were found during this excavation on the western side of the plateau.
Four had rings of stone or clay sides, which leads Price to believe that they would be better
classified as ovens.380 However, all of them contained ash and charcoal, and four of them even
contained bones (some of which were articulated) and small amounts of pottery.381 According to
Price, “While this would seem to be an exception to the predominance of bone and pottery
deposits in the east, these remains do not exhibit the same traits as the characteristic animal bone
burials, which appear to have ritual significance, and as they exist only in relation to the fire pits
must be interpreted as simply the leftovers of a normal meal.”382 Price believes these fire pits
date to the Herodian period, which is later than the Hasmonean period, because of the pottery
found in these pits.383
At one point during the 2006 excavation, Price’s dig crossed that of de Vaux’s. Next to
the stone wall that divides the southern part of the plateau between east and west, the work done
by Price’s team traced the extent of de Vaux’s southern trench.384 However, Price went deeper
than de Vaux and exposed a marl floor and uncovered bone and pottery deposits that were
missed by de Vaux’s team.385 These deposits were found under the wall, meaning that the wall
was of a later date than the bone deposits.386 It also means that the wall was probably not for
379
Ibid.
380
Ibid.
381
Ibid.
382
383
384
Ibid., 7.
385
Ibid.
386
Ibid.
71
defensive purposes, as it would have had a deep foundation, but instead served probably as a
fence.387
In December of 2006 a small team went back to excavate some GPR anomalies from
2002 on the western ridge on the extreme southwestern edge of the plateau.388 The layers that
showed habitation elsewhere on the plateau, had a heavy concentration of field stones and
boulders.389 However, according to Price, “very little, if any, potsherds were found in this stony
accumulation.”390 The purpose of this boulder formation remains unknown, but as the stones
appear to be worked by human hand it is assumed that they were not deposited to their current
position by floodwaters.391
Price returned to the Qumran plateau to continue excavations in December of 2008.392
One of the main objectives of this excavation was to complete the work that was begun in the
2006 excavation, and to uncover more animal bone deposits, not only determine their extent, but
also to acquire more samples for the Hebrew University’s Qumran Plateau DNA Project.393
Previous archaeologists who had excavated in an area adjacent to the squares in the 2008
excavations, claimed that the site was an Iron Age granary. Therefore, Price and his team made
sure to take special care when excavating these squares, in order to be able to confirm or deny
these claims.394 This slow and careful excavation of each layer of the stratigraphy, revealed “a
significantly large deposit of pottery and animal bones from the late Hasmonean period/early
387
Ibid.
388
389
390
Ibid.
391
Ibid., 7-8.
392
Randall Price, “Excavation Report: Qumran Plateau 2008,” Unpublished manuscript in
author’s possession, 1.
393
Ibid.
394
Ibid.
72
Roman period.”395 Most of these deposits were in the same style as those previously found, but
there were some with some unusual characteristics. Some of these bone deposits were discovered
buried on planks of charred wood, or large pieces of plaster.396 Price states that these might have
been from community buildings, and their presence indicates a careful means of burial which
“could add further evidence that these deposits were not the result of a garbage dump.”397
This area dates to the Hasmonean and Roman eras as well because of the coins found in
the area. There were two bronze coins and one large sliver coin found, dating from either the
Hasmonean or Herodian eras, offering further confirmation of the age of the material remains
being excavated. 398 There were also some charred date pits found that will be subjected to
radiocarbon dating.399 When the test results are retrieved this will help confirm an approximate
date for the layer.
As many bone deposits were found in this excavation, Price determined that it might be
profitable to excavate outside of the eastern trench to see if the deposits continued under the wall
to the other side.400 As deposits were found directly next to the wall and well under it in the 2006
excavation, Price and his team wanted to see if this pattern continued.401 Also, there was an
increasing amount of Herodian pottery found with the bone deposits instead of Hasomnean, and
the team was curious to see if this pattern continued.402
395
Ibid.
396
Ibid.
397
Ibid.
398
Price, “Excavation Report: Qumran Plateau 2008,” Unpublished manuscript in author’s
possession, 1.
399
Ibid.
400
Ibid.
401
Ibid.
402
Ibid.
73
Though they could not get a permit to return the following year, Price returned with a
team of thirty volunteers to the plateau in 2010 to determine whether the bone deposits were
located on both sides of the wall that divided the southern half of the plateau.403 However, when
they arrived they were told that they were not allowed to dig this season. Therefore, they joined
other digs and worked with their other Qumran finds that were in storage for the three week
period in which they would have been excavating on the plateau.404 Two years later they were
finally able to return for one final season in 2012.
The purpose of the excavation in 2012 was to determine whether the bone deposits that
were found on the western side and underneath the wall separating the plateau continued onto the
eastern side of the wall.405 They also wanted to fill in the gaps left by previous digs in this area of
the plateau. 406 When Dr. Jim Strange dug on the plateau in 1996 it was not well documented,
and so the boundaries of his excavation were unclear. Price and his team discovered these
boundaries and were able to ensure that there were not any sizable gaps on the plateau that
remained unexcavated.407
The archaeologists found the same things on the eastern side of the wall, that they found
on the western side of the wall.408 They discovered many more animal bone deposits continuing
in the same pattern, and covered by pottery. Since they were present underneath and on both
sides of the wall, Price has concluded that the bone deposits were probably placed there in Period
Ib, and before the construction of the wall separating the plateau.409
403
Ibid.
404
Personal interview with Dr. Randall Price, April 3, 2017. Shorthand notes in the author’s
possession.
405
Ibid.
406
Ibid.
407
Ibid.
408
Ibid.
409
Ibid.
74
During this period of excavation, when digging around the collapsed section of the wall,
the archaeologists discovered a layer of ash, probably from the time of the Roman destruction of
the Qumran plateau in A.D. 68.410 This assists in narrowing down the date that the wall was built
because it would have to be after Period Ib, which is the era the bone deposits and pottery found
underneath the wall were from, but before the Great Revolt and the temporary Roman
occupation of the site.411 They were also successful in finding the excavation pit from Strange’s
dig and mapping it on the plateau.412 After this dig, they was determined that the excavation of
the southern end of the Qumran plateau was complete.
Another survey was conducted in October 2012 with a geophysical team from Texas.
Three days were spent using both GPR and seismic resistivity equipment to probe the southern
end of the plateau. The team reported new anomalies and perhaps a collapsed cave as a result of
this survey.413 This is a possible area for exciting future excavations on the Qumran plateau.
Though Price conducted extensive excavations on the plateau, he has also been directly
responsible for a current series of cave excavations for Operation Scroll.414 The excavation on
the most recent cave started in January of 2017.415 The location selected for excavation was
originally found by Price and Israeli archaeologist, Yacov Kalman, in 2010, when they were
looking for different caves surrounding Qumran that had been previously surveyed by members
of the IAA and showed signs of habitation during antiquity.416 Israeli authorities had previously
410
Ibid.
411
Ibid.
412
Ibid.
413
Randall Price, Unpublished notes in the author’s possession, April 2017.
414
Here I begin to speak from personal experience, I have known Dr. Price for many years, and
was personally involved in and present for most of the excavation of this cave (later known as Cave 12).
415
The exact dates for the permit are January 1 through December 31, 2017.
416
Price and Gutfeld also worked together excavating Qumran’s southern plateau. It was during
the 2006 dig season that they explored this cave together.
75
surveyed in 1993 because they were afraid that the West Bank, Qumran included, was going to
be given to the Palestinians. Those who surveyed it stayed for a one day, took some pottery
samples, and designated it Cave 53.417 They then tossed the dirt they had surveyed outside the
mouth of the cave. The permit to excavate Cave 53 was received late in 2016.
To the untrained eye and at first glace, the cave looks indistinguishable from others
throughout the Judean desert. However, upon closer inspection, there are two crude, man-made,
limestone pillars towards the mouth of the cave in order to support the roof. This is a clear
indication that at some point in antiquity this cave was at least temporarily inhabited. The first
chamber of the cave is relatively small, barely tall enough for a man to stand upright, with a dirt
floor and large rocks and boulders dispersed throughout. Towards the back of the chamber there
was a small hole, leading into a tunnel that stretched approximately fifty feet.418 The entrance of
the tunnel is initially approximately two feet tall and wide, but becomes drastically smaller as
one crawls further back into the Judean mountain range.419 The floor of the tunnel was covered
in dirt, small pieces of rock, animal bones, and fecal matter at an average depth of about two or
three inches.420 Looking back out of the mouth of the cave there is a clear view of the Dead Sea
and the ruins on the Qumran plateau.
417
Lauren Young, “Archaeologists Might Have Found Another Dead Sea Scroll Cave: It Could
Be Cave Number 12,” Smithsonian Magazine (February 8, 2017), accessed March 7, 2017,
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/archaeologists-might-have-found-another-dead-sea-scroll-
cave-180962092/.
418
I speak in the past tense here because post excavation some of these features have changed and
are no more.
419
For most of the dig it was my job to explore and excavate this area, as I was the smallest and
initially the only one who could fit.
420
These animal bones were most likely drug into the tunnel by hyenas that were in the area. The
bones were found to be from many different animals: sheep, goats, and even camels. The fecal matter is
most likely from goats, sheep, or other animals that wandered into the cave.
76
The first thing that Price, Gutfeld, and their team did was clear some of the larger
boulders and sift through the fill that was removed by the archaeologists who surveyed the cave
in 1993. This fill was fairly archaeologically rich. Some pieces of pottery from several different
ages were found, as well as an obsidian blade. This was quite an encouraging find early on in the
excavation, as obsidian is not naturally formed in the Judean desert, and therefore was brought in
by those inhabiting the cave.421
In the front chamber of the cave there were successive layers of woven sleeping mats and
fire pits on top of one another. Price and Gutfeld surmise that this is because those who took up
residence in the cave only did so temporarily. They would leave their sleeping mat in the cave
(which may have been infested with ticks and other vermin) and burn it, in order to kill the bugs
and other pests. Then when they returned, they would simply bring a new, clean sleeping mat.
Under several layers of repeated sleeping mats and charcoal remains, there was a plaster floor.
These sleeping mats date from around the Hasmonean and Herodian eras, and the plaster floor
might date from the Hasmonean period or earlier.422
Underneath the plaster floor the team discovered the oldest remains ever found in a
settlement around the Dead Sea. Some archaeologists and historians date these remains to around
10,000 B.C., but other historians might think it to be closer to six or eight thousand B.C.423
Either way, this lowest layer was dated to the pre-pottery Neolithic (PPNB) Neolithic period,
because of the pottery and weaponry found. Artifacts found in this layer consisted of things like
421
The closest place in antiquity where obsidian was naturally occurring was Anatolia (Turkey).
For more information, see Renfrew, Archaeology: The Key Concepts, 33.
422
Although no coins were found, the dating of these mats is from the pottery fragments that were
occasionally discovered in the layer through sifting.
423
Depending on one’s worldview, the Neolithic period can be interpreted into these two different
time frames. The general timeline is still the same. The main different is that one timeline is a little more
compressed. For more information, see Charles Gates, Ancient Cities: The Archaeology of Urban Life in
the Ancient Near East and Egypt, Greece and Rome (New York: Routledge, 2011).
77
flint, stone arrowheads, and thick, Wadi Rabbah type of pottery sherds and cookware with signs
of use.
In the back tunnel the top layer of gravel and bones were carefully extracted in order to
avoid contamination.424 They will undergo DNA analysis at a later time. After the gravel, bone,
and fecal matter was removed and sifted through, there was a sandy layer with intermittent
boulders. Along the tunnel there were occasional niches. At first glance these niches appeared to
be full of the same gravel mixture that was in the main section of the tunnel. However, as the
tunnel was excavated and made accessible, these niches were excavated as well. In some of
them, usually directly underneath the gravel, some large pieces of pottery were found.425 There
were some index pieces among the fragments, like lips and bases, that indicate that these were
storage jars. Although more research needs to be done, they appear to be a similar make and
composition of the pottery that was made locally in Qumran. When the gravel and sand that was
removed from the tunnel was sifted through, the team discovered a date pit and many olive pits.
This could mean that these storage jars were used for food storage, but the food items could also
have been brought in later by rats or other animals. Funds are currently being raised in order to
conduct radiocarbon dating on the olive pits in order to get an approximate date for when they
grew and arrived in the cave.
Two weeks into the excavation things seemed like they were wrapping up. The American
team left as planned after two weeks with Price, and the Israelis thought they were going to
excavate for a few more days with Gutfeld. However, a day after the Americans left Gutfeld sent
an email to Price asking him to come back, because they had moved a large bolder from the front
424
I did this by wearing gloves and carefully removing the bones using only my tools. I was
careful not to touch any of the bones with my skin. After I removed them, they were placed in a new
cardboard box, catalogued, and bagged without being touched.
425
The era of this pottery is yet to be determined.
78
chamber of the cave. Underneath this bolder was a broken jar and a leather fragment, measuring
seven centimeters by eleven centimeters. Although it does not currently appear to have anything
written on it, the fragment is going through multi-spectral imaging in order to determine if the
writing is simply worn or faded. Linen wrappings and leather strings that would have covered
and tied the scrolls while they were in jars were also found. Price and a few Americans came
back and the team continued to dig for two more weeks hoping to find more jars and scroll
fragments. During this time, they found a total of seven broken jars, pieces of papyri, and leather
scraps. They also found some iron pickaxe heads from the 1950s, like the ones the Bedouins use
when looking for scrolls.426 According to Gutfeld, “Although at the end of the day no scroll was
found… the findings indicate beyond any doubt that the cave contained scrolls that were
stolen.”427 Because of the scroll fragment that was found, and since there is enough evidence that
Dead Sea Scrolls were present in the cave at one time, it was reclassified from Cave 53 to Dead
Sea Scroll Cave 12.428
Though he has not yet discovered an intact scroll, Price has still made a tremendous
impact on the archaeological history of Qumran and is continuing his search for undiscovered
scrolls in the caves surrounding the area. While excavating for ten years on the plateau he
unveiled new aspects of the Qumran community, giving scholars a more complete picture of
what life there was like. While doing so, he utilized modern technology, such as GPR and
radiocarbon dating, in order to ensure that he got the most accurate results possible from his
finds. Now working with Operation Scroll, Price begins a different aspect of excavation at
Qumran, in order to save as many scrolls from the ravages of time and the Bedouins as possible.
426
Young, “Archaeologists Might Have Found Another Dead Sea Scroll Cave.”
427
Ibid.
428
Ibid.
79
His dedication to finding the truth, and extensive excavations, have given new insights into the
community that lived in Khirbet Qumran and deposited the Dead Sea Scrolls in surrounding
caves.
80
Chapter 4
The People of Qumran
Ever since European and American explorers first visited Qumran in the nineteenth
century there has been much speculation about who lived on the plateau and later about who
wrote the scrolls that were discovered in the surrounding caves. Because of ancient manuscripts
like The Jewish Wars by Flavius Josephus, as well as some of the works by Philo of Alexandria
and Pliny the Elder, some scholars believe the Jewish sect known as the Essenes inhabited the
site. However, because of certain material remains, others experts believe the Qumran residents
were their own separate, religious sect, though still retaining some of the essential elements of
Judaism. There are even those who do not believe that the people who lived here were Jewish in
any way, and that Qumran was a Roman villa or fortress. Despite the controversy surrounding
those who lived on the Qumran plateau, because of the material remains, it is evident that those
who lived there in antiquity were Jewish and involved in sectarian practices.
Flavius Josephus, a first century Jew, wrote The Jewish Wars to describe his life before
and during the First Jewish Revolt. It offers much insight into the practices of the Essene sect
during the first century A.D.429 During the early stages of the war, he was a military commander
for the Jewish rebels, and after his capture was recognized by the Romans as being a
considerable asset. Because of this, he was not executed and became an unwilling witness to the
destruction wrought by the Romans throughout Judea as the rebels were destroyed and the revolt
was crushed.430 Though the events discussed in his writings are generally political or military in
nature, Josephus is specific in the names and people groups that he mentions. One group that
recurs several times is that of the Essenes. He was familiar with this sect as he was trained for the
429
Josephus, The Jewish War, 9.
430
Ibid., 28.
81
priesthood from birth and was required to become an authority on all aspects of Jewish Law.431
When he was about sixteen years old and as part of his training, he spent several months
studying with various sects of Judaism, including the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes,
in order to decide which group to join.432 Although he eventually decided on joining the
Pharisees, his time spent studying Essene practice makes him one of the ancient experts on the
sect.433
According to Josephus, the Essenes were one of the three larger schools of Jewish
thought in first century Judea.434 Of the three sects, the Essenes were the most disciplined and
severe, as “They eschew pleasure-seeking as a vice and regard temperance and mastery of the
passions as virtue. Scorning wedlock, … [they do not] wish to do away with marriage as a
means of continuing the race, but they are afraid of the promiscuity of women and [are]
convinced that none of the sex remains faithful to one man.”435 In this way, the the Essene sect
greatly resembles Christianity’s monastic system. Regarding finances, “they [were] communists
to perfection, and none of them will be found to be better off than the rest.”436 According to
Josephus, it was “their rule… that novices admitted to the sect must surrender their property to
the order, so that among them all neither humiliating poverty nor excessive wealth.”437 This
means that all wealth belonged to the community as a whole, and there were no such things as
individual possessions.
431
Ibid., 10.
432
Ibid.
433
Ibid., and Joan E. Taylor, The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea (Oxford Scholarship
Online, 2013), 50-51.
434
Josephus, The Jewish Wars, 133.
435
Ibid.
436
Ibid.
437
Ibid.
82
When discussing their appearance, Josephus states, “Oil they regard[ed] as polluting, and
if a man is unintentionally smeared with it he scrubs himself clean; for they think it desirable to
keep the skin dry and always to wear white… neither garments or shoes [were] changed till they
[drop] to pieces or [were] worn out with age.”438 The scrubbing of their bodies and the whiteness
of their garments shows that cleanliness was of the upmost importance to the Essenes, as it was a
physical representation of the inward righteousness and purity in which they tried to live their
lives. To further ensure their purity, they bathed together at least daily, sometimes more
frequently.439
Philo of Alexandria, who was also very familiar with the Essenes, further explains what
lengths these communities went through to remain ritually pure and clean. According to Philo,
“[the Essenes] live in villages, avoiding all cities on account of the habitual lawlessness of those
who inhabit them, well knowing that such a moral disease is contracted from associations with
wicked men, just as a real disease might be from an impure atmosphere, and that this would
stamp an incurable evil on their souls.”440 While he later claims that the sometimes live in cities
as well, it is evident that the Essenes were committed to avoiding what they saw as sin and
impurity.441
Although the Essenes were Jewish, their religious practices differed in many ways from
the Judaism that was practiced in Jerusalem in the first century A.D. Instead of going to the
Temple that was in Jerusalem to pray and perform other religious rituals, they usually would
438
Ibid., 133-134.
439
Ibid., 134.
440
Philo, The Works of Philo, Complete and Unabridged, C. D. Young, trans., (Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson Publishers, 2008), 689.
441
Ibid., 745.
83
practice their rites and rituals within their colonies.442 They would pray before sunrise wherever
they were, and “not utter a word on secular affairs” until those prayers were completed.443 These
prayers were generally traditional in nature, but also placed more emphasis on the future coming
of the Messiah, “as if beseeching Him to appear.”444 Then, after working until noon, they would
all meet together wearing loincloths made of linen and wash themselves with cold water.445
According to Josephus, this was a purification ritual that was required before the noon meal.
“They… go into the refectory in a state of ritual cleanliness as if it was a holy temple and sit
down in silence.”446 Josephus’ description of this refectory, though minimal, is reminiscent of the
special dining area found by de Vaux on the Qumran plateau from Period Ib, as mentioned in
chapter 2.
When the Essenes dined, the food was brought out and laid before them. The priest
would pray over it, but “to taste the food before this prayer [was] forbidden.”447 After the meal
was over they would then say another prayer, during which they would “give thanks to God as
the Giver of life.”448 The garments worn during these meals were considered sacred, and
therefore were removed before they returned to work until the evening.449 Their religious
practices also encouraged the importance of silence, sobriety, and restricted food and drink to
442
Ibid., 689. They did not even offer animal sacrifices to God in the Temple in Jerusalem, which
was a cornerstone of Jewish worship.
443
Josephus, The Jewish Wars, 134.
444
Ibid.
445
Ibid.
446
Ibid.
447
Ibid.
448
Ibid.
449
Ibid. This seems to contradict with Josephus’ earlier claim that the Essenes did not discard
their clothes until they were falling apart. However, because garments were worn to sacred meals does not
mean that they were discarded. It could mean that they were reserved for these meals and were not
allowed to be worn elsewhere. Josephus’s statement might not be a contradiction, just devoid of
explanation.
84
what they saw as simple sufficiency.450 They championed good faith, raising their voices only
when justified, and were generally pacifists who worked at keeping their tempers under careful
control.451
The Essene sect was so strict that “they could take no action without orders from their
supervisors… [except for] personal aid, and charity.”452 However, even this called for some
supervision within the community, as charitable gifts to ones own family required special
permission and an official sanction from the leaders of the community.453 It is because of this
strictness that, according to Josephus, “Every word they [spoke] was more binding than an
oath.”454 Accordingly, swearing was considered worse than perjury to them, because they
thought if a man could not be believed without swearing in God’s name, they thought him to
already be guilty.455
Aside form the necessities of daily living and religious worship, scholarly work was of
the upmost importance to the Essenes. According to Josephus, “They [were] wonderfully
devoted to the work of ancient writers.”456 They read not only for religious purposes, but also for
others forms of community betterment. Particularly, they were interested in learning all about
medicinal roots and the properties of stones in order to cure diseases.457 This too, is strikingly
similar to the priorities of those who once lived at Khirbet Qumran, as they are often credited
450
Ibid.
451
Ibid., and James J. Bloom, The Jewish Revolts Against Rome, A.D. 66-135: A Military
Analysis (Jefferson, NC: Mcfarland & Company, 2010), 81-82. There were some exceptions to this
pacifism. Most notably John the Essene, who was the Jewish commander of the Western Region during
the First Jewish Revolt.
452
Josephus, The Jewish War, 134.
453
Ibid. Since the Essenes were celibate, family members mentioned here would be parents,
siblings, and extended family, like aunts, uncles, and cousins, etc.
454
Ibid.
455
Ibid., 134-135.
456
Ibid., 135.
457
Ibid.
85
with writing, accumulating, and hiding the Dead Sea Scrolls. Philo also claims that the Essenes
were a very scholarly community. He wrote, “[the Essenes] are above all men devoted to the
service of God… studying to preserve their own minds in a state of holiness and purity.”458
From what Josephus relates about the Essenes, and what is known about the Qumran
community from previous chapters, it is evident that these two groups had many striking
similarities. For example, much like the Essenes described above, those who lived in Qumran
wore only white, linen garments.459 While there were some woolen linens that were thought to
belong to the Qumran community found in a cave in a lower section of the Kidron valley, it was
decided that this cave was far enough removed from the activities of ancient Qumran to be
considered a separate settlement, and the other materials found in the cave did not match other
contents of the Dead Sea Scroll caves.460 The Qumran community being associated with the
Essenes for having garments made only of white linen holds true.
Another way in which the Qumran community is similar to the Essene sect is their
emphasis on ritual purity. In the ruins on the Qumran plateau, de Vaux uncovered several
bathing pools in the small community. It is thought that they were used for ritual baths because
of the ridge that separates those descending into the pool from those outside of the pool. This
was done so that those who were ritually clean and coming out of the pool would not
accidentally be touched by those who were descending into the pool unclean. This large number
of bathing pools would be required to accommodate all of people required to bathe multiple
458
Philo, The Works of Philo, 689.
459
Orit Shamir and Naama Sukenik, “Qumran Textiles and the Garments of Qumran’s
Inhabitants,” Dead Sea Discoveries 18, no. 2 (2011): 206.
460
Ibid.
86
times daily in an Essene community. These pools are similar to those found near the Temple
Mount in Jerusalem and are called miqva’ot, or ritual bath.461
The isolation of the Qumran community and its distinct separation from the religious
activities of Jerusalem also indicates that they were possibly Essenes. According to Josephus,
“[The Essenes] possess no one city but everywhere have large colonies.”462 This sounds similar
to the settlement at Qumran. It was not associated with any large cities and stood alone as its
own self-sufficient colony. However, this is also where the comparison starts to degrade as no
other community like Qumran has ever been found, and Josephus mentions above that the
Essenes had colonies everywhere.
Since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, many scholars have noticed the similarity
between the community that the scrolls described and the Essenes mentioned by Josephus, as
seen above. However, with the interpretation and publication of more Dead Sea Scrolls and more
archaeological information uncovered in the cemetery, many are beginning to doubt whether the
Qumran plateau was inhabited by Essenes. Instead, some have come to believe the inhabitants
were a separate but similar sect. According to Jodi Magness and Kenneth Atkinson, “the
archaeological remains at Khirbet Qumran do not match the lifestyle described in any of [the
classical sources.]”463 This means that these scholars, who are experts on Qumran, the Dead Sea
Scrolls, and the archaeology of both, do not believe the religious sect that once lived there was
Essene.
De Vaux found female remains in 1949 and the 1950s, when he excavated forty-three
graves. Female remains were also found by S. Steckoll, who conducted some minor excavations
461
Hirschfeld, “Early Roman Manor Houses in Judea and the Site of Khirbet Qumran,” 161.
462
Josephus, The Jewish Wars, 133; and Philo, The Works of Philo, 689.
463
Kenneth Atkinson and Jodi Magness, “Josephus’s Essenes and the Qumran Community,”
Journal of Biblical Literature 129, no. 2 (Summer 2010): 317.
87
on the plateau in the 1960s and excavated ten graves.464 All of the grave were fairly similar,
rectangular holes, about 1.2 to 2 meters deep, with a narrow niche at the bottom for the body.465
To seal the niche, baked bricks, flagstones, or rocks were placed on top of the body, and then the
grave was filled with dirt. Then a mound of stones was placed on top of the grave as a marker
and to protect the grave underneath.466 De Vaux believed the Qumran community to be all male
because in what he deemed to be the orderly, carefully planned section of the cemetery, only
men were buried.467 Women and children were only buried in graves of an “abnormal type and
situated apart from the rows… [or] the extensions of the cemetery over the hillocks to the
east.”468
One of the main arguments against the claims that Qumran was an Essene community is
the discovery of the remains of females and children in the plateau’s cemeteries. This means one
of three things. Either woman were allowed to join this religious sect, which is unlikely as
Judaism generally separates the genders during religious ceremonies and rituals; families were
present on the Qumran plateau, and these women were the wives, mothers, and daughters of the
men involved in the sect; or women from outside of the community were buried at Qumran.469
Despite his discovery of females at Qumran, de Vaux continued to believe that the Jewish
sect that lived on the plateau was Essene. According to him, “In the main cemetery, which was
well laid out on the plateau of Qumran itself we excavated 31 tombs, and among these there is
only one which is certainly that of a woman. It is in a position apart from the general alignment,
464
Joan E. Taylor, “The Cemeteries of Khirbet Qumran and Women’s Presence at the Site,” Dead
Sea Discoveries 6, no. 3 (November 1999): 285-286.
465
Ibid., 286.
466
Ibid., 286-287.
467
Ibid., 288.
468
Ibid., For more information see, De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 57-58.
469
Taylor, “The Cemeteries of Khirbet Qumran and Women’s Presence at the Site,” 285.
88
and is of a different type from the rest… [the other female graves] are situated in the extensions
to the main cemetery or in two secondary ones. This may indicate that the women were not
members of the community, or at any rate not in the same sense as the men buried in the main
cemetery.”470 De Vaux believes that this might mean this particular Essene colony was lax in its
rules on celibacy, and marriage may have been allowed.471 However, he does add the caveat
“Clearly the women’s tombs do not strengthen the argument that the community was related to
the Essenes, but they do not rule it out either.”472
Those in favor of the Essene argument contend that Josephus and the other ancient
authors who wrote about the Jewish sect were mistaken in their belief that the Essenes of
Qumran were celibate males.473 It is clear from Josephus’ writings mentioned previously that the
Essenes were strictly celibate for many reasons and were a sect entirely comprised of males.
However, challenging the status quo that Qumran was an Essene community has been difficult,
as many scholars whose interests are in early Judaism are fighting previously conceived
notions.474 Much progress has been made in interpreting who actually lived at Qumran, but in the
beginning it was difficult as “contradictory evidence [was] dismissed… as inconsequential.”475
Many still believe that it was the Essenes who lived in the settlement at Qumran, like de Vaux.
470
Ibid.
471
Ibid.
472
Ibid.
473
Linda Bennett Elder, “The Woman Question and Female Ascetics Among Essenes,” The
Biblical Archaeologist 57, no. 4 (December 1994): 222.
474
Ibid.
475
Ibid. This is still a work in progress as when one asks most people who are familiar with
Qumran and its history, “Who lived at Qumran?” They are most likely to reply with “The Essenes.”
89
Others believe that it was still a Jewish religious sect similar to, but separate from, the
Essenes.476
While there is still much debate about which Jewish sect lived in Qumran, there are still
those who believe that Qumran might have been a Roman or Herodian fortress or manor house,
or a sort-of hostel for those visiting the Dead Sea area in antiquity.477 In his article, Early Roman
Manor Houses in Judea and the Site of Khirbet Qumran, Yizhar Hirschfeld compares the
architecture of Qumran “with settlements of a similar size, function, and date” in order to
determine that it is not a unique site and also the original purpose of the ruins.478 He claims that
“Recent discoveries of comparable sites from the Late Hellenistic and Early Roman periods in
Judea may indicate that Qumran was part of a pattern of settlement characteristic of Judea from
the first century B.C.E. through the first century C.E.”479 While he does not explicitly state it, it
is clear from his writing that Hirschfeld does not think that the Qumran community was built by
a Jewish sect.
Though Hirschfeld laid out the complete argument in the late 1990s, the Belgian team
that is most well known for presenting the idea of Qumran being an agricultural settlement is
Robert Donceel and Pauline Donceel-Voûte.480 They claim that de Vaux completely ignored
some vital pieces of archaeological evidence while formulating his theories about Qumran, and
476
This is an argument to which the answer will probably never be known with any guarantee.
The one exception would be if more writings were found explicitly stating the religious sect of those who
lived in Qumran. Even then, there would probably still be those who speculate.
477
Hirschfeld, “Early Roman Manor Houses in Judea and the Site of Khirbet Qumran,” 161-162.
478
Ibid., 162.
479
Ibid.
480
Jurgen Zangenberg and Jean-Baptiste Humbert, Qumran: Site of the Dead Sea Scrolls:
Archaeological Interpretations and Debates: Proceedings of the Conference Held at Brown University,
November 17-19, 2002 (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill Academic Publishers, 2005), 2. Some sources claim
that their work came before Hirschfeld’s. However, it would only be a few years’ difference as both
events occurred almost simultaneously.
90
adopted the term villa rustica to describe the site.481 Many of de Vaux’s publications remain in
French; therefore Donceel and his team have more of de Vaux’s work readily available to them,
including excavation notes.482 However, their argument does not seem to differ much from
Hirschfeld’s, except for his claim that the sophisticated glass and stoneware found at Qumran
does not fit with the sectarian model.483
The main argument presented by Hirschfeld and others who maintain that Qumran was a
Roman settlement is that other manor houses from this time period feature a tower. According to
Hirscfeld, “the tower was an essential element, since its height and thick walls offered its
inhabitants security and, at the same time, gave pronounced architectural expression to the
owner’s command over his land.”484 While Qumran does have a tower, and there was probably
an element of security in its purpose, as seen in chapter 2 its main purpose was probably storage,
judging from the archaeological remains.485
Another feature of Qumran’s ruins that Hirschfeld believes could indicate that it was a
traditional manor house is the complex water supply system. He believes this indicates that “the
principal occupation of the owners was agricultural.”486 While a complex irrigation system
would be a necessity for a manor in an agricultural society, it would also be necessary for any
large community attempting to survive in a desert environment; therefore, the complex water
481
Ibid.
482
Ibid., 203.
483
Ibid., 245-246. The glass found at the site actually points to perfume production, which might
have been a way for the community to generate revenue; therefore, the presence of glass does not
eliminate the possibility of a Jewish, sectarian community living at Qumran.
484
Hirschfeld, “Early Roman Manor Houses in Judea and the Site of Khirbet Qumran,” 164.
485
The tower mentioned here was constructed in Period 1b. While this two-story tower was
defensive in nature, as there were no windows and only one way in or out of the building, de Vaux
believes that the lower level was used for storage. See chapter 2 for more information.
486
Ibid.
91
system neither proves nor disproves that Qumran was inhabited by farmers and not a Jewish
religious sect.
A final feature that is common to all manor houses from the Herodian/Roman period in
Judea is “evidence of destruction and neglect.”487 This destruction layer happened at
approximately the same time for all of the manor houses, which was around seventy A.D.,
towards the end of the Great Revolt.488 Apparently, the Roman army saw these manor houses as
a threat and systematically destroyed them.489 While Qumran does fit this criteria as well, it does
not mean that it was a manor house, as the Roman’s were destroying nearly every settlement
they came across during the Great Revolt.490 Therefore, this is not a feature that indicates that
Qumran was a manor house, as it is something that is commonly seen is various structures and
settlements throughout Judea.
Another argument that Hirschfeld makes for Qumran being a manor is its strategic
location on an elevated plateau sixty meters above the Dead Sea.491 This elevation would have
made the community a great observation post, especially when combined with the tower, from
which one can see the entire northern half of the Dead Sea and a few of the major roads in the
area.492 The location was also strategic because two ancient roads passed through Qumran and
continued south towards the oasis at Ein Gedi, one of which also connects Qumran with ancient
487
Ibid.
488
Ibid.
489
Ibid.
490
Ibid., 164. Hirschfeld mentions several sites that match this description. For example, Horvat
Elq, northeast of Caesarea, is the remains of a large agricultural complex surrounded by a wall, on the top
of a hill, with a tower. Another is Qasr e-Leja, on the northwestern margin of Samaria.
491
Ibid., 171.
492
Ibid.
92
Jericho.493 The other road was the fastest route from Jerusalem to Qurman.494 These roads would
have put Qumran in line with some important trade routes in the ancient world, as this was the
optimal route through the desert because of the many springs that are along the road.495
Again, while Qumran does match the location requirements of a manor house, this does
not mean that it was one. Anyone individual or group who wanted to remain connected with
what was going in the ancient world, yet somewhat isolated, would have built a structure along
this route. According to the ancient sources Josephus and Philo of Alexandria, they both estimate
that the Essene sect “numbered over four thousand souls.”496 While there were several colonies
of Essenes in Judea, it would make sense for the Essenes to have a large settlement at Qumran,
where they could still live on the fringes of society while in a close proximity to trade routes and
Jerusalem.
Pliny the Elder also claimed that there was a large community of Essenes by the western
shore of the Dead Sea “below” En Gedi.497 While this could mean the Qumran site, it requires
some explanation, as the location is not entirely clear in the text. Pliny mentions several sites and
their general locations in respect to one another.498 He first mentions Jericho, then the Essenes by
the Dead Sea, then En Gedi “below them.”499 This description is directionally north to south,
however, the phrase used by Pliny could be used to mean two different things. The first could be
that the Essenes literally lived in a place high above En Gedi, in its general vicinity.500 In this
493
Ibid., 171-172. The roads to Ein Gedi would have been important as it was, and still is, a
source of fresh water in the desert.
494
Ibid., 172-173.
495
Ibid., 174.
496
Geza Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective (Cleveland: William Collins &
World Publishing Co Inc., 1978), 125.
497
Ibid., 127.
498
Ibid.
499
Ibid. The exact words used here by Pliny are infra hos Engada.
500
Ibid.
93
case Qumran would not work as the location of Pliny’s Essenes as Qumran is twenty miles north
of En Gedi.501 However, Benjamin Mazar, the famous Israeli archaeologist, led a team in the
early 1960s to explore the area of En Gedi thoroughly, and no ruins that remotely resembled
Pliny’s account were found.502 On the other hand, if “below them” is translated as “south of
them” or “further down,” which fits in the context of Pliny’s journey southward in his
description, then Qumran fits perfectly.503 Qumran is located eight miles south of Jericho, and
twenty miles south of Qumran is En Gedi.504 As there is no other archeological site in the area
that fits Pliny’s Essenes, this is a powerful argument in favor of the Essenes residing in Qumran
in ancient times.
While there it is still much debate about what sect lived in Qumran during antiquity, it is
evident that they were Jewish and had many similarities to the Essenes that were mentioned
many times by Josephus, Philo, and Pliny. These similarities include style of dress and their
emphasis on ritual purity. However, the discovery of women and children in the cemeteries of
Qumran means that these were maybe not Essenes, but a similar Jewish sect. Although some like
Hirschfeld might try to argue otherwise, it is also clear that Qumran was a deeply religious,
Jewish community and not a Herodian manor house. The main arguments for it being a manor
house are easily explained away, and are generally applicable to most sites that were present for
the destruction wrought by the Romans in the Great Revolt. Furthermore, ancient manuscripts
and sources, combined with archaeological evidence, provides little support for the villa rustica,
and supports the theory that a Jewish sectarian community, possibly the Essenes mentioned by
Pliny and Josephus, lived in Qumran until the First Jewish Revolt. Thanks to the work of many
501
Ibid.
502
Ibid.
503
Ibid.
504
Ibid.
94
archaeologists in the past century and a half, and the translation of ancient manuscripts, more is
now known about this community than ever. Hopefully, future archaeological excavations on the
plateau will help irrefutably end the ongoing debate about the Qumran community.
95
Conclusion
It is evident that Khirbet Qumran is an archaeological site of significance to all who
realize the importance of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Many amazing discoveries have been made on
the Qumran plateau and the surrounding caves in the last one hundred years. Initially
archaeology in general was rather primitive. However, using progressively more modern
archaeological techniques, such as GPR and radiocarbon dating, archaeologists like Roland de
Vaux and J. Randall Price have continued to uncover more material remains that show a more
complete picture of what life was like on the Qumran plateau during the height of its occupation.
These material remains point to a Jewish, sectarian settlement, possibly Essene, that devoted
themselves to ritual purification and religious scholarly pursuits. The arguments of those who say
otherwise are usually general, and could apply to a number of Jewish sites whose destruction
dates to the time of the First Jewish Revolt. Hopefully with the assistance of DNA analysis it will
soon be proven that the members of this community were also responsible for the production and
preservation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Looking into the future, as excavations continue on the
plateau and the surrounding caves, the archaeological history of Qumran is not yet complete, and
more exciting discoveries are anticipated.
From the first chapter, it is evident that archaeological techniques have greatly changed
over the years. Through time, and with the help of technology, methods became much more
detailed and precise. This is also true at Qumran, where early explorers excavated as they saw fit,
and more precise methods of excavations did not come to the plateau until the 1950s with de
Vaux’s excavations. In the discoveries made by Price nearly fifty years later, it is also evident
that the incorporation of technology, such as GPR, into the archaeological method, has decreased
survey time and increased productivity.

96
These digs, along with others that have taken place on the Qumran plateau, uncovered not
only Iron Age ruins, but the remains of a community that spanned from the time of the
Hasmoneans until its destruction during the First Jewish Revolt. From these architectural
remains, as well as the artifacts that were found, the human remains in the cemetery, and the
archaeological remains from surrounding caves, it is evident that the community that lived at
Qumran was a Jewish sectarian settlement, possibly Essene.
Others, like Yizhar Hirschfeld, argue that Qumran was not inhabited by members of a
Jewish sect, but was a Herodian era mansion that was destroyed by the Romans during the First
Jewish Revolt.505 He provides much evidence to support his theory, such as a layer of destruction
dating to the Roman Period, a complex water system, and pieces of sophisticated glass and
stoneware found on the plateau. However, while the complex water system and layer of
destruction would be expected in a manor house, they also would be expected for any large
settlement in the desert from the first century. The sophisticated glass and stoneware can be
explained away with the possibility of the community having a perfumery.
The ancient sources such as Flavius Josephus, Philo of Alexandria, and Pliny the Elder,
all support the possibility of Qumran being an Essene settlement. Josephus gives an account of
their daily life and some of their religious requirements. Philo does this as well, and also
estimates that this Jewish sect numbered at around 4,000 at the time he was writing.506 Pliny
gives a fairly precise description of the location of large settlement of Essenes on the western
bank of the Dead Sea, that matches the location of the Qumran plateau.507 All of these sources
seem to indicate that those who lived in Qumran were members of the Essenes.
505
Hirschfeld, “Early Roman Manor Houses”.
506
Philo, The Works of Philo, 689.
507
Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 127.
97
This thesis adds to a more complete history of the archaeology of Qumran. Though it
does not discuss every excavation that has taken place on the plateau, access to Price’s
unpublished writings on his excavations and the opportunity to participate in the excavation of
Cave 12, added much new information to the subject. Also, the emphasis on archaeological
excavations that took place on the plateau, as opposed to the surrounding caves or the Dead Sea
Scrolls, is a fairly unique aspect of this thesis.

98
Bibliography
Primary
Robbed.” Israel Antiquities Authority. Accessed April 2, 2017.
De Saulcy, F. Narrative of a Journey Round the Dead Sea and in the Bible Lands; in 1850 and
1851. Including An Account of the Discovery of the Sites of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Volumes 1 and 2. London: Richard Bentley, 1854.
Elgvin, Torleif, Kipp Davis, and Michael Langlois, eds. Gleanings from the Caves: Dead Sea
Scrolls and Artefacts from the Schøyen Collection. New York: Bloomsbury T&T Clark,
2016.
Farhi, Yoav and Randall Price. “The Numismatic Finds from the Qumran Plateau Excavations
2004-2006, and 2008 Seasons.” Dead Sea Discoveries 17 (2010): 210-225.
Grissino-Mayer, Henri D. “Principles of Dendrochronology.” The Science of Tree Rings. Last

updated November 2016. Accessed on December 11, 2016.
http://web.utk.edu/~grissino/principles.htm.
Guillaume-Rey, Emmanuel. Voyage in the Haouran and on the Shores of the Dead Sea Executed
During the Years 1857 and 1858. Paris: A. Bertrand, 1861.
Herron, Ellen Middlebrook, ed. The Dead Sea Scrolls: Catalog of the Exhibition of Scrolls and
Artifacts from the Collections of the Israel Antiquities Authority. Grand Rapids: William
B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003.
Josephus, Flavius. The Jewish War. Translated by G.A. Williamson. New York: Penguin Books,
1970.
Layard, Austen Henry. Discoveries in the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon: With Travels in
Armenia, Kurdistan and the Desert: Being the Result of a Second Expedition Undertaken
for the Trustees of the British Museum. Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 2002.
Libby, Willard F. Radiocarbon Dating. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1955.
Lynch, W.F. Narrative of the United States’ Expedition to the River Jordan and the Dead Sea.
Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1849.
Martinez, Florentino Garcia, and Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar. The Dead Sea Scrolls: Study Edition,
Volumes 1 and 2. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997 and
1998.
99
Poole, Henry. “Report of a Journey in Palestine.” The Journal of the Royal Geographical Society
of London 26, (1856): 55-70.
Price, Randall “Excavation on the Qumran Plateau 2002-2006,” Unpublished manuscript in

author’s possession.
---. “New Discoveries at Qumran: A Special Report.” World of the Bible Ministries Newsletter 6,
no. 3 (Fall/Winter 2004), 1-4.
---. “Qumran Yields New Secrets: 2005 Dig Report.” World of the Bible Ministries Newsletter 7,
no. 2 (Winter 2005), 1-3.
---. Secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1996.
---. “The Continuing Quest of Qumran: 2006 Dig Report.” World of the Bible Ministries
Newsletter 8, no. 2 (Fall/Winter 2006), 1-4.
Schliemann, Heinrich. Troy and Its Remains: A Narrative of Researches and Discoveries Made
on the Site of Ilium, and in the Trojan Plain. New York: B. Blom, 1968.
Shanks, Hershel. “Absorbing Archaeology at the Jerusalem Congress.” Biblical Archaeology

Review 16, no. 6. (November/December 1990): 50.
Vaux, Roland de. Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls. London: Oxford University Press,
1973.
Wheeler, Margaret. History Was Buried: A Source Book of Archaeology. New York: Hart
Publishing Company, Inc., 1967.
Wheeler, Mortimer. Still Digging. New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., Inc., 1956.
Wilson, John. The Lands of the Bible Visited and Described: In an Extensive Journey
Undertaken with Special Reference to the Promotion of Biblical Research and the
Advancement of the Cause of Philanthropy, Volume I. Edinburgh: William Whyte and
Co., 1847.
Woolley, Leonard. Digging up the Past. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1961.
---. Spadework in Archaeology. New York: Philosophical Library, Inc., 1953.
Yonge, C.D., trans. The Works of Philo: Complete and Unabridged. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson
Publishers, 2008.
100
Secondary
Albertz, Rainer. Family and Household Religion in Ancient Israel and the Levant. Winona Lake,
IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012.
Allen, Susan Heuck. Finding the Walls of Troy: Frank Calvert and Heinrich Schliemann at
Hisarlik. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999.
Atkinson, Kenneth, and Jodi Magness. “Josephus’s Essenes and the Qumran Community.”
Journal of Biblical Literature 129, no. 2 (Summer 2010), 317-342.
Avi-Yonah, Michael. Introducing Archaeology: Cassell’s Introducing Archaeology Series Book

1. London: Cassell and Company, Ltd, 1973.
Banerjee, Dwijen. Oil Sands, Heavy Oil, & Bitumen: From Recovery to Refinery. Tulsa:
PennWell Corporation, 2012.
Baumgarten, Albert. “Who Cares and Why Does It Matter? Qumran and the Essenes, Once
Again!” Dead Sea Discoveries 11, no. 2 (2004): 174-190.
Beck, John A. The Baker Book of Bible Charts, Maps, and Time Lines. Grand Rapids: Baker
Books, 2016.
Brier, Bob. “Napoleon in Egypt: The General’s Search for Glory Led to the Birth of
Egyptology.” Archaeology 52, no. 3 (May/June 1999): 44-53.
Brooke, George J. “The Temple Scroll and the Archaeology of Qumran, ‘Ain Feshkha, and
Masada.” Revue de Qumrân 13, no. ¼ (October 1988): 225-237.
Broshi, Magen. “Essenes at Qumran? A Rejoinder to Albert Baumgarten.” Dead Sea Discoveries
14, no. 1 (2007): 25-33.
Cargill, Robert R. “Did Archaeologists Really Discover a New Dead Sea Scroll Cave?: Dead Sea
Scroll Cave Under the Microscope.” Biblical Archaeological Society. Accessed on April
12, 2017. http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-artifacts/dead-sea-
scrolls/new-dead-sea-scroll-cave/.
Charlesworth, James H. “The Origin and Subsequent History of the Authors of the Dead Sea
Scrolls: Four Transitional Phases Among the Qumran Essenes.” Revue de Qumrân 10,
no. 2 (May 1980): 213-233.
Chazon, Esther Glickler. “Prayers from Qumran and Their Historical Implications.” Dead Sea
Discoveries 1, no. 3 (November 1994): 265-284
Cobbing, Felicity J. “The American Palestine Exploration Society and the Survey of Eastern
Palestine.” Palestine Exploration Quarterly 137, no. 1 (April 2005): 9-21.
101
Collins, John J. Beyond the Qumran Community: The Sectarian Movement of the Dead Sea
Scrolls. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010.
Cook, J.M. The Troad: An Archaeological and Topographical Study. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1973.
Davies, Philip R. “Between Text and Archaeology.” Dead Sea Discoveries 18, no. 3 (2011):
316-338.
---. “Commentary: How Not to Do Archaeology: The Story of Qumran.” The Biblical
Archaeologist 51, no. 4 (December 1988): 203-207.
---. “Eschatology at Qumran.” Journal of Biblical Literature 104, no. 1 (March 1985): 39-55.
Davis, Miriam C. Kathleen Kenyon: Digging Up the Holy Land. London: Left Coast Press, 2010.
Dever, William G. and H. Darrell Lance, editors. A Manual of Field Excavation: Handbook for
Field Archaeologists. New York: Hebrew Union College—Jewish Institute of Religion,
1978.
Eisenman, Robert. The New Testament Code: Gospels, Apostles, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Old
Saybrook, CT: Konecky and Konecky, 2014.
Elder, Linda Bennett. “The Women Question and Female Ascetics Among Essenes.” The
Biblical Archaeologist 57, no. 4 (December 1994): 220-234.
Elgvin, Torleif. “An Incense Altar from Qumran?” Dead Sea Discoveries 9, no. 1 (2002): 20-33.
Eshel, Hanan. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Hasmonean State. Grand Rapids: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2008.
Eshel, Hanan and Magen Broshi. “Excavations at Qumran, Summer of 2001.” Israel Exploration
Society 53, no. 1 (2003): 61-73.
Ewing, Upton Clary. The Prophet of the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Essenes and the Early
Christians—One and the Same People, Their Seven Devout Practices. Joshua Tree, CA:
Tree of Life Publications, 1993.
Fidanzio, Marcello, ed. The Caves of Qumran: Proceedings of the International Conference
Lugano, 2014. Boston: Brill, 2017.
Fields, Weston W. The Dead Sea Scrolls: A Full History. Boston: Brill, 2009.
Gates, Charles. Ancient Cities: The Archaeology of Urban Life in the Ancient Near East and
Egypt, Greece and Rome. New York: Routledge, 2011.
102
Golb, Norman. “Who Hid the Dead Sea Scrolls?” The Biblical Archaeologist 48, no. 2 (June
1985): 68-82.
Goranson, Stephen. “Further Qumran Archaeology Publications in Progress.” The Biblical

Archaeologist 54, no. 2 (June 1991): 110-111.
Grant, Jim, Sam Gorin, and Neil Fleming. The Archaeology Coursebook: An Introduction to
Themes, Sites, Methods, and Skills. New York: Routledge, 2008.
Graves, David E. Biblical Archaeology: An Introduction with Recent Discoveries that Support
the Reliability of the Bible. Montcon, New Brunswick, Canada: David E. Graves, 2014.
---. Biblical Archaeology Volume 2: Famous Discoveries that Support the Reliability of the
Bible. Toronto: Electronic Christian Media, 2015.
Guha, Sudeshna. “Imposing the Habit of Science: Sir Mortimer Wheeler and Indian
Archaeology.” Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 13, no. 1 (May 2003): 4-10.
Hachili, Rachel. “Burial Practices at Qumran.” Revue de Qumrân 16, no. 2 (December 1993):
247-264.
Hauser, Kitty. Shadow Sites: Photography, Archaeology, and the British Landscape, 1927-1955.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Heger, Paul. “Celibacy in Qumran Hellenistic Fiction or Reality? Qumran’s Attitude Toward
Sex.” Revue de Qumrân 26, no. 1 (June 2013): 53-90.
Hendin, David and Herbert Kreindler. Guide to Biblical Coins. St. Louis: Amphorae Publishing
Group, 2010.
Hirschfeld, Yizhar. “Early Roman Manor Houses in Judea and the Site of Khirbet Qumran.”
Journal of Near Eastern Studies 57, no. 3 (July 1998): 161-189.
---. Qumran in Context: Reassessing the Archaeological Evidence. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson
Publishers, 2004.
Holden, Joseph M. and Norman Geisler. The Popular Handbook of Archaeology and the Bible:
Discoveries that Confirm the Reliability of Scripture. Eugene, OR: Harvest House
Publishers, 2013.
Kaplan, Eran and Derek J. Penslar, eds. The Origins of Israel, 1882-1948: A Documentary
History. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press, 2011.
King, Philip J. American Archaeology in the Mideast: A History of the American Schools of
Oriental Research. Winona Lake, IN: The American School of Oriental Research, 1983.
103
Kugler, Rob. “Making All Experience Religious: The Hegemony of Ritual at Qumran.” Journal
for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Period 33, no. 2 (2002):
131-152.
Kugler, Rob and Esther Chazon. “Women at Qumran: Introducing the Essays.” Dead Sea
Discoveries 11, no. 2 (2004): 167-173.
LaSor, William Sanford. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament. Grand Rapids: William
B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1979.
Levy, Thomas and Thomas Higham. The Bible and Radiocarbon Dating: Archaeology, Text, and
Science. New York: Routledge, 2014.
Magness, Jodi. “A Response to Cargill.” Near Eastern Archaeology 72, no. 1 (March 2009): 45-
47.
---. The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 2002.
---. “Two Notes on the Archaeology of Qumran.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental
Research 312 (November 1998): 37-44.
Martinez, F. García and A. S. van der Woude. “A “Groningen” Hypothesis of Qumran Origins
and Early History.” Revue de Qumrân 14, no. 4 (August 1989): 521-541.
Martinez, F. García and Claude Grenache. “The Great Battles Over Qumran.” Near Eastern
Archaeology 63, no. 3 (September 2000): 124-130.
Mébarki, Farah and Claude Grenache. “The Qumran Library.” Near Eastern Archaeology 63, no.
3 (September 2000): 144-149.
Metso, Sarianna. “Methodological Problems in Reconstructing History from Rule Texts Found at
Qumran.” Dead Sea Discoveries 11, no. 3 (2004): 315-335.
Murray, Tim. Milestones in Archaeology: A Chronological Encyclopedia. Oxford: ABC-CLIO,

2007.
Peck, D. C. “The Qumran Library and Its Patrons.” The Journal of Library History (1974-1987)
12, no. 1 (Winter, 1977): 5-16.
Peuch, Emile. “The Necropolises of Khirbet Qumran and Ain el-Ghuweir and the Essene Belief
in Afterlife.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 312 (November
1998): 21.
104
“Qumran Park: Archaeology and History.” Israel Nature and Parks Authority. Accessed March
1, 2017.
http://www.parks.org.il/sites/English/ParksAndReserves/qumran/Pages/default.aspx#arch
.
Regev, Eyal. “Access Analysis of Khirbet Qumran: Reading Spatial Organization and Social
Boundaries.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 355 (August 2009):
85-99.
Renfrew, Colin and Paul Bahn. Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, and Practice.
London: Thames & Hudson Ltd., 2007.
Romer, John. The History of Archaeology: Great Excavations of the World. New York:
Checkmark Books, 2001.
Rose, Mark. “What Did Schliemann Find- and Where, When, and How Did He Find It?”
Archaeology 46, no. 6 (November/December 1993): 33-36.
Schenker, David. “Twenty Years of Israeli-Jordanian Peace: A Brief Assessment.” The

Washington Institute for Near East Police. October 23, 2014. Accessed February 25,
2017. http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/twenty-years-of-israeli-
jordanian-peace-a-brief-assessment.
Schiffman, Lawrence H. “Communal Meals at Qumran.” Revue de Qumrân 10, no. 1 (September
1979): 45-56.
---. “Origin and Early History of the Qumran Sect.” The Biblical Archaeologist 58, no. 1 (March
1995): 37-48.
---. Qumran and Jerusalem: Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the History of Judaism. Grand
Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010.
---. Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls: The History of Judaism, the Background of Christianity,
and the Lost Library of Qumran. New York: Doubleday, 1994.
---. “The New Halakhich Letter (4QMMT) and the Origins of the Dead Sea Sect.” The Biblical
Schiffman, Lawrence H. and James C. VanderKam, eds. Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls,
Volumes 1 and 2. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Schultz, Brian. “The Qumran Cemetery: 150 Years of Research.” Dead Sea Discoveries 13, no.
2 (2006): 194-228.
Shamir, Orit and Naama. “Qumran Textiles and Garments of Qumran’s Inhabitants.” Dead Sea
Discoveries 18, no. 2 (2011): 206-225.
105
“Shrine of the Book.” The Israel Museum, Jerusalem. Last updated 2014. Accessed February 25,
2017. http://www.english.imjnet.org.il/page_899.
Stacey, David. “Some Archaeological Observations on the Aqueducts of Qumran.” Dead Sea
Discoveries 14, no. 2 (2007): 222-243.
Stein, Leslie. The Making of Modern Israel, 1948-1967. Cambridge: Polity, 2009.
Strugnell, John. “Qumranology Then and Now.” Near Eastern Archaeology 63, no. 3
(September 2000): 175-176.
Talmon, Shemaryahu. The World of Qumran From Within. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, The
Hebrew University, 1989.
Taylor, Joan E. “The Cemeteries of Khirbet Qumran and Women’s Presence at the Site.” Dead
Sea Discoveries 6, no. 3 (November 1999): 285-323.
---. The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea. Oxford Scholarship Online, 2013.
---. “Khirbet Qumran in the Nineteenth Century and the Name of the Site.” Palestine Exploration
Quarterly 134, no. 2 (July, 2002): 144-164.
Traill, David A. “Schliemann’s Mendacity: A Question of Methodology.” Anatolian Studies 36

(1986): 91-98.
Trever, John C. “The Book of Daniel and the Origin of the Qumran Community.” The Biblical
Vermes, Geza. The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective. Cleveland: William Collins &
World Publishing Co Inc., 1978.
Vermes, Geza and Martin D. Goodman, eds. The Essenes: According to the Classical Sources.
Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989.
Warner, Mallory. “Carbon-14 is 75+0 Years Old.” Smithsonian. Last updated February 27, 2015.
Accessed December 12, 2016. http://americanhistory.si.edu/blog/carbon-14.
Wintle, Justin. New Makers of Modern Culture: Volume 2. New York: Routledge, 2007.
Wright III, Benjamin G. “Wisdom and Women at Qumran.” Dead Sea Discoveries 11, no. 2
(2004): 240-261.
Young, Lauren. “Archaeologists Might Have Found Another Dead Sea Scroll Cave: It Could Be
Cave Number 12.” Smithsonian Magazine (February 8, 2017). Accessed March 7, 2017.
106
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/archaeologists-might-have-found-another-
dead-sea-scroll-cave-180962092/.
Zangenberg, Jurgen and Jean-Baptiste Humbert. Qumran: Site of the Dead Sea Scrolls:
Archaeological Interpretations and Debates: Proceedings of the Conference Held at
Brown University, November 17-19, 2002. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill Academic
Publishers, 2005.
Zias, Joe. “Qumran Archaeology: Skeletons with Multiple Personality Disorders and Other
Grave Errors.” Revue de Qumrân 21, no. 1 (June 2003): 83-98.
---. “The Cemeteries of Qumran and Celibacy: Confusion Laid to Rest?” Dead Sea Discoveries
7, no. 2 (2000): 220-253.
Zias, Joe and James D. Tabor, and Stephanie Harter-Lailheugue. “Toilets at Qumran, The
Essenes, and the Scrolls: New Anthropological Data and Old Theories.” Revue de
Qumrân 22, no. 4 (December 2006): 631-640.

Full Text

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Text

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Text

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Archaeological History of Qumran:

With an Explanation of Archaeological Techniques

Presented by Christy Connell

Dr. David L. Snead

Dr. J. Randall Price

Liberty University History Department

Chapter 1: A Brief History of Archaeological Methods and Techniques……..…………………10

Chapter 2: An Early History of Archaeology at Khirbet-Qumran ………………...…………….30

Chapter 3: Qumran Excavations in the 21st Century……………..……………………………...57

Chapter 4: The People of Qumran……………………………………………………………….80

Khirbet Qumran is an archaeological site located on a plateau in Qumran National Park

that it was some kind of Jewish sectarian community.

layers is preserved for analysis.

by the Romans during the Great Revolt.7

scholarship already published on Qumran.

sources that are either inaccessible, or are now lost to time.

questions that must be answered when conducting an archaeological excavation.

have aided in improving the accuracy of the modern archaeological method.

explorers who traveled to Qumran in the nineteenth century.

My interpretations, as well as those of other scholars as to the identity of those who

the historiography by incorporating studies of recent excavations using previously inaccessible

A Brief History of Archaeological Methods and Techniques

When studying archaeology, it is important to understand what methodologies and

diversity to an imprecise science.30

In the early development of what is now the historical-science of archaeology, it more

methodology it has become.31 The German archaeologist, Heinrich Schliemann (1822-1890),

in modern Turkey. The excavation proceeded in 1870.33

previously excavated archaeological sites (like Nimrud, an Assyrian palace34), Schliemann

indiscriminately, Schliemann planned to cut into the archaeological mound transversely in an

to uncover as much archaeological information as possible, in order to contribute to the

bottom layer of the mound.)37

deemed them “unimportant” in his quest for Troy.46

Archaeology will always be destructive. Every time an archaeologist uncovers a building,

develop careful excavation and classification techniques.48

techniques, Schliemann still made some beautiful discoveries.

a particularly fragile artifact demanded attention.63

also a component of radiocarbon dating.

impacted the field of archaeology.71

be no smaller than twenty-five by twenty-five by five millimeters.73 These samples cannot be

get mixed with something from another layer.78

than from any dig to which she ever contributed.83

much technical precision in recording and much forward planning.85

production of archaeological knowledge.”86 This archaeological method requires the careful

lay the ground work for future archaeologists.

of Wheeler’s students to qualify as a professional archaeologists, she is probably the most

which could be hundreds of years before it was burned.103

misunderstanding in the context of deposition.104 This happens with the archaeologist, or

information exact interpretation of the radiocarbon dating is impossible.105

populations that ate a lot of marine life might be inaccurate.110

approximate by some archaeologists.

dimensional datasets called “time-slices” or “slice-maps.”124 These datasets can be “sliced”

features that may have archaeological significance.125

Archaeology in Rome needed a more complete picture of an unexcavated area. Aerial

taken to excavate the entire area.

archaeologists became more knowledgeable about what to expect in an archaeological mound,

of the historical context. Technological advances also greatly assisted archeologists in

An Early History of Archaeology at Khirbet-Qumran

The 150-year history of archaeology at Khirbet-Qumran is in many ways parallel to the

history of archaeology elsewhere, especially when it comes to the plateau. Various

rich area, without the looming threat of war or violence.