The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception

by Michael Baigent

  In the course of the next few years, major developments can be expected from any or all of three distinct quarters. The most obvious of these, needless to say, is the Qumran material itself. Now that the entire corpus of this material is readily accessible, independent scholars, without preconceptions, without axes to grind and vested interests to protect, can get to work. The international team’s ‘orthodoxy of interpretation’ has already begun to come under attack; and as this book has demonstrated, the supposed archaeological and palaeographical evidence with which they support their position will not withstand close scrutiny. In consequence, we can expect a radical revision of the process whereby dates have been assigned to a number of particularly important texts. As a result, new contexts and interpretations will emerge for already familiar material. And new material will emerge in perspectives that would have been cursorily and high-handedly dismissed a few years ago.

  At the same time, there is also the possibility, enhanced by each new archaeological expedition Eisenman and his colleagues undertake to Qumran and the shores of the Dead Sea, that wholly new material may come to light. This possibility will be further enhanced — now that the Israeli government has granted permission for its use — by deployment of the ‘Subsurface Interface Radar’ system.

  Finally, there is the clandestine scroll market, which may at any moment cough up something of unprecedented consequence — something hitherto kept secret, at last released into public domain. As we have said, such material exists. The question is simply if and when those who hold it decide it can be divulged.

  Whatever the quarter or quarters from which new material might issue, fresh and, in some cases, very major revelations are bound to be forthcoming. As this occurs, we can expect ever more light to be shed on biblical history, on the character of ancient Judaism, on the origins of both Christianity and Islam. One should not, of course, expect a disclosure of such magnitude as to ‘topple the Church’, or anything as apocalyptic as that. The Church today, after all, is less a religious than a social, cultural, political and economic institution. Its stability and security rest on factors quite remote from the creed, the doctrine and the dogma it promulgates. But some people, at any rate, may be prompted to wonder whether the Church — an institution so demonstrably lax, biased and unreliable in its own scholarship, its own version of its history and origins – should necessarily be deemed reliable and authoritative in its approach to such urgent contemporary matters as overpopulation, birth control, the status of women and the celibacy of the clergy.

  Ultimately, however, the import of the Qumran texts resides in something more than their potential to embarrass the Church. The real import of the Qumran texts resides in what they have to reveal of the Holy Land, that soil which, for so many centuries, has voraciously soaked up so much human blood — blood shed in the name of conflicting gods or, to be more accurate, not very dissimilar versions of the same God. Perhaps the documents yet to be divulged may confront us a little more inescapably with the scale and pointlessness of our own madness — and shame us, thereby, at least by a degree or so, in the general direction of sanity. The Dead Sea Scrolls offer a new perspective on the three great religions born in the Middle East. The more one examines those religions, the more one will discern not how much they differ, but how much they overlap and have in common — how much they derive from essentially the same source — and the extent to which most of the quarrels between them, when not precipitated by simple misunderstanding, have stemmed less from spiritual values than from politics, from greed, from selfishness and the presumptuous arrogance of interpretation. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all, at present, beset by a resurgent fundamentalism. One would like to believe – though this may be too much to hope for — that greater understanding of their common roots might help curb the prejudice, the bigotry, the intolerance and fanaticism to which fundamentalism is chronically prone.

  17 January 1991

  13 October 1991

  Notes and References

  Note

  The full bibliographical details, when not cited here, are to be found in the Bibliography.

  Preface

  1. Eisenman, Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, p.xvi.

  1. The Discovery of the Scrolls

  1. The true story of the discovery will probably never be known. All the various accounts differ in certain details. Arguments over the correct sequence of events continued into the 1960s. For the different accounts, see: Allegro, The Dead Sea Scrolls, pp.l7ff; Brownlee, ‘Muhammad Ed-Deeb’s own Story of his Scroll Discovery’, pp. 236ff; ‘Edh-Dheeb’s Story of his Scroll Discovery’, pp.483ff; ‘Some New Facts Concerning the Discovery of the Scrolls of 1Q’, pp.417ff; Harding, The Times, 9 August 1949, p. 5; Samuel, ‘The Purchase of the Jerusalem Scrolls’, pp.26ff; Treasure of Qumran, pp.l42ff; Trever, ‘When was Qumran Cave 1 Discovered?’, pp.l35ff; The Untold Story of Qumran, pp.25ff; Wilson, The Dead Sea Scrolls 1947-1969, pp.3ff.

  2. See, for example, Brownlee, op. cit., p.486, and n.6; Allegro, op. cit., p.20.

  3. Wilson, op. cit,, p.4.

  4. Van der Ploeg, The Excavations at Qumran, pp. 9-13.

  5. Interviews, Miles Copeland, 10 April and 1 May 1990. A search of CIA archives requested under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act has failed to locate the photographs.

  6. Interview, 21 May 1990.

  7. Yadin, The Message of the Scrolls, pp. 15-24, quoting Sukenik’s private journal.

  8. Ibid., p. 14.

  9. Trever, The Untold Story of Qumran, p.85.

  10. Time Magazine, 15 April 1957, p.39.

  11. Allegro, op. cit., pp.38-9.

  12. Ibid., p.41.

  13. Pliny, Natural History, V, xv.

  14. De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 134-5.

  15. Reports of this survey can be found in the following: de Vaux, ‘Exploration de la region de Qumran’, pp. 540ff.; Reed, ‘The Qumran Caves Expedition of March 1952’, pp.8ff.

  16. Ibid.

  17. Allegro, The Treasure of the Copper Scroll, p.35.

  18. Time Magazine, op. cit., p.38.

  19. Yadin, op. cit., p.40.

  20. Ibid., pp.41-52.

  21. Sharon to Eisenman, 16 January 1990.

  2. The International Team

  1. Pryce-Jones, ‘A New Chapter in the History of Christ?’, p.12ff.

  2. Ibid., p. 14.

  3. Ibid.

  4. Pryce-Jones to authors, 11 January 1990.

  5. Interview, Magen Broshi, 12 November 1989.

  6. Interview, Frank Cross, 18 May 1990.

  7. Private communication.

  8. Interview, Abraham Biran, 4 December 1989.

  9. Interview, James Robinson, 3 November 1989.

  10. North, ‘Qumran and its Archaeology’, p. 429.

  11. Interview, Norman Golb, 1 November 1989.

  12. Interview, Shemaryahu Talmon, 8 November 1989.

  13. Time Magazine, 14 August 1989, p.44.

  14. BAR, May/June 1989, p. 57; September/October 1989, p. 20.

  15. Interview, James Robinson, 3 November 1989.

  16. See Robinson, ‘The Jung Codex: the Rise and Fall of a Monopoly’; see also Robinson, ‘Getting the Nag Hammadi Library into English’.

  17. A total of three volumes of Discoveries in the Judaean Desert dealing with the Cave 4 fragments have been published to date. There remain, so far as the projected publication schedule is concerned, fifteen further volumes dealing with Cave 4 texts and one more of Cave 11.

  18. New York Times, 26 June 1989, p. 84.

  19. BAR, September/October 1985, p. 6.

  20. Ibid., p.66. The magazine adds: ‘Obviously, the existence of this factor is controversial and disputed.’

  21. Ibid., p.66.

  22. New York Times, op. cit., pp.Bl, B4.

  23. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 5 July 1989, p.A7.

  24. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran, p.30.

  25. Allegro,
The Dead Sea Scrolls, p.50.

  26. This letter and many following are to be found in the private correspondence file of John Allegro’s papers.

  3. The Scandal of the Scrolls

  1. Wilson, The Dead Sea Scrolls 1947-1969, p. 77.

  2. Ibid., pp.97-8.

  3. Ibid., p.97.

  4. Interview, Philip Davies, 10 October 1989.

  5. There was, however, one ‘rash’ statement made by Wilson which, for the record, should be dismissed. De Vaux told Wilson a story of events during the Six Day War, when, according to Wilson’s report, the Israeli troops, upon entering the grounds of the Ecole Biblique on 6 June 1967, sat priests, two at a time, as hostages in the open courtyard. The threat was that they should be shot if any sniper fire should come from the buildings of the Ecole or the associated Monastery of St Stephen. See Wilson, op. cit., p.259. Interviews in Israel have indicated that this event did not take place but was a tale foisted upon Wilson by de Vaux. Wilson did not apparently check this statement with any Israeli sources.

  6. Interview, Shemaryahu Talmon, 8 November 1989.

  7. Given to the Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres on 26 May 1950. Reported in Le Monde, 28-9 May 1950, p.4.

  8. Brownlee, ‘The Servant of the Lord in the Qumran Scrolls I’, p.9.

  9. Allegro to Strugnell, in a letter undated but written between 14 and 31 December 1955.

  10. Ibid.

  11. Ibid.

  12. New York Times, 5 February 1956, p.2.

  13. Ibid.

  14. The Times, 8 February 1956, p.8.

  15. Allegro to de Vaux, 9 February 1956.

  16. Allegro to de Vaux, 20 February 1956.

  17. Ibid.

  18. Allegro to de Vaux, 7 March 1956.

  19. Ibid.

  20. Allegro to Cross, 6 March 1956.

  21. The Times, 16 March 1956, p. 11.

  22. The Times, 20 March 1956, p. 13.

  23. Ibid.

  24. Allegro to Strugnell, 8 March 1957.

  25. Smyth, ‘The Truth about the Dead Sea Scrolls’, p.33.

  26. Ibid., p.34.

  27. Allegro to Claus-Hunno Hunzinger, 23 April 1956.

  28. Harding to Allegro, 28 May 1956.

  29. The Times, 1 June 1956, p. 12.

  30. Allegro to Harding, 5 June 1956.

  31. Ibid.

  32. Ibid.

  33. Allegro to Cross, 5 August 1956.

  34. Allegro to de Vaux, 16 September 1956.

  35. Allegro to team member (name withheld), 14 September 1959.

  36. Team member (name withheld) to Allegro, 21 October 1959.

  37. Allegro to de Vaux, 16 September 1956.

  38. Ibid.

  39. Allegro to Cross, 31 October 1957.

  40. Ibid.

  41. Allegro to James Muilenburg, 31 October 1957.

  42. Allegro to Muilenburg, 24 December 1957.

  43. Ibid.

  44. Allegro to Dajani, 10 January 1959.

  45. Ibid.

  46. The Times, 23 May 1970, p.22.

  47. The Times, 19 May 1970, p.2.

  48. The Times, 26 May 1970, p.9.

  49. The Daily Telegraph, 18 May 1987, p.ll.

  50. The Times, 5 October 1970, p.4.

  51. Wilson, op. cit., p. 125.

  52. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective, pp. 23-4.

  53. Times Literary Supplement, 3 May 1985, p.502.

  54. Ibid.

  55. Eisenman has pointed to mention of ‘the Poor’ in the War Scroll; see Eisenman, op. cit., p.43, n.23; p.62, n.105. This text states that the Messiah will lead ‘the Poor’ to victory against the armies of Belial (The War Scroll, XI,14 (Vermes, p.116 — Vermes for his own reasons translates ‘Belial’ as ‘Satan’) ). For a more detailed discussion, see Eisenman, ‘Eschatological “Rain” Imagery in the War Scroll from Qumran and in the Letter ofjames’, p. 182.

  56. Interview, Emile Puech, 7 November 1989.

  57. BAR, March/April 1990, p. 24. This fragment is coded 4Q246 and was first found and privately translated by the scholars in 1958.

  58. Ibid.

  4. Opposing the Consensus

  1. The Times, 23 August 1949, p.5.

  2. Ibid.

  3. Jean Carmignac, review of Roth, The Historical Background of the Dead Sea Scrolls. See Revue de Qumran, no.3, 1959 (vol.i, 1958-9), p.447.

  4. De Vaux made this assertion in ‘Fouilles au Khirbet Qumran’, Revue biblique, vol.lxi (1954), p.233. He repeated it in his ‘Fouilles de Khirbet Qumran’, Revue biblique, vol.lxiii (1956), p.567, and in ‘Les manuscrits de Qumran et l’archeologie’, Revue biblique, vol.lxvi (1959), p. 100.

  5. Roth, ‘Did Vespasian Capture Qumran?’, Palestine Exploration Quarterly, July-December 1959, pp.l22ff.

  6. Driver, The Judaean Scrolls, p.3.

  7. De Vaux, review of Driver, The Judaean Scrolls. See New Testament Studies, vol.xiii (1966-7), p. 97.

  8. Ibid., p. 104.

  9. Albright, in M. Black, ed. The Scrolls and Christianity, p. 15.

  10. Eisenman to authors, 13 June 1990.

  11. Eisenman to authors, 27 September 1989.

  12. BAR, September/October 1985, p.66.

  13. Ibid., p.6.

  14. Ibid., p.66.

  15. Ibid., p.70. BAR first called for the publication of the unpublished scrolls in May 1985.

  16. Ibid.

  17. Benoit to Cross, Milik, Starcky and Puech, Strugnell, E. Ulrich, Avi (sic) Eitan, 15 September 1985.

  18. Eitan to Benoit, 26 December 1985.

  19. Interview, Yuval Ne’eman, 16 January 1990.

  20. Ibid.

  21. Eisenman, Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, p.xvi.

  22. Eisenman to authors, 5 July 1990.

  23. It is called ‘MMT’ from the first letters of three Hebrew words occurring in the opening line: Miqsat Ma’aseh ha-Torah, ‘Some rulings upon the Law’. The text essentially gives the position of the Qumran community on a selection of rules from the Torah.

  24. Catalogue of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 07/04/81.

  25. Eisenman to authors, 15 September 1990.

  26. A copy of this timetable was published in BAR, July/August 1989, p.20. Mrs Ayala Sussman of the Israeli Department of Antiquities confirmed for us that this was the timetable. Interview with Ayala Sussman, 7 November 1989.

  27. Letter, Eisenman and Davies to Strugnell, 16 March 1989.

  28. Letter, Eisenman and Davies to Drori, 2 May 1989.

  29. Ibid.

  30. Ibid.

  31. Letter, Strugnell to Eisenman, 15 May 1989.

  32. BAR, September/October 1989, p.20.

  33. Letter, Strugnell to Eisenman, 15 May 1989.

  34. Davies, ‘How not to do Archaeology: The Story of Qumran’, pp.203-4.

  5. Academic Politics and Bureaucratic Inertia

  1. Florentino Garcia-Martinez to Eisenman, 4 October 1989.

  2. New York Times, 9 July 1989, p.E26.

  3. BAR, May/June 1990, p.67.

  4. BAR, July/August 1990, p.44.

  5. BAR, July/August 1989, p. 18.

  6. BAR, November/December 1989, p.74.

  7. BAR, July/August 1989, p. 18.

  8. Ibid., p. 19.

  9. Los Angeles Times, 1 July 1989, Part II, pp.20-21.

  10. International Herald Tribune, 16 November 1989, p.2.

  11. BAR, July/August 1990, p.47.

  12. Time Magazine, 14 August 1989, p.44.

  13. BAR, March/April 1990, cover.

  14. BAR, July/August 1990, p.6.

  15. Interview, Ayala Sussman, 7 November 1989.

  16. Ibid.

  17. Ibid.

  18. Interview, Shemaryahu Talmon, 8 November 1989.

  19. Ibid.

  20. Ibid.

  21. Interview, Shemaryahu Talmon, 9 November 1989.

  22. Interview, Jonas Greenfield, 9 November 1989.

  23. Conversation with Ayala Sussman, 10 November 1989.

  24. Ib
id.

  25. Ibid.

  26. Interview, Hilary Feldman, 4 December 1989.

  27. Ibid.

  6. The Onslaught of Science

  1. Letter, Allegro to Muilenburg, 24 December 1957.

  2. Letter, Strugnell to Allegro, 3 January 1956.

  3. Wilson, The Dead Sea Scrolls 1947-i969, p. 138.

  4. Allegro’s suspicions about the international team were raised during his summer at the ‘Scrollery’ in 1957. They crystallised during the debacle of his television programme, the filming of which took place in Jerusalem, Qumran and Amman in October 1957. He planned to try to break up the international team and open the scrolls to all qualified scholars. Then, in a letter to Awni Dajani (curator of the Palestine Archaeological Museum) dated 10 January 1959, Allegro wrote: ‘I think it would be a ripe opportunity to take over the whole Museum, scrolls and all…’ Allegro returned to this theme in September 1966. On 13 September of that year he wrote to Awni Dajani saying that he was very concerned about the situation and that the Jordanian government should act. It is clear, though, from a letter of 16 September 1966 (to Joseph Saad), that Allegro had been told that the Jordanian government was planning to nationalise the museum at the end of the year. Allegro then began a series of letters regarding the preservation of the scrolls and ideas for raising funds for research and publication. Then, as adviser on the scrolls to the Jordanian government, he produced a report on the present state and the future of scroll research which he sent to King Hussein on 21 September 1966. The same day he also sent a copy of the report to the Jordanian Prime Minister. The Jordanian government nationalised the museum in November 1966.

  5. BAR, July/August 1990, p.6.

  6. Interview, Philip Davies, 10 October 1989.

  7. Interview, Norman Golb, 1 November 1989.

  8. Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement, 1887, p. 16.

  9. De Rosa, Vicars of Christ, p. 179.

  10. For a detailed account of the personal and political machinations which lay behind the promulgation of this dogma, see Hasler, How the Pope became Infallible.