THE SCROLLS, THE SECT, AND QUMRAN

Some of the most intriguing texts among the manuscripts found in the Qumran caves are those that have been identified as "sectarian." These writings disclose the laws, literature and daily life of a unique group of people who separated themselves from the general Jewish community and from the worship performed at the Temple in Jerusalem. The group has been variously referred to as the Dead Sea Sect, the inhabitants of Qumran, and the Yahad ("Community"). They were early identified with the Essenes described by Josephus, Philo and Pliny the Eler, but have alternatively been considered Sadducees, or perhaps Zadokites, or Zealots (see Sadducees or Essenes).

A longstanding question has been: what is the relationship between the writings found in the 11 caves near Qumran, and the settlement of Qumran itself? From the earliest days of excavation and research, it was assumed that the inhabitants of the Qumran site were the authors of the special sectarian texts found among the scrolls. In fact, it was often assumed that this group had authored most of the manuscripts in the Qumran corpus, with the exception of the biblical scrolls and works already known to us from the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. Today, most scholars still believe that there is an association between the scrolls and the settlement, though the scholarly theories have become more complex and cautious. Even de Vaux, the original excavator at Qumran, did not view the settlement as the main dwelling-place for the Community described in the sectarian Scrolls, but rather as a location used for gatherings and special communal meals. There remains a "consensus" view of the site as a religious center, but it is no longer portrayed as a secluded proto-monastery. And although it is generally believed that the preserved scrolls are all texts that would have been valued by the Community, scholars today are less apt to identify particular scrolls as "sectarian."

Alongside the gradual modification and adjustments of the conventional theories about the Community, more radical theories have been advanced as well. Some argue that the corpus could not have belonged to a small sect, but rather came from a large community such as Jerusalem. There have been attempts to explain Qumran as a fortress, an agricultural villa, or a manor house. According to such alternate explanations, the texts found in the nearby caves do not belong to the inhabitants of the Qumran site.

While these alternative theories raise important points for discussion, the overwhelming evidence leads to the conclusion that the writers of the sectarian literature are associated with the site of Qumran. What are the reasons for identifying the scrolls with the settlement?

The proximity of the caves to the settlement (especially cave 4)
The inkwells found at the site, which suggest that scribal activity was carried out there
The so-called "yahad" ostracon, a deed of gift which appears to involve handing over property to the community (yahad); see Economic Life
the distinctive types of pottery found both in the caves and at the settlement
Archaeological evidence of precautions to preserve ritual purity, in keeping with the emphasis on ritual purity in the sectarian scrolls. These include: the extensive water system; the cylindrical pottery and the number and variety of stone vessels, which are not susceptible to impurity; see Ritual Purity
The cemetery"burial practices differ significantly from those followed in most other Second Temple communities and sites; see Cemetery.
The large number of dining utensils in the Pantry suggests that communal meals were held here.

Those who view the Qumran settlement as a fortress, a villa, or a manor house have objected that interpreting the site in the context of the scrolls imposes a preconceived notion upon the archaeological evidence. However, it is possible to argue in the opposite direction: since all archaeology requires interpretation, refusal to take the contents of the nearby caves into account may also impose preconceptions, and neglect relevant data into the bargain.

Even those who do not associate the scrolls with the settlement of Qumran would have to acknowledge that the Qumran corpus includes a group of scrolls that are the product of a particular "Community." The theory that the scrolls are the remnants of the Jerusalem Temple library does not account for these "sectarian" scrolls.

The Community depicted in the scrolls has distinctive sociological, political, and religious (theological and halakhic [legal]) attributes. One significant characteristic is its communal lifestyle. The sect distanced itself from the rest of society and from Jerusalem"s city-life. The members of the Dead Sea sect did not retain full ownership of personal possessions. Individuals swore to devote their wealth along with all their physical and mental strength to the yahad. In addition to the sharp division between the members of the Community and outsiders, there was a strict hierarchy within the group. The priests, and especially the "sons of Zadok," are awarded the highest status, though the makeup of the leadership seems to have changed over time. While the sect appears to have permitted marriage (the Damascus Document 7:6-8 speaks of marrying and begetting children), some texts indicate that there were members who refrained from marrying at all (the Community Rule, in which women are not mentioned at all, seems to have such persons in mind).

These distinctive literary traits seem to be supported by many of the distinctive aspects of the site, listed above. In light of the archaeological and literary evidence currently available to us, a link between the community of the sectarian scrolls and the Qumran site still seems to be the most elegant way of accounting for the known pieces of the puzzle.

More Info

The Community’s rigor in halakhic matters pertaining to purity and to observing the Sabbath have prompted some scholars to identify them with the priestly Sadducees known from Josephus, the New Testament, and rabbinic writings. In particular, the “Halakhic Letter,” 4QMMT, records a number of halakhic disputes, in which the writers’ views are aligned with views attributed to the Sadducees in later rabbinic texts.

In a similar vein, the 364-day solar calendar used by the Community differs from the lunar calendar that was likely in use in Jerusalem at the time. One copy of 4QMMT is prefaced by a 364-day calendar. The rabbinic calendar was based upon observation of the moon and was adjusted to the seasons by the occasional declaration of a leap year, in which an extra month was added. Rabbinic sources record the Sadducees’ use of a solar calendar as a major source of dispute between Sadducees and Pharisees. It is clear, though, that other groups also preferred a solar calendar, and even within the Qumran corpus there is evidence of a variety of calendrical systems. Likewise, the halakhic stringencies shared by the Sadducees and the Community are also likely to have been adopted by other groups.
The identification of the sect as Sadducees does not seem justified by the evidence. The attempt to do so, however, contributed to scholarship by bringing attention to the importance of halakhah, legal tradition, in the formation and identity of ancient Jewish sects.

This was an area not addressed by Josephus in his description of the three main Jewish groups, Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes (Jewish War 2.2–13), the source that continues to serve as the standard framework for responding to the question “who was the Dead Sea sect?” Because Josephus was writing for a Greek-educated (and largely Gentile) audience, he described the various Jewish parties as “philosophies,” focusing on philosophical and social matters, rather than religious law. Even taking Josephus’s bias into account, however, there is a striking resemblance between the community described in the sectarian scrolls and the Essenes as described by Josephus.

Among the theological convictions that Josephus attributes to the Essenes are beliefs in angels, fate, divine reward and punishment, and immortality of the soul. The Dead Sea Scrolls include numerous references to angels, demons, and powerful heavenly beings such as the evil Belial and the anticipated heavenly savior, Melchizedek. Dualistic determinism is central to the Community’s worldview: The “Treatise on the Two Spirits” in the Community Rule clearly lays out the belief, which underlies many of the sect’s writings, that God has predetermined the nature and fate of each individual. God has preordained whether each person is a Son of Light or of Darkness, and has preordained the course of history for the entire cosmos. The Sons of Light will be granted eternal salvation while the evil-doers are doomed for perdition.

Josephus attributes prophetic abilities to the Essenes. This has been related to the distinctive interpretative approach found in the Qumran pesharim, commentaries which show how the writings of the biblical prophets predict the events of the “last days,” including the sect’s own history. Josephus also emphasizes the Essenes’ concern with holiness and purity, which dovetails with the Community’s priorities as described in the scrolls, and is corroborated by the archaeology of the Qumran settlement.
Another important way that Josephus’ description of the Essenes matches the information in the sectarian scrolls is his depiction of their initiation procedures and communal way of life, including the sharing of property. Some scholars point to discrepancies between the sources in some details, but this is not a basis for discounting the larger resemblances. Similarly, the discovery of toilets at Qumran has been used as an argument both for and against Essene identification. Josephus records that members of the Essene Community were given special digging tools, which they would use to dig a hole in a remote location for purposes of defecation. On the one hand, this might seem inconsistent with the presence of a toilet within the Qumran site; on the other hand, it indicates a common concern with sanitation/purity arrangements pertaining to bathroom habits. 4Q472 (Halakha C) mentions “covering excrement.” One may conclude that requirements for particular sanitation arrangements is a shared characteristic of Essenes and the Qumran Community, but that there would have been a range of methods for how this concern was applied in different circumstances.

Most importantly, we must recognize that there is variation in detail even within the different manuscripts of the Dead Sea Scrolls themselves. The “Essene hypothesis” remains the best way to interpret the evidence from our archaeological and literary sources, but we must be somewhat flexible about the scope of the label “Essene.” We need to allow for variety among different groups who would have fallen under the umbrella category of “Essenes,” and we must realize that each of these groups would have undergone change and development over time.

Yizhar Hirschfeld, “Early Roman Manor Houses in Judea and the Site of Khirbet Qumran,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 57/3 (1998): 161–189
Steve Mason, “What Josephus says about the Essenes” http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il/symposiums/programs/Mason00-1.shtml
Lawrence H. Schiffman, The Halakhah at Qumran (Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity 16; Leiden: Brill, 1975)
Eliezer Segal, “Josephus’ Essenes and the Community Rule,” http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/361_Transp/JosephusQumran.html
Hershel Shanks, “The Qumran Settlement—Monastery, Villa or Fortress?” Biblical Archaeological Review 19/3 (1993): 62–65.
Hartmut Stegemann, The Library of Qumran: On the Essenes, Qumran, John the Baptist, and Jesus (Leiden: Brill; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998).