Was Qumran Abandoned at the End of the First Century BCE?
The chronology and development of Qumran in Period I have been the subject of much debate. One of the most influential hypotheses to emerge is Jodi Magness's revision of Roland de Vaux's chronology. In this paper, we revisit a key point of Magness's chronology, namely, her suggestion...
| Autores principales: | ; |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | Electrónico Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Verificar disponibilidad: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Gargar...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publicado: |
Scholar's Press
[2016]
|
| En: |
Journal of Biblical literature
Año: 2016, Volumen: 135, Número: 2, Páginas: 301-320 |
| (Cadenas de) Palabra clave estándar: | B
Qumran
/ Destrucción
/ Datación
/ Estratigrafía
/ Silberfund
|
| Clasificaciones IxTheo: | HH Arqueología KBJ Italia |
| Otras palabras clave: | B
DEBATES & debating
B Qumran Site (West Bank) B Occupations B DE Vaux, Roland B Chronology B MAGNESS, Jodi |
| Acceso en línea: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Sumario: | The chronology and development of Qumran in Period I have been the subject of much debate. One of the most influential hypotheses to emerge is Jodi Magness's revision of Roland de Vaux's chronology. In this paper, we revisit a key point of Magness's chronology, namely, her suggestion that Qumran was destroyed and abandoned around 9/8 BCE and reinhabited ca. 4/1 BCE. Our analysis of the published evidence indicates that this conclusion can no longer be supported. Instead, we propose collapsing Periods I and II into one long phase of occupation with various architectural subphases. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1934-3876 |
| Obras secundarias: | Enthalten in: Journal of Biblical literature
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.15699/jbl.1352.2016.3085 |