Rick Sumner

Yeah, anyone in their right mind would have issued a much harsher criticism of Eisenman's work. Usually terms like "Thieringesque" or such lofty names as Baigent, Lincoln and Leigh, or Jose O'Callaghan are mentioned alongside Eisenman to put him in the appropriate context.

To be fair, there are some reasonable points made along the way. To be more fair, there aren't enough of them to bother reading his nine-hundred-plus page historical novel.

Paleography and two radio-carbon tests say Eisenman is wrong from the outset. But, you see, because Eisenman is such an excellent paleographer (who, at the time at least, didn't read a word of Hebrew, that might have changed since then) and such an accomplished physicist, he is more than qualified to simply ignore every expert in both fields and unilaterally date the Dead Sea Scrolls to the time that works best for him. When all else fails, scream bias. He does it a lot. One wouldn't want to disagree with Eisenman, then we're just part of the greater conspiracy trying to keep a good scholar down.

What the heck? I think I'm gonna write a book. Judas Iscariot is now the Teacher of Righteousness, Matthias the Wicked Priest. . .it'll be a best seller, I promise.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Vorkosigan

Only about the connection between the DSS and the James community.

Vorkosigan

Rick Sumner

True enough, though I think when I have some time I'm going to take a look through Eisenman's book again, and work out just how much of it falls under this category. It's considerably more than most of his fans seem to think, and his case is considerably more vested in it than he implies in his introduction. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that, at least on a page count, 75% of the book can be dismissed under this heading before it's even picked up.

Further, his methodology must be viewed as inherently suspect based on his treatment of the DSS. It is unquestionable that, at least on this count, he is prone to eisegetical readings of the evidence--he forces the evidence to his conclusions, rather than shapes his conclusions from the evidence.

It follows reasonably that one must read the rest with a very jaundiced eye.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Vorkosigan

Good to see you!

I think Eisenman's book give the impression of "75%" being connected to his case for the DSS because the language used across all the documents has so many overlaps. But it is not necessary that the entire DSS be from the first century CE for Eisenman's insights to be correct.

Vorkosigan

Toto

Redeating the Dead Sea Scrolls seems to say that none of the scrolls date to the first century.

spin

Just checking in from an internet cafe . . .

Doudna is of course correct.

An easy indicator is that if the scrolls were deposited in the first century CE,they would predominantly represent the first century . . . scrolls don't last too long through usage. However, the bulk of C14 tested scrolls show first century BCE and with the use of extra information, such as same scribal hand should date to the eariest date range if there is more than one text by that scribe, and a text cannot indicate a later date than the patch used to fix it. . . etc.

Most scroll datings come in to the first century BCE, so the others are almost certainly contamination results and there have been articles written on scrolls contamination. C14 dates cannot get older than the real date through contamination. They can seem younger. The bulk of dating should indicate the deposit date and there should only be older texts, the ones that have lasted longer. (Hopefully this is clear in the rush.)


spin

Naked Ape

Do you and J.P. see eye to eye on a lot of his book reviews? Just curious.

BTW, if you are trying to impress me with name dropping it didn't work, his story may be complete crap for all I know, but it's as coherent as the official version. If you are going to dismiss authors who write about this period just because they believe wierd stuff, you narrow the field considerably.

I am more impressed with Eisenman's publication of the photographs of the scrolls and breaking of the logjam that was being imposed by parties uninterested in widespread scholastic access.

-- [Nov 20] Shanks publishes Eisenman's photos in A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls, co-edited by James M. Robinson.
-- [Nov 25] At annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in Kansas City MO, scroll project director, E. Tov, announces lifting of all publication restrictions, allowing any scholar to examine the official scroll photos & publish whatever was discovered.
-- SBL passes resolution affirming the right of all scholars to have access to facsimile reproductions of all ancient manuscripts without any publication restrictions



Cheers,

Naked Ape

Rick Sumner

Depends on what he's reviewing. When we agree it's seldom for the same reasons.

I wasn't being facetious. Those are genuinely the names usually associated with Eisenman.

A noteworthy accomplishment, regardless of Eisenman's later work.

Vorkosigan:
I hope to begin an early edition of a "page count" on Eisenman later this week.

Regards,
Rick Sumner