%PDF-1.6
%âãÏÓ
1 0 obj<>
endobj
2 0 obj<>
endobj
3 0 obj<>
endobj
5 0 obj<>
endobj
7 0 obj<>
endobj
8 0 obj<>>>
endobj
9 0 obj<>
endobj
10 0 obj<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>]/P 9 0 R/S/Article/T()/Pg 11 0 R>>
endobj
11 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
12 0 obj<>
endobj
13 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
14 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
15 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
16 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
17 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
18 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
19 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
20 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
21 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
23 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
25 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
26 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
27 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
28 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
29 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
30 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
31 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
32 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
33 0 obj<>
endobj
34 0 obj<>
endobj
35 0 obj<>
endobj
36 0 obj<>
endobj
37 0 obj<>
endobj
38 0 obj<>
endobj
39 0 obj<>
endobj
40 0 obj<>
endobj
41 0 obj<>
endobj
42 0 obj<>
endobj
44 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
45 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
47 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
48 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
49 0 obj<>
endobj
50 0 obj<>
endobj
52 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
53 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
54 0 obj<>
endobj
55 0 obj<>
endobj
57 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
58 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
60 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
61 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
62 0 obj<>
endobj
64 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
65 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
67 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
68 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
70 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
71 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
73 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
74 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
76 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
77 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
78 0 obj<>
endobj
80 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
81 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
83 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
84 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
86 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
87 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
89 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
90 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
92 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
93 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
94 0 obj<>
endobj
96 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
97 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
99 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
100 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
102 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
103 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
105 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
106 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
108 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
109 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
110 0 obj<>
endobj
112 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
113 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
115 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
116 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
118 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
119 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
121 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
122 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
124 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
125 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
126 0 obj<>
endobj
128 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
129 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
131 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
132 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
134 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
135 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
137 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
138 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
140 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
141 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
142 0 obj<>
endobj
144 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
145 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
147 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
148 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
150 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
151 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
153 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
154 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
156 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
157 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
158 0 obj<>
endobj
160 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
161 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
163 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
164 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
166 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
167 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
169 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
170 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
172 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
173 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
174 0 obj<>
endobj
176 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
177 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
178 0 obj<>
endobj
179 0 obj<>
endobj
181 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
182 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
184 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
185 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
187 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
188 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
190 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
191 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
192 0 obj<>
endobj
194 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
195 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
197 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
198 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
200 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
201 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
203 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
204 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
206 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
207 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
208 0 obj<>
endobj
210 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
211 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
213 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
214 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
216 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
217 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
219 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
220 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
222 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
223 0 obj<>
endobj
225 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
226 0 obj<>
endobj
228 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
229 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
231 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
232 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
234 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
235 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
237 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
238 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
240 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
241 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
242 0 obj<>
endobj
244 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
245 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
247 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
248 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
250 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
251 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
253 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
254 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
256 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
257 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
258 0 obj<>
endobj
260 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
261 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
262 0 obj<>
endobj
264 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
265 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
267 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
268 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
270 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
271 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
273 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
274 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
275 0 obj<>
endobj
277 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
278 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
280 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
281 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
283 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
284 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
286 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
287 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
289 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
290 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
291 0 obj<>
endobj
293 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
294 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
296 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
297 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
299 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
300 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
302 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
303 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
305 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
306 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
307 0 obj<>
endobj
309 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
310 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
312 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
313 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
315 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
316 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
318 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
319 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
321 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
322 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
323 0 obj<>
endobj
325 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
326 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
328 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
329 0 obj<>
endobj
331 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
333 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
334 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
336 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
337 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
339 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
340 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
341 0 obj<>
endobj
343 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
344 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
345 0 obj<>
endobj
347 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
348 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
350 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
351 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
353 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
354 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
356 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
357 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
358 0 obj<>
endobj
360 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
361 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
363 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
364 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
366 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
367 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
369 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
370 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
372 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
373 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
374 0 obj<>
endobj
376 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
377 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
379 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
380 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
382 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
383 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
385 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
386 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
388 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
389 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
390 0 obj<>
endobj
392 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
393 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
395 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
396 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
398 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
399 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
401 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
402 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
404 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
405 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
406 0 obj<>
endobj
408 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
409 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
411 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
412 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
414 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
415 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
417 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
418 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
420 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
421 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
422 0 obj<>
endobj
424 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
425 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
426 0 obj<>
endobj
428 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
429 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
431 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
432 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
434 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
435 0 obj<>
endobj
437 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
439 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
440 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
441 0 obj<>
endobj
443 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
444 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
446 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
447 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
449 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
450 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
452 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
453 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
455 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
456 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
457 0 obj<>
endobj
459 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
460 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
462 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
463 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
465 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
466 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
468 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
469 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
471 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
472 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
473 0 obj<>
endobj
475 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
476 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
478 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
479 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
481 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
482 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
484 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
485 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
487 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
488 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
489 0 obj<>
endobj
491 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
492 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
494 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
495 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
497 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
498 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
500 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
501 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
503 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
504 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
505 0 obj<>
endobj
507 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
508 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
509 0 obj<>
endobj
511 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
512 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
514 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
515 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
517 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
518 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
520 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
521 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
522 0 obj<>
endobj
524 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
525 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
527 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
528 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
530 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
531 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
533 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
534 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
536 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
537 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
538 0 obj<>
endobj
540 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
541 0 obj<>
endobj
542 0 obj<>
endobj
543 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
545 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
546 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
548 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
549 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
551 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
552 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
554 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
555 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
556 0 obj<>
endobj
558 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
559 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
561 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
562 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
564 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
565 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
567 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
568 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
570 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
571 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
572 0 obj<>
endobj
574 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
575 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
577 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
578 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
580 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
581 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
583 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
584 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
586 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
587 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
588 0 obj<>
endobj
590 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
591 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
592 0 obj<>
endobj
594 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
595 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
597 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
598 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
600 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
601 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
603 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
604 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
605 0 obj<>
endobj
607 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
608 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
610 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
611 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
613 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
614 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
616 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
617 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
619 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
620 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
621 0 obj<>
endobj
623 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
624 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
626 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
627 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
629 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
630 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
632 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
633 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
635 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
645 0 obj<>
endobj
646 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 751 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 736 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 719.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 703 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 686.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 636.961 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 620.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 405.923 520 214.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 389.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 339.884 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 323.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 290.345 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 273.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 257.307 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 240.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 158.268 520 82.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 141.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 125.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 108.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 93.768 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 78.768 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 63.768 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 50.268 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 14.268 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
12.5 0 0 12.5 176.6 755.116 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
-13.328 -1.2 Td
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 724.0875 Tm
( )Tj
12.826 -1.2 Td
(History/Religion/Archaeology)Tj
-12.826 -1.2 Td
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
("An engrossing read....A racy tale of archaeological sins, religious big\
otry, academic )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(megalomania, misconduct and possible criminality, along with bizarre pol\
itical )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(intrigue." \227)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(Antiquity )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(U.K.\))Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(The oldest Biblical manuscripts in existence, the Dead Sea Scrolls were \
found in caves near )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jerusalem in 1947, only to be kept a tightly held secret for nearly fift\
y more years, until the )Tj
T*
(Huntington Library unleashed a storm of controversy in 1991 by releasing\
copies of the )Tj
T*
(Scrolls. In this gripping investigation authors Baigent and Leigh set ou\
t to discover how a )Tj
T*
(small coterie of orthodox biblical scholars gained control over the Scro\
lls, allowing access to )Tj
T*
(no outsiders and issuing a strict "consensus" interpretation. The author\
s' questions begin in )Tj
T*
(Israel, then lead them to the corridors of the Vatican and into the offi\
ces of the Inquisition. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(With the help of independent scholars, historical research, and careful \
analysis of available )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(texts, the authors reveal what was at stake for these orthodox guardians\
: The Scrolls present )Tj
T*
(startling insights into early Christianity\227insights that challenge th\
e Church's version of the )Tj
T*
("facts." More than just a dramatic expose of the intrigues surrounding t\
hese priceless )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(documents, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(presents nothing less than a new, highly )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(significant perspective on Christianity.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
("Crystalline, well-documented. . .Baigent and Leigh advance startling th\
eories that should )Tj
T*
(change the way we view ancient Judaism and nascent Christianity. . ." \
)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(\227)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(Publishers Weekly)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
("A wonder of savage detail. . .The reading of the archaeological, histor\
ical and analytic-)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(textual evidence is always ingenious." \227John Leonard, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(New York Newsday)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
("Not for the theologically faint of heart." \227)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(Chicago Tribune)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(Michael Baigent graduated from Canterbury University, Christchurch, New \
Zealand. Richard )Tj
T*
(Leigh followed his degree from Tufts University with postgraduate studie\
s at the University )Tj
T*
(of Chicago and the State University of New York at Stony Brook. Together\
the authors have )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(also written )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(Holy Blood, Holy Grail; The Messianic Legacy; )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(and )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(The Temple and the Lodge. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(Both writers live in England.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
1.8 -1.2 Td
(Cover design by Francine Kass Cover photograph courtesy of APAVideworld \
Photos)Tj
2.977 -1.2 Td
(A Touchstone Book \225I IV Published by Simon & Schuster New York)Tj
12.5 0 0 12.5 10 97.9386 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.204 TD
( )Tj
16.674 -1.2 Td
(by the same authors)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 159.7106 54.0215 Tm
(THE HOLY BLOOD AND THE HOLY GRAIL)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 207.74 38.3098 Tm
(\(with Henry Lincoln\))Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(1 of 190\)3/19/2007 2:)Tj
(28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
647 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 763.768 520 2.232 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 750.268 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 720.268 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 663.268 520 57 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 606.268 520 57 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 549.268 520 57 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 492.268 520 57 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.268 520 57 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.768 520 34.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 372.268 520 28.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 337.768 520 34.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 319.768 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 301.768 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 283.768 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 267.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 250.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 235.768 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 220.768 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 205.768 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 190.768 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 177.268 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 163.768 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 150.268 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 136.768 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 123.268 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 109.768 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 96.268 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 82.768 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 69.268 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.768 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 42.268 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 6.268 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 203.13 754.0215 Tm
(THE MESSIANIC LEGACY)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 207.74 738.3098 Tm
(\(with Henry Lincoln\))Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 189.3881 724.0215 Tm
(THE TEMPLE AND THE LODGE)Tj
47.5 0 0 47.5 10 679.1159 Tm
( )Tj
4.502 -1.2 Td
(THE)Tj
-1.486 -1.2 Td
(DEAD SEA)Tj
0.263 -1.2 Td
(SCROLLS)Tj
-0.583 -1.2 Td
(DECEPTION)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
28.75 0 0 28.75 174.5788 410.2794 Tm
(Michael Baigent)Tj
23.75 0 0 23.75 252.1875 380.1253 Tm
(and)Tj
28.75 0 0 28.75 187.3437 347.2794 Tm
(Richard Leigh)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
15 0 0 15 10 324.7227 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
11.693 -1.2 Td
(A TOUCHSTONE BOOK)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 182.9212 271.817 Tm
(Published by Simon & Schuster)Tj
-5.958 -1.2 Td
(New York London Toronto Sydney Tokyo Singapore)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
12.5 0 0 12.5 10 239.9386 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(TOUCHSTONE)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 10 181.0215 Tm
(Rockefeller Center 1230 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10020)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Copyright \251 1991 by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh)Tj
T*
(All rights reserved)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(including the right of reproduction)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in whole or in part in any form.)Tj
T*
(First Touchstone Edition 1993)Tj
T*
(TOUCHSTONE and colophon are registered trademarks)Tj
T*
(of Simon & Schuster Inc. Manufactured in the United States of America)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(9 10 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data)Tj
T*
(Baigent, Michael.)Tj
T*
(The Dead Sea scrolls deception / by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(2 of 190\)3/19/2007 2:)Tj
(28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
648 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 752.5 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 739 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 725.5 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 712 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 698.5 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 685 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 671.381 520 13.619 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 657.881 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 644.381 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 618.881 520 25.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 593.381 520 25.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.881 520 25.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 537.881 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 521.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 504.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 488.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 471.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 455.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 438.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 422.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 405.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 389.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 372.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 356.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 339.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 323.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 306.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 290.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 273.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 257.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 240.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 224.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 206.381 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 191.381 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 173.381 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.381 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 119.381 520 36 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 47.381 520 72 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 11.381 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 10 756.2534 Tm
(p. cm.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Includes bibliographical references and index.)Tj
T*
(1. Dead Sea scrolls\227Criticism, interpretation, etc.\227)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(History. 2. Dead Sea scrolls\227Relation to the New)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Testament. I. Leigh, Richard. II. Title.)Tj
T*
(BM487.B26 1991)Tj
T*
(296.1'55\227dc20)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(91-41879)Tj
0 -1.211 TD
(CIP)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(ISBN: 0-671-73454-7 ISBN: 0-671-79797-2 \(pbk\))Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
21.25 0 0 21.25 10 625.9115 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
25 0 0 25 214.45 546.1521 Tm
(Dedication)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 525.9689 Tm
( )Tj
13.14 -1.2 Td
(L'abbaye de la fontaine vive,)Tj
1.034 -1.2 Td
(Avec sa chapelle lucide)Tj
-1.57 -1.2 Td
(Ou Nostres Dames nous genent)Tj
1.522 -1.2 Td
(D'y habiter dans la cave)Tj
3.214 -1.2 Td
(Vout\351e.)Tj
1.444 -1.2 Td
( )Tj
-4.193 -1.2 Td
(Les rouleaux de foins)Tj
-0.168 -1.2 Td
(Sous un linceul de sel,)Tj
0.154 -1.2 Td
(Et la cloche au ficelle)Tj
-0.932 -1.2 Td
(Ou se trouve un seul moin)Tj
3.139 -1.2 Td
(Maussade.)Tj
2 -1.2 Td
( )Tj
-4.416 -1.2 Td
(Mais autour du chastel)Tj
0.91 -1.2 Td
(L'h\351raut proclame)Tj
0.895 -1.2 Td
(La sorcellerie)Tj
-1.597 -1.2 Td
(De la druidesse-dame)Tj
-0.751 -1.2 Td
(Et sa chat s\351duit le soleil.)Tj
4.958 -1.2 Td
( )Tj
15 0 0 15 222.8862 211.386 Tm
(\227)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 237.8862 211.386 Tm
(Jehan l'Ascuiz)Tj
12.5 0 0 12.5 10 195.5519 Tm
( )Tj
15 0 0 15 10 178.386 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(The authors and publishers would like to thank the following for permiss\
ion to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(reproduce photographs:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The executors of the estate of John Allegro \(3, 8-10, 14-15, 17, 19-27\)\
; Michael )Tj
T*
(Baigent \(28-38, 39\); Cambridge University Library \(I\); Israel Antiqu\
ities Authority )Tj
T*
(\(6-7, 11-13, 18\); Israeli Government Press Office \(40\); William Reed\
\(2\); John L. )Tj
T*
(Trever \(5\); Sabine Weiss/RAPHO \(16\) and Yigael Yadin \(4\).)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(3 of 190\)3/19/2007 2:)Tj
(28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
649 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 739 520 27 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 712 520 27 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 685 520 27 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 668.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 652 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 635.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 619 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 568 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 531.842 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 513.684 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 495.526 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 477.368 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 459.21 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 441.21 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 423.21 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 405.051 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.893 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.893 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.893 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 332.735 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 314.577 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 296.419 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 278.261 520 18.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 260.261 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 242.261 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 224.261 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 206.261 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.261 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 173.261 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.261 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 140.261 520 15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 123.761 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 107.261 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 90.761 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 74.261 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 57.761 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 38.261 520 19.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 2.261 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 746.4436 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
9.722 -1.202 Td
(Contents)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 673.0489 Tm
( )Tj
T*
(Acknowledgments)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Map of Qumran and the Dead Sea)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
15 0 0 15 10 606.0046 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Preface)Tj
12.5 0 0 12.5 10 572.1705 Tm
( )Tj
15 0 0 15 10 555.0046 Tm
(I THE DECEPTION)Tj
T*
(1 The Discovery of the Scrolls)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.211 TD
(2 The International Team)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.211 TD
(3 The Scandal of the Scrolls)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
T*
(4 Opposing the Consensus)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.211 TD
(5 Academic Politics and Bureaucratic Inertia)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.211 TD
(II THE VATICAN'S REPRESENTATIVES)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(6 The Onslaught of Science)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.211 TD
(7 The Inquisition Today)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.211 TD
(III THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(8 The Dilemma for Christian Orthodoxy)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.211 TD
(9 The Scrolls)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
T*
(10 Science in the Service of Faith)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.211 TD
(11 The Essenes)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
T*
(12 The Acts of the Apostles)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(13 James 'The Righteous' )Tj
T*
(14 Zeal for the Law )Tj
T*
(15 Zealot Suicide)Tj
T*
(16 Paul - Roman Agent or Informer?)Tj
12.5 0 0 12.5 10 177.4314 Tm
( )Tj
15 0 0 15 10 160.2655 Tm
(Postscript)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
12.5 0 0 12.5 10 144.3963 Tm
( )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 128.3098 Tm
(Notes and References)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(Bibliography)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Index)Tj
/TT4 1 Tf
16.25 0 0 16.25 10 46.3822 Tm
( )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(4 of 190\)3/19/2007 2:)Tj
(28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
650 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 739 520 27 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 712 520 27 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 685 520 27 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 18 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 556 520 111 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 523 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 473.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 457 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 407.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 374.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 358 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 341.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 325 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 308.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 292 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 275.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 245.5 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 212.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 196 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 175 520 21 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 158.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 142 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 125.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 109 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 92.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 76 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 40 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 746.4436 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
7.945 -1.2 Td
(Acknowledgments)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
15 0 0 15 10 672.0046 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 647.4319 Tm
(W)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
15 0 0 15 32.5 647.4319 Tm
(e should like to thank Robert Eisenman for the generosity with which he \
made )Tj
-1.5 -1.362 Td
(available to us his time, his energy )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 221.65 627.0046 Tm
(and .his insights. We are particularly grateful for the )Tj
-15.393 -1.23 Td
(light he has cast on the relationship between the Dead Sea Scrolls and t\
he New Testament, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and on the social, political and religious forces at work in the histori\
cal backdrop. Our debt to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(him will become more than apparent in the course of the following pages.\
We should also )Tj
T*
(like to thank Heather Eisenman.)Tj
T*
( We should like to thank Mrs Joan Allegro for the access she provide\
d to her husband's )Tj
T*
(material and for her sympathy and support in our undertaking.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( We should like to thank the staff of Jonathan Cape, specifically To\
m Maschler, Tony )Tj
T*
(Colwell, Jenny Cottom, Lynn Boulton and Helen Donlon; and Alison Mansbri\
dge our editor )Tj
T*
(for her suggestions and the patience she displayed in the most arduous c\
ircumstances.)Tj
T*
( We should like to thank Rod Collins for fostering fiscal well-being\
and peace of mind.)Tj
T*
( We should like to thank our agent Barbara Levy for presiding over t\
he project, as well as )Tj
T*
(Ann Evans, who co-instigated it and has now found a new vocation as medi\
um for the )Tj
T*
(wandering and restless shade of Jehan l'Ascuiz.)Tj
T*
( Finally, we should like to thank the staffs of the British Library \
Reading Room, and of the )Tj
T*
(London Library.)Tj
T*
( And, it goes without saying, we should like to thank our ladies.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 230.4375 253.7319 Tm
(Preface)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 233.5875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
17.5 0 0 17.5 135.3288 180.7804 Tm
(THE FOUR DEAD SEA SCROLLS)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 268.2812 163.0875 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-9.098 -1.203 Td
(Biblical manuscripts dating back to at least)Tj
0.278 -1.2 Td
(200 bc are for sale. This would be an ideal)Tj
-0.445 -1.2 Td
(gift to an educational or religious institution)Tj
1.401 -1.2 Td
(by an individual or group. Box F 206.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-10.921 -1.197 Td
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 56.4319 Tm
(S)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 22.51 56.4319 Tm
(uch was the advertisement that appeared in the )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Wall Street Journal )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(on 1 June 1954. Were )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(5 of 190\)3/19/2007 2:)Tj
(28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
651 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.961 520 165.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.961 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.961 520 231 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.961 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(an advertisement of this sort to appear today, it would no doubt be thou\
ght some species of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(practical joke, not entirely in the best of taste. Alternatively, it mig\
ht be regarded as a coded )Tj
T*
(message - to mask an arms deal, for example, or something involving espi\
onage.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Today, of course, the Dead Sea Scrolls are well enough known, if o\
nly by name. Most )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(people, while having an extremely nebulous idea of what they are, will a\
t least have heard of )Tj
T*
(them. If nothing else, there exists an awareness that the scrolls are in\
some way genuinely )Tj
T*
(precious items, archaeological evidence of immense importance. One doesn\
't expect to find a )Tj
T*
(specimen of them while digging in one's back garden. One doesn't regard \
them even as one )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(might the rusted weapons, the domestic utensils and appliances, the remn\
ants of equipment )Tj
T*
(or apparel that might be found at, say, the site of some Roman excavatio\
n in Britain.)Tj
T*
( The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 generated a flurry o\
f excitement both in )Tj
T*
(scholarly circles and among the general public. But by 1954 that excitem\
ent had been )Tj
T*
(skillfully defused. The scrolls, it was assumed, had revealed everything\
they were going to )Tj
T*
(reveal, and this was made to seem less dramatic than had been expected. \
In consequence, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(advertisement for their sale elicited no particular public interest when\
it appeared on page 14 )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(of the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Wall Street Journal. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Immediately below it was an advertisement for industrial steel )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(tanks, electric welders and other equipment. In the adjacent column were\
lists of premises for )Tj
T*
(rent and situations vacant. It was the equivalent of offering items of T\
utankhamun's treasure )Tj
T*
(amidst lots of surplus plumbing or computer supplies. This book will sho\
w how such an )Tj
T*
(anomaly could have occurred.)Tj
T*
( In tracing the progress of the Dead Sea Scrolls from their discove\
ry in the Judaean desert )Tj
T*
(to the various institutions that hold them today, we found ourselves con\
fronting a )Tj
T*
(contradiction we had faced before - the contradiction between the Jesus \
of history and the )Tj
T*
(Christ of faith. Our investigation began in Israel. It was to extend to \
the corridors of the )Tj
T*
(Vatican, and, even more ominously, into the offices of the Inquisition. \
We also encountered a )Tj
T*
(rigidly maintained 'consensus' of interpretation towards the content and\
dating of the scrolls, )Tj
T*
(and came to understand how explosive a non-partisan examination of them \
might be for the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(whole of Christian theological tradition. And we discovered how fiercely\
the world of )Tj
T*
(orthodox biblical scholarship was prepared to fight to retain its monopo\
ly of available )Tj
T*
(information.)Tj
T*
( For Christians today, it is perfectly possible to acknowledge the \
Buddha, for example, or )Tj
T*
(Muhammad, as historical individuals, just as one might Caesar or Alexand\
er, and to )Tj
T*
(differentiate them from the legends, the traditions, the theologies that\
have become associated )Tj
T*
(with them. So far as Jesus is concerned, however, such differentiation i\
s altogether more )Tj
T*
(difficult. At the very heart of Christian belief, history and theology a\
re inextricably )Tj
T*
(entangled. Each suffuses the other. Yet each, if looked at separately, i\
s a potential threat to )Tj
T*
(the other. It is therefore easier, and safer, to blur the demarcation li\
nes between them. Thus, )Tj
T*
(for the faithful, two quite distinct figures are fused into one. On the \
one hand, there is the )Tj
T*
(historical individual, the man who, according to most scholars, actually\
existed and walked )Tj
T*
(the sands of Palestine two thousand years ago. On the other hand, there \
is the man-god of )Tj
T*
(Christian doctrine, the divine personage deified, extolled and promulgat\
ed by St Paul. To )Tj
T*
(examine this personage as an historical individual - to regard him, that\
is, as one might regard )Tj
T*
(Muhammad or the Buddha, Caesar or Alexander - is still, for many Christi\
ans, tantamount to )Tj
T*
(blasphemy.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(6 of 190\)3/19/2007 2:)Tj
(28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
652 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 683.5 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.5 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.5 520 396 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.5 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 20.5 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( During the mid-1980s, we were engaged in precisely such blasphemy.\
In researching the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(project we'd undertaken at the time, we were trying to separate history \
from theology, to )Tj
T*
(distinguish the historical Jesus from the Christ of faith. In the proces\
s, we blundered head-on )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(into the muddle of contradictions that confronts all researchers into bi\
blical material; and like )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(all researchers before us, we found ourselves bewildered by that muddle.\
)Tj
T*
( In the kind of research we'd embarked on, scriptural accounts, nee\
dless to say, could )Tj
T*
(provide only the most meagre aid. As historical documents and testimony,\
the Gospels, as )Tj
T*
(every scholar knows, are notoriously unreliable. They are essentially ac\
counts of stark mythic )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(simplicity, seemingly occurring in an historical limbo. Jesus and his di\
sciples appear centre )Tj
T*
(stage of an extensively stylised tableau, from which most of the context\
has been stripped )Tj
T*
(away. Romans and Jews mill confusingly in the background, like extras on\
a film set. No )Tj
T*
(sense is conveyed of the social, cultural, religious and political circu\
mstances in which Jesus' )Tj
T*
(drama is embedded. One is, in effect, confronted with an historical vacu\
um.)Tj
T*
( The Acts of the Apostles fleshes out the picture only slightly. Fr\
om the Acts, one derives )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(at least a tenuous sense of a milieu - of internecine strife and doctrin\
al squabbles amongst )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jesus' immediate followers, of a coalescing movement which will graduall\
y take the form of )Tj
T*
('Christianity', of a world that extends beyond the circumscribed confine\
s of Galilee and )Tj
T*
(Judaea, of the geographical relation of Palestine to the rest of the Med\
iterranean. But there is )Tj
T*
(still no accurate rendering of the broader social, cultural, religious a\
nd political forces at )Tj
T*
(work. Everything is focused on, and restricted to, St Paul. If the Gospe\
ls are stylised, the Acts )Tj
T*
(are no less so, albeit in a different way. If the Gospels are reduced to\
the stark )Tj
T*
(oversimplification of myth, the Acts comprise a kind of picaresque novel\
- a picaresque )Tj
T*
(novel, moreover, intended for specifically propagandist purposes and wit\
h Paul as )Tj
T*
(protagonist. There may be some insight into Paul's mentality, attitudes \
and adventures, but )Tj
T*
(there is no reliable perspective on the world in which he moved. From th\
e standpoint of any )Tj
T*
(historian, any responsible chronicler, no account of the epoch would hav\
e been complete )Tj
T*
(without some reference to Nero, say, and the burning of Rome. Even withi\
n Palestine, there )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(were developments of momentous importance to those living at the time. I\
n ad 39, for )Tj
T*
(example, Herod Antipas, Tetrarch of Galilee, was exiled to the Pyrenees.\
By ad 41, both )Tj
T*
(Galilee and Judaea - administered by Roman procurators since ad 6 - had \
been conferred on )Tj
T*
(King Agrippa, and Palestine was united under a single non-Roman monarch \
\(puppet though )Tj
T*
(he might be\) for the first time since the days of Herod the Great nearl\
y half a century before. )Tj
T*
(None of these developments is so much as mentioned in the Acts of the Ap\
ostles. The effect )Tj
T*
(is akin to reading a biography of, say, Billy Graham which makes no ment\
ion of his )Tj
T*
(friendships with presidents and other prominent individuals, no mention \
of Kennedy's )Tj
T*
(assassination, no mention of the civil rights movement, the war in Vietn\
am, the )Tj
T*
(transformation of values during the 1960s, Watergate and its aftermath.)Tj
T*
( Contrary to Christian tradition, Palestine two thousand years ago \
was as real as any other )Tj
T*
(historical setting - that of Cleopatra's Egypt, for example, or of Imper\
ial Rome, both of which )Tj
T*
(impinged upon it. Its reality cannot be reduced to a bald mythic simplic\
ity. Whoever Jesus or )Tj
T*
(Paul were, and whatever they did, must be placed against the backdrop of\
broader events - )Tj
T*
(against the swirl of personalities, groups, institutions and movements t\
hat operated in 1st-)Tj
T*
(century Palestine and composed the fabric of what is called history.)Tj
T*
( To obtain any real sense of this period, we, like every other rese\
archer, had to turn to )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(7 of 190\)3/19/2007 2:)Tj
(28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
653 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 667 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 568 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.5 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 271 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.5 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 53.5 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(other sources - Roman accounts, historical chronicles compiled by other \
writers of other )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(orientations, allusions in later documents, apocryphal texts, the teachi\
ngs and testimony of )Tj
T*
(rival sects and creeds. Jesus himself was, needless to say, seldom menti\
oned in these sources, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(but they furnish a comprehensive and detailed picture of the world in wh\
ich he moved. In )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fact, Jesus' world is better documented and chronicled than, for example\
, that of King Arthur, )Tj
T*
(or of Robin Hood. And if Jesus himself remains elusive, he is no more so\
than they.)Tj
T*
( It was therefore with surprise and zest that we plunged into the b\
ackground of the )Tj
T*
('historical Jesus'. But no sooner had we done so than we found ourselves\
confronted by a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(problem that besets all researchers into biblical history. We found ours\
elves confronted by an )Tj
T*
(apparently bewildering spectrum of Judaic cults, sects and sub-sects, of\
political and religious )Tj
T*
(organisations and institutions, which seemed sometimes to be militantly \
at odds with one )Tj
T*
(another, sometimes to overlap.)Tj
T*
( It quickly became apparent to us that the labels used to different\
iate between these )Tj
T*
(various groups \227 Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Zealots, Nazorenes - \
were neither accurate )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(nor useful. The muddle remained, and Jesus seemed to have connections of\
one kind or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(another with virtually all its components. Thus, for example, insofar as\
anything could be )Tj
T*
(established about him at all, he appeared to have come from a Pharisee f\
amily and )Tj
T*
(background, and to be steeped in Pharisaic thought. Several modern comme\
ntators have )Tj
T*
(stressed the striking parallels between Jesus' teachings, especially the\
Sermon on the Mount, )Tj
T*
(and those of Pharisee exponents such as the great Hillel. According to a\
t least one )Tj
T*
(commentator, Jesus 'was himself a Pharisee'.)Tj
T*
( But if Jesus' words were often interchangeable with those of offic\
ial Pharisee doctrine at )Tj
T*
(the time, they also appear to draw heavily on mystical or 'Essene' thoug\
ht. John the Baptist is )Tj
T*
(generally recognised as having been an Essene of some sort, and his infl\
uence on Jesus )Tj
T*
(introduces an obvious Essene element into the latter's career. According\
to scriptural )Tj
T*
(accounts, however, John's mother - Jesus' maternal aunt, Elizabeth - was\
married to a priest )Tj
T*
(of the Temple, thereby giving both men Sadducee connections. And - most \
sensitive of all for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(later Christian tradition - Jesus clearly seems to have included Zealots\
among his followers: )Tj
T*
(Simon Zealotes, for example, or Simon the Zealot, and possibly even Juda\
s Iscariot, whose )Tj
T*
(name, as it comes down to us, may derive from the fierce Sicarii.)Tj
T*
( In itself, of course, the mere suggestion of association with the \
Zealots was highly )Tj
T*
(provocative. Was Jesus indeed the meek lamblike saviour of subsequent Ch\
ristian tradition? )Tj
T*
(Was he indeed wholly non-violent? Why, then, did he embark on violent ac\
tions, such as )Tj
T*
(overturning the tables of the money-changers in the Temple? Why is he po\
rtrayed as being )Tj
T*
(executed by the Romans in a fashion reserved exclusively for revolutiona\
ry activity? Why, )Tj
T*
(before his vigil in Gethsemane, did he instruct his followers to equip t\
hemselves with )Tj
T*
(swords? Why, shortly thereafter, did Peter actually draw a sword and lop\
off the ear of a )Tj
T*
(minion in the High Priest's entourage? And if Jesus was in fact more mil\
itant than generally )Tj
T*
(depicted, was he not also, of necessity, more politically committed? How\
, then, could one )Tj
T*
(explain his preparedness to 'give unto Caesar' what was Caesar's - assum\
ing that to be an )Tj
T*
(accurate transcription and translation of his words?)Tj
T*
( If such contradictions surrounded Jesus during his lifetime, they \
also appeared to have )Tj
T*
(survived him, continuing for at least another forty-odd years after his \
reported death. In ad )Tj
T*
(74, the fortress of Masada, having withstood a sustained Roman siege, wa\
s at last overrun, )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(8 of 190\)3/19/2007 2:)Tj
(28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
654 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 667 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.5 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.461 520 66.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.961 520 214.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.423 520 148.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 20.423 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(but only when its defending garrison committed mass suicide. The defende\
rs of Masada are )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(generally acknowledged to have been Zealots - not a religious sect, acco\
rding to conventional )Tj
T*
(interpretations, but adherents of a political and military movement. As \
it has been preserved )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(for posterity, however, the doctrine of the garrison's defenders would a\
ppear to have been )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that of the Essenes -the allegedly non-violent, mystically oriented sect\
who were believed to )Tj
T*
(have disowned all forms of political, not to say military, activity.)Tj
T*
( Such were the contradictions and prevailing confusion we found. Bu\
t if we were )Tj
T*
(flummoxed by it all, so, too, were professional scholars, 'experts' far \
more deeply versed in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the material than ourselves. After threading a path through the maze, vi\
rtually every reliable )Tj
T*
(commentator ended up at odds with his colleagues. According to some, Chr\
istianity arose as )Tj
T*
(a quietist, mystery-school form of Judaism, which couldn't therefore hav\
e any connection )Tj
T*
(with militant revolutionary nationalists such as the Zealots. According \
to others, Christianity )Tj
T*
(was itself, at first, a form of revolutionary fudaic nationalism, and co\
uldn't possibly have )Tj
T*
(anything to do with pacifist mystics like the Essenes. According to some\
, Christianity )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(emerged from one of the mainstreams of Judaic thought at the time. Accor\
ding to others, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Christianity had begun to deviate from Judaism :ven before Paul appeared\
on the scene and )Tj
T*
(made the rupture official.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( The more we consulted the 'experts', the more apparent it became \
that they )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(knew, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(effectively, little more than anyone else. Most disturbing of all, we en\
countered no one )Tj
T*
(theory or interpretation that satisfactorily accommodated all the eviden\
ce, all the anomalies, )Tj
T*
(inconsistencies and contradictions.)Tj
T*
( It was at this point that we came upon the work of Robert Eisenman\
, Chairman of the )Tj
T*
(Department of Religious Studies and Professor of Middle East Religions a\
t California State )Tj
T*
(University in Long Beach. Eisenman had been an undergraduate at Cornell \
at the same time )Tj
T*
(as Thomas Pynchon. He studied Comparative Literature there under Vladimi\
r Nabokov, )Tj
T*
(receiving his BA in Physics and Philosophy in 1958, and his MA in Hebrew\
and Near )Tj
T*
(Eastern Studies from New York University in 1966. In 1971 he was awarded\
a PhD in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Middle East Languages and Cultures by Columbia University, having concen\
trated )Tj
T*
(specifically on Palestinian history and Islamic law. He has also been an\
External Fellow of )Tj
T*
(the University of Calabria in Italy and a lecturer in Islamic law, Islam\
ic religion and culture, )Tj
T*
(the Dead Sea Scrolls and Christian origins at the Hebrew University in J\
erusalem. In 1985-6, )Tj
T*
(he was Research Fellow in Residence at the William F. Albright Institute\
of Archaeological )Tj
T*
(Research in Jerusalem, and in 1986-7 Visiting Senior Member of Linacre C\
ollege, Oxford, )Tj
T*
(and Visiting Scholar at the Oxford Centre for Postgraduate Hebrew Studie\
s.)Tj
T*
( We came upon Eisenman's work initially in the form of a slender te\
xt cumbersomely )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(entitled )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(which was published in 1983 by E.J. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Brill of Leiden, Holland. The book was precisely the sort of thing one m\
ight expect from )Tj
T*
(such an author writing for an academic publisher. There were more footno\
tes than there was )Tj
T*
(text. There was a presupposition of enormous background knowledge and a \
forbidding welter )Tj
T*
(of sources and references. But there was also a central thesis of exhila\
rating commonsense )Tj
T*
(and lucidity. As we hacked our way through the density of the text, the \
questions that had )Tj
T*
(perplexed us began to resolve themselves, clearly and organically, witho\
ut ingeniously )Tj
T*
(contrived theories, and without crucial fragments being ignored.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( We drew extensively on Eisenman's work in the first section of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Messianic Legacy )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(9 of 190\)3/19/2007 2:)Tj
(28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
655 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 667 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 568 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 535 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 502 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 469 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.961 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 385.049 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 203.472 520 165.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 167.472 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(\(London, 1986\). Our conclusions owed much to the perspective he had op\
ened for us on )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(biblical scholarship and the historical background to the New Testament.\
However, certain )Tj
T*
(questions remained unanswered. We could not have known it at the time, b\
ut we had )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(overlooked a crucial link - a link that has, over the last five years, b\
ecome a focus for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(controversy, a topic for front-page articles in national newspapers. Tha\
t link proved to be the )Tj
T*
(information provided by the Dead Sea Scrolls.)Tj
T*
( At the centre of the puzzle, we were to discover, was a hitherto u\
nknown connection )Tj
T*
(between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the elusive figure of St James, Jesus' \
brother, whose )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dispute with Paul precipitated the formulation of the new religion subse\
quently known as )Tj
T*
(Christianity. It was this link that had been painstakingly concealed by \
a small enclave of )Tj
T*
(biblical scholars, whose conveniently orthodox interpretation of the scr\
olls Eisenman came to )Tj
T*
(call the 'consensus'.)Tj
T*
( According to Robert Eisenman:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( A small group of specialists, largely working together, developed \
a consensus . . . In lieu )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of clear )Tj
T*
( historical insight . . . preconceptions and reconstructions, such \
as they were, were stated )Tj
T*
(as facts, )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( and these results, which were used to corroborate each other, in t\
urn became )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(new )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(assumptions, )Tj
T*
( that were used to draw away a whole generation of students unwilli\
ng \(or simply unable\) )Tj
T*
(to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( question the work of their mentors.)Tj
11 0 0 11 223.8675 393.1564 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 373.1364 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The result has been the upholding of an official orthodoxy of interpreta\
tion - a framework of )Tj
T*
(assumptions and conclusions which, to outsiders, appears to have the sol\
idity of established )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(and undisputed fact. In this fashion, many of the so-called )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(donn\351es, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the 'givens' of history, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(were produced. Those responsible for developing the consensus view of Ch\
ristianity have )Tj
T*
(been able to exercise a monopoly aver certain crucial sources, regulatin\
g the flow of )Tj
T*
(information in a manner that enables its release to serve one's own purp\
ose. This is the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(phenomenon explored by Umberto Eco in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Name of the Rose, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(where the monastery, and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the library within it, reflect the medieval Church's monopoly of learnin\
g, constituting a kind )Tj
T*
(of closed shop', an exclusive 'country club' of knowledge from which ill\
but a select few are )Tj
T*
(banned - a select few prepared to toe the 'party line\222. )Tj
T*
( Those purveying the 'party line' can bolster the authority they ar\
rogate to themselves by )Tj
T*
(claiming that they alone have seen the relevant sources, access to which\
is closed to all )Tj
T*
(outsiders. For outsiders, assembling the disparate available fragments i\
nto a coherent order )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(amounts to an exercise in semiotics - and in the realm of semiotic exerc\
ises it becomes )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(perfectly possible to hold the Knights Templar responsible for everythin\
g, and Umberto Eco )Tj
T*
(himself responsible for the collapse of the Banco Ambrosiano. Thus, most\
outsiders, in the )Tj
T*
(absence of any access to the relevant sources, have no choice but to acc\
ept the interpretations )Tj
T*
(of the 'party line'. To challenge those interpretations is to find onese\
lf labelled at best a crank, )Tj
T*
(at worst, a renegade, apostate or heretic. Few scholars have the combina\
tion of courage, )Tj
T*
(standing and expertise to issue such a challenge and hold on to their re\
putations. Robert )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(10 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
656 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 608.5 520 42 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 566.5 520 42 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 517 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 487 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 457 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 440.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 424 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 281.5 520 142.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 83.5 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 47.5 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Eisenman, whose currency and credibility have placed him among the most \
prominent and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(influential figures in his field, has done so. His story provided the im\
petus for this book.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
35 0 0 35 263.1925 620.0608 Tm
(I)Tj
-3.959 -1.2 Td
(THE DECEPTION)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 554.5489 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 263.75 495.2577 Tm
(1)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
-5.555 -1.201 Td
(The Discovery of the Scrolls)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 445.0875 Tm
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 404.4319 Tm
(E)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 25.0075 404.4319 Tm
(ast of Jerusalem, a long road slopes gradually down between barren hills\
sprinkled with )Tj
-1.091 -1.407 Td
(occasional Bedouin camps. It sinks 3800 feet, to a depth of 1300 feet be\
low sea-level, and )Tj
T*
(then emerges to give a panoramic vista of the Jordan Valley. Away to the\
left, one can )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(discern Jericho. In the haze ahead lie Jordan itself and, as though seen\
in a mirage, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(mountains of Moab. To the right lies the northern shore of the Dead Sea.\
The skin of water, )Tj
T*
(and the yellow cliffs rising 1200 feet or more which line this \(the Isr\
aeli\) side of it, conduce )Tj
T*
(to awe - and to acute discomfort. The air here, so far below sea-level, \
is not just hot, but )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(palpably so, with a thickness to it, a pressure, almost a weight.)Tj
T*
( The beauty, the majesty and the silence of the place are spellbind\
ing. So, too, is the sense )Tj
T*
(of antiquity the landscape conveys - the sense of a world older than mos\
t Western visitors are )Tj
T*
(likely to have experienced. It is therefore all the more shocking when t\
he 20th century )Tj
T*
(intrudes with a roar that seems to rupture the sky - a tight formation o\
f Israeli F-16s or )Tj
T*
(Mirages swooping low over the water, the pilots clearly discernible in t\
heir cockpits. )Tj
T*
(Afterburners blasting, the jets surge almost vertically upwards into inv\
isibility. One waits, )Tj
T*
(numbed. Seconds later, the entire structure of cliffs judders to the rec\
eding sonic booms. )Tj
T*
(Only then does one remember that this place exists, technically, in a st\
ate of permanent war - )Tj
T*
(that this side of the Dead Sea has never, during the last forty-odd year\
s, made peace with the )Tj
T*
(other. But then again, the soil here has witnessed incessant conflict si\
nce the very beginning )Tj
T*
(of recorded history. Too many gods, it seems, have clashed here, demandi\
ng blood sacrifice )Tj
T*
(from their adherents.)Tj
T*
( The ruins of Qumran \(or, to be more accurate, Khirbet Qumran\) ap\
pear to the right, just )Tj
T*
(as the road reaches the cliffs overlooking the Dead Sea. Thereafter, the\
road bends to follow )Tj
T*
(the cliffs southwards, along the shore of the water, towards the site of\
the fortress of Masada, )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(11 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
657 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 599 520 167 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 153.5 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 117.5 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.0875 Tm
(thirty-three miles away. Qumran stands on a white terrace of marl, a hun\
dred feet or so above )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the road, slightly more than a mile and a quarter from the Dead Sea. The\
ruins themselves are )Tj
T*
(not very prepossessing. One is first struck by a tower, two floors of wh\
ich remain intact, with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(walls three feet thick - obviously built initially with defence in mind.\
Adjacent to the tower )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(are a number of cisterns, large and small, connected by a complicated ne\
twork of water )Tj
T*
(channels. Some may have been used for ritual bathing. Most, however, if \
not all, would have )Tj
T*
(been used to store the water the Qumran community needed to survive here\
in the desert. )Tj
T*
(Between the ruins and the Dead Sea, on the lower levels of the marl terr\
ace, lies an immense )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(cemetery of some 1200 graves. Each is marked by a long mound of stones a\
ligned - contrary )Tj
T*
(to both Judaic and Muslim practice - north\227south.)Tj
T*
( Even today, Qumran feels remote, though several hundred people liv\
e in a nearby kibbutz )Tj
T*
(and the place can be reached quickly and easily by a modern road running\
to Jerusalem - a )Tj
T*
(drive of some twenty miles and forty minutes. Day and night, huge articu\
lated lorries thunder )Tj
T*
(along the road, which links Eilat in the extreme south of Israel with Ti\
berius in the north. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Tourist buses stop regularly, disgorging sweating Western Europeans and \
Americans, who )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(are guided briefly around the ruins, then to an air-conditioned bookshop\
and restaurant for )Tj
T*
(coffee and cakes. There are, of course, numerous military vehicles. But \
one also sees private )Tj
T*
(cars, both Israeli and Arab, with their different coloured number-plates\
. One even sees the )Tj
T*
(occasional 'boy racer' in a loud, badly built Detroit monster, whose spe\
ed appears limited )Tj
T*
(only by the width of the road.)Tj
T*
( The Israeli Army is, needless to say, constantly in sight. This, a\
fter all, is the West Bank, )Tj
T*
(and the Jordanians are only a few miles away, across the Dead Sea. Patro\
ls run day and night, )Tj
T*
(cruising at five miles per hour, scrutinising everything - small lorries\
, usually, with three )Tj
T*
(heavy machine-guns on the back, soldiers upright behind them. These patr\
ols will stop to )Tj
T*
(check the cars and ascertain the precise whereabouts of anyone exploring\
the area, or )Tj
T*
(excavating on the cliffs or in the caves. The visitor quickly learns to \
wave, to make sure the )Tj
T*
(troops see him and acknowledge his presence. It is dangerous to come upo\
n them too )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(suddenly, or to act in any fashion that might strike them as furtive or \
suspicious.)Tj
T*
( The kibbutz - Kibbutz Kalia - is a ten-minute walk from Qumran, up\
a short road from )Tj
T*
(the ruins. There are two small schools for the local children, a large c\
ommunal refectory and )Tj
T*
(housing units resembling motels for overnight tourists. But this is stil\
l a military zone. The )Tj
T*
(kibbutz is surrounded by barbed wire and locked at night. An armed patro\
l is always on duty, )Tj
T*
(and there are numerous air-raid shelters deep underground. These double \
for other purposes )Tj
T*
(as well. One, for example, is used as a lecture hall, another as a bar, \
a third as a discotheque. )Tj
T*
(But the wastes beyond the perimeter remain untouched by any such moderni\
ty. Here the )Tj
T*
(Bedouin still shepherd their camels and their goats, seemingly timeless \
figures linking the )Tj
T*
(present with the past.)Tj
T*
( In 1947, when the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, Qumran was ver\
y different. At that )Tj
T*
(time the area was part of the British mandate of Palestine. To the east \
lay what was then the )Tj
T*
(kingdom of Transjordan. The road that runs south along the shore of the \
Dead Sea did not )Tj
T*
(exist, extending only to the Dead Sea's north-western quarter, a few mil\
es from Jericho. )Tj
T*
(Around and beyond it there were only rough tracks, one of which followed\
the course of an )Tj
T*
(ancient Roman road. This route had long been in total disrepair. Qumran \
was thus rather )Tj
T*
(more difficult to reach than it is today. The sole human presence in the\
vicinity would have )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(12 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
658 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 535 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.5 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.587 520 83.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 170.587 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 37.175 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 1.175 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(been the Bedouin, herding their camels and goats during the winter and s\
pring, when the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(desert, perhaps surprisingly, yielded both water and grass. In the winte\
r, or possibly the early )Tj
T*
(spring, of 1947, it was to yield something more - one of the two or thre\
e greatest )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(archaeological discoveries of modern times.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The precise circumstances attending the discovery of the Dead Sea \
Scrolls have already )Tj
T*
(passed into legend. In a number of particulars, this legend is probably \
not entirely accurate, )Tj
T*
(and scholars were bickering over certain points well into the 1960s. It \
remains, however, the )Tj
T*
(only account we have. The original discovery is ascribed to a shepherd b\
oy, Muhammad adh-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Dhib, or Muhammad the Wolf, a member of the Ta'amireh tribe of Bedouin. \
He himself later )Tj
T*
(claimed he was searching for a lost goat. Whatever he was doing, his iti\
nerary brought him )Tj
T*
(clambering among the cliffs at Qumran, where he discovered an opening in\
the cliff-face. He )Tj
T*
(tried to peer inside but, from where he stood, could see nothing. He the\
n tossed a stone into )Tj
T*
(the blackness, which elicited a sound of breaking pottery. This, needles\
s to say, impelled him )Tj
T*
(to further exploration.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Hoisting himself upwards, he crawled through the aperture, then dr\
opped down to find )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(himself in a small cave, high-ceilinged and narrow, no more than six fee\
t wide and perhaps )Tj
T*
(twenty-four long. It contained a number of large earthenware jars, about\
two feet tall and ten )Tj
T*
(inches wide, many of them broken. Eight are generally believed to have b\
een intact, though )Tj
T*
(the quantity has never been definitively established.)Tj
T*
( According to his own account, Muhammad became frightened, hauled h\
imself back out )Tj
T*
(of the cave and fled. The next day, he returned with at least one friend\
and proceeded to )Tj
T*
(explore the cave and its contents more closely. Some of the earthenware \
jars were sealed by )Tj
T*
(large 'bowl-like' lids. Inside one of them, there were three leather rol\
ls wrapped in decaying )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(linen - the first of the Dead Sea Scrolls to see the light in nearly two\
thousand years.)Tj
11 0 0 11 472.8525 376.695 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 356.675 Tm
( During the days that followed, the Bedouin returned to the site an\
d at least four more )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(leather rolls were found. At least two jars were removed and used for ca\
rrying water. When )Tj
T*
(proper archaeological excavation began, it revealed a substantial number\
of sherds and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fragments - enough, according to reliable estimates, to have constituted\
no fewer than forty )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(jars. There is no way of knowing how many of these jars, when first disc\
overed, were empty )Tj
T*
(and how many actually contained scrolls. Neither is there any way of kno\
wing how many )Tj
T*
(scrolls were taken from the cave and, before their significance became a\
pparent, secreted )Tj
T*
(away, destroyed or used for other purposes. Some, it has been suggested,\
were burned for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fuel. In any case, we were told that more scrolls were taken from the ca\
ve than have )Tj
T*
(previously been recorded, or than have subsequently come to light. Altog\
ether, a total of )Tj
T*
(seven complete scrolls were to find their way into the public domain, al\
ong with fragments of )Tj
T*
(some twenty-one others.)Tj
T*
( At this point, accounts begin to grow increasingly contradictory. \
Apparently, however, )Tj
T*
(thinking the scrolls might be of some value, three Bedouin took all they\
had found - three )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(complete parchments according to some sources, seven or eight according \
to others - to a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(local sheik. He passed the Bedouin on to a Christian shopkeeper and deal\
er in curios and )Tj
T*
(antiques, one Khalil Iskander Shahin, known as 'Kando'. Kando, a member \
of the Syrian )Tj
T*
(Jacobite Church, contacted another Church member residing in Jerusalem, \
George Isaiah. )Tj
T*
(According to reliable scholars, Kando and Isaiah promptly ventured out t\
o Qumran )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(themselves and removed a number of additional scrolls and/or fragments.)Tj
11 0 0 11 414.03 45.2825 Tm
(2)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(13 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
659 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 617.5 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.587 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 352.087 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 71.587 520 280.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 35.587 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( Such activities were, of course, illegal. By the law of the Britis\
h mandate - a law )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(subsequently retained by both Jordanian and Israeli governments - all ar\
chaeological )Tj
T*
(discoveries belonged officially to the state. They were supposed to be t\
urned over to the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Department of Antiquities, then housed in the Palestine Archaeological M\
useum, known as )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the Rockefeller, in Arab East Jerusalem. But Palestine was in turmoil at\
the time, and )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem a city divided into Jewish, Arab and British sectors. In these\
circumstances, the )Tj
T*
(authorities had more pressing matters to deal with than a black market i\
n archaeological )Tj
T*
(relics. In consequence, Kando and George Isaiah were free to pursue thei\
r clandestine )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(transactions with impunity.)Tj
T*
( George Isaiah reported the discovery to his ecclesiastical leader,\
the Syrian Metropolitan )Tj
T*
(\(i.e. Archbishop\) Athanasius Yeshua Samuel, head of the Syrian Jacobit\
e Church in )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem. Academically, Athanasius Yeshua Samuel was a naive man, untut\
ored in the )Tj
T*
(sophisticated scholarship needed to identify, much less translate, the t\
ext before him. The late )Tj
T*
(Edmund Wilson, one of the earliest and most reliable commentators on the\
Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(discovery, wrote of Samuel that he 'was not a Hebrew scholar and could n\
ot make out what )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the manuscript was'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 122.0762 508.695 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 127.5762 505.175 Tm
( He even burned a small piece of it and smelled it, to verify that the )Tj
-8.551 -1.2 Td
(substance was indeed leather, or parchment. But whatever his academic sh\
ortcomings, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Samuel was also shrewd, and his monastery, St Mark's, contained a famous\
collection of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(ancient documents. He thus had some idea of the importance of what had p\
assed into his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(hands.)Tj
T*
( Samuel later said he first learned of the Dead Sea Scrolls in Apri\
l 1947. If chronology has )Tj
T*
(hitherto been vague and contradictory, however, it now becomes even more\
so, varying from )Tj
T*
(commentator to commentator. But some time between early June and early J\
uly Samuel )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(requested Kando and George Isaiah to arrange a meeting with the three Be\
douin who'd made )Tj
T*
(the original discovery, to examine what they'd found.)Tj
T*
( When the Bedouin arrived in Jerusalem, they were carrying at least\
four scrolls and )Tj
T*
(possibly as many as eight - the three they'd originally found themselves\
, plus one or more )Tj
T*
(from whatever they or Kando and George Isaiah had subsequently plundered\
. Unfortunately, )Tj
T*
(the Metropolitan had neglected to mention the Bedouin's impending visit \
to the monks at the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(monastery of St Mark. When the Bedouin appeared with their dirty, crumbl\
ing and ragged )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(parchments, themselves unshaven and insalubrious-looking, the monk at th\
e gate turned them )Tj
T*
(away. By the time Samuel learned of this, it was too late. The Bedouin, \
understandably )Tj
T*
(resentful, wanted nothing further to do with Metropolitan Samuel. One of\
them even refused )Tj
T*
(to have any further dealings with Kando, and sold his portion of the scr\
olls - a 'third' share )Tj
T*
(which amounted to three scrolls - to the Muslim sheik of Bethlehem. Kand\
o managed to )Tj
T*
(purchase the shares of the remaining scrolls, and sold them in turn to t\
he Metropolitan for a )Tj
T*
(reported \24324. This cache was believed at first to consist of five scr\
olls, but proved eventually )Tj
T*
(to contain only four, one of them having broken in two. Of the four text\
s, one was a well-)Tj
T*
(preserved copy of the book of Isaiah from the Old Testament, the parchme\
nt of which )Tj
T*
(unrolled to a length of twenty-four feet. The other three, according to \
the nomenclature later )Tj
T*
(adopted by scholars, included the 'Genesis Apocryphon', a commentary on \
the 'Book of )Tj
T*
(Habakkuk' and the so-called 'Community Rule'.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Shortly after the Bedouin's abortive visit to Jerusalem - in late \
July according to some )Tj
T*
(reports, in August according to others -Metropolitan Samuel sent a pries\
t to return with )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(14 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
660 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 617.5 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.587 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 352.087 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.087 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.087 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 19.087 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(George Isaiah to the cave at Qumran. Being engaged in illicit activities\
, the pair worked by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(night. They examined the site at length and found at least one additiona\
l jar and some )Tj
T*
(fragments; they also conducted, apparently, some fairly extensive excava\
tions. When the first )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(official research party reached the location a year later, they discover\
ed an entire section of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the cliff-face had been removed, making a large entrance into the cave b\
elow the smaller hole )Tj
T*
(originally explored by the Bedouin. What this enterprise may have yielde\
d remains unknown. )Tj
T*
(In researching this book, we interviewed certain people who insisted tha\
t George Isaiah, )Tj
T*
(during the course of his nocturnal explorations, found a number of other\
scrolls, some of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(which have never been seen by scholars.)Tj
T*
( Having obtained at least some of the scrolls, Metropolitan Samuel \
undertook to establish )Tj
T*
(their age. He first consulted a Syrian expert working at the Department \
of Antiquities. In this )Tj
T*
(man's opinion, the scrolls were of fairly recent date. The Metropolitan \
then consulted a Dutch )Tj
T*
(scholar working with the Ecole Biblique et Arch\351ologique Fran\347aise\
de J\351rusalem, an )Tj
T*
(institution run by Dominican monks and financed, in part, by the French \
government. He was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(intrigued, but remained sceptical about the scrolls' antiquity, describi\
ng subsequently how he )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(returned to the Ecole Biblique and consulted 'a prominent scholar' there\
, who lectured him )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(about the prevalent forgeries floating around amongst dodgy antique deal\
ers.)Tj
11 0 0 11 433.115 492.195 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 438.615 488.675 Tm
( As a result, he )Tj
-31.172 -1.2 Td
(abandoned his research on the matter, and the Ecole Biblique lost its op\
portunity to get )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(involved at the beginning. Only the relatively untutored Metropolitan, a\
t this point, seems to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(have had any inkling of the scrolls' age, value and significance.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In September 1947, the Metropolitan took the scrolls in his posses\
sion to his superior, the )Tj
T*
(Patriarch of the Syrian Jacobite Church in Horns, north of Damascus. Wha\
t passed between )Tj
T*
(them is not known, but on his return the Metropolitan again dispatched a\
party of men to )Tj
T*
(excavate the cave at Qumran. Presumably he was acting on the Patriarch's\
instructions. In any )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(case, he obviously believed there was more to be discovered.)Tj
T*
( Metropolitan Samuel's visit to Syria in September had coincided wi\
th the arrival there of )Tj
T*
(Miles Copeland, who had joined the OSS during the Second World War, had \
remained with )Tj
T*
(that organisation when it became the CIA and went on to become a long-se\
rving operative )Tj
T*
(and station chief. In a personal interview, Copeland told how, in the au\
tumn of 1947, he had )Tj
T*
(just been posted to Damascus as the CIA's representative there. In the c\
ircumstances then )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(prevailing, there was no need to operate under particularly deep cover, \
and his identity seems )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to have been pretty much an open secret. According to Copeland, a 'sly E\
gyptian merchant' )Tj
T*
(came to see him one day and claimed to possess a great treasure. Reachin\
g into a dirty sack, )Tj
T*
(the man then pulled out a scroll, the edges of which were already disint\
egrating - fragments )Tj
T*
(were flaking off into the street. When asked what it was, Copeland, of c\
ourse, couldn't say. If )Tj
T*
(the merchant left it with him, however, he promised he would photograph \
it and get someone )Tj
T*
(to study it.)Tj
T*
( In order to photograph it, Copeland and his colleagues took the sc\
roll up on to the roof of )Tj
T*
(the American Legation in Damascus and stretched it out. A strong wind wa\
s gusting at the )Tj
T*
(time, Copeland remembered, and pieces of the scroll peeled away, wafted \
over the roof and )Tj
T*
(into the streets of the city, to be lost for ever. According to Copeland\
, a substantial portion of )Tj
T*
(the parchment vanished in this manner. Copeland's wife, an archaeologist\
herself, said she )Tj
T*
(could not help wincing every time she heard the story.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Using photographic equipment supplied by the American government, \
Copeland and his )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(15 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
661 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 599.587 520 166.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 566.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 367.175 520 199.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 86.675 520 280.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 50.675 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(colleagues took, he reported, some thirty frames. This, he said, was not\
sufficient to cover the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(entire length of the scroll, which must, therefore, have been considerab\
le. Subsequently, the )Tj
T*
(photographs were taken to the American embassy in Beirut and shown to a \
prominent official )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(there, a man versed in ancient languages. The official declared the text\
to be part of the Old )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Testament book of Daniel. Some of the writing was in Aramaic, he said, s\
ome in Hebrew. )Tj
T*
(Unfortunately, however, there was no follow-up. Copeland returned to Dam\
ascus, but the 'sly )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Egyptian merchant' was never seen again and the photographs were left in\
a drawer.)Tj
11 0 0 11 472.2063 657.195 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 477.7063 653.675 Tm
( No one, )Tj
-34.015 -1.2 Td
(to this day, knows what became of them, or of the scroll itself, althoug\
h fragments of a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Daniel scroll were subsequently found at Qumran, five years after the in\
cident Copeland )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(described.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( If the scroll Copeland saw and photographed was indeed a text of D\
aniel, it has never )Tj
T*
(become public.)Tj
T*
( Although it was precisely at this time that Metropolitan Samuel wa\
s in Syria with the )Tj
T*
(scrolls he had purchased, it is unlikely that the scroll Copeland saw wa\
s one of these, since )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(only three of the scrolls in his possession could be unrolled at all, an\
d only one - the twenty-)Tj
T*
(four-foot-long Hebrew text of Isaiah - would have taken more than thirty\
frames of film to )Tj
T*
(photograph. If this is what Copeland saw, why should it have been identi\
fied as Daniel, not )Tj
T*
(Isaiah, and why should the writing have been identified as both Hebrew a\
nd Aramaic? It is )Tj
T*
(possible, of course, that the CIA official was mistaken. But when we rep\
eated Copeland's )Tj
T*
(story to a prominent Israeli researcher, he was intrigued. 'It might be \
very interesting,' he )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(said, in confidence. 'It might be a scroll that hasn't been seen yet.' I\
f we could obtain any )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(further information, he said, 'I'll exchange with you . . . additional d\
ata concerning missing )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(scrolls.')Tj
11 0 0 11 51.8138 391.7825 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 57.3138 388.2625 Tm
( Which implies, needless to say, that such data exist and have never bee\
n made )Tj
-3.441 -1.2 Td
(public.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( While Copeland's photographs were being examined in Beirut, Metrop\
olitan Samuel was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(persisting in his efforts to confirm the age of the scrolls in his posse\
ssion. A Jewish doctor )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(who visited his monastery put him in touch with scholars from Hebrew Uni\
versity. They in )Tj
T*
(turn put him in touch with the head of Hebrew University's Department of\
Archaeology, )Tj
T*
(Professor Eleazar Sukenik. On 24 November, before Sukenik came to view t\
he scrolls held )Tj
T*
(by the Metropolitan, a secret meeting occurred between him and a figure \
subsequently )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(identified only as an Armenian antique dealer. Neither had had time to o\
btain the requisite )Tj
T*
(military passes. They were therefore obliged to meet at a checkpoint bet\
ween the Jewish and )Tj
T*
(the Arab zones of Jerusalem, and to talk across a barrier of barbed wire\
. Across this barrier, )Tj
T*
(the Armenian showed Sukenik a fragment of a scroll on which Hebrew writi\
ng could be )Tj
T*
(discerned. The Armenian then explained that an Arab antique dealer from \
Bethlehem had )Tj
T*
(come to him the day before, bringing this and other fragments alleged to\
have been found by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Bedouin. Sukenik was asked if they were genuine and if Hebrew University\
were prepared to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(purchase them. Sukenik requested a second meeting, which occurred three \
days later. This )Tj
T*
(time he had a pass, and was able to look closely at a number of fragment\
s. Convinced they )Tj
T*
(were important, he resolved to go to Bethlehem to see more, dangerous th\
ough such an )Tj
T*
(undertaking was at the time.)Tj
T*
( On 29 November 1947, Sukenik slipped furtively out of Jerusalem an\
d made the )Tj
T*
(clandestine trip to Bethlehem. Here he was told in detail how the scroll\
s had been discovered )Tj
T*
(and was shown three scrolls which were for sale - those which the Metrop\
olitan had missed - )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(16 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
662 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 682.087 520 83.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 616.087 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 566.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 500.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 482.675 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 466.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.675 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 235.175 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 119.675 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 103.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 86.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 50.675 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(and two of the jars that contained them. He was allowed to take the scro\
lls home, and was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(studying them when, at midnight, dramatic news came over the radio: a ma\
jority of the )Tj
T*
(United Nations had voted for the creation of the state of Israel. At tha\
t moment, Sukenik )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(resolved to purchase the scrolls. They seemed to him a kind of talismani\
c portent, a symbolic )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(validation of the momentous historical events that had just been set in \
motion.)Tj
11 0 0 11 439.6738 690.195 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 670.175 Tm
( This conviction was shared by his son, Yigael Yadin, then chief of\
operations for the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Haganah - the semi-clandestine militia which during the struggle for ind\
ependence in 1948 )Tj
T*
(was to evolve into the Israeli Defence Forces. For Yadin also the discov\
ery of the scrolls was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to assume an almost mystical significance:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( I cannot avoid the feeling that there is something symbolic in the\
discovery of the scrolls )Tj
T*
(and their )Tj
T*
( acquisition at the moment of the creation of the State of Israel. \
It is as if these )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(manuscripts had )Tj
T*
( been waiting in caves for two thousand years, ever since the destr\
uction of Israel's )Tj
T*
(independence, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( until the people of Israel had returned to their home and regained\
their freedom.)Tj
11 0 0 11 469.7587 490.7825 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 470.7625 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Towards the end of January 1948, Sukenik arranged to view the scro\
lls held by )Tj
T*
(Metropolitan Samuel. The meeting, again, was to be clandestine. It was t\
o occur in the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(British sector of Jerusalem, at the YMCA, where the librarian was a memb\
er of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Metropolitan's congregation. Security was particularly tight here, the Y\
MCA being situated )Tj
T*
(directly across the road from the King David Hotel, which had been bombe\
d, with great loss )Tj
T*
(of life, in 1946. To enter the zone, Sukenik had to obtain a pass from t\
he British District )Tj
T*
(Officer, Professor Biran.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Endeavouring to pass himself off as just another scholar, Sukenik \
carried a handful of )Tj
T*
(library books with him and made his way to the YMCA. Here, in a private \
room, he was )Tj
T*
(shown the Metropolitan's scrolls and allowed to borrow them for inspecti\
on. He returned )Tj
T*
(them to the Metropolitan on 6 February, unable to raise sufficient funds\
to purchase them. By )Tj
T*
(that time, the political and economic situation was too tense for any ba\
nk to authorise the )Tj
T*
(requisite loan. The local Jewish authorities, faced with the prospect of\
impending war, could )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(not spare anything. No one else was interested.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Sukenik tried to bring down the price, and the Syrian agent repres\
enting the Metropolitan )Tj
T*
(arranged to meet him a week later. By that time, Sukenik had contrived t\
o raise the money )Tj
T*
(required. He heard nothing, however, from the Metropolitan or the agent,\
until some weeks )Tj
T*
(later a letter arrived from the Syrian declaring that the Metropolitan h\
ad decided, after all, not )Tj
T*
(to sell. Unknown to Sukenik, negotiations were already in train by then \
with American )Tj
T*
(scholars who had photographed the scrolls and insisted a much better pri\
ce could be elicited )Tj
T*
(for them in the United States. Sukenik, needless to say, was mortified b\
y the lost opportunity.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(Metropolitan Samuel had contacted the Jerusalem-based Albright Institute\
\(the American )Tj
T*
(School of Oriental Research\) in February, and a complete set of prints \
had been sent by the )Tj
T*
(Institute to the acknowledged expert in the field, Professor William F. \
Albright, at Johns )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(17 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
663 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 566.587 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 484.087 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 352.049 520 132.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 335.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 319.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 269.549 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 236.549 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 203.549 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 170.549 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.049 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 88.049 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.049 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 38.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 2.549 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Hopkins University. On 15 March, Professor Albright replied confirming S\
ukenik's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(conviction of the importance of the discovery, and setting the seal of a\
pproval on the Qumran )Tj
T*
(texts. He also, unwittingly, provided support for those intent on attrib\
uting to the scrolls the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(earliest date possible:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( My heartiest congratulations on the greatest manuscript discovery \
of modern times! )Tj
T*
(There is no )Tj
T*
( doubt whatever in my mind that the script is more archaic than tha\
t of the Nash )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Papyrus . . . I )Tj
T*
( should prefer a date around 100 bc . . . What an absolutely incred\
ible find! And there can )Tj
T*
(happily )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( not be the slightest doubt in the world about the genuineness of t\
he MS.)Tj
11 0 0 11 425.5388 574.695 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 554.675 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( On 18 March, a suggested press release was drawn up. In the meanti\
me, the scrolls had )Tj
T*
(been taken to Beirut and placed in a bank there for safekeeping. Later i\
n the year, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Metropolitan Samuel was to pick them up, and in January 1949 he took the\
m to the United )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(States, where they were to spend the next few years in a New York bank v\
ault.)Tj
T*
( On 11 April, the first press release appeared, issued by Yale Univ\
ersity, where Professor )Tj
T*
(Millar Burrows - director of the Albright Institute - was head of the De\
partment of Near )Tj
T*
(Eastern Languages. The press release was not entirely truthful. No one w\
anted swarms of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(amateurs \(or rivals\) to descend on Qumran, and so the discovery was al\
leged to have been )Tj
T*
(made in the library of Metropolitan Samuel's monastery. But for the firs\
t time, fully a year )Tj
T*
(after they'd initially surfaced, the existence of the Dead Sea Scrolls b\
ecame known to the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(general public. On page 4 of its edition for Monday, 12 April 1948, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ran the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(following article under the headline 'ancient mss.)Tj
T*
(found in palestine':)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( New York, April 11)Tj
T*
( Yale University announced yesterday the discovery in Palestine of \
the earliest known )Tj
T*
(manuscript )Tj
T*
( of the Book of Isaiah. It was found in the Syrian monastery of St \
Mark in Jerusalem, )Tj
T*
(where it had )Tj
T*
( been preserved in a scroll of parchment dating to about the first \
century BC. Recently it )Tj
T*
(was )Tj
T*
( identified by scholars of the American School of Oriental Research\
[the Albright )Tj
T*
(Institute] at )Tj
T*
( Jerusalem.)Tj
T*
( There were also examined at the school three other ancient H\
ebrew scrolls. One was )Tj
T*
(part of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( a commentary on the Book of Habakkuk; another seemed to be a manua\
l of discipline of )Tj
T*
(some )Tj
T*
( comparatively little-known sect or monastic order, possibly the Es\
senes. The third scroll )Tj
T*
(has not )Tj
T*
( been identified.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(18 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
664 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.923 520 280.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.423 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.923 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.923 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 102.923 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(It was not an article calculated to set the world of scholarship aflame.\
So far as most readers )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(were concerned, it would have meant little enough, and would anyway have\
)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(been effectively up-staged by other news on the same page. Fourteen Germ\
an SS officers )Tj
T*
(who'd commanded extermination squads on the Eastern Front were sentenced\
to hang. )Tj
T*
(According to the chief prosecutor, the judgment 'was a landmark in the c\
ampaign against )Tj
T*
(racial intolerance and violence'. There were also reports of a massacre \
in the Holy Land the )Tj
T*
(previous Friday. Two Jewish terrorist organisations - the Irgun and the \
Stern Gang - had )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(wiped out the Arab village of Deir Yasin, raping girls, exterminating me\
n, women and )Tj
T*
(children. The Jewish Agency itself expressed 'horror and disgust' at wha\
t had happened. In )Tj
T*
(the meantime, according to other reports on the page, there was fighting\
in Jerusalem. Arab )Tj
T*
(artillery had bombarded the western quarter of the city at dusk. Quantit\
ies of new field-guns )Tj
T*
(had arrived from Syria and were aimed at Jewish sectors. The city's wate\
r supply had again )Tj
T*
(been cut off. Rail supplies had been disrupted. Renewed fighting for the\
Tel Aviv-Jerusalem )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(road was expected to be imminent. Elsewhere in the Holy Land, Arab terro\
rists had murdered )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(two British soldiers, and Jewish terrorists one. \(Forty-two years later\
, while this was being )Tj
T*
(checked and copied from microfilm in a local library, there was a bomb a\
lert and the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(premises had to be evacuated. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Plus ca change )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(. . .\))Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Hostilities in the Middle East were to continue for another year. \
On 14 May 1948 - the )Tj
T*
(day before the British mandate was scheduled to expire - the Jewish Peop\
le's Council met in )Tj
T*
(the Tel Aviv Museum and declared their own independent state of Israel. \
The response from )Tj
T*
(adjacent Arab countries was immediate. That very night, Egyptian aircraf\
t bombed Tel Aviv. )Tj
T*
(During the six and a half months of fighting that followed, Israel was t\
o be invaded by troops )Tj
T*
(from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Transjordan, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, while th\
e King of )Tj
T*
(Transjordan proclaimed himself monarch of all Palestine.)Tj
T*
( The final ceasefire took effect on 7 January 1949. According to it\
s terms, the large central )Tj
T*
(section of what had formerly been Palestine was to remain Arab. This ter\
ritory was occupied )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and then annexed by Transjordan, which on 2 June 1949 began to call itse\
lf simply Jordan. )Tj
T*
(Thus Qumran passed into Jordanian hands, along with the Arab east side o\
f Jerusalem. The )Tj
T*
(border between Israel and Jordan - the Nablus road - cut through the cen\
tre of the city.)Tj
T*
( Amidst these dramatic historical events, the scrolls attracted lit\
tle public attention or )Tj
T*
(interest. Behind the scenes, however, political, religious and academic \
forces were already )Tj
T*
(beginning to mobilise. By January 1949, the Department of Antiquities fo\
r Transjordan and )Tj
T*
(Arab Palestine had become involved, under the auspices of its director, \
Gerald Lankester )Tj
T*
(Harding. So had Father Roland de Vaux, director, since 1945, of another \
institution - the )Tj
T*
(Dominican-sponsored Ecole Biblique, situated in the Jordanian-controlled\
eastern sector of )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem, and for the last sixty years a centre of French-Catholic bibl\
ical scholarship in the )Tj
T*
(city.)Tj
T*
( A year and a half had now elapsed since the scrolls were first fou\
nd. To date, however, no )Tj
T*
(trained archaeologist had visited the site of the discovery. The Albrigh\
t Institute had tried, but )Tj
T*
(the war, they decided, rendered any such endeavours too dangerous. It wa\
s at this point that a )Tj
T*
(Belgian air-force officer, Captain Philippe Lippens, appeared on the sce\
ne. Lippens had )Tj
T*
(arrived in Jerusalem as a member of the United Nations Truce Supervision\
Organisation. But )Tj
T*
(he was also Jesuit-trained, and a graduate of the Oriental Institute at \
the University of )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(19 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
665 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 535 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 502 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 370 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.5 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 218.5 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Louvain. He had read of the scrolls, and now approached de Vaux, who unt\
il then appears to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(have been sceptical about their significance. If he managed to locate th\
e cave of the original )Tj
T*
(discovery, Lippens asked, would de Vaux confer legitimacy on the underta\
king by acting as )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(technical director for subsequent excavations? De Vaux assented.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( On 24 January, Lippens established the support of a British office\
r commanding a brigade )Tj
T*
(of the Jordanian Arab Legion, and, through this officer, the support of \
Lankester Harding in )Tj
T*
(Amman. With Harding's blessing, the British Army's archaeological office\
r was despatched )Tj
T*
(to Qumran, to search for the cave in which the original discovery had be\
en made. He was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(accompanied by two Bedouin from the Arab Legion, who located the cave on\
28 January. )Tj
T*
(Inside, they found remains of the linen in which the scrolls had been wr\
apped and numerous )Tj
T*
(pieces of pottery. A fortnight or so later, early in February, Harding a\
nd de Vaux visited the )Tj
T*
(cave together. They found enough shards for more than forty jars and the\
remains of thirty )Tj
T*
(identifiable texts, as well as many more unidentifiable fragments. Withi\
n another fortnight, )Tj
T*
(the first official archaeological expedition had been mounted.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(In the years that followed, scrolls became big business indeed, and traf\
fic in them came to )Tj
T*
(constitute an extremely lucrative cottage industry. Fragments were being\
smuggled to and fro )Tj
T*
(in dirty wallets, in cigarette boxes, in assorted other makeshift contai\
ners. Forgeries began to )Tj
T*
(appear, and wily local merchants had no shortage of gullible purchasers.\
The popular press )Tj
T*
(portrayed anything resembling ancient parchment as immensely valuable. I\
n consequence, )Tj
T*
(Arab dealers were loath to settle for anything less than hundreds of pou\
nds, and on at least )Tj
T*
(one occasion a thousand - and this, it must be remembered, was in the da\
ys when a house )Tj
T*
(could be mortgaged for \2431500.)Tj
T*
( When Metropolitan Samuel took his scrolls to the United States, Jo\
rdanian radio reports )Tj
T*
(claimed he was asking a million dollars for them. Fears arose that scrol\
ls would be bought )Tj
T*
(not only for private collections and as souvenirs, but also as investmen\
ts. At the same time, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of course, the scrolls themselves were dangerously fragile, requiring sp\
ecial conditions of )Tj
T*
(light and temperature to preserve them from further deterioration. In ma\
ny of them, indeed, )Tj
T*
(the process of deterioration was already irreversible. As the black mark\
et burgeoned, so did )Tj
T*
(the prospect of ever more valuable material being lost irretrievably to \
scholarship.)Tj
T*
( Responsibility to do something about the matter devolved upon Gera\
ld Lankester )Tj
T*
(Harding of the Department of Antiquities. Harding concluded it was less \
important to insist )Tj
T*
(on the letter of the law than to rescue as many scrolls and fragments as\
he could. In )Tj
T*
(consequence, he adopted a policy of purchasing scroll material from whom\
ever happened to )Tj
T*
(have it. This affected the legal status of such material by tacitly ackn\
owledging that anyone )Tj
T*
(who possessed it had a legitimate claim to it. In their negotiations and\
transactions, Harding's )Tj
T*
(agents were authorised to ignore all questions of legality and \(up to a\
point\) price. He )Tj
T*
(himself, being fluent in Arabic, befriended not just dealers, but the Be\
douin as well, and let it )Tj
T*
(be known he would pay handsomely for anything they might obtain. Neverth\
eless, )Tj
T*
(Metropolitan Samuel was accused of having 'smuggled' his scrolls out of \
the country, and the )Tj
T*
(Jordanian government demanded their return. By that time, of course, it \
was too late. )Tj
T*
(Eventually, the Bedouin of the Ta'amireh tribe were given what amounted \
to a 'cave-hunting )Tj
T*
(monopoly'. The Qumran area became, in effect, a military zone, and the T\
a'amireh were )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(20 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
666 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 715.087 520 50.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 632.587 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.087 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 517.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 484.087 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.087 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 418.087 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.175 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 383.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 134.762 520 248.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 98.762 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.675 Tm
(charged with policing it, 'to keep other tribes from muscling in on the \
scroll rush'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 458.7312 756.195 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 469.7312 752.675 Tm
( )Tj
-33.435 -1.2 Td
(Whatever the Ta'amireh found, they would take to Kando, who would remune\
rate them. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Kando would take the material to Harding and be remunerated in turn.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In October 1951, members of the Ta'amireh tribe arrived in Jerusal\
em with scroll )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fragments from a new site. Both Father de Vaux of the Ecole Biblique and\
Harding were )Tj
T*
(away, so the Bedouin approached Joseph Saad, director of the Rockefeller\
Museum. Saad )Tj
T*
(demanded to be taken to the site in question. The Bedouin went off to co\
nsult, and failed to )Tj
T*
(return.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Saad obtained a jeep, a letter of authority from the archaeologica\
l officer of the Arab )Tj
T*
(Legion and some armed men and drove to the first Ta'amireh camp he could\
find, outside )Tj
T*
(Bethlehem. The next morning, as he was driving into Bethlehem, he saw on\
e of the men who )Tj
T*
(had approached him the day before. Dispensing with all niceties, Saad pr\
oceeded to kidnap )Tj
T*
(the Bedouin:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( As the Jeep slewed to a stop, Saad called the man over and immedia\
tely demanded more )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( information about the cave. Fear came into the Arab's eyes and he \
made as if to move on. )Tj
T*
(The )Tj
T*
( soldiers leapt down from the jeep and barred his way. Then, at a n\
od from Saad they )Tj
T*
(lifted the )Tj
T*
( man bodily and pushed him into the back of the truck. The driver l\
et in the clutch and )Tj
T*
(they roared )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( off back the way they had come.)Tj
11 0 0 11 209.705 408.2825 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 388.2625 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Subjected to this sort of persuasion, the Bedouin agreed to cooperate. S\
aad obtained )Tj
T*
(reinforcements from a nearby military post, and the contingent headed of\
f down the Wadi )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Ta'amireh towards the Dead Sea. When the terrain became impassable, they\
abandoned the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(jeep and began to walk. They walked for seven hours, until they came to \
a wadi with walls )Tj
T*
(hundreds of feet high. Far up in the cliff-face, two large caves could b\
e seen, with clouds of )Tj
T*
(dust issuing from them - the Bedouin were already inside, collecting wha\
t they could. At )Tj
T*
(Saad's arrival, a number of them emerged. The soldiers accompanying Saad\
fired into the air )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and the Bedouin dispersed. Of the two caves, one, when the soldiers reac\
hed it, proved to be )Tj
T*
(huge - twenty feet wide, twelve to fifteen feet high and extending some \
150 feet back into the )Tj
T*
(cliff. It was the next morning before Saad got back to Jerusalem. Exhaus\
ted after his )Tj
T*
(expedition \(which had included fourteen hours of walking\), he went to \
sleep. He woke later )Tj
T*
(in the day to find Jerusalem in a state of upheaval. Friends of the Bedo\
uin had spread the )Tj
T*
(news of his 'kidnapping' and incarceration. One commentator observed aft\
erwards that it was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('perhaps' a mistake to have used force: this served to drive documents u\
nderground and made )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the Bedouin more reluctant to relinquish what they found.)Tj
11 0 0 11 328.89 142.87 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 122.85 Tm
( Saad's expedition led to the discovery of four caves at Wadi Murab\
ba'at, just over eleven )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(miles south of Qumran and some two miles inland from the Dead Sea. The m\
aterial found )Tj
T*
(here was less difficult to date and identify than that from Qumran, but \
of nearly comparable )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(import. It derived from the early 2nd century ad - more specifically, fr\
om the revolt in Judaea )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(orchestrated by Simeon bar Kochba between ad 132 and 135. It included tw\
o letters signed )Tj
T*
(by Simeon himself and furnished new data on the logistics, economics and\
civil )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(21 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
667 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 683.262 520 82.738 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.762 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.724 520 132.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.224 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.224 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.224 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.224 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.724 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.224 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.724 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 285.811 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 269.311 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 185.36 520 83.951 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 149.36 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.85 Tm
(administration of the rebellion, which had come within a hair's-breadth \
of success - Simeon )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(actually captured Jerusalem from the Romans and held the city for some t\
wo years. )Tj
T*
(According to Robert Eisenman, this insurrection was a direct continuatio\
n of events dating )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(from the previous century - events which involved certain of the same fa\
milies, many of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(same underlying principles, and perhaps also Jesus himself.)Tj
T*
( Shortly after the discovery of the caves at Murabba'at, activity a\
round Qumran began to )Tj
T*
(gather momentum. Having returned from Europe, Father de Vaux began to ex\
cavate the site, )Tj
T*
(together with Harding and fifteen workers. These excavations were to con\
tinue for the next )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(five years, until 1956. Among other things, they exhumed a complex of bu\
ildings, which )Tj
T*
(were identified as the 'Essene community' spoken of by Pliny.)Tj
T*
( Pliny himself perished in ad 79, in the eruption of Vesuvius which\
buried Pompeii and )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Herculaneum. Of his works, only the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Natural History )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(survives - which, however, deals with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(both the topography and certain events in Judaea. Pliny's sources are un\
known, but his text )Tj
T*
(refers to the sack of Jerusalem in AD 68, and must therefore have been c\
omposed some time )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(after that. There was even for a time a legend, now discredited, that, l\
ike Josephus, he )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(accompanied the Roman army on its invasion of Palestine. In any case, Pl\
iny is one of the )Tj
T*
(few ancient writers not just to mention the Essenes by name, but to loca\
te them )Tj
T*
(geographically. He locates them, quite specifically, on the shores of th\
e Dead Sea:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( On the west side of the Dead Sea, but out of range of the noxious \
exhalations of the coast, )Tj
T*
(is the )Tj
T*
( solitary tribe of the Essenes, which is remarkable beyond all the \
other tribes in the whole )Tj
T*
(world, as )Tj
T*
( it has no women and has renounced all sexual desire, has no money,\
and has only palm-)Tj
T*
(trees for )Tj
T*
( company. Day by day the throng of refugees is recruited to an equa\
l number by numerous )Tj
T*
( accessions of persons tired of life and driven thither by the wave\
s of fortune to adopt their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( manners . . . Lying below the Essenes was formerly the town of Eng\
edi . . . next comes )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( Masada.)Tj
11 0 0 11 76.825 293.9189 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 273.8988 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(De Vaux took this passage as referring to Qumran, assuming that 'below t\
he Essenes' means )Tj
T*
('down', or to the south. The Jordan, he argued, flows 'down', or south, \
to the Dead Sea; and if )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(one continues further south, one does indeed come to the site of Engedi.\
)Tj
11 0 0 11 406.3987 226.5063 Tm
(14 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 420.1487 222.9864 Tm
(Other scholars )Tj
-29.829 -1.2 Td
(dispute de Vaux's contention, maintaining that 'lying below' is to be un\
derstood literally - that )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(the Essene community was situated in the hills )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(above )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Engedi.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Whether Qumran was indeed Pliny's community or not, de Vaux was sp\
urred on to )Tj
T*
(further efforts. In the spring of 1952, he endeavoured to wrest the init\
iative from the Bedouin )Tj
T*
(and make a systematic survey of all caves in the vicinity. The survey wa\
s conducted between )Tj
T*
(10 and 22 March 1952 by de Vaux, three other members of the Ecole Bibliq\
ue and William )Tj
T*
(Reed, the new director of the Albright Institute. They were accompanied \
by a team of twenty-)Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(four Bedouin under the authority of three Jordanian and Palestinian arch\
aeologists.)Tj
11 0 0 11 466.3488 93.0552 Tm
(15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 477.3488 89.5352 Tm
( Not )Tj
-33.989 -1.2 Td
(surprisingly, perhaps, it was the Bedouin who did all the work, clamberi\
ng up the steep, often )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(precipitous cliff-faces and exploring caves. The archaeologists preferre\
d to remain below, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(compiling inventories, drawing up maps and charts. As a result, the surv\
ey was not very )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(22 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
668 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 715.948 520 50.052 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 615.535 520 100.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 467.035 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 384.535 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.035 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 334.989 520 33.046 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 317.077 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 300.577 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 185.077 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 69.577 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 33.577 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.5352 Tm
(comprehensive. The Bedouin, for example, chose not to divulge the existe\
nce of certain )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(caves they had found. Several scrolls did not come to light until much l\
ater. And one is )Tj
T*
(known never to have been recovered from the Bedouin.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Altogether, the survey encompassed some five miles of cliff-face. \
It examined 267 sites )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(according to de Vaux, 273 sites according to William Reed. According to \
de Vaux, it yielded )Tj
T*
(thirty-seven caves containing pottery. According to Reed, it yielded thi\
rty-nine. The official )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(map produced at the conclusion of the expedition shows forty.)Tj
11 0 0 11 352.9388 656.6427 Tm
(16)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 363.9388 653.1227 Tm
( Shards were found for more )Tj
-25.741 -1.2 Td
(than a hundred jars, a highly speculative figure. Such imprecision is ty\
pical of Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(research.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( But if the 1952 survey was amateurish, it also produced one genuin\
ely important )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(discovery. On 20 March, two days before the end of the survey, in the si\
te designated Cave 3, )Tj
T*
(a research team found two scrolls - or, rather, two fragments of the sam\
e scroll - of rolled )Tj
T*
(copper. The writing on it had been punched into the metal. Oxidisation h\
ad rendered the )Tj
T*
(metal too brittle to be unrolled. Before it could be read, the scroll wo\
uld have to be sliced )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(open in a laboratory. Three and a half years were to pass before the Jor\
danian authorities )Tj
T*
(allowed this to be done. When they at last consented, the cutting was pe\
rformed in )Tj
T*
(Manchester under the auspices of John Allegro, a member of de Vaux's tea\
m. The first )Tj
T*
(segment of the scroll was finished in summer 1955, the second in January\
1956.)Tj
T*
( The scroll proved to be an inventory of treasure - a compilation o\
r listing of gold, silver, )Tj
T*
(ritual vessels and other scrolls. Apparently, at the commencement of the\
Roman invasion, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(this treasure had been divided into a number of secret caches; and the '\
Copper Scroll', as it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(came to be known, detailed the contents and whereabouts of each such cac\
he. Thus, for )Tj
T*
(example:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(item 7)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(. In the cavity of the Old House of Tribute, in the Platform of the Ch\
ain: sixty-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(five bars of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( gold.)Tj
11 0 0 11 58.51 325.1844 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 305.1644 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(According to researchers, the total hoard would have amounted to some si\
xty-five tons of )Tj
T*
(silver and perhaps twenty-six of gold. To this day, there is some argume\
nt as to whether the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(treasure ever in fact existed. Most scholars, however, are prepared to a\
ccept that it did and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that the scroll comprises an accurate inventory of the Temple of Jerusal\
em. Unfortunately, )Tj
T*
(the locations indicated by the scroll have been rendered meaningless by \
time, change and the )Tj
T*
(course of two millennia, and nothing of the treasure has ever been found\
. A number of )Tj
T*
(people, certainly, have searched for it.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In September 1952, six months after the official survey, there sur\
faced a new source of )Tj
T*
(scrolls. It proved to be a cave within some fifty feet of the actual rui\
ns of Qumran, which de )Tj
T*
(Vaux and Harding had excavated in 1951. Here, at the site demarcated Cav\
e 4, the largest )Tj
T*
(discovery of all was made - again, predictably, by the Bedouin. Some yea\
rs would be )Tj
T*
(required to piece this material together. By 1959, however, most of the \
fragments had been )Tj
T*
(organised. The work was conducted in a large room, which came to be know\
n as the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Scrollery', in the Rockefeller Museum.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The Rockefeller Museum - or, to give it its official name, the Pal\
estine Archaeological )Tj
T*
(Museum - had first opened in 1938, during the British mandate, and was b\
uilt from funds )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(23 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
669 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 550.087 520 215.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.087 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 401.587 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 218.675 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 53.675 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 17.675 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(donated by John D. Rockefeller. It contained not only exhibition space, \
but also laboratories, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(photographic dark-rooms and the offices of the Department of Antiquities\
. Shortly before the )Tj
T*
(mandate ended in 1948, the museum had been turned over to an internation\
al board of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(trustees. This board was made up of representatives of the various forei\
gn archaeological )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(schools in Jerusalem - the French Ecole Biblique, for example, the Ameri\
can Albright )Tj
T*
(Institute, the British Palestine Exploration Society. For eighteen years\
, the Rockefeller was to )Tj
T*
(exist as an independently endowed institution. It managed to retain this\
status even through )Tj
T*
(the Suez Crisis of 1956, when many of its staff were recalled to their h\
ome countries. The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(only casualties of the crisis were Gerald Lankester Harding, dismissed f\
rom his post as )Tj
T*
(director of the Department of Antiquities, and the scrolls themselves. D\
uring hostilities, they )Tj
T*
(were removed from the museum, placed into thirty-six cases and locked up\
in a bank in )Tj
T*
(Amman. They were not returned to Jerusalem until March 1957, 'some of th\
em slightly )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(moldy [sic] and spotted from the damp vault'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 260.7175 558.195 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 538.175 Tm
(In 1966, however, the Rockefeller, with the scrolls it contained, was of\
ficially nationalised by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the Jordanian government. This move was to have important repercussions.\
It was also of )Tj
T*
(questionable legality. The museum's board of trustees did not object, ho\
wever. On the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(contrary, the president of the board transferred the museum's endowment \
fund from London, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(where it had been invested, to Amman. Thus the scrolls and the museum ho\
using them )Tj
T*
(became, in effect, Jordanian property.)Tj
T*
( A year later, the Middle East erupted in the Six Day War, and Jord\
anian East Jerusalem )Tj
T*
(fell to Israeli troops. At five o'clock on the morning of 6 June 1967, Y\
igael Yadin was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(informed that the museum had been occupied by an Israeli paratroop unit.\
)Tj
T*
( After becoming, in 1949, chief of staff of the Israeli Defence For\
ces, Yadin had resigned )Tj
T*
(in 1952 and studied archaeology at Hebrew University, earning his PhD in\
1955 with a thesis )Tj
T*
(on one of the Dead Sea Scrolls. That year he began teaching at Hebrew Un\
iversity. In 1954 )Tj
T*
(he had travelled to the USA on a lecture tour. There, after speaking at \
Johns Hopkins )Tj
T*
(University, he met Professor William F. Albright and asked why the Ameri\
can had published )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(only three of Metropolitan Samuel's four scrolls. Albright replied that \
Samuel was anxious to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(sell the scrolls and would not allow the fourth to be published until a \
purchaser had been )Tj
T*
(found for all of them. Could a purchaser not be found in the States, Yad\
in asked: 'Surely a )Tj
T*
(few million dollars for such a purpose is not too difficult to raise.' A\
lbright's reply was )Tj
T*
(astonishing. The scrolls, he said, would probably sell for as little as \
half a million. Even so, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(however, no American institution or individual appeared to be interested\
.)Tj
11 0 0 11 412.8887 226.7825 Tm
(19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 206.7625 Tm
( There were, in fact, two reasons for this apparent apathy. In the \
first place, facsimile )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(editions of the first three scrolls had already been produced; and this,\
for most American )Tj
T*
(researchers, obviated the need for the originals. More significant, howe\
ver, was the legal )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(status of the scrolls' ownership. The Jordanian government had branded M\
etropolitan Samuel )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('a smuggler and a traitor', claiming he had had no right to take the scr\
olls out of Jordan; and )Tj
T*
(the Americans, by virtue of publishing the contraband texts, were accuse\
d of collusion in the )Tj
T*
('crime'. This, needless to say, deterred prospective purchasers, who had\
no desire to lay out a )Tj
T*
(substantial sum of money, only to find themselves embroiled in complex i\
nternational )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(litigation and, quite possibly, end up with nothing. Yadin, on the other\
hand, had no need to )Tj
T*
(fear the Jordanians. Relations between his country and theirs couldn't p\
ossibly sink any lower.)Tj
T*
( On 1 June, Yadin was telephoned by an Israeli journalist stationed\
in the States, who )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(24 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
670 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.461 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.461 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 467.549 520 116.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 251.636 520 215.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 169.136 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 152.636 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 136.136 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 119.636 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 103.136 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 86.636 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.636 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 20.636 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(called the advertisement in the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Wall Street Journal )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(to his attention. Yadin resolved )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(immediately to obtain the scrolls, but recognised that a direct approach\
might jeopardise )Tj
T*
(everything.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In consequence, he worked almost entirely through intermediaries, \
and it was a New )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(York banker who replied to the advertisement. A meeting was arranged for\
11 June 1954, a )Tj
T*
(price of $250,000 for the four scrolls was agreed on and a wealthy benef\
actor found to )Tj
T*
(provide the requisite money. After a number of frustrating delays, the t\
ransaction was )Tj
T*
(completed at the Waldorf Astoria on 1 July. Among those present was a di\
stinguished )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scholar, Professor Harry Orlinsky, whose role was to ensure the scrolls \
were indeed genuine. )Tj
T*
(In order to conceal any Israeli or Jewish interest in the deal, Orlinsky\
introduced himself as )Tj
T*
('Mr Green'.)Tj
T*
( The next day, 2 July, the scrolls were removed from the vault of t\
he Waldorf Astoria and )Tj
T*
(taken to the Israeli Consulate in New York. Each scroll was then sent ba\
ck to Israel )Tj
T*
(separately. Yadin returned home by ship, and a code was arranged to keep\
him informed of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(each scroll's safe arrival. Details of the transaction were kept secret \
for another seven months. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Not until 13 February 1955 did a press release reveal that Israel had ac\
quired the four scrolls )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(of Metropolitan Samuel.)Tj
11 0 0 11 144.8188 492.1564 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 155.8188 488.6364 Tm
( Along with the three scrolls previously purchased by Sukenik, )Tj
-10.605 -1.2 Td
(they are now in the Shrine of the Book, which was established specifical\
ly to house them.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( By the end of 1954, then, there were two entirely separate bodies \
of scroll material and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(two entirely separate cadres of experts working with them. In West Jerus\
alem, there were the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Israelis, addressing themselves to the scrolls acquired by Sukenik and Y\
adin. In East )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem, at the Rockefeller, there was a team of international scholar\
s operating under the )Tj
T*
(direction of de Vaux. Neither group communicated with the other. Neither\
had any contact )Tj
T*
(with the other. Neither knew what the other possessed or what the other \
was doing, except for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(what leaked out in scholarly journals. In several instances, specific te\
xts were fragmented, )Tj
T*
(some pieces being in Israeli hands, some at the Rockefeller - which made\
it, of course, that )Tj
T*
(much more difficult to obtain any sense of the whole. So ridiculous was \
the situation that )Tj
T*
(certain individuals were tempted to do something about it. Former Major-\
General Ariel )Tj
T*
(Sharon reported that, in the late 1950s, he and Moshe Dayan devised a pl\
an for an )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(underground raid on the Rockefeller, to be conducted through Jerusalem's\
sewer system.)Tj
11 0 0 11 497.0663 276.2439 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 508.0663 272.7239 Tm
( )Tj
-36.223 -1.2 Td
(The plan, needless to say, was never implemented.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Now, however, in 1967, hearing of the capture of the Rockefeller, \
Yadin immediately )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dispatched three colleagues from Hebrew University to ensure that the sc\
rolls were safe. He )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(recognised the implications of what had happened. Because the Rockefelle\
r Museum was no )Tj
T*
(longer an international institution, but a Jordanian one, it would pass \
into Israeli hands as a )Tj
T*
(spoil of war.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
25 0 0 25 263.75 64.894 Tm
(2)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(25 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
671 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 736 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 719.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 703 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 571 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.675 520 118.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 370.175 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 238.136 520 132.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 139.136 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 103.136 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 151.25 744.2707 Tm
(The International Team)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 724.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(Yigael Yadin recounted the events of 1967 to David Pryce-Jones in an int\
erview conducted )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(early in 1968. He was aware, he said, that other scrolls were around, an\
d that Kando, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dealer involved in the original discovery, knew where they were. He ther\
efore sent other staff )Tj
T*
(members from Hebrew University, accompanied by three officers, to Kando'\
s house in )Tj
T*
(Bethlehem. Kando was taken under escort to Tel Aviv. When he emerged aft\
er five days of )Tj
T*
(interrogation, he took the officers back to his home and produced a scro\
ll which had been )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(hidden there for six years. This proved to be an extremely important dis\
covery - the 'Temple )Tj
T*
(Scroll', first published in 1977.!)Tj
T*
( Pryce-Jones also interviewed Father de Vaux, who was highly indign\
ant at what had )Tj
T*
(occurred. According to Pryce-Jones, de Vaux called the Israelis 'Nazis':\
'His face flushed as )Tj
T*
(he claimed the Israelis would use the conquest of Jerusalem as a pretext\
to move all the Dead )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Sea Scrolls from the Rockefeller and house them in their Shrine of the B\
ook. ')Tj
11 0 0 11 439.055 511.695 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 444.555 508.175 Tm
( He also )Tj
-31.604 -1.2 Td
(feared for both his own position and his access to the Qumran texts, bec\
ause, as Pryce-Jones )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(discovered, 'Father de Vaux had refused to allow any Jews to work on the\
scrolls in the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Rockefeller\222.)Tj
11 0 0 11 82.16 460.7825 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 440.7625 Tm
( De Vaux's fears, in fact, proved groundless. In the political and \
military aftermath of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Six Day War, the Israelis had other matters on their plate. Yadin and Pr\
ofessor Biran, who )Tj
T*
(from 1961 to 1974 was director of the Israeli Department of Antiquities,\
were therefore )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(prepared to maintain the status quo, and de Vaux was left in charge of t\
he scrolls, with the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(stipulation that their publication be speeded up.)Tj
T*
( A cache of some eight hundred scrolls had been discovered in Cave \
4 in 1952. To deal )Tj
T*
(with the sheer quantity of this material, an international committee of \
scholars had been )Tj
T*
(formed, each member of which was assigned certain specific texts for stu\
dy, interpretation, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(translation and eventual publication. Owing nominal allegiance to the Jo\
rdanian Department )Tj
T*
(of Antiquities, the committee in reality functioned under the virtually \
supreme authority of )Tj
T*
(Father de Vaux. He subsequently became editor-in-chief of the definitive\
series on the Dead )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Sea Scrolls, the multi-volume )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Discoveries in the Judaean Desert, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(published by Oxford )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(University Press. He was to retain his prominence in the field until his\
death in 1971.)Tj
T*
( Roland de Vaux was born in Paris in 1903 and studied for the pries\
thood between 1925 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and 1928 at the seminary of Saint Sulpice, learning Arabic and Aramaic i\
n the process. In )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1929, he joined the Dominican Order, under whose auspices he was sent to\
the Ecole )Tj
T*
(Biblique in Jerusalem. He began teaching regularly at the Ecole in 1934 \
and served as its )Tj
T*
(director from 1945 until 1965. Between 1938 and 1953, he edited the Ecol\
e's magazine, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Revue biblique.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
( To those who met or knew him, de Vaux was a striking and memorable\
personality, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(something of a 'character'. A heavy smoker, he wore a bushy beard, glass\
es and a dark beret. )Tj
T*
(He also, invariably, wore his white monk's robes, even on excavations. A\
charismatic man, )Tj
T*
(known for his vigour and enthusiasm, he was an eloquent lecturer and an \
engaging raconteur, )Tj
T*
(with a flair for public relations. This made him an ideal spokesman for \
the enterprise on )Tj
T*
(which he was engaged. One of his former colleagues described him to us a\
s a good scholar, if )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(26 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
672 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 499.175 520 151.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.175 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 301.175 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 268.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 218.675 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 152.675 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 37.175 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 1.175 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(not a particularly good archaeologist.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( But behind his personable fa\347ade, de Vaux was ruthless, narrow-\
minded, bigoted and )Tj
T*
(fiercely vindictive. Politically, he was decidedly right-wing. In his yo\
uth, he had been a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(member of Action Franchise, the militant Catholic and nationalist moveme\
nt which )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(burgeoned in France between the two world wars, which extolled the cult \
of 'blood and soil' )Tj
T*
(and expressed more than a little sympathy for the dictatorships in Germa\
ny, Italy and, on )Tj
T*
(Franco's triumph, Spain. )Tj
T*
( Certainly he was ill-suited to preside over research on the Dead S\
ea Scrolls. In the first )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(place, he was not just a practising Catholic, but also a monk, and this \
could hardly conduce to )Tj
T*
(balance or impartiality in his handling of extremely sensitive, even exp\
losive, religious )Tj
T*
(material. Moreover, he was hostile to Israel as a political entity, alwa\
ys referring to the )Tj
T*
(country as 'Palestine'. On a more personal level, he was also anti-Semit\
ic. One of his former )Tj
T*
(colleagues testifies to his resentment at Israelis attending his lecture\
s. After interviewing de )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Vaux, David Pryce-Jones stated that 'I found him an irascible brute, sli\
ghtly potty too.')Tj
11 0 0 11 485.4612 541.695 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 490.9612 538.175 Tm
( )Tj
-34.979 -1.2 Td
(According to Magen Broshi, currently director of the Israeli Shrine of t\
he Book, 'de Vaux )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(was a rabid anti-Semite and a rabid anti-Israeli - but was the best part\
ner one could ask for'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 513.47 507.2825 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 487.2625 Tm
( This was the man, then, to whom responsibility for the Dead Sea Sc\
rolls was entrusted. In )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1953, the board of trustees of the Rockefeller Museum, whose president a\
t the time was de )Tj
T*
(Vaux himself, had requested nominations from the various foreign archaeo\
logical schools - )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(British, French, German and American - then active in Jerusalem. No Isra\
elis were invited, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(despite the proximity of the well-trained staff of Hebrew University. Ea\
ch school was asked )Tj
T*
(for funds to help sustain the cost of the work.)Tj
T*
( The first scholar to be appointed under de Vaux's authority was Pr\
ofessor Frank Cross, )Tj
T*
(then associated with McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago and with \
the Albright )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Institute in Jerusalem. Cross was the Albright's nominee, and began to w\
ork in Jerusalem in )Tj
T*
(the summer of 1953. The material assigned to him consisted of specifical\
ly biblical texts - )Tj
T*
(scroll commentaries, that is, found in Cave 4 at Qumran, on the various \
books of the Old )Tj
T*
(Testament.)Tj
T*
( Material of a similar nature was assigned to Monsignor Patrick Ske\
han, also from the )Tj
T*
(United States. At the time of his appointment, he was director of the Al\
bright Institute.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Father Jean Starcky, from France, was nominated by the Ecole Biblique. A\
t the time, he was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(attached to the Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique. Starcky, \
an expert in Aramaic, )Tj
T*
(was assigned the corpus of material in that language.)Tj
T*
( Dr Claus-Hunno Hunzinger was nominated by the Germans. He was assi\
gned one )Tj
T*
(particular text, known as the 'War Scroll', as well as a body of materia\
l transcribed on )Tj
T*
(papyrus rather than on parchment. He subsequently left the team and was \
eventually replaced )Tj
T*
(by another French priest, Father Maurice Baillet.)Tj
T*
( Father Josef Milik, a Polish priest resettled in France, was anoth\
er nominee of the Ecole )Tj
T*
(Biblique, with which he was also affiliated. A disciple and close confid\
ant of de Vaux, Milik )Tj
T*
(received an especially important corpus of material. It included a quant\
ity of Old Testament )Tj
T*
(apocrypha. It also included 'pseudepigraphical' writings - texts in whic\
h a later commentator )Tj
T*
(would try to impart authority to his words by ascribing them to earlier \
prophets and )Tj
T*
(patriarchs. Most important of all, it included what was called 'sectaria\
n material' - material )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(pertaining specifically to the community at Qumran, their teachings, rit\
uals and disciplines.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(27 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
673 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 650.461 520 115.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.461 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.461 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 220.049 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 203.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 187.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 151.049 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( The British nominee to the team was John M. Allegro, then working \
for his doctorate at )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Oxford under Professor Godfrey R. Driver. Allegro went to Jerusalem as a\
n agnostic. He was )Tj
T*
(the only member of the team not to have specific religious affiliations.\
He was also the only )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(philologist in the group and already had five publications to his credit\
in academic journals. )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(He was thus the only one to have established a reputation for himself )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(before )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(working on the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scrolls. All the others were unknown at the time, and made their names o\
nly through their )Tj
T*
(work with the texts assigned them.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Allegro was assigned biblical commentaries \(which proved in fact \
to be 'sectarian )Tj
T*
(material' of the kind assigned to Milik\) and a body of so-called 'wisdo\
m literature' - hymns, )Tj
T*
(psalms, sermons and exhortations of a moral and poetic character. Allegr\
o's material seems to )Tj
T*
(have been rather more explosive than anyone at the time had anticipated,\
and he himself was )Tj
T*
(something of a maverick. He had, certainly, no compunction about breakin\
g the 'consensus' )Tj
T*
(de Vaux was trying to establish and, as we shall see, was soon to be ous\
ted from the team and )Tj
T*
(replaced by John Strugnell, also enrolled in a doctoral programme at Oxf\
ord. Strugnell )Tj
T*
(became a disciple of Frank Cross.)Tj
T*
( According to what principles was the material divided, distributed\
and assigned? How )Tj
T*
(was it determined who would deal with what? Professor Cross, when asked \
this question on )Tj
T*
(the telephone, replied that the matter was resolved with 'discussion and\
easy consensus and )Tj
T*
(with the blessing of de Vaux':)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( Certain things were obvious; those of us who had full-time profess\
orships could not take )Tj
T*
(unknown )Tj
T*
( and more complex problems. So we took biblical, the simplest mater\
ial from the point of )Tj
T*
(view of )Tj
T*
( identification of material and putting stuff into columns and what\
-not. The people who )Tj
T*
(were )Tj
T*
( specialists in Aramaic, particularly Starcky - obviously the Arama\
ic stuff went to him. )Tj
T*
(The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( interests of the several scholars, the opportunities for research,\
pretty much laid out what )Tj
T*
(each of )Tj
T*
( us would do. This was quickly agreed to and de Vaux gave his bless\
ing. We didn't sit )Tj
T*
(down and )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( vote and there was no conflict in this. Basically the team worked \
by consensus.)Tj
11 0 0 11 466.3625 228.1564 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 208.1364 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( Professor Cross makes it clear that each member of the team knew w\
hat all the others )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(were doing. All the material had been laid out and arranged in a single \
room, the 'Scrollery', )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and anyone was free to wander about and see how his colleagues were prog\
ressing.* They )Tj
T*
(would also, of course, help one another on problems requiring one or ano\
ther individual's )Tj
T*
(special expertise. But this also meant that if any one of the team were \
dealing with )Tj
T*
(controversial or explosive material, all the others would know. On this \
basis, Allegro, to the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(end of his life, was to insist that important and controversial material\
was being withheld, or )Tj
T*
(at least delayed in its release, by his colleagues. Another independent-\
minded scholar who )Tj
T*
(later became involved reports that he was in the 1960s instructed 'to go\
slow', to proceed in a )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(28 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
674 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 715.087 520 50.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 698.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 682.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.087 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 517.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 401.587 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 218.675 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 182.675 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.675 Tm
(deliberately desultory fashion 'so that the crazies will get tired and g\
o away'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 430.0488 756.195 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 435.5488 752.675 Tm
( De Vaux )Tj
-30.949 -1.2 Td
(wanted, so far as it was possible, to avoid embarrassing the Christian e\
stablishment. Some of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the Qumran material was clearly deemed capable of doing precisely that.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(_______)Tj
T*
(* 'Scrollery' was a large room containing some twenty trestle tables whe\
re scroll fragments )Tj
T*
(were pressed under sheets of glass. Photographs dating from the 1950s sh\
ow a complete and )Tj
T*
(appalling lack of any environmental control for the material, much of wh\
ich was already )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(deteriorating. Windows are open, for example, curtains blowing in the br\
eeze. No attempt has )Tj
T*
(been made to exclude heat, humidity, wind, dust or direct sunlight. It i\
s all a far cry from the )Tj
T*
(conditions in which the scrolls are housed today. They are now in a base\
ment room, under a )Tj
T*
(special amber light. Temperature and humidity are rigorously controlled.\
Each fragment is )Tj
T*
(held between sheets of thin silk stretched in perspex frames.)Tj
T*
(_______)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( It was certainly convenient for de Vaux that until 1967 the Rockef\
eller Museum lay in the )Tj
T*
(Jordanian territory of East Jerusalem. Israelis were forbidden to cross \
into the sector, and this )Tj
T*
(provided the anti-Semitic de Vaux with a handy pretext to exclude Israel\
i experts, even )Tj
T*
(though his team of international scholars was supposed, at least theoret\
ically, to reflect the )Tj
T*
(widest diversity of interests and approaches. If politics kept the Israe\
lis out of East Jerusalem, )Tj
T*
(they could easily have been provided with photographs, or with some othe\
r access to the )Tj
T*
(material. No such access was granted.)Tj
T*
( We raised the issue with Professor Biran, governor of the Israeli \
sector of Jerusalem at )Tj
T*
(the time and subsequently director of the Israeli Department of Antiquit\
ies. He stated that the )Tj
T*
(Jordanian authorities had been adamant in refusing to let Sukenik, or an\
y other Israeli )Tj
T*
(scholar, enter their sector of Jerusalem. In his capacity of governor, B\
iran had replied by )Tj
T*
(authorising de Vaux's committee to meet in the Israeli sector and offeri\
ng them safe )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(conducts. The offer was refused. Biran then suggested that individual sc\
rolls or fragments be )Tj
T*
(brought over, to be examined by Israeli experts. This suggestion was sim\
ilarly rejected. 'Of )Tj
T*
(course they could have come,' Professor Biran concluded, 'but they felt \
that they had )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(possession [of the scrolls] and would not let anyone else take them.')Tj
11 0 0 11 382.9138 259.7825 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 388.4138 256.2625 Tm
( In the existing political )Tj
-27.521 -1.2 Td
(climate, the scrolls were a fairly low priority, and no official pressur\
e was brought to bear on )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(this academic intransigence.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The situation was rendered even more absurd by the fact that the I\
sraelis, first at Hebrew )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(University and then at the specially created Shrine of the Book, had sev\
en important scrolls )Tj
T*
(of their own - the three originally purchased by Sukenik, and the four Y\
igael Yadin managed )Tj
T*
(to purchase in New York. The Israelis seem to have pursued and published\
their research )Tj
T*
(more or less responsibly - they were, after all, accountable to Yadin an\
d Biran, to the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(government, to public opinion and the academic world in general. But the\
team at the )Tj
T*
(Rockefeller emerge in a rather less favourable light. Funded by substant\
ial donations, )Tj
T*
(enjoying time, leisure and freedom, they convey the impression of an exc\
lusive club, a self-)Tj
T*
(proclaimed elite, almost medieval in their attitude to, and their monopo\
lisation of, the )Tj
T*
(material. The 'Scrollery' in which they conducted their research has a q\
uasi-monastic )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(atmosphere about it. One is reminded again of the sequestration of learn\
ing in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Name of )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(29 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
675 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 682.049 520 83.951 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 632.549 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 616.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.049 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.049 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 517.049 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 484.049 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 466.136 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 449.636 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 383.636 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 218.482 520 165.155 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 201.982 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 185.482 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 149.482 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(the Rose. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(And the 'experts' granted access to the 'Scrollery' arrogated such power\
and prestige )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to themselves that outsiders were easily convinced of the justness of th\
eir attitude. As )Tj
T*
(Professor James B. Robinson \(director of another, more responsible, tea\
m which translated )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the texts found in the Egyptian desert at Nag Hammadi\) said to us: 'Man\
uscript discoveries )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(bring out the worst instincts in otherwise normal scholars.')Tj
11 0 0 11 331.3788 690.1564 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 670.1364 Tm
( If the international team were high-handed in monopolising their m\
aterial, they were no )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(less so in interpreting it. In 1954, just when the team were beginning t\
heir work, the dangers )Tj
T*
(had already been anticipated, by a Jesuit scholar, Robert North:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Regarding the date of the scrolls, or rather the triple date of th\
eir composition, )Tj
T*
(transcription, and )Tj
T*
( storage, there has recently attained a relative consensus which is\
both reassuring and )Tj
T*
(disquieting. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( It is reassuring insofar as it proceeds from such a variety of con\
verging lines of evidence, )Tj
T*
(and )Tj
T*
( provides a 'working hypothesis' as basis of discussion. But there \
is danger of a false )Tj
T*
(security. It is )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( important to emphasize the frailty of the evidences themselves . .\
.)Tj
11 0 0 11 394.945 474.2439 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 454.2239 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( North's warnings were to be ignored. During the course of the subs\
equent decade, a )Tj
T*
('consensus' view - to use his term and Robert Eisenman's - was indeed to\
emerge, or be )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(imposed, by the international team working under de Vaux at the Rockefel\
ler. A rigid )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(orthodoxy of interpretation evolved, from which any deviation was tantam\
ount to heresy.)Tj
T*
( This orthodoxy of interpretation, which grew progressively more do\
gmatic over the )Tj
T*
(years, was enunciated in its entirety by Father Milik and published in F\
rance in 1957 under )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(the title )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Dix ans de d\351couvertes dans le d\351sert de Juda. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Two years later, Milik's work was to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(be translated into English by another member of de Vaux's international \
team, John Strugnell. )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(By that time, the first English formulation of the consensus view had al\
ready appeared \226 )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(Ancient Library of Qumran, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(by Professor Frank Cross, Strugnell's mentor, in 1958. The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(consensus view was summarised and given its final polishing touches by F\
ather De Vaux )Tj
T*
(himself in a series of lectures given to the British Academy in 1959 and\
published in 1961 as )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(L'arch\351ologie et les manuscrits de la Mer Morte. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(By then, its tenets were soundly entrenched. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Anyone who presumed to challenge them did so at severe risk to his credi\
bility.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(In 1971, on Father De Vaux's death, an extraordinary situation developed\
. Although he did )Tj
T*
(not in any legal sense own the scrolls, he nevertheless bequeathed his r\
ights to them to one of )Tj
T*
(his colleagues, Father Pierre Benoit, another Dominican and subsequently\
de Vaux's )Tj
T*
(successor as head of the international team and of the Ecole Biblique. F\
or Father Benoit )Tj
T*
(actually to inherit de Vaux's rights, privileges and prerogatives of acc\
ess and control was, as )Tj
T*
(a scholastic procedure, unprecedented. From a legal point of view, it wa\
s, to say the least, )Tj
T*
(extremely irregular. More extraordinary still, however, the scholarly wo\
rld did not contest )Tj
T*
(this 'transaction'. When we asked Professor Norman Golb of the Universit\
y of Chicago why )Tj
T*
(so dubious a procedure was allowed to occur, he replied that opposing it\
would have been 'a )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(30 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
676 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 748.087 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 616.087 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.087 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 166.311 520 284.776 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 130.311 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.675 Tm
(lost cause'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 69.7575 756.195 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 736.175 Tm
( With de Vaux's behaviour as a precedent, other members of his team\
followed suit. Thus, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(for example, when Father Patrick Skehan died in 1980, he bequeathed righ\
ts to the scrolls in )Tj
T*
(his custody to Professor Eugene Ulrich of Notre Dame University, Indiana\
. The scrolls that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(had been the preserve of Father Jean Starcky were similarly bequeathed -\
or, more )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(euphemistically, 'reassigned' - to Father Emile Puech of the Ecole Bibli\
que. Thus the Catholic )Tj
T*
(scholars at the core of the international team maintained their monopoly\
and control, and the )Tj
T*
(consensus remained unchallenged. Not until 1987, on the death of Father \
Benoit, were their )Tj
T*
(methods to be contested.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( When Father Benoit died, Professor John Strugnell was designated h\
is successor as head )Tj
T*
(of the international team. Born in Barnet, north London, in 1930, Strugn\
ell received his BA )Tj
T*
(in 1952 and his MA in 1955, both from Jesus College, Oxford. Although ad\
mitted to the PhD )Tj
T*
(programme at Oxford's Faculty of Oriental Studies, he never completed hi\
s doctorate, and his )Tj
T*
(candidature lapsed in 1958. In he had been admitted to de Vaux's team, h\
ad gone to )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem and remained there for two years. In 1957, after a brief stint\
at the Oriental )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Institute of the University of Chicago, he returned to Jerusalem, becomi\
ng affiliated with the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Rockefeller Museum where he worked as epigraphist until 1960. In that ye\
ar, he was )Tj
T*
(appointed Assistant Professor of Old Testament Studies at Duke Universit\
y's Divinity )Tj
T*
(School. In 1968, he moved to Harvard Divinity School as Professor of Chr\
istian Origins.)Tj
T*
( Strugnell's appointment as head of the international team was not \
entirely unimpeded. )Tj
T*
(Since 1967, the Israeli government had been legally authorised to ratify\
all such )Tj
T*
(appointments. In Father Benoit's case, the Israelis hadn't bothered to e\
xercise their authority. )Tj
T*
(In Strugnell's, for the first time, they asserted their own rights over \
the material. According to )Tj
T*
(Professor Shemaryahu Talmon, a member of the committee that vetted Strug\
nell, his )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(appointment was not ratified until certain conditions were met.)Tj
11 0 0 11 355.62 358.7825 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 366.62 355.2625 Tm
( Among other things, the )Tj
-25.936 -1.2 Td
(Israelis were troubled by the way in which certain members of the intern\
ational team tended )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to play the role of 'absentee landlord'. Since the 1967 war, for example\
, Father Starcky had )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(refused to set foot in Israel. Father Milik, de Vaux's closest confidant\
and protege, had for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(many years lived in Paris, with photographs of some of the most vital sc\
roll material, to )Tj
T*
(which he alone has access. No one else is allowed to make photographs. W\
ithout Milik's )Tj
T*
(consent, no one, not even on the international team, is allowed to publi\
sh on the material of )Tj
T*
(which he has custody. To our knowledge, he has never, since the 1967 war\
, returned to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Jerusalem to work on this material. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Time Magazine )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(describes him as 'elusive'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 436.9512 225.37 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 447.9512 221.85 Tm
( Another )Tj
-31.851 -1.203 Td
(publication, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Biblical Archaeology Review \(BAR\), )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(has twice reported that he refuses even to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(answer letters from the Israeli Department of Antiquities.)Tj
11 0 0 11 325.425 190.9189 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 336.425 187.3988 Tm
( He has treated both other )Tj
-23.74 -1.2 Td
(scholars and the general public with what can only be described as disda\
in.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Anxious to discourage such behaviour, the Israelis insisted that t\
he new director of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scroll project spend at least some of his time in Jerusalem. Strugnell, \
who was reconsidering )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(his position at Harvard in any case, complied by taking half-retirement \
from his post. He )Tj
T*
(began to spend half of each year in Jerusalem, at the Ecole Biblique, wh\
ere he had his own )Tj
T*
(quarters. But there were other obligations which he failed to discharge.\
He did not publish the )Tj
T*
(texts entrusted to him. His commentary on one of these texts - a fragmen\
t of 121 lines - has )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(been expected for more than five years and has still not appeared. He wr\
ote only one 27-page )Tj
T*
(article on the material in his possession. Apart from this, he published\
an article on Samaritan )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(31 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
677 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 665.311 520 100.689 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.311 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 416.399 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 299.486 520 116.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 200.409 520 99.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 164.409 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.3988 Tm
(inscriptions, a translation of Milik's study of Qumran and, as we shall \
see, a long and hostile )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(critique of the one member of the international team to challenge the in\
terpretation of the )Tj
T*
(consensus. It is not a very impressive record for a man who spent a life\
time working in a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(field which depends on publication. On the other hand, he allowed select\
ed graduate students )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to work on certain original texts for their doctoral degrees - thus earn\
ing prestige for them, )Tj
T*
(for their mentor and for Harvard University.)Tj
T*
( In general, under Strugnell's auspices, the international team pro\
ceeded pretty much as )Tj
T*
(they did before. It is interesting to compare their progress with that o\
f scholars working on a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(different corpus of texts, the so-called 'Gnostic Gospels' discovered in\
Egypt, at Nag )Tj
T*
(Hammadi.)Tj
T*
( The Nag Hammadi Scrolls were found two years before the Dead Sea S\
crolls, in 1945. )Tj
T*
(By 1948, they had all been purchased by the Cairo Coptic Museum. There w\
as initially an )Tj
T*
(attempt to establish a Qumran-style monopoly over the material, again by\
an enclave of )Tj
T*
(French scholars, and as a result, work on them was retarded until 1956. \
No sooner did it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(finally get under way than it was interrupted by the Suez crisis. After \
this delay, however, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scrolls were in 1966 turned over to an international team of scholars fo\
r translation and )Tj
T*
(publication. The head of this team was Professor James M. Robinson of th\
e Institute for )Tj
T*
(Antiquity and Christianity at Claremont Graduate School, California. Whe\
n we spoke to )Tj
T*
(Professor Robinson about the team in charge of the Qumran texts, he was \
scathing. The )Tj
T*
(Qumran scholars, Professor Robinson said, 'no longer have to make reputa\
tions - all they can )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(do is break them'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 107.185 424.5063 Tm
(15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 404.4864 Tm
( Professor Robinson and his team, in contrast, moved with impressiv\
e rapidity. Within )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(three years, a number of draft transcriptions and translations were bein\
g made available to )Tj
T*
(scholars. By 1973, the entire Nag Hammadi library was in draft English t\
ranslation and was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(circulating freely amongst interested researchers. In 1977, the whole bo\
dy of the Nag )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Hammadi codices was published, in facsimile and a popular edition - a to\
tal of forty-six )Tj
T*
(books plus some unidentified fragments. It thus took Robinson and his te\
am a mere eleven )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(years to bring the Nag Hammadi Scrolls into print.)Tj
11 0 0 11 289.18 307.5939 Tm
(16)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 287.5739 Tm
( Granted, the Qumran texts were more numerous and posed more comple\
x problems than )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(those from Nag Hammadi. But even allowing for this, the record of de Vau\
x's international )Tj
T*
(team does not exactly inspire confidence. When they were formed in 1953,\
their declared )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(objective and intention was to publish )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(all )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the scrolls found at Qumran in definitive editions, )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(forming a series to be issued by Oxford University Press as )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Discoveries in the Judaean )Tj
T*
(Desert of Jordan.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
( The first volume appeared quickly enough, in 1955, and dealt with \
the fragments found in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the original cave at Qumran, now officially designated Cave 1. Not until\
1961, six years later, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(did the next volume appear; and this did not deal with Qumran texts at a\
ll, but with material )Tj
T*
(found in the nearby caves of Murabba'at. In 1963, a third volume appeare\
d, which dealt )Tj
T*
(primarily with scroll fragments from Cave 2, Cave 3 and Caves 5-10. Of t\
hese fragments, the )Tj
T*
(most complete and most important was the 'Copper Scroll', found in Cave \
3. Apart from the )Tj
T*
('Copper Scroll', the lengthiest text amounted to just over sixty lines, \
and most came to )Tj
T*
(something between four and twelve lines. But the fragments also yielded \
two copies of a text )Tj
T*
(known as 'The Book of Jubilees'. A copy of the same text would later be \
found at Masada, )Tj
T*
(revealing that the defenders of the fortress used the same calendar as t\
he Qumran community, )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(32 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
678 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 732.409 520 33.591 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.87 520 181.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.87 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 286.87 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 120.381 520 166.49 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 103.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 87.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 51.381 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.4966 Tm
(and establishing closer connections between the two sites than de Vaux f\
elt comfortable )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(acknowledging.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( The fourth volume of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Discoveries in the Judaean Desert )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(appeared in 1965, under the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(editorship of James A. Sanders. But Professor Sanders was not a member o\
f de Vaux's team. )Tj
T*
(The scroll he dealt with - a volume of psalms - had been found by the Be\
douin in Cave 11 by )Tj
T*
(1956 and brought, along with a number of fragments, to the Rockefeller M\
useum. No )Tj
T*
(purchaser being forthcoming, the material was locked in one of the museu\
m's safes, to which )Tj
T*
(no one was allowed access. Here it remained until 1961, when the Albrigh\
t Institute was at )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(last enabled to buy it, finance being provided by Kenneth and Elizabeth \
Bechtel of the )Tj
T*
(Bechtel Corporation, a giant American construction company with many int\
erests in the )Tj
T*
(Middle East \(though none in Israel\), many connections with the America\
n government and at )Tj
T*
(least some associations with the CIA. Professor Sanders's volume thus ap\
peared )Tj
T*
(independently of the framework and timetable established by de Vaux's in\
ternational team.)Tj
T*
( In the meantime, however, the bulk of the most copious and most si\
gnificant material - )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the material found in the veritable treasure trove of Cave 4 - continued\
to be withheld from )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(both the public and the academic community. Now and again, small pieces \
and tantalising )Tj
T*
(fragments would leak into scholarly journals. But not until 1968 did the\
first official )Tj
T*
(publication of material from Cave 4, albeit a very small proportion, app\
ear. It did so under )Tj
T*
(the auspices of the one 'renegade' or 'heretic' on de Vaux's team, John \
Allegro.)Tj
T*
( As delays in releasing the Qumran material persisted, and the time\
between published )Tj
T*
(volumes continued to lengthen, suspicions began to proliferate that some\
thing was seriously )Tj
T*
(amiss. Critics voiced three suspicions in particular. It was suggested t\
hat de Vaux's team were )Tj
T*
(finding their material too difficult, too complex. It was also suggested\
that they might )Tj
T*
(deliberately be proceeding slowly, suppressing or at least retarding the\
release of certain )Tj
T*
(material in order to buy time. And it was suggested that the team were s\
imply lazy and idle, )Tj
T*
(basking in comfortable sinecures which they would obviously be in no hur\
ry to relinquish. It )Tj
T*
(was further pointed out that no such delays had occurred with the pieces\
of Qumran material )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in American and Israeli hands. In contrast to de Vaux's team, American a\
nd Israeli scholars )Tj
T*
(had wasted no time in bringing their material into print.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( The sixth volume )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(of Discoveries in the Judaean Desert )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(did not appear until 1977, nine )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(years after Allegro's work. A seventh volume was not issued until 1982, \
an eighth only in )Tj
T*
(1990 - and this latter did not deal with Qumran texts. As we have noted,\
draft translations of )Tj
T*
(Nag Hammadi codices were in circulation within three years. In the case \
of the Qumran )Tj
T*
(material, no such draft translations were ever made available by de Vaux\
's team, nor are they )Tj
T*
(so today. The entire Nag Hammadi corpus was in print within eleven years\
. It is now )Tj
T*
(approaching thirty-eight years since de Vaux's team began their work, an\
d they have so far )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(produced only eight volumes - less than twenty-five per cent of the mate\
rial in their hands.)Tj
11 0 0 11 508.74 161.5268 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 519.74 158.0068 Tm
( )Tj
-37.072 -1.203 Td
(As we shall see, moreover, of the material which )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(has )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(appeared in print, very little of it is the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(material that really matters.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(In an interview published in the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Robert Eisenman spoke of how 'a small )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(circle of scholars has been able to dominate a field of research for sev\
eral generations \(even )Tj
T*
(though some of these scholars have been defunct in this field for years\)\
and to continue to do )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(33 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
679 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 595.35 520 170.65 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 394.486 520 200.864 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 109.718 520 284.768 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 73.718 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(so through their control of graduate studies and placing their coterie o\
f students and scholars )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(in the most prestigious academic chairs'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 232.4475 739.695 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 243.4475 736.175 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Biblical Archaeological Review, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(an influential )Tj
-16.978 -1.2 Td
(journal published by the Washington lawyer Hershel Shanks, described de \
Vaux's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(international team as being 'governed, so far as can be ascertained, lar\
gely by convention, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(tradition, collegiality and inertia'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 193.1225 688.7825 Tm
(19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 204.1225 685.2625 Tm
( According to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the 'insiders' who hold the scrolls )Tj
-14.118 -1.2 Td
('have the goodies - to drip out bit by bit. This gives them status, scho\
larly power and a )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(wonderful ego trip. Why squander it?')Tj
11 0 0 11 218.6837 654.37 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 229.6837 650.85 Tm
( And at a conference on the scrolls at New York )Tj
-15.977 -1.2 Td
(University in 1985, Professor Morton Smith, one of the most distinguishe\
d names in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(contemporary biblical studies, began by saying scathingly: 'I thought to\
speak on the scandals )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(of the Dead Sea documents, but these proved too numerous, too familiar a\
nd too disgusting.')Tj
11 0 0 11 518.5025 603.4575 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 583.4375 Tm
( How have the members of the international team responded to such d\
amning )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(condemnation? Of the original international team assembled in 1953, only\
three at present )Tj
T*
(remain alive. Joseph Milik, who has since left the priesthood, maintains\
, as we have seen, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(life of an 'elusive' recluse in Paris. Professors John Strugnell and Fra\
nk Cross were at )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Harvard University Divinity School. Of these, Professor Cross proved the\
most accessible )Tj
T*
(and allowed himself to be questioned about the delays in publication. In\
an interview with the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(New York Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(he admitted that progress had 'generally been slow' and offered two )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(explanations. Most members of the team, he said, were engaged in full-ti\
me teaching and )Tj
T*
(could get to Jerusalem to work on the material only during summer holida\
ys. And the scrolls )Tj
T*
(that have not yet been published, he added, are so fragmented that it is\
difficult to fit them )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(together, much less translate them.)Tj
11 0 0 11 200.9462 420.5063 Tm
(22)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 211.9462 416.9864 Tm
( 'It's the world's most fantastic jig-saw puzzle,' he )Tj
-14.687 -1.303 Td
(remarked on another occasion.)Tj
11 0 0 11 178.7675 402.5939 Tm
(23)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 382.5739 Tm
( It would, of course, be rash to underestimate the complexity of th\
e work in which Cross )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and his colleagues were engaged. The myriad fragments of Qumran texts do\
indeed constitute )Tj
T*
(a daunting jigsaw puzzle. Nevertheless, Cross's explanations are not alt\
ogether convincing. It )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(is certainly true that members of the international team are active in t\
eaching and have only )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(limited time to spend in Jerusalem; but Cross did not mention that most \
of the work now )Tj
T*
(being done on the scrolls is done with photographs, which do not require\
the researcher to )Tj
T*
(travel anywhere. In fact, the state of photography at present often make\
s it easier, and more )Tj
T*
(reliable, to deal with photographs than with original parchments. As for\
the complexity of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(jigsaw, Cross himself contradicted his own argument. As early as 1958, h\
e wrote that most of )Tj
T*
(the scroll fragments then in the team's hands had already been identifie\
d -had been identified, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(in fact, by the summer of 1956.)Tj
11 0 0 11 182.6175 219.6814 Tm
(24)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 193.6175 216.1613 Tm
( According to John Allegro, writing in 1964, assembly and )Tj
-13.354 -1.2 Td
(identification of all Cave 4 material - the most copious corpus - was 'n\
early complete' by )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(1960/61.)Tj
11 0 0 11 58.51 185.2688 Tm
(25)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 69.51 181.7488 Tm
( Nor was the task of identifying material always as difficult as Cross m\
ight lead )Tj
-4.328 -1.2 Td
(one to believe. In a letter to John Allegro, dated 13 December 1955, Str\
ugnell wrote that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(\2433000 worth of Cave 4 material had just been purchased \(with Vatican\
funds\) and identified )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.305 TD
(in one afternoon.)Tj
11 0 0 11 104.3387 134.3254 Tm
(26)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 115.3387 130.8054 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Complete photographs of the material, he added, would require no more )Tj
-7.661 -1.2 Td
(than a week.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Even before he breached the consensus of the international team, A\
llegro was anxious to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(speed things up and sceptical of the various reasons proffered for not d\
oing so. But was it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(merely as a sop that de Vaux wrote to him on 22 March 1959 that all the \
Qumran texts would )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(be published, and )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Discoveries in the Judaean Desert )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(complete, by the middle of 1962, the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(34 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
680 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 667 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.5 520 379.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 271 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 238 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 205 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 175 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 145 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 128.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 112 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 76 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(date scheduled for StrugnelFs concluding volume? In the same letter, de \
Vaux stated that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(work on the original texts would be finished by June 1960, after which t\
hey would be turned )Tj
T*
(over to the various institutions that had paid for them. Today, more tha\
n thirty years after de )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Vaux's letter, survivors of his team and its new members still cling to \
the scrolls in their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(possession, insisting on the need for continued research. And, it is wor\
th repeating, what has )Tj
T*
(been voluntarily released is, for the most part, of least importance.)Tj
T*
( The Qumran texts are generally classified under two rubrics. On th\
e one hand, there is a )Tj
T*
(corpus of early copies of biblical texts, some with slightly variant rea\
dings. These are )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(referred to as 'biblical material'. On the other, there is a corpus of n\
on-biblical material )Tj
T*
(consisting for the most part of documents never seen before, which can b\
e labelled 'sectarian )Tj
T*
(material'. Most outsiders, needless to say, instinctively assume the 'bi\
blical material' to be of )Tj
T*
(the greater interest and consequence - the simple word 'biblical' trigge\
rs associations in the )Tj
T*
(mind which lead automatically to such a supposition. To our knowledge, E\
isenman was the )Tj
T*
(first to detect, and certainly the first to emphasise, the sophistry inv\
olved in this. For the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('biblical material' is perfectly innocuous and uncon-troversial, contain\
ing no revelations of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(any kind. It consists of little more than copies of books from the Old T\
estament, more or less )Tj
T*
(the same as those already in print or with only minor alterations. There\
is nothing radically )Tj
T*
(new here. In reality, the most significant texts comprise not the 'bibli\
cal' but the 'sectarian' )Tj
T*
(literature. It is these texts - rules, biblical commentaries, theologica\
l, astrological and )Tj
T*
(messianic treatises - that pertain to the 'sect' alleged to have resided\
at Qumran and to their )Tj
T*
(teachings. To label this material 'sectarian' is effectively and skilful\
ly to defuse interest in it. )Tj
T*
(Thus, it is portrayed as the idiosyncratic doctrine of a fringe and mave\
rick 'cult', a small, )Tj
T*
(highly unrepresentative congregation divorced from, and wholly periphera\
l to, the supposed )Tj
T*
(mainstream of Judaism and early Christianity, the phenomena to which it \
is in fact most )Tj
T*
(pertinent. Outsiders are thus manipulated into accepting the consensus \227\
that the Qumran )Tj
T*
(community were so-called Essenes and that the Essenes, while interesting\
as a marginal )Tj
T*
(development, have no real bearing on broader issues. The reality, as we \
shall see, is very )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(different, and the perfunctorily dismissed 'sectarian' texts will prove \
to contain material of an )Tj
T*
(explosive nature indeed.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
25 0 0 25 263.75 183.2577 Tm
(3)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-5.195 -1.201 Td
(The Scandal of the Scrolls)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 133.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 92.4319 Tm
(I)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 18.7525 92.4319 Tm
(ronically enough, it was not a biblical scholar, not an expert in the fi\
eld, but an outsider )Tj
-0.637 -1.407 Td
(who first detected something suspect in the international team's positio\
n. The outsider was )Tj
T*
(the distinguished American literary and cultural critic, Edmund Wilson, \
whom most )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(university students in Britain and the States will have encountered thro\
ugh his work in fields )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(35 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
681 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 649.807 520 116.193 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 418.691 520 231.116 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.191 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 352.691 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.191 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.191 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 252.278 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 235.778 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 169.778 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 153.278 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 120.278 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 87.278 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 54.278 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 18.278 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.5489 Tm
(far removed from Qumran and 1st-century Palestine. He is known for his o\
wn fiction - for )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(I)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Thought of Daisy )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and, particularly, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Memoirs of Hecate County. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(He is known as the author of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Axel's Castle, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(an original and pioneering study of the influence of French symbolism on\
20th-)Tj
T*
(century literature. He is known for )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(To the Finland Station, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(an account of Lenin's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(machinations and the Bolshevik hijacking of the Russian Revolution. And \
he is known for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the grotesque, highly publicised literary feud he precipitated with his \
former friend, Vladimir )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Nabokov, by presuming to challenge Nabokov's translation of Pushkin's )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Evgeny Onegin.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
( As his controversy with Nabokov demonstrated, Wilson had no compun\
ction about )Tj
T*
(venturing into waters beyond his officially acknowledged expertise. But \
perhaps it was just )Tj
T*
(such recklessness that Qumran research required - the perspective of an \
outsider, a man )Tj
T*
(capable of establishing some kind of overview. In any case, Wilson, in 1\
955, wrote a lengthy )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(article for the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New Yorker )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(on the Dead Sea Scrolls - an article which, for the first time, made )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the scrolls a 'household phrase' and generated interest in them from the\
general public. In the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(same year, Wilson expanded his article and published it as a book, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Scrolls from the Dead )Tj
T*
(Sea. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Fourteen years later, in 1969, this text was expanded again, to encompas\
s new material, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and was reissued at virtually twice its former length. To this day, it r\
emains one of the basic )Tj
T*
(and most popular investigative works on the Qumran scrolls by an outside\
r. But even if )Tj
T*
(Wilson was an outsider in the realm of biblical scholarship, he was cert\
ainly no mere amateur )Tj
T*
(or dabbler; not even de Vaux's international team could impugn his integ\
rity or 'high )Tj
T*
(seriousness'. Wilson was thus able, on behalf of the literate public, to\
call them in some sense )Tj
T*
(to account.)Tj
T*
( As early as 1955, Wilson detected a desire on the part of the 'exp\
erts' to distance the )Tj
T*
(Qumran scrolls from both Judaism and Christianity. The 'experts', it see\
med to him, were )Tj
T*
(protesting rather too vehemently, and this aroused his suspicions:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( As soon as one sets out to study the controversies provoked by the\
Dead Sea Scrolls, one )Tj
T*
( becomes aware of a certain 'tension'. . . But the tension does not\
all arise from the at first )Tj
T*
(much )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( disputed problems of dating, and the contention about the dating i\
tself had, perhaps, )Tj
T*
(behind it other )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( anxieties than the purely scholarly ones.)Tj
11 0 0 11 251.3537 260.3858 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 240.3658 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Wilson stressed how much the scrolls had in common with both rabbinical \
Judaism, as it was )Tj
T*
(emerging during the 1st century ad, and with the earliest forms of Chris\
tianity; and he noted a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(marked 'inhibition', on the part of both Judaic and Christian-oriented s\
cholars, to make the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(often obvious connections:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( One would like to see these problems discussed; and in the meantim\
e, one cannot but ask )Tj
T*
(oneself )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( whether the scholars who have been working on the scrolls - so man\
y of whom have )Tj
T*
(taken )Tj
T*
( Christian orders or have been trained in the rabbinical tradition \
- may not have been )Tj
T*
(somewhat )Tj
T*
( inhibited in dealing with such questions as these by their various\
religious )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(36 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
682 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 698.587 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 682.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 632.587 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 616.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.087 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.087 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 515.675 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 499.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 416.675 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 217.262 520 199.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 181.262 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(commitments . . . one )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( feels a certain nervousness, a reluctance, to take hold of the sub\
ject and to place it in )Tj
T*
(historical )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( perspective.)Tj
11 0 0 11 96.68 706.695 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 686.675 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(In accordance with scholarly decorum, Wilson is, of course, being tactfu\
l, couching a fairly )Tj
T*
(serious charge in the most diplomatic of language. He himself had no com\
punction about )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(taking hold of the subject and placing it in historical perspective:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( If, in any case, we look now at Jesus in the perspective supplied \
by the scrolls, we can )Tj
T*
(trace a )Tj
T*
( new continuity and, at last, get some sense of the drama that culm\
inated in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Christianity . . . The )Tj
T*
( monastery [of Qumran] . . . is perhaps, more than Bethlehem or Naz\
areth, the cradle of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( Christianity.)Tj
11 0 0 11 99.0038 523.7825 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 503.7625 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( It is, alas, characteristic and typical of biblical scholarship, a\
nd particularly of scholarship )Tj
T*
(associated with the scrolls, that such a connection should be made not b\
y the 'experts' in the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(field, but by an astute and informed observer. For it was Wilson who gav\
e precise and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(succinct expression to the very issues the international team endeavoure\
d so diligently to )Tj
T*
(avoid.)Tj
T*
( These imputations about the bias of most biblical scholars were ec\
hoed to us personally )Tj
T*
(by Philip Davies, Professor of Biblical Studies at the University of She\
ffield and author of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(two books on the Qumran material. As Professor Davies pointed out, most \
scholars working )Tj
T*
(with the scrolls were - and, for that matter, still are - Christian-orie\
nted, with a background )Tj
T*
(primarily in the New Testament. He knew a number, he said, whose researc\
h sometimes )Tj
T*
(conflicted painfully with their most passionately held personal beliefs,\
and questioned )Tj
T*
(whether objectivity, in such cases, was really possible. Professor Davie\
s stressed the )Tj
T*
(perennial confusion of theology with history. All too often, he said, th\
e New Testament is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(taught not just as the former, but also as the latter - as a literal and\
accurate account of lst-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(century events. And if one takes the New Testament - the Gospels and the\
Acts of the )Tj
T*
(Apostles - as incontrovertible historical fact, it is impossible to do s\
cholarly justice to the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(scrolls. Christian doctrine, in effect, 'dictates the agenda'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 323.885 225.37 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 205.3114 Tm
( Because Edmund Wilson was an outsider, the international team coul\
d)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(get away with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(adopting towards him an attitude of patroning condescension. He was too \
distinguished to be )Tj
T*
(insulted or abused; but he could be ignored, or dismissed superciliously\
as an intelligent and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(well-intentioned amateur who simply did not understand the complexities \
and subtleties of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the issues involved, and who, in his alleged naivet\351, might make 'ras\
h statements'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 460.2575 141.4189 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 465.7575 137.8988 Tm
( It was )Tj
-33.146 -1.2 Td
(thus that many scholars were intimidated against saying what they actual\
ly believed. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Academic reputations are fragile things, and only the most audacious or \
secure individuals )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(could afford to incur the risk involved - the risk of being discredited,\
of being isolated by a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(concerted critical barrage from adherents of the consensus. 'The scrolls\
are a fief, )Tj
T*
(Shemaryahu Talmon, himself a prominent Israeli professor in the field, o\
bserved; and the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(37 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
683 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 748.087 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.587 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 547.262 520 118.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 398.762 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 382.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.762 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 355.251 520 13.512 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 338.751 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 325.251 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 311.751 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 295.251 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 278.751 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 265.251 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 251.751 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 235.251 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 218.751 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 205.251 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 191.751 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 175.251 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 161.751 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 148.251 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 134.751 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.251 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 107.751 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 94.251 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 80.751 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 67.251 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 53.751 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 37.251 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 1.251 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.675 Tm
(scholars who monopolized them were, in effect, 'a cabal'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 324.6275 756.195 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 736.175 Tm
( Not even such cabals, however, can be omnipotent in suppressing di\
ssent. Edmund )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Wilson may have been an outsider, but deviation from the international t\
eam's consensus was )Tj
T*
(beginning to surface within the cocooned sphere of biblical scholarship \
itself. As early as )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1950, five years before Wilson's book, Andre Dupont-Sommer, Professor of\
Semitic )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Language and Civilisation at the Sorbonne, had)Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(presented a public paper which caused a sensation.)Tj
11 0 0 11 289.51 655.7825 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 295.01 652.2625 Tm
( He addressed himself to one of the )Tj
-20.728 -1.2 Td
(Qumran texts recently translated. It described, he explained to his audi\
ence, a self-styled 'Sect )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the New Covenant', whose leader, known as the 'Teacher of Righteousne\
ss', was held to be )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(a Messiah, was persecuted, tortured and martyred. The \221Teacher's' fol\
lowers believed the end )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the world to be imminent, and only those with faith in him would be s\
aved. And albeit )Tj
T*
(cautiously, Dupont-Sommer did not shrink from drawing the obvious conclu\
sion - that the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('Teacher of Righteousness' was in many ways \221the exact prototype of J\
esus'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 428.3163 555.37 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 535.35 Tm
( These assertions provoked a squall of controversy and protest, Jes\
us' uniqueness and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(originality were held to be under attack, and the Catholic establishment\
, especially in France )Tj
T*
(and the States, began to unleash its critical artillery. Dupont-Sommer h\
imself was somewhat )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(shaken by the reaction and, in subsequent statements, sought shelter beh\
ind more circumspect )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(phraseology. Anyone who might have been inclined to support him was also\
, for a time, )Tj
T*
(obliged to duck for cover. Yet the seed of doubt had been planted, and w\
as eventually to bear )Tj
T*
(fruit. From the standpoint of Christian theological tradition, that frui\
t was to be particularly )Tj
T*
(poisonous when it burgeoned amidst the international team themselves, in\
the very precincts )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the Rockefeller Museum's 'Scrollery'.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 120.78 372.4785 Tm
(1 Solomon Schecter surrounded by boxes of the manuscripts)Tj
-1.681 -1.201 Td
(he obtained from the Cairo geniza)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(in 1896 and brought to Cambridge.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 343.3384 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 189.2137 328.9668 Tm
(2 Muhammad adh-Dhib, \(right\))Tj
-3.332 -1.2 Td
(who discovered the first cave of Dead Sea Scrolls.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 299.8384 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 129.2119 268.9668 Tm
(3 Kando and George Isaiah, who first brought the scrolls)Tj
0.21 -1.2 Td
(to the attention of the Metropolitan of the Syrian Church.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 239.8384 Tm
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 166.2469 208.9668 Tm
(4 Professor Eleazar Sukenik, who in 1947)Tj
-7.873 -1.2 Td
(was the first Israeli scholar to obtain and translate some of the Dead S\
ea Scrolls.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 179.8384 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 115.47 165.4668 Tm
(5 A portion of one of the scrolls, the 'Habakkuk Commentary',)Tj
-0.901 -1.2 Td
(which tells of a battle between the leader of the Dead Sea community)Tj
3.08 -1.2 Td
(and two opponents, the 'Liar' and the 'Wicked Priest'.)Tj
11.432 -1.2 Td
( )Tj
-0.125 -1.2 Td
(6)Tj
0.125 -1.2 Td
( )Tj
-0.125 -1.2 Td
(7)Tj
-22.567 -1.2 Td
(6-7 Examples of scroll fragments purchased from the Bedouin after the\
ir identification and arrangement.)Tj
8.028 -1.2 Td
(Few of these thousands of fragments can be pieced together precisely.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 41.8384 Tm
( )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(38 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
684 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 752.488 520 13.512 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 735.988 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 722.488 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 705.988 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 692.488 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 678.988 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.488 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 648.988 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 635.488 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 621.988 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 605.488 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 591.988 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 575.488 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 561.988 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 548.488 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.988 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.488 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 504.988 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 491.488 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 474.988 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 461.488 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 444.988 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 428.488 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 131.488 520 297 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 95.488 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 218.5988 756.2043 Tm
(8 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Father Josef Milik)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 740.5759 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 223.4419 726.2043 Tm
(9 Dr Frank Cross.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 710.5759 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 165.3075 696.2043 Tm
(10 Excavations among the Qumran ruins:)Tj
-4.736 -1.2 Td
(Father de Vaux and Father Milik with Gerald Lankester Harding)Tj
6.973 -1.2 Td
(of the Department of Antiquities.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 653.5759 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 91.2319 639.2043 Tm
(11 One of the pots containing animal bones found during the excavatio\
ns)Tj
-1.58 -1.2 Td
(and never satisfactorily explained. They appear to be the remains of sac\
red meals.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 610.0759 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 264.375 595.7043 Tm
(12)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 580.0759 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 264.375 565.7043 Tm
(13)Tj
-11.57 -1.2 Td
(12-13 The Qumran ruins during one of the excavations)Tj
0.416 -1.2 Td
(led by Father de Vaux and Gerald Lankester Harding.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 523.0759 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 32.0569 508.7043 Tm
(14 Professor H. Wright Baker of Manchester University cutting the 'Co\
pper Scroll' into segments )Tj
-0.193 -1.2 Td
(in order for it to be translated. It proved to contain a list of treasur\
es from the Temple of Jerusalem.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 479.5759 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 65.7619 465.2043 Tm
(15 The unopened 'Copper Scroll', found broken into two sections in Ca\
ve 3 in 1952.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 449.5759 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(Among the scholars of Father de Vaux's original international team, perh\
aps the most )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dynamic, original and audacious was John Marco Allegro. Certainly he was\
the most )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(spontaneous, the most independent-minded, the most resistant to suppress\
ion of material. )Tj
T*
(Born in 1923, he saw service in the Royal Navy during the war and in 194\
7 - the year the )Tj
T*
(first Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered - entered Manchester University a\
s an undergraduate )Tj
T*
(studying Logic, Greek and Hebrew. A year later, he transferred to the\
honours course in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Semitic Studies. He also developed an interest in philology, the study o\
f the origins of )Tj
T*
(language, its underlying structure and development. Bringing his philolo\
gical expertise to )Tj
T*
(bear on biblical texts, he quickly became convinced that scripture could\
not be taken at face )Tj
T*
(value and proclaimed himself an agnostic. In June 1951, he graduated wit\
h a BA, first-class )Tj
T*
(honours, in Oriental Studies, and the following year received his MA for\
his thesis, 'A )Tj
T*
(Linguistic Study of the Balaam Oracles in the Book of Numbers'. In Octob\
er of that year, he )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(enrolled in the doctoral programme at Oxford under the supervision of th\
e distinguished )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Semitic scholar, Professor Godfrey R. Driver. A year later, Driver recom\
mended him for the )Tj
T*
(international team then being assembled by de Vaux, and Allegro was assi\
gned the crucial )Tj
T*
(material found in Cave 4 at Qumran. He departed for Jerusalem in Septemb\
er 1953. By that )Tj
T*
(time, he had already published four acclaimed articles in academic journ\
als - a track record )Tj
T*
(more impressive than anyone else on the team could claim.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( In 1956, Allegro published a popular book, )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(following this in 1968 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(with his own research on the texts and fragl ments from Cave 4 in the fi\
fth volume of the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(definitive Oxford University Press series, )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
(Discoveries in the Judaean Desert. )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(At this point, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Allegro was one of the most esteemed and prestigious figures in the fiel\
d of biblical )Tj
T*
(scholarship. Yet within two years, he was to abandon his colleagues on t\
he international )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(39 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
685 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.5 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 398.762 520 185.738 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 316.185 520 82.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 299.685 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 266.685 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 233.685 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 200.685 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 167.685 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 134.685 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 116.773 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 100.273 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 64.273 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(team, turn his back upon the academic world and resign his university po\
st at Manchester. He )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was also to be vilified and discredited. What had happened?)Tj
T*
(It quickly became clear, to the academic community in general as well as\
to the international )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(team, that Allegro was the only one among them who was not only an agnos\
tic, but also )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(uninhibited about 'rocking the boat'. Unconstrained by any personal reli\
gious bias, he )Tj
T*
(explained things, often impetuously, as he saw them; and he rapidly lost\
patience with his )Tj
T*
(colleagues' refusal to countenance any theories, or even evidence, that \
might contradict the )Tj
T*
(accepted 'party line' on Christian origins. In particular, he grew exasp\
erated with the strained )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(attempts to distance Christianity from the scrolls and the Qumran commun\
ity. He insisted on )Tj
T*
(the obvious connection between the two, and suggested that connection mi\
ght be closer than )Tj
T*
(anyone had hitherto believed - or, at any rate, dared to suppose.)Tj
T*
( The first major storm occurred in 1956, when Allegro agreed to giv\
e a series of three )Tj
T*
(short talks on the Dead Sea Scrolls, to be transmitted on radio in the n\
orth of England on 16, )Tj
T*
(23 and 30 January. It was clear that he intended to accelerate the tempo\
of scroll research by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(injecting an element of excitement and controversy. 'I think we can look\
for fireworks', he )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(wrote imprudently to John Strugnell, who was then in Jerusalem.)Tj
11 0 0 11 367.8575 508.695 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 373.3575 505.175 Tm
( That statement, as Allegro )Tj
-26.426 -1.2 Td
(failed to appreciate, was bound to set alarm bells ringing in the Cathol\
ic-dominated )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Scrollery'. Oblivious of this, he went on to say that 'recent study of \
my fragments has )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(convinced me that Dupont-Sommer is more right than he knew'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 363.0587 457.7825 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 374.0587 454.2625 Tm
( At the time, apparently, )Tj
-26.477 -1.2 Td
(Strugnell was considering a career in the Church. Allegro quipped, 'I sh\
ouldn't worry about )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that theological job, if I were you: by the time I've finished there won\
't be any Church left for )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(you to join.')Tj
11 0 0 11 75.505 406.87 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 386.85 Tm
( Allegro's first and second broadcasts attracted little attention i\
n Britain, but the second )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(was written up by the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(which misunderstood and misquoted him, yet )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(generated a flurry of debate. The third talk, broadcast on 30 January, w\
as followed on 5 )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(February by an article in the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(which could not but cause a sensation. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Christian bases seen in scrolls', the headline proclaimed:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( The origins of some Christian ritual and doctrines can be seen in \
the documents of an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(extremist )Tj
T*
( Jewish sect that existed for more than 100 years before the birth \
of Jesus Christ. This is )Tj
T*
(the )Tj
T*
( interpretation placed on the 'fabulous' collection of Dead Sea Scr\
olls by one of an )Tj
T*
(international )Tj
T*
( team of seven scholars . . . John Allegro . . . said last night in\
a broadcast that the )Tj
T*
(historical basis )Tj
T*
( of the Lord's Supper and part at least of the Lord's prayer and th\
e New Testament )Tj
T*
(teaching )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( of Jesus were attributable to the Qumranians.)Tj
11 0 0 11 279.225 124.8802 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 104.8602 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The same article hinted at trouble to come, quoting a Catholic scholar a\
s saying that 'any )Tj
T*
(stick now seems big enough to use against Christianity' provided it coul\
d be used 'to dislodge )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(belief in the uniqueness of Jesus'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 193.4937 57.4677 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 204.4937 53.9477 Tm
( Allegro, in fact, was beginning to trespass on very )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(40 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
686 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 631.098 520 134.902 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 482.598 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.098 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 281.773 520 151.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 215.734 520 66.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 166.195 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 149.695 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 116.695 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 83.695 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 50.695 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 14.695 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(sensitive territory indeed. On 6 February, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Time Magazine )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ran an article entitled 'Crucifixion )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Before Christ'. Two days later, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(reported that three American religious leaders, one )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jewish, one Catholic and one Protestant, had joined forces to refute All\
egro and warn against )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(any attempt to depict 'the Essenes' as precursors of Christianity.)Tj
11 0 0 11 360.185 706.6177 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 371.185 703.0977 Tm
( All this controversy was, )Tj
-26.268 -1.2 Td
(of course, finding its way back to de Vaux, together with requests that \
something be done. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Allegro, however, appears to have been almost naively insouciant. On 9 F\
ebruary, he wrote )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to de Vaux claiming he was 'being accused of saying the most astonishing\
things, some of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(which are true, and are indeed astounding, others come from the bosoms o\
f eager reporters'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 515.3675 639.2052 Tm
(15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 619.1852 Tm
( It is clear in retrospect that Allegro never fully realised how sa\
crosanct the idea of Jesus' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('uniqueness' was, and that, as a result, he underestimated the lengths t\
o which de Vaux and )Tj
T*
(other members of the international team would go in order to distance th\
emselves from his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(blunt approach. This was his only real mistake, so far - that of expecti\
ng his colleagues to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(accept his assertions without letting their own religious allegiances in\
fluence their judgment. )Tj
T*
(In his own view, he was addressing his material as a disinterested schol\
ar, and hoped they )Tj
T*
(might eventually do likewise. His innocent gibe that, by the time he'd f\
inished, there'd be no )Tj
T*
(Church left for Strugnell to join, testifies to his conviction of how im\
portant and conclusive )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(he felt his material to be - and to his excitement at the discovery.)Tj
T*
( On 11 February, de Vaux wrote back to Allegro, distinctly unamused\
. All the texts )Tj
T*
(available to Allegro, de Vaux said, were also available to the other mem\
bers of the team in )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem. They had failed to find anything that supported Allegro's int\
erpretation.)Tj
T*
( In his reply, on 20 February, Allegro attempted to stand his groun\
d and at the same time )Tj
T*
(repair the rift with his colleagues and defuse the public controversy: '\
You will excuse me if I )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(think that everyone in the world is going stark, raving mad. I am enclos\
ing my broadcast )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(talks, as you request, and if, after reading them, you are left wonderin\
g what all the fuss is )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(about, you will be in precisely my position.')Tj
11 0 0 11 251.1888 357.2927 Tm
(16)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 262.1888 353.7727 Tm
( Noting that Strugnell and Milik were alleged to )Tj
-18.341 -1.2 Td
(be preparing rebuttals of his statements, he commented, 'I am not waging\
any war against the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Church, and if I were, you may rest assured I would not let any loophole\
s in . . . I stand by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(everything I said in my three talks but I am quite prepared to believe t\
hat there may be other )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(interpretations of my readings.')Tj
11 0 0 11 181.27 289.8802 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 269.8602 Tm
( On 4 March, de Vaux replied, warning Allegro that a rebuttal was i\
ndeed being prepared. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(It would not be just from Strugnell and Milik, however. Neither would it\
be confined to a )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(scholarly journal. On the contrary, it would take the form of a letter t\
o )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in London )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and would be signed by all the members of the international team.)Tj
T*
( Instead of being intimidated, Allegro was defiant. Not mincing wor\
ds, he responded that )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(a letter to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
('should be most interesting to the London public, who have never heard )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(my broadcasts':)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( I have already pointed out to you that these broadcasts were made \
on the local Northern )Tj
T*
(station. . )Tj
T*
( .You and your friends are now apparently going to draw the attenti\
on of the gutter press )Tj
T*
(of this )Tj
T*
( country to these passages, of which neither they nor the majority \
of their readers have )Tj
T*
(heard, and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( start a witch hunt. . . I congratulate you. What will certainly ha\
ppen is that the press, )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(41 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
687 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 747.695 520 18.305 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 714.695 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 698.195 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 680.283 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 663.783 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 614.283 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 597.783 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 564.783 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 548.283 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 515.283 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 482.283 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 449.244 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 416.244 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 381.832 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 365.332 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 231.919 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 182.342 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 165.842 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 149.342 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 116.342 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 83.342 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 66.842 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 30.842 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.2829 Tm
(scenting )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( trouble, will descend like hawks on me and want to know what it is\
all about . . . they will )Tj
T*
(have )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( added fuel in what appears on the face of it to be a controversy d\
eveloping between the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( ecclesiastics of the Scroll team and the one unattached member.)Tj
11 0 0 11 381.9375 688.3904 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 668.3704 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(He went on to invoke Edmund Wilson, indicating just how worried de Vaux'\
s team should be )Tj
T*
(by the suspicions Wilson had voiced. In effect, he was attempting to use\
Wilson as a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(deterrent:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( Having regard to what Wilson has already said about the unwillingn\
ess of the Church to )Tj
T*
(tackle )Tj
T*
( these texts objectively, you can imagine what will be made out of \
this rumpus.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( With all respect I must point out to you that this nonsense \
of Wilson's has been taken )Tj
T*
(seriously )Tj
T*
( here. At every lecture on the Scrolls I give, the same old questio\
n pops up: is it true that )Tj
T*
(the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( Church is scared . . . and can we be sure that )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(everything )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(will be published. That may )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(sound silly )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( to you and me, but it is a serious doubt in the minds of ordinary \
folk . . . I need hardly add )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(what )Tj
T*
( effect the signatures of three Roman priests on the bottom of this\
proposed letter will )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(have.)Tj
11 0 0 11 39.3975 389.9393 Tm
(19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 369.9193 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( It seems clear that, by this time, Allegro was becoming nervous. O\
n 6 March, he wrote to )Tj
T*
(another member of the international team, Frank Cross, who had just been\
offered an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(appointment at Harvard University: 'I am awfully pleased about Harvard. \
Not only because )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(this Christianity business is played out. ')Tj
11 0 0 11 231.3475 306.0268 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 242.3475 302.5068 Tm
( But in the same letter, he admitted that the barrage )Tj
-16.898 -1.2 Td
(of criticism was wearing him down and that he was feeling, both physical\
ly and mentally, 'at )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the end of my tether'. Certainly he had no desire to see the publication\
of a letter which )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(alienated him publicly from the other members of the team and, by so doi\
ng, impugned his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(credibility.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( By now, of course, it was too late. On 16 March 1956, the letter d\
uly appeared in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(signed by Strugnell as well as by Fathers de Vaux, Milik, Skehan and Sta\
rcky, most of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the team's 'big guns':)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( There are no unpublished texts at the disposal of Mr Allegro other\
than those of which the )Tj
T*
( originals are at present in the Palestine Archaeological Museum wh\
ere we are working. )Tj
T*
(Upon the )Tj
T*
( appearance in the press of citations from Mr Allegro's broadcasts \
we are unable to see in )Tj
T*
(the )Tj
T*
( texts the 'findings' of Mr Allegro.)Tj
T*
( We find no crucifixion of the 'teacher', no deposition from \
the cross, and no 'broken )Tj
T*
(body of )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(42 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
688 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 763.842 520 2.158 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 730.842 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 697.842 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 681.342 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 663.429 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 646.929 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 580.852 520 66.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 564.352 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 531.352 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 498.352 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 465.352 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 432.352 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 414.44 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 397.94 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 314.027 520 83.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 281.027 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 264.527 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 231.527 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 198.527 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 165.527 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 149.027 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 116.027 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 83.027 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 50.027 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 14.027 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 751.9295 Tm
( their Master' to be stood guard over until Judgment Day. Therefore\
there is no 'well-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(defined )Tj
T*
( Essenic pattern into which Jesus of Nazareth fits', as Mr Allegro \
is alleged in one report )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to have )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( said. It is our conviction that either he has misread the texts or\
he has built up a chain of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( conjectures which the materials do not support.)Tj
11 0 0 11 290.6925 671.537 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 651.517 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( To publish this sort of accusation - especially in a letter to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(- is remarkable )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(behaviour. It patently reflects a conclave of academics 'ganging up' on \
one of their own )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(members. Forced on to the defensive, Allegro replied with a letter to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(of his own, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(which explained and justified his position:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( In the phraseology of the New Testament in this connection we find\
many points of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(resemblance )Tj
T*
( to Qumran literature, since the sect also were looking for the com\
ing of a Davidic )Tj
T*
(Messiah who )Tj
T*
( would arise with the priest in the last days. It is in this sense \
that Jesus 'fits into a well-)Tj
T*
(defined )Tj
T*
( messianic \(not "Essenic" as I was wrongly quoted . . .\) pattern'\
. There is nothing )Tj
T*
(particularly new )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( or striking in the idea.)Tj
11 0 0 11 151.6938 422.5472 Tm
(22)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 402.5272 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(It is a reasonable enough statement, a legitimate correction of an impor\
tant misquotation. It )Tj
T*
(also indicates how eager Allegro's colleagues were to 'jump on him', to \
find an excuse for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(discrediting him. In any case, Allegro added, 'It is true that unpublish\
ed material in my care )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(made me more willing to accept certain suggestions made previously by ot\
her scholars on )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(what have appeared ... to be insufficient grounds.')Tj
11 0 0 11 283.2125 322.1347 Tm
(23)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 302.1147 Tm
( The bickering and ill-feeling continued until finally, on 8 March \
1957, Allegro wrote )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(angrily to Strugnell:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( You still do not seem to understand what you did in writing a lett\
er to a newspaper in an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(attempt )Tj
T*
( to smear the words of your own colleague. It was quite unheard of \
before, an )Tj
T*
(unprecedented case )Tj
T*
( of scholarly stabbing in the back. And, laddie, don't accuse me of\
over-dramatising the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(business. I )Tj
T*
( was here in England . . . Reuters' man that morning on the 'phone \
to me was classic: 'But I )Tj
T*
( thought you scholars stuck together! . . .' And when it was realis\
ed that in fact you were )Tj
T*
(quoting )Tj
T*
( things I never even said, the inference was plain. This letter was\
not in the interests of )Tj
T*
(scholarly )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( science at all, but to calm the fears of the Roman Catholics of Am\
erica . . . And what it all )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(boiled )Tj
T*
( down to was that you guys did not agree with the interpretation I \
put on certain texts - )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(43 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
689 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 747.027 520 18.973 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 714.027 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 681.027 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 648.027 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 630.115 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 613.615 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 514.576 520 99.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 330.174 520 184.402 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 313.674 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 297.174 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 181.674 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 145.674 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 751.6147 Tm
(where I )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( have quite as much chance of being right as you. Rather than argue\
it out in the journals )Tj
T*
(and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( scholarly works, you thought it easier to influence public opinion\
by a scurrilous letter to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(a )Tj
T*
( newspaper. And you have the neck to call it scholarship. Dear boy,\
you are very young )Tj
T*
(yet, and )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( have much to learn.)Tj
11 0 0 11 139.0712 638.2222 Tm
(24)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 618.2021 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( As we have already noted, Allegro was the first of the internation\
al team to publish )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(all )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(the material entrusted to his charge. He remains the only one to have do\
ne so. John Strugnell, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(on the other hand, in accordance with the 'go-slow' policy of the team, \
has published virtually )Tj
T*
(nothing of the substantial materials at his disposal. The only major wor\
k to which he did )Tj
T*
(address himself, entitled 'Notes in the Margin', comprises 113 pages of \
criticism of Allegro, )Tj
T*
(which Eisenman labels a 'hatchet-job'.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( In the meantime, the damage had been done. The letter to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(signed by de Vaux )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and three other ecclesiastics effectively gave free rein to the Catholic\
propaganda machine. )Tj
T*
(Opprobrium and vilification intensified. In June 1956, for example, a Je\
suit commentator )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(published in the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Irish Digest )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(an article entitled 'The Truth about the Dead Sea Scrolls'. He )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(attacked Wilson, Dupont-Sommer and, especially, Allegro. He then went on\
to make the )Tj
T*
(extraordinary statement that the 'Scrolls add surprisingly little to our\
knowledge of the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(doctrines current among the Jews from, say, 200 bc to the Christian era'\
.)Tj
11 0 0 11 407.7187 405.6937 Tm
(25)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 418.7187 402.1737 Tm
( He concluded in )Tj
-29.725 -1.2 Td
(positively inflammatory fashion: 'It was not from such a sect that "Jesu\
s learned how to be )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Messiah" . . . Rather, it was from soil such as this that sprang the tho\
rns which tried to choke )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the seed of the Gospel.')Tj
11 0 0 11 138.1087 354.7812 Tm
(26)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 149.1087 351.2612 Tm
( Allegro was now being portrayed not merely as an erring scholar, )Tj
-10.117 -1.2 Td
(but as a veritable Antichrist.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(While this controversy was still raging around him, Allegro was already \
becoming involved )Tj
T*
(in another. The new bone of contention was to be the so-called 'Copper S\
croll', found in Cave )Tj
T*
(3 at Qumran in 1952. As we have noted, the two fragments that made up th\
e 'Copper Scroll' )Tj
T*
(remained unopened for three and a half years. Speculation was rife about\
their contents. One )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(researcher attempted to read the indentations showing through the copper\
and visible on the )Tj
T*
(outside of the roll. It seemed to say, he suggested, something about tre\
asure. This suggestion )Tj
T*
(elicited a salvo of derision from the international team. It proved, how\
ever, to be quite correct.)Tj
T*
( In 1955, a year before his public dispute with his colleagues on t\
he international team, )Tj
T*
(Allegro had discussed the problem of the 'Copper Scroll' with Professor \
H. Wright-Baker of )Tj
T*
(Manchester College of Technology. Wright-Baker devised a machine that co\
uld slice the thin )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(copper into strips, thus rendering the text legible. The first of the tw\
o fragments was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(accordingly sent to Manchester, in Allegro's care, in the summer of 1955\
. Wright-Baker's )Tj
T*
(machine performed its task, and Allegro quickly embarked on a translatio\
n of what had been )Tj
T*
(revealed. The contents of the fragment proved so extraordinary that he k\
ept them initially )Tj
T*
(wholly to himself, not even divulging them to Cross or Strugnell, both o\
f whom wrote to beg )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(44 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
690 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 683.5 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.5 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 403 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 205 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.5 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 53.5 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(for details. His reticence cannot have improved his relations with them,\
but Allegro was in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fact waiting for the second fragment of the scroll to arrive in Manchest\
er. Any partial or )Tj
T*
(premature disclosure, he felt, might jeopardise everything. For what the\
'Copper Scroll' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(contained was a list of secret sites where the treasure of the Temple of\
Jerusalem was alleged )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to have been buried.)Tj
T*
( The second fragment was received in Manchester in January 1956. It\
was quickly sliced )Tj
T*
(open and translated. Both fragments, along with accompanying translation\
s, were then )Tj
T*
(returned to Jerusalem. Only then did the real delays begin. De Vaux and \
the international )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(team were worried about three things.)Tj
T*
( Their first concern was valid enough. If the contents of the scrol\
l were made public and )Tj
T*
(stories of buried treasure began to circulate, the Bedouin would be digg\
ing up the entire )Tj
T*
(Judaean desert, and much of what they found might disappear for ever or \
elude scholarly )Tj
T*
(hands and slip into the black market. Something of this sort was, in fac\
t, already occurring. )Tj
T*
(On discovering or learning of a potentially productive site, the Bedouin\
would set up a large )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(black tent over it, loot it, pick it clean and sell their plunder privat\
ely to antique dealers.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( De Vaux and the international team were also worried that the trea\
sure inventoried in the )Tj
T*
('Copper Scroll' might actually exist - might be a real treasure rather t\
han an imaginary one. If )Tj
T*
(it were indeed real, it would inevitably attract the attention of the Is\
raeli government, who )Tj
T*
(would almost certainly lay claim to it. Not only might this remove it fr\
om the authority of the )Tj
T*
(international team. It might also trigger a major political crisis; for \
while Israel's claim might )Tj
T*
(be legitimate enough, much of the treasure, and the scroll specifying it\
s location, would have )Tj
T*
(been found in Jordanian territory.)Tj
T*
( If the treasure were real, moreover, there were theological ground\
s for concern. De Vaux )Tj
T*
(and the international team had been intent on depicting the Qumran commu\
nity as an isolated )Tj
T*
(enclave, having no connection with public events, political developments\
or the 'mainstream' )Tj
T*
(of lst-century history. If the 'Copper Scroll' did indeed indicate where\
the actual contents of )Tj
T*
(the Temple lay hidden, Qumran could no longer be so depicted. On the con\
trary, connections )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(would become apparent between Qumran and the Temple, the centre and focu\
s of all Judaic )Tj
T*
(affairs. Qumran would no longer be a self-contained and insulated phenom\
enon, but an )Tj
T*
(adjunct of something much broader - something that might encroach danger\
ously on the )Tj
T*
(origins of Christianity. More disturbing still, if the 'Copper Scroll' r\
eferred to a real treasure, )Tj
T*
(it could only be a treasure removed from the Temple in the wake of the a\
d 66 revolt. This )Tj
T*
(would upset the 'safe' dating and chronology which the international tea\
m had established for )Tj
T*
(the entire corpus of scrolls.)Tj
T*
( The combination of these factors dictated a cover-up. Allegro at f\
irst colluded in it, )Tj
T*
(assuming that delays in releasing information about the 'Copper Scroll' \
would only be )Tj
T*
(temporary. In consequence, he agreed not to mention anything of the scro\
ll in the book he )Tj
T*
(was preparing - his general introduction to the Qumran material, schedul\
ed to be published )Tj
T*
(by Penguin Books later in 1956. In the meantime, it was arranged, Father\
Milik would )Tj
T*
(prepare a definitive translation of the 'Copper Scroll', which Allegro w\
ould follow with )Tj
T*
(another 'popular' book pitched to the general public.)Tj
T*
( Allegro had consented to a temporary delay in releasing informatio\
n about the 'Copper )Tj
T*
(Scroll'. He certainly didn't expect the delay to prolong itself indefini\
tely. Still less did he )Tj
T*
(expect the international team to defuse the scroll's significance by dis\
missing the treasure it )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(45 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
691 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.587 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 365.724 520 217.364 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 111.161 520 254.563 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 75.161 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(inventoried as purely fictitious. When Milik proceeded to do so, Allegro\
did not at first )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(suspect any sort of conspiracy. In a letter to another of his colleagues\
, dated 23 April 1956, )Tj
T*
(he gave vent to his impatience, but remained excited and optimistic, and\
referred to Milik )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(with cavalier disdain:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( Heaven alone knows when, if ever, our friends in Jerusalem are goi\
ng to release the news )Tj
T*
(of the )Tj
T*
( copper scroll. It's quite fabulous \(Milik thinks literally so, bu\
t he's a clot\). Just imagine )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the agony of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( having to let my [book] go to the press without being able to brea\
the a word of it.)Tj
11 0 0 11 478.215 607.695 Tm
(27)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 587.675 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( A month later, Allegro wrote to Gerald Lankester Harding, in charg\
e of the Jordanian )Tj
T*
(Department of Antiquities, and de Vaux's colleague. Perhaps he already s\
ensed something )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was in the wind and was trying to circumvent de Vaux personally, to appe\
al to an alternative )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and non-Catholic authority. In any case, he pointed out that as soon as \
the press release )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(pertaining to the 'Copper Scroll' was issued, reporters would descend )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(en masse. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(To deal with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(this contingency, he suggested that Harding, the international team and \
everyone else )Tj
T*
(involved close ranks and adopt a 'party line' towards the media. On 28 M\
ay, Harding, who )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(had been warned and briefed by de Vaux, wrote back. The treasure listed \
in the 'Copper )Tj
T*
(Scroll', he said, didn't appear to be connected with the Qumran communit\
y at all. Nor could it )Tj
T*
(possibly be a real cache - the value of the items cited was too great. T\
he 'Copper Scroll' was )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(merely a collation of 'buried treasure' legends.)Tj
11 0 0 11 263.5363 408.2439 Tm
(28)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 274.5363 404.7239 Tm
( Four days later, on 1 June, the official press )Tj
-19.239 -1.2 Td
(release pertaining to the 'Copper Scroll' was issued. It echoed Harding'\
s assertions. The scroll )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(was said to contain 'a collection of traditions about buried treasure'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 380.4113 373.8314 Tm
(29)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 353.8114 Tm
( Allegro appears to have been stunned by this duplicity. On 5 June,\
he wrote to Harding, 'I )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(don't quite follow whether this incredible "traditions" gag you and your\
chums are putting out )Tj
T*
(is for newspaper, government, Bedu or my consumption. Or you may even be\
lieve it, bless )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(you.')Tj
11 0 0 11 36.5375 306.4189 Tm
(30)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 47.5375 302.8988 Tm
( At the same time, however, he was still appealing to Harding as a possi\
ble ally against )Tj
-2.73 -1.2 Td
(the phalanx of Catholic interests. Did not Harding think, he asked, that\
'a bit more ready )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(information on these scroll matters might not be a good idea? It's well \
known now that the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(copper scroll was completely open in January, and despite your attempts \
to squash it, it is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(also known that my translation went to you immediately . . . A little ge\
neral information . . . )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(saves a good deal of rumour-mongering, which has now taken on a somewhat\
sinister note.')Tj
11 0 0 11 514.2675 222.5063 Tm
(31)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 525.2675 218.9864 Tm
( )Tj
-37.474 -1.2 Td
(He adds that 'the feeling would get around that the Roman Catholic breth\
ren of the team, by )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(far in the majority, were trying to hide things'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 263.77 188.0939 Tm
(32)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 274.77 184.5739 Tm
( The same point is stressed in a letter to )Tj
-19.256 -1.2 Td
(Frank Cross in August: 'In lay quarters it is firmly believed that the R\
oman Church in de )Tj
T*
(Vaux and Co. are intent on suppressing this material.')Tj
11 0 0 11 304.25 153.6814 Tm
(33)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 315.25 150.1613 Tm
( To de Vaux personally, he observed )Tj
-22.2 -1.2 Td
(drily, 'I notice that you have been careful to keep it dark that the tre\
asure is Temple )Tj
T*
(possessions.')Tj
11 0 0 11 80.0838 119.2688 Tm
(34)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 99.2488 Tm
( Allegro had originally believed a full translation of the text of \
the 'Copper Scroll' would )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(be released fairly promptly. It must now have been clear to him that thi\
s wasn't going to )Tj
T*
(occur. In fact, four years were to pass before a translation of the text\
appeared, and then it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was published by Allegro himself, who by that time had lost all patience\
with the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(46 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
692 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 482.675 520 283.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 299.647 520 183.028 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 283.147 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 250.147 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 217.147 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 184.147 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 151.147 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 118.147 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 85.147 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 67.234 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 50.734 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 14.734 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(international team. He still would have preferred to publish his popular\
book after the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('official' translation, scheduled to be done by Father Milik, and was le\
d to believe this would )Tj
T*
(be possible. Milik's translation, however, was suddenly and unexpectedly\
subject to further )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(delays, which may well have been deliberate. Allegro was asked to postpo\
ne his own )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(publication accordingly. At one point, indeed, this request, transmitted\
through an )Tj
T*
(intermediary, appears to have been attended by threats - from a member o\
f the team whose )Tj
T*
(name cannot be divulged for legal reasons. Allegro replied that, 'As con\
veyed to me, the )Tj
T*
(request was accompanied by the expression of some rather strange sentime\
nts originating, it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was said, from yourself and those for whom you were acting. There appear\
ed even to be )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(some forecast of consequences were I not to accede to this request.')Tj
11 0 0 11 380.5625 607.695 Tm
(35)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 391.5625 604.175 Tm
( The recipient of this )Tj
-27.75 -1.303 Td
(letter wrote back sweetly that Allegro must not imagine himself the vict\
im of persecution.)Tj
11 0 0 11 504.945 589.7825 Tm
(36 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 569.7625 Tm
(Thus, when Allegro went ahead with his own publication, he found himself\
in the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(embarrassing position of seeming to have pre-empted the work of a collea\
gue. In effect, he )Tj
T*
(had been manoeuvred into providing the international team with further a\
mmunition to use )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(against him - and, of course, to alienate him further from them. Milik's\
translation, in fact, did )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(not appear until 1962 - two years after Allegro's, six years after the '\
Copper Scroll' had been )Tj
T*
(sliced open in Manchester and ten years after it had been discovered.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( In the meantime, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(- Allegro's popular book on the Qumran material, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(from which all mention of the 'Copper Scroll' had been withheld - had ap\
peared in the late )Tj
T*
(summer of 1956, some five months after the controversy surrounding his r\
adio broadcasts. )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(The controversy, and especially the letter to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(had, as Allegro predicted, ensured the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(book's success. The first edition of forty thousand copies sold out in s\
eventeen days, and )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Edmund Wilson reviewed it enthusiastically on the BBC. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(now in its )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(second edition and nineteenth printing, continues to be one of the best \
introductions to the )Tj
T*
(Qumran material. De Vaux did not see it that way, and sent Allegro a len\
gthy critique. In his )Tj
T*
(reply, dated 16 September 1956, Allegro stated that 'you are unable to t\
reat Christianity any )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(more in an objective light; a pity, but understandable in the circumstan\
ces'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 422.2525 324.2541 Tm
(37)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 433.2525 320.7341 Tm
( In the same )Tj
-30.782 -1.2 Td
(letter, he draws attention to a text among the scrolls which refers to t\
he 'son of God':)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( You go on to talk blithely about what the first Jewish-Christians \
thought in Jerusalem, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and no one )Tj
T*
( would guess that your only real evidence - if you can call it such\
- is the New Testament, )Tj
T*
(that )Tj
T*
( body of much worked-over traditions whose 'evidence' would not sta\
nd for two minutes )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in a court )Tj
T*
( of law . . . As for . . . Jesus as a 'son of God' and 'Messiah' - \
I don't dispute it for a )Tj
T*
(moment; we )Tj
T*
( now know from Qumran that their own Davidic Messiah was reckoned a\
'son of God', )Tj
T*
('begotten' )Tj
T*
( of God - but that doesn't prove the Church's fantastic claim for J\
esus that he was God )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Himself. )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( There's no 'contrast' in their terminology at all - the contrast i\
s in its interpretation.)Tj
11 0 0 11 482.9725 75.3416 Tm
(38)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 55.3216 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(After everything that had passed, Allegro would have been extremely naiv\
e to assume that he )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(47 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
693 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 582.734 520 183.266 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 566.234 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.234 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 500.234 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 467.234 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.234 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 401.234 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.234 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 335.234 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.234 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 269.234 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 236.234 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 218.322 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 201.822 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 119.322 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 102.822 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 69.822 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36.822 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 0.822 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.3216 Tm
(could still be accepted by his erstwhile colleagues as a member of their\
team. Nevertheless, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that was precisely what he seems to have done. In the summer of 1957, he\
returned to )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem and spent July, August and September working on his material i\
n the 'Scrollery'. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(From his letters of the time, it is clear that he did indeed feel himsel\
f part of the team again )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and had no doubt that all was well. In the autumn, he travelled back to \
London and arranged )Tj
T*
(with the BBC to make a television programme on the scrolls. In October, \
he returned to )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem with producer and film crew. They immediately went to see Awni\
Dajani, )Tj
T*
(Jordanian curator of the Rockefeller Museum and one of Allegro's closest\
friends. The next )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(morning, Dajani took them round 'to get things moving with de Vaux'. In \
a letter of 31 )Tj
T*
(October to Frank Cross, whom he still assumed to be his ally, Allegro de\
scribed the ensuing )Tj
T*
(events:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( We foregathered . . . and explained what we hoped to do, only to b\
e met with a blank )Tj
T*
(refusal by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( De V. to collaborate in any way. We stared open-mouthed for some t\
ime, and then Dajani )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and the )Tj
T*
( producer started trying to find out what it was all about. The who\
le thing was a complete )Tj
T*
(knock-)Tj
T*
( out because, as far as I was aware I had left my dear colleagues o\
n the best of terms - or )Tj
T*
(pretty )Tj
T*
( much so. Certainly no bitterness on my side about anything. But De\
Vaux said that he had )Tj
T*
(called a )Tj
T*
( meeting of 'his scholars' and that they had agreed to have nothing\
to do with anything I )Tj
T*
(had )Tj
T*
( anything to do with! My pal the producer then took the old gent ou\
tside and explained in )Tj
T*
(words of )Tj
T*
( one syllable that we were avoiding any controversial matter at all\
in the program on the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(religious )Tj
T*
( side, but he \(de Vaux\) was quite adamant. He said that whereas h\
e could not stop us )Tj
T*
(taking )Tj
T*
( pictures of the monastery at Qumran, he would not allow us in the \
Scrollery or the )Tj
T*
(Museum )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( generally.)Tj
11 0 0 11 85.2263 226.4291 Tm
(39)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 206.4091 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Allegro described himself as still flummoxed. Awni Dajani, however\
, was beginning to )Tj
T*
(get annoyed. He apparently saw the programme as 'a very definite boost f\
or Jordan - )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(antiquities and tourism', and declared a preparedness to assert his auth\
ority. He was, after all, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(an official representative of the Jordanian government, whom not even de\
Vaux could afford )Tj
T*
(to defy:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( as soon as it became clear to my dear colleagues that even without\
them the programme )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was )Tj
T*
( going forward . . . they started putting their cards on the table.\
It was not the programme )Tj
T*
(they )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(48 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
694 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.587 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 416.675 520 166.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 367.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 317.675 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 301.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 284.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 251.675 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 218.675 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 200.762 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 184.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 118.262 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 85.262 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 68.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 32.762 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( objected to, only Allegro . . . They then called in a taxi at our \
hotel and made the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(producer an )Tj
T*
( offer - if he would drop Allegro completely, and have Strugnell as\
his script writer, or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Milik, they )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( would collaborate . . . Then one day, after we had returned from a\
n exhausting day at )Tj
T*
(Qumran, )Tj
T*
( Awni phoned to say that when he had got in it was to find a note \(\
anonymous\) waiting for )Tj
T*
(him, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( offering \243150 to him to stop us going to Amman and photographin\
g in the Museum )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(there.)Tj
11 0 0 11 40.9238 607.695 Tm
(40)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 587.675 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In the same letter, Allegro tried to persuade Cross to appear in t\
he programme. After )Tj
T*
(consulting with de Vaux, Cross refused. By now, the penny had pretty muc\
h dropped for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Allegro and he knew precisely where he stood in relation to his former c\
olleagues. On the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(same day that he wrote to Cross, he had also written to another scholar,\
a man who was not )Tj
T*
(officially a member of the international team but had been allowed to wo\
rk with the scrolls. )Tj
T*
(Allegro repeated the account of his contretemps and then added that he w\
as 'starting a )Tj
T*
(campaign, very quietly for the moment, to get the scrollery clique broke\
n up and new blood )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(injected, with the idea of getting some of the stuff Milik, Strugnell an\
d Starcky are sitting on, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(published quickly in provisional form'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 223.6888 441.2825 Tm
(41)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 234.6888 437.7625 Tm
( Two months later, on 24 December 1957, he wrote )Tj
-16.341 -1.2 Td
(to the same scholar saying that he was worried:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( From the way the publication of the fragments is being planned, th\
e non-Catholic )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(members of the )Tj
T*
( team are being removed as quickly as possible . . . In fact, so va\
st is Milik's, Starcky's and )Tj
T*
( Strugnell's lots of 4Q [Cave 4 material], I believe that they shou\
ld be split up immediately )Tj
T*
(and new )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( scholars brought in to get the stuff out quickly.)Tj
T*
( . . . a dangerous situation is fast developing where the original \
idea of an international and )Tj
T*
( interdenominational editing group is being bypassed. All fragments\
are brought first to )Tj
T*
(De V. or )Tj
T*
( Milik, and, as with cave Eleven, complete secrecy is kept over wha\
t they are till long )Tj
T*
(after they )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( have been studied by this group.)Tj
11 0 0 11 208.5912 208.87 Tm
(42)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 188.85 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(This report is extremely disquieting. Scholars outside the internationa\
l team have suspected )Tj
T*
(that some form of monitoring and selection was taking place. Here, Alleg\
ro confirms these )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(suspicions. One can only wonder what might have happened to any fragment\
that held )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(doctrines opposed to that of the Church.)Tj
T*
( Allegro then outlined his own plan, part of which involved 'inviti\
ng scholars who can )Tj
T*
(spare six months or a year at least to come to Jerusalem and take their \
place in the team':)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( I believe that a rule should be laid down that preliminary publica\
tions must be made )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(immediately )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(49 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
695 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 765.762 520 0.238 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 749.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.262 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.262 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.262 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.262 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 582.85 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 566.35 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 401.35 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 318.85 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.35 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 269.35 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 236.35 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 203.35 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 170.35 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 137.35 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 104.35 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 86.437 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 69.937 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 33.937 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.85 Tm
( the document is collected as far as it seems possible, and that a \
steady stream of these )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( publications should be made in one journal . . . This business of \
holding up publication of )Tj
T*
(fragments )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( merely to avoid the 'deflowering' of the final volume seems to me \
most unscholarly, as is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the )Tj
T*
( business of keeping competent scholars away from the fragments . .\
. There was perhaps )Tj
T*
(good )Tj
T*
( reason . . . when we were in the first stages of collecting the pi\
eces. But now that most of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(this )Tj
T*
( work is done, anybody can work over a document and publish it in a\
t least provisional )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(form.)Tj
11 0 0 11 40.1675 590.9575 Tm
(43)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 570.9375 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(One may not immediately sympathise with Allegro as his personality manif\
ests itself through )Tj
T*
(his letters - cavalier, impudent, cheerfully iconoclastic. But it is imp\
ossible not to sympathise )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(with the academic integrity of his position. He may indeed have been ego\
centric in his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(conviction that his particular interpretation of the Qumran material was\
valid and important. )Tj
T*
(But the statements quoted above constitute an appeal on behalf of schola\
rship itself -an )Tj
T*
(appeal for openness, honesty, accessibility, impartiality. Unlike de Vau\
x and the international )Tj
T*
(team, Allegro displays no propensity for either secrecy or self-aggrandi\
sement. If he is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(conspiring, he is conspiring only to make the Dead Sea Scrolls available\
to the world at large, )Tj
T*
(and quickly enough not to betray the trust reposed in academic research.\
Such an aspiration )Tj
T*
(can only be regarded as honourable and generous.)Tj
T*
( Allegro's honour and generosity, however, were not to be rewarded,\
or even recognized. )Tj
T*
(The film, completed by the end of 1957, was not transmitted by the BBC u\
ntil the summer of )Tj
T*
(1959, and then only in a late-night slot which attracted a minimal audie\
nce. By that time, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(understandably enough, Allegro was beginning to grow uneasy. On 10 Janua\
ry 1959, after )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the latest in a long series of postponements, he wrote to Awni Dajani:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( Well, they've done it again. For the fifth time the BBC have put o\
ff showing that TV )Tj
T*
(programme )Tj
T*
( on the Scrolls . . . There can be no reasonable doubt now that De \
Vaux's cronies in )Tj
T*
(London are )Tj
T*
( using their influence to kill the programme, as he wished . . . De\
Vaux will stop at )Tj
T*
(nothing to )Tj
T*
( control the Scrolls material. Somehow or other he must be removed \
from his present )Tj
T*
(controlling )Tj
T*
( position. I am convinced that if something does turn up which affe\
cts the Roman Catholic )Tj
T*
(dogma, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( the world will never see it. De Vaux will scrape the money out of \
some or other barrel )Tj
T*
(and send )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( the lot to the Vatican to be hidden or destroyed . . .)Tj
11 0 0 11 309.7912 94.545 Tm
(44)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 74.525 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(After repeating what he'd come increasingly to see as a viable short-ter\
m solution - )Tj
T*
(nationalisation of the Rockefeller Museum, the 'Scrollery' and the scrol\
ls by the Jordanian )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(50 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
696 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 715.087 520 50.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 698.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 682.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 500.587 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 385.01 520 115.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 203.356 520 181.655 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 167.356 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(government - he reveals the sense of punctilio to which he'd previously \
felt subject: 'I might )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(even let out an instance or two when information has been suppressed - b\
ut I'll only do that if )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(De Vaux looks like winning.')Tj
11 0 0 11 170.9713 723.195 Tm
(45)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 703.175 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(In 1961, King Hussein appointed Allegro honorary adviser on the scrolls \
to the government )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of Jordan. The post, however, though prestigious enough, entailed no rea\
l authority. It was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(not until November 1966, five years later, that the Jordanian government\
finally acted on )Tj
T*
(Allegro's suggestion and nationalised the Rockefeller Museum. By then, a\
s we have seen, it )Tj
T*
(was too late. Within the year, the Six Day War was to erupt, and the mus\
eum, the 'Scrollery' )Tj
T*
(and its contents all passed into Israeli hands; and Israel, as we have n\
oted, was too much in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(need of international support to risk a head-on confrontation with the V\
atican and the )Tj
T*
(Catholic hierarchy. Only four years before, Pope John XXIII had official\
ly and doctrinally )Tj
T*
(exculpated the Jews of any responsibility for Jesus' death, and excised \
all vestiges of anti-)Tj
T*
(Semitism from Roman Catholic Canon Law. No one wished to see this sort o\
f conciliatory )Tj
T*
(work undone.)Tj
T*
( By that time, too, Allegro was understandably weary and disillusio\
ned with the world of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(professional scholarship. For some time, he had been anxious to leave ac\
ademia and sustain )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(himself solely as a writer. He was also eager to return to his original \
chosen field, philology, )Tj
T*
(and had spent some five years working on a book which derived from what \
he regarded as a )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(major philological breakthrough. The result of his efforts appeared in 1\
970 as )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Sacred )Tj
T*
(Mushroom and the Cross - )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the work for which Allegro today is most famous, and for which )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(he is almost universally dismissed.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( The argument in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(rests on complicated philological )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(premises which we, like many other commentators, find difficult to accep\
t. That, however, is )Tj
T*
(incidental. Scholars tend all the time to expound their theories based o\
n premises of varying )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(validity, and they are usually, at worst, ignored, not publicly disgrace\
d. What turned )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The )Tj
T*
(Sacred Mushroom and the Cross )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(into a scandal were Allegro's conclusions about Jesus. In )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(attempting to establish the source of all religious belief and practice,\
Allegro asserted that )Tj
T*
(Jesus had never existed in historical reality, was merely an image evoke\
d in the psyche under )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the influence of an hallucinatory drug, psilocybin, the active ingredien\
t in hallucinogenic )Tj
T*
(mushrooms. In effect, he argued, Christianity, like all other religions,\
stemmed from a )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(species of psychedelic experience, a ritualistic )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(rite de passage )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(promulgated by an orgiastic )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(magic mushroom cult.)Tj
T*
( Taken separately, and placed in a different context, Allegro's con\
clusions would probably )Tj
T*
(not have provoked the storm they did. Certainly reputable scholars befor\
e Allegro had )Tj
T*
(questioned, and doubted, the existence of an historical Jesus. Some of t\
hem, for that matter, )Tj
T*
(still do, though they are in a minority. And there is little dispute tod\
ay that drugs - )Tj
T*
(psychedelic and of other kinds -were used to at least some extent among \
the religions, cults, )Tj
T*
(sects and mystery schools of the ancient Middle East - as indeed they we\
re, and continue to )Tj
T*
(be, across the world. It is certainly not inconceivable that such substa\
nces were known to, )Tj
T*
(and perhaps employed by, lst-century Judaism and early Christianity. One\
must also )Tj
T*
(remember the climate and atmosphere of the late 1960s. Today, in retrosp\
ect, one tends to )Tj
T*
(think in terms of the so-called 'drug culture' - in terms of a facile er\
satz mysticism, of Ken )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(51 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
697 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 650.461 520 115.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.345 520 231.116 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 233.453 520 185.892 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 150.953 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 134.453 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 117.953 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 84.953 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 67.041 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 50.541 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 14.541 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(Kesey and his 'Merry Pranksters', of Tom Wolfe and )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(hippies thronging the streets of San Francisco's Haight-Ashbury, staging\
'love-ins' and 'be-ins' )Tj
T*
(in Golden Gate Park. That, however, is only one side of the picture, and\
tends to eclipse the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(very real excitement and expectation that psychedelia generated even in \
more sophisticated )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and disciplined minds - the conviction, shared by many scientists, neuro\
logists, biochemists, )Tj
T*
(academicians, psychologists, medical practitioners, philosophers and art\
ists, that humanity )Tj
T*
(was indeed on the verge of some genuine epistemological 'breakthrough'.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( Books such as Huxley's )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Doors of Perception )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(enjoyed enormous currency, and not )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(just among the rebellious young. At Harvard, Timothy Leary, with his pro\
clamations of a )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
('new religion', still possessed in those days a considerable measure of \
credibility. In )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The )Tj
T*
(Teachings of Don Juan, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Castaneda had produced not just a best-selling book, but also an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(acclaimed academic dissertation for the University of California. Psyche\
delic substances )Tj
T*
(were routinely used in both medicine and psychotherapy. Divinity student\
s in Boston )Tj
T*
(conducted a service under the influence of LSD, and most of them said af\
terwards they had )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(indeed experienced an intensified sense of the sacred, a greater rapproc\
hement to the divine. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Even the MP Christopher Mayhew, later Minister of Defence, voluntarily a\
ppeared stoned on )Tj
T*
(the nation's television screens, beaming beatifically at his interviewer\
, wearing the )Tj
T*
(seraphically celestial smirk of a man newly promoted to sagehood. One ca\
n see why the )Tj
T*
(academic and critical establishment recoiled in alarm from Allegro's boo\
k, even though )Tj
T*
(Allegro himself repudiated the mentality of Haight-Asbury and never hims\
elf smoked or )Tj
T*
(drank.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( All the same, and even if not for the reasons usually cited, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Sacred Mushroom and the )Tj
T*
(Cross )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(was a distinctly unorthodox book, and effectively compromised Allegro's \
credibility as )Tj
T*
(a scholar. Its reviewer in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(for example, became personal, embarking on an amateur )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(psychoanalysis of Allegro in order to debunk him.)Tj
11 0 0 11 286.4987 359.9245 Tm
(46 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 300.2487 356.4045 Tm
(Allegro's own publishers publicly )Tj
-21.109 -1.303 Td
(apologised for issuing the book, cravenly admitting it to be 'unnecessar\
ily offensive'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 475.905 342.012 Tm
(47)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 486.905 338.492 Tm
( In a )Tj
-34.684 -1.203 Td
(letter to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(on 26 May 1970, fourteen prominent British scholars repudiated Allegro's\
)Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(conclusions.)Tj
11 0 0 11 78.365 307.5608 Tm
(48)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 89.365 304.0408 Tm
( The signatories included Geza Vermes of Oxford, who'd concurred with mu\
ch )Tj
-5.772 -1.2 Td
(of Allegro's previous work on the Qumran material, and who was soon to e\
cho his complaints )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(about the international team's delays. The signatories also included Pro\
fessor Godfrey Driver, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Allegro's former mentor, who had formulated a more radical interpretatio\
n of the Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(texts than Allegro himself had ever attempted.)Tj
T*
( Allegro continued to bring the attention of the public to the dela\
ys in the publication of )Tj
T*
(the scrolls. In 1987, a year before his death, he declared the internati\
onal team's delays to be )Tj
T*
('pathetic and inexcusable', and added that his former colleagues, for ye\
ars, 'have been sitting )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(on the material which is not only of outstanding importance, but also qu\
ite the most )Tj
T*
(religiously sensitive':)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( There is no doubt . . . that the evidence from the scrolls undermi\
nes the uniqueness of the )Tj
T*
( Christians as a sect . . . In fact we know damn all about the orig\
ins of Christianity. )Tj
T*
(However, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( these documents do lift the curtain.)Tj
11 0 0 11 223.8675 75.1483 Tm
(49)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 55.1283 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( By this time, the initiative had passed into the hands of the next\
generation of scholars )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(52 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
698 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 614.051 520 151.949 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 597.551 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 581.051 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 332.1 520 248.951 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 315.6 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 282.6 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 266.1 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 233.1 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 200.1 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 182.187 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 165.687 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 116.149 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 99.649 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 66.649 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 30.649 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.1283 Tm
(and Allegro had left the world of scroll scholarship to pursue his resea\
rch on the origins of )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(myth and religion. His works subsequent to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(were )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(moderate enough, but for most readers, as well as for the academic estab\
lishment, he was to )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(remain an 'exile', the man who, in the sneering words of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(had 'traced the source of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Christianity to an edible fungus'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 189.3138 688.1585 Tm
(50)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 200.3138 684.6385 Tm
( He died suddenly in 1988, no longer accepted by his )Tj
-13.841 -1.2 Td
(colleagues, but still energetic, enthusiastic about his own philological\
work in progress, and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(optimistic. It must have been some consolation for him to see, before hi\
s death, that his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(defiance of the international team, and his concern about their delays i\
n releasing material, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(were already being echoed by others.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(In 1956, Edmund Wilson had favourably reviewed Allegro's 'popular' book \
on the Dead Sea )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Scrolls. In 1969, when he brought out the new edition of his own book, i\
t had swollen to )Tj
T*
(twice its former length. The situation regarding the scrolls was no long\
er, for Wilson, merely )Tj
T*
(a question of 'tension' and 'inhibition'; it had now begun to assume the\
proportions of a cover-)Tj
T*
(up and a scandal: 'I have been told by a Catholic scholar that at first,\
in regard to the scrolls, )Tj
T*
(a kind of official policy tended to bias scholarship in the direction of\
minimizing their )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(importance.')Tj
11 0 0 11 77.7737 472.246 Tm
(51)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 88.7737 468.726 Tm
( By the mid-1970s, biblical scholars were beginning to speak openly of a\
)Tj
-5.729 -1.2 Td
(scandal. Even the most docile began to have their worries, and the inter\
national team were )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(alienating men who had no desire to engage in academic controversy. Amon\
g the most )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(prominent names in contemporary Semitic scholarship, for example, is tha\
t of Dr Geza )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Vermes, who has, since 1951, been publishing books and articles on the s\
crolls. Initially, he )Tj
T*
(had no quarrel with the international team and their work. Like many oth\
ers, however, he )Tj
T*
(gradually began to lose patience with the delays in publication. In 1977\
, he published a book, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in the first chapter of which he publicly flung )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(down the gauntlet:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( On this thirtieth anniversary of their first coming to light the w\
orld is entitled to ask the )Tj
T*
(authorities )Tj
T*
( responsible for the publication of the Qumran scrolls . . . what t\
hey intend to do about this )Tj
T*
( lamentable state of affairs. For unless drastic measures are taken\
at once, the greatest and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( most valuable of all Hebrew and Aramaic manuscript discoveries is \
likely to become the )Tj
T*
(academic )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( scandal )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(par excellence )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(of the twentieth century.)Tj
11 0 0 11 292.9475 190.2949 Tm
(52)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 170.2749 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( True to form, the international team did not deign to take any not\
ice. Nearly a decade )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(later, in 1985, Dr. Vermes again called them to account, this time in th\
e )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Times Literary )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Supplement:)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Eight years ago I defined this situation as 'a lamentable state of\
affairs' and warned that it )Tj
T*
(was )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( 'likely to become the academic scandal par )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(excellence )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(of the twentieth century' unless )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(drastic )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(53 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
699 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 763.61 520 2.39 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 730.61 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 714.11 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 696.198 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 679.698 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 612.285 520 67.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 480.285 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 364.785 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 348.285 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 315.285 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 297.373 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 280.873 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 247.873 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 214.873 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 198.373 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 165.373 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 132.373 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 115.873 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 99.373 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 82.873 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 66.373 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 49.873 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 13.873 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 751.6976 Tm
( measures were taken at once. Regrettably, this has not happened an\
d the present chief )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(editor of )Tj
T*
( the fragments has in the meantime gone on the record as one who re\
jects as unjust and )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( unreasonable any criticism regarding the delay.)Tj
11 0 0 11 291.05 704.3051 Tm
(53)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 684.2851 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(In the same statement, Dr Vermes praised Yigael Yadin, who had just died\
, for the )Tj
T*
(promptitude with which he'd ushered into print the Qumran material in hi\
s possession: 'But it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(is also a reminder to us all, especially to those who have been tardy in\
responding to the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(challenge of their privileged task, that time is running out.')Tj
11 0 0 11 332.135 620.3926 Tm
(54)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 600.3726 Tm
( In his desire to avoid undignified controversy, Dr. Vermes neglect\
ed to pursue the matter )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(further. As before, the international team took no notice whatever of hi\
s comments. For Dr. )Tj
T*
(Vermes, the situation must be particularly galling. He is a recognized e\
xpert in the field. He )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(has published translations of such scrolls as have found their way into \
the public domain - )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(through Israeli auspices, for example. He is certainly as competent to w\
ork on unpublished )Tj
T*
(Qumran material as any member of the international team, and is probably\
better qualified )Tj
T*
(than most. Yet for the whole of his distinguished academic career, acces\
s to that material has )Tj
T*
(been denied him. He has not even been allowed to see it.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In the meantime, valuable evidence continues to remain under wraps\
. We ourselves can )Tj
T*
(personally testify to vital material which, if it has not exactly been s\
uppressed, has not been )Tj
T*
(made public either. In November 1989, for example, Michael Baigent visit\
ed Jerusalem and )Tj
T*
(met with members of the current international team. One of them was Fath\
er Emile Puech, )Tj
T*
(the young 'crown prince' of the Ecole Biblique, who 'inherited' the scro\
ll fragments )Tj
T*
(previously assigned to Father Jean Starcky. These included material labe\
lled 'of unknown )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(provenance'. In personal conversation, Father Puech divulged three impor\
tant discoveries:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( 1. He had apparently found new overlaps between the scrolls and t\
he Sermon on the )Tj
T*
(Mount, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( including fresh and significant references to 'the poor in sp\
irit'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 392.635 305.4801 Tm
(55)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 285.4601 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( 2. In the Epistle of Barnabas, an apocryphal Christian text menti\
oned as early as the 2nd )Tj
T*
(century )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( ad, Puech had found a quotation hitherto untraced, attributed\
to an 'unknown prophet'. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The )Tj
T*
( quotation, in fact, proved to have come directly from one of \
the Dead Sea Scrolls, thus )Tj
T*
( establishing that the author of the Epistle of Barnabas was a\
member of, or had access )Tj
T*
(to, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Qumran community and its teachings. Here was an incontroverti\
ble link between )Tj
T*
(Qumran and )Tj
T*
( Christian tradition.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 3. In the work of the 2nd-century Christian writer Justin Martyr,\
Puech found yet another )Tj
T*
( quotation deriving directly from the Qumran scrolls.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(54 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
700 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 530.685 520 235.315 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 514.185 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 497.685 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 481.185 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 464.685 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 448.185 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 418.185 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 388.185 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 371.685 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 355.185 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 97.185 520 258 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 61.185 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.675 Tm
('We are not hiding anything,' Puech insisted adamantly. 'We will publish\
everything.')Tj
11 0 0 11 477.4312 756.195 Tm
(56)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 488.4312 752.675 Tm
( To )Tj
-34.795 -1.2 Td
(our knowledge, however, none of the revelations confided by Puech in con\
versation has yet )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(appeared in print, and there seems no immediate likelihood of their doin\
g so. On the other )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(hand, there has been a recent 'leak' which offers some indication of the\
kind of material still )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(being suppressed. This 'leak' surfaced in 1990, in the pages of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and was confided, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(apparently, by an unnamed scholar whose conscience was troubling him. It\
consists of a )Tj
T*
(Qumran fragment very similar to a passage in Luke's Gospel. Referring to\
Jesus' imminent )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(birth, Luke \(1:32-5\) speaks of a child who will be called 'Son of the \
Most High' and 'Son of )Tj
T*
(God'. The Qumran fragment from Cave 4 also speaks of the coming of someo\
ne who 'by his )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(name shall ... be hailed [as] the Son of God, and they shall call him 'S\
on of the Most High'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 509.9088 606.2439 Tm
(57 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 586.1852 Tm
(This, as )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(points out, is an extraordinary discovery, 'the first time that the term\
"Son of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(God" has been found in a Palestinian text outside the Bible'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 340.0412 571.7927 Tm
(58)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 351.0412 568.2727 Tm
( Whatever the circumstances )Tj
-24.803 -1.2 Td
(pertaining to the release of this fragment, it derives from the corpus o\
f material hitherto )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(controlled, and rigorously withheld, by the 'elusive' Father Milik.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
25 0 0 25 263.75 426.4429 Tm
(4)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
-4.834 -1.201 Td
(Opposing the Consensus)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 376.2727 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 335.6171 Tm
(E)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 25.0075 335.6171 Tm
(dmund Wilson, John Allegro and Geza Vermes all condemned the internation\
al team for )Tj
-1.091 -1.407 Td
(secrecy, for procrastination and delay in releasing Qumran material and \
for establishing a )Tj
T*
(scholarly monopoly over the Dead Sea Scrolls. Wilson and Allegro both ch\
allenged the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(team's laboured attempts to distance the Qumran community from so-called\
'early )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Christianity'. In other respects, however, all three scholars concurred \
with the consensus of )Tj
T*
(interpretation established by the international team. They accepted, for\
example, the team's )Tj
T*
(dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls as being pre-Christian. They also accepte\
d the team's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(contention that the members of the Qumran community were Essenes. And th\
ey accepted that )Tj
T*
(the supposed Essenes at Qumran were of the traditional kind described by\
Pliny, Philo and )Tj
T*
(Josephus - ascetic, reclusive, pacifist, divorced from the mainstream of\
social, political and )Tj
T*
(religious thought. If Christianity were indeed somehow connected with th\
e Qumran )Tj
T*
(community, it therefore emerged as less original than had hitherto been \
believed. It could be )Tj
T*
(seen to have drawn on Qumran, just as it was acknowledged to have drawn \
on 'conventional' )Tj
T*
(Old Testament Judaism. Apart from that, there was no particular reason t\
o modify one's )Tj
T*
(image or conception of it.)Tj
T*
( By the 1960s, however, scholarly opposition to the international t\
eam's consensus had )Tj
T*
(begun to arise from another quarter. Its questioning of that consensus w\
as to be much more )Tj
T*
(radical than anything submitted by Wilson, Allegro or Vermes. It was to \
challenge not only )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(55 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
701 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.961 520 115.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.961 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 334.098 520 167.864 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 37.059 520 297.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 1.059 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(the dating of the Qumran scrolls as established by the international tea\
m, but also the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(allegedly Essene character of the Qumran community. The men responsible \
for this criticism )Tj
T*
(were Cecil Roth and Godfrey Driver.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Cecil Roth was perhaps the most prominent Jewish historian of his era. A\
fter serving with the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(British Army during the First World War, he had obtained his doctorate f\
rom Merton )Tj
T*
(College, Oxford, as an historian. For some years, he was Reader in Jewis\
h Studies at Oxford )Tj
T*
(- the post now occupied by Geza Vermes. He was a prolific writer, with m\
ore than six )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(hundred publications to his credit. He was also editor-in-chief of the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Encyclopaedia judaica. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(He commanded enormous respect in the academic world, and was recognised \
especially for )Tj
T*
(his expertise in Judaic history.)Tj
T*
( Godfrey Driver was a figure of comparable academic stature. He, to\
o, had served with the )Tj
T*
(British Army during the First World War, seeing action particularly in t\
he Middle East. He, )Tj
T*
(too, taught at Oxford, at Magdalen College, becoming, in 1938, Professor\
of Semitic )Tj
T*
(Philology. Until 1960, he also did three stints as Professor of Hebrew. \
He was joint director )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the team which translated the Old Testament for the New English Bible\
. As we have )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(noted, he was John Allegro's mentor, and recommended Allegro for the int\
ernational team.)Tj
T*
( From the very first discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Professor\
Driver had advocated )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(caution about the early, pre-Christian dates ascribed to them. In a lett\
er to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(on 23 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(August 1949, he warned that the pre-Christian date ascribed to the Qumra\
n scrolls 'seems )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(likely to win general acceptance before being subjected to critical exam\
ination'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 448.1712 442.6177 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 453.6712 439.0977 Tm
( In the same )Tj
-32.267 -1.2 Td
(letter, he stated: 'The external evidence . . . for a pre-Christian date\
is extremely precarious, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(while all the internal evidence seems against it. ')Tj
11 0 0 11 275.595 408.2052 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 281.095 404.6852 Tm
( Driver stressed the risks of attributing too )Tj
-19.716 -1.2 Td
(much accuracy to what he called 'external evidence' -to archaeology and \
palaeography. He )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(advocated, rather, a scrutiny of the 'internal evidence' - the content o\
f the scrolls themselves. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(On the basis of such evidence, he was eventually to conclude that the sc\
rolls dated from the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1st century of the Christian era.)Tj
T*
( In the meantime, Cecil Roth had been conducting his own research a\
nd, in 1958, )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(published the results in a work entitled )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Historical Background of the Dead Sea Scrolls. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(The historical background, he argued, was not pre-Christian, but, on the\
contrary, dated from )Tj
T*
(the time of the revolt in Judaea, between ad 66 and 74. Like Driver, Rot\
h insisted that the )Tj
T*
(texts of the scrolls themselves were a more accurate guide than archaeol\
ogy or palaeography. )Tj
T*
(Availing himself of this guide, he developed a number of points that not\
only ran counter to )Tj
T*
(the international team's consensus, but must also have outraged the Cath\
olics among them. )Tj
T*
(Citing textual references in one of the scrolls, for instance, he demons\
trated that the 'invaders' )Tj
T*
(regarded as adversaries by the Qumran community could only be Romans - a\
nd, further, )Tj
T*
(could only be Romans of the Empire, of imperial rather than republican t\
imes. He also )Tj
T*
(demonstrated that the militant nationalism and messianic fervour in many\
of the scrolls had )Tj
T*
(less in common with traditional images of the Essenes than with the Zeal\
ots described by )Tj
T*
(Josephus. He acknowledged that the original community at Qumran might in\
deed have been )Tj
T*
(established by Essenes of the traditional kind, but if so, he contended,\
they would have )Tj
T*
(vacated the site when it was destroyed in 37 bc. Those who occupied it s\
ubsequently, after 4 )Tj
T*
(bc, and who deposited the scrolls, would not have been Essenes at all, b\
ut Zealots. Pursuing )Tj
T*
(his argument a step further, he then endeavoured to establish links betw\
een the Qumran )Tj
T*
(community and the fierce defenders of Masada thirty miles to the south.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(56 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
702 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 599.549 520 166.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 497.724 520 101.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 281.773 520 215.951 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 245.773 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( Such assertions, needless to say, provoked indignant criticism fro\
m Father de Vaux's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(team. One of de Vaux's associates, Jean Carmignac, in reviewing Roth's b\
ook, complained )Tj
T*
(that Roth 'does not miss any occasion to closely link Masada and Qumran,\
but this is another )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(weakness of his thesis'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 137.7375 706.695 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 143.2375 703.175 Tm
( Even when, eight years later, Yigael Yadin, in his excavations at )Tj
-9.69 -1.2 Td
(Masada, found scrolls identical to some of those discovered at Qumran, t\
he international )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(team refused to consider Roth's thesis. Quite clearly, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(some )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(sort of connection had to exist )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(between Qumran and Masada, yet the team, their logic now creaking painfu\
lly at the seams, )Tj
T*
(insisted only one explanation was possible - 'some' of the Essenes from \
Qumran must have )Tj
T*
(deserted their own community and gone to the defence of Masada, bringing\
their sacred texts )Tj
T*
(with them!)Tj
T*
( So far as Masada was concerned, Roth was, then, to be vindicated b\
y Yadin's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(excavations. But he was also quite capable of fighting his own battles. \
In an article published )Tj
T*
(in 1959, he focused particularly on de Vaux's assertion, based on suppos\
ed 'archaeological )Tj
T*
(evidence', that the scrolls could not have been deposited any later than\
the summer of ad 68, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(when Qumran was 'taken by the 10th Legion'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 262.4088 523.7439 Tm
(4 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 270.6588 520.2239 Tm
(Roth demonstrated conclusively that the 10th )Tj
-18.957 -1.303 Td
(Legion, in the summer of AD 68, was nowhere near Qumran.)Tj
11 0 0 11 347.9475 505.8314 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 485.8114 Tm
( Roth's arguments may have infuriated de Vaux's international team,\
but they were shared )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(by his colleague Godfrey Driver. The two worked closely together, and in\
1965 Driver )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(published his massive and detailed opus on the Qumran material, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Judaean Scrolls. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(According to Driver, 'arguments to establish a pre-Christian date of the\
Scrolls are )Tj
T*
(fundamentally unsound'. The sole reasons for establishing such a date we\
re, he pointed out, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(palaeographical, 'and these cannot stand alone'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 269.6413 405.3802 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 275.1413 401.8602 Tm
( Driver agreed with Roth that the scrolls )Tj
-19.283 -1.2 Td
(referred to the period of the revolt in Judaea, between ad 66 and 74, an\
d were thus 'more or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(less' contemporary with the New Testament. He also concurred with Roth t\
hat the Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(community must have consisted of Zealots, not traditional Essenes. He ca\
lculated that the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scrolls could have been deposited at Qumran any time between then and th\
e end of the )Tj
T*
(second revolt in Judaea, the rebellion of Simeon bar Kochba between ad 1\
32 and 135. He )Tj
T*
(was scathing about the scholarship of the international team, as exempli\
fied especially by de )Tj
T*
(Vaux.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Roth and Driver were both famous, acknowledged, 'heavyweights' in \
their respective )Tj
T*
(historical fields, who could not be ignored or cavalierly dismissed. The\
ir prestige and their )Tj
T*
(learning could not be impugned or discredited. Neither could they be iso\
lated. And they were )Tj
T*
(too skilled in academic controversy to put their own necks into a noose,\
as Allegro had done. )Tj
T*
(They were, however, vulnerable to the kind of patronising condescension \
that de Vaux and )Tj
T*
(the international team, closing ranks in their consensus, proceeded to a\
dopt. Roth and Driver, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(august though they might be, were portrayed as out of their element in t\
he field of Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scholarship. Thus, de Vaux, reviewing Driver's book in 1967, wrote, 'It \
is a sad thing to find )Tj
T*
(here once more this conflict of method and mentality between the textual\
critic and the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(archaeologist, the man at his desk and the man in the field. ')Tj
11 0 0 11 338.6113 123.4677 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 344.1113 119.9477 Tm
( Not, of course, that de Vaux )Tj
-24.299 -1.2 Td
(spent so very much time 'in the field' himself. As we have seen, he and \
most others on the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(international team were content to remain ensconced in their 'Scrollery'\
, leaving the bulk of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the fieldwork to the Bedouin. But the 'Scrollery', it might be argued, w\
as at least closer to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran than was Oxford. Moreover, de Vaux and his team could claim first\
-hand familiarity )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(57 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
703 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 548.636 520 151.364 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 380.811 520 167.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 281.811 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 265.311 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 248.811 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 97.448 520 151.364 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 80.948 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 47.948 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 11.948 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(with the entire corpus of Qumran texts, which Roth and Driver, denied ac\
cess to those texts, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(could not. And while Roth and Driver had questioned the international te\
am's historical )Tj
T*
(method, they had not actually confronted its excessive reliance on archa\
eology and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(palaeography.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Archaeology and palaeography appeared to be the team's strengths, \
allowing de Vaux to )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(conclude his review of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Judaean Scrolls )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(by stating, confidently and definitively, that )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('Driver's theory ... is impossible'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 190.0562 657.1564 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 195.5562 653.6364 Tm
( He could also, by invoking archaeology and palaeography, )Tj
-13.495 -1.2 Td
(dazzle other figures in the field and effectively hijack their support. \
Thus Professor Albright )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was persuaded to weigh in against Driver, whose thesis, Albright declare\
d, 'has failed )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(completely'. Its failure, Albright went on, derived from 'an obvious sce\
pticism with regard to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the methodology of archaeologists, numismatists, and palaeographers. Of \
course, he [Driver] )Tj
T*
(had the bad luck to run into head-on collision with one of the most bril\
liant scholars of our )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(day - Roland de Vaux . . . ')Tj
11 0 0 11 157.2075 556.7439 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 536.7239 Tm
( Moving on to the offensive, the international team and their colle\
agues continued to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(bombard Roth and Driver with increasingly contemptuous criticism. Both, \
as Eisenman has )Tj
T*
(observed, 'were ridiculed in a manner unbecoming their situation and -wi\
th such ferocity as )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(to make one wonder'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 127.7962 489.3314 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 138.7962 485.8114 Tm
( No one dared support them. No one dared risk the wrath of the now )Tj
-9.367 -1.303 Td
(solidly entrenched consensus. 'And the scholarly sheep', as Eisenman say\
s, 'fell into line.')Tj
11 0 0 11 500.325 471.4189 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 511.325 467.8988 Tm
( )Tj
-36.46 -1.2 Td
(So far as Roth and Driver were concerned, their interests and reputation\
s weren't confined )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(exclusively to Qumran research. In consequence, they simply retired from\
the arena, not )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(deeming it worthwhile to pursue the matter further. That this should hav\
e been allowed to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(happen testifies to the timidity and docility of other researchers in th\
e field. It remains a black )Tj
T*
(mark in the record of Qumran scholarship.)Tj
T*
( If the international team had exercised a monopoly before, their p\
osition now appeared to )Tj
T*
(be unassailable. They had outmanoeuvred two of their most potentially fo\
rmidable )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(adversaries, and their triumph seemed to be complete. Roth and Driver ha\
d been driven to )Tj
T*
(silence on the subject. Allegro had been discredited. Everyone else who \
might pose a threat )Tj
T*
(had been intimidated into compliance. By the late 1960s and early 1970s,\
the hegemony of )Tj
T*
(the international team was virtually absolute.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(By the mid-1980s, such opposition as existed to the international team w\
as scattered and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(disorganised. Most of it found expression in the United States, through \
a single journal, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Biblical Archaeology Review. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(In its issue for September/October 1985, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(reported a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(conference on the Dead Sea Scrolls held at New York University the previ\
ous May. It )Tj
T*
(repeated the statement by Professor Morton Smith made at that conference\
: 'I thought to )Tj
T*
(speak on the scandals of the Dead Sea documents, but these proved too nu\
merous, too )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(familiar, and too disgusting.)Tj
11 0 0 11 164.6875 139.9677 Tm
(>12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 181.8915 136.4477 Tm
( It observed that the international team were 'governed, so far )Tj
-12.501 -1.303 Td
(as can be ascertained, largely by convention, tradition, collegiality an\
d inertia'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 442.465 122.0552 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 453.465 118.5352 Tm
( And it )Tj
-32.252 -1.2 Td
(concluded:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The insiders, the scholars with the text assignments \(T.H. Gaster\
, professor emeritus of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Barnard )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(58 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
704 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 682.087 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 514.185 520 151.402 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 332.685 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 118.147 520 214.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 82.147 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( College, Columbia University, calls these insiders 'the charmed ci\
rcle'\), have the goodies )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(- to drip )Tj
T*
( out bit by bit. This gives them status, scholarly power and a wond\
erful ego trip. Why )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(squander it? )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( Obviously, the existence of this factor is controversial and dispu\
ted.)Tj
11 0 0 11 404.5013 690.195 Tm
(14)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 670.1364 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(called attention to the residue of frustration and resentment built up a\
mong scholars of )Tj
T*
(proven ability who had not been admitted to the 'charmed circle'. It als\
o, by implication, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(called attention to the benefits reaped by institutions such as Harvard \
University, where both )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Cross and Strugnell were stationed and where 'pet' graduate students wer\
e granted access to )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Qumran material while far more experienced and qualified researchers wer\
en't. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ended )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(its report by calling for 'immediate publication of photographs of the u\
npublished texts',)Tj
11 0 0 11 493.4913 573.2052 Tm
(15 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 553.1852 Tm
(echoing Morton Smith, who asked his colleagues to 'request the Israeli g\
overnment, which )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(now has ultimate authority over those scroll materials, immediately to p\
ublish photographs of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(all unpublished texts so that they will then be available to all scholar\
s'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 397.8325 522.2927 Tm
(16)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 502.2727 Tm
( That Smith's exhortation was ignored again bears witness to academ\
ic faint-heartedness. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(At the same time, it must be mentioned that Smith's exhortation was unfo\
rtunate in that it )Tj
T*
(implicitly passed the blame from the international team, the real culpri\
ts, to the Israeli )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(government, which had more immediate problems on its hands. The Israelis\
had kept their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(side of the bargain, made in 1967, that the international team would be \
allowed to retain their )Tj
T*
(monopoly, provided they published; the international team had not. Thus,\
while the Israeli )Tj
T*
(government might have been irresponsible in letting the situation contin\
ue, it was not to )Tj
T*
(blame for the situation itself. As Eisenman soon came to realise, most I\
sraelis - scholars and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(journalists alike, as well as government figures - were appallingly igno\
rant about the true )Tj
T*
(situation, and, it must be said, indifferent to it. Through this ignoran\
ce and indifference, an )Tj
T*
(outdated status quo had been allowed to continue intact.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( In 1985, however, the same year as the conference reported by )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(a well-known Israeli )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(MP, Yuval Ne'eman, began to take an interest in the matter, and in the p\
rocess showed )Tj
T*
(himself to be surprisingly well briefed. Ne'eman was a world-famous phys\
icist, Professor of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Physics and head of the Physics Department at Tel Aviv University until \
1971, when he )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(became President of the university. Prior to that he had been a military\
planner, one of those )Tj
T*
(responsible for evolving the basic strategic thinking of the Israeli Arm\
y. Between 1961 and )Tj
T*
(1963, he had been scientific director of the Soreq Research Establishmen\
t, the Israeli Atomic )Tj
T*
(Energy Commission. Ne'eman raised the issue of the scrolls in the Knesse\
t, the Israeli )Tj
T*
(Parliament, declaring it a 'scandal' that the Israeli authorities had no\
t reviewed or updated the )Tj
T*
(situation - that the international team had been left with a mandate and\
monopoly dating from )Tj
T*
(the former Jordanian regime. It was this challenge that finally forced t\
he Israeli Department )Tj
T*
(of Antiquities to investigate how and why an enclave of Catholic-oriente\
d scholars should )Tj
T*
(exercise so complete and exclusive a control over what was, in effect, a\
n Israeli state treasure.)Tj
T*
( The Department of Antiquities proceeded to confront the internatio\
nal team on the )Tj
T*
(question of publication. What accounted for the procrastination and dela\
ys, and what kind of )Tj
T*
(timetable for publication could reasonably be expected? The director of \
the team at the time )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(was Father Benoit, who on 15 September 1985 wrote to his colleagues.)Tj
11 0 0 11 401.4487 58.8416 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 412.4487 55.3216 Tm
( In this letter, a copy )Tj
-29.269 -1.2 Td
(of which is in our possession, he reminded them of Morton Smith's call f\
or immediate )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(59 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
705 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 698.234 520 67.766 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 462.958 520 235.276 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 363.958 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 347.458 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 330.958 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 231.958 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 98.468 520 133.49 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 62.468 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.3216 Tm
(publication of photographs. He also complained \(as if he were the aggri\
eved party\) about the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(use of the word 'scandal', not just by Morton Smith, but by Ne'eman as w\
ell, in the Knesset. )Tj
T*
(He went on to state his intention of recommending John Strugnell as 'chi\
ef editor' of future )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(publications. And he requested a timetable for publication from each mem\
ber of the team.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Compliance with Father Benoit's request was dilatory and patchy. T\
he Department of )Tj
T*
(Antiquities, prodded by Ne'eman, wrote to him again on 26 December 1985,\
repeating its )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(request for a report and for answers to the questions it had raised.)Tj
11 0 0 11 369.3288 655.4291 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 380.3288 651.9091 Tm
( One cannot be sure )Tj
-26.933 -1.2 Td
(whether Benoit based his reply on reliable information received from his\
colleagues, or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(whether he was simply improvising in order to buy time. But he wrote to \
the Department of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Antiquities promising definitively that everything in the international \
team's possession )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(would be published within seven years - that is, by 1993.)Tj
11 0 0 11 323.17 588.0166 Tm
(19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 334.17 584.4966 Tm
( This timetable was submitted, in )Tj
-23.576 -1.2 Td
(writing, as a binding undertaking, but of course no one took it seriousl\
y, and in personal )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(conversation with us, Ne'eman stated he had heard 'on the grapevine' tha\
t the timetable was )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(generally regarded as a joke.)Tj
11 0 0 11 167.685 537.104 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 178.685 533.584 Tm
( It has certainly proved to be so. There is no prospect whatever )Tj
-12.268 -1.2 Td
(of all the Qumran material, or even a reasonable part of it, appearing b\
y 1993. Not even the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(whole of the material from Cave 4 has been published. Following Allegro'\
s volume for )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Discoveries in the Judaean Desert )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(back in 1968, only three more have been issued, in 1977, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1982 and 1990, bringing the total number of volumes to eight.)Tj
T*
( Nonetheless, the intensifying pressure engendered panic among the \
international team. )Tj
T*
(Predictably enough, a search began for a scapegoat. Who had brought the \
Israeli government )Tj
T*
(into the affair? Who had briefed Ne'eman and enabled him to raise the is\
sue in the Knesset? )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Perhaps because of the repetition of the word 'scandal', the team conclu\
ded Geza Vermes to )Tj
T*
(have been responsible. In fact, Vermes had had nothing whatever to do wi\
th the matter. It )Tj
T*
(was Robert Eisenman who had briefed Ne'eman.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(Eisenman had learned from the omissions of Roth and Driver. He appreciat\
ed that the entire )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(edifice of the international team's consensus rested on the supposedly a\
ccurate data of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(archaeology and palaeography. Roth and Driver had correctly dismissed th\
ese data as )Tj
T*
(irrelevant, but without confronting them. Eisenman resolved to challenge\
the international )Tj
T*
(team on their own terrain - by exposing the methodology and demonstratin\
g that the resulting )Tj
T*
(data were irrelevant.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( He opened his campaign with the book that first brought him to our\
attention, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, )Tj
T*
(Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(published by EJ. Brill in Holland in 1983. In this book, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(he posed the first serious challenge the international team had yet enco\
untered to their )Tj
T*
(archaeology and palaeography. In his introduction, he explicitly flung d\
own the gauntlet to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the 'small group of specialists, largely working together' who had 'deve\
loped a consensus'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 505.66 156.0756 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 516.66 152.5556 Tm
( )Tj
-36.848 -1.2 Td
(Given the text's limited audience and circulation, of course, the intern\
ational team could )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(simply ignore the challenge. Indeed, the likelihood is that none of them\
read it at the time, in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(all probability dismissing it as a piece of ephemera by an upstart novic\
e.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Eisenman, however, refused to let his efforts be consigned to obli\
vion. By 1985, his )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(second book, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(had appeared in Italy, ironically under )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the imprint of one of the Vatican presses, Tipographia Gregoriana. It ca\
rried an Italian )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(60 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
706 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 535 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 403 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 304 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 38.587 520 265.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 2.587 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(preface, and the next year, with some additions and a revised appendix, \
was brought out by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(EJ. Brill. That same year, Eisenman was appointed Fellow-in-Residence at\
the prestigious )Tj
T*
(Albright Institute in Jerusalem. Here he began working behind the scenes\
to acquaint the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Israeli government with the situation and raise the scrolls on their age\
nda of priorities.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The international team's stranglehold, he realised, could not be b\
roken solely through )Tj
T*
(decorous or even strident protests in learned journals. It would be nece\
ssary to bring external )Tj
T*
(pressure to bear, preferably from above. Accordingly, Eisenman met and b\
riefed Professor )Tj
T*
(Ne'eman, and Ne'eman then forced the issue in the Knesset.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Later that year, Eisenman himself approached Father Benoit, and ve\
rbally requested )Tj
T*
(access to the scrolls. Predictably enough, Benoit politely refused, adro\
itly suggesting that )Tj
T*
(Eisenman should ask the Israeli authorities, and implying that the decis\
ion was not his to )Tj
T*
(make. At this point, Eisenman was still unaware of the stratagems employ\
ed by the )Tj
T*
(international team to thwart all applicants who wanted access to the scr\
olls. He was not, )Tj
T*
(however, prepared to be excluded so easily.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( All scholars during their tenure on the staff of the Albright Inst\
itute give one lecture to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the general public. Eisenman's lecture was scheduled for February 1986, \
and he chose as his )Tj
T*
(subject 'The Jerusalem Community and Qumran', with the provocative subti\
tle 'Problems in )Tj
T*
(Archaeology, Palaeography, History, and Chronology'. As in the case of h\
is book on James, )Tj
T*
(the title itself was calculated to strike a nerve. In accordance with cu\
stom, the Albright )Tj
T*
(Institute sent invitations to all important scholars in the field in Jer\
usalem, and it was a matter )Tj
T*
(of courtesy for sister institutions, like the French Ecole Biblique, to \
be represented. Five or )Tj
T*
(six turned up, a higher number than usual.)Tj
T*
( Since they were unfamiliar with Eisenman and his work, they may no\
t have expected )Tj
T*
(anything out of the ordinary. Gradually, however, their complacency bega\
n to crumble, and )Tj
T*
(they listened to his arguments in silence.* They declined to ask any que\
stions at the end of )Tj
T*
(the lecture, leaving without extending the usual courtesy of congratulat\
ions. For the first )Tj
T*
(time, it had become apparent to them that in Eisenman they faced a serio\
us challenge. True to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(form, they ignored it, in the hope, presumably, that it would go away.)Tj
T*
( The following spring, one of Eisenman's friends and colleagues, Pr\
ofessor Philip Davies )Tj
T*
(of Sheffield University, arrived in Jerusalem for a short stay. He and E\
isenman went to )Tj
T*
(discuss with Magen Broshi, director of the Shrine of the Book, their des\
ire to see the )Tj
T*
(unpublished scroll fragments still sequestered by the international team\
. Broshi laughed at )Tj
T*
(what apparently struck him as a vain hope: 'You will not see these thing\
s in your lifetime,' he )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(said.)Tj
11 0 0 11 35.5887 211.695 Tm
(22)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 46.5887 208.175 Tm
( In June, towards the end of his stay in Jerusalem, Eisenman was invited\
to tea at the )Tj
-2.661 -1.2 Td
(house of a colleague, a professor at the Hebrew University who would lat\
er become a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(member of the Israeli 'Scroll Oversight Committee'. Again he took Davies\
with him. A )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(number of other academics, including Joseph Baumgarten of Baltimore Hebr\
ew College, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(were present, and early in the evening John Strugnell - Allegro's old ad\
versary and )Tj
T*
(subsequently the head of the international team - made his appearance. B\
oisterous and )Tj
T*
(apparently intent on confrontation, he began to complain about 'unqualif\
ied people' )Tj
T*
(importunately demanding access to the Qumran material. Eisenman responde\
d on cue. How )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(did Strugnell define 'qualified'? Was he himself 'qualified'? Aside from\
his supposed skills in )Tj
T*
(analysing handwriting, did he know anything about history? Ostensibly, i\
t was all a half-)Tj
T*
(joking, more or less 'civilised' debate, but it was growing ominously pe\
rsonal.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(61 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
707 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.049 520 133.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 466.136 520 83.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 449.636 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.136 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.136 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 367.136 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 334.136 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 299.724 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 283.224 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 200.685 520 82.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 151.108 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 52.108 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 16.108 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(__________)Tj
T*
(*For an outline of Eisenman's remarks, see Chapter 10, Science in the Se\
rvice of Faith.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(The next year, 1986-7, Eisenman spent at Oxford, as Senior Scholar at th\
e Oxford Centre for )Tj
T*
(Postgraduate Hebrew Studies and visiting Member of Linacre College. Thro\
ugh contacts in )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem, he had been given two secret documents. One was a copy of a s\
croll on which )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Strugnell was working, part of his 'private fiefdom'. This text, written\
apparently by a leader )Tj
T*
(of the ancient Qumran community and outlining a number of the community'\
s governing )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(precepts, is known by those in the field as the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('MMT' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(document. Strugnell had shown it )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(around at the 1985 conference, but had not published it.)Tj
11 0 0 11 316.6525 574.6564 Tm
(23)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 327.6525 571.1364 Tm
( \(Nor has he yet, though the entire )Tj
-23.102 -1.2 Td
(text comes to a mere 121 lines.\))Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The second document was of more contemporary significance. It comp\
rised a computer )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(print-out, or list, of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(all )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Qumran texts in the hands of the international team.)Tj
11 0 0 11 422.4725 523.7439 Tm
(24)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 433.4725 520.2239 Tm
( What made it )Tj
-30.798 -1.2 Td
(particularly important was that the international team had repeatedly de\
nied that any such )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(print-out or list existed. Here was definitive proof that vast quantitie\
s of material had not yet )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(been published and were being suppressed.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Eisenman had no hesitation about what to do:)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
( Since I had decided that one of the main problems between scholars\
, which had created )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(this )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( whole situation in the first place, was over-protectiveness and je\
alously guarded secrecy, )Tj
T*
(I decided )Tj
T*
( to circulate anything that came into my hands without conditions. \
This was the service I )Tj
T*
(could )Tj
T*
( render; plus, it would undermine the international cartel or monop\
oly of such )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(documents.)Tj
11 0 0 11 73.0163 307.8314 Tm
(25)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 287.8114 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Eisenman accordingly made available a copy of the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('MMT' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(document to anyone who )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(expressed a desire to see it. These copies apparently circulated like wi\
ldfire, so much so that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(a year and a half later he received one back again from a third party wh\
o asked if he had seen )Tj
T*
(it. He could tell by certain notations that this was one of the copies t\
hat he had originally )Tj
T*
(allowed to circulate.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( The print-out, like the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('MMT' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(document, was duly circulated, producing precisely the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(effect Eisenman had anticipated. He made a particular point of sending a\
copy of it to )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Hershel Shanks of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(thus providing the journal with ammunition to renew its campaign.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( By this time, needless to say, Eisenman's relations with the inter\
national team were )Tj
T*
(deteriorating. On the surface, of course, each maintained with the other\
a respectable )Tj
T*
(academic demeanour of frosty civility. They could not, after all, public\
ly attack him for his )Tj
T*
(actions, which had been manifestly disinterested, manifestly in the name\
of scholarship. But )Tj
T*
(the rift was widening between them; and it wasn't long before a calculat\
ed attempt was made )Tj
T*
(to freeze him out.)Tj
T*
( In January 1989, Eisenman visited Amir Drori, the newly appointed \
director of the Israeli )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(62 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
708 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 681.695 520 84.305 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 582.695 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 417.695 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 203.195 520 214.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 104.195 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 87.695 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 54.695 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 18.695 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.6954 Tm
(Department of Antiquities. Drori inadvertently reported to Eisenman that\
he was about to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(sign an agreement with the team's new chief editor, John Strugnell. Acco\
rding to this )Tj
T*
(agreement, the team's monopoly would be retained. The previous deadline \
for publication, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(accepted by Father Benoit, Strugnell's predecessor, was to be abrogated.\
All remaining )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Qumran material was to be published not by 1993, but by 1996.)Tj
11 0 0 11 360.9825 689.8029 Tm
(26)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 669.7829 Tm
( Eisenman was naturally appalled. Attempts to dissuade Drori, howev\
er, proved futile. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Eisenman left the meeting determined to employ a new and more drastic st\
ratagem. The only )Tj
T*
(means of bringing pressure to bear on both the international team and on\
the Department of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Antiquities, and perhaps stop Drori from proceeding with the contract, w\
ould be Israel's High )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Court of Justice, which dealt with miscarriages of justice and private a\
ppeals from )Tj
T*
(individuals.)Tj
T*
( Eisenman explored the question with lawyers. Yes, they concluded, \
the High Court might )Tj
T*
(be persuaded to intervene. In order for it to do so, however, Eisenman w\
ould have to present )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(it with proof of a miscarriage of justice; he would have to show, prefer\
ably in writing, that )Tj
T*
(access to the scrolls by a legitimate scholar had been refused. At the t\
ime, no such record )Tj
T*
(existed - not, at least, in the legalistic sense the Court would require\
. Other scholars had, of )Tj
T*
(course, been refused access to the scrolls; but some of them were dead, \
others were scattered )Tj
T*
(across the world, and there was none of the required documentation. Stru\
gnell would )Tj
T*
(therefore have to be approached with a series of new requests for access\
to specific materials )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(- which, as a foregone conclusion, he would refuse. Now that Eisenman ha\
d the catalogue )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(numbers, his task would be easier.)Tj
T*
( Not wishing to make this request alone, Eisenman felt it would be \
more impressive if he )Tj
T*
(enlisted the support of others. He approached Philip Davies of Sheffield\
, who agreed to )Tj
T*
(support him in what both recognised would be only the first shot of a pr\
olonged engagement )Tj
T*
(fought through the Israeli High Court. On 16 March 1989, the two profess\
ors submitted a )Tj
T*
(formal letter to John Strugnell. They requested access to certain origin\
al fragments, and )Tj
T*
(photographs of fragments, found at the Qumran site designated Cave 4, an\
d listed in the )Tj
T*
(computer print-out which Eisenman had leaked into circulation. In order \
to preclude any )Tj
T*
(misunderstanding, they cited the reference numbers assigned by the print\
-out to the )Tj
T*
(photographic negatives. They also requested access to a number of scroll\
commentaries, or )Tj
T*
(commentary fragments, related to the primary text. They offered to pay a\
ll costs involved and )Tj
T*
(promised not to publish any definitive transcription or translation of t\
he material, which )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(would be used only in their own research. They promised, too, to abide b\
y all the normal )Tj
T*
(procedures of copyright law.)Tj
T*
( In their letter, Eisenman and Davies acknowledged the time and ene\
rgy expended over )Tj
T*
(the years by the international team - but, they said, they felt the team\
had 'already been )Tj
T*
(adequately compensated' by enjoying such long and exclusive access to th\
e Qumran material. )Tj
T*
(They stated that thirty-five to forty years was long enough for other sc\
holars to have waited )Tj
T*
(for similar access, without which 'we can no longer make meaningful prog\
ress in our )Tj
T*
(endeavours'. The letter continued:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( Surely your original commission was to publish these materials as \
quickly as possible for )Tj
T*
(the )Tj
T*
( benefit of the scholarly community as a whole, not to control them\
. It would have been )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(63 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
709 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.087 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 566.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.175 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 317.675 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 301.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 268.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 235.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 202.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 169.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 151.262 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 134.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 98.762 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(different, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( perhaps, if you and your scholars had discovered these materials i\
n the first place. But )Tj
T*
(you did not; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( they were simply assigned to you . . .)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( . . . The situation as it now stands is abnormal in the extreme. T\
herefore, as mature )Tj
T*
(scholars at )Tj
T*
( the height of our powers and abilities, we feel it is an impositio\
n upon us and a hardship )Tj
T*
(to ask us )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( to wait any longer for the research availability of and access to \
these materials forty years )Tj
T*
(after )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( their discovery.)Tj
11 0 0 11 116.1638 591.195 Tm
(27)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 571.175 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Eisenman and Davies expected Strugnell to refuse their requests. S\
trugnell, however, did )Tj
T*
(not bother to reply at all. On 2 May, therefore, Eisenman wrote to Amir \
Drori - who earlier )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that year had renewed the international team's monopoly with the publica\
tion deadline of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1996. Eisenman enclosed a copy of the letter to Strugnell, mentioning th\
at it had been posted )Tj
T*
(to both of Strugnell's addresses, at Harvard and in Jerusalem. Of Strugn\
ell's failure to reply, )Tj
T*
(he wrote: 'Frankly, we are tired of being treated contemptuously. This k\
ind of cavalier )Tj
T*
(treatment is not really a new phenomenon, but is part and parcel of the \
process that has been )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(going on for 20-30 years or more . . ,')Tj
11 0 0 11 215.6313 441.2825 Tm
(28)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 421.2625 Tm
( Since Strugnell would not grant access to the Qumran material, Eis\
enman requested that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Drori, exercising a higher authority, should do so. He then made two par\
ticularly important )Tj
T*
(points. As long as the international team continued to control the Qumra\
n texts, it would not )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(be sufficient merely to speed up the publication schedule. Nothing short\
of free scholarly )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(access would be satisfactory - to check the international team's conclus\
ions, to allow for )Tj
T*
(variations in translation and interpretation, to discern connections the\
team themselves might )Tj
T*
(perhaps have overlooked:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( We cannot be sure . . . that they have exhausted all possible frag\
ments in relation to a )Tj
T*
(given )Tj
T*
( document or that they are putting fragments together in proper seq\
uence. Nor can we be )Tj
T*
(sure if )Tj
T*
( the inventories are in fact complete and that fragments may not ha\
ve been lost, destroyed )Tj
T*
(or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( overlooked in some manner or for some reason. Only the whole of th\
e interested )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scholarly )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( community working together can assure this.)Tj
11 0 0 11 278.0975 159.37 Tm
(29)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 139.35 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The second point would appear, at least with hindsight, to be self\
-evident. The )Tj
T*
(international team insisted on the importance of archaeology and palaeog\
raphy. It was on the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(basis of their supposedly accurate archaeological and palaeographical st\
udies, as Eisenman )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(had explained, that dates for the Qumran texts had been posited - and ac\
cepted. Yet the texts )Tj
T*
(themselves had been subject only to carbon-dating tests in use at around\
the time of the )Tj
T*
(scrolls' discovery - tests which were very clumsy and consumed much manu\
script material. )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(64 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
710 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 599.35 520 166.65 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 548.437 520 50.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 331.035 520 217.402 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 231.919 520 99.116 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 215.419 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 182.419 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 165.919 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 149.419 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 116.419 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 99.919 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 83.419 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 50.419 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 14.419 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.85 Tm
(Lest too much text be lost, therefore, only some of the wrappings found \
in the jars had been )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(tested. These confirmed a date of around the beginning of the Christian \
era. None of the texts )Tj
T*
(had been tested by the more recent techniques of Carbon-14 dating, even \
though Carbon-14 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dating had now been refined by the newer AMS \(Accelerator Mass Spectros\
copy\) technique. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Little material would now be lost in the process and greater accuracy co\
uld be achieved. )Tj
T*
(Eisenman therefore suggested that Drori exercise his authority and perfo\
rm new, up-to-date )Tj
T*
(tests. He also recommended that outsiders be brought into the process to\
keep it fair. He )Tj
T*
(concluded his letter with a passionate appeal: 'Please act to release th\
ese materials to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(interested scholars who need them to proceed with professional research \
without prejudice )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(and without distinction immediately. ')Tj
11 0 0 11 218.3537 607.4575 Tm
(30)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 587.4375 Tm
( No doubt prompted by Drori, Strugnell, in Jerusalem at the time, a\
t last replied on 15 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(May. Despite the fact that Eisenman's letter to him had been posted to h\
is address at both )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Harvard and Jerusalem, he blamed the delay on its having been sent to 't\
he wrong country'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 510.2388 556.545 Tm
(31)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 536.4864 Tm
( According to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
('Strugnell's imperious reply to Eisenman's request for access displays )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(extraordinary intellectual hauteur and academic condescension.')Tj
11 0 0 11 361.4775 522.0939 Tm
(32)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 372.4775 518.5739 Tm
( In it, he declares himself )Tj
-26.362 -1.203 Td
('puzzled' as to why Eisenman and Davies showed their letter to 'half the\
)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Who's Who )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(of Israel'. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(He accuses them of not having followed 'acceptable norms' and refers to \
them as 'lotus-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(eaters', which, in Strugnell's Mandarin, presumably denotes Californians\
, though why this )Tj
T*
(term should apply to Philip Davies at Sheffield is an open question. Str\
ugnell contrives not )Tj
T*
(just to deny Eisenman's and Davies's request for access, but also to dod\
ge each of the salient )Tj
T*
(points they had raised. He advises them to take as their example the way\
'such requests have )Tj
T*
(been handled in the past' and go through established channels - ignoring\
the fact that all such )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(requests 'in the past' had been denied. He also complains that the print\
-out Eisenman and )Tj
T*
(Davies had used to cite reference numbers of photographic negatives was \
old and out of date. )Tj
T*
(He neglects to mention that this print-out, not to mention any new one, \
had been unavailable )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(to non-members of the international team until Eisenman put it into circ\
ulation.)Tj
11 0 0 11 446.92 339.1427 Tm
(33)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 319.1227 Tm
( Eisenman responded to Strugnell's brush-off by going as public as \
he possibly could. By )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(the middle of 1989, the issue had become a )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(cause c\351l\350bre )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in American and Israeli )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(newspapers, and, to a lesser degree, was picked up by the British press \
as well. Eisenman was )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(extensively and repeatedly quoted by the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Washington Post, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Los )Tj
T*
(Angeles Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Chicago Tribune, Time Magazine )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and Canada's )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maclean's Magazine. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(He )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(stressed five major points:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( 1. That all research on the Dead Sea Scrolls was being unfairly m\
onopolised by a small )Tj
T*
(enclave )Tj
T*
( of scholars with vested interests and a biased orientation.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 2. That only a small percentage of the Qumran material was findin\
g its way into print )Tj
T*
(and that )Tj
T*
( most of it was still being withheld.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 3. That it was misleading to claim that the bulk of the so-called\
'biblical' texts had been )Tj
T*
(released, )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( because the most important material consisted of the so-calle\
d 'sectarian' texts - )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(new )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(65 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
711 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 747.381 520 18.619 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 714.381 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 697.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 664.881 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 648.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 615.381 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 598.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 582.381 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 516.381 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 499.881 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 466.881 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.881 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 415.968 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 399.468 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 382.968 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 366.468 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 349.968 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 333.468 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.468 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 273.468 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 256.968 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 240.468 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 64.852 520 175.616 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 28.852 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 751.9681 Tm
(texts, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( never seen before, with a great bearing on the history and re\
ligious life of the 1st )Tj
T*
(century.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( 4. That after forty years, access to the scrolls should be made a\
vailable to all interested )Tj
T*
(scholars.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 5. That AMS Carbon-14 tests, monitored by independent laboratorie\
s and researchers, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(should )Tj
T*
( immediately be conducted on the Qumran documents.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( As was perhaps inevitable, once the media had begun to sensational\
ise it, the affair )Tj
T*
(quickly degenerated, with Eisenman being misquoted on two separate occas\
ions, and a )Tj
T*
(barrage of invective coming from both sides. But behind the clash of ego\
s, the central issue )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(remained unresolved. As Philip Davies had written in 1988:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( Any archaeologist or scholar who digs or finds a text but does not\
pass on what has been )Tj
T*
(found )Tj
T*
( deserves to be locked up as an enemy of science. After forty years\
we have neither a full )Tj
T*
(and )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( definitive report on the dig nor a full publication of the scrolls\
.)Tj
11 0 0 11 375.1037 424.0756 Tm
(34)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 404.0098 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
25 0 0 25 263.75 311.7258 Tm
(5)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-8.723 -1.201 Td
(Academic Politics and Bureaucratic Inertia)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 261.5556 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 220.9 Tm
(E)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 25.0075 220.9 Tm
(arly in 1989, Eisenman had been invited to present a paper at a conferen\
ce on the scrolls to )Tj
-1.091 -1.407 Td
(be held at the University of Groningen that summer. The organiser and ch\
airman of the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(conference was the secretary of the journal )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the official organ of the Ecole )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Biblique, the French-Dominican archaeological school in Jerusalem of whi\
ch most of the )Tj
T*
(international team were members or associates. According to the arrangem\
ent, all papers )Tj
T*
(presented at the conference would subsequently be published in the journ\
al. By the time of )Tj
T*
(the conference, however, Eisenman's conflict with the international team\
, and the ensuing )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(controversy, had become public. It was not, of course, feasible to retra\
ct Eisenman's )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(invitation. He was therefore allowed to present his paper, but its publi\
cation in )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
(Revue de )Tj
T*
(Qumran )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(was blocked.*)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The chairman of the conference was deeply embarrassed, apologising\
to Eisenman and )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(66 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
712 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 698.587 520 67.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 682.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 632.549 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 616.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.472 520 66.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 516.972 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 483.972 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 450.972 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 417.972 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 401.472 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.472 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 335.472 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 318.972 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 285.972 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 269.472 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 252.972 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 219.972 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 202.059 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 185.559 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 86.482 520 99.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 50.482 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(explaining there was nothing he could do - his superiors, the editors of\
the journal, had )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(insisted on excluding Eisenman's paper.)Tj
11 0 0 11 229.78 739.695 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 235.28 736.175 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(had thus effectively revealed )Tj
-16.384 -1.2 Td
(itself, not as a non-partisan forum for the spectrum of scholarly opinio\
n, but as a species of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(mouthpiece for the international team.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(____________)Tj
T*
(*The paper has since been published. See Eisenman, 'Interpreting "Abeit-\
Galuto in the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Habakkuk )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Pesher', Folia orientalia, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol. xxvii \(1990\).)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.199 TD
( The balance was, however, slowly beginning to tilt in Eisenman's f\
avour. The )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(for example, had monitored the dispute throughout, and had assessed the \
arguments of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the opposing factions. On 9 July 1989, it pronounced its judgment in an \
editorial entitled 'The )Tj
T*
(Vanity of Scholars':)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Some works of scholarship, like the compilation of dictionaries, l\
egitimately take a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(lifetime. But )Tj
T*
( with others, the reasons for delay can be less lofty: greed for gl\
ory, pride, or just plain old )Tj
T*
(sloth.)Tj
T*
( Consider the sorry saga of the Dead Sea Scrolls, documents t\
hat might cast )Tj
T*
(spectacular new )Tj
T*
( light on the early history of Christianity and the doctrinal evolu\
tion of Judaism.)Tj
T*
( The scrolls were discovered in 1947, but many that are in fr\
agments remain )Tj
T*
(unpublished. )Tj
T*
( More than 40 years later, a coterie of dawdling scholars is still \
spinning out the work )Tj
T*
(while the )Tj
T*
( world waits and the precious pieces lapse into dust.)Tj
T*
( Naturally, they refuse to let others see the material until \
it is safely published under )Tj
T*
(their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( names. The publication schedule of J.T. Milik, a Frenchman respons\
ible for more than 50 )Tj
T*
( documents, is a source of particular frustration to other scholars\
. . .)Tj
T*
( Archaeology is particularly vulnerable to scholars who gain \
control of materials and )Tj
T*
(then )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( refuse to publish them.)Tj
11 0 0 11 156.6575 210.1666 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 190.1466 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( Despite the unseemly squabbling, the clack and crack of ruptured )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(amour propre, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fustian and umbrage and general high dudgeon, Eisenman's arguments were \
now beginning )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to carry weight, to convince people. And there was also another developm\
ent, of comparable )Tj
T*
(importance. The 'outsiders' - the adversaries of the international team \
- were beginning to )Tj
T*
(organise, to consolidate their efforts and conduct conferences of their \
own. In the months )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(following the editorial in the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(there were to be two such conferences.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The first of these was arranged by Professor Kapera of Krakow, wit\
h the aid of Philip )Tj
T*
(Davies, and took place at Mogilany, Poland. It produced what became know\
n as the )Tj
T*
('Mogilany Resolution', with two main demands: that 'the relevant authori\
ties' in Israel should )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(67 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
713 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.5 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 304 520 214.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 202.175 520 101.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 185.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 169.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 37.02 520 132.155 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 1.02 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(obtain photographic plates of all unpublished scrolls, and that these s\
hould be supplied to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Oxford University Press for immediate publication; and that the data obt\
ained from de Vaux's )Tj
T*
(excavations at Qumran between 1951 and 1956, much of which had not yet a\
ppeared, should )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(now be issued in definitive published form.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Seven and a half months later, a second conference was convened, o\
n Eisenman's home )Tj
T*
(territory, California State University at Long Beach. Papers were presen\
ted by a number of )Tj
T*
(academics, including Eisenman himself, Professor Ludwig Koenen and Profe\
ssor David Noel )Tj
T*
(Freedman from the University of Michigan, Professor Norman Golb from the\
University of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Chicago and Professor James M. Robinson from Claremont University, who h\
ad headed the )Tj
T*
(team responsible for publishing the Nag Hammadi Scrolls. Two resolutions\
were produced: )Tj
T*
(first, that a facsimile edition of all hitherto unpublished Qumran fragm\
ents should be issued )Tj
T*
(immediately \227 a necessary 'first step in throwing the field open to s\
cholars irrespective of )Tj
T*
(point of view or approach'; and second, that a data bank of AMS Carbon-1\
4 results on known )Tj
T*
(manuscripts should be established, to facilitate the future dating of al\
l previously undated )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(texts and manuscripts, whether on papyrus, parchment, codex or any other\
material.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( None of these resolutions, of course, either from Mogilany or from\
Long Beach, was in )Tj
T*
(any sense legally binding. In the academic community, however, and in th\
e media, they )Tj
T*
(carried considerable weight. Increasingly, the international team were f\
inding themselves on )Tj
T*
(the defensive; furthermore, they were beginning, albeit slowly, to give \
way. Thus, for )Tj
T*
(example, Milik, while the public battle raged, quietly passed over one t\
ext - the very text )Tj
T*
(Eisenman and Davies had requested to see in their letter to Strugnell - \
to Professor Joseph )Tj
T*
(Baumgarten of Hebrew College in Baltimore. Baumgarten, of course, who wa\
s now a )Tj
T*
(member of the international team, characteristically refused to let anyo\
ne else see the text in )Tj
T*
(question. Neither did Strugnell - who as head of the team was supposed t\
o authorise and )Tj
T*
(supervise such transactions - bother to inform Eisenman or Davies what h\
ad occurred. But )Tj
T*
(the mere fact that Milik was handing over material at all reflected some\
progress, some sense )Tj
T*
(that he felt sufficiently pressured to relinquish at least part of his p\
rivate fiefdom - and with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(it, some of the onus of responsibility.)Tj
T*
( More promising still, Milik, in 1990, surrendered a second text, t\
his time to Professor )Tj
T*
(James VanderKamm of North Carolina State University. VanderKamm, in a br\
eak with the )Tj
T*
(international team's tradition, promptly offered access to other scholar\
s. 'I will show the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(photographs to anyone who is interested in seeing them', he announced.)Tj
11 0 0 11 404.295 244.695 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 409.795 241.175 Tm
( Milik, not )Tj
-29.076 -1.303 Td
(surprisingly, described VanderKamm's behaviour as 'irresponsible'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 380.59 226.7825 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 386.09 223.2625 Tm
( VanderKamm then )Tj
-27.352 -1.2 Td
(withdrew his offer.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(An important role in the campaign to obtain open access to the Dead Sea \
Scrolls was, as we )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(have already indicated, played by Hershel Shank's journal, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Biblical Archaeology Review. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(It )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(was )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(that fired the opening salvo of the current media campaign, when in 1985\
it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(published a long and hard-hitting article on the delays in releasing Qum\
ran material. And )Tj
T*
(when Eisenman obtained a copy of the computer print-out listing all the \
fragments in the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(international team's possession, he leaked this document to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(He thus furnished )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(with )Tj
T*
(invaluable ammunition. In return, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(was only too eager to provide publicity and an open )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(forum.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(68 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
714 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 682.01 520 83.99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 530.608 520 151.402 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 398.608 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 265.118 520 133.49 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 77.891 520 187.227 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 41.891 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
( As we have also noted, however, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR's )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(attack, at least in part, was directed at the Israeli )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(government, whom it held as responsible for the delays as the internatio\
nal team themselves.)Tj
11 0 0 11 520.5925 739.6564 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 526.0925 736.1364 Tm
( )Tj
-37.534 -1.203 Td
(Eisenman was careful to distance himself from )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR's )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(position in this respect. To attack the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Israeli government, he felt, was simply to divert attention from the rea\
l problem - the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(withholding of information.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( Despite this initial difference of approach, however, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR's )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(contribution has been )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(immense. Since the spring of 1989, in particular, the magazine has susta\
ined a relentless, non-)Tj
T*
(stop barrage of articles directed at the delays and deficiencies of Qumr\
an scholarship and )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(research. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR's )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(basic position is that, 'in the end the Dead Sea Scrolls are public trea\
sures'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 509.7437 622.6666 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 515.2437 619.1466 Tm
( )Tj
-36.745 -1.2 Td
(As for the international team: 'The team of editors has now become more \
an obstacle to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(publication than a source of information. ')Tj
11 0 0 11 240.4637 588.2541 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 245.9637 584.7341 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(has in general pulled very few punches and, )Tj
-17.161 -1.2 Td
(indeed, often comes very close to the legal limits of what can be printe\
d. And while )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Eisenman may not have shared )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR's )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(eagerness to attack the Israeli government, there is no )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(question that those attacks have helped to produce at least some results\
.)Tj
T*
( Thus, for example, the Israeli authorities were persuaded to ass\
ume some measure of )Tj
T*
(authority over the unpublished Qumran material. In April 1989 the Israel\
i Archaeological )Tj
T*
(Council appointed a 'Scroll Oversight Committee' to supervise the public\
ation of all Qumran )Tj
T*
(texts and ensure that the members of the international team were indeed \
fulfilling their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(assigned tasks. In the beginning, the creation of this committee may hav\
e been something of )Tj
T*
(a cosmetic exercise, intended merely to convey the impression that somet\
hing constructive )Tj
T*
(was being done. In practice, however, as the international team have con\
tinued to drag their )Tj
T*
(feet, the committee has assumed more and more power.)Tj
T*
( As we have noted, Father Benoit's timetable, according to which th\
e whole of the Qumran )Tj
T*
(material would be published by 1993, was superseded by Strugnell's new a\
nd \(theoretically at )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(least\) more realistic timetable, with a deadline of 1996. Eisenman had \
remained profoundly )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(sceptical of the team's intentions. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(was more vociferous. The 'suggested Timetable', the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(magazine proclaimed, was 'a hoax and a fraud'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 269.6275 322.7643 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 275.1275 319.2443 Tm
( It was not signed, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pointed out; it )Tj
-19.282 -1.2 Td
(technically bound no one to anything; it made no provision whatever for \
progress reports or )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(proof that the international team were actually doing their jobs. What w\
ould happen, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(asked the Israeli Department of Antiquities, if the stipulated deadlines\
were not met?)Tj
T*
( The Department of Antiquities did not reply directly to this query\
, but on 1 July 1989, in )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(an interview with the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Los Angeles Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Amir Drori, the department's director, issued what )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(might be construed as a nebulous threat: 'For the first time, we have a \
plan, and if someone )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(does not complete his work on time we have the right to deliver the scro\
lls to someone else. ')Tj
11 0 0 11 520.785 205.7745 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 526.285 202.2545 Tm
( )Tj
-37.548 -1.203 Td
(Strugnell himself, however, in an interview with the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(International Herald Tribune, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(made )Tj
T*
(clear how lightly he took such threats. 'We are not running a railroad',\
)Tj
11 0 0 11 393.7625 171.3233 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 404.7625 167.8033 Tm
( he said. And in an )Tj
-28.71 -1.2 Td
(interview with ABC Television, he was even more explicit: 'If I don't me\
et [the deadline] by )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(one or two years, I won't worry at all.')Tj
11 0 0 11 218.8625 136.9108 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 229.8625 133.3908 Tm
( Milik, in the meantime, remained, as )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Time Magazine )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-15.99 -1.2 Td
(put it, 'elusive', although the magazine did manage to extract one chara\
cteristically arrogant )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(statement from him: 'The world will see the manuscripts when I have done\
the necessary )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(work.')Tj
11 0 0 11 44.1687 85.9983 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 65.9397 Tm
( Justifiably unappeased, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(continued its campaign. In the ABC Television interview, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Strugnell, with somewhat lumbering humour, and manifest contempt, had co\
mplained of the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(69 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
715 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 532.136 520 233.864 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 515.636 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 499.136 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.636 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 235.136 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 119.636 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 83.636 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(recent attacks to which he and his colleagues had been subjected. 'It se\
ems we've acquired a )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(bunch of fleas', he said, 'who are in the business of annoying us.')Tj
11 0 0 11 364.5575 739.695 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 375.5575 736.175 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(promptly ran a )Tj
-26.586 -1.2 Td
(signally unflattering photograph of Professor Strugnell surrounded by 'n\
amed fleas'. In )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(addition to Eisenman and Davies, the 'named fleas' included Professors J\
oseph Fitzmyer of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Catholic University, David Noel Freedman of the University of Michigan, \
Dieter Georgi of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the University of Frankfurt, Norman Golb of the University of Chicago, Z\
.J. Kapera of )Tj
T*
(Krakow, Philip King of Boston College, T.H. Gaster and Morton Smith of C\
olumbia, and )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Geza Vermes of Oxford University. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(invited all other biblical scholars who wished to be )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(named publicly as 'fleas' to write in. This invitation elicited a stream\
of letters, including one )Tj
T*
(from Professor Jacob Neusner of the Institute for Advanced Study at Prin\
ceton, author of a )Tj
T*
(number of important works on the origins of Judaism and the formative ye\
ars of Christianity. )Tj
T*
(Speaking of the international team's work, Professor Neusner described t\
he history of the )Tj
T*
(Dead Sea Scrolls scholarship as 'a monumental failure', which he attribu\
ted to 'arrogance and )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(self-importance'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 102.2075 540.2439 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 520.2239 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(By the autumn of 1989, we had already begun to research this book and, i\
n the process, to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(become embroiled, albeit quietly, in the controversy. On a trip to Israe\
l to gather material and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(interview a number of scholars, Michael Baigent decided to check on the \
so-called 'Oversight )Tj
T*
(Committee', recently formed to supervise the work of the international t\
eam. In theory, the )Tj
T*
(committee might be anything. On the one hand, it might be a 'paper tiger\
', a means of )Tj
T*
(formally institutionalising official inaction. On the other, it might of\
fer a real possibility of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(power being taken from the international team and placed in more assiduo\
us hands. Would )Tj
T*
(the committee merely serve to cosmeticise further delays? Or did it poss\
ess both the authority )Tj
T*
(and the will to do something constructive about the existing situation?)Tj
T*
( Among the individuals making up the committee were two members of \
the Israeli )Tj
T*
(Department of Antiquities - Amir Drori, the department's head, and Mrs A\
yala Sussman. )Tj
T*
(Baigent had arranged initially to speak with Drori. On his arrival at th\
e Department of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Antiquities, however, he was urged to speak instead with Mrs Sussman, wh\
o presided over )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the sub-department in charge of the Qumran texts themselves. Drori, in o\
ther words, had a )Tj
T*
(number of matters on his plate. Mrs Sussman's activities were focused mo\
re specifically on )Tj
T*
(the scrolls.)Tj
T*
( The meeting with Mrs Sussman took place on 7 November 1989. She cl\
early, and )Tj
T*
(perhaps understandably, regarded it as an unwelcome intrusion on her alr\
eady busy schedule. )Tj
T*
(While being scrupulously polite, she was also therefore impatient, dismi\
ssive and vague, )Tj
T*
(vouchsafing few details, endeavouring to get the conversation over with \
as soon as possible. )Tj
T*
(Baigent was also, of course, polite; but it proved necessary for him to \
become tiresomely )Tj
T*
(insistent, conveying the impression that he was prepared to wait in the \
office all day unless )Tj
T*
(some answers to his queries were forthcoming. Eventually, Mrs Sussman ca\
pitulated.)Tj
T*
( Baigent's first questions concerned the formation and purposes of \
the 'Oversight )Tj
T*
(Committee'. Mrs Sussman, at that point, apparently regarding her intervi\
ewer not as a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(researcher with some background in the subject, but as a casual journali\
st skating on the )Tj
T*
(surface of a story, imprudently confided that the committee had been for\
med to deflect )Tj
T*
(criticism from the Department of Antiquities. In effect, Baigent was giv\
en the impression that )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(70 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
716 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 616.087 520 116.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.098 520 182.99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 349.185 520 83.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 266.685 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 118.185 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 82.185 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(the committee had no real interest in the scrolls themselves, but was me\
rely a species of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(bureaucratic screen.)Tj
T*
( What was its nominally official role, Baigent asked, and how much \
actual authority did it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(exercise? Mrs Sussman remained vague. The committee's job, she said, was\
to 'advise' Amir )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Drori, Director of the Department of Antiquities, in his dealings with P\
rofessor Strugnell, )Tj
T*
(chief editor for any publication of Qumran material. The committee inten\
ded, she added, to )Tj
T*
(work closely with Strugnell, Cross and other members of the internationa\
l team, towards )Tj
T*
(whom the Department of Antiquities felt an obligation. 'Some,' she decla\
red, 'have gone very )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(far with their work, and we do not want to take it away from them.')Tj
11 0 0 11 379.0775 624.195 Tm
(15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 604.1364 Tm
( What about )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR's )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(suggestion, Baigent asked, and the resolution adopted by the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(convention at Mogilany two months before - of making facsimiles or photo\
graphs available )Tj
T*
(to all interested scholars? Mrs Sussman's gesture was that of a woman dr\
opping an irrelevant )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(letter into a wastepaper basket. 'No one discussed it seriously,' she sa\
id. On the other hand, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and somewhat more reassuringly, she stated that the new timetable, accor\
ding to which all )Tj
T*
(Qumran documents would be published by 1996, was correct. 'We can reassi\
gn,' she stressed, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('if, for example, Milik doesn't meet the dates.')Tj
11 0 0 11 261.075 507.2439 Tm
(16)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 272.075 503.7239 Tm
( Every text in Milik's possession, she )Tj
-19.06 -1.2 Td
(emphasised, had been allocated a publication date in the schedule. At th\
e same time, she )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(acknowledged her sympathy for Strugnell's position. Her husband, she rev\
ealed, a professor )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of Talmudic studies, was helping Strugnell on the translation - all 121 \
lines of it - of the long-)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(delayed )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('MMT' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(document.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( So far as Mrs Sussman was concerned, everything on the whole seeme\
d to be in order )Tj
T*
(and proceeding acceptably. Her chief preoccupation, however, seemed to b\
e less the Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(material itself than the adverse publicity directed at the Department of\
Antiquities. This )Tj
T*
(profoundly disturbed her. The scrolls, after all, were 'not our job'. 'W\
hy is it causing trouble?' )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(she asked, almost plaintively. 'We have other, more important things to \
do.')Tj
11 0 0 11 424.7413 357.2927 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 337.2727 Tm
( Baigent, needless to say, left the meeting disquieted. It is accep\
ted wisdom in Israel that if )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(one wishes to bury a subject, one creates a committee to study it. And a\
s a matter of historical )Tj
T*
(fact, every previous official attempt to oversee the work of the interna\
tional team had been )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(circumvented by de Vaux and Benoit. Was there any reason to suppose the \
situation would )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(change?)Tj
T*
( The following day, Baigent met with Professor Shemaryahu Talmon, o\
ne of two scholars )Tj
T*
(at Hebrew University who were also members of the 'Oversight Committee'.\
Professor )Tj
T*
(Talmon proved to be congenial company indeed - wry, witty, well-travelle\
d, sophisticated. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Unlike Mrs Sussman, moreover, he seemed to have not only an overview of \
the problem, but )Tj
T*
(a familiarity with its minutiae and details - and a manifest sympathy fo\
r independent scholars )Tj
T*
(seeking access to the Qumran material. Indeed, he said, he had had diffi\
culties himself in the )Tj
T*
(past, had been unable to obtain access to original texts, had been oblig\
ed to work with )Tj
T*
(transcriptions and secondary sources - whose accuracy, in some instances\
, had subsequently )Tj
T*
(proved to be questionable.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( 'Controversy is the lifeblood of scholarship,' Professor Talmon de\
clared at the very )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(beginning of Baigent's meeting with him.)Tj
11 0 0 11 237.8237 91.8802 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 248.8237 88.3602 Tm
( He made it clear that he regarded his membership )Tj
-17.369 -1.2 Td
(of the 'Oversight Committee' as a welcome opportunity to help change the\
situation. 'If it is )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(only a watch-dog committee,' he said, 'then I shall resign.')Tj
11 0 0 11 328.285 57.4677 Tm
(19 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 342.035 53.9477 Tm
(The committee, he stressed, had )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(71 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
717 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 632.587 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 449.675 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.675 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 251.675 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 101.762 520 149.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 65.762 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(to be able to achieve some concrete results if it was to justify its exi\
stence. He acknowledged )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the problems confronted by the international team: 'Scholars are always \
under pressure and )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(always take on too much. A deadline is always dead. ')Tj
11 0 0 11 306.5188 723.195 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 317.5188 719.675 Tm
( But, he added, if a particular )Tj
-22.365 -1.2 Td
(researcher had more texts in his possession than he could effectively ha\
ndle, he must pass )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(some of them on. The committee would 'encourage' researchers to do preci\
sely this. In )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(passing, Talmon also mentioned that, according to rumour, there were sti\
ll large fragments in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the archives, hitherto unknown and yet to be assigned. This rumour was s\
ubsequently to )Tj
T*
(prove correct.)Tj
T*
( Baigent asked Professor Talmon about the fuss resulting from Eisen\
man and Davies's )Tj
T*
(requesting to see certain documents. Talmon said he was wholly in favour\
of access being )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(granted them. There was, he stated, a 'need to help people in utilising \
unpublished )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(information. This is a legitimate demand.')Tj
11 0 0 11 239.7213 573.2825 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 250.7213 569.7625 Tm
( The scrolls, he concluded, should be made )Tj
-17.507 -1.2 Td
(available to all interested and qualified researchers. At the same time,\
he acknowledged that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(certain technical difficulties had to be sorted out. These difficulties,\
which were now being )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(taken in hand, fell under three headings: first, the now out-of-date and\
superseded catalogue )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(needed revision and updating; second, there was still no full inventory \
of all the scrolls and )Tj
T*
(scroll fragments, some of which were still unassigned \('the only person\
who knows what is )Tj
T*
(where is Strugnell'\); and finally, there was an urgent need for a gener\
al concordance )Tj
T*
(encompassing all the known texts.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( As for the timetable according to which everything would be publis\
hed by 1996, Talmon )Tj
T*
(was honestly doubtful. Quite apart from whether or not the international\
team met their )Tj
T*
(deadlines, he queried whether Oxford University Press would be able to p\
roduce so many )Tj
T*
(volumes in so short a time. Looking at the schedule, he observed that no\
fewer than nine )Tj
T*
(volumes were due to appear between 1990 and 1993. Could OUP cope with th\
is? And could )Tj
T*
(Strugnell handle the editing of so much while still pursuing his own res\
earch?)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( If they arose, however, these obstacles would at least be legitima\
te obstacles, not )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(attributable to obstruction or deliberate withholding of material. They \
were, in effect, the )Tj
T*
(only obstacles Talmon was prepared to tolerate. This was genuinely reass\
uring. In Talmon, )Tj
T*
(the 'Oversight Committee' appeared to have a serious and responsible sch\
olar who )Tj
T*
(understood the problems, was determined to confront them and would not b\
e deflected by )Tj
T*
(obfuscation.)Tj
T*
( Baigent had learned that the 'Oversight Committee' was scheduled t\
o meet the following )Tj
T*
(day, at ten in the morning. He had therefore arranged a meeting for nine\
o'clock with )Tj
T*
(Professor Jonas Greenfield, another member of the committee who was on t\
he staff at )Tj
T*
(Hebrew University. He put to Greenfield what had now become a routine qu\
estion - would )Tj
T*
(the 'Oversight Committee' 'have teeth'? 'We would like it to have teeth,\
' Greenfield replied, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('but they will have to grow.')Tj
11 0 0 11 163.1337 159.37 Tm
(22)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 174.1337 155.85 Tm
( Having nothing to lose, Baigent decided to put the cat among )Tj
-11.937 -1.2 Td
(the pigeons. He repeated to Professor Greenfield what Ayala Sussman had \
said to him - that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the committee had been formed primarily to deflect criticism from the De\
partment of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Antiquities. Perhaps this would elicit some reaction.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( It most certainly did. The next morning, Mrs Sussman telephoned Ba\
igent. Sounding )Tj
T*
(somewhat rattled at first, she stated she was annoyed with him for telli\
ng Professor )Tj
T*
(Greenfield she had made so dismissive a remark. It wasn't true, she prot\
ested. She couldn't )Tj
T*
(possibly have said anything like that. 'We are very keen,' she stressed,\
'for this committee to )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(72 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
718 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 630.899 520 135.101 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 431.486 520 199.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 414.986 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 398.486 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 266.486 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 132.997 520 133.49 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 96.997 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.4375 Tm
(do things.')Tj
11 0 0 11 66.7188 755.9575 Tm
(23)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 77.7188 752.4375 Tm
( Baigent asked if she wished him to read back to her his notes; when she\
said )Tj
-4.925 -1.2 Td
(yes, he did so. No, Mrs Sussman insisted: 'The committee was formed to a\
dvise the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Department [of Antiquities] on sensitive matters.')Tj
11 0 0 11 282.0988 721.545 Tm
(24 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 295.8488 718.025 Tm
(As for her dismissive remarks, she had )Tj
-20.789 -1.2 Td
(thought she was speaking 'off the record'. Baigent replied that he had o\
riginally arranged his )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(interview with Amir Drori, the department's director, in order to obtain\
, precisely )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(for )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(record, a statement of official policy on the matter. Drori had passed h\
im on to Mrs Sussman, )Tj
T*
(whom he had no reason to suppose was expressing anything other than the \
'official line'. The )Tj
T*
(interview, therefore, had been very much 'on the record'.)Tj
T*
( Baigent then became somewhat more conciliatory, explaining the gro\
unds for his )Tj
T*
(concern. The 'Oversight Committee', he said, was potentially the best th\
ing that had happened )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in the whole sorry saga of Dead Sea Scroll research. It offered, for the\
first time, a genuine )Tj
T*
(possibility of breaking the log-jam, of transcending academic squabbles \
and ensuring the )Tj
T*
(release of texts which should have been made public forty years ago. It \
had thus been )Tj
T*
(profoundly disconcerting to hear that this unique opportunity might be s\
quandered, and that )Tj
T*
(the committee might be no more than a bureaucratic mechanism for maintai\
ning the status )Tj
T*
(quo. On the other hand, Baigent concluded, he had been reassured by his \
conversations with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Professors Talmon and Greenfield, both of whom had expressed an unimpugn\
ably sincere )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(desire for the committee to be both active and effective. Mrs Sussman no\
w hastened to )Tj
T*
(concur with her colleagues. 'We are very keen to get this moving,' she a\
ffirmed. 'We are )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(searching for ways to do it. We want to get the whole project moving as \
fast as possible.)Tj
11 0 0 11 496.145 439.5939 Tm
(\22225)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 419.5739 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(Partly through the determination of Professors Talmon and Greenfield, pa\
rtly through Mrs )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Sussman's embarrassment, the 'Oversight Committee' had been galvanised i\
nto some sort of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(resolve. There remained, however, the disquieting question raised by Pro\
fessor Talmon - )Tj
T*
(whether it was technically and mechanically possible for Oxford Universi\
ty Press to produce )Tj
T*
(the stipulated volumes in accordance with Strugnell's timetable. Had the\
timetable perhaps )Tj
T*
(been drawn up in full knowledge that it couldn't conceivably be met? Mig\
ht it perhaps have )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(been just another tactic for delaying things, while at the same time abs\
olving the international )Tj
T*
(team of any blame?)Tj
T*
( On his return to the United Kingdom, Baigent telephoned Strugnell'\
s editor at Oxford )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(University Press. Was the schedule, he asked, feasible? Could eighteen v\
olumes )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(of )Tj
T*
(Discoveries in the Judaean Desert )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(be produced between 1989 and 1996? If a blanch could be )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(audible over the telephone, Baigent would have heard one. The prospect, \
Strugnell's editor )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(replied, 'seems highly unlikely'. She reported that she'd just had a mee\
ting with Strugnell. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(She'd also just had a fax on the matter from the Israeli Department of A\
ntiquities. It was )Tj
T*
(generally accepted, she said, that 'the dates were very vague. Each date\
was taken with a )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(pinch of salt. We couldn't cope with more than two or three a year at th\
e most.')Tj
11 0 0 11 443.4138 141.104 Tm
(26)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 121.084 Tm
( Baigent reported that both the Department of Antiquities and the '\
Oversight Committee' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(were worried about whether the timetable could be met. 'They are right t\
o be worried about )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the dates,' the editor at OUP replied.)Tj
11 0 0 11 209.5262 90.1915 Tm
(27)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 220.5262 86.6716 Tm
( She then expressed what sounded disturbingly like a )Tj
-15.311 -1.2 Td
(desire to fob off the entire project. OUP, she said, felt no need to dem\
and that the series be )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(reserved wholly for themselves. Perhaps some other press - university or\
otherwise - might )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(73 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
719 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.461 520 115.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.961 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.807 520 198.155 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.807 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.807 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(be interested in co-publication? She wasn't even sure that OUP covered i\
ts costs on each )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(volume.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(During the last four months of 1990, developments pertaining to the inte\
rnational team and )Tj
T*
(their monopoly began to occur with accelerating momentum. Criticism by s\
cholars denied )Tj
T*
(access to the Qumran material received increasing publicity and currency\
, and the Israeli )Tj
T*
(government, it seems, was susceptible to the mounting pressure. This pre\
ssure was )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(intensified by an article which appeared in November in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Scientific American, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(fiercely )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(castigating the delays and the general situation, and according independ\
ent scholars space in )Tj
T*
(which to voice their grievances.)Tj
T*
( In mid-November, news broke that the Israeli government had appoin\
ted a Dead Sea )Tj
T*
(Scroll scholar, Emmanuel Tov, to act as 'joint editor-in-chief of the pr\
oject to translate and )Tj
T*
(publish the entire corpus of Qumran material. This appointment was appar\
ently made without )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(consulting the existing editor-in-chief, John Strugnell, who was reporte\
d to have opposed it. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(By that time, however, Strugnell was ill in hospital and not available f\
or comment - or, it )Tj
T*
(would seem, for any serious opposition. By that time, too, even his form\
er colleagues, such )Tj
T*
(as Frank Cross, were beginning to distance themselves from him and to cr\
iticise him publicly.)Tj
T*
( There were also other reasons for this sequence of events. Earlier\
in November, Strugnell, )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(from his quarters at the Ecole Biblique, had given an interview to a jou\
rnalist for )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Ha aretz, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(leading Tel Aviv newspaper. The precise context of his remarks is not, a\
t the moment, )Tj
T*
(altogether clear; but the remarks themselves, as reported by the world'\
s press, were hardly )Tj
T*
(calculated to endear him to the Israeli authorities - and display, for a\
man in his position, )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(what can only be described as a flamboyant lack of tact. According to th\
e )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(12 December 1990, Strugnell - a Protestant convert to Catholicism - said\
of Judaism: 'It's a )Tj
T*
(horrible religion. It's a Christian heresy, and we deal with our heretic\
s in different ways.' Two )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(days later, the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(contained more of Strugnell's statement: 'I think Judaism is a racist )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(religion, something very primitive. What bothers me about Judaism is the\
very existence of )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Jews as a group . . .' According to London's )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Independent, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Strugnell also said that the 'solution' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(- an ominous word - for Judaism was 'mass conversion to Christianity'.)Tj
T*
( In themselves, of course, these comments had no direct relevance t\
o the question of Dead )Tj
T*
(Sea Scroll scholarship, to the withholding of Qumran material from other\
researchers and the )Tj
T*
(procrastination in its release. But such comments could hardly have been\
expected to enhance )Tj
T*
(the credibility of a man responsible for the translation and publication\
of ancient Judaic texts. )Tj
T*
(Not surprisingly, a major scandal ensued. It was covered by British news\
papers. It was a )Tj
T*
(front-page item for newspapers in Israel, France and the United States. \
Strugnell's former )Tj
T*
(colleagues, as gracefully but as hastily as possible, endeavoured to dis\
own him. By the )Tj
T*
(middle of December, it was announced that he had been dismissed from his\
post - a decision )Tj
T*
(in which, apparently, his former colleagues and the Israeli authorities \
had concurred. Delays )Tj
T*
(in publication and problems of health were cited as factors contributing\
to his dismissal.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(74 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
720 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 707.5 520 42 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 623.5 520 84 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 607 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 590.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 574 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 557.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 527.5 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 497.5 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 481 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 464.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 272.5 520 192 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.175 520 118.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 118.175 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
35 0 0 35 256.385 719.0608 Tm
(II)Tj
-3.667 -1.2 Td
(THE VATICAN'S )Tj
-0.806 -1.2 Td
(REPRESENTATIVES)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 611.5417 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
25 0 0 25 263.75 535.7577 Tm
(6)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-5.097 -1.201 Td
(The Onslaught of Science)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 485.5875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 444.9319 Tm
(U)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 26.245 444.9319 Tm
(ntil now, this book has referred to the 'villains of the piece' as 'the \
international team'. In )Tj
-1.181 -1.407 Td
(our conversations with them, however, Robert Eisenman and others would o\
ften allude to the )Tj
T*
(Ecole Biblique, the French-Dominican archaeological school in Jerusalem.\
Indeed, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('international team' and the Ecole Biblique were frequently used interch\
angeably; and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Allegro, too, in his letters, would refer to the international team as t\
he 'Ecole Biblique gang'. )Tj
T*
(We wondered why this association should constantly be made. Why were the\
international )Tj
T*
(team and the Ecole Biblique treated as though they were the same thing? \
What was the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(relationship between them? Was it formally defined and delineated? Was t\
he international )Tj
T*
(team 'officially' an adjunct of the Ecole Biblique? Or was the overlap b\
etween them so great )Tj
T*
(as to render any distinction superfluous? With some advice and pointers \
from Eisenman, we )Tj
T*
(endeavoured to clarify the matter.)Tj
T*
( As we have noted, the international team, from its very beginnings\
, was dominated by )Tj
T*
(Father de Vaux, then director of the Ecole Biblique, and by his close fr\
iend and disciple, the )Tj
T*
(then Father Milik. As Allegro complained, both men would constantly arro\
gate first claim to )Tj
T*
(all incoming texts: 'All fragments are brought first to De V. or Milik, \
and . . . complete )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(secrecy is kept over what they are till long after they have been studie\
d by this group.')Tj
11 0 0 11 482.56 196.695 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 488.06 193.175 Tm
( Even )Tj
-34.768 -1.2 Td
(Strugnell stated that when fresh material came in, Milik would invariabl\
y pounce on it, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(claiming it fell within the parameters of his own particular assignment.\
)Tj
11 0 0 11 399.9225 162.2825 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 142.2625 Tm
( Not surprisingly, then, Milik ended up with the lion's share of th\
e most important material )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(- and particularly of the controversial 'sectarian' material. The creati\
on of his monopoly was )Tj
T*
(facilitated by the fact that he was permanently resident in Jerusalem at\
the time, along with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(two of his staunchest supporters, de Vaux and Father Jean Starcky. Fathe\
r Skehan, though )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(not permanently resident in Jerusalem, threw his weight behind this triu\
mvirate. So did )Tj
T*
(Professor Cross - who had been assigned 'biblical' rather than 'sectaria\
n' material anyway. )Tj
T*
(Allegro, of course, cast himself in the role of rebel, but his oppositio\
n was hampered by the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(75 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
721 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 650.5 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.923 520 214.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.384 520 214.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 104.472 520 116.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 87.972 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 71.472 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 35.472 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(fact that he was in Jerusalem only intermittently. Of those residing in \
Jerusalem during the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(crucial period of excavation, purchase of material, allocation of texts \
and collation of )Tj
T*
(fragments, only the young John Strugnell \(who would hardly have challen\
ged de Vaux )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(anyway\) was not Catholic - and he subsequently converted. All the other\
s were, in fact, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Roman Catholic priests, attached to, and residing at, the Ecole Biblique\
. Among the other )Tj
T*
(current members of the team or writers in the area of Qumran studies wor\
king at the Ecole )Tj
T*
(are Father Emile Puech and Father Jerome Murphy-O'Connor.)Tj
T*
( It was not just by virtue of being on the spot that this Catholic \
conclave came to dominate )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran scholarship. Neither, certainly, was it by virtue of any outstand\
ing pre-eminence in )Tj
T*
(the field. Indeed, there was no shortage of no less competent or qualifi\
ed scholars who, as we )Tj
T*
(have noted, were excluded. A major determining factor was the Ecole Bibl\
ique itself, which )Tj
T*
(systematically undertook to establish for itself, as an institution, a p\
osition of unrivalled pre-)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(eminence. The Ecole had its own journal, for example, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(edited by de Vaux, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(who published in its pages some of the most consequential and influentia\
l early articles on )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran - articles bearing the stamp of first-hand authority. And in 1958\
, the Ecole launched )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(a second journal, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(devoted exclusively to the Dead Sea Scrolls and related )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(matters. Thus the Ecole officially controlled the two most prominent and\
prestigious forums )Tj
T*
(for discussion of Qumran material. The Ecole's editors could accept or r\
eject articles as they )Tj
T*
(saw fit, and were thereby enabled to exert a decisive influence on the \
entire course of )Tj
T*
(Qumran scholarship. This situation was inaugurated at the very inception\
of Qumran studies.)Tj
T*
( In addition to its publications, the Ecole created a special resea\
rch library oriented )Tj
T*
(specifically towards Qumran studies. A card index was compiled, which do\
cumented every )Tj
T*
(book, every scholarly article, every newspaper or magazine report publis\
hed on the Dead Sea )Tj
T*
(Scrolls anywhere in the world. All publications on the subject were coll\
ected and filed in the )Tj
T*
(library - which was not open to the general public. Although some of the\
secret, unclassified )Tj
T*
(and still unassigned scroll material was kept at the Ecole, most of it w\
as housed at the )Tj
T*
(Rockefeller Museum. Nevertheless, the Rockefeller was reduced to the sta\
tus of a mere )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('workshop'. The Ecole became the 'headquarters', the 'offices', the 'sch\
ool' and the 'nerve )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(centre'. Thus the Ecole contrived to establish itself as the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(de facto )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and generally recognised )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(centre of all Qumran scholarship, the focus of all legitimate and academ\
ically respectable )Tj
T*
(research in the field. The Ecole's 'stamp of approval' could, in effect,\
underwrite, certify and )Tj
T*
(guarantee a scholar's reputation. Withholding such endorsement was tanta\
mount to )Tj
T*
(destroying a man's credibility.)Tj
T*
( Officially, of course, the studies over which the Ecole presided w\
ere supposed to be non-)Tj
T*
(denominational, non-partisan, impartial, unbiased. The Ecole presented t\
o the world a faqade )Tj
T*
(of 'scientific objectivity'. But could such 'objectivity' in fact be exp\
ected on the part of a )Tj
T*
(Dominican institution, with vested Catholic interests to protect? 'My fa\
ith has nothing to fear )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(from my scholarship', de Vaux once stated to Edmund Wilson.)Tj
11 0 0 11 355.0425 145.5791 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 360.5425 142.0591 Tm
( No doubt it didn't, but that )Tj
-25.494 -1.2 Td
(was never in fact the real question. The real question was whether his s\
cholarship, and its )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(reliability, had anything to fear from his faith.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(As we ourselves became )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(au fait )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(with the situation, we began to wonder if the correct )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(questions were indeed being asked, if blame was indeed being correctly a\
pportioned. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Biblical )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(76 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
722 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 516.933 520 249.067 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 333.904 520 183.028 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 83.579 520 250.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 67.079 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 50.579 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 14.579 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(Archaeology Review, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(for example, had focused on the Israeli government as a primary )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(culprit. But if the Israeli government was guilty of anything, it was gu\
ilty only of an )Tj
T*
(understandable sin of omission. By virtue of John Allegro's success in p\
ersuading the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Jordanian government to nationalise the Rockefeller Museum,)Tj
11 0 0 11 352.5538 706.6564 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 358.0538 703.1364 Tm
( and political and military )Tj
-25.313 -1.203 Td
(circumstance - the Six Day War and its aftermath - Israel suddenly found\
itself, as a )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(fait )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(accompli, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(in possession of Arab East Jerusalem, where the Rockefeller Museum and t\
he )Tj
T*
(Ecole Biblique were situated. As 'spoils of war', the Dead Sea Scrolls t\
hus became )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(de facto )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(Israeli. But Israel was fighting for its own survival at the time. In th\
e turmoil of the moment, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(there were more urgent matters to deal with than the sorting out of scho\
larly disputes or the )Tj
T*
(rectifying of academic inequities. Neither could Israel afford to isolat\
e itself further on the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(international scene by antagonising a body of prestigious researchers an\
d thereby provoking a )Tj
T*
(reaction from the intellectual community - as well, quite possibly, as f\
rom the Vatican. In )Tj
T*
(consequence, the Israeli government had taken the expedient course of do\
ing nothing, of )Tj
T*
(implicitly sanctioning the status quo. The international team had simply\
been asked to get on )Tj
T*
(with their business.)Tj
T*
( It was, of course, more accurate to assign responsibility to the i\
nternational team )Tj
T*
(themselves - as, indeed, a number of commentators had not hesitated to d\
o. But were the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(motives ascribed to the team wholly accurate? Was it simply a matter of \
what the )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(New York )Tj
T*
(Times )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(called 'the vanity of scholars', and Professor Neusner in )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('arrogance and self-)Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(importance'?)Tj
11 0 0 11 80.4413 441.0506 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 85.9413 437.5306 Tm
( These factors undoubtedly played a part. But the real question was one \
of )Tj
-5.523 -1.203 Td
(accountability. To whom, ultimately, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(were )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(the international team accountable? In theory, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(they should have been accountable to their peers, to other scholars. But\
was that indeed the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(case? In reality, the international team seemed to recognise no accounta\
bility whatever, )Tj
T*
(except to the Ecole Biblique. And to whom was the Ecole Biblique account\
able? Although )Tj
T*
(he'd not investigated the matter himself, Eisenman prompted us, when we \
probed him, to )Tj
T*
(explore the connection between the Ecole and the Vatican.)Tj
T*
( We approached other scholars in the field, some of whom had gone p\
ublicly on record to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(condemn the 'scandal'. Not one of them, it transpired, had thought to lo\
ok into the Ecole )Tj
T*
(Biblique's background and official allegiances. They had, of course, rec\
ognised that the Ecole )Tj
T*
(was Catholic, but they did not know whether it had any direct or formal \
connection with the )Tj
T*
(Vatican. Professor Davies at Sheffield, for example, confessed that he f\
ound the question )Tj
T*
(intriguing. Now that he thought about it, he said, he found it striking \
how criticism was so )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(often and so assiduously deflected away from the Ecole.)Tj
11 0 0 11 319.6913 225.0995 Tm
(6 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 327.9413 221.5795 Tm
(According to Professor Golb at the )Tj
-23.123 -1.2 Td
(University of Chicago, 'people hint. . . that there are connections' bet\
ween the Ecole and the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Vatican. 'A lot of events,' he said, 'fit the theory [of connection].')Tj
11 0 0 11 365.4925 190.687 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 370.9925 187.167 Tm
( Like his colleagues, )Tj
-26.254 -1.2 Td
(however, he had not explored the matter any further. Given the Ecole's u\
ndisputed )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dominance of Qumran scholarship, it seemed to us particularly important \
to ascertain the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(institution's official orientation, attitudes, allegiances and accountab\
ility. Here, we decided, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was something we ourselves could undertake to investigate in detail. The\
results were to )Tj
T*
(prove a major revelation, not just to us, but to other independent resea\
rchers in the field as )Tj
T*
(well.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(Today, in the late 20th century, one takes the procedures and methodolog\
y of historical and )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(77 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
723 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 632.079 520 133.921 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.041 520 264.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 219.541 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 183.541 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.167 Tm
(archaeological research more or less for granted. Until the mid-19th cen\
tury, however, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(historical and archaeological research, as we understand such things tod\
ay, simply didn't exist )Tj
T*
(at all. There were no accepted methods or procedures; there was no coher\
ent discipline or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(training; there was no real awareness that such research in any sense co\
nstituted a form of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('science', requiring the rigour, the 'objectivity', the systematic appro\
ach that any science does. )Tj
T*
(The 'field', such as it was, existed not as a sphere of formal academic \
study but as a happy )Tj
T*
(hunting-ground for learned - and often not so learned - amateurs. The te\
rritory was as yet too )Tj
T*
(uncharted to accommodate anything that might be called 'professionalism'\
.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Thus, for example, in the early 19th century, wealthy Europeans, o\
n their 'grand tour', )Tj
T*
(might rummage about at random for Greek or Roman artefacts to ship back \
to the chateau, )Tj
T*
(schloss or country house at home. In their search for antiquities, a few\
ventured further afield, )Tj
T*
(digging holes all over the fertile terrain of the vast and moribund Otto\
man Empire. Such )Tj
T*
(enterprises amounted, in effect, not to anything that might pass for arc\
haeology, but to )Tj
T*
(treasure-hunting. Knowledge of the past was deemed less important than w\
hatever booty it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(might provide; and funds for the plundering of such booty were supplied \
by, or for, various )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(museums in quest of large and dramatic statues to place on display. Publ\
ic demand for relics )Tj
T*
(of this sort was considerable. Crowds would flock to museums to see the \
latest trophies, and )Tj
T*
(the popular press would have a field day. But the trophies themselves we\
re more an )Tj
T*
(inspiration to the imagination, and to imaginative speculation, than to \
any form of scientific )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(method. Flaubert's )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Salammb\364, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(for example, published in 1862, represents an extraordinary )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(feat of 'literary archaeology', a grandiose imaginative attempt to recon\
struct, with meticulous )Tj
T*
(scientific precision, the splendour of ancient Carthage. But science its\
elf had not yet caught )Tj
T*
(up with Flaubert's aesthetic objectives. Certainly no historian had ever\
attempted to use )Tj
T*
(scientific or archaeological data to bring ancient Carthage so vividly b\
ack to life.)Tj
T*
( Until the mid-19th century, what passed for archaeology was, more \
often than not, a sorry )Tj
T*
(business indeed. Wall paintings, carvings and other artefacts would visi\
bly disintegrate )Tj
T*
(before the bemused eyes of their discoverers - who, of course, had no re\
al concept of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(conservation. Priceless statues would be demolished in the search for so\
me supposed treasure )Tj
T*
(concealed within them. Or they might be hacked into fragments to make tr\
ansportation easier )Tj
T*
(- and then lost, when the barges transporting them sank. To the extent t\
hat any systematic )Tj
T*
(form of excavation was practised at all, it had not yet been yoked to hi\
story - to the principle )Tj
T*
(of illuminating the past. The excavators themselves lacked the knowledge\
, the skill and the )Tj
T*
(technology to turn their discoveries to account.)Tj
T*
( The acknowledged 'father of modern archaeology' was the Ge\
rman-born Heinrich )Tj
T*
(Schliemann \(1822-90\), naturalised as an American citizen in 1850. Fr\
om his boyhood, )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Schliemann had been a passionate admirer of Homer's )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Iliad )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Odyssey. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(He was firmly )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(convinced that these epics were not 'mere fables', but mythologised hist\
ory, chronicles )Tj
T*
(inflated to legendary status, perhaps, but still referring to events, p\
eople and places which )Tj
T*
(had once actually existed. The Trojan War, Schliemann insisted, to t\
he mockery and )Tj
T*
(scepticism of his contemporaries, was an event in historical fact. Troy \
was not just a figment )Tj
T*
(of a poet's imagination. On the contrary, it had once been a 'real' city\
. One could use Homer's )Tj
T*
(work as a species of map. One could identify certain recognisable geogr\
aphical and )Tj
T*
(topographical features. One could compute approximate speeds of travel a\
t the time, and )Tj
T*
(thereby estimate the distance between one point and another cited by Hom\
er. By such means, )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(78 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
724 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.461 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.461 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.961 520 214.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 71.549 520 232.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 35.549 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(Schliemann concluded, one could retrace the itinerary of the Greek fleet\
in the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Iliad )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(locate the actual historical site of Troy. After performing the requisit\
e calculations, )Tj
T*
(Schliemann was firmly convinced he had found 'the X that marked the spot\
'.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Having amassed a fortune in commerce, Schliemann embarked on what \
his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(contemporaries regarded as a quixotic enterprise - to undertake a full-s\
cale excavation of the )Tj
T*
('X' he had located. In 1868, he went to Greece and proceeded, using a po\
em that was two and )Tj
T*
(a half millennia old as his guide, to retrace the alleged route of the G\
reek fleet. At what he )Tj
T*
(believed to be the relevant site in Turkey, he began to dig. And to the \
world's consternation, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(astonishment and admiration, Schliemann there found Troy - or, at any ra\
te, a city that )Tj
T*
(conformed to Homer's account of Troy. As a matter of fact, Schliemann fo\
und a number of )Tj
T*
(cities. In four campaigns of excavation, he uncovered no fewer than nine\
, each superimposed )Tj
T*
(on the ruins of what had been its predecessor. Nor, after this initial s\
pectacular success, did )Tj
T*
(he confine himself to Troy. A few years later, between 1874 and 1876, he\
excavated at )Tj
T*
(Mycenae in Greece, where his discoveries were deemed to be perhaps even \
more important )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(than those made in Turkey.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Schliemann demonstrated triumphantly that archaeology could do mor\
e than just prove or )Tj
T*
(disprove the historical validity underlying archaic legends. He also dem\
onstrated that it could )Tj
T*
(add flesh and substance to the often bald, stark chronicles of the past \
- could provide a )Tj
T*
(recognisably human and social context for them, could provide a matrix o\
f daily life and )Tj
T*
(practices that enabled one to understand the mentality and milieu from w\
hich they had )Tj
T*
(issued. What was more, he demonstrated the applicability of strict scien\
tific method and )Tj
T*
(procedures, the careful observation and recording of data. In addressing\
himself to the nine )Tj
T*
(superimposed cities at Troy, Schliemann employed the same techniques tha\
t had only )Tj
T*
(recently come into favour in geological studies. These enabled him to co\
nclude what to the )Tj
T*
(modern mind appears self-evident - that one stratum of deposits can be d\
istinguished from )Tj
T*
(others on the basic premise that the lowest is the earliest in time. Sch\
liemann thus became the )Tj
T*
(pioneer of the archaeological discipline known as 'stratigraphy'. Almost\
single-handed, he )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(revolutionised archaeological thought and methodology.)Tj
T*
( It was quickly recognised, of course, that Schliemann's scientific\
approach could readily )Tj
T*
(be brought to bear on the field of biblical archaeology. In 1864, four y\
ears before the )Tj
T*
(discovery of Troy, Sir Charles Wilson, then a captain in the Royal Engin\
eers, had been sent )Tj
T*
(to Jerusalem, to survey the city and produce a definitive map. In the co\
urse of his work, )Tj
T*
(Wilson became the first modern researcher to excavate and explore beneat\
h the Temple, )Tj
T*
(where he discovered what were believed to have been Solomon's stables. H\
is endeavours )Tj
T*
(inspired him to help co-found the Palestine Exploration Fund, the chief \
patron of which was )Tj
T*
(no less a person than Queen Victoria herself. At first, the work of this\
organisation proceeded )Tj
T*
(in a characteristically uncoordinated fashion. At the 1886 annual meetin\
g, however, Wilson )Tj
T*
(announced that 'some of the wealthy men of England would follow Dr. Schl\
iemann's )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(example' and apply his scientific approach to a specific biblical site.)Tj
11 0 0 11 384.0412 129.1564 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 389.5412 125.6364 Tm
( The enterprise was )Tj
-27.603 -1.2 Td
(entrusted to the charge of a prominent archaeologist then active in Egyp\
t, William Matthew )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Flinders Petrie. Adopting Schliemann's methods, Flinders Petrie, after t\
wo false starts, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(discovered a mound containing the ruins of eleven superimposed cities.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( During his work in Egypt, Flinders Petrie had evolved another tech\
nique for the dating of )Tj
T*
(ancient ruins, based on a pattern of gradual development and change in t\
he shape, design and )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(79 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
725 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 634 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.461 520 132.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 416.461 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(embellishment of household pottery. This enabled him to establish a chro\
nological sequence )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(not just for the artefacts themselves, but for the rubble surrounding th\
em as well. Although )Tj
T*
(certainly not foolproof, Petrie's approach brought another manifestation\
of scientific )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(methodology and observation to bear on archaeological research. It becam\
e one of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(standard procedures employed by his team in Palestine - a team which, in\
1926, was joined )Tj
T*
(by the young Gerald Lankester Harding. As we have noted, Harding, eventu\
ally head of )Tj
T*
(Jordan's Department of Antiquities, was to play a crucial role in the ea\
rly excavation and )Tj
T*
(compilation of the Dead Sea Scrolls.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( While British archaeologists in Egypt and Palestine followed in Sc\
hliemann's footsteps, )Tj
T*
(the Germans refined and elaborated his procedures. German archaeology en\
deavoured to do, )Tj
T*
(in fact, what)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Flaubert, in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Salammb\364, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(had done in fiction - to re-create, down to the most minute detail, the \
)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(entire milieu and society from which specific archaeological artefacts h\
ad issued. This, )Tj
T*
(needless to say, was a slow, painstaking process, requiring much care an\
d inexhaustible )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(patience. It did not just involve the excavation of 'treasures', or of m\
onumental structures. It )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(also involved the excavation and reconstruction of administrative, comme\
rcial and residential )Tj
T*
(buildings. Using this approach, Robert Koldeway, between 1899 and 1913, \
excavated the )Tj
T*
(ruins of Babylon. From his work, there evolved a coherent and comprehens\
ively detailed )Tj
T*
(picture of what had previously, to all intents and purposes, been a 'los\
t civilisation'.)Tj
T*
( The archaeological advances of the 19th century stemmed in large p\
art from Schliemann's )Tj
T*
(critical scrutiny of Homer's epics, his methodical scientific insistence\
on disengaging fact )Tj
T*
(from fiction. It was, needless to say, only a matter of time before scri\
pture itself was )Tj
T*
(subjected to the same sort of rigorous scrutiny. The man most responsibl\
e for this process )Tj
T*
(was the French theologian and historian Ernest Renan. Born in 1823, Rena\
n embarked on a )Tj
T*
(career in the priesthood, enrolling in the seminary of St Sulpice. In 18\
45, however, he )Tj
T*
(renounced his intended vocation, having been led by Germanic biblical sc\
holarship to )Tj
T*
(question the literal truth of Christian teaching. In 1860, Renan embarke\
d on an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(archaeological journey to Palestine and Syria. Three years later, he pub\
lished his famous \(or )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(notorious\) )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(La vie de J\351sus, {The Life of Jesus\), )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(which was translated into English the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(following year. Renan's book sought to demystify Christianity. It portra\
yed Jesus as 'an )Tj
T*
(incomparable man', but still a man - an eminently mortal and non-divine \
personage - and )Tj
T*
(formulated a hierarchy of values which today would be called a form of '\
secular humanism'. )Tj
T*
(Renan was no obscure academic or fly-by-night sensationalist. On the con\
trary, he was one )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(of the most esteemed and prestigious intellectual figures of his age. As\
a result, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Life of )Tj
T*
(Jesus )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(created one of the greatest upsets in the history of 19th-century though\
t. It became one )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the half-dozen or so best-selling books of the entire century, and ha\
s never subsequently )Tj
T*
(been out of print. For the 'educated classes' of the time, Renan became \
as much a household )Tj
T*
(name as Freud or Jung might be today; and, in the absence of television,\
he was probably )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(much more widely read. At a single stroke, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Life of Jesus )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(transformed attitudes towards )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(biblical scholarship almost beyond recognition. And for the next thirty \
years of his life, )Tj
T*
(Renan was to remain a thorn in the Church's side, publishing subsequent \
works on the )Tj
T*
(Apostles, on Paul and on early Christianity in the context of imperial R\
oman thought and )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(culture. He produced two epic series of texts, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Histoire des origines du christianisme )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(1863-)Tj
T*
(83\) and )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Histoire du peuple d'Israel )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(1887-93\). It is no exaggeration to say that Renan )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(80 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
726 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.884 520 198.116 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.884 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 372.884 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 359.384 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 342.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.384 520 40.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 285.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 269.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 255.884 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 242.384 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 225.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 209.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 195.884 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 179.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 165.884 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 149.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.384 520 27 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 92.384 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 75.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 62.384 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 48.884 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 12.884 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(released from its bottle a genie which Christianity has never since mana\
ged to recapture or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(tame.)Tj
T*
( At the same time, of course, Rome was being buffeted from other qu\
arters as well. Four )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(years before )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Life of Jesus, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Charles Darwin had published )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Origin of Species, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(followed it in 1871 with )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Descent of Man, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(a more theologically oriented work which )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(questioned scriptural accounts of the creation. In Darwin's wake, there \
followed the great age )Tj
T*
(of English agnosticism, exemplified by Thomas Huxley and Herbert Spencer\
. Influential and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(widely read philosophers - Schopenhauer, for example, and particularly N\
ietzsche - were also )Tj
T*
(challenging, even blasphemously demolishing, conventional Christian ethi\
cal and theological )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(assumptions. Under the doctrine of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('l'art pour l'art', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the arts were becoming established as a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(self-contained religion of their own, moving into sacred territory which\
organised religion )Tj
T*
(seemed increasingly to have abdicated. Bayreuth became, in effect, the t\
emple of a new cult, )Tj
T*
(a new creed; and well-educated Europeans deemed it quite as acceptable t\
o be 'a Wagnerian' )Tj
T*
(as to be a Christian.)Tj
T*
( The Church was under sustained political attack as well. In 1870-7\
2, Prussia's shattering )Tj
T*
(victory in her war with France, and the creation of the new German Empir\
e, produced, for the )Tj
T*
(first time in modern history, a supreme military power in Europe which o\
wed no allegiance )Tj
T*
(whatever to Rome. To the extent that the new empire was Christian at all\
, it was Lutheran; )Tj
T*
(but the Lutheran Church, to all intents and purposes, was little more th\
an an adjunct of the )Tj
T*
(War Office. Most traumatic of all, Garibaldi's partisan army, by 1870, h\
ad finally effected the )Tj
T*
(unification of Italy - had captured Rome, had wrested the Papal States a\
nd all other territory )Tj
T*
(from the Church, and reduced Catholicism to the status of a non-secular \
power.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 111.8869 376.6 Tm
(16 Father Jean Starcky celebrating Mass at the ruins of Qumran)Tj
4.444 -1.2 Td
(prior to the day's archaeological excavations.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 347.4716 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 10.8225 333.1 Tm
(17 Members of the international team at the Rockefeller Museum, Jerus\
alem, working on the scrolls from )Tj
0.886 -1.2 Td
(Cave 4. Centre, bearded, is Fathc de Vaux, with Father Milik to his righ\
t and Father Starcky to his left. )Tj
11.013 -1.2 Td
(John Allegro is seated to the right of the illustration.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 290.4716 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 31.7531 259.6 Tm
(18 Members of the international team working on scroll fragments in th\
e 'Scrollery': \(left to right\) )Tj
9.774 -1.2 Td
(Father Patrick Skehan, John Strugnell, John Allegro.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 230.4716 Tm
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 40.7869 199.6 Tm
(19 \(left to right\) John Strugnell, Frank Cross, Father Milik, John \
Allegro and Father Starcky.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 183.9716 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 117.4837 169.6 Tm
(20 John Allegro and John Strugnell working in the 'Scrollery'.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 153.9716 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 19.2094 139.6 Tm
(21 \(left to right\) John Strugnell, John Allegro, Father Skehan, Dr \
Claus-Hunno Hunzinger and Father )Tj
21 -1.2 Td
(Milik.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 110.4716 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 94.3763 96.1 Tm
(22 John Allegro working on the 'Nahum Commentary' in the 'Scrollery')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 80.4716 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 67.0219 66.1 Tm
(23 Father Milik, flanked by Dr Hunzinger and Father Benoit, studying \
some newly )Tj
-1.04 -1.2 Td
(purchased scroll fragments in January 1956. The fragments probably came \
from Cave II.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(81 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
727 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 736 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 722.5 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 706 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 692.5 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 676 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 662.5 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 646 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 632.5 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 619 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 602.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 586 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 401.675 520 184.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 385.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 187.175 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 53.762 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 17.762 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 62.1788 739.716 Tm
(24 Dr Hunzinger in January 1956 holding the 'Psalms Scroll' from Qumr\
an, Cave II.)Tj
8.735 -1.2 Td
(This scroll was not to be published until 1965.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 710.5875 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 29.6888 696.216 Tm
(25 Scroll fragments as they were brought in by the Bedouin who discov\
ered them in January 1956.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 680.5875 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 124.695 666.216 Tm
(26 The 'Psalms Scroll' from Cave II before it was unrolled.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 650.5875 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 139.365 636.216 Tm
(27 A seal found at the Qumran ruins with, curiously,)Tj
-5.525 -1.2 Td
(the owner's name, 'Josephus', written in Greek rather than Hebrew or Ara\
maic.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 607.0875 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
( Beleaguered by onslaughts from science, from philosophy, from the \
arts and from secular )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(political powers, Rome was more shaken than she had been at any time sin\
ce the beginning )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the Lutheran Reformation three and a half centuries before. She respo\
nded with a number )Tj
T*
(of desperate defensive measures. She sought - vainly, it anspired - poli\
tical allegiances with )Tj
T*
(Catholic, or nominally Catho-ic, powers, such as the Habsburg Empire. On\
18 July 1870, )Tj
T*
(after a vote by the First Vatican Council, Pope Pius IX - characterised \
by Metternich as )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('warm of heart, weak of head and lacking utterly in common sense')Tj
11 0 0 11 377.7162 477.195 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 383.2162 473.675 Tm
( - promulgated the dogma )Tj
-27.143 -1.303 Td
(of Papal Infallibility.)Tj
11 0 0 11 124.9637 459.2825 Tm
(10 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 138.7137 455.7625 Tm
(And to counter the depredations being wrought on scripture by Renan )Tj
-9.361 -1.2 Td
(and German biblical scholarship, the Church began equipping her own cadr\
es of meticulous )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scholars - elite intellectual 'shock troops' who were supposed to confro\
nt Catholicism's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(adversaries on their own ground. Thus arose the Catholic Modernist Movem\
ent.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(The Modernists were originally intended to deploy the rigour and precisi\
on of Germanic )Tj
T*
(methodology not to challenge scripture, but to support it. A generation \
of clerical scholars )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was painstakingly trained and groomed to provide the Church with a kind \
of academic strike )Tj
T*
(force, a corps specifically formed to defend the literal truth of script\
ure with all the heavy )Tj
T*
(ordnance of the most up-to-date critical scholarship. To Rome's chagrin \
and mortification, )Tj
T*
(however, the programme backfired. The more it sought to arm younger cler\
ics with the )Tj
T*
(requisite tools for combat in the modern polemical arena, the more those\
same clerics began )Tj
T*
(to desert the cause for which they had been recruited. Critical scrutiny\
of the Bible revealed a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(multitude of inconsistencies, discrepancies and implications that were p\
ositively inimical to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Roman dogma. The Modernists themselves quickly began to question and sub\
vert what they )Tj
T*
(were supposed to be defending.)Tj
T*
( Thus, for example, Alfred Loisy, one of the most prominent and pre\
stigious Modernists, )Tj
T*
(wondered publicly how, in the light of recent biblical history and archa\
eology, many of the )Tj
T*
(Church's doctrines could still be justified. 'Jesus proclaimed the comin\
g of the Kingdom', )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Loisy declared, 'but what came was the Church.')Tj
11 0 0 11 279.1975 127.87 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 290.1975 124.35 Tm
( Loisy argued that many points of )Tj
-20.378 -1.2 Td
(dogma had crystallised as historically conditioned reactions to specifi\
c events, at specific )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(places and times. In consequence, they were not to be regarded as fixed \
and immutable )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(truths, but as - at best - symbols. According to Loisy, such basic tenet\
s of Christian teaching )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(as the Virgin Birth and Jesus' divinity were no longer tenable.)Tj
T*
( Rome, in trying to play Frankenstein, had created a monster in her\
own laboratory. In )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(82 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
728 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 667 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 517.049 520 149.951 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 319.049 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 137.549 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 38.549 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 2.549 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(1902, shortly before his death, Pope Leo XIII created the Pontifical Bib\
lical Commission, to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(supervise and monitor the work of Catholic scriptural scholarship. Later\
that year, Leo's )Tj
T*
(successor, Pius X, placed Loisy's works on the Inquisition's Index of fo\
rbidden books. In )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1904, the new Pope issued two encyclicals opposing all scholarship which\
questioned the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(origins and early history of Christianity. All Catholic teachers suspect\
ed of 'Modernist )Tj
T*
(tendencies' were summarily dismissed from their posts.)Tj
T*
( The Modernists, of course, comprising the best-educated, most erud\
ite and articulate )Tj
T*
(enclave in the Church, did not hesitate to fight back. They were support\
ed by prominent )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(thinkers, by distinguished cultural and literary figures. In Italy, one \
such was Antonio )Tj
T*
(Fogazzaro. In 1896, Fogazzaro had become a senator. He was also regarded\
as 'the leading )Tj
T*
(Catholic layman of his day' and, by his contemporaries at least, as the \
greatest novelist Italy )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(had produced since Manzoni. In )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Saint, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(published in 1905, Fogazzaro wrote: 'The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Catholic Church, calling herself the fountain of truth, today opposes th\
e search after truth )Tj
T*
(when her foundations, the sacred books, the formulae of her dogmas, her \
alleged infallibility, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(become objects of research. To us, this signifies that she no longer has\
faith in herself.')Tj
11 0 0 11 486.7675 525.1564 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 505.1364 Tm
( Fogazzaro's work, needless to say, was itself promptly placed on t\
he Index. And the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Church's campaign against the movement it had fostered and nurtured proc\
eeded to intensify. )Tj
T*
(In July 1907, the Holy Office published a decree officially condemning M\
odernist attempts )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to question Church doctrine, papal authority and the historical veracity\
of biblical texts. Less )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(than two months later, in September, Modernism was effectively declared \
to be a heresy and )Tj
T*
(the entire movement was formally banned. The number of books on the Inde\
x suddenly and )Tj
T*
(dramatically increased. A new, much more stringent censorship was instit\
uted. Clerical )Tj
T*
(commissars monitored teaching with a doctrinal rigidity unknown since th\
e Middle Ages. At )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(last, in 1910, a decree was issued requiring all Catholics involved in t\
eaching or preaching to )Tj
T*
(take an oath renouncing 'all the errors of Modernism'. A number of Moder\
nist writers were )Tj
T*
(excommunicated. Students at seminaries and theological colleges were eve\
n forbidden to )Tj
T*
(read newspapers.)Tj
T*
( In the 1880s, however, all of this still lay in the future. Among \
the young Modernist )Tj
T*
(clerics of the 1880s, there was a naive credulity and optimism, a ferven\
t conviction that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(methodical historical and archaeological research would confirm, rather \
than contradict, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(literal truth of scripture. The Ecole Biblique et Archeologique Franchis\
e de Jerusalem - )Tj
T*
(which subsequently came to dominate Dead Sea Scroll scholarship - was ro\
oted in the first )Tj
T*
(generation of Modernism, before the Church realised how close it had com\
e to subverting )Tj
T*
(itself. It originated in 1882, when a French Dominican monk on pilgrimag\
e in Jerusalem )Tj
T*
(resolved to establish a Dominican house there, consisting of a church an\
d a monastery. He )Tj
T*
(chose a site on the Nablus Road, where excavations had revealed the rema\
ins of an earlier )Tj
T*
(church. According to tradition, it was precisely here that St Stephen, s\
upposedly the first )Tj
T*
(Christian martyr, had been stoned to death.)Tj
T*
( Rome not only approved the idea, but embellished and expanded it. \
Pope Leo XIII )Tj
T*
(suggested that a biblical school also be established. This school was fo\
unded in 1890 by )Tj
T*
(Father Albert Lagrange and opened in 1892, with living quarters for fift\
een resident students. )Tj
T*
(The installation was one of a number of institutions created at the time\
, to equip Catholic )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scholars with the academic expertise necessary to defend their faith aga\
inst the threat posed )Tj
T*
(by developments in historical and archaeological research.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(83 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
729 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 383.559 520 382.441 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 268.059 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 152.52 520 115.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 37.02 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 1.02 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( Father Lagrange had been born in 1855. After studying law, he had \
gained his doctorate )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in 1878, then entered the seminary of St Sulpice, the centre of Modernis\
t studies at the time. )Tj
T*
(In 1879, he had become a Dominican. On 6 October 1880, however, under th\
e Third French )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Republic, all religious orders were banished from France. The 25-year-ol\
d Lagrange had )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(accordingly gone to Salamanca, in Spain, where he studied Hebrew and tau\
ght Church )Tj
T*
(history and philosophy. It was at Salamanca that he was ordained a pries\
t, on St Dagobert's )Tj
T*
(Day \(23 December\), 1883. In 1888, he was sent to the University of Vie\
nna to study Oriental )Tj
T*
(languages. Two years later, on 10 March 1890, at the age of thirty-five,\
he arrived at the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fledgling Dominican house of St Stephen in Jerusalem, and there, on 15 N\
ovember, )Tj
T*
(established a biblical school. The school was called initially the 'Ecol\
e Practique d'Etudes )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Bibliques'. Lagrange created for it its own journal, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(which began publication )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in 1892 and continues today. Through this organ, as well, of course, as \
through the )Tj
T*
(programme of studies, he sought to imbue the new institution with an att\
itude towards )Tj
T*
(historical and archaeological research which can best be summed up in hi\
s own words. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(According to Father Lagrange, 'the various stages in the religious histo\
ry of mankind form a )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(recit, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(a history that is directly and supernaturally guided by God to lead to t\
he ultimate and )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(definitive stage - the messianic age inaugurated by Jesus Christ'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 363.815 492.1177 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 374.815 488.5977 Tm
( The Old Testament was 'a )Tj
-26.532 -1.2 Td
(group of books indicating a register of the various stages of an oral tr\
adition that God used )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(and guided ... in the preparation for the definitive New Testament era'.\
)Tj
11 0 0 11 397.0075 457.7052 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 408.0075 454.1852 Tm
( The orientation was )Tj
-28.946 -1.2 Td
(clear enough. To the extent that Lagrange employed modern methodology at\
all, he would )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(employ it to 'prove' what he had already, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(a priori, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(decided to be true - that is, the literal )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(veracity of scripture. And the 'definitive' nature of the New Testament \
and the events it )Tj
T*
(chronicled rendered it effectively off limits to scholarly scrutiny.)Tj
T*
( In 1890, when Lagrange established the Ecole Biblique, Modernism h\
ad not yet come )Tj
T*
(under a cloud. By 1902, however, it had fallen into serious official dis\
repute. In that year, as )Tj
T*
(we have noted, Pope Leo XIII created the Pontifical Biblical Commission,\
to supervise and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(monitor the work of Catholic scriptural scholarship. In the same year, L\
agrange returned to )Tj
T*
(France to lecture at Toulouse - where he was accused of being a Modernis\
t, and met with )Tj
T*
(furious opposition. By that time, the mere suggestion of historical and \
archaeological )Tj
T*
(research was sufficient to get one stigmatised.)Tj
T*
( The Pope himself, however, recognised that Lagrange's faith was st\
ill intact, and that his )Tj
T*
(heart, so far as the Church was concerned, was in the right place. And i\
ndeed, much of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Lagrange's work comprised a systematic rebuttal of Alfred Loisy and othe\
r Modernists. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Lagrange was accordingly made a member, or 'consultant', of the Pontific\
al Biblical )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Commission, and his journal, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(became the Commission's official organ. This )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(arrangement obtained until 1908, when the Commission launched a journal \
of its own, the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Ada apostolicae sedis.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
( From lower down in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, accusations of Mo\
dernism continued. So )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(demoralising were these accusations that Lagrange, in 1907, temporarily \
renounced his work )Tj
T*
(in Old Testament studies. In 1912, he resolved to abandon biblical studi\
es altogether and )Tj
T*
(leave Jerusalem. He was duly recalled to France. But the Pope again rall\
ied to his support, )Tj
T*
(dispatched him back to his post in Jerusalem and ordered him to continue\
his work. The )Tj
T*
(Ecole Biblique, originally created as a forum for Modernism, had now bec\
ome a bulwark )Tj
T*
(against it.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(84 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
730 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.549 520 133.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 466.136 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 416.636 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.136 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 367.136 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 334.136 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 301.136 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 283.224 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 266.724 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 131.899 520 134.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 95.899 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(Among the original team of international scholars assembled by Father de\
Vaux in 1953 was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the late Monsignor Patrick Skehan. Father Skehan was head of the Departm\
ent of Semitic )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and Egyptian Languages and Literatures at the Catholic University in Was\
hington. He was )Tj
T*
(also, later, a member of the Pontifical Biblical Commission. And in 1955\
, he was director of )Tj
T*
(the Albright Institute in Jerusalem. In this capacity, he was instrument\
al in the political )Tj
T*
(manoeuvrings which established the Ecole Biblique's dominance of Dead Se\
a Scroll research. )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(In 1956, he played a key role in organising the letter to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(that was intended to isolate )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(and discredit John Allegro.)Tj
11 0 0 11 158.94 607.6564 Tm
( 15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 587.6364 Tm
( Father Skehan was among the few scholars to be entrusted with acce\
ss to the scrolls )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(themselves. His attitudes offer some indication of the orientation of th\
e Catholic scholars )Tj
T*
(associated with the Ecole Biblique. Writing in 1966, Father Skehan decla\
red that the Old )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Testament was not 'a thumbnail sketch of the history and prehistory of t\
he human race . . . In )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the fullness of time, Our Lord came; and a proper part of the duty of ev\
ery Old Testament )Tj
T*
(scholar is to trace in sacred history the development of the readiness t\
o be aware of Christ )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(when he would come . . .')Tj
11 0 0 11 150.3325 490.7439 Tm
(16 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 164.0825 487.2239 Tm
(In other words, the primary responsibility of every biblical )Tj
-11.206 -1.2 Td
(scholar is to ferret out from the Old Testament supposed anticipations o\
f)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(accepted Christian doctrine. Viewed any other way, the Old Testament pre\
sumably has scant )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(value and relevance. This is a curious definition of 'dispassionate scho\
larship'. But Father )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Skehan was even more explicit:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( it would seem that in our day it is incumbent upon biblical schola\
rs . . . to indicate . . . as )Tj
T*
(best they )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( can the general lines of the progress by which God steadily led, a\
s he surely did, stone )Tj
T*
(age, )Tj
T*
( Chalcolithic, and ancient pagan man to the capability of measuring\
up, in some degree, to )Tj
T*
(the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( social fact which is the Christian Church.)Tj
11 0 0 11 257.8575 291.3314 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 271.3114 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Father Skehan, of course, made no real pretence to 'dispassionate \
scholarship'. In fact, he )Tj
T*
(regarded it as positively dangerous - considering that 'studies carried \
out from a perspective )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that puts literary and historico-critical considerations in the foregrou\
nd can, usually in the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(hands of popularizers, result in oversimplification, exaggeration, or ne\
glect of more profound )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(matters'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 56.3925 190.9189 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 67.3925 187.3988 Tm
( Ultimately, the biblical scholar's work should be guided and determined\
by )Tj
-4.174 -1.2 Td
(Church doctrine and 'be subject always to the sovereign right of Holy Mo\
ther Church to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(witness definitively what is in fact concordant with the teaching she ha\
s received from )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Christ'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 49.5313 140.0063 Tm
(19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 119.9864 Tm
( The implications of all this are staggering. All enquiry and inves\
tigation, regardless of )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(what it might turn up or reveal, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(must )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(be subordinated and accommodated to the existing )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(corpus of official Catholic teaching. In other words, it must be edited \
or adjusted or distorted )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(until it conforms to the requisite criteria. And what if something comes\
to light which can't be )Tj
T*
(made thus to conform? From Father Skehan's statements, the answer to tha\
t question would )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(85 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
731 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 732.961 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.549 520 67.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 649.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 616.049 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.049 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 566.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 517.049 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 499.136 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 482.636 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 284.636 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 248.636 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(seem clear. Anything that can't be subordinated or accommodated to exist\
ing doctrine )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(must, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(of necessity, be suppressed.)Tj
T*
( Father Skehan's position, of course, was not unique. It was effect\
ively echoed by Pope )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Pius XII himself, who maintained 'that the biblical exegete has a functi\
on and a responsibility )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(to perform in matters of importance to the church'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 287.805 690.1564 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 298.805 686.6364 Tm
( As for the Ecole Biblique and its )Tj
-21.004 -1.2 Td
(research on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Skehan says:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Are there not . . . providential elements also in the curious fact\
that the Holy Land is the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(place on )Tj
T*
( earth best suited to be a kind of laboratory for the study of huma\
n life continuously, with )Tj
T*
(no major )Tj
T*
( periods missing . . . I believe that there are . . .)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( . . . Therefore, it seems to me that there is an ultimate religiou\
s value which we cannot yet )Tj
T*
( measure, but which has Providence behind it, in the fact that Pere\
Lagrange established )Tj
T*
(upon )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( Palestinian soil an institute . . .)Tj
11 0 0 11 199.0762 507.2439 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 487.2239 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( For years, most independent scholars were quite unaware of any suc\
h divine mandate )Tj
T*
(having been possessed by the Ecole Biblique, or of the Vatican's wishful\
thinking on the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(matter. On the contrary, the Ecole appeared to be an impartial scholarly\
institution dedicated, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(among other things, to collecting, collating, researching, translating a\
nd elucidating the Dead )Tj
T*
(Sea Scrolls, not for suppressing them or transforming them into Christia\
n propaganda. Thus, )Tj
T*
(for example, a scholar or graduate student in Britain, or the States, or\
anywhere else, having )Tj
T*
(established some academic credibility with a thesis or publication in on\
e or another sphere of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(biblical study, would apply for access to the Qumran material. He'd have\
no reason to expect )Tj
T*
(a rebuff - would assume the scrolls were available for study by anyone w\
ho had acquired )Tj
T*
(legitimate academic credentials. In every case known to us, however, req\
uests for access )Tj
T*
(have been summarily refused, without apology or explanation - and with t\
he inevitable )Tj
T*
(concurrent implication that the applicant himself was somehow inadequate\
.)Tj
T*
( Such, to take but one example, was the case for Professor Norman G\
olb of the University )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of Chicago. Professor Golb had done his doctoral dissertation on Qumran \
and on Qumran-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(related material found in Cairo. Having amassed years of experience in t\
he field, he )Tj
T*
(embarked on a research project to check the palaeographical dating of th\
e scrolls, which had )Tj
T*
(been established by Professor Cross of the international team and which \
Golb felt could be )Tj
T*
(improved. To confirm his thesis, Golb of course needed to see certain or\
iginal texts - )Tj
T*
(photographic facsimiles would obviously not have sufficed. In 1970, he w\
as in Jerusalem and )Tj
T*
(accordingly wrote to de Vaux, then head of the Ecole Biblique and the in\
ternational team, )Tj
T*
(requesting access and explaining that he needed it to validate a researc\
h project which had )Tj
T*
(already occupied years of his life. Three days later, de Vaux replied, s\
tating that no access )Tj
T*
(could be granted without 'the explicit permission of the scholar who is \
in charge of their )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(edition'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 54.11 93.3314 Tm
(22 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 67.86 89.8114 Tm
(The scholar in question was the then Father Milik, who, as de Vaux knew \
only too )Tj
-4.208 -1.2 Td
(well, wasn't prepared to let anyone see anything. After all the time and\
effort he had invested )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in it, Golb was obliged to abandon his project. 'Since then,' he told us\
, 'I have had good )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(reason to doubt all Cross's datings of texts by palaeography.')Tj
11 0 0 11 342.6263 42.4189 Tm
(23)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(86 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
732 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 764.311 520 1.689 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 614.36 520 149.951 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 431.448 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 414.948 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 381.948 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 348.948 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 315.948 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 282.948 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 265.035 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 248.535 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 149.535 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 133.035 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 116.535 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 100.035 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 83.535 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 67.035 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 37.035 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 1.035 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.3602 Tm
( On the other hand, fragments of Qumran material )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(will )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(be made available to researchers )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(affiliated with the Ecole itself, to young scholars and proteges of the \
international team, to )Tj
T*
(graduate students under the tutelage of one or another team member, who \
can be assured of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(toeing the official 'party line'. Thus, for instance, Eugene Ulrich of N\
otre Dame, a student of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Cross's, 'inherited' the scroll material originally assigned to Father P\
atrick Skehan. He also )Tj
T*
(appears to have inherited something of Skehan's attitude to other schola\
rs. When asked why )Tj
T*
(facsimile photographic editions couldn't be produced, he replied that 't\
he vast majority of )Tj
T*
(people who will use these editions - including average university profes\
sors - are barely able )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(to judge competently difficult readings'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 229.78 622.4677 Tm
(24)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 602.4477 Tm
( Independent scholars from Britain, the States and elsewhere have t\
hus found it impossible )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to get access to unpublished scroll material. For Israeli scholars, such\
access has been )Tj
T*
(inconceivable. As we have noted, Father de Vaux, a former member of the \
notorious Action )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Franchise, was a fairly outspoken anti-Semite. To this day, members of t\
he Ecole Biblique )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(seem to remain hostile to Israel, even though it is supposed in theory t\
o be a neutral enclave )Tj
T*
(for impartial scholarship, a refuge from the political and religious div\
isions rending modern-)Tj
T*
(day Jerusalem. When asked why no scholars from Tel Aviv University were \
involved in )Tj
T*
(editing the scrolls, Strugnell replied: 'We are looking for quality in Q\
umran studies, and you )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(don't get it there.')Tj
11 0 0 11 105.0813 472.5552 Tm
(25)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 116.0813 469.0352 Tm
( With his characteristic, and self-incriminating, eloquence, the late Fa\
ther )Tj
-7.715 -1.2 Td
(Skehan effectively articulated his and his colleagues' anti-Israeli bias\
in a letter quoted in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Jerusalem Post Magazine:)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( I feel obliged to tell you . . . that I should not under any circu\
mstances grant through any )Tj
T*
(Israeli )Tj
T*
( functionary, any permission to dispense, for any purpose, or to an\
y extent, of anything )Tj
T*
(whatsoever )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( that is lawfully housed in the Palestine Archaeological Museum. I \
regard the State of )Tj
T*
(Israel and all )Tj
T*
( of its personnel as having no legal standing whatsoever with respe\
ct to the Museum and )Tj
T*
(its )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( contents.)Tj
11 0 0 11 79.8913 273.1427 Tm
(26)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 253.1227 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(As we have noted, this attitude is shared by the former Father Milik. Ne\
ither he nor another )Tj
T*
(of his colleagues, the late Father Starcky, ever returned to Jerusalem a\
fter the 1967 war, when )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the scrolls passed into Israeli hands. Then again, of course, their posi\
tion only echoes that of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the Vatican itself, which, even today, does not recognise the State of I\
srael. But one is )Tj
T*
(prompted to ask whether their prejudice simply coincided with official C\
hurch policy, or )Tj
T*
(whether it was formally dictated by the ecclesiastical hierarchy.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 263.75 45.2929 Tm
(7)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(87 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
733 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 736 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 719.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 703 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 541.136 520 161.864 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 425.559 520 115.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 226.108 520 199.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 190.108 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 154.7 744.2319 Tm
(The Inquisition Today)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 724.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 683.4319 Tm
(A)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 26.245 683.4319 Tm
(s an antidote to the spreading 'infection' of Modernism, Pope Leo XIII, \
in 1902, had )Tj
-1.181 -1.407 Td
(created the Pontifical Biblical Commission to supervise and monitor the \
progress \(or lack )Tj
T*
(thereof\) of Catholic scriptural scholarship. It consisted originally of\
a dozen or more )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(cardinals appointed by the Pope and a number of 'consultants', all deeme\
d to be experts in )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(their fields of research and study. According to the )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
(New Catholic Encyclopaedia, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Commission's official function was \(and still is\) 'to strive . . . wit\
h all possible care that God's )Tj
T*
(words . . . will be shielded not only from every breath of error but eve\
n from every rash )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(opinion'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 57.9325 567.1564 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 63.4325 563.6364 Tm
( The Commission would further undertake to ensure that scholars 'endeavo\
ur to )Tj
-3.886 -1.303 Td
(safeguard the authority of the scriptures and to promote their right int\
erpretation'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 456.985 549.2439 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 529.2239 Tm
( As we have noted, Father Lagrange, founder of the Ecole Biblique, \
was one of the earliest )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(members of the Pontifical Biblical Commission. The Ecole Biblique's jour\
nal, )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
(Revue )Tj
T*
(biblique, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(was also, until 1908, the Commission's official organ. Given the close a\
ffiliation )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(between the two institutions, it is clear that the original Ecole Bibliq\
ue was an adjunct of the )Tj
T*
(Commission's propaganda machine -an instrument for promulgating Catholic\
doctrine under )Tj
T*
(the guise of historical and archaeological research, or for enforcing th\
e adherence of )Tj
T*
(historical and archaeological research to the tenets of Catholic doctrin\
e.)Tj
T*
( One might expect this situation to have changed during the last ha\
lf-century, and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(especially in the years since the Second Vatican Council of the early 19\
60s. In fact, it has not. )Tj
T*
(The Ecole Biblique today retains as close an association with the Pontif\
ical Biblical )Tj
T*
(Commission as it did in the past. Degrees at the Ecole, for example, are\
conferred specifically )Tj
T*
(by the Commission. Most graduates of the Ecole are placed by the Commiss\
ion as professors )Tj
T*
(in seminaries and other Catholic institutions. Of the Commission's ninet\
een official )Tj
T*
('consultants' today, a number are influential in determining what the ge\
neral public learns of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the Dead Sea Scrolls. Thus, for instance, Father Jean-Luc Vesco, the cur\
rent head of the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Ecole Biblique and a member of the )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
(Revue biblique's )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(editorial board, is also a member of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Pontifical Biblical Commission. So, too, is at least one other member of\
the journal's editorial )Tj
T*
(board, Jose Loza. So, too, is a prominent writer on the scrolls, a Jesui\
t named Joseph )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Fitzmyer, who has compiled the official concordance for much of the Qumr\
an material.)Tj
11 0 0 11 491.91 234.2154 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 214.1954 Tm
( In 1956, the name of Father Roland de Vaux, Director of the Ecole \
Biblique, appeared for )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the first time on the list of the Commission's 'consultants'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 327.5838 199.8029 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 333.0838 196.2829 Tm
( He would have been appointed )Tj
-23.497 -1.2 Td
(the year before, in 1955, and he continued as a 'consultant' until his d\
eath in 1971. The timing )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of de Vaux's appointment is interesting. In 1955, it must be remembered,\
much of the crucial )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and controversial 'sectarian' material from Cave 4 was still being purch\
ased and collated. In )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(December of that year, indeed, the Vatican laid out money for a number o\
f important )Tj
T*
(fragments. In 1955, too, the 'Copper Scroll' was unrolled in Manchester,\
under John Allegro's )Tj
T*
(auspices, and Allegro himself was beginning to go public in a potentiall\
y embarrassing )Tj
T*
(fashion. The Vatican thus became aware, for the first time, of the kind \
of problems it might )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(have to face in connection with the Qumran material then coming to light\
. The ecclesiastical )Tj
T*
(hierarchy almost certainly felt the need of some sort of 'chain of comma\
nd', or, at least, 'chain )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(88 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
734 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 664.175 520 101.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 395.937 520 268.238 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 280.437 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 263.937 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 247.437 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 81.025 520 166.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 45.025 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(of accountability', whereby some measure of control could be exercised o\
ver Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scholarship. In any case, it is significant, if not particularly surpris\
ing, that from 1956 on, )Tj
T*
(every director of the Ecole Biblique has also been a member of the Ponti\
fical Biblical )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Commission. When de Vaux died in 1971, the Commission's list of 'consult\
ants' was updated )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(to include the name of his successor at the Ecole, Father Pierre Benoit.\
)Tj
11 0 0 11 398.7538 690.195 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 404.2538 686.675 Tm
( When Benoit died in )Tj
-28.673 -1.303 Td
(1987, the new director, Jean-Luc Vesco, became a 'consultant' to the Com\
mission in turn.)Tj
11 0 0 11 502.6212 672.2825 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 652.2625 Tm
( Even today, the Pontifical Biblical Commission continues to super\
vise and monitor all )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(biblical studies conducted under the auspices of the Catholic Church. It\
also publishes official )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(decrees on 'the right way to teach . . . scripture'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 271.5525 621.37 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 277.0525 617.85 Tm
( In 1907, adherence to these decrees was )Tj
-19.422 -1.2 Td
(made obligatory by Pope Pius X. Thus, for example, the Commission 'estab\
lished', by decree, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that Moses was the literal author of the Pentateuch. In 1909, a similar \
decree affirmed the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(literal and historical accuracy of the first three chapters of Genesis. \
More recently, on 21 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(April 1964, the Commission issued a decree governing biblical scholarshi\
p in general and, )Tj
T*
(more specifically, the 'historical truth of the Gospels'. The decree was\
quite unequivocal, )Tj
T*
(stating that 'at all times the interpreter must cherish a spirit of read\
y obedience to the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Church's teaching authority'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 167.3275 504.4575 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 172.8275 500.9375 Tm
( It further declared that those in charge of any 'biblical )Tj
-11.842 -1.2 Td
(associations' are obliged to 'observe inviolably the laws already laid d\
own by the Pontifical )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Biblical Commission'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 132.43 470.045 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 137.93 466.525 Tm
( Any scholar working under the Commission's aegis - and this, of )Tj
-9.304 -1.2 Td
(course, includes those at the Ecole Biblique - is thus in effect constra\
ined by the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Commission's decrees. Whatever conclusions he might reach, whatever the \
revelations to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(which his research might lead him, he must not, in his writing or his te\
aching, contradict the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Commission's doctrinal authority.)Tj
T*
( The head of the Pontifical Biblical Commission today is Cardinal J\
oseph Ratzinger. )Tj
T*
(Cardinal Ratzinger is also head of another Catholic institution, the Con\
gregation for the )Tj
T*
(Doctrine of the Faith. This designation is fairly new, dating from 1965,\
and probably )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(unfamiliar to most laymen; but the institution itself is one of long-est\
ablished pedigree. It has, )Tj
T*
(in fact, a unique and resonant history behind it, extending back to the \
13th century. In 1542, )Tj
T*
(it had become known officially as the Holy Office. Prior to that, it was\
called the Holy )Tj
T*
(Inquisition. Cardinal Ratzinger is, in effect, the Church's modern-day G\
rand Inquisitor.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The official head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is a\
lways the reigning )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Pope, and the executive head of the Congregation is today called its sec\
retary, although in )Tj
T*
(earlier times he was known as the Grand Inquisitor. Of all the departmen\
ts of the Curia, that )Tj
T*
(of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is the most powerful. \
Ratzinger is perhaps )Tj
T*
(the closest to the Pope of all the Curia cardinals. Certainly they have \
many attitudes in )Tj
T*
(common. Both wish to restore many pre-Vatican II values. Both dislike th\
eologians. )Tj
T*
(Ratzinger sees theologians as having opened the Church up to corrosive s\
ecular influences. A )Tj
T*
(deeply pessimistic man, he feels that the Church is 'collapsing', and on\
ly the suppression of )Tj
T*
(all dissent can assure its survival as a unified faith. He regards those\
who do not share his )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(pessimism as 'blind or deluded'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 184.9138 89.1325 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 69.1125 Tm
( Like the Inquisition of the past, the Congregation for the Doctrin\
e of the Faith is in large )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(part a tribunal. It has its own judges, the chief of whom is called the \
'Assessor'. The 'Assessor' )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(89 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
735 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 683.5 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 484.087 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.51 520 181.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 119.598 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 83.598 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(is aided by a 'Commissar' and two Dominican monks. These individuals hav\
e the specific )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(task of preparing whatever 'investigations' the Congregation chooses to \
undertake. Such )Tj
T*
(investigations generally pertain to breaches of doctrine on the part of \
clerics, or anything else )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that might threaten Church unity. As in the Middle Ages, all investigati\
ons are conducted and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(pursued under conditions of total)Tj
T*
(secrecy.)Tj
T*
( Until 1971, the Pontifical Biblical Commission and the Congregatio\
n for the Doctrine of )Tj
T*
(the Faith were supposed to be separate organisations. In reality, howeve\
r, the separation )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(between them was little more than nominal. The two organisations overlap\
ped one another in )Tj
T*
(a multitude of respects, ranging from their functions to the membership \
of their governing )Tj
T*
(bodies. In 1969, for example, eight of the twelve cardinals presiding ov\
er the Congregation )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(also presided over the Commission.)Tj
11 0 0 11 206.6938 574.695 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 217.6938 571.175 Tm
( A number of individuals acted as 'consultants' for both. )Tj
-15.105 -1.2 Td
(At last, on 27 June 1971, Pope Paul VI, in an attempt to streamline bure\
aucracy, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(amalgamated the Commission and the Congregation in virtually everything \
but name. Both )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(were housed in the same offices, at the same address - the Palace of the\
Congregation at Holy )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Office Square in Rome. Both were placed under the directorship of the sa\
me cardinal. On 29 )Tj
T*
(November 1981, that cardinal became Joseph Ratzinger.)Tj
T*
( Numerous contemporary priests, preachers, teachers and writers hav\
e been muzzled, )Tj
T*
(expelled or deprived of their posts by the body over which Ratzinger now\
presides. The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(victims have included certain of the most distinguished and intelligent \
theologians in the )Tj
T*
(Church today. One such was Father Edward Schillebeeckx, of the Universit\
y of Nigmegen in )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Holland. In 1974, Schillebeeckx had published a book, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Jesus: An Experiment in Christology. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(In this work, he appeared, in the eyes of his adversaries, to be questio\
ning the literal truth of )Tj
T*
(certain dogma, such as the Resurrection and the Virgin Birth. In Decembe\
r 1979, )Tj
T*
(Schillebeeckx was hauled before a tribunal of the Congregation for the D\
octrine of the Faith, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(where one of his judges publicly accused him of heresy. He survived his \
investigation by the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(tribunal, but in 1983 he was again summoned to a tribunal of the Congreg\
ation, this time for )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(his latest book, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Ministry: A Case for Change.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
( What were Schillebeeckx's transgressions? If only tentatively, he \
had questioned the )Tj
T*
(Church's position on celibacy. He had sympathised with arguments for the\
ordination of )Tj
T*
(women. Most seriously of all, he had suggested the Church should 'change\
with the times' )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(rather than remaining fettered to immutably fixed doctrines.)Tj
11 0 0 11 339.945 243.2052 Tm
(12 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 353.695 239.6852 Tm
(The Church, he contended, )Tj
-24.996 -1.2 Td
(should respond to, and evolve with, the needs of its faithful, instead o\
f imposing draconian )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(codes upon them. He had argued, in short, for a dynamic pastoral approac\
h, as opposed to the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(static one favoured by Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger. Once ag\
ain, Schillebeeckx )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(survived the Congregation's investigation and interrogation. To this day\
, however, he remains )Tj
T*
(under close scrutiny, and his every word, written or spoken, is carefull\
y monitored. It goes )Tj
T*
(without saying that such assiduously vigilant surveillance will exert a \
profoundly inhibiting )Tj
T*
(influence.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( A more telling case is that of the eminent Swiss theologian Dr Han\
s K\374ng, formerly head )Tj
T*
(of the Department of Theology at the University of T\374bingen. K\374ng \
was generally )Tj
T*
(acknowledged to be among the most brilliant, most influential, most topi\
cally relevant )Tj
T*
(Catholic writers of our age - a man who, following in the footsteps of P\
ope John XXIII, )Tj
T*
(seemed to offer a new direction for the Church, a new humanity, a new fl\
exibility and )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(90 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
736 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 580.147 520 185.853 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 496.234 520 83.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 479.734 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 446.734 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 430.234 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 412.322 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 395.822 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 245.909 520 149.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 112.497 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 76.497 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(adaptability. But Kung was also controversial. In his book )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Infallible?, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(first published in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(German in 1970 and in English the following year, he challenged the doct\
rine of papal )Tj
T*
(infallibility - which, one must remember, had never existed in the Churc\
h until 1870 and had )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(only then been established by a vote. 'No one is infallible', K\374ng wr\
ote, 'but God himself.')Tj
11 0 0 11 503.7762 706.6564 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 514.7762 703.1364 Tm
( )Tj
-36.711 -1.2 Td
(Further, 'the traditional doctrine of infallibility in the Church . . . \
rests on foundations that )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(cannot be regarded as secure'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 173.9687 672.2439 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 184.9687 668.7239 Tm
( K\374ng also recognised the distinction between theology and )Tj
-12.725 -1.2 Td
(history, and the former's propensity to parade itself as the latter. He \
attacked the sophistry of )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(such Church 'scholars' as Cardinal Jean Danielou, who, in 1957, had publ\
ished )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Scrolls and Primitive Christianity, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(a work primarily of theological propaganda: 'Theologians )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(such as Danielou . . . now bring an aura of pseudo-learning to the role \
of Grand Inquisitor, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(are appointed Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church and fulfil its expectat\
ions.')Tj
11 0 0 11 442.4925 588.2541 Tm
(15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 568.2341 Tm
( After the election of John Paul II, K\374ng was critical of the ne\
w pontiff's rigidity in morals )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and dogma. 'Is the Catholic theologian', he asked, 'going to be allowed \
. . . to ask critical )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(questions . . . ?')Tj
11 0 0 11 94.59 537.3416 Tm
(16 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 108.34 533.8216 Tm
(Was John Paul II really free, K\374ng wondered, of the personality cult \
which )Tj
-7.152 -1.2 Td
(had bedevilled earlier popes; and was he not perhaps excessively preoccu\
pied with doctrine, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(at the expense of 'the liberating message of Christ'?)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Can the Pope and the Church credibly speak to the conscience of to\
day's people if a self-)Tj
T*
(critical )Tj
T*
( examination of conscience on the part of the Church and its leader\
ship does not also )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( simultaneously occur . . . )Tj
11 0 0 11 171.9337 420.4291 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 400.4091 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( K\374ng's outspokenness made him, of course, an irresistible targe\
t for the inquisitional )Tj
T*
(tribunals of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Having eval\
uated his statements, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the tribunal accordingly passed judgment. On 18 December 1979, the Pope,\
acting on the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(formal recommendation of the Congregation, stripped K\374ng of his post \
and pronounced him )Tj
T*
(no longer qualified to teach Roman Catholic doctrine. He was informed th\
at he was no longer )Tj
T*
(a Catholic theologian, and was forbidden to write or publish further. K\374\
ng himself effectively )Tj
T*
(summarised what had befallen him: 'I have been condemned by a pontiff wh\
o has rejected )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(my theology without ever having read one of my books and who always has \
refused to see )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(me. The truth is that Rome is not waiting for dialogue but for submissio\
n.')Tj
11 0 0 11 417.715 254.0166 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 233.9966 Tm
( Under the directorship of Cardinal Ratzinger, the Congregation, du\
ring the last decade, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(has become increasingly entrenched, intransigent and reactionary. Ratzin\
ger is vehemently )Tj
T*
(critical of all changes in the Church since the Second Vatican Council o\
f 1962-5. The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Church's teachings, he maintains, are being 'tarnished' by doubt and que\
stioning. According )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to one commentator, Ratzinger seeks 'a return to Catholic fundamentalism\
. . . and reasserting )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the literal truth of papally-defined dogma'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 243.1313 153.604 Tm
(19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 254.1313 150.084 Tm
( Through the Congregation for the Doctrine of )Tj
-17.755 -1.2 Td
(the Faith, Ratzinger's attitudes determine the attitudes of the Pontific\
al Biblical Commission, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of which he is also head, and filter down from there into the Ecole Bibl\
ique.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( During the course of 1990, these attitudes served to place the Con\
gregation prominently )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in the news. In May, the Congregation issued a preliminary draft of the \
new, revised and )Tj
T*
(updated 'Universal Catechism of the Catholic Church' - the official form\
ulation of tenets in )Tj
T*
(which all Catholics are obliged formally to believe. Allowing no flexibi\
lity whatever, the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(91 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
737 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 649.087 520 116.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 449.675 520 199.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 367.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 349.262 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 332.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 283.262 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 101.762 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 65.762 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(new 'Catechism' definitively condemns, along with a catalogue of other t\
hings, divorce, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(homosexuality, masturbation and sexual relations before or outside marri\
age. It lays down, as )Tj
T*
(basic tenets of the Catholic faith, papal infallibility, the Immaculate \
Conception and the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Assumption of the Virgin Mary, as well as the 'Universal Authority of th\
e Catholic Church'. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(In one particularly dogmatic passage, the new 'Catechism' declares that \
'the task of giving an )Tj
T*
(authentic interpretation of the Word of God . . . has been entrusted to \
the living teaching )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(office of the Church alone'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 160.2462 657.195 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 637.175 Tm
( In June, there appeared a second document, published by the Congre\
gation for the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Doctrine of the Faith and written by Cardinal Ratzinger himself. This do\
cument addresses )Tj
T*
(itself specifically to the functions and obligations of the theologian, \
a term intended to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(encompass the biblical historian and archaeologist as well. According to\
this document, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(approved and endorsed by the Pope, Catholic theologians have no right to\
dissent from the )Tj
T*
(established teachings of the Church. Indeed, dissent is itself promoted \
\(or demoted\) to the )Tj
T*
(status of an actual 'sin': 'To succumb to the temptation of dissent . .\
. [allows] infidelity to the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Holy Spirit . . .')Tj
11 0 0 11 94.6037 523.7825 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 105.6037 520.2625 Tm
( If a theologian begins to question Church doctrine, he is thus, by skil\
ful )Tj
-6.953 -1.2 Td
(psychological manipulation, made to feel morally tainted for doing so. A\
ny propensity to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(question is effectively turned back on the questioner and transformed in\
to guilt - something )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in which the Church has always trafficked most profitably. In the same d\
ocument, Cardinal )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Ratzinger states:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( The freedom of the act of faith cannot justify a right to dissent.\
This freedom does not )Tj
T*
(indicate )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( freedom with regard to the truth, but signifies the free determina\
tion of the person in )Tj
T*
(conformity )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( with his moral obligations to accept the truth.)Tj
11 0 0 11 280.4075 357.37 Tm
(22)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 337.35 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In other words, one is perfectly free to accept the teachings of t\
he Church, but not to )Tj
T*
(question or reject them. Freedom cannot be manifested or expressed excep\
t through )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(submission. It is a curious definition of freedom.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Such restrictions are monstrous enough when imposed on Catholics a\
lone - monstrous in )Tj
T*
(the psychological and emotional damage they will cause, the guilt, intol\
erance and bigotry )Tj
T*
(they will foster, the horizons of knowledge and understanding they will \
curtail. When )Tj
T*
(confined to a creed, however, they apply only to those who voluntarily s\
ubmit to them, and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the non-Catholic population of the world is free to ignore them. The Dea\
d Sea Scrolls, )Tj
T*
(however, are not articles of faith, but documents of historical and arch\
aeological importance )Tj
T*
(which belong properly not to the Catholic Church, but to humanity as a w\
hole. It is a )Tj
T*
(sobering and profoundly disturbing thought that, if Cardinal Ratzinger h\
as his way, )Tj
T*
(everything we ever learn about the Qumran texts will be subject to the c\
ensorship machinery )Tj
T*
(of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith - will be, in effect, \
filtered and edited for us )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(by the Inquisition.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Given its obligatory allegiance to the Congregation, one is justif\
ied in wondering )Tj
T*
(whether, quite simply, the Ecole Biblique can be trusted. Even if the Is\
raeli government )Tj
T*
(clamped down and ordered the immediate release of all Qumran material, h\
ow could we be )Tj
T*
(sure that items potentially compromising to the Church would ever see th\
e light of day? We )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(92 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
738 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 732.762 520 33.238 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.762 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.262 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.262 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 410.262 520 42 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.262 520 42 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 351.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 335.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 318.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 272.262 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 242.262 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 225.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 209.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 50.262 520 159 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 14.262 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.85 Tm
(personally, in this book, should like to pose publicly certain basic que\
stions to Father Jean-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Luc Vesco, the Ecole Biblique's current director.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( \225 If the Ecole Biblique is accountable to the Pontifical B\
iblical Commission and the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, what are its re\
sponsibilities to )Tj
T*
(scholarship?)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( \225 How can any reputable academic institution function unde\
r the strain of such )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(potentially )Tj
T*
( divided, even mutually hostile, loyalties?)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( \225 And what exactly would the Ecole Biblique do if, among t\
he unpublished or perhaps )Tj
T*
(as yet )Tj
T*
( undiscovered Qumran material, something inimical to Church \
doctrine turned up?)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
35 0 0 35 249.5775 421.8233 Tm
(III)Tj
-5.57 -1.2 Td
(THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 356.35 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 263.75 280.5202 Tm
(8)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-7.695 -1.201 Td
(The Dilemma for Christian Orthodoxy)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 230.35 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 189.6944 Tm
(T)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 25.0075 189.6944 Tm
(here is virtually unanimous agreement among all the concerned parties - \
apart, of course, )Tj
-1.091 -1.407 Td
(from the international team themselves and the Ecole Biblique - that the\
history of Dead Sea )Tj
T*
(Scroll scholarship does constitute a 'scandal'. And there would seem to \
be little doubt that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(something irregular - licit, perhaps, but without moral or academic sanc\
tion - lurks behind the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(delays, the procrastinations, the equivocation, the restrictions on mate\
rial. To some extent, of )Tj
T*
(course, this irregularity may indeed stem simply from venal motives - fr\
om academic )Tj
T*
(jealousy and rivalry, and from the protection of vested interests. Reput\
ations do, after all, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(stand to be made or broken, and there is no higher currency in the acade\
mic world than )Tj
T*
(reputation. The stakes, therefore, at least for those 'on the inside', a\
re high.)Tj
T*
( They would be high, however, in any sphere where a lack of reliabl\
e first-hand testimony )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(93 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
739 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 598.762 520 167.238 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 384.262 520 214.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 348.262 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 751.85 Tm
(had to be redressed by historical and archaeological research. They woul\
d be high if, for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(example, a corpus of documents pertaining to Arthurian Britain were sudd\
enly to come to )Tj
T*
(light. But would there be the same suppression of material as there is i\
n connection with the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Dead Sea Scrolls? And would one find, looming as a supreme arbiter in th\
e background, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(shadowy presence of an ecclesiastical institution such as the Congregati\
on for the Doctrine of )Tj
T*
(the Faith? The Nag Hammadi Scrolls are a case in point. Certainly, they \
afforded ample )Tj
T*
(opportunity for venal motives to come into play. Such motives, to one or\
another degree, may )Tj
T*
(indeed have done so. But the Church had no opportunity to establish cont\
rol over the texts )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(found at Nag Hammadi. And, venal motives notwithstanding, the entire cor\
pus of Nag )Tj
T*
(Hammadi material found its way quickly into print and the public domain.\
)Tj
T*
( The Church's high-level involvement in Dead Sea Scrolls scholarshi\
p must inevitably )Tj
T*
(foster a grave element of suspicion. Can one ignore the possibility of a\
causal connection )Tj
T*
(between that involvement and the shambles that Qumran research has becom\
e? One is )Tj
T*
(compelled to ask \(as, indeed, many informed 'outsiders' have\) whether \
some other vested )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(interest may be at stake, a vested interest larger than the reputations \
of individual scholars - )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the vested interest of Christianity as a whole, for example, and of Chri\
stian doctrine, at least )Tj
T*
(as propounded by the Church and its traditions. Ever since the Dead Sea \
Scrolls were first )Tj
T*
(discovered, one single, all-pervasive question has haunted the imaginati\
on, generating )Tj
T*
(excitement, anxiety and, perhaps, dread. Might these texts, issuing from\
so close to 'the )Tj
T*
(source', and \(unlike the New Testament\) never having been edited or ta\
mpered with, shed )Tj
T*
(some significant new light on the origins of Christianity, on the so-cal\
led 'early Church' in )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem and perhaps on Jesus himself? Might they contain something com\
promising, )Tj
T*
(something that challenges, possibly even refutes, established traditions\
?)Tj
T*
( Certainly official interpretation ensured that they did not. There\
is, of course, nothing to )Tj
T*
(suggest any deliberate or systematic falsification of evidence on the pa\
rt of the international )Tj
T*
(team. But for Father de Vaux, his most intensely personal convictions we\
re deeply engaged )Tj
T*
(and were bound to have exerted some influence. The key factor in determi\
ning the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(significance of the scrolls, and their relation, or lack of it, to Chris\
tianity, consisted, of )Tj
T*
(course, in their dating. Were they pre- or post-Christian? How closely d\
id they coincide with )Tj
T*
(Jesus' activities, around ad 30? With the travels and letters of Paul, r\
oughly between AD 40 )Tj
T*
(and 65? With the composition of the Gospels, between ad 70 and 95? Whate\
ver the date )Tj
T*
(ascribed to them, they might be a source of possible embarrassment to Ch\
ristendom, but the )Tj
T*
(degree of embarrassment would be variable. If, for example, the scrolls \
could be dated from )Tj
T*
(well before the Christian era, they might threaten to compromise Jesus' \
originality and )Tj
T*
(uniqueness - might show some of his words and concepts to have been not \
wholly his own, )Tj
T*
(but to have derived from a current of thought, teaching and tradition al\
ready established and )Tj
T*
('in the air'. If the scrolls dated from Jesus' lifetime, however, or fro\
m shortly thereafter, they )Tj
T*
(might prove more embarrassing still. They might be used to argue that th\
e 'Teacher of )Tj
T*
(Righteousness' who figures in them was Jesus himself, and that Jesus was\
not therefore )Tj
T*
(perceived as divine by his contemporaries. Moreover, the scrolls contain\
ed or implied certain )Tj
T*
(premises inimical to subsequent images of 'early Christianity'. There we\
re, for example, )Tj
T*
(statements of a militant messianic nationalism associated previously onl\
y with the Zealots - )Tj
T*
(when Jesus was supposed to be non-political, rendering unto Caesar what \
was Caesar's. It )Tj
T*
(might even emerge that Jesus had never dreamed of founding a new religio\
n or of )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(94 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
740 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 535 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 502 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 469 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 436 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 403 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 370 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 337 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 304 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 271 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 238 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 205 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 172 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 139 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 73 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 37 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(contravening Judaic law.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The evidence can be interpreted in a number of plausible ways, som\
e of which are less )Tj
T*
(compromising to Christendom than others. It is hardly surprising, in the\
circumstances, that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(de Vaux should have inclined towards and promulgated the less compromisi\
ng )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(interpretations. Thus, while it was never stated explicitly, a necessity\
prevailed to read or )Tj
T*
(interpret the evidence in accordance with certain governing principles. \
So far as possible, for )Tj
T*
(example, the scrolls and their authors had to be kept as dissociated as \
possible from 'early )Tj
T*
(Christianity' - as depicted in the New Testament - and from the mainstre\
am of lst-century )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Judaism, whence 'early Christianity' sprang. It was in adherence to such\
tenets that the )Tj
T*
(orthodoxy of interpretation established itself and a scholarly consensus\
originated.)Tj
T*
( Thus, the conclusions to which Father de Vaux's team came in their\
interpretation of the )Tj
T*
(scrolls conformed to certain general tenets, the more important of which\
can be summarised )Tj
T*
(as follows:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( 1. The Qumran texts were seen as dating from long prior to the Ch\
ristian era.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( 2. The scrolls were regarded as the work of a single reclusive co\
mmunity, an unorthodox )Tj
T*
('sect' on )Tj
T*
( the periphery of Judaism, divorced from the epoch's main curr\
ents of social, political )Tj
T*
(and )Tj
T*
( religious thought. In particular, they were divorced from mil\
itant revolutionary and )Tj
T*
(messianic )Tj
T*
( nationalism, as exemplified by the defenders of Masada.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 3. The Qumran community must have been destroyed during the gener\
al uprising in )Tj
T*
(Judaea in ad )Tj
T*
( 66-73, leaving all their documents behind, hidden for safety \
in nearby caves.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( 4. The beliefs of the Qumran community were presented as entirely\
different from )Tj
T*
(Christianity; )Tj
T*
( and the 'Teacher of Righteousness', because he was not portra\
yed as divine, could not )Tj
T*
(be )Tj
T*
( equated with Jesus.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 5. Because John the Baptist was altogether too close to the teach\
ings of the Qumran )Tj
T*
(community, )Tj
T*
( it was argued that he wasn't really 'Christian' in any true s\
ense of the word, 'merely' a )Tj
T*
( precursor.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( There are, however, numerous points at which the Qumran texts, and\
the community )Tj
T*
(from which they issued, paralleled early Christian texts and the so-call\
ed 'early Church'. A )Tj
T*
(number of such parallels are immediately apparent.)Tj
T*
( First, a similar ritual to that of baptism, one of the central sac\
raments of Christianity, )Tj
T*
(obtained for the Qumran community. According to the Dead Sea text known \
as the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(95 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
741 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 562.35 520 137.65 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 496.35 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 395.937 520 100.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 247.437 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 211.437 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
('Community Rule', the new adherent 'shall be cleansed from all his sins \
by the spirit of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(holiness uniting him to its truth . . . And when his flesh is sprinkled \
with purifying water and )Tj
T*
(sanctified by cleansing water, it shall be made clean by the humble subm\
ission of his soul to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(all the precepts of God.'i)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Secondly, in the Acts of the Apostles, the members of the 'early C\
hurch' are said to hold )Tj
T*
(all things in common: 'The faithful all lived together and owned everyth\
ing in common; they )Tj
T*
(sold their goods and possessions and shared out the proceeds among thems\
elves according to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(what each one needed. They went as a body to the Temple every day . . . \
')Tj
11 0 0 11 415.3225 640.695 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 420.8225 637.175 Tm
( The very first )Tj
-29.878 -1.2 Td
(statute of the 'Community Rule' for Qumran states that 'All. . . shall b\
ring all their knowledge, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(powers and possessions into the Community . . .')Tj
11 0 0 11 277.9325 606.2825 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 283.4325 602.7625 Tm
( According to another statute, 'They shall )Tj
-19.886 -1.303 Td
(eat in common and pray in common . . . ')Tj
11 0 0 11 235.1288 588.37 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 240.6288 584.85 Tm
( And another declares of the new adherent that 'his )Tj
-16.773 -1.303 Td
(property shall be merged and he shall offer his counsel and judgment to \
the Community'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 499.4037 570.4575 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 550.4375 Tm
( Acts 5:1-11 recounts the story of one Ananias and his wife, who ho\
ld back some of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(assets they are supposed to have donated to the 'early Church' in Jerusa\
lem. Both are struck )Tj
T*
(dead by a vindictive divine power. In Qumran, the penalty for such a tra\
nsgression was rather )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(less severe, consisting, according to the 'Community Rule', of six month\
s' penance.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Thirdly, according to Acts, the leadership of the 'early Church' i\
n Jerusalem consists of )Tj
T*
(the twelve Apostles. Among these, according to Galatians, three - James \
\('the Lord's )Tj
T*
(Brother'\), John and Peter - exercise a particular authority. According \
to the 'Community )Tj
T*
(Rule', Qumran was governed by a 'Council' composed of twelve individuals\
. Three 'priests' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(are also stressed, though the text does not clarify whether these three \
are included in the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(twelve of the 'Council' or separate from them.)Tj
11 0 0 11 261.6387 404.045 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 384.025 Tm
( Fourthly, and most important of all, both the Qumran community and\
the 'early Church' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(were specifically messianic in orientation, dominated by the imminent ad\
vent of at least one )Tj
T*
(new 'Messiah'. Both postulated a vivid and charismatic central figure, w\
hose personality )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(galvanised them and whose teachings formed the foundation of their belie\
fs. In the 'early )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Church', this figure was, of course, Jesus. In the Qumran texts, the fig\
ure is known as the )Tj
T*
('Teacher of Righteousness'. At times, in their portrayal of the 'Teacher\
of Righteousness', the )Tj
T*
(Qumran texts might almost seem to be referring to Jesus; indeed, several\
scholars suggested )Tj
T*
(as much. Granted, the 'Teacher of Righteousness' is not depicted as divi\
ne; but neither, until )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(some time after his death, was Jesus.)Tj
T*
( If the Qumran texts and those of the 'early Church' have certain i\
deas, concepts or )Tj
T*
(principles in common, they are also strikingly similar in imagery and ph\
raseology. 'Blessed )Tj
T*
(are the meek', Jesus says, for example, in perhaps the most famous line \
of the Sermon on the )Tj
T*
(Mount, 'for they shall inherit the earth' \(Matt. 5:5\). This assertion \
derives from Psalm 37:11: )Tj
T*
('But the meek shall possess the land, and delight themselves in abundant\
prosperity.' The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(same psalm was of particular interest to the Qumran community. In the De\
ad Sea Scrolls, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(there is a commentary on its meaning: 'Interpreted, this concerns the co\
ngregation of the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Poor . . .')Tj
11 0 0 11 59.0737 122.1325 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 64.5737 118.6125 Tm
( The 'Congregation of the Poor' \(or the 'meek'\) was one of the names b\
y which the )Tj
-3.969 -1.2 Td
(Qumran community referred to themselves. Nor is this the only such paral\
lel: 'Blessed are the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven', preaches Jesus \(M\
att. 5:3\); the 'War Scroll' )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(from Cave 1 states: 'Among the poor in spirit there is a power . . . ')Tj
11 0 0 11 375.8463 71.22 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 381.3463 67.7 Tm
( Indeed, the whole of the )Tj
-27.007 -1.2 Td
(Gospel of Matthew, and especially Chapters 10 and 18, contains metaphors\
and terminology )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(96 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
742 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 613.262 520 152.738 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 479.85 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 313.437 520 166.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 127.7 520 185.738 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 111.2 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 78.2 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 45.2 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 9.2 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(at times almost interchangeable with those of the 'Community Rule'. In M\
atthew 5:48, for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(instance, Jesus stresses the concept of perfection: 'You must therefore \
be perfect just as your )Tj
T*
(heavenly Father is perfect.' The 'Community Rule' speaks of those 'who w\
alk in the way of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(perfection as commanded by God'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 201.4962 706.695 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 206.9962 703.175 Tm
( There will be, the text affirms, 'no pity on all who depart )Tj
-14.327 -1.303 Td
(from the way ... no comfort . . . until their way becomes perfect'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 364.5575 688.7825 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 375.5575 685.2625 Tm
( In Matthew 21:42, Jesus )Tj
-26.586 -1.2 Td
(invokes Isaiah 28:16 and echoes Psalm 118:22: 'Have you never read in th\
e scriptures: It was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the stone rejected by the builders that became the keystone.' The 'Commu\
nity Rule' invokes )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the same reference, stating that 'the Council of the Community . . . sh\
all be that tried wall, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(that precious corner-stone'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 158.72 621.37 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 601.35 Tm
( If the Qumran scrolls and the Gospels echo each other, such echoes\
are even more )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(apparent between the scrolls and the Pauline texts - the Acts of the Apo\
stles and Paul's )Tj
T*
(letters. The concept of 'sainthood', for example, and, indeed, the very \
word 'saint', are )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(common enough in later Christianity, but striking in the context of the \
Dead Sea Scrolls. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(According to the opening line of the 'Community Rule', however, 'The Mas\
ter shall teach the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(saints to live according to the Book of the Community Rule . . .')Tj
11 0 0 11 361.5737 520.9575 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 372.5737 517.4375 Tm
( Paul, in his letter to the )Tj
-26.369 -1.2 Td
(Romans \(15:25-7\), uses the same terminology of the 'early Church': 'I \
must take a present of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(money to the saints in Jerusalem.')Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Indeed, Paul is particularly lavish in his use of Qumran terms and\
images. One of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran texts, for example, speaks of 'all those who observe the Law in t\
he House of Judah, )Tj
T*
(whom God will deliver . . . because of their suffering and because of th\
eir faith in the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Teacher of Righteousness'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 157.9637 420.545 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 168.9637 417.025 Tm
( Paul, of course, ascribes a similar redemptive power to faith in )Tj
-11.561 -1.2 Td
(Jesus. Deliverance, he says in his epistle to the Romans \(3:21-3\), 'co\
mes through faith to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(everyone . . . who believes in Jesus Christ'. To the Galatians \(2:16-17\
\), he declares that 'what )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(makes a man righteous is not obedience to the Law, but faith in Jesus Ch\
rist'. It is clear that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Paul is familiar with the metaphors, the figures of speech, the turns of\
phrase, the rhetoric )Tj
T*
(used by the Qumran community in their interpretation of Old Testament te\
xts. As we shall )Tj
T*
(see, however, he presses this familiarity to the service of a very diffe\
rent purpose.)Tj
T*
( In the above quote from his letter to the Galatians, Paul ascribes\
no inordinate )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(significance to the Law. In the Qumran texts, however, the Law is of par\
amount importance. )Tj
T*
(The 'Community Rule' begins: 'The Master shall teach the saints to live \
according to the )Tj
T*
(Book of the Community Rule, that they may seek God . . . and do what is \
good and right )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(before Him, as He commanded by the hand of Moses and all His servants th\
e Prophets . . .')Tj
11 0 0 11 509.6888 237.6325 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 520.6888 234.1125 Tm
( )Tj
-37.141 -1.2 Td
(Later, the 'Community Rule' states that anyone who 'transgresses one wor\
d of the Law of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Moses, on any point whatever, shall be expelled')Tj
11 0 0 11 277.1212 203.22 Tm
(15 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 290.8712 199.7 Tm
(and that the Law will endure 'for as long )Tj
-20.427 -1.303 Td
(as the domain of Satan endures'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 187.375 185.3075 Tm
(16)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 198.375 181.7875 Tm
( In his rigorous adherence to the Law, Jesus, strikingly )Tj
-13.7 -1.2 Td
(enough, is much closer to the Qumran texts than he is to Paul. In the Se\
rmon on the Mount )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(\(Matt. 5:17-19\), Jesus makes his position unequivocally clear - a posi\
tion that Paul was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(subsequently to betray:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( Do not imagine that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets\
. I have come not to )Tj
T*
(abolish )Tj
T*
( but to complete them. I tell you solemnly . . . not one dot, not o\
ne little stroke, shall )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(disappear from )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(97 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
743 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 517.049 520 166.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 398.724 520 118.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 347.811 520 50.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 331.311 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 314.811 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 199.311 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 163.311 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( the Law until its purpose is achieved. Therefore, the man who infr\
inges even one of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(least of )Tj
T*
( these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be consi\
dered the least in the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( kingdom of heaven . . .)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( If Jesus' adherence to the Law concurs with that of the Qumran com\
munity, so, too, does )Tj
T*
(his timing of the Last Supper. For centuries, biblical commentators have\
been confused by )Tj
T*
(apparently conflicting accounts in the Gospels. In Matthew \(26:17-19\),\
the Last Supper is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(depicted as a Passover meal, and Jesus is crucified the next day. In the\
Fourth Gospel \(13:1 )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(and 18:28\), however, it is said to occur )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(before )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the Passover. Some scholars have sought to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(reconcile the contradiction by acknowledging the Last Supper as indeed a\
Passover feast, but )Tj
T*
(a Passover feast conducted in accordance with a different calendar. The \
Qumran community )Tj
T*
(used precisely such a calendar - a solar calendar, in contrast to the lu\
nar calendar used by the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(priesthood of the Temple.)Tj
11 0 0 11 152.065 541.6564 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 163.065 538.1364 Tm
( In each calendar, the Passover fell on a different date; and Jesus, )Tj
-11.132 -1.2 Td
(it is clear, was using the same calendar as that of the Qumran community\
.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Certainly the Qumran community observed a feast which sounds very \
similar in its ritual )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(characteristics to the Last Supper as it is described in the Gospels. Th\
e 'Community Rule' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(states that 'when the table has been prepared . . . the Priest shall be \
the first to stretch out his )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(hand to bless the first-fruits of the bread and new wine'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 316.0612 457.7439 Tm
(18 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 329.8112 454.2239 Tm
(And another Qumran text, the )Tj
-23.259 -1.2 Td
('Messianic Rule', adds: 'they shall gather for the common table, to eat \
and to drink new )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(wine . . . let no man extend his hand over the first fruits of bread and\
wine before the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Priest . . . thereafter, the Messiah of Israel shall extend his hand ove\
r the bread'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 447.03 406.8314 Tm
(19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 386.8114 Tm
( This text was sufficient to convince even Rome. According to Cardi\
nal Jean Danielou, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(writing with a 'Nihil Obstat' from the Vatican: 'Christ must have celebr\
ated the last supper on )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the eve of Easter according to the Essenian calendar. ')Tj
11 0 0 11 305.7213 355.9189 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 335.8988 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(One can only imagine the reaction of Father de Vaux and his team on firs\
t discovering the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(seemingly extraordinary parallels between the Qumran texts and what was \
known of 'early )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Christianity'. It had hitherto been believed that Jesus' teachings were \
unique - that he )Tj
T*
(admittedly drew on Old Testament sources, but wove his references into a\
message, a gospel, )Tj
T*
(a statement of'good news' which had never been enunciated in the world b\
efore. Now, )Tj
T*
(however, echoes of that message, and perhaps even of Jesus' drama itself\
, had come to light )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(among a collection of ancient parchments preserved in the Judaean desert\
.)Tj
T*
( To an agnostic historian, or even to an undogmatic Christian, such\
a discovery would )Tj
T*
(have been exciting indeed. It probably would have been with a certain sa\
cred awe that one )Tj
T*
(handled documents actually dating from the days when Jesus and his follo\
wers walked the )Tj
T*
(sands of ancient Palestine, trudging between Galilee and Judaea. One wou\
ld undoubtedly, )Tj
T*
(and with something of a frisson, have felt closer to Jesus himself. The \
sketchy details of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jesus' drama and milieu would have broken free from the print to which t\
hey had been )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(confined for twenty centuries - would have assumed density, texture, sol\
idity. The Dead Sea )Tj
T*
(Scrolls were not like a modern book expounding a controversial thesis; t\
hey would comprise )Tj
T*
(first-hand evidence, buttressed by the sturdy struts of 20th-century sci\
ence and scholarship. )Tj
T*
(Even for a non-believer, however, some question of moral responsibility \
would have arisen. )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(98 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
744 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 681.811 520 84.189 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.311 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 648.811 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 632.311 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 615.811 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.311 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 569.311 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 539.311 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 522.811 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 506.311 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 363.811 520 142.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 347.311 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 323.311 520 24 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 299.311 520 24 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 282.811 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 246.811 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.3988 Tm
(Whatever his own scepticism, could he, casually and at a single stroke, \
undermine the faith to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(which millions clung for solace and consolation? For de Vaux and his col\
leagues, working as )Tj
T*
(representatives of the Roman Catholic Church, it must have seemed as tho\
ugh they were )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(handling the spiritual and religious equivalent of dynamite - something \
that might just )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(conceivably demolish the entire edifice of Christian teaching and belief\
.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 263.75 577.569 Tm
(9)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-2.098 -1.201 Td
(The Scrolls)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 527.3988 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 486.7433 Tm
(I)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 18.7525 486.7433 Tm
(t is not feasible or relevant in this book to list all the texts known t\
o have been found at )Tj
-0.637 -1.407 Td
(Qumran, or even to have been translated and published. Many of them are \
of interest solely )Tj
T*
(to specialists. Many of them consist of nothing more than small fragment\
s, whose context )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and significance cannot now be reconstructed. A substantial number of th\
em are )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(commentaries on various books of the Old Testament, as well as on other \
Judaic works )Tj
T*
(known as apocrypha and pseudepigrapha. But it is worth at this point not\
ing a few of the )Tj
T*
(Qumran documents which contain material of special relevance - and two i\
n particular which )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(will prove not only most illuminating, but most controversial indeed.)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
20 0 0 20 10 329.9279 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The 'Copper Scroll')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 287.3988 Tm
( )Tj
T*
(Found in the Qumran cave designated number 3, the 'Copper Scroll' simply\
lists, in the dry )Tj
T*
(fashion of an inventory, sixty-four sites where a treasure of gold, silv\
er and precious religious )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(vessels is alleged to have been hidden. Many of the sites are in Jerusal\
em proper, some of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(them under or adjacent to the Temple. Others are in the surrounding coun\
tryside, perhaps as )Tj
T*
(far afield as Qumran itself. If the figures in the scroll are accurate, \
the total weight of the )Tj
T*
(various scattered caches amounts to sixty-five tons of silver and twenty\
-six tons of gold, )Tj
T*
(which would be worth some \24330 million at today's prices. It is not a \
particularly staggering )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(sum as such things go - a sunken Spanish treasure galleon, for example, \
would fetch far more )Tj
T*
(\226 but not many people would turn their noses up at it; and the religi\
ous and symbolic import )Tj
T*
(of such a treasure would place it, of course, beyond all monetary value.\
Although this was )Tj
T*
(not publicised when the contents of the scroll were originally revealed,\
the text clearly )Tj
T*
(establishes that the treasure derived from the Temple - whence it was re\
moved and secreted, )Tj
T*
(presumably to protect it from the invading Romans. One can therefore con\
clude that the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Copper Scroll' dates from the time of the Roman invasion in ad 68. As w\
e have noted, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(certain members of the international team, such as Professor Cross and t\
he former Father )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(99 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
745 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 682.811 520 83.189 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 516.399 520 166.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 417.399 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.899 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 384.399 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 360.399 520 24 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 343.899 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 156.749 520 187.15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.336 520 67.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 53.336 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.3988 Tm
(Milik, deemed the treasure to be wholly fictitious. Most independent sch\
olars now concur, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(however, that it did exist. Nevertheless, the depositories have proved i\
mpossible to find. The )Tj
T*
(directions, sites and landmarks involved are indicated by local names lo\
ng since lost; and the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(general configuration and layout of the area has, in the course of two t\
housand years and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(endless wars, changed beyond all recognition.)Tj
T*
( In 1988, however, a discovery was made just to the north of the ca\
ve in which the )Tj
T*
('Copper Scroll' was found. Here, in another cave, three feet or so below\
the present surface, a )Tj
T*
(small jug was exhumed, dating from the time of Herod and his immediate s\
uccessors. The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(jug had clearly been regarded as very valuable, and had been concealed w\
ith extreme care, )Tj
T*
(wrapped in a protective cover of palm fibres. It proved to contain a thi\
ck red oil which, )Tj
T*
(according to chemical analysis, is unlike any oil known today. This oil \
is generally believed )Tj
T*
(to be balsam oil - a precious commodity reported to have been produced n\
earby, at Jericho, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(and traditionally used to anoint Israel's rightful kings.)Tj
11 0 0 11 304.2637 557.5063 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 309.7637 553.9864 Tm
( The matter cannot be definitively )Tj
-21.801 -1.2 Td
(established, however, because the balsam tree has been extinct for some \
fifteen hundred )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(years.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( If the oil is indeed balsam oil, it may well be part of the treasu\
re stipulated in the 'Copper )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Scroll'. In any case, it is an incongruously costly commodity to have be\
en used by a )Tj
T*
(community of supposedly isolated ascetics in the desert. As we have note\
d, however, one of )Tj
T*
(the most important features of the 'Copper Scroll' is that it shows Qumr\
an not to have been so )Tj
T*
(isolated after all. On the contrary, it would seem to establish links be\
tween the Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(community and factions associated with the Temple in Jerusalem.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
20 0 0 20 10 367.0154 Tm
(The 'Community Rule')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 348.4864 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Found in Cave 1 at Qumran, the 'Community Rule', as we have seen, adumbr\
ates the rituals )Tj
T*
(and regulations governing life in the desert community. It establishes a\
hierarchy of authority )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(for the community. It lays down instructions for the 'Master' of the com\
munity and for the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(various officers subordinate to him. It also specifies the principles of\
behaviour and the )Tj
T*
(punishment for violation of these principles. Thus, for instance, 'Whoev\
er has deliberately )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(lied shall do penance for six months.')Tj
11 0 0 11 214.5038 251.5939 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 220.0038 248.0739 Tm
( The text opens by enunciating the basis on which the )Tj
-15.273 -1.2 Td
(community define and distinguish themselves. All members must enter into\
a 'Covenant )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(before God to obey all His commandments';)Tj
11 0 0 11 253.0725 217.1814 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 258.5725 213.6613 Tm
( and he who practises such obedience will be )Tj
-18.078 -1.303 Td
('cleansed from all his sins'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 157.4 199.2688 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 162.9 195.7488 Tm
( Adherence to the Law is accorded a paramount position. Among )Tj
-11.12 -1.2 Td
(the various terms by which the community's members are designated, one f\
inds 'Keepers of )Tj
T*
(the Covenant')Tj
11 0 0 11 85.4187 164.8563 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 90.9187 161.3363 Tm
( and those who have 'zeal for the Law'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 304.7312 164.8563 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 144.8363 Tm
( Among the rituals stipulated, there is cleansing and purification \
by baptism - not just )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(once, but, apparently, every day. Daily prayers are also specified, at d\
awn and at sunset, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(involving recitations of the Law. And there is a ritually purified 'Meal\
of the Congregation')Tj
11 0 0 11 510.2663 113.9438 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 515.7663 110.4238 Tm
( -)Tj
-36.783 -1.2 Td
(a meal very similar, as other scrolls attest, to the 'Last Supper' of th\
e so-called 'early Church'.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The 'Community Rule' speaks, too, of the 'Council' of the Communit\
y, made up of twelve )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(men and, possibly, a further three priests. We have already discussed th\
e interesting echoes )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the 'cornerstone' or 'keystone' image in relation to the Council of t\
he Community. But the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(100 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
746 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 715.087 520 50.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 616.087 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.175 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 416.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 376.119 520 24.056 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 359.619 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 59.794 520 299.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 23.794 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(scroll also states that the Council 'shall preserve the faith in the Lan\
d with steadfastness and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(meekness and shall atone for sin by the practice of justice and by suffe\
ring the sorrows of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(affliction'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 66.32 723.195 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 703.175 Tm
( In their eagerness to distance the Qumran community from Jesus and\
his entourage, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scholars promoting the consensus of the international team stress that t\
he concept of )Tj
T*
(atonement does not figure in Qumran teachings - that Jesus is to be dist\
inguished from )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran's 'Teacher of Righteousness' in large part by virtue of his doctr\
ine of atonement. The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Community Rule', however, demonstrates that atonement figured as promin\
ently in Qumran )Tj
T*
(as it did with Jesus and his followers in the so-called 'early Church'.)Tj
T*
( Finally, the 'Community Rule' introduces the Messiah - or perhaps \
Messiahs, in the )Tj
T*
(plural. Members of the Community, 'walking in the way of perfection', ar\
e obliged to adhere )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(zealously to the Law 'until there shall come the prophet and the Messiah\
s of Aaron and )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Israel'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 46.4512 556.7825 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 51.9512 553.2625 Tm
( This reference is usually interpreted as meaning two distinct Messiahs,\
two equally )Tj
-3.051 -1.2 Td
(regal figures, one descended from the line of Aaron, one from the establ\
ished line of Israel -i.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(e. the line of David and Solomon. But the reference may also be to a dyn\
asty of single )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Messiahs descended from, and uniting, both lines. In the context of the \
time, of course, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Messiah' does not signify what it later comes to signify in Christian t\
radition. It simply )Tj
T*
(means 'the Anointed One', which denotes consecration by oil. In Israelit\
e tradition, it would )Tj
T*
(seem, both kings and priests - in fact, any claimant to high office - we\
re anointed, and hence )Tj
T*
(Messiahs.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
20 0 0 20 10 382.7915 Tm
(The )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(')Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(War Scroll')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 364.2063 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Copies of the 'War Scroll' were found in Caves 1 and 4 at Qumran. On one\
level, the 'War )Tj
T*
(Scroll' is a very specific manual of strategy and tactics, obviously int\
ended for specific )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(circumstances, at a specific place and time. Thus, for example: 'Seven t\
roops of horsemen )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(shall also station themselves to right and to left of the formation; the\
ir troops shall stand on )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(this side . . .')Tj
11 0 0 11 78.5575 283.8138 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 89.5575 280.2938 Tm
( On another level, however, the text constitutes exhortation and prophet\
ic )Tj
-5.786 -1.2 Td
(propaganda, intended to galvanise morale against the invading foe, the '\
Kittim', or Romans. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The supreme leader of Israel against the 'Kittim' is called, quite unequ\
ivocally, the 'Messiah' - )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(though certain commentators have sought to disguise or dissemble this no\
menclature by )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(referring to him as 'Thine anointed'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 206.6525 216.4013 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 217.6525 212.8813 Tm
( The advent of the 'Messiah' is stated as having been )Tj
-15.102 -1.2 Td
(prophesied in Numbers 24:17, where it is said that 'a star from Jacob ta\
kes the leadership, a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(sceptre arises from Israel'. The 'Star' thus becomes a sobriquet for the\
'Messiah', the regal )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(warrior priest-king who will lead the forces of Israel to triumph. As Ro\
bert Eisenman has )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(stressed, this prophecy linking the Messiah figure with the image of the\
star occurs elsewhere )Tj
T*
(in the Qumran literature, and is of crucial importance. It is also signi\
ficant that the same )Tj
T*
(prophecy is cited by sources quite independent of both Qumran and the Ne\
w Testament - by )Tj
T*
(historians and chroniclers of lst-century Rome, for example, such as Jos\
ephus, Tacitus and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Suetonius. And Simeon bar Kochba, instigator of the second revolt agains\
t the Romans )Tj
T*
(between ad 132 and 135, called himself the 'Son of the Star'.)Tj
T*
( The 'War Scroll' imparts a metaphysical and theological dimension \
to the struggle against )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(101 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
747 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 568 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 535 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 511 520 24 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 494.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 412 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 313 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 196.087 520 116.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 160.087 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(the 'Kittim' by depicting it as a clash between the 'Sons of Light' and \
the 'Sons of Darkness'. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(More importantly still, however, the scroll contains a vital clue to its\
own dating and )Tj
T*
(chronology. When speaking of the 'Kittim', the text refers quite explici\
tly to their 'king'. The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Kittim' concerned cannot, therefore, be the soldiers of republican Rome\
, who invaded )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Palestine in 63 BC and who had no monarch. On the contrary, they would h\
ave to be the )Tj
T*
(soldiers of imperial Rome, who invaded in the wake of the revolt of ad 6\
6 \227 although, of )Tj
T*
(course, occupying troops had been present in Palestine since the imposit\
ion of imperial )Tj
T*
(Roman prefects or procurators in AD 6. It is thus clear that the 'War Sc\
roll' must be seen in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the context not of pre-Christian times, but of the 1st century. As we sh\
all see, this internal )Tj
T*
(evidence of chronology -which advocates of the 'consensus' contrive to i\
gnore - will be even )Tj
T*
(more persuasively developed in one of the other, and most crucial, of th\
e Qumran texts, the )Tj
T*
('Commentary on Habakkuk'.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
20 0 0 20 10 517.6165 Tm
(The 'Temple Scroll')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 499.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The 'Temple Scroll' is believed to have been found in Cave 11 at Qumran,\
though this has )Tj
T*
(never been definitively established. As its name suggests, the scroll de\
als, at least in part, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(with the Temple of Jerusalem, with the design, furnishings, fixtures and\
fittings of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(structure. It also outlines specific details of rituals practised in the\
Temple. At the same time, )Tj
T*
(however, the name conferred on the scroll, by Yigael Yadin, is somewhat \
misleading.)Tj
T*
( In effect, the 'Temple Scroll' is a species of Torah, or Book of t\
he Law - a kind of )Tj
T*
(alternative Torah used by the Qumran community and other factions elsewh\
ere in Palestine. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The 'official' Torah of Judaism comprises the first five books of the Ol\
d Testament - Genesis, )Tj
T*
(Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. These are deemed to be the b\
ooks of laws )Tj
T*
(which Moses received on Mount Sinai, and their authorship is traditional\
ly ascribed to Moses )Tj
T*
(himself. The 'Temple Scroll' constitutes, in a sense, a sixth Book of th\
e Law.)Tj
T*
( The laws it contains are not confined to rites of worship and obse\
rvance in the Temple. )Tj
T*
(There are also laws pertaining to more general matters, such as ritual p\
urification, marriage )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and sexual practices. Most important and interesting of all, there are l\
aws governing the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(institution of kingship in Israel - the character, comportment, behaviou\
r and obligations of )Tj
T*
(the king. The king, for example, is strictly forbidden to be a foreigner\
. He is forbidden to )Tj
T*
(have more than one wife. And like all other Jews, he is forbidden to mar\
ry his sister, his aunt, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(his brother's wife or his niece.)Tj
11 0 0 11 175.1512 204.195 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 184.175 Tm
( There is nothing new or startling about most of these taboos. They\
can be found in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Leviticus 18-20 in the Old Testament. But one of them - that forbidding \
the king's marriage )Tj
T*
(to his niece -is new. It is found elsewhere in only one other place, ano\
ther of the Dead Sea )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Scrolls, the 'Damascus Document'. As Eisenman has pointed out, this stri\
cture provides an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(important clue to the dating of both the 'Temple Scroll' and the 'Damasc\
us Document' - and, )Tj
T*
(by extension, of course, to the other Dead Sea Scrolls as well. As we ha\
ve noted, the )Tj
T*
(consensus of the international team regards the Dead Sea Scrolls as pre-\
Christian, dating )Tj
T*
(from the era of Israel's Maccabean kings. But there is no evidence that \
the Maccabean kings )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(\227 or any Israelite kings before them - ever married their nieces or e\
ver incurred criticism for )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(102 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
748 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 731.587 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.087 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.087 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 500.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 467.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 418.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 401.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 335.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 301.175 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 268.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 235.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 202.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 185.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 169.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 152.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 128.675 520 24 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 112.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 76.175 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.675 Tm
(doing so.)Tj
11 0 0 11 60.4212 756.195 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 71.4212 752.675 Tm
( The issue seems to have been utterly irrelevant. Either marriage to one\
's niece )Tj
-4.467 -1.2 Td
(was accepted, or it was never practised at all. In either case, it was n\
ot forbidden.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The situation changed dramatically, however, with the accession of\
Herod and his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(descendants. In the first place, Herod was, by Judaic standards at the t\
ime, a foreigner, of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Arabian stock from Idumaea - the region to the south of Judaea. In the s\
econd place, the )Tj
T*
(Herodian kings made a regular practice of marrying their nieces. And He\
rodian princesses )Tj
T*
(regularly married their uncles. Bernice, sister of King Agrippa II \(ad \
48\22753\), married her )Tj
T*
(uncle, for example. Herodias, sister of Agrippa I \(ad 37-44\), went eve\
n further, marrying two )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(uncles in succession. The strictures in the 'Temple Scroll' are thus of \
particular relevance to a )Tj
T*
(very specific period, and constitute a direct criticism of the Herodian \
dynasty -a dynasty of )Tj
T*
(foreign puppet kings, imposed on Israel forcibly and sustained in power \
by imperial Rome.)Tj
T*
( Taken in sum, the evidence of the 'Temple Scroll' runs counter to \
the consensus of the )Tj
T*
(international team in three salient respects:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( 1. According to the consensus, the Qumran community had no connect\
ion with, or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(interest in, )Tj
T*
( either the Temple or the 'official' Judaism of the time. Like \
the 'Copper Scroll', )Tj
T*
(however, the )Tj
T*
( 'Temple Scroll' establishes that the Qumran community were ind\
eed preoccupied with )Tj
T*
(Temple )Tj
T*
( affairs and with the governing theocracy.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 2. According to the consensus, the supposed 'Essenes' of Qumran we\
re on cordial terms )Tj
T*
(with )Tj
T*
( Herod. The 'Temple Scroll', however, goes out of its way to in\
clude certain specific )Tj
T*
(strictures )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( \227 strictures intended to damn Herod and his dynasty.)Tj
11 0 0 11 341.1138 325.7825 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 352.1138 322.2625 Tm
( These strictures would be )Tj
-24.881 -1.2 Td
(meaningless )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( in any other context. 3. According to the consensus, the 'Temp\
le Scroll' itself, like all )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the other )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Qumran texts, dates from pre-Christian times. Yet the internal\
evidence of the scroll )Tj
T*
(points to )Tj
T*
( issues that would have become relevant only during the Herodia\
n period - that is, )Tj
T*
(during the 1st )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( century of the Christian era.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
20 0 0 20 10 135.2915 Tm
(The 'Damascus Document')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 116.7625 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The 'Damascus Document' was known to the world long before the discovery\
of the Dead )Tj
T*
(Sea Scrolls at Qumran. In the absence of a context, however, scholars we\
re not sure what to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(make of it. Towards the end of the last century, the loft of an ancient \
synagogue in Cairo was )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(found to contain a )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('geniza' \227 )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(a depository for the disposal of worn-out or redundant religious )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(103 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
749 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 534.845 520 231.155 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.768 520 132.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.768 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 137.356 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 101.356 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(texts' - dating from the 9th century ad. In 1896, a few fragments from t\
his )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('geniza')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( were )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(confided to one Solomon Schechter, a lecturer at Cambridge University wh\
o happened to be )Tj
T*
(in Cairo at the time. One fragment proved to contain the original Hebrew\
version of a text )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(which, for a thousand years, had been known only in secondary translatio\
ns. This prompted )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Schechter to investigate further. In December 1896, he collected the ent\
ire contents of the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
('geniza' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(- 164 boxes of manuscripts housing some 100,000 pieces - and brought the\
m back to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Cambridge. From this welter of material, two Hebrew versions emerged of \
what came to be )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(known as the 'Damascus Document'. The versions from the Cairo )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('geniza' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(were obviously )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(later copies of a much earlier work. The texts were incomplete, lacking \
endings and probably )Tj
T*
(large sections in the middle; the order of the texts was scrambled and t\
he logical development )Tj
T*
(of their themes confused. Even in this muddled form, however, the 'Damas\
cus Document' )Tj
T*
(was provocative, potentially explosive. Schechter published it for the f\
irst time in 1910. In )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(1913, R.H. Charles reprinted it in his compilation )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the )Tj
T*
(Old Testament.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
( When Eisenman was given, and passed on to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Biblical Archaeology Review, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the computer )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(print-out which inventoried all the Qumran material in the hands of the \
international team, )Tj
T*
(there were listed, among the items, additional versions and/or fragments\
of the 'Damascus )Tj
T*
(Document'. Having been found at Qumran, they were obviously much earlier\
than those of )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(the Cairo )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('geniza', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and probably more complete. It was the Qumran parallels and the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fragments of the 'Damascus Document' that Eisenman and Philip Davies of \
Sheffield )Tj
T*
(requested to see in their formal letter to John Strugnell, thereby preci\
pitating the bitter and )Tj
T*
(vindictive controversy of 1989. Why should this document be such a bone \
of contention?)Tj
T*
( The 'Damascus Document' speaks firstly of a remnant of Jews who, u\
nlike their co-)Tj
T*
(religionists, remained true to the Law. A 'Teacher of Righteousness' app\
eared among them. )Tj
T*
(Like Moses, he took them into the wilderness, to a place called 'Damascu\
s', where they )Tj
T*
(entered into a renewed 'Covenant' with God. Numerous textual references \
make it clear that )Tj
T*
(this Covenant is the same as the one cited by the 'Community Rule' for Q\
umran. And it is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(obvious enough - no scholar disputes it - that the 'Damascus Document' i\
s speaking of the )Tj
T*
(same community as the other Qumran scrolls. Yet the location of the comm\
unity is said to be )Tj
T*
('Damascus'.)Tj
T*
( It is clear from the document's context that the place in the dese\
rt called 'Damascus' )Tj
T*
(cannot possibly be the Romanised city in Syria. Could the site for 'Dama\
scus' have been in )Tj
T*
(fact Qumran? Why the name of the location should have been thus masked r\
emains uncertain )Tj
T*
(- though simple self-preservation, dictated by the turmoil following the\
revolt of ad 66, would )Tj
T*
(seem to be explanation enough, and Qumran had no name of its own at the \
time. In any case, )Tj
T*
(it can hardly be coincidental that, according to the international team'\
s computer print-out, no )Tj
T*
(fewer than ten copies or fragments of the 'Damascus Document' were found\
in Qumran's )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(caves.)Tj
11 0 0 11 43.9763 145.4631 Tm
(15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 125.4431 Tm
( Like the 'Community Rule', the 'Damascus Document' includes a list\
of regulations. Some )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of these are identical to those in the 'Community Rule'. But there are s\
ome additional )Tj
T*
(regulations as well, two of which are worth noting. One pertains to marr\
iage and children - )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(which establishes that the Qumran community were not, as Father de Vaux \
maintained, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(celibate 'Essenes'. A second refers - quite in passing, as if it were co\
mmon knowledge - to )Tj
T*
(affiliated communities scattered throughout Palestine. In other words, Q\
umran was not as )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(104 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
750 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 547.262 520 202.238 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 461.937 520 85.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 361.525 520 100.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 229.525 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 180.025 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 144.025 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(isolated from the world of its time as de Vaux contended.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The 'Damascus Document' fulminates against three crimes in particu\
lar, crimes alleged to )Tj
T*
(be rampant among the enemies of the 'Righteous', those who have embraced\
the 'New )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Covenant'. These crimes are specified as wealth, profanation of the Temp\
le \(a charge levelled )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(by the 'Temple Scroll' as well\) and a fairly limited definition of forn\
ication - taking more than )Tj
T*
(one wife, or marrying one's niece. As Eisenman has shown, the 'Damascus \
Document' thus )Tj
T*
(echoes the 'Temple Scroll' in referring to issues of unique relevance to\
the period of the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Herodian dynasty.)Tj
11 0 0 11 110.815 640.695 Tm
(16)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 121.815 637.175 Tm
( And it echoes, as we shall see, a dispute in the community which figure\
s )Tj
-8.132 -1.2 Td
(more prominently in another of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the 'Habakkuk Comme\
ntary'. This )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dispute involves an individual designated as 'the Liar', who defects fro\
m the community and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(becomes its enemy. The 'Damascus Document' condemns those 'who enter the\
New Covenant )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(in the land of Damascus, and who again betray it and depart'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 345.8437 573.2825 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 356.8437 569.7625 Tm
( Shortly thereafter, the )Tj
-25.225 -1.303 Td
(document speaks of those 'who deserted to the Liar'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 297.155 555.37 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 535.35 Tm
( The 'Damascus Document' also echoes the 'Community Rule' and the '\
War Scroll' by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(speaking of a Messianic figure \(or perhaps two such figures\) who will \
come to 'Damascus' - a )Tj
T*
(prophet or 'Interpreter of the Law' called 'the Star' and a prince of th\
e line of David called 'the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Sceptre'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 57.1487 487.9575 Tm
(19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 68.1487 484.4375 Tm
( On five subsequent occasions in the text, there is a focus on a single \
figure, 'the )Tj
-4.229 -1.303 Td
(Messiah of Aaron and Israel'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 171.7 470.045 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 450.025 Tm
( The significance of this Messiah figure will be explored later. Fo\
r the moment, it is worth )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(considering the implications of 'Damascus' as a designation for Qumran. \
To most Christians, )Tj
T*
(of course, 'Damascus' is familiar from Chapter 9 of the Acts of the Apos\
tles, where it is taken )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to denote the Romanised city in Syria, that country's modern-day capital\
. It is on the road to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Damascus that Saul of Tarsus, in one of the best-known and most crucial \
passages of the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(entire New Testament, undergoes his conversion into Paul.)Tj
11 0 0 11 334.225 369.6325 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 349.6125 Tm
( According to Acts 9, Saul is a kind of inquisitor-cum-'enforcer', \
dispatched by the high )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(priest in the Temple of Jerusalem to suppress the community of heretical\
Jews - i.e. 'early )Tj
T*
(Christians' - residing in Damascus. The priesthood are collaborators wit\
h the occupying )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Romans, and Saul is one of their instruments. In Jerusalem, he is alread\
y said to have )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(participated actively in attacks on the 'early Church'. Indeed, if Acts \
is to be believed, he is )Tj
T*
(personally involved in the events surrounding the stoning to death of th\
e individual identified )Tj
T*
(as Stephen, acclaimed by later tradition as the first Christian martyr. \
He himself freely admits )Tj
T*
(that he has persecuted his victims 'to death'.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Prompted by his fanatical fervour, Saul then embarks for Damascus,\
to ferret out fugitive )Tj
T*
(members of the 'early Church' established there. He is accompanied by a \
band of men, )Tj
T*
(presumably armed; and he carries with him arrest warrants from the high \
priest in Jerusalem.)Tj
T*
( Syria, at the time, was not a part of Israel, but a separate Roman\
province, governed by a )Tj
T*
(Roman legate, with neither an administrative nor a political connection \
with Palestine. How, )Tj
T*
(then, could the high priest's writ conceivably run there? The Roman Empi\
re would hardly )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(have sanctioned self-appointed 'hit-squads' moving from one territory to\
another within its )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(domains, serving arrests, perpetrating assassinations and threatening th\
e precarious stability )Tj
T*
(of civic order. According to official policy, every religion was to be t\
olerated, provided it )Tj
T*
(posed no challenge to secular authority or the social structure. A Jerus\
alem-based 'hit-squad' )Tj
T*
(operating in Syria would have elicited some swift and fairly gruesome re\
prisals from the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(105 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
751 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.461 520 148.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.461 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 329.461 520 24 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 312.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 179.51 520 133.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 143.51 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Roman administration - reprisals such as no high priest, whose position \
depended on Roman )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(favour, would dare to incur. Given these circumstances, how could Saul o\
f Tarsus, armed )Tj
T*
(with warrants from the high priest, possibly have undertaken his punitiv\
e expedition to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Damascus - if, that is, 'Damascus' is indeed taken to be the city in Syr\
ia?)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( If 'Damascus' is understood to be Qumran, however, Saul's expedi\
tion suddenly makes )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(perfect historical sense. Unlike Syria, Qumran )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(did )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(lie in territory where the high priest's writ )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(legitimately ran. It would have been entirely feasible for the high prie\
st in Jerusalem to )Tj
T*
(dispatch his 'enforcers' to extirpate heretical Jews at Qumran, a mere t\
wenty miles away, near )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jericho. Such action would have thoroughly conformed to Roman policy, w\
hich made a )Tj
T*
(point of not meddling in purely internal affairs. Jews, in other words, \
were quite free to harry )Tj
T*
(and persecute other Jews within their own domains, so long as such activ\
ities did not )Tj
T*
(encroach on the Roman administration. And since the high priest was a Ro\
man puppet, his )Tj
T*
(efforts to extirpate rebellious co-religionists would have been all the \
more welcome.)Tj
T*
( This explanation, however, despite its historical plausibility, ra\
ises some extremely )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(awkward questions. According to the consensus of the international team,\
the community at )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran consisted of Judaic sectarians - the so-called 'Essenes', a pacif\
ist ascetic sect having )Tj
T*
(no connection either with early Christianity or with the 'mainstream' of\
Judaism at the time. )Tj
T*
(Yet Saul, according to Acts, embarks for Damascus to persecute members o\
f the 'early )Tj
T*
(Church'. Here, then, is a provocative challenge both to Christian tradit\
ion and to adherents of )Tj
T*
(the consensus, who have studiously avoided looking at the matter altoget\
her. Either members )Tj
T*
(of the 'early Church' were sheltering with the Qumran community \226 or \
the 'early Church' and )Tj
T*
(the Qumran community were one and the same. In either case, the 'Damascu\
s Document' )Tj
T*
(indicates that the Dead Sea Scrolls cannot be distanced from the origins\
of Christianity.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
20 0 0 20 10 336.0779 Tm
(The 'Habakkuk Commentary')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 317.5489 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Found in Cave 1 at Qumran, the 'Habakkuk )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Pesher', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(or 'Habakkuk Commentary', represents )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(perhaps the closest approximation, in the entire corpus of known Dead Se\
a Scrolls, to a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(chronicle of the community - or, at any rate, of certain major developme\
nts in its history. It )Tj
T*
(focuses in particular on the same dispute cited by the 'Damascus Documen\
t'. This dispute, )Tj
T*
(verging on incipient schism, seems to have been a traumatic event in the\
life of the Qumran )Tj
T*
(community. It figures not just in the 'Damascus Document' and the 'Habak\
kuk Commentary', )Tj
T*
(but in four other Qumran texts as well; and there seem to be references \
to it in four further )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(texts.)Tj
11 0 0 11 39.4113 187.6177 Tm
(22)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 167.5977 Tm
( Like the 'Damascus Document', the 'Habakkuk Commentary' recounts h\
ow certain )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(members of the community, under the iniquitous instigation of a figure i\
dentified as 'the )Tj
T*
(Liar', secede, break the New Covenant and cease to adhere to the Law. Th\
is precipitates a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(conflict between them and the community's leader, 'the Teacher of Righte\
ousness'. There is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(mention, too, of a villainous adversary known as 'the Wicked Priest'. Ad\
herents of the )Tj
T*
(consensus have generally tended to regard 'the Liar' and 'the Wicked Pri\
est' as two different )Tj
T*
(sobriquets for the same individual. More recently, however, Eisenman has\
effectively )Tj
T*
(demonstrated that 'the Liar' and 'the Wicked Priest' are two quite separ\
ate and distinct )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(106 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
752 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 599.51 520 166.49 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 416.598 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.098 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 383.598 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 367.098 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.598 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 334.098 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 304.098 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 274.098 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 257.598 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 241.098 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 80.685 520 160.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 44.685 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.675 Tm
(personages.)Tj
11 0 0 11 74.5287 756.195 Tm
(23)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 85.5287 752.675 Tm
( He has made it clear that 'the Liar', unlike 'the Wicked Priest', emerg\
es from )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-5.493 -1.203 Td
(within )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the Qumran community. Having been taken in by the community and accepted\
as a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(member in more or less good standing, he then defects. He is not just an\
adversary, therefore, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(but a traitor as well. In contrast, 'the Wicked Priest' is an outsider, \
a representative of the )Tj
T*
(priestly establishment of the Temple. Although an adversary, he is not t\
herefore a traitor. )Tj
T*
(What makes him important for our purposes is the clue he provides to the\
dating of the events )Tj
T*
(recounted in the 'Habakkuk Commentary'. If 'the Wicked Priest' is a memb\
er of the Temple )Tj
T*
(establishment, it means the Temple is still standing and the establishme\
nt intact. In other )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(words, the activities of 'the Wicked Priest' )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(pre-date )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the destruction of the Temple by Roman )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(troops.)Tj
T*
( As in the 'War Scroll', but even more explicitly, there are refere\
nces that can only be to )Tj
T*
(imperial, not republican, Rome - to Rome, that is, in the 1st century AD\
. The 'Habakkuk )Tj
T*
(Commentary', for example, alludes to a specific practice - victorious Ro\
man troops making )Tj
T*
(sacrificial offerings to their standards. Josephus provides written evid\
ence for this practice at )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the time of the fall of the Temple in ad 70.)Tj
11 0 0 11 243.3375 523.7052 Tm
(24)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 254.3375 520.1852 Tm
( And it is, in fact, a practice that would make no )Tj
-17.77 -1.2 Td
(sense under the republic, when victorious troops would have offered sacr\
ifices to their gods. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Only with the creation of the empire, when the emperor himself was accor\
ded the status of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(divinity, becoming the supreme god for his subjects, would his image, or\
token, or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(monogram, be emblazoned on the standards of his soldiers. The 'Habakkuk \
Commentary', )Tj
T*
(therefore, like the 'War Scroll', the Temple Scroll' and the 'Damascus D\
ocument', points )Tj
T*
(specifically to the Herodian epoch.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 257.5 312.3554 Tm
(10)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
-5.819 -1.201 Td
(Science in the Service of Faith)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 262.1852 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 221.5296 Tm
(A)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 26.245 221.5296 Tm
(ccording to the consensus of the international team, the historical even\
ts reflected in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(all )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-1.181 -1.407 Td
(the relevant Dead Sea Scrolls occurred in Maccabean times - between the \
mid-2nd and mid-1 )Tj
T*
(st centuries bc. The 'Wicked Priest', who pursues, persecutes and perhap\
s kills the 'Teacher of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Righteousness', is generally identified by them as Jonathan Maccabaeus, \
or perhaps his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(brother Simon, both of whom enjoyed positions of prominence during that \
epoch; and the )Tj
T*
(invasion of a foreign army is taken to be that launched by the Romans un\
der Pompey in 63 )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(bc.)Tj
11 0 0 11 26.4175 121.7927 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 31.9175 118.2727 Tm
( The historical backdrop of the scrolls is thus set safely back in pre-C\
hristian times, )Tj
-1.594 -1.2 Td
(where it becomes disarmed of any possible challenge to New Testament tea\
ching and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(tradition.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( But while some of the Dead Sea Scrolls undoubtedly do refer to pre\
-Christian times, it is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(a grievous mistake - for some, perhaps, deliberate obfuscation - to conc\
lude that all of them )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(107 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
753 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 617.5 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 280.399 520 337.101 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 244.399 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(do so. Pompey, who invaded the Holy Land in 63 bc, was, of course, a con\
temporary of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Julius Caesar. At the time of Pompey and Caesar, Rome was still a republ\
ic, becoming an )Tj
T*
(empire only in 27 bc, under Caesar's adoptive son, Octavian, who took th\
e imperial title of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Augustus. If the Roman invasion referred to in the scrolls was that of P\
ompey, it would have )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(involved the armies of republican Rome. Yet the 'War Rule' speaks of a '\
king' or 'monarch' of )Tj
T*
(the invaders. And the 'Habakkuk Commentary' is even more explicit in its\
reference to )Tj
T*
(victorious invaders sacrificing to their standards. It would therefore s\
eem clear that the )Tj
T*
(invasion in question was that of imperial Rome - the invasion provoked b\
y the revolt of ad )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(66. )Tj
T*
( Professor Godfrey Driver of Oxford found numerous textual referenc\
es within the scrolls )Tj
T*
(that provide clues to their dating. Focusing in particular on the 'Habak\
kuk Commentary', he )Tj
T*
(concluded that the invaders could only be 'the Roman legions at the time\
of the revolt in ad )Tj
T*
(66'. This conclusion, he added, 'is put beyond doubt by the reference to\
their sacrificing to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(their military standards'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 143.4713 541.695 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 148.9713 538.175 Tm
( His statements, however, elicited a vicious attack from Father de )Tj
-10.107 -1.2 Td
(Vaux, who recognised that they led inexorably to the conclusion that 'th\
e historical )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(background of the scrolls therefore is the war against Rome'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 343.9325 507.2825 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 349.4325 503.7625 Tm
( This, of course, de Vaux could )Tj
-24.686 -1.2 Td
(not possibly accept. At the same time, however, he could not refute such\
precise evidence. In )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(consequence, he contrived to dismiss the evidence and attack only Driver\
's general thesis: )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Driver has started from the pre-conceived idea that all scrolls were po\
st-Christian, and that )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(this idea was based on the fallacious witness of orthography, language a\
nd vocabulary.')Tj
11 0 0 11 490.5762 439.87 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 496.0762 436.35 Tm
( It )Tj
-35.351 -1.2 Td
(was, he declared, for professional historians 'to decide whether [Drive\
r's] motley history . . . )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(has sufficient foundation in the texts'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 216.415 405.4575 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 221.915 401.9375 Tm
( It is interesting that de Vaux, who taught biblical )Tj
-15.412 -1.2 Td
(history at the Ecole Biblique, should suddenly \(at least when he had to\
answer Professor )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Driver\) don a cloak of false modesty and shrink from considering himsel\
f an historian, taking )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(refuge instead behind the supposed bulwarks of archaeology and palaeogra\
phy.)Tj
11 0 0 11 446.8375 354.545 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 452.3375 351.025 Tm
( In fact, )Tj
-32.17 -1.2 Td
(archaeological data reinforce the indications of chronology provided by \
the internal data of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the scrolls themselves. External evidence concurs with internal evidence\
- evidence of which )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(the consensus would seem to remain oblivious. At times, this has led to \
an embarrassing )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(faux)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(pas.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
( De Vaux, it will be remembered, embarked on a preliminary excavati\
on of the Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(ruins in 1951. His findings were sufficiently consequential to justify a\
more ambitious )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(enterprise. A characteristic lassitude set in, however, and no full-scal\
e excavation was )Tj
T*
(undertaken until 1953. Annual excavations then continued until 1956; and\
in 1958, an )Tj
T*
(associated site at Ein Feshka, less than a mile to the south, was also e\
xcavated. In his )Tj
T*
(eagerness to distance the Qumran community from any connection with earl\
y Christianity, de )Tj
T*
(Vaux rushed his conclusions about dating into print. In some instances, \
he did not even wait )Tj
T*
(for archaeological evidence to support him. As early as 1954, the Jesuit\
professor Robert )Tj
T*
(North noted no fewer than four cases in which de Vaux had been forced to\
retract on his )Tj
T*
(dating. North also found it distressing that, even on so crucial a matte\
r, no specialists )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('independently of de Vaux's influence' were asked to contribute their co\
nclusions.)Tj
11 0 0 11 458.4837 105.5939 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 463.9837 102.0739 Tm
( But it was )Tj
-33.017 -1.2 Td
(not de Vaux's style to invite opinions that might conflict with his own \
and shed a more )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(controversial light on the material. Nor was he eager to announce his er\
rors when they )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(occurred. Although quick to publish and publicise conclusions that confi\
rmed his thesis, he )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(108 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
754 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.675 520 266.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 169.136 520 181.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 103.136 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 86.636 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 53.636 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 17.636 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(was markedly more dilatory in retracting them when they proved erroneous\
.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( One important element for de Vaux was a thick layer of ash found t\
o be blanketing the )Tj
T*
(surroundings of the ruins. This layer of ash patently attested to a fire\
of some sort, which had )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(obviously caused considerable destruction. Indeed, it had led to Qumran'\
s being partially, if )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(not wholly, abandoned for some years. A study of the coins found at the \
site revealed that the )Tj
T*
(fire had occurred at some time towards the beginning of the reign of Her\
od the Great, who )Tj
T*
(occupied the throne from 37 bc until 4 BC. The same data indicated that \
rebuilding had )Tj
T*
(commenced under the regime of Herod's son, Archelaus, who ruled \(not as\
king, but as )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(ethnarch\) from 4 BC until AD 6.)Tj
T*
( According to de Vaux's thesis, the Qumran community consisted of s\
upposedly placid, )Tj
T*
(peace-loving and ascetic 'Essenes', on good terms with Herod as with eve\
ryone else. If this )Tj
T*
(were the case, the fire which destroyed the community should have result\
ed not from any )Tj
T*
(deliberate human intention - from an act of war, for example - but from \
an accident, or a )Tj
T*
(natural disaster. Fortunately for de Vaux, a large crack was found runni\
ng through a cistern. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Although independent researchers found no indication that the crack exte\
nded any further, de )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Vaux claimed to have traced it through the whole of the ruins, the whole\
of the Qumran )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(community.)Tj
11 0 0 11 76.0825 492.195 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 81.5825 488.675 Tm
( Even if it did, a number of experts concluded, it could probably be asc\
ribed to )Tj
-5.206 -1.303 Td
(erosion.)Tj
11 0 0 11 53.9175 474.2825 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 59.4175 470.7625 Tm
( For de Vaux, however, the crack, such as it was, seemed the result of o\
ne of the )Tj
-3.594 -1.2 Td
(many earthquakes the region has suffered over the centuries. Instead of \
trying to identify the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(cause of the crack, in other words, de Vaux went rummaging for an earthq\
uake that might )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(have been responsible. As it happened, there was a more or less convenie\
nt earthquake on )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(record. Josephus speaks of one that occurred towards the beginning of He\
rod's reign, in 31 )Tj
T*
(Be. This, de Vaux concluded, had caused the fire which led to the abando\
ning of the )Tj
T*
(community. He did not bother to explain why rebuilding did not commence \
for a quarter of a )Tj
T*
(century before, suddenly, proceeding with noticeable rapidity.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Robert Eisenman points to the strikingly precise timing of the del\
ay in rebuilding. It )Tj
T*
(coincides perfectly with Herod's reign. No sooner had he died than recon\
struction promptly )Tj
T*
(began - and part of this reconstruction consisted of strengthening the d\
efensive towers, as )Tj
T*
(well as creating a rampart. It would thus seem clear, for some reason wh\
ich de Vaux chose to )Tj
T*
(ignore, that no one dared to rebuild Qumran while Herod remained on the \
throne. But why )Tj
T*
(should that be the case if the community were on as congenial a footing \
with Herod as de )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Vaux maintained, and if the destruction of the community resulted from a\
n earthquake? It )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(would appear much more likely that the community was destroyed deliberat\
ely, on Herod's )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(orders, and that no reconstruction )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(could )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(begin until after his death. But why should Herod )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(order the destruction of a community so placid, so universally loved, so\
divorced from )Tj
T*
(political activity?)Tj
T*
( Whether wilfully or through negligence, de Vaux remained oblivious\
of such questions. )Tj
T*
(Eventually, however, the logic he mustered to support his hypothetical e\
arthquake became )Tj
T*
(too strained even for the closest of his supporters, the then Father Mil\
ik. In 1957, Milik wrote )Tj
T*
(of the fire and the alleged earthquake that:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( the archaeological evidence from Qumran is not unambiguous as to t\
he order of these two )Tj
T*
(events )Tj
T*
( . . . the thick layers of ashes suggests a very violent conflagrat\
ion, better to be explained )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(109 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
755 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 698.587 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 682.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.587 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 464.762 520 134.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 362.899 520 101.864 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 212.948 520 149.951 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 128.997 520 83.951 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 92.997 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(as a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( result of a conscious attempt to burn down the whole building; so \
the ashes may show the )Tj
T*
(traces )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( of an intentional destruction of Qumran.)Tj
11 0 0 11 252.1237 706.695 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 686.675 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Whether the fire was caused by earthquake or by deliberate human agency \
cannot be )Tj
T*
(definitively established. Certainly the evidence offers less support to \
de Vaux than it does to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Milik and Eisenman, who, on this unique occasion, are in accord. Neverth\
eless, many )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(adherents of the consensus still invoke the earthquake, and it still fig\
ures with metronomic )Tj
T*
(regularity in their texts.)Tj
T*
( In another instance, however, de Vaux's misinterpretation of the e\
vidence - or, to put the )Tj
T*
(matter charitably, wishful thinking - was much more conclusively exposed\
. Very early in his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(excavations, he found a heavily oxidised coin on which, he said, he 'bel\
ieved' he could )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(discern the insignia of the Roman 10th Legion.)Tj
11 0 0 11 268.94 540.2825 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 279.94 536.7625 Tm
( Purporting to cite Josephus, he also said )Tj
-19.632 -1.2 Td
(that the 10th Legion had conquered Jericho, eight miles away, in June of\
ad 68. Everything )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(seemed to fit nicely. On the basis of his coin, de Vaux argued that Qumr\
an must have been )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(destroyed by the 10th Legion in ad 68. 'No manuscript of the caves', he \
later declared, waxing )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(dogmatic on the basis of questionable data, 'can be later than June, ad \
68.')Tj
11 0 0 11 415.1575 472.87 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 452.8114 Tm
( De Vaux had first described his discovery of the coin in 1954, in \
)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(He )Tj
T*
(repeated his account five years later, in 1959, in the same journal.)Tj
11 0 0 11 371.24 438.4189 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 382.24 434.8988 Tm
( The 'fact' of the coin, and )Tj
-27.072 -1.2 Td
(de Vaux's emphatic dating on the basis of it, thus became enshrined in t\
he established corpus )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of evidence routinely invoked by adherents of the consensus. Thus, for e\
xample, Frank Cross )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(would write that the coin stamped with the insignia of the 10th Legion c\
onstituted 'grim )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(confirmation'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 86.945 371.0063 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 350.9864 Tm
( De Vaux, however, had made two bizarre errors. In the first place,\
he had somehow )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(contrived to misread Josephus, ascribing to Josephus precisely the oppos\
ite of what Josephus )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(in fact said. Josephus most emphatically did )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(not )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(assert that the 10th Legion captured Jericho )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in ad 68. As Professor Cecil Roth demonstrated, of the three Roman legio\
ns in the vicinity, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(only the 10th was not engaged in the conquest of Jericho.)Tj
11 0 0 11 325.8237 287.0552 Tm
(15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 336.8237 283.5352 Tm
( The 10th Legion had remained a )Tj
-23.769 -1.2 Td
(considerable distance to the north, guarding the top of the Jordan Valle\
y. In the second place, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the coin de Vaux had found proved not to be from the 10th Legion at all,\
or, for that matter, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(from any other. Although badly damaged and oxidised, the coin, when subj\
ected to expert )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scrutiny, proved to have come from Ashkelon and to date from AD 72 or 73\
.)Tj
T*
( Here was a blunder that could not be equivocated away. De Vaux had\
no choice but to )Tj
T*
(publish a formal retraction. This retraction, however, appeared only as \
a footnote in his opus )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(L'archeologie et les manuscrits de la mer morte, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(published in French in 1961 and in English )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(translation in 1973. 'Mention of this was unfortunate', de Vaux says lac\
onically, 'for this coin )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(does not exist.')Tj
11 0 0 11 91.5375 137.104 Tm
(16)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 117.084 Tm
( On the whole, de Vaux tended to be shamelessly cavalier in his con\
clusions about coins. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(When he found any that did not conform to his theories, he simply dismis\
sed them. Thus, for )Tj
T*
(example, he found one dating from the period between ad 138 and 161. He \
shrugged off its )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(possible relevance with the comment that it 'must have been lost by a pa\
sser-by'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 452.5988 69.6915 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 463.5988 66.1716 Tm
( By the )Tj
-32.989 -1.2 Td
(same token, of course, an earlier coin, on which he attempted to establi\
sh his dating and )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(110 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
756 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.961 520 198.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.461 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 104.549 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 88.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 71.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 35.549 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(chronology for Qumran, could also have been lost by a passer-by; but de \
Vaux seems not to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(have considered this possibility.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Of the archaeological evidence found at Qumran, coins have been particul\
arly important to )Tj
T*
(the international team and the adherents of their consensus. Indeed, it \
was on the basis of this )Tj
T*
(evidence that they deduced the timespan of the community; and it was thr\
ough their )Tj
T*
(interpretation of this evidence that they established their dating and c\
hronology. Prior to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Eisenman, however, no one had bothered to question their misinterpretati\
on. Roth and )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Driver, as we have seen, endeavoured to establish a chronology on the ba\
sis of the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(internal )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(evidence of the scrolls themselves. De Vaux and the international team w\
ere able to discredit )Tj
T*
(them simply by invoking the external evidence supposedly provided by the\
coins. That this )Tj
T*
(evidence had been spuriously interpreted went unnoticed. Eisenman recogn\
ised that Roth and )Tj
T*
(Driver, arguing on the basis of internal evidence, had in fact been corr\
ect. But in order to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(prove this, he had first to expose the erroneous interpretation of the e\
xternal evidence. He )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(began with the coin distribution, pointing out that they revealed two pe\
riods of peak activity.)Tj
T*
( Some 450 bronze coins were discovered at Qumran in the course of e\
xcavation. They )Tj
T*
(encompassed a span of some two and a half centuries, from 135 BC to AD\
136. The )Tj
T*
(following table groups them according to the reigns in which they were m\
inted:)Tj
T*
(1 coin from 135-104 BC)Tj
T*
(1 coin from 104 BC)Tj
T*
(143 coins from 103-76 bc)Tj
T*
(1 coin from 76-67 bc)Tj
T*
(5 coins from 67-40 bc)Tj
T*
(4 coins from 40-37 bc)Tj
T*
(10 coins from 37-4 bc)Tj
T*
(16 coins from 4 bc-6 ad)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(91 coins from 6-41 ad \(time of the proc\
urators\))Tj
T*
(78 coins from 37-44 ad \(reign of Agripp\
a I\))Tj
T*
(2 Roman coins from 54-68 ad)Tj
T*
(83 coins from 67 ad \(2nd year of the re\
volt\))Tj
T*
(5 coins from 68 ad \(3rd year of the r\
evolt\))Tj
T*
(6 additional coins more precisely from the revolt, too oxidised to ident\
ify)Tj
T*
(13 Roman coins from 67-8 ad)Tj
T*
(1 Roman coin from 69-79 ad)Tj
T*
(2 coins from 72-3 ad)Tj
T*
(4 coins from 72-81 ad)Tj
T*
(1 Roman coin from 87 ad)Tj
T*
(3 Roman coins from 98-117 ad)Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(6 coins from 132-6 ad \(revolt of Sime\
on bar Kochba\))Tj
11 0 0 11 420.5338 112.6564 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 92.6364 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( The distribution of coins would appear to indicate two periods whe\
n the community at )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran was most active - that between 103 and 76 bc, and that between ad\
6 and 67. There )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(111 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
757 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 584.461 520 181.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.961 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.923 520 132.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 82.283 520 254.64 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 65.783 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 49.283 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 13.283 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(are a total of 143 coins from the former period, 254 from the latter. Fo\
r adherents of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(consensus, this did not mesh as neatly as they would have liked with the\
ir theories. )Tj
T*
(According to their reading of the scrolls, the 'Wicked Priest' was most \
likely to be identified )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(as the high priest Jonathan, who lived between 160 and 142 bc - half a c\
entury )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(before )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the first )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(concentration of coins. In order to support his thesis, Father de Vaux n\
eeded a very early date )Tj
T*
(for the founding of the Qumran community. He was thus forced to argue th\
at the solitary coin )Tj
T*
(dating from between 135 and 104 bc served to prove the thesis correct - \
even though )Tj
T*
(common sense suggests that the community dates from between 103 and 76 B\
C, the period )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(from which there is a concentration of 143 coins. The earlier coin, on w\
hich de Vaux rests his )Tj
T*
(argument is much more likely to have been merely one that remained in ci\
rculation for some )Tj
T*
(years after it was minted.)Tj
T*
( De Vaux ascribed particular significance to the disappearance of J\
udaic coins after ad 68 )Tj
T*
(and the nineteen Roman coins subsequent to that year. This, he maintaine\
d, 'proves' that )Tj
T*
(Qumran was destroyed in ad 68; the Roman coins, he argued, indicated tha\
t the ruins were )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('occupied' by a detachment of Roman troops. On this basis, he proceeded \
to assign a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(definitive date to the deposition of the scrolls themselves: 'our conclu\
sion: none of the )Tj
T*
(manuscripts belonging to the community is later than the ruin of Khirbet\
Qumran in AD 68. )Tj
T*
('19)Tj
T*
( The spuriousness of this reasoning is self-evident. In the first p\
lace, Judaic coins have )Tj
T*
(been found which date from Simeon bar Kochba's revolt between ad 132 and\
136. In the )Tj
T*
(second place, the coins indicate only that people were wandering around \
Qumran and )Tj
T*
(dropping them; they indicate nothing, one way or the other, about the de\
position of )Tj
T*
(manuscripts, which could have been buried at Qumran as late as bar Kochb\
a's time. And )Tj
T*
(finally, it is hardly surprising that the coins subsequent to ad 68 shou\
ld be Roman. In the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(years following the revolt, Roman coins were the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(only )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(currency in Judaea. This being the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(case, they need hardly have been dropped solely by Romans.)Tj
T*
( Eisenman is emphatic about the conclusions to be drawn from de Vau\
x's archaeology. If )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(it proves anything, he states, it proves precisely the opposite of what \
de Vaux concludes - )Tj
T*
(proves that the latest date for the scrolls having been deposited at Qum\
ran is not ad 68 but ad )Tj
T*
(136. Any time up to that date would be perfectly consistent with the arc\
haeological )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(evidence.)Tj
11 0 0 11 62.305 261.1177 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 73.305 257.5977 Tm
( Nor, Eisenman adds, is the consensus correct in assuming that the destr\
uction of )Tj
-4.604 -1.303 Td
(the main buildings at Qumran necessarily meant the destruction of the si\
te.)Tj
11 0 0 11 421.6888 243.2052 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 432.6888 239.6852 Tm
( There are, in )Tj
-30.741 -1.2 Td
(fact, indications that at least some cursory or rudimentary rebuilding o\
ccurred, including a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('crude canal' to feed water into a cistern. Rather unconvincingly, de Va\
ux claimed this to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(have been the work of the Roman garrison supposed, on the basis of the c\
oins, to have )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(occupied the site.)Tj
11 0 0 11 105.8513 175.7927 Tm
(22)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 116.8513 172.2727 Tm
( But Professor Driver pointed out that the sheer crudeness of the )Tj
-7.771 -1.303 Td
(reconstruction does not suggest Roman work.)Tj
11 0 0 11 261.295 157.8802 Tm
(23)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 272.295 154.3602 Tm
( De Vaux maintained that his theory, )Tj
-19.076 -1.203 Td
(conforming as it did to the alleged destruction of Qumran in ad 68, was \
in accord with )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('les )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(donn\351es d'histoire\222 )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the 'accepted givens of history' - 'having forgotten', as Professor Driv\
er )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(observed drily, 'that the historical records say nothing of the destruct\
ion of Qumran in ad 68 )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(by the Romans'. In short, Driver concluded, 'the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
("donn\351es d'histoire" )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(are historical fiction'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 508.52 90.3904 Tm
(24)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 70.3704 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(112 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
758 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 565.175 520 200.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 400.175 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 383.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.675 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 317.675 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 284.675 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 266.762 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 250.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 182.85 520 67.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 146.85 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(There is another crucial piece of archaeological evidence which runs dia\
metrically counter to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the interpretation of the consensus. De Vaux himself studiously, and jus\
tifiably, avoided )Tj
T*
(referring to the ruins at Qumran as a 'monastery'. As he explained, he '\
never used the word )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(when writing about the excavations at Qumran, precisely because it repre\
sents an inference )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(which archaeology, taken alone, could not warrant'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 293.8963 690.195 Tm
(25)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 304.8963 686.675 Tm
( It is clear, however, that he )Tj
-21.447 -1.2 Td
(nevertheless thought of Qumran as a species of monastery. This is reflec\
ted by his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(uninhibited use of such monastic terms as 'scriptorium' and 'refectory' \
to describe certain of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the structures. And if de Vaux himself had some reservations about dubbi\
ng Qumran a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('monastery', other adherents of the consensus did not. In his book on th\
e Dead Sea Scrolls, for )Tj
T*
(example, Cardinal Danielou babbled happily about the 'monks of Qumran', \
even going so far )Tj
T*
(as to state that 'the monasticism of Qumran can be considered as the sou\
rce of Christian )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(monasticism'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 85.4325 573.2825 Tm
(26)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 553.2625 Tm
( What de Vaux, his colleagues and adherents of the consensus chose \
consistently to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(overlook was the distinctly and unmistakably military character of some \
of the ruins. When )Tj
T*
(one visits Qumran today, one will inevitably be struck initially by the \
remains of a substantial )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(defensive tower, with walls of some feet in thickness and an entrance on\
ly on the second )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(storey. Less obvious, but just across a small passageway from the tower,\
there is another )Tj
T*
(structure whose function may not be immediately apparent. In fact, it is\
what remains of a )Tj
T*
(well-built forge - complete with its own water supply for tempering the \
tools and weapons )Tj
T*
(crafted within it. Not surprisingly, the forge is something of an embarr\
assment to the scholars )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the international team, clinging to their image of placid, pacifist '\
Essenes'. Thus de Vaux )Tj
T*
(scuttled away from the issue as fast as tongue and pen could carry him:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( there was a workshop comprising a furnace above which was a plaste\
red area with a )Tj
T*
(drainage )Tj
T*
( conduit. The installation implies that the kind of work carried on\
there required a large )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fire as well )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( as an abundant supply of water. I do not venture to define its pur\
pose any more precisely )Tj
T*
(than )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( that.)Tj
11 0 0 11 54.6875 274.87 Tm
(27)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 254.85 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Which is rather like not venturing to define the purpose of empty cartri\
dge cases and spent )Tj
T*
(projectiles of lead scattered around the OK Corral in Tombstone, Arizona\
. Professor Cross, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(following in de Vaux's footsteps but incapable of the same disingenuousn\
ess, grudgingly )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(alludes to 'what appears to have been a forge'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 261.9962 190.9575 Tm
(28)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 170.8988 Tm
( In fact, arrows were found )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(inside )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the ruins of Qumran; and while one could argue that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(these were loosed by attacking Romans, they are, as Professor Driver ass\
erted, 'as likely to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(have belonged to the occupants')Tj
11 0 0 11 185.0788 140.0063 Tm
(29)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 196.0788 136.4864 Tm
( - if not, indeed, more likely. On the whole, the military )Tj
-13.533 -1.2 Td
(character of the ruins is so flagrant that another independent scholar, \
Professor Golb of the )Tj
T*
(University of Chicago, has gone so far as to see in them an )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(entirely )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(martial installation.)Tj
11 0 0 11 489.2838 105.5939 Tm
(30)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 500.2838 102.0739 Tm
( )Tj
-35.657 -1.2 Td
(According to Golb, the scrolls were never composed or copied at Qumran a\
t all, but were )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(brought there, from Jerusalem, specifically for protection. 'No fragment\
of parchment or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(papyrus', Golb has pointed out, 'was ever found in the debris . . . nor \
any tools of scribes . . . )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(113 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
759 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 748.087 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 731.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 715.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 484.087 520 231 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.087 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 418.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 385.087 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.675 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 334.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 251.675 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 116.85 520 134.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 80.85 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.675 Tm
(')Tj
11 0 0 11 12.475 756.195 Tm
(31)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 736.175 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(Apart from coins and the physical ruins, the most important body of exte\
rnal evidence used )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(by the international team for dating the Dead Sea Scrolls derived from t\
he tenuous science of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(palaeography. Palaeography is the comparative study of ancient calligrap\
hy. Assuming a )Tj
T*
(strictly chronological and linear progression in the evolution of handwr\
iting, it endeavours to )Tj
T*
(chart developments in the specific shape and form of letters, and thus t\
o assign dates to an )Tj
T*
(entire manuscript. One might find, for example, an old charter or some o\
ther document in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(one's attic. On the basis not of its content, but of its script alone, o\
ne might guess it to date )Tj
T*
(from the 17th as opposed to the 18th century. To that extent, one would \
be practising a )Tj
T*
(species of amateur palaeography. The procedure, needless to say, even wh\
en employed with )Tj
T*
(the most scientific rigour, is far from conclusive. When applied to the \
texts found at Qumran, )Tj
T*
(it becomes feeble indeed - and sometimes tips over into the ludicrous. N\
evertheless, de Vaux )Tj
T*
(invoked palaeography as another corpus of external evidence to discredit\
the conclusions, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(based on internal evidence, of Roth and Driver. It was, therefore, the a\
lleged palaeographical )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(evidence pertaining to Qumran that Eisenman had next to demolish.)Tj
T*
( Palaeography, according to Frank Cross of the international team, \
'is perhaps the most )Tj
T*
(precise and objective means of determining the age of a manuscript'. He \
goes on to explain:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( we must approach the problems relating to the historical interpret\
ation of our texts by first )Tj
T*
( determining the time period set by archaeological data, by paleogr\
aphical evidence, and )Tj
T*
(by other )Tj
T*
( more objective methods before applying the more subjective techniq\
ues of internal )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(criticism.)Tj
11 0 0 11 61.5625 358.7825 Tm
(32)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 338.7625 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Why internal evidence should necessarily be more 'subjective' than that \
of archaeology and )Tj
T*
(palaeography Cross does not bother to clarify. In fact, this statement i\
nadvertently reveals )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(why palaeography should be deemed so important by adherents of the conse\
nsus: it can be )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(used to counter the internal evidence of the documents -evidence which m\
akes sense only in )Tj
T*
(the context of the 1st century AD.)Tj
T*
( The most prominent palaeographical work on the Dead Sea Scrolls wa\
s done by )Tj
T*
(Professor Solomon Birnbaum of the University of London's School of Orien\
tal Studies. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Birnbaum's endeavours received fulsome endorsement from Professor Cross,\
who hailed )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(them as 'a monumental attempt to deal with all periods of Hebrew writing\
'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 421.675 192.37 Tm
(33 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 435.425 188.85 Tm
(Attempting to )Tj
-30.94 -1.2 Td
(parry the copious criticism to which Birnbaum's exegesis was subjected, \
Cross asked his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(readers to remember 'that it was written by a professional paleographer \
tried to the limit by )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the Lilliputian attacks of non-specialists'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 235.8987 141.4575 Tm
(34)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 246.8987 137.9375 Tm
( Such is the intensity of academic vituperation )Tj
-17.229 -1.2 Td
(generated by the question of palaeographical evidence.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Birnbaum's method is bizarre to say the least, reminiscent less of\
the modern scientific )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(method with which he purports to dignify it than of, say, the nether rea\
ches of numerology. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Thus, for example, he presupposes - and the whole of his subsequent proc\
edure rests on )Tj
T*
(nothing more than this unconfirmed presupposition - that the entire spec\
trum of the texts )Tj
T*
(found at Qumran extends precisely from 300 bc to ad 68. Thus, in one ins\
tance, he takes a )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(114 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
760 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 530.448 520 235.552 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 427.21 520 103.238 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 311.71 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 97.21 520 214.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 61.21 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.4375 Tm
(text of Samuel found in Cave 4 at Qumran. Having methodically combed thi\
s text, he cites )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(forty-five specimens of a particular calligraphic feature, eleven specim\
ens of another. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Mit )Tj
T*
(der Dummheit', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Schiller observed, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('k\344mpfen G\366tter selbst vergeben.' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(For reasons the gods )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(themselves must find mind-boggling, Birnbaum then proceeds to set up an \
equation: the )Tj
T*
(proportion of 56 to 11 equals 368 to x \(368 being the number of years t\
he texts span, and x )Tj
T*
(being the date he hopes to assign to the text in question\). The value o\
f x - calculated, )Tj
T*
(legitimately enough, in purely mathematical terms - is 72, which should \
then be subtracted )Tj
T*
(from 300 bc, Birnbaum's hypothetical starting point. He arrives at 228 B\
C; 'the result', he )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(claims triumphantly, 'will be something like the absolute date' for the \
Samuel manuscript.)Tj
11 0 0 11 503.0475 622.4677 Tm
(35)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 514.0475 618.9477 Tm
( )Tj
-36.658 -1.2 Td
(To speak of 'something like' an 'absolute date' is rather like speaking \
of 'a relatively absolute )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(date'. But quite apart from such stylistic solecisms, Birnbaum's method,\
as Eisenman says, 'is, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(of course, preposterous'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 143.8288 571.5552 Tm
(36)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 154.8288 568.0352 Tm
( Nevertheless, Birnbaum employed his technique, such as it was, to )Tj
-10.533 -1.2 Td
(establish 'absolute dates' for all the texts discovered at Qumran. The m\
ost alarming fact of all )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(is that adherents of the consensus still accept these 'absolute dates' a\
s unimpugnable.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Professor Philip Davies of Sheffield states that 'most people who \
take time to study the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(issue agree that the use of paleography in Qumran research is unscientif\
ic', adding that )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('attempts have been made to offer a precision of dating that is ludicrou\
s'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 408.6675 487.6427 Tm
(37)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 419.6675 484.1227 Tm
( Eisenman is rather )Tj
-29.794 -1.2 Td
(more scathing, describing Birnbaum's endeavours as 'what in any other fi\
eld would be the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(most pseudo-scientific and infantile methods'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 262.6288 453.2302 Tm
(38)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 273.6288 449.7102 Tm
( To illustrate this, he provides the following )Tj
-19.173 -1.303 Td
(example.)Tj
11 0 0 11 60.0225 435.3177 Tm
(39)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 415.2977 Tm
( Suppose two scribes of different ages are copying the same text at\
the same time, and the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(younger scribe were trained more recently in a more up-to-date 'scribal \
school'? Suppose the )Tj
T*
(older scribe were deliberately using a stylised calligraphy which he'd l\
earned in his youth? )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Suppose either or both scribes, in deference to tradition or the hallowe\
d character of their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(activity, sought deliberately to replicate a style dating from some cent\
uries before - as certain )Tj
T*
(documents today, such as diplomas or certificates of award, may be produ\
ced in archaic )Tj
T*
(copper-plate? What date could possibly be assigned definitively to their\
transcriptions?)Tj
T*
( In his palaeographic assumptions, Birnbaum overlooked one particul\
arly important fact. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(If a document is produced merely to convey information, it will, in all \
probability, reflect the )Tj
T*
(most up-to-date techniques. Such, for example, are the techniques employ\
ed by modern )Tj
T*
(newspapers \(except, until recently, in England\). But everything sugges\
ts that the Dead Sea )Tj
T*
(Scrolls weren't produced merely to convey information. Everything sugges\
ts they had a ritual )Tj
T*
(or semi-ritual function as well, and were lovingly produced so as to pre\
serve an element of )Tj
T*
(tradition. It is therefore highly probable that later scribes would deli\
berately attempt to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(reproduce the style of their predecessors. And, indeed, all through reco\
rded history, scribes )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(have consistently been conservative. Thus, for example, illuminated manu\
scripts of the )Tj
T*
(Middle Ages contrived to reflect a sacred quality of antiquity, not the \
latest technological )Tj
T*
(progress. Thus many modern Bibles are reproduced in 'old-fashioned' prin\
t. Thus one would )Tj
T*
(not expect to find a modern Jewish Torah employing the style or techniqu\
e used to imprint a )Tj
T*
(slogan on a T-shirt.)Tj
T*
( Of the calligraphy in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Eisenman concludes tha\
t 'they simply )Tj
T*
(represent a multitude of different handwriting styles of people working \
more or less at the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(same time within the same framework, and tell us nothing about chronolog\
y at all'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 465.7988 54.4052 Tm
(40)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 476.7988 50.8852 Tm
( Cecil )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(115 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
761 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 633.961 520 132.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 563.075 520 54.387 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 546.575 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 530.075 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 513.575 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 497.075 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 480.575 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 464.075 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.075 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 404.075 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 387.575 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 245.036 520 142.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 77.211 520 167.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 41.211 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Roth of Oxford was, if anything, even more emphatic: 'In connection for \
example with the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(English records, although a vast mass of dated manuscript material exist\
s covering the entire )Tj
T*
(Middle Ages, it is impossible to fix precisely within the range of a gen\
eration the date of any )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(document )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(on the basis of palaeography alone.' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(He warned that 'a new dogmatism' had arisen )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in the field of palaeography, and that 'without any fixed point to serve\
as a basis, we are )Tj
T*
(already expected to accept as an historical criterion a precise dating o\
f these hitherto )Tj
T*
(unknown Hebrew scripts'. He even, in his exasperation at the complacency\
and intransigence )Tj
T*
(of the international team, had recourse to the unscholarly expedient of \
capital letters:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
1.351 -1.203 Td
(IT MUST BE STATED HERE ONCE AND FOR ALL THAT THE SO-CALLED )Tj
0.681 -1.2 Td
(PALAEOGRAPHICAL EVIDENCE IS WHOLLY INADMISSIBLE IN THIS )Tj
13.196 -1.555 Td
(DISCUSSION.)Tj
11 0 0 11 306.8638 571.1364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0.25 0.32 Td
(41)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 551.1622 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 257.5 442.3323 Tm
(11)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
-2.07 -1.201 Td
(The Essenes)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 392.1622 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 368.0066 Tm
(T)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 25.0075 368.0066 Tm
(he reader by now will be familiar with the conclusions of the consensus \
view of the )Tj
-1.091 -1.407 Td
(international team and, as expressed through its journals, the Ecole Bib\
lique, as well as with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the processes by which those conclusions were reached. It is now time to\
return to the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(evidence and see whether any alternative conclusions are possible. In or\
der to do so, certain )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(basic questions must again be posed. Who, precisely, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(were )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the elusive and mysterious )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(denizens of Qumran, who established their community, transcribed and dep\
osited their sacred )Tj
T*
(texts, then apparently vanished from the stage of history? Were they ind\
eed Essenes? And if )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(so, what exactly does that term mean?)Tj
T*
( The traditional images of the Essenes come down to us from Pliny, \
Philo and Josephus, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(who described them as a sect or sub-sect of lst-century Judaism.)Tj
11 0 0 11 362.4675 218.731 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 367.9675 215.211 Tm
( Pliny, as we have seen, )Tj
-26.034 -1.2 Td
(depicted the Essenes as celibate hermits, residing, with 'only palm-tree\
s for company', in an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(area that might be construed as Qumran. Josephus, who is echoed by Phil\
o, elaborates on )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(this portrait. According to Josephus, the Essenes are celibate - althoug\
h, he adds, almost as an )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(afterthought, 'there is a second order of Essenes' who do marry.)Tj
11 0 0 11 358.6175 151.3185 Tm
(2 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 366.8675 147.7985 Tm
(The Essenes despise )Tj
-25.954 -1.2 Td
(pleasure and wealth. They hold all possessions in common, and those who \
join their ranks )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(must renounce private property. They elect their own leaders from amongs\
t themselves. They )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(are settled in every city of Palestine, as well as in isolated communiti\
es, but, even in urban )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(surroundings, keep themselves apart.)Tj
T*
( Josephus portrays the Essenes as something akin to a monastic orde\
r or an ancient )Tj
T*
(mystery school. Postulants to their ranks are subjected to a three-year \
period of probation, the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(116 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
762 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 667 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.087 520 116.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 430.35 520 119.738 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 413.85 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 380.85 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 347.85 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 314.85 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 296.937 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 280.437 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 247.437 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 96.035 520 151.402 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 60.035 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(equivalent of a novitiate. Not until he has successfully undergone this \
apprenticeship is the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(candidate officially accepted. Full-fledged Essenes pray before dawn, th\
en work for five )Tj
T*
(hours, after which they don a clean loincloth and bathe - a ritual of pu\
rification performed )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(daily. Thus purified, they assemble in a special 'common' room and parta\
ke of a simple )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(communal meal. Contrary to later popular misconceptions, Josephus does n\
ot describe the )Tj
T*
(Essenes as vegetarian. They are said to eat meat.)Tj
T*
( The Essenes, Josephus says, are well versed in the books of the Ol\
d Testament and the )Tj
T*
(teachings of the prophets. They are themselves trained in the arts of di\
vination, and can )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(foretell the future by studying sacred texts in conjunction with certain\
rites of purification. In )Tj
T*
(their doctrine, according to Josephus, the soul is immortal but trapped \
in the prison of the )Tj
T*
(mortal and corruptible body. At death, the soul is set free and soars up\
wards, rejoicing. )Tj
T*
(Josephus compares Essene teaching to that of 'the Greeks'. Elsewhere, he\
is more specific, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(likening it to the principles of the Pythagorean schools.)Tj
11 0 0 11 313.6275 558.195 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 538.175 Tm
( Josephus mentions Essene adherence to the Law of Moses: 'What they\
reverence most )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(after God is the Lawgiver, and blasphemy against him is a capital offenc\
e.')Tj
11 0 0 11 421.07 523.7825 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 426.57 520.2625 Tm
( On the whole, )Tj
-30.296 -1.2 Td
(however, the Essenes are portrayed as pacifist, and on good terms with e\
stablished authority. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Indeed, they are said to enjoy the special favour of Herod, who 'continu\
ed to honour all the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Essenes';)Tj
11 0 0 11 59.83 472.87 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 65.33 469.35 Tm
( 'Herod had these Essenes in such honour and thought higher of them than\
their )Tj
-4.024 -1.303 Td
(mortal nature required . . . ')Tj
11 0 0 11 159.49 454.9575 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 164.99 451.4375 Tm
( But at one point, Josephus contradicts himself - or perhaps slips )Tj
-11.272 -1.2 Td
(his guard. The Essenes, he says:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( despise danger and conquer pain by sheer will-power: death, if it \
comes with honour, they )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(value )Tj
T*
( more than life without end. Their spirit was tested to the utmost \
by the war with the )Tj
T*
(Romans, who )Tj
T*
( racked and twisted, burnt and broke them, subjecting them to every\
torture yet invented in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(order to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( make them blaspheme the Lawgiver or eat some forbidden food.)Tj
11 0 0 11 385.76 305.045 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 285.025 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(In this one reference, at variance with everything else Josephus says, h\
is Essenes begin to )Tj
T*
(sound suspiciously like the militant defenders of Masada, the Zealots or\
Sicarii.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( With the exception of this one reference, Josephus' account was to\
shape popular images )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(of the Essenes for most of the ensuing two thousand years. And when the \
)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Aufkl\344rung, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the so-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(called 'Enlightenment', began to encourage 'free-thinking' examination o\
f Christian tradition, )Tj
T*
(commentators began to make connections between that tradition and Joseph\
us' Essenes. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Thus, in 1770, no less a personage than Frederick the Great wrote defini\
tively that 'Jesus was )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(really an Essene; he was imbued with Essene ethics'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 300.0287 155.0939 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 305.5287 151.5739 Tm
( Such apparently scandalous assertions )Tj
-21.493 -1.2 Td
(proceeded to gain increasing currency during the latter half of the next\
century, and in 1863 )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Renan published his famous )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Vie de Jesus, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in which he suggested that Christianity was 'an )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Essenism which has largely succeeded'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 228.2263 104.1427 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 84.1227 Tm
( Towards the end of the 19th century, the revival of interest in es\
oteric thought )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(consolidated the association of Christianity with the Essenes. Theosophy\
, through the )Tj
T*
(teachings of H.P. Blavatsky, postulated Jesus as a magus or adept who em\
bodied elements of )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(117 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
763 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 468.807 520 297.193 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.768 520 99.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.268 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 186.817 520 133.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 150.817 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(both Essene and Gnostic tradition. One of Blavatsky's disciples, Anna Ki\
ngsford, developed )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(a concept of 'esoteric Christianity'. This roped in alchemy as well and \
portrayed Jesus as a )Tj
T*
(Gnostic thaumaturge who, prior to his public mission, had lived and stud\
ied with the Essenes. )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(In 1889, such ideas were transplanted to the Continent through a book ca\
lled )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Great )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Initiate, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(by the French theosophist Edouard Schure. The mystique surrounding the E\
ssenes )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(had by now begun to associate them with healing, to credit them with spe\
cial medical )Tj
T*
(training and to represent them as a Judaic equivalent of the Greek Thera\
peutae. Another )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(influential work, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Crucifixion by an Eye-Witness, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(which appeared in German towards the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(end of the 19th century and in English around 1907, purported to be a ge\
nuine ancient text )Tj
T*
(composed by an Essene scribe. Jesus was depicted as the son of Mary and \
an unnamed )Tj
T*
(Essene teacher, whose fund of secret Essene medical knowledge enabled hi\
m not just to )Tj
T*
(survive the Crucifixion, but also to appear to his disciples afterwards \
as if 'risen from the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(dead'. George Moore undoubtedly drew on this work when, in 1916, he publ\
ished )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Brook )Tj
T*
(Kerith )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and scandalised Christian readers across the English-speaking world. Moo\
re, too, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(portrayed Jesus as a prot\351g\351 of Essene thought, who survives the C\
rucifixion and retires to an )Tj
T*
(Essene community in the general vicinity of Qumran. Here, years later, h\
e is visited by a )Tj
T*
(fanatic named Paul, who, quite unknowingly, has come to promulgate a biz\
arre mythologised )Tj
T*
(account of his career and, in the process, promote him to godhood.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( The Essenes depicted in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Brook Kerith )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(derive ultimately from the 'stereotyped' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Essenes of Pliny, Josephus and Philo, imbued now with a mystical charact\
er which endeared )Tj
T*
(them to esoteric-oriented writers of the late 19th and early 20th centur\
ies. To the extent that )Tj
T*
(educated readers knew anything of the Essenes at all, this was the preva\
iling image of them. )Tj
T*
(And something of this image was retained even by more critical commentat\
ors, such as )Tj
T*
(Robert Graves, who in other respects sought to demystify Christian origi\
ns.)Tj
T*
( When the Dead Sea Scrolls came to light, they seemed, on the surfa\
ce at least, not to )Tj
T*
(contain anything that conflicted with the prevailing image of the Essene\
s. It was only natural, )Tj
T*
(therefore, that they should be associated with the established conceptio\
ns.)Tj
T*
( As early as 1947, when he first saw the Qumran texts, Professor Su\
kenik had suggested )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(an Essene character for their authorship. Father de Vaux and his team al\
so invoked the )Tj
T*
(traditional image of the Essenes. As we have noted, de Vaux was quick to\
identify Qumran )Tj
T*
(with the Essene settlement mentioned by Pliny. 'The community at Qumran'\
, Professor Cross )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(concurred, 'was an Essene settlement.')Tj
11 0 0 11 219.6187 244.4631 Tm
(10 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 233.3687 240.9431 Tm
(It soon became regarded as an established and )Tj
-16.245 -1.203 Td
(accepted )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(fact )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(that the Dead Sea Scrolls were essentially Essene in their authorship, a\
nd that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the Essenes were of the familiar kind - pacifist, ascetic, celibate, div\
orced from public and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(particularly political issues.)Tj
T*
( The community at Qumran, the consensus view contends, built upon t\
he much earlier )Tj
T*
(remains of an abandoned Israelite fortress dating from the 6th century B\
C. The authors of the )Tj
T*
(scrolls arrived at the site some time around 134 bc, and the major build\
ings were erected )Tj
T*
(around 100 bc and thereafter - a chronology safely and uncontroversially\
pre-Christian. The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(community was said to have thrived until it was decimated by an earthqua\
ke, followed by a )Tj
T*
(fire, in 31 bc. During the reign of Herod the Great \(37-4 bc\), Qumran \
was abandoned and )Tj
T*
(deserted, and then, in the reign of Herod's successor, the ruins were re\
occupied and )Tj
T*
(rebuilding undertaken. According to the consensus, Qumran then flourishe\
d as a quietist, )Tj
T*
(politically neutral and disengaged enclave until it was destroyed by the\
Romans in ad 68, )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(118 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
764 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 665.587 520 100.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 467.549 520 198.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.549 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 253.049 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 236.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 203.549 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 169.136 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 136.136 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 103.136 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 86.636 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 70.136 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 37.136 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 1.136 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(during the war that also involved the sack of Jerusalem. After this the \
site was occupied by a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Roman military garrison until the end of the 1st century. When Palestine\
rose in revolt again )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(between ad 132 and 135, Qumran was inhabited by rebel 'squatters'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 383.835 723.195 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 394.835 719.675 Tm
( It was a neat, )Tj
-27.988 -1.2 Td
(conveniently formulated scenario which effectively defused the Dead Sea \
Scrolls of whatever )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(explosive potential they might have. But the evidence seems to have been\
ignored when )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(expediency and the stability of Christian theology so dictated.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( There is a contradiction, quite apart from the geographical questi\
on, in de Vaux's )Tj
T*
(assertion that the passage from Pliny, quoted here on page 20, refers to\
Qumran - a )Tj
T*
(contradiction which pertains to the dating of the scrolls. Pliny is refe\
rring, in this passage, to )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(the situation )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(after )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the destruction of Jerusalem. The passage itself indicates that Engedi h\
as )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(likewise been destroyed - which it was. The Essene community, however, i\
s described as still )Tj
T*
(intact, and even taking in a 'throng of refugees'. Yet even de Vaux ackn\
owledged that )Tj
T*
(Qumran, like Jerusalem and Engedi, was destroyed during the revolt of AD\
66-73. It would )Tj
T*
(thus seem even more unlikely that Pliny's Essene community is in fact Qu\
mran. What is )Tj
T*
(more, Pliny's community, as he describes it, contains no women, yet ther\
e are women's )Tj
T*
(graves among those at Qumran. It is still, of course, possible that the \
occupants of Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(were Essenes, if not of Pliny's community, then of some other. If so, ho\
wever, the Dead Sea )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Scrolls will themselves reveal how ill informed about the Essenes Pliny \
was.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(The term 'Essene' is Greek. It occurs only in classical writers -Josephu\
s, Philo and Pliny - and )Tj
T*
(is written in Greek as 'Essenoi' or 'Essaioi'. Thus, if the inhabitants \
of Qumran were indeed )Tj
T*
(Essenes, one would expect 'Essene' to be a Greek translation or translit\
eration of some )Tj
T*
(original Hebrew or Aramaic word, by which the Qumran community referred \
to themselves.)Tj
T*
( Accounts of the Essenes by classical writers are not consistent wi\
th the life or thought of )Tj
T*
(the community as revealed by either the external evidence of archaeology\
or the internal )Tj
T*
(evidence of the texts themselves. Josephus, Philo and Pliny offer portra\
its of the Essenes )Tj
T*
(which are often utterly irreconcilable with the testimony of Qumran's ru\
ins and of the Dead )Tj
T*
(Sea Scrolls. The evidence at Qumran, both internal and external, repeate\
dly contradicts their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(accounts. Some of these contradictions have been cited before, but it is\
worth reviewing the )Tj
T*
(most important of them.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 1. Josephus acknowledges that there is 'another order' of Essenes \
who do marry, but this, )Tj
T*
(he )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( indicates, is atypical.)Tj
11 0 0 11 159.71 193.7439 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 170.71 190.2239 Tm
( In general, Josephus says, echoing Philo and Pliny, the Essenes )Tj
-11.688 -1.2 Td
(are )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( celibate. Yet the graves of women and children have been found\
among those )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(excavated at )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Qumran. And the 'Community Rule' contains regulations governin\
g marriage and the )Tj
T*
(raising of )Tj
T*
( children.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( 2. None of the classical writers ever mentions anything to sugges\
t that the Essenes used a )Tj
T*
(special )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(119 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
765 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 566.587 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 499.175 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 466.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 449.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 416.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 383.675 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 367.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.675 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 317.675 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 284.675 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 266.762 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 233.762 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 217.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 200.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 184.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 151.262 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 116.85 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 83.85 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 50.85 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 14.85 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( form of calendar. The Qumran community, however, did - a uniqu\
e, solar-based )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(calendar, )Tj
T*
( rather than the conventional Judaic calendar, which is lunar-b\
ased. If the Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(community )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( were indeed Essenes, surely so strikingly noticeable a charact\
eristic would have been )Tj
T*
(accorded )Tj
T*
( some reference.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( 3. According to Philo, the Essenes differed from other forms of a\
ncient Judaism in )Tj
T*
(having no cult )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( of animal sacrifices.)Tj
11 0 0 11 155.4888 591.195 Tm
(13 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 169.2388 587.675 Tm
(Yet the 'Temple Scroll' issues precise instructions for such )Tj
-11.581 -1.2 Td
(sacrifices. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( And the ruins of Qumran revealed animal bones carefully placed\
in pots, or covered by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(pots, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( and buried in the ground under a thin covering of earth.)Tj
11 0 0 11 349.4875 523.7825 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 360.4875 520.2625 Tm
( De Vaux speculated that )Tj
-25.49 -1.2 Td
(these bones )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( might be the remains of ritual meals. They might indeed. But t\
hey might equally be the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(remains )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( of animal sacrifices, as stipulated by the 'Temple Scroll'.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 4. The classical writers use the term 'Essene' to denote what the\
y describe as a major sub-)Tj
T*
( division of Judaism, along with the Pharisees and Sadducees. N\
owhere in the Dead Sea )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Scrolls, )Tj
T*
( however, is the term 'Essene' found.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 5. Josephus declares the Essenes to have been on congenial terms w\
ith Herod the Great, )Tj
T*
(who, he )Tj
T*
( says, 'had these Essenes in such honour and thought higher of \
them than their mortal )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(nature )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( required'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 96.1025 274.87 Tm
(15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 107.1025 271.35 Tm
( Yet the Qumran literature indicates a militant hostility towards non-Ju\
daic )Tj
-7.062 -1.2 Td
( authorities in general, and towards Herod and his dynasty in p\
articular. What is more, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( appears to have been abandoned and uninhabited for some years \
precisely because of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( persecution by Herod.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( 6. According to classical writers, the Essenes were pacifist. Phi\
lo specifically states that )Tj
T*
(their )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( numbers included no makers of weapons or armour.)Tj
11 0 0 11 330.7737 141.4575 Tm
(16)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 341.7737 137.9375 Tm
( Josephus emphatically )Tj
-24.129 -1.2 Td
(distinguishes )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( between the non-violent Essenes and the militantly messianic a\
nd nationalistic Zealots. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Yet the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( ruins of Qumran include a defensive tower of a manifestly mili\
tary nature, and what )Tj
T*
('can only )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(120 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:38 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
766 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 731.587 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 698.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 632.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 499.175 520 83.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 365.685 520 133.49 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 131.744 520 233.941 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 95.744 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.675 Tm
( be described as a forge'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 176.2787 756.195 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 187.2787 752.675 Tm
( As for the Qumran literature, it is often martial in the )Tj
-12.893 -1.2 Td
(extreme, as )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( exemplified by such texts as the 'War Scroll'. Indeed, the bel\
licose character of such )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(texts )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( would seem to have less in common with what Josephus says of t\
he Essenes than with )Tj
T*
(what he )Tj
T*
( and others say of the so-called Zealots - which is precisely w\
hat Roth and Driver )Tj
T*
(claimed the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Qumran community to be, thereby incurring the fury of de Vaux \
and the international )Tj
T*
(team.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( The Qumran community wrote mostly not in Greek, but in Aramaic and\
Hebrew. So far )Tj
T*
(as Aramaic and Hebrew are concerned, no accepted etymology for the origi\
ns of the term )Tj
T*
('Essene' has hitherto been found. Even the classical writers were mystif\
ied by its derivation. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Philo, for example, suggested that, in his opinion, the name stemmed fro\
m the Greek word )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(for 'holy', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('oseeos', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and that the Essenes were therefore the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Oseeotes', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(or 'Holy Ones'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 478.05 507.2825 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 487.2625 Tm
( One theory has enjoyed a certain qualified currency among certain \
modern scholars, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(notably Geza Vermes of Oxford University. According to Vermes, the term \
'Essene' derives )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(from the Aramaic word )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('assayya', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(which means 'healers'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 322.1113 456.37 Tm
(19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 333.1113 452.85 Tm
( This has fostered an image in )Tj
-23.499 -1.2 Td
(some quarters of the Essenes as medical practitioners, a Judaic equivale\
nt of the Alexandrian )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(ascetics known as the 'Therapeutae'. But the word )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('assayya' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(does not occur anywhere in the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(corpus of Qumran literature; nor is there any reference to healing, to m\
edical activities or to )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(therapeutic work. To derive 'Essene' from )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('assayya')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(', therefore, remains purely speculative; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and there would be no reason to credit it at all unless there were no ot\
her options.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( In fact, there )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(is )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(another option - not just a possibility, but a probability. If the Qumra\
n )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(community never refer to themselves as 'Essenes' or )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('assayya', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(they do employ a number of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(other Hebrew and Aramaic terms. From these terms, it is clear that the c\
ommunity did not )Tj
T*
(have a single definitive name for themselves. They did, however, have a \
highly distinctive )Tj
T*
(and unique concept of themselves, and this concept is reflected by a var\
iety of appellations )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(and designations.)Tj
11 0 0 11 105.48 273.3029 Tm
(20 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 119.23 269.7829 Tm
(The concept rests ultimately on the all-important 'Covenant', which )Tj
-7.944 -1.2 Td
(entailed a formal oath of obedience, totally and eternally, to the Law o\
f Moses. The authors )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the Dead Sea Scrolls would thus refer to themselves as, for example, \
'the Keepers of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Covenant'. As synonyms for 'Covenant' and 'Law', they would often use th\
e same words that )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(figure so prominently in Taoism - 'way', 'work' or 'works' )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\('ma'asim' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in Hebrew\). They would )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(speak, for instance, of'the Perfect of the Way', or 'the Way of Perfect \
Righteousness')Tj
11 0 0 11 472.77 189.3518 Tm
(21 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 486.52 185.8318 Tm
(- 'way' )Tj
-34.656 -1.2 Td
(meaning 'the work of the Law', or 'the way in which the Law functions', \
'the way in which the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Law works'. Variations of these themes run all through the Dead Sea Scro\
lls to denote the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran community and its members.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In the 'Habakkuk Commentary', Eisenman, continuing this line of th\
ought, found one )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(particularly important such variation - the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Osei ha-Torah', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(which translates as the 'Doers of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the Law'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 60.5862 88.9006 Tm
(22)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 71.5862 85.3806 Tm
( This term would appear to be the source of the word 'Essene', for the c\
ollective )Tj
-4.479 -1.203 Td
(form of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Osei ha-Torah' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(is )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Osim', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pronounced 'Oseem'. The Qumran community would thus )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(have constituted, collectively, 'the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Osim'. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(They seem, in fact, to have been known as such. An )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(121 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
767 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 698.549 520 67.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 682.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 652.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 638.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 625.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 608.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 595.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 578.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 565.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 535.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 521.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 508.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 491.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 478.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 464.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 421.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 407.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 391.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 377.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 364.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 347.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 334.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 304.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 290.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 250.049 520 40.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 233.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 220.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 206.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 193.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 179.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 163.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 149.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 136.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 119.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 106.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 92.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 79.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 65.549 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 49.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 13.049 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(early Christian writer, Epiphanius, speaks of an allegedly 'heretical' J\
udaic sect which once )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(occupied an area around the Dead Sea. This sect, he says, were called th\
e 'Ossenes'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 470.0887 739.695 Tm
(23)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 481.0887 736.175 Tm
( It is )Tj
-34.261 -1.203 Td
(fairly safe to conclude that the 'Essenes', the 'Ossenes' of Epiphanius \
and the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Osim' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran community were one and the same.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 37.1925 655.7648 Tm
(28 Qumran, showing the marl terraces. The photograph was taken from \
the ruins looking west )Tj
-1.985 -1.2 Td
(towards the Judaean hills, with Cave 5 on the extreme left and the two o\
penings of Cave 4 just to the right. )Tj
6.859 -1.2 Td
(The original entrance to Cave 4 can be seen above the right-hand opening\
.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 613.1364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 43.4588 598.7648 Tm
(29 The ruins of Qumran. Caves 4 and 5 can be seen at the end of the n\
earer eroded cliff-face.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 583.1364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 85.8094 568.7648 Tm
(30 The interior of Cave 4, Qumran, where the largest number of fragme\
nts)Tj
-0.735 -1.2 Td
(were discovered in 1952. Fragments of up to 800 different scrolls were r\
etrieved.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 539.6364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 70.4925 525.2648 Tm
(31 The Qumran ruins from the fortified tower. In the foreground are t\
he remains )Tj
-2.083 -1.2 Td
(of the circular weapons forge, to the left of which part of the water co\
nduit has been exposed.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 496.1364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 112.6687 481.7648 Tm
(32 Remains of the main waterway into the Qumran community.)Tj
4.209 -1.2 Td
(The site had a complex water system fed from)Tj
-1.433 -1.2 Td
(seasonal water flowing in the Wadi behind the ruins.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 439.1364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 62.5331 424.7648 Tm
(33 A cistern cut into the desert floor on the rocky terraces near to \
the Qumran ruins.)Tj
2.735 -1.2 Td
(Water control and storage were vital to the survival of such a community\
.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 395.6364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 45.1406 381.2648 Tm
(34 The water supply to Qumran depended upon this water tunnel carved \
through solid rock)Tj
1.655 -1.2 Td
(in the cliff-face. The water was dammed in the Wadi and directed through\
this tunnel.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 352.1364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 190.9462 337.7648 Tm
(35 The exit of the water tunnel.)Tj
-8.275 -1.2 Td
(From here the water flowed down the Waterway to the settlement itself.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 308.6364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 76.275 294.2648 Tm
(36 Several of the 1,200 or so rock-covered graves slightly to the eas\
t of tb ruins.)Tj
-5.126 -1.2 Td
(Aligned north-south, contrary to normal Jewish practice, the graves appe\
ar to be unique to the Qumran-)Tj
0.86 -1.2 Td
(type of community. A small number of graves has been opened, and the rem\
ains of men, women and )Tj
18.332 -1.2 Td
(children found)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 238.1364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 63.4444 223.7648 Tm
(37 A dozen or so Qumran-type graves - aligned north\227south - have b\
een discovered )Tj
-2.916 -1.2 Td
(some nine miles south of Qumran, at En el-Ghuweir. Clearly there was a s\
ettlement also on this site.)Tj
5.012 -1.2 Td
(The caves in the Wadi and cliffs behind may well have served as reposito\
ries )Tj
4.279 -1.2 Td
(for the same type of scrolls as were found near Qumran.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 167.6364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 119.5481 153.2648 Tm
(38 Ruins of a settlement at En el-Ghuweir near to the graves.)Tj
2.609 -1.2 Td
(The ruins have been dated to the Herodian period.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 124.1364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 89.9888 109.7648 Tm
(39 The pyramidal hill at Gamla in the Golan where the final citadel st\
ood.)Tj
1.155 -1.2 Td
(Here, on 10 November 67 AD, 4,000 zealots died fighting the Romans )Tj
1.721 -1.2 Td
(and another 5,000 killed themselves by jumping over the cliff.)Tj
-6.822 -1.2 Td
(The Dead Sea Scrolls provide an insight into the rationale which lay beh\
ind the mass suicides.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 53.6364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 147.0262 39.2648 Tm
(40 The ruins of Masada where, on 15 April 74 ad,)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(122 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
768 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 765.549 520 0.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 752.049 520 13.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 735.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 620.01 520 115.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 603.51 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 570.51 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 537.51 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 519.598 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 503.098 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 437.098 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 420.598 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 387.598 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 371.098 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 338.098 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.185 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.685 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.685 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 168.685 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
11.25 0 0 11.25 38.295 755.7648 Tm
(960 Zealots - men, women and children - killed themselves rather than su\
rrender to the Romans.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 740.1364 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Thus the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls may be thought of as 'Ess\
enes', but not in the )Tj
T*
(sense as defined and described by Josephus, Philo and Pliny. The account\
s of the classical )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(chroniclers prove to be altogether too circumscribed. They have also pre\
vented many modern )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scholars from making the necessary connections - perhaps, in some cases,\
because it was not )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(deemed desirable to do so. If the connections )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(are )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(made, a different and broader picture )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(emerges - a picture in which such terms as 'Essene' and 'the Qumran comm\
unity' will prove )Tj
T*
(to be interchangeable with others. Eisenman effectively summarises the s\
ituation:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( Unfortunately for the premises of modern scholarship, terms like: \
Ebionim, Nozrim, )Tj
T*
(Hassidim, )Tj
T*
( Zaddikim . . . turn out to be variations on the same theme. The in\
ability to relate to )Tj
T*
(changeable )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( metaphor . . . has been a distinct failure in criticism.)Tj
11 0 0 11 316.2812 527.7052 Tm
(24)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 507.6852 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( This, precisely, is what we are dealing with - changeable metaphor\
s, a variety of different )Tj
T*
(designations used to denote the same people or factions. Recognition of \
that point was urged )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(as early as 1969 by an acknowledged expert in the field, Professor Matth\
ew Black of St )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Andrews University, Scotland. The term 'Essene' was acceptable, Professo\
r Black wrote:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( provided we do not define Essenism too narrowly, for instance, by \
equating it exclusively )Tj
T*
(with the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Dead Sea group, but are prepared to understand the term as a gener\
al description of this )Tj
T*
( widespread movement of anti-Jerusalem, anti-Pharisaic non-conformi\
ty of the period. It )Tj
T*
(is from )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( such an 'Essene-type' of Judaism that Christianity is descended.)Tj
11 0 0 11 379.6687 328.2927 Tm
(25)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 308.2727 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(There is support for Professor Black's contention in the work of Epiphan\
ius, the early )Tj
T*
(Christian writer who spoke of the 'Ossenes'. Epiphanius states that the \
original 'Christians' in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Judaea, generally called 'Nazoreans' \(as in the Acts of the Apostles\),\
were known as )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Jessaeans'. These 'Christians', or 'Jessaeans', would have conformed pr\
ecisely to Professor )Tj
T*
(Black's phraseology - a 'widespread movement of anti-Jerusalem, anti-Pha\
risaic non-)Tj
T*
(conformity'. But there is an even more crucial connection.)Tj
T*
( Among the terms by which the Qumran community referred to themselv\
es was 'Keepers )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(of the Covenant', which appears in the original Hebrew as )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
('Nozrei ha-Brit\222. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(From this term )Tj
T*
(derives the word )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
('Nozrim\222 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(one of the earliest Hebrew designations for the sect subsequently )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(known as 'Christians'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 129.9138 145.3029 Tm
(26)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 140.9138 141.7829 Tm
( The modern Arabic word for Christians, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
('Nasrani', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(derives from the )Tj
-9.521 -1.2 Td
(same source. So, too, does the word 'Nazorean' or 'Nazarene', which, of \
course, was the name )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(by which the 'early Christians' referred to themselves in both the Gospe\
ls and the Acts of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Apostles. Contrary to the assumptions of later tradition, it has nothing\
whatever to do with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jesus' alleged upbringing in Nazareth, which, the evidence \(or lack of \
it\) suggests, did not )Tj
T*
(even exist at the time. Indeed, it seems to have been the very perplexit\
y of early )Tj
T*
(commentators encountering the unfamiliar term 'Nazorean' that led them t\
o conclude Jesus' )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(123 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
769 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.423 520 132.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 515.598 520 101.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 499.098 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 482.598 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 466.098 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 449.598 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.098 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 403.098 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 373.098 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 356.598 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 340.098 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 197.598 520 142.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 82.098 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 46.098 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(family came from Nazareth, which by then had appeared on the map.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( To sum up, then, the 'Essenes' who figure in classical texts, the \
'Ossenes' mentioned by )Tj
T*
(Epiphanius, and the 'Osi'm', the Qumran community, are one and the same.\
So, too, are the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
('Jessaeans', as Epiphanius calls the 'early Christians'. So, too, are th\
e )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Nozrei ha-Brit', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
('Nozrim', the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Nasrani' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and the 'Nazoreans'. On the basis of this etymology, it becomes clear )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that we are indeed dealing with Professor Black's 'widespread movement',\
characterised, as )Tj
T*
(Eisenman says, by shifting metaphor, a variety of slightly different des\
ignations used for the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(same people, shifting with time, translation and transliteration, just a\
s 'Caesar' evolves into )Tj
T*
('Kaiser' and 'Tsar'.)Tj
T*
( It would thus seem that the Qumran community was equivalent to the\
'early Church' )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(based in Jerusalem - the 'Nazoreans' who followed James, 'the Lord's bro\
ther'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 438.2162 591.1177 Tm
(27)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 449.2162 587.5977 Tm
( Indeed, the )Tj
-31.943 -1.2 Td
('Habakkuk Commentary' states explicitly that Qumran's ruling body, the '\
Council of the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Community', was actually located at the time in Jerusalem.)Tj
11 0 0 11 334.0462 556.7052 Tm
(28)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 345.0462 553.1852 Tm
( And in Acts 9:2, the members )Tj
-24.367 -1.2 Td
(of the 'early Church' are specifically referred to as 'followers of the \
Way' - a phrase identical )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(with Qumran usage.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 257.5 411.3554 Tm
(12)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
-4.472 -1.201 Td
(The Acts of the Apostles)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 361.1852 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 320.5296 Tm
(A)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 26.245 320.5296 Tm
(part from the Gospels themselves, the most important book of the New Tes\
tament is the )Tj
-1.181 -1.407 Td
(Acts of the Apostles. For the historian, in fact, Acts may be of even gr\
eater consequence. )Tj
T*
(Like all historical documents issuing from a partisan source, it must, o\
f course, be handled )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(sceptically and with caution. One must also be cognisant of whom the tex\
t was written for, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and whom it might have served, as well as what end. But it is Acts, much\
more than the )Tj
T*
(Gospels, which has hitherto constituted the apparently definitive accoun\
t of the first years of )Tj
T*
('early Christianity'. Certainly Acts would appear to contain much basic \
information not )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(readily to be found elsewhere. To that extent alone, it is a seminal tex\
t.)Tj
T*
( The Gospels, it is generally acknowledged, are unreliable as histo\
rical documents. )Tj
T*
(Mark's, the first of them, was composed no earlier than the revolt of ad\
66, and probably )Tj
T*
(somewhat later. All four Gospels seek to evoke a period long predating t\
heir own )Tj
T*
(composition - perhaps by as much as sixty or seventy years. They skim cu\
rsorily over the )Tj
T*
(historical backdrop, focusing essentially on the heavily mythologised fi\
gure of Jesus and on )Tj
T*
(his teachings. They are ultimately poetic and devotional texts, and do n\
ot even purport to be )Tj
T*
(chronicles.)Tj
T*
( Acts is a work of a very different order. It cannot, of course, be\
taken as absolutely )Tj
T*
(historical. It is, for one thing, heavily biased. Luke, the author of th\
e text, was clearly )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(124 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
770 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 617.5 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 502 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.5 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 205 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 73 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 37 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(drawing on a number of different sources, editing and reworking material\
to suit his own )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(purposes. There has been little attempt to unify either doctrinal statem\
ents or literary style. )Tj
T*
(Even Church historians admit that the chronology is confused, the author\
having had no )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(direct experience of many of the events he describes and being obliged t\
o impose his own )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(order upon them. Thus certain separate events are fused into a single oc\
currence, while single )Tj
T*
(occurrences are made to appear to be separate events. Such problems are \
particularly acute in )Tj
T*
(those portions of the text pertaining to events that predate the advent \
of Paul. Further, it )Tj
T*
(would appear that Acts, like the Gospels, was compiled selectively, and \
was extensively )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(tampered with by later)Tj
T*
(editors.)Tj
T*
( Nevertheless, Acts, unlike the Gospels, aspires to be a form of ch\
ronicle over a )Tj
T*
(continuous and extended period of time. Unlike the Gospels, it constitut\
es an attempt to )Tj
T*
(preserve an historical record, and, at least in certain passages, to hav\
e been written by )Tj
T*
(someone with a first-, or second-, hand experience of the events it desc\
ribes. Although there )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(is bias, the bias is a highly personal one; and this, to some extent, en\
ables the modern )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(commentator to read between)Tj
T*
(the lines.)Tj
T*
( The narrative recounted in Acts begins shortly after the Crucifixi\
on - generally dated at )Tj
T*
(ad 30 but possibly as late as ad 36 - and ends somewhere between ad 64 a\
nd 67. Most )Tj
T*
(scholars believe the narrative itself was composed, or transcribed, some\
time between ad 70 )Tj
T*
(and 95. Roughly speaking, then, Acts is contemporary with some, if not a\
ll, of the Gospels. It )Tj
T*
(may predate all four. It almost certainly predates the so-called Gospel \
of John, at least in the )Tj
T*
(form that that text has come down to us.)Tj
T*
(The author of Acts is a well-educated Greek who identifies himself as Lu\
ke. Whether he is )Tj
T*
(the same as 'Luke the beloved physician', mentioned as Paul's close frie\
nd in Colossians 4:14, )Tj
T*
(cannot be definitively established, though most New Testament scholars a\
re prepared to )Tj
T*
(accept that he is. Modern scholars also concur that he would seem, quite\
clearly, to be )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(identical with the author of Luke's Gospel. Indeed, Acts is sometiiries \
regarded as the 'second )Tj
T*
(half of Luke's Gospel. Both are addressed to an unknown recipient named \
'Theophilus'. )Tj
T*
(Because both were written in Greek, many words and names have been trans\
lated into that )Tj
T*
(language, and have probably, in a number of instances, altered in nuance\
, even in meaning, )Tj
T*
(from their Hebrew or Aramaic originals. In any case, both Acts and Luke'\
s Gospel were )Tj
T*
(written specifically for a Greek audience - a very different audience fr\
om that addressed by )Tj
T*
(the Qumran scrolls.)Tj
T*
( Although focusing primarily on Paul, who monopolises the latter pa\
rt of its narrative, )Tj
T*
(Acts also tells the story of Paul's relations with the community in Jeru\
salem composed of )Tj
T*
(Jesus' immediate disciples under the leadership of James, 'the Lord's br\
other' - the enclave or )Tj
T*
(faction who only later came to be called the first Christians and are no\
w regarded as the early )Tj
T*
(or original Church. In recounting Paul's association with this community\
, however, Acts )Tj
T*
(offers only Paul's point of view. Acts is essentially a document of Paul\
ine - or what is now )Tj
T*
(deemed to be 'normative' - Christianity. Paul, in other words, is always\
the 'hero'; whoever )Tj
T*
(opposes him, whether it be the authorities or even James, is automatical\
ly cast as villain.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( Acts opens shortly after Jesus - referred to as 'the Nazorene' \(i\
n Greek )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Nazoraion'\) - )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(has )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(disappeared from the scene. The narrative then proceeds to describe the \
organisation and )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(125 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
771 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 634 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 459.096 520 174.904 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 310.596 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 109.733 520 200.864 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 73.733 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(development of the community or 'early Church' in Jerusalem and its incr\
easing friction with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the authorities. The community is vividly evoked in Acts 2:44\2276: 'The\
faithful all lived )Tj
T*
(together and owned everything in common; they sold their goods and posse\
ssions and shared )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(out the proceeds among themselves according to what each one needed. The\
y went as a body )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to the Temple every day but met in their houses for the breaking of brea\
d . . .' \(It is worth )Tj
T*
(noting in passing this adherence to the Temple. Jesus and his immediate \
followers are usually )Tj
T*
(portrayed as hostile to the Temple, where, according to the Gospels, Jes\
us upset the tables of )Tj
T*
(the moneychangers and incurred the passionate displeasure of the priesth\
ood.\))Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Acts 6:8 introduces the figure known as Stephen, the first officia\
l 'Christian martyr', who )Tj
T*
(is arrested and sentenced to death by stoning. In his own defence, Steph\
en alludes to the )Tj
T*
(murder of those who prophesied the advent of the 'Righteous One', or the\
'Just One'. This )Tj
T*
(terminology is specifically and uniquely Qumranic in character. The 'Rig\
hteous One' occurs )Tj
0 -1.815 TD
(repeatedly in the Dead Sea Scrolls as )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Zaddik' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11 0 0 11 264.87 554.675 Tm
(1)Tj
0.5 0.32 Td
( )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 275.87 547.635 Tm
(The 'Teacher of Righteousness' in the scrolls, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-19.336 -1.203 Td
('Moreh ha-Zedek\222 )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(derives from the same root. And when the historian Josephus speaks of a \
)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(teacher, apparently named 'Sadduc' or 'Zadok', as the leader of a messia\
nic and anti-Roman )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Judaic following, this too would seem to be a faulty Greek rendering of \
the 'Righteous One'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 517.1413 500.2039 Tm
(2 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 480.1839 Tm
(As portrayed in Acts, then, Stephen uses nomenclature unique and specifi\
cally characteristic )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of Qumran.)Tj
T*
( Nor is this the only Qumranic concern to figure in Stephen's speec\
h. In his defence, he )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(names his persecutors \(Acts 7:53\) - 'You who had the Law brought to yo\
u by angels are the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(very ones who have not kept it.' As Acts portrays it, Stephen is obvious\
ly intent on adherence )Tj
T*
(to the Law. Again, there is a conflict here with orthodox and accepted t\
raditions. According )Tj
T*
(to later Christian tradition, it was the Jews of the time who made an au\
stere and puritanical )Tj
T*
(fetish of the Law. The 'early Christians' are depicted, at least from th\
e standpoint of that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(stringency, as 'mavericks' or 'renegades', advocating a new freedom and \
flexibility, defying )Tj
T*
(custom and convention. Yet it is Stephen, the first 'Christian martyr', \
who emerges as an )Tj
T*
(advocate of the Law, while his persecutors are accused of dereliction.)Tj
T*
( It makes no sense for Stephen, a self-proclaimed adherent of the L\
aw, to be murdered by )Tj
T*
(fellow Jews extolling the same Law. But what if those fellow Jews were a\
cting on behalf of a )Tj
T*
(priesthood which had come to an accommodation with the Roman authorities\
- were, in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(effect, collaborators who, like many of the French under the German occu\
pation, for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(example, simply wanted 'a quiet life' and feared an agitator or resistan\
ce fighter in their midst )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(might lead to reprisals?)Tj
11 0 0 11 138.7 218.2914 Tm
(3 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 146.95 214.7714 Tm
(The 'early Church' of which Stephen is a member constantly stresses )Tj
-9.96 -1.2 Td
(its own orthodoxy, its zealous adherence to the Law. Its persecutors are\
those who contrive to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(remain in good odour with Rome and, in so doing, lapse from the Law, or,\
in Qumran terms, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(transgress the Law, betray the Law.)Tj
11 0 0 11 205.8825 167.3789 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 211.3825 163.8589 Tm
( In this context, Stephen's denunciation of them makes )Tj
-14.646 -1.203 Td
(sense, as does their murder of him. And as we shall see, James - James '\
the Just', the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Zaddik' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(or 'Righteous One', the 'brother of the Lord' who best exemplifies rigor\
ous adherence to the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Law - will subsequently, according to later tradition, suffer precisely \
the same fate as Stephen.)Tj
T*
( According to Acts, it is at the death of Stephen that Paul \226 th\
en called Saul of Tarsus - )Tj
T*
(makes his debut. He is said to have stood watch over the discarded cloth\
es of Stephen's )Tj
T*
(murderers, though he may well have taken a more active role. In Acts 8:1\
, we are told that )Tj
T*
(Saul 'entirely approved of the killing' of Stephen. And later, in Acts 9\
:21, Saul is accused of )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(126 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
772 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 683.5 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.587 520 83.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.549 520 165.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.549 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 236.549 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 218.636 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 70.136 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 34.136 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(engineering precisely the kind of attack on the 'early Church' which cul\
minated in Stephen's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(death. Certainly Saul, at this stage of his life, is fervent, even fanat\
ic, in his enmity towards )Tj
T*
(the 'early Church'. According to Acts 8:3, he 'worked for the total dest\
ruction of the Church: )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(he went from house to house arresting both men and women and sending the\
m to prison'. At )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the time, of course, he is acting as a minion of the pro-Roman priesthoo\
d.)Tj
T*
( Acts 9 tells us of Saul's conversion. Shortly after Stephen's deat\
h, he embarks for )Tj
T*
(Damascus to ferret out members of the 'early Church' there. He is accomp\
anied by his hit-)Tj
T*
(squad and bears arrest warrants from his master, the high priest. As we \
have noted, this )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(expedition is likely to have been not to Syria, but to the Damascus that\
figures in the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('Damascus Document'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 135.62 607.695 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 587.6364 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(En route )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(to his destination, Saul undergoes some sort of traumatic experience, wh\
ich )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(commentators have interpreted as anything from sunstroke, to an epilepti\
c seizure, to a )Tj
T*
(mystical revelation \(Acts 9:1-19; 22:6-16\). A 'light from heaven' purp\
ortedly knocks him )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(from his horse and 'a voice', issuing from no perceptible source, demand\
s of him: 'Saul, Saul, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(why are you persecuting me?' Saul asks the voice to identify itself. 'I \
am Jesus, the Nazorene,' )Tj
T*
(the voice replies, 'and you are persecuting me.' The voice further instr\
ucts him to proceed to )Tj
T*
(Damascus, where he will learn what he must subsequently do. When this vi\
sitation passes )Tj
T*
(and Saul regains a semblance of his former consciousness, he finds he ha\
s been stricken )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(temporarily blind. In Damascus, his sight will be restored by a member o\
f the 'early Church' )Tj
T*
(and he will allow himself to be baptised.)Tj
T*
( A modern psychologist would find nothing particularly unusual in S\
aul's adventure. It )Tj
T*
(may indeed have been produced by sunstroke or an epileptic seizure. It c\
ould equally well be )Tj
T*
(ascribed to hallucination, hysterical or psychotic reaction or perhaps n\
othing more than the )Tj
T*
(guilty conscience of a susceptible man with blood on his hands.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Saul, however, interprets it as a true manifestation of Jesus, who\
m he never knew )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(personally; and from this his conversion ensues. He abandons his former \
name in favour of )Tj
T*
('Paul'. And he will subsequently be as fervent in promulgating the teach\
ings of the 'early )Tj
T*
(Church' as he has hitherto been in extirpating them. He joins their comm\
unity, becomes one )Tj
T*
(of their apprentices or disciples. According to his letter to the Galati\
ans \(Gal. 1:17-18\), he )Tj
T*
(remains under their tutelage for three years, spending much of that time\
in Damascus. )Tj
T*
(According to the Dead Sea Scrolls, the probation and training period for\
a newcomer to the )Tj
T*
(Qumran community was also three)Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(years.)Tj
11 0 0 11 42.45 226.7439 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 206.7239 Tm
( After his three-year apprenticeship, Paul returns to Jerusalem to \
join the leaders of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('community' there. Not surprisingly, most of them are suspicious of him,\
not being wholly )Tj
T*
(convinced by his conversion. In Galatians 1:18-20, he speaks of seeing o\
nly James and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Cephas. Everyone else, including the apostles, seems to have avoided him\
. He is obliged )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(repeatedly to prove himself, and only then does he find some allies and \
begin to preach. )Tj
T*
(Arguments ensue, however, and, according to Acts 9:29, certain members o\
f the Jerusalem )Tj
T*
(community threaten him. As a means of defusing a potentially ugly situat\
ion, his allies pack )Tj
T*
(him off to Tarsus, the town \(now in Turkey\) where he was born. He is, \
in effect, being sent )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(home, to spread the message there.)Tj
T*
( It is important to understand that this was tantamount to exile. T\
he community in )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem, like that in Qumran, was preoccupied almost entirely with eve\
nts in Palestine. The )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(127 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
773 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 650.5 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 568 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.587 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.087 520 313.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 85.087 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(wider world, such as Rome, was relevant only to the extent that it impin\
ged or encroached on )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(their more localised reality. To send Paul off to Tarsus, therefore, mig\
ht be compared to a )Tj
T*
(Provisional IRA godfather sending a new, ill-disciplined and overly ener\
getic recruit to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(muster support among the 'Shining Path' guerrillas of Peru. If, by impro\
bable fluke, he )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(somehow elicits men, money, materiel or anything else of value, well and\
good. If he gets )Tj
T*
(himself disembowelled instead, he will not be unduly missed, having been\
more nuisance )Tj
T*
(than asset anyway. )Tj
T*
( Thus arises the first of Paul's three \(according to Acts\) sortie\
s abroad. Among other )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(places, it takes him to Antioch, and, as we learn from Acts 11:26, 'It w\
as at Antioch that the )Tj
T*
(disciples were first called "Christians".' Commentators date Paul's jour\
ney to Antioch at )Tj
T*
(approximately ad 43. By that time, a community of the 'early Church' was\
already established )Tj
T*
(there, which reported back to the sect's leadership in Jerusalem under J\
ames.)Tj
T*
( Some five or more years later, Paul is teaching in Antioch when a \
dispute arises over the )Tj
T*
(content of his missionary work. As Acts 15 explains, certain representat\
ives of the leadership )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in Jerusalem arrive in Antioch, perhaps, Eisenman suggests, with the spe\
cific purpose of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(checking on Paul's activities.)Tj
11 0 0 11 169.06 508.695 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 174.56 505.175 Tm
( They stress the importance of strict adherence to the Law and )Tj
-11.968 -1.2 Td
(accuse Paul of laxity. He and his companion, Barnabas, are summarily ord\
ered back to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jerusalem for personal consultation with the leadership. From this point\
on, a schism will )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(open and widen between Paul and James; and the author of Acts, so far as\
the dispute is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(concerned, becomes Paul's apologist.)Tj
T*
( In all the vicissitudes that follow, it must be emphasised that Pa\
ul is, in effect, the first )Tj
T*
('Christian' heretic, and that his teachings - which become the foundatio\
n of later Christianity - )Tj
T*
(are a flagrant deviation from the 'original' or 'pure' form extolled by \
the leadership. Whether )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(James, 'the Lord's brother', was literally Jesus' blood kin or not \(and\
everything suggests he )Tj
T*
(was\), it is clear that he knew Jesus, or the figure subsequently rememb\
ered as Jesus, )Tj
T*
(personally. So did most of the other members of the community, or 'early\
Church', in )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem - including, of course, Peter. When they spoke, they did so wi\
th first-hand )Tj
T*
(authority. Paul had never had such personal acquaintance with the figure\
he'd begun to regard )Tj
T*
(as his 'Saviour'. He had only his quasi-mystical experience in the deser\
t and the sound of a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(disembodied voice. For him to arrogate authority to himself on this basi\
s is, to say the least, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(presumptuous. It also leads him to distort Jesus' teachings beyond all r\
ecognition - to )Tj
T*
(formulate, in fact, his own highly individual and idiosyncratic theology\
, and then to )Tj
T*
(legitimise it by spuriously ascribing it to Jesus. For Jesus, adhering r\
igorously to Judaic Law, )Tj
T*
(it would have been the most extreme blasphemy to advocate worship of any\
mortal figure, )Tj
T*
(including himself. He makes this clear in the Gospels, urging his discip\
les, followers and )Tj
T*
(listeners to acknowledge only God. In John 10:33-5, for example, Jesus i\
s accused of the )Tj
T*
(blasphemy of claiming to be God. He replies, citing Psalm 82, 'Is it not\
written in your Law, I )Tj
T*
([meaning God in the psalm] said, you are Gods? So the Law uses the word \
gods of those to )Tj
T*
(whom the word of God was addressed.')Tj
T*
( Paul, in effect, shunts God aside and establishes, for the first t\
ime, worship of Jesus -)Tj
T*
(Jesus as a kind of equivalent of Adonis, of Tammuz, of Attis, or of any \
one of the other dying )Tj
T*
(and reviving gods who populated the Middle East at the time. In order to\
compete with these )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(divine rivals, Jesus had to match them point for point, miracle for mira\
cle. It is at this stage )Tj
T*
(that many of the miraculous elements become associated with Jesus' biogr\
aphy, including, in )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(128 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
774 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.049 520 149.951 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.049 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 169.136 520 281.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 133.136 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(all probability, his supposed birth of a virgin and his resurrection fro\
m the dead. They are )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(essentially Pauline inventions, often wildly at odds with the 'pure' doc\
trine promulgated by )Tj
T*
(James and the rest of the community in Jerusalem. It is hardly surprisin\
g, therefore, that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(James and his entourage should be disturbed by what Paul is doing.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Yet Paul knows full well what he is doing. He understands, with a \
surprisingly modern )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(sophistication, the techniques of religious propaganda;)Tj
11 0 0 11 310.1763 673.695 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 315.6763 670.175 Tm
( he understands what is necessary to )Tj
-22.231 -1.2 Td
(turn a man into a god, and he goes about it more astutely than the Roman\
s did with their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(emperors. As he himself pointedly acknowledges, he does not pretend to b\
e purveying the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(historical Jesus, the individual whom James and Peter and Simeon knew pe\
rsonally. On the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(contrary, he acknowledges, in 2 Corinthians 11:3-4, that the community i\
n Jerusalem are )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(promulgating )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('another Jesus'. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Their representatives, he says, call themselves 'servants of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(righteousness' - a characteristic Qumranic usage. They are now, to all i\
ntents and purposes, )Tj
T*
(Paul's adversaries.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In accordance with instructions issued to him, Paul returns from A\
ntioch to Jerusalem - )Tj
T*
(around ad 48-9, it is generally believed - and meets with the community'\
s leadership. Not )Tj
T*
(surprisingly, another dispute ensues. If Acts is to be believed, James, \
for the sake of peace, )Tj
T*
(agrees to compromise, thereby making it easier for 'pagans' to join the \
congregation. )Tj
T*
(Somewhat improbably, he consents to relax certain aspects of the Law, wh\
ile remaining )Tj
T*
(adamant on others.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Paul pays lip service to the leadership. He still, at this point, \
needs their endorsement - )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(not to legitimise his teachings, but to legitimise, and ensure the survi\
val of, the communities )Tj
T*
(he has founded abroad. He is already, however, bent on going his own way\
. He embarks on )Tj
T*
(another mission of travel and preaching, punctuated \(Acts 18:21\) by an\
other visit to )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem. Most of his letters date from this period, between ad 50 and \
58. It is clear from his )Tj
T*
(letters that he has, by that time, become almost completely estranged fr\
om the leadership in )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Jerusalem and from their adherence to the Law.)Tj
11 0 0 11 271.9375 342.2439 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 277.4375 338.7239 Tm
( In his missive to the Galatians )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(c. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ad 57\), he )Tj
-19.45 -1.2 Td
(alludes scathingly to 'these people who are acknowledged leaders - not t\
hat their importance )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(matters to me' \(Gal. 2:6\). His theological position has also deviated \
irreparably from those )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(who adhere rigorously to the Law. In the same letter to the Galatians \(\
2:16\), he states that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('faith in Christ rather than fidelity to the Law is what justifies us, a\
nd . . . no one can be )Tj
T*
(justified by keeping the Law'. Writing to the Philippians \(3:9\), he st\
ates: 'I am no longer )Tj
T*
(trying for perfection by my own efforts, the perfection that comes from \
the Law . . .' These )Tj
T*
(are the provocative and challenging statements of a self-proclaimed rene\
gade. 'Christianity', )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(as it will subsequently evolve from Paul, has by now severed virtually a\
ll connection with its )Tj
T*
(roots, and can no longer be said to have anything to do with Jesus, only\
with Paul's image of )Tj
T*
(Jesus.)Tj
T*
( By ad 58, Paul is again back in Jerusalem - despite pleas from his\
supporters who, )Tj
T*
(obviously fearing trouble with the hierarchy, have begged him not to go.\
Again, he meets )Tj
T*
(with James and the leadership of the Jerusalem community. Employing the \
now familiar )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumranic formulation, they express the worry they share with other 'zeal\
ots of the Law' - that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Paul, in his preaching to Jews living abroad, is encouraging them to for\
sake the Law of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Moses.)Tj
11 0 0 11 49.3387 76.8314 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 60.3387 73.3114 Tm
( It is, of course, a justified accusation, as Paul has made clear in his\
letters. Acts )Tj
-3.661 -1.2 Td
(does not record his response to it. The impression conveyed is that he l\
ies, perjures himself )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and denies the charges against him. When asked to purify himself for sev\
en days - thereby )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(129 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
775 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 732.724 520 33.276 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.724 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.224 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.724 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 153.811 520 149.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 54.811 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 18.811 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.8114 Tm
(demonstrating the unjustness of the allegations and his continued adhere\
nce to the Law - he )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(readily consents to do so.)Tj
T*
( A few days later, however, he again runs foul of those 'zealous fo\
r the Law', who are )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(rather less temperate than James. On being seen at the Temple, he is att\
acked by a crowd of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the pious. 'This', they claim in their anger, 'is the man who preaches t\
o everyone )Tj
T*
(everywhere . . . against the Law' \(Acts 21:28ff\). A riot ensues, and P\
aul is dragged out of the )Tj
T*
(Temple, his life in danger. In the nick of time, he is rescued by a Roma\
n officer who, having )Tj
T*
(been told of the disturbance, appears with an entourage of soldiers. Pau\
l is arrested and put in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(chains - on the initial assumption, apparently, that he is a leader of t\
he Sicarii, the Zealot )Tj
T*
(terrorist cadre.)Tj
T*
( At this point, the narrative becomes increasingly confused, and on\
e can only suspect that )Tj
T*
(parts of it have been altered or expurgated. According to the existing t\
ext, Paul, before the )Tj
T*
(Romans can trundle him off, protests that he is a Jew of Tarsus and asks\
permission to )Tj
T*
(address the crowd who had just been trying to lynch him. Weirdly enough,\
the Romans allow )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(him to do so. Paul then expatiates on his Pharisaic training under Gamal\
iel \(a famous teacher )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the time\), on his initial hostility towards the 'early Church', on h\
is role in the death of )Tj
T*
(Stephen, on his subsequent conversion. All of this - or perhaps only a p\
art of it, though one )Tj
T*
(cannot be certain which part - provokes the crowd to new ire. 'Rid the e\
arth of this man!' they )Tj
T*
(cry. 'He is not fit to live!' \(Acts 22:22\))Tj
T*
( Ignoring these appeals, the Romans carry Paul off to 'the fortress\
' - presumably the )Tj
T*
(Antonia fortress, the Roman military and administrative headquarters. He\
re, they intend to )Tj
T*
(interrogate him under torture. Interrogate him for what? To determine wh\
y he provokes such )Tj
T*
(hostility, according to Acts. Yet Paul has already made his position cle\
ar in public - unless )Tj
T*
(there are elements of his speech that, in a fashion not made clear by th\
e text, the Romans )Tj
T*
(deemed dangerous or subversive. In any case, torture, by Roman law, coul\
d not be exercised )Tj
T*
(on any individual possessing full and official Roman citizenship - which\
Paul, having been )Tj
T*
(born of a wealthy family in Tarsus, conveniently does. Invoking this imm\
unity, he escapes )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(torture, but remains incarcerated.)Tj
T*
( In the meantime, a group of angry Jews, forty or more in number, m\
eet in secret. They )Tj
T*
(vow not to eat or drink until they have brought about Paul's death. The \
sheer intensity and )Tj
T*
(ferocity of this antipathy is worth noting. One does not expect such ani\
mosity - not to say )Tj
T*
(such a preparedness for violence - from 'ordinary' Pharisees and Sadduce\
es. Those who )Tj
T*
(display it are obviously 'zealous for the Law'. But the only such passio\
nate adherents of the )Tj
T*
(Law in Palestine at the time were those whose sacred texts came subseque\
ntly to light at )Tj
T*
(Qumran. Thus, for example, Eisenman calls attention to a pivotal passage\
in the 'Damascus )Tj
T*
(Document' which declares of a man that 'if he transgresses after swearin\
g to return to the Law )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(of Moses with a whole heart and soul, then retribution shall be exacted \
from him'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 460.0513 161.9189 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 141.8988 Tm
( How can the violent action contemplated against Paul be reconciled\
with the later popular )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(image, put forward by the consensus, of placid, ascetic, quietist Essene\
s? The clandestine )Tj
T*
(conclave, the fervent vow to eradicate Paul - these are more characteris\
tic of the militant )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Zealots and their special assassination units, the dreaded Sicarii. Here\
again there is an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(insistent suggestion that the Zealots on the one hand, and the 'zealous \
for the Law' at Qumran )Tj
T*
(on the other, were one and the same.)Tj
T*
( Whoever they are, the would-be assassins, according to Acts, are t\
hwarted by the sudden )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(130 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
776 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 632.549 520 133.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.549 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 187.049 520 247.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 170.549 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.049 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 118.049 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(and opportune appearance of Paul's hitherto unmentioned nephew, who some\
how learns of )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(their plot. This relative, of whom we know nothing more, informs both Pa\
ul )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(and )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the Romans. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(That night, Paul is removed, for his own safety, from Jerusalem. He is r\
emoved with an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(escort of 470 troops - 200 infantry under the command of two centurions,\
200 spearmen and )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(70 cavalry!)Tj
11 0 0 11 72.2325 690.1564 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 83.2325 686.6364 Tm
( He is taken to Caesarea, the Roman capital of Judaea, where he appears \
before )Tj
-5.326 -1.2 Td
(the governor and Rome's puppet king, Agrippa. As a Roman citizen, howeve\
r, Paul has a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(right to have his case heard in Rome, and he invokes this right. As a re\
sult, he is sent to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Rome, ostensibly for trial. There is no indication of what he will be tr\
ied for.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( After recounting his adventures on the journey - including a shipw\
reck - Acts ends. Or, )Tj
T*
(rather, it breaks off, as if the author were interrupted in his work, or\
as if someone had )Tj
T*
(removed the original ending and inserted a perfunctory finale instead. T\
here are, of course, )Tj
T*
(numerous later traditions - that Paul was imprisoned, that he obtained a\
personal audience )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(with the emperor, that he was freed and went to Spain, that Nero ordered\
his execution, that )Tj
T*
(he encountered Peter in Rome \(or in prison in Rome\), that he and Peter\
were executed )Tj
T*
(together. But neither in Acts nor in any other reliable document is ther\
e a basis for any of )Tj
T*
(these stories. Perhaps the original ending of Acts was indeed excised or\
altered. Perhaps )Tj
T*
(Luke, the author, simply did not know 'what happened next' and, not bein\
g concerned with )Tj
T*
(aesthetic symmetry, simply allowed himself to conclude lamely. Or perhap\
s, as Eisenman has )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(suggested - and this possibility will be considered later - Luke did kno\
w, but deliberately cut )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(short his narrative \(or was cut short by later editors\) in order to co\
nceal his knowledge.)Tj
T*
( The last sections of Acts - from the riot inspired in the Temple o\
n - are muddled, )Tj
T*
(confused and riddled with unanswered questions. Elsewhere, however, Acts\
is ostensibly )Tj
T*
(simple enough. On one level, there is the narrative of Paul's conversion\
and subsequent )Tj
T*
(adventures. But behind this account looms a chronicle of increasing fric\
tion between two )Tj
T*
(factions within the original community in Jerusalem, the 'early Church'.\
One of these factions )Tj
T*
(consists of 'hardliners', who echo the teachings of Qumranic texts and i\
nsist on rigorous )Tj
T*
(observance of the Law. The other, exemplified by Paul and his immediate \
supporters, want to )Tj
T*
(relax the Law and, by making it easier for people to join the congregati\
on, to increase the )Tj
T*
(number of new recruits. The 'hardliners' are less concerned with numbers\
than with doctrinal )Tj
T*
(purity, and seem to have only a cursory interest in events or developmen\
ts outside Palestine; )Tj
T*
(nor do they display any desire for an accommodation with Rome. Paul, on \
the other hand, is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(prepared to dispense with doctrinal purity. His primary objective is to \
disseminate his )Tj
T*
(message as widely as possible and to assemble the largest possible body \
of adherents. In )Tj
T*
(order to attain this objective, he goes out of his way to avoid antagoni\
sing the authorities and )Tj
T*
(is perfectly willing to come to an accommodation with Rome, even to curr\
y favour.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(The 'early Church', then, as it appears in Acts, is rent by incipient sc\
hism, the instigator of )Tj
T*
(which is Paul. Paul's chief adversary is the enigmatic figure of James, \
'the Lord's brother'. It )Tj
T*
(is clear that James is the acknowledged leader of the community in Jerus\
alem that becomes )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(known to later tradition as the 'early Church'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 257.83 94.7439 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 268.83 91.2239 Tm
( For the most part, James comes across as a )Tj
-18.824 -1.2 Td
('hardliner', though he does - if Acts is to be believed - display a will\
ingness to compromise on )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(certain points. All the evidence suggests, however, that even this modes\
t flexibility reflects )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(some licence on the part of the author of Acts. James could not, obvious\
ly, have been excised )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(131 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
777 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.5 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 403 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 370 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 337 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 304 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 274 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 244 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 227.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 211 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 52 520 159 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 16 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(from the narrative - his role, presumably, would have been too well-know\
n. In consequence, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(he could only be played down somewhat, and portrayed as a conciliatory f\
igure - a figure )Tj
T*
(occupying a position somewhere between Paul and the extreme 'hardliners'\
.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In any case, the 'sub-text' of Acts reduces itself to a clash betw\
een two powerful )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(personalities, James and Paul. Eisenman has demonstrated that James emer\
ges as the )Tj
T*
(custodian of the original body of teachings, the exponent of doctrinal p\
urity and rigorous )Tj
T*
(adherence to the Law. The last thing he would have had in mind was found\
ing a 'new )Tj
T*
(religion'. Paul is doing precisely that. Paul's Jesus is a full-fledged \
god, whose biography, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(miracle for miracle, comes to match those of the rival deities with whom\
he is competing for )Tj
T*
(devotees - one sells gods, after all, on the same marketing principles t\
hat obtain for soap or )Tj
T*
(pet food. By James's standards - indeed, by the standards of any devout \
Jew - this, of course, )Tj
T*
(is blasphemy and apostasy. Given the passions roused by such issues, the\
rift between James )Tj
T*
(and Paul would hardly have been confined, as Acts suggests it was, to th\
e level of civilised )Tj
T*
(debate. It would have generated the kind of murderous hostility that sur\
faces at the end of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(narrative.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In the conflict between James and Paul, the emergence and evolutio\
n of what we call )Tj
T*
(Christianity stood at a crossroads. Had the mainstream of its developmen\
t conformed to )Tj
T*
(James's teachings, there would have been no Christianity at all, only a \
particular species of )Tj
T*
(Judaism which might or might not have emerged as dominant. As things tra\
nspired, however, )Tj
T*
(the mainstream of the new movement gradually coalesced, during the next \
three centuries, )Tj
T*
(around Paul and his teachings. Thus, to the undoubted posthumous horror \
of James and his )Tj
T*
(associates, an entirely new religion was indeed born)Tj
T*
(- a religion which came to have less and less to do with its supposed fo\
under.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 257.5 282.2577 Tm
(13)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-4.223 -1.201 Td
(James 'The Righteous')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 232.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 191.4319 Tm
(I)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 18.7525 191.4319 Tm
(f James played so important a role in the events of the time, why do we \
know so little about )Tj
-0.637 -1.407 Td
(him? Why has he been relegated to the status of a shadowy figure in the \
background? Those )Tj
T*
(questions can be answered simply enough. Eisenman stresses that James, w\
hether he was )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(literally Jesus' brother or not, had known Jesus personally in a way tha\
t Paul never did. In his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(teachings, he was certainly closer to 'the source' than Paul ever was. A\
nd his objectives and )Tj
T*
(preoccupations were often at variance with Paul's - were sometimes, inde\
ed, diametrically )Tj
T*
(opposed. For Paul, then, James would have been a constant irritant. With\
the triumph of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Pauline Christianity, therefore, James's significance, if it couldn't be\
obliterated completely, )Tj
T*
(had, at the very least, to be diminished.)Tj
T*
( Unlike a number of personalities in the New Testament, James does \
seem to have been an )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(132 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
778 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 699.5 520 66.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 497.262 520 202.238 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 297.85 520 199.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 281.35 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 248.35 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 215.35 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 197.437 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 180.937 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 113.525 520 67.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 77.525 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.5875 Tm
(historical personage, and, moreover, one who played a more prominent rol\
e in the affairs of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(his time than is generally recognised. There is, in fact, a reasonably c\
opious body of literature )Tj
T*
(pertaining to James, even though most of it lies outside the canonical c\
ompilation of the New )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Testament.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In the New Testament itself, James is mentioned in the Gospels as \
one of Jesus' brothers, )Tj
T*
(though the context is generally vague or confusing and has obviously bee\
n tampered with. In )Tj
T*
(Acts, as we have discussed, he assumes rather more prominence, though it\
is not until the )Tj
T*
(second part of Acts that he emerges in any kind of perspective. Then, wi\
th Paul's letter to the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Galatians, he is clearly identified as the leader of the 'early Church',\
who resides in Jerusalem )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(and is attended by a council of elders.)Tj
11 0 0 11 217.735 607.195 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 223.235 603.675 Tm
( Apart from those that impinge on Paul, however, one )Tj
-15.508 -1.2 Td
(learns little of his activities, and even less about his personality and\
biography. Neither is the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Letter of James in the New Testament of much value in this respect. The \
letter may indeed )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(derive from a text by James, and Eisenman has drawn attention to its Qum\
ranic style, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(language and imagery.)Tj
11 0 0 11 134.8638 539.7825 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 140.3638 536.2625 Tm
( It contains \(James 5:6\) an accusation whose significance will become \
)Tj
-9.481 -1.303 Td
(apparent shortly - an accusation to the effect that 'you murdered the ri\
ghteous [or just] man'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 515.9588 521.87 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 521.4588 518.35 Tm
( )Tj
-37.197 -1.2 Td
(Again, however, no personal information is vouchsafed.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Such is James's role in scripture proper. But if one looks further\
afield, a portrait of James )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(does begin to emerge. This is the research which Eisenman has been pursu\
ing over the last )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(few years. One source of information he has emphasised is an anonymous t\
ext of the 'early )Tj
T*
(Church', the so-called 'Recognitions of Clement', which surfaced very ea\
rly in the 3rd )Tj
T*
(century. According to this document, James is preaching in the Temple wh\
en an unnamed )Tj
T*
('enemy', accompanied by an entourage of followers, bursts in. The 'enemy\
' taunts James's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(listeners and drowns out his words with noise, then proceeds to inflame \
the crowd 'with )Tj
T*
(revilings and abuse, and, like a madman, to excite everyone to murder, s\
aying "What do ye? )Tj
T*
(Why do ye hesitate? Oh, sluggish and inert, why do we not lay hands upon\
them, and pull all )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(these fellows to pieces?" ')Tj
11 0 0 11 151.735 338.9575 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 157.235 335.4375 Tm
( The 'enemy' does not confine himself to a verbal assault. Seizing a )Tj
-10.708 -1.2 Td
(brand of wood, he begins to flail about with it at the assembled worship\
pers, and his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(entourage follow suit. A full-scale riot ensues:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Much blood is shed; there is a confused flight, in the midst of wh\
ich that enemy attacked )Tj
T*
(James, )Tj
T*
( and threw him headlong from the top of the steps; and supposing hi\
m to be dead, he cared )Tj
T*
(not to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( inflict further violence upon him.)Tj
11 0 0 11 213.555 205.545 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 185.525 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(James, however, is not dead. According to the 'Recognitions', his suppor\
ters carry him back )Tj
T*
(to his house in Jerusalem. The next morning, before dawn, the injured ma\
n and his supporters )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(flee the city, making their way to Jericho, where they remain for some t\
ime - presumably )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(while James convalesces.)Tj
11 0 0 11 150.14 121.6325 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 101.6125 Tm
( For Eisenman, this attack on James is pivotal. He notes the para\
llels between it and the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(attack on Stephen as recounted in Acts. He suggests that Stephen may be \
an invented figure, )Tj
T*
(to disguise the fact that the attack - as Acts could not possibly have a\
dmitted - was really )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(directed at James. And he points out that Jericho, where James flees for\
refuge, is only a few )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(133 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
779 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.587 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 350.559 520 232.528 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 199.234 520 151.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 98.822 520 100.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 82.322 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 65.822 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 29.822 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(miles from Qumran. What is more, he argues, the flight to Jericho has a \
ring of historical )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(truth to it. It is the kind of incidental detail that is unlikely to hav\
e been fabricated and )Tj
T*
(interpolated, because it serves no particular purpose. As for the 'enemy\
', there would seem to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(be little doubt about his identity. The 'Recognitions of Clement' conclu\
des:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( Then after three days one of the brethren came to us from Gamaliel\
. . . bringing us secret )Tj
T*
(tidings )Tj
T*
( that the enemy had received a commission from Caiaphas, the chief \
priest, that he should )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(arrest all )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( who believed in Jesus, and should go to Damascus with his letters \
. . .)Tj
11 0 0 11 414.0712 607.695 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 587.675 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( The surviving editions of Josephus' )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Antiquities of the Jews )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(contain only one reference to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(James, which may or may not be later interpolation. The chronicle report\
s that the Sanhedrin, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the religious high court, call before them James, 'the brother of Jesus \
who was called Christ'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 519.0388 540.2439 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 524.5388 536.7239 Tm
( )Tj
-37.421 -1.2 Td
(Accused \(most improbably\) of breaking the Law, James and certain of hi\
s companions are )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(found guilty and accordingly stoned to death. Whether this account is ac\
curate, doctored or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(wholly invented, the most important aspect of it is the date to which it\
refers. Josephus )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(indicates that the events he has described occurred during an interval )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(between )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Roman )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(procurators in Judaea. The incumbent procurator had just died. His succe\
ssor, Lucceius )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Albinus, was still )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(en route )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(to Palestine from Rome. During the interregnum, effective power )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in Jerusalem was wielded by the high priest, an unpopular man named Anan\
as. This allows )Tj
T*
(the account of James's death to be dated at around ad 62 - only four yea\
rs before the outbreak )Tj
T*
(of the revolt in ad 66. Here, then, is at least some chronological evide\
nce that James's death )Tj
T*
(may have had something to do with the war that ravaged the Holy Land bet\
ween ad 66 and )Tj
T*
(73. For further information, however, one must turn to later Church hist\
orians.)Tj
T*
( Perhaps the major source is Eusebius, 4th-century Bishop of Caesa\
rea \(the Roman )Tj
T*
(capital of Judaea\) and author of one of the most important early Church\
histories. In )Tj
T*
(accordance with the conventions of the time, Eusebius quotes at length f\
rom earlier writers, )Tj
T*
(many of whose works have not survived. In speaking of James, he cites Cl\
ement, Bishop of )Tj
T*
(Alexandria \(c. ad 150-215\). Clement refers to James, we are told, as '\
the Righteous', or, as it )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(is often translated, 'the Just' - )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Zaddik' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in Hebrew.)Tj
11 0 0 11 281.2875 258.2541 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 286.7875 254.7341 Tm
( This, of course, is the by now familiar )Tj
-20.13 -1.2 Td
(Qumranic usage, whence derives the 'Teacher of Righteousness', the leade\
r of the Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(community. According to Clement, Eusebius reports, James was thrown from\
a parapet of the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Temple, then beaten to death with a club.)Tj
11 0 0 11 237.2187 207.3416 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 187.3216 Tm
( Later in his chronicle, Eusebius quotes extensively from a 2nd-cen\
tury Church historian, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Hegesippus. All of Hegesippus' works were reputedly extant as late as th\
e 16th or 17th )Tj
T*
(century. Everything has since disappeared, though copies may well exist \
in the Vatican, as )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(well as in the library of one or another monastery -in Spain, for exampl\
e.)Tj
11 0 0 11 411.3488 139.9291 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 422.3488 136.4091 Tm
( At present, )Tj
-29.989 -1.2 Td
(however, almost everything we have by Hegesippus is contained in the exc\
erpts from his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(work cited by Eusebius.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Quoting Hegesippus, Eusebius states that James 'the Righteous' 'wa\
s holy from his birth':)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( he drank no wine ... ate no animal food; no razor came near his he\
ad; he did not smear )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(134 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
780 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.587 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 181.437 520 401.65 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 164.937 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 131.937 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 98.937 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 65.937 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 29.937 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(himself )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( with oil, and took no baths. He alone was permitted to enter the H\
oly Place [the Holy of )Tj
T*
(Holies in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( the Temple], for his garments were not of wool but of linen [i.e. \
priestly robes]. He used )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(to enter )Tj
T*
( the Sanctuary alone, and was often found on his knees beseeching f\
orgiveness for the )Tj
T*
(people, so )Tj
T*
( that his knees grew hard like a camel's . . . Because of his unsur\
passable righteousness, he )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( called the Righteous and . . . 'Bulwark of the people' . . .)Tj
11 0 0 11 338.4187 607.695 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 587.675 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(At this point, it is worth interrupting the text to note certain intrigu\
ing details. James is said to )Tj
T*
(wear linen, or priestly robes. This was the prerogative of those who ser\
ved in the Temple and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(belonged to one of the priestly families, traditionally the Sadducean 'a\
ristocracy' who, during )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the 1st century, came to an accommodation with Rome and the Herodian dyn\
asty of Roman )Tj
T*
(puppets. Again, Eisenman points out, Epiphanius, another Church historia\
n, speaks of James )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(wearing the mitre of the high priest.)Tj
11 0 0 11 207.4362 490.7825 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 218.4362 487.2625 Tm
( Then, too, only the high priest was allowed to enter the )Tj
-15.159 -1.2 Td
(Holy of Holies, the inner sanctum and most sacred spot in the Temple. Wh\
at, then, can James )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(be doing there -and without eliciting any explanation or expression of s\
urprise from Church )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(historians, who seem to find nothing untoward or irregular in his activi\
ties? Did he, perhaps, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(by virtue of his birth, have some legitimate right to wear priestly appa\
rel and enter the Holy )Tj
T*
(of Holies? Or might he have been acting, as Eisenman suggests, in the ca\
pacity of a kind of )Tj
T*
('opposition high priest' - a rebel who, defying the established priestho\
od's accommodation )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(with Rome, had taken upon himself the role they had betrayed?)Tj
11 0 0 11 358.6588 373.87 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 369.6588 370.35 Tm
( Certainly the established )Tj
-26.157 -1.2 Td
(priesthood had no affection for James. According to Hegesippus, the 'Scr\
ibes and Pharisees' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(decide to do away with him, so that the people 'will be frightened and n\
ot believe him'. They )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(proclaim that 'even the Righteous one has gone astray',)Tj
11 0 0 11 311.675 322.9575 Tm
(15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 322.675 319.4375 Tm
( and invoke a quote from the Old )Tj
-22.74 -1.2 Td
(Testament - in this case from the prophet Isaiah \(Isa. 3:10\) - to just\
ify their actions. They note )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that Isaiah had prophesied the death of the 'Righteous One'. In murderin\
g James, therefore, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(they will simply be bringing Isaiah's prophecy to fulfilment. But also, \
in using this quote )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(from Isaiah, they are following a technique employed in both the Dead Se\
a Scrolls and the )Tj
T*
(New Testament. Eisenman points out that, just as this quote is used in o\
rder to describe the )Tj
T*
(death of James, so the Qumran community employs similar 'Righteousness' \
passages from )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(the New Testament in order to describe the death of the 'Teacher of Righ\
teousness'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 469.36 206.045 Tm
(16)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 480.36 202.525 Tm
( )Tj
-34.208 -1.2 Td
(Eusebius goes on to describe the death of James in the following manner:\
)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( So they went up and threw down the Righteous one. They said to eac\
h other 'let us stone )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(James )Tj
T*
( the Righteous', and began to stone him, as in spite of his fall he\
was still alive . . . While )Tj
T*
(they )Tj
T*
( pelted him with stones . . . [a member of a particular priestly fa\
mily] called out: 'Stop! )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(What are )Tj
T*
( you doing . . .' Then one of them, a fuller, took the club which h\
e used to beat clothes, and )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(135 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
781 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 698.587 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 682.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 581.675 520 100.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 464.762 520 116.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 247.437 520 217.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 131.937 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 95.937 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(brought )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( it down on the head of the Righteous one. Such was his martyrdom .\
. . Immediately after )Tj
T*
(this )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( Vespasian began to besiege them.)Tj
11 0 0 11 216.5937 706.695 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 686.675 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Vespasian, who became emperor in AD 69, commanded the Roman ar\
my that invaded )Tj
T*
(Judaea to put down the revolt of ad 66. Here again, then, is a chronolog\
ical connection )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(between James's death and the revolt. But Eusebius goes further. The con\
nection for him is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(more than just chronological. The entire 'siege of Jerusalem', he says, \
meaning presumably )Tj
T*
(the whole of the revolt in Judaea, was a direct consequence of James's d\
eath - 'for no other )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(reason than the wicked crime of which he had been the victim'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 356.9125 589.7825 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 569.7625 Tm
( To support this startling contention, Eusebius invokes Josephus. T\
he passage of Josephus )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(he quotes, although no longer to be found in any extant version of Josep\
hus, was )Tj
T*
(unquestionably what Josephus wrote, because Origen, one of the earliest \
and most prolific of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the Church Fathers, quotes precisely the same passage. Referring to the \
revolt of AD 66 and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the Roman invasion that followed, Josephus states that 'these things hap\
pened to the Jews in )Tj
T*
(requital for James the Righteous, who was a brother of Jesus known as Ch\
rist, for though he )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(was the most righteous of men, the Jews put him to death'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 331.3788 472.87 Tm
( 19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 452.85 Tm
( From these fragments pertaining to James, a scenario begins to tak\
e form. James, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(acknowledged leader of the 'early Church' in Jerusalem, represents a fac\
tion of Jews who, )Tj
T*
(like the Qumran community, are 'zealous for the Law'. This faction is un\
derstandably hostile )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(towards the Sadducee priesthood and the high priest Ananas \(appointed b\
y Herod)Tj
11 0 0 11 458.7038 405.4575 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 469.7038 401.9375 Tm
(\), who )Tj
-33.433 -1.2 Td
(have betrayed their nation and their religion by concluding an accord wi\
th the Roman )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(administration and its Herodian puppet-kings. So intense is this hostili\
ty that James arrogates )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(to himself the priestly functions which Ananas has compromised.)Tj
11 0 0 11 370.14 354.545 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 381.14 351.025 Tm
( Ananas' supporters )Tj
-26.992 -1.2 Td
(respond by contriving James's death. Almost immediately thereafter, the \
whole of Judaea )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(rises in revolt, and Ananas is himself one of the first casualties, assa\
ssinated as a pro-Roman )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(collaborator. As the rebellion gains momentum, Rome is forced to react, \
and does so by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dispatching an expeditionary force under Vespasian. The result is the wa\
r which witnesses )Tj
T*
(the sack of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple in AD 68, and wh\
ich does not end )Tj
T*
(until the fall of Masada in ad 74.)Tj
T*
( The only uncertain element in this scenario is the nature and magn\
itude of the part played )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(by James's death. Did it merely coincide chronologically? Or was it, as \
Josephus and )Tj
T*
(Eusebius assert, the primary causal factor? The truth, almost certainly,\
lies somewhere in )Tj
T*
(between: the revolt stemmed from enough contributing factors for the his\
torian not to have )Tj
T*
(had to fall back on James's de2th as a sole explanation. On the other ha\
nd, the evidence )Tj
T*
(unquestionably indicates that James's death was not just a marginal inci\
dent. It would seem to )Tj
T*
(have had at least something to do with the course of public events.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In any case James, as a result of Eisenman's analysis, indubitably\
emerges as a more )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(important personage in lst-century history than Christian tradition has \
hitherto acknowledged. )Tj
T*
(And the 'early Church' emerges in a very different light. It is no longe\
r a congregation of )Tj
T*
(devotees eschewing politics and public affairs, pursuing a course of per\
sonal salvation and )Tj
T*
(aspiring to no kingdom other than that of heaven. On the contrary, it be\
comes one of the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(136 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
782 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.5 520 264 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 238 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 202 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(manifestations of Judaic nationalism at the time - a body of militant in\
dividuals intent on )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(upholding the Law, deposing the corrupt Sadducee priesthood of the Templ\
e, toppling the )Tj
T*
(dynasty of illegitimate puppet-kings and driving the occupying Romans fr\
om the Holy Land. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(In all these respects, it conforms to conventional images of the Zealots\
.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( But what has all this to do with Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls?)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(From the Acts of the Apostles, from Josephus and from early Christian hi\
storians, there )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(emerges a coherent, if still incomplete, portrait of James, 'the Lord's \
brother'. He appears as )Tj
T*
(an exemplar of'righteousness' - so much so that 'the Just', or 'the Righ\
teous', is appended as a )Tj
T*
(sobriquet to his name. He is the acknowledged leader of a 'sectarian' re\
ligious community )Tj
T*
(whose members are 'zealous for the Law'. He must contend with two quite \
separate and )Tj
T*
(distinct adversaries. One of these is Paul, an outsider who, having firs\
t persecuted the )Tj
T*
(community, then converts and is admitted into it, only to turn renegade,\
prevaricate and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(quarrel with his superiors, hijack the image of Jesus and begin preachin\
g his own doctrine -a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(doctrine which draws on that of the community, but distorts it. James's \
second adversary is )Tj
T*
(from outside the community - the high priest Ananas, head of the Sadduce\
e priesthood. )Tj
T*
(Ananas is a notoriously corrupt and widely hated man. He has also betray\
ed both the God )Tj
T*
(and the people of Israel by collaborating with the Roman administration \
and their Herodian )Tj
T*
(puppet-kings. James publicly challenges Ananas and eventually meets his \
death at the hands )Tj
T*
(of Ananas' minions; but Ananas will shortly be assassinated in turn. All\
of this takes place )Tj
T*
(against a backdrop of increasing social and political unrest and the imp\
ending invasion of a )Tj
T*
(foreign army.)Tj
T*
( With this scenario in mind, Eisenman turned to the Dead Sea Scroll\
s, and particularly the )Tj
T*
('Habakkuk Commentary'. When the fragmentary details of the Qumran texts \
had been )Tj
T*
(assembled into a coherent sequence, what emerged was something extraordi\
narily similar to )Tj
T*
(the chronicle of Acts, Josephus and early Christian historians. The scro\
lls told their own )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(story, at the centre of which was a single protagonist, the 'Teacher of \
Righteousness' - an )Tj
T*
(exemplar of the same virtues associated with James. Like James, the 'Tea\
cher' was the )Tj
T*
(acknowledged leader of a 'sectarian' religious community whose members w\
ere 'zealous for )Tj
T*
(the Law'. And like James, the 'Teacher' had to contend with two quite se\
parate and distinct )Tj
T*
(adversaries.)Tj
T*
( One of these was dubbed the 'Liar', an outsider who was admitted t\
o the community, then )Tj
T*
(turned renegade, quarrelled with the 'Teacher' and hijacked part of the \
community's doctrine )Tj
T*
(and membership. According to the 'Habakkuk Commentary', the 'Liar' 'did \
not listen to the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(word received by the Teacher of Righteousness from the mouth of God'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 408.09 178.695 Tm
(22)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 419.09 175.175 Tm
( Instead, he )Tj
-29.752 -1.2 Td
(appealed to 'the unfaithful of the New Covenant in that they have not be\
lieved in the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Covenant of God and have profaned His holy name'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 299.2587 144.2825 Tm
(23)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 310.2587 140.7625 Tm
( The text states explicitly that 'the )Tj
-21.837 -1.303 Td
(Liar . . . flouted the Law in the midst of their whole congregation'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 374.1275 126.37 Tm
(24 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 387.8775 122.85 Tm
(He 'led many astray' and )Tj
-27.482 -1.303 Td
(raised 'a congregation on deceit'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 189.4512 108.4575 Tm
(25)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 200.4512 104.9375 Tm
( He himself is said to be 'pregnant with [works] of )Tj
-13.851 -1.303 Td
(deceit'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 48.7475 90.545 Tm
(26)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 59.7475 87.025 Tm
( These, of course, are precisely the transgressions of which Paul is acc\
used in Acts - )Tj
-3.618 -1.2 Td
(transgressions which lead, at the end of Acts, to the attempt on his lif\
e. And Eisenman )Tj
T*
(stresses Paul's striking hypersensitivity to charges of prevarication an\
d perjury.)Tj
11 0 0 11 444.775 56.1325 Tm
(27)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 455.775 52.6125 Tm
( In 1 )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(137 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
783 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 515.675 520 184.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 383.675 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 233.762 520 149.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 151.262 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 83.85 520 67.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 47.85 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Timothy 2:7, for example, he asserts indignantly, as if defending himsel\
f, that 'I am telling )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the truth and no lie'. In II Corinthians 11:31, he swears that: 'The God\
and Father of the Lord )Tj
T*
(Jesus . . . knows that I am not lying.' These are but two instances; Pau\
l's letters reveal an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(almost obsessive desire to exculpate himself from implied accusations of\
falsity.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( According to the Dead Sea Scrolls, the 'Liar' was the adversary of\
the 'Teacher of )Tj
T*
(Righteousness' from within the community. The 'Teacher's' second adversa\
ry was from )Tj
T*
(outside. This was the 'Wicked Priest', a corrupt representative of the e\
stablishment who had )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(betrayed his function and his faith.)Tj
11 0 0 11 200.9462 640.695 Tm
(28)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 211.9462 637.175 Tm
( He conspired to exterminate the 'Poor' - those 'zealous )Tj
-14.687 -1.2 Td
(for the Law' - said to be scattered about Jerusalem and other places. He\
harried the 'Teacher )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of Righteousness' wherever the 'Teacher' sought refuge. At the hands of \
the 'Wicked Priest's' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(minions, the 'Teacher' suffered some serious injury and possibly - the t\
ext is vague on the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(matter - death. Subsequently, the 'Wicked Priest' was himself assassinat\
ed by followers of the )Tj
T*
('Teacher', who, after killing him, 'took vengeance upon his body of fles\
h' - that is, defiled his )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(corpse.)Tj
11 0 0 11 49.325 540.2825 Tm
(29)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 60.325 536.7625 Tm
( The parallels between the 'Wicked Priest' of the scrolls and the histor\
ical figure of )Tj
-3.66 -1.2 Td
(the high priest Ananas are unmistakable.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In his book on James, Eisenman explores these parallels -James, Pa\
ul and Ananas on the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(one hand, the 'Teacher of Righteousness', the 'Liar' and the 'Wicked Pri\
est' on the other - in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(exhaustive detail. He goes through the 'Habakkuk Commentary' and other t\
exts line by line, )Tj
T*
(comparing them with information vouchsafed by Acts, by Josephus and by e\
arly Christian )Tj
T*
(historians. In our own pages, it would be impossible to do adequate just\
ice to the weight of )Tj
T*
(evidence he amasses. But the conclusions of this evidence are inescapabl\
e. The 'Habakkuk )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Commentary' and certain other of the Dead Sea Scrolls are referring to t\
he same events as )Tj
T*
(those recounted in Acts, in Josephus and in the works of early Christian\
historians.)Tj
T*
( This conclusion is reinforced by the striking and pervasive recurr\
ence of Qumranic )Tj
T*
(philosophy and imagery in Acts, in the Letter of James and in Paul's cop\
ious epistles. It is )Tj
T*
(also reinforced by the revelation that the place for which Paul embarks \
and in which he )Tj
T*
(spends three years as a postulant is in fact Qumran, not the city in Syr\
ia. Even the one )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fragment that would not, at first, appear to fit -the fact that the pers\
ecution and death of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(James occurs quite specifically in Jerusalem, while the Dead Sea Scrolls\
have been assumed )Tj
T*
(to chronicle events in Qumran - is explained within the texts themselves\
. The 'Habakkuk )Tj
T*
(Commentary' states explicitly that the leadership of the community were \
in Jerusalem at the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(relevant time.)Tj
11 0 0 11 85.6113 241.87 Tm
(30)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 221.85 Tm
( There is another point which Eisenman stresses as being particular\
ly important. In the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Letter to the Romans \(1:17\), Paul states that 'this is what reveals th\
e justice of God to us: it )Tj
T*
(shows how faith leads to faith, or as scripture says: the upright man fi\
nds life through faith'. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(The same theme appears in the Letter to the Galatians \(3:11\): 'the Law\
will not justify anyone )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in the sight of God, because we are told: the righteous man finds life t\
hrough faith'.)Tj
T*
( These two statements constitute, in effect, 'the starting-point of\
the theological concept of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(faith'. They are ultimately, as Eisenman says, 'the foundation piece of \
Pauline theology'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 494.0275 124.9575 Tm
(31)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 505.0275 121.4375 Tm
( )Tj
-36.002 -1.2 Td
(They provide the basis on which Paul is able to make his stand against J\
ames - is able to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(extol the supremacy of faith, while James extols the supremacy of the La\
w.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( From where does Paul derive this principle of the supremacy of fai\
th? It was certainly not )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(an accepted part of Judaic teaching at the time. In fact, it derives fro\
m the original Book of )Tj
T*
(Habakkuk, a text of Old Testament apocrypha believed to date from the mi\
d-7th century bc. )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(138 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
784 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 714.85 520 51.15 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.35 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 648.85 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 615.811 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 582.811 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 564.899 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 548.399 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 414.986 520 133.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 398.486 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 381.986 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 365.486 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 348.986 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 332.486 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.486 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 272.486 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 255.986 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 239.486 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 203.486 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.4375 Tm
(According to Chapter 2, Verse 4 of the Book of Habakkuk, 'the upright ma\
n will live by his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(faithfulness'. Paul's words in his letters are clearly an echo of this s\
tatement; and the Book of )Tj
T*
(Habakkuk is clearly the 'scripture' to which Paul refers.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( More important still, however, is the 'Habakkuk Commentary' - the \
gloss and exegesis on )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(part of the Book of Habakkuk found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The 'Haba\
kkuk )Tj
T*
(Commentary' cites the same statement and then proceeds to elaborate upon\
it:)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(But the righteous shall live by his faith. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Interpreted, this concerns all those who observe )Tj
T*
(the )Tj
T*
( Law in the House of Judah, whom God will deliver from the House of\
Judgment because )Tj
T*
(of their )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( suffering and because of their faith in the Teacher of Righteousne\
ss.)Tj
11 0 0 11 405.9863 573.0063 Tm
(32)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 552.9864 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( This extraordinary passage is tantamount, in effect, to a formulat\
ion of early 'Christian' )Tj
T*
(doctrine. It states explicitly that suffering, and faith in the 'Teacher\
of Righteousness', )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(constitute the path to deliverance and salvation. From this passage in t\
he Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Paul must have derived the foundation for the whole of his own theology.\
But the passage in )Tj
T*
(question declares unequivocally that suffering and faith in the 'Teacher\
of Righteousness' will )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(lead to deliverance only among 'those who observe the Law in the House o\
f Judah'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 468.2325 456.0939 Tm
(33)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 479.2325 452.5739 Tm
( It is )Tj
-34.126 -1.2 Td
(just such emphasis on adherence to the Law that Paul contrives to ignore\
, thereby )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(precipitating his doctrinal dispute with James and the other members of \
the 'early Church'.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 257.5 310.744 Tm
(14)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
-2.931 -1.201 Td
(Zeal for the Law)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 260.5739 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 219.9182 Tm
(A)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 26.245 219.9182 Tm
(ccording to Robert Eisenman, the Qumran community emerges from the Dead \
Sea Scrolls )Tj
-1.181 -1.407 Td
(as a movement of a very different nature to that of the Essenes of popul\
ar tradition. This )Tj
T*
(movement has centres not just in Qumran, but in a number of other places\
as well, including )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jerusalem. It can exercise considerable influence, can wield considerabl\
e power, can )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(command considerable support. It can dispatch Paul, as well as many othe\
rs, on embassies of )Tj
T*
(recruitment and fund-raising abroad. It can organise riots and public di\
sturbances. It can plot )Tj
T*
(assassinations \(such as that attempted on Paul at the end of Acts and, \
subsequently, that of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Ananas\). It can put forward its own legitimate alternative candidate fo\
r the position of the )Tj
T*
(Temple's high priest. It can capture and hold strategically important fo\
rtresses such as )Tj
T*
(Masada. Most significantly of all, it can galvanise the entire populatio\
n of Judaea around it )Tj
T*
(and instigate a full-fledged revolt against Rome - a revolt which leads \
to a major conflict of )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(139 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
785 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 667 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 565.098 520 101.902 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.098 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 200.608 520 232.49 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 164.608 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(seven years' duration and necessitates the intervention not of a few det\
achments, but of an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(entire Roman army. Given the range and magnitude of these activities, it\
is clear that )Tj
T*
(traditional images of the Essenes and of the 'early Church' are woefully\
inadequate. It is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(equally clear that the movement which manifested itself through the Qumr\
an community and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the 'early Church' also manifested itself through other groups generally\
deemed to be separate )Tj
T*
(- the 'Zadokites', for example, the Zealots and the Sicarii.)Tj
T*
( Eisenman's research has revealed the underlying simplicity of what\
had previously )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(seemed a dauntingly complicated situation. As he says, 'terms like: )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Ebionim, Nozrim, )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Hassidim, Zaddikim )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(i.e., Ebionites, Palestinian Christians, Essenes, and Zadokites\), tur\
n out )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(to be variations on the same theme')Tj
11 0 0 11 203.4212 607.6177 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 208.9212 604.0977 Tm
(, while 'the various phraseologies the community at )Tj
-14.467 -1.2 Td
(Qumran used to refer to itself, e.g. 'sons of light' ... do not all desi\
gnate different groups, but )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(function as interchangeable metaphors'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 227.8412 573.2052 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 553.1852 Tm
( The militant Zealots and Sicarii will prove similarly to be variat\
ions on the same theme, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(manifestations of the same movement. This movement is militant, national\
istic, )Tj
T*
(revolutionary, xenophobic and messianic in character. Although rooted in\
Old Testament )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(times, it coalesces during the Maccabean period of the 2nd century BC; b\
ut the events of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1st century of the Christian era will imbue it with a new and particular\
ly ferocious )Tj
T*
(momentum. At the core of the movement lies the question of dynastic legi\
timacy - legitimacy )Tj
T*
(not just of the ruling house, but of the priesthood. In the beginning, i\
ndeed, priestly )Tj
T*
(legitimacy is the more important.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The legitimacy of the priesthood had become crucial in Old Testame\
nt times. It was )Tj
T*
(supposed to descend lineally from Aaron through the Tribe of Levi. Thus,\
throughout the Old )Tj
T*
(Testament, the priesthood is the unique preserve of the Levites. The Lev\
ite high priests who )Tj
T*
(attend David and Solomon are referred to as 'Zadok' -though it is not cl\
ear whether this is a )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(personal name or an hereditary title.)Tj
11 0 0 11 208.5638 357.2927 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 214.0638 353.7727 Tm
( Solomon is anointed by Zadok, thereby becoming 'the )Tj
-14.841 -1.203 Td
(Anointed One', the 'Messiah' - )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('ha-mashi'ah' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in Hebrew. But the high priests were themselves )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(also )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(anointed and were also, in consequence, 'Messiahs'. In Old Testament tim\
es, then, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(people of Israel are, in effect, governed by two parallel lines of'Messi\
ahs', or 'Anointed Ones'. )Tj
T*
(One of these lines presides over spiritual affairs and descends from the\
Tribe of Levi through )Tj
T*
(Aaron. The other, in the form of the kingship, presides over secular aff\
airs and traces itself, )Tj
T*
(through David, to the Tribe of Judah. This, of course, explains the refe\
rences in the Dead Sea )Tj
T*
(Scrolls to 'the Messiah\(s\) of Aaron and of Israel', or 'of Aaron and o\
f David'. The principle is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(essentially similar to that whereby, during the Middle Ages in Europe, P\
ope and Emperor )Tj
T*
(were supposed to preside jointly over the Holy Roman Empire.)Tj
T*
( The priestly line invoking a lineage from Aaron maintained their s\
tatus until the )Tj
T*
(Babylonian invasion of 587 BC. In 538 BC, when the 'Babylonian Captivity\
' ended, the )Tj
T*
(priesthood quickly re-established itself, again claiming a descent \(met\
aphorical, if not literal\) )Tj
T*
(from Aaron. In 333 BC, however, Alexander the Great overran the Holy Lan\
d. For the next )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(160-odd years, Palestine was to be ruled by a succession of Hellenistic,\
or Greek-oriented, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dynasties. The priesthood, during this period, spawned a bewildering mul\
titude of claimants, )Tj
T*
(many of whom adapted, partially or completely, to Hellenistic ways, Hell\
enistic life-styles, )Tj
T*
(Hellenistic values and attitudes. As is often the case in such circumsta\
nces, the general )Tj
T*
(liberalising tendency engendered a 'hard-line' conservative reaction. Th\
ere arose a movement )Tj
T*
(which deplored the relaxed, heterodox and 'permissive' atmosphere, the i\
ndifference to old )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(140 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
786 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.108 520 49.892 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 500.195 520 215.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 317.283 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 168.744 520 148.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 132.744 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.6954 Tm
(traditions, the defilement and pollution of the ancient 'purity', the de\
fiance of the sacred Law. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(This movement undertook to rid Palestine of Hellenised collaborators and\
libertines, who )Tj
T*
(had, it was felt, by their very presence, desecrated the Temple.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( According to the first book of Maccabees, the movement first asser\
ted itself - probably )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(around 167 BC - when Mattathias Maccabaeus, a country priest, was ordere\
d by a Greek )Tj
T*
(officer to sacrifice on a pagan altar, in defiance of Judaic law. Enrage\
d by this blasphemous )Tj
T*
(sight, Mattathias, who 'burned with zeal for the Law' \(1 Mace. 2:26\), \
summarily killed a )Tj
T*
(fellow Jew who complied, along with the Greek officer. In effect, as Eis\
enman has said, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Mattathias thus became the first 'Zealot'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 232.6263 623.8029 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 238.1263 620.2829 Tm
( Immediately after his action in the Temple, he )Tj
-16.591 -1.2 Td
(raised the cry of revolt: 'Let everyone who is zealous for the Law and s\
upports the Covenant )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(come out with me' \(1 Mace. 2:27\). Thereupon, he took to the countrysid\
e with his sons, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Judas, Simon, Jonathan and two others, as well as with an entourage call\
ed the 'Hasidaeans' - )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('mighty warriors of Israel, every one who offered himself willingly for \
the Law' \(1 Mace. )Tj
T*
(2:42\). And when Mattathias, a year or so later, lay on his deathbed, he\
exhorted his sons and )Tj
T*
(followers to 'show zeal for the Law and give your lives for the Covenant\
of our fathers' \(1 )Tj
T*
(Mace. 2:50\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( On Mattathias's death, control of the movement passed to his son, \
Judas, who 'withdrew )Tj
T*
(into the wilderness, and lived like wild animals in the hills with his c\
ompanions, eating )Tj
T*
(nothing but wild plants to avoid contracting defilement' \(2 Mace. 5:27\)\
. This attests to what )Tj
T*
(will eventually become an important principle and ritual -that of purify\
ing oneself by )Tj
T*
(withdrawing into the wilderness and, as a species of initiation, living \
for a time in seclusion. )Tj
T*
(Here, Eisenman suggests, is the origin of remote communities such as Qum\
ran, the first )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(foundation of which dates from Maccabean times.)Tj
11 0 0 11 286.0862 391.3904 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 291.5862 387.8704 Tm
( It is, in effect, the equivalent of the )Tj
-20.479 -1.2 Td
(modern 'retreat'. In the New Testament, of course, the supreme exemplar \
of self-purification )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in remote solitude is John the Baptist, who 'preached in the wilderness'\
and ate 'locusts and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(honey'. But it must be remembered that Jesus, too, undergoes a probation\
ary initiatory )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(experience in the desert.)Tj
T*
( From the fastnesses to which they had withdrawn, Judas Maccabaeus,\
his brothers and his )Tj
T*
(companions embarked on a prolonged campaign of guerrilla operations whic\
h escalated into )Tj
T*
(a full-scale revolt and mobilised the people as a whole. By 152 bc, the \
Maccabeans had )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(wrested control of the Holy Land, pacified the country and installed the\
mselves in power. )Tj
T*
(Their first act, on capturing the Temple, was to 'purify' it by removing\
all pagan trappings. It )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(is significant that though the Maccabeans were simultaneously )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(de facto )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(kings and priests, the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(latter office was more important to them. They hastened to regularise th\
eir status in the )Tj
T*
(priesthood, as custodians of the Law. They did not bother to call themse\
lves kings until the )Tj
T*
(fourth generation of their dynasty, between 103 and 76 bc.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( From the bastion of the priesthood, the Maccabeans promulgated the\
Law with )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fundamentalist ferocity. They were fond of invoking the Old Testament le\
gend of the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('Covenant of Phineas', which appears in the Book of Numbers.)Tj
11 0 0 11 354.4512 125.9393 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 359.9512 122.4193 Tm
( Phineas was said to be a )Tj
-25.451 -1.2 Td
(priest and a grandson of Aaron, active after the Hebrews had fled Egypt \
under Moses and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(established themselves in Palestine. Shortly thereafter, their numbers a\
re devastated by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(plague. Phineas turns on one man in particular, who has taken a pagan fo\
reigner to wife; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(seizing a spear, he promptly dispatches the married couple. God, at that\
point, declares that )Tj
T*
(Phineas is the only man to 'have the same zeal as I have'. And He makes \
a covenant with )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(141 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
787 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 732.332 520 33.668 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 648.419 520 83.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 582.419 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 316.968 520 265.451 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 182.143 520 134.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 146.143 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.4193 Tm
(Phineas. Henceforth, in reward for his zeal for his God \(1 Mace. 2:54\)\
, Phineas and his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(descendants will hold the priesthood for all time.)Tj
T*
( Such was the figure to whom the Maccabean priesthood looked as a '\
role model'. Like )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Phineas, they condemned all relations, of any kind, with pagans and fore\
igners. Like Phineas, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(they insisted on, and sought to embody, 'zeal for the Law'. This 'xenoph\
obic antagonism' to )Tj
T*
(foreign ways, foreign wives etc. was to be passed on as a legacy, and 'w\
ould seem to have )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(been characteristic of the whole Zealot/Zadokite orientation'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 345.0737 656.5268 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 636.5068 Tm
( Whether the Maccabeans could claim a literal pedigree from Aaron a\
nd from David is not )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(certain. Probably they couldn't. But their 'zeal for the Law' served to \
legitimise them. During )Tj
T*
(their dynasty, therefore, Israel could claim both a priesthood and a mon\
archy that conformed )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(more or less to the stringent criteria of Old Testament authority.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( All of this ended, of course, with the accession of Herod in 37 bc\
, installed as a puppet by )Tj
T*
(the Romans who had overrun Palestine a quarter of a century before. At f\
irst, before he had )Tj
T*
(consolidated his position, Herod was also preoccupied by questions of le\
gitimacy. Thus, for )Tj
T*
(example, he contrived to legitimise himself by marrying a Maccabean prin\
cess. No sooner )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was his position secure, however, than he proceeded to murder his wife a\
nd her brother, )Tj
T*
(rendering the Maccabean line effectively extinct. He also removed or des\
troyed the upper )Tj
T*
(echelons of the priesthood, which he filled with his own favourites and \
minions. These are )Tj
T*
(the 'Sadducees' known to history through biblical sources and through Jo\
sephus. Eisenman )Tj
T*
(suggests that the term 'Sadducee' was originally a variant, or perhaps a\
corruption, of'Zadok' )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(or )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('Zaddikirn - )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the 'Righteous Ones' in Hebrew, which the priesthood of the Maccabeans )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(unquestionably were.)Tj
11 0 0 11 127.6175 407.5756 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 133.1175 404.0556 Tm
( The 'Sadducees' installed by Herod were, however, very different. )Tj
-8.954 -1.2 Td
(They were firmly aligned with the usurping monarch. They enjoyed an easy\
and comfortable )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(life of prestige and privilege. They exercised a lucrative monopoly over\
the Temple and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(everything associated with the Temple. And they had no concept whatever \
of 'zeal for the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Law'. Israel thus found itself under the yoke of a corrupt illegitimate \
monarchy and a corrupt )Tj
T*
(illegitimate priesthood, both of which were ultimately instruments of pa\
gan Rome.)Tj
T*
( As in the days of Mattathias Maccabaeus, this situation inevitably\
provoked a reaction. If )Tj
T*
(Herod's puppet priests became the 'Sadducees' of popular tradition, thei\
r adversaries - the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('purists' who remained 'zealous for the Law' - became known to history u\
nder a variety of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(different names.)Tj
11 0 0 11 99.3475 257.6631 Tm
(9)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 104.8475 254.1431 Tm
( In certain contexts - the Qumran literature, for example - these advers\
aries )Tj
-6.898 -1.2 Td
(were called 'Zadokites' or 'Sons of Zadok'. In the New Testament, they w\
ere called )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Nazorenes' -and, subsequently, 'early Christians'. In Josephus, they we\
re called 'Zealots' and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Sicarii'. The Romans, of course, regarded them as 'terrorists', 'outlaw\
s' and 'brigands'. In )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(modern terminology, they might be called 'messianic revolutionary fundam\
entalists'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 475.5338 190.2506 Tm
(10)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 170.2306 Tm
( Whatever the terminology one uses, the religious and political sit\
uation in Judaea had, by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the beginning of the 1st century AD, provoked widespread opposition to t\
he Herodian )Tj
T*
(regime, the pro-Herodian priesthood and the machinery of the Roman Empir\
e, which )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(sustained and loomed behind both. By the 1st century ad, there were thus\
two rival and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(antagonistic factions of 'Sadducees'. On the one hand, there were the Sa\
dducees of the New )Tj
T*
(Testament and Josephus, the 'Herodian Sadducees'; on the other hand, the\
re was a 'true' or )Tj
T*
('purist' Sadducee movement, which repudiated all such collaboration and \
remained fervently )Tj
T*
(loyal to three traditional governing principles - a priesthood or priest\
ly 'Messiah' claiming )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(descent from Aaron, a royal 'Messiah' claiming descent from David and, a\
bove all, 'zeal for )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(142 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
788 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 745.731 520 20.269 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 729.231 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 712.731 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 597.231 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 379.867 520 217.364 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 192.64 520 187.227 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 156.64 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 750.3181 Tm
(the Law'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 60.5862 753.8381 Tm
(11)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 733.8181 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(It will by this time have become clear to the reader that 'zeal for the \
Law' is not a casually )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(used phrase. On the contrary, it is used very precisely in the way that \
such phrases as )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('brethren of the craft' might be used in Freemasonry; and whenever the p\
hrase, or some )Tj
T*
(variant of it, occurs, it offers a vital clue to the researcher, indicat\
ing to him a certain group )Tj
T*
(of people or movement. Given this fact, it becomes strained and disingen\
uous to argue - as )Tj
T*
(adherents of the consensus do - that there must be some distinction betw\
een the Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(community, who extol 'zeal for the Law', and the Zealots of popular trad\
ition.)Tj
T*
( The Zealots of popular tradition are generally acknowledged to hav\
e been founded at the )Tj
T*
(dawn of the Christian era by a figure known as Judas of Galilee, or, mor\
e accurately perhaps, )Tj
T*
(Judas of Gamala. Judas launched his revolt immediately after the death o\
f Herod the Great in )Tj
T*
(4 bc. One particularly revealing aspect of this revolt is cited by Josep\
hus. At once, 'as soon as )Tj
T*
(mourning for Herod was over', public demand was whipped up for the incum\
bent Herodian )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(high priest to be deposed and another, 'of greater piety and purity', to\
be installed in his )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(place.)Tj
11 0 0 11 42.45 488.4256 Tm
(12)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 53.45 484.9056 Tm
( Accompanied by a priest known as 'Sadduc' - apparently a Greek translit\
eration of )Tj
-3.16 -1.203 Td
('Zadok', or, as suggested by Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Zaddik, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(the Hebrew for 'Righteous One' -Judas and his )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(followers promptly raided the royal armoury in the Galilean city of Sepp\
horis, plundering )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(weapons and equipment for themselves. Around the same time - either just\
before or just )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(after - Herod's palace at Jericho, near Qumran, was attacked by arsonist\
s and burned down.)Tj
11 0 0 11 511.5312 420.9744 Tm
(13)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 522.5312 417.4544 Tm
( )Tj
-37.275 -1.2 Td
(These events were to be followed by some seventy-five years of incessant\
guerrilla warfare )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and terrorist activity, culminating in the full-scale military operation\
s of AD 66-73.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( In )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(written in the volatile aftermath of the revolt, Josephus states that )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Judas of Galilee had founded 'a peculiar sect of his own'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 322.345 353.5233 Tm
(14)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 333.345 350.0033 Tm
( Josephus' second major work, )Tj
-23.516 -1.203 Td
(however, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Antiquities of the Jews, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(was composed a quarter of a century or so later, when the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(general atmosphere was rather less fraught. In this work, therefore, Jos\
ephus could afford to )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(be more explicit.)Tj
11 0 0 11 102.7988 302.5721 Tm
(15)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 113.7988 299.0521 Tm
( He states that Judas and Sadduc 'became zealous', implying something )Tj
-7.549 -1.2 Td
(tantamount to a conversion - a conversion to some recognised attitude or\
state of mind. Their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(movement, he says, constituted 'the fourth sect of Jewish philosophy', a\
nd the youth of Israel )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('were zealous for it'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 120.33 251.6596 Tm
(16 )Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 134.08 248.1396 Tm
(From the very beginning, the movement was characterised by )Tj
-9.024 -1.2 Td
(Messianic aspirations. Sadduc embodied the figure of the priestly Messia\
h descended from )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Aaron. And Judas, according to Josephus, had an 'ambitious desire of the\
royal dignity' - the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(status of the royal Messiah descended from David.)Tj
11 0 0 11 288.7675 200.7471 Tm
(17)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 180.7271 Tm
( Judas himself appears to have been killed fairly early in the figh\
ting. His mantle of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(leadership passed to his sons, of whom there were three. Two of them, Ja\
cob and Simon, )Tj
T*
(were well-known 'Zealot' leaders, captured and crucified by the Romans s\
ome time between )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(AD 46 and 48. The third son \(or perhaps grandson\), Menahem, was one of\
the chief )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(instigators of the revolt of AD 66. In its early days, when the revolt s\
till promised to be )Tj
T*
(successful, Menahem is described as making a triumphal entry into Jerusa\
lem, 'in the state of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(a king' - another manifestation of messianic dynastic ambitions.)Tj
11 0 0 11 360.3913 83.8346 Tm
(18)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 371.3913 80.3146 Tm
( In AD 66, Menahem also )Tj
-26.283 -1.2 Td
(captured the fortress of Masada. The bastion's last commander, known to \
history as Eleazar, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was another descendant of Judas of Galilee, though the precise nature of\
the relationship has )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(143 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
789 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 515.675 520 233.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 349.262 520 166.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 81.025 520 268.238 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 64.525 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 48.025 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 12.025 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(never been established.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The mass suicide of 'Zealot' defenders at Masada has become a fami\
liar historical event, )Tj
T*
(the focus of at least two novels, a cinema film and a television mini-se\
ries. It has already )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(been referred to in this book, and there will be occasion to look at it \
more closely shortly. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Masada, however, was not the only instance of such mass suicide. In AD 6\
7, responding to )Tj
T*
(the rebellion sweeping the Holy Land, a Roman army advanced on Gamala In\
Galilee, the )Tj
T*
(original home of Judas and his sons. Four thousand Jews died trying to d\
efend the town. )Tj
T*
(When their efforts proved futile, another five thousand committed suicid\
e. This reflects )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(something more than mere political opposition. It attests to a dimension\
of religious )Tj
T*
(fanaticism. Such a dimension is expressed by Josephus, who, speaking of \
the 'Zealots', says: )Tj
T*
('They . . . do not value dying any kinds of death, nor indeed do they he\
ed the deaths of their )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(relations and friends, nor can any such fear make them call any man Lord\
. . .')Tj
11 0 0 11 437.8587 574.695 Tm
(19)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 448.8587 571.175 Tm
( To )Tj
-31.917 -1.2 Td
(acknowledge a Roman emperor as a god, which Rome demanded, would have be\
en, for the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
('Zealots', the most outrageous blasphemy.)Tj
11 0 0 11 239.515 540.2825 Tm
(20)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 250.515 536.7625 Tm
( To such a transgression of the Law, death would )Tj
-17.492 -1.2 Td
(indeed have been preferable.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( 'Zeal for the Law' effectively brings the 'Zealots' - usually envi\
saged as more or less )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(secular 'freedom fighters' - into alignment with the fervently religious\
members of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran community; and, as we have already noted, Qumranic texts were fou\
nd in the ruins )Tj
T*
(of Masada. 'Zeal for the Law' also brings the 'Zealots' into alignment w\
ith the so-called 'early )Tj
T*
(Church', to whose adherents the same 'zeal' is repeatedly ascribed. The \
figure cited in the )Tj
T*
(Gospels as 'Simon Zelotes', or 'Simon the Zealot', attests to at least o\
ne 'Zealot' in Jesus' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(immediate entourage; and Judas Iscariot, whose name may well derive from\
the Sicarii, )Tj
T*
(might be another. Most revealing of all, however, is Eisenman's discover\
y - the original )Tj
T*
(Greek term used to denote members of the 'early Church'. They are called\
, quite explicitly, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.303 TD
('zelotai )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(of the Law' - that is, 'Zealots'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 215.5213 357.37 Tm
(21)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 337.35 Tm
( There thus emerges, in lst-century Palestine, a kind of fundamenta\
list dynastic priesthood )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(claiming either genealogical or symbolic descent from Aaron and associat\
ed with the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(expected imminent advent of a Davidic or royal Messiah.)Tj
11 0 0 11 325.81 306.4575 Tm
(22)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 336.81 302.9375 Tm
( This priesthood maintains itself )Tj
-23.768 -1.2 Td
(in a state of perpetual self-declared war with the Herodian dynasty, the\
puppet priests of that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dynasty and the occupying Romans. Depending on their activities at a giv\
en moment, and the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(perspective from which they are viewed, the priesthood and its supporter\
s are variously )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(called 'Zealots', 'Essenes', 'Zadokites', 'Nazoreans' and a number of ot\
her things - including, )Tj
T*
(by their enemies, 'brigands' and 'outlaws'. They are certainly not passi\
ve recluses and mystics. )Tj
T*
(On the contrary, their vision, as Eisenman says, is 'violently apocalypt\
ic', and provides a )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(theological corollary to the violent action with which the 'Zealots' are\
usually associated.)Tj
11 0 0 11 498.0425 189.545 Tm
(23)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 509.0425 186.025 Tm
( )Tj
-36.294 -1.2 Td
(This violence, both political and theological, can be discerned in the c\
areer of John the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Baptist - executed, according to the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, for co\
ndemning the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(marriage of Herod Antipas to his niece because it 'is against the Law fo\
r you to have her'. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(And, indeed, Eisenman has even suggested that John the Baptist may have \
been the )Tj
T*
(mysterious 'Sadduc' who accompanied Judas of Galilee, leader of the 'Zea\
lots' at the time of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Jesus' birth.)Tj
11 0 0 11 74.35 89.1325 Tm
(24)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 69.1125 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(144 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
790 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 551.5 520 214.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 403 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.587 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 286.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 253.087 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 217.087 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(To recapitulate, then, there emerge, from the confusing welter of sobriq\
uets and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(nomenclature, the configurations of a broad movement in which 'Essenes',\
'Zadokites', )Tj
T*
('Nazoreans', 'Zealots' and other such supposed factions effectively fuse\
. The names prove to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(be merely different designations - or, at most, different manifestations\
- of the same religious )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and political impetus, diffused throughout the Holy Land and beyond, fro\
m the 2nd century )Tj
T*
(BC on. The ostensibly separate factions would have been, at most, like t\
he variety of )Tj
T*
(individuals, groups and interests which coalesced to form the single mov\
ement known as the )Tj
T*
('French Resistance' during the Second World War. At most. For Robert Eis\
enman personally, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(any distinction between them is but a matter of degree; they are all var\
iations on the same )Tj
T*
(theme. But even if some subtle gradations between them did exist, they w\
ould still have been )Tj
T*
(unified by their joint involvement in a single ambitious enterprise - th\
e ridding of their land )Tj
T*
(of Roman occupation, and the reinstatement of the old legitimate Judaic \
monarchy, together )Tj
T*
(with its rightful priesthood.)Tj
T*
( That enterprise, of course, did not end with the destruction of Je\
rusalem and Qumran )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(between ad 68 and 70, nor with the fall of Masada in ad 74. In the immed\
iate aftermath of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(debacle, large numbers of 'Zealots' and Sicarii fled abroad, to places w\
here there were )Tj
T*
(sizeable Judaic populations - to Persia, for example, and to Egypt, espe\
cially Alexandria. In )Tj
T*
(Alexandria, they attempted to mobilise the local Jewish population for y\
et another uprising )Tj
T*
(against Rome. They met with little success, some six hundred of them bei\
ng rounded up and )Tj
T*
(handed over to the authorities. Men, women and children were tortured in\
an attempt to make )Tj
T*
(them acknowledge the emperor as a god. According to Josephus, 'not a man\
gave in or came )Tj
T*
(near to saying it'. And he adds:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( But nothing amazed the spectators as much as the behaviour of youn\
g children; for not )Tj
T*
(one of )Tj
T*
( them could be constrained to call Caesar Lord. So far did the stre\
ngth of a brave spirit )Tj
T*
(prevail )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( over the weakness of their little bodies.)Tj
11 0 0 11 246.39 310.695 Tm
(25)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 290.675 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Here again is that strain of fanatical dedication - a dedication t\
hat cannot be political in )Tj
T*
(nature, that can only be religious.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( More than sixty years after the war that left Jerusalem and the Te\
mple in ruins, the Holy )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Land erupted again in a new revolt, led by the charismatic Messianic fig\
ure known as Simeon )Tj
T*
(bar Kochba, the 'Son of the Star'. According to Eisenman, the terminolog\
y suggests that )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Simeon was in reality descended by blood from the 'Zealot' leaders of th\
e previous century.)Tj
11 0 0 11 512.535 193.7825 Tm
(26)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 523.535 190.2625 Tm
( )Tj
-37.348 -1.2 Td
(In any case, the image of the 'Star' had certainly figured prominently a\
mong them during the )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(period culminating with the first revolt.)Tj
11 0 0 11 226.9337 159.37 Tm
(27)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 237.9337 155.85 Tm
( And, as we have noted, the same image figures )Tj
-16.577 -1.2 Td
(repeatedly in the Dead Sea Scrolls. It derives ultimately from a prophec\
y in the Book of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Numbers \(24:17\): 'a star from Jacob takes the leadership, a sceptre ar\
ises from Israel'. The )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('War Rule' invokes this prophecy, and declares that the 'Star', or the '\
Messiah', will, together )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(with the 'Poor' or the 'Righteous', repel invading armies. Eisenman has \
found this 'Star' )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(prophecy in two other crucial places in the Qumran literature.)Tj
11 0 0 11 349.0887 75.4575 Tm
(28)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 360.0887 71.9375 Tm
( One, the 'Damascus )Tj
-25.461 -1.2 Td
(Document', is particularly graphic: 'The star is the Interpreter of the \
Law who shall come to )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(145 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
791 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 748.087 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 629.762 520 118.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 329.937 520 299.825 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 178.612 520 151.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 79.612 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 43.612 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.675 Tm
(Damascus; as it is written . . . the sceptre is the Prince . . .')Tj
11 0 0 11 329.0688 756.195 Tm
(29)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 736.175 Tm
( Josephus, as well as Roman historians such as Suetonius and Tacitu\
s, reports how a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(prophecy was current in the Holy Land during the early 1st century ad, t\
o the effect that 'from )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Judaea would go forth men destined to rule the world'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 309.585 705.2825 Tm
(30)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 320.585 701.7625 Tm
( According to Josephus, the )Tj
-22.588 -1.2 Td
(promulgation of this prophecy was a major factor in the revolt of ad 66.\
And, needless to say, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the 'Star' prophecy finds its way into Christian tradition as the 'Star \
of Bethlehem', which )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(heralds Jesus' birth.)Tj
11 0 0 11 117.4975 654.37 Tm
(31)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 128.4975 650.85 Tm
( As 'Son of the Star', then, Simeon bar Kochba enjoyed an illustrious )Tj
-8.618 -1.2 Td
(symbolic pedigree.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Unlike the revolt of ad 66, Simeon's insurrection, commencing in A\
D 132, was no ill-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(organised conflagration resulting, so to speak, from spontaneous combust\
ion. On the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(contrary, much prolonged and careful planning went into the enterprise. \
Jewish smiths and )Tj
T*
(craftsmen pressed into Roman service would, for example, deliberately fo\
rge slightly sub-)Tj
T*
(standard weapons. When these were rejected by the Romans, they would be \
collected and )Tj
T*
(stored for use by the rebels. From the war of the previous century, Sime\
on had also learned )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(that there was no point in capturing and holding fortresses such as Masa\
da. To defeat the )Tj
T*
(Romans, a campaign based on mobility, on hit-and-run tactics, would be n\
ecessary. This led )Tj
T*
(to the construction of vast underground networks of rooms, corridors and\
tunnels. In the )Tj
T*
(period prior to the revolt, Simeon used these networks for training. Sub\
sequently, once )Tj
T*
(hostilities had begun, they served as bases and staging areas, enabling \
the rebels to launch a )Tj
T*
(sudden lightning assault, then disappear - the kind of ambush with which\
American soldiers, )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(to their cost, became familiar during the war in Vietnam.)Tj
11 0 0 11 322.7575 421.9575 Tm
(32)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 333.7575 418.4375 Tm
( But Simeon did not confine )Tj
-23.546 -1.2 Td
(himself solely to guerrilla operations. His army included many volunteer\
s from abroad, many )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(mercenaries and professional soldiers with considerable military experie\
nce. Indeed, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(surviving records discovered by archaeologists have revealed that a numb\
er of Simeon's )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(officers and staff spoke only Greek.)Tj
11 0 0 11 207.0237 354.545 Tm
(33)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 218.0237 351.025 Tm
( With such well-trained forces at his disposal, he could, )Tj
-15.129 -1.2 Td
(on occasion, meet the Romans in pitched battle.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Within the first year of the revolt, Simeon had destroyed at least\
one complete Roman )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(legion, and probably a second.)Tj
11 0 0 11 178.025 303.6325 Tm
(34)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 189.025 300.1125 Tm
( Palestine had been effectively cleared of Roman troops. )Tj
-13.02 -1.2 Td
(Jerusalem had been recaptured and a Judaic administration installed ther\
e. The campaign )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(came within a hair's-breadth of total success. It failed primarily becau\
se Simeon was let down )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(by his expected allies. According to his overall grand design, his troop\
s were to be supported )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(by forces from Persia, where a great many Jews still resided and enjoyed\
the sympathetic )Tj
T*
(favour of the reigning dynasty. Just when Simeon most needed these reinf\
orcements, )Tj
T*
(however, Persia itself was invaded from the north by marauding hill trib\
es, who effectively )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(pinned down Persian resources, leaving Simeon bereft of his promised sup\
port.)Tj
11 0 0 11 446.1225 186.72 Tm
(35)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 166.7 Tm
( In Syria, safely outside Palestine, the Romans regrouped under the\
personal leadership of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the Emperor Hadrian, with Julius Severus, formerly governor of Britain, \
as his second-in-)Tj
T*
(command. Another full-scale invasion ensued, involving as many as twelve\
legions, some )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(eighty thousand troops. In a two-pronged advance, they fought their way \
from post to post )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(down the entire length of the Holy Land. Eventually Simeon was cornered,\
making his last )Tj
T*
(stand at Battir, his headquarters, a few miles west of Jerusalem, in ad \
135.)Tj
T*
( During the entire course of the revolt, Simeon's troops were in co\
nstant occupation of )Tj
T*
(Qumran. Coins found in the ruins attest to their presence in what would,\
after all, have been a )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(146 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
792 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 604 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 574 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 557.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 541 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 349 520 192 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 332.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 299.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 266.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 250 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 233.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 217 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 200.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 167.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 134.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 101.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 68.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 52 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 16 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(site of considerable strategic importance. It is thus possible, despite \
the claims of Father de )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Vaux, that some, at least, of the Dead Sea Scrolls were deposited in Qum\
ran as late as )Tj
T*
(Simeon's time.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 257.5 612.2577 Tm
(15)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-2.459 -1.201 Td
(Zealot Suicide)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 562.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 521.4319 Tm
(O)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 27.505 521.4319 Tm
(nce the broad messianic movement of lst-century Palestine is seen in per\
spective, and )Tj
-1.273 -1.407 Td
(once the apparently diverse sects are seen as integral parts of it, a nu\
mber of hitherto )Tj
T*
(inexplicable elements and anomalies slip into place. Thus, for example, \
the apocalyptic and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(eschatological ferocity of John the Baptist begins to make sense, as doe\
s his role in the events )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(recounted by the Gospels. Thus, too, can one account for a number of the\
ologically awkward )Tj
T*
(passages and incidents pertaining to Jesus' own career. There is, as we \
have noted, at least )Tj
T*
(one 'Zealot' in his following, and possibly more. There is the violence \
of his action in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(overturning the tables of the money-changers at the Temple. There is his\
execution not by )Tj
T*
(Judaic but by Roman authorities, in a fashion specifically reserved for \
political offenders. )Tj
T*
(There are numerous other instances, which the authors of this book have \
examined at length )Tj
T*
(elsewhere. Finally, there are Jesus' own words:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth; it is\
not peace I have come to )Tj
T*
(bring, )Tj
T*
( but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, a da\
ughter against her )Tj
T*
(mother . . . )Tj
T*
( \(Matt. 10:34-5\))Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(And, more tellingly still, in unmistakably Qumranic phraseology:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( Do not imagine that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets\
. I have come not to )Tj
T*
(abolish )Tj
T*
( but to complete [or fulfil] them . . . not one dot, not one little\
stroke shall disappear from )Tj
T*
(the Law )Tj
T*
( until its purpose is achieved. Therefore the man who infringes eve\
n one of the least of )Tj
T*
(these )Tj
T*
( commandments and teaches others to do the same will be considered \
the least in the )Tj
T*
(Kingdom of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Heaven. \(Matt. 5:17-19\)!)Tj
T*
( )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(147 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
793 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 765.5 520 0.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 203.087 520 116.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 186.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 153.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 120.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 87.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 54.587 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 38.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 2.087 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.5875 Tm
(In this passage, it is almost as if Jesus had anticipated Paul's advent.\
Certainly he could not )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(have warned against it any more specifically. By the standards he lays d\
own, Paul's status in )Tj
T*
(the Kingdom of Heaven cannot be much higher than that of official)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(pariah-in-residence.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Another anomaly that emerges in a fresh light is the fortress of M\
asada, and the character )Tj
T*
(and mentality of its tenacious defenders. When the Holy Land rose in rev\
olt in ad 66, Masada )Tj
T*
(was one of the first strongholds to be seized - by Menahem, the son or g\
randson of Judas of )Tj
T*
(Galilee, founder of the 'Zealots'. Perched high on a sheer-sided mountai\
n overlooking the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(south-western shore of the Dead Sea, some thirty-three miles below Qumra\
n, the place )Tj
T*
(became the rebels' most important bastion, the supreme symbol and embodi\
ment of )Tj
T*
(resistance. Long after that resistance had collapsed elsewhere, Masada c\
ontinued to hold out. )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem, for example, was occupied and razed within two years of the i\
nsurrection's )Tj
T*
(outbreak - in ad 68. Masada remained impregnable, however, until ad 74. \
From within its )Tj
T*
(walls, some 960 defenders withstood repeated assaults and a full-scale s\
iege by a Roman )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(army estimated to have numbered fifteen thousand.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Despite the tenacity of this resistance, Masada's position, by the\
middle of April ad 74, )Tj
T*
(had become hopeless. Cut off from reinforcement, entirely encircled by R\
oman troops, the )Tj
T*
(garrison no longer had any prospect of withstanding a general assault. T\
he besieging )Tj
T*
(Romans, after bombarding the fortress with heavy siege machinery, had co\
nstructed an )Tj
T*
(immense ramp running up the mountainside and, on the night of 15 April, \
prepared for their )Tj
T*
(final onslaught. The garrison, under the command of Eleazar ben Jair, ca\
me to their own )Tj
T*
(decision. The men killed their wives and children. Ten men were then cho\
sen to kill their )Tj
T*
(comrades. Having done so, they proceeded to draw lots, choosing one to d\
ispatch the )Tj
T*
(remaining nine. After he had performed this task, he set fire to what re\
mained of the )Tj
T*
(buildings in the fortress and killed himself. Altogether, 960 men, women\
and children )Tj
T*
(perished. When the Romans burst through the gate the following morning, \
they found only )Tj
T*
(corpses amid the ruins. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Two women and five children escaped the carnage, supposedly having\
hidden in the )Tj
T*
(water conduits under the fortress while the rest of the garrison killed \
themselves. Josephus )Tj
T*
(recounts the testimony of one of the women - drawing, he says, on her in\
terrogation by )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Roman officers.)Tj
11 0 0 11 98.5912 260.695 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 104.0912 257.175 Tm
( According to Josephus, she furnished a detailed account of what transpi\
red )Tj
-6.843 -1.2 Td
(on the last night of the siege. If this account is to be believed \(and \
there is no reason why it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(shouldn't\), Eleazar, the commander of the fortress, exhorted his follow\
ers to their mass )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(suicide by his charismatic and persuasive eloquence:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( Ever since primitive man began to think, the words of our ancestor\
s and of the gods, )Tj
T*
(supported by )Tj
T*
( the actions and spirits of our forefathers, have constantly impres\
sed on us that life is the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(calamity )Tj
T*
( for man, not death. Death gives freedom to our souls and lets them\
depart to their own )Tj
T*
(pure home )Tj
T*
( where they will know nothing of any calamity; but while they are c\
onfined within a )Tj
T*
(mortal body )Tj
T*
( and share its miseries, in strict truth they are dead.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(148 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
794 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 733 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.5 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 500.587 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 484.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 433.175 520 50.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 118.262 520 314.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 82.262 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( For association of the divine with the mortal is most improp\
er. Certainly the soul can )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(do a )Tj
T*
( great deal when imprisoned in the body; it makes the body its own \
organ of sense, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(moving it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( invisibly and impelling it in its actions further than mortal natu\
re can reach. But when, )Tj
T*
(freed from )Tj
T*
( the weight that drags it down to earth and is hung about it, the s\
oul returns to its own )Tj
T*
(place, then in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( truth it partakes of a blessed power and an utterly unfettered str\
ength, remaining as )Tj
T*
(invisible to )Tj
T*
( human eyes as God Himself. Not even while it is in the body can it\
be viewed; it enters )Tj
T*
( undetected and departs unseen, having itself one imperishable natu\
re, but causing a )Tj
T*
(change in the )Tj
T*
( body; for whatever the soul touches lives and blossoms, whatever i\
t deserts withers and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dies: such )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( is the superabundance it has of immortality.)Tj
11 0 0 11 271.6075 508.695 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 488.675 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(According to Josephus, Eleazar concludes: 'Let us die unenslaved by our \
enemies, and leave )Tj
T*
(this world as free men in company with our wives and children. That is w\
hat the Law )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(ordains.')Tj
11 0 0 11 56.3925 441.2825 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 421.2625 Tm
( On occasion, Josephus is unreliable. When he is so, however, it sh\
ows. In this instance, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(there is certainly no reason to doubt his word; and the excavations of M\
asada conducted in )Tj
T*
(the 1960s tend to support his version of events. It is, of course, proba\
ble that he embellished )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Eleazar's speeches somewhat, making them perhaps more eloquent \(and lon\
g-winded\) than )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(they might actually have been, availing himself of some poetic licence. \
But the general tenor )Tj
T*
(of the narrative rings true, and has always been accepted by historians.\
What is more, )Tj
T*
(Josephus had a unique and first-hand understanding of the mentality that\
dictated the mass )Tj
T*
(suicide at Masada. At the beginning of the revolt, he himself had been a\
rebel commander in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Galilee. In AD 67, his forces were besieged by the Romans under Vespasia\
n at Jotapata - )Tj
T*
(now Yodefat, near Sepphoris. When the town fell, many of its defenders c\
ommitted suicide )Tj
T*
(rather than submit to capture. Many others, including Josephus himself, \
fled and hid in caves. )Tj
T*
(According to his own account, he found himself in one cave with forty ot\
her fugitives. Here, )Tj
T*
(as at Masada, lots were drawn as to who would kill his comrades. Whether\
'by chance', as )Tj
T*
(Josephus suggests, or by 'the providence of God', or perhaps by a fiddle\
which aided and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(abetted one or the other, he and another man ended up as the sole surviv\
ors. Persuading his )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(companion to surrender, he then himself defected to the victorious Roman\
s.)Tj
11 0 0 11 427.0237 175.87 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 432.5237 172.35 Tm
( He does not )Tj
-30.729 -1.2 Td
(emerge from the adventure in any very creditable light, of course. But e\
ven if he himself )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(could not live up to them, he was no stranger to 'Zealot' attitudes, inc\
luding their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(preparedness for self-immolation in the name of the Law.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In reality, there was a fairly sophisticated logic governing such \
self-immolation, which )Tj
T*
(would not have been readily apparent to Josephus' readers, either at the\
time or subsequently. )Tj
T*
(The mass suicides at Masada, at Gamala and at other sites are explained \
by Eisenman as )Tj
T*
(resting ultimately on the uniquely 'Zealot' concept of resurrection. Thi\
s concept derived )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(primarily from two Old Testament prophets, Daniel and Ezekiel, both of w\
hose texts were )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(149 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
795 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 683.262 520 82.738 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.262 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.762 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.762 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.262 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 500.35 520 34.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.35 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 351.85 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 318.85 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.35 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 269.35 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 252.85 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 219.85 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 186.85 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 170.35 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 153.85 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 104.35 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 68.35 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.85 Tm
(found among the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran. Daniel \(Daniel 12:2\) was t\
he first to give )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(expression to the concept in any developed form: 'Of those who lie sleep\
ing in the dust of the )Tj
T*
(earth many will awake, some to everlasting life, some to shame and everl\
asting disgrace.' He )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(speaks, too, of an imminent 'Kingdom of Heaven', and of 'End Times', of \
the 'coming of an )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(anointed Prince', of a 'Son of Man' on whom 'was conferred sovereignty' \
\(Daniel 7:13-14\).)Tj
T*
( In Ezekiel, the relevant passage is the famous vision of a valley \
filled with dry bones, all )Tj
T*
(of which, God announces, will live again:)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( I mean to raise you from your graves . . . and lead you back to th\
e soil of Israel. And you )Tj
T*
(will )Tj
T*
( know that I am Yahweh, when I open your graves and raise you from \
your graves . . . )Tj
T*
(And I shall )Tj
T*
( put my spirit in you, and you will live . . .' \(Ezekiel 37:12-14\)\
)Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(So important was this passage deemed to be that a copy of it was found b\
uried under the floor )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(of the synagogue at Masada.)Tj
11 0 0 11 166.9425 508.4575 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 488.4375 Tm
( The concept of resurrection derived from Daniel and Ezekiel was pi\
cked up and adopted )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(by the original 'zealots for the Law', the Maccabees. Thus, in the secon\
d book of Maccabees, )Tj
T*
(it is used to encourage martyrdom for the sake of the Law. In 2 Maccabee\
s 14:42, an Elder of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jerusalem kills himself rather than be captured and suffer outrages. In \
2 Maccabees 6:18ff., a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(priest and teacher of the Law kills himself as an 'example of how to mak\
e a good death . . . )Tj
T*
(for the venerable and holy laws'. This incident, according to Eisenman, \
is the prototype for )Tj
T*
(the establishment of later Zealot mentality. The principle finds its ful\
lest expression in 2 )Tj
T*
(Maccabees 7, where seven brothers submit to death by torture rather than\
transgress the Law:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( Said one brother, '. . . you may discharge us from this present li\
fe, but the king of the )Tj
T*
(world will )Tj
T*
( raise us up, since it is for his laws that we die, to live again f\
or ever.')Tj
T*
( Another said, 'It was heaven that gave me these limbs; for t\
he sake of his laws I )Tj
T*
(disdain them; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( from him I hope to receive them again.')Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The next said to his tormentors, 'Ours is the better choice,\
to meet death at men's )Tj
T*
(hands, yet )Tj
T*
( relying on God's promise that we shall be raised up by him; wherea\
s for you . . . there can )Tj
T*
(be no )Tj
T*
( resurrection, no new life.')Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(Here then, in the pre-Christian book of Maccabees, is the principle of b\
odily resurrection that )Tj
T*
(will figure so prominently in later Christian theology. It is available,\
however, as the third of )Tj
T*
(the above speeches makes clear, only to the righteous, to those 'zealous\
for the Law'.)Tj
T*
( But there is another point of relevance in the passage devoted to \
the death of the seven )Tj
T*
(brothers. Just before the last of them is to be executed, his mother is \
brought in to see him. )Tj
T*
(She has been urged to plead with him to submit and thereby save himself.\
Instead, she says to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(him that 'in the day of mercy I may receive you back in your brothers' c\
ompany' \(2 Mace. )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(150 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
796 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 584.5 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 436 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 400 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(7:29\). At the end of time, those who die together will be resurrected t\
ogether. Thus Eleazar, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in his exhortation to the garrison of Masada, urges them to die 'in comp\
any with our wives )Tj
T*
(and children. That is what the Law ordains.' Not the Law of the 'Sadduce\
e' establishment or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of later Judaism - only the Law of the so-called 'Zealots'. Had the wome\
n and children in the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fortress been left alive, they would not have been exterminated by the v\
ictorious Romans. )Tj
T*
(But they would have been separated from their menfolk and from each othe\
r. And many of )Tj
T*
(them would have been enslaved, raped, consigned to Roman army brothels a\
nd thereby )Tj
T*
(defiled, bereft of their ritual purity according to the Law. At Masada, \
separation and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(defilement were feared more than death, since death, for the 'Righteous'\
, would have been )Tj
T*
(only temporary. Here then, among the ferocious defenders of Masada, is a\
principle of bodily )Tj
T*
(resurrection virtually identical to that of later Christianity.)Tj
T*
( The garrison who defended Masada can hardly be reconciled with tra\
ditional images of )Tj
T*
(placid, peace-loving Essenes - who, according to adherents of the consen\
sus, made up the )Tj
T*
(community at Qumran. And indeed, as we have noted, adherents of the cons\
ensus continue to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(insist that no connection can possibly have existed between the Qumran c\
ommunity and the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(garrison at Masada, despite the discovery at Masada of texts identical t\
o some of those found )Tj
T*
(at Qumran - found at Qumran and, in at least two instances, found nowher\
e else - and despite )Tj
T*
(the use by the defenders of Masada of precisely the same calendar as tha\
t used by the )Tj
T*
(Qumran material: a unique solar calendar, in contrast to the lunar calen\
dar of the official )Tj
T*
('Sadducee' establishment and of later rabbinical Judaism.)Tj
T*
( Once again, there can be discerned the configuration of what Eisen\
man has described: a )Tj
T*
(broad messianic nationalistic movement in which a number of supposed fac\
tions, if there was )Tj
T*
(ever any distinction between them, effectively merged. Eisenman's explan\
ation )Tj
T*
(accommodates and accounts for what has previously seemed a welter of con\
tradictions and )Tj
T*
(anomalies. It makes sense, too, of the mission on which Paul is dispatch\
ed by James and the )Tj
T*
(hierarchy of the so-called 'early Church' - the 'Nazorean' enclave -\
in Jerusalem. In biblical )Tj
T*
(times, it must be remembered, 'Israel' was not just a territory, not jus\
t a particular tract of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(land. Even more important, 'Israel' denoted a people, a tribe, a 'host'.\
When Paul and other )Tj
T*
('evangelists' are sent forth by the hierarchy in Jerusalem, their purpos\
e is to make converts to )Tj
T*
(the Law - that is, to 'Israel'. What would this have meant in practical \
terms, if not the )Tj
T*
(recruitment of an army? Since Old Testament times, and especially since \
the 'Babylonian )Tj
T*
(Captivity', the 'tribe of Israel' had been scattered across the Mediterr\
anean world and beyond, )Tj
T*
(on into Persia - where, at the time of Simeon bar Kochba's rising in ad \
132, there was still )Tj
T*
(enough sympathy to elicit at least a promise of support. Were not the\
emissaries of the )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem hierarchy sent to tap this potentially immense source of manpo\
wer - to 'call to the )Tj
T*
(colours' the dispersed people of 'Israel' to drive the Roman invaders fr\
om their native soil and )Tj
T*
(liberate their homeland? And Paul, in preaching a wholly new religion ra\
ther than mustering )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(recruits, was, in effect, depoliticising, demilitarising and emasculatin\
g the movement.)Tj
11 0 0 11 481.2675 145.695 Tm
(7)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 486.7675 142.175 Tm
( This )Tj
-34.674 -1.2 Td
(would, of course, have been a far more serious matter than merely lapsin\
g from dogma or )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(certain ritual observances. It would have been, in fact, a form of treas\
on. For the Law, as it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(figures in the Dead Sea Scrolls, is not wholly confined to dogma and rit\
ual observances. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Running throughout the Qumran texts, as a sacred duty, there is clearly \
a thrust to build a )Tj
T*
(legitimate messianic persona, whether royal, or priestly, or both. By im\
plication, this would )Tj
T*
(involve the re-establishment of the ancient monarchy and priesthood, to \
drive out the invader, )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(151 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
797 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 715.087 520 50.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 698.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 682.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 649.087 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 632.587 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 602.587 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 572.562 520 30.026 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 556.062 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 229.206 520 326.856 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 163.206 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 146.706 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 113.706 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 80.706 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 47.706 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 11.706 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(to reclaim and purify the Holy Land for the people chosen by God to inha\
bit it. In the words )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(of the 'War Scroll': 'The dominion of the [invaders] shall come to an en\
d . . . the sons of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(righteousness shall shine over all the ends of the earth. ')Tj
11 0 0 11 316.075 723.195 Tm
(8)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 703.175 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 257.5 610.8452 Tm
(16)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-6.904 -1.201 Td
(Paul )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\227 )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(Roman Agent or Informer?)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 560.6492 Tm
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 536.4936 Tm
(W)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 32.5 536.4936 Tm
(ith this grand design in mind, it is worth looking again at the confused\
and sketchy )Tj
-1.636 -1.407 Td
(description of the events that occur towards the end of the Acts of the \
Apostles. Paul, it will )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(be remembered, after a prolonged evangelistic mission abroad, has again \
been summoned to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jerusalem by James arid the irate hierarchy. Sensing trouble, his immedi\
ate supporters exhort )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(him repeatedly, at each stage of his itinerary, not to go; but Paul, nev\
er a man to shrink from )Tj
T*
(a confrontation, remains deaf to their appeals. Meeting with James and o\
ther members of the )Tj
T*
(community's leadership, he is again castigated for laxity in his observa\
tion of the Law. Acts )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(does not record Paul's response to these charges, but it would appear, f\
rom what follows, that )Tj
T*
(he perjures himself, denying the accusations against him, which his own \
letters reveal to have )Tj
0 -1.305 TD
(been justified.)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
11 0 0 11 87.9075 387.2258 Tm
(l)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 90.9655 383.7058 Tm
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(In other words, he recognises the magnitude of his offence; and however \
)Tj
-5.888 -1.2 Td
(fierce his integrity, however fanatic his loyalty to 'his' version of Je\
sus, he acknowledges that )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(some sort of compromise is, this time, necessary. Thus, when asked to pu\
rify himself for )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(seven days and thereby demonstrate the unjustness of the allegations aga\
inst him, he readily )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(consents to do so. Eisenman suggests that James may have been aware of t\
he true situation )Tj
T*
(and that Paul may well have been 'set up'. Had he refused the ritual of \
purification, he would )Tj
T*
(have declared himself openly in defiance of the Law. By acceding to the \
ritual, he became, )Tj
T*
(even more than before, the 'Liar' of the 'Habakkuk Commentary'. Whatever\
the course of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(action he chose, he would have damned himself- which may have been preci\
sely what James )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(intended.)Tj
11 0 0 11 60.7925 237.3133 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 217.2933 Tm
( In any case, and despite his exculpatory self-purification, Paul c\
ontinues to inspire enmity )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in those 'zealous for the Law' - who, a few days later, attack him in th\
e Temple. 'This', they )Tj
T*
(proclaim, 'is the man who preaches to everyone everywhere . . . against \
the Law' \(Acts )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(21:28\). The ensuing riot is no minor disturbance:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( This roused the whole city: people came running from all sides; th\
ey seized Paul and )Tj
T*
(dragged him )Tj
T*
( out of the Temple, and the gates were closed behind them. They wou\
ld have killed him if )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(a report )Tj
T*
( had not reached the tribune of the cohort that there was rioting a\
ll over Jerusalem. \(Acts )Tj
T*
(21:30-)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(152 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
798 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.461 520 115.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.461 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.549 520 182.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 136.136 520 166.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 100.136 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( 31\))Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
(The cohort is called out - no fewer than six hundred men -and Paul, in t\
he nick of time, is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(rescued, presumably to prevent civil upheaval on an even greater scale. \
Why else would the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(cohort bother to save the life of one heterodox Jew who'd incurred the w\
rath of his fellows? )Tj
T*
(The sheer scale of the tumult attests to the kind of currency, influence\
and power the so-)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(called 'early Church' must have exercised in Jerusalem at the time - )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(among Jewsl )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Clearly, we )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(are dealing with a movement within Judaism itself, which commands loyalt\
y from much of )Tj
T*
(the city's populace.)Tj
T*
( Having rescued him from the incensed mob, the Romans arrest Paul -\
who, before he is )Tj
T*
(marched off to prison, asks permission to make a self-exonerating speech\
. Inexplicably, the )Tj
T*
(Romans acquiesce to his request, even though the speech serves only to f\
urther inflame the )Tj
T*
(mob. Paul is then carried off for torture and interrogation. As was aske\
d previously, )Tj
T*
(interrogation about what? Why torture and interrogate a man who has offe\
nded his co-)Tj
T*
(religionists on fine points of orthodoxy and ritual observance? There is\
only one explanation )Tj
T*
(for the Romans taking such an interest - that Paul is suspected of being\
privy to information )Tj
T*
(of a political and/or military nature.)Tj
T*
( The only serious political and/or military adversaries confronting\
the Romans were the )Tj
T*
(adherents of the nationalistic movement - the 'Zealots' of popular tradi\
tion. And Paul, the )Tj
T*
(evangelist of the 'early Church', was under threat from those 'zealous f\
or the Law' \226 forty or )Tj
T*
(more of them in number - who were plotting to kill him, vowing not to ea\
t or drink until they )Tj
T*
(had done so. Saved from this fate by his hitherto unmentioned nephew, he\
is bundled, under )Tj
T*
(escort, out of Jerusalem to Caesarea, where he invokes his right as a Ro\
man citizen to make a )Tj
T*
(personal appeal to the emperor. While in Caesarea, he hobnobs in congeni\
al and intimate )Tj
T*
(fashion with the Roman procurator, Antonius Felix. Eisenman has emphasis\
ed that he is also )Tj
T*
(intimate with the procurator's brother-in-law, Herod Agrippa II, and wit\
h the king's sister - )Tj
T*
(later the mistress of Titus, the Roman commander who will destroy Jerusa\
lem and eventually )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(become emperor.)Tj
11 0 0 11 105.4525 310.6564 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 290.6364 Tm
( These are not the only suspicious elements looming in the backgrou\
nd of Paul's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(biography. From the very beginning, his apparent wealth, his Roman citiz\
enship and his easy )Tj
T*
(familiarity with the presiding establishment have differentiated him fro\
m his fellows and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(from other members of the 'early Church'. Obviously, he has influential \
connections with the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(ruling elite. How else could so young a man have become the high priest'\
s hatchet man? In )Tj
T*
(his letter to the Romans \(16:11\), moreover, he speaks of a companion s\
trikingly named )Tj
T*
('Herodion' - a name obviously associated with the reigning dynasty, and \
most unlikely for a )Tj
T*
(fellow evangelist. And Acts 13:1 refers to one of Paul's companions in A\
ntioch as 'Manaen, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(who had been brought up with Herod the Tetrarch'. Here, again, there is \
evidence of high-)Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(level aristocratic affiliation.)Tj
11 0 0 11 162.3638 144.2439 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 124.2239 Tm
( Startling though the suggestion may be, it does seem at least poss\
ible that Paul was some )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(species of Roman 'agent'. Eisenman was led to this conclusion by the scr\
olls themselves, then )Tj
T*
(found the references in the New Testament to support it. And indeed, if \
one combines and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(superimposes the materials found at Qumran with those in Acts, together \
with obscure )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(references in Paul's letters, such a conclusion becomes a distinct possi\
bility. But there is )Tj
T*
(another possibility as well, possibly no less startling. Those last mudd\
led and enigmatic )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(153 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
799 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 551.5 520 214.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.5 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 337 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 304 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 271 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 241 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 224.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 208 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 81.961 520 126.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 45.961 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(events in Jerusalem, the nick-of-time intervention of the Romans, Paul's\
heavily escorted )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(departure from the city, his sojourn in luxury at Caesarea, his mysterio\
us and utter )Tj
T*
(disappearance from the stage of history - these things find a curious ec\
ho in our own era. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(One is reminded of beneficiaries of the 'Witness Protection Program' in \
the States. One is )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(also reminded of the so-called 'supergrass phenomenon' in Northern Irela\
nd. In both cases, a )Tj
T*
(member of an illicit organisation - dedicated to organised crime or to p\
aramilitary terrorism - )Tj
T*
(is 'turned' by the authorities. He consents to give evidence and testify\
, in exchange for )Tj
T*
(immunity, protection, relocation and money. Like Paul, he would incur th\
e vengeful wrath of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(his colleagues. Like Paul, he would be placed under seemingly disproport\
ionate military and/)Tj
T*
(or police protection. Like Paul, he would be smuggled out under escort. \
Having co-operated )Tj
T*
(with the authorities, he would then be given a 'new identity' and, toget\
her with his family, )Tj
T*
(resettled somewhere theoretically out of reach of his vindictive comrade\
s. So far as the world )Tj
T*
(at large was concerned, he would, like Paul, disappear.)Tj
T*
( Does Paul, then, belong in the company of history's 'secret agents\
'? Of history's informers )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and 'supergrasses'? These are some of the questions generated by Robert \
Eisenman's research. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(But in any case, Paul's arrival on the scene set a train of events in mo\
tion that was to prove )Tj
T*
(irreversible. What began as a localised movement within the framework of\
existing Judaism, )Tj
T*
(its influence extending no further than the Holy Land, was transformed i\
nto something of a )Tj
T*
(scale and magnitude that no one at the time can have foreseen. The movem\
ent entrusted to )Tj
T*
(the 'early Church' and the Qumran community was effectively hijacked and\
converted into )Tj
T*
(something that could no longer accommodate its progenitors. There emerge\
d a skein of )Tj
T*
(thought which, heretical at its inception, was to evolve in the course o\
f the next two centuries )Tj
T*
(into an entirely new religion. What had been heresy within the framework\
of Judaism was )Tj
T*
(now to become the orthodoxy of Christianity. Few accidents of history ca\
n have had more far-)Tj
T*
(reaching consequences.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 219.3 249.2319 Tm
(Postscript)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 229.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
22.5 0 0 22.5 10 188.4319 Tm
(T)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 25.0075 188.4319 Tm
(he story of the scrolls is, needless to say, unfinished. The plot contin\
ues to unfold, taking )Tj
-1.091 -1.407 Td
(new twists and turns. Much has happened since this book appeared in Grea\
t Britain in May )Tj
T*
(1991. By the autumn, things had built to a climax, and the scrolls were \
the subject of front )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(page coverage, as well as editorials, in such newspapers as )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
(The New York Times. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Even as the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(American edition of our book is being prepared for publication, other bo\
oks and articles are )Tj
T*
(appearing in print, conferences are being convened, media attention is i\
ntensifying, various )Tj
T*
(protagonists are issuing new statements.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In May, the Israeli 'Oversight Committee' granted to Oxford Univer\
sity a complete set of )Tj
T*
(photographs of all scroll material, and a centre for scroll research was\
established under the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(154 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
800 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 700 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.461 520 148.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.961 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.961 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.961 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 36.961 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(auspices of Gaza Vermes. Access, however, was still rigorously restricte\
d, still denied to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(independent scholars. Interviewed on British television, Professor Norma\
n Golb of the )Tj
T*
(University of Chicago queried the purpose of such a centre. Was it, he a\
sked, simply to be a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(centre of frustration?)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( On 5 September, the American press reported that two scholars at H\
ebrew Union College )Tj
T*
(in Cincinnati, Professor Ben-Zion Wacholder and one of his doctoral stud\
ents, Martin G. )Tj
T*
(Abegg, had 'broken the monopoly' of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Using the conc\
ordance prepared )Tj
T*
(by the international team in the 1950s, they had then employed a compute\
r to reconstruct the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(texts themselves. The results, said to be 80 percent accurate, were publ\
ished by the Biblical )Tj
T*
(Archaeology Society under Hershel Shanks. The surviving members of the i\
nternational team )Tj
T*
(were predictably furious. Professor Cross inveighed against 'piracy'. 'W\
hat else would you )Tj
T*
(call it,' the deposed John Strugnall fulminated, 'but stealing?' On 7 Se\
ptember, however, an )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(editorial in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The New York Times )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(endorsed Wacholder's and Abegg's action:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Some on the committee might be tempted to charge the Cincinnati sc\
holars with piracy. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(On the )Tj
T*
( contrary, Mr. Wacholder and Mr. Abegg are to be applauded for thei\
r work - and for )Tj
T*
(sifting )Tj
T*
( through layer upon layer of obfuscation. The committee, with its o\
bsessive secrecy and )Tj
T*
(cloak-and-)Tj
T*
( dagger scholarship, long ago exhausted its credibility with schola\
rs and laymen alike. The )Tj
T*
(two )Tj
T*
( Cincinnatians seem to know what the scroll committee forgot: that \
the scrolls and what )Tj
T*
(they say )Tj
T*
( about the common roots of Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism belong\
to civilisation, not )Tj
T*
(to a few )Tj
T*
( sequestered professors.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( A more electrifying revelation was soon to follow. On 22 September\
, the Huntingdon )Tj
T*
(Library in California disclosed that it possessed a complete set of phot\
ographs of all )Tj
T*
(unpublished scroll material. These had been entrusted to the library by \
Betty Bechtel of the )Tj
T*
(Bechtel Corporation, who had commissioned them around 1961. Having learn\
ed of the )Tj
T*
(photographs' existence, members of the international team had demanded t\
hem back. The )Tj
T*
(Huntingdon had responded with defiance. Not only did the library make it\
s possession of the )Tj
T*
(photographs public but it also announced its intention of making them ac\
cessible to any )Tj
T*
(scholar who wished to see them. Microfilm copies were to be offered for \
as little as ten )Tj
T*
(dollars. 'When you free the scrolls,' said William A. Moffett, the libra\
ry's director, 'you free )Tj
T*
(the scholars.')Tj
T*
( Again, of course, members of the international team kicked up a ru\
mpus, this time more )Tj
T*
(petulant than before. Again, there were charges of 'theft of scholarly w\
ork'. One independent )Tj
T*
(professor replied, however, that most people '. . . will regard [the Hun\
ting-ton] as Robin )Tj
T*
(Hoods, stealing from the academically privileged to give to those hungry\
for . . . knowledge.')Tj
T*
( Amir Drori, head of the Israeli Antiquities Authority, accused the\
Huntington of sundry )Tj
T*
(legal transgressions - even though the photographs had been taken long b\
efore the scrolls )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(155 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
801 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 683.5 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 568 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 535 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 502 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.5 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 170.587 520 248.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 134.587 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(passed into Israeli hands as spoils of war. Magen Broshi, director of th\
e Shrine of the Book, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(spoke darkly of legal action. The Huntington stood its ground. 'There's \
either freedom of )Tj
T*
(access or not. Our position is that there should be unfettered access.' \
By that time, release of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the photographs was already a fait accompli, and any attempt to reverse \
the process would )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(have been futile. 'It's too late,' the Huntington declared. 'It's done.'\
)Tj
T*
( On 25 September, the Israeli government gave way, carefully distan\
cing itself from )Tj
T*
(Drori's and Broshi's pronouncements. Drori and Broshi were said to have \
been 'speaking as )Tj
T*
(individuals, not as representatives of the Israeli government.' Yuvel Ne\
'eman, Israel's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Minister of Science, issued a press statement asserting that)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( . . . every scholar should be granted free access to examine the s\
crolls and publish his )Tj
T*
(findings. It )Tj
T*
( is fortunate that this opportunity has now become feasible through\
public exposure of the )Tj
T*
(scrolls' )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( photographic collection by the Huntington Library.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( In the meantime, at 11:05 that morning, Robert Eisenman's name had\
gone down on )Tj
T*
(record as that of the first scholar formally to request and obtain acces\
s to the Huntingdon's )Tj
T*
(photographs of scroll material. The battle for access had been won. Ther\
e still remains, )Tj
T*
(however, the process of dismantling the 'orthodoxy of interpretation' pr\
omulgated for the last )Tj
T*
(forty years by the international team.)Tj
T*
( By the time the events chronicled above had hit the headlines, Eis\
enman had begun to )Tj
T*
(pursue his research on other fronts as well. In 1988, he had pointed out\
that the excavations at )Tj
T*
(Qumran were far from complete, far from exhaustive. The surrounding terr\
ain is, in fact, )Tj
T*
(ideal for the preservation of manuscripts, and virtually all experts in \
the field agree that there )Tj
T*
(are more discoveries to be made. It is not just possible, but probable, \
that additional scroll )Tj
T*
(material still exists, buried under landslides and rock-falls. Many cave\
s have yet to be )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(excavated properly - that is, through the rubble of fallen roofs and dow\
n to bed-rock. Other )Tj
T*
(caves, previously explored only by the Bedouin, have to be explored anew\
, since the Bedouin )Tj
T*
(tended to overlook some concealed documents and to leave behind many fra\
gments; and, in )Tj
T*
(any case, officially sanctioned Bedouin excavations effectively ceased w\
ith the 1967 war. )Tj
T*
(There are other sites in the general vicinity of Qumran that have yet to\
be thoroughly )Tj
T*
(explored. Nine miles to the south, for example, on the shores of the Dea\
d Sea, at a place )Tj
T*
(called En el-Ghuweir, an Israeli archaeologist found Qumran-style graves\
and the ruins of a )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Qumran-style \(albeit smaller\) residence.)Tj
11 0 0 11 231.4713 195.195 Tm
(1)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 236.9713 191.675 Tm
( It is certainly reasonable to suppose that the caves )Tj
-16.507 -1.2 Td
(in the nearby wadis, hitherto unexcavated, may also be repositories for \
scrolls.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( With these facts in mind, Eisenman determined to embark on his own\
archaeological )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(explorations. His primary objective was, of course, to look for addition\
al scroll material. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Such material might -as proved to be the case with the 'Temple Scroll' -\
be entirely new. But )Tj
T*
(even if it duplicated material already in the hands of the international\
team, it would render )Tj
T*
(pointless any continued suppression. Quite apart from the prospect of ad\
ditional scroll )Tj
T*
(material, however, Eisenman wanted to build up as complete a picture as \
possible of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(population in the entire region, from Qumran on south towards Masada. Th\
ere might have )Tj
T*
(been, he concluded, other Qumran-style communities. In consequence, he u\
ndertook to look )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(156 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
802 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.5 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 403 520 148.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.461 520 181.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.423 520 99.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 86.423 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(for evidence of any other kind - evidence of water control, for example,\
such as terraces, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(aqueducts and cisterns, which might have been constructed to sustain liv\
estock and support )Tj
T*
(agriculture.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( To date, Michael Baigent has accompanied Robert Eisenman and his t\
eam of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(archaeologists and volunteers on two exploratory expeditions, in January\
1989 and in January )Tj
T*
(1990. In the first of them, they concentrated on the excavation of a cav\
e roughly a mile south )Tj
T*
(of Qumran, some 500 feet up the cliff. The cave opened into a series of \
chambers extending )Tj
T*
(at least eighty feet back into the rock. Part of the interior had a smoo\
th floor made of palm )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fronds and packed mud. No scrolls came to light, but a number of Iron Ag\
e remains were )Tj
T*
(found - a juglet, an oil lamp, and, uniquely, an arrow shaft and arrowhe\
ad in perfect )Tj
T*
(preservation after 3,000 years. The expedition proved, for the first ti\
me, that some at least of )Tj
T*
(the caves around Qumran had been inhabited -not just used as temporary r\
efuges during brief )Tj
T*
(periods of danger, but occupied on a more permanent basis.)Tj
T*
( The second expedition endeavoured to explore as much as possible o\
f the Dead Sea coast )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(south of Qumran and the adjacent cliff-face. The purpose of this underta\
king was to compile )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(an inventory of all hitherto unexplored caves that might warrant subsequ\
ent exhaustive )Tj
T*
(excavation. Dividing itself into small teams, the expedition searched so\
me thirteen miles of )Tj
T*
(cliff, rising precipitously as high as 1,200 feet. Apart from caves, the\
re were found the )Tj
T*
(remains of artificial terraces and walls, of constructions for water con\
trol and irrigation - all )Tj
T*
(attesting to human inhabitation and cultivation. Altogether, 137 habitab\
le caves were located )Tj
T*
(and subjected to preliminary examination without excavation. Of these, 8\
3 were deemed )Tj
T*
(worthy of systematic excavation: they will become the focus of future ar\
chaeological activity.)Tj
T*
( Of particular and revolutionary importance to any such activity wi\
ll be a new system of )Tj
T*
('high-tech' ground radar known as 'Subsurface Interface Radar' \(SIR\). \
We had been )Tj
T*
(discussing with Eisenman the likelihood of there being other caves in th\
e vicinity of Qumran )Tj
T*
(and along the shore of the Dead Sea, as well as of caves, rooms, cellars\
, passages and/or )Tj
T*
(other subterranean structures under the ruins of Qumran itself. De Vaux,\
the only person to )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(attempt any excavation of the actual site, never looked for anything of \
the sort, never really )Tj
T*
(probed beneath the surface. Yet it is virtually unknown for a constructi\
on of the kind attested )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(to by the Qumran ruins )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(not )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(to have underground chambers, passages, dungeons or escape )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(tunnels. It is generally acknowledged that something of the sort must in\
deed exist. But some )Tj
T*
(fairly major excavations would be necessary, involving much trial and er\
ror and probably )Tj
T*
(damage to the site.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
( The prospect, therefore, of finding anything under Qumran seemed, \
)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(a priori, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(doomed in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(advance by the magnitude of what would have been entailed. But in the au\
tumn of 1988 we )Tj
T*
(chanced on a newspaper article about a 'secret burial vault' of possible\
relevance to )Tj
T*
(Shakespearean scholars, found under a church near Stratford-on-Avon. Wh\
at interested us )Tj
T*
(about this article was the fact that the vault had apparently been locat\
ed by a species of )Tj
T*
(underground radar scanning system, operated by a firm based in the south\
of England.)Tj
T*
( The possibilities offered by SIR proved exciting indeed. It was a \
terrestrial equivalent of )Tj
T*
(a ship-based sonar recording system. The apparatus was portable. When mo\
ved at a constant )Tj
T*
(speed over the ground, it produced a computer-generated image of subterr\
anean features. The )Tj
T*
(image in turn was produced through the building up of a profile of 'inte\
rfaces' - that is, points )Tj
T*
(at which earth or rock or any other substance of density and solidity ga\
ve way to air. The )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(157 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
803 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 568 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 416.675 520 151.325 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 383.675 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 367.175 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 334.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 301.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 268.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 235.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 202.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 169.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 136.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 103.175 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 85.262 520 17.913 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 68.762 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 32.762 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(entire system was thus ideal for locating underground caves and cavities\
. At the very least, it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(would register interfaces 30 feet below the surface. Under good conditio\
ns, it could penetrate )Tj
T*
(as deep as 120 feet.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( The manager of the company that operated the radar proved keen to \
help. He had, it )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(transpired, read and enjoyed the books we had previously published. The \
prospect of his )Tj
T*
(equipment being employed at Qumran intrigued him. He even offered to com\
e along on an )Tj
T*
(expedition and operate the apparatus himself. As a result of this offer,\
Eisenman's 1990 )Tj
T*
(expedition made a special point of noting sites warranting investigation\
by radar. We are now )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(waiting for permission from the Israeli government to bring the equipmen\
t into the country )Tj
T*
(and employ it at Qumran.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(The Dead Sea Scrolls found in 1947 were not the first such ancient texts\
to come to light in )Tj
T*
(the Judaean desert. Indeed, there are reports of such texts being found \
as early as the 3rd )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(century a.d. The theologian Origen, one of the early Church Fathers, is \
alleged to have made )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(one such discovery. According to the Church historian Eusebius, Origen f\
ound several )Tj
T*
(different versions of Old Testament texts, some of which had been lost f\
or many years. He is )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(said to have 'hunted them out of their hiding places and brought them to\
light'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 440.0312 475.695 Tm
(2)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 445.5312 472.175 Tm
( One version )Tj
-31.675 -1.2 Td
(of the psalms, we are told, 'was found at Jericho in a jar during the re\
ign of Antoninus, Son of )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(Severus'.)Tj
11 0 0 11 59.445 441.2825 Tm
(3)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 64.945 437.7625 Tm
( This reference allows us to date the discovery to somewhere between a.d\
. 211 and )Tj
-3.996 -1.2 Td
(217.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( More intriguing still is a letter dating from some time shortly be\
fore a.d. 805, written by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Timotheus, Patriarch of Seleucia, to another ecclesiastic:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( We learned from trustworthy Jews who were being instructed . . . i\
n the Christian faith )Tj
T*
(that ten )Tj
T*
( years ago, near Jericho, some books were found in a cave . . . the\
dog of an Arab hunter )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(followed )Tj
T*
( an animal into a cave and didn't return. The Arab went in after it\
and found a small cave )Tj
T*
(in which )Tj
T*
( there were many books. The Arab went to Jerusalem and told the Jew\
s there who then )Tj
T*
(came out )Tj
T*
( in large numbers and found books of the Old Testament and other bo\
oks in Hebrew )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(characters. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( As the person who told this story to me was a learned man . . . I \
asked him about the )Tj
T*
(many )Tj
T*
( references in the New Testament which are referred to as originati\
ng in the Old )Tj
T*
(Testament but )Tj
T*
( which cannot be found there . . . He said: they exist and can be f\
ound in the books from )Tj
T*
(the cave . )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
( . .)Tj
11 0 0 11 40.9375 93.37 Tm
(4)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 73.35 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Similar discoveries have continued to occur through the centuries,\
up until modern times. )Tj
T*
(One of the most famous is that of Moses William Shapira, an antique deal\
er with a shop in )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(158 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
804 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 632.35 520 133.65 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.35 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.311 520 99.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 252.811 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 186.811 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 86.399 520 100.413 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 50.399 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 752.4375 Tm
(Jerusalem in the late 19th century.)Tj
11 0 0 11 198.65 755.9575 Tm
(5)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 204.15 752.4375 Tm
( In 1878, Shapira was told of some Arabs who, on the run )Tj
-14.12 -1.2 Td
(from the authorities, had sought refuge in what is now Jordanian territo\
ry, on the eastern )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(shore of the Dead Sea. Here, in a cave at Wadi Mujib, directly across th\
e Dead Sea from En )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Gedi, they were reported to have found a number of old bundles of rags w\
hich they tore )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(open, hoping to find valuables of some kind. They found only a number of\
dark leather )Tj
T*
(scrolls. One of the Arabs took these away with him and later claimed tha\
t possession of them )Tj
T*
(had brought him luck. This was said to be his reason for not wanting to \
sell them \227 or for )Tj
T*
(raising the price.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Shapira, who sold antiquities to European collectors and museums, \
was intrigued. )Tj
T*
(Through a sheik with whom he was friendly, he managed to purchase what p\
urported to be )Tj
T*
(the entire corpus of material. This comprised fifteen strips of parchmen\
t, each about three-)Tj
T*
(and-a-half by seven inches in size. After studying his acquisition for s\
ome weeks, Shapira )Tj
T*
(realised that what he had was an ancient version of the Book of Deuteron\
omy, one which )Tj
T*
(differed markedly from the established biblical text.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In 1883, after a number of vicissitudes and consultations with exp\
erts, Shapira brought )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(his scroll fragments to London. He was preceded by great excitement and \
extensive coverage )Tj
T*
(in the press. British experts pronounced the fragments genuine, and tran\
slations of them were )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(published in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The Prime Minister, William Gladstone, came to see them and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(discussed their possible purchase with Shapira. A sum of _\2431 million \
was apparently )Tj
T*
(mentioned - a staggering figure for the time.)Tj
T*
( The French government sent a prominent scholar, one of Shapira's o\
ld enemies, across )Tj
T*
(the Channel to examine the fragments and compile a report. Shapira refus\
ed to let the )Tj
T*
(Frenchman inspect the fragments closely or to handle them. The Frenchman\
was allowed )Tj
T*
(only a cursory look at two or three fragments. He was then reduced, by S\
hapira's )Tj
T*
(intransigence, to spending two days looking at two additional fragments \
on display in a glass )Tj
T*
(case, jostled by other visitors to the museum. Out of spite, and a proba\
bly justified )Tj
T*
(exasperation, the Frenchman at last pronounced the fragments to be forge\
ries. Other scholars, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(without even bothering to look at the fragments, echoed this conclusion,\
and the affair )Tj
T*
(quickly degenerated into farce. Shapira had effectively ruined himself. \
Repudiated and )Tj
T*
(discredited, he shot himself in a Rotterdam hotel room on 9 March 1884. \
His scroll fragments )Tj
T*
(were purchased by a London antiquarian book-dealer for ,\24310 5s.)Tj
T*
( Since then, they have disappeared - though they might conceivably \
still turn up in )Tj
T*
(someone's attic or among the belongings of some private collector. Accor\
ding to the last )Tj
T*
(attempt to trace them, they may have been taken to Australia with the ef\
fects of a dealer in )Tj
T*
(antiquities.)Tj
T*
( A number of modern authorities - including Allegro, who made a spe\
cial study of Shapira )Tj
T*
(\227 have become convinced that Shapira's fragments were probably genuin\
e. Had they been )Tj
T*
(discovered this century rather than last, Allegro maintained, they would\
in all likelihood have )Tj
0 -1.303 TD
(proved to be as valid as the material found at Qum-ran.)Tj
11 0 0 11 313.5862 127.5063 Tm
(6)Tj
13.75 0 0 13.75 319.0862 123.9864 Tm
( But in the late 19th century, egos, )Tj
-22.479 -1.2 Td
(scholarly reputations and vested interests were as much 'on the line' as\
they are today. As a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(result, something of potentially priceless value has, almost certainly, \
been irretrievably lost.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( At the same time, discoveries such as Shapira's continue to be mad\
e. Thus, for example, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(in the late 1970s, when we ourselves had little more than a cursory know\
ledge of the Dead )Tj
T*
(Sea Scrolls and other such documents, we were telephoned by a friend fro\
m Paris, a collector )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(159 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
805 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.461 520 99.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.461 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.961 520 115.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.961 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.961 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 86.461 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(of antiques. He asked if, on virtually no notice, we could meet him at a\
restaurant in London, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(not far from Charing Cross. Michael Baigent, who'd done much professiona\
l photography, )Tj
T*
(was particularly requested. He was asked to bring a camera along - and k\
eep it hidden.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( Baigent found our associate in the company of three other men - an\
American collector, a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Palestinian dealer and a Jordanian engineer. He accompanied them to a ne\
arby bank, where )Tj
T*
(they were ushered into a small private room and two wooden chests were p\
roduced, each )Tj
T*
(locked with three padlocks. 'We don't know what's in these chests,' one \
of the bank's officials )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(said pointedly. 'We don't )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(want )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(to know what's in them.' The officials then left, locking )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Baigent and his four companions in the room.)Tj
T*
( A telephone call was made to Jerusalem and some sort of permission\
was obtained. The )Tj
T*
(Jordanian engineer then produced a bunch of keys and proceeded to open t\
he two chests. )Tj
T*
(Inside, there were literally hundreds of thin cardboard sheets, each hol\
ding \(attached by )Tj
T*
(adhesive tape!\) a dozen or so fragments of ancient parchment and/or pap\
yrus. The fragments )Tj
T*
(obviously spanned a considerable period of time, derived from a number o\
f diverse sources )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and had been inscribed in several different languages -Aramaic, for exam\
ple, Hebrew, Greek )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and Arabic. As might be expected of so eclectic and haphazard an assembl\
age, not everything )Tj
T*
(was of value. Many of the fragments proved subsequently to be worthless \
- receipts and )Tj
T*
(documents pertaining to ancient commercial transactions that might have \
been ferreted out of )Tj
T*
(some archaic rubbish tip. But there were others as well.)Tj
T*
( The collection had come to London through the clandestine scroll m\
arket active in )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem and Bethlehem during the 1950s and 1960s, and had been brought\
out of Israel )Tj
T*
(during, or shortly after, the 1967 war. It was now supposedly being offe\
red for sale to a )Tj
T*
(certain unnamed European government, for an alleged price of \2433 milli\
on. Baigent was )Tj
T*
(asked to make a selection of photographs, to be displayed as samples of \
what was available. )Tj
T*
(He took approximately a hundred photographs. But there were hundreds of \
sheets and, )Tj
T*
(altogether, upwards of two thousand fragments, most of)Tj
T*
(them relatively large.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( In the dozen or so years since this incident, we have heard nothin\
g further about the )Tj
T*
(collection. If a sale was indeed negotiated, it was done so quietly, wit\
h no public )Tj
T*
(announcement of any kind. Alternatively, the entire collection may still\
be sequestered in its )Tj
T*
(London bank, or in some other similar depository elsewhere, or amongst t\
he treasures of )Tj
T*
(some private dealer.)Tj
T*
( Transactions such as the one to which we'd been peripherally privy\
were not, we )Tj
T*
(subsequently learned, at all uncommon. During the course of the next dec\
ade, our research )Tj
T*
(was to bring us into contact with an intricate network of antique dealer\
s and collectors )Tj
T*
(engaged in subterranean scroll traffic. This network is international an\
d deals on a scale )Tj
T*
(comparable to that of networks trafficking in paintings or gems. Hundred\
s of thousands of )Tj
T*
(pounds can be produced on virtually immediate notice and be transferred \
on the basis)Tj
T*
(of a handshake.)Tj
T*
( Two factors have conducted to the dissemination of the underground\
scroll market. One )Tj
T*
(was the action of Yadin and the Israeli military in the immediate afterm\
ath of the 1967 war, )Tj
T*
(when the dealer known as Kando was held for interrogation and forced to \
divulge the )Tj
T*
(existence of the 'Temple Scroll'. Not surprisingly, this action upset th\
e existing 'truce' and )Tj
T*
(fostered a profound mistrust between Israeli and Arab dealers. As a resu\
lt, much material )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(160 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
806 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.5 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.5 520 165 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 238 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 40 520 181.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 4 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(found by the Bedouin, which would ordinarily have passed into Israeli ha\
nds, now finds its )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(way illegally to Amman or Damascus or even further afield. From there, i\
t passes to the West )Tj
T*
(via such routes as Turkey or the Lebanon.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( A second spur to the subterranean scroll market was a law institut\
ed under the auspices of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(UNESCO, according to which any antiquities smuggled out of a country mus\
t be returned to )Tj
T*
(their point of origin. This law was made retroactive. In consequence, in\
dividuals who had )Tj
T*
(invested large sums in scroll material, or hoped to obtain large sums fo\
r scroll material, could )Tj
T*
(not afford to make their holdings public. In effect, the law drove the c\
landestine traffic in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scrolls even further underground \227 and, of course, caused a dramatic \
increase in prices.)Tj
T*
( How does the underground scroll trade operate? Much of it is contr\
olled by certain )Tj
T*
(families well known in the antique trade, who supply many of the legal a\
ntiquities on sale in )Tj
T*
(Israel and abroad. During the course of the last half-century, these fam\
ilies have established )Tj
T*
(their own intelligence networks, which maintain close contacts with the \
Bedouin and keep )Tj
T*
(abreast of all rumours, whispers, legends and reported discoveries of an\
tiquarian interest. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(When a potentially fruitful site is located, the land will be rented for\
a year and a large black )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Bedouin tent - ostensibly a domicile -will be erected. At night, excavat\
ions will be conducted )Tj
T*
(under the tent. When all antiquities of value have been removed, the ten\
t will be dismantled )Tj
T*
(and its occupants will move on. A similar process occurs in towns, and p\
articularly in )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem, which has proved especially fertile territory. Sites will be \
rented for short periods )Tj
T*
(or, if necessary, purchased. If a house does not already exist, one will\
be constructed. The )Tj
T*
(occupants will then excavate downwards from the cellar to bedrock.)Tj
T*
( Through such procedures as these, much scroll material has found i\
ts way into the hands )Tj
T*
(of private collectors and investors. This material entirely circumvents \
the world of 'official' )Tj
T*
(archaeology and biblical scholarship. Indeed, the world of 'official' ar\
chaeology and biblical )Tj
T*
(scholarship often does not even realise it exists. Unknown to the academ\
ics, there is at )Tj
T*
(present a substantial quantity of Qumran and related material in the han\
ds of collectors or for )Tj
T*
(sale. We ourselves know of numerous fragments. We know of a well-preserv\
ed copy of one )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran text, called the 'Book of Jubilees'. We know of a handful of lett\
ers by Simeon bar )Tj
T*
(Kochba. And there are substantial grounds for believing that other docum\
ents - documents of )Tj
T*
(a much more explosive nature, utterly unique and undreamed of by the wor\
ld of scholarship )Tj
T*
(\227 also exist.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
(In the course of the next few years, major developments can be expected \
from any or all of )Tj
T*
(three distinct quarters. The most obvious of these, needless to say, is \
the Qumran material )Tj
T*
(itself. Now that the entire corpus of this material is readily accessibl\
e, independent scholars, )Tj
T*
(without preconceptions, without axes to grind and vested interests to pr\
otect, can get to work. )Tj
T*
(The international team's 'orthodoxy of interpretation' has already begun\
to come under attack; )Tj
T*
(and as this book has demonstrated, the supposed archaeological and palae\
ographical evidence )Tj
T*
(with which they support their position will not withstand close scrutiny\
. In consequence, we )Tj
T*
(can expect a radical revision of the process whereby dates have been ass\
igned to a number of )Tj
T*
(particularly important texts. As a result, new contexts and interpretati\
ons will emerge for )Tj
T*
(already familiar material. And new material will emerge in perspectives \
that would have been )Tj
T*
(cursorily and high-handedly dismissed a few years)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(161 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
807 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.954 520 82.546 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.454 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.454 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.454 520 198 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.954 520 280.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.454 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.954 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.454 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.954 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.954 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(ago.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( At the same time, there is also the possibility, enhanced by each \
new archaeological )Tj
T*
(expedition Eisenman and his colleagues undertake to Qumran and the shore\
s of the Dead )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Sea, that wholly new material may come to light. This possibility will)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(be further enhanced - )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(now that the Israeli government has granted permission for its use - by \
deployment of the )Tj
T*
('Subsurface Interface Radar')Tj
T*
(system.)Tj
T*
( Finally, there is the clandestine scroll market, which may at any \
moment cough up )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(something of unprecedented consequence -something hitherto kept secret, \
at last released into )Tj
T*
(public domain. As we have said, such material exists. The question is si\
mply if and when )Tj
T*
(those who hold it decide it can be divulged.)Tj
T*
( Whatever the quarter or quarters from which new mat\
erial might issue, fresh )Tj
T*
(and, in some cases, very major revelations are bound to be forthcomin\
g. As this occurs, )Tj
T*
(we can expect ever more light to be shed on biblical history, on the\
character of ancient )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Judaism, on the origins of both Christianity and Islam. One should not, \
of course, expect a )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(disclosure of such magnitude as to 'topple the Church', or anyth\
ing as apocalyptic )Tj
T*
(as that. The Church today, after all, is less a religious than a soc\
ial, cultural, political and )Tj
T*
(economic institution. Its stability and security rest on factors quite r\
emote from the creed, the )Tj
T*
(doctrine and the dogma it promulgates. But some people, at any rate, may\
be prompted to )Tj
T*
(wonder whether the Church - an institution so demonstrably lax, biased a\
nd unreliable in its )Tj
T*
(own scholarship, its own version of its history and origins \227 should \
necessarily be deemed )Tj
T*
(reliable and authoritative in its approach to such urgent contemporary m\
atters as )Tj
T*
(overpopulation, birth control, the status of women and the celibacy of t\
he clergy.)Tj
T*
( Ultimately, however, the import of the Qumran texts resides in som\
ething more than their )Tj
T*
(potential to embarrass the Church. The real import of the Qumran texts r\
esides in what they )Tj
T*
(have to reveal of the Holy Land, that soil which, for so many centuries,\
has voraciously )Tj
T*
(soaked up so much human blood \227 blood shed in the name of conflicting\
gods or, to be )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(more accurate, not very dissimilar versions of the same God. Perhaps the\
documents yet to be )Tj
T*
(divulged may confront us a little more inescapably with the scale and po\
intlessness of our )Tj
T*
(own madness - and shame us, thereby, at least by a degree or so, in the \
general direction of )Tj
T*
(sanity. The Dead Sea Scrolls offer a new perspective on the three great \
religions born in the )Tj
T*
(Middle East. The more one examines those religions, the more one will di\
scern not how )Tj
T*
(much they differ, but how much they overlap and have in common - how muc\
h they derive )Tj
T*
(from essentially the same source - and the extent to which most of the q\
uarrels between them, )Tj
T*
(when not precipitated by simple misunderstanding, have stemmed less from\
spiritual values )Tj
T*
(than from politics, from greed, from selfishness and the presumptuous ar\
rogance of )Tj
T*
(interpretation. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all, at present, bes\
et by a resurgent )Tj
T*
(fundamentalism. One would like to believe \227 though this may be too mu\
ch to hope for \227 )Tj
T*
(that greater understanding of their common roots might help curb the pre\
judice, the bigotry, )Tj
T*
(the intolerance and fanaticism to which fundamentalism is chronically pr\
one.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( \
17 January 1991 13 )Tj
T*
( \
October 1991)Tj
T*
( )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(162 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
808 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 653.5 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 637 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 620.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 596.5 520 24 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 580 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 563.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 547 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 530.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 514 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 497.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 480.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 464.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 315.768 520 148.693 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 299.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 282.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 266.229 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 216.729 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 200.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 183.691 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 167.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 150.691 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 134.152 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 117.614 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 101.114 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 84.614 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 68.075 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 51.536 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 15.536 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 158.2125 661.7319 Tm
(Notes and References)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 641.5489 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
20 0 0 20 10 603.1165 Tm
(Note)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 584.5875 Tm
( )Tj
T*
(The full bibliographical details, when not cited here, are to be found)Tj
T*
(in the Bibliography.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(Preface )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.198 TD
(1 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.xvi.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(1 The Discovery of the Scrolls)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.196 TD
(1 The true story of the discovery will probably never be known. All t\
he various accounts )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(differ in certain details. Arguments over the correct sequence of events\
continued into the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(1960s. For the different accounts, see: Allegro, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.l7ff; Brownlee, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Muhammad Ed-Deeb's own Story of his Scroll Discovery', pp. 236ff; 'Edh-\
Dheeb's Story of )Tj
T*
(his Scroll Discovery', pp.483ff; 'Some New Facts Concerning the Discover\
y of the Scrolls of )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(1Q', pp.417ff; Harding, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(9 August 1949, p. 5; Samuel, 'The Purchase of the )Tj
T*
(Jerusalem Scrolls', pp.26ff; )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(Treasure of Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.l42ff; Trever, 'When was Qumran Cave )Tj
T*
(1 Discovered?', pp.l35ff; )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(The Untold Story of Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.25ff; Wilson, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea )Tj
T*
(Scrolls 1947-1969, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.3ff. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(2 See, for example, Brownlee, op. cit., p.486, and n.6; Allegro, op.\
cit., p.20. )Tj
T*
(3 Wilson, op. cit,, p.4.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(4 Van der Ploeg, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(The Excavations at Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp. 9-13. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(5 Interviews, Miles Copeland, 10 April and 1 May 1990. A search of \
CIA archives )Tj
T*
(requested under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act has fai\
led to locate the )Tj
T*
(photographs.)Tj
T*
(6 Interview, 21 May 1990.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(7 Yadin, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(The Message of the Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp. 15-24, quoting Sukenik's private)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(journal.)Tj
T*
(8 Ibid., p. 14.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(9 Trever, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(The Untold Story ofQumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.85.)Tj
T*
(10 )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(Time Magazine, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(15 April 1957, p.39.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(11 Allegro, op. cit., pp.38-9.)Tj
T*
(12 Ibid., p.41.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(13 Pliny, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(Natural History, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(V, xv.)Tj
T*
(14 De Vaux, )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp. 134-5.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(15 Reports of this survey can be found in the following: de Vaux, '\
Exploration de la )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(163 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
809 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 748.536 520 17.464 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 732.036 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 715.498 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 698.959 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 682.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 665.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 649.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 632.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 616.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 599.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 583.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 566.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 550.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 533.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 517.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 500.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 484.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 467.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 434.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 418.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 401.92 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 385.382 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 368.882 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 335.882 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 269.843 520 66.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 253.304 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 236.766 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 203.766 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 187.266 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 170.727 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.188 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 137.65 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.111 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 88.111 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 71.611 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.111 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 38.572 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 2.572 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 753.1238 Tm
(region de Qumran', pp.540ff.; Reed, 'The Qumran Caves Expedition of Marc\
h 1952', pp.8ff.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(16 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(17 Allegro, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Treasure of the Copper Scroll, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.35.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(18 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Time Magazine, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(op. cit., p.38.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(19 Yadin, op. cit., p.40.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(20 Ibid., pp.41-52.)Tj
T*
(21 Sharon to Eisenman, 16 January 1990.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(2 The International Team)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.196 TD
(1 Pryce-Jones, 'A New Chapter in the History of Christ?', p,12ff.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(2 Ibid., p. 14.)Tj
T*
(3 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(4 Pryce-Jones to authors, 11 January 1990.)Tj
T*
(5 Interview, Magen Broshi, 12 November 1989.)Tj
T*
(6 Interview, Frank Cross, 18 May 1990.)Tj
T*
(7 Private communication.)Tj
T*
(8 Interview, Abraham Biran, 4 December 1989.)Tj
T*
(9 Interview, James Robinson, 3 November 1989.)Tj
T*
(10 North, 'Qumran and its Archaeology', p.429.)Tj
T*
(11 Interview, Norman Golb, 1 November 1989.)Tj
T*
(12 Interview, Shemaryahu Talmon, 8 November 1989.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(13 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Time Magazine, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(14 August 1989, p.44.)Tj
T*
(14 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(May/June 1989, p.57; September/October 1989, p.20.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(15 Interview, James Robinson, 3 November 1989.)Tj
T*
(16 See Robinson, 'The Jung Codex: the Rise and Fall of a Monopoly';\
see also Robinson, )Tj
T*
('Getting the Nag Hammadi Library into English'.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(17 A total of three volumes of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Discoveries in the Judaean Desert )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(dealing with the Cave 4 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(fragments have been published to date. There remain, so far as the proje\
cted publication )Tj
T*
(schedule is concerned, fifteen further volumes dealing with Cave 4 texts\
and one more of )Tj
T*
(Cave 11.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(18 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(26 June 1989, p.B4.)Tj
T*
(19 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(September/October 1985, p.6.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(20 Ibid., p.66. The magazine adds: 'Obviously, the existence of thi\
s factor is controversial )Tj
T*
(and disputed.')Tj
T*
(21 Ibid., p.66.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(22 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(op. cit., pp.Bl, B4.)Tj
T*
(23 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Chronicle of Higher Education, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(5 July 1989, p.A7.)Tj
T*
(24 Cross, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Ancient Library of Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.30.)Tj
T*
(25 Allegro, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.50.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(26 This letter and many following are to be found in the private cor\
respondence file of )Tj
T*
(John Allegro's papers.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(3 The Scandal of the Scrolls)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.198 TD
(1 Wilson, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls 1947-1969, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 77.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(164 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
810 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.5 520 132 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 568 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.961 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.423 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.384 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.845 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.307 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.768 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.768 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(2 Ibid., pp.97-8.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(3 Ibid., p.97.)Tj
T*
(4 Interview, Philip Davies, 10 October 1989.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(5 There was, however, one 'rash' statement made by Wilson which, fo\
r the record, should )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(be dismissed. De Vaux told Wilson a story of events during the Six Day W\
ar, when, )Tj
T*
(according to Wilson's report, the Israeli troops, upon entering the grou\
nds of the Ecole )Tj
T*
(Biblique on 6 June 1967, sat priests, two at a time, as hostages in the \
open courtyard. The )Tj
T*
(threat was that they should be shot if any sniper fire should come from \
the buildings of the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Ecole or the associated Monastery of St Stephen. See Wilson, op. cit., p\
.259. Interviews in )Tj
T*
(Israel have indicated that this event did not take place but was a tale \
foisted upon Wilson by )Tj
T*
(de Vaux. Wilson did not apparently check this statement with any Israeli\
sources.)Tj
T*
(6 Interview, Shemaryahu Talmon, 8 November 1989.)Tj
T*
(7 Given to the Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres on 26 Ma\
y 1950. Reported in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Le Monde, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(28-9 May 1950, p.4.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(8 Brownlee, 'The Servant of the Lord in the Qumran Scrolls I', p.9.\
)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(9 Allegro to Strugnell, in a letter undated but written between 14 \
and 31 December 1955.)Tj
T*
(10 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(11 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(12 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(5 February 1956, p.2.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(13 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(14 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(8 February 1956, p.8.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(15 Allegro to de Vaux, 9 February 1956.)Tj
T*
(16 Allegro to de Vaux, 20 February 1956.)Tj
T*
(17 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(18 Allegro to de Vaux, 7 March 1956.)Tj
T*
(19 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(20 Allegro to Cross, 6 March 1956.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(21 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(16 March 1956, p. 11.)Tj
T*
(22 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(20 March 1956, p. 13.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(23 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(24 Allegro to Strugnell, 8 March 1957.)Tj
T*
(25 Smyth, 'The Truth about the Dead Sea Scrolls', p.33.)Tj
T*
(26 Ibid., p.34.)Tj
T*
(27 Allegro to Claus-Hunno Hunzinger, 23 April 1956.)Tj
T*
(28 Harding to Allegro, 28 May 1956.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(29 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(1 June 1956, p. 12.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(30 Allegro to Harding, 5 June 1956.)Tj
T*
(31 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(32 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(33 Allegro to Cross, 5 August 1956.)Tj
T*
(34 Allegro to de Vaux, 16 September 1956.)Tj
T*
(35 Allegro to team member \(name withheld\), 14 September 1959.)Tj
T*
(36 Team member \(name withheld\) to Allegro, 21 October 1959.)Tj
T*
(37 Allegro to de Vaux, 16 September 1956.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(165 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
811 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.923 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.384 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.845 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.307 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.268 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.729 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.652 520 82.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.152 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.114 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.614 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.114 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.614 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.075 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.575 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.498 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.382 520 66.116 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.343 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.804 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 88.766 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.266 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.727 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.227 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.227 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(38 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(39 Allegro to Cross, 31 October 1957.)Tj
T*
(40 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(41 Allegro to James Muilenburg, 31 October 1957.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(42 Allegro to Muilenburg, 24 December 1957.)Tj
T*
(43 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(44 Allegro to Dajani, 10 January 1959.)Tj
T*
(45 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(46 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(23 May 1970, p.22.)Tj
T*
(47 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(19 May 1970, p.2.)Tj
T*
(48 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(26 May 1970, p.9.)Tj
T*
(49 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Daily Telegraph, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(18 May 1987, p.ll.)Tj
T*
(50 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(5 October 1970, p.4.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(51 Wilson, op. cit., p. 125.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(52 Vermes, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp. 23-4.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(53 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Times Literary Supplement, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(3 May 1985, p.502.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(54 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(55 Eisenman has pointed to mention of 'the Poor' in the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(War Scroll; )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(see Eisenman, op. cit., )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(p.43, n.23; p.62, n.105. This text states that the Messiah will lead 'th\
e Poor' to victory against )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(the armies of Belial )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(The War Scroll, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XI,14 \(Vermes, p.116 - Vermes for his own reasons )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(translates 'Belial' as 'Satan'\) \). For a more detailed discussion, see\
Eisenman, 'Eschatological )Tj
T*
("Rain" Imagery in the War Scroll from Qumran and in the Letter ofjames',\
p. 182.)Tj
T*
(56 Interview, Emile Puech, 7 November 1989.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(57 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(March/April 1990, p. 24. This fragment is coded 4Q246 and was first f\
ound )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and privately translated by the scholars in 1958.)Tj
T*
(58 Ibid.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(4 Opposing the Consensus)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.198 TD
(1 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(23 August 1949, p.5.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(2 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(3 Jean Carmignac, review of Roth, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Historical Background of the Dead Sea Scrolls. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(See )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no.3, 1959 \(vol.i, 1958-9\), p.447.)Tj
T*
(4 De Vaux made this assertion in 'Fouilles au Khirbet Qumran', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.lxi )Tj
T*
(\(1954\), p.233. He repeated it in his 'Fouilles de Khirbet Qumran', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.lxiii )Tj
T*
(\(1956\), p.567, and in 'Les manuscrits de Qumran et l'archeologie', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.lxvi )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(\(1959\), p. 100.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(5 Roth, 'Did Vespasian Capture Qumran?', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Palestine Exploration Quarterly, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(July-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(December 1959, pp.l22ff.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(6 Driver, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Judaean Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.3.)Tj
T*
(7 De Vaux, review of Driver, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Judaean Scrolls. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(See )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New Testament Studies, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xiii )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(\(1966-7\), p. 97.)Tj
T*
(8 Ibid., p. 104.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(9 Albright, in M. Black, ed. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Scrolls and Christianity, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 15.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(10 Eisenman to authors, 13 June 1990.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(166 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
812 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 732.961 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.423 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.384 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.307 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.768 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.729 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.691 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.691 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.691 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.652 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.114 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.575 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.036 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.498 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.998 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.498 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 88.959 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.92 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.382 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.382 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(11 Eisenman to authors, 27 September 1989.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(12 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(September/October 1985, p.66.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(13 Ibid., p.6.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(14 Ibid., p.66.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(15 Ibid., p.70. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(first called for the publication of the unpublished)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(scrolls in May 1985.)Tj
T*
(16 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(17 Benoit to Cross, Milik, Starcky and Puech, Strugnell, E. Ulrich,\
)Tj
T*
(Avi \(sic\) Eitan, 15 September 1985.)Tj
T*
(18 Eitan to Benoit, 26 December 1985.)Tj
T*
(19 Interview, Yuval Ne'eman, 16 January 1990.)Tj
T*
(20 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(21 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.xvi.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(22 Eisenman to authors, 5 July 1990.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(23 It is called )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('MMT' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(from the first letters of three Hebrew words occurring in the opening )Tj
T*
(line: )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Miqsat Ma'aseh ha-Torah, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
('Some rulings upon the Law'. The text essentially gives the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(position of the Qumran community on a selection of rules from the Torah.\
)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(24 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Catalogue of the Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(07/04/81.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(25 Eisenman to authors, 15 September 1990.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(26 A copy of this timetable was published in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(July/August 1989, p.20. Mrs Ayala )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Sussman of the Israeli Department of Antiquities confirmed for us that t\
his was the timetable. )Tj
T*
(Interview with Ayala Sussman, 7 November 1989.)Tj
T*
(27 Letter, Eisenman and Davies to Strugnell, 16 March 1989.)Tj
T*
(28 Letter, Eisenman and Davies to Drori, 2 May 1989.)Tj
T*
(29 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(30 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(31 Letter, Strugnell to Eisenman, 15 May 1989.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(32 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(September/October 1989, p.20.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(33 Letter, Strugnell to Eisenman, 15 May 1989.)Tj
T*
(34 Davies, 'How not to do Archaeology: The Story of Qumran', pp.20\
3-4.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(5 Academic Politics and Bureaucratic Inertia)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.196 TD
(1 Florentino Garcia-Martinez to Eisenman, 4 October 1989.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(2 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New York Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(9 July 1989, p.E26.)Tj
T*
(3 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(May/June 1990, p.67.)Tj
T*
(4 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(July/August 1990, p.44.)Tj
T*
(5 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(July/August 1989, p. 18.)Tj
T*
(6 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(November/December 1989, p.74.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(242)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Notes to pages 87-102)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(7 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(July/August 1989, p. 18.)Tj
T*
(8 Ibid., p. 19.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(9 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Los Angeles Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(1 July 1989, Part II, pp.20-21.)Tj
T*
(10 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(International Herald Tribune, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(16 November 1989, p.2.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(167 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
813 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 732.923 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.384 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.845 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.307 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.307 520 264 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.768 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.229 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.691 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.652 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.652 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(11 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(July/August 1990, p.47.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(12 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Time Magazine, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(14 August 1989, p.44.)Tj
T*
(13 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(March/April 1990, cover.)Tj
T*
(14 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(July/August 1990, p.6.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(15 Interview, Ayala Sussman, 7 November 1989.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(16 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(17 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(18 Interview, Shemaryahu Talmon, 8 November 1989.)Tj
T*
(19 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(20 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(21 Interview, Shemaryahu Talmon, 9 November 1989.)Tj
T*
(22 Interview, Jonas Greenfield, 9 November 1989.)Tj
T*
(23 Conversation with Ayala Sussman, 10 November 1989.)Tj
T*
(24 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(25 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(26 Interview, Hilary Feldman, 4 December 1989.)Tj
T*
(27 Ibid.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.204 TD
(6 The Onslaught of Science)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.196 TD
(1 Letter, Allegro to Muilenburg, 24 December 1957.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(2 Letter, Strugnell to Allegro, 3 January 1956.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(3 Wilson, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls 1947-i969, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 138.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(4 Allegro's suspicions about the international team were raised duri\
ng his summer at the )Tj
T*
('Scrollery' in 1957. They crystallised during the debacle of his televis\
ion programme, the )Tj
T*
(filming of which took place in Jerusalem, Qumran and Amman in October \
1957. He )Tj
T*
(planned to try to break up the international team and open the scrolls t\
o all qualified scholars. )Tj
T*
(Then, in a letter to Awni Dajani \(curator of the Palestine Archaeologic\
al Museum\) dated 10 )Tj
T*
(January 1959, Allegro wrote: 'I think it would be a ripe opportunity to \
take over the whole )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Museum, scrolls and all. . .' Allegro returned to this theme in Septembe\
r 1966. On 13 )Tj
T*
(September of that year he wrote to Awni Dajani saying that he was very c\
oncerned about the )Tj
T*
(situation and that the Jordanian government should act. It is clear, tho\
ugh, from a letter of 16 )Tj
T*
(September 1966 \(to Joseph Saad\), that Allegro had been told that the J\
ordanian government )Tj
T*
(was planning to nationalise the museum at the end of the year. Allegro t\
hen began a series of )Tj
T*
(letters regarding the preservation of the scrolls and ideas for raising \
funds for research and )Tj
T*
(publication. Then, as adviser on the scrolls to the Jordanian government\
, he produced a report )Tj
T*
(on the present state and the future of scroll research which he sent to \
King Hussein on 21 )Tj
T*
(September 1966. The same day he also sent a copy of the report to the Jo\
rdanian Prime )Tj
T*
(Minister. The Jordanian government nationalised the museum in November 1\
966.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(5 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(July/August 1990, p.6.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(6 Interview, Philip Davies, 10 October 1989.)Tj
T*
(7 Interview, Norman Golb, 1 November 1989.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(8 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(1887, p. 16.)Tj
T*
(9 De Rosa, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Vicars of Christ, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 179.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(10 For a detailed account of the personal and political machination\
s which lay behind the )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(promulgation of this dogma, see Hasler, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(How the Pope became Infallible.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(168 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
814 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 732.961 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.423 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.884 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.845 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.307 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.768 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.754 520 16.514 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.215 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.715 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.177 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.638 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.099 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.561 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.022 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 319.983 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.483 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 253.906 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.367 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 187.79 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.252 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.752 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.252 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.713 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.213 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 88.674 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.174 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.636 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.097 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.097 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(11 Ibid., p.246.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(12 Fogazzaro, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Saint, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.242.)Tj
T*
(13 Schroeder, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Pere Lagrange and Biblical Inspiration, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 13, n.7.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(14 Ibid., p. 15.)Tj
T*
(15 Letter, Allegro to Cross, 5 August 1956.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(16 Murphy, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Lagrange and Biblical Renewal, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.60.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(17 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(18 Ibid., p.62.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(19 Ibid., p.64.)Tj
T*
(20 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(21 Ibid., 61-2.)Tj
T*
(22 De Vaux to Golb, 26 March 1970.)Tj
T*
(23 Interview, Norman Golb, 1 November 1989.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(24 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(July/August 1990, p.45.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(25 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(BAR, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(January/February 1990, p. 10.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(26 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Jerusalem Post Magazine, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(29 September 1989, p. 11.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.204 TD
(7 )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
(The Inquisition Today)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.199 TD
(1 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New Catholic Encyclopaedia, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xi, p.551.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(2 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(3 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Annuario pontificio, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(1989, p. 1187.)Tj
T*
(4 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Annuario pontificio, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(1956, p.978.)Tj
T*
(5 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Annuario pontificio, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(1973, p. 1036.)Tj
T*
(6 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Annuario pontificio, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(1988, p. 1139.)Tj
T*
(7 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New Catholic Encyclopaedia, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xi, p.551.)Tj
T*
(8 Benjamin Wambacq, 'The Historical Truth of the Gospels', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Tablet, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(30 May 1964, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(p.619.)Tj
T*
(9 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(10 Hebblethwaite, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Synod Extraordinary, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 54. According to Pope John Paul II, 'the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has no other purpose than to \
preserve from all )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(danger . . . the authenticity and integrity of... faith'; see Hebblethwa\
ite, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(In the Vatican, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.90.)Tj
T*
(11 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Annuario pontificio, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(1969, pp.967, 1080.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(12 Schillebeeckx argues that the 'apostolic right' - the rights of \
the local leaders of Church )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(communities - 'has priority over the Church order which has in fact grow\
n up'. See )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Ministry: )Tj
T*
(A Case for Change, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.37.)Tj
T*
(13 Kung, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Infallible? An Enquiry, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 196.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(14 Ibid., p. 102.)Tj
T*
(15 Ibid., p.18.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(16 Kung, 'The Fallibility of Pope John Paul II', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Observer, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(23 December 1979, p. 11.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(17 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(18 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Sunday Times, 2 )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(December 1984, p. 13.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(19 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(20 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Observer, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(27 May 1990, p.l.)Tj
T*
(21 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Independent, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(27 June 1990, p. 10.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(169 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
815 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 732.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.923 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.884 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.345 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.768 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.229 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.152 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.614 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.536 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 385.998 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 352.92 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.382 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.304 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 286.766 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 253.688 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.15 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 220.611 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.072 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 187.572 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.072 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.534 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 104.995 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 88.495 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 71.995 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.495 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 19.495 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(22 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(27 June 1990, p. 9.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(8 The Dilemma for Christian Orthodoxy)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.198 TD
(1 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(III, 7ff. \(Vermes, p.64\). \(As Vermes's translations of the Dead )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Sea Scroll texts are the easiest to obtain for the English speaking read\
er, page references to )Tj
T*
(his work will be added.\))Tj
T*
(2 Acts, 2:44-6.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(3 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(I, llff. \(Vermes, p.62\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(4 Ibid., VI, 2-3 \(Vermes, p.69\).)Tj
T*
(5 Ibid., VI, 22-3 \(Vermes, p.70\).)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(6 Eisenman, in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.32, n.16, draws important )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(parallels between the ruling council of Qumran and that of the 'early Ch\
urch' in Jerusalem, )Tj
T*
(under James.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(7 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Commentary on Psalm 37, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(HI, 11 \(Vermes, p.291\). See also Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 108 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Ebion/ Ebionim\), )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(and pp.xiv, xvi, and )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(62-3.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(8 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The War Scroll, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XIV, 7 \(Vermes, p. 120\).)Tj
T*
(9 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VIII, 21 \(Vermes, p.73\). See also Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, )Tj
T*
(Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.42, n.21; pp. 89-90; p. 109 for )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Tamimei-Derech.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(10 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(X, 21-2 \(Vermes, p. 77\).)Tj
T*
(11 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VIII, 7 \(Vermes, p.72\). See also Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, )Tj
T*
(Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.80.)Tj
T*
(12 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(I, 1 \(Vermes, p.61-2\).)Tj
T*
(13 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Habakkuk Commentary, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VIII, 2-3 \(Vermes, p.287\). See also Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James )Tj
T*
(the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.37\22740.)Tj
T*
(14 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(I, 2-3 \(Vermes, pp.61-2\).)Tj
T*
(15 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VIII, 22ff. \(Vermes, p.73\). See also Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.xii.)Tj
T*
(16 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(II, 19 \(Vermes, p.63\).)Tj
T*
(17 Driver, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Judaean Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.316-30; Talmon, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The World of Qumranfrom )Tj
T*
(Within, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.147-85.)Tj
T*
(18 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VI, 4-6 \(Vermes, p.69\).)Tj
T*
(19 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Messianic Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(II, 20-21 \(Vermes, p. 102\).)Tj
T*
(20 Danielou, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls and Primitive Christianity, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.27.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(9 The Scrolls)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.198 TD
(1 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Newsweek, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(27 February 1989, p. 55.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(2 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VII, 3 \(Vermes, p.71; Vermes gives the words: 'whoever )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(has deliberately lied'; these words do not exist in the Hebrew original,\
which reads 'if he has )Tj
T*
(spoken unwittingly'\).)Tj
T*
(3 Ibid, I, 16ff. \(Vermes, p. 62\).)Tj
T*
(4 Ibid., Ill, 6ff. \(Vermes, pp.64\).)Tj
T*
(5 Ibid., V, 9 \(Vermes, p.67\).)Tj
T*
(6 Ibid., IX, 23 \(Vermes, p.75; translated by Vermes as \
'zealous for the Precept', )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(170 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
816 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.384 520 49.616 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.845 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.307 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.807 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.229 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.229 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.191 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.152 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.652 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.152 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.152 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.114 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.614 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.114 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.036 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.536 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.036 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.959 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.42 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.882 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.382 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 88.882 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.843 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.343 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.343 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(which tends to obscure this important phrase\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(7 Ibid, VI, 16ff. \(Vermes, p.71\).)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(8 Ibid., VIII, 3ff. \(Vermes, p.72\). See also Eisenman,\
)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.42, n.21; for a detailed discussion, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(see James the Just in the )Tj
T*
(Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 8.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(9 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(IX, 11 \(Vermes, p.74\).)Tj
T*
(10 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The War Scroll, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VI, 7 \(Vermes, p.Ill; Vermes calls this document 'The War Rule'\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(11 Ibid., XI, 7 \(Vermes, p. 116; Vermes translates 'Messiah' as 'T\
hine anointed' which )Tj
T*
(obscures the import of this passage\). See also Eisenman, 'Eschatolog\
ical "Rain" Imagery in )Tj
T*
(the War Scroll from Qumran and in the Letter of James', pp. 180-82.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(12 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Temple Scroll, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(LXVI, lOff. \(Vermes, p. 158\). See also Eisenman's appendix to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(entitled 'The "Three Nets of Belial" in the Zadokite )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Document and "balla/BELA" in the Temple Scroll', pp.87-94.)Tj
T*
(13 Eisenman, ibid., p.89.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(14 Ibid., demonstrating the niece-marriage connection to Herodians.\
)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(15 Parts of eight copies of the 'Damascus Document' were found in C\
ave 4, parts of )Tj
T*
(another in Cave 5 and one more in Cave 6.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(16 Eisenman, appendix to )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
('The "Three Nets of )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Belial" in the Zadokite Document and "balla/bela" in the Temple Scroll',\
pp.87-94.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(17 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Damascus Document, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VIII, 21-21b \(Vermes, p.90\). \(All line numbers for this )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(document are from the edition of C. Rabin.\))Tj
T*
(18 Ibid., XX, 15 \(Vermes, p.90\).)Tj
T*
(19 Ibid., MS 'A', VII, 18-20 \(Vermes, p.89\).)Tj
T*
(20 Ibid., VII, 21a \(Vermes, p.88\); XX, 1 \(Vermes, p.90\);\
XII, 23 \(Vermes, p.97\); )Tj
T*
(XIII, 20 \(Vermes, p.98\); XIV, 19 \(Vermes, p.99\).)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(21 See Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 68, n.120; p.69, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(n.122.)Tj
T*
(22 Ibid., p.42, n.19. In addition to the documents we have mentione\
d, reference to the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Liar' or to those who reject the Law can be found in the Psalm 37 Comme\
ntary and other )Tj
T*
(Qumran texts.)Tj
T*
(23 Ibid., p.xv.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(24 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VI, vi. See aso Driver, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Judaean Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp. 211-)Tj
T*
(14; Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.27.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(10 Science in the Service of Faith)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.198 TD
(1 See, for example, Vermes, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.29, 31; de Vaux, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.116-17.)Tj
T*
(2 Driver, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Judaean Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.211.)Tj
T*
(3 De Vaux, in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New Testament Studies, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xiii \(1966-7\), p.91.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(4 Ibid., p.93.)Tj
T*
(5 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(6 Eisenman, in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(exposes de Vaux's )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(treatment of Driver; see p.47, n.47; p.56, n.92; p.57, n.93; p.72, n.129\
; p.83 \(n.155\).)Tj
T*
(7 North, 'Qumran and its Archaeology', p.434.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(171 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
817 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 667 520 99 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.923 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.384 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.345 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.691 520 99.155 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.152 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.614 520 82.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.114 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.614 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.114 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.614 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.114 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.614 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.075 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.536 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.498 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.998 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.498 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.459 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 88.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 36.459 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(8 A British architect with previous experience of repairing earthqu\
ake-damaged buildings )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(was in charge of the reconstruction of the Qumran ruins for the Jordania\
n government prior )Tj
T*
(to the war of 1967. He stated that there was no evidence that the Qumran\
buildings were )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(damaged by earthquake and gave, as his opinion, that the crack in the ci\
stern was caused by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the weight of water coupled with faulty construction or repair. See Stec\
koll, 'Marginal Notes )Tj
T*
(on the Qumran Excavations',)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(p.34. 9 Callaway, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The History of the Qumran Community, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.45.)Tj
T*
(10 Milik, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Ten Years of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judaea, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 52.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(11 De Vaux, 'Fouilles au Khirbet Qumran', p.233. This article appea\
red)Tj
T*
(in 1954.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(12 De Vaux, in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New Testament Studies, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xiii \(1966-7\), p. 104.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(13 De Vaux, 'Les Manuscrits de Qumran et l'archeologie', p. 100.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(14 Cross, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Ancient Library of Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.47.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(15 Roth, 'Did Vespasian capture Qumran?', p. 124.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(16 De Vaux, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(L'archeologie et les manuscrits de la mer morte, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.32, n.l; )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Archaeology and )Tj
T*
(the Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.40, n.l. In addition, it is worth noting that in the absence of any )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(complete publication of de Vaux's excavation results certain doubts ling\
er about all his coin )Tj
T*
(discoveries. The Israeli coin expert Ya'acov Meshorer told Eisenman that\
neither he nor )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(anyone else he knew had ever seen de Vaux's coins. Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, )Tj
T*
(Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.93, n.173. See also p.94, n.175 for the so-called '10th Legion' coin.)Tj
T*
(17 De Vaux, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, p.67.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(18 Ibid., pp.19, 22, 34, 37, 44-5. It is difficult to be precise ab\
out the exact numbers of )Tj
T*
(coins found and their identification until the long-delayed publication \
of de Vaux's final )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(report on the excavation. The archaeological reports published in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(have, by de )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Vaux's own admission, been incorrect with regard to the coin identificat\
ion. See ibid, p. 19, )Tj
T*
(n.3.)Tj
T*
(19 Ibid., p. 109.)Tj
T*
(20 Eisenman, op. cit., p.34.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(21 Ibid., p.92 \(n.168\).)Tj
T*
(22 De Vaux, op. cit., p.43.)Tj
T*
(23 Driver, op. cit., p.396.)Tj
T*
(24 Ibid., p.394.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(25 De Vaux, in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New Testament Studies, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xiii \(1966-7\), p.99, n.l.)Tj
T*
(26 Danielou, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls and Primitive Christianity, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.121\2272.)Tj
T*
(27 De Vaux, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 28. See also Eisenman, op. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(cit., p.94, n.174.)Tj
T*
(28 Cross, op. cit., p.51.)Tj
T*
(29 Driver, op. cit., p.397.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(30 Golb, 'The Dead Sea Scrolls', p. 182. In )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Science Times, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(21 November 1989, p.C8, Golb )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(said of Qumran, 'There's nothing to show it was anything but a fortress.\
')Tj
T*
(31 Golb, 'The Problem of Origin and Identification of the D\
ead Sea Scrolls', p.5.)Tj
T*
(32 Cross, op. cit., pp.86-7.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(33 Cross, 'The Development of the Jewish Scripts', in Wright, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Bible and the Ancient )Tj
T*
(Near East, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 135. See also Eisenman, op. cit., pp.28-31; p.82, n.155; p.84, n.156 \
and n.157; )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(172 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
818 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.961 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.345 520 49.616 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.807 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.268 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.729 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.191 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.191 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.652 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.114 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.614 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.075 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 286.998 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.459 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 253.92 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.382 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.304 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 187.766 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.227 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.688 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.611 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.072 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.495 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 38.995 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 2.995 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(p.86, n.158 and n.159; p.87, n.l61;p.88, n.163.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(34 Cross, ibid., p. 191, n.20.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(35 Birnbaum, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Hebrew Scripts, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 130. This was first pointed out by Eisenman, op. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(cit., p.85 \(n.157\).)Tj
T*
(36 Eisenman, op. cit., p.85 \(n.157\).)Tj
T*
(37 Davies, 'How Not to do Archaeology: the Story of Qumran', p. 206\
.)Tj
T*
(38 Eisenman, op. cit., p.29.)Tj
T*
(39 Ibid., p.30.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(40 Eisenman to authors, 7 July 1990.)Tj
T*
(41 Roth, 'The Zealots and Qumran: The Basic Issue', p.84.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(11 The Essenes)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.198 TD
(1 The main classical references to the Essenes are found in: Joseph\
us, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Life; The Jewish )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(II, viii; )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Antiquities of the Jews, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XVIII, i Philo Judaeus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Every Good Man is Free, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XII-)Tj
T*
(XIII; )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Hypothetica, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(11 Pliny, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Natural History, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(V, xv.)Tj
T*
(2 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(II, viii.)Tj
T*
(3 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Antiquities of the Jews, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XV, x.)Tj
T*
(4 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(II, viii.)Tj
T*
(5 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Antiquities of the Jews, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XV, x.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(6 Ibid. This close relationship between the Essenes of Jos\
ephus' description and )Tj
T*
(King Herod the Great was explored in detail in Eisenman, 'Confus\
ions of Pharisees and )Tj
T*
(Essenes in Josephus', a paper delivered to the Society of Biblical Liter\
ature Conference in )Tj
T*
(New York, 1981.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(7 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(II, viii.)Tj
T*
(8 Quoted by Dupont-Sommer, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Essene Writings from Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 13.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(9 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(10 Cross, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Ancient Library of Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.37-)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(8.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(11 The standard elaboration of the consensus hypothesis is i\
n de Vaux, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Archaeology )Tj
T*
(and the Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.3-45.)Tj
T*
(12 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(II, viii.)Tj
T*
(13 Philo Judaeus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Every Good Man is Free, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XII.)Tj
T*
(14 De Vaux, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp. 12-14.)Tj
T*
(15 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Antiquities of the Jews, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XV, x. See also on this, Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James the Just in )Tj
T*
(the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 79.)Tj
T*
(16 Philo Judaeus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Every Good Man is Free, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XII.)Tj
T*
(17 Cross, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Ancient Library of Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.51.)Tj
T*
(18 Philo Judaeus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Every Good Man is Free, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XII.)Tj
T*
(19 Vermes, 'The Etymology of "Essenes" ', p.439. See also Vermes, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea )Tj
T*
(Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 126.)Tj
T*
(20 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 6.)Tj
T*
(21 Ibid., p. 108 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Derech, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
('the Way'; )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(ma'aseh, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
('works'/'acts'\); p. 109 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Tamimei-)Tj
T*
(Derech, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
('the Perfect of the Way'; )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Tom-Derech, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
('Perfection of the Way'\). See also the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(discussion on p.41, n.17.)Tj
T*
(22 Ibid., p. 109.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(173 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
819 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 732.961 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.384 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.845 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.807 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.268 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.729 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.152 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.614 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.614 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.536 520 66.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 385.998 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 352.998 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.498 520 82.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 253.959 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 220.959 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.42 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.42 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.882 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.382 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.882 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 85.882 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(23 Epiphanius of Constantia, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Adversus octoginta haereses, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(I, i, Haeres xx \(Migne, 41, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(col.273\).)Tj
T*
(24 Eisenman, op. cit., p. 44, n.30.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(25 Black, 'The Dead Sea Scrolls and Christian Origins', in Black,\
)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Scrolls and )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Christianity, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 99.)Tj
T*
(26 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.99 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Nozrei ha-Brit\).)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(27 Ibid., pp.vii-x.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(28 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Habakkuk Commentary, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XII, 7ff. \(Vermes, p. 289\).)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(12 The Acts of the Apostles)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.198 TD
(1 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp. xiii, 4\2276.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(2 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Antiquities of the Jews, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XVIII, i. See also ibid., p.59, n.99.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(3 Eisenman, op. cit., pp. 10-11, 22-3. For arguments regarding the \
'Stephen' episode being )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(a reworking of an attack upon James as recorded in the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Recognitions of Clement )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(I, 70\), see )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(p.76, n.144, and also )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.4, n.ll; p.39.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(4 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadotites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 41, n.17.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(5 Ibid., p.68, n.120; p.69, n.122. Eisenman sees both 'Damascus\
' references as )Tj
T*
(generically parallel.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(6 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Community Rule, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VI, 14-23 \(Vermes, p.70\). The sense is not entirely clear: )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(this novitiate period was at least two years with the third year being t\
he first of full )Tj
T*
(membership; or, the novitiate itself took three years with the fourth ye\
ar being the first of full )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(membership. See Vermes, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 7.)Tj
T*
(7 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp. 30-32.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(8 Eisenman points to the psychological attitude demonstrate\
d in Paul's first letter to )Tj
T*
(the Corinthians where he, among other precepts, explains the necessity o\
f 'winning':)Tj
T*
(So though I am not a slave of any man I have made myself the slave of ev\
eryone so as to win )Tj
T*
(as many as I could. I made myself a Jew to the Jews, to win the Jews ...\
To those who have )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(no Law, I was free of the Law myself ... to win those who have no Law ..\
. All the runners at )Tj
T*
(the stadium are trying to win, but only one of them gets the prize. You \
must run in the same )Tj
T*
(way, meaning to win. \(1 Corinthians 9:19-27\).)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(9 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp. 30-32.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(10 Ibid.; see also p.57, n.39 \(where Eisenman reviews Paul's 'defa\
mation of the Jerusalem )Tj
T*
(leadership' in his letters\).)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(11 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Damascus Document, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XV, 12-14 \(Vermes, p.92\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(12 Acts 23:23 states unequivocally that there were 200 soldiers, 20\
0 auxiliaries and 70 )Tj
T*
(cavalry as the escort.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(13 Eisenman, James )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 3.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(13 James 'The Righteous')Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.196 TD
(1 While Acts never explicitly states that James is the 'leader' of the J\
erusalem community, in )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Acts 15:13-21 and 21:18 he has a prominent role. The latter tellingly st\
ates that 'Paul )Tj
T*
(went . . . to visit James, and all the elders were present'. This puts t\
he elders in a subordinate )Tj
T*
(position to James. Paul, in his letter to the Galatians \(2:9\), states:\
'James, Cephas and John, )Tj
T*
(these leaders, these pillars'. Later, this same letter \(2:11-12\) clear\
ly shows that Cephas is )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(174 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
820 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 716.5 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.923 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.384 520 49.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.845 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.345 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.807 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.268 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.729 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.229 520 66 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.652 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.152 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.652 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.114 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.614 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.114 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.614 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.114 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.114 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 53.114 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(subordinate to James \(Cephas = Peter\). John is barely mentioned in Act\
s after the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(introduction of Paul. Later Church writers specifically call James the l\
eader of the early )Tj
T*
('Christians'.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(2 For example, James 2:10: 'if a man keeps the whole of the Law, exc\
ept for one small )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(point at which he fails, he is still guilty of breaking it all'. See Eis\
enman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James the Just in )Tj
T*
(the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.2, n.6; p.21, n.l; p.25; p.58 \(n.39\).)Tj
T*
(3 In the Greek text it reads as here. Curiously, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jerusalem Bible )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(translated primarily by )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(de Vaux and the members of the Ecole Biblique obscures the sense with th\
e reading: 'It was )Tj
T*
(you who condemned the innocent and killed them . . .')Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(4 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Recognitions of Clement, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(I, 70.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(5 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(6 Eisenman, when discussing this incident, notes that six w\
eeks later, when in )Tj
T*
(Caesarea, Peter mentions that James was still limping as a result of his\
injury. As Eisenman )Tj
T*
(says, 'Details of this kind are startling in their intimacy and one shou\
ld hesitate before simply )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(dismissing them as artistic invention.' See Eisenman, op. cit, p.4, n.ll\
.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(7 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Recognitions of Clement, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(I, 71.)Tj
T*
(8 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Antiquities of the Jews, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XX, ix.)Tj
T*
(9 Eusebius, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The History of the Church, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(2, 1; 2, 23.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(10 Ibid., 2, 1.)Tj
T*
(11 A number of the older monasteries in Spain have, since th\
eir foundation, )Tj
T*
(systematically collected all available texts both orthodox and heretical\
. As these monasteries )Tj
T*
(have never been plundered, their holdings remain intact. Unfortunately, \
access to their )Tj
T*
(libraries is severely restricted.)Tj
T*
(12 Eusebius, op. cit., 2, 23.)Tj
T*
(13 Eisenman, op. cit., p.3.)Tj
T*
(14 Ibid.)Tj
T*
(15 Eusebius, op. cit., 2, 23.)Tj
T*
(16 Eisenman, op. cit., p. 10.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(17 Eusebius, op. cit., 2, 23.)Tj
T*
(18 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(19 Ibid. See also Eisenman, op. cit., p.28, n.12; p.60, n.40 \(refer\
ring to Origen, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Contra )Tj
T*
(celsum, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(1.47; 2.13\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(20 Herod Agrippa II.)Tj
T*
(21 Eisenman, op. cit., pp.63-5.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(22 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Habakkuk Commentary, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(II, 2 \(Vermes, p.284\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(23 Ibid., II, 3-4 \(Vermes, p.284\).)Tj
T*
(24 Ibid., V, 11-12 \(Vermes, p.285\).)Tj
T*
(25 Ibid., X, 9-10 \(Vermes, p.288\).)Tj
T*
(26 Ibid., X, 11-12 \(Vermes, p.288\).)Tj
T*
(27 For a comprehensive review of Paul's sensitivity to the charge o\
f lying, see Eisenman, )Tj
T*
(op. cit., p.39, n.24.)Tj
T*
(28 Eisenman, op. cit., p.viii, points out the important \
difference between the 'Liar' )Tj
T*
(and the 'Wicked Priest'. This distinction must be made before any histor\
ical sense can be )Tj
T*
(made of the texts. The consensus position is that the 'Liar' and the 'Wi\
cked Priest" are the )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(175 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
821 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.884 520 82.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.345 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.807 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.768 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.268 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.729 520 115.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.191 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.691 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.691 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.152 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.652 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.114 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.575 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.075 520 49.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.536 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.536 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(same person. See Vermes, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.30.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(29 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Habakkuk Commentary, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(IX, 2 \(Vermes, p. 287\). See Eisenman, op. cit., pp.50-51, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(where he explains that the passage would read more accurately as: 'they\
took vengeance )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(upon the flesh of his corpse'. This relates the passage very closely to \
the known facts of )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Ananas' death. See also Eisenman, 'Interpreting )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
("Arbeit Galuto" )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in the Habakkuk )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Pesher', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(which connects this phrase to the Sanhedrin trial of James.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(30 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Habakkuk Commentary, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XII, 7ff. \(Vermes, p. 289\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(31 Eisenman to authors, 22 August 1990.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(32 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Habakkuk Commentary, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VIII, Iff. \(Vermes, p.287\). See also Eisenman, op. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(cit., pp.37-9, for a discussion of this reference to 'faith'.)Tj
T*
(33 Eisenman, ibid.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(14 Zeal for the Law)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.198 TD
(1 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 44, n.30.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(2 Ibid., p.6.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(3 Ibid., p.8; p.45, n.36 \(quoting Wernberg-Meller\).)Tj
T*
(4 Ibid., p. 12; p.49, n.58; see also p.26.)Tj
T*
(5 Ibid., p. 12.)Tj
T*
(6 Ibid., p. 13; p.49, n.58. See Numbers 25:7ff. Mattathias invokes t\
his covenant in his )Tj
T*
(dying speech \(1 Mace. 2:54\): 'Phinehas our father, because he was deep\
ly zealous, received )Tj
T*
(the covenant of everlasting priesthood.' \(Revised Standard Version\))Tj
T*
(7 Eisenman to authors, 29 August 1990.)Tj
T*
(8 Ibid., pp. 13-16; p.45, n.36.)Tj
T*
(9 Ibid., p.44, n.30.)Tj
T*
(10 Ibid., p. 10.)Tj
T*
(11 Ibid., p.90, n.164. This terminology of 'purist' and 'He\
rodian' Sadducees derives )Tj
T*
(from Eisenman. The 'purist' Sadducees, or the 'Zealots', were, after 4 b\
c, 'Messianic' in their )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(ideology. Hence Eisenman refines his terminology on occasion to speak of\
the post-4 bc )Tj
T*
(groups rather as 'Messianic Sadducees' and 'Boethusian Sadducees' - the \
latter after Simon )Tj
T*
(ben Boethus, whom Herod established as high priest. In our text, we have\
retained the )Tj
T*
(simpler division into 'purist' and 'Herodian' groups. This approach prov\
ides the key to )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(understanding the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
('MMT' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(document.)Tj
T*
(12 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(II, i. See Eisenman, op. cit., pp.25-6.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(13 Josephus, op. cit., II, iv.)Tj
T*
(14 Ibid., II, viii.)Tj
T*
(15 Eisenman, op. cit., p.53, n.79; p.75, n.140.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(16 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Antiquities of the Jews, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XVIII, i.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(17 Ibid., XVII, x.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(18 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(II, xvii.)Tj
T*
(19 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Antiquities of the Jews, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XVIII, i.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(20 This material received an early public airing in a paper gi\
ven by Eisenman to the )Tj
T*
(Society of Biblical Literature at its meeting in New York in 1981, 'Con\
fusions of Pharisees )Tj
T*
(and Essenes in Josephus'.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(21 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Acts 21:20.)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(176 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
822 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.423 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.345 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.807 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.729 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.229 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.229 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.691 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.152 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.652 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.152 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.075 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.575 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.036 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.536 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.036 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.536 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.036 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.498 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.459 520 99.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 88.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.459 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.959 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.42 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.42 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(22 Eisenman, op. cit., pp.5-9.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(23 Ibid., p.58, n.95.)Tj
T*
(24 Ibid., pp.36-7; p.90, n.164; p.96 \(n.179\).)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(25 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VII, x; the translation of G.A. Williamson is used here )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(The )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Jewish War, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp.392-3\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(26 Eisenman, op. cit., p.96, n.180.)Tj
T*
(27 Ibid., pp.25-6.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(28 Ibid., p.73, n.132; listing )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Damascus Document, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VII, 18-21; )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The War )Tj
T*
(Scroll, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(XI, 5ff; )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(A Messianic Testimonia )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(4QTest\), 9-13.)Tj
T*
(29 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Damascus Document, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VII, 18-21.)Tj
T*
(30 Tacitus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Histories, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(V, xiii; the translation of K. Wellesley is used here \(p.279\). See )Tj
T*
(also Suetonius, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Twelve Caesars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Vespasian, 4; translation by R. Graves \(p.281\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(31 Eisenman, op. cit., p.25.)Tj
T*
(32 Gichon, 'The Bar Kochba War', p. 88.)Tj
T*
(33 Ibid., p.92.)Tj
T*
(34 Ibid., pp.89-90.)Tj
T*
(35 Gichon to authors, 12 January 1990.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.204 TD
(15 Zealot Suicide)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.196 TD
(1 The last sentence of this quote from Matthew is a pure Qumran-sty\
le statement opposing )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the methods of 'the Liar'.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(2 Josephus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish Wars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VII, ix.)Tj
T*
(3 Ibid., VII, viii; the translation used is that of G.A. Williamso\
n, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Jewish War, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 387.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(4 Ibid. \(Williamson, p.390\).)Tj
T*
(5 Ibid., Ill, viii.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(6 Yadin, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Masada, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(pp. 187-8. Yadin makes nothing of this fact. See Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p. 22; p. 67 n.117.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(7 Ibid., p.62 n.105.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(8 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The War Scroll, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(I, 6-8 \(Vermes, p. 105\).)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(16 Paul - Roman Agent or Informer?)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.196 TD
(1 Especially 1 Corinthians 9:19-27. See above, Chapter 11, n.8.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(2 Eisenman to authors, 24 August 1990.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(3 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(James thejust in the Habakkuk Pesher, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.16, n.39; p.59, n.39.)Tj
T*
(4 Eisenman, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(p.62, n.105, makes the )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(point that 'Paul's "Gentile mission", overriding the demands of \
the Law and addressed )Tj
T*
(equally "to Jews and Gentiles alike" ... is perfectly in line with the e\
xigencies of Herodian )Tj
T*
(family policy.' Eisenman has made a detailed examination of all the evid\
ence surrounding )Tj
T*
(Paul's links with the ruling families in a paper 'Paul as Herodian' deli\
vered to the Society of )Tj
T*
(Biblical Literature, 1983.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.202 TD
(Postscript)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.196 TD
(1 Bar-Adon, 'Another Settlement of the Judean Desert Sect'.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(2 Eusebius, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The History of the Church, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(VI, 16 \(p.256\).)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(177 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
823 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 603.961 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 587.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 570.923 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 554.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 521.345 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 504.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 488.307 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 471.768 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 455.229 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 438.729 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 422.191 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 339.536 520 82.655 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 306.536 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 256.92 520 49.616 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 190.766 520 66.155 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 124.611 520 66.155 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 108.072 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 75.034 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 58.534 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 22.534 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(3 Ibid.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(4 Braun, 'Ein Brief des Katholikos Timotheos I', p.305.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(5 The full story of Shapira is told in Allegro, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Shapim Affair.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(6 Ibid., pp. 114-19.)Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
25 0 0 25 202.625 612.1932 Tm
(Bibliography)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 592.0489 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Albright, W.F. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Archaeology of Palestine, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(rev. edn \(Harmondsworth,)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1963\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Allegro, J.M. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Treasure of the Copper Scroll )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1960\) )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Sacred Mushroom and )Tj
T*
(the Cross )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1970\) )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls: A Reappraisal, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(2nd edn \(Harmondsworth,)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1975\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Newton Abbot, 1979\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Annuario pontificio )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Vatican City; published annually\))Tj
T*
(Avigad, N. and Yadin, Y. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(A Genesis Apocryphon )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Jerusalem, 1956\))Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Baillet, M. 'Fragments du document de Damas, Qumran, grotte 6',)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol. lxiii \(1956\), pp.513ff.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Bar-Adon, P. 'Another Settlement of the Judean Desert Sect at En el-Ghuw\
eir on the Shores )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(of the Dead Sea', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no.227 \(Oct. 1977\), )Tj
T*
(pp. Iff. Birnbaum, S.A. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Hebrew Scripts )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Leiden, 1971\) Black, M. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Scrolls and )Tj
T*
(Christian Origins )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1961\) Black, M., ed. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Scrolls and Christianity )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, )Tj
T*
(1969\) Bonsirven, J. 'Revolution dans l'histoire des origines chretienne\
s?', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Etudes,)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(vol.cclxviii \(Jan.-Mar. 1951\) Braun, O. 'Ein Brief des katholikos Timo\
theos I iiber biblische )Tj
T*
(Studien)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(des 9. Jahrhunderts', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Oriens Christianus, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.1 \(1901\), pp.299ff. Brownlee, W.H. 'A )Tj
T*
(Comparison of the Covenanters of the Dead Sea Scrolls with pre-Christian\
Jewish Sects', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The )Tj
T*
(Biblical Archaeologist, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol. xiii, no.3 \(Sept. 1950\), pp.SOff.)Tj
T*
('The Servant of the Lord in the Qumran Scrolls I', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Bulletin of the American Schools of )Tj
T*
(Oriental Research, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no. 132 \(Dec. 1953\), pp.8ff. 'Muhammad ed-Deeb's own Story of his )Tj
T*
(Scroll Discovery', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Journal of Near Eastern Studies, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xv \(Jan.-Oct. 1956\), pp. 236ff. 'Edh-)Tj
T*
(Dheeb's Story of his Scroll Discovery', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no.12, vol.iii \(1962\), pp.483ff.)Tj
T*
('Some new facts concerning the discovery of the Scrolls of 1Q', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no.15, vol.)Tj
T*
(iv \(1963\), pp.417ff. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Meaning of the Qumran Scrolls for the Bible )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Oxford, 1964\) Bruce, )Tj
T*
(F.F. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Second Thoughts on the Dead Sea Scrolls )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1956\) Burrows, M. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Scrolls of St. Marks Monastery, 2 )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vols \(New Haven, 1950-51\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(The Dead Sea Scrolls )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1956\))Tj
T*
(Callaway, P.R. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The History of the Qumran Community )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Sheffield, 1988\) Charles, R.H. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The )Tj
T*
(Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament,)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
(2 vols \(Oxford, 1913\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Cross, F.M. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Ancient Library of Qumran )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1958\) Cullmann, O. 'The Significance )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(178 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
824 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 732.923 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.845 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.268 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.191 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.152 520 66.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.575 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.036 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.42 520 49.616 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 385.797 520 49.623 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 253.527 520 132.271 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 236.988 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 220.449 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 187.372 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 170.872 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.333 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 137.833 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 104.756 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 71.679 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 35.679 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(of the Qumran Texts for Research into the Beginnings of Christianity', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Journal of Biblical )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Literature, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.lxxiv, part IV \(Dec. 1955\), pp.213ff.)Tj
T*
(Cupitt, D. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Sea of Faith: Christianity in Change )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1984\) Danielou, J. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead )Tj
T*
(Sea Scrolls and Primitive Christianity, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. S.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Attanasio \(Westport, 1979\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Davies, A.P. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(New York, 1956\) Davies, P.R. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The )Tj
T*
(Damascus Covenant )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Sheffield, 1983\) )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Behind the Essenes )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Atlanta, 1987\))Tj
T*
('How Not to do Archaeology: The Story of Qumran', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Biblical Archaeologist )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Dec. 1988\), )Tj
T*
(pp.203ff. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Discoveries in the Judaean Desert, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(series:)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(vol.i, Milik, J.T. and Barthelemy, D \(1955\) vol.ii, Benoit, P., Milik,\
J.T. and de Vaux, R. )Tj
T*
(\(1961\) vol.iii, Baillet, M., Milik, J.T. and de Vaux, R. \(1962\) vol.\
iv, Sanders, J.A. \(1965\) vol.)Tj
T*
(v, Allegro, J.M. \(1968\) vol.vi, Milik, J.T. \(1977\) vol.vii, Baillet,\
M. \(1982\) vol.viii, Tov, E. )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(\(1990\) Driver, G.R. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Hebrew Scrolls )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Oxford, 1951\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(The Judaean Scrolls )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Oxford, 1965\) Dunn, J.D.G. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Jesus, Paul and the Law )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1990\) )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Dupont-Sommer, A. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls: A Preliminary Survey, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. E.M. Rowley )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(\(Oxford, 1952\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(The Jewish Sect of Qumran and the Essenes, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. R.D. Barnett \(London, 1954\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Les ecrits esseniens decouverts pres de la Mer Morte )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Paris, 1959\) )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Essene Writings from )Tj
T*
(Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. G. Vermes \(Oxford, 1961\) Eisenman, R.H. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians )Tj
T*
(and Qumran )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Leiden, 1983\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Leiden, 1986\))Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
('The Historical Provenance of the )Tj
T*
("Three Nets of Belial" Allusion in the Zadokite Document and )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Balla/Bela )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in the Temple )Tj
T*
(Scroll', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Folia orientalia, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xxv \(1988\), pp.51ff.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Eschatological "Rain" Imagery in the War Scroll from Qumran and in the \
Letter of James', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Journal of Near Eastern Studies, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xlix, no.2 \(April 1990\) 'Interpreting )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
("Abeit-Galuto" )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in )Tj
T*
(the Habakkuk )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Pesher', Folia orientalia,)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( vol.xxvii \(1990\) Epiphanius of Constantia. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Adversus )Tj
T*
(octoginta haereses, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(I, i, Haeres xx, in J.-P. Migne, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Patrologiae cursus completus, series )Tj
T*
(graeca, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.41 \(Paris, 1858\) )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Epistle of Barnabas, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Ante-Nicene Fathers, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.i, ed. A.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(C. Coxe \(Grand Rapids, 1985\), pp.l37ff. Eusebius of Caesarea )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The History of the Church )Tj
T*
(from Christ to Constantine,)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( trans. G.A. Williamson \(Harmondsworth, 1981\) Feldman, L.H. )Tj
T*
(and Hata, G. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Josephus, Judaism and Christianity )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Detroit, 1987\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Josephus, the Bible and History )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Detroit, 1989\))Tj
T*
(Fisk, R. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Pity the Nation )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1990\))Tj
T*
(Fitzmyer, J.A. 'The Qumran Scrolls, the Ebionites and their Literature',\
)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Scrolls and the )Tj
T*
(New Testament, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ed. K. Stendahl \(London, 1958\),)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(pp.208ff.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(The Dead Sea Scrolls: Major Publications and Tools for Study, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(2nd)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(edn \(Missoula, 1977\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Fogazzaro, A. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Saint, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. M. Prichard-Agnetti \(London, 1906\) Fritsch, C.T. 'Herod the )Tj
T*
(Great and the Qumran Community', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Journal)Tj
T*
(of Biblical Literature, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.lxxiv, part III \(Sept. 1955\), pp.l73ff. Gallarati-Scotti, T. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Life )Tj
T*
(of Antonio Fogazzaro, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. M. Prichard-Agnetti \(London, 1922\))Tj
T*
(Gaster, T.H. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scriptures )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(New York, 1956\) Gichon, M. 'The Bar Kochba War - )Tj
T*
(A Colonial Uprising against Imperial Rome \(131/2-135 ce\)', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue intemationale )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(179 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
825 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 732.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.423 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.345 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.268 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.229 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.691 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.606 520 33.084 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.568 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.529 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 484.99 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 418.836 520 66.155 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.22 520 49.616 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 352.72 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 319.643 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.104 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 286.604 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 253.52 520 33.084 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 220.52 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 170.942 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 154.404 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.365 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 71.788 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 38.71 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 2.71 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(d'histoire militaire, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(no.42)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(\(1979\), pp.82ff.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
('Who Were the Enemies of Rome on the Limes Palaestinae', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Studien)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(zu den Militargrenzen Roms, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(iii \(Stuttgart, 1986\) Gilkes, A.N. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The Impact of the Dead Sea )Tj
T*
(Scrolls )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(London, 1962\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Golb, N. 'The Problem of Origin and Identification of the Dead Sea Scro\
lls', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Proceedings of )Tj
T*
(the American Philosophical Society, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(vol.cxxiv, no.l)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(\(1980\), pp. Iff.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
('The Dead Sea Scrolls', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The American Scholar )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(spring, 1989\), pp. 177ff.)Tj
T*
(Graves, R'. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(King Jesus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(4th edn \(London, 1960\))Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(The White Goddess )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(London, 1977\))Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Hasler, A.B. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(How the Pope became Infallible, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(trans. )Tj
T*
(P. Heinegg \(New York, 1981\) Hebblethwaite, P. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Synod Extraordinary )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(London, 1986\))Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(In the Vatican )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Oxford, 1988\) )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(trans. A. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Marshall \(London, 1967\))Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(The Jerusalem Bible, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(ed. A. Jones \(after R. de Vaux\) \(London, 1966\) Josephus, F. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Antiquities of the Jews: A History of the Jewish Wars and)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Life of Flavius Josephus, Written by Himself, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(trans. W. Whiston \(London, n.d.\))Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(The Jewish War, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(trans. G.A. Williamson \(Harmondsworth, 1978\) Kahle, P.E. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The Cairo )Tj
T*
(Geniza )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(London, 1947\) Kenyon, K. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Digging up Jericho )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(London, 1957\) Knibb, M.A. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The )Tj
T*
(Qumran Community )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Cambridge, 1987\) Kuhn, K.G. 'Les rouleaux de cuivre de Qumran', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(vol.lxi \(1954\), pp.l93ff.)Tj
T*
(Kiing, H. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Infallible?, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(trans. E. Mosbacher \(London, 1971\) Ladouceur, D.J. 'Josephus and )Tj
T*
(Masada', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Josephus, Judaism and Christianity,)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( ed. L.H. Feldman and G. Hata \(Detroit, 1987\), )Tj
T*
(pp.95ff. Leon-Dufour, X. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The Gospels and the Jesus of History, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(trans. J. McHugh)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(\(London, 1968\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Lloyd, S. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Foundations in the Dust, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(rev. edn \(London, 1980\) Maier, J. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The Temple Scroll )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(\(Sheffield, 1985\) Metzger, B.M., ed. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The Apocrypha of the Old Testament )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(New York,)Tj
T*
(1965\) Milik, J.T. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Ten Years of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judaea, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(trans.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(J. Strugnell \(London, 1959\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Murphy, R. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Lagrange and Biblical Research )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Chicago, 1966\))Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Negoitsa, A. 'Did the Essenes )Tj
T*
(Survive the 66-71 War?', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran,)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(no.24, vol.vi \(1959\), pp.517ff. Nemoy, L. 'Al-Qirqisani's Account of t\
he Jewish Sects and )Tj
T*
(Christianity',)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Hebrew Union College Annual, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(vol.vii \(1930\), pp.317ff. Neusner, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(J. Judaism in the )Tj
T*
(Beginning of Christianity )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(London, 1984\) )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(New Catholic Encyclopaedia, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(14 vols \(New York, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1967\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(North, R. 'Qumran and its Archaeology', )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The Catholic Biblical Quarterly,)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(vol.xvi, no.4 \(Oct. 1954\), pp.426ff. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(ed. F.L. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Cross and E.A. Livingstone, 2nd edn \(Oxford, 1983\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Pearlman, M. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls in the Shrine of the Book )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Jerusalem, 1988\) Philo )Tj
T*
(Judaeus )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(On the Contemplative Life, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(trans. F.H. Colson \(Cambridge, Mass., and London, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1967\))Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Every Good Man is Free, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(trans. F.H. Colson \(Cambridge, Mass., and London, 1967\) Pliny )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(Natural History, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(trans. H. Rackham and W.H.S. Jones, 10 vols)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(180 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
826 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Vermes, Geza, 63, 64-5, 67, 68, 75, 89, 171)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Vesco, Father Jean-Luc, 119, 120,126 Vespasian, 192-3)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Wall Street Journal: )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(scrolls advertised in, 1, 2, 23-4)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('War Scroll', 28-9,134,141-2,150, 217 )Tj
T*
('Wicked Priest', 149-50,151,157,1% )Tj
T*
(Wilson, Sir Charles, 106 )Tj
T*
(Wilson, Edmund, 7-8, 41-4, 48-9, 51, 56, 63-4, 67,101 )Tj
T*
(Wolfe, Tom, 62 Wright-Baker, H., 52)Tj
T*
(Yadin, Yigael, 12, 23-4, 25, 26, 31, 64-5,142, 233)Tj
T*
(Zealots, xv, xvi, 167,194,199, 200, 204-7, 208, 211-17, 219-20; )Tj
T*
(and the Qumran community, 69, 70, 171)Tj
T*
( )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(190 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
827 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 732.923 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.384 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.307 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.229 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.614 520 49.616 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.536 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.459 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.42 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.804 520 49.616 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 418.727 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.15 520 49.577 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 302.995 520 66.155 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 269.957 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 236.918 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 121.147 520 115.771 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 104.609 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 71.57 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 55.031 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 19.031 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(\(London, 1938-42\) Ploeg, J. van der )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Excavations at Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. K. Smyth \(London,)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(1958\) Pryce-Jones, D. 'A New Chapter in the Story of Christ', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Daily Telegraph)Tj
T*
(Magazine, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(19 July 1968, pp.l2ff.)Tj
T*
(Pritz, R.A. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Nazarene Jewish Christianity )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Jerusalem and Leiden, 1988\) Rabin, C. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Qumran )Tj
T*
(Studies )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Oxford, 1957\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Rabin, C, ed. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Zadokite Documents, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(2nd rev. edn \(Oxford, 1958\) )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Recognitions of )Tj
T*
(Clement, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. Thomas Smith, in the )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Ante-Nicene Library,)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( 25 vols, vol.iii \(Edinburgh, 1867\))Tj
T*
(Reed, W.L. 'The Qumran Caves Expedition of March 1952', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Bulletin of the American Schools )Tj
T*
(of Oriental Research, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no. 135 \(October, 1954\), pp.8ff. Robinson, J.M. 'The Jung Codex: The )Tj
T*
(Rise and Fall of a Monopoly', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Religious Studies Review, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no.3 \(Jan. 1977\), pp.l7ff.)Tj
T*
('Getting the Nag Hammadi Library into English', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Biblical Archaeologist, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xlii \(Fall 1979\), )Tj
T*
(p.239 Rosa, P. de )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Vicars of Christ )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1989\))Tj
T*
(Roth, C. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Historical Background of the Dead Sea Scrolls )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Oxford, 1958\) 'The Zealots and )Tj
T*
(Qumran: The Basic Issue', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.ii, no.5 \(1959\), pp.81fF.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
('Did Vespasian Capture Qumran?', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Palestine Exploration Quarterly )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(July-Dec. 1959\), pp.)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(l22ff.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
('Qumran and Masadah: A Final Clarification Regarding the Dead Sea Sect',\
)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue de )Tj
T*
(Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no. 17, vol.v \(1964\), pp.81ff. Rowley, H.H. 'The Qumran Sect and Ch\
ristian )Tj
T*
(Origins', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Bulletin of)Tj
T*
(the John Rylands Library, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xliv, no.l \(Sept. 1961\), pp.H9ff. Samuel, A.Y. 'The Purchase of )Tj
T*
(the Jerusalem Scrolls', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Biblical Archaeologist, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xii, no.2 \(May, 1949\), pp.26ff.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Treasure of Qumran )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1968\) )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(La Sainte Bible, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(traduite . . . sous la direction de L'Ecole )Tj
T*
(Biblique de Jerusalem \(Paris, 1956\) Schillebeeckx, E. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Ministry: A Case for Change, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. J. )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Bowden \(London, 1981\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Schroeder, F.J. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Pere Lagrange and Biblical Inspiration )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Washington, 1954\) Silberman, N.A. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Digging for God and Country )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(New York, 1982\) Smith, M. 'The Dead Sea Sect in Relation )Tj
T*
(to Ancient Judaism', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(New)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Testament Studies, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.vii \(1960-61\), pp.347ff. Smyth, K. 'The )Tj
T*
(Truth about the Dead Sea Scrolls', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Irish Digest)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( \(June 1956\), pp.31ff.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Steckoll, S.H. 'Preliminary Excavation Report in the Qumran Cemetery', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(no.23, vol.vi \(1968\), pp.323ff.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
('Marginal Notes on the Qumran Excavations', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no.25, vol.vii \(1969\), )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(pp.33ff.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Stendahl, K., ed. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Scrolls and the New Testament )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1958\) Stutchbury, H.E. and )Tj
T*
(Nicholl, G.R. 'Khirbet Mazin', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Annual of the)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Department of Antiquities of Jordan, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vols.vi-)Tj
T*
(vii \(1962\), pp.96ff. Suetonius )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Twelve Caesars, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. R. Graves \(Harmondsworth, 1979\) )Tj
T*
(Sukenik, E.L. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Dead Sea Scrolls of the Hebrew University )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Jerusalem, 1955\) Tacitus )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The )Tj
T*
(Histories, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(trans. K. Wellesley, rev. edn \(Harmondsworth, 1988\) Talmon, S. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The World of )Tj
T*
(Qumran from Within )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Jerusalem, 1989\) Trever, J. 'When was Qumran Cave 1 Discovered?', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no.9, vol.iii \(1961\), pp.l35fF.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(The Untold Story of Qumran )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1966\))Tj
T*
(Vaux, R. de 'A Propos des manuscrits de la mer morte', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.lvii \(1950\), )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(pp.417ff.)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
('Exploration de la region de Qumran', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol. lx \(1953\), pp.540ff.)Tj
T*
('Fouille au Khirbet Qumran', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.lx \(1953\), pp.83fT. 'Fouilles au Khirbet )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(181 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
828 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 732.923 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.384 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.307 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.768 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.229 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.691 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.652 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.614 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.536 520 33.077 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 517.998 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.498 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 484.959 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.42 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 451.882 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.382 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 418.882 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.382 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 385.882 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 355.882 520 30 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 339.382 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 322.882 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 306.382 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 289.882 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 273.382 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 256.882 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 240.343 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 223.843 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 207.343 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 190.843 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 174.343 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 157.843 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 141.343 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 124.843 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 108.304 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 91.804 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 75.304 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 58.804 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 42.304 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 6.304 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(Qumran', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.lxi \(1954\), pp.206ff. 'Fouilles de Khirbet Qumran', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.lxiii \(1956\), pp. 533ff.)Tj
T*
('Les manuscrits de Qumran et l'archeologie', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.lxvi \(1959\), pp.87ff.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(rev. edn \(Oxford, 1977\) Vermes, G. 'The Etymology )Tj
T*
(of "Essenes" ', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(no.7, vol.ii \(1960\), pp.427ff.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1977\) )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Jesus the Jew )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1977\))Tj
T*
('The Essenes and History', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Journal of Jewish Studies, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(vol.xxxii, no.l \(1981\), pp.l8ff.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Jesus and the World of Judaism )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1983\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(3rd edn \(Sheffield, 1987\) Webb, J. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Flight from Reason )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(\(London, 1971\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(The Harmonious Circle )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1980\) Wilson, E. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Scrolls from the Dead Sea )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(1955\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(The Dead Sea Scrolls 1947-1969, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(rev. edn \(Glasgow, 1977\) Wright, G.E., ed. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Bible and )Tj
T*
(the Ancient Near East )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1961\) Yadin, Y. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(The Message of the Scrolls )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1957\))Tj
0 -1.203 TD
('What the Temple Scroll Reveals', )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Daily Telegraph Magazine, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(19)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(July 1968, pp.l5ff.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Masada )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1975\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Bar-Kokhba )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1978\))Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(The Temple Scroll )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(London, 1985\))Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
0 -1.204 TD
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
( )Tj
T*
( )Tj
25 0 0 25 240.1375 364.1135 Tm
(Index)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 343.9692 Tm
( )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Aaron, priestly line of, 200-1, 204, 205, Barnabas, 181)Tj
T*
(207 Baumgarten, Jos\
eph, 77, 86)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Acts of the Apostles, xiii-xiv, 43, 132-3, Bechtel Corporation, 36\
-7)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(134,147,175-87; on James, 188-9, 194 Benoit, Father Pierre, 33, 34,\
74, 76, 78,)Tj
T*
(Agrippa, King, xiv 88, 91, 120)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Albright, William F., 13, 23, 71 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Biblical Archaeology Review \(BAR\), )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(34,)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Albright Institute \(American School of 38, 72, 73, 87, 88-9, \
90,101,102,145,)Tj
T*
(Oriental Research\), 13,14,16, 20, 22, 226)Tj
T*
(28, 36, 75, 76,113 biblical texts, 40, 8\
2)Tj
T*
(Alexander the Great, 201 Biran, Professor, 26,\
31)Tj
T*
(Allegro, John M., 21, 29, 30, 37, 39, Birnbaum, Solomon, 161-\
2, 163)Tj
T*
(45-63, 67, 70, 72, 74,100,101-2,113, Black, Matthew, 173,174)Tj
T*
(119, 231; and the 'Copper Scroll', Blavatsky, H.P., 167)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(51-6 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Brooke Kerith, The, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(168)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(AMS \(Accelerator Mass Spectroscopy\) Broshi, Magen, 28, 76-7)Tj
T*
(dating, 81, 83, 86 Burrows, Millan, 14\
)Tj
T*
(Ananas \(high priest\), 193, 194-5, 1%,)Tj
T*
(199 Carmignac,Jean,\
69)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(182 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
829 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 732.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.423 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.384 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.345 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.807 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.768 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.229 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.691 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.152 520 33.039 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.614 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.114 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.614 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.614 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0489 Tm
(Ancient Library qfQumran )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Cross\), 33 Catholic Church, 108-17; Congregation)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(animal sacrifices, 170 for the Doctri\
ne of the Faith, 120-6;)Tj
T*
(Antioch, Paul's journey to, 180-1 Modernist Movement, \
109-11,112-)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Antoninus, Sonof Serverus, 229 13)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(archaeological research: Charles, R.H., 145)Tj
T*
(methodology, 103-7 Christianity, xvi, xviii\
, 235-6; Allegro's)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Axel's Castle )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Wilson\), 41 writings on, 61-3; and the E\
ssenes,)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(167-8; links with Qumran teaching,)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Baillet, Father Maurice, 29 42-7, 65-6, 67,13\
0-7 )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(see also )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Catholic)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(baptism, 132 Church)Tj
T*
(CIA \(Central Intelligence Agency\), 10,)Tj
T*
(11,37)Tj
T*
(Clement, Bishop of Alexandria, 191 )Tj
T*
('Community Rule', 8, 132, 134, 135,)Tj
T*
(140-1,146,147,169 )Tj
T*
(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 120-6 )Tj
T*
(Copeland, Miles, 10-11 )Tj
T*
('Copper Scroll', 21, 36, 51-6, 119, 138-40)Tj
T*
(Cross, Frank, 28, 29-30, 33, 38, 39, 49, 52, 72, 100; )Tj
T*
(Allegro's letters to, 55, 57, 58; )Tj
T*
(on the archaeological evidence atQumran, 160, 161; )Tj
T*
(palaeographic dating of texts, 115, 116; )Tj
T*
(on Roman coins at Qumran, 155; )Tj
T*
(and Strugnell,)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(95 'Crucifixion Before Christ' )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Time)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Magazine\), )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(47 )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(Crucifixion by an Eye-Witness, The, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(167-8)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Dajani, Awni, 57-8, 60)Tj
T*
('Damascus Document', 143,144-9, 150,)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(179,185, 209 Daniel: concept of resurrection in, 214-15)Tj
T*
(Danielou, Cardinal Jean, 123, 136, 159 )Tj
T*
(Darwin, Charles, 108 )Tj
T*
(David, Messiah of, 200, 204, 205 )Tj
T*
(Davies, Philip, 43, 76, 77, 79-80, 82, 83, 85, 86, 89, 102; )Tj
T*
(on palaeographic dating, 162 )Tj
T*
(Dayan, Moshe, 24)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Dead Sea Scrolls, The )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Allegro\), 45, 56 )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(Dead Sea Scrolls and Primitive)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Christianity, The )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Danielou\), 123 )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( \(Vermes\), 64)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(De Vaux, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(see )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Vaux, Father Roland de )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Discoveries in thejudaean Desert of Jordan,)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( 27, 36-8, 39, 45, 74, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(94 )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Doors )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(of Perception, The )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(\(Huxley\), 62 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Driver, Godfrey R., 29, 45, 63, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 75,152; )Tj
T*
(on the archaeological evidence at Qumran, 156, 159,160, 161; on the Zeal\
ots, 171 )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(183 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
830 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 33 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 568 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 535 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 502 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 469 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 436 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 403 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 370 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 337 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 304 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 271 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 238 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 205 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 172 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 139 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.961 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.961 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Drori, Amir, 78-9, 80, 81, 88, 89, 90, 93 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Dupont-Sommer, Andre, 44-5, 46, 51)Tj
T*
(Eco, Umberto, xix, xviii Ecole Biblique et Archeologique Franqaise de Je\
rusalem, 9, 16, 22, )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(27, 28, 29, 33, 84; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and the Catholic Church, 102-3, 111, 112,113,114-15, 116, 125-6; )Tj
T*
(and the international team, 99-101, 102-3; )Tj
T*
(and the Pontifical Biblical Commission, 118-19,120, 124)Tj
T*
(Eisenman, Robert, xix, xvii-xviii, 19, 32, 38, 40, 51, 71, 73, 75-83, 84\
-5, 99, 102; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(archaeological explorations, 226-7, 228, 229; )Tj
T*
(on the archaeological evidence at Qumran, 154, 155, 156, 158,161, 162; )Tj
T*
(on the calligraphy in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 163; )Tj
T*
(on the 'Damascus Document', 145, 185; )Tj
T*
(on the Essenes, 173; )Tj
T*
(on the 'Habakkuk Commentary', 172, 195, 196; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(on James, 187, 188,189-90,191-2; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(on the 'Liar' and the 'Wicked Priest', 149; )Tj
T*
(on the Messiah, 141-2; on Paul, 181, 186, 197, 218, 220, 221; )Tj
T*
(and the Qumran community, 199-200, 202; )Tj
T*
(on the rebuilding of Qumran, 154; )Tj
T*
(on the Saducees, 203; on the Temple Scroll, 143; )Tj
T*
(on the Zealots, 201, 205, 207, 208-9, 215)Tj
T*
(Eleazar ben Jair, 206, 212, 213, 214, 216 )Tj
T*
(Epiphanius, 172,173,192 )Tj
T*
(Essenes, xvi; and Masada, 216; )Tj
T*
(Pliny's writings on, 19-20,165, 168, 169, 170,173; )Tj
T*
(and the Qumran community, 40, 67, 68, 69, 70,146, 148,153,165-74,199 )Tj
T*
(Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, 190-1,192,193, 229 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Ezekiel: concept of resurrection in, 214,215)Tj
T*
(Fitzmyer, Joseph, 89,119 264)Tj
T*
(Flinders Petrie, William Matthew, 106 )Tj
T*
(Fogazzaro, Antonio, 110 )Tj
T*
(Frederick II, King of Prussia \(the Great\), 167 )Tj
T*
(Freedman, David Noel, 86,89)Tj
T*
(Galatians, Paul's letter to, 135,180,)Tj
T*
(183,188-9,197 )Tj
T*
(Gamaliel, 184 )Tj
T*
(Gaster,T.H.,72,89 )Tj
T*
(Georgi, Dieter, 89 )Tj
T*
(Gladstone, William, 230 )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Gnostic Gospels, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(see )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Nag Hammadi Scrolls )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Golb, Norman, 33, 86, 89,103,115-17,160)Tj
T*
(Gospels, the, 43,175,176 )Tj
T*
(Graves, Robert, 168 )Tj
T*
(Greenfield, Jonas, 93, 94 )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(184 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
831 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.461 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.923 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.884 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.345 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.307 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.807 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Groningen, University of, 84)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Habakkuk Commentary', 146, 149-50, 151,152,172,174, 195,196,197, 219 )Tj
T*
(Hadrian, Emperor, 210 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Harding, Gerald Lankester, 15, 16, 17,18, 22, 54-5,106 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Hasidaeans, 201 )Tj
T*
(Hegesippus, 191,192 )Tj
T*
(Herod Agrippa II, 220 )Tj
T*
(Herod Antipas, Tetrarch of Galilee, xiv,207 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Herod the Great, 153, 154,169,170,203, 205 )Tj
T*
(Herodian, 220 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Historical Background of the Dead Sea)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Scrolls )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Roth\), 68-9 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Hunzinger, Dr Claus-Hunno, 28-9 )Tj
T*
(Hussein, King of Jordan, 60 )Tj
T*
(Huxley, Aldous, 62 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Huxley, Thomas, 108)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Infallible? )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Kiing\), 122-3)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Irgun \(Jewish terrorist organisation\), 15)Tj
T*
(Isaiah, George, 7, 8, 9)Tj
T*
(Israel: and the Catholic Church, 60-1;)Tj
T*
(government, 31, 72-5, 87-8, 89-90, 95, 101-2, 234; )Tj
T*
(Six Day War \(1967\), 23, 26, 60,102, 233 )Tj
T*
(Italy, unification of, 108)Tj
T*
(James, Saint \(brother of Jesus\), xviii, 133,174,177, 178,181,186-7,188\
-98; )Tj
T*
(death, 190-1, 192-4, 196; )Tj
T*
(and Paul, 182, 183, 188, 189,194,197-8, 217, 218-19)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Eisenman\), 75)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jerusalem: Temple of, 142, 149-50, 193, 202)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Jesus Christ: Allegro's writings on, 61; )Tj
T*
(in the desert, 202; and the Essenes, 167-8; )Tj
T*
(in the Gospels, 175, 177; )Tj
T*
(as historical individual, xii-xiii, xiv-xvi; and James, 188; )Tj
T*
(and Paul, 181-2, 183; )Tj
T*
(and the Qumran texts, 56, 130, 131, 133, 134, 135-7; )Tj
T*
(and Qumran's 'Teacher of Righteousness', 44, 140-1; )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Renan's )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Life of Jesus, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(107-8; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and the Zealots, 211-12)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Jesus: An Experiment in Christology )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Schillebeeckx\), 122)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(John \(Apostle\), 133)Tj
T*
(John Paul II, Pope, 122,123)Tj
T*
(John the Baptist, xv, 132, 202, 207, 211)Tj
T*
(John XXIII, Pope, 60-1, 122)Tj
T*
(Jonathan Maccabaeus, 151)Tj
T*
(Josephus, Flavius, 67, 69, 142, 150,154, 155, 178; )Tj
T*
(on the Essenes, 165, 166-7, 168, 169, 170, 171, 173; )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(185 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
832 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.961 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.923 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.384 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.845 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.345 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.807 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.807 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(on James, 190,193-4,195,1%; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(on the mass suicide at Masada, 213, 214; )Tj
T*
(on the Zealots, 204, 205, 206, 208, 209)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Judaean Scrolls, The )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Driver\), 70, 71)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Judas Iscariot, xv, 206)Tj
T*
(Judas Maccabaeus, 201-2)Tj
T*
(Judas of Galilee, 205, 206, 207, 212)Tj
T*
(Kando \(Khalil Iskander Shahin\), 7, 8,)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(17-18, 26 Kapera, Z.J.,85, 89)Tj
T*
('Keepers of the Covenant', 172, 173-4)Tj
T*
(Kesey, Ken, 62)Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Khirbet Qumran, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(see )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Qumran)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(King, Philip, 89)Tj
T*
(Kingsford, Anna, 167)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Koenen, Ludwig, 86)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Koldeway, Robert, 107)Tj
T*
(Kiing, Hans, 122-4)Tj
T*
(Lagrange, Father Albert, 111-13, 118 )Tj
T*
(Last Supper, timing of, 135-6 )Tj
T*
(Leary, Timothy, 62 )Tj
T*
(Leo XIII, Pope, 110, HI, 112, H8 )Tj
T*
('Liar, the', 149, 146-7, 195-6, 219 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Life of Jesus, The )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Renan\), 107-8, 167 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Lippens, Captain Philippe, 16 )Tj
T*
(Loisy, Alfred, 109-10, 112)Tj
T*
(Lozajose, 119 )Tj
T*
(Lucceius Albinus, 190 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Luke's Gospel, 66,176-7)Tj
T*
(Mogilany Resolution, 85-6, 90)Tj
T*
(Moore, George, 168)Tj
T*
(Moses, 120,145)Tj
T*
(Muhammad adh-Dhib \(Muhammad the)Tj
T*
(Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome, 1W)Tj
T*
(Nabokov, Vladimir, xvii, 41)Tj
T*
(Nag Hammadi Scrolls, 32, 35-6, 37, 86, 129-30)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Name of the Rose, The )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Eco\), xviii, 32 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Nazoreans \(Nazarenes\), 174, 217 )Tj
T*
(Ne'eman,Yuval,73,74-5,76)Tj
T*
(Neusner, Jacob, 89 )Tj
T*
(New Testament, 43; )Tj
T*
(on James, 188-V )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(New York Times: )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
('The Vanity of Scholars', 85)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Nietzsche, F., 108)Tj
T*
(North, Robert, 32, 153)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(186 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
833 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 699.961 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 666.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 633.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 600.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 567.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.923 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.884 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.384 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.884 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.884 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
('Notes in the Margin' \(Sturgill\), 51)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Maccabeans, 201-3)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Eisenman\), xvii, 75 )Tj
T*
(Mark's Gospel, 175 )Tj
T*
(Martyr, Justin, 65-6 )Tj
T*
(Masada, fortress of, xvi, 69, 132,193,199, 208; )Tj
T*
(mass suicide at, 206, 212-14, 216)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Mattathias Maccabaeus, 201, 204 )Tj
T*
(Mayhew, Christopher, 62 )Tj
T*
(Menahem, 205-6, 212 )Tj
T*
(Messiah figure, 133,141-2,147; )Tj
T*
(Of Aaron and of David, 200, 204, 205 )Tj
T*
(Metternich, Prince, 109 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Milik, Father Josef, 29, 32, 34, 35, 38, 48, 49, 58, 85, 88, 91; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and the 'Copper Scroll', 53, 54, 55-6; )Tj
T*
(on the archaeological evidence at Qumran, 154-5; )Tj
T*
(controls and withholds Qumran material, 66, 86-7, 99-100, 116,117 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Ministry: A Case for Change)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.197 TD
(\(Schillebeeckx\), 122 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(MMT document, 77, 78, 91)Tj
T*
(Old Testament, 112,113-14 )Tj
T*
(Origen, 193, 229)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Origin of Species, The )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Darwin\), 108 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Orlinsky, Harry, 24 )Tj
T*
(Oversight Committee, 89-90, 91, 92, 93-4, 95, 225, 226)Tj
T*
(palaeography, dating by, 160-4 )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Palestine Archaeological Museum, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(see)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -1.2 TD
(Rockefeller Museum Palestine Exploration Fund, 106 )Tj
T*
(Paul, Saint, xiii-xiv, xviii, 134-5, 176, 177,178-87,199, 218-21; )Tj
T*
(as 'the Liar', 195; conversion of, 147-8,179-80; )Tj
T*
(and James, 182,183,188,189,194,197-8, 217, 218-19; )Tj
T*
(and Jesus, 212 )Tj
T*
(Paul VI, Pope, 121 )Tj
T*
(Peter, Saint, 133,181,182,185 )Tj
T*
(Philo Judaeus: on the Essenes, 165,168,169,170,171,173 )Tj
T*
(Phineas, Covenant of, 202-3 )Tj
T*
(Pius IX, Pope, 109 )Tj
T*
(PiusX, Pope, 110,120 )Tj
T*
(Pius XII, Pope, 114)Tj
T*
(Pliny, 19-20, 67,165,168,169,170,173 )Tj
T*
(Pontifical Biblical Commission, 113, 118-19, 120, 121, 124, 126 )Tj
T*
(Pryce-Jones, David, 26, 28 )Tj
T*
(Puech, Father Emile, 33, 65, 66, 100 )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(187 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
834 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 568 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 534.961 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.423 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 501.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 468.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 435.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 402.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 369.884 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.345 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 336.845 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.307 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.807 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.307 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.768 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.268 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.768 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.229 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.691 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.691 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.691 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.691 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.191 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.691 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.691 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Pynchon, Thomas, xvii)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Qumran: archaeological evidence at, 152-64; )Tj
T*
(coins found at, 155-9, 210; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(destruction of, 153-5; )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and the Essenes, 168-74; )Tj
T*
(and Masada, 216; )Tj
T*
(ruins of, 4-5; )Tj
T*
(teachings, and Christianity, 65-6, 67, 130-7)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Ratzinger, Joseph, 120, 121-2, 124-5)Tj
T*
('Recognitions of Clement', 189-90)Tj
T*
(Reed, William, 20, 21)Tj
T*
(Renan, Ernest, 107-8, 167)Tj
T*
(resurrection, Zealot concept of, 214-16)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Revue biblique, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(27, 100, 112, 113)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Revue de Qumran, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(84, 100)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Righteous One', 177-8)Tj
T*
(Robinson, James, M., 32, 35, 36, 86)Tj
T*
(Rockefeller Museum \(Palestine)Tj
T*
(Archaeological Museum\), 7, 18, 22-3, 25, 28, 31-2, 34, 36, 60, 101, 102\
; )Tj
T*
(Scrollery, 22, 30, 32, 45,46, 57, 60, 71)Tj
T*
(Roth, Cecil, 68-70, 71, 72, 75, 171; )Tj
T*
(on the archaeological evidence at Qumran, 155, 156, 161, 163-4)Tj
T*
(Saad, Joseph, 18-19)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Sacred Mushroom and the Cross )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Allegro\), 61, 62-3)Tj
T*
(Sadducees, 193, 203-4 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Saint, The )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Fogazzaro\), 110 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(sainthood, concept of, 134 )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Salammbd )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Flaubert\), 104, 107 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Samuel, Athanasius Yeshua \(Metropolitan Samuel\), 7-8, 9, 11, 12,13, 14\
, 17, 23, 24 )Tj
T*
(Sanders, James A., 36 )Tj
0 -1.203 TD
(Saul of Tarsus, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(see )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Paul Schechter, Solomon, 145 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Schillebeeckx, Father Edward, 122)Tj
T*
(Schliemann, Heinrich, 104-6, 107)Tj
T*
(Schopenhauer, A., 108)Tj
T*
(Schure, Edouard, 167)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Scientific American, )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(95)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Scrolls from the Dead Sea )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Wilson\), 42)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(sectarian texts, 40, 82-3)Tj
T*
(Sermon on the Mount, 65, 133-4, 135)Tj
T*
(Severus, Julius, 210)Tj
T*
(Shanks, Hershel, 38, 78, 87)Tj
T*
(Shapira, Moses William, 229-31)Tj
T*
(Sharon, Ariel, 24)Tj
T*
(Sicarii, 167,184,185,199,200,204,208)Tj
T*
(Simeon bar Kochba, 19, 70, 142, 158,208, 209-10, 217, 234 )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(188 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
835 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)Tj
ET
EMC
/WebCaptureBG BMC
/WebCaptureFN <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
1 1 1 rg
10 749.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 733 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 716.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 700 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 683.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 667 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 650.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 634 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 617.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 601 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 584.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 568 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 551.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 535 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 518.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 502 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 485.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 469 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 452.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 436 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 419.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 403 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 386.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 370 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 353.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 337 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 320.5 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 303.961 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 287.461 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 270.961 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 254.423 520 16.539 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 237.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 221.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 204.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 188.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 171.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 155.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 138.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 122.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 105.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 89.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 72.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 56.423 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 39.923 520 16.5 re
f
EMC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
10 36 520 3.923 re
f
EMC
EMC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
0 0 0 rg
BT
/TT0 1 Tf
13.75 0 0 13.75 10 754.0875 Tm
(Simon Maccabaeus, 151 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Simon Zealotes \(Simon the Zealot\), xv,206 )Tj
T*
(SIR \(Subsurface Interface Radar\), 228-9, 234 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Skehan, Father Patrick, 28, 33, 49, 100,)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(113-15, 116-17)Tj
T*
(Smith, Morton, 38, 72-3, 74, 89 )Tj
T*
(Solomon, 200 )Tj
T*
(Spencer, Herbert, 108 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
('Star' prophecy, 141-2, 208-9 )Tj
T*
(Starcky, Father Jean, 28, 30, 33, 34, 49,58, 65, 100, 117)Tj
T*
(Stephen, Saint, 111, 147,177-9,184,190 )Tj
T*
(Stern Gang \(Jewish terrorist)Tj
T*
(organisation\), 15 )Tj
T*
(stratigraphy, 106 )Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Strugnell, John, 29, 32, 33-5, 38, 39, 46,47, 48, 49, 52, 58, 72, 116, \
145;)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Allegro's letters to, 46, 50-1; )Tj
T*
(Denies outside access to Qumran material, 77, 78, 79-80, 81-2; )Tj
T*
(and Judaism, 95-6; )Tj
T*
(television interview, 88-9 )Tj
T*
(Suez crisis \(1956\), 22, 35 )Tj
T*
(Sukenik, Eleazar, 11-13, 24, 31, 168 )Tj
T*
(Sussman, Ayala, 89, 90-1, 93-4 )Tj
T*
(Syrian Jacobite Church, 7, 9)Tj
T*
(Talmon, Shemaryahu, 34, 44, 91, 92-3, 94 )Tj
T*
('Teacher of Righteousness', 44, 131,)Tj
T*
('Teacher of Righteousness' \(Cont.\) 132,133,140-1,145,149,151,178, 197-\
8; )Tj
T*
(James as, 191, 192, 195, 196)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(Teachings ofDonJuan, The )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Castaneda\), 62)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Temple Scroll', 26, 142-4, 150, 170, 226, 233)Tj
T*
(Timotheus, Patriarch of Seleucia, 229)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.203 TD
(To the Finland Station )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(\(Wilson\), 41)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Tov, Emmanuel, 95)Tj
T*
(Troy, excavation of, 104-5)Tj
T*
(Ulrich, Eugene, 33,116 )Tj
T*
(underground scroll trade, 232-4)Tj
T*
(VanderKamm, James, 87)Tj
T*
(Vaux, Father Roland de, 15-16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 29, 30, 31, 33, 70-1; )Tj
T*
(and Allegro, 47, 48, 49, 51, 56, 57, 58, 60; )Tj
T*
(and the 'Copper Scroll', 52, 53, 54, 55; )Tj
T*
(and the archaeological evidence at Qumran, 152-60, 161; )Tj
T*
(claims Qumran community are Essenes, 146,168-9; interviewed by Pryce-)Tj
T*
(Jones, 26, 27-8; )Tj
T*
(and the Pontifical)Tj
T*
(Biblical Commission, 119 )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
0 0 0 rg
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(189 of 190\)3/19/2007 )Tj
(2:28:39 PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
836 0 obj(Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette)
endobj
837 0 obj<>
endobj
838 0 obj<>
endobj
839 0 obj<>
endobj
840 0 obj<>
endobj
841 0 obj[838 0 R]
endobj
842 0 obj(file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm)
endobj
843 0 obj(K"\)ßßçÝþ/OµX*è¡)
endobj
844 0 obj<>
endobj
845 0 obj<>
endobj
846 0 obj(qeåœW9\\²û‚!÷0/ž)
endobj
847 0 obj<>
endobj
848 0 obj<>
endobj
849 0 obj<>
endobj
850 0 obj<>
endobj
851 0 obj<>
endobj
852 0 obj<>stream
2007-03-19T14:28:39+07:00
2007-03-19T14:28:14+07:00
2007-03-19T14:28:39+07:00
application/pdf
Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette
uuid:587bacc7-d837-448f-8338-f238499e5914
uuid:468231eb-704c-4dd9-8734-2c230eba007a
Acrobat Web Capture 7.0
endstream
endobj
xref
0 853
0000000004 00000 f
0000000016 00000 n
0000000146 00000 n
0000000248 00000 n
0000000006 00000 f
0000000413 00000 n
0000000043 00001 f
0000000481 00000 n
0000000583 00000 n
0000000627 00000 n
0000000674 00000 n
0000006574 00000 n
0000006791 00000 n
0000006857 00000 n
0000006881 00000 n
0000007087 00000 n
0000007111 00000 n
0000007317 00000 n
0000007341 00000 n
0000007569 00000 n
0000007593 00000 n
0000007810 00000 n
0000007834 00000 n
0000008029 00000 n
0000008053 00000 n
0000008237 00000 n
0000008261 00000 n
0000008445 00000 n
0000008469 00000 n
0000008664 00000 n
0000008688 00000 n
0000008883 00000 n
0000008907 00000 n
0000009125 00000 n
0000009220 00000 n
0000009315 00000 n
0000010504 00000 n
0000010756 00000 n
0000011933 00000 n
0000012171 00000 n
0000013353 00000 n
0000013600 00000 n
0000014787 00000 n
0000000046 00001 f
0000015031 00000 n
0000015055 00000 n
0000000051 00001 f
0000015240 00000 n
0000015264 00000 n
0000015449 00000 n
0000016622 00000 n
0000000056 00001 f
0000016842 00000 n
0000016866 00000 n
0000017051 00000 n
0000018222 00000 n
0000000059 00001 f
0000018451 00000 n
0000018475 00000 n
0000000063 00001 f
0000018660 00000 n
0000018684 00000 n
0000018869 00000 n
0000000066 00001 f
0000018964 00000 n
0000018988 00000 n
0000000069 00001 f
0000019173 00000 n
0000019197 00000 n
0000000072 00001 f
0000019393 00000 n
0000019417 00000 n
0000000075 00001 f
0000019613 00000 n
0000019637 00000 n
0000000079 00001 f
0000019822 00000 n
0000019846 00000 n
0000020031 00000 n
0000000082 00001 f
0000020126 00000 n
0000020150 00000 n
0000000085 00001 f
0000020346 00000 n
0000020370 00000 n
0000000088 00001 f
0000020566 00000 n
0000020590 00000 n
0000000091 00001 f
0000020775 00000 n
0000020799 00000 n
0000000095 00001 f
0000021006 00000 n
0000021030 00000 n
0000021227 00000 n
0000000098 00001 f
0000021322 00000 n
0000021346 00000 n
0000000101 00001 f
0000021532 00000 n
0000021556 00000 n
0000000104 00001 f
0000021754 00000 n
0000021779 00000 n
0000000107 00001 f
0000021977 00000 n
0000022002 00000 n
0000000111 00001 f
0000022200 00000 n
0000022225 00000 n
0000022423 00000 n
0000000114 00001 f
0000022522 00000 n
0000022547 00000 n
0000000117 00001 f
0000022745 00000 n
0000022770 00000 n
0000000120 00001 f
0000022968 00000 n
0000022993 00000 n
0000000123 00001 f
0000023191 00000 n
0000023216 00000 n
0000000127 00001 f
0000023425 00000 n
0000023450 00000 n
0000023648 00000 n
0000000130 00001 f
0000023749 00000 n
0000023774 00000 n
0000000133 00001 f
0000023972 00000 n
0000023997 00000 n
0000000136 00001 f
0000024206 00000 n
0000024231 00000 n
0000000139 00001 f
0000024451 00000 n
0000024476 00000 n
0000000143 00001 f
0000024674 00000 n
0000024699 00000 n
0000024897 00000 n
0000000146 00001 f
0000024998 00000 n
0000025023 00000 n
0000000149 00001 f
0000025221 00000 n
0000025246 00000 n
0000000152 00001 f
0000025444 00000 n
0000025469 00000 n
0000000155 00001 f
0000025667 00000 n
0000025692 00000 n
0000000159 00001 f
0000025879 00000 n
0000025904 00000 n
0000026102 00000 n
0000000162 00001 f
0000026203 00000 n
0000026228 00000 n
0000000165 00001 f
0000026426 00000 n
0000026451 00000 n
0000000168 00001 f
0000026638 00000 n
0000026663 00000 n
0000000171 00001 f
0000026861 00000 n
0000026886 00000 n
0000000175 00001 f
0000027073 00000 n
0000027098 00000 n
0000027296 00000 n
0000000180 00001 f
0000027397 00000 n
0000027422 00000 n
0000027620 00000 n
0000027720 00000 n
0000000183 00001 f
0000027815 00000 n
0000027840 00000 n
0000000186 00001 f
0000028038 00000 n
0000028063 00000 n
0000000189 00001 f
0000028250 00000 n
0000028275 00000 n
0000000193 00001 f
0000028495 00000 n
0000028520 00000 n
0000028718 00000 n
0000000196 00001 f
0000028819 00000 n
0000028844 00000 n
0000000199 00001 f
0000029042 00000 n
0000029067 00000 n
0000000202 00001 f
0000029265 00000 n
0000029290 00000 n
0000000205 00001 f
0000029488 00000 n
0000029513 00000 n
0000000209 00001 f
0000029711 00000 n
0000029736 00000 n
0000029923 00000 n
0000000212 00001 f
0000030024 00000 n
0000030049 00000 n
0000000215 00001 f
0000030258 00000 n
0000030283 00000 n
0000000218 00001 f
0000030470 00000 n
0000030495 00000 n
0000000221 00001 f
0000030682 00000 n
0000030707 00000 n
0000000224 00001 f
0000030905 00000 n
0000030930 00000 n
0000000227 00001 f
0000031285 00000 n
0000031505 00000 n
0000000230 00001 f
0000031606 00000 n
0000031631 00000 n
0000000233 00001 f
0000031840 00000 n
0000031865 00000 n
0000000236 00001 f
0000032063 00000 n
0000032088 00000 n
0000000239 00001 f
0000032286 00000 n
0000032311 00000 n
0000000243 00001 f
0000032509 00000 n
0000032534 00000 n
0000032732 00000 n
0000000246 00001 f
0000032833 00000 n
0000032858 00000 n
0000000249 00001 f
0000033045 00000 n
0000033070 00000 n
0000000252 00001 f
0000033268 00000 n
0000033293 00000 n
0000000255 00001 f
0000033491 00000 n
0000033516 00000 n
0000000259 00001 f
0000033725 00000 n
0000033750 00000 n
0000033948 00000 n
0000000263 00001 f
0000034049 00000 n
0000034074 00000 n
0000034272 00000 n
0000000266 00001 f
0000034372 00000 n
0000034397 00000 n
0000000269 00001 f
0000034595 00000 n
0000034620 00000 n
0000000272 00001 f
0000034818 00000 n
0000034843 00000 n
0000000276 00001 f
0000035041 00000 n
0000035066 00000 n
0000035275 00000 n
0000000279 00001 f
0000035376 00000 n
0000035401 00000 n
0000000282 00001 f
0000035610 00000 n
0000035635 00000 n
0000000285 00001 f
0000035833 00000 n
0000035858 00000 n
0000000288 00001 f
0000036056 00000 n
0000036081 00000 n
0000000292 00001 f
0000036279 00000 n
0000036304 00000 n
0000036502 00000 n
0000000295 00001 f
0000036603 00000 n
0000036628 00000 n
0000000298 00001 f
0000036837 00000 n
0000036862 00000 n
0000000301 00001 f
0000037082 00000 n
0000037107 00000 n
0000000304 00001 f
0000037294 00000 n
0000037319 00000 n
0000000308 00001 f
0000037517 00000 n
0000037542 00000 n
0000037740 00000 n
0000000311 00001 f
0000037841 00000 n
0000037866 00000 n
0000000314 00001 f
0000038053 00000 n
0000038078 00000 n
0000000317 00001 f
0000038287 00000 n
0000038312 00000 n
0000000320 00001 f
0000038499 00000 n
0000038524 00000 n
0000000324 00001 f
0000038711 00000 n
0000038736 00000 n
0000038923 00000 n
0000000327 00001 f
0000039024 00000 n
0000039049 00000 n
0000000330 00001 f
0000039236 00000 n
0000039261 00000 n
0000000332 00001 f
0000039654 00000 n
0000000335 00001 f
0000039852 00000 n
0000039877 00000 n
0000000338 00001 f
0000040097 00000 n
0000040122 00000 n
0000000342 00001 f
0000040320 00000 n
0000040345 00000 n
0000040544 00000 n
0000000346 00001 f
0000040645 00000 n
0000040670 00000 n
0000040869 00000 n
0000000349 00001 f
0000040969 00000 n
0000040994 00000 n
0000000352 00001 f
0000041193 00000 n
0000041218 00000 n
0000000355 00001 f
0000041417 00000 n
0000041442 00000 n
0000000359 00001 f
0000041630 00000 n
0000041655 00000 n
0000041854 00000 n
0000000362 00001 f
0000041955 00000 n
0000041980 00000 n
0000000365 00001 f
0000042201 00000 n
0000042226 00000 n
0000000368 00001 f
0000042425 00000 n
0000042450 00000 n
0000000371 00001 f
0000042649 00000 n
0000042674 00000 n
0000000375 00001 f
0000042873 00000 n
0000042898 00000 n
0000043097 00000 n
0000000378 00001 f
0000043198 00000 n
0000043223 00000 n
0000000381 00001 f
0000043422 00000 n
0000043447 00000 n
0000000384 00001 f
0000043646 00000 n
0000043671 00000 n
0000000387 00001 f
0000043859 00000 n
0000043884 00000 n
0000000391 00001 f
0000044083 00000 n
0000044108 00000 n
0000044329 00000 n
0000000394 00001 f
0000044430 00000 n
0000044455 00000 n
0000000397 00001 f
0000044654 00000 n
0000044679 00000 n
0000000400 00001 f
0000044878 00000 n
0000044903 00000 n
0000000403 00001 f
0000045102 00000 n
0000045127 00000 n
0000000407 00001 f
0000045315 00000 n
0000045340 00000 n
0000045539 00000 n
0000000410 00001 f
0000045640 00000 n
0000045665 00000 n
0000000413 00001 f
0000045875 00000 n
0000045900 00000 n
0000000416 00001 f
0000046110 00000 n
0000046135 00000 n
0000000419 00001 f
0000046356 00000 n
0000046381 00000 n
0000000423 00001 f
0000046580 00000 n
0000046605 00000 n
0000046804 00000 n
0000000427 00001 f
0000046905 00000 n
0000046930 00000 n
0000047129 00000 n
0000000430 00001 f
0000047229 00000 n
0000047254 00000 n
0000000433 00001 f
0000047442 00000 n
0000047467 00000 n
0000000436 00001 f
0000047666 00000 n
0000047691 00000 n
0000000438 00001 f
0000048084 00000 n
0000000442 00001 f
0000048272 00000 n
0000048297 00000 n
0000048496 00000 n
0000000445 00001 f
0000048597 00000 n
0000048622 00000 n
0000000448 00001 f
0000048832 00000 n
0000048857 00000 n
0000000451 00001 f
0000049045 00000 n
0000049070 00000 n
0000000454 00001 f
0000049269 00000 n
0000049294 00000 n
0000000458 00001 f
0000049482 00000 n
0000049507 00000 n
0000049695 00000 n
0000000461 00001 f
0000049796 00000 n
0000049821 00000 n
0000000464 00001 f
0000050009 00000 n
0000050034 00000 n
0000000467 00001 f
0000050222 00000 n
0000050247 00000 n
0000000470 00001 f
0000050468 00000 n
0000050493 00000 n
0000000474 00001 f
0000050692 00000 n
0000050717 00000 n
0000050916 00000 n
0000000477 00001 f
0000051017 00000 n
0000051042 00000 n
0000000480 00001 f
0000051241 00000 n
0000051266 00000 n
0000000483 00001 f
0000051465 00000 n
0000051490 00000 n
0000000486 00001 f
0000051689 00000 n
0000051714 00000 n
0000000490 00001 f
0000051902 00000 n
0000051927 00000 n
0000052115 00000 n
0000000493 00001 f
0000052216 00000 n
0000052241 00000 n
0000000496 00001 f
0000052451 00000 n
0000052476 00000 n
0000000499 00001 f
0000052664 00000 n
0000052689 00000 n
0000000502 00001 f
0000052877 00000 n
0000052902 00000 n
0000000506 00001 f
0000053090 00000 n
0000053115 00000 n
0000053303 00000 n
0000000510 00001 f
0000053404 00000 n
0000053429 00000 n
0000053650 00000 n
0000000513 00001 f
0000053750 00000 n
0000053775 00000 n
0000000516 00001 f
0000053974 00000 n
0000053999 00000 n
0000000519 00001 f
0000054220 00000 n
0000054245 00000 n
0000000523 00001 f
0000054444 00000 n
0000054469 00000 n
0000054657 00000 n
0000000526 00001 f
0000054758 00000 n
0000054783 00000 n
0000000529 00001 f
0000054982 00000 n
0000055007 00000 n
0000000532 00001 f
0000055195 00000 n
0000055220 00000 n
0000000535 00001 f
0000055419 00000 n
0000055444 00000 n
0000000539 00001 f
0000055643 00000 n
0000055668 00000 n
0000055856 00000 n
0000000544 00001 f
0000055957 00000 n
0000055982 00000 n
0000056404 00000 n
0000057191 00000 n
0000000547 00001 f
0000057390 00000 n
0000057415 00000 n
0000000550 00001 f
0000057625 00000 n
0000057650 00000 n
0000000553 00001 f
0000057860 00000 n
0000057885 00000 n
0000000557 00001 f
0000058084 00000 n
0000058109 00000 n
0000058319 00000 n
0000000560 00001 f
0000058420 00000 n
0000058445 00000 n
0000000563 00001 f
0000058655 00000 n
0000058680 00000 n
0000000566 00001 f
0000058890 00000 n
0000058915 00000 n
0000000569 00001 f
0000059136 00000 n
0000059161 00000 n
0000000573 00001 f
0000059371 00000 n
0000059396 00000 n
0000059606 00000 n
0000000576 00001 f
0000059707 00000 n
0000059732 00000 n
0000000579 00001 f
0000059931 00000 n
0000059956 00000 n
0000000582 00001 f
0000060166 00000 n
0000060191 00000 n
0000000585 00001 f
0000060401 00000 n
0000060426 00000 n
0000000589 00001 f
0000060625 00000 n
0000060650 00000 n
0000060860 00000 n
0000000593 00001 f
0000060961 00000 n
0000060986 00000 n
0000061196 00000 n
0000000596 00001 f
0000061312 00000 n
0000061337 00000 n
0000000599 00001 f
0000061547 00000 n
0000061572 00000 n
0000000602 00001 f
0000061782 00000 n
0000061807 00000 n
0000000606 00001 f
0000062017 00000 n
0000062042 00000 n
0000062241 00000 n
0000000609 00001 f
0000062342 00000 n
0000062367 00000 n
0000000612 00001 f
0000062577 00000 n
0000062602 00000 n
0000000615 00001 f
0000062801 00000 n
0000062826 00000 n
0000000618 00001 f
0000063025 00000 n
0000063050 00000 n
0000000622 00001 f
0000063249 00000 n
0000063274 00000 n
0000063473 00000 n
0000000625 00001 f
0000063615 00000 n
0000063640 00000 n
0000000628 00001 f
0000063839 00000 n
0000063864 00000 n
0000000631 00001 f
0000064063 00000 n
0000064088 00000 n
0000000634 00001 f
0000064287 00000 n
0000064312 00000 n
0000000636 00001 f
0000064511 00000 n
0000000637 00001 f
0000000638 00001 f
0000000639 00001 f
0000000640 00001 f
0000000641 00001 f
0000000642 00001 f
0000000643 00001 f
0000000644 00001 f
0000000000 00001 f
0000064536 00000 n
0000064627 00000 n
0000071609 00000 n
0000077769 00000 n
0000085086 00000 n
0000092783 00000 n
0000099254 00000 n
0000104958 00000 n
0000110633 00000 n
0000116281 00000 n
0000122039 00000 n
0000128046 00000 n
0000133677 00000 n
0000139263 00000 n
0000145129 00000 n
0000150740 00000 n
0000156600 00000 n
0000162316 00000 n
0000168568 00000 n
0000174943 00000 n
0000180672 00000 n
0000186318 00000 n
0000192477 00000 n
0000199124 00000 n
0000205226 00000 n
0000211197 00000 n
0000217087 00000 n
0000222987 00000 n
0000229221 00000 n
0000235275 00000 n
0000241284 00000 n
0000247738 00000 n
0000253807 00000 n
0000259649 00000 n
0000265671 00000 n
0000272118 00000 n
0000277809 00000 n
0000284241 00000 n
0000290535 00000 n
0000299138 00000 n
0000307157 00000 n
0000313514 00000 n
0000320115 00000 n
0000326893 00000 n
0000333876 00000 n
0000340082 00000 n
0000345799 00000 n
0000352234 00000 n
0000358662 00000 n
0000364669 00000 n
0000371264 00000 n
0000377696 00000 n
0000383550 00000 n
0000389995 00000 n
0000396417 00000 n
0000403358 00000 n
0000409311 00000 n
0000415343 00000 n
0000421273 00000 n
0000427563 00000 n
0000433875 00000 n
0000440123 00000 n
0000446002 00000 n
0000452657 00000 n
0000458390 00000 n
0000464662 00000 n
0000471333 00000 n
0000477664 00000 n
0000484637 00000 n
0000490641 00000 n
0000497451 00000 n
0000503355 00000 n
0000509509 00000 n
0000515426 00000 n
0000521585 00000 n
0000527695 00000 n
0000533085 00000 n
0000539115 00000 n
0000545224 00000 n
0000550969 00000 n
0000556738 00000 n
0000562462 00000 n
0000570615 00000 n
0000577817 00000 n
0000583634 00000 n
0000589575 00000 n
0000595907 00000 n
0000602270 00000 n
0000608661 00000 n
0000614801 00000 n
0000621011 00000 n
0000626898 00000 n
0000633599 00000 n
0000639647 00000 n
0000645981 00000 n
0000651469 00000 n
0000657769 00000 n
0000664099 00000 n
0000670489 00000 n
0000676925 00000 n
0000682847 00000 n
0000689372 00000 n
0000695538 00000 n
0000701365 00000 n
0000707921 00000 n
0000713738 00000 n
0000720036 00000 n
0000725989 00000 n
0000732035 00000 n
0000738001 00000 n
0000743987 00000 n
0000750567 00000 n
0000758227 00000 n
0000764381 00000 n
0000770628 00000 n
0000777004 00000 n
0000783227 00000 n
0000789428 00000 n
0000795991 00000 n
0000801941 00000 n
0000808223 00000 n
0000815169 00000 n
0000821910 00000 n
0000833076 00000 n
0000840031 00000 n
0000846145 00000 n
0000851838 00000 n
0000857971 00000 n
0000863968 00000 n
0000869702 00000 n
0000875684 00000 n
0000881548 00000 n
0000887535 00000 n
0000893378 00000 n
0000899654 00000 n
0000906197 00000 n
0000912500 00000 n
0000918656 00000 n
0000924638 00000 n
0000930983 00000 n
0000937286 00000 n
0000943313 00000 n
0000949298 00000 n
0000955554 00000 n
0000962045 00000 n
0000968116 00000 n
0000974072 00000 n
0000980356 00000 n
0000986229 00000 n
0000992297 00000 n
0000998429 00000 n
0001005022 00000 n
0001010622 00000 n
0001016820 00000 n
0001022613 00000 n
0001028311 00000 n
0001034281 00000 n
0001040226 00000 n
0001046017 00000 n
0001052244 00000 n
0001058219 00000 n
0001064128 00000 n
0001069888 00000 n
0001075978 00000 n
0001083420 00000 n
0001091807 00000 n
0001099719 00000 n
0001107851 00000 n
0001116581 00000 n
0001124173 00000 n
0001132798 00000 n
0001141080 00000 n
0001149064 00000 n
0001156893 00000 n
0001165446 00000 n
0001173342 00000 n
0001180682 00000 n
0001188568 00000 n
0001196842 00000 n
0001204793 00000 n
0001212709 00000 n
0001221034 00000 n
0001223680 00000 n
0001231679 00000 n
0001240742 00000 n
0001249674 00000 n
0001257473 00000 n
0001265782 00000 n
0001273691 00000 n
0001281853 00000 n
0001290019 00000 n
0001297915 00000 n
0001297967 00000 n
0001298005 00000 n
0001298147 00000 n
0001298178 00000 n
0001298280 00000 n
0001298306 00000 n
0001298430 00000 n
0001298466 00000 n
0001300068 00000 n
0001300121 00000 n
0001300157 00000 n
0001300203 00000 n
0001300247 00000 n
0001300291 00000 n
0001300378 00000 n
0001300493 00000 n
trailer
<]>>
startxref
1303982
%%EOF
1 0 obj<>
endobj
3 0 obj<>
endobj
5 0 obj<>
endobj
11 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
14 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
16 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
18 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
20 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
22 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
24 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
26 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
28 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
30 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
32 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
45 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
48 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
53 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
58 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
61 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
65 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
68 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
71 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
74 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
77 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
81 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
84 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
87 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
90 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
93 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
97 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
100 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
103 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
106 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
109 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
113 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
116 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
119 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
122 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
125 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
129 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
132 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
135 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
138 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
141 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
145 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
148 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
151 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
154 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
157 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
161 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
164 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
167 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
170 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
173 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
177 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
182 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
185 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
188 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
191 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
195 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
198 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
201 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
204 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
207 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
211 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
214 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
217 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
220 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
225 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
229 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
232 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
235 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
238 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
241 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
245 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
248 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
251 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
254 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
257 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
261 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
265 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
268 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
271 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
274 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
278 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
281 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
284 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
287 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
290 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
294 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
297 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
300 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
303 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
306 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
310 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
313 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
316 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
319 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
322 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
326 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
331 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
334 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
337 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
340 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
344 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
348 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
351 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
354 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
357 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
361 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
364 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
367 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
370 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
373 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
377 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
380 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
383 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
386 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
389 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
393 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
396 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
399 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
402 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
405 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
409 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
412 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
415 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
418 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
421 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
425 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
429 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
432 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
437 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
440 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
444 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
447 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
450 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
453 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
456 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
460 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
463 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
466 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
469 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
472 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
476 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
479 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
482 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
485 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
488 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
492 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
495 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
498 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
501 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
504 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
508 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
512 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
515 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
518 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
521 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
525 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
528 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
531 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
534 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
537 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
543 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
546 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
549 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
552 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
555 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
559 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
562 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
565 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
568 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
571 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
575 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
578 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
581 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
584 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
587 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
591 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
595 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
598 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
601 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
604 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
608 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
611 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
614 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
617 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
620 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
624 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
627 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
630 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
633 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
850 0 obj<>
endobj
851 0 obj<>
endobj
854 0 obj<>
endobj
855 0 obj<>
endobj
856 0 obj<>
endobj
857 0 obj<>
endobj
858 0 obj<>
endobj
859 0 obj<>
endobj
860 0 obj<>
endobj
861 0 obj<>
endobj
862 0 obj<>
endobj
863 0 obj<>
endobj
864 0 obj<>
endobj
865 0 obj<>
endobj
866 0 obj<>
endobj
867 0 obj<>
endobj
868 0 obj<>
endobj
870 0 obj<>
endobj
871 0 obj<>
endobj
872 0 obj<>
endobj
873 0 obj<>
endobj
874 0 obj<>
endobj
875 0 obj<>
endobj
876 0 obj<>
endobj
877 0 obj<>
endobj
878 0 obj<>
endobj
879 0 obj<>
endobj
880 0 obj<>
endobj
881 0 obj<>
endobj
882 0 obj<>
endobj
883 0 obj<>
endobj
884 0 obj<>
endobj
885 0 obj<>
endobj
886 0 obj<>
endobj
887 0 obj<>
endobj
888 0 obj<>
endobj
889 0 obj<>
endobj
890 0 obj<>
endobj
891 0 obj<>
endobj
893 0 obj<>
endobj
894 0 obj<>
endobj
895 0 obj<>
endobj
896 0 obj<>stream
/P <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT 0 Tc 0 Tw
/T1_0 1 Tf
100 Tz 0 Tr
9.0000 0.0000 0.0000 9.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6667 85.3242 Td () Tj 9.0000 0.0000 0.0000 9.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6667 85.3242 Td (Scanned & Semi-Proofed by Cozette )Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/P <>BDC
q
BT 0 Tc 0 Tw
/TT0 1 Tf
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 53.9530 Td () Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 53.9530 Td (not a particularly good archaeologist.)Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/P <>BDC
BT 0 Tw 0 Tc
/TT0 1 Tf
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 52.7530 Td () Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 52.7530 Td ( But behind his personable fa\347ade, de Vaux was ruthless, narrow-minde\
d, bigoted and )Tj
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 37.3236 52.7530 Td (fiercely vindictive. Politically, ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 51.5530 Td (he was decidedly right-wing. In his yo\
uth, he had been a )Tj
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 24.0206 51.5530 Td (member of Action Franchise, the militant Catholic and ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 50.3530 Td (nationalist moveme\
nt which )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 12.7466 50.3530 Td (burgeoned in France between the two world wars, which extolled the cult \
of 'blood and soil' )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 49.7396 50.3530 Td () Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 49.1530 Td (and expressed more than a little sympathy for the dictatorships in Germa\
ny, Italy and, on )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 37.0196 49.1530 Td (Franco's triumph, Spain. )Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/P <>BDC
BT 0 Tc 0 Tw
/TT0 1 Tf
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 47.9530 Td () Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 47.9530 Td (Certainly he was ill-suited to preside over research on the Dead Sea Scr\
olls. In the first )Tj
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 37.6846 47.9530 Td (place, he was not just a ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 46.7257 Td (practising Catholic, but also a monk, and this \
could hardly conduce to )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 29.3836 46.7257 Td (balance or impartiality in his handling of extremely ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 45.4985 Td (sensitive, even exp\
losive, religious )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 15.3846 45.4985 Td (material. Moreover, he was hostile to Israel as a political entity, alwa\
ys referring to the )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 50.3776 45.4985 Td () Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 44.2712 Td (country as 'Palestine'. On a more personal level, he was also anti-Semit\
ic. One of his former )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 38.2116 44.2712 Td (colleagues testifies to his ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 43.0439 Td (resentment at Israelis attending his lecture\
s. After interviewing de )Tj
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 27.7696 43.0439 Td (Vaux, David Pryce-Jones stated that 'I found him an ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 41.8166 Td (irascible brute, sli\
ghtly potty too.')Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/StyleSpan <>BDC
BT 0 Tc 0 Tw
/TT0 1 Tf
11.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 18.2770 52.2708 Td (4 )Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/P <>BDC
BT 0 Tc 0 Tw
/TT0 1 Tf
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 15.2216 41.8166 Td (According to Magen Broshi, currently director of the Israeli Shrine of t\
he Book, 'de ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 40.5894 Td (Vaux )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 3.5796 40.5894 Td (was a rabid anti-Semite and a rabid anti-Israeli - but was the best part\
ner one could ask for'.)Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/StyleSpan <>BDC
BT 0 Tw 0 Tc
/TT0 1 Tf
11.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 50.2445 50.7367 Td (5)Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/P <>BDC
BT 0 Tw 0 Tc
/TT0 1 Tf
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 39.3621 Td () Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 39.3621 Td ( This was the man, then, to whom responsibility for the Dead Sea Scrolls\
was entrusted. In )Tj
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 39.1596 39.3621 Td (1953, the board of trustees ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 38.1621 Td (of the Rockefeller Museum, whose president a\
t the time was de )Tj
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 26.8256 38.1621 Td (Vaux himself, had requested nominations from the various ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 36.9621 Td (foreign archaeo\
logical schools -)Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 13.9656 36.9621 Td (British, French, German and American - then active in Jerusalem. No Isra\
elis were ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 35.7621 Td (invited, )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 4.4416 35.7621 Td (despite the proximity of the well-trained staff of Hebrew University. Ea\
ch school was asked )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 41.5176 35.7621 Td (for funds to help ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 34.5621 Td (sustain the cost of the work.)Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/P <>BDC
BT 0 Tc 0 Tw
/TT0 1 Tf
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 33.3621 Td () Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 33.3621 Td ( The first scholar to be appointed under de Vaux's authority was Profess\
or Frank Cross, )Tj
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 37.8936 33.3621 Td (then associated with ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 32.1621 Td (McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago and with \
the Albright )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 28.8006 32.1621 Td (Institute in Jerusalem. Cross was the Albright's ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 30.9621 Td (nominee, and began to w\
ork in Jerusalem in )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 19.0776 30.9621 Td (the summer of 1953. The material assigned to him consisted of specifical\
ly ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 29.7621 Td (biblical texts -)Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 6.8856 29.7621 Td (scroll commentaries, that is, found in Cave 4 at Qumran, on the various \
books of the Old )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 42.6596 29.7621 Td (Testament.)Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/P <>BDC
BT 0 Tc 0 Tw
/TT0 1 Tf
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 28.5621 Td () Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 28.5621 Td ( Material of a similar nature was assigned to Monsignor Patrick Skehan, \
also from the )Tj
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 37.3256 28.5621 Td (United States. At the time of his ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 27.3621 Td (appointment, he was director of the Al\
bright Institute. )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 22.9946 27.3621 Td (Father Jean Starcky, from France, was nominated by the Ecole ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 26.1621 Td (Biblique. A\
t the time, he was )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 13.1076 26.1621 Td (attached to the Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique. Starcky, \
an expert in ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 24.9621 Td (Aramaic, )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 5.1066 24.9621 Td (was assigned the corpus of material in that language.)Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/P <>BDC
BT 0 Tc 0 Tw
/TT0 1 Tf
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 23.7621 Td () Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 23.7621 Td ( Dr Claus-Hunno Hunzinger was nominated by the Germans. He was assigned \
one )Tj
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 35.9906 23.7621 Td (particular text, known as the 'War ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 22.5621 Td (Scroll', as well as a body of materia\
l transcribed on )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 21.8676 22.5621 Td (papyrus rather than on parchment. He subsequently left the team and ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 21.3621 Td (was \
eventually replaced )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 11.0216 21.3621 Td (by another French priest, Father Maurice Baillet.)Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/P <>BDC
BT 0 Tw 0 Tc
/TT0 1 Tf
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 20.1621 Td () Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6636 20.1621 Td ( Father Josef Milik, a Polish priest resettled in France, was another no\
minee of the Ecole )Tj
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 38.3806 20.1621 Td (Biblique, with which he was ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 18.9621 Td (also affiliated. A disciple and close confid\
ant of de Vaux, Milik )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 26.9096 18.9621 Td (received an especially important corpus of material. It ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 17.7621 Td (included a quant\
ity of Old Testament )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 16.3286 17.7621 Td (apocrypha. It also included 'pseudepigraphical' writings - texts in whic\
h a later ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 16.5621 Td (commentator )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 6.6906 16.5621 Td (would try to impart authority to his words by ascribing them to earlier \
prophets and )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 40.3266 16.5621 Td (patriarchs. Most ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 15.3621 Td (important of all, it included what was called 'sectaria\
n material' - material )Tj
T*
13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 30.8236 15.3621 Td (pertaining specifically to the community at ) Tj 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 13.7500 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 1.1636 14.1621 Td (Qumran, their teachings, rit\
uals and disciplines. )Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
/P <>BDC
Q
BT 0 Tw 0 Tc
/T1_0 1 Tf
9.0000 0.0000 0.0000 9.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6667 17.8048 Td () Tj 9.0000 0.0000 0.0000 9.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Tm 2.6667 17.8048 Td (file:///D|/My Forbidden Documents/Baigent, Michael & Leigh, R.ichard - T\
he Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.htm \(27 of 190\)3/19/2007 2)Tj
(:28:38 PM )Tj
ET 0.0000 Tw 0.0000 Tc
EMC
endstream
endobj
898 0 obj<>
endobj
899 0 obj<