The present study presents and discusses the tefillin (phylactery) remains found in Cave 34 at Naḥal Ṣeʾelim within the framework of Yohanan Aharoni’s first 1960 expedition to the Judean Desert. Presented here are a leather tefillin case, never before reported upon, and two inscribed tefillin slips (34ṢePhyl A and 34ṢePhyl B) which have until now received only preliminary treatment. Very few close parallels to the Naḥal Ṣeʾelim tefillin slips are known from elsewhere in the Judean Desert. Both the tefillin slips and the case appear quite compatible with rabbinic descriptions and prescriptions, although there is little reason to label these ritual objects as in some way or another “rabbinic”. The paleographic analysis of the tefillin slips suggests that the texts were penned sometime in the second half of the first century ce. While a Bar Kokhba period date for the deposit of the tefillin remains in Cave 34 does not appear at all unlikely, an earlier dating—possibly First Revolt period—must not be precluded.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Aharoni, “Expedition B,” 21–24; “Seqer Naḥal Ṣeʾelim,” 181–83. For memoirs on the excavations and discoveries in Cave 34 written by other expedition members, see: Micha Livneh, “Pirqe Mishlaḥat Naḥal Ṣeʾelim,” Niv ha-Qevuṣah 9 (1960): 352–64, esp. 354–59 (Hebrew); Arnon Goren, “Zikhronot mi-Midbar Yehudah,” in Yemei Midbar Yehudah: ʿEiduyot ve-Zikhronot Shel Ḥevrei ha-Mishlaḥot Shel Yohanan Aharoni. Ed. Shimon Dar et al. Maʿabarot: Vatikei Mishleḥot Naḥal Ṣeʾelim, 2010, 141–45 (Hebrew); Beno Rothenberg, “Ḥipasnu Megilot Genuzot be-Naḥal Ṣeʾelim,” in be-ʿIqvot Melakhim u-Mordim, 161–72, esp. 169–72 (Hebrew).
M. Morgenstern, “34ṢeNumbers,” in Miscellaneous Texts from the Judean Desert. Ed. J. Charlesworth et al. djd 38. Oxford: Clarendon, 2000, 209, pl. xxxiii.
P. Wernberg-Møller, “The Exodus Fragment from Massada,” Vetus Testamentum 10 (1960): 229–30. The photograph in The Times appeared on February 16, 1960 (pg. 13). The caption beneath the photo cites as the provenance of the fragment “a cave between Massada and Ein Geddi”, and this geographic description appears to have been the source of the mistaken attribution of the fragment to “Massada” in the title of Wernberg-Møller’s article.
E. Tov and S.J. Pfann, “List of the Texts from the Judaean Desert,” in The Texts from the Judaean Desert: Indices and an Introduction to the Discoveries in the Judaean Desert Series. Ed. Emanuel Tov. djd 39. Oxford: Clarendon, 2002, 27–114, esp. 112. The “name” columns in this list should be referred to for all tefillin texts cited below.
Adler, “Content and Order,” 209–11. Relying on Aharoni’s omission of Exod 13:1, Yehudah Cohn viewed 34ṢePhyl A as evidence for “minor non-conformity with tanna’itic practice”: Tangled Up, 125.
Aharoni, “Expedition B,” 19–24, pl. 8:E, 10:C–D. Cf. Rahmani, “The Coins,” 63. None of the other texts found in Cave 34 (see above, n. 4–5) contain internal dates nor have any been dated paleographically.
Aharoni, “Expedition B,” 19–24; “Seqer Naḥal Ṣeʾelim,” 182–83.
See Yonatan Adler, “Identifying Sectarian Characteristics in the Phylacteries from Qumran,” RevQ 89 (2007): 79–92, esp. 89, n. 40.
R. de Vaux, “Archéologie” in Qumrân Grotte 4, II. Ed. R. de Vaux. djd 6. Oxford: Clarendon, 1977, 3–22. For a survey of the various theories regarding the nature of the deposits in the caves near Qumran, see: Adler, “Distribution”.
All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 839 | 119 | 12 |
Full Text Views | 281 | 14 | 2 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 114 | 25 | 4 |
The present study presents and discusses the tefillin (phylactery) remains found in Cave 34 at Naḥal Ṣeʾelim within the framework of Yohanan Aharoni’s first 1960 expedition to the Judean Desert. Presented here are a leather tefillin case, never before reported upon, and two inscribed tefillin slips (34ṢePhyl A and 34ṢePhyl B) which have until now received only preliminary treatment. Very few close parallels to the Naḥal Ṣeʾelim tefillin slips are known from elsewhere in the Judean Desert. Both the tefillin slips and the case appear quite compatible with rabbinic descriptions and prescriptions, although there is little reason to label these ritual objects as in some way or another “rabbinic”. The paleographic analysis of the tefillin slips suggests that the texts were penned sometime in the second half of the first century ce. While a Bar Kokhba period date for the deposit of the tefillin remains in Cave 34 does not appear at all unlikely, an earlier dating—possibly First Revolt period—must not be precluded.
All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 839 | 119 | 12 |
Full Text Views | 281 | 14 | 2 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 114 | 25 | 4 |