Habbakuk Pesher part 1

It is from Josephus that we learn that the Jewish zealots' main inspiration for rising up against Rome in the first century was "an a

The ambiguous oracle THAT WAS ALSO FOUND IN THEIR SACRED WRITINGS, how at that time one from their country would become ruler of the habitable earth," (War 6.5.4).

We know from rabbinic and christian sources that three 'world ruler' prophecies were current in the first century; 1.) the Shiloh prophecy (Gen. 49:10); 2.) the Star prophecy (Num. 24:17); 3.) and the falling cedars of Lebanon imagery (Isa. 10:34 and parallels). The latter one is also applied in rabbinic sources (ARN 4.5, Git. 56a-b, Yoma 39b, Lam. R. 5.31) to the fall of the Temple in 70 CE. The former are applied to Jesus by various early church fathers. There is no outside corroborating evidence that these had currency in any other period.

As it happens, all three of these are in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Star prophecy is discussed twice in the War Scroll, and once in the Damascus Document; the Shiloh prophecy is found in the Genesis Commentary; and
the Lebanon imagery abounds throughout the pesherim (commentaries on the life of the Righteous Teacher). All apply them to an expected and triumphant Messiah. This is an interesting coincidence, even if only that.

That being said, let's talk about the Habakkuk Pesher. All of the pesherim (except Isaiah) were found in single copies only, and are written in Hebrew. They all deal with the life of the Righteous Teacher, and seem
to be the last literature the Dead Sea Scroll group produced, as we hear no more from them in their other writings.

The Habakkuk Pesher was found in cave 1, along with the War Scroll, the Community Rule, the Thanksgiving Hymns, the Isaiah Scroll, most of the other pesherim (all more or less intact), and various other Biblical
works. Like the other pesherim, it applies Biblical prophecies to the situation the group finds itself in. It is in the language here that we must look to determine what period these scrolls come from, as carbondating,
palaeography, and other scientific measurements are all inconclusive and always debatable.

For the sake of my discussion, I will use the Wise, Abegg, Cook translation, and I will comment wherever I feel it is necessary on the imagery of this incredible pesher.

Like the other pesherim and the non-Biblical Scrolls, the Habakkuk Pesher speaks of the 'Kittim,' which the translators admit most scholars now agree refers to the Romans (p. 30). However, they are inclined to believe
the pesher is refering to the conquest of Judaea by Pompey in 63 BCE, and I aim to show why this is wrong.

The pesher tells us concerning the Kittim (the first few parts of which I leave without comment, in order to establish a feel for the pesher's method, and because they are also a little fragmentary):

Habakkuk} "For I am now about to raise up the Chaldeans, that br[utal and reckle]ss people" (1:6a).

Pesher} This refers to the Kittim, w[ho are] swift and mighty in war, annihilating [many people, and ...] in the authority of the Kittim and [the wicked ...] and have no faith in the laws of [God].

H} "They range across the land to seize dwellings not their own" (1:6b).

P} [This refers to the Kittim ...] and they cross the plain, attacking and pillaging the cities of the land, for that is what is meant when it says "to seize dwellings not their own."

H} "Dire and dreadful are they; their law and their fame come from themselves alone" (1:7).

P} This refers to the Kittim, the fear and [dread] of whom are on all nations. By intention their only thought is to do evil, and in deceit and trickery they conduct themselves with all the peoples.

H} "Swifter than panthers their horses, faster than desert wolves. Their horses, galloping, spread out, from afar they fly like a vulture intent on food, all of them bent on violence, their faces ever forward" (1:8-9a).

P} [This refers to] the Kittim, who trample the land with [their] horses and with their beasts. From far away they come, from the seacoasts, to eat up all the peoples like an insatiable vulture. In anger and [hostility] and in wrath and arrogance they speak with all [the peoples, for] that is what it means when it says, ["their faces ever forward."]

H} ["They will gather] captives [like sand" (1:9b).]

P} [This refers to ... ... ...].

H} ["At kings] they mock, potentates they laugh to scorn" (1:10a).

P} This means that they sneer at leaders and deride the nobility; they jeer at kings and princes, and ridicule a throng of people.

H} "They laugh at every fortress; they just pile up dirt and capture it" (1:10b).

P} This refers to the rulers of the Kittim, who deride the fortresses of the peoples and with a sneer laugh at them. With a great army they surround them to capture them, and with fear and terror fortresses fall into their power. Then they destroy them because of the crimes of those who dwell there.

The destruction of Judaea by Roman legions during the War of 66-70 CE involved the falling of many fortresses and cities of the Jewish people, as Josephus documents for all to see in the many examples of this in his Jewish War (see 4.1.1 ff., 4.2.1 ff. and 4.9.1 especially). He says nothing comparable concerning Pompey's conquest in 63 BCE (War 1.6.1-1.7.6; Ant. 14.2.3-14.4.4), nor does any (other) Roman historian. In fact, outside of the siege of Jerusalem -and on this, more below- he is presented as having more success with diplomacy. There is nothing like what is being described in the pesher here.

And the part about believing the fortresses fell because of the crimes of those who dwelled in them is also echoed in Josephus reports of the outrageous behavior (including cross-dressing) of some of the more radical
Jews inside them.

H} "The wind passes and they are gone, having made might their god" (1:11).

P} This refe[rs t]o the rulers of the Kittim, who enter the land by the advice of a family of criminals: each in turn, [their] rulers come, one after the other, to devastate the la[nd. When it says] "they made might their god," this means [... a]ll the peoples [...] [...].

This cannot apply to any era but Imperial Rome, if we are talking about Roman eras. At the point in time of Pompey's conquest, the Republic was being governed with no system of one ruler coming after another, but
rather tribunes, triumvirates (the first being that of Pompey, Julius Caesar and Crassus), Herodian puppet kings, and procurators later with the complete annexation in 6 CE. This was the system Jews writing of
that era would have encountered, a hodgepodge of Roman, Idumaean bureaucracy, not one Kittim
ruler following another, bent on destruction of the Land, which definitely was the case in the era of the Emperors, particularly around the time of the Jewish war of 66-70 CE, where this was literally the situation.

H} "You made humanity as helpless as fish in the sea, like something a worm could rule over. He draws them [all] out [with a hook], pulls them in with his net, gathers them [with his dragnet. Therefore he sacrifices] to his net, therefore he is happy [and rejoices and burns incense to his dragnet; for by them] his lot in life [is enriched and his food is wholesome" (1:14-16).]

P} [This refers to ...] [...] the Kittim, and they added to their wealth by all their plunder like the fish of the sea. And when it says, "therefore he sacrifices to his net and burns incense to his dragnet," this means that they sacrifice to their standards, and that their weapons are what they worship. "For by them his lot in life is enriched and his food is wholesome" means that they impose the yoke of their taxes -this is "their food"- on all the peoples yearly, thus ruining many lands.

Rome didn't begin taxing Judaea until 6 CE with the Census of Cyrenius (Ant. 18.1.1), in consequence of its total annexation. It was over this issue that the first century zealot movement began, the period in which Yeshua lived (which is why he was asked his opinion of the issue, and why Paul talks about it in his letters), and was not a situation Jews were subjected to previously by Rome, including Pompey's day. The part about the Kittim sacrificing to their standards is also described vividly in the Jewish War and not Pompey's conquest:

"And now the Romans, upon the flight of the rebellious into the city, and upon the burning of the holy house itself, and of all the buildings around it, brought their standards to the temple and set them near to its eastern gate; and there did they offer sarifices to them" (6.6.1).

There is no record of Pompey's conquest of such events, in any of our sources concerning him. Even the plunder spoken of above is well documented for the first century sack of Jerusalem: "While the holy house was on fire, everything was plundered [by the victorious Romans] that came to hand" (War 6.5.1), and not Pompey's time.

"...nor did the Romans, out of the anger they bore...leave off, either by night or day, burning the places in the plain, and stealing away the cattle that were in the country, and killing whatever appeared capable
of fighting, and leading the weaker people as slaves into captivity,so that Galilee was all over filled with fire and blood" (War 4.1.1).

Pompey on the other hand, though accepting of political bribes and tribute, was famous for NOT plundering the Temple when he took Jerusalem, as even pagan writers living before Josephus noted: "Cneius Pompeius, when he was conquerer, and had taken Jerusalem, did not touch anything belonging to that temple," (Cicero, Oration for Flaccus).

Josephus only says the same thing (War 1.7.6, Ant. 14.4.4): "Yet did Pompey touch nothing of all this, on account of his regard to religion."

As we can see from the pesher's descriptions (all of them are cited here), the Kittim had anything but regard for the Jews and Judaism.

H} "Therefore he keeps his sword always drawn to kill nations without pity" (1:17).

P} This refers to the Kittim, who destroy many people with the sword, including boys, the weak, old men, women, and children. Even on the child in the womb they have no mercy.

This clinches it for me, as Pompey did no such things. Yes, he killed in war, he oversaw atrocities such as the slaughter of priests (which in any event was mostly done by Pharisees), but he still had enough sense of honor to abstain from killing women, children, the weak, and old people (or at least hadn't ever the need to). No, what is being described here is the actions of the Roman legions in the War of 66-70 CE, the one which ended in the total destruction of Judaea and the Qumran New Covenanters. What we are reading is the latters' (the losers') accounts of this War.

"[Vespasian] came then into [Gadara], and killed all the youth, the Romans having no mercy on any age whatever" (War 3.7.1)

They killed six thousand women and children in one manly incident (War 4.2.5).

"...the rest of the multitude [who survived a Roman siege] had their throats cut, partly in the open air, and partly in their own houses, both young and old together" (War 3.7.31).

"...As for the Romans, they so well remembered what they had endured during the seige [of the town of Jotapata], that they spared none, nor pitied any, but drove the people down the precipice from the citadel,
and killed them as they drove them down..." (War 3.7.34).

"So [Vespasian] deliberated with the other commanders whether he ought to save old inhabitants or not ... [And for security purposes he] acknowledged they did not deserve to be saved ... But still he considered with himself after what manner they should be slain..." (War 3.10.10).

I assert that our accounts of first century zealots in Josephus more closely resemble the imagery in the Habakkuk Pesher than any of our accounts of the conquest of Pompey, and that therefore we must view this document and the other Dead Sea Scrolls like it as being descriptive of the era of Yeshua and Ya'akov.

Hanan