The Punishment of the Wicked Priest and the Death of Judas

THE PUNISHMENT OF THE WICKED PRIEST AND THE DEATH OF JUDAS

RICK VAN DE WATER Jerusalem

In a recent reassesment of Jonathan the Hasmonean as the Wicked Priest of the Qumran pesharim, the claim has been made that all other theories have been refuted Òonce and for all.Ó1 There appears to have been little response to this claim, perhaps in part because that identi cation already enjoys something of a consensus. One of the main arguments for Jonathan has always been his death at the hands of gentiles (exe- cuted by Tryphon in 142 BCE), which is supposed to agree with what is said of the demise of the Wicked Priest in 1QpHab and 4Q171. 2 According to H. Stegemann, the Habakkuk pesher even agrees with JonathanÕs death outside Judea. 3 On the other hand, there are a number of reasons why such con dence in identifying Jonathan as the Wicked Priest is misleading. To begin with, StegemannÕs assertion was based on a highly ques- tionable interpretation of the above-mentioned pesher.4 J. Carmignac and W. Brownlee have criticized taking as past events what could actually refer to future punishment, according to the verb tenses. 5 The

1 E. Puech, ÒJonathan le prtre impie et les dbuts de la communaut de Qumran. 4QJonathan (4Q523) et 4QPsAp (4Q448),Ó RevQ 17 (1996) 241 –70, esp. 269. 2 E.g. G. Jeremias, Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit (SUNT 2; Gšttingen, 1963) 75. A.S. van der Woude has recently asserted that Òall commentatorsÓ see 1QpHab 9:9 –12 as JonathanÕs murder by Tryphon (ÒOnce Again: The Wicked Priests in the Habakkuk Pesher from Cave 1 of Qumran,Ó RevQ 17 [1996] 383). 3 H. Stegemann, Die Entstehung der Qumrangemeinde (Bonn: privately published, 1971) 205–6. 4 J. Murphy-OÕConnor: ÒI see no evidence for thisÓ (ÒThe Essenes and Their His- tory,Ó RB 81 [1974] 230 n. 67); M. Knibb: Òby no means straightforwardÓ (ÒKeeping up with Recent Studies: III. The Dead Sea Scrolls: Re ections on Some Recent Publications,Ó ExpTim 90–1 [1978–80] 297). 5 J. Carmignac, Les Textes de Qumran traduits et annots (Paris, Letouzey & An , 1961) 1:55–6; W. Brownlee, ÒThe Wicked Priest, the Man of Lies, and the Righteous Teacher—The Problem of Identity,Ó JQR 73 (1982) 7.

©Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2003 Dead Sea Discoveries 10, 3 Also available online – www.brill.nl 396 RICK VAN DE WATER perfect verbs that clearly indicate past punishment occur in passages that make no mention of gentiles, nor do they offer anything that would suggest a sudden execution, even if preceded by torture. In- stead, there is a speci c mention of diseases, which does not t what is known of Jonathan. 6 Brownlee also pointed out that there is no warrant for deriving Òillegitimate priesthoodÓ from the title Òwicked.Ó On the contrary, there is clear evidence that at one time, the Wicked Priest was highly regarded, but that through greed, he transgressed the law. Brownlee put it bluntly: Òin any translation it is the lust for wealth which has made a traitor of the Wicked Priest, and nothing is said of the usurpa- tion of an o f ce which did not belong to him.Ó7 To this can be added that there is no certainty that he was even a high priest at all. 8 From another angle, the presence of Essenes in the Temple as late as 103 BCE is hard to reconcile with the idea of an exodus of Zado- kites from Jerusalem at the time of Jonathan. 9 Some have even ques- tioned whether JonathanÕs external concerns would have permitted him to persecute the Zadokites. 10 Still another problem is posed by seeing him as the object of praise in 4Q448. 11 The explanation that this song was written when Jonathan was only a military leader before becoming high priest leaves an important question unanswered: Why would it then be kept by the Qumran community for over two hun- dred years after Jonathan had become the Wicked Priest? 12 These dif culties, and especially the question of the punishment of the

6 Brownlee, ÒWicked Priest,Ó 4; cf. M. Knibb, The Qumran Community (Cam- bridge: University Press, 1987) 239. 7 Brownlee, ÒWicked Priest,Ó 17. 8 P. Callaway, The History of the Qumran Community: An Investigation (Shef eld: Academic Press, 1988) 156 –67. 9 J. Murphy-OÕConnor, ÒJudah the Essene and the Teacher of Righteousness,Ó RevQ 10/40 (1981) 583. 10 E.g. F.M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies , (Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor, 1961 2) 153 n. 87a. J. Charleworth has criticised Jonathan supporters for not addressing CrossÕ arguments (ÒThe Origin and Subsequent History of the Authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Four Transitional Phases Among the Qumran Essenes,Ó RevQ 10 [1979–1981] 222). 11 G. Vermes, ÒThe So-Called King Jonathan Fragment (4Q448),Ó JJS 44 (1993) 294–300. For the original proposal that the ÒJonathanÓ in question is Alexander Janneuas, cf. E. Eshel et al., ÒA Composition Containing Part of Ps. 154 and a Prayer for the Welfare of King Jonathan and his Kingdom,Ó IEJ 42 (1992) 199 –229. 12 Puech (ÒJonathan le prtre impie,Ó 259, 268) has attempted to defend that explanation with the suggestion that the song was introduced into the Qumran library by a member, without the notice of the others ( !).