The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception (review)

Book Reviews 105 events along the way (cf. pp. 188-194). This is not to' say that Schwartz is not critical of josephus' use of his sources. Rather, he grants him more credit for having a conscious method than some other recent historians. Schwartz's careful scholarship, refreshing curiosity, and clear writing style make this book a valuable contribution to the study of early judaism and early Christianity. Stuart D. Robertson jewish Studies Purdue University The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception, by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh. New York: Summit Books, 1991. 268 pp. 40 plates. $20.00. The recent public controversy concerning the release of unpublished Dead Sea Scroll material certainly confirms Geza Vermes' remark that the failure to publish the entire Qumran corpus some thirty years after its initial discovery would constitute "the academic scandal par excellence of the twentieth century" (The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective [Revised edition; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977], p. 24). Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh's The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception must be read against the background of this controversy. The authors (and the present reviewer) agree that the failure to publish all of the scrolls in a timely fashion does constitute an inexcusable scandal. But· this reviewer must ask whether Baigent and Leigh add to that scandal by making unsubstantiated accusations and claims. The purpose of this volume may be summarized by the statement printed on the dust cover, "Why a handful of religious scholars conspired to suppress the revolutionary contents of the Dead Sea Scrolls." Essentially , Baigent and Leigh maintain that the International Team charged with the responsibility for p.ublishing the Dead Sea Scrolls, together with the Roman Catholic Church, has deliberately suppressed publication of those portions of the Scrolls that are deemed to contain embarrassing material concerning the origins of Christianity. Their charges are based in large measure on publications pertaining to the character of the Qumran community and the origins of Christianity by Professor Robert Eisenman, here described as "among the most prominent and influential figures in his field" (p. xix). Summaries of Eisenman's work and conclusions constitute a major portion of this volume. According to Baigent and Leigh, Eisenman demonstrates that the Qumran group was part of a militant and 106 SHOFAR Fall 1993 Vol. 12, No. 1 "broad messianic national movement" (p. 216); that early Christianity led by James the brother ofJesus emerged from the Qumran sect; that Paul is the "liar" of the Habakkuk commentary who undermined the movement by "depoliticizing, demilitarizing and emasculating" it (p. 217); and that Paul was a Roman agent whose testimony against the group was rewarded by an ancient "witness protection program" in which he was given immunity and a new identity by the Roman authorities (pp. 220-21). ... Baigent and Leigh describe how the Scrolls came under the control of scholars based at the Dominican Ecole biblique et archeologique fran~aisein EastJerusalem, who then formed the basis of the International Team assigned to publish the Scrolls. They accurately portray the open hostility displayed by some members of the original team toward the modern state of Israel, and they correctly note that no Jewish scholars were allowed to work on the Scrolls. They note how the team has refused access to the unpublished scrolls by qualified scholars over the years and how many scrolls have been turned over to favored students who published them as part of their doctoral dissertations. There is certainly enough basis to charge the original International Team with gross irresponsibility in its handling of the Scrolls, but the discussion takes a rather ominous turn when it speaks about the use of the "Catholic propaganda machine" to vilify those who questioned the Team's positions (p. 51) or when the authors ask whether "objectivity [could] in fact be expected on the part of a Dominican institution (L'ecole biblique), with vested Catholic interests to protect" (p. 101). It is appropriate to raise questions about the role of the individuals involved, the Ecole, and the Church, but the authors' charges that the parties have actively conspired to suppress material that would undermine the credibility of Christianity is based largely on innuendo. As for the work of Robert Eisenman...