Charles wrote on Jun 28, 2007 1:58 PM:This article fails to inform readers of the controversy surrounding this exhibit. The recent L.A. Times article by Mike Boehm clearly indicates that people have been criticizing the museum for taking sides in a vicious academic struggle between proponents of two different theories of scroll origins. The article cites the recent essay entitled "Truth and Fiction in Current Exhibitions of the Dead Sea Scrolls" by well-known University of Chicago historian Norman Golb: "The museum, instead of guiding viewers toward an understanding of the controversy over the origin and significance of the scrolls, manifestly undertakes to manipulate the layman's comprehension of them." The article further quotes the embarrassing attempt by the exhibit curator, Dr. Risa Levitt Kohn, to explain the museum's decision to present only the old, now widely discredited theory of scroll origins: "You don't want to confuse people with so many competing theories." This is nothing less than an astounding confession. Does the Museum truly believe that visitors will be "confused" if they are given an accurate account of the current state of scholarship in this field? Are we to believe it is preferable to manipulate people than to "confuse" them by telling them the truth? One does not expect to hear such obscurantist balderdash from an institution whose declared mission is to "educate the public." Rather than allowing the Natural History Museum to use it as a public relations tool, the North County Times might have signaled the existence of this controversy, with sufficient information to direct readers towards an informed understanding of the issues involved. For details, anyone who is actually interested in finding out what is going on can download Professor Golb's "Fact and Fiction" article from the University of Chicago website (a google search brings it up). In an appendix that specifically addresses the San Diego exhibit, Golb concludes that the facts he enumerates "raise basic questions regarding the scientific conduct of the San Diego museum in respect to its forthcoming exhibit of the Scrolls." Readers should also consult Golb's earlier editorial in The Forward (also on line), which explains exactly why this controversy is so important.

Jim wrote on Jun 29, 2007 3:15 PM:WOW. Charles REALLY must love Norman Golb! It's a shame that Professor Golb and his friends spend more time criticizing the efforts of others and shamelessly promoting Dr. Golb's book than they do actually seeing the exhibit. If they had actually gone to the San Diego Museum as I did this morning, they would have seen the virtual reality movie, and would have liked the part where the museum ACCEPTS Professor Golb's idea that the site was originally a fortress. They would have seen professors Magen and Peleg's pottery research. They would have seen the reasoning behind DeVaux's Essene theory, and how it is being challenged today. Why are Golb and his friends criticizing Golb's own theory?? On a more positive note, the exhibit was VERY well done!! The photography was an added bonus!!

Charles wrote on Jul 1, 2007 9:51 AM:Apparently Jim doesn't understand the nature of the debate about Qumran, and his failure to understand it AFTER seeing the exhibit shows how badly the museum is misinforming the public. The question is not whether Qumran was "originally a fortress" (even DeVaux admitted that it was), but whether the site was ever inhabited by Essenes or any other sect. Mike Boehm's Los Angeles Times article states that the exhibit "acknowledges that competing theories exist but sticks mainly to a low-keyed assertion of the mainstream view." Detailed published descriptions of the virtual reality film confirm this--the film mentions Magen and Peleg, but rejects their conclusions that no sect lived at Qumran and that the Scrolls came from Jerusalem. On the other hand, the film accepts DeVaux's interpretations of Qumran (e.g., his identification of one locale as a "scriptorium," or of the cisterns as "ritual baths"), without explaining the reasons why an entire series of major archaeologists have rejected them. Thus, the museum has indeed chosen to misinform the public and take sides in this debate.

Suzanne wrote on Jul 1, 2007 9:43 PM:Jim obviously doesn't understand the issues being raised here. The fundamental point being raised by Golb and others is that the museum has carefully exluded all opponents of the traditional theory of Scroll origins from its lecture series, including all of the major archaeologists of the past decade who have concluded that no sect ever lived at Qumran. Golb doesn't need to go to the exhibit to see that the lecture series roster (published on the museum's website) is utterly biased towards the old theory.

John wrote on Jul 3, 2007 10:27 AM: The show was GREAT! If you're in San Diego or visiting, go see it! The nasty comments above do not represent the fresh and informative things I saw. The museum did San Diego proud.

John wrote on Jul 3, 2007 9:51 PM: What is this? Why are there all of these nasty comments on every one of the articles about the Dead Sea Scrolls show? There was no controversy there that I saw and most of the people were very curious and attentive as they were walking through. I disagree with the person above, it was a very educational show with plenty of "information to direct readers towards an informed understanding of the issues involved." I wish people would stop being mean and respect a really good thing.

Suzanne wrote on Jul 4, 2007 2:06 PM:John--you are obviously ignorant of the issues involved here. The question is not whether the exhibit is enjoyable, but whether it properly informs the public of the reasons WHY an entire series of scholars have rejected the Qumran-sectarian theory of scroll origins over the past decade. There is a superb piece on this by Charles Gadda on the Now Public site, entitled Dead Sea Scrolls Misleads Public? The link is [Web site] Do your homework, read the articles linked there and please get back to us with your opinion once you have informed yourself, since you were clearly misinformed by the exhibit.

Suzanne wrote on Jul 4, 2007 2:32 PM:P.s. I see that they don't publish links, but you can easily google the name and title to find it.

Charles wrote on Jul 4, 2007 2:46 PM:John--you say the "there was no controversy there," at the exhibit. That's precisely the problem. The scrolls are at the core of a vicious academic controversy, exposed in the New York Times, the Cambridge History of Judaism and many other sources. Scholarly interpretation of the scrolls is polarized between two different theories. All of the proponents of one of those theories have been excluded by the museum. This is morally wrong and offensive to many people. You were misinformed by the exhibit.

Larry wrote on Jul 11, 2007 2:11 PM:These Dead Sea Scrolls shows are not intended to 'educate' people, they are fundamentally religious celebrations, just like a Bible movie or a Jesus 'documentary.' As long as people enjoy what they see, the museum will simply ignore questions of historical accuracy, neutrality, or any other scientific issue that might arise. It's profitable for their organization, therefore they would only change something if people actually started, say, to picket the exhibit or shout out in anger during the lecture series, which is obviously not going to happen.