FRAGMENTS OF A ZADOKITE WORK

INTRODUCTION

§ I. SHORT ACCOUNT OF THE ZADOKITE PARTY AND INCJDENTALLY OF TIIE BOOK.

WRITTEN towards the close of the fi�st century B.C. in good Hebrew,1 our book represents the
beliefs and expectations of a body of reformers who sprang up in the second century B.C. within
the priesthood, as the Pharisees had within the laity, and called themselves, at all events in the first
century, 'the Sons- of Zadok'. 2 The reformation, in which they were the chief movers, was the
result of a slow but steady religious r�vival, which took place between the years 196 and 176 n.c.
or thereabouts (i. 6), and which culminated at the close of this period in the formation of a Party
within the priesthood. This Party-' the penitents of Israel '-appears to have attempted the
reform of irregularities connected with the Temple (§ IO. i ), but having failed in the attempt they
left Jerusalem and the cities of Israel, either voluntarily or under compulsion, and withdrew to
Damascus under the leadership of 'the Star', otherwise designated as 'the Lawgiver' (§ Io. i),
where they established the ' 'cw Covenant'-' the Covenant of Repentance'. Thus the first
breach of the Party was with their brethren the Sadducean priesthood. After the institution
of the New Covenant, the Party appears to · ave returned from Damascus and made the cities
of Israel the sphere of their missionary efforts. l<'or an unspecified period of years till the coming of
the Teacher of Righteousness, they were to obey faith:ully the interpretation of the Law laid down
by the Lawgiver above referred to. It was probably during this period that they finit came into
open antagonism with the Pharisees-an antagonism which grew in bitterness with the growing
years. The most virulent attacks in our book are directed against the Pharisees (§ 10. ii). The
ground for these attacks can be best understood from the knowledge of the origin of the Party.
The movement that gave them birth was of an intensely ethical and religious character, and naturally
tended to lead them to recognize the Prophets as of great worth, even if not of equal worth with the
Law, and therein to differentiate themselves from both Pharisee and Sadducee. This was one
cause of the breach with the Pharisees. Another arose from the fact that whereas the Pharisees
were upholding and-developing a vast body of oral tradition, the reformed Sadducccs (i.e. our Party)
absolutely opposed its acceptance except in a few particulars. They clung fast to the written Law
and would have none of the oral. While the Pharisees called their school or college 'the House
of Midrash ', our Party designated theirs as 'the House of the Law'. Furthermore, since they
claimed to represent the true Israel, especially on the priestly side, to them belonged the covenant<;
and the priestly functions, and the rights of teachiug and judging Israel-which latter functions had
been usurped by the Pharisees; to them also belonged the Temple at Jerusalem as their Sanctuary,
to them belonged Jerusalem,• the holy city'(§ 10. iii).
The precepts of the Law as expounded by the Lawgiver were to be obeyed till the coming
of the Teacher of Righteousness. This Teacher was to come 'in the end of the days'. It was
probably during this time that the Party assumed the name' the Sons of Zadok' (§ Io. iv).,
After the death of the 'Teacher of Righteousness', whose teaching and activities are not
recounted-a fact which points to the defectiveness of our MSS.-a considerable period elapses,
much more than forty years. We have now arrived at the date of our author. He is living'in the
end of the days', and the advent of the Messiah 'from Aaron and Israel' is momentarily looked for.
If I am right in my interpretation of this phrase, the Messiah was to be a son of Mariamne and
Herod(i.e. from Aaron and Israel), and the book was therefore written between 18 and 8 B.C. Herod
put his two sons to death in 8 B.C., since they were the popular idols of the nation, and so this hope,
like so many that preceded it, failed to reach fulfilment(� 12).
1 There are some Aramaisms and Rabbinic expressions in the text, but the Hebrew is good on the whole.
2 The Party, though originating appa rently with the priests and Levites, came to embrace a strong lay element,
just as the Pharisaic party, though in the main a lay movement, came ultimately to embrace a section of the priests.
785 3E