text:
To understand the schism that gave birth to the Dead Sea sect, we need to frame it against the background of Jewish history and sectarianism in the Hellenistic period. But we now have even more specific information about the particular conflicts, mostly over sacrifices and ritual purity, that led the sectarians to break away and form a distinct group. Indeed, we will see that the origins of the sect are to be traced to the internal priestly turmoil associated with Hellenistic reform, the Maccabean Revolt, and the rise of the Hasmonean dynasty and high priesthood.
Evidence of the Halakhic Letter
A Qumran text, today known as the Halakhic Letter, demonstrates quite clearly that the root cause that led to the sectarian schism consisted of a series of disagreements about sacrificial law and ritual purity.1 The full name of this document is Miqsat Maīase ha-Torah (some legal rulings pertaining to the Torah). The writers of its text list more than twenty laws that describe the ways their practices differed from those prevailing in the Temple and its sacrificial worship. But even more important, the document reveals more precise information than we have previously had about the origins of the sect.
The Halakhic Letter begins with a statement about its own intent:
These are some of "our (legal) rulings" [regarding Go]d's Torah which are [some of] the rulings of [the] laws which we hold, [and a]ll of them are regarding [sacrifices] and the purity of… (Halakhic Letter B1-3).(2)
The first sentence announces that what follows are some of "our [legal] rulings" that "we hold." Throughout the letter the authors refer to themselves in the plural. What then follows is a list of twenty-two halakhic matters over which the sectarians disagree with the addressee of the letter. For most of these, the text includes both the view of the writers as well as that of their opponents. Such phrases as "but you know" and "but we hold," indicate the polemical nature of the text. Later we will look at one of the document's specific laws, which demonstrates unquestionably that this group adhered to the Sadducean trend in Jewish law. The second part of the letter returns to general principles, presenting the writers' general views on the schism now under way. The authors state:
[You know that] we have separated from the mainstream of the peo[ple and from all their impurities and] from mixing in these matters and from being involved w[ith them] regarding these matters. But you k[now that there cannot be] found in our hands dishonesty, falsehood, or evil (Halakhic Letter C7-9).
The writers here state that in accepting the aforementioned rulings, they had to withdraw from participation in the rituals of the majority of the people. The purpose of this document was to call on their erstwhile colleagues in Jerusalem and the Hasmonean leader to effect a reconciliation that would allow them to return to their role in the Temple. Needless to say, reconciliation meant accepting the views this document put forth. Accordingly, the authors make the general statement that the addressees know that the members of this dissident group are reliable and honest, meaning that the list of laws is indeed being strictly observed as stated by the authors.
At this point, the letter plainly explains its purpose:
[For indeed] we have [written] to you in order that you will investigate the Book of Moses [and] in the book[s of the p[rophets and of Davi[d…, in the deeds] of each and every generation (Halakhic Letter C9-11).
The sectarians have written to the addressee (now for the first time in the singular) in order that "you" will examine the words of the Torah, the Prophets, and David (presumably the biblical accounts of the Davidic monarchy), as well as the history of the generations. The text now turns to what is to be found in those particular documents, that is, the Scriptures that the sectarians want their opponent to search. The addressee is told (again in the singular) that it has been foretold that he would turn aside from the path of righteousness and, as a result, suffer misfortune. The text of the Halakhic Letter then predicts that in the End of Days, the ruler will return to God. All of it is in accord with what is written in the Torah and in the Prophets. This time the authors do not mention the Writings, probably because the relevant blessings and curses do not occur there.
The text now returns to the discussion of the kings, recalling the blessings fulfilled during the time of Solomon, son of David, and the curses visited on Israel from the days of Jeroboam, son of Nebat (ca. 922-901 bce, son of Solomon), through the time of Zedekiah (597-586 bce, last king of Judah).
Next the writers state that in their view some of the blessings and curses have already come to pass:
And we recognize that some of the blessings and curses which are written in the B[ook of Mo]ses have come to pass, and that this is the End of Days when they will repent in Isra[el] for[ever…] and they will not backsli[de] (Halakhic Letter C20-22).
Here the authors reveal their belief that they are currently living on the verge of the End of Days, a notion that later became normative in Qumran messianic thought. It is also clear that they considered their own age the period foretold by the Bible as the final repentance of Israel. In light of these beliefs, the authors exhort the addressee (singular) to recall the events surrounding the reigns of Israel's kings, to examine their deeds, and to note that those who observed the laws of the Torah were spared misfortune, their transgressions forgiven. Such was the case with David, whom the addressee is asked to remember.
The authors then sum up why they sent this text to the addressee:
And indeed, we have written to you some of the rulings pertaining to the Torah which we considered were good for you and your people, for [we have seen] that you have wisdom and knowledge of the Torah. Understand all these [matters] and seek from Him that He correct your counsel and distance from you evil thoughts and the counsel of Belial, in order that you shall rejoice in the end when you find some of our words correct. And let it be considered right for you, and lead you to do righteousness and good, and may it be for your benefit, and for that of Israel (Halakhic Letter C26-32).
Here the phrase Miqsat Ma'ase ha-Torah appears. The authors state that the letter is intended for the benefit of the addressee and the nation. The addressee is credited with being wise and having sufficient knowledge of the Torah to understand the halakhic matters presented in the letter.3 The writers call on him to mend his way and renounce all of his incorrect views on matters of Jewish law. Doing so will lead him to rejoice at the end of this period (the End of Days), for he will come to realize that the writers of the letter are indeed correct in their views. His repentance will be judged a righteous deed, beneficial both for him and for all Israel.
One of the interesting features of the Halakhic Letter is the way the grammatical number of addressees shifts. In the introductory sentence, the letter is addressed to an individual, but in the list of laws, the authors engage in a dispute with a group ("you," plural). When the text returns to its main argument-at the conclusion of the list of laws-it shifts back to the singular. We will see later that the plural sections are addressed to priests of the Jerusalem Temple, and the singular to the Hasmonean ruler. To understand the nature of this text, we will consider an example of one of its halakhic controversies-the law regarding liquid streams: [And even] regarding (poured out) liquid streams, we sa[y] that they do not have [pu]rity. And even the liquid streams do not separate between the impure [and the] pure. For the moisture of the liquid streams and (the vessel) which receives from them are both considered one identical moisture (Halakhic Letter B56-58).
This enigmatic rule refers to questions of ritual purity in the pouring of liquids from one vessel to another. In a case when the upper vessel is pure and the lower one is not, the question in our text concerns whether the upper vessel-the source of the liquid stream-can be rendered impure when the stream itself links the two vessels together. The text of the Halakhic Letter asserts that the entire entity is "one moisture," that is, that the impurity does rise back up the stream, against the direction of the flow, so as to render the upper vessel impure.
This law has a close parallel in the Mishnah. There, in reporting a number of disputes between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, the Mishnah states:
The Sadducees say: "We complain against you Pharisees. For you declare pure the (poured out) liquid stream" (M. Yadayim 4:7).
In contrast to our text and the Sadducean view quoted in the Mishnah, the Pharisees ruled that in such cases the stream did not impart impurity to the pure vessel from which it was being poured. To them, the impurity of the lower vessel could not flow up, against the flow of the stream, to render the upper vessel impure. Because the Sadducees, in this and many other cases, share the same positions we find in the Halakhic Letter, we can convincingly show, using this and other Qumran texts, that the Qumran sect had a substratum of Sadducean halakhic views.
It appears that this letter was written to the head of the Jerusalem establishment, the high priest. The comparisons with the kings of Judah and Israel must have been particularly appropriate to someone who saw himself as an almost royal figure. In the letter, the ruler is admonished to take care lest he go the way of the kings of First Temple times. Such a warning could be addressed only to a figure who could identify, because of his own station in life, with the ancient kings of biblical Israel.
The Halakhic Letter makes no mention of the Teacher of Righteousness or any other leader or official known from the sectarian documents. Because the sect's own official history, presented in the Zadokite Fragments, claims that their initial separation from the main body of Israel took place some twenty years before the coming of the teacher, we can conclude that the Halakhic Letter was written by the collective leadership of the sect in those initial years. This explains why the teacher does not appear in this text.
Historical Ramifications
The Halakhic Letter has wide ramifications for our understanding of Jewish history in the Hasmonean period. In the letter, the views ascribed to the opponents of the emerging sect are the same as those usually attributed in rabbinic literature to the Pharisees or the early Rabbis. When Mishnaic texts preserve Pharisee-Sadducee conflicts over the same matters discussed in the Halakhic Letter, the views of the letter's authors match those of the Sadducees.
Only one possible explanation can be offered for this phenomenon: The earliest members of the sect must have been Sadducees unwilling to accept the status quo established in the aftermath of the Maccabean revolt.4 The Maccabees, by replacing the Zadokite high priesthood with their own, reduced the Zadokites to a subsidiary position for as long as Hasmonean rule lasted. Even after leaving Jerusalem, the Dead Sea sect continued to refer to itself or its leaders as the "Sons of Zadok." Our text makes clear that the designation "Sons of Zadok" is to be taken at face value. These were indeed Sadducees who protested the imposition of Pharisaic views in the Temple under the Hasmonean priests.
That interpretation explains why the writers of the Halakhic Letter constantly assert that the addressees know the authors' views to be correct. The founders of the sect aimed their halakhic polemics (addressed to a plural opponent) at their Sadducean brethren who continued to serve in the Temple and accepted the new reality. It was these remaining Jerusalem Sadducees who now followed views known to us from Pharisaic-rabbinic sources and who, in the view of the authors of this letter, knew very well that the old Sadducean practices were otherwise than what they were now observing.
Although it may be hard for us moderns to conceive that a schism of such magnitude could occur over what appear to be minor aspects of ritual law, we must remember that to the various factions in the Jerusalem priesthood and to the Jewish people in ancient times, the correct conduct of sacrificial worship was the primary guarantor of their welfare. Indeed, they regarded the sacrificial system as the prime connection of the people of Israel to God, the source of blessing for the land and its inhabitants. Had not many Jews only recently risen up in arms in the Maccabean Revolt in order to ensure the purity of that worship against foreign, pagan influence? Now, in the aftermath of that rebellion, no one was willing to accept easily the conduct of this worship in any way inconsistent with his own particular views.
Thus, when Temple worship was entrusted to a usurper-the Hasmonean high priest who acted according to already existing Pharisaic views-some pious Sadducees formed a sect and seceded from participation in the ritual of the Jerusalem Temple. At first the sect sought a reconciliation. When that failed, the members experienced disappointment and confusion.
The dissonant Zadokite priests increasingly saw themselves as a sectarian group. We can date the true beginnings of our sect to the moment the Qumran Zadokites' moderate attempts at reform failed, convincing them that Hasmonean succession was not temporary but permanent. Some have challenged this theory of the sect's Sadducean origins, arguing that it does not explain the group's more sectarian or radical tendencies, especially the animated polemic and xenophobia so often found in later sectarian texts. But those later texts reveal the eventual effects of the earlier schism. After they failed in their initial attempts, exemplified by the Halakhic Letter, to reconcile and win over the Hasmoneans and the remaining Jerusalem Sadducees to their own system of Temple practice, the Qumran Zadokites gradually developed the sectarian mentality of the despised, rejected, and abandoned outcast. Accordingly, they began to look upon themselves as the true Israel, condemning and despising all others.
Another challenge to this theory is the incongruity between some of the beliefs of the sect in its heyday with teachings Josephus attributes to the Sadducees. However, Sadducean priests were not uniform in their degree of Hellenization nor in all their beliefs. Josephus's descriptions concern only the somewhat Hellenized Sadducees of the Roman period. Moreover, I am not claiming that the Dead Sea sect as we know it is Sadducean, only that its origins and the roots of its halakhic tradition lie in the Sadducean Zadokite priesthood.
The Halakhic Letter is a sectarian document from the earliest stage in the sect's development, when its members still hoped to return to participation in Temple worship. It is not even certain that the letter postdates the beginning of the self- imposed exile of the sect. In this document we learn of the disagreements about Jewish law that led to the formation of the sect. It was only later that the Teacher of Righteousness and other leaders, most probably priestly, developed the group that was to produce the complete corpus of sectarian texts. Another Qumran text-the Temple Scroll, essentially a rewritten Torah into which the author has inserted his own views on Jewish law-is also composed of sources deriving from the Sadducean tradition.5 Indeed, the finds at Qumran are now providing us with insights into this tradition never before available.
The revelations contained in the Halakhic Letter demand that we reevaluate some of the older theories identifying the sect with known Second Temple groups. First, the theories that seek to link the sect and its origins with the Hasidim (pietists) must now be abandoned. Other theories tying the emergence of the sect to some subgroup of the Pharisees are certainly no longer tenable. The dominant Essene hypothesis, if it is to be maintained at all, requires radical reorientation. Those holding this theory must now argue that the term "Essene" came to designate the originally Sadducean sectarians who had gone through a process of radicalization until they became a distinct sect. Alternatively, they must broaden their understanding of the term to include a wide variety of similar groups, of which the Dead Sea sect might be one.
The notion that the collection of scrolls at Qumran is not representative of a sect but is a balanced collection of general Jewish texts must also be rejected. There is by now too much evidence proving that the community that collected those scrolls emerged out of sectarian conflict and that that conflict sustained it throughout its existence. The Halakhic Letter characterizes the conflict as a disagreement over points of Jewish law with those in control of the Temple in Hasmonean Jerusalem.
Further, the nature of the collection, even if it contains many texts not explicitly sectarian, which might have been acceptable to all Jews in Second Temple times, is still that of a subgroup with definite opposition to the political and religious authorities of the times.
The Exodus to Qumran
When the group who composed the Halakhic Letter decided to move to Qumran, the members took a decisive step in their own evolution. They now defined themselves as a dissenting group struggling against an unsympathetic majority. This was not a sudden step, however. It seems likely that the Qumran center was established after a period of groping that lasted about a generation. Only then did the sect retreat to Qumran. The Teacher of Righteousness, whose leadership had been established sometime after composition of the letter, probably influenced the decision.
How can we determine the nature and date of the exodus to Qumran? Our conclusions must rest on the archaeological finds at Khirbet Qumran and on the literary evidence of the sectarian texts. And central to an understanding of the event is familiarity with the text known as the Zadokite Fragments, the first scroll discovered by Solomon Schechter among the manuscripts of the Cairo genizah.6 Today, we know of at least nine additional manuscripts of this text, which were found at Qumran. Affinities in language and ideology indicate that this document belonged to the Qumran sectarians. Further, other sectarian texts contain excerpts from that text, indicating that it indeed was a document central to the thought of the Qumran sect. Modern scholars refer to this text also as the Damascus Document or Damascus Covenant due to its symbolic reference to Damascus as the land of the sect's exile.
The text is divided into two parts: the Admonition and the laws. Our discussion focuses on the Admonition. Although the Qumran manuscripts of this text indicate there was additional material at the beginning of the Zadokite Fragments, they preserve very little significant material from that section, which must at one time have been part of a much longer passage. The text of the Zadokite Fragments as preserved in medieval manuscripts begins by declaring that in ancient times, Israel went astray. As a result, God "hid His face" and allowed the destruction of the First Temple (dated in modern scholarly chronology to 586 bce). Yet a remnant of the defeated people remained, and it was they who ultimately formed the sect. In this narrative, the sectarians regard their way of life and belief as a direct continuation of biblical tradition, claiming to be the tradition's true recipients.
The text presents its understanding of the formation of the sect as follows:
And in the period of wrath, three hundred ninety years after He had handed it (the Temple) over to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylonia, He remembered them (Israel) and caused to grow from Israel and Aaron the root of a plant (i.e., the sect) (Zadokite Fragments 1:5-7). This official chronology, written by the sectarians themselves, poses problems for scholars (Rabinowitz 1954). If we calculate from the modern scholarly dating of the destruction of the First Temple, we arrive at 196 bce for the founding of the sect. This dating does not square with the archaeological data, however. Further, based on evidence in the Halakhic Letter, the sect must have formally separated itself after the Maccabean Revolt of 168-164 bce.
Nevertheless, there is evidence that ancient Jews did not have a chronology that matches ours for dating the destruction of the First Temple. Because of a vast gap in the chronology of the Persian period, it is doubtful whether ancient Jews could have made such a calculation with any degree of accuracy. Therefore, we can only assume that we have approximate information from the period. We therefore must be content to date the founding of the sect sometime in the second century bce.
The text of the Zadokite Fragments then tells about a period of confusion followed by the rise of the sect's leader, the Teacher of Righteousness:
Then they understood their transgression and knew that they were guilty. They were like blind (men) groping on the road for twenty years. Then God paid attention to their deeds for they sought Him whole-heartedly, and He set up for them a Teacher of Righteousness to direct them in the way of his (the teacher's) heart (Zadokite Fragments 1:8-11 = Da 2 I 12-15). It appears that during an initial period-perhaps of twenty years-the sect was leaderless and perhaps even formless until the Teacher of Righteousness established his leadership over it. Only with the teacher's emergence and his assumption of control did sectarian teachings and a distinctive way of life take shape.
From what we learned earlier from the Halakhic Letter, we can accept as reliable the account in the Zadokite Fragments that describes this initial period between the schism and the emergence of the teacher's leadership. It was during that period, most probably, that the Halakhic Letter was sent and a reconciliation attempted. After their failure to win over the Jerusalem Sadducees and the Hasmonean high priest, the sect became a permanent entity, no longer expecting to rejoin the Jerusalem establishment.
The Teacher of Righteousness assumed leadership of the sect and introduced his teachings; at that time or shortly thereafter the sect moved to its site in the wilderness at Qumran. Both the archaeological dating of the site and the literary materials about Damascus confirm the fact. The Zadokite Fragments has a portion that has become known as the "Well Midrash" (6:3-11), which prominently features the Damascus imagery (Brooke 1980). It is an excellent example of pesher interpretation, a form of biblical interpretation that reads biblical verses as prefigurations of contemporary events. Here a verse from Numbers is interpreted: "A well which the officers have dug, which the notables of the people have dug…" (Numbers 21:18). The Zadokite Fragments explains:
The well is the Torah and those who dig it are the returnees (or: penitents) of Israel who leave the land of Judea and who live in the land of Damascus (Zadokite Fragments 6:4-5). On the face of it, this text seems to refer to an exodus of the sectarians from Judea to Damascus, where they settled, at least for a time. Below this, on the same page, the sectarians are described as: those who enter the new covenant in the land of Damascus (6:19). Again this text refers to an exodus to Damascus.
Before continuing, I would like to comment on the expression "new covenant." In several texts the sectarians term themselves "those who have entered the covenant," referring to the new covenant they entered when they constituted or joined the sect. This idea derives from Jeremiah 31:31-32, which speaks of a renewal of God's covenant with Israel in the End of Days. The term as it is used in this text must be sharply distinguished from the Christian concept of a new covenant, that is, a New Testament, which will replace the old covenant (so-called Old Testament) with a new scripture.
In another pesher-type exegesis, the text (Zadokite Fragments 7:14-21) interprets Amos 5:26-27, "And you shall carry…the star of your God which you have made for yourselves, and I will exile you farther than Damascus." There we find:
And the "star" (Amos 5:26) is the interpreter of the law (the sectarian official who interprets Torah for the sect with divine inspiration) who comes to Damascus (Zadokite Fragments 7:18-19).
A literal reading of this passage suggests that the interpreter of the law left Judea and joined his fellow sectarians at Damascus. Later on, in describing sectarians who ceased to live according to the ways of the sect, the Zadokite Fragments speaks of:
those people who had entered the new covenant in the land of Damascus and have turned away and rebelled, and turned aside from the well of living waters (Zadokite Fragments 19:33-34). The "well of living waters" is God's Torah as correctly interpreted by the sectarians. The Damascus theme is continued further on when the text describes those:
…who have despised the covenant and the agreement which they swore to in the land of Damascus which is the new covenant (Zadokite Fragments 20:11-12).
Writing before the Halakhic Letter was known, many scholars deduced from these passages that after the initial schism, there was an actual exodus to Damascus. This theory further claims that in Damascus the sect took shape and set down the foundation of its teachings. From there, it is assumed, the group moved on to the sectarian settlement at Qumran. Some have actually sought to locate a historical event that might have led to that exodus. Others have suggested excavation of modern-day Damascus in an attempt to find the remains of this group. What then is Damascus? (Davies 1990; Iwry 1969; Milikowsky 1982; North 1955a; Wieder 1962:1-52; cf. Knibb 1983) Is it a real place or a metaphorical term? We know that the sectarians, especially in the Zadokite Fragments, often spoke in code words. We find all kinds of pseudonyms for actual personages, yet almost never a personal name that would allow a definite identification. The Jewish sects of the day are never mentioned by name even though we see numerous references to them designated with code words in the sectarian texts. Why then should we fall into the trap of taking place names literally? Rather it is more likely that "Damascus" is a code word for Qumran.
The notion is strengthened even more by the use of Damascus as a symbol in other texts of the period. The New Testament pictures Paul receiving a vision of Jesus on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:3-6). It is likely that the symbolic meaning of Damascus as an eschatological stopover would have led to its use here. Indeed, even in Amos 5:27 it is connected with the destruction of syncretist Israelites-those who had mixed worship of the God of Israel with pagan ways-in the End of Days.
In addition, we should mention the suggestion that Damascus was actually at one time the name of the toparchy (administrative district) in which Qumran was situated. This suggestion assumes that Qumran, even though it is located on the western shore of the Dead Sea, was at one time part of the same administrative unit as Damascus and could, therefore, bear its name. In any case, these possibilities all taken together allow us to regard Damascus as a symbol. Accordingly, we need not seek any specific exodus to Damascus. Rather, we can assume that the desert settlement of Qumran was the Damascus to which the sectarians referred and that it was there that the sect established its settlement at about the same time as the Teacher of Righteousness (perhaps the very same first interpreter of the law) came to the fore.
It is indeed curious that the sectarian texts from Qumran contain no mention of the name of the site; Khirbet Qumran is the Arabic name. Some scholars have theorized that it may be the biblical place Secacah7 (Joshua 15:61), although this is probably an Iron Age site located four miles (seven kilometers) southwest of Qumran. In any case, it was to Qumran, not to Damascus, that the sect migrated.
There is one additional text, Rule of the Community, that must be considered here because it makes the connection between the sectarian's separatism and the desert.8 Rule of the Community, also known as Manual of Discipline (a Christian monastic term imposed on the text), was one of the first seven scrolls discovered in cave 1. This almost intact document lays out the basic theology of the sect as well as its rules of admission and initiation and its code of punishments. At one point, the scroll speaks of the separation of the Qumran sectarians from the main body of Israelites:
When these form a community in Israel, according to these rules they shall be separated from the midst of the settlement of the people of iniquity to go to the desert, to clear there the road of the Lord, as it is written, "In the desert clear the road of the Lord; straighten in the wilderness a highway for our God" (Isaiah 40:3). This is the interpretation of the Torah [which] He commanded through Moses to observe, according to everything that is revealed from time to time, and as the prophets have revealed by His holy spirit (Rule of the Community 8:12-16).
The passage appears to refer directly to the exodus to the desert. But in fact, this separatism is to be understood symbolically as fulfilling the command of Isaiah 40:3 to prepare a way through the wilderness as part of the preparations for the End of Days. The passage then goes on to tell us how to interpret that preparation. To prepare the way in the desert means to interpret the Torah, specifically to explain it according to sectarian interpretations. Despite its mention of the wilderness, the text makes no direct connection between the sect and
the desert region. Nonetheless, it is only against the background of the sect's settlement at Qumran that such desert imagery makes sense. In fact, the desert motif is extremely prominent in sectarian literature. The sectarians saw themselves as living a pristine life like that of the Israelites in the period of desert wandering. Further, they saw themselves as having gone into the desert to receive the Torah, just as Israel had in the period of the Exodus. All this is to be expected from a group that had left the more thickly settled areas of Judea to relocate in the wilderness, there to maintain its own standards of sanctity and purity.
The sect came into being, then, after the Hasmoneans had taken over the high priesthood, about 152 bce. Thereafter, they attempted, as we can see from the Halakhic Letter, to reconcile with their Zadokite-Sadducean brethren who continued to serve in the Jerusalem Temple, as well as with the Hasmonean leaders. When this failed, they still were leaderless until, at some point, the Teacher of Righteousness arose to lead them. It was he who gave the sect shape and direction. Eventually he led the group from its Sadducean origins toward its intensely apocalyptic, sectarian mentality and toward the many beliefs that differentiated the sect from the Sadducees. Probably during the early years of the teacher's career-within a generation or so after the founding of the sect-the members of the group established the sectarian center and library at Qumran.
This article excerpts pages 83-95 of Lawrence H. Schiffman, Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls: The History of Judaism, the Background of Christianity, the Lost Library of Qumran. Philadelphia and Jerusalem: Jewish Publication Society, 1994.
(1) The existence and contents of the Halakhic Letter were first reported by Qimron and Strugnell (1984, 1985) in two separate articles, both entitled "An Unpublished Halakhic Letter." Further discussion may be found in Schiffman (1990)." The entire text, in an early version of the edition by Qimron and Strugnell, was published-without the permission of the editors-in Eisenman and Robinson, A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls, (1991) in the Publisher's Foreword, by Shanks, as figure 8. This edition was in turn based on Kapera (1990). Figure 8 appeared only in the first edition of Eisenman and Robinson, but was subsequently removed in accord with the ruling of an Israeli court. This text was the cause of the lawsuit by Qimron against Shanks.
(2) All translations presented here are by the author, except for biblical texts, which for the most part follow the New Jewish Publication Society translation. Square brackets are used to indicate restorations made by scholars to fragmentary scroll texts. Parenthesis are used to indicate explanatory material added to the translation.
(3) General discussion of the various systems of Jewish law observed during the Second Temple period, together with a more detailed discussion of the Halakhic Letter, may be found in Schiffman (1989, 1991) and Baumgarten (1991). Extremely important is Sussmann (1989/90). The first to realize the Sadducean halakhic tendencies of the Halakhic Letter, when only a short passage from it was known, was Baumgarten (1980:163-64). A thorough study of the law of the document is found in Qimron and Strugnell (1994:123-77). The text of Sussmann's Hebrew article appears in translation with selected footnotes in that same volume, on pp. 129-200.
(4) The Halakhic Letter confirms the priestly origins of the sect, which fact had been suggested by, among others, Cross (1971); cf. also Schwartz (1990, 1992a). The historical relevance of the Halakhic Letter to the founding of the sect is discussed in Schiffman (1990). On this issue, see Qimron and Strugnell (1994:109-21), who see the letter as originating during the leadership of
the Teacher of Righteousness. We, however, see the letter as dating to before his career. (5) in addition to the Halakhic Letter, another Qumran text, the Temple Scroll, also shows some affinity with Sadducean halakhah, as shown in Schiffman (1989). Attention was called to Sadducean elements in the Temple Scroll by Lehmann (1978). This and other articles by Lehmann on the scrolls are collected in his Massot u-Massa'ot (1982). The Sadducean connection was also proposed early in Qumran research by North (1955b). Burgmann (1989) also alleges a Sadducean background for this scroll, but Burgmann fails to argue his thesis in a sustained manner, dealing only with the Levitical favoritism in the Temple Scroll. This connection is also prominent in Wacholder (1989:99-169), on which see Basser (1984) who raises some of the fundamental problems in Wacholder's argumentation.
(6) The Zadokite Fragments provides important information for determining the history of the sect's establishment. This text was first published by Schechter (1970), and has recently been reedited by Qimron (1992). For a description of the manuscripts of this document that were discovered in Qumran cave 4, see Baumgarten (1992). The text of these manuscripts has now been published from preliminary transcriptions by Milik in Wacholder and Abegg (1991-92) in fascicle 1. On the reliability of the medieval copies, see Baumgarten (1992:62). See also Rowley (1952) for the relationship of the genizah find to the Qumran corpus. The best commentary remains Rabin (1954). Extremely important is Ginzberg, (1976) which was a path-breaking study of this text. See Davies (1983), for a study of the "Admonition", which, however, ignores the legal section of the text. Davies shares the notion of Babylonian origins for the Essenes with Murphy-O'Conner (1972A, 1972B, 1985) who analyzes this text. See also Davies (1982a). For a discussion of the sectarians' viewing themselves as the direct heirs of biblical Israel, see Talmon (1989:11-52).
(7) This identification has been suggested by Bar-Adon (1977) and Allegro (1960:68-74). Cross and Milik (1956) suggest that Qumran is to be identified with "The City of Salt." A useful discussion of both views may be found in Davies (1982b:36-40).
(8) See Talmon (1966) and Schwartz (1992b:29-43) on the significance of the desert and the exodus to it in the thought of the Qumran sectarians. On the influence of the Bible in general, see Freedman (1971).
Allegro, J. M.
1960 The Treasure of the Copper Scroll. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Bar-Adon, P.
1977 Another Settlement of the Judean Desert Sect at 'En El-Ghuweir on the Shores of the Dead Sea. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 227:1-25.
Basser, H. W.
1984 The Rabbinic Citations in Wacholder's The Dawn of Qumran. Revue de Qumran 11:549-60.
Baumgarten, J. M.
1980 The Pharisaic-Sadducean Controversies about Purity and the Qumran Texts. Journal of Jewish Studies 31:157-70.
1991 Recent Qumran Discoveries and Halakha in the Hellenistic-Roman Period. Pp. 147-58 in Jewish Civilization in the Hellenistic-Roman Period. Edited by S. Talmon. Philadelphia: Trinity Press International.
1992 The Laws of the Damascus Document in Current Research. Pp. 51-62 in The Damascus Document Reconsidered. Edited by M. Broshi. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society and the Shrine of the Book, Israel Museum.
Brooke, G. J.
1980 The Amos-Numbers Midrash (CD713b-81a) and Messianic Expectations. Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentlische Wissenschaft 92:397-404.
Broshi, M., ed.
1992 The Damascus Document Reconsidered. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society and the Shrine of the Book, Israel Museum.
Burgemann H.
1989 11QT: The Sadducean Torah. Pp. 257-63 in Temple Scroll Studies. Edited by G. J. Brooke. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Cross, F.M.
1971 The Early History of the Qumran Community. Pp. 70-89 in New Directions In Biblical Archaeology. Edited by D. N. Freedman and J. C. Greenfield. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Cross, F. M. and Milik, J. T.
1956 Explorations in the Judaean Buqźąh. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 152:5-17.
Davies, P. R.
1982a The Ideology of the Temple in the Damascus Document. Journal of Jewish Studies 33:287-301.
1982b Qumran. Cities of the Biblical World. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
1983 The Damascus Covenant: An Interpretation of the "Damascus Document." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 25. Sheffield: JSOT Press.
1990 The Birthplace of the Essenes: Where is "Damascus"? Revue de Qumran 14:503-19.
Eisenman, R. H. and Robinson, J. M.
1991 A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Prepared with an Introduction and Index. With a Foreword by H. Shanks. 2 vols. Washington, DC: Biblical Archaeological Society.
Freedman, D. N.
1971 The Old Testament at Qumran. Pp 131-41 in New Directions in Biblical Archaeology. Edited by D. M. Freedman and J. C. Greenfield. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Ginzberg, L.
1976 An Unknown Jewish Sect. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America.
Iwry, S.
1969 Was There a Migration to Damascus? The Problem of sby ysr'l. Eretz-Israel 9:80-88.
Kapera, Z. J.
1990 An Anonymously Received Pre-publicaltion of the 4QMMT. The Qumran Chronicle Apendix A, no. 2.
Knibb, M. A.
1983 Exile in the Damascus Document. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 99:99-117.
Lehmann, M. R.
1978 The Temple Scroll as a Source of Sectarian Halakhah. Revue de Qumran 9:579-88.
1982 Massot u-Massa'ot. Jerusalem: Mosad Harav Kook.
Milikowsky, C.
1982 Again: DAMASCUS in Damascus Document and in Rabbinic Literature. Revue de Qumran 11:97-106.
Murphy-O'Conner, J.
1972a A Critique of the Princes of Judah (CD VIII, 3-9). Revue Biblique 79:200-216.
1972b A Literary Analysis of Damascus Document XIX, 33-XX, 34. Revue Biblique 79:544-64.
1985 The Damascus Document Revisited. Revue Biblique 92:223-46.
North, R.
1955a The Damascus of Qumran Geography. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 87:34-38.
1955b The Qumran "Sadduces." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 17:44-68.
Qimron, E.
1992 The Text of CDC. Pp. 9-49 The Damascus Document Reconsidered. Edited by M. Broshi. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society and the Shrine of the Book, Israel Museum.
Qimron, E. and J. Strugnell
1984 An Unpublished Halakhic Letter from Qumran. Pp. 400-407 in Biblical Archaeology Today: Proceedings of the International Congress on Biblical Arcaeology, Jerusalem, April 1984. Edited by J. Amitai. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, in cooperation with the American Schools of Oriental Research.
1985 An Unpublished Halakhic Letter from Qumran. Israel Museum Journal 4:9-12.
1994 Miqsat Ma'ase ha-Torah. With contributions by Y. Sussman and A. Yardeni. Discoveries in the Judean Desert 10. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Rabin, C.
1954 The Zadokite Documents. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Rabinowitz, I
1952 The Authorship, Audience, and Date of the de Vaux Fragment of an Unknown Work. Journal of Biblical Literature 71:19-32.
1954 A Reconsideration of "Damascus" and "390 Years" in the "Damascus" ("Zadokite") Fragments. Journal of Biblical Literature 73:11-35.
Rowley, H. H.
1952 The Zadokite Fragments and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Schechter, S.
1970 Documents of Jewish Sectaries: Fragments of a Zadokite Work. Prolegomenon by J. A. Fitzmyer. 2 vols. New York: Ktav.
Schiffman, L. H.
1989 The Temple Scroll and the Systems of Jewish Law of the Second Temple Period. Pp. 246-50 in Temple Scroll Studies edited by G. J. Brooke. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
1990 The New Halakhic Letter (4QMMT) and the Origins of the Dead Sea Sect. Biblical Archaeologist 53:64-73.
1991 Qumran and Rabbinic Halakhah. Pp. 138-46 in Jewish Civilization in the Hellenistic-Roman Period,. Edited by S. Talmon. Philadelphia: Trinity Press International.
Schwartz, D. R.
1990 On Two Aspects of a Priestly View of Descent at Qumran. Pp. 157-79 in Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls: The New York University Conference in Memory of Yigael Yadin. Edited by L. H. Schiffman. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series 8. JSOT/ASOR Monographs 2. Sheffield: JSOT Press for ASOR.
1992a "Law and Truth": on Qumran Sadducean and Rabinic Views of Law. Pp. 229-40 in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Symposium Papers, Tel Aviv, Israel, March 20-24, 1988, Edited by D. Dimant and U. Rappaport. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
1992b Studies in the Jewish Background of Christianity. Wissenshaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 60. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck). Sussmann, J.
1989/90 Heqer Toldot ha-Halakhah u-Megillot Midbar-Yeudah: Hirhurim Talmudiyim Rishonim le-'Or Megillat "Miqsat Ma'ase ha-Torah." Tarbiz 59:11-77. Talmon, S.
1966 The "Desert Motif" in the Bible and Qumran Literature. Pp. 31-63 in Biblical Motifs, Origins, and Transformations. Edited by A. Altmann. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
1989 The World of Qumran from Within: Collected Studies. Jerusalem: Magnes Press. Wacholder, B. Z.
1983 The Dawn of Qumran: The Sectarian Torah and the Teacher of Righteousness. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press.
Wacholder, B. Z. and Abegg, M. G.
1991-92 A Preliminary Edition of the Unpublished Dead Sea Scrolls: The Hebrew and Aramaic Texts from Cave Four. 2 fascicles. Washington DC: Biblical Archaeology Society. Wieder, N.
1962 The Judean Scrolls and Karaism. London: East and West Library.


text: RT Book, Whole DB /z-wcorg/ DS http://worldcat.org ID 35450507 LA English T1 Coming apart : a memoir of the Harvard wars of 1969 A1 Rosenblatt, Roger., PB Little, Brown and Co. PP Boston YR 1997 SN 0316757268 9780316757263 AB On the afternoon of April 9, 1969, Roger Rosenblatt, then a young English instructor at Harvard, stepped out of his classroom building. There, across the Yard, he saw students hanging out of the windows of the main administrative building, waving revolutionary flags and chanting. The student uprisings that were rocking the country had finally come to America's most prestigious university. In short order, the demonstrators forcibly ejected deans from their offices. Less than twenty-four hours later - in an act unprecedented in Harvard's history - the University president invited local police to storm the Yard, and in riot gear, they attacked the students with tear gas and truncheons. In the turbulent weeks that followed, Rosenblatt soon found himself at the center of the chaos. As the Senior Tutor in an undergraduate House, he sat up night after night counseling angry, frightened students. As a member of the faculty committee formed to investigate the takeover and determine punishments, he saw just how fragile the bonds were that held the University together. For himself, Rosenblatt gained a very special Harvard education. Drawing on the recollections of faculty - Archibald Cox, Derek Bok, John Kenneth Galbraith, John Dunlop, James Q. Wilson, and Martin Peretz - and of students - Al Gore, Michael Kinsley, James Fallows, Frank Rich, Christopher Durang, and Mark Helprin - Rosenblatt has written an eloquent, often ironic, sometimes funny memoir that can be read as modern history and as a moral tale about a time when people persuaded themselves that they could fix things by taking them apart.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
What is JotForm?
JotForm is a free online form builder which helps you create online forms without writing a single line of code. No sign-up required.
At JotForm, we want to make sure that you're getting the online form builder help that you need. Our friendly customer support team is available 24/7.
We believe that if one user has a question, there could be more users who may have the same question. This is why many of our support forum threads are public and available to be searched and viewed. If you'd like help immediately, feel free to search for a similar question, or submit your question or concern.
HTML Editor Will Not Allow Simple a href tag to fire up SMS on smartphoneAsked by markashton on May 16, 2014 at 10:23 AM
What gives with this html editor? All I ever have is trouble with it.
I need to implement the following link that fires up an SMS i.e. TXT on a smartphone.
0123456789
Why does this editor strip this out ... it's simple html for god sake not JS.
Can you advise me please.
Thanks Mark
JotForm Support Manager
There were several security patches our developers made to prevent XSS injections.
Please use the embed link button , to insert your line. That should make it.
Have tried your suggestion. It doesn't work.
The editor in its wisdom strips out the desired expression:
JotForm Support
Hello Mark,
It seems you are right. The insert/edit link of the editor only accepts http:// or https:// and anything else is simply deleted.
I am not sure if this is intentional. I am sending a query to our back end team. We will get back to you on this soon.
Thank you!
Oh no ... I get the feeling this will be 6 months to a year...
Can't I have a godamn link in your forms that will fire up the txt function on a smartphone.
Just so you know ... I don't do any forms on normal computers ... just smartphones
JotForm Support
Hi Mark,
We apologize for the delays. But let us be optimistic also. I hope it will not take that long to have a turnaround on this.
The ticket for this have "Important" priority -- so, I think it should be addressed by our support developer with higher importance also among the already in queued tickets.
We will notify you for any status update when available.
Thank you.
So, here I am with a form ... trying to add some simple html so as to be able to facilitate the sending of TXT messages by users ...
Yours ... does not work ...Send an SMS
That important priority that is banded about a lot ... what happened to that?
Can you advise me please. I'd be grateful
Regards Mark
Hey mark, sorry about that. Your ticket is still opened and I do understand that you are requesting this to be done as soon as possible.
I will go ahead and shoot our dev a follow-up message to see what I can find out for you.
Doesn't work ...
Have number: 0123456789
Apply code to trigger sms function on smartphones:
Gets converted to this by html editor
Causes 'Page Not Found'
Am I missing something?
More importantly ... did you test this?
Regards Mark
Hmm...Okay...Sorry about that and thanks for the update.
I think this was tested beforehand so I'm not exactly sure what the problem with it is now but we will double-check this further then.
Okay, yeah I see there's still some sort of problem. I was able to replicate what you pointed out where it's converted to a prefixed backslash in front of the sms reference.
0123456789
Please replace the mobile number in your example above with 0123456789 please
It is an operational number I have.
Thnaks Mark
My fault, I'm sorry about that.
The number is still there for the public to see ... I don't want them to see it ... can you edit the nuber between the tags
Thanks Mark
And the video also shows the number ... needs to be removed please.
Thankyou very much
I changed both and you are welcome.
So back to the point of the thread ... and the fact that you hijacked me into using this thing with the promise it was fixed ... ;-)
The developer emrew86 states one word ... "fixed"
My testing, in the space of 30 seconds, finds the antonym of the word to be true ... "broken". The statement "fixed" being 100% inaccurate.
I'm curious ... what testing did you do?
Also ... is that the end of this again ... like until Feb 2015 when I mention it again.
Thanks mark
Is this hand ... or not?
Many Thnaks
JotForm Support
Hello markashton,
I did check this and there still seems to be some unresolved issue. When the hyperlink URL "sms:123456789" is added in the TEXT field and saved, "/" is actually prefixed in the URL. That is the reason when the hyperlink is clicked on the browser, it actually gets converted to : http://www.jotform.com/sms:123456789 Please check the screenshot below:
Let me update this to our back end team. We will get back to you on this soon.
Thank you!
Hi Ashwin,
Yeah I figured that out as per the first post I made at the top.
What I want to know is when the expression will be enabled to be allowed. If possible.
Thanks Mark
JotForm Support
Hello Mark,
I have already reopened the ticket and sent a note to the assigned developer.
We will get back to you as soon as we have any update from them.
Thank you!
Don't bother ... it's too late .., it'll never get done anyway ... not in hours ... just months to years.
Forget it.
Thanks Mark
It would be nice to have an answer as there are others of us also looking for that answer and the number is only increasing.
JotForm Support
Hi nicabrian,
I see you have posted your concern on this thread : http://www.jotform.com/answers/731588-html-code-for-sms-tap-to-text#1
We will assist you there.
Same issue nearly 2 years later. After spending $$$$ with you guys, it seems like a simple issue to resolve...
JotForm Support
We apologize for this inconvenient.
However, I can see you have opened your own thread about this, it can be reached on this link: https://www.jotform.com/answers/843805.
We will assist you with your concern as soon as possible.
Tell you what ....
As I spent hours on the topic post on this thread.
Read back on all of this thread ... did my prophecy come true?
Like no fix for years.
I don't believe that was ever entered into a system at all.
Also @Ashwin_d ...
Who was the web developer assigned to it on Sept 9 2014 ??
Does he still have a job with Jotform?
Mark ... the guy who posts suggestions so ridiculous they are never honored xx
(touch of sarcasm note ... not nastiness)
JotForm Support
Thanks for the follow-up.
I can see that this thread is no longer assigned to a developer.
I have re-opened this thread so our manager will be able to re-assigned this to one of our available developers. I think Emre, our UX Engineer is not working with JotForm anymore that's why the "assigned-to" is left blank.
Thanks by the way for not giving up on this. I think this deserves an immediate action.
We'll keep you posted.
JotForm Developer
Hello Mark,
It is fixed now. However, you need to clear form cache or edit HTML field on builder to see it working.


text:
Washington — Chances are that Republican Bill Cassidy doesn't consult an actual game plan that spells out how he can unseat Democrat Mary Landrieu in the U.S. Senate race in Louisiana that will be decided Dec. 6.
But if he were doing so, it could read something like this:
- For the Nov. 4 open primary, establish a position as the best-financed, mainstream Republican candidate to fend off any tea party challenge.
- Hang the albatross of President Barack Obama — a Democrat widely unpopular in Louisiana — around Landrieu's neck.
- Finish first or second in the primary while keeping Landrieu below the majority needed for an outright win, to set up a head-to-head, Republican-vs-Democrat showdown with her in the Dec. 6 runoff in a state that increasingly votes Republican.
- Unify Republicans behind your candidacy in the runoff.
- Draw lots of support from highly motivated national Republican organizations and conservative political groups for advertising and field operations in runoff.
- Avoid mistakes. Run a risk-averse campaign.
- Ride the Republican wave to victory Dec. 6.
So far, so good for Cassidy, who, if opinion polls are to be believed, is well on his way to ending Landrieu's 18-year run in the Senate.
"I don't think he needs to do much differently than he did in the primary," said Jennifer Duffy, a senior editor with the national Cook Political Report in Washington. "He's done the biggest thing he needed to do, which is unify the party."
Under Louisiana's open primary system, all candidates, regardless of party, are listed on the same ballot in November. If no candidate captures a majority of the primary vote, the top two finishers meet in a December runoff.
Cassidy, 57, a three-term congressman from Baton Rouge, wound up as the only Republican with experience in public office listed on the Nov. 4 ballot. But Rob Maness, a retired Air Force colonel who lives in Madisonville, joined the race as a Republican with the backing of national tea party groups.
Maness' unexpectedly strong campaign won him 14 percent of the primary vote — well short of Landrieu's 42 percent and Cassidy's 41 percent but enough to force them into a runoff. Including a third, minor candidate, Republicans in the primary captured a combined 56 percent of the vote.
"For Cassidy, it's obviously about pulling the party together," said the Cook Report's director, Charlie Cook.
Maness managed to carve out ideological space to Cassidy's right — no easy trick, as Cassidy is rated as more conservative than the average House Republican, based on his voting record in Congress.
"There's not really much daylight between some of the positions Cassidy has taken and some of the positions the tea party has taken," said Albert Samuels, a political science professor at Southern University in Baton Rouge.
But Cassidy is certainly not a right-wing firebrand: His political style is relatively low-key and even somewhat starchy.
"The thing about Cassidy is, he's widely acceptable but not the most preferable for a lot of Republicans in the state," Cook said "He doesn't throw red meat and get them enthusiastic. So his strength is also his weakness: He can go after swing voters, but he doesn't rev up the base.
"In the runoff, he just needs those voters to just see red" — red, as in Republican, Cook said.
It took Maness a few days, but he endorsed Cassidy after the runoff. So did Tony Perkins, the evangelical Christian leader, who previously had supported Maness over Cassidy. Maness appeared at a Republican "unity rally" in Baton Rouge on behalf of Cassidy, as did Louisiana U.S. Sen. David Vitter, Gov. Bobby Jindal and U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, of Kentucky, a tea party favorite. Soon after that, Cassidy was joined by Maness at a campaign stop near Monroe, along with Phil Robertson, the gun-and-Bible-totin' star of "Duck Dynasty," and former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, a tea party icon who had pointedly endorsed Maness in the primary.
"That's good for reminding people that there's an election and reassuring those far-right people that Cassidy is a better alternative than Sen. Landrieu," said Joshua Stockley, who teaches political science at the University of Louisiana at Monroe. "It certainly doesn't hurt Rep. Cassidy to have these headlines indicating that all these Republicans are supporting him and endorsing him.
"That average guy who just went out and voted for Maness because he represented the tea party, when they see Maness urging people to vote for Cassidy, yeah, he's going to respond to that."
"The big question for Bill Cassidy is, can he get those real conservative north Louisiana voters, and can he get those Christian voters?" said Pearson Cross, a political scientist at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette.
Cassidy need only round up the same share of the vote — 60 percent — received by the Republican presidential candidates in 2008 and 2012 to cruise to victory, Cross said.
"Cassidy just has to run a standard base campaign," said Brian Brox, a political scientist at Tulane University in New Orleans.
"He needs to lock down white voters and conservatives," Stockley said. "If he can get 80 to 90 percent of the conservatives to vote for him, if he can get 75 percent of the white voters to vote for him, if he can limit the gender gap to 5 percent or less, he will win."
Landrieu, 58, has a near-total lock on black voters — she won the support of 94 percent of them in the primary, according to exit polls — but black voters make up only 31 percent of the electorate. Landrieu's 18 percent of the white vote in the primary is almost certainly too little to win a head-to-head contest with Cassidy.
Landrieu supporters point to other times when she has beaten the odds, as in 2002, when, in her first run for re-election, she fell short of a majority in a primary in which Republican candidates combined for more than half the vote. In the runoff, she beat Republican Suzanne Haik Terrell 52-48.
But that Republican primary vote total in 2002 was a bare majority of 51 percent, and Landrieu's primary showing that year was 4 percentage points better than what she pulled Nov. 4, as she attracted a considerably larger share of the white vote. Also, Louisiana was not as deeply red as it is now: In 2002, both U.S. senators were Democrats, as were two of the seven House members, the lieutenant governor and the state attorney general. Today in Louisiana, the only Democrats in Congress are Landrieu and Cedric Richmond, from the black-majority 2nd District. And no Democrat has won a statewide vote since Landrieu's last Senate election in 2008.
The Cassidy campaign can count on two other strengths, Duffy said: money and organization. National Republican organizations are providing cash and field workers on a level the Democrats have yet to indicate they will match. Other outside backing for Cassidy in the runoff, mainly in the form of political advertising by independent, conservative political groups, has run close to $2 million, while Landrieu has received little or nothing.
Cassidy also stands to benefit from two developments beyond his control.
In the general elections in other states Nov. 4, a red wave provided Obama-bashing candidates enough seats for Republicans to take over control of the Senate in the next Congress, meaning Landrieu will lose her position as chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and can no longer promise to use its clout for the benefit of Louisiana's dominant oil and gas industry.
And after the Nov. 4 voting, Landrieu bucked her fellow Democrats in the lame-duck Senate and tried to push through a bill greenlighting the Keystone XL pipeline — a move of seeming desperation that ended in highly publicized failure.
The biggest threat to the Cassidy campaign may be complacency.
"They can't take this for granted," Duffy said. "The Cassidy campaign has to pay real attention to — and communicate to their supporters — why it's important to turn out, because certainly that is what Landrieu's doing with her supporters."
Despite Maness' endorsement of Cassidy, and despite the much greater distance politically between Maness and Landrieu, there's no certainty that Maness' voters will line up behind Cassidy in the runoff — or if they will vote at all.
"Some of them will go to Cassidy," Stockley said. "I think a proportion of them, and enough of a proportion that could be significant, will sit out in the runoff.
"Rather than compromise by voting Republican-light, they just don't vote," he said.
Although it seem paradoxical, Cross said, some Maness supporters may vote for Landrieu in the runoff.
"Voters are not automatons," he said. "They're not machines."
But given Landrieu's financial disadvantage and her dismal showing among white voters, the Cassidy campaign clearly sits in the driver's seat, Samuels said.
"It's their election to lose," he said.
And Cassidy has played it that way, relentlessly directing the voters' attention to Landrieu's Democratic fellowship with the much-maligned Obama instead of grappling with her over big issues and even, incumbent-like, avoiding televised debate appearances with her.
"For the Cassidy campaign," Samuels said, "essentially, the strategy is, 'Don't screw it up.' "
Follow Gregory Roberts of The Advocate Washington bureau on Twitter, @GregRobertsDC.


text:
I'm an educated songwriter/producer/engineer from the Netherlands. Studied Audio Design at the HKU with a focus on studio technology and music production.
- I can help with writing songs from scratch, or in a further state of the process.
- I play several instruments (guitar, bass, keys) and have the equipment to produce a good sounding recording.
- Edit vocals (tuning)
- Mix and/or mastering of music
- Have a good time
Send me an email through 'Contact' button above and I'll get back to you asap.
My credits include
Gear highlights
- Macbook Pro 15" (2015)
- Pro Tools 10 & 11
- Ableton Live 9
- Fender Telecaster
- Orange Rockerverb 50C
- Taylor acoustic
- Roland Juno 106
- Microkorg.


text:
Engage your patients to drive more referrals.
Accelerate referrals and grow your social media base with online sweepstakes and contests through Sesame Sweepstakes. Better engagement translates into more fans, increased practice loyalty, and referrals. Sesame is the only vendor within dentistry that ties your patient data to your sweepstakes and contests, which drives more engagement from your existing patients and expanded reach to prospective patients within their social network on Facebook.
Dedicated Sesame Specialist Support
You'll work with a dedicated Sesame Social specialist to help engage patients and generate new patients through sweepstakes and contests. Your specialist will design your promotion and help you determine the best practices and timeline for your specific sweepstakes or contest.
Full-Service Management of Promotions
Sesame takes care of all of the finite details of your campaign, including compliance with Facebook guidelines, local and state regulations, branded in-office promotional materials, promotional email blasts and newsletters to existing patients, campaign-designed landing pages, capturing of entrant contact details, and more.
Detailed Performance Reporting
Your practice stays informed on the progress of your campaign every step of the way with detailed reporting on all entrants and campaign performance. You'll receive a detailed report at the end of your promotion that tracks the reach, traffic, and results of your promotion across not only your social channels but also your website.
Dental Sesame or Ortho Sesame Integration
Harness the power within Ortho Sesame and Dental Sesame patient management software to promote your sweepstakes or contest on Facebook and boost your dental patient engagement.


text:
- geld
I. transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Old Norse gelda; akin to Old English gelde sterile
Date: 14th century
1. castrate
2. to deprive of a natural or essential part <sick of workingmen being gelded of their natural expression — Atlantic> II. noun Etymology: Old English gield, geld service, tribute; akin to Old English gieldan to pay, yield — more at yield Date: 1610 the crown tax paid under Anglo-Saxon and Norman kings
New Collegiate Dictionary. 2001.