Biblical Archaeology Review

De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 16–17.

Jodi Magness, “The Community at Qumran in Light of Its Pottery,” in Methods of Investigation of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Khirbet Qumran Site, pp. 39–50.

Donceel and Donceel-Voûte, “The Archaeology of Khirbet Qumran,” p. 12. Donceel-Voûte also refers to “a number of colored stone slabs [at Qumran], carefully cut to be used in pavements of the opus sectile type,” which is apparently the same opus sectile pavement mentioned by Humbert in connection with Ein Feshkha, suggesting that one of the two parties is confused.

Humbert, “L’éspace sacré à Qumran,” p. 171 (my translation).

For the cemetery at Qumran, see de Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 45–48.

Netzer, Masada III, pp. 234–281.

Donceel-Voûte, “Les ruines de Qumran reinterprétées,” p. 34.

For the identification of mikva’ot, see de Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 10; see also Ronny Reich, “The Great Miqveh Debate,” BAR 19:02.

De Vaux, Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 12. The similarity between locus 77 at Qumran and the triclinium at Hilkiah’s palace is especially striking; both share the same long, narrow plan, the square pillars at one end to support the roof, the partition running between the walls, and the pillars that separated one end of the hall from the rest of the interior.