It was under the influence of Sukenik's vision that de Vaux approached
his study of Qumran. Since he was the first to excavate along the shore of the
Dead Sea, it was unnecessary for him to fit the site within a given
archaeological framework. His interpretation was pre-determined by a most
inspiring vision that was not solely based on archaeological facts. For De Vaux
the remains of the site and the manuscripts from the caves were undeniably
inter-connected; the local community was certainly Essene and the spatial
distribution clearly responded to the needs of a community living in seclusion.
De Vaux's interpretation was based on the cultural patterns available to him,
which influenced his great enthusiasm and passion for the subject. Since his
ideas were attractive and fascinating they found many listeners and they became
established. There are those who will still accept his theory unconditionally
and those who will challenge it. De Vaux's weaknesses are few, but they do
exist; making a revision necessary. His excavation was a masterpiece created in
a rush. The remains were studied superficially and with little attention to
detail. The gradual horizontal development of the building complex was ignored,
and the stratigraphy was treated unfairly. The entire site was placed into a
pre-existing historical framework.
The combined use of several forced
patterns misled the excavator. Those patterns are: 1) the use of literary
sources describing an idealized lifestyle that only represents a small part of
the historical reality, 2) the general archaeological interpretation of the site
that is heavily influenced by the model of westernized monasticism, and 3) the
tenaciously maintained assumption that the Essenes were only at Qumran. Today no
one can prove that Qumran is an Essene site though the hypothesis remains the
most likely one.