Cited by 42Biblical Studies and InterpretationQur’anic Interpretation StudiesLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Studies in Qumran law

Baumgarten, J.M.·1977·BRILL eBooks

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1163/9789004667471

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Pharisaic traditions are contrasted to the laws of Moses, which are followed by all Ioudaioi, as explored in Antiquities 1-12.

    “The Pharisaic traditions are contrasted to the laws of Moses, which are followed by all Ioudaioi, which is explored in Antiquities 1-12.This can be read as a version of the rabbinic idea of the oral Torah (Baumgarten 1977).”

    From Nomos and the Dispute in Galatians 2: A Case of Conflicting By-Laws (2023) · cites this paper as Baumgarten 1977

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Baumgarten, J. M.
Corresponding author
Baumgarten, J.M.
Venue
BRILL eBooks
Publisher
BRILL
Published
1977-01-01
OpenAlex
W582261956
Cited by
42
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
7.96
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
BRILL eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Qur’anic Interpretation Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis
Keywords
Qumran, Second Temple Judaism, Jewish law, Dead Sea Scrolls

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review