SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHE S ... - Emanuel Tov

Scribal Practices and Approaches Reflected in the Texts from the Judean Desert 39
Scrolls could also be tied by single strings or thongs not connected to a reinforcement tab;
some of these strings could have been passed through holes in the leather of the scroll or a cover
sheet. According to Broshi–Yardeni, DJD XIX, 77, the tiny fragment 4QList of False Prophets ar
(4Q339) was folded and held together by a string passed through holes still visible on the
fragment.
Contracts were rolled up, while the string around them was strengthened with a seal. For
illustrations, see Schubart, Das Buch, 55. The systems for tying the tefillin were described in
detail by Yadin, Tefillin.
(2) Several scrolls were protected by linen wrappings. For a general description of such
wrappings without detailed proof relating to archeological evidence, see M. Bélis, “Les étoffes de
lin pour protéger les manuscrits,” Le monde de la Bible 107 (1997) 32. Remnants of wrappings
detached from the scrolls were found in caves 1 and 11 (for the former, see Sukenik, Mgylwt
gnwzwt, illustrations 2 and 3; for the latter, see DJD XXIII, 431). One section of a scroll was
found in cave 1 still enclosed in its wrapper with the leather stuck to a broken jar sherd (DJD I,
pl. I, 8–10). According to the description by G. Lankester Harding, DJD I, 8, upon opening the
wrapping, the scroll material corroded to a solid black mass. Some of the linen fragments found in
the same cave probably derived from such wrappings. 80 1QIsa a was also once covered with a
linen wrapping (see the evidence quoted by G. M. Crowfoot, DJD I, 18–19). Reportedly, the
wrapper of 11QT a is now in the Schøyen collection in Oslo, Norway.
The linen fragments from cave 1 are both non-dyed and dyed, in the latter case sometimes
with rectangular patterns. The use of linen wrappings for scrolls is referred to in m. Kil. 9.3 and
m. Kel. 28.4 (both: µyrps(h) twjpfm, ‘wrappers for scrolls’) and in y. Meg. 1.71d (hpm, ‘cover’),
for which G. M. Crowfoot mentioned some parallels from the classical world (see further Safrai,
Jewish People, 940). Josephus, Ant. XII 11 § 90 likewise states with regard to the Torah scroll
sent to Egypt from Jerusalem: “and when they had taken off the covers (ejneilhvmata) wherein
they were wrapt up … .” The linen fragments from cave 1 displaying rectangular patterns and
blue elements may be similar to the wrappers described in the Talmudic literature with figures
‘portrayed on them’ (twrywxm).
(3) In a combination of the two aforementioned systems, some scrolls were both enclosed in
linen wrappings and tied with a leather thong. One of the linen fragments from cave 4 (Israel
Museum photograph X94.920) was attached to such a leather thong and must have enveloped a
scroll together with the leather thong. This system is not otherwise known from the literature. 81
If the evidence mentioned under systems 1 and 2 for 1QIsa a is correct, that scroll was also tied in
two ways.
Literary scrolls were not sealed as were most documentary texts that were tied up as scrolls.
Many such seal impressions (bullae) were found among the Wadi Daliyeh Samaritan texts, and in
a few cases the seals were still attached to the tied-up documents (DJD XXIV, pl. XXII). See
further JDS 3, pl. 14.
Little is known with certainty regarding the storage of scrolls at Qumran, but several details
may be inferred from archeological remains. Caves 1 and 3 at Qumran held large numbers of
cylindrical jars, several of which were probably used for storing scrolls (for an early parallel, see
Jer 32:14), while a smaller number of remains were found in other caves and in Khirbet Qumran. 82
These jars may have been sealed with pieces of linen, as suggested by G. M. Crowfoot, DJD I,
80 See the description of this material by G. M. Crowfoot, DJD I, 18–38, especially 24–8 (‘The Linen Textiles’). See p. 24
ibid.: “It seems probable that all the cloths were made for one of two purposes, either as scroll wrappers or as jar
covers.”
81 The linen fragment was dated to 160–41 BCE in the radiocarbon analysis performed by Jull et al., “Radiocarbon Dating,”
that is, the period of the scrolls themselves. The quoted article also presents a photograph of the linen fragment with the
attached thong.
82 For a thorough description and analysis, see Pfann, “Kelei Dema> .”