SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHE S ... - Emanuel Tov

4
TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF SCROLL WRITING
Some technical aspects of the writing of scrolls have been studied in monographs as well as in the
introductory paragraphs of the DJD editions in vols. VIII ff., but most aspects still need to be
studied in greater detail. A start has been made in the monographic studies 106 to be mentioned
below as well as in this book, but these do not exhaust the subject.
a. Ruling, guide dots/strokes (illustrations 2a, 2a 3, 3 12, 12 13, 13 15) 15
Almost all Qumran and Masada texts written on leather had ruled horizontal lines in accordance
with the practice for most literary texts written on leather in Semitic languages and in Greek. 107
Early parallels of different types allow us to assume that also the earliest biblical scrolls must
have been ruled.
Ruling is evidenced in earlier times on cuneiform clay tablets (Driver, Semitic Writing, 39–40), in lapidary
inscriptions, and in some papyrus and leather documents in various Semitic languages (Ashton, Scribal Habits, ch.
6). The ruling of the Deir >Allah inscription from the eighth century BCE was described by A. R. Millard,
“Epigraphic Notes, Aramaic and Hebrew,” PEQ 110 (1978) 23–6 (especially 24). In some inscriptions, these lines
were not clearly visible, while in others they were very distinct, almost ornamental, especially in the Samaritan
inscriptions of later periods. See also some early Aramaic inscriptions and the ossuary of Simon ‘builder of the
temple’ written in the paleo-Hebrew script in the first century CE. 108 For the ruling on leather texts, as in those from
Qumran, no earlier evidence is available. For early documents, see the ruling of Akkadian clay tablets that usually
ceases to be visible after inscription. 109 For the later evidence for ruling, see most medieval scrolls and codices of
MT (Sirat, Ha-ketav, 33–6) and SP. 110
In contrast, Judean Desert texts written on papyrus were not ruled (for Qumran, see, e.g.
4QpapMMT e [4Q398], 4QpapJub h [4Q223–224], and the Greek texts 4QpapLXXLev b and
4Qpap paraExod gr [4Q127]). The horizontal and vertical fibers probably provided some form of
guide for the writing, although the horizontal fibers were not precisely horizontal (Alexander,
“Literacy,” 9). Most Egyptian papyri, like those from the Judean Desert, were not ruled (for
exceptions see Ashton, Scribal Habits, 106, 111). On the other hand, Turner, Greek Manuscripts,
6 (with references to ancient sources) suggests that a lead instrument was used in the writing of
papyri leaving a mark on the papyrus which has now disappeared. At the same time, possibly
ink guide marks were used and subsequently erased.
Tefillin, also, were not ruled; see those from the Judean Desert and the prescriptions in b.
Menah≥. 32b; b. Meg. 18b.
106 For an initial analysis of several valuable technical data on the scrolls, see H. Stegemann, “Methods for the
Reconstruction of Scrolls from Scattered Fragments,” in Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls: The New
York University Conference in Memory of Yigael Yadin (ed. L. H. Schiffman; JSOT/ASOR Mon 2; Sheffield 1990) 189–
220; see further the studies mentioned in n. 1 above.
107 For a general introduction, see J. Leroy, Les types de reglure des manuscrits grecs (Paris 1976). Turner, Greek
Manuscripts, 4–5.
108 For a discussion of the evidence, see J. Naveh, “An Aramaic Tomb Inscription Written in Paleo-Hebrew Script,” IEJ 23
(1973) 82–91, especially 89.
109 Oral communication, Z. Abusch.
110 For a description, see especially J. Fraser, The History of the Defter of the Samaritan Liturgy (unpubl. diss. University
of Melbourne, 1970) 60 ff.; further: Crown, Samaritan Scribes, 73–7; Robertson, Catalogue, 2; S. Talmon, “Some
Unrecorded Fragments of the Hebrew Pentateuch in the Samaritan Version,” Textus 3 (1963) 63; T. Anderson, Studies
in Samaritan Manuscripts and Artifacts: The Chamberlain–Warren Collection (ASOR Mon 1; Cambridge, Mass.
1978) 16.