The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The ... - josephprestonkirk

116 EXCERPTED MANUSCRIPTS AT QUMRAN
other criteria. 47 Such is the case with 4QTestim and, perhaps, 4QEzek a . 48
With that caveat made, in the case of the smaller-sized scrolls, it seems
safe to say that their dimensions: (1) indicate that they did not contain
the entire composition in question (but see §3 below); (2) “facilitated easy
transport”; 49 and (3) have bearing on these manuscripts’ probable function
and use (see §4 below). 50
c. Content: Correspondence in Passage Selection and Distribution
Examination of the passages excerpted in these documents reveals that,
oftentimes, the same portions of biblical text are excerpted. Both 4QDeut j
and 4QDeut n , for example, begin a column with Deut 5:1 and reserve a
single column for Deut 8:5–10. Deuteronomy 11:6–13 appears in both
4QDeut j and 4QDeut k1 . With the exception of Deuteronomy 8, these
texts are also common in the phylacteries (tefillin) and mezuzot, which are,
in turn, excerpted documents of a specialized type. 51 The list of passages
that were to be included in the tefillin according to the halakah (esp. b.
Menah[. 34a–37b, 42b–43b and Mas. Tep. 9) were Exod 13:1–10, 11–16;
Deut 6:4–9; and 11:13–21. 52 However, not all Qumran tefillin, especially
those from Cave 4, follow this halakah. 53
47. Contra Tov: “All collections of excerpts are written in scrolls of small dimensions”
(ibid., 586).
48. In the case of Testimonia, note: (1) it is written on a single sheet; (2) it contains
excerpts from four different compositions, which may be thematically related; and (3)
the excerpts are separated with scribal marks. With regard to 4QEzek a (4Q73), the
interrelated nature of the selections makes excerption possible. See George J. Brooke,
“Ezekiel in Some Qumran and New Testament Texts,” in The Madrid Qumran Congress: Proceedings
of the International Congress on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Madrid 18–21 March 1991 (ed. J.C. Trebolle Barrera
and L. Vegas Montaner; 2 vols; STDJ 11; Madrid: Editorial Complutense; Leiden: Brill, 1992),
1:317–37, esp. 319; and further below at note 95. In both cases, then, the criterion of form is most
significant and more determinative than size.
49. See Tov, “106–108. Introduction to 4QCant a–c ,” 198; Stephen Pfann, “4Q298:
The Maskîl’s Address to All Sons of Dawn,” JQR 85 (1994): 213 and, esp., 213n14:
“Most portable scrolls were owned by individuals and intended to be carried about
and read during certain feasts.” The liturgical/ritual connection is intriguing, but
unfortunately Pfann cites no evidence in support of this claim.
50. Cf. the comments of Grayson in note 3 above.
51. Annette Steudel, “Testimonia,” in EDSS 2:938; Duncan, “Deuteronomy,” 201;
idem, “Considerations of 4QDt j ,” 201–2.
52. See Tov, “Tefillin of Different Origin,” 45*.
53. Ibid.; see also idem, “A Categorized List of All the ‘Biblical Texts’ Found in the
Judaean Desert,” DSD 8 (2001): 83–84; idem, “D. The Biblical Lists from the
Judaean Desert: 1. Categorized List of the ‘Biblical Texts,’” in The Text from the Judaean