Time and again I wanted to embark on a revision of my monograph of 2004 because many segments needed revision due in large part to the veritable flood of studies published in the wake of that monograph. However, it took a long time before I finally commenced work on this enterprise. Literally tens of relevant books and hundreds of research papers have been written since 2004 and I realized that I needed to absorb all of them into a new edition. As time passed, I recognized that the more I waited, the more new studies accumulated. Finally, after a little less than twenty years, I untied the Gordian knot and started reworking the first edition. It may not be a complete revision, as I may never know enough for reviewing all the aspects covered by the title of this book in this changing world. Some aspects covered by the second edition are dominated by computers and instruments whose names I hardly know … but I’ll do my best, covering as much as possible under the title of Scribal Practices1. The title has not changed, but I’ve added a subtitle: Material Culture and Writing Practices in Modern Research.
This book was written as a monograph, not as a handbook, created alongside my work as someone who accompanied others who edited the Judean Desert scrolls. However, following the book’s publication, several colleagues said to me that it covers many aspects of a handbook for those who study the scrolls and edit new fragments. Indeed, the first round of editing of the scrolls was finalized in 2004, but further editions and reeditions followed, and the study of the scrolls will probably continue for a long time. I see that Scribal Practices1 is also used in the study of ancient texts in other languages just as I used Johnson, Bookrolls, which records data from a different culture (the Oxyrhynchus Greek papyrus fragments). I dealt with several aspects of what is now named “material culture.” The investigation of material culture existed before I turned to describing the skins, ink, stitches, etc. of the scrolls but I did not use that term, which only later became fashionable (see the bibliography in the section “Bibliography 2004–” under Cohn, Dayfani, Falk, Gayer, Krauẞ, Kottsieper, Rabin, Ratzon, Stökl Ben-Ezra, and Tigchelaar).
What Changes Have Been Made?
At first sight, the second edition resembles the first one (Scribal Practices1). However, the similarity is only apparent. Yes, indeed, the book follows the same structure and number of chapters and appendices, but their content differs, often much. The tables look familiar, but upon closer examination one notices small differences within the tables due to different conceptions and to mistakes made in Scribal Practices1. More in detail:
-
I tightened the argumentation, streamlined the discussion, left out many superfluous discussions, arguments, and details. When shortening the discussion, I often referred to my recent introduction to the textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible, TCHB4.
-
References to the scrolls have been updated according to several reeditions and the text of these editions is now quoted instead of the earlier editions: 1QIsaa (DJD XXXII), 1QHa (DJD XL), 11QTemple (Schiffman–Gross, Temple Scroll), and sundry other texts. References have been added to Lange, Handbuch.
-
To all the names of the Scripture scrolls I added inventory numbers as is customary in modern research, e.g., 1QGen (
1Q1 ). -
Most inventory numbers of the Judean Desert texts presented in the text are now hyperlinked to images in the Leon Levy Dead Sea Scrolls Digital Library (LLDSSDL) of the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA), e.g., 1QGen (
1Q1 ). These references are clickable. The link usually opens the first page in the LLDSSDL. Note that a few texts are not included inthe LLDSSDL. The small number of scrolls of the Israel Museum collection are not hyperlinked (1QS, 1QSa [1Q28a], 1QSb [1Q28b], 1QIsaa, 1QM [1Q33], 1QHa, 1QpHab, 11QTa [11Q19]), but the images of these scrolls are easily inspected at the Israel Museum website:http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/community . -
Many details regarding the recording and analysis of the tefillin and 4QRP have been changed. Both groups of texts are now included among the Scripture scrolls while in Scribal Practices1 the tefillin formed a category of their own and 4QRP was listed among the nonbiblical texts. The tefillin are now included in Appendix 1 after the listing of the Pentateuch texts.
-
The reworking embodied in this volume was preceded by several Vorstudien; see the list in the section “Bibliography 2004–” below.
-
With the help of Ira Rabin, I rejuvenated the terminology for the skin-based texts [no longer “leather”!] and for inks.
-
Deviating from Scribal Practices1, I deleted the column in the tables that comments on the sectarian nature of the Qumran writings, thus eliminating this speculative set of data from Appendices 1, 2, 3, 8, and 9.
-
I changed my position regarding the nature of the corpus of texts found in Cave 4: I now describe this corpus as a library that was moved from a community building to the cave.
-
Due to the reduction in the number of papyri (much fewer Cryptic-A papyri), the statistics were changed (ch. 3e; Appendix 2).
-
Deviating from Scribal Practices1, no judgments on the relation between Judean Desert scrolls and rabbinic regulations were passed since the rabbinic rules were written for complete Torah scrolls meant for the synagogue service.
-
The complete manuscript was rewritten and adapted to the stylesheet of the second edition of The SBL Handbook of Style.
-
The figures and illustrations were streamlined and improved with several figures and new images from the IAA’s LLDSSDL.
-
All the statistics and data in the tables have been recalculated.
-
The following paragraphs have been almost completely rewritten, renewed, and expanded: text corpora (ch. 1b), background of the documents (ch. 1d), Table 2.2 (thanks to criticisms of Hayes, “Searching” § 2.4.1), sheets (ch. 3c), ruling, guide dots/strokes (ch. 4a), dimensions of columns and margins (ch. 4e), deluxe scrolls (ch. 4j), relation between scrolls and compositions (ch. 4k), division between large text units (ch. 5a3), scribal intervention techniques (ch. 5c2, 5f), divine names (ch. 5d), cryptic texts (chs. 6c, 7g), mixture of scripts (ch. 6d), texts written on papyrus (ch. 7d), scribal features of Aramaic texts (ch. 7h), Appendix 5 (new Greek texts).
What Has Not Been Changed?
-
Much use has been made of the extremely helpful images of the Leon Levy Dead Sea Scrolls Digital Library that was not available for Scribal Practices1. However, I did not recheck all the references in this monograph.
-
Since the publication of Scribal Practices1, many small fragments have been renamed or added to the analysis, especially through the many fruitful studies of Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar (e.g., “Qumran Cave 11Q”), Émile Puech, and Oren Ableman. The details are referenced in Börner, “New Identifications” and in the earlier list of Annette Steudel and Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar, “Identifications and Classifications of Fragments and Manuscripts from the Judean Desert (2010–2020)—A Provisional Bibliography,” QC 28–29 (2020–2021): 137–54. These new data have been reviewed for the present edition, but most details in them are not relevant to the analysis in this book. Whenever a significant detail was known to me, it was added to the analysis; for example, an intriguing case of three vertical dots with virtually no context in a little fragment published by Puech, “Nouveaux menus,” 228 (see n. 126).
This book is about scribal practices, not about dating. In the course of the analysis, many manuscript dates assigned to the scrolls in the DJD editions are quoted, mainly from the summary of Webster, “Chronological Index” and they are usually not accompanied by alternative dating. The important and stimulating study of Mladen Popović et al., “Dating Ancient Manuscripts Using Radiocarbon and AI-based Writing Style Analysis,” PLoS One 20(6): e0323185.
-
The number of 950 assumed Qumran compositions was left unchanged, untouched by the very small fragments possibly representing separate compositions (Börner, “New Identifications”).
What Is Left to Do?
Almost inevitably, and in spite of all my efforts, some mistakes are left in the manuscript of this book and oversights may be spotted as well. If I was unaware of a new edition of a scroll subsequent to the DJD edition, I may have missed a relevant detail. In some cases, I stayed with the decisions of the original (DJD) edition, bypassing newer details or data when weighing the subjectivity of the DJD edition against a later edition. In short, this edition presents a step forward but there is always room for improvement and the subjective element in assessing the data should not be forgotten. Furthermore, I’m often reminded of the inscription on the eraser on my desk that was given to me by a dear colleague who sometimes disagrees with my publications: errare humanum est.
Reviews of Scribal Practices1 have been helpful in preparing this second edition, especially the suggestions, corrections, and criticisms. Every author likes praise, but I find constructive criticisms more helpful. I learned something from all the critical notes, especially those of Abegg, “Linguistic Analysis,” idem, “Qumran Scribal Practice,” Tigchelaar, “Assessing,” and Zahn, “Beyond.” I am aware of the following reviews of the whole book or an essential part of it:
-
George J. Brooke, JSOT 29 (2005): 35–36.
-
Alan Millard, JSJ 37 (2006): 504–8.
-
Geza Vermes, JJS 57 (2006): 354–55.
-
Donald W. Parry, DSD 14 (2007): 365–67.
-
James Charlesworth, CBQ 69 (2007): 134–37.
-
Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar, DSD 14 (2007): 368–72.
-
Bernard M. Levinson, Legal Revision and Religious Renewal in Ancient Israel (Cambridge: University Press, 2008), 162–64.
-
Stephen A. Reed, “Physical Features of Excerpted Torah Texts,” in Jewish and Christian Scripture as Artifact and Canon, ed. C.A. Evans and H.D. Zacharias (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2009), 82–104.
-
Tigchelaar, “Assessing.”
-
Abegg, “Linguistic Analysis.”
-
Idem, “Qumran Scribal Practice.”
-
Florentino García Martínez, “Scribal Practices in the Aramaic Literary Texts from Qumran,” in Myths, Martyrs, and Modernity: Studies in the History of Religions in Honour of Jan N. Bremmer, Numen Book Series 127 (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 329–41.
-
Steve Delamarter, “Sociological Models for Understanding the Scribal Practices in the Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Rediscovering the Dead Sea Scrolls: An Assessment of Old and New Approaches and Methods, ed. M.L. Grossman (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 182–97.
-
Russell E. Fuller, RevQ 25 (2011): 136–39.
-
Benjamin H. Parker, “Fingerprinting the Scribes: Patterns of Scribal Practice in the Biblical Texts from the Judean Desert, with Special Reference to the Tefillin,” in Celebrating the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Canadian Collection, ed. P.W. Flint et al., EJL 30 (Atlanta: SBL, 2011; Leiden: Brill, 2011), 77–103.
-
Ziony Zevit, “Not-So-Random Thoughts on Linguistic Dating and Diachrony in Biblical Hebrew,” in Diachrony in Biblical Hebrew, ed. C. Miller-Naudé and Z. Zevit, LSAWS 8 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012), 455–89 (469–71).
-
S. Llewelyn, S. Ng, G. Wearne, and A. Wrathall, “A Case for Two Vorlagen behind the Habakkuk Commentary (1QpHab),” in Keter Shem Tov: Essays on the Dead Sea Scrolls in Memory of Alan Crown, ed. Shani Tzoref and Ian Young, PHSC 20 (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013), 123–50.
-
Reymond, Qumran Hebrew, 5–11 and passim.
-
Shem Miller, “The Oral-Written Textuality of Stichographic Poetry in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” DSD 22 (2015):162–88.
-
Brooke, “Between Scroll and Codex?”
-
Zahn, “Beyond.”
-
Jared Jacobs, Statistics, Linguistics and the “Biblical” Dead Sea Scrolls, JSSSup 40 (Oxford: University Press, 2018), 24–26 and passim.
-
Falk, “Margins.”
-
Abegg, “Qumran Scribal Practice.”
-
Shem Miller, Dead Sea Media, Orality, Textuality, and Memory in the Scrolls from the Judean Desert, STJD 129 (Leiden: Brill, 2019).
Thanksgiving
In the preface to Scribal Practices1 I wrote that the preparation of that edition took twelve years, but its revision took much less, probably four years of solid work preceded by several years of intermittent activity. The project started with the transferal of completely outdated computer files to newer versions, including the retyping of all the Greek and Hebrew words. I was greatly helped in this task by my assistant at the Hebrew University, Amitai Cohen.
It is a pleasant task to thank the libraries that helped me in performing my research. The Bloomfield Library at Mount Scopus provided me with books that I did not have in my personal library. Further, most helpful were the members of the staff of the Lanier Theological Library in Houston, Texas and its directors David Capes and Jennie Enright when Mr. Mark Lanier hosted me twice for research stays when preparing this edition. That research library turned out to be very beneficial for my kind of research. To them this book is gratefully dedicated.
Amitai Cohen, B.A. verified and improved the listings in Tables 8.2–8; without his much-appreciated talmudic expertise I would not have been able to finalize that part of this study.
Marta Feliciangeli, a doctoral student at the University of Lugano, who is writing a dissertation on scribal signs in the Isaiah scroll, volunteered to provide me with critical remarks and bibliographical updates on an earlier form of the manuscript of this book. I am very grateful to her for her wise remarks from which I learned much.
Martin G. Abegg offered a detailed critique of everything relating to the Qumran scribal practice (ch. 8a2 and passim), while comparing my data with his database. All along, Marty also provided me with sundry lists based on his database.
Ira Rabin helped me graciously in changing the terminology regarding skins (see above).
Other colleagues kindly read chapters of the draft and improved the content. They challenged my analyses and helped me to keep my references up to date: Drew Longacre (chs. 2, 7); Leonardo Pessoa (chs. 2, 8); Ira Rabin (ch. 3); Hila Dayfani (ch. 6); Jonathan Ben-Dov (sections on cryptic texts, ch. 6c and ch. 7g). I’m grateful to all of them.
The idea to hyperlink the Judean Desert fragments to the images of the Leon Levy Dead Sea Scrolls Digital Library was suggested to me by Beatriz Riestra of the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA). She also enthusiastically prepared the files needed for executing this task based on an earlier form of the index of the book. I am very grateful for her initiative and encouragement and for the support and involvement of the director of the Dead Sea Scrolls Unit at the IAA, Dr. Joe Uziel. I am also grateful to Benny Saret, B.A. of the Hebrew University computing facility for writing a program for inserting the hyperlinks from the Excel file prepared by Beatriz Riestra into the book.
Janice Karnis once again applied her expertise by carefully copy-editing the book and saving me from many an error.
Anat Berkovich inventively assisted me for one year in checking references, making the preparations for the indexes, reading proofs, and providing technical advice.
It’s an honor that editors-in-chief George J. Brooke and Jutta Jokiranta of the series Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah were willing to accept my manuscript into its midst, for which I am very grateful. The team at Brill (Laura Morris, Katelyn Chin, Katerina Sofianou) graciously and professionally took care of everything involved with the publication. Finally, the electronic manuscript has been treated with the best possible care by TAT Zetwerk (Manon Vrolijk and her colleagues). They are the best!
I’m grateful to all of them.
Jerusalem, 1 August, 2025
Emanuel Tov