Wrapping Up 1QM: Revisiting Debated Fragment Placements in the War Scroll with 3D Models (Frags. 3, 9, 10 & Cols. 19–20)
This article evaluates the debated placements of fragments in the reconstruction of the War Scroll from Cave 1 (1QM). There are three fragments (frags. 3, 9, 10) and one large fragment cluster (1QM 2, 8, DSSHU pl. 34; 1Q33 2) that are contested in 1QM scholarship. These placements are important for...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Brill
2023
|
| In: |
Dead Sea discoveries
Year: 2023, Volume: 30, Issue: 3, Pages: 262-291 |
| Further subjects: | B
material reconstruction
B composite texts B 3D model B 1QM B War Scroll |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | This article evaluates the debated placements of fragments in the reconstruction of the War Scroll from Cave 1 (1QM). There are three fragments (frags. 3, 9, 10) and one large fragment cluster (1QM 2, 8, DSSHU pl. 34; 1Q33 2) that are contested in 1QM scholarship. These placements are important for establishing the text of 1QM and the determination of whether there was another War Scroll from Cave 1 among the fragments assigned to 1QM and 1Q33. I will evaluate the remaining debates about fragment placements in 1QM, focusing especially on Hanan and Esther Eshel’s proposal (2000) that the large fragment cluster is not part of 1QM but is the remnant of a different scroll, which they label 1QMa. To assist in weighing the plausibility of fragment placements in 1QM, this article incorporates 3D visualizations of how 1QM would appear in a rolled state to demonstrate how well some proposed fragment placements cohere with the scroll’s damage patterns. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1568-5179 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Dead Sea discoveries
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15685179-bja10047 |