
Dead Sea scrolls study raises new questions over texts' origins - diodorus
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/sep/06/dead-sea-scrolls-study-questions-origins
======
ilimilku
The "big picture" background here is that the scholarly consensus, established
prematurely before all but the scrolls in the 1st cave were found, was that
they belonged to an Essene "monastic" settlement at the ruins of Khirbet
Qumran nearby. This has been challenged in a number of ways, yet the consensus
of the local, Essene origin remains in tact. A Jerusalem origin hypothesis was
developed principally by Norman Golb and advanced by a few others, yet the
history of Scrolls scholarship has proven to be nasty to say the least. This
new evidence, while saying little in the grand scheme, does possibly hint at a
non-Dead Sea, i.e. Jerusalem origin of the scrolls.

~~~
mrpara
Not a historian so I may be missing something, but how would one possibly
differentiate between the origin being the Dead Sea or Jerusalem based on
things like materials used? I mean, Jerusalem and the Dead Sea are less than
35km apart (according to google). Even thousands of years ago, it would have
been a non-issue to transport materials or techniques between these two
locations. I can't imagine that our knowledge of scroll-making at the time is
so specific that we could possibly rule out a craftsman taking a camel from
one location to another.

~~~
duxup
Yeah the scale of trade always seems to surprise everyone. It's hard for me
often to understand how folks draw the archaeological lines here.

Materials could have been traded and the scrolls written near the Dead Sea ...
or even folks from the Dead Sea traveled to Jerusalem, used local materials
and made some scrolls, and traveled back.

~~~
partialrecall
I think it's instructive to consider bronze. To make bronze you need copper,
which is very common, and tin, which isn't. Tin was only mined in a small
handful of locations around the world:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_sources_and_trade_in_ancie...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_sources_and_trade_in_ancient_times#/media/File:Tin-
ancient-sources.svg)

So from that, it's clear to see that extensive trading networks were necessary
for these civilizations, not just for luxuries like exotic herbs and spices,
but their basic industrial needs.

~~~
DiffEq
Well not exactly true; you can use Arsenic instead of Tin and there is
evidence that they certainly did use it; I am not sure of the breakdown of
ancient tin-Bronze vs arsenic Bronze in use. In any case your point still
stands as we also know there was tin bronze in use and likely much of it may
have come from the British isles.

~~~
cwkoss
Would arsenic bronze have any added toxic effects?

~~~
partialrecall
More to the people producing it than using it. But metallurgy and mining must
have been awfully dangerous industries to be in back then regardless of the
arsenic.

~~~
cwkoss
I was thinking more along the lines of "added weapon poison damage", ex.
[https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/99646/can-...](https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/99646/can-
arsenic-make-deadly-weapons)

Seems that lethal dose for arsenic is likely too high to be transmitted by
even a pure arsenic trioxide blade, unless it was manufactured with the intent
of leaving bits inside the wound, like maybe a blade a rough brittle surface
to leave grit. Even so, would have to introduce ~50+mgs worth, which sees like
a tall order.

Seems arsenic bronze is even less toxic, so probably not poisoning anyone. I
wonder if the minor local toxicity of arsenic blade cuts would reduce the
chance of the wound causing sepsis.

~~~
partialrecall
Perhaps an arsenic bronze arrow head broken off inside of somebody could
poison them slowly over time.

------
INTPenis
Doesn't really mean anything if the materials aren't local to the region.
People in bronze age scandinavia were trading for copper with the
mediterranean so there was a "global" trade network already in place.

~~~
BurningFrog
> _People in bronze age scandinavia were trading for copper with the
> mediterranean_

Sorry to make a minor point, but while the goods scandinavian and
mediterranean _goods_ travelled that far, doesn't mean the people did.

Perhaps more likely, each was traded a dozen times with someone 50km away, and
the goods reached people the manufacturer had no idea existed.

~~~
dredmorbius
Given that goods typically moved by water (far less energy than overland),
possibilities of longer voyages are somewhat more credible.

I don't know the actual history / archaeology, or quantities involved.

Europe _does_ have a remarkably good inland navigable river network.

There's mention here that Scandinavians raided Mediterranian coastal towns and
villages:

[https://www.realmofhistory.com/2016/05/17/cypriot-copper-
axe...](https://www.realmofhistory.com/2016/05/17/cypriot-copper-axes-bronze-
age-sweden/)

This map suggests a possible eastern route (the accompanying web page makes no
mention of Sweden, scandinavia, or the Baltics):

[http://theancientneareast.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/08/Tra...](http://theancientneareast.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/08/Trade-network-0011.png)

(from: [http://theancientneareast.com/the-bronze-age-world-
system/](http://theancientneareast.com/the-bronze-age-world-system/))

Travel along the Donau, Dneiper, or Don rivers could have reached the Black
Sea:

[https://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/euriv.gif](https://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/euriv.gif)

This article and map suggest sea routes, through the Straits of Gibraltar:

[https://www.speroforum.com/a/ROURBRXIJL49/77965-Ancient-
trad...](https://www.speroforum.com/a/ROURBRXIJL49/77965-Ancient-trade-from-
Mediterranean-to-Scandinavia-revealed)

------
dr_dshiv
This sent me down a little rabbit hole. I love the history of this time.
Shwep.org is a great, great source of inspiration and history.

I just got this Kindle book to satisfy my dead sea scroll interpretations,
even though the author is a bit antiauthoritarian! He apparently had a direct
influence on the public release of the scrolls.

"Breaking the Dead Sea Scrolls Monopoly: A New Interpretation of the Messianic
Movement in Palestine"

~~~
dayofthedaleks
'Shwep.org'

Is this a typo? Domain does not appear to exist.

~~~
philk10
Guessing it's [https://shwep.net/](https://shwep.net/)

~~~
dr_dshiv
Thank you. Highly recommended. It's probably the most intellectually
satisfying podcast I've ever listened to.

------
wickerman
I find the study of materials in papyrology/religious studies/history truly
fascinating. I'm more familiar with the history and content of the Nag Hammadi
library, but it really is fascinating how much experts can tell from the
materials, the word usage, the language they were written in.

------
IlegCowcat
Have they released all the scrolls yet?

~~~
ilimilku
Yes, the scrolls have been published in their entirety in the series
Discoveries in the Judaean Desert numbering some 40 volumes. These are the
official "first editions". There are numerous other collections of a non-
critical nature as well as translations. A simple search should yield the
relevant results.

------
throwaway218649
The Dead Sea scrolls need a serious re-examination by modern scholars not
biased towards mainstream Christianity, similar to the work on Jesus mythicism
that has been done over the past 20 years that draws on Gnostic, Essene, and
other historically contemporary sources. John Allegro's work on the Dead Sea
scrolls needs a non-biased re-examination:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Allegro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Allegro)

~~~
ilimilku
The Christian bias on scroll scholarship was widely corrected in the 90s with
the Scrolls' public release. Since then Jewish scholarship of the Scrolls has
contributed an enormous amount, cf. Lawrence Schiffman, Emanuel Tov, et al.

~~~
whenchamenia
How about research unencumbered by deeply held beliefs relating to the
scrolls? Jewish scholars are hardly unbiased.

------
tomohawk
Click bait title

~~~
mrob
I'll call out click-bait when I see it, but I don't see it here. "Dead Sea
scrolls study finds salts used in construction are not common to region" is
not particularly meaningful to non-archaeologists. I think the important point
is the increased mystery, and "raises new questions" is a reasonable way to
phrase it.

~~~
gus_massa
I actually like your version of the title better :).

This is a technical forum, and people is expected to understand this and
understand that if the salt is uncommon there is something unexpected. [I
didn't know that is was common to cover the parchment with salts, but it's not
so hard to understand the relation anyway. IANAA]

And it's almost the subtitle:

> _Dead Sea scrolls study raises new questions over texts ' origins_

> _Salts used on Temple scroll are not common to Dead Sea region, researchers
> find_

Perhaps the mods will agree to change it.

------
emmelaich
It's now not far-fetched to believe they're fake.

~~~
TallGuyShort
I don't believe any of the scrolls that overlap with biblical canon are
believed to be originals, so what do you mean by fake? It sounds like you just
want to take a jab at them because they're of religious significance, which is
just as irrational as religious people who don't like scientific theories they
don't even understand because they feel it's an enemy to their rrligion.

~~~
CelestialTeapot
"I don't believe any of the scrolls that overlap with biblical canon are
believed to be originals, so what do you mean by fake?"

That's true of any bible text we have. The original texts are lost, hence
biblical exegesis and hermeneutics exist as disciplines. And which "canon" are
you talking about? The 5th century canon before the East-West schism of the
Eastern Orthodox-Catholic church? The 16th century canons of the Roman
Catholic or the Church of England? There are a lot of canons out there.

