Great Isaiah Scroll Chapters 16:14 to 18:07 Translators Notes
Click on Image to Enlarge
The Great Qumran Isaiah Scroll
For the line by line translation of this pageclick here
I apologize for the star on line 20 and for the foot notes. They are due to my mistake in the first reading of a repeated passage which at first appeared jumbled to me and is not. It is illustrative however of how easy it is for a careful scribe to make a mistake. There is no error there. The page is very regular and has very little variation from the received text as well as being in good physical condition. The only item of note is the line which may come from a former crease in the leather (perhaps before it was unfolded to be written upon.) The crease in the middle of the page obscure letters on some other pages as it does here.
Paragraphs and spatium:
Line 2 ends chapter 16 and line 3 begins chapter 17. Line 6 is the end of 17:3 Line 18 is the end of 17:11 and line 19 begins 17:12; Line 23 is the beginning of chapter 18. The only spatium on the page is in line 10 and is the beginning of 17:7.
LETTERS ADDED BETWEEN THE LINES BY AN EDITOR:
(Line 07.) vs 17:4
(6th word.) an ayin omitted by the scribe from Jacob’s name has been added by the editor. It joins the lower part of the tsade in the line above making it a little difficult to see.
(1st word.) a waw is added to rosh (head)
(Last word.) a waw is written over the last word. The page is actually remarkable for the lack of need for editing additions.
VARIATIONS IN Q FROM THE RECEIVED TEXT.
Q= The Great Isaiah Scroll. M= the received text.
(Line 02.) 5th, 6th and 7th words
(5th word.) The 5th wordin Q has an overwritten letter. In M = it is “miz’ar” adv. (trifling) and Q = a mistake in spelling with an attempted correction. There may be two letters written in the same space. One is tsade. One possible explanation is that the scribe wrote a tsade for a zayin and attempted to overwrite. The over written letter makes it look like a lamed was over written but the scribe more probably wrote a zayin above the tsade to correct the improperly written tsade.
(6th word.) Q adds a waw conj. to negative; waw not in M.
(7th word. [last word]) Q = “kavod” (heavy or glory) There is no doubt that the Q scribe has written a daleth at the end of this word. He has emphasized the tittles on the daleth. M = “kavir” adj. (mighty)
(Between lines 2 and 3.) in the right margin. I apologise for my insertion of Roman numerals (XVII) to indicate the beginning of chapter 17.
(2nd and 4th words.) Find Damascus spelled “Darmesheq” which is the consistent spelling for Damascus in Q. M= “Damesheq.” See page 6SEE: http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qum-6.htm#darmesheq for other locations of this spelling. And there may be a scratched out correction over the 1st Darmesheq. It is also found in Line 5: 5th word.
(Next to last word.) Q = “hayiyta” and M = “hiytah” a different spelling for hayah 3ms.
(3rd words.) Q = “‘avor’aro” and M = “‘aro’er.” (A city name)
(Line 06.) vs 3
(6th words.) Q = “yhwh” a misspelling of (3ms) and M = “yihyu” (3mpl)
(Line 10.) vs 6
(5th words.) a scribble or remarking obscures what should be a masc pl ending plus 3fs suf. (…peyha)
(1st word after the spatium.) A beth is missing from the 1st word after the spatium.
(Line 12 – 13.)
(Line 12.) vs 8
(Last word in 12.) has added 3ms suf not in M. Then omits the next word in M “yadayv” (his hands) It is not in Q.
(Line 13.) vs 8
(1st word.) M has cunj waw and Q does not. i.e. Q ” ‘asher” and M = “ve-‘asher”
(4th word.) there is a conj. waw added to l’o (not) not in M.
(Line 15.) vs 10
(2nd from last word.) Q = “shakachtiy” looks like verb pf. 1cs (I forgot) but is the Q form of M = “shakachte” verb pf 2fs (you forgot). For this form in Q see the introduction where adding yodSEE: http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qum-intr.htm#yod fem suf to 2fs verbs and pronouns is discussed.
(3rd word.) M = “ma’uzek” n + 2fs suf (your strength). Q = likely a mistake in scripting as a letter was written and over written with an ayin to correct the word and then a waw was added by the scribe for a “u” vowel sound.
(All of line 17.) All of line 17 is difficult to read due to a crease which runs through the center of the page. The crease actually runs through all the 4 pages on this strip of leather (pages 12 to 15) but this line is blurred by the crease more than the others. See the discussion on lines and creasesSEE: http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qum-intr.htm#creases in the introduction.
(2nd word.) Q seems to add initial conj waw to “tizra’ennu” and edits a yod over the word making possibly “tizra’eynu”.
(5th word.) M = “tesagsegiy” verb imp 2fs (you fence it in). Q = “tesagsagsiy” + a waw is edited over the last syllable of this word adding a vowel sound, most likely after the final gimmel which would make it “tesagsagesiy.” A different spelling or pronunciation?
(Last word.) extra mayim in the last word.
(Last word.) M = “u-morat” cj + part (polished or peeled). Q = “u-me-morat” The initial extra mem in Q is most likely the preformed indicator of a participle which is common Hebrew construction for participles. There is also an edited waw over this word.
(Next to last word.) M = kituv and Q agrees with qerey.
(1st word.) Q has no article which is present in M.
(Last word.) Q has final “he” not in M. Q = be-‘etah” and M be-‘et” (at that time) The Q reading makes this word which ordinarily ends with a closed syllable to have a final open syllable consistent with Aramaic pronunciation. See Introductory page.SEE: http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qum-intr.htm#aramaic