Click on Image to Enlarge
The Great Qumran Isaiah Scroll
For the line by line translation of this page click here
This is the second and last page in this shorter than usual strip of leather that is sewn into the scroll. The seam at the left is in good condition with only slight loosening apparent and no evidence of repair. The page is clear and no letters are obscured. One characteristic that we have not called attention to is the vertical line extending down the middle of the page almost to the bottom. These lines are frequent and appear to be caused by the folds in the original leather before they were opened to be inscribed. They would not have been refolded after inscription but would have been rolled up. The years have caused the original folds to show some darkening in the area of the fold and the lines have appeared. This can be seen on a number of pages. However all vertical lines are not due to folds. Some margins may also have been made straight with lines that could not originally be detected. These became marks that age has brought back into view. Examples of lines drawn to make a straight margin can be seen on pages 2, and page 4, and page 5, and page 7. Page 7 also has a line due to previous folding. A good example of lines due to creases due to folding may be seen on page 14. A very impressive example of a margin line can be seen on page 38. There are other examples of these as well that you can find. See the introduction for more on lines.
There is an editorial mark to emphasize the importance of the first 6 verses of chapter 33. The first mark is on the preceding page at the beginning of Chapter 33 and the end mark is on this page in the right margin under the 6th line which also marks the end of verse 6 and a new paragraph marked by indentation as well as the usual method of not filling out the preceding line.
A Strange Mark
At the end of line 2 there is a configuration of short lines and dots that make a figure for which we have no explanation except that it may be the remains of an attempted erasure. The mark is digitally enlarged here for you see fig 01.
There are other unknown notations more difficult to explain.
See the introductory page for a catalogue of marks
VARIATIONS IN Q FROM THE MASORETIC TEXT:
(3rd word. a different reading:) Q = “kek-kalothka” (when you complete) and M = “ken-nelothka” (when you make an end).
(Next to last word.) waw = scheva: a good example of Q scribe adding waw to indicate a vowel sound in this case a vocal sheva. See waw after gimmel making certain the pronunciation “yiv ge du” (they shall spoil) which is also the masoretic pointing. See the same usage on page 36 line 27, 4th word. See also introductory page waw stands for any vowel.
(3rd word.) Q = “le-kah” and M = “le-ka”
(5th word.) Q = “ve-hayah” and M = “hayah.”
(1st word.) Q = “hoshu’athe:nu” and M = “yeshu’athe:nu “
(6th word.) Q = “mashaq” and M = “ke-mashaq”
(3rd word.) Q = “ve-yeshu’oth” (and salvation) and M = “yeshu’oth” (salvation). The addition of conj. in Q changes the order of the sentence. M = “wisdom, knowledge, strength of salvation shall be the stability of your times, the fear of YHWH is his treasure.” Q = ” and faithfulness of your times is strength; and the fear of YHWH is salvation, wisdom and knowledge, that is his treasure.”
(3rd word.) (if the 2nd word is not taken as 2 words in Q which it appears to be in the Q text.) Rather than the M reading “behold their valiant ones (lions)” Q may be read as two words “behold I see them” and then the following word in Q is “za’aqu” (they shall rage against) and M = “tsa’aqu” (they shall cry out)
(2nd word.) Q = an editorial addition of article “he” to ” ‘arets” not in M.
(3rd word.) Q does not have article “he” and M does.
(6th word.) Q appears to have conj. waw and verb “hayah,” not in M. But the waw appears to have a scribble on it and a dot over it indicating the waw is a mistake.
(Last word.) Q omits conj waw which is found in M.
(6th word.) Q = most likely a misspelling with an extra tau added to the word ” ‘ethromam” (exalt). M has what is probably the correct reading which is the same as Q if the superfluous tau is removed. M = verb 2nd stem 1st sing (I will exalt myself).
(1st word.) Q = “chashashah” and M = “chashash.” In Q the “he” could be a feminine ending but “chash” is a masculine noun Thus this may be further Aramaic influence adding an open syllable to a word which is usually closed in Hebrew.
(1st word.) The word “siyd” (lime) has a added horizontal stroke over what should be a yod but may resemble a resh. Some on marked it perhaps to call attention to the shape of the letter.
(6th word.) (1st word in verse 12) Q = conj + verb imperf. 3mpl “ve-yihyu” and M = perf 3mpl “ve-hayu.” They are translated the same.
(2nd word.) Q = verb imp (may be jussive) “ve-yedaber” and M = participle “ve-dobe:r.” (he who says).
(8th word.) Q = “kaphiy” pl cons. hands of) and M = “kaphiyv” (his hands).
(2nd word.) Q = “libekah” and M = “libeka”
(2nd word.) A “he” is written above the line to correct the text as in M.
(7th word.) Q = a yod to amend “tir’eh.” The yod is not needed and an attempt was made by a scribe to scratch it out.
(4th word.) A scribal slip making a mistake in forming a letter. What ought to be a shin appears to be a yod kaf.
(3rd word.) Q = fem plu. “neharoth” and M = masc. pl “nehariym.”
(8th word.) M = telek v. 2fs (go) and Q = telav v. 2fs (perhaps acquire)
(Last word.) Q = “shat” and M = “shayit.”
(8th word.) Q = a superfluous conj waw on YHWH not in M.
(Last word.) Q = kiy cj. because or that; M = ke:n yes or so.
(3rd word.) Q = “parash” and M = “parashu.”
(Ninth word.) Q = “marobeh” and M = “marbeh.” The additional waw in Q must be a misspelling because it adds an extra sylable.
Original Source: Ch 33:01 to 33:24