There are a number of masoretic type of marks in the scroll that are obvious after some scrutiny. This was first pointed out to me by Neil Altman of Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania. I will append a letter I wrote to his editer, Mr. David Crowder of El Paso, Texas affirming that I had seen some of the pointings and other marks brought to my attention that are controversial and raise questions about the date of the edited marks that is ascribed to the scroll. see the letter below.
Since that time I have discovered many such marks, especially dagesh which indicates the doubling of a letter by putting a dot in the “bosom” of the consonant. These Masoretic kind of vowel pointings are so profuse that it is too burdensom to catalogue all of them.
I will give a few on different pages but will give more attention to pages one and twelve but will not exhaust all the marks on those pages. There are a few markings that are unique to the Isaiah Scroll which are frequent but not Masoretic.
Two most frequent are a vertical line of 3 dots and a diagnal line of 3 dots, a horizontal line of 2 dots is also found with some frequency, They are similar to serey (long e sound) but are found before a word on mid line or after. Holem and hiriq yod and hiriq appear frequently.
For editorial marks that are very controversial as to the date of the scroll and its origin see section XVSEE: http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-intr.htm#controv which follows the letter below.
Page 1 line 7:SEE: http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-1.htm in the 3rd from last word there is a dagesh in the beth of the word “chabburah” or wounds
Page 2: And the third word in line 21SEE: http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-2.htm there is a hiriq, an “i” under the aleph in the third letter from last. the word ha-nasa’iym meaning “the exalted.”
Page 19 Line 2:SEE: http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-19.htmin the last word. Find a lamed in the word achlah. The lamed has a dagesh in it. The word means eaten. If this is a Masoretic dagesh it would make the word a 3rd stem verb which would intensify the meaning and instead of “eaten” with the dagesh it would mean “devoured.” The dagish is very clear
Page 13:SEE: http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-13.htm#moabdot see dots for emphasis after 3 entries of the word Moab.
Page 35 line 16 4th word.SEE: http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-35.htmThe word is “ve’etsorekah” (I will make you a NAZAR) it has a holem over the waw. This insures proper pronunciation and makes sure the waw is a vowel and not a consonent. The suffix is masc. singular. The he is added to insure pronunciation of the suffix as an extra sylable and not as closing the preceding resh.
Page 41:SEE: http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-41.htm find a clear holem over the lamed in the first word, Also find holem over aleph on line 7, 10th word; a segol plus dot on line 10 4th from last word; and holem over Heth on line 19, 2nd word.
Page 12:SEE: http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-12.htm) has many inserted marks which appear to be clearly Masoretic pointings. There are two horizontal dots beginning lines 1 and 3; on line two find 3 diagnal … Continue reading
Original source: Vowel Pointings Similar to Masoretic Points and Dagesh
|↑8||SEE: http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-12.htm) has many inserted marks which appear to be clearly Masoretic pointings. There are two horizontal dots beginning lines 1 and 3; on line two find 3 diagnal dots under the hem of the 5th word; on line 2 last word find a hiriq under mem (for min or from); on Line 2 find a segol under and over the 5th word; on line 4 find a hiriq yod crowded into the 3rd word; on line 23 find another hiriq yod; on line 24 find a dagesh in the daleth in the 5th word, This is the last letter in the word. Dagesh is inserted to indicate the hard sound of the daleth since it follows a vowel sound and would ordinarily be pronounced with the fricative sound; on line 26 find a holem over aleph in the 5th word. There are more such marks on page 12 look for them for yourself.
March 27, 05 | David Crowder
A few weeks ago Neil Altman showed me what appeared to be some numerals and masoretic vowel pointings in the Isaiah Scroll and thereby sparked my curiosity. I got out my copies of the colored plates of the Isaiah Scroll and began on page one to see with a magnifying glass if I could see any such markings. I decided to catalog them. Let me tell you that such marks are easy to spot and there are so many that I lost interest in cataloging them due to the profusion of them, There are just too many of the same kind of marks for them to be a mistake or parchment weathering. I would describe them: many of them being segols (3 dots in a triangular shape) and several sereys (2 horizontal dots) many colons and the most profuse is something unique to the scroll and not masoretic. Many vowels and words are pointed with 3 dots, some are in line vertically, –there are many of these. and some are in line diagnally. There are (as I already said.) too many of them, to be a mistake in the compostion of the parchment. One word has very clear dotted beth. It is the word for wounds in Isa 1:6. the transliteration in Strongs dictionary shows that it is to be pronounced with the double beth It gives “chabburah” in the pronunciaon key. The word in Hebrew has a very clear dot in the beth whch is Masoretic pointing for doubling the letter. It is clear and can be seen without magnification. Shwa also appears under some letters beginning words, these are conjunctions and prepositions which is consistent with masoretic pointing.
One other thing that is different than the masorah is that the vowel pointings are above and below the words. To me this is more consistent with an Aramaic scribe than with a Hebrew scribe. Ancient Aramaic is pointed in this way, that is, the same kind of markings are placed both over and under the word to indicate vowels. My own observation has been that the language of the Scroll is not pure Hebrew but is an Aramaic dialect of Hebrew. For the use of semi vowels in the scroll as vowel markings that are not masoretic see my article on the use of waw to represent any vowel, here: http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qum-intr.htm
There are two micrographic notations on page one as well. at the end of line 29 there is an extremely small but long notation and this one has vowel pointings which are quite clear under magnification — the notation under the end of line 29 is unpointed. There is a hiriq (single dot) where it should be in the masorah in the word yadiy (my hand) in line 29; the hiriq is the vowel “i”
Then Mr Altman called me this a.m. He wanted me to check for red ink markings on plate 39 in Isaiah 47:7 the last word in the verse is the first word on line 27. These are in addition to those I wrote about previously. There are red ink markings on the first words in line 27, 28, and 29. Over the first word in line 27 there is a red ink marking that has structure but I can not confirm what miniature letter it may represent. In line 28 there is a red stroke in the first letter which is an ayin and over the first word in line 29 there is a red dot that may be a holem. I wish to confirm that these markings are very red, very red indeed, there is no fading and they are fire engine red. There is no mistaking them for discoloration of the parchment. Then on line 27 in the middle of the line the same word (she:Kol) (short e) which has to do with what is complete or the latter end of a thing, this word in line 27 which has the red dot over it in the next line (28) has what appears to me to be a numeral 3 over it in ordinary ink in line 27. This is clearly seen without magnification.
Then Mr Altman asked me to look at the large X in the margin of column 41 and at the right hand extremities of the X there are two red dots at the right top which Mr Altman sees as a numeral 3 and a red dot above it. I can not confirm that it is a 3 but there is structure to the dot under magnification it is curved as a 3 would be. The red is apparent and there is a red dot at the bottom of the right had of the X as well. I must say that these observations that Mr Altman has presented to me are of great interest. I have done extensive work on the scroll from the standpoint that its antiquity (1st century BCE dating) is genuine. I would like it to be genuine and I am not yet able to completely subscribe to Mr Atltman’s conclusions but I am able to confirm that what he has pointed out to me is actually a part of the copies of the scroll that I have in my possession. The red ink is there. Vowel pointings are there. Micography was already detected by me however I have discovered more since my appetite has been aroused by Mr Altman.
Page 1 – 18
Page 19 – 36
Page 37 – 54
Pg 01 —- Ch 01:01 to 01:26
Pg 19 —- Ch 24:04 to 25:05
Pg 37 —- Ch 43:20 to 44:23
Original source: Introductory Page((SEE: http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qum-intr.htm