DEAD SEA SCROLLS.....how old? #3

It is a huge job to put together thousands of fragments to form the possible 800 or so different MSS.

They first try to form words, and sentences, and paragraphs, and then pages, and finally complete scrolls.

Think of a jigsaw puzzle with no picture of the completed form and often not the entire pieces. Then on top of that you have about 800 pictures you are trying to put together. Sometimes there may be 90 percent of pieces missing from some scrolls.

Some are Biblical texts and we know some of these, but about 60 percent are texts which were unknown before the finding of the dead Sea Scrolls.

DATING ANCIENT MSS

DeSalvo gives on pages 80 and 81 the popular "radiocarbon dating" (C14). The material must contain some carbon atoms. Life is carbon based. The theory is that all living organisms breath in air, which contains both atoms of C12, which is stable, and a small amount of radioactive  C14, which is unstable and slowly decays. When the organism dies, whether plant or animal, it stops taking in C12 and C14 and this unstable isotope starts to disintegrate at a constant rate. The rate is indicated by its half-life, which is the time it takes to break down into other atoms. The half-life of C14 is 5,730 years. So, if an organism had 100 molecules of C14 in its body when it died, in 5,730 years it would have about half of that, which is 50 molecules. Hence, by measuring this ratio in a carbon-based organism, we can go back and determine when it died and therefore date the material.

Desalvo goes on to say that since the pieces were written on animal skins or papyrus made from plants, the C14 method could be used to discover the ball-park date when the plants were cut down and died. There is a range of error of several hundred years, but for carbon based organisms C14 is thought to be quite reliable. As no one wanted to destroy any of the pieces of fragments, they used in 1952 some of the linen fabric that the scrolls were wrapped in from Cave 1. The dates arrived at were between 167 B.C. and 233 A.D. But by the 1990s a more efficient technique has been developed. Less material was needed and it was much more accurate in dates. This time 8 scroll fragments were dated and the range was given as 200 B.C. to 100 A.D.

OTHER clues are also taken into consideration.

Style of handwriting. Most of the scrolls were written by different scribes. Few were written by the same scribe and is helpful. It's not easy. One clue would be any outstanding idiosyncrasies of the handwriting of the scribe.

Lines on the parchment for guidance, spacing characteristics, the number of lines per page, how the lettesr are placed on the lines, above, below, in the middle, and so a certain scribe could be noted as you examine all the pieces of the scrolls.

Today DNA tests of the animal fragments can link pieces together.

As the scrolls were rolled, if an insect ate right through the scroll, it would leave a pattern of holes, which could be used to try and put piece with piece.

If a scroll was laid on end and there was moisture damage etc. the damage could help piece together end match-ups.

Today Computer technology, analysis, enhancements, magnification, and digital imaging, help decipher faded characters etc. Even a technique called "multispectral imaging" (MSI) was used to render invisible script visible.

The letters are written down on paper using standard Hebrew characters that can then be read by anyone trained to read Hebrew. Then the next step is translating the Hebrew into other languages like English - called then the "translating process."

As DeSalvo explains each fragment is identified by the cave it came from, and given a number. Example: 1Q18 - means it came from Cave 1 at Qumran, and the number 18 means it is the 18th MSS from Cave 1. So we have a system to identify the fragment by the cave and by the MSS.

An important word is given by DeSalvo about "conservation" of the scrolls. Some of the early team did not treat the scrolls with carefulness. Some used masking tape to tape the fragments together. Some fragments were left on the table to be exposed to the sun, windows were left open, and one researcher applied olive oil to some fragments to help bring out the script. The environment was not the best to say the least - rather a disgrace. And by and large no one made a record of the original condition of the fragments.
....................