<<

Dead Sea Discoveries 19 (2012) 198–214 brill.nl/dsd

Notes on the Three -Type Yadin Fragments Leading to a Discussion of Identification, Attribution, Provenance, and Names

Eibert Tigchelaar Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, KU Leuven, Charles Deberiotstraat 26–box 3101, 3000 Leuven, Belgium [email protected]

Abstract The identification of the three Qumran-type Yadin fragments as Qumran Cave 11 fragments is dubious in one case, and erroneous in the other two cases. This raises the more general question how we need to deal with unprovenanced Dead Sea Scroll fragments.

Keywords Qumran; fragments; provenance

In 1997 and 1998, Shemaryahu Talmon published three Hebrew frag- ments without classification marks from the estate of Yigael Yadin.1 Talmon argued that the absence of sigla strongly suggests that these fragments were not found at , since Yadin had carefully registered all items discov- ered there. Instead, he considered it likely that they are from Qumran and that Yadin had purchased them from an antique dealer or an intermediary. This article will first look again at those three fragments, and then discuss

1 Shemaryahu Talmon, “Unidentified Fragments of Hebrew Writings from the Estate of Yigael Yadin,” Tarbiz ̣ 66 (1996–97): 113–21 [Hebrew]; idem, “Fragments of Hebrew Writings without Identifying Sigla of Provenance from the Literary Legacy of Yigael Yadin,” DSD 5 (1998): 149–57. He also describes the fragments in idem, Masada VI. The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965. Hebrew Fragments from Masada (with contributions by Carol Newsom and Yigael Yadin; : Exploration Society, [1999]), 18 n. 9.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2012 DOI: 10.1163/156851712X644659 E. Tigchelaar / Dead Sea Discoveries 19 (2012) 198–214 199 more generally the matter of identification of unprovenanced materials believed or reported to be from Qumran, and finally the issue of naming unprovenanced fragments.

1. The Yadin Fragments

1.1. Yadin frg. 1: 11Q8 frg. 3

The first of the three fragments published by Talmon was already included in the Dead Sea Scroll Inventory Project fascicle Masada, listed as “MasPs Psalms 18:26–29,” without locus number, but with the reference to Photo JWS 98.2 Two years later, the 1994 Catalogue lists it as “Mas1g” with the following information: “Psc(?) (Psalms 18:26–29).”3 The catalogue locates the fragment in the Shrine (though without inventory number), refers to the Photo “JWS 98” and the name of the editor: Talmon. Because Talmon opined that the three fragments did not originate from Masada, but are rather of the Qumran-type, the fragment for a short time was referred to as “XQPs.” These old sigla are still mentioned in later lists, up to the most recent one.4 The fragment is clearly legible and shows remnants of Ps 18:26–29. Talmon considered a Qumran origin, but at that time not all Qumran Psalms manuscripts had yet been published. Since I was involved in the publication of the Cave 11 materials, alerted me to the

2 Stephen A. Reed, Dead Sea Scroll Inventory Project: List of Documents, Photo- graphs and Museum Plates. Fascicle 14: Masada ([Claremont, Calif.:] Ancient Bible Manuscript Center, 1992), 7. 3 Stephen A. Reed, The Dead Sea Scrolls Catalogue: Documents, Photographs and Museum Inventory Numbers (rev. and ed. by Marilyn J. Lundberg with the col- laboration of Michael B. Phelps; SBLRBS 32; Atlanta: SBL, 1994), 185, 460. Yadin frg. 1 was photographed, together with Yadin frg. 2 (not yet straightened) and four other small fragments, in 1992 by the West Semitic Research Project, on photo JWS 98. 4 Emanuel Tov, Revised Lists of the Texts from the (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 70, where it mentions “olim Mas1g?; XQPs.” Similarly Tov in DJD 39:81 and in the “Appendix F: Texts from the Judean Desert,” in The SBL Handbook of Style For Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Early Christian Studies (ed. Patrick H. Alexander et al.; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1999), 211. The question mark in “Mas1g?” was probably intended to question the Masada provenance.