Talk:Tanakh at Qumran

untitled
How can one have "unidentified" or "controversial" biblical text? I do not understand this.--Standforder (talk) 20:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Many of the scrolls are extremely fragmentary. We're talking little scraps of paper here. If the only legible text is a word here, part of a word there, the name of a Biblical figure over there, part of a sentence underneath, identifying what book it was originally from may not be possible with any certainty. Especially since the Qumran sect apparently had texts in multiple versions (some resembling the Masoretic Text, some with phrasing matching the Septuagint, some otherwise unattested variants), and pesharim that interspersed lines from scripture with commentary. &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 05:39, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Text types
It'd be informative if the list also showed the text-type of any scrolls that have been identified (Masoretic, proto-Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch, idiosyncratic). &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 05:39, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose that Tanakh at Qumran be merged into Dead Sea Scrolls. I think that much of the content is already duplicated between the articles, as the DSS article contains a list of all of the scrolls. A list of just the Biblical ones can be determined by scrolls that are listed with Biblical citations. Different colors could be added as well. I think that information in this article relevant to the parchment and type of the scrolls should be merged over, but with relevant citations. Eagletennis (talk) 23:01, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

This is closed. Since there are no objections I will merge the articles and place a redirect. TYVM. Eagletennis (talk) 00:03, 19 June 2012 (UTC)