For many years after the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, text analysis and fragment attribution were the main concern of the scholars dealing with them. The uncertain archaeological provenance of a large part of the collection added an additional difficulty to the formidable task of sorting thousands of fragments. After sixty years of scholarly research, the questions of origin, archaeological provenance, and correct attribution of the fragments are still debated. In many cases, material characterization of the scroll writing media delivers answers to these questions.
Physical and chemical examination of the skin-based material of the Dead Sea Scrolls started shortly after their discovery. Subsequent studies dedicated to long-term preservation resulted in a respectable body of knowledge about this material, in many ways very different from medieval parchment.
A new multi-instrumental approach, developed for an accurate characterization of the highly inhomogeneous “parchment” of the Dead Sea Scrolls, might lead to a reliable reconstruction of their history. This approach is illustrated by the case studies, in which we discuss the specific questions of origin (1QHa), archaeological provenance (11QTa), and post-discovery interventions (1QapGen ar).
D. Burton J. B. Poole and R. Reed“A New Approach to the Dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls,”Nature184 (1959): 533–34; R. Reed and J. B. Poole “A Study of Some Dead Sea Scroll and Leather Fragments from Cave 4 at Qumran: Physical Examination” Proceedings of the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society 9 (1962): 1–13; R. Reed and J. B. Poole “A Study of Some Dead Sea Scroll and Leather Fragments from Cave 4 at Qumran: Chemical Examination” Proceedings of the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society 9 (1964): 171–82.
E. F. Hansen S. N. Lee and H. Sobel“The Effects of Relative Humidity on Some Physical Properties of Modern Vellum: Implications for the Optimum Relative Humidity for the Display and Storage of Parchment,”The Book and Paper Group Annual 10 (1991): 84–108; M. Derrick “Evaluation of the State of Degradation of Dead Sea Scroll Samples Using FT-IR Spectroscopy” The Book and Paper Group Annual 10 (1991): 49–65; H. Sobel and H. Ajie “Modification in Amino Acids of Dead Sea Scroll Parchments” Free Radical Biology and Medicine 13 (1992): 701–2.
G. Brooke“The Historical Documents at the John Rylands University Library: The Reed Dead Sea Scrolls Collection,”e-Preservation Science3 (2006): 35–40; I. Rabin G. Brooke J. Hodgson E. Pantos and J. Prag “The Ronald Reed Archive at the John Rylands University Library” e-Preservation Science 4 (2007): 9–12.
E. Tov“The Sciences and the Reconstruction of the Ancient Scrolls: Possibilities and Impossibilities,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls in Context: Integrating the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Study of Ancient Texts Languages and Cultures (ed. A. Lange, E. Tov, M. Weigold, and B. H. Reynolds III; Leiden: Brill2011) 3–25.
Z. Levin and E. Ganor“Measurements of Aerosol Size Spectra and Chemical Composition in the Dead Sea Rift Valley,” in Atmospheric Aerosols and Nucleation (ed. P. E. Wagner and G. Vali; Berlin: Springer1988) 229–32.
E. Shalev Y. Yechieli and A. BeinThe Hydrogeological System in the Naḥal Parsa—Naḥal Yeelim Area: Implications Regarding the Evaporation Ponds and on the Possibility of Sinkholes Forming Nearby ( Jerusalem: Geological Survey of Israel2005) [Hebrew].
N. Caldararo“Storage Conditions and Physical Treatments Relating to the Dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls”Radiocarbon37 (1995): 21–32; E. Boyd-Alkalay and E. Libman “Restoration Techniques at the Israel Antiquities Authority” in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Fifty Years after Their Discovery 1947–1997 (ed. L. H. Schiffman E. Tov and J. C. VanderKam: Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society in cooperation with the Shrine of the Book Israel Museum 2000) 875–80.
A. Wallert“Deliquescence and Recrystallization of Salts in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Archaeological Conservation and its Consequences (ed. A. Roy and P. Smith; London: International Institute for Conservation1996) 198–201.