This article examines Hartmut Stegemann’s preliminary proposal that the remains of the beginning handle sheet of 1QHa have survived and provide useful data for reconstructing the scroll. According to Stegemann, this handle sheet supplies critical material evidence that three columns existed before 1QHa 4, the first substantially extant column in the manuscript. The handle sheet was recovered from one of three scrolls, 1QM, 1QIsab, and 1QHa. Each of these possibilities is considered, and a new proposal that the handle sheet belongs to the end of 1QIsab is advanced. The article offers a tentative reconstruction of the handle sheet as part of 1QIsab to demonstrate its material continuity with col. 28 of 1QIsab.
Since the discoveries of the first Dead Sea Scrolls, the motif of a communion with the angels has been repeatedly emphasized and discussed as a characteristic of the self-understanding of the community behind these writings. Of particular interest in this discussion are the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (4Q400–407; 11Q17; and Mas1k ShirShabb). However, the origin of the so-called Angelic Liturgy is still an unresolved question in scholarship. In this article we will try to figure out the relationship of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice to the sectarian literature by analyzing the communion with the angels described therein. I will demonstrate that this composition has the most explicit connections to the liturgical communion with the angels that is uniquely found in undisputed sectarian texts. The Angelic Liturgy is then not so much the source, but much more an example of the liturgical development inside the yaḥad.
Approximately thirty tefillin cases were discovered in the Judean Desert. The publishers of these finds distinguished between single-compartment cases, which they identified as “arm-tefillin,” and four-compartment cases, which they identified as “head-tefillin.” Here I present a further typological distinction between two subtypes among the four-compartment tefillin cases: (1) the “simple-type,” in which a single line of stitching separates the compartments from one another, and (2) the “split-type,” in which the compartments are separated by incisions in the leather and each compartment is stitched closed individually. It seems likely that some kind of ritual issue is at stake, and an allusion to these two types as competing halakhic practices may be found in the tannaitic literature—with the rabbis ultimately rejecting the “split-type.” The Judean Desert finds may represent a synchronic debate between competing groups, a diachronic development, or perhaps practices followed contemporaneously by members of one and the same group.