A few Qumran scrolls have some writing in red ink on them (e.g., 4QNum-b, 2QPs), and in most cases their editors plausibly suggest that this may indicate a liturgical function (see, e.g., DJD XII, p. 211 for 4QNum-b).
I was wondering if the use of red ink could additionally suggest that the scroll was not intended to be a "biblical" scroll, but was a text copied for expressly liturgical functions? (if such a distinction can be made) The basis of my query is mMeg 2.2 where red ink/dye [SQR)] is prohibited for use on biblical scrolls: "If it were written with paint, or with red dye [SQR)], or with resin, or with copperas, on paper or on partially prepared hide, he has not performed his duty, unless it is written in Hebrew on parchment and with ink [DYW]." mMeg 2.2 Obviously one problem with my reasoning is that it is anachronistic, applying later Jewish tradition to the Qumran scrolls. But in my own defense, Tov has demonstrated that many of the latter rabbinic guidelines for scroll preparation and copying appear to have been followed with the Qumran scrolls (e.g., his article on the dimensions of the scrolls). Also note that I am assuming that the SQR) mentioned is red ink, and that the ink (DYW) mentioned at the end of the line cannot be red. Any thoughts? -Tyler ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tyler F. Williams Chair, Religion & Theology Program Assistant Professor of Old Testament/Hebrew Bible Taylor University College & Seminary 11525 - 23 Avenue, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6J 4T3 Phone: (780) 431-5217 / Fax: (780) 436-9416 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For private reply, e-mail to "Tyler Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: "unsubscribe Orion." Archives are on the Orion Web site, http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il. (PLEASE REMOVE THIS TRAILOR BEFORE REPLYING TO THE MESSAGE)
