"As some of the oldest surviving documents on Earth..."
that statement marginalizes the fact that there are millions(!) of written documents from the two millennia before 0
You're mistaken. We have carvings that are older than the 2000+ year old Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), but it may be inaccurate to refer to cave carvings and inscriptions as "documents."
But even if you classify stone and clay carvings as documents, the statement is nonetheless true: the DSS are "some of the oldest surviving documents on earth." There are some fragments that are older (e.g. a clay fragment found in Jerusalem [0] dating to 1400 BC), yet the DSS remain as some of the oldest surviving documents in existence, and they comprise more than a mere fragment. For example, the DSS contains almost all the books of Psalms (the longest book of the Bible) and several copies of Isaiah.
This is an interesting find because it suggests there are more caves than previously believed, which may produce additional ancient witnesses to the historic texts of the Bible and other Jewish religious documents.
The Code of Hammurabi survives in virtually complete form on a stele and pips the Dead Sea Scrolls by 1500 years or so. A reasonably complete version of the Epic of Gilgamesh is 1000 years or so older than the Dead Sea Scrolls.
So it's by no means the earliest essentially-complete collection of manuscripts found. That said, it is still in sparse company. As far as I can tell, the next major complete manuscript are a few copies of the Bible dating to mid-4th century. Complete versions of things like the Odyssey and the Iliad date only to around 1000.
You're mistaken. There is a sizable amount of extant Akkadian, Sumerian, Egyptian, Greek, and Chinese literature from well before when the TaNaK was written. In fact of each of those languages have a sum of extant literature that surpasses, in volume, the largess of writing in the Bible.
> Between half a million[3] and two million cuneiform tablets are estimated to have been excavated in modern times, of which only approximately 30,000[4] – 100,000 have been read or published.
The fact that so few have been translated thus far is pretty amazing.
Cuneiform tablets make up the largest source of older writings. Millions might be a stretch, since the only numbers I could find added up to 500K tablets, and tablets ≠ texts.
The Dead Sea Scrolls are dated to ~200BC-AD100, which appears to be roughly contemporaneous with the oldest extant Chinese manuscript fragments.
Note that this is assuming that you're counting the dates of the manuscripts themselves, not the dates of texts being composed. There's a lot of texts in Greek and Latin known to be older, but they are known only from fourth- or fifth-hand copies in manuscripts dating back usually to later than AD600.
>The Gudea cylinders are a pair of terracotta cylinders dating to circa 2125 BC, on which is written in cuneiform a Sumerian myth called the Building of Ningursu's temple.[1] The cylinders were made by Gudea, the ruler of Lagash, and were found in 1877 during excavations at Telloh (ancient Girsu), Iraq and are now displayed in the Louvre in Paris, France. They are the largest cuneiform cylinders yet discovered and contain the longest known text written in the Sumerian language.
But it is also easy to fall for pithy contrarian posts on HN! The dead sea scrolls are among the oldest documents. Notable they are the oldest version of books of the Hebrew bible. Many important texts which we think are older (like Plato, Homer etc.) are only known from transcriptions which are much more recent than then dead sea scrolls.
I'm sure there are lots of people associated with this discovery that would be happy to sweep those older documents under the rug and forget about them.
“prove that Dead Sea scrolls from the Second Temple period were hidden in the cave”
“the findings indicate beyond any doubt that the cave contained scrolls that were stolen.”
“The material, when published, will provide important new evidence for scholars of the archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea caves.”
“The discovery towards the end of the excavation of a pair of iron pickaxe heads from the 1950s (stored within the tunnel for later use) proves the cave was looted.”
>> "Although at the end of the day no scroll was found, and instead we ‘only’ found a piece of parchment rolled up in a jug that was being processed for writing, the findings indicate beyond any doubt that the cave contained scrolls that were stolen." -Dr. Gutfield
Yeah, despite reading the article I don't get the HN-front-page significance. I'd be tempted to guess this is more of a PR thing than a substantive find.
This article doesn't seem to mention that it's in the "wrong" place. (How is that defined anyway?) The HU article linked in another comment does seem to hint at that a little.
For anyone curious, this is actually part of Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
>All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
I'm not sure what this is from or if you made it up, but I read it first in the style of Monty Python and then in the Style of Blackadder... both equally humorous... [Off to look it up]
The found scroll is presently being carbon dated in Bonn. If genuine it belongs at the beginning of the other scrolls and is believed to read "To my darling Candy. All characters portrayed within these scrolls are fictitious and any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental."
