CRYPTIC B SIGN INVENTORY AND HYPOTHESIS DOSSIER
Technical Analysis of Available Images
December 12, 2025
METHODOLOGY
This document provides a sign-by-sign inventory of Cryptic B letter forms visible in publicly available images, correlated with published identifications (Oliveiro 2025, via Schuster 2025).
Scope of claims:
- This is a completion hypothesis, not a completed decipherment
- All readings are provisional pending verification against full corpus
- Alternative assignments are noted where applicable
- Falsification conditions are specified
Images analyzed:
- fig1gif.png — Infrared photograph, Leon Levy Digital Library (ישראל sequence)
- 64097562.jpeg — 4Q363 fragments, color photograph
- 64097558.jpeg — PAM 41.692 archival plate
- 64097559.jpeg — Corner fragment, conservation photograph
- 64097560.jpeg — Isolated fragment, conservation photograph
- 64097561.jpeg — Single fragment, conservation photograph
PART I: CONFIRMED SIGN IDENTIFICATIONS
These identifications derive from Oliveiro (2025) and are visually verifiable in available images.
Sign 1: YOD (י)
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | י (yod) |
| Visual form | Vertical stroke with additional curved element descending left |
| Derivation | Modified Jewish Hebrew yod |
| Occurrences | fig1gif.png (position 1 of ישראל sequence); 64097562.jpeg (multiple) |
| Confidence | HIGH |
| Visual description | Primary vertical (~3mm), secondary stroke curves down-left from midpoint or top |
| Distinguishing feature | The additional stroke differentiates from standard yod |
| Alternatives considered | Could be confused with vav if secondary stroke unclear |
| Falsification condition | If this sign appears where yod is grammatically impossible, assignment fails |
Sign 2: SHIN (ש)
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | ש (shin) |
| Visual form | Three-pronged form derived from paleo-Hebrew ה (he) |
| Derivation | Paleo-Hebrew he (same substitution as Cryptic A) |
| Occurrences | fig1gif.png (position 2 of ישראל sequence); 64097562.jpeg (top fragment) |
| Confidence | HIGH |
| Visual description | Three vertical or near-vertical strokes, often connected at base |
| Distinguishing feature | Identical to Cryptic A shin — cross-script consistency |
| Alternatives considered | None strong; form is distinctive |
| Falsification condition | If pattern fails in words where shin is required (e.g., שמים, שנה) |
Sign 3: RESH (ר)
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | ר (resh) |
| Visual form | Curved head on vertical stem |
| Derivation | Resembles paleo-Hebrew resh |
| Occurrences | fig1gif.png (position 3, damaged); inferred from ישראל |
| Confidence | MEDIUM (damage affects visibility) |
| Visual description | Inverted-J shape; curved element at top bending right |
| Distinguishing feature | Curve distinguishes from dalet |
| Alternatives considered | Dalet (if curve is actually angular) |
| Falsification condition | If proposed resh and dalet are not distinguishable across corpus |
Sign 4: ALEPH (א)
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | א (aleph) |
| Visual form | Cross-form with diagonal strokes |
| Derivation | Modified from Jewish Hebrew or paleo-Hebrew aleph |
| Occurrences | fig1gif.png (position 4 of ישראל); 64097559.jpeg (corner fragment) |
| Confidence | HIGH |
| Visual description | Two diagonal strokes crossing, sometimes with additional horizontal |
| Distinguishing feature | X-shape or cross distinguishes from other letters |
| Alternatives considered | Tav (if more T-shaped); Ayin (if more circular) |
| Falsification condition | If sign appears where aleph is impossible and alternative fits better |
Sign 5: LAMED (ל)
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | ל (lamed) |
| Visual form | Elongated vertical with upper curve or hook |
| Derivation | Exaggerated form of standard lamed |
| Occurrences | fig1gif.png (position 5 of ישראל); 64097562.jpeg (multiple tall verticals) |
| Confidence | HIGH |
| Visual description | Tallest letter in alphabet; extends above line height; curved top |
| Distinguishing feature | Height distinguishes from all other letters |
| Alternatives considered | None; height is diagnostic |
| Falsification condition | If another tall letter exists that is not lamed |
Sign 6: HE (ה) — Tentative
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | ה (he) |
| Visual form | [Requires differentiation from shin usage of paleo-he] |
| Derivation | Unknown — may use different form since paleo-he = shin |
| Occurrences | Expected in יהודה (Yehudah) if identified |
| Confidence | LOW (form not independently confirmed in images) |
| Visual description | TBD |
| Distinguishing feature | Must differ from shin (paleo-he) |
| Alternatives considered | N/A |
| Falsification condition | If no distinct he-form exists, יהודה reading fails |
Sign 7: VAV (ו) — Tentative
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | ו (vav) |
| Visual form | Simple vertical stroke |
| Derivation | Likely minimal modification from standard |
| Occurrences | Expected in יהודה; not independently confirmed |
| Confidence | LOW |
| Visual description | Short vertical, no secondary elements |
| Distinguishing feature | Distinguished from yod by absence of secondary stroke |
| Alternatives considered | Yod (if secondary stroke present) |
| Falsification condition | If vav and yod cannot be distinguished |
Sign 8: DALET (ד) — Tentative
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | ד (dalet) |
| Visual form | Angular head on vertical stem |
| Derivation | Modified standard form |
| Occurrences | Expected in יהודה; not independently confirmed |
| Confidence | LOW |
| Visual description | Inverted-L shape; angular (not curved) top |
| Distinguishing feature | Angular vs. curved distinguishes from resh |
| Alternatives considered | Resh |
| Falsification condition | If dalet/resh distinction fails across corpus |
Sign 9: AYIN (ע) — Tentative
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | ע (ayin) |
| Visual form | Circular or oval form |
| Derivation | Possibly from paleo-Hebrew ayin (eye-shape) |
| Occurrences | Expected in יעזב, יעקב; not independently confirmed |
| Confidence | LOW |
| Visual description | Rounded, possibly closed circle |
| Distinguishing feature | Circularity |
| Alternatives considered | Samekh (if closed); other rounded forms |
| Falsification condition | If no rounded form exists where ayin is required |
Sign 10: ZAYIN (ז) — Tentative
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | ז (zayin) |
| Visual form | Unknown |
| Derivation | Unknown |
| Occurrences | Expected in יעזב; not confirmed |
| Confidence | VERY LOW |
| Visual description | TBD |
| Distinguishing feature | TBD |
| Alternatives considered | N/A |
| Falsification condition | If יעזב reading cannot be visually confirmed |
Sign 11: BET (ב) — Tentative
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | ב (bet) |
| Visual form | Unknown |
| Derivation | Unknown |
| Occurrences | Expected in יעזב, יעקב; not confirmed |
| Confidence | VERY LOW |
| Visual description | TBD |
| Distinguishing feature | TBD |
| Alternatives considered | Kaf (similar forms in some scripts) |
| Falsification condition | If bet/kaf distinction fails |
Sign 12: QOF (ק) — Tentative
| Field | Data |
|---|---|
| Hebrew value | ק (qof) |
| Visual form | Unknown |
| Derivation | Unknown |
| Occurrences | Expected in יעקב; not confirmed |
| Confidence | VERY LOW |
| Visual description | TBD |
| Distinguishing feature | TBD |
| Alternatives considered | N/A |
| Falsification condition | If יעקב reading cannot be visually confirmed |
PART II: IMAGE-BY-IMAGE INVENTORY
Image: fig1gif.png (Infrared)
Technical specs: Grayscale infrared photograph. Leather appears light; carbon ink appears dark.
Visible text:
| Register | Signs visible | Proposed reading | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Upper | 2-3 partial forms | Unidentified | LOW |
| Lower | 5-6 signs in sequence | ישראל (+ possible continuation) | HIGH (for ישראל) |
Detailed sign inventory (lower register, R→L):
| Position | Visual description | Proposed value | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vertical + curved secondary stroke | י (yod) | HIGH |
| 2 | Three-pronged form | ש (shin) | HIGH |
| 3 | Curved head, damaged | ר (resh) | MEDIUM |
| 4 | Cross/diagonal strokes | א (aleph) | HIGH |
| 5 | Tall vertical with curve | ל (lamed) | HIGH |
| 6? | Partial stroke at left edge | Unknown | LOW |
Notes:
- Central area shows physical damage (bright spot = hole or abrasion)
- Upper register partially visible but not analyzed
Image: 64097562.jpeg (4Q363 Color)
Technical specs: Color photograph, white background. Multiple fragments.
Fragment A (top):
| Position | Visual description | Proposed value | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-2 (R) | Two short strokes | Uncertain | LOW |
| 3 | Tall vertical with curve | ל (lamed) | MEDIUM |
| 4 | Angular form | Uncertain | LOW |
| 5 | Three-pronged | ש (shin)? | MEDIUM |
| 6-7 | Connected strokes | Uncertain | LOW |
| 8 | Gap/word break? | — | — |
| 9 | Tall vertical | ל (lamed)? | MEDIUM |
| 10-12 | Partial forms | Uncertain | LOW |
Fragment B (lower left):
| Line | Signs visible | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5-6 partial | Right portion damaged |
| 2 | 3-4 signs | Cut at fragment edge |
Fragment C (right edge):
- 2-3 partial letters
- Insufficient for identification
Overall assessment: Fragment A contains the most legible material. The "wide line" spacing characteristic of 4Q363 is visible. Multiple tall verticals consistent with lamed. At least one three-pronged form consistent with shin.
Image: 64097558.jpeg (PAM 41.692)
Technical specs: Archival B&W photograph. Plate number visible: "41.692"
Content: Approximately 30+ fragments arranged in rows.
Limitation: At this resolution, distinguishing Cryptic B from standard Hebrew script is not reliably possible. According to Fascicle 10, this plate contains material from multiple manuscripts including 4Q362, but individual fragment identification requires either:
- Higher resolution images
- Cross-reference with published fragment maps
- Direct comparison with known Cryptic B letter forms
Status: INVENTORY NOT POSSIBLE at current resolution
Image: 64097559.jpeg (Corner fragment)
Technical specs: Color photograph, dark background, conservation tissue visible.
Visible signs:
| Position | Visual description | Proposed value | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (upper R) | Angular/bent form, two strokes | א (aleph)? | MEDIUM |
| 2 | Curved descending stroke | Uncertain | LOW |
| 3? | Partial at edge | Uncertain | VERY LOW |
Notes: The angular form in position 1 is consistent with the cross-form aleph identified elsewhere. However, alternative readings (ayin, tav) cannot be excluded without context.
Image: 64097560.jpeg (Isolated fragment)
Technical specs: Color photograph, dark background, conservation tissue.
Visible signs:
| Position | Visual description | Proposed value | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (lower) | Tall vertical with upper curve | ל (lamed)? | LOW |
| 2 | Small mark to right | Uncertain | VERY LOW |
Notes: Fragment is largely illegible. Possible lamed based on height, but insufficient context for confirmation.
Image: 64097561.jpeg (Single fragment)
Technical specs: Color photograph, dark background, conservation tissue.
Visible signs:
| Position | Visual description | Proposed value | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (lower R) | Vertical stroke | Uncertain | VERY LOW |
| 2 | Curved form to left | Uncertain | VERY LOW |
Notes: Leather severely darkened. Minimal legible content under visible light. This fragment demonstrates why infrared imaging is essential for 4Q362 material.
PART III: HYPOTHESIS STATUS SUMMARY
Confirmed (HIGH confidence)
- 5 letters: י ש ר א ל
- 1 word: ישראל
Probable (MEDIUM confidence)
- 0 additional letters confirmed independently
- 0 additional words confirmed independently
Hypothesized (LOW confidence, pending verification)
- Letters: ה ו ד ע (required for יהודה, יעזב, יעקב)
- Words: יהודה, יעזב, אהלי יעקב (reported by Oliveiro but not independently verified in these images)
Unidentified
- ~10-12 letters of the 22-letter alphabet
- 5 letters explicitly noted as uncertain by Oliveiro
PART IV: FALSIFICATION CONDITIONS
The completion hypothesis fails if:
-
Sign-value conflicts emerge — If a proposed letter assignment produces impossible readings in multiple contexts
-
Alternative assignments fit better — If a different Hebrew value explains the same sign distribution more economically
-
Expected patterns do not appear — If high-frequency letters (א, ה, ו, י, ל, מ, נ) are not identifiable in proportionate quantities
-
Word readings produce nonsense — If proposed translations yield no coherent semantic content
-
Cross-script inconsistency — If signs shared with Cryptic A (e.g., shin = paleo-he) show different values
PART V: REQUIRED NEXT STEPS
To advance from hypothesis to verified decipherment:
-
Obtain higher-resolution images — Current images insufficient for complete inventory
-
Systematic corpus mapping — Every occurrence of every sign across all fragments
-
Frequency analysis — Compare sign frequency to expected Hebrew letter frequency
-
Context testing — Test proposed readings against grammatical and semantic constraints
-
Peer review — Submit hypothesis to scholars with access to original materials
-
Publication of sign table — Make methodology transparent and reproducible
PART VI: SCOPE OF CLAIMS (EXPLICIT)
This document claims:
- Visual plausibility of Oliveiro's published identifications
- Confirmation of 5 letter values from available images
- Confirmation of 1 word (ישראל) from available images
- Methodological framework for testing additional identifications
This document does NOT claim:
- Complete decipherment of Cryptic B
- Independent verification of all 17 letters reported by Oliveiro
- Verification of words beyond ישראל
- Translation of continuous text
REFERENCES
Oliveiro, Emmanuel. 2025. [Title unknown]. Dead Sea Discoveries (December 2025). [Accessed via Schuster 2025]
Pfann, Stephen J. 2000. "Cryptic Texts." In Qumran Cave 4.XXVI: Cryptic Texts and Miscellanea, Part 1, edited by Stephen J. Pfann and Philip S. Alexander, 515-701. DJD XXXVI. Oxford: Clarendon.
Schuster, Ruth. 2025. "Unknown Alphabet in Dead Sea Scrolls Has Been Cracked, Scholar Says." Haaretz, December 11, 2025.
Document prepared by Lee Sharks in collaboration with Claude (Anthropic)
December 12, 2025
Status: Working hypothesis — not peer reviewed
No comments:
Post a Comment