A local hospital put up some motivational signs, in crayon. One reads, "Medical workers: not all heros wear capes". But it's written on three lines in three different colors, so it reads like "Medical workers: Not All Heroes. Wear capes!"
> reveal, v. ts., 1. make (previously unknown or secret information) known to others.
If I turn on a flashlight in a dark room, I reveal the contents of the room; but the flashlight also reveals the contents of the room; and at the lowest level, the light from the flashlight reveals the contents of the room. One could go even deeper, and say that the objects "reveal themselves", as the pigments in the objects react to the light by transmitting information about the objects to my eyes (unlike stealth planes or dark matter, which do not reveal themselves in response to light.)
A server can "reveal" information by transmitting it to you, in response to your request for it. A server reveals itself when it responds to a ping. A server that ignores pings and portscans is avoiding revealing itself.
Basically, any entity in the causal chain for information being produced—even a non-agentive one—seems capable of "revealing" in English.
(Perhaps you're thinking of "unveil"? That word implies that there's a thing external to the information—a veil/curtain—and requires an agentive entity to act upon it.)
My intuition for the verb 'reveal' is that the subject need be in some way active in the object being de-obscured. A server responding to pings reveals itself because handling incoming connections and sending packets in response is an active process. If the leather had undergone some sort of chemical process, say, an oxidation, and this had made the script apparent, I think it would be reasonable to say that the fragments were revealing the lettering. However, as far as I can see, nothing has changed about the scroll, nor even about our technological ability to interrogate it - rather, someone simply attempted to look closer than had been done so before.
Etymologically, 'reveal' is of the same heritage as 'unveil' - both are essentially analogies to the removing of a veil, and as such have the connotation of action. Only in a poetic context would I personally think it appropriate to use 'reveal' in a passive sense - as in your example of objects revealing themselves on exposure to light.
This is of course just wot i rekon. I would probably chose 'divulge' over 'reveal' in the title of the OP article.
> However, as far as I can see, nothing has changed about the scroll, nor even about our technological ability to interrogate it - rather, someone simply attempted to look closer than had been done so before.
I believe one common usage of "reveal" is that an autostereogram ("Magic Eye" picture) reveals a 3D image when you focus on it correctly. Nothing about the picture changes; nothing about your eyes change, either, really. It's just "looking closer." But the 3D object was obscure, and now it's been... revealed. Revealed by what? By whom? Not too clear.
I guess, in the Dead-Sea-Scroll-fragments case, it actually is clear: it was revealed by a microscope.
the light is the noun that acts to reveal the feat.
the dust is the noun that acts to reveal riders.
the air is the noun that acts to reveal devastation.
the spark is the noun that acts to reveal the spectrum.
In none of those examples were the feet, rider, devastation or spectrum the nouns that the verb reveal refers to as acting.
Reveal can be used as a verb, but in the title in question, the noun is Dead Sea Scrolls not "the Professor, the investigation, or the scanner" that did the revealing. The Dead Sea Scrolls did not act on their own to reveal something, they were acted upon.
All those examples show writing revealing an idea, not the text itself appearing.
The structure of the original sentence is just harder to parse at first glance because it's missing words or punctuation, or written in the wrong order.
"Text revealed on Dead Sea Scroll fragments thought to be blank" is much easier to read.
> It's a poorly written headline, the scrolls themselves did not perform the reveal.
Material versus efficient cause. The scrolls are the material cause of the revelation, the researchers are the efficient cause of the revelation. Both reveal the text.
If you’re ever in Manchester, the John Rylands Library mentioned here is one of the local jewels and absolutely worth the visit.
If you are a library connoisseur, there are also Chatham’s (one of the oldest libraries in the land, and likely the oldest dedicated to music), the Pantheon-inspired Central Library, and the elusive (and exclusive) Portico. The Law Library was pretty striking too but sadly they moved and the original building was sold.
I already found it frustratingly ambiguous that there could be more than one Manchester in the US, then I checked and it turns out there are more than 30
I don’t remember any examples off-hand, but we have a few town names in Indiana which aren’t even unique within the state, because one of the locations isn’t incorporated.
A very important note a few paragraphs in to the National Geographic article:
>The new findings don’t cast doubt on the 100,000 real Dead Sea Scroll fragments, most of which lie in the Shrine of the Book, part of the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. However, the report’s findings raise grave questions about the “post-2002” Dead Sea Scroll fragments, a group of some 70 snippets of biblical text that entered the antiquities market in the 2000s. Even before the new report, some scholars believed that most to all of the post-2002 fragments were modern fakes.
> And a longer piece about a forged first-century gospel from the same institution:
As a clarification to this comment, the article does not say that the fragment is a forgery; rather it says that the claims of its age were fraudulent, or at least misleading, and that the process by which it was obtained was likely criminal. (If it was stolen, I think it has been returned, since it's in the Egypt Exploration Society collection now.)
This is a different matter than the DSS fragments, which NatGeo says were created in modern times.
Unrelated but similar article about using X-rays to read text on paper fragments used during the binding process in the medieval ages: https://medievalbooks.nl/2015/12/18/x-rays-expose-a-hidden-m... The whole MedievalBooks.nl blog is fascinating, lots of good reading there.
> The Dead Sea Scrolls are ancient Jewish religious manuscripts that were found in the Qumran Caves in the Judaean Desert, near Ein Feshkha on the northern shore of the Dead Sea in the West Bank. Scholarly consensus dates these scrolls from the last three centuries BCE and the first century CE.
I went to a Jesuit university and was required to take a certain number of credits in religious courses, so I looked over the catalogue and chose the most interesting and less mainstream options, like classes on Yoga and Buddhism. One of the classes I chose was about the history of the Old Testament from an archaeological perspective, which sounded very Indiana Jones and turned out to be quite interesting. The professor was an archaeologist and had dug at some of the sites we studied in the course. The only thing I remember from that class was the story how the Bedouin were shopping the scrolls before the location of the caves were exposed and the Western archaeologist (who couldn't immediately travel to the site and wanted to obtain the scrolls at any cost) offered to pay them per piece. This is very likely how many of the scrolls were torn into tiny pieces, as Bedouin were looking to maximize their payout. I didn't find any reference to this in the linked wiki and I certainly don't know how true the story is (IIRC this story wasn't in our official class texts either), but it's something to consider that we could have a more-intact set of scrolls today had it not been for a terrible decision made in haste.
It is extremely difficult to do archeology in many countries in the middle-east, even pre-war.
Turkey, for example refuses most requests for digs. It is generally understood that they don't want excessive religious historical context placed on their country as it doesn't mesh well with their current national identity.
Can you elaborate on Turkey being unwilling to conduct historical research on its soil?
Are you an archeologist/historian?
I ask because I'm generally interested in history. I've read speculations that the region called Anatolia has had a shift in 14th century in language/culture/etc.
It might have well been a mistranslation. Stating that you're so desperate to buy that you'll accept "the tiniest bits you can find" could sound like a reasonable thing to say to transmit urgency; then a translator approximates to "he will pay for every small piece" and you're screwed.
The second paragraph of the press release reveals what the institution is actually excited about ;)
> The discovery means that The University of Manchester is the only institution in the UK to possess authenticated textual fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
