From Kibbutz to the global stage
Jericho area: A New Hypothesis on Mysterious Latin Letters in the Copper Scroll
The Copper Scroll: Are Its Mysterious Foreign Letters Codes Used by Ancient Water Engineers?
The Uniqueness of the Jericho District and the Concentration of the Greek Signs
One of the most striking features of the Copper Scroll is not the meaning of any individual sign, but the distribution of the signs themselves. All groups of Greek letters in the Scroll appear only in its opening section, through Section 15. After that, they disappear completely and do not recur anywhere in the remainder of the text.
This concentration coincides with the Scroll’s first geographical division — the Jericho, Kahlat and Jordan Valley district, which in the arrangement proposed here extends through Sections 1–19. In other words, all the Greek signs occur within the Jericho district, while no comparable signs appear in the other geographical districts described later in the Scroll.
That is the observation. The interpretation begins only from this point.
This unusual geographical concentration raises a new question: Why were Greek signs used specifically in the documentation of the Jericho district? Do they reflect a local recording tradition, a particular administrative unit, a team of surveyors or specialists working in the area, or a system of technical abbreviations that was not used in the other districts?
The hypothesis examined in this article proposes another possibility: the letters may not be a cipher in the conventional sense at all, but professional abbreviations used by the specialists who worked in the Jericho district.
This distinction also clarifies the proposed novelty of the argument. The fact that the letters are concentrated at the beginning of the Scroll is not a new discovery. The question raised here is whether their concentration specifically within the geographical division associated with Jericho can help explain their function.
The foreign letters — Greek and/or Latin — embedded in the Copper Scroll constitute one of the most intriguing puzzles in the study of the document. Since the Scroll was discovered in Cave 3 at Qumran in 1952, various attempts have been made to explain these unusual signs and their function within the text.
Within the hydraulic interpretation we have been developing — according to which the Scroll can be examined not only as a list of hidden treasures, but also as a document preserving information about ancient infrastructure and waterworks in Judea — the foreign signs may have another practical meaning: a professional lexicon used by surveyors, infrastructure administrators and water specialists.
Dividing the Scroll into Five Geographical Districts
Analysis of the text within the proposed model suggests that the sections of the Scroll follow a geographical sequence that can be divided into five operational districts:
Jericho, Kahlat and the Jordan River outlet — Sections 1–19
Sekhakha and Herodium
The Hebron Hills and Gush Etzion
Ramat Rachel and Jerusalem
Mount Gerizim, Nahal Tirza and Adam Bridge
Section 60 stands apart from this operational sequence. In the proposed model, it functions as a concluding section, perhaps indicating the location where a copy of the archive was concealed.
The Foreign Codes in the Jericho Division
The central textual observation is therefore straightforward: the foreign codes examined here are concentrated within the first 15 sections of the Scroll, all of them falling within the geographical division identified here as the Jericho and Jordan Valley district. From Section 20 onward, these codes disappear from the sequence.
The distribution may point to a difference in recording practices between districts. One possibility is that the Jericho district was documented by specialists who routinely used foreign abbreviations, while the professionals responsible for the other districts employed different recording conventions.
This does not prove the meaning of any individual code. But instead of treating each group of letters separately as a mysterious cipher, we can ask whether they functioned as technical abbreviations referring to a structure, measurement, material, depth or work instruction.
A Proposed Working Glossary of Engineering Codes
The following interpretations are working hypotheses that should be tested against technical Greek and Latin terminology, epigraphic parallels and the measurement systems of the period.
KEN — Section 1
One possibility is a connection with canalis — a channel or water conduit. Within the hydraulic model, the installation may have been associated with capturing runoff from the Valley of Achor and conveying it through a principal channel.
XAG — Section 4
A possible relationship with choma/xoma, in the sense of an embankment or constructed barrier, should be investigated.
If Kahlat is identified with the area of the historical Jordan River outlet, it is also worth asking whether the installation had a role in the movement of goods. The second part of the abbreviation, AG, might — as a hypothesis only — represent a destination or route designation.
One possibility worth testing is Gaza–Alexandria, comparable in principle to origin or destination markings used in ancient trading systems. At this stage, this should not be regarded as a demonstrated decipherment.
HN — Section 7
The code may indicate some form of vertical measurement — height, depth or number of steps.
If “42 HN” at the cistern of Beit Shua refers to 42 rock-cut steps, and an average vertical rise of approximately 22 cm per step is assumed, the resulting vertical difference would be slightly more than nine meters.
The meaning of the letters HN themselves still requires philological investigation.
THE + DI 10 — Section 9
One of the more intriguing possibilities to test is whether DI refers to digitus, the Roman finger unit.
Ten Roman digiti equal approximately 18.5 cm. If the number describes the diameter or width of an opening, it becomes possible to ask whether the notation specifies a standardized drainage aperture through which water entered a cistern or settling chamber.
The possible relationship between THE and theca likewise requires separate linguistic and epigraphic verification.
TR — Section 12
A possible relationship with terra — earth or soil — should be examined.
From a hydrological perspective, the notation might refer to a reservoir or pit excavated into naturally impermeable clay-rich soil, thereby reducing the need for complete artificial lining.
SK — Section 15
This code occurs in a context that we propose may relate to a rock-cut conduit or tunnel.
A connection with technical terms such as specus can be investigated, although the meaning of the letters SK themselves remains unresolved. If the installation actually passes through marl or gypsum-bearing formations, it would be worth examining whether the notation refers to the geological material, the excavation method, or a requirement for special waterproofing.
Kahlat and Section 60
Within the proposed geographical division, Kahlat recurs in the Jericho section and connects several sections in which the foreign signs appear. This raises the possibility that Kahlat was an important point within the system described in the Scroll — hydraulically, administratively or logistically.
Kahlat’s appearance again in Section 60 — “bebitsa ditzfon Kahlat” (“in the marsh north of Kahlat”) — acquires particular significance within this hypothesis. Unlike the first district, no technical code is required here: the section may instead function as an instruction for locating the archive or the “copy of the writing” (mishneh ha-ketav).
If the proposed identification of Kahlat within the Jordan River–Dead Sea outlet system is correct, the ancient geography must be examined according to the Dead Sea levels of the relevant period rather than according to the modern shoreline.
This leads to another geographical hypothesis: the expression “north of Kahlat” may point farther north along the Jordan Valley. Within this framework, the area of Adam Bridge also deserves renewed examination.
This is not yet a proven archaeological location. It is a prediction generated by the model — and for precisely that reason, it can be tested through a combination of historical topography, hydrology, archaeology and a renewed reading of the Copper Scroll.
Related Topics
