Many other variations are accounted for by the Qumran scribe's use of a system of adding semi-vowels to indicate vowels in a word. This accounts for most of the differences between the Q text and the M text. There are no vowels, as such, in the Masoretic Text. To indicate vowel sounds and open syllables the Qumran scribes frequently added a waw or a yod or a he, or less frequently, an aleph to words to help in pronunciation and in meaning. To read many other very legitimate reasons for the many "letter for letter" variations in the Qumran text from the Masoretic Text please read the introduction to the translation of the Qumran Isaiah Scroll.
According to a letter I received from the curate of the Israel Museum at the University of Jerusalem, that is, The Shrine of the Book, the scroll will never be in the condition it was when first photographed by the Albright Foundation, and that is due, (in spite of extreme care and climate control given to the room where the scroll is stored) to oxidation of the leather on which it was written and it is now in a darkened condition that makes it very difficult to read. Thus this facsimile copy is now better to read than the opportunity of seeing the original which few of us will probably be privileged to do.
This first page illustrates several of the characteristics
that
are present and recur often in the rest of the Scroll. Some
letters which
were missed by the first copyist or scribe were written in above
the line
of words You will see, (all above the first line,) that an
ayin
was elided from Isaiah's name and was inserted later either by
the original
scribe, correcting his own mistake, or by a later editor. It is
anyone's
guess which is true and can not be concluded either way with
certainty.,
but it is more likely a later editor. (There is evidence in the
scroll
of multiple editors with different "hand-writing" and spelling
and editorial
marks.) The same is true for the yod added to the last of
Jerusalem
and the waw in the word biy-yomey. If you see those you
might also
see that the original scribe missed the yod which properly
begins
Hezekiah's name in Hebrew* on the second line and what looks like
a correction
in the lamed in the word "kings of" is the scribal
peculiarity of
making the lamed extremely large in the word "malchey". He is
consistent
in making large lameds.
*See page 28 and comments there
under line
29 for a thorough examination of the 4 different ways that the Q
scribes
spelled Hezekiah's name.
1. Some of these additions might be corrections by the original scribe or some may be additions of vowel letters like o, u, or i which are indicated by waw, for the first two and yod for the last . This addition of elided letters and the addition of waw and yod where they help in the reading above the line is very frequent.
2. Sometimes a word is added above the line which has been left out by the copyist. There is no illustration of that on this page but it is not infrequent.
3. Aleph is often added to the end of words where the Masoretic text does not use aleph. For instance the word "Kiy." the conjunction, meaning "because" or "that" has an aleph appended. An example of this can be seen in the first word on the right in line 3 of the text above. Addition of aleph to words not having aleph at the end of the word in the Masoretic is frequent in the Qumran text and may be evidence of Aramaic which is marked by the use of aleph sufformatives . Such Aramaic influence in the scribe should be expected and is confirmation of the chronological context of copying the scrolls. The addition of aleph (and "he") as a Q scribal peculiarity is illustrated at length on page 53 under Q Scribal Spelling Addition of aleph by the Q scribe or scribes is also discussed in the Introductory page. under the heading "Aleph and "he" endings added." Some words that are Aramaic in origin and differ from the words found in the Masoretic text in the same place are listed in Section VIII. Aramaic Spelling in the Introductory page.
4. The gaps in the text caused by disintegration of the leather on which the text was written are called "lacunae" In each lacuna as in this one on the page above it is possible to reproduce the missing text from the Masoretic text which is absolutely always consistent with the context. Although there are some variation from the Masoretic text, these are very infrequent and most often involve only a word and more often person and number of a verb or number of a noun, but even this is infrequent and can not be considered substantial.
5. There are several places where an extra word or two is added to the text. These are infrequent in relation to the total text and they add no real content that is not already in the text. One such addition of 2 words can be seen on this page in the last word in line 18 and the first word in line 19 These words are especially interesting because of their Aramaic origin and are discussed under Variations below.
6. Rarely, a verse is missing altogether. There is no example of this on the first page here but you can see in the portion of the next page , between the second and third line up from the lacuna there are editor's marks indicating where verse 10 of Isaiah 2 is completely omitted. Whoever the editor was he marked the text circa 100 BCE. before it was "bottled" Thus the original Isaiah text was understood at that time to contain some words which were not written by the original Qumran scribe and the elision was taken (in BCE) to be a scribal error. This is also the case in other places where there is an omission or a redundancy where the scribe has copied the same text twice and an editor has marked the error
7. An example of other frequently found editorial corrections:
A good
example of an unmarked redundancy is in Isaiah 38:19
and 20. In verse 20, (line 12) after the second word
"le-hoshiy'eniy" 
(to save me) the whole of verse 19 is repeated as well as the
first two
words of verse 20. There is nothing to indicate the repetition
which is
an obvious error. But an omission in the next two verses is
corrected in
the margin. The last word of verse 21 and the first 6 words of 22
were
omitted and an editor with a different hand and stroke and
spelling (kiy
without the aleph) entered the omitted words in the left margin
vertically.
There is no way to account for a careful editor spotting the
omitted words
and not noting the redundancy which he could not have avoided
seeing.
8. There were two scrolls of Isaiah found in the same cave. The one called the "Qb" text has only about two thirds of the text surviving. You can see a portion of Isa 57:17 through 59:9 in the Qb text here. Click the "Back " button on your browser to return to this page. There is internal evidence that points to it having been copied from the Great Isaiah Scroll. In the "lapse" or "gap" of 16:8-9 the "Qb" text has a space left in the text, to mark the omission, which is unmarked in the Great Isaiah Scroll. This omission can be seen in page 13 of the Scroll. My comments there are under the heading "A Serious Omission." When I first translated the Qumran scroll in 1996 I added these comments to the translation:
"The copyist or scribe must have been copying from another manuscript [rather than listening to a reader] and ended at "gephen shikmah" in verse 8, his eyes then returned to the page at "gephen shikmah" midway in verse 9 and then copied the rest of verse 9 and proceeded on to verse 10 leaving out the words, between the two "gephen shikmah" entries, that comprise 2/3 of verse 8 and 1/3 of verse 9."9. None of these "errors' are indicative of a different text with wide variations from the text that has been received. If anything, the "errors" confirm the received text. .
Physical Condition of the Page:
This is the first page of 3 on the first of 17 strips of
leather
that make up the scroll. With the next page and page 54 this is
the most
damaged and difficult to read of the pages of the scroll. Since
it is the
first page it would have seen more unrolling and rerolling of the
scroll.
It also would be closer to what ever elements would have affected
the scroll.
There are a number of various kinds of blemishes on the total
scroll. Almost
all of them are represented on this first page.
1. Leather has actually deteriorated and fallen away and text
has been
lost. See the large lacuna at the bottom left.
2. Darkened portions of decaying leather which would be lost
with little
pressure.
3. Surface chipping where the underlying leather has survived
but a
letter or two has been lost as in line 1: 7th word and in line
12: 2nd
word.
4. Where material has fallen away but does not affect the
text as in
the bottom margin and the right margin from line 12 to line 25.
5. Right marginal lines due to initial pressure of drawing a
line to
form a straight margin and its erasure after the page was
composed. For
these and other lines read the discussion in the Introductory
page under
the heading of Probable Causes
for these
lines.
6, Vertical and horizontal creases due to folding as below
line 16.
7. Creases that became splits in the surface of the leather.
For more
on creases click on Probable Causes link above.
8. A blemish in the surface of the leather that may result
from natural
wear and tear or may have been a blemish in the original leather
skin surface.
A blemish extends diagonally from right to left from line 2
through 6.
which joins a crease that extends into the next page.
9. Small internal lacunae within the text of the page
sometimes affecting
text. See lines 3, 12, and 22.
Variations in the Q Text from the Masoretic Text:
Line 2: Last word: Q = an article "he" is added not in
M.
Line 3: 6th word: Q = This word is partially
obliterated because
of the blemish in the leather and the lacuna that follows the
word. But the word
in Q has a single mem instead of
2 mem's as in M = "ve-romamtiy." Also the yod is missing in the
lacuna and abrading has obscured the word in general.7th word:
Q = "hemah" 3mpl pro
noun and M = "hem" 9th word Q = "biy" prep beth + suf 1cs
(in me)
corresponds exactly with M and we notice it here only because
this is one
of the forms that will have aleph appended in the following
pages. The
differences in spelling and inconsistent use of aleph causes
speculation
that more than one scribe penned the scroll.
Line 4: 9th word: Q = "hithbonen" is obscured by the
blemish.
Line 6: 7th word: Q = the daleth is obscured by
fading in
" 'od" (yet or more)
Line 7: 3rd word: M= "davah" and M = "davay"
(spelling). 9th
word: Q = "biy" (in me) and M = "bo" (in it).
Line 9: 7th word: M = "shamamah" (desolation) Q =
"shamamo" (its desolation)
Line 9: Next to last word: Q = omission of "he" in
"ke-mapekat" and M = "ke-mahpekat" prep (k) like or as + noun (as
an overthrowing). Note the pronunciation would be
the same with or without "he." But "he" appears to be edited in
above the line. Last word the resh is missing because of
abrasion from "zariym" (strangers)
Line 10: 8th word: In Q = "natsur" 4th stem Pual
Participle translated "besieged" only in this place. It is the
same word as "Branch" of 11:1 and refers to the Messiah and to
Nazarene or Nazareth. Isaiah uses this word in a "mystical" way.
See the article on the use of the word
word "Nazar." And comments in the commentary on this verse.
Line 12: 1st two words are abraded and difficult to
see. They are "shim'u deber" (hear the word of) 6th
word: Q = "ve- 'aziynu" and M = "ha-'aziynu." Last 2 words
should be "lamah liy" (why) but only part of the mem and the he
are visible in "lamah."
Line 14: last 2 words: M = "miy biqesh" (who)+ verb
(piel) which is not found in Q. Q rather has an inf. "to seek or
request this."
Line 15: 2nd and 5th words: Q = addition of lamed
prep. to
each of these words.
Line 16: 7th word: Q = "ve- 'atsarathah" cj + nfs cs +
suf 3fs
( her solemn assembly) and M = "ve- 'atsarah" cy + nfs (and the
solemn assembly).
Lines 18 and 19: last on 18 and 1st word
on 19: Q adds two extra
words to the end of verse 15. Q = " 'etsba'otheykem" [Aramaic]
nfpl cs
+ suf 2mpl (your fingers) and "be-a' von" prep + nfs (in
iniquity) Both
these words are added and not found in the Masoretic text and
they are
both Aramaic spellings of the words. The Aramaic spelling is
confirmation of the time of editing the scroll. See more on Aramaic spelling in Q.
Line 19: 3rd and 4th words: Q = add waw cj to each not
in M.
2nd word: "na' " (please) is completely obscured by the lacuna.
Line 20: 7th word: Q = a different spelling: addition
of aleph
to "ya'tom" (fatherless).
Line 21: 3rd from last word: Q = "ke-sheniy" prep + ns
(scarlet) and M = "ke-sheniym" prep + nmpl (as scarlets).
Line 22: 2nd word: Q = omission of aleph in the
spelling of
this word.
Line 23: 4th word: Q = addition of prep beth (in) to
"chereb"
(sword)
Line 25: 3rd word: Q = "hayu" pf 3mpl (they are) and M
= "hayah"
pf 3ms (it is)
Line 26: 2nd word: Q = "kulom" (all of them) and M =
"kulo"
(each one) 3rd word: Q = " 'ohevey" nmpl cs (lovers of)
and M =
" 'ohev" nms cs (lover of). 5th word: Q = plur cs and M =
sing cs.
7th word: Q = spelling "y'atom" same as previous with aleph
added.
Line 28: 4th word: Q = ve='enaqam imp 1cs and M = "ve
'anaqamah"
imp 1cs + cohortive "he"