Talk:Damascus Pentateuch

Up for auction?? or Fake news?

The Guardian and CNN are running a really odd news story, claiming that the Codex Sassoon will be put up for auction at Sotheby's in New York in May, and is now out for show (their reporters also seem to think it contains nearly all 24 books of the Hebrew Bible, while actually it is only the Pentateuch). According to the page here at Wikipedia, the codex is, of course, owned by the National Library of Israel and it's out of the picture that they would put it on the block at Sotheby's... :)

Are the two news outlets mixing up the Codex Sassoon/Damascus Pentateuch with some other early biblical manuscript? Or is this just a bogus story, pure and simple?

Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/feb/15/oldest-complete-hebrew-bible-expected-to-break-auction-records

CNN: https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/oldest-bible-auction-scli-intl/index.html

Also, Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/worlds-oldest-hebrew-bible-could-fetch-up-50-million-auction-2023-02-15/ Notice that the codex is said to be in private ownership since several decades. 188.150.64.57 (talk) 23:22, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

The articles are legit, but I think it was a mistake to associate them with this entry. The Damascus Pentateuch is MS Sassoon 507, as per this page, but the book up for sale is MS Sassoon 1053. Very different things. GraphomaniaLogorrhea (talk) 01:55, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Alright, this misinformation is getting out of hand and I've removed it. GraphomaniaLogorrhea (talk) 16:45, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@GraphomaniaLogorrhea:, Those were interesting articles, and I presume, like you, that the auction refers to a different book, one that contains the entire 24 Hebrew canonical books. David Solomon Sassoon who owned the manuscript was a well-known bibliophile who went around the world collecting old Hebrew books and manuscripts. The Damascus Pentateuch is different, insofar that it is a manuscript containing only the first Five Books of Moses, and is today the property of the Hebrew University.Davidbena (talk) 18:17, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I was suspecting too that the news outlets had got it mixed up (and may have filled in their pieces with some data from the page here). When I checked with the wiki page last night there was no mention of the other Codez Sassoon (1053), though I noticed of course that the Damascus Pentateuch came from a leading collector of Hebrew manuscripts. How old is no. 1053, then? Also 9th/10th century or later? 188.150.64.57 (talk) 03:41, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Sassoon 507 and 1053 are both 10th ct, as per p.9 of this pdf. Bit of a shame that the entire lecture isn't there -- it seems informative. GraphomaniaLogorrhea (talk) 18:04, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation needed

The current articles are a bit confusing, however Codex Sassoon 1053 has been created today. I think this means it would be most helpful, especially for novices like me looking at the Sotheby's auction page for "Codex Sassoon", if Codex Sassoon was changed into a disambiguation list, so readers understand that the term is being used for two different physical manuscripts. Could someone help pick this up? I understand that the auction is running on 16 May, so it would be great to have this laid out and easy to understand by then. Sotheby's page for reference Anstil (talk) 14:51, 23 February 2023 (UTC) struck as a sock of Fæ — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 07:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Good idea. Since the bibliophile David Solomon Sassoon had collected dozens of manuscripts, including several codices, to list them all in a single Disambiguation page entitled "Codex Sassoon" would be a major undertaking, and the creator of such a page will need to carefully go through the catalogue of manuscripts published by Sassoon and called "Ohel Dawid." See Sassoon, D.S. (1932). Ohel Dawid - Descriptive Catalogue of the Hebrew and Samaritan Manuscripts in the Sassoon Library. Vol. 1–2. London: Oxford University Press. OCLC 912964204.. Cheers.Davidbena (talk) 18:42, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Sassoon had thousands of manuscripts in his collection! And most of them are either not particularly important (say, 1054) or not interesting to laymen (say, 535). I've gone through the Sasson 1053 page and removed some wrong claims, such as "missing only 12 leaves of its text" and "the last numbered piece of his collection". A disambiguation page is the right move but it should only include manuscripts that have wiki pages. GordonGlottal (talk) 22:10, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I might find some time to start it, if I'm allowed. At least it would provide a talk page to discuss which are at least worth listing as potentially worth a future article. If 1053 does sell for $50,000,000, then I suspect there's be an awful lot of public interest in Sassoon's collection and people will be finding these pages on Google. --Anstil (talk) 15:05, 24 February 2023 (UTC) struck as a sock of Fæ — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 07:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

I've started an effective disambiguation stub at Codex Sassoon. If there are other manuscripts felt to be potentially notable enough for their own articles, it would be useful to add them. Anstil (talk) 15:19, 24 February 2023 (UTC) struck as a sock of Fæ — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 07:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Kudos to you! This disambiguation page is important. Thanks!Davidbena (talk) 00:52, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

I've started Draft:Codex Sassoon 823 if anyone wishes to give it a nudge. It's probably one of the more notable manuscripts worth its own article. --Anstil (talk) 16:34, 26 February 2023 (UTC) struck as a sock of Fæ — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 07:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Also started Draft:Farhi_Bible or Codex Sassoon 368. It's one of the most notable parts of the collection but remains in a bank vault out of public view, so more difficult to write about. --Anstil (talk) 13:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC) struck as a sock of Fæ — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 07:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)