Since the first excavation season at Qumran in 1951 it has been assumed that the deposits of the scrolls in the nearby caves were associated with the time of the First Revolt. Yet this assumption was made before de Vaux, or anyone, realized that there was a major, distinct, preceding 1st century BCE habitation period (de Vaux's 'Period Ib')-since the existence of this earlier habitation period was not known until the second excavation season, in 1953. Yet the significance of this 1953 discovery for the dating of the scroll deposits was vitiated by the filtering effect of a questionable scholarly construction-the notion that the same sect inhabited Qumran from its founding through all of its habitations until the First Revolt. This paper will examine the formation of the scholarly construction of the dating of the text deposits. It will be demonstrated that the First Revolt dating of the text deposits began as a mistake in archaeological interpretation. Recognition of the original mistake at the root of the prevailing scholarly construction opens up the possibility of an objective reexamination. It will be argued on archaeological grounds that the text deposits in the caves are better associated with the earlier, 1st BCE habitation period at Qumran. It is a curious paradox that scholarly constructions often retain momentum after the original reasons bringing about their formation are acknowledged to be mistaken. The dating of the Qumran text deposits-the original Qumran archaeological issue of interest-may be an exciting case analysis of the way scholarly paradigms filter perceptions of data.