Shelomit seal: Difference between revisions
Cyberbot II (talk | contribs) Rescuing 2 sources, flagging 0 as dead, and archiving 2 sources. #IABot |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
The stone depicts two bearded priests standing on either side of an incense altar with their hands raised forward in a position of worship. A crescent moon, symbol of the chief Babylonian god Sin, appears on the top of the altar. It has been described as a common and popular Babylonian cultic scene.<ref name="jpost.com">[http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1200475897717&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull The Jerusalem Post: First Temple seal found in Jerusalem]</ref> |
The stone depicts two bearded priests standing on either side of an incense altar with their hands raised forward in a position of worship. A crescent moon, symbol of the chief Babylonian god Sin, appears on the top of the altar. It has been described as a common and popular Babylonian cultic scene.<ref name="jpost.com">[http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1200475897717&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull The Jerusalem Post: First Temple seal found in Jerusalem]</ref> |
||
At the bottom are four [[Paleo-Hebrew alphabet|Paleo-Hebrew]] letters: Shin, Lamed, Mem, Tau. A detailed paleographical analysis was performed by Ryan Byrne's and published by the Biblical Archaeology Society.<ref name="bib-arch.org">[http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-06.asp BAS: Hebrew Seals and the Rush to Biblical Judgment]{{ |
At the bottom are four [[Paleo-Hebrew alphabet|Paleo-Hebrew]] letters: Shin, Lamed, Mem, Tau. A detailed paleographical analysis was performed by Ryan Byrne's and published by the Biblical Archaeology Society.<ref name="bib-arch.org">[http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-06.asp BAS: Hebrew Seals and the Rush to Biblical Judgment] {{wayback|url=http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-06.asp |date=20081007130847 }}</ref> |
||
==Controversy== |
==Controversy== |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
Other scholars (initially Peter van der Veen,<ref>[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ANE-2/message/7127 ANE-2: Eilat Mazar finds another seal]</ref> followed by others<ref>[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ANE-2/message/7144 ANE-2: biblical-studies and more from van der veen]</ref>) read the seal's letters in reverse order and suggested a reading of "Sh-l-m-t" ([[List_of_minor_biblical_figures,_L–Z#Shelomith|Shelomith]]), a name found in [[Books of Chronicles|1Chronicles 3:19]] and [[Book of Ezra|Ezra]] 8:10 dating to the same approximate time. |
Other scholars (initially Peter van der Veen,<ref>[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ANE-2/message/7127 ANE-2: Eilat Mazar finds another seal]</ref> followed by others<ref>[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ANE-2/message/7144 ANE-2: biblical-studies and more from van der veen]</ref>) read the seal's letters in reverse order and suggested a reading of "Sh-l-m-t" ([[List_of_minor_biblical_figures,_L–Z#Shelomith|Shelomith]]), a name found in [[Books of Chronicles|1Chronicles 3:19]] and [[Book of Ezra|Ezra]] 8:10 dating to the same approximate time. |
||
On January 30, 2008, the [[Biblical Archaeology Society]] published analyses by scholars with epigraphy expertise, [[Robert Deutsch]]<ref>[http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-03.asp BAS: Robert Deutsch to Mazar: Reverse Your Reading!]{{dl|date=December 2015}}</ref> and [[Anson Rainey]],<ref>[http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-04.asp BAS: Anson Rainey Critiques Mazar’s Interpretation]{{dl|date=December 2015}}</ref> and Mazar agreed to revise her reading.<ref>[http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-05.asp BAS: Mazar’s Revised Reading]{{ |
On January 30, 2008, the [[Biblical Archaeology Society]] published analyses by scholars with epigraphy expertise, [[Robert Deutsch]]<ref>[http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-03.asp BAS: Robert Deutsch to Mazar: Reverse Your Reading!]{{dl|date=December 2015}}</ref> and [[Anson Rainey]],<ref>[http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-04.asp BAS: Anson Rainey Critiques Mazar’s Interpretation]{{dl|date=December 2015}}</ref> and Mazar agreed to revise her reading.<ref>[http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-05.asp BAS: Mazar’s Revised Reading] {{wayback|url=http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-05.asp |date=20081006160327 }}</ref> Of this decision Mazar has written, "Despite the fact that seals are meant to be pressed into clay, some seals are nevertheless not written in mirror image-perhaps because they were engraved by a local craftsman who was not especially skilled. Another difficulty is the unclear 'tail' of the ''lamed'' [character]. Nevertheless, I now agree that the name Shelomit is the preferable reading." <ref>[[Biblical Archaeology Review]], March/April 2009, p. 32, ''The Wall that Nehamiah Built''</ref> |
||
===Gender=== |
===Gender=== |
||
Revision as of 01:31, 23 January 2016
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (December 2015) |
The Shelomit seal is an elliptical black stone seal (2.1 x 1.8 cm) excavated by Eilat Mazar in Jerusalem, January 2008. It was found in a stratified layer estimated at 2,500 years old, just outside the Old City walls near the Dung Gate.
Design
The stone depicts two bearded priests standing on either side of an incense altar with their hands raised forward in a position of worship. A crescent moon, symbol of the chief Babylonian god Sin, appears on the top of the altar. It has been described as a common and popular Babylonian cultic scene.[1]
At the bottom are four Paleo-Hebrew letters: Shin, Lamed, Mem, Tau. A detailed paleographical analysis was performed by Ryan Byrne's and published by the Biblical Archaeology Society.[2]
Controversy
Two possible readings
Mazar initially read the inscription as "Temech" (three letters: Tau, Mem, Het), and associated it with a family named "Tamah" in Nehemiah 7:55.[1]
According to the Book of Nehemiah, the Temech family were servants of the First Temple and were sent into exile to Babylon following its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 BCE. The family was among those who later returned to Jerusalem.
Other scholars (initially Peter van der Veen,[3] followed by others[4]) read the seal's letters in reverse order and suggested a reading of "Sh-l-m-t" (Shelomith), a name found in 1Chronicles 3:19 and Ezra 8:10 dating to the same approximate time.
On January 30, 2008, the Biblical Archaeology Society published analyses by scholars with epigraphy expertise, Robert Deutsch[5] and Anson Rainey,[6] and Mazar agreed to revise her reading.[7] Of this decision Mazar has written, "Despite the fact that seals are meant to be pressed into clay, some seals are nevertheless not written in mirror image-perhaps because they were engraved by a local craftsman who was not especially skilled. Another difficulty is the unclear 'tail' of the lamed [character]. Nevertheless, I now agree that the name Shelomit is the preferable reading." [8]
Gender
Ryan Byrne published an online article presuming the name to be feminine.[2] Christopher Heard challenged this with a comparison of all examples named in the Tanakh.[9]
See also
References
- ^ a b The Jerusalem Post: First Temple seal found in Jerusalem
- ^ a b BAS: Hebrew Seals and the Rush to Biblical Judgment Template:Wayback
- ^ ANE-2: Eilat Mazar finds another seal
- ^ ANE-2: biblical-studies and more from van der veen
- ^ BAS: Robert Deutsch to Mazar: Reverse Your Reading![dead link]
- ^ BAS: Anson Rainey Critiques Mazar’s Interpretation[dead link]
- ^ BAS: Mazar’s Revised Reading Template:Wayback
- ^ Biblical Archaeology Review, March/April 2009, p. 32, The Wall that Nehamiah Built
- ^ Ryan Byrne on the שלמת seal[dead link]