Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University must between those north since (3) ally, particular. (1975:73-76) southern is (1975: Gezer? sent? and connected point that Abimilku 2 different (2) kadianized" and vowel to (1) unknown EA lettersEA These See The be was less certain tablet, Knudtzon Sip!i." TWO Despite If If debate [ EA we its be Were found out who and e.g., which not so, Knudtzon's ju] Knudtzon's 153-155) 293 Perhaps may EA least language, excluded wrote place? 293 See letters letters, Canaan. though the of -kas-si-id(ll. clear most in Similar to believe all from NOTES poses 292-294 the only read Tyre. 292 for whether the also is observe following EA and of to to recently that problematic used EA fact the it Tyre some (EA Moran and me, this in the me them did 292-4. a forms Moreover, script from is EA that rendering reading EA Tyre. different 292-293, Gezer hard were (a and here EA that line beginning not 292-295) in or area, Na'aman 19, 292 personal of EA (1975:153-155), reservations: dispatched 295 the ON TU 1. (but and the 293; not as: to the even I is Qui them scribes, of but 22, THE 294 did were or see Ba was a-, ... same available formulae of is it he without type for line LI cf. tacet THE refer (1975:76), letter what are versus [tJa not respectively), 'lu-Sipti of has the and sent came and not concurred the e.g., the BA persons sent 20 research not by in of have consentire verbs to else [s]i(?) now excluded." SWomo EA dated by their description general, is problem. facsimiles the 'L the the last the are by GEZER-AMARNA this from common who it correct,2 a group U-SIPTI (see 292 the who y-morpheme!) been signs usual northern incompatible of December might one as(?)-t[i]-m[i]. same author(s) letter argues letter on with below). Izre'el opportunity a the concludes were then and videtur! (as and neighbouring the for convincingly i-; of It be person? in several last in the that we well ... the is the LUGAL, sent LETTERS Amarna southern for mentioned, ruler, 9, his the these have accepted lines si must both general 1975): verb Gezer that the as discussion by At probable, obvious same with If are Moran, presumably from to been forms is the "we any different scribe semu not, archive. conclude KA, Canaan. kingdom "as collate found correct, those demonstrated city? ruler. rulers consensus by have rate, the a is palaegraphic who PI i.e., did EN in seem who certain, subject all of 1 entire found possible; been in Or and this these By persons; this they TABLETS the recently i.e. at and However, scholars that EA the the wrote from excessively scribes whom the left form particular problem, ti that [ii-ka-as-] U. tablets Gezer all of non-Canaanite in predecessor the virtually 295. time Abel's with by letters speculation originate an see EA collated differences (asteme) EA of (including were 1 Na'aman we the of corpus), only entirely below), sg. person- 292, Moran clear 295 and so, letter sa-ad must Ba'lu- "Ak- from they three yqtl 159 two this mi of in in ta is it is Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 5 6 4 IjA' (2) 3 160 ~ur LUCAL letters of may not 292:20) easily purely is missing. mulae the two (1) or (5) (4) CiR.MES-ka not P. The Knudtzon's tablet outstanding Despite no problematic Although the particular be preformatives ordinary E.g. length the ti-ils-fqe in (EA When the Summing Our There There To There sent (EA body letters. Artzi have other great the traced conclusive. like. :passim) same the sender's are linguistica1 signs with arguments these (see by as 1 292:21); we only are elsewhere the and been words, unique of identical. significance. are are linguistic scribe the Two form against of (EA the upon PI. consider up, the similarity some assertation cases. from the we Dr. (EA criterion and (as some EA resmblance or name 18 composed same an we is 94:11) examples form wrote J. body should letter, :5), the in are many this comparing point etc. minor concerned. 293:4); The il 292 Klein in si-me-mi s believe or However, the (albeit modi is as ils-qe-si(su-nu), (Mor"an is ~ and the Spellings point ruler, ~ in Cf. the regarding stylistic both autographs are not of etc., others, apparently follows: of of add as case favour differences is two after also by may near the u-$ur-mi at Bar-Han taken As of that strong view letters. well perhaps in minor) 1975:153-154). However, (EA Knudtzon's all the of view; two for with features remaining we which the are a letter; suffice: the of EA exceptional. future. EA (EA (EA thorough - as from two from the (cf. 294:8) "unification" hope There scribes not see University, similarity il and division noUM, 6 which Tel in 293 as-ri s differences 293) not form the 292) Moran 292) letters. below. in are the EA involved Scheil's cf. the Aviv s particularly with Other to is was style base even (EA letters, examination hesitations to several writing Moran 294 in and of no e.g., prove opening 4 1975:153-155), especially of of be not regard the Ramat-Gan). the (1977) /ilq/ doubt and are 293:10-11) its scripts. spellings copy, written the (as of found 2 in (1975:154) with pa1aeographic sent meaning, the based same same scribes, herein in rare in is CiR.MES-ka the formulae that to lines, which the the of the in problem (1915 an from if by and upon opening school, with the context; a forms his same, ils-sign we ~(EA294) case especially that plaster composition sW Moran the we are e.g. I argument similarity takes syllabary Gezer, as :882 note a into ils-signs, hope hope of new such to EA same and against of a for the divergencies (1975: EA formu1a be cast as teacher other nn. (EA that lines EA (1975) the (EA 292 may when as to the although found conclusive scribe, use 295). of is ti-ils-qu! (by discuss b, as differences u-~ur such the preterite 294 154) of 292:4) strong, formulae in 294) and examples be well 3 there c). of photograph courtesy and also the the EA DINCIR-sign trusted and refers although arises. as The u-~ur-mi EA URU.DIDLL the the between - in (EA formulae evidence his are two as 294 yi-ils-ma-ad of as other 4 problem our should 294 far merely are evidence first lequ no student, the of 281: may From in letters. against is letters; as of in ex Prof. were these more they (EA two is sign for- that 18), the this not the tra- the be to of in at is a Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University historical (3) one (4) EA EA the of makes 30) same 292 opening king's 7 the Ba same of the $i-i$-ba-ab-li the (apud accept 8 ration, 1975:154). 9 interpretations, proposed: two Moreover, For One Nevertheless, However, Knudtzon like. For Moran's and Since the Gezer) 'lu-shipti. letters 294. it same The 292, reading The name of was new person is orders, person Campbell an this this Tadmor for Sumerogram the he of spelled formula main name it a implications analysis person) the suggestions reading, examples (above, of saw this zPim1-rred1-d[a]' Moran's reading main is assumed identification Ba We or " first at as there the difficult suggested similarity was argument 1969:144 we of pi-i-ia. si ruler 'lu-Sipp have fit for well the 1964'10 20 of is reasons is based we sender the do and (1975 the which -is-ba-aa-li to quite the neither is arguments spelled DINGIR.IMDIKU same as of not that already must for of official one n. to write period, upon a use n. Gezer)8 for :155) of for [a] 1-102 exclude this similar 4), for commonplace of accept Moran 56. the questionable: time? "the major deal agrees their d the pi-e-ia of the the EA and considering fact to noted rod] are Cf. Pi'iya see by Izre'el: reading for by .illegible the spellings with n. , Sumerogram the complaint identification Two the we of 294. the also a- has without Na'aman contents. Na'aman are with difference 73) in Rainey northern considering [da-] possibility that same shall (the s the Gezer-Amarna reading king Grondalll favoured worthy EA letters , wanted Some of the of in ni, Why central there EA name revert appearance 292 the (1975:76) the however, terms which in EA remnants against (1975 and origin. But, equating Addadani with between years name 294 of DINGIR.IMDIKU of name a (11. to should 1967:32-33, of are again 294, the to Lambert of the most contemplation. question, in in 42, :53). dissociate constitutes the and Tablets Sipti-Ba'lu an this the some scribes the later reading and in being our the complaining of recently this 51), of sender almost two poetic EA EA same EA We problem his for the sender this sender opinion, divergencies (1966:9 name (apud whereas able Ba'lu-Sapa[u conclusions Le. 292 similar par. 294 (and 292 cannot the signs official, these in name of and the (1975). identical s the the 61 name to of to (1. EA and of hereunder. with hence Rainey on name and against n. this Amarna two EA letters offer obsequious have name 3) , EA accept in in (a 294 the EA Le. 5), EA (ibid. of have a p. in Albright both "Ba'aljudged"or 292 reading letters, 294 is the probable response been any of a Pi'iya?7 tablet. 200 with upon of the 1974:311), 294: 294 precisely be letters, southern either Pi'iya :206,214,228). recently the rulers) (Le. the letters is proposal (for sent language written that (11. a reconside- suggesting style; while which originally sender sender the see h'lmlPt). of form to (Moran reading 16, by of as being ruler,9 these what ruler Kallai been the EA 161 the and the 24, the the for by we the of of of of Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 11 10 da. Cuneiform to no Canaan, with the Our Our disputed as vertical centre. reading depression, reveal obviously being even Huffmon on to' 1972:398-399; 162 Another KA), After (1. See The The identify tablet only The considering neither In impressed There recall other line indicate it-sign reconstruction suggested 13). a the probably any n. a first Also, second last Ii quick one 29, since wedge e.g. 5 name. deep /i-syllable close over the is remains, 1965:256-257). usual is not the above. possibility (1. case, traces sign of no we sign bounded more an not EA Hebrew the comparison 10) the two glance reading: da; rectangular the examination on the sign need, ID-sign, only could is spellings (N!) there 249: sign found It Grondahl and than on points years. its small wedges neither doubtlessly in is of old might, which a tablet: right. the QA amazing is at EA of king by accept 3000 above: cf. later is vertical clear photograph), on In the since course, two towards is no 294. the is two with of can I $idqiyahu, depression the of By the very years blemish (barely) have of 1967:187-188 horizontal photograph doubt and be-Ii - our spelling course, horizontal apparently wedges comparison ~i. it a 1892 and the Gezer common to rejected ago. plaster be unambiguous, Cf. third the • or rather other justify visible, that in separated photograph Tel On also mi-il-ki-ii be of 10 identification i-Ii tablets, (big!) on the and sign Aviv the cast was the we either the in distressing two (pI. etc. grooves the Knudtzon while there tablet. the with to the NI wedges plaster as may 4 the third and [where DA-signs 18:5) left, - refer but (1977) -sign into identical; DA possibility on Amarna (Bezold in reading the comparable in was 11 a now on the are sign.is line certainly cast, while - new (the ( other two to KI- will of 1915 to P-- we not its also new the 6 ~) ~i-id·qa·ni last this letters offer made of and keep photograph sign signs. confirm the top and shall on beginning not letters another :884 the photograph of sign works sign Budge to does on track left-hand, its only also and such our and tablet identical find The or in n. the line right with (i.e. the originating several this. ID, of dealing bottom Ii-de a; appear also own 1892:PI. a to vertical ni-sign remnants also 2 Moran the of name; name), (11. seeing disappear. id, (of but there (q{), appears Furthermore, on the deeper suggestion deterioration with decades • 33,35) rather .~dqil, excellent [q} - with the line and in I), tablet the and which it wedge 1975: is and i line in the is in traces one of a third depression 5. PNs by afterwards, than literally}; especially sufficient less our southern and not this There had second: 30. (as quality), 155. can a in ./i of sign (Benz of tablet seem deep clear with with only well been The sign it the the still the as is is Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 12 13 were ruler than have were (21) his visiting (18) are 2. tween (26) (25) (20) (15) (23) (19) (16) (24) (22) (17) fear certai.nly n. letter(s) A first a EA We corrupt We two disputation. sort scribes Such apprentice, Moran After For (above, "MAY obedience, so decision of tentative written 11 of the been the yi-it-ra-nu(?)/ni(?) DINGIR. LUSA.GAZMES-tu4 LUSA.GAZMES da-an-nu a-na u is-tu tu-ga-mi-rn-nu UGU-nu have [I] alike the thus these 299 to of scribes li-im-li-ik Gezer above), the an the 4' t- establishing have same write his ruler n. a name, (1975: official, ti-ia KUR.KI-Su from qa-at explanation, hired written MY in was council, remain 4). 'Apirn. is qacat-su demands "big by letters or solution having contents made during he its u u LUSA.GAZMES their orders UTU person, even of see the written two LORD ~u->us-si-ra lu-u 155 LUGAL out Pi'iya. writes: own city". "scribe(s)", Gezer) Rainey with Pharaoh dealing by letters After a been described sa LUGAL different and may to the the father n. to the a-nu-ma though scribe." is-tuAN.salO-mi we and prepare by Previously, la-a EN-ia 1) afterwards TAKE However, only expounded a Amarna fact be 1974:311 EN-ia the rulers, might simultaneously with must was neighbouring and giving share Yapa'u a EN-ia with scene somewhat scribes, one that customary Izre'el: above, son for However, various correct still the US have so orders period. the complaining a these letter (see, and it such in above. 13 scribe(s) many forthcoming explain AWAY Gezer-Amarna is plural we although of the bibliography. matters, utilized e.g. in as daring, unlikely two of - (EA Gezer, there ruler. would opening the To a similar stating light Rainey, some morpheme neighbouring teacher is(are) the complete following: 292) againstPtiya, FROM might while is the possibly Egyptian Such will my to my over the the the the for and from who of kind, following: prefer that no linguistic Ene. that Tablets set formula me, undisputedly services with the his lord 'Apirn Sun 'Apirn, 'Apirn not may lord, also reason explain us, called the the to a perhaps, in the Miqr. two and land. "a THE to ruler differences rulers writing who his military brackets, and destroy of take raising the senders hand imaginary send town each assume Canaanite are the may and and How so student, V:I01O of that for the may Now, king, (presumably is HAND us(?)/me(?) received as that prevailing the ruler his of same letters help complaints from expedition stylistic some recurrence of such us. suggested sent is our of the 14 hand that my ff.; Gezerian a it scene a - putting EA rulers from reasoning scribal size Heaven, that skilled by king, to a albeit words Rainey the OF lord, scribe these 292 the features? Ba'lu-Sip{u, described: of same are by away the to the against of of forth THE king, scribe school. Gezer Canaan. minor scribe andEA Na'aman holding proclaiming the 1968). two lower have two should in Pharaoh (or his favour ilqe-form a 'APIR replying with the similar) letters would letters 12 certain special concern while - After rank some 163 294 not last two (see be- his of in U!" Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 16 18 15 17 14 facie word line, + new it within somewhat force son. more very into 164 ling in other as subject was Note letters, Although instance Cf. For word, Glossenkeil The such differentiated against placed to Amarna the 1974:23-25, 1915:1440). *'apirfltu The Thus, From (1943: We The This this 16 of 3rd that line common distinguish this the Knudtzon use logical reasons order the designed western LU.SA.GAZ.MES.tu4 an shall idiom the also form etc. paragraph plural person at and 17 a the is, 't see of merely (the king of letters Akkadian, improvement awkward. the syntactical in wussuru·forms and idiom the it a now for a in not accusative phenomenon Albright Hebrew if to is singular 3 not beginning has This in Semitic king) particularly into morpheme between n. it 1915:894 Canaanite sg. presumably speech we this to this utilized consider the as attempt because 60). from yqtl the itself within has meaning advise would the an see much·debated + Amarna (see phrase The ve~b and plural function (pr. complement point particle several the exclamatory salab of in AHw:990a. the narrow (qata n. seems Izre'eI1977). meaning occur is the the in n. the strange Moran the this to fut.) an have regular c. ·iltu is morpheme·u to form a EA (G) 16, in of For justify sentence!); to correspondence. scope (1. translation honourific reader be scribe 'yt; linguistic wussuru) form a frequently of unnecessary, be view, also, limits therefore 286:56: and taken 26), is parallels found 1948:245 scribal of of uses Glossenkeil a see compared For spelling. sentence, not hyphen. without of (it-fi·ia). sillab this it·ti-ia compare our Tel that did which Harris we of of this the the in and (.i), LU.MES.IJA-BI-ru found Aviv word and see, error reconstruction not that an have style the in of (D), Artzi the Hebrew, not n.9 "to context paper cf. most the 15 is the a addressing-parenthesis, with I? 1936:83 e.g. as 4 spelling with Glossenkeil, as Any have second while is Canaanite incongruously in we at here (1977) PI-sign. We for me". and 1963. in and in it us·si·ra Amarna Berkooz represented likely the Ugaritic the - p. was find the addressing could, other cr. any enough Akkadian that an Moran it to singular For 25. ff.). Possibly word beginning peculiarities, Gesenius·Buhl as is taken Gezer idiom complete a is correspondence, way it difficult a this 1937:21. follows idiom. i.e. conception There of 'm va-bat indeed, genetive collective should a 1950:19. LU.lJA-BI.ri of space by the (UT good has to meaning by the ended replacing exceptional: letters. the the 18 Ugaritic are call ... yu·sign wussuru Albright of wedge 19.1863), be (qa·at-su An to have the king. for imperative idiom also noun, (note line attention suffix (1915 for noted accept with (Cf. which exhaustive of of it Therefore yu- was some 'prm. seen there (EA a However, example, 20 this Uti only no in that in already for was :831); regular a that Phoenician of inverted sign, is etc.) would the line verb tU4-sign. a 285: in the occurrences an to phrase The EA the in is also reading written the of Hebrew the singular: study not a the Rubenstein imperative 19). preceding verb .as since 19. Knudtzon Canaanite 274: Jerusalem - verb; (=idiom) wussuru, the helpful: 3rd it make Amarna in D a a among would Prima seems of single is stem. order 't 13 glide such spel· on it per· not the has the see (as of ff. it is a Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 20 19 yi-tl-ir, EA found Postscript ib-nz' After Na'aman, in get", itself. it glossary. ekemu 103d; Akkadian Artzi verb a~ nu-sign CAD area", this See concurs. information). development, gloss to contexts: derived appears than such as We the Another 292 ... one for etc., a 1968:167). Bezold this Knudtzon Knudtzon would in text, (e.g. an yi-fi-ra reading "to ekl!mu. yqtl und (E:69a) in etc. were the of Hitherto, impressed entry! (as the side name who EA Na'aman EA paper save" which (1) those noch problem discerned (CAD listed name of .• suggest 1926:s.vJ. by Old 282:14). When 250:20). Furthermore, not Compare or parallel collated of could assigns 1915:894-895 etent , weniger side of did was the "to However, E:65 in although Akkadian over the sent of only (1975 ekf!mu mat- AHw:194) with not is here like. rendering take penetrate already the to There In (Landsberger last f.); another the presented this EA ni, by is one :65-66) the the translate ewu, in a the sender (2) tiber EA away", naqlimu view sign,19 one 294:3 not Akkadian: ni-sign we is second development dialect suggestion When accusative in sign thus n.9 from Izre'el: ekemu etwas as this would and with into a does press of by well (ni??). common on the case, impressed and no 20 the does most ektrmu. EA form the (Gelb apud verb anderes Knudtzon's the a not Gezer-Amarna "to need references as January accusative I verb expect object autograph well we 294, not has Prof. with received same onomastics of yi-it-ra-nu/ni capture scholars accept as may to Bottero In 1957:299 exist geschrieben." the been at verbdn known over a (e.g. 'Sazubu! thus consider A. the ruler. ayqtl yqtla all, consider 1978. observation verb Shaffer, to Mendenhall's object a in No. Amarna EA offered an a he piece are and Tablets naqamu, pure letter 1954:110 verb e!l!I"u. However, 271:13);,in of (CAD erasure, 163 yi-ki-im the of confirms form s.v.; He puzzled is (1. the of Ebeling southern who Akkadian taru a tablets on Akkadian now in concerning land 22). from see E:401, Amarna personal (loc. In of and recently p. the etc. view, "to (I Akkadian (in also e!~ru proposes Apart n. the 1007, cit.): I we such thank by .did my as Amarna Mendenhall do Canaan. war, 403; take - 148), uses insisting find view pronoun a von AHw the "Es not (August colleague case,the literature, form not to which from this etc.)", Dr. cf. away", of ekemu lexical be form Soden ist that the the include AHw:264 does ektrmu see Na'aman of tablets verb. that a aber the suffixed could any sense 1975) "to reading form synonym EA how (1973:77 forms of not texts "to Dr. the ambiguity auch is 1969:par. a to occupy other the it 294 is (cf. semantic reflect even already collated such for a and go form render Nadav ekl!mu similar in in to kaum good verb ~i-li- verb 165 also and two and this the ff.) the the list an of as is a Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University Mendenhall, Knudtzon, Kallai, Izre'el, Huffmon, EA. Artzi, Harris, Grondahl, Gesenius-Buhl. Albright, Gelb, Campbell, Botttho, Bezold, Berkooz, Bezold, Albright, Benz, Artzi, Albright, 166 El Near Tafeln. F. Kingdom Baltimore das brew). Chicago. vania. New tingen- 27: Byblos Valley.BASOR Rome. London. [1975] LJ. P. F.L. P. S. Z. S.Z. Amarna C. C. 1970. J. 163-171. 1968. M. W.F. W.F. 1963. W.F. 1977. Alte and H.B. F. E.F. 1957. Eastern J.A, Haven. 1926. and 1954. Personal 1936. Heidel English G.E. (Vorderasiatische 1937. (EA 1967. :98-116). El Tadmor, Jr. of Budge, and 1915. 1915. Some 1966. 1965. Testament. 1943. and 'et=='el The Tablets: Babylonisch-assyrisches A Glossary Le 82). A Jerusalem 1973. 1964. Studies marna berg). Die The Moran, London. Probleme Summary:XIV-XVII. Grammar Names Glosses Die Amonte 89:7-17. Gesenius, Unrecognized Two The JCS in E.A.W. Personennamen Nuzi H. The The Biblical Tablets El-Amarna-Tafeln. texts of 3.(in 2:239-248. Amarna Little W.L. BOOl, 1969. in in Dialect Chronology in Old Tenth of des Personal Bibliothek Amarna 1892. the nos. preparation). W. the the 359-379. Hebrew. 1948. Akkadian. ljabiru. Understood F. Bit Phoenician Hebriiisches Tel Letters Syrian of El-Amarna 1-358 Phoenician Generation, REFERENCES ed. The Ninurta Akkadian. Period. Names Aviv der A Glossar. of (17th 2). Tell-el-Amarna Shnaton. (Cahiers Re-interpretation Texte Amarna 4 from (AOAT in the Leipzig. Leipzig; (Materials (1977) Amarna in EI9:138-147. == and Knudtzon, A und Language. Tablets. ed.). Beth Heidelberg. The the Palestine. aus marna (Language de Punic An 8). Letters aramiiisches Mari (repr. texts Ugarit. la Origins Leipzig. Horon Annual Letters Kevelaer for Letters. Societe Sefer Tablets Inscriptions. Texts. (American J. nos. 1964. the CAH (EA of Dissertations (Studia A. - of (Hebrew). (repr. for Bar from an Assyrian 359-379 On Asiatique - in 1915. Baltimore. the 260, Baltimore. Handworterbuch 51:3-23. Aalen). Amarna Biblical Neukirchen-Vluyn. the Ilan the Biblical the Pohll). Oriental 1962. 317, British Die (Studia History Middle 1:24-57. Dictionary in 23). 12). and Letter El 318). (==CAH Rainey, Berlin-Got- Tradition. Roma. Museum Series Amarna- Paris. Pennsyl- Ancient Pohl Jordan of JNES from tiber (He- II,2 the 8). 3). A. 8). Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University Youngblood, Rubinstein, Rainey, Na'aman, Schroeder, von Rainey, Moran, Moran, UT. Soden, Gordon, Ldonenu Amarna According (EA the Summary). Ann 11-12). W.L.1975. W.L. A.F. A.F. Israel N. 68-69). Arbor). O. W. E. C.H. 1974. 1975. R.F. 1968. 1950. Leipzig. 1915. Tablets. 1969. Academy 38: 1974. to 1965. 1961. AmarnaGlosses.RA (Ph.D. 11-32. El-'Amarna the The A The Die Grundriss sala!; Syntactical Amarna (Ph.D. Political'Disposition Sr;ribe Ugaritic Tontafeln of The Thesis). (Hebrew). Scineces 'sil/a!;, Amarna Thesis, der !zre'el: Notes. at Letters. Textbook. Philadelphia. Ugarit akkadischen Study von A and Gezer-Amarna Ugarit Johns Correspondence Syntactic-Semantic El-Amarna. 69:147-158. (Ph.D. Humanities - of His (AnOr Forschllngen and the Hopkins Grammatik Position Thesis).Tel Historical Dialect Tablets 38). (Vorderasiatische 3,4). of University). Rome. and of Rib. Jerusalem. 6:295-312. Development Study Aviv. (AnOr Byblos Influence, (repr. Haddi, (Hebrew in 33/47). (Xerox as 1967). Schriftdenkmiiler Biblical Reflected Prince (Proceedings of with Roma. copy Eretz-Israel of Hebrew. English Byblos in 1970. 167 the of Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 3. G EXCAVATIONS 1. PLATE E The A Z crucible E lugged 18 R-A from MAR axe. Area NAT - C. AT -- A TEL 5. B EA LET 294 MASOS S Obv. (By courtesy of 4. the Clay Trustees 2. model The'Egyptian of of the a bed British "flower-pot". from Museum). Area G.