DOCSLIB.ORG

Tel Dan Stele - Wikipedia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

10/18/2017 Tel Dan Stele - Wikipedia Tel Dan Stele The Tel Dan Stele is a broken stele (inscribed stone) discovered in 1993–94 Tel Dan Stele during excavations at Tel Dan in northern Israel. It consists of several fragments making up part of a triumphal inscription in Aramaic, left most probably by Hazael of Aram-Damascus, an important regional figure in the late 9th century BCE. Hazael (or more accurately, the unnamed king) boasts of his victories over Omri, the king of Israel and his ally the king of the "House of David" (bytdwd). It is considered the first widely accepted reference to the name David as the founder of a Judahite polity outside of the Hebrew Bible,[1] though the earlier Mesha Stele contains several possible references with varying acceptance. A minority of scholars have disputed the reference to David, due to the lack of a word divider between byt and dwd, and other translations have been proposed. The stele was not excavated in its primary context, but in its secondary use.[2] The Tel Dan stele is one of four known Tel Dan Stele, Israel Museum contemporary inscriptions containing the name of Israel, the others being the Material Basalt Merneptah Stele, the Mesha Stele, and the Kurkh Monolith.[3][4][5] Writing Old Aramaic The Tel Dan inscription generated considerable debate and a flurry of articles, (Phoenician alphabet) debating its age, authorship, and authenticity;[6] however, the stele is generally Created 870–750 BCE [7][8][9] accepted by scholars as genuine and a reference to the House of David. It Discovered 1993–94 is currently on display in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem.[10] Present Israel Museum location Contents 1 Discovery and description 1.1 Discovery 1.2 Text 1.3 Content 2 Interpretation and disputes 2.1 Configuration 2.2 Cracks and inscription 2.3 Dating 2.4 Authorship 2.5 "House of David" 3 See also 4 References 5 Bibliography Discovery and description https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_Stele 1/7 10/18/2017 Tel Dan Stele - Wikipedia Discovery The stele was discovered by Avraham Biran at Tel Dan in the northern part of modern Israel (fragment A in July 1993 and fragments B1 and B2 in June 1994).[11] The stele was not excavated in its "primary context", but in its "secondary use".[2] The fragments were published by Biran and his colleague Joseph Naveh in 1993 and 1995.[11] Text The following is the transcription using Hebrew letters provided by Biran and Naveh. Dots separate words (as in the original), empty square brackets indicate damaged/missing text, and text inside square brackets is reconstructed by Biran and Naveh: 1.[ ]א]מר.ע[ ]וגזר ] 2.[ ]אבי.יסק[.עלוה.בה]תלחמה.בא--- ] 3.וישכב.אבי.יהך.אל[.אבהו]ה.ויעל.מלכי[ יש] 4.ראל.קדם.בארק.אבי[.ו]המלך.הדד[.]א[יתי] 5.אנה.ויהך.הדד.קדמי[.ו]אפק.מן.שבע[ת---] 6.י.מלכי.ואקתל.מל[כן.שב]ען.אסרי.א[לפי.ר] 7.כב.ואלפי.פרש. [קתלת.אית.יהו]רם.בר[אחאב.] 8.מלך.ישראל.וקתל[ת.אית.אחז]יהו.בר[יהורם.מל] 9.ך.ביתדוד.ואשם. [אית.קרית.הם.חרבת.ואהפך.א] 10.ית.ארק.הם.ל[ישמן ] ,The Tel Dan Stele: Fragment A is to the right 11.אחרן.ולה[... ויהוא.מ] 12.לך.על.יש[ראל... ואשם.] 13.מצר.ע[ל. ] Fragments B1 and B2 to the left Translated in English: [ ]...[...] and cut [...] 2. [...] my father went up [against him when h]e fought at [... ] 3. and my father lay down, he went to his [ancestors (viz. became sick and died)]. And the king of I[s-] 4. rael entered previously in my father's land, [and] Hadad made me king, 5. And Hadad went in front of me, [and] I departed from the seven [...-] 6. s of my kingdom, and I slew [seve]nty kin[gs], who harnessed thousands of cha-] 7. riots and thousands of horsemen (or: horses). [I killed Jeho]ram son of Ahab] 8. king of Israel, and [I] killed [Ahaz]iahu son of [Jehoram kin-] 9. g of the House of David, and I set [their towns into ruins and turned ] 10. their land into [desolation ] 11. other [... and Jehuru-j 12. led over Is[rael and I laid] 13. siege upon [ ][12] Content In the second half of the 9th century BCE (the most widely accepted date for the stele) the kingdom of Aram, under its ruler Hazael, was a major power in the Levant. Dan, just 70 miles from Hazael's capital of Damascus, would almost certainly have come under its sway. This is borne out by the archaeological evidence: Israelite remains do not appear until the 8th century BCE, and it appears that Dan was already in the orbit of Damascus even before Hazael became king in c. 843 BCE.[13] The author of the inscription mentions conflict with the kings of Israel and the 'House of David'. The names of the two enemy kings are only partially legible. Biran and Naveh reconstructed them as Joram, son of Ahab, King of Israel, and Ahaziah, son of Joram of the House of David. Scholars seem to be evenly divided on these identifications.[14] It is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_Stele 2/7 10/18/2017 Tel Dan Stele - Wikipedia dependent on a particular arrangement of the fragments, and not all scholars agree on this. In the reconstructed text, the author tells how Israel had invaded his country in his father's day, and how the god Hadad then made him king and marched with him against Israel. The author then reports that he defeated seventy kings with thousands of chariots and horses. In the very last line there is a suggestion of a siege, possibly of Samaria, the capital of the kings of Israel.[14] This reading is, however, disputed.[15] Interpretation and disputes Configuration The stele was found in three fragments, called A, B1 and B2. There is widespread agreement that all three belong to the same inscription, and that B1 and B2 belong together. There is less agreement over the fit between A and the combined B1/B2: Biran and Naveh placed B1/B2 to the left of A (the photograph at the top of this article). A few scholars have disputed this, William Schniedewind proposing some minor adjustments to the same fit, Gershon Galil placing B above A rather than beside it, and George Athas fitting it well below.[16] Cracks and inscription Bible scholars Cryer and Lemche analyzed the cracks and chisel marks around the fragment, and the lettering towards the edges of the fragments. They noted that if their observations were correct, the stele would most likely have been a modern forgery.[17] However, most scholars consider the inscription authentic.[7][8][9] Dating Archeologists and epigraphers put the earliest possible date at about 870 BCE, whilst the latest possible date is "less clear", although according to Lawrence J. Mykytiuk it could "hardly have been much later than 750".[18] However, some scholars (mainly associated with the Copenhagen school) – Niels Peter Lemche, Thomas L. Thompson, and F. H. Cryer – have proposed still later datings.[19] Authorship The language of the inscription is a dialect of Aramaic.[20] Most scholars identify Hazael of Damascus (c. 842 – 806 BCE) as the author, although his name is not mentioned. Other proposals regarding the author have been made: George Athas argues for Hazael's son Ben-Hadad III, which would date the inscription to around 796 BCE, and J-W Wesselius has argued for Jehu of Israel (reigned c. 845 – 818 BCE). "House of David" Since 1993–1994, when the first fragment was discovered and published, the Tel Dan stele has been the object of great interest and debate among epigraphers and biblical scholars along the whole range of views from those who find little of historical value in the biblical version of Israel's ancient past to those who are unconcerned about the biblical version, to those who wish to defend it. Its significance for the biblical version of Israel's past lies particularly in lines 8 and 9, which mention a "king of Israel" and a "house of David". The latter is generally understood by scholars to refer to the ruling dynasty of Judah. However, although the "king of Israel" is generally accepted, the rendering of the phrase bytdwd as "house of David" has been https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_Stele 3/7 10/18/2017 Tel Dan Stele - Wikipedia disputed by some. This dispute is occasioned in part because it appears without a word divider between the two parts.[21] The significance of this fact, if any, is unclear, because others, such as the late Anson F. Rainey, have observed that the presence or absence of word-dividers (for example, sometimes a short vertical line between words, other times a dot between words, as in this inscription) is normally inconsequential for interpretation.[22] The majority of scholars argue that the author simply thought of "House of David" as a single word – but some have argued that "dwd" could be a name for a god ("beloved"), or could mean "uncle" (a word with a rather wider meaning in ancient times than it has today), or, as George Athas has argued, that the whole phrase might be a name for Jerusalem (so that the author might be claiming to have killed the son of the king of Jerusalem rather than the son of the king from the "house of David".[23][24] Other possible meanings have been suggested: it may be a place-name, or the name of a god, or an epithet.[21] Mykytiuk observes that "dwd" meaning "kettle" or "uncle" do not fit the context.
Recommended publications
  • Three Conquests of Canaan

    Three Conquests of Canaan

    ÅA Wars in the Middle East are almost an every day part of Eero Junkkaala:of Three Canaan Conquests our lives, and undeniably the history of war in this area is very long indeed. This study examines three such wars, all of which were directed against the Land of Canaan. Two campaigns were conducted by Egyptian Pharaohs and one by the Israelites. The question considered being Eero Junkkaala whether or not these wars really took place. This study gives one methodological viewpoint to answer this ques- tion. The author studies the archaeology of all the geo- Three Conquests of Canaan graphical sites mentioned in the lists of Thutmosis III and A Comparative Study of Two Egyptian Military Campaigns and Shishak and compares them with the cities mentioned in Joshua 10-12 in the Light of Recent Archaeological Evidence the Conquest stories in the Book of Joshua. Altogether 116 sites were studied, and the com- parison between the texts and the archaeological results offered a possibility of establishing whether the cities mentioned, in the sources in question, were inhabited, and, furthermore, might have been destroyed during the time of the Pharaohs and the biblical settlement pe- riod. Despite the nature of the two written sources being so very different it was possible to make a comparative study. This study gives a fresh view on the fierce discus- sion concerning the emergence of the Israelites. It also challenges both Egyptological and biblical studies to use the written texts and the archaeological material togeth- er so that they are not so separated from each other, as is often the case.
  • BIBLIOTHECA SACRA for July, 1916, Mr

    BIBLIOTHECA SACRA for July, 1916, Mr

    1918.] ,The Exodus in the Light of Archteology. 543 ARTICLE III. THE EXODUS IN THE LIGHT OF ARCH2EOLOGY. BY THE REVEREND A. E. WHATHAM, LOUISVILlE, KY. IN the BIBLIOTHECA SACRA for July, 1916, Mr. Harold M. Wiener published an article entitled "The Date of the Ex­ odus," and in October, 1917, one on " The Date of the Exo­ dus and the Chronology of Judges." Now Mr. Wiener claims to have shown in his first artkle that the Israelites were defeated by the Egyptian Pharaoh, Merneptah, in the fifth year of his reign, being overthrown outside of Egypt somewhere between its eastern border and the southern border of Canaan. In his second article Mr. Wiener claims to have shown that the Exodus of Israel from Egypt took place in the second year of Merneptah's reign. In other words, Mr. Wiener claims to have shown that the defeat of Israel which is mentioned on the celebrated Mer­ neptah stele took place after the Exodus, and while the Israelites were yet in the wilderness. In opposition to Mr. Wiener's assertions stands a previous statement by the well-known scholars Professors Harris and Chapman, that "a recently-deciphered Egyptian inscription ... shows that the Beqe-Israel were already in Palestine at the time of the Exodus, so that the migration must have been partial and not national" (" Exodus and Journey to Ca­ naan." HDB, vol. i. p. 802). The discoverer of this Egyptian stele, Professor Petrie, Digitized by Google 544 The Exodus in the Light of ArcMology. [Oct. views the defeat of "Israel," to which reference is made on 'this stele, as an overthrow which took place in Palestine while the histork Israel had not yet fled from Egypt (Cont.
  • MESHA STELE. Discovered at Dhiban in 1868 by a Protestant Missionary

    MESHA STELE. Discovered at Dhiban in 1868 by a Protestant Missionary

    MESHA STELE. Discovered at Dhiban in 1868 by a Protestant missionary traveling in Transjordan, the 35-line Mesha Inscription (hereafter MI, sometimes called the Moabite Stone) remains the longest-known royal inscription from the Iron Age discovered in the area of greater Palestine. As such, it has been examined repeatedly by scholars and is available in a number of modern translations (ANET, DOTT). Formally, the MI is like other royal inscriptions of a dedicatory nature from the period. Mesha, king of Moab, recounts the favor of Moab's chief deity, Chemosh (Kemosh), in delivering Moab from the control of its neighbor, Israel. While the MI contains considerable historical detail, formal parallels suggest the Moabite king was selective in arranging the sequence of events to serve his main purpose of honoring Chemosh. This purpose is indicated by lines 3-4 of the MI, where Mesha says that he erected the stele at the "high place" in Qarh\oh, which had been built to venerate Chemosh. The date of the MI can be set with a 20-30-year variance. It must have been written either just before the Israelite king Ahab's death (ca. 853/852 B.C.) or a decade or so after his demise. The reference to Ahab is indicated by the reference in line 8 to Omri's "son," or perhaps "sons" (unfortunately, without some additional information, it is impossible to tell morphologically whether the word [bnh] is singular or plural). Ahab apparently died not long after the battle of Qarqar, in the spring of 853, when a coalition of states in S Syria/Palestine, of which Ahab was a leader, faced the encroaching Assyrians under Shalmaneser III.
  • Biblical Archaeology: the Hydra of Palestine's History

    Biblical Archaeology: the Hydra of Palestine's History

    Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 78. årg., 2015 s. 243-260 Biblical Archaeology: The Hydra of Palestine’s History Professor emeritus, ph.d. Thomas L. Thompson, Københavns Universitet Abstract: Both Israel Finkelstein and William Dever have allegedly dis- tanced themselves from the kind of “biblical archaeology” of William F. Albright. Their own efforts, however, to relate Palestinian archaeology and biblical narrative not only reflect Albright’s earlier methods, they create a politically oriented incoherence. In three recent works, since the turn of the millennia, Finkelstein uses archaeologically based argu- ments primarily to resolve problems of biblical interpretation. Dever, who also has published three biblical-archaeological studies since 2001, concentrates, rather, on archaeological issues, while using biblical nar- rative for his underlying historical context. A discussion of the figures of Solomon and Josiah on the one hand and a discussion of “landscape archaeology” and site classification, on the other hand, illustrate the shortcomings of their methodology. Keywords: Biblical archaeology – history of Palestine – Canaanite – Is- raelite – Solomon – Josiah. Albrightean “Biblical Archaeology” In a presentation of “expert opinions” in the article “Biblical Archaeo- logy” in Wikipedia,1 both William Dever and Israel Finkelstein are cited – along with Ze’ev Herzog – as clearly distancing themselves from Albrightean “biblical archaeology”– a theologically apologetic discourse on the use of Palestinian archaeology in support of the hi- storicity
  • Boundaries and Inheritance As Legal Metaphors in the Hebrew Bible and Hellenistic Jewish Literature

    Boundaries and Inheritance As Legal Metaphors in the Hebrew Bible and Hellenistic Jewish Literature

    Some of the Other Works of the Torah: Boundaries and Inheritance as Legal Metaphors in the Hebrew Bible and Hellenistic Jewish Literature Author: Daniel Jon Vos Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/bc-ir:108730 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, 2020 Copyright is held by the author, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise noted. SOME OF THE OTHER WORKS OF THE TORAH: BOUNDARIES AND INHERITANCE AS LEGAL METAPHORS IN THE HEBREW BIBLE AND HELLENISTIC JEWISH LITERATURE Daniel Jon Vos A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the department of Theology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Boston College Morrissey College of Arts and Sciences Graduate School March 2020 © Copyright 2020 Daniel Jon Vos SOME OF THE OTHER WORKS OF THE TORAH: BOUNDARIES AND INHERITANCE AS LEGAL METAPHORS IN THE HEBREW BIBLE AND HELLENISTIC JEWISH LITERATURE Daniel Jon Vos Advisor: David S. Vanderhooft, Ph.D. In this dissertation, I explore the metaphorical value of law in the Hebrew Bible and Hellenistic Jewish literature. While the study of biblical law and Hellenistic Jewish halakah is well established, less attention has been paid to the intentional use of legal diction to create legal metaphors—metaphors that draw upon legal language for the sake of generating new ethical and theological insights. My argument is based upon Roger White’s theory of metaphor which states that a metaphor juxtaposes two otherwise unrelated vocabularies in order to produce new meaning. Thus, I draw upon comparative study of ancient Near Eastern law as a means of understanding the register of biblical Hebrew legal diction concerning land tenure and inheritance.
  • Tanakh and Archaeology B. from Achav Onwards the Latest

    Tanakh and Archaeology B. from Achav Onwards the Latest

    Fundamental Issues in the Study of Tanakh By Rav Amnon Bazak Shiur #6b: Tanakh and Archaeology B. From Achav onwards The latest period in which controversy arises regarding the relationship between the Biblical text and the archaeological record is from the reign of King Achav, in the first half of the 9th century B.C.E., onwards.[1] Archaeological discoveries dating from this time – which many researchers believe to be the period during which the Books of the Torah and of the Prophets were written – do generally accord with the textual account, and therefore scholars acknowledge the basic reliability of the Tanakh’s historical descriptions from this period onwards. These discoveries are very exciting in their own right, lending a powerful sense of connection to the world of the Tanakh through a direct, unmediated encounter with the remains of the concrete reality described in the text. Indeed, the discovery of the first relevant findings, in the 19th century, refuted some prevalent critical approaches which had maintained that all the biblical narratives were later creations, severed from any historical context. We shall discuss some of the most famous findings relating to narratives about the Israelite kingdom from the period of Achav onwards. 1. In Sefer Melakhim we read: "And Mesha, king of Moav, was a sheepmaster, and he delivered to the king of Israel a hundred thousand lambs, and a hundred thousand rams, with the wool. But it was, when Achav died, that the king of Moav rebelled against the king of Israel…" (Melakhim II 3:4-5) In 1868, a stele (inscribed stone) dating to the 9th century B.C.E.
  • Or Biblical Balak?1

    Or Biblical Balak?1

    TEL AVIV Vol. 46, 2019, 3–11 Restoring Line 31 in the Mesha Stele: The ‘House of David’ or Biblical Balak?1 Israel Finkelstein1, Nadav Na’aman1 and Thomas Römer2 1Tel Aviv University, 2Collège de France, University of Lausanne After studying new photographs of the Mesha Stele and the squeeze of the stele prepared before the stone was broken, we dismiss Lemaire’s proposal House of David’) on Line 31. It is now clear that there are‘) בת]ד[וד to read three consonants in the name of the monarch mentioned there, and that the first is a beth. We cautiously propose that the name on Line 31 be read as Balak, the king of Moab referred to in the Balaam story in Numbers 22–24. Keywords Mesha Stele, Mesha, Moab, Beth David, Balak, Horonaim, Horon The bottom part of the Mesha Stele, which includes Line 31, is broken (Fig. 1). About צאן seven letters are missing from the beginning of the line, followed by the words sheep/small cattle of the land”). Next there is a vertical stroke that marks“) הארץ And“) וחורנן ישב בה the transition to a new sentence, which opens with the words Hawronēn dwelt therein”). Evidently a name is expected to follow. Then there is a legible beth, followed by a partially eroded, partially broken section with space for two letters, followed by a waw and an unclear letter. The rest of the line, with space for three letters, is missing. Scholars have offered a variety of possibilities in an effort to complete and decipher :Clermont-Ganneau (1875: 173; 1887 .ישב בה the eroded and missing part of Line 31 after and suggested that “il faut très probablement y chercher un ou deux ב]..[וד read here (107 noms propres dʼhomme” (1887: 107).
  • The Stele of Merneptah—Assessment of the Final 'Israel' Strophe and Its

    The Stele of Merneptah—Assessment of the Final 'Israel' Strophe and Its

    VIEWPOINT || JOURNAL OF CREATION 27(1) 2013 The Stele of Merneptah—assessment of the final ‘Israel’ strophe and its implications for chronology Patrick Clarke The text of the final poetic strophe of the famous stele of the pharaoh Merneptah (item JE 31408, the Cairo Museum) appears to mention Israel. With few exceptions, the majority of archeologists date this text and Merneptah’s reign to the 1200s bc in the Conventional Egyptian Chronology. This would place both this pharaoh and his stele in the biblical time of the Judges. An analysis of this Egyptian text indicates that Merneptah’s reign should instead be dated to 913–903 bc; a movement of three centuries. Furthermore, the stele offers tantalizing clues to the identity of the biblical Shishak. All this has huge ramifications for biblical chronology, bringing us closer to a satisfying correlation of established secular history with the inerrant biblical timeline. he black granite ‘Victory Stele’ of Merneptah was world-famous 28-line ‘Victory Stele’ discussed here, from Tdiscovered by W.F. Petrie in 1896. This stele (3.18 m his mortuary temple on the West Bank at modern Luxor. All high x 1.63 m wide) is the only known Egyptian document refer to military campaigns. generally accepted as mentioning ysry3l—Israel. The text Like his post-Amarna predecessors, Merneptah faced itself is dated by most analysts as c. 1209/1208 BC in the political/military issues in the Egyptian sphere of influence Conventional Egyptian Chronology (CEC). Merneptah’s during his reign. This included crushing a revolt in northern reign itself is assigned to the period 1213–1203 BC, which Reṯenu.1 In his regnal year four, there were problems on would place both this pharaoh and his stele in the biblical Egypt’s western borders which involved the Libyans.2 By time of the Judges.
  • The Times of Israel Newly Deciphered Moabite Inscription May Be First Use

    The Times of Israel Newly Deciphered Moabite Inscription May Be First Use

    The Times of Israel https://www.timesofisrael.com/newly-deciphered-moabite-inscription-may-be-first-use-of- written-word-hebrews/ Newly deciphered Moabite inscription may be first use of written word ‘Hebrews’ Cylindrical altar from 3,000 years ago found in Jordan also offers first evidence of early Moabite script — and could repaint picture of geopolitics in the ancient Levantine world By AMANDA BORSCHEL-DAN 28 August 2019, 7:24 pm7 Inscribed late 9th or early 8th century BCE altar that was discovered in a Moabite sanctuary at the Khirbat Ataruz site in central Jordan in 2010. (Courtesy of Adam Bean) • Inscribed late 9th or early 8th century BCE altar from a Moabite sanctuary as found in situ at the Khirbat Ataruz site in central Jordan in 2010. (Courtesy) • Moabite sanctuary and stepped structure at the Khirbat Ataruz site in central Jordan. (Courtesy) • Aerial view of the Khirbat Ataruz site in central Jordan. (APAAME) • 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 The earliest written use of the word “Hebrews” may have been found upon an inscribed Moabite altar discovered during ongoing excavations at the biblical site of Atarot (Khirbat Ataruz) in Jordan. The two newly deciphered late 9th century or very early 8th century BCE Moabite inscriptions incised into the cylindrical stone altar serve as tangible historical anchors for a battle of epic proportions. According to researcher Adam Bean’s Levant article on the find, “An inscribed altar from the Khirbat Ataruz Moabite sanctuary,” the inscriptions offer new insight into the bloody aftermath of the conquest of Atarot that is described in the famed Mesha Stele and in the Bible.
  • From to Here Here

    From to Here Here

    From here To here BIBLICAL SURVEY: Old Testament The Divided Monarchy: Judah (Part 3) Biblical-Literacy.com © Copyright 2011 by Mark Lanier. Permission hereby granted to reprint this document in its entirety without change, with reference given, and not for financial profit. 1040 Saul 1040 1010 Saul David 1040 1010 970 Saul David Solomon 1040 1010 970 930 Jeroboam (22 yrs) Saul David Solomon Rehoboam (17 yrs) 930 Jeroboam (22 yrs) Rehoboam (17 yrs) Jeroboam (22 yrs) 930 Rehoboam (17 yrs) Jeroboam (22 yrs) 930 Rehoboam (17 yrs) Invasion of Pharaoh Shoshenq I Nadab (2 yrs) Jeroboam (22 yrs) 930 Rehoboam (17 yrs) Invasion of Pharaoh Shoshenq I Nadab (2 yrs) Jeroboam Baasha (24 yrs) (22 yrs) 930 Rehoboam (17 yrs) Invasion of Pharaoh Shoshenq I Nadab (2 yrs) Jeroboam Baasha (24 yrs) (22 yrs) Elah/Zimri/Omri (2 yrs/7 days/12 yrs) 930 Rehoboam (17 yrs) Invasion of Pharaoh Shoshenq I Nadab (2 yrs) Jeroboam Baasha (24 yrs) (22 yrs) Elah/Zimri/Omri (2 yrs/7 days/12 yrs) 930 880 Rehoboam (17 yrs) Invasion of Pharaoh Shoshenq I Nadab (2 yrs) Ahab/Jezebel Jeroboam Baasha (24 yrs) (22 yrs) Elah/Zimri/Omri (2 yrs/7 days/12 yrs) 930 880 Rehoboam (17 yrs) Invasion of Pharaoh Shoshenq I Nadab (2 yrs) Ahab/Jezebel Jeroboam Baasha (24 yrs) (22 yrs) Elah/Zimri/Omri (2 yrs/7 days/12 yrs) 930 880 Rehoboam (17 yrs) Abijam (2 yrs) Invasion of Pharaoh Shoshenq I Nadab (2 yrs) Ahab/Jezebel Jeroboam Baasha (24 yrs) (22 yrs) Elah/Zimri/Omri (2 yrs/7 days/12 yrs) 930 880 Rehoboam (17 yrs) Abijam (2 yrs) Asa (41 yrs) Invasion of Pharaoh Shoshenq I Nadab (2 yrs) Ahab/Jezebel
  • The Valediction of Moses

    The Valediction of Moses

    Forschungen zum Alten Testament Edited by Konrad Schmid (Zürich) · Mark S. Smith (Princeton) Hermann Spieckermann (Göttingen) · Andrew Teeter (Harvard) 145 Idan Dershowitz The Valediction of Moses A Proto-Biblical Book Mohr Siebeck Idan Dershowitz: born 1982; undergraduate and graduate training at the Hebrew University, following several years of yeshiva study; 2017 elected to the Harvard Society of Fellows; currently Chair of Hebrew Bible and Its Exegesis at the University of Potsdam. orcid.org/0000-0002-5310-8504 Open access sponsored by the Julis-Rabinowitz Program on Jewish and Israeli Law at the Harvard Law School. ISBN 978-3-16-160644-1 / eISBN 978-3-16-160645-8 DOI 10.1628/978-3-16-160645-8 ISSN 0940-4155 / eISSN 2568-8359 (Forschungen zum Alten Testament) The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2021 Mohr Siebeck Tübingen, Germany. www.mohrsiebeck.com This work is licensed under the license “Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Inter- national” (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). A complete Version of the license text can be found at: https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. Any use not covered by the above license is prohibited and illegal without the permission of the publisher. The book was printed on non-aging paper by Gulde Druck in Tübingen, and bound by Buch- binderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. Acknowledgments This work would not have been possible without the generosity of my friends, family, and colleagues. The Harvard Society of Fellows provided the ideal environment for this ven- ture.Atatimeinwhichacademiaisbecomingincreasinglyriskaverse,theSociety remains devoted to supporting its fellows’ passion projects.
  • Writing and Literacy in the World of Ancient Israel Archaeology and Biblical Studies Tammi Schneider, Editor

    Writing and Literacy in the World of Ancient Israel Archaeology and Biblical Studies Tammi Schneider, Editor

    Writing and Literacy in the World of Ancient Israel Archaeology and Biblical Studies Tammi Schneider, Editor Number 11 Writing and Literacy in the World of Ancient Israel Epigraphic Evidence from the Iron Age Writing and Literacy in the World of Ancient Israel Epigraphic Evidence from the Iron Age by Christopher A. Rollston Society of Biblical Literature Atlanta Writing and Literacy in the World of Ancient Israel Epigraphic Evidence from the Iron Age Copyright © 2010 by the Society of Biblical Literature All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permit- ted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions Office, Society of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329 USA. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Rollston, Chris A. Writing and literacy in the world of ancient Israel : epigraphic evidence from the Iron Age / by Christopher A. Rollston. p. cm. — (Archaeology and biblical studies ; no. 11) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-58983-107-0 (paper binding : alk. paper) 1. Inscriptions, Semitic. 2. Semitic languages, Northwest. 3. Bible. O.T.—Criticism, interpretation, etc. 4. Middle Eastern literature—Relation to the Old Testament. 5. Pales- tine—Languages. I. Title. PJ3085.R65 2010 492—dc22 2010033450 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free, recycled paper conforming to ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R1997) and ISO 9706:1994 standards for paper permanence.