9011Re: [ANE-2] Re: High Priest sarcophagus/Caiphas
- Oct 9, 2008There were two ossuaries with the family name Caiphas, one Joseph son of ....and the second bearing only the family name Caiphas Unfortunately, religious fanatics were stoning us during the excavation and we were eventually forced to abandon the excavation, though we were fortunate to take the ossuaries to the museum for examination. One interesting fact though glossed over by many is that I, working alongside Ronnie Reich the excavator, found a coin in situ in the palate of one of the woman in an ossuary. Seems she was 'covering all her bets' with this Pagan custom and in retrospect this seems to have been for me personally, one of the more hypocritical customs observed due to the fact that this was the family of the High Priest. Little bit of back sliding it seems. Later I spoke to David Flusser about this and he asked if it was male of female, when I told him it was an adult female, he simply shrugged as if to say, I'm not all that surprised.
Joe Zias www.joezias.com
Science and Antiquity Group - Jerusalem
--- On Thu, 10/9/08, Jack Kilmon <jkilmon@...> wrote:
From: Jack Kilmon <jkilmon@...>
Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Re: High Priest sarcophagus
Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008, 9:38 AM
Yes, we do have Caiphas' ossuary and the inscription on it is YHWSF BR QYF)
and not the Greek form of his name (I think Joe Zias examined the skeletal
remains). That is why I was wondering if xxbn may be part of the semitized
name of one of the many Greek names used for the HPs. I can't speak for
Robert and I believe he is a member here, but I am sure he meant that the BN
as a suffix could be a possibility that requires closer examination of the
damaged margin between the broken edge of the sarc lid and the BN that
appears to show up on the photos. I see what looks like an incised mark
over and slightly to the right of the Beyt.
I am sure that HPs like Theophilos, i.e., had Hebrew/Aramaic names in
addition to their Greek names (even though this HPs name on his
grandaughter' s ossuary is transliterated Greek to Hebrew). Hopefully in
this ongoing excavation they will find other shards of this sarcophagus.
The more I study the inscription from a paleographic standpoint, the more I
think it is late Hasmonean... .but this is part of an amateur's fun with new
----- Original Message -----
From: "George F Somsel" <gfsomsel@yahoo. com>
To: <ANE-2@yahoogroups. com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Re: High Priest sarcophagus
> If you are suggesting xxBN HKHN HGDL then none of the names suggested in
> the article as being high priests of this period would end with BN. It
> would then likely require a different time frame (which may not be a
> problem since I am not aware of how well-established this time frame might
> be). I note that Caiphas is included. Do we not already have an ossuary
> attributed to him?
> . search for truth, hear truth,
> learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
> defend the truth till death.
> - Jan Hus
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jack Kilmon <jkilmon@historian. net>
> To: ANE-2@yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 4:14:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Re: High Priest sarcophagus
> No, I noted that an excellent epigrapher suggested it...I was refering to
> Robert, of course since he is one of the best. His books have sure taught
> me a lot. Since the text is in Hebrew I suspect that if the -BN is the
> suffix of a name, as Robert suggests, it may be the Semitic version of one
> of the many Greek names used.
> Jack Kilmon
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Christopher Conlan" <chris_conlan@ yahoo.co. uk>
> To: <ANE-2@yahoogroups. com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 2:57 PM
> Subject: [ANE-2] Re: High Priest sarcophagus
>>I am fairly certain that Jack Kilmon raised this possibility earlier
>> today, and noted that there are no known High Priests whose name ends
>> <...>bn - that would seem like a real problem with this theory.
>> I guess that the value of the piece would be significantly higher if
>> it is the sarcophagus of a "known" High Priest, than if it is the
>> sarcophagus of the son of an unknown High Priest...
>> Christopher Conlan
>> Washington, DC
>> --- In ANE-2@yahoogroups. com, "Robert Deutsch" <mail@...> wrote:
>>> Dear list members,
>>> The interpretation of the inscription make no sense !
>>> Can a certain person be the son of an anonymous High Priest ?
>>> As the right side of the fragment is damaged and the surface
>>> before the first visible letter is missing, I will suggest a
>>> different reading:
>>> [....]bn the High Priest
>>> Where the "...bn" is the suffix of a personal name.
>>> This means that the sarcophagus belongs to a named High Priest
>>> and not to a son of an anonymous High Priest.
>>> Robert Deutsch
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> ------------ --------- --------- ------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>