Re: SV: SV: [ANE-2] seals of biblical characters?
- Dear Dr. Lemche, Sorry, I was not clear. When I say unexcavated, I am saying unexcavated by an archaeological controlled excavation. You do not have to dig to find things all of the time because an inscribed item like the Mesha Stele was found on the surface. Many items are found in the ground. So you are correct. If it is clearer to say unprovenanced, then one could say that over ninety percent of the inscribed material used by scholars today is unprovenanced, for example-- the Amarna Tablets.
With Much Gratitude,
--- In ANEemail@example.com, Niels Peter Lemche <npl@...> wrote:
> only one question: How can you study unexcavated material? In some way, any genuine seal from the ANE must have been unearthed in some way or the other.
> However, your remarks do not make the procedure more legitgimate.
> Niels Peter Lemche
> -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
> Fra: ANEfirstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:ANEemail@example.com] På vegne af Michael Welch
> Sendt: den 15 december 2011 21:46
> Til: ANEfirstname.lastname@example.org
> Emne: Re: SV: [ANE-2] seals of biblical characters?
> Dear Dr. Lemche and Dr. West and List Members, The idea that unexcavated inscribed material is not used by scholars is completely false. The idea that ASOR does not allow unexcavated inscribed material to be published by its current members is true. However, once the inscribed unexcavated material is published, it is free to be used by ASOR members. You may wonder why. It is because over ninety percent of the inscribed material from Palestine/Israel is unexcavated. All scholars on this list have studied unexcavated material. This is because since at least 1847, unexcavated seals, tablets, stelae, Dead Sea Scrolls, ostraca, and bullae have been purchased and published by scholars.
> With Much Gratitude,
> Sincerely Yours,
> Michael Welch
> Deltona, Florida
> --- In ANEemail@example.com, Jim West <jwest@> wrote:
> > ASOR also rejects 'discoveries' outside of controlled digs.
> > On 12/15/2011 4:49 AM, Niels Peter Lemche wrote:
> > > if they are found in a controlled archaeological context, it is good and important. But such seals have been known for many years (e.g. Avigad's bullae). Some of them were denounced as fakes, one of the reasons why leading archaeologists in Israel denies to use them for anything if they are not found in such a controlled context.
> > >
> > > Niels Peter Lemche
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > ++++++++
> > Jim West, ThD
> > Petros
- A detailed study I have seen took all the encircling evidence and
gradually homed in on the position of the city of Akkad.
Two interesting possibilities are that Akkad is under the river
(Tigris); or it is buried beneath Baghdad (on the Tigris), directly
north of Babylon (on the Euphrates).
School of History
Massey University, NZ
On 21/12/2011, at 11:19 AM, Douglas Petrovich wrote:
> Hello, Gene.
> This is a good question, and I know that some have taken this
> position (Akkad was bordered with Babylon). I would like to defer to
> those better averse with Mesopotamian geography/topography/
> archaeology, but I can say a couple of things briefly.
> First, this would render somewhat nonsensical texts such as this one
> by Tiglath-pileser I, who noted that Babylon�s army marched toward
> the Assyrians, meeting one another somewhere to the north, along the
> Second, If we propose that the two cities were in fact �twin
> cities�, then 1) there is no reason to do any marching; the
> Assyrians already would have been upon the Babylonians, and 2) we
> cannot explain why Babylon is on the Euphrates while the Akkad,
> conversely, is said to be �on the Tigris�.
> There are other texts out there that give us information about
> Akkad�s proximity to other sites, including Babylon. I just do not
> have any in front of me. Maybe others can bail me out here.
> Doug Petrovich
> Toronto, Canada
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]