Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: SV: SV: [ANE-2] Re: Primary document

Expand Messages
  • Frank Polak
    Dear All, Some small details. 1. The noun group /MLK Y#R)L/ appears as such, as far as a poor Hebraist like me can discern, in the opening of line 8 (entirely
    Message 1 of 83 , Jul 5 1:28 PM
      Dear All,
      Some small details.
      1. The noun group /MLK Y#R)L/
      appears as such, as far as a poor Hebraist like me
      can discern, in the opening of line 8 (entirely in fragment A as far as
      I can discern).
      Then there is /MLK Y/ in line 3 of fragment B1,
      and /R)L/ in the opening of line 4 (fragment A, as far as I
      can see).
      What is unsure is which word precedes /BYTDWD/ in the opening of line
      9, where it is preceded by /K/.
      The distance between this /BYTDWD/ and /MLK Y#R)L/ depends on the
      size of the original text. According to Naveh's reconstruction the
      in-between
      would amount to ca 30 graphs. In any case the in-between is less than
      a line,
      which certainly cannot be regarded as a lot.
      2. When one uses the words 'meticulous' and 'forgery' one has to keep in
      mind that Naveh, on any account one of the three greatest paleographists
      and epigraphists alive, and also an archeologist of reknown (it was him
      who
      identified Tel-muqanna as Eqron) is known to all as an extremely
      meticulous scholar (beyond the limits of the possible, I would say). He
      also is the integrity self.
      He also has discovered many forgeries, more than anyone else,
      I would say. It is certainly fair to say that if the Tel Dan
      inscription were a forgery he would have discovered
      that.
      3. As we all know, the historical content of the Tel Dan inscription is
      extremely problematic
      and in any case not very complimentory to the national genius, so to
      say.
      (contrast the Joash 'inscription,' about which Naveh seems to have
      refused to give his opinion
      after the first team of chemicists declared it original). So
      nationalistic motifs are a priori
      out. Since the inscription was not up for sale (and even could not be
      up for sale, since Biran was head of the
      SAntiquities department), nobody could have made money out of it
      either. When there still were
      only rumors about the find I asked a friendly archeologist back home
      from Tel Aviv to
      Jerusalem about the possibility of a falsum, and he just had a good
      laugh: in his
      opinion the archeologists involved were not only far too honest for
      that but also lacked the
      necessary commercial sharpness.
      Thus it seems less plausible to discard the lettering. How to
      reconstruct the vacat is of course
      another matter.
      4. Our innate mind set is one problem. Hypercorrection is another one,
      like, forty years ago,
      overactive anti-communistic politicians who had been very active CP
      members twenty years before;
      or like eating pork on Yom Kippur behind the shul.
      5. No reason to turn Omri into Arabic. Maybe it just stands for (MR+DN.
      Best,
      frank polak



      On 5 Jul, 2007, at 21:35, Niels Peter Lemche wrote:

      >
      > Still, there are leaps and there are leaps.
      > Translating
      > "house of David" is really beyond dispute anymore,
      > so making the connection to the biblical king is not
      > that much of a stretch given the find-spot. Maybe
      > if it had been found only a few miles more north.
      >
      > Tory Thorpe
      >
      > No it is not. If you look into Hagelia's survey, you will be
      > surprised.
      > Hagelia's study is not very original, and he is not a member of the
      > Copenhagen school. It is a meticulous analysis of the inscription, and
      > he presents what we know.
      >
      > He is also sure that the inscription is genuine. AS you probably know,
      > some of us have problems with the chisel marks down the broken side!
      >
      > Let me in the interest of the public refer, not to Giovanni Garbini's
      > original attack on the genuineness of the article but to Russell
      > Gmirkin, "Tool Slippage and the Tel Dan Inscription," SJOT 16 (2002),
      > pp. 293-302.
      > Also my own "'House of David': The Tel Dan Inscription(s), in Thomas
      > L.
      > Thompson with Salma Jayyusi (eds.), Jerusalem in Ancient History and
      > Tradition. London: Clark, 2003, pp. 46-67. Alas the fotos in the
      > English
      > version are b-w. The Arab version has the color fotos.
      >
      > But, as I concluded in 2003, the arguments in favour of a forgery "are
      > hardly strong enough to win over the person--scholar or layperson--who
      > does not want to be convinced.
      >
      > If it is a forgery, the byt dvd is definitely the "house of David."
      >
      > Finally: Please remember that scholarly hypotheses are not decided by
      > hand rising, although such a procedure will definitely support your
      > position.
      >
      > Niels Peter Lemche
      >
      >
      >

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Antonio Lombatti
      I m not sure if archaeological discoveries in Rome are relevant to listers and discussed on ANE. So, block my email if necessary. A large 2nd-century bath
      Message 83 of 83 , Jul 20 11:23 AM
        I'm not sure if archaeological discoveries in Rome are relevant to listers and discussed on ANE. So, block my email if necessary.


        A large 2nd-century bath complex believed to be part of a wealthy Roman's luxurious residence has been partially dug up in Rome, archaeologists said.

        The exceptionally well-preserved two-story complex, which extends for at least five acres, includes ornate hot rooms, vaults, changing rooms, marble latrines and an underground room where slaves lit the fire to warm the baths.

        The complex was believed to be part of a multi-story villa that belonged to the Roman-era equivalent of a billionaire, a man called Quintus Servilius Pudens who was a friend of Emperor Hadrian. It was unclear whether the baths were open to the public or reserved for the owner's distinguished guests.

        This is the link to the full article:

        http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2007/07/20/romanbath_arc.html?category=archaeology&guid=20070720091530

        There are some nice photos too.

        Antonio Lombatti
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.