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

Re: [ANE-2] Re: Mesha stela: ryt reading corrected to hyt?

Expand Messages
  • Frank Polak
    Dear Reinhard And what was your reading? Is Lemaire right? Best, Frank Polak
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 2, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Reinhard
      And what was your reading? Is Lemaire right?
      Best,
      Frank Polak

      On Aug 2, 2008, at 10:23 AM, AkDir. Dr. Reinhard G. Lehmann wrote:

      > In April this year, I studied the squeeze in the Louvre Museum and
      > made some high resolution makro photographs of line 12 and other
      > passages.
      >
      > The photographs by Aaron Schade in that IEJ article, from a
      > technical point of view, are not worth the paper they are printed on.
      >
    • AkDir. Dr. Reinhard G. Lehmann
      It is difficult to decide. All that I can say for sure is that Lemaire s reading is more likely than Schade s, who did not take into account the material shape
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 2, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        It is difficult to decide.
        All that I can say for sure is that Lemaire's reading is more likely than Schade's, who did not take into account the material shape of the fragments at all.
        Also Lemaire's reading seems not *absolutely* clear for me, but in my opinion it is the best we have at the moment.
        The squeeze is in a really disenchanting condition, esp. at the margins.

        At the MICAH conference in Mainz, November 14-16, a staff member of our
        'Forschungsstelle' will give a lecture on another margin passage (line 11) of the Mesha inscription.

        R.G.Lehmann

        --- In ANE-2@yahoogroups.com, Frank Polak <frankha@...> wrote:
        >
        > Dear Reinhard
        > And what was your reading? Is Lemaire right?
        > Best,
        > Frank Polak
      • Yitzhak Sapir
        ... Dear All, I meant to comment on this. I was considering when I came upon the article whether to comment on the subject given the time that passed since.
        Message 3 of 6 , Aug 9, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 8:27 PM, AkDir. Dr. Reinhard G. Lehmann wrote:
          > It is difficult to decide.
          > All that I can say for sure is that Lemaire's reading is more likely than Schade's, who did not take into account the material shape of the fragments at all.
          > Also Lemaire's reading seems not *absolutely* clear for me, but in my opinion it is the best we have at the moment.
          > The squeeze is in a really disenchanting condition, esp. at the margins.
          >
          > At the MICAH conference in Mainz, November 14-16, a staff member of our
          > 'Forschungsstelle' will give a lecture on another margin passage (line 11) of the Mesha inscription.
          >
          > R.G.Lehmann

          Dear All,

          I meant to comment on this. I was considering when I came upon the
          article whether
          to comment on the subject given the time that passed since. I figured
          it was worth it
          because others may come upon the thread and would get a mistaken impression. It
          turns out it was worth it much more. Thank you very much, Reinhard,
          for this valuable
          information!

          Yitzhak Sapir
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.