Re: Drawing of Khirbet Qeiyafa ostracon
> Do you have the full bibliography for the publicationIt was jointly published by the IAA Jerusalem Region & Hebrew University of Jerusalem. (It's a pity that neither of those institutions has a better method of making publications available for sale online.) The page numbers are:
Haggai Misgav, pp. 111-123
Ada Yardeni, pp. 124-125
Aaron Demsky, pp. 126-129
Shmuel Ahituv, pp. 130-132
Since the entire publication (except for main title page & bibliographies) is in Hebrew, I can't give you all the article titles, but it's fairly easy for me to transliterate Misgav's as "The Ostracon from Khirbet Qeiyafa". It was forwarded to me second- (or third? or fourth?) hand from an anonymous source.
I should also respond publicly to a private E-mail that was sent to me, in which someone explained that the ostracon had been subjected to special imaging procedures in the U.S., thereby allowing the scholars to see "lines which are no [sic] visible to the naked eye and not visible in any one image, including the published one."
Aren Maier reported that Misgav was not impressed by these images at the conference, & his paleography chart indicates 10 (ten!) question marks, showing a degree of uncertainty with one or more instances of the Vau, Het, Mem, Nun, Samek, Tsade, Shin, & possibly 3 other undeciphered marks.
Furthermore, the 4 key words from the initial press conference were read by Misgav long before the special imaging, & those are the ones I said I had difficulty seeing ("So in all 4 main words, there is some uncertainty.").
While I appreciate this article by Misgav with photos & drawings, this is an extremely important artifact, & if there are additional images that help clarify some of the letters, they should be published as well so that all scholars can see them without having to examine the artifact firsthand. They would not need to publish the entire ostracon for each alternate lighting shot, but simply crop the more difficult letters (though I don't see any reason why the entire photos cannot be made available on a CD/DVD or on a website).
> Vau, Het, Mem, Nun, Samek, Tsade, Shin, & possibly 3 otherSorry, I mistakenly omitted the Dalet too. By the way, the fragmented Dalet that forms "obed" (servant/slave) is very similar to identified forms of the Alef, Bet, & Lamed on the ostracon!
- Rev Fr Stephen Smuts put a link to a new 2-minute YouTube video on his BiblicalPaths Wordpress blog today showing Yosef Garfinkel & Haggai Misgav discussing/debating the reading of the inscription:
It's all Hebrew, but with an English translation provided, which I'm posting below for reference (each phrase prefaced with an asterisk). The video was made in 2008 by Daniel Remer on behalf of Foundation Stone. It was obviously filmed after the detailed images were made last year, but before a thorough translation was made (recently published).
*) First we have the "chet" ... the problem is that the order is all backwards. First comes "chet" then comes "zayin" ... go figure!
*) Therefore I don't know if it's one letter or two, because one is right up against the other.
*) If it's "yud", then you have "mem" then "yud" ... so then what is "mem, yud, and bet?"
*) What is that?! If it says "eved, melech" it has much more meaning. What can I do, there's no "ayin" there ...
*) Definitely no "ayin" there.
*) Maybe look again at the pictures. I will go over them again. I downloaded a portion (of [Dr. Greg] Bearman's) pictures ...
*) This is davka a good picture - a real picture. Yes, yes, yes. It's the one that I made the sketch from. I couldn't make a sketch from the Ostracon - it's in the safe.
*) What's happening here, is that a kind of "mem"? Is that a "shin"? That's apparently an "aleph", that's a "mem". Then there's something else. It's erased!
*) There's nothing to be done about it. There's something with a curve. That's apparently a "mem".
*) This line - I don't know if it's a separation line or a letter. This letter could be a "tzadi". I'm not sure.
*) What is this thing? That's "kuf" or "reish".
*) So "tzadi, kuf" ... It's starting to look like an alphabet. "Tzadi, kuf, reish, shin, tav" - there's no shin.
*) But you have here the "melech", the "eved melech" ... but there's no "Ayin" - it doesn't help you!
*) So what's this dot. It's not a dot, it's exactly like a "yod". Look how nice this is ... on top, it's clear, straight - no curve. Here, here's an "ayin" for you.
*) Here's an "ayin" - perfectly clear. Round with a dot in the middle. That one is too big and it is not round.