Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Diogenes the Cynic · 10-30-2008, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Five lines on pottery uncovered here appear to be the oldest Hebrew text ever found and are likely to have a major impact on knowledge about the history of literacy and alphabet development....

...A specialist in ancient Semitic languages at Hebrew University, Haggai Misgav, says the writing, on pottery using charcoal and animal fat for ink, is in so-called proto-Canaanite script and appears to be a letter or document in Hebrew, suggesting that literacy may have been more widespread than is generally assumed. That could play a role in the larger dispute over the Bible, since if more writing turns up it suggests a means by which events could have been recorded and passed down several centuries before the Bible was likely to have been written.

There's a lot of predictable, premature and unwarranted attempts to connect the site, a fortified city about 20 miles southeast of Jerusalem, with David.

There appears to be difficulty with reading the inscription

Quote:

Although the inscription has yet to be fully deciphered, it contains the roots of the words 'slave,' 'judge' and 'king.' It is thought to be part of a letter or a legal text that was written as a deliberate message by a trained scribe

I guess we can be pretty confident it doesn't have anything in it which could be interpreted as a "DWD," or we'd be hearing it shouted from the rooftops.

Anat · 10-30-2008, 10:28 AM

Is there an image of the inscription anywhere?

Toto · 10-30-2008, 11:14 AM

Reuters has a slide show, but not a close up photo.

But watch out - this is wrapped up in politics.

Ynet has more details

Quote:

The shard is now kept in a university safe while philologists translate it, a task expected to take months. ...

The Israelites were not the only ones using proto-Canaanite characters, and other scholars suggest it is difficult _ perhaps impossible _ to conclude the text is Hebrew and not a related tongue spoken in the area at the time. Garfinkel bases his identification on a three-letter verb from the inscription meaning "to do," a word he said existed only in Hebrew.

...

Other prominent Biblical archaeologists warned against jumping to conclusions.

Hebrew University archaeologist Amihai Mazar said the inscription was "very important," as it is the longest proto-Canaanite text ever found. But he suggested that calling the text Hebrew might be going too far.

bacht · 10-30-2008, 02:09 PM

Does "proto-Canaanite" refer to a specific era, such as before the Israelite monarchies, ie. late 2nd millenium?

Gorit Maqueda · 11-16-2008, 01:49 PM

From here:

Quote:

[...] archaeologists [...] found a shard of pottery that's about 3,000 years old [...] south of current-day Beit Shemesh. [...]
The ostracon has five lines of text in black ink. It's written in Hebrew, making it the earliest Hebrew text ever found. Researchers have deciphered some of the words, including slave, judge and king.

I've found no more news about it. What strikes me is the fact that they have deciphered only a few words. Isn't Hebrew from that time well understood? I suppose the writing system to be Phoenician or Phoenician-like, so that shouldn't be an issue either. Perhaps the text is toot faint?

Toto · 11-16-2008, 11:05 PM

merged this with a previous thread.

spin · 11-17-2008, 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Reuters has a slide show, but not a close up photo.

But watch out - this is wrapped up in politics.

Ynet has more details

Quote:

The shard is now kept in a university safe while philologists translate it, a task expected to take months. ...

The Israelites were not the only ones using proto-Canaanite characters, and other scholars suggest it is difficult _ perhaps impossible _ to conclude the text is Hebrew and not a related tongue spoken in the area at the time. Garfinkel bases his identification on a three-letter verb from the inscription meaning "to do," a word he said existed only in Hebrew.

...

Other prominent Biblical archaeologists warned against jumping to conclusions.

Hebrew University archaeologist Amihai Mazar said the inscription was "very important," as it is the longest proto-Canaanite text ever found. But he suggested that calling the text Hebrew might be going too far.

Just a clarification. In the above, when the writer talks of "proto-Canaanite characters", it's a reference to the form of the characters, the particular script. The reference to a "proto-Canaanite text" alludes to the language, which was a precursor to the major languages that emerged more or less around 1000BCE, the parent to Hebrew and Phoenician amongst others.

I would be surprised that one could determine that a language was Hebrew based on one word, three letters. One knows nothing about the variations of the period through lack of exemplars. One usually looks for grammatical indicators that point to features unique to particular languages.

spin

Toto · 12-02-2008, 12:04 PM

Update: Reading the ancient fine print.

A high tech firm in Santa Barbara CA seems to have failed to uncover any new text.

Quote:

The result is hundreds of high-resolution images shot with different light filters. Using a process called spectral imaging, Boydston and Bill Christens-Barry, another imaging expert, aimed to maximize the contrast of the ink, made of charcoal and animal fat, against the terra-cotta piece.

Although they didn't find any hidden text, the images will be sent back to Israel. Other high-tech images were produced -- using slightly different imaging techniques -- at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles and two other technical shops on the East Cost.

Once the shard's message is fully scrutinized and decoded, findings will be published in scholarly journals by Yosef Garfinkel of Hebrew University, who led the dig. A few words already deciphered -- "slave," "king," "land" and "judge" -- indicate that it may be a legal text, lending weight to some scholars' belief that King David wielded considerable power over the Israelites.

Minimalist · 12-02-2008, 12:23 PM

Quote:

The fortress was situated on the border between biblical Philistia and the biblical kingdom of Judea and it thought to have been a major checkpoint guarding the main road from the coast to Jerusalem.

A fort, on an east-west road between Jerusalem and Gath would serve equally well for a Philistine sentry watching the east as for a Judahite sentry looking west.

The Philistines did exist and Gath existed at the time frame Garfinkle has identified. "Jerusalem" at the same time period, seems to have been a one-horse town of perhaps 1000 people. It seems far more likely that the settled Philistines would have been building forts to protect their lands from nomadic attacks as opposed to the village of Jerusalem building a fort to protect their huts.

Once again, two factors seem to be at work here. First, the tendency to try to cram everything found in the M/E into some sort of biblical context in order to placate the religious nuts. Second, if Garfinkle had announced that he found a few lines of proto-canannite script at a Philistine fortress who would pay it any attention in the mainstream media?

mg01 · 12-02-2008, 12:44 PM

What form of logic connects these two statements?

Quote:

A few words already deciphered -- "slave," "king," "land" and "judge" -- indicate that it may be a legal text,

Quote:

lending weight to some scholars' belief that King David wielded considerable power over the Israelites.

I can only guess this is "biblical sensationalism" on the part of those reporting the story.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-30-2008, 10:28 AM	#2
Anat Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: home Posts: 3,715	Is there an image of the inscription anywhere?

10-30-2008, 02:09 PM	#4
bacht Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Canada Posts: 2,305	Does "proto-Canaanite" refer to a specific era, such as before the Israelite monarchies, ie. late 2nd millenium?

11-16-2008, 11:05 PM	#6
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	merged this with a previous thread.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.