Archaeology News
Dr. Eilat Mazar again falls under crucial and scholarly criticism concerning her evaluation of a new finding in the excavations in the area of the City of David. Earlier in January, Dr. Mazar announced the finding of a seal attributed to the time of Nehemiah and she determined that the translation of the seal was Temech from the biblical text found in Nehemiah 7:6, 7:46, and 7:55.
Dr. Mazar had interpreted the seal to read “tmx” (TanaH).
The criticisms were quick to follow—an interpretation was needed to see if the seal should be read right to left or left to right. Hebrew is read right to left, but a seal is inscribed to be impressed into wax or other soft material, and would be read in a mirror image.
In support of Dr. Mazar and after speaking with Dr. Mazar, Dr. peter van der Veen acknowledged that during the Persian period, Jewish inscriptions were sometimes written the wrong way which is evidenced by other archaeological findings; however, in this case, his interpretation was that the interpretation should be ‘sh-l-m-t'. Peter van der Veen is supported by other epigraphic scholars including Robert Deutsch who was very public in his slamming of Dr. Mazar.
Dr. Mazar is not an expert in epigraphy which is the study of written script. She did, in fact, using her own interpretation, mistranslate the inscription on the seal.
There are only three consonants on the seal, the vowels in ancient Hebrew are not identified, therefore, there is always room for error in translating ancient Hebrew text. The mirror-image translation or lack of mirror-image could be substantiated as previous stated.
On further evaluation by epigraphic scholars, the name is not Temech from the biblical text; but on the recommendation of noted epigrapher, Anson Rainey, as he critiqued Eilat Mazar’s interpretation:
“It is obvious that the inscription on the newly discovered seal from the City of David excavations has to be read from left to right—that is, in the negative. Otherwise, the tail of the letter MEM is on the wrong side.
“Most seals, unless they are devoted to a temple, are incised in the negative so that the inscription can be read from right to left in the clay impression of the seal. Therefore, the suggested reading by Dr. Eilat Mazar cannot be interpreted from right to left on the seal itself. The personal name is most likely to be read: sh-l-m-t.” This could be the name of Shelomit, the daughter of Zerubabbel (1 Chronicles 3:19). The name was apparently common in the exilic and post-exilic period, e.g. Ezra 8:10.” (BAR: January 30, 2008)
In the latest barrage of hurled insults to Dr. Mazar, the more scholarly community was correct in their interpretation but unduly harsh that Dr. Mazar had incorrectly identified a seal to be associated with a name from the Bible—but from the wrong text.
Mazar has now acknowledged that the seal should indeed be read as “Shlomit.”
“I accept the suggestion made by Peter van der Veen and followed by many other scholars to read Sh l m t. Actually, I love it. For the time being, this reading is preferable to my reading of t m h or h m t.”
1 Chronicles 3:19 And the sons of Pedaiah were, Zerubbabel, and Shimei: and the sons of Zerubbabel; Meshullam, and Hananiah, and Shelomith their sister:
Ezra 8:10 And of the sons of Shelomith; the son of Josiphiah, and with him an hundred and threescore males.
“First Temple seal found in Jerusalem” Etgar Lefkovits, Jerusalem Post, January 17, 2008
“Anson Rainey Critiques Mazar’s Interpretation,” January 30, 2008 http://www.bib-arch.org/Mazar/bswbMazarRainey.asp
Dr. Mazar had interpreted the seal to read “tmx” (TanaH).
The criticisms were quick to follow—an interpretation was needed to see if the seal should be read right to left or left to right. Hebrew is read right to left, but a seal is inscribed to be impressed into wax or other soft material, and would be read in a mirror image.
In support of Dr. Mazar and after speaking with Dr. Mazar, Dr. peter van der Veen acknowledged that during the Persian period, Jewish inscriptions were sometimes written the wrong way which is evidenced by other archaeological findings; however, in this case, his interpretation was that the interpretation should be ‘sh-l-m-t'. Peter van der Veen is supported by other epigraphic scholars including Robert Deutsch who was very public in his slamming of Dr. Mazar.
Dr. Mazar is not an expert in epigraphy which is the study of written script. She did, in fact, using her own interpretation, mistranslate the inscription on the seal.
There are only three consonants on the seal, the vowels in ancient Hebrew are not identified, therefore, there is always room for error in translating ancient Hebrew text. The mirror-image translation or lack of mirror-image could be substantiated as previous stated.
On further evaluation by epigraphic scholars, the name is not Temech from the biblical text; but on the recommendation of noted epigrapher, Anson Rainey, as he critiqued Eilat Mazar’s interpretation:
“It is obvious that the inscription on the newly discovered seal from the City of David excavations has to be read from left to right—that is, in the negative. Otherwise, the tail of the letter MEM is on the wrong side.
“Most seals, unless they are devoted to a temple, are incised in the negative so that the inscription can be read from right to left in the clay impression of the seal. Therefore, the suggested reading by Dr. Eilat Mazar cannot be interpreted from right to left on the seal itself. The personal name is most likely to be read: sh-l-m-t.” This could be the name of Shelomit, the daughter of Zerubabbel (1 Chronicles 3:19). The name was apparently common in the exilic and post-exilic period, e.g. Ezra 8:10.” (BAR: January 30, 2008)
In the latest barrage of hurled insults to Dr. Mazar, the more scholarly community was correct in their interpretation but unduly harsh that Dr. Mazar had incorrectly identified a seal to be associated with a name from the Bible—but from the wrong text.
Mazar has now acknowledged that the seal should indeed be read as “Shlomit.”
“I accept the suggestion made by Peter van der Veen and followed by many other scholars to read Sh l m t. Actually, I love it. For the time being, this reading is preferable to my reading of t m h or h m t.”
1 Chronicles 3:19 And the sons of Pedaiah were, Zerubbabel, and Shimei: and the sons of Zerubbabel; Meshullam, and Hananiah, and Shelomith their sister:
Ezra 8:10 And of the sons of Shelomith; the son of Josiphiah, and with him an hundred and threescore males.
“First Temple seal found in Jerusalem” Etgar Lefkovits, Jerusalem Post, January 17, 2008
“Anson Rainey Critiques Mazar’s Interpretation,” January 30, 2008 http://www.bib-arch.org/Mazar/bswbMazarRainey.asp
posted by ~serapha~ at 8:27 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home