The Latest Seal
February 29, 2008Joseph Lauer writes
Thank you to G.M. Grena, publisher of the LMLK Blogspot http://lmlk.blogspot.com/ and other interesting LMLK sites, who has done a service for those interested in the recently discovered Rephaihu (ben) Shalem seal by sending the following, which was directed to the ANE-2 moderator (but has not been circulated to that list) regarding “a simple, impression-image drawing for reference (mirrored from the actual seal)” that he produced.
It was suggested by Mike Welch on ANE-2 that the sideways caret-like sign (>
on the seal before the resh in Rephaihu is a lamed, making the line read “Belonging to Rephaihu”. See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ANE-2/message/7515 (Thus, my theorizing that perhaps the sign was an unsuccessful and incomplete attempt to incise the first resh has gone out the window, although that first lamed does not quite match the lamed on the second line in Shalem/Shallum or the curved-bottom ca. 700 BCE lamed on Ada Yardeni’s “Alphabets Ancient & Modern” chart.)
Hi Jim!
I hope that you don’t mind if I add the text of G.M. Grena’s e-mail, which explains what he did and the preliminary basis of his drawing. It might be of value for those viewing the drawing.
**************
G.M. Grena’s e-mail:
“Raphaihu (ben) Shalem” Seal Drawing
I noticed some discussion of this seal, & thought it would be helpful to have a simple, impression-image drawing for reference (mirrored from the actual seal). Since it has no significant connection to LMLK seals, I don’t really have an appropriate publication forum, & thought it might get widest distribution among scholars if ANE-2 were to make it available via their database.
Since this is only a preliminary drawing based on 2 photos–one that has a clear inscription, but is skewed; & another that is not skewed, but lo-res–it will probably need to be updated when better photos are available, but this should suffice for now. The region of the Hey & Vau is particularly questionable (an attempt at a ligature?), & to a certain degree resembles a Het, & even resembles the arrangement that Eilat Mazar interpreted as a Het for her Tamah misreading. I made the initial drawing of the letters based on the hi-res Haaretz photo, then unskewed it as best I could to match the lo-res IAA photo.
I included the 2 little circles/dots because we see similar objects used as word dividers on other seals (LMLK M2U & S2U), though they’re obviously not dividing anything on this seal.
If the ANE-2 moderators are not interested in publishing/storing it, anyone else CC’d on this E-mail is certainly welcome to publish it online for reference. Just bear in mind that it’s not done to the same standard as my LMLK seal drawings.
G.M. Grena
Not at all Joseph.
Dear All
The seal is to be dated to the 7th century BC and not to the 8th as it was stated by the excavators and followers
Also, the palm branche serves as a simple space filler, i.e. it has nothing to do with the Ashera, the Temple or the Christmas tree
Robert Deutsch
[...] it was dated to the 8th century BCE on the basis of stratigraphy, but Deutsch disputes that date [here]. Yitzhak [...]
Dear Dr. West and Listers, Hi!!! This is the problem with epigraphy and iconography and even stratigraphy. They are not sciences. They are based to a great extent on what the beholder sees. Dr. Peter van der Veen has just argued that the mid-Seventh century might be moved down fifty years or so. This is based on his doctoral and post-doctoral analyses of pottery. Thus, even pottery analyses are up to what the beholder observes. Dr. Paul W. Lapp before his early death in 1970 lamented this very circular reasoning problem.
With Much Gratitude,
Sincerely Yours,
Mike Welch
Deltona, Florida