Queries & Comments

008

JOTTING DOWN JERUSALEM

Revolt Money

Concerning your editorial (“A Little Jot on a Jerusalem Column,” BAR, January/February 2019), may I call to your attention that Jerusalem is spelled YRWShLYM, i.e., with the second yod, on shekels of the First Revolt in the late 60s C.E.

Dr. Fulco, that is correct! In fact, Jerusalem is spelled both ways on the Great Revolt coinage. Year 1 coinage reads YRWŠLM (יושלים), while Year 2 coins add the second yod and read YRWŠLYM (ירושלים). So we can see that there is evidence that the second yod was still working its way into the spelling in the first century C.E. With the discovery of the Jerusalem column, we see that this change took some time, as we now have evidence that the extra yod appeared outside of manuscripts even earlier, in the first century B.C.E.—B.C.

Well Jotted

Kudos to Editor Cargill for his “A Little Jot on a Jerusalem Column.” This is precisely the sort of detailed, factual archaeological information that I look for in your magazine. Keep up the good work.

DIRTY DETAILS

How’s Your Breakfast?

I have learned a great deal from reading BAR. I enjoyed the article “Digs 2019: A Day in the Life” (BAR, January/February 2019) and had many curiosities about what that would be like.

I do have one concern. I sincerely hope I’m misunderstanding your reference to the Lord of the Rings-inspired “first breakfast,” unless I missed the fact of it being somehow presented as the deception it is. It seems to me that the Lord of the Rings books and movies are occult in nature. I’m hoping you can tell me that you have not replaced a morning devotion to Jesus with a devotion to anything else.

Yes, Alan, I was referring to the first and second breakfasts mentioned in the Lord of the Rings. And while I consider Tolkien’s work to be epic fantasy and not in any way occult, my physical size in the article’s photos reveals what those who have dug with me already know: After a hard morning of digging the earth, I consider each on-site second breakfast to be a religious experience.—B.C.

All That I Missed

Thank you for the great article by Robert Cargill, which I think of as “A Day in the Life” of the dream I had as an 18-year-old, of becoming an archaeologist.

It just wasn’t to be. My love and interest in archaeology has never waned, even at age 80. Until reading this article, I never had a clue what a day “in the life” would have been like. Now I know what I missed. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

Fantasy Archaeology

I’ve always suspected that I am actually an archaeologist in the guise of a retired medical and blood bank technologist, and the article “Digs 2019” confirmed it. Reading this article, I felt like I was actually on the dig and a part of it. I’m tempted to think, “If I were 25 years younger…,” but I will have to live vicariously through excellent articles such as this one.

Broken Pieces of Memory

I was interested in reading Bob Cargill’s account of a day on a dig. I was interested to learn that there is such a thing as a “discard pile” where most excavated pottery goes! It raised a number of questions, including: What happens to the pottery? And if it’s truly discarded, why not document each piece, in terms of location and time period, sell them 010cheap, flood the antiquities market with little mementos that a lot of folks might be happy with, and undercut the sale of unprovenanced artifacts?

Keep up the great work.

Jim, the broken pieces of pottery are examined, but largely deemed non-indicative, that is, they are not as helpful as other pieces in dating the locus in which they were found. They have no commercial value.—B.C.

WHAT’S IN A TITLE?

Can You Spell It for Me?

The recent article “Commander of the Fortress? Understanding an Ancient Military Title” (BAR, January/February 2019) concerning seals and Hebrew linguistics was interesting and informative. The box “How Do You Spell in Ancient Hebrew?” raises a question that extols the nuances of the Bible. Could the author comment on the concurrent use of the two words for “prophet/seer” in addition to a third term (ozeḥ) to distinguish King David’s advisors in 1 Chronicles 29:29?

William Schniedewind responds: The Book of Chronicles was written much later than the books of Samuel and Kings, and it is collecting and interpreting from its sources. In 1 Chronicles 29:29, the author collects all the various prophetic titles and ascribes a different title to each early Biblical figure. The editing process of these titles can be illustrated in 2 Samuel 24:11, where Gad is called both a “nabî’ ” and the “ozeḥ of David.” 1 Samuel 9:9 indicates that the titles ro’eh and ozeḥ (“seer”) are older than the term nabî’. In sum, Chronicles relies on sources for collecting prophetic titles, and it sometimes levels the diachronic aspects of these titles in its recounting of the history of Israel.

BEAUTY PRODUCTS

Ancient Skin Care

The article “The Last Days of Canaanite Azekah” (BAR, January/February 2019) states that found near the skeleton of a young woman was an artisan kit with grinding tools, minerals, and pigments. The ceramic vessels contained various kinds of oils and fats. It is obvious to the casual eye that the product(s) manufactured were skin creams and makeup. Another look may turn up perfume used to make the creams and makeup smell more pleasing than oils tend to be.

Oded Lipschits responds: The use of the artisan kit to produce makeup creams or perfume is indeed very likely. However, we do not want to set our minds on one option only and rule out other possibilities, such as the production of jewelry or ceramics. We hope that future excavations will clarify this riddle.

LOT AND ABRAHAM

Given to Abram. Period!

I think there is no problem with Abram giving land to Lot as suggested in “Safeguarding Abraham” (BAR, January/February 2019). Yes, Genesis 12:7–9 is the first place God promises the land to Abram. However, in Genesis 13:14–15, after Abram lets Lot select land for his herds, God again promises the land to Abram and his “offspring forever.” Then in Genesis 15:17–21 God makes a covenant with Abram, reiterating and expanding the previous promise of the land. Then in Genesis 26:3–4 God promises the land to Isaac, and in Genesis 35:10–12 he makes the same promise to Israel and “to [his] offspring after [him].” How could God have been clearer that the land was given to the descendants of Israel, and that use by Lot did not affect the ownership of the land?

Lot Selfish and Lustful?

I have a question regarding Lot and his wickedness, greed, and cunning in choosing the Jordan Valley (“Safeguarding Abraham”). The two Early Church Fathers Dr. Rickett quotes (Chrysostom and Ambrose) both concur that Lot was selfish and lustful. But in 2 Peter 2:7–8, Lot is called “a righteous man” and reference is made to his “righteous soul.” Did Lot somehow become righteous later? What am I missing?

Dan Rickett responds: The patriarchal history includes declarations of promise and accounts of separation between brothers (incidentally, Lot is called Abram’s “brother” in Genesis 13–14). Add to this the later statements concerning Ammonites and Moabites, and Abram’s offer appears problematic.

The comments by Chrysostom and Ambrose are interpretive. Lot seems ambiguous in Genesis 13, and in the 2 Peter passage it isn’t necessary to equate righteousness with blamelessness. It is not imperative when Lot was righteous but solely that he was and that hearers/readers can see in Lot’s rescue their own hope of deliverance in Jesus.

GREETINGS AND GRIEVANCES

A Future Archaeologist

I walked into our living room and saw our 6-year-old grandson reading your magazine. He looked up and said, “Grandpa, look at these pig bones!” Later 064that morning, he had the newest issue and said, “Grandpa, what’s a fibula?” I think we have a future archaeologist!

Armchair Archaeology

Congratulations to Robert R. Cargill as editor of BAR. This praise comes from a subscriber since Volume 1, No. 3. You give me information and photos that I, an armchair archaeologist, cannot get anywhere else.

Christian Era

I fail to understand why people get so upset when they read B.C.E. (Before CHRISTIAN era) and C.E. (CHRISTIAN era). When I read them that way I don’t get upset about others’ ignorance. May you do as well as Hershel!

Cargill’s Era

I’ve noticed a trend among museums and academics to switch to a nondenominational dating system (B.C.E. and C.E.), instead of the Christian terms B.C. and A.D. In keeping with this trend, perhaps Bob Cargill could add the honorific “Editor” after his name. He could then initial his columns and comments “B.C.E.,” instead of the fraught “B.C.”

JOTTING DOWN JERUSALEM Revolt Money Concerning your editorial (“A Little Jot on a Jerusalem Column,” BAR, January/February 2019), may I call to your attention that Jerusalem is spelled YRWShLYM, i.e., with the second yod, on shekels of the First Revolt in the late 60s C.E. (REV.) WILLIAM J. FULCO, S.J. PROFESSOR, ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN STUDIES LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY LOS ANGELES, CA Dr. Fulco, that is correct! In fact, Jerusalem is spelled both ways on the Great Revolt coinage. Year 1 coinage reads YRWŠLM (יושלים), while Year 2 coins add the second yod and read YRWŠLYM (ירושלים). So we can see […]