Deciphering the Inscription

UNC CHARLOTTE MOUNT ZION EXPEDITION / SHIMON GIBSON

After the discovery of the inscribed stone mug in 2009, it was initially studied by Stephen Pfann, who published a preliminary study. Since then, however, scholars have largely ignored this intriguing find. I became fascinated by this artifact and resolved to conduct my own paleographical study.¹

—–

Although the incised writing is coarser than what we might expect in a manuscript, the inscription was likely created by a single scribe. Deciphering the inscription is admittedly difficult, not due to the quality of the incisions, but because of the diversity of script types present: among them the so-called Cryptic A script, similar to that seen in the Qumran manuscripts, as well as Paleo-Hebrew and Aramaic (also known as square Hebrew). Building on Pfann’s preliminary decipherment, I propose the following reading of the cup’s inscription (with vacat noting the lack of writing in facets 1, 17, and 20).

UNC CHARLOTTE MOUNT ZION EXPEDITION / SHIMON GIBSON

The inscription is similar to later incantation and curse texts, which often feature seemingly meaningless words or letters known as nomina barbara. However, this text is unusual because it contains no requests or personal names. This inscription, found in situ in a first-century CE archaeological context, sheds new light on the use of nomina barbara in reference to the Tetragrammaton and, more broadly, the substitution of theonyms and the divine epithet tseba’ot (“[Lord of] hosts”). Indeed, the scribe appears to manipulate the form of the letter tsade in the first two scripts, demonstrating a high degree of mastery in the art of writing. Additionally, the inscription can be compared to later amulets containing sequences of multiple tsades, suggesting the existence of an incantatory tradition. The Mt. Zion inscription may serve as a missing link between the divine epithet “YHWH tseba’ot” in the Hebrew Bible and its use in later incantations.

I believe the absence of a request or personal name points to the mug’s ritual use. It is unsurprising, therefore, that it was unearthed in an elite Jewish home, complete with a mikveh, a bathtub, and a nearby water cistern. Several mishnaic texts (m. Yadayim 1:2; Parah 3:2; Betzah 2:3; t. Shabbat 17:1) and the Gospel of John (2:6–7) attest to rites involving water contained in a vessel. The limestone mug may have been used to transport small amounts of pure water from the cistern to the nearby mikveh. The inscription invoking YHWH’s power was probably intended to preserve this water from possible contamination and thus to guarantee its purity when it was eventually deposited in the ritual pool. In this context, the letters associated with the Tetragrammaton and the divine epithet tseba’ot could be seen as a request for divine protection to ensure the water’s purity.