Lecture in Tampa on the Khirbet Qeiyafa Excavation

I will be presenting a lecture at the Florida College Annual Lectureship this coming Tuesday, February 1st, on the significance of Khirbet Qeiyafa. Prof. Yossi Garfinkel and Dr. David Adams have been kind enough to permit the use of photos from the excavation, so anyone who comes will see great pictures of the dig and its discoveries.

My lecture is at 8:00 a.m. Tuesday morning in McCarty Auditorium. Don’t worry about it being a bit early to concentrate. News from this excavation seems to possess an inherent caffeine all its own.

Overview of 2010 digs on ‘Book and Spade’ podcast

This week’s 13-minute program of “The Book and the Spade” gives overviews of several excavations planned for this spring and summer. Among those mentioned are:

• Ashkelon (ongoing excavations headed by a team from Harvard)
• Khirbet el-Maqatir (possible site of Ai)
• Bethsaida (hometown of Peter and Andrew; possible hometown of Absalom’s mother in OT times)

and my personal favorite…

• Khirbet Qeiyafa ([Quote from the program: The site dates to "a time of intense archaeological interest right now... What's being found here may well inform the debate over the 10th century [the time of King David] in years ahead. This is a very interesting and significant archaeological site…”)

The program notes that most volunteers at these and other sites tend to be college students and “older, retired people.” I certainly don’t fall in either category (though I am currently in a graduate program) but I was able to excavate for three weeks last summer. You can do it as well. Want to come to Khirbet Qeiyafa with me this summer?

Hebrew U. Open Letter re: the Galil Translation of the Khirbet Qeiyafa Inscription

I saw this new section on the official Khirbet Qeiyafa excavation website a few days ago but could not take the time to comment on the new open letter regarding Prof. Galil’s popularized translation of the inscription.

It’s a shame this translation has shot through the media so quickly. It’s been reported as fact and little attention has been given to substantive analysis. Galil’s version hasn’t yet been published in a scholarly journal. It seems more and more scholars are expressing skepticism at the translation. If points in the open letter are true, there could be ethical questions. I don’t know enough details to form conclusions on these matters. Hopefully, everything may be properly balanced with time.

Some Needed Balance on the Khirbet Qeiyafa Translation

Many or most of the major news outlets have recently run stories about Prof. Galil’s translation of the Qeiyafa ostrcaon. His translation is interesting and exciting, but there are points of caution. 1) His translation has not yet been published for review by other epigraphers. 2) None of the important words in his translation are clearly visible in the inscription. Galil had to attempt the reconstruction of many words based on scattered bits of surviving ink.

One problem with the popular media’s popularization of this story is that other epigraphers’ work, particularly that of Haggai Misgav, has been entirely omitted from news articles. Prof. Misgav studied the inscription for over a year and published the first translation of the text last October. Other epigraphers have presented alternative translations in recent months.

The reason Prof. Galil’s translation hit the news and has continued to spread is due to its completeness and its similarity to biblical texts. But the portion of the inscription that is clearly readable does not permit a complete translation without the generous use of assumption. Galil’s translation could be accurate, but there is a greater chance at this point that it is not so. Don’t assume this is the final word!

This article in “Christianity Today” is the first I’ve seen that addresses the lack of certainty with Galil’s translation. It even provides Haggai Misgav’s translation of the inscription. Misgav’s version does not provide the feeling of closure that comes from Galil’s, but it does reveal the difficulty in identifying many of the key letters and words. Be sure to read the second page of the article.

As I wrote previously on this blog:

The real news to this inscription has been that even a small, border town in 10th century B.C. Judah possessed scribes who could record events and administrate on behalf of a government. An administrative capital (such as Jerusalem?) would have had equal if not greater capability to preserve its own history and sacred writings.

We do not have to ascertain the inscription’s exact meaning to understand its potential role in supporting Israelite literacy in the 10th century B.C. As the “Christianity Today” article points out, the fortifications and other material remains in Khirbet Qeiyafa offer stronger evidence of the Bible’s historicity at this point in time. There is more work to be done before there can (may?) be reasonable agreement on the inscription’s specific message.

New Short Video on the Qeiyafa Inscription

Foundation Stone has a new two-part video on the inscription that has (again) caught the attention of the worldwide press. The Khirbet Qeiyafa team has also issued a formal response to the recent news reports of Prof. Galil’s translation. This response is published in full in my previous post.

You may view both parts of the video here. These videos are still “rough cut” versions. The second video does not yet have all of its English subtitles, but that will no doubt be resolved soon. Both parts are interesting and informative.

Khirbet Qeiyafa Team’s Response to the New Inscription Translation

Foundation Stone, which works with Professor Yusef Garfinkel to develop the Khirbet Qeiyafa/Elah Fortress site, has released a response to Prof. Galil’s recent translation of the ostracon inscription. This is the first blog to receive the response from the Khirbet Qeiyafa staff. Here is the full text from Rabbi Barnea Selavan, co-director of Foundation Stone:

Recent press reports based on Haifa U. Prof. Gershon Galil’s interpretation of the Elah Fortress- Khirbet Qeiyafa ostracon ignore epigrapher Dr Hagai Misgav’s work.

At the annual Jerusalem Region Israel Antiquities Authority-Hebrew University academic conference in Nov 2009, 4 interpretations were given, ranging from it being a fragment (it is broken) of a communication (Misgav), a monumental inscription, taking note of the size of the letters and dots and lines dividing it (Yardeni); a scribal exercise on the pot surface, changing directions deliberately- explaining a different direction to the writing, and the aleph changing directions – and the text itself being an “encyclopedic list” of important knowledge as such (Demsky); or, a scribal exercise indeed (Achituv), with a list of important recorded facts; in this case, a hierarchy of divinity positions, etc. (This is my recollection of Prof Achituv’s oral presentation, not in the publication; I may have misunderstood him.) These were published in “New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and its Region, Collected Papers,” Vol 3, pp. 111-132; the annual conference proceedings. All this was ignored in the press releases.

Dr Aren Maeir shared a review on his blog at that time (I note that he has now posted a positive view of Prof Galil’s new interpretation). We look forward to Dr Misgav and other epigraphers’ responses to Prof Galil’s interpretation.

The article further made use of the sketch Dr Misgav prepared without fully crediting it.

The releases produced news headlines as if the October and November 2008 world media coverage did not exist (I am tempted to announce the Dead Sea scrolls have been found).

Out of 50 characters in the text some 40 are largely visible to the naked eye, though they may not be complete. Most of the remaining ten characters become visible through imaging, which Dr Misgav used to make his sketch. It does not seem that all the scholars had access to all this material when offering interpretations. When looking at a line and not realizing that its continuation can actually be discerned in imagery, and conversely, inserting figures where no ink traces are visible with the most sophisticated instruments, suggesting a reading on such grounds seems to be unreasonable. Excavator Prof Yosef Garfinkel has now made a small sampling of these materials available on his website.

Dr Misgav contends, and the other 3 senior presenters – Prof. Ada Yardeni, Aharon Demsky, Shmuel Achituv – did not disagree, that as this form of writing continues for centuries basically as is, it should no longer be called “proto”-Canaanite, because it does not lead into something else; it should be called Canaanite. His conclusions regarding literacy in the 10th century are partially addressed in the video I refer you to below; his full comments will be incorporated in later editions. They are more cautious and well grounded than the presentation currently in the media, and still profound.

It is difficult to measure and to appreciate the intensity and effort Dr Misgav invested for many months, over a year of poring over the ostracon and images, before making a public statement. Prof Achituv publicly compliments him on this in the publication. Dr Misgav fully appreciates the import and potential game-changing nature of the ostracon, and the care which must be taken in this interpretation. This makes the omission of reference to his work all the more inappropriate.

Dr Rollston has contended the text is not Hebrew. His blog comments do not address the linchpin of Dr Misgav’s contention – that “al ta’as” is solely a Hebrew conjugation; nor Prof Achituv’s other published proofs (p.130) of it being Hebrew. I asked for his clarification of this point and as of this writing have not received a response. Perhaps he is arguing on the direction of the writing, as he addresses the various possibilities in his blog, right to left, left to right, and alternating line by line. One should add to those three, in which direction to hold the ostracon, which in itself took Dr Misgav time to decide on, and which Prof Demsky has offered literally a novel twist on. On this first line of the ostracon with “al ta’as”, none of the other 5 approaches published to date seem to disagree with the direction, from what I understand.

As we have shared privately with both Prof Garfinkel and Dr Misgav, Foundation Stone encourages a conference with the world’s leading epigraphers, and with scholars from different disciplines who may provide a different take. Especially as one must “fill in the gaps” here, not only of letters, but of the missing words, and the context and nature of the text, and its purpose. All should be provided with direct access to the ostracon and all the imagery, with time for discussion and interchange.

Some background: Hebrew University produced one kind of imagery which was very useful. Foundation Stone then played a role in supporting and facilitating further hi-tech imagery work in four Boston and Los Angeles institutions, led by Dr. Greg Bearman of Snapshot Spectra (in fact the ostracon is serving as a case test being reviewed by Dr Bearman and the IAA to determine which methods are worth investing in as SOP for reading such inscriptions).

We then helped provide Dr Misgav with the various images that Dr Bearman obtained in a useful form, which helped him produce his analysis and interpretation, and the published sketch. Foundation Stone CoDirector David Willner, MA Ed., invested significant time, travel, and work to make this process effective; including improving the images used by the scholars in research, presentations at conferences and on websites; and producing materials for use by the staff on the excavation site itself to present to scholarly visitors like Prof. Larry Stager of Harvard, and to lay visitors.

Understanding the origins of the alphabet, and of Hebrew writing, has important educational value for the general public and for Jewish educational circles. The context of its discovery at Elah Fortress- Khirbet Qeiyafa- Sha’arayim (both gates are now reconstructed), adds additional meaning. As press accounts are not coming out clearly we decided therefore to release a rough video at this time, sharing with you some of the ostracon story and the process of its interpretation.

The rough video is up on our website http://www.foundationstone.org in two parts.

Please credit it properly. Please look for updated versions to follow.

Yours,

Rabbi Barnea Levi Selavan
CoDirector
Foundation Stone
http://www.foundationstone.org
Tevet 29 5770
January 15 2010

U.S. Media Report About Deciphering the Khirbet Qeiyafa Inscription

After yesterday morning’s news that the world’s oldest Hebrew inscription may have finally been translated, I found this story in the U.S. media this morning. Here is an excerpt:

The inscription is the earliest example of Hebrew writing found, which stands in opposition to the dating of the composition of the Bible in current research; prior to this discovery, it was not believed that the Bible or parts of it could have been written this long ago.

… current theory holds that the Bible could not have been written before the 6th century B.C.E., because Hebrew writing did not exist until then.

The real news to this inscription has been that even a small, border town in 10th century B.C. Judah possessed scribes who could record events and administrate on behalf of a government. An administrative capital (such as Jerusalem?) would have had equal if not greater capability to preserve its own history and sacred writings.

For anyone unaware of the history of this inscription, here’s a brief summary.

• The inscription was discovered in a 10th century B.C. (Iron Age IIA) stratum during the 2008 excavation season at Khirbet Qeiyafa.
• Its Proto-Canaanite characters have been determined to record a Hebrew-language message, based on the existence of specific vocabulary.
• It is the oldest Hebrew inscription yet discovered in the world.
• Most of the inscription has remained indecipherable until now, even after high-tech scans to recover some of the faded letters.

I had the privilege of searching for more inscriptions while working at Khirbet Qeiyafa in the summer of 2009, and plan to go back for more this July. There is a reasonable chance more texts will be found in the next few years.

New Translation of Khirbet Qeiyafa Inscription Published

Prof. Gershon Galil has published his own translation and drawing of the 10th century B.C. inscription from Khirbet Qeiyafa. It is quite different from the preliminary translation put forth previously by Prof. Hagai Misgav (see my previous post here, Prof. Aren Maeir’s report of Misgav’s translation here , and video here). It’s been tough to translate due to the faded 3,000 year-old ink and the fact that some letters face different directions in the text. (Check out the aleph in the upper left, and then in other places in the drawing below.)

I do not know of a translation into Hebrew characters, but here is the English version by Prof. Galil as reported on Eurekalert:

1′ you shall not do [it], but worship the [Lord].
2′ Judge the sla[ve] and the wid[ow] / Judge the orph[an]
3′ [and] the stranger. [Pl]ead for the infant / plead for the po[or and]
4′ the widow. Rehabilitate [the poor] at the hands of the king.
5′ Protect the po[or and] the slave / [supp]ort the stranger.

It is noted that this translation shows a similar content to Isaiah 1:17, Psalm 72:3 (I believe the article meant verse 4), Exodus 23:3 and other passages.

Courtesy of the University of Haifa

The inscription is the oldest Hebrew in the world, though the characters are “Proto-Canaanite”, dating to the time of the biblical David. There has been plenty of previous coverage in the scholarly world and in the popular media. Now to see how this translation holds up under peer review.

HT: Paleojudaica

Update: This translation has only been published in the news media. It has yet to appear in a scholarly journal for peer review and analysis.

First discovered Jesus-era house in Nazareth

The Israel Antiquities Authority has announced the unearthing of a house in Nazareth from the time of Jesus. This is the first structure from that period to be excavated in Jesus’ hometown.

Early Roman structure from Jesus' time, unearthed in Nazareth.

The discovery is of the utmost importance since it reveals for the very first time a house from the Jewish village of Nazareth and thereby sheds light on the way of life at the time of Jesus. The building that we found is small and modest and it is most likely typical of the dwellings in Nazareth in that period. From the few written sources that there are, we know that in the first century CE Nazareth was a small Jewish village, located inside a valley. Until now a number of tombs from the time of Jesus were found in Nazareth; however, no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period.

…[The] earlier building consisted of two rooms and a courtyard in which there was a rock-hewn cistern into which the rainwater was conveyed. The artifacts recovered from inside the building were few and mostly included fragments of pottery vessels from the Early Roman period (the first and second centuries CE). In addition, several fragments of chalk vessels were found, which were only used by Jews in this period because such vessels were not susceptible to becoming ritually unclean.

Another hewn pit, whose entrance was apparently camouflaged, was excavated and a few pottery sherds from the Early Roman period were found inside it. The excavator, Yardenna Alexandre, said, “Based on other excavations that I conducted in other villages in the region, this pit was probably hewn as part of the preparations by the Jews to protect themselves during the Great Revolt against the Romans in 67 CE”.

…The “Association Mary of Nazareth” intends on conserving and presenting the remains of the newly discovered house inside the building planned for the “International Marian Center of Nazareth”.

Here’s a noteworthy bit from an AP article as excerpted by PaleoJudaica:

The absence of any remains of glass vessels or imported products suggested the family who lived in the dwelling were “simple,” but Alexandre said the remains did not indicate whether they were traders or farmers.

It’s impossible to get a feel for 1st- century Nazareth today unless you visit the nearby Nazareth Village.  Modern Nazareth is a congested place. This site will undoubtedly join the tour itineraries. It will be a good addition, and a convenient one since it’s right next to the Church of the Annunciation.

Read the full IAA press release while the link lasts. You can download a couple of high-res photos there as well.

Coming announcement of “New Find” from Nazareth

This is from Joe Lauer, via Todd Bolen:

This morning the IAA’s Spokesperson circulated a notice to journalists inviting them to a Press Conference to be held tomorrow morning, December 21, at which “The IAA will Reveal a New Archeological Find in Nazareth”. The meeting point will be behind the Church of the Annunciation, next to the upper entrance to the old school of Saint Joseph at 10:20 AM.

The notice does not give a hint of what that “New Archeological find” is, although I suspect that some list recipients are in the know (and some might think that it may have something to do with a fast-approaching date on the calendar).

So, stay tuned.

Hmmm…