The Minor, Trivial Stuff Thread

[patrick457]

In the Gospel of John (19:23-24 NAB), we read that:

When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his clothes and divided them into four shares, a share for each soldier. They also took his tunic, but the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top down.
So they said to one another, “Let’s not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it will be,” in order that the passage of scripture might be fulfilled (that says): “They divided my garments among them, and for my vesture they cast lots.” This is what the soldiers did.

Let’s note how tunics were like at that time (from Jodi Magness’ The Archeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls):

A sleeveless tunic (Greek chiton; Hebrew haluq), covered by a large, rectangular mantle (Greek himation; Roman pallium; Hebrew tallit or me’il) were worn by both men and women in Roman Palestine (see Fig. 60). The Roman toga was analogous to a mantle but differed in having a curved hem. The tunic consisted of a large rectangular sheet woven with two parallel bands of a different color that run from selvage to selvage and spaced widely apart. Whereas most Greek and Roman tunics were woven in a single piece, those from Masada and the Cave of Letters were woven in two pieces and sewn together at the shoulders, leaving an opening for the neck (see Fig. 58). This feature facilitated adherence to the laws of purity, for if one half of the mantle sic] became impure it could be removed and replaced without defiling the other half…

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/6894/durasynagoguewc3davidanr.jpg

Thus in a way, Jesus’ tunic is rather unique, somewhat ‘out of the ordinary’. St. John goes into detail describing how it was without seam and woven in one piece that the soldiers did not want to tear it and instead decided to cast lots. It is thought that the tunic must have been one of the latest in fashion because to produce such a garment one would require a larger loom, since the old standard-sized looms in common use would not be workable. Larger looms which allowed wider cloth to be made were apparently invented only in Jesus lifetime.

Now, first of all, how exactly did Jesus get this tunic? Leaving aside the idea taught by some that Jesus must have been rich based on this passage, some think that Mary made it. Others, based on the fact that Jesus did have some well-to-do followers (cf. Luke 8:3), suggest that it may have been given to Him by these women disciples. Still another suggestion proposes that this was the “elegant clothing” Herod dressed Jesus in (Luke 22:11). Admittedly, we can’t know for sure, that is certain.

 

[patrick457]

Now we’ll drift over…

The Gospel reading for the First Sunday of Lent is about the temptation of Jesus in the desert; so, let’s check first the places where these occurred.

The Synoptics all relate that the Spirit led Jesus to the wilderness “to be tested by the Slanderer (diabolos, from where we get ‘devil’)”. Where is this wilderness? Probably it was the wastelands of Judea which lay between Jerusalem and the Jordan, bordered by the eastern slopes of the Judean Mountains to the west and by the shore of the Dead Sea to the east - from west to east, there is a steep descent of over 1200 meters.

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/2554/77558137.jpg
(From here)
When we hear the word ‘desert’, the thing that comes to our minds is searing heat, endless sand dunes and an occasional oasis - something like the Sahara. However, the Judean desert is unlike that: there are only a few areas of dunes there, and they are mainly along the Mediterranean coast. Mostly, the Negev and Judean deserts are rocky areas, either mountainous with virtually no vegetation, or flat (as in the Arava), with scattered trees and bushes (however, even these are not enough to provide shade). Both deserts are criss-crossed by wadis. Also, the Judean desert was not big, spanning only 1,500 square kilometers.

http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/640/judeandeserti.jpg

Compared to the Negev down south, the Judean desert lay mostly uninhabited, though it was close to settled areas. Because of that, it proved useful as a good as a refuge and hiding place for rebels, bandits, monks and hermits throughout history.

The hard limestone mountains of Judea made for rough walking, even for one accustomed to traveling on foot. Some of the paths had been washed away by water from sudden rain squalls erupting through the wadis. And as mentioned, there were also bands of thugs that preyed on lone, unprotected travelers in that area. Perhaps Jesus was speaking from experience when He told about the story of the man beaten by such robbers on the way between Jerusalem and Jericho and left for dead (Luke 10:30-37) - the route passes through the wilderness, twisting and turning through canyons and ravines dotted with caves. It’s not a stretch to assume that Jesus may have witnessed such gangs of marauders wandering around or even brutally attacking a helpless traveller. There were also a number of animals residing in the area, such as leopards, lions, and ibices/ibexes to name a few (cf. Mark 1:13).

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/5394/800pxyaelst06w.jpg

The desert floor was, of course, littered with countless stones, many of which would have rather resembled the loaves of bread Jesus would have been familiar with, hence:

And having come the Tester said to Him, “If Son you are of God, say that these stones should become bread.” But answering, He said, “It is written, ‘Not by bread alone shall man live, but by every word proceeding out of the mouth of God.’”

-Matthew 4:3-4

And the Slanderer said to Him, “If Son you are of God, say to this stone that it should become bread.” And Jesus answered to him, “It is written, ‘Not by bread alone shall man live [but by every word of God]’.”

-Luke 4:3-4

 

[Spirithound]

As for fixing the crossbar to the erect post, one of the more convenient methods with which this may have been accomplished is the mortise-and-tenon joint. In this idea, the patibulum would have a mortise (a hole) in the middle, which fitted snugly to the stipes’ tenon (a projection on the end of a timber for insertion into a mortise). Assembled together, this would yield a tau (T-shaped) cross.

So, since the Scriptures tell us that an inscription was set above Jesus’ head, would it be more likely that the tenon was long enough to hold the patibulum and a little extra for the inscription, or, could it have been affixed to the patibulum, which would then be above his head when he is is hanging?

 

[patrick457]

So, since the Scriptures tell us that an inscription was set above Jesus’ head, would it be more likely that the tenon was long enough to hold the patibulum and a little extra for the inscription, or, could it have been affixed to the patibulum, which would then be above his head when he is is hanging?

Aside from those, another possible solution that I can think of is this: that the inscription was on a stick, kinda like what the soldier at the right of the picture below is holding (though I kind of imagine a more shorter handle than that one). The placards, as you may know, serve the purpose of making clear who the victim was and what his crime is: they were either hung around the victim’s neck or carried in front of him.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

In the Middle Ages, some artists depicted Jesus crucified on a tau cross. In order for the sign to be “above His head” as Matthew reports it, they employed quite similar solutions:

http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/729/crucifixio.jpg

One interesting thing is that we have a number of accounts where condemned men had the resumes of their crimes carried before them or tied on their necks, we have no explicit records other than the Gospels that these were then fastened to the victim’s crosses in cases of crucifixion. It was thus suggested by some that this events surrounding Jesus’ titulus (which incidentally is one that is mostly accepted as historically true*) was remembered precisely because what was done with the placard was unique.

*There are of course some historians who doubted whether the sign itself was real. Even so, most accept that there was such a sign on Jesus’ cross since it is difficult, according to them, to imagine that the Evangelists or the early Christians would make this up because for one, “King of the Judeans” is certainly not a nice title and is one that is never used by Christians (Fr. Joseph A. Fitzmyer once reasoned that if Christians made this talk about an inscription all up, they would have used Christos instead “for Christians would have scarcely called their Lord ‘the king of the Jews’”), and, because in light of the events surrounding Jesus’ death, the ‘crime’ as stated in the placard makes perfect sense.

 

[patrick457]

Then the Slanderer takes Him to the holy city and stood Him on the pterygion of the Temple, and says to Him, “If Son you are of God, throw yourself down, for it is written, ‘His messengers He shall command concerning you,’ and ‘On hands they shall lift you up, so that you will not dash on a stone your foot.’” Jesus declared to him again, “It is written, ‘You shall not test the Lord your God.’”

-Matthew 4:5-7

And he led Him to Jerusalem, and stood Him on the pterygion of the Temple, and said to Him, “If Son you are of God, throw yourself down from here, for it is written, ‘To His messengers He shall command concerning you, to guard over you,’ and ‘On hands they shall lift you up, so that you will not dash on a stone your foot.’” And Jesus, answering, said to him, “It is said, ‘You shall not test the Lord your God.’”

-Luke 4:10-12

What is the ‘pterygion’? The word is a diminutive of pteryx, ‘wing’. Hence pterygion means, ‘little wing’ or ‘winglet’. Apart from Matthew and Luke’s use of the word, the word is not used elsewhere to refer to a building feature, though there are rare uses of it in classical literature for a projecting piece of a coat of armor or rudder or some such machinery. Thus, it is usually interpreted that here, pterygion refers to an extremity, a tip or a projection: Jesus now found Himself on a very high portion of the Temple. Even so, which part of the Temple complex He stood at is not really clear and is open for speculation and debate. Here are some theories:

(1) The roof of the Royal Portico

The area inside the outer walls is known as the outer court or, as Josephus expresses, “the first court” (The Mishna refers to these as the “mount of the House”); the largest area within the outer court was to the south, then the east, then the north and finally the west (m. Mid. 2.1). It was paved with stones (Jewish War 5.11.2; 192-93). Anyone who was ritually pure could enter into them.

This in turn was surrounded by a stoa, or portico adjacent to the inside of the walls (Jewish War 5.5.2; 191-93; Antiquities 15.11.5; 410-416). The portico consisted of three rows of columns, except along the southern wall where there were four rows of columns (Acts 2:46). The outermost columns were pilasters, columns set into the Temple wall. The portico consisting of four rows of columns on the south was called the Royal Portico.

The portico was effectively a basilica (in the Roman sense), a cross between the Supreme Court, House of Representatives, and Stock Exchange, as Alec Garrard put it (The Splendor of the Temple, p. 40). It functioned as a marketplace (a number of writers think that this was the area where Jesus drove out the moneychangers, though others disagree) and a meeting area for the Jewish Sanhedrin. On the upper floors, priests (kohanim) and Levites performed various chores, and from there tourists were able to observe the events.

http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/7572/templum.jpg
A model of Herod’s Temple. The Royal Portico is the red-roofed edifice at left (south).

With the exception of those along the southern wall, each column was twenty-five cubits high and made of a single piece of white marble; the ceiling of the portico was lined with cedar. On the three sides of the outer court the portico was thirty cubits wide (War 5.11.2; 190). The Royal Portico meanwhile consisted of four rows of columns, thereby creating three aisles; the two outer aisles were thirty ‘feet’ (‘podes’; approximately equal to the English foot) wide and over fifty ‘feet’ high, whereas the middle aisle was one and half times wider than each of the outer aisles (i.e., forty-five feet wide) and twice as high (100 feet high).

The Royal Portico was apparently one of the highest points of the Temple. From the eastern end of the top of this porch there was an almost vertical drop of 450 feet into the Kidron Valley. Josephus gives a description of the area (Antiquities 15):

410: Now in the western quarters of the enclosure of the temple there were four gates; the first led to the king’s palace, and went to a passage over the intermediate valley; two more led to the suburbs of the city; and the last led to the other city, where the road descended down into the valley by a great number of steps, and thence up again by the ascent for the city lay over against the temple in the manner of a theater, and was encompassed with a deep valley along the entire south quarter;

411: but the fourth front of the temple, which was southward, had indeed itself gates in its middle, as also it had the royal cloisters (stoa), with three walks, which reached in length from the east valley unto that on the west, for it was impossible it should reach any farther:

412: and this cloister deserves to be mentioned better than any other under the sun; for while the valley was very deep, and its bottom could not be seen, if you looked from above into the depth, this further vastly high elevation of the cloister stood upon that height, insomuch that if any one looked down from the top of the battlements, or down both those altitudes, he would be giddy, while his sight could not reach to such an immense depth.

http://www.abu.nb.ca/Courses/NTIntro/InTest/images/ViewOuterCourts2_sm.jpg
Looking south from the Court of the gentiles to the Royal Portico (3D model by the Urban Simulation Team).

 

[patrick457]

1a.) The southeast corner

A staircase at the southeasternmost corner, where the Royal Portico and Solomon’s Portico met, climbed right to the top, with access to every floor and apartment to the building. Alfred Edersheim (1825–1889), author of The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, suggested this location because it provided the longest drop to the ground. However, modern archeological discoveries revealed that a paved courtyard/street was located beneath this corner, so the drop would have been much shorter than Edersheim believed:
The Spirit of God had driven Jesus into the wilderness; the spirit of the Devil now carried Him to Jerusalem. Jesus stands on the lofty pinnacle of the Tower, or of the Temple-porch, presumably that on which every day a Priest was stationed to watch, as the pale morning light passed over the hills of Judæa far off to Hebron, to announce it as the signal for offering the morning sacrifice. If we might indulge our imagination, the moment chosen would be just as the Priest had quitted that station. The first desert-temptation had been in the grey of breaking light, when to the faint and weary looker the stones of the wilderness seemed to take fantastic shapes, like the bread for which the faint body hungered. In the next temptation Jesus stands on the watch-post which the white-robed priest had just quitted. Fast the rosy morning-light, deepening into crimson, and edged with gold, is spreading over the land. In the Priests’ Court below Him the morning-sacrifice has been offered. The massive Temple-gates are slowly opening, and the blasts of the priests’ silver trumpets is summoning Israel to begin a new day by appearing before their Lord. Now then let Him descend, Heaven-borne, into the midst of priests and people. What shouts of acclamation would greet His appearance! What homage of worship would be His! The goal can at once be reached, and that at the head of believing Israel.

It cannot be regarded as certain, that the πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ was, as commentators generally suppose, the Tower at the southeastern angle of the Temple Cloisters, where the Royal (southern) and Solomon’s (the eastern) Porch met, and whence the view into the Kedron Valley beneath was to the stupendous depth of 450 feet. Would this angle be called ‘a wing’ (πτερύγιον)? Nor can I agree with Delitzsch, that it was the ‘roof’ of the Sanctuary, where indeed there would scarcely have been standing-room. It certainly formed the watch-post of the Priest. Possibly it may have been the extreme corner of the ‘wing-like’ porch, or ulam, which led into the Sanctuary. Thence a Priest could easily have communicated with his brethren in the court beneath. To this there is, however, the objection that in that case it should have been τοῦ ναοῦ. At p. 244, the ordinary view of this locality has been taken.1b.) The southwest corner, aka The Place of Trumpeting

At the west end of the Royal Stoa was another structure, which probably formed a large gallery and entrance. There was another entrance into the west side, approached by the huge monumental staircase that led into the portico. In the southwest corner of this building a spiral staircase led from the basement to the top. The top of this building formed what was known as the Place of Trumpeting.

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3042/800pxreconstructionmode.jpg

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/7854/templecornerstreetscenem.jpg
Two reconstructions of the southwest corner of the Temple Mount. The arch is the so-called Robinson Arch (discovered in 1838 by American researcher Edward Robinson), built to link the Tyropoeon Valley, a major traffic artery in the Second Temple Period, with the Royal Portico.

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/3603/southwall12sb.jpg
The southwestern corner of the Temple Mount today. One can see near the south-western corner the remains of the Robinson Arch.

The top stone on the southwest corner of the Temple Mount bore an inscription which read in part, l’bet hatqia l’hak…] “to/of/for the house of trumpeting [to proclaim…].” It was found near the southwest corner of the Temple Mount during the 1968-78 excavations, led by the late Prof. Benjamin Mazar. The huge stone, about 8x3x3 feet (2.43×1 m), was lying on the Roman period street that ran along the southern wall.

ADMIN: IMAGE REMOVED

Apparently the priests would signal the start of Shabbat and feastdays by blowing the shofar from this place. Josephus refers to a place atop the Temple “opposite the lower city,” meaning the southwest corner, “where it was the custom for one of the priests to stand each seventh day and announce with the trumpet the arrival [of the Sabbath] in the afternoon and [its] ending on the following evening, in order to give the people notice of the times for both leaving off and resuming work” (Jewish War 5.582).

http://blog.ritmeyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/trumpeting-stone.jpg

This location was proposed since it was here that public announcements were made; if Jesus would try to drop Himself and invoke divine protection, this is one of the perfect spots to do it.

 

[patrick457]

2.) On the top of the Temple proper

Approaching the sanctuary from the east, one first entered the porch first built by Herod, which stood in front of the sanctuary itself. Behind this was a building, sixty cubits high and wide on the inside and a hundred outside, that housed both the ‘Holy’ and the ‘Holy of Holies’. On the south, west and north were thirty-eight chambers, on which the wealth of the Temple was stored. On the north side was a staircase which led to the rooftop.

A plan of Herod’s Temple
Another one in color

Built of dressed white limestone and covered with heavy plates of gold in front and rising high above its marble-cloistered courts, the sanctuary was a conspicuous and dazzling object from every side. The Temple shone so bright in daylight that it is said that one could not look directly at it at day as it would blind you. According to Josephus, “it reflected so fierce a blaze of fire that those who tried to look at it had to turn away, as if they had looked straight at the sun. To approaching strangers it appeared in the distance like a mountain covered with snow.” (Jewish War 5.5.6)



The roof is edged with golden spikes which served to prevent birds from settling in and polluting the roof, according to the Mishnah, though it is of course doubtful that only spikes would have been enough; it is also likely that men were posted on the rooftop to prevent birds from approaching.

 

[patrick457]

Let’s do a little break, shall we?

One thing that Renaissance Christian iconography and Cecil B. DeMille has imprinted onto our minds is this image:

The Telegraph US - Breaking news, opinion & analysis

The Tablets of the Law are depicted as rectangular slabs - sometimes with rounded tops, which are probably about the size of paving-stones. In reality, these would have been probably too heavy and cumbersome to be carried by an elderly man down a steep mountainside, even for one who has unabated vigor like Moses. We won’t deny that they do serve a legitimate artistic purpose, however: they make the Ten Commandments legible enough for the viewer!

Now Jewish belief does report that divine power assisted Moses in carrying these tablets (the letters supported themselves as well as the stone in which they were encased) - Moses only dropped them when help was withdrawn once he saw the people worshipping the Golden Calf. Now the tablets as described in Jewish tradition were cubes made of sapir (sapphire/lapis lazuli) as a reminder of the heavens, six tefachim (handbreadths; 1 tefach equals 8-10 centimeters) long and wide, and three tefachim thick. The words were not just engraved on the surface, but rather were bored fully through the stone (cf. Exodus 32:15, “on the one side and on the other were they written”), yet both sides appeared normally instead of the reverse side being a mirror image as one would expect.

http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/2730/75823226.png
A rough idea of the tablets as described in Jewish lore, by yours truly. Note however that the tablets were supposed to contain “all the precepts of the Torah in all their particulars” all categorized according to their respective commandments and that they can be rolled up like a scroll, despite of them being hewn out of stone (Louis Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews III; Exodus Rabbah VIII).
It is thought, however, that historically it is most likely that the Tablets were actually much smaller ostraca (singular ostracon; a piece of pottery or stone usually containing scratched-in words or other forms of writing). In Egypt, anything with a smooth surface could be used as a writing surface. Because papyrus was too valuable and costly, people in those days usually scribbled short notes and matters of no lasting value (say, sketches, receipts or scribal exercises) on broken pottery or in flakes of stone chipped out of rocks. Modern scholars are grateful for this economic attitude, since these hard surfaces lasted longer than papyrus, which rotted in damp areas. Ostraca have been very valuable resources in researching human society and behavior in ancient cultures: some of these have been found to contain ancient literary texts, stories or folk songs.

http://historyofscience.com/G2I/timeline/images/gezer_calendar.jpg
The Gezer calendar (c. 10th century BC), discovered in Gezer by R.A.S. Macalister in his excavations between 1902 and 1907, is a tablet of soft limestone inscribed in a “Phoenician” or what has been called paleo-Hebrew script. The calendar describes monthly or bi-monthly periods and attributes to each a duty such as harvest, planting, or tending specific crops. The text could either be a schoolboy’s memory exercise or perhaps the text of a popular folk song or even a mnemonic designed for the collection of taxes from farmers.

http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/1557/450pxegyptelouvre085e.jpg
Irynefer sitting before a tray of bread. Drawing upon a limestone slab (20.40 cm x 24.30 cm), New Kingdom period, found in his tomb at Deir el-Medina.

http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/903/359pxostraconmentioning.jpg
A hieratic ostracon mentioning officials involved with the inspection and clearing of tombs during the time of the 21st dynasty, circa 1070-945 BC. Originally from Thebes.

http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/9016/ps354801l.jpg
Limestone ostrakon (33 cm x 38.5 cm) with a register of workmen’s absences from Deir el-Medina, c. 1250 BC

http://www.britishmuseum.org/images/ps331488_m.jpg
Ostrakon containing the final lines of The Tale of Sinuhe (29.5 cm x 17 cm) probably from Thebes, c. 1250 BC

 

[patrick457]

How many commandments were contained in one tablet was a matter of debate, even for the rabbis. In the Mekhilta (an early midrashic collection on Exodus ascribed pseudonymously to Rabbi Ishmael, AD 90-135), Rabbi Hanina ben Gamaliel is quoted as expressing: “How were the Ten Commandments given? Five on one tablet and five on the other. ‘I am the Lord’ was written across ‘You shall not murder’…but the Sages say ten on one tablet and ten on the other”. These two traditions are maintained in Midrash Rabbah on Exodus, sec. 47.6, where the same controversy is ascribed to the Amoraim, Rabbi Judah (arguing for five on each) and Rabbi Nehemiah (saying there were ten on each).

St. Augustine, meanwhile, was of the opinion that (Sermo 33,2,2L 38,208, quoted in the Catechism, paragraph 2067):

As charity comprises the two commandments to which the Lord related the whole Law and the prophets…so the Ten Commandments were themselves given on two tablets. Three were written on one tablet and seven on the other.

Both the arrangements proposed by Rabbi Hanina and St. Augustine seem to be more a theologically-oriented parsing of the Commandments: one category identifies our relationship with God, and the other our relationship with our neighbors:

Talmudic Division

God

1.) I am the Lord your God.
2.) You shall have no other gods before me.
3.) You shall not misuse the name of your God.
4.) Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy.
5.) Honor your father and mother. (Was it grouped here because, after all, God is our Father?)

Neighbor

6.) You shall not murder.
7.) You shall not commit adultery.
8.) You shall not steal.
9.) You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10.) You shall not covet.

Catholic Division (as per St. Augustine)

God

1.) I am the Lord your God; you shall have no other gods before me.
2.) You shall not misuse the name of your God.
3.) Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy.

Neighbor

4.) Honor your father and mother.
5.) You shall not murder.
6.) You shall not commit adultery.
7.) You shall not steal.
8.) You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
9.) You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.
10.) You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.

Which brings us to the ten-ten arrangement by the earlier Sages (pre-Mishnah). This belief has a curious resemblance to customs practiced in the Ancient Near East during treaties made between two or more parties. It is customary for every written treaty to be issued in duplicate, each party receiving a complete copy. One example of this is the treaty containing the pact made between Ramses II and the Hittite King Hattusilis III, c. 1270 B.C. The Egyptian copy was found in Egypt, and the Hittite one in the capital of the Hittites, in eastern Turkey. The contents of both copies are identical.

Thus, one tablet was Israel’s copy of the covenant, while the other was God’s. It is obvious that the Lord’s tablet had to be deposited where the Divine Presence is, but what about Israel’s tablet?

When a covenant was struck between parties of unequal status, the lesser partner, or vassal, would place his copy of the pact in the temple of his god, the reason being that the vassal had then to take an oath in the name of his god to the sovereign. Depositing a copy in the temple of the vassal strengthened the vassal’s obligation to the greater king. In addition, sanctity was ascribed to the treaty itself, because the gods of each side were witness to the agreement. Since the Israelites were the lesser partners to the covenant, it was natural to file their copy under the feet of the God of Israel - within the Ark which symbolizes His throne and footstool.

Also, the fact that both these two copies of the covenant were contained inside the Ark further symbolized the Ark’s role as a point of contact between God and His people, the place where His relationship with them was symbolized by the Law, obedience to which linked Israel to God and vice versa.

 

[Spirithound]

The Telegraph - Telegraph Online, Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph - Telegraph

heh…well now that’s interesting…I so wanted to bust this pic wide open and say THAT’s NOT HEBREW!!! but it turns out the lettering there is Ancient Hebrew, circa 8th century BC, and the Hebrew that we are mostly familiar with is Aramaic script, which the Israelites began to use in every-day life around 6th century BC.

Source:
ancientscripts.com/

 

[patrick457]

heh…well now that’s interesting…I so wanted to bust this pic wide open and say THAT’s NOT HEBREW!!! but it turns out the lettering there is Ancient Hebrew, circa 8th century BC, and the Hebrew that we are mostly familiar with is Aramaic script, which the Israelites began to use in every-day life around 6th century BC.

Source:
ancientscripts.com/

You’ve opened up a whole new trail to blaze there.

 

[patrick457]

If I might add concerning ostraca: the fact that the Tablets were made of stone suggest that they were quite larger than many clay tablets (another popular writing medium in the Ancient Near East - and one that is also considered by a few such as Giovanni Garbini to be candidates for the Tablets of the Law), though some inscribed pieces or tablets of stone were still small enough to fit the human palm, convenient for holding with one hand while writing on it with the other. The Gezer Calendar, for example, is only 11.1 centimeters long and 7.2 centimeters wide.

Writing on the front or back was not unusual (again Exodus 32:15, “on the one side and on the other were they written”). When the scribe reached the end of one side, he would often continue around the bottom edge and then move onto the second side. Even flakes that fit in the palm could contain around 15-20 lines or more.

So if this proves to be historically true unfortunately we’ll probably have to picture Moses when smashing the Tablets as not looking like this:



Rather, something like a very angry Moses throwing out two pieces of inscribed stone which are barely larger than his hand down at the foot of Sinai hard enough that they shatter.

And it happened that when he came near the camp that he saw the calf and the dancing, and the nose of Moses burned hot* and he cast out from his hands the tablets and broke them to pieces under the mountain.

*That Moses’ ‘nostrils waxed hot’ equals he ‘became angry’ (another Semitic figure of speech!), because when one experiences anger, the nostrils become distended and breathing becomes hard that one snorts. In one good example, Psalm 18:8 says that “smoke rose from [God’s] nostrils” in His wrath.

-Exodus 32:19

 

[patrick457]

Now to turn back (‘convert’ in the original sense of the word ) a bit.

heh…well now that’s interesting…I so wanted to bust this pic wide open and say THAT’s NOT HEBREW!!! but it turns out the lettering there is Ancient Hebrew, circa 8th century BC, and the Hebrew that we are mostly familiar with is Aramaic script, which the Israelites began to use in every-day life around 6th century BC.

Source:
ancientscripts.com/

Yep, that’s the ancient, Paleo-Hebrew all right.

The Paleo-Hebrew alphabet is a regional offshoot of the mostly-identical Phoenician alphabet (begun c. 1050 BC-300 AD), which was the descendant of Proto-Canaanite (ca. 1400 BC-1050 BC), which in turn most likely descended from the script in use around Egypt, Palestine and Sinai during the Middle Bronze Age (2000-1500 BC). This was the script that the OT Israelites from before the Exile and their neighbors (there was actually little difference between the scripts in use in the region) would have been familiar with.

The decline of Paleo-Hebrew started after the Babylonian capture of Judea, when most of the nobles were taken into exile. The alphabet continued to be used by the people who remained to work the fields. Beginning from the 5th century BC onward, when the Aramaic language and script (itself also a descendant of the Phoenician! ) became an official means of communication, the alphabet was preserved mainly for writing certain literature, such as books of the Bible (some Paleo-Hebrew fragments of the Torah were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls). There was even a tradition of writing YHWH in Paleo-Hebrew even when the rest is in the Aramaic script or even in Greek. The vast majority of Hasmonean coinage, as well as the coins of the First Jewish-Roman War and Bar Kokhba’s revolt, also bore Paleo-Hebrew legends. The alphabet finally ceased to be used completely after 135 AD with the expulsion of the Jews by Hadrian.

By the way, it might interest you to know that the Samaritan script is actually a direct descendant of Paleo-Hebrew!

Here’s an article that might also be of interest: How the Alphabet Was Born from Hieroglyphs

 

[patrick457]

A few images:

The Wadi El-Hol Inscriptions (c. 2000 BC)


Traces of the 16 and 12 characters of the two Wadi el-Hol inscriptions.

Proto-Sinaitic (c. 1500 BC)

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/1903/protosinaitic.png
Based from here; unattested letters missing

Phoenician (c. 1050 BC-300 AD)



Paleo-Hebrew (10th century BC-AD 135)

http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/2843/zayitandgezere.jpg
The script of the Zayit Stone (10th century BC) compared with the Gezer Calendar.

http://www.typophile.com/files/hebrew-script_5538.jpg
1: Gezer Calendar (10th century BC)
2: Mesha stele (Moabite; 9th century BC)
3: Siloam inscription (8th century BC)
4: 7th century BC seals
5: Early 6th century ostracon from Arad
6: 2nd century BC Leviticus fragment
7: Medieval Samaritan bookhand

http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/8636/lachish.png
The Lachish Ostraca (7th century BC). Font courtesy of Jack Kilmon.

 

[patrick457]

Here’s one more trivia about the DeMille tablets (yeah, sorry for this ).
Both the 1923 and the 1956 versions employ the ‘Protestant’ reckoning for the commandments, which treat “Thou shalt not have other gods” and “Thou shalt not make any graven image” as separate commandments and the commandment against coveting as only one. However, it is interesting to note that the tablets in the 1956 film were actually quite different - there is one commandment that is missing:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

TABLET ONE (left)

Lines 1-2: ’ānōḵî / YHWH ’ĕlōheyḵā (I am YHWH your God)
Lines 3-4: Lō’ yihəyeh-ləḵā / ’ĕlōhîm ’ăḥērîm (You shall not have other gods*)
*the words ‘al-pānāya “before me” are absent
Line 5: Lō’ ṯa‘ăśeh-ləḵā fesel (You shall not make to yourself a graven image)
Lines 6-7: Zāḵwōr ’eṯ-ywōm / haššabāṯ ləqadəšwō (Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy)

TABLET TWO (right)

Lines 1-2: Kabēḏ / ’eṯ-’āḇîḵā wə’eṯ-’immeḵā (Honor your father and mother)
Line 3: Lō’ tirəṣāḥ (You shall not murder)
Line 4: Lō’ tinə’āf (You shall not commit adultery)
Line 5: Lō’ tiḡənōḇ (You shall not steal)
Lines 6-7: Lō’-ṯa‘ăneh ḇərē‘ăḵā / ‘ēḏ šāqer: (You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor)
Line 8: Lō’ ṯaḥəmōḏ bêṯ rē‘eḵā (You shall not covet your neighbor’s house)

If you’ve noticed, the commandment against using God’s name in vain is gone!

And yep, the tablets were hewn out of actual red granite from Jebel Musa (the mountain we usually think of when we say ‘Mt. Sinai’), though AFAIK there were also about four other pairs made out of fiberglass. DeMille was apparently proud of the granite tablets and displayed them in his office for some time after the film.

 

[patrick457]

Raising this thread back once more. Again and always, everyone is free to drop by and maybe ask some questions they’d like to see here.

Before we go on, I’ll just try to reiterate what this thread is exactly about before post number 1 gets buried…as I’ve said: by “minor stuff” I mean the small, ‘trivial’ things related to the Bible that never make it in serious high discussion and knowledge of which are not really necessary for the salvation of our souls or for being a good Christian (i.e. we’re not discussing serious theological matters here - just to give people a break from such matters often discussed ad nauseum on this subforum, like whether Catholic doctrine is Scriptural or whether the Eucharist is actually Biblical or whatnot).

Rather we’re talking about the small details: you know, history and archeology and all that stuff which might help in making the Biblical narratives more comprehensible and alive.

I also encourage first-time viewers to look at the former posts to get a picture of what the thread is exactly about (I have a penchant for not being linear, so I often jump around certain topics ).

 

[patrick457]

The 'High Places’

http://www.lifeintheholyland.com/im... place with standing stones, db6804053210.jpg
10 monumental megaliths possibly comprising a Canaanite “high place” found in Gezer

In the Bible, we often encounter Canaanite sanctuaries (and Israelite establishments which were imitations of these) known under the name “high places”, the normal translation of the Hebrew word bamot (sing. bamah). We do not know the verbal root from which the word is derived, and the noun itself may be pre-Semitic. The cognates of bamah in both Akkadian and Ugaritic mean the ‘back’ or ‘trunk’ of an animal, though it can also denote any elevated ground, such as a crest of a hill or height. In the Bible too, apart from the cultic references and some obscure texts, bamah can mean the ‘back’ of one’s enemies (Deuteronomy 33:29), ‘heights’ (Deuteronomy 32:13; Psalm 18:34; Isaiah 58:14; Micah 1:3; Amos 4:13; Habbakkuk 3:19), the ‘back’ of clouds (Isaiah 14:14), or the ‘waves’ of the sea (Job 9:8). The idea which the word expresses therefore is something which stands out in relief from its background, but the idea of a mountain or hill is not contained in the word itself (note how in 2 Kings 16:4; 2 Chronicles 28:4 the “high places” are distinguished from the “hills”).

It is quite true however that some, perhaps many, of these “high place” stood in the elevated areas: men “went up” to the neighboring bamah from Samuel’s home-town and “came down” from it (1 Samuel 9:13, 14, 19, 25). In Ezekiel 20:28-29, the word is interpreted, by a play on words, as the name of the lofty hill where men went to offer sacrifice. Solomon built a bamah for Chemosh and Molech (received text) or Milcom (reconstruction based on verses 5 and 33) “on the mountain east of Jerusalem” according to 1 Kings 11:7. The fact that high hills seemed to be places destined for worship is a sufficient explanation of these texts, but not all bamoth were on the hills. There were some in the towns (1 Kings 13:32; 2 Kings 17:29; 23:5) and even at the gate of Jerusalem (2 Kings 23:8). The bamah of Tophet stood in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (Jeremiah 7:31; 32:35). In Ezekiel 6:1-3, we read that:

And there was a word of YHWH toward me, saying:
"*Son of man, set your face toward mountains of Israel and prophesy toward them, and say:

Mountains of Israel, hear a word of the Lord YHWH!
Thus says the Lord YHWH to the mountains and to the hills,
to the ravines and to the valleys:
Behold I, I am bringing upon you a sword,
And I will destroy your high-places.*"

One meaning which may suit all of these references is a ‘mound’ or ‘knoll’ for cultic purposes. They may have used, sometimes, a prominent rock, but it would seem that this mound was usually artificial: this would make sense of bamoth being “built” (1 Kings 11:7; 14:23; 2 Kings 7:9; 21:3; Jeremiah 19:5), “torn down” and “destroyed” (2 Kings 23:8; Ezekiel 6:3).

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/848/megiddo.jpg
An oval platform found in Megiddo (Stratum XII) made of unhewn stone probably dating from about 2500 BC, approximately 8 to 10 meters wide and 1.25 meters high. This platform apparently remained in use for several centuries after its construction (with temples later being built beside it) for sacrificial purposes, as testified by the presence of animal bones and remains of jars.

Since a ‘high place’ was a place of worship, each one had to have its altar. The knoll itself could serve as an altar, but an altar could also be built on it, and some biblical texts do mention one as part of the high place (2 Kings 21:3; 2 Chronicles 14:2, 4 [3, 5]; Ezekiel 6:6). The altar was either built of stones separate from the bamah (2 Kings 23:15 LXX; 2 Chronicles 34:3f.) or was made as a portion of the bamah itself. This may explain the Greek word bōmos ‘platform’ or ‘altar’, which seems to be cognate with bamah.

Aside from the altar, the most important furnishings for a bamah were the 'asherah and the matztzevah (1 Kings 14:23; 2 Kings 18:4; 23:13f.; 2 Chronicles 14:2 [3]). To these must be added texts which, though not expressing any connection with a bamah, certainly have the same type of worship in mind (Exodus 34:13; Deuteronomy 7:5; 12:3; 16:21-22; Micah 5:12-13). On the other hand, such furnishings were not unique to bamoth: Ahab installed an 'asherah (1 Kings 16:33) and a matztzebah (2 Kings 3:2) in the temple of Baal in Samaria.

 

[patrick457]

Matztzevah, also rendered as maṣṣebah or matstsebah (plural: matztzevot, from the Hebrew word natzab meaning ‘to stand’, ‘to erect’ or ‘to set up’) is the usual term for an erect standing stone. It was a sort of commemorative stele usually erected as a sign of an alliance or undertaking. These stones functioned as a sort of testimony or witness, a symbol of divine presence and a memento of divine revelation. But not only this: matzetzevah can also be erected in honor of a deceased person’s memory (headstones are actually also called matzetzevah in Hebrew today).

In the Bible, we often hear of matzetzevot being set up in commemoration of some event or in memory of someone. On at least four occasions, Jacob sets up a matzetzevah in connection with certain events of his life: the most well-known is, of course, after he receives the vision of the stairway reaching to heaven in Luz/Bethel (Genesis 28:18). In Genesis 31 (v. 45-54), Jacob erects another one (as well as a mound) as a witness of his decision to leave Laban. After his return to Bethel, God appears again to Jacob, and once more, Jacob erects yet another matzetzevah in memory of this (Genesis 35:14-15). Not too long after this event, Rachel dies and Jacob sets up one last stone in his wife’s grave (35:20).

Going further, God’s covenant with Israel through Moses was represented by twelve matzetzevot erected at the foot of Mount Sinai, one stone for each tribe (Exodus 24:4).

Finally, Joshua himself is another prolific matzetzevot-erecter. The book of Joshua records a number of times that here erected such monuments pointing to the power of God: in Joshua 4:20-24 for example, Joshua sets up twelve stones taken from the Jordan in memory of Israel’s miraculous crossing of the river. Near the end of his life, after Joshua challenged the Israelites to serve God, he takes a large stone and sets it “under the oak that was in the sanctuary of YHWH” as a witness against them should they deny the Lord (24:25-27).

It was not a huge step from the idea of the standing-stone as a sign of the presence of the divine or the manifestation of a god to accepting the stone itself as a representation of the deity, and there was not need for it to be hewn in the shape of a statue: even in its crude, natural shape, the matzetzevah is a symbol of the god.

We might note that the matzetzevah is not, by itself, evil: as shown above, a few of the ‘good’ characters of the Bible in olden days erected one or more of these at some point in their lives. What was condemned in the Bible were the altars and standing-stones of Canaanite gods, which were abominations to the Lord. His covenant with Moses demanded that the Israelites tear these monuments to other deities down (Exodus 23:24; Deuteronomy 7:5). Still, in latter days, the connection between matzetzevot and worship of false gods seems to have strengthened to the point that making one was eventually frowned upon altogether.

A matzetzevah was the symbol of a male deity (cf. 2 Kings 3:2 and 10:26-27). Female deities, meanwhile, were represented with the 'asherah, a name applied to both the goddess bearing this name and the cultic symbol.

The Ras Shamra texts mention Asherah (as Athirat) as a consort of the god El, and the Old Testament links her with Baal (Judges 3:7; 2 Kings 23:4). Interestingly, inscriptions linking YHWH and 'asherah have also been discovered, although whether the goddess or a cultic object is meant here is admittedly unclear: an 8th century BC ostracon inscribed with the phrase “Berakhti etkhem l’YHWH Shomron (or shomrenu) ul’asherato” (‘I have blessed you by YHWH of Samaria (or ‘our guardian’) and His 'asherah’). Another inscription, from Khirbet el-Qom near Hebron, reads in part: “Blessed be Uriyahu by YHWH; for from his enemies by His 'asherah He has saved him.”

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/6877/kuntilleth.jpg
The “YHWH of Samaria and His 'asherah”.

All we know about these 'asherah (the cultic objects) is that these were usually carved out of wood (Exodus 34:13; Judges 6:25-26, and thus could be burned (Deuteronomy 12:3; 2 Kings 23:6, 15); alternatively, they could be live trees (Deuteronomy 16:21; 2 Kings 23:14; Micah 5:13). It is more commonly thought however that these were man-made wooden objects (1 Kings 14:15; 16:33; 2 Kings 17:16; 21:3; Isaiah 17:8) that could be erected like the matztzevot (2 Kings 17:10) and standing upright (2 Kings 13:6; Isaiah 27:9), which may imply that it was a kind of post or stake. There are some who have suggested something midway between these two possibilities, saying that it could be a pruned living tree. It is impossible to be more precise about it however, and there is some doubt whether this object was actually carved with a likeness of the goddess.

 

[patrick457]

Errata: matzetzevah=matztzevah

Along with smaller cultic vessels like basins and lavers for ablution, ephod and teraphim, another furnishing of bamot was the khammanim (Leviticus 26:30; 2 Chronicles 14:4 [5]; 34:4, 7; Ezekiel 6:4-6; cf. also Hosea 4:13). The word, usually thought to derive from khamam ‘to be hot’, is never found outside bamot expect when it is with an 'asherah (Isaiah 17:8), or with an altar and an 'asherah (Isaiah 27:9).

We do not know the exact form that these items took. For a long time, khammanim were thought to be ‘pillars of the sun’, following Rashi. Ancient translations (for example, the Septuagint, the Vulgate, the Targumim and the P’shitta) rendered khamman differently from each other - sometimes they even translate the same word differently in different contexts. This shows that the meaning of the word has already become obscure at such an age.

Unfortunately, neither archeology nor epigraphy provide a final answer to this mystery: the word appears in Nabatean and Palmyran inscriptions but they do not provide a clear indication of what it refers to. There is one theory which states that it might be incense utensils of some kind (which is thought by some to have a stela-like form), which rested on the ground or even upon an altar; cf. 2 Chronicles 34:4, which speaks of khammanim “that were high above” the altars of Baal. Opinions differ as to the precise identification of the utensil: they are variously thought to be similar to either the incense stands or mini-altars themselves, or the vessels which were placed over these altars or stands.

Another idea suggests that a khamman, instead of being a sort of utensil or altar, may actually be some sort of edifice, say a canopy which was built over the main altar; the term would then refer to a sort of outdoor chapel or model shrine which probably housed the matztzevot and the 'asherim.

http://ebibletools.com/israel/beersheba/thumbnails/DCP_1076.jpg
An altar from Megiddo, dating 1000-900 BC and discovered in 1926 near a four-chambered gate and a casemate wall dated to the 10th century BC. This altar is too small for animal sacrifices and must have been used for sacrifices of wine, incense, or grain mixed with oil.

ADMIN: IMAGE REMOVED
A cult stand from Tel Rehov. Cult stands a sort of miniature box-like object, usually made of ceramic, which could have been used for various functions, such as being pedestals for an image or as a stand for offerings, say a bowl of incense. They appear to fill a role vis-a-vis the small stone altars similar to that played by the small altars to the large altars when found together.

 

[patrick457]

Bumping once more for great justice.

For the moment, linking to an article I just found: Golgotha: A Reconsideration of the Evidence for the Sites of Jesus’ Crucifixion and Burial. The author does not believe in the traditional site of Golgotha, which is the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (but she does think that the actual Golgotha was near it) yet thinks that the traditional site of Jesus’ tomb - the Edicule inside the church - may very well be authentic. (note, I do not necessarily hold this opinion nor support it)

But IMO she convincingly shows, using the Gospels and other evidence, that the name “Golgotha” was apparently not just applied to the specific knoll where Jesus was crucified - contrary to later ideas of a ‘Mount Calvary’ - but to the whole area where both this spot and the garden where Jesus’ tomb was located. In fact, the idea that Golgotha was a high hill or a mount is not found in the Gospels at all! (cf. St. Epiphanius of Salamis: “There is nothing to be seen on the place resembling this name; for it is not situated upon a height that it should be called (the place) of a skull, answering to the place of the head in the human body”)

Matthew 27:33: And when they had come to a place called Golgotha (that is called ‘Place of a Skull’)…
Mark 15:22: And they bring Him to the place Golgotha (which is translated, ‘Place of a Skull’)…
Luke 23:33: And when they came to the place that is called ‘Skull’, there they crucified Him and the criminals, one on the right and one on the left.
John 19:16b-17: And carrying the cross by Himself, He went out to the place called ‘Place of a Skull’ (which is called in Hebrew Golgotha)…



DISCLAIMER: Once again, by linking to it, the author of this post does not automatically endorse all of the contents of the article. Nor does the article necessarily express the opinions and beliefs of this poster.