Talk:Tel Dan stele
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tel Dan stele article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 12 months ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Thoth and Enoch
[edit]Concerning Thoth, I noticed that there was an interesting view among mythographers and egyptologists that Thoth was a supposed early incarnation of Enoch, who also held a special status among Jews. It would be interesting if we could show gather the ancient sources that make such a comparison in order to put it into perspective with the Tel Dan Stele. ADM (talk)
arguments against the reading of House of David as Davidic dynasty-minority view
[edit]the phrase bytdwd as "house of David" is disputed,(BY WHOM??)[11] in part because it appears without a word-divider between the two parts. In addition, the rest of the inscription uses dots to separate words, but bytdwd appears as a single word, ביתדוד, not בית•דוד. ...
but some have argued that "dwd" could be a name for a god ("beloved"), or could mean "uncle" (a word with a rather wider meaning in ancient times than it has today), or that the whole phrase might be a
name for Jerusalem (so that the author might be claiming to have killed the king of Jerusalem rather than a king of the "house of David".[12][13]
Other possible meanings have been suggested:(BY WHOM???) it may be a place-name, or the name of a god, or an epithet.[11] But even if (as seems likely)[14] the correct translation is "House of David", Francesca
Stavrakopoulou argues that it does not logically support the assumption that the Bible's David was an historical figure.[11]
arguments in favor of the reading is House of David as Davydic Dynasty-majority view
[edit]__________NOTHING________Everything has been erased
" The latter is generally understood to refer to the ruling dynasty of Judah," can not been seen as argument in favor of reading bytdwd as Davidic Dynasty as it simply explains that "House of David" is generaly considered to be biblical phrase for Davidic dynasty, or even less, it does not clearly explains anything but is misleading.
Why this sections have been removed?
[edit]0.Lawrence J. Mykytiuk argues against the possibility that the term bytdwd could refer to the name of a god, cultic object, epithet or a place and concludes that in line with ancient Aramaic and Assyrian patterns for geopolitical terms, the phrase "House of David" refers to a Davidic dynasty or to the land ruled by a Davidic dynasty. [1] Brian B. Schmidt states that the reading of "House of David" in Tel Dan inscription "is now widely accepted" [2] Hallvard believes that the Tel Dan inscription is the most important archeological finding in Israel/Palestine since the discovery of Dead Sea Scrolls [3]
Also why this materiel is avoided?
Lawrence J. Mykytiuk
1. David, founder of the dynasty that ruled Judah (r. ca. 1010–970), 1 Sam 16:13, etc. (IBP, 110–32, 265–77; Mykytiuk, “Corrections,” 119–21) Terms that incorporate his name in monumental Northwest Semitic inscriptions, leading to IDs, are as follows: a. David’s name is a clear element in the phrase bytdwd in the Tel Dan stele, line 9.17 b. David’s name is also an element in the phrase bt[d]wd in the Mesha Inscription, line 31, though its presence is unclear at prima vista, due to the fragmentation in that line.18 ● Aramaic usage of b(y)t + personal name in a variety of Aramaic sources, including the Tel Dan stele, is a way of indicating a dynasty by a phrase pattern that incorporates the name of its founder.19 That this phrase pattern has this significance is especially clear in instances where the incorporated personal name is known to be a royal name or where the phrase is known to refer to a kingdom. Since a dynasty governs a territorial realm, b(y)t + personal name is also a geographical name referring to that territorial realm.20 Thus the term in the Tel Dan stele incorporates a conventional phrase pattern which indicates that the David to whom it refers was the founder of a dynasty. This point of singularity is also found in the biblical text: both the Bible and the inscription refer to the one and only David who was the founder of the dynasty of Judah. Also, it can then be argued, from internationalization of this Aramaic usage and resulting—or simply parallel—Moabite usage, that bt + personal name in line 31 of the Mesha Inscription contains the same point of singularity. Besides such inscriptionalbiblical singularity, the fact that there is only one David in the biblical king lists, which purport to be complete, gives his ID also what can be called biblical singularity. c. An inscription written within about forty-five years of David’s lifetime by Pharaoh Sheshonq I sheds additional light on “the house of David” mentioned in the Tel Dan stele as a possible geographical reference to the territory ruled by “[the kin]g of the house of David.” Sheshonq’s inscription contains the phrase hadabiyat-dawit, “the heights (or highland) of David.” According to the geographically organized sequence in the inscription, this area should be in the southern part of Judah or the Negev, where the book of 1 Samuel places David when he was hiding from King Saul. An ID of King David as the person whose name is included in this phrase is entirely plausible, both in view of Kitchen’s research into the rendering of the name and in view of other ancient Hebrew phrases, such as “the city of David” and “the house of David,” which include a geographical dimension. It seems extremely doubtful that we shall suddenly discover some other, previously unknown David who was famous enough to have lent his name to the region mentioned in Sheshonq’s timely inscription.21
Also omitted from the text is
2..Hagelia, Hallvard (2005). "Philological Issues in the Tel Dan Inscription"
●Supporting that "house of David" refer to Davidic dynasty
3. Simcha Shalom (2005).
●Supporting that "house of David refer to Davidic dynasty even stating that it is usual practice not to use dots in royal names.
4.Schmidt, Brian B. (2006)
●Supporting that "house of David refer to Davidic dynasty and even pointing out to similar patterns like "BytHmria"-for Israel
5.Grabbe 2007, p. 333.
"The Tel Dan inscription generated a good deal of debate and a flurry of articles when it first appeared, and even accusations of forgery, "but it is now widely regarded (a) as genuine and (b) as referring to the Davidic dynasty and the Aramaic kingdom of Damascus"
6.Gary A. Rendsburg, “On the Writing ביתדוד in the Aramaic Inscription from Tel Dan,” IEJ 45 (1995): 22–5;
●Supporting that "house of David refer to Davidic dynasty
7.Hallvard Hagelia et all 2009 "The Dan Debate: The Tel Dan Inscription in Recent Research (Recent Research in Biblical Studies) "
●Supporting that "house of David refer to Davidic dynasty
and again we have "Other possible meanings have been suggested:(BY WHOM???)" and "it may be a place-name, or the name of a god, or an epithet" which is originating from Mykytiuk
the phrase bytdwd as "house of David" is disputed,(BY WHOM??)
Best regards
References
- ^ Mykytiuk 2004, p. 125-126.
- ^ Schmidt 2006, p. 315.
- ^ Hallvard 2005, p. 232.
Finkelstein statement
[edit]It is considered the first widely accepted reference to the name David as the founder of a Judahite polity outside of the Hebrew Bible
Is Finkelstein arguing that this stele was the first extrabiblical text to be created with such a reference to David? Or is this a poorly written statement that it was the first such text to be discovered, or that it's the oldest such text currently known, or what? I've tagged it with {{Huh}} because it's really not clear. Nyttend (talk) 23:55, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- It means the oldest such text currently known. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 06:51, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- C-Class Judaism articles
- Low-importance Judaism articles
- C-Class Israel-related articles
- High-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- C-Class Ancient Near East articles
- Low-importance Ancient Near East articles
- Ancient Near East articles by assessment
- C-Class Assyrian articles
- Low-importance Assyrian articles
- WikiProject Assyria articles
- C-Class Phoenicia articles
- Low-importance Phoenicia articles
- WikiProject Phoenicia articles