Gezer Tablet (formally Calendar) 840 BCE
Gezer Tablet's Israelites Blame Astrological Powers Energized by Magic-Crafters for Drought. It's Philistines blame Life-Priest's for Mixing in Life-Powers with Astrological Powers with Their Eagle-Vultures (840 BCE)
(September 6, 2022) Put some Israelites and Philistines together in a room discussing the cause of a drought and this is the result. Slightly different line by line letter styles indicates many lines were written by different people. The themes of these lines can be classified as either Israelite or Phoenician. Phoenician texts are always supportive of magical motion powers and so blame droughts on the life powers. This is in contrast to the Israelites who were anti-magic and instead always supportive of the life powers. The middle of the road position was that of the Aegeans/Philistines who supported both but were against mixing them inappropriately.
Translation in Akkadian (Levant Text 2)
(read right to left. Capital letters on stone. Inner vowels inferred)- IRu ḪaNu ASu. Pu IRu ḪaWȗ
- Re'u Gi IRu. Ḫu KaLu Qu Ṣu.
- IRu Ḫ’u Ša. Du Lu NaTu.
- IRu ḪaQu Ša. Ru IṢu Pu.
- IRu ḪaQu Ša. Ru U Tu Gi Mu.
- IRu ḪaWȗ Zu MuRu.
- IRu ḪaQu Ša.
In English
- (Israelite Person 1) Astrological-powers are intimidating the Healer's (sun god Hu) openings. Astrological-power's are howling.
- (Israelite Person 1) The shepherds (magic crafters) are energizing the astrological-powers. Hu is restraining the thread's activity.
- (Aegean/Philistine Person 2) Astrological-powers are the same as astrological-owls. Life-manifestations are lacking motion-revelations.
- (Aegean/Philistine Person 3) Astrological-powers are mixing-up similar-things. Eagle-Vultures are making scarce the Openings.
- (Aegean/Philistine Person 4) Astrological-powers are mixing-up similar-things. Eagle-Vultures and magic are energizing the fertility-fluids
- (Israelite Person 5) Astrological-power's are howling for the elimination of the rainstorms.
- (Aegean Person 6) Astrological-powers are mixing-up similar-things.
Droughts Defined the Archaeological Periods in the Levant
(August 9, 2022) Like most regions of the earth, correlating the archaeology of the southern levant with carbon 14 dating and absolute dating has been undergoing some debate. The best correlation with linguistics is the chronology proposed by Amihai Mazar in 2014. This chronology is reproduced below:
References
Langut, D. Finkelsein, I, Litt, T. (2013) Climate and the Late Bronze Collapse: New Evidence from the Levant. Tel Aviv 40:149-175. Online at https://www.academia.edu/6053886/Climate_and_the_Late_Bronze_Collapse_New_Evidence_from_the_Southern_LevantMazar, Amihai (2005) The Debate over the Chronology of the Iron Age in the Southern Levant: its History, the Current Situation and a Suggested Resolution. pp. 15-30 in: T. Levy and T. Higham (editors), The Bible and Radiocarbon Dating - Archaeology, Text and Science. London. Online at: https://www.academia.edu/2632501/The_Debate_over_the_Chronology_of_the_Iron_Age_in_the_Southern_Levant_its_History_the_Current_Situation_and_a_Suggested_Resolution_2005
Archaeology of Tablet
The Gezer tablet was found in September 1908 during the first archaeological dig at Gezer by R.A.S. Macalister. (Albright 1943)
Gezer was located 18 miles (30 kilometers) northwest of Jerusalem on the coastal plain near the border with the hill country. Just prior to the writing of the tablet Gezer had been a prosperous Israelite trading city for 140 years. It was last destroyed during the troubles surrounding the previous 980 BCE drought. After that it was extensively rebuilt by the presumed victor in that struggle which was growing state of (northern) Israel with its capital at Samaria. This was the time when Gezer’s fabled 6 chambered gate and large walls were built.
(Continue Reading)
These walls would stand for the next 300 years until destroyed by Assyria in 733 BCE (Ortiz and Wolf 2012). An identical gate was built at the same time in the northern trading city of Hazor indicating the same political entity (northern Israel) was responsible for both (Finkelstein 2013). Jerusalem at the time was no larger than Gezer and not as important strategically beyond being the gateway to the Dead Sea area. Jerusalem at the time was at the end of the line for Israelite civilization.
To get a sense of population scale from archaeology, Gezer at this time had a size of 108 dunams. Given an average people density of 50 per dunam this produces a population of 5,400 people. Compare this to Jerusalem at the time which had a size of 130 dunams and so had a population of 6,500 people (Shiloh 1980). In contrast, the Israelite capital city of Samaria had a population twice that of Jerusalem (Broshi and Finkelstein 1992). A rough estimate of the number of people surrounding a city but within its economic zone can be found by multiplying the city population by a factor of 7.
The Gezer rebuilt after the 980 BCE drought was well planned having three distinct areas:
- Domestic quarter
- Administrative center with public buildings and military buildings associated with the gate complex
- Fortification system
Gezer did not emerge completely unscathed from the 840 BCE Elijah drought and its resulting troubles. After the Elijah drought a social and economic change is observed. Its large administrative center was razed and replaced by housing even though the rest of the city was not destroyed. During the 700’s BCE as the central rule of Judah strengthened this former administrative district would once again start to see administrative buildings with many built on the same lines as the razed ones (Ortiz and Wolf 2012).
References
Finklestein, I. (2019) First Israel, Core Israel, United (Northern) Israel. Near Eastern Archaeology 82.1Ortiz, S and Wolf, S. (2012) Guarding the Border to Jerusalem: The Iron Age City of Gezer. Near Eastern Archaeology 75 : 1:4–19.
Sivan, Daniel (1998) The Gezer Calendar and Northwest Semitic Linguistics. Israel Exploration Journal Vol. 48 No. 1/2 pages 101-105
Akkadian Translation
(September 6, 2022)
Translation in Akkadian (Med 2)
(read right to left. Capital letters on stone. Inner vowels inferred)- IRu ḪaNu ASu. Pu IRu ḪaWȗ (Med 2.1)
- Re'u Gi IRu. Ḫu KaLu Qu Ṣu. (Med 2.2)
- IRu Ḫ’u Ša. Du Lu NaTu. (Med 2.3)
- IRu ḪaQu Ša. Ru IṢu Pu. (Med 2.4)
- IRu ḪaQu Ša. Ru U Tu Gi Mu. (Med 2.5)
- IRu ḪaWȗ Zu MuRu. (Med 2.6)
- IRu ḪaQu Ša. (Med 2.7)
In English
- (Israelite Person 1) Astrological-powers are intimidating the Healer's (Hu) openings. Astrological-power's are howling.
- (Israelite Person 1) The shepherds (magic crafters) are energizing the astrological-powers. Hu is restraining thread's activity.
- (Aegean/Philistine Person 2) Astrological-powers are the same as astrological-owls. Life-manifestations are lacking motion-revelations.
- (Aegean/Philistine Person 3) Astrological-powers are mixing-up similar-things. Eagle-Vultures are making scarce the Openings.
- (Aegean/Philistine Person 4) Astrological-powers are mixing-up similar-things. Eagle-Vultures and magic are energizing the fertility-fluids
- (Israelite Person 5) Astrological-power's are howling for the elimination of the rainstorms.
- (Aegean/Philistine Person 6) Astrological-powers are mixing-up similar-things.
Attempted Hebrew Translation Which Even Many Hebrew Scholars Claim is False
Biblical scholar William Albright (Albright 1943) was the first to propose a translation soon after this tablet was discovered. Yet, many Hebrew scholars today claim that this text is not in Hebrew. These include Andre Llemaire in the year 2000 and Benjamin Sass (Sass 2005 page 84).
Albright's Translation in Hebrew
(differences in red)- YRḪW ASP YRḪW Z ( Z is added)
- R’ I YRḤW LQŠ
- YRḪ ‘ṢD PŠT (Philistine letters on stone)
- YRḪ QṢR ‘RM
- YRḪ QŞR W # GR
- YRḪW ZMR
- YRḪ QŞ
Albright's translation in English
- His two months (olive) harvest His two months Are
- Grain-planting. His two months late planting
- His month. Hoeing up flax
- His month. Harvest barley
- His month. Harvest festivity
- His two months. Vine-tending
- His month. Summer fruit
Comment
YR is Hebrew for “calendar” not month. W does not mean 2nd. That number is represented by the letter B. Letter het (Ḫ) is not a possessive ending ("his"). That letter is the dual use He written in English as either H or E. It is the H used in the word “Yahweh” for example. “Z” does not exist in the text and does not mean “are.”
Albright uses the Hebrew shin letter assignment (Š) which is reversed in Alphabetic Akkadian (Ṣ). This change is /s/ sounds for the tribe of Judah is reflected in the shibboleth story of Judges 12.
Albright somehow sees a P in front of this unusual shin. The word ‘şd is not a known Hebrew word so "howing" is a wild guess (see Talmon – 1963)
‘RM – The picture shows the circle (‘) and stick (R) lines to be touching so it has to be a P. Also, the stick has no triangle so not an R.
# - Albright did not put in the T which is impossible to miss
...
References
Albright, W.F. (1943) The Gezer Calendar. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. No. 92, pages 16-26Sass, B. (2005) The Alphabet at the Turn of the Millennium. Tel Aviv. Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archeology
Talmon, S. 1963 The Gezer Calendar and the Seasonal Cycle of Ancient Canaan. Journal of the Americal Oriental Society Vol. 83 No. 2 pages 177-187
Translation Resources Used
All texts translated to the scholar's standard.
Lexicon Used
Olmsted, D.D (January 1, 2022) Mediterranean Akkadian Lexicon 3rd Edition – 2022. DOI Permanent URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.17613/nbb6-wg16. Online at: https://www.academia.edu/66851810/Mediterranean_Akkadian_Lexicon_3rd_Edition_2022Letter Charts Used
Letter Class Comparison ChartLevant Letter Chart