Wikipedia mirror

Canaanite and Aramaic seal inscriptions

Inscribed ring seal discovered in Jerusalem
Four inscribed seals, alongside the Blacas papyrus in Gesenius's 1837 Scripturae Linguaeque Phoeniciae

Canaanite and Aramaic seal inscriptions are short texts engraved on personal seals and bullae used in the ancient Near East during the first millennium BCE. Written primarily in Phoenician, Hebrew and Aramaic, the inscriptions typically record personal names, patronymics, titles, or brief formulas. They are an important source for the study of wider Canaanite and Aramaic inscriptions, palaeography and onomastics.

Function and characteristics

Seals in the region were initially associated with protective or symbolic functions, and later became administrative tools used to authenticate documents and property. Most are stamp seals, often of scaraboid form, and many are decorated with figural or symbolic motifs in addition to inscriptions.

Most such stamp seals date approximately from the 9th to the 5th centuries BCE.[1]

The inscriptions are usually brief, most commonly giving the name and patronymic of the seal owner. In some cases, titles, the name of a superior, or a blessing formula are included.

Some of the seals show theophoric names, including divine elements such as -yahu and -baʿal.[1]

History of research

The scholarly study of Semitic seal inscriptions began in the late nineteenth century, with pioneering publications by scholars such as Charles Clermont-Ganneau, Eugène-Melchior de Vogüé, and Moritz Abraham Levy. Early corpora relied heavily on museum collections and the antiquities market, often without secure archaeological provenance.[1]

Corpus

Authenticity and forgeries

Forgery is a significant concern in assessing the corpus, as there has been significant demand among collectors, and the items are small and forgery is difficult to detect. Questions of authenticity have played a significant role in the study of seal inscriptions.[2] From the nineteenth century onward, scholars debated whether certain seals represented genuine ancient objects or modern forgeries, especially when seals combined iconographic elements from different cultural traditions.[3]

The numbers of known seals allocated by "nationality" is significantly different from the wider corpus of known Canaanite and Aramaic inscriptions; Hebrew forms a large majority of the seals and bullae, whereas for wider inscriptions, Hebrew is a small minority and Phoenician and Aramaic are the majority.[4]

Writing in 2014, Philippe Bordreuil suggested that we can be certain only of the 164 seal inscriptions which were known prior to the publication of notable monumental descriptions that could be easily copied, as well as those found subsequently in controlled archaeological excavations:[5]

  • 44 Hebrew
  • 6 Phoenician
  • 57 Aramaic
  • 34 Ammonite
  • 17 Moabite
  • 6 Edomite

Earliest published

The table below lists all the inscribed seals published before 1850, ordered by the date they were found.[6]

Language Image Inscription WSS No. Century BCE Material Known Since Published
Phoenician (disputed) lʾbybʿl 1122 8th Sardonyx scaraboid 1726 Gori, 1726[7]
Phoenician lʾḥtmlk ʾšt yšʿ 1102 8th Agate scaraboid 1791
Phoenician bnʾw/r 728 6th White stone scaraboid (unknown location) 1791 Tassie and Raspe 1791[8]
Aramaic lhwdw sprʾ 754 7th Green jasper scarab 1791 Tassie and Raspe 1791[9] CIS II 84
Hebrew An inscription lbnyhw bn šḥr 108 7th (?) Onyx scaraboid 1812 Clarke 1813[10]
Moabite lkmšṣdq 1036 8th Porphyry scarab 1826
Aramaic An inscription lmrʾ hd 809 7th Carnelian scarab 1828 Hamaker, 1828
Hebrew lnʾhbt bt dmlyhw 39 7th Burnt carnelian scaraboid 1837
Aramaic lsrgd – Late 9th Quartz cylinder seal 1837 Gesenius 1837[11]
Aramaic lnbrb 817 Mid 7th Agate scaraboid 1837
Aramaic lʿzy 1116 Late 8th / early 7th Agate scaraboid (missing) 1837 Lajard 1837,[12] CIS II 90
Phoenician lbʿlytn ʾšʾl mʾš lmlqrt bṣr 719 5th–4th Chalcedony scaraboid 1843
Hebrew lʿbdyhw bn yšb 290 Late 8th / early 7th Jasper scaraboid 1846
Aramaic lpltḥdn – 8th Carnelian cylinder seal 1847 Lajard 1847[13]
Aramaic lmmh – 8th Unknown scaraboid (missing) 1847–49 Lajard 1847–49[14]
Aramaic ḥnky 795 Early 6th Chalcedony octagonal conoid 1849 Lajard 1847–49[15]
Hebrew lntnyhw bn ʿbdyhw 279 Early 7th Chalcedony conoid 1849
Ammonite ltmkʾl bdmlkm 853 6th Octagonal conoid 1849

Wider corpus, including unprovenanced

The Corpus of West Semitic Stamp Seals (WSS) states that, at the time of its publication in 1997, approximately 1,591 West Semitic inscribed seals, sealings, and related stamped objects were known when cylinder seals are included, or about 1,511 when they are excluded. Within this larger body, the WSS defines a principal working corpus of 1,189 stamp seals used for detailed study. Of these, 180 are recorded as having secure archaeological provenance, or 85-88 securely provenanced seals excluding a small number of unrepresentative large hoards.[16]

The WSS explains that “nationality” is the primary principle used to classify seals, determined by a combination of script, language, names, and iconography, though palaeography "outweigh[ed] all others". Some have been revised and reclassified, or remain uncertain. The authors emphasise that the classification remains provisional: "we are still far from achieving a definitive classification".[17] According to Avigad and Sass: "There is a great similarity among the scripts and the onomasticon of the various West Semitic peoples, making it difficult to distinguish between the different groups of seals."[1]

The core WSS corpus is as follows:

Unprovenanced Provenanced
Category Seals Bullae Handles Total Seals Bullae Handles Total
Hebrew 399 262 50 711 29 57 46 132
Phoenician 36 2 38 3 1 4
Aramaic 97 8 2 107 6 7 1 14
Ammonite 148 1 149 10 1 11
Moabite 41 1 42 3 3
Edomite 7 2 1 10 3 2 1 6
Philistine? 4 1 5 3 1 4
Hebrew-Phoenician 1 1
Hebrew-Aramaic 5 5
Hebrew-Ammonite 1 1
Hebrew or Moabite 4 4 1 1
Moabite or Edomite 7 7
Phoenician or Aramaic 21 21 1 1
Aramaic or Ammonite 18 18 1 1
Undefined 70 70 3 3
Pseudo-script 5
Doubtful and forged 21
West Semitic? 2
Total 859 277 53 1217 63 69 48 180

Provenanced

The 88 core provenanced seals and bullae (excluding handles), excluding LMLK seals, the Avigad hoard and the City of David hoard is:

Region Site Hebrew Phoenician Aramaic Ammonite Moabite Edomite Philist.? Misc.
Palestine (51) Acre (2) 716, 732
Aroer (1) 1055
Arad (5) 70, 71, 72, 111, 132
Ashdod (1) 1065
Atlit (1) 777
Beersheba (1) 661
Beit Shemesh (2) 52, 293
Beth Zur (1) 412
Dan (3) 669, 692 1165 (Undef.)
En Gedi (2) 94, 172
Tell el-Far'ah (South) (1) 1069
Gibeon (2) 220 757
Tell el-Hesi (1) 568
Tell Jemmeh (1) 1068
Jerusalem (6) 35, 147, 150, 210, 261, 326
Tell Judeideh (2) 536, 639
Kiriath-Jearim (1) 212
Lachish (6) 59, 350, 360, 385, 405, 498
Tel Megiddo (4) 2, 85, 160 1124 (Undef.)
Tel Michal (1) 162
Tell en-Nasbeh (2) 8 800
Revadim (1) 1067
Samaria (3) 419 (W. Daliyeh), 711 1078 (He-Mo)
Shechem (1) 224
Transjordan (15) Amman (5) 859, 916, 944, 973 1011
Busaira (1) 1050
Deir Alla (1) 988
Tell el-Kheleifeh (2) 1051, 1054
Tell el-Mazar (2) 872 1109 (Ar-Am)
Umm el-Biyara (1) 1049
Tall al-Umayri (3) 860, 886, 977
Phoenicia & the West (4) Byblos (1) 990
Carthage (1) 185
Cádiz (1) 267
Tharros (1) 745
Syria (5) Carchemish (1) 774
Hama (2) 760, 768
Til Barsib (1) 1100 (Ph-Ar)
Zincirli (1) 750
Mesopotamia (12) Babylon (1) 1048
Khorsabad (3) 743 755, 843
Nimrud (1) 1154 (Undef.)
Nineveh (2) 796, 837
Nippur (1) 815 (rig. Susa)
Susa (1) 759 1020
Ur (2) 975 1034
Egypt (1) Elephantine (1) 788
TOTAL (88) 40 4 14 11 3 6 4 6

Examples

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d Avigad & Sass 1997, p. 21-22.
  2. ^ Fox, Nili S. (1999). "Nahman Avigad. Corpus of West Semitic Stamp Seals. Revised and completed by Benjamin Sass. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities/Israel Exploration Society/Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1997. 640 pp". AJS Review. 24 (2): 362–365. doi:10.1017/S0364009400011326. ISSN 0364-0094. Retrieved 2026-02-07. Sass is well aware of the possible presence of forgeries in the collection, and consequently he exercises caution by drawing few statistical conclusions. Several of his remarks speak to the issue (e.g., pp. 15, 465, 552). Notably, his final comment on this serious matter appears directly above his name at the end of the volume. It clearly mirrors his deep concern: "The possibility that our mostly unprovenanced material contains forgeries should always be borne in mind, for the impact of such items on works like the present one is inestimable" (p. 552). Given Sass's legitimate concern over authenticity, it is surprising that he did not divide the main catalogue by separating objects derived from controlled archaeological excavations from those acquired by other means.
  3. ^ Bordreuil 2014, p. 127-140.
  4. ^ Bordreuil 2014, p. 127-128: "There can be no doubt that the number of Hebrew seals has seen a truly astonishing increase, with most items coming essentially from the antiquities market... The disproportion of Hebrew seals is rather worrying, as the following statistics (based on WSS p. 549) show. Phoenician: 36 well-identified seals and 22 items less certainly identified, for a total of about 58; Aramaic: 97 well-identified seals, with 18 less-certain items, a total of about 115; Ammonite: 148 well-identified seals and 18 less-certain items, a total of about 166; Moabite: 41 well-identified seals and 4 less-certain items, a total of about 45; Edomite: 7 well-identified seals and 7 less-certain items, a total of about 14. How can such a large number of Hebrew documents compared with the relatively small number of Phoenician, Aramaic, and Transjordanian seals be explained? Present data indicate that Old Hebrew writing was commonly in use for only about two centuries, a brief period compared with the centuries-long persistence of Aramaic writing. Moreover, the use of Old Hebrew writing was limited to a rather small territory, which cannot be compared with the extended area of Aramaic writing before and after the 5th century b.c.e. Finally, in spite of the wealth of the cities on the Phoenician coast, Phoenician seals do not exceed a few dozen, a surprisingly small number."
  5. ^ Bordreuil 2014, p. 127, 138: "The number of West-Semitic inscribed seals has increased greatly since the beginning of the 1970s. The number of these documents was then at approximately 600, whereas today the number of bullae, seal impressions, and seals exceeds 1,600 (WSS p. 552). This is owing to the increasing number of uncontrolled excavations occurring in the Middle East by “amateurs” whose activities, which have been going on for well over a century now, are both a cause and a consequence of increasing demand by collectors. While collectors of the past worked for the most part from their studies, where they received their suppliers, they now must compete, in the field as it were, with travelers seeking ancient artifacts—especially inscriptions. Tiny items such as inscribed seals are relatively easy to smuggle across borders. One consequence of this strong demand has been the development of the forger’s art, and fake seals are becoming more and more sophisticated and difficult to detect... Today, with the criterion of discovery during official archaeological excavations or the publication and/or acquisition of a seal at a date in time before that of a notable monumental inscription, we can be certain of the genuineness of at least 44 Hebrew seals, 6 Phoenician seals, 57 Aramaic seals, 34 Ammonite seals, 17 Moabite seals, and 6 Edomite seals, for a total of 164, or about 10% of the total of approximately 1,600.
  6. ^ Bordreuil 2014, p. 128-137.
  7. ^ Gori, A. F. 1726 Inscriptiones antiquae in Etruriae urbibus existantes: 70, pl. 11
  8. ^ Tassie and Raspe 1791, Descriptive Catalogue of a General Collection of Ancient and Modern Gems: 4, no. 34, pl. 7:34
  9. ^ Tassie and Raspe 1791: pl. 11:654
  10. ^ Clarke 1813, Travels in Various Countries of Europe, Asia, and Africa, vol. 2: Greece, Egypt, and the Holy Land: 180
  11. ^ Gesenius 1837: 221–22, pl. 28:67
  12. ^ Lajard 1837 Recherches sur le culte, les symboles, les attributs et les monuments figurés de Vénus en Orient et en Occident.: pl. 14G:13
  13. ^ Lajard 1847 Observations sur l’origine et la signification du symbole appelé la croix ansée. Mémoires de l’Institut royal de France 17: 352, pl. 3:4
  14. ^ Lajard 1847–49, Introduction à l’étude du culte public et des mystères de Mithra en Orient et en Occident: pl 36:1
  15. ^ Lajard 1847–49: pl. 44:17
  16. ^ Avigad & Sass 1997, p. 547-552.
  17. ^ Avigad & Sass 1997, p. 17.
  18. ^ Ledrain, E. (1882). "NOTE SUR DEUX SCEAUX PORTANT LE MÊME NOM HÉBREU". Revue Archéologique. 43. Presses Universitaires de France: 285–287. ISSN 0035-0737. JSTOR 41732402. Retrieved 2026-02-07.
  19. ^ Sachau, Eduard (1882). "Aramäische Inschriften". Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin: 1064.

Bibliography

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.