Mesha Stele (English Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Mesha Stele" in English language version.

refsWebsite
Global rank English rank
3rd place
3rd place
26th place
20th place
5th place
5th place
2nd place
2nd place
1st place
1st place
6th place
6th place
low place
low place
low place
low place
497th place
371st place
low place
low place
121st place
142nd place
2,640th place
3,789th place
4,952nd place
3,572nd place
5,668th place
6,019th place
low place
9,527th place
low place
8,548th place
27th place
51st place
1,031st place
879th place
2,220th place
1,461st place
2,000th place
1,766th place
9,112th place
7,304th place
11th place
8th place
1,283rd place
1,130th place
571st place
403rd place
low place
low place
1,190th place
959th place
3,538th place
3,083rd place
649th place
827th place
low place
low place

academia.edu

  • Maeir, Aren M. (2013). "Israel and Judah". The Encyclopedia of Ancient History. New York: Blackwell: 3523–3527. The earliest certain mention of the ethnonym Israel occurs in a victory inscription of the Egyptian king MERENPTAH, his well-known 'Israel Stela (ca. 1210 BCE); recently, a possible earlier reference has been identified in a text from the reign of Rameses II (see RAMESES I–XI). Thereafter, no reference to either Judah or Israel appears until the ninth century. The pharaoh Sheshonq I (biblical Shishak; see SHESHONQ I–VI) mentions neither entity by name in the inscription recording his campaign in the southern Levant during the late tenth century. In the ninth century, Israelite kings, and possibly a Judaean king, are mentioned in several sources: the Aramaean stele from Tel Dan, inscriptions of SHALMANESER III of Assyria, and the stela of Mesha of Moab. From the early eighth century onward, the kingdoms of Israel and Judah are both mentioned somewhat regularly in Assyrian and subsequently Babylonian sources, and from this point on there is relatively good agreement between the biblical accounts on the one hand and the archaeological evidence and extra-biblical texts on the other.
  • Richelle 2021, p. 154*. Richelle, Matthieu (2021). "A Re-Examination of the Reading BT DWD ("House of David") on the Mesha Stele". Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies. 34: 152*–159*. ISSN 0071-108X. JSTOR 27165968.

archive.org

archives-ouvertes.fr

halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr

  • This reading of Mesha's father name, quoted here for copyright reasons, is no longer accepted. In light of the El-Kerak Inscription, the common reading is now "kmš[yt]", i.e. "Chemosh-yt". According to H. L. Ginsberg, the second element might be vocalized yatti, short for yattin, a conjugation of Northwest Semitic ytn, from Proto-Semitic wtn "to give"; a well-known derivative is ntn. See William L. Reed and Fred V. Winnett, "A Fragment of an Early Moabite Inscription from Kerak", Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 172 (1963), p. 8 n. 20a; and Romain Garnier and Guillaume Jacques A neglected phonetic law: The assimilation of pretonic yod to a following coronal in North-West Semitic. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, Cambridge University Press (CUP), 2012, 75 (1), pp.135–145.

baslibrary.org

biblicalarchaeology.org

biblicalarchaeology.org

library.biblicalarchaeology.org

biblicalstudies.org.uk

books.google.com

cojs.org

doi.org

ebooksread.com

eurekalert.org

haaretz.com

jordantimes.com

jstor.org

  • Albright 1945, p. 250: "The Moabite Stone remains a corner-stone of Semitic epigraphy and Palestinian history" Albright, William F. (1945). "Is the Mesha Inscription a Forgery?". The Jewish Quarterly Review. 35 (3). University of Pennsylvania Press: 247–250. doi:10.2307/1452186. JSTOR 1452186.
  • Fleming, Daniel E. (1 January 1998). "Mari and the possibilities of Biblical memory". Revue d'Assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale. 92 (1): 41–78. JSTOR 23282083. The Assyrian royal annals, along with the Mesha and Dan inscriptions, show a thriving northern state called Israël in the mid—9th century, and the continuity of settlement back to the early Iron Age suggests that the establishment of a sedentary identity should be associated with this population, whatever their origin. In the mid—14th century, the Amarna letters mention no Israël, nor any of the biblical tribes, while the Merneptah Stele places someone called Israël in hill-country Palestine toward the end of the Late Bronze Age. The language and material culture of emergent Israël show strong local continuity, in contrast to the distinctly foreign character of early Philistine material culture.
  • Niccacci, Alviero (1994). "The Stele of Mesha and the Bible: Verbal System and Narrativity". Orientalia. 63 (3): 226–248. ISSN 0030-5367. JSTOR 43076168.
  • Richelle 2021, p. 154*. Richelle, Matthieu (2021). "A Re-Examination of the Reading BT DWD ("House of David") on the Mesha Stele". Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies. 34: 152*–159*. ISSN 0071-108X. JSTOR 27165968.
  • Yahuda, A. S. (1944). "The Story of a Forgery and the Mēša Inscription". The Jewish Quarterly Review. 35 (2): 139–164. doi:10.2307/1452562. JSTOR 1452562.
  • Albright 1945, pp. 248–249: "In the first place, no inscription of comparable age was then known, and it would, accordingly, have been impossible for the greatest scholar of the day to have divined the true forms of characters in use in the third quarter of the ninth century B. C. E… It is very easy to determine the exact state of knowledge at that time by examining Schroder's handbook, Die phonizische Sprache, and Levy’s monograph, Siegel und Gemmen, both of which appeared in 1869. No lapidary Hebrew or Canaanite inscription antedating the sixth century (reign of Psammetichus II) was then known, aside from the still unintelligible Nora and Boss inscriptions and a few Old-Hebrew seals which could not then be dated at all. Since the forms of characters changed rapidly between around 900 and 590 BCE, thus no possible way existed of knowing what the alphabet of Mesha's time might be. Now, we have many inscriptions dating from between around 850 and 750 BCE, some of which, like the nearly contemporary stele of Kilamuwa of Sham'al, the Hazael inscription from Arslan Tash, and the Ben-hadad Stele, resemble the Mesha Stone very closely in script. Some of the forms of characters had not then been found in any documents. Thus, forging the Mesha Stone was humanly impossible. Albright, William F. (1945). "Is the Mesha Inscription a Forgery?". The Jewish Quarterly Review. 35 (3). University of Pennsylvania Press: 247–250. doi:10.2307/1452186. JSTOR 1452186.
  • Emerton, J. A. (2002). "The Value of the Moabite Stone as an Historical Source". Vetus Testamentum. 52 (4): 483–492. doi:10.1163/156853302320764807. ISSN 0042-4935. JSTOR 1585139.

livescience.com

livius.org

louvre.fr

collections.louvre.fr

  • "Stèle de Mecha". Musée du Louvre. 830. Retrieved 11 September 2021.

michaellanglois.org

phys.org

semanticscholar.org

api.semanticscholar.org

timesofisrael.com

uni-halle.de

menadoc.bibliothek.uni-halle.de

unil.ch

serval.unil.ch

web.archive.org

wikipedia.org

de.wikipedia.org

  • Albright 1945, pp. 248–249: "In the first place, no inscription of comparable age was then known, and it would, accordingly, have been impossible for the greatest scholar of the day to have divined the true forms of characters in use in the third quarter of the ninth century B. C. E… It is very easy to determine the exact state of knowledge at that time by examining Schroder's handbook, Die phonizische Sprache, and Levy’s monograph, Siegel und Gemmen, both of which appeared in 1869. No lapidary Hebrew or Canaanite inscription antedating the sixth century (reign of Psammetichus II) was then known, aside from the still unintelligible Nora and Boss inscriptions and a few Old-Hebrew seals which could not then be dated at all. Since the forms of characters changed rapidly between around 900 and 590 BCE, thus no possible way existed of knowing what the alphabet of Mesha's time might be. Now, we have many inscriptions dating from between around 850 and 750 BCE, some of which, like the nearly contemporary stele of Kilamuwa of Sham'al, the Hazael inscription from Arslan Tash, and the Ben-hadad Stele, resemble the Mesha Stone very closely in script. Some of the forms of characters had not then been found in any documents. Thus, forging the Mesha Stone was humanly impossible. Albright, William F. (1945). "Is the Mesha Inscription a Forgery?". The Jewish Quarterly Review. 35 (3). University of Pennsylvania Press: 247–250. doi:10.2307/1452186. JSTOR 1452186.

wikisource.org

en.wikisource.org

wiktionary.org

en.wiktionary.org

  • Albert Löwy, A Critical Examination of the So-called Moabite Inscription in the Louvre, 1903, 3rd issue rev. and amended. Lowy's arguments against the authenticity of the stele were related to (a) apparent errors in the language, composition and palaeography of the text, (b) signs of plagiarism from the bible, and (c) the rhetorical question "Can an absolute unicum which, as a literary production, is alleged to have emanated from an ancient, now defunct, nation, serve as acceptable evidence of its own genuineness, if such evidence be challenged?"

worldcat.org

search.worldcat.org

worldhistory.org