Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Экронская надпись" in Russian language version.
The first thing to consider when examining an ancient inscription is whether it was discovered in context or not. It is obvious that a document purchased on the antiquities market is suspect. If it was found in an archeological site, one should note whether it was found in its primary context, as with the inscription of King Achish from Ekron, or in secondary use, as with the Tel Dan inscription. Of course texts that were found in an archaeological site, but not in a secure archaeological context present certain problems of exact dating, as with the Gezer Calendar.
The inscription is composed of five lines and seventy-one characters, written in a script similar to Phoenician, and to Old Hebrew, and is perhaps, as Naveh has suggested, a candidate for a local late Philistine script.
The first thing to consider when examining an ancient inscription is whether it was discovered in context or not. It is obvious that a document purchased on the antiquities market is suspect. If it was found in an archeological site, one should note whether it was found in its primary context, as with the inscription of King Achish from Ekron, or in secondary use, as with the Tel Dan inscription. Of course texts that were found in an archaeological site, but not in a secure archaeological context present certain problems of exact dating, as with the Gezer Calendar.
The inscription is composed of five lines and seventy-one characters, written in a script similar to Phoenician, and to Old Hebrew, and is perhaps, as Naveh has suggested, a candidate for a local late Philistine script.
