Aramaic Inscription on Stela "Sefire III": New Photographs

Volume 16 2016 BAAL Bu lletin d'Arché ologie et d'Arch itectu re L iban Dl nnlNsrĚnE DE LA cULTURE nrcrloN GÉ NÉ nnlrors ANnqu rÉ s a ises BAAL 1ó' 2016 Pp.339-348 Aromoic lnscription on Stelo "sefire lll": New Photogrophs JaN DUŠ EKand Gaev ABOUSAMRA The Aramaic stela "Sefire lll", presumably discouered in Sefire (Syria), was acquired for theNational Museum oJ Beirut in 1956. Since its first publication by André DupontSommer and Jean Starcky in 1956 it has been subject of a number of reeditions and modifications of reading. After hauing reexamined the stela in the National Museum of Beirut we propose in this article new photographs of the most disputed passages in the inscription with the commentarY. The basalt stela with an Aramaic inscription of 29 lines of text to which this article is devoted, consists of nine relatively well preserved fragmentsl. The original ť áxt was longer; undetermined number of lines are missing at the beginning and end of the inscription. The stela was purchased for the National Museum of N' 2036 (Fis. 1). The inscription contains a treaý apparently concluded between two kings in the mid-Sth cenfury BCE who ruled over the tenitories in the proximity Beirut in 1956, where it is stored under I nv. of Aleppo. Some commentators reconstruct the name of "Bar-Ga'yah'', King oÍ KTK, who was one of the concluding parties in the treaties on stelae Sefire I and I I 2, André Lemaire with Jean-Marie Durand and Herbert Donner with Wolfgang Rólliga. I n spite of these efforts, there remains no unanimity as to the reading and interpretation of some passages of the inscription. Apart from its epigraphic problems, the inscription also presents grammatical difficultí es and problems related to historical interpretation that must be solved before a solid transcription with translation is proposed. This article is devoted exclusively to the epigraphic aspects. For this reason we do not include the tuanscription and the translation of'the whole text herc. Line 8 on line 25 (see below). The inscription was first published in 1956 in an editio princeps by André Dupont-Sommer and Jean Starclď. Since that time, the inscription has been studied and re-published by eminent scholars, including Joseph A. Fí Emyer, Franz Rosenthal, John C. L. Gibson, Edward Lipirí ski, É milePuech, The last word in the sentence nr[ r] x ':xln nlurxt o\ ntu: has been read either with het (ntv't "to send") or with mem (a\ v\ "for peace"). Dupont-Sommer and Starcky in editio princeps read nlul nr[ 5] x ':xln nluxr and fuanslated in French as "et á qui j'enverrai mon ambassadeur pour (lui) envoyer (un message)"s. This 339 Aramaic I nscription on Stela "Sefire I 1l": New Photographs BAAL 16' 2o1ó Fí g. 7- The basalt stela "Sefire I I I " with Aromaí c inscrí ption. reading was confirmed by Puech6 and also adopted by Donneiftvith Róllig. However, Gibson, Lipiáski, Lemaire tbfa\ with Dirand and Fitzmyer read.+ rn* nr[ ':] N '> x!n nluxr "and I send my arnbassador to him for peace"7. Our examination of the inscription confirms the reading with heÍ : nlu! nr[ :] x ,:x'rn nluxt "and I will send my envoy to him to send (a message)". However, we understand why the mem could have been read. the light (FiS. 2). But a closer examination of the letter shows that this stroke does not seem to be part of the letter, and thus the correct reading should be het (Fig. 3). Line 9 Actually, the het has a stroke looking like the leg of a On line 9, Dupont-Sommer with Starcky, Gibson, Lipirí ski, Fltzmyer and Donner with RÓllig read nurn5r ... 1n! gn[ r n] !rr,! "you shall not rule upon me concerning mem in its middle. We were able to highlight it with [ it. And] if not, ..."8. However, Lemaire with Durand 340 .!ar, ] -] r-lš eli. a.ncl Gaby Abousar.'lra BAA[ ' 1'6' 20!'ó Fig. 4- Detail of line 9. Line 73 Fig' 2- Detaí l of line B' Dupont-Sommer and Starcky read the first worcÍ on line nron (Fig 5) and explained it as being an imperative pl. of the root.lon "to beat," with a personal pronoun suffix of 3'd pers. f. sg., written defectivelyll. Fitzmyer and Gibson considered the pe in nrcn to be a scribal error and proposed to correct the reading to nr:n from the root n> : "to strike," attested in the previous word12. Puech reads nun instead of uouu(n:on); for him the reading of pe is clear enough and he too admits the presence of a scribal error here with pe instead of kaf3. Thus, he understands the word as n::n "you will strike her (: the "city" in feminine)". This formr may be analyzed as pealn2"d trlers. sg. m. impf., with a pronominal suffix 3'd pers. f. sg. (= n,rp), with added nun oÍ the "long imperfect '', or the nun energicum1 Fis. 3- Detail oJ line 8 noticed that it is possible to reconstruct only one letter in the lacuna and that the remains of the letter just prior to the lacuna correspond to alef rather than yod; thus they read ... ;n'r ;n[ r ] &rr' 't nu1n5r and translate in French "et tu n'auras pas pouvoir sur moi á ce sujet. Fis. 5- Detail of line 13. [ Et] sinon ..."e. This reading fully corresponds to what is preserved on the stone and is supported by our photograph (FiS. 4). They correctly observed that the with the ri-reaning of inclicativera. 'Thus, the phrase word xty "above", "about it" is well attested in Official :rnr n:{ := } on n:: Nn n'rir mgans "and if it is Aramaiclo. So the correct reading and its translation will indeed strike it witfr a swol:d". seems to be ... lnt 1n[ r ] &rl 'l nurnlr "you won't have authority over me in this matter. [ And] if not, ...". where one can read ;nr a city, yotl A similar case appears in the left part of the line, il,x nei'i n)r. I riizmyer and Gibson l 34Í . I _) Aramaic I nscription on Stela "Sefire I I I ": New Photographs BAAL 16,2016 pe in non is clear (Fig' 6)' Here, Puech proposes as well to consider Lhe pe in non to be a scribal error, where a kol should have been written instead of pe, as follows: n(n)'x n{ r:} on n> r "you will read 15 n)n n)r, but the peal, indeed strike him"16. The form nrn is analyzed as as well by 2nd pers. sg. m. impf. This solution, adopted Lemaire and Durand17, is the most probable' The last lelter he shows that this form is the "long imperfect" and is to be translated by an indicative as well18, as in the first occuffence of this verb atthe beginning of the line. The object of this transitive verb is indicated Fig. 6- Detail of line 13 pers' by the nota accusatiui with pronominal suffix 3'd m.sg. Line 73-74 Dupont-sommer and Starcky read the word at the "and end of line 13 and the beginning of line 14 nruur his greats"le and this reading was preferred by Puech Durand as well2o. Fltzmyer, Gibson and Lemaire with read nrerur with resh instead oÍ gimel'2l' Fitzmyer translates it "and his nobles'' (: Akkadian š urbů "very great"); Rosenthal, Gibson and Lemaire with Durand understood it as "his family, his clan" (: Syriac * nr-tu Fig. 7- Detaí l ot' line 73. "generation, genealogy, family, tribe, race, nation")' The reading o'Í . resh is clearly visible in the stone, not a gimel, (Fig.7), thus the correct reading is nrrrurt "and his clan". Line 74 The reading of x'r[ y] "treaý-stipulations'' is clear according to the context; it appears here in a stereoýped formula "you will have betrayed all the which is also attested on lines 4, 1'6-17 and 23. However, there seems to be a rest of a horizontal line beneath the head of the gods of these treaty-stipulations", supposed dalet (FiS. 8), which would indicate the reading oÍ a b et.This reading with b et, however, would make no sense and seems excluded by the other clear occulrences of the word in the same type of formula that repeats several times in the inscription' Apart from no a scribal error, which is always possible, we have line clear interpretation for the rest of this horizontal as beneath the head oÍ the letter which should be read dalet. 342 Fis. 8- Detail of line 14' Jan Duš ek and Gaby Abousamra BAAL 16, 2016 Line 79 Most of the commentators reconstruct five letters in the lacuna: 'n[ 'rno,r] lil[ n] i "and [ k] ings [ who are in] my [ viciniý] ''22. Puech observes that this reconstruction is too long: there is only space for three letters, not five23. I ndeed, the lacuna is too short to contain five letters, as the space only accommodates three, as one can see on the photograph, where the missing part of the line is marked with a rule (Fig. 9). I t is true that the reconstruction of 'n[ rno] "my [ vicini] ý'' seems obvious, because of the attestation of 'nrno'r x,lln !> r "all the kings in my viciniý'' on lines 7 - Fig. 9- Detail oJ lí ne 19. B. However, there is no place for the relative pronoun ,r. But the stofus absolutus of 1:!n requires 'r between and ,n[ rno] (: subst. nrno "vicinity"24 with suff. 1't pers. sg.). So, when we reconstruct 'nrno, the only possible solution would be the omission of ,r by the scribe, already raised by Puech. 13t[ n] i Line 22 Most authors saw a lacuna in the end of line 22 and reconshucted a yod Í here (: pronominal suffix 1't pers. sg.): [ '] ri:y "[ my] offspring"zs. Nevertheless, Lemaire and Durand read the yod as damaged:zthpv. Actually, the remains of a yod are clear enough (Fig. 10) and thus this last reading is correct. Line 25 I n the lacuna in the middle of line 25, DupontSommer and Starcky reconstruct the name of "Bar- Ga'yah", King of KTK, mentioned in the stelae from I I 27. I t is true that we can reconstruct five or six letters in the lacuna and the name of the King of KTK frts there quite well. I t is also true that the letter he (which is also the last letter in "Bar-Ga'yah") is Sefire I and preserved in the text. For these reasons, many authors accepted this reconstruction2s; others, however, not. For example, Rosenthal does not reconstruct "Bar Ga'yah" in the lacuna2e. Gibson hesitates to read the letter after lacuna as he and prefers to see there an 'ayin3o. The discussion on the name of a person whose name is to be reconstructed in this lacuna is beyond the topic of this article, because other historical Fis. 10- Detail of line 22 aspects must be taken into account. However, we can clearly refuse the reading oÍ ayin after the lacuna' which was proposed by Gibson. The he is clear on (Fig. 11). Thus "Bar-Ga'yah" the reconstruction of the name in the lacuna is theoretically possible, but we leave it for the moment without commentary. the stone, as the photograph confirms Line 26 The usual reconstruction and reading at beginning of the line is 'i[ : r: rlr ... ] "[ ... and] the my [ grands] on [ is in conflict] "st. However, a careful examination of the inscription reveals that the rest of the head oÍ resh is preceded by the top of the head of another letter, at a distance that usually separates hvo letters (FiS. 12). Thus, it becomes possible to reconstruct thebet: 'ii[ rrl,r ...] "[ ... and] my [ grand] son is in conflict". 343 _..-F_ Aramaic I nscription on Stela "Sefire I I I ": New Photographs BAAL 16,2016 be in conflict with" seems to be used in Aramaic without any preposition; it is used as a transitive verb Fí g. 11- Detaí l oJ line 25. with direct object. I f we adopt this reconstruction and reconstruct the beginning of line 26 as usually proposed, the text on that line would be as follows: xsr,;n n,lJ,r n,to:t n,x!n iI orx'r':n] '-rpv t1't 'iiI rrrllrrrr' rnl "I if my son is in conflict andl my [ grand] son lis in conflict] and my offspring is in conflict lwith the kings of Arpald, Tal'ayim and its villages and its lords, whoever raises ..." According to this reconstruction the position of Tal'ayim in this conflict would not be sufficiently clear. But we perhaps have to admit that we do not fully understand the purpose and the sense of the paragraph on Tal'ayim in the present treaty, because Fig. 72- Detaí l of lí ne 26 its defining parts are lost. I n the middle of the line, Dupont-Sommer with Starcky, followed by others, read and reconstructed the following: o,x!n 9[ u 1pv nr'] 'rpv:r'r "and my offspring will be in conflict [ with your offspring o] n Tal'ayim"32; Lemaire and Durand have o'x':ň 9[ y t:5n rn] 'rpr', rr'r "et conteste ma descendance, [ un des rois, au suljet de Tal'ayum"33. Both proposals consist of the reconstruction of seven letters in the lacuna and six or seven letters may actually be reconstructed there. Fí g. 73a- Detoí l ot' line 26. However, the reading oÍ a lamed before n'x!n, which appears in both proposals, does not seem supported by what can be seen on the stone. The rest of the letter, which is visible on the stone, does not look like an upper part of a lamed; it is rather the top of a triangle (FiS. 13 a-b) that could have belonged to bet, dalet or resh. a beú , it could be the preposition r "in'' ("in Tal'ayim"). The preposition r can also be used with the verb :'r with the meaning "to quarrel with", as is attested in Biblical Hebrew in Gen 31:36; Ju 6:32 and Ho 2:4. The possible : could also be the last letter of the verb :,r "to be in conflict", attested on the same I f it is line. I f it is a dalet, we may reconstruct i[ orx ':!n] 'rprr rlr "... and my offspring is in conflict with lthe kings of Arpald". I n this inscription (line 17) the verb lr "to 344 Fí g. 13b- Detoí l of line 26. Jan Duš ek and Gaby Abousamra BAAL 16,2016 Line 27 At the beginning of the second half of line 27, Dupont-Sommer with Starcky proposed a reconstruction that appears only in the commentary Fí g. 14- Detoil of line 27 á l'un des ro] is d'Arpad, [ tu le tueras; et si tu ne] le ltuks s pas' tu auras trahi ces pactes_ci.''3a' Lemaire with € Durand accepted this reconstruction; they were even able to discern the remains oÍ a taw beÍ ore nir[ and thus read nj':ň[ i:n'l tnr ...] . (at One can discern the remains of a letter before lnir'lthe beginning of the second half of line 27. The reading oÍ taw, proposed by Lemaire and Durand, seems possible. However, one may observe that the letter in question probably had some head' and that it looks like the head oÍ anun or kaf . This is observed on our photograph Fig. 15- Detaí I of line 29. (Fis. 14). trruo possibilities for interpreting preceding nrpur. First, it is possible to these letters reconstruct a word ending with nir.[ . I t can be a verb with a pronominal suffix 3'd pers. m. or í ., perhaps in "long imperfect" with a nun inserted betrveen the root Actually, there are and the suffix. Second, if we read ni':i[ , it would also be possible to reconstruct a stereoýped formula that appears four times in the inscription, on lines 4,9, 74, and 20: ;!x x'rvr nrpv.l í ,rl ilnr '.. ] " [ . . . and i] f not, you will have betrayed these treaty-stipulations"' I n that case, we must admit an error on the part of the scribe who interchanged lamed and nun in Í nr' Line 29 Dupont-Sommer and Starcky, followed by others, reconstructe dl\ ne29 as follows: r] o] 'r in lrr rou l[ r nn )r ] "[ and all th] at is beautiful and all that is go[ od ] ".35 Another possibility is to read uuour instead of yod in the beginning: [ :] u'r fin5rrroui[ ... ] "[ ... ] and beautiful and all that is go[ od l" . Waw fits better the rest of the letter: a slightly ascending line from right to left. Moreover, the lower horizontal bar that one would expect for a yod is not discernible on the stone (Fig. 15). 345 --Aramaic I nscription on Stela "Sefire I I I ": New Photographs BAAL 16.2016 NoÍ es !7- Lemaire - Durand, 7984, p.119 and 1- We would iike to express our gratih.rde to Ms. Anne-Marie the verbs tertí ae infirmae has he as last letter; see Degen, Afeiche, Director of the National Museum of Beirut, and Mr. 7969, p.76-77. 145. 18- The "long imperfect" with the meaning of indicative in Gaby Layoun, former Minister of Culfure of Lebanon, who allowed us to sfudy the inscription in the National Museum of Beirut on June 77, 2013. This study is a result of the research funded by the Czech Science Foundation as the 19- Dupont-Sommer - Starcky, 1956, p. 27 and 33. 20- Puech, 7982,p.584. 2L- Fitzmyer, 7995, p.138 and 154; Gibson, 1975, p. 48 - Durand, 7984, p. 1,79, 129 and 14S. project GA Č R P4O7l72lGl68 "History and I nterpretation and 54; Lemaire of the Bible". This reading with resh was also mentioned by Rosenthal, 1960, p.29, note 8. 2- Dupont-Sommer - Starcky, 1960. 3- Dupont-Sommer - Starcky, 7956; see also Dupont- 22- Dupont-Sommer - Starcky,1956, p. 27; Gibson ,1975, - Durand, 1984, p. 119 and 146 (they use p. 48; Lemaire Sommer, 1960. the reconstruction, admitting however that it is too long); 4- Fitzmyer, 7958, 1995; Rosenthal, 1960; Gibson, 7975; Lipií ski, 1975; Puech, 1982, 1'992; Lemaite - Durand, 1984; Donner - RÓllig, 2002, n" 224, p.56-57 Fitzmyer,1995, p.138 and 157; Donner _ Róllig, 2002, p. 57. . 5- Dupont-Sommer - Starcky, 7956, 27 and 28. 6- Puech, 1982, p.583. 7- Gibson, 1975, p.46 and 53-54; Lipiriski, 1975, p. 55; Lemaire - Durand, 1,984, p. 719; Fibmyer, 1995, p. 136 and 150. 23- Puech, 1,982, p.586. 24- HoÍ tijzer - Jongeling, 7995, p. 7995, p. 136; Donner - Róllig, 2002, p. 56. 25- Dupont-Sommer - Starc!,7956,p.27; Gibson, 1975, - 28- Fitzmyer, 1995,140 and 161; Lipiú ski, 1975, p. 57; - Durand, 1984, p.120 and p. I 74;Puech, 1992, Lemaire 10- Porten - Lund, 2002, p. 257. 29- Rosenthal, 1960, p. 31. t2- Fitzmyer,7995, p. 138 and 153; Gibson, 7975, p. 48 lI 9. 27- Dupont-Sommer - Starcky, 7956, p. 27 and 35. p. 105. 1- Dupont-Sommer - Starcky, 1956, p. 27 and 33. p. 140; Donner Róllig, 2002, p. 57. 9- Lemaire - Durand, 7984, p.7\ 9,729 and 145. 1 83. p. 50; Lipiriski,7975, p.57;Fitzmyer,7995, 26- Lemaire - Durand, 7984, p. 8- Dupont-Sommer - Starcky, 1956, p.27; Gibson, 1975, p. 48; Lipiií ski, 1975, p. 56 (translation only); Fitzmyer, 7 3O- Gibson, 7975,p.50 and 56. 3 1- Dupont-Sommer - Star cW, 7956, p. 27 ; Gibson, 792 5, and 54. p. 50; Fitzmyer, 1995, p. 140; Lemaire 13- Puech, 7982, p. 584-586. p.120. 14- For the inserted nun oÍ the "long imperfect'', see Degen, 1969, p. 80. For the nun energicum, see Segert, 32- Dupont-Sommer, 1956, p. 27; Gibson,7975, p.50; 1975,p.253, 33- Lemaire - Durand, 1984, p.720. S 5.6.5.3., and p. 310, $ 5.7.9.4.5. The "long imperfect" has the meaning of indicative; see Degen, 7969, p. 100-109. - Durand, 1984, Fitzmyer, 1995, p. 140; Donner - Róllig, 2002, p. 57 34- Dupont-Sommer - Starcky, 7956, . p. 36. This reconstruction is not in the transcription of the text on p. 1.5- Fitzmyer, 1995, p. 138 and 153; Gibson, 1975, p. 48 and 54. 16- Puech, 1982, p. 584-586. 346 35- 27 . - Starcky, 1956, p. 27 and 36; Gibson, 1,975, p.50; Lemaire - Durand, 1984, p. I 2O; Dupont-Sommer Fitzmyer,7995' p. 140; Donner _ Róllig, 2002, p' 57. Jan Duš ek and Gaby Abousamra BAAL16,20T6 Bibliography Porten, B. - Lund, J.A. 2OO2. Aramaic Documents from Degen, R. 1969. Altaramdische Grommatik I ndiana: Eisenbrauns. Egypt: A Key-W ord-in-Context Concordance, Winona Lake, der Chn (Abhandlungen fur die Kunde des Morgenlandes 38, 3), Wiesbaden: Deutsche I nschriften des 10.-8. Jh. u. morgenlándische Gesellschaft, Kommissionsverlag Franz Steiner. - Róllig, w. 2oo2. Kanaondí sche und I nschriften, Band l. 5. erweí terte und Puech, É .tssz. "Les inscriptions aramé ennes I et III Puech, É .tssz. "Les traité s aramé ens de Sfiré ,'' in J. Briend (ed.), Traité s et serments dans le Proche-orient Donner, H. ancí en (Supplé ment au Cahier Evangile 81), Paris: Cerf. aramtjische Rosenthal, ú berarbeitete Aufloge, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Dupont-Sommer, A. 196o. de Sfiré : nouvelles lectures,'' Reuue biblique 89, p. 576-587. F. 1960. "Notes on the third fuamaic I nscription from Seffre-Sijin," Bullďin oJ the Amerí can "Appendice I : Stěle I I I ,'' in Schoo/ s of Oriental Research 1-58 (1968), p. 28-33. Mé moires pré senté spar diuers souonfs d I 'Acadé mie des Segert, s. / nscripÍ ions et Be\ I es-Lettres de l'I nstitut de France, Tome Bibliographie, Chrestomathie und Glossor, l-eipzig: VEB XI , premiěre partie, Paris: I mprimerie nationďe, 323-328. Verlag Enzyklopádie. Dupont-Sommer, A. - Starcky, J. 1956. 1975. Altaramaische Grammatí k mit "Une inscription aramé enne iné dite de Sfiré ," Bulletin duMusé e de Beyrouth 73, p.23-4I . Dupont-Sommer, A. - Starcky, J. 1960. "Les inscriptions aramé ennes de Sfiré (stěles I etll)," Mé moires pré senté spar diuers savants d l'Acadé mie des I nscňphons et Belles-Lettres 15/ 1, Paris: I mprimerie nationďe, p. 797 -327, Pl. il-xxx. Fitzrnyer, J.A. 1958. "The fuamaic Suzerainty Treaty from Sefire in the Museum of Beirut," The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 20, p. QQ4-476. 1995. The Aramaic I nsuiptions of Sefire, Revised Edition (Biblica et Orientalia, 19/ A), Roma: Editrice pontificio I nstituto biblico. Gibson, J.C.L. 1975. Textbook oJ Synan Semitic I nscriptions ll Aramaic I nscriptions I ncluding I nsuiptions in the Dialect of Zenjirli, Oxford: Clarendon Press (reprinted 2003). HoÍ tiizet, J. - Jongeling, K. 1995. Dictionary oJ the North-West Semitic I nscnptions, I -[ , Leiden - New York - Kóln: Brill. Lemaire, A. - Durand, J.-M. | 984. Les í nscrí ptions aramé ennes de Sfiré ď I 'Assgrie de Shamshi'i/ u (Hautes é tudes orientales 20), Geněve - Paris: Droz. Lipiriski, E. 1975. "Re-reading the I nscriptions from Sefire''' in: idem, Studí es in Aramaic I nscriptions and Onomastics I (orientďia Lovaniensia Analecta 1), Leuven: Leuven University Press, p.24-57 . 347