Talk:Banobal stele

Phoenicia Low‑importance

	Phoenicia portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Phoenicia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Phoenicia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.PhoeniciaWikipedia:WikiProject PhoeniciaTemplate:WikiProject PhoeniciaPhoenicia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Inscription

user:Hans van Deukeren, thank you for adding the inscription.

in Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften (5 ed.), the inscription appears differently: in line 2 "L...]D/RT ŠMR N’LKY" and not "L...(?)‘ŠT]RT ŠMRN ’NKY", and in line 3 "[. YB]RK"and not "[. TB]RK". These changes change the understanding of the inscription. Why did tou do that? פעמי-עליון (talk) 09:28, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken the changes from Krahmalkov, Phoenician-Punic Dictionary, because they seem to me plausible:

A reference to Astarte in line 2 seems plausible to me: (a) she is mentioned explicitly in line 3, and (b) three persons mentioned in the inscription bear a name derived from Astarte, and therefore may have felt particularly close to this goddess: Pa‘ol‘astarte Sr., his wife Ḥan‘astarte, and their son Pa‘ol‘astarte Jr.;

’NKY ("I") in line 2 would fit in nicely with the 1st person Singular ’Š’L ("I ask");

In line 3 [Y]BRK ("may he [=who?] bless") seems less logical than [T]BRK ("may you bless", or "may she [Astarte] bless"). But if you can offer convincing translations of the KAI version of the text, I will gladly yield. Hans van Deukeren (talk) 16:53, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First, thank you for answering. It seems like you have a great knowledge in the Phoenician dialect of the Canaanite language and I'm happy to see there are people who are still interested in this topic.

About the inscription, as long as all of the changes appear in the source you gave (Krahmalkov), it's alright. I suggest you mention there are several possible readings to the inscription because it isn't well preserved, and show the reading of KAI and RES (you can find them in the hebrew article, if know how to read hebrew).

The "’NKY" instead of "’LKY" makes sense because Lamedh and Nun are very similar in ancient Phoenician, and it is likely to see the cult of Astarte of Samaria in Egypt (Jeremiah Chapter 44, 15-17: "And they answer Jeremiah — [...] all the people who are dwelling in the land of Egypt: "[...] for we certainly do everything that has gone out of our mouth, to make incense to the queen of the heavens, and to pour out drink-offerings to her..."), but it is anusual (for example, because while names derived from the name of Baal where found in Samaria, no such name derived from Astarte was found there) and must be sourced.

About "[T/Y]BRK", L’LM ’DRT ’M ’LM ‘ŠTRT WL’LNM means "to the great (female) goddess, mother of gods, Astarte, and to (other) gods", so it makes sense the askingis from Astrte and the other gods, so it is YBRK in plural (יברכו).

I don't think every reading must come with a translation. It is possible that an inscription is easily read but hardly translated, and we should offer all of the possible readings to the reader.

פעמי-עליון (talk) 18:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]