Aramaic Ossuary Inscription Translation

[Poetic Justice]

In 1953 a cave outside of Jerusaleum was discovered in connection with
the Dominus Flevit Church.

122 ossuaries were found and 43 had inscriptions and 1 was claimed to be
that of St. Peter.

The charcoal inscription they claim reads 'Shimon Bar Yonah' (or some
variation of that) or in English 'Simon son of Jonah'.

Now I'm curious, is that actually letter for letter what it reads?
There just doesn't seem to be enough letters?

Does it use abbreviations?

Or is that vertical line meant to be the "bar" seperating "Simon" and
"Jonan" and people would know that Simon|Johan means 'son of'?

Also a 'Chi Rho' symbol was found on another ossuary in the cave and I'm
wondering if that 'Simon Bar Jonah' is an *exact* translation or are
they just reading more into it in an attempt to tie it to early
Christianity?

The broken ossuary;
http://tinyurl.com/c7q44u4 OR
www.uhl.ac/files/cache/3e4e010c52c3de5324484ea91c11aad6_f402.jpg

The inscription;
http://tinyurl.com/cjb4lrp OR
www.preteristarchive.com/Ancient_Revelations/epigraphy/images/DF-photo-81.jpg
Regards, Walter

x-poster soc.history.ancient & sci.archaeology

[SolomonW]

On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 13:57:46 -0400, Poetic Justice wrote:

> 'Shimon Bar Yonah'
This is it in modern Hebrew
����� �� ����

Chgeck it up here and make your own mind up.
http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/28_chart.html


As in Hebrew, Aramaic has are no vowels so it is shorter then the English
also I presume like Hebrew speakers today, Aramaic speakers would find
English is very long winded to speak as they can speak faster in their own
tongue.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Apr 9, 8:04 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 13:57:46 -0400, Poetic Justice wrote:
> >  'Shimon Bar Yonah'
>
> This is it in modern Hebrew

> ùîòåï áø éåðä
>
> Chgeck it up here and make your own mind up.http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/28_chart.html

>
> As in Hebrew, Aramaic has are no vowels so it is shorter then the English

it's not the language but the script that does notreperesent the
vowels.

> also I presume like Hebrew speakers today, Aramaic speakers would find
> English is very long winded to speak as they can speak faster in their own
> tongue.

the orthograpy has nothing to do with the rapidity of speech.

[Poetic Justice]

>'Shimon Bar Yonah'

SolomonW wrote;

>This is it in modern Hebrew

>ùîòåï áø éåðä

Ok but that would be what a modern Hebrew writer would write if I said
in English 'Shimon Bar Yonah' and not a translation from Aramaic
correct?

>Chgeck it up here and make your own
>mind up.
>http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/28_chart.

>tml

Thanks for the website but I'm still lost:-) and I can' match up either
for an even close type of english translation.

Using that site for the ossuary's Aramaic inscription there are 2
letters that I can't even take a wild guess at.

The 1st letter which is an inverted V with a smaller inverted v within
it /^\ and the next to the last letter which looks like an outline for a
crossbow.
And other letters, for the N there are 2 but they look like this n and
the last letter is an excellent match for the top u section but on the
inscription it has a long tail like a Y.

So what I was hopeing was someone who reads Aramaic to say "Yes that is
an exact translation and in English it means 'Simon son of Jonah' which
was St. Peter's name.

Or "No, it's not"

Or "It could mean that but it could also this".
Like 'Smn (son of) Jnh' could also mean 'Samen (son of) Jinoh' or
something such.

It *seems* that after the 'Chi Rho' inscription was discovered was when
they conclued that this ossuary was St. Peter's
and I was wondering if their religious views pushed them in that
direction?
Regards, Walter

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Apr 8, 1:57 pm, paradisel...@webtv.net (Poetic Justice) wrote:

anyone take a stab at this? (sci.lang added)

> The inscription;http://tinyurl.com/cjb4lrpORwww.preteristarchive.com/Ancient_Revelations/epigraphy/images/DF-phot...

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 9, 7:34 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 8, 1:57 pm, paradisel...@webtv.net (Poetic Justice) wrote:
>
> anyone take a stab at this? (sci.lang added)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In 1953 a cave outside of Jerusaleum was discovered in connection with
> > the Dominus Flevit Church.
>
> > 122 ossuaries were found and 43 had inscriptions and 1 was claimed to be
> > that of St. Peter.
>
> > The charcoal inscription they claim reads 'Shimon Bar Yonah' (or some
> > variation of that) or in English 'Simon son of Jonah'.
>
> > Now I'm curious, is that actually letter for letter what it reads?
> > There just doesn't seem to be enough letters?
>
> > Does it use abbreviations?
>
> > Or is that vertical line meant to be the "bar" seperating "Simon" and
> > "Jonan" and people would know that Simon|Johan means 'son of'?
>
> > Also a 'Chi Rho' symbol was found on another ossuary in the cave and I'm
> > wondering if that 'Simon Bar Jonah' is an *exact* translation or are
> > they just reading more into it in an attempt to tie it to early
> > Christianity?
>

> > The broken ossuary;http://tinyurl.com/c7q44u4ORwww.uhl.ac/files/cache/3e4e010c52c3de5324...
>
> > The inscription;http://tinyurl.com/cjb4lrpORwww.preteristarchive.com/Ancient_Revelati......

> > Regards, Walter
>
> > x-poster soc.history.ancient & sci.archaeology

The links don't work.

[Poetic Justice]

Peter T. Daniels wrote;

>The links don't work.

They seem to have run together and also broke in Yusuf's (Thanks BTW for
the additional cross post group) quote of my original post.
Here they are. Regards, Walter

[SolomonW]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 19:15:58 -0400, Poetic Justice wrote:

>>'Shimon Bar Yonah'
>
> SolomonW wrote;
>
>>This is it in modern Hebrew

>>����� �� ����

>
> Ok but that would be what a modern Hebrew writer would write if I said
> in English 'Shimon Bar Yonah'

Yes as Shimon Bar Yonah is a transcription from the old Hebrew and I would
be surprised if it was not identical to the old Hebrew of the time.

> and not a translation from Aramaic
> correct?

I would be surprised if it was not very close.

>
>>Chgeck it up here and make your own
>>mind up.
>>http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/28_chart.
>>tml
>
> Thanks for the website but I'm still lost:-) and I can' match up either
> for an even close type of english translation.
>
> Using that site for the ossuary's Aramaic inscription there are 2
> letters that I can't even take a wild guess at.
>
> The 1st letter which is an inverted V with a smaller inverted v within
> it /^\ and the next to the last letter which looks like an outline for a
> crossbow.
> And other letters, for the N there are 2 but they look like this n and
> the last letter is an excellent match for the top u section but on the
> inscription it has a long tail like a Y.
>
> So what I was hopeing was someone who reads Aramaic to say "Yes that is
> an exact translation and in English it means 'Simon son of Jonah' which
> was St. Peter's name.
>
> Or "No, it's not"
>
> Or "It could mean that but it could also this".
> Like 'Smn (son of) Jnh' could also mean 'Samen (son of) Jinoh' or
> something such.
>

This is a common and difficult problem of identifying letters in old
inscriptions in stone. I was once in an archaeological site and an expert
quite excited explained to me the letters in an inscription. While he was
doing that I could sort of work out the letters but only just and not with
any confidence.

If you look up many translated inscriptions being translated you will see
that many of the experts disagree on the letters.

[SolomonW]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 11:40:33 -0700 (PDT), Yusuf B Gursey wrote:

> On Apr 9, 8:04�am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 13:57:46 -0400, Poetic Justice wrote:
>>> �'Shimon Bar Yonah'
>>
>> This is it in modern Hebrew

>> ����� �� ����

>>
>> Chgeck it up here and make your own mind up.http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/28_chart.html
>>
>> As in Hebrew, Aramaic has are no vowels so it is shorter then the English
>
> it's not the language but the script that does notreperesent the
> vowels.

Please we are talking here inscriptions.

>
>> also I presume like Hebrew speakers today, Aramaic speakers would find
>> English is very long winded to speak as they can speak faster in their own
>> tongue.
>
> the orthograpy has nothing to do with the rapidity of speech.

It is not rapidity of speech.

I presume like Hebrew, Aramaic would have dramatically fewer words and text
then the equivalent text in English.

[Peter T. Daniels]

> www.preteristarchive.com/Ancient_Revelations/epigraphy/images/DF-phot...

I can see how someone might claim it says "Shimon bar Yonah," but how
likely is it that a "charcoal" (if that's what it is) inscription
could have lasted 2000 years?

The "bar" would be the pair of angles looking like one letter, to the
left of the vertical.

BTW I don't appreciate being forced to scroll back and forth between
my own earlier message and this one in order to see what someone else
had said. Why would two different people have deleted the actual
content of the message they were referring to?

[Poetic Justice]

Thanks everyone and I think this answers my question. Regards, Walter


Dr. Stephen Pfann (his impressive bio below) came to this conclusion
about the inscription.

That it reads;

"Shimon Bar Zilla.

However, photos indicate some surface erosion exists to the left of the
alef, which may allow for another letter, for example a yod, which would
yield the reading SHM WN BR ZYLA [I], that is, Simon Barzilla"

(I had to delete some clutter that came thru with that 'cut and paste' a
big problem with Webtv, hopefully it doesn't change the meaning by not
posting any accents in that name but it's in the website below intact)

Very detailed on his reasons and methods for this conclusion.

www.uhl.ac/en/projects/talpiot-tomb/shimon-barzillai/

His Bio;

"Dr. Stephen Pfann (B.S., Bethany College; M.A., Graduate Theological
Union; PhD, Hebrew University) is the founder and president of the
University of the Holy Land and the Center for the Study of Early
Christianity.

Since 1992, Dr. Pfann has significantly contributed to the publication
of the Dead Sea Scrolls as a member of the International Team of
Editors.

In the spring of 1993, he published The Dead Sea Scrolls on Microfiche
in collaboration with Professor Emanuel Tov, Editor-in-Chief of the Dead
Sea Scrolls Publication Project.

As researcher of the Dead Sea Scrolls, drawing on his scientific
background, he has made innovative contributions to the field by
developing a method of using hair follicle patterns on parchment, as
well as other characteristics in papyrus, to reconstruct fragmentary
scrolls.

As an editor, Dr. Pfann has published one of the manuscripts of the
Book of Daniel from Qumran cave 4 and is responsible for the
decipherment of more than sixty manuscripts written in the "cryptic"
scripts which were used exclusively among the Qumran sectarians.
These documents contain esoteric teaching reserved for the priestly
circles of Second Temple Period Judaism and of the Qumran community.

The results of his research are being published in the series
Discoveries in the Judaean Desert (Oxford University Press)."

http://www.greenscholarsinitiative.org/ScholarStaff/Details/Pfann

[Poetic Justice]

Peter T. Daniels wrote;

>I can see how someone might claim it
>says "Shimon bar Yonah,"

Thanks, I posted a website here that refutes that claim.

>but how likely is it that a "charcoal" (if
>that's what it is) inscription could have
>lasted 2000 years?

Actually it seems very likely they will and in this case within a cave
so not effected by rain, wind blown sand, etc.

It seems that there are quite a few scattered around.

Google; ossuary charcoal inscription written.

Also just; charcoal inscription written.

And others; pompeii charcoal graffito inscription written

And this recent discovery;

It's an excavation of a Roman fort complex in Jordan (3rd-6th C AD).

"In the bathhouse, the archaeological team found numerous charcoal
inscriptions and drawings decorating its walls, essentially ancient
Roman graffiti."

www.utk.edu/tntoday/2012/10/26/professors-archaeological-finds-jordan/

>The "bar" would be the pair of angles
>looking like one letter, to the left of the
>vertical.

Thanks, that website also mentions your conclusion.

>BTW I don't appreciate being forced to
>scroll back and forth between my own
>earlier message and this one in order to
>see what someone else had said.
>Why would two different people have
>deleted the actual content of the message
>they were referring to?

Sorry and I do see your point. But technically I did quote the actual
content of the message I was referring to, it was your "The links don't
work" post:-).
Regards, Walter

[Whiskers]

["Followup-To:" header set to sci.archaeology.]

Perhaps a few hints as to how Aramaic is written, might help you to sort
yourself out.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etSgnxpi6hI&playnext=1&list=PLBCECC5BF05A8C1EF&feature=results_main>
or <http://preview.tinyurl.com/csvpbby> for short.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

[me]

On Apr 10, 12:34 am, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 8, 1:57 pm, paradisel...@webtv.net (Poetic Justice) wrote:
>
> anyone take a stab at this? (sci.lang added)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In 1953 a cave outside of Jerusaleum was discovered in connection with
> > the Dominus Flevit Church.
>
> > 122 ossuaries were found and 43 had inscriptions and 1 was claimed to be
> > that of St. Peter.
>
> > The charcoal inscription they claim reads 'Shimon Bar Yonah' (or some
> > variation of that) or in English 'Simon son of Jonah'.
>
> > Now I'm curious, is that actually letter for letter what it reads?
> > There just doesn't seem to be enough letters?
>
> > Does it use abbreviations?
>
> > Or is that vertical line meant to be the "bar" seperating "Simon" and
> > "Jonan" and people would know that Simon|Johan means 'son of'?
>
> > Also a 'Chi Rho' symbol was found on another ossuary in the cave and I'm
> > wondering if that 'Simon Bar Jonah' is an *exact* translation or are
> > they just reading more into it in an attempt to tie it to early
> > Christianity?
>

> > The broken ossuary;http://tinyurl.com/c7q44u4ORwww.uhl.ac/files/cache/3e4e010c52c3de5324...
>
> > The inscription;http://tinyurl.com/cjb4lrpORwww.preteristarchive.com/Ancient_Revelati......

> > Regards, Walter
>
> > x-poster soc.history.ancient & sci.archaeology

'Chi Rho

why ?

[Poetic Justice]

>Also a 'Chi Rho' symbol was found on
>another ossuary in the cave and I'm
>wondering if that 'Simon Bar Jonah' is an
>*exact* translation or are they just reading
>more into it in an attempt to tie it to early
>Christianity?

me wrote;

>'Chi Rho
>why ?

I realize the 'Chi Rho' symbol predates Christianity and likely wasn't
used by them until the later 3C but with Constantine in the 4C it really
takes off as *the* Christian symbol as a monogram.

My point was a 20C archaeologist with a Christian slant might want to
tie these two seperate inscriptions into something that they are not.

A fish or an anchor would be somewhat more believable. Regards, Walter

[Poetic Justice]

Whiskers wrote;

>Perhaps a few hints as to how Aramaic is
>written, might help you to sort yourself
>out.
><http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etSg

>xpi6hI&playnext=1&list=PLBCECC5BF05

>8C1EF&feature=results_main> or
><http://preview.tinyurl.com/csvpbby> for
>short.

Thanks, I'll check it out! Regards, Walter

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Apr 11, 10:55 am, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 10, 6:48 am, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > ["Followup-To:" header set to sci.archaeology.]

> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etSgnxpi6hI&playnext=1&list=PLBCECC5BF...>

> > or <http://preview.tinyurl.com/csvpbby> for short.
>

> this is more like it:
>
> http://www.nativlang.com/aramaic-language/aramaic-writing-square.php- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Apr 11, 4:05 pm, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:

> On 2013-04-11, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 10, 6:48 am, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:

> >> ["Followup-To:" header set to sci.archaeology.]

> >> On 2013-04-10, Poetic Justice <paradisel...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> [...]

>
> >> Perhaps a few hints as to how Aramaic is written, might help you to sort
> >> yourself out.

> >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etSgnxpi6hI&playnext=1&list=PLBCECC5BF...>

> >> or <http://preview.tinyurl.com/csvpbby> for short.
>

> > this is more like it:
>
> >http://www.nativlang.com/aramaic-language/aramaic-writing-square.php
>

> There are three styles there.
>

the Palestinian (Herodian) script is relevant.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Apr 11, 4:04 pm, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:
> On 2013-04-11, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 10, 6:48 am, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:

> >> ["Followup-To:" header set to sci.archaeology.]

> >> On 2013-04-10, Poetic Justice <paradisel...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> [...]

>
> >> Perhaps a few hints as to how Aramaic is written, might help you to sort
> >> yourself out.

> >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etSgnxpi6hI&playnext=1&list=PLBCECC5BF...>

> >> or <http://preview.tinyurl.com/csvpbby> for short.
>

> > that is not the Aramaic Square Script of the period in question
>
> There are ten videos in that playlist ...
>

I didn't notice that. #4 is relevant.