“Jonah” Ossuary Discussed in Print in 1981

Posted in: Archaeology and Media, Archaeology in the News
Tags: ,
Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Google+2Email this to someoneShare on Reddit0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on LinkedIn0

By Eric M. Meyers and Christopher Rollston, ASOR Blog Guest Editors for March 2012

It has come to the attention of the ASOR Blog that a newspaper article about the so-called “Patio Tomb” in East Talpiyot was published in Hebrew in DAVAR on May 22, 1981 (this tomb has also been called “Talpiyot Tomb B”). The article was entitled, “Haredim Prevent Removal of Ossuaries from Ancient Tomb,” written by the late archaeologist and journalist, Zvi Ilan. Within the article, Ilan notes that religious extremists prevented the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) in 1981 from excavating the tomb. Although Amos Kloner (the excavator for the IAA) wished to excavate the tomb, he was not permitted do to so, nor was he even permitted to remove artifacts from the tomb (although he managed to remove a small ossuary belonging to a child). In fact, he was forced to abandon his attempt to write a full scientific report. Kloner’s incomplete report is mentioned briefly in Tabor and Jacobovici’s book.

One of the ossuaries in this tomb has been dubbed by Tabor and Jacobovici as “the Jonah Ossuary,” because of Tabor and Jacobovici’s interpretation of the ornamentation on the ossuary as that of “Jonah and the Whale” (This ossuary in Kloner’s incomplete report is labeled #1). Significantly, however, it is clear from the article in DAVAR that the ornamentation on the ossuaries identified in 1981 include the following: (1) Architectural features (perhaps of the Second Temple?) and (2) An amphora (Heb.agartal). These two understandings of the ornamentation are the very interpretations that were proposed on the ASOR blog (in March 2012). Tabor and Jacobovici did not mention in their book that the ossuary had been previously discussed in print and (most importantly) that the design was long ago suggested to be an amphora. Should one assume that they had not seen this article?

click to enlarge

~~~

All content provided on this blog is for informational purposes only. The American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR) makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this blog or found by following any link on this blog. ASOR will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information. ASOR will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or use of this information. The opinions expressed by Bloggers and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of ASOR or any employee thereof.
 

 

Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Google+2Email this to someoneShare on Reddit0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on LinkedIn0

There are no comments published yet.

Leave a Comment

Sign in to view all ASOR Blog content!
If you have not set up a username and password for the ASOR Blog, please close this box by clicking anywhere on the screen then go to the Friends of ASOR option in the menu above. If you have forgotten your password, please click the Forgot Login Password option in the above menu.