The reading of Shin starting col. B line 1 of 4Q448 has been proposed by M.O. Wise, N. Golb, G. Doudna, and R. Gmirkin. A much longer list of readers read Ayin; and a number of the latter have declared that the reading of shin is "materially impossible" or the like. (Citations on request.) The four who read (or once read) Shin are related in more than one way. The Eisenman & Wise 1992 book p.16 gives its first acknowledgement for "help and suggestions" to Norman Golb; Wise was Golb's student. Doudna, I think, briefly studied at Chicago. The latter three are otherwise influenced by Golb. Gmirkin cited Doudna's paper. Doudna also on orion quite emphatically declared for Shin, though a differently shaped shin than Golb's. By the way, Golb and Doudna use "effaced" rather than "defaced"; the latter might imply intention. Golb did not revise his 1995 book when reissued in paperback, nor correct errors: e.g. on supposed absence of Herod the Great coins; on Pliny supposedly in Judaea [where he never set foot], etc.--merely adding an addendum naming Y. Hirschfeld--before the--still unpublished--Y. Magen, Y. Peleg dig. Golb (p. 262-7) dismissed the paleographic skills of Ada Yardeni in his book; soon afterward, he changed his tune, when the "yahad" (or not) ostracon was published. Though Wise read shin; Abegg in Wise Abegg Cook 1996 read ayin, as had Abegg and Wacholder, and many others. Compare also Andre Caquot "...On propose de traduire la colonne de droit 'Eveille-toi, Saint....'" (Annuaire du College de France 1993 p. 671).
On 11 Jan 2000 G. Doudna wrote, in part: "...I am no longer sure that reading is Shin. Perhaps it is Ayin after all....." and "Main makes a very good argument for the 'Rise up against Jonathan' reading." Those who wish to read the context, the long post, see: http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il/orion/archives/2000a/msg00038.html For my part, I have looked at, over the years, many photos, b/w and color, in various reproductions, and the original at the 1993 Library of Congress exhibit. I read ayin. Golb read the entire column B as a prose "rubric." R. Gmirkin did not explicitly specify where his proposed title ends. But wherever he proposes it to end, that would affect his claim about proposed relevance of Hebrew poetry parallelism. best, Stephen Goranson _______________________________________________ g-Megillot mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
