¹ See Cross, F. M., “The Discovery of the Samaria Papyri,” BA 26 (1963), 110–21.Google Scholar

² Cf. Nehemiah 2:10, 19; 3:33; 4:1; 6:1, 2, 5, 12, 14; 13:28 (snblṭ); Elephantine P. 30:29 (sn'blṭ). The gentilic “Horonite” is best explained as derived from Bêt Ḥôrôn.

³ Neh. 13:28.

⁴ Antiq. XI, 297–301. This event probably must be dated before 404, since according to Neh. 12:22 Jaddua I (see below) came to the throne during the reign of Darius (II). Josephus identifies him as the stratēgos of Artaxerxes, presumably confusing him with the notorious eunuch of Artaxerxes III.

⁵ Cf. N. H. Snaith, Studies in the Psalter (London, 1934), 13–14; Rowley, “Sanballat and the Samaritan Temple,” BJRL 38 (1955), 184f.

⁶ Antiq. XI, 302–12; 321–25.

⁷ A. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford, 1923), 110 (quoted by Rowley, op. cit. [n.5], 173, n.1).

⁸ See, for example, his discussion in The Second Isaiah (New York, 1928), 456–60, and references.

⁹ For detailed bibliographical references, see Rowley, op. cit. (n.5), passim.

¹⁰ Cf. Albright, W. F., “Dedan” in Geschichte und altes Testament, ed. Ebeling, G. (Tübingen, 1953), 6, n. 3.Google Scholar

¹¹ On papponymy in the Tobiad family, see Mazar, B., “The Tobiads,” IEJ 7 (1957), 137–45; 229–38Google Scholar; and, especially, 235 and n. 73.

¹² This is not counter to probabilities. Sanballat I no doubt died ripe in years, his eldest already advanced in age. This construction is, of course, hypothetical. Our evidence is tantalizingly limited to the following set of readings in the Dâliyeh Papyri.

(1) [yš]wʻ (or [yd]wʻ) br snʼblṭ wḥnn sgnʼ …

(2) qdm [Ḥ]nnyh pḥt šmryn …

(3) [yšʻ?]yhw bn [snʼ]

blṭ pḥt šmrn

(4) ly[š/dw]ʻ

The last two readings are in Palaeo-Hebrew on sealings. They are the only inscribed seals in the lot of more than 125 impressions and seal rings. Evidently, in Persian fashion, only officials had inscribed seals.

The Sanballat seal (which we earlier reconstructed to read [ḥnn]yhw) more likely read ydʻyhw or yšʻyhw, the formal name as against the caritative yaddūʻ or yešūαʻ. There are no traces of the long tails of the nuns on the seal. Ḥannan the prefect probably must be equated with the governor Hananiah, suggesting that he succeeded an elder brother Yešūaʻ (?) in the governorship.

¹³ See above, n. 4; see also W. F. Albright, The Biblical Period (Pittsburgh, 1950), 54.

¹⁴ Counting Joiada as I. Cf. Lapp, P., “Ptolemaic Stamped Handles from Judah,” BASOR 172 (1963), 33, no. 54.Google Scholar

¹⁵ See E. Bickerman, From Ezra to the Last of the Maccabees (New York, 1962), 42–43, who observes that the conflicts of the Persian period between Samaria and Jerusalem were largely political, rather than religious.

¹⁶ Cf. Cross, “… the Samaria Papyri,” 118f. and n. 22. The reconstruction of the background of the deposit of the Daliyeh papyri was worked out by the writer on the basis of a preliminary study of the papyri and associated artifacts, notably coins. The subsequent campaigns of excavation led by Professor Lapp have tended to confirm this hypothesis. Certainly the deposit is homogeneous, a series of artifacts including pottery from ±331 B.C. The latest papyrus, with a date formula preserved, comes from March 18, 335 B.C.

¹⁷ E. Bickerman, op. cit. (n.15), 43f.

¹⁸ “The Samaritans at Shechem,” HTR 55 (1962), 357–66; cf. Wright, Shechem: The Biography of a Biblical City (New York, 1965), 170–81.

¹⁹ Bull, Robert J. and Wright, G. Ernest, “Newly Discovered Temples on Mt. Gerizim in Jordan,” HTR 58 (1965), 234–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁰ Josephus, War I, 31, 33; VII, 422–35.

²¹ See P. W. Lapp, “The Second and Third Campaigns at ‘Arâq el-’Emîr,” Basor 171 (Oct., 1963), 8–38; and “The Qaṣr el-ʻAbd: A Proposed Reconstruction,” ibid., 39–45.

²² On a possible sacrificial cult at Qumrân, see F. M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumrân, 2nd ed. [Anchor Books] (New York, 1961), 100–06.

²³ From the Stone Age to Christianity (Baltimore, 1940, 2nd ed., 1946), 336, n. 12. Cf. BASOR 140 (Dec, 1955), 33, n. 29; and BASOR 81 (Feb., 1941), 5f.

²⁴ On the textual and palaeographical aspects of “Proto-Samaritan” texts from Qumrân, see my early comments in BASOR 141 (Feb., 1956), 12, n. 5a; The Ancient Library of Qumrân, 172f.; “Development of the Jewish Scripts,” The Bible and the Ancient Near East, ed. G. Ernest Wright (New York, 1961), 189, n. 4.

²⁵ See provisionally the writer's paper, “The History of the Biblical Text …,” HTR 57 (1964), 281–99, and “The Contribution of the Discoveries at Qumrân to the Study of the Biblical Text,” to appear in a forthcoming issue of the Israel Exploration Journal.

²⁶ My knowledge of this seal is thanks to Professor Nahman Avigad, who will publish it. Its script shows a number of special traits in common with the Samaritan seals.

²⁷ Published by Ovid R. Sellers, The Citadel of Beth-zur (Philadelphia, 1933), 73f.

²⁸ See most recently Lapp, Paul W., “Ptolemaic Stamped Handles from Judah,” BASOR 172 (Dec, 1963), 22–35.Google Scholar

²⁹ J. S. Holladay, in a letter dated December 2, 1965, has called my attention to stamps on wine-jars of the Greek islands, notably Thasos, which bear the pentagram, and evidently influenced Jewish potters.

³⁰ See Hanson, R. H., “Paleo-Hebrew Scripts in the Hasmonaean Age,” BASOR 175 (Oct., 1964), 26–42Google Scholar. With the publication of the full lot of Cave IV manuscripts, more precision in dating these Qumrân hands will become possible.

³¹ On the orthography of Palestinian texts, see the second paper listed in note 25, and Freedman, D. N., “The Massoretic Text and the Qumrân Scrolls: a Study in Orthography,” Textus II (1962), 87–103.Google Scholar

³² See Campbell, E. F. in Toombs and Wright, “The Third Campaign at Balâṭah (Shechem),” BASOR 161 (Feb., 1961), 47Google Scholar; and Wright, G. E., “The Samaritans at Shechem,” HTR 55 (1962), 358–59.Google Scholar