• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ancient Pre-Hebrew curse tablet/amulet

Delvo

Дэлво Δε&#
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
12,047
Location
North Tonawanda, NY
I ran across an interesting archeological discovery a couple of days ago... through a Christian source that was blathering about how it totally proves a particular story in the Bible true, which proves another one true, which proves the whole thing true, which proves God real and totally destroys the nonsense of all those mean atheists/skeptics who've been so horribly "persecuting" them by not believing it all. Given the mostly-religious presentation about it so far, I find it suspicious that religious organizations apparently got their hands on it before its official publication in a peer-reviewed journal, which is supposed to be coming soon. Releasing this to them first looks like an attempt to get their spin on it out there and in people's brains first, before any aspect of it that doesn't fit their narrative gets a chance.

It's hard to find a source on it which gets to the original facts instead of just the religious spin & propaganda, but this one isn't bad:

https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology...-mt-ebal/00000180-5b9b-dc66-a392-7fdbc7790000

Also, here's an informative video about the general category of artifacts that this new discovery is said to be a member of, "curse tablets": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_sDsFq6VnU

They're not well named; instead of tablets, they're really sheets of metal, with a curse scratched/gouged into one side and then hidden by rolling/folding the sheet up. You can see their typical size in that video: comparable to a modern standard piece of paper, because people need to be able to write on them, usually a few sentences plus some other extra stuff, with tools that don't allow them to write super-tiny.

That's one odd thing about the one they say they found in Isreal recently: it's more amulet-sized or CPU-sized or stamp-sized than sheet-sized, so the curse, in addition to being shorter & simpler than most, still had to be written super-tiny to fit there, so tiny I don't know how they'd do it. And it's folded in half instead of rolled. And it's supposedly (although with some debate about this) from the Bronze Age rather than Iron or Historiographic. And it's in Israel instead of Italy or Greece. Specifically, it was found at a hill that apparently everybody had already somehow agreed was Mount Ebal, which is associated with a story in Deuteronomy about curses.

amulet in hand:
https://www.thetrumpet.com/files/W1...06703d/20220331-stripling interview-1.jpg.jpg

They didn't want to risk damaging it by trying to open it, so they scanned it with something like a CT scanner, and say they've now read what was written inside it. The result includes, as the name of the god who's supposed to enforce the curse, "JHW" (yahoo!). It's missing the H at the end to be the usual representation of the name of the Hebrew god Yahweh/Jehovah, but at least one of the articles I've seen on this says it's written that way in the Bible sometimes. I guess the idea is that H, which is silent at the ends of Hebrew words now, had already gone silent at the ends of words that early so it didn't always seem necessary to write it.

The discoverers have published a sketch of only that word, not the whole inscription, and no images of the direct CT scanner output:
https://biblearchaeology.org/images...2022/415fe585-5f63-211d-62d2-94b9236b62bc.jpg

The sketch shows, contrary to what some religionists have been saying, not the Hebrew alphabet or even Proto-Hebrew, but Proto-Sinaitic or Proto-Canaanite, a stage so early that you can still see how it's derived from Egyptian writing, before we even get to the Phoenician alphabet, which would then become the Aramaic one, which would then become the Hebrew one. That's consistent with the dates they've given for this thing, around 1400-1200 BCE. Unfortunately, in the whole inscription as they've quoted it in some of the articles about it, the most common letters would be 'alp and ra'š, which, at that super-tiny size, would be the same as just rough-edged but vaguely round pits or bumps... exactly the kind of thing you'd think you saw a bunch of if you were trying to read letters into just a randomly non-smooth surface, not actual writing at all. Sometimes people just make flat metal objects by mashing the metal out thinner & wider than necessary and then folding it, and sometimes the result is just lumpy. Also, curse tablets in general don't seem to be typical of Hebrew or other Canaanite religion, so if that's what this is, then just the idea that it's somebody from that time & place doing curse tablets at all would be a bit of news even if it were normal size and perfectly clear.

If it does say what they say it says, it's the second indication we have of Yahweh-worshipping precursors to the Hebrews living in that area at about that time. But the other is an Egyptian reference to "the nomads of Yahweh" as one of a list of nomadic groups the Egyptians knew about, so this would be the oldest appearance of that name (or anything else written at all I think) in a precursor to Hebrew instead of Egyptian. It would be a mild surprise to me to find them that far north back then, because Yahweh worship later on is more associated with the south, but that's no big deal. It's also not clear to me what nomads are doing with even this amount of lead, so we'd have a sign here of either lead-carrying nomads or Bronze-Age Yahweh-worshippers who aren't nomads. Either way, it generally fits the big picture I already had but puts a little unexpected twist on it.
 
Last edited:
This reminds me of the oodles of fake ancient scrolls that end up in private church archives.

They celebrate how it will always go to prove something only important to them. Totally not knowing the language, letters or something about it is totally historically incorrect.
Or just not caring.
Forget the part about smuggling ancient relics from anywhere is quite illegal. When something from Africa ends up in West Virginia or wherever else suddenly there should be raised eyebrows at least.
 
Last edited:
I'd really like to see the CT image and details about how they did it before I comment much more. Not the least because of the way CT works. Something that's both that thin AND made of lead (which is actually very good at absorbing x-ray), well, theoretically it could be done with some highly specialized CT equipment that's designed to work at that scale, but I haven't heard of any. At any rate, it's not clear at all to me exactly what did they use and exactly what was the result.

Also because of how pitted and non-uniform the exterior is in those photos. I wish I could just believe that the interior is a perfectly flat sheet where every dent and groove is purposely made, but it's not clear.

Mind you, I'm not saying it's a fake or (more likely) pareidolia. I'm just saying I don't know. I'd like a bit more data, is all I'm saying.
 
Last edited:
...snip...
That's one odd thing about the one they say they found in Isreal recently: it's more amulet-sized or CPU-sized or stamp-sized than sheet-sized, so the curse, in addition to being shorter & simpler than most, still had to be written super-tiny to fit there, so tiny I don't know how they'd do it. And it's folded in half instead of rolled. And it's supposedly (although with some debate about this) from the Bronze Age rather than Iron or Historiographic. And it's in Israel instead of Italy or Greece. Specifically, it was found at a hill that apparently everybody had already somehow agreed was Mount Ebal, which is associated with a story in Deuteronomy about curses.

...snip...

Quite seriously - very carefully! I don't find the size issue a problem in considering if the writing is an artifact or not, people with simple tools can produce the most amazing crafts at very tiny scales.

After reading about it I am a little dubious that they have accurately been able to image any original text. One point is as Hans points out they are a tad vague about how they've managed it and secondly the two surfaces have been pushed against each other for so long I doubt there is still two distinct surfaces, chemical and physical reactions would tend to fuse the surfaces together over such a long time (and given how tiny the writing must have been I would have thought that would have annihilated most of the text).

Still very interesting.
 
Quite seriously - very carefully! I don't find the size issue a problem in considering if the writing is an artifact or not, people with simple tools can produce the most amazing crafts at very tiny scales.

Soort of. You have to understand that these are not modern Latin letters, nor Norse runes, nor even Hebrew. Also, there is no such thing as one single proto-Canaanite (aka proto-Sinaitic), but various stages and variants of letters being gradually adapted from Egyptian hieroglyphs, which can be somewhat more complex and trickier to write very very small with a needle on lead.

In fact, it's not even really an alphabet at this stage. It's really simplified hieroglyphics (most of which WERE already a syllabic alphabet, not unlike hiragana), including signs that were not actually supposed to be read phonetically. See, for example the Wadi el-Hol inscriptions.

Which is also the saving grace, really. You need to scratch less letters there, when you're not writing the vowels too.

But here come more problems:


1. As I was saying, it's not even a single alphabet, but a whole family of VERY different alphabets. It's kind like an archaeologist in the year 4022 saying that something is written in 2nd millennium CE European script. Well, which one? Are we talking Latin, Greek, Russian, Norse, or what? Are we talking cursive handwriting, or army stencil font, or what? Gregorian script maybe? The differences there can be literally just as wild.


2. Actually most of that evolution happened INSIDE Egypt, as simplified local alphabets. Sort of how like the Japanese had a perfectly functional set of hieroglyphs, when they decided to make the simplified hiragana and katakana sets.

There are only a couple of inscriptions found in the actual Canaan, and typically not more than a couple of letters each. For example the Ophel pithos gives us a grand total of 5 complete letters, and traces of 3 more. It's kinda hard to be sure of all the intermediate stages and whatnot.

Especially because they diverge A LOT. E.g., what might be a Yad (i.e., "Y") on the side in the pic that Delvo supplied, is more like a Gabi (i.e., "G") in the south arabic variant. Conversely a W in proto-Sinaitic might literally be the Y in ancient south-arabic.

Especially when dealing with an artefact that already seems out of time and place there, I'm thinking it can be tricky to be that sure exactly what script variant was used. I mean, not saying that professional archaeologists couldn't do that, but I'd like to see, you now, more information.


3. Even then, the 3 signs in the photo Delvo posted need... some kind heart and generous disposition to say that they absolutely say YHW. Not the least, because the letters are slanted in weird ways.

E.g., the supposed Y is literally rotated 45 degrees counter-clockwise and missing a segment. It also might make more sense as a Gaml ("G") with an extra crack. Hell, to be honest, it looks EXACTLY like a "Gabi" (another "G") with a line missing, perhaps smooshed when folding or not clear on the scan, or it was already starting to lose that extra line. (Like it did when it branched into southern arabic.) Except that one is even more rotated then. But we already are accepting rotated letters, I suppose.

The H is... well, not exact, but I suppose a decent enough effort, if you're trying to do a really tiny scratching exercise.

The Waw is the bigger problem. And bear with me to the end on this one. Not only it too is rotated, but the loop at the top is in the wrong position. It COULD be the result of just trying to write a tiny script, or regional variation, I suppose. BUT at that angle, if that loop at the top didn't actually connect (or wasn't supposed to connect) to the longer line, that's a Lamd ("L") not a Waw ("W").

So basically that deity (if indeed it refers to one) could just as well be YHL or even GHL or whatever.

Now again, I'm not necessarily saying these guys couldn't make sure. Just, well, I'd like to see for myself what the CT scan actually looks like.


4. But to return to what you actually wrote, here's my... amazement at that. Surely a skilled jeweller or whatever, who can do such tiny inscriptions without a magnifying glass or anything, wouldn't just toss the letters at jumbled angles around. Seems a bit of a contradiction. Either it's important enough so you invest the time and effort and presumably money to pay the guy who can do that (his being literate alone would be a very rare skill, and worth charging money for), OR it's so unimportant that the letters can be jumbled at random angles, like someone kicked over a box of children's cubes with letters on them. I'm having some trouble wrapping my head around it being both at the same time.
 
Last edited:
...snip...

4. But to return to what you actually wrote, here's my... amazement at that. Surely a skilled jeweller or whatever, who can do such tiny inscriptions without a magnifying glass or anything, wouldn't just toss the letters at jumbled angles around. Seems a bit of a contradiction. Either it's important enough so you invest the time and effort and presumably money to pay the guy who can do that (his being literate alone would be a very rare skill, and worth charging money for), OR it's so unimportant that the letters can be jumbled at random angles, like someone kicked over a box of children's cubes with letters on them. I'm having some trouble wrapping my head around it being both at the same time.

Or they knew no one else would be able to check so threw in something vaguely like it was meant to be. People were still people back then and getting away with cutting corners is not new! :D
 
Or they knew no one else would be able to check so threw in something vaguely like it was meant to be. People were still people back then and getting away with cutting corners is not new! :D

I suppose so, but it's still weird. I mean, if nothing else, imagine I gave you a sheet of paper and a pencil, and told you to write on it, in capital letters, "Dear Enemy, may the lord hate you and all your kind. May you turn orange in hue, and may your head fall off at an awkward moment." Would it even come naturally to you to write the letters at jumbled angles around?
 
Anyway, the more I think about it, the more I'm having trouble wrapping my head around a different thing: it being an amulet. I mean, you can even see the hole for the string in the photo where someone is holding it.

Now magical amulets are nothing new. Long before this, every temple in Egypt sold amulets for everything from fertility, to healing stuff, to good luck. Like, if Covid had happened in Egypt, you'd get an amulet instead of a vaccine. Wife not getting pregnant? Get her a fertility amulet. Etc. That's common.

What I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is wearing an amulet that says:

Cursed, cursed, cursed - cursed by the God YHW.
You will die cursed.
Cursed you will surely die.
Cursed by YHW – cursed, cursed, cursed.

Like, why in Lucifer Morningstar's good name would you wear THAT?

It's probably just a case of me missing something there, but... yeah, it's just that: I feel like I'm missing something there.
 
I don't believe it is meant to be worn or that is a hole. The "amulet" references are just a size comparison to clarify that it's more like that size than normal curse-tablet size, and that shadow just belongs to a deeper-than-average dent. Here is a set of exterior shots in different lighting.
 
Anyway, the more I think about it, the more I'm having trouble wrapping my head around a different thing: it being an amulet. I mean, you can even see the hole for the string in the photo where someone is holding it.
..snip..

If you are talking about the photo that has it on someone's palm - I'm pretty certain that isn't a hole.



 
Well, what can I say? It looked like one to me.

I guess it's true what they say: when you get old, two things go bad. First the eyes, and I can't remember the other one.
 
That looks interesting but it's out of context.

My skills on ancient written language are zero, it seems that whomever has the relic is on par with me.

Making up guesses on it folded up doesn't make sense. Archeology unrolls a heap of Roman lead curse things from temple sites do it is possible to get a better view before going on.
 
They didn't want to risk damaging it by trying to open it, so they scanned it with something like a CT scanner, and say they've now read what was written inside it. The result includes, as the name of the god who's supposed to enforce the curse, "JHW" (yahoo!). It's missing the H at the end to be the usual representation of the name of the Hebrew god Yahweh/Jehovah, but at least one of the articles I've seen on this says it's written that way in the Bible sometimes. I guess the idea is that H, which is silent at the ends of Hebrew words now, had already gone silent at the ends of words that early so it didn't always seem necessary to write it.


So what they're saying is, they've found the earliest documented case of taking the Lord's name in vain.
 
Pretty much. Possibly in general, not just for YHWH, since the first curses from Mesopotamia I know of are also around this time. (Though a proper historian would probably know a few more.)

Edit: actually, scratch that, Egypt had some earlier curse inscriptions. Not in tablet form, afaik, though.
 
Last edited:
That looks interesting but it's out of context.

My skills on ancient written language are zero, it seems that whomever has the relic is on par with me.

Making up guesses on it folded up doesn't make sense. Archeology unrolls a heap of Roman lead curse things from temple sites do it is possible to get a better view before going on.

More recent computer analysis is allowing virtual unrolling - I recall seeing that used recently for the Herculaneum Papyri

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herculaneum_papyri#Virtual_unrolling

ETA: though lead - with its high atomic number and attenuation of X-rays might be difficult for that
 
The thing about the lack of a hole reminds me: that's actually another reason to doubt that this even is a curse scrap. The tradition with curse tablets is to fix them to something/somewhere significant to you and/or your cursee. So, once they've been rolled up (or folded in this case), they do get a hole through them, made by the nail that fixes them to the target location. That's why the Latin word for them is "defixio", meaning a thing that's been fixed in place.

This thing not only didn't have that done but was even so small that it probably couldn't have been done, because a nail through it could have entirely split it apart. Your first thought might be that this can simply be from a different tradition of curse scraps in which nailing them onto something else is not what you do with them. But then what do you do with them in this tradition? Just leave it behind at a stone altar on a hill? Then why weren't there a lot more little lead chips like this at that altar?
 

Back
Top Bottom