9:02am Wow! Finally able to start a post in the morning! One of the many benefits of being unemployed!
This morning I realized that I didn’t post the abstract for this lecture, which I submitted back in March. I’m actually glad I didn’t, because after composing the lecture, it turned out not to match it. I’m not yet sure if we’re going to have an opportunity to revise it prior to the conference literature getting printed, but I’ll compose a new one for clarification if necessary.
Yesterday I printed all 100 slides & script on 50 sheets (front & back) for a 3-ring binder. Still need to get a hole-punch, but I’m planning to rehearse it after I post this blog. Having to flip physical pages in addition to clicking the computer will slow me down a little, but this has the advantage of giving the audience time to absorb the content of each slide that I’m not actually reading aloud.
This morning I received an opt-out notification regarding the professional recording that’s made at ETS each year by WordMP3:
As in the past, ETS has partnered with WordMp3, to record sessions from the 2014 ETS Annual Meeting. This partnership will allow access to scholarship by students, faculty, and pastors. We would like to invite you to include your ETS presentation in the 2014 recording library. … By including your presentation in the recording library, you grant WordMp3 a non-exclusive right to publish your presentation in the ETS recording library. You will retain the copyright of your content and this non-exclusive right does not preclude publication in other venues. The right only grants WordMp3 the ownership of the audio copy created, not your work. The benefits of this partnership have been warmly received and we look forward to this year’s library of recordings.
It’ll be interesting to hear how that turns out compared to my own recording. In any case, it’s nice to know it’ll be available indefinitely in case my YouTube account ever gets deleted.
I now have time to elaborate upon pithom’s comments from a couple weeks ago.
“Not all scholars think the scarab and winged sun are “religiously neutral”.”
True. Off the top of my head, I don’t know their names (might mention them in an upcoming blog after re-reading my Lv1 book), but I constructed my presentation to contrast my interpretation with that of Lipschits, & both of our interpretations contrasted with the mainstream/consensus. It’s not my intention to explain every single scholar’s interpretation of every single facet of this phenomenon due to my allotted 30-minute presentation window. It’s funny that pithom found a problem with the simplest, least controversial slide in the show! He’ll need a hockey/catcher’s mask to prevent a concussion from all the face-palm’s he’ll be doing when he hears the whole lecture! And boxing gloves might alleviate hand-injuries from hitting the face mask!
Here’s a list of the scholars quoted in my slideshow (in the order of their appearance):
- David Ussishkin: The Renewed Archaeological Excavations at Lachish (1973-1994); 2004, p. 2142
- Andrew Vaughn: Theology, History, & Archaeology in the Chronicler’s Account of Hezekiah; 1999, pp. 14 & 141
- Anson Rainey: Wine from the Royal Vineyards; BASOR 245 (Winter 1982), p. 58
- Jeffrey Hudon: NEASB vol. 55 (2010), p. 30
- Lipschits et al.: Reconsidering the Chronology of the lmlk Stamp Impressions; Tel Aviv 37 (2010) #1, p. 7
- Lipschits et al.: ibid., p. 10
- Israel Finkelstein: Comments on the Date of Late-Monarchic Judahite Seal Impressions; Tel Aviv 39 (2012) #2, p. 76
- David Ussishkin: The Dating of the lmlk Storage Jars and Its Implications; Tel Aviv 38 (2011) #2, p. 222.
- David Ussishkin: ibid. 2004, p. 2145
- Andrew Vaughn: ibid., p. 152
- Lipschits et al.: Judahite Stamped and Incised Jar Handles; Tel Aviv 38 (2011) #1, p. 15
- J. Baker Greene: Some Remarks on the Interpretation of the Impressions on the Vase Handles Found at the Foot of the Temple Wall; PEQ vol. 13 (October 1881), p. 308
- Yigael Yadin: The Fourfold Division of Judah; BASOR 163 (October 1961), pp. 7-8David Ussishkin: ibid. 2004, p. 2145
- Andrew Vaughn: ibid., p. 116
- Yohanan Aharoni: The Land of the Bible: A Historical Geography (Second, revised edition 1979), Map 32
- Yigael Yadin: ibid., p. 10
- Olga Tufnell: Reviews & Notices: Tell En-Nasbeh; PEQ vol. 80 (July-October 1948), p. 148-9
- David Ussishkin: ibid. 2004, p. 110
- Jane Cahill: Rosette Stamp Seal Impressions from Ancient Judah; IEJ 45 #4 (1995), p. 247-8
- Jane Cahill: ibid., pp. 247-50
- Lipschits et al.: Judahite Stamped and Incised Jar Handles; Tel Aviv 38 (2011) #1, p. 29
- Jane Cahill: ibid., pp. 251-2
- Alexander Fantalkin & Israel Finkelstein: Khirbet Qeiyafa: An Unsensational Archaeological and Historical Interpretation; Tel Aviv 39 (2012) #1, p. 56-7
I’m also quoting Clermont-Ganneau & a couple non-LMLK scholars, but want to keep that content private until the lecture. Maybe in an upcoming post, I’ll list quotations from my book, &/or the Bible.
Posting that bullet list was useful because I spotted a typo in my 2nd Yadin citation (was “pp. 10”, is “p. 10”)! Speaking of typos, I’m a decent English grammarian, but in scrutinizing 1 of my slides, I’m perplexed by this:
“Again, a significant quantity were illegible.”
I’m fairly confident it should be “was” since “quantity” is singular, but it sounds wrong to my ears. Why is that? When I read quantity, my brain thinks it’s a plural amount, & says, “Gimme a plural verb!” For now, I’m planning to leave it as “were” since it’ll go by so fast during the presentation that no one will notice, but astute listeners to the recording might catch it.
Pithom also said, “I hope it’s not at all like Evolution Science.” Here’s my response:
Maybe tomorrow, the good Lord’ll take you away…