Complete
Linguistic features:
Mixed shapes of letters; mixture of Aramaic and Hebrew in Samaritan script; association of the dating formula and creed
Formulae:
ܐܢܐ or "I" followed by a name; ܒܫܢܬ In the year; ܒܫܢܬ ܕܐܠܟܣܢܕܪܘܣ ܒܪ ܦܝܠܝܦܘܣ ܡܩܝܕܘܢܝܐ – The era of Alexander
Quotations from literary texts:
Description
date: 772/773 CE (the year 1084 of the Seleucid era). description: On a displaced, loose slab. When record, it lay to the northwest of the church. The find-spot has in its immediate vicinity several buildings, and the original location of the lintel has not been yet identified Probably from an ordinary house. H. 1.72 m; W. 0.73 m. Dimensions of the inscribed field: H. 0.66 m, the last lower lines’ H. 16 cm. Letter height 4–13 cm. First recorded by the PAES and first published by Enno Littmann in 1934 with a drawing. ed. PAES IVB 51. Cf. PAES IIB, p. 287; Tchalenko 1953, vol. 1, p. 153; Tchalneko 1958, vol. 3, p. 97, 121; TIB 15, p. 1361. ܒܫܢܬ ܐܠܦ -ܘܬܡܢܐܝܢ ܘܐ[ܪ] ܒܥ] ܒܡܢܝܢܐ] .4 ܕܐܠܟܣܢܕܪܘܣ ܒܪ ܦܝܠܝܦܘܣ ܡܩܝܕܘܢܝܐ ܐܢܐ ܕܢܝܐܝܠ .8 ܐܢܐ ‘In the year one thousand and eight and [four] according to the era of Alexandros the son of Philippos the Macedonian. – I, Daniel, am I.’ (tr. E. Littmann) commentary: Littmann described the lettering as mainly majuscule, also containing several minuscule letters, which he considered as a peculiarity. Littmann begins his commentary with examples for the identification of the ‘era of the Greeks’ with the Seleucid era. For inscriptions using this formula, see Pognon 1907, no. 52 and p. 131. According to Littmann (which may need a revision), the Jacobites preferred the term ‘era of Alexander’ to the ‘era of the Greeks’. The latter was used by the Meklites. If so, this could point to the Jacobite (non-Chacedonian) character of the village. An issue not surprising in this area. The final mention of Daniel with the pronoun "I" is really interesting, though common in Syrian inscriptions. Especially, the repetition of the pronoun is rather unexpected. Perhaps another name followed? Littmann suggests that this could be an architect or, more plausibly, owner of an ordinary house where the lintel was originally positioned over a doorway. Littmann also argued that the inscription was a spectacular case of the expression of one's identity through an inscription. He claimed that Daniel was a Jacobite, but this is pushed much too far. In this case, the dating formula may have no such peculiar meaning. Klaus Peter Todt and Bernard Andreas Vest in TIB 15 suggests that the inscription points to the existence of a monastery at this site.
Dimensions: surface: w 0.73 x h 1.72 meter
Condition: On a displaced, loose slab. When record, it lay to the northwest of the church. The find-spot has in its immediate vicinity several buildings, and the original location of the lintel has not been yet identified Probably from an ordinary house.
Text: Letter height 4–13 cm. Dimensions of the inscribed field: H. 0.66 m, the last lower lines’ H. 16 cm.
Date: 772 CE - 773 CE
(the year 1084 of the Seleucid era)
Findspot: Unknown
Original location: Syria Kafr Lāb (Kefr Lāb; Kheurbet Kafer Lâb; Kaproliabōn kōmē) 36.366667, 36.966667 house unknown
Current repository: Unknown
Text type: building inscription
Summary:
Inscription from a house in Kafr Lāb (Kefr Lāb; Kheurbet Kafer Lâb; Kaproliabōn kōmē). 772 CE - 773 CE.
Changes history: 2022-08-07 Pawel Nowakowski Creation; 2023-11-13 Martyna Swierk Last modification; 2023-10-26 Martyna Swierk Preparation of EpiDoc file
Publication details: University of Warsaw; Warsaw;
Available under licence CC-BY 4.0
; @2021Translation
‘In the year one thousand and eight and [four] according to the era of Alexandros the son of Philippos the Macedonian. – I, Daniel, am I.’ (tr. E. Littmann)
Commentary
Littmann described the lettering as mainly majuscule, also containing several minuscule letters, which he considered as a peculiarity.
Littmann begins his commentary with examples for the identification of the ‘era of the Greeks’ with the Seleucid era. For inscriptions using this formula, see Pognon 1907, no. 52 and p. 131. According to Littmann (which may need a revision), the Jacobites preferred the term ‘era of Alexander’ to the ‘era of the Greeks’. The latter was used by the Meklites. If so, this could point to the Jacobite (non-Chacedonian) character of the village. An issue not surprising in this area.
The final mention of Daniel with the pronoun "I" is really interesting, though common in Syrian inscriptions. Especially, the repetition of the pronoun is rather unexpected. Perhaps another name followed? Littmann suggests that this could be an architect or, more plausibly, owner of an ordinary house where the lintel was originally positioned over a doorway.
Littmann also argued that the inscription was a spectacular case of the expression of one's identity through an inscription. He claimed that Daniel was a Jacobite, but this is pushed much too far. In this case, the dating formula may have no such peculiar meaning.
Klaus Peter Todt and Bernard Andreas Vest in TIB 15 suggests that the inscription points to the existence of a monastery at this site.
Bibliography (edition)
- PAES IVB E., Littmann,1934, Publications of the Princeton University Archaeological Expeditions to Syria in 1905–5 and 1909. Division IV: Semitic Inscriptions. Section B: Syriac Inscriptions, 51.
Bibliography
- PAES IIB H. C., Butler, 1920, Publications of the Princeton University Archaeological Expeditions to Syria in 1905–5 and 1909. Division II: Architecture, Section B: Northern Syria, Leiden, 287. G., Tchalenko, 1953, Villages antiques de la Syrie du Nord: Le Massif du Bélus a l'époque romaine 1, Paris, 153. G., Tchalenko, 1958, Villages antiques de la Syrie du Nord: Le Massif du Bélus a l'époque romaine 3, Paris, 97, 121. TIB 15 K.-P., Todt, B. A., Vest, 2014, Tabula Imperii Byzantini, Vienna, 1361.