Caroline H said:
That's interesting, so is it not believed to belong to Jezebel?
Oh, what I meant was that the seal might be an Egyptian seal (shooting from the hip here - judging from how it looks) judging from the
Egyptian Hieroglyphs on it which may have been reused (by
adding the letters for the name YZBL soon afterward) by Semitic contemporaries in Phoenicia. The date of the seal as I understand it is
correct for the period of Jezebel, so it may indeed be her. I'm just saying that it looks like the seal already had something on it and then had the name added later when it was used by Jezebel (although whether or not this is the
biblical Jezebel is disputed - see my quote below though).
Now I haven't read that much on the seal and it is possible that the entire seal (letters and all) was designed at the same time. I could be wrong about the "Egyptian-seal" thing, and Phoenicia may have
intentionally emulated the Egyptian style with heiroglyphs on the seal (which is within reason - Egypt is known to have cultural influences in Canaan: Byblos being the biggest example). I'll have to look into it more when I get the chance.
If it helps, here is what I wrote concerning it in the other Trivia thread in this section:
Ittobaal I is the same person as Ethbaal in 1 Kings 16:31, and the significance of this Biblical figure is that he was the father of Jezebel. Read here if you are interested further.
So now you can tell others that we have independent proof that Jezebel's father who is mentioned in the Bible existed (from Josephus, who quoted Menander of Ephesus)! Also, as an aside, a few years ago a seal with the Hebrew/Phoenician letters YZBL in were found on it, leading many to believe that it is the seal of Jezebel, therefore confirming her existence as well. Although some scholars say it could have been another Jezebel. Yet the counter point is made that not many "common" people would have been prominent enough to have their own seal, therefore it is likely that it was the Jezebel daughter of Ethbaal.
So for purposes of your summary I would take a cautiously
optimistic stance (as opposed to the more skeptical scholarly "cautiously pessimistic" view). ;)
Caroline H said:
Our article summaries only need to be half a page double spaced, so there's not much to it. It basically says the same thing that that website I linked says...I doubt you'd want to use it
Well, if you ever wanted to expand it or free style another article of sufficient length (1 page is enough) my offer stands for hosting guest articles.
God Bless,
~Josh