1540:
painting to a king who died 1000 years ago and an editor would put that painting in the info box of the article because it's related/attributed with some small description and no one would really complain about the artwork because there's a description, which is no different than what I'm doing with
Promptuarii Iconum Insigniorum Omri. I mean, obviously a 16c drawing from a legit published book of a 8c BC figure isn't really accurate because it's a piece of tribute artwork long after the death of of the actual figure. Basically, this is common sense per
851:, an impressive attempt to contextualize the biblical story by interweaving it with what we know of ancient Near Eastern history. Even when Bright wrote, a more skeptical view prevailed in German scholarship, at least with regard to the early books of the Bible. But the scene has changed drastically in the last quarter century. In a book originally published in 1992, Philip Davies claimed that "biblical scholars actually know - and write - that most of the 'biblical period' consists not only of unhistorical persons and events, but even of tracts of time
713:
that the united kingdom of David and
Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom." The new theories envision this modest chiefdom as based in a Jerusalem that was essentially a cow town, not the glorious capital of an empire. Although, as Herzog notes, some of these findings have been accepted by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists for years and even decades, they are just now making a dent in the awareness of the Israeli public -- a very painful dent.
398:
377:
198:
139:
77:
53:
293:
272:
503:
482:
1635:(whatever that meansâStAnselm chose the word and put it in quotation marks, but he's not quoting me). It's idealized and stereotyped; but it is a contemporary representation of the man as he wished to be seen, and therefore historical. The RouillĂ© woodcut of Omri, by contrast, is wholly imaginary (as a representation of Omri, that is), and therefore purely decorative, not encyclopedic.
744:
archaeology of Israel at
Harvard and director of the Harvard Semitic Museum, says "Ninety-five percent of the specialists in the field would disagree with him" and dismisses Phyllis Tribble, a professor of biblical studies who enthusiastically reviewed "The Bible Unearthed" in the New York Times Book Review, as someone who "doesn't know much about the Old Testament and archaeology."
408:
303:
22:
589:
few people at United
Nations after 12am & then Harry S. Truman signed papers before Congress opened at about 8AM in the morning on a day in 1948 AD/CE. He may have had the papers all night and just made them official with the Presidents signature so that the United States could not debate his actions in recognizing something had had never existed before that morning.
847:
the middle of the 20th century, English language scholarship on ancient Israel was dominated by the
Albright school, which placed great confidence in the archeology as a a means by which to affirm the essential reliability of the biblical text, beginning in the time of Abraham. This approach found its classic expression in John Bright's
188:
167:
87:
1500:
scientific consensus about David appears to be that, if he ever existed, virtually no historically reliable information about him survives, so practically everything we "know" about David is likely to be just as fictional as
Cordier's statue. (Of course, the statue probably is a very accurate representation of
747:
And while Baruch
Halpern, a historian who was a co-director of the Megiddo excavation with Finkelstein, describes the book as "excellent" and "challenging," he remains unconvinced by Finkelstein's redating of the Solomonic ruins because the theory relies overmuch on pottery seriation, a technique for
743:
Tgeorgescu, did you happen to read that whole article from which you pulled your quote? Notice that it says, "Some of his colleagues find this theory unacceptable. Dever declares that
Finkelstein is "the only archaeologist in the world" who advocates the redating. Lawrence Stager, a professor of the
1630:
condescends to lecture me on "how art works". He would have a point if
Knowledge were an art gallery, rather than an encyclopedia, but it's not. In an article on artistic representations of the kings of Israel through the ages, the Rouillé woodcut would be appropriate. In an historical article on
943:
with the suggestions made about ancient Israel in recent decades by scholars such as those whom I have cited. What I am saying is that it is bad scholarship, and bad pedagogy, simply to ignore an important body of recent work, offering adult students a literalist-leaning account that is by scholarly
924:
In fact, until recently I could find no 'maximalist' history of Israel since
Wellhausen. ... In fact, though, 'maximalist' has been widely defined as someone who accepts the the biblical text unless it can be proven wrong. If so, very few are willing to operate like this, not even John Bright (1980)
920:
The fact is that we are all minimalists -- at least, when it comes to the patriarchal period and the settlement. When I began my PhD studies more than three decades ago in the USA, the 'substantial historicity' of the patriarchs was widely accepted as was the unified conquest of the land. These days
846:
The last quarter of the 20th century has also seen the development of a crisis in the historiography of ancient Israel, which shows no sign of abating in the early years of the 21st. This crisis takes the form of a progressive loss of confidence in the historical value of the biblical narratives. In
596:
is in a different language. How would the tetra-gram be on it? It's not even in a Hebrew variation script? Some author claimed it had "four Greek letters" on it somewhere. But I looked at the stone. No one even bothers to circle the claim??? = "Look foreign language. God existed back then too." Yeah
1383:
if you ask? Because cameras did not exist and paintings, drawings, statues we the closest thing to being remembered as a monarch ruler or for those who had short reigns where archeological investigations or historical references couldn't indicate any monuments of remembrance of some sort, or simply
1146:
It's not at all clear to me that the king is the primary topic. More likely that people searching for Omri are searching for the other people ... who in aggregate receive far more search hits. Seems as though only a handful of people are interested in checking out the king -- even though his name
947:
The Hebrew Bible is simply not a reliable source for the history of ancient Israel, and the authors of the textbooks surveyed seem largely unaware of this fact. Writers of textbooks for undergraduates need to ask themselves: If we are content to provide students with mythical, legendary, uncritical
885:
He cites the factânow accepted by most archaeologistsâthat many of the cities Joshua is supposed to have sacked in the late 13th century b.c. had ceased to exist by that time. Hazor was destroyed in the middle of that century, and Ai was abandoned before 2000 b.c. Even Jericho, where Joshua is said
712:
Herzog laid out many of the theories Finkelstein and Silberman present in their book: "the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact
588:
I understand people are trying to justify the existence of Israel, since it was cut from Syria by Britain in 1922 AD/CE. Then in 8 hours in 1948 the US invented a Jewish Religious State as a Nation or Country, by a cutting lines out of a drawing of "Palestine" in an unannounced-UN-meeting by only a
1655:
Like I said before, Not all Monarchs are going to have a image made during their time. Many royalty articles are going to have art as a representation of them in the info box but the content of the article might say ruled from something BC/AD or ruled long before a portrait was attributed to them.
786:
Let me reinforce this claim in respect to my own work. The mainstream view of critical biblical scholarship accepts that Genesis-Joshua (perhaps Judges) is substantially devoid of reliable history and that it was in the Persian period that the bulk of Hebrew Bible literature was either composed or
751:
While Finkelstein may be main stream, his views are certainly not the consensus nor are they the end all that this article has made them out to be if even his own co-director is unconvinced by his theory and techniques. It seems that this article is written more from watching NOVA and reading pop
681:
This page is in need of considerable reconstruction. It is not the case that "conservative biblical" archaeologists are the only individuals who disagree with Finkestein's low-chronology, namely because it is completely contradicted by strata findings, pottery assemblages, our understanding of the
575:
On the Moabite inscription transliteration, the transliteration of the inscription is given: âmry mlk yĆĄrâl But assuming that Moabite is essentially a dialect of Hebrew, shouldn't the s be a Ć, since that is how it was likely pronounced in Ancient Hebrew (it's well-established that the letter shin
866:
For Kitchen, the biblical story (at least from the time of Abraham) is true until proven otherwise. Needless to say, he is not troubled by postmodernism or deconstruction, which he dubs "the crown of all follies." His critiques of Lemche, Thompson and others are not without substance, but his own
584:
There is not proof that Omri and Israel have any connection. Native American Tribe Cherokee was in North Carolina. = Therefore North Carolina is all Cherokee and the entire state represents the boundaries of the Cherokee tribe??? Or the Reverse, any tribe that existed before the Founding of North
1601:
misses my point regarding a written description. I'm not talking about one based on a surviving, contemporary description of Omri, but a completely imaginary one, like the Rouillé woodcut. Pictures of monarchs are appropriate in their infoboxes if they're thought to represent life portraits, as
1539:
Even if there were some basic description of him, there isn't any physical monument or art work from his era to correlate with a written description. And I don't understand why this article only when so many other monarch info box articles do the same thing. I mean, a famous painter attributes a
1521:
Suppose Chaucer or Shakespeare had written a description of Omri. That description would be notable with respect to Chaucer or Shakespeareâit might be art of the highest orderâbut it would tell us nothing about the historical Omri, and it would be wrong to present it in the article on Omri as a
1431:
This isn't about photographs versus paintings: if Omri had sat for a portrait, and it survived, I'd be all in favor of putting it in the article, whatever the medium. I just don't think it adds anything to our knowledge of the man, to have a picture of some 16th C. French artist's model in the
662:
It is misleading to present this theory as the most widely accepted as Israel Finkelstein and his camp represent a very small handful of people that put forth and accept this theory. The large majority reject his extremely low dating outright, along with his theories about the prominence of the
1499:
There are a fair number of ahistorical decorations on the "David" page, fanciful representations of King David from various centuries, and if that statue weren't in the infobox (which is supposed to contain facts), there'd be little risk of anybody's thinking that it was a portrait. Also, the
897:
In this search, the Old Testament has quite literally been his guide. This approach was once common for archaeologists in Israel, but in recent years it has come to define an extreme position in a debate over whether the Bible should be read as historical fact or metaphorical
798:
In other words, says archaeologist David Ilan, "Yossi has an agendaâpartly ideological, but also personal. He's a very smart and ambitious guy. Finkelstein's the big gorilla, and the young bucks think he's got a monopoly over biblical archaeology. So they want to dethrone
886:
to have brought the walls tumbling down by circling the city seven times with blaring trumpets, was destroyed in 1500 b.c. Now controlled by the Palestinian Authority, the Jericho site consists of crumbling pits and trenches that testify to a century of fruitless digging.
1614:(even if they're idealized or stereotyped). Otherwise, they're purely decorative, and not encyclopedic. Why Omri? Because I happened to be editing the page, and noticed that the picture presented as his likeness was a fiction. As I said, I'm not on a crusade.
944:
standards probably twenty years out of date. At the very least, textbook authors should include more critical scholars' works and some minimalist works in their recommended readings, so that students would have a chance to confront such arguments on their own.
752:
news articles (Laura Miller is the author of "The Magician's Book: A Skeptic's Adventures in Narnia") than sound archeological evidence and scientific enquiry. I second the motion to reword this portion of the article or present a counter point.
1504:âjust not King David.) Omri, on the other hand, is somewhat better-documented, and is unlikely to be purely or mostly legendary, so the article should make a greater effort to stick to the facts, as far as we can discover them.
1566:
I have restored the picture. It has been a long-standing practice here to have pictures of biblical/historical characters, and they do not have to be at all "realistic" (whatever that means). That's not how art works.
835:
Many archaeologists question whether the obsessive scramble to prove the biblical narrative is a healthy enterprise. One of them, Tel Aviv University's Raphael Greenberg, flatly states, "It's bad for archaeology.
909:
So although much of the archaeological evidence demonstrates that the Hebrew Bible cannot in most cases be taken literally, many of the people, places and things probably did exist at some time or another.
948:
histories of ancient Israel, how can we have any legitimate grounds for complaint or criticism when others are willing to provide mythologized, fictionalized histories of other peoples and places?
1410:
of Rouillé's drawings (though I rather doubt they're as notable as Leonardo's paintings). The Rouillé drawing (woodcut, I think) of Omri would be appropriate in an article on Rouillé, or on his
1347:
The picture in the infobox was not of Omri, so I have deleted it. If it's of anybody, it's of some sixteenth-century C. E. European. I could draw an equally authentic picture of Omri.
1739:
1694:
597:
people had god's. Show me the name of "nine" in Hebrew. Even the Hebrew text Moses wrote says "I am that I am" and not YHVH, etc. The 4 letters aren't common until the Masoretic Text.
454:
663:
Omrides that is spawned from said dates. When creating articles like this it must be important not to dishonestly put forth views only held by minorities as the most favored.
1754:
543:
870:
More sophisticated, but ultimately equally apologetic, is another volume published in 2003, Iain Provan, V. Philips Long, and Tremper Longman III, entitled provocatively,
553:
1759:
1172:, but that doesn't stop the latter being the primary topic. That's because when someone has two names, we suppose that people usually search by using both those names.
1734:
464:
1021:
1373:. You might as well remove pictures of paintings attributed to David in his article because clearly it's not him or a photo of him, or we could go and break the
1689:
1744:
519:
1749:
1219:. Every modern Omri is named after this Omri, either directly or at one or two removes. Anyone simply searching Omri is going to be looking for this Omri.
824:
The irony is that biblical archaeology's enfant terrible has become the establishment, a Goliath fending off upstart assaults on his chronological order.
148:
63:
1729:
1147:
is closest to the search term. Interest in the basketball player, for example is far greater, and people can easily be searching by his first name.--
430:
349:
359:
1714:
1704:
510:
487:
244:
105:
580:
Religious Text without Matching History, Unfounded claims that all East of the Mediterranean must be Israel, & all kings must be Israel Kings
1090:
Yes, I think so. The alternatives are mostly people, none of whom are known simply as "Omri". The king of Israel is clearly the primary topic.
254:
1699:
421:
382:
109:
1005:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
1719:
1684:
1638:
At any rate, I've put all the time into this that I care to, so as far as I'm concerned the picture will stay. So much for consensus!
1203:
592:
It bothers me that people are running around rampant on Knowledge declaring everything to be Jewish Hebrew or Yahweh. The Meshna Stele
973:
698:
325:
113:
1724:
645:
104:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
648:, based on what I have read. I'm not a historian so I hesitate to add it here before someone more knowledgeable has checked it. --
220:
1709:
100:
58:
1571:, if you are a notable artist and you release the picture with an appropriate license, we could you use your picture instead.
1577:
1379:
1178:
1096:
1053:
813:
Still, Finkelstein's theories strike an intellectually appealing middle ground between biblical literalists and minimalists.
316:
277:
33:
1631:
Omri, King of Israel, it's not. The question is not of realism but of historicity. The statue of Amenhotep III isn't
775:
Apart from the well-funded (and fundamentalist) âbiblical archaeologists,â we are in fact nearly all âminimalistsâ now.
1079:
211:
172:
576:
had both the sh/Ć sound in Hebrew)? I don't know enough about Moabite individually to know if it lacks the Ć sound.
324:-related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
518:
related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
931:
996:
602:
616:. As you probably know, Knowledge editors don't establish facts, facts are established by scholars who live by
1310:
1207:
1135:
977:
805:
694:
1456:
is there, and know one really knows what David's physical appearance is, shouldn't that be removed then? â
787:
achieved its canonical shape. I thus find attempts to push me out onto the margin of scholarship laughable.
1075:
1661:
1611:
1549:
1461:
1393:
1333:
1123:
1071:
1006:
39:
770:
Agreed, Finkelstein is mainstream, but there is no consensus on such matters. See the following quotes:
690:
939:
I am certainly not insisting that authors of Western Civilization texts for university classes should
1385:
1281:
1152:
969:
758:
733:
686:
629:
598:
725:
671:
broadly agrees. The ones who disagree are laregly conservative biblical (i.e. text-based) scholars.
21:
1607:
1031:
1656:
This is common practice on Knowledge in general for Monarchs, Saints etc. This is common sense. â
954:
429:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
219:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1647:
1581:
1531:
1441:
1356:
1306:
1182:
1131:
1100:
1057:
621:
617:
515:
1657:
1596:
1545:
1457:
1389:
1250:
92:
1269:
1277:
1148:
966:"...Zionism was created mainly by non-religious (sometimes anti-religious) people..."?!?
729:
649:
625:
397:
376:
1043:
Reverting undiscussed move - and it would seem that the article is the primary topic for
1541:
1370:
1302:
1224:
1026:
426:
413:
308:
867:
views are too blatantly apologetic to warrant serious consideration as historiography.
1678:
1639:
1625:
1603:
1572:
1568:
1523:
1449:
1433:
1366:
1348:
1298:
1237:
1173:
1165:
1127:
1115:
1091:
1048:
753:
668:
613:
1414:, but it doesn't belong in an historical article on Omri, any more than a fanciful
1323:
203:
879:
John J. Collins, The Bible after Babel. Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age.
860:
John J. Collins, The Bible after Babel. Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age.
1241:
76:
52:
1332:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
403:
298:
193:
82:
925:
whose history is not a maximalist one according to the definition just given.
1220:
672:
502:
481:
138:
667:
Finkelstein's views are representative of mainstream archaeologists - even
292:
271:
891:
Jennifer Wallace, âShifting Ground in the Holy Landâ Smithsonian Magazine
1482:
Yes, if somebody feels like doing it. I'm not on a crusade or anything.
321:
1377:
because it's clearly not him. Why do some article's use drawings from
1273:
1236:, per historical significance. I had already moved the page back per
914:
Jonathan Michael Golden, Ancient Canaan and Israel: new perspectives
112:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
1453:
1169:
216:
1432:
article, no matter what name the artist chose to attach to it.
1406:
Who said anything about breaking stuff? I'm not advocating the
1199:
1119:
1067:
1044:
1452:
The Statue of King David by Nicolas Cordier in the infoxbox of
1388:'s drawings are as notable as Leonardo da Vinci's paintings. â
792:
Philip Davies, Minimalism, "Ancient Israel," and Anti-Semitism
187:
166:
15:
612:
We don't debate here if Israel deserves to be a country, see
593:
137:
1522:
description of that man. How is a picture any different?
748:
dating sites using ceramic remains, which he distrusts."
1665:
1650:
1585:
1553:
1534:
1465:
1444:
1397:
1359:
1314:
1285:
1255:
1228:
1211:
1186:
1156:
1139:
1104:
1083:
1061:
1036:
981:
762:
737:
675:
652:
633:
606:
921:
it is quite difficult to find anyone who takes this view.
995:
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
932:
Some Recent Issues in the Study of the History of Israel
215:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
1384:
an artist can express him/herself anyway they want to.
1198:. The ancient king of Israel is the primary topic for
1322:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
1374:
514:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
425:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
320:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1009:. No further edits should be made to this section.
1336:. No further edits should be made to this section.
1016:Summarily reverted and moved back by another user.
1202:as a single name, and ought to be at this title.
585:Carolina, is still a citizen of North Carolina.
1740:High-importance Jewish history-related articles
1695:Unknown-importance biography (royalty) articles
1272:) are a fraction of those who search for Omri (
937:
918:
907:
895:
883:
864:
844:
833:
822:
811:
796:
784:
773:
710:
1070:(which is a disambig with 18 alternatives) to
780:Philip Davies, Beyond Labels: What Comes Next?
8:
1755:High-importance Ancient Near East articles
476:
371:
266:
161:
47:
1268:that the people who search for the king (
955:"Ancient Israel in Western Civ Textbooks"
646:map of the area occupied by Omri and Ahab
624:. We simply render what the sources say.
1760:Ancient Near East articles by assessment
1735:C-Class Jewish history-related articles
1375:Statue of King David by Nicolas Cordier
806:David and Solomon, Kings of Controversy
528:Knowledge:WikiProject Ancient Near East
478:
373:
268:
163:
49:
19:
718:Laura Miller, King David was a nebbish
531:Template:WikiProject Ancient Near East
7:
1690:C-Class biography (royalty) articles
1274:3 times as many -- up to 195 per day
1014:The result of the move request was:
508:This article is within the scope of
439:Knowledge:WikiProject Jewish history
419:This article is within the scope of
314:This article is within the scope of
209:This article is within the scope of
98:This article is within the scope of
1745:WikiProject Jewish history articles
1369:, obviously not a photo of him per
1066:If so, then also move the existing
853:that do no belong in history at all
594:http://en.wikipedia.org/Mesha_Stele
442:Template:WikiProject Jewish history
38:It is of interest to the following
1750:C-Class Ancient Near East articles
14:
1730:High-importance Judaism articles
1240:before finding this discussion.
501:
480:
406:
396:
375:
301:
291:
270:
196:
186:
165:
149:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility
85:
75:
51:
20:
1418:of Omri by a Sixteenth-Century
548:This article has been rated as
459:This article has been rated as
445:Jewish history-related articles
354:This article has been rated as
249:This article has been rated as
122:Knowledge:WikiProject Biography
1715:High-importance Bible articles
1705:WikiProject Biography articles
1380:Promptuarii Iconum Insigniorum
125:Template:WikiProject Biography
1:
1315:23:12, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1286:18:33, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1256:18:23, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1229:17:19, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1212:14:25, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1187:09:07, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1157:07:33, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1140:07:19, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1105:07:02, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1084:06:14, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1062:01:29, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
1037:05:14, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
738:21:30, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
522:and see a list of open tasks.
511:WikiProject Ancient Near East
433:and see a list of open tasks.
334:Knowledge:WikiProject Judaism
328:and see a list of open tasks.
223:and see a list of open tasks.
146:This article is supported by
1114:on merits and procedure per
872:A Biblical History of Israel
658:More prominent Omride theory
337:Template:WikiProject Judaism
110:contribute to the discussion
1700:Royalty work group articles
962:Neutrality, relevance, etc.
229:Knowledge:WikiProject Bible
1776:
1720:WikiProject Bible articles
1685:C-Class biography articles
982:17:37, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
763:08:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
707:Finkelstein is mainstream:
571:Incorrect transliteration?
554:project's importance scale
534:Ancient Near East articles
465:project's importance scale
422:WikiProject Jewish history
360:project's importance scale
255:project's importance scale
232:Template:WikiProject Bible
547:
496:
458:
391:
353:
286:
248:
181:
145:
70:
46:
1725:C-Class Judaism articles
1666:18:54, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
1651:17:08, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
1586:03:15, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
1554:02:39, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
1535:01:59, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
1466:01:05, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
1445:00:51, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
1398:00:10, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
1360:23:21, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
1329:Please do not modify it.
1002:Please do not modify it.
726:King David was a nebbish
676:12:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
653:21:19, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
634:23:39, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
607:22:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
1710:C-Class Bible articles
1018:Okay, that works too.
959:
936:
917:
906:
894:
882:
863:
843:
840:Robert Draper, op.cit.
832:
829:Robert Draper, op.cit.
821:
818:Robert Draper, op.cit.
810:
795:
783:
724:Source: Laura Miller "
721:
142:
28:This article is rated
1124:Omri (disambiguation)
1072:Omri (disambiguation)
682:regions history, etc.
141:
101:WikiProject Biography
1295:Someone close please
1168:gets more hits than
64:Royalty and Nobility
317:WikiProject Judaism
1343:Picture in Infobox
930:Lester L. Grabbe,
143:
128:biography articles
34:content assessment
1642:J. D. Crutchfield
1569:J. D. Crutchfield
1526:J. D. Crutchfield
1436:J. D. Crutchfield
1386:Guillaume Rouillé
1351:J. D. Crutchfield
1076:Anthony Appleyard
1025:
1022:non-admin closure
972:comment added by
849:History of Israel
703:
689:comment added by
620:and published in
618:publish or perish
568:
567:
564:
563:
560:
559:
525:Ancient Near East
516:Ancient Near East
488:Ancient Near East
475:
474:
471:
470:
370:
369:
366:
365:
265:
264:
261:
260:
212:WikiProject Bible
160:
159:
156:
155:
1767:
1629:
1600:
1331:
1248:
1029:
1019:
1004:
984:
957:
934:
915:
904:
892:
880:
861:
841:
830:
819:
808:
793:
781:
766:
719:
702:
683:
622:reliable sources
536:
535:
532:
529:
526:
505:
498:
497:
492:
484:
477:
447:
446:
443:
440:
437:
416:
411:
410:
409:
400:
393:
392:
387:
379:
372:
342:
341:
340:Judaism articles
338:
335:
332:
311:
306:
305:
304:
295:
288:
287:
282:
274:
267:
237:
236:
233:
230:
227:
206:
201:
200:
199:
190:
183:
182:
177:
169:
162:
130:
129:
126:
123:
120:
106:join the project
95:
93:Biography portal
90:
89:
88:
79:
72:
71:
66:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
1775:
1774:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1766:
1765:
1764:
1675:
1674:
1623:
1594:
1345:
1340:
1327:
1242:
1027:
1000:
990:
967:
964:
958:
952:
935:
929:
916:
913:
905:
902:
893:
890:
881:
878:
862:
859:
842:
839:
831:
828:
820:
817:
809:
804:Robert Draper,
803:
794:
791:
782:
779:
756:
720:
717:
684:
660:
642:
599:4WhatMakesSense
582:
573:
550:High-importance
533:
530:
527:
524:
523:
491:Highâimportance
490:
461:High-importance
444:
441:
438:
435:
434:
412:
407:
405:
386:Highâimportance
385:
356:High-importance
339:
336:
333:
330:
329:
307:
302:
300:
281:Highâimportance
280:
251:High-importance
234:
231:
228:
225:
224:
202:
197:
195:
176:Highâimportance
175:
127:
124:
121:
118:
117:
91:
86:
84:
61:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
1773:
1771:
1763:
1762:
1757:
1752:
1747:
1742:
1737:
1732:
1727:
1722:
1717:
1712:
1707:
1702:
1697:
1692:
1687:
1677:
1676:
1673:
1672:
1671:
1670:
1669:
1668:
1644:
1636:
1618:
1617:
1616:
1615:
1589:
1588:
1564:
1563:
1562:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1556:
1528:
1512:
1511:
1510:
1509:
1508:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1473:
1472:
1471:
1470:
1469:
1468:
1438:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1401:
1400:
1353:
1344:
1341:
1339:
1338:
1324:requested move
1318:
1317:
1291:
1290:
1289:
1288:
1270:up to 61 a day
1259:
1258:
1231:
1214:
1192:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1160:
1159:
1143:
1142:
1108:
1107:
1087:
1086:
1064:
1040:
1012:
1011:
997:requested move
991:
989:
986:
963:
960:
953:Jack Cargill,
950:
946:
945:
927:
923:
922:
911:
900:
888:
876:
869:
868:
857:
837:
826:
815:
801:
789:
777:
772:
771:
761:comment added
741:
740:
728:." Salon.com.
715:
709:
708:
679:
678:
659:
656:
644:I have made a
641:
638:
637:
636:
581:
578:
572:
569:
566:
565:
562:
561:
558:
557:
546:
540:
539:
537:
520:the discussion
506:
494:
493:
485:
473:
472:
469:
468:
457:
451:
450:
448:
436:Jewish history
431:the discussion
427:Jewish history
418:
417:
414:Judaism portal
401:
389:
388:
383:Jewish history
380:
368:
367:
364:
363:
352:
346:
345:
343:
326:the discussion
313:
312:
309:Judaism portal
296:
284:
283:
275:
263:
262:
259:
258:
247:
241:
240:
238:
235:Bible articles
221:the discussion
208:
207:
191:
179:
178:
170:
158:
157:
154:
153:
144:
134:
133:
131:
97:
96:
80:
68:
67:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1772:
1761:
1758:
1756:
1753:
1751:
1748:
1746:
1743:
1741:
1738:
1736:
1733:
1731:
1728:
1726:
1723:
1721:
1718:
1716:
1713:
1711:
1708:
1706:
1703:
1701:
1698:
1696:
1693:
1691:
1688:
1686:
1683:
1682:
1680:
1667:
1663:
1659:
1654:
1653:
1652:
1649:
1645:
1643:
1640:
1637:
1634:
1627:
1622:
1621:
1620:
1619:
1613:
1609:
1605:
1598:
1593:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1587:
1583:
1579:
1576:
1575:
1570:
1565:
1555:
1551:
1547:
1543:
1538:
1537:
1536:
1533:
1529:
1527:
1524:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1517:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1513:
1503:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1493:
1492:
1491:
1481:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1467:
1463:
1459:
1455:
1451:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1443:
1439:
1437:
1434:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1409:
1405:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1399:
1395:
1391:
1387:
1382:
1381:
1376:
1372:
1368:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1358:
1354:
1352:
1349:
1342:
1337:
1335:
1330:
1325:
1320:
1319:
1316:
1312:
1308:
1307:In ictu oculi
1304:
1300:
1296:
1293:
1292:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1257:
1254:
1253:
1249:
1247:
1246:
1239:
1235:
1232:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1215:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1204:168.12.253.66
1201:
1197:
1194:
1193:
1188:
1184:
1180:
1177:
1176:
1171:
1167:
1166:David Cameron
1164:
1163:
1162:
1161:
1158:
1154:
1150:
1145:
1144:
1141:
1137:
1133:
1132:In ictu oculi
1129:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1110:
1109:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1095:
1094:
1089:
1088:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1069:
1065:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1052:
1051:
1046:
1042:
1041:
1039:
1038:
1035:
1034:
1030:
1023:
1017:
1010:
1008:
1003:
998:
993:
992:
987:
985:
983:
979:
975:
971:
961:
956:
949:
942:
933:
926:
910:
899:
887:
875:
873:
856:
854:
850:
836:
825:
814:
807:
800:
788:
776:
769:
768:
767:
764:
760:
755:
749:
745:
739:
735:
731:
727:
723:
722:
714:
706:
705:
704:
700:
696:
692:
688:
677:
674:
670:
669:William Dever
666:
665:
664:
657:
655:
654:
651:
647:
639:
635:
631:
627:
623:
619:
615:
611:
610:
609:
608:
604:
600:
595:
590:
586:
579:
577:
570:
555:
551:
545:
542:
541:
538:
521:
517:
513:
512:
507:
504:
500:
499:
495:
489:
486:
483:
479:
466:
462:
456:
453:
452:
449:
432:
428:
424:
423:
415:
404:
402:
399:
395:
394:
390:
384:
381:
378:
374:
361:
357:
351:
348:
347:
344:
327:
323:
319:
318:
310:
299:
297:
294:
290:
289:
285:
279:
276:
273:
269:
256:
252:
246:
243:
242:
239:
222:
218:
214:
213:
205:
194:
192:
189:
185:
184:
180:
174:
171:
168:
164:
151:
150:
140:
136:
135:
132:
115:
114:documentation
111:
107:
103:
102:
94:
83:
81:
78:
74:
73:
69:
65:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
1641:
1632:
1573:
1525:
1501:
1435:
1419:
1415:
1411:
1407:
1378:
1350:
1346:
1328:
1321:
1294:
1265:
1264:But here we
1251:
1244:
1243:
1233:
1216:
1195:
1174:
1111:
1092:
1049:
1032:
1015:
1013:
1001:
994:
974:75.111.49.92
965:
940:
938:
919:
908:
896:
884:
871:
865:
852:
848:
845:
834:
823:
812:
797:
785:
774:
750:
746:
742:
711:
691:142.68.12.21
685:â Preceding
680:
661:
643:
614:WP:NOT#FORUM
591:
587:
583:
574:
549:
509:
460:
420:
355:
315:
250:
210:
204:Bible portal
147:
99:
40:WikiProjects
1658:JudeccaXIII
1597:JudeccaXIII
1546:JudeccaXIII
1458:JudeccaXIII
1416:description
1412:Promptuarii
1408:destruction
1390:JudeccaXIII
1334:move review
1007:move review
968:âPreceding
757:âPreceding
1679:Categories
1278:Epeefleche
1149:Epeefleche
730:Tgeorgescu
650:EnSamulili
626:Tgeorgescu
1633:realistic
119:Biography
59:Biography
1626:StAnselm
1502:somebody
1450:Jdcrutch
1367:Jdcrutch
1122:back to
970:unsigned
898:fiction.
754:Gingabox
699:contribs
687:unsigned
1542:WP:BLUE
1371:WP:BLUE
1303:WP:SNOW
1234:Support
1217:Support
1196:Support
1112:Support
759:undated
552:on the
463:on the
358:on the
331:Judaism
322:Judaism
278:Judaism
253:on the
30:C-class
1578:Anselm
1420:writer
1299:WP:BRD
1245:bd2412
1238:WP:BRD
1179:Anselm
1130:also.
1128:WP:BRD
1116:WP:BRD
1097:Anselm
1054:Anselm
903:Ibidem
36:scale.
1610:, or
1606:, or
1454:David
1170:David
1033:Slash
988:Move?
941:agree
799:him."
226:Bible
217:Bible
173:Bible
1662:talk
1648:Talk
1612:here
1608:here
1604:here
1582:talk
1550:talk
1544:. â
1532:Talk
1462:talk
1442:Talk
1394:talk
1357:Talk
1311:talk
1301:and
1297:per
1282:talk
1276:).--
1266:know
1225:talk
1208:talk
1200:Omri
1183:talk
1153:talk
1136:talk
1126:per
1120:Omri
1101:talk
1080:talk
1068:Omri
1058:talk
1045:Omri
1028:Red
978:talk
734:talk
695:talk
673:PiCo
630:talk
603:talk
544:High
455:High
350:High
245:High
108:and
1326:.
1221:BPK
640:Map
1681::
1664:)
1646:|
1584:)
1574:St
1552:)
1530:|
1464:)
1440:|
1396:)
1355:|
1313:)
1305:.
1284:)
1227:)
1210:)
1185:)
1175:St
1155:)
1138:)
1118:.
1103:)
1093:St
1082:)
1074:.
1060:)
1050:St
1047:.
999:.
980:)
951:â
928:â
912:â
901:â
889:â
877:â
858:â
838:â
827:â
816:â
802:â
790:â
778:â
736:)
716:â
701:)
697:âą
632:)
605:)
62::
1660:(
1628::
1624:@
1599::
1595:@
1580:(
1548:(
1460:(
1422:.
1392:(
1365:@
1309:(
1280:(
1252:T
1223:(
1206:(
1181:(
1151:(
1134:(
1099:(
1078:(
1056:(
1024:)
1020:(
976:(
874:.
855:.
765:.
732:(
693:(
628:(
601:(
556:.
467:.
362:.
257:.
152:.
116:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
