![]() | Ebla received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
![]() | Ebla has been listed as one of the
History good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: August 17, 2014. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from Ebla appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 31 August 2014 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
Now almost every noun is linked. Why create a link to a name that has no other existence besides its appearance in an inscription at Ebla? Links are meant to be followed for more detailed information. They have no other purpose. Wetman 01:42, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
As a general rule, not just here, if the entry is littered with dead end "links" and every date is linked, etc then meaningful links, like Sargon of Akkad in this entry, become invisible. Wetman 23:13, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
"It is rumored that Giovanni Petinato, an epigrapher studying the texts, reported that the names of five famous Biblical cities near the Dead Sea (Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboim, and Bela/Zoar) were mentioned in the Ebla archives (tablet 1860) in the same order as in Genesis 14." It isn't reassuring to see Giovanni Pettinato's name misspelled, but the publication of such "information" must be more encyclopedic than a "rumor." Can anyone confirm this? Is it meaningful? -- Wetman 14:05, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Someone needs to write an article on the Ebla Tablets.
I'm not sure there is anything conclusive about mention of Sodom and Gomorrah. Here's a quote from a website (itself quoting Biblical Archaeology Review):
When the archives at ancient Ebla (in present day northern Syria) were first discovered in 1975, the translator, Giovanni Pettinato, reported he had found the names of the 5 cities of the plain were not only listed, but in the same order as in Genesis. However, the Syrian government was "angered at the emphasis placed in the West on the tablets' alleged Biblical significance". (BAR, May/June 1980, p. 48) A rather large controversy then began over these tablets, which the Syrians felt were being used to link the Biblical Patriarchs with Syrian history, something they would not stand for. This finally resulted in Pettinato's resignation and letter of recantation as to many of the translations. The later appointed director of the Italian mission excavating at Ebla issued a statement which shows why Pettinato was forced to recant: "These allegations [linking the Ebla tablets with the Bible] were propagated by Zionist-American centres to be exploited for atrocious purposes aimed at proving the expansionist and colonialistic views of the Zionist leaders." (Ibid., p. 49). When Pattinato, the original translator of the texts, made his recantation, he still insisted that the 2 cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were correct.
- If the original translator of the texts, obviously a man who was considered highly qualified to lead the project until he fell afoul Syrian Judeophobia, says that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were mentioned in the texts, and were listed in the same way that the Scriptural text lists them, then this is not a "rumor" but as authoritative as one can ask for. Treating it as a mere "rumor" because it is displeasing to rabid anti-Zionists (or worse, antisemites), and removing any reference to this highly relevant matter from the article itself, is not academically acceptable. There is a further point to be made, showing to what a degree this Wikipedia article has capitulated to Syrian "anti-Zionism." The Syrian view is that the language of the Ebla archival materials is "Eblaite." This is to avoid admitting that it is in fact a very early form of Hebrew. This can be verified objectively, and is not really a matter of political ideology and should not be distorted by ideology, it is a purely philological matter. If one simply cannot bring oneself to say "Hebrew," for fear of suggesting that Israel and Jews really do have authentic deep historical roots in the region and the Biblical account is substantially correct about Abraham, etc., then at the least one must admit that the language spoken and written in the Ebla empire was "Proto-Canaanitic." But "Eblaite"? Come on. -
-I don't know whether Eblaite is an early form of Hebrew, but you can just forget the Abraham bit, unless you have some tangible contemporary evidence in hand. You can also forget about Jacob, Isaac, Moses, Samson and many others. Maybe, just maybe, starting with David, you are dealing with real people. Thomas Keyes
--Thomas Keyes - Fortunately, the archaeological and historical evidence is against you. DRJ 00:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
108.45.122.74 ( talk) 17:31, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
An article Ebla tablets was begun in March 2010.-- Wetman ( talk) 19:21, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
hey, this is one of the most important article for the history of Syria, and in its old form was filled with mistakes, it took me a week but i finally wrote the article as it should be, i thank every one of the former editor, their work helped me where to look, im giving you a summary of the edits i made to each section , i counted on the newest works by different professors, i neglected old sources that contradict newer findings, please read my work, fix the grammar , and tell me if you have any notes, and please dont delete anything without adding a reliable source and have a discussion since every single sentence i wrote is backed by a reference :
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dudley Miles ( talk · contribs) 13:27, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
I will take this one. A couple of initial comments.
Comments
The map of "the first Ebla kingdom" is an original research. There is no evidence that Damascus existed in the 3rd millennium BC, and there is no evidence that Ebla's dominion reached that far to the south. The word "Halab" is not attested before the Yamhad era. The map must be corrected or removed, because these are grave mistakes.-- HD86 ( talk) 01:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
This book [1] is not about Ebla but about Canaan. The author does not discuss the issue. He just throws a casual remark about Ebla's political control without pointing out any evidence. This is not a sufficient citation. The truth is that Damascus is not mentioned in the Ebla archive, nor in any other writings from the 3rd millennium BC. The earliest reference to Damascus was made in Egyptian writings from the reign of Tuthmosis III in the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. It was not an important town at that time. There is no justification for putting Damascus on the Ebla map. The southern border must be drawn up towards Qatna (even the inclusion of Qatna is uncertain, so I suggest making the southern border dashed). The word Halab must be corrected to Halam (I think there is one author who read this word "Halab," but this reading is unproven).-- HD86 ( talk) 05:18, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
HD86 is wrong about the source, but the point that Ebla probably didn't control Damascus is valid. Tubb's assertion was made in the 90's and a lot of older claims about Ebla's size starting are misrepresenting its extent. Reconstructing the geography and placing toponyms is a very challenging, long process and it's often not entirely clear where everything is (look at Dugurasu and Armi which have both only been convincingly located in the past decade).
I think it makes a lot of sense to try to update the map to align with what we know now about the surroundings of Ebla. In Bonechi 2016 there's a map from Archi 2011 and Bonechi's comments about interpreteing Ebla's borders. Both of these scholars have published a lot on Ebla and are probably more familiar with the sources than the authors currently used as a reference for the map. I think using either one of those as a basis for a map of Ebla would help bring the map a little more up-to-date with current knowledge. - Gulkishar ( talk) 22:08, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Eblaitic language is Amorite Language
Kingdom of Armi 2290 BC in Halab (Aleppo) under name Yamshad (loanword from Yamhadite dynasty)
1810 BC under Mari-Dynasty annexed by Babylonia 1761 BC, to ~ 1650 BC Vasall by Mari (Amoriter)
Land of Apiru (egypt viewpoint, Thutmoses III) and
Land of Mukish under Mitanni viewpoint (from Urkish=Urshu/Warsuwa=Waššukanni)
Than Ebla/Alalakh/Yamshad to 1517 BC, Begin of Mitanni-Time (Hani-Rabbat, Bit Balikh) to Šattiwazza, King of Mitanni
annexed by Hittite Šuppiluliuma (renamed in Uris=Urkish), here is etablished a Luwian Dynasty. Now came a IE Aspect in her language. Hittite contract between Tudhaliya II with luwian Sunassura II of Kizzuwatna (ŠunaŠŠura)
under Uratru a province Mukish (unsave reading)
Arame (correct Arme - a loanname from Eblaitic King Armi for legitimation) Arame 858 BC–844 BC to 810 BC under Menua, Son of Išpuini (biblic Minni)
Arme (hurritic i to e is move from hittitic to uratean language) is a mythical ancestry of Rusa-Dynasty in Uratru, Uratru is a rest from Mitanni population, and one of 8 Nairi-Countrys in Assyrian viewpoint (after the fall of Hittiti Kingdom 1190 BC) destroyed from Salmanasser III. and Sargon II. (Rusa II.)
God: eblaitic "Hadda" in c. 2500 BCE, then Adad = under semitic influence Hadad and under Uratru Ḫaldi/chaldi and Teššup or Teshub. Mythical Epos: Kingdom of Heaven, tells from Anu, alalu (Alalakh) and others and Epos "Song of Release". This is the mythical base for Nairi in Uratru (assyrian loanname from Urkish) and Mannai by Martianus (greek name for Mitanni)
It is the same region and same peoples with 2 Languages, Eblaitic (called Amoriter) in West and Hurritic in East)
Yamhad Halab | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
c. 1810 BC–c. 1517 BC | |||||||
![]() Yamhad at its greatest extent c. 1752 BC | |||||||
Capital | Halab | ||||||
Common languages | Amorite | ||||||
Religion | Levantine religion ( Hadad was the chief deity) [1] | ||||||
Government | Absolute monarchy | ||||||
King, Great King. [2] [3] | |||||||
• c. 1810 – c. 1780 BC | Sumu-Epuh | ||||||
• c. 1780 – c. 1764 BC | Yarim-Lim I | ||||||
• c. 1524 – c. 1517 BC | Ilim-Ilimma I | ||||||
Historical era | Bronze Age | ||||||
• Established | c. 1810 BC | ||||||
• Disestablished | c. 1517 BC | ||||||
Area | |||||||
1750 BC est. [2] | 43,000 km2 (17,000 sq mi) | ||||||
| |||||||
Today part of |
Dates are estimated and given by the Middle chronology. [4]
King | Reigned | Title | Relation to Previous King |
---|---|---|---|
Sumu-Epuh | c. 1810 BC – c. 1780 BC | King | |
Yarim-Lim I | c. 1780 BC – c. 1764 BC | Great King | Son. [5] |
Hammurabi I | c. 1764 BC – c. 1750 BC | Great King | Son. [6] |
Abba-El I | c. 1750 BC – c. 1720 BC | Great King | Son. [7] |
Yarim-Lim II | c. 1720 BC – c. 1700 BC | Great King | Son. [8] |
Niqmi-Epuh | c. 1700 BC – c. 1675 BC | Great King | Son. [9] |
Irkabtum | c. 1675 BC – Mid-17th century BC | Great King | Son. [10] |
Hammurabi II | Mid-17th century BC | Great King | Possible brother. [11] |
Yarim-Lim III | Mid-17th century BC – c. 1625 BC | Great King | Brother of Irkabtum. [12] |
Hammurabi III | c. 1625 BC – c. 1600 BC | King | Son. [13] |
Sarra-El | Early 16th century BC | King | Possible son of Yarim-Lim III. [14] |
Abba-El II | Mid-16th century BC | King | Son. [14] |
Ilim-Ilimma I | c. 1524 – c. 1517 BC | King | Possible son. [15] |
The third para under Archive period mentions several places: Hazuwan, Burman, Emar, Halabitu and Salbatu. The location of Hazuwan is not known; Burman and Emar are on the map; but Halabitu and Salbatu aren't. It would be helpful if they were, if only so that the reader doesn't have to go to the link to each to find the locations. Prisoner of Zenda ( talk) 12:12, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
The given history spans more than four millennia (3500 BC to 700 AD). Would a visual timeline help? I've compiled one for your comments.
Prisoner of Zenda ( talk) 01:32, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
![]() | Ebla received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
![]() | Ebla has been listed as one of the
History good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: August 17, 2014. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from Ebla appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 31 August 2014 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
Now almost every noun is linked. Why create a link to a name that has no other existence besides its appearance in an inscription at Ebla? Links are meant to be followed for more detailed information. They have no other purpose. Wetman 01:42, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
As a general rule, not just here, if the entry is littered with dead end "links" and every date is linked, etc then meaningful links, like Sargon of Akkad in this entry, become invisible. Wetman 23:13, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
"It is rumored that Giovanni Petinato, an epigrapher studying the texts, reported that the names of five famous Biblical cities near the Dead Sea (Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboim, and Bela/Zoar) were mentioned in the Ebla archives (tablet 1860) in the same order as in Genesis 14." It isn't reassuring to see Giovanni Pettinato's name misspelled, but the publication of such "information" must be more encyclopedic than a "rumor." Can anyone confirm this? Is it meaningful? -- Wetman 14:05, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Someone needs to write an article on the Ebla Tablets.
I'm not sure there is anything conclusive about mention of Sodom and Gomorrah. Here's a quote from a website (itself quoting Biblical Archaeology Review):
When the archives at ancient Ebla (in present day northern Syria) were first discovered in 1975, the translator, Giovanni Pettinato, reported he had found the names of the 5 cities of the plain were not only listed, but in the same order as in Genesis. However, the Syrian government was "angered at the emphasis placed in the West on the tablets' alleged Biblical significance". (BAR, May/June 1980, p. 48) A rather large controversy then began over these tablets, which the Syrians felt were being used to link the Biblical Patriarchs with Syrian history, something they would not stand for. This finally resulted in Pettinato's resignation and letter of recantation as to many of the translations. The later appointed director of the Italian mission excavating at Ebla issued a statement which shows why Pettinato was forced to recant: "These allegations [linking the Ebla tablets with the Bible] were propagated by Zionist-American centres to be exploited for atrocious purposes aimed at proving the expansionist and colonialistic views of the Zionist leaders." (Ibid., p. 49). When Pattinato, the original translator of the texts, made his recantation, he still insisted that the 2 cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were correct.
- If the original translator of the texts, obviously a man who was considered highly qualified to lead the project until he fell afoul Syrian Judeophobia, says that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were mentioned in the texts, and were listed in the same way that the Scriptural text lists them, then this is not a "rumor" but as authoritative as one can ask for. Treating it as a mere "rumor" because it is displeasing to rabid anti-Zionists (or worse, antisemites), and removing any reference to this highly relevant matter from the article itself, is not academically acceptable. There is a further point to be made, showing to what a degree this Wikipedia article has capitulated to Syrian "anti-Zionism." The Syrian view is that the language of the Ebla archival materials is "Eblaite." This is to avoid admitting that it is in fact a very early form of Hebrew. This can be verified objectively, and is not really a matter of political ideology and should not be distorted by ideology, it is a purely philological matter. If one simply cannot bring oneself to say "Hebrew," for fear of suggesting that Israel and Jews really do have authentic deep historical roots in the region and the Biblical account is substantially correct about Abraham, etc., then at the least one must admit that the language spoken and written in the Ebla empire was "Proto-Canaanitic." But "Eblaite"? Come on. -
-I don't know whether Eblaite is an early form of Hebrew, but you can just forget the Abraham bit, unless you have some tangible contemporary evidence in hand. You can also forget about Jacob, Isaac, Moses, Samson and many others. Maybe, just maybe, starting with David, you are dealing with real people. Thomas Keyes
--Thomas Keyes - Fortunately, the archaeological and historical evidence is against you. DRJ 00:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
108.45.122.74 ( talk) 17:31, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
An article Ebla tablets was begun in March 2010.-- Wetman ( talk) 19:21, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
hey, this is one of the most important article for the history of Syria, and in its old form was filled with mistakes, it took me a week but i finally wrote the article as it should be, i thank every one of the former editor, their work helped me where to look, im giving you a summary of the edits i made to each section , i counted on the newest works by different professors, i neglected old sources that contradict newer findings, please read my work, fix the grammar , and tell me if you have any notes, and please dont delete anything without adding a reliable source and have a discussion since every single sentence i wrote is backed by a reference :
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dudley Miles ( talk · contribs) 13:27, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
I will take this one. A couple of initial comments.
Comments
The map of "the first Ebla kingdom" is an original research. There is no evidence that Damascus existed in the 3rd millennium BC, and there is no evidence that Ebla's dominion reached that far to the south. The word "Halab" is not attested before the Yamhad era. The map must be corrected or removed, because these are grave mistakes.-- HD86 ( talk) 01:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
This book [1] is not about Ebla but about Canaan. The author does not discuss the issue. He just throws a casual remark about Ebla's political control without pointing out any evidence. This is not a sufficient citation. The truth is that Damascus is not mentioned in the Ebla archive, nor in any other writings from the 3rd millennium BC. The earliest reference to Damascus was made in Egyptian writings from the reign of Tuthmosis III in the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. It was not an important town at that time. There is no justification for putting Damascus on the Ebla map. The southern border must be drawn up towards Qatna (even the inclusion of Qatna is uncertain, so I suggest making the southern border dashed). The word Halab must be corrected to Halam (I think there is one author who read this word "Halab," but this reading is unproven).-- HD86 ( talk) 05:18, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
HD86 is wrong about the source, but the point that Ebla probably didn't control Damascus is valid. Tubb's assertion was made in the 90's and a lot of older claims about Ebla's size starting are misrepresenting its extent. Reconstructing the geography and placing toponyms is a very challenging, long process and it's often not entirely clear where everything is (look at Dugurasu and Armi which have both only been convincingly located in the past decade).
I think it makes a lot of sense to try to update the map to align with what we know now about the surroundings of Ebla. In Bonechi 2016 there's a map from Archi 2011 and Bonechi's comments about interpreteing Ebla's borders. Both of these scholars have published a lot on Ebla and are probably more familiar with the sources than the authors currently used as a reference for the map. I think using either one of those as a basis for a map of Ebla would help bring the map a little more up-to-date with current knowledge. - Gulkishar ( talk) 22:08, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Eblaitic language is Amorite Language
Kingdom of Armi 2290 BC in Halab (Aleppo) under name Yamshad (loanword from Yamhadite dynasty)
1810 BC under Mari-Dynasty annexed by Babylonia 1761 BC, to ~ 1650 BC Vasall by Mari (Amoriter)
Land of Apiru (egypt viewpoint, Thutmoses III) and
Land of Mukish under Mitanni viewpoint (from Urkish=Urshu/Warsuwa=Waššukanni)
Than Ebla/Alalakh/Yamshad to 1517 BC, Begin of Mitanni-Time (Hani-Rabbat, Bit Balikh) to Šattiwazza, King of Mitanni
annexed by Hittite Šuppiluliuma (renamed in Uris=Urkish), here is etablished a Luwian Dynasty. Now came a IE Aspect in her language. Hittite contract between Tudhaliya II with luwian Sunassura II of Kizzuwatna (ŠunaŠŠura)
under Uratru a province Mukish (unsave reading)
Arame (correct Arme - a loanname from Eblaitic King Armi for legitimation) Arame 858 BC–844 BC to 810 BC under Menua, Son of Išpuini (biblic Minni)
Arme (hurritic i to e is move from hittitic to uratean language) is a mythical ancestry of Rusa-Dynasty in Uratru, Uratru is a rest from Mitanni population, and one of 8 Nairi-Countrys in Assyrian viewpoint (after the fall of Hittiti Kingdom 1190 BC) destroyed from Salmanasser III. and Sargon II. (Rusa II.)
God: eblaitic "Hadda" in c. 2500 BCE, then Adad = under semitic influence Hadad and under Uratru Ḫaldi/chaldi and Teššup or Teshub. Mythical Epos: Kingdom of Heaven, tells from Anu, alalu (Alalakh) and others and Epos "Song of Release". This is the mythical base for Nairi in Uratru (assyrian loanname from Urkish) and Mannai by Martianus (greek name for Mitanni)
It is the same region and same peoples with 2 Languages, Eblaitic (called Amoriter) in West and Hurritic in East)
Yamhad Halab | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
c. 1810 BC–c. 1517 BC | |||||||
![]() Yamhad at its greatest extent c. 1752 BC | |||||||
Capital | Halab | ||||||
Common languages | Amorite | ||||||
Religion | Levantine religion ( Hadad was the chief deity) [1] | ||||||
Government | Absolute monarchy | ||||||
King, Great King. [2] [3] | |||||||
• c. 1810 – c. 1780 BC | Sumu-Epuh | ||||||
• c. 1780 – c. 1764 BC | Yarim-Lim I | ||||||
• c. 1524 – c. 1517 BC | Ilim-Ilimma I | ||||||
Historical era | Bronze Age | ||||||
• Established | c. 1810 BC | ||||||
• Disestablished | c. 1517 BC | ||||||
Area | |||||||
1750 BC est. [2] | 43,000 km2 (17,000 sq mi) | ||||||
| |||||||
Today part of |
Dates are estimated and given by the Middle chronology. [4]
King | Reigned | Title | Relation to Previous King |
---|---|---|---|
Sumu-Epuh | c. 1810 BC – c. 1780 BC | King | |
Yarim-Lim I | c. 1780 BC – c. 1764 BC | Great King | Son. [5] |
Hammurabi I | c. 1764 BC – c. 1750 BC | Great King | Son. [6] |
Abba-El I | c. 1750 BC – c. 1720 BC | Great King | Son. [7] |
Yarim-Lim II | c. 1720 BC – c. 1700 BC | Great King | Son. [8] |
Niqmi-Epuh | c. 1700 BC – c. 1675 BC | Great King | Son. [9] |
Irkabtum | c. 1675 BC – Mid-17th century BC | Great King | Son. [10] |
Hammurabi II | Mid-17th century BC | Great King | Possible brother. [11] |
Yarim-Lim III | Mid-17th century BC – c. 1625 BC | Great King | Brother of Irkabtum. [12] |
Hammurabi III | c. 1625 BC – c. 1600 BC | King | Son. [13] |
Sarra-El | Early 16th century BC | King | Possible son of Yarim-Lim III. [14] |
Abba-El II | Mid-16th century BC | King | Son. [14] |
Ilim-Ilimma I | c. 1524 – c. 1517 BC | King | Possible son. [15] |
The third para under Archive period mentions several places: Hazuwan, Burman, Emar, Halabitu and Salbatu. The location of Hazuwan is not known; Burman and Emar are on the map; but Halabitu and Salbatu aren't. It would be helpful if they were, if only so that the reader doesn't have to go to the link to each to find the locations. Prisoner of Zenda ( talk) 12:12, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
The given history spans more than four millennia (3500 BC to 700 AD). Would a visual timeline help? I've compiled one for your comments.
Prisoner of Zenda ( talk) 01:32, 17 June 2022 (UTC)