This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Sack of Jerusalem (10th century BC) page were merged into Shishak. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
This topic deserves treatment it is own right, separate from the entry on Shoshenq I. In particular, the name in Hebrew, and the issues raised by David Rohl are better treated here.
Why "Shishaq" and not "Shishak"? Unless the reader understands that the Hebrew only uses /q/, all kinds of misinterpretations can be made, particularly when taking Rohl's views into consideration. -- Nefertum17 11:13, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I have changed the redirect at Shishak to point here, rather than to Shoshenq I, on the grounds that this will be less confusing to readers. Feel free to discuss the change in this space; please justify it here or at Talk:Shoshenq I if you feel it necessary to revert the change. Chick Bowen 04:46, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
I hold the view that he was Tuthmosis III, why is that one not mentioned here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.131.23.208 ( talk) 13:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Can someone give me some good sources on the Shishak/Shoshenq I inscription of his campaign in Judah/Israel?
It's worth listing all the cities, and fleshing out the political significance of humiliating your defeated enemies by reducing one of their most important cities to a "town" (Jerusalem) on your (Shishak's) mortuary inscription(?) as based on your article. apologies...don't have time to find the article(s) myself right now. Hkp-avniel ( talk) 10:23, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
We use the most common name/spelling. Google Scholar, 53 'Shishaqs', 2010 'Shishaks'. Google Books, 314 'Shishaqs'. 1620 Shishaks,. Seems pretty obvious we should call the article Shishak. Dougweller ( talk) 18:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Is far mroe popular among Revisionists then Rhol's theory is, but regarldess whoever added the comment about Pun in hebrew being "More rare" then Rhol implies is clearly ignorant, I've studied the Old Testament enouhg to know that t's author could barely go a Chapter without useing a Pun somewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.92.234.42 ( talk) 01:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
The article has the following two statements:
Texts written in various ancient languages seem to indicate that the first vowel was both long and round, and the final vowel was short. For example, the name is written in the Hebrew Bible as שישק [ʃiːʃaq].
This "for example" contradicts the the preceding sentence as the durative-long-i is not rounded. The "for example" here should be giving the "šu:šaq" version (here, the durative-long-u is a rounded vowel) mentioned after this 'example' here. — al-Shimoni ( talk) 18:46, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
I know this is trivia, but some people might find it interesting to know that this was the Pharaoh referred to in Raiders of the Lost Ark. -- DanielCD ( talk) 23:58, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
There is a fresh proposal to merge Sack of Jerusalem (10th century BC) to here. This appears to have been done before and reversed, it's not clear if the correct procedure was followed. PatGallacher ( talk) 20:42, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Sack of Jerusalem (10th century BC) page were merged into Shishak. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
This topic deserves treatment it is own right, separate from the entry on Shoshenq I. In particular, the name in Hebrew, and the issues raised by David Rohl are better treated here.
Why "Shishaq" and not "Shishak"? Unless the reader understands that the Hebrew only uses /q/, all kinds of misinterpretations can be made, particularly when taking Rohl's views into consideration. -- Nefertum17 11:13, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I have changed the redirect at Shishak to point here, rather than to Shoshenq I, on the grounds that this will be less confusing to readers. Feel free to discuss the change in this space; please justify it here or at Talk:Shoshenq I if you feel it necessary to revert the change. Chick Bowen 04:46, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
I hold the view that he was Tuthmosis III, why is that one not mentioned here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.131.23.208 ( talk) 13:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Can someone give me some good sources on the Shishak/Shoshenq I inscription of his campaign in Judah/Israel?
It's worth listing all the cities, and fleshing out the political significance of humiliating your defeated enemies by reducing one of their most important cities to a "town" (Jerusalem) on your (Shishak's) mortuary inscription(?) as based on your article. apologies...don't have time to find the article(s) myself right now. Hkp-avniel ( talk) 10:23, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
We use the most common name/spelling. Google Scholar, 53 'Shishaqs', 2010 'Shishaks'. Google Books, 314 'Shishaqs'. 1620 Shishaks,. Seems pretty obvious we should call the article Shishak. Dougweller ( talk) 18:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Is far mroe popular among Revisionists then Rhol's theory is, but regarldess whoever added the comment about Pun in hebrew being "More rare" then Rhol implies is clearly ignorant, I've studied the Old Testament enouhg to know that t's author could barely go a Chapter without useing a Pun somewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.92.234.42 ( talk) 01:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
The article has the following two statements:
Texts written in various ancient languages seem to indicate that the first vowel was both long and round, and the final vowel was short. For example, the name is written in the Hebrew Bible as שישק [ʃiːʃaq].
This "for example" contradicts the the preceding sentence as the durative-long-i is not rounded. The "for example" here should be giving the "šu:šaq" version (here, the durative-long-u is a rounded vowel) mentioned after this 'example' here. — al-Shimoni ( talk) 18:46, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
I know this is trivia, but some people might find it interesting to know that this was the Pharaoh referred to in Raiders of the Lost Ark. -- DanielCD ( talk) 23:58, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
There is a fresh proposal to merge Sack of Jerusalem (10th century BC) to here. This appears to have been done before and reversed, it's not clear if the correct procedure was followed. PatGallacher ( talk) 20:42, 16 December 2017 (UTC)