The 2021 winner of the "Tell me you did not read the article without saying you did not read the article" and "tell me you are intellectually dishonest and dim without saying you are intellectually dishonest and dim" awards (and soon to be the recipient of a refund from Cincinnati Bible College as they failed to teach him anything) is . . . *drum roll* . . . .
The article in question is:
Neal Rappleye, "An Ishmael Buried Near Nahom," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 48 (2021): 33-48. This very issue was addressed on pp. 37-38 of the article:
Lehi’s
Family and South Arabian Writing and Burial Customs
Since this stela is in a
thoroughly Arabian style and the inscription is in Epigraphic South Arabian,
some may wonder if Israelites from Jerusalem, such as Lehi and his family,
would be likely to adopt such foreign practices in their burial customs. Iron
age burial practices in Judah and Israel largely mirror those of their neighbors
in Palestine,35 and later Jews of the Second Temple Period also frequently
incorporate the burial traditions of their surrounding culture.36 So, it is not
unreasonable to suppose that while traveling through Arabia, likely along the
major caravan route,37 Lehi and his family may have adopted burial practices
common to local populations or fellow caravan travelers. The fact that the
inscription is in Epigraphic South Arabian, however, does raise the question of
whether Lehi’s family had learned the local language and script. When making
arrangements for Ishmael’s burial, it is plausible that Lehi’s family hired a
local stone carver (perhaps from the Nihm tribe) to make the stela and inscribe
it with Ishmael’s name; in light of the clear (albeit crude) execution of local
style and script, this is perhaps the more likely hypothesis. Nonetheless,
there are some indications that Lehi’s family may have learned South Arabian
languages. Certainly, learning the name “Nahom” and arranging with the local
population for the proper burial of Ishmael would have required at least
learning the spoken language. Furthermore, some scholars have proposed a South
Arabian etymology for the name Irreantum, suggesting that Lehi’s family
had become conversant in the local languages.38 More specifically suggesting
knowledge of Epigraphic South Arabian script is an unpublished study of the
Book of Mormon “Caractors” document indicating that some of the symbols bear
resemblance to North and South Arabian characters.39 S. Kent Brown also argued
that Lehi’s family may have spent time in servitude in South Arabia.40 If that
is true, then the skilled labor of Nephi and Lehi (and perhaps others in the
party), who could both write and work in metals (and write on metals),41 likely
would have been one of their best assets as servants to tribal overlords,
requiring them to learn the language.42
Notes for the Above
35.
See Elizabeth Bloch-Smith, Judahite Burial Practices and Beliefs about the Dead (Sheffield,
UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992).
36. See Rachel Hachlili, Jewish Funerary Customs,
Practices and Rites in the Second Temple Period (Boston, MA:
Brill, 2005). See also Pieter W. van der Horst, “Jewish Funerary Inscriptions —
Most Are in Greek,” Biblical Archaeology Review 18, no. 5
(September/October 1992): 46–57.
37. See Lynn M. Hilton and Hope A. Hilton, In Search of Lehi’s Trail (Salt
Lake City: Deseret Book, 1976), 27–44; George Potter and Richard Wellington, Lehi in the Wilderness: 81 New,
Documented Evidences That the Book of Mormon is a True History (Springville,
UT: Cedar Fort, 2003), 53–71.
38. See Paul Y. Hoskisson, Brian M.
Hauglid, and John Gee, “What’s in a Name? Irreantum,” Journal of Book of Mormon
Studies 11, no. 1 (2002): 90–93, 114–15.
39. See “Similarities between the Anthon
Transcript and Old South Arabian (Arabic),” Journal of Book of Mormon
Studies 8, no. 2 (2002): 83, 88; Brown, “New Light from
Arabia,” 88.
40. See S. Kent Brown, “A Case for Lehi’s
Bondage in Arabia,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 6, no. 2
(1997): 205–17; S. Kent Brown, From Jerusalem to Zarahemla: Literary and Historical Studies of
the Book of Mormon (Provo, UT: BYU Religious Studies Center, [Page 48]1998),
55–59; Brown, “New Light from Arabia,” 90–92. Note, however, the critique in
Aston, Lehi and Sariah in Arabia, 97–98.
41. Their ability to write needs no defense
— the very existence of their records attests to that. On Lehi and Nephi’s
skills in metal working, see John A. Tvedtnes, The Most Correct Book: Insights
from a Book of Mormon Scholar (Springville, UT: Horizon,
2003), 78–97; Jeffrey R. Chadwick, “Lehi’s House at Jerusalem and the Land of
his Inheritance,” in Glimpses of Lehi’s Jerusalem, ed. John W. Welch, David
Rolph Seely, and Jo Ann H. Seely (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2004), 113–17; Neal
Rappleye, “Lehi the Smelter,” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 14
(2015): 223–25. Many South Arabian inscriptions are engraved in bronze,
indicating the value of Nephi’s skill in writing on metallic surfaces.
42. See Potter and Wellington, Lehi in the Wilderness,
64.
 |
| Paul Nurnberg demonstrates how he reads books and articles. |
