Talk:Canaanite and Aramaic inscriptions

Expansion
I saw this article listed at the DYK nominations page and decided to help expand. I hope it is alright, given that Onceinawhile has nominated the page and is working on its improvement. Aside from additional content, I suggest structuring the article so that it has a background and context (e.g. why use Canaanite and Aramaic together) and also include different categories(?) such as Old Aramaic, Imperial Aramaic, Middle Aramaic, etc.. Unfortunately, I do not have sufficient sources presently to write about this. Regards, Darwin Naz (talk) 23:27, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , thank you for your excellent additions. I would be delighted to collaborate with you here. I have added an image box to the top of the article to explain the intended scope – it is inspired by the scope of the “gold standard” work on this topic, Kanaanäische und Aramäische Inschriften, which covers all inscriptions in what was previously known as the “Phoenician-style” alphabet. As such it does not include Imperial or Middle Aramaic, or any of their descendent scripts. Onceinawhile (talk) 06:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , maybe an expanded intended scope - particularly an exposition of what you referred to as gold standard - should constitute the background section. It is a bit challenging for me to add content since there is no specific time period outlined. Darwin Naz (talk) 01:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Kata Biblion blog
Some good work has been done at https://grammar.katabiblon.com/?page=ph.

Seems to be building on our work at Wikipedia, as uses many of our photos etc. But contains some good additions. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:52, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Ugarit?
Is there a point in mentioning the Ugaritic texts? They are not written in the Canaanite alphabet but in a proto-Canaanite language, closely related to Iron Age Canaanite.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 01:09, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
@User:Onceinawhile, this is a very very nice article. Thank you. A couple of years ago I tried to learn the topic, the oldest ones in particular, and such a thing was very needed.

Do you think the list in Sass and Finkelstein, 2013 should be added to the list of corpora? It has many modern proposals regarding dating, notes many discredited objects, and has a useful table with drawings throughout. trespassers william (talk) 14:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you. Yes you make a good point. That article would be a good addition to the table, particularly with its numbered list at the end. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:53, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Amman Citadel Inscription.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Amman Citadel Inscription.jpg

Carthaginian tombstones article
I would like to incorporate the Carthaginian tombstones article into this list, but not sure how best to do it, because it covers such a big number. what do you think would be best? Onceinawhile (talk) 18:51, 17 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I would prefer to add a link Carthaginian tombstones in the "See also" section. The article "Carthaginian tombstones" is a kind of "meta-description" of an entire category (or, in fact, several categories) of inscriptions, and it may overlap with some of the items in the large list of individual inscriptions. Because of this different character, it seems to me less fitting to put "Carthaginian tombstones" in that list. A link in the "See also" section, I think, would be useful. Hans van Deukeren (talk) 11:18, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Hans, I have done that. Onceinawhile (talk) 19:56, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Kition
288:
 * https://www.persee.fr/doc/crai_0065-0536_1991_num_135_4_15050 [probably in the Cyprus museum]
 * https://base-map-polytheisms.huma-num.fr/source/269
 * #144 in

289 Three lines
 * https://base-map-polytheisms.huma-num.fr/source/29
 * #A30 in *


 * #1030 in

290 Three lines

Other kition inscriptions (cesnola) 1874: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/241847 CIS I 14 https://resources.metmuseum.org/resources/metpublications/pdf/The_Metropolitan_Museum_Journal_v_11_1976.pdf https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/241825?pos=6

Carthage
KI 84, NE 432,15, CIS I 180, found 1867, lost, was at the Paris World Fair; Carthage

NSI 48 Carthage CIS I 181, NE 432, 14 found 1860

KI 77 CIS I 198 Carthage

KI 75 Carthage, 1831, Copehagen museum, CIS I 199, NE 431, 10

KI 81 CIS I 228 Tunis / Carthage

KI 78 CIS I 236 Carthage

NE 431, 9 CIS I 240, 1817

KI 79 CIS I 250 Carthage

NSI 49 Carthage CIS I 269

NE 431, 12, CIS I 363

NSI 54 Tunis [Schroder p.271] one of four neopunic inscriptions

KI 82 [same as 83, already in there] Carthage

KI 86 1899 Carthage

NE 430 Carthage

NE 431, 11, found 1870

NE 431, 13

NE 432, 16 found 1832

Sardinia and Spain
NSI 60 Sulci (Sardinia), CIS I 149, Himilkath, Museum of Cagliari, early Neo Punic

KI 61, Tharros Sardinia, CIS I 154

KI 65 Villaricos, Spain, early 1900s

Egyptian Aramaic
Aramaic Papyrus Luparensis: NSI 77 Aramaic Papyrus Luparensis = “from the Louvre”, CIS II 146, TAD C3.12, Louvre; https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5775081m/f13.item TAD C3.12 Also Drovetti, but published later [1862]*

Greek script

 * KAI 174: graffiti in the Wasta cave near Tyre
 * KAI 175: Gr. 1 in Berthier A.,Charlier R., Le sanctuaire punique d'El-Hofra à Constantine, Paris, 1955 https://base-map-polytheisms.huma-num.fr/source/1083
 * KAI 176: Gr.3 in Berthier A.,Charlier R., Le sanctuaire punique d'El-Hofra à Constantine, Paris, 1955 https://base-map-polytheisms.huma-num.fr/source/1088
 * KAI 177

Other
Wadi Daliyeh Aramaic papyri

KI 2 tiny Moabite seal

KI 4 Many Hebrew seals

NE 434,2 CIS I 151

NE 444,4-7

NE 445 Neirab [CIS II 75]

NE 446 C [CIS II 72] Babylon

KAI 160 [same as 159?]

KAI 179 Bir Semech Latino-Libyan [in LATIN]

NE 435, C1 Hadrumentum Urn

Onceinawhile (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2023 (UTC)