[poll id=”18″]
You may also like
As a member of the Bible Gateway Blogger Grid #BibleGatewayPartner, I was offered the opportunity to review a free copy of The […]
Share this:
I am pleased to be able to post on the Newsletter for Targumic and Cognate Studies images for TgLam and TgRuth from […]
Share this:
UPDATED – Excursus below. That is overstating the case and an example of really bibliogeeky link baiting. (Can we have a competition […]
Share this:
No really. See for yourself. I am not sure who created this, but I had to share it.
6 thoughts on “Poll: You tell me, was it 587 BCE or 586 BCE?”
I love that your question about this on Twitter a couple of days back is ranking higher than a Wikipedia page!
http://skitch.com/samharrelson/bdtsp/586-or-587-bce-google-search
Oh, and 587.
Now THAT is the measure of success! Thanks for posting this Sam:
By the way, this discussion from the b-Hebrew list that comes up in the Google search is actually pretty good.
So… the question is… to believe Wikipedia (587 BCE) or the Jewish Virtual Library (586 BCE)? When I entered your question in Google search, it gave me http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/The_Temple.html as the first ranked page.
Coincidentally that follows the scholarship in that older works say 586 (Telushkin as cited by JVL) and more recent scholarship that uses 587 (Wiki).
All of my student handouts say 587/586 BCE. Don’t even get me started about Solomon’s date.