[poll id=”18″]
You may also like
This brief post began as a response to a comment on my earlier post “Age in the Book of Ruth and a […]
Share this:
This week at the International SBL meeting, three Qumran sessions were given over to commemorating the work of John Collins on Apocalypticism. […]
Share this:
This week I have been trying to focus on research and writing. I was more successful than I expected, if I am […]
Share this:
Or so says reader Dave Wyman. I am very grateful for his comments and wanted to share them and respond to them […]
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.