[poll id=”18″]
You may also like
Noodling around on the British Museum catalogue of illuminated manuscripts I came cross this curious dragon drawn in a 14th century Machzor […]
Share this:
Gen. 2:7 Then the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of […]
Share this:
Many of you know that last year I was the interim rector of an Episcopal parish going through transition. Requiring an interim […]
Share this:
This morning I will be celebrating at a nearby parish and was going over my sermon notes. Today is Proper 8, the […]
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.