[poll id=”18″]
You may also like
John has an intriguing post regarding Lam. 3:51: Lamentations 3:51: A New Proposal This is a notoriously problematic passage and John has […]
Share this:
Because of my administrative schedule I do not teach often, usually once a year and for various other reasons this is the […]
Share this:
Many who read this blog are members of the Society of Biblical Literature or familiar with it, but many are not aware […]
Share this:
I mentioned the other day that the Gospel for this week is a difficult passage: Luke 16:1-13. It is the parable of […]
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.