• DOI:10.2307/1356612
• Corpus ID: 163239060

The ʿAmmān Citadel Inscription: A New Collation

@article{Fulco1978TheC,
  title={The ʿAmmān Citadel Inscription: A New Collation},
  author={William J. Fulco},
  journal={Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research},
  year={1978},
  volume={230},
  pages={39 - 43}
}

• William J. Fulco
• Published 1 April 1978
• History
• Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

the cAmm.n Citadel Inscription (Horn 1969; Cross 1969; Albright 1970; Puech and Rof6 1973) and several articles commenting on its various aspects (see bibliography in Puech and Rof6 1973: 531). These treatments differ widely in the reading itself, the translation, and-especially in Albright's study-in the supposed context. Horn (1969: 9), who worked from a squeeze, photographs, and some collations from the stone itself, takes it as a building inscription. Cross' article (1969) is an epigraphic study and commentary on Horn's version, and his reading is apparently based on Horn's photograph. Cross (1969: 18) also assumes it is a "building inscription, apparently of a temple, or of the Citadel itself, in effect the precinct of the deity." Albright's imaginative study (1970) interprets the inscription as a command from the god Milkom to an Ammonite king, apparently to prepare for battle. Puech saw the stone briefly, but worked almost exclusively from photographs. He and Rof6 (1973: 545-46) take it as a temple inscription. For the convenience of the reader in making comparisons, the readings and translations of Horn, Albright, and Puech and Rof6 are given here.