EXPLORE BY YEAR
— 1920s —
THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
NOVEMBER 23, 1929
Dear Professor Glueck:
Many thanks for your reprint RECENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL WORK IN PALESTINE, which is very interesting and part of which I will use later on in the publication I am planning.
It is also very nice to get news from you and be reminded of the good time we had together in Jerusalem.
Mrs. Chiera united with me in sending you very best regards.
23rd September 1930
Dear Mr. Glueck,
I have to thank you for your letter and for the interesting news you give about the excavations at Tell Bait Mirsim.
So far as the Jerash synagogue pictures are concerned, I personally have no objection to their re-appearing in ‘Asia’, but as it is a popular magazine and published in America, I should be obliged if you would first obtain the consent of my colleagues in Yale to the publication. Will you please write therefore to Professor Dougherty of Yale? I am sending him a copy of this note.
January 30, 1933
Dear Dr Glück,
I have been very much interested in the two documents which you gave me this morning, and am very grateful to you for having let me see them.
Dr. Fisher’s list of the main works to be undertaken in the future at Jerash is admirably clear and comprehensive. What you want from me I take it is a list arranged in order of urgency having [required] to the proposed early publication and the staff, the money, and the like are at your disposal.
I have not been to Jerash since the summer of 1930, so any knowledge of the recent work there is derived strictly from to the reports, photos which I have seen. Consequently we must take the following suggestions with reserve; there are points one might qualify [?] at once if one were on the spot.
However, so far as my information goes, the buildings to be considered first are:
The Temple of Artemis
The Forum and South Gate
The Triumphal Arch
The Theatre at Birketain
On these I believe a great deal of recent work has been accomplished: they are all works of great importance and are obviously sufficient in [?] for the first Jerash volume. It would seem therefore wise to concentrate on these first and to postpone work on such things as the city walls, the other gates, the Temple of Zeus, the two big Theatres and the Baths.
There is also a piece of clearance north of the ‘Cathedral’ and behind the nymphaeum which I am personally anxious to see made, but I am afraid it may be a very difficult job. I would like to talk it over on the spot with you and Fisher and Horsfield.
I hope this is the sort of answer you wanted.
April 15, 1933
Here is the memorandum I promised you in Jerash – I an sorry to have not sent it sooner.
When are you coming here. My wife has a lot of pottery and from which you might like to [?] a selection for to C-[?]
CINCINNATI INSTITUTE OF FINE ARTS
Dec 26, 1939
Dr. Nelson Glueck
c/o Dr. Samuel Iglauer
162 Glenmary Avenue
Dear Dr. Glueck:
It is with very great pleasure that I have to advise you that there has been awarded to you for distinguished archaeological work in the Near East, the Rosa F. and Samuel B. Sachs Scholarship of $500.00 for the year 1938.
This award has been made by the Board of Trustees of the Institute on the recommendation of its Scholarship Committee.
The formal presentation of the award will be made to you at the office of the Institute, #101 Gwynne Building, Cincinnati, at 3:00 P.M., Wednesday, December 27th.
HENRY J. CADBURY
7 BUCKINGHAM PLACE
29 Dec 1939
My dear Nelson,
I was asked by the Trustees of the American Schools of Oriental Research at their meeting on Monday to write to you in appreciation of the new and splendid service you have given us in the last two months in America. As a classicist I should call your labors as a lecturer Herculean. I do not know what is the Orientalist’s equivalent.
The gross income of your lectures (reported as about $2800) is being credited to the endowment fund and is enabling us to claim at the close of the year from the Rockefeller Foundation the full maximum sums that they offered. But the interest in our work that you have engendered in scores of places is a lasting contribution that will long yield dividends – not exclusively financial.
Wishing you a restful and comfortable voyage
February 3 1942
It gives me pleasure to inform you of your election as a member of the Cosmos Club on February 2, 1942.
At your earliest convenience kind enough to enter your name and address in the Address Book at the Club; the Clerk will at the same time furnish you with a copy of the By-Laws.
I am truly yours,
March 21, 1966
Professor Frank M. Cross, Jr.
Harvard Semitic Museum
6 Divinity Avenue
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts
Thanks for sending me the copy of Navah’s good article on “The Scripts of Two Ostraca From Elath” intended for the BASOR.
On the obverse of The Phoenician ostracan No. 2070, I think I can now make out more of the letters than previously. I would read the first letter of the 2nd the first line as an aleph and the last three as l š
- The mem at the end of the first line is now quite clear to me. The fourth last letter may also be an aleph although a mem is possible.
In the bottom last line, I still prefers šcdbcl, instead of the possibility of šmr bcl, which you suggested.
On the reverse of No. 2070, I believe that in the blob of the second last letter of the bottom, third line, I can make out a mem, and would read the final letter as a nun and the third last letter as a resh, thus r m n (Rumman). If the first two letters of this bottom line are to be read as bd, as you have suggested to me, then we would have the theophoric name of Bod-rumman (cf. L, E f S E III, p. 316, H d NSE, p. 369; Ryckmans, p. 32). The “Bod” element also occurs in the first part of the second line of ostracon 6043, as Albright originally recognized (BASOR 82, April 1941, pp. 13-14). Studying the original ostracan 6043 again, which Naveh properly designates as Edomite, (cf. Albright, BASOR 82, p. 13), I think you r suggestion of a koph and the reading of q(ws) are correct, – the full name thus being Bod-Qaus.
I have also been looking again at the lte Edomite graffito, reg. no. 374, published in BASOR 71, Oct. 1938, p. 17, Fig. 7; 72, Dec. 1938, p.9, Fig. 2 and OSJ, p. 111, Fig. 60, and would now read it as lcmyrw, “Belonging to ‘Amiru” – to read as a yod.
I have inserted with dots the middle and a suggestion of the bottom line of the letter I would like (to read as a yod.)
P.S. In the first line of ostracan 6043, there may be a letter between the resh and the ayin, possibly a gimel. I have indicated on the attached rough drawing where I think I see it, although I have inked it too strongly. The final lamed is hard to see on the orginal ostracan, which I have reexamined, having borrowed it from the Smithsonian. There is a lump on the surface which results in the appearance of a lamed in the photographs. However, I cannot absolutely rule out the possibility of its existence.
I tried my hand at copying several of the ostraca again, but am not satisfied because of a tremor in my hand.
I am nevertheless sending you copies and am also sending copies, including a copy of this letter, to Dr. Albright.