Not so much! (Ark update)

Looks like it was a case of bad transaltion. Oh, well. Whatever they have, even if it dates from a latter post-Roman era would have been interetnig to see.

See here:

http://www.ethiopianreview.com/news/6067

http://www.adnkronos.com/IGN/News/Cronaca/?id=3.0.3445266776

Ark of the Covenant to be revealed?

See the news article here: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/132067

The Ethiopians are planning on revealing what they claim to be the Ark of the Covenant supposedly held in the Church of Mary Zion in Axum. Now it may be an old replica, or even a reliquary of some sort, even if not the genuine object.

I'm not sure how they plan on dating it [they aren't going to let a piece of it get broken off for carbon dating I'll bet].

Even if it is not legitimate it might be an interesting replica. If it does date from the time when Jews may have fled to Ethiopia, then there is a good possibly it is an exact replica made by people who saw the original.

This would be most interesting to see how they represent the Cherubim. We in the modern world tend to use human figurines. Yet, the Cherubim where not unknown in the ancient near east [such as the Arslan Tash Cherub that dates to 8th-9th century BC], and acted as guardian spirits to sacred spaces and thrones of the king. These are similar roles as played in the Old Testament as guardians of Eden (Gen 3:24) and God's throne (Ezek 1:1-28; 10:1-22). A Cherub was always represented as a composite creature, and never completely human in form. Normally they had a human face/head, but then animal bodies, such as a lion body and snake tail. Or even the lower half of a bull. In one case however, in connection with the vision in Ezekiel, the Cherubim may have animal heads such as that of eagles, but with a human body.

Conversely, it may be possible to help date the object based on said representations. A “Cherub” in the modern post-renaissance sense or as seen in some Christian iconography would suggest a latter date as a reinterpretation of the Ark. However if the Ark’s Cherubim fit the pattern found in the Ancient Near East, then it [although certainly not proof of being the genuine Ark] does show it as coming out of the same time period and cultural region of the original.

Further Reading:

Ark of the Covenant: [not claiming veracity or anything, these are just what I am most aware of]

"The Sign and the Seal" by Graham Hancock

"In Search of the Lost Ark of the Covenant" by Cornuke and Halbrook

"Lost Temple Treasures" by Randall Price

"Mysteries Of The Bible: Essays by the Biblical Archeology Society" ed by Molly Meinhardt

Cherubim:

Van Der Torn, Becking, and Van Der Horst “Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible” p. 190

Othmar Keel “Symbolism of the Biblical World” p.142

Elie Borowski, “Cherubim: God's Throne?,” Biblical Archeology Review 1995, p.37.

New Book

"Dreams, Visions, and Spiritual Authority in Merovingian Gaul" by Isabel Moreira.

Found it at half-price books [I need to just stop prentending I won't buy something "this time"]

It sounds intereting, i'll post some comments when I'm done. [And when I get to it, as i'm reading a book on the sacraments]