Garth Gilmour, Contributor

There was some excitement when it was announced in early July that a small tablet held in storage at the British Museum in London had been deciphered and found to contain a reference to a Babylonian man with the same name as one mentioned in the scriptures.

The museum has a massive trove of cuneiform tablets and inscriptions, many thousands of which have never been read or deciphered, the products of scores of excavations in Mesopotamia and the lands of the ancient near east in the romantic era of archaeology, from the nineteenth century to the beginning of the second world war.

An Austrian scholar, Michael Jursa, was reading one of these which told how the chief eunuch, one Nabu-sharrussu-ukin, sent gold to the temple treasury at a place called Esangila. This happened, according to the tablet, in the tenth year of Nebuchadnezzar, which we know to be around 595 BC.

Professor Jursa recognised the name from the story of the siege and destruction of Jerusalem as recorded by the prophet Jeremiah 39:3. Here we read of three senior Babylonian officials who sat in the city gate of Jerusalem after the wall was breached at the end of the siege in587 or 586 BC. One of them was Nebo-Sarsekim, by some translations, the same name as that recorded on the little tablet in the British Museum.

Much has been made of the parallel names in the two sources. This proves the Bible, say some, it shows the reliability of the Bible say others, while yet others scoff that the two names must refer to different people.

Who is right? Certainly the coincidences between the two sources are remarkable. An unusual name in each case is ascribed to a senior military officer known as the chief officer, or more specifically the chief eunuch, both individuals served during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, though the stories take place some eight years apart.

Close similarities

Is it likely they were the same person? Of course, it is. Is it certain they were the same person? Of course not! But unless and until evidence is found to the contrary, I think it is legitimate to assume that they are one and the same individual, on the basis of the close similarities in the two sources.

Too much can be made of such similarities, however. For example, in the same verse that refers to Nebo-Sarsekim, Jeremiah 39:3, two other individuals are referred to, both with the name Nergal-Sharezer. The author gave them different titles (one is "of Shamgar", the other "a high official") to distinguish them. Clearly, these are not the same person. Interestingly, they share the same name with a later ruler of Babylon who seized the throne from Nebuchadnezzar's successor Amel-marduk in around 560 BC, some 27 years after the events described in Jeremiah 39. Was one of these two mentioned in Jeremiah 39 the same man who became king in 560 BC? Quite possibly, but again, we cannot be certain without more evidence.

Other cases have arisen where biblical names have been uncovered in an archaeological context, leading to cries of 'I told you so' in respect of the veracity or otherwise of the scriptures. Some of these have more credibility than others. The recently trumpeted 'discovery' of the so-called tomb of Christ, was based on the presence of several very common first century AD names that also occur in the New Testament. The lack of any reasonable supporting evidence saw the story rapidly disappear from public consciousness.

Other finds, on the other hand, do lend credibility to the scriptures. In 1979, a collection of seal impressions was found in the City of David in Jerusalem, in a room that was destroyed in the Babylonian destruction in 586 BC. Among the names listed on these sealings were two that referred to biblical characters - Gemariah, son of Shaphan and Azariah, son of Hilkiah. Gemariah is referred to in Jeremiah 36, and other places where he is identified as the royal secretary to the king, while Azariah is named in priestly lists in 1 Chronicles 6 and 9. But it is their fathers that are significant, for both are mentioned in the much maligned story in 2 Kings 22 of the discovery of the scroll of the law in the temple during the reign of King Josiah a generation before.

Nationwide religious reform

According to the biblical narrative, Hilkiah was the High Priest who discovered the scroll, while Shaphan was the royal secretary who took it and read it to the king. The result was a nationwide religious reform that had very significant consequences throughout the nation.

Are the two individuals mentioned in the seal impressions the same as the biblical characters? We cannot say for certain, but in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the answer seems to be, yes, probably they are. The names, the context of the discovery, and the date all support the identification. Does this add to biblical credibility? For some, it may well do so.

The whole matter of biblical reliability is, of course, bound up with faith. If everything could be proved by the stuff we dig out of the ground, where would there be room for faith? The writer to the Hebrews says it best: "Without faith it is impossible to please God." (Hebrews 11:6). If he is right, then it's best not to try too hard to prove everything in the Bible. Leave some room for faith - it's a necessary element to pleasing God!

Dr. Garth Gilmour is a biblical archaelogist based at the University of Oxford.Send feedback to mark.dawes@gleanerjm.com