The Jehucal and Gedaliah Bullae

The Yehukal bulla appeared in the 2005 excavation of the Large Stone Structure at the summit of the City of David. Wet sifting of soil from the 2007–2008 work in nearby Area G yielded the Gedalyahu impression, published with dozens of Hebrew bullae in the site’s excavation volume. Their discovery years and precise loci differ, so they should not be described as two impressions found together in a single archive box. Their proximity is nevertheless meaningful within Jerusalem’s elite administrative quarter. The sealings entered scholarship through excavation reports and epigraphic catalogues rather than the market. Subsequent popular presentations paired them because Jeremiah pairs the owners, but responsible narration preserves the distinct recovery histories.

Both objects are small clay bullae impressed by incised stamp seals that once secured tied documents. Yehukal’s three-generation formula includes an additional ancestor, Shovi, not supplied in Jeremiah; this extra information is compatible with, but does not prove, the proposed identification. Gedalyahu’s impression preserves his father Pashhur. Late paleo-Hebrew letter forms and conventional l- ownership formulas mark them as products of Judahite administration. The reverse sides and clay form witness document closure even though the papyri and cords have vanished. Neither bulla contains a job title, king’s name, prophetic reference, or narrative statement. They are signatures of administrative activity, not miniature biographies, and their value arises from the combined epigraphic and archaeological context.

Ceramic and architectural context together with paleography place both impressions near the end of the First Temple period, broadly the late seventh or early sixth century BC. Jeremiah situates Jehucal and Gedaliah under King Zedekiah during the Babylonian siege, an appropriate horizon for the objects. Area G and the summit structures preserve repeated evidence of elite residence and administration before the 586 BC destruction. Yet a destruction layer only establishes that material was present by the catastrophe; it does not date every sealing to the siege year. Nor does spatial proximity prove that both men worked simultaneously in one office. The strongest chronological conclusion is that officials bearing these exact paired names participated in Jerusalem’s late monarchic documentary system.