Does SBLHS intend authors who use footnote-bibliography style citations also to use the "ibid." notation according to normal Chicago Manual of Style conventions? SBLHS, pgs. 58 n. 6, 59 n. 7, 70, appears to suggest that this procedure would be entirely appropriate.On the other hand, SBLHS, pg. 40, only provides the advice that "subsequent notes referring to the same source should use a short title and the abbreviated note form exhibited in the examples in §7.2." Moreover, SBLHS, pg. 62, provides an example of back-to-back notes (78–79) that both refer to Dahood's commentary on Psalms, but the second of these notes does not employ the "ibid." notation. The current version of the SBLHS Student Supplement, pgs. 4, 10, also provides similar examples.Therefore, if you could offer some clarification about the preferences of SBLHS toward the use of "ibid." or direct me to someone who could, I would be very grateful.
Although the issue is not addressed explicitly, SBLHS does intend for authors to use "ibid." when appropriate. As you note, this is consistent with, e.g., notes 5 and 6 on p. 58. The consecutive numbering of notes 78–79 on p. 62 is unfortunate, since it does imply (incorrectly) that short-title references should be used in subsequent notes. In short, in this matter (and many others) we follow CMS's conventions.