No title

bi

o

cal

rcaeol o

A Publicationof the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearch

st

Volume47 Number 4

December 1984

-Arc IqL3

f925

4

19373

19 5

19~~~9c Tii 7

1

?9

6

?4 t6

19

3 79

f9 19

190 9

Publications from the

Harvard Semitic Museum Courtesy

AmericanSchools of Oriental Research: Essential Guides to the Ancient Near East

Since its foundingin 1900, the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearchhas pioneeredNorth Americanand internationalresearchprojectsinto the fascinating worldof the ancient Near East. ASOR publicationsrepresentthe highest standardsin disseminatingthe resultsof this researchto the non-specialistand the scholar.The followingsamplingof ASOR publicationsis of interestto all generallibrariesas well as specializedcollections in religion,archaeology,or the Near East.

American Archaeology in the Mideast:A History of the American Schools of Oriental Research by PhilipJ. King Thisengagingbooktracesthe longstandingAmericaninterestin exploring the worldof the Bible.Whilefocusing on Americanexcavationsand primarily Dr.Kingpresentsa greatdealof surveys, on othernationalresearch information effortsaswellas the intellectualcurrents whichhaveshapedarchaeological research in the NearEast. "Thereaderis leftwiththe cumulative of a remarkable impression pieceof historicalwriting.... King'sbookwillproveto be a valuableadditionto the libraryof archaeology." -Theology Today ISBN0-89757-508-3

andskillfullywritten.... a finechoicefor "Lucidly anypublicoracademiclibrary." 4th ed. -MagazinesforLibraries,

BiblicalArchaeologist

The leadingillustrated magazineon the entireworldof the ancientNearEast.Since it beganin 1938,BAhasoffereditsreaders andreadability. Published reliability quarterly, it reviewsnot onlywhathasbeenfound,but whatthesediscoveries contributeto ourunderstandingof the worldof the ancientNearEast. See insertforsubscription information.

Forsubscriptions to Biblical Archaeologist, sendorderto:ASORSubscription Services, 4243 SpruceStreet,Philadelphia, PA19104

cloth$15.00

The BiblicalArchaeologistReader, Vols. 1 and 2

The BiblicalArchaeologistReader,

Vol. 4, ed. byEdwardE Campbell,Jr. Thishighlyregarded seriesoffersreprints andDavidNoel Freedman of seminalstudieswhichfirstappeared in The latestissuein thisseriescollectsthe Biblical from1938-1963. mostsignificantarticleswhichappeared Archaeologist A widediversityof topicsarerepresented in BAbetween1969-1975.The selections fromthe worldof the OldTestament includegeneralconsiderations of the aims to the socialenvironmentof of BiblicalArchaeology, patriarchs Archaeologyand the CommonLife,Archaeologyandthe earlyChristianity. Vol.1 ed. byG. ErnestWrightand of ReligiousLife,andthe contributions DavidNoel Freedman to a greaterunderstanding of archaeology ISBN0-89757-501-6 paper$6.00 the background to the NewTestament. Vol.2 ed.byDavidNoel Freedman and Publishedjointlywiththe AlmondPress. Jr.

Edward E Campbell, ISBN0-89757-502-4

paper$6.00

ISBN0-907459-34-X ISBN0-907459-35-8

Bibliographyof Holy Land Sites

Thisextremelyusefulworklistsallsignificantarchaeological on sites publications in the LevantandTransjordan. The bibin 1971and originallyappeared liography hasnowbeenfullybroughtupto datewith the publication of Part2. Published jointly with the HebrewUnionCollege. Part1 EleanorK.Vogel,comp. ISBN0-87820-626-4 paper$5.00 Part2 (1970-1981)EleanorK.Vogeland BrooksHoltzclaw, comps. ISBN0-87820-625-6 paper$5.00

cloth$24.95 paper$ 9.95

on ASORpublications, write:Eisenbrauns, ToorderASORbooksorformoreinformation P.O.B.275,WinonaLake,IN 46590

BiblialArchaeolg t A Publicationof the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearch

Volume47 Number 4

December 1984

Page206

Page224

Page240

197 ASOR at 85 PhilipJ.King

224 Noah and the Flood in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Tradition P

246 Biblical Archaeologist Update

A past presidentof the American Schools of Oriental Researchhighlights the organization's85 yearsof studying the history of the ancient Near East and eastern Mediterranean.

206 Gezer Revisited:New Excavationsof the Solomonic and Assyrian PeriodDefenses

William G. Dever The ten-yearexcavationprojectat Gezer ended in 1973. In 1984 the excavatorsreturnedfor another season in orderto settle a naggingcontroversy and to fill in some importantgaps in our knowledgeof the site.

220 BA Portrait

Zimri-Lim Takesthe GrandIbur

Jack Lewis An eminent scholar surveysthe diverseresponsesto the story of the flood found in the three majorreligions of the Middle East.

240 The Museum Trail

The Petrie Museum of EgyptianArchaeology, University College London

BarbaraAdams This importantcollection, the core of which is made up of artifactsfrom Sir FlindersPetrie'ssixty-plusyears of archaeologicaleffort,coversthe full rangeof Egypt'scomplex history.

JackM. Sasson Using informationfrom fifteen justtranslatedtexts, this article addsto the descriptiongiven in our June 1984 issue of the last king to occupy the famous palace at Mari.

253 A Note on Artistic of the Representations SecondTempleof Jerusalem Asher S.

Kaufman The pictorial informationon coins is often enigmatic and requiresthe use of relatedliteraryevidence to be properlyinterpreted.This is especially true for the portrayalof the Second of Jerusalem. Temple

Sir FlindersPetrie ValerieM. Fargo As a result of Petrie'smonumental work at the turn of the century,he is recognizedas having single-handedly establishedNear Easternarchaeology as a scientific discipline.

DEPARTMENTS 195

Introducingthe Authors

196 Fromthe Editor'sDesk 255

Book Reviews

Biblical Archaeologist is published with the financial assistance of the Endowment for Biblical Research, Boston (formerlyZion Research Foundation), a nonsectarian foundation for the study of the Bible and the history of the Christian Church.

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

193

Biblical

Archaeologist

Editor EricM. Meyers ExecutiveEditor MartinWilcox Associate Editor JamesW.Flanagan Assistant Editor KarenS. Hoglund Book Review Editor PeterB. Machinist EditorialAssistants Melanie Arrowood Daniel M. Cohen Sue Ann Curtis Art Director LindaHuff AdvertisingDirector KennethG. Hoglund EditorialCommittee LloydR. Bailey Carole Fontaine VolkmarFritz LawrenceT. Geraty David M. Gunn A. T. Kraabel BaruchA. Levine Carol L. Meyers JackSasson JohnWilkinson

Announcing the appearance of a new series, Excavations and Surveys in Israel, the English translation of Hadashot Arkhthe Archaeological eologiyot, Newsletter of the Department of Antiquities and Museums.

Biblical Archaeologist (ISSN 0006-0895) is published quarterly (March, June, September, December) by the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR), a nonprofit, nonsectarian educational organization with administrative offices at 4243 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104. Annual subscription rates are $16 for individuals and $25 for institutions. There is a special annual rate of $14 for students and retirees. Current single issues are $5 ($4 for students and retirees). Outside the U.S., U.S. possessions, and Canada, add $2 for annual subscriptions and $1 for single issues. Subscription orders and correspondence should be sent to ASOR Subscription Services, P.O. Box 3000, Department BB, Denville, NJ 07834. Article proposals, manuscripts, and editorial correspondence should be sent to the ASOR Publications Office, P.O. Box H.M., Duke Station, Durham, NC 27706. Unsolicited manuscripts must be accompanied by a self-addressed, stamped envelope. Foreign contributors should furnish international reply coupons. Advertising correspondence should be addressed to the ASOR Publications Office, P.O.Box H.M., Duke Station, Durham, NC 27706 (telephone: 919-684-3075). Composition by Liberated Types, Ltd., Durham, NC. Printed by PBMGraphics Inc., Raleigh, NC. Second-class postage paid at Philadelphia, PA 19104 and additional offices. Postmaster: Send address changes to ASOR Subscription Services, PO. Box 3000, Department BB, Denville, NJ 07834.

Copyright ? 1984 by the American Schools of Oriental Research. OF 0

L) O

194

cT ?

This new series is published by the W.F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research in cooperation with the Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology, the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums and the Israel Exploration Society. Each volume of this series presents an overview of archaeological activities in Israel -- large and small scale excavations, salvage work, surveys and other research - in a given year. Volume 1 is available for purchase in the United States from Eisenbrauns, P.O.B. 275, Winona Lake, Indiana 46590 at a cost of $9.00. In Israel, it can be purchased from the Israel P.O.B. Exploration Society, Jerusalem at a member's 7041, cost of $7.00. The volume is also available to visitors to the Albright Institute, at the Israel Exploration Society's member's price.

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

Excavations

and in

Surveys Israel

1982

Volume

1

English Edition of Hadashot Arkheologiyot Archaeological Newsletter of the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums, Numbers 78-81 Jerusalem 1982

BarbaraAdams

JackP Lewis ValerieM. Fargo

William G. Dever

Philip1.King

Asher S. Kaufman

Introducing the

Philip J.King is Professorof Biblical Studies at Boston College. A past presidentof the American Schools of OrientalResearch, Dr. King has been actively engagedin field archaeologyunder ASOR auspices for overtwenty years, and a recent book of his, American Archaeology

in the Mideast (Philadelphia: The

American Schools of Oriental Research, 1983), presents the history of ASOR.His currentresearchfocuses on archaeology's contribution to the study of the prophetsof the eighth century B.C.E.

William G. Dever is Vice Presidentfor ArchaeologicalPolicy of the American Schools of Oriental Research.With a Ph.D. from HarvardUniversity,he has directedseveralexcavations,including the one at Gezer in 1966-1971 and 1984. He is presently Professor of Near East Archaeology at the University of Arizona, and he just completed a six-yearstint as Editorof the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. Among

many otherprojects,Dr. Deveris now at work on a popularbook on Gezer. ValerieM. Fargoreceived her Ph.D. in Near EasternArchaeology from the University of Chicago. She is Assistant to the Director of the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago, and Project Director of the Joint Expedition to Tell el-Hesi in Israel. Jack P. Lewis is Professor of Bible at the Harding Graduate School of Religion in Memphis, Tennessee. With Ph.D.s from HarvardUniversity andfrom HebrewUnion College, Dr. Lewis has authorednumerous books, including The Interpretationof

Authors

JackM. Sasson

Noah and the Flood in Jewish and Christian Literature (Leiden:

E. J.Brill, 1968; reprintedin 1978).He is also on the editorial

boards of Restoration Quarterly and the Journal of Hebraic Studies.

BarbaraAdams is Curator of the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeologyat University College London.She is the authorof Ancient Hierakonpolis and Supplement (Warminster, England:

Aris & Phillips, 1974) and now excavates at the site with the American team led by Dr. Michael A. Hoffman of the University of South Carolina under the auspices of the American ResearchCenter in Egypt.Her latest publication, with Richard Jaeschke, is Koptos Lions (Milwaukee: Milwaukee Public Museum, 1984). JackM. Sasson receivedhis Ph.D.from BrandeisUniversity.He is Professorof Religion at the University of North Carolinaat Chapel Hill and AdjunctProfessorof Religion at Duke University. Dr. Sasson has published widely, especially on Mari, and among his writings is a commentary on the Book of Ruth published in 1979by JohnsHopkins University Press. Asher S. Kaufmanwas educated at George Heriot's School in Edinburgh,Scotland. He received his Ph.D. from Edinburgh University. Since 1959 he has been a faculty member of the Hebrew University of Jerusalemin the Department of Physics (nowthe RacahInstitute of Physics).He has been interestedfor many years in Temple research (preciselocation and architectural form).

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

195

Elizabeth B. Moynihan

From

The

the

Editor's

Desk

foundingof the AmericanSchoolsof Ori- history,a time that most of us believe will be crucial to its

ental Researchin 1900was an expression of the fascination that the ancient Near East held for people in the United States. In the eighty-five since then, which has witnessed ASOR's often years in what we now refer to as the Middle work pioneering has steadily grown, and so has our that fascination East, organization. Today ASOR is an international organization, with field projects,researchinstitutes, numerous publications (including Biblical Archaeologist), and both individual and institutional members. Its vitality has led to the recent election, for the first time, of a chairman of the boardof trustees. Ourgoverningbody felt that ASORhad become so dynamic and multifaceted that one of its members, a "firstamong equals,"should work virtually on a day-to-daybasis with its officers and staff. Our first chairman is Mrs.ElizabethB. Moynihan, and I am proudto introduce her here to the readersof BA and friendsof ASOR.Mrs.Moynihanbringsto this important role an extensive backgroundin projectmanagement and in architecturalhistory. Among her many activities, she has managed the campaigns of her husband, New York SenatorDaniel P.Moynihan, and written the book Paradise as a Garden: The Gardens of Persian and Mogul India (New York:Braziller,1979).Wearefortunateindeed to have someone of her ability at this time in ASOR's

196

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

continued success. ASORat eighty-fivefaces increasingfinancial commitments in every aspect of its operation, and during the upcoming yearMrs.Moynihanwill be leading an effortto increase our endowment. This capital campaign will insure a solid base for current programsand should lay the groundworkfor additional projects that have been identified as valuablebut which currentresources make impossible to carryout. This issue of BA is playing a part in this effortwith two important articles. The first, by Philip King, a past president of ASOR, is an enlightening essay on the history of our organization, and the second, by William G. Dever, our currentvice presidentfor archaeologicalprojects,is a lively and captivating presentation of the fortification system at Gezer. These two papersmanifest ASOR'spast and present, and we ask your help as subscribers to BA and as friends and members of ASOR in promoting its future. Together,I think we will find it an exciting task.

Eric M. Meyers Editor

at

G.ErnestWright examining potterywithoneof his area at Shechem. supervisors

by

Philipj

King

Foundedin 1900 with 26 institutional members in the United States and one overseasinstitute in Jerusalem, the American Schools of Oriental Research has participated in most of the important archaeological events in the Middle East during the past 85 years, including the discovery and publication of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the work at Tell Beit Mirsim, Jerash, Gezer, Tell el-Hesi, Meiron, and many other famous Holy Land sites. Its numerous publications, such as the annuals and monographs, the Bulletin of ASOR, the ASOR Newsletter, the Journalof Cuneiform Studies,and BiblicalArchaeologist,have played an important role in disseminating information on these discoveries to scholarly and general audiences alike. It has also grown impressively as an organization during this time, presently consisting of 162 institutional members from throughoutthe world including universities, colleges, seminaries, and museums; 3 research and educational institutes (The W Albright Institute of ArchaeF. ological Researchin Jerusalem;the American Centerof Oriental Researchin Amman, Jordan;

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

197

and the CyprusAmerican Archaeological Research Institute in Nicosia, Cyprus);approximately 40 affiliated fieldwork projects; several centers in the United States, including its administrative office in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and its publications office in Durham, North Carolina; and nearly 7,500 individual members. As ASOR enters its eighty-sixth year, the officers, trustees, and members would like to invite all those who are interested in the history of the ancient Near East and easternMediterraneanto join them in a yearlongcelebrationofASOR'spast and a look towardsits future.7bkick off this celebration, I have asked Philip King, a past president of the organization, to write about some of the highlights of ASOR's work so far. It is a pleasure for me to present this article, and I would urgeanyone who is interested in learning more about us to see ProfessorKing'sbook American Archae-

ology in the Mideast:A Historyof the AmericanSchoolsof

Oriental Research(WinonaLake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1983) or to contact any of our members, officers, or institutions. EricM. Meyers Editor

rchaeology has come a long way in the last

century.At onetimeit hadseriouscompeti-

tion from treasurehunting. Forinstance there was the clandestine operationby the Englishman Montague B. Parker whose scandalous activities were summarized in The New YorkTimes headline of May 7, 1911:"AMysterious Expedition, ApparentlyNot Composed of Archaeologists, Hunts Strange Treasure Under the Mosque of Omar, Sets the Moslems in a Ferment, and May Cause Diplomatic Incident."Determined to locate the treasureof Solomon'sTempleallegedly buried beneath the Temple Mount, the notorious Parkersparedno means, including bribery,to achieve his objective.In conducting his treasurehunt Parkercleared the tunnels and shafts opened earlier by Charles Warren in his own authentic exploration of undergroundJerusalem. Parkerhoped those subterraneanpassages would lead to the Temple treasure. Jews accused Parker of desecrating the tombs of David and Solomon, while Moslems charged him with profaning the sanctuary of the Dome of the Rock.At the same time scholarsresident in Jerusalem became suspicious. The New York Times cited the misgivings of Richard Gottheil: "None of the party appeared to be archaeologists." The newspaper report continued: "They [Parkerand company] made such a mystery of what they did that nobody could follow their work." The upshot of the aborted treasure hunt was that the so-called excavators barely escaped with their lives and, needless to say, found nothing. Unfortunately his misadventure has not deterred others in the same pursuit. The American Schools of Oriental Research, better

198

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

Sir FlindersPetriein the gardenof the school in Jerusalem(upper left), standing between Nelson Glueck on the left and P L. O. Guy, the excavatorof Megiddo(upperright),and in the library of the Jerusalemschool (above).This seminal figureof modern archaeology spent his last years at the ASOR school in Jerusalem,where he died in 1942.

TheoldestofASOR'soverseas theAlbrightin institutes, wasfoundedin 1900 Jerusalem andhasbecomean international centerfor scholarlyresearch.

known by the acronymASOR,came into being in 1900.In that year ASOR established its first overseasinstitute in Jerusalemto promote scholarly researchin the Near East and thereby to counteract the treasure hunters. ASOR's constitution stated: The main objectof saidSchoolshallbe to enable properlyqualifiedpersonsto prosecuteBiblical, linguistic, archaeological,historical, and other kindredstudiesandresearchesundermorefavorableconditionsthancan be securedat a distance fromthe HolyLand.

AmericansExplorethe Holy Land The buildings of the Jerusalemschool, which were constructedin Nineteenth-Century before the establishment of ASOR'sJerusalem 1925. Long School a handfulof Americansparticipatedin the rediscoveryof the Holy Land.The most distinguished, EdwardRobinson,was the first scientific explorerof issue). Bliss completed Petrie'sdig at Tell el Hesi on the Palestine(see King 1983a).Equippedwith little more northern edge of the Negev and also excavated at Jeruthan compass, thermometer, telescope, measuring tape, and Bible, he succeeded in identifying over one hundred biblical sites. In 1848,a decade afterRobinson'sfirst trip to Palestine, William F. Lynch of the United States navy explored along the JordanRiver and circumnavigated the Dead Sea. This first scientific survey of the Dead Sea was an important contribution to science. It produced, in addition to maps and drawings,reportson the flora and fauna of the Dead Sea, its geology, and an analysis of the water content. The oft-statedfact that the Dead Sea is 1,300feet below the level of the Mediterraneanwas first established by the Lynchexpedition. FrederickJ.Bliss was among the first archaeologists to excavatesystematically in Palestine.Bornin Beirut as the son of an American missionary, he was trained by the redoubtable British Egyptologist, Sir W. M. Flinders Petrie (see the BAPortraitof PetriebyValerieFargoin this

salem and other important sites. Unlike many of his peers Bliss was not attracted to field archaeology by apparentglamour. Workingalone at Tell el Hesi and at the same time plagued with poor health, Bliss found the inevitable annoyances of life on a dig hardto take. At the end of one especially difficult season at Hesi, he rejoiced: "Freefor a while from all the careand worryand responsibility, dirt, dust of ages, fleas, squabbles."On another occasion, frustratedby the lack of discovery at Hesi, he called the site a "fraud."And yet another time, when blinded by Hesi dust, he referredto the profession of an archaeologistas "asilly life."

From 1900 to the End of WorldWarI From ASOR'sinception at the turn of the century until the end of WorldWarI annual appointees, most of whom were leading biblical scholars, directed the Jerusalem School. The more intrepidones embarkedon some rather

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

199

daring trips to become acquainted with the environs of Palestine. Director in 1904-1905, Nathaniel Schmidt of Cornell University undertook a grueling inspection tour of the Dead Sea region, the Edomite territory, and the Negev. In circumnavigating the Dead Sea he and his students had some hair-raisingexperiences.In the course of exploration,he recounted,his partywas surroundedby "aswarm of savages,not encumbered with much clothing, but armedto the teeth with swords,guns, pistols, and knives."He continued: "Wetried to get our boat out, but deemed it most expedient to let them drag it ashore, when guns were pointed at us and our food and blankets were carriedaway."In their exploration of the Dead Sea, Schmidt and his companions were as courageous as William Lynchduringhis perilous expedition fifty-seven years earlier. RichardJ.H. Gottheil, professorof rabbinic literature and Semitic languagesat Columbia University was director of the Jerusalem School from 1909 to 1910. In the course of the year Gottheil concentrated on Arabic manuscripts and inscriptions and compiled a complete catalog of the Arabic manuscripts housed in the public libraryof the Kutainahfamily and in the privatelibraries of the Jar-Allahand al-Buderifamilies. This project was the first of several undertakingsby ASOR in the field of Islam.

200

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGISTIDECEMBER

William F.Albright and His Students At the end of WorldWarI William E Albrightbecame the

firstlong-term director oftheJerusalem School.Albright was the scholar who played the chief role in shaping the destiny of ASOR. As a precocious youngster he had an insatiable curiosity about the ancient Near East. The classic at that time, History of Babylonia and Assyria by R. W Rogers,fired Albright with such youthful enthusiasm that he could hardly wait to get to Jerusalembefore, as he feared,all the tells had been dug. On the occasion of Albright's appointment to Jerusalem, James A. Montgomery, ASOR's first president, remarked:"Itmay be that he [Albright]can provehimself as the coming director for a term of years."Apparently Albright passed the test, for he served as director of the JerusalemSchool for over a dozen years. Takinga genuine interest in promisingyoung scholars, Albright gave many of them their initial start. Benjamin Mazar, one of Israel'smost distinguished scholars, was one of them. Mazar still boasts of his closeness to Albright. It began with Albright's dig at Tell Beit Mirsim, where Mazarmasteredthe intricacies of stratigraphyand typology. Mazarwas one of the first Palestinian Jewsto conduct his own excavation. In 1936, an especially troubled year because of riots, strikes, and curfews, he began to dig at

Beth Shearim (known as "SheikhAbreik"in Arabic) in southwestern Galilee. An important site in Jewish history,Beth Shearim was a significant rabbinic center, and its cemetery became a central Jewish necropolis. Mazar relates with pride that he preparedhis Beth Shearim materials for publication in the basement of the Jerusalem School. Nelson Glueck also exerted a strong influence on ASOR'shistory. Like Albright, he, too, was a long-term director of the JerusalemSchool. Trainedby Albright at Tell Beit Mirsim, Glueck became an excavator but is better known as an explorerin the traditionof the pioneer EdwardRobinson. During his comprehensive surveys of Transjordanand the Negev, Glueck visited more than fifteen hundred sites, and many of his identifications have stood the test of time. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 was the most electrifying event in the history of biblical archaeology. As often happens, the find was accidental-the Bedouin stumbled upon the manuscripts secreted in a cave on the west side of the Dead Sea.ASORwas not part of the actual discovery but afterwardshelped in several ways. The Syrian Orthodox Metropolitan of Jerusalem arrangedfor the scrolls to be brought to the Jerusalem School for evaluation. Examining the cache, John C. Treverrecognized the uniqueness of the find and sought permission to photograph the manuscripts. When he dispatchedprints of the Isaiah Scroll to Albright at Johns Hopkins University for his appraisal,the response came by air letter: on the greatestmanMyheartiestcongratulations uscriptdiscoveryof moderntimes! There is no doubtin my mindthat the scriptis morearchaic thanthatoftheNashpapyrus. I shouldprefera date around 100 B.C. What an absolutelyincredible find!And there can happilynot be the slightest doubtin the worldaboutthe genuinenessof the manuscript.

G. ErnestWrightand the Foundingof Biblical Archaeologist One of ASOR'smost influential leaders was G. Ernest Wright,a versatile scholar distinguished in both biblical theology and archaeology.The convergenceof these two disciplines was central to his conception of biblical studies. Holding to his basic position that revelation comes throughevent, Wrightunderstoodbiblical faith as rooted in history and saw it as archaeology'sfunction to recoverthe historical foundation of the Judeo-Christian tradition. An inspiring teacher,he trained a whole generation of field archaeologistsin his classes at Harvardand in the field at Tell Balatah (ancient Shechem). Almost everyAmerican archaeologistdirecting a dig today came under Wright'sinfluence. Wrightmade anotherenduringcontribution to biblical archaeology by launching the Biblical Archaeologist, intended to provide the general readerwith reliable and current information about Near Eastern archaeology, especially as it contributes to an understanding of the Bible. When the first issue of this journal appearedin 1938 it consisted of a mere four pages, at an annual subscription rate of 50 cents.

Past directorof the Jerusalem school, Nelson Glueck, is shown on the far left in his role as explorer(as he surveyed the area near JebelHamr Idfan)and on the near left as archaeologist (in his excavations at Tellel Kheleifehfrom 1938 to 1940).Right: John C. T7ever,the first person to photographthe Dead Sea Scrolls at the Jerusalemschool is shown here at the Claremont Library.Farright: Nelson Glueck resting at the springof Dan duringa field trip taken by the Jerusalem school in 1947.

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

201

At ASOR'sinstituteinJordan,a centralconcernis thatcommercial andarchaeological development preservation go handin hand.

Left:Nelson Glueck and William G. Dever at Gezerin 1971.Above: Between 1950 and 1956 successive directorsof the Jerusalemschool conducted excavations at biblical Dibon (modernDhiban), known as the capital of the ancient Moabite kingdom and as the findspot of the famous Moabite Stone.

ASOR in Jerusalem,Baghdad,Jordan,Carthage,and Cyprus Working in a particularly volatile region of the world, ASOR has had to be sensitive to partisan politics while alwaysremainingevenhanded.In 1923ASORestablished in Baghdadits second overseas institute. Modern Iraq, roughly coextensive with ancient Mesopotamia, holds a special interest forbiblical scholarsbecause of its illumination of biblical events. Unfortunately at the moment the political climate is not conducive to sustained American work in Iraq,and the institute is not active, but in the past ASOR made a notable contribution to the archaeology of that country. The partitioning of Palestine in 1948 had the unfortunate effect of cutting ASORoff from its friends in modern Israel.The realignment of internationalbordersbetween Israel and Jordan after the war of 1967 restored this relationship. Before 1967 the JerusalemSchool served as ASOR'sbase in Jordan;after 1967 ASOR established in Amman a new institute, the American Center of Oriental Research,better known as ACOR. At the same time ASOR renamed its JerusalemSchool the Albright Institute of Archaeological Research (AIAR)in honor of its most renowned director. ASOR also aspired to open an institute in Beirut to serve as a center for the study of Phoenician history and culture, but political turmoil preventedit. Now it may be too late. Instead,in the 1970sASORturnedtowardtwo of the principal colonies of ancient Phoenicia-Carthage and Cyprus-and opened institutes. Strategically located, Cyprus is a natural bridge between east and west and is, therefore,the obvious meeting place for classical and Near Easternarchaeologists.Civilization on Cyprus

202

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

dates as early as 7,000 B.C., and all the archaeological periods are under investigation from the Neolithic age through the Byzantine, Medieval, and Ottoman eras. ASOR'sCyprusAmerican ArchaeologicalResearchInstitute (CAARI),so well directedby StuartSwiny,is actively engaged in the extensive archaeological research underway on the island. Swiny also excavates at Sotira Kaminoudhia, a settlement and cemetery site in the Limassol district, important for the transitional Chalcolithic/EarlyBronzeAge. Making allowance for the traditions of the host countries, ASOR'soverseasinstitutes operatebasically in the same way. Each has a hostel to accommodate resident scholars. In addition to providing support services for archaeological field projects, such as excavations and surveys, these centers sponsor extensive educational programs, consisting of lectures, seminars, field trips, and exhibits. The institute libraries support these common programsas well as independent research.Most of the scholars in residence receive their financing from ASOR's generous fellowships. Funded by government grants and private donations, in academic year 19851986 ASOR will distribute more than $170,000 in research fellowships, professorships, scholarships, and travelgrants. As the oldest of ASOR'soverseas centers the Albright Institute in Jerusalemconducts the most comprehensive educational program. Its energetic director, Seymour Gitin, is responsible for the Albright Institute's newly expandedprogramand improvedfacilities. In addition to overseeing a variety of scholarly activities, Gitin also codirects with TrudeDothan of the HebrewUniversity a joint American-Israelidig at Tell Miqne (probablyPhilistine Ekron)in the JudahiteShephelah.Also, through his initiative, Hadashot Arkheologiyot, the indispensable

newsletter of the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums, will now be available on a regular basis in Englishunder the title Excavations and Surveysin Israel. This is an extraordinaryservice to the American archaeological community. Because Israel'sown archaeological community comprises such a largenumber of professional members, the Albright Institute no longer serves as a base for many digs, as Amman does. Instead, the Albright Institute is becoming an important international center for scholarly research and intellectual exchange. In the spirit of Albright's day it continues to be a congenial meeting place for Americans, Israelis, and scholars of other nationalities. The history of ACOR in Jordanis a great success story. Manyhave contributedto its birth andgrowth,but no one so much as JamesA. Sauer,one of its long-termdirectors. ACOR was born in 1968 in a rented building on Jebel Amman. It immediately outgrew that house and a succession of rented quarters. Sixteen years later a threestorey permanent building situated on a hill across the street from the University of Jordanand near the British and German archaeologicalinstitutes is under construction. The site of the new building is a gift of the Jordanian government. In addition, ACOR has received private funding from Americans and Jordanians,as well as a substantial grant from the United States government in recognition of ACOR's contribution as an American institution to the history and archaeology of Jordan.On the occasion of the ground-breakingceremony on August 4, 1984 Prince RaadIbn Zeid observed: One of ACOR's outstanding achievements has been to help integrate archaeology into the education of young Jordanians,and to promote our understanding of archaeology as a dynamic and interdisciplinaryfield of study that has many relevant applications to the problems of developing countries throughout the area. Today the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordanis burgeoning with archaeological activity, ranging from excavations

Topleft: The directorof the Taanachexcavations from 1963 to 1968, Paul Lapp(wearingthe cap),is shown escortingmembers of the JordanianDepartment of Antiquities around the site. Topright: The author, Philip J.King(on the left), and Melvin K. Lyonsin Jordan.As ASOR'smedical director,Dr. Lyonsprepareda handbook entitled The Careand Feedingof Dirt Archaeologists(1978)which addressed problems of health care and hygienic standards of dig camps. It has since become an important referencemanual for hundreds of staff members and volunteersassociated with excavations.Above: The currentpresident of ASOR, JamesA. Sauer,is shown here relaxing at the WadiRamm Desert Post in Jordan.

and surveys to restoration and conservation of monumental sites. SeveralAmerican archaeologists,following in the footsteps of Nelson Glueck, are conducting topographical surveys in Jordan;they have identified hundreds of new sites in previously neglected areas of the

country.On the southern bank of the Wadiel Hasa on the Jordanianplateau, for example, Burton MacDonald pinpointed more than 1,000 archaeological sites, while J. Maxwell Miller identified another 500 sites in the Moab plain. Donald O. Henry has been doing a surface survey of

prehistoric sites in southern Jordan,most of which have neverbeen explored.These surveysareproducingthe raw material for the writing of an archaeological history of the region. One of the most dramatic discoveries in recent times occurred on the eastern outskirts of Amman at Ain

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

203

ASOR'sinstitutein Cyprusserves as a meetingplacefor classicaland NearEasternarchaeologists. Ghazal where Gary Rollefson has been excavating.This Neolithic site yielded a spectacular collection of plaster human figures which are 8,000 years old. Comparablein significance to the Neolithic finds at Jerichoand Beidha, Ain Ghazal, accordingto the excavator,may be the best preservedand largest Neolithic settlement in the Near East. The rapid population growth and industrial development in Jordan, requiring construction of roads and factories, inevitably destroy ancient sites. While archaeologists find this disquieting, they do not think the country should become a museum. Insteadof competing with one another, archaeologists and engineers are encouragedto work together for the preservationof Jordan's cultural heritagewithout standingin the way of economic progress.Commercial growth and archaeologicalpreservation can go hand in hand when there is cooperation. David W.McCreery,the vigorous directorof ACOR, and JamesA. Sauer,the president of ASOR, have published a timely booklet, Economic Development and Archaeology in the Middle East, which addressesthese critical issues. All of the ACOR-sponsoredfield projects underway in Jordanare dedicated to protecting and preserving the cultural heritage of the land beyondthe JordanRiver. ASOR Thday When JamesSauerbecame presidentof ASORin 1982the organization'sadministrative headquartersmoved from Cambridge,Massachusetts to a double house on Spruce Street, Philadelphia, at the edge of the University of Pennsylvania campus. ASOR had come full circle-in this same building James Montgomery, ASOR's first president (1912-1933), had his offices. Also, Sauer fills the same academic post held by Montgomery. The newly acquiredbuilding in Philadelphia not only houses the administrativeoffices of ASORbut also has a hostel for students and visitors. Recently ASOR took an important step when it elected its first chairpersonof the board of trustees. Elizabeth Moynihan was the unanimous choice; she will work closely with the ASOR president in fund-raisingand in a number of other undertakings. The president also has the support and assistance of two excellent vice presidents- EricM. Meyersof Duke University is responsible for the ASOR publications and William G. Dever of the University of Arizona oversees all archaeological field projects affiliated with ASOR. Sauer,Meyers,and Dever-all former students of

204

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

William G. Dever,ASOR'svice president for archaeologicalprojects, is shown here leading a tour of TelDan in the summer of 1984. He is to the left of whom, looking back, is followed by Carol Meyers-AbrahamMalamat-and by AvrahamBiran,the directorof excavations at Dan. Immediately behind Dr. Biranare, on his right, James A. Sauer,president of ASOR, and, on his left, EricM. Meyers,ASOR's vice president forpublications. At the back is LawrenceE. Stager.

ErnestWright- are an impressive triad with vast experience in Near Easternarchaeology.Buildingon the dedication and hardwork of numerous scholarly predecessors, they are providingASOR with creative leadership,compatible with all the new developments in Near Eastern archaeology. On its eightieth birthdayASOR stoppedto take a look both backward and forward. After reviewing its past ASOR then planned for the future, specifically for the critical half-decadebetween 1980 and 1985. A task force formulated a set of goals which the trustees approved. The first goal is a summary of all the rest: To initiate,encourageand supportresearchinto the publicunderstanding of the peoplesandculturesof the NearEastandtheirwiderspheresof interactionfrom earliest times to the modern informedprojperiod,especiallyarchaeologically ects whichareintegrativeandinterdisciplinary. The ASOR goals conform well to the state of the archaeological art in the Near East on the threshold of 1985. As with many disciplines, the passage of time and the explosion of knowledge have made archaeologyquite complex. In the past twenty years almost every aspect of Near Easternarchaeologyhas changed.In the first place, both the temporal and the geographical horizons of archaeologyhave broadenedconsiderably.Todayarchaeologists are vitally concerned with every period, from Paleolithic to the Ottoman era; from the geographical perspective,surveysand excavationsareunderwayin the

ASOR is sponsoring projects in Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan,Syria,Tunisia,Turkey,and North Yemen.Politics permitting, ASORmay resume work in Iraqand begin in Lebanon.In Middle Easterncountries where ASORdoes not have overseas institutes, it maintains scholarly contact through membership in the following cognate organizations: the American Institute of IranianStudies, the American Institute for Yemeni Studies, the American Research Center in Egypt, and the American Research Institute in Turkey.These institutes as well as ASOR are all members of the Council of American Overseas ResearchCenters.Foundedin 1981,this council was created by agreement of its members to provide a forum for increased communication and cooperation among American overseasresearch centers.

The tour at Dan stops to inspect a balk. In the foregroundon the left is AbrahamMalamat. Other tourmembers are,from the left, William G. Dever,ASOR trustee JonasGreenfield,JamesA. Sauer, and EricM. Meyers.On either side of Dr. Meyersare excavation staff members.

lands extending from Tunisia to Iraqand from Turkeyto Yemen. Todayarchaeologyis interdisciplinary.Field archaeologists work side by side with natural and social scientists including geologists, physical and cultural anthropologists, paleoethnobotanists, hydrologists, and ethnographers. Also floral and faunal remains, often neglected in the recent past, are commanding special attention. Archaeology is benefiting greatly from improved techniques of retrieval, recording, and analysis of data. Thermoluminescence, for example, is especially useful in dating pottery and other fired clay artifacts, and neutron activation analysis can even establish the provenance of the clay used in making the pottery. Atomic absorption spectrometry and other techniques can now determine the sources of stones in ancient construction and of metals in ancient tools and weapons. New world archaeology with its emphasis on anthropology has directed the interest of Near Eastern archaeologists to such phenomena as social change, ancient economics, tradepatterns, and population shifts. Consequently, Near Eastern archaeology'sprimary interest in political history has shifted to a broaderconcern for the total environment of past societies and the human impact upon them. Consonant with the broadergeographicalperspective,

Conclusion It is a sadfact that the treasurehunting in the Middle East has not completely stopped.Would-bearchaeologists,for example, continue to expend money, time, and effort in search of Noah's ark. Buyuk Aghri Daghi, a remote promontory in northeastern Turkeywithin the boundaries of the land of Ararat,has been the target of several American expeditions in pursuit of the ark. Radiocarbon analysis of wood fragmentsfoundthere, however,yields a date no more ancient than the seventh to eighth centuries A.D. The most recent episode of searching for Noah's ark was reportedby The New YorkTimes whose headline read,"TurksHold American OverClaim to the Ark."This American, claiming to have found remains of the ark on Mount Ararat,was carryinga bag of dirt and rocks from the mountain as proofof his discovery.After studying the confiscated material geologists at the Istanbul Archaeological Museum declaredit had no historical value. The continuing good work of ASOR,however,makes it possible to see these efforts clearly in their properperspective: as small bursts of misguided energy in a field where much important and lasting work is being done. Without question the American Schools of Oriental Researchis at the forefrontof Near Easternarchaeology and allied disciplines. But it can continue to lead the way only through the cooperation of all of its membersindividuals, institutions, corporations,and trustees-for that was the key to ASOR'ssuccess duringits first eightyfour years. Suggestions for FurtherReading King,P. J. 1983a EdwardRobinson:BiblicalScholar.Biblical Archaeologist46: 230-32. 1983b American Archaeology in the Mideast. A History of the American Schools of Oriental Research. Philadelphia:The American Schools of OrientalResearch. McCreery,D. W.,and Sauer,J.A. 1984 EconomicDevelopmentand Archaeologyin the Middle East. Amman, Jordan,and Philadelphia,PA:Departmentof Antiquities and the American Schools of OrientalResearch.

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

205

Gezer Revisite

A view of TelGezerlooking north. Field I is to the left. Field III, the Solomonic gate area, is to the right. In the foregroundare the ancient approachroads from the Aijalon Valley.

New

Excavations of and

the

Assyrian Period

Solomonic

Defenses

G.DEVER BYWILLIAM

When

Alexanderone observerput it), field method Robert

StewartMacalister dug the great site of Gezer near the Aijalon Valley eighty years ago (1902-1909), Palestinian or biblical archaeologywas in its infancy.Indeed, these were the first large-scaleexcavations in the Holy Land.Despite the excavator's enormous energy and enterprise (a "monument of bee-like activity,"as

206

was then so primitive that with the excavation'spublication in 1912it graduallybecame evident that the vast exposure of Gezer'scity plan in Macalister's"First"through "Fourth Semitic"levels could not be dated accurately,much less understood adequately.Forexample, among Macalister'smost important discoveries was a gatewaycomplex near

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

the "OuterWall"of the city that he interpretedas a private entrance to a "MaccabeanCastle,"or to be exact, the palace of Simon Maccabeus in the second century B.C. Beforehe left Gezer in 1909, Macalisterbackfilled the area to protect it, and it was soon forgotten.But half a century later, Yigael Yadinreinterpretedthis complex, sight unseen, as a tenthcentury Solomonic city gate with

four entryways (Yadin1958).Yadin based his interpretationon the almost exact tenth-century parallels then known from his own excavations at Hazor and Megiddo,as well as the referencein 1 Kings 9:15-17 to Solomon'sbuilding activities at these three sites in addition to Jerusalem. Yadin'sbrilliant hunch was confirmed by the HarvardSemitic Museum- Hebrew Union College excavations from 1967 to 1970 in field III,when the city gate was fully cleared using modern methods and was dated to the Solomonic era with reuse phases in the Assyrian and the Hellenistic periods (Deverand others 1971: 112-20). Macalister had regardedthe gate complex as later than the "Outer Wall,"that is, it was set into a breach of an earlier,partially destroyedcity wall. Macalister had traced this massive rampart-the outermost of the fortification walls encircling Gezer-for a distance of some thirteen hundredyards.He dated the original construction to his "Third Semitic"period (roughlyour Late Bronze Age, around 1500- 1200 B.c.), but he noted that the many towers of well-dressed ashlar masonry were secondarily inserted into the wall and that the semicircular bastions built arounda few of the outer towers were later still. He concluded that the ashlar towers were a Solomonic rebuild, comparingthe masonry with the fine ashlar blocks that the German archaeologist Gottlieb Schumacherwas bringing to light then (1903-1905) at Solomonic Megiddo.The final addition of the bastions he placed in the period of the Maccabeanwars in the second century

B.c.

New Excavationsat Gezer We excavatedMacalister's"Outer Wall"and several of its towers in our fields I, II, V, and IX from 1964 to 1973 and arguedboth stratigraphically and ceramically that, for once(!),Macalister had been amazingly accurate in his dates.

PharaohkingofEgypt hadgoneup and capturedGezerand burntit withfire.... andhadgivenit as dowryto his daughter (1Kings9:16). diedI

;,

s

W t"nner e

Wall"

\

(Gap

High PPVlac "High

Plac"

:I. S

Excavation

(19,14)eWl

i:i

Field

I

(Unexcavated)

SGate

reach

.

--JAI

..

Overallplan of Gezershowing the variousexcavations. The "palace"west of the field-Ill gate, as well as the "Gatehouse"(orouter gateway) and the "OuterWall,"are shown as they were understoodprior to the 1984 season.

Specifically,we attempted to demonstrate that the "OuterWall" was basically a Late BronzeIIA construction of the well-known Amarna Age of the fourteenth century B.c., for the archives found at Akhenaton'scapital of El Amarna in Egyptrevealthat Gezer was a major city-state of ancient Palestine during that period (Dever,Lance, and Wright 1970:43-44; Dever and others 1974:36-39; Dever 1973a and 1982 and referencesthere).We concluded that this city wall probably functioned until the tenthcentury Egyptiandestruction mentioned in 1 Kings 9:16 and 17. This text declares that the pharaoh "burnedGezer with fire"before ceding the city to Solomon as a dowry to accompanyhis daughterin marriageto the Israelite king. The

A Continuing Controversy Despite Gezer'shard-wonreputation for pioneering the newer and more precise British-Americanstratigraphic (also known as the or "balk-debris "Wheeler-Kenyon" layer")methods in Israel (Dever 1973a and 1973b),several reviewers rejectedour interpretationof the evidence when we presented it in detail in Gezer I (Dever,Lance,and Wright 1970)and II (Deverand others 1974).Among them was Dame Kathleen Kenyon (1977),who attempted to redate all three phases of the "OuterWall"to the Hellenistic period. Already the Israeli scholar Aharon Kempinski had arguedthat the first phase of this city wall dated to the IronAge, probablyfrom the ninth to eighth centuries B.c. (Kempinski1972;see the reply in

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGISTIDECEMBER

207

Dever 1973c).More recently three younger archaeologists of the Tel Aviv Institute of Archaeology have published articles (Finklestein 1981; Zertal 1981;and Bunimovitz 1983), trying to reworkthe Gezer evidence -Macalister's and ours-to come out with a similar date. Thus, while few disputed our Solomonic date for the inner four-entrywaygate and the adjoiningstretch of casemate walls, severalauthorities arguedthat Macalister'souter "Gatehouse"and his "OuterWall"were later additions in the IronAge, perhapsbuilt in the Assyrian period in the ninth to eighth centuries B.c. Severalcritics pointed out that our LateBronzedate for the "Outer Wall"was anomalous: Everyother known fortification system in use in ancient Palestine at this time was simply a reuse of the Middle Bronze Age city walls. Weheld out for an original construction during the LateBronzeAge, however,not only on the basis of our new evidence but also on the assumption that at Gezer there was no other candidate for a LateBronzeAge wall. The Middle Bronzewalls had been destroyedaround 1500 B.C.and never reused, but in our view it was unthinkable that Gezer had remained unwalled in the Amarna Age (see the detailed reply to Kenyon,Kempinski, and Zertal in Dever 1982).Thus, Macalister'scareful description of relative phases, newer stratigraphic evidence, refined ceramic dating, and "deadreckoning"on the basis of historical considerations all supported our interpretation. Resolve to Returnto the Field Our ten-yearexcavationprojectat Gezer had come to an end on schedule in 1973 and none of the senior staff-least of all myself-had any intentions of going back for further fieldwork. Most had gone on to direct other projects in Israel, Cyprus, or Egypt,and all were more concerned with completing the projected series of seven final report

208

WhenI saw Gezerin thespringof 1984, SoutheasternBaptistTheological Seminary in WakeForest,North exactlytwentyyears Carolina. Elmo and Hannah Scoggin from the seminary joined the Devers afterwefirstwent and eight Arizona doctoral students there,thesitewas to make up the supervisorystaff, and the seminary also sent a group deserted and of twenty-five stalwart seminarians -the most redoubtablevolunteer with weeds. overgrown work force I'veever seen. In affiliation with the original sponsor,the volumes than with bringing to light Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute of Religion, and now also additional material. Nevertheless, I under the umbrella of the American decided that it was a disgraceful situation- a reflection on our much- Schools of Oriental Research,we vaunted modern methods -to allow worked for five weeks in Juneand a major,well-published city wall July.Despite limited time and system to remain in such dispute money, a makeshift camp, and a miniscule work force for such an that authorities could vary by as ambitious project-not to mention much as twelve hundredyears on the skepticism of a lot of watchful the question of its date, not to critics -we revivedsome of the mention its interpretation(Dever I determined to Gezer project'sold momentum and 1982).Accordingly, for a short team back to season Gezer go spirit. It was not the "BigDig" in the summer of 1984 to resolve, if of the infamous movie by that title that we had once filmed there, but it possible, some of these controversies. I thought, "Enoughof this run- was a nostalgic, often exhilarating season. And we managedto achieve ning battle in the literature- let us have some new and more conclusive all our archaeologicalobjectives.1 data!" But it was not to be so easy.When The 1984 Season I saw Gezer in the spring of 1984, Our primaryaim for the 1984 season was to cut some new sections exactly twenty years after we first went there to work, the site was de- against the "OuterWall"so as to date serted and overgrownwith weeds. it more firmly. But we also intended Our once-marvellousdig camp, with to clear awayMacalister'smassive facilities for one hundredand forty dump heaps from the outer "Gatehad been dismantled. house" of the Solomonic city gate, long people, I whom unseen proby anyone now living and My graduatestudents, had to recruit as staff, mostly posed published only sketchily, in orderto confirm its characterand date. been in kindergartenwhen we first startedto dig at Gezer!I did arrange Finally,as a long shot - a bonus, if it with nearbyKibbutzGezer for them worked-we decided to recleara to house and feed up to forty diggers large casemate wall and doublein the coming summer, but at the courtyard building shown on last minute they could provideonly Macalister's plan adjoining the gate on the west, hoping that it might space for us to erect a makeshift own. cook on our and prove to be a Solomonic structure camp similar to Yadin's "Palace 6000" at There were many times in late I the when rued and summer Megiddo (Yadin 1970). spring day I had decided to go back to The Lower Tlrrace Gezer. Nevertheless, we found modest funding from the University The area of the "Gatehouse" and "Outer Wall"was dubbed the "lower of Arizona and the National Geoterrace" because of its situation well well as from as graphicSociety,

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

downslope from the main gate. Beforewe could even begin to develop an excavation strategy,however, we had to locate these long-buried structures,which was no easy task, even with monumental architecture, since we knew from experience that Macalister'splans were frequently off by ten meters or more. Ploughing through Macalister'sdump heaps, which were twenty feet high, and removing severalhundredtons of dirt was feasible only with a bull-

OutrWall" atehous" breach Drawingsof archaeologicalphotographsby LindaHuff.

\/4 "OuterWall"

/r, r

3

Y, ~-----rc

and the "OuterWall" Macalister'splan of the "palace,"the "Gatehouse," Tobp: from The Excavationof Gezer, volume III,plan VI.Note the breachin the "OuterWall."Right: The "Gatehouse"afterpartial clearance. (1)Ashlar drain;(2) substreet;(3)ashlarpiers;and (4)probe into the tenth-century-B.c. fills. The original roadway surface was removed by Macalister.Below: This rough ashlar block with an inscribed "H,"a mason'smark, was found in Macalister'sdump overthe "Gatehouse."

C~

~.

I LT~LIJ

rl

5 v

J

3 4 21

dozer, that much-maligned bete noir of the modern archaeologist. Our driver,Ovadiah,was such an artist with the giant machine that we peeled the debris awayto bare the "Gatehouse"and "OuterWall" (which, sure enough, were not where they should have been!),scarcely dislodging a single in situ stone. An initial surprise awaitedus when the first element on the lower terrace,the "Gatehouse,"was cleared. It was constructed of rather fine ashlar masonry,preservedfive courses high in the north wall. Macalister had not published an

adequatedescription or even a single photographof the "Gatehouse" (exceptin his curious, obscure book Bible Sidelights from Gezer,which we had not seen). The ashlar blocks and their courses were nearly identical to the well-known Solomonic masonry at Megiddo and other sites.

On one block still in situ in a nearby tower, as well as on another block in the Macalister dump from this area, we noted masons' marks

-

an "H"

and a backward-facing"ELthat are paralleledonly at Megiddo.Astonishingly, this fine ashlar masonry was found even in the large drain

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

209

Innergate 0 V Vdrain __

o__ _ _A

__

_

Casematewall cesspool

vats fragment of water conduit

"Gatehouse astern

Tower

H

casemate wall

"OuterWall"

Approachroad

"Gatehouse" end of drain

Above left: Macalister'splan of the "MaccabeanCastle"from The Excavation of Gezer, volume I, figure 104. Under building H, which dated to the Hellenistic period, the eastern half of the Solomonic four-entrywaycity gate was uncovered.Above right: A new plan of the Solomonic inner-gatearea, including the "Gatehouse"and the "OuterWall,"based on a field survey by Wolfgang Schleicher.Below right: A section throughthe plasteredglacis from the Middle BronzeAge. (1)The glacis; (2) the foundation trenchfor the "Outer Wall'"and (3) the tenth-century-B.c.mudbrick revetment built on top of (4) the "OuterWall."

running below the roadwayand inside the south wall of the gatewhich was invisible to all but the original builders. Macalister had, of course, removed all occupational material down to street levels. But in soundings well below that we found deep, densely packed fills that servedas the "Gatehouse"foundations. They produced consistent mid- to late-tenthcentury-B.C.sherds-the first hard evidence we had for the date of the "Gatehouse."We also noted a heavy stone substreet, obviously intended as a defense against possible subsidence of the fills that carriedthe roadwayup the steep slope. But as the tilted ashlars of the drain showed dramatically,severe slippage had occurredanyway.(One suspects that some engineer'shead rolled when an investigation was held!)A final observationwas that both the angle and the dimensions of the "Gatehouse,"as shown on Macalister'splan, were inaccurate, so a

210

new architecturalsurvey of the entire areawas carriedout.2 Our strategyfor dating the second element on the lower terrace,the nearby"OuterWall,"was, we thought, deceptively simple, but it provedsimply deceptive!We would dig upslope from the inner face, below where Macalisterhad penetrated, in orderto reach undisturbed, datableliving surfaces against the wall. The "uglyfact that killed the elegant theory"was the massive "InnerWall"and glacis, or plastered embankment, of the Middle Bronze Age (around 1650-1500 B.C.), which

we encountered unexpectedly,filling much of the area. It turned out that here, exactly as we had found it in field I, the "OuterWall"was set tightly against an earlier glacis, which was scarpedback to receive it. Moreover,both the exposed plasteredslope and the old inner city wall continued in use upslope

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

1~

-----i ~

3-

1---- I ;s

from the new city wall, so that there never were any accumulating structures or living surfaces inside the "OuterWall."Thus our first deep trench inevitably failed to date the wall conclusively, except to show that it was later than the Middle BronzeAge city walls. The section, when driven all the way up the slope, did, however,revealfor the first time in the Gezer excavations all the various defense systems in a single sounding-the "InnerWall," the "OuterWall,"and the Solomonic casemate wall, the latter well dated here to the tenth century B.C.

x.2;-

"I

7k7l. I,' ~

~

g_

U-i C- 3ch~

?--4

The "OuterWall."(1)Tenth-century-B. c. uppercourses and mudbrick revetmentsectioned at right;(2) tenth-century-B.c.terrace walls for fills; (3) second-century-B.c.buttress;and (4) the Macalister dump.

Another Try compensate for the erosion of the natural terraintowardthe valley Our next attempt came outside the below was ingenious, but not al"OuterWall,"ordinarilynot considered a promising areafor in situ, together successful. First, they datable deposits. But here we had a brought in tons of fill to partially bit of well-deservedluck: Macalister level the slope. Then they began to build an interlocking system of had trenched along the top of the stone terraces,continuing to fill up wall only deeply enough to map it. and over these walls - a sort of subBelow that we dug down the face of terraneanhoneycomb that consolithe wall all the way to bedrock, an dated the deep fills. All this enor14 or 23 feet. astonishing courses, mous effort was below groundlevel, that he had written (Macalister found this wall standing no more simply to form a foundation for the than 11 to 12 feet high.) Furtherroadwayup to the outer gate. To we encountered a maze of guardthe roadway,the engineers more, built on top of the fill a tower and buttresses revetments, terraces, the at first inscrutable wall, against (approximately8 by 10 feet and but at last untangled and dated with constructed of good, typical Solomonic ashlar,or drafted,masonry), painstaking excavation, not to mention many drawn sections. against the face of the outer wall. the relative of sequence Gradually Finally,they plasteredthe face of the at least three phases became clear. wall for a distance, then carefully The lowest phase we had reached in laid against that a low revetment or the last week of the excavation, curb of several courses of mudbrick. was dated The date of these elaborateconphase 3, by large quantities of characteristicIsraelite handstructions, based on associated burnished sherds of the late tenth pottery and the style of masonry, It was a massive was clearly Solomonic. But we century B.C. filling and construction operation of the recognized- as was pointed out Solomonic engineers, obviously incessantly by our many archaeoto with the designed cope steep logical visitors - that none of this of the mound below the inner slopes interesting and valuable new evia outer dence datedthe "OuterWall"itself. gate by creating second, city All of our structures could be secwall and gate system to go with the ondary,in which case our theory four-entrywaygate and casemate wall upslope. Their solution to that the original wall dated earlier,

to the Late BronzeAge, was still tenable. The ashlar tower, for instance, looked like it was indeed inserted, as Macalister had thought of his towers.But there was no way to be sure, since careful workmanship could have simply disguised the joint. In our second (andfinal) attempt to date the "OuterWall,"we had been racinghard against time. The day before our last possible day of excavation I began to despair.Skillful strategy (we thought!),heroic earthmoving efforts by the volunteers, and steady,painstaking work by the staff where it counted most, under greatpressure,had almost paid off -but not quite. The final element of proof still eluded us. Wouldwe find it? Wasthere time? One thing had intrigued me all along: the Solomonic ashlar tower was founded nearly halfway up the face of the "OuterWall."Wouldthe builders have done that intentionally, if they were also the builders of the lower courses? Also, a sharp-eyed area supervisorhad pointed out a week before, in another deep sounding, apparentdifferences in the upper and the lower courses. Could we have two building phases? On the final morning, in a burst of inspiration and optimism, we drove the trench desperatelydown. In the

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

211

21s oo

Right: A deep sounding where the bonded join between the foundations of the Solomonic ashlar tower at left and the uppercourses of the "OuterWall"at right is shown. Below is the c. trench which cuts throughthe earlier dark organicmaterial chalk-filled tenth-century-B. against the lower courses of the "OuterWall"on bedrock.Note the slightly differentmasonry and alignment. Below: This simplified drawing of a section throughareas 17-20 of field III shows the Middle BronzeII Trench Mac. "InnerWall"and glacis, the CASEMATE 16002 Late Bronze-IronI "Outer 17004 Ph. 3 Wall,"and the Solomonic 17009 casemate wall upslope. 10t 2. 17011 WAIl 17014

--

17013

17029 "INNER

last two hours of the last day,we made it, finally hitting bedrock! Then we quickly cleaned the section to see it more clearly, and there literally popped into view a textbook example of a deep retrenching of the bottom three or four courses of the wall sitting on bedrock. Above the hardwhite chalk packed into the backfilled trench, the ashlar tower was founded. There was only one possible explanation for the sequence of features clearly visible in this section. The Solomonic engineers had found the stub of the "OuterWall"and had dug a trench down through severalfeet of dark brown organic debris accumulated against the wall face, apparentlyto check its footing. Then they had immediately backfilled the trench with packed chalk, founded the tower on that, and finally carriedthe wall on up for another nine or ten courses with smaller, roughly dressed masonry,but including some ashlarblocks where the tower bonded with the wall masonry.And the more we looked at the wall, the more it was clear that there was a difference in characterand even in alignment in the lower several courses and in the superstructure. Thus we now had a "phase4,"the original construction phase of the "OuterWall,"indisputably earlier, and enough so that it had had time to accumulate severalfeet of debris against its outer face. Such a massive pre-tenth-century-B.C. wall can

212

WALL" 17022 MB II Ph.8

Revetment

-Ph

3 Mac.

GLACS

Trench

--

Ph.8

hardlyhave been built in the Philistine era of the twelfth to eleventh centuries B.C., much less in the period of decline at the end of the LateBronzeAge in the thirteenth century B.C. Historical as well as stratigraphicconsiderations force us back at least into LateBronzeIIA, the AmarnaAge of the fourteenth

REBUILD 18003 10th c. 3 =Ph.

Revetment Ph.3 -

-

century B.C., as we had argued all

along. But now we had sufficient evidence that the burden of proof was on anyone who would argue otherwise. The dramatic section alone was almost literally black and white proof. Although the properunderstanding and dating of phases 3 and 4 were the most gratifyingresults of the 1984 season, the uppermost phases of the "OuterWall"complex also contributed to the later history of the city gate. Phase 2 consisted of a massive T-shapedbuttress against the wall that was difficult to date, but probablybelongs to the ninth century B.C. It rode over the stub of the tower,which had evidently been destroyed,like the upper gate, in the raid of the EgyptianpharaohShishak around 918 B.c. A final large but

crudely constructed phase-1buttress rose abovethe phase-2 buttress, datedby pottery and glass fragments to the Hellenistic period, when we know that Gezer'sIronAge gateway was reused for the last time in the

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

OUTER

WALL" 19002 LBII Ph.7

204.00m 0

1

2

3 m.

course of the Maccabeanrefortification of the site. One enigma was the "breach"that Macalister has shown on his plans, which was nearly twenty feet long and located between the broken end of the "OuterWall"and the north wall of the "Gatehouse."It did, indeed, persist all the way down to founding or street levels. But surely the wall must originally have connected with the "Gatehouse"to close the lower line of fortifications. What we encountered in the breach, however,were two phases of roughly coursed rubble fill. The lower phase, connected with the phase-2 buttress, was badly burned. We are inclined to regardthis as evidence of the Assyrian siege and destruction of

517 \-tr

_,

Upper: Outerface of the "OuterWall."(1)Plaster and mudbrick revetment of upper(Solomonic)courses with some ashlar blocks showing; (4) two (2) Solomonic ashlar tower;(3)ninth-century-B.c."T-buttress"; phases of rubble filling in the breach;and (5)tenth-century-B.c.terrace walls and fills. Lower:Solomonic ashlar tower of the "Outer Wall."(1)7tvophases of rubble filling in the "breach"in the wall; c. terracefor sub(2)ninth-century-B.c.buttress;(3) tenth-century-B. roadway fills; and (4) tenth-century-B.c.tower.

1

1~

s

Tiglath-pileser III around 734 B.C.A

well-known relief from the palace of this king mentions "Gezer"in cuneiform and actually portraysan Assyrian battering ram drawnup against the turretedtowers of the city and breachingthe wall, possibly near the gate, which was the most vulnerable point. As Professor BenyaminMazar,Israel'sveteran archaeologist, asked when he visited us the last week, could we be gazing upon the very spot where Tiglathpileser drew up his war engines to breach Gezer's city walls that fateful year? A final rubble repairabovethe burn layerbelonged in all probability to phase 1 and the final trauma of Gezer in the Maccabean wars.

The Upper Tbrrace While things were in a state of awful suspense on the lower terrace,half our work crew, for whom there was no room in the small probes there, had been excavatingsteadily but almost leisurely on the upperterrace, in the supposed"palace"west of the uppergate. I had studied Macalister's one minute plan and exactly two sentences of text(!)on this building, which had long intrigued me. I felt that if Yadincould play hunches, so could I, and his own Solomonic "Palace6000"at Megiddo,excavated in the 1960s, might provethe clue (Yadin1970).The two buildings certainly seemed similar: Assyrianstyle bit hilhni open-courtstructures, built into the casemate city wall, and both incorporatingcorner

4

towers.The Megiddo"palace"measured approximately70 by 95 feet, but, if I were correct, the Gezer structure was even larger- about 60 by 120 feet. Anticipation was high as we began. But here, too, there were surprises. The biggest surprisewas that there were not one but at least two "palaces,"hopelessly entangled, as we had often discoveredto our chagrin, on Macalister'splans. We carefully bulldozed tons of dump, only to discoverthat the uppermost building had been almost completely trenched out, and even partially removed,by Macalister.At first we could neither date nor make sense of the tatters of walls. We assumed that this ephemeral building had not been drawnby Macalister,so we

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

213

Above left: A plasteredpillar fromphase 3 which was reusedin the wall of a building fromphase 1 on the upperterrace.Note Macalister'sbackfill trench to the left, behind the meterstick. This was typical of the phase-1 building. Above right: TheAssyrian is depicted in this siege of Gazru ("Gezer") drawing of a relief from the palace of Tiglathpileser III at Nimrud. Below right: View of field III looking south. The overgrownSolomonic gate of the 1967-1970 excavationsis at the left, and the new areas in the "palace" are at the right. Note the plasteredlane between the two complexes (in the center)and the drop-offof the terrainto the valley below. Beyond,to the left of this photograph,is the Valley of Aijalon.

probedon below, looking for "our" palace. So intent were we on reaching tenth-century-B.c.levels that it was a day or two before it dawned on us that there was no lower palatial building (eventhough we did reach some in situ courtyardsand restorable tenth-century pottery).Then, in looking back over our shoulder,we realized that we could connect our fragmentarywalls with elements of Macalister'splan, even though the plan was confused and on too small a scale to allow for detailed comparisons. The conclusive proof came when we located a curious stone half-circlethat had not been previously excavated - then discovered

the other half of this silo on Macalister'splan, dug by him seventyfive years ago. A bit more probing,

214

and we were able to expose and correctly chart all the remaining traces of Macalister'supperbuilding, which became our phase 1. But how were we to date this building since its walls were trenched out and left standing isolated on stubs of debris? Fortunately,we were able to excavate one of these stubs under the walls,

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

and from this small pocket of undisturbedand sealed material we retrieveda few cooking pot rims that date to the late ninth or eighth centuries B.C. Thus the phase-1 "palace" was probablybuilt sometime in the eighth century B.c., then destroyed

by the Assyrians. This upper IronAge II structure,

as hypothetically reconstructed from correctedelements of both Macalister'splan and ours, can be interpretedonly hesitantly.3It meal•-sured approximately40 by 120 feet, i excluding the casemate wall (which i was, however,integral to it). The west half, rooms 1-4, may have had a residential purpose, to judgefrom the silo in room 1. The plan borrows some aspects from the familiar 12 "Israelite"or four-roomhouse, such 13 16 1C5] as a central corridor/courtyardand stone walls incorporatingupright pillars. The east half was evidently a barracksunit adjoiningthe Compositeplan of phase 1 on the upperterrace(eighth century B.c.;see note 3 below). Assyrian-periodtwo-entrywaycity gate. The major features are: (1)room 1, an entrance corridorand guardroom;(2)room 6, possibly a double-chamberedstairwell in a corner tower; (3)room 7, certainly an open courtyard,perhapsa small "paradeground"of sorts; and (4)rooms 8 and 9, clearly small guardroomsopening onto both the "palace"and the lane leading to the west guardroomof the city gate (tower 11). The tenth-century-B.c.casemate (rooms 12-16) had been cleared out and reused after an earlier destruction (probablyby the pharaoh Shishak) in connection with the phase-1"palace."This is clear,both from the poor rebuild of the upper courses of the inner casemate wall between rooms 9 and 12 as well as from the destruction debris of casemate 12, which spilled over into guardroom9. This ashy mudbrick 'Cdebris contained numerous partially restorablevessels of the late eighth (( century B.C., more than one hundred

SI)

ii

1

••M.

clay loomweights (many severely burned), and two iron arrowheads. The stones of the upper courses some completely calcined into lime by the fierce heat of the fire - fell down both into the casemate and directly onto the guardroom floor. Thus, even though Macalister had almost completely trenched out this building (in several places we found smashed early-twentieth-century

1

Nil

1N

-

K

/

~

cr!

Guardrooms8 and 9, as seen looking east across the lane to tower 11 of the Solomonic gate. (1)Phase-1and phase-2 floors in section; (2)IronII rebuild of the uppercourses of the (3)inner casemate wall which was destroyedat the end of phase 1.

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

215

porcelain china on the floorsMacalister'sdinner plates!),we have a firm Assyrian-periodhorizon for the phase-1"palace"or barracks, with the end securely dated to the

the building, along with the fourentryway city gate, had been violently destroyedin the late tenth century B.C.,probably in the Shishak

734 B.C.destruction. This is, no

doubt, the same Assyrian destruction encountered by us earlier in the adjoininguppergate in field IIIas well as in the 1984 season in the lower "Gatehouse"and "OuterWall" area. Now that we had successfully integratednearly all the elements of Macalister's"palace"into an eighthresidencecentury-B.C.-structure barracksadjoiningthe gate, we had to probebelow for our putative tenth-century "palace."First, much to our surprise,the walls of guardrooms 8 and 9 continued to go down to much lower levels, with a succession of floors dating to the ninth and tenth centuries B.C.When completely cleared some of the walls stood over six feet high, a rarefind in Iron Age archaeology.The ninth-century, or phase-2, floor levels are clear, as is the fact that the main walls from phase 3 were rebuilt and reused. But the overallplan of this structure adjoining the gate is uncertain, except for the reuse of guardrooms8 and 9. Apparently,following the Shishak destruction in the late tenth century B.C., the guardroomswere rebuilt of necessity in phase 2, but the remainder of the phase-3 building was too badly destroyedto repair.In general, this fits with the known historical and archaeologicaldata, which indicate that Gezer was in decline in the

Displaced blocks from the west wall of room 7 of the tenth-century-B. C. "palace"from phase 3. The robbertrench(1)is barely visible at the left.

raid alreadymentioned. Everywhere overlyingthe floors there was up to three feet of plastery debris,with wet-smoothed white wall plaster fragments of extraordinarilyhigh quality. The same quality is seen in the masonry,which is of massive, roughly squaredblocks. Along the west wall, these fine building blocks had tumbled over in disarrayand remainedwhere they fell. Here and there, however,the wall had been robbeddown to its foundation course, the robbertrench being clearly visible in the sections. Despite the fact that this large courtyardbuilding had been looted before its destruction and was found by us almost empty, a few smashed storejarsand bowls on the floor gaveus a date of the mid to late tenth century B.C.

In probingfurther down for our

The plan of this building was relatively simple. Room 7 was certainly an open courtyard,cobbled in places. Room 5 was a small entrance court, flanked by a probablestairwell for a corner tower,room 6. This court was also entered from the gate lane to the east. A side-courtto the right as one came in, room 4, had a large, well-preservedlimestone basin in the corner.This installation had two carvedchannels at the rim on each side that overflowedinto two large storejarswith the necks broken off, set flush into the plaster floor. Studies of such installations have shown that they were olive presses. The olives were crushed in the

expected phase-3 "palace,"it quickly became apparent that guardrooms 8 and 9 had certainly been built in the mid to late tenth century B.C.,when the four-entryway city gate and casemate wall were constructed. Their entrances opened off the fine plastered lane leading along the west wall of the gate into tower 11, and their floors were continuous with this paving. These small, secure

basin, then warm water was poured in which floated off the clarified oil into the settling basins. At first we regarded this large stone basin (which some volunteers promptly dubbed "Bathsheba's bath," complete with soap dishes!) as an odd feature of a monumental building adjoining the public gateway. But, in fact, similar presses have been found not only in royal, but even in temple precincts.

early to middle ninth century B.C.

216

:,I

/

7<

;!,-t ---' i..

< ""c,

chamberswere obviously designed to help control traffic at this crucial juncture.The remainderof the phase-3 "palace"was not, however, very clear,nor was it comprised of elements that continued in use into the ninth and eighth centuries B.C. In fact, the remaining portions of

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

Oliveswerecrushed in the basin, then

warmwaterwas pouredin which floatedoffthe oil. 041

61

-8

Above: The olive oil press in the cornerof room 4 of the phase-3 "palace"(tenth century B. c.). Right: Plan of phase 3 on the upperterrace(tenth century B. c.;

10

seenote3 below).

1

13

1=5

14

The existence of this phase-3 building, integrally related to the city gateway,its tower, and its two guardrooms,rules out any possibility that we have here merely a private house. This is either part of a largerpublic complex, possibly an administrative center- or, indeed, our anticipated Solomonic "palace" after all. It is not, however,a bit hilaini like the tenth-century Megiddo "Palace6000."Much more integrally related to the city gate, the Gezer structure is likely a combination administrative centerbarracks.But we shall remain uncertain of its exact function, since the rest of the building lies to the west, unexcavatedeither by Macalister or us. All that is clear is that some parts of this monumental structure were significant enough to have been repaired,despite destructions, and reused into the late eighth century B.C., a life span of over two hundredyears. Conclusion The 1984 season at Gezer, on the twentieth anniversaryof the series of campaigns that began in 1964, is

o

0

undoubtedly the last of the current excavations at the site. Certainly there remain fascinating problems of the earlier excavations,Macalister's and ours, that could be solved. Gezer, as we have always known, is indeed a complex but rewardingsite. But for now we must be content to have filled in some important lacunae in our knowledge of the Iron Age fortification and the political history of the Solomonic and Assyrian eras. It is also gratifying to have laid to rest (we hope!)a nagging controversyover the date of the "OuterWall"and "Gatehouse." Finally,we have put Gezer in the headlines again after a few years of relative neglect as attention turned naturally to newer and somewhat more glamorous sites. Now we must concentrate on the continuing final publication series, as well as on more popular accounts of our work.4 And, since the site is still very much visited, we hope to do more conservation and reconstruction work in

5

M.

orderto open Gezer eventually to a wider public. Notes to 1Weexpressourgratitudein particular

the National GeographicSociety for its support, as well as to the other sponsors.Professor Scoggin,Associate Director,and his students from SoutheasternBaptistSeminaryare especially to be commended.Mr.RichardJ. Scheuermade a substantialcontribution to the supportforthcomingfrom the Hebrew Union College- JewishInstitute of Religion. We also wish to thank the members of KibbutzGezer (especiallyBarryAleshnik), for becoming our lifeline to ancient Gezer.A fuller reportof the 1984 season will soon appearin the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 2Theplan of the Solomonic inner gate area, is based on a new theodolite surveydone by Mr.WolfgangSchleicher.It supplantsand augments all previouslypublishedplans of our field-IIISolomonic gate. Note in particular that the "Gatehouse"is both farthereast and at a less acute angle to the inner gate than previouslythought, thus making less likely our hypotheticalreconstructionof a closure wall between the two gates in Dever 1982, figure3. The short stretchof wall foundations discoveredin 1984 just west of the "Gatehouse" providesa much more plausible

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

217

closure with the "OuterWall"running westward.Note also that the alignment of the "Gatehouse" with the "OuterWall"to the east is now seen to be much more feasible than on Macalister'serroneousplan in 1912,volume I, figure 102. 3Thecomposite plan of phase 1 on the upperterracewas preparedfrom field drawings of William G. Deverand Gloria London. Only the portions of the wall shown in black were clearedby us. The casemate walls in outline were,however,checked and more accuratelyplannedby retrenchingthe upperface. The remainingwalls in outline were taken selectively and with slight modifications from an enlargementof Macalister'splan IV (1912),correctingtheir placement by our walls. Wecannot, of course,vouch entirely for everydetail of the resultantplan, particularly for such featuresas entrances (most of them were missed by Macalister).The plan of phase 3 on the upperterraceis largelyby Gloria London,with the casemate wall duplicated from the composite plan of phase 1 in the same area. 4VolumeIII,on the IronAge-Hellenistic remains in field VII,and volume IV,the final reportof the Middle BronzethroughIronI in field VI, are materialon the "acropolis" both in press and should appearin 1985.A

popularaccount of the excavationsis in progress and will be publishedby Thomas Nelson in 1986.

Dever,andothers 1971 FurtherExcavationsat Gezer, 1967-1971. The Biblical Archaeologist 34: 94-132. 1974 GezerII. Reportof the 1967- 70 Bibliography Seasons in Fields I and II. JeruBunimovitz, S. 1983 Glacis 10014and Gezer'sLate salem: HebrewUnion College. BronzeAge Fortifications.TelAviv Finkelstein,I. 10:61-70. The Date of Gezer'sOuter Wall.Tel 1981 Aviv 8: 136-45. Dever,W.G. 1967 Excavationsat Gezer. The Biblical Kempinski,A. 1972 Review of Gezer I. Israel Exploration Archaeologist 30: 47-62. 1973a The Gezer Fortificationsand the Journal22: 183- 86. Reviewof GezerII.Israel Explora1976 "HighPlace:"An Illustrationof tion Journal23: 210-14. StratigraphicMethods and Problems. Palestine ExplorationQuarter- Kenyon,K. M. 1977 Review of GezerII.Palestine Exploly 105:61-68. ration Quarterly1977:55-58. 1973b TwoApproachesto Archaeological Method:The Architecturaland the Macalister,R. A. S. The Excavationof Gezer,Vols.I-III. 1912 Stratigraphic.Eretz-Israel11:1-8. 1973c Towerat 5017 at Gezer:A Rejoinder. London:JohnMurray. Israel ExplorationJournal Yadin,Y 22: 23-26. 1958 Solomon'sCity Walland Gate at The LateBronze,IronAge, and Gezer.IsraelExplorationJournal8: 1982 Hellenistic Defenses of Gezer. 80-86. 1970 Journalof Jewish Studies 33: 19-34. Megiddoof the Kingsof Israel.The Biblical Archaeologist 33: 73- 79. Dever,W.G., Lance,H. D., Wright,G. E. 1970 GezerI. PreliminaryReportof the Zertal, A. 1981 The Gates of Gezer.Eretz-Israel15: 1964-66 Seasons. Jerusalem: HebrewUnion College. 222-28.

OF

so

o co

a W. E Albright Institute of Archaeological Research

in Jerusalem is pleased to announce new Academic Excavation Appointments Field trip Publication Fellowships programs and improved Research library Workshops Scholars' residence For further information contact: ASOR Administrative Offices 4243 Spruce Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 Tel: (215) 222-4643

218

CyprusAmerican Archaeological ResearchInstitute I in Nicosia, Cyprus welcomes visiting scholars and interested laymen. Facilities and programsinclude: Researchlibrary Scholars'residence Annual researchappointments Study collections Informalsummer seminars Periodiclectures Guided site visits Vehicle and equipment rental Forfurtherinformationcontact CAARI (41King Paul St., Nicosia, Cyprus)or: ASORAdministrativeOffices 4243 SpruceStreet Philadelphia,PA 19104 Tel:(215)222-4643

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

~

o

American Center of Oriental Research in Amman, Jordan welcomes visiting scholars and interested laymen. Programs include: Archaeology classes Lectures and seminars Guided site visits A research library Study collections Annual appointments Scholars' residence Vehicle and equipment rental Liaison with local officials Rescue archaeology For further information contact: ASOR Administrative Offices 4243 Spruce Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 Tel: (215) 222-4643

BA

Sir

PORTRAIT

Flinders Petrie

by ValerieM. Fargo 220

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLDGIST/DECEMBER

ir Flinders Petrie is a seminal figure in Near Eastern archaeology.Renowned for his great industry (inthe course of overhalf a century of work he excavatedfifty sites and published nearly one hundred books) and intellectual ability (he has been called "the greatest archaeological genius of modem times"), he is generally recognized as having singlehandedly established Near Eastern archaeology as a scientific discipline. William Matthew Flinders Petrie was born on June 3, 1853. As a child he sufferedfromchronic asthma and was too weak to attend school regularly; in fact, he never received any formal training. His mother, who was a linguist, attempted to teach him Latin and Greek, but this was a markedfailure. He later claimed that once he had finished a lesson, he forgotit. He was a curious child, however,and reada wide rangeof books. He also took long walks, exploring the countryside, and he spent a lot of time studying the exhibits at the British Museum. From his father, a civil engineer, Petrie learned planning and drawing,and from his mother he developedan interest in collecting coins, minerals, and fossils. He attributed his interest in exploringto his maternalgrandfather,Captain Matthew Flinders,an early explorer of Australia. When he was thirteen years old, Flinders Petrie read Piazzi Smythe's Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid. This volume attemptedto show that the plan of the Great Pyramid concealed prophecies concerning the children of Israeland the British people. Both Petrie and his father were intrigued by this book, and a number of years later Petrie'sfather encouragedhim to go to Egyptto measure the pyramid with the intention of proving Smythe's theories. Instead,Petrie'sfirst surveyingwork took place at Stonehengewhen he was nineteen. His fatherprovided an old theodolite (a surveyor'sinstrument that measures horizontal and vertical angles, and can also be used to determine levels and elevations), and together they remodeled andupdatedit, with the result that it functioned quite accurately although only they could operateit. Throughout the 1870s Petriemade trips to surveysites in England,and this early work resulted in his first two publications,Inductive Metrology(1877)and Stonehenge (1880).The formerwas an attempt to explain the history of weights and measures from extant objects and monuments, while the latter presented the findings of his survey at that site. In 1880, when he was twenty-seven, Petrie set out on

Sir FlindersPetriephotographedon the groundsof the American School of Oriental Researchin Jerusalem(left)in 1939 and at Tellel Ajiul around 1933 when he was using his Swan camera. Photographsare used courtesy of the Petrie Museum, University College London.

his first trip to Egypt with the purpose of measuring and planning the pyramids. He spent two seasons systematically noting very detailed measurements of the Gizeh pyramids, along with their materials and methods of construction. His camp was located in a nearby tomb, and his schedule was arranged to avoid the daily tourist groups. At night he worked inside the pyramids and during the day he wrote up his notes and did some outdoor surveying. Petrie had hoped to prove Piazzi Smythe's theories, but the data conclusively refuted the entire hypothesis. Petrie was disappointed when many people did not accept his results, and he stated that these people could "be left with the flat earth believers and other such people to whom a theory is dearer than a fact" (Petrie 1931: 35). With this project Petrie began his practice of publishing his data immediately after finishing the fieldwork. He acknowledged that this had its disadvantages, but he always favored making the data available for other scholars' use over the possibility that later discoveries would

require revisions of his interpretations. Shortly after completing the pyramid survey Sir Flinders Petrie learned that the Royal Society of Antiquaries had granted 100 pounds for a group of engineers to do the very same survey. He submitted his report and the Royal Society, finding his work reliable and accurate, awarded him the 100 pounds. While working at the pyramids, Petrie developed an intense interest in the antiquities of Egypt. At that time there was no systematic investigation of ancient sites. Museum-quality objects were retained and everything else was discarded. In some cases excavators were not even present at the site but left their foremen to carry on alone. The sort of excavation that was going on struck Petrie as pillage and he felt a great urgency to correct this situation. Thus he began his lifework of systematically excavating and recording the antiquities of every site for which he could get permission to dig. Rather than discarding the ordinary objects and sherds, Petrie insisted that every artifact be retained and considered as archaeological evidence. For many years he worked with virtually no financial backing other than a small family income. In the mid-1880s he worked under the auspices of the Egypt Exploration Fund, but without a stipend. In fact at first the fund was dubious about taking him on at all because of his lack of a university education. Many people questioned his motives for working without a salary. He explained himself in this way: You seem to take for granted that as I am not workingformoney ... I must thereforebe working for fame. . . . I work because I can do what I am doing, better than I can do anythingelse. .... And I am awarethat such work is what I am best fitted for. If credit of any sort comes from such work, I haveno objectionof any sort to it; but it is not what stirs me to work at all. (Petrie1931:39-40) Petrie was also known for his frugality His equipment was a hodgepodge of things patched together, including the old theodolite he had used at Stonehenge. Living conditions in the field were also rigorous. Initially Petrie simply lived in an unused tomb near the pyramids, and later when his staff expanded there were a couple of tents. He had no concern for physical comforts for himself, and this view extended to provisions for staff members as well. He had one table for working and eating, and "in a trough down the center of the table stood a double row of tins containing various kinds of food, and near by a can

BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

1984

221

Neverformallyeducated,Sir FlindersPetriesingleas a NearEasternarchaeology handedlyestablished scientificdiscipline. opener. His idea of satisfying the pangs of hunger when they became intense, was to eat from several tins at randomuntil they were empty. He took for grantedthat his staff would do the same"(Wilson 1964:93). Needless to say,there was more than one case of food poisoning on Petrie'sexpeditions. Sir FlindersPetrie'sfirst excavations were in the Egyptian Delta. In 1883he beganworking in the areaof Tanis, where he was to drawplans of temple ruins. On the way from Cairoto Tanishe stoppedat all the ancient sites and in this way he stumbled on the site of Naukratis,the firstknown Greek colony in Egypt before Alexander the Great. This site was full of beautifully painted Greek pottery.After this exciting beginning Petrie spent several seasons in the Delta, and he excavatedin Egyptcontinuously until 1926,with the one exception of his 1890work at Tell el-Hesi. His annual routine was to spend the winter in the field and then return to England for the summer to write the reports.Each year he shipped back to Englandhis shareof the artifacts,which were displayed for the public in an annual exhibition in London. This served to develop public interest in Petrie's work and thereby helped to provide a somewhat better financial footing. His financial situation improved in 1892 when he was appointedthe first incumbent of the newly established chair of Egyptologyat the University of London. Petrie'swork in Egypt included the excavation of several major sites, such as Abydos, Amarna, Naqadah, Sinai, anda number of Theban temples. Among his finds, the best known by far is the Merneptahstele. This stele, which contains the oldest known referenceto Israel,was found in 1896 in pharaohMerneptah'smortuary temple at Thebes. The day it was discoveredPetrie commented, "This stele will be better known in the world than anything else I have found"(1931:160). By 1890 Petrie'srelations with the Egypt Exploration Fundhad deterioratedand he decided to do some work in Palestineforthe PalestineExplorationFund.His task was to explore two sites in the southern coastal plain, Umm Lakis and Khirbet Ajlan, to determine whether they could be identified with biblical Lachish and Eglon. A brief visit to Umm Lakis showed it to be no earlier than the Roman period, so Petrie went on to Tell el-Hesi. The WadiHesi flowed directly beside the east side of the tell and had cut part of it away,so that a cross section of the occupational layers was exposed. Petrie spent six weeks excavating there and was able to determine that the evolution of pottery forms corresponded to the sequence

222

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

of soil layers.Through his insights at Tell el-Hesi, Petrie established the importanceof pottery for chronologyand the significance of stratigraphicexcavation, two of the most basic archaeologicalprinciples. He, however,found conditions there difficult. Not only was he robbed by natives but the stagnantwater in the areawas unhealthy and tasted terrible: "The colour and taste is almost too much forme. Whenboiled it is three courses in one: soup, fish, and greens"(Petrie 1931:116). Petrie decided to return to Egyptwhere he was able to excavatemany more sites, but none with extensive stratigraphy.He developedan increasing interest in typology and began working on a series of volumes on basic categories of artifacts.During WorldWarI, when excavation was impossible, he began concentrating on these "corpus"volumes in which he gathered unstratified examples of each type of artifact from many sites and groupedthem together.To do this he developeda system of "sequencedating."He groupedpottery and other artifacts into families based on form, decoration, and ware. His observations led him to believe that one family evolved gradually into another over time. He assigned numerical sequence dates to the various families and thus had a sequence of related families or types. These families could be linked historically when compared with excavatedmaterials. Here, as with his work at Tell el-Hesi, Petrie made use of the essential archaeological principles of stratigraphyand typology. By 1926Petriehad returnedto work in Palestine,where he excavatedat Tell el Ajjul, Ghazzeh, Tell Jemmeh, and Tell el Farah,all located in the southern coastal area.By this time he was in his seventies and beginning to slow down slightly. But it was not until 1935, at the age of eighty-two,that he retiredfrom fieldwork altogether and took up residence at the American School in Jerusalem, where he remaineduntil his death in 1942.He was buried in the British cemetery on Mt. Zion. Although many of his chronological conclusions have been revisedas a consequence of more recent discoveries, Petrie is a seminal figure in Near Eastern archaeology. His insistence on recording every artifact and its exact provenanceturned field method in a new direction, and his great insights that an archaeological site was composed of a series of superimposed layers of occupation and that the sequence of artifactual material was chronologically significant cannot be overrated. They have formed the very foundation of the work of all who followed him.

Bibliography

The contact and exchangeof culture and ideas between ancient Egyptand Palestine was of particularinterest to Sir FlindersPetrie.This drawing of a New Kingdomtomb painting from Petrie'sbook A History of EgyptDuring the XVIIthand XVIIIthDynasties (London:Methuen& Co., 1896) shows Africans and Asiatics in adoration of the pharaoh.

Albright,W.E 1942 Sir W. M. Flinders Petrie, 1853-1942. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research87: 7- 8. Callaway,J.A. 1980 SirFlindersPetrie:Fatherof PalestinianArchaeology.Biblical ArchaeologyReview 6(6):44- 55. Glueck, N. 1942 Sir W.M. FlindersPetrie, 1853-1942. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research87: 6- 7. Petrie,W.M. F. 1877 Inductive Metrology;or, the Recoveryof Ancient Measures from the Monuments. London:Saunders. 1880 Stonehenge: Plans, Description, and Theories. London: E. Stanford. 1892 Ten Years Digging in Egypt. Chicago: Fleming H. Revell Company. 1931 Seventy Years in Archaeology. London: Sampson Low, Marston& Co., Ltd. Smith, S. 1943 Sir Flinders Petrie, 1853-1942. Proceedings of the British Academy 28. London:H. Milford. Smythe,P. 1978 Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid. Fourth and much enlargededition, reprintof 1880. New York:Bell Publishing Co. Wilson, J.A. 1964 Signs and WondersUpon Pharaoh:A History of American Egyptology.Chicago:University of ChicagoPress.

Now distributed by the American Schools of Oriental Research O

Ancient

Jewish

by Ya'akov Meshorer

Coinage

The first comprehensive publication of ancient Jewish coins in 100 years, Meshorer's work takes advantage of the many additional finds of new materials in recent years. While this publication is of particular interest to numismatists and archaeologists, the author also extensively treats Jewish history, the interpretation of ancient Jewish symbols, and Jewish epigraphy.

To Order:

Volume 1. Persian Period through Hasmonaeans. Pp. 184; 56 plates. Volume 2. Herod the Great through Bar Cochba. Pp. 295; 36 plates.

Send your orderand payment to: Eisenbrauns P.O.B. 275 Winona Lake, IN 46590 Mastercardand Visaare accepted;please supplyyour

Distributed by ASOR/Eisenbrauns for Amphora Books. 2 volume set: $150.00; $120.00 (20%discount) to members of ASOR.

Ifprepaying,add$3.00percopy to your prepayment.

card number and the expiration date.

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

223

Noah and

In

the

is

Jewish,

Christian,

andMuslim Tradition BYJACK P LEWIS

•T

he storyof Noahandthe greatflood,as

told in the Bible in Genesis 5:28-9:17 and in the Koran,primarily in Sura 11:25-48, has challenged the imaginations of Jews,Christians, and Muslims for centuries. Responses have been diverse, including both the magnificent, as seen in the sublime artistic expression of a stained glass window at the Cathedral of Chartres in France,and the questionable, as seen in the numerous quasi-archaeological expeditions in search of Noah's ark. Anyone seeking to identify the differencesboth within and among the three traditions might at first feel pessimistic about succeeding, but I think one can gain a sense of these differences by concentrating on a representativemedium.Therefore, in this paperI will survey the response to the story of Noah contained in the religious writings of the three traditions. Noah in Jewish and Christian Tradition In looking at the literary responses to the flood story,I

224

A 42-panestained glass window depicting the entire story of Noah was created during the mid-thirteenthcenturyin the workshopsof Notre Dame for the ChartresCathedral.This detail of the window in the cathedral shows the familiar representationof the beasts of the land and the birds of the sky arrangedin pairs.

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

This touchinglyprimitive etching of Noah was found in one of the oldest Christian catacombs - the Santa Priscilla Catacombs in Rome. Carvedon a fourth-centuryslab of marble this highly schematized scene shows Noah with raised arms as he stands up in the ark, which is renderedin the abbreviatedform of a box. Noah was a common figure in paleo-Christianart because his story of beingpreserved by God during the greatdeluge was comfortingto those Christians who were undergoingpersecution.

should first mention those that occur in the Bible outside of Genesis. In the Old Testament, the genealogy in 1 Chronicles 1:4includes the name of Noah in the tenth generation, with the names of his sons following in immediate sequence. In Isaiah 24:1 and 4- 5, the prophecy of a divine wrath whose overflowing will lay waste to the earth is surely an allusion to the flood. And

in Isaiah 54:9, God'spromise to rebuke Israelno more is likened to the assurance given to Noah after the flood that the event would not be repeated;the flood is thus here being comparedto the exile. In Ezekiel 14:14and 20, Noah is cited, along with Daniel and Job,as a man of unusual righteousness. It is asserted, however,that even he, if faced with the contemporaryprob-

Noah meaningof the biblicalnameNoah (Noah)continuesto puzzlemodT he ern interpreters.Since biblical writers often supply an imaginative

explanationfornamesin keepingwith someelementin the story,weneednot assumethata proposalis (orwasintendedto be)the originalmeaning.Thus we aretold,at Genesis5:29,that the nameis relatedto the verbniham ("to "Lamech...calledhis nameNoah,saying,'Outofthegroundwhich console"): fromourwork the Lordhascursedthis oneshallbringus relief[yenahamend]

andfromthe toil of ourhands.'"Apparently,this is an allusion to Genesis 9:20, where Noah pioneers the art of wine making:"Noahwas the first tiller of the soil. He planted a vineyard."Why the writer, at 5:29, did not use the verbni1hh ("torest"),cognate to the name N6ah (whereasthe verb "to console"is not), remains unclear. In that case, the text would have readyenihenuz("willbring us rest"),and some modern interpretershave wanted to restore that as the original reading in order to accord the biblical writer a better pun! It is preferable,however,to retainthe present reading,with the understandingthat biblical etymologies are often more playful than linguistically correct. There is some evidence that the name Noah is connected with a divine being. Cuneiform texts, for example, contain such personal names as Mu-utna-ha ("Man[devotee]of [the god] Nah(a)")and Na-hi-li ("Nia is my god"). These correspondin form to the Hebrew names Met(h)u-selah("Manof [the god] Selah":Genesis 5:21)and Areli ("[the]lion[-like one] is my god":Genesis 46:16).Since the Akkadian (cuneiform)name Nah could easily become N6ah in Hebrew, it is possible that the two are the same and that the latter is a shortened form (nickname)of a typical theophoric personalname: "Thegod No6ahdoes (or:is) so-and-so." Alternatively, it is possible that the name originally denoted a human being who was accordedsemidivine status as the result of some extraordinary event. Mention might be made in this regardof the Mesopotamianflood-hero Ut-napishtim, equivalent of the biblical N6ah. Having built a boat at divine direction,he andhis family survivea massive flood that the gods havebrought upon the earth. Thereafter,he is elevated to the status of an immortal and dwells beyondthe edge of the known world. If, in anotherversion of the story, the flood-hero'sname had contained the element Nih/N6alh, this would help explain names such as "Nah is my god."The biblical writers, by contrast, would have repressedthat part of the ancient story and have kept the floodhero as a human being. A fragmentarytext from Asia Minor, written in the Hurrian language, may contain just such a variationin the Mesopotamianflood story.The hero's name is given as Na-ah-mu-ui-li-el (orNa-ah-ma-su-li-el),the firstpartof which may be the familiar Nah/N6ah. LloydBailey

lems of the destruction of the temple and of exile, would not be able to save his children;his righteousness would deliver only himself. In the New Testament, Luke 3:36 also provides a genealogy that names Noah as the tenth generation and gives the names of his sons. In addition, the flood forms the basis of a caution against wickedness and an admonition to watchfulness for the Second Advent. Matthew 24:38 and Luke 17:27point out, in similar language:As life went its ordinary careless way until Noah entered the ark and the flood destroyedothers, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. Hebrews 11:7says that Noah, being warned, acted by faith, built an ark to save his household, condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith. In 1 Peter3:20 and 21 we find the idea that God with patience waited in the days of Noah while the ark was being built; eight persons were saved in the ark by water, and in like manner baptism saves. And 2 Peter 2:5 says that God destroyedthe ancient ungodly world by the flood but saved Noah, a preacherof righteousness, and seven others. Apocryphaand Pseudepigrapha.One can find references and allusions to the flood story in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha.Because these terms have been used in a variety of ways that can be confusing to the general reader,I should perhaps digress here for a moment. Early in the second century B.C.E.,

in Alexandria,Egypt,the Hebrew (or Jewish)Bible was translated for the first time. This translation into Greek, which came to be called the Septuagint (because of a legend that the translation was done by seventytwo Jewish scholars), includes books that are not in the Hebrew Bible. Why these extra books came to be included is still the subject of scholarly debate. The influence of the Septuagint has been great, for subsequent trans-

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

225

lations from the Hebrew into Greek also incorporatedthe extra books, and the first translation into Latin (todaycalled the Old Latin Bible) used the Septuagintas the basis of its Old Testament.Even at the end of the fourth century c.E. when Jerome

made the standardLatin translation (todaycalled the VulgateBible), using the Hebrew Bible as his text for the Old Testament,he also translated the extra books-though pointing out their special nature in the prefacesto individual books. The prefaceswere often ignoredby later copyists, and over time all the books came to be generally considered legitimately a part of the Old Testament. When the Protestantsprepared their edition of the Bible, however, they chose to follow the Hebrew Bible for the Old Testament, and thus the extra books were excluded; they were set apartand referredto as a groupas the Apocrypha. (Etymologically, Apocryphameans "things that are hidden,"but it is not clear why this was chosen to describe the books.) The Roman Catholic Church reactedto the Protestants at the Council of Trentin 1546 by declaringthe extra books canonical. Despite the fact that the canonicity of these books is accepted by many groups,including the Eastern OrthodoxChurches (which still use the Septuagint)and the Russian OrthodoxChurch, most scholars now use the Protestantterminology and referto them as the Apocrypha. The books of the Apocryphaare chiefly, if not exclusively, Jewishand were written in the last preChristian centuries and the first century C.E.During the past one hundred years, however, scholarship has identified many other Jewish and Jewish-Christian works from approximately the same period. Often these profess to be written by ancient worthies of Israel who lived long before the books were actually composed. These have thus come to be referred to as the Pseudepigrapha,

226

which is made up of two Greek words which mean "falselyattributed."The Pseudepigrapha,then, can be defined as Jewishwritings of the Second Templeperiod resembling the Apocryphain general character but not included in the Bible or Apocrypha (see Stone 1983). Getting back to our subject, apocryphal and pseudepigraphalwriters, each out of his own setting, expounded the flood for its homiletical value. The "sonsof God"were angels, sons of nobles, or descendants of Seth in differentcircles. Following the Septuagintrendering,gigantes, their offspringwere "giants."Imagination supplied the bill of particulars of the sins of the flood generation and elaboratedon the details of the righteousness of Noah, making him an example of one who married a kinswoman (Tobit4:12)or of asceticism in early life (in one of the Books of Adam and Eve known also as the Cave of Treasures),depending on the values of the writer. Detailed surveys of the flood are included in the pseudepigraphal1 Enoch, Book of Jubilees,Sibylline Oracles, and Book of Adam and Eve/Caveof Treasures (see Charles 1913,Charlesworth 1983, and Malan 1882). Another pseudepigraphalbook that should be mentioned is PseudoPhilo. This work, also called Biblical Antiquities (see James 1971) when it was thought to be a legitimate work of Philo-who is discussed in the next section -was probablywritten after 70 c.E. and preservedin Latin (thoughperhaps once in Greek).It has little in common with the genuine Philo in its treatment of the flood. Although it seeks to give a more religious tone to biblical narratives, nothing of allegory or Haggadah (scriptural interpretation that is nonlegal and narrative in character and which aims at the development of inner piety and religious development) is to be seen. Its distinctive ideas include that the "rest"once thought to be implied in Noah's name is the

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

relieving of the world of wicked inhabitants, and that Noah was three hundredyears old when his three sons were born. In the postflood episode the writer expounds ideas of resurrection,final judgment, hell, and the new heaven and earth. Scholarshave speculated that there once was a pseudepigraphal book of Noah. Some persons have conjecturedthat such a book would explain fragmentsof works found at Qumran,and they postulate it as a source behind material preservedin 1 Enoch and the Book of Jubilees. But no extant list includes a book of Noah, and no certain trace of such a book survives. Hellenistic Jewish Writers.Two important Hellenistic Jewishwriters who have worked with the flood story are Philo of Alexandriaand Flavius Josephus. Philo was born in Alexandria around 30 B.C.E.The greater part of

his careerwas devotedto an exposition of the Pentateuch in terms designed to make it both comprehensible and palatable to those brought up on Greek philosophy.Josephus was born in Jerusalem around 37 c.E.

At the beginning of the war between the Romans and the Jews,he was governorof Galilee. When, despite his valor and shrewdness,the stronghold he defendedwas taken, he found favorwith the Roman general Vespasianand therebybecame an eyewitness to many of the events of that conflict. It is as a historian of the Jewsthat he is renowned. Philo, working from the Septuagint version, alludes to a good portion of the verses in the flood narrative (see Lewis 1968: 183-85). The most complete treatments are found in the treatises On Abraham (De Abrahamo), Moses I and II (De Vita Mosis), On the Unchangeableness of God (Quod Deus immutabilis sit), and Questions and Answers on Genesis (Quaestiones et Solutiones in Genesin)- see Colson 1966a, 1966b; Colson and Whitaker 1968;

and Marcus 1961.Philo deals with the flood on three levels: the event of the past, the lessons to be drawn from it, and the allegories that can be attached to it. It is the allegorical Noah that is the most puzzling, yet is of most interest, in Philo. Noah and the other patriarchs,in addition to being

living men of the past, are types of souls that represent stages in the advanceof the soul towardthe mystic vision. Noah is a preliminary stage in the advanceof any soul. Abrahamand Moses representstill higher stages. The allegory is not entirely consistent. The deluge is once a flood of passion from which

Makeyourselfan arkofgopherwood;make roomsin theark,andcoverit insideandout withpitch(Genesis6:14).

The task of building the ark is shown in great detail in this section of a ninth-centuryaltarpiece from the Cathedralof San Matteo in Salerno,Italy. In the Middle Ages Noah was known as the patron saint of shipwrights and carpenters.

Noah barely escapes but elsewhere is a cleansing of the soul. Facedwith the flood of passion, the mind goes into the ark which is the body. Coming out of the ark, Noah escapes from the body to higher things. Having done that, however, he falls back into a foolish and derangedcondition representedin the postflood drunkenness and nakedness. There are blanks in Philo's allegory that we greatly regret.Though the details are minute, repetitious, and farfetched,the message is clear. The goals for which men strivefame, display,and pleasure- minister only to the body and are not worthwhile. The real man cannot at this present time entirely separate himself from his passions but he can keep them under control, even as Noah was king overthe animals in the ark. He must make use of his body until the flood of passion has driedup and he has expelled the last residue of darkness from his soul; then he can come forth. We assume that he comes forth to immortality, though Philo is not specific about it in his discussion. The treatment of the flood in Josephuscomes in Jewish Antiquities, book 1, chapters3 and 4 (see Thackeray 1967:32-57). His narration is a paraphraseof Greek scripture, but he shows little interest in drawinglessons other than the demonstration of Jewish antiquity. Josephushas Adam warn his descendants of successive destructions by fire and flood. Like Philo, he ascribes four stories to the ark. He mentions only one trip of the dove, instead of the three reportedin Genesis. Josephusattempts to parallel the biblical story with narratives of other people. He notes that Berossus the Chaldean has a flood story. (Berossus,who lived around 290 B.C.E.,was a priest of Bel and

author of a history of Babylonin three books, the first of which dealt with the origin of the flood.) Josephus also relates that Nicholas of

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

227

Damascus tells of a mountain in Armenia called Barison which people who fled in the time of the flood were saved.An ark carriedone man ashore there, and Josephus assumes that this might be the man of whom Moses wrote (Nicholas, born around 64 B.C.E.,was an advisor

and court historian of Herod the Great, and, after Herod'sdeath, also representedHerod Archelaus in Rome. He published a history in 144 books that coveredfrom the earliest

times to 4 B.C.E.).

EarlyChristian writers. The second century C.E.saw an effort to organize

and clarify Christian concepts against a proliferationof competing ideas and influences. Chief among those making this effort at that time was Irenaeus,bishop of Lyonsand the first Church Fatherto systematize doctrine (see Robertsand Donaldson 1981a). Twoother individuals figuring in this conflict were Theophilus of Antioch and Justin Martyr.Theophilus became the sixth bishop of Antioch in Syria around 168 C.E. He was one of the earliest commentators on the Gospels. Justin Martyr was one of the early Christian apologists. Borna paganin Samaria about 100 C.E., he convertedto Christianity at Ephesus at about the age of thirty-eight. He thereafter went to Rome and opened a school of Christian philosophy;he and some of his students were martyred under MarcusAurelius in about 165 C.E.

Each of these used the story of the flood in his writing. Irenaeussaw the end times as developingwickedness like that prior to the flood. The destruction it caused is like that which is to come in a flood of fire. In his Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching (see Robinson 1920), Irenaeus was particularly interested in expounding the flood as an event of the past. Theophilus was also interested in this. He thought that the remains of the ark were to be seen in the Arabian mountains

228

New Testament are pointed out), the (Dods 1979a: 117).Both considered church said Noah was a type of problems like how many animals were taken into the ark and how Christ, and the eight in the ark were a type of the eighth day (Sunday)on they could be fed. Justin Martyrwas concerned with which Christ was raised from the the idea of Noah'srighteousness. In a dead. The flood sometimes was a philosophical defense of Christian type of baptism and sometimes a beliefs, which is written in the form type of the times of the end of the of an argumentbetween himself and world. Christians saw Noah'sposta Jewnamed Trypho,he uses the fact that in Genesis Noah is called righteous to supporthis position in a dispute on the necessity of observing food laws and circumcision. He argues that even though Noah did not observe these laws, he was acknowledgedto be a just man (see Robertsand Donaldson 1981b:204). Thus, these early Christian writers began with the assumptions that the Old Testament is a valid recordof the past and that the Christological interpretationis the valid one. The figure of righteous Noah served a moral purpose.As a preacherof righteousness (anidea not mentioned in the Old Testament),he was a model of one calling men to repentance; and details of his preaching message were embellished. The sins of the flood generation were detailed. The concord of the diverse animals in the ark illustrated the peace that should be in the church. It was common to allege, as Philo had earlier done, that Noah and Deucalion (the mythical hero of a Greek story)were the same figure. The sculptorof this early twelfth-centurystone capital from France,created a In its typology (ameth- the Sainte Madelaine Basilica in VWzelay, versionof the construction of the ark. ForChrisod of Christian apologyin whimsical tians this scene was not only a literal depiction of a biblical which analogies between event but was symbolic of the building of the spiritual

Makea rooffortheark,and finishit to a cubitabove;and setthedoor... in itsside (Genesis6:16).

the Old Testament and

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

church.

flood promise to his sons as a promise of the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles. The heretics were no less diligent than the orthodox in using the flood for their purposes.And a major source of heresy was the Gnostics. Gnosticism was comprised of a wide variety of sects, all basically promising salvation through hidden knowl-

edge (gnosis)that they claimed was revealedto them alone. Prominent Gnostics include Marcion, Apelles, Tatian,and Valentinus. Marcion was the source of the first great Christian heresy.Basically he asserted that there were two gods: the Creator,known through the Old Testament, and the good Fatherof Jesus.He thought the gospels of Jesusand Paul were corruptedby those who could only recognize the Creator.When he presented his ideas to the Roman church in 144

ButI will establishmy covenantwithyou (Genesis6.:18).

C.E., he was excommuni-

cated. He went on to form his own church, which became widespreadand powerful. One of the effects he had on Christians was that he stimulated the assembling of the canon of the New Testament. Apelles was a student of Marcion. Tatianwas a student of Justin Martyr,but after his master'sdeath he left Christianity and became an encratite Gnostic -that is, he regardedall matter as evil and denied the salvation of Adam. Valentinus founded the most celebratedof Gnostic sects. Sometime after 135 C.E.he went to

God'scovenant with Noah is dramaticallyportrayedin stark, realistic terms in this mosaic from the Cathedralof MariaAnnunziata in Otranto,Italy, which dates to the twelfth century.

Rome and set forth a doctrine that was only revealedto us when his Gospel of Truth,found among the documents discoveredat Nag Hammadi in Egyptin 1945, was published. Finally,I must mention the Ophites (in Greek, "believersin the serpent")and the Sethians. The Ophites comprised a groupof Gnostic

sects notorious for licentious cultism and invertedmorality; for them, villains like Cain and the Sodomites were heroes. They carriedto extremes the teaching of Marcionthat an essential hostility exists between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament. The Sethians were a sect whose beliefs centered on Adam'sson Seth. Tatianarguedthat Moses did not copy Greek stories and gave data that suggest Deucalion is more recent than Moses. The Valentinians allegorized the thirty cubits of the height of the ark to get their Triacontad (a series of thirty aeons, or eternal beings) and the eight persons in the ark to get their Ogdoad(the first eight aeons of the Triacontad). The Ophites had the aeon Sophia save Noah and his family. The Sethians had the flood sent by the mother (the power of all powers),but angels frustratedher plan by saving Ham and seven others in the ark. Thus evil survived that made the later descent of Christ necessary. Marcion invertedOld Testament values and had Christ, at his descent into Hades to save Old Testament sinners, leave there Noah and other righteous men who supposed that their God was merely tempting them. Apelles, like the orthodoxIrenaeus and Theophilus, concentrated on the details of the flood, but he did it to play up the difficulties. As a disciple of Marcion,he maintained his master'scontempt towardthe Old Testament and he set out to provethat the writings of Moses contain no divine wisdom and were not the work of the Holy Spirit. In 1945 a collection of ancient manuscripts was discoverednear Nag Hammadi, a town on the Nile in Upper Egypt.Thirteen codices (or book manuscripts)containing fortysix texts (fortyof which had been previously lost, except for small fragments of three of them) were found. The language of the texts is Coptic, which is a late stage of the Egyptian

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

229

tongue written in a modified form of the Greek alphabet.Most of the texts are Gnostic documents. (See Robinson 1977, 1979a, 1979b,and VanElderen 1979 for more information on these manuscripts.) The Nag Hammadi literaturehas enlargedour knowledge of Gnostic treatment of the flood. In The Apocalypse of Adam, it is the lower God who in the flood destroysall flesh; yet he quiets his angerand saves Noah who is also called Deucalion (69:2-17; 70: 7-15). After the flood, Noah divides the earth among his three sons that they may serve the creatorin slavery (72: 15- 25). The coming Illuminator is to save the souls of those who have the gnosis of the eternal God in their hearts and receive a spirit from one of the eternal angels (76: 8-27). A related story is told in The Hypostasis of the Archons (92: 5 and following) where the Archons decide to destroyman and beast, but the Archon instructs Noah to build a boat and to take into it his children and birds and beasts. Norea (refused admittance)burns the ark, however, and Noah has to build it again. The story is again alluded to in the Apocryphon of Johnand in The Concept of Our Great Power. LaterChristian writers. LaterChristian writers such as Jerome(347-

ments, plans, and sorts of animals were used in typology. The wood of the ark became a type of the cross. The ark in the flood was a type of the church riding out the persecutions or riding out a flood of passion. Forsome the flood

bol of the Holy Spirit which brings peace. The coming out of the ark may be a symbol of the church's yielding up persons for judgment in the future. Noah's drunkenness servedas an admonition against drunkenness;

TakeintotheArka pairfromevery species,yourtribe(exceptthosealready doomed),andall thetruebelievers (Sura11:40).

419 C.E.), Augustine (354-430 C.E.), and JohnChrysostom (347- 407 C.E.)

made extensive use of typological interpretation.In fact, they pushed the comparison of the Old Testament to the New Testament to, and sometimes beyond, its limits. They saw a figure of Paul'scon-

trast between flesh and spirit in God's decree that his spirit would not abide in man. Noah, the end of one generation and the beginning of another, is a type of Christ. His name Noah ("rest")suggested the rest for the weary promised by Jesus. The concept of the ark as a box prevailed from the Septuagint rendering of the Hebrew tebah as the Greek kibotos. All details of its measure-

230

In 784 c.E.Beatus, the Abbot of the Monasteryof San Martin de Liebano authoreda commentary on the Revelationof St. Johnthe Divine. Sometime between 970 and 975 c.E.a copy of the manuscript was illuminated by a monk named Emeterio,who was inspired by the Noah story as shown in this illustration.

was a symbol of baptism and for others a symbol of the flood of fire yet to come at the end of the world. The sending out of the ravenwas the expelling of sin from the mind or the expelling of sinners from the church. The dove becomes the sym-

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

but others saw it as a type of the passion of Jesus.Ham is a type of the mockers in the church;but elsewhere he representsthe Jewish people who consented to Jesus' death. Shem and Japhethare types of those Jewsand Gentiles who honor

Jesus.The blessing on Japhethsuggests that all the world is occupied by the church with Gentiles "inthe tents of Shem." As you can see, the pushing of typology to its limits naturally led to a wealth of interpretations,many that

were contradictory.Augustine, however, in his City of God, said that symbols could be taken in different ways; all explanation need not be the same so long as none is proposed that is incompatible with the Christian faith (see Dods 1979b:306-07).

And in theseventhmonth,on the seventeenth dayof themonth,the arkcameto restuponthemountains ofAr'arat(Genesis8:4).

According to Genesis, when the rain ceased and the water receded the ark of Noah came to rest upon the mountains of Ararat.This scene was renderedin dramatic simplicity on one of the forty-twobronze,bas-relief plaques on the main door of the Cathedralof Monreale,Italy. Createdin 1186 by Bonanno Pisano, it marks a high point in Italian medieval sculpture.

The Floodin RabbinicThought. Within the Jewishtradition, the interpretationof Scripturehas played an important role. It has basically taken two forms: Haggadah (orin AramaicAggadah) and Halakhah, the former consisting of interpretationin the manner of stories, sermons, folklore, theology, and speculative inquiry of all kinds, and the latter being concerned with deducing oral law from the written law of the Scriptures. Severalcompilations of this material, which was largely transmitted orally at first, were eventually written down. They include the Midrash, the first such compilation; the Mishnah, compiled in Palestine between 160 and 200 c.E.; and the

This third-century-A.D. coin fromApameia Kibotos in Phrygia (modern Thrkey)is an early representationof the Noah story and is thought to show Jewishinfluence. On the right side Noah and his wife emergefrom the box-shapedark as the floodwaters recede. On the left they are shown full length, standing with raised arms giving thanks for their salvation. As Yacakov Meshorernotes in his article "AnAncient Coin Depicts Noah's Ark"(BiblicalArchaeologyReview,1981,volume 7, number 5, pages 38-39), this coin "isthe only coin-typeknown to bear a Biblical scene."It is not surprisingthat coins fromApameia bear the images of Noah and the ark, for the city is located near the mountains of Araratwhere Noah'sark is said to have landed, and the city's most celebratedrelic was believed to be a fragment from the original ark. Courtesyof Dr. Arie Kindlerof the KadmanNumismatic Museum, TelAviv,Israel.

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

231

Tosefta,made up of material not lacking in faith to enter the ark until garbage,the middle for Noah and included in the Mishnah. Once it the water reachedhis ankles. He the clean animals, and the top for was written down, the Mishnah was was, however,the one herald to his the unclean. studied intensively, subjectedto men to generation, calling Gopherwood was consideredto be and some sort of cedar,and the tsohar criticism, commentary, supple- repentance. the rabbis mentation, especially by in the academies in Palestine and Babylon.Eventually,two collections of responses to the Mishnah developed:the Palestine Gemara, written down near the end of the fourth century C.E.,and a much longer Babylonian Gemara, written down a century later. The second of these is by farthe more important. The Mishnah and the Gemaracommentaries together constitute the two Talmuds,the Palestinian and Babylonian (Lipman1970). While the Mishna, Tosefta,and other Jewish sources make passing referencesand allusions to Noah and the flood, it is in Sanhedrin of the BabylonianTalmud (see Shachterand Freedman1935)and in Genesis Rabbah of the Midrash (see Freedman1977)that the major rabbinictreatment of the flood is to be found. These sources, of course, are the compilation of continuous differingopinions. The full rangeof rabbinicscripturalexegesis is appliedto the flood and must be considered to understandits treatment. Unfortunately,a survey like the present one can only arbitrarily pick items and cannot claim to be entirely representative.Fora more detailed discussion, see Lewis 1968: 121- 55. Though the generations prior to Noah were evil, because the Lordis A magnificent thirteenth-centurymosaic in San Marco,Venice,capturesthe sense of suspense long-suffering,the coming of the and hope of Noah searchingfor evidence of dry land after the rain ceased. The raven who flood was delayedto allow for failed to returnto the ark is shown on the left while the dove is just being released by Noah. repentance.The bene 'elohim (sons Accordingto a Jewishlegend the raven'sfeathers were originally white but turned black when of God)were sons of judges.The it did not returnto the ark. times priorto the flood were times of prosperityand ease, and much The specifications of the ark attention is given to detailing the (rendered"roof"in the Revised StandardVersionof the Bible)was attractedmuch attention. One sins of that generation. Opinion some sort of skylight. The animals commentator considered these differedon the question of that dimensions properto use in boat gatheredthemselves to the ark. generation'shaving a share in the There was much debate overwhat world to come. building. Effortswere made to food the animals ate and overwhat describe the design with interior Noah was of limited righteousness. One opinion was that he was partitions. The bottom floor was for happenedto the re'em,a large

And[Noah]sentfortha raven;and it wentto andfrountilthewatersweredriedupfromthe earth.Thenhe sentfortha dovefromhim,to seeif thewatershadsubsided fromtheface of theground(Genesis8:7- 8).

ai-a

N

g

:

bw:

.

232

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

animal. Some contended that he was only tied to the back of the ark and followed along. The waters of the flood had the ordinarydestructive power of water but also were boiling hot as a fitting punishment for the sensuous behavior of the wicked. RabbiJudah

insisted that the water was fifteen cubits abovethe surface at any given point. Fish were not included in the destruction. Life in the ark was a trying experience. Cohabitation was prohibited; however,Ham, the dog, and the raventransgressedand each received a fitting punishment. Animals had to be fed at their normal times day and night. The ordeal continued a year, and, after sending the birds, only at God'scommand Noah exited the ark. A great deal of attention focuses on the covenant made with Noah and on what was prohibited in it. These prohibitions were considered binding on non-Jewsas well as upon Jews. The rabbisconsidered Noah to be degradedin the vine-growingepisode, saw his drunkenness to involve an affair with his wife, and gavea sexual interpretationto Ham'saction. They struggledat length with why Canaanwas cursed when Ham had been guilty. Takingthe antecedent of the pronoun in the biblical verse to be the Shekinah (rather than Japheth),some considered that the promise to Noah was that the Shekinah would dwell in the tents of Shem.

Noahwasthefirsttillerof the soil.Heplanteda vineyard (Genesis

9:20).

Noah'sdrunkenness was a favorite subject in medieval art. Here,in a second bas-relieffrom the door of the Cathedral of Monreale,Noah is shown seated beneath the vine that he planted as he partakes of its fruit. Reputedto be the first man to make wine (and the first to be intoxicated by it), he became the patron saint of the coopersduring the Middle Ages.

The Flood in Muslim T'Iadition The Koran,of course, is the book composed of sacredwritings accepted by Muslims as revelations made to Muhammed by Allah through the angel Gabriel. The revelations came to

Muhammed in Mecca between 610 and 622 C.E.and in Medina between 622 and 632 C.E.

In the Koranthe story of Noah (Nuh) is narratedas being told by Allah and is used basically to show that God sends warnersbut that these have been continuously rejected. Sura 71, which is named "Noah,"does not deal with the flood (tufan)itself, but is a summary of Noah's preaching.The flood is alluded to in several suras,but is chiefly told in Sura 11 which is called "Hud."The following is a summary compilation from various sections (see Pickthall 1976). God chose Adam, Noah, the family of Abraham,and the family of Imram (Amram) - each one the

posterity of the other- aboveall human beings (3:30).The gift of prophecy is bestowed upon Noah (11:36),making him the first prophet (4:161;6:84).He is followed by others like Moses and Abraham (37:83). Noah is a great admonisher (11:25; 61:2),a true messenger (26:107),a grateful servant of God (11:3).Allah enters a covenant with him just as he later does with Moses, Abraham, and Aaron. Noah is considered to be a Muslim (10:72). In the presentation, Noah takes on features that Muhammed, himself, had and faces problems that he faced. He asks forgiveness for his guests; he shows filial piety by prayingfor his parents (71:29).He is reproachedby his contemporaries for being only one of the people; they would have preferredan angel as a messenger (10:71- 73; 23:24). They say he is wrong (7:60),is lying (7:64), is possessed (54:9), gathers about him only the lowest of people (11:27; 26:111), and only reprobates follow him (23:23-36). Noah replies that he seeks and treasures nothing except from Allah (10:71- 73). He does not claim to have Allah's treasures or to know his secrets (11:29-31). Noah was sent to warn the people before a grievous torment came

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

233

upon them. He reminded them that he was an obvious warner and that he fearedfor them the torment of the grievous day.He called on the people to worship only Allah (23:23 -26; 11:28and following). He promised that God would forgivetheir sins and would give them time, but when the appointedtime came, there would be no deferring(71:1-4). Noah called night and day,but the people put their fingers in their ears and tried to cover themselves with their garments. He spoke both publicly and in secret, urging them to ask for forgiveness,for Allah is forgiving. He promised that Allah would send rain, wealth, gardens, and rivers.He reminded them that Allah had given the moon and the sun. He had made the earth a carpet that they might walk in broadpaths (71:10and following). Noah reminded the people that he sought no wealth from them. His hire was from Allah. He did not say that he had seen the unseen, nor did he claim to be an angel. However,refusing to heed, the people called on him to bring on them what he had threatened (11:34). Since the people were calling him a liar and one insane (23:23- 26; 59:9-10), Noah appealedto God for help. Noah complained that they had rebelled against him and had devised a plot urging that people not leave their gods:Wadd,Suwah, Yaghuth,Ya'uq,and Narr.Noah called upon Allah not to leave upon the earth one of the unbelievers,for if he left one, that one would lead astrayAllah's servants and would bear children who were sinners and unbelievers. However, Noah asked that God would pardon him, his parents, and whoever entered his house believing (71:25 and following). God inspired Noah to make a boat and instructed him to take into it two of every kind of creature with his own family, except for the sinful son who had opposed him and would drown. He was not to pray to

234

AndHam,thefatherof Canaan,sawthe nakedness of hisfather,andtoldhistwo brothers outside.ThenShemandJaphethtooka garment,andlaid it uponboththeirshoulders, andwalkedbackwardandcoveredthe nakednessof theirfather(Genesis9:22- 23).

As told in Genesis, when Noah'sson, Ham, spied upon his naked and intoxicated fatherhe dishonoredNoah and thus Ham'sdescendants were cursed to be the servants of othernations. In the sixth century an illuminated manuscript of the book of Genesis written in Greekwas produced which included an exquisite painting of this scene. The high quality of the painting and the fact that it appearson a purple codex indicate that the manuscript was either an imperial gift or was of royalpatronage.The manuscriptis now known as the ViennaGenesis and this photographis used courtesy of the ViennaNational Library.

God for those who should do wrong, but when once in the boat was to say,"Praisebelongs to God who savedus from the unjust people"and "MyLord!make me alight in a blessed alighting-place,for you are the best of those who cause men to alight!"He was told, "Verily,in that is a sign, and, verily we were trying

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

them"(11:35and following; 23:27-30). While Noah was building the boat, the people jested him every time they passed by.He replied,"If you jest at us, verily we shall jest at you even as you are jesting, and you shall surely know." Noah was 950 years old when the

flood came (29:14).He was told to load into the ark the animals, his family, and those who believed;but the believers were few (11:40and following). When the time came, the caldronboiled (11:40and following; 23:27). God opened the gates of heaven and water poured down, but also the earth burst forth in springs, and the waters met (54:10-14). Noah was borne on a thing of planks and nails, sailing under Allah'soversight as a rewardto him who had

about. Noah confessed that he sought refuge in the Lord,that he did ask such, and that unless he be forgiven,he would be among those who lose. Noah was then told to descend in safety with Allah'sblessings upon him. He was told that some nations would enjoy prosperity,but afterwards God would touch them with grievous woe. God has revealed secrets to Noah not known before to him; but he was exhorted to be pa-

Mt. Ararat,believed by some to be the place where Noah's ark came to rest after the flood.

been disbelieved by his contemporaries (54:10- 14). The boat floated on waves like mountains. Noah cried in vain to his unbelieving son, pleading with him to ride with them; but the son chose to go to a mountain for safety.A wave came between them and the son drowned.The unbelieving people were drownedand made to enter into the fire (71:25). Eventually it was said, "0 earth! swallow down your water!"and "0 heaven hold!"The matter was decided and the boat settled on Mt. Judi (in Arabia).Noah spoke to the Lordabout his son, but was told not to ask for what he did not know

tient and was told that the issue is for those who fear (11:50and following). Noah's wife (aswell as his son), along with Lot'swife, is considered a sinner (66:10)destined for the fires of hell. Post-Koranexegesis. Reflecting numerous currents,post-Koran exegesis - as found in Abu Hatim alSidjistani (around 869 C.E.),Al-Kisa'i (around 805 C.E.), and others -

expands the flood story beyond both the Bible and the Koran,filling in numerous gaps, sometimes from the JewishHaggadah,sometimes from Christian lore, and sometimes in distinctive ways. Traditionassigns 1,200 years to the period separating

Adam and Noah, has Noah begin warning the people at age fifty (the tradition is not uniform), the flood to come in Noah's950th year, and has him to live 50, 200, or 350 years after the flood. Between Noah and Abrahamare 1,142years, and 2,832 years separateAbrahamand the Hegira of Muhammed. The flood lasted six months and the ark went about the whole space of the earth in that time. The essentials in the story of the cause of the flood were taken over from Christian lore. One version of the "sonsof God and daughtersof men"episode by Ibn cAbbas relates that there were a thousand years between Noah and Idris (Enoch).At that time some of the descendants of Adam (consisting of beautiful men and ugly women) lived on the mountain, and some (ofbeautiful women and ugly men) lived on the plain. Iblis (Satan),in the form of a young shepherd,made unprecedented music on the plain, a festival was declared,the mountain men came down to the women who adornedthemselves for the occasion, and adultery became common. Koran,Sura33:33, which forbids public adornment of women, is said to be relevantto this matter. Another version by al-Hikani found 800 years between Adam and Noah, duringwhich time women were ugly and men handsome. The abovementioned verse of the Koranis considered relevantto the aggressive lustful designs of these women. Ibn cAbbashad Adam'sdescendants to reach 40,000 during Adam's lifetime; but alreadythey were drinking, doing wrong, and committing adultery.Adam admonished that the children of Seth and of Habil (Cain)should not intermarry; despite that, however,a hundred Sethites descended to visit the pretty Cainite women and stayed with them. Lateranother group,and finally all, of the Sethites came. These were drownedin the flood of Noah.

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

235

Syriantradition tends to center Noah'spre-floodactivities in the Bekaaof Lebanon.Ibn Khurdadbih (864 C.E.)has Noah set forth in the ark from JabalLuban(the Lebanon). Yakut(around1225 C.E.)has Noah live in a village called Sahr,which is in Jabalal Jalil,a mountain range that extends from Hims to Damascus, and he has the flood begin to pour out from there. He gives cAin al Jarras the name of the place Noah entered the ark, and he locates it between Baalbekand Damascus. The geographerDimashki (around 1300 C.E.)reportsthat near Karak Nuh (Karakof Noah) is a place where water rises up bubbling from the groundand which is called "The Cataractof the Deluge." In legend, Noah'swife is Waliya, and the sinful son who perished in the flood is Kanacan"whom the Arabscall Yam."Waliya'ssin was that she told the people that Noah was madinun (insane).Noah lived longer than any other prophet and was the first mucammar (a man of great age).Despite his years,his life was comparedby him at its end to a man'sentering a house of two doors. He enters one and then exits at the other. When commanded to build an ark, Noah asked the Lordwhat an ark was and was told that it was a house of wood that would float on the water until the Lordhad cleansed the earth. When Noah asked where the water was and where the wood was, he was told to plant trees, which he proceededto do. Fortyyears passed during which he abstainedfrom prayingagainst the wicked who were mocking him. During that time God made the women sterile and no children were born. With the trees grown, Noah was instructed to cut them and to dry them. He then received instructions on building the ark. Gabriel (Djibril)was sent to teach him how to build. Noah was commanded to prepare 124,000 boardsfor the construction;

236

on each one appearedthe name of some prophet from Adam to Noah. Finally there were four more boards needed, and on them appearedthe names of the first four Sunnite Caliphs of whom the fourth is cAli ibn Abi Talib.A Sufite legend has

cAli later raised to heaven on this board,which had been preservedby divine power. Noah, the first establisher of sacred law, the first to call people unto Allah, and the first warnerof mankind was mocked by the people

4F?

sw

3

oil

Irm

•low

'

1

'

.?-

?-"ITnm

;?

IF

e

i

,~

Noah'sark is a frequentsubject of Muslim paintings. In this example, from a manuscriptin the British Museum, the artist has cleverlysolved the problem of showing the animals' presence on the ark after they had been packed away in the hold by opening the sides of the vessel to reveal them within. Noah and his family are seated on the deck while the swirling floodwaters, which must originally have been painted in silver but have now turned black, surroundthe boat. The young man clinging to a minaret in the foregroundis Noah'sson, who rejectedhis father'swarning and drowned in the flood. By permission of the British Library

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

while he was building the ark:"once a prophet, now a carpenter"and "a boat for the mainland,"they said. At that time Noah became the first person to use a guarddog. He was working by day,but at night the people were destroyingwhat he had done. At God'sorder,Noah acquired a guarddog that barkedwhen people came. At such times Noah was awakened,took a large stick, and ran them off. In this way,he made progress on schedule. Accordingto Thaclabi (around 1035 C.E.),the ark had a prow and stern like the head and tail of a cock but had a body like a bird. The design was learned when Jesus,at his disciples' request, raised Ham from the dead, and Ham described it. In the ark, the lower story was for the quadrupeds,the middle for the human beings, and the top for the birds.An alternate tradition has the birds on the lower, the animals in the middle, and Noah and his family on top. The ant was the first creatureto enter the ark, and the donkey was the last. Iblis (Satan)came in on the donkey'stail when Noah impatiently said to the donkey (who had put his forepartinto the ark but was refusing to go fartherafter Satanhad gotten on his tail), "Comein even if Satan is with you."When asked by Noah how he got in, Satan reminded Noah of his words and was allowed to stay.The pig arose from the elephant'stail and the cat from the lion. The concerned inhabitants of the ark asked Noah how they and the other creatures could coexist with the lion. God gave fever (which had not been on earth before)power over the lion and calmed him; however, since that time feverhas not ceased from the world. When the inhabitants next complained that the mouse consumed their food and drink, the lion sneezed and produced a cat before whom the mouse lay down. God tamed the instincts of the animals so that the goat and lion

and the dove and the birds of prey could exist together.The number of human beings in the ark varies in number from seven to eighty in various sources;but in addition to those in the ark, cUdi b. cAnak (Og)was also savedwith the believers. AlKisa'ihas him to work with Noah on the ark;others have him attempting to destroy the arkby various means after the flood started, and still others have him to survive outside the ark. Thaclabi gives his height as 23,333 els and had Noah drive him in front of the ark,but the flood reached only to cUdi's knees. Noah took Adam'sbody into the ark to separatethe men from the women. Continence was orderedfor both man and beast, but Ham transgressed and was punished by being given a black skin. Following the flood, Noah instructed his son Shem not to move the coffin containing Adam'sbody until he saw at his door a bull pulling an ox cart. He should follow the cart and bury the coffin where the cart stopped. Shem, out of curiosity, first opened the coffin, but then closed it and did as told. The cart stopped at Jerusalem,and he buried Adam there. The extent of the flood is disputed. Some sources spare only the Haram in Mecca from destruction, but others spare the site of the sanctuary in Jerusalemalso. The Kacba was taken up into heaven. Djibril (Gabriel)concealed the sacred stone which accordingto some was white prior to the flood but was black afterward. Arablegend, as early as Ibn Khurdadbih (864 C.E.)who spoke of Mount Al Judibeing in the Kurd country, transferredDjebel Djudi (Mt. Judi),the landing place of the ark, to Mesopotamia, and various legends about Noah'slater life cluster aroundthe identification. "Thevillage of the eighty,"at the base of the mountain, claims to be where the eighty survivors after the flood settled, and Arabgeographers mention a monastery,Deir al-Djudi.

Palestinian legend has the first thing disclosed from the waters of the flood to be the Rock in Jerusalem. With the ark grounded,the raven, sent out from the ark, fed on carrion and forgotNoah. The dove brought back an olive leaf in its bill and had mud on its feet; its rewardwas to receive its collar and to become a domestic bird. On the day of cAshura', a voluntary fast day,the tenth of Moharram,a day adoptedfrom Jewishinterpretationof casor (Leviticus 16:29),everyone came out of the ark. Men, women, and animals all fasted and gave thanks to Allah. Developing legend showed an interest in the theme of Noah's drunkenness. Noah planted the vine. Iblis (Satan)poured on it the blood of a lion, a bear,a panther,a jackal, a dog, a fox, and a rooster.The one who drinks wine takes on the characteristics of these animals, becoming as braveas a lion, strong as a bear, short-temperedas a panther, lewd as a jackal, vicious as a dog, sly as a fox, and noisy as a rooster.This story has numerous variations and appearsin other settings. Noah had four sons: Shem, Ham, Japheth,and Yoktan.When Noah was readyto bless his sons and their descendants, they were sleeping all day.Of Shem'sdescendants only Arphaxadrespondedto Noah'scall. Noah gave Shem his best blessing and established kingship and prophecy in the house of Arphaxad.Getting no response from Ham and his descendants, Noah made them slaves to the children of Shem. But after having heardthis pronouncement, Misr, grandsonof Ham, woke up from his sleep, ran to Noah, and appealedto him to prayfor him. He received the fortune of living in the blessed land of Egypt,in its fine villages, a refuge of God'sservants, whose riveris the most beneficent of riversof the world. The descendants of Japhethalso did not respond to Noah's call, and Noah prayed against them to make them the worst creatures.

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

237

Noah's daughterenters the picture as the one keeping house for Noah after the death of his wife. Various villages claim a tomb of the daughter. Such a tomb is shown at cAllar es Sifleh in southern Palestine near which is KhurbetNuh accordingto the Surveyof WesternPalestine (see Conder and Kitchener 1883:62and 123).The spring at this place is called "thespring of the daughterof Noah."Another tomb is near Baalbek (as mentioned below), and at Baghdada pasha'swife in the Turkishperiod built a cupola in honor of the daughterof Noah. Out of this material, in the concepts of the partitioning of the ark, of Noah's anxiety about the animals, and of Ham'ssin and punishment, Muslim tradition has been influenced by JewishHaggadah(see Sanhedrin 108aand 108b in the BabylonianTalmud;Shachterand Freedman1935: 739-49). The concept of cUdi b. cAnak's (Og's)escaping the flood also goes back to the Haggadicidea that Og escaped (Niddah 61a in the Babylonian Talmud;Slotki 1948:433). Local folklore knows few bounds. When the Christian cult of saints' relics was abolished in Saint Sophia, Istanbul (when the church building became a mosque), the doors which were said to be made of wood from Noah'sark remained objects of veneration. Beforesetting out on a voyage,Muslims touched the doors and said the opening sentences of the Koran(afatiha) for the repose of

Noah'ssoul.

There are divergenttraditions about Noah'stomb. cAli of Herat, writing in 1173 c.E., suggested that Noah was buried in Hebron. AshSharafi ibn Qatta'i reported a tradition that the tomb was in Jerusalem. Ibn Jubair (1185 c.E.) in his Diary reported being told that the tomb of Noah was two days' journey from Damascus. Then Dimashki (around 1300 c.E.) described Al Karak Nuh as, "Avillage near Baalbek. There is here the tomb of Noah, also the

238

tomb of Hablah, the daughterof Noah."William M. Thomson (1859: 204) in the nineteenth century reportedhaving visited KerakNuh, north of Zahleh in Lebanon,where the reportedtomb of Noah was veneratedand where a local legend told that the great size of Noah made the 132-foottomb too short for a prone burial of the prophet.A hole had to be dug for his legs, which were bent from his knees down. Thomson in his travelingfrom Beit Jibrinto Hebron also reportedhis being able to see on a hill to the south of the roadbetween Idhnaand et Tuffahthe tomb of Neby Nuh (the prophet Noah), indicating the location of Dura. This village of Dura is describedby E M. Abel (1938:32 and 239) as having 7,255 inhabitants and as being located 8 kilometers westsouthwest of Hebron.The Surveyof WesternPalestine (Conderand Kitchener 1883:328) refersto the description of the shrine given by M. V. Guerin (1869:354). The Israel survey of Judeamentions it in listing Dura and Tapuh.

idea of Noah'sbeing a preacherof righteousness are both aspects of the desire to redefine- or, from a Muslim point of view, to define correctly-the nature of important biblical figures. It is not too much to say, then, that the treatment given to the story within each tradition was determined in largepart by the setting and concerns of the individual writers and that the flood story helps us understandthese concerns.

Conclusion As even this brief survey demonstrates, the story of Noah and the flood has been put to many uses by Jewish,Christian, and Muslim writers. Forinstance, in the Jewish tradition, the emphasis put on the story as an actual event by Hellenistic writers reflects the Jewish people'sstrong sense of history, whereas the kind of detailed attention given to it by the rabbisindicated the concern to understand

Blackman,P.,translator 1977 Mishnayoth. VolumeIV Order Nezikin. Pointed Hebrew Text, English Translation,Introductions, Notes, Supplement,Appendix, Indexes, Addenda, Corrigenda, second edition. Gateshead:Judaica Press. Charles,R. H. 1983 TheApocryphaand Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testamentin English, VolumeII, Pseudepigrapha.Oxford: ClarendonPress. Charlesworth,J.H., editor 1983 The Old TestamentPseudepigrapha, VolumeI, Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments.GardenCity, NY: Doubleday. Colson, E H., translator 1966a On Abraham(De Abrahamo), pp. 1- 135 in Philo VI. Cambridge, MA, and London:HarvardUniversity Press and Heinemann. 1966b Moses I and II (De Vita Mosis),pp. 273-595 in Philo VI. Cambridge, MA, and London:HarvardUniversity Press and Heinemann. Colson, E H., and Whitaker,G. H., translators 1968 On the Unchangeablenessof God (QuodDeus immutabilis sit),

Exceptwhereotherwiseindicated, the illustrationsin this articlewere supplied by Erich Lessing.They originally appearedin his The Story of Noah (New York: Time-Life

Books,no date).Muchof the information given in the legendsalso comesfromthatfinebook.

Bibliography Abel, E-M. 1938 Geographiede la Palestine:ParLe P E-M.Abel des Fr~resPrecheurs. TomeII, GeographiePolitique. Les Villes. Paris:LibrairieLecoffre,J. Galbalda et Cie, diteurs.

precisely the relationship of the people with God. Writers in the Christian tradition, while naturally sharing some of these tendencies, have emphasized the typological

possibilities of the story, seeing in it a means of defining Christian beliefs in a way that demonstrates that these are the fulfillment of a divine plan. In the Muslim tradition, the retelling of the story throughout the Koran and the advancement of the

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

pp. 1-101 in Philo III. Cambridge, MA, and London:HarvardUniversity Press and Heinemann. Conder,C. R., and Kitchener,H. H. 1883 The Surveyof WesternPalestine. Memoirsof the Topography, Orography,Hydrography,and Archaeology,VolumeIII, Judaea, edited with additionsby E. H. Palmerand W.Besant.London:The Committee of the PalestineExploration Fund. Dawood,N. J.,translator 1974 The Koran,fourthrevisededition. New York:PenguinBooks. Dods, M., translator 1979a Theophilus to Autolycus,pp. 85121 in TheAnte-Nicene Fathers, Translationsof the Writingsof the Fathers down to A.D.325, Volume II,

edited by A. Robertsand J.Donaldson, revisedfor Americanedition by A. C. Coxe. GrandRapids,MI: Eerdmans. 1979b St. Augustin'sCity of God, pp. 1-511 in A Select Libraryof the Nicene and Post-NiceneFathersof the Christian Church,VolumeII, reprint, edited by P. Schaff.Grand Rapids,MI:Eerdmans. Freedman,H., translator 1977 The MidrashRabbah. VolumeI, Genesis. London:Soncino. Guerin, M. V. 1869 Description de la Palestine. Judee, VolumeIII. Paris. Heller, B. 1936 Nuh. Pp. 948-49 in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, edited by M. Th. Houtsma, A. J.Wensinck, E. Lkvi-Provengal, H. A. R. Gibb,and W.Heffening.Leidenand London: E. J.Brill and Luzacand Co. James,M. R., translator 1971 The Biblical Antiquities of Philo. Series:The Libraryof Biblical Studies, edited by H. M. Orlinsky. New York:KTAV. Lewis,J.P. 1968 A Study of the Interpretationof Noah and the Flood in Jewish and ChristianLiterature.Leiden: E. J.Brill. Lipman,E. J.,translator 1970 The Mishnah: Oral Teachingsof Judaism.New York:W.W.Norton and Company. Malan,S. C., translator 1882 The Book of Adam and Eve,also called The Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan. London:Williams and Norgate. Marcus,R., translator 1961 Philo. SupplementI. Questions and Answers on Genesis. Cambridge, MA, and London:HarvardUniver-

sity Pressand Heinemann. Neusner, J.,translator 1977 The Tosefta,Translatedfrom the Hebrew.Sixth Division, Tohorot (The Orderof Purities).New York: KTAV. Roberts,A., and Donaldson, J.,translators 1981a AgainstHeresies,pp. 307-567 in The Ante-Nicene Fathers,Translations of the Writingsof the Fathers down to A.D.325 VolumeI, edited by A. Robertsand J.Donaldson, American reprintof the Edinburgh edition. GrandRapids,MI: Eerdmans. 1981b Dialogue of Justin,Philosopherand Martyr,with Trypho,a Jew,pp. 194270 in TheAnte-Nicene Fathers, Translationsof the Writingsof the Fathersdown to A.D.325, edited by A. Robertsand J.Donaldson, American reprintof the Edinburgh edition. GrandRapids,MI: Eerdmans. Robinson,J.A., translator 1920 St. Irenaeus, The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching.London: Society for PromotingChristian Knowledge. Robinson,J.M., editor 1977 The Nag Hammadi Libraryin English. San Francisco:Harperand Row. 1979a The Discoveryof the Nag Hammadi Codices. Biblical Archeologist42: 206- 24. 1979bb Getting the Nag HammadiLibrary into English. Biblical Archeologist 42: 239-48. Shachter,J.,and Freedman,H., translators 1935 SederNezikin, VolumeIII, Sanhedrin.The Babylonian Talmud, edited by I. Epstein.London: Soncino. Slotki, I. W.,translator 1948 Niddah. Pp. 1-548 in Seder Tohoroth.The Babylonian Talmud, edited by I. Epstein.London: Soncino. Stone, M. 1983 Why Study the Pseudepigrapha? Biblical Archaeologist46: 235 -43. Thackeray,H. St. J.,translator 1967 JosephusIV JewishAntiquities, Books I-IV Cambridge,MA, and London:HarvardUniversity Press andHeinemann. Thomson, W.M. 1859 The Land and the Book:or, Biblical Illustrations from the Mannersand Customs, the Scenes and Sceneryof the Holy Land, VolumeIII. New York:Harperand Brothers. VanElderen,B. 1979 The Nag HammadiExcavation. Biblical Archeologist42: 225- 31.

The AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearchinvites applications for 0O S

01 OFO

participants in

An

Institute

for

College Faculty and Museum

Curators to improve college-level teaching in the humanities and to improve the presentation of humanistic themes in museum programs. "The Ancient Near East as the Cradle of Civilization"will be the subject of the 1985 Institute, to be held June 3 to July 12, 1985, at the University Museum, University of Pennsylvania. Each participant will receive a stipend of $2,500. Foradditional information and applications, write or call ASOR Administrative Offices -NEHSI 4243 Spruce Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 Tel. (215) 222-4643

Funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

239

THE

The

Petrie

University College

MUSEUM

TRAIL

MuseumofEgyptia London

by BarbaraAdams Sir FlindersPetrie,developedthe archaeology,

unique and priceless collection of Egyptianartifacts that form the core of the Petrie Museum of EgyptianArchaeology.Currently housed in the Department of Egyptology at University College London, this collection combines select artifacts either discoveredby Petrie during his many excavations or purchasedby him from local inhabitants and antiquities dealers; over the years it has also been supplemented by additional gifts and donations. The outstanding arrayof materials covers the full rangeof Egypt'scomplex history, and is being increasingly recognized as important to scholars, students, and interested laypeople. Sir FlindersPetrie and his Collection Sir Flinders Petrie began his careerin Egyptin 1881 and continued to work there until 1925,except forthe yearsof the FirstWorldWar.During that time he laid the foundations of proper archaeological method, excavated fortythree sites, andpublished thirty-sevenreportsand twelve catalogues.He continued to work in Palestine after 1922, where he lived following his retirement in 1933, and continued to add to his prodigious publication record until his death in 1942. In his early career,Petrie workedunder the auspices of the EgyptExplorationFund and then organizedhis own EgyptianResearchAccount, which continued after 1905 as the British School of Archaeology in Egypt (BSAEwas disbanded in 1953). The material brought home from these excavations, together with the purchases Petrie made during his winters in Egypt,formed the nucleus of his collection. In 1892 he was made the first Edwards Professor of Egyptology at University College London; the college bought his collection in 1913, through the generosity of Sir RobertMond and WalterMorrison.The

240

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

Thoughtto be the earliest preservedgarment known from Egypt,and possibly the earliest linen garmentin the world, this child's tunic was discoveredby Sir FlindersPetriein a FirstDynasty mastaba at Tarkhan.The main body or skirt of the tunic was missing but what remains gives exciting details of the manufactureof early Egyptian clothing (UC.28614B).

This verylong and narrow-sleeved,linen dress from a Fifth Dynasty tomb at Deshasheh appearsto have been designed exclusively as a gravegood and was never worn (UC.31182).

gatheredby Begunwithmaterials thefatherof modernarchaeology, thePetrieMuseumcollectioncoversall ofEgypt'scomplexhistory.

The museum'snamesake, Sir WilliamMatthew FlindersPetrie,and his wife, Lady Hilda Petrie,at Illahun in 1912. This photographis used courtesy of Miss MargaretDrower.

collection continued to grow as his students and successors in the BSAEsupplied artifacts from their fieldwork. Since 1952 the departmenthas been associated with the Egypt Exploration Society in excavations in Egypt, first under the late ProfessorW. B. Emery at Saqqaraand in Nubia and later under the present EdwardsProfessor,H. S. Smith, who is the field director at Memphis. The collection has been the gratefulrecipient of objects from these excavations. In postwar years it has also received generous gifts from the Trustees of the Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine in 1964 and 1980. Occasionally, there have been private bequests, notably the Langtoncat figureswhich were collected by N. and B. Langtonand were received by the museum in 1972. The Unique Nature of the Collections The Petrie Museum's greatest strength is its wealth of Egyptianarchaeologicalmaterial dating from prehistoric to Romantimes. Much of the collection consists of small artifacts which Petrie rightly recognized as valuable

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

241

Left:Frontand back views of an incomplete female figurinefrom the predynastic site of Qau. Thepainted designs on the figurehave generatedmuch discussion -some scholars believe they representtattooing while others think they indicate body painting or decorative fabric (UC.9601).Above:A carvedelephant ivory of the protodynasticperiod from the Main Deposit at Hierakonpolisshowing birds and animals in relief. The other half is in the CairoMuseum (UC.14864).Below: This red polished dish from Badaridates to the Amratian (orNagada I) period of predynastic Egypt.Its interior,decorated with white paint, displays a scene that has been interpretedas people working on looms

records of Egypt's technological and cultural development. For instance, pottery, scarabs, and stelae demonstrate stylistic changes and are important chronological indicators. The Petrie Museum collection is therefore primarily an archaeological rather than an art museum and is an excellent resource for teaching and researchfor students and Egyptologistsalike. Petrie'sexcavationreportswere advancedfor their day, yet he certainly did not publish all the material that he found.He retainedmuch unique unpublished materialin his own collection to be studied at a later date. Nearly a century has passed since Petrie discovered the first of these unpublished artifacts,and in the meantime a great deal has been learned concerning Egypt's past. Today these little-known objects have the potential of yielding significant insight into various aspects of ancient Egyptian life. These artifacts are constantly being rediscovered and with the aid of Petrie'sarchive- a collection of his dig notebooks, diaries, and distribution lists-truly

(UC.9547).

remarkablespecimens have come to light and are receiving noteworthy attention. The exhibition of many of these fine objectsis preceded by carefulrestoration.The curatorialendeavors,currently undertaken by Rosalind Hall and myself, have been greatly helped since 1975 by the work of students of the Conservation Department of the Institute of Archaeol-

The PetrieMuseum'sreconstructedmonumental lions from Koptos.Dating to the FirstDynasty, these rarelimestone sculpturesmeasure approximatelyfour-and-a-halffeet long, and each weigh a half-ton. Left and right: Thereare more originalfragmentsremaining on the right side of one lion (UC.35294B). Middle: The second lion is betterpreservedon its left side (UC.35294A).

242

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

ogy, University of London. Now where corrosion prevailed there is shining, sometimes inscribed, metal; where hard mud once obscured, the earliest decorated ivories of historic Egypt are revealed; and where fragments were disarrayed,todaywhole pots, stone vas&es and figures are reassembled. Among the amazing results of the recent conservation program are the earliest garments in the world. Our textile collection is mainly the productof Petrie'sexcavations at the Fayum cemeteries of Tarkhan, Meydfim, Deshasheh, Gurob,Illahhn, and Hawara.In 1977 a group of these textiles underwenttreatment in the Victoria and Albert Museum's Textile Conservation Workshop in Osterley Park, London. The exciting story of finding a tunic among a batch of ragsfrom Tarkhanis describedin the following terms by the conservatorMrs. Sheila Hand: The most spectaculardiscoveryof the wholeprogrammetookplacewhile sortingthrougha tumbled heap of dirty funerarylinen: first by the tracingof a seam in what appearedto be just anotherrag,andthen by the realizationthat two furtherragswerestill attachedto the firstone and were,in fact,sleevesstill bearingdistinctsignsof pleating(Hall1982:28-29). This linen tunic dates to the FirstDynasty, making it the earliest preservedgarment known from Egypt, and perhaps in the world. A similar tale of rediscoveryand restoration concerns two leonine statues. Stone lions, especially largeones, are rare from the prehistoric and Early Dynastic periods of Egyptianhistory. One limestone lion hadbeen known for years in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. It was excavated in 1894 by Sir Flinders Petrie in the temple at Koptos,located at the western end of the WadiHammamat in Upper Egypt.At the same time, Petrie discovered two other large limestone lions on the basal clay below

Above:A Greco-Romanwax encaustic mummy portraitdepicting a youth with curly hair and beard(UC.19610).Farleft: This faience figure,from the Langtoncat collection, depicts a baboon with a sun disc above a cat mounted on a papyruscolumn (UC.36129).Left:A bust of the goddess Hathoris carved on both sides of this slip of wood from Gurob.It dates to the Eighteenth or Nineteenth Dynasty and is approximately9 centimeters long (UC.16759).Right: A sculptor'strial piece in limestone from the EighteenthDynasty capital of king Amenhotep IV (also known as Akhenaten) at Tellel Amarna (UC.013).FarRight: This particularlyattractivefigure of the goddess Isis, Motherof the Apis, was found among a cache in the necropolis at Saqqara.The sculptureis made of bronze with the details inlaid with gold. It dates to the late period in Egypt

(UC.30489).

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

243

the level of the Ptolemaic temple stairway.These statues were never illustrated in his site reportand they seemed to have disappearedafter the excavation. Formany years their whereabouts were unknown. Then early in 1980, a chance contact occurredthrough a visit arrangedby the LondonFederationof Museums and Art Galleries to the Wellcome Historical Medical Museum and the Petrie Museum. Two officers of the Wellcome collection, Richardde Peyerand Georgina Russell, asked me if the phrase"Koptoslions, 1894"meant anything,chalked as it was on wooden chests full of stone fragments in their store. On inspection of the largerfragments of stone, it was apparentto me that the larger"lost"lions of Koptos had been rediscovered.Shortly afterwardsthe Wellcome Trustees generously gave the chests and their contents, which included other objects excavated at Koptos, to University College London. My research in our manuscriptdistributionlists revealedthat SirHenryWellcome had acquiredthem from Petrie in 1927 in the hope that the Wellcome conservatorswould reconstructthe lions, a task which Petrie, and later the Wellcome conservators, had been unable to do. Todaythe thousands of fragmentarystone pieces have been painstakingly reassembled by our conservator, RichardJaeschke.The two lions each measure four-anda-halffeet long and weigh a half-ton.They possess all the features of the Archaic type of lion: wide-open mouth with teeth bared, curving muzzle lines, rather robust body,andtail rising from the root up overthe center of the back and curling to the left. Small areas of unbattered surface indicate that the statues were once highly polished and possibly painted red. The lions date at least to the First Dynasty (3100 B.c.), which makes them, if not the most beautiful lions known from ancient Egypt, certainly the largest lions of this period. The Usage of the Collection Membersof the Department of Egyptologyoften muse on the joy Petrie would derive to see his collection being so actively used today.It has not become a sterile dryasdust assemblage, but a growing source of information, which can be collated with the data being producedby modern excavations in Egypt. Knowledge of the collection is being more widely disseminated throughthe publication of a new series of scholarly catalogues and volumes by Messrs. Aris and Phillips. Commencing in 1972, this series now includes such topics as statuary,inscriptions, reliefs, ostraca, and material from the archaeological sites of Amarna, Gurob,and Hierakonpolis. For teaching undergraduatestudents the culture of ancient Egypt through direct contact with its remains, the PetrieCollection is unrivalled.Forthe researcherand mature scholar, it is a veritable mine of new discoveries. For members of the public it is a place to deepen an interest in the subject of Egyptology.

244

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

Although not a public museum, the PetrieMuseum of Egyptian Archaeology is open to visitors Monday to Friday,10:00 A.M. to 12:00M., 1:15P.M.to 5:00P.M.It is closed for a week at Christmas and Easter and for four weeks in the summer. Groups and researchvisitors are requestedto make an appointment. The Petrie Museum, located in what used to be a dray horse stable, has quickly outgrownits present accommodation. Exhibition cases, storagecupboardsplus the new displays of the textile garments, the mummy portraits, the ostraca, and the Langton cat collection fill virtually every possible inch of floor space. The museum is also frequentlycrowdedwith people including undergraduate students from the University College, visiting scholars, research associates, volunteer workers, and members of the public. In fact the recently restoredstone lions from Koptoscannot even fit into the present space. As part of the University College's 150th Anniversary Appeal, ?700,000 is being sought in order to refurbish new premises to house the collection. The proposednew museum would greatly enable the vital work now in progresson the collection to continue and expand.In the meantime the Koptos lions rest patiently in the south cloisters of University College, awaiting their deserved abode in the new Petrie Museum of EgyptianArchaeology.When this is built it will become the majorfocus for Egyptianarchaeologicalresearchin Great Britain.

Suggestions for FurtherReading Adams,B. 1974 Ancient Hierakonpolis. Supplement. Warminster,England: Aris & Phillips Ltd. Adams,B., and Jaeschke,R. 1984 The KoptosLions. Series:Contributionsin Anthropologyand History 3. Milwaukee:MilwaukeePublic Museum. Hall, R. M. 1982 Garments in the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology. TextileHistory 13:27-45. Petrie,W.M. E 1974 Illahun, Kahun and Gurob. Reprint of 1891. Warminster, England:Aris & Phillips Ltd. Samson, J. 1978 Amarna, City of Akhenaten and Nefertiti: Nefertiti as Pharaoh.Warminster:Aris & Phillips Ltd. Stewart,H. M. 1976 EgyptianStelae, Reliefs and Paintingfrom the PetrieCollection. PartOne:TheNew Kingdom.Warminster,England:Aris & Phillips Ltd. 1979 EgyptianStelae, Reliefs and Paintingsfrom the PetrieCollection. PartT7vo:Archaic Periodto SecondIntermediatePeriod. Warminster,England:Aris & Phillips Ltd. Ward,W A. 1978 Studies on ScarabSeals. Volume 1. Pre-12thDynasty Scarab Amulets. Warminster,England:Aris & Phillips Ltd.

Takes Zimri-Lim Grand Tour

the -r

rr.: :h-~

IC

~

--

.?

Ilt;II-

L-

~ ~ ~

.

r?

?YS

~

:" .

C~?:j

" .. -.

.

•.:

Ugarit 4, .,•.

C1 i,-

"R

.

...

I

!

..

ll

?

e

"?'~.'1i 72;-"

Jr':'?J~

.L

k/1

Mari

?E

,.

-...

.,

Zimri-Lim's =

'Trip

Zimri-Lim's journey Mari

?~?... i=r

delegation's

(maybealso .= journey includingZimri-Lim) MariCalendar day/month

1 2. 3. 4.

Leaves Mari approximately 8/12 Zilkhan 29/12 10/1 Kirdakhat Khakkulan 24-26/1 30/1 5. Zalpakh 3/2 6. Yakullum 7 Khalab (or Aleppo) ?/2 ?/2 Muzunnum 8. 9. Layash 13/2 10. Ugarit 28/2-16/3 16/3 or 4?- ?/4 11. Khazazar 12. Khalab (or Aleppo) ?/4 13. Mari by ?/8 The locations of 3, 4, 6, 8, and 9 are uncertain.

-

246

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

:..

. . •. - ..,2-

,

-,:

SASSON BYJACKM. n arecentissueofBiblical Archaeologist, I re-created some thoughts that Zimri-Lim, the last king of Mari, may have had when he was visited by an ambassador from Ugarit (Sasson 1984). I had him express the wish that some day he would like to visit the ambassador's homeland - a Mediterranean port-city located directly across Cyprus' pinlike peninsula. This reconstruction was not totally fictional. Almost fifty years ago Charles Jean quoted a short passage from an unpublished tablet which said that Zimri-Lim did make a trip to Ugarit and as he passed by the upper Syro-Mesopotamian region called Idamaras he picked new troops for his army.' Fifty years ago we also had evidence that Zimri-Lim once visited Yamkhad, with its capital at Khalab (today's Aleppo). In fact, one of Zimri-Lim's yearformulas, used by the scribes to establish the date of various documents, commemorated this visit. But since this specific year could not be securely placed within ZimriLim's reign, we were not sure when this event occurred. Even as my article in the June BA was at the printers, a new volume reached my desk which contained 630 previously unpublished Mari texts (Bardet and others 1984). Fifteen of these documents, edited and studied by Pierre Villard, strongly suggest that Zimri-Lim did go to Yamkhadian territory in order to meet his father-in-law Yarim-Lim, that he may have accompanied Yarim-Lim back to Khalab, and that he may even have traveled as far as Ugarit. Indeed, it appears that Zimri-Lim did make a grand tour of the northwest! The Departure Roughly speaking Zimri-Lim's journey occurred around ten years or so before Hammurabi of Babylon dis-

mantled Mari; according to the middle chronology, this deed should have happened around 1760 B.C.E. (see Glass 1984). The trip began during the last months of a year named after a recently concluded military compact with the Elamites. In fact Zimri-Lim had just offered a handsome throne to the god Addu of the

town of Makhanum, possibly to thank him for a successful enterprise in which Mari dispatched military aid to its ally to the east. He was certainly on the road at the beginning of this year's twelfth month, Eburum. Large outlays of food for the royal table indicate that a big banquet took place in Mari around

Yamkhad kingdom and sphere of influence

approximateMari kingdomduring Zimri-Lim's reign Mari'ssphere

of influence .:::Man

sphere~

~

i,

It should be noted that the precise location of many cities and the territorial boundaries of various kingdoms of Syro-Mesopotamiaduring the Middle Bronze Age cannot at present be firmly established or demarcated.Much of the informationon the maps given here, therefore,is conjecturaland is based on textual evidence from Mari and Alalakh. The size of territoryunder Mari'simmediate control and of land under its influence dependedon Zimri-Lim'sfortunes in battle as well as his ability to make good marriages for his many daughters (see Sasson 1984: 112-13). Although the documents unearthed at Mari may give the impression that Zimri-Limwon everybattle and skirmish that he faced,the reality must have occasionally been differentfor we constantly readreports,sent by the king's many spies and diplomats,of formerallies abandoningMari'scause in favorof this or that enemy. This tendency was especially prevalent among the nomadic groupsthat moved in and out of Mari'sreach. Moreover,the notion that powers control all land that lay within clearly etched frontiersis derivedfrom observingmodernpolitical conditions. In the ancient world the territory of a city-state may have had pockets of powers whose rulers were either independent or owed their allegiance to distant enemies. I have not tried to indicate such pockets on the map above. If it is difficult to chart Mari'sfrontiers duringthe reign of Zimri-Lim,it is virtually impossible to do the same for the kingdom of Yamkhad,and it will remain so as long as we do not have access to its archives. These, however, probablylie below the inhabited portions of Aleppo and may, therefore,be beyond retrieve. JackM. Sasson

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

247

the eighteenth of Kiskissum, the precedingmonth, and it is tempting to associate this occasion with a gala send-offfor the royalparty.2 Accordingto my calculations, in the particularyear in which ZimriLim began his journey,the month of Eburumfell approximatelyat the end of December. Anyone who has visited the Levantduring the winter realizes that December, January,and Februaryare likely to be the wettest of months, and while the daytime temperaturerarelyfalls below 320 Fahrenheit,the air is wet and the cold is penetratingand raw.Still it is a period in which nature is not dormant, and even the more desertine regions are coveredwith greens. In the region near Mari the climate is slightly different-nature is not as luxuriant, for the earth often freezes and the nights are slightly colder. Wehave texts from Mari that tell us about rains and mud that made some roadsand passes difficult to negotiate. With this in mind, one might question why Zimri-Limdid not delay the start of his journeyby a few months. An answer is not difficult to find. Springtimein Mari, as well as in almost every other spot in the Near East, was the most charming of seasons but it was also the busiest time of the year. Canals and irrigation ditches were cleared, dikes were preparedfor late springflooding, and eventually the harvests were secured and the grains were threshed, winnowed, and deposited in the palaces and temples. There were also many festivals to celebrate.In addition, springwas the time when armies marched. Traveling in winter, therefore, allowed Zimri-Lim to find his hosts less busy and more ready to welcome him. Spring is a brief season in the Near East-as April comes to an end the hot, dry air of summer quickly sweeps across the land, desiccating the fertile landscape. Summer is definitely not the best time to travel. Probably for all these reasons,

248

Zimri-Limfound it useful to begin his trek in Eburum. The king took with him large quantities of textiles, finished clothing, jewelry,weapons, haberdashery, and footwear.He could also depend upon his trusted functionaries to providemore by quick messengers should the need arise. Some of the recordsfrom the months previous to the journey'sstart indicate that the Mari artisans were busy preparing the necessary materials. Travelingin MariThrritory Zimri-Lim'sfirst stops were likely to be in his own territory,for the route he took was not the most direct. He had palaces in Terqaon the Euphrates (to the north of Mari),in Saggaratum on the KhaburRiver (slightly upstream from where the river joined the Euphrates),and in Qattunan (almost at the edge of Mari's territory).Along the way,he was joined by Yatar-Aya,one of his many wives, who was probablythe regnant spouse in the palace at Terqa.It is interesting to note that his wife Shiptu, the daughterof the king of Yamkhad,apparentlystayed in Mari to care for the main palace in the capital. By then the caravanmust have reachedimpressive proportions,for it included not only the king, the many members of his family, and the staff for each individual but also mountains of gifts and personnel to care for them. The convoy also included a number of merchantambassadorssome of whom, we now know, took occasion to make privatepurchases for future sales. Journeying in Foreign Lands As the caravan progressed northward, the voyage entered a new year, labeled by the Mari chancellery: "Year:Zimri-Lim offered a great throne to the god Addu of Makhanum." Zimri-Lim's first foreign host was the king of Ilansura, KhayaSumu. If you recall my earlier article, you know that this king was a

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

twofold son-in-law,for he was marriedto two of Zimri-Lim's daughters,Kirum and Shimatum. PierreVillard suggests that ZimriLim took this occasion to settle Kirum'sdivorce, since her letters suggest she had become suicidal about her unhappiness in Ilansura. At any rate, on the tenth day of the new year Khaya-Sumureceived "aniron ring, gold centered, with a seal adornedwith two small lapislazuli stones; another iron ring, and a linen 'loin-girder.'"It is impossible that Khaya-Sumudid not respondin kind; unfortunately,we do not have an entry to tell us what Zimri-Lim received. Usually gifts exchanged among rulers - not to be confused

with tributes periodically made by vassals (aform of shakedown)and by defeatedenemies -tend to balance out each other, thus allowing the treasury to come out fairly even after all the transactions are completed. But this gift to Khaya-Sumupales beside those that Zimri-Limbegan to present to the Yamkhadianswhen he met them in the last week of the first month, Urakhum. We know that gifts were given out to his father-in-law,Yarim-Lim,to his mother-in-law,Gashera,as well as to members of Yarim-Lim'scircle which, among others, included Yarim-Lim'spersonal songstress. The gift presentations were made repeatedlyand at various moments -often at religious ceremonies

-

usually before the deities of various towns along the way.A particularly striking presentation took place in the temple of Adduof Khakkulan,a town probably in Yamkhadian control. Gashera was presented with a very ornate item, probably a broach, made of gold almost twelve ounces in weight and encrusted with precious stones. We cannot be sure that Zimri-Lim himself traveled to Yamkhad's capital, or that he went westward to Ugarit itself. The quotation given below in note 1 indicates that he did.

We are only certain that he did meet Yarim-Lim face-to-face, that Mari offered all sorts of textiles to Addu of Khalab, and that more gifts for the king of Yamkhad accompanied Yarim-Lim as he made his way to Ugarit, apparently accompanied by Zimri-Lim's own wife, Yatar-Aya.But it would be terribly odd if Zimri-Lim merely monitored their progress, sending others to make the various presentations in his behalf. This is especially unlikely since all sorts of gifts were exchanged between Mari and allies of Yamkhad in Ugarit itself. In particular Mediterranean wines and honey, much appreciated along the Euphrates, were given to the Mari contingents. (Almost two years later we find Zimri-Lim's private secretary, Shunukhrakhalu, still controlling about thirty jars of his loot from the journey [ARMT XXXIII. 217].) This leg of the journey from Khalab to Ugarit occupied almost two full months (the second, Malkanum, and the third, Lakhum) in Mari's calendar. It also included two stops, at Muzunnum and Layash (or Layish). Now this Layash/Layish is the place that has been identified as Dan in northern Israel (Pardee and Glass 1984: 93). It is clear, however, that this town is to be located between Aleppo and Ugarit, miles to the north of biblical Dan. Hence the interpretation first offered by Abraham Malamat and more recently cited by Dennis Pardee and Jonathan Glass in the article published in Bib-

lical Archaeologist must now be amended accordingly.3 Conclusion When and how this trip came to an end is not at all clear. Surely the trajectory back included as many ceremonies and visits as did the trip toward Khalab. Perhaps Zimri-Lim returned home via the desert route, that is, by going south to Qatna first. We cannot, however, be sure of the king's presence back in his capital until the beginning of the eighth

The Calendarat Mari scribes at Maridateddocuments by month, day,and year.As faras

Thewe can tell, the custom of dividing the month into weeks was not

common outside of Israel (see Hallo 1977). Without relying on specific names for the days of the week (forexample, Sunday and Monday),the Mesopotamian simply gave ordinal numbers to the days of each month from 1 to 29 or 30, even when he was awareof the lunar month's natural division into four phases. The year itself was given not as a number but as a full-sentence name inventedto commemorate some importantpolitical, martial, or cultic event that was the highlight of the preceding twelvemonth period (for example, "Urakhum, 12th day, Year:Zimri-Lim presented a greatthroneto the god Shamashof Makhanum").At the beginning of a yearwhen the central administration'schoice for the year title had not completely circulated throughout the kingdom, scribes may have concurrently used two, perhapseven three, differentformulas.Therefore,the three dozen separate formulas available to us for Zimri-Lim'sreign in reality reflect no more than eighteen actual years of reign. Scholarshiphas not, as yet, made definite links amongmost of these formulas.(Seethe note to the table at the end of this sidebarfor additionalexamples of year titles.) With the exception of Egypt,all early Near Easterncivilizations had a lunisolar calendarin which the months were calculatedby the cycle of the moon and the yearsaccordingto the sun. Since 12cycles of the moon (each lasting 291/2days-totaling 354 days in a year)do not match the 365-day solar year,adjustmentshad to be made in orderto bringthe calendarin line with nature. Ideally,under a lunar calendareach month begins on the daythat the first slim crescent after a new moon appears.In practice it is not always possible to sight the moon during unfavorableclimactic conditions, so ancient timekeepers often solved this problem by assigning 30 days to 6 months. This, however,was 3 daysmore than the lunar calendarpermitted for each month). They made up for the extra half days by giving 6 (1/2 day months no more than 29 days. It is still not clear how Mariassigned each month a specific length of either 29 or 30 days.Since I so farhavebeen able to find only two occasions in which a Marimonth lasted 29 days,the possibility exists that normally all Marimonths were30 dayslong. One thing, however,is certain- months of unequal lengths did not alternate at Mari. In fact, in differentyears we often find sequences of 30-daymonths, and in one particularyear we have nine months with 30 days each. Thus even if the remaining 3 months of that year were 29 days long, we would have, in this instance, a year of 357 days-that is, one at least 3 dayslonger than the normal 354 days found in a lunar year. We cannot yet determine how many of the Mariyears duringthe time of Zimri-Limstretchedbeyond the number of dayswithin a normal lunar cycle, but since we never find a 31-day month, the Mari lunar calendar could never have stretched long enough to match the solar year of 3561/2 days. The Mari year,therefore,was short 51/2days-if all 12 months were reckonedat 30 dayseach-or it was 11/2 daysshort if half of the 12months were 29 days long. Such a discrepancybetween the solar andlunar cycles can be tolerated by certain cultures. Forexample, in the Muslim world a month such as Ramadanwill move from one season in one year to another season a few yearslater.At Mari,however,life was guidedby agriculturewhich followed the sun's cycle and not the moon's. Since the solar year fits much better continued on page 250

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

249

with agricultural life, every few years the Mari bureaucrats would panic at seeing their calendar falling out-of-step with the seasons. They would, therefore, ask the king to orderthe insertion of an intercalarymonth in orderto catch up with nature but because the lunar year did not consistently alternate between 29- and 30-daymonths, this intercalation could not be precharted.Thus the Marichancellery made decisions to expand the year on a seemingly ad hoc basis. The table given here providesinformation on 12yearsin the reign of ZimriLim that are known to be consecutive. The Mari calendar'stwelve permanent months, which the scribes say began each year with Urakhum, are given on the left, and the years are listed across the top. When the number of days for a certain month is known, I have entered that number in the appropriate box; where the boxes are blank, the number of days is not yet known. When a box is shaded, it indicates that in that year that month was followed by an intercalary month. Thus, the table shows that there were at least 5 intercalarymonths during this portion of Zimri-Lim'stenure: one at the end of the second year,one near the beginning of the fifth year,two in the middle of the tenth year,and one in the middle of the eleventh year. (I should mention that I have not shown an intercalary month that is known to have come after the fourth month, Abum; we do not know if it occurred during the reign of ZimriLim or some other Mari ruler.) It is unknown whether an intercalated month necessarily contained 29 or 30 days.Thus the shadedareasshould be understood to stand for a block of time that may have stretched as much as 60 days.It may well be that the intercalated month of Malkanum in the fifth year peteredout halfway through its run. Note that a stretch from the fifth month of the tenth year through the fifth month of the eleventh year- a period that would normally include only 13 months-ended up having 16 full months! If all these months contained a full 30 days,then this year (with its 480 days) compares well with the famous "last year of confusion"just before the Julian calendar was inaugurated on January1, 46 B.C.E.

250

would EveryfewyearstheMaribureaucrats panicat seeingtheircalendarfalling withtheseasons. out-of-step TwelveYearsDuring Zimri-Lim'sReign

Months of the Mari Calendar

YearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYear 1' 2' 3' 4' 5' 6' 7' 8' 9' 10' 11' 12' 3( 30 1. Urakhum 30 30? 30 30 29? 2. Malkanum 30 3. Lakhum 30 30 30 30 4. Abum 30 30 5. Khibirtum 30 30 6. IGI.KUR 7. Kinunum 8. Dagan 9. Liliatum

30

30 30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

11. Kiskissum

30

30

30? 30

30

30

30

30 30?

30

10. Belet-Biri 12. Eburum

30

30

30

30

30

29? 30 30

30

Notes:Theprimesigns(') nextto theyearnumbersindicatethatwe knowthat these yearswereconsecutive;we cannotyet, however,say wherethese yearsoccurredwithinZimri-Lim's reign. The coloredlines in years8' and 9' indicate when Zimri-Lim'strip to the northwesttook place.

Thefollowingarethe titles fortheyearsin this table: Year

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

1'

2' 3' 4' 5'

Name Zimri-Limput the banks of the Euphratesin good order.

wona greatvictoryin Saggaratum againstthe Zimri-Lim

Benyaminitesand killed their kings. Zimri-LimcapturedAshlakka. [Anotherformulafor this year readsas follows:Zimri-Lim offeredhis statue to the god Adduof Khalab.] Zimri-Limpresenteda greatthrone to the god Shamashof Makhanum. Zimri-Limtook a census of his land.

6'

fortifiedDur-Yakhdullim. Zimri-Lim

7'

Zimri-Limpresentedhis statue to the god Khattaof Kakkulatum.

8' 9' 10' 11' 12'

Zimri-Lim senthis soldiersto Elam'said.

[A variantof this formulareadsas follows:Zimri-Limwent to aid Elam.]

Zimri-Lim presenteda greatthroneto the godAdduof Makhanum.

Zimri-Limwent to the aid of Babylon. [Anotherformulafor this year readsas follows: Zimri-Lim went to aid Yamkhad.] Zimri-Limoffereda greatthrone to the god Daganof Terqa. Zimri-LimcapturedAshlakkafor the second time.

JackM. Sasson

month, named Dagan after the god. One account (IX.46)tells us that high-rankingmilitary officers from Babylonwere given precious vessels as gifts. Briefthough it may be, this document witnesses an important alliance between Mari and Babylon. In fact, Mari was soon to send a military contingent to help Hammurabi fight his enemies, and the presence of Babylonianofficers was repeatedly recordedin the early months of the following year.4The war must have begun soon afterwards.A text dated to the third (?)day of the ninth month, Liliatum, recordsan outlay of clothing for the king, who was ready to go to Razama,a town which saw much fighting between Babylon and its enemies (Birot1978: 185-87). By then, however,Zimri-Limhad to deal with a major change of power in Khalab.Scarcely had Zimri-Lim returnedhome than the news of Yarim-Lim'sdeath reached him. A terse account tells us that ZimriLim orderedthe dispatch of gifts for Yarim-Lim'stomb on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, within two weeks of entertaining the Babylonian officers. The new king of Khalab(unfortunatelyfor us also named Hammurabi)succeeded his father and began a rule that seems, if not overtly hostile to Zimri-Lim, certainly warmer to his namesake in Babylon.We now know that less than a decade later this direct relationship between the two Hammurabis led to Babylon'saggression against Mari. Can we speculate on the reason for this remarkablevoyageof ZimriLim? Obviously it allowed the king of Mari to reinvigorate past alliances and secure new ones. In fact, the Mari chancellery may have even regarded the trip as partially military in nature, because one variant of the formula reads: "Year:Zimri-Lim went to aid Yamkhad." We must not be surprised if there were other reasons too. Zimri-Lim's father, Yakhdun-Lim, once boasted

of reaching the Mediterraneanand of conquering hosts of enemies on his way there and back. And Shamshi-Adad,one of the past's most brilliant and powerfulrulers, whose own son had ruled Mari for a score of years before Zimri-Lim,also boasted of reaching the edge of the Great Sea.s Perhapsit was pleasing to Zimri-Limto share in the deeds of these illustrious predecessors;and to have done it without the shedding of blood or the enormous expenses of war must have been especially gratifying. Notes I"Previously,when my lord went to Ugarit, picked troops from Idamarasaccompanied him"(Jean1939a:67). The remaining sentences, as cited by Jean,aregarbledbut they indicate that troubles occurredwhile ZimriLim was away. 2Theparticularrecordswill be publishedby J.-P.Materne.Fornow, see Materne 1983:196. 3Theeconomic document (XXIII.556)cited in Pardeeand Glass 1984, page93, should readas follows: 10 minas of tin, Sumu-erah,at Muzunnum; 81/3minas of tin, Ewri-Talma,at Layashim; 30 minas of tin, Ibni-Adad,king of Hazor; responsible:Addi-Addu,at Hazazar,on first(?)registration. 20 minas of tin, Amud-pi-El; 20 minas of tin, Ibni-Addu,on second registration; 1[+] minas of tin, to the man from Crete; 1/3mina of tin to the translator,chief merchantamong the men from Crete,in Ugarit. [?minas of tin to Ibni-Addu,]on third registration... The italics indicate unclearreadings.I would, furthermore,expect the name in the third line to readIbni-Adduratherthan Addi-Addu. 4Amongthese texts are XXI.100,which names fourof the Babylonian"generals," XXI.389,which mentions seven of these officers, and XXIII.564-67.Please see the remarks by PierreVillardin Bardet1984. 50n these voyagesto the Mediterranean, which may have also included one by Sargon of Agadehimself, see Malamat'sfine article (1965).

Bibliography Bardet,G., Joannbs,F.,Lafont,B., Soubeyran, D., and Villard,P. 1984 ArchivesAdministratives de Mari 1. Series:ArchivesRoyalesde Mari 23. Paris:Editions Recherchesur les Civilisations.

Birot,M. 1978 Reviewof The Old Babylonian Tablets from Tellal-Rimah by S. Dalley and others. Revue dAssyriologie 72: 181-90. De Vaux,P. 1961 Divisions of Time. Chapter12 in Ancient Israel. Its Life and Institutions. New York:McGraw-HillBook Company,Inc. De Vries,S. J. 1962 Calendar.Pp.483-88 in The Interpreter'sDictionary of the Bible, volume 1. Nashville: AbingdonPress. Glass, J.T 1984 The Problemof Chronologyin Ancient Mesopotamia.Biblical Archaeologist 47: 92. Hallo, W W 1977 New Moons and Sabbaths:A Casestudy in the ContrastiveApproach. Hebrew Union College Annual 48: 1-18. Hunger,H. 1980 Kalender.Pp.297-303 in Reallexikon der Assyriologie 5. Berlin/New York:Walterde Gruyter. Jean,C. F 1939a Excerptade la correspondancede Mari.Pp. 62-69 in Revue des Etudes semitiques. 1939b Bihrum,dans les Lettresde Mari. Revue dAssyriologie 36: 112. Malamat,A. 1965 Campaignsto the Mediterraneanby Yahdunlimand Other Mesopotamian Rulers.Pp.363- 73 in Studies in Honor of Benno Landsbergeron his seventy-fifthBirthday,April 21, 1965. Series:AssyriologicalStudies 16. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press. Materne,J.-P 1983 LAnndede Kahatdans la chronologie du regne de Zimri-Lim. Mari:Annales de Recherches Interdisciplinaires2: 195-99. Pardee,D., and Glass, J.T. 1984 LiterarySourcesfor the History of Palestine and Syria:The MariArchives. Biblical Archaeologist 47: 88-99. Sasson, J.M. 1979 The Calendarand Festivalsof Mari duringthe Reignof Zimri-Lim. Pp. 119-41 in Studies in Honorof TomB. Jones,edited by M. A. Powell and R. H. Sack. Series:Alter Orient und Altes Testament203. Kevelaer/ Neukirchen-Vluyn:Butzon & Bercker/NeukirchenerVerlag. 1984 Thoughts of Zimri-Lim.Biblical Archaeologist47: 110-20. Schmidt, J.D. 1974 Ancient Middle EasternCalendar Systems. Pp.604-06 underthe term calendarin The New Encyclopaedia Britannicavolume 3. Chicago:EncyclopaediaBritannica,Inc. Whiting, R. J. 1979 Some Observationson the Drehem Calendar.Zeitschrift fir Assyriologie 69: 21 - 24.

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

251

A

Note

on

Artistic

Second

of the Representations

Temple

of

erusalem

BYASHER S. KAUFMAN

information vine decoration was within the pictorial

on coins is often enigmatic and requiresthe careful use of literary evidence to be properlyinterpreted.This is especially true with regardto the portrayalof the Second Temple of Jerusalem. There appearsto be little doubt that the facadeof the hekhal of the Second Temple is depicted on the silver coins of BarKokhba.Questions emerge, however,when one seeks to interpretthe details of the scene. Accordingto Muehsam (1966), these coins display the hekhal as seen by the priest from the Mount of Olives during the rareceremony of the burning of the red heifer (see Numbers 19:1- 10 for the Pentateuchal legislation regardingthis rite). Veryrecently Sporty (1983)has concentrated on a single feature of these depictions: the wavy line shown abovefour columns grouped in pairs.He conjectures that this line is most likely a representation of the grapevinedecoration referred to by Josephus. The facade shown on the coin is indeed, as Muehsam has noted, the external face of the hekhal- that is, the facade of the temple porch. On the other hand, two texts of Josephus (TheJewish War,book 5, chapter 5, paragraph4-Thackeray 1961:265 -and Jewish Antiquities, book 15, chapter 11,paragraph3-Marcus and Wikgren 1963: 191)and the Mishnaic tractateMiddoth (chapter3, mishnah 8; see Blackman 1965a:522 and Danby 1933a:595) describe a grapevinedecoration within the porch between the entrance of the porch, which had no doors, and the entrance of the Holy Place, which

Trhe

was fitted with doors. If the grape-

porch, it would not have appearedin a representationof the outer face of the hekhal. How then does one interpretthe wavy line of the Bar Kokhbacoins?

A coin from the time of BarKokhbashowing the rosette-likefeatureat the top of the hekhal facade. Thephotographis by Zev Radovan,courtesy of Dr. YacakovMeshorer.

The termhekhalasusedbythe Tannaimhas two meanings. It

canreferto thecentralfeatureofthe SecondTemple,an immense edifice. It can also,however,referto a morerestrictedportionof the Second Temple, namely the Holy Place,a chamberthat adjoinedthe Holy of Holieson the easternside. This was the originalsense of hekhalwithinthe SolomonicTemple (compare 1 Kings 6:17 and 1 Kings 7:50). Here, I use hekhal in the largersense and so include in it the porch of the Second Temple (the 'Ulam), the entrance chamber on the eastern side.

While rereadingthe Mishnaic tractate Yoma(chapter6, mishnah 8; see Blackman 1965b:303 and Danby 1933b: 170),it suddenly struck me that the wavy line could be a representation of the wisp of scarlet pinned to the facade of the hekhal on the Day of Atonement during the period of the Second Temple as stated in the BabylonianTalmud (RoshHashanah 31b):"Originally they used to fasten the thread of scarlet on the entrance of the porch on the outside. If it turned white, they used to rejoice;if it did not turn white, they were sad. They [therefore]made a rule that it should be fastened on the entrance of the porch on the inside"(see Simon 1938: 152;the translations given in the present paperare my own). On some of the coins displaying the facadeof the hekhal, the wavy line is replacedby a rosette-like feature. This may be a representationof the golden tablet that glittered on the incidence of the first raysof the rising sun, as recordedin the tractate Yoma(chapter3, mishnah 10; see Blackman 1965b:287 and Danby 1933b: 166)and the tractate Tosefta YomHakkipurim (chapter2, section 3): "His mother Helena had a golden reflectormade over the entrance to the hekal.

....

and at the moment of

the rising sun [its appearancewas as if] sparksemanated from it." If one is seeking an artistic representation of the grapevinethat decoratedthe temple, then according to Engle (1977)one should turn to one of the six panels of the glass bottle signed by Ennion, the Sidon glassmaker who lived at the beginning of the currentera. I think Anita Engle is correct in this regard, be-

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

253

V

\j

\

c-

\C

j!

?s-

;~

cause three of the remaining panels on the bottle depict items that are collectively mentioned in the same paragraph of the Mishnaic tractate Tamid (chapter 3, mishnah 6; see

Blackman 1965c:479 and Danby 1933c: 584);1this paragraphrelates

to the daily service in the temple: "Those on whom the lot had fallen to clear the ash from the Inner Altar and from the candelabrum went on in front with four vessels in their hands -the ash collector and the oil A glass amphoramade during the first vessel and two keys."The remaining century C.E.by the Sidon glassmaker,Ennion, is shown in these two drawings. The unrepresentation on the bottle has the wrappedpanels depict, from left to right, two appearance of a reed flute, which, as keys, an oil vessel, a reed flute, a grapevine, indicated by Engle, was closely assoand an ash collector. The vessel is now in the ciated with the temple service. Museum New York. The Metropolitan of Art, These examples illustrate the drawing of the panel is reproducedfrom Das Glas im Altertume by A. Kisa (Leipzig:Karl value of interpreting artistic repreW Hiersemann, 1908). sentations of the Second Temple with the aid of the literature of the Tannaim.

the destructionof the F ollowing Second in 70 c.E., the

Temple Jewish community as it sought to the apply requirementsof Torahin a new social andreligious setting, felt the need to preserve those oral teachings that had previously provided guidance to the faithful. These oral traditions had been established and maintained by a body of teachers, which in Aramaic was called the Tannaim.The teachings of the Tannaimreflect many of the details of life and worship,and thus are invaluable for gaining insight into the Second Temple period in the Levant(516B.C.E.to 70 C.E.).The oral teachings of the Tannaimwere preserved in written form in the Mishnah, which was completed by the beginning of the third century C.E.

The Mishnahhas been pub-

lished in two helpful English translations, both of which havebeen frequently reprinted. See the references to Blackman and Danby in the bibliographyto this paper.

254

Acknowledgment I am grateful to ProfessorA. Wasserstein of the Department of Classics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem for discussing with me the relevant passages of the Greek text of the writings of Josephus.

Note 1Theinterpretationbased on Tamid3: 6 was first reportedin the Palestine Exploration Quarterly111:2 (1979).

Bibliography

Blackman,P.,translator 1965a TractateMiddoth.Pp. 499-533 in Mishnayoth:Pointed Hebrew Text, English Translation,Introductions, Notes, Supplement,Appendix, Indexes, Addenda, Corrigenda,Volume V,OrderKodashim,third edition. New York:The Judaica Press. Blackman,P.,translator 1965b TractateYoma.Pp. 269-312 in Mishnayoth:Pointed Hebrew Text, English Translation,Introductions, Notes, Supplement,Appendix, Indexes, Addenda, Corrigenda,Vol-

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

ume II, OrderMoed, third edition. New York:The JudaicaPress. Blackman,P.,translator 1965c TractateTamid.Pp. 463-98 in Mishnayoth:PointedHebrew Text, English Translation,Introductions, Notes, Supplement,Appendix, Indexes, Addenda, Corrigenda,Volume V,OrderKodashim,third edition. New York:The Judaica Press. Danby,H., translator 1933a Middoth ("Measurements"). Pp. 589 -98 in Fifth Division, Kodashim ("HallowedThings"),in The Mishnah: Translatedfrom the Hebrew with Introductionand BriefExplanatory Notes. Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press. Danby,H., translator 1933b Yoma("TheDay of Atonement").Pp. 162- 72 in Second Division, Moed ("SetFeasts"),in The Mishnah: Translatedfrom the Hebrew with Introductionand BriefExplanatory Notes. Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press. Danby,H., translator 1933c Tamid ("TheDaily Whole-offering"). Pp. 582-89 in Fifth Division, Kodashim("HallowedThings"),in The Mishnah:Translatedfrom Hebrew with Introductionand Brief ExplanatoryNotes. Oxford:Oxford University Press. Engle,A. 1977 An Amphoriskof the Second TemplePeriod.Palestine Exploration Quarterly109: 117-22. Marcus,R., and Wikgren,A., translators 1963 JosephusVIII:JewishAntiquities, Books XV-XVII. Series:LoebClassical Library.Cambridge,MA, and London:HarvardUniversity Press and Heinemann. Muehsam,A. 1966 Coin and Temple:A Study of the ArchitecturalRepresentationon Ancient Jewish Coins. Leeds:Leeds University OrientalSociety. Simon, M., translator 1938 RoshHashanah,Translatedinto Englishwith Notes, Glossary,and Indices.In The Babylonian Talmud: SederMoced, Volume edited by I. I, Press. Epstein.London:The Soncino Sporty,L. D. 1983 Identifyingthe Curving Line on the Bar-KokhbaTempleCoin. Biblical Archaeologist 46: 121-23. Thackeray,H. St. J.,translator 1961 JosephusIII: The Jewish War,Books IV-VII. Series:LoebClassical Library.Cambridge,MA, and London: HarvardUniversity Press and Heinemann.

Boo

Reviews**

Scripturein the Jewish and Christian Traditions:Authority,Interpretation, Relevance,edited by FrederickE. Greenspahn,236 pp. Nashville: Abingdon, 1982; $10.95. The paperscollected in this volume come from a symposium organizedby the Center for JudaicStudies of the University of Denver.They include contributions from mainline Catholicism (Dulles, Vawter,McBrien)and Protestantism (Kelsey,Stendahl),Protestant fundamentalism (Gerstner),and Conservative and ReformJudaism(Neusner, Fishbane,Blank).Only the last, that of Stendahl,reflects significant interaction between the speakers.The subject matter has of course often been covered(for example, JamesBarr,The Bible in the Modern World[New York:Harper& Row, 1973]),but its presentation from differentperspectives,denominational and critical, adds a valuable dimension. As dogmatic theologians, Dulles and McBriendetail the slow adjustment, still in progress,of official positions to the critical consensus in biblical studies, especially the reactionarypontificate of Pius X which set Roman Catholic scholarshipback at least a generation.Vawter, who is also a biblical scholar, does the same in a rathermore original and detached way.Kelsey follows up some of the leads in his The Uses of Scripturein Recent Theology (Philadelphia:Fortress Press, 1979),tracing the genesis of contemporaryoptions for biblical interpretation in mainline Protestantism.In the most relaxedand conversationalpiece in the book, Stendahlarguesfor an open and flexible approachto the use of the Bible. At the other end of the band, Gerstnerpresents an argumentfor the literal truth and inerrancyof the Bible which, if I have understoodit, goes as follows: The miracles workedby Jesus providedivine authentication for his teaching;Jesustaught that the Bible is the Wordof God and, as such, free of any kind of error;it must thereforebe so, and to state otherwise is quite simply blasphemy.

Neusner's contribution addressesthe issue of the nonbiblical characterof Mishnah contrastedwith, say,the QumranTemple Scroll. He shows how the fiction of an unbrokenoral tradition from Sinai, as well as the often abstruse ways of relating halakah to biblical (and especially Priestly)law, arose as a response to dissonance between self-image and social reality.Equallyvaluable, especially in view of the widespread ignoranceof the Jewishexegetical tradition in Christian biblical scholarship,is Fishbane'ssummary of its history to the early modern period. Sheldon Blank, finally, sets out in more popularform a Reformview of biblical social ethics which drawsespecially on prophetic preaching. As an ecumenical endeavor,the publication of the symposium will at least help some readersoverthe first hurdle of simple ignoranceof what is going on in other traditions. It will also encourage those who believe that Christian biblical scholarshipmust find ways of reincorporatingexegetical traditions in Judaism and the issues to which they give rise. JosephBlenkinsopp University of Notre Dame

ArchaeologicalCommentary on the Bible, by Gonzalo B6ez-Camargo.xxxvii + 289 pp. Garden City,New York: Doubleday, 1984; $17.95. A few years ago in this journal (1982, volume 45, page 101)H. Darrell Lance called for better dissemination of archaeological information bearingon the Bible, including scholarly archaeological commentaries on the Bible. There is also a greatneed for good popularlywritten archaeologicalcommentaries on the Bible, and Baez-Camargohas attempted to answerthat need with this book. The author,a United Bible Societies' scholar,originally published an earlier version of this book in 1979 in his native languageof Spanish, and now has revised, updated,and translatedthat volume into English. He begins with a 10-pageintroduction surveyingarchaeology and biblical studies. Then he proceeds book by book from Genesis to Revelation(the Apocryphaor deuterocanonical books are not included)with

comments on selected verses. The relevant portion of the verse is quoted from the Revised StandardVersion,followed by comments rangingfrom a couple of lines to severalpages.Almost every paragraphconcludes with a source, using an abbreviationsystem that requires constant checking with the list of abbreviations.An additional selective bibliographyof just over one page plus a 20-pageindex conclude the volume. Coverageis proportionedfairly between the Old Testamentand New Testament, but total coverageis very limited, so that 30 of the 66 books of the Bible have a page or less of comments (13 books are omitted completely). The minor prophetsreceive the least attention in the Old Testament,and most everythingoutside the Gospels and Acts receive only brief attention in the New Testament.There is no introduction to any biblical book, and no transitions between books, sections, or time periods. Though the author is not a field archaeologist, he is knowledgeableof secondary sources. He is not, however,always up to date, and he tends to rely on the older views of Albright, Wright,and Glueck without indicating where subsequent revisions in their views have been necessary.He tends to stress the positive value of archaeologyfor biblical illumination, though a limited number of problem areasare generallypresented fairly.As might be expected of a linguist, he emphasizes epigraphyand lexical comments. Much more could have been included on material culture (everyday life). There are 24 pages of black-andwhite illustrations. They are of poor quality,however,concentrate on the New Testament,and are not conveniently placed with the verse they are intended to illustrate. There is some crossreferencing,but this could be improved with a textual index. Despite these weaknesses, this archaeological commentary is an improvement on its only competitor,Archaeology of the Bible: Book by Book (New York: Harperand Row, 1976),by Gaalyah Cornfeld,with David Noel Freedman.It will be helpful to students of the Bible, and most useful as a handbookfor reference ratherthan for readingthrough from coverto cover. JamesC. Moyer Southwest Missouri State University

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

255

Interpretation

A JOURNAL OF BIBLE AND THEOLOGY

3401 BROOKROAD* RICHMOND,VA. 23227 Telephone (804) 355-0671

* A PREVIEW OF COMING ISSUES *

FOR

JANUARY

APRIL

THE PRAISE OF GOD IN PSALM AND HYMN Including: "The Role of Hymns in Old Testament Theology" by Patrick D. Miller, Jr. "The Praise of God in the Theological Reflection of the Church" by Geoffrey Wainwright "The Use of Hymnic Elements in Preaching" by Elizabeth Achtemeier

JULY SIGNIFICANT INTERPRETERS OF THE BIBLE Including: "Jonathan Edwards as Biblical Interpreter" by Conrad Cherry "Soren Kirkegaard, Exegete" by Janet F. Fishburn "John Wesley and the Wholeness of Scripture" by Timothy L. Smith

THE BOOK OF DANIEL

1985 Founded in 1947, Interpretation now has the largest circulation of any journal of its kind in the world E Interpretation lists among its regular contributors the noted names of outstanding theological scholarship as well as the younger scholars who will become the leading authorities of the future E Interpretation is read by pastors, professors, seminary students, and others living in every state of the nation and in 85 foreign countries E Interpretation is one of a very select number of publications that is indexed by five major library index services E Interpretation numbers Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Jews among its regular readers because of its widely acknowledged reputation for significant biblical scholarship E Interpretation is subscribed to by more than 1600 college, university, seminary, and public libraries - further evidence that it is the essential journal in its field.

Including: "Is Daniel Also Among the Prophets?" by Klaus Koch "The Preacher in the Lion's Den" by W. Sibley Towner "Daniel and His Social World" by John J. Collins

OCTOBER JEWISH-CHRISTIAN DIALOGUE Including: "Christian View of Relationship Between Christians and Jews" by Robert Jewett "Religious Authority in Judaism" by Jacob Neusner "Theological Implications of the Holocaust" by Gerard Sloyan

ENTER MY SUBSCRIPTION TO INTERPRETATION: ] Begin my three-year subscription. D Begin my one-year subscription. issue. D Send me the month

Send to:

Name -

Enclose check for $27.00 (U.S.,); $30 (Foreign)* Enclose check for $11.00 (U.S.); $12.50 (Foreign)* Enclose check for $4.00 each (U.S.); $4.55 each (Foreign)*

year

please print or type plainly

Street address or box number

City

State

Zip

SEND YOUR CHECKTO: Interpretation,3401 Brook Road, Richmond,Virginia23227 *U.S. currency only

1984 ARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER BIBLICAL

219

Books

Biblical

on

Tv

Criticism

~?n;-:::j::::?:::::Evidence ?

...........:::::::

IXI

,?

O.. .U

i

Jew~

...........?

i

: i: : j: : : :

. . . ..;..?. ~1.

. ...

^

*

?

l-:

TRUE? THEDEADSEASCROLLS IS CHRISTIANITY Arnheim Michael ANDTHE On what basis can Christianity claim to have the exclusive truth about God if what was said to be MYTH CHRISTIAN fact-that a man named Jesus was the Messiah JohnAllegro

This provocative book examines the devastating impact of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls on official Church dogma and argues that what was conceived as myth was misused and misrepresented as historical fact. Allegro reconstructs the world of conflicting ideas of the early centuries and shows how the struggles for supremacy between the "heretics" and their "orthodox" rivals shaped the church at its inception. Cloth $18.95

THEHISTORICAL FORJESUS EVIDENCE G.A.Wells

JESUSOUTSIDE THEGOSPELS R.JosephHoffmann

and the Son of God-turns out to be merely blind faith? Michael Arnheim makes a persuasive case that the Gospels misunderstood, mistranslated, or deliberately distorted the Old Testament prophecies to bolster Christianity's claim to be the true religion. Cloth $19.95

The canonical gospels are the standard source for reconstructing the life and teaching of Jesus of Nazareth. Far from being objective or historical, they are, claims the author, simply a reinforcing tale-albeit a powerful one-written after a specific doctrine about Jesus had been formulated. Examining non-Biblical sources, Hoffmann constructs a balanced and thoroughly historical assessment of the Jesus tradition.

Did Christianity evolve without a historical Jesus Christ? In this carefully researched work, Wells scrutinizes Scripture, recordedfact, and the wealth of Judeo-Christian and pagan myths, and concludes that ". . . the rise of Christianity . . . can be explained quite well without him." "This is the first scholarly demonstration that Jesus never had any place in history." - Times Supplement Literari, Cloth $18.95

Cloth $15.95 Pleasesendme the followingbooks:

(Please add $2.00 for postage and handling, .50 for each additional book. NY State residents add 7% sales tax.) Name Address City/ State

8

PROMETHEUS

BOOKS

700 East Amherst St.

Zip

BA

Buffalo, N.Y. 14215

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

245

Editor'sNote The response to our special issue on Mari (June 1984) has been very gratifying, and it has included many requests for more information. In particular, people have asked about a subject touched on in the article by Andre Lemaire ("Mari, the Bible, and the Northwest Semitic World,"pages 101-08) and expanded on in a sidebar written in our editorial office ("The Ban in the Old Testament and at Mari,"page 103). In answering such inquiries, we have been referring people to a paper by Abraham Malamat that is cited in Lemaire's article: "The Ban in Mari and in the Bible," which is found in Biblical

Essays 1966, Proceedingsof the 9th Meeting of "Die Ou-Testamentiese Werkgemeenskapin Suid-Afrika " (Potchefstroom, South Africa: Ou-Testamentiese Werkgemeenskap, 1966), pages 40 - 49. This was one of the primary sources we consulted when writing our sidebar, and it is indispensable for anyone interested in the subject. Similarly, when we sought to provide our readers summary information on the Mari and Assyrian dynasties at Mari, the chart given on page 112 was adapted from one appearing in an article Dr. Malamat wrote

for EncyclopaediaJudaica. Eric M. Meyers

252

ip

C!

I

44Tell Leiln

r~C-sI? on

abur

the

by Harvy

Economic Development and Archaeology in

the MiddleEast

has just been publishedby the Departmentof Antiquitiesof Jordan,ACORand ASOR, to informdevelopersof the cultural and economic significanceof ancient sites throughoutthe Middle East. In addition,the booklet describes the experiencesin Jordan that demonstratehow cooperation between developersand antiquities authoritieshas had results that respond to the interestsand needs of everyoneconcerned. These experiencesserve as models for similarsituationsin other developingcountriesof the Middle East. Witha prefaceby H.R.H.Crown PrinceHassan,and authoredby DavidW. McCreeryand James A. Sauer, the booklet was published undera contractwith the Agency for InternationalDevelopment.

1984 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

will

Plais

Weis

6f

New From ASOR ...

j

-

F% O p

The 30-pageillustratedbooklet is availablein Englishor Arabicto any interestedperson for only $2.00 per copy, to cover costs of postage and handling;or $3.00 for airmail deliveryoutside North America. I enclose $2.00 for postage and handling within North America I enclose $3.00 for air mail postage beyond North America Send check or moneyorder,payable to ASOR, in U.S. dollars only, to ASOR, 4243 Spruce Street, Philadelphia,PA 19104. Allow 6 weeks for delivery. Name Address

City, State, Zip

a simplified summary and digest of the 66-page HarI

lick report on d igita analysis l of the Shroud. Thisstudy was done by Dr. The toannounce itsnewest MAGE OF Filas Series SHROUD OF isprivileged Filmstrip YSIS THE filmstrip, ANAL TURIN,

ANEWI"

#178. "IMAGEANALYSISOF THESHROUDOF TURIN" ENEWI"

TheFilas FilmsripSer ies is privilegedto announce its newest The' "IMAGEANAL YSISOF THESHROD OF TogRINaphs. colmstrip, was done by Dr. a simplified summary and digest of the 66-page Haralickreport on digital analysis of the Shroud. This o=o Robert M. Haralick, Director of the Spatial Data Analysis Laboratoryat VirginiaPolytechnic Institutestudy and State Universitv'%, 6 . the existence of at least six letters of the name of' Blacksburg, Virginia.The Haralick report presents supporting evidence fior

:.:

:i:

Tiberius Caesar plus the characteristic astrologer's staff and money-shaped pattern belonging to a coin issued bv Pontius Pilate in 29 A.D. as existing in imprints over the right eye of the Man of the Shroud. Other implications from the report confirm the Shroud as the model of icons of Jesus the sixth and suggest the existence ofa "modesty cloth "anda on theByzantine Man the Shroud. Thisfrom is the ?=' possible analysis of Shroud century

T.

.

4

first of photographs. complete digital made fevidencephylactery ever The e.. new this evidence onthe to$30.00 earlier filmstrip presents Shroud, supporting forthe dating ofthe image adding dramaticall, that the Shroud is not a forgery and is the burialcloth of Jesus Christ.

LENGTH:100 frames,30 minutevoice cassettewith narrationby FrancisL. Filas,S.J., Professorof Theologyat Loyola University.

OTHER INTHEFILAS MATERIALS FILMSTRIP SERIES: #177. PONTIUS PILATE COINS ON THE TURIN SHROUD. Documentation authenticating and dating Shroud via Pilate coins. 100 frames, 30 minute cassette. "THE DATINGOF THE SHROUDOF TURIN FROMCOINSOF PONTIUSPILATE,"Packet with numismatic sketches, 2 slides, 1 color print, 16,000 word Monograph. 3rd edition. Full page photo.

$30.00 $6.50

#163. THE SHROUDOF TURIN:IS THISTHEPHOTOGRAPH OFJESUSCHRIST?Summarizesbasic scientific & historical "case" for Shroud. 84 frames, 38 minute cassette.

$25.00

#173. THE 1978 EXPOSITION OF THE SHROUDOF TURIN:A DOCUMENTARY. Shroudin natural shades; pollen types; lists scientific tests. 113 frames. 30 minute cassette. #160. JERUSALEM, 66 A.D. Modern reconstruction of ancient Jerusalem, scale of 1/50 life size. 105 frames, 42 minute cassette. #164. THE DESERTS OF BIBLICAL ISRAEL TODAY. Sinai, Negev, Judean deserts; Qumran, Jericho, Masada,Herodium. 135 frames, 31 minute cassette. #165. BIBLICAL LOCATIONSIN JERUSALEM TODAY.24 orientation maps & floor plans; 40 locations, Bethlehem included. 133 frames, 38 minute cassette. #167. BIBLICAL LOCATIONS IN GALILEE TODAY. Hazor, Megiddo, Nazareth, Capernaum, Tabor, Lake of Galilee. 133 frames, 31 minute cassette. #169. THE SEACOAST OF THE BIBLE TODAY. Biblical Joppa, Ashkelon, Caesarea, Carmel, Haifa Bay, Acre. 135 frames, 30 minute cassette.

$25.00

$22.00 $22.00 $22.00 $22.00 $22.00

#170. LITERARYFORMS:A KEYTO UNDERSTANDTHE BIBLE.25 sprightlycartoons,42 biblical

locales. Modern and biblical contrasts of wording vs. meaning. 92 frames, 20 minute cassette. #172. THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS. Jerusalem, Emmaus, Lake of Galilee, Mt. Olivet. Audio-visual recap of New Testament narratives. 116 frames, 25 minute cassette. #174. WHERE JESUS LIVED - AS IT LOOKS TODAY. Bethlehem, Galilee, Jerusalem. (Children's filmstrip: 5th grade and under.) 70 frames, 15 minute cassette. #175. PLACES PAUL VISITED AS THEY LOOK TODAY. Follows Paul from Tarsus to Rome. Aerial and ground photography by R. V. Schoder. 106 frames, 27 minute cassette.

$22.00 $22.00 $20.00 $25.00

#176. THE EBLATABLETS:THEIR RELEVANCETO THE BIBLE.Facts of Ebla and influenceon understanding biblical ideas (Dahood-Durazzi). 100 frames, 30 minute cassette.

I

$35.00

All cassettes for these filmstrips have automatic/manual signals to advance strip. Printed keys for each frame. Musical interludes. Except as noted, production, narration and photography by Francis L. Filas, S.J.

DISTRIBUTED BY: Cogan Productions, A Division of ACTA Foundation, Suite A, 11173 Alabama Avenue, Youngtown, Arizona, 85363. If ordering for institution, please give name of person ordering. If individual, please give credit reference. (No delivery charges if payment with order. U.S.A. ONLY.)

256

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1984

NEW

FOR

BOOKS

THE EPISTLES TO THE COLOSSIANS TO PHILEMON, AND TO THE EPHESIANS on the New International Commentary New Testament by PFF.Bruce This second replacementvolume in the NICNT series displays the same skill, scholarship, and spiritual mnsightthat characterize F.F. Bruce'sprevious works. Cloth, $18.95

COMMENTARY ON ROMANS by C.E.B. Cranfield Cranfield'stwo-volume commentary on Romans in the prestigious Internationsl Critical Commentarywas acclaimedby F.E Bruce as "well wortlhvto take its.place alongside the reallygreat commentaries on Romans." Now Cranifieldhas abridged his very scholarlyand technical work into this one-volume paperback edition. Paper, $10.95

THE NEW CENTURY BIBLE COMMENTARY Edited byRonald E. Clements and Matthew Black The latest additions to this popular commentary series based on the RSV. i KINGS by G.H. Jones. Paper, $7.95 2 KINGS by G.H. Jones. Paper, $7.95 EZRA, NE'HEMIAH, ESTI-ER by D.J. Clines. Paper, $7.95

THESSALONIANS I AND 2 New Testament Commentaries

Iyndale by Leon Morris Based on the text of the Revised StandardVersion, this latest replacementvolume in the Tyndale series is a verse-by-verse the meaning and which discussesquestions of commentary, and 2 Thessalonians. interpretation Paper, $4.95 ofl

BONHOEFFER AND SOUTH

AFRICA Theologv in Dialogue W.

byJobn deG"ru-&y In this

stimulating book, John W. deGruchy points out the relevanceof Dietrich Bonhoeffer's thought to the life of the church in South Africa today, en agin in dialogue the theology of Bonhoefer and the theology of South Africa. Paper, $6.95

SCHOLARS

A MOMENT OF TRUTH

The Confession of the Dutch Reformed Mission Church, 1982 Edited by G.D. Cloete and D.J. Smit In the fall of 1982,the South African Dutch Reformed Mission Church (DRMC) took the bold step of declaring that the situation confronting the churches in South Africa constituted a status confessionis-a state of confession-a condition in which the very truth of the gospel is at stake. This book contains the text of the draft confession and its accompanying letter as well as nine essaysexaminin the fistorical precedent, background, theological meaning, and practicalconsequences of this historic action. Paper, $9,95 FREE TO BE DIFFERENT

byMalcolmeees, R.J.Berry,

rnd David Attkinson A psychologist, a geneticist, and a theologian discuss human freedom and responsibility. "Afascinating investigationinto the respective influenceson human behaviorof 'nature,''nurture,' and 'grace.'"-John R.W. Stott Paper, $6.95

SIGNS OF THE KINGDOM

A Ragaz Reader Edited by Paul Bock Paul Beockhas selected and translatedinto English a representativesampling of the works of Leonhard Ragaz, a eading figure in early zoth-century Swiss religious socialism (a movement thai paralleledthe social gospel movement in America). Paper, $7.95

LEFtVRE

Pioneer of Ecclesiastical Renewal

in France byPhilip EdgcrmbeHughes

In this first substantialstudy in English of the life and work of one of the leading scholarsof the Isth and 16thcenturies, Philip Edgcumbe Hughes has drawn on the original works and letters of JacquesLef'evred'Etaplesand his contemporariesto offer a thorough examination of Lefevre'simportant role in the ecclesiasticalrenewal movement in Franceand his influence on the thought of the Reformers. Paper, $14.95

HISTORY AND HISTORICAL UNDERSTANDING

AMERICA by Wilton M. Nelson A chronological account of the history of Protestantism in CentralAmerica, describing briefly its main movements and trends.

Edited by C. T. Mclntire and Ronald Wells A collection of essays by a respectedgroup of Christianscholars, this book explores what insight Christian faith may bring to our understanding of history and historical study.

Paper, $4.95

Paper, $6.95

PROTESTANTISM IN CENTRAL

TESUSSON OF MAN

by Barnabas Lindars The use and meaning of the term Son of Man, which is found in the New Testament almost exclusivelyin the Gospels, has been the cause of endless controversv in this century. Here, in an attem t to breakthe deadlock in the debate, BarnabasLindars offers a complete reappraisal of the meaning and use of "Son of Man in the New Testament. Paper, $9.95

THE WORLD OF ST. JOHN

The Gospel and the Epistles by E. EaR Ellis In this brief but helpful survev of the background, purpose, plan, and teaching of the Johannine literature,Ellisguides the readerto a better understanding and fuller appreciation of the Gospel and the Epistles of John. Paper, $4-95

DANIEL WITH AN INTRODUCTION TO APOCALYPTICLITERATURE The Forms of the Old Testament

Literature byJobhnJ. Collins In his introduction to Jewish apocalypticliterature, Collins defines an apocalvpse and examines the main characteristicsof this literature. His section-by-section commentary on Daniel provides a structuralanalysis (verse-by-verse) of each section, as well as discussion of its genre, setting, and intention. Includes bibliographies and glossar). Paper, $I4.95 ISAIAH 56-66: THE NEW ISRAEL International Theological Commentary by GeorgeA.F. Kniht This latest volume, which follows Knight's earlier ITC volume on Isaiah40-55, focuses on Isaiah 56-66, which completes the whole Isaian revelation by describing the comprehensive purpose of Cod, in Covenant with Israelfor the redemption of all creation. Paper,$5.95 Prices subject to change. For more information on these and other recent Eerdmanstides, write for a copy of our latest catalog. Examination copies of most publications are availableto qualified professors. orwrite: Atyourbookstore

475

K

IRWM.B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING CO.

s55JEFFERSON AVE. S.E. / GRAND RAPIDS, MICH. 49503

Philip Edgcumbe C T Mclntire

F. F. Bruce

John W. deGruchy George A.F, Knight

Hughes

:

,

"No

4

1

/

•*~

-t

•

,

•i•

T

,m