NL.
~r
It
?~
ICI
..A.
--S
--4
Biblical Archaeolo
ontheAncientWorldfromMesopotamia totheMediterranean Perspectives A Publication oftheAmerican Schoolsof Oriental Research
186 ,
..
!:i
203
1994 December
Beetles in Stone: The EgyptianScarab WilliamA. Ward A commonbeetleplayedanuncommonroleinancientEgyptianculture. Extraordinarily frequentas anartisticmotif,thedungbeetle'snameand imageportrayedtheideaof birth,of life,andespeciallythesecondbirth intoeternalexistence.Whatwasso captivating aboutthedungbeetle?As a powerfulamulet,a seal,orpieceof jewelry,thescarabalsoboasteda tremendouspopularitybeyondEgypt.Suchpopularitypresentsarchaeolbutcomplexpossibilities fortakingthemeasureof ogy withintriguing, these"beetlesin stone."
The Fortressesat 'En ;IaHeva RudolphCohen arebeginningto uneartha singularlyimpressiveseriesof Excavations superimposedfortressbuildingsnearoneof themostabundantspringsin theArabahValleyof Israel.FiveoccupationlevelsstretchfromtheByzanPeriods tineandEarlyIslamicPeriodsthroughtheRomanandNabataean at all theway to theeighthcenturyof theIronAge.Locatedstrategically theintersection of routes,EnIHaseva beganitslifeas a royaloutpostso significantthatit mayevenhavelefta memoryof itsname.
page 186
215
What's in a Name: The Anonymity of Ancient Umm el-Jimal Bertde Vries of Camels"is onlyonereadingof themodemnameof thisstark "Mother Itsancientname?Noneof thetantaandintriguingbasalt-built settlement. in the sources checksout.Theancientsitewill literary lizingpossibilities lives haveto remainanonymous,withonlytheresiduesof itsinhabitants' to their witnessing identity.
220
The WomanQuestion and FemaleAscetics Among Essenes
r.I
page 203
Volume 57 Number 4
LindaBennettElder of a celiWerenottheEssenesatQumrancelibatemales?Thepresumption batemalepopulationon theshoresof theDeadSeacontinuesto rulescholButwhatabouttheskeletonsof femalesin thecemeterarlyimaginations. ies?Andwhataboutthetextualreferences to liturgiesinvolvingwomen? Do notallthesignspointto thepresenceof femaleasceticsatQumran?
CP
236
News, Notes, and Reviews TheWallsofJerusalem. Withitscontinuousurbanoccupation, extending offersa crucialcase-study backto the20thcenturyBCE, thecityofJerusalem inurbandevelopmentandspatialsymbolism.A new,detailedanalysisof comitssuccessivewallsandgatesby G.J.WightmanrevealsJerusalem's in the mortar and and often written stone. bloodyhistory city's plex On the cover: Numerousschematic representationsof Egyptiandesign scarabs animate the backgroundfor three examples of the modificationof the scarab outside of Egypt:the highly ornamental Phoenicianscarab (top) and two Europeanexamples-Etruscan and Greekscarabswith obvious motifs from the classical repertoire.
FromtheEditor last two years have seen BA achieve the transition to full electronic production. Every image and every piece of text of volume 57-from the jots and tittles to the jugs and tells-made its way to the printer on disk. Electronic production has offered the possibility of innovative layouts and enhanced visual presentations of research findings. BiblicalArchaeologisthas become a more effective vehicle of communication. This issue's table of contents manifests the diversity that has become the magazine's hallmark. Articles roam from the scarabs of Egypt to a spring-fed strategic site in the Arabah Valley to the shores of the Dead Sea to the fringe of the Arabian Desert. Despite their geographical, topical, and chronological variety, the articles are linked by their preoccupation with the classic questions of archaeology of the historic periods, namely: typology and toponymy. The first essay, Ward's presentation on Egyptian scarabs, eventuates in a consideration of their typological history. This multifarious history of scarab style, in turn, provides helpful links between Egyptian historical periods and archaeological phases of Bronze Age Palestine. Attention to numerically significant groups of scarabs underlies the typology's usefulness as a chronological guide. Toponomy links Cohen's and de Vries' pursuits at distant locations along ancient Palestine's major north-south line of communication. Cohen is convinced that the ancient name of his site is preserved in Roman/Byzantine as well as biblical literary sources. For de Vries, the ancient name of Umm elJimal remains unknown and probably unknowable. The royal and imperial interests that sponsored the series of fortresses at cEn Haeeva apparently did not come into play at Umm el-Jimal's location just a few kilometers off the via ilova. For their part, ancient record keepers and map makers stuck to the main roads and primary stations. Perhaps epigraphic finds will resolve the toponomic issues for the sites. Barring that, their inhabitants will be known only through the archaeologically recovered and reconstructed detritus of their lives, only through stratigraphy, typology, and sherd counts. The counts have always been there, as Elder recognizes in her treatment of women ascetics at Qumran. The sheer number of females and children buried in Qumran's cemeteries unbalances the long-tenured view that its residents were exclusively celibate males. Elder calls attention as well to texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls that offer entry into women's participation in the life of the Qumran community. The fact that these data have not been widely heeded makes us conscious of how deeply what archaeologists believe to be worthy of recording impinges upon interpretation. Consciousness about what one credits with reality, i.e., epistemology, must accompany the fundamental pursuits of collecting, counting, and classifying. The post-modern era recognizes the continuous shaping and re-shaping of the world of interpretation. Archaeological "collecting," "counting," and "classification" do not suffice in this world, but they do supply the foundation for constructing a past that aims at coherence and correspondence to the recoverable data. This larger world of multiple interpretations and perspectives for reading the data finds representation in the easy structuring and re-structuring of text and graphics made possible by BA'scomputer production. Eventually these electronic particles find a fixed form as the ink of the pages of the journal. Hopefully, the images of jots and jugs offer insight in our encounter with the past and present.
The
`A1P4{
Htarw
Biblical
Archaeologist
on theAncientWorldfrom Perspectives to theMediterranean Mesopotamia
Editor David C. Hopkins Art Director Robert D. Mench, Top Design
BookReviewEditor JamesC. Moyer
Editorial Assistant Mary PetrinaBoyd Editorial Committee
JefferyA. Blakely
Elizabeth Bloch-Smith
Betsy M. Bryan J.P.Dessel
Douglas A. Knight Mary Joan Leith
Gloria London Jodi Magness Gerald L. Mattingly
Ernest S. Frerichs Ronald S. Hendel Richard S. Hess
Kenneth G. Hoglund
Gaetano Palumbo Paul Zimansky
Subscriptions Annual subscription rates are $35 for individuals and $45 for institutions.There is a special annual rate of $28 for those over 65, physically challenged, or unemployed. Biblical is also availableas partof the benefits Archaeologist of some ASOR membership categories. Postage for Canadian and other internationaladdresses is an additional $5. Payments should be sent to ASOR Membership/ Subscriber Services, P.O. Box 15399,Atlanta, GA 30333-0399 (ph: 404-7272345; Bitnet: SCHOLARS@EMORYUI).VISA/ Mastercard orders can be phoned in. Back issues Backissues can be obtained by calling SP Customer Services at 800-437-6692or writing SP Customer Services, P.O. Box 6996, Alpharetta, GA 30239-6996. Postmaster Send address changes to Biblical ASOR Membership/SubscriberSerArchaeologist, vices, P.O.Box 15399,Atlanta, GA 30333-0399. Second-class postage paid at Atlanta, GA and additional offices. Copyright @ 1994 by the American Schools of Oriental Research. Correspondence All editorial correspondence should be addressed to BiblicalArchaeologist, 4500 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20016-5690(ph: 202-885-8699;fax:202-885-8605). Books for review should be sent to Dr.James C. Moyer, Department of Religious Studies, Southwest Missouri State University, 901 South National, Box 167,Springfield,MO 65804-0095. Advertising Correspondence should be addressed to Sarah Foster,Scholars Press, PO. Box 15399, Atlanta, GA 30333-0399(ph:404-727-2325; fax:404-727-2348).Ads for the sale of antiquities will not be accepted. BiblicalArchaeologist (ISSN0006-0895)is published quarterly(March,June, September,December) by Scholars Press, 819 Houston Mill Road NE, Atlanta,GA 30329, for the American Schools of Oriental Research(ASOR),3301 North Charles Street,Baltimore,MD 21218. Printedby Cadmus JournalServices, BaltimoreMD. OF 0?
lL
Beetles Stone:
ile a biologist may appreciate the beauty of the beetle's physical structure and the wonder and precision of its life cycle, to most of us the beetle is simply a pest, certainly not a creature to be endowed with awe and respect. The Egyptian attitude toward the beetle was quite the opposite of the attitudes of most people today.1The beetle is an extraordinarily common motif in Egyptian art, it was honored in religious thought, and the name of the beetle and its picture portrayed the idea "to come into existence" in the Egyptian language and script. The Egyptians honored the beetle because it represented something that was deeply meaningful within the framework of their beliefs about the universe. It spoke about the powers they believed controlled that universe, and reflected thoughts about the Egyptians themselves and their eternal existence.
in
The
Egyptian Scarab By William A. Ward
The male beetle makes a ball of dung to be buriedjust under the surfaceand used later as a food supply.To rollthis food supply to where it will be buried,the beetle balances on its rearlegs, using the front and middle pairto push the ball. Photograph by S. 1.Bishara.FromWard1978:1071.
-" -
• --
Scarab Origins, Manufacture, and Use Origins Around 2500 BCE, a class of small stone amulets began to appear in design found primarilywith women Egypt, and childrenburied in cemeteries of the ordinary people of Egypt. The earliest examples are shaped like a tiny pyramid and have geometric and animal designs engraved on the bottom surface. As time went by, the shape of these objectschanged into circularbases with a pierced knob on the back, the form which caused early archaeologiststo call these objects"buttonseals."Shortlyafter this, design amulets began evolving into objectsthat retained the circularor oval base, but were now carved with backs in the form of animal or human heads, or whole animal or human figures.2 One of these animals was the beetle. Within a very short time, the beetle be-
,
. •',,a . ,•,•
:,.-
.
.
.r.
N,
.
)
~5?
?' ??
It L L
?Yj
.'
came almost the only back used on this class of object.It is this final stage of artisticdevelopment that is called the "scarab.3"Fromabout 2200 BCE to late in Egyptian history,scarabsremained one of the most common objectsmanufacturedin Egypt. Hundreds of thousands are known in museums around the world. They are found in every excavation in Egypt and across the ancient world from Syria to Spain. By the end of its long history,the scarabhad become a universal objectin the Mediterranean countries and was manufacturedin many places outside Egypt. What was createdas a small amulet for women and children of the poorer classes of Egypt became an internationalobject for all classes of people everywhere in the ancient world. Life Cycle of the Dung Beetle But the immediate question is: why the beetle?Or more specifically,why one species of this insect, the dung beetle? Nothing can be less inspiring to us than an army of beetles crawling around a dung-heap. But the Egyptians saw something vitally significantin that very situation.They saw a vision of rebirth into paradise, the resurrectionof the soul; they saw the daily rebirthof their most powerful symbol, the sun, as it appears each morning over the eastern horizon. They saw, of course, what they thought was the beginning and the end of the birthcycle of the dung beetle. Time after time, they witnessed the mature beetle rollinga ball of dung, burying this ball under the earth,and some fifteen to eighteen weeks later,a new beetle emerging from the ground. But the Egyptiansmisunderstood the life cycle of the dung beetle. The dung beetle actually makes two balls of dung, one round and one pearshaped.4The round ball is simply a food supply tucked away somewhere in the sand for storage in a kind of kitchen pantry.The pear-shapedball is the one in which the egg is actually laid. But this pear-shapedmaternalball was made underground. Casual observers never see it;they see only the round ball made on the surface.This led to the
44
Pi
'L?
II C
44 16iIQ
"
~ ~
-?
'st
lb
~i~
The female beetle makes an oval ball underground.The egg is placed in a pouch on this ball which becomes the food supply for the larvaonce the egg is hatched. Casualobservers never notice the female's activityand can easily attributethe birth-cycleto the male alone. Photographby S. I. Bishara.FromWard1978: 101.
12
3
4
7
Design-amulets and earlyscarabs.Scarabsare one form of an earlytype of object, the design-amulet, the earliest(1) having a pyramidshaped back. These soon developed into examples with shanks (2) and knobs (3) as well as animaland human figures (4-5). The beetle form, or scarab,was one of the latter,from the first small ones (6) to the largermore elaborate style (7). The objects shown here date ca. 2300 to 2100 BCE.Drawingsafter Brunton(1927; 1948).
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchlaeologist
187
,/
-y
\r
I
---2Z
The god Khepri seated in his barkas the personificationof the morning sun; after a vignette to Chapter17 of the Book of the Dead written duringthe New Kingdom.Khepriis identified by the symbol of a beetle on his head. The dung beetle (ScarabaeusSacer L),the model for the scarabamulet, was associatedwith Kheprialreadyin the PyramidTextsof the Old Kingdom. He is frequentlymentioned in the Bookof the Dead as being a self-engendered deity who each night creates the morning sun that emerges the next morning.The name Kheprimeans "Hewho comes into existence (by himself);"that of the dung beetle/scarabwas kheprer,"that 30. which continuouslycomes into existence (by itself)."DrawingfromE.Navillel971:pl.
misconceptionthatit is thelargeround ballin whichtheegg is placedand from whichthenew beetleis born.Inreality, themalebeetleworkson thesurfaceto createthe familyfoodsupply,whilethe femaleis undergroundpreparingthe nursery. Inmakingtheroundfeeding-ball, thedungbeetleuses its powerfulforelegsanda spade-likeprojectionin front calledtheclypeus.Thesearethetools withwhichit worksby scoopingand moldingtherawmaterialuntilit forms a ballof dungaboutfourto five times itsown size.Thisis thetaskof themale beetlewho laboriouslycollectstheraw material;thenpushing,patting,shapspherethat ing,buildsup a near-perfect is easilyrolledto whereit will be buried in thesand. Meanwhile,thefemalelaborsundergroundmakingthepear-shapedmaternalballin whichtheegg is to be laid. Workingalone,sheburrowsfourto eightinchesintotheground,digs out a chamberaboutfourinchessquare, bringstherawmaterialintothischamber,andcreatesthepear-shapedball.At theball'snarrowend,she carefullyconstructsan oval hollowin whichtheegg is laid.Thelittlechamberand thetunnelby whichit is reachedis thenclosed 188
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
Important Egyptian officials were granted the use of a royalsignet ring with which they could seal documents in the king's name. Here,an unnamed treasuryofficialof preKingTutankhamon(ca. 1336-1327 BCE) sents such a seal to the Viceroyof Nubia, Amenhotep, who is identified in this scene by his nickname-Huy.Inthe book of Genesis, Joseph is said to have receivedsuch a seal when he became the EgyptianMinisterof Agriculture.Fromthe tomb of Amenhotep, no. 40 in the Theban necropolis.Drawing
up.Whenthelarvabreaksoutof theegg, it feedson thematernalball.Whenready tochangeintothepupalstage,itburrows from Newberry,1906: pl. II. deeperintotheearth.Hereit carvesout anotherchamberin whichit changes supremesymbolof birth,of life,and intoa pupa,feedingon plantroots.After especiallythesecondbirthintoeternal existence.Thelittlestonescarabhad two to threeweeks,it emergeson the surfaceas a youngbeetle. becomea powerfulamuletto helpassureeternallifein paradise,a meaning whichwas maintainedthroughoutits Symbolic Associations and other Uses longhistory.Thescarabsignifiedthe Observationsof thedungbeetlemade regenerativepowersof Atumthecrethis are what made the ator,and Re,theproviderof life.As by Egyptians insectso importantto them(Ward1978: such,it was a potenttalismanindeed. Butscarabsalsohadotheruses.We 43-46;de Meulenaere1972;Giveon 1974).Herewas a creaturethatemerged now knowthattheearlydesignamulets out of theearth,an immediatesymbolof weresometimesused as seals,forexof thedead.Becausethey ample,on theclaystoppersof pottery theresurrection misunderstoodtheactualbirth-cycle, jars(Giddyand Grimal1979:38-39; the as the of beetle 1980:267-68).By around 2000 BCE, theyapparentlythought a scarab became a coma who of of sex, male, planted impression being single his seed in theroundballout of which mon methodforsealingmanykindsof camehisoffspring.Theyveryearlyasso- objects.Theirdesignswereimpressed ciatedthismistakenviewwiththedivine intotheclaystoppersof potteryvessels, or themud sealingson storagechestsor powertheycalledKhepri,who was a formof thesun-godRe,themorning rolled-uppapyrusdocuments.Scarabs eachday.5 usedas sealsfoundextensiveuse in govsun rebornby self-generation at all levels.7 ernmentadministration Thebeetlewas alsoassociatedwith Withthe adventof theTwelfthDynasty, Atum,to whom thecreationof theunithereappeareda new classof scarabsenversewas ascribed,and who was also self-engendered.6 gravedwiththenamesandtitlesof kings and governmentofficialsfromprime Thedungbeetlethusbecamethe
ministersdown to humble caretakersof storehouses. Some officialsof the centralgovernment were granted the privilege of using a scarab-sealengraved with the king's name. Since they acted in the king's name, they could thus use the king's name to sign documents. This does not mean that all scarabs engraved with names and titles were used as seals. The scarabbecame an even more potent amulet for achieving the afterlifewhen it was engraved with a personal name. This identified the specific individual on an objectwhich was intended to help the person gain immortality.This practicewas carriedeven furtherwith royal names. A king's personal name in itself had important magical propertiessince the king, while not a god during his lifetime as popularly believed,8did hold an office which had been createdat the beginning of time and which was endowed with divine power. Scarabsnaming especially venerated kings were made in bulk, often for centuries after their lifetimes. Such scarabswere obtained through visits to royal funerarytemples as a souvenir of the prayers offered there by an individual on behalf of the royal soul. One group of scarabsnaming Sesostris I was made five centuries afterhis death (Ward1971:134-36).Many Egyptian rulers were so honored long after their lifetimes. Scarabsnaming Thutmosis IIIof the Eighteenth Dynasty, for example, were still being made a thousand years afterhe died (Jaeger1982).A similar practicehas continued down to the presentday in Nubia. A scarabfound by a local inhabitantoften becomes a family heirloom, a kind of a magical good-luck piece, passed down from generation to generation.9 The scarabwas also used as a piece of jewelry.Stone scarabsin gold or silver ring-mounts are quite common, and scarabswere often used as elements in pectorals,bracelets,and necklaces (Aldred 1971;Wilkinson 1971;Andrews 1990).While scarabswere thus used for decorative purposes, in Egypt they no doubt maintained theirbasic amuletic character.The horse shoe in America and blue bead in Near Easterncountries are used in the same manner today.
I Of
While the scarab was most commonly used as a talisman to achieve eternal life, it had other uses as well, for example, sealing papyrusdocuments or as in this case, a Middle Kingdom wooden wig box found at Lisht.
''
Commoners as well as kings inscribedtheir names and titles on scarabsthat were sometimes used as seals. Tothe left is a scarab naming "TheSteward Khnumhotep"of the Middle Kingdomand, to its right,one naming KingAmenhotep IIIand Queen Tiyof the Eighteenth Dynasty.Note the V-shapedmarkingscalled the humeralcallosityon the wing cases of the Eighteenth Dynastyscarab,a typographicalfeature that was not used before that time. It does not The appear, of course, on the Middle Kingdomscarab. Photographs courtesyof DaphnaBen-Tor, Dr. IsraelMuseum,Jerusalem.
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
189
glb~~4 Scarab of the Phoenician tradition, ca. 800-700 BCE. Phoeniciancraftsmen,always influenced by Egyptianart, produced a new type of scarabcombining Egyptianmotifs with those of other traditions.The resultwas often a complicated design and a highly
decorated representationof the beetle itself. Inthis example, the decoration on the back is far more elaborate than on Egyptian scarabs and the design on the base is a mixture of many traditions.The centralfigure wears an Egyptianheaddress and a Canaan-
O~
ee
O
e
WOE)
4)e
Scarabs engraved with royal names were most often amulets, not seals, and were continuouslyre-issuedlong aftera king had died. Inthis group,an incorrectspellingof the name of SesostrisI (ca. 1943-1898 BCE)runsdown
190
Biblical
Archa'olo•'ist
57:4 (1994)
the center of the design and two examples add the name of Amenhotep II(ca. 1427-1401 at the top. Thesescarabswere therefore BCE) made five centuriesafterthe reignof the king they honor. Drawingsafter Ward1971:fig.29.
ite cloak,the winged sun-disc is taken from Assyrianart, and the four-winged scarab is a Canaaniteadaptation of a common Egyptian motif, probablyinfluenced by Hurrian prototypes. Photos and drawing from Ward 1967:pi. 12:1and p. 69.
Manufacture Scarabswere made of almost any kind of stone, often of glazed composition, or, more rarelyof gold, silver,or bronze. The most common materialused is universally known as steatite, though it is really a kind of talc (Lucas 1962:15556; Richards1992:5-8). In its natural state, this soft stone is easily carved and engraved, which accounts for its very common use in the manufactureof scarabsand other small objects.Once the scarabwas fashioned, it was plunged into a hot liquidglaze.This accomplished two things: the glaze coating gave a smooth shiny surface to the object,and the intense heat of the glaze altered the chemical composition of the stone through dehydration so that it became very hard. This hardened form is properly called steatite.The glaze is actually an early form of glass that could be colored by the addition of coloring agents. Scarabswere most often given a deep blue or green glaze, imitating the color of the live insect. The second most common materialis glazed composition, often termed faience, frit,or paste; again, this is a form of glass using the same ingredients but in different proportions (Lucas 1962:160;Ward1993:95; Clerc,et al. 1976:24-28). Scarabs, Scarabs, Everywhere One of the intriguing things about scarabswas their popularity outside
Canaanite artists adapted the Egyptian scarabto local beliefs and engravingtechniques as earlyas the Middle BronzeAge. One such adaptation is the use of symbolism in the
5
7
8
9
"Omega-group" as on nos. 1-4, representingthe Canaanitegoddess Astarte. Exampleslike nos. 5-6 are included in this group as they are engraved in raisedreliefand show the same crude scarab style. A second group, the "nakedgoddess" of nos. 7-9, portraysAstarte herselfin a typicallyCanaanite, but not Egyptian,
include Egyptian hieroglyphs and symbols. Two of these are Keel'sjaspergroup and the well-known robed Canaanite figure.The jaspergroup (Keel 1989b)is characterizedby stick-figures and carelessengraving,and all examples are manufactured from hard stones. While the standing figures find ready comparisons with Asiatic cylinder seals, the jaspergroup scarabs make consistent use of Egyptian symbolism as well. The other design-the standing or enthroned male figure with Canaanite costume (Schroer1985)-is obviously not Egyptian but again includes Egyptian symbols as part of the design.
K4W
stance. Drawings after Keel 1989a and Schroer 1989.
Egypt. This raises the question of what the scarabsignified in foreign places and how much this peculiarly Egyptian class of objectmight be adapted to foreign ideas and beliefs. Such adaptations are already evident in Middle Bronze Age Canaan as shown by Othmar Keel and his colleagues in Freiburg.Two of these adaptations are the Omega-group and the nude goddess motif. The Omega-group (Keel 1989a)takes its name from the prominent symbol in the design resembling the Greek letter.Both this symbol and the symbol that usually accompanies it are said to representa Canaanitefertilitygoddess, possibly Astarte.The symbols find their prototypes in the cylinder seal traditionsof Mesopotamiaand Syria.The designs are
engraved in raised relief,which is not an Egyptian practiceon scarabs,and seems to derive from copying cylinder seal impressions. We have here, then, a local engraving technique with a mixed design repertoire of both Asiatic and Egyptianorigin. The nude goddess shown frontally (Schroer1989:93-121)is clearly a west Asiatic motif with prototypes on cylinder seals and the common Astarte plaques. Showing human or divine figures frontallyruns contraryto the Egyptian practiceo0so that, in this case, both the subjectmatterand the method of representationare Canaaniterather than Egyptian. The sources of other motifs are not as clear as these since they almost always
5
/
8
Other Canaanite adaptations of the Egyptian scarab include a series done in a local engravingtechnique, the "Jaspergroup," nos. 1-4. Nos. 3-4, however, while carved in this Canaanitestyle are local copies of purelyEgyptiandesigns. Nos. 5-8 represent the "toga-wearer"group, a royalfigure in Canaanitecostume, based on prototypes in Canaaniteand Syrianart. Drawings after Keel 1989b and Tufnell1984
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
191
The lattertwo scarabgroups present a problem encountered with many scarabsand other objects found outside Egypt:what is the purpose of the use of Egyptian symbolism in a clearly foreign context?In other words, these Egyptian symbols have a particular significancewithin an Egyptiancontext. Was that significance the same in a foreign context, or was the meaning altered to suit the beliefs of that foreign context?Or are we here dealing with nothing more than symbols which are used merely as decoration in an attempt to copy admired Egyptian originals? Keel and his colleagues support the idea that Egyptian symbolism was altered to suit Canaanitebeliefs. Their arguments are not convincing, and these scarabsmay be merely bad copies with no local religious significance. The same problem of interpretation is found in other foreign scarabtraditions. In the early firstmillennium BCE, we begin to find large collections of
del
2
8
9
Phoenician (nos. 1-7) and Egyptian (nos. 8-10) scarabs portrayinga scene from the Isis-Osirismyth. Thisand many other scenes from the myth are known from hundredsof Phoenicianscarabsfound throughout the
192
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
Egyptian artistic influence, includingthe scarab, is found on jewelrymade locally aroundthe Mediterranean.Thisgold bracelet from Sardinia, dating ca. 700-600 BCE, iS embossed with Egyptianpalmettes, lotus flowers, and the "flyingscarab"motif. The latter provesthe non-Egyptianorigin of the
piece as it portraysthe scarabwith four wings, a common foreign adaptation of the two-winged flying scarabtypicalof Egyptian art. The four-winged variantprobablyoriginated in Syriaunder the influence of Hurrian art which used such four-winged figures
scarabsof the so-called Phoenician style in MediterraneanEurope,for example at Ibiza,Spain and Tharros,Italy (Fernandez and Padr6 1982;Acquaro, Moscati,and Umberti 1975).Hundreds were found at Carthageon the North Africancoast (Vercoutter1945).This Phoenicianscarabtraditionis dominat-
ed by hard stones, chiefly jasperand carnelian,and shows a strong Egyptian influence in the repertoireof motifs (cf. Culican 1968:50-56).11A large portion of such scarabswere manufactured locally and, by indirectevidence, we can point to Carthage,Phoenicia, Rhodes, Greece, Sardinia,and Italyas having workshops where these scarabs were produced on the spot. The Phoenician scarabstyle was borrowed by Greek gem engravers in the sixth century BCE, who perhaps learned the art of cutting hard stones from Phoenician craftsmen. By the end of the fifth century,the scarab form became much less used as this archaicGreekstyle gradually changed into classical Greek gems (Boardman1968;Boardmanand Vollenweider 1978).The Greek scarabstyle was soon brought to Etruriaby Greek immigrants where a new and distinctly Etruscantraditionappears from the sixth to third centuries. This is characterizedby its widespread use of a deep red carnelian,decoration on the edge of the plinth and wing cases, and local engraving techniques (Boardman1975; Zazoff 1968).Both the Greek and Etruscan traditionsearly introduced a design repertoireof their own, and the Egyptianizing motifs gradually disappeared. Concurrentwith these Phoenician, Greek, and Etruscanhard-stone styles, countless other scarabsof steatite and glazed composition were being manufacturedat, among other places, Carthage, Perachorain south-easternGreece,
3
10
Mediterraneanworld. The scarabevidence indicatesthat the popularityof Isisin foreign cultures may have arisen somewhat earlier than now supposed. Drawingsafter Ward 1970b.
extensively.
and Lindos on Rhodes (Vercoutter1945; James 1962;Blinkenberg1931).The sum total is quite remarkable;scarabsare found in quantity throughout the Mediterraneanfrom the early firstmillennium BCE into Hellenistic times.
Scarab popularity It is franklydifficult to account for this. The facts of which we can be certainare these. Egyptian scarabswere very popular abroadamong local populations. At least as early as 800 BCE, scarabsin the Phoenicianstyle were manufactured abroad.While these foreign scarabsretained much of the design repertoireof the Egyptian tradition,foreign techniques, motifs, and designs were introduced which altered the characterof the Egyptian originals. Justwhy the Egyptianscarabbecame so popular abroad is hard to say. Certainly,the meaning of the scarabas an amulet to help attaina cheerful afterlife did not really apply in other societies. The afterlifeas conceived by most religions of western Asia was a ratherdismal existence in a cave beneath the earth where everyone went afterdeath, irrespectiveof how they had lived in this life. The Greeks looked forward to their own gloomy Hades. It does not seem logical that such societies would care much for the amuletic characterof the Egyptianscarab.Still,in the firstmillennium BCE, ideas about the next life were changing.The Asiaticreligionsand the new cults thatsprang up everywhere now taught that divine reward and punishment were reserved for eternity and good or evil actions in this life would determine whether that eternity was spent in bliss or misery. In this context, the scarabmay have held more significance. There is scarabevidence that the EgyptianOsiris myth, which was intimately associated with resurrection,became popular beyond Egypt. One cannot say how early this myth became attractiveoutside Egypt,but by the early first millennium BCE, episodes from this myth are portrayedon scarabsmade abroad.Practicallyall the majorepisodes in the Osiris myth are found on scarabsmade in Mediterraneancoun-
I,
When the scarab was adopted by cultures in the west, there were appropriatechanges, especiallyin the design repertoire.The green jasper scarab(top) was engraved in the Greco-Phoenicianstyle with a purelyGreek motif, Heraklesholding a club and a bow and arrows.The sardonyxscarab (bottom) is of Etruscanorigin, the motif again from the classicalrepertoire.Here,Heraklesstands on the left, holding up the heavens with one
tries,illustratingthe popularity of this myth in foreign places. Indeed, thereare more scarabsportrayinga largervariety of scenes from the Osiris myth found abroadthan thereare from Egypt itself,12 conforming to the general spread in the first millennium of Isis as a universal mother-goddess. This was an attribute which was not part of her original character in Egypt, though it did eventually emerge therebecause of her immense popularity. With the possible exception of such scenes which can be relatedto the spread of Egyptian religious beliefs, it seems probable that the most extensive use of scarabsin foreign places was simply for jewelry and decorative design. Scarabs mounted as finger-rings,ear-rings,and pendants are found in all the traditions noted here-Phoenician, Greek,and Etruscan.As decorative motifs, the scarabwas used on the ivories and metal
hand and grasping a club in the other. He is accompanied by Atlas pluckingapples from a tree around which twines a serpent with three heads. The Egyptianscarab in the west was thus transformedinto a Greco-Roman object, an ancestor of the engraved gem traditionof the ClassicalPeriod.Photographs by Pia Ward.Courtesyof the Departmentof Classical Art, TheMuseum of FineArts, Boston.
bowls for which the Phoenicians are so well known, and on other objectssuch as the braceletfrom Tharros(see photo on page 192). It seems likely that, in these contexts, scarabs were seen more as exotica than as symbols of thought and belief.
The Troublewith Scarabs Multiplicity and Variabilty '"Thetrouble with scarabs"is an apt title for the remainder of this article.The trouble with scarabsis that there are so many and, with the exception of those made of glazed composition in molds, no two are alike. The pure bulk of scarabs is well known to anyone interested in archaeology.The enormous number of scarabs made in Egypt is due to their basic characteras amulets, including those engraved with royal names. The religious beliefs of ancient
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
193
Egypt demanded an extraordinary range of amulets of all kinds-the scarabwas merely one of an almost endless variety (see, e.g., Petrie 1914; Miiller-Winkler1987).Because of its initial association with the gods Atum and Re, and then with all deities, and kings, and the thousand other forces that brought protectionfrom evil, the scarabbecame one of the most popular amulets, equaled only by the sacred eye of Horus. Theirsheer bulk, then, is due to a popular demand for yet another amulet that offered protection from evil. It is perhaps not as well known that no two scarabsare the same, with the exception of those made in molds. For example, in the Middle Bronze IIIAge, the so-called Hyksos period (ca. 16501550 BCE),the numerous varieties of heads, backs, sides, and designs used at that time permit over one hundred thousand typological combinations. Adding the category of scarabsizeand only those most commonly usedthe possible combinations become about one million. The endless variety of scarabsis thus due to these two primary factors:they were desired as amulets to obtain the good will of the supramundane world, and the engravers who made them had available a very wide range of typological features from which to choose. Scarabs and Dating. Now the fundamental question we have all asked for a long time is this: If there are so many scarabs,and if they are found in archaeological contexts everywhere in the ancient world, would they not be useful in dating archaeologicallevels at this or that site? Could scarabs,like pottery or coins, become another tool by which culturalsequences and archaeological periods can be defined? This problem was firstaddressed by Flinders Petriein 1889and has been studied ever since by scholars who have devoted much time and energy to find acceptableanswers (surveyed in Wardand Dever 1994). Methodology. The method employed in this task was always firstto createa stylistichistoryof scarabsbased on those inscribedwith royal names. This yield194
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
Clypeus Antenna
Tibia
Pronotum
Humeral Callosity Suture
Elytra
The Egyptian Dung beetle Scarabaeus SacerL.Thebeetle'sstrongforelegsandshovel-like clypeusenablesit to formballsof dungfourtimesitssize.Thehumeralcallosityis one of the typological features that helps to distinguish scarabstyle. AfterWard1978,Frontispiece.
ed a chronologicalskeleton and set up a rough sequence of typological changes which could then be applied to the vast numbers of scarabsinscribed with other designs, which are by farthe most numerous. Having done this, one then compared scarabsfrom new excavations with the established typological sequence and assigned a date to this or that archaeologicallevel, to this or that tomb. It ought to have worked, but it didn't. The basic idea is all right-link a stylistic history of scarabsto the chronology of Egyptian kings-but it is really not as simple as it sounds. Difficultiesabound. First,the primary emphasis has been on the endless multitude of designs engraved on the base of scarabs.The study of scarab history has thus been primarilya history of the designs, not the scarabas a whole.
It is like studying coins only from the obverse side, or Attic vases only from the paintings, or Canaanite pottery only from the rims. One cannot ignore the reverse side of coins, or the shapes and fabricof Attic vases, or the necks and sides and bases of Canaanite pottery. One must considerthe whole object.This is axiomatic in archaeology and has always been recognized as the proper way to study and organize any class of object.But scarabshave too often been treatedas if they consist only of the designs engraved on their base; the scarab itself was relatively unimportant. Even when scarabbacks and sides were considered, they took second place to the designs. A second difficulty is that there are severalclasses of scarabs:those engraved with designs, those with royal names,
thosewith privatenames,andscarabs of anyof thesegroupsmadein hard stones.Whilein any givenperiod,these classessharesometypologicalfeatures, eachhasits own peculiaritiesof styleso thatwe mustdealwithseverallinesof stylisticdevelopmentthatarethesame at somepoints,butquitedifferentat others. Third,it hasbecomeincreasingly evidentthatmanyroyalnamescarabs weremadelongafterthelifetimesof thekingstheycommemorate, sometimescenturieslater.A stylistichistory of royalnamescarabsmusttherefore definewhichonesarecontemporary andwhichweremadelater.Otherwise, one getsa veryincorrectview of the typologicalhistoryof royalname scarabswhichthenskews thehistoryof thedesignscarabtradition.13 Finally,even contemporary royal namescarabsarenotalwaysa reliable guide.A paradeexampleis thelarge groupof scarabsnamingtheso-called Sebekhotepkingsof theThirteenthDynasty.No one questionsthatmostare products;theybelongto contemporary thesecondhalfof theseventeenthcenForthatreason,thisscarab turyBCE. group,numberingwell overa hundred (Tufnell1984:pls.54-56),is stillconsidereda key pointin thechronologyof scarabstyle.Inreality,however,this scarabgrouphas itsown particular uniquetypology.Itstandsaloneand in no way reflectswhattherestof scarab productionlookedlikein theThirteenth Dynasty.Thisgroupreallyrepresents was notlike whatscarabmanufacture in thelaterseventeenthcenturyBCE (Ward1987:512). Thfnell's Contribution These are a few of the difficulties.There are many more, but these are enough to illustratethat there must have been something wrong with the traditional approachto scarabhistory.In spite of the enormous effort put into their study for more than a century,the use of scarabsas a chronological tool has remained very limited. Olga Tufnellfelt this in the 1950'sas she put together her volumes on Lachish(Tufnell1958).There were hundreds of scarabsfrom that site,
butthereferenceworksof the timedid notsupplytheanswersshe wanted fromall thismaterial.Itwas theLachish publicationthatset heron a courseof studythatwas to continueuntilshe died in 1985.In 1%2,whenTufnellwas in Beirutworkingon the MontetJar treasure,I joinedherprojectand we
hUfl chaactrisic
.63
~*l~~~ eatres
ypoogial
*~~~1~ '4RW.
I
begana happycollaborationthatlasted over20 years. Tufnelldecidedthata differentapproachwas needed.All the accepted conclusionsaboutscarabhistoryhad to be discarded.Mostof thedatingcriteria whichhadbecomearchaeological law had to be ignored.Theemphasison
S
*1
65" a
i-m
S0
te
1..*g,1
IIA
III
o
bgmmg ggjj.
IV
V
VI
1,1
1,2
Side a
X
X
Side bl
X
X
-
Head Al
X
X
X
X
Design 1
X
X
X
X
Side b2
-
X
-
Head A3
-
X
X
X
X
X
Side c3Design 2
-
1,3
II
X
X
X
Side e5
X
-
-
-
-
-
Side e6
X
X
X
-
X
X
Head B2
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Side d5
X
X
X
X
Design 3B1
-
X
Design 3C
-
X
X
-
X
X
-
-
X
X
-
X
X
-
X
X
-
X
X
Side e9
Design 7B
-
Side d6 Design 6 Design 10
--
-
Head D9 Head B3
-
X
X
X
Side ella Design 11A
X
-
-
X
--
X
X Design 11D Eachchronologicalperiodhas its own uniquegroupof characteristic features.Theseare usually not the majortypologicalcategories,but the sub-typesof these categories.Some features arecharacteristic overseveral;the latonlyin one chronologicalphase,othersarecharacteristic ter areof littleuse in dating.Thetypologicalsequenceshown hereis exactlylikethat of any potteryseriation.Thefeaturesmost commonlyused in Period1,1(earlyFirstIntermediatePeriod) are verydifferentfromthose in PeriodV (FifteenthDynasty).Thestages in between show the normalprogressionof changeone also findswith pottery,old featuresdroppingout, new ones being added, and a few used frequentlyoverlong stretchesof time. InPeriodVI(earlierEighteenth Dynasty),for as yet unexplainedreasons,severalearlytypologicalfeaturesthat had gone out of use suddenlyreappear.
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
195
80
70 60
50 Legend 40-
1
I A1 LN
30 .7q.
0 1,1
1,2
1,3
II
How the system works. The scarab illustratedhere is from a large group found in a tomb of the mid-18th Dynasty,ca. 1450 BCE, though its typological profileshows it was made almost five centuriesearlier.Applyingthe typology discussed in this essay, this scarab has the simplest lunate head with no markings(Al), a lined naturalisticback (LN),a high profilewith the legs cut h jour (c3), and an animalfigure as the only design (1D), in this case a beetle. The graph plots the percent of use of each of these features through nine chronologicalphases from the earliestscarabs (PeriodI,1)to the mid18th Dynasty(PeriodVI). Thedate of manufactureis most likelyto be that chronological phase in which all four features were characteristic,hence when
royal name scarabswas faulty,so this, too, had to go. Since the bulk of scarabsare design scarabs,they would be a betterstarting point. Once a typological history had been gained from design scarabsfound in datable archaeologicalcontexts, then the royal name scarabscould be brought into the equation, but not before.Tufnell insisted that the whole scarabneeded to be considered, not just the design on the base. Every head, every side, every detail had to be examined. And the core sample must be based on large groups of excavated examples. These were to be found at stratifiedCanaanitesites, not in Egypt where large groups of scarabsand impressions are generally found in contexts covering long periods of time. Only aftera stylistic history of design scarabshad been established should one turn to scarabswith royal names, and then only after the troublesome scarabsnaming Twelfth Dynasty
196
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
IIA
III
IV
V
VI
there was the highest probabilitythat they would appear on the same scarab. Inthis case, the date is Period1,3,the later 11th Dynasty. Note that HeadAl, BackLN,and side c3 were also common in the 18th Dynastywhen severaltypological features long out of use suddenly reappearedon scarabs of that time. However,this date is ruledout by severalfactors:the high profilewas a dominate feature only in the earliest periods of scarab manufacture;the small size (length 10 mm) and design 1D were characteristiconly then; there are excellent parallelsfrom FirstIntermediatePeriodburials(Ward 1978, pl. 6: 153-155). Scarabdrawing from Tufnell,1984:114, fig. 24:32.
kings had been sifted thoroughly to determine which were contemporary.14
Scarab Style The history of scarabstyle is very much like that of pottery.When a new pottery form is introduced, it appears first in small numbers. As its popularity increases,examples become more and more numerous until it begins to go out of style. Examples then become fewer and ultimately disappear.An archaeological phase is distinguished by a group of pottery forms and details such as rims, handles, and bases which have reached their apex of usage, though all may appear earlierand later than the phase in which they dominate. This is also true of scarabs,though on a rather more complicated level. I am the first to admit that the typological system developed by Tufnell and myself over the years is far from simple. It is not easy to use and is some-
times cumbersome, but that is the nature of the material,not the system. It is impossible to produce an easy-to-read dating chartwhich has all the facts illustrated on one quick-referencediagram. We defined some thirtymajorcategories of style--heads, backs, sides, and designs--broken down into over two hundred and fifty sub-types (Ward 1978:20-33;Tufnell 1984:27-38).While the majorcategories do show a general chronological sequence, it is the subtypes which are often more important because they come and go more quickly and are thus more reliableindicatorsof chronological sequence. As with a pottery sequence, each phase in the history of scarabstyle is distinguished by a group of typological features which were most commonly used during that phase. To show how important the details are, often minute ones, let me note first the detail with the funny name the humeral callosity.This is a natural
60
50 Legend 40
HAlA
SA3
_
30
20
10
0 1,1
1,2
1,3
II
Even the smallest details may be importantin dating scarabs.The graph plots the percent of use of three similarlunate head types from the beginning of scarab historyto the mid-18th Dynasty.The typological differences between them are slight:Al is plain,A3 has tiny single lines markingthe eyes, A5 has double lines. The chronological differences, however,are significant.Priorto the New Kingdom, Al and A3 were verycommon up to the earlyyears of the 12th Dynasty(PeriodII),A5 was more likelyto be used in the 12th to 15th
markingon the live beetle, represented on scarabsby the little V-shape marks on the wing-case. The humeral callosity firstappears,but extremely rarely,on scarabsat the very end of the Hyksos period, just before the advent of the EighteenthDynasty.Fromthen on, these markingsbecome standardon scarabs with lined backs, that is, where the wing-cases are outlined by engraved lines. This detail is thereforean excellent broad indicatorof date: scarabswith the humeral callosity belong to the Eighteenth Dynasty or later.That is of great help for,among other things, isolating the many later reissues of scarabsnamingTwelfthDynastykin Scarabsnaming SesostrisI, for example, were still being manufacturedin the EighteenthDynasty and even later.Many can be judged as late only by the appearanceof the little V's on the wing-case. While the humeral callosity is an easily recognized feature,even the tini-
IIA
III
IV
V
VI
Dynasties(PeriodsII-V).Allthree appear rathersuddenly as characteristic heads in the 18th Dynasty(PeriodVI).While none of these head types providesa specific date, they do limitthe possibilities;for example, head A3 points to either the FirstIntermediatePeriodor the 18th Dynasty.Othertypological features used with A3 heads will determine which date is the correctone: a side type c, cut a jour, points to the earlierdate; the figure of a deity as the design indicates the 18th Dynasty.
est details of scarabtypology can be chronologicallysignificant,This means that every aspect of scarabshas to be investigated-heads, backs, sides, designs, and even the less significant features such as size and material.Typing individual scarabstakes time and can be frustrating,but the proper analysis of their various components does allow most scarabsto be dated. Unfortunately, thereare many scarabswith typological featuresthat were all used over long periods of time. This emphasizes an important point about using scarabsfor dating. Individual scarabsare usually not helpful. But groups of scarabsare a differentmatter. Again, pottery is a good analogy. A single pottery vessel is not a good dating criterionunless it is known to have a very restrictedperiod of use. In general, a single pot is not sufficientto date a burialor house level. Buta group of pottery vessels of varying sizes and shapes
can point to a specific archaeological period. The largerthe group, the easier it is to assign a date.
CanaaniteTombScarabs.Groupsof scarabsactthe sameway.A good example is a fairlylargegroupof scarabs foundin Canaanitetombdepositsof the later Middle Bronze I and transitional I/II periods (Wardand Dever 1994).This group has some sixty differenttypological features.Some are useless as dating evidence since they appear rarelyon scarabs as a whole. But there are sufficient featuresused frequentlyenough in this group to establish a typological profile. We have here, then, a set of typological featureswhich can be used to give a broad definition of what scarabs of the later MB I and I/II transitionperiods should look like, i.e., in scarabPeriod IIA,Twelfth Dynasty. These Period IIA scarabsform a bridge between the preceding stages of scarabhistory (PeriBiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
197
SI
.'.
Periods'OS
Dynstes
*~~ ~ .
~
0
-
. ..
0
.
.
00
1-@
.
0
00
)I.
200
*150
000
1950
EndOld Kingdom 2185 FI.P Dyn.IX/X (north)
Dyn.XI (south)
Early Bronze IV 1,1-3
2033 Dyn.XI
1963
Materialfrom Egyptiansites. FirstIntermediatePeriod,into earlyyearsof 12th Dynasty. 2000
II
MontetJarscarabsfrom Byblos.Typologically relatedto last phase of PeriodI. Early12th Dynasty. Middle Bronze
Dyn.
I
XII
IIA
1775
1786 Dyn. '46-:"
ScarabsfromJerichoand Megiddo.MBII.Later12th, early 13th Dynasty.
III
XIII IV 1650 Dyn.XV (north) Dyn.XVII (south) 1550 Dyn.XVIII
Scarabsfrom Canaanitesites of MBI and VIItransition. 12th Dynasty.
Middle Bronze II 1650
V
VI
ScarabsfromJericho,Megiddo,and CAjjOl. MBII. 13th Dynasty.
Middle Bronze III
ScarabsfromJericho,Megiddo,Fara,and CAjjQI. MBIll. 15th Dynasty.
Late BronzeI
Scarabsfrom Lahun,Gurob,and Sedment. LBI. Earlier18th Dynasty.
datedscarabgroupsfrombothEgyptandCanaanhavebeentestedagainstthe basicdesignscarabseries A dozenarchaeologically the resultsgainedfromthe mainseries.Theablistedabove.Alldateto the typologicalphaseto whichtheyshouldbelong,verifying latestassessment(1989),areapproximate. Canaanite solutedatesfor Egypt,basedon Kitchen's phasesafterWardand archaeological Dever(1994).ChangesinabsoluteEgyptianchronologywillcausesimilarchangesin Canaanite archaeological chronology.
198
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
ods I-II)and the one that follows (Period III).As with a pottery sequence, the scarabsequence shows a gradualchange in the characteristicscarabfeaturesallowing us to define several succeeding phases in scarabmanufacture. So a clear and progressive stylistic chronology can be established. How does this fit into a relative chronology between Egyptian historicalperiods and the archaeologicalphases of Canaan?This is shown in the chronological chart.Period I, which breaksdown into threedistinct phases of scarabmanufacture,is dated by archaeological context from the early FirstIntermediate Period to about the early years of the TwelfthDynasty.The Montet Jargroup, ScarabPeriod II,is so closely associated with Period I that it must follow immediately thereafter.These two periods are contemporaryto the late EarlyBronze and early Middle BronzeI ages. Periods IIAand IIIare closely related to royal name scarabsof the laterTwelfth Dynasty which fixes them somewhere in that period. Since Period IIA falls archaeologically in the CanaaniteMiddle Bronze I and the I/II transition,Period IIIfalls in the earlierMiddle BronzeII Age. ScarabPeriod IV,which progresses neatly from IIIis thus roughly the ThirteenthDynasty,or the laterMiddle BronzeIIAge. Period V is archaeologically associated with the Egyptian Fifteenth Dynasty and the CanaaniteMiddle Bronze IIIAge. Absolute Chronology. If a relativechronology is fairlysimple to establish,an absolute chronology is not. I must note here the chaos into which Egyptian absolute chronology has been thrown in recentyears.15In 1950,RichardA. Parker concluded, after a detailed study of the astronomicaland other evidence, that the Twelfth Dynasty ruled for 206 These dates years,from 1991to 1786BCE. became a kind of comfortablefriend to students of comparative history and archaeology who depend a great deal on the chronology of Egypt. Parker's astronomicallyfixed absolute dates for the TwelfthDynasty went unquestioned for over threedecades. A sense of order prevailed both in Egyptian history and
in setting out the general limits of Canaanite archaeologicalphases. In the past decade, a series of studies have appeared which challenge Parker's conclusions and lower the dates for the Twelfth Dynasty by over half a century.This researchis based primarilyon exhaustive studies of the astronomical evidence, some of which had never been published previously.The new dates proposed for the Twelfth Dynasty are 1937-1759 BCE. It is doubtful, however, that this lowering of Twelfth Dynasty chronology is going to stand up since it is builton certainassumptionsthateither are not true or cannot be substantiated.16 This is not to say that Parker'soriginal dates for the Twelfth Dynasty are carved in stone. Some adjustments have had to be made in the matter of coregencies and the lengths of individual reigns. It seems most likely that the TwelfthDynasty ruled for 178 years, from 1963-1786 BCE(Kitchen1989),and these are the dates I am now using. It must be emphasized, however, that even these absolute dates are approximate though they do represent,I think, the best we can do at present.17 In terms of an absolute chronology for Canaanitearchaeologicalphases, the scarabevidence indicatesthe dates given on the charts.Middle Bronze I began some time before the Twelfth Dynasty, ca. 2000 BCE, Middle Bronze IIbegan toward the end of that dynasty, ca. 1800/ Middle Bronze IIIbegan ca. 1750 BCE, 1650 BCE,the so-called Hyksos Age. To sum up very briefly,there are nine well-defined phases in the history of scarabmanufacturefrom theirinitialappearanceat the end of the Old Kingdom into the earlierEighteenth Dynasty. These phases representa continuous development in scarabtypology, each phase with its own characteristictypological profile.This typological history is based on excavated collections and has been defined by a detailed study of all typological featuresof scarabs,the firstattempt to do so. These nine stages in scarabhistory can be roughly equated with Egyptian dynasties and Canaanite archaeologicalperiods and are helpful in providing absolute dates for the latter. As a final note, I should emphasize
that the completely new look at scarab history that Tufnelland I worked on for so many years was bound to contain some errors.No matter how well planned a projectmay be, mistakes are inevitable when such a vast amount of materialmust be considered. A thorough revision of the project(Wardand Dever 1994) has hopefully removed the majordefects and given greaterclarity to both the typological system developed by Tufnelland how it applies both to Egyptian and Canaanitehistory.
Notes 1Mostnotablythe dung beetle(Scarabaeus SacerL.).A generalmisconceptionis that ScarabaeusSacerL.was the only beetlehonoredby the Egyptiansas thisspeciesis theone
mostcommonlyrepresented. Inreality, there wereothers,forexample,thelong,thinbeetle knowntotheEgyptians as theankh-beetle, foundasanamuletalreadyinGerzeantimes (Ward1978:43-44). Furthermore, scarabs do not always representScarabaeus SacerL.,but
manyotherspeciesaswell(Bishara 1978:8891).Whilethepresentessayisconcerned primarilywiththedungbeetleas thescarabpar excellence, theEgyptians didnotmakethe biologicaldistinctionsof modernscienceand
seemtohavepassedon toa wholeclassof insecttherespecttheygavetoScarabaeus. It wasthelatter'slifecycle,however,thatinfluencedthemthemost. 2Whendesignamuletsfirstbeganturningup inburials, theywereconsidered foreignimportsastheywerea newtypeof objectin Egyptian archaeology. Earlystudiessuggested
diverseforeignorigins,especiallythe Aegean and Anatolia(e.g.,Newberry1906:59-61;Petrie 1925:1-3;Frankfort1939:296-98).It is now quite certainthatin both formand design thisclassof
objectis purelyEgyptian (Ward1970a). formany 3Theclassicgeneralstudiesofscarabs yearswerethoseof Newberry(1906)andPetrie (1917),thoughboth arenow out-dated.More
recentworksof goodqualityarethoseofde Meulenaere (1972),HornungandStaehelin Boochs(1982), (1976:13-193), andBen-Tor (1989). onthesubjectisquite Thespecialized literature extensive; cf.Martin(1985)fora bibliography listingalmostseven hundreditems,exclusive of scoresof discussionsin individualexcavationreports.
4Onthelifecydeof thedungbeetle,seeBishara (1978),anEgyptian biologistwhohasmadea life-longstudyof thebeetlesnativetoEgypt. 5Forexample,fromChapter15of theEgyptian Bookof theDead:"GreetingsHorakhty(= the
sun),Khepritheself-engendered. Howexcellentwhenyouappearinthehorizonand thetwolandswithyourrays." brighten BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
199
6
Forexample,in a shorthymn to the sun from Spell587of the EgyptianPyramidTexts,Atum is identifiedas Khepri,bothbeing formsof the sun:"GreetingsAtum!GreetingsKheprithe selfengendered.... Mayyou (i.e.,Atum)come intoexistencein thisyour nameof Khepri." 7Note especiallythe hundredsof administrativesealingsfromthetown of Lahun("Kahun") and the Egyptianfortressat Uronartiin Nubia, now convenientlycollectedand studiedby On Egyptiansealsand sealings Tufnell(196%1). in general,see Boochs(1982). 8Kingscould and oftendid becomegods after theirdeath.Theextentto whicha kingachieved divineattributesin his lifetimehas long been debated;thedifficultiesinvolvedareconveniently summarizedin Silverman1991.On occasion, a veneratedcommonermightalso be elevated to divinity(Otto1943).Itmustbe emphasized, however,thatEnglishtermssuch as "god"and "divine"implymodem theologicalconcepts thatdo not necessarilyreflectthoseof antiquity. Thewhole debateon thesupposed "godkings"of Egypthas beencoloredby ignoring thisratherimportantpoint. 9Cf.Ward1976on a scarabin the possessionof a Nubianfamilyforseven generations.Bya strangecoincidence,theson who will inherit thisobjectbearsthesame nameas the Egyptian officialwho once owned it,yet the childwas namedbeforethe parentsknew what was writtenon the scarab. 1'Therareexceptionsto thisarethe god Bes, usuallyshown frontallyto emphasizehis physicalappearance,and the headof Hathor,iconographicallyassociatedwith thesistrum(a percussioninstrument)which was normally portrayedfrontally. " Whileit is generallyfeltthatthis tradition belongsto the IronAge, its originsmustcertainlybe earlier.Scarabsin this stylearevery numerousand canbe seen throughoutthe literatureand in unpublishedmuseumand privatecollections.All thisis currentlybeing assembledforthe CorpusGlypticaPhoenicia
inBrussels. Project
12A very summarylistin Ward1970b:348-49. Inreality,the numberwith Osiridescenesis veryextensive,and examplescanbe foundin any collectionof scarabsexcavatedin most placesaroundthe Mediterranean. '3Themajorattemptto do createsucha typologivcalhistoryis thatof Jaeger(1982)who deals primarilywith thescarabsof Thutmosism, but includesotherrulersof the New Kingdom. Jaeger'smethodologywas subsequentlyfollowed by Weise(1990)who is concernedwith portrayalsof kingson scarabs.WhileJaeger studiedonly the designson scarabplinths,it is of interestthatwhen the othertypologicalcategoriesareconsidered,thosescarabsof Thutmosis IIIthathe judgedto be contemporaryfall
200
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
into placewherethey should in the royalname seriesof the EighteenthDynasty(Ward1984). 14Inpre-NewKingdomtimes,it is only with thisdynastythatlaterre-issuesmustbe seriously considered.Veryfew were producedfor ThirteenthDynastyrulers,none forthoseof the Hyksosand theirvassalsand probablynone fortheSeventeenthDynasty.The matterof contemporarymanufactureversusre-issuesfor TwelfthDynastyroyalnamescarabshas beena problemfromthestartand is stilldebatedin currentliterature(e.g.,Tufnell1984versus O'Connor1985). on thissubjectgrows annually;I 15Literature haveelsewheresummarizedthedebateas it stood in 1990(Ward1992).Otherstudieshave appearedsincethen,notablyLuft'sanalysisof chronologicaldatain the lllahunpapyri(Luft 1992). 16Thekey problemin the longdebateis whether or not therewas a singlepointin Egyptat which officialastronomicalobservationswere made. Thischieflyconcernsthe helicalrisingof the starSiriuswhich heraldedtheadventof a new lunaryear.TheargumentcentersaroundMemphisand Elephantineas havinga kindof nationalobservatorywheresuch sightingswere madeand thencommunicatedto the restof the country.However,a heliacalrisingor any other astronomicalevent was observedon different days all along the Nile Valley;seven days earlier at Elephantinethanat Memphis,forexample. Due to the obviousimpossibilityof communicatingan astronomicalsightingto the whole countryon the sameday,it is evident thatsuch importanteventsas thebeginningof a new lunaryearoccurredon differentdays in differentregionsof Egyptand thateachregion followedits own locallunarcalendar.Sincethe purposeof the lunarcalendarwas to organize the complicatedsystemof religiousfestivals and rituals,it did not matterthata given festival at Memphishad alreadytakenplacea week earlierat Elephantine.Whatmatteredwas that the festivaltook placeon the designatedday of the lunarcalendarat any placein the country. All this,of course,concernsonly the lunar calendar.The Egyptiancivilcalendarwith its regular365-dayyearwas the one used for administrativepurposesat all levels from recordingmilitarycampaignsto datingpersonal lettersand laundrylists.Thetwo calendars servedtwo differentpurposes:one to organize religiousfestivalsand ceremonies,the otherto organizedaily life.Sincethe lunarcalendarwas shorterthanthe civilcalendar,the two were almostalwaysout of synchronism.Thismay be a problemformodernscholarshipbut was not forthe ancientEgyptians.TheIslamicand Jewishdual calendricalsystemsstillused today areperfectmoderncounterparts. '7The key date fortheTwelfthDynastyis the reignof Sesostris I; the Illahunarchivesrecord a heliacalrisingof Siriusin his seventhregnal year.Thecurrentestimatesforthisreignare
1862-1843BCE(Kitchen1989:153)and 1872-1854 BCE(Luft1992:228), both incorporatingthe now acknowledgedshorterreignof SesostrisIII, nineteenratherthanthirty-six+years.Itis to Parker'screditthathis date of 1878-1843BCE (Parker1950:69)is aboutthe same exceptthat he allowed fora thirty-sixyear reign.Itis ironic thatwith Luft'svery detailedexaminationof the evidence,muchof it unknownto Parker, the debatehas swung fullcircleand thatmost of it has provenunnecessary.
Bibliography Acquaro,E.,Moscati,S. and Umberti,M. L. Collezionedi 1975 AnecdotaTharrhica. studi fenici5. Rome:Consiglio Nazionaledelle Ricerche. Aldred,C. 1971 Jewelsof thePharaohs.EgyptianJewelry of the Dynastic Period. London:
Thamesand Hudson.
Andrews,C. 1990. AncientEgyptianJewelry.London: The BritishMuseum. Ben-Tor,D. 1989 TheScarab.A Reflectionof Ancient Egypt.Jerusalem:The IsraelMuseum. Bishara,S. I. 1978 Biologyand Identificationof Scarab Beetles.AppendixA in Pre-12th Dynasty ScarabAmulets.Editedby WilliamWard.Studieson ScarabSeals Arisand Phillips. I. Warminster: Boardman,J. 1968 ArchaicGreekGems.Schoolsand Artists in theSixthand EarlyFifth CenturiesB.C.Evanston:Northwestern UniversityPress. 1975 Intagliosand Rings.Greek,Etruscan and Eastern.London:Thamesand Hudson. Boardman,J.and Vollenweider,M.-L. 1978 Catalogueof the EngravedGemsand FingerRings in theAshmoleanMuseum I. Greekand Etruscan.Oxford: ClarendonPress. Boochs,W 1982 Siegelund Siegelnim AltenAgypten. KolnerForschungenzu Kunstund Altertum4. SanktAugustin:Hans Richarz. Clerc,G., et al. 1976 Fouillesde KitionII. Objetscgyptiens et dgyptisants.Nicosia:Departmentof Antiquities. Fernandez,J.H. and Padr6,J. del MuseoArqueolkgico de 1982 Escarabeos Ibiza.Tragajosdel Museo Arquel6gico 7. Madrid:Ministryof Culture. Frankfort,H. 1939 CylinderSeals.A DocumentaryEssay on tireArt and Religionof thieAncient
NearEast.New York:Macmillan and Co. Giddy,L.and Grimal,N.-C. 1979 Balat:rapportpreliminairedes fouillesa 'AinAseel, 1978-1979.Biulletinde I'InstitutFrarCiais d'Archdoliogie Orientale79:31-39. 1980 Balat:rapportpreliminairedes fouilles'a'AynAsil, 1979-1980.Bulletinde I'InstitutFranCais d'Archdologie Orientale80:257-69. Giveon,R. 1984 Skarabaus.Cols.968-81 in Lexikon derAgiyptologie. Editedby W.Helck and W.Westendorf.Vol.5. Wiesbaden:Harrassowitz. Hornung,E.and Staehelin,E. 1976 Skarabden undandereSiegelamuilette Mainz:von aus BaslerSammilungen. Zabern. Jaeger,B. 1982 Essaide classificationet datationdes OrbisBiblicus scarabcesMeinkhiperre. et Orientalis,Ser.Arch.2. Fribourg: EditionsUniversitaires. James,T G. H. 1962 The Egyptian-TypeObjects.Pp.461516 in Perachora.TheSanctuariesof HeraAkraiaand Limnenia II. Editedby T.J.Dunbabin.Oxford:Clarendon Press. Keel,O. 1989a Die Q-Gruppe.EinmittelbronzezeitlicherStempelsiegel-Typmit erhabenemReliefaus AnatolienNordsyrienund Palistina.Pp.39-87 in Studicen zu deniStempelsiegeln aus II. Editedby O. Keel. Paldstina/Israel OrbisBiblicuset Orientalis88. Freiburg:Universittitsverlag. 1989b Die Jaspis-Skarabiien-Gruppe. Eine vorderasiatischeSkarabienwerkstatt v.Chr.Pp.213-42 des 17.Jahrhunderts in Studie'nzu deniSteimpelsiegeln awus II. Editedby O. Keel. Paldstina/Israel OrbisBiblicuset Orientalis88. Freiburg:Universititsverlag. Kitchen,K.A. 1989 SupplementaryNotes on 'TheBasics of EgyptianChronology.'Pp. 152-59 in High,Middleor Low?Acts of an Internathial Colloquium,onAbsolute ChronologyHeldat tireUniversityof 20th-22ndAugust 1987. Gotlhenburg Part3. Editedby P.Astrim. Studiesin MediterraneanArchaeologyand Literature,Pocket-book80.Gothenburg:Astrims Firlag. Luft,U. 1992 Die chlronologisclhe Fixierungdes iigyptischenMittlerenReichesrnachi demTemnpelarchiv votnlllahun.Vienna: Akademieder Osterreichischen Wissenschaften.
Lucas,A. 1962 AncientEgyptianMaterialsand Induistries.4th ed. Editedby J.R. Harris. London:Arnold. Martin,G. T. 1985 Scarabs,Cylinde'rs and OtherEgyptian Seals.A Checklistof Publications. Arisand Phillips. Warminster: H. de. Meulenaere, 1972 Scarabae'us saccr.Brussels:Hoechst BelgiumS.A. Miller-Winkler,C. 1987 DieiigyptischenObje'kt-amrulette. Mit PublikationderSanmnlung dtes BiblischenInstitfuts der Universitdt Schwceiz, Fre'iburg Saninlung eIhe'mals FouadS. Matouk.OrbisBiblicuset Orientalis,Ser.Arch.5. Freiburg: Universittitsverlag. Newberry,P E. 1906 Scarabs.An Introductionto the Study of EgyptianSealsand SignetRings. London:Constable. O'Connor,D. 1985 TheChronologyof Scarabsof the MiddleKingdomand the Second IntermediatePeriod.Journalof the Societyfor the Studyof EgyptianAntiquities15:1-41. Otto, E. 1943 Gehaltund Bedeutungdes igyptischen Heroenglaubens.Zeitschriftfiir AgyptischeSpracheundAltertumskunde78:28-40. Parker,R.A. 1950 TheCalendarsof AncientEgypt.Studies in AncientOrientalCivilization26. Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress. PetrieW.M.EF 1889 HistoricalScarabs:A Seriesof Drawings froimthePrincipleCollections London: ArrangedChronologically. Nutt. 1914 Amulets.London:Constable. 1917 Scarabsand Cylinderswith Namnes. Illustratedby the EgyptianCollection in UniversityCollege,London.London:BritishSchoolof Archaeologyin Egypt. 1925 Buttonsand Design ScarabsIllustrated by tireEgyptianCollectionin UniCollege,London.London: vzersity BritishSchoolof Archaeologyin Egypt. Richards,E 1992 ScarabSealsfroma Middleto,Late BronzeAge Tombat Pellain Jordan. OrbisBiblicuset Orientalis117. Freiburg:Universititsverlag. Schroer,S. 1985 Der Mannim Wulstsaummantel.Ein Motivder Mittelbrornze-Zeit IIB.Pp.
a:
r It
.i
:
??:
?-,lf~
Professor William A. Ward devoted nearlya quarter.-century(1963-1986)of his professionallife to the American Universityof Beirutin Lebanonwhere he taughtand held numerous administrative positions including that of Associate Dean. Currently Visiting Professorat Brown University,Dr.Wardreceivedhis Ph.D.in SemiticLanguagesat Brandeis University.Authorof numerousbooks on aspects of Egyptology and scores of scholarly articles,his latestwork will appearas ScarabTypologyand ArchaeologicalContext: An Essay on Middle BronzeAge Chronology(withW.G. Dever;,Studieson ScarabSeals3. San Antonio: VanSiclen Press, 1994).Prof.Wardserved as editor of BerytusArchaeologicalStudies from 1%9 to 1985and continues as co-editor.
51-115in Studienzu den Stempelsiegelnlaus Paliistina/Israel I. Edited
by O. Keel.OrbisBiblicuset Orientalis 67. Freiburg:Universitcitsverlag. 1989 Die GCttinden Stempelsiegelnaus Palistin/Israel.Pp. 89-207 in Studien zu den StempelsiegelnautsPaldstina/ IsraelII. Editedby O. Keel.Orbis Biblicuset Orientalis88. Freiburg: Universitlitsverlag. Silverman,D. P. 1991 Kingshipand Divinity.Pp. 58-87 in Religionin AncientEgypt.Editedby B. E.Shafer.Ithaca:CornellUniversity Press. Tufnell,O. 1958 LachishIV.TheBronzeAge. London: OxfordUniversityPress.1965Seal
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
201
ImpressionsfromKah n Townand UronoartiFort.A Comparison. nal of EgyptianArchaeology ,Jour61:67-101.
1984 ScarabSealsand theirContributionto Historyin the EarlySecondMillennium B.C.Studieson ScarabSealsH. Aris and Phillips. Warminster: Vercoutter, J. 1945 Lesobjetsigyptienset Jgyptisantsdui fundrairecarthaginois.Paris: nmobilier Geuthner. Ward,W A. 1%7 ThreePhoenicianSealsof the Early FirstMillenniumB.C.Journalof EgyptianArchaeology53:69-74. 1970a TheOriginof EgyptianDesignamulets("Button-seals"). Journal(of Archaeology,56:65-80. 1970b A PhoenicianScarabwith a Rare Eg.ylptian Design:A WingedIsisand Mummi9:343-54. formOsiris.OriensAntiquuis 1971 Egyptand the EastMediterranean World2200-1900 B.C.Beirut:American Universityof Beirut. 1976 A New Chancellorof the Fifteenth Dynasty.OrientaliaLovaniensiaPeriodica6/7:589-94. 1978 Pre-12thDynastyScarabAmulets. Studieson ScarabSealsI.Warminster. Arisand Phillips. 1984 Reviewof Jaeger1982.Bibliotheca Orientalis41:93-100. 1987 ScarabTypologyand Archaeological Context.AmericanJournalof Archaeology91:507-32. 1992 The PresentStatusof Egyptian Chronology.Bulletinof theAmerican Schoolsof OrientalResearch 288"53-66.
1993 TheScarabs,Scaraboidand AmuletPlaquefromTyrianCineraryUrns. Studies(for Beryftus Archaeological 1991)39:89-99. Ward,W.A. and Dever,W.G. and Archaeological 1994 ScarabTyipology Context.An Essayon MiddleBronze Age Chronology.Studieson Scarab SealsIII.SanAntonio:VanSiclen Press. Weise,A. 1990 Zum Bilddes Kinigs auf igyiptischenl OrbisBiblicuset Siegelamrnuletten. Orientalis96. Freiburg: Universititsverlag. Wilkinson,A. 1971 AncientEgyptianJewelry.London: Methuen. Zazoff,P. Mainzam 1968 Etruskisclhe Skarabdlien. Rhein:von Zabern.
202
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeolohnist
NORTH AMERICAN ARCHAEOLO Editor
ROGERW.MOELLER
RegionalAdvisoryEditors
JAMESE. AYRES VAUGHNBRYANT, Jr. JOHNL.COTTER RICHARD D. DAUGHERTY MICHAEL A. GLASSOW C. GOODYEAR ALBERT S. GREENWOOD ROBERTA JAMESB. GRIFFIN MARTHALAITA
J. JEFFERSONREID RODERICK SPRAGUE CARLYLE S. SMITH RODERICK SPRAGUE R.MICHAEL STEWART DAVIDH.THOMAS JAMES A. TUCK CLAUDE N. WARREN WALDOR. WEDEL
State and Provincial ArchaeologicalSocieties JOHN PFEIFFER
Resource Management and ContractArchaeology EDWARDS. RUTSCH
General Historical Archaeology
ROBERTL SCHUYLER
IndustrialArchaeology ROBERTM. VOGEL
Book Reviews JAY CUSTER
AIMS& SCOPE North American Archaeologist is concerned with all aspects of American Archaeology.Geographicallyit covers the continent north of high cultures in Mesoamerica-the United States and part of northern Mexico. Topically it spans the entire range of cultural evolution in America from Paleo-Indian studies to Industrial Archaeology. Theoretical and methodologicalarticles, provided their data base is North America, are also accepted and research based on cultural resource management as well as work by state and local societies is solicited along with the more traditional academic-museum projects. The editor particularly encourages papers that cut across regional or topical boundaries but more specialized items are also welcomed. Information: Subscription Price per volume - 4 issues yearly Institutional Rate: $118.00 Individual Rate: $36.00 Postage & handling: $4.50 U.S. & Canada; $9.35 elsewhere. ISSN 0197-6931
NA8(94
offf0aIfwnka lywMPL anAUIim aaMw
Baywood Publishing Company, Inc. 26 AustinAvenue,P.O.337, Amityville,NY 11701 Phone(516) 691-1270 Fax(516) 691-1770 Orders only-call
toll-free (800) 638-7819
i
.~
11
.
4.
3t"
-.. '4'
' ..
c ....cr --,1.. .•
>
.•..•
?
~ '..
: .
it,
,\; ,Jc.
5-
"_s
.
.•.. *
fl-f: .-
"
The
I
f
Fortresses atEn
IHaeva
By RudolphCohen
L
at En argescaleexcavations
IIasevahaveprovidedone of the mostimportantrecentdiscoveries in theArabah.Excavators haveexposeda successionof fortresses-from theByzantineandearlyIslamicperiod to theIon Age-occupying thiscrucial crossroadsof ancientcommerce.In bothRomanand IronAge periods,the UIaevafortresswas amongthemost immensein theregion.Excavationis finallyclarifyingthe truenatureof the site,whichhasbeenknownandvisited forovera century.
A Historyof Early Researchat the Site As earlyas thenineteenthcentury,researcherstouring the area of CEn
Iaseva,one of themostabundant springsof theArabah,notedremains besidethespring(CEinHusuv;mapref. 17340242).A. Musilvisitedthe areain 1902andprepareda sketchof the squarefortress,whichmeasured120x 120feet,andhadprojectingcornertowers figs.144-145).He an additionalmulti-roomedstrucsaw(1907"207-208, tureadjacentto thefortressin thesouth, as well as the remainsof a bathhousein the east.Musilidentifiedthe fortress with thecaravanserai (aninnserving caravans)whichHastamentionedin theNotitiaDignitatum (Seeck1876:73). In 1930,thefort-and itsoriginal groundplan-were damaged.E Frank visitedthesitein 1932.A. Alt (1934:254) (1935:6)identifiedthe largestructureat
'En HIaeva as the Roman fortressEise-
ba on accountof the similaritybetween the ArabicandGreeknames.Thename Eisebais mentionedonlyin the BeershevaEdict(Alt1935:31). N. Glueck (1934-1935:17-20,115) concludedthat the ruinwas a Nabataeancaravanserai Aerialview of lageva. Thesouthernwall of the Romanfortressrunsacrossthe upper leftportionof thisnorth-oriented view.The two easterntowersof the latestIronAge fortstandat the right.Partof the wallof the earlierIronAgefortressis visibleat the photo'sright-handmargin.Thephotograph encompassesthe bottomhalfof the top planpresentedon page 204. (Allphotographs courtesyof theauthorandthe IsraelAntiquities
Authority.)
BMialArchaeologist 57:4(1994)
203
daean Kingdom (Cohen 1988/89b; 1991) providing one of the most important and surprising discoveries made in the Arabah in recentyears. The work at cEnHaseva has distinguished five occupation levels (from the latest to the earliest): (1) Byzantine and Early IslamicPeriod fifth-seventh centuriesCE) (2) Roman Period (second-fourth centuries CE) (3) NabataeanPeriod(firstcenturycE) (4) IronAge (seventh-sixth centuries BCE) (5) Iron Age (eighth century BCE)
,,1
*
I
~
F
r
E~
The southern wall of the Romanfortress, Stratum2, stretches ca. 46m towards one of the fort's four projectingtowers. Against its inside face, buildersconstructed an ashlar wall, probablyto support a set of stairs.
also used laterby the Romans. He, like Alt, identified the site with Eiseba,included in a list of Negev towns and the yearly taxes levied on each by the Byzantine authorities.In 1950,during a study trip, B. Mazar found a small number of IronAge sherds as well as decorated Nabataean and RomanByzantine sherds (Aharoni 1963:31). Relying on these finds, Y.Aharoni proposed identifying cEn Hayeva with both biblicalTamarand Roman Tamara (Aharoni 1963;contraAlt 1935;Gichon 1976:80-81 and esp. fn. 4). B. Rothenberg (1967:123-125,162-165) found only Roman-period remains during his survey in 1960.
r
The Roman Fortress (Strata 2a-2b)
excavations at the site have been directed by the author and Y.Yisrael,on behalf of the IAA, with funding provided through the Negev TourismDevelopment Administration. The excavations employ 50-60 workers from Yeruham. The excavators have uncovered two underlying fortressesdating to the Ju-
The most obvious and substantialremains at cEn Haseva are those of the Roman fortress.The building of the Roman fortressat Haeeva occupied two clearly distinct stages. Stratum2a offered a typical square fortress(castellum ca. 46 x 46 m) with four projectingtow-
N
buildings
The Excavations In 1972,on behalf of the Department of Antiquities and Museums, salvage excavations at cEn Haseva concentrated on the southwestern cornerof the Roman fortresswith square towers. Subsequently,excavatorsturned their attention to the southwestern square tower and a dump area containing numerous Nabataean sherds (Cohen 1972).These excavations were renewed in 1987 and continued intermittentlyuntil 1991 (Cohen 1988/89b; 1991)under the auspices of the IsraelAntiquities Authority (IAA). Beginning in 1993,large scale 204
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
020
ers (tetrapurgia). Workerscleared the southwestern and northwestern towers (each 7.0 x 8.5 m) and part of the southem and northernwalls (2.4 m wide). The northeasterntower was destroyed completely in recent times. The walls of the northwesterntower were 1.25 m wide; its entrance (1 m wide) was in the southeasterncomer. A 1 m wide ashlar wall was built against the inner face of the southern fortresswall and presumably served to support steps leading to the upper story.Excavationshave also revealed two floors. The laterone (Stratum 2a), dated to the third-fourth centuriesCEand was partiallypaved with fieldstones, while the earlier,beatenearth floor (Stratum2b), dated to the second-third centuries CE. Inside the fortress,several rooms (2.5 x 3.0 m) lay along the southern wall, suggesting that there was a row of rooms along each inner wall, as is typical in LateRoman forts. In IronAge fortresses,where these rooms are also evident, they are called 'casematerooms'. Approximately 50 m southeast of the
Roman fortressthe remains of a bathhouse are currentlyunder excavation. Since the excavation here is still in the early stages, no information is available regardingits plan. It is interestingto
note that a bathhouse existed near the Yotvatafort of the same period (Meshel 1989:234-236). The Roman fortress(Stratum2b) at cEnHaSeva is the largest of its kind
PAa .. .. r _
(Top.) Oven (tabun) near the entrance to the southern tower, Stratrum2.
(Below.) View of the room along the Romanwall with steps leading to the upper story,Stratum2.
-if
Airr ?rdjl
00W1
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
205
IrINA i.
''~
uI"
"I
I
f.
.,
.~
i ,
*14.
,Y
C
.
/•I •'
iQ
.JJ •I •Sraum
*'.~.,...Oil
(fttf~(Stratum
known in the Arabah. The Emperor Trajanprobably founded it afterthe annexation of the Nabataean Kingdom to the Roman Empire (106 CE),thus establishing ProvinciaArabia. At the end of the third or the beginning of the fourth centuries CE,during the reign of Diocletian, the fort flourished once again. The projectingtowers were added at that time (Stratum2a). This Late Roman fortresswas part of the Diocletian frontiersystem (Berchem 1952;Bowersock 1971;1983:138-147; Gichon 1967;1980;Graf 1987;Avi-Yonah 1966:118-121;Roll 1989:252-260)that depended principally on towers, forts, and fortresseserected along strategic roads. The inhabitantsof the southeastem frontierof the Roman Empire,between the Euphratesand the Red Sea, were Arab tribes called Saracens(Graf 1978;Parker1985;Gichon 1986;Mayerson 1986)who conducted razzia,with the basic aim of taking booty from the merchantsand travelerswho crossed the desert areas and whose destination was important commercial and trade
206
in the Romanfortress,
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
cities, including Jerusalemand Gaza. The tracksouth from Jerusalem would have first reached Elusa, continued on to Tamara positioned south of the Dead (.Haeeva), Sea (LacusAsphaltides),and led from thereto Transjordan, Rababatora,and Philadelphia. Archaeologicalinvestigation indicates that cEn stood at an impor.Haeeva tant junction with roads leading west, northeast,and south. The western route ascended via MacalehCAqrabimroad, past the forts and towers of Rogem Safir, Horvat Safirand Mesad Safir(Cohen 1983b),until it reached Mamshit. The road to the northeast stretched toward the area of the Dead Sea and Mesad Boqeq, where M. Gihon (1971) uncovered a smaller (ca. 17 x17 m) but similar fortress.On the modem highway between the Dead Sea and Dimona, Gichon also excavated a fortress(ca. 38 x 38 m) at Qasr el Juheiniye and, following Alt's proposal (Alt 1935:34),identified it as ancient Tamar(Gichon 1976). From here, it seems there was a Roman road to Zoar,south of the Dead Sea.
lampsofthe
Roman period found
2.
Travelingsouth from cEn Ha5eva the road followed the Arabah Valley to Yotvata where Z. Meshel excavated a fortress similar in plan and size (ca.40 x 40 m). The fort at Yotvatacontained a very important discovery among others: a Latin Imperialinscription.Dating to the time of Diocletian, the inscription was found outside and opposite the eastern facade of the Roman fort, in front of its gate (Roll 1989). cEnHa5eva seems to have been, therefore,an important military and administrative center in the Roman period significant enough to have left an impression in ancient sources. But do we know its ancient name? As opposed to Gichon's identificationof the fortressat Qasr el Juheiniye with Tamara, the authorbelieves that the Tamara described in the ancient sources is in fact cEnHaeeva, as Aharoni proposed long ago (Aharoni 1963).cEn Haeeva does find mention in Eusebius (late third, early fourth century CE.)Eusebius describes Tamara(cEn Hayeva) as a day's march from Mamshit and states
that "today it is a militaryguard post" (Onomasticon[ed. Klostermann]8:8). The fortressat 'En Hayeva-Tamara,was mentioned in the TabulaPeutingeriana (Miller1916:773;Aharoni 1963:33-37) as a stronghold along the road leading south from Jerusalem.Tamara/'En lHasevais mentioned in several other ancient sources:Ptolemaios, Geographiae V 15, the NotitiaDignitatumn (Seeck 1876: Mosaic in Madaba and The 74), Map(AviYonah1954:42-43,P1.4). The Romanfortfell into disuse during the second half of the fourth century CE,
perhaps as the result of the earthquake of 363 CEwhich destroyed Petraand several other sites (Russell 1980;Hammond 1980).Over its remainsStratum 1 offered scanty and unidentifiable remnants, including pottery of the sixthseventh centuries CE.
square ground plan and size to those uncovered by the author at Mo'a and Sha'arRamon, sites along the PetraGaza Road (Cohen 1982;1987).Decorated pottery and coins of Nabataean kings were collected on its floors. It is possible then to surmise that during both the Nabataean and Roman periods there existed a route connecting Ha~eva (Tamara) with Mo'a and continuing from there southward along the Arabah to Mesad Be'er Menuha (Cohen 1983c), Yotvata,H. Dafit (Cohen 1984),and, finally,to Aila (Elath).
The Nabataean Caravanserai (Stratum 3) The foundations of the Stratum2b Roman fortresswere probablybuilt over the remains of a Nabataeancaravanserai (Stratum3), possibly similar in its
Li ~?~
Roman period elongatedjarandjug.
?) C'
I
~))?L;?~'\ SI~ -?
?
4+
)C I ?,"rs~6F~yC~' '? .r
L
~ r 1
r
t
r
n '' r
~irs ?~- ~2?,
?, .. .d~ -*
.r.
.,:.•
;1-
r
X
~Qs. '":k ~
--I
''
i
i
.
"
-?-
|~
?
• ',
c4, ? ?~? ?gi~
'i
tl~c~ P4~,,"
:Y'~.l' 1 ?'???
-?
"oOur. .''~P~U~?
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
207
aa'
r.
V.
.?
*%?
,'~
'
-C
4q
-'
'
:'
t;
*
. ..-
?-
*
?
N
?
L
0
..
j
Viewed from above its western half, the gate to the IronIIfortressshowsoff its firstentrywayandchamber.Eachof the gate'stotalof fourchambersmeasure2.5 x 3.3 m. Betweenthe gate'stwo halvesrunsa otoN 4m widepassageway.
The Iron Age Fortresses (Strata 4,5) Stratum4 Onlytheeasternsection(ca.36 m long) andtwo projectingtowers(ca.14m apart)havethusfarbeenclearedin the Stratum4 fortress.Thesquaresoutheasterntower,completelyuncovered, measures11x 11m. Itsouterwalls reachapproximately1.5m in width. Potteryretrievedfromthefloorbelongsto theseven-sixthcenturiesBCE, whichsuggeststhatthisfortresswas builtduringthe reignof Josiahanddestroyedat aboutthesametimeas the FirstTemplein Jerusalem,in 586BCE. Stratum5 TheStratum5 fortressis square,100x 100m, coveringapproximately1 hectare(2.5acres).Whilesome sectionsof thewallsweredestroyedcompletely, othersstillstand2 m high.Thefortress's 208
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
offset-insetwall was 3 m wide ateach offsetand2.5m wide at eachinset,with t threeprojecting comertowers.Theinsetsandoffsetswerespaced8-10 m apart.An outerrampartand moatare currentlybeingexposed.Severalcasemate-roomshavebeenclearedalong thenorthernandeasternsidesof the parapet;theirinnerwallsare2 m wide. Thesoutheasternandnorthwestern
towers,whichprotrudeabout3 m from thewall'sline,havealsobeenuncovered.Itis not clear,however,if thereis a fourthtowerat the northeastern comer. Cornerof the tower of the lateIronAge fortress,Stratum4. Withexteriorwallsover 1m inwidth,the square,11 x 11m tower occupiesone of the cornersof the lastIron Agefortressat H.aseva. WE"Tf
A
Pottery vessels fromthe floorof one of the towersof the lateIronAgefortress,Stratum4. Thesetwo jugletsanda jarsuggestthatthe finalIron Agefortwas constructeddurreign ingthe seventh-century of Josiah.
I
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
209
351r.T
)-
I:
S
'tie
-IA
~iLta
Jr
a"
~~?U -4'
?rr
--I-
The fortress-gatestood near its northeasterncomer. The gate complex measures ca. 15 x 12.8m. The western section has not yet been completely exposed. The walls, ashlar-built,are preserved to a height of ca. 3 m and are especially impressive in the quality of their construction and state of preservation.Between the gate's four piers (ca. 2.5 m in width), the gate passageway narrows from 4.8 m on the outside to 4 m on the inside. Two identical chambers,2.5 x 3.3 m, stand on each side of the passageway, thus demonstrating that this is a fourchamberedgate, common in fortifications in Israeland Judah in the nintheighth centuries BCE(Stem 1990).This gate resembles in plan the fortress-gate at Tellel-Kheleifeh,differing only in orientation:the 'En Ha5eva fortress-gate faces the road approaching from the north,while the Tellel-Kheleifehgate sits on the southern side, facing the sea.
(Above.) The four-chambered gate to the fortress, Stratum5, viewed from the north through the gate into the fort. The gate complex covered an impressiveca. 15 x 13 m, a size commensurate with the over-
;~?r I 'L~-Y I Iow,
all dimensions of the fort. Builtaccording to a plan common throughout Israeland Judah in the IronAge, Haseva'sgate most nearlyresembles the fortressgate at Tell el-Kheleifeh.
lb)
up.
i
-
.-
?i .
? wo.
View of the end of the unexcavated part of the western gate, in section, showing its well-preservedpier.
210
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
Ar
?
Technicallyspeaking, the architectureat cEnHaSevaconsists of two principal parts.Withits gate area,the northeastern section is similar in plan and is alone as big as the Tellel-Kheleifehfortress.Remains of an outer-gateare also being uncovered at 'En The plan of the.Hayeva. fortressin this stratum is complex and unique, reflectingarchitectonic elements from two IronAge fortresstypes: the square fortresswith a solid offset-insetwall, like the fortresses at Tel cArad(StrataVII-IX)(Aharoni 1981:6-7),Tellel-Kheleifeh(StrataII-IV; Glueck 1939;Pratico1985),and the Tov (Cohen 1985;1988/89a);and.Horvat fortresswith projectingtowers, like the middle and upper fortressesat Tel Kadesh-Barnea(Cohen 1981;1983a)and the fortressat Horvat Uzza (Beit-Arieh 1986),which is rectangular.It should be noted that the cEn fortressin .Haveva by both a this stratum was surrounded solid outer wall and a row of casemate rooms. This immense fortressis one of the largest known in the Negev and adja-
cent regions. Itcovers four times the area taken up by such considerablefortresses as that at Tel'Arad, Iorvat Tov,Horvat Uzza, and Tellel-Kheleifeh,coming close in size to fortifiedcities of this periodBeersheva,for example, which also extends over an areaof about I hectare(2.5 acres;Aharoni 1973:75,80). During whose reign was the Stratum 5 fortressat CEnHaSevabuilt?Thus far, the scant ceramic materialrecovered makes it difficult to assign a date. It was probablybuilt in the eighth-seventh centuries BCE, during the reigns of King Uzziah and his successors. An examination of the relationsbetween Judah and Edom as they are described in the Bible reveals several possibilities.Amaziah, the son of Joash,diligently fortifiedhis kingdom both from within and without, and, afterhe instituted reforms in the army,went to war with Edom. He defeated the Edomites in the Valleyof Salt, in the northernArabah,and then went on to conquer Sela (2 Kgs 14:7).He renamed it Joqte'el,and settled descendants from the Tribeof Judah there. Was
the large fortressat cEnHaseva established during Amaziah's rule, and was it from here that he set out against the Edomites?Or was the fortressbuilt during the reign of his son Uzziah (2 Kgs 15:1),the powerful and active king who "builtElot and restoredit to Judah"(2 Kgs 14:22;2 Chr 26:13)?Or perhaps this fortresswas built during the reign of Jehoshaphatwhen "there was no king in Edom, a deputy was king" (1 Kgs 22:48), and when in an unsuccessful attempt to repeat Solomon's achievements, "Jehoshaphatmade ships of Tarshishto go to Ophir for gold, but they did not go, for the ships were wrecked at Ezion-geber"(1 Kgs 22:49;Bartlett1989:115-116).
Casemate rooms in the wall of the central area of the IronAge IIfortress, Stratum5. The walls of IronIIHasevacombined solid offset-inset with casemate wall construction. The walls enclosed the largest fort of the Negev, equal in size to the regional administration center Beersheva.
/
I
toAN VA
-C-
I
+ 40
1':
-
Owe C
p~d??*
1 I W-
-.
.?~~-?
-
--.
?
rArkY :~QiAft
OW-
0, -."ip
k
AA to
4
t
r
L?
t
,c~
r
r.-
I
r
: b
~i~
~"?
-1 ?r ?~e~
LI~-`'3~C~YB I
?,-?
'L
`i?3 t:3 ?;raL-
?
Y
?
rrs~?. p
r
r ~ ?ile
?
r;a, J -?*~r
.li ''?+.;,
r
,i cc, : X'
z
c T' 1~
u?'~
';S?-
t
I I I
Edomitemountainsto theeast.Theresemblance betweentheplanof the cEn Hasevafortressandthatat Tellel-Kheleifeh(StrataII-I) is notsurprisingsinceit appears Anotherpossibilityis thatthisfortress thatbothwerebuiltat thesametime. was establishedin thecourseof the Israelite/Judahite retaliatory campaign Summary of Moab (2Kgs3:4- Thefindsfromthe RomanandIron Mesha, King against 15),whoserebellionagainstthe Kingof Age fortressesat cEnHasevasupport Israelis mentionedin theSteleof Mesha Aharoni'sproposalto identifythesite, Dearman1989). whichwas a majorfortresson thesouth(Bartlett1989:116-122; ThelargeStratum5 fortressmayhave easternborderof theJudaeanKingdom, servedas thedeploymentcenterforthis bothwithbiblicalTamar(Ezek47:19; invasion.Thegroundplanof theStra48:28)andwithTamaramentionedin tum5 fortressat cEnHasevahas several the Romanand Byzantinesourcescited. featuresin commonwith thatof thefor- 1 Kgs9:17-18statesthat"Solomonbuilt the Lower,Baalath tressuncoveredatTelJezreel(UssishGezer,Beth-horon kinandWoodhead1992),an important andTamarin thewilderness,in the administrative centerin the Israelite land."Somescholarsbelievea mistake was madehereandthat,in fact,the Kingdom. Thedimensionsof theStratum5 for- referenceis notto Tamarbut to Tadmor, tressat cEnIHasevaand theevidenceof referredto in theparalleldescriptionin in thewilderness" theintensebuildingactivitytherereflect 2 Chr8:4:"Tadmor Itsaton theroad (Gray1970:248-249). itsstrategicimportance. Thisproblemwill whichfollowedtheArabahfromnorth be solvedif remainsdatingto thetimeof Solomonareuncoveredat cEnHayeva. to southleadingto Elathand theRed Sea,anddefendedtheareaoppositethe Thisis likely,giventheparallelbetween
r
r
e~b~~~I~ C~ti~ ?r
Pottery vessels fromthe IronAge II
Stratum thesecarinated 5, include fortress, ceramic bowlsandoillamp.Unfortunately, findsremain tooscantto permit accurate construction. datingof thestructure's
212
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
thehistoriesof cEnHIaeva-Tamar and InEzekiel,thesetwo Kadesh-Barnea. siteson thesouthernborderof Israelare mentionedin proximity. Thestrategiclocationof cEnIHIaevaTamaris obvious,sittingas it does at the intersectionof fourmajorroutes- one leadingsouthto Elath,one traveling east to Edom,a thirdleadingnorthto Jerusalem,and the fourthleadingwest to thecenthroughMacalehcAqrabim tralNegev area.Theremainsof theimpressivefortressestestifyto theimportanceof thesiteduringtheIronAge and,later,in the Nabataeanand Roman periods.Aharonibelievedthatthesystemof road-fortresses was established the time of the First during Templeperiod in the Negev and theArabah.These
road-fortresseswere to defend the kingdom and "to open up the trade routes to the countries of the south" (Aharoni 1967:17).This has once again proved to be right. Greateconomic importance was attached to the control of these regions because of the profitableluxurytrade with Southern Arabiaand East Africa mentioned in the Bible (Eph'al 1982:63- 64). Biblicalsources referto the building and maritime activities undertaken during the reigns of Kings Solomon, Jehoshaphat,and Uzziah, who controlledElathand Ezion-geber(Yeivin 1960;Gray 1970:254-262).cEnHaseva was clearly a significant royal outpost in the Arabah until its destruction at the time of the destruction of the FirstTemWhether or not the ple, ca. 586 BCE. Edomites were partnerswith the Babylonians in this destruction remains a question. In the Nabataean and Roman periods, the importance of cEnHa?eva increased following a prolonged abandonment lasting nearly 500 years. This points to the renewed strategicimportance of the area as a whole at this time, and suggests that the status of cEnHaseva again matched that attained during the FirstTemple period. It is the massive plan of the Roman fortressat 'En in the third-fourth centuries CE .Hayeva furthersidentificationof the site which with Roman Tamara. Excavationsat the site have uncovered signs which indicate that it was still occupied in the sixth-seventh centuries CE,well after its fourth century destruction,possibly because of the earthquakeof 363 CE. Furtherwork is planned at cEnHaeva for 1993 and 1994 which will certainly reveal more of the history of the site and the surrounding region.
1981 AradInscriptiots. Judean : DesertStudies.Jerusa+ V. . lem:The BailikInstitute ~Ashdod ? and IsraelExploration Society. Alt, A. Lacpish 1935 Aus der 'ArabaII-IV. 100 9 MI Hesi desdeutschlen / " Zt'itschrift I'alilestinaVereins TellHalif TellJamma 58:1-78. Tell
IsraelExplorationSociety. 1966 TIhe lJoly Landfromthe Persianto theArabConquests(536BCEto640 CE).A I listoricalGeography.(;rand Rapids,MI: BakerBookHouse.
10
EnGedi H. *Tv
Shera\ TeFaah Be'erShevra'
•. ?*ellcArad TellMaihata
TelFarah
iAro' ' er .
. Jerusalem: Commentarni
jW
'
H.. gem
(
020
>
Kadesh
Bamea
020
In
/
Bartlett,J.R. 1989 EdomandtheEdomites. JSOTSupplementSeries77.Sheffield:JSOT Press. Beit-Arieh,Y 1986 Horvat'Uzz7a-A Border Fortressin the Eastern Nege?vQadmnoniot 19:31-40(Hebrew). Berchem,D. van 1952
Bowersock,G.W 1971 A Reporton Arabia Provincia. Journalof
RomanStudies. 61:219-242. 1983
40 9"
L'Anrmede Dioclhtienet la Rfonrie Constantiniernie.Paris:P.Geuthner.
RomanArabia.Cam-
/o
Ka~Rrir
S
~
j
Mapsof IronA Sie intheNegev 0
2km/
9,
el-Kheeh
W8
bridge,MA:Harvard UniversityPress. Cohen,R. Stamp seal impressionshowing a warriorholding a weapon.
Bibliography Aharoni,Y.
andtheRoadstoElath. 1963 Tamar
16
IsraelExplorationJournal
13:30-42. 1967 Forerunnersof the Limes: IronAge Fortressesin the Negev.IsraelExploration Journal17:1-17. 1973 TelBeer-Sheva.Qadmoniot 6:75-84 (Hlebrew).
S
Avi-Yonah,M. 1954 TheMAdaba MosaicMapl ionand withlntroduct
Jerusalem
NoO
1972
Mesad Hazeva. HadasliotArkheohgilyot
44:36-37(Hebrew). 1981 Excavationsat Kadesh-barnea 1976-1978.BiblicalArchaeologist 44:93-107. 1982 New Lighton the 'Petra-GazaRoad'. 45:240-247. Biblical Archaeologist 19761983a Excavationsat Kadesh-Barnea, 16:2-14(Hebrew). 1982.Qadmoniot 1983b Ma'aleSafir.Excavatioms andSurveys in Israel2:64-65. 1983c MesadBe'erMenuha.Excamttions and Surv ys in Israel3:16-17.
and 1984 HorvatDafit.Excavations Suri1es in Israel4:108. 1987 Excavationsat Moa, 1981-1985. Qadmoniot20:26-31 (Hebrew).
andSurves 1988/ HorvatTov.Excamztions 89a in Israel7-8:179-180.
BiblicalArclhaeogist57:4(1994)
213
Frank,E des 1934 Aus der 'ArabaI. Zeitschrift deutschen Palilestina-Vereins 57:191-280.
C? 'i~ `L
i r
.r ?r,
~L~~r' .? 4?
I
.u? ~?
r
~?~?~
e-~c~ln~i~:?
`'u RudolphCohenis DeputyDirectorof theIsraelAntiquitiesAuthorityand Directorof the'EnHaeva excavations. hisactivSince1965,he hasconcentrated itiesin theNegev,wherehe directedthe Negev EmergencyProjectduringthe years1978-1988in hiscapacityas Archaeologistof theNegev District.Cohen hasalsodirectedexcavationsat Kadesh Barnea(seeBA44 [1981].93-107)andat severalsitesalongtheNabataean-Roman 240Road(see BA45 [19821: Petra-Gaza 247).Dr.Cohenhasexcavateddozensof fortressesin theNegev,studyingtheir role-and thatof theaccompanying settlements-in thehistoryof theregion.
and Excavations 1988/ cEn .Hayeva-1987. in Israel7-8:52-53. 89b Surveys 1991 cEnIJaseva- 1988/1989.Excavations andSurveysin Israel10:46-47. Dearman,J.A. 1989 HistoricalReconstructionand the MeshaInscription.Pp. 155-210 in and Studiesin theMeshaInscription Moab,editedby A. Dearman.Archaeology and BiblicalStudies,2. Atlanta: ScholarsPress. Eph'al,I. 1982 TheAncientArabs:Nomadson the Borders 9th-5th oftheFertileCrescent: B.C..Leiden:E.J.Brill. Centuries Eusebius E.Klostermanned. Onomasticon. Leipzig1904.
214
57:4(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
Gichon,M. 1967 TheOriginof the LimesPalaestinae and the MajorPhasesin its Development.Pp. 175-193 in Studienzu den Roms.Koln-Graz: Militargrenzen BohlauBerlag. 1971 Das KastellEn Boqeq.Bonner 171:386-406. Jahrbucher 1976 Excavationsat Mezad Tamar1973-75.PreliminaryRe"Tamara" port.Saalburg-Jahrbuch XXXIII:80-94. 1980 Researchon the LimesPalaestinae:A Stocktaking.Pp. 843-864 in Roman FrontierStudies1979.PapersPresented British tothe12thInternational Congress. ArchaeologicalReportsInternational. Series71.Editedby Hanson,W.S.and Keppie,L.J.EOxford:BAR. 1986 Who were the Enemiesof Romeon the LimesPalaestinae.Pp.584-592 in RomsIII. Studienzu denMilitargrenzen 13thInternationaler Limeskongress, Aalen 1983.Stuttgart:Kommissions VerlagK.Teiss. Glueck,N. in EasternPalestine,II. 1934- Explorations 1935 Annualof the AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearchXV.New Haven: ASOR. 1939 The SecondCampaignat TellelKheleifeh(Ezion-Geber: Elath).BulletinoftheAmericanSchoolsofOriental Research 75:8-22. Graf,D.E 1978 TheSaracensand the Defenseof the ArabianFrontier.BulletinoftheAmericanSchoolsofOrientalResearch 278:1-26. 1987 TheRomanRoadSystemof Arabia Petraea[Abstract,The88thGeneral JournalofArchaeolMeeting].American ogy91:319. Gray,J. 2nd ed. 1970 I &IIKings:A Commentary. Old TestamentLibrary.Philadelphia: WestminsterPress. Hammond,PC. 1980 New Evidenceforthe FourthCentury CE.Destructionof Petra.Bulletinofthe AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch 238-65-67. Mayerson,P. 1986 TheSaracensand the Limes.Bulletin oftheAmericanSchoolsofOrientalResearch262:35-47. Meshel,Z. 1989 A Fortat Yotvatafromthe Timeof Journal Diocletian.IsraelExploration 39:228-238.
Miller,K. Romana.Stuttgart:Strecker 1916 Itineraria and Schrader. Musil,A. 1907 ArabiaPetraeaII Edom.Vienna:A. Holder. Parker,S.T. A Historyofthe 1985 RomansandSaracens: ASORDissertation ArabianFrontier. Series6. WinonaLake,IN: Eisenbrauns. Pracico,G.D. 1985 Nelson Glueck's1938-1940Excavations at Tellel-Kheleifeh:A Reappraisal.BulletinoftheAmericanSchools 259:1-32. ofOrientalResearch Ptolemaios Editedby J.FisherCodex 1932 Geographiae. UrbinasGraecus82. Bibliothecae Vaticanae,Lipsia. Roll,I. 1989 A LatinImperialInscriptionfromthe Timeof DiocletianFound at Yotvata. IsraelExploration Journal39:239-260. Rothenberg,B. in theNegevandthe 1967 Negev.Archaeology Arabah.Givatayim-RamatGan.(Hebrew). Russell,K.W. 1980 The Earthquakeof May 19,363 CE. BulletinoftheAmericanSchoolsofOrien238:47-64. talResearch Seeck,O, ed.. 1876 NotitiaDignitatum.Berolini. Stem, E. 1990 Hazor,Dor and Megiddo in the Time of Ahab and under AssyrianRule. IsraelExploration Journal40:12-30. Ussishkin,D. and Woodhead,J. 1992 Excavationsat TelJezreel1990-1991: PreliminaryReport.TelAviv19:3-56. S. Yeivin, 1960 Did the Kingdomsof Israelhave a MaritimePolicy?JewishQuarterly Review50:193-228.
J~ 4Yb
4444
4:?
-
*4-44444
-
-;~
-
~
~c?.
-A
C
--
? -
4-
4
4.-4
4~n
-t
"4
rz ;
-- -
>
4
4
4
Ai -~y~C
.'
4"i
-P--4
-a
4F
TW
,'4~L44~
-'
~
-
4L
4
A
LC
9;
5~B: aL?.CPc~%
4
-
-f
'44'
--
~
-g'~
~
4$
4.
-
4cs
c
744
What's in a Name: The Anonymity of Ancient
Umm
el-Jimal
By Bert de Vries
have targetedsites such as Tell Hesban because their modem names appear to preserve the ancient ones. That is not the case with Umm el-Jimal.There is no apparent connection between the modern name and what the place may have been called in antiquity.The mid-nineteenth and PalestieL' of century Handbook with the biblical connected the nameSy.ria toponym Beth-gamul fromJer48:23
(Grahamand Porter:522,cited in Waddington 1870).W. H. Waddington pointed out that Beth-gamuloccurs in a catalogue of towns in faraway Moab and concluded that the ancient name "is absolutely unknown" (1870:485).In 1909 Briinnow rathercasually identified Umm el-Jimalwith Triconiumon the assumption shared by Butlerthat its name must have been included in the list of militarydetachments of the Notitia (Briinnow 1909: Dig•itatiuut Orienttis 69-70). No one has supported that identificationsubsequently.Others have assumed that the modem name is just that-a modern name.
H. C. Butleridentified the site as Thantia.He based his identificationon his interpretationof site locations along the via lovatraianaon the Peultinger Table,i on the place where the similar name Thainathaoccurs in the NotitiaDignitaturn,and on the 1909discovery at Umm el-Jimalof the Greek half of a bilingual (Littmannno. 238) mentioning Gadhi(Above.) Via nova north of Qasrel-Ba'ij, ca. 6 km northwest of Umm el-Jimal,winter 1973. Umm el-Jimalwas not situated on the via nova, but on a side road. Itwas not a likelystop for commercialtravelersor government ministers. Photo by Bertde Vries.
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
215
t
~y.
410j ~ 41f
41r
(1913:151). ma, partXvn; O(avourlvb0v Although Butlerhimself stressed the tentativeness of his conclusion and emphasized that this identificationwas based on drasticemendations of the medieval map (Butler1921:xiv-xvi), and although Littmannhad interpreted (Littmann Oavourlvdv as "TanUikh" 1913:138),Thantiabecame the popularly accepted ancient name for Umm elJimalfor much of this century. Not everyone has agreed, however, and recent reexaminationsand new discoveries have laid the Butlerhypothesis to rest. Already in 1971 Bowersock suggested that Thantiacould be either Khirbetes-Samraor al-Khab.He did not even mention the Butlerhypothesis (1971:238).Subsequent archaeological work at two sites along the via nova have brought much betterunderstanding of the relationshipbetween sites on the PeutingerTableand sites on the ground. Based on their work at KhirbetesSamraand environs, Desreumaux and Humbert have argued convincingly 216
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaealogist
9-Fm
?
s~~c
~?"All
C.' .'?~
;q~;r
?- ..? I
-Cpl?I c
--Ix
,c
~
r :?om
~.:...
: '~t-~;: ;
~
lok ??
?~-'
?
that Samra is to be identified with the Peutingermap's Hatita, and therefore imply that Bowersock'sdilemma is solved by identifying the map's Thantia with the site of al-Khabon the ground (1981:34,note 2). During David Kennedy's 1978 and 1981examination of stretchesof the via novabetween Umm el-Jimaland Khirbetes-Samra,he discovered that Tughratel-Jubb,a modern village located on the course of the via novzat the point where it crosses the recently constructed four-lanehighway to Damascus, had good ceramic evidence of Roman settlement (Kennedy 1982:152-3).In a detailed critiqueof Butler's arguments for a Thantia = Umm el-Jimalidentification,and a clever reconciliation of mileage on the Peutinger Tablewith mileage on the ground, he argues convincingly for the identification of Tughratel-Jubbas Thantia/Thainatha (148-54). This identificationis much more convincing than Butler'sbecause it uses the PeutingerTablewithout emendations, the location fits the map's mileage much more precisely,and it is on
t:
.
~ . i~ j
~l'
Camels pass north side of Barracksat Umm el-Jimal,summer 1993. Photoby Bert de Vries.
the via nom, while Umm el-Jimalis on a side road some 6 km east of it (Kennedy 1982:pl. 8). The Kennedy thesis was accepted by Thomas Bauzou afterhis own thorough survey of the northern sector of the road (Bauzou 1985:142). By accepting the likelihood of these alternativepossibilitieswe may conclude thatUmm el-Jimalwas not Thantia.Axel Knauf has pointed out that it also could not have been Thainathaor any other because place in the NotitiaDignitatumn when that document was written (408 CE)Umm el-Jimalwas without a military unit. He arrives at this gap in military presence because the garrison mentioned on the burgusinscriptionof 371 CE(Littmannno. 233)was transferredto mobile forces after 388 CE,and the quartersfora new garrison,the Barracks,was not completed until 411 CE(Knauf 1984: 580). Knauf has also concluded that it is
?
impossible to find a name for Umm elJimalin Arabicsources listing places with Ghassanidbuildings,though presumably Umm el-Jimalwas a Ghassanid stronghold(585-6).2Should we then conclude with him that "we do not know the ancient name of Umm el-Jimal" (581)?In reactionto Knauf's despair of a positive answer,Henry MacAdam has put forth a new thesis, viz. that Umm el-Jimalcould possibly be Ptolemy's Surattha,as follows (1986:17):
list of towns in Arabia Petraeathere is one whose location is very promising. That is Surattha,which Ptolemy locates southeast of Adrama and southwest of Bostra,at his co-ordinates 69015'Eand 31'10'N. Obviously no modern site could be equated with Suratthapurely on the basis of these co-ordinates,but the location when plotted on a graph is farther north and east than any other town in ArabiaPetraeaexcept Bostra.
[Knaufloverlooked the possibility that among the unidentified placenames in Ptolemy's(Geography V.16.4)
He selects Umm el-Jimalratherthan neighboring sites like Umm es-Surabor Sabhah because it is the only site in the area known to have a town as early as the second centurywhen Ptolemy'smap was produced (de Vries1986:227-41).
The world of Umm el-Jimal. (Mapdrawn by KimFynewever.) 2614 JEBEL SHEIKH
Mapof the ~orldof Ummel-Jimal
ProfessorBertde Vriesis directorof the Ummel-JimalProject. CurrentlyProfessorof Historyat CalvinCollege,Grand Rapids,Michigan,Dr.de Vriesserved as Directorof ACORfrom1988-1991. He hasservedas an architect-surveyor on numerousfieldprojectsincluding theHesbanProjectand the LimesArabicusProjed.Amonghis manyother Prof.de Vriesis theauthor publications, of Ummel-Jimal, "Gem oftheBlackDesert" and Umnm A Nabatean, Romnan, el-Jimal: andEarlyIslamic Byzantine TaoninNorthernJordan, as a supplement forthcoming to theJournal ofRoman Archaeology.
Shahbae -212
I * r
oBeitRas
DRL12E
AbdaJEBEL DeaI
7
Irbid*
I
\
.ameth L,,---,
ePela
Unvn
A)AUON
Mafraq
e
,
/
Irntan
,
?2*T•h
/675 16 U U %% Lqhra d4Xttm, / ommim' ., U
SOUTHERN
Khirbet
Wadi Zara
la
P"
n
1247
',
%
0
e-Surab
RANGE laK)
oaI
HAURAN
Deir
-'
'
es-Samra
0o
*Qasre-Halabat
AMMAN 6 Azraq
.iB~s
*Madaba
|4C *QasrAmra OasrUweinid
*Kharana
2
There is always hope that future excavations at the village will bring corroborating inscriptionalevidence to light. Otherwise, the actual identificationof ancient Umm el-Jimalin literarysources will have to remain uncertain. There is, of course, historicalmerit in knowing the ancient name. One would be able to trackthe history of the site according to its occurrencein literary and epigraphic texts. However, the reconciliation of the historicaland archaeological data that would be necessary can also be a distraction.For now, the ancient people of Umm el-Jimalowe their identity not to referencesto them in texts, but to what they themselves did as preserved in the archaeological evidence. However, even if it were definitely confirmed that the town was once called Surattha(or something else), the scarcityof documentation makes it clear that we are not dealing with a place of monumental fame and political import like Bostra,PhiladelBiblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
217
-"..• .
!.~f ?-~ "
phia, or Gerasa.The people of Umm elJimalare destined to remain ruralfolk from one of a number of similar communities on the fringe between the urbanized Mediterraneanand the nomadic desert. But it is that very fact that makes them such interestingand significant objectsof inquiry. The name Umm el-Jimalitself is variously interpretedas Mother/Place of Camels or Mother/Place of Beauty, accordingto the double meaning of the rootjml.The issue cannot be solved on whether the root is to be pronounced jamdil,'beauty,'or jiminl,'camels.' Although I and many others find the place pleasing and attractive,still others find it eerie and somber.GertrudeBell's early twentieth century guide, for example, reactedvery negatively to the place. She says of their approach to the ruins, "Now Umm ej Jemalhas an evil name and Gablan's [her guide] evident anxiety enhanced its sinister reputation" (Bell 1907:70-3).Given its similarity to many other basalt ruins in the lava lands, I find it difficult to imagine that this place in particularhad the reputation of "beauty"among the tribes who frequentedthe region in the era before Europeanslike Bell and Butler began to visit. The association with
218
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
camels seems much more plausible for a society in which camel herding was so prominent and for which the reservoirs of Umm el-Jimalhad a very practical attraction.Howard Butlercould sense this much better than we because camel herding was still a mainstay of tribal economy at the time of his 1909visit. When he and his party were at Hallabat, a camel herding tribe passed their encampment. The concluding portion of his very colorful description makes the point (Butler1930:90):
Sheikh Hayil es-Serour's camels at Umm
...the vast mass that turned the gray desert to a dark brown was made up of camels. Camels with bells, camels with large packs, camels with folded tents, camels with housings full of women and children,camels with long poles on which chickens solemnly perched, mother-camels with baby-camels.Once in a while a black camel, now and then a white camel, here aged camels with hides that looked moth-eaten, there some gay young camels, still gray or white and woolly One could not believe there were so many camels in all the world. The solid dark brown creeping stream,extending from a little below us, how far to the east one
Butler's more restrainedexplanation of the name in his reporton the town's architectureoffers an apt conclusion to this essay (Butler1913:150):
el-Jimal, 1993. Photo by B. de Vries.
could not see, flowed steadily past the castle hour after hour, and it was not until four o'clock in the afternoon that the rear-guardwent by, eight hours after we had first seen them, and it was over an hour more before the last of them disappeared over the hills in the direction of Umm idj-Djimal- "TheMother of Camels"!
This ancient ruined city has long been called by the Arabs Umm idj-
Djimal,which,beingtranslated,is
"Motherof Camels".... It is not definitely known what the city was called in Roman or early Christian times;but "Motherof Camels" it is now, and no name could fit it better, especially in the spring time when the Bedawin, with hundreds of breeding camels, pitch their tents around the walls of the city,and the new-born camels are sheltered with-
in the ruins against the winds that blow from Hermon's snow-capped peak.
Notes Tableis a thirteenth-century 1 ThePeutinger copy of a Romanmap.Thiscolorfulparchment map of the Romanworld measuresca.6.8by 34 m, takingthe shapeof a long rectangle. Conformingthe distancesto thisshapecaused severedeviationsand has createdproblemsfor modem interpreters of its cartography. 2Ghassanwas an Arabtribalkingdom(phylarchy)betweenthe Euphratesand theJordan and functionedas a bufferforByzantium againstPersia.
Bibliography Bauzou,T. 1985 Lesvoies de communicationdans le HauranAl'poque romaine.Pp. 137-65 in Hauran1,PremiirePartie. Editedby J.-M.Dentzer.Paris:LibraireorientalistePaulGeuthner. Bell,G. 1907 TheDesertandtheSown.Boston:Beacon Press(reprinted1987).
Bowersock,C. W. 1971A Reporton ArabiaProvincia.Journal of RomanStudies61:219-42. Briinnow,R.E. 1909 Die Kastelledes ArabischenLimes. de Melchior Pp. 65-77 in Florilegium Vogiki.Paris:Imprimerienationale. Butler,H. C. 1913 Architecture. Syria.Publications ofthe PrincetonUniversity Archaeological toSyria.Div.II,Sect.A, part Expedition 3. UmmIdj-Djinmdl. Leyden:Brill. 1921 SouthernHauran.Pp.63-70 in PublicationsofthePrincetonUniversityArtoSyria.Divs.II chaeological Expadition & m, Sect.A, part2. Leyden:Brill. Butler,H. C., Norris,F A., and Stoever,E.R. 1930 Publications ofthePrinceton University to Syria. Archaeological Expedition DivisionI,Geographyand Itinerary. SectionA, TheExpedition of 1904-5. SectionB,TheExpedition of 1909. Leyden:Brill. Desreumaux,A. and Humbert,J.-B. 1981 Hirbetes-Samra.AnnualoftheDepartofAntiquities ofJordan25:33-83. tment
by P.Freemanand D. Kennedy. BritishArchaeologicalReportsInternationalSeries297.Oxford:B.A.R. Kennedy,D. L. 1982 Archaeological on the Explorations RomanFrontierin North-East Jordan. BritishArchaeologicalReportsInternationalSeries134.Oxford:B.A.R Knauf,E.A. 1984 Umm el-Jimal:An ArabTownin Late 91:578-86. Antiquity.RevueBiblique Littmann,E. 1913 Greekand LatinInscriptions.Pp. 131-223in Syria.Publications ofthe PrincetonUniversity Archeological ExpeditiontoSyria,Div.M, Sect.A, Part3, Umm Idj-Djimal.Leyden:Brill. MacAdam,H. I. 1986 Studiesin theRomanProvinceofArabia: Sector.BritishArchaeoTheNorthern logicalReportsInternationalSeries 295.Oxford:BAR. Waddington,W.H. 1870 Inscriptions et Latinesde la Grecques Syrie.Vol.3. Paris.Reprinted,Roma: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 1968.
de Vries,B. 1986 Umm el-Jimalin the FirstThreeCenturiesA.D. Pp. 227-41 in TheDefense oftheRomanandByzantineEast.Edited
* Special offer *
THE
MOST THE
COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF
WALLS
OF
JERUSALEM
"a monumental work of very high calibre ... an important
scholarly workusefulfor everyoneinterestedin the historyof Jerusalem" - reviewer'scomment
The Walls ofJerusalem. From the Canaanites to the Mlamluks by Gregory J. Wightman Wightman's work is the first complete scholarly reference to the walls of Jerusalem, containing a treasure of information which is well organized, clearly written, and richly illustrated. Dealing with the defence systems of Jerusalem from the earliest times to the end of the Middle Ages, The Walls of Jerusalem combines archaeological and literaryevidence whilst remaining accessible to the general reader. 210x297mm hardcover. 345 pages, 89 illustrations,31 endplates
Comprehensively indexed.ISBN0 646 160087
MEDITERRANEANARCHAEOLOGYSUPPLEMENT4
ORDER
FORM~l
cut or copy, and fax or Please send ...... copy/ies of send to The Walls of Jerusalem
MEDITARCH Box 243 Holme Bldg Universityof Sydney NSW 2006 Australia Fax: +61 2 692 4889
* Special price: US$98 (NormalpriceUS$115) Please add for postage: US$8 pervol.(Aust.&NZ) US$14(allothercountries) O Ienclose US$............ cheque/money order (payable to the Universityof Sydney) OR O Please send a pro-formainvoice OR charge my: l Visa E Mastercard CardNo. Signature:
Expiry date:
Name: Address .................................. ........... Country:
......Postcode: .............
t
:Ini
r, i
?
The
Woman
I
Question and
Female
Ascetics
Among Essenes By Linda Bennett Elder
espite recentstudies on Jewish women in the GrecoRoman world (e.g., Levine 1992; Kraemer 1993), little scholarly 220
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
attention has been directed to women's experience in Early Judaism of the Late Second Temple period. The present study is part of a larger project which is interested in establishing the social location of Jewish women within these chronological parameters (ca. 180 BCE- 70
CE).Social location is defined as the subject's relationship to external aspects of reality within her community that shape, determine, and define her status and influence within that community. A marked increase in religious piety was characteristic of several
I
pkp
rCr
mow
?rr
Priestesses in the Greco-Roman World. Although the priestess of Arsinoe Philopater held office for life and was not obliged to be a virgin(Pomeroy1984:57), asceticism is characteristicamong permanent religious functionariesfrom the Hellenisticperiod forward (Kraemer1993:90-91) and may have had its genesis as earlyas the Old Babylonian period among the Nadituof Sippar(Harris 1962). A strictasceticism characterized the religiouspraxisof permanent members of the Isaicpriesthood in the Greco-Roman world (Witt 1971:91).These religiousfunc-
tionariesalso receivedextensivetraining toward the execution of their sacred duties. A Prophet/High Priest(ess)receivedtraining in philosophy,astronomy, mathematical science, medical arts, and mysticaltheology (Witt 1971:89-90). Although female priests were neveras numerous as male priests in the Isistradition,from 200 BCEthe evidence of inscriptionssuggests increasingnumbers of women as permanent priestsof Isis(Heyob 1975:97). Beginningat the far left, are here depicted: Myrina(Eolide)FaithfulPriestess of Isis (terracotta, second half of second
CenturyCE,LouvreMYR.2499; photograph from Dunand 1973:pl.Xl.1);Priestessof Isis Playingthe Harp(terracotta, Museum of Alexandria;photograph from Dunand 1973: pl. XL.1); Priestessof Isis with Tambourine (terracotta, Museum of Alexandria;photograph from Dunand 1973:pl.XL.2);Priestess of IsisPlayingthe Tambourineand Singing (terracotta, photograph from Dunand 1973: Priestessof Isiswith Tambourine pl.XLI.1); (terracotta, Museum of Cairo;photograph from Dunand 1973:pl.XLI.20.
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
221
?
.?
Nt -I
,i
sectarianmovements of LateSecond TemplePeriodJudaism,including, among others, Hasideans, Essenes, and Theraputae.Consideringthe apparentpervasivenessof these sectarian movementsand elementsof asceticism evidencedin the threementioned above, I include religious asceticism as an element of social location. When appraisingvarious models for female ascetics in LateSecond TempleJudaism,I consider Philo's female Theraputae(Philo VitaContemplativa)as paradigmaticand the fictionalJudith(Judith8:5,6;9:1;10:3; 11:17b;12:6-8; 16:21,22) and Anna the prophetess (Luke2: 36-38) as provisional.' In light of this evidence advanced for the existence of female ascetics,2the question of the existence of femaleEssenesbecomes increasingly significant.Both textual and archaeologicaldata indicate that women were integralto Essene communities. Complexities in interpretation of these data occuras a result of scholars'assumption that Essenes at 222
BiblicalArchaeologist57:4 (1994)
Aerial view of KhirbetQumran:The Qumranwere celibatemales. fringeof the maincemeteyis visibleat the Despite recentacknowledgments upperleft cornerof thisaerialviewof Qum(Schuller1992)by some Qumran ran,beginningaboutfiftymetersfromthe scholarsthatwomen were presentat architectural ruins.Photographcourtesyof Qumran(Schiffman1983:12-13,214; R. Cleave. Stegmann 1985:410),this perspective has not previously been sanctioned in the literature.Many scholarswho Davies' 1988article "How Not to Do have in interests Judaism, may early Archaeology:The Story of Qumran" but whose areasof concentrationare demonstratesthat "dangersof over outside the purview of Qumran interpretation"are inevitable when to are reluctant scholarship, challenge "preconceptionsshape analysis" a status quo that assumes ascetics at Qumran were celibate males. So pervasive is this view IC that contraOwl dictory evidence has largely been dismissed as inconsequential. Philip
.. .
(1988:203-208). Such analyses undergird theories which presently enjoy "canonical" status in Qumran studies. Current concern among scholars to re-visit previous interpretations of Qumran research demands that scholars seriously consider evidence for female ascetics among the Essenes. The present analysis offers an interpretiveframeworkthatpermitsopenness to evidence for female presence at Qumran. It is my contention that such evidence needs to be factored into future research as well as current ,re-visitings of the Qumran corpus.
og
V
Archaeological Evidence
The question of female remains in the cemeteries at Qumran elicits a number of typical responses. Helmut Koester notes concerning the cemeteries of that desert community: "the one large and two smaller cemeteries of about twelve hundred graves [accommodate] full members of the sect who lived permanently at Qumran, namely celibate males" (1983:236). In contrast, G. Vermes in 1975 affirmed that marriage was the general custom among Essenes. In discussing cemeteries at Qumran, however, he remarked that "archaeologists working in the large cemetery have uncovered on the fringes of the graveyard a few female and child skeletons" (emphasis mine; 1975:30). In 1978 Vermes similarly declared that "of the twenty-six tombs opened so far all contained adult male skeletons; however, the archaeologists have uncovered on the peripheriesof the cemetery the bones of a few women and children"
t~?
Tombs from the cemetery at Qumranin variousstages of recordingand excavation: (left):Tombin the main cemetery before the excavation;(top to bottom): Tomb29 opened up: the loculus covered with stones; Tomb27 opened up: the loculus covered with mud bricks;Tomb21 with the skeleton exposed after clearing. De Vauxexcavated only forty-one of the twelve hundred graves in the cemeteries of Qumran.Photographs
4'.
from De Vaux 1973:pls. 25A-26b.
BiblicalArchaeologist57:4 (1994)
223
?4e ~Eii
OF -
to Steckoll added nine tomb excavations bringthe total number of exposed graves to fifty,a mere four percent of the cemetery population. The nine women and six children among their number comprise over thirtypercent of the known Qumranburials. Tomb20 (top right)contained the skeleton of a male;Tomb21's occupant (top left) was female. Photographsfrom Revue Biblique60 [1953]:p. 5.
(1978:97). Yet close examination and careful tabulation of the excavation reports of archaeologists Roland De Vaux (1973:110) and S. H. Steckoll (1967-68:323) indicate that of the fifty graves excavated in the main and secondary cemeteries at Qumran, over thirty percent of the excavated graves contained remains of women and children. In his summary of information concerning Qumran cemeteries, as presented in the Schweich Lectures (delivered in 1959 and published in 1973), Roland De Vaux implies for the main cemetery a general align-
224
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
.lot-
-
uoP~?
ment of some eleven hundred graves and posits as "different from the rest" the singular grave from this "main" cemetery which is the grave of a female. He then remarks that six other tombs of females and four of children are situated either in the secondary cemeteries or the extensions to the "main" cemetery (1973:110). On the face of it, one untrained as an archeologist supposes that the irregularity of the female grave in relation to what is presented as a highly ordered, consistently and systematically arranged group of 1099 exclusively male graves indicates some sort of anomalous relationship. This perception begins to shift as the data are examined more carefully. Of twelve hundred graves in the main and secondary cemeteries, only forty-one were excavated by De Vaux. S. H. Steckoll conducted nine more excavations in the main cemetery in 1966 and 1967 (Steckoll 1967-68). This total of fifty out of
twelve hundred means that only a little more than four percent of the total number of graves have been excavated as of the present writing. Despite De Vaux's account of a consistent regularity in the descriptions of the graves, a close reading of grave contents indicates numerous differences. De Vaux's insistence that "these graves conform to a type which is constant throughout" is contradicted by his citations of several exceptions to the stated constant conformation (1956:570-572). De Vaux's and Steckoll's published materials attest to a total of fifty tombs with thirty-six male, nine female and six children (one child buried with its mother) whose remains have been excavated at Qumran.3 Evaluated in terms of percentages, over thirty percent of the excavated remains are women and children. With the exception of the western section, both male and female remains have been discovered in each site. It is also interesting to
Cumuatie
tl0 Rsuls
Pulised
o
xcaatin
Rpors
fr
Cmetrie
)I~r/t~Tn"
De Vaux:
25
1
Steckoll:
6
2
Wet
etin
fMan
eetry(raesarage
2 (1 w Mother) ifernlyfrmMan
3 (Earlyreportshows 2 4- 1 uncertain)
De Vaux:
Eat etinofMinCmeer.Grvs.fane.dffrntyfrmMan
1 (Earlyreport=uncertain)
De Vaux: Seodr
Qura
1
De Vaux:
emtry()
4 Gavsafane
lk
Mi
Cmtey
1 rrnge.wthvayin
Secndr.QuranCeetry(B)(Gavs
oietaios)
De Vaux:
1
1
3
Totals:
36
9
6 (1 w/Mother)
community.
north...and are identicalin form with the tombs of the main cemetery at Qumran"(1973:89).Some twenty tombs from this site were excavated. The remainsincluded twelve males, seven females and one child, thus disclosing that forty percentof these burialsare women and children.
note the implicitand unfounded assumptions thatall female graves have by now been excavatedand thatthe earliestremainswere interredat the centerof the main cemetery. Finally,De Vaux'sdiscussions of excavationsat Ain El Ghuweir (1973: 88-89; Bar-Adon1971),which is some seven kilometerssouth of Qumran,do not make definitive the connectionof this settlementwith Qumran.De Vaux'sassessmentsdo, however,revealcoins and pottery sherds with counterpartsat Qumran, especiallyduring Period II (earlyfirst centurycE-68 CE).Excavationsof a small cemeterythererevealed that "withone exceptionall these tombs were orientedfromsouth to
Textual Evidence Analyses of texts fromthe Dead Sea Scrollsthat referto women have largelybeen renderedin the context of an ongoing debate concerningissues of marriageand celibacyamong membersof the communitiesfor whom the texts were written.It is now importantthat textualevidence for the presenceof female asceticsat Qumranbe acknowledgedand evaluated fromthe point of view of women's experience.What,we need to inquire,do these texts tell us about women's participationwithin the yahad(community)?As the present inquiryproceeds,I advance two texts, 1QSaI. 4-11 and 4Q502,for considerationin this regard.First, however, a briefexcursusidentifies
Of fifty excavated graves at Qumranin whichgenderdesignationhasbeendetermined,overthirtypercentarewomenand children.Exceptforthe threetombsof the
western bothgendershavebeen cemetery, unearthedat allsites.Thepopulationin-
the terred atQunmran constitutes hardly malecelibate of anexclusively membership
Qumrantexts associated with claims of celibacyand marriage. A myriad of unresolved questions prohibitsa definitive assessmentof marriageamong Essenes.Necessary criteriafor evaluation would include: 1) dates for various codal formulations;2) the branchesof the community to which particularcodes applied; and 3) the changesin the codes based upon changesin the community's self-understandingsover time. Nevertheless, it is importantto note that no published text fromQumran mandatescelibacy!Six texts from the Dead Sea Scrollsare usually advanced to support theories for celibate males at Qumran:1QM7.4-6; 1QS1.6,4.9-10;CD 2.16,4.15-18 and 'The Wilesof the WickedWoman" (4Q 184).Only classicalsources from the firstcenturyCEexplicitlydescribe the Essenesas celibate,e.g. Philo 11.14-16),Josephus (J.W. (Hypothetica 2.8.2.120- 121;Ant. 18.21-22), and Pliny (Nat.Hist. 5.17.4).These authors could only have had personal experienceof the community at Qumranduring QumranPeriod II, 57:4(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
225
*xca *aedgrJ Oienatio
Grav#
0e
Main
Not AlignedHead/South North/South
Female Male
T.11. T.12. T.13.
"
" Male(?) 2 Male Male " " "
T.20 T.21 T22 T23 T24 T25 T26
2 Male Male
T27 T28 T29 T30 T 31
fromearly in the Common Erato 68 CEwhen that site was destroyed. On the other hand, published Qumrantexts indicatingor implying the presenceof femalesand children among the Essenesare found in 1QS 4-5; 1QSaI.4-11;CD V.7;1QSb111.2, V IV20, 1-2, 6-9, 11,VII4-9 , XI 12, XIV4, 15, XVI10-11;IQHHymn C 14-15;4Qp Ps 37 II.1;IIQTemple9 57.15-19,63.10-15, 64.2-4; 4Q502. The ongoing work of JosephBaumgartenon 4QD texts (see below) will, as they are published, provide further and more specific referencesto the presenceof females at Qumran. 1QSa I. 4-11 Although scholarshave yet to inquirewhat might have been the 57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
*
mS xcaate
Yr
emeter
20-40 yrs.
1949
1951
to
T.15. T.16. T.18 T.19
226
Va.x
Male
T.3. T.4. T.5. T.6.
s
GederAge
North/South East/West North/South o ....
T1. T.2.
T.7. T.8. T.10.
*
30 yrs uncertain ca. 16 yrs. ca. 30. 30-40 yrs. ca. 30 yrs. 30-40 yrs. 30 + yrs.
1953
1956
ca. 30 yrs. ca 30 yrs. ca 49 yrs. 1 ca 25 1 uncertain ca. 50 yrs 30 40 yrs ca 30 yrs ca 22 23 yrs
Male 6>
30 40 yrs
Male, Male
30 35 yrs 25 30 yrs
experienceof female Essenes,critical discourse pronouncesno argument against the presenceof women among Essenesin campsor villages throughoutPalestineand Syria.The prospectof femalesas active participants at Qumran,however,elicits considerablecontroversy.Among texts cited to argue for the presence and participationof women at Qumran, IQSa1.4-11and 4Q502are the most persuasive(Elder1991).The two columns that comprise1QSaare referredto as the RuleAnnex (the title designated by Dupont-Sommer1964) or as the MessianicRule (Vermes 1987).They are interpretedvariously by exegetes as a "messianic"document pertainingto the communityin an age to come, as relatingto Essenes
1956
in the settlementsin Palestineand Syria,or as an addendum to the CommunityRule and thus applicable to the communityat Qumran. The particularrelevanceof IQSa 1.4-11to the presentdiscussion is unmistakable. (4) On theirarrival,they shall gather them all together,including childrenand women, and shall read into [their]ea[rs](5) all the preceptsof the Covenantand shall instructthem in all their ordinanceslest they stray in [their] st[rayling.(6) And this is the rule for all of the hosts of the Congregation, concerningevery native in Israel.From[his] you[th] (7) [he shall be in]structedin the Bookof
S.H tc
l-
Main
Extesin
Male
North/South
G.2. G.3.
nd
Cmetery
65 yrs.
1966/67
40 yrs 22 yrs.
G.4. G.5. G.6.
Female&child
G.7. G.8. G.9.
Female " Male
25 yrs.-2yrs 14-16 yrs. 23 yrs. 65 yrs.
"
25/26yrs.
G.10.
East/West Sux
-e
xeninsT
-ai
.emtr
Western Extension T 17. T.18.(?) T.19.(14?)?
? Verydamaged Woodencoffin Head/South Verydamaged
Male Male Uncertain(laterMale?)
East/West "
Female "
1953 30 yrs.
EasternExtension T.32. T.33.
30 yrs. under30 25 yrs.
T.34. T.35. T.36. T.37.
yrs. 6-7 yrs.
"30-40 Child Uncertain(laterMale?)
North/South De
North No Number No Number
North/South North/South
1956
Vu0:
ecodary
Female Male
Cemter
30-35 yrs. 50 + yrs.
1955
South Female 30 yrs. 1956 Child 6 yrs. Child 7-8 yrs. Child 8-10 T.4. yrs. Gendernot determined:MainCemetery= 3; WesternExtension1 (later= MaleT.19 [?]);EasternExtension1 (later= MaleT.37[?]) T.1. T.2. T.3.
Meditationand shall be taught the preceptsof the Covenantin accordance with his age, and [shall receive] (8) his educationin their ordinancesfor ten years [from]the time of entry into the children's [class].Then at the age of twenty [he shall be subject(9) [to] the census: he shall enterinto the lot in the midst of his clan [to live] in communityin the holy Congregation. And he shall not [approach]a woman to know her sexually un-
Vague North/South East/West "
less he is twenty years old when [she] (follows Dupont-Sommer 1962:104)knows [good] and evil (10);and this being so, she shall be admittedto invoke the ordinances of the Law against him, and to take her place at the hearingof the ordinances...(11) Notice thatwomen and children (1.4) are included among those assembled to have read to them (1.5) the preceptsof the Covenant.There
are referencesto a gender inclusive children'sclass (1.8) and expectationsthat a young woman will know "good and evil." The agency of a young marriedfemale (1. 9-10) is mentioned in the contextof her admission to invoke ordinances of the Law against her husband and in the expectationthat she will take her place in the communityassembly during juridicalproceedings (1.11). D. Barthelemy,the originaltranslator of 1QSa(Barthelemy1955),conBiblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
227
tends that this document was intended for a different group of Essenes, e.g., early Essenes or Hasidim, and not the Essenes at Qumran who were addressed by the Rule of the Community (1QS). Among the reasons cited by Barthelemy for distinguishing the communities to which 1QS and 1QSa were directed is his presupposition that the Rule of the Community (1QS) related exclusively to the "quasi monastic" congregation at Qumran. 1QSa, on the other hand, clearly relates to a large assembly of men, women, and children, and thus, on the basis of his presupposition, would not pertain to Qumran (1955: 108). Concerning 1QSa I. 9-11 and the woman's responsibility to invoke ordinances of the Law against her husband, Barthelemy proposes that within the Essene congregation "considering the influences of Hellenism
prevalent at the time, the naturally more fervent, more traditionalist young women were charged by their elders to denounce married offenders to the authorities" (1955:113). On the basis of 1QSa I. 4-11 and evidence for females in the cemeteries at Qumran, H. Neil Richardson affirms the presence and participation of females in the desert community (1957:108-122). The references to children and marriage presuppose the existence of families among Qumran Essenes (1957:119). He challenges scholars who object to the translation of IQSa 1.11which brings the wife of the young man into the assembly as a witness. Richardson questions arguments which appeal to secondary sources such as Josephus, Philo, and Rabbinic texts to argue against the possibility of women testifying at Qumran when we have the primary sources in hand (1957:119). Considering the acknowledged misogyny Locations of Sites of both Philo and JoseDiscus-ed phus, the question raised by Richardson is particu%K larly relevant for scholars engaged in the retrieval _Jericho and reconstruction of women's history. In a recent publication Ross Jerusalem Kraemer elucidates the G Qumran significance of chronology and primary sources in Bethlehem yrcania relationship to texts conHerodion cerning Jewish women in the Greco-Roman world (1992:93- 94). The dangers of the practice of giving precedence to secondary sources in studies of Early Judaism of the Late Second Temple period have also been addressed by Shaye J. D. Cohen (Cohen 1987). Joseph Baumgarten's response to Richardson questions whether we can assume that this group Masada / would give to woomenthe dominant function of Si participating in juridical
228
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
proceedings of the community and acting as witnesses against their husbands (1957:266-269). Based upon his interpretation, Baumgarten solves the "gender gap" by intentionally emending the primary text of 1QSa 1.11 to read "and he shall be received to testify in accordance with the Laws of Torah and to his place in hearing judgments" (1957:268). A fourth interpretation of the text by A. Dupont-Sommer contributes a gender inclusive perspective (1962: 80). Dupont-Sommer argues against placing the Rule and its Annex in contradistinction and questions any intention to differentiate between the two. The texts concerning women in IQSa are applicable to female Essenes at Qumran, an observation affirmed in his commentary (1957:104). His translation of IQSa 1.10 renders "... to know her sexually unless he is twenty years old when she knows good and evil." Dupont-Sommer agrees that a married woman possessed the right to invoke the law against her husband and to assist at community assemblies (1957:104).4 To approach the issues in question from the point of view of women's experience, the following arguments obtain. 1QSa 7-11 presents the chron-
Evidence for the ability to give legal testimony by female ascetics is demonstrated among VestalVirgins.According to Plutarch(second century CE),Vestal Virginswere instituted at Rome in the seventh centuryBCE by Numa Pompilius (715-673) (PlutarchLifeof Numa PompiliusIX-X).The numerous privilegesallocated to Vestal Virginsincluded exemption from guardianship(TwelveTablesof administration Rome ca. 450 BCE), of her own affairs(PlutarchLifeof Numa PompilusIX-X),and the ability to give legal testimony (Plutarch Lifeof PublicolaVIII.4;AurusGellius VII7.2). Greekmarble,height 1.2 m. ForumRomanum,House of the Vestals, Rome, Second half of second centuryCE, Museo NazionaleRomano. Photograph fromZinseling 1972 pl. 97.
ology of a young man's journey, specifically in his relationship to women.It also presents instructions to a young woman who intends to marry. The counsel in 1QSa designates the qualifications for both the young man who is to be twenty years of age and his potential bride. She will know good and evil and will assume her readiness for responsibility as a participant in the community. 1QSa 1.10-11 is written in the context of a particular sectarian movement whose eschatological emphases place primacy on obedience to the laws of the community and severe punishments for transgressions. The impossibility for Baumgarten of women as capable of being charged with ethical judgment ignores the analog of both Theraputrides and
ascetic Pythagorean women living in community with males. Pythagorean women were encouraged by the Sage specifically for their embrace of a personal ethic and moral excellence (lamblichus Vita Pythagorum54).
Let us return briefly to 1QSa 1.8 and the gender inclusive "children's class."5 There is an increased emphasis upon education among the Jews in the Hellenistic period (Hengel 1974). The author of Sirach indicates
What do Josephus, Pliny, and Philo Know about Celibacy at Qumran?
T o the numerous attempts by scholars to reconcile accounts of Josephus, and Philo that Essenes were
celibate males as well as Josephus' Pliny, account of married Essenes, the following is submitted: Concerning chronology: 1) De Vaux advances three strata of habitation of the settlement at Qumran by Essenes: Period IA-second half of second century BCE.;Period IB-soon after second century BCEto 31 BCE;Period II- early years of CEto 68 CE;2) Dates for Josephus, Philo and Pliny extend from late first century BCEto late first century CE.;3) Eusebius quotes Philo's Apologia pro Judaeis No.14 that they (Essenes) banned marriage at the same time as they ordered the practice of continence. Documentation based upon the personal experience of Philo, Josephus, and Pliny is only possible for these authors in De Vaux's Qumran Period II (early first century CEto 68 CE).The social/cultural realities in Palestine changed radically from the beginning of Period IA (Maccabean revolt) to Period IB (Hasmonean Dynasty) to Period II under Roman Rule in the Common Era. Transitions in the self-understandings of Jews in Palestine and among the Essenes cannot fully be determined until proper chronologies are assigned to particular Dead Sea documents. Meanwhile each of the following hypotheses can reasonably be posited for testing when and if more information becomes available. A) As faithful adherents of tenets of Hasidic piety, women and children were among family members of the community at Qumran in each of the three habitation periods. Josephus, Pliny, and Philo (i.e., sources who were not members of the community and were alive only during and after Qumran Period II) relied upon insufficient information and/or indulged their own misogyny in interpreting available information. B) Women and children were members of the community at Qumran in Periods IA and IB. Following the earthquake and abandonment of the settlement in 31 BCE,they were not included in the reformation of the community. When Palestine was under Roman rule and eschatological expectations were heightened, members of the community at Qumran "banned marriage" (for those at the desert community) and ordered the practice of perfect continence. C) Hypothesis B with the following emendation: celibate male inhabitants of Qumran Period II lived in caves and huts adjacent to the community buildings at Qumran. The settlements at Ain el Ghuweir and Ain Feshka are associated by De Vaux with Period II. Excavations of 20 tombs at Ain el Ghuweir revealed 40 percent were women and children. It is possible to suggest that male and female Essenes and their children inhabited separate quarters at nearby settlements like Ain Feshka and Ain el Ghuweir in period II. Each of the three classical authors is accommodated in this hypothesis.
Biblical Archaeologist 57:4 (1994)
229
Falsehood (1QS I-IV; see especially IV). A young woman of marriageable age at Qumran would know "good and evil" as defined by the teachings of the community. As a bearer of this knowledge she would be equally capable of making judgments as a male counterpart. I.,
A1I
t
PER
r
IAFLIU /
?7
Educated female members of Pythagoreancommunities, probablyas earlyas the fifth Alic 1986:123-124) may be precursorsfor (lamblichusVita PythagorumXXXVI; centuryBCE educated female women and childrenlivingthe ascetic lifestyleof the Qumrancommunity. Inthe Greco-Romanworld asceticism is characteristicfor permanent religiousfunctionaries. Permanentmembers of the priesthood of Cybelepracticeda stringent religiousasceticism and receivedcomprehensiveeducation in preparationfor their respectiveduties (Vermaseren 1977:96-112). At Romefemale priestswere equallysanctioned by the state as male priests.As a new Priestess,LaberiaFeliciawould have been recommended for nominationto the College of the Decemviriwho supervisedthe Greekand OrientalCultsat Rome (Vermaseren 1977:107). Upon her approvalshe would have receiveda diploma signed by the photographfrom deputy chairman(promagister;Vermaseren1977:107). RomefirstcenturyCE;
4Q502 The most convincing textual evidence for female participation at Qumran proceeds from 4Q502, published by Maurice Baillet in 1982 (1982:81-105). This document describes liturgical praxis at Qumran and consists of over three hundred fragments. The largest preserved section consists of seventeen lines which appear to be a celebration including both females and males. Scholarly debate pertains principally to questions of seasonal context and specific function. Baillet submits the text as a celebration of marriage. He proposes that along with blessings and praises addressed to the God of Israel, hymnic passages are recited in the midst of a ceremony characterized as joyous (1982:81). To Baillet, 4Q502 is reminiscent of an Israelite ritual which includes betrothal, marriage, circumcision, and confirmation and exhibits striking parallels with the treatment of marriage in the Book
4
il~, atill ?
GroupI Fragments1,2, 3,
Vermaseren1977:pl 41.
the presence of a Wisdom Academy in Jerusalem as early as 180 BCE,and in 175 BCEa Hellenistic gymnasium was established at Jerusalem (I Maccabees 1:14). Later references attest to the institution of Jewish elementary schools in Palestine by Simeon ben Shetah (J.T.KethVIII. 11) in the first century BCE,and by Joshua B. Gamala (B. BabaBatra21a) in the first century
230
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
CE.Considering the literary orienta-
tion of the desert community, and thus the significance of education, a "children's class" at Qumran would not have been anomalous. If, like earlier female Pythagorean children, female Essene children were students, they, like all community members, would have been instructed in the Two Spirits of Truth and
isrV
WitPst M?7
A2
of Tobit (1982:81). In "4Q502:Marriage or Golden Age Ritual" (1983:125-136), Joseph Baumgarten challenges Baillet and proposes that 4Q502 is a fixed feast to celebrate venerable men and women of the community at Qumran. Baumgarten establishes the presence and primacy of the older members of the community. My interest here is in the wide varietyof persons who participate in this feast:
Ar
ek?
wo
I the man and his wife (F[ragment]. 1 l[ine].3) I his female/beloved (El 1.7) 1 the Daughter of Truth (E2 1.3) I their venerable ones and some young people (E9 1.4) I sons and daughters (E141.6) I The man and his female companion seated in the assembly of the Righteous Ones... (F19 1.1) I ...old men and old women and young people (E19 1.2)
Male and female priests and religiousdevotees of both genders participatedin liturgical celebrationsas iconographyfrom religionsof the Greco-Romanworld illustrates.Examples from the Cybeleand Isistraditions include an IsisCult Processionin which the priestess of Isis, lotus flower on her brow,walksat the head of the procession. She holds the situla and the holy Uraeusserpent winds around her left arm. She is followed by a scribewith a book-roll,a male priestcarryingholy water, and a young girl bearingthe sistrumand the ladle for the holy water. Rome second quarterof second centuryCE,the Vatican;photograph fromZinserling1972:pl. 106.
I [the woman's] numerous lineage, Daughters of Eve...among eternal people (E24 1.3)
I and virgins, boys and girls (E19 1.3)
1the woman who gives blessing to her husband/ the man...while standing in the assembly of the venerable men and the venerable women... (E24 1.4)
I her husband, the man who gives blessing to his wife/the woman (F24 1.2)
Group II Fragment19
I pronounces a blessing of peace... (E24 1.5) I in the midst of the old men [women] (E24 1.6).6 Despite the variety of categories of females described in 4Q502, Baum-
Group III Fragment24
•
1
.
"i , ? " a %
.tow
?"
?
1
1
0 lob
'.
.
.
4Q502: three among the many groups of fragments pieced together by M. Baillet. The document describes liturgyinvolving women. (Photographsfrom MauriceBaillet 1982: pls. 29-30.)
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
231
garten focuses on the older venerable females, but with some rather astonishing implications. He finds in Philo's female Theraputae an analog for the venerable women at Qumran (1983:125-136). In contrast to his position in 1QSa 4-11, Baumgarten now discusses The Daughter of Truthfrom 4Q502 F2, L.3, asserting: if this is descriptive of the female partner to the marriage it would seem that she is portrayed as a mature person possessing the spiritual qualities considered vital for participation in the religious life of the Community. Among these are listed "intelligence and understanding in the midst" (F.2 L.4)...and among the rewards associated with the Way of Truth is the gift of long life. The theme of longevity is found throughout 4Q502 which refers repeatedly to elderly men and women. (1983:128) Despite considerable evidence in 1QSa 1.4-11, 4Q502, and in the cemetery remains, Baumgarten's reading of 4Q502 wants children to be "spiritual" in nature (1983: 132). In conclusion, however, Baumgarten affirms that "what is certain is the presence of aged women within the Qumran establishment. Just as the early virgins of the Theraputae took part in the religious life, so the Essenes had a female order of aged ahayot [sisters], the distaff counterpart of the mature ahim [brothers]"(1983:135). It is unfortunate that Baumgarten's androcentric myopia prevents factoring into his interpretation the variety of female participants described in 4Q502. We note with interest and enthusiasm, however, Baumgarten's reference to an Order of Mothers at Qumran in his recent translation of 4Q 270 1.13-15 (1993:268- 276). This text from Cave 4 relates to penalties and infractions in the Qumran Penal Code and was discussed by Baumgarten at the Qumran Section of the Annual Meetings of the SBL in San Francisco in November of 1992.
232
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
rw
rA jr,
Liturgical celebrations across lines of gender were characteristicof Theraputae(mid-first centuryBCE-first centuryCE;PhiloVita ContemplativaVIII,IX,X) as well as Essenes (firstcentury BCE-firstcenturyCE.)accordingto the evidence of 4Q502. Inthis second example of a liturgical celebration,a sacrificeto Cybelewith flute playerand drummer,a woman approaches the altarand sprinklesincense on the fire. She is accompanied by male musicians.Romanmarble relief,Rome VillaAlbani[in situ]; PhotographfromZinserling1972:p 97.
Conclusions Evidence advanced in the preceding arguments militates against interpretations that suggest Qumran was a bastion of male celibacy and sanctity. Excavation reports reveal that thirty percent of the excavated tombs at Qumran contain remains of women and children. 4Q502 attests to female participants in liturgical celebrations at Qumran. 1QSa 1. 7-11 provides instructions for a young woman of marriageable age concerning her responsibilities within the communi-
ty.J.Baumgartenadvancesevidence
for an Order of Sisters and Brothers and an Order of Mothers and Fathers at Qumran. Eileen Schuller considers that these parallel constructions may indeed indicate women's full membership in the community (1993:8-9). Yet, despite Schuller's potent suggestion, at this time no available text describes female initiation into the community or female status in the
complex hierarchy of the Essenes. Both texts and archaeological evidence, however, do affirm among Essenes at Qumran female infants, female children, females of marriageable age, females with children, females as wives, older "venerable" females who may or may not be married and may or may not have had both spiritual and material offspring. The self-understanding of these ascetic women like that of Essene women "in the camps" would have been shaped by the theological perspectives, ascetic praxis, and doctrinal proscriptions of the Dead Sea Scrolls as adapted by their respective communities.
Acknowledgments "Female Ascetics Among Essenes" (with slight modifications) was read at the Qumran Section of the Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting in November, 1991 at Kansas City, Mo.
Notes 1Scholarlyconsensus places a date for authorship of Luke's Gospel at ca. 80-90 CE. The author of this Gospel, however, describes Anna the prophetess as eightyfour years of age in Jesus' infancy.Anna was "of great age, having lived with her husband seven years after her marriage,then as a widow to the age of eighty-four.She never left the Temple but worshipped there with fasting and prayer night and day" (Luke 2:36-37). This chronology suggests that (whether or not Anna is a fictional character) Anna's "dates"coincide with Essenes, Theraputae,and a late date for Judith (e.g., Hasmonean period and possibly as late as 63 BCE).
2 Asceticism is defined for the present study as a mode of life characterizedby voluntary self denial for the purpose of spiritual discipline. This rudimentarydefinition permits new parametersfor asceticism other than traditionalChristianmodels in which celibacy is considered implicit. 3 Laperrousaz(1976)also mentions that only fifty out of twelve hundred graves have been excavated; however, he does not note percentages. Alfred Marx("Lesracines du Celibat Essenien,"Revuede Qumran 7[1970]:323-342)also considers the number of graves that have been opened and says that male graves relative to female graves would be important.He cites no figures, however, from which to derive percentages. Marx then proceeds to note the importance of children's graves as the only means for our conclusions about marriage.Otherwise he suggests we could be in the same situation as the Theraputaeor the women around Jesus (335).Despite his attention to the excavation reports Marx concludes this section by noting that one is surprised by the small number of female graves (and he is apparently convinced that by now all of the female graves have been excavated) and that they provide means for favorably presuming that the majorityof the inhabitants of Qumran at a certain time were males living in celibacy (335). 4Heth's investigation of this issue explores evidence from the Qumran texts and argues in some depth for marriageand the presence of women among the Essenes (1986:48-87and esp. 58-62, 64, 66, 71). 5I am indebted to John E Priest, Professorof Religion at FloridaState University,Tallahassee, Floridafor the following clarification of the interpretationsof this line by Barthelemyand Dupont-Sommer.Two words in the middle of line eight constitute a problem for the translator/interpreter.The first has a lacuna at the beginning and the second has a disputed final letter.Priest notes that Barthelemyproposed the follow-
ing transcription[ ] bwcbtband suggested that the lacuna contained either a yodh or waw + yodh. He read btbas a defective or Aramaic form of twband translated "and if he goes well [progresses]."Richardsonaccepts this reconstruction.Dupont-Sommer differs. He translatedthe words as" [from] the time of entry into the children'sclass." The Hebrew underlying this translation must be something like this: [m] bw btp.(It should be noted that "class"has no basis in this text but is inserted to clarify what Dupont-Sommer takes to be the implicit meaning.) The significant issue here is whether the use of btpmay indicate that education was for all the children and not for males alone. In biblical Hebrew, the word refers to boys and girls alike. The text does not demand this interpretation,but it seems to allow it. 6There is at present no published translation of this text in English.
Bibliography Adon, P. Bar 1970 Chronique Archeologique. Revue Biblique87:398-400. 1971 Another Settlement of the Judean Desert Sect at Ain Ghuweir on the Dead Sea. EretzIsrael10:72-89. Baillet, M. 1982 Qumran Grotte 4, 502. Rituel de Mariage. Pp. 88-105 in Discoveries in theJudeanDesert7. Oxford. Barthelemy D. and Milik, J. T., eds. and trans. 1955 Qumran Cave I. Discoveriesin the JudeanDesert1. Oxford. Baumgarten,J. M. 1957 On the Testimony of Women in IQSa.Journalof BiblicalLiterature 76(4):266-269. 1983 4Q502, Marriageor Golden Age Ritual?Journalof JewishStudies 35(2):125-136. 1993 The Cave 4 Versions of the Qumran Penal Code. Journalof JewishStudies 43(2):268-276. Cohen, S. J. D. 1987 FromtheMaccabeesto theMishnah. Philadelphia: WestminsterPress. Davies, P. R. 1988 How Not to Do Archaeology: The Story of Qumran. BiblicalArchaeologist 51:203-208. De Vaux, R. 1953 Fouilles De KhirbetQumran. Revue Biblique60:83-106. 1954 Fouilles De KhirbetQumran. Revue Biblique61:206-236. 1956 Fouilles De KhirbetQumran. Revue Biblique63:568-572.
1973 Archaeologyand theDead Sea Scrolls. London: Oxford University Press. De Vogel, C. J. 1966 Pythagorasand EarlyPythagoreanism. Assen, Netherlands: Royal Van Gorcum Ltd. Dunand, E 1973 LeCulted' Isis dansle BassinOriental De LaMiditerranee.3 vols. Leiden: Brill. Dupont-Sommer,A. 1962 TheEsseneWritingsfromQumran. Cleveland & New York:The World Publishing Co. Elder,L. B. 1991 Transformationsin the Judith Mythos: A Feminist CriticalAnalysis. Ph.D. diss., The Florida State University, Tallahassee,Florida. Harris, R. 1962 BiographicalNotes on the Naditu Women of Sippar.Journalof CuneiformStudies16(1):1-12. Hengel, M. 1974 JudaismandHellenism.Vol. I. Philadelphia: Fortress. Heth, W. A. 1986 Matthew's Eunuch Sayings: 19:12 and Its Relationship to Paul's Teachings on Singleness in 1st Corinthians 7. Ph. D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary,Dallas, Texas. Heyob, S. K. 1975 TheCult of Isis Among Womenin the Graeco-Roman World.Leiden: Brill. Iamblichus 1965 VitaPythagorum.Trans.T. Taylor. London: J. M. Watkins. Josephus 1969 Antiquities.Translatedby L. H. Feldman. Loeb Classical Library18. Cambridge:Harvard University Press. 1967 JewishWars.Translatedby H. St. J. Thackeray.Loeb Classical Library 2. Cambridge:Harvard University Press. Koester,H. 1983 Introductionto theNew Testament. Vol. 1, History, Culture and Religion of the Hellenistic Age. Philadelphia: Fortress. Kraemer,R. S. 1992 Her Shareof theBlessings:Women's ReligionsAmongPagans,Jewsand Christiansin the Greco-Roman World. New York:Oxford University Press.
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4 (1994)
233
1941 VitaContemplativa. Translatedby F. H. Colson. Loeb Classical Library 9. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
Sub-Scribe
Pliny 1969 NaturalHistory.Translatedby H. Rackham.Loeb Classical Library5. Cambridge:Harvard University Press. Pomeroy,S. B. 1984 Womenin HellenisticEgypt:From Alexanderto Cleopatra.New York: Schocken Books.
I wp
Linda Bennett Elder is Assistant Professor of Religion at Thiel College where she teachesReli(Pennsylvania) gious Studies and Women's Studies. She received her Ph.D. in Humanities and Religion from Florida State University. Most of her "digging" consists of exploring texts from Late Second Temple Judaism for insights into the social reality of Jewish women in that cultural ambient.
Lapperousaz,E. M. 1967 Qumran et Decouvertes au desert de Judea. Supplementau Dictionnaire de la Bible.Edited by H. Cazelles and A. Feuillet. Paris:Letouzy et Ane. 1976 Qoumran:L'Etablissement essenien des bordsde la MerMorte:histoireet du site. Paris:A and J archd-ologie Picard. Levine, A. J. 1991 WomenLikeThis:New Perspectives on JewishWomenin theGreco-Roman World.Atlanta:Scholars Press. Marx, A. 1970 Les racines du c6libat essenien. Revuedu Qumran7:323-342. Philo 1941 Hypothetica.Translatedby F.H. Colson. Loeb Classical Library9. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
234
57:4 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
Richardson,H. N. 1957 Some Notes on IQSa.Journalof BiblicalLiterature76(2):108-122. Schiffman, L. H. 1983 SectarianLawin theDeadSea Scrolls: CourtsTestimoniesand PenalCode. Chico:Scholars Press. Schuller,E. 1994 Women and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Pp. 115-131 in Methodsof Investigationof theDeadSeaScrollsand KhirbetQumranSite:PresentRealitiesand FutureProspects.Edited by M. O. Wise, et al. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 722. New York:New YorkAcademy of Sciences. Steckoll, S. H. 1967-68 PreliminaryExcavationReport from Qumran Cemetery.Revuede Qumran6:323-344. Stegmann, H. 1985 Some Aspects of Eschatology in Texts from the Qumran Community and in the Teachingsof Jesus. Pp. 408-426 in BiblicalArchaeology Today:Proceedingsof theInternational Congresson BiblicalArchaeology. Edited by J. Amitai. Jerusalem: Israel ExplorationSociety. Vermes,G. 1978 DeadSeaScrolls,Qumranin Perspective.Cleveland: Wm. Collins & WorldPublishing Co. 1987 TheDeadSeaScrollsin English.New York:Penguin. Vermaseren,M.J. 1977 Cybeleand Attis:TheMythand the Cult. London:Thames and Hudson. Waithe,M. E. 1987 A Historyof WomenPhilosophers: Ancient WomenPhilosophers600 B.C. to 500 A.D. Dordrecht:Martinues Nijhoff. Witt, R.E. 1971 Isis in theGraeco-Roman World.Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press.
To order your subscription to Biblical Archaeologist with VISAor MasterCard, simply call Scholars Press at (404) 727-2345.
Statementof Ownership Managementand Circulation October1, 1994 Title:BiblicalArchaeologist. Publication Number006-0895.Frequency:Quarterly. Fourissues publishedannually.Subscription price:$45.00institutions,$35.00individuals.Locationof Officeof Publication: 819 HoustonMill RoadNE, Atlanta,GA 30329.Headquartersof publisher:Same. Publisher:ScholarsPress.Editor:David C. Hopkins,BiblicalArchaeologist,4500 MassachusettsAve. NW,Washington, DC 20016.Owner:TheAmericanSchools of OrientalResearch,3301NorthCharles St., Baltimore,MD 21218.Thepurpose, function,and non-profitstatusof this organizationand the tax exemptstatus for Federalincometax purposeshas not changedduringthe preceding12 months.The averagenumberof copies of each issue duringpreceding12 months are:(A) Totalnumberof copies printed: 4260;(B) Paidcirculation,mail subscriptions:3489;(C)Totalpaid:3489;(D) Free distribution:59;(E)Totaldistribution: 3548;(F)Copies not distributed:712;(G) Total:4260.Theactualnumberof copies of single issue publishednearestto filing date:(A) Totalnumberof copies printed: 4194;(B)Paidcirculation:3442;(C)Total paid circulation:3442;(D) Freedistribution:60;(E)Totaldistribution:3502;(F) Copies not distributed:692;(G)Total: 4194.I certifythatthe statementsmade by me above arecorrectand complete. HarryW.Gilmer,Director,ScholarsPress.
Zinserling, V. 1972 Womenin Greeceand Rome.New York:Abner Schram.
News, The
of
Walls a
New,
and
Notes, of Jerusalem:
Detailed
Synopsis
Study
e city of Jerusalemprovides a cruh Icial case-studyin urbandevelopment and spatial symbolism. Thereis probably no other living city in the world with such a long and continuous urbanoccupation, extending back to the 20th centuThe complex and often bloody ry BCE. history of that urbandevelopment is written in mor___ tarand stone in the city's physical fabric.In the vibrantOld City of today we see and hearconstantechoes and reverberationsof all that the Holy City has meant to countless generationsof people around the world. The successive city walls and gates that have enfolded Jerusalem's hills for four thousand years are a testamentin stone to the importancevested in this nexus of spiritualconsciousness.In theirunending raisingsand castings-down we see reflectedthe defence of this tiny tractof land against some of the greatcurrentsof ancientand medieval history:the Egyptianexpansioninto WesternAsia;the emergence of Israel, Judah,and the Philistinesin Palestine and the demise of Canaanitecivilization;the rise and fall of Assur and Babylon; expansion of the Persianempireto the Mediterranean; conquest of the East Alexander and the by complex legacy of Hellenism thus engendered;the rise of Parthiaand the concomitantexpansionof RomethroughItaly,Greece,the eastern Mediterranean,and finallyto the gates of Jerusalem;the destructionof the Holy City at the handsof Titus,an eventas muchcelebratedin the Westas mourned in the East;the city's renaissanceas the sacredand spiritualheartof Christianity; its conquest threecenturieslaterby the power of nascentIslam;the ensuing 236
Reviews
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
centuryof Jihadand Crusadewhere East and Westclashed on battlefieldsacross the Levant,with Jerusalemalways as its sacred goal; and all the time, and continuing to the present day, the
ov N
VIM
slow and difficultcoming-to-termsof Jew,Christian,and Muslim with their shared inheritance. The laststone fortificationswere built around Jerusalemby the Ottoman sultanSuleimanthe Magnificentin the 16th century.Yetone would be mistakento thinkthatthese,the presentwalls of the Old City,areonly a picturesqueanachronism in a world where ironarrowheads have given way to nuclearwarheads. These very walls were the prize of Al-
lenby in 1917;in 1948 watchful Arab eyes looked out frombehind theirworn but still-strongbattlements,and in the aftermathwalls of barbed wire came to augment those in stone and mortar;in 1967,the walls and gates were stormed by the Israeliarmy,so that now, in this the latestchapterof the city's history, modem Israellays claimto politicalsuzeraintyover the walls and theirprecious contents. In thecontextof thisrichhistory,The WallsofJerusalem: FromtheCanaanitesto theMamluks,just published by Meditarch(MediterraneanArchaelogy Supplement 4. Sydney, 1993),aims at unravelling the physical complexities and symbolic associationsof the city's walls and gates through a thorough and critical study of the archaeological,architectural,graphic,and literaryevidence. Only the Ottoman walls are excluded, since thesewarranta separate,detailed study. The WallsofJerusalem divides itself into three parts,the firstdealing with the Canaanite,Israelite,and Persiancities;the second with the troubledGrecoRomanperiod, ending with the destructionof Jerusalemby Titusin 70 CE;and the third with the Middle Ages, when Christiansand Muslims vied for controlover the Holy Places in the city and built strong walls and towers suitable to their purpose. This phase also ended in a final destruction,that of the Ayyubid princelingan-Nasir Dawud and a mercenary army of KhorezmianTurksin 1244. Since the work deals primarilywith the city walls, gates, and towers, the various citadels and fortresses,as well as the Haram ash-Sharif,are eitheromitted or given summary treatment. PartI opens with a study of the walls of the BronzeAge city,and recognizes theirraisond'etrein both the generalcultural milieu of feuding Canaanitecitystatesand the local necessityof securing access to a vital naturalwater source in the nearby KidronValley.Chapter2 discusses the royal Israelitecitadel and provides the firstcomprehensive recon-
WITHi
AlltltltU
INA
11
1.t
Om
Zionandin thecourtyardof theOttomanCitadel(theremainsof whicharedivided intosix structural phases). Chapter7 turnsits attentionto the thornyproblem of Josephus''Third'and 'SecondWalls'.Inregardto theformer,the'northerly line'and 'southerlyline' theoriesarebothfoundto havecertaindeficienciesin theirtreatmentof theara 1 andliterary chaeological evidence.Thebookargues thatonlyat theDamascus Gate,beneaththeHadrianic citygate,is theresomedirectevidenceforanHerodiangateortowerbelonging / ,e totheThirdWall'.Elsewherearounditscircuit,the courseof the'ThirdWall' probablydivergedconsido erablyfromthatof theOttomanwalls,whicharebuilt & ofa mainlyoverfoundations citywallerectedinthelate 3rdorearly4thcenturiesCE. As fortheenigmaticMayerSukenikwallnorthof the OldCity,thebookadvances / the theorythatit was a barrierwall erectedbysoldiers of theTenthRomanLegion citadelmodelisusedtoaccountformany aftertheiroccupationof thecityin70CE, andthatit wasdestroyedeitherafterthe aspectsof thebiblicaldescriptionof Nehemiah'srebuildingthatarehitherto SecondRevoltorwith Hadrian'sinauunexplained. gurationof the cityas ColoniaAelia PartIIopenswitha thorough examin- Capitolina.Thebookgathersandanaandarchitec- lyzes allavailableevidenceforthe ationof thearchaeological turalevidenceforGreco-Roman fortifi- courseof the 'SecondWall'andproposcationsaroundtheCityof David.The es whatamountsto a 'minimalist'posidiscussionthenmovestoa consideration tionforits course. of theso-called'FirstWall'aroundthe Finally, Chapter8 summarizesthedewesternhill(orUpperCity,as it was velopmentof the fortifications through thencalled).Theclaimthattheearliest theGreco-Roman period,includingan partsofthiswesternwallcandatenoearanalysisof masonrystylesandtheirimlierthanthetimeof HerodtheGreatis indicators. portanceas chronological showntobe incorrect througha detailed Thechapterattemptstorelateeachmain andarchitectural stratigraphic analysis. buildingphaseto thewrittenevidence Thebookalsoprovides,forthefirsttime, of theBooksof Maccabees, Wisdomof a detailedstudyof thecomplexdevelBenSira,theGospels,Actsof the Apostles,andthebooksof FlaviusJosephus. opmentof thewesterntraceof thiswall Thewrittenevidence,as withthatfor duringtheGreco-Roman period,in tandemwiththecomplexremainsonMount theIsraeliteandPersianperiods,is not a
?-
Hi. $I11
I i as sl l l r aul r
The Old City of Jerusalem andenvirons.
is structionof it.Thisreconstiuction andliterary basedonbotharchaeological evidenceandon an analogywiththe royalcitadelatSamaria. better-preserved Chapter3 discussesthevariousrebuildaroundtheeastingsof thefortifications ernhillduringtheLateIsraeliteperiod, andbiblical in lightof thearchaeological evidence,andreachessomenovelcondusionsin regardto thehistoricalcontextsof theserebuildings.As fortheLate Israelite citywallaroundthewesternhill, thebookaddressesthevarious'maximalist'and 'minimalist' positionsadopted bypreviousscholarsandproposesa new traceforitswesternandsouthernsections.SincethewallsrebuiltbyNehemiwereessentially ahinthe5thcenturyBCE thoseoftheLateIsraelite period,thesame
:
?
IDI
I', :I 'I
I III
II!
CD• II
,'00 II ": ,I .. I . ' r1. .. i ::• • ,,--i "';;
- :"1
"I
J.-
,II) 'I
-'
II II
.
(
II II ( II
II
I'
II
il
iI
R,
t4
.
Plan of Jerusalem at the end of the 6th centuryCE.
simplyappendedto thearchitectural analysesbutis subjecttodetailedcritical evaluationin itsown rightbeforebeing appliedto thephysicalevidence. Thesameapplieswith even more cogencyto PartIIIof thebook,which interweavesdetailedstudiesofboththe physicalandwrittenevidencerelating to thecitywallsandgates.Particularly importantforthisphaseof thecity's historyareaccountswrittenby pilgrims andothervisitorstotheHolyCity.These areusefulnotonlyforthelightthey walls throwonthepositionsofsuccessive the andgates,butalsofor constantly evolving,symbolicassociationsgivento The variouspartsof thefortifications. symbolismof nomenclatureplaysan importantpartin thebook'sdiscussion of theByzantineandMedievalperiods, as forexamplethe generaltendencyof Christians, Jews,andMuslimsto give separatenamesto the samegatesin orderto emphasizespecificreligiousassociations.Thebookalsoexaminesthe greatinterestby medievaltravellersand historiansin thecity'sancienthistory
Sketch plan of Jerusalem at the end of the Umayyadperiod.
and topography,and theiroftennovel of monumentssuchas reinterpretations theTowerof David.Thephysicalevidencefromthe ByzantineandEarly Islamicperiodsofteneitherfailsus completelyor is of only secondaryvalueby comparisonwith theinformationcontainedin writtenaccounts.Thebook makesfulluse of thelatterto buildup thefirstcomprehensiveview of Jerusalem'sfortifications duringthislong and complexperiod.Amongtheaspects discussedat lengthare:thebuildingof a new citywall by eitherDiocletianor the southernextensionof Constantine; thewallsduringthe5thcenturyby the ByzantineempressEudociain orderto protectChristianHoly Placeson Mount ZionandaroundSiloam;theconstructionof an elaborateforewalland ditch outsidethe northernhalfof the citywall some timeduringthe EarlyIslamic period;the gatesof Jerusalemas recorded by the 10thcenturyArabgeographer Muqaddasi;thechangeswroughton thefortifications by theCrusadersdur12th the centuryCE,includingerecing
tionof a largebarbicanin frontof St. Stephen'sGate;thenew citywallbuilt aroundMountZionby sultanSaladin afterhis conquestof thecityin 1187;the massivetowersbuiltintothe citywalls by theAyyubidruleral-Mu'azzam'Isa in the 13thcentury(whichhe subsequentlyrazedduringtheFifthCrusade); andfinallytherebuildingof thecitadel by theMamluksultansof Cairoin the early14thcentury,and theslow process of robbing-outof thecitywallsbetween thattimeand the 16thcentury. Theintrinsicphysicalcomplexityof mirrors thewallsandgatesofJerusalem thecity'scomplexandmomentoushistory.Therichsymbolicassociationsattachedto thesestonesandmortar-in theBible,thebooksof FlaviusJosephus, theQuran,andthewritingsof pilgrims, sincethe4th andgeographers historians of this the echo CEimportance century revered and city. long-tenured deeply ByG.J. Wightman
49
.b
:LajAb
4w
10
Ar
4L
'Ain
Ghazal
-Op< -
The four-phase LPPNBcult buildingin the northfieldat cAinGhazal,viewto the
1993-1994
Two six-weekexcavationseasonsat I NeolithiccAinGhazal(ontheoutskirtsof Amman)in 1993and 1994foNeolithic cusedon LatePre-Pottery and (LPPNB), PPNC, Yarmoukian potteryNeolithicdepositsin thenorthand centralfieldsof thesite.
Incontrast tootherareasofCAin
Ghazal,LPPNB(ca.6500-6000CE)layersin thenorthfieldwererelatively undisturbedby laterNeolithicactivity.
Twobuildings wereexposed thatare
particularly important.Thefirstis a structurethatunderwentfourphasesof construction. Theplanof thePhase1 structure is unknown,sincelater (P1) obliterated allbuta smallpartof phases thesouthwall anda patchof a redpaintedlimeplasterfloor.TheP2south and northwallswerestraight,butbetweenthemwas a curvedwallto the
west. Photograph by YZoubi.
west,builtof chalkratherthanflint bouldersor hardlimestone.Soonafter constructionthe apsidalwallbeganto collapse,so a straightN-S wallwas builton theP2red-paintedplasterfloor, whichchangedtheshapeto a rectangularplan.SometimelatertheP2-P3floor was cutfortheP4building,whichconsistedof sevensuperimposedredpaintedfloorsdirectlyatopeachother insidea circularwall thatformeda room2 m in diameter.A doorwayled to an antechamber to theeast,although thispartof the P4buildingwas almost totallydestroyedby erosion,possiblya lateNeolithicphenomenon. Thecircularshapeof the P4room (extremelyrarein the LPPNB)and the superimposedfloorsstronglysuggesta ritualfunctionforthebuilding.This conclusionis supportedby the presence
of a large(60cm diameter)holein the centerof the room.Inthe wallsof this hole aretwo pairsof stone-linedchannels(N-SandNE-SW)thatrunbeneath thefloortowardstheouteredges of the wall.At thelip of thehole,the floor plasterbeginsto risevertically,indicating thata featureroseoutof thehole, probablyrestingon thechannelstones thatprojectedslightlyintothehole.The channelsmay havebeenductsto draw airintotheholeand thefeature,possible to feeda fire.Consideringall this evidence,it is verylikelythatthe P4 structure,atleast,servedsomecultic purposeforthe LPPNBresidentsof cAinGhazal. Nearbywas a largeLPPNBdomestic structurethathadbeenseverelydamagedin ancientandmoderntimes.The houseis at least10m long (E-W),al57:4(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
239
thoughit is notknownwhattheN-S dimensionwas.A rowof foursmall (lessthan2 X 2 m each)roomsoccurs alongthesouthernedge of thehouse, andeachroomhasa doorwayleading to a centrallargeroom,whichis representedby onlya narrowremnantof a limeplasterfloorthatincludeda small butdeep circularhearthnextto an unfiredday storagesilo. Thereis strongevidencethatthis was a two-storiedhouse.Thebuilding was destroyedin a fire,andin the fillof thewesternmostroomtherewerenumerousburnedday chunkswithbeam impressionsthatmingledwithdense quantitiesof floorplasterthatcould onlyhavefallenintothe roomfrom above.Interspersed amongtheceiling day,ceilingstones,andupperfloor plasterwereenormousamountsof The 8.8 m long Yarmoukian House in
the centralfield,viewto the west.Thewesternwallcontinuesthroughthe balkat the upper rightof the photo. Photograph by Y Zoubi.
charredlentilsand vetchseeds,evidently storedin thesecond story.Floorplaster,burnedday and stones,andlentils and vetchwerealso foundin thecircular hearthandstorage silo in thenortheast room. Followingthe destructionof the house,the walls servedas thefoundationfora later LPPNBstructurethat underwenttwo subsequentrebuildingphases. Theearliestrebuild includeda curvedwall with two smallreco tangularniches(ca. 30 X 40 cm)about50 cm abovethesurface. ThelatestLPPNB housewas motifiedby PPNCinhabitantswho
hadabandonedthe use of limeplaster floorsin favorof huwwarsurfaces (crushedchalk mixedwithmud). Densefindsof crudeflintsand fire-cracked rocks litteredthefloors and courtyard surfaces.A remarkablefertility figurine13.5cm high,madeof pink limestone,was recoveredfroma courtyardnearanother PPNChousein the northfield. Inthesouthfield,excavators exposeda virtually 1cm completeYarmoukian period(ca.5500-5000? house,measuring8.8 BCE) The PPNCfertility figurine m in lengthandmore of pink limestone. Photograph than4 m in width,along with numerouscourtyard byYZoubi.
IT
*;6
A3,
80 70
7014
AIN GHAZAL1993 Centeral Field
ft w
j-A
0
32
Fe
34era
36
l7o
1m
2Sn
79
oD *am awal
soIV:
,
A 36?
36
3
' 323
The walled street (bottom)andlatercircular"tent"structureinthe centralfield.Drawing byA. Omari.
surfaces that included frequentstonelined postholes that evidently supported shade structures(arishas). A small "kitchen-building"was also excavated in the south field. Consisting of a subrectangularwall only one stone
34
high and measuring ca. 1.5 X 2.0 m, the interiorincluded a large fired storage jar,a small fireplace,and numerous grinding stones. One of the most remarkablediscoveries was a walled, stepped street about 2.5 m wide that extended at least 12 m upslope (E-W).In the north wall two gateways about a meter wide led from the street into courtyards;the southern
wall was badly damaged by later Yarmoukian activities. The street may have been constructed as early as the late PPNC, although this is not definite; certainly it served the Yarmoukian population. The latest occupational phase at CAin Ghazal is demonstrated by a temporary circularstructureapproximately4.5 m in diameter.The stone wall is narrow (one stone wide) and low (one or two courses),and thereis a broadentry to the northeastflankedby low stone platforms on both sides. Huwwarplaster at the entry shows conclusively that this was a living area and not a small animal enclosure. Altogether,the structureresembles a logical ancestor to the Bedouin tent, since it is believed that the temporary structurewas used by Yarmoukian pastoralistswho brought their herds of sheep and goats to CAinGhazal during the hot and dry summer months. Researchat CAinGhazal was funded by the Instituteof Archaeology and Anthropology (YarmoukUniversity), a grant from USAI administered through the American Center of OrientalResearch,and the JordanianDepartment of Antiquities. ZeidanKafafiand GaryRollefson
Megalithic at
Tell
Tomb
El-mUmeiri,
Jordan
'cow.
.
~Ilk
Tomb in process of excavationviewedfromthe front.Bonesarevisibleagainstthe rearand byFrankSpangler. comprise some 20 disarticulatedskeletons. Photograph
A
Polish-Americanteam, organized by Levant FoundationPoland and working within the Madaba Plains Projectwith a task of researchingcemeteries, located and excavated an isolated megalithicstructureon Tellel-cUmeiri's SE slope in June-July1994.The tomb took the shape of a "u"(3.2 m X 2.7 m X 2.8 m), oriented east by northeastand built mostly of slab-likeboulders. The interiormeasured 1.9m X 1.0mX 1.8 m. It is possible that the structuremay origSee Tomb,page 242
57:4(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
241
ularboulderssittingon flattenedbedrockabuttedthestructureone meter belowitspresenttop,andtracesof plasbeen covered a horizontal by inallyhave beams which are teredfloorssealedagainstthisseeming capstone(s)orwooden it stone circle. now missing,giving a dolmen'sapinteriorcontainedanimpacted The of some pearance.Thearrangement the interior was bone innerfeaturessuggests heap,with some tracesof articulaof dividedintotwo chambers,one above tion, some20 individuals,judgedby thenumberof skulls.Boneswereapparanother,by meansof woodenbeams. now Thefrontsideof thestructure, open, entlypushedtowardtherearas new was at leastpartiallybuiltover,creating burialsoccurred.Amongthebones,excavatorsdiscoveredtwentycomplete probablya kindof "porthole." the strucvessels:ninemedium-largeneckedjars Theimmediatecontextof known: the (somewithledgehandles);two juglets; tureis notyet completely and ninesmallcups.All vesselshave the of the exterior awaits excavation been to the Early small datedpreliminarily nextfieldseason.However, irregTomb from 241 page
In BronzeIBperiod(3150-3000BCE). unearthed a addition,excavators large numberof flinttools,includingtwo scrapers,two rowsof beads,and three spindlewhorls. TheUmeiritombis extraordinary amongsimilarmegalithicconstructions in theLevant.Itis amongtheveryfew containingsucha greatquantityof originalhumanskeletonsalongwith a very impressiveand well preservedpottery assemblage. BoguslavDabrowski OysteinS. LaBianca ElzbietaDubis
BB'
A
A
A
Plan and sections of the tomb.Drawing by
Some of the 20 completeEarlyBronzeIBvessels.Photograph byFrank Spangler.
Dubis. Elzbieta
Conservation
of
the
Petra
Papyri
Thescrollswerefoundnearthesixth carbonizedpapyrusscrollswhich centuryByzantinechurchin Petra.The werefoundat Petrain late1993.(Foran sixtyor so charredpapyrusscrollswere accountof thediscovery,see BA57:1 broughtto the conservationlaboratory twelvehad atACOR.As of mid-October, [1994]:55-57.)Undertheleadershipof The been unrolled. conservation team Frds6n(professor of paPmfessor Jaakko this pyrologyattheAcademyof Finland),the anticipatescompleting extremely conservationteamarrivedfromFinland slowanddemandingprocessof conservat thebeginningof September1994. ing thecarbonizedpapyriby theend of
C
242
workhasbegunonthe onservation
57:4(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
February1995.Thefragilematerialis beingphotographedusingspecial methodsin orderto maketheblackink on thecharredblackpapyruseasierto decipher.Publicationworkwill be undertakenby theUniversityof Helsinki and theUniversityof Michigan. Thetextsreadso farareeconomic documentsin Greek.Theywerewritten
/q
to
This sixteen cm long scroll is currently being unwrapped.A view of its end (ca. two cm in diameter)clearlyshows the layersof rolled papyrus. Photographby HenryCowherd, @ACOR.
by several differentpeople in a variety of types of handwriting, sometimes very cursive and difficult to decipher, but in other cases extremely legible. Some texts are written on both sides of the papyrus. Despite the fact that Greek was the language of Roman and Byzantine Arabiaand Palestine,a variety of traditionalNabataean names has already been deciphered;there are also many Christianand pagan Greeknames. The largestscroll opened so far was originallyabout ten meters long. It inventories the property of a deceased person named Obodianus and deals with contractsand agreements concernThis mass of carbonized papyrusscrolls containsten of the total of over sixty scrollsnow creditedto Petra's Byzantinechurch.
ing loans, sales, and inheritancesof plots of land and houses. Another scroll (originallyabout four meters long) consists in three copies of the will of a man suffering from a severe illness; he leaves his property to the Peter,apparently the abbot of the monastery at Jebel Haroun, and to a person named Theodorus Obodianus. The writer asks his heirs to provide clothing and food for his mother.A third scroll which is still under conservation deals with a division of inherited property.The property includes gardens, houses, and agricul-tural land. All of the properties were south of Petra. The measurements and 41l location of the properties with the names of all the neighbors are described with great accuracy. The texts found in the scrolls constitute the largest group of written material . .
from antiquity found in Jordan.They are especially importantbecause they belong to the end of the fifth and beginning of the sixth century-the latest date found so far in the scrolls is 538 CE-which is otherwise almost a blank page in the history of Petra.As made plain by the scrolls already read, the 4tr
~
L .
t;
Ilk
9hp 40
The single word "PETRA"(Petra)from one of the scrolls. Photograph by Henry Cowherd,? ACOR.
Photographby HenryCowherd, ? ACOR.
qt
46?
~if
,16 "V;
fi?
Nr
papyri will yield detailed information on the people of Petraand their economic and social situation. They will also offer information on the question of what happened to the Nabataeans and Nabatean culture in Petraunder early Byzantine rule. Funding for the painstaking conservation projecthas come from a variety of sources including private donors and the National Endowment for the Humanities (USA). Additional funds are criticalfor the successful conservation of this stupendous legacy. Individual donors may choose to adopt and name a scroll. For furtherinformation,contact ACOR (410-516-3495 in the U.S.; 846-117 in Jordan). GlenL.Peterman ACORAssistantDirector
1
AL
•
"• "• 4L"
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4(1994)
243
voi
op 14
1p,
9k
14
dw
%
*.,; ,. "aI.!, Ap
m" A
.4 -
A-
I Z: 1,
Or-A
4..
I, * -10 - 4 1...
Vp %#441Ff*'
a
*P it
,p 4W
Oar
A? lop jo. -
Ito' 3w
go
16
I4e-. V OV,
1-1 %R . .40'
dPlpp
KholetriaOrtos, Cyprus.
The
1994
Kholetria
Ortos
n excavationseasonsupportedby A e NationalGeographicSociety andtheNationalEndowmentforthe Humanitieshasjustbeencompletedat thelargeaceramicNeolithicsettlement Ortos.Thestudy,undertakof Kholetria en by theUniversityof NevadaatLas Vegas,is investigatingsettlementand economicpatternsof earlyNeolithic societyin westernCyprus.The1994 thethirdandmost seasonrepresented intenseeffort. Locatedon top of a prominenthill overlookingtheXeropotamus Valley, Ortoswas at one timea large remainsareexsettlement.Artifactual thesitehas tremelyrich. Unfortunately, beensubjectedto severenaturaland culturaldisturbancesoverthecenturies, as demonstratedby geoarchaeological investigationof thesite. Despitethis degradation,overa meterof stratified 244
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
Excavations materialis present.However,no intact architectural remainshavebeenrecovered,althoughexcavatorsretrieved fragmentsof mudbrick Findsincludeover62,000chipped stoneartifacts.Theserepresentall frominitialrestagesof manufacture, ductionto finaltoolproduction.Retouchedtoolsarecommon,withcrescentshapedsicklebladesbeingvery abundant.Othertoolformsinclude truncations, burins,andscrapers. Groundstonealsois abundant.Overa dozenenigmaticincisedcobbleshave beenrecovered.Similarartifactsare only knownfromKhirokitia.Several ornamentsalsohavebeenrecovered, includingtwo tinybakedclayfigurines of portlyshapedhumans. A huge sampleof bonewas recovered,with caprines(sheepand goats), pigs,anddeerwell represented.The
caprinesrepresentabout50 percentof the animals,whilepigs anddeerform approximately equalproportions.Exhaustivefloatationstudiesalsoyielded significantamountsof carbonizedplant materials.Together,theseshouldprovide excellenteconomicdataon subsistencestrategiesduringtheNeolithic.In addition,we hopethatphytolithstudies will alsoadd economicandenvironmentaldata. Theexcavationof Ortoswill provide substantialinformationon a poorly understoodportionof Cyprus'long past. Thesedatawill shed considerable new lighton how Neolithicpeoples adaptedto,and impacted,a nearpristineenvironment. AlanH. Simmons
from Vessels Early Church Christian
.?* : ---.? ..
Threeliturgicalglassvesselsunearthed this summer by archaeologistsfrom St. Louis Community College could significantlyexpand knowledge of ancient Christiancongregationsin Syria. Excavatorsunearthed a glass chalice and two glass oil lamps during the summer season at TellTuneinir,Syria.The site is situated in northernSyria,along the KhaburRiver,a tributaryof the EuphratesRiver.All threevessels were discovered in a filled cistern outside of an early Christianchurch in Syria. (Fora description of the church,see BA 57:1 [1994]:38-45.)The shapes of the lamps and chalice are typical of an era of approximately 400-700 CE.A calibrated radiocarbondate indicates that the vessels were buried approximately 1,100 years ago (ca. 900 CE),probably as part of a church renovation. Discoveries of altarequipment are
The
History
of
Ancient
By G6sta W Ahlstr6m,990pp.Minneapolis:FortressPress, 1993;$29.00(paper). opus,now Inhis long-awaited magnum Ahlstrom
published posthumously, recounts the history of Palestinefrom prehistorictimes until its conquest by Alexander the Great.Ahlstrom's main goal is to write a history of the peoples of Palestine "ina form freed from the bias of the biblicalwriters"(10).He seeks "totry to write a history of ancient Palestinein the same way that the history of any other country and all of its people is normally written"(52).In this Ahistr6m succeeds admirably. In a lengthy introduction,Ahlstr6m lays out his particularmethodological interestsand concerns.He stresses the importance of archaeology,a discipline in which he was well-versed, to eluci-
oii~*5 .Urr~ru1~
An ancient Christian chalice, center, and two glass oil lamps from TellTuneinir.The chalice is about seven inches tall with a rimdiameter of 3 1/8 inches. The largeroil lamp measures 8 1/4 inches tall with a diameter of 6 1/4 inches. The smallerlamp is 8 5/8 inches tall with a diameter of 5 1/2 inches. Aftercleaning the chalice, examinationrevealedthat the interiorof the vessel contained a dry red residuethat resembles red wine. Thisidentificationwill be tested when the resin is analyzedfor the wine's distinctivetannins. Photograph by DaveHanlon.
rare.A 600-yearold silver treasurewas discovered in Syria by the German Archaeological Mission excavating at Resafa. The three glass vessels from
Tuneinirare several centuries older that the Resafa finds. MichaelFuller
Palestine date Palestine's past, and throughout gives a detailed and solid treatmentof the archaeologicaldata. He also assesses the Bible as a historicalsource. His criticismsare many: Israelitehistoriography as a whole is late in date (43, 513); and the Bible is religious history (32,43), "notreally concerned with facts"(42), and contains "literarycreations"(50) and schematisms (42,375). However, he does not totally discount the biblical witness, but relies on it extensively for the monarchicalperiod and after. Chapter 1 surveys the land of Palestine, its name, geography, climate, travel routes, and naturalresources.This is followed by a chapter on the prehistoric period by Gary O. Rollefson. Ahlstrom then reconstructsthe EarlyBronze through Persian periods in several wellwritten and very detailed chapters. Throughout,he extends his discussion to
include the Transjordanianpeoples and nations. In addition, twenty-four wellselected maps illustratethe text.Chapter 5, "TheLate Bronze Age," is the highlight of the book, for it shows Ahlstrom's skill in blending textual and artifactual data in a carefuland controlled manner. The main strengths of the volume are:1) its massive documentation. Each page is a rich mine of bibliography,offering both the scholar and student opportunity for furtherresearch;2) its several indices, facilitatingtopical study; and 3) its reconstructionof each epoch on the basis of data drawn from extant sources and not on the basis of flights of fancy or generalizingmodels borrowed from other cultures or periods. Thereare also threeweaknesses. First, despite the enormous documentation, thereis no full bibliographyin the appenSee Ancient Palestine,page 246
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
245
incisiveevaluationof thesenew materials.Third,Ahlstrim'suse of the Bibleis dices.Unfortunately, thismakesusing puzzling.Whenhe describestheIron the volumesomewhatawkwardsince age and Persianperiods,he tendsesin abbrereferences many sentiallyto restatethebiblicalstory(alappearonly viatedform.Tofindthefullbibliograph- beitwithoutits religiousperspective) ic data,thereadermustplow through with archaeological supplements,even theprecedingreferencesorconsultthe it that notneedcorrobodoes declaring Indexof Authorsandlookup every rationfromindependentsources(542). occurrenceof thatname.Second,as Thisstatementis ratherconfusing,since lamentedby Ahlstr6m(11),thedocuearlierhe hadwarnedthereaderagainst mentationendsat 1986,withonly a few relianceon thebiblicaltextwithoutextrabiblicalsupport(32).Also,he writes,"it referencesto newerworks.Thusmany recent volumes are is quiteclearthatthebiblicalwriters omitted, important andmostregretfully, thereaderis deknewnothingabouteventsin Palestine of use of skilled and the tenthcenturyBCE" (45),yet before prived Ahlstr6m's 245 Ancient Palestine from page
Introducing
the
the
Context
Cultural
of
ByJohnJ. Pilch, xiv + 212 pp and xiv + 254 pp. Mahwah,NJ:PaulistPress, 1991; $14.95each.
pfhetwovolumesinthissetarenot
yournormalBiblestudyguides. Insteadof proceedingchronologically or bookby book,theyincorporate a series of "sessions"thataddressspecificaspectsof thebiblicaltextin lightof the corebeliefsandvaluesof theculturein whichthetextwas produced.Exceptfor theintroduction, whichis thesamein eachvolume,each"session"is basedon a contrastbetweenthebeliefsandvalues of theancientMediterranean world andthoseof NorthAmericanculture. Forexample,SessionThreein thefirst volumecontraststheemphasisin Americancultureon guilt,manifested withtheMediterranean core internally, valuesof honorandshame,expressed externally. Buildingon thiscontrast, Pilchpresentsa numberof penetrating insightsintopassagesfromtheBookof how an underProverbs,demonstrating of honor and shame clarifies standing muchthatmightotherwisebe unclearto a NorthAmericanaudience. Readersof Biblical will Archaeologist perhapsbe surprisedthattheseguides 246
Context
Cultural
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
the
New
of
the
Old
he givesa detailedhistoryof theJudges periodusingbiblicaldataextensively. Theseminorcaveatsnotwithstanding,Ahlstr6m'smasteryof the fullspectrumof sourcesand standardhistoricalcriticalmethodologymakesthis volume a valuableadditionto SyroPalestinianand Israelitehistoricalstudies.Anyoneinterestedin the history andarchaeologyof IsraelandPalestine will benefitgreatlyfromit. PaulS.Ash EmoryUniversity
Testament
and
Introducing
Testament
to the "culturalcontext"of the Oldand New Testamentshavenothingto say aboutarchaeology. Thoseseekingsuch informationmustturnelsewhere.Also, certainreadersmightbe troubledby some of theculturalcontrastsdeveloped by Pilch.Forexample,in theNew Testamentvolumehe claimsthata recognitionthattheMediterranean cultural of and strategies deception lying "permeate"theNew Testamentis essential forits understanding. Doesthismean thatdeceptionandlyingareany less pervasivein NorthAmericanculture? Shouldwe notalsoconsidertheirrole in ourown lives?He alsosuggeststhat a predilectionforviolenceis centralto Mediterranean culture,implyingthat violenceis less importantin ourown. Thiscontrastseemsrathershallowin lightof theexplosiveincreasein violence we in Americaarepresentlyexperiencing. Fewof us canlegitimatelyexpectto escapethe impactof thisunfortunate development.Theseobservationssuggest thattheuse of discrete,categorical distinctionsbetweencultures,although an undoubtedlyeffectiveteachingtechcontributeto a nique,canunfortunately monolithic,stagnant,andpossiblydistortedpictureof the culturesbeingcompared.Canwe reallyignoretheobvious
diversitythatexistswithinNorthAmericanculture?Is it appropriateto argue thatsuchdiversitydid notexistin the ancientMediterranean world?Arewe in trulyjustified assumingthatMediterraneanculturehasnot undergoneany significantchangesoverthelasttwo to fourthousandyears?Canwe justifiably downplaytheimpactof culturalchange in ourown society? One other"feature" of thesevolumes shouldbe noted.Pilchdoes notalways providesupportforhis claimsabout Mediterranean andNorthAmericanculhe oftenbeginshisinsights Instead, ture. with the words"expertstellus,"without notingwho theseexpertsareor the evidenceupon whichtheirclaimsare based.Whileit wouldbeunfairto askfor a detailedbibliographic apparatusin a workdearlydirectedto a lay audience, thisoccasionallackof supportmakesit difficultto accepthis assertionswithout question.Additionalevidenceof a potentialproblemin thisregardcomes froman examplehe uses to supporthis claimthata group'sculturehasa profoundinfluenceon how it perceivesthe world.Pilchassertsthatthe HopiIndiansof theAmericanSouthwestperceivetheworldin onlytwo colorsbecausetheirlanguagehasonlytwo color
terms.Ignoringtheproblemswith the generalclaimeven if the factsof the examplewerecorrect,the truthis that the Hopihave an extensivecolorterminologyexpressedquiteclearlyin a rich and vibrantartistictraditiondating backwell beforeany contactwith Europeans.Inthiscase,andperhapsin oth-
Ancient
Hebrew
ers,Pilchdearlyneedsto a betterjob checkinghis facts. Despitethesecaveats,thereis much of valuein thesestudyguides.Theinandin some sightsareoftenenlightening casesprofound.Whilenon-Catholics may findthe numerousreferencesto VaticanIIsomewhatdistracting,indi-
Inscriptions: Corpus
and
WadeR.Kotter SilverSpring,MD
Concordance
commodities(barley,wine),and fora few otherwords(e.g.,the symbolfora pot).Additionally,twelveuncertain symbolsareidentifiedandlabeled "symbol1"through"symbol12." Thesecondmainsectionof the book Sncient Hebrew Inscriptions presents Xathe knownHebrewinscriptions is a detailedconcordanceof all the comthatdatefromearlierthanapproximate- pletedistinctwordsand symbolsfound in theinscriptions,includingthe conThetwo primarypartsof the ly 200BCE. and bookarethetransliterated textsanda junctionw,inseparable prepositions, Daviesalsonotesthe orcommen- heinterrogativum. no translation concordance; frequencyof occurrenceof eachword taryis included. Thetextsareassigneda doublenum- withinthe corpusas a whole. ber:the firstgroupsthemaccordingto Generallyspeaking,thereadingsthat Daviesproposesareof equalor higher theirsiteof origin(1forLachish,2 for Arad,etc.),while thesecondidentifies probabilitythanthoseof the earliereditionsfromwhichtheyvary,though the specificinscriptionin question.An scholarswill continueto debateindividexceptionis madeforsealsandsealimpressions,stamps,coins,andinscribed ual readings.Forexample,in the fourth line of the thirdLachishletter(1.003.4), weightsandmeasures,whichare Daviesproposesto readw,wherethe groupedaccordingto typeratherthan siteand areassignedinitialnumbers originalpublicationreadsS.Thoughnot an impossiblereading,the shortdownthatrangefrom100to 109. Eachentryin thetextsectionis accom- strokethatis presentsuggeststhata letterotherthanw is morelikely.On a few referenceto paniedby a bibliographical its primarypublication.Readingsfreoccasions,a rightbracketis presentin quentlyvaryin detailfromthosepresent the middleof a linewithouta correin thepublicationscited,reflectingcorspondingleftbracket(e.g.,1.006.8, rectionsto theoriginalreadingsormore 1.020.2).Thoughperhapsindicatinga recentunderstandingsof the text.Alter- breakin the surfaceof the inscription,it would seempreferableto enclosea natereadingsarenot infrequent,and blankspaceinsidea pairof brackets.In obviousscribalerrorsaresometimes thereading[hwlbshouldbe corrected.Transliteration followscom100.595.1, mon practice,withoutdistinguishing [hwb],sincetheleftpartof thebullais brokenoff.Daviestranscribes betweensinandshin. onlythe Numeralsandvariousothersymbols firsttwo linesof papyrusA fromWadi as do Benoitet al.in Discovoccurin certaintexts,especiallythose Murabba'at, DesertofJordan thatreflectlistsof provisions.Theyare eriesintheJudaean (DJD), (Oxford: especiallyfrequentin theAradinscrip- vol.2, LesgrottesdeMurabba'at tions.Thesymbolspresentin theinscrip- ClarendonPress,1961).However,readtionsincludethoseforvariousweights ings fromlinesthreethroughfive are andmeasures(e.g.,bath,ephah, for presentin thenotesof DJD,and,though shekel),
By G.I. Davies, xxxiv + 563 pp. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1991;$110.00.
vidualsfromanytraditionwill no doubt profitfroma seriousindividualorgroup studyprogrambasedon thesevolumes.
the photographin thatbookis unclear, theselinesshouldprobablyhavebeen includedin thepresentbook Despitesuchminormatters,it is hard to findfaultwithanyaspectof thebook. Thepresentationof thetextis dearand lucid,andthe concordanceis comprehensiveand easyto use. Originalpublicationsaregivenforeachreading,and readingspublishedin othermajorcollectionsof inscriptionsarecross-referencedin a handytableatthe end of the book.Twoadditionsmightbe consideredin futureeditions.First,in orderto facilitatelocatingparticular inscriptions, it wouldbe helpfulto havea fullbibliography,includingreferencenumbers to readingsin thepresentbook,of allof the primarypublications.Second,numberingeveryfivelinesof the longer inscriptionswouldmakecomparisons of thereadingsin thisbookwithother a littleeasier. transcriptions AncientHebrew is desInscriptions tinedto be a primaryreferencetoolfor epigraphists,historians,and other scholarsforyearsto come.Itsconcise and presentation, logicalorganization, comprehensiveconcordancemakeit invaluableforthestudyof Hebrew epigraphicmaterial.
R.Adair, James Jr. TexasChristianUniversity
Biblical 57:4(1994) Archaeologist
247
Biblical
Social
Values
and
Edited by JohnJ. Pilch and BruceJ.
Malina. 244 pp. Peabody, MA:. Hendrickson, 1993; $19.95.
of the
difficultiesfaced
major by O0ne historians,biblicalscholars,and archaeologists is identifying with the social world of the ancient Near Eastand Mediterraneanarea.To do so requires an understanding of sociology, anthropology, and psychology.Many of us simply do not want to add anotherbody of scholarly literatureto our reading list. Moreover,social-scientificstudy of the ancient world is a fairlynew subdiscipline and one which many scholarsfind foreign or intimidating.However, it is preciselybecause the culturalorientation of the peoples of the ancient world is in many cases exactly the opposite of western culturethat misintermodemrn, pretationof texts and artifactualdata has occurred.Keyed to the socialand cultural orientationof the Mediterraneanworld, BiblicalSocialValuesand TheirMeaning:A Handbook attempts to provide researchers and students with an easy to understand, non-threateningguide to social scientificterminology and social values. Although it is primarilyconcernedwith the New Testamentperiod, most of what is found here is equally applicable to the world of ancient Israel. The editors'introductionsets the tone for the volume. It defines basic terms like "value,""value object,"and "symbol," and then provides a lucid explanationof the kinds of values and human behaviors which are the basis of Mediterranean culture.These include a time orientation that looks first to the past and then to the present, a sense of subjectionand powerlessness in relationshipto nature, and a view of human nature as a mixture of both good and evil. The comparative charton pp. xxx-xxxviii is particularly helpful, and quite startlingthe first time through, in demonstrating the gulf of differencein reactionto the world. The individual articlesare, for the most part,quite short. They are written
248
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:4(1994)
Their
Meaning:
A
Handbook
by a group of thirteenscholars,most of whom have worked together as a part of the Social Sciences and New Testament InterpretationSection at the Society of BiblicalLiterature'sannual meeting. The writing is broadly done, and sometimes the reader will find that the articlestops short of full coverage. For instance, the articleon "feast"(pp. 7679) provides excellentinformationon the importanceof food and the social nature of meals. However, and perhaps this is intended in all of the articles,it require that the reader seek out the examples listed and test the premises of the author. Some of the terminology will seem foreign or even stilted to many scholars (for example, "progressorientation"in relation to change). However, each term is well explained and eventually should become the basis of a new vocabulary within the discipline. Cross references to related articlesor terms also increase the utility of this handbook. A sample of the articlesthrows light on physical items, such as clothing and jewelry (pp. 20-25), that have social connotations of status, gender, and wealth, and on relationships,especially in the articles on "dyadism" (pp. 49-52), "group orientation"(pp. 88-91), and "patronage"(pp. 133-137). The article on "hands-feet"(pp. 92-95) provides an excellent example of the contrastbetween the modem and ancient world views. In ancientMediterraneanculture, healing is a "hands on" activity,which involves "power and restorationof meaning to a person'slife,"while in westem culture hands are seen in relationto technology, productivity,and employment (p. 95). Since it is no longer enough to simply collect data, catalogue it, and store it, archaeologistsand those who interpret the findings of excavation must now become familiarwith social-scientificterminology.This volume is an excellent firststep toward providing the profession and our students with a basic knowledge of this subdiscipline's usefulness to historicaland theologicalinter-
pretation.Its only majorflaw is the failure to include a reading list or basic bibliography.Futureeditions, in addition to revised and expanded articles, should correctthis oversight. VictorH. Matthews Southwest Missouri State University
Sub-Scribe
Toplaceyoursubscriptionto Biblical Archaeologist,complete this form and returnit to ScholarsPress,P.O. Box15399,Atlanta,GA30333-0399. Individualordersmust be prepaid by checkor money-orderdrawnon a UnitedStates bankor by VISAor Forfasterservicewith MasterCard. or VISA,call (404) 727MasterCard 2345. Non-USsubscribersadd $5 for postage. EI $35 USindividuals E- $45 USinstitutions nI $40 non-USindividuals E1$50 non-USinstitutions El Checkormoney-order enclosed VISA MasterCard EI I CardNumber Date Expiration Signature Name (Please print.)
Address)
Country
Scholas Scholars Pressispleased to offera selection ofASOR-related Thesetitles Eisenbrauns. titles,previously published through include theASOR earlyissuesoftheBASOR Supplements, volumes and fromtheASORDissertation Annual, series, works. additional Titlesfromthebacklist,aslistedbelow,are noteligiblefornormal member Theavailability discounts. of thiscollection ofbacklisttitlesthrough Scholars Press assures thewidestpossible fortheseimportant audience works. The Other Side of the Jordan NelsonGlueck Code:85 92 15
Cloth:$20.00
The Care and Feeding of Dirt Archaeologists MelvinK. Lyons Code:85 92 18
The Tell el-Hesi Field Manual A. Blakely& Lawrence E. Toombs Jeffrey Code:85 92 13 Code:85 92 14
Paper:$5.95
Cloth:$20.00 Paper:$15.00
Romans and Saracens A Historyof the ArabianFrontier S. ThomasParker Code:85 91 01
Paper:$35.00
Paper: $30.00
Arrowheads of the Neolithic Levant Avi Gopher Code:85 91 05
38. The 1957 Excavations at Beth Zur PaulLapp Code:85 92 07
Cloth:$35.00
39. The Excavation at Bethel (1934-1960) JamesL. Kelso Code:85 92 08
Cloth:$35.00
41. Discoveries in the Wadi ed-Daliyeh PaulW. LappandNancyL. Lapp Cloth:$35.00
43. Preliminary Excavation Reports Bib edh-Dhric,Sardis,Meiron,Tell el-Hesi,Carthage (Punic) DavidNoelFreedman, editor Cloth:$35.00
47/48. Two volumes in one: 47. The Excavations at Araq el-Emir, Volume 1 NancyL. Lapp,editor
Cloth:$47.50
49. Recent Excavations in Israel Studiesin IronAge Archaeology GitinandWilliam G. Dever,editors Seymour
Paper:$10.00
Cloth:$45.00
Code:85 91 06
Cloth:$35.00(NoMEMBER PRIct)
50. The JordanValley Survey, 1953 SomeUnpublishedSoundingsConductedby James Mellaart AlbertLeonard Jr. Code:85 91 07
Cloth:$40.00
Paper:$10.00
18. American Expedition to Idalion, Cyprus, First Preliminary Reports Seasonsof 1971 and 1972 andG. ErnestWright, Lawrence E. Stager,AnitaWalker, editors Code: 85 93 03
Cloth:$17.50 Paper:$13.50
Code:85 92 12
15/16. A Roman-Byzantine Burial Cave in Northern Palestine R. O. SellersandD. C. Baramki Code:85 92 02
Code:85 92 05 Code:85 92 06
Cloth:$45.00
7/9. The Early Arabian Necropolis of Ain Jawan A Pre-IslamicandEarlyIslamicSite on the Persian Gulf R. L. Bowen Code:8592 01
Cloth:$15.00
21. Report on Archaeological Work at Suwwanet eth-Thaniya, Tananir, and Khirbet Minha (Munhata) GeorgeM. Landes,editor
48. The Amman Airport Excavations, 1976 LarryG. Herr,editor
Amarna Personal Names S. Hess Richard Code:85 91 04
Code:85 92 04
Code:85 92 10 Paper: $32.50
Lower Galilee during the Iron Age ZviGal Code:8591 03
19. The Joint Expedition to Caesarea Maritima, Volume 1 Studiesin the Historyof CaesareaMaritima Charles T. Fritsch, editor
Code:85 92 09
Burial Patterns and Cultural Diversity in Late Bronze Age Canaan RivkaGonen Code:85 91 02
Pres
Paper:$12.50
cholars Center -437
Sc 2o
a -44fZ
??:?:?r::?:
iif iiii::-iiiii :lii-ii-
::
i:::
.::~:i: ''''
_-I-i:;
::i:: ii.....,i. .:i._,..:::iiiii:.: i:::: ::::':
:::iiii :::
::::-
:i::::: I:___il
: :-i:: ::::
:::
:::': '
:::' :::
-i:::
::::i:::-I: ::?::? ::rjiiiii -:I:I
fiiliii""i I: :iiiil:l-.ii.i.i-i
i: li-i:ii::::: :::: :ii-:::::iii:l:: ~i: ::: ::::::~ii
:I: :::::-:
:ii-:-----:ii----::i:: ::- iiii? iiiiiiiiiii :::_i:: _ii: iiii-''i? _-,iii,:-,:::iiiiii--: :ii ::j_:
:i:
ii ::i::~
1
:i::i:i:::: :i
:::
:i
:?:::-::i:i: i'i '' :::-:: :-:: :::*:?:? :i: _ij:
::i: :::::::::: :::::'::: -::-:--:::i:::l :::-::::::::::i:_: iiiii
i:
:I:
I:i,
''iii :::,i : :::::':' :':':::. :iiiiin:
:: ::
:? ii::
:i:i:
:: :: ,::?::
::::
:i: -I.
::j: -':':i:: ::::::::
i'i:
::i:
ii
li:li
:i:
:::i:
iiii-
?::il -:::::i'i:::::: -i:?~Bi:l: ::: :i:: :iiiil:: .:::::: :::::::i:::i:i: :::i: :::::i::
:i
-iiiiiiiiiiiiii '::::::::' _~::???i: :: :::
::
::_ ::::::ii::liii i.???::.i.i.i.?,ii: ?i:
::
:: :i: ::-:i:: ::
:::: ::::: ::::
::::i:i:i
:iii: :::::: iii: i::::::::: ::li:
?:::
g
?:::?: ::i:
''~iliiiiiiiiilliiiiil: : :::::::: ::::: I: ,riiii: _:::j:l:i:: :w:::::::: ::::: :iiiiii:ii:: :::::::::::::: :?-.-~.i gsis: ::::::::::::? .iiiiiiiii: :::::::: :::::: :iIi:::: ::I_ :::::::::::::?: :i:i:i:: ::ii:lliiiiiiiii
::
:::::::::::
j.i
:s
:::
?:?
ilili:
~:::::::::::: iiii
:::::::: ::::: i --::i:': ::i::'iiiii :: ii:il::::iiiiiii ::--'':''''': -':''''-:iiiiiiiiliiiiiiiiii :-:::
9D.:''""11
~,:jiiiii,,:
i:ii: ::? :i::: :::::::: ::':i::
::I:::
'':' : :::: -:-:::-::: :::i:::::::: ~:
::: ::::i:i:: :::::
_il:
:::
::i:i:i::::. :::': ::::::: :::iii:: iiiiiiii::: :iiiiii :::: :: ::i:i:i:i:::::i:i:i:i:: ::::::::: .Sil
c~iiiiiii ::::.: :::::?b~b~p~:. : :::::::::i?li-ib::iii :i:i:::' ?iili:: ::::::: ::::ii:::: : ::::::: ::: :::-: : ::: :':::: ::: :i: -18j :::::: :::: I: ::-:::-''''''::.:.:::.
::i iii: ::::::
:::::::::: ::::i-i:
ii-:l:::::-:i :::::::::::::: :~::i::::::? :? :::: :::::: ::: ::-::: ::i :i:
:'-'''''''-''''''''':''''''''''''''':':' :::::::: iniiiiialaiiiiili:i::iiii:::::::i ::i:I:: I ?'ii?i?iiiiii:: :ii:i?i :iii liiiiiiiiii:i:iiiiiiI: iiiiii :-::-
:::: -:-I : :, ::: .?:?:::::::: ri,.,:,:ii' :::::lii:?li:i:::: :::::::::::: iiiiI :i:i :iiiiireiij:iiiiii:: iii;ii::
a: ::,:i::
iiiiiiXiir :::.' :i:.:::::
:::
:::::: ~-i-i i-: ~:.::_:::::: ::: :::iii:::': : ::: :::::...::::::-::::??~: :::?-::':: ::: -:I:: ::::_:::iii -iiii1::
:I-:: ::i: :::::ii-ii?:':::':''i~.?i ::i:i:: ::''''''''' i:::: ::iiiiiaiii:::::::::::: :::::::::::: :':'?::: :iiiii: :::::::: :ili:i_-liiiii :''''':::::: :::: :: ::
:i:i:l:::: ?:?
:::
:::
::?:
::::
-::::::::::?? :::::? iiI_ :- :::::i::::: :iii: -I:I ::::: ::ii :::::::::::: i: ::::-:::i:: -::: :::::: : :: ::i:-:i:::: ::: :?:
:'::
iii::iiili:il: ::: ::: :::::::::::: :i::-:: ::-:::
:::::::
:liiiii:Il:i::?: :::ii::
'''''''''''':': ::::::::::
:::::::.::::: ::_i:: ::::: : ::':'':: :::::::
::i::
?ii:i:::::
::::-:-: i: ::.:~: ::iiiii::: iiiiiii
::~: : -:::i:i: :rj::
::i: :'
iiiiiiiiiiiliii :::::::::::::. iiiiiiil::
:: ::::::i:i:::
::::
::::::::::::::: iii::
::i:
~:::::
.1 :::
:?:::? ,:s::: ::i
:i: :::'i: :':':: liiii: .ili
::~::
:i? i::
::~: ::: :iii-:?
-:i::.: :iiiii:?l::: :?:_:::::
--
j:_
::::
:::::
:?:
-iiiij:iii: : :::::::::-:
:::::?::~?'::i:
::::
:::::li:I :::il:: :::,:::: :::111:::::: :::::::::
siiiii::lii::
I:
iii::i:i:i: ::::::: :::::::::::::
::::
:::
::: ::-::: ::1::
~::::: iiI
ii:
::::-::::::::
':" ::::I
::::::: :::::::::::::: :iiiiiji: ::i:i:i:
:: ::: :i :i: :?
*a:::i::
?''::::::
::: ::::::::::::::::: :::i:::i:i:i:: :::::::: ':::' ::':':' '''iii' :''''''''':::::: :::::_:: iii::::
:::
::
:'--::::?' ::::
:::
.iii: ::: :
:ii::
:ib
id:
:::::
:::~::::
:?-:::::::::::::
'iiiiiii:-::iiil: .::::::.,i:::i:ii:j
i:i
::::; 'i'':
::::I:
iii
:ii
:::
i::
::i:: :
i- ililii-i:-i-i'-
:':':':: ?-j? al :::
:::
.:::;:i: :::i:i:i:: ::i:i:j::::i: i:iiiiiliiiijiiiii:ii li::iiiiii?ii?: I:i: :ii ::: :::.? :: :'ii~il4:i:ii~iiijiIc ::i?::::::::i?~::)i:: :::I iiii
::: ::
::iiiiii: :i:i:i:i:i::::
::i:: ::: ::::: :::::::::~ ::::i:: ::: ::
i
:i::
:ii:: ::i~ :? i-:::::::::: ::::::::::::::: ::ri ::;::li:: ::::::: -ii:::::ii: iii i-_:i:iii:i::-ii :I:: :i::::iiii:::: ::: ::i:
:: _:::.::i::
.::i: :::::::::: :::::
:i::-iiiiii: :?: :::::::
~i iii:: ::: :iii-
::'''' ::::::::::::: iiiiil:::: iiiii :::: ::.: ::::':':: :-:,iiiiiiiiii:!:: ::'''''''':'': ::':':~: ::-:''''''
:::
~iiiiiiiii:jii:
-iiiiiii::
:::: : ':::':'::: :::i~: :::
I?
-lii
::::::i: :::::iii.,iiiiiiaiiiraaiiiiiiii:::: :'':'''''''''''''''''''':'?':: :i~il::'i'..:i:: :::::::i:: :'i:l'i'i'i':: a:iiiii:::'-1::: -:-?::: ::i:::i:i? ::-::::::: ::::::? :: :::::::' liiitiiiriii:i i'iiii ?:?::::::::: :i: :::I:::i:i ::::::i: :':::::::: ::ii::: ::::: ii:i':::::'i ::i:i:i:::: :::: ::- ijiii :::j ::::
-
:i-i:iiiiiii-: i:i:.. ,:i:i:ii-'::,, :::':':': :':iiiiii:':i:iliiii:i;i.~'.ii,,l:::il_ ::
i:i :li:
::::::::: :iiiii:i: :
::,:::: ,k
:::i:
liiiiil :::
:::::i:i::, :: ::: :: ::':I:-::::::I:
-i: i :::: -:-:::-
:: 'iiil _ii:
:::
:i?j
-i ::::: ::::::
:i ii :::
:-::
::::::::: :-:i:i:: :: :::i~ ::.:Ii:iii-i:-iiiii iiiii-i :
:ii
I:::
::::.~:i?: 'i::::: i:: i:::: ::::::i:i:::. ::::
i:: :i:
:,:: :_: :
:-'::
:::':'' i:i: ::::
:::: :: ::
:i
::: ::::
::_I:::
_i:j
S H
ii Iliii InI
r,,
II
I
,S
et,
-
--
......
A
-
0*
...
