Perspectiveson the Ancient Worldfrom Mesopotamiato the Mediterranean
Vol.59 No.4
December1996
to the Rescue Tiglath-Pileser 411061111111161v c+1v ?r rrr
*~i
;
'
4X
ii ?
I
.
.t
, 1.
,\
:+'~ 46
i ?
161 f It
,
V;IL
~t/At
4.4 Ti
~
;
~
Olr?bc?I
'
i
Military
L
C
U
~
.?
Y
or
8
Intervention
Iron-Age Style S.
to
he
SeeRonld
~epirahc
cs
ronAge!
.e
-dl'
nayis
pg
23
Biblical Archaeolo Perspectiveson the Ancient Worldfrom Mesopotamiato the Mediterranean
Volume59 Number4
A Publicationof the American Schools of OrientalResearch 194
December1996
The Makingof The OxfordEncyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East Adapted from the Preface by Eric M. Meyers, Editor-in-Chief
The ground-breaking OxfordEncyclopediaof Archaeologyin the Near East has just appeared. ASORcan be justly proud of its role in the making of the OEANE.Eric M. Meyers, Editor-in-Chief,and Section Editors William G. Dever, Carol Meyers, JamesD. Muhly,Dennis Pardee,and JamesA. Sauercan claima toweringand durable contributionto Near Easternresearch.
198
Ethnicityand Originof the Iron I Settlers in the Highlands of Canaan: Can the Real Israel Stand Up? Israel Finkelstein
Who settled in the hundreds of small villages that dotted the hill country of Iron I Canaan? In last December's issue of BAdevoted to ceramicsand ethnicity,William Dever identified these highlanders as a new ethnic entity, as the people Israel.In a challenge to Dever's identification,Israel Finkelsteinargues that Dever is too conservative archaeologically; Dever has valued ceramics over settlement patterns. Moreover,Dever's historical reconstructionclings too tightly to the biblical story. Instead,Finkelsteindepicts the rise of an ethnically distinct Israelas the latest phase in long-term, cyclic processes of settlement oscillations in the highlands. Archaeologicaldata firstplace this "realIsrael"on the historicalstage only in the ninth-eighth centuries BCE.
ge 194
213 .,..-0!4-
W
Appeals for Military Intervention:Stories from Zinjirli and the Bible Simon B. Parker
Al
Iron Age Syrian inscriptions and various biblical stories referencean ancient military strategy used by Near Easternkings who were threatenedby a more powerful neighbor: they bid a yet more formidable king to the rescue. Examining the literary dynamics of these accounts discloses that the royal inscriptions from Zinjirli possess neither a greaternor a lesser correspondence to "history"than the biblical accounts of Asa and Ahaz. Whether in inscriptions recovered in modern times by archaeologistsor in a Bibletransmittedforcenturiesby religiousbodies, such accounts must be appreciatedas narrativesbefore they can be used as historical sources.
225
Royal Officials and CourtFamilies:A New Look at the 'T1 ' (ykliidim) in 1 Kings 12 Nili Fox
The famous narrativeof Rehoboam's first and worst royal decision (1 Kings 12:115) structuresthe new king's options as the choice between the advice of the court "elders"and "youth."The preciseidentityof this lattergroup with whom Rehoboam fatefully sides has heretofore eluded historians. Their designation, yldidnm, should be understood as a technicalterm signifying membership in a group of sons of royal officials raised in the palace household. Egypt offers analogies forjust such a royal institution,and biblicallists and recoveredseals evidence multi-generational families of Israelitecourt officials.
233
The Date of the Siloam Inscription:A Rejoinderto Rogerson and Davies Ronald S. Hendel
As deeply as the Siloamtunnelrunsbeneaththe limestonespur of IronAge Jerusalem, so deeply flawed is Rogerson and Davies' palaeographic assessment of the Siloam inscription. Anything more than a cursory analysis demonstrates that the letter forms of the inscription belong to a reliable sequence of the eighth-seventh century BcEand do not fit the palaeo-Hebrew sequence of the Hasmonean period. The epigraphic data are clear,coherent, and compelling. Tiglath-PileserIIIparades in triumph on this limestone low relief from his palace at Nimrud(Calah;ca. 730 BCE). Biblicalliteratureand stories from Zinjirliboth describe appeals of lesser kings to this Assyrianmonarchfor militaryintervention on their behalf. Courtesyof the Trusteesof the BritishMuseum,London. Photo by Zev Radovan.
From
the
Editor
Few articles in BA's recent history have generated as much controversy as last issue's "Wasthe Siloam Tunnel Built by Hezekiah?"by Rogerson and Davies. The decision to publish their argument about this famous tunnel had been questioned within BA's editorial committee, and heated debate erupted at ASOR's annual meeting. Of course, not all the expressions of concern qualified as "debate" (substitute ad hominem argument), but the airing of thoughts and feelings served to point out how personally invested archaeologists and historians can be in their methods, truth claims, and interpretations. The contentious discussion of BA's decision to publish an article-perceived by some as "flawed"-on the ardently embraced attribution of the tunnel to Hezekiah connects directly to the on-going exchange regarding the Tel Dan bytdvdinscription (is it a reference to the historical "house of David" or not?). Several of the personalities and much of the acrimony have carried over. But there is an obvious difference between the two questions. The translation and interpretation of the freshly unearthed Tel Dan inscription naturally drew a variety of views. The date of the Siloam tunnel, on the other hand, has long been established palaeographically. Needless to say, it is not easy to revisit the incontrovertibly established. Because of the nature and implications of Rogerson and Davies' attempt to redate the Siloam tunnel, BA asked editorial committee member Ronald Hendel to provide a response to their September article. Avoiding diatribe, Hendel responsibly refutes their Hasmonean dating of the tunnel by reviewing the paleographic dating of its inscription. He criticizes Rogerson and Davies for failing to do their epigraphic homework. According to Hendel, a peek into the massive treasury of Late Iron II inscriptions deprives their argument of any validity. However unsuccessful Rogerson and Davies' attempt to argue their novel dating of the Siloam tunnel may be, its publication leads to a clarification of the foundations of our paleographic knowledge of ancient Hebrew. Moreover, this and other gains will have come through an open scholarly forum. In this instance, we have paid a price in hostility, but this cannot be allowed to shake BA's commitment to the open forum for ongoing research. This issue of BA also offers up a response by Israel Finkelstein to William Dever's reconstruction of the emergence of ethnicity in the Iron Age highlands of Canaan (December 1995). He insists that Dever compromises his archaeology by adhering to the canonical story of Israel's self-perception as a distinct people. Finkelstein's remarks are part of a long-running debate on this vexed issue. Throughout the debate, Finkelstein and Dever have staked out different views in prose that has often been sharp and pointed. But they have both steered clear of name calling, misrepresentation of each other's views, and questioning of each other's motives. Instead they have focused on defining the questions, surfacing the crucial data, and supplying the appropriate interpretive framework. Their exchange, in other words, exemplifies the scholarly pursuit of knowledge. This pursuit naturally includes severe assessments and sharp attacks-after all, we do hold our subject matter dear. Ultimately we hold our opinions open to the appeal of the greatest coherence of and congruence with the data.
Biblical
Archaeologist
on theAncientWorldfrom Perspectives to theMediterranean Mesopotamia
EditorDavid C. Hopkins Art Director Bucky Edgett,LuckyProductions Book Review EditorMichel Fortin Arti-FactsEditorsBruceand CarolynRoutledge EditorialAssistants Mary PetrinaBoyd, Ellen Rowse Spero EditorialCommittee Kenneth G. Hoglund JefferyA. Blakely ElizabethBloch-Smith Douglas A. Knight Betsy M. Bryan MaryJoanLeith GloriaLondon J. P.Dressel ErnestS. Frerichs Jodi Magness Ronald S. Hendel Gerald L. Mattingly RichardS. Hess GaetanoPalumbo Paul Zimansky Subscriptions Annual subscriptionrates are $35 for individuals and $45 for institutions.Thereis a special annual rate of $28 for students, those over 65, physically challenged, or unemployed. Biblical is also available as part of the Archaeologist benefits of some ASORmembership categories. Postage for Canadianand other international addresses is an additional $5. Payments should be sent to ASORMembership/Subscriber Services,P.O.Box 15399,Atlanta, GA 30333-0399 Phone 404-727.2345.E-mail:
[email protected]. VISA/Mastercardorders 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 ASORMembership/Subscriber Archaeologist, Services,P.O.Box 15399,Atlanta, GA 30333-0399. Periodicalsclass postage paid at Atlanta, GA and additional offices. Copyright? 1996by the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearch. Correspondence All editorial correspondence should be addressed to BiblicalArchaeologist, 4500 MassachusettsAvenue NW, Washington,DC 20016-5690(ph:202-885-8699;fax:202-885-8605;email
[email protected]).Correspondence regardingsubmissions for Arti-Factscan be sent to Prof.B. Routledge;School of Arts and Sciences, Departmentof Anthropology;325 University Museum; 33rd and SpruceStreets;Philadelphia, PA 19104-6398 Book Reviews All books for review should be sent to: ProfessorMichel Fortin,Departement d'histoire,Universite Laval, Ste-Foy,Quebec, Canada GIK 7P4. Books entering Canada should be marked:EducationalMaterialfor Review; No CommercialValue-GSTExempt. Advertising Correspondenceshould be addressed to Leigh Anderson, ScholarsPress,P.O. Box 15399,Atlanta, GA 30333-0399(ph:404-7272327;fax:404-727-2348).Ads for the sale of antiquitieswill not be accepted. BiblicalArchaeologist(ISSN0006-0895)is published quarterly(March,June,September, December)by ScholarsPress, 819 Houston Mill Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30329,for the American Schools of OrientalResearch(ASOR);656 Beacon Street;Boston, MA 02215-2010.Phone: 616353.6570.Printedby Cadmus JournalServices, Baltimore,MD.
The Making of The Oxford Encyclopedia of in the Near East Archaeology Adaptedfrom the Prefaceby EricM.Meyers,Editor-in-Chief
T
OFARCHAEOLOGY HEOXFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA East its IN t/lI' Near began journey from idea to actuality in 1988 when the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR) moved its headquarters from Philadelphia to the campus of the Johns Hopkins Universityin Baltimore.As firstvice president for publications I was encouraged by the ASOR Boardof Trusteesto establish a closer working relationship with the Johns Hopkins University Press. In that context I developed a project entitled "TheASORHandbookof BiblicalArchaeology,"which was to be an authoritative one-volumereferencework on all aspects of the materialcultureof the lands of the Bible in antiquity. The geographical region to be covered was Syria-Palestine, or the modern territories of Israel, Jordan,Syria, and Lebanon. The chronological range was to have been the Early Bronze Age to the Byzantine Period. The idea was to make available and easily accessible the results of modern archaeological scholarship to readers interested in the ancient Near East and biblical studies. No comparable work existed. The model for the ASORhandbook was a Germanclassic in the field, KurtGalling's largely unavailable to EngReallexikon, Bibliscdws and lish readers long ago out of print. From the outset, the was to have endeavored to bring together handbook ASOR the results of archaeological fieldwork, epigraphy, and literary-historical studies. Archaeological fieldwork was also understood as something more than site reports. Rather,it secured data that led to a better understanding of aspects of everyday life such as agriculture, family life, medicine and public health, clothing, diet, and architecture. It examined how different sorts of material culture shaped and were shaped by the environment. Similarly, a major concern was to have been the economy of the peoples of the Levant; the volume would detail their industries, such as the
194
59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
productionof agriculturalcommodities, glassmaking, shipbuilding, and metallurgy.The more familiar quest to determine the social world as well as the political setting of the peoples and cultures of the ancient Near East remaineda basic aim. In addition, true to the tradition of W. F.Albright-preeminent archaeologist and orientalist,formerprofessorof Near Eastern Studies at the Johns Hopkins University and long-term director of ASOR's Jerusalem school-the handbook would deal with the full range of writtenmaterialsthathave survived from Syria-Palestine,fromthe originsof alphabetic writing to the development of elaborate scribal practices and varied literatures.Finally,the projectwould embrace the challenge of explaining archaeological techniques, theory, methods, and practice including all matters pertaining to science and archaeology. It soon became apparent to me and my counterparts at the Johns Hopkins University Press that such an undertaking was far too ambitious for ASORand Hopkins and that what I envisioned fell squarely into the area of encyclopedic reference works. It was then, in seeking a publisher with a strong reference department, that ASOR and Oxford University Press came together. Initial meetings with the Oxford University Press reference editors resulted in a major reconceptualization of the project. First,it was obvious that the only way that the wide variety of issues to be covered could be properly accommodated was through a multivolume approach. Second, as the editorial team began the serious work of laying out a general plan, it became clear that we did not want to limit our geographical locations to the Levant. Rather, we were interested in the archaeology of the entire Near East, from the eastern Mediterraneanto Iran, from Anatolia to the ArabianPeninsula;we also wanted to include Egypt,Cyprus, and parts of North and East Africa. Because of ASOR's
particular role in the archaeology of Cyprus, there was hardly any argument there. What soon became a very real problem for all of us was the classical world and the question of sites relating to the New Testament.In thinkingabout the Hellenistic world or the Roman Empire, it became very difficult to limit our scope to the territories associated with the Near East. What would we do with Rome or Athens, the ItalianPeninsula and Greece?If we would deal only with sites relatingto the New Testament world, how would that section stand up vis-a-vis the other conceptual categories in the encyclopedia? In the end, we opted for the geographical principle and added places such as Maltaand Sardinia,whereSemitic culture had been strong since antiquity, the Aegean world, and North Africa as far as Morocco. Anatolia would be our northern boundary, Iran our eastern boundary, and Ethiopia and the Arabian Peninsula our southern limits. In a way we adopted Albright's inclusive geographical view of the ancientNear Eastand decided to employ a broaderchronological range as well. Since so much important new archaeological work was being done in periods prior to the Bronze Age, we felt that any new archaeological reference work could not fail to treat the newest discoveries in prehistory. At the other end of the chronological spectrum it seemed less and less acceptable to end our studies in the Byzantineperiod, especially given the recentupsurge of interest and discoveries in the field of Islamic archaeology. In the end, we decided to extend our coverage through the Crusades while allowing for individual authors to discuss some sites and some aspects of material culture of even later periods where appropriate. It should be noted, however, that many subjects and sites do not fall easily into the categories or parameters of the project. In some regions or countries certain periods of human history simply have not received as much attention as others. Islamic archaeology is stronger,as might be expected, in the Arab world. Iron Age archaeology is stronger in Israel because of interest in the Bible and the ancient kingdom of Israel. More extensive digging in Israel, for example, has resulted in the fact that more is known about its antiquity than about most other ancient societies. Correspondingly, the relatively fewer excavations in Arabia and East Africa and the current political situation in those areas means that our knowledge of their ancient cultures is more limited. Despite such limitations, it was impossible for us to title our project anything but what we in truth had become, an encyclopedia of Near Eastern archaeology. While some of us had some nostalgic feelings for titles such as Encyclopediaof Archaeologyin the Biblical Worldor some variant of
that, in the end we were all more comfortable with the more descriptive, geographical nomenclature, which we also believed was more appropriate, less political, and more inclusive: The OxfordEncyclopediaof Archaeology in the Near East.Although Syria-Palestine remains very much at the core of these volumes, it is largely the result of the fact that there has been more historic interest, and consequently, more fieldwork in that area. The cultures of both ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, which have held such places of pride in Western consciousness since the beginning of the nineteenth century, especially after the decipherment of hieroglyphics and cuneiform, presented us with special problems as we planned our coverage. Both cultures have enormous literatures and complex histories that cannot be comprehensively presented even in a five-volume work such as this encyclopedia, which includes so many individual site entries. Nonetheless, we have aimed to provide sufficient coverage of these cultures so that the interested student or scholar can use our entries and their accompanying bibliographies as suitable entry points for furtherstudy. Similarly, given the limited access of Westerners, especially English speakers, to Iraq and Iran, we have only been able to highlight the most important sites there, although we have also included broader entries on all the significant historical peoples and cultures in those countries. The presentation of sites stands at the very core of the present work and represents the first time that site reports of the archaeology of the entire Near East have been brought together in a single work. Despite the necessary selectivity, site entries number almost 450 of the 1,100entries in the encyclopedia. The editors have endeavored to include entries on all of the most significant sites; others are discussed within the context of the more general entries on regions, countries, or peoples. The index and synoptic outline of the work themselves represent major research tools. Specific sites for which we have independent entries may be generally located on the regionalmaps. Such topics as scientifictechniques and archaeology, biographiesof prominent archaeologistsnow deceased; histories of all the major archaeological institutes and organizations in the Near East;and discussion of peoples, places, and languages as well as individual artifacts and their decoration and industries may be readily located by utilizing one of these referencetools. In locating the discussion on certain specialtiessuch as glassmaking (see "VitreousMaterials") or shipbuilding (see "Underwater Archaeology," "Seafaring," or "Ships and Boats"), the system of internal cross-referencingis designed to make the encyclopedia user-
Editor-in-Chief: Eric M. Meyers
Section Editors: William G. Dever, Carol Meyers, James D. Muhly, Dennis Pardee, and James A. Sauer
BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
195
I C~''zralr~
It . Poo~v
..........
AWL??B;i
-.,,N - o ~ ~ : ?tr
top
rrrxr itr i
All(
196
59:4(1996) Biblical Arch•aeologist
i.VI
-
: ~lift
* I
Uff
.I
0
C
Alc? WO
?
friendly, leading readers from a particular entry into a vast network of related topics. There are several kinds of specialty articles in this work that distinguish it from all other presentations; the issues involved in these articles are at the cutting edge of the field of Near Eastern and world archaeology. In the area of theory or history of the discipline, I would call attention to the multipart entry "History of the Field," which, following a general overview, is organized as ten articles that cover all the countries and regions of the Near East. The special role of "biblicalarchaeology"becomes clear within the largercontext of Near Eastern archaeology. To round out the broad geographicalperspective,the readershould consult the entries "Ethiopia,""Nubia,"and "North Africa."Other entries such as "New Archaeology," "Underwater Archaeology," "Survey, Archaeological," and "Salvage Excavation" will also indicatethe richdiversityof archaeologicaltheoryand method. While there have been numerous works on the history of archaeology, there is nothing in the existing literature that can quite compare to this treatment, which has the benefit of being site specific and up to date in terms of actual fieldwork while treating archaeology historically and in general terms. I would also like to mention a number of entries within the category of Special Topics: "Development and Archaeology,""Museumsand Museology,""Ethicsand Archaeology," "Ideology and Archaeology," "Nationalism and Archaeology," and "Tourismand Archaeology."Each of these articles is designed to call attention to the place and plight of archaeology in the individual countries in which it is practiced. Moreover, these entries focus on the results of archaeological work and the influence those results have on both the national culture and consciousness of people at home and abroad. How the stories of peoples and places of long ago are recovered and told anew brings us closer to the contemporaryissue of how modem nation-statesdefine themselves and their cultures in the multicultural universe of contemporary society. These articles allow the reader to reflect on the impact of the field of archaeology on the citizens of the modern countries located in the territories of ancient civilizations, on the tourists who visit there, and on the students who read their ancient literatures. Bringing together the work of a wide array of scholars from all over the world has been a real challenge; by the time we had completed the commissioning of articles, we had enlisted 560 contributors from more than two dozen countries. The encyclopedia contains more than 1,100 entries, and the sheer logistics of communicating in a variety of languages with individuals from so many countries has been enormously complicated. The efforts of the dedicated staff of the Scholarly and Professional Reference Department at Oxford University Press have enabled the editors to overcome many of these logistical barriers. It has been a privilege to work with them. of TheOxfordEncyclopediaof EricM. Meyers,Editor-in-Chief Archaeologyin the Near East. BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
197
Origin of
and Ethnicity
-aa a\A
The village of DeirAmmarwest of Ramallah.The settlement history of the site is typicalof centralhill countrysites in the second-first millenniaBCE: a small MiddleBronzesite was deserted in the Late THE REGARDING EMERGENCE OF Bronze,resettled in the IronI,and grew significantlyin the IronII. HETWO THORNIEST QUESTIONS
By Israel Finkelstein
T
early Israel involve the interplay between archaeology and ethnicity.The first is related to the formation of the early Israelite ethnicity: can we identify a new ethnic entity in the archaeological record of the highlands in the Iron I? The second: what can we learn from the archaeological recordabout the origin of the people who settled the hundreds of new Iron I villages in the hill country? In a recent issue of BiblicalArchaeologist(1995a) as well as elsewhere (1993:"Will the Real Israel Please Stand Up?"), W. Dever has delved into this thicket of issues. But his reconstruction remains too wedded to the biblical story and too conservativearchaeologically.I wish to refuteDever's answers to these questions and offer my own, alternative solutions.
Dever'sHypothesis on the Rise of Early Israel
Ethnicityin Early Israel Dever's response to the question of ethnicity in the highlandsof Canaanin the IronI is based on threerelatedarguments. He asserts, first and foremost, that archaeology can identify a distinct new ethnic entity in the highlands of Canaan in the Iron I. According to Dever, 198
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
in twelfth century BCECanaan, there did exist, at least on the highland frontier,a new ethnic entity, which we can recognize in the archaeological remains, and which we can distinguish from other known ethnic groups such as "Canaanites"and "Philistines"(1993:24;see also 1995a:201). Yet, as far as I can judge, this is a circular argument. It is based on the biblical text, rather than on the archaeological data. There is a remarkable continuity in the material culture in the Late Bronze/Iron I transition(Dever 1991;1993; 1995a). The differences between the two cultures can be explained on the basis of socio-economic and environmental differences (e.g., London 1989). If this is the case, how can archaeologists trace a new ethnic group in the Iron I? Moreover,if material culture of the Iron I highlands sites did not depart from the Late Bronze traditions until ca. 1100-1050 (Dever 1995a:206),how can one distinguish a distinct new ethnos in the late-thirteenth century, over a century before this point of departure? I refer to the methodological
JEZREEL >" * "VALLEY 'L ,SHEAN
JEZREEL
13
ETH
,
FPenin
•-LLEY ohan --4o - Uthran "IVALLEY
VALLEY
-Dothan
Tell-el
.D ,ll
l
S.
-
ETH
LLEY LETHEY ) .
Z.Dothan
--4
SHEAN VALLEY VALLE
Tell-el
•
Far'ah
(Not Surveyed) 4
ES
Shechem O
S$HEAN
Tell el-
T"
Far'ah
Samaria
JEZREEL EH
zA~
I
Shechemr"
e
"
-
o
', \ of t Tell Abu
Kh
Kh.Marjama
U
?Ein San)(ya et-Tel
,Kh.
4:
4:
iBethel(
. :
*0
0
'
z ~-
el-Jib
)
Bethel
"'
z
,('A)
C
0
Jerusalem
C
, Emeq Refaim
Jerusalem
"',Giloh Jerusalem
.0
Dead
) LU U--
.Dead Hebron
.
Efrat
SBeth-ZurDead
I
KSea
0 Km 10/
Kh.e/Kirmil
c Hebron
Sea
*Hebron
Sea 1
"'
0,
0?Km 0
Km
Sea
1 S 10
0
, Kh Rabud
Km
10
. es-Samu
A
Site
B
categories
Cave A
A/B '*
Burial V
B/C
C
D
E
Site categories
Tomb A
Small Medium Large CentralFortified 0
:?
Shaft Tomb V
Site
Possible Iron I
categories Cemeteries
A B
a V
C D
Unclassified
,
Adheringto the biblicalnarrativeon the riseof EarlyIsrael,Deverinsistson isolatingthe settlement phenomenon of the IronIfrom the long However,most characteristicsof the settlement processof the Iron demographichistoryof the highlandsin the fourth-to-secondmillenniaBCE. I (Map3) can alreadybe seen in two earlierwaves of settlements-in the EarlyBronzeI (Map 1) and in the MiddleBronzeI I-III (Map2; some of the cemeteries markedon the map date to the MBI). Map 1, EarlyBronzeI Site symbolsindicatetype (cave, burial,and settlement) and size classifications(in hectares):CategoryA: 0.1-0.3 ha; CategoryB:0.4-1.0 ha; CategoryC 1.1-4.9ha; CategoryD: 5.0-9.9 ha; CategoryE:over 10 ha. Map2, MiddleBronzeII-I11Site symbolsindicatetype (tomb, shaft tomb, settlement, and fortified)and size classifications(in hectares):Small site, lessthan 1.0 ha; Mediumsite, ca.1.0-1.4ha; Largesite, ca. 1.5-3.0ha; and centralfortified sites. Map3, IronI Site symbolsindicatetype (cemetery,settlement, unclassified)and size classifications(in hectares):CategoryA: 0.1-0.3 ha; CategoryB:0.4-1.0 ha; CategoryC 1.1-5.0ha; CategoryD: 5.1-9.9 ha.
problem of identifying this supposed ethnos,not to the theoreticalquestion whether it existed or not. Overnight creation of an ethnic entity is difficult to comprehend even in cases of discontinuity in the material culture; how much more in this case of continuity. A somewhat similar case clarifies this point: the transition from the EarlyBronzeIIIto the IntermediateBronzeAge showed a dramatic change in the settlement patterns, but clear lines of continuity in the pottery traditions. Yet, in his many articles on the late third millennium BCE,Dever has never suggested that the people of the Intermediate
Bronze Age formed a distinct new ethnic entity in Canaan. Rather,he rightly explained the transformations in the settlement patterns in terms of socio- economic change (e.g., 1980; 1995b). What differentiates the two cases is the Bible. I dare suggest that, were it not for the biblical description of the rise of early Israel in the highlands of Canaan, Dever would have taken a similar course of explanation for the Late Bronze/Iron I transition. Adhering to the biblical narrative, Dever insists on isolating the settlement phenomenon of the Iron I from the long demographic history of the highlands in the third and secBiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
199
ond millenia BCE(see below). Putting aide the very late and irrelevant biblical narrative and taking a long-term perspective (Finkelstein 1994; 1995a), on the same lines of argumentationone could easily "create"ethnic entities in the highlands in the two previouswaves of settlement that took place there-in the Early Bronze and in the Middle Bronze Ages. Can we identify the ethinicity of inhabitants of specific sites? If the Iron I highlands people as a whole are s~ll~~~ distinguishable, then such identification ought to be possible. Yet Dever (1993:27)casts doubt on the ethnic affiliations of the inhabitantsof specific sites Kh.Ghurabawest of Shiloh representa typicalnewly-founded IronAge site in the highlands. The verysmall IronIsite grew in size in the IronIIto cover an area of ca. 2 acres. in the region, such as Tell en-Nasbeh and Bethel. Since there are no differthe identificationof the early Iron I settlers as ethnic Israelites: ences between the Iron I finds at these two sites and sites such as Shiloh, Kh. Raddana, and et-Tell, Dever's doubts must be rooted in non-archaeologicalconsiderations,namely Despite our uncertainty as to the full content of the term, these 12th-11th century ethnic Israelites ... possessed an the biblical story of Israel's settlement. overall material culture that led directly on into the true, Even if we could distinguish the highlands people archaefull-blown Iron Age culture of the Israelite Monarchy ... the there remains and Canaanites from Philistines, ologically That cultural continuity alone would entitle us to From I the sites of the of Iron plateau. Transjordanian problem the material culture point of view, they are virtually identiregard these Iron I villagers as the authentic progenitors of later Biblical"Israel"(1993:24;see also 1995a:210). cal to the hill country sites west of the Jordan, though they In identities. other ethnoi and national different birth to gave This argument is doubtless correct as it is well-known words, from the archaeological record there is absolutely no the very beginning of archaeological field work in the from in the of the ethnic to highlands Cisjorentity way distinguish dan from the people who settled in hundreds of Iron I sites highlands in the 1920s. But it is meaningless for the main in the highlands of Transjordan. In fact, we are unable to question at stake: when did the ethnic boundaries that separatedearlyIsraelfromthe otherentitiesof Cis- and Transjordan make such a separation until quite late in the Iron II. which the new ethnic crystallize? group Many interpreters identify The Origin of the Iron I Settlers in the Highlands was formed in the highlands in the Iron I with the Israel In recentyears, Dever has become the principal supporter named on the Merneptah Stele. Similarly,Dever argues that "this ethnic group may be presumed to be roughly the same among archaeologists of the Mendenhall-Gottwald social as that which had called itself 'Israelite' since the late 13th revolution theory, arguing that the Iron I settlers in the hill and was thus well enough establishedto be listed country originated from the sedentary population of the lowcenturyBCE, as 'Israel' ... in the well known 'VictoryStele' of Merneptah" lands in the LateBronzeAge. His views arebased on arguments which were already detailed in the 1970s and 1980s, regard(1993:24). "If these 'Israelites' [of the Merneptah Stele-I.E] were not our hill country people," Dever asks rhetorically, ing pottery and architecture continuity and agricultural "thenwho and wherewere Memeptah's'Israelites'?" (1995a:209). sophistication. Ceramictraditions the socionot on do scholars size, agree Unfortunately, In Dever's opinion, the traits of continuity in the pottery economicnature(pastoralor sedentarypeople),or geographical location of Merneptah's Israel (see Hasel's summary 1994). repertoirebetween the Late Bronze sites of the lowlands and the Iron I sites of the highlands indicate that the inhabiIn other words, at least from the territorialpoint of view, one tants of the latter originated from the sedentary population cannot make an instinctive connection between "Israel"of of the former (see already Ahlstram 1986:26-36).The essen1207 BCEand the area where the Israelitemonarchy emerged tial question here is the relevance of the ceramic repertoire two centuries later. Furthermore,we cannot make an equationbetween Memeptah'sIsraeland the entireIronI population to the riddle of the origin of the proto-Israelites. Ceramic traditions of any group of people are influenced of the central hill country.1 The third prong of Dever's argument posits the conti- by several factors, among them the socioeconomic condinuity in the highlands in both materialcultureand settlement tions of the makers/users;the environmentof theirsettlements; previous, local traditions; influence of nearby regions; patterns from the Iron I until the late Iron II as clinching
rg
QERN'iL ;?g Yr$~ llgsbi,losi-, 4~;k'n sslsP;i~r~n~'i,;:-BaBi~
200
59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
.~
?d-? ?r~b~.,s--:~a? r --
?~?-,=
?-'~i-
v
?)
'e
:II
--,
i-. _
;i* ii:T .a~:I?
1~?
??"ii .f~,? ~nr;;L'~=~ ?r
- ~iru*u--
~a
h
~4 :. ~t-~?-?li~:. ~-~:~E1I~EYL~:Jd??~~ 4"
~)? i!
c
"-r
-i::'r3~L~ML?f~7~~1%i ':%::" I
i
ar--~?r~-~.l??,? :~r~i.. ?.~t~? i ---- ?~ b
i?;~ ?
C
i:'
? .'Y?
•-yc -L
~C1~41?"i;j' * ";:::: ::?T ??: 5'.
L-'L-]hs
..:&ml-
I•-.
:--?`:6
i:l~:~
L??
:t:?~~
s i
3~-5~i~ J.
Collared-rim jars in a destructionlayer at Shiloh(left). Once suggested by Albrightand Aharonito be an indicatorof "Israelite"sites, they have later been found in lowlandssites, such as TelNamion the coast. Collaredrimpithoi are also abundant in every IronIsite in the Transjordanian south of Amman(right). Hencethey cannot be used to identify IronI ethnoi. All plateau-the best known example being Tallal-cUmayri illustrationscourtesyof the author unlessnoted. Rightphoto by MadabaPlainsProject.
customs brought with them from their homeland in cases of migrating groups; and their cognitive world. In the case of the highlands of Canaan in Iron I, marks of continuity of Late Bronze traditions show no more than peripheral influence from Iron I lowlands centers, such as Megiddo, Beth-shean and Gezer, which still practiced at that time the pottery traditionsof the previous period. Traitsof discontinuityreflect the fact that the highlands people lived in small, isolated, rural, almost autarchic communities, located in a different environment. ArchitecturalTraditions As for the architectural traditions of the early Iron Age villagers in the hill country, Dever argues that the "protoIsraelites" borrowed the four-room house-type from the lowlands (alreadyAhlstr6m1984:42-48).Butintensiveresearch of over a century, in dozens of Late Bronze sites around the country, has revealed only one possible Late Bronze prototype of this house (at Tel Batash). In any event, the layout of the Iron I highlands sites and the main architecturalcomponent of the village-the four room house- reflect the socioeconomic condition of their inhabitants and the need to adapt to the hilly environment, not necessarily their origin. LongTermDemographicProcesses As mentioned above, Dever sees the wave of settlement of the Iron I as the first significant occupation in the history of the hill country.This observationleads him to assert that the Iron I people must have originated from other areas of Canaan, that is, from the lowlands. In this Dever either
ignores the most important result of recent surveys-that the region was intensively occupied by hundreds of sites twice before-in the Early Bronze (Finkelstein and Gophna 1993) and in the Middle Bronze (Finkelstein 1993) or is unaware of its meaning. This alone is enough to make his view of the settlers' origin obsolete. TechnologicalInnovations Dever suggests that the emergence of Israel in the highlands of Canaan was made possible by two technological innovations. First, he revives Albright's half-century old theory (Albright 1949:113)that the Iron I wave of settlement in the highlands was an outcome of the new skill of hewing water cisternsand plasteringthem. Thereare three serious flaws in this hypothesis. We know today what Albright could not have known several decades ago: the central hill country of Canaan was densely settled already in the third and second millennia BCE. Moreover,the results of recentsurveys, in fact already those of the 1968 emergency survey, have proven beyond any doubt that the knowledge of hewing water cisterns had been mastered already in the Middle Bronze, and most probably even earlier, in the Early Bronze. Scores of sites dating to these periods are located in hilly areas devoid of any permanent water sources (e.g., Gophna and Porath 1972:197). The hewing and plastering of water cisterns was therefore an outcome of the penetration into the "dry"areas of the hill than the factor which opened the way to country,,ratherinto these the expansion geographical niches. Finally, it seems that some of the Iron I highlands sites BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
201
r aredevoid of water cisterns.Apparently, b -6~6 x their inhabitants brought water from distant springs and stored it, perhaps in the typical, large Iron I pithoi (Zertal 1988). ^,? Dever adds that terracing, too, was ?~"l:i~`l :?a?9 ? ~~;Aclllll?r~ a new, Iron I technological innovac ??: tion, that enabled the "proto-Israelites" :?-i to expand in the highlands frontier(see alreadyde Geus 1975;Gottwald1979:658B :?e 59). He further argues that the i: z sophisticated skill of constructing terraces indicates that the builders came from a rural,sedentarybackground(see ??. ::j already Ahlstr6m 1982). However, it :;~5iZ is now clear that the Iron I settlement " process began in areas of the hill coun" XS the necessitate did not which try construction of terraces-the desert *li: r II m~? fringe, the intermontane valleys of the centralrange, and flat areas,such as the A terracedslope in the highlands,north of Jerusalem.Deversuggested that terracingwas a Bethel plateau. Moreover, the Middle to expand in the Bronze activity on the western slopes new, IronItechnological innovationthat enabled the "proto-Israelites" of the highlands-where cultivation highlandsfrontier.He furtherargued that the sophisticatedskillof constructingterraces indicatedthat the builderscame from a rural,sedentarybackground.However,EarlyBronzeI without terracing is almost impossiand MiddleBronzeactivityin the western slopes units of the highlands-where cultivation ble-indicates that terrace-buildingwas already carried out at that time. There without terracingis almost impossible-seems to indicatethat terrace-buildinghad already is good reason to suggest that terracing been carriedout at that time. Terracingwas therefore an outcome of the demographic was practiced even before, in the Early expansioninto the rugged partsof the hill countryand of the beginning of highlands horticulture,ratherthan an innovationwhich made this expansion possible. Henceterraces Bronze, with the first widespread culindicatethat their builderspracticedhorticulture;they tell us nothing about their origin. tivation of olives and grapevines in the hill country (Finkelstein and Gophna 1993).Terracingwas thereforean outcome of the demographic and for all, that Middle Eastern nomads settle down not expansion into the rugged parts of the hill country and of because they favor sedentary life or disdain it, but for wellthe beginning of highlands horticulture,ratherthan an inno- calculated economic, political, and social necessities (see vation which made this expansion possible (cf. Hopkins summary and bibliography in Finkelstein and Perevolotindicate that terraces 1985:173-186).Consequently, though sky 1990). As for the second argument, the relatively well-documented history of Palestine in recentcenturies inditheir builders practiced horticulture, they tell us nothing cates that the local population, especially along the desert about their builders' origin. PastoralBackground fringe, was flexible enough to respond quickly to changing Dever rejects the idea that a large part of the Iron I political and economic situations by shifting back and forth along the sedentary-pastoral continuum. Such shifts could highlands population came from pastoral background. He involve large groups of people, in fact populations of entire claims that pastoral nomads "typically resist sedentarization"(1993:26).Furthermore,Dever arguesthat "largenumbers regions (Hiitteroth 1975; Lewis 1987; LaBianca 1990; of pastoral nomads successfully settling down to a Mediter- Grossman 1992). Dever's Dilemmas ranean mixed economy is both unlikely and unprecedented Three main obstacles thus block Dever's way to deciin the settlement history of Palestine" (1995a:201). Both notions are wrong. On top of that, they manifest lit- phering the question of ethnicity and the origin of the tle use of the rich anthropologicaland ethnographicliterature "proto-Israelites."First,Dever is haunted by the biblical narratives on the rise of early Israel.True,Dever stands far from on the people of the Middle East-past and present-and a misunderstanding of the mechanisms behind the tradi- the biblical archaeology of the past, that is, from attempts to tional polymorphous society of the region. adjust archaeology to the conquest narratives. Yet, he still The first argument is based on old, romantic, and naive accepts some sort of historical authenticity in the biblical and the noble Bedouin between the about story of the rise of early Israel. Especially evident is his deep animosity myths conviction about the uniqueness of the Israelite phenomebetween confrontation and the everlasting thefalah[peasant] the desert and the sown. But it should be acknowledged, once non, supposedly its spiritual singularity. Dever is aware, of
202
59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
set of factors, that serve to establish and maintain the group's distinctive we-ness by its own members, and external set of factors, that serve to shape and designate its they-ness to all non-members (Ringerand Lawless 1989:1;Kelly and Kelly 1980:134-35). In Barth's words, "ethnicity is created by a combination of self ascription and ascription by others" (1969:13). These examples of attempts to define ethnicity, all taken from contemporary cases where all data necessary for the investigation of these traits are available, show that ethnic lines are fluid, flexible, and changeable. Identifying them in the material culture of a given group is bound to be a perplexing task. The critical question is how to delineate the boundaries that define a group, ratherthan the cultural stuff that they enclose. In this connection we have to keep in mind Barth's warning that these boundaries,which separatethe "we"fromthe "they," A tent with a fenced pen in the highlandsin the 1980s.Tentslikethis are mainly social boundaries, though they may have terhave been pitched by Bedouinfrom the Beer-shebavalleyor by villagers ritorial expression (1969:15). who specializein animalhusbandry.MiddleBronzeand IronI sites with a handfulof sherdsbut with no architecturalremainsmay have looked the Ethnicity may be expressed by several cultural same. characteristics, the most important among them are language, script, ritual behavior, physical features (e.g., Macdonald 1987 on tattoo patterns in the Philippines), course, of the advantage of the archaeologicaltestimony over dietary choices (e.g., Langenwalter1980;DeBoer 1987;McKee the biblical one (1993:24) and of the late date and very dif1987), and different aspects of material culture. In the latferent agenda of the Deuteronomistic historian. But he is ter, ethnicity can be expressed in a number of aspects: unable, or unwilling, to put aside the irrelevant, late-Iron II architectural forms (e.g., Baldwin 1987; Paloczi-Horvath biblical narrative and tackle the archaeological data on their 1989); clothing style (e.g., Washburn 1990);mortuary pracown terms.2 tices; and style of artifacts,such as pottery, lithics, weaponry Second, Dever looks at the problems-both ethnicity and (Larick 1986), jewelry, and basketry (Bernick 1987). Even in cases of contemporary societies-when all these origin of early Israel-from a surprisingly conservative are visible or traceable-it may be difficult to delineate within traditional traits mainly pottery archaeology, angle typology.3 Settlementand demographicpatterns,anthropology,and ethno- clear ethnic boundaries, because "we can assume no simple historyarementionedin his synthesis,but arenot comprehended. one-to-one relationship between ethnic units and cultural similarities and differences" (Barth 1969:13-14). There are Third, I suspect that Dever tends to see the reality in the highlands in the Iron I in terms of modem American his- several reasons for this situation. First,group identity is influtory. He seems to compare the formation of ancient Israelite enced by complex sociological and psychological factors ethnicity to that of modern American ethnicity, specifically, (Baker1983:13).Second, processes of assimilation and acculturation tend to blur ethnic lines (e.g., Pyszczyk 1987).Third, that both societies were melting pots of groups that came from different origins, rebelled against their oppressors, and it is difficult to distinguish between expressions of status and manifestation of ethnicity (e.g., Cheek and Friedlander1990). were tied together by spiritual bonds (e.g., 1995a:211). Finally, it is sometimes extremely difficult, or even imposThe Formationof the Israelite Ethnic Identity sible, to distinguish between the reflection of "style" and Ethnicity,Material Culture,and Text ethnicity in material culture (e.g., Wiessner 1984; Sackett Weber (1961) defined ethnicity as a sense of common 1990). To sum up, since ethnicity and ethnic identity "are condescent extending beyond kinship, political solidarity vis-avis other groups, and common customs, language, religion, cepts that take their form and content from the give and take of human behavior.... Thereis the same continuityand change values, morality, and etiquette. The identification of memabout them as there is about human behavior" (Peterson bers of an ethnic group and categorization of ethnic fluid and more or less are "more or less others 1982:17).Needless to say, identifying ethnic lines in past culgroups by hierarchies of dichotomizatures is even a more complex and treacheroustask. Regarding we/they multiple,formingnestling the past, ethnic identification is not simple even in periods tions" (Cohen 1978:395).An ethnic group consists of those covered by texts. Even if contemporaneous records exist, one who conceive of themselves as being alike by virtue of their common ancestry, real or fictitious, and who are so "cannot assume that the 'peoples' described in the sources Kwan and others 1965:47) (Shibutani correspbnd to the self-conscious identity groups which are regarded by between internal is created the essential to the definition of ethnicity" (Shennan 1989:15). by dichotomy Ethnicity BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
203
In reference to ethnicity in Iron I Palestine, three points should be stressed from the outset: The first-the tension between "ideal"past cultures and "real"culturalsituations-applies with greatest force to the case of early Israel. The second-that cultural forms may change while the subtler aspects of culture and their meaning may still remain the same over very extended periods of time (in the case of acculturation-e.g., Tax 1960)-applies especially to the case of the Philistines in the post-formative phase of their settlement in the southern coastal plain. The third-that untraceable social networks may be just as important in describing ethnicity as material culture because the latter can be shared by several ethnic groups (e.g., Hill 1989)-applies to all groups active on the scene at that time. A special word should be devoted here to text and ethnicity. It is widely accepted today that historical narratives, especially those dealing with origin myths of early nations, tell us not only how the past led to the present, but also how the present creates the past (Chapman et al. 1989:1).Regarding Israel's early history, Cohen's words are critical: ...ethnic group formation is a continuing and often innovative cultural process of boundary maintenance and reconstruction. Once the ethnic identities and categories are triggered into being salient, cultural rationalization for the legitimacy of the mobilized grouping are actively sought for and created by those involved.... The emerging history can be part real,part fancy (Cohen 1978:397-98; see also Horowitz 1977).
of a given community, a fact which further complicates the identification of ethnic boundaries of past people. Pottery Archaeologists tend to put ethnic labels on pottery types, especially when they are decorated.Thus we relateto "Philistine," "Edomite,"and "Midianite"pottery. But in doing this, we ignore style, status, and trade factors. Therefore, with so many variables playing behind the scene, in most cases (except for certain migrating groups) pottery cannot indicate ethnos. This has been demonstrated in numerous examples, especially in cases where reliable historical documents are available to supplement the archaeological data. Good examples are Adams' studies on the pottery of Medieval Nubia (1968;1979) and Kramer'sinsights on the Habur ware and the Hurrians (1977). Both showed the complexity of ceramic evidence in regard to historic, cultural, and racial change. Another interesting example comes from the arena discussed here, the central hill country of Palestine. Three different communities occupied this territory in the Ayyubid/Crusader period-local Moslems, eastern Christians, and Franks.The villages of the latter can easily be identified by detailed texts,but pottery is a differentstory:Cohen Finkelstein's study of the pottery collected in these villages (1991) found imported "Crusader" wares in all three communities. They were apparently distributed according to status and wealth, rather than along ethnic lines. Except for few rare vessels, there are no special features in the pottery of the Iron I highlands sites, neither in the assemblages as a whole nor in specific types. The collaredThis applies very well to the biblical account on the ori- rim pithos, once advertised by Albright (1937:25)and even more boldly by Aharoni (e.g., 1970:264-65)as an indicator of gin of early Israel.Though it may have some historical seeds, these areextremelydifficultto extractfromthe myth (Na~aman "Israelite"sites, has since then been found in lowlands sites, such as Tel Nami on the coast (Artzy 1994) and Megiddo 1994). The story is concealed in the wrap of the ideology and in of Israela the of much later (Esse 1992). Collared-rim pithoi are also abundant in every phase history politics Iron I site in the Transjordanian plateau-the best known those of the late-monarchic period. The Case of the Highlands in the Iron I examples being Sahab (Ibrahim 1978) and Tall al-cUmayri The Iron I sites in the hill country are relatively poor in (Tellel-cUmeiri;Herr, forthcoming) near Amman. The dominance of this type in central hill country sites should be finds. With the absence of written material and cemeteries, attributed to economic, environmental, and social factors, and with the scarcity of finds related to ritual, the only significantfeaturesfordeterminingthe ethnicityof theirinhabitants such as horticulture-basedsubsistence (Finkelstein 1988:275are pottery, architectural forms (both the house and the 85) and distance of the Iron I communities from stable water in the sources the and as reflected of (Zertal 1988), rather than to the ethnic background settlement), foodways layout of the population. The significant number of collared-rim faunal assemblages. These three types of finds are generally discovered in large quantity and/or vast exposures in every jarsfound at Megiddo (Esse 1992)eliminatesLondon'shypothexcavated site. esis (1989) that they are found primarily in rural (as opposed A preliminary word of caution is required here. Binford to urban) communities. Architecture (1972:20-25)saw material finds as reflecting varying levels of In certain cases, architecture forms may indicate the oricultural evolution-functional needs, social traditions, ideas, and symbols. As I have already mentioned above, the gin and thus ethnos of past people. In Medieval Hungary, certain features of the fifteenth-sixteenth century settlements material culture of a given group of people mirrors the are characteristic of the Cumanian ethnic group and can environmental background of their habitat, their socio- economic and socio-politicalsystems, the influenceof neighboring apparently be traced back to their steppe traditions (Paloczicultures, the local heritage, traditions of the country of origin Horvath 1989). Ellenblum (1992) argues that mason marks and other construction features found in Medieval sites in in the case of migrating groups, and of course, their cognitive world. In most cases we cannot determinewhich of these vari- Israel can distinguish Frankish settlements from Moslem ables is/are the dominantone/s in shaping the materialculture communities. 204
59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
erg~)g
.
i,:SRO
:::':IV, AL9, IMF
NA
65
1?
: : ~a~
Z-?lwe
i.
;a
:
'..w "SIT
,7:I
An aerialview of Izbet Sartah(top)-an IronI-earlyIronIIsite in the foothills of western Samaria,overlookingthe coastal plain.The layout of arrowsmarkthe peripheral,innerwall in the aerial picture)reflectsstrong StratumIII(below, right;twelfth-earlyeleventh centuryBCE; occupationof the inhabitantsin animal husbandry,while the abundanceof grain silos in StratumII(below, left; late eleventh-earlytenth century)reflectsa shift to intensivecultivation.
4
a
1
/
.
/o
0
?K
000
00
I
C 0 0
meters 55
Unfortunately,this is not the case in the IronAge. Y Shiloh (1973) described the four-room house as an Israelite housetype, but it has later been found also in lowlands and TransjordanianIron I sites (e.g., Sauer 1986:10and Arti-Facts in this issue). Its popularity in the central hill country must be linked to environmental and social factors, rather than to the ethnic background of the communities (Stager 1985; Finkelstein 1988:254-59).
80
o~
//
I/ I_
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
0
metens
S
205
Several years ago I suggested that the layout of some of the Iron I highlands sites-a large courtyard surrounded by hint at the pastoral backa belt of broadrooms-may inhabitants their of 1988:237-50).But this (Finkelstein ground sites in the lateis true for Negev Highlands correspondence eleventh/tenth centuries span as well, not to mention Early Bronze II sites in Sinai and Middle Bronze sites in the Black Desert (Finekelstein 1995b:37-49). Thus this layout should be attributed to socio-economic characteristicsof the inhabitants rather than to any specific ethnicity. In sum, pottery and architectural forms in Iron I sites on both sides of the Jordanriver reflectenvironmental,social, and economic traitsof the settlers. They tell us nothing about ethnicity. This leaves us with the third widespread find in the Iron I sites-the faunal assemblage. Foodways Dietary patterns tend to be conservative symbols of ethnicity. Certain groups resist change in foodways even in the face of potential assimilation (Staski 1990;DeBoer 1987). What people eat, and how they eat it, is an important aspect of the process of ethnicity. Culinary practices often rival ideology and religion in terms of cultural conservatism, and food is one of the primary symbols manipulated by people seeking to maintain their cultural identity and group solidarity (McKee 1987). Nonetheless, identifying ethnic groups according to their diet is not devoid of obstacles. In certain cases, processes of acculturation,inter-culturalcontacts, and availability or scarcityof certain food products can influence the culinary practices of a given group (e.g., Langenwalter 1980:110;DeBoer 1987;Crabtree 1990). Archaeologistsand archaeo-zoologistshave accumulated a greatbody of data on animal husbandry in Bronzeand Iron Age Palestine in recent years. Especially important for the study of ethnicity in the Iron Age are the data on the percentage of pig bones in the faunal assemblages. Hesse's 1990 study of Palestinian pork production, which dealt mainly with Philistinefoodways, assembled most relevantdata. This can now be supplemented with data that have been published in the last few years, mainly from the highlands (Kolska Horwitz 1986-87for Mount Ebal near Shechem; Kolska Horwitz 1989 for Emeq Refaim in the highlands southwest of Jerusalem;Hellwing, Sade, and Kishon 1993 for Shiloh;LaBianca 1990:145for Hesban in Jordan). It is clear now that in the BronzeAge pig husbandry was practicedin both the lowlands and the highlands. The changing percentage of pig bones in the assemblages reflects the different environmental and socio-economic backgrounds of a given site. In the Iron I, pigs appear in great numbers in the Shephelah and the southern coastal plain (TelMiqne, Tel Batash, and Ashkelon) and are quite popular at other lowlands sites. But they disappear from the faunal assemblages of the central hill country.The most interesting fact is that at that time, and in the IronII,pigs continue to be present in significant numbers at Hesban in Transjordan. The faunal assemblages of the Iron II reflect the same traits. Regardless of the factors which may influence pig distribution (Hesse 206
59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
Pig Bones in Several
18.0
Iron I Sites 10.4 8.0 4.8
0.1
Ashkelon Miqne Batash Shiloh
0
0
Ebal RaddanaHesban
Percentageof pig bones in the faunal assemblagesof seven IronI sites. The chartshows the popularityof pork productionin Philistine sites of the southern coastal plain. Pigsare not present in highlands site south of Amman.Pig sites, while they appear in a Transjordanian popularityversuspig taboos may shed light on ethnic boundariesin the IronI.
1990), this seems to mean that the taboo on this animal was already practiced in the hill country in the Iron I-pigs were not presentin proto-IsraeliteIronI sites in the highlands,while they were quite popular at a proto-Ammonitesite and numerous at Philistine sites (for the lattersee Hesse 1990:217-18).As predictedby Stagerseveral years ago (1991:9,19),food taboos, more precisely, pig taboos, are emerging as the main, if not only avenue that can shed light on ethnic boundaries in the Iron I.4Specifically, this may be the most valuable tool for the study of ethnicity of a given, single Iron I site. It took centuries for distinctive national, or ethnic, material cultures to develop in the Highlands of Palestine--Cisand Transjordanianalike. They seem to have been evolved with the rise of complex political systems and were influenced by the growing conflictsbetween the emerging polities. In the case of early Israel,most "ethnic"features in the material culture developed and were introduced by the monarchy, possibly because the new state controlled vast areas with mixed elements. It was essential to unite them by creating a sense of nationalism and ethnic identity.5
TheOriginof the Proto-Israelites
In order to tracethe origin of the IronI settlers in the highlands of both Cis- and Transjordan(and I do not see a reason to separate between them), we need to go back to the results of the archaeological surveys that have been undertaken in these regions. I have recently tackled this issue elsewhere (Finkelstein1994;1995a)so a short summary will suffice here. Conventional wisdom today views complex historical processes, such as the one discussed here, from a longterm perspective (Braudel's la longue durcee-1958; for the highlands of Palestine, already Alt 1925; also Coote and
txt4
---
w
J06
-Il
IronI sites in rugged topography in the western Samariahighlands.Kh.Tibna(top of left photo above) and Kh.BanatBarr(right,on the cliff). Bothwere firstsettled in the MiddleBronze,reoccupiedin the IronI,and expanded in the IronII.The latterwas a center of olive oil productionin the IronII.
Withelam 1987). Indeed, recent studies have outlined cyclic rhythms in the occupational history of all three zones of the southern Levant in the fourth-to-firstmillennia BCE: rise and collapse of urban civilizations in the lowlands; settlement oscillations and rise and collapse of desert polities in the steppelands (Finkelstein 1995b);and waves of settlement with intervals of decline in the highlands. Hence the investigation of the processes that took place in the Iron I requires insights into the occupational history of a much longer period: from the inception of the first wave of settlement in the highlands in the beginning of the Early Bronze to the outcome of the Iron I transformation, that is, the rise of the territorialstates of the Iron II. There were three waves of settlement with two intervals of decline in the central hill country in the third and secAll three led to the rise of complex political ond millennia BCE. formations; but while the first two degenerated, the third high-tide resulted in the development of full-scale statehood. These waves of settlement had much in common, especially in their demographic patterns, but also in certain aspects of their material culture. The first wave of settlement in the highlands of western Palestine commenced in the Chalcolithic period and peaked in the Early Bronze (Finkelstein and Gophna 1993). It was followed by a dramaticcrisisin the IntermediateBronze Age, when almost all Early Bronze sites were abandoned (Finkelstein1991).The settlement crisis continued in the Middle Bronze I (Albright's MB IIA). The second demographic expansion took place in the Middle Bronze II-III(Albright's MB IIB-C).It seems that the process startedin the MB II,when scores of small sites sprouted in different parts of the region. In the MB III,several sites developed to serve as government centers for the ruling elite, while some of the small sites were abandoned. This impressive settlement system collapsed at the end of the Middle Bronze Age. The Late Bronze Age marks the second demographic crisis in the highlands. The thirdwave of settlementtook place in the IronI, in the twelfth-
eleventh centuries BCE. This settlement system expanded drain the Iron when the number of sites doubled II, matically and the total built-up area almost tripled. The published data from the surveys in the Transjordanian plateau do not allow a full and detailed reconstructionof the settlement patterns throughout the ages. But it provides enough information to trace settlement oscillations similar to those detected in the highlands of western Palestine. The three waves of settlement in the highlands of Cisjordanshow considerable similarities in the details of the demographic dispersal. In all three phases the settlement system was well-balanced, with sites comprising several major centers, numerous small villages, and scores of tiny sites, some of them apparently seasonal campsites of pastoral or transhumant groups. The population doubtless comprised both sedentary and pastoral people. There is a surprising correspondence in the settlement locales. Many of the Iron Age I sites of the central hill country were established at sites which had been occupied already in the Early Bronzeand especially in the Middle Bronze.The resemblance between the three systems in the east-west and northsouth distribution of settlements is striking. Finally, certain parallelisms exist in the material culture and in the political developments of the three peak periods. The outcome of the Iron Age I settlement activity-the emergence of the Israelite territorial states-resembles some features of the formation of large territorialpolities in the central hill country in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages and possibly also in the Early Bronze Age. The two periods of decline-the IntermediateBronzeand the Late BronzeAges-also show similar features.Therewere only few sedentary sites, most of them relatively small, and the balance tilted toward the pastoral component of the population. Archaeologists have begun to find indications for the presence of significantpastoralgroups in the centralhill country throughout the late-fourth-through-secondmillennia BCE BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
207
(Finkelstein 1992). Early Bronze I and Middle Bronze (mostly MB I-II) cemeteries, not related to nearby settlement sites, have been recorded in recent surveys and excavations. Small Middle Bronze II-IIIand Iron Age I sites, which revealed a handful of sherds but no architectural remains, should apparently be interpreted as seasonal sites of pastoral-nomadsor transhumantgroups. The pastoral phenomenon is especially evident in times of settlementdecline.Almost all IntermediateBronze " Age sites are found in the eastern flank of the central hill for The location convenient pastoral activity. country-a exceptionally large number of IntermediateBronzecemeteries not related to sedentary sites should also be noted. The archaeological evidence for pastoral people dwindles in the subsequent periods of more complex political systems. None of the Early Bronze I and Middle Bronze I-IIcemeteries, which are not related to sedentary sites, were reused in the Early Bronze II-IIIand in the Middle Bronze III. Moreover, it seems that many of the seasonal Middle BronzeIIsites were abandonedin the Middle Bronze III,while the phenomenon of small seasonal sites is almost nonexistent in the Iron Age II. The traditional interpretations of such settlement oscillations, as results of migration of new groups from distant parts of the Levant or demographic expansion and withdrawal from the nearby lowlands, cannot explain the demographic history of the highlands of both Cis- and Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages. First,although there are some archaeological indications for the presence of northern groups in the central hill country in both the Middle Bronze and Iron I (for the former see Brandl 1993:243-44), the overallcharacterof the materialcultureof these regions shows clear local features. As for the lowlands contributions to the highlands population, recentstudies have shown beyond doubt that the lowlands population had never reached close to a "carryingcapacity"point, and hence there were no landhungry demographic surpluses eager to expand into new frontiers.It is therefore more reasonable to explain these settlement fluctuations in terms of socio-economic change, that is, shifts toward a more sedentary or a more pastoral society, in accordance with political, economic, and social transformations. The faunal material from sites in the central hill country also attests to shifts along this continuum-between plow-agriculturecommunitiesand pastorallyorientedgroups. Similar shifts, which are more typical to the marginal areas of the Middle East-highlands and steppelands alike-were recorded in recent generations in both the central hill country (Grossman 1992) and Transjordan(Lewis 1987; see also LaBianca1990). The results of the long-term study of the archaeology of the highlands indicate that much (but not all) of the Iron I settlement process in both Cis- and Transjordanwas part of a cyclic mechanism of alternating processes of sedentarization and nomadization of indigenous groups in response to changing political, economic, and social circumstances. But these cyclic processes were influenced by other, broader 208
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
Similaritiesin the settlement patterns and materialcultureof the can be traced highlandspeople in the fourth-to-secondmillenniaBCE in the locationof the sites, in potterytraditionsand in architectural features. Mountain-tophigh places in Samaria-Middle BronzeJebel er-Rukba(top) and IronI "BullSite"(bottom)-demonstrate these traits.
i..
0,
?
I
f
i
.
'I
.
.
Lcar "' ; '
,,,
"
\
7
' )\\
,i; '; I',2
")
".
"-
..
" ? ".
-
political, economic, and social developments. Short-term local events, foreign interventions, and migration of local and alien groups also played significant roles in the demographic history of Palestine. All of them are hardly dictated
520
Central Hill Country: Total Number of Sites
254
248
by environmental conditions and long-term processes. These non-cyclic phenomena explain the dissimilarities between the phases of the cyclic processes. The emergence of early Israel and the other "national" entities in the southern Levant was therefore determined by a combination of longterm history and short-term circumstances and by a balance between local developments and external influences.
Conclusion 88 29
28
CHAL EBI
EB11-111IBA
MB
IAI
LB
IA11 262
Highlands of Transjordan:
-2
Total Number of Sites
218
in Four Surveys
141
137 96 61
39
32
-I
CHAL
EB
I
EB
MB
IBA
I -I
IA
LB
I
IA
Whatwe have here are two differentapproachesto archaeology and to the relationship between archaeology and the biblical text. W. G. Dever, who is strongly influenced by the biblical narrative, views the rise of early Israel as a siingular evetntof population shift from the sedentary lowlands to the empty highlands. The migrating groups immediately crystallized into a new ethnic entity, which can be identified in the archaeological record as early as the late-thirteenth century BCE.As far as I can judge, the rise of early Israel was the latest phase in long-term,cyclicprocessesof settlement oscillations and rise and fall of territorialentities in the highlands. These processes, which took place in Cis- and Transjordan with the formation of alike, started in the first millenium BCE national, territorial states, including Israel and Judah. The ethnic lines between the emerging entities developed slowly and gradually. Though faunal assemblages from the highland sites may reflect different dietary practices as early as Iron I, the material of these and other sites disclose ethnic lines only in the late-Iron II. Therefore, the "real Israel" cannot stand up before the ninth-eighth centuries BCE.
I
Settlement oscillationsin the centralhillcountrybetween the Jezreeland Beer-shebavalleys(top) and in the highlandsof (above, accordingto the resultsof four recent surveys) Transjordan seem to reflectthe cyclicnature of the settlement historyof these regionsfrom the EarlyBronzeIto the IronI. Thefaunal assemblages from two highlandssites from the IntermediateBronzeto the IronI may hint at fluctuationsbetween a more pastoralsociety (more sheep/goats, light blue) and a more sedentarysociety (more cattle, darkblue) Percentagesshown below.
Sheep versus Cattle Bones
Two Highland Sites: IBA through IA I
Notes I Based on the testimony of the Merneptah Stele, Dever dates the foundation of the Iron I highlands sites to the late-thirteenth century Wci-. But from a pure archaeological point of view, it is extremely difficult to provide a precise date for the beginning of the Iron I wave of settlement in the highlands. Moreover, most of the sites were probably established in the late-twelfth, if not in the eleventh century BKi-.
In this Dever is no different than "Israeliarchaeologists ... [who] read the Bible at face value ... divorced from formal, critical biblical studies" (Dever 1995c:75, n. 4).
2
Moreover, regarding pottery, Dever is unwilling to accept statistical comparison of assemblages (1993:27)-the only modern direction which can liberate research from meaningless typological discussions and lead to real progress. 4On pig husbandry as a demarcator between Christian and Moslem communities in Medieval Palestine, see Rosen 1995.
5This is connected to the question of the date of the development
23
22 12
9
4
IBARephaim MBRephaim MBShiloh
LBShiloh
of a real, full-blown national, territorial states in the Levant. Looking at the evidence from an archaeological, rather than biblical point of view, this development seems to have happened not before the ninth century bce (see Jamieson-Drake 1991; Ahlstr6m 1991; Niemann 1993; Finkelstein forthcoming).
IAI Shiloh
BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
209
Bibliography Adams, W. Y. 1968 Invasion, Diffusion, Evolution? Antiquity 42:194-215. 1979 On the Arguments from Ceramics to History: A Challenge Based on Evidence from Medieval Nubia. CurrentAnthropology20:72734. Aharoni, Y. 1970 New Aspects of the Israelite Occupation in the North. Pp. 25465 in Near Eastern Archaeology in the Twentieth Century, Essays in Honorof Nelson Glueck,edited by J.A. Sanders. New York:Doubleday. Ahlstr6m, G. W. 1982 Where did the IsraelitesLive. Journalof Near EasternStudies41:13338. 1984 The Early IronAge Settlersat Hirbet el-Msas (TelMasos). Zeitschrift des Deutschen Paliistina-Vereins100:35-52. 1986 Whowere the Israelites?Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. Albright, W. F. 1937 Further Light on the History of Israel from Lachish and Megiddo. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research68:22-26. 1949 TheArchaeologyof Palestine. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Alt, A. 1925 Die Landnahme der Israeliten in Palastina. Leipzig: Universitit Leipzig. Artzy, M. 1994 Incense, Camels and Collared Rim Jars:Desert Trade Routes and Maritime Outlets in the Second Millennium. Oxford Journal of Archaeology13:121-47. Baker, D. G. 1983 Race Ethnicity and Power. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Baldwin, S. J. 1987 Roomsize Patterns:A Quantitative Method for Approaching Ethnic Identification in Architecture. Pp. 163-74 in Ethnicity and Culture, edited by R. Auger, M. F. Glass, S. MacEachern and P. H. McCartney. Calgary: The University of Calgary. Barth, F. 1969 Introduction. Pp. 9-38 in Ethnic Groupsand Boundaries,edited by F. Barth. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. Bernick, K. 1987 The Potential of Basketry for Reconstructing Cultural Diversity on the Northwest Coast. Pp. 251-57 in Ethnicityand Culture,edited by R. Auger, M. F. Glass, S. MacEachern, and P. H. McCartney. Calgary: The University of Calgary. Binford, L. R. 1972 An ArchaeologicalPerspective.New York:Seminar Press. Brandl, B. 1993 Clay, Bone, Metal and Stone Objects. Pp. 223-62 in Shiloh: The Archaeologyof a BiblicalSite, edited by 1.Finkelstein. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University. Braudel, F. 1958 La longue duree. Annales EconomiesSocieLtsCivilisations13:725-53.
210
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
Chapman, M., McDonald, M., and Tonkin, E. 1989 Introduction. Pp. 1-21 in Historyand Ethnicity,edited by E. Tonkin, M. MacDonald, and M. Chapman. London: Routledge. Cheek, C. D. and Friedlander, A. 1990 Pottery and Pig's Feet: Space, Ethnicity, and Neighborhood in Washington, D.C., 1880-1940. Historical Archaeology24:34-60. Cohen, R. 1978 Ethnicity: Problem and Focus in Anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropology7:379-403. Cohen Finkelstein, J. 1991 Pottery Distribution, Settlement Patterns and Demographic Oscillations in Southern Samaria in the Islamic Periods (unpublished M.A. thesis). The Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Coote, R. B. and Whitelam, K. W. 1987 The Emergenceof Early Israel in Historical Perspective. Sheffield: Almond. Crabtree, P. J. 1990 Zooarchaeology and Complex Societies: Some Uses of Faunal Analysis for the Study of Trade, Social Status and Ethnicity. Pp. 155-205 in ArchaeologicalMethod and Theory, edited by M. B. Schiffer. Tucson: The University of Arizona. DeBoer, W. R. 1987 You Are What You Don't Eat: Yet Another Look at Food Taboos in Amazonia. Pp. 45-54 in Ethnicity and Culture, edited by R. Auger, M. E Glass, S. MacEachern, and P. H. McCartney. Calgary: The University of Calgary. Dever, W. G. 1980 New Vistas on the EB IV ("MB I") Horizon in Syria-Palestine. Bulletin of the American Schoolsof Oriental Research237:35-64. 1991 Archaeological Data on the Israelite Settlement: A Review of Two Recent Works. Bulletin of the AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch 284:77-90. 1993 Cultural Continuity, Ethnicity in the Archaeological Record, and the Question of Israelite Origins. Eretz-Israel24:22*-33*. 1995a Ceramics, Ethnicity, and the Question of Israel's Origins. Biblical Archaeologist58:200-13. 1995b Social Structure in the Early Bronze IV Period in Palestine. Pp. 282-96 in TheArchaeology of Society in the Holy Land, edited by T. E. Levy. Leicester: Leicester University. 1995c "Will the Real Israel Please Stand Up?" Archaeology and Israelite Historiography: Part I. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research297:61-80. Ellenblum, R. 1992 Construction Methods in Frankish Rural Settlements. Pp. 16889 in The Horns of Hattin, edited by B. Z. Kedar. Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi. Esse, D. L. 1992 The Collared Pithos at Megiddo: Ceramic Distribution and Ethnicity. Journalof Near EasternStudies 51:81-103. Finkelstein, I. 1988 TheArchaeologyof the IsraeliteSettlement.Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. 1991 The Central Hill Country in the Intermediate Bronze Age. Israel ExplorationJournal41:19-45. 1992 Pastoralism in the Highlands of Canaan in the Third and Sec-
ond Millennia B.C.E.Pp. 133-42 in Pastoralismin theLevant:Archae-
edited by O. Bar Perspective, ologicalMaterialsin Anthropological
Yosef and A. Khazanov. Madison: Prehistory Press. 1993 The Sociopolitical Organization of the Central Hill Country in the Second Millennium B.C.E. Pp. 110-31 in BiblicalArchaeology
SymposiumSupplement,edited by A. Today1990, Pre-Congress Biran and J. Aviram. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. 1994 The Emergence of Israel:A Phase in the Cyclic History of Canaan in the Third and Second Millennia BCE. Pp. 150-78 in From
and HistoricalAspectsof Nomadismto Monarchy:Archaeological
EarlyIsrael,edited by I. Finkelstein and N. Nalaman. Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi and Israel Exploration Society. 1995a The Great Transformation: The "Conquest" of the Highlands Frontiers and the Rise of the Territorial States. Pp. 349-65 in
TheArchaeology of Societyin theHolyLand,edited by T. E. Levy. Leicester: Leicester University.
andHistoryof theNegev,Sinai 1995b Livingon theFringe:TheArchaeology andNeighbouring Regionsin theBronzeandIronAges.Sheffield: n.d.
Academic Press. The Archaeology of the United Monarchy: An Alternative View. Levant28. (In press.)
Finkelstein, I. and Gophna, R. 1993 Settlement, Demographic and Economic Patterns in the Highlands of Palestine in the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Periods and the Beginning of Urbanism. Bulletin of the AmericanSchools
289:1-22. of OrientalResearch
Finkelstein, I. and Perevolotsky, A. 1990 Processes of Sedentarization and Nomadization in the History
of Sinai and the Negev. Bulletinof theAmericanSchoolsof Oriental Research279:67-88.
Hill, C. W. 1989 Who is What? A Preliminary Enquiry into Cultural and Physical Identity. Pp. 233-41 in ArchaeologicalApproachesto Cultural Identity, edited by S. Shennan. London: Unwin Hyman. Hopkins, D. C.
1985 TheHighlandsof Canaan:AgriculturalLifein theEarlyIronAge. Social World of Biblical Antiquity 3. Sheffield: JSOT Press. Horowitz, D. L. 1977 Cultural Movements and Ethnic Change. Pp. 6-18 in EthnicConflicts in the WorldToday,edited by M. O. Heisler. Philadelphia: American Academy of Political and Social Science. Hiitteroth, W. 1975 The Pattern of Settlement in Palestine in the Sixteenth Cen-
tury.Pp. 3-10 in Studieson PalestineduringtheOttomanPeriod, edited by M. Maoz. Jerusalem: Magnes. Ibrahim, M. 1978 The Collared-rim Jarof the Early Iron Age. Pp. 116- 26 in Archaeology in the Levant,edited by R. Moorey and P. Parr.Warminster: Aris and Phillips. Jamieson-Drake, D. W.
1991 Scribesand Schoolsin MonarchicJudah:A Socio-Archaeological Approach.Sheffield: JSOT Press. Kelly, M. C. S. and Kelly, R. E. 1980 Approaches to Ethnic Identification in Historical Archaeology.
on Ethnicityin America, Perspectives Pp. 133-43in Archaeological
edited by R. L. Schuyler. New York: Baywood. de Geus, C. H. J. 1975 The Importance of Archaeological Research into the Palestinian Agricultural Terraces,with an Excursus of the Hebrew Word gbi.
PalestineExploration Quarterly107:65-74. Gophna, R. and Porath, Y. 1972 The Land of Ephraim and Manasseh. Pp. 195-241in JudaeaSamaria and the Golan,edited by M. Kochavi. Jerusalem: Carta. (Hebrew.) Gottwald, N. K. 1979 The Tribesof Yahweh.New York:SCM Press.
Kolska Horwitz, L. 1986-87 Faunal Remains from the Early Iron Age Site on Mount Ebal. Tel Aviv 13-14:173-89. 1989 Diachronic Changes in Rural Husbandry Practices in Bronze Age Settlements from the Refaim Valley, Israel. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 121:44-54. Kramer, C. 1977 Pots and People. Pp. 91-112 in Mountains and Lowlands:Essays in
theArchaeology editedby L.D. Levineand ofGreater Mesopotamia,
C. T. Young. Malibu: Undena.
Grossman, D.
1992 RuralProcess-Pattern Sedentarization, LaBianca, O. S. Nomadization, Relationships: and Nomadization: FoodSystemCyclesat Hesban 1990 Sedentarization and SettlementFixation. New York:Praeger. and Vicinity in Transjordan.Hesban 1. Berrien Springs: Andrews
Hazel, M.G. 1994 Israel in the Merneptah Stela. Bulletin of the American Schools of
OrientalResearch 296:45-61. Hellwing, S., Sade, M., and Kishon, V. 1993 Faunal Remains. Pp. 309-50 in Shiloh:The Archaeologyof a Biblical Site, edited by I. Finkelstein. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University. Herr, L. G. n.d. The History of the Collared Pithos at Tell el-'Umeiri, Jordan. In TheDouglasL. EsseMemorialVolume,edited by S. Wolff.Chicago. (In prep.) Hesse, B. 1990 Pig Lovers and Pig Haters: Patterns of Palestinian Pork Production. Journalof Ethnobiology10:195-225.
University. Langenwalter, P E. 1980 The Archaeology of 19th Century Chinese Subsistence at the Lower China Store, Madera County, California. Pp.102-11 in
on Ethnicityin America,edited by R.L. Perspectives Archaeological Schuyler. New York: Baywood. Larick, R. 1986 Age Grading and Ethnicity in Style of Loikop (Samburu) Spears.
WorldArchaeology 18:269-83. Lewis, N. N.
1987 NomadsandSettlersin SyriaandJordan,1800-1980.Cambridge: Cambridge University.
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
211
London, G. 1989 A Comparison of Two Contemporaneous Lifestyles of the Late Second Millennium B.C. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research273:37-55.
Stager, L. E. 1985 The Archaeology of the Family in Ancient Israel. Bulletin of the American Schoolsof Oriental Research260:1-35. 1991 AshkelonDiscovered.Washington, D.C.: Biblical Archaeology Soci-
Macdonald, W. K. 1987 Symbols and Skin: Telling Enemies from Friends in Northern Luzon. Pp. 33-43 in Ethnicityand Culture,edited by R. Auger, M. F. Glass, S. MacEachern, and P. H. McCartney. Calgary: The University of Calgary.
Staski, E. 1990 Studies of Ethnicity in North American Historical Archaeology. North AmericanArchaeologist11:121-45.
McKee, L. W. 1987 Delineating Ethnicity from the Garbage of Early Virginians: Faunal Remains from the Kingsmill PlantationSlave Quarter.American Archaeology6:31- 39. Nalaman, N. 1994 The "Conquest of Canaan" in the Book of Joshua and in History. Pp. 218-81 in FromNomadismto Monarchy:Archaeologicaland Historical Aspects of Early Israel, edited by I. Finkelstein and N. Na>aman. Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi and Israel Exploration Society. Niemann, H. M. Entwick1993 Herrschaft,Kbnigtumund Staat.Skizzenzur soziokulturellen Israel. Alten Testament im monarchischen zum Forshungen lung 6. Tiibingen: J. C. B. Mohr. Paloczi-Horvath, A. 1989 Steppe Traditions and Cultural Assimilation of a Nomadic People: the Cumanians in Hungary in the 13th-14th Century. Pp. 291-302 in ArchaeologicalApproachesto Cultural Identity, edited by S. Shennan. London: Unwin Hyman.
ety.
Tax, S. 1960 Acculturation. Pp. 192-96 in Men and Culture;SelectedPapersof the Fifth International Congress of Anthropologicaland Ethnological Sciences,edited by A. F. C. Wallace. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. Washburn, D. K. 1990 Style Classification and Ethnicity: Design Categories on Bakuba RaffiaCloth. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. Weber, M. 1961 Ethnic Groups. Pp. 301-309 in Theorieson Society, edited by T. Persons, E. Shils, K. D. Naegele, and J. R. Pitts. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe. Wiessner, P. 1984 Reconsidering the BehavioralBasis for Style: A Case Study Among the Kalahari San. Journalof AnthropologicalArchaeology3:190-234. Zertal, A. 1988 The Water Factor during the Israelite Settlement Process in Canaan. Pp. 341-52 in Societyand Economyin TheEasternMediterranean(c. 1500-1000 B.C.), edited by M. Heltzer and E. Lipinski. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters.
Peterson, R. A. 1982 EthnicIdentityStrategiesand Diversity.Bloomington: Indiana University. Pyszczyk, H. 1987 Ethnic Persistence and Identity: The Material Culture of Ukrainian Albertans. Pp. 303-308 in Ethnicity and Culture, edited by R. Auger, M. F. Glass, S. MacEachern, and P. H. McCartney. Calgary: The University of Calgary. Ringer, B. B. and Lawless, E. R. 1989 Race, Ethnicityand Society. New York:Routledge. Rosen, B. 1995 Swine Breeding in Eretz-Israel after the Roman Period. Cathedra 78:25-42. (Hebrew.) Sackett, J. R. 1990 Style and Ethnicity in Archaeology: The Case for Isochrestism. Pp. 32-43 in TheUses of Style in Archaeology,edited by M. W. Conkey and C. A. Hastorf. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Sauer,J.A. 1986 Transjordanin the Bronze and Iron Ages: A Critique of Glueck's Synthesis. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 263:1-26. Shennan, S. 1989 Introduction: Archaeological Approaches to Cultural Identity. Pp. 1-31 in ArchaeologicalApproachesto Cultural Identity, edited by S. Shennan. London: Unwin Hyman. Shibutani, T. and Kwan, K. M. 1965 EthnicStratification:A ComparativeApproach.New York:Macmillan. Shiloh, Y. 1973 The Four-Room House - The Israelite Type House? Eretz-Israel 11:277-85. (Hebrew.)
212
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
Dr. Israel Finkelstein currently serves as the Chair of the Department of Archaeology and Near Eastern Studies at Tel Aviv '40 University. He has taught as visiting scholar at Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the University of Chicago, and Harvard University. Director of numerous excavations I'MT10 and surveys, including the excavations at CIzbetSartah and Shiloh, Professor Finkelstein is co-director of ID D the renewed excavations at Megiddo. Along with scores of articles in academic journals, Finkelstein's publications include the seminal volume The Archaeologyof the IsraeliteSettlement(1988) and, more recently, Living on the Fringe:TheArchaeologyand History of the Negev, Sinai and NeighboringRegions in the Bronzeand IronAges (1995). He is a member of the Archaeological Council of Israel and the editorial boards of TelAviv and Qadmoniot.
Appeals for Military Intervention: Stories from Zinjirli and the Bible
M
r
f
t
?
K?
n~~
1I y? s
By Simon B. Parker SIKE GOVERNMENTS THROUGHTHE AGES, ANCIENTNEAR
Eastern kings, threatened by a more powerful neighbor sometimes appealed to a yet more powerful king to attack the threatening neighbor. Several accounts in inscriptions and the Bible describe the use of such a strategy by kings of Iron Age Syria-Palestine. It would be easy to regardthese accounts as accurate,reliable descriptions of actual events, as some have done; or to treat all the biblical accounts as purely literary products in the service of latertheologicalinterests,a practicenow favored in certain quarters.But inscriptions, no less than uninscribed archaeological discoveries, require interpretation; and the historical value of biblical texts must be assessed in light of pertinent epigraphic material. Ratherthan simply assigning each of these accounts to one of the two modern categories of fact or fiction, we need to ask: what kind of literary composition is this, and how does this presentation of events compare with other accounts of the same strategy? The differences among the inscriptions and the various biblical storieswill disclose a varietyof relationswith historicalevents.
Inscriptions from Zinjirli.
Two royal inscriptions from Zinjirli (near the modern Turkish-Syrianbordereast-northeastof the gulf of Iskenderun) each include an account of the successful use of this military strategy of appeal for intervention.A recentlypublished new edition of all the inscriptions from Zinjirligives a firmerbasis for study of these texts (Tropper 1993). The KilamuwaInscription. The inscription of Kilamuwa was written in Phoenician and dates from around 825 BCE.In 1902 the German excavators of the site discovered it in fragments on the left side of the gateway of the northwest palace (PalaceJ)on the acropolis of Zinjirli (von Luschan 1911:374).The inscription falls into two parts, divided by a horizontal double bar.In the first part, Kilamuwa boasts of achieving things that his predecessors had not, then refersto his disposal of hostile neighbors. In the second part, he reports his parental care of a previously disadvantaged segment of the population which now owns livestock and personal adornments it had never seen
3p
E
Planof the Zinjirlicitadel as excavated by 1911. The inscriptionof king Kilamuwawas found at the main entranceto the palace in the northwest corner(J). The arrow indicatesthe find spot. From Luschan1911:262.
before. The inscription ends with curses on anyone damaging it. At the end of the first part, Kilamuwa includes a minimal story which reads as follows: "And the king of the Danunians was more powerful than I (or too powerful for me), so I hired against him the king of Assyria:1they gave a girl for a sheep and a boy for a garment." 2 Various meanings have been assigned to the last clause. The best supported meaning refers it to the economic prosperity following the Assyrian intervention.At that time, male and female slaves were cheap, either because the Assyrians sold theirDanunian captives cheaply-as the conquerors of Israel sold "a boy for (the hire of) a prostitute" and "a girl for wine," according to Joel 4:3 (Eng. 3:3;Collins 1972:186)or because the Danunians themselves sold their young people into slavery in order to survive the conditions following Assyrian depredation-as the Judeansdid following the siege and destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, according to Lam 1:11 (Hillers 1992:62,87-88; Oppenheim 1955). This interest in the economic benefits of Kilamuwa's actions anticipatesthe theme of the second half of the body of the inscription (11.9-13): BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
213
. .. ,r
214
59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
~ ~
I/A
r'a??f~~i~
4
'1
'"..2
iii
:,; i~epq:
\
C ) \,/ V ?: ~?~i~~l -): :II~~ - I I"
?~??;~j w. YO T- T~:
11
IF"i:?i
:ii?:~. ~
_;?-
\\\
' "IN XV???::-~` -tN, K .;?..
I'
~ ~ ~`~ ?.-
MV.
v?Nnx
44..
IgI
~~Va\ liltiy
I_
~:~~
I .ii
iii'
ifll" #1" ? ??? iii?ii.;:~
"
9ff III:-
iii!
.i
illH1111"Iff 1111 Iffes.7 11 fills,
" It
it,
opl 1111111
?
I
?
IiI
c i?
I
",
~?? Ic.
l~"';~~~
Planof the city of Zinjirlias excavated by 1898. An artisticreconstructionof the citadel from the same year. Kilamuwa'sreferenceto his hostile neighbors, especiallythe king of the Danunians,illustratesthe need for the fortifications.FromLuschan1898:Tafel29-30. 1, Kilamuwa, son of Hayya, sat on the throne of my
father. Under the former kings the Muskabiml lived4 like dogs. But I, to one I was a father, to another I was a mother, and to another I was a brother. And whoever had not seen the face of a sheep, I made him the owner of a flock; and whoever had not seen the face of an ox, I made him the owner of a herd; and [whoever had not seen... I made himf the owner of silver and the owner of gold; and whoever had not seen a tunic" from his youth, in my time they covered him with fine linen.7 And I took the Muskabim by the hand and they looked to me like a fatherless child to its mother8
Kilamuwa's rhetoric in the three-clause story of his disposal of the Danunian threat is revealing. The first clause admits only that the Danunian king was "more powerful than I," not that he inflicted any particular defeat on Kilamuwa, or invaded his territory,or confined him to his capital city Kilamuwa admits only his relativesuperiority.This alone serves as the motive and justification for his appeal to the Assyrian king. Kilamuwa then says, not that he appealed to the Assyrian king, but that he "hired"his services. The word "hired"subsumes a range of activities: a request and gifts to the Assyrian king, the king's agreement to intervene, and his subsequent invasion of the Danunians. But it gives the Assyrian no credit for his actions. Kilamuwa himself is the sole subject: "I hired." This expresses the presumptuousness of BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
,,~
215
Kilamuwa's point of view-the Assyrian king would scarcely have regarded himself as Kilamuwa's hireling. Kilamuwa thus passes over the Assyrian actions to move immediately to the beneficial economic consequences of his action, expressed by a synecdoche: the cheapness of a male or female slave. This account is the written record Tt 9 sponsored by the king involved, and it stands closer in time to the historical events than any of the other stories we shall consider. Yet the brevity and rhetoric of this minimal story disclose Inloo -0"F- W 4 relatively little of the actual events. We learn only that the king of the Danunians threatenedKilamuwa,who appealed with presents to the Assyrian king, who invaded the Danunians. Its rhetoric reveals more of other historical data than events. It ignoresthe specificactions of both of the foreign kings, and instead speaks of Kilamuwa's "hiring" of the Assyrian king, and the beneficial economic consequences of The inscriptionof Kilamuwa.The king stands in the upper left his action. Thus Kilamuwa expresses the point of view of his corner,pointing to the symbolsof four deities. The inscriptionmakes court and reflects the story of these events as told in the court. no referencesto gods outside the concludingcurses. The text is The second half of the inscription, with its emphasis on the divided by the double horizontalline acrossthe middle into two economic benefits of Kilamuwa's reign, suggests that it was sections of eight lines each. Photo from Donnerand Rollig, Kanaanaischeund AramaischeInschriften,vol. 2. 1978:pl. 27; probably also intended for wider consumption. This is from Luschan1911:375. the of the at main location the drawing supported by inscription entrance to the palace, where it was probably a symbolic representation of oral propaganda. (Few of its viewers would have been able to read it.) 9 AZIA We know from Assyrian sources that Shalmaneser III campaigned against Que (the Danunians) in 839, 834, and 833 BCE. We do not know whether Shalmaneser was encouraged by Kilamuwa's appeal to set his sights on this area in fi~ 7,7 839; or whether Kilamuwa decided to throw in his lot with .7 . ' 77 '' the Assyrian king in 834, knowing of Shalmaneser's already ".. ,• .' ..D " -;.; ': ,V 'i , in area of A • interest his Nor the 839. : !2 proven through campaign , /,:l :•,t " ". :, :: - -"-.• ;- 7'-; ,• . ..• -. .. - _!: _ .t _"...•."." do we know whether Kilamuwa remained an Assyrian vas,, .. sal for long. In any case, the Assyrians of this period were new to this region on the extreme northwestern border of their empire and had had little to do with the coastal Phoenicians. Thus, Kilamuwa could probably safely assume that no Assyrian representatives likely to visit his palace and see this inscription would be able both to read the Phoenician alphabet and to understand the Phoenician language. ThePanamuwaInscription. (von Luschan 1893:48). The inscription was written in the in Zintheir first the excavators of local Samalian dialect and dated to about a century later than 1888, campaign During the of a dolerite the inscription of Kilamuwa, i.e. in the 730s BCE.It contained uncovered lower statue jirli part bearing an inscriptiondedicated by Bir-Rakibto his fatherPanamuwa a much longer account of a king's appeal again to the Assyrian king against an unnamed antagonist ( 11.2-11): (Sachau 1893). Although probably originally set up in the in it excavators found about royal necropolis nearby Gerein, three kilometers from there in an abandoned Islamic ceme2-6....10destroyed/the terriblething...from/in his father's had it a where someone reused as house, and he killed his father Bir-Sfir,and he killed his tery, (upsidedown) gravestone 44
S
216
BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
-
dently quoted to anticipate and justify the subsequent Assyrian invasion. In the midst of all the antagonist's ravages, Panamuwa mounted a chariot NZ' , and fled the land. Finally,thereis a statement about the consequent economic conditions:inflatedprices for basic commodities. Ll. 6-8 constitute the second part of the narrative.The criticalaction of Panamuwa comes in 1. 6: "Then my father Pana[muwa, so]n of Bi[rsfir],brought [a present] to the king of Assyria, who made him king over his father's q44 house and killed the stone of destruction from his father's house...." The word "present" is restored, but that No(, ;'9 sense is virtually necessary in this con. text. The second part ends with the ,/ Assyrian king breaking open the prisons and releasingthe prisonersof Samnal. The final part of the story, reintro~1; ducing Bir-Rakib's father as subject, recounts his subsequent actions: he releases certain women, buries others, and improves his father's house. Basic commodities are now abundant and cheap. Panamuwa makes new civil and military administrative appointments, and is ranked with other mighty kings, becoming very rich. Thus Panaof Assyrian muwa's engaging intervention is vindicated: the wrongs of the antagonist are righted as far as possible, the dynasty is restored, other personnel are released from prison, wretched economic conditions are reversed,and Panamuwa'sinternational status is established. The inscriptionof Panamuwawas carvedon Apparentlythe historicalbackground of this story is an internal revolt against a monumentalstatue of the king, most of the reigning dynasty and an oppressive which has not been recovered.The king's rule by a rival of the protagonist. Panafeet can be discernedbeneath the text, muwa fled the country and won the which is inscribedon the ruler'sankle-length garment. The text representsPanamuwa's support of the Assyrian king, who son's memorializationof his father's destroyed the incumbent and put PanaThe narrative falls into three parts salvationfrom militarydistress.Panamuwa's muwa on the throne as his vassal. that correspond to the three clauses of (However, as Liverani reminds us, the strategy includedan appeal to the Assyrian for Kilamuwa's story: threat, appeal and III, military king, Tiglath-pileser protagonist of such stories may himself From be a usurper, who legitimates his rule his intervention The first benefits. antagonist. against part (lines response, Luschan 1893:54. the how recounts 2-6) by claiming that his predecessor was antagonist a usurper and that he himself is the only of all of Panamuwa's family, destroyed the heir of filled the prisons, and devastated the land. It also includes a preceding ruler [1974].) In this case, legitimate are also provided. details I: "if various other Panamuwa a a of curse you by prior king, quotation the then kill one of and into house the sword sons, antagonist seems to have been internal Although my my bring rather than external-a usurper rather than an invader-in I will release the sword in the land of Samlal." This is evifather's seventy 70 (sic)11brothers. But my father mounted a chariot and...12 and he filled the prisons with the rest of them,13and he made ruined towns more common than inhabited towns,...14" and if(?) you bring the sword into my house, and kill one of my sons, then I will release the sword in the land of Sam~al." Thenhe/they pierced(?)...thecurse(?) of Panamuwa son of QRL...my father Panamu[wa], son of Birsfir, (they)fled fromthe land.15And sheep and cattle and wheat and barley [were scarce];and a half-minastood at (only) a shekel, and a STRB(weight?) of onions(?) at a shekel, and two-thirds of a mina of oil (?) at a shekel. 6-8. Then my father Pana[muwa, so]n of Bi[rsiir],brought [a present]16 to the king of Assyria, who made him king over his father's house and killed the stone of destruction from his father'shouse and...17 from the treasureof the houses of the land of Sam~al from.... Then he broke open the prisons and released the prisoners of Sam~al. 8-11. Then my father arose and released the women from the [neck stocks?]...the house of the women who had been killed, and he buried them in (?).... [Then he took] his father's house and made it better than before. And wheat and barley and sheep and cattlewere abundant in his days. And all [ ] ate from...the price was cheap. And in the days of my fatherPanamuwa, he appointed masters of villages and masters of chariots.And my fatherPanamuwa was counted among mighty kings.... And my father was rich in silver, yes, and rich in gold.
ix
:",
4e,,
59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
217
other respects the basic plot is similar to that of Kilamuwa. the gods of Sam~aldelivered my father Panamuwa from A threatens B; B procures the military intervention of C by the destruction that occurred in his father's house,/S and Hadad stood by him. appealing to him with presents; and B and his country prosper as a result. But in this case, the story is told, not by Panamuwa himself, but by his heir and successor, Bir-Rakib. According to this, it is neither the Assyrian king nor PanaIt thus represents the events as told in the court of the king muwa himself who deserves credit for his survival or success, but the gods of Sam~al,especially Hadad, motivated by the of the next generation. Bir-Rakib, like his father, Panamuwa, owed his place good conduct (sdq)of Panamuwa's father.This introductory statement now imposes a theological cast on the story, dison the throne to Tiglath-PileserIII,a fact which he acknowlin 1. 19 of this well as in other a plane of divine activity behind the plane of human later as closing inscription edges activity on which the story proceeds. Though no gods are inscriptions. Assyrian records represent Samral as paying tributeby 737, by which time Tiglath-Pileserhad gained con- mentioned within the story, the reader of the inscription is now expected to recognize the role of the gods of Samnalin trol of the entire north Syrian region (for the first time since the days of Shalmaneser) and probably instituted an Panamuwa's survival and of Hadad in his continuing suceffective administration of it. Consequently, the story behind cess. This secondary interpretation of the story anticipates the work of the Deuteronomistic historian. the inscription, as told in the vassal's court, might have had been heard by representativesof the Assyrian court. The inscription itself might have been read by local Assyrian offi- The Books of Kings The historian in Kings presents two stories concerned cials. In contrastwith Kilamuwa'sboast of using the Assyrian with Bir-Rakib full to the role the same strategy,although they were written at a greater as a recognition hireling, gives king of the Assyrian king in establishing his father(as well as himself) on the throne and liberating political prisoners. He sharpens the characterization of the three main actors to vilify Panamuwa's opponent, who is objectified as "the stone of destruction" and whose malefactions are listed. He gives full credit to Tiglath-Pileser,who appears as a just benefactor, meting out appropriate .... .... " " destructionto the antagonistand restoring the legitimate dynasty. He demonstrates Panamuwa's own goodness and greatness. Panamuwa is presented as a survivor who brought about these benefits, added many of his own, and prospered by his deeds. Thus the rhetoric of the inscription again reveals more than the events in the life of the protagonist. ElsewhereBir-Rakibcreditsboth the dynastic deity Rakib-EI and TiglathPileser with setting him on the throne (11.19-20 of the present inscription and Tropper B1:4-7;B4:5).But he does not impose this synergistic view of the forces at work in his own reign on this story of his father.Rather,the story is told on the purely human planeBir-Rckibpicturedseated on an Assyrian-styledthrone, probablydictatingfor the scribewho as are all the other stories of this type. stands before him with pen-caseand writing board.The ca. 1.1 m tall stele was found at But we should note a different level of where Bir-Rakib ruled, like his father,thanksto Tiglath-PileserIll.Allegianceto the interpretationof these events in the state- Sam~al lord-indicated as well by the fact that this Syrianking paid tribute to TiglathAssyrian ment immediatelyprecedingthe quoted have influenced the compositionof the Panamuwainscriptionin which Pileser-may narrative (11.1-2): od,
Bir-Rakib gives full recognitionto the role of the Assyrianking. The inscriptionmight have
Becauseof his father'srightconduct, 218
been read by local Assyrian officials. From Luschan 19711:3Tafel 60.
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
.41 14
Nc~
Tiglath-pileserIII,depicted on a larger-than-liferelief from Calah (Kahlu).Panamuwaand Ahaz both appealed to the Assyrian monarchfor interventionagainsttheir enemies. @TheTrusteesof the BritishMuseum,London.
chronologicaldistance from the actualhistoricalevents which they portray.
Asa of Judah
According to 1 Kgs 15:17-22, Baasha of Israel fortified Ramahas a base from which to hem in Asa of Jerusalem.Asa was able, however, to send envoys to Benhadad of Damascus with silver and gold from temple and palace treasuries along with the message: Therehas been a treatybetween me and you and between my father and your father.19Look, I am sending you a present (o~oiad)of silver and gold. Go and break your treaty with Baasha, king of Israel, so that he withdraws from me (v. 19). Some see the use of gohiadhere as an expression of opprobrium, translating it "bribe." But it would be surprising if the narratorput in the mouth of the speaker a word expressing disapproval of the speaker's action. Study of the biblical usage of the word shows that it is a general word for "present," that only acquires the connotations of "bribe"in legal contexts in which a third party is wronged. In other contexts (e.g., Isa 45:13;Prov 17:8;21:14)such connotations are absent, and there is no trace of odium attaching to the word.20In the present context there are no legal issues at stake, and there is no suggestion that the thirdparty is being unjustly treated. Hence we cannot conclude that there is any odium attached
to the term here. Asa's speech is used simply to display the arguments by which Asa prevailed upon Benhadad to break with Baasha and support him. Benhahad "responded"to Asa by sending his troops against several northern Israelite towns and through most of Israel's northeastern territory. When Baasha heard of this, he withdrew to Tirzah.According to v. 22, Asa then removes the stones and wood of Ramah and with them constructsMizpah and Geba of Benjamin.He thus consolidates his deliverance by restoring the border further north and fortifying it. Asa thus effectively shifts the balance of power in his favor and accomplishes something more permanent than the cessation of a siege. The historian's approval of Asa in vv. 11-14 is not inconsistent with this success. However, some inconsistencyappearsbetween this story and the immediately preceding v. 16: "There was war between Asa and Baasha,king of Israel,all their reigns." This is a refrain in these accounts of the early reigns of the two monarchies (14:30;15:6,7, 16, 32). The historian thus renders the resolution of the story in 15:17-22as a mere interlude in an ongoing conflict, diminishing the impact of Asa's accomplishment, as portrayed in the story. But if 15:17-22 is not the creation of the historian,neitherdoes it have the stamp of palace rhetoric.It seems highly unlikely that the historianis drawing on a royal inscription or any other written source directly reflecting an oral court story of the ninth century. The skillfully constructed speech at the center of the present account confirms this. It reads like something written accordingto Thucydides'famous claim-the writerhas made the speaker say what, in his view, was called for by the situation (ThePeloponnesianWarI:22). While probablytoo blunt in its language to be an actual diplomatic appeal, the speech provides an appropriately argued message for a king attempting to engage the military intervention of a possibly unwilling ally.
Ahazof Judah
While no other documents refer to the events concerning Asa, Assyrian records do provide some background for this story of Ahaz's appeal to Tiglath-Pileser III. After establishing his control of northern Syria and receiving voluntary tributefrom the states of southern Syria and northern Palestine in 738, Tiglath-Pileser III faced resistance from Damascus and Samaria in 734. The two states had to prepare for an Assyrian invasion and, as the following story suggests, they did so by attempting to force neighboring kingdoms into an alliance. 2 Kings 16:5 recounts that the kings of Aram and Israel laid siege to Jerusalem. Ahaz of Judah then sent a message to Tiglath-Pileser: "I am your servant and your son. Come up and deliver me from the power of the king of Aram and the power of the king of Israel, who are attacking me" (v. 7). He also sent a present along (v. 8). Then "the (oh.ad) him and...went to of up to Damking Assyria responded ascus and-took it. He exiled its inhabitants to Qir and killed Rezin" (v. 9). 59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
219
We have already noted the meaning of ohiadand the importance of situational context for the evaluation implied. Here, as in 2 Kings 15, it is an effective means of drawing off an invader, devoid of legal or negative connotations. Cogan and Tadmor argue that, since Assyrian vassals never speak of themselves as "son" of the Assyrian king, Ahaz's self designation as Tiglath-Pileser's "servant" and "son"is a damning referenceto his failure to act as Yahweh's servant and son (Tadmor and Cogan 1979:504-7;1988:192; followed by Irvine 1990:87-90;cf. Na~aman 1995). But both words are traditionalexpressions of subservience and respect in Syria-Palestine, going back to the El Amarna letters (EA 158:2;288:66;Kalluveettil 1982:129). Biblical literature recognizes this. David speaks of himself as Nabal's son in seeking a favor from that unworthy-without any sign of disapproval by the narrator.Thus there is no evidence in this little narrative of any negative judgment by the narrator.Indeed, there are several other stories in which Jerusalemis threatenedand the king effectively uses palace and temple treasure either to buy off the invader directly or to buy military intervention from elsewhere to draw off the invader. Thus it seems fair to conclude that this story,if not simply neutral,was composed, like that concerning Asa, to present an effective diplomatic maneuver.Doubtless the kings of Israeland Damascus would have viewed Ahaz's move negatively, but for the Judean court, it would have been a success. This account, while preserving no trace of royal rhetoric,seems to acknowledge that fact. At the same time, it makes clear that the move involved submission to Assyria. In this respect, it is like the story of Panamuwa; both contrast with the stories of Asa and Kilamuwa. This account of a diplomatic success of Ahaz contrasts with the historian's strong disapproval of him (15:2-4).Thus neither the story of Asa nor that of Ahaz makes a perfect fit with its present context. However, the two stories have many features in common, not only of plot, but of language and of interests.This may be representedby the following schematic summary of the two stories: 1 Kgs 15 17) Then RNi, king of GN1 went up against GN2... so as not to allow anyone to leave or go in to RNi king of RNi 18) and RN2 took the silver and gold that were left in the treasuries of Yahweh's temple and...the king's palace and handed them over to his servants and sent them to RN3...king of GN3...: 19) (nominalsentencedescribing presentand past relations) 220
2 Kgs 16 5) At that time RNi king of GNi went up to Jerusalem... to do battle and laid siege against RN2... 8a) and RN2 took the silver and the gold that were in Yahweh'stemple and in the treasuriesof the king's palace 7a) RN2 sent messengers to RN3 king of GN3: (nominal sentence describing proposed relations)
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
Look I'm sending you a present... (requestfor assistance--imperatives and jussive) to 20) Then RNBresponded king RN2 and sent officersagainst...and struck...
8b) and he sent to the king of GN3 a present 7b) (request for assistanceimperative) Then the king of GN3 responded to him and the king of GN3 went up...and took
The commonalities of the two stories suggest that they come from a common social-cultural context-and perhaps that one has been heavily influenced by the other.
Comparisonof the Accounts from Zinjirli and in Kings
There are striking contrasts between the two biblical stories on the one hand and the two inscriptions on the other. First, there are significant differences in content. Unlike the inscriptions, the biblical stories make no mention of the economic benefits of the kings' actions for the country. These are not works of public propaganda. On the other hand, they share certain distinctive narrative elements that are missing from the inscriptions: quotation of the diplomatic message, statement of the nature and source of the presents, and report of the military actions undertaken by the third party. They are concerned with diplomatic rhetoric,disbursements from the coffers of Jerusalem temple and palace, and the Judean king's success in defending Jerusalem and getting invaders invaded. This, as well as the lack of interest in the general economy, suggests Jerusalem court circles as the general matrix for the production of these stories. More specifically it was those in the court who were committed to international involvements, rather than to isolationist policies or to apolitical quietism, who created these narratives. Second, there are differences in rhetoricbetween the two pairs of texts. There is no trace in either of the biblical stories of the rhetoric of the central actor or his successor, nor any direct expression of the interests of the particular court involved. Both these stories stand at an objective distance from the passions of lived history,without, on the other hand, being excited by literary or theological passion. They are examples of that extraordinary,dispassionate historiographic prose that we find here and there in the Deuteronomistic history and in Neo-Babylonianchronicles(forwhich see Glassner 1993). OtherBiblical References to the Strategy The same strategy is more briefly recounted in three other biblicalcontexts,apparentlyremote from any historicalevents. All three accounts are told by the party posing the initial threator by a narratorsympathetic to that party,and all three use the Hebrew cognate of the verb used by Kilamuwa, Akr "hired," a term now not of pride, but of reproach. In the story of 2 Kgs 6:24-7:20,the narrator tells us (7:6) thatYahwehhad caused the Arameanarmy besieging Samaria to hear the sound of chariots and horses and a great army. Under this delusion the Arameans say to each other: "The
-
,',, ,,
~~he
-a,,. ,
All / Ile
The king in his chariotprocesseson a low-relief panel from Tiglath-Pileser's palace.The larger fortresscity.Sometimesthe energetic king's panel depictsthe conquest of a Syro-Palestinian campaignswere responsesto appeals for interventionfrom his threatened allies. ?The Trusteesof the BritishMuseum,London.
there a divine role, and that is because a religious power has displaced a military one. Num 22-24 presents a fuller, complex account of the sequence of actions to which Deut 23:5b-6 refer. In the Zinjirli inscription, the verb ?krexpressed the presumption of Kilamuwa in his account of his successful appeal to the king of Assyria. In these literary texts, the Hebrew cognate expresses the resentmentof the initially threatening party-or a narratorsympathetic to that party-against whom the third force is hired.21(As with the word ohlad,the point of view of the speaker or writer determines connotations and evaluation.)
Conclusion king of Israel has hired against us the kings of the Hittites and the kings of Egypt to come against us." In light of this assumption, the Arameans flee, leaving all behind them. The delusion caused by Yahweh and the explanation assumed by the Arameans constitute the narrator's disclosure to the reader of how Yahweh had disposed of the besieging Arameans-something the Israelitesin the story never learn. The significant fact for the theme of this article is that the Arameans reconstruct for themselves the same sequence of events that Kilamuwa claimed to have set in motion when he used the verb "hire":a threatened king sent an appeal with presentsto a thirdparty,the thirdparty agreedto respond, and marched against the threatening force. In 2 Sam 10:6the Ammonites, fearing that David is planning to conquer their city, "sent off and hired" the forces of a number of Aramean states. Here again, the same series of actions is invoked. In the sequel, both hirers and hired are defeated by Israel. The story ends however, not with the destruction of Ammon-Joab abandons the fight after the Ammonites have fled into their city-but with the defeat of the hired Arameans. They concluded a vassal treaty with Israel so that "Aramwas afraid to help the Ammonites any more" (v. 19). This, the narrator seems to say, is the fate of those who let themselves be hired to fight against Israel. Finally,the same word occurs in the little narrative cited to explain the prohibition against admitting Moabites into the convocation of Yahweh in Deut 23:5b-6. This narrative refers to the strategy used by Balak of Moab when he felt threatened by Israel. His response to the perceived militarythreatwas to hire not, in this case, a military,but a religious force-the seer, Balaam. Moab "hired against you Balaam, son of Beor,from Pethor (Pitru) of Aram-Naharaim, to curse you." Here the negative judgment of this move is explicit: "ButYahweh your God was not willing to listen to Balaam" and reversed the force of his speech "because Yahweh your God loves you" (v. 6). A higher power reversed the role of the hired power. Only in this story of the strategy is
The Zinjirliinscriptions present us with two stages in the transmission of court stories---one a report from the court of the king in question, the other an account from the successor of the king in question.Both arecast in a formthatexpresses the specific point of view and interests of the named speaker, emphasizing in particular the economic benefits of his (or his father's) actions for his people. The two narratives about Asa and Ahaz present us with accounts composed by court officials perhaps some generations later than the actors, focusing on disbursements from the treasury and on diplomatic messages. These are historiographic, rather than propagandistic, in character and interest. Their present contexts add other perspectives to the stories of Panamuwa, Asa, and Ahaz. In his opening statement, Bir-Rakibprovides the story of his father's careerwith a theological dimension, and the Deuteronomistic historian gives his distinctive theological evaluation of the two Judean kings in his opening assessment of their reigns (1 Kgs 15:11-14;2 Kgs 16:2b-4). The last three stories discussed have the literary characteristics neither of the propagandistic royal inscriptions from Zinjirli nor of the historiographic texts in Kings. They are woven into their present literary settings where each serves a moral or theological purpose: as part of the narrator's revelation to the reader of divine activity unknown to the participants (in 2 Kings 6-7), in an illustration of the fate of military hirelings when they agree to attack Israel (in 2 Samuel 10), arndin a justification and motivation for the observance of a law (in Deut 23). Ancient narratives, whether in inscriptions recovered in modern times by archaeologists, or in a Bible transmitted for centuries by religious bodies, must be appreciated as narratives before they can be used as historical sources. Then they may well yield more interesting historical information about the mental or social world of their authors than about the events to which the narratives refer.
59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
221
Notes 1 The comparative sense of cl (in the first sentence), well known in the Akkadian cognate, eli, is uncharacteristic of Northwest Semitic, but is found in the Phoenician of neighboring Karatepe (Azatiwada KAI26:A III2-4; Gibson 1982:41-64; see Held 1961:24with some similar Hebrew constructions).
Lake Van
Zinjirli/Sam'al 2Sperling objects that the word "garment" (swzvt) refers to a royal mantle (since it is mentioned as being worn by a deceased queen in the Batnolam inscription KAI 11:1) or indeed to a temple veil is here (in KAI 76 A 4). He proposes that swzvt related to an Akkadian word for a type of groats, and then interprets the word for "sheep" (9)and Samalian Aramaic 9as cognate with Akkadian geu "barley."But the use of a swt by a dead queen does not entail that all swt's were fit for royaltya "dress" is worn by poor women as well as queens; and the word swt in KAI76 A 4 has no immediate context, so nothing can be said about its particular meaning there. Further, it might be objected that if the price were measured in grain, an indication of quantity would be stated. When the native words make sense, it is unnecessary to resort to Akkadian loanwords.
Damascus ,
Jerusalem Dead Sea
3One segment of the population, presumably the earlier non-Semitic stratum, made subject by the Aramean invaders, but now cultivated by Kilamuwa, whose name comes from their language. 4For this reading and understanding see now Tropper 1993:39-41; 1994. s Restoration on the basis of parallelism; cf. Sperling 1988:335. In this section of the inscription, the parallel contrasts between the former state and the latter disallow the other proposed translation, "linen," which is too close to the material of the new state. The counterpart of someone who had never even seen the face of a sheep or an ox is someone who had never even seen a tunic. Thus ktn must have a meaning similar to that of Hebrew ktnt (a meaning also attested of Official Aramaic ktn).
6
7 Cf. the equally hyperbolic claim in David's poetic lament over Saul and Jonathan (there addressing the women of Israel and speaking of Saul): "who clothed you with scarlet and fineries, who set ornaments of gold on your clothes" (2 Sam 1:24).
222
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
Lhrnia
Kalhu/Calah *
Hebrew apparently offers a cognate in Gen 49:11 where lbul6 is parallel to siltch, both meaning roughly "his garment." Also in favor of the above translation is the economic language of the rest of the inscription, which the present line anticipates (see below). The meaning of the verbal root of the word gbr (usually translated "man" in Hebrew) is "be strong," and slaves are bought especially for their physical strength. My English translation "boy" ("girl")is intended to imply both the youth and the servile role of these traded people. The youth of a gbr is certainly in the mind of the author of Job 3:3, which uses the Hebrew cognate in the phrase horageber"a boy has been conceived." It is worth noting that in Gelez (Classical Ethiopic) the cognate verb is commonly used for "act, do, work, make, labor," and the noun gabr has developed the specific meaning "slave, servant, bondsman, vassal" (Leslau 1991:178).
8For this understanding of the last sentence, see Zevit 1990.
Lake
Que
9 On limited literacy and the ceremonial or symbolic function of many written texts in the ancient Near East, see the recent review in Whitt 1995, especially 2395-96. 10Troppercautiouslysuggests:"and a cursed fellow(?)stole(?)his throne(?),..." Clearly the enemy is the subject of the next verbs.
11The word
for "seventy" is followed by seven dots.
12 Cf. Idrimi's
departure from Emar in the Akkadian inscription of Idrimi (found in the ruins of the north Syrian city of Alalah and dating from some time in the third quarter of the second millennium BCE),11.13-15. This clause suggests the motif of the departure of the hero, with only his essential equipment or personnel, after which he passes through alien territory and eventually assumes the throne. For the motif, see Liverani (1972) and compare the reference to Panamuwa's flight and n. 15 below. At the end of the line Tropper allows: "...master...pierced...Panamuwa(?)." 13The singular suffix must refer to a plurality of people-the rest of Panamuwa's "father's house"? Clearly the subject is again the enemy.
14Troppersees the possibility of reading "and Panamuwa..." or ....[Panamuwa] son of QRL ... " In any case, Panamuwa I, not Bir-Rakib's father, seems to be speaking next. Cf. the Hadad inscription of Panamuwa I, 11. 24-27 (Tropper 1993:H 24-27). 15Or "disappeared from the land." The verb Ibdt/wis f. sg. or m. pl. according to Tropper, who translates "musste(n)...umherirren(?)" For my translation, cf. halqanu "we fled" in Idrimi 1. 4. Was the subject the family/staff of Panamuwa? The missing word(s) at the beginning of the sentence read(s) --tt. 16Tropperrestores gy, used of an offering to Hadad in 1. 5 of the inscription dedicated to that deity by Panamuwa I (the son of QRL), and of gifts to Yahweh in Isa 18:7;Pss 68:30;76:12.Although Tropper claims that there is room for only two letters, it is tempting to suggest a cognate of Hebrew and Aramaic ghd, used in the two biblical passages discussed below in
precisely the sense required here, and attested as a verb in Old Aramaic (Sefire III [KAI224] 28), where, although the immediate context is broken, it seems again to refer to the sending of gifts by the vassal to engage another king to attack the overlord.
17Tropper sees 41ras a possible reading and suggests the translations: "drove out" or "the evil." 18 ihth zhihwt bbyt abwh. Cf. the language describing the first event in the story of Idrimi: ina Halab bit abiya nmaiktuittabgi "A terrible thing occurred in Halab, my father's house" (ll. 2-3).
19Similarly Weinfeld 1988:347(but using the present tense). The common "founders on the inapplicability of translation "Let there be a treaty.... the volitive to the previous two kings ("my father...your father") and on the lack of anything in the Hebrew text, as we have it, to justify in translation the insertion of "as there was" before the reference to the fathers. However, Rudolph 1951:206and Wurthwein 1977:188conjecture that a k "as"has been lost [by haplography] after "and you" (abinekA).The expression here would then be similar to the proposal of Burnaburiash II of Babylon to Amenophis IV of Egypt: kiabbaniitti ahami tabannu Ila tabanu "as our fathers were on good terms with each other, let us be on good terms" (EA 8:11-12). Weinfeld 1988:347, with further bibliography on ancient Near Eastern and Greek terms for gift/bribe.
KAI, Canaaniteand AramaicInscriptions 1962 Kanaanaischeund aramidische Inschriften,edited by H. Donner and
W.R6llig.3 vols. Wiesbaden:Otto Harrassowitz.
Held, M. 1961 A Faithful Lover in an Old Babylonian Dialogue. Journal of Studies15:1-26. Cuneiform Hillers, D. R. 1992 Lamentations.A New Translationwith Introductionand Commen-
tary.2d ed. AnchorBible7a. New York:Doubleday. Irvine, S. A. 1990 Isaiah,Ahaz, and the Syro-EphraimiteCrisis. Society of Biblical Lit-
eratureDissertationSeries123.Atlanta:ScholarsPress. Kalluveettil,P. andCovenant. AnalectaBiblica88.Roma:BiblicalInsti1982 Declaration tute. Leslau,W. 1991 Comparative Dictionaryof Gecez(ClassicalEthiopic).Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
20) Cf.
In this respect these passages are more like the accounts in Assyrian royal inscriptions, in which Assyria plays the role of the initial aggressor and reports the use of the strategy by those it threatens, only to scoff at its failure. The earliest example I have found is from the early thirteenth century, when Adad-Narari I records that he attacked Khanigalbat, whose king "went to the land of Khatti for aid. The Hittites took his presents, but did not render him assistance," leaving him to the mercy of the Assyrians (Grayson 1987:135-36).There are several similar Assyrian references from the seventh century. 21
Bibliography Cogan, M. and Tadmor, H. 1979 Ahaz and Tiglath-Pileser in the Book of Kings: Historiographic Considerations. Biblica60:491-508. 1988 II Kings. Anchor Bible 11. New York: Doubleday. Collins, T. 1971 The Kilamuwa Inscription-a Phoenician Poem. Die Weltdes Ori-
ents6:183-88. EA, El ArnarnaTablets 1964 Die El-AmarnaTafeln,edited by J. A. Knudtzon, O. Weber,and E. Ebeling. 2 vols. Vorderasiatische Bibliothek 2. Leipzig, 1915; reprint, Aalen: Otto Zeller Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Gibson,J.C. L. 1982 Textbookof Syrian Semitic Inscriptions. Vol. 3, PhoenicianInscriptions. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Glassner,J.-J. 1993 ChroniquesMisopotamiennes.Paris: Les Belles Lettres. Grayson, A. K. 1987 Assyrian Rulers of the Third and Second Millennia BC (to 1115 BC). The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia; Assyrian Periods 1. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Liverani,M. 1972 Partiresul carro,per il deserto.Annalidell'Istitutouniversitario orientaledi Napoli 32 (N.S. XXII):403-15.
24:438-53. 1974 L'histoirede Joas.VetusTestamentum Luschan,F.von 1893 Fiinf Bildwerke aus Gerdschin.Pp. 44-54 in Ausgrabungenin Sendschirli1. Mittheilungenaus den orientalischenSammlungen der k6niglichenMuseenzu Berlin11.Berlin:Spemann. 1911 Bildwerke und Inschriften. Pp. 325-80 in Ausgrabungenin Sendschirli4. Mittheilungenaus den orientalischenSammlungender k6niglichenMuseenzu Berlin14. Berlin:Reimer. Nalaman,N. 1995 TheDeuteronomistand VoluntaryServitudeto ForeignPowers. 65:37-53. Journal for theStudyof theOldTestament Oppenheim,A. L. 1955 Siege-DocumentsfromNippur.Iraq17:69-89. Sachau,E. 1893 Die Inschriftdes K6nigsPanammi von !k?mal.Pp. 55-4 in AusI. Mittheilungenaus den orientalischen grabungenin Sendschirli der Sammlungen k6niglichenMuseenzu Berlin11.Berlin:Spemann. Tropper, J. 1993 Die Inschriftenvon Zincirli. Neue Edition und vergleichendeGrammatik des phiinizischen,sam'alischen und aramaiischenTextkorpus. Abhandlungen zur Literatur Alt-Syrien-Paldistinas 6. Miinster: UGARIT-Verlag. 1994 "Sie Knurrten wie Hunde" Psalm 59,16, Kilamuwa:10 und die Semantik der Wurzel lun. Zeitschriftfir dieAlttestamentlicheWissenschaft 106:87-95. Weinfeld, M. 1988 Initiation of Political Friendship in Ebla and its Later Developments. Pp. 345-48 in Wirtschaftund Gesellschaftvon Ebla, edited by H. Waetzoldt and H. Hauptmann. Heidelberger Studien zum Alten Orient 2. Heidelberg: Heidelberger Orientverlag.
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
223
Whitt,W.D. 1995 TheStoryof the SemiticAlphabet.Pp. 2379-2397in Civilizations oftheAncient NearEast,vol.4. Editedby JackM. SasSons. son.New York:CharlesScribner's Wirthwein, E. 1977 Das ErsteBuchder Konige.Kapitel116. Das Alte TestamentDeutsch11/1. und Ruprecht. Vandenhoeck G6ttingen: Zevit,Z. 1990 Phoenician nb9/np?and its Hebrew SemanticEquivalents.Maarav5-6:33744.
Israel Finkelsteint LIVINGON THE FRINGE:The Archaeologyand Historyof the Negev, Sinaiand Neighbouring in the Bronzeand IronAges rRegions and T hisvolume of thelong-terim is thefirstoveralsynithesis settlement d emiographic thattookplacein thearidzonesof thesouthern processes Levant. .. Thisvast thesouthern theNegev,theSinaipeninsula, area.whichincludes andtheHejaz(NWArabia) plateau despitebeingdrNandsparsely Trans-ordan rolein thehistoryof theancientNearEastasbotha populated. played animportant routeof contactbetweenmoredenselysettledregionsandasa sourceof valuable raw resources. Finkelstein examines thepolitical. andnatural economicand materials thattookplacein thesouthern deserts. theprocesses processes including dernographic of andtheriseandcollapse of desertpolity. sedenterization andnoniadization, at the ersity is Profl'ssor ofTel sbratcl .'Ati otArchaeol•ey 'niL Fitskclst•is
ISBN 1 85075 555 8
cl ?40.00/$60.00
Monographsin MediterraneanArchaeology,6
210pp
A. V.G. Betts (ed.)
THEHARRA ANDTHEHAMAD: Excavations andSurveysin
o
Eastern Volume1 Jordan, Eastern isdivided intotvo sectors: therocky basalttarraI environmentally Jordan
to thewestandtheopengravelplainsof theHamsad to theeast.Thisis thefirstin Sseries of reports outin thisregion carried ontfieldwvork tifrom1979-91andpresents
- SimonB. Parkeris Associate Professorof HebrewBibleand HarrellH. BeckScholarin HebrewScriptureat the BostonUniversitySchoolof Theology. He receivedhis Ph.D.fromthe Johns HopkinsUniversityand is the authorof NarrativeTradition: ThePre-Biblical Essays on theUgariticNarrativePoemsKeretand Aqhat(ScholarsPress,1989)and of numerousarticleson the literatureand religionof the ancientLevant,especially Ugaritand Israel.Dr.Parkerservesas the generaleditorof the SBLWritingsfrom the AncientWorldSeriesand editorand one of the translatorsof a forthcoming volume in thatseries:UgariticNarratives. He has justcompleteda book on narrativesin northwestSemitic inscriptionsof the Assyrianperiodand in the Bible.
withtheuseof desert associated 'kites' of areasurveydataon Kebaran Studiesof Epipaleolithic includeanalysis and occupation Natufian sites.TheLateNatufian sawanexpansion intothesesteppic with regions, seasonal sitesestablished downfrom occupation alongthemajorwadisystems draining of Druze The results at the site of Anaza are in thisvolume. Natufian' Khallat Jebel soundings '1tara presented hasbeencarried outthrough Detailedstudyof Neolithichuntingpractices excavation atthesiteof Dhuweda. whichwasoccupiedin thelate7thmillennium in:(Pre-Pottery NeolithicB) andagainin theearly6th millennium sc (LateNeolithic).Inbothperiodsthesiteis associated withtheuseofhuntingtraps,theso-called desertkites'.Findsfromi includea corpusof rockcarvings of late7thmillennium sli: datewhich Dhuw\eila humian depictanimals. figuresandabstract designs. Thisvolumie alsoincludes of workbyUzbekandRussian on huntingtrapsand scholars aneditedsummary animalmigration in Uzbekistan, patterns oniltheUstiurtplateau whichliesbetweentheAralandtheCaspian seas.Intuhis environiental conditions closeto thoseof theNorthArabian area.whichexperiences steppe. havefoundhunting in designto thoseof theNorthArabian 'kites. archaeologists trapsverysimilar
ISBN 1 85075 614 7
SheffieldArchaeologicalMonographs,9
Individualscholarsare entitledto a 50%discounton these books. (Pleasesee our catalogueor WWWAhome page for details.)
Biblical Archaeologist 224
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
cl PRICENOT YET SET
To place your subscriptionto BiblicalArchaeologist, simplycall ScholarsPressat 404/727.2345.
c. 240pp
Royal A
New
Officials and Look at the
Kings
'
rI
in
(y6ad im) 1
Families:
Court
12
By Nili Fox
#
-J,
HENARRATIVE OF1 12:1-15 that led to recounts the final events KINGS the division of the United Kingdom into two states, Israel and Judah. Following Solomon's death, the assembly of Israelites at Shechem petitioned the heir, Rehoboam, to lighten the heavy yoke his fatherhad imposed on Israel.Facing this critical decision at the time of his coronation,Rehoboamconsultedtwo groups, and theMI'l1' (yNladin). the0D pI (zeqonhim) The zq-entmi recommended that he appease the people in order to secure their loyalty. But Rehoboam did not follow their counsel:
47, 47
4
T
?MW
R /J/17 im:.M !x
?, f7
.i
..
A?W-
i4
J,
?.w4.0i lo? MPM,
"He [Rehoboam] ignored the counsel of the z~qenhmwho advised him and he took counsel with the yladfimwho grew up with him, the ones standing before him" (12:8). The advice of the yelidim, which the king followed, was to intensify Solomon's authoritarian demands.
v7 t4
,sow-
it --Wooe
o?r
'of
-,2-
?z ITT rrAwo 00
"o Tlffl?l --loop, 40" ek vll':..?..??.? -*,? , ,4el - ?
The title Amenopphis III(1391-1353 BCE).
59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
r-4
owti"
The title hrdw n k3p appearsthirteen times on the stela of lunna, mastershipbuilderof the gods' barquesduringthe reign of refersto childrenof officialsand palace personnel.These childrenreceivedtheir education and trainingat courttogether with the future Pharaoh.Widelyattested in the EighteenthDynastyof the New Kingdom,the technicalterm may providea parallelfor the use of ydlidim in 1 Kings12. Photo from Hieroglyphictexts from Egyptian Stelae, etc. PartVIII.Editedby I.E.S. Edwards.(London:TheBritishMuseum, 1939),pl. 33.
"rot
-4:X,
00 ow
4, - 4?. I
*A? tnlo
Z-1 , -
:?
?:t
?,
-w
10,
#,z
Je
oop loop.
441( "sow;-
4,
225
Who made up the two groups of royal advisors? The •JNPI,"elders" or "old men," have been identified as either the tribal elders, who since premonarchic times represented their tribesand took part in various decision making processes (Lipinski 1974:431;McKenzie 1959:388-96),or as Solomon's old guard, those functionaries who survived him and now served his son (Noth 1968:274-75;Reviv 1989:100-101;Tadmor 1971:57-58). The identity of the O'TiS', "young men" (literally, "children"), however, presents a number of difficulties that are compounded by the fact that the term appears in the Bible with this particular nuance only in this episode (1 Kgs 12:8, 10, 14 = 2 Chr 10:8, 10, 14). The closest possible analogy, which deserves some attention, is the usage of the term yldiidn in the book of Daniel. In the opening of the narrative of Daniel, a group of royal were brought before the Judean youths, designated yelthadim, Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar to be trained at court to serve as royal functionaries (1:4,17).1Not only was Daniel's group labeled yvladin, but the other youths residing in the palace were also identified by this title (1:10, 13,15).Notably, once Daniel and his comrades complete their three years of instruction, they were no longer known as members of the circle of ydladitm.Instead, they were called by their newly acquired titles, f D2'"ZFIT,"wise men of Babylon" (2:12). In contrast to Daniel's group, Rehoboam's yladidin were clearly adults of the king's generation. With no pattern of biblical usage upon which to rely,scholars continue to debate and the roles they played in the the identity of the yeladimn monarchic organization. Evans and Malamat thought they were brothers, half-brothers or other relations of Rehoboam (1966:277; 1963:249). Recently, Kitchen called the yladini Rehoboam's "buddies" (1986:157).Tadmorposited that they were the young inexperiencedofficialsappointedby Rehoboam (1971:57-58);Yeivin placed them in the class of high court officials distinct from members of the tribal elders (1964:7879). Lipinski and Malamat turned to Mesopotamia in search of similar political institutions. Lipinskicompared the y•ladhn to the madarunm, "district administrators," in the Mari texts who appear to have been regularsat the King'stable (1974:432and 37). Malamat drew an analogy between the yldin the ziqeibit in Israel and the "bicameral" assembly in the Sumerian city state composed of men and elders. He saw these groups as two permanent councils (1963:247-53).2 The usage of the designation 0 '15' for "young men" in this narrative has been generally viewed as merely a literary device to distinguish the young, arrogant, inexperienced group from the wise elders (Gray 1963:283;Lipinski 1974:437; Liver1967:96-100; Malamat1963:249;Tadmor1971:58).Thereby, the term did not define chronological age but rather characterized the group's foolishness. The players in this drama were even said to be "drawn as types ratherthan individuals" (Long 1984:135).
An EgyptianParallel?
A possibility not previously considered is that yadihn in 1 Kings 12 is a technical term, a title comparable to the
226
BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
Closeupview of title on stela. Eighteenthdynastyinsriptionsshow that hrd n k3p, literally"childof the nursery(of Pharaoh's household),"referredto childrenof palace personnel,from amongst whom Pharaohpickedsome of his officials.
Egyptian term lrdi k3p(pl. brdwi k3p),"child of Pharaoh's household."3 This phrase first appeared as a title in Egypt in the Middle Kingdom but was most widely attested in the Eighteenth Dynasty of the New Kingdom (1550-1300), afterwhich it disappeared (Feucht1985:3843;Helck 1958:25254). Egyptian written records from the Eighteenth Dynasty, primarily tomb inscriptions,indicate that the brdwi k3pwere the childrenof officialsand palace personnel (Feucht1985:40). Several generations of brdw a k3p are attested from certain families (Feucht 1985:41).These youngsters, often commoners from different social strata, apparently received their education and trainingat court together with the future Pharaoh. Some hrdw n k3p were of foreign origin, either Asiatic or Nubian (Helck 1977:650;Redford 1988:16-17;Seipel 1977:991; cf. Feucht 1985:42-43). Occasionally, the brdw a k3p functioned in the palace as a judiciary body. In one instance they signed a marriage contract(Feucht1985:43).In anothercase a master legally awarded his slave freedom in front of a council of brdw(Lurje1971:6970). Whereas details for these incidents are lacking, we can infer that under certain circumstances the group possessed judicial authority. Apparently, the Pharaoh picked a number of his functionaries from among those who grew up with him and on whose loyalty he could count. Inscriptionsbelonging to palace staff and officials of varying rank reveal that several personal attendants who surrounded the Pharaoh as well as officers and administrators retained the title brd i k3peven as adults. This category included: butler, fanbearer, standardbearer, overseer of work projects, master shipbuilder, royal scribe, commander, and even the Viceroy of Kush (Helck 1939:34 nn. 6-8). In addition to civil positions, brdwt k3palso attained religious offices (Feucht 1985:4041). For the common Egyptian it was undoubtedly an honor to have been a member
Biblicaland epigraphic data combine to construct multi-generational trees for several court families from the late Iron IIperiod. These patterns of family continuity within the monarchical organization suggest residencieswithin or nearby the palace complex. The 1 Kingschronicler's observation that Rehoboam's "young men" grew up with him is a literal statement.
Shaphan Family Meshulam
I Azaliahu
.
Shaphan (Josiah's scribe)
I
Jaazniah
Elasha
Gemariah
Ahikam
(Zedekiah 's official)
(Zedekiah 's official)
(Jehoiakim "s scribe)
(Josiah's official)
Micaiah
Gedaliah
(Jehoiakim's official)
(royal steward governor of Judah
I-
Hilkiah Family
Neriah Family
YHilkiah
Mahseiah Mahseiah
(Josiah's high priest)
_""_:__,Azariah (Jeholakim's high priest)
Seraiah (Zedekiah's
priest)
high,
I
Gemariah
Hanan
(Zedekiah's
(priest)
'.:-Neriah Baruch
official)
(Jeremiah's scribe)
S
I
Seraiah
(Zedekia h "s quartermaster)
/ ;
Jehozadak (Zedekiah"'s
priest)p
Illustrationand photo credits:Gemariahand Azariahimpressions:@ IsraelAntiquitiesAuthority;Seraiahimpression:N. Avigad 1987:236,@The IsraelMuseum;Baruch:Courtesyof R.Deutsch1994:27;and Hanan'sring:? Cabinetdes Medailles,BibliothequeNationale, Paris. Biblical Archaeologist 59:4 (1996)
227
of this elite group. Exactly how many Pharaonicofficials began as hrdzwn k3p is uncertainsince the title may not have been consistentlyrecorded.Moreimportantly,it seems to have ceased to function as a status symbol in titularies by the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty.
zj-
.................
.
CourtFamilies in Israel
,lot
The yladim, who grew up with I, -to n Rehoboam and served him as adults, may have been childhood members ........... xl: ks AR of Solomon's palace-household analo- Among the Cityof Davidbullae catalogued by Y.Shiloh 470? gous to the Lirdw nik3pin Egypt.Although (1986),this impressionfrom the seal "belongingto a list of Rehoboam's officials was not Azariahuson of Hilkiahu"likelynames a second g& included in the Bible, the reigns of sevgeneration high priestof the familyof Hilkiahu.Photo ........... . . eral other kings have preserved lists of used by permissionof the IsraelAntiquitiesAuthority sons of officials and religious personnel who in turn were appointed to The agate seal in this seventh-centuryBCE ring names its 1 4 owner listed as "Hanan son of Hilkiahu the priest,"a biblicallyunattested family memberand government positions. Kings the sons of a number of dignitaries of brotherof Azariahu.Thisringseal and the seal that producedthe bullae of Azariahu David's court in a record of Solomonic (illustratedon the previouspage) were crafted by the same engraver.? Cabinetdes For the sons of Medailles, BibliothequeNationale,Paris. appointees. example, David's scribeSeraiah/Shisha,Elihoreph and Ahijah, succeeded as scribes (4:3);Azariah and Zabud, to Gedaliahu the house minister," which is connected to sons of Nathan, served as minister over the prefects and Gedaliah the governor of Judah (de Vaux 1936:96-102).An More substantial both additional bulla and a seal set in a ring are assigned to two friend, data, king's respectively (4:5).5 biblical and epigraphic, is available from the reigns of Josiah, sons of Hilkiah,Josiah'shigh priest (Elayi1992:680-85;Schneider 1988:139-41;1991:30-33).One son, Azariah, who served Jehoiakim, and Zedekiah. Charts of court families evidence two or more generationsof office-holdersamong others, as high priest before the Babylonian exile (1 Chr 5:39; 9:11) from the Shaphan (2 Kgs 22:12;25:22;Jer29:3;36:10-12;Ezek is connected to the bulla impressed, 7/2 p 7/ 1,'7'P7•2, 8:11),Neriah (Jer29:3;36:4,10-12; 51:59),and Hilkiah (2 Kgs "(belonging) to Azariahu son of Hilkiahu." A second son, not mentioned in the Bible, is identified as the owner of the 22:4;25:18;1 Chr 5:39-41)families. h seal engraved, Notably, members of the Shaphan and Neriah families 7/27r? ', "(belonging) to 77.-.In/17'p often have their grandfather's name included in their Hanan son of Hilkiahu the priest." Recently, Elayi showed that the same seal-cutter probablycarved the seals of patronymic, suggesting at least three generations of dignitaries. This phenomenon occurs for the following names: Azariahu and Hanan (1992:682-84).Unfortunately, the bulShaphan son of Azaliah son of Meshullam, Josiah's scribe (2 lae of Berekiahu and the seals of Seriah and Hanan are Kgs 22:3); Micaiah son of Gemariah son of Shaphan, an unprovenienced; as such, their authenticity is unproven. official of Jehoiakim (Jer36:11);Gedaliah son of Ahikam son Whereas some of the relationships illustrated on these of Shaphan, the governor of Judah after the Babylonian con- chartsare inferredand certainreservationsremain,7the secure quest (2 Kgs 25:22);Baruch son of Neriah son of Mahseiah, examples alone seem to indicate a general pattern for the monarchicstate-organization,minimally for the periods specJeremiah's scribe;6 and his brother Seriah son of Neriah son of Mahseiah, Zedekiah's quartermaster(Jer32:12;51:59). ified. The evidence that certain families held key positions at the royal court implies that they resided in or near the Importantly, several seal impressions and seals discovered this century have been assigned tentatively to members palace complex. Thus, the 1 Kings writer's observation of these court families. They include: two bullae impressed, that Rehoboam's ytladini "grew up with him" (12:8) can be n 1 to Berekiahu son understood O25, "(belonging) literally. Apparently, the children of Solomon's 01/1-1"3the72/1-.'F which --1Neriahu of are associated with Baruchthe closest officers and attendants were raised at court together scribe," scribe (Avigad 1978a:52-56;Deutsch and Heltzer 1994:37-38); with the princes. When Rehoboam ascended the throne, he a seal engraved, , "(belonging) to Seriahu(son presumably chose some of his officials from that group of 1'"3-/1.'1" owner is identified as Baruch'sbrother yNladni.While a number of the older officials retained their of) Neriahu," whose Seriah(Avigad 1978b:86-87);a bulla impressed, na posts, as evidenced by Adoram whose tenure of office dates p?/1I'"1 to the time of David (2 Sam 20:24;1 Kgs 4:6, 12:18),one can Z),"(belonging) to Gemariahu son of Shaphan," which 7is associatedwith Zedekiah'sscribeGemariah(Shiloh1986:16- imagine that the new king would appoint trusted men of his :? T., 38);a bulla imprinted,7 V'13 "(belonging) own generation to various positions. " /1.I'L2 sm
.? mzi
228
BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
In light of the above reconstruction, it is conceivable that in a crisis Rehoboam would consult members of the y|ladim and even follow their advice. It also seems reasonable that these new appointees would be overzealous in avoiding a policy that could be construed as indicative of their weakness. In contrast, the conciliatory course advocated by the ziqinim was predicated on their experience.8 While serving Solomon, they undoubtedly witnessed the dissatisfaction and insurrection that brewed in the kingdom as a result of the authoritarian monarchic system (Tadmor 1971:57-58).9
Avenuesof 'ITansmission
If Rehoboam's ylladifmn are considered analogous to the brdwn k3pof the Pharaohs, then possible origin of this usage of ydfladimdeserves attention. One way to explain a Hebrew translation of an Egyptian title, in this case part of a title, is through borrowing. In the past, scholars have argued that certain features of the Davidic and Solomonic state-organization were influenced directly by the Egyptian system. For example, Begrich, Mettinger, and de Vaux maintained that the positions of some monarchic officials, such as the royal scribe, court herald, royal house minister, and the king's friend/acquaintance were modelled after Egyptian prototypes (1940/41:1-29; 1971:19-110;1939:394-405),10Redford suggested that Solomon based his twelve-district organization and taxation system on a similar structure created by Pharaoh Shishak (1972:141-56)." Theories postulating direct Egyptian influence on the Israeliteadministrativehierarchygenerally remain unproven. Two majordifficulties persist:demonstrating contactbetween Egypt and Israel during the period of the United Monarchy and accounting for wide time gaps between the last attestationof a term in Egyptianrecordsand the initialappearance of the supposed Hebrew counterpart. The first issue is problematic primarily because Egyptian sources are silent on interconnections between Egypt and Syria-Palestine in this period. The Bible,however, reports three instances. First, during David's reign, the Edomite prince Hadad fled to Egypt where he married the Pharaoh's sister-in-law: their son was raised at court with the princes (1 Kgs 11:17-20).Secondly, early in Solomon's reign he wed an Egyptian princess who came to live in Jerusalem (3:1). Thirdly, the northerner Jeroboam, after a failed attempt to dethrone Solomon, took flight to Egypt where the Pharaoh granted him asylum (11:40).Of these threecases, Solomon's marriageand subsequent alliance with a Pharaoh,perhaps Siamun of the Twenty-firstDynasty, would have presented opportunity for cultural exchange.'2 Although an association with Egypt would not necessarily have influenced Israelite officialdom, palace customs such as those associatedwith the brdwn k3pmay have been adopted. A weak point in this theory is that the title was last attested in Egyptian texts at the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty, more than 300 years before Solomon's reign. An alternate but related approach posits indirect transmission of the Egyptian practicevia the Canaanitecity-states.
During the New Kingdom, when Syria-Palestine was under Egyptian hegemony, local rulers regularlysent their sons and daughters to Egypt, in part as hostages and in part to be trained as obedient Egyptian vassals before being reinstated in their homeland (Redford1992:198-99,270).SeveralAmama letters indicate that Caananite princes served as brdw at the Pharaoh'scourt.Forexample, Yahtiri,rulerof Gaza, explicitly stated that as a child in Egypt he served the Pharaoh "standing at the gate," apparently as gatekeeper or guard (EA296:25-29).Aziri prince of Amurru reminded the Pharaoh Abdithat he sent his sons for service to Egypt (EA 156:8-12).13 hiba, ruler of Jerusalem, who credited his position to the Pharaoh's benevolence, bore two Egyptian titles, rutdiJarri and tiezi,which he probablyacquiredas a young man in Egypt (EA 288:9-15).4 Whereas the designation brd nik3p is not attested in these Akkadian texts, the existence of the institution associated with this title is evident.15 Since the Amarna period corresponds to the latter part of the EighteenthDynasty, a weakness of this theory is a wide time gap, like the one proposing direct Egyptian influence. More than 300 years separate the Canaanite material from the advent of the Israelitekingdom. On the other hand, ample data confirming continuity of Egyptian control over Canaan in the Nineteenth and even into the TwentiethDynasty counts (Redford 1992:192-213).16Accordingly, practices associated with the title brd niik3pcould still have been operational in one form or another.In the account of Wenamun, for instance, mention is made of Zaker-Ba~al'scourt "youths" or "pages" (ANET 1969:26).The Israelite monarchy, which developed in a Canaanite setting, must have been familiar with the indigenous system. When David established Jerusalem, the former Jebusite stronghold, as his capital, he probably adopted certain components of the Canaanite administrative apparatus (Ahlstrom 1993:473-75; Rilterswdrden 1985:120-22).
Conclusion The material presented above strongly suggests that the designation O"I', ylidirm in 1 Kings 12 should be understood as a technical term signifying membership in a special group.17Rehoboam'scontemporaries,who were raised with him at the royal court, belonged to a palace household institution analogous to that of the brdwn k3pof Egypt. Probably, the yladim were sons of officials and courtiers, both At the time Rehoboamascended of myal and non-myal descent. the throne, they served him in various capacities. Evidence for the existence of families of Israelite court officials spannina several generations supports this theory. The usage of D'~t' in this narrative played a second role as well. As a literary device, the term refered to the immaturity and impetuousness of the younger advisors, a point the writer no doubt meant to emphasize as part of his ideological justification for the schism of Solomon's kingdom. Simultaneously, there is no reason to doubt that he utilized existing terminology to express the contrast between the two groups of royal advisors. BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
229
The precise natureof the offices held by individual ytladim and the exact relationshipof these persons to the king remain elusive issues. Additionally, the question of origin and the transmission of the institution associated with the yladimfiis not fully discernable. Apparently, the practice from which the title arose was the result of a connection with Egypt. An indirect connection seems more likely than direct borrowing. However, the chance that it developed independently, conceived in fulfillment of a common need, cannot be totally discounted. Analogies from the book of Daniel, for instance, may reflect a wider ancient Near Eastern tradition.'8
Notes I Various opinions exist concerning the role of Daniel and the other foreign youths at the Babylonian court. According to the text, they were recruited for their physical and intellectual qualities (Dan 1:4).Since their training included instruction in the language and writing system of the empire, it seems they may have served as scribes, perhaps mastering the ancient cuneiform system (Montgomery 1927:119-21). Another possibility is that they were educated in omen lore (Hartman and DiLella 1978:129-30). 2 Falkenstein (1966:47) has demonstrated, however, that no concrete evidence exists of a bicameral legislature in Sumer. He points out that the Sumerian assembly described in the "Gilgamesh and Agga," text in question, does not reflect such councils. Likewise, the existence of this type of a political institution in Israel is not supported by the biblical data. lird = child, k3p = royal nursery (Faulkner 1962:204, 284) or more generally-the royal living quarters in the inner palace where the princes were raised (Erman and Grapow 1961:103-104;Quirke 1990:117). 4Feucht cites forty examples (1985:45-46 n. 32). 'It is uncertain whether Azariah and Zabud were sons of the same Nathan or whether this Nathan was the prophet at David's court. hWhile Baruch's position as scribe is not tied directly into an official role, his accessibility to the palace complex and acceptance by Jehoiakim's ministers (Jer 36:8-19), as well as his brother's position as quartermaster, indicate he belonged to a prominent court family (Muilenburg 1983:227-38). 7 For example, the owner of the bulla inscribed Gedaliahu the house minister,who is generally identified as Gedaliah son of Ahikam son of Shaphan governor of Judah under the Babylonians, could actually be Gedaliah son of Pashhur, one of King Zedekiah's officials (Jer 38:1). Avigad notes reservations and recommends guidelines for establishing these types of associations (1987:236-37). 1 In light of the role of the yladim in this narrative, the understanding of as senior court functionaries is preferable to that of clan elders. zeqenimh An interesting analogy from an Amarna letter further supports that interpretation. In the letter, the citizens of Tunip request that the Pharaoh remember Egypt's longstanding rule over Tunip. They ask him to consult the la-be-ru-te-.ii//atm-ma-ti,"his old men" (EA 59:11; Akkadian, labiru = old; Hurrian, ammati = old; CAD L 29). Presumably, "his old men" refers to veteran royal functionaries who would be cognizant of past policies. "The most extreme examples are Jeroboam's attempted coup (1 Kgs 11:27) and, in the reign of David, Absalom's revolt which was supported by the clan leaders (2 Sam 15-18).
230
59:4(1996) BiblicalArchaeologist
i0 The royal scribe: Hebrew swpr, Egyptian s.4.t; the court herald: Hebrew the royal house minister: Hebrew 9rcl hbytEgyptmzkyr,Egyptian uwhinm.w; ian mrpr wr; the king's friend or acquaintance: Hebrew r'/h hmlkEgyptian rhi-nswt.
1 Redford, however, does not support the idea that positions of Israelite officials were modelled after Egyptian ones (1992:369-72). 12See Mettinger (1971:140-57)and Williams (1975:238-52)on the influence of Egyptian literature in Israel; cf. Redford (1992:386-94). 13Following Moran who reconstructs, "[my] sons" (1992:242). 14Both terms appear to be Akkadian transliterations of Egyptian words: = = ruhi 4arri = rhi-nswt, "king's friend or acquaintance" (.arru nswut king); iezi = ulw, "soldier" (Donner 1961:273-74; Oppenheim 1965:255 n. 5). Abdi-hiba is the only Syro-Palestinian ruler to call himself by these titles (EA 285:6;287:69;288:10).In other instances, the term for Egyptian soldier, wcuw,is used solely to designate Egyptians (EA 108:16; 109:22;150:6,9; 152:47,50;230:11;287:47).Donner suggests that the Pharaoh conferred the designation ruhi arri on Abdi-hiba as an honorific title (1961:274).Cf. Moran who thinks Abdi-hiba was not in line for succession but rather came to the throne due to his military position (1975:156). 15 Although the title hirdn k3p is unattested in non-Egyptian texts, there are other examples of technical vocabulary exchanged between Egypt and Canaan in this period. A number of Semitic military terms appear in Egyptian texts of the Amarna Age (Ward 1961:39), and several Egyptian words in the Amarna letters, beside Abdi-hiba's titles, resemble Egyptian titles (Knudtzon 1915:1549-51). lb In addition to data from Egyptian documents reporting military victories of the Pharaohs, isolated written material from Canaan reflects Egypt's continued supremacy. For example, hieratic inscriptions on bowls from Lachish and Tel Sera( record taxes collected for Egyptian temples in Canaan in the late thirteenth and early twelfth centuries (Cerny 1958:133, pl. 44; Goldwasser 1984:77-87, pl. 4).
17The usage of '0T' is comparable to that of the term "1V~(nacar;pl. nilarhm)which can represent variant technical designations. For example, while "V3 commonly signifies a male child or youth, it often refers to adults in a dependent relationship vis-a-vis their parents (e.g., 1 Sam 16:11; 2 Sam 18:29; Stager 1985:25-28). Attendants in the service of persons of higher status are also known as D'"1)~ (e.g., 1 Sam 9:27; 2 Sam 13:17). In other cases D0' ") denotes military personnel of a special class (e.g., 1 Sam 30:17; 2 Sam 2:14; MacDonald 1976:147-70).
" Generally, the description in Daniel is viewed as reflecting a Persian court setting. The education of Daniel and his comrades appears to be rooted in the Persian system (Montgomery 1927:119-21; Hartman and DiLella 1978:129-30;Collins 1993:139-40). Other examples of this type of an institution are found in Macedonia in the fourth century. There, schools of basilikoipaides, "royal pages (literally--children)," existed for similar purposes. Members consisted of princes as well as sons of court functionaries. One goal of the "school" was to prepare future officers. Although Philip of Macedon takes credit for the development of this institution, it seems to have a longer tradition traceable to the Persian period (Hammond and Griffith 1979:401-402;Hammond 1982:56-57).
Bibliography Ahlstrom, G. 1993 The History of Ancient Palestine. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
ANET 1969 Ancient Near EasternTexts.2nd. ed. Edited by J. Pritchard. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hammond, N. and Griffith, G. 1979 A History of Macedonia,Vol. II. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Hammond, N.
Avigad, N. 1978a Baruch the Scribe and Yerahme-el the King's Son. Israel Explo-
1982 TheMacedonian State:Origins,InstitutionsandHistory.Oxford: Clarendon Press.
rationJournal28:52-56. 1978b The Seal of Seriah, Son of Neriah. EretzIsrael14:86-87.(In Hebrew.) 1987 On the Identification of Persons Mentioned in Hebrew Epigraphic Sources. Eretz Israel 19:235-37. (In Hebrew.)
Hartman, L. and DiLella, A. 1978 The Bookof Daniel. The Anchor Bible.Garden City: Doubleday. Helck, W.
Begrich, S. diealttestamentliche Wissenschaft 1940/41SOfer und Mazkir. Zeitschriftfiir 58:1-29.
1939 DerEinflussderMilitfirfiihrer inder18dgyptischen Dynastie.Leipzig: Hinrichs.
1958 Zur Verwaltung desMittlerenundNeuenReichs.Leiden:Brill. 1977 S.v. Palastverwaltung in Lexikonder Agyptologie, edited by W. Helck. Band 4. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
CAD 1973 Chicago Assyrian Dictionary. Vol. L. Edited by M. Civil et al. Chicago: Oriental Institute.
Kitchen, K.
1986 TheThirdIntermediatePeriodin Egypt.Warminster:Aris and Cerny, J. 1958 Egyptian Hieratic. In LachishIV: The Bronze Age, edited by O. Tufnell. London: Oxford University Press. Collins, J. 1993 Daniel. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Deutsch, R. and Heltzer, M.
1994 FortyNewAncientWestSemiticInscriptions. Jaffa:Archaeological
Phillips. Knudtzon, J. 1915 Die El-Amarna-Tafeln,Vol. 2. Aalen: Zeller. Lipinski, E. 1974 Le Recit de 1 Rois XII 1-19 a la Lumiere de l'ancien Usage de Hibreu et de nouveaux Textes de Mari. VetusTestamentum24:43037.
Center. Donner, H.
Liver, J. 1967 The Book of the Acts of Solomon. Biblica48:75-101.
Wis1961 Der "FreunddesKbnigs".Zeitschriftfiirdiealttestamentliche senschaft 73:269-77.
Long, B.
toHistoricalLiterature. The Formsof 1984 1 Kings,Withan Introduction the Old Testament Literature Series, edited by Rolf Kierim and Gene M. Tucker. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Elayi, J. 1992 New Light on the Identification of the Seal of Priest Hanan, Son of Hilqiyahu (2 Kings 22). BibliotecaOrientalis 49:680-85. Lurje, I. Erman, A. and Grapow, H. 1961 Wbrterbuchder dgyptischenSprache.Vol. 5. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Evans, D. 1966 Rehoboam's Advisors at Shechem, and Political Institutions in Israel and Sumer. Journalof the Near EasternSociety 25:273-79. Falkenstein, A. 1966 Zu "Gilgames und Agga." Archivfiir Orientforschung21:47-50.
zumromischen Recht RechtForschungen 1971 Studienzumaltdigyptischen 30. Weimar: Hermann Bohlaus.
Malamat, A. 1963 Kingship and Council in Israel and in Sumer. Journalof Near Eastern Studies 22:247-53. MacDonald, J. 1976 The Status and Role of the Nalar in Israelite Society. Journal of
theNearEasternSociety35:147-70.
Faulkner, R. 1962 A ConciseDictionaryof Middle Egyptian.Oxford: Griffith Institute.
McKenzie, J. 1959 The Elders in the Old Testament. Analecta Biblica 10:388-96.
Feucht, E. 1985 The HRDW N K3P Reconsidered. Pp. 38-47 in PharaonicEgypt: TheBibleand Christianity,edited by S. I. Grol. Jerusalem: Magnes Press.
Mettinger, T. 1971 SolomonicState Officials:A Study of the Civil GovernmentOfficials of the IsraeliteMonarchy. Lund: CWK Gleerups.
Goldwasser, O. 1984 Hieratic Inscriptions from Tel Seracin Southern Canaan. TelAviv 11:77-93. Gray, J. 1963 I and II Kings:A Commentary.Philadelphia: Westminster Press.
Montgomery, J. 1927 A Critical and Exegetical Commentaryon the Bookof Daniel. New York:Charles Scribner's Sons. Moran, W. 1975 The Syrian Scribe of the Jerusalem Amarna Letters. Pp. 146-66 in Unity and Diversity: Essays in the History, Literatureand Religion of theAncient Near East,edited by H. Goedicke and J. Roberts.
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
231
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 1992 The Amarna Letters. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Muilenburg, J. 1983 Baruch the Scribe. Pp. 215-38 in Proclamationand Presence,edited by J. Durham and J. Porter. Macon: Mercer University Press. Noth, M. 1968 Kinige.Neukirchen-Vluyn:NeukirchenerVerlagdes ErziehungsvereIns. Oppenheim, A. L. 1965 A Note on the Scribes in Mesopotamia. Pp. 253-56 in Studies in Honorof BennoLandsberger,edited by H. Giiterbock and T.Jacobsen. Assyriological Studies 16. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Quirke, S. 1990 TheAdministrationof Egypt in the LateMiddle Kingdom.Kent: SIA. Redford, D. 1972 Studies in the Relations Between Palestine and Egypt During the First Millennium B.C. Pp. 141-56 in Studies on the Ancient Palestinian World, edited by J. W. Wevers and D. B. Redford. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 1988 AkhenatenTempleProjectIII. Toronto: Aris and Phillips. 1992 Egypt, Canaan,and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Reviv, H. 1989 The Eldersin Ancient Israel.Jerusalem: Magnes Press. Riitersworden, U. 1985 Die Beamntender israelitischen Kiinigszeit. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Schneider, T. 1988 Azaryahu Son of Hilkiahu (High Priest?) on a City of David Bulla. Israel ExplorationJournal38:139-41. 1991 Six Biblical Signatures: Seals and Seal lmpressionr c;, wl,1 cal Personages Recovered. BiblicalArchaeologyRev Seipel, W. 1977 Harimzogling. P. 991 in Lexikon der Agyptologie, Helck and E. Otto, band 2. Wiesbaden: Harrassow
Revue Biblique48:394-405. Ward, W. 1961 Comparative Studies in Egyptian and Ugaritic. Journalof the Near EasternSociety 20:31-40. Williams, R. 1975 A People Came Out of Egypt. Vetus Testamentum Supplement 28:238-52. Yeivin, S. 1964 Rehoboam and Jeroboam. Pp. 73-97 in Sefer Korngrin, edited by A. Vaiser and B. T. Lurya. Tel-Aviv. (in Hebrew.)
Nili Foxis completing her doctoral dissertation at the Universityof Pennsylvania on Israeliteofficials and monarchical administration. She has excavated at Hazor and Haror and taught biblical studies at Reconstructionist RabbinicalCollege and at the University of Pennsylvania. Her publications include studies of the cultic matrix of body-painting in the ancient Near East and a of as gesture anger in ancient Israel and clapping Mesopotamia.
Subscribe
to
Shiloh, Y. 1986 A Group of Hebrew Bullae from the City of E ExplorationJournal36:16-38. Stager, L. 1985 The Family in Ancient Israel. Bulletin of the Ameriu Oriental Research260:1-35. Tadmor, H. 1971 "The People" and the Kingship in Ancient Israel: Political Institutions in the Biblical Period. Pp. 46 SocietyThroughtheAges, edited by H. Ben-Sasson ar New York:Schocken Books. Vaux, de R. 1936 Le sceau de Godolias, maitre du palais. Revue Bibli 1939 Titres et functionnaires egyptiens h la cour de Davir
232
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
To place your subscription to BiblicalArchaeologist, simply call Scholar'sPress, at 404/727.2345 with VISAor MasterCard information handy! Or,send check or money order drawn on a U.S. bank to: RO. Box 15399, Atlanta, GA 303330399. Individualorders must be prepaid. $35 USindividuals $40 Non-USindividuals $45 USinstitutions $50 Non-USinstitutions
The Date of the Siloam Inscription: A
to Rejoinder Rogersonand
Davies
Insidethe tunnel: regardlessof what is known or unknown about the location of Jerusalem'scity wall at the end of the eighth century BCE,the inscriptionchiseled into the wall of this tunnel unequivocally justifiesthe sobriquet "Hezekiah'stunnel." Photo from the Beegle Collection.
By Ronald S. Hendel N AN ARTICLEIN THE MOST RECENTBA, "WAS THE SILOAM
Tunnel Built by Hezekiah?",John Rogerson and Philip Davies argue that the script of the Siloam Inscription
cannot conclusively be dated by paleographic analysis. They acknowledge that specialists in paleography unanimously date the inscription to the last quarter of the eighth century iicv, but they maintain that the paleographers
are mistaken, apparently deluded by circular reasoning and professional hubris.This is a remarkableclaim and deserves some consideration. Rogersonand Davies' chief contentionis thatpaleographic analysis of ancient Hebrew inscriptions is extremely imprecise. In the case of the Siloam Inscription, they write: "the fact is this: it is frequently not possible to prove on pal'ographic evideJlce aloe,ihllethelr a text inj palco-Hebrew, datL'Sfroli, saly, the eighlth-seveLJlth ceLJt ries or is HasJJion'aJlor
later"(1996:146,italics in original). A brief comparison of the script of the Siloam Inscription with some eighth-seventh century scripts and some Hasmonean era scripts prompts them to conclude that "neithersequence is clearly more convincing than the other"(1996:146).Hence paleographicanalysis of the script is of no value in establishing the date of the
inscription. The inconclusiveness
of the paleography is cru-
cial to their larger argument that the Siloam Tunnel dates to the Hasmonean era. A review of the relevant evidence, however, shows that Rogerson and Davies' paleographic arguments are deeply flawed. It is in fact quite easy to tell that the script of the Siloam Inscription belongs to the eighth-seventh century sequence and not to the paleo-Hebrew sequence of the Hasmonean era and later.
Eighth-SeventhCenturyBCEEpigraphy
What evidences the supposed chronological ambiguity
in the Siloam script? Rogerson and Davies argue that:
the Siloam Inscription displays a number of peculiarities when set in an Iron II sequence.... There is no ancient par-
allel to the alep,there iiay be a double hooked :ayin in the
Yavneh Yam inscription, and there iaay be a parallel to the sadLeh in one of the Lachish ostraca, while the qop now
seems to be more isolated (1996:146).
The problem with this statement is that there are plh'nty of parallels to these four letters in Hebrew inscriptions from the late Iron Age, a number of which are datable by their BiblicalArciae()holo1ist59:4 (1996)
233
tav
sin
-,4
?. ,I\
I •IS
234
BiblicalArchaeologist 59:4(1996)
qop sadeh
res
I-L
1
pe
cayin samek
o
nun
mem lamed
kap
yod
tet
het
zayin vav
he'
dalet
gimel
bet
'alep
i?
A samplingof four Hebrewletters ('alep,zayin, sadeh, and qop) in rockinscriptions,engraved seals, and ceramicetchings from the eighth and seventh centuriesBCE. Depictedhere are (clockwisefrom top left):the RoyalStewardinscription(fromSilwan;Ahituv 1992:26-29):zayin, sadeh; another Silwanburialinscription(Ahituv1992:30-31):qop; the seal of y?znyhw(fromTellNasbeh;Ahituv 1992:126):-alep,zayin;the seal of sdq (fromnear Samaria;Ahituv1992:207):sadeh, qop, -alep;a pot inscribedqd?(from Beersheba;Hestrinet al. 1972:81):qop; and a pot inscribed lyhz'(fromTelcAreini;Hestrinet al. 1972:123):zayin, 'alep. These letterscan be comparedto those on the scriptchart(above)from the standardintroductionto Hebrewpaleography(Naveh 1982:77). The four letters in the SiloamInscriptionquestioned by Rogersonand Davies(as well as all its other letters)have clear parallelsin the scriptsof Hebrewseals. The chartincludesthe scriptsof (1) the GezerCalendar,(2) the Meshastele, (3) the Siloaminscription,(4) seventh centuryBCE ostracafrom Arad,and (6) a second-centuryBCE seventh centuryBCE seals, (5) earlysixth-centuryBCE manuscriptfragment of Leviticus.
archaeological context. (Many others have been acquired from antiquity dealers and are unprovenienced.) Relevant texts includes stone inscriptions, inked ostraca, engraved seals, and inscriptions scratched on ceramic vessels.' As is plainly visible in a sample of the inscriptional evidence from the eighth-seventh centuries BCE( illustration is at left), these four letters in the Siloam inscription have abundant company (as established already in Cross 1962:3641). Moreover, paleographers have been able to describe the development of these letters during this era and later, making the place of the Siloam Inscription in this sequence even clearer. The historical sequences of the 'alep (Naveh 1982:90),zayin (Naveh 1982:95),and qop(Cross 1979:75)are particularly clear. There is no question that Rogerson and Davies' concerns about these letters in the Siloam Inscription are misplaced. The script of the Siloam Inscription fits uniformly into the eighth-seventh century BCEsequence.
A
the Siloam Inscription, the similarites are quite impressive. With the exception of tet and samek,which are not attested in the Siloam text, the only letters that are not very similar are zoazo,yod (and even here, though 4Q yod has a hook on the tail, this feature is missing from the addition to the Qumran manuscript at Exod 11:8-12:2,so that the yodis thus very similar to that in the Siloam script [Skehan 1992:84-85and plate XI]),kap(which, in any case, is quite singular according to Renz II/1.162), and qop (1996:146). According to their comparison of the two scripts only the waw,yod,kap,and qopare noticeably dissimilar, though they note that a yod by another hand (in the patch at Exod 11:812:2) is similar to the Siloam yod. In their view these are the only obstacles to dating the Siloam Inscription to the time of 4QpaleoExodm. Let us look at these two scripts.
V40
HasmoneanandHerodianPaleo-Hebrew Let us turn to the paleo-Hebrew scriptsof the Hasmonean era and later.Rogerson and Davies argue that the closest parallel to the script of the Siloam Inscription is the script of the paleo-Hebrew text of Exodus from Qumran cave 4, 4QpaleoExodm(published in Skehan et al. 1992). They write: If the script of 4QpaleoExodmn is compared with that of
In addition to the differences in zoazo,yod, kap,and qop, there are noticeable differences in dalet,lanied,niein,cayin,and pe.Severalother lettershave more subtle differencesin length, proportion, or stance. The reason for these differences in script is easy to ascertain:the letters in 4QpaleoExodmnbelong to a different (and later) stage in the historical development of Hebrewscriptthanthe lettersin the Siloam Inscription. The paleo-Hebrew scripts of the Hasmonean era and later BiblicalArchaeologhist 59:4(1996)
235
[-4TT have undergone noticeable development in comparison to the scripts of the eighth-seventh century BCI:.The developments in the script of 4QpaleoExodmcompared to earlierand laterscriptshave been described in detail by Hanson (1964:3436) and McLean (1982:73-78). To test the distinction between the eighth-seventh centuryiKl:scriptsand the paleo-Hebrewscriptsof the Hasmonean era and later,I have chosen the lettersequence brkas an experimental control. A comparison of the same letter sequence in different texts allows us to see plainly the similarities and differences in shape, size, stance, and spacing of the letters. I have gathered five instances of this sequence from inscriptions from the eighth-seventh century B13CE and one instance from 4QpaleoExodfl (see chart on facing page). It is quite easy to see that the 4Q script is the odd one out and clearly differs from the eighth-seventh century BCEscripts. In contrast, the Siloam Inscription clearly belongs in the company of the other eighth-seventh century 1CE inscriptions. Paleography is not an arcane science. It only requires careful examination of the data.
Conclusion I hope to have shown that a more complete paleographic analysis than that undertakenby Rogersonand Davies yields reliable results. The script of the Siloam Inscription fits without problem into the eighth-seventh century sequence and does not fit into the sequence of paleo-Hebrew scripts the Hasmonean era and later (of which only 4QpaleoExodm is cited by Rogerson and Davies as comparable). In sum, Rogerson and Davies' conclusions regarding the paleography of the Siloam Inscription are unwarranted.2It is possible to distinguish between Iron II and Hasmonean scripts. Whatever the archaeological uncertainties concerning the location of the western wall of Jersualem in Iron II, the paleography of the Siloam Inscription belongs to the eighth-seventh century sequence, right around the BcI- a Hasmonean date. time of Hezekiah, and excludes
Notes ITwo major collections of inscriptions are Ahituv 1992 and Hestrin et al. 1972. In addition, there are numerous examples in the recent collections of Sass 1993 and Dl)eutschand Hetlzer 1994.
236
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
The historicaldevelopments of 'alep, zayin, and qop help to cement the dating of the Siloaminscription.Itsformsof these three lettersfit clearlywithin the broadersequences. The 'alep and zayin sequences commence with the eighth centuryand end with a Samaritanscript. Cross'sreconstructionof the qop moves from tenth-ninththrough seventh-sixthcenturies.(Allsequences move rightto left.) Adapted from Naveh (1982:90,95) and Cross(1979:75). 2 It is worth noting that Rogerson and Davies' linguistic comments on Siloam Inscription are also unwarrented. They state that "some of the linguistic features of the Siloam Inscription become problematic if it is early" (1996:146). These features are the apparent internal miiatresin bcr'dand and the pronominal suffix of r1u (where one would expect a final uirws lihe).These forms are easily comprehended by the following observations. 1) blwd and nuws) may be consonantal spellings with the dipthong aW (so Cross and Freedman 1952:50-51), or they may be early examples of internal matresin the Siloam inscription, as found sporadically in other eighth century inscriptions (Royal Steward, some hnlk seals, etc.; see ier in , sis, ?mt,qil, Sarfatti 1982:58-63). (Note the absence of internal mnatres is best understood as a biform or dialectal varisr, ym, and hsmn.)2) in9, ant of the ordinary Hebrew form ri111h occurs once in Jer 6:21). It (r<w plausibly parallels the variation of yw/vhw in personal names (see Cross and Freedman 1952:50and references);compare the development of plural nouns with pronominal suffixes of the type *sasa'/lu > sasaw (Pardee 1978:62, n. 75; for other possibilities see Zevitl980:19-20).
Bibliography Ahituv, S. 1992 Handbookof Ancient Inscriptions:Fromn tihePeriodof theiFirst Hebrz, The of the SecondConmmonwealth. Colnnonwlealthl and the Beginnming Biblical Encyclopedia Library 7. Jerusalem: Bialik. (Hebrew.) Cross, F. M. 1962 Epigraphic Notes on Hebrew Documents of the Eighth-Sixth Centuries B.C: II. The Murabbalit act Papyrus and the Letter Found Near Yabneh-Yam. Biulletin of theiAmerican Schools of Oriental Research165:34-46. 1979 Two Offering Dishes with Phoenician Inscriptions from the Sanctuarv of IArad. Bulletinof the AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch 235:75-78. Cross, F. M. and Freedman, D).N. 1952 Early Hebrew Orthography: A Study of theiEpigraphic Evidence. American Oriental Series 36. New Haven: American Oriental Society. D)eutsch, R. and Heltzer, M. 1994 FortyNew Ancient WestSemiticlnscriptions.Tel Aviv-Jaffa:Archaeological Center. Hanson, R. S. 1964 Paleo-Hebrew Scripts in the Hasmonean Age. Bulletinof theAmerican Schoolsof Oriental Research175:26-42. Hestrin, R. et al. 1972 InscriptionsReveal:Documenmts fromtiheTimeof the Bible,tiheMislhna, and the, Talmud. Israel Museum Catalogue 100. Jerusalem: Israel Museum. McLean, M. D. 1982 The,Use and Developmentof Palaeo-Hebretwin the Hellehnisticand RomianPeriods. Ph.D diss, Harvard University. Ann Arbor:
LateIronIIcompanions.Fromtop to bottom, the letter sequences belong to a Tel clraostracon (Ahituv1992:104);the Khirbet el-Qom inscription(Ahituv1992:113);a Judean Desertcave inscription(Ahituv 1992:116);the Siloaminscription(Naveh 1982:66);4QpaleoExodm (Exod 12:31);and an inscriptionon a stone vessel from KuntilletCAjrud (Naveh 1982:66).Script tracingsby the author
Whichword doesn't fit? Fiveof these six examples of the three-letter sequence brk come from the LateIronAge. One is paleoHebrewfrom the Dead Sea scroll 4QpaleoExodm.Rogersonand Daviesargue that the Siloaminscription'sletter forms can be placed just as easily in the epigraphyof late paleo-Hebrewas that of the eighthseventh centuries8CE.Butthe paleo-Hebrew stands out clearlyin this collection of words. Justas clearly,the Siloambrkfits with its
UniversityMicrofilms. Naveh, J. An Intro1982 EarlyHistoryoftiheAlphabet: ductionto WestSemiticEpigraphyand Jerusalem:Magnes;LeiPalaeography. den: Brill.
rig /150
Pardee,D. 1978 The Judicial Plea from Mesad Hashavyahu (Yavneh-Yam):A New PhilologicalStudy.Maarav1:33-66.
Skehan,P.et al., eds. and 1992 QumranCave4, IV,Paleo-Hebrew GreekBiblicalManuscripts.Discoveries in theJudeanDesertIX.Oxford:Clarendon. Zevit, Z. 1980 Matres Lectionis in Ancient Hebrew AmericanSchoolsof OrienEpigraphis. talResearchMonographs2. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research.
Purvis,J. D. andtheOrigin Pentateuch 1968 TheSamaritan of theSamaritanSect.HarvardSemitic Monographs2. Cambridge,MA:Harvard University. Rogerson,J.and Davies, P.R. 1996 Was the Siloam Tunnel Built by 59:138Hezekiah?Biblical Archaeologist 49. Sarfatti,G. B. 1982 HebrewInscriptionsof the FirstTemple Period- A Survey and Some LinguisticComments.Maarav 3:55-83. Sass, B. 1993 The Pre-exilicHebrewSeals:Iconismvs. Aniconism.Pp. 194-256 in Studiesin theIconography Seals, of NorthwestSemiticInscribed edited by B.Sass and C. Uehlinger.Orbis Biblicuset Orientalis 125. Fribourg:University Press;Gbttingen:Vandenhoeck& Ruprecht.
RonaldS. Hendelis AssociateProfessorin the Departmentof Religious Studiesat SouthernMethodist University.He has received threeuniversitydegrees fromHarvard,culminatingin his Ph.D. fromthe Departmentof Near EasternLanguagesand Civilizations (1985).Dr.Hendel has publisheda monographon the JacobCycle as well as dozens of articlesand reviews.He is currentlyworking on the Genesisvolume for the AnchorBible.He serves as a memberof BA's editorialCommittee.
Statement of Ownership,Managementand Circulation,October 1 1996 Title: •bl.calArdsologist Fourissuespublished 006-0895.Frequency: Number Publication annually Quarterly of 819HoustonMillRoadNE,Atlanta,GA30329.Headquarters Locationof Officeof Publication: $35.00individuals. Subscription price:$45.00institutions, DC20016.Owner:The 4500Massachusetts Ave.NVW Biblical DavidC Hopkins, Scholars Press.Editor: Same.Publisher: Washington, Archaeologist, publisher: 656 BeaconStreet American Schoolsof Oriental Research, andthe taxexemptstatusforFederalincometax purposeshasnot statusof thisorganization Thepurpose,function,andnon-profit Boston,MA02215-2010. changedduringthe preceding12months.Theaveragenumberof copiesof eachissueduringpreceding12monthsare:(A)Totalnumberof copies mailsubscriptions: 3784;(F)Copiesnotdistrib198;(E)Totaldistribution: 3586;(C)Totalpaid:3586;(D)Freedistribution: 4540;(B)Paidcirculation, printed: nearestto filingdate:(A)Totalnumberof copiesprinted:4725;(B)Paid uted:756;(G)Total:4540.Theactualnumberof copiesof singleissuepublished 4725.Icer931;(G)Total: 3794;(F)Copiesnotdistributed: circulation: 106;(E)Totaldistribution: 3594;(D)Freedistribution: 3688;(C)Totalpaidcirculation: Press. W Gilmer, Scholars Director, tifythatthe statementsmadebymeabovearecorrectandcomplete.Harry
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
237
Arti-Facts CAin
A0i -A1 2
*~-~~#~
>p
Ghazal
Excavations 1996
490
N %
Y14 Lid.
...
II
Pt•
.34L '
•; •
, "•
•
•,
The PPNCtemple at CAinGhazal(top). Inthe foreground is an earlier domestic structure.Againstthe center of the east wall is the (LPPNB) altar.A massiveterracewall behind the temple protected it from erosion. View to the east. View to the east of the LPPNB temple (above). Inthe foreground is the burned clay platform(altar?);to the left are the three "standing stones"; irnmediatelybehind is the red-paintedplasterhearth;and in the center of the eastern wall is the orthostat. PhotographscourtesyBilalDughaidiand YussefZobi. a
Archaeologist
59:4"
In the 1996 season, CAinGhazal's East Field, a ca. six-acreextension across the Zarqa River from the main site, yielded dramatic evidence of some of the earliest known temples in the world. Architectural techniques, including the use of dressed stones and oblique-angle corners, show that one of the temples is LPPNB in date (7,500-7,000 BCE, calibrated). Located high up the slope near the center of the East Field, the building measures 4 m N-S and minimally5 m E-W,although the western partwas destroyed by erosion. The structureconsisted of a single room with a dirt floor; both features were very uncharacteristic of the LPPNB. A N-S line of three "standing stones" stood at the center (although the center stone had fallen down). At the southern end of this group sat a floorlevel platform. It was enclosed by two long limestone blocks and some irregular limestone slabs between which lay a 3-cm layer of clay that had been burned to the color and texture of fired pottery. A roughly square hearth (ca. 50 cm on a side) nestled in the floor between the standing stones and the eastern wall. Made of lime plaster and painted red, the hearth was surrounded by seven small, flat limestone slabs. An orthostatof brilliantwhite limestone-ca. 80 cm high and 40 cm thick-was erected as part of the eastern wall. A small knob which lends an anthropomorphic character to the object, projected from the top of this large stone. The second temple is situated about 100 m to the south and far down the hillside. The building once had two rooms, but erosion has destroyed much of the western one. The well-preserved eastern room is 6.5 m long (N-S) x 3.5 m wide (E-W); the eastern wall still stands about 1.8 m high. The floor of the east room is made of a yellowish clay obtained when the builders excavated a storage room outside the building; the clay was not used for the floor of the western room. Against the center of the east wall is an altar (1.5 x 0.5 m) of thick limestone slabs that rest on three pairs of upright supports ca. 60 cm high. In front is a hearth of unpainted lime plaster surroundedby seven limestone slabs. The doorway in the western wall has a narrow screen wall to the south that leads into the western room for about 50 cm before making a right-angle turn towards the north, effectively shielding the hearth and altar in the eastern "holy of holies" from the view of anyone outside. Based on the use of undressed field stones, this temple probably dates to the earliest part of the PPNC period (ca. 7,000-6,500 BCE,cal.). The temples offer a new dimension of religion in the Neolithic Levant. Notably, neither temple indicates any association with the ancestor cult, which appears to have decreased in importance by the end of the seventh millennium. Gary Rollefson and Zeidan Kafafi
Paleolithic in
the
Hunters
Azraq
Oasis
During research work associated with paleoclimatic reconstructionfor Jordan,scientists working with the Madaba Plains Projectdiscovered a new Lower Paleolithic kill and butchering site in the marsh region of Azraq Shishan ("South Azraq") in July 1996. The falling water table at one pool, called CAinSoda (soda is the feminine form of aswad,meaning "black"),exposed deposits of artifacts, including hundreds of large butchering implements and even more numerous flake tools, cores, and chipping debris. Numerous fossil bones intermingled with the chipped stone material. Many of the bones appeared to be from camels, possible onagers, and wild boar, and even included the molar of an unidentified elephant species. Surface collection produced hundreds of chipped stone artifacts. Detailed examinationhas shown thatthe bulk of the artifacts date to the Late and Final Acheulian period of the Lower Paleolithic (ca. 250,000 BP). However, there were also tools and cores distinctiveof the Epipaleolithicperiod (probor Geometric ablyKebaran[18,000-12,500BCE] Kebaran [12,500-10,000BCE])and the PPNB Neolithic phase (7,600-6,000 BCE). An intensive research project at CAin Soda is now planned to learn more of how the vicinity changed over long periods of time and how human visitors made use of the-locality from the most ancient periods down through the Early Islamic and modern eras. As part of this proposed long-term research project, additional investigations were undertaken in mid-August 1996. Dr. Mohammed Waheeb (Departmentof Antiq-
,4LL
'
•
AV••_•
A Overview of CAinSoda pond looking south at the site where in situ artifactswere found on the edge of the pond (where people are standing at water'sedge). Photos by L. Quintero. > Close-upview of one of the Lower Paleolithichandaxes(photo center) found in situ on the edge of the pond.
7
Portionsof the collection.of Lower Paleolithicartifactsfrom CAinSoda as they were being registeredin the field.
'" ...
on the Roman wall concentrated while the remaining members of systems, the team focused their efforts on the prehistoric periods, not only at LAin Soda, but
uities)
at nearby LAin Qasiya as well. New collections added the earlier samples to yield more than 400 exquisite Acheulian butchering tools and 275 smaller flake tools, as well as numerous bags of animal bones. At nearby LAinQasiya, a Mousterian period of exploitation (150,000-50,000 BP)has been tentatively identified, and it appears that this spring/pool may not have existed in
cts
earlier times. The Acheulian artifactsare very telling: the open water was a major attraction for large and small animals. The enormous concentration of chipped stone meat cleavers
testifies to the lucrative harvest by hunters in the region. Later exploitation in the Epipaleolithic and Neolithic periods occurred when the pools had been replaced to a large degree by densely vegetated marshes, a
hae
change clearly indicated by the characterof the sediments. Finally, a visit to CAinel-Assad (Lion's Spring), just a couple of kilometers southwest of (Ain Soda, showed the consequences of the dropping water table in the Azraq Basin. Filled with water during excavations in 1980 and 1981, (Ain el-Assad today is a
Gold
from
the
dry dust bowl, and severalbulldozertrenches nearbyshow the desperateattemptsto "chase" the falling water supply. But while the camel and sheep pastoralists can no longer use CAinel-Assad to water theirherds and flocks, the dried sediments in the bulldozer cuts have shown where the earlier Paleolithic and Neolithic occupations occurred.In addi-
Combined
Caesarea
A,
40IIrchaeologist ?
..
prosperity for Caesarea, and it was during this period that the city reached its greatest size. This summer,extensive potterydeposits encountered on an artificial hill or acropolis overlookingCaesarea'sharborhave dated the large early Christian church that dominatedthe city'sheightsto the eraof Anastasius or his immediate successors. The church replaced a Herodian temple dedicated to the goddess Roma and the EmperorAugustus, which had been the preeminent shrine of early, pagan Caesarea. When the church was constructed, the temple was stripped down to its foundations, which were then used to support the walls of the church. Unlike the earlier temple, which was built on a rectangularplan ca. 29 x 56 m, the church was octagonal.Eachof its eight exteriorwalls measured about 16 m, and the diameter of the building was nearly 39 m. In additionto the octagonalchurch,ornamental streets, public baths, and palace facilities graced the city,while luxurious villas dotted the surrounding countryside. The growing role of Caesarea as the entry point for Christianpilgrims visiting the Holy Land
1996
likely made an important contribution to the city's wealth. Archaeologists from Trinity College in Connecticut, working under the auspices of CCE, discovered a small reminder of the wealth of the city.These students unearthed a cacheof eleven decoratedgold pieces sealed under a stone-paved floor north of the harbor in a domestic quarterof the city. The nature of the earth that included the gold pieces suggests thatthey were dumped along with the fill under the floor ratherthanplaced therecarefully.It is hard to imagine that gold, which does not corrode and which is therefore brightly visible in the earth,would have been disposed of deliberately in this manner. The pieces were probably deposited inadvertently in the fill. Designed for attachment to the leather of a belt or scabbard, the decoration and design dates the gold pieces to the sixth or seventh century CE.Five of the pieces are decorated with knot patterns in relief,a type of decoration that is distinctly European in character.Two other pieces form a buckle; its catchplate is incised with stylized bird heads, and the large clasp bears the monogram of a name in Greek, Stephanos. The name was common during the Late Roman era, and two governors named Stephanos are known to have served in Caesarea during the sixth century CE.The LateRoman era at Caesarea ended with the Arab conquest of the city in 640 CE. Perhaps that important historic transitioncan provide an explanation for the burial of the gold, which may have been lost in some event relating to the end of Roman control of the city.
MarthaK.Risserand FrederickA. Winter TrinityCollegeand the Universityof Maryland
"Alg
59:4"" ,
G. Rollefson, L. Quintero, R. Low, D. Schnurrenberger, and R. Watson
Expeditions,
f n
About 500 CEthe Roman EmperorAnastasius (491-518) ordered the restoration of the harborat CaesareaMaritimaon the eastern coast of the Mediterranean. The harbor had originally been constructed by King and Herod the Greatbetween 22 and 10 BCE, the of the Roman early years Empire, during it was one of the largest and most important ports on the Mediterranean.By Late Roman times it had deteriorated badly, and its sad stateforcedships tryingto use the ancient port to run a gauntlet of subsurface ruins and wrecks. There can be little doubt that Anastasius'documented initiativeson behalf of the harbor were paralleled by similar, unrecorded efforts on the part of his predecessors and successors. The harbor was a critical source Caesarea'swealth,and archaeologistsparticipating in the jointAmerican-IsraeliCombined Caesarea Expeditions (CCE), which are led by HaifaUniversityand the Universityof Maryland, continue to unearth clear signs of the economic success of this important Levantine port. The Late Roman or Early Byzantine era (324-640 CE)was a time of
tion to the planned excavations at CAinSoda and 'Ain Qasiya, it would also be worthwhile to resume excavationsat 'Ain el-Assad.
,
t
Iron
Early
I Pillared
Building
Sitting atop the western escarpment of Tallal-'Umayriin centralJordan,this recently excavated "pillared building" (and adjoining animal pen) from ca. 1200 BCEbelongs to the site's Iron I settlement. Excavated as part of the Madaba Plains Project,the building is extremely well preserved due to two meters of destructiondebris.It promises important contributions to the discussion of hill-country settlements in both Jordan and Israel. The building itself (internal measurements:8 m x 6.5 m, plus a 5 x 7.5-m extension for the animal pen) offers striking similarities to contemporaryearly IronI "four-room houses" in the hill country of western Palestine. The broad room stretches across the western end of the building (top in photo) and connects to the three long rooms via a doorway into the northern one. Two rows of five post-bases supported divider-wall posts and the roof or a second story. The paving flagstones in the southern long room are typical of side rooms. A massive basalt saddle quern had fallen from the roof or second story into an open areabetween the long rooms and animal pen. While resembling "four-room houses" found elsewhere, this building differs significantly. Most have been located in small unfortified agrarian villages in the western highland. The building at Tall-al-'Umayri formed an integralpart of a 1.5-hectaretown protected at least on the west by a dry moat, stone retaining wall, steep earthen rampart,
Ammon, the
Biblical
and
Moab
Tall
al-cUmayri
and apparently double-wall, or "casemate," defense system. Casemate walls appear throughout Palestine toward the end of Iron I, but at CUmayri this early form of double-wall protectiondates to the period's very beginning, perhaps even to the years prior to 1200. Finally, contents recovered from the broad room and a second-story room above it include ca. forty collared pithoi,numerousballistica,six bronze weapons, and the scattered skeletal remains of two men who likely died protecting their city.
Douglas R. Clark WallaWalla College
Drawingby RhondaRoot.
jok
Edom:
Early
States/Nationsof
Jordan
in
Period
By BurtonMacDonald,84 pp. Amman:Al Kutba, 1994; US $12.00 (paper). BurtonMacDonaldhas provided a valuable collection of information concerning the states of Ammon, Moab, and Edom. The subtitle to his volume indicates chronological limitations as the biblical period. In his introduction,he furtherdefines the period as that from "approximately 1200 BC to just
act
at
after AD 300" (p. 7). The author's stated purpose is "tobring together in a single volume all the known historical and archaeological information about the land and people of Ammon, Moab, and Edom in the Biblical period." He further indicates that he directs the book to the "sophisticated layperson and student," and he hopes to provide sound scholarly opinions for these. The primary value in this
volume is that it organizes in one concise source the primary information available concerning these states and peoples. The organizationof the book is well conceived, dealing first with literary sources and then with archaeologicalevidences. The authorbegins with Egyptianliterarysources, moves then to Mesopotamianliterarysources, treats epigraphic materials recovered by excavation in the general area, and finally,
59 icalArchaeologist
1
reviews information presented by the Bible. His second major section deals with the archaeologicalmaterials.Withineach of these sections, he chooses to move in order from Ammon to Moab to Edom. At times, this becomes awkward because some of the sources refer to more than one of these, yet MacDonald handles this problem adequately so that the reader does not come away with confusion at this point. Professor MacDonald is well informed on his subject; he has researched the matters carefully and has presented in a usable fashion a great deal of appropriate material. The strongest part of his book treats the archaeological evidences and materials. The book is certainly a valuable addition to the literature and sources available to the student and scholar.The major drawback for the scholar is the lack of source citation;sometimes there are references,but more often than not only the name of an individual who has expressed an opinion or excavated a site or presented relevant material in some way is given. Much of the
Bethsaida: the
Sea
of
A
City
by
material is fairly technical and assumes a level of sophistication that makes the book less valuable than it could be for the layperson. Perhaps there is no fully appropriate middle ground between writing for scholarsand writing for the interestedlayperson, and this book is as appropriate a compromise as could be found. The list of selected readings which is appended to the book is a worthwhile addition, and its citations are well-chosen. The attached lists of names, primarilyof kings of various countries, is helpful, but could be presented in a more effective and usable fashion. The identification of sites as a part of the appendix as well as the glossary is a valuable addition, especially for the lay reader of the volume. From the technical aspect, the book is well arranged.The photographs, all in black and white, are quite small, but are printed with exceptional clarity.At least a doubling in size of the photographs would add significantly to the value of the book. There are severalproofreadingor typographicalerrors,
the
North
Shore
of
Galilee
Rami Arav and Richard A. Freund, Editors. xxi + 337 pp. Kirksville, MO: Thomas Jefferson University Press, 1995; US$40.00 ($15.00 pb). This publication represents the first volume of the Bethsaida Excavations Project. The editors are to be congratulated for producing such a useful and timely volume. It is comprised of twelve studies, divided into two parts: Archaeology and Geology of Bethsaida and the Literatureof Bethsaida. Each article contains a bibliography, and there is also a select bibliography at the end of the volume, as well as several helpful indices. There are sixty-seven black and white illustrations,line drawings, and tables in this inexpensive,paperbackedition (nearly all in the first section). The first section includes reports on the 1987-1993excavation seasons (RamiArav), the geographicaland geologic investigations that lead to the excavations at et-Tell (John
F.Shroder,Jr.and Moshe Inbar),Hellenistic and Roman fineware (SandraFortner),Hellenistic and Roman cooking ware (Toni Tessaro),Israelitebulla (BaruchBrandl),and the coins of Herod Philip (Fred Strickert). The technical aspects of ceramic typology and excavationtechniquesareadequately covered in these studies. Sufficient drawings and photos illustratepottery styles and site plans, and tables provide necessary details of excavation strategies and discoveries to date. Particularlyhelpful are the comparative charts on coinage. The lack of sharp visual images of the coins slightly mars this section. In the chapter on the geologic history of the area, the authors introduce the reader to the intricacies of site identification. Using the techniques of regional geomorphology, soils studies, and the examination of pollen cores, Shroder and Inbar demonstrate the movement of the shore of the Sea of Galilee and the transfer and abandonment of
59:4 IIrchaeologist
but these are easily recognized and provide no problem for the reader. Abook of this sortwill need to be revised and updated with regularity, particularly for the inclusion of archaeologicalevidence. Indeed, there are a number of discoveries since the publication of the volume which would need to be added to bring it up to date. Hopefully more referencesand sources will be added in the process of updating the book and presenting a second edition. Ammon, Moab and Edom: Early States/Nationsof Jordanin the BiblicalPeriod goes well beyond a travel guide; it falls a bit short of providing the scholara compendium of information concerning these ancient states. Nevertheless, it will serve a valuable purpose if only for the information it gathers in one place, particularly for the undergraduate student or the sophisticated layperson. Professor MacDonald is to be commended for his careful work on this important volume. Bruce C. Cresson BaylorUniversity
sites. They very clearly provide a model for future archaeological research throughout the Middle East. The second section offers discussions of place names (RamiArav), military strategy in the first century CE(JohnT. Greene), New Testament traditions and narratives concerningBethsaida(MarkAppold, HeinzWolfgang Kuhn, and JohnJ. Rousseau), and Bethsaida in Rabbinicliterature(RichardA. Freund). While these articlesmay be of less interest to archaeologists, they provide the necessary literaryand historicalbackground on the site of Bethsaida. It is too easy to simply catalogue artifactual remains without concern for or attention to how they may fit into the social context of the ancient city. These studies, while certainly not exhausting the subject, link the physical remains to events described in Josephus, the New Testamentwriters,the Rabbis,as well as modem literary critical examinations of these traditions. With this publication, Arav and Freund have demonstrated that useful archaeological data can be published in an inexpensive, attractive form. They have mixed scien-
A
ct
tific reports with literary studies to provide a range of information that can be useful to most scholars.Although costs prevented the inclusion of color photos, the clarity of the black and white illustrations is generally
Dictionary Biblical
of
Judaism
in
the
Period
Jacob Neusner, Editor-in-Chief, and William Scott Green, Editor. 2 volumes, 694 pp., maps. New York:Macmillan Library Reference USA, Simon & Schuster Macmillan, 1996. US $175.00. This new DictionaryofJudaismin theBiblicalPeriodcovers "the era during which the sacred writings of both Judaism and Christianity were formulated and canonized, in other words, from about 450 BCE,when the Pentateuch as we know it was formulated,to the closureof the BabylonianTalmud around 600 CE"(vii). Within this time span, the Dictionaryoffers over 3,300 entries dealing with the wider range of facts and data pertainingto the so-defined BiblicalJudaism than has ever been included in a single dictionary or encyclopedia. Intended for the lay reader as well as the scholar or student, the Dictionary provides information, both concise and precise, not only about matters usually found in biblical dictionaries (writings, rulers, geographical names, historical or archaeological sites, beliefs and theological conceptions), but also, among other things,aboutcustoms,laws, holidays,prayers,
History
good (except for the site plan on pp. 8-9), and the tables, while squeezed in this small format (6"x 9"), are both readable and filled with useful information. Hopefully, additional volumes on the excavations at
and
blessings, rabbis,and sages belonging to the formative period of RabbinicJudaism. Furthermore, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the writings of Philo of Alexandria and Josephus are given special mention, along with the Greco-Roman and Christian writers in so far as they are of interest for our knowledge of BiblicalJudaism.Also included are the Apocrypha and pseudepigrapha, with the notable exclusion of those found in the Nag Hammadi Library. The great number of entries and their variety give the Dictionary its distinctive mark, but, at the same time, they risk making its use more difficult. This difficulty is largely attributable to the rather eclectic way the entries are listed. The listing combines technical terms either in their original language or English equivalent, set expressions, theological concepts, realia,titles of writings, and terms of modern scholarship. The numerous cross-referenceswill of course be of help, but the user will need some imagination to benefit best from the hidden treasures of the Dictionary. Although succinct, the entries provide the reader with all the pertinent informa-
Technology of
By Rafael Frankel, Shmuel Avitsur, and Etan Ayalon, translated by Jay Jacobson, 208 pp, 233 illustrations. Arlington, VA: Olearius Editions, 1994; U.S. $40.00. (The book is only available by mail order from Olearius Editions, P.O. Box 906, Arlington, VA 22216.) A popular title for this book would be All You Ever Wanted to Know about Olive Oil andMore.It is really threebooks (or more properly booklets) in one. The first chapter "Ancient Oil Mills and Presses in the
Olive
Oil
in
the
Land of Israel"by RafaelFrankeloriginated froma Hebrew-languagebooklet"TheAncient Oil ExtractionPlant"published by the Eretz Israel Museum in Tel Aviv in 1986. It deals with the olive tree, the fruit, and the harvest,:the production of olive oil (where the greatest emphasis is placed); and the Old Testament and Talmudic sources on olive oil production. The second chapter, "Olive Oil Production in the Land of Israel: Traditional to Industrial," by Shmuel Avitsur, originated from a Hebrew-language booklet, "The Traditional Oil Extraction Plant"
Bethsaida will be forthcoming soon. Victor H. Matthews SouthwestMissouri State University
tion, including chronological data and the most obvious biblical and Rabbinic references. Regrettably,no references are given for the much mentioned Eusebius of Caesaria and Flavius Josephus. Furthermore, a significantnumber of entries are too purely descriptive and lack an historicalperpective (see, for example, "Pharisee"). Of course, everyone cannot but concur with the editors that to provide "extensive articles, complete with bibliographies" is "a separate task" (vii). Nevertheless, it would have been useful, and possible within reasonable space, to give, at least for the major entries, one or two bibliographicalreferencesin order to enable the reader to carry on his or her own research. But these reservations are minor in comparison with the wealth of erudition one will have accessto in the Dictionary. Thereis no doubt that it will prove an invaluable tool for scholarsand students, especially in regard with the early Rabbinic Judaism. From that point of view and for many other aspects of Biblical Judaism in general, the Dictionary will be an indispensable complement to the existing biblical dictionaries. Therefore, its two editors and seventy contributors deserve our congratulations and gratitude. Paul-Hubert Poirier UniversiteLaval
Holy
Land
published also by the Eretz Israel Museum in 1984 and revised in 1986. It deals with the uses of olive oil, manual methods of production, the traditional oil extraction plant and improvements and mechanization in the twentieth century, and finally the use of olive oil in soapmaking. In 1985 Professor Carter Litchfield, founder of Olearius Editions, a small publishing house specializing in the history of oil mills, visited Israel and toured the Eretz Israel Museum. Discussions began about translating the two previously mentioned booklets. After work
i aacts "
hae..t
ol '1
had begun on the book it was decided to add a third section by Etan Ayalon, curator of the Man and His Work Center of the Eretz Israel Museum. This chapter is entitled "Reconstructinga TraditionalOlive Oil Plant at the Eretz Israel Museum, TelAviv." It provides details of the museum from the planning, to the building, to the outside exhibits, to the actual instruction given to visitors and school children. There are many helpful features in the book. In the introductory material there is a chronology, a map of sites, and a flow chart delineating the olive oil extraction process. At the end of each chapterthereis a briefconclusion and notes. At the end of the volume is a four-page glossary. This is an extremely valuable glossary because it includes many Hebrew and some Arabic terms in transliteration.The goal is to standardizeterminology and usage, and this glossary will provide some incentive for accomplishing that laud-
Roman
The
Roads
able goal. There is also a five-page bibliography and eight-page index. Finally, the last two pages give a brief biography of the three authors along with their pictures. This book has very much to commend it. The translation is very well done into idiomatic American English. The 233 illustrations include line drawings, old prints, and beautiful black and white photos well arranged with excellent descriptions and explanations. The publisher has spared no expense (except for colored pictures) and produced a beautiful book at a moderate price. The archaeologicalinformationis presented accurately and thoroughly. Nothing I know of achieves such thoroughness on olive oil and its productionin the Holy Land. Therearea few minorweaknesses.There is information about olives and olive trees scatteredthroughout the volume. Yeta short separate chapter on olives and olive trees would have made this excellent book
I: Judaea Roads Jaffa-Jerusalem in
By Moshe Fischer, Benjamin Isaac, and Israel Roll, pp. vii + 434, 16 figures and maps, 106 plates. BAR International Series 628. Oxford: Tempvs Reparatvm, 1996; ?49 (paper). During the Roman occupation of Judea, about 1500 km of roads were constructed in Judea and Palestine. The systematic study of this road system began with Michael AviYonah in the 1930s and was reinitiated by Mordechai Gichon and the Israel Milestone Committee in 1970. The fieldwork of this project was conducted between 1983-1989. In addition to the authors, a number of specialists assisted in the project including the late Derek Riley, who conducted aerial photography of the region; Alla Stein, who served as adviser on numismatics; and Morna Isaac as consultant for statistics.During the survey, Gichon and Fischer directed excavationsof key sites.As a result,the report is a collaborative effort. Isaac discusses the literary evidence from the Biblical to the modern era (ch.1);a detailed description of the roadnetworkbetween Jaffaand Jerusalem
59.4s rchlaeologist al
follows by Israel Roll (ch. 2); a Gazetteer fully discussing each of the 131 sites is supplied by Fischer and Isaac (ch. 3); and an inventory of the milestones by Isaacand Roll provides the crucialepigraphic material (ch. 4). Finally, the conclusions drawn from the investigation are masterly unfolded by Fischer, Isaac and Roll (ch. 5). Forthe 115miles of road connectingJaffa and Jerusalem investigated, only seven of the forty milestones are inscribed. In comparison, the shorter Legio-Scythopolis road previously published in the same series (BAR International Reports141,1982)yielded twentysix inscribedmilestones of the seventy found or reported.Of the more than 450 milestones known in Israel, about one-fourth are inscribed. The earliest of these is dated to Vespasian in CE69, but it is isolated. It is not until the reign of Hadrian that the Roman road system began in earnest. Most of the inscribed milestones in Judaea date to CE 162, during the reign of Lucius Verus and Marcus Aurelius. None are later than Constantine. The Jaffa-Jerusaleminscribed texts support the pattern,ranging from Mar-
even better. This would have produced inevitable overlap with other chapters, but the currentvolume has overlap already with three separate authors writing individual chapters. Likewise the section on "Old Testament and Talmudic Sources on Olive Oil Production" (pp. 78-85) is far too brief and could have easily been expanded into a chapter.Finally,there should be a separateindex of Bibleand otherprimarysource references.The present index has entries for such texts as the Bible and the Talmud, but page listings are not as helpful as a reference index. Though thereis much more detail in this book than most of us need, it is well worth reading or at least having available to use as a handbook. I enthusiastically recommend it for all academic librariesand for personal librarieswhere olive oil is of special interest. James C. Moyer SouthwestMissouri State University
cus Aurelius to Constantine, even if they occur in lower percentage than elsewhere. The topography and physical evidence for the roads are amply and attractively illustrated with excellent photographs and maps in this impressive study. Although the road-system primarily functioned for Roman administrative and military purposes, possible exceptions are cited. The authors argue that the northern branchbetween Lydda-BeitHoron-Jerusalem was the military route, not the southern Lydda-Emmaus-Jerusalemroad (p. 14).This hypothesis draws support from the absence of milestones on the Jaffa-Lydda-Emmaus segment of the latter and the abundant literary evidence for the use of the former.Yet, there are eighteen milestones on the route between Emmaus and Jerusalem,more than the fourteen markers (all anepigraphic)that grace the Beth Horon route. Moreover, the TabulaPeutingerianalists a route between Jerusalem-Emmaus-Lydda-[Antipatris]-Caesarea (Maritima), suggesting the Roman coastal route from Caesarea utilized the southern route to Jerusalem. It is also only on the southern stretch between LyddaEmmaus-Jerusalemthat evidence exists for the activities of the LegioX Fretensis,the permanent garrison of Jerusalemafter the First Jewish Revolt until Diocletian. The garrison
NORTH AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGIST
appears with the CohorsVI UlpiaPetraeorum, a Nabataean Arab miliary unit, at Emmaus, and an unidentified CohorsIX at al-Qubab AIMS AND SCOPE between Emmaus and Lydda. The raising Editor of Lydda (Diospolis) and nearby Emmaus North American Archaeologist is concerned with ROGERW. MOELLER all aspects of American Archaeology. Geographi(Nicopolis) to civic status in the third cenRegional Advisory Editors it covers the continent north of high cally JAMESE. AYRES tury also supports their being linked by in Mesoamerica-the United States and cultures BERGMAN CHRISTOPHER an official route. of northern Mexico. Topically it spans the VAUGHNM. BRYANT,JR. part In fact,neitherbranchappears to be suitJOHN L. COTTER entire range of cultural evolution in America able for any large-scale troop movements RICHARDD. DAUGHERTY from Paleo-Indian studies to Industrial ArchaeMICHAELA. GLASSOW or transportationof heavy baggageby wagon. ology. Theoretical and methodological articles, ALBERTC. GOODYEAR The ascentfrom the coastalplain to Jerusalem provided their base is North America, are also ROBERTAS. GREENWOOD JAMESB. GRIFFIN some 800 m above sea level involves traaccepted and research based on cultural resource MARTHALATTA management as well as work by state and local versing difficult terrainafterpassing the foot J. JEFFERSONREID societies is solicited along with the more hills of the Shephelah. The serpentine and RODERICKSPRAGUE traditional academic-museum projects. The R. MICHAEL STEWART rugged Emmaus-Jerusalem stretch of the editor particularly encourages papers that cut DAVIDH. THOMAS southern road is matched by the zigzag across regional or topical boundaries but more JAMESA. TUCK CLAUDEN. WARREN stepped ascent of Beit Horon of the northspecialized items are also welcomed. WALDOR. WEDEL ern route. The linking of Beth Horon and Subscription Information: and Provincial State Emmaus by an official route accompanied Price per volume--4 issues yearly Societies Archaeological ISSN: 0197-6931 by milestones indicates a search for alterJOHN PFEIFFER Institutional Rate: $136.00 native ascents into Jerusalem. The Resource Management IndividualRate: $40.00 and concentrationof watchtowers, roadstations, Postage and handling:$6.50 U.S. and Canada, Contract Archaeology and militarybases in the eastern sector must $11.75 elsewhere EDWARDS. RUTSCH reflect the need for facilitating travelers in General Historical Archaeology the region. During the Byzantine era, the ROBERTL. SCHUYLER vicinal roads multiplied as the population Complimentary issue available upon request Industrial Archaeology density expanded beyond that of any other ROBERTM. VOGEL pre-modern period. The skimpy evidence Book Reviews for Roman activity on the road between JAYCUSTER Jappa and Lydda suggests it was earlier of Baywood Publishing Company, Inc. purely secondary status, not a main route, 26 Austin Avenue, Amityville,NY 11701 and explaining why the TabulaPeutinegeriana call (516) 691-1270 fax (516) 691-1770 orderline (800) 638-7819 ItinerariumAntoninifail to mention it. Later e-mail:
[email protected] web site: http://baywood.com Christianpilgrim trafficand the Islamic elevation of Jaffa as a major port of Palestine forany period.Itis exemplaryin every respect David E Graf may account for the Jaffa-Lyddaextension. for a cooperative archaeological report. This important study will be extremely Universityof Miami (FL) useful for anyone interested in the region
The Sea of Galilee Boat: An Extraordinary2000 Year Old Discovery By Shelley Wachsmann, 420 pp. New York:Plenum Press, 1995; U.S. $24.95. As a result of a drought in Israelin 1985, the continuous pumping of water out of the Sea of Galilee for irrigation purposes, and the receding shoreline of that large lake, came one of the most remarkablediscoveries the following year, the discovery of a first-centuryboat. TheSeaof GalileeBoatrelates
t4acts
i
POO
the intriguing events that led to the discovery,recovery,preservation,and identification of thatboat.Comprisedof a prologue,twelve chapters, and an epilogue, the volume provides the readerwith an outstandingaccount of the series of events involved in the process. Of all the features that contribute to this remarkablereport,perhaps the most important is the storyline approach used by the author.Wachsmann,a skillednauticalarchae-
ologist who from 1976 to 1989 served as the Inspector of Underwater Antiquities of the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums, demonstrates exemplary skill as a communicatoras well. He detailsthe events of the discovery from beginning to end, and also his own personal response to the discovery and engagement with the whole process. The storyline style and the author's personal engagement with it in turn provide the reader with an informative and captivating experience with the boat itself. Wachsmann's compelling style is evident throughout the book, even if the detailed
descriptionof some of the proceduresinvolved are at times difficult to follow. The book also introduces the reader to a whole series of new problems involved in the archaeological process, in other words the problemsconfrontedby a nauticalarchaeologist over against those confronted by the traditional field archaeologist. For instance, how do you excavate a wooden boat buried in the mud or silt for perhaps 2,000 years, the cells of the wood having deteriorated to the point that the wood is something akin to wet cardboard? How do you preserve a boat of this type? How do you identify a boat of this type? While Wachsmann takes the reader through these challenging problems and the means by which the team carefully worked out the solutions, he also introduces the
reader to a variety of other valuable topics, that is, important pools of information about the culture, geography, and history of Palestine as it relates to the ancient world of which the boat was a part. For instance, Wachsmann dedicates an entire chapter to the Sea of Galilee in which he introduces the reader to important information about the large inland lake, the names associated with it and the important stories, traditions, and legends about the lake. Though the informationaboutthe Sea of Galileeis encydclopedic in nature, Wachsmann again delivers it to the reader through his storyline approach. Other important topics Wachsmann highlights include the role of the Sea of Galilee and seafaring activities in the Gospels, the role of the naval battle at Migdal in the Jewish Roman War,the origin and evolution of
Timnah:A BiblicalCityin the SorekValley By GeorgeL. Kelmand AmihaiMazar, xix + 186 pp., 183figures. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1995; cloth US $29.50. This is the sort of popular account of an excavation which every dig director should aspire to write. In plain, non-speculative, jargon-free English, it describes the results of the twelve excavation seasons (1977-79, 1981-89)directedby the authorsat TelBatash, biblical Timnah. Not only is the text well written, but the volume is profusely illustrated with uniformly excellent black and white photographs,plans, sections,isometric views, drawings of artifacts,and thirty-eight color photographs. The introduction provides the reasons for the excavation:the elucidationof the Late Bronze to Iron I transition and the desire to provide a field school for students and volunteers. Chapter 1 gives a brief overview of the geographic setting of Tel Batash and the history of its identification with Timnah. Chapter2 provides an overview of the course of the excavation, the areas excavated, and the system used to record the site's remains (further information on the excavation's daily routine, its staff, and its sponsors are found in three appendices). The meat of the excavationresultsis contained in chapters 3-8, which cover Timnah
59:4
4
.rchaeologist
in the Neolithic to Middle Bronze Ages, the Late Bronze Age, Philistine Timnah, Timnah during the United Monarchy, eighth-century Timnah, and seventh-century Timnah.These chaptersfollow the same basic format:historical introduction for the period, including biblical and extra-biblical sources, discussion of sources which mention Timnah in particular, account of the architecturalremainson an areaby areabasis (and by stratum where a chapter deals with more than one stratum), description of artifactual remains of particular importance, and an account of the end of the stratum. The authors are especially to be congratulated for their efforts to set Timnah in its regional and Near Eastern context. Moreover,the text is mercifullyfree of exaggerated claims and speculations presented as fact. When the artifactualdata necessary for dating a building or stratum is not there, the authorsfeel freeto admit it, ratherthan pressing the issue. Chapter 8, the seventh-century Stratum II, is perhaps the most interesting chapter as this stratum was violently destroyed and yielded rich ceramic assemblages. In addition, the remains of this stratum emerged just below the ground surface and so were widely exposed. Excavators uncovered the remains of private dwellings, part of a pub-
oil lamps and the role they play in dating, as well as others. All this adds up to an informativereaderfriendly volume. Wachsmann is to be commended for his excellentreport,the style by which he brings it to the reader, and the manner in which he shares his own intrigue and personal involvement with the project.TheSeaof GalileeBoatshould be read by anyone interested in archaeology, Jewish history,or early Christianity.Though not all field reports-whether they be from land or from sea-lend themselves to this format and style, the book is an excellent model for archaeological reporting that bridges the gap between research and the lay reader.
LaMoine DeVries SouthwestMissouri State University
lic building, two olive pressing complexes (similar to those at nearby Tel Miqne), two industrial complexes possibly used for textile dying, a possible cult room, part of a road, and sections of the town fortifications. The authors point out that olive pressing and textile production were complementary,not conflicting,industries.They provide a useful summary of the settlementplan and a comparison to other broadly excavated sites and discuss several problematicissues. The book has only two weaknesses.First, it lacks a bibliography and indexes. The end notes for each chapter contain the pertinent sources, but a comprehensive bibliography would have made it more user friendly for the reader. Second, the figures are not keyed into the text; an occasional parenthetical reference to the appropriate figure would have been helpful. These two matters aside, this is a book which will provide the scholar with a good overview and introduction to the site, and the lay person with an eminently readable excavation account.
Jeffrey R. Zorn San Jacinto,CA
THE IN CAUGHT ELECTRONIC
OPPORTUNITIES
IN
NET
ARCHAEOLOGY
By John Younger Studying the past is a challenge, especially with modern technology, and more especiallywhen the modem technologyloses its electricity; Hurricane Fran on the U.S. East Coast brought home some interesting insights into antiquity. The sudden loss of the e-maildiscussionlistANE was also upsetting, and it provoked a digression into the problematicpublic areasof the Internet:netiquette, publishing, and copyright.
The Primitive Past BroughtHome I had planned to write this column over the weekend of September 7/8, but hurricane "Fran"hit Durhamin the early morning hours of that FridayMy dog Maxand I woke up shortly after midnight to howling winds and driving rain, and we sat side by side and watched through the open back door, Max with a bone and me with a beer. We 96 Copy, saw some of the mighty oaks that lined our streetslowly toppleover onto carsand houses AntonijKoornhof'sbeautiful reconstructionsof ancient architecture,as in this depiction of (not ours, but that was just luck), downing the Pharoslighthouse,contain copyrightnotices. Surfin to http://www.hk.super.net/-antonij. power lines and exploding transformers. I find myself wondering how it could have happened. I underFor days power was out all over the city. stand from several former members of ANE that one of the prime Needless to say, just plain coping took priority. But neighbors reasons for disbanding it was the persistentrudeness of an extremely pulled together in a remarkableshow of community spirit, helping small number of people on the list who spoiled it for the others. to saw away the trees, holding block parties before the food could Most lists allow anyone to subscribe and contribute in their own spoil, sending out search teams to find the one grocery store in the county still open. Ours was the only house in the neighborhood way, and it would be nice to think that even rudeness could be tolerated. Besides, my personal policy is if I don't like what I to have a gas hot-water heater and stove, and people came to take showers and cook dinners. read, I simply delete it and avoid the temptation to reply. But in Of course, through all this I thought of early society (without point of fact, e-mail lists are not really public; a private server allots valuable space and memory for the running of the list and a real power) surviving through similar communal effort. I found this sudden step back in time interesting, but not so interesting as to person, the list-owner,owns and manages it. As a list-owner myself, I have come to regard my subscribers as my colleagues, and I'll regret the return of a normal life, electrified and electronic. go to some length to provide a comfortable environment for them and their electronic thoughts. That goal may entail barring those The Loss of ANE who jeopardize that environment. This past summer I was distressed to hear that Chuck Jones had But I am also aware of the legitimate tensions between the pubdisbanded ANE, the e-mail discussion list on the Ancient Near East. lic and the private faces of e-mail and the temptation to reply Chuck, of course, did not decide to disband ANE lightly-ABZU is still operating, and keeps us all up to date on proliferating web spontaneously, and perhaps carelessly. E-mail netiquette requires a little thought and considerable restraint. sites. The loss of ANE, however, I find disturbing on a variety of levels. I'm not certain how long it had been "on-line"; four years seems about right-AegeaNet, its imitator, is three years old as of Archiving the Net As our archaeology lists grow older, the number of messages December 1, 1996. E-mail discussion lists on archaeology are few and very young, as are most of those that concern the humanities, grows exponentially. Archiving them of course is a great concern. and, while some attritionis expected, the loss of ANE leaves a noticeMany postings are worthy of being saved, but most are (to put it able gap. kindly) of local interest.All postings to AegeaNet, for example, have
Koornhof Anconij '51-t
Caught in the Net
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
247
been archived (since December 1995) at the University of Michigan's ROMEServer(http://classics.lsa.umich.edu/aegeanet.archive/), thanks to John Muccigrosso and Sebastian Heath. But even in this short period of time, there have been hundreds of postings, and most of these will be of little, if any, value in the future. In the September issue of the magazine TheNet, I read that Deja News (http://www.dejanews.com/) has archived many postings to the Usenets. Usenets, you may remember, are the public discussion groups and BBS (Bulletin Board Services) on all subjects imaginable (even unimaginable). There's at least one on archaeology (sci.archaeology,also archived by Deja News), sometimes with fifty or more postings each day. Some of these messages reveal candidly what the public thinks about archaeological issues. Apparently, Deja News has plans to archive all postings to the Usenet. Such archives may constitute a veritable treasuryof sociological data on the present state of world intellect, but otherwise would possess only dubious value. We find ourselves endlessly fascinating and proper subjects of our own studies, even if at times what we do seems mighty feeble, especially in the presence of a hurricane.
Publishing on the Net So how does one separate the grain from the chaff on the Internet?Thereare very few ways of assessing the reliabilityof information cached on a web site. Few search engines provide any quality rating of the sites they list; and few electronic, academically reputable magazines and journals publish full articles. Two such are the ClassicalanidMedievalReviewsout of BrynMawr, for which you can subscribe or gopher. You can also register for the University of York'sInterinetArchaeology;and you can get the latest newsletter on underwater archaeology from FloridaState or on dendrochronology from Cornell. But the major periodicals are lagging. Over the web you can view select images and abstracts of feature articles from issues of BASORand Archaeology,but not full articles, let alone the entire volume. The same is true for BiblicalArchaeologist, though a pilot project of full publication on the Net will soon be up and running. The
American Joutrnal of Archaeology is even more limited; there you can retrieveonly tables of contents and lists of books received (valuable for keeping up-to-date on bibliography), but no articles, not even abstracts, and no illustrations. I expect that the major journals will indeed want to present entire editions to the public at large; after all, it's a very large public that uses the Internet.I presume, therefore,that they are not now completely on-line because of financial, logistical, and copyright reasons. Paid subscriptions to a journal's web edition, however, could be handled easily; I've seen many sites with a short home-page that requires credit card payments before you're allowed to go further.Protectingcopyright is a greater problem, though here too I've run across some solutions. Some authors of graphics (like Koornhof) have put their signature and copyright notice on the image itself, which, when downloaded my JPEGviewer cannot "read". And I've even run across a couple of images that I could view but not download. Another solution, though much less satisfactory, is to prevent the viewing of images altogether. The art history department at the has pubUniversity of Wisconsin (http://www.wisc.edu/arth/) licly accessible course syllabi, like Professor Nick Cahill's survey course on premodern art. His text is informative,and there are many linked illustrations, though when I clicked on one I was told I did not have permission to retrieve it (presumably the students have permission). This is really no solution at all, and for a publicly accessible document, it was irritating not to be able to access its full content. The demand for good and reliable publications, complete with text and graphics, is growing; and I'm sure solutions to the various problems in rating, archiving, and copyright protection will be solved in the new future-they have to be if this technology is to be of any real use. If you have any comments or questions, or would like to see a topic discussed, e-mail me:
[email protected] check out my Web home page: http://www.duke.edu/web/jyounger/.
As BA was going to press the ANE list announced that it was back in business. For details and information on how to subscribe, see the ANE Webpage: http://www-oi.uchicago.edu/OI/ANE/Ol_ANE.html.
InternetGatewaysites for the AncientOld World A general list of archaeologicale-mail discussion lists: Forgeneral lists http://www.duke.edu/web/jyounger/archlist.htmi of WWW/FTP/Gopher sites, see ABZU(http://wwwfor the oi.uchicago.edu/OI/DEPT/RA/ABZU/ABZU_NEW.HTML) Ancient Near East,and Kapatija for the Greek (http://www.duke.edulweb/jyounger/kapat96.htmi) and Romanworld. Classicalart: http://www.duke.edu/web/classics/GrkArt.html Pre-Columbianarchaeology: http://www.duke.edu/web/classics/Mayan.html NauticalArchaeology: http//www.duke.edu/web/classics/Nautical.html Some ArchaeologicalPeriodicalson the Web
248
BiblicalArchaeologist59:4 (1996)
(also consult Scholar'sPress:http://llscholar.cc.emory.edul) AmericanJournalof Archaeology:httpJ/classics.lsa.umich.edu/ AJA.html Archaeologymagazine: http://www.he.net/~archaeol/index.html BASOR&BiblicalArchaeologist:http//scholar.cc.emory.edul scripts/ASOR/ BrynMawrClassical&MedievalReviews:gopherJ/gopher.lib. 1/alpha Virginia.EDU:70/1 annual reports:http://www.arts.cornell.edu/ Dendrochronology, dendro/ FloridaState University,"Stemto Stern":http://ocean.fsu.edu/ oce/dive/ InternetArchaeology:http://intarch.york.ac.uk/
Caught in the Net
Explore the history and cultureof the ancient w THE
OXFORD
ENCYCLOPEDIA
OF
RCHA IN T49r t
5 VOLUMES
4Oa
EDITOR IN CHIEF: ERic M. MEYERS, DUKE UNIVERSITY
In
1,125 entries, this unique reference explores the archaeological data relating to the ancient
Near East-the
sites, languages, material culture, archaeologicalmethods, organizationsand institutions, and major excavatorsand scholarsof the field. Ranging from prehistoric times to the early centuries of the rise
of Islam, it covers the civilizations of Syria-Palestine, Mesopotamia,Anatolia, Iran,Arabia,Cyprus,Egypt, and the coastalregionsof North and EastAfrica. In addition to up-to-datesite reportsand entrieson ancient placesand .•.,..>
peoples, there are specialized entries on all aspects of the material cultural remains such as ceramics, glass, and metal. And synthetic
:
articles on such subjects as medicine and music allow researchersto pursuetopics not normallyassociatedwith archaeologyin a new way. Published under the auspices of the American Schools of Oriental Research, the encyclopedia brings greater breadth to the study of archaeologyin the biblicalworld. It is a valuableresourcefor scholars
a
Wk!
k,
and students of archaeology,as well as ancient art and architecture, languages,history,and religion. WINTER 220 LINEDRAWINGS, 1996 2480 PP.;415 HALFTONES, 30 MAPS $575.00
FOR THE 5-VOLUME SET
To ORDER OR FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CALL 1-800-451-7556. FOR A BROCHURE,
OXFORD
PLEASE CALL 212-726-6087.
IN CANADA, PLEASE CALL 1-800-387-8020.
PRICE IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE
UNIVERSITY
AND APPLIES ONLY IN THE U.S.
PRESS
all,
IP-.
;ANL.C
"
•" .
s:It
I-'pA?S
. .
?
-
""'
-
o%1r
. ,do-., All
.
,t. ,
?,,'go''• • ar•••41o
4P6?
•"
•q'e,'
•
S'..
No'.. .
'.,.s.
0
404%, -'im
4W.?
t. .,r,.
,%,.-
*-f
?'•
W
4-v
-O,,. •o,
Gold from sixth or seventh century CECaesareaemerges brightlyfrom fill soil beneath a stone pavement. The eleven pieces constituted a decorated buckle.The largest clasp boasts the monogram of Stephanos.
?
.•
".
•
"
17•n,
