The Judean Pillar-Figurines and the Archaeology of Asherah (British Archaeological Reports (BAR) International)

B.A.R. All titles available from: Hadrian Books Ltd, 122 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 7B:p, England

The current BAR catalogue, with details of all titles in print, post-free prices and means of payment, is available free from the above address. All volumes are distributed by Hadrian Books Ltd.

Table of Contents Acknowledgments Chapter

I:

Chapter

II:

Chapter

III:

A General Introduction

4

History of Research

10

Typology

28

Chapter IV:

Chronology

40

Chapter

Distribution Patterns

43

Chapter VI:

Aspects of Manufacture

49

Chapter VII:

Damage Patterns

54

Chapter VIII:

Archaeological Contexts

57

Chapter IX:

Analogies to the Judean Pillar-Figurines

68

Notes about Function and Meaning

73

Chapter

BAR S636

3

V:

X:

Figures 1-40

The Judean Pillar-Figurines and the Archaeology of Asherah

82

Abbreviations and Bibliography

114

Appendixes and Keys

© R Kletter 1996 Introduction and Keys to Appendixes 1-2

ISBN 0 86054 818 X

135

Key 1: The Fields of Appendix 1

136

Key 2: Codes for the Figurines in Appendix 1

137

8L

Key 3: The Location of the Figurines Today

139

AfoO~

Key 4: List of Site Names

Tempvs Reparatvm Volume Editor: Rajka Makjanic

•A~K1)(;\ tI(1C\(p ~\

British Archaeological Reports are published by

TEMPVS REPARATVM Archaeological and Historical Associates Limited

All enquiries regarding the submission of manuscripts for future publication should be addressed to: David P Davison MA MPhil DPhil General Editor BAR Tempvs Reparatvm Tel: 01865 311046 29 Beaumont Street Oxford OXI 2NP Fax: 01865 311047

141

Key 5: The Figurines - Holland's Typology

142

Key 6: The Figurines - Engle's Typology

145

Appendix 1:

Data Base for the Judean Pillar-Figurines

147

Appendix 2:

Catalogue of Judean Pillar-Figurines

177

Addenda: Figurines 789-854

218

Appendix 3:

Judean Pillar-Figurines of Unknown Archaeological Origin

232

Appendix 4:

Transjordanian Anthropomorphic Figurines

237

Appendix 5:

Other Anthropomorphic Figurines

246

Indexes: 1. Authors 2. Geographical Index 3. Biblical Sources

1

288

Acknowledgments

List of Figures

This book originated in a Hebrew Ph.D. thesis, submitted to the University of Tel-Aviv in April 1995. The present work is (Chapter II: History of Research) Fig. 1. Attributes of the use and disposal offigurines (after Voigt 1983) Fig. 2. The quantitative factor in JPFs' studies (Chapter III: Typology) Fig. 3. Typology of other figurines Fig.3b. The Relation between the typologies of Holland and Engle Fig. 4. Typology - whole JPFs Fig. 5. Typology - hand-made JPFs' heads Fig. 6. Typology - moulded JPFs' heads Fig. 7. Coastal and northern moulded types - appendix 5.III Fig. 8. Appendix 5.11 and hand-made coastal and northern types Fig. 9. Phoenician figurines - appendix 5.VI Fig. 10. Transjordanian figurines - appendix 4 Fig. 11. Plaque figurines - appendix 5.V

revised and includes significant additions, especially in chapters II, IX and X.

It is a great pleasure to thank first my two

supervisors, Professors Pirhiya Beck and Nadav Na'aman. To them lowe most of my knowledge at its very best.

During my Ph.D. studies I have received the Wolf Fund Stipend for research students for 1991, a prize from Yad Izhak Ben Zvi for 1995, and the stipend of the Council of Higher Education for three years (1992-94).

I hope that I have not

disappointed my benefactors. lowe a special debt of gratitude to the British Council for a Post-Doctoral scholarship, which enabled me to write this book at ease in Oxford, among whose "natives" I have found much warmth. The advice and encouragement of Dr. P.R.S. Moorey, Keeper of Antiquities in the Ashmolean Museum, and Prof. HG.M. Williamson, Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University, were very helpful.

I have derived much information from many Scholars and Institutions abroad, allowing me access to material often not yet published. Included among them are the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford; Dr. K. Prag, Manchester University; Dr. 1. Zorn,

(Chapter IV: Chronology) Fig. 12. The dating of the JPFs Fig. 13. Amended dating of the JPFs

University of Berkeley, California; L. Keppie, the Hunterian Museum, Glasgow; E. 1. Keal1, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto;

(Chapter V: Distribution Patterns) Fig. 14. The danger of circular arguments Fig. 15. Distribution of 854 JPFs (sites and main sub-types) Fig. 16. Distribution map of the JPFs Fig. 17. Distribution graph of the JPFs Fig. 18. Site hierarchy (main sites and sub-types) Fig. 19. Size of sites, extent of excavations and amount of JPFs (Chapter VI: Aspects of Manufacture) Fig. 20. Size offigurines and heads (mm.) Fig. 21. Analysis of the white-wash Fig. 22. Production of a series offigurines (after Nicholls 1952) Fig. 23. Classification of the moulded heads Fig. 24. Example of a series, type B.3.b

B. Isserlin, University of Leeds; P. Watson, Department of Archaeology and Ethnography, University of

Birmingham; Lori Iliff, Michael C. Carlos Museum, Emory University, Atlanta; G. Ruffle, the Oriental Museum, Durham; Heather Rice, Weingreen Museum of Biblical Antiquities, Dublin; and G.F. Stone, the Australian Institute of Archaeology, Melbourne.

In Israel the help was no less encouraging, including: Prof. Y. Beit Arieh (Ira, Qitmit and Malhata); Dr. Z. Herzog, Miriam Aharoni and Lili Singer (Arad and Beer Sheba); Nurit Feig (Arad); Miriam Tadmor (Beer Sheba); A. De-Groot (Ramot, Moza and City of David); A. de Groot, Diana Gilbert-Peretz and D. Ariel (City of David); Dr. R. Reich and A. Meir (Mamila); Prof. M. Kochavi (Malhata); O. Borowski (Lahav); D. Amit (Kh. Geresh and Kh. Anim); Uza Zvulun and Yael Olenick (Bretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv); Prof. Y. Meshorer, Tallai Oman and Michal Dayagi-Mendels (Israel Museum, Jerusalem); O. Rimon (Hecht Museum, Haifa); Prof. A. Mazar (Tel Batash); Prof. R. Gophna (Kh. Hoga and Mefalsim);

(Chapter VII: Damage Patterns) Fig. 25. Main points of breakage Fig. 26. Breakage patterns of the JPFs Fig. 27. Breakage pattern of modern clay figurines Fig. 28. A group of modern figurines Fig. 29. A modern figurine Fig. 30. Percentage of broken figurines in ancient assemblages

Prof. D. Ussishkin (Lachish); Dr. G. Barkay (KetefHinom); Y. Dagan (Judean Shephelah survey and Lachish); R. Peled, B. Brandl and B. Brimer (Collections of the Israel Antiquities Authority); G. Horwitz (Collections of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem). I benefited from many talks with Dr. G. Barkay, Orna Zimhoni and G. Kovo.

I thank deeply my friends and colleagues at the Israel Antiquities Authority and its management; all my teachers, colleagues and friends at the University of Tel Aviv, and especially Prof. 1. Yakar. I also wish to thank Mrs. Liora Pik and Sarah Vered;

(Chapter VIII: Archaeological Context) Fig. 31. The archaeological context of the JPFs Fig. 32. The context - wider generalizations Fig. 33. A "model" Judean city Fig. 34. Beth Shemesh - season 1933 (distribution map) Fig. 35. Arad - the Iron Age fortress (distribution map) Fig. 36. Tel en-Nasbeh - northern area (distribution map) Fig. 37. Tel en-Nasbeh - southern area (distribution map) Fig. 38. Tel Beer Sheba (distribution map) Fig. 39. Tel Beit Mirsim - SE quarter (distribution map) Fig. 40. Tel Beit Mirsim - NW quarter (distribution map)

2

Mrs. Shoshana Noy and Mr. G. Shpigel, all from the University of Tel Aviv. I also wish to thank A. Kennedy; M. Cox (drawings, figs. 4-11); A. Pikovski (maps, figs. 34-40) and M. Saltzberg (photographs, figs. 28-29). Last but not least, lowe much to my dear young friends, Y. Mizrahi and lrit Ziffer.

The only apology I can make for writing this book is that it has not been typed by a wife, nor deprived five little children of the attention of a loving father, nor caused grief to a loyal dog. I dedicate it to the memory of my late mother, Haviva. Raz K1etter

3

Chapter I: A General Introduction "It is not about San Michele and your precious marble fragments from the Villa of Tiberius you have been writing the whole time, it is only some fragments ofclay from your own broken life that you have brought to light"

(Axel Munthe. 1929 [rep. 1991]. The Story of San Michele. London: 3). The main aim of this work is a detailed study of the Judean Pillar-Figurines (henceforward JPFs for short), small clay female-figurines dating to the late Iron Age period. A very large number of studies has been made on these figurines during the last hundred years, from monographs and scientific papers to all kinds of secondary literature. Since the discoveries of the inscriptions and drawings at Kh. elKom and Kuntillet 'Ajrud, the pillar figurines have drawn even more attention, being usually interpreted as ex-pressions of Judean religious beliefs. Anything concerning the religion of Judah is bound to arouse much interest and, often, heated debates. Despite the vast amount of research, the relations between the JPFs and the political borders of Judah were never adequately studied, and this forms another major subject of the present work. I hasten to inform the readers that my intention is an archaeological examination, rather than a study of the Old Testament sources about the Asherah. The basic archaeological possibilities - and limitations - were often ignored by archaeologists and historians, who wished to solve the problems of the symbolism and meaning of the JPFs. Many scholars used the figurines mainly in order to prove - or disprove - various interpretations of the Old Testament. For these reasons, I have focused on seemingly "dry" archaeological aspects, such as dating, context and distribution. There is such a vast amount of recent literature on the Biblical Asherah, that it would be superfluous to offer, once more, a review of all the Old Testament verses and interpretations concerning her. I will not, however, avoid taking a clear stand in the debate. Thus, the title of the book, "The Archaeology of Asherah", is not misleading, and I hope to justify this title even if only in a very modest way.

archaeological phasing are not avoided, but will be discussed later (chapter 1.2-3 below). There are several absolute chronologies for Judah throughout the period under discussion, but the differences between them are measured by a few years only. Those differences result from contradictions within the Biblical sources; from the fragmentary state of some Assyrian and Babylonian sources; from chronological problems (Kitchen 1982-3; Spalinger 1973), and from uncertainty about the exact calendar used in Judah and Israel (Tadmor 1963:274279; Thiele 1965; Na'aman 1986c; Malamat 1983:243-247; Galil 1991; Kutsch 1974:544f; Edwards 1992; Donner 1986:370-381). On the other hand, archaeological remains can not be dated accurately within a few years or months, thus most of the differences between the chronological systems are negligible for our purposes. For this reason I will not discuss the absolute chronology, and have followed one common system (Thiele 1965: Appendix B).

The JPFs belong mostly to the 8th and 7th centuries BC. Judah flourished throughout the 8th century BC, and did not suffer from the Assyrian conquests of Transjordan and Samaria (for which see Na'aman 1994:20-24; Becking 1992; Green, A.R. 1993). The great change came with the campaign of Sennacherib against Judah in 701 BC, which forms a sharp divide both historically and archaeologically. This is, therefore, a vital starting point. The lower limit of this research is the end of the first temple period in 586 BC. At this time Judah lost its independence and many of its settlements were destroyed.

4

The picture that emerges from the analysis of these sources indicates how severe was the punishment of Judah: areas were lost (in the Shephelah probably), heavy booty and taxes were taken, and there were mass-deportations and the destruction of dozens of cities. Judah's economy was severely affected, though Jerusalem was not conquered and Judah remained independent.

The Assyrian withdrawal from the West left a vacuum, into which the empires penetrated, first Egypt and then Babylon. This was a highly important event for the history of Judah, only its exact date is debatable. The main reason for this is a gap in the Mesopotamian sources between the latest annals of Ashurbanipal in 639 BC, and the beginning of the Babylonian chronicles in 627 BC. Many scholars assumed an early Assyrian withdrawal, close to the beginning of Josiah's reign. Assyria was indeed troubled by the Babylonian revolt of 652-648 BC (Frame 1992: chapter 8), but it seems that it held the west until ca. 630-620 BC (following Na'aman 1989:54-56; Bloom 1988:68f). Thus, the reign of Josiah does not form a real historical period, as it is divided between the ''pax Assyriaca" and the period of upheavals following the Assyrian withdrawal.

1.2.2. Until the Reign of Josiah (700-639 Be)

1.2.1. The campaign of Sennacherib

This time period is comfortable for discussing the Judean Kings, but does not form a clear historical period. It is within a relatively peaceful period, termed the ''pax Assyriaca" (Na'aman 1987:7-8). Judah remained loyal to Assyria and enjoyed stability. The conquest of Egypt by Assyria in 671 marked its zenith (Spalinger 1974a; 1978; Lambert 1982). There were rebellions in Egypt in 669, but these were suppressed during 667 and 664 BC. The Assyrians were helped by a local dynasty from the Delta, which later became independent under the rule of Psammetichus I. This was probably achieved with Assyrian agreement and not by rebellion (Spalinger 1974a:316-320; 1974b; 1976; also Burstein 1984).

The Old Testament sources about the campaign are varied. Micah 1 might reflect it, but in a very obscure way (Vargon 1994; Schmitt 1990; Mittmann 1990). Kings II, 18-19 is our major source, but it is a composition made of different materials. Kings II 18:13-16 has the character of a

Both Sennacherib's campaign and the Babylonian conquest of 586 BC did not cause a total change in the material culture, of course. Difficulties in the historical and

then added a story about the capture of Manasseh in Babylon and his repentance (II Chr. 33:10-17). Many scholars accepted this as an authentic story (Reviv 1982:136; Elat 1975:66-68; Elat 1977:223; Tatum 1991: 136f; Rainey 1993:147 n. 1, 150ff; Bahat 1981; Barkay 1985: 491-492), but I agree with the view that this is a late, a-historical "Midrash" (Zmirin 1952:29-31; Curtis and Madsen 1910:497-499; North 1974:336-338; Smelik 1992: 188; Williamson 1982:388-393; Lowery 1991:185-89).

1.2. Historical Background

Sennacherib's campaign in 701 BC formed a major break in the former peaceful prosperity of Judah. The Assyrian sources do not describe the event in an accurate geographic or chronological order. Sennacherib conquered Jaffa and Ashkelon, restored Ekron (Padi was only later released from his captivity in Jerusalem) and defeated the Egyptians at Elteke (Honor 1926; Childs 1967; Tadmor 1985; Na'aman 1974; 1979:61-70; Galil 1988). Then, or at the same time, Sennacherib attacked "46 cities" in Judah, with the conquest of Lachish being the centerpiece (as wall scenes from the palace of Nineveh indicate, Ussishkin 1982). The campaign was presented as a complete victory with deportations and transference of Judean areas to Philistia, though Hezekiah remained in power, Jerusalem was not conquered and Judah was not annexed to Assyqa (for the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem see Barkay 1985:67-71; Ussishkin 1979; 1994:59). Some scholars believe that theAssyrians were forced to withdraw (Tadmor 1985:77; Galil 1988). Na'aman suggested that Sennacherib was satisfied with the submission of Hezekiah, and did not aim to annex all Judah _ otherwise he would have returned and surely succeeded in doing so (Na'aman 1993:112-115; 1994:25-26).

1.1. The Absolute Chronology

chronicle, and seems historically reliable (Gray 1964:513f; Montgomery 1951:482-485; Rofe 1983:78-79; Tadmor 1985:66; Smelik 1992:101, 124; cf. Seitz 1993). It fits well the Assyrian sources, except for the minor difference in the amount of booty taken from Judah. Afterwards, we find two separate prophetic stories, describing negotiations between Assur and Hezekiah, with the prophet Isaiah acting as the "real hero". The first story is II Kings 18:17-19:9a, with direct continuation in 19:36-37. The second story is dovetailed into the first (originally II Kings 19:9b-35). Both stories are probably later and less reliable then the chronicle of 18:13-16 (Rofe 1983:80-83, against Cohen 1979).1 The story of II Kings 19:32-35, about the miracle at the end of the campaign, is legendary and unreliable (for the city list of 18:24 see Zadok 1976; for deportations in general see Na'aman and Zadok 1988; Na'aman 1993). The description in the book of Isaiah is mostly similar to Kings II, and need not be described in detail here (Orlinsky 1940; Clements 1983; Westerman 1969; Smelik 1992; Konkel 1993).

The reign of Ammon (643/2-641/640 BC) was but a short interlude of little historical significance (II Kings 21: 19-26; cf. Na'aman 1989:39-40; Galil 1~92:10, n. 28; Elitzur 1994). Ammon was murdered in obscure circumstances (for some suggestions about this episode cf. Malamat 1975:85f; 1994:229).

1.2.3. The Reign of Josiah (639-609 Be)

The Old Testament account of Josiah's reign is focused on his reform (II Kings 22:3-23:27), which has been connected with the book of Deuteronomy since De-Wette in the early 18th century AD. The literature on this subject is immense (for a few monographs see Noth 1943; Weinfeld 1972; Nelson 1981; Spieckermann 1982; Mayes 1983), but here I will discuss only the reform and its political significance. Following the book of Kings, the reform begun in Josiah's 18th year (622 BC), when the book was accidentally discovered. This reform encompassed the following actions: 1. Concluding a treaty between the king, the people, and God (II Kings 23:2-3; for treaties in the Bible in general see Tadmor 1982; McCarthy 1973; Nicholson 1986; Kitchen 1989). 2. Purifying the Jerusalem temple (II Kings 23:4-7). 3. Centralizing the cult by abolition of the other "high places" in Judah, from "Gebac to Beer-Sheba" (ibid: 23:814). Gebac is probably a city in Benjamin (Aharoni 1987:310; Na'aman 1989:37 n. 66), and not in Ephraim (as suggested by Galil 1992:1-2). 4. Purification acts in Samaria, mainly in Bethel (II Kings 23:15).2 This is very significant evidence: it is highly unlikely that Josiah could

The sources about Judah during this period are few. The Old Testament describes Sennacherib's murder immediately after his campaign, as if he was punished for attacking Judah. Actually, Sennacherib was murdered some 20 years later (II Kings 19:36f; cf. Parpola 1980). Manasseh ruled for 55 years, but very few details are known about his reign from the OT, and Assyria is not even mentioned. Manasseh was portrayed as a complete sinner in II Kings 21 (Gray 1964:641-646; Schniedewind 1991; Smelik 1992:131-168). The Chronicler repeated this picture (II Chr. 33:1-9), but 1These twostories led in the pastto the theory that therewere two different campaigns of Sennacherib in the west (Mazar, B. 1964:292; Horn 1966; Shea 1985). Against this theory see Rainey 1982b; Spa1inger 1978; Hutter 1982; Kitchen 1982-3:65, n.33; 1983:243. Cf alsoSme1ik 1992: n. 53; VonBeckerath 1992.

The story about the manof God is probably late: Rote 1983:144f, n. 89;cf Van Winkle 1989:33f

2

5

act in Samaria prior to the Assyrian withdrawal from Israel. 5. Celebrating the Passover feast (II Kings 23:21-23), which was made into a national feast (cf. Deut. 16:1).3 The story of the reform is totally different in Chronicles: there, Manasseh repented, and Josiah could not have had so much to purify. The Chronicler attributed the reform to Josiah's 12th year (II Chr. 34:2-7), separating it from the book, with a second later reform (ibid 34:33). The reform was extended to all "the cities of Manasseh and Ephraim and Simeon and even unto Naphtali" (II Chr. 34:6). Some scholars took this as history (lately, Suzuki 1992:31-37; Weinfeld 1992: 164f, 166f), but again the view that it is a legend, lacking historical significance, should be accepted (Na'aman 1989:50, n. 118; Spieckermann 1982:30-41 with further references). To summarise, the reform began in 622 BC and included acts only in Judah, Benjamin and the Bethel region.

1.2.4. The Story about Josiah's Death (609 Be) When the Babylonian annals re-appear in 627 BC, the situation is already very different from that of 639 BC. Assyria is now fighting for its lif~. The annals are fragmented, especially for the years 622-617 BC, and the Assyrian chronology is not secure (Zmirin 1952: chapter 1; Na'aman 1989:53-56; Na'arnan 1991; Oates 1965; Wiseman 1956:5-23; Brinkman 1984:105ff; Zawadzki 1995). The main line of events is still clear: Nabopolassar became king in Babylon in 626 BC and rebelled immediately. After a few years, Babylon appeared as the victorious side and in 616, when the chronicles are clear, it is attacking Assyria directly. In 615 Assur was besieged by a combined Babylonian - Median army (for Media see Diakonoff 1985; Zawadzki 1988; Dandamayev and Lukonin 1989). Assyria was defeated in 612, but its authority still held in Haran for a few years. During this period, Egypt stood on the side of Assyria and sent forces to help several times, including one sent in 609 BC. Josiah's death should be seen against this background. The description in Kings (II:23:29) is short and enigmatic. Josiah went towards Necho in Megiddo, and Necho killed Josiah when he saw him. The terms are problematic (for the text see Welch 1925; Montgomery 1951:537f; Gray 1964:678-680. For reconstructions see Frost 1968; Malarnat 1975; 1983:233-241; 1988: 120ff; Na'aman 1989: 63-68; Spieckermann 1982:138-153). The story in Chronicles (II 35:20-24) is very different, and again it seems to be a legend without historical value (Zmirin 1952:98-102; Malarnat 1975:88f; Oded 1977:486; Williamson 1982:408ff; 1982b; 1987. Against see Na'arnan 1989:66-68; Begg 1987; North 1974:379-381).4 It is very hard to believe that Josiah would

leave Judah to fight Egypt in the open field, thus it is unlikely that he rebelled against Egypt (vs. Malamat 1975:90; 1988:120-122; Galil1992:11). More probably, he was an Egyptian vassal who came to submit to Egypt, but was killed for reasons not explained by the author of Kings (Na'aman 1989:66-68).

1.2.5. From 609 BC to the Destruction of the First Temple This short period was very dynamic, and there are many references about it in Kings, Chronicles, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and "outer" (especially Babylonian) sources. Egypt probably ruled the land of Israel even before 609. In 606 Nebuchadnezzar defeated Egypt in the battle of Carchemish in Syria (Zmirin 1952:24f; Malarnat 1983:254; 1988: 122f; Wiseman 1985: 21ff; Wiseman 1956:23-26). This defeat brought about an Egyptian withdrawal from Syria. The land of Israel became the next battleground, and Nebuchadnezzar made repeated campaigns to the west until 601 Be. In Judah, Jehoahaz succeeded Josiah (II Kings 23:20-22), but Necho placed Jehoiakim / Eliakim on the throne instead (ibid: 24-26). Judah became a vassal of Babylon during the days of Jehoiakim (609-598 BC), probably in 604 BC (Na'aman 1992, not 603 or 605 BC, as Wiseman 1985:23f; Wenning 1988:190 n. 88; Worschech 1987; Malamat 1983:256-259). Perhaps this submission was not destructive (Rainey 1975:53-58), but the sources are limited and we lack details. Three years later, Jehoiakim rebelled, probably influenced by the Babylonian fiasco against Egypt in 601600 BC near the Egyptian border (Lipinski 1972). The Bible describes the immediate "punishment" of Judah (Kings II 24:1-2), but in fact the Babylonian retaliation came two years later, in 598 BC. Meanwhile Jehoiakim died and Jehoiakin, his son, replaced him. Jehoiakin surrendered to Babylon (II Kings 24:10-18) and was deported, but kept alive (ibid: 14f, Malamat 1983:269; Begg 1986b). Judah suffered deportation (ibid:13f; cf. Malarnat 1983:259-262; 1988: 124f; Wiseman 1965:32-35; 1985:30-32; Rainey 1975:57f; 1983:17; Green, 1982). The Babylonians placed Zedekiah on the throne as the last Judean king (II Kings 24:17). The reign of Zedekiah (597-586 BC) stood in the shade of Judah's bitter end - the rebellion against Babylon and the destruction of Jerusalem in 58t> Be. The prophetic books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel contribute many details to our knowledge, especially about the fate of the capital, Jerusalem (Ma1arnat 1993:275-281). On the other hand, we know little about the exact development of the Babylonian campaign against other Judean cities. Egyptian forces came to the aid of Judah (Jeremiah 37:7-11; 44:30; Malamat 1983:286-288), but were obviously not very helpful. Azeka and Lachish were conquered by the Babylonians (Jer. 34:7; cf. Malarnat 1988:125-128; Wiseman 1985:34-38; Kutsch 1974). Finally, Jerusalem was conquered in 586 (for the exact date see Cazelles 1983; Edwards 1992) and Judah became a Babylonian province.

3 See Montgomery 1951:5351; Gray 1964:6731; Curtis and Madsen 1910:512-516; Williamson 1982:403-408; Spieckerman 1982:130138. Verses 23:24-27, or at least 26-27 are probably secondary (Montgomery 1951:635,Gray 1964:677). 4 Scholars even explained level II at Megiddo as indication of Jo~i~'s presence (Stern 1989b:243, n. 64; Galil 1992: 11, n. 32). This IS baseless (Kempinski 1993:109-111; Ussishkin 1993:84).

6

The .Shephelah. Amost all the sites were destroyed: Lachish level III (see above), Tel Batash level II (Mazar, A. and KeIrn 1980:96; KeIrn and Mazar 1982' 1991' Ma 1985:306ff, 319); Tel Eitun and Tel Beit Mirsim (Zimh: 1985:63ff, 82f; Dagan 1992:64); Tel HalifILahav level VIb (Jacobs 1993:5; 1994:152-4; Seger 1988: 143f); Beth Shemesh level IIc (Wightman 1985: chapter 10; EAEHL ~ew I:25~; D~g~n 1992:53) and Azeka (according to the Azeka inscription": Na'aman 1994:5f, 17-20. cf. also Dagan 1992:27-34; vs. Galil 1995). Tel Judeideh (Goded) was p~rha~s also destroyed at that time (Dagan 1992:44). The situation at Tel Erani is not clear (EAEHL new IV: 1278-1281). Tel Hesi was not destroyed and is probably not a Judean site (Oren 1993; Stem 1994; vs. Doennan 1987: 143ff; Fargo 1987; Toombs 1981; 1983:33).7

1.3. Archaeological Background 1.3.1. The Separation of the Assemblages of the 8th and 7th Centuries BC W,e ~ve see~ tha~ Sennachrib's Campaign is a clear histoncal startmg point, but it is also an archaeological one. In order ~o, under~d this, we have to ask how was Sennachenb.s C~Palgn reflected in the material culture of Judah. Lachish IS the key site in this regard, since today it is clear that level III was destroyed not in 598, as suggested by SW:key. (1937), but during 701 BC (Lachish III:47, 55; US~is~n 1977:52ff; 1982; Aharoni 1976; Lachish V).5 The dating is c~rro~orated by the finding of remains of a siege ramp at this SIte (Uss~shkin 1983: area R; 1989; Eph'al 198~) and by. ~e mention of Lachish in the ostraca found during ~e Bntlsh excavations (Yadin 1985b:142-143, with earlier literature). The rich assemblage of Lachish level III enables us to date other assemblages to the end of the 8th centur,Y BC (Zimhoni 1990; 1995; Wightman 1985) Especially important are the lmlk stamps, which can be no; related safely to the reign of Hezekiah (Ussishkin 1977'56' Na'aman 1979; Rainey 1982). . ,

The N.egev. Sites in the Negev suffered destruction at the same orne or at approximately the same time, e.g., Tel Beer Sheba level II (see above) and Arad level VIII (Rainey 1987:18-20; Herzog 1984:19-22; Zimhoni 1985:84-87; Mazar and Netzer 1986:89f). For Tel Ira see Beit Arieh 1985; 1987; Biran 1985; 1987; Rainey 1993: n. 5). The Judean Mountains. In the Southern Judean mountains the situation is less clear. Remains of the 8th century are known from Beth-Zur (Sellers 1933:53) and Hebron ~Chadwick 1992:124, 127, 199; Ofer 1990:91; 1993), but it is not clear ~ these sites were destroyed. Kh. Rabud may have been nuned.{Kochavi 1.974:16, 18). It is hard to point to clear destruction levels m Benjamin and the Northern Judean Mountains. Jerusalem was not destroyed and it is hard to date exactly its remains (Mazar, A. 1985:317: Barkay 1985:420-421; for the excavations see Shiloh 1984: 1989; Avigad 1980; 1986; Jerusalem I-II). The same is tru~ for many smaller settlements nearby, e.g., Ramot and Moza. Tel en-Nasbeh flourished throughout both centuries without any clear destruction levels (TN I-II; Zorn 1993:114, 161). Ramat Rabel may have been destroyed (Na'aman 1979:72f: . Barkay 1993: 10).

S~nce c~ramic

typology can not be totally accurate, the of dating grow when we head further away from Lachish. . For th~n, we must consider the possibility that changes.m matenal culture may not only be temporal, but also regional. Tel Beer-Sheba is a good example: most scholars agree that the assemblage of Lachish III is similar to Tel Beer Sheba II, but the date of the latter is dependent ~pon ~at of the fi~st, and an exact date can not be fixed by ~ure arch~eologIcal means (cf. Kenyon 1976:63f, vs. BS I.~f, 76; Naaman 1979:75; 1986:13f).6 Also, in areas that did not suffer from Sennacherib's campaign, our ability to separate the 8th and 7th centuries BC is limited. For e~ple, .Jeru~ale~ was not destroyed, and we find a direct contln~tlon in ~ts material culture, while the 586 BC destruction there is much more prominent. The lmlk stamps may. help to date assemblages, but a few jars may have continued in.use a little after 701 BC (Mazar, A. 1985:317; Mazar, Amit and Illan 1984:247f; Eshel 1989: Stem 1994:19~). ~en only the handles of the jars survived, they may be mtrusrve and are less reliable for dating (Barka 1985'419ft) . of the jars may relate toY . . Al so, the diismibuuon ~y other factors (Na'aman 1979:75ff; 1986:14-17; for a ~st of stamps see Garfinkel 1988:70; for the origin of the Jars see Mommsen, Perlman and Yellin 1984). A summary of the m:chaeological effects of Sennacherib's campaign in each region of Judah follows. diffic~tles

The Judean Desert. Destructions were not identified in this area. En Gedi existed already during the 8th century BC (Barkay 1993, vs. Mazar et. al. 1963:33, 57f). So did probably the smaller Buqe'ah sites, which are usually dated only to the 7th century BC (Stager 1975' 1976: also Cross and Milik 1956; Bar Adon 1989; Stem' 1994;· Finkelstein 1~93:64~. It seems that Sennacherib's campaign was not felt directly m this area. To sum up, the campaign of Sennacherib had grave results for the JUde~ Shephelah and the Negev (the Edomites may have. used this opportunity to join in the destruction). It is possible to divide the 8th and the 7th centuries BC well in these areas, but in the other areas of Judah the situation is

5 A f:w scholars continue to object to this dating (Holladay 1976'

~~hin~ 1?79:49-53; 1988; 1992), or even to the identificatio~

. e SIte With Lachish (Ahlstrom 1980; 1983 1985' but ' see 6Th . the e suggestions to lower ~e date of Beer Sheba II to well inside

7.The excavators dated the end of Gezer VI (area VII) to Tiglath Pileser's campaign of 734/3 BC (Seger 1987:1241). It was perhaps destroye~ also.in 701 BC (there are many lmlk stamps, but these were mainly found out of context). For Gezer see also Na'aman 1988:74; Becking 1992:114-118; Reich and Brandl 1985.

Davies 1982; 1985).This view can no longer be held.

7~ centwy BC (Yadin and Geva 1983; Eshel 1986: the appendix:43) are not convincing.

7

The Judean Desert. Here En Gedi level V was perhaps destroyed (Mazar et. al. 1963:33, vs. Barkay 1993:106), and also Vered Jericho (Eitan 1984; 1994). Eitan related the end of this site to the reform of Josiah, but this has no archaeological basis. The situation at Jericho is not clear (Weippert, M and H. 1976:145, 148; EAEHL new 11:680), but in fact Jericho belonged to Israel and not to Judah.

more ambiguous and our ability to phase the material remains much more limited.

1.3.2. The Separation of the Assemblages of the 7th and 6th Centuries BC How well demarcated is the lower limit of the period under research (i.e., the 586 BC date)? This question faces similar difficulties to those seen in chapter 1.3.1 (above), only more powerful. First, there were quite a few Babylonian campaigns to the land of Israel between 604-586 BC, and this complicates the picture. Archaeologically, we can not date any site exactly within these years. The exact dating must be judged historically: the end of Lachish level II will be dated to 586 BC (Lachish III; Ussishkin 1983) while that of Ekron level lb to 604 or 603 BC (Dothan and Gitin 1987:202, 215; Gitin 1989:45, 47; Na'aman 1992). Of course sites can also be destroyed in events that were not recorded, at any given time. For our purposes we can define the whole period of 604-586 BC as one horizon of destruction, and the exact dating within it is not very crucial. Thus, I will use the term "7th century BC" to mark all the assemblages in Judah that can be dated between 700 and 586 BC. One should keep in mind that there is likely to be a "late bias" - i.e., the majority of the finds would relate to the end of the levels concerned, towards the 604-586 BC destruction horizon.

The Negev. This area suffered almost a total wave of destruction after its flowering during the 7th century BC. Destructions were found in Tel Malhata (Kochavi 1970:23, Beit Arieh, personal communication); Arad level 6 (Rainey 1987; Herzog 1987:77; cf. Ussishkin 1988); Tel Ira (Biran 1985; 1987H:26f; Beit Arieh 1985:20, 25; 1987;35); Aroer level 2 (Biran 1987:33; Biran and Cohen 1981) and Uzah level 4 (Beit Arieh 1986:33, 35; 1987:37f; Beit Arieh and Cresson 1991:130, 134; for a detailed historical survey of the Negev in the 7th century BC see Na'aman 1987). Tel Masos was perhaps destroyed as well (Zimhoni in: Masos 1:130, but cf ibid:124; Kempinsky et. al. 1981:167). The small site of Kh. Radum was probably deserted (Beit Arieh 1992). The identity of the destroyers at each site is not clear, whether Babylonians or Edomites, but this is not crucial to our purposes here. Benjamin. The area of Benjamin is somewhat an exception. It is hard to discern destructions there, and this area may have submitted to the Babylonians without struggle, prior to the destruction of Jerusalem (thus Malamat 1983:286f; Eshel 1986:16; Barkay 1993:196f; for another opinion see Kochman 1982:26). For the lack of destruction at Tel enNasbeh see Zorn 1993:161-162. 8

The second problem is that there are limited written sources about the details of the Babylonian campaigns against Judah. Most of the evidence relates to Jerusalem and its vicinity, and it is hard to assess the situation in other regions. An even graver problem is the Babylonian period (586-532 BC). It was more or less peaceful, and left a kind of a material "tabula rasa" in Judah (despite the pioneering efforts of Weinberg 1971:204-207; Barkay 1985:298-300; 1989:42; 1993). Sites that were not destroyed in 586 BC often continued directly into the Persian Period (Barkay 1993; Zorn 1993:183-5), and this hampers our ability to define the lower limit of the 7th century assemblage. Despite all these difficulties, 586 BC (or, to be more exact, 604-586 BC) can be set as a clear line for the archaeological phasing, since many sites in Judah were destroyed then (listed, according to geographical regions, below).

1.4. Archaeological Sub - Phasing of the 7th Century BC? Can the 7th century BC in Judah (or, better defined, the period of 700-586 BC) be separated into archaeological subphases? If this is possible, we would be able to date finds much more accurately, and to relate them much better to historical processes. We have seen earlier (chapter 1.2 above) that the reigns of the kings of Judah do not form real historical periods, and that a clear separation should be recognized between the pax Assyriaca (the first half of the.7th century BC) and the period of struggles following the Assyrian withdrawal (ca. 630/620-586 BC). Judah may have gained a certain amount of independence in between these phases, but this would have been a very short and exceptional period, if at all. Of course, archaeological phases are not always dependent upon historical ones. Can archaeological sub-phases be

The Shephelah. In the Shephelah the following sites were destroyed: Lachish level II (already discussed above), Tel Batash level II (Mazar A. and Kelm 1980:93, 96f; Mazar A. 1985:307-320) and Azeka (Dagan 1992:34, 261f). The Judean Mountains. Ramat Rabel level Va was distroyed (RR I; RR 1I:119f; Aharoni 1956:143, 151), as was Jerusalem or at least the city of David level X (Malamat 1988; Avigad 1980:53; Kenyon 1974:170f; Mazar E. and B. 1989). Many small villages surrounding Jerusalem were probably also ruined. Further south one may probably add Beth Zur and Kh. Rabud (Kochavi 1973: 55-58; Sellers et. al. 1968: pls, 18-19; Sellers 1933:53; EAEHL new: 1252).

Barkay has opposed the setting of the end of the IronAge in 586 BC (1993). For our purpose, 586 BC is the only possible date, since we deal only with Judah, which certainly suffered greatly and lost its independence at this date. The question of terminology (i.e. whether the 6th century· BC is part of the Iron Age)is not important in this regard.

established, considering that the separation of the 8th and 7th centuries BC as a whole was achieved only some 20 years ago?

Sease 1993). According to the logic ofYadin and Geva, one sherd of pottery is enough to prove Judean control at remote sites, even at Tel Keisan which was part of Phoenicia. Most of this criticism is true for the work of Eshel as well (1986), but he dealt mainly with ceramic assemblages, which require a separate discussion.

A suggestion for four archaeological sub-phases within the 7th century BC has recently been made (Yadin and Geva 1983; Eshel 1986), but it can hardly be accepted, for the following reasons:

Another alternative was suggested lately by Oren, following his important excavations in the southern coastal plain. Oren separated an Assyrian phase (701-640 BC) from a later "Egyptian" phase (640-540 BC; Oren 1991:13-15; 1993). The excavations at Tel Haror, Tel Shera, Ruqeish and other sites in this region have not been published fully yet, thus Oren's suggestion can not be explored in detail (for preliminary reports see Oren and Netzer 1974; Oren 1982; Oren 1986). However, it seems that this is also an historical separation, based on an early date for the Assyrian withdrawal from the west. Even if this phasing fits Philistia, it may not fit other parts of the land of Israel. Moreover, most of the finds from the so-called Assyrian phase are not typical of Judah; and there is nothing clearly Egyptian in the material culture of the second phase. The basic problem in this phasing relates to the dating of the sites. At first, Oren dated destructions at Tel Haror and Tel Shera to the end of the 7th, or early 6th, centuries BC (Oren 1988:136). Later Oren changed this dating to ca. 640 BC. This was done according to the assumption that the sites were ruined by Egyptian campaigns against the withdrawing Assyrians (Oren 1991). Yet, the Egyptian 26th dynasty was an ally of Assyria (cf. part 1.2 above), thus Oren's reconstruction is unlikely. Perhaps a few sites were ruined in 640 BC, but surely the 604-586 BC destruction horizon would be much more substantial, and should therefore be preferred for the dating of destructions at sites in Philistia and Judah.

1. The suggested phases were built upon the reigns of the Judean kings, rather than on an independent archaeological basis (and we saw that these reigns do not constitute distinctive historical phases, chapter 1.2. above). 2. Archaeologically, dating to a margin of 20 or 30 years is impossible for Iron Age Judah. For example, see the different dating suggested for the end of Tel Beer Sheba level II (chapter 1.3 above), from 720 to 701 BC or even later. 3. The phases noted by Yadin and Geva (1983: table p. 284) are often valid for a few sites, or one site only. These phases often designate only minor changes and alterations in a restricted locality. At no site do all all four phases exist, and only four sites (of the 19 discussed by Yadin and Geva) have evidence of three phases. In some cases, Yadin, Geva and Eshel defined "phases" which are not recognized by the excavators of the sites, e.g., at Lachish (cf. Ussishkin 1993:133f; Zimhoni 1990:47). At Tel Beer Sheba, for example, there is no "level I", other than one wall with scanty remains (BS I:6f). Surprisingly, Yadin and Geva (1983) ignored Jerusalem completely - the capital of Judah. The reason is clear: Jerusalem does not fit their fourfold division at all. 4. Yadin and Geva (1983), as well as Eshel (1986), did not accept the separation of the 8th and 7th centuries BC, as is accepted by almost all the archaeologists today (see chapter 1.3.1 above).

In the future, the 7th century BC may perhaps be divided into two sub-phases, but currently this is not possible. We have to recognize the fact that the first half of the 7th century BC "slips between the fingers", since no large-scale destruction occurred. For the archaeologist this means lack of rich destruction levels and clearly dated assemblages. The remains of the 7th century BC belong mostly to the second half of the century (and the beginning of the 6th century BC). For these reasons, all the efforts to identify king Manasseh's supposed building projects are very problematic, even if we take the Chronicler's version to be historically reliable (e.g., Tatum 1991). The archaeological limitations, unfortunate as they are for scientific scholarship, must be fully acknowledged, otherwise the whole picture might be biased from the very beginning.

5. The suggested fourfold division is combined with very simplistic explanations of material culture, ignoring basic arc~eological limitations. For example, Yadin and Geva claim that the East-Greek pottery can be dated accurately within a margin of 10 years (1983:250). This may be true for later periods, but not for the Iron Age (cf. Bowden 1991: see also the new dating proposed by Wenning 1989; accepted by Waldbaum 1994).9 Furthermore, the East Greek pottery surely has no special relation with Judah, and the same holds true for the engraved tridacna shells (found allover the ancient Near East, Brandl 1984; Reese and

8 Lately,

8

9 For the East-Greek pottery in the Levant and its chronology see Boar~an 1980; 1988; Collombier 1987; Cook 1992. Lately it wasfound alsoat Kabri, see Niemeier 1994. 9

Chapter II: The History of Research "...After such knowledge, whatforgiveness? Think now History has many cunning passages, contrived corridors And issues, deceives with whispering ambitions Guides us by Vanities... Gives too late What's not believed in, or if still believed, In memory only, reconsidered passion"

influential scholar until the end of this phase, signified by the excavations at Lachish (though these were published only in 1953 (Lachish III).

mentioned, but obviously many more "unidentifiable" fragments were discarded (TBM 1II:69). All were ascribed to level A and dated to the 8th century BC and later. More specifically, one figurine from silo 32 was seen as the earliest (cf. app. 2:229), while all the other pillar figurines were said to belong to the last hundred years of level A (pertaining to the 7th century BC, but now commonly dated to the 8th century BC). Albright saw no great differences between pillar figurines from Tel Beit Mirsim and from Megiddo, and discussed the context only for the purpose of dating. Against the explanation of female figurines, Albright explained figurines of horses, males, a woman carrying a child and women carrying lamps as toys or amulets (ibid:142).2 Perhaps more important was the technical report by Kelso and Thorley (in TBM III: 138141). They believed that two JPFs' heads were brought from Phoenicia because of their superior quality over other badlyfired "local Astartes". Kelso and Thorley also related the pillar body with a tree, that was used in the cult of Asherah (ibid:138).

TI.2.t. The Study ofPilz (1924)

(T.S. Eliot, 'Gerontion'). The Judean Pillar Figurines (henceforward, JPFs for short) were discovered in the nineteenth century AD, and since then discussed in many monographs and papers, not to mention the wealth of secondary and popular treatments. These figurines have been found in almost every Iron Age II excavation in Judah. I have defined several phases in the complicated history of research, but the separating lines between each phase are not always decisive, and the publication dates are often more important then the actual dates of excavation. I will comment only briefly on many studies, which are discussed in detail in the following chapters. A simple representation of the quantitative. progress of research is given in fig. 2.

11.1. From the Nineteenth Century to the Excavation of Gezer (1912) One of the first JPF ever found was brought by father Berkeley to the British Museum in 1865, as part of an assemblage from a grave near Bethlehem (app. 2:7). Very little was known about these figurines then, so ClermontGanneau doubted its authenticity and could not date it clearly (1884:224). It was fully published only a hundred years later (Tubb 1981). Other JPFs found their way into private collections, e.g., the Ustinov collection, later donated to the Museum ofUppsala (Supinska-Levset 1976; 1978:1720, no. UT5).

mandate that followed has to be seen as a very different period (chap. 11.2 below). At Gezer, Macalister defined the figurines as cult objects, usually as representation of goddesses (Gezer 11:411) or the Biblical teraphim (Macalister 1915:270f). The figurines were broken on purpose during magical rites (Macalister 1905:270f). Macalister separated plaque figurines, shaped as a rectangular lump of clay with frontal moulding (Gezer 11:411-416), from pillar figurines which are made in the round. He believed that the last are a Cypriot form of a nurturing goddess (dea nutrix - ibid:417). At that time, large amounts of Cypriot Iron Age figurines were already known. Macalister noticed that the pillar type was later than the plaque type, dating this type to his late Semitic IV and Persian-Hellenistic levels (Gezer 11:417). Unfortunately, due to the unfortunate method of his excavations at Gezer, almost all the JPFs that he found there have no clear archaeological context. Mackenzie's work in Beth Shemesh (1912) deserves the highest regards. His report of the first season is clear and detailed, even to the point of giving exact locations for figurines found inside a certain grave (cf. app. 2:8-9). Mackenzie thought that the hand-made, pinched head variation of the JPFs represented a Semitic figure, due to its facial features (possibly the aquiline nose - he did not specifythe reasons for this conclusion). Two figurines from tomb 5 were seen as a pair of gods (cf. below, app. 2:8-9), an idea followed recently by Wenning (1991). For Mackenzie, the figurines were cultic idols of gods that protected human beings. They were put in the graves as an expression of magic (Mackenzie 1912:76-77). Mackenzie, like many other scholars of his generation, separated sharply religion from magic, following the work of Frazer (1890; for criticism cf. Voigt 1984:168 n.I; Versnel 1991; Ritner 1992). I will discuss this question more thoroughly below (chap. IX). Mackenzie (1912:54) also used the name Astarte for the pillar figurines.

Since the beginning of the 20th century the term "Astarte figurines", together with the notion that these are representations of fertility goddesses, became common (for plaque figurines already at the end of the 19th century AD, Clermont-Ganneau 1896:6f, 242; cf. Contenau 1914:94:ff). Vincent suggested that these figurines had been deliberately broken during rituals (1907:161-163). Contenau (1914:94ff, 100) made a general survey of naked female figurines from the Near East, including Cana'an, but mainly pertaining to the 3rd and 2nd millenniums BC (and without mentioning the pillar figurines).

11.2. Between the Two World Wars: the "Astarte Phase"

The publication of Macalister's excavations at Gezer in 1912 marks the end of this phase of research. The excavations at Gezer (Gezer II-III) and Beth Shemesh (Mackenzie 1912) gave access, for the first time, to relatively large assemblages of JPFs. These assemblages could now be dated, at least crudely, and provided some information on their context. Soon afterwards, the first world war caused an interval in the archaeological activity, and the British

During this phase, there occurred a significant acceleration in the quantity of excavations in the land of Israel under the British Mandate, and many studies on the JPFs were published. The changes were not only quantitative (fig. 2 below), but qualitative as well. Albright was the most

10

Pilz made the first comprehensive study of figurines from Israel. It was part of an unpublished thesis titled "Yahweh and the female goddess". Pilz catalogued 123 figurines of all periods, including metal, stone and faience figurines (1924:133-145). He arranged these by the position of the arms (ibid:157), separating "plaque figurines" (his types A, B) from pillar figurines (C), tambourine players (0), etc. (ibid:140). Actually, Pilz catalogued only 12 pillar figurines from Gezer, dated after 1000 BC (ibid:145, 150, 161). He understood most of the figurines as "Gdtterdarstellung", except the tambourine players, which he perceived to be representations of human beings. Pilz offered varied explanations for each type of figurine, and for the pillar figurines he hinted giving milk. by a goddess or a mother, or Cypriot / Phoenician 'Astarte' figures (pilz 1924:161). Nevertheless, he made some interesting remarks. First, he noted that if these were indeed female goddesses, then the monotheistic cult of Yahweh did not suppress her cult (ibid:167); this critical attitude is unusual for archaeologists of this phase. Secondly, Pilz noted the small size of the figurines, thus they were not cult statues (Kultbilder) but only smaller copies of statues, still representing goddesses. Pilz also suggested that the figurines were related to "popular religion" (ibid:161, but without further discussion). He did not try to relate them directly with the Old Testament and his general attitude was cautious:

At Tell e-Nasbeh, all the human figurines were of the pillar type (TN 1:145), and a very clear definition of the two major variations was formulated: the "pinched head" and the mould-made head. Both variations were seen as contemporary. The excavators gave the numbers of all the figurines that have been found, including small fragments not published with drawings or photographs (ibid:246, 273, map fig. 50c). Some 150 JPFs had been discovered, all from level I (except one or two), dated to 750-450 Be. The excavators believed that the JPFs had been deliberately broken (ibid:245), and were amulets or homely icons, not used in official temples. They had not been found in tombs at this site, supposedly because they were not used as concubines or female replacements during internment rituals (but probably the tombs found at Tel en-Nasbeh predate the period when these figurines became common). In the summary, the JPFs were termed Astarte figurines and examples of the prophetic condemnations, but they have also been considered as votive objects and "evidence of the extent to which magic ruled the minds of the ancients". Their crudity and small size indicate that they are cheap tokens, that replace "by magic and ritual the place of the real object in religion" (ibid:248). In the same breath, the authors suggested that the figurines were manufactured by uninstructed potters, perhaps chiefly women, being part of a local worship (TN 1:248).

"Religionsgeschichtlich muss sich unsere Typenvergleichung die Archaologisch so lohnend war, wollen wir auf festen boden bleiben, mit dem wenigen oben Gesagten bescheiden" (pilz 1924:167).

TI.2.2. Major Excavations during the 1920's and 1930's These excavations formed a large data-base of JPFs, for the first time. The final report of the excavations at Beth Shemesh offered a short synthesis, and a date from the 10th century BC and later was suggested for the pillar figurines (AS V:155). This date was based on an early date for tomb 1 at this site.1 The excavators exempted themselves from a detailed study with the excuse that Albright was preparing one on the same subject.

Excavations outside Judah helped to define other types of pillar figurines, especially at Samaria (Samaria 1:348f, #Bl) and Megiddo (May 1935). At Megiddo, all the anthropomorphic figurines were explained in connection with religion (cult, mortuary cult, mother-goddesses, etc.).

This Albright did, but he dealt with the plaque figurines and gave only a short summary about the pillar figurines (Albright 1939:117-119). Albright dated the pillar figurines to the 7th-6th centuries BC and called them "nurturing goddesses". In his view, some of the heads had been made in Cyprus (ibid:120). More detailed was the Tel Beit Mirsim report from 1943 (TBM III). 39 pillar figurines were

2 A somewhat different view was proposed by Albright in his book

"Archaeology and the Religion oflsrael" (1942). There he claimed that Iron Age II pillar figurines have no similarity to the Cana'anite plaque figurines; and that the Israelites used these figurines as amulets for help during birth or as expressions of "sympathetic magic"; thus, "in no case can we label them with the name of a goddess" (Albright 1942:115).

1 Many scholars adopted this dating, e.g., IBM Ill:69; Pritchard 1943:24, no. 203; Holland 1975:330; Engle 1979:20.

11

Even animal figurines were not seen as mere toys, but as related to cults of bulls or herds (May 1935:28, 34). The important thing was the recognition that the type of pillar figurines so common in the south "had little influence" at Megiddo - other than one exceptional figurine (May 1935:31, reg. no. M.I776; app. 2:102 in the present work).

Hooke (1938:25) barely mentioned the figurines: "Vast numbers of Astarte figurines and amulets showed how widespread was the use of such charms for apotropaic or fertility purposes". Burrows (1941:220f) managed to call the figurines every conceivable term, all in the same short section: Astartes, "dumb and helpless idols" (though this is less likely), household deities like the Biblical teraphim, expressions of sympathetic magic, images of the mother-goddess, votive objects and playthings. Otherwise, Burrows just repeated the words of Albright and Pritchard.

11.2.3. The Monograph of Pritchard (1943) This monograph indicates well the state of research at the end of the Astarte phase. Pritchard discussed 249 female figurines of the Bronze and Iron ages in Israel. 52 of these were termed pillar figurines, his type VII (pritchard 1943:56, nos. 189-240). These included many figurines that cannot be termed thus today, like juglets, figurines with legs, women holding birds, etc. (ibid: catalogue nos. 199, 218-221, 225, 236-240).3 Pritchard dated the pillar figurines to after 1000 BC, following Albright at Tel Beit Mirsim." He noted that pillar figurines appear also in private loci, thus being private property (ibid:87). Pritchard though that their origin was Cyprus or Mesopotamia (ibid:53, 87).

Galling thought that all the figurines were goddesses of life and fertility. This is evidence that the war staged by the Israelite religion against the goddesses was not always successful since the Israelites used, to a certain extent, these figurines (Galling 1937:230). Galling also hinted that major goddesses, such as Anat or Asherah, were paredos of the male god - but he did not explicitly identify these goddesses with the figurines: "Sie lebten mit ihrer kleinen Abbilden als kraftgelandes vis natur in der privaten Sphare .des Symbol der israelitischen Hauses. Soweit man die weiblische Gottheiten als Grossgdtter ansprechen darf (Anath, Aschira), sind sie Paredoi des M3nnIichen Gottes" (1937:233).5

Pritchard's conclusions were cautious: the nature of all three major goddess mentioned in the Old Testament, Astarte, Asherah and Anat, is quite similar (pritchard 1943:59-81). Thus, there is no unequivocal evidence for the identification of a specific goddess with the pillar figurines (ibid:2-4, 8587). Pritchard believed that the pillar type was a direct continuation of the plaque figurines depicting a woman holding her breasts, thus perhaps indicating a symbolic representation of womankind, or mother goddess, or private, domestic cult of milk-fertility (ibid:83, 87). In this way, a rather peculiar mix of explanations is given in Pritchard's summary, but his caution is much more appealing then arrogance, which is, unfortunately, not uncommon among archaeologists.

11.2.4. Popular and Other Short Allusions during the 'Astarte' Phase Popular works are not necessarily worse than scientific papers, and are usually simpler to analyze. Driver saw the figurines from Gezer as images of home - gods, especially Astartes, without discussing the pillar figurines in particular (1922:56-58). For Watzinger (1933: 117), the pillar figurines were a direct continuation of the Bronze Age plaque figurines, therefore evidence for the continuation of the domestic cult of the female nature goddess. The specific term Astarte appears only in the labels to the photographs (Watzinger 1933: pI. 40:96, 98; cf. also Reifenberg 1927:9096).

11.3.1. The Contribution of New Excavations

Many JPFs were found in Aharoni's excavations at Ramat Rabel, but were only partly published (RR I-II). Aharoni used the term Astarte, but did not state a clear view about the identity of these figurines. 6 Ciasca's detailed study of the horse-and-rider figurines from this site was important, showing the ability to identify small fragments. She often managed to identify broken parts through changes of color resulting from exposure (or lack of exposure) to oxygen during firing (Ciasca 1964:95-100; cf. her publication of the Tell Erani material, Ciasca 1962; 1963).

Many important excavations have taken place during the present phase, e.g., those at Lachish, Jerusalem (by Kenyon), Gibeon and Ramat Rabel. Tufnell ascribed the JPFs at Lachish to level III-II, i.e., 8th7th centuries BC (Lachish III:374). She lowered the date of the figurines from Beth Shemesh tomb 1, by arguing that only the beginning of the burials there are from ca. 900 BC, but the tomb continued to be used later; thus the figurines are probably later (ibid:377). The Tel Beit Mirsim pillar figurines are distinctive from the Megiddo pillar figurines, although Albright disagrees. Still, many of these figurines are only "crudely playthings" or "homely symbols", lacking any artistic value (ibid:374). The moulding of the heads was technically good, and they were all made in one place, while the bodies were made locally at each site (Lachish III:375). Occasionally, the report glided into unwarranted generalizations. For example, it was suggested that the pillar figurines may have represented the naked goddess, a goddess returning to Israel and to Greece (and having a shared Assyrian origin - ibid:377). Regarding the horse-andrider figurines, Tufnell wrote that: "The simultaneous introduction of equestrian figures is a further sign of northern pressure, commemorating, perhaps, these bands of horseman from the northern steppes [meaning the Scythians] whose descendants had reached Egypt by the middle of the seventh century" (ibid:377).

World War II terminated this phase of research, though not as sharply as did World War I earlier. One l~t wo~d concerns the title of this phase - "Astarte". Dunng this period, the term Astarte was very commonly attached ~o the pillar figurines (as well as to other types of figunnes). Earlier, it was used mainly in respect of the plaque figurines, but these figurines were not yet separated well from the pillar figurines, and the term was used mutually for both kinds. Furthermore, many scholars who saw these figurines as representations of a goddess related them with forbidden or foreign cults; fitting them to the Old Testament's descriptions of foreign, condemned goddesses like Anat or Astarte. The term Astarte remained popular much later, somewhat ironically, and a few scholars use it even today (e.g., Haran 1992:331).

A very large quantity of pillar figurines was discovered in Kenyon's excavations in Jerusalem. Kenyon (1967: 101) was very assured about the meaning of animal figurines: "it is always possible to say that an animal figure has no greater significance than that of a toy." On the other hand, female pillar figurines are mainly "elemental mother - goddess" and "fertility cult objects" (ibid). Kenyon suggested that horse figurines are related to the "sun horses" that are mentioned in II Kings (cf already Samaria III:78), especially because of the applied disc that some horses carry between their ears (though this phenomenon is quite rare among the Judean horse figurines). Many female pillar figurines were found in cave I, which Kenyon believed to be a temple's favissa. These figurines were not related to Yahweh, in her view: "The association of these female figurines with a fertility cult, abhorrent to the worshippers of Yahweh, is very obvious" (Kenyon 1974:141). The fullest publication of the JPFs from Kenyon's excavations at Jerusalem was written by Holland (whose work I will discuss in detail in chap. 11.3.4 below).

3 Of the 52 figurines he termed "pillar", I have defmed only 12 as JPFs in the present study(cf. fig. 2). 5 The secondedition of his book, from 1977, holds no significant changes in this regard.

12

However, they limited the range to the 8th-7th centuries BC (Gibeon WS:15-17).

The opinions of Galling are exceptional for this early stage of research, preceding the "Asherah phase of research" by more than thirty years.

s.

4 His catalogue nos. 191-2 from Megiddo were dated to the Iron AgeI, but these are not JPFs (following my detinitions).

11.3. From World War II until 1975

A very important contribution was made at that time by Gophna (1970), despite its brevity. Following small scale surveys, Gophna defined clearly a pillar type of figurine typical of southern Philistia (1970:27, 29). This type is clearly different to the simple, pinched, hand-made type of figurine which is typical of Judah and rare in the coastal plain (ibid:29, pI. 6:6; cf. app. 2:68 below). Gophna dated the figurines and the sites to the 7th-6th centuries Be. He also suggested precise dating to Josiah's reign, but it was made via historical considerations, and did not depend on archaeological evidence (Gophna 1970:30). Excavations outside Judah, especially those at Hazor, Ta'anakh, Samaria and Ashdod, were also important to the study of the JPFs. At Ta'anakh, the figurines are earlier than the JPFs, but Lapp noted the lack of the "Dea Nutrix figurine, typical of the Iron Age II in southern Palestine" (Lapp 1967:37; cf. Lapp 1964). Assemblage E207 at Samaria contained many figurines (Samaria III:76), explained as votive objects related to different goddesses. Horse figurines were related with a sun cult; pillar figurines with a mother goddess; a woman and child figurine with Isis, etc. (Samaria III:77-78). The figurines were supposedly signs of foreign, non-Yahweistic cult: "These poor relics do help to quicken our understanding the of the mingled scorn and pity which they [the OT prophets] pour on the people of Samaria - scorn of their adultery, and pity for their desperate state under the threat of the Assyrian invasion" (Samaria III:79). Ashdod is important for the definition of the assemblages of the southern coastal plain. Most of the figurines from Ashdod were found in area D which was termed cultic, while the figurines were called Astartes (Ashdod I:137-139). In the following report (Ashdod II-III: 125), Hachlili related the figurines from area D to domestic and industrial contexts. The comparisons that she found to the figurines from Ashdod lack examples from Judean sites, but she did not make an explicit allusion to this fact. She suggested that the variety of figures indicates that they were not gods, but

In Gibeon, 54 JPFs were found in the great public pool (of which only 27 were published with a photograph or drawing: Gibeon WS). The excavators tried to date the figurines by their relative depths within the pool, but following Pritchard (1943), they suggested that the pillar type was used in Palestine in the IOth-6th centuries BC.

6 The same is true for his textbook "The Archaeology of the Land ofIsrael" (Aharoni 1978)and his Tel Beer ShebaReport(BS I). In a popular book, though, Aharoni defmed a JPF from Arad ~ Astarte, a fertility goddess of Cana'anite origins (Aharom 1971b:l13-114).

13

functions. Even the "unenlightened and tolerant circles in Israel" understood that Yahweh cannot be worked in a similar way (therefore one does not find similar representations of a male god). All this proves the antiquity of the first two commandments (Wright 1957:118).

individual human beings (Ashdod II-III: 128, 132). At the same time, female figurines were explained by Hachlili as votive objects, which were used to enhance fertility or to assure female safety by sympathetic magic (ibid: 113). Animal figurines were explained in various ways: as burial gifts, as symbols of sacrifices of animals (of the species represented by the figurines), and even as toys (Ashdod 11III:134-135).

A similar view was expressed by Heaton (1974:232); the figurines were mother goddesses that belonged to women. They were not idols but "lucky charms" - maybe the famous teraphim. Heaton (1974:232) liked one of these figurines from Lachish, which "is more pleasant than usual, but when she had her cheeks painted red, she must have appeared distinctly garish". Much more important were the short remarks made by the Frankens, who noted the difficulties in the AstartelFertility explanations. The variety of female types of figurines calls for different represented figures. Furthermore, it is hard to see all the animal figurines as related to fertility, since pregnancy or sexuality were usually not stressed, and some species of animals are missing (Franken and Franken-Battershill 1963:143). The Frankens suggested a comprehensive research of figurines according to the different types and following detailed statistic analysis and study of distributions and contexts. One should ask is any type of figurine limited to a certain segment of the population? What is the relation between the distribution in cities versus agricultural villages? This ideal plan of research, however, did not materialize.

D.3.2. The Research of Reed In an important study, Reed (1949) discussed the problematic nature of the Asherah, which seems to appear in the Old Testament sometimes as a female goddess and other times as a cultic object. Reed concluded that the Asherah was a cultic object in temples, both in the cults of Yahweh and Ba'al. This conclusion was based on the places and the verbs which are related to the Asherah in the Old Testament, as well as on other cultic objects mentioned beside it. In some instances, Asherah is an image of a goddess called Asherah (Reed 1949:53, 95). Reed (1949: appendix 1) rejected simplistic identifications of the Asherah with various material objects. He wrote that even if the Asherah was made of wood, it does not imply that every wood, tree, or pole is an Asherah (1949:37). He criticized harshly, and rightly, the many identifications of the Asherah with all kinds of trees, groves and poles, since:

Ahlstrom warned about seeing the figurines only as part of popular religion, since some had been found in the royal palace at Ramat Rabel (1963:51). De-Vaux (1958:82) thought that these figurines were toys:

"When one assumes, as he has no right to do, that the Asherah was a tree or a pole, then the field becomes a large one and every stylized tree or upright pole may be called an Asherah" (Reed 1949:3).

a

"Le petit Israelite passait le meilleur de son temps jouer dans les rues ou sur la place avec les garsons et les filles de son ~ge... Ils chantaient, dansaient, s'amusaient avec des modelages de terre cuite comme on en a retrouve dans les fouilles; les petits filles ont toujours jou~ ~ la poupee, "

Reed separated small figurines found in domestic buildings and large Asherah statues that stood in public temples (1949: 72 n.14). The clay figurines are not "Asherim", though Reed did not cancel out the possibility that some of them represented goddesses, which we can not yet identify specifically. Reed did not discuss the JPFs in particular, but his study presented a well balanced and critical attitude to the question of the Biblical Asherah (as opposed to many of the later "Asherah studies").

Exceptional among the popular literature of those years was a book by Patai, called "The Hebrew Goddess" (1967).7 Patai argued that the written sources imply that Asherah and Astarte were not part of a foreign cult or magical phenomena, but kosher Hebrew goddesses - even if their first origin was, perhaps, foreign (1967:25-26, 34-52). He went as far as to state that Asherah was Yahweh's consort, and the pillar figurines were used to support this theory. Patai took it for granted that the naked female figurine belonged to ritualistic, or religious contexts (1967:30). The Late Bronze Age plaque figurines, or the Middle Bronze Age figurines from the temple at Nahariya, were explained as representations of Astarte. 8 On the other hand, pillar

D.3.3. General Allusions and Popular Literature Many allusions to the JPFs have been made during this phase of research, but only a selection is presented here. Wright (1957: 117f) claimed that archaeology confirmed the Biblical ban of idols, since figures of Yahweh were not found in Israelite sites. The female figurines that were found there in plenty are only mother goddesses, though less sensual then their Cana'anite predecessors. Wright perceived them to be evidence of large scale syncretism within the common people, verging on polytheism. The figurines were the property of the common people, who used them as "good-luck charms" for magical, rather then theological,

7 The first chapterof this book appeared originally in JNES 1965. For a short later summary, but without significant changes, cf Patai 1987:379. 8 The reason for identifying Astarte with the Nahariya figurines was their horns. Patai claimed that the homs were related to the place name "Ashtarot Kamayim" and henceto Astarte (ibid:56, nn. 24, 58-59, 98).

14

grouped as type N, with sub-type N.II defined as moulds of pillar figurines (ibid:314-316). Holland occasionally used the term Astarte for various sub-types within his A type (ibid:49, 62, 97, 102, 133, etc.).

figurines represent Asherah as a domestic goddess which also has an aspect of fertility. The figurines are not the large, wooden cult idols, but Patai saw no great differences between the two. The large quantities of pillar figurines indicates the extreme popularity that the Asherah had in all levels of Israelite society. This was perhaps due to the belief that Asherah helped in giving birth and encouraged fertility (patai 1967:32-35). Critical scrutiny would show that Patai's theory is simplified and lacks an understanding of the archaeological material. Patai quoted from other archaeologists without criticism (e.g., the view of Albright that the moulds were imported, Patai 1967:60). For some reason, the Asherah figurines were discussed in the chapter on the kingdom of Israel and not in relation to Judah. Nevertheless, Patai has influenced many of the later archaeologists (see below), despite the general popular, often even grandiose, tone of his book: "Is the Hebrew goddess dead or does she merely slumber, soon to awaken rejuvenated by her rest and reclaim the hearts of her sons and lovers?"?

Holland followed Albright's chronology, attributing type A figurines entirely to Iron Age II, until the 6th century Be (1975:16, 319). He did not discuss separately the date of each sub-type within group A, and accepted the chronology of various excavators, or amendments suggested by Kenyon to various levels. The one JPF from Beth Shemesh tomb 1 was defined as the earliest of its kind (ibid:30). Holland noted that his type B was not popular "in the heart" of the Israelite culture (ibid:319); its appearance at Megiddo and Samaria was ascribed to a large foreign population that supposedly lived in these Israelite cities. Even the material and finish of the figurines from Samaria are different from those in Judah (Holland 1975:163). The appearance of type B at Tel Gemmeh was explained as having an Egyptian, or Phoenician influence (ibid:319-320); although this is its homeland (together with the areas of Samaria and a few figurines from Transjordan, ibid:330f).

Worthy of note, and on a totally different scale, is an extensive work by Ucko (1968) dealing with prehistoric figurines from the Near East and the Aegean. I have mentioned this work here because of its theoretical importance. Ucko discussed varied explanations given to figurines which lack historical sources: mother-goddesses, dolls, concubines and magical figures (1968:409-414, 420423). He made extensive use of anthropological material (ibid:424fi) and criticized sharply the "mother-goddess" explanation (ibid:417-419). Ucko thought that in any assemblage of figurines, there are some types of figurines that can have more than one explanation; on the other hand, no one explanation can fit all the figurines in a given assemblage. It is logical, that the same figurines had several functions (ibid:426). Important also was the statement that figurines which have a similar outlook may have represented different figures (ibid:423-425).

Holland thought that type A was mainly Judean, but it appeared also a little in the north. Jerusalem seems to be its homeland (ibid). When discussing the separate types, Holland did connect directly some sub-types of A with Judah (1975:181, 183, 187, types AI, A.IV.e, AI.g, etc.). Furthermore, he quite often used the definition "Judean" in regard to different specific figurines (ibid: 105, 106). Thus, Judean figurines at Tel Gat [i.e., Tel Erani] imply that this was a Judean site (ibid:96). Moulds type N.II were also called Judean (ibid:324), but as there are almost no moulds, this conclusion must have been formulated on the basis of differences between the types of moulded heads. The archaeological context of the figurines was not really discussed, other then a general statement that they are found in various contexts (1975:325, 331). Holland thought that the figurines were deliberately mutilated, since whole vessels and broken figurines were found in the entrance to cave 1 in Jerusalem (ibid:330, 337-338). He believed that figurines from graves were mother-goddesses which served as burial gifts. Cave 1 in Jerusalem was a favissa (ibid:327329, following Kenyon). Horse figurines may relate to a sun cult (ibid:342). Even figurines from domestic houses are cultic (ibid:325); thus, the many figurines from Ashdod area D strengthen its definition as a cultic area (ibid:55, but this is rather a circular argument: one has first to prove the cultic nature of the figurines themselves!). Rarely, Holland made unwarranted generalizations, e.g., that the large quantity of pillar figurines at Tel Beit Mirsim shows the Israelite love of cult-idols, against which the Biblical prophets complained so much (ibid: 142). The more elongated face of type A.lV.f figurines is perhaps a hint about the ethnic origin of the settlers in the coastal plain (ibid: 189).

D.3.4. The Dissertation of Holland (1975) This monumental work is the most thorough study on figurines from Israel so far, and it marks the end of the present phase of research. Holland presented 2711 artifacts, of which ca. 1000 were not published earlier. This work remains unpublished, other than a short summary (Holland 1977, without significant changes from the dissertation). Holland separated the discussion into two parts: review by sites (1975:39-177) and review by types of figurines (ibid:178-318). This was followed by a short summary (ibid:319-346). Anthropomorphic figurines were divided into solid pillars (type A); hollow pillars (type B) and plaques (type C). 572 specimens were counted in type A (Holland 1975:319), including hand-made heads (type AI) and mould made heads (types A.II-AIX). Body fragments and heads without clear classification where gathered thereafter (types AX-AXIl, ibid: 194-197). Moulds were

A few matters impaired the extensive work of Holland. First, the cumbersome structure; although Holland's main aim was to give a full catalogue, there is none in his work. A

Is the tone, in a way, a retlection of the eventful year of publication - 1967?

9

15

reader interested in a specific figurine must recollect the material about it from various chapters in Holland's work. The type table (Holland 1975:20-36) is disconnected from the second volume, where only part of the figurines were fully described (mainly new, unpublished ones). Many details are still missing from Holland's work, especially for the many figurines from Kenyon's excavations in Jerusalem. So far, Holland's thesis is the main publication of these figurines (a few were published in the Jerusalem I and II volumes). Regrettably, Holland often did not give the loci or registration numbers of these figurines, which are now spread allover the world. 10

about Asherah. From the beginning, the basic assumption is that the JPFs represented the Asherah (Engle 1979:1-2). This identification was made earlier by Patai (1967, see II.3.3 above). For the Old Testament sources, Engle relied heavily on the work of Reed (cf. chap. 11.3.2 above). Engle stressed the principle that a common type is much more important for study than the various, "obscure" pieces, and therefore set severe rules for defining what he termed as "classical pillar figurines". This definition excluded the pillar types of figurines found at Megiddo (Engle 1979:9, II). Engle's classical type included most of Holland's types A II-AIX, 11 while all the other types of pillar figurines were defined as foreign (ibid:9). Engle excluded from the discussion at least 183 body fragments (i.e., Holland's types AX-AXI), claiming that these could not be classified since the heads were lacking. Holland's types AXII-AXVlI were also excluded by Engle as being irregular or miscellaneous. Even the pinched, hand-made heads (Holland's type AI) were omitted by Engle, on the pretense that they were too "featureless" for classification (Engle 1979:10). Nevertheless, Engle criticized the typology of Holland as artificial and suggested a typology of seven sub-types according to minor changes in the shapes of the eyes (ibid, but cf. already Kelso and Thorley, TBM III:140). Another type of pillar figurine was called "foreign" (type VIII) and ascribed to figurines from Phoenicia, Ammon, Moab and Philistia (Engle 1979:14-15).

A second major limitation is the typological scheme: Holland's type A included not only pillar figurines, but any solid figurine, even those with legs (AXIlI), sitting figures, peg figurines and even hollow, double-moulded figurines (Holland 1975: type AIV.g.2-3). This mixture prevented Holland from reaching clear conclusions about the date and the distribution of each sub-type. But the major limitation is the lack of a synthesis for the huge number of artifacts. Almost no general conclusions were offered (other than ibid, 319-325; 325-329). There was no statistic analysis (Holland is hardly to be blamed for this, as this would have been hard to achieve before the era of private computers). Only the major types (A, B, C) were discussed, but not the many subtypes; thus, for all the figurines of type A one can find only a few sentences in Holland's summary (1975:319-320). Only a few type A figurines from cave 1 were discussed in more detail, but even this was done briefly. What is the value of a very detailed typology, if it is not used for synthesis? For these reasons Holland's work, despite its wide scope and thoroughness, marks the end of a fruitful phase of research (rather than the beginning of a new phase).

Engle (1979:19) adopted Aharoni's Iron Age chronology, yet continued to accept an early date for Beth Shemesh tomb I, like Albright. Engle also dated figurines from level IV at Beer Sheba early (ibid:20), thus concluding that the beginning of the JPFs was around the late 10th or early 9th centuries BC. Most of the JPFs are from the 8th century BC, with gradual decline until the 6th century BC (evidence for such a decline, or explanations why it should have occurred were not given). Engle suggested that typological differences were related to chronology: type I may be early, while type V is late - but he accepted the dating of many sites without any criticism. He discussed the distribution of the figurines only briefly, but clearly associated types I-VII with Judah, since only 2 of the 147 "classical pillar figurines" were found outside Judah. Therefore, these were Judean figurines, while type VIII was foreign (Engle 1979: 16 and fig. 13).

11.4. 1975-1995, The Asherah Phase The last two decades have been very dynamic concerning the research of the JPFs. The prosperity of this research has much to do with the Asherah inscriptions found at the sites of Kh. el-Kom and Kuntillet 'Ajrud, and the growing interest in the study of the religion of Judah and Israel during the First Temple period.

The discussion of the contexts was also very limited (Engle 1979:27ft). Engle wanted to prove that the JPFs had religious function. He admitted that many figurines came from domestic contexts, and that a few figurines were found in public or industrial contexts (ibid:29-30). A dozen were found in tombs, and in his view this is at least a "quasireligious" context. Three other JPFs were found in favissa,

n.4.1. The Dissertation of Engle (1979) This work marks the new phase of research, both chronologically and thematically. The JPFs are discussed in the opening pages (despite the use of the word Israel in the general title of the work). Then Engle reviews the sources 10 The drawings and photographs in the photocopy of Holland's thesis are not always clear, and many figurines were not drawn or photographed. Thus, despite the correspondence with many institutions and the kind help of Prof. K. Prag, head of the Jerusalem project today, it is sometimes hard to identify figurines in Holland's work with the records kept by Museums and Institutions.

11 Holland (1975) had a total of 159 figurines of these types; Engle had a total of 147 "classical pillar figurines", including a dozen newfigurines published after 1975.

i.e., a religious context.12 Engle also tried to find a religious background for JPFs from cisterns, pools and silos, assuming that they had been thrown there deliberately. However, this deliberate throwing was claimed first because only heads had been found, and later because whole figurines had been found (cf. ibid 30-31). In explaining the figurines as Asherah, Engle suggested an analogy to Greece, where figurines seem to be small copies of large cultic statues (ibid:35). The situation in Greece is much more complicated than what he assumed to be (cr. Alroth 1988), and analogies cannot form decisive proof (see more about analogies in chapter IX below). In summary, Engle (1979:50-52) suggested that his classical pillar figurines represented Asherah, since she was the only serious candidate for identification. He even claimed that the logic should be turned around: instead of learning from the Old Testament about the JPFs, the JPFs can teach us about the identity of the Biblical Asherah. Engle (1979:62-63) also connected the Biblical plural form Asherim with the JPFs.13

represented Asherah? The Old Testament, regrettably, gives no evidence that relates Asherah with small clay figurines at all. Where is, then, the archaeological proof for this identification? Engle's efforts to attribute religious functions to JPFs found in cisterns, graves, etc. are feeble and unconvincing. Even if we adopt them, most of the JPFs still come from domestic contexts, lacking any clear religious, or cultic function. As a matter of fact, Engle simply adopted the old view that figurines were cultic artifacts, and just changed their title from Astarte to Asherah. True, this fits more the. date of the pillar figurines, but the proof for the identification is still lacking.

n.4.2. New Excavations An impressive number of important sites have been excavated during this phase of research. Many JPFs were found at Tel Ira, Tel Beer Sheba, Arad, Jerusalem, Ramot and other sites. Many of these figurines have not yet been published, but I was able to include them in this work through the kindness of the excavators. Among the publications, the Jerusalem volumes are important for an understanding of cave 1. The authors explained the cave as a phenomenon of popular religion: "this cave fits in with the general picture of popular religion in that period" (Jerusalem II:127, also 44, 48-50, 125ft). The female figurines were explained as representations of women who came to the cave seeking help during illness or birth; but also as magical objects (Jerusalem II:128; cf. recently Franken 1995). It is actually the bird figurines who are thought to have represented Asherah (Jerusalem II:128; for the pottery from the cave cf. Lagro and Noordhuizen 1987). Figurines from Mazar's excavation in Jerusalem were explained otherwise, as foreign cult. It was claimed that they have been deliberately mutilated by religious reformers (Nadelman 1989:123). Lastly, a group offigurines from the Kenyon's excavations have been republished as "new" (Amr 1988; but cr. Franken 1989 and app. 2: nos. 364,371,373, 385, 388, 389 [possibly], 411).

Engle no doubt contributed to our understanding by defining clearly a Judean type of pillar figurine, and by stressing the value of a standard type as the main subject of research, but, there are many drawbacks in Engle's work. It is mainly a Biblical study, and the JPFs were brought in as outside support for his theory about the Asherah. The figurines occupy a minor part of the work (Engle 1979:5-28), and are not discussed for their own sake. Engle did not check JPFs with his own eyes and admitted that only someone with direct access to the material could make a detailed typology (ibid:10). Nevertheless, he dismissed the detailed typology of Holland, who had far better direct access to the figurines. Holland's typology was rejected in favor of a new - though admittedly an arbitrary - one (Engle's own acknowledgment, 1979:13-14). A major set back is the exclusion of all the fragments of body-parts and hand-made heads, not to mention every other doubtful item. It is a very convenient method, but it left Engle with only a small portion of the whole corpus of figurines, up to the extent that one wonders whether the general conclusions can be considered valid. The so called foreign type was not studied closely, but presented like an unimportant leftover. The geographic discussion was simple, and Engle did not even raise the question of the relations between the JPFs and the borders of Judah. For example, he took the JPFs and the lmlk seal impressions to be contemporaneous and claimed that they fitted the evidence in the Old Testament - but the use of the JPFs began much earlier and continued well after the lmlk stamps, according to Engle's own dating (1979:24-26). The moulds (or their lack) were not discussed at all.

n.4.3. Collections, General Allusions and Popular Literature Regarding collections, I will mention only one example to show the problems involved. It concerns a large group of figurines offered for sale in Jerusalem's antiquity market. One part of this group was taken abroad, reaching the collections of a museum and was published, at least partially (Jeremias 1993; cf. below, App. 3:77-78). Other figurines of this group were bought by a rich Texan (thus complained Jeremias). Archaeology suffered a double damage: the figurines surely came to light as a result of robbery, inflicting much damage on the robbed site/s (such a large number of figurines are unlikely to be a "family inheritance", as often claimed by merchants). Furthermore, we do not know the archaeological origins (date, nature of context, site, etc.) and cannot rely upon anything told by antiquities dealers. Only the artifacts remained, devoid of any context.

The main problem about Engle's work is, however, different. Where is the basis for the main argument that the JPFs 12 Only because Engle accepted the definition of Jerusalem cave 1 as a ''favissa'', and the same for a ''favissa'' in Aharoni's excavations at Lachish. 13 His attitude towards the Of verses is far from being critical, e.g., his tendency to accept without questioning the versions in Chronicles (ibid:63, 68-69).

16

17

This criticism should not be seen as general disaproval of the quality of publications of such finds - these can be valuable and one good example was offered by SupinskaL~vset (1976; 1978; on the difficulties of studying figurines without context see Bailey 1994:323; for the possibility to identify modern forgery of figurines see Moorey 1994).

208; 1990:166) dated the pillar figurines to the 8th-7th centuries BC. According to his view, they functioned within domestic fertility cult, related to Astarte or Asherah (1990:191). Often, a group of several figurines is found together. The figurines have been deliberately mutilated, perhaps in relation to Josiah's reform or to the activity of the Deuteronomistic school. Barkay also suggested that the hand-made heads were made in the 7th century BC, and are later than the moulded heads (1990:192).

Many studies during this phase of research examined the JPFs. Ahlstrom believed that the JPFs were religious objects, casting doubts on the picture of "pure", monotheistic Yahwehism. Ahlstrom was one of the few scholars who warned that not all the figurines belonged to popular religion and as something opposed to the official cult. This was based on the fact that some figurines had been found in the royal palace of Ramat Rabel (1984:136; 1991:129; cf. already 1963:51-54). In any case, our ability to separate popular from official religion is very limited (Ahlstrom 1982:83; cf. 1984:18; 1991:127-129). Ahlstrom accepted the identification of the JPFs with Asherah and explained the animal figurines as representations of Yahweh or Ba'al. He even claimed that the figurines and other archaeological finds "can correct the picture of the religion which has been presented by the Old Testament writers" (Ahlstrom 1984:135), since the Old Testament "has turned things virtually upside down" (ibid:138). Unfortunately, he did not differentiate between the Judean figurines and other types, e.g., those from Samaria or Megiddo (ibid:136). It also seems that he did not fully grasp the limitations of archaeology, thus his "explicitly archaeological approach" is not a very profound one. For example, one mouse figurine led him to the conclusion "this mouse figurine may indicate that the cult of Beth Shemesh may have been influenced by the Philistines" (Ahlstrom 1984:121). One head of a horse from Hazor "indicates that the religion of Israel during the time of Omri and Ahab included sun worship" (Ahlstrom 1984:127). To derive such general conclusions from so few, humble and unclear archaeological finds can only be termed speculative - if not worse. 14

Briend called the figurines naked idols of a goddess, and related them to fertility cult. He claimed that they cast doubts in regard to the depth of the belief in Yahweh among the common population (Briend 1992:37-38). Whitt just echoed Ahlstrom's and Dever's opinions: "Archeologists commonly identify the naked goddess with a fertility goddess, that is, Asherah ... therefore it is reasonable that the symbols of horses, bulls and naked women, so common in Jerusalem, are the symbols of Yahweh and his mate, the goddess Asherah (=Anat =Astarte)" (Whitt 1992: 48; on Dever see chap. 11.4.6 below). Haran (1992:331) tried to identify the Biblical queen of heaven with Mesopotamian Ishtar, and wrote that: "Some say that in the land of Israel this name [queen of heaven] was transferred to the Cana'anite comparison of Ishtar, whose figurines were found in plenty in archaeological excavations". For Bloch-Smith, the pillar figurines may have represented Asherah, but also perhaps teraphim, or "mother of generation" whose breasts gave milk to babies in the family (1992:218f, following Bird, for which see chap. 11.4.9 below). Tigai thought that the figurines were not goddesses but magical figurines, and that they did not imply polytheism. The evidence for this is the lack of theophoric names of goddesses from late Iron Age Judah (Tigai 1986:91f, 1987:192f, n.116). It is doubtful, though, if one can rely so much on the onomastic evidence, especially as it is negative in character. Hestrin (1991:57) saw the pillar body of the pillar - figurines as a symbol of the tree trunk of Asherah, and the breasts as a symbol of life and nurture given by the mother goddess. At the same time, the pillar figurines belonged to popular cult. Coogan (1987:119) explained the figurines as companions to the national male god, but as part of a popular religion (without mentioning the specific names of any goddess). Fritz (1994: 163-5) made a well balanced summary, seeing the pillar figurines as cultic, but without stating if they were goddesses or amulets. Miller (1986:245) thought that the figurines were goddesses, but not Asherah. For other allusions to the JPFs, without significant contributions, see Dearman 1992:89f; Halpren 1987:82ff, n.25; 1991:77f, n.I.

Helga Weippert described the pillar figurines briefly and cautiously. She thought that they were part of an assemblage, which included miniature models of furniture. The meaning of Samaria locus E207 and Jerusalem cave 1 are not clear, but perhaps from the temple at Sarepta one can suggest a connection of the figurines with cult (Weippert 1988:629-631). In a later criticism of Keel and Uehlinger, Weippert (1994:22, 27) accepted their dating for these figurines to the lOth century BC and later (for Keel and Uehlinger see chap. 11.4.7 below). However, Weippert rejected the assumption that the pillar body is related to the Asherah. A. Mazar mentioned briefly the identification of the figurines with Astarte and the difference between figurines from Israel and from Judah (1990:501-502). Barkay (1985:

Some of the allusions to the JPFs are quite amusing. Mitchell (1988:73) defined a JPF figurine as "the sort of thing that could not have been in the hands of any faithful worshipper of Yahweh" and therefore the owner of the grave where this figurine was found was "a heretic", one of those condemned by the prophets. Pettey's thesis was greatly influenced by the work of Engle, though he acknowledged the fact that there is no direct proof for the

14 These are not isolated examples, but a general trend. Ahlstrom

(1984: 131) also claimed that the an-iconic standing-stones in the

temple of Arad represented Ba'al, Yahweh and Asherah (sic); and that two objects depicting lions from Tel Beit Mirsim indicated that there was a temple in that city (Ahlstrom 1984:131-2).

18

identification of the JPFs with Asherah (1985:218, 220). The trouble is that Pettey identified all kinds of "Asherah objects", from "Hathor" head-rests in Judean burials to plaque figurines and seals - without dealing with the JPFs at all. This system mixted the Judean Asherah (mentioned in sources from the first millennium BC) with archaeological finds from periods as early as the Middle Bronze age. Indeed, Pettey (1985:261) claimed that most of the "Asherah objects" were Cana'anite and only few belonged to the Iron Age II - a very strange conception. Kyle mentioned the figurines simultaneously using every possible term (Astarte figurines, heathen relics of gentiles, amulets in association with superstitious beliefs), except the possibility that they are part of a foreign cult of idols (since it is inconceivable that Jews made idols). Kyle (1977:76) was obviously more worried about the fact that "sometimes one is terrified to think that ancient Palestinian people were as superstitious as some modern Americans".

weder die Benutzung weiblicher Terrakotten noch ihre Verehrung bzw. die der sie reprasentierenden Gottheiten aus" (Hubner 1989:54). In a later article, Hubner (1992:123:fl) claimed that the Asherah was venerated in the temple of Apollo-Hylates in Kourion, since there was a circular structure with a sacred grove and "poles" there. But it is necessary to state that the date of this structure is late, and its meaning is open to various explanations. Moreover, by this time HUbner (1992: 128-129) had identified Asherah with the JPFs as well as with figurines of tambourine holders and motifs on seals. Hubner's attitude is perhaps close to that of Dever (see chap. 11.4.7 below); but for both the basic problem is the same: there is a lack of prooffor the identification of the JPFs with the Asherah. In one case Hubner (1992: fig.2) mentioned a unique figurine of the fourth century BC from Chitroi as evidence for a cultic dance around an "Asherah pole". It is a pity that he did not pay much attention to what Reed already had to say about the same object in 1949:

Many scholars followed Kenyon in relating horse-and-rider figurines with a sun-eult. This may be important in relation to the study of the JPFs, but I will not discuss it further here. For some recent contributions on this subject see Taylor 1993; 1994; Worschech 1992). In my opinion, the most precise and agreeable presentation of this subject was offered in an unpublished dissertation by Holloway (1992: 501-509).

"No inscription accompanies this scene, hence there is no justification for calling the tree an Asherah, except as one might call any representation of a tree an Asherah" (Reed 1949:4). Surprisingly, in a book about games, Hiibner presented a different picture, that the figurines represented both goddesses and children's toys (1993:92-97, fig. 46). It is almost impossible to separate these two functions, claimed Hiibner, since the uses of a cultic object and a toy are overlapping. One must question what the evidence is for the use of the JPFs as toys? Hiibner has no shred of proof for his theory, and the best he could manage was to bring in anthropological or historical analogies for the use of figurines as toys. This was done much earlier (cf. Ucko 1968), but cannot constitute a solution. 16

II.4.4. Hubner, Holladay and Wenning These three scholars produced papers dealing with the JPFs from varied viewpoints, which merit detailed discussion. Hubner (1989) formed very wide generalizations from a rather narrow data-base of only one JPF head, found on the surface at Tel Malhata in the Negev. He suggested that the JPFs had many functions. Basically they were objects of popular religion, but in graves they relate to burial cult and in houses to private piety (ibid:53 and n.53). The JPFs from the pool at Gibeon were broken in an iconoclastic action (ibid). Generally they may have represented female goddesses and been venerated as goddesses. The fact that they were meant to be seen from the front implies that they were idols of Gods ("GiJ"tterbilder'').15 It is hard to identify them with specific goddesses (ibid:54 and n.62), since the figurines were really "power figures" ("Kraftbilder''), not defined as specific goddesses. The figurines were among the most common cult remains and therefore very significant, since they shed clear light on the variety of religious levels in Israel and on the close relation of Yahweh to Asherah:

Totally different is Holladay's study (1987), a detailed review of cult in Iron Age Israel and Judah from an "explicitly archaeological" viewpoint. In the course of his study, Holladay discussed different cult objects, including stone altars, incense stands and clay figurines. His archaeological review was given an ambitious theoretical framework, the base of which lies the assumption that many different levels existed within ancient religions. Holladay separated an "established worship" from what he unfortunately termed as "tolerated nonconformist worship". This term is unfortunate because one immediately thinks about underground, or forbidden cult. The "nonconformist" cult was expressed in Jerusalem cave 1 and in Samaria locus E.207 since, in opposition to "established" cult-sites, these places were inconspicuous, found outside cities and included many small figurines (Holladay 1987:267-270, 274-275). In this way, Holladay related figurines with "nonconformist" cult. Later he made a statistical analysis of cult objects from

"Gleichzeitig werden sie ein deutlich Licht auf die Vielschichtligkeit der religiosen Verhaltnisse in einem Israel, in dem fUr den einen Landes - und Hauptgott Yahwe enge Beziehungen zur (s)einer '!rt bellegt sind". The figurines represented goddesses, and therefore have been banned by Yahwehism: "Die Verehrung Jahwes schloss

16 Only one "toy" is mentioned from Iron Age Judah (ibid: 94 n. 10), and it is not a JPF. One must also note that the form of the JPF head from Malhata is not typical to Judah, and it is perhaps not a JPF but a plaque - figurine (see app. 2: 103).

15 This reasoning I found hard to follow, or perhaps misunderstood it.

19

form an overwhelming part of the data base. His main conclusions are very problematic. What is the evidence that the JPFs are goddesses and not magical artifacts or figures of mortal beings? Why should the standing-rider figurines designate a god? It is much more probable that the difference in the types of the horse-and-rider figurines is only stylistic: when a rider has a pillar-base, he cannot be depicted as sitting! Furthermore, the standing riders held the neck of the horse, unlike gods. Wenning claimed that this was done only to support the riders during firing, and that these supports (which are not real hands) were broken on purpose after firing. This is a very unusual idea, which does not seem likely. If fact, the riders hold reigns, and the extension of the hands to the horse's neck is only a convention of the potters (cf. Tatton-Brown and Crouwel 1992:291). Wenning also thought that the "bird" handmade heads were made in order to avoid full anthropomorphic representation, thus suggesting that these were not mortal beings but gods. Again, there is no proof for such a theory (cf. a similar idea for Cypriote figurines, Orphanides 1990:48, 50ff, but lacking evidence). Si~lar hand-made heads are very common in the whole ancient Near East, and it seems that they are only a simple, easy (though schematic) way of portraying human heads.

four sites. His conclusions in regard to the figurines were that they usually appeared in domestic quarters (ibid:276), one in each house. They were related to small "house shrines", but represented a goddess, and the only possible identification was with Asherah (ibid:278). This identification did not prevent Holladay from also calling the figurines nurturing goddesses, suggesting that mainly women indulged in this cult and defining the whole phenomenon under the term "popular religion", e.g., something different than the official cult that, in his view, was an-iconic (Holladay 1987:278-281). The importance of Holladay's study is that it raised questions and gave a contextual analysis, though not a very thorough one and only for four sites. The conclusions were perhaps too hastily reached, and the theoretical framework is cumbersome; it seems to have been attached to the evidence post factum. The separation of the two religious levels is plausible in itself, but problematic in regard to the figurines: why should these be termed "nonconformist", if they are found in so many living houses? Although Holladay referred to the important theoretical study of Voigt (1983, cf. chap. 11.4.5 below), it seems that he did not apply much of her work to his study.

Most speculative is Wenning's explanation of the two figurines from Beth Shemesh tomb 5 as a heavenly pair: ~e absurdity of this approach is best understood by accepting ~t for a minute. If this was a heavenly pair, and the goddess IS Asherah than surely the god must be Yahweh (in Judah). But isn'tit surprising that only one pair was found in one grave, among 336 graves known to Wenning, and 854 JPFs known today? Were the Judeans so atheistic, that they avoided putting representations of their main gods in their burials? What is the evidence that the figurines from Beth Shemesh tomb 5 constitute a pair? It is a family tomb, with many burials over a period of a few generations at least. There is no evidence at all that these two figurines were put together, side by side. Furthermore, if the horse-and-rider is the main male god, it is somewhat surprising that his figure is smaller then the female Asherah figurines: usually, the size is an indication of importance in ancient art, and it is unlikely that the Asherah was more important than Yahweh (for criticism cf. also Keel and Uehlinger 1992:392).

Altogether different is the study of Wenning (1991), who dealt only with JPFs from burials (this was a secondary product of his larger research about burials). The custom of putting JPFs in burials was not compulsory, since only 23 of ca. 336 Judean burials contained JPFs (Wenning 1991:89). Usually there was one JPF per family grave. Jerusalem cave 1 and Samaria E207 are not graves, and thus were not discussed (ibid: 90, n.l). Some pillar-figurines were found whole, thus probably the rest were not broken deliberately. Wenning (1991:91) claimed that the Beth Shemesh burials indicated that the JPFs were not icons, i.e., put in the grave as venerated figures; nor were they votive objects, toys or representations of human beings. The figurines represented a nurturing goddess, with stress on nudity and sexuality, but not fertility and birth (since the lower body is not portrayed). They are, in his view, "Segensbild", which may be identified with the Biblical Asherah.

An innovation by Wenning was the separation of the horseand-rider figurines into two types. The first was a sittingrider type which was, in his view, a human figure, while the second was a standing-rider type, which represented a god. This god has only pinched face, thus a full anthropomorphic representation was avoided. Two figurines were found in tomb 5 at Beth Shemesh, one JPF and one standing-rider figurine, and Wenning claimed that the two were a god and a goddess, perhaps a heavenly pair ("Gottes Paar"). However, at the last moment Wenning (1991:96-97) declined from naming them with the specific names of Asherah and Yahweh, and wrote that the god may also have been a general sky- or sun-god ("Himmelsherr" or ~~).

11.4.5. Theoretical Studies and the work of , M. Voigt (1983) Some studies about figurines are important to us for their theoretical value (cf. the work of Ucko, mentioned earlier), even though they do not deal directly with the JPFs. ~or example Fowler (1985:343) claimed that not every figurine was a g~ddess, thus the places where fi~nes were !ound were not necessarily cultic places. To Illustrate this, he provided evidence of figurines functioning as toys or magical objects. Fowler (1985:335) cautioned. that "the truth is we simply do not know what these figurines were, nor, for that matter, what purpose they might have served." His conclusion was similar: "archaeology has not thrown light whatever [sic] upon the purpose and function of any

Wenning's study is highly interesting, but very speculative. He did not consult the main work on the JPFs (Wenning 1991:96 n.2), that is, the study by Holland (1975). Wenning dismissed all the JPFs that were not from burials - yet these

20

Palestinian figurine supposedly of a deity, nor has it demonstrated beyond doubt the latter's identity" (ibid:343). There is truth in this, but the conclusion that figurines are not necessarily sacred is not very new.

Many other studies of figurines can contribute to our understanding, even when dealing with Minoan, Cypriot or Bengali figurines (e.g., Pilali-Papasteriou 1989; CarlessHulin 1989; Bhattacharya 1989).18. Theoretical studies of symbols and iconography may also be useful (Skorupski 1976:116-124; Morris 1987:218-234; Kippenberg 1985-6; Gudison 1989; Carless-Hulin 1989; Duff, Clark and Chadderdon 1992). However, the explanation of visual forms as a symbolic system is possible only when there is enough "external evidence", i.e., historical or ethnographic sources, to help to break the symbolic code (Kippenberg 1985-6:vii; for a theoretical study of archaeology and cult cf. Renfrew 1985; also Garwood et.al. 1991; on fertility cult in the Mediterranean see Bonnano 1986).19

A highly important study was made by Voigt (1983) in regard to prehistoric figurines from the site of Hajj Firuz Tepe in Iran, and it merits a careful review. Voigt classified the functions of small figurines, which are known from ethnographic sources, as follows: 1. Cult figures, representing supernatural entities, usually as their symbols or cultic objects. 2. Magic vehicles, related with rituals of fertility, birth, protection from evil spirits, damaging enemies etc. Voigt warned (1983: 186 and n.l) that magic and religion cannot be separated clearly, and that it is wrong to create a dichotomy between the religious and the "secular" domains. 3. Didactic or educational figures, for teaching values or sexual facts during initiation rites and other ceremonies. 4. Children's toys, used for amusement. 5. Representation of deceased people, people related to the deceased and animals, which served as burial furniture (Voigt 1983:186). Burials had not been discovered in Hajj Firuz Tepe, so Voigt did not discuss this category.

11.4.6. The Archaeological Approach of W. G. Dever In an early book, Paul and Dever (1977:267-271) barely mentioned the small anthropological figurines ("images"), and did not relate them at all to the Asherah. But following the discovery of the inscriptions from Kh. el-Kom and Kuntillet 'Ajrud, Dever became one of the "Asherah priests" and an opposite pole to the negative opinions of Fowler (chap. 11.4.5 above). For Dever, archaeology is omnipotent and the key to solving Biblical issues. Archaeology, in his view, proves that there was an Asherah cult in Israel, sinc~ the figure playing the lyre in the Kuntillet 'Ajrud pithoi drawings is the Asherah (Dever 1982:38f;. 1984:23-24). The coiffure of this figure is identical-to that of the SyroPalestinian Astarte figurines of the 9th-8th centuries BC (Dever 1982:3~). The last are "no doubt" a representation of the mother-goddess, thus the coiffure is a proof that we are dealing with a religious scene - and with a goddess.

The use of figurines from categories 1-2 is well known from Mesopotamia. Categories 3-4 are known only from modern ethnographic evidence, but were probably used in ancient times as well (Voigt 19lB~187). Voigt surveyed-the work of Ucko (1968), and outlined the difficulty in distinguishing between the categories of function in cases where there are no written sources relating to ancient figurines. She suggested that some attributes might help to determine the function of a figurine, among them are patterns and degrees of wear, points of damage, breakage patterns, evidence of burning, disposal patterns, types of archaeological contexts, and relations to other artifacts (Voigt 1983:191-193). Figure 1 (below) shows the attributes according to categories of function, as suggested by Voigt (1983: table 29).

I

Dever (1982:39) claimed that Asherah was related also to artifacts representing a women on a horse, and that she was a mixed Cana'anite goddess: Asherah-Anat-Astarte. The merging of the goddesses was taken from former studies:

Of course, the difficulties of defining the function of a

"Albright, Cross, Stadel mann and many other commentators have long since pointed out an extraordinary, almost bewildering fluidity in the conception of many Northwestern Semitic deities, seen in the overlap in their roles, their tendency to coalesce and split off, and even their ability to combine opposites" (Dever 1984:28).

figurine are enormous. This is obvious if a list of clear, different attributions between the categories of function is made: there are very few clear cut attributes.l? For example, figurines which show exaggerated sexual attributes might represent fertility goddesses or ritual vehicles, but also figurines used for initiation rites and even children's toys (Voigt 1983:189). Similar forms may be used for various functions in the same society (ibid: 191).

18 For example, Bhattacharya (1989) dealt with the cult of the snake Goddess Manasha. This cult changes from area to area, and may lack an iconic figure of the goddess itself. Votive figurines of horses and elephants may be used. It seems that in this case an iconographic, or stylistic analyses would hardly have helped to find the connection between these figurines and the snake goddess (known from written sources and ethnographic evidence).

The discussion of Voigt is remarkable. Although she was not able to suggest clear answers for many problems, she has made a significant contribution by raising issues and by being conscious of the implied difficulties. It is a wonder that Voigt's study has not been used thoroughly in regard to the research of the JPFs, despite its importance.

19 If the figurines represented gods, questions about the Israelite Monotheism and the Biblical ban of idols are likely to rise. On these subjects see Haag 1985; Dohmen 1985; Lemche 1992; Mettinger 1994; Dietrich 1994.

17 If one takes table 28 of Voigt and removes the similar attributes between the categories, very few differences would be left.

21

Dever probably paid no attention to what Reed (1949:4) had to say about such methods of study: "It is apparent that the pictographic material relating with the subject of the Asherah can be helpful only after the nature and the function of the word have been established by a critical study of the epigraphic and literary evidence available".

11.4.7. The "Iconographic School":

According to the Kuntillet- 'Ajrud inscriptions, Dever had no hesitation in identifying the figurines as Asherahfigurines, but because of so-called overlapping between the all Cana'anite goddesses, the figurines could have represented Anat and Astarte at the same time. Dever rejected, though, the attribution of the Jerusalem cave 1 figurines to heathens only, and suggested that: "it is tempting to see in these figurines dramatic evidence of the background of reforms such as that of king Josiah" (Dever 1990:159).

Asherah is also understood by Dever as part of popular religion, and as syncretism; this is supposedly documented by archaeology, which gives a realistic and balanced picture of religion in ancient Israel (Dever 1982:39). Asherah was a mother-goddess in the 8th-7th centuries BC, while earlier she was related with the cult of the "Lion-Lady". Her function as a goddess was proved by the large number of Israelite fertility figurines: "Hundreds of female terracottas of the so-called "Astarte" (more accurately, "Asherah") type have been found, mostly Judean pillar-base figurines" (Dever 1983:573). The figurines were not just the goddess Asherah, but functioned as talismans to aid conception and childbirth. We "desperately need a current and systematic treatment of all the data on Late Bronze and Iron Age figurines," stated Dever (1983:579, n. 11; cf. Dever 1982:40). One should remember, though, that only a few years had passed since Holland's extensive Ph.D., which was probably not consulted in detail by Dever.

In the following publications, the tone became even more boastful. It seems that Dever had convinced himself completely. Asherah was related by him to almost everything, from the Ta'anakh cult stand, to doves, to plaque figurines of playing women, to the lyre player of Kuntillet 'Ajrud. There were hundreds of Asherah figurines in small household shrines already during the Iron Age I period (Dever 1991:110f, 112). Asherah is called the great Cana'anite mother-goddess, and all the goddesses are the same: Anat, Asherah, Astarte, Elat, Kudshu (Dever 1994:121f). For Dever (1994:122), "There is simply no way around it: these are Asherah figurines". Above all, Dever even suggested that the small bronze lion found at Arad is, "no doubt, an Asherah symbol" (1994:109; cf. 1991:111). Unfortunately, this artifact is not a figurine but an Assyrian type of scale-weight, well known from Assyria (and from other regions). This was noted by Bron and Lemaire (1983:765, n. 20), followed by many scholars (Holladay 1987:257, and table 2; Rose 1975:192; Barkay 1990:190; KIetter 1991:132). This artifact has no obvious relation to the Asherah (cf. Rose 1975:189), there is nothing else which is surely related with the Asherah in the temple of Arad, and we do not know the circumstances in which this weight reached the temple. Obviously, it is necessary to refer the readers, and Dever, once again to the appropriate warnings of Reed (1949, cf. 11.3.2 above).

Dever (1990) was even more resolved in his popular book, where chapter four is titled "Archaeology reconstructs the lost background of the Israelite cult". On the one hand, "in Israelite agricultural villages, the modeling of common farm animals in clay was probably a natural impulse [sic], so not all of the zoomorphic figurines need be interpreted culticully" (Dever 1990:157).20 On the other hand, the anthropomorphic Iron Age figurines represented a "dea nutrix", similar to the former Bronze Age plaque figurines.-! they adopted motifs from the Cana'anite cult of a mother-goddess. They were not something forbidden, because they may have been used in conception, birth and breast-feeding rituals. In opposition to this, we do not find male figurines, according to the Biblical second commandment. Through a new kind of mathematics, Dever somehow discovered thousands of pillar figurines:

Dever's attitude creates a confused mixture, which includes every possible term and definition for the figurines at the same time: mother-goddess, nurturinggoddess, lion-lady, Asherah (which is also Anat-AstarteElat-and Kudshu), a phenomenon of popular religion, and fertility cult (against pasting such attributions to Asherah see Wiggins 1991:383). This way, the Aherah becomes a complete "mischwesen, " which can include practically everything. Once Dever used the pillar figurines in order to explain the figure on the Kuntilled 'Ajrud pithoi (argued by the similarity of the coiffure and pre-supposing that the figurines represented goddesses); but later the figurines were explained by the Kuntillet 'Ajrud figure (cf. Dever 1982:38 vs. Dever 1990:157-159). A much more careful attitude to the Kuntillet 'Ajrud material is needed (see Beck 1982; also Hadley 1994:274f). The identification of the figurines with Asherah was suggested much earlier, and much more clearly (Engle, Patai and others, see above). Perhaps this identification "is correct, but Dever fails to provide the evidence.

"Thousands of these terra-cottas have been found at Israelite sites" (1990: 157); "...the pillar base, or so-called Astarte figurines ...that are prevalent throughout Israel and Judah... As many as 3,000 or more are now known, some 2,000 from Jerusalem alone ..." (1994:121).

20 This is just a smallexample of carelessness. Why "villages"? Are Jerusalem, Tell e-Nasbeh or Lachish, where many JPFs and animal figurines were found, villages? Furthermore, what exactly is a "natural impulse", and why must such a "natural impulse" be associated with a non-cultic figurine? 21 Indeed, the sameexplanation was suggested for bothkinds of figurines (Dever1987:2261).

22

Winter, Keel and Uehlinger

1

I have grouped together in this section a line of studies, which stress iconography as the main theme. The largescale work ofUrs Winter (1983) about the iconography of women and goddesses in the ancient Near East is prominent among these studies. This book actually focuses on understanding the Old Testament material, and it is a common approach for many of the iconographic studies. Often, they do not aim at explaining iconographic material per se, but discuss it in order to solve Biblical, or theological, problems. Winter (1983:93-134) reviewed the appearances of a "naked goddess" on cylinders seals (I will not deal with these) and figurines. He (1983:95) believed that figurines usually represented goddesses: "meine vermutung geht... dass es sich in der Mehrzahl den Fiille um Gottinen handelt". The main types of figurines were classified by the position of their arms (Winter 1983:96-97). The pillar type was seen as common to the land of Israel during the lOth-6th centuries, but especially during the 8th-7th centuries BC (ibid:107-109). Its origin lies perhaps in Cyprus, but it is actually a unique Palestinian type (ibid:124). The moulds may have been foreign (phoenician? - ibid:127). Winter claimed that the figurines were related to women: "Ohne weiteres darf man annehmen, das diese vor allem fUr die hier lebenden Frauen eine besondere Function gehabt haben miissen" (Winter 1983:127). This is not very convincing: what is the evidence that relates the figurines with female burials ("Frauengra"bem")? Every tomb contained mass-burials, and there is no such evidence, unfortunately. Winter rejected the general explanations of mothergoddesses or fertility-figurines, since a more precise definition is possible. Following the excavators of Tel enNasbeh, where figurines were found in domestic buildings, Winter (1983: 131) suggested that they were domestic icons or amulets, that helped to make the atmosphere of the house erotic. In other cases, figurines were given to a temple as ex voto, or were burial gifts to ensure female magic (ibid: BOt). The figurines belonged to popular religion, but were not opposed to the official religion: "Fiir den Kontext der israelitischen Religion ist wichtig, dass solche Figiirchen, die ihren 'Sitz im Leben' in der Privatfrdmmigkeit hatten, den offizielen JHWHKult nicht zum vomeherein getahrdeten" (Winter 1983:131t). Winter found the proof that the JPFs were goddesses in the figure of the naked goddess on Syrian cylinder-seals, despite the differences in time, materials and geographical areas: "...es sich bei den Figiirchen um aus der Privatfrdmmigkeit erwachsene Gotterdarstellungen handelt. Das wird durch die Siegel bestatigt" (Winter 1983:192, cf. ibid: 134).

The figure on the seals is a goddess, since she sometimes appears with a horned cap, or standing on animals, or "accompanied by wings and a god (though these attributes are known from a small percentage of the naked goddess seals). Winter concluded that the figurines represented not toys, but a goddess, that originated in private religion. Even if a few figurines represented playing, or praying women, these were exceptions (Winter 1983:192t). It is impossible to identify the goddess, but Winter called her "the Syrian goddess" - a central goddess in the pantheon, paredos to Hadad and Amurru, a defending, praying and inter-mediating goddess (Winter 1983:193-196). She was also a sky goddess, whose nakedness symbolized female power.22 The importance of Winter's study lies in its wide background, but this is also its major deficiency (as criticized already by Lipinski 1986; Van den-Toom 1986). Can we compare phenomena that are so different? Winter compiled second millennium seals from Syria with figurines and written evidence from first millennium BC Israel. He took the whole Near East as one unified, cultural entity. However, not all the figurines are necessarily goddesses and their mixing into a "Syrian goddess" is problematic. There is a strong opposite view, which calls for the use of inner, contemporaneous evidence only, rather than making analogies to other places, times and cultures (Renfrew 1985; Carless-Hulin 1989:95. Against the theory of the naked goddess see Bretschneider 1991:24; also Wiggins 1991). Regarding the JPFs specifically, Winter made no new discoveries and relied on rather old literature. He did not use Holland's thesis, and referred very briefly to Engle (Winter 1983:97, 108 n.68). Keel and Uehlinger (1992) took the iconographic theory to its extreme. Keel formulated the main principles much earlier (Keel 1972). The study of the OT had exhausted itself and reached a dead end, it being dependent on problematic OT sources: "Da die biblischen Texte immer dieselben bleiben... entartet die Diskussion manchmal zur repetition von Hingst Geschriebenem, von Schulmeinungen und Pauschalthesen" (Keel and Uehlinger 1992:,0). The study of iconography was neglected, but it could produce a rich source of information. Iconography is superior to written sources, because it is authentic and immediately yielding: "Iconography compels us to see through the eyes of the ancient Near East" (Keel 1972:8; cf. Keel and Uehlinger 1992:,0). This is problematic, since there is no direct, "innocent eye" and the beholder's part is always crucial: "what we see depends on our interpretation" (Wittgenstein quoted in: Kippenberg 1985-6:vii). From the very beginning, the aim of Keel was not an iconographic study per-se, but to enlighten OT and historical sources through iconographic studies. Keel's school of thought has 22 Regarding the Biblical Asherah, Winter took her to be a goddess who was suppressed by Yahwehism and later reinstalled (for more references aboutthe Asherah, see chapter X below).

anu . stamps.

They ""tbought that the seal portrayed a goddes$beside a branch, thus being the "vegetation goddess" which continues the Middle Bronze Age traditions. A limestone statuette from Megiddo, or Ammonite statues, are mixed up in the discussion without any reserve. The full breasts of the pillar figurines implied an aspect of a nurturing goddess (Keel and Uehlinger 1992:380). This is further proved by the woman and child figurine from Tel Beth Mirsim (ibid:381; here app. 2:232.).24

~;wuable;Lwill

only; on-aspeetswmch are relevant to the pillar·figurines, discussed in detail in a recent monograph by Keel and Uehlinger (1992). The line of argument of Keel and Uehlinger was as follows:

A. Dove figurines of Iron Age II in Palestine indicate an attribute of "the goddess" (meaning a goddesses in a sense of "the mother goddess", or "the naked goddess" of Urs Winter).

Keel and Uehlinger (1992: #195) saw the pillar figurines as a representation of Asherah. That they were goddesses was concluded from the identification of dove figurines with a goddess (see above). It was Asherah, because in Iron Age Judah she was the only possible candidate. The figurines are not Asherim, which were cult objects in temples. The figurines were part of a general tendency towards iconic representation in the 7th century, versus an earlier an-iconism (1992:384f; but cf. the Hebrew seals, mostly of the 7th century, which are an-iconic: Sass 1993). In other areas, the pillar figurines are Astartes (1992:385).

B. The evidence for A is that dove-figurines were found in the Middle Bronze Age temples of Nahariya and Megiddo. These doves figurines represented "the messengers of love between the god and the goddess".

C. The evidence for the last interpretation was described in an earlier work (Keel 1977:143-168): in some ancient Syrian seals there is a scene of a dove between a god and a goddess (cf. Keel and Uehlinger 1992:36, 370). In this way, Iron Age dove figurines were related to Middle Bronze age figurines, and then to Syrian cylinder seals, though, claimed Keel and Uehlinger (1992:26, 370), the dove figurines were not found together with the female pillar figurines of the goddess, and thus the dove figurines were only attributes or substitutes for the goddess.

A detailed criticism of the methods of Keel and Uehlinger deserves a whole monograph (cf. Weippert, H. 1994; Caquot 1994). In regard to the JPFs, there are many limitations in their theory, some of which have already been mentioned above (I will discuss further limitations in the following chapters). The work of Schroer also belongs to the iconographic school, but she accepted Winter's conclusions about the JPFs and discussed them very briefly (1987: 45 n.120; 343f n.189; 387 n.170). Schroer thought that the Old Testament term "om7N" (god) encompassed all human and animal representations, including the small clay figurines: "Unter die Pauschalbezeichnung om~:1N nicht nur plastische Darstellungen mannlicher Gottheiten, sondern z.B. auch all die weiblichen Terrakottafiguren, die bei ausgrabungen in Israel/Palastina in so engen Mengen gefunden wurden, fallen" (Schroer 1987:343fand n.189-190).

Regarding the pillar figurines, Keel and Uehlinger did not consult the thesis of Holland (Keel and Uehlinger 1992: n.388) but called for a new catalogue: "Die Publikation eines Katalogs aller Belege ist ein dringendes Desiderat" (ibid:374). Reflecting on the scarcity of the moulds, they suggested that these were used in extra-mural potter's workshops (ibid:372·374; against see evidence for workshops in Wood.1990:33f, fig. 16). They believed that the heads were imported and only the bodies made locally at each site (following Albright). They also claimed that heads were used separately as whole artifacts (ibid:374), but this claim is baseless.P Keel and Uehlinger dated the figurines from the end of the 8th to the 7th century BC, but included figurines from Northern Israel within the corpus. Only one figurine was used at each house or burial (1992:376). Therefore, these were household icons, related to private, or family, religion - but not to a popular religion of the lower social strata only (ibid, and n. 345). There is a time gap between the PFs and the earlier plaque figurines, thus the origins of the PFs lies elsewhere, perhaps in Assyria or Phoenicia (ibid:376, but without corroborating evidence).

II.4.8. Other Figurines and the Neighboring Areas At present we have quite a large quantity of data about different types of clay figurines, which were found in areas neighboring Judah. This situation did not exist 20 or 30 years ago, so that now we are in a better position to judge possible comparisons, or differences between these figurines and the JPFs.

The identification of the PFs was strengthened by a scaraboid seal from Lachish (Keel and Uehlinger 1992:376·378, fig. 323). Keel and Uehlinger were not worried about the fact that this seal was unstratified and had no other comparison among Hebrew Iron Age seals

Transjordan. We have a D.Phil. by Amr (1980), but it is a very problematic study. Otherwise, our knowledge is

new work on magic in Egypt (Ritner 1992; 1993; cf. chap.

still limited (lsserlin 1976; Dornemann 1983:129-137; Beck 1995; Bienkowski 1991b).25

IX below). From all these areas, figurines are found that are either contemporary or earlier than the JPFs. Some later figurines are important to us because of implied theoretical aspects. Figurines from various periods can be used for analogies, or for the study of the origin and continuation of motifs. For Example, the Late Bronze age plaque-figurines (Ben Arieh 1983; Beck 1986; Conrad 1985; Tadmor, M. 1982), or the Persian period figurines (Stern 1973:159-181; Linder 1986; Stern 1989).

Phoenicia. Figurines are now better known through excavations at Sarepta (pritchard 1988:31-71), Tel Keisan (Keisan 1:331-335) and Achzib (partly unpublished). We also have many collections and a few syntheses (Culican 1969; 1975~; Ganzman et. al. 1987; Gubel 1982; 1986; 1991; in general see Ward 1994). Philistia. There have been important new excavations in. the southern coastal plain, at Tel Shera, Tel Harer, Rukeish, Ekron, Ashkelon, etc. Their publication will no doubt enhance our -understanding greatly. (for 'some preliminary reports see Oren'1986; 1991; 1993; Dothan' and Gitin 1987; Gitin 1989; 1993; 19'95).

II.4.9. Gender and Feminist Approaches

Cyprus. Cyprus is the richest area in regard to clay figurines (also large clay statues). There is a wide range of studies on Cypriot figurines, pottery workshops and relations with other areas (Beer 1991; Bisi 1979; 1989; 1991; Carless-Hulin 1989; 1989b; Caubet 1991; 1992; Connely 1989; Karageorghis 1977; 1987; Meerschaert 1991; Sophocleous 1985; S~rensen 1991; Vandenabeele 1986; Yon and Caubet 1988; Uhlenbrock 1993). There are interesting assemblages of figurines in Cyprus already in the Chalcolithic period (Goring 1991; A-Campo 1994). A very extensive work is being made by Karageorghis (1993; 1993; 1994; unfortunately, the volume about Smal figurines of the 7th-6th centuries BC is currently i . press).

" 1

The Aegean world and Greece. Varied and rich literature exists on figurines from this area (Ammerman 1991; Haag 1981; Higgins 1969; Nicholls 1952; 1970; Pilali-Papasteriou 1989; Price 1978; Romano 1988). The publication of the Philakopy Temple is important from a theoretical point of view (Renfrew 1985:1-25, 417419). For naked female figurines there is now a new monograph by Bohm (1990; for review see Hermary 1992). A very interesting work deals with the placing of small figurines in Greek temples and their relation with the large cult statues (Alroth 1988; 1989; cf. Van-Straten 1992).

Often, the feminist literature takes it for granted that the pillar figurines represented Asherah, other goddesses or teraphim (TeubalI984:91-93; for the teraphim see Loretz 1992), and that they were related specifically to women (for which there is no decisive archaeological proof). For example, Gadon (1989: 172ff, fig.96) sawall figurines as goddesses and pillar figurines as Asherah, which testifies to the existence of a very important Hebrew goddess. Often, the archaeological contribution of these studies is limited, as they tend to adopt archaeological knowledge second hand.

Syria - Mesopotamia. There is also a very rich source for small figurines here (Badre 1980; Barrelet 1968; Blocher 1987; Geller 1989; Colbow 1991; Spycket 1992). For us, the literature about the magical use bt figurines in this area is important (Black and Green 1992; Green 1983; 1994; Wiggermann 1992; discussed in chap. IX below).

Studies of gender can be important from a theoretical point of view, by suggesting new insights into subjects such as the physical place and gender (Ardener 1993, and esp. the study of Hirschon there), or dress and gender

Egypt. Egyptian figurines are known mainly from graves (Noblecourt 1953), but also from. houses and Temples. The assemblage at the Gebel el-Zeit temple is., especially interesting (Gamer-Wallert , 1992; Wilford 1993; Pinch 1983; 1993:198-226). Highly important is

a

23 The only evidence for this was one head with a suspension (?) hole from Hazor. This is an exception, and furthermore, does not belong to the Judean figurines.

26 For general feminist studies of the Bible see Harris 1984; Bird 1987; Day, P.L. 1989; Hackett 1987. Cf. also Goldenberg 1979. Unavailable to me at the moment is a study by Rosemary Ruether (1974. Religion and sexism - hnages of Women in the Jewish and Christian Traditions. NY).

25 For the general history of Transjordan in the Iron Age II see 24 Despite the fact that this figure has no female breasts at all, and the child is carried on its back.

24

In the last twenty years or so, the impact of feminism and gender studies has been growing in the field of Old Testament studies, and hence in relation to the Asherah and to the pillar figurines.P' Carol Meyers wanted to use the figurines to help reconstruct female participation in the religious life, since in her view they show a connection between women and household cult (1988: 161). Meyers was skeptic about the identification of the figurines as goddesses (then they may have been used also by men); but if they represented mortal women or motherhood symbols, then they are part of women's lives (ibid:162). The pillar figurines stressed motherhood but not sexuality, thus they were perhaps votive objects, which encouraged fertility. They cannot be identified with a specific goddess (ibid:162-3). The figurines represented religious feelings; especially female religious life. This shows that women had a place in domestic religion, furthermore, domestic cult is impossible without women. This analysis shares with some other feminist studies the wish to "beautify" the dominantly male picture of the Old Testament (for an opposite feminist direction see Goldenberg 1979).

Barnett 1989; Bienkowski 1991; Weippert 1987; Dicou 1994; Worschech 1990b; Herr 1993.

25

roles (Barnes and Eicher 1992). Of course, there are also popular feminist studies. One very dubious example is a book about the Egyptian Hagar, not worthy of comment (Teubal 1990). In another study, the figurines are termed widely as "a burst of popular piety", "a visual metaphor" and "a kind of tangible prayer for fertility and nourishment" (Frymer-Kensky 1992: 158ft). These terms only obscure the subject. It must be stressed that publications of this sort are common everywhere and are not an invention of feminist circles.

1987:281; Jerusalem 11:49, 127). Wright related PF with the common folks (1957:117). The use of the term common religion did not prevent the description of the figurines in any other way, from goddesses to magic objects and mortal female-figures. It is important to avoid defining common religion as something which is forbidden or has exceptional norms, or is a phenomenon of the lower levels of society only. Common religion is also not a new subject in OT studies (e.g., Albertz 1978; Segal 1976). A comprehensive bibliographical list is reviewed by Berlinerblau (1993), who also defined popular religious groups in a negative way: "any association of individuals living within the borders of ancient Israel, who by dint of their religious beliefs, political beliefs, rituals, symbols and so on, are denigrated by the authors of the Old Testament" (1993:18).

IT.4.tO. The Theme of Popular Religion In the last ten years the theme of popular-, common- or folk-religion became widespread in regard to the pillar figurines (e.g., Holladay 1987, chap. 11.4.3 above). A good basis for discussing this subject is found in a volume of studies edited by Vrijhof and Waardenburg (1979). The first thing one must note is the lack of agreement as to what exactly is "common religion". The editors used this definition:

Recently, Ackerman (1992) tried to explore common religion in sixth century BC Judah, from a few rather difficult prophetic verses in the OT (for a short review cf. Mulder 1994). Ackerman's definition of common religion is, again, negative: "it is not the religion that is usually presented to us as normative in the Bible. More specifically, it is not the religion of the Deuteronomistic school, the priests, or the prophets" (Ackerman 1992:ix).

"If by official religion we mean beliefs and practices which are prescribed, regulated and socialized by specialized religious institutions, then common religion can be described as those beliefs and practices of an overtly religious nature, which are not under the domination of a prevailing religious institute" (Vrijhof and Waardenburg 1979:2,668).

M. Rose dealt with the pillar-figurines in relation to popular religion in Judah and Israel. Following a short description, he accepted the identification of the pillarfigurines with Ashera as plausible, though not proven (1975:183). Rose did not differentiate between pillar figurines in Judah and other regions, and defined them as cult objects of the Israelite cult. They appear throughout the Iron Age II period, thus are not restricted to a specific period when only Yahweh was worshipped (Rose 1975:185). Rose was in favour of seeing these figurines as part of a popular religion (not "foreign"), perhaps mainly of women who were not satisfied by the official Yahweh-cult:

This is, of course, a negatively based definition. The scholars who took part in the book could not agree about the definition (ibid:669-671, 672-674). Many of them noted that there are close ties between official and common religions, and these should not be viewed as independent, and necessarily opposed phenomena, The terms "official religion" and "common religion" are stamped by doctrinal, institutional religion in general, and Christianity in particular. They are less practical with half-doctrinized religions (Hinduism or Buddhism), and may be totally inadequate with other religions (e.g., agrarian pre-literate African religions, ibid:674).

"Diese Aschera-Statuetten waren Bestandteil des 'Bodensatzes' der Volksfrdmmigkeit, vielleicht waren sie Eigentum der Frauen in Israel/Judah, deren BedUIfnisse der Yahwe-Kult der offiziellen Welt vielleicht nicht befriedigte" (Rose 1975:186).

Sadek suggested simpler and also positive definitions in regard to ancient Egypt (1988:1-2). National religion was the religion practiced in temples, in the name of the King, by a body of professional priests and clerics. It was a religion for the people and on their behalf, but not practiced by them. Common religion included beliefs and customs of the Egyptian people outside the official royal temples, but was not a religion of the poor only. Both had been but different forms of the same basic religion, and not different religions (Sadek 1988:2, 294),27 Is the analysis of Sadek valid for ancient Judah?

Rose (1975:186) noticed that these figurines were found at the Palace of Ramat Rabel, and thus were not related only to low, uneducated levels of society. Furthermore, he noticed the lack of figurines in the temple of Arad, which was clearly an official temple of Yahweh. This casts doubts on the theory that Asherah was Yahweh's paredos: "Ware Aschera Jahwes "inevitable, necessary counterpart", so harte man ihre Prasentz in den Gestalt der weiblichen Pfeilerfigiirchen unter den frommen Jahwe-Verehren Arads erwarten kdnnen. Nichts aber dergleichen konnte fUr Arad beobachtet werden (Rose 1975:192). The perception shown by Rose (1975) is all

The connection between pillar-figurines and common religion is not new (see already Pilz 1924:161; Holladay 27 For expressions of common religion in the workmen's village at Deir el Medina, see Tosi 1988.

26

the more impressive, when it is compared with all the later articles of Dever.

("I bless you by Yahweh, our guardian and by his Asherah", again the reading of Naveh 1979). Scholars debated about the word Shomeron. It could mean the city Samaria or the whole area of Samaria; or perhaps the word comes from the vern "guard" in the meaning of "Yahweh is our guardian". Another debate concerned the ending of the word Asheratah. In correct ancient Hebrew, this ending is impossible if the word means the private name of a goddess. Another mention of Asheratah was found on pithos A. These finds have been the subject of an overwhelming number of discussions (Gilula 1976; Beck 1982; Emerton 1982; Dever 1984; North 1989; Dietrich and Loretz 1992: chapter 3.3; Hadley 1993; 1994:425429; Lemaire 1994:148f - to name only a few). Recently, the word Asherah appeared also in an inscription "kd~ l'rrt" from Ekron (Smith 1994:200; Gitin 1995:72).

Another interesting study was made by Vorlander (1986). His definition of popular religion is as follows: "the term 'popular religion' refers to the popular ideas entertained by the Israelite concerning God's action in the life of the individual, the community, and in nature" (1986:63). This popular religion existed side by side with the worship of Yahweh. It included belief in demons and concerned practical methods of encouraging God's assistance and not theological interest in God itself (Vorlander 1986:65f, 69). Vorlander (ibid:67) saw the figurines as representations of divinities. The popular religion of Israel was criticized sharply by the Prophets (ibid:68f), but only the Exile caused a decisive break, when Yahweh became a close, personal god.

The finds from Kuntillet 'Ajrud and Kh. el-Kom brought up the question of the place of Asherah in Israelite and Judean religion. Was she a great goddess and a mate to Yahweh? What is the relation between the inscriptions and the drawings (Beck 1982)? I will return to these questions in the concluding chapter.

A few scholars have warned against a simplified understanding of common religion in regard to the JPFs (Ahlstrom 1982:83f; 1984; Keel and Uehlinger 1992: n.345; Rose 1975).28 The study of Vorlander is interesting, and many points may be accepted (or denied). Yet, it seems that in a way Vorlander, and other scholars, run the risk of substituting the "good old" Frazerian conception of magic, with what they call popular religion. Is this just "the same lady in a different dress"?

11.5. Summary In this chapter, I have reviewed the development of research in a chronological order. Throughout the last hundred years, most of the scholars explained the JPFs in one of the four following ways: I. As toys. 2. Mortal human beings (both these explanations are rather rare). 3. Magical artifacts. 4. Cultic artifacts, related with goddesses, either representations of a goddess herself, or its attribute, or votive objects. Voigt's (1983) fifth category, related to burials, can be safely ruled out because only a minority of the JPFs were found in burials. In the last years there has been a growing tendency to identify the JPFs with the biblical Asherah. Recently, Dietrich and Loretz (1992) discussed cult statues in Mesopotamia in relation to the Old Testament. The authors deliberately refrain from discussing the pillar-figurines; it seemed to them that archaeologists had hopelessly mixed philological and historic arguments while dealing with the figurines:

IT.4.11. The Inscriptions ofKh. el-Kom and Kuntillet 'Ajrud ' I will briefly describe these inscriptions and drawings, since they are of a crucial importance to the understanding of the Biblical Asherah. A blessing inscription was found in a grave at Kh. elKom, which includes the following Hebrew sentence: "nrn\!lN~1 '"l~) mn» 1m"lN 1"l:1" ("May Uriyahu be blessed by Yahweh my guardian and by his Asherah" - reading by Naveh 1979; but cr. Lemaire 1977). Since then, the inscription has been treated by many scholars (e.g., Mittman 1981; Schroer 1983; Zevit 1984; Dever 1984; . Hadley 1987; O'Conner 1987; Shea 1990; Hadley 1994:242ft). Phitoi with inscriptions and drawings were found at Kuntillet 'Ajrud, a site from the 8th century BC on the border of the Negev and Sinai (for the archaeology of the site see Ayalon 1985; Gunneweg et. al. 1985; Hadley 1993; Meshel 1994). One of the pithoi (B) carried the drawing of a sitting women playing a lyre, and two standing figures (of Bes? - see Beck 1982: fig.5). An inscription was written above the drawings, which included the sentence: "nn"l\!lN~' n~\!l mm~ o:mN rrru"

"Auf diese Weise sind nicht nur Mischargumentationen entstanden, die mehrfach mit Zirkelschlussen durchsetzt sind, sondern auch archaologische Argumentationsmodelle, in einigen Fallen zu philologisch ungenugend fundierten Schlussfolgerungen gefuhrt haben" (Dietrich and Loretz 1992:92). After reviewing more then a hundred years of research, it seems to me that there is no lack of suggestions and speculations in regard to the meaning and symbolism of the JPFs. What we still miss is an updated, systematic catalogue of figurines, and solid evidence for the preference of one specific explanation.

28 Ahlstrom (1982:26) suggested an unusual opposition; common religion as village ritual, versus the official, national religion in cities, as if a sharp line separated the religion of cities from that of villages. On "common Yahwehism", but without connection to the JPFs, see also 01yan 1985:108. 27

Chapter III: The Typology of the JPFs '1 can discover facts, Watson, but 1 cannot change them" (Conan Doyle / Sherlock Holmes: "The Problem of Thor Bridge").

Typology may seem a "trifle", but it is a crucial stage in any study of artifacts. Questions such as what makes a type of figurine, and how can fragmented bodies or heads be ascribed to a certain type are decisive. Typology is the groundwork for any data-base, and determines what is excepted - or excluded - from the discussion. This is not a technical matter, and the effects of typology on dating, origins or meaning of a certain type of figurine can be substantial. Great care, and especially common sense, are essential. Furthermore, defining one type involves its separation from other types, which need then to be mentioned. Therefore, the framework for discussion in the current chapter is wider than the JPFs themselves.

111.1. Former Typologies and Guiding Principles The term "pillar-figurine" is a very common name in the archaeological literature for figurines which are made in the round and have a schematic, pole-like lower body, without a separation of the legs. The base of these figurines is usually wider than the body, to allow them to stand safely. This term is too general for our needs: first, it encompasses a huge geographic area, for pillar-figurines are found in the Aegean, Cyprus, Phoenicia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Israel and even the Punic World. Secondly, the temporal frame is too vague, from the second millennium BC to the classical periods at least.' Thirdly, the definition pillar-figurine is not specific from an iconographic or technical point of view; furthermore, it encourages associations with the 'pole' of the Biblical Asherah or with 'pillar-cult' (associations which, perhaps, have no basis). On the other hand, it is impossible and useless to change such a deeply-rooted term. What we need is a refinement and a clear sub-division of the different types of pillar-figurines. I have already mentioned various definitions of pillarfigurines and JPFs (chapter II), and will concentrate here on the main typologies offered, i.e., those of Holland (1975) and Engle (1979). Holland included the JPFs among the 573 solid figurines of his type A, together with a varied mixture of other types: figurines with legs (AXIII), sitting figurines, peg figurines and even hollow, double-moulded figurines (e.g., his type A.IV.g.2-3). This mixture prevented Holland from reaching clear conclusions, and in fact, he did 1 For Mycenean Bronze Age pillar-figurines see Hagg 1981: figs. 1, 3; Gesell 1985:61f, photographs 61-62, 64-66. For Persian period figurines from Cyprus see Gube1 1986: nos. 47, 49. For Greece cf. Hadzisteliou-Price 1978: pls. 1-6. For an Early Bronze example from Israel see de-Miroschedji 1995: 37 lower left; back cover upper right. See further references in chap. 11.4.8 (above).

not define clearly a Judean form of pillar-figurine, nor did he deal with every sub-type separately (Holland 1975:178ff; 1977:121f). This is unfortunate, since Holland had prepared the ground for synthesis of a very detailed typology, arranged according to the shape and number of curls (for the moulded heads), or applied features (for the hand-made heads; see also chapter III.6 and key 5 below). Engle (1979:9) included most of Holland's types A II-AIX under the term "classical pillar-figurines", relating them with Judah. Engle did not discuss Holland's types AX-AX! (all the body fragments), claiming that these could not be classified; nor Holland's types A.XII-AXVII, which seemed to him irregular or exceptional; neither Holland's type AI (all the hand-made heads), which appeared "too featureless" in his eyes. As a result, Engle (1979:11-12) studied only the mould made heads of the JPFs, ca. 150 specimens. These "classical pillar-figurines" were sorted into five sub-types according to the shape of the eyes. Engle believed that the center of the mould, where the eyes are situated, is better preserved than the curls (1979:13-15). At the same time, he claimed that his typology was harmonious with that of Holland, which he abandoned (clearly not a proper claim, cf. chap. III.6 below). Engle (1979:13-15) admitted that he had no direct access to the figurines and that his typology was arbitrary. It is thus better to retain Holland's typology, and only combine Engle's eye types in it. The eye-shapes are often obscure, and Engle contradicted himself when he suddenly preferred the curls for his type VI (though most of the figurines of this type have clear eye-shapes, cf. app. 2: 92, 94). Engle (1979:14-15) gathered doubtful cases in his type VII, but admitted that the doubts concerned only the eye-shapes, otherwise they were good "classical pillar-figurines". Engle defined one type (VIII) as foreign to Judah - it is indeed so but he was pleased to leave the matter at hand, not explaining in detail the differences between this "foreign" type and the "classical pillar-figurines". Furthermore, this "foreign" type is aetually a combination of many sub-types from different geographical regions (app. 5 below), which Engle failed to discuss. The major limitation in Engle's work was the exclusion of most of the JPFs from the discussion: he was left with ca. 150 artifacts (his types I-VII), or only 100 fit for classification (if we exclude the doubtful type VII). This stands in sharp contrast to the present catalogue of 854 JPFs (excluding ca. 100 more from unknown origins, app. 3). Therefore, the picture presented by Engle is very partial (cf. chap. 11.4.1 and key 6).

28

It must be said that Ruth Amiran (1956) and R. Gophna (1970) preceded Engle with a clear definition for the Judean pillar-figurines, but did not go into details in these short publications, nor discussed the possibilities and limitations of the definition "Judean". Before making further typological definitions, it is necessary to list a few guiding principles that I used.

X, it would be better to include the ten fragments in doubt, even if one is likely to belong to type Y, rather than neglect 9 fragments of X. Of course, statistical calculations such as this require a large amount of any type of artifact, and strictly speaking, this can hardly be achieved for the JPFs. Still, I· would suggest that any consideration is better then nothing, and the results can be tested in the future, when enough finds accumulate.

1. The Common Type One of the main contributions of Engle (1979:9) was the explicit use of the principle of a common type. In any assemblage of figurines, we are likely to find many types of different figurines, one or a few of each type beside many similar figurines which belong to one or a few types. The last are the main, or "common" type/s in the assemblage. Among the other figurines, some may be similar (but not exactly so) to the common type/s, and can be defined as exceptional forms. Other figurines may be totally different from the common type/s, e.g., exports from another site, influences from other types of artifacts, or fruits of the whim of a certain potter. Often, these unique figurines acquire a lot of attention, since they may be much more interesting artistically, than the common type/s (which is often stereotyped). However, since I deal mainly with archaeological and historical questions (distribution, relation to Judah, etc.), and not artistic analysis, the common type is central: it forms the great majority of any assemblage, and the key to its understanding.

111.2. Definition of a Judean Pillarfigurine I will define two major vananons of JPFs, which are common to Late Iron Age Judah. This definition is not new, but based on earlier studies. 1. Hand-made, "pinched" JPFs [fig. 4:1, my type A). The figurines have a simple, solid, hand-made head and body. They are all made from simple clay, usually covered with white-wash. Above this appears often the remains of painted decoration, usually simple bands of red or yellow. The painting marks anatomical details (eyes, pupils, face, etc.), or jewelery (necklaces, bracelets, etc.). The size of the figurines vary from 10-16 em. The head and the body are formed from the same lump of clay. The head was pinched by the potter's fingers to form two shallow depressions for eyes and a protruding nose. All the figurines portray a standing woman who holds her hands under her breasts. The fingers of the hands are not indicated, except rarely by paint. The arms may meet each other or even merge as one continuous band across the chest. They may support the breasts or be placed a little beneath them. The lower body is shaped as a pillar. The base is usually concave and always slightly widening, to enable the figurine to be free standing. There is no indication of feet, legs or sexual organs.

2. The Importance of Whole Figurines Most of the figurines, except perhaps in burials or favissa, are found broken, i.e., heads or bodies detached from each other. How can one be related to the other? Engle chose a convenient solution by ignoring all the body-fragments and many of the heads (see above), but this results in a large loss of data. One should try to learn from the whole figurines about the fragments (below), hence the great value of whole figurines. Whole figurines are also the starting point for the study of the archaeological context (chap. VIII below).

This type of JPF can be sorted into several sub-types, according to features which were applied to the heads (cf also key 2 below). These are my types A.l (simple heads); A2 (heads with "turbans'); A.3 (heads with "turbans" and side-locks); A4 (heads with hats) and A5-6 (few exceptional heads, app. 2:53, 367, 368).

3. Main Typology according to the Heads This is not a universal principle, but a result of the nature of the JPFs. Most JPFs are found broken. Their pillar bodies are hand-made, very schematic and standard. The heads are much more varied in details, especially the moulded ones, thus enabling a more detailed - and better - typology. It does not mean that the body-fragments are neglected, only that they form a secondary component within the main typology.

2. Mould-made face JPFs [fig. 4:2, my type B]. The body of this variation of figurines is similar to that of type A, showing a women holding her breasts, but the head was made separately and attached to the body by means of a peg, fitting into a deep depression in the upper body. After the attachment, the clay of the neck was smoothed upwards to hide the joint, often making the neck thick (out of proportion). Sometimes the smoothing blurred the line of the chin. These figurines are larger then their hand-made sisters, varying between 14-21 em. in height. The head was formed from a rounded lump of clay, stamped in an open mould to form the face and the hairdress. The face is usually round and full, with a smiling mouth and large eyes,

4. Statistical Considerations Exact definition of fragments is not always possible. Often, a certain fragment may have belonged to two or three different types of figurines. If the distribution-proportions of these types are known, it may be meaningful. For example, let us assume that a common type X appears 10 times more than a rare type Y (the proportion may be judged from the whole figurines, or from well-classified fragments). Statistically, from every 10 fragments which may belong to both X and Y, only one belongs to Y. When discussing type

29

often exaggerated.? The lids are usually arched. The face is surrounded from three sides by a curly hairdress.P There are as many as 6 ridges with rows of curls above the forehead (though one "linear" sub-type has only ridges without curls). The curls vary in shapes, and the variations of the number of rows and shape of curls enable a detailed typology (Fig. 6; following Holland 1975; for more details cf. key. 3 below). Usually there are protruding side-locks, descending to the chin but never further down. These side locks are also curled (unless they are simple or worn out). There is no indication of ears, as if they are covered with the side-locks. The use of white-wash and painted decoration in yellow and red is common, (like in type A, above). The back of the head is roughly made by hand. The head may be round at the top or pointed, as if having a cap, but there is never an applied hat (unlike the hand-made A.4 heads).

must stress that my aim is not to produce a detailed catalogue of these 900 figurines, but just to study them as far as they are useful for the understanding of the JPFs. For this reason, I present the results briefly. Readers who may wish to avoid this rather technical section can continue directly to chap. 11.4 (below).

m.3.t. Transjordanian Figurines (Appendix 4) Information from Transjordan is still limited, and a detailed, reliable catalogue is lacking. The Chronology is often not clear, as are the contexts. In general, the Transjordanian figurines are closer to the Phoenician and Coastal types than to the JPFs (Dornemann 1983; Gubel 1991:137; HomesFredericq 1987:92f). I have not tried to stress regional differences, but these probably existed.

All the body fragments which belong to types A and B are termed here as type C. They are further divided into three sub-types: whole bodies (C.l), middle body fragments (C.2) and bases (C.3), and all will be discussed later. Often, body fragments cannot be associated with one specific type of head.

Drum players. App. 4.1 [Fig. 10:1-2]. 8 specimens. The northern ones are similar to Phoenician figurines (app. 5.VI.2), with hollow, pillar bodies and drums held perpendicular to the body (for the ridge on the body of nos. 1-2 cf. another figurine from unknown origins, app. 3:16). The fragments from Amman are hard to define (nos. 4-5), but probably belong to the same type. No. 3 from Gebel Qal'ah is solid (?). For other types of drum players see app. 5.1.3, 5.V.I. For the identification of the drums see the discussion in type 5.VI.2 (below).

In the following pages, I wish to show that these figurines (my types A-B-C) are indeed the common type of anthropomorphic clay figurines in Iron Age II Judah. This involves the definition and cataloguing of other types of figurines.

111.3. Typology of Other Figurines

Moulded heads. App. 4.n [fig. 10:3-5]. 26 specimens, but cf. note at the end of app. 4.11. The bodies were not preserved, and the heads may have belonged to different types of figurines. They are all different from the JPFs: the face is much more elongated and the hairdress includes long side-locks, reaching the shoulders (or at least the chin). Large ears are usually represented (except nos. 1, 13?, 25). Some of the heads have necklaces with crossed pendants (nos. 16, 17, 20). Nos. 18, 23, 24 have a special hairdress (cf. mould 5.VIII.9 and figurines 5.VIII.6-8, 10, 16). The painted decoration, when it survives, is white and black or red and black. It seems that some of these 4.11 heads belonged to type 4.1 figurines [fig. 10:2] and others to type 4.III or even to horse-and-rider figurines. As far as I know, none of these Transjordanian heads is comparable to the Judean heads (excluding one or two doubtful cases, when inadequate publications or a bad ,preservation state prevent exact classification).

Ca. 900 anthropomorphic figurines from Iron Age Israel were catalogued in appendixes 4-5, and presented in the format of a table (fig. 3 below).4 Most of these figurines have archaeological contexts, or at least the sites of origin are known, and very few figurines are of unknown origins. The last were added for the sake of completeness, or in cases where whole figurines from secure origins were not found. I have listed all the anthropomorphic figurines, including all of Holland's types A-C and many new ones. The fragments are separated from whole, or nearly whole, figurines. 5 I have focused on defining common types, and often grouped together the various exceptions and irregular figurines. I 2 This is often called an archaic smile, after Greek figurines and sculptures. It certainly does not indicate any direct connections

with the west. 3 I am using the term "hairdress" for convenience sake. It is not always clear whether these heads show the natural hair, an artificialwig or even some sort of a headdress.

Pillar bodies. App. 4.m [fig. 10:6]. 17 specimens. The hollow bodies, nos. 13-17, have various positions: hands on the stomach, on the breasts (?), holding a dove (?), etc. Most of them come from northern Transjordan. The solid bodies (nos. 1-12) include gestures of extended hands (no. 8), hands on the stomach (no. 4), along the body (no. 1), on the breasts (no. 2), etc. All these bodies are different from the JPFs, except two or three fragments, which look similar to the JPFs but are too battered for exact classification (nos. 6, 7, 10).

4 No doubtmore female figurines exist (in private collections, new

excavations which were not yet published, etc.). The number here is still large enoughto present a validgeneral picture. 5 By "nearly whole" I mean figurines, of which at least the head and the upper body survived, to the extent that the position of the arms can be recognized. For example, the position of the arms of JPF no. 251 (app. 2) is not clear, thus it is not included among the "nearly whole" figurines.

30

m.3.2. Exceptional/Other Figurines, mainly

Male figurines. App. 4.IV [fig. 10:7]. 7 specimens. As in other areas, male clay figurines are rare. The only whole figurine is "the traveler", no. 1, which has a hollow body. Nos. 5-6 have solid bodies, but may had been rider figurines. Nos. 2, 4, 7 have ate! (Egyptianizing) crowns. Daviau and Dion (1994) suggested that these three heads represented the godEl.

from Judah (Appendix 5.1) Included here are some types of figurines, that are similar (but not identical) to the JPFs (5.1.1, 5.1.3). These have a few different traits that mark them as variations, but are still included in the JPFs' catalogue (app. 1-2). Other types are not similar to the JPFs, though they were found in Judah; these are presented below (5.1.2, 5.1.4-5.1.6).

Hand-made, whole figurines and heads. App. 4.V [fig. 10:8-9]. 15 specimens. This is not a homogenous group, and the differences between the sites are great. In general, incised and applied decorations are common. The heads are not similar to the JPFs, except perhaps in one case (no. 12). The body of no. 1 is hollow, while those of nos. 8-9 are solid, but not of the pillar type. No. 15 is unique. For the rest of the figurines, the exact type/s of bodies are not clear.

Type 'Be' figurines. App. 5.U [fig. 4:5]. These figurines have a typical JPF moulded head (my type B), but hollow, wheel-made pillar bodies (my type E). Since the main classification of the JPFs is done by heads, I have included this type in the JPFs' catalogue. Only two whole figurines are known of this type (app. 2:78, 183). A few similar figurines from unknown origins may be added (see app. 3:16,87), but there is a danger that they are forged. This is especially true for app. 3:16, which is perhaps "modelled" on figurines from Transjordan (cf. app. 4.1.1-2 above; the unique form of the lower body with a ledge).

Hand-made body fragments. App. 4.VI. 15 specimens. All are not of the pillar type; most are fragments of legs, which cannot be further classified. Nos. 14-15 are exceptional, being fragments of large-sized clay sculptures. Large clay sculptures are known from Cyprus and Edom (Connelly 1989; Beck 1995), but not from Judah.

Hollow pillar body-fragments. App. 5.L2. Only 8 specimens are known from Judah, 7 from Jerusalem and one from Tel Beer Sheba. They could have belonged to figurines like VI.1 (above), but also to types 5.111.1-6 or 5.IV6 (below).

Plaque figurines. App. 4. vn. 11 specimens, some made in the traditions of the second millennium BC, with wide clay backgrounds around the figure (nos. 1,4,5). Other figurines lack the background (nos. 2, 10). A mould of a plaque figurine is known from Tawilan (app. 5.VIII.5 below). NO.3 holds a drum, perhaps (if so, it belongs with type 5.V.l below). For plaque figurines from Israel cf. app. 5.V25.V.ll (below).

Female drum-players. App. 5.L3 [fig. 4:3-4]. 10 specimens, 3 of which are in doubt. The figurines portray a woman, who holds a disk of clay close to the chest. All the other details are typical of the JPFs: solid pillar bodies and simple hand-made heads (of type A). More specimens are registered from unknown origins (cf. app. 3:12, 99). The identification of the disk is discussed in relation to type 5.VI.2 (below). For other figurines of female drum-players cf. types 4.1,5.111.6, 5.VI.

Plaque figurines of pregnant women. App. 4.vm [fig. 10:10]. 16 specimens. This type is very different from the Late Bronze and early Iron Age plaque figurines, and more similar to the coastal Iron Age II plaque figurines (type 5.V.9 below). It seems that it belongs to the late Iron Age II as well; a large group of three figurines was found in Buseirah, which flourished mainly during this period. The hands survived in 8 specimens, always grasping the breasts, with the thumb separated from the other fingers. The faces are quite crude, with side-locks reaching the shoulders. There is no proof that heads 10-16 belonged to these figurines, but it is possible. No. 16 is exceptional, since it has perhaps a peg (and thus belongs with type 4.11 heads).

Miscellaneous heads. App. 5.L4. 24 specimens. The heads are moulded (nos. 1-11) or hand-made (nos. 13-24), but are all different from the JPFs' heads. They vary much and do not form a homogeneous group. A few are badly preserved or inadequately published, preventing further classification (nos. 3, 4). No.8 may belong to the classical periods. No. 16 is similar to Persian period figurines. No. 22 is similar to the coastal heads of type 5.1V (below). Most of the heads were found in Jerusalem and Lachish.

Unique plaque figurines. App. 4.IX. 4 specimens. Three of these figurines hold a child and one portrays a pregnant, dressed woman. All come from the Jordan valley. For discussion see Beck 1991. Leg-fragments of plaque figurines. App. 4.X. 12 specimens. Nos. 1,2, Tl, 8 belonged possibly to type 4.VIII. The rest cannot be classified any further.

App. 5.L5. 24 Miscellaneous solid body parts. specimens. All are different from the JPFs' pillar bodies, e.g., in the position of the hands, in applied features, or in the holding of an object. A few bodies seem quite similar to the JPFs (nos. 1, 5, 13, 19, 20), and may be defined as variations. Yet, they are not identical to the JPFs and are not included among the last.

Unclassified. App.4.XI. 8 specimens. Most of them were found at Tell el-Mazar, but the quality of the preliminary publication does not allow certain classification.

Unclassified Fragments. App. 5.L6. 9 specimens, mostly coming from Beth Shemesh. Bad preservation and inadequate publication prevent further classification.

31

can be made. The grouping of the coast and the north is done since on the one hand there are many similarities in the form of figurines from both these areas, while on the other hand the quantities of (published) figurines are not so great as in Judah.

ID.3.3. Figurines with Pillar Bases, Mainly from Judah (App. 5.II) I have grouped here figurines with pillar bases, which are definitely not female JPFs. It is necessary to discuss them in order to settle the status of the pillar base fragments (my type C.3, chap. 111.5). To this group must be added riders with pillar bases (type H.l.p in the original Ph.D thesis. I will use the data collected there without discussing these figurines further). Most of the figurines of types 5.11 are similar to the JPFs in manufacturing techniques, clay, white-wash and painted decorations.

Heads with long, uncombed locks. App. 5.m4 [fig. 7:6]. 4 specimens. These are similar to type 5.III.3 (above), only simpler and without the combing. They are more crude in appearance. Types 5.III.7-8 may possibly belong here too. Most of the 5.IIIA heads were found at Megiddo. They resemble some of the hollow heads from the same site (5.VI.5-8 below), but the technique is very different.

The female pillar figurines of these areas are usually more elaborate than the JPFs. They have long side-locks, reaching the shoulders or the neck at least. The ears are large and often exaggerated. Moulded necklaces are common, and sometimes there are pendants on the forehead. The faces are more delicate than the JPFs faces, with better, more elongated proportions. In many cases, the head was formed from a lump of clay larger thqJt the size of the mould, leaving a sort of an un-moulded circumference around the face. Usually the body is wheel-made and hollow. Apart from these general traits, there are many variations in the shape of the figurines. 6

"Lamp" figurines. App. 5.ll.1. [fig. 8:1]. 4 specimens. The figures carry lamps above their heads. This peculiar type is rare, with two Transjordanian and two Judean examples. No.3 is exceptional, similar to 5.1V types and not to the JPFs. Lamp figurines are known from the Punic world, Phoenicia and Cyprus (Beck 1991:91, nn. 24-26; Isserlin 1976; Gubel 1986:120 no. 5; 1991:134; Vandenabeele 1986:354, 356; 1989:266; Homes-Fredericq 1987:92; Yon and Caubet 1988:30).

"Delicate" coastal type. App. 5.m2 [fig. 7:2-4]. 12 specimens, all from the southern coastal plain. Only one has remains of a hollow body. The heads are similar to type 5.111.1 (above), but much more delicate, without the crude lines. Heads nos. 1-7 are very similar and may have been made in the same mould (or mould-series, for which see chap. VI below). Unfortunately, many of the photographs of these heads do not show the details clearly. There is a necklace, with a large central pendant featuring a rosette. Heads nos. 8-12 vary a little from each other [fig. 7:3-4]. The center of production of these heads may have been at Tel Gemmeh (Gophna 1970), but central Philistine sites, such as Ekron and Ashkelon, may prove otherwise.

Male figurines with hand-made (type A) heads. App. 5.ll.3 [fig. 8:3]. 5 specimens. The definition of males is based on the appearance of beards, since none of the figurines are whole. The exact identity is not always clear, and some of these figurines may have been riders. In Trandsjordan, even what looks like a male beard is sometimes only an elongated chin, which is common also for female figurines. There are also hermaphrodite figurines, though these are few (Beck 1991).

Heads with long, combed locks. App. 5.m3 [fig. 7:5]. 9 specimens, all from the southern coastal plain. Only one (no. 6) has part of a hollow body and hands under the breasts. The head from Kh. Hoga is the most beautiful [fig. 7:5]. The hair is collected in thick side-locks, which curl alongside the face and almost meet under the chin. The locks are delicately combed with vertical lines (except no. 7, perhaps). Figurine no. 2 was dated to the Persian period, and the manufacture of these heads may have continued later then the Iron Age period. No. 9 from Ekron was said to have "Egyptianizing" features (Gitin 1995:73), but it is a local coastal head.

11.3.4. Coastal and Northern Moulded-Face Types (App. 5.111) I have classified here many figurines from the coastal plain and northern Israel, including most of Holland's (1975) type B. The majority of the figurines are from Iron Age levels, but for some of the older excavations the dating is not clear. The classification is based on the heads (instead of the position of hands, like Holland's classification). The final publications of new excavations, such as Tel Shera, Tel Haror, Ekron, Dor, Megiddo and Hazor will surely contribute greatly. Until then, only a preliminary typology

6 For another whole figurine with hollow body and moulded face, ofa "northern" type, see Oman 1986:34 (origin unknown). Another example is now in the Hecht Museum, University of Haifa (reg. no. H.792).

32

Fairly whole pillar figurines. App. 5.IV.1 [fig. 8:4]. 8 specimens. Unfortunately, the data from Tel Gemmeh and Tel el-Ajjul is very partial. Most of the figurines have hollow pillar bodies. No. 3 probably holds a drum. Nos. 4-5 have typical coastal type heads (of type 5.111.3 above). It is not clear whether their bodies are hollow or solid (the same is true for no. 6). Nos. 6-7 from Megiddo are different. No. 8 holds a drum perpendicular to the body; its face is mould made (?).

Heads with "crescent" hairdress. App. 5.m5 [fig. 7:7]. 4 specimens. This is not a homogeneous group. No. 3 has a hollow body and holds a drum in its hands. The heads of this group are quite similar to the heads of the JPFs, more than any other coastal group. Some do not have ears, like the JPFs, but most have a wide "frame" of clay around the moulded face (unlike the JPFs).

Peg figurines. App. 5.IV.2. 10 specimens. The term "peg figurine" was coined by Petrie, for very crude hand-made figurines whose lower body is pointed and solid, like a peg. They were probably stuck into the earth. Often they feature women, but some examples do not have clear signs of sex. The heads are usually similar to type 5.IIIJ (above). Some of the figurines are from the Iron Age I, featuring wailing women with their hands on their heads (Dothan 1982: 237ff). Other figurines are dated to the Iron Age II, and have stump hands or hold their hands on their breasts.

Northern drum players. App. 5.m6 [fig. 7:8]. 7 specimens, 6 from Megiddo and one from Samaria. Only one (no. 1) has remains of a hollow, wheel-made body. Unlike bodies of JPFs and southern coastal types, this body is shaped as a cylinder with ridges, and its section is very thick (like pottery juglets). The face is rather crude and the hair is indicated by many horizontal lines. The position of the arms of no. 7 is like the Phoenician type of drum players (5.VI.2 below), but its head is similar to the heads of type 5.V.l (for a similar head from Samaria, without body, cf. 5.III.7.28 below).

"Schematic" coastal type. App. 5.m1 [fig. 7:1]. 6 specimens, all from the southern coastal plain. Only one figurine has part of a hollow body (no. 2). The faces are elongated and characterized by an abundant use of incised lines (some may have been added after the moulding). In this type, the lines are rather crude. The hairdress flows in long side-locks behind the ears, until the beginning of the neck. The locks are marked by horizontal lines. There is a necklace made of a few short lines, and sometimes a pendant on the forehead as well.

Bird figurines with pillar bases. App. 5.ll.2 [fig. 8:2]. 34 specimens (no. 34 is from an unknown origin). All the figurines are solid and hand-made (type E.I of Holland 1975). 25 clearly have pillar bases, while the situation of the rest of the figurines is not clear. Most of the figurines were found in Jerusalem (17), Tel en-Nasbeh (6) and Tel Beer Sheba (3). Only one figurine from Tel es-Safi (no. 23), and one from Hazor (no. 3), were found out of Judah. The figurine from Hazor cannot be classified clearly, and its similarity to the Judean bird-figurines is not clear. Holland included figurines from Megiddo in his E.I type, but these are different from the Judean ones (for details see the end to app. 5.11.2; for an iconographic discussion of birds in the ancient Near East see Keel 1977).

ID.3.5. Coastal and Northem Hand-made Head Types and Miscellaneous (App. 5.1V)

.

(

"Ashdodite" coastal heads. App. 5.IV.3 [fig. 8:5-8]. 21 specimens, all from the southern coastal plain. They are very common at Ashdod, hence the name "Ashdodite". Usually they are flattened from above (it was suggested that they had applied hats, but there is no proof for this). The eyes are indicated by small clay pellets (or disks), applied to the depressions formed by hand. The aquiline noses are also applied. Usually there are representations of applied ears and mouths; sometimes there is an incised line across the mouths. All these details are not found among the JPFs' hand-made heads. The Ashdodite heads belonged to more than one type of figurine: to peg and pillar figurines (nos. 12), as well as solid female figurines (no. 10), solid figurines with legs (riders? - nos. 7, 9); playing woman (no. 12) and even a naked male [fig. 8:5]. Comparisons to the Ashdodite heads are known from Cyprus and Phoenicia (Courtois 1984: pls, 9, 10; fig. 24; Karageorghis 1993: pI. 18:7, 10).

Northern moulded heads. App. 5.m 7 [fig. 7:9]. 41 specimens. Many figurines of this group were inadequately published or badly preserved, and cannot be classified clearly. Most of the heads have long side-locks and some have ears (nos. 7, 8, 10, etc.). NO.6 may be a male figurine. No.7 has a hole (for suspension?), but it is the only case known among the 900 figurines in appendixes 4-5. It is not a hole for firing, of the type found in hollow heads [cf. fig. 9:6 and type 5.VI.5 below]. Body parts are preserved in no. 11 (hollow body and stump hands, extended sideways); nos. 12,36 (solid body, one hand on the shoulder holding a veil); and no. 39 (hand-made body). No. 20 from Megiddo is reminiscent of heads from the Jordan valley (4.11.18,23,24 above). No. 25 may be later then the Iron Age. For no. 28 cf. figurine 5.111.6.7 (above).

"Ashdoda" heads. App. 5.IV.4 [fig. 8:9]. 7 specimens. This type is fairly close to type 5.IV.3 (above), but more schematic. The only whole figurine of this type (no. 1) is the famous so-called "Ashdoda" [fig. 8:9], showing a women with a body shaped as a rectarigular chair or bed. The heads are flattened from above, cylindrical and without any clear separation between the neck and the head. The eyes and the nose are applied. The connections between the "Ashdoda" and Aegean figurines are obvious (cf. especially no. 4, and Dothan 1982 for discussion). It is possible that type 5.IVA heads are the forerunners of type 5.1V.3 heads (the whole Ashdoda figurine is dated to the Iron Age I period). For Cypriote comparisons cf. Courtois 1984: figs. 24:14; 26:9.

Coastal moulded heads. App. 5.mS. 40 specimens. It seems that most of these heads belong to female figurines with hollow bodies (cf. types 5.111.1-5.III.5 above). No. 17 is the only whole one, a women playing a string instrument. Like the other 5.III types, the heads are different from the JPFs' heads: they have ears and long side-locks (notwithstanding the many cases of badly preserved or inadequately published specimens, which cannot be classified). Most of the heads were found at Ashdod and Tel Gemmeh. A few have an Aegean "Daedalic" type of coiffure (nos. 1, 7, 8, 15; cf. Schwartz 1989: pl. 49:6-8).

Miscellaneous heads. App. 5.IV.5. 41 specimens. Many heads in this group cannot be adequately classified. No.4 is hollow. Body parts were preserved in 17 specimens, and

33

they are usually solid. They include figurines with legs (nos. 6-8, 10, 21?, 22, 34, 38) and other forms (nos. 9, 14). Another figurine is holding an object (28). There is also one pillar shaped body (no. 20, in doubt) and one hollow body (no. 23). Heads nos. 12, 13, 17? and 19 form a special group, probably of male figurines. Almost all the heads of type 5.1V5 have incised or applied features. Only no. 24 from Tel Gemmeh is close in form to the hand-made JPFs' heads, but unlike them it has incised nostrils. Some of the heads from Tel Gemmeh are close to type 5.1V.3. No.9 is similar to no. 39, and both belong, probably, to the Iron Age I period.

below (in type 5.VI.2). The moulding of these figurines is shallow. The women wear bracelets and often rings on the ankles. The figurines were made from different moulds and vary in details. No. 9 from Tel Ira is unique: it portrays a Hermaphrodite figure (Beck 1991). The figurines were dated to the Iron Age I and II. It is possible to discern within them one group, which is more deeply and crudely moulded. The figurines in this group hold a small drum, usually with both hands (unlike the more common position of one hand holding the bottom of the drum and the other hand beating it). Most of this group was found in Transjordan, it is less decorated and has simpler hairdresses (without curls around the face).

Hollow body-parts (of types 5.rn-5.1V). App. 5.IV.6. 23 specimens. Nos. 1, 4-18, 21 are certainly hollow. A few of them hold their breasts, others hold a drum (nos. 14-16,21) or some other, unidentified object (nos. 17, 18?). Nos. 2-3 are very similar to each other, but it is not clear whether or not their bodies are hollow. For no. 9 cf. 5.1II.6.1,above.

Plaque figurines in the tradition of the second millennium BC. App. 5.V.2 - 5.V.6 [fig. 11:3-9]. 73 specimens. Almost all of these figurines have a wide, unmoulded clay background around the moulded part (except type 5.V6). The moulding is shallow. There are many variations in the position of the arms (on the chest, along the body, uplifted, holding lotus branches, etc.). I have sorted the figurines according to the hairdress styles (unlike Holland), since in many cases only the heads survived and the position of the arms is unknown.

Solid body parts. App. 5.IV.7. 28 specimens. They are all made in the round, but have varied arm positions: on the chest (nos. 4, 12?, 13, 16?); on the stomach (nos. 2, 3, 7, 17, 23, 28); lifted (nos. 1, 14, 26, 27); behind the back (no. 5); alongside the body (no. 8, 18) and holding an object (no. 24). Two or three fragments resemble the JPFs, to a certain extent (nos.'8, 10, 27), but they all have features which do not appear among the JPFs.

"Hathor" hairdress. App. 5.V.2 [fig. 11:3]. 33 specimens, all having wide clay backgrounds and shallow moulding. 18 of them depict a naked woman with the arms extended sideways and holding lotus branches (nos. 1-2, 8-11, 12?, 13-16, 21-23, 25-27, 29). Other figurines are holding their breasts (nos. 4-7, 24). Few figurines hold one hand on the chest and the other along the body (nos. 3, 31), both hands along the body (no. 28), or both hands on the belly (no. 30).

Solid fragments, unclassified. App. 5.IV.8. 11 specimens. All have remains of legs, except no. 1, but each is different from the other.

"Hathor" hairdress with a cap of "feathers". App. 5.V.3 [fig. 11:4]. 7 specimens from Gezer. They all have a wide clay background. The "feathers" appear as vertical lines on the forehead, but the meaning of this hairdress is not clear. No. 5 does not have "Hathor" side-locks, but the drawing is not very good. When the bodies have been preserved, they show naked females with their hands on their breasts (except no. 1, which has one hand along its body). No.7 from Gezer dates probably to the Late Bronze Age. For the "feather" hairdress cf. also type 5.V5 below.

m.3.6. Plaque Figurines (App. 5. V) Plaque figurines are made of shallow, rectangular (or somewhat oval) lumps of clay, moulded in the front with a shallow mould (usually). They were very popular during the Late Bronze Age. At Gezer, many were attributed to the early Iron Age period, and Holland accepted this dating. Today, it seems that some at least belong to the Late Bronze Age, following better dated examples from newer excavations at Gezer and elsewhere. In any case, there are also plaque figurines from clear Iron Age I contexts. During the Iron Age II, they are restricted to a few types, which are very different from their Bronze Age predecessors. I have classified the plaque figurines mainly by the shapes of the heads, consistent with the classification of the JPFs. Drum players. App. 5.V.1 [fig. 11:1-2]. 42 specimens (cf. also 4.VII.3 below). Most of these figurines have already been discussed by Beck (1991). They hold a disk of clay close to the chest, usually covering one breast. The edge of the disk is often decorated with geometric patterns of incised lines," The identification of the disk as a drum is discussed

"Crescent" hairdress. App. 5.V.4 [fig. 11:5]. 22 specimens. The side-locks descend straight downwards, and are usually shorter then those ofthe former types. They do not curl outside at the lower end like the "Hathor" hairdress. There are some variations, with many figurines having narrow clay backgrounds and hands on their bellies. Nos. 14 from Tel Beit Mirsim were found in level B of the late Iron Age I period. Nos. 12-14 from Gezer have a special hairdress. Nos. 15-16, 18, 22 are made in the tradition of type 5.V.II. Some of the drawings and photographs are poor, . preventing exact classifications.

7 The identification of plaque figurines is much easier then round figurines, since the head forms a direct continuation of the body, and a small body-part may suffice. Also, plaque-figurines are more sturdy then round ones (chap. VII and fig. 30 below).

"Feathers" hairdress without side-locks. App. 5.V.5 [fig. 11:6]. 4 specimens, including one mould. Unlike type 5.V3, the heads protrude from the plaque and lack clay backgrounds. No. 4 is the only whole figurine, with its

34

hands holding its breasts. This is probably a northern group, found at Ta'anakh and Megiddo.

Leg fragments. App. 5.V.H. 10 fragments, too battered or small for further classification.

"Uraeus symbol" hairdress. App. 5.V.6 [fig. 11:7-8]. 7 specimens. They have no clay backgrounds. Part of the body survived for no. 2, with hands holding breasts. The symbol on the head is not really identical among all these figurines. Sellin (1904:74) suggested that this symbol was an Egyptian uraeus (viper), followed by Giveon (1967). This explanation was criticized by Lapp (1964:40).

m.3.7. Phoenician Figurines (App. 5.VI) I am using the term Phoenician for convenience sake, to avoid a long geographic term such as "the Coast of Northern Israel". The number of excavations in central Phoenicia (Lebanon) is limited, and published reports are few (in general see Ward 1994). Many of the figurines below deserve the "Phoenician" label, while in some cases it is more a matter of an accepted convention. The chronology of each type is not easy to define, with some types continuing well into later periods.

Other plaque figurines. App. 5.V.7 [fig. 11:9]. 38 specimens. This is not a homogeneous group. No. 1 is a double flute player; nos. 2-4 carry a child; nos. 5-7 are exceptional, perhaps indicating western influences. Nos. 814 from Beth Shean form a special group of simple, crude figurines from tombs (cf. perhaps 5.V.4.21, but the photograph is bad). The figurine from Tel Zeror, no. 17, has a "Hathor" hairdress, but the body is almost without a clay background (unlike type 5.V2 above).

In general, the figurines grouped here as Phoenician are technically superior to the JPFs. Many are made in a double mould, with hollow heads and bodies. They tend to be more realistic, with the faces better portrayed. Also, some unique types appear in this group, such as the so-called dea Tyria and the daily life scenes.

Body fragments with background. App. 5.V.8. 31 specimens, probably of types 5.V.2 - 5.V6 (above). Only a few can be classified exactly (e.g., nos. 4, 23, which were holding lotus branches). The fragments from Ashdod may have belonged to type 5.V9 (below).

"Dea Tyria", App. 5.VI.1 [fig. 9:1]. 16 specimens. The bodies are hollow and made in a double mould. The figurines depict sitting, pregnant women, holding one hand on their bellies and the other on their knees. Some of these figurines are later then the Iron Age (nos. 8-10, 12? 13-14). Many are derived from illegal excavations; and their origins are unknown (not included here, except no. 15). Their name was coined by Culican (1969), and they are common in Phoenicia (Culican 1969; 1975-6; Gubel 1986:113 nos. 3638; 1991:131; Pritchard 1988:49-52, fig. 12; Vandenabeele 1986:351f). They are also common in Cyprus, at sites like Kition and Amathos (Beer 1991:78; Caubet 1991: fig. 4a-b; Gubel 1991:131; Sophocleous 1985: pI. 18:1, figs. 7-9; Vandenabeele 1986:35lf; 1989:266; Yon and Caubet 1988: 3lf, figs. 2a, 7a, 8a, 9), and in the Punic world (Gubel 1991:131, with references).

Pregnant plaque figurines in deep moulding. App. 5.V.9. 21 specimens. This appears to be quite a common type in the southern coastal plain (for comparable Transjordanian figurines cf. type 4.VIII above). It seems to be a late Iron Age II development. 8 A large group of these figurines was found in Ashdod (nos. 1-7). The hands lie on the chest, or one hand lies along the body and the other on the chest. Some figurines were found in levels 1-3 of area D, while others were not stratified. A second group from Tel Gemmeh is different from the Ashdodite group. These figurines are made from large clay lumps, stamped in a smaller mould (thus leaving a clay background). The photographs in the report are, unfortunately, not very good. The classification of nos. 19-20 is not clear. I have included here also the Tel Batash plaque figurines, which are unique (19-21), but share the deep moulding, the long side-locks and the suggestion of pregnancy.

Women playing drums. App. 5.Vl.2 [fig. 9:2-3]. 15 specimens. Most of these figurines have hollow, wheel-made bodies (my type E). The body of nos. 11-13 is also hollow, but the position of the arms is different. No. 11 holds a dove (?), cf. fragments 5.VI.5.27-28 from Tel Keisan (below). All the faces are made in a mould. The hair is collected in long side-locks, often ending with a large "bun" or "earlobe" shape on the shoulders (nos. 5, 9). In other cases, the side-locks are twisted (no. 7) or simple (cf. Elgavish 1994:64). The figurines hold a large disk perpendicular to the body.

Miscellaneous body fragments. App. 5.V.10. 29 specimens. Nos. 1-8 have no backgrounds (from Ashdod, Ta'anakh and Megiddo). The other figurines include a wild range of peculiarities or unclassified fragments. Nos. 10, 16 and 25 have a peculiar decoration on the belly. They are perhaps fragments of female drum-players.

Formerly, the disk was explained as a sacred loaf of bread or as a cake (e.g., Glueck 1945). Meyers claimed that the disk was a drum only when it was perpendicular to the body (like in my types 4.1, 5.VI.2). When it was fastened to the breasts, it was not a drum (thus Meyers 1987:117f; 1991:18f; cf. Meerschaert 1991:183f).

8 It seems that the general trend in development of plaque figurines began with figurines with clay-backgrounds (first wide and later narrow). The next stage were figurines whose heads protrude from the background; fmally the figurines lost the background completely. Technically, there is perhaps a movement from shallow moulding to deep moulding. This is nothing but a tentative suggestion.

35

Miscellaneous. App. 5.VL6. 7 specimens. Most of these are hollow fragments of figurines, whose archaeological origins are unknown.

I find it hard to agree with this view: the decoration at the edges and especially the way in which the hands are portrayed (one holding the lower side of the disk and the other beating flatly against it) fit the position of a drum. It seems to me that both types convey the same theme, and only the technique is different (round figurines vs. plaque figurines). In coroplastic art, it is harder to depict a drum perpendicular to the body; furthermore, such a depiction is impossible for the manufacturing of plaque figurines, which are flattened lumps of clay stamped in a very shallow, frontal mould. It seems that in both cases we are dealing with drums, only the style of presentation is different. Another argument in favour of this conclusion is the fact that there are female figurines in Cyprus and Phoenicia, which do hold loaves or cakes, but these are different from drum-holding figurines (Yon and Caubet 1998:30; for drums in the Bible see Keel 1972:335ff; Schmidt-Colinet 1981; Mitchell 1992).

The conclusion is clear: apart from very few figurines of type Be, heads of types A and B are always related with solid pillar bodies of type C.

different (having large ears, long side-locks of hair, necklaces etc.). Even the simpler hand-made common types of female figurines are different from the Judean ones (e.g., in the use of incisions and applications).

m.5.2. The Possibility that Heads of Type A Belonged to Disk-Holding Bodies

m.3.8. Miscellaneous (App. 5.VB - 5.VDI) Figurines from later periods. App. 5.VILI. 23 specimens. Holland (1975) included all these figurines in his work. I have listed them in the appendix, only to show that they are later from the Iron Age and therefore have no direct relation with the JPFs. They need not be discussed further here. Miscellaneous. App. 5.VIL2. 6 specimens. Holland (1975) included them in his work. They are either made of stone or faience, or belong to periods other than the Iron Age II. A few represent fragments of animal figurines, or fragments whose archaeological origins are unknown.

In any case, drum-holding figurines are very common in Cyprus and Phoenicia (Gubel 1986:120 no. 49; Karageorghis 1987:17-19, nos. 7, 27, 29; Yon and Caubet 1988:30f, fig. 6a; Bisi 1989:259f; Vandenabeele 1989:266, 268; Meyers 1991:20f; S~rensen 1991: pl. 68e; Meerschaert 1991:183-186; Caubet 1992:262). They are also quite common in the Punic World (Ferron 1969; note that also there the disk is fastened to the chest).

Moulds. App. 5.vm. 21 specimens, excluding 7 other specimens already included in appendixes 4-5 (for details see note in app. 5.VIII). It was necessary to present these moulds in relation to the questions of production, mouldseries and origin of the technique (discussed in chap. VI).

IlIA. The Classification of the Whole Figurines

Daily scenes. App. 5.VL3 [fig. 9:4]. 3 specimens. This is a rare type in Northern Israel. It depicts kinds of daily activities: a woman kneading dough, a bathing women and a women holding an object (a phallus?). Similar daily scenes in clay are known from Cyprus and the Punic world (Bisi 1979: fig. 4; Karageorghis 1987: group 1, pl. 1:1-4; Vandenabeele 1986:354-357; 1989:267).

I have catalogued 53 whole, or nearly whole, JPFs (appendixes 1-2, excluding the addition to app. 2). Six of these figurines are defined as exceptional (four have drums, type 5.1.3; and two have hollow bodies, type 5.1.1). This leaves 48 "regular" whole JPFs of my types Ac-Bc (a few are nearly whole, my types A+, B+. One figurine lacks breasts, app. 2:8; and another carries a child, app. 2:232). All these 53 figurines were found in Judah, except perhaps one or two from sites on the western border, whose exact political affiliation is not clear (cf. chap. V below). There is only one exception - a figurine from Tel el-Oreimeh, but it has a hollow body (type Be, app. 5.1.1). It does not matter if one excludes type Be for being exceptional or includes it with the JPFs, since there are so few figurines of this type (app. 5.1.1). The conclusion is clear: according to the whole figurines, the definition of the JPFs as Judean is valid. These figurines are indeed the common (anthropomorphic) type in Iron Age II Judah.

Other, fairly whole, figurines. App. 5.VL4. 4 specimens. The exact type to which these figurines belong is not clear (perhaps 5.VI.l?). Miscellaneous fragments. App. 5.VL5 [fig. 9:5-8]. 42 specimens, including heads and body fragments. Nos. 1-24, 36-38 are heads, mostly hollow and made in a double mould [fig. 9:5]. The hole in the back side of the head was called a ventilation hole (Holland 1975; Keisan I:335f). Its function is to prevent explosion of the head when the air inside is heated during firing. Few heads are solid (nos. 3, 4?, 11, 13), and as for the rest of the heads, the structure is not clear. Most of the heads have long side-locks behind the ears. Vertical lines above the forehead mark the hair. The facial features are delicate.I'' Some heads are reminiscent of the famous "woman at the window" ivories. Head no. 5 [fig. 9:5] belongs, probably, to a rider. The body parts, nos. 24-35 and 39-41, are hollow and wheel-made (as far as can be judged). They were found at Tel Keisan and Kabri. One similar head is dated to the Persian Period (no. 42).

It is possible to start to see regional assemblages according to the evidence of the whole figurines. The Judean coroplastic assemblage includes the JPFs, but also the much rarer types 5.1.3, 5.11.2 and 5.11.3. Characteristic of all of these is the simple, solid, pillar body, usually covered with white-wash and often decorated with simple bands of yellow and red paint. Most of these traits are shared with other types of Judean figurines, such as animal figurines (not discussed here). On the other hand, in the coastal plain, Phoenicia and Transjordan, the assemblages are different. The common types of female figurines in these areas have hollow, wheel-made bodies; and the moulded heads are

10Holland (1975)placeda head from Gileam(here app. 5.VI.5.3) in his type A.IV.a (among JPF figurines). It seems that it belongs to a type found in Shiqmona (cf app. 5.VI.5.13, 17, etc.) and is different from the JPFs. 36

111.5. The Classification of Heads and Body Fragments of the JPFs

When we judge by the whole figurines, most of the types of female drum players do not have A type heads at all (see 5.VI.2, 5.V.l and 4.1). It is clear that the possibility of type A heads and disk-holding bodies applies only to type 5.1.3. There are currently 27 whole JPFs with type A heads and type C bodies (app. 1-2, types Ac, A+), versus only 3 whole, or nearly whole figurines of type 5.1.3.12 If we rely on this relation, ca. 11.5% of type A heads could have belonged to drum-players of type 5.1.3.

The conclusion about the differences in the assemblages of the whole figurines (above) is valid also when considering the figurine fragments. Among the ca. 850 figurines in app. 4-5 (excluding the Judean types of 5.1.1, 5.1.3 and, of course, the figurines of app. 5.VII), only a handful look similar to the JPFs (e.g., 4.111.6-7; 4.Y.12; 5.111.5.1-2, 4). Furthermore, it is likely that most of these figurines are not really similar to the JPFs, but belong to other types of figurines. The "similarity" is only a result of inadequate publications or bad state of preservation, which prevent us from noticing differences. Certainly, there are very few JPFs' fragments outside Judah - while the opposite is also true: there are few "foreign" figurines in Judah.

The fragments may help us here again: there are 123 JPFs' body fragments, that show a clear position of hands supporting the breasts (app. 1-2, among types Cl-C2). On the other hand, there are only 7 body fragments in app. 1-2, which hold a drum (three of which are doubtful). This 123:7 relation means that ca. 5.7% of type A heads could have had drums, a fairly low percentage.

Before continuing, we must first sort some problems regarding the identification of the fragments of the JPFs themselves.

I would further argue that type 5.1.3 is a Judean type of figurine. Apart from the drum, all the other features are exactly similar to the JPFs. Thus, including this type in the JPFs' corpus (as I did) would not matter in regard to the discussion about the borders of Judah (chap. V).

m.5.1. The Possibility that Heads of Types A-B belong to Bodies not of Type C It is clear that in a few rare cases the type B heads appear with a hollow pillar body (type Be, App. 5.1.1, cf. fig. 3 above). There is no other type of figurine that I know of, inside or outside Judah, which has heads of type B with bodies that are not solid pillar bodies (type C). There are 22 whole JPFs with B heads (Be, B+, app. 1-2) versus only 2 whole figurines of type Be (app. 5.1.2). If we rely on this relation, some 10% of the B heads may have been connected to hollow E bodies. In absolute numbers, it would mean ca. 14-15 heads. 11 Type Be seems to be a hybrid form between the JPFs and the coastal or Phoenician pillar figurines. One of the two whole Be figurines was found at Tel el-Oreimeh, outside Judah. The other was found at Lachish, near Philistia.

m.5.3. The Possibility that Heads of Type A Belonged to Solid Rider Figurines The hand-made type A heads are very similar to heads of horse and rider figurines from Judah (but not from other areas). The Judean riders were discussed in the original Ph.D work as type H.l. Without the body, the classification of the head is often not clear. But it is enough to have a small body part, or even the section of the neck. The necks are rounded in the JPFs, while they are much thinner and crescent shaped in the riders. Unfortunately, information on this is missing from many of the early excavation reports.

In any case, the body-fragments present the same picture: I have found only 8 fragments of hollow pillar bodies in Judah (app. 5.1.2), versus 245 solid, regular JPFs' bodies (types Cl-C3 in app. 1-2). In other words, hollow pillar bodies are extremely rare, forming only ca. 3.3% of the bodies in Judah. This is, no doubt, a negligible percentage (based on a large enough amount of artifacts).

Against 27 whole JPFs with type A heads, there are only 2 whole riders with the same type of head (one from Lachish, Lachish III: pl. 29:18 and Holland 1975: D.VI.a.l1 = D.XV.a.6; the other from Beth Shemesh, Mackenzie 1912: 88 pls, 53, 54:3 and Holland 1975: D.VI.a.2). This is a fairly negligible relation. Differences of size may help to distinguish the two types: the riders are significantly smaller than the JPFs. Heights of heads of Judean riders vary between 13-23 mm (17 specimens with an average of 18

11 Again excluding the addition to app. 2, which, if included, would further support my argument.

12 Thesethreewholefigurines are app. 1-2: nos. 45,118,359. 37

mm), while those of type A JPFs' heads vary between 15-32 mm (104 specimens with an average of 26 mm).13

other types and not to the JPFs. The current number of C.3 bases is considerable (43 in app. 1-2, and much more with the addition to app. 2), thus their fate must be decided. IS Despite the problem, I have retained all C.3 bases as JPFs' bases (in app. 1-2). Most of them did belong to JPFs, and their exclusion would be a loss. A more substantial reasoning is the fact that almost all the other types mentioned above (5.ll.1-2 and H.1.p) are also Judean figurines, found in Judah and having the same coroplastic tradition. They all share with the JPFs the solid, hand-made pillar body, the white-wash and simple painted decoration, the schematic rendering, the lack of incised and applied details, etc. Thus, even if I had included a few bases of these figurines among the JPFs' corpus, this is a well calculated risk that would have no effect on the Judean definition of the JPFs.

ID.5.4. The Problem of Relating the Body Fragments (types C.1-C.2) to the Heads The question is whether C.I-C.2 body fragments can be related to heads, which are not of types A-B? If so, it would mean that perhaps not every C body is a JPFs. This seems a very rare possibility, if at all. Inside Judah, there are no whole examples for this (among all the figurines in app. 5.1 and 5.11. Of course, there is nothing of this sort in app. 1-2). This is true for figurines from other areas (app. 4-5), which have hollow bodies or different arms positions (unlike C.lC.2). Theoretically, few figurines of this kind may exist (perhaps among type 5.1V), and are perhaps unknown to me because of poor photographs or partial publications, but at the moment we can consider this to be a purely theoretical possibility.

Following the conclusions of sections 111.5.1-5, I have defined 578 figurines in app. 1-2 as JPFs, and they will serve as our basic data-base for any further discussion. These figurines include 150 hand-made heads of type A, 183 moulded heads of type B and 245 body parts of types C.I-C.3. With the addition to app. 2, the total is 854, of which there are 198 hand-made heads, 208 moulded heads and 448 body parts.

Therefore, we must discuss the pillar bodies of types Cl-C2 in relation to the JPFs. One should not dismiss them as impossible for classification, as did Engle (1979). On the contrary, they are quite distinctive. Furthermore, whenever the upper end of the body remains, it is possible to classify it more exactly than assumed so far. Type A heads were made as part of the body, and when broken would leave a simple section at the neck. Type B heads have a peg, and when broken would either leave a distinctive depression in the body (if the peg remained intact with the head), or appear as an inner circle in the section of the neck. This enables us to associate body fragments with types A or B exactly, but regrettably, earlier excavators missed this opportunity and did not present the necessary evidence in most of the publications. 14

111.6. Comparison to the HollandEngle Typologies Having established the present typology, I will comment briefly on its relation to the former main typologies of Holland and Engle.

ID.6.1. The Relation between the Typologies of Holland and Engle

ID.5.5. The Problem of the Definition of the Pillar Bases, Type C.3

There is no clear correlation between the two systems, and that of Holland is much better, being more detailed and encompassing a larger number of figurines. Therefore, Engle's eye types can only be added as a secondary component, but cannot form the base of an independent typology.

are basically different in every other aspect. In a few cases, I have classified figurines differently to Holland (usually after seeing the figurines themselves; see app. 2: nos. 57, 72, 73, 79, 144 167, 308, etc.). In two cases, Holland mistook two different photographs of the same figurine as two different figurines (Holland 1975, figurines AIII.b.2=AII.e.3; AIV.e.2=AVI.a.3). Engle used this as an argument against Holland's whole typology, but this was unjust. These are only simple errors, that are bound to happen in every study of such a magnitude. The blame lies in bad photographs and inadequate textual descriptions. It surely does not imply a basic fault in the typology of Holland.

ID.6.2. Holland's Typology compared with the Present Work 359 figurines were included in app. 1-2 (below) from Holland's types All-AX In fact, included are all the specimens from Holland's types Al.a-g, All, AlII, AIY.ad, AV, AVI.b, AVI.e; AVII; A VIII; AIX; AXb; and AX.c (except five specimensj.P The following types are partially included: ALi (3 of 12); AIV.e (4 of 7); AVI.a, AVI.d; AXa (5 of 12); AX.i (1 of 2) and most of AX! (except fragments which cannot be clearly classified). None of the figurines from Holland's types ALi, k, 1; AIV.f, g, h; AVI.b; AX.d-h; AX!I-AXVII was included in my JPFs corpus (but appear in app. 4-5, of course). The classification was done strictly by form, and never according to geographic considerations. The figurines which were excluded are typologically different, to a substantial degree, from the JPFs. Details and discussion for each case are presented in the appendixes.

ID.6.3. Engle's Typology compared with the Present Work

There is thus no good correlation between my typology and that of Holland, despite the mutual basic principles (typology based on hairdress styles: the number of rows and shape of curls for moulded heads; applied additions for hand-made heads). The reason for the lack of correlation is the mixing of different types in Holland's type A (types that I do not define as JPFs). For example, in Holland's typology figurines from Megiddo or Buseirah can be put with JPFs, if they have the same number and shape of curls, but

I have rejected Engle's typology, and it has no apparent correlation with my typology. There are 146 figurines in the JPFs' corpus (app. 1-2 below), which appear in Engle's work, including all his types I-VI, most of his type VII and very few of his foreign type VIII (app. 1-2: nos. 11,86, 161, which seemed to be "kosher" JPFs to me). I have not included Engle's figurines 1:6, VII:4, since their origins are unknown. Another figurine which was not included is Engle's VI:6, which he saw in the [now closed] Beer-Sheba Museum, but gave no registration number. I assume that it is a figurine from Aharoni's excavations at Tel Beer Sheba, already included in my catalogue. Excluded are a few other figurines, which seemed to be mistakn classifications.l? Most of Engle's type VIII is included in app. 4-5. To sum up, Engle dealt with only 146 JPFs, which form about a quarter of the JPFs known today (in app. 1-2), or only a sixth (including the addition of app. 2).

18 These are Holland'sAll.d2, AIX.b.l, AX.bA8, AX.c.1-2.

19 Engle's type Vll:37 looks very different to a JPF. His Vll:40, Vll:42 have ears, and should have been defined as his "foreign" type VllI. Figurine Vll:36 is a plaque figurine, wrongly classified by Engle. It does appear in Holland's work, where it should be, among the plaque figurines (Holland's type C.IX.g.9).

Engle claimed that his typology corresponded well to Holland's typology, but keys 5-6 and fig. 3b (below) prove otherwise. Almost all of Engle's types were spread among several of Holland's types. Furthermore, each of Holland's types has more sub-types, which are different (not detailed in fig. 3b below). For example, Engle's type III is scattered among seven types and sub-types of Holland's, 16 and Engle's type V is scattered among ten of.Holland's types and subtypes.!? The 15 specimens of Engle's type VII seem, at a first glance, to accord well with Holland's type All, but actually they are scattered among 6 sub-types (Holland 1975: types AII.a, Allc, AII.d, A.lI.e, AIl.h, A.lLi).

This is the hardest problem, since bases C.3 could belong not only to the JPFs, but also to lamp figurines (type 5.11.1), bird figurines with pillar bases (type 5.11.2) and riders with pillar bases (type H.1.p in the original Ph.D). The ratio between the whole figurines, JPFs on one hand and all these other types on the other hand is 49:9. We can compare body parts (only those that have the base) as well; JPFs' fragments of types Cl and C2 versus the other types mentioned above. Then the ratio is more in favour of the JPFs. Still, quite a large proportion of C.3 bases could have belonged to the 13 Unfortunately, I have studied these differences at a rather late stage, after including all the type A heads in app. 1-2. It is possible that a few of the smaller heads among them are riders, but it was senseless to start all of the appendixes and tables from the beginning because of a few items.

15 There are also differences of size between the larger JPFs and the smaller riders' bases, but I have not used these for the classification of the fragments. 16 Holland's types AII.a, All.h, AN.a, AN.b, AN.d, AVll.a, AVll.b.

14 In app. 1: field "breaks", a small letter "p" indicates a depression of a peg in a body, or an intact peg left with a head. Of course, it appears only when the neck is broken (code 1).

17 These are: All.a, All.c, All.d, Am.b, AVI.a, AVI.c, AVI.d, kVle, AIX, AXil.

38

39

peaceful continuation in the area between the Iron Age and the Babylonian period are correct (chap. 1.3.2 above). Zorn (1993) dated some loci from Tel en-Nasbeh, in which JPFs were found, to a "Babylonian-Persian" level (cf. app. 2: nos. 126, 138, 148, 152?, 171?, 172?). It must be pointed out that these loci are often mixed, and that Zorn could not date artifacts with certainty to specific sub-phases within the Iron Age. Nor could Zorn (1993:967) present coherent, detailed building plans for each phase, though not through any fault of his own.

Chapter IV: The Chronology "The psychoanalyst, like the archaeologist in his excavations," the WolfMan recalled Freud telling him, "must uncover layer after layer ofthe patient psyche, before coming to the deepest, most valuable treasures" (Gray, P. 1989. in: Sigmund Freud and Art. ed. L. Gamwell and R Wells. New York 16). 2: nos. 33, 98, 276, 598,600).2 A few other JPFs' fragments were dated to the 9th century BC (app. 2: nos. 99, 187, 188, 280. Add, maybe, no. 457 from Arad).

IV.t. The Data The dates of the archaeological phases and levels of the Judean sites were discussed in chap. 1.3 - 1.4 (above). The dating of each JPF was investigated carefully and registered in appendixes 1-2. There is no need to repeat the technical details of dating here. I was very careful in dating the figurines, perhaps too careful, but caution is surely better then adopting "exact" dates which lack solid archaeological evidence. Only 251 of the 578 JPFs have any dating data (app. 1: field "date"), i.e., ca. 43.6% of the total corpus (excluding figurines 614-854 in the addition to app. 2).1 All the rest of the JPFs lack clear stratigraphy, having been found on the surface, in earth debris, on slopes outside the settlements, and in varied secondary contexts (such as late building fills and pits). It is suffice to cite a few examples. Kenyon's excavations at Jerusalem produced a very large assemblage of JPFs, but only a small part of it is securely dated. Most of the figurines were found in a secondary, or late contexts (such as "Early Jewish Iron Age Ic-Id" , cf. Jerusalem 1:2). This is, of course, not through any fault of the excavators. In Tel en-Nasbeh, the levels and sub-phases of the Iron Age were not distinguished well, and today it is hopeless to try and date exactly many of the figurines, since one cannot date exactly even whole rooms and houses (cf. Zorn 1993). We begin the study of chronology with the already much reduced data base of 251 JPFs (fig. 12 below).

To be honest, we cannot differentiate the 10th century from the 9th century BC in Judah. There is a growing tendency to lower the dates of levels which were dated to the 10th century BC, to the 9th century BC (e.g., Jericke 1992:219 n.17 for Tel Beer Sheba V; for the Negev in general cf. Na'aman 1992b:83; Haiman 1994:59-61).3 In some cases, there are doubts regarding the archaeological stratigraphy of early dated JPFs. For example, it is clear that Grant hardly understood the Iron Age levels at Beth Shemesh; Wright did a marvellous post-mortem analysis - but of finds from one area only (AS V). As a result of the careless excavations, we cannot date securely many JPFs from Beth Shemesh, since most of the loci are mixed. In Arad the registration of the loci is usually clear, but scholars debate about the chronology of the Iron Age levels (Herzog 1984; 1987; Mazar and Netzer 1986; Ussishkin 1988).

During the Persian period, a totally different picture emerges. New forms of figurines appear, many of which show clear Aegean or Persian motifs. A new technique of double-moulding of hollow figurines becomes common. Most of the figurines are found outside settlements, in pits or favissae. The distribution patterns are very different from the Iron Age: the large assemblages of figurines are found outside Judah, along the coast (Stern 1992:159-174; Stern 1989). It would be safe to conclude that the JPFs went out of use before the Persian period, presumably ca. 586 BC. This conclusion is based on the meager number of JPFs which can be dated later than 586 BC, and on the great changes that occurred in the typology, context and distribution of figurines in the land of Israel after 586 BC.

Many JPFs cannot be dated accurately, except a general dating to the Iron Age II (15 figurines, including a few from mixed loci). 4 I defined the date of not less than 84 JPFs as tentatively 8th-7th centuries BC, since their contexts are not secure. Included here are 33 figurines which probably date to the 8th century BC and 36 figurines which probably date to the 7th century BC (fig. 12: rows "8?", "17"). 15 other figurines can only be dated tentatively to both these centuries (fig. 12: row "8-7?").

IV.2.2. Post Iron Age dating Only two JPFs have been dated to the Persian period (nos.' 185, 482), but they are exceptional in other ways as well. The head from Tel Michal (app. 2:482) is probably hollow, and thus belonged to one of the coastal types and not to the JPFs. It was found in an area which had remains of the Persian period, but actually its archaeological context is not clear. The stratification of the Tel Erani head (app. 2:185 ) was not published.

IV.2.1. Early dating (10th - 9th centuries BC) In the past, many scholars claimed that pillar-figurines appeared already in the 10th century BC (e.g., Pilz 1924:140, 161; Pritchard 1943:57; TBM 11I:69; AS V:155, n.28). In many cases, the early-dated figurines were not JPFs according to my definition. In other cases, the dating was not based on sound archaeological contexts. Early dating of the JPFs continued to be popular and is found even today (Keisan I: 346, #BIb; Engle 1979:20f; Winter 1983:107; Lachish V:16; Bloch-Smith 1992:219 n.17). According to the present data (app. 1-2), this view must be questioned. One can count on the fingers the number of "early" figurines dated to the 10th century BC. To be more precise, we are dealing with fragments of figurines (see app.

A certain continuation in the use of the JPFs into the sixth century BC is possible, since surely the destruction of 586 BC could not affect each and every artifact in Judah. From an archaeological point of view, the sixth century BC (Babylonian period) is almost a terra incognita. For example, few of the figurines from Benjamin could have belonged to this period, if the assumptions about the 2 No. 598 is somewhat exceptional. It was dated to the Iron Age I period. 3 This has nothing to do with the JPFs themselves, but with historical considerations about the campaign of Shishak (for the Negev). In other areas, it is the debate about the united Israelite kingdomand the so-called "myth" of king Solomon.

I 297 JPFs have some registration in the Locus field, and 191 in the square field - perhaps since squares were not used in all the early excavations (cf app. 1).

40

Regarding sub-type distributions, the moulded (B) heads are dominant in the 8th century BC (31 specimens). The handmade (A) heads clearly existed then, but in fewer numbers (6 specimens). 13 body fragments exhibit remains of a peg or depressions for a peg, i.e., they once had B heads. 8 of them are dated to the 8th century BC. 7 In the 7th century BC there is a continuation of type B, but a slight dominance of type A. There may be varied explanations for the differences between the centuries, e.g., that the hand-made heads were cheaper (fitting the less wealthy 7th century BC in Judah), or that this is a question of individual taste (a "fashion"). Since the numbers of securely dated JPFs available for comparison are limited (especially for the 7th century BC), the differences may be purely accidental.

IV.3. 8th-7th Centuries BC

The stratigraphy of excavators should be respected, unless there is solid evidence to the contrary. In any case, the amount of "early" dated JPFs is so meager, that their importance is negligible. The JPFs are recognized as a common, substantial phenomenon starting with the 8th centuryBC.

IV.2. The Early and the Late

53 of the securely-dated 143 JPFs can be dated only generally to both the 8th and the 7th centuries BC. Only 90 JPFs could be clearly dated to one specific century, and most of these are from the 8th century BC (70 JPFs). It is clear that the JPFs were very popular by then, unlike the inscribed weights and the rosette stamps, which are basically from the 7th century BC (KIetter 1991; KIetter in press A). Only 20 JPFs were dated to the 7th century BC, somewhat surprisingly. The pillar-figurines of neighboring Phoenicia, Transjordan and Philistia also belong mostly to the 8th-7th centuries BC. An indication for this can be seen in the area of the Kingdom of Israel, where many sites suffered destruction during the Assyrian conquests of 732-730 and 720 BC. Very few pillar-figurines were found in large Israelite sites that had been destroyed in the 8th century BC and not reoccupied to a large extent later (the best example is Hazor). On the other hand, relatively large assemblages of pillar-figurines were found in sites that prospered in the 7th century BC (e.g., Samaria and Megiddo). Of course, these are not JPFs.6

IVA. Amended Dating Data

I.

I

Despite this, there is do doubt in the dating of the JPFs to the 8th-7th centuries BC. This is based on the secure dating of 143 JPFs (fig. 12, row "total secure"). The next question is, can we separate the JPFs of the 8th century BC from those of the 7th century BC? It is not an easy task. Many of the JPFs were found in early excavations, when the separation of the two centuries was not yet possible. In some areas, such as the Judean Desert and the Judean mountains, it is difficult to separate the centuries even today, presumably because Sennacherib's campaign in 701 BC was not very destructive in these areas (chap. 1.3.1 above). Scholars usually thought that there was no chronological pattern within the JPFs, or avoided this question completely. Few scholars made some suggestions (Barkay 1990; Engle 1979),5 but only in a tentative way.

The archaeological dating data can be improved to a certain degree. If a specific site existed only in one century (either the 7th or the 8th) but not in both, then all the JPFs found in this site may be accurately dated, even if they lack clear archaeological stratigraphy. This is a very mixed blessing, since one-period sites are few. We do find 8th century Be sites which were destroyed in 701 BC and left unoccupied

is no real archaeological proof for chronological differences between his two types. Engle also relied on doubtful dating, made in someexcavations. 6 For example, there are no pillar figurines in the relatively early graves in Samaria, but there are many in later loci (such as £.207; Samaria ill:72). In Ashdod, most of the Iron Age figurines belong to later levels of the 8th-7th centuries Be (AshdodII-ill: 135).

4 Mixed loci appear as "mix" in field "date" of app. 1. Of course, this does not mean anything in regard to their dates. Among the 15 "Iron Age II" figurines, I have included also the 4 fragments from Bethel.

7 The 13 are app. 2: nos. 29, 182, 215, 222, 269. 271, 297, 387, 403, 420, 457, 477, 578. There are many more, no doubt, but the published data is incomplete. Sometimesthe lack of peg can show that a body had a hand-made, type A, head (e.g., app. 2: 31, 360, 361,384).

5 Engle(1979:20f) claimed that his type I may be early and type V later; but his typology is problematic (chapter ill.6 above). There

41

little change for the 7th century BC (only 24 dated JPFs). Thus, the main problem remains; without a large assemblage from each century, inter-comparison cannot be made.

(or almost unoccupied) later, mainly in the Shephelah.f The main sites are Tel Beit Mirsirn, Beth Shemesh and Tel Halif (Lahav). One can add Tel Beer Sheba in the Negev. It is safe to assume that all the JPFs from these sites are from the 8th century BC at the latest. There are also sites where the JPFs can be dated to the seventh century BC, though these are fewer in number (mainly sites in the Negev, such as Tel Malhata, Tel Masos and Tel Ira). Areas such as the Judean Mountains, the Judean Desert and Benjamin did not suffer violent destruction during Sennacherib's campaign. These areas would be "late-biased", i.e, their material finds would mainly point towards the 7th century BC.9 Unfortunately, there is no way to translate this conclusion into absolute numbers. It is impossible to say which figurine in the rich JPFs' assemblages of sites like Jerusalem, Tel en-Nasbeh and Gibeon is "early", and which is "late" .. Most of these figurines can only be dated generally to the 8th-7th centuries BC.

I hasten to stress that the relatively small number of well dated JPFs from the 7th century BC should not be taken as evidence for a substantial change in the manufacture or use of the figurines. Of course, it should not be related with any "cult reform" in a simplistic manner. The differences between the phases are quantitative, and not necessarily qualitative. Most of the JPFs were found in the northern Judean Mountains, where it is almost impossible to distinguish between the 8th and the 7th centuries BC (above). As for the Judean Shephelah, the decline in the numbers of JPFs in the 7th century BC may be a result of the general population decline there.

It is not clear why so few body fragments are dated to the 7th century BC, but since the heads required bodies, it must be accidental. Certain regional differences are apparent in some of the variations of JPFs' heads, but matching chronological evidence is not apparent. These regional differences are further discussed in chaps. V.4.2, VI.2.3 (below).

I have presented the amended dating evidence in fig. 13 (below). As earlier or later dating can now be safely ruled out, I will discuss only the 8th and 7th centuries BC. The amendment of the data increased our knowledge about the 8th century BC (127 dated JPFs, fig. 13), and showed again the prominence of type B during this period. It made very

Chapter V: Distribution Patterns and the Relation with the Borders of Judah "Einen Stiefelvoll Him in den Regen geste/t: Es wird ein gehn sein, ein grosses, weit Iiber die Grenzen die sie uns Ziehen" (paul Celan, from: 'Zeitgehoft', 1976).

V.I. The Borders of Judah and the "Heartland" Conception

is not clear. Mittmann (1990) suggested a maximalist view, according to which Hezekiah annexed Ekron and a large part of the territory of Ashdod. Ashkelon and its Jaffa-Azor enclave probably became part of the anti-Assyrian alliance. Hezekiah may have achieved control over Gat as well (Na'aman 1979:67; 1974:27; but more likely Ekron was concerned here instead: Mittrnann 1990:98f).

V.1.1. The Borders of Judah between 701-586 BCI

The archaeological evidence, especially the distribution of the Judean /m/k stamps, strengthens the picture of Judean control in Ekron, and perhaps also in Gezer (Na'aman 1974:35; 1979:75-76; 1986:10-11; 1988:74; Rainey 1983: 15; cf. also Shavit 1992:34ff, 140ff; Kempinski 1993b:178180).

The borders of Judah had been more or less stable since the reign of Asa until 701 BC (Kings 15:16-20; cf. Kallai 1960; Mazar, Amit and l11an 1984; Aharoni 1987; Na'aman 1989:19, 54-55). Judah's northern border passed between Jericho - Mizpah (Tell en-Nasbeh; Aharoni 1958; Kallai 1960; 1986). Its eastern border, the Dead Sea, as well as its southern border, the Arad - Beer-Sheba valleys, were natural borders. Jericho belonged to Israel (Weippert, M. and H. 1976), and the border passed south of it, but probably north of Vered Jericho (Eitan 1984; 1994). These borders remained more or less stable, though Judah had some periods of expansion eastwards and southwards: it ruled Edom until the days of Jehoram, son of Jehoshafat. Later it struggled for the control of the Arabah and Elat (Na'aman 1987b:214-216, with references). The Chronicler claimed that Abiyah conquered southern Samaria (Chr. 2:13), but the historicity of this event is doubtful (Klein 1983, vs. Jones 1994; Deboys 1990). Formerly, it was thought that Judah expanded greatly under Uziah, who was equated with a Syrian king named Azariah; but Na'aman (1974) showed that this equation was baseless.

After his campaign, Sennacherib tore areas from Judah and delivered them to the rule of Ashdod, Gaza and Ekron. The exact extent of these areas is not clear. Formerly, scholars thought that most of Judah had been affected, leaving only a small enclave around Jerusalem and Bethlehem (Alt 1930:242-243; Noth 1960:268-269). It now seems that only the Shephelah, or parts of it, were lost (Na'aman 1979:83; 1986:17; Mittrnann 1990:104; Rainey 1983; Galil 1988:11 n.35; cf. Dagan 1992:260-262). The centralization of the oil industry at 7th century BC Ekron may also reflect the loss of oil producing areas in the Judean Shephelah (Dothan and Gitin 1987; Gitin 1989; 1990; Eitam 1990; Finkelstein 1993:64). Gezer probably returned to Assyrian hands (Reich and Brandl 1985; Becking 1992:114-118). Historical sources on Judah's borders during most of the ''pax Assyriaca" period (700-630/620 BC) are lacking (cf. chap. 1.2.2). Many scholars believe that Manasseh reclaimed the areas lost in the west in 701 BC (Ginsberg 1950; Bulbach 1981; Tatum 1991; Lowery 1991:169; Finkelstein 1993:64; Rainey 1993:160-162). This reconstruction is based, to a large extent, on accepting the Chronicler's story about the repentance of Manasseh (II Chr. 33:10-17; against which see chap. 1.2.2 above). It is also plausible that the return to the "traditional" border was achieved later, by Josiah, contemporary with the Assyrian withdrawal from the west (Na'aman 1989:85).

The western border of Judah was the most unstable of its borders. It passed in the Shephelah, encompassing the Judean cities of Beth Shemesh (Na'aman 1987b), 'Azeqa (Na'aman 1974; 1994; against Galil 1992b:117; 1995) and Lachish (Lachish III; Ussishkin 1977; 1983). Gezer belonged to Israel and later to the Assyrian province of Samaria (Na'aman 1986:7, 10; 1988:74; 1987b:211). The identification of sites in the southern Shephelah is a well known problem, but an approximate border can be deduced with the help of geographic features and settlement patterns (Gophna 1981; Dagan 1992). It is clear that Ekron and Gat belonged to Philistia (Dothan and Gitin 1987; 1994; Gitin 1989; 1990; 1993; 1995; Dagan 1992:34-41). 8 On the settlement deterioration in the Shephelah after 70I Be see Dagan 1992:259-263; Na'aman 1993:113f, with further bibliography.

Hezekiah expanded outside (west) of Judah's "traditional" border in the Shephelah. The exact extent of his expansion

9 Following the archaeological rules that most of the fmds belong to the later years of each level, and that violent destruction of a level leaves a higher nwnber of fmds than peacefulabandonment.

1 ThiS is . a shortened version of a forthcoming paper (Kletter in press A).

42

According to a very common view, Josiah conquered vast areas of the land of Israel and established a kind of a "mini empire" (for the latest adherents to this view see Galil 1992b; Weinfeld 1992:146; Stern 1994; Suzuki 1992:32-37; Laato 1992:76). This theory is based on an early date for the Assyrian withdrawal from the west, while following the Chronicles' version about the geographical extent of Josiah's

43

reform (II Chr. 34). Since the Chronicler's version should be rejected (Chap. 1.2.3 above), it seems that Josiah expanded only into the southern part of Samaria, to the region of Bethel (following II Kings 23:15).2 The death of Josiah at Megiddo (II Kings 23:29, cf. chap. 1.2.4 above) does not imply Judean rule there.

and Yisrael 1995); the appearance of Edomite pottery in the Negev (Mazar, E. 1985) and written evidences (e.g., in the Arad ostraca: Aharoni 1981: nos. 24:20; 40:15).

V.l.2. The Danger of Circular Arguments and the "Heartland of Judah"

A central source in the debate about the kingdom of Josiah is the town list of Judah (Joshua 15; for the basic treatment see Alt 1925b; for a thorough recent discussion see Na'aman 1989). The geographical scope of this list fits well a small kingdom of Josiah, and the dating of the list to his reign is based on the appearance of Bethel, Ophra and Jericho in the list: Judah controlled these cities only during Josiah's reign (Na'aman 1989). The dating of Garfinkel (1987; cf. Galil 1987; Ahituv 1994) is not convincing.

As the historical evidence regarding the borders of Judah during the late Iron Age period is often partial or obscure, the use of archaeological information as a filler for historical lacunae is inevitable. The binding of these two disciplines together carries the danger of tautological, or circular, arguments (fig. 14). One danger is related to the assumption that material remains can indicate political borders (fig. 14: the fourth clause). This question has not been explored much in the archaeological theory of the last 30 years or so. Throughout this period, the so-called new archaeology emphasized the lack of correlation between what was called "pots and people" (e.g., Renfrew 1984; Clarke 1968). Many archaeologists stressed social changes and conceptions about frontiers and peripheries, and not the study of actual border lines. There was also a tendency to ignore historical periods and historical sources. The focus was put on ethnicity, which is hard to define (Green and Perlman 1985; Hodder 1982; 1986; Rowlands et. al. 1987; Renfrew and Cherry 1986, etc.).

Archaeological remains have been seen as proof of the "empire" of Josiah, especially since the excavation at Mesad Hashavyahu in the 1960's. This one-period coastal site was explained as a Judean fort of Josiah (Naveh 1962; Reich 1989), leading to the conclusion that Josiah controlled access to the sea and parts of the coastal plain of Philistia (for criticism see Na'aman 1989:56-57, 00.147-8). Recently, Wenning lowered the date of Mesad Hashavyahu to around 600 BC, following lower dating of the East-Greek pottery found at this site (1989:183-189, cf. Dion 1992:86-88, n.103, Waldbaum 1994:59). If true, the fort had nothing to do with Josiah.3 Wenning (1989:189fi) suggested that king Jehoiakim ruled it, but in view of the weak position of Jehoiakim (who is featured in the Bible as a subservient king to Egypt and Babylon, II Kings 24:1), it is hard to accept this suggestion.

If one shifts the focus from "people" as ethnic units to

"polities" or political units, the relations between artifacts and political borders must be implored. Borders are important for a wide range of purposes: political (maintaining relations with neighboring polities), military (declaring wars, border disputes, etc.), and economic (taxation, return of refugees, trade relations, etc.). Many ancient Near Eastern sources indicate the importance of political borders and the great care taken in establishing and maintaining them. Ideological conceptions regarding borders were also very clear (see esp. Liverani 1990), and in fact universal, from third millennium BC Mesopotamia (e.g., Cooper 1983) to the first millennium BC Biblical sources (e.g., Na'aman 1986b). I have dealt with the relations between artifacts and polities elsewhere (Kletter in press A), and will not repeat the details. The main conclusion is that archaeology can ,indicate political borders with the help of historical sources. At the same time, each polity and each artifact must be studied on its own merits: there are no "covering laws".

Different reconstructions of Judah's borders can be made for the period between 609-586 BC. The archaeological and historical evidence from this period indicates no great changes in the borders. In the Shephelah, Lachish and 'Azeqa remained in Judah (Jeremiah 34:7 and the Lachish ostraca). So did En Gedi in the east and Arad in the south (the Arad ostraca, Aharoni 1981). Certain areas were perhaps torn away from Judah, but only during its very last days. The loss of Bethel - Benjamin to Babylon, and the Negev to Edom, are likely candidates; yet there is no clear evidence for this (Malamat 1982; 1988; Na'aman 1992; Wiseman 1985; Beit Arieh 1995:310-315). Edomites perhaps infiltrated into the Judean Negev at the very end. This is seen from the Edomite site at Qitmit (Beit Arieh 1987; 1989; 1995); the shrine at En-Hazevah (Cohen 2 II Kings 23:19 mentions a reform throughout "the cities of Samaria", but the historicity of this verse is doubtful (Na'aman 1989:55, n. 138; Ahlstrom 1993:752,763-766).

It is more specific to our case that the danger of circularity exists if we do not pay close attention to the definition of Judah in the first and second sentences (in fig. 14). How are the borders of Judah defined there - the very same borders, that we try to define later (in the fourth sentence offig. 14)?

3 Wenning did not discuss the erection date of this fort, which, from a theoretical point of view, can easily be 20 or 30 years earlier than its end. In any case, it would be historically impossible to claim that Mesad Hashavyahu remained in Judean hands from Josiah until ca. 600 Be without interruption. The ostraca from the site cannot date it exactly (Young 1992; DobbsAllsopp 1994, with furtherreference).

Historical sources are the means to overcome this difficulty. This is not an easy process, since the interpretation of the historical evidence is disputed; but it is not possible to rely

44

solely on archaeological evidence. One must first state an opinion about the historical sources independently (chap. 1.3, V.U above). One should also remember that archaeology and history are only a modern dichotomy of only one past: even the dating of archaeological strata is dependent upon historical evidence, e.g., the 701 and 586 destruction horizons.

JPFs, and the northern part of Israel only 7 JPFs (in accordance, ca. 0.5%, 0.8% of all the JPFs). If we adopt the heartland of Judah concept as base for our

discussion, then 822 JPFs (ca. 96%) were found within this area. This number is so high, that there is only one possible conclusion: the JPFs are Judean figurines, found in the kingdom of Judah. This conclusion is not merely possible, it is necessary. The distribution picture is so clear, that even if we misjudged a few sites in regard to the definition of the heartland of Judah, it matters little. Outside Judah, almost no JPFs were found, i.e., in the kingdoms of Israel, Phoenicia, Philistia and Transjordan (below). Local figurine assemblages appear in all these areas, and this also strengthens the conclusion above.

Another working solution involves the geographical conception of the "heartland of Judah".4 This is the area that was always under Judean control, i.e., a minimal definition. Inside this area, Judean population was the overwhelming part of the entire population, and political control was wielded by Judeans. The heartland of Judah included the Judean mountains, Benjamin, the Judean desert and the Biblical Negev. Clearly, Transjordan, Northern Israel, Phoenicia and Philistia had never been a true part of Judah. Only the Shephelah presents a problem, due to the unstable border in this area (chap. V.l above). One can separate it into two parts. The eastern Shephelah is safely attributed to the heartland of Judah (Tel Beit Mirsim, Tel Halif, Tel ej-Judeideh, etc). We have historic evidence for the Judean political affiliation of other sites there (Lachish, Azeka and Beth Shemesh). The western Shephelah (Gat, Ekron) is ascribed to Philistia. A marginal zone remains, where the affiliation of sites such as Kh. Hoga, Tell Erani and Tell Burna is left open for the meantime (Kletter in press A: map 3).

To sum up, the JPFs (as classified here) are Judean. These figurines were manufactured and used by Judeans in Judah, though this does not necessarily mean each and every figurine: a few could have been used outside Judah by nonJudeans (see below). Again, the reader should remember that I am speaking about Judah and the Judeans here as political (and not ethnic) entities.

V.2.2. The JPFs Outside Judah Outside Judah (as defined above) only 32 JPFs were found (ca. 4% of the whole corpus). A great many of these 32 figurines are really cases of doubtful classification, but I have nevertheless included them in the catalogue. This was done to overcome any suspicion of begging the question by excluding finds which do not fit the theory, by defining them as "exceptional". But doubts do exist.

The conception of the heartland of Judah is far from being perfect, and is used only as a working tool. The idea is that this conception may help in the definition of artifacts as Judean: even if Judah expanded outside its heartland, it would only strengthen a definition of artifacts as Judean (leaving less of them outside Judah). On the other hand, it seems that Judah never lost this heartland, except perhaps in its very latest days.

Of the 32 JPFs outside Judah, there are 4 doubtful fragments from Bethel, which cannot be classified due to lack of information (app. 2:3-6). One head from Tel Michal (no. 482) is probably a hollow head, part of the typical coastal figurine types (app. 5). Unfortunately, the report is not specific in regard to this head, and its location today is unknown. Two body fragments from Samaria (app. 2:147, 293) do not look like JPFs, but like northern figurines of females with long side-locks, reaching the shoulders. The body fragment from Tel Qasilah (app. 2:280) is exceptional in form, holding an object with both hands (a drum?). One of the Shechem heads (no. 337) does not look like a regular JPF. The figurine from Tel el-Oreimeh, my type Be, has a hollow, wheel-made body (no. 183, defined as type Be and discussed in chapter III above). One head from Megiddo was defined as a JPF, but it lacks archaeological context and the quality of the published photograph is low. Apart from these, we are left with figurines from Ashdod, Tel elOreimeh, Kh. Hoga and Tel es-Safi (App. 2: nos. 2,68, 181, 182).6

V.2. The JPFs and Judah V.2.1. The JPFs inside Judah In order to achieve the maximal database, I have discussed here all the JPFs, including the addition to app. 2 (nos. 579854). The distribution is presented in a table (fig. 15) and a map (fig. 16). The table is arranged by geographic regions, with an alphabetic order of sites within each region. In total, 854 JPFs were found in 42 sites. The vast majority were found in the Judean mountains: 628 figurines (or 75.3% of all JPFs).5 The Judean Shephelah comes next with 126 JPFs (or 14.8%), and third the Negev (89 JPFs, or 10.4%). These are the only areas in which a significant quantity of JPFs has been found. The coastal plain (philistia) yielded only 4

4 This is surely not a new concept - it was used in different contexts (e.g., the kernel defmition ofAlt 1925:159; 1930:222).

6 A few other fragments, that could not be defined clearly, are included in app. 4-5. Theoretically, it is possible that some ofthese are JPFs, but evenso it would not change the general picture.

5 This number includes the 4 fragments from Bethel, app. 2:3-6. Their classification is not certain.

45

These figurines are scattered as isolated "foreign" inside large assemblages of figurines, which are types (see app. 4-5 and chap. III). The same is true like Megiddo, Ashdod, or Samaria; the JPFs exception there.

artifacts of local for sites are an

In the Coastal Plain, Northern Israel and Southern Phoenicia, the number of JPFs is meager (11 figurines in total), even if we disregard the doubts concerning the identification of a few of these. Thus, these figurines cannot testify on any significant trade or cultural influence, not to speak of political domination and conquest (for trade in Israel under Assyrian rule see Elat 1977; 1990). The figurines could have reached these areas in varied ways: through Judeans traveling abroad, by small-scale immigration of individuals and families, or as "mementos" brought from Judah by local people. In any case, these few Judean objects do not support the view about Judean conquests in the reign of Josiah. The picture is somewhat different in the western Shephelah. Single JPFs were found in some sites in this area, outside heartland Judah (e.g., at Kh. Hoga). Of course, it is possible that "the blame" lies on the cautious definition of the heartland area (above), and that some of these sites belonged to Judah. In any case, the number of sites and figurines is so small, that it has no real significance. On the other hand, groups of JPFs were found in Gezer (7 figurines) and in Tel Erani (8 figurines). In Gezer, there is also a large assemblage of other types of figurines (see app. 5.III-IV), while at Tel Erani the JPFs seem to be the dominant type of anthropomorphic figurine. It would be hazardous to conclude that Tel Erani belonged to Judah, and Gezer to Israel and later to Assyria (for historical evidences on Gezer cf. chap. V.l.l above). The evidence consisting of a few figurine fragments is too precarious to indicate political affiliation of sites of such magnitude. In any case, a different explanation to that suggested for northern Israel and the coastal plain is required for the western Shephelah. It is possible that sites in the western Shephelah had mixed populations, a conceivable situation for a frontier zone between Judah, Philistia and the kingdom of Israel (later Assyrian Samaria). Another possibility is that the JPFs indicate cultural contacts in sites near the Judean borders. Keeping in mind the Judean intervention in the western Shephelah during Hezekiah's revolt, the JPFs could be some sort of a "secondary product" of this event. Whatever the reason, these little groups of JPFs in the western Shephelah cannot prove any theory about Judean conquest of this area. Trade in figurines is known from later periods in Israel (Linder 1986). Despite this fact, I have not suggested trade as an explanation for the occurrence of JPFs outside Judah. First, the coastal and northern types of pillar-figurines are more elaborate and technically superior to the JPFs. Had there been inter-polity trade of figurines in the Iron Age II period, one would expect it to follow the opposite direction into Judah. Second, there is really no evidence for such trade, not in the form of many 'foreign' pillar-figurines within Judah (cf. app. 4-5), nor in the form of many JPFs outside Judah. Third, it is plausible that the JPFs had

religious meaning (chap. X below), which would make them less appealing for other religions (it does not have to be very different religions - local or national groups can reject religious artifacts of another, quite similar, neighboring group). The last two arguments are not decisive, but the quantity of JPFs outside Judah is in any case too small to sustain an explanation of trade.

V.3. Inner Judean Distribution Pattern and Site Hierarchy V.3.t. Main Sites and Main Sub-Types The main sites where JPFs were found are shown in figs. 17-18 (below). Details of the main sub-types, A, B, and C (without the addition to app. 2) are given in fig. 18. At each of these sites, both types of heads and body fragments have been found. More B heads - versus A heads - were discovered at Lachish, Tel Beit Mirsim and Beth Shemesh. The numbers are balanced, more or less, at Gibeon, Tel Beer Sheba and Arad, whereas A heads are more prominent at Jerusalem and Tel en-Nasbeh. It may be a regional difference: a preference for the moulded heads (B) in the Shephelah versus a balance, or a slight superiority of hand-made heads (A) in the Negev and the Judean mountains. On the other hand, perhaps it is only random occurrence, resulting from incomplete data. There was a tendency to publish every head in the older excavations in the Shephelah , but many body fragments were neglected. This happened because the heads are more impressive in photographs or drawings. Also, scholars believed that the JPFs were toys, without much artistic, or symbolicvalue. For example, at Tel en-Nasbeh 19 of the 34 hand-made heads were only mentioned in an appendix (TN I: app. A), while all the 28 moulded heads were published adequately'? For other sites, a similar appendix is perhaps missing, and we are left with a partly misleading picture. Chronological factors can also be involved: the Shephelah flourished in the 8th century BC, while the Negev flourished in the 7th century BC (Na'aman 1987, cf. chap. 1.3 above).

V.3.2. Sites, excavated Areas, and the Quantity of the JPFs The relations between the quantity of the JPFs at each site, its size and the extent of the excavated areas are shown in fig. 19. The data about the size of sites and excavations is in many cases an estimation. Wherever possible, I quoted the figures from excavation reports or the EAEm.. A few estimations were suggested verbally by the excavators, or estimated from maps. I included sites with 5 or more JPFs, but excluded extra-mural areas (e.g., cemeteries, settlement quarters outside the walls, etc.; fig. 19). Whenever possible, 7 One B head lacks a photograph in the figurine plates, but probably does appear in a separate plate.

46

I indicated the size of the Iron Age II levels, or the size of excavated areas in those levels (otherwise, it is the size of the whole site / excavation).

scholars. The majority of the rooms and a very large percentage of the buildings seem to have functioned without any of these figurines.

As expected, there is a correlation between quantities of JPFs, size of sites and extent of excavation. It is not always a direct relation, since many other factors are involved here, e.g., the wealth of each site, the nature of excavated areas within a site, the different fate of the levels and the methods of excavation and publication. For example, a wealthy quarter, or a violent destruction of a level, can yield many more artifacts in comparison with poor areas and peaceful abandonment. The small, agricultural village of Ramot is a good example: here the relatively large quantity of JPFs does not reflect a great size or wealth. Rather, it is the result of cautious, modem excavation methods, detailed registration systemand the availability of each fragment, however small, for direct study (courtesy the excavator, A. de-Groot). Beth Shemesh can probably illustrates the unfortunate opposite. The 1933 season was well published by Wright (AS V), and most of the JPFs from Beth Shemesh are from this season. From the huge areas of Grant's former seasons in the west of the city, very few figurines are known, certainly not because these areas are poorer.

V.3.3. Site Hierarchy The distribution of the JPFs (figs. 17-18) can teach us about site hierarchy and regional diversity inside the kingdom of Judah. The assumption that the quantities of JPFs indicate wealth and importance of sites is, of course, simplistic. Again, we can overcome these limitations by treating the statistic as a very general, tentative picture. Regarding geographic regions first, the northern Judean mountains are very dominant. The southern Judeari mountains (south of Bethlehem, until the Negev) appear almost blank on the distribution map (fig. 16). Even Hebron, a central site in this region, is disappointing (despite the excavations, Ofer 1990b:203-204; Chadwick 1992). This area was poorer than the northern mountains, and the number and size of excavated areas are smaller. The Judean Desert is also poorly represented, probably since it was a marginal area for settlement (Bar Adon 1989; Broshi and Finkelstein 1992:52).

Different population estimates exist for ancient Near Eastern cities, but following some common ones, one dunam of domestic buildings was occupied by ca. 25 persons or 5.4 houses (Stager 1985:17-18; Broshi and Finkelstein 1992:48, with further references). The total excavated area of all the sites in fig. 19 is 140-163 dunam, while 531 JPFs have been found in these sites." This means that one excavated dunam yielded 3.5-3.8 JPFs in average. Some factors imply that this average is too high. All the JPFs from burials should be excluded, thus the JPFs' density inside settlements is lower. Furthermore, at many sites the JPFs are separated by a few levels (e.g., Arad and Lachish), and are not contemporaneous. The quantity of JPFs at a certain temporal point is therefore considerably lower. However, an exact statistic is not possible, nor is it crucial. It does not matter much if the average above is even doubled or halved, since we only need a general scale of order.

Regarding site hierarchy, Jerusalem stands isolated at the top of the distribution list, with 405 JPFs (including the addition to app. 2). This is easy to explain on grounds of its large physical size, its status as a capital, and the large extent of excavated areas (fig. 17). Tel en-Nasbeh comes second with 143 JPFs. This can be partially explained by the large extent of excavations there and the relatively good publication (TN 1: app. A). On the other hand, Tel enNasbeh is not larger than Lachish or Tel Beit Mirsim. Its higher quantity of JPFs may indicate a higher concentration in the northern Judean mountains in general. The third level in the hierarchy is occupied by 6 sites, with a few dozen JPFs (between 23-43 at each site): Gibeon, Arad, Tel Beer Sheba, Beth Shemesh, Lachish and Tel Beit Mirsim. These sites can be seen as local centers of their immediate surroundings, or as regional centers. All the sites in this group are walled cities, except the fortress of Arad. It is interesting that the distribution in the Shephelah is more or less equally divided between Lachish, Beth Shemesh and Tell Beit Mirsim (all more or less equal in size). Usually, Lachish is considered as "the capital of the Shephelah", according to the historical sources and its impressive archaeological remains (e.g., Garfinkel 1984:43, 48-49 and table 4). It is possible that Lachish was an administrative center, while the JPFs indicate daily, "unofficial" activity (unlike the lmlk impressions). The JPFs are perhaps better indicators of size and population-density, while the lmlk stamps indicate better political and administrative status.9

At a first glance, the average reached above is quite low, and it is tempting to conclude that there was only one JPF per family (or per one domestic house) at any given time. Such a conclusion would be very important, strengthening the assumption that the JPFs represented the same figure, and not many individual, different figures. Otherwise, we would expect to find groups of JPFs together; whereas if all the JPFs represented the same figure, there would be no need to put two (or more) together in the same place. Yet, caution is needed. First, the evidence we have is partial: many figurines were missed, not registered or not published. Second, the JPFs' fragments indicate disposal patterns, rather than patterns of use (see chaps. VII, VIII below). The conclusionabove remains tentative. In any case, the quantity of the JPFs is not so overwhelming as was assumed by some

9 Garfinkel's studies (1984; 1985) about the "private" impressions are problematic. First, they are not an independent phenomenon, but are part of the lmlk corpus (Na'aman 1988:76). Second, Garfinkel assumed direct relations between distribution and the activity of the officials named on the seals, but all the jars were

8 Gibeon was excluded from the average, since the JPFs there were found in one pool.

47

In the fourth level of hierarchy we find many sites, where small JPFs' groups were found (4-12 figurines at each site). These sites are not homogeneous. Some are small, agricultural sites; others are big cities, that were excavated on a small scale (or are not yet fully published). The fifth and final level of hierarchy groups together sites in which few JPFs had been found (1-3 figurines at each site). This level includes the largest number of sites (21), but with the lowest quantity of JPFs. It includes small sites, random surface finds, burials near settlements, etc. A few large sites are included as well, but these were little excavated (like Kh. Rabud).

Shephelah after 701 BC, but the JPFs were still in use (e.g., in Lachish level II). The Negev flourished in the 7th century BC, but JPFs appear there also in the 8th century BC (e.g., Tel Beer Sheba). We simply do not have enough data to study the chronological patterns of distribution.

V.4.2. Distribution and Sub-Types The question is, whether certain subtypes of the JPFs ~e related to a specific region of Judah, or even to a certam group of sites? Some regional distinctions can be suggested for the heads (the bodies are very stereotyped and do not help much).

Outside Judah, the quantity of JPFs bears no relation to the wealth and size of the sites. For example, the few JPFs in Ashdod and Megiddo (one JPF) teach us nothing about the settlement hierarchy of these sites. For the hierarchy of such sites, we must study the local assemblages.

The hand-made JPFs' heads may be rounded or pointed at the top, but both these forms are common and show no difference in the distribution pattern. Other features are more indicative. It seems that the "hammer" shape (sub-type A.l.Ah) is common in the Negev, with 4 specimens from Arad and Beer Sheba (app. 2: 251, 252, 475, 481 [ef. fig. 5:2]). Only one head like this was found elsewhere (app. 2: 10 from Beth Shemesh). Heads with "turbans" (type A.2) are found only in the northern Judean mountains, at Jerusalem (app. 2: 332, 362-365, 433), Ramat Rabel (app. 2: 117) and Tel en-Nasbeh (app. 2: 131, 137, 488-489). The same is true for heads with "turbans" and side-locks (type A.3), found at Jerusalem (app. 2: 333-336, 435) and Tel enNasbeh (app. 2: 128, 133-136; 138), except one head from Jericho (ibid: 71). Most of the heads with applied hats, type A.4, were also found in the Judean Mountains (app. 2: 5152, 366, 369, 139-140 [cf. fig. 5:5-6]). The only exception is one head from Tel Masos (app. 2: 241).10

To sum up, the distribution pattern of the JPFs contributes to the study of the site hierarchy in Judah. Most of the former analyses were based on size of sites, or on the official lmlk stamps. The use of other criteria for activity may contribute to a better picture (cf. the section on Lachish above). For example, the inscribed Judean weights (Kletter 1991) may indicate economic activity and trade; industrial installations may indicate manufacturing processes, while everyday pottery vessels may indicate population density. This subject is certainly beyond the scope of the present work.

VA. Relations between Distribution, Date and Sub-Types

The differences in distribution noted above are probably only typological. That is, these are differences between regional workshops, each producing some minor changes in "design" of the JPFs. It does not seem likely that the differences are related to separate sets of symbolism and function, or to chronological factors. In any case, our data is too scanty and there is no need to add speculation. I have not mentioned the moulded (B) heads, which will be studied separately (chap. VI.2 below).

V.4.l. Distribution and Date Since currently the exact dating of most of the JPFs is not clear, it is too early to draw separate distribution maps of the 8th and the 7th centuries BC. The outer limits of distribution and the relation to Judah's borders seem to be similar in both these centuries, as the JPFs were used in all parts of Judah. There are differences, e.g., the decline in the

Chapter VI: Aspects of Manufacture "Everything one was to become must have been there, for better or worse. One's future might have been prophesized from the shape ofhouses as from the lines ofthe hand... Here in Berkhampsted was the first mould ofwhich the shape was to be endlessly reproduced" (Graham Green. A Sort of Life: 12). The basic study of the manufacture of the JPFs was carried out by Kelso and Thorley (in: TBM ill: 138-141). I have already referred to their work (chap 11.2.2 above), and need not repeat their conclusions here.

relatively low temperatures, ca. 600-700 degrees Celsius. 1 This accounts well for the high fragility of the figurines. The firing usually gave the outer surfaces a red-brown colour, while the core remained gray or black (Gibeon WS: 15). Early scholars believed that the material culture of Israel was impoverished, therefore attributing any artifact with outstanding technical or artistic qualities to foreign countries (usually, Phoenicia or Egypt). It was suggested then, that all the heads of the JPFs were moulded in one center and that the moulds were foreign imports (Albright, TMB ill:69, 83; Kelso and Thorley, ibid:139f; followed by Patai 1967:60, n.41; Winter 1983:127; cf. Lachish III:375). Negbi (1966) suggested a separation of figurine groups by petrography in a pioneering study of Persian Period figurines from Tel Sippor (for criticism cf. Keisan 1:349). Large scale petrographic analyses of JPFs have not yet been published. Small scale analyses seem to imply local manufacture in each region (or even in each town), since JPFs from Jerusalem were made from local terra-rosa clay, while JPFs from Tel Ira in the Negev were made from local loess clay (Kletter, in press B: nos. I, 3; here app. 2: nos. 245, 249; the petrographic tests were made by Y. Goren). JPFs from the Shephelah have not yet been analyzed, but a few animal Iron Age figurines from Maresha have been. Their clay was found to be very different from that of later figurines, and was probably local. Exact geographic origins cannot be established yet (courtesy of A. KIoner and the Maresha team). We also lack petrographic or neutronactivation analyses for the few JPFs found outside Judah.

VI.I. Aspects of Manufacture VI.I.l. Height Measures The measurements of whole figurines and body fragments are listed in Field "Hal" (app. 1), while the heights of the . heads are listed in field "Hh" (app. 1). All measurements are in millimeters. The height of the moulded heads are measured from the lowest point of the chin until the beginning of the hairdress (i.e., only the face; for the reasons for this see chap. VI.2 below). The hand-made heads are measured from the top of the head (including applied parts) to the lowest point of the nose. The data is presented in fig 20. It is not complete because the measurements of many JPFs are unknown. Note that whole figurines appear twice in fig. 20, once measured as whole figurines, then as heads only. So far, the size of the JPFs has not been studied, except for some suggestions being made regarding a few figurines. For example, the excavators at Gibeon suggested that the JPFs vary between 8 and 14 em in height (Gibeon WS:15f). From Fig. 20, it is clear that the type B figurines are larger than the hand-made type A ones, both in body and in head size. Furthermore, note that only the face is measured for moulded JPFs in fig. 20; the whole heads are considerably larger. There are sharp variations in the size of each subtype. Hand-made heads vary from between 14-40 mm, excluding a very few exceptionally larger ones. Moulded faces are vary from between 19-41 mm .

Moorey and Fleming (1984:77f, cf. Spycket 1992:227, n.395) suggested that hand-made figurines were made in domestic areas by women, but were careful when writing that each case must be treated on its merits. The excavators of Tel en-Nasbeh made a similar suggestion for all the JPFs, because of their cheap materials and crude workmanship (TN 1:273). This view was adopted by scholars from the feminist school (Teubal 1990:43; Meyers 1988:161-163; Gadon 1989:177ff, 186). The last attributed the JPFs to women, but it seems to be based on the pre-eonception that female figurines belong to female religion or to "female house cult". As far as the JPFs are concerned, there is no archaeological evidence whatsoever for this view. The crude design (unlike other pottery vessels) does not indicate production by women. The figurines did not have. to withstand pressures (unlike cooking, storing and eating vessels), and perhaps this is the reason of their "lower manufacturing standards". The model of each woman making her own household figurines at home can hardly be accepted for the JPFs. It does not accord with the fact that

The measurements are important for two reasons: the study of the moulds (below, chap. v.z) and the classification of the figurine fragments. They can also help to separate JPFs' type A heads from the similar rider's heads, which are usually smaller (18 mm in average). I have not used this difference to exclude heads from the JPFs' catalogue (app. 12), because it became evident at a late stage of research, too late a stage to change all the tables and catalogues because ofa few items (cf. also chap. III.5.3 above).

10 The quantity of some sub-types is too small for detailed study. Two Heads from Jerusalem were defined as type A5 Cappo 2: 3678), but are really quite exceptional in comparison with the other JPFs. One head from Gibeon was defined as type A6 Cappo 2: 53), and is even more exceptional. The classification of two other heads from Tel en-Nasbeh (app. 2: 488-489) is not clear.

stamped in the Shephelah. Third, he amalgamated Ramat Rahel and Jerusalem, creating a severe bias in the distribution pattern.

48

VI.1.2. Clay and Firing The clay of the JPFs was not well sifted, and it has a high degree of grit and often remains of straw. It was fired in

1 I wish to thank Y. Goren of the Israel Antiquities Authority for this observation.

49

the JPFs are very homogeneous in shape. Also, the use of moulds indicates mass manufacture at a rather high technical level and not dispersed, domestic production.

As far as can be judged at present, there are no significant differences in the painted decoration between the various JPFs' sub-types.

VI.1.3. White-Wash and Painted Decorations

VI.1.4. The Nakedness

199 out of 578 JPFs show remains of white-wash (marked by the sign "+" in app. 1, field "Ws").2 Probably many other figurines were white-washed, but this was not always mentioned in publications, e.g., at Tel en-Nasbeh (Zorn, verbal communication). Also, The surfaces of many figurines are so eroded, that the white-wash is no longer present. The white-wash is found on all sub-types. Two animal heads from the 7th century BC level at Tel Ira, typical of Judah, were analyzed by I. Segal (fig. 21 below).3 The chemical component of the white-wash was analyzed as CaC03, i.e., a deliberate lime wash (and not a natural encrustation of salts). The white-wash was probably done in order to give the figurines a light, smooth finish, facilitating and stressing the painted decorations (cf. TMB III:106; for Cypriote figurines, Caubet 1992:261).

The lower body of the JPFs is schematic, without any indication of sex. Perhaps it was not meant to convey nakedness. The upper body seems to be naked, but some scholars claim that it is hard to separate nakedness from a transparent cloth. It seems, though, that there is not much of a difference between the two. Figurines which have painted decoration on the body are probably not naked (Hermary 1992:183). Furthermore, Egyptian figurines were covered with mat-clothes (Posener-Krieger 1985; Pinch 1993:224). Thanks to the dry climate, the clothes did not deteriorate, otherwise leaving what would appear to be naked figurines. There is no indication of paint on the body of the JPFs (other than on shoulders and arms, probably signifying jewels). Therefore it seems that at least the breasts are presented naked.

It seems that most of the JPFs were decorated by paint (Hubner 1989: 51 n.35). So far, I have found 91 JPFs with remains of paint (App. I: field "CL"). The painting was done by brush on the white-wash. Usually, red paint was used (52 specimens: 14 type A, 28 type B and 10 type C).4 Yellow paint appears on 6 specimens; brown on 4 and black on 3. White paint was reported for five figurines, but I suspect there is some confusion with white-wash. The decoration is often bi-chrome, red and yellow (9 specimens) or red and black (2 specimens). The decoration is almost always composed of simple bands on the neck, shoulders, upper breasts and arms, probably symbolizing jewelery such as necklaces and bracelets. The whole face is often covered by red paint, and sometimes details of eyes, brows, and hairdress are painted. In a few cases, yellow or brown is used for the upper edge of the heads. More elaborate decorations appear rarely, with the use of two or three colours.! For example, one figurine from Gibeon has yellow colour on the face (a mask? - thus Gibeon WS:15), yellow coloured fingers, and alternating bands of yellow and red on the shoulders, neck and arms (app. 2:42). Kelso and Thorley suggested that yellow paint symbolized gold jewelery (TBM III: 140). It is important to note that in some cases, the painted decorations were limited to the front, and do not continue on the back of the figurines (TBM III: 138; Gibeon WS: 15). This leads to the conclusion that the figurines were supposed to be seen from the front. Further proof for this is found in the moulded (B) heads, where the back side is often left crude (TMB III: 140; Keel and Uehlinger 1992:380).

VI.1.5. Other Aspects The separate parts of the JPFs and their joining together have already been described in detail (Kelso and Thorley, TBM II: 138ff; Gibeon WS:15; Lachish III:374; Engle 1979: 11-12; Winter 1983:107). Many other questions relating to the manufacture of the JPFs are still left open. We know that there were at least a few centers of production, but were there regional centers, or (more likely) local workshops at each large site? Was the manufacture done in the usual potter's workshops, where other clay vessels were made (this seems reasonable)? What was the "life expectancy" of a figurine, i.e., how many years did a figurine survive? Did it last a short while, like average daily pottery vessels, or more? (for a short period of use see Winter 1983:131). If the figurines were made in the usual potter's workshops, what were the mechanisms of marketing? Were they sold like any other commodity, and at what "prices"? For all these questions, the information we have at the moment permits only speculation.

VI.2. Moulds and Moulded Heads VI.2.I. The Moulds Very few moulds for anthropomorphic figurines are known from the Iron Age period in Israel. Holland counted 17 moulds of anthropomorphic figurines, mostly plaque figurines (1975:314-317). I have counted 28 now (app. 5.VIII). Moulds for solid pillar-figurines are very rare (Holland's type N.II.a). Only three of these moulds bear some resemblance to the JPFs (app. 5.VIII: nos. 1, 2, 14). The most similar is the one from Beth Shemesh, but even this mould is not identical with any of the JPFs' heads.

2 In five further figurines, the nature of the wash or decoration is not clear (app. 2: 86, 184,338,369,479). 3 The specimenswere given courtesyofI. Beit Arieh. The analyses were done using SEM at the Geological Institute, Jerusalem. 4 Red burnish was reported for 7 specimens, but perhaps it was confusedwith red paint. 5 Marked by code "8" in App. I: field "CL".

50

A few moulds were found after 1975, but none of a JPF.6 Three moulds were found at Tel Batash in 8th century BC contexts (app. 5.VIII: nos. 19-21), but these are not JPFs' moulds either.

which come, directly or indirectly, from the same "archetype mould", or "patrix" (see also fig. 22 belowj.? During the manufacturing process, the first stage is the making of an archetype figurine, from which first moulds are made. After firing, these moulds produce the "first generation" of figurines. So far, it is likely to be the production of one potter or one workshop. Anyone can produce from the figurines of the first generation more moulds ("second generation moulds"), and from these more figurines ("second generation figurines"). Further generations are then possible, and Nicholls identified up to five generations emerging from one "archetypal" mould (1952:219-220; cf. fig. 22 below). All generations after the first are "derivative generations", which could have been manufactured in other workshops and from varied clays (Nicholls 1952:221, with evidence from Greece). The identification of the generations relies not only on style, but also on the shrinkage of the heads when they are dried and fired. Nicholls (1952:220 n.21, n.23) produced modern figurines from an ancient mould, and concluded that moulded figurines lose some 13-14% of their size with each successive generation.

Keel and Uehlinger claimed that the lack of moulds was a result of not finding the potter's workshops (1992), but some workshops were excavated (Wood 1991:33fI, fig. 16). Holland (1975:324; 1977:131) concluded that the moulds were Judean, but this was deduced from the moulded heads, not from moulds themselves. The lack of moulds forces us to study the heads carefully (below).

VI.2.2. Basic Principles for the Study of Mould-made Figurines Kelso and Thorley were the first to discuss the technique of the moulded JPFs heads (TBM III: 138-141). In their view, the heads were made from a better clay than the bodies, since this was necessary for achieving the little moulded details (they are also better made than usual pottery vessels). The moulds were made of clay, baked in very low temperatures. This made the moulds more porous, shortening the time needed for drying the heads inside them. The slow drying process necessitated the use of many moulds, though each mould could produce up to 200 heads or so. Kelso and Thorely thought that one especially beautiful JPF head was made in a bronze mould, which is more durable but also more expensive. In bronze moulds, the drying is quicker and thus the whole production process is shorter. Kelso and Thorley believed that the moulds were foreign, because of their superior quality. They noted the phenomenon of shrinkage during production, and estimated that a head was ca. 15% smaller than the mould in which it was produced (TBM III: 138). Since the work of Kelso and Thorley, little progress has been made. Scholars repeated their conclusions, or offered short technical discussions (e.g., Hachlili in: Ashdod II-III: 125f). Other scholars only referred to the many difficulties in this field of study (e.g., Hubner 1989:50).

The picture is more complicated because of the "horizontal" dimension of the series. Varied details (such as the treatment of the hair, eyebrows and ears) were incised or worked by hand in the moulds ("intaglio" work, or "in the negative"), and are therefore not produced automatically in all the figurines (Nicholls 1952:221f). This may lead to the appearance of variations in shape of moulds and figurines, especially after the first generation, although all of them originated from the same archetype. The moulds of a certain generation, with these hand-made changes, were termed by Nicholls "parallel moulds". The whole picture of production by moulds is, therefore, rather complex (fig. 22); not to mention other possible factors such as bad manufacture or distortion of the clay while it is still soft. Nicholls warned that it is more practical to follow the main lines of production, rather than be lost in the maze of small, "unprofitable" details (1952:223-224). Ammerman (1985) based a study of figurines from Medma in Italy on the principles formulated by Nicholls: "Every terra-cotta figurine cast from a mould holds a specific place within a family of mechanically related mould and casts whose ancestry can be traced back (at least theoretically) to a common source or model" (Ammerman 1985:10). At the same time, she was conscious of the fact that only a fraction of the entire ancient production was found, and that a "prototype" (Nicholls "archetype") was never identified. Usually we would find first generation figurines and later derivative generations (ibid: 11-12). Ammerman (1985:12) claimed that up to 5 generations and 7 variants exist in one mould-series from Medma, and that clay analyses indicates an "active exchange of terracottas between Medma and her mother and sisters colonies", up to a third of the figurines of certain types.

With this background in mind, Nicholls' study (1952) is highly important, though it dealt with Greek figurines from the Archaic periods. Nicholls adopted the term "group", meaning: "pieces that resemble each other in such a way as to suggest that they are the work of the same modeller" (Nicholls 1952:218). Since it is hard to define the groups exactly when dealing with ancient figurines, a larger definition for the group is needed, i.e., figurines from the same workshop - "a mass of material closely related stylistically, though not always quite certainly, because it is the work of the same modeller or, at least, of the same workshop" (Nicholls 1952:219). The groups are composed of "series", a technical (not stylistic) term for figurines

6 Cf. a Middle Bronze age mould (Keisan 1:350, c.2.22); a Persian period mould from Dor (Stern 1992:60, photo 72); two moulds from unknown origins (app. 5.VIII: nos. 11, 21) and two moulds from Amman (ibid: nos. 6-7).

7 Often, a series and a group coincide, ibid:224. Another study by Nicholls (1970) deals with Greek figurines,but not with moulds.

51

Two observations of Ammerman are important. First, that trade was likely to be in figurines, and not in moulds. However, in the archaeological record one is likely to see not the exchanged figurine itself, but derivative figurines which were copied from it (through moulds taken from the exchanged figurine). Second, that the adoption of a certain type of figurine implied the adoption of its imagery: "for votive terracottas, the adoption of a mould series by the coroplasts at a new site implies that their imagery was considered to be appropriate at some level for the cult at the second site" (Ammerman 1985:13-14). If the Judean JPFs were religious artifacts, it could explain the fact that they were not copied as a mould-series outside of Judah, nor were moulded heads from neighboring kingdoms copied in Judah (cf. chap. Y.2.2 above).

suggested very cautiously (ibid). Fig. 23 helps, at the most, to discern the technical connections between the heads. The minimal number of JPFs' moulds is 24, being the number of all the sub-types (fig. 23: left column). Possibly, some of the unclassified heads and "exceptional" heads belonged to other moulds. Furthermore, some of the heads in the same sub-type are clearly different from each other, in both shape and size, to the extent that they must have been made in different moulds. Thus, a cautious estimation ofa few dozen moulds for all the JPFs is more than likely.? This estimation alone signifies that we are dealing with massproduction, of which only a small part has been discovered so far. It also hints that the figurines were made in a number of centers (otherwise, why would one center need so many moulds?). Unlike Nicholls, I had to measure the height of the moulded heads from the chin to the beginning of the hairdress, i.e. along the whole face. Since I was unable to check every head, I had to define the clearest possible measure. It had to be useful for photographs and drawings (often in small scales), and as long as possible (for accuracy). This is not an ideal measure, for sometimes the potter obscured the lower chin when he joined heads to bodies. Also, the chin is a line and not a specific point, thus less accurate for measurements.

VI.2.3. Application for the JPFs? The principles, so well described by Nicholls, were applied in figurine studies, mainly in the Aegean realm (Nicholls 1952:220f; Ammerman 1985; 1991:210-213; Caubet 1992:216f; Vandenabeele 1989:269f; etc.). But are they applicable for the JPFs? So far, no trial has been made to apply them. Scholars assumed (though often not explicitly) that there was no chronological development within the JPFs. Putting the matter to test is not so simple. Basic details are missing in the early reports, and the facial details of many heads are obscure because of inadequate photographs or drawings. Nicholls, and other scholars who dealt with mould production, had direct access to large assemblages of figurines. They could check the moulded details with their own eyes. For the JPFs, it is very hard to collect a large assemblage of moulded heads for direct study. In Israel, the larger museums hold not more than a dozen JPFs each; while figurines under display cannot be removed for long periods. The largest collection is with the Israel Antiquities Authority, but it is devided between various stores. Abroad, the JPFs are scattered between some 30 institutions, from the U.K. to Australia and the U.S.A. The study of the moulds and moulded heads is important, thus at least the central questions must be asked: How many moulds can one identify? How many "mould-series" came from one mould? Are there regional or temporal variations between the moulded heads, and what can these teach us about production, distribution and relations between the sites? These questions may also contribute to a better understanding of the meaning of the JPFs.

Were the publications full, and the data base complete, it would have been possible to draw an accurate matrix of heads. Then, one would easily find the mould-series and distinguish early and late heads within each series (according to their size). At present, the data permits only the technical arrangement of heads from the same sub-type, by descending size (example shown in fig. 24).

Furthermore, the location of the head from Jericho is unknown, and it may even be the same head as that in the collection. Working by photographs and drawings makes the definition of mould-series almost impossible. A mistake of no more then 15% in the height of a head, or missing one line of curls above the forehead, will cause a misplacement of a head in the series, or even its transference to a completely different mould-series.

that the technique of moulding heads, while the bodies are hand-made or wheel-made, arrived to the Levant from the Aegean world (Albright 1939:120; Kelso and Thorley, TBM III:138ff; Patai 1967:60). Currently, all the scholars agree that the origin of this technique is in the Levant, from where it spread to Cyprus, the Aegean world, and thence to Italy and the western Mediterranean. Some scholars date the spread of this technique to Cyprus to the 8th century BC, and as for plaque figurines, even to the 9th century BC (Caubet 1991:136; Vandenabeele 1986:352f, 355; 1989:266). Other scholars lower this date to the seventh century BC, especially for the appearance of this technique in Greece (the "Daedalic" style, Higgins 1969:10, 14f; Morris 1992; Schwartz 1989; Vafoloulou-Richardson 1981:3f, fig. 192; Reyes 1994:35). It is common to think that other "oriental" motifs appeared in the west together with this moulding technique, e.g., the motif of the naked woman and the woman playing the drum. Many scholars explain this as a result of Phoenician inter-mediation (Ammerman 1991:208f; Bisi 1989:263; Meerschaert 1991: 186; Sorenson 1991:233f; Vandenabeele 1986:351, 359; Yon and Caubet 1988:29ff, 33).10 On the other hand, it is also realized that the coroplastic art of Cyprus had contacts with the Levantine coast, thus ideas and motifs traveled both ways (Bisi 1989:289; 1991:88. Such an influence is not apparent in the JPFs).

Even if the study of the mould production of the JPFs proves unsuccessful at the moment, I hope that it paves the way for future studies. When the importance of this subject is realized, excavators will publish all the necessary data. Then we will be able to judge the mould-series and the chronology of the heads within them. We will understand better the relations between production centers and sites, and perhaps learn more about the origins of the moulding (below). One feature in regard to the moulded heads has not yet been mentioned. This is the "edge of the mould" line. The edge of the mould, when stamped into a somewhat larger lump of clay, leaves a line like a very shallow ridge on the heads. This line surrounds the moulded part, but is clearest at the top of the head, above the lines of curls. This "edge of mould" line can be seem in some of the moulded heads (app. 2: nos. 19, 26, 210, 245, 246, 263, 308, etc.). It may help to measure the moulded part exactly and to identify heads from the same mould-series.

The information from the Phoenician coast is still very partial (Brown 1992; Ward 1994). The difficulties of defining what "Phoenician art" is exactly, as well as its exact chronology, deny an unequivocal conclusion in regard to the origin of the technique of moulded heads (for some discussions on this subject see Beer 1991; Culican 1969; 1975-6:50ff; Ganzmann a.o. 1987:86, 91-94; Gubel 1991; Pritchard 1988:5-55).

VI.2.4. The Origins of the Moulding Technique The use of moulds for clay plaque figurines was known from the late third millennium BC in Mesopotamia and in Syria (Spycket 1992:36, 54, 233f). Formerly, scholars believed

I have put the word "series" in brackets in the title of fig. 24, since it does not represent a real series (in Nicholls' definition). The photographs of some of these B.3.b heads from Lachish are bad, and do not permit comparisons to other heads in this "series". One figurine from Lachish is exceptional- it looks different from all the other B.3.b heads (app. 2: 86). Another figurine from Ramat Rabel is so badly preserved, that it can not be placed in the typological sequence with any certainty (app. 2: 120). At a first glance, one can assume that fig. 24 indicates a homogeneous series, with three or four generations of linked figurines, all from the Judean mountains and the Shephelah. But in fact, it could be a collection of figurines from different moulds, without direct connections. The same situation applies to the other sub-types, thus there is no point in presenting a whole set of similar tables. Very rarely can we make a case for direct dependence, e.g., a head from Jericho and a head from the collections of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem (app. 2:70 vs. app. 3:91). The shape is clearly the same - but even in this case, the head from the collection may be modem, based on the ancient head.

In total, 183 moulded (B) heads were found so far, but many cannot be neatly classified into sub-types.f There are only 129 classified heads, presented in fig. 23. Kelso and Thorley remarked that the 13 moulded heads from Tel Beit Mirsim were made in at least 11 different moulds; whereas only two pairs of heads were supposedly produced in two moulds (a pair in each mould: TBM III:139f). Due to the bad preservation state, even this was

10 The origin of the later double mould technique is also thought to be in the "Dea Gravida" and other figurines from the Levant (Caubet 1992:261f; Yon and Caubet 1988:31).

9 It is currently hard to estimate the influence of "horizontal"

variations in regard to the number of moulds, but it cannot be very significant.

8 These include heads without any classification, other than "B".

52

53

Chapter VII: Damage and Breakage Patterns "Even so will I break this people and this city, as ones breaketh a potter's vessel, that cannot be made whole again" (Jeremiah 19:11).

figurines against a wall, or on a floor, what evidence should we look for?

VII. I. Evidence of Burning Remains of black soot, indicating burning, are found on the surface of only four JPFs (i.e., only 0.7% of the whole corpus). These figurines are marked by "+" in field "BU" of app. 1 (and app. 2: nos. 157, 246, 247, 269). These four figurines were most probably burnt when their relative sites and levels were violently destroyed (e.g., no. 269), or in accidental fires. It does not seem likely that they were burnt during deliberate cultic, or magic rituals, since their quantity is so meager.

Some of the JPFs' fragments suffered badly, at more than one point. Still, even this is not certain proof of deliberate mutilation. It may have been the result of successive, accidental damages. Many JPFs' fragments are so badly worn, that their surfaces are obscure and cannot reflect the causes of damage.

There is evidence about mutilation of figurines from the ancient Near East. One clear case is a figurine from Kisonerga in Cyprus, dating to the fourth millennium BC (peltenburg 1988:292; Ioannides 1992: esp. 39, nn. 7-8). VII.2. Breakage Patterns The clarity in this case is achieved because it is a stone figurine, and the marks of mutilation are easy to identify. Many Scholars assumed that the JPFs were deliberately . Another clear case of mutilated figurines are the execration broken or mutilated (TN 1:145; Jerusalem 11:128; Hubner figurines from Egypt (Ritner 1993:148ff; in the Aegean 1989:53; Ashdod II-III:132; Vincent 1907:163; Holland world cf. Talalay 1987). I will mention them again in 1975:137; Macalister 1905; Barkay 1990:191; Jeremias chapter IX, but even in this case, the written inscriptions on 1993:59). Some scholars even connected the broken JPFs the figurines show that they were mutilated, and not any specifically with Biblical "reforms". They believed that the particular form of the broken figurine fragments. 2 JPFs represented a foreign, un-Yahwehistic cult, therefore the Biblical reformers took special pain to mutilate these One possible way to know if figurines were deliberately figurines (Mazar, E. 1979:152; Nadelman 1989:123; cf. mutilated is by finding indicative breakage patterns. That is, Dever 1990: 159). All these theories are built on two bases: evidence for a high percentage of broken points, which are one, the fact that the overwhelming majority of the JPFs not natural weak points. It must be high enough to be were found broken; second, the assumption that such a high considered unlikely for accidental breakage, and it must be percentage of damage cannot be accidental. In support of evidenced in a large number of figurines. The breakage this theory, it was noted that thick body parts were broken as patterns of the JPFs are shown in Fig. 26 (below). The only well (Barkay 1990:191), or that the peg-less type A heads point which can be considered an "unnatural" weak point is were neatly cut across the neck, as if on purpose (TN 1:245). the thick body, between the base and the chest (fig. 26: code Yet, there is no decisive archaeological evidence for any 5; even this is not beyond doubt). There is no evidence that deliberate mutilation of the JPFs, nor any Biblical evidence this part was broken in a significantly higher rate that would about mutilation of small clay figurines in ancient Judah and suggest mutilation, compared with necks (code 1), for Israel. I example. The damage patterns of the JPFs were never closely studied. I have concentrated on breakage which is easier to see, but in the future other damage patterns should be studied (small "chipping", scratches, rubbed surfaces, etc.). Broken parts were registered in codes, in field "Break" of app. 1. The codes refer to main breaking points (see Fig. 25 below). The problem is that almost any point in the JPFs is a weak point, thus it is extremely hard to decide if any part was broken accidentally or on purpose. I have checked personally some 120 figurines, but nowhere was there a clear sign for deliberate mutilation (with the addenda to app. 2, I have checked ca. 300 figurines, but the results are the same). The problem is also to define what we are looking for. If one searches for marks of cutting by knives, for example, there are none. But if the mutilation was done by smashing the

Although the evidence gathered is very preliminary, a few observations can be made. Necks were not broken at a specific point, but at any point along their entire length. Of course, hand-made heads (type A) have no pegs (and no breakage along the pegs, fig. 26: code "lp"). There are few attested broken noses and bases in fig. 26, but this reflects only the limited registration and not real breakage patterns. Composite fractions are important, but their registration is even more preliminary. Many of these registered composite fractions are minor, e.g., combinations of necks and noses (codes 1+7), or necks and other facial damages (codes 1+8). Thus, they do not prove the assumption of deliberate mutilation. The impression is that the arms are the most vulnerable part of the body, but one should combine at least 2 Kerestz (1976) suggested that artifacts were broken in the cult of Hathor, but cf. the study of Pinch (1993:214, 341). Mutilation of "magical" figurines is discussed in chap. IX (below).

There is evidence for metaphorical breakage of pottery vessels, though (Jeremiah 19:1,11). I

54

some of the broken points 2+3 (fig. 26), which may relate to the same arm.

21-38). The modem figurines are probably stronger than the ancient ones, being fired in a modem kiln with temperature control (and having good, homogeneous clay). Almost a half remained whole (fig. 27: nos. 1-38).5 The comparison group (fig. 27: nos. 40-49) shows that the weakest points are first the arms, then the neck, and then the body and the nose. This more or less applies to the early trials (nos. 1-38). The arms are very vulnerable since they are thin and protruding from the body (also, each figurine has two arms). The breasts of the modem figurines were damaged very little, but I suspect that is because they were much too small and hardly protruding from the body (in comparison with the ancient JPFs).

There are many other limitations, e.g., do we have enough figurines to make this statistic reliable? We also do not have the original figurines (except the few whole ones), only different fragments, thus the registration of broken parts is very partial.

VII.3. Experimental Research of Breakage There are many possible ways of deliberately breaking a clay figurine: throwing it with force towards a wall or on a floor, cutting it with sharp tools, smashing it with a hammer, etc. On the other hand, only one form is possible for accidental breakage - an accidental fall of the figurines. Possibly, figurines can suffer also from violent destruction of sites, and from secondary damages occurring later, e.g., when dumped with other debris or during later building activities. However, if the JPFs were broken accidentally, then most of them would have been broken by accidentally falling. This would have occurred from heights of 1.5 m or so at the most (ancient four-room houses were not much higher).3 Furthermore, the figurines would fallon hard earth floors (the usual Iron Age floors, unless it happened in the cobbled courtyards).

The modem figurines sustained less neck fractions, but all of them have hand-made heads, made as a direct continuation of the body. They are probably stronger than the ancient moulded (B) necks (because of the peg). Furthermore, the modem figurines have very solid and thick bodies, probably exaggerated in comparison with the JPFs (Figs. 28-29). All the breaks in the modem figurines appear "new" and are sharp. The JPFs are perhaps worn out, maybe because of gradual wear through the years, or due to differences in material and firing. All the above may be correct for the modem figurines, but we cannot be certain that it applies to the ancient ones. The quantity of the experiments is really too small, enough only to raise some questions. I believe, though, that the experiment had everlasting impact upon some of my neighbours, as it was conducted in an open-air laboratory (or, more exactly, a backyard between some lame shrubs and laundry wires).

By using modem made figurines of roughly the same shape and size, results of such accidental falls can be studied. Some 40 figurines were manufactured from terra rosa clay, selected in the vicinity of northern Jerusalem (fig. 28-29 below). The figurines were hand-made and fired in low temperatures, ca. 600-700 degrees Celsius.f I hasten to point out that these modem figurines do not necessarily resemble the ancient ones in strength or elasticity. Exact imitation of this sort is hardly possible. On the other hand, it seemed a bit unlikely that archaeological institutes and museums would lend me ancient figurines for use in breaking tests.

VI.4. Percentage of Broken Figurines and Summary The assumption about deliberate mutilation was made not only in regard to the JPFs, but to other types of ancient figurines. For example, for figurines of different periods from Susa (Spycket 1992:235). Spycket did not explain how this assumption fits with the evidence that some figurines were mended by bitumen (ibid: 235, cf. Ucko 1968:419). Among the JPFs, about 5% remained whole (chap. 11.4 above; there, the number includes "nearly whole" figurines, even if all the lower body is missing. Here, I am speaking really about whole figurines). Most of the whole JPFs were found in tombs, where they were not deliberately mutilated (see chap. VIII below). The reasons why very few whole JPFs were left in other contexts can be varied, and they cannot prove an assumption of deliberate mutilation (nor, of course, refute it for the JPFs in general).

The modem figurines were dropped from heights of 1.5-2 m onto a hard earth surface. One group was dropped from a height of 3 m onto a cement floor, in order to neutralize the factors of strength and height, checking only the breaking point after severe damage. Different initial positions were tested. Then, the fragments were collected and significant breaking points registered. The results are listed in Fig. 27 (below). It appears that the position at the beginning of the fall (or rather, at its end) has great effects on the results. Figurines that hit the base or the head were less damaged (fig. 27: nos.

The question is whether a rate of 5% of whole figurines in an assemblage is unusual, and thus indicates deliberate mutilation. An answer is suggested in fig. 30 (below).

3 Possibly, a figurine could fall from a second floor, but it would be hard to calculate exactly the resulting effects. 4 The clay was selected with the help of Y. Goren. The figurines

5 Cracks were not counted, but in some cases they were very close

were manufactured by E. Kamayski.

to full ruptures.

55

Another argument against the assumption that the JPFs were mutilated is the lack of deliberate mutilation of the face. The faces of many JPFs are well preserved and intact. We know that it was customary to mutilate faces of anthropomorphic figures in many periods and cultures. Anthropomorphic representations were feared (as, indeed, other representations), since people believed that they owned the powers of those represented. Mutilation of these figures symbolized their "killing"; it denied them the ability to act in the real world. Within this context, the head is especially important, as it enables. a person to see, talk, smell, and hear. This is the reason for mutilation of statues, paintings, etc. in Mesopotamia (Brandes 1980; Nylander 1980), Egypt (Ritner 1993: nn. 671-675) and elsewhere (e.g., mutilation of eyes in the Dura synagogue, Kelley 1994). This conception of mutilation does not imply that the mutilated figures were negative, or "bad": in many cases the mutilators do not understand or do not care about it too much. There is no sign of systematic, deliberate mutilation of the faces of the JPFs (except broken noses and other damages, which seem accidental). Again, one can argue that the analogy to large statues and art scenes is misleading, and that perhaps small clay figurines escaped face-mutilation because it was considered enough just to break them (but cf. evidence about small figurines from Egypt, Ritner 1993: nn. 671-675). It is possible, but one would rather expect to find at least some mutilated faces if the JPFs were really mutilated in the course of "zealous Biblical reforms".

Though the number of cases is not great, it is enough. The data clearly shows that a low percentage of whole figurines is the usual pattern. It is not an exception, but a norm for small clay figurines, regardless of the period or the type. I do not mean that the form is not important - probably the fact that a larger percentage of plaque figurines survived whole relates to their shape, a compacted, "lump" like form which is less vulnerable.f Apart from form, what really counts is the context. In burials, there is a higher percentage of whole figurines of any kind - since the figurines were put there cautiouslyand not disturbed after the burials went out of use (unless they were robed). Grave goods were damaged when new burials were added, but probably it was not violent, deliberate damage - just a pushing of the older burials out of the way. On the other hand, whole figurines are very rare in fills and refuse debris. Following this conclusion, it is very unlikely that the JPFs were deliberately mutilated during a Biblical (religious) reform. Similar breaking patterns appear elsewhere, in assemblages that were surely not subjected to the rage of "Biblical reformers". There are a few more points to be made. The JPFs appear as good figures (the smile, the full face, the breasts which may be portrayed as being offered). If they also functioned as good figures, it is hard to see why they should be mutilated in ritual acts. Mutilation of "magical" figurines is likely to occur in "black magic", where the figurines represent enemies or bad spirits. It is also possible in burial contexts, where good figures may be broken as signs of grief. But surely this cannot fit the JPFs, which are mainly found in domestic contexts (chap. VIII below). Of course, one must be aware of identifying too simply the outer form and its appeal to our eyes, with the function and meaning in ancient times. I am only pointing out that the rope cannot be pulled from both sides. If one claims that the JPFs represented Asherah, which was certainly a "good" entity, then it is impossible to suggest that the figurines were mutilated in "magical" rites (and as for "Biblical reforms", see above).

To sum up, the study of breakage pattern is complex, and does not lead to unequivocal answers in regard to the symbolismand function of the JPFs. It does indicate that the JPFs are not fundamentally different from any other assemblage of clay figurines in regard to damage patterns, and there is no real evidence for their deliberate mutilation. On the contrary, it seems that accidental breakage is a better explanation.

180 whole plaque figurines are mentioned in fig. 3 (andchap. ill) This must not be confused; many "nearly whole" figurines are included in fig. 3 (including evenupper halves of figurines, as long as the position of the arms and the head survived). Note that most of the whole figurines are plaque figurines. Furthermore, the tendency was to publish every whole figurine, while small fragments were often neglected or discarded. This causes a certain biasin ourdatabase in favour of the whole figurines. 6

Chapter VIII: The Archaeological Context ''Does the Eagle know what is in the pit? Or will thou go ask the Mole?" (W. Blake. The Book of Thell. Viking. [1955]: 279)

The only former study of the context of the JPFs, which is worthy of mentioning, was made by Holladay (1987). Even this study encompassed only four sites, and the JPFs were examined as a very secondary component in the discussion. When dealing with the contexts, the quantity and the reliability of our data are especially important. The data is incomplete, and the questions which arise are very complicated. Who where the owners of the figurines? How can one determine who used the loci where figurines have been found? Was the owner of the place necessarily that of the figurine? Does the context indicate the meaning of a figurine? Sometimes, scholars tried to pull the rope from both sides simultaneously (cf. the criticism of Fowler, chap. 11.4.5 above). Can the same type of figurine serve for varied functions, depending on the contexts (e.g., in a temple it would have been a cultic figurine, in a tomb it would have been a tomb gift and in a children's burial- a toy)?

The data regarding contexts is presented in fig. 31 (below). I have separated the whole figurines (types Ac, Be) from the "nearly whole" ones (types A+, B+), which for the study of contexts must be treated with the other fragments. The context is registered in two fields of app. 1. Field "context. 1" includes a short verbal definition of the context, while field "context.2" is used for a general definition, discussed further below. In all, 71 different entries (or definitions of contexts) are registered in field "context.1". These definitions are sorted into a more workable form as 19 categories (fig. 31: left column; cf. the discussion below). As mentioned earlier, all this pertains only to the 255 JPFs which have at least some information about context. There are 27 whole JPFs, of which the context of 20 is known (i.e., 74% of the whole figurines). This is a high rate, compared with the fragments, amongst which only ca. 40% have known contexts. Of course, the few whole figurines were always better published and described. The whole JPFs are divided almost equally between the hand-made type (A) and the moulded type (B).

Only 255 JPFs have any contextual data and in many cases this data is partial or obscure. I will start with the whole figurines.

• Graves 12 of the 20 whole JPFs were found in graves (including app. 2: no. 7). This high percentage is expected, because whole artifacts were usually put cautiously inside graves. Even if later thrown into a repository to m.ake room for later interment, it was done from low heights and without much violence. Once a grave ceases to function and is sealed, the finds remain in peace (unless disturbed by robbers or by natural causes). Unfortunately, the exact locations of the whole JPFs within the graves are rarely known. We know the specific room inside a grave in Lachish, but not the exact location in that room (app. 2: nos. 75,80,82). We know that one figurine was found at the left back side of a room in a grave at Beth Shemesh (app. 2:8), but this is all.

VIII.t. The Context of the Whole Figurines It is important to separate the whole figurines from the fragments. One can assume that the context is related to usepatterns only for whole figurines, and even then this must be checked for each individual case. The situation is different with fragments. First, there is a higher danger of mistakes in stratigraphy, and small fragments might "migrate" between loci and levels, and be found out of context. Second, it is unreasonable that the heads, or the bodies, where used as separate parts. Heads may indeed represent a whole figure, and are often used for that purpose (e.g., heads of rulers on coins). This is not valid for the JPFs: their heads could not be used independently, as they cannot stand without the body. The moulded heads cannot stand, because of the peg; the hand-made heads cannot stand, because they were made as one piece with the body. This negates the suggestion of Keel and Uehlinger (1992:374), that heads were used independently.1 It follows that the fragments indicate disposal patterns after use, rather than actual usepatterns. The places where we find the fragments are more likely to be secondary places of disposal. Still, even disposal patterns may be fruitful for the understanding of the JPFs.

All the graves are common Judean Iron Age family graves (cf. Barkay 1994). To the best of my knowledge, there is not even one whole JPF, that can be safely related to a specific skeleton. Thus, we do not know if the JPFs belonged to females, males or both sexes. At Lachish, tomb 106 had at least 25 skulls, but these could not be preserved. Tomb 120 held remains of ca. 1500 persons. The bone finds from tomb 102 were not published (Lachish III:179, 193, 229). There are no osteological reports from the earlier excavations at Beth Shemesh (Mackenzie 1912). The burials of Mamila (Jerusalem) are still being studied.e All of these are family burials, or mass-graves. The finding of one or two JPFs in a grave indicates that it was not put customarily with each

I Keel and Uehlinger had only one perforated head in favour of their suggestion, but it was found at Megiddo and is not a JPF head. There is noteven one JPF headwhich is perforated.

56

2 Stromberg (1993) studied Greek burial[rods as indicators of the sex of the buried. TheJudean mass-graves do not enable a similar study.

57

Most of the whole JPFs (other than in tombs) are related to domestic contexts, except the one from the public storehouse (above).. Unfortunately, we do not have exact details of the nature of these contexts. At least in some cases, like at Tel Beer Sheba, the whole figurines survived by chance, when the level was violently destroyed. There is no clear evidence for cultic contexts of the figurines (whether religious or magic). The figurines are found in regular domestic assemblages, without obvious cultic vessels in the vicinity (for example, stone altars, fenestrated cult stands, and exceptional luxury artifacts).

burial, but only rarely (cf. Wenning 1991:89). Nor was a figurine put in each grave; there are hundreds of Iron Age II graves from Judah (Barkay 1994), but only 28 JPFs were found in these graves (including the figurine fragments). It is probable that the JPFs were not intended to be used in graves, as specific grave goods. They could be occasionally (and quite rarely) put in a grave as objects which belonged to the deceased before hislher death and were to "accompany" him/her afterwards. This is like many other daily artifacts found in burials. The fact that a figurine was placed in a grave does not associate it with any cultic or magic meanings, as is true for any other daily artifacts in the grave. Lately, there have been many discussions about the cult of the dead in Ugarit and Israel (Loretz 1992; 1994; Dietrich and Loretz 1992:39-76; Smith 1994:214-223; Bloch-Smith 1992). Even if the Judean burials were accompanied by religious or "magic" rituals, and even if these burials expressed certain beliefs in after-life, we have no reason to connect these beliefs and rituals specifically with the JPFs (versus Engle [1979:29-31] and other scholars, but cf. Ucko 1968:419).3

of Gibeon. This 'public' pool obviously served the needs of the whole population of Gibeon for a considerable period of time within the Iron Age II. Not even one whole JPF was found there, only fragments that could not be mended (Gibeon WS:22f). If is thus likely that the JPFs' fragments reached the pool at different times, and not as one homogeneous group. The distribution of the fragments in different depths of the pool can strengthen this conclusion. But how did the fragments get into the pool?

If the JPFs were thrown whole into the pool, we would have expected some to survive whole; the water would have absorbed the shock of the fall. Therefore, it seems that the JPFs were thrown after breakage, as fragments. This does not reveal, whether they were deliberately broken in a ritual and then thrown (thus the excavators, also Hubner 1989:53), or only broken accidentally and thrown as waste. In favour of the last assumption, one can compare the many other broken pottery vessels from the same pool. 5 Furthermore, the pool itself served daily needs and does not prove there is any religious or "magic" function of the JPFs - just as the JPFs do not prove (currently) a religious or "magic" role for the pool itself. 6

Figurine no. 252 from Tel Beer Sheba represents the only case of a whole JPF from a domestic context whose details are more or less clear. It was found together with daily pottery vessels and two miniature clay models, one a lamp and one a stool or a bed (BS 1:36). Does this constitute proof for a cultic assemblage, as suggested by the excavators (or, to use a term more common now, a "house cult", for which see chap. X.7.1 below)? Regarding the architectural form, the room is part of a regular house, without any special attributes to suggest religious or "magic" functions. It seems that the cultic explanation was again based on the pre-conception, that the JPFs have cultic meaning, or that they represented a goddess (called 'Astarte' by the excavators). I do not claim that this explanation is impossible, but only that it was not proven in regard to the figurine from Tel Beer Sheba, nor indeed any of the JPFs.

The fact that whole JPFs were found in graves contradicts the theory that all the JPFs were deliberately mutilated. JPFs were carefully put in graves, obviously in order to function as whole objects, and certainly not to be broken in a ritual. 4 • Other Contexts The remaining 8 whole JPFs have been found in varied contexts. Two whole JPFs were found in water cisterns, at Tel en-Nasbeh and Tel Beit-Mirsim (app. 2: 125, 232). It seems that these cisterns were part of the domestic quarters, but there is no evidence that connects them with a specific house. Two whole JPFs were found in a pit at Tel Beit Mirsim, either a silo or a waste pit (app. 2:197-198). The pit is located in a domestic area, but its exact position is not clear. Garbage was usually thrown outside the houses, in the streets or outside the city walls, thus it is more likely that this pit was a silo or some other installation. Only two whole JPFs were found in domestic rooms: one on a floor which does not have a clear function (app. 2: 11 from Beth Shemesh); the other in room 369 of a four-roomed house (app. 2: 126 from Tel en-Nasbeh). This house is situated near the big city gate, and its owner possibly belonged to the higher classes of society. Only one figurine was found in a casemate room, on the floor (app. 2:252 from Tel Beer Sheba, see further below). The last of the whole figurines was found in a storehouse (app. 2:253 from Tel Beer Sheba), and is the only whole JPF from an unequivocal public context.

I will follow the order of fig. 31 (left column), explaining the various categories of context when necessary. The location of JPFs and other figurines from selected sites is mapped out in figs. 34-40 (below).

3 One can quote Barkay (1994:153) in relation to graves from Judah: "fmds from graves should not be explained as special fmds, destinedto serve as burial gifts, or as objects of magical meaning; but as part of an assemblage of artifacts, which surrounded the peopleand were used by them during their lives" (free translation from the Hebrew).

Some 1300 artifacts were found in cave I, including animal figurines, miniature models of furniture and quantities of daily pottery - vessels (Holland 1975:328; 1977:136). The cave was probably used in the 8th century BC (Jerusalem Large quantities of broken pottery were found in the pool, but only two whole jars (Gibeon WS:16). Some of the figurinefragments could have been part of debris fill, dumped or washed into the pool.

5

,

• Water Pools (27 Fragments). One figurine from Lachish was perhaps related to the "large pit" (app. 2:60), but all the other fragments in this category were found in the large pool

Thus, these are not objects whose main function is to be mutilatedin "magical" rituals.

4

58

• Tombs (8 fragments, in addition to 12 whole figurines discussed above). The only information in regard to the context of two fragments from Tel Beer Sheba and Jericho is found in the cards of the Rockefeller Museum and Romema (app. 2: nos. 73, 481). As far as I know, graves were not excavated by Aharoni at Tel Beer Sheba, so there is probably a mistake in the card or in my own registration (for app.2:481). Three other fragments include one from Beth Shemesh tomb I (app. 2: 15); one from the left bench of Beth Shemesh tomb 5 (app. 2:9); one from Lachish tomb 120 (app. 2:79) and three from Mamila, Jerusalem (app. 2:467469). Two body fragments were found in the repository inside tomb 5 at Mamila (app. 2:467-468). Were they put there after deliberate breakage (as a sign of mourning, perhaps)? It is possible, but they could also be remains of whole figurines that were damaged or lost after the interment for one reason or another.

• Caves (16 fragments). Four of these fragments were found near the entrance to Jerusalem cave 1, and could have been connected with activities outside the cave. Two fragments were found in caves, of which the nature is not clear (app. 2:472 from Maresha and app. 2:41 from a cistern or burial in Gezer). All the rest of the fragments are related to Jerusalem cave I (except one fragment in doubt, app. 2:430). This brings us to the complex question of the nature of this cave.

VIII.2. The Context of the Fragments

• Cisterns (14 fragments). Usually, the cisterns concerned are small and related to domestic buildings. Some of these cisterns open into rooms or courtyards of houses. Other cisterns are situated in open areas, or in areas poor in building remains within the settlements {app. 2: 133, 139, 153,232). Two figurines were found in cistern 25 at Beth Shemesh (nos. 10, 29). This cistern is situated near a junction of two streets, and could have been a public cistern - though probably used by everyone (i.e., by 'private' persons). Regarding typology, there is no obvious connection between the cisterns and any specific sub-type of JPF(all the major sub-types were found in cisterns).

Again, my impression is that the JPFs themselves are the main reason for the cultic label attached to Jerusalem cave I. This clearly forms a circular argument: once the figurines are removed, what archaeological evidence is there of a cultic function for cave I, whether Yahwehistic, unofficial or "popular"? Only three or four artifacts, out of some 1300 found in this cave, can be termed cultic: one broken cult stand (Holland 1977: fig. 9:23; Jerusalem 11:44, C270); two small stone altars and one pottery model, perhaps of a temple (Holland 1977: fig. 9:20-22). Perhaps cave I was used for usual, domestic activities, just like the domestic function of the nearby rooms. I will conclude with this remark, and return to discuss cave I later (chapter VIllA. 1 below).

• Silos and Other Pits (14 fragments, almost all of subtypes B and C). Apart from the fragments, few whole figurines were also found in silos and pits, which seem to belong to domestic dwellings." It is important to know if JPFs were found in waste pits, for this may prove that they had no special sacred status during disposal. Unfortunately, . there is no clear evidence for this. The exact function of many pits is unknown. It seems that most of the pits concerned have been used as silos, or as other domestic installations. This is likely for pits inside houses, since refuse was usually thrown out of the houses.

To sum up, there are very few whole JPFs, hardly enough to present a general picture of the use of the JPFs. The JPFs from burials negate the assumption of deliberate mutilation, and there is no clear evidence that suggests religious contexts for any of the figurines.

• Rooms in Houses (49 fragments, in addition to two whole figurines, discussed further below). This is by far the largest group among the JPFs' fragments. Part of this group could have been broken during emergency times (e.g., a violent destruction of a level), and therefore left broken in the houses. This cannot apply to all the group (not all the levels were violently destroyed, and there is no case were fragments from the same locus could be mended together).

6 For clarification, one has only to compare with a really cultic

pool, the Mayan cenota in Chichen Itza. The differences are clear, and show that it is the JPFs themselves that, when assumed to be cultic, lead to the cultic explanationof the Gibeonpool. 7 I have excludesfragment no. 456, found in the secondary context of a Hellenistic pit.

I

II:49f). Kenyon defined the cave as the favissa of a nearby temple, but evidence for the existence of such a temple was never found. Currently, the cave is explained as a center for house cult, or domestic cult, i.e., related to "magic", "popular religion" or "unofficial cult" (e.g., Holladay 1987; Dever 1990:159; Jerusalem 11:49, 125; Franken 1995; cf. also Bourke 1992. I have reviewed all these opinions in chap. II above). Kenyon and Holland thought that the finding of broken JPFs beside whole pottery vessels indicated that the first were deliberately mutilated (Holland 1975:330,337; but cf. chap. VII above). On this basis, some scholars even related cave I with Biblical reforms, especially that of Josiah (chap. III; e.g., Dever 1990: 159f; Barkay 1990:191; cf. Nadelman 1989:123). This is all too far fetched: figurines are much more vulnerable than daily pottery vessels (cf. chapter VII above). If the JPFs were broken in the cave during rituals, why were only fragments found there, without even one case of two figurine fragments that could be mended together?

59

Thus, it seems that part of this group, if not most of it, indicates disposal patterns after use. If true, then the fragments were not considered holy or sacred when discarded, at least not to the extent that one would bury them in specialfavissae (like broken cult statues). Most of the houses are three- or four- roomed houses (the exact architectural plan is not relevant). Some of the figurines were used perhaps in upper stores, and fell down when the houses were ruined. Thus, their place of discovery will not always indicate the place of use. Generally, there is not enough information in order to indicate the exact function of each room. Very rarely do the rooms belong to a later period, and it is obvious that the fragments had nothing to do with them (app. 2:240, perhaps also nos. 295-297).8 Some of the buildings are bigger or different in plan from regular domestic houses, and perhaps these were public buildings (app. 2:118, 276, 262). Two whole figurines (app. 2:11, 216) were found in what look like regular domestic buildings. They prove that the JPFs were indeed used in such buildings, as does the large amount of fragments. The fragments originated in whole figurines, and it is likely that the last were used in the houses. After being broken, the fragments were dumped nearby; some thrown outside houses (below), some left inside. Other figurines were broken when sites suffered conquest and destruction (for the question of deliberate mutilation see chap. VII above).

Of course, the whole population passed through the gates, thus this "public" location teaches us nothing about the owner of the fragments in question. • Storehouse (7 fragments). Four fragments, as well as one whole figurine (chap. VIII.1 above) were found in the public storehouses at Tel Beer-Sheba and Beth-Shemesh (the so called "tripartite buildings"). In both these sites, the buildings clearly functioned as storehouses and not as stables. The fragments were found both in the storage areas and in the central passages. Two other fragments were found in a public storehouse (but not tripartite) at Tel Ira, close to the gate. All these buildings were not related to cult. The figurines could have been part of the "furniture" of the buildings, or personal belongings of the staff that worked there. It is also possible (though much less likely) that they belonged to 'private' people who came to deliver / accept goods. If the fragments indicate only disposal patterns, then they were dumped, without any special holiness, in the storehouses. Another possibility is that they were broken when sites were destroyed by violence, and the other parts were not found in the excavations (this is less likely, especially in the case of Beth Shemesh, where there is no clear evidence of a violent destruction in the 8th century BC).

• Streets and Alleys (8 fragments). The streets are simply the wider thoroughfares between quarters, or along the inner side of the city walls (fig. 33). The alleys are narrow passages, usually between domestic buildings. The fragments from streets and alleys are important for understanding the disposal patterns. It seems that the fragments were thrown into the streets and alleys after the figurines were broken. It is hardly possible to imagine whole figurines thrown into the streets, and none were found there (neither were fragments that could be mended). There is no element of holiness or sacredness here, but rather what happened is the dumping of domestic waste after it went out of use. Refuse of bones, broken pottery, ashes, etc. is commonlyfound in street fills of the Iron Age II (e.g., Hazor area B and the new northern cut in Beth-Shemesh). The origin of the fragments is not certain. Probably, most were thrown from domestic buildings, but few perhaps from public buildings (e.g., app. 2:273 from Tel Beer Sheba, found near the public storehouses). Fragments can also be carried away, e.g., inside sewage trenches of the jnain streets. In any case, the disposal of JPFs' fragments in streets and alleys casts doubts on the assumption that the JPFs represented a venerated, high goddess (cf. Voigt 1983, chapter II.4.5 above). On the other haad, we must not forget that objects lose a great deal of value (both economic and symbolic) after they are broken, thus a direct equation of disposal patterns and use patterns is dangerous.

• Courts (10 fragments). This group of fragments was found in open courts, and not in rooms. Almost all of them are from domestic buildings (except app. 2:205). Whole JPFs were not found in courts, perhaps because the last were used for cooking and other household industries, while the JPFs functioned in relation to the roofed living / storage areas. After the figurines broke, the fragments were thrown and a few ended up in the courts (or in the streets, see below). This is only a likely scenario, since the quantity of fragments from courts is small. We need much more information in order to attain clear answers. • Other Domestic Contexts (19 fragments). A few domestic categoriesin fig. 31 (left column) are grouped together here. Two fragments came from houses that are probably domestic, but further information about the exact place in the houses where they were found is lacking. Other fragments were found in doubtful contexts that could not be better specified: "room or court" (app. 2:144, 149, 455); "room or alley" (app. 2:17, 35, 131,447); "room?" (app. 2:20, 26, 100, 166, 228, 272, 454) and "house?" (app. 2:69, 477). It is likely that most of these cases concern regular, domesticloci. • Gates Only two fragments can be numbered in this category (app. 2:165, 224). Another fragment (app. 2:96) was found in proximity to a gate, but on the surface (it is included in the category of surface finds, mentioned below).

• Open Areas (9 fragments). These fragments were found in open areas inside sites, but usually the nature of the area is not clear. In one case, it seems that it is an area of a gate and public buildings (app. 2:136). In most of the other cases, the areas are situated close to domestic quarters.

8 These are cases of mixed stratigraphy from early excavations. Generally, I asswned that the stratigraphy of the excavators is valid, unless there is evidence to the contrary.

60

storehouses (or stables), fortifications (walls, towers), water systems and large silos. Public building, such as palaces, are recognized by their special plan, large size, prominent position and the appearance of luxury objects. There are doubts in regard to houses which have the usual domestic plan, but are larger and well-situated: in this case, clear separation of 'public' from 'private' is impossible. It is probable that all the public areas mentioned above, except perhaps palaces and "secret" military institutions, were open to the general public (i.e., for all or most of the "common" population). Furthermore, daily domestic vessels can be used in every public loci.9

• Outside Settlements (12 fragments). At least 3 JPFs fragments were found in the glacis outside the city walls. They were probably thrown outside the walls, or transferred inside fills that were used to repair the fortifications (app. 2:246, 248, 449). Fragments could have related also with extra- mural quarters of domestic buildings, such as those found at Tel en-Nasbeh, Lachish area 500 (and the western slope of the fortress of Arad?). Other fragments were perhaps related to caves (app. 2:167, 143). One fragment was found near a cemetery, but perhaps it was thrown above the city wall and rolled down the slope (app. 2:24). The fragments from area 500 at Lachish, mentioned above, could also belong to nearby cemeteries (app. 2:83, 84, 90, 93, 95).

Sacred or cultic buildings are little known from Iron Age II Judah. Excluding for the moment the question of a "house cult", cult was practiced in temples and "high places", and very few of these have been found in excavations. As a matter of fact, from Iron Age II Judah we only have the temple of Arad (for other doubtful cultic assemblages see Holladay 1987; for the definition of temples in the ancient Near East cf. Lundquist 1983; Shiloh 1979; Nakhai 1994). Of course, sacred structures from Israel and other neighboring kingdoms do not help here.

• Fills, Surface Finds, Debris and Miscellaneous (37 fragments). 11 fragments were found in fills of later periods from Kenyon's excavations in Jerusalem, i.e., in secondary contexts. 8 fragments were found in debris of an unclear nature. 10 fragments were surface finds, but sometimes the general nature of the area was known from the excavations. The last 8 fragments were found in various contexts: one above bedrock (probably from a domestic assemblage, app. 2:462), one from the surface of a public building which may belong to a late period (the so called "tower" at Tel enNasbeh, app. 2:171), one from the "western tower" of Tel Beit Mirsim (app. 2:225), one from a secondary context of a Hellenistic foundation trench (app. 2:444), two from debris at Tel en-Nasbeh (app. 2:145, 154) and the last two from unclear contexts (app. 2:2, 448).

It would be safe to say that domestic contexts are by far the best represented in any excavation. These contexts include not only houses, but small cisterns, silos and pits as well as open courts. Furthermore, though casemate rooms were architecturally part of public city walls, they served for domestic purposes, as part of four-room houses. Unless there is evidence to the contrary, the assemblages found in casemate rooms should be treated as domestic in nature. It is hard to define the general nature of streets and alleys in terms of public or private. The. population as a whole used these streets and alleys, without clear social separations. Their waste fills can come from any building. Even if the nature of the adjoining building is known, it can not be applied, since small fragments can be moved large distances in the streets (e.g., by sewage trenches).

VIII.3. A General Analysis of Contexts It is not easy to translate the detailed observations about the contexts of the fragments (above) into clear conclusions. Definitions like "cistern", "room" or "house" do not indicate the general nature of such loci. Is it a domestic room, the room of a temple, or perhaps of a military fortress? Rarely, the picture is different: we know the general nature of an area, while the exact locus and stratigraphy of the figurine are not clear (e.g., a figurine found on the surface of an area that was used only for domestic buildings). In order to achieve a wider picture, I have defined a few general categories of contexts: private, public, sacred and burial (app. 1: field "context.2"). The difficulties inherent in such a definition are, of course, formidable. My intention is to use the simplest definitions, in order to avoid the difficulties and achievea general picture, though somewhat simplified.

The general context of 173 JPFs, including a few doubtful cases, can be determined. The picture is presented in fig. 32 (below). Most of these JPFs are related to domestic (private) contexts: 70 specimens, plus another 42 doubtful ones. This is natural, since most of the excavated areas are domestic, or include daily artifacts. Still, the obvious conclusion is that the JPFs were not expensive objects, and that they were used by the population as a whole (or, by the so called "common" people). 19 JPFs were found in graves. 17 other figurines were found in caves, mostly from Jerusalem cave 1 but also from caves which could have been tombs. Only 9 JPFs could be ascribed to public contexts (with 11 more in doubt). There is hardly any evidence for JPFs in sacred contexts (5 JPFs at the most, including app. 2: 238, 252, 446, 448). One figurine from Lahav was found

A schematic plan of a Judean city of the Iron Age II is presented in Fig. 33 (below). It is not an accurate plan of any specific city, but a more or less representative plan, expressing features known from many excavated cities in Judah. The burial assemblages of such cities are usually well defined: whole cemeteries of rock-hewn tombs, cut in the slopes of the city itself or in the nearby slopes. Only rarely do doubts arise about the function of a certain cave, whether domestic, industrial or burial. The public areas of a Judean city are also quite well defined, including gates,

9 Even a palace would use daily pottery vessels, e.g., for the use of

its servants. The opposite is also possible: the use of royal commodities outside the royal circles, e.g., in times of danger. Thus, the Imlk jars from Lachish could be used to feed the whole population during Sennacherib's siege.

61

together with carved limestone blocks and a fenestrated clay stand in a domestic context (Jacobs 1992; Borowski 1995; cf. app. 2:238), which was called a "house shrine". I have not included the finds from Jerusalem Cave I here, since I do not define it as a cultic assemblage (see chap. VIII.2, section "caves" above). The scarcity of JPFs in sacred assemblage may be due to the scarcity of excavated sacred buildings, or to the difficulties of defining sacred and cultic in the archaeological record in general.

discussion that follows, buildings are designated by one prominent room number (e.g., Beer Sheba building 32) or a combination of a few rooms (e.g., Beth Shemesh house 370374). Groups of JPFs appear with their catalogue numbers and "+" signs (e.g., app. 2: 13+15).

I must stress that the categories private, public and sacred, as detailed above, define the buildings and the physical places, and not necessarily the finds and the people concerned. In other words, even if a building can be termed sacred, it does not imply that each and every artifact found within it is necessarily sacred.

• Burials. 2-4 JPFs were found in a few burials, i.e., Beth Shemesh tombs 1 (app. 2: 13+15), Beth Shemesh tomb 5 (app. 2: 8+9); Lachish tombs 106 (app. 2: 75+80+82) Lachish tomb 1002 (app. 2: 76+77+78+81) and Mamila tomb 5 (app. 2: 467+468). I cannot define these JPFs as groups, since there is no evidence that they are real groups, in a sense of figurines used together at the same time. They were found in the same places, but it is much more likely that these figurines belonged to different persons, and were put in the grave when those persons died, i.e., at different times. The JPFs from Mamila were found in the repository pit of the grave, probably thrown there when new burials have been added. The figurines were probably personal property (cf. Pritchard 1943:87), and not a group which belonged to the whole tomb as such, or even to one of its rooms. The assumption of personal property fits a head of a horse figurine from Samaria that carries an inscribed name, presumably of its owner (Chapter IX.2 below; of course, it is not a JPF). Since personal ownership can be possible for religious or "magical" objects, it does not negate the explanation of the JPFs as such.

vm.4.1. Groups of JPFs from Single Loci

One clear conclusion that can be drawn is that the JPFs were found, and probably used, in all types of contexts, or at all levels of human activity, and especially in the daily, domestic realm. Another interesting fact is, that female pillar figurines are missing, or extremely rare, in the few clear sacred buildings (of "official cult") of the Iron Age II. In Edom, two clear Iron Age cultic assemblages have been found so far: Qitmit (Beit Arieh 1995) and En Hazevah (Cohen and Yisrael 1995). In both assemblages, the cultic vessels are mainly large pottery stands, and small, handmade female figures are applied to these. Only three heads (among hundreds of vessels and fragments) from Qitmit belonged to free standing figurines, probably of the pillar type (Beck 1995). There are none from En Hazevah, as far as I know. In Judah, the temples were perhaps an-iconic (Beck, ibid). At Arad only two JPFs' fragments, at the most, could be related to the temple (app. 2:446, 448). A similar situation probably existed in the earlier precincts of Tel Qasileh (Iron Age I, Philistia) and Dan (Iron Age II, northern Israel). 10 Is this accidental, since the number of sacred Iron Age II buildings is so small? Or perhaps the small, clay pillar figurines had no role in sacred public places? If so, it is a different situation from the Greek world, where small figurines were dedicated in temples (Alroth 1989). At present, an unequivocal answer about any function/s of the JPFs in the public cult is impossible.

• Cisterns. A few JPFs were found together in domestic cisterns at Tel Beit Mirsim (app. 2: 197+198, perhaps also 217+218), Tel el-Ful (app. 2: 193+194), Tel En-Nasbeh cistern 216 (app. 2: 133+139+153+492+493) and Tel enNasbeh cistern 159 (app. 2: 142+170+179+180). Add cistern 25 in Beth Shemesh, which could have been a public cistern (app. 2: 10+29). According to Zorn, a few figurines were also found in cisterns 176 and 300 at Tel en-Nasbeh (personal communication). Like the mass graves (above), the cisterns indicate only disposal patterns, and there is nothing to prove that the figurines were thrown into them as real groups, i.e., at the same time. This holds true for the Gibeon pool as well (cf. chap. VIl.l-2 above).

VIII.4. Groups of Figurines

• Domestic Quarters and other Residential Areas. Unfortunately, only a few domestic loci can be considered for the present purpose. These arei

So far, I have only discussed the context of single JPFs. It is time to ask whether there existed groups of JPFs, which testify to the use of more than one figurine at the same time and place? The answer is not simple, and I will begin with data concerning single loci. I will not deal with loci whose nature is obscure, nor with surface finds, nor with general areas (such as Lachish loci 500 and 1500), as these cannot contribute anything to the discussion. 11 Throughout the

1. Beth Shemesh, locus 374 (app. 2: 14+35). The trouble is, that there are two loci with this number on the map, thus the fragments were not necessarily found in the same place (Fig. 34 below). 2. Kh. Geresh, locus 19 (body fragments, app. 2: 459-461).

10 Quantities of small figurines were found in Jerusalem cave I and Samaria locus E.207, but the definition of those assemblages as culticis doubtful (chap. VIII. 1-2above).

2: 295-296). Street 38-39 at Tel Beer Sheba is very long, therefore the fragments found there do not make a real group (app. 2: 257, 470).

room 44 from Crowfoot's excavation in Jerusalem is probably late, and the figurines belonged to an earlierlevel (app. 11 For example,

62

3. Arad, locus 350 (app. 2: 446+453). The figurines concerned are a hand-made head and a body fragment, and they are the only finds from a little room in the temple (fig. 35 below).

very clear: the lack of JPFs. Remove the JPFs from cave I, and its presumed cultic nature dissolves almost completely. In view of the conclusion above, what is the evidence of cave I regarding groups of JPFs? At a first glance, it is tempting to see the JPFs from the cave as a group. Once this view is taken (it was taken for granted), it is easy to believe that this group of figurines formed the focus of religious, or "magic" rituals inside the cave. This view is tempting altogether because it is so romantic. At last, there is evidence of Judean religious (or "magical") beliefs of the Iron Age period, from Jerusalem itself and from a mysterious place. 12 But is this view true?

4. Tel Beer Sheba, locus 443 (app. 2: 262+268). In this case, it may be fragments from different rooms of the same building (fig. 38 below). 5-7. Tel Beit Mirsim, locus SE.13.32 (app. 2: 203+229; cf. fig. 39), locus NW.32.10 (app. 2: 210+216, two moulded heads, cf. fig. 40) and locus NW32.12 (app. 2: 220+221, two body fragments). 8. Ramot, locus 131 (app. 2: 464+309, two body fragments).

One must ask is it probable that all the 1300 artifacts from cave I were in use at the same time? Regardless of the cultic definition of these artifacts, how can this be possible in such a small cave? A casual look in the plan shows how small it is (Holland 1977: fig. 6). What free place could the cave offer for performing any cultic rituals, with all these objects? It seems to me that there is no escape from the conclusion that cave I is a storage assemblage. As a matter of fact, this is not so far from the former explanation of Kenyon "favissa" - only she labeled the artifacts as cultic.

Dr. Zorn kindly handed me a list of figurines from Tel enNasbeh, based on the excavators' diaries at Berkeley. A few more groups should perhaps be added on the basis of this list, as follows:

9. Room 64, a body fragment (museum no. 311) and a pillar base (app. 2: 569). 10. Room 438, a head (app. 2: 150), two pillar bases and a body fragment.

If this definition is true, all the artifacts were not used inside cave I, but deposited (or dumped) there, perhaps during a prolonged period of time (say, 20-30 years). We do not know the identity of those who put the finds in the cave, nor the circumstances involved, neither .the origins of the finds (nearby buildings? of what sort? disposal of waste?). We cannot even be sure that all the artifacts originated from the same place. Cave I, unfortunately, is a secondary context, and its value for understanding the JPFs is more limited then previously thought. All the JPFs from the cave are fragmented, possibly in a disposal context. There is no clear evidence that these figurine fragments formed one real group with direct relationships between each member.

11. Room 513, two pillar bases. 12. Room 616, two heads (app. 2: 496+497; for the room see Zorn 1993:360). Possibly, a few more pairs exist in the following rooms: 221 (app. 2:136 and museum no. 906); 366; 372; 393 (app. 2:134 and a body fragment); 398 (app. 2:152 and another fragment) and 445. I have not seen the other figurines that are mentioned in the list, and am not certain that they are all JPFs. In any case, even together with all of these figurines, the number of JPFs' groups is very small in relation to the general quantity of JPFs.

• Summary. Unfortunately, most of the contexts discussed above fall into the category of general, mass contexts (graves, pools, cisterns, pits and caves). As such, they do not indicate the existence of meaningful, contemporaneous groups of JPFs at the same locus. Furthermore, most of these contexts relate to disposal patterns rather than to use patterns. As for loci from "living" levels, there are only about a dozen domestic loci in which 2-4 JPFs' fragments have been found together. So far, no two whole JPFs were found together in one "living" loci (such as rooms, courts, storehouses and casemate rooms). Certainly, larger groups never appear in the archaeological record. It is true that the present data is very partial, and that its nature is mainly "negative", but the picture seems quite clear - the JPFs were not used in groups.

• Jerusalem Cave 1. With this cave we reach another challenge. All former scholars did not dispute the cultic character of this cave, whether defining it as a favissa of a temple (Kenyon), or as a center for "popular religion", "magic", or "house cult" (e.g., Jerusalem II; Franken 1995; Holladay 1987; for discussion of ritual in archaeology cf. Barrett 1991). It seems that this explanation rests on the assumption that the JPFs are "magical" or "cultic" figurines (chap. VIII.2 above). The assemblages of nearby caves II-III seem to strengthen this conclusion. They are not fundamentally different from cave I, except for rather minor differences in the appearance of certain pottery types and their relative quantities per cave. JPFs were not found in caves II-III, and I suspect that this is due to an earlier date of these caves - before the use of the JPFs became common (but the reason can also be accidental). Not surprisingly, caves II-III were never defined as cultic (Jerusalem II: 125; the explanation in relation with "guest houses" is awkward, but this is beyond the scope of the present work). The reason is

12 Caves are mysterious, romantic places. I say this not out of scorn, but out of deep conviction.

63

VDI.4.2. Groups of JPFs in Whole Buildings (Figs. 34-40)

The list includes only a short verbal description, and I have not seen these figurines.lf Furthermore, in many cases it is impossible to define the houses with certainty (Zorn 1993).

Since each domestic building served one family, the question of whether each house had more than one JPF might be important (for a study of the family in Israel see Stager 1985, with further references). Did one family use only one figurine at a time, or a few spread in different rooms of the house? The study of single loci alone (above) would not answer such questions. The problem is, that even if we find a few JPFs' fragments in the same building, how can we know for sure that they were used at the same time? If they are only fragments of figurines, perhaps these were imbedded in floors and fills after being broken. The data is very preliminary and the search is time consuming. I have concentrated on main sites, and used distribution maps (figs. 34-40 below). I will not discuss here mass loci such as graves, cisterns and caves, because these will be useless for our purposes. The following is a list of JPFs found in the same buildings. It is surely a very incomplete list.

The conclusions are still clear; there is no significant evidence for the use of groups of JPFs together at the same time and place. The "groups" found above include mainly fragments that do not necessarily imply use-patterns. The quantity of groups is small, as is the number of figurines within each group. It thus seems that each JPF functioned separately, and not in "scenes" composed of groups of JPFs together (for relation to other finds see chap. VIII.5 below). This conclusion fits the assumption that the figurines were "private" property. It is also important, since it strengthens the view that all the JPFs represented the same figure, and not many independent figures. If all the JPFs symbolized the same figure, it explains why there was no need to repeat this figure in the same "scene". This is the most likely explanation for the lack of contemporaneous groups of JPFs.

VIII.5: The Relation to Other Artifacts

1. Beth Shemesh, house 370-374 (app. 2: 14+17+35). Only the area of season 1933 was published adequately, but the plan of house 370-374 is incomplete (fig. 34 below).

Holladay (1987:275fi) was the first scholar to discuss the relation between the JPFs and other finds. His study was limited to four sites only, and to the level of whole buildings (rather then loci). This is problematic, since when each loci is checked, most of the "house groups" dissolve. Houses cannot form good units of study regarding relations between the artifacts. Holladay claimed that the JPFs served in "house shrines", situated in the upper storeys. When the houses collapsed, the JPFs were dispersed in the ground floor. This theory is complicated, and surely it cannot apply to all the JPFs. Holladay (1987:276) believed that all the figurines (including animal figurines) are religious artifacts that imply a cult practiced in about half of the houses of Tel Beit Mirsim. He did not distinguish at all between fragments in secondary locations and whole figurines in situ, and ignored the acute problem of whether the place of find reflects use-patterns, or only disposal patterns.

2. Arad, locus 350 (app. 2: 446+453, already discussed above; cf. fig. 35 below). 3. Arad. A house in the south of the fort, formed if the casemate wall is removed (app. 2:57+451, perhaps also 477; fig. 35 below). The casemate wall is probably later (for the debate about it see Herzog 1984; Mazar and Netzer 1986; Ussishkin 1988).

cr.

4. Tel Beer Sheba, house 443 (app. 2: 262+268, already discussed in chap. VIII.4. 1 above). Fig. 38 (below). 5. Tel Beer Sheba, the eastern storehouse (app. 2: 251+254+266). 6. Tel Beer Sheba, a room (?) east of the "cellars house 32" (app. 2: 259+269). If this room was part of the cellars house, add app. 2:276. Fig. 38 (below).

If data and time were unlimited, we could have looked for every possible connection between the JPFs and any other artifact. Some limits are inevitable. I have concentrated on a few types of artifacts that seemed more promising. For example, one finds daily pottery vessels almost everywhere. A registration of all the vessels found beside the JPFs would be cumbersome and perhaps unrewarding. If one specific type of vessel is related to the JPFs more than another type, it will be meaningful but it would be very time consuming to find that specific type. For the present study I have used two fields in app. 1. The first field lists relations with other figurines (field "FGRP"), while the second field lists relations with other types of artifacts ("LFND"). All the codes in these fields are given in key 2 (below). I have used the distribution maps for the main sites (figs. 34-40) and the data in appendixes 4-5 (below).

7-9. Tel Beit Mirsim, two groups from single loci, already reported above (app. 2: 210+216; 220+221). The third group is from two separate loci in a house (app. 2: 211+231). 10. Tel en-Nasbeh, building 634+639 (app. 2: 177+156).13 11. Tel en-Nasbeh, building 399+670+398 (app. 2: 148+ 152). A few more groups may have existed at Tel en-Nasbeh, according to the list made by Zorn. These are: house 661+656+655 (app. 2: 87 + pillar base F); house 432+ 453+430 (app. 2: 57+60 + base fragment B); and finally house 370+439 (app. 2: 494+169). The data is incomplete.

14 Of course, this is all my fault and has nothing to do with Dr.

13 For JPFs' fragments A-G see app. 2: note after no. 576.

Zorn.

64

The discussion is very preliminary. I have only checked singe loci, since the study of whole buildings is less rewarding but even more time consuming (above).

216 (one HR from the list of Zorn and JPFs 169, 494); 10. Tel en-Nasbeh rooms 408+402 (HR 148 and JPF 92); lI. Tel en-Nasbeh room 513 (HR 105 and JPF "0"); 12. Tel enNasbeh cistern 370 (HR 147 and JPF 494).

VDI.5.1. Relation to Other Types of Figurines Cappo 1: field "FGRP

Wenning (1991) claimed that the HRs and the JPFs represented a pair of gods, but the archaeological evidence does not support this claim. Most of the "groups" of HRs and JPFs are from general, mass locations, e.g., cisterns, pools, streets and mass-burials. These loci do not prove a real, direct relation between these two types of figurines. Against the dozen "groups" (above) there are hundreds of figurines from both types, that were found separately. There could have been some connection between the JPFs and the HRs, but it was not a very binding one.

fI

)

A. Female Figurines (other than JPFs) Outside Judah, female figurines are common (appendixes 45), but these had, of course, no physical contact with the JPFs. Most of the plaque figurines (app. 4.VIII-4.IX, 5.Y) are earlier than the JPFs. A few plaque figurines are contemporaneous, but very rarely found in Judah. Other than JPFs, there are not many female figurines in Iron Age II Judah (app. 5, types 5.1.2, 5.1Y.4, 5.IV.5, 5.1.6), even if we include heads and bodies whose sex in not very clear. IS I have found no meaningful connections between these other figurines and the JPFs. As usual, the location and date of many of these other female figurines is not clear, or inadequately published. It is a moot point whether these other, differently rendered types of female figurines portrayed the same figure as the JPFs, or perhaps different figures.

D. Animal Figurines Animal figurines form the majority of figurines in almost any assemblage of figurines from Israel. I have registered some cases where animal figurines were found together with JPFs in the same loci (app. 2: 18, 22?, 23, 25, 29, 41, 80, 128,197,198,218,266,459,461,462,467,468). No doubt this is a very partial registration. Many details are missing for early excavations, while recently found figurines are not yet fully published. So far there is no proof for a direct connection between animal figurines and JPFs, such as a building loci where two whole figurines of these types were found together. In many loci, only one JPF was found alone. Most of the "groups" listed above are derived from mass locations, which do not prove direct relations. Therefore, there is no archaeological proof for the assumption that the animal figurines were attributes of the JPFs (if the last represented a goddess), though it is not impossible (for animals and gods cf. Gorg 1993). A close study of the species of the animal figurines will help to provide an answer (most of them represent household animals, such as equids and cattle, but many are very schematic). I have found no meaningful relation between the JPFs and the hollow, zoomorphic vessels. The last are not very common, and some of them seem to be earlier than the JPFs.

B. Male Figurines The number of male clay figurines from Judah is meager (app. 5.11.3). A few of these have been found with JPFs but only in mass contexts. The places are Tel en-Nasbeh ci~tern 216 (app. 5.11.3.2 and JPFs nos. 169, 494) and Jerusalem tomb or cave 6015 (app. 5.11.3.4 and JPF no. 439). There is no real evidence for the use of pairs of figurines, i.e., combinations of one female JPF and one male figurine. This is also clear from the scarcity of male figurines in comparison with the many JPFs. Hence, the JPFs did not have a male counterpart, at least not in clay (nor in metal, cf. X.7.3 below).

c. Horse-and-Rider Figurines

E. Bird Figurines

An obviously male figure is that of the horse-and-rider figurines (henceforward HRs for short).16 HRs figurines have been found with JPFs together in the same loci in a number of cases, as follows: 1. Arad locus 380 (HR 80 and JPF 448); 2. Beth Shemesh room 373 (HR 4 and JPF 17); 3. Beth Shemesh cistern 25 (HR 3 and JPFs 10, 29); 4. The pool at Gibeon; 5. Jerusalem cave I (HRs 31, 35, 36, 50, 64, 68, 71; for the JPFs see app. 1 and chap. VIII); 6. Lachish tomb 1002 (Hrs 75, 76 and JPFs 76-78,81); 7. Lachish tomb 106 (HR 77 and JPFs 75, 80, 82); 8. Tel Beer Sheba street 38 (HR 224 and JPFs 257, 470); 9. Tel en-Nasbeh cistern

Many scholars claimed that bird (dove?) figurines are related to a popular - or common - religion, and that they were an attribute, or a symbol, of the Biblical Asherah (for an iconographic study see Keel 1977). For that reason, I selected the bird figurines for a closer study, based on the data in app. 5.11.2 (birds with pillar bases); on Holland's thesis (birds without pillar bases, Holland 1975: types E.lIE.III) and on recent material from new excavations and publications. Altogether, these sources produced ca. 50 solid bird figurines from Judah. Other types appear in neighboring areas, but I will not discuss these, because they have no direct archaeological contact with the JPFs. In nine cases, JPFs and bird figurines were found together:

IS It is logical to include these, since the number of male figurines among the clear cases is meager.

1. Beth Shemesh tomb 1 (app. 5.11.2.13 and JPFs nos. 13, 15).

16 Discussed in chapter IV and app. 6-7 of the original Ph.D. work (Hebrew, 1995).

65

2. Beth Shemesh room 373 (app. 5.11.2.17 and JPF 17). 3. Beth Shemesh room 374 (app. 5.11.2.14 and JPF 14). 4. Jerusalem cave 1 (seven bird figurines, Jerusalem 11:48; for the JPFs consult app. 1). 5. Lachish tomb 1002 (app. 5.11.2.15 and JPFs 76, 78, 81). 6. Arad locus 450 (head of a bird, reg. no. c456/1, not yet published, and JPF 451. It is not certain that the two originate from the same level). 7. Tel en-Nasbeh cistern 159 (app. 5.11.2.17 and JPFs 142, 170,179,180). 8. Tel Beit Mirsim pit 33A.15 (app. 5.11.2.27 and JPF 232). 9. Tel Beit Mirsim locus NW.32-13 (JPF 205 and a bird figurine, TBM III: pI. 58; Holland 1975: E.II1.34).

rituals (cf. Rystedt 1992). Of course, rattles could be used for music without religious connotations. Rattles were found near JPFs nos. 41, 169,439, but from mass loci (tombs and cisterns), which are not very helpful.

contexts. Heads of type A were not found in courts, while heads of type B were not found in fills. These and other minor "differences" seem accidental, and probably reflect only the incomplete information at the moment. As far as the contexts can testify, there does not seem to be any difference of function between hand-made heads (type A) and moulded heads (type B). Probably both types represented the same figure.

(extent of excavations, relative wealth of sites, methods of excavation and publication, etc.). As a general impression, it seems that the JPFs were found in similar contexts in every region of Judah, i.e., there are no apparent regional differences (such as certain contexts which appear in one specific region but not in another).

B. Miniature Models of Furniture At least 11 JPFs were found with clay models of furniture in the same loci (app. 2: nos. 13, 15, 32, 142, 197, 198, 217, 218,232,252,259). Most of these are from pits or tombs, i.e., general locations, but a few were found in domestic loci at several sites. Miniature models of furniture, usually beds, are known from very early periods in the ancient Near East (Spycket 1992: chap. VI: nos. 735-743; chap VII: nos. 1307-1369). They appear in Israel in the Early Bronze Age, perhaps representing birth stools (Beck 1993). In Mesopotamia, they are found in both temples and domestic buildings, starting with the Early Dynasty period (Cholidis 1992:172ff, 180ff; for a short review cr. Dietrich 1992, UF 24:499). Sometimes, figurines of naked women and even couples in erotic positions are applied to these beds, but it is not clear if these represented mortal persons, or supernatural figures (Cholidis 1992:175ff; for beds in the OT see Weippert 1976).

In relation to the rather limited number of bird figurines from Judah, this is substantial evidence for some sort of relationship. But again, most of it is from mass locations, which do not indicate real groups, nor clarify the nature of the supposed relationship.

VIII.S.2. Relation to Other Finds (app. 1, field "LFIND") 105 JPFs were registered in field "LFIND", i.e., they were found with other artifacts. This is a very preliminary registration, limiting the ability to draw conclusions. 103 JPFs were registered as having been found with daily pottery vessels, but as noted earlier, this does not contribute much to our understanding. Sometimes, JPFs were found together with Imlk seal impressions (app. 2: 23, 87, 89, 168, 169, 484-486); with jewelery (app. 2: 7); with weapons (app. 2: 10, 13, 303, 305, 308) and with inscribed weights (app. 2: 142, 169, 225). Most of these "groups" are from mass loci and not really indicative. Furthermore, the quantity of loci with these "groups" is small, not exceeding what can naturally be expected from finds of the same period (Iron Age II) and place (Judah).

Following the present data (figs. 31-32), the main sub-types of the JPFs (A-B-C) are well devided between the varied

It is interesting that the Late Bronze age and Iron I age plaque figurines include a group of figurines, which probably portray women lying on beds (Tadmor, M. 1982). The origin of this group is Egypt, where similar figures appear as both figurines and in wall scenes (cf. chap. X.7.4 below). One can also refer to the "Ashdoda" figurine, whose body is shaped as a bed (app. 5.1Y.4.1). If the miniature models represented birth stools, does it indicate that the JPFs are connected with birth? It is possible, but then why is the lower body of the JPFs so schematic? These clay models from Iron Age Judah are also much less common than the JPFs, thus they could not really form "pairs". So far, only few loci exhibit remains of both a JPF and a clay model. There is not even one case where a figurine was actually found standing on such a bed (the JPFs could not lie on the beds because of their round bases). On the other hand, it is not necessary for the figurines to actually stand on the beds. Perhaps they stood nearby and "endowed" the beds without direct physical contact. Much more material is needed, especially whole figurines from "living" loci (such as app. 2:252), before we will be able to achieve clear answers in these matters.

A. Cult Vessels The problem is, of course, how to define cultic vessels. If we do not want to beg the question, we should limit the definition to the really clear objects: stone altars, large fenestrated cultic stands, and standing stones ("m:l~y')"). JPFs were found with these finds in the same loci only in very few cases. I have found four places where JPFs were found with cult stands: 1. JPF 133 (from a cistern); 2. JPF 238 (in a room), 3. JPF 18 (in doubt). 4. The JPFs from Jerusalem cave 1 (but cf. chap. VIllA above). Only one JPF was registered with a standing stone (app. 2: 32 from Beth Shemesh, room 305). This stone was called "beatyl", but is probably a regular building stone and not a real "standing stone". Add now one JPF head from Lahav (app. 2: 238, Jacobs 1992; already discussed in chap. VIII.3 above). One must remember that the quantity of these cult objects is very small.

VIII. 6. The Context in relation to Date, Distribution and Typology The study of context in relation to date, distribution and typology is rather brief - we simply do not have the required data for such a study, and must leave it for the future. Regarding date, we lack the ability to compare between assemblages of the 8th and the 7th centuries BC (chap. IV above), not to speak of inner phasing within each century. Many factors can be involved in the distribution pattern

Clay rattles should perhaps be added here, since these musical instruments could have been related to religious

66

67

Chapter IX: Analogies to the Judean Pillar Figurines? "Claypit, clay pit, you are the clay pit ofAnu and Enlil, the clay pit ofEa, lord ofthe deep, the clay pit ofthe great gods... your gift you have received, and so, in the morning before lama'! I pinch off the clay ofNN son ofNN; may it be profitable, may what I do prosper"... (Wiggermann 1992: 13, text I: 151-157).

In the former chapters, I have often mentioned other types of figurines, albeit briefly. The only exception concerned the typology, where I classified a large quantity of other figurines (chap. III and app. 4-5), though I have been careful not to use these figurines as a direct analogy to the JPFs. In other chapters, e.g., while discussing the relations between the distribution of the JPFs and the borders of Judah, there was no need to make analogies. Analogy may contribute to this study, if the group which is used for analogy can furnish clear evidence on the subject for which it is evoked for comparison. In other words, there is little sense in comparing one group of finds to another group, which is even less well known. A comparison between two unknowns will not help. One should also bear in mind that analogies can never constitute proof, but only serve as a tool for bringing up suggestions and possibilities.

A figure of a naked female, standing on a lion, is depicted on the famous Egyptian stele from Winchester college (England). The figure holds a lotus (and a snake?) and probably wears a crown. On her side, three names are inscribed: Kudshu, Astarte and Anat. The relation between the scene and the inscribed names is not so simple. Does the figure represent all of the goddesses, or only one? Some would claim that all these goddesses are forms of one "basic" goddess (for the stele see Wiggins 1991:386ff, fig. 1; Hadley 1994: n.64, with further literature there). I mention this stele only to show that in certain cases even an inscription does not solve all the problems.

I have tried to find analogies from places and periods as close as possible to the JPFs, since larger temporal and geographical distances usually weaken analogies. I will not discuss figurines made of other materials (such as stone or metal), large scale sculpture and other forms of art (such as seal impressions and carved ivories). Of course, with a motif as common as the JPFs, analogies can be found in all of these fields. Indeed, extensive analogies were offered by scholars of the "iconographic school" (chap. III.4.7 above), but their success in explaining the JPFs is questionable.

There is a figurine of "Isis with Horus on her knees" in the Cairo Museum. It probably dates to the sixth century BC, and carries a Phoenician dedication: "to my lady, to Astarte" (/lmnl!J)l~ m:l'~/I. See Lipinski 1984:109f, nn. 139-141; museum no. CGC.39291).

IX.2. Inscribed Figurines with Known Functions

Egyptian figurines of cows are sometimes inscribed with the name of Hathor (pinch 1993:161f), since the cow is an attributive animal of this goddess. Finally, figurines for "magic" uses are well known from Egypt, and a few are inscribed (for further discussion, see chap. IX.3 below).

Very few small clay figurines from the ancient world carry inscriptions that clarify their function (or at least partially). In a few other cases, written evidence can indicate the function of such figurines although they may not be inscribed themselves. Following are a few examples.

IX.2.2. Mesopotamia Figurines of gods were placed in foundation deposits of temples, and texts indicate the ways of producing and depositing such figurines. The figurines were meant to protect the temple from storms. They vary between 10-20 em. in height, and carry a formula: "The vizier of the gods, the leader who conquers all the storms". These figurines may represent a minor god called Ninhibur (Borger 1976; cf. also Green, AR. 1988).

IX.2.1. Egypt Two Egyptian figurines of a woman with a child from the second millennium BC carry inscriptions that indicate that they were used in order to encourage birth. The origin of these two figurines is unknown. The first figurine is made of limestone and exhibited today in Berlin (reg. no. 14517). Its inscription is an appeal: "may you grant birth (or

68

IX.2.5. The Fragment from Samaria As far as I know, only one fragment (among the thousands of figurines and figurine fragments from Iron Age Israel) carries an inscription. It is the head of a horse from Samaria,. which carries one word inscribed before firing: "(7N ?iJlY~". This is presumably a private name (to cz[I?]), which marks the ownership (Samaria III:16, no. 3, pI. 1:3a3b; 81: no. 29). It strengthens the assumption that the figurines were owned by individuals.

IX.2.3. The Seville Figurine

conception) to your daughter, Seh". It seems that the appeal was made to the dead father, asking him to help his daughter and thus secure the continuation of his family in future generations (Noblecourt 1953:37-39; Tooley 1991). The second figurine is now in the Louvre. It is inscribed with a wish addressed to the KA of NN, to endow birth to a women named Tita (Noblecourt 1953:37-39). Noblecourt explained these figurines as concubines, but today ~e tendency is to see them as fertility figurines, related WIth birth (Pinch 1983; Pinch 1993). Small (uninscribed) figurines from the temple of Gebel el-Zeit were explain~d as representations of the goddess Hathor (posener-Krieger 1985:297f; Gamer-Wallert 1992:90).

IX.t. The Use of Analogies

Figurines were used for a wide variety of magical functions in Mesopotamia. Sometimes such figurines were inscribed (discussedin detail in chap. IX.3 below).

The Museo Arqueologico de Seville (Spain) acquired a small bronze figurine in 1963. It depicts a naked, sitting female, but its origin is unknown. The head of this figurine is quite similar to heads of the "women at the window" ivories and to Phoenician clay figurines (cf. app. 5.VI.1-2, 5.VI.5 below). On the base there is a Phoenician inscription, dated by Cross to the 8th century BC. Other scholars lower the date to the 7th or 6th centuries BC. This inscription tells us that two brothers dedicated this figurine to the goddess "tzltrtl}r" (line 4), which fulfilled their wish. It is not clear if "I}r" means the l:Iurrians, the region Hurru (i.e., Syro-Phoenician coast), or a cave (Cross 1971; Teixsidor 1975; Lipniski 1984; Hvidberg-Hansen 1986:172; Ammerman 1991:219; Vance 1994:118; Lemaire 1994:130, 132). Recently, Puech (1993) suggested that "hr" means a window, thus reading "Astarte in the window".

IX.2.6. Conclusions The inscribed figurines testify that female figurines served a wide range of functions in the ancient period. Some represented goddesses and could even replace large c~t statues in times of crisis; other figunnes were votive dedications in the form of the gods (but possibly in the forms of venerating women as well). Yet other figurines were used for so-called magical purposes (see below). I have not found inscribed figurines that were used as toys or as initiation figures (cf. Voigt 1983). It is perfectly possible that they existed, since one can hardly expect to find explanatory inscriptions on such objects.

IX.2.4. Classical Literature There is evidence in classical sources about putting small figurines in temples as dedications to the gods (Romano 1988:128; Alroth 1988:195). From one source at least, it is clear that the figurine represented the goddess:

IX.3. The Magical Use of Small Figurines IX.3.t. Egypt

"To thee I dedicated a very beautiful image of thy form, Cypris, since I have nothing better than thy form..." (Ammerman 1991:203; cf. Romano 1988).1 Atheneaus tells a story about a merchant named Herostratos from Naukratis, who bought a small figurine (or statuette) of Aphrodite while visiting her temple at Paphos. On his way back to Egypt by ship, a storm broke, and Herostratos and his friends prayed to the figurine, asking the help of the goddess. The storm subsided. After reaching Egypt safely, Herostratus dedicated the figurines to Aphrodite in a temple at Naukratis (Ammerman 1991:223, Atheneaus 16:675). Even if this story is only a legend, it is most interesting. It shows that small figurines were manufactured in relation with temples and sold to private peoples. These figurines could be dedicated at temples (cf Alroth 1989). At times of crisis, the small figurine could "personify" the goddess; but 'probably at other times Herostratos and his friends would apply not to a figurine, but to large cult statues in the temples. From the story it is clear that, at least in this case, the figurine represented the goddess (and not women venerating her).

Recently, Ritner (1993) offered a thorough discussion ~f magic in ancient Egypt. Ritner stressed the fact that magic was legitimate in Egypt, and practiced even by priests and kings. For example, Papyrus Lee deals with a conspiracy against Ramesses III, and blames the rebels (among other things) not for practising magic, but for using it a~ainst the king. As a matter of fact, the rebels used the magical books of the King himself (Ritner 1993:13 n.46; 199ft). Magic and religion were two sides of the same coin (ibid:28), and there was even a god of magic with his own cult (HK', ibid:14ft). Indeed, magic could have been effective in a society that believed it (ibid:189). One can not differenti~te between private and public magic (ibid:183). The official priests were in fact those who practiced magic, since they knew how to read and write. They also controlled the magical scripts, held in "the house of life" in the temples (Ritner 1993:204ff, 220ft). The same magical document could be used for both royal needs and private needs. Verbal magic (spells) were as important as the material expression (the rituals), quite the opposite of the common tendency evident in modem anthropological studies (ibid:68). The attitude towards magic changed into a negative one only with the Roman conquest, when magic became an underground, illegal occupation (ibid:217ft).

1 Female figurines appear on fronts of clay models of shrines. These were explained as goddesses, but they are not free standing figurines and, as far as I know, none carries an inscription (Culican 1976; Seeden 1979:15,23; Mazar, A. I 985b; Bretschneider 1991).

Ritner showed the widespread use of figurines for magical purposes in Egypt. One use was the making of enemy

69

figurines from various materials, and then mutilating or melting them in the course of a ritual (Ritner 1993:113:tl). This act symbolized the killing and annihilation of the enemy (wax figurines and their melting - ibid:199ff, 158f, 209, n. 968. Clay figurines - ibid:153ff. Stone figurines ibid: 116£ Beheading figurines - ibid:161f). This custom continued during many periods and well into Roman times, as one bound female figurine stabbed by metal arrows shows (ibid: 112 fig. 2; cf. similar figurines from Maresha: Bliss and Macalister 1902:154ff, pl. 85). Sometimes the figurines were buried (Ritner 1993: 172:tl). Figurines made by priests were found in foundation deposits (ibid: 13, n.48) and two female figurines were found in a "magicians" box (ibid: 222:tl). The coffin texts give examples for making such figurines:

different demons (Wiggerrnann 1992). The house could be protected by complicated rituals, involving interment of protective figurines (Wiggerrnann 1992:xii).2 The rituals lasted for a few days and included many purification acts, preparing the materials, producing the figurines and purifying the figurines on a river bank. The figurines were probably endowed with life by performing the "opening of the mouth" ritual (that was performed for large cult statues as well). Then the figurines were buried in the house, combined with more purification acts. The manufacturing orders of the figurine are very specific. For example: "Seven statues of sages whose clay is mixed with [wax], furnished with [wings] and the face of a bird, holding in their right hand a cl[eaner,] in their left hands a bucket; they are clad in white paste, and endowed with feathers by hatchings in the wet paste - you shall make" (Wiggerrnann 1992: text 1, lines 170-173).

"To be spoken over a figure of the foe made of wax and inscribed with the name of that foe on his breast. .. to be put up in the ground..." (Ritner 1993:173, Coffin texts spell 37).

In the specific case quoted above, the figures can be identified with the "guards" on Assyrian reliefs (for the "cleaner" and the bucket, cf. Wiggerrnann 1992:66:tl). Other figurines hold branches of dates, clubs, or daggers. The "names" of the figures were sometimes inscribed on the shoulder of the figurines, specifying their function (ibid, text 1: lines 195:tl). They represented a vast number of varied entities: from gods in anthropomorphic forms (Sebettu, Lugalgirra, Meslamtaea, etc.), through apkallit creatures shaped as animals (bulls, dogs, snakes, etc.), to all kinds of monsters and mythic creatures (e.g., lion-man, scorpionman, fish-man, Wiggerrnann 1992: text 1:180ff; pp. 46-58; Green, A. 1994).

The best example of magical figurines in Egypt are the execration figurines, especially from Mirgissa (2nd millennium BC). These figurines are often inscribed with the names of the enemies and formulas against them (Ritner 1993:137-140). They were probably called rs.t in Egyptian (ibid:187ff, fig. 17). They were made by the ruling regime and used against potential enemies of the Egyptian state (ibid:141). The texts inscribed on the figurines are not magical, but the figurines were used in rituals involving their being "killed" by burying, melting, burning, etc. (ibid:148-153; Koenig 1990; Grimal 1985). Often, the faces of the figurines were mutilated, to prevent them from taking action (Ritner 1993: nn. 671-675). Similar figurines also served private people in Egypt, and were found in private tombs (ibid: 149 n. 671, 183f).

A very interesting difference concerns the materials used for these figurines. Figurines of gods and goddesses were made of tamarisk, and the gods are called the sons of heaven (biniU '!am~). On the other hand, demonic creatures are made of clay, and are related to the earth (ApsG; Wiggermann 1992: text 1:144, pp. 48, 60, 87). Only one exception is known, a lesser god which is not made of wood (Lu/a/, ibid:60). The clothing was also different - the gods and some of the sages usually wear dresses (represented by paint), unlike inferior demons (ibid:53ff; for clothes of cult statues cf. Matsushima 1993:211ff).

IX.3.2. Mesopotamia Many sources indicate the use of small figurines for magic in Mesopotamia and in the Hittite empire, and their remains were found in excavations (Black and Green 1992:81f). They represented varied figures: gods, demons and mythological figures. Some were made in anthropomorphic forms, others were a mixture of anthropomorphic and animal forms, and yet others had purely animal shapes.

The texts specify the exact positions of the figurines in the house, and there were probably fixed rules in this matter. Figurines were put alone or in groups in all parts of the house: the gate, the rooms and tht: courts (Wiggermann 1992:58ff). It seems that gods and. monsters were concentrated in the outer gate area, appkallii creatures in living rooms and various monsters (Lu/a/, Latarak) elsewhere (ibid:99-101).

From written sources, we learn that figurines were made for "black magic", shaped as enemies or victims. To conterclaim them, wax or clay figurines in the shape of the black "sorcerers" were manufactured. These were burnt by fire or drowned in a river (Gurney 1960; Geller 1989; Black and Green 1992:81f). Many figurines were buried whole inside houses, as protectors of the houses. These figurines were sometimes found in excavations (Rittig 1977; Green, A. 1983; 1985; 1988; Green and Black 1992; Holloway 1992:198ff; Wiggerrnann 1992; Green 1994).

The figurines found in excavations (e.g., Green A. 1983; 1985; 1988) show that rituals of the kind described in the written sources were indeed performed. Not every detail in

A new study deals with ritual texts, the aim of which was to protect new houses (or houses under construction) from epidemics and diseases, represented by a varied "army" of

2 These magical texts are not easy to understand, and are often obscure and debated by various scholars. Here I have followed the

translations of Wiggermann.

70

the sources fits the actual figurine - perhaps the manufacturers had some freedom in their actions (Green A. 1983:92f; 1985; Wiggerrnann 1992:50, 63:tl). Figurines appear in private houses at AJlur, Ur and other cities. The archaeological data, especially regarding context, is often incomplete or problematic, and many figurines cannot be identified clearly (Wiggerrnann ibid: 631f, 97, I43:tl). We learn from written sources about the figurines found in excavations, rather than vice versa.

For this reason, I will limit the discussion to female figurines, especially figurines from geographical areas which are close to Judah and are from more or less the same period of time.

IX.4.1. Greece Small pillar figurines (and other types) were found in temples, in niches around the altar and sometimes even on the altar. It seems that some of these figurines represented goddesses (having a high "polos" hat), while others represented women venerating (Ammerman 1991:203; Alroth 1988; for Crete cf. Gesel 1985:61; Van Straten 1992:194). Naked female figurines were cornmon in Greece and in the Aegean world starting with the 8th-7th centuries BC, and it is usually assumed that their origin lay in the Levant (Karageorghis 1987:1-2; Bohrn 1990:119ff; Herrnary 1992; for the eastern influence on Greece during this period see Burkert 1992:20; Morris, S. P. 1992; Osborne 1993; Zimansky 1993). This motif is rare in the western Mediterranean, where it appears during the 7th - 6th centuries BC, surely coming from the east.

The rituals described in these texts are complicated and long, possibly also expensive (producing so many figurines, clothing them, etc.). It is doubtful whether such rituals were performed for each house. Perhaps they were used for houses of the upper classes, while much shorter and cheaper versions were used for smaller houses. The texts studied by Wiggerrnann involve protective figures, i.e., good or "white magic". Even though, some of the figures have a bad, menacing outer form such as monsters and demons. This warns us that the outer form does not necessarily reflect the inner function directly. "Bad" figurines were also used in Mesopotamia, e.g., figures that personalized diseases, epidemics, death, and murder (Wiggerrnann 1992:92). The Maq/b rituals give an example, in which one made representations of "black magicians" and "killed" them by burning, breaking, eating, etc. (Abusch 1987-90). It is important to note that protective figurines were not mutilated; in order to protect the house and its dwellers, they had to remain whole and were therefore buried whole. The probable implication for the JPFs is that if the JPFs represented a good figure (in function, not only in form), it is unlikely that they would have been deliberately mutilated (whether they represented gods, mortal beings or mythical figuresj'

IX.4.2. Cyprus Cyprus is the richest source of coroplastic art in the Near East during the Iron Age II period. All scholars agree that the origin of the naked female motif, as well as the technique of moulding the face, lay in the Levant. This type of figurine arrived in Cyprus in the 8th century BC or a little later. Many scholars believe that Phoenician traders were responsible for the introduction of these figurines in Cyprus (Karageorghis 1987:1-2; Yon and Caubet 1988:30; Ammerman 1991:220ff; S,srenson 1991:23lf; Caubet 1992:261, etc.). There are connections between figurines from Phoenicia, Israel and Philistia, and figurines from Cyprus (Bisi 1989; Gubel 1991). The Cypriot figurines of naked women were usually interpreted as "Astartes", fertility goddesses or naked goddesses, but this is a copy of the labels given to similar figurines from the Levant. 5 In this case, using Cypriot figurines as an analogy for the JPFs is like a dog chasing its own tail. In Cyprus, many figurines are found in burials, but also in temples and in domestic structures.

IX.4. Other Female Figurines The motive of the naked female is widespread throughout human history, with different meanings for different human societies (Auerbach 1992:308). Figurines of naked women, with hands on their chests, are found already by the end of the third millennium BC in Mesopotamia (ibid:31Of; Spycket 1992:36, 54, 234). Spycket believes that the figurines are fitted out according to the customs and demands of the local populations and, with a few exceptions, are not connected with other figurines (ibid:227). Wiggins (1991:392) warned from crossing cultural boundaries, and Renfrew expressed a similar view: "Religious system of a given period has to be interpreted primarily in the light of evidence available for that period, and not on the basis of subsequent belief systems, however well-documented" (Renfrew 1985:3).4

IX.4.3. Neighboring Areas The areas nearest to Judah may prove the most important for comparison. Small clay figurines of naked females appear in all these areas during the Iron Age II period: Phoenicia,

the basis of visual similarity with other cultures across space and time, unless an unbroken link can be proven".

3 Mutilation is possible in this case, only if one assumes a "reform", i.e., an act on behalf of a group of people who deemed that these figures were bad and not good

5 Similarly, Bronze Age Cypriot plaque figurines were termed "Astartes" following the Levantine terminology: Orphanides 1990:48, 50ff.

4 Cf a similarview of Carless-Hulin (1989:95): "It is preferable to interpretsymbols within the contextof the host culture, and not on

71

Philistia, Transjordan and Israel. They share with the JPFs the general motif (standing woman) and technique (the moulded heads), but there are marked differences in details (chap. III above, and app. 4-5). There are varied hand positions among figurines from these areas, but hands on the chest is a quite common one. These figurines are not the only type in these areas, and there is a greater variety of types, at least in Phoenicia and Philistia, in comparison with Judah (e.g., figurines of musicians, daily scenes, and pregnant women). Other figurine motifs appear in these areas as in Judah (horses and riders, animal figurines, etc.), though there are again marked differences in details. The Phoenician figurines relate not only to domestic buildings, but to burials (Achzib) and temples (Sarepta, Pritchard 1988:48f; the Eshmun temple in Sidon: Ganzman et. al. 1987). In that respect, they resemble the Greek world (see above).

of figurines from the neighboring areas is smaller (at least for published figurines). While we have the Bible and Hebrew inscriptions for Judah, we have very little written evidence for neighbouring areas, such as Philistia or northern Israel. The symbolism and function of the figurines from the surrounding areas are not clearer than that of the JPFs. Analogy to the former will not solve the problems concerning the later. Scholars who see the JPFs as representations of a goddess may claim that similar goddesses were venerated in all the vicinity, with minor stylistic variations (Asherah in Judah, Astarte in Phoenicia, etc.). Other scholars say that it is different facets of one "basic" goddess (Astarte equals Asherah, equals Anat, etc., especially Dever 1990). This raises the question, was there a great cosmic goddess, a sort of a universal "mothergoddess" or "general goddess" (see chap. X.3 below)? On the other hand, there is no difficulty in retaining any other explanation for the JPFs (magical figurines, toys), assuming that similar figurines were used for similar purposes in the neighboring regions.

The bad news is that we know less about all these areas, compared to what we know about Judah. A few examples will suffice to show this. In Phoenicia, the excavations are few and the chronology uncertain. Thus, it is not even clear if the Phoenician figurines preceded their Judean sisters, and if the technique of the moulded face appeared there for the first time. Archaeological context and chronology of Transjordanian figurines are often problematic. The quantity

So long as the meaning of the female figurines from the neighboring areas is not clear, they cannot solve the problems concerning the meaning of the JPFs.

73

Chapter X: Notes About Meaning and Function "Out ofreluctant matter What can be gathered? Nothing, beauty at best" (Cheslav Milosz. The Collected Poems 1931-1987.London 1988.Vicking: 123).

The aim of this chapter is to criticize some of the theories regarding the JPFs, and support, to a certain extent, other theories. During the last hundred years, four basic attitudes crystallized in the study of the JPFs, each advocating a different explanation. These four basic explanations are: 1. Toys, used for children's amusement. 2. Mortal women. 3. Goddesses, whether general (such as "mother goddess", "fertility goddess" or "nurturing goddess") or specific (usually Astarte or Asherah). The combination of AnatAstarte-Asherah (e.g., Dever 1990, 1994) stands closer to the conception of a general goddess. 4. Magical figures. No one has suggested that the JPFs were initiation figures (cf. Voigt 1983); in any case, initiation rites can perhaps be considered as part of magical rites (it would be very hard to distinguish the two in the archaeological record). Similarly, it is clear that the JPFs cannot be mortuary figures, since most of them were found in settlements and not in burials. I will proceed from two basic assumptions. First, that the JPFs represented one identical figure and not many individual figures. Second, that the JPFs had one basic function and not many functions (that could interchange according to various factors, such as area, period and context). I will return to these two assumptions later (chap. X.7.6).

X.I. Toys The explanation of the JPF as toyss was made in the early phases of research, but was never very popular. Sometimes it was applied to a few specific figurines, e.g., Albright for one pillar figurine of a woman with a child (TBM III:142; app. 2:232 below). The explanation of toys was often restricted to zoomorphic figurines, as opposed to anthropomorphic ones (e.g., Lachish III:374; Kenyon 1967:101; 1974:142; Franken and Franken-Battershill 1963: 139; Burrows 1941:221). Very few scholars thought that all the figurines were toys (e.g., De-Vaux 1958:82), and some rejected this explanation completely (May 1939:28).

Firstly, JPFs were found in public buildings, where we would not expect to find children's toys (storehouses in Tel Beer Sheba and Tel Ira, the temple area in Arad, the public buildings of Ramat Rahel). Secondly, the overwhelming uniformity - indeed, even stereotyping - of shape does not fit toys. We would expect toys to have a more individual character, either by manufacture or decoration, or through wear by children's handling. Thirdly, the crude manufacture and lack of decorations on the back side of the JPFs indicate that they were meant to be seen from the front, i.e., to stand in a rather static position (perhaps with their back against walls or pieces of furniture). This does not fit toys, which are used for dynamic playing. Fourthly, the JPFs are very vulnerable, while toys require the ability to sustain the wear and tear of playing (if this was needed, better clay and firing were possible). Fifthly, at present there is no archaeological evidence to connect the JPFs with children, or with children's burials.! So far, written evidence for the use of figurines as toys in Iron Age Judah has not been found, and indeed, can hardly be expected. In any case, the arguments put forward seem solid enough to reject the idea that the JPFs were children's toys, There is a growing tendency to reject this explanation in regard to other ancient Near Eastern figurines (e.g., in Egypt: Tooley 1991; orin Greece: Gates 1992:169).

X.2. Representations of Mortal Women The idea that the JPFs represented mortal women has been almost completely ignored, at least in writing. Pritchard (1943:86) raised this possibility, but only as a tentative option, and it was rather superseded by the idea that the JPFs were goddesses. Hachlili made this suggestion for figurines from Ashdod, because their many variations of

During the last three decades, the explanation of toys has not been put forward for the JPFs. Fowler (l985:341f) mentioned it, but only as a warning against believing that every figurine was cultic. Otherwise, Fowler did not prove that ancient figurines were toys, or that the JPFs were in particular (for further discussion see Ucko 1968:422f; on children in Mesopotamia see George 1993; on toys in the Bible see Hallo 1993, but without reference to the JPFs). Hubner (1993:92fI, fig. 46) is the only modem scholar that returned to this old explanation, but without any new substance (cf. chap. 11.4.4 above).

72

The cheap material of the JPFs, the mass production, the popularity in domestic areas and the throwing of fragments into streets may fit the explanation of toys. The (partial) nakedness of the JPFs does not negate an explanation as toys (since modem puppets often have sexual attributes, cf. Voigt 1983:187, 189). Nor does the lack of similar male figurines, since it is possible that female puppets were used by girls, while boys refrained from using any sort of puppets. Yet, other facts do not accord with this explanation.

1 When speaking of toys, I mean children's toys by definition. We, adults, also have "toys" - only we call these gods or magical figures. Therefore, though the separation of children's toys from adult's toys may not be absolute, it can certainly be used in archaeology and is not artificial.

73

shape may imply different women, and not one goddess (Ashdod Il-Ill: 132). The JPFs from Jerusalem cave I were explained as representations of women, who came to the cave to seek help in birth or disease (Jerusalem II: 128; it is quite close to an explanation of magical figures, for which see X.6 below). Perhaps the theory that the JPFs represented mortal women is not appealing, because it lacks the glamour that mysterious magic, or prestigious Israelite religion, have. But is this theory acceptable?

"mother goddess" was most widely used, and often related to fertility (Duncan 1924:180; May 1935:27; Burrows 1941:221; Wright 1957:118; Kenyon 1967:101; Heaton 1974:232; Dever 1982:38; 1990:137; Keel and Uehlinger 1992:381). A few scholars used this term for convenience sake only (Holland 1975:124; Holladay 1987:278). Yet other scholars stressed the fertility aspect, especially in regard to animal figurines (TBM ill:82; Hooke 1938:25; Mazar 1990:501; TN 1:247; Jerusalem II: 128): It was hard to see all the small animal figurines as gods, in opposition to anthropomorphic figurines.

There are some doubts regarding the explanation of mortal women. The great physical and technical uniformity (clay, white wash, decoration, position of hands, schematic lower body) seem to imply the lack of any effort in representing individual women. Even the heads are very uniform. True, ancient art stressed types and not individual portraits, especially when not dealing with gods, kings, queens and the like. The JPFs were probably used separately and not in groups (chap. VIllA above). This hints that they symbolized the same figure, and not many individual women. The possibility that the JPFs represented mortal figures of "fertility" does not fit the lack of pregnancy, children and rendering of the pubic area. Finally, Understanding the JPFs as mortal women does not solve our problem. It gives a title, but not the meaning. Who exactly were these women? Why were they represented in large quantities? How do we explain their wide distribution in all sorts of contexts?

The terms "nurturing goddess" or "suckling goddess" were used by many scholars for the JPFs (TN 1:245; Macalister 1912:417; Reifenberg 1927:97; Supinska-Lovset 1978:2lf; Holladay 1987:278; Wenning 1991:91; Keel and Uehlinger 1992:380f). The term "naked goddess" was less popular (Watzinger 1933:117; Lachish ill:374), and adopted mainly within the iconographic school of thought, which also coined the term "the Syrian goddess" as a universal entity (Winter 1983:127ff, 131, 192-199; Briend 1992:27).

Many scholars criticized sharply such "mother goddess" theories (Franken and Franken-Battershill 1963:144f; Ucko 1968:417ff; Orphanides 1990:45f; ~I'iggins 1991:392; Day 1992:181, 185; Walls 1992:15; Bailey 1994). Lemche (1992:253, nn. 26-27) even went as far asto define the ide of fertility in Biblical studies as a modem, post Freudian bias. Every one of the major known goddesses in the ancient Near East was a "mother goddess" in that she mixed motherly and divine characteristics, much as every male god is, by definition, a "father god". 2 Gods, as imaginary creations of the human race, cannot be completely detached 2 Yet, we do not hear scholars speaking about a general "father god" of unknown name, and of extensive spheres of influence (in the context of Judah). Does the existence of such a Judean "father god" depend upon finding small figurines?

74

If we reject the idea of a "great cosmic goddess", we must also deny the terms "mother goddess", "fertility goddess" and the likes. The main question is do the JPFs represent a goddess? If not, then all these terms are groundless. If the JPFs do represent a goddess, then there is no escape from trying to identify a specific goddess (see above). It is thus clear that these vague terms are superfluous in any way, and we would do much better without them.

X.4. Astarte, Anat and Astarte-Anat-Asherah

X.3.3. "Naked Goddess", "Nurturing Goddess", "Suckling Goddess"

/1·

E

Many scholars suggested that the JPFs represented female goddesses, but did not try to identify them with specific goddesses, believing that this was impossible (pritchard 1943; HUbner 1985:53; Miller 1986:245; Barkay 1990:191). Other scholars continued to use "general terms", though they identified the JPFs with a specific goddess. The term

Behind terms such as "mother goddess", "fertility goddess", "nurturing goddess" and "naked goddess" lies the assumption that there existed a certain great cosmic goddess or "general goddess", worshipped by a large number of societies. This goddess was usually related to the prehistoric periods. Perhaps she could have some minor temporal and geographic variations, but it was claimed that she was one "basic" goddess. In my view, this theory cannot be accepted for Iron Age II Judah. There may have been syncretism and influences between different goddesses at different places. There may have been common origins in some distant past. But, once a population adopts a goddess at a certain time and place, it cannot be "a general goddess"; it is adopted for the specific needs and circumstances of a specific population, thus becoming unique. That goddess is not identical with any other goddess, although she may have similar traits, a similar "history", or a similar physical form. After all, there must be some general similarity between all the goddesses (all this holds true for gods as well, and is not meant to be discriminative in any way).

This term, popular with the iconographic school, is even more problematic. I have already referred to the problems of mixing sources from nearly 2000 years and treating the whole Near East as one cultural unity (chapter 11.4.7 above). Furthermore, what is Syrian in the JPFs? They have no relation, whatsoever, with Syria. As long as the JPFs are discussed, this term is misleading and must be discarded forthwith.

The notion of a prehistoric "mother goddess" was very widespread at the end of the last century and the beginning of this century, together with the idea of fertility. It was believed that prehistoric figurines represented a goddess, but without written sources this goddess could not be named (Ucko 1968:409-416). Complex theories were built on the idea of a general "mother goddess", especially for Europe and the Mediterranean areas. Scholars even reconstructed matriarchal societies ruled by women and later suppressed by males, on the basis of the female "mother goddess". How absurd this is can be seen from the JPFs; they are all female, but the Bible shows that Judean society was dominated by men. That is, the sex of the small figurines tells us very little about the status of the sexes in ancient societies.

X.3. Mother Goddess, Fertility Goddess, Nurturing Goddess and Naked Goddess

There is much more to be said. During the Iron Age II period, several goddesses are known from Judah and the neighbouring kingdoms (e.g., Astarte, Asherah). Never do we hear about some "general mother goddess", worshipped by everyone. Is it possible that another major goddess existed in Iron Age II Judah, without being mentioned in any written source (including the OT)? Furthermore, is it conceivable that the only feature of this goddess is that she is "a mother goddess", in other words, lacking any characteristics (since she is 'just like any other goddess")? The same is true also for the term fertility and its abuse: it is such a vague term, and every goddess has some kind of fertility. 3 It is worth quoting the expression of Handy about the idea of a "mother-goddess":

X.3.2. "Syrian Goddess"

X.3.t. "Mother Goddess" and "Fertility Goddess"

On the other hand, if the JPFs had some symbolic meaning, they had to "act an action", even if only a symbolic one. This makes them very similar to the so-called magical figures (cf. part X.6 below). Also, we must return to the former questions of who is symbolized by these women and why? In other words, seeing the JPFs as mortal women cannot constitute a full explanation, since it does not answer the question of what the meaning of such figurines was.

believers are her "children". It is such a basic idiom in almost any human society. As far as the JPFs are concerned, there is hardly an indication of motherhood (except one figurine, app. 2: 232, which carries a child on its back - but it is the only one among 854 JPFs).

"a topic, overused since the nineteenth century, which is "in" now, but it is a lazy way to deal with the variety of female deities known from the ancient world" (Handy 1993:158).

It seems to me that all these terms are vague and contribute nothing to the understanding of the JPFs. The reasons for this are explained below.

Theoretically, it is possible that such mortal figures were made without any deep meaning, but for aesthetic reasons only. This explanation was never suggested, perhaps because it is so simple; everyone tried to find a hidden meaning! From an archaeological point of view, it is extremely hard to test such a theory, since with only "fashion" for meaning and function, any archaeological context is possible. But an explanation of mortal women without symbolism does not fit what we know about ancient art, which was a rigid way of expressing (mainly) royal and religious messages.

from human mortal life, and reflects aspects of the later as a mirror. Any scholar who explains the JPFs as a goddess must strive to identify this goddess specifically. If he/she believes that it cannot be done, then adding "mother" and "fertility" to the definition "goddess" contributes nothing.

I , I

Many scholars identified the JPFs with the goddess Astarte," beginning with the early stages of research (Vincent 1907:161; Gezer II:412; Driver 1922:33ff; Pilz 1924:161, 166). At first, the name was used for both plaque figurines and pillar figurines, but later some scholars termed only the plaque figurines as "Astartes" (patai 1967:58-60, 98ft). Many scholars used the name Astarte only for convenience sake, as a general name for the JPFs, without really claiming that they represented the goddess Astarte (Barkay 1990:191; Phytian-Adams 1923:80; Watzinger 1933:117, photo; TN 1:245, 273; TBM III:138; Holland 1975:42, 62, 97; Holland 1977:154; Kyle 1977:76; Aharoni 1978: photo 37; Keisan 1:350; Mazar 1990:501; Jeremias 1993:44). Some scholars created an amusing situation, by calling the JPFs Astarte on one hand, but explaining them as Asherah on the other hand (Ahlstrom 1963:53f; 1984:138; Oded 1994:126f).

The term "naked goddess" is similar to that of "mother goddess", and related with fertility. The "naked goddess" was identified mainly in Syrian seal impressions and plaque figurines of the second millennium BC as the "rain goddess", mate of the storm god (Blocher 1987; Van Loon 1990; Auerbach 1992). Even if the identification of the Syrian seal impressions is correct, what is their relation to Judean figurines from the later Iron Age period? The JPFs are only partially naked, and have very schematic lower bodies. Furthermore, the term "naked goddess" and the likes may describe the figure superficially, but does not really explain it (like "fertility" or "mother goddess"). These are all very vague terms, since almost any goddess has some aspect of motherhood. Any goddess is a mother, thus her 3 For example, the Greek goddesses:

"almost every single Greek goddess has a fertility aspect of one kind or another" (HadzisteliouPrice 1978:3; for fertility cult cf. Bonanno 1986).

4 I am using the more common English spelling Astarte, though the Biblical form "Ashtoret" is more appropriate for figurines from Judah.

75

During the last few decades, the Astarte explanation lost its popularity. Today Astarte is mentioned in relation to the JPFs mainly as part of a combination of the goddesses Astarte, Anat and Asherah together, by scholars who claim that all these goddesses were, more or less, the same goddess (Dever 1982:38; 1987:226f, nos. 1-3; 1990:157f; 1994; Hestrin 1987; Hvidberg-Hanson 1986:176, etc.). There is no need to review here the written sources about these goddesses, already studied in detail elsewhere. 5 None of the scholars identified the JPFs with Anat along, since it is clear that Anat flourished mainly during the second millennium BC (on Anat see Hvidberg-Hansen 1986: 172f; Deem 1978; Smith 1990:61ff; Walls 1992; Day P.L. 1992; Smith 1994:204, n. 45).

the identification with Asherah is that if the JPFs represented a goddess, it must have been Asherah. She is the only likely candidate in later Iron Age Judah, in the light of her dominant position in the Old Testament (versus any other goddess) and her appearance beside Yahweh in the inscriptions from Kh. el-Kom and Kuntillet 'Ajrud (chap. II.4.11 above).

domestic waste (chap. VIII) may seem a problem, if Asherah was a high, venerated goddess. But the status of Asherah is not clear; there is a great difference between disposal patterns and use-patterns; and the small figurines do not have the high position of large cult statues. Finally, if the JPFs represented Asherah, the lack of male god figurines is intriguing (chap. X,7.3 below).

In the Bible, Asherah is often mentioned as a cultic object

Many scholars assumed that the pillar bodies of the JPFs represented a tree - trunk, the assumed form of the Biblical Asherah. This was another reason for identification between the two, but it is a completely baseless argument. On one hand, the OT does not give a specific description of the Asherah. That she was made of wood is common to cult statues (and other objects) in the whole ancient Near East. Living trees may have been her symbol (Judges VI), or wooden cult objects'? However, there is no definite proof that she had a pillar body. In Greece, female figurines may be pillar-shaped, but statues of goddesses are anthropomorphic (Alroth 1989). On the other hand, the JPFs' body does not seem to represent a tree. Pillar bodies are a widespread solution for standing figurines in the Near East. The widened base is necessary to enable the figurines to stand safely. Once a round body with a widening base is used, it is difficult to represent separate legs! Indeed, the legs "return" when double-moulded figurines, where the body is fully made in a mould, appear. With rounded pillar bodies, the only way to show legs is perhaps by incisions or stamping on the front part of the round body; but this certainly looks awkward (it is found in one or two figurines, see app. 5.IV.7.19 below). Furthermore, some of the riders of the horse-and-rider figurines also have pillar bases. But these riders stand on horses - surely their body cannot be connected to trees or poles. Finally, pillar figurines from Transjordan and Phoenicia are more elaborately rendered, and a few have painted decorations or a ledge on the body (cf. app. 4.1.1-2 and fig. 10:1-2). These probably indicate dresses, which are not a logical outfit for trees.

made of wood (connected with the verbs "fell", "smash"" and "burn by fire": Ex. 34:13; Deut. 7:5; 12:13). In Judges VI, Asherah may have been an actual tree, standing above or near the altar. In a few verses, it seems that Asherah is a goddess. During the monarchical period, a /I~O!l1l and a 111lS~!lY.l1I of the Asherah are mentioned. These are moot terms, but Asherah was clearly part of the official cult of Judah - she was introduced into the Jerusalem temple by Judean kings (I Kings 15:13, 33; II Kings 21:7). It seems that during the Iron Age, or most of this period, Asherah was a desirable component within the Judean cult and not an opposed cult or a foreign one. II Kings 18:19 relates Asherah with Ba'al, but this seems to be a secondary interpolation (while the "Asherim" of the Chronicler is a late form, which is historically doubtful). It is possible that Asherah was considered as a paredos of Yahweh, at least in some circles. This is currently debated, and the amount of recent literature on the Asherah is bewildering - from "solid" scientific monographs and papers to all kinds of popular literature and bizarre expressions. 6 For our purposes, the central. question is whether indeed the JPFs represented Asherah?

The theory about a combination of Astarte-Anat-Asherah seems doubtful to me (and cf. already Reed 1949). The OT and other written sources distinguished explicitly three goddesses, with different names. It is hard to believe that all three could be venerated as the same one goddess during the later Iron Age period (on the other hand, the JPFs are so uniform that they can hardly represent three different goddesses, since how would the users know which is which?). Furthermore, there are differences in time and space between these goddesses, though our sources are not always clear or reliable. Anat was mainly a Cana'anite goddess of the second millennium BC. Astarte was mainly associated with Phoenicia and the kingdom of Israel, and not with Judah. Asherah was mainly a local Judean and Israelite entity of the first millennium BC (Lemaire 1994:134; cf. Day, P.L. 1992; Wiggins 1991). Therefore, Anat and Astarte do not fit the obvious Judean definition of the JPFs (against the identification with Astarte cf. already Franken and Franken-Battershill 1963: 145f).

This explanation is possible regarding date and distribution. Asherah is connected in the OT mainly with Judah and Israel. The female pillar figurines from Israel (different in details from the JPFs) can be explain as "Israelite Asherah" (e.g., Dever 1994). The many JPFs in domestic houses may reflect a common appeal of the Asherah, and there is no problem in the appearance of a few JPFs in public and scared locations. The JPFs from pits and cisterns, and the private ownership of figurines (chaps. VIIIA.l, IX.2.5) can also fit this explanation. There is no clear evidence for cult in relation to the JPFs, but neither is the exact form of veneration of the Biblical Asherah clear (also, there is the problem of what is cult exactly and how is it expressed in the archaeological record). The throwing of JPFs as

X. 5. Asherah The view that the JPFs represented the Biblical Asherah is the most popular explanation today, therefore I have named the present phase of research "the Asherah phase" (chap. IIA above). The debates about the exact nature of the Biblical Asherah find expression in regard to the JPFs, as variations in the meaning attached to these figurines (whether as a phenomenon of official religion, a forbidden or non-conformist cult, a house-cult or expressions of popular religion), but the similarity is greater than the differences (patai 1967:35, 43, 60; Engle 1979:27ff, 50-52, 80; Dever 1982:37; Ahlstrom 1982; 1984:136; Teubal 1984:91; Holladay 1987:278; Gadon 1989:96 photo, 171; Dever 1990:158f; Wenning 1991:90; Bloch-Smith 1992: 218f, n.16; Dever 1994:120-122). Somewhat exceptional is the identification of the bird figurines, rather than the JPFs, with Asherah (Jerusalem II: 127f, fig. 7:4). The logic behind

6 The following list includes impo~t publications on the Asherah, together with some secondary literature: Reed 1949; Lemaire 1977; Emerton 1982; Winter 1983; Dever 1984; Pettey 1985;Hvidberg-Hansen 1986:174f;Mendenhal11985; 01yan 1985: chaps. 2-3, 51fI; Hadley 1987; Hestrin 1987; Schroer 1987:21-45; Tigay 1987:172flI; Kyle-Macarter 1987:143ff; Koch 1988; Ljung 1989:54-58; Betlyon 1985; North 1989; Dever 1990: chap. 4; Smith 1990:80-124; Best 1991; Hestrin 1991;Wiggins 1991; Day, J. 1992; Dearman 1992:79; Dietrich and Loretz 1992; FrymerKensky 1992: chap. 13; Hiibner 1992; Margalith 1994; Whitt 1992; Ikeda 1993; Wiggins 1993; Zeeb 1993; Day, J. 1994:184ff; Dever 1994; FrettlOh 1994; Hadley 1994; Lemaire 1994:148f; Smith 1994:198-206. On the new inscription from Ekron see Gitin 1993:250-252; 1995:72.

For Asherah see chapter X.5 below. On Astarte see Leclant 1960; Fantar 1973; Delcor 1974; Hvidberg-Hansen 1986:171f; Ammerman 1991:219ff; Day, P.G. 1992; Day, J. 1992; Gorg 1993; Day, J. 1994:187; Smith 1994:205; Lemaire 1994:129ff; Margalith 1994(on plaque figurines); Davila and Zuckerman 1993 (on a late inscribed throne,but without a figure). 5

76

gods). At that period, scholars who adopted this explanation thought that the JPFs had no relation whatsoever to Yahweh and to the official Israelite cult. Usually, the magic was termed "sympathetic" or "apotropaic", and the figurines were regarded as amulets for domestic use, or as "good luck charms" (Hooke 1938:25; TN 1:245, 248; Burrows 1941:220; Wright 1957:118; Ashdod II-III: 133; Heaton 1974:232; Kyle 1977:76; Jerusalem II: 128). A few scholars suggested magic just as an alternative to seeing every figurine as a goddess (Fowler 1985). Many scholars fused the magic explanation with an assumption of deliberate mutilation of the JPFs (but see chap. VII above; for an anthropologic discussion of magic see Morris 1987). In the last decade or so, magic was largely replaced by the Ashera explanation (cf. Tigay 1986:9lf, though hardly convincing). The date and the distribution may fit a magical explanation of the JPFs - one can easily assume that Judah had its own magic figurines, different to those of neighboring kingdoms. The context is also fitting, as are the (probable) private ownership and cheap material (clay). The disposal as domestic waste (in streets) is at least easier to understand than if the JPFs represented a high, major goddess. Disposal in cisterns, pits and silos may fit well with magical figurines (but the JPFs were not thrown whole, thus are unlikely to be protecting figures that guaranteed the water and grain sources).

If the JPFs relate to magic, it seems probable that it is "good (white) magic". They have "good" outward shape (smile, full face, "offering" the breasts). They were probably not mutilated deliberately, and were very popular in many contexts of life in Judah. The lack of overt sexual features suggests that they symbolized "plenty" rather then "fertility" (cf. Wenning 1991:91). Even so, seeing the JPFs as magical figures meets heavy opposition on more than one front. There is no archaeological proof that the JPFs are related to any magic rituals. True, one need not suppose complex rituals of the kind documented from Mesopotamia (cf. chap. IX.3 above), and large parts of rituals will not be found in the archaeological record (e.g., the use of organic materials and verbal rituals). The problem is, however, much more difficult. It relates not only to the question of what is magic (below), but to the fact that defining the JPFs as magical figurines is no real solution. This definition gives a function, but not the meaning. If the JPFs are magical figurines, who is this figure? Why wasn't it mentioned in the OT - since it was popular in Judah for at least a hundred years, and the uniformity of the JPFs implies that we are dealing with one figure? In other words, the definition as magical figurines does not give a full answer, but only a functional one (further discussed below).

To summarize briefly, the JPFs may have represented Asherah, but conclusive evidence is still lacking. If this is the case for 854 JPFs, with a distribution and date fitting the Asherah, it is clear that all the other so-called Asherah objects stand in a worse position. Regrettably, varied artifacts were called Asherah in a frenzy of publications during the last decade. Asherah objects multiplied like mushrooms after the rain, so beware - there are many poisonous ones.

X.6. A Magical Figure The notion that the JPFs are magical figurines was widespread during the early stages of research, when magic was understood as the complete opposite of religion (and

X.7. Summary is possible that the cult object was shaped as a pillar, but this is a symbol that should not be directly equated with the goddess. Also, was Asherah a "high" goddess, and was she expressed in anthropomorphic cult statues? 7 It

I wish to mention briefly some topics that have not yet discussed, in order to clarify a few points and to show the

77

complexity of others. Following this, I will conclude with a short summary.

impossible to identify the exact species depicted). I mention this because of the role of bulls and calves in Israelite religion (Vernieylen 1990, with more references there), but I am reluctant to make any further speculations.

X.7.1. "House Cult" The cult in Judah is a large and complicated field of research. As far as the JPFs are concerned, there is very little evidence to connect them with cult (see chap. VIII above) - if by cult we mean special activities (e.g., giving votive objects, burning incense, sacrificing animals, praying) held in sacred buildings (shrines, temples, "high places", etc.) with the help of special cultic furniture (altars, incense stands, stone stele, etc.; for the anthropology of cult see Morris 1987:235-263). By "house cult", obviously none of the above is meant. It is hard to imagine sacrifices made to the JPFs, or persons kneeling before them and burning incense (the possibility exists - cf. the story ofHerostratos in chap. IX.2.4 above, but this is a rare exception and not a norm). What constitutes, then, "house cult"? Is there any clear archaeological or historical evidence for "house cult" in Iron Age II Judah? The scholars who used the concept of "house cult" usually pre-supposed that JPFs were cultic objects. If cultic objects constantly appear in domestic contexts, then they imply a "house cult". For example, Holladay (1987:276) claimed that there is evidence for cult in almost half of the Tel Beit Mirsim houses - but the evidence is the JPFs themselves. Once cult is expanded in such a way, we face the risk of seeing cult everywhere. Even if the figurines are religious objects, it does not imply that they had a special cult. It seems better to limit the term cult to the definition made above (for popular religion and "house cult" see also Ammerman 1991; Gerstenberger 1994 and chap. 11.4.10 above; for rituals in archeology see Barrett 1991).

X.7.3. The lack of Male Figurines and the "Ban of Idols" Is the lack of small male figurines from Judah related with the Biblical "ban of idols"? If so, it implies that such figurines represented gods. Indeed, Ahlstrom identified a metal figurine from Hazor as representing Yahweh, but this was sharply criticized by Hallo (1983:1-2). Many scholars grasped the "ban of idols" as a late creation of the Deuteronomistic school (chap. 11.4.5 above, n. 19; Dietrich 1994). It is worth remembering that female clay figurines are dominant in the whole ancient Near East, while metal figurines are usually male (Moorey and Fleming 1984; they can be identified as gods only when they have divine attributes, like crowns, ibid:78-80). Metal figurines were common in the Late Bronze age and very rare in the Iron Age II (Muhly 1980). Thus, Judah is not an exception, but similar with other Near Eastern kingdoms. There was a marked tendency to avoid iconic representations in Iron Age II Judah, expressed in the Arad temple and the Hebrew seals (only 4% of these seals carry anthropomorphic figures, and only two seals have a clear figure of a goddess, Sass 1993:197, no. 136f; Uehlinger 1993:281-288). Compare the different situation at the Edomite shrines of Qitmit and En Hazevah (Beck 1993b; 1995; Cohen and YisraeI1995). Aniconism is not unique to Judah, however (Oman 1993; Mettinger 1994). The question of the "ban of idols" is a complex one. For the present discussion, one must remember that small clay figurines are not equal to large cult statues, thus we should beware of jumping to conclusions about a "ban of idols" if our data is derived from small figurines.

X.7.2. The JPFs and Animal Figurines The lack of small male figurines does not necessarily imply that the female figurines belonged to women only. The Biblical Asherah does not, since the kings of Judah themselves introduced her to the Jerusalem temple. Furthermore, we must be very careful not to project modern gender conceptions on the past, regardless of their importance and necessity today. If Judean women had no "feminist consciousness", possibly they would not have felt oppressed by the "official male religion", and would not turn to "female domestic cult" (cf. chap. 1104.9 above).

Animal figurines in Iron Age II Judah are even more common than the JPFs. Almost all scholars understood that it would be ridiculous to see all the animal figurines as representation of gods, or as attributive animals of gods. The relation between these animal figurines and the JPFs is not clear. The date, manufacture technique, decoration, distribution and contexts are similar, but the animal figurines seem to require a different explanation from that of the JPFs (cf. Ucko 1968:418). The most common explanation for animal figurines is magical figures (related with "plenty"?). But it is also possible that the animal figurines represented nothing more than the animals themselves, while the JPFs represented a goddess. Perhaps this goddess bestowed plenty onto the animal figurines that stood in front of her. Most of the animal figurines from Judah are domestic animals (mainly equids and cattle). It is interesting that horned bulls do not appear among them. Horned bulls are found as zoomorphic vessels, though. Perhaps the horns were not an easy medium for clay figurines. Perhaps the figurines portrayed young, horn-less bulls (many animal figurines are so schematic, that it is

X.7.4. The JPFs, Plaque Figurines and Persian Period Figurines Clay plaque figurines of naked women, holding their hands on their chests, appear in Israel in the second millennium BC much earlier than the JPFs (Albright 1939; Pritchard 1943: types I-III; Riis 1949; Tadmor, M. 1982; Ben-Arieh 1983; Conrad 1985; Beck 1986). These plaque figurines continued into the Iron Age I period (Holland 1975: type C;

78

Tadmor 1982:17lf; here chapter III and app. 4.VIII-X, 5.Y). The meaning of the plaque figurines is not clear. Tadmor distinguished two groups within them (1982: 140-149, 156, 161-164). One group depicts standing women (goddesses?) whose feet turn outwards, often holding attributes like lotusblossoms or snakes. Sometimes they stand on lions or horses. The second group show women lying on a bed, that has a ledge at her feet. Tadmor (1982:170f) related this group with a burial cult, and noted similar figurines from Egypt (Donatelli 1988:207; Pinch 1993; cf. also KamIah 1993; Musberg 1992).8 The Egyptian plaque figurines were found in private houses, and were explained as amulets. Similar figures appear on Egyptian wall paintings as representations of mortal women whose function was to ensure safe conception and birth (pinch 1983).

Asherah herself (in a few verses, e.g. I Kings 15:13; cf. also chap. X.5 above). The relations between the gods and their cult statues have been discussed lately by many scholars (Hallo 1983; Jacobsen 1987; for Greece cf. Gladigow 1985-6; Romano 1988; for Mesopotamia see Oppenheim 1964:183-198; Dietrich and Loretz 1994:7-38; Matsushima 1993; for Egypt, Ockinga 1984). Most of the large cult statues disappeared, since they were made of wood and of precious metals (for the burial of statues cf. Hallo 1983:15f; Matsushima 1993:210, with more references). One source from the reign of Nabfi-Apla-Iddina (the 9th century BC) is enlightening. It tells how the Sutu destroyed the cult statue of ~~ in Sippar, so that his cult could not continue as usual. A symbol of a sun-wheel served as a temporal substitute for the cult statue. Nabii-Apla-Iddina claimed that the god decided to forgive his people and return. As a result, a model of baked clay of the God was discovered, and enabled the reproduction of a cult statue for Samas. The exact nature of this model is not clear, though: is it a figurine, a tablet of clay, or even a cylinder seal (thus Lee 1993)? In any case, this story shows that a small representation or "likeness" of the god existed, and could be used in times of necessity (cf. the story about Herostratos, chap. IX.2A above).

Plaque figurines appear also during the Iron Age II, but rarely and mostly outside Judah. These are mostly figurines of musicians (Beck 1991; add now plaque figurines from Tel Halif and Dor). The transfer from plaque figurines to pillar figurines is not clear, and there might have been a time gap between the two forms (Tadmor 1982:172). Since the meaning of the plaque figurines is not clear, they cannot solve the question of the meaning of the JPFs. The picture of Persian period figurines is completely different from that of the Iron Age figurines. A new technique appears - double moulded, hollow figurines. Motifs are different; dressed women, women holding doves, men holding their beards, etc. Even the distribution and the contexts are different: in the Persian period we mainly find favissae along the plains (e.g., Negbi 1966), and few figurines from Judah. In between, the Babylonian period is almost a tabula rasa. Stern claimed that the JPFs continued into the Persian period (1973:167, 179 n. 48), but this is unlikely, and the very few naked "eastern" female figurines of the Persian period are different. He noticed the lack of small clay figurines from Persian period Judah, and claimed that it indicated the absolute acceptance of the "ban of idols", while other neighbouring nations continued to use figurines (Stern 1989:53f; cf. 1973:159, 181). This is a very interesting observation, but we must be cautious because of the time gap and the lack of direct continuity. Stern also took it for granted that small figurines represented gods (he defined figurines from Judah as "pagan", Stern 1989:53), and may be compared with large cult statues without any difficulty.

The relation between small figurines and large cult statues is not always simple. Alroth showed that the two are not necessarily identical in shape, even when depicting the same figure (Alroth 1989, based on material from Greek shrines and temples). In Greek shrines, small figurines were often dedicated in front of cult statues (ibid; also Romano 1988), but the context of the JPFs are domestic. Curtis (1984) believes that the Biblical "ban of idols" is very ancient, and archaeology perhaps sustains this, in that large sculptures are not found in Judah, unlike Ammon (stone sculptures), Cyprus (clay statues, possibly of prayers: Connelly 1989); Phoenicia (Eshmun temple at Sidon: Ganzman et. al. 1987) and Edom (Qitmit and En-Hazevah: Beck 1995; Cohen and YisraeI1995).

X.7.6. One Figure and One Function? At the beginning of chapter X, I mentioned two basic assumptions that need to be reviewed again. I believe that all the JPFs represented the same figure, and not many, different figures. This is based on the schematic rendering, without any effort to individualize the figurines. The small variants in the form of the JPFs have, according to this view, only stylistic significance. The lack of groups of JPFs from the same loci also strengthens this view, as each JPF was meant to be used separately (chap. VIllA). Following this reasoning, I believe that the JPFs had one meaning only, and represented one figure. Theoretically, it is possible that the same type of figurine would have more than one meaning, but this is also a very easy way of escaping ~e problem. When "the" meaning is not clear, an~ difficultIes appear with every identification, it is convenient to take

X.7.5. Figurines and Cult Statues Some scholars adopted the view that the JPFs represented the Biblical Asherah, and treated the two as equal. They swapped without a second thought, from one to the other and vice versa. In the Bible, the term Asherah probably denotes a large cult object, a cult statue of the goddess Asherah (Deut. 16:21, especially in relation to the Jerusalem temple, II Kings 21:7; 23:6), and finally the goddess 8 A Syrian variant of plaque figurines was explained as a goddess by Conrad (1985).

79

every known meaning and apply it at will. But it is a dangerous method.

If the JPFs portrayed the same figure, it is likely that they had one basic function (whatever that may be). It is possible to assume that one figure was used for more than one function. The important question is the function of the majority, and I believe that the majority of the JPFs had a similar function. I have nothing against the possibility that a few JPFs were used for various other functions.

x. 7.7.

Summary

I have discussed the various explanations for the JPFs, reviewing their advantages and disadvantages. It seems that all the following explanations should be rejected: toys, mortal figures, "mother goddess", "nurturing goddess", "fertility goddess", "Syrian goddess", "naked goddess", Anat, Astarte and a compositional "cosmic goddess" (AnatAstarte-Asherah-Kudshu, etc.).

that the western world of his time knew right from wrong and could "designate the fallacious attributions of causality as irrational, and the corresponding acts as 'magic'."

or another run counter to the categorical framework within which we (at least officially) interpret the world" (Skorupski 1976:159).

Malinowski (1925:88) follows Frazer. He defined magic as "a practical art consisting of acts which are only means to a definite end expected to follow later on"; while religion is "a body of self-contained acts being themselves the fulfillment of their purpose". To make it more simple, "the belief in magic... is extremely simple. It is always the affirmation of men's power to cause certain definite effects by a definite spell and rite. In religion, on the other hand, we have a whole supernatural world of faith: the pantheon of spirits and demons, the benevolent power of totem, guardian spirit, tribal all-father, the vision of future life"... (Malinowski 1925:88). Magic is a specific art for specific aims (ibid). A sense of irony is left when reading, in 1995, what Malinowski wrote in 1922 (p. 89):

The few quotes above are enough to show that there is no accepted definition of magic, and it cannot be separated exactly from religion. The polarization between the two and the negative attitude towards magic are mainly a legacy of the late Judaism and Christianity. Magic is not defined by values, but sociologically: what "we" do is religion, what "they" do is magic. As Ritner puts it: "Magic here is simply the religious practices of one group viewed with disdain by another", or in other words, "Your religion is my Magic" (Ritner 1992:190; cf. Versnel1991; Voigt 1983).

"Looking...from our high places of safety and developed civilization, it is easy to see all the crudity and irrelevance of Magic. But without its power and guidance, early men could not have mastered his practical difficulties... nor could man have advanced to the higher stages of culture."

Two explanations remain probable: magical figure and Asherah (chap. X.4-5 above). It is necessary to stress immediately, that these two explanations are not contradictory, but complementary. In order to explain this statement. a closer look at magic is needed.

Mauss (1972:18, origin 1950) is aware that certain societies define other religion or former religion as magic, and there is no ideal definition. He suggested a social definition of magic (1922:24):

Former studies of the JPFs that mentioned magic used, to a large extent. a concept of magic based on the works of Tylor, Frazer and their immediate followers. In this conception, magic is at the opposite pole to religion. It deals with natural forces, at the most demons and monsters coercing them for immediate personal help (while religion deals with supernatural gods, questions of moral and "high theology"). Magic works by rituals, made by witches or sorcerers (while religion involves cult. prayers, and official priesthood). Magic has no logic (as opposed to science) and is usually seen as primitive, if not totally negative.

"A magical rite is any rite which does not playa part in organized cults - it is private, secret. mysterious and approaching the limit of a prohibited rite...we do not define magic in terms of the structure of its rites, but by the circumstances in which these rites occur". However, Mauss does not really follow this definition, and in the conclusion returns to a somewhat vague conception, more in line with Frazer's: "while religion, because of its intellectual character, has a tendency towards metaphysics, magic - which we have shown to be more concerned with the concrete - is concerned with understanding nature".

As anthropologists and sociologists continued to search for a definition of magic, it seems that the picture became more and more problematic. Weber (1922, trans. 1965:28) gives a definition of magic quite close to that of Frazer:

Skorupski (1976) discussed these studies (and others, e.g. Durkheim's), aware that "the 'opposition' between the two 'institutions' of magic and religion does not exists as a general fact" (1976:127). There is a severe problem in the demarcation of magic from religion, if it is possible at all. Skorupski (1976:154) considered tlie problem so acute, that "it is a mistake to think that a theory of magic, or of religion, must begin with a definition of what magic or religion is". Also, "we must not expect a neatly exhaustive distinction...between the religious and the magical" (ibid: 155). The problem of defining magic is clear to Skorupski, but the problem with Skorupski is that he does not offer a solution to this problem, though obviously believing that there is one. His conclusion is reminiscent of the words of Weber:

"The relationship of men to supernatural forces which take the forms of prayer, sacrifice and worship may be termed "cult" and "religion", as distinguished from "sorcery", which is magical coercion. Correspondingly, those beings that are worshipped and entreated religiously may be termed "gods", in contrast to "demons", which are magically coerced and charmed." But Weber (ibid:ibid) knows that this separation is not absolute, since: "the cults we have just called "religious" practically everywhere contain numerous magical components".,. Even the differentiation of priests and sorcerers is problematic, since: "in many great religions, including Christianity,· the concept of the priest includes such a magical qualification." Weber admitted that magic is defined only from an outside point of view, but believed

"What is for us in the end most striking about magical practices is that they require assumptions which in one way

80

The JPFs are not evidence of "popular religion", if by this we mean the opposite to an "official Yahwistic religion". The Asherah was part of the Yahwistic religion, though she was probably not as important as he was. The function of the Asherah figurines was possibly as a protecting figure in domestic houses, more likely a figure which bestowed "plenty", especially in the domain of female lives (but not necessarily used by women only). These figurines have nothing to do with "black magic" and were not a forbidden cult. at least for most of the time and for most of the population. It seems that they were not broken deliberately. Other than being a symbol for the goddess and what she can bestow, I doubt if these figurines were object of cult practices. At the most, one can imagine that they were addressed in prayers or wishes, perhaps during times of pressure and need.

Magic and religion are problematic categories of definition in the ancient Near East as well (Ritner 1992; 1993:4:ff). In ancient Egypt. magic was legal and could be desirable; it was practiced in official temples by high-ranking priests, and had no connotation of immorality. Much the same is true for Mesopotamia (Ritner 1992; 1993; Wiggermann 1992).9 Therefore, the JPFs can represent Asherah, without negating magical aspects or the relation to magical rituals (I am using magic here in Ritner's sense of the term, of course). On the other hand, explaining the JPFs as purely magical figures is not satisfactory, since it relates only to their function, not to their meaning. In order to keep a purely magical explanation, one would have to assume that there was a very common magical figure in Judah (the large quantity of JPFs), that was not mentioned in the OT, and is not one of the known goddesses. This is possible, but quite perplexing - in view of the finding of many JPFs in varied contexts of Judean society.

It is interesting that Judean seals of the same period portray no comparable female figure (Sass 1993, except in very few cases). If the JPFs represented Asherah, why is she not represented on the seals? The seals reflected higher levels of society, but Asherah was probably venerated by them as well. Most of the seals belonged to men and carry Yahwistic names, thus maybe explaining their an-iconism. Also, Asherah was probably much lower in status than Yahweh. But it is better not to speculate further. It is important to stress that the identification of the JPFs with Asherah seems very probable, but is not proven and should not be taken for granted. This identification is based on the Biblical sources (together with the Kh. el-Kom and Kuntillet 'Ajrud inscriptions) or, to be more correct, on a certain interpretation of these sources (e.g., in rejecting the "Asherim" of the Chronicler). It would be unwise to tum the wheel the full way round, and simplistically draw conclusions from the JPFs about the Biblical Asherah.

It seems therefore that the JPFs are indeed a representation of the Biblical Asherah: this is the simplest and most logical explanation. This view is hardly new, but many former scholars adopted it for quite incorrect arguments (chap. II above). The JPFs are not exactly identical with the Biblical Asherah (which is usually a large cult statue or cult object, related to the goddess Asherah). They are small figurines, without special, sacred status and probably not connected with public temples. The sacredness of an object stands in relation to its function (that is, status), its value ("price"), and its form (size). The large cult statue of the Asherah was sacred because it was made of expensive materials, situated in a public temple and represented the goddess in front of all the population - but especially the higher classes (priests, kings, etc.). On the other hand, the JPFs were cheap, everyday objects, representing the goddess in private houses, in front of ordinary people (chiefly, though not only).

The present study of the JPFs does not solve all the problems, but is perhaps part of a new phase of research, with its many, as yet unanswered, questions.

Addenda The following works appeared (or became available) after the completion of this book, and could not be integrated: 1. The second part of a third volume on Cypriot figurines (small figurines of the 7th-6th centuries) by V. Karageorghis, 1995.

2. A publication of the pottery vessels from

Jerusalem cave I, by Eshel, in: Jerusalem IV (1995). Eshel dates the cave to the 7th century BC, following his pottery chronology (but cf. chap. 1.4. above). 3. A new work on the Asherah by C. Frevel (1995?), which I have not yet studied.

9 During my stay in Oxford I had the pleasure of hearing a lecture by M. Cunningham, a Ph.D scholar at Cambridge University. He has reached (independently) similar conclusions about magic in a study of Mesopotamian incantations from the third and second

millenniums BC.

81

Figures 1 - 40

Fig. 2: The Quantitative Factor in JPFs' Studies Name and year

Fig. 1: Attributes ofthe Use and Disposal of Figurines (after Voigt 1983)1 Function

Attributes

1

Due to cautious use there would be minor (or no) damage. Ritual touching (e.g., during

Cult Figure

festivities) may cause areas of polish or abraison at heads and legs. Possible damage by

1886

"killing" during disposal. May be found in special (ritual) places, or in inaccessible places

Gezer II

1912

Pilz

1924

Clermont Ganneau

Type of

Total

PF I JPF-

JPF-my

publication

human

author's

definition

figurines

definition

1

1

paper

1

Notes

one JPF, from a museum's collection

report

?

?

7

exact nos. not given

123

12

7

all JPFs from Gezer

report

?

38

37

+unoublished fragments

monozraoh

249

52

14

(caves, bodies of water). Assemblages of different figurines, deposed of in the same place, are possible. Unlikely to be associated with ordinary refuse.

TBMIII 2

Either no wear, or burnished by touching (e.g., while used as an amulet). Often, exhibits

Vehicle of

signs of burning or mutilation on purpose as part of the disposal process. This can be seen by

Magic

fresh breaks in a consistent location (e.g., necks or waists). Disposal patterns in caves, beneath house-floors, in pits, fires and in bodies of water . Usually, figurine fragments are separated at the time of disposal, thus mending will not be possible. Groups of figurines are

Pritchard

1943 1943

Tel Nasbeh 1947

reoort

148 (60)

148

Lachish

report

12?

24

SamariaI,I1I

report

37

2?

both JPFs in doubt

Gibeon WS 1961

report

54

26

onlv 27 have photos

Holland

Ph.D.

958

573

359

958 = his A+B+C types

1953

detailed registration

possible, since rituals may be repeated at the same place, or several figurines may be used in one ritual. Association with domestic refuse is possible.

3

Possibly minor damage to surfaces during handling, especially at base. Burning is possible, as

Initiation

is the finding of whole figurines. Often, the figurines are disposed of in inaccessible places

Figure

1975

Engle

1979

Ph.D.

187

147

145

"classical" JPF

like caves and bodies of water. Rarely found in domestic contexts. Groups of figurines are

Jeremias

1992

Dauer

ca. 35

20

20?

JPFs from robbery

possible, since initiation groups may be disposed of as one unit. Sometimes, association with

Present study

Ph.D.

1852

854

854

ordinary, domestic refuse. Notes: Often, exact numbers are not available. The numbers in the column "total figurines" do not include

4

Damage to surfaces, which are chipped and abraded, especially at base of standing figurines.

Toy

Applied parts broken away. Broken areas are worn by continual use. No systematic mutilation, but damage in points of structural weakness. Disposal in ordinary domestic assemblages, inside and also outside houses. Random distribution in fills and debris, not in groups. Association with domestic refuse, including bones, broken vessels, etc.

periods later than the Iron Age, nor animal figurines. The column "my definition" includes figurines which appear in the present catalogue (app. 1-2 below). For Tel en-Nasbeh, 60 indicates the number of figurines with photographs or drawings in the report. For the works of Holland and Engle cf. also keys 5-6. The number 854 (present study) does not include JPFs from unknown origins (app. 3 below). The definition "JPF" (column "PF/JPFs author's definition") was used since the thesis of Engle (1979).

1General note: I have given relatively few drawings offigurines (figs. 4-11). I have no right to use drawings from some of the new excavations, such as the City of David, Jerusalem. I am preparing publications of figurines from other excavations, which will hopefully be published soon, thus I preferred not to use drawings from these excavations (e.g., Lachish and Tel Beer Sheba). The JPFs are quite stereotyped, and a few drawings suffice for a general impression. Finally, it helps to keep this book within reasonable limits.

82

83

Fig. 3: Typology of Other Figurines Type

Whole

Fig. 3 (continuation)

Fragments

Total

Body

Type

Whole

Fragments

Solid Hollow 4.1. woman nlavinz a drum; hollow, wheel-made bodv 4.11. moulded heads 4.m. solid and hollow nillar bodies 4.1V male figurines 4.V. hand-made fizurines (whole or heads) 4.VI. hand-made bodvDarts (not pillar bodies) 4.VII. olaoue figurines 4.vm. nlacue figurines of nreznant women 4.x1. unique plaque figurines 4.X. lea frazments of plaque fizurines 4.XI. addenda (miscellaneous) Total appendix 4

5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 5.1.4 5.1.5 5.1.6

fizurines with moulded face, hollow bodies (Be) hollow bodY Parts female drum players (solid, pillar body) miscellaneous heads miscellaneous bodvDarts miscellaneous fragments (not classified). Total appendix 5.1

2 2 5 2 1

14

6 26 17 5 13 15 6? 14 3 12 8 125

8 12 2

5 1

15 5 8

14

41

2 8

2 8 7? 24 24 9 72

3

5

5.11.1 lamp-figurines with pillar bodies 5.11.2 bird fizurines with pillar bases 5.11.3 male figurines Total appendix 5.11

5.m.l 5.m.2 5.m.3 5.111.4 5.111.5 5.m.6 5.m.7 5.m.8

2

2 6

2 28 5 35

8

coastal plain - schematic heads with pendants coastal plain - finely moulded heads, pendant coastal nlain - moulded heads, double combed locks coastal plain - moulded heads, uncombed locks coastal plain- crescent moulded heads drum nlavinz pillar figurines, hollow bodies northern Israel- various moulded heads coastal plain - various moulded heads Total appendix 5.111

5.IV.l Fairly whole hand-made figurines with pillar bodies 5.IV2 nea fizurines 5.IV.3 "Ashdodite" hand-made heads 5.IVA "Ashdoda" figurines

1 1 1

1 1 5

7 6 3 1

7 4 24 10

35

1 b=25

1

1

1

1 1 1

5 11 8 4 4 6 41 39 118

1 4 18 6

1 2 1 3 10

31 10 3 1

s:

5

8 26 17 7 15 15 11 16 4 12 8 139

5.N.5 various hand-made fizurines

8

5.1V.6 hollow body Parts (of figurines types 5.m-5.IV) 5.IV.7 solid body Parts (of figurines types 5.m-5.1V) 5.IV.8 miscellaneous fragments Total appendix 5.1V

2 8 10 (7?) 24 24 9 77

4 34 5 43

6 12 9 4 4 7 41 40 123

5.V.l female plaque fizurines holdinz a disk (drum) 5.V.2 plaque figurines with "Hathor" hairdress 5.V.3 plaque figurines with "feathers" and "Hathor" dress 5.VA plaque figurines with "crescent" hairdress 5.V5 plaque figurines with "feather hats", no background 5.V6 nlacue fizurines with "ureus svmbol", no backzround 5.V7 plaque figurines with uniaue features. 5.V.8 body fragments with clav backzround 5.V.9 plaque figurines of nreanant women, high moulding 5.VI0 miscellaneous body frazments 5.V.ll miscellaneous leg fragments Total appendix 5.V

22 28 5 14 1 1 17

5.VI.1 Dea Tyria (pregnant, sittinz women) 5.VI.2 women plaving drums and related types 5.VI.3 fizurines portravinz daily life scenes 5.VI.4 other, fairly whole fizurines 5.VI.5 various heads (1-14, 36-38) and body Parts 5.VI.6 various fizurines of unknown orizin Total anoendix 5.VI.l

10 12 3 2

9

97

27

Total

33 23 28 11 124

Solid Hollow 16 1 23 28 11 72 29

41 23 28 11 149

20 5 2 8 3 6 21 31 12 29 10 147

42 33 7 22 4 7 20 31 21 29 10 226

42 33 7 22 4 7 38 31 21 29 10 244

6 3

14 13

2

2 42 7 60

3 2

2

8

18?

5.VII. 1-2 Persian period and fizurrines of other materials 5.VIII moulds Grand Total

16 15 3 4 42 7 87

(29) (21) 181

862

Notes: Whole - including "nearly whole". The type - names are often presented in a short form. Types 5.VII-VIII are not included in the grand total (with 50 specimens, thus altogether 912). 12 figurines, types 5.1.1 and 5.1.3 were included in appendix 2, thus the total number of other figurines in appendixes 4-5 (or in fig. 3), is 900.

Table 3b: The Relation between the Typologies of Holland and Engle

8 10 21 7

Notes: Whole - including "nearly whole". b = number of clearly classified pillar bases (type 5.11.2). See continuation on the next page. The type-names are often presented in a short form.

!

Type Engle I II m IV V VI VII

Total No. 39 7 15 9 21 7 42

Holland All 7 4 4 12 1 15

Holland Am 23 4 2 1 2 3

Holland AIV

Holland A.V 1

Holland AVI 2

1 5

Holland A VII

Holland A VIII

Holland AIX

Holland AXIl

1

1

3

4

3 1

6 4 5

2

! 84

25

Body

85

2

5

Fig. 4: Typology - Whole JPF

Fig. 5: Typology - Hand-made JPF Heads

1. Figurine no. 254 [AI]

1. Figurine no. 9 [type A]

2. Figurine no. 252 [A1.h]

3. Figurine no. 332 [A2]

2. Figurine no.36 [type B]

4. Figurine no. 71 [A3]

5. Figurine no. 52 [A4] 3. Figurine no. 360 [body C.1.d]

6. Figurine no. 140 [A4] 5. Figurine no. 78 [type Be]

4. Figurine no. 118 [A+.1.d]

7. Figurine no. 367 [A.S]

Notes: the numbers refer to Appendix 2. No. 140 is drawen from the original figurines, now in the Rockefeller Museum.

Notes: the numbers refer to App. 1-2. Sizes of figurines are listed in App.1.

86

87

Fig. 6: Typology - Moulded JPF Heads 2. No. 245, type B.3.B, Tel 'Ira

1. No. 19, type B.3-4, Beth Shemesh

3. No. 375, type B.3.C, Jerusalem

Fig. 7: Coastal and Northern Moulded Types - Appendix 5.111 1.

5.III.l.l, Kh. Hoga

2.

5.III.2.2

Mefalsim

3.

5.III.2.8 Tel Shera

4.

5.III.2.9Tel Shera

5.

5.III.3.1 Kh. Hoga

6.

5.III.4.1 Tel Kinnerot

7.

5.III.5.3 Tel Gemmeh

8.

5.III.6.1 Megiddo

9.

5III.7.5 Dan

4. No. 72, type B.3(?), Jericho

5. No. 258, type B.6.C, Tel Beer Sheba

6. No. 209, type B.2.G, Tel Beit Mirsim

Notes: the numbers refer to Appendix 2. Notes: the numbers refer to appendix 5.

88

89

Fig. 8: Appendix 5.11 and Hand-made Coastal! Northern Types

Fig. 9: Phoenician Figurines - Appendix 5.VI 1. Achzib 5.VI.1.1

:;~

2. Achzib 5.VI.2.3a

3. Shiqrnona 5.VI.2.7

. ,.,

Q. .

. ..::E,~

1. 5.11.1.4 T. B. Mirsirn

2.5.11.2.15 Lachish

3.5.11.3.1 Beer Sheba (suq)

4. 5.1V.1.2 Tel Gemmeh

4. Achzib 5.VI.3.3

5. Gile'am 5.VI.5.3

2

6. 5.1V.3.5 Ashdod

8. 5.IV.3.9 Ashdod

6. Megiddo 5.VI.5.10

5. 5.1V.3.21 Maresha

7. Shiqrnona 5.VI.5.11

~'

(---(

i ,F"l'I .

7. 5.1V.3.6 Ashdod

~

It

\i '.

9. 5.1V.4.1 Ashdod

Notes: the numbers refer to appendix 5 Notes: the numbers refer to appendix 5.

90

91

8. Shiqrnona 5VI.5.17

. .an Figurines - Appendix 4 . Fig. 10: Transjordani 1. Nebo 4.1.1

2. Nebo

4.1.2

3. Kh. el-Medeineh

411.4

. F·Ig. 11'. Plaque Figurines - Appendix S.V. 4. Sahab 4.11.9

1. Nebo 5.VI.2 I yeh 411.18 . 5. Tell es-Sa "di

6. Tell Deir 'AlIa 4.111.6

7. Beth Saida 4.1V2

8. Buseirah 4.Vl

9. Buseirah 4.V2

. ah 4.VIII. 1 10. Buseir

(~~""' ..

'. ;

'\

~.,

2. Gezer 5.VI.7

:i

4. Gezer

5. TBM

6. Ta'anakh

1. 5.V.3.4

5.V4.1

5.V5.4

. . 1.

"~\'. .-""" -'- \\ \ ..-r ---'-".J ~¥~~. .

Notes: the numbers refer to appendix 4.

8. Ta 'anakh 5.V6.7

92

93

9. Tel Zeror 5.V7.17

Fig. 15: Distribution of 854 JPFs (sites and main sub-types)

Fig. 12: The Dating ofthe JPFs

USite UDate / Typeee

Ac

A+

A

(hundreds BC)

all

Bc

B+

B

allD

CI

C3

A 1

I

9-7? ,9-8?, 9? 8?

1

3

8-7? 7?

7

1

5

9

3

4

4

2

8

16

5

1

general Total in doubt

8

4

17

29

10

1

3

3

7

10

1

1 1 6

5

2

5

1

3

13

18

1

1

10

10

1

35

46

9

10

1 2

3

1

9-8 8

2

8-7

2

7 Total secure

2

2

4

6

2

12

14

1

7

7

23

27

3

2

2

Persian?

10

6

40

56

all

13

3

3

2 1

4

14

33

6

15

2

36

5

15

28

103

1

1

27

31

12

14

6

33

70

13

14

6

9

8

24

52

9

9

1

3

4

20

49

54

25

17

62

143

2

2

87

103

18

2 28

35

21

92

251

Notes: "?" indicates date in doubt. The first row, "10 or earlier," is not included in row "total in doubt".

Fig. 13: Amended Dating of the JPFs UDate / Typeee

Ac

A+

A

aliA

Bc

B+

B

allD

Cl

C2

C3

allC

Total

(hundreds BC) 8 (with 9)

4

3

7 Total

4

Notes to figs. 12-13:

7

9

16

8

8

17

24

8

8

3

3

52

63

18

19

8

48

127

10

10

1

2

3

6

24

62

73

19

21

11

54

151

The dates are given in hundreds of years BC. "7" means the whole seventh

century BC and the early sixth (until 586 BC). The row "general" in fig 12 includes mixed loci, or general dating to the Iron Age II (partly in doubt). Fig. 13 includes JPFs without archaeological contexts, from one-period sites; hence the difference in numbers in comparison with fig. 12.

Fig. 14: The Danger of Circular Arguments I. if a certain type of artifact is found in Judah 3. and since it is a "Judean artifact"

~

2. then it is a "Judean artifact"

~

Ac

A+

A

4. its distribution relates to Judah's borders

Abu Gosh Bethel Bethlehem Gibeon Jericho Jerusalem Kh. 'Anim Kh. e-Ras Kh. Geresh Kh. Rabud (Debir) Moza RamatRahel Ramot (el-Burg) Tel el-Ful Tel en-Nasbeh Vered Jericho Total Judean Mt. Arad Aroer Beer Sheba -SUQ Malhata Tel Beer Sheba Tel Ira TelMasos Total Negev area Azeka Beth Shemesh Gezer Kh.Hoga Lachish Maresha Tel Beit Mirsim Tel el-Areini (Brani) Tel ej-Judeidah Tel el-Muleiha Tel es-Safi (Gat) Tel Halif (Lahav) Total Shephelah

Be

all A

Total

C

10 or earlier

Grand Total

C2

I Type ee

B

1

10

3

1 98 I

12 1 103 1

1

C2

1 2 5

1

1 2 1

1 1

1

3 1 1 31

8 I?

146 8

7 3 44

1

6

8

2

2 16

2 19

2

1 1 1 2 1

1

1 8

4

Total Coastal Plain Megiddo Samaria Shechem Tel eI-'Oremeh

3

1

9

1

3 1 1

1 5 1 2 34 159

5 2 1 5 1 2 1

1 7 3 46

1

1

1 1 2 2 1 28 1 90 4 3 3 2 12 5 1 30 4 14 3

1 1 2 2 1 28 1 94 4 3 3 2 13 5 1 31 4 19 4

4 1

1

5

1

15

21

2

2

13 6 4 1

17 6 4 1

2

2

62

78

2 143

375

628

1

10

23

1 1

1 2 22 2 2 39

3

5

8

23

83

35

2 3 4 1 30

62 2

132 7

1

1 3

6

9 1 1 18

118

257

1

1 3

2 6

10

1 1 15

5 1

7

6 1 1

2

3

9

1 1

18 1 1

10

4

30

1

1

6 1

18

I 2

1

12

4

14

1

1

1

1 1

1

1

Total North 170

198

1 17

5

3 186

4 208

1 83

89 4 30 7 1 29 1 37 8 5 1 1 2 126 1 1 2

I I

1

2

1

1

1 2 2 2

2

3

7

448

854

1 2 1

3 4 4 43 7 5

1

1

2

2

14

16

4 4 10 1 81

1 4 1 27 4 405 1 1 3 1 6 11 13 4 143 3

4

I

14

Total

all C

1

1 2

1

C3

1

1 2

Cl

all B

1

Ashdod Tel Michal Tel Qasilah

Total all areas

B+

163

162

4

Notes: The KetefHinom figurines are included within Jerusalem (for convenience sake). Body parts nos. 787-789 are included as type C3 in the table. Fragments nos. 807-834, which can be only classified as "other C fragments", are included in column "all C".

94

95

Fig. 16: Distribution Map

R.K.

Fig. 17: Distribution Graph ofthe JPF

t

• Samaria 2

o

Megiddo Tel 'Oreimeh 2 Tel Farah 2

M

]

• Shechem 2

r-tr.I

",£i ...

Cl)

-co

• Tel Michal T. Beer Sheba 43

~

• Tel Qasileh 2

Tel Nasbeh 143 (16.7%)

border . . .Joshua . . . . 15 .. .... • Bethel 4 ,;';'" -

, Gezer7 •

/

/ / Ekron.

I Tel Safi. /

/

/ ~

/

/

-

-

/

~e~n-:NaSbeh 143 f~A

Gibeon 27.

\&

Abu Ghosh. Ramot 13 •

•e.

Moza' 6 • Ramat Rahel 11.

8h eth • ~ el11esh 30.'

elra4

• ~e

"

• Jericho 4

"

Ramat Rahel 11

~

~

Vered Jericho 3

Jerusalem 405 (47.5%)

~

-

• Jerusalem 405 • Kh. e- Ras

w

• Beth Lehem

'

1../

/ .§-" • Tel Goded 5 .~-

Tel Erani 8" /

/

/

~i

•

Maresha

• Lachish 29

I

Fig. 18: Site Hierarchy (Main Sites and Sub-types)

(

I I • Tel Muleiha • Tel Beit

I

Mirsim 37

• Kh. Geresh 3

• Kh. Rabud

~

90

I

DC

• Tel Halif 2 '

I

81

DB

80

• Kh. 'Anim

I

70 60

/

I

50

• Arad 23

I I

Tel Beer Sheba 43 • Beer S~eba suq 4.

\

•

'Tel Masos 5

40

• Tel Ira 7

30

• Malhata 4

20 10

-, .......

_-

• Aroer3'

-- -

-- --- Judah's border, following Na'aman

---- .......

..""

Legend and Notes: 1989. The numbers indicate the number of JPF found at each site (when only one JPF was found, the number is omitted). Arrows point in direction of sites outside the map's limits.

96

0 BeitMirsim

Beth Shemesh

Lachish

Arad

BeerSheba

Gibeon

Jerusalem

Tel Nasbeh

Note: the figurines in the addenda (nos. 588-854) are not included here (unlike figs. 15-17 above).

97

Fig. 19: Size of Sites, Extent of Excavations and Amount of JPFs Region /Site

(dunams)

Excavated area

40-501 300-500 20 (outer) 5 32 2.5 10 25 40 3 38 108 60-70 30 15 25

301 2-3 0.5-1 20 2 4-5 3 2 1.5 15? 50? 15-20 8 1.5 0.9

Size

1 Gibeon 1 Jerusalem 1 Ramat Rabel 1 Ramot 1 Tel en-Nasbeh 2Arad 2 Tel Beer Sheba 2 Tel Ira 2 TelMasos 3 Azeka 3 Beth Shemesh 3 Gezer 3 Lachish 3 Tel Beit Mirsim 3 Tel Erani 3 Tel ei-Judeideh

Total JPF 27 165 11 13 143 23 43 7 5 4 30 7 29 37 8 5

JPF per 1

Notes

dunam

5.5 3.7-5.5 13-26 7.1 11.5 8.6-10.7 2.3 2.5 2.7 2 0.14 1.4-1.9 4.6 5.3 5.5

all JPF from the pool capital, including burials royal palace? villa~e

fortified city Iron A~e fort only fortified city fortified city city Iron A~e fort only fortified city, burials fortified city, burials fortified city, burials fortified city, burials upper city only city

Notes: The regions are: 1. Judean Mountains 2. Negev 3. Shephelah. The extent of the excavations is, in many cases, a crude estimation and not exact figures. Numbers are "rounded" for convenience sake. The excavated areas in Jerusalem are perhaps estimated too low, but on the other hand the new JPFs from the city of David are not included here.

Fig. 20: Size of Figurines and Heads (mm.) Type=>

UData Average

Maximwn

Minimum

Aewhole 12 specimens 129 (without no. 287) 160 = no. 125 68? = no. 287 98 = no. 80

Be whole 13 specimens (without Be) 162 210 = no. 198 138 =no.l

A, A+, Ae 104 specimens

B,B+,Be 150 specimens

Bodies Cl 45 specimens

26

28.3

90.8

53 = no. 369 46 = no. 140 14 = nos. 327, 348

41

144 = no. 306

19 = no. 60

53 = no. 468 45 = no. 468 <

Notes: the "nos." in the table refer to app. 2. The number of specimens indicates figurines which could be measured (actually, or from drawings and photographs).

o 1'\

Striped ceramics - head with painted decoration. Plain ceramic - head without decoration (the examples are taken from the white-washed parts only). Analyses by I. Segal, Israel Antiquities Authority.

98

99

Fig. 22: Production of a Series of Figurines (after Nicholls 1952)

Fig. 24: Example of a "Series", Type B.3.b

Archetype (''patrix")

U Horizontal Variations

¢::Moulds: First Generation =>

Horizontal Variations

u

u

u

Figurines: First Generation

Figurines: First Generation

Figurines: First Generation

u

u

u

u

Derivative Generations, both

u

u

u

of figurines and moulds (+more

u

Heightnun.

33 32

Figurinenos.

84 83 142

32

31

31

30

29

28

26

145 112

146

141

307

16 58

86 120

IN

IN

IN

J

AS Gi

L

25

21

21

(app, 1-2),

Sites

u

L

IN

R

RR

Notes: AS=Beth Shemesh; Gi=Gibeon; J=Jerusalem; L=Lachish; TN=Tel en-Nasbeh; R=Ramot; RR= Ramat Rabel. From 17 B.3.b heads, only 12 could be measured.

horizontal variations)

Fig. 23: Classification of the Moulded Heads Fig. 25: Main Points of Breakage Type

BIa BIb BIc BI-2a B2a B2b B2c B2e B2g B2-3a B2-3d B3a B3b B3c B3d B4a B4b B4c B4d B4e all B5 B6c

Jerus.

Ramat Rabel

Gib.

TN

Lach.

TBM

Tel

Gezer

AS

BS

Arad

Ira

Total

1 2 7 7

1

1 1

2

1 1 1 3 1 2

2 1

1 1

2 1

1 4

1 4

2

1

2

1 4

3 2 1 1 1 3

1

1 1 1 3

1 1

1

1

2 3

1 2

1

1 4

1 1

1 1 1 1

1

1

1

I? 27

2? 2

2? 2

7

28

21

17

6

4

19

12

4

5

8 OTHER HEAD DAMAGES _____ 7 NOSE

13

1 1

1

4 2 1

1

1

2

3 2

2

2

1 1 1

2 3 2

Total

Erani

B.O B.srt

other

31

3 5 1 4 7 1 17 16 4 2 5 19 1 1 1 4 1 3 4?

1. NECK IpPEG

4 BREASTS

5 PILLAR BODY

183

Notes: the names of the sites are abbreviated: Gib. = Gibeon; Jerus. = Jerusalem; Lach. = Lachish; 1N = Tel Nasbeh; TBM = Tel Beit Mirsim; AS = Beth Shemesh; BS = Tel Beer Sheba. The
f

I

6 BASE

Fi

100

.2: 198 (TBM III: 1. 31:6).

101

Fig. 28: A Group of Modern Figurines

Fig. 26: Breakage Patterns of the JPFs Breakage=:>

1

Id

lu

Ip

2

4

3

5

7

6

8

UTvnes A

33

52

17

B

52

53

33

C

78

21

163

126

Total

comp,

Total with

breaks

data

10

10

6

16

3

6

4

23

124

20

5

4

4

9

5

6

26

31

179

13

13

72

62

24

112

19

I?

I?

124-

166

67

38

87

76

34

137

27

13

31

178

469

Notes: comp = composite breaks.

Fig. 27: Breakage Patterns of Modern Clay Figurines breakage code => .(J. height

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

& position

1-10

1.5m, horizontal, face up

4

6

5

4

11-20

1.5m, horizontal, face down

3

7

7

2

21-30

1.5m, vertical, head down

2

2

31-38

2m, horizontal, face down

1

4

4

39a-b

accidentally while carrying

1

1

1

40-49

3m, cement floor

8+

9

9

6

6

4

4

Total

17+

29

28

13

7

5

5

1

I

1

1

remain

total

whole

falls

2

10

2

10

8

10

4

8 2 10

16

50

Notes: the numbers of the right column refer to the experiments. Some of the figurines that were not damaged were used for a second trial. Two figurines were damaged while carried in a car before the trials (no. 39a-b), and not used any further.

102

103

Fig. 30: Percent of Broken Figurines in Ancient Assemblages

Fig. 29: A Modern Figurine Site

Broken

Whole

% of whole

figurines

figurines

figurines

1 ashdoda

1.6

Ashdod I, II-III, mainly Iron Af!,e.

Sources and notes

Ashdod (philistia)

63

Samaria (Israel)

31

0

0.0

Samaria III, only the Iron Af!.e

Keisan (phoenicia)

61

0

0.0

Keisan I, all levels and types

Transiordan

139

8

5.8

App.4.

Horse and riders

284

9

3.2

All the wholes are from zraves

Meziddo (Israael)

65

7.7

May 1935, females, pls, 32-33

12.3

APD. 5.V, without nearly whole

Plaque figurines

5- 4 plaq.

244

30

Notes: The horse and riders figurines were discussed in the Ph.D work (1995, Hebrew). The whole Transjordanian figurines are: app. 4: nos. 1.1-2, IV. 1, V.l, V.8, VII.I-2, IX.4. plaq.= plaque figurines. The column "whole figurines" does not include the "nearly whole" figurines (unlike fig. 3 above)

Fig. 31: The Archaeological Context ofthe JPFs Subtypeee

Ac

A A+

all A

2

4 12 1 1 2 10

6 12 1 1 7 11

1 2

1 2

JJ. Context cistern pool, water system pit, silo cave, cave (?), tomb (?) tomb room in a house court, court of a house house house or court, room or alley house? room? casemate (one case in doubt) gate, court of a zate storehouse street, alley open area inside a site outside city walls fills surfaces and debris miscellaneous Total per subtvpe

5 1

1

9

Bc

2 7 1

1 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 49

2 2 2 2 2 2 3 58

1

11

Cl

C2

C3

all C

Total

1 3 2 4 3 5 2 1

1 4 4 5

2

7

4 1

4 7 6 12 3 16 4 1 2 5 3 1 1 2 3 1 8 6 2 88

16 27 16 16 20 51 10 2 7 9 5 2 7 8 9 12 11 18 8

B B+

all B

6 8 7 3 3 23 6

6 8 9 3 10 24 6

3 4 1 1 3 4 4 9

3 4 1 1 4 4 4 9

10 3 98

10 3

2 1 1

109

28

1 1

1

1 3 1 1 2 1 1 6 4 1 42

3

1 2

13

255

Note: Miscellaneous contexts include court or alley; alley?; tower; on bedrock; foundation trench; debris heaps.

104

105

Fi . 34: Beth Shemesh - Season 1933

Fig. 32: The Context - Wider Generalizations Subtype::::>

A A+

Ac

UContext grave cave, cave?, grave? domestic (dom) domestic? sacred, sacred? public public? Total per subtype

5

2 1

8

2 9 10 2 2 1 26

all A 7 9 12 3 2 1 34

Bc

B B+ 6 1 3

1 11

3 3 30 11 1 3 5 56

all

Cl

C2

C3

B 9 4 33 11 1 4 5 67

Fig. 33: A "Model" Judean City

3 4 6 6

2 21

5 10 8 1 3 2 29

3 10 4

1 18

all C 3 13 28 19 1 3 5

72

~::-J f'B"n

Total 19 17 70 42 5 9 11 173

~

R

tp/r

.\ "

-

s o

u

N

, w

~

i !

Notes:

• JPF body fragment. •• or • - whole JPF.

I

I

-

...

• JPF A head.

- JPF moulded B head.

* Horse and Rider.

The location of some figurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of numbers and Roman numerals refer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

106

107

Fi .36: Tel en-Nasbeh Northern Part

I

18

0 p

J

...I r

z

12

y

x

w

I

T

V

s

R

Q

p

N

"

o.J

11

L.,

o c::::J

•

[

0

'J L

_

--

-

----'\-._-~

13

N M L

K

J

H G

21

F

E .... A

23 '

'

NI-I---"'•

449

.4SZ

I

10 Notes:

- JPF body fragment. - ~ or - - whole JPF.

~

JPF A head.

i

5

,.

o

_ JPF mouldedB head.

* Horse and Rider.

25 Notes:

- JPF bodyfragment. -~ or -- whole JPF.

~ JPF A head.

- JPF mouldedB head.

* Horse and Rider.

The location of some figurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of numbersand Roman numerals refer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

The locationof some figurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of numbers and Roman numerals refer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

108

109

I AC

AB

I

AD

I

Fi . 37: Tel en-Nasbeh AE I AF I AG

28

AK

111 I

I AL

143.

o

19 I

I 17/

1.7 I

115 I

11/

•

- ....- - - 1 l z

"

B

" .> ,/

--I~"'~~~ \ -....u..L ~............1

/ - - -.....l o

(

~

'/

/'

I

Q

.:

\

I

r

I

\

\

0

0

o

--

o

, -,

_~).

_ .... ---

GATE

M

K

\

'\

20

s

o

e14S

r

22

o

<,

---

,/

\

\

J

\

j-..::;._ ->

H

r...~~~~q· - - 'C

u

JW....ttLJ.

I

_ ...-

\ ) ~ 18 r\

J

F

,/

r-,

\"-'-

-

/.

/,

o

/

498'"

B

16

u ...............-.....,(IN'

14

Notes:

s iii

10 • JPF bodyfragment. ... or •• wholeJPF.

.. JPF A head.

• JPF moulded B head.

* Horseand Rider.

Notes:

• JPFbodyfragment. • .. or •• wholeJPF.

.. JPF A head.

5

0

• JPF moulded B head.

* Horseand Rider.

The locationof some figurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of numbersand Roman numerals refer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

The location of somefigurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of numbers and Roman numerals refer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

110

111

Fi .39: Tel Beit Mirsim - South East

Fi .40: Tel Beit Mirsim - North West

uarter

•

uarter

'N

\

I

'I

t.+---1

-

I

I .... --

r

o

o

,~ I I

22

i

I I

I

123

21

t ....__._..

I i

N

12

11

Notes:

• JPF bodyfragment. • .l or • - wholeJPF.

.l JPF A head.

- JPF moulded B head.

* Horse and Rider.

Notes:

12 • JPFbodyfragment. ..l or • - whole JPF.

.l JPF A head.

- JPF moulded B head.

* Horse and Rider.

The location of somefigurines is approximated. The numbers referto the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of numbers and Romannumeralsrefer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

The location of somefigurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of numbers and Romannumerals referto app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

112

113

Abbreviations AASOR- Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research ABSA- Annual of the British School at Athens ADAJAnnual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan Archiv fUr Orientforschung AIDAJAAmerican Journal of Archaeology AJBIAnnual of the Japanese Biblical Institute AOSAmerican Oriental Society ASAnatolian Studies AUSSAndrews University Seminary Studies BABAR-

Biblical Archaeologist British Archaeological Report. Oxford. Tempus Reparatum. BARev- Biblical Archaeologist Review BASOR- Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research BIFAO- Bulletin de l'Institute Francais d'Archeologie Orientale Bi. Or. - Bibliotheca Orientalis BNBiblische Notizen CdE-

Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Cuneiform Studies Journal of Jewish Studies Journal of Near Eastern Studies Journal of Northwest Semitic Literature Jewish Quarterly Review Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal of Semitic Studies Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities

LA-

Liber Anuus

OIPOROr.An.OTLOTS-

Oriental Institute Publications Orientalia Oriens Antiquus Old Testament Library Old Testament Studies

PEF(QS)- Palestine Exploration Fund (Quarterly Statement) PEFAPalestine Exploration Fund, Annual of PEQPalestine Exploration Quarterly PJBPalastina Jahrbuch

Chronique d'Egypt

EAEID.- Encyclopedia of Archaelogical Excavations in the Holy Land, 2 Vols., 1970 (Hebrew; translated into English and revised, 4 vols., 1975-1978). EAEID.newThe New Encyclopedia of Archaelogical Excavations in the Holy Land, 4 Vols. 1993 (Hebrew; English revised ed., 4 vols., 1994). EIEretz Israel Enc.Miqr.-Encyclopedia Miqrait. Hebrew. 8 Vols. (Biblical Encyclopedia). GM-

JBLJCSJJSJNESJNSLJQRJSOTJSSJSSEA-

QDAP-

Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of Palestine

RARBRDACRdERLARSF-

Revue d'Assyriologie et d'Archeologie Orientale Revue Biblique Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus Revue d'Egyptologie Reallexikon der Assyriologie (Berlin) Rivista di Studi Fenici

Shnaton- Shnaton. An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Near-Eastern Studies. Hebrew. SIHAJ- Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan (Vols. I-IV) SIMAStudies in Mediterranean Archaeology

Gottinger Miszellen

Had. Arch.Hadashot Archaeologiot. IAA, Jerusalem (Hebrew). HARHebrew Annual Review HTRHarvard Theological Review HUCA- Hebrew Union College Annual IEJIsrael Exploration Society 1st. Mit- Istanbuler Mitteilungen JANES- Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society JAOSJournal of the American Oriental Society JARCE- Journal of the Archaeological Research Center in Egypt

TA-

Tel Aviv

UF-

Ugarit Forschungen

VT-

Vetus Testamentum

ZAZAW-

Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie, Zeitscrhift fUr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina Vereins

ZDPV-

114

Bibliography A-Campo, A. L. 1994. Anthropomorphic Representations in Prehistoric Cyprus. A Formal and Symbolic Analysis of Figurines c. 3500-1800 B.C. Jonsered. P. Astroms. Abel, F. M. 1921. D~couverte d' un tombeau antique a Abou GhOch. RB 30: 98-102. Abusch, T. 1987-90. MaqlG. RLA VII: 346-351. Ackerman, Susan 1992. Under every Green Tree. Popular Religion in Sixth - Century Judah. Atlanta (Harvard Semitic Monographs 46). Scholars Press. Ackerman, Susan and Braunstein, S. L. 1982. Israel in Antiquity. From David to Herod. The Jewish Museum, New York. NY. Aharoni, y. 1956. Excavations at Ramat Rabel 1954. lEI 6: 137-157. Aharoni, y. 1958. The Northern Boundary of Judah. PEQ: 27-31. Aharoni, y. 1959. Zephat ofThutmose. lEI 9/2:110-122. Aharoni, Y. 1962, 1964, See: RR I, RR II. Aharoni, Y. 1971. The Beer Sheba Excavations. The Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University (without page numbers). Aharoni, Y. 1971b. Roads and Sites. Tel Aviv. (Hebrew). Aharoni, Y. 1973. (00.). Excavations and Studies in Honor of Professor Sh. Yeivin. Tel Aviv. The Institute of Archaeology (Hebrew). Aharoni, y. 1973, 1975 , see: BS 1, Lachish V. Aharoni, y. 1976. The Stratification of Judahite Sites in the 8th and 7th Centuries B.C.E. BASOR 224:73-90. Aharoni, y. 1978. The Archaeology of the Land ofIsrael. English Trans. by A. Rainey, 1982. Philadelphia. Westminster Press. Aharoni, Y. 1981. Arad Inscriptions. Jerusalem (IES). Aharoni, Y. 1987. The land of the Bible. A Historical Geography. 2nd ed., ed. by A. Rainey. London. Aharoni, Y. and Amiran, Ruth 1964. Arad: A Biblical City in Southern Palestine. Archaeology 17/1: 43-53. Ahituv, Sh. 1994. The Missing District: A Study of the Cities and Districts of Judah in Joshua 15:21-62. EI 24: 7-11. Ahlstrom, G. W. 1963. Aspects of Syncretism in Israelite Religion. Lund (Horae Soederblominae), Ahlstrom, G. W. 1980. Is Tell ed-Duweir Ancient Lachish? PEQ: 7-9. Ahlstrom, G. W. 1982. Royal Administration and National Religion in Ancient Palestine. Leiden. Brill. Ahlstrom, G. W. 1983. Tell ed-Duweir: Lachish or Libnah? PEQ 103f. Ahlstrom, G. W. 1984. An Archaeological Picture of Iron Age Religions in Ancient Palestine. Studia Orientalia 55: 117-144. Ahlstrom, G. W. 1985. Tell ed-Duweir: Still a Problem. BASOR 132: 46f. Ahlstrom, G. W. 1991. The Role of Archaeological and Literary Remains in reconstructing Israel's History. in: Edelman, Diana. ed. The Fabric of History. JSOT Supplement Series 127. Sheffield: 116-141.

115

Ahlstrom, G. W. 1993. The History of Palestine from the Paleolithic Period to Alexander's Conquest. JSOT Supplement Series 146. Sheffield. Albertz,R. 1978. Personliche Friimigkeit und ofjizielle Religion. Sttutgart. Calwer Verlag. Albright, W. F. 1939. Astarte Plaques and Figurines from Tel Beit - Mirsim. Melanges Syriens ofJerts a monsieur Ren~ Daussaud. Paris. Librarie Geutbner: 107-120. Albright, W. F. 1942. Archaeology and the Religion of Israel. Baltimore. Jhon Hopkins Press Alroth, Brita 1988. The positioning of Greek Votive Figurines. in: Hagg, R, Marinatos, N. and Nordquist, G. C. eds. Early Greek Cult Practices. Stockholm. P. Alstrdms Verlag: 195-203. Alroth, Brita 1989. Greek Gods and Figurines. Aspects of Antropomorphic Dedications. Uppsala. Almquist and Wiksell. Alt, A. 1925. The Settlement of the Israelite Tribes in Palestine. in: Wilson, RA. (trans.) 1966. Essays on Old Testament History and Religion. Oxford. JSOT Press: 135-169. Alt, A. 1925b. Juda Gaue unter Josia. PJB 21: 100-117. Alt, A. 1930. Nachwort iiber die Territorialgeschichte Bedeutung von Sanheribs Eingriff in Palastina. PJB 25: 80-88. Reprinted in: Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel II: 242-249. Ammerman, Rebecca M. 1985. Medma and the Exchange of Votive Terracottas. in: Molene, Caroline and Stoddart, S. eds. Papers in Italian Archaeology IV. BAR International Series 246. Oxford: 5-19. Ammerman, Rebecca M. 1991. The Naked Standing Goddess: A Group of Archaic Terracotta Figurines from Paestum. AJA 95/2: 203-230. Amiran, R 1956. Two Tombs in Jerusalem from the Period of the Kings of Judah. Bulletin of the Israel Exploration Society XX/3-4:173-179 (Hebrew). Amiran, R 1967. A Note on Figurines with "Disks". EI 8: 99-100 (Hebrew). Amiran, R and Eitan, A. 1970. Excavations in the Courtyard of the Citadel, Jerusalem. IE! 20: 9-17. Amr, A. 1. 1980. A Study of Clay Figurines and Zoomorphic Vessels of Transjordan during the Iron Age, with special Reference to their Symbolism and Function. PhD Thesis, University of London. Amr, A. J. 1988. Ten Human Clay Figurines from Jerusalem. Levant 20: 185-196. ANEP see: Pritchard, J.B. 1954. Arav, R 1992. Beit Saida. Notes and News. IE! 43:252-254. Arav, R 1994. Beit Saida. Had. Arch. 101-2:22 (Hebrew). Ardener, Shirely. ed. 1993. Women and Space. Ground Rules and Social Maps. Oxford. Berg. AS 1. Grant, E. 1931. Ain Shems Excavations 1. Haverford. College Press. AS 2. Grant, E. 1932. Ain Shems Excavations 1928-1931 Part 11. Haverford. College Press.

AS 3. Grant, E. 1934. Rumeilah, being Ain Shems Excavations Part III. Haverford. College Press. AS 4. Grant, E. 1938. Ain Shems Excavations Part IV. Pottery. Haverford. College Press. AS 5. Grant, E. and Wright, G. E. 1939. Ain Shems Excavations Part V. Text. Haverford. Ashdod I. Dothan, M. and Freedman, D.N. 1967. Ashdod I. The First Season of Excavations 1962. Atiqot VII. Ashdod II-III. Dothan, M. ed. 1971. Ashdod II-III. The Second and Third Seasons of Excavations 1963, 1965. Atiqot IX-X. Auerbach, Elise. 1992. Review of: Blocher, F. 1987. Untersuchungen zum Motiv der Nackten Frau in der altbabylonischenZeit. JNES 51/4: 308-310. Avigad, N. 1960. Excavations at Machmish, 1958. Prelimina:ry Report. lEI 10: 90-96. Avigad, N. 1970. Excavation in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, Jerusalem, 1970. 0020:129-134. Avigad, N. 1972. Excavations in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City. Qadmoniot 19-20:91-100 (Hebrew). Avigad, N. 1980. The Upper City ofJerusalem. Jerusalem. Shiqmona. Avigad, N. 1986. Hebrew Bullae from the Time ofJeremiah. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Ayalon, E. 1985. The Iron Age Pottery Assemblage from Horvat Teiman (Kuntillet 'Ajrud). MA Thesis, Tel Aviv University (Hebrew). Badre, Leila 1980. Les figurines anthropomorphes en terre cuite ['age du Bronze Syrie. Paris. P. Geuthner. Bahat, D. 1981. The Wall of Manasseh in Jerusalem. lEI 31: 235-2236. Bailey, D.W. 1994. Reading Prehistoric Figurines as Individuals. World Archaeology 25/3:321-333. Bar-Adon, P. 1989. Excavations in the Judean Desert. 'Atiqot IX (Hebrew Series). Barkay, G. 1985. Northern and Western Jerusalem in the End of the Iron Age. Ph.D. Theis, Tel Aviv University (Hebrew). Barkay, G. 1989. The Priestly Benediction on the Ketef Hinom Plaques. Cathedra 52/:37-76 (Hebrew). Barkay, G. 1990. The Iron Age II-III. in: Ben-Tor, A. ed. The Archaeology of Ancient Israel in the Biblical Period. Tel Aviv. The Open University: 77-233 (Hebrew). Barkay, G. 1993. The Redefining of Archaeological Periods: does the Date 588/586 B.C.E. Indeed mark the End of the Iron Age Culture? in: Biran, A. and Aviram, J. eds. Biblical Archaeology Today 11. Jerusalem. Keter: 106-109. Barkay, G. 1994. Burial Caves and Burial Practices in Judah in the Iron Age. in: Singer, I. ed. Graves and Burial Practices in Israel in the Ancient Period. Jerusalem: 96-164 (Hebrew). Barnes, Ruth and Eicher, J.B. eds. 1992. Dress and Gender. Making Meaning in Cultural Context. NY and Oxford. Berg. Barnett, R. D. 1968. Illustrations of Old Testament History. London. The Trustees of the British Museum.

a

a

116

Barrelet, M. T. 1968. Figurines et reliefs en terre cuite de la Mesopotamie antique. Vol. I. Paris. Institut Francais d'Arch~ologie de Beyrouth LXXXV. Bartlett, J. R. 1989. Edom and the Edomites. Sheffield. JSOT Supplement Series 77. Barrett, J.C. 1991. Towards an Archaeology of Ritual. in: Garwood, P. et. al. eds. Sacred and Profane. Proceedings of a Conference on Archaeology and Ritual. Oxford University, Committee for Archaeology Monographs 32. Beck, Pirhiya 1982. The Drawings from Horvat Teiman (Kuntillet 'Ajrud). TA 9:3-86. Beck, Pirhiya. 1986. A New Type of Female Figurine. in: Kelly - Buccellati, Marilyn ed. Insight through Images. Studies in Honor of Edith Porada. Malibu. Udenda Press: 29-34. Beck, Pirhiya. 1991. A Figurine from Tel 'Ira. EI21:87-93 (Hebrew). Beck, Pirhiya. 1993. Early Bronze Age "Bed Models" Reconsidered. TA 20/1: 33-40. Beck, Pirhiya. 1993b. Transjordanian and Levantine Elements in the Iconography of Qitmit. in: Biran, A. and Aviram, J. eds. Biblical Archaeology Today 11. Jerusalem. Keter: 231-236. Beck, Pirhiya. 1995. Catalogue of Cult Objects and Study of the Iconography. in: Beit- Arieh, I. ed. Horvat Qitmit. An Edomite Shrine in the Biblical Negev. Tel Aviv University:27-197. Becking, B. 1992. The Fall ofSamaria. An Historical and Archaeological Study. Leiden. Brill. Beer, Cecilia. 1991. Eastern Influences and Styles? A Reconsideration of some Terracottas of Cypriote Manufacture. in: Vandenabeele, Frieda and Laffineur, R. eds. Cypriote Terracottas. Brussels and Liege. Vrije Universiteit: 77-85. Begg, C.T. 1986. The Significance of Jehoiachin's Release: a New Proposal. JSOT 36: 49-56. Begg, C.T. 1987. The Death of Joshia in Chronicles: Another View. fIT 37: 1-8. Beit Arieh, I. 1985. Tel 'Ira - A Fortified City of the Kingdom of Judah. Qadmoniot 69-70: 17-24 (Hebrew). Beit Arieh, I. 1986. Horvat 'Uzza - A Border Fortress in the Eastern Negev. Qadmoniot 73-74:31-40 (Hebrew). Beit Arieh, I. 1987. Tel 'Ira and Horvat 'Uza: Negev Cities in the Late Israelite Period. Cathedra 42: 34-38 (Hebrew). Beit Arieh, I. 1987b. An Edomite Temple at Horvat Qitmit. Qadmoniot 75-76:72-79 '(Hebrew). Beit Arieh, I. 1989. An Edomite Shrine-at Horvat Qitmit. EI 20:134-146 (Hebrew. English Version 1991 in: TA 18/1:93-116). Beit Arieh, I. 1992. Horvat Radum. EI23:106-12 (Hebrew). Beit Arieh, I. 1995 (ed.). Horvat Qitmit. An Edomite Shrine in the Biblical Negev. Tel Aviv University. Beit Arieh, I. and Cresson, B. C. 1991. Horvat 'Uza. A Fortified Outpost on the Eastern Negev Border. BA: 126-135. Ben-Arieh, Sarah. 1983. A Pottery Mould for a Goddess Figurine. Qadmoniot 64:123-124 (Hebrew).

Ben-Dov, M. 1982. The Dig at the Temple Mount. Keter. Jerusalem. (Hebrew). Bennett, C.M. 1966. Fouilles d'Umm el Biyara. RB 73: 372403. Bennett, C.M. 1972. Chronique archeologiques, Buseirah. RB 79/3: 426-430. Bennett, C. M. 1973. Excavations at Buseirah, Southern Jordan, 1971. Levant 5: 1-11. Bennett, C.M. 1983. Excavations at Buseirah. in: Sawyer, 1. F.A. et.al. eds. Midian, Moab and Edom. Sheffield. JSOT Supplement Series 24:9-17. Bennett, C.M. and Blakely, J.A. eds. 1989. Tell el- Hesi. The Persian Period (Stratum V). Winona Lake. Eisenbrauns. Berlinerblau, J. 1993. The 'Popular Religion' Paradigm in Old Testament Research. A Sociological Critique. JSOT 60: 3-26. Betlyon, J.W. 1985. The Cult of the Asherahl Elat at Sidon. JNES 44: 53-56. Best, 1. 1991. Linguistic Evidence for a Phoenician Pillar Cult in Crete. JANES 20: 7-13. Bhattacha:rya, D. K. 1989. Terracotta Worship in Fringe Bengal. in: Hodder, I. ed. The Meaning of Things. Material Culture and Symbolic Expression. London. Unwin Hyman: 12-22. Bienkowski, P. 1986. Jericho in the Late Bronze Age. Warminster. Arris and Philips. Bienkowski, P. 1991. Edom and the Edomites. Review Article. PEQ: 139-142. Bienkowski, P. 1991b. (ed.). The Art ofJordan. Treasures from an Ancient Land. Gloucestershire. A. Sutton and the National Museums and Galleries. Biran, A. 1974. Tel Dan. BA 37/2:26-51. Biran, A. 1985. Tel 'Ira. Qadmoniot69-70:25-28 (Hebrew). Biran, A. 1987. Tel 'Ira and Aroer towards the End of the Judean Monarchy. Cathedra 42: 26-33 (Hebrew). Biran, A. 1992. Dan. 25 Years of Excavations at Tel Dan. Tel Aviv. Hakibbutz Hameuchad (Hebrew). Biran, A. and Cohen, R. 1975. Aroer. Notes and News. lEI 25: 171. Biran, A. and Cohen, R. 1978. Aroer in the Negev. Qadmoniot 41: 20-24 (Hebrew). Biran, A. and Cohen, R. 1981. Aroer in the Negev. EI 15: 250-273 (Hebrew). Bird, Phillis. 1987. The Place of Woman in the Israelite Cultus. in: Miller, P. D., Hanson, P. D. and McBride, S. D. eds. Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of F. M. Cross. Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 407-419. Bisi, Anna Maria. 1979. Les sources Syro - Palestiniennes et Chypriotes de I'art Punique. Antiquites Africaines 14: 17-35. Bisi, Anna Maria. 1989. Le rayonnement des terres cuites chypriotes au Levant aux premiersiecles de rage du Fer. in: Peltenburg,E. ed. Early Society in Cyprus. Edinburgh: 256-265. Bisi, Anna Maria. 1991. Heritages, emprunts et survivances Chypriotes dans les terres cuites des colonies phc!niciennes. in: Vandenabeele, Frieda and Laffineur, R. eds. Cypriote Terracottas. Vrije University: 87-92.

Black, J.and Green, A. 1992. Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia. An Illustrated Dictiona:ry. London. The Trustees of the British Museum. Bliss, F. J. 1898. Excavations at Jerusalem. London. PEF. Bliss, F. J. 1899. Second / Third Report on the Excavations of Tell Zakariya. PEFQS: 89-111,170-187. Bliss, F. J. and Macalister R. A. S. 1902. Excavations in Palestine. London. PEF. Bloch-Smith, Elizabeth M. 1992. The Cult of the Dead in Judah: Interpreting the Material Remains. JBL 111/ 2: 213-224. Blocher, F. 1987. Untersuchungen zum Motiv der nackten Frau in der atlbabylonischen Zeit. Munich. Profil Verlag. Bloom, Joanne B. 1988. Material Remains of the NeoAssyrian Presence in Palestine. PhD Dissertation, Bryn Mawr College. Boardman, J. 1980. The Greeks Overseas. London. 2nd Edition. Thames and Hudson. Boardman, J. 1988. Trade in Greek decorated Pottery. Oxford Journal ofArchaeology 7:27-33,371-373. Bohm, Stephanie. 1990. Die 'Nackte Gottin'. Zur Ikonographie und Deutung unbekleideter weiblischer Figuren in den fruhgriechischen Kunst. Mainz. Von Zabem Verlag. Bonano, A. ed. 1986. Archaeology and Fertility Cult in the ancient Mediterranean. Papers presented at the First Conference on Archaeology of the Ancient Mediterranean, Malta 1985. Amsterdam. Gruner. Borger, R. 1976. Tonmanchen und Puppen. Bi. Or. 30: 176-183. Borowski, O. 1995. Hezekiah's Reforms and the Revolt against Assyria. BA 58/3:·148-155. Bourke, S. 1992. Excavations in the Iron Age Extra - Mural Quarter on the South - East Hill of Jerusalem: Review Article. PEQ: 59-62. Bowden, H. 1991. The Chronology of Greek Painted Pottery: Some Observations. Hephaistos 10:49-59. Brandes, M. 1980. Destruction et mutilation de statues en Mesopotamie. Akkadica 16: 28-40. Brandl, B. 1984. The engraved Tridacna Shell Discs. AS 24: 15-41. Bretschneider,1. 1991. Gotter in Schreinen. Eine Untersuchung zu den syrischen und levantischen Tempelmodeln, ihrer Bauplastik und ihren Gotterbildern. UF23: 13-32. Briend, J. 1992. Bible et Archeologie: dialogue entre deux disciplines. Le Monde du Bible 75: 37-41. Brinkman, J. A. 1984. Prelude to Empire. Babylonian Society and Politics, 747 - 626 B.C. Philadelphia. Babylonian Fund (Occasional Publications no. 7). Bron, F. and Lemaire, A. 1983. Poids inscrits ph~nico­ arameens du VIlle sickle avo J. C. in: Atti dell congresso internazionale di study fenici e punici vol. 3. Rome: 767-770. Broshi, M. and Finkelstein, I. 1992. The Population of Palestine in Iron Age II. BASOR 287: 47-60. Brown, S. 1992. Perspectives on Phoenician Art. BA 55/1: 6-24.

117

BS I. Aharoni, Y. ed. 1973. Beer Sheba 1. Tel- Aviv University, The Institute of Archaeology. BS n. Herzog, Z. ed. 1984. Beer Sheba II. The Early Iron The Age Settlements. Tel- Aviv University, Institute of Archaeology. Bulbach, S. W. 1981. Judah in the Reign of Manasseh. PhD Dissertation. New York University. Burkert, W. 1992. The Orientalizing Revolution. Near Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic Age. Harvard University Press. Burstein, S.M. 1984. Psamtek I and the End of Nubian Domination in Egypt. JSSEA 14/2: 31-35. Burrows, M. 1941. What mean these Stones? New Haven. ASOR Caquot, A 1994. Review of: Keel, O. and Uehlinger, C. 1992. GOttinen, Gotter und Gottessymbole. Bi. Or. 51/3-4: 378-382. Carless-Hulin, Linda S. 1989. The diffusion of Religious Symbols within Complex Societies. in: Hodder, I. ed. The Meaning of Things. Material Culture and Symbolic Behaviour. London. Unwin Hyman: 9095. Carless-Hulin, Linda S. 1989b. The Identification of Cypriote Cult Figures through Cross - Cultural Comparison: Some Problems. in: Peltenburg, E. ed Early Society in Cyprus. Edinburgh. Edinburgh University. Caubet, Annie. 1991. The Terracottas Workshops ofIdalion during the cypro - archaic Period. Acta Cypria 1991/3. Jonsered. P. Astrdm (SIMA Pocket book 120): 128-149. Caubet, Annie. 1992. Achna, 1882: R~flection sur les d€couvertes du sanetuaire cypro - archaic et classiques. in: loannides, G.C. ed. Studies in Honor of Vassos Karageorghis. Nicosia. The Society of Cypriot Studies: 261- 267. Cazelles, H. 1983. 587 ou 586? in: Meyers, C. L. and O'Connor, M. eds. The Word of the Lord shall go Forth. Winona Lake. Eisenbrauns: 427-435. Chadwick, J.R 1992. The Archaeology of Biblical Hebron in the Bronze and Iron Ages. PhD Dissertation, University of Utah. Chambon, A 1984. Tell el-Far'ah I. L'Age du Fer. Paris. 1. Gabalda. Childs, B.S. 1967. Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis. Studies in Biblical Theology 2. Great Britain. SCM. Cholidis, Nadja. 1992. Moobel in Ton. Untersuchungen zur archaologischen und religionsgeschichtlichen Bedeutung der Terrakottamodelle von Tischen, Stuhlen und Betten aus dem Alten Orient. Munster. Ugarit Verlag. Ciasca, Antonia. 1962. Tell Gat. Or. An. I: 23-39. Ciasca, Antonia. 1963. Un Deposito di Statuette de Tell Gat. Or. An. II: 45-63. Ciasca, Antonia. 1964. Some Particular Aspects of the Israelite Miniature Statuary at Ramat Rabel. in: Aharoni, Y. ed. RR II: 95-100. Clarke, D.L. 1968. Analytical Archaeology. Bristol. 2nd ed. 1978. Methuen.

Clements, RE. 1983. The Ishaiah Narrative of2 K. 20:1219 and the Deuteronomistic History. in: Zakovitch, Y. and Rofe, A eds. I. L. Seeligmann Volume. Jerusalem. Rubinstein: 209-220. Clermont- Ganneau, Ch. 1884. Antiquities of Palestine in London. PEFQS: 222-230. Clermont- Ganneau, Ch. 1896. Archaeological Research in Palestine Vol. I. Repr. 1971, English translation by A Stewart. Jerusalem. Raritas. Clermont- Ganneau, Ch. 1896. Archaeological Researches in Palestine during the Years 1873-4, Vol II. London. PEF. Cohen, R 1979. Neo-Assyrian Elements in the first Speech of the Biblical rab-Iaqe. Israel Oriental Studies 9: 32-47. Cohen, Rudolph. 1983. Kadesh-Barnea. A Fortress from the Time of the Judean Kingdom. The Israel Museum Catalogue No. 233. Jerusalem. The Israel Museum. Cohen, R. and Yisrael, Y. 1995. On the Road to Edom. Discoveries from 'En Hazevah. Israel Museum Catalogue no. 370. Jerusalem (Hebrew and English). Colbow, Gudrun. 1991. Die kriegrische Iitar. Miinchen. Profil Verlag. Collombier, AM. 1987. Ceramique Greque et echanges en Meditterranee Orientale. in: Cypre et la cote SyroPhenicienne. Studia Phoenicia 5: 239-248. Connelly, J.B. 1989. Standing before one's God. Votive Sculpture and the Cypriote Religious Tradition. BA 52/4: 210-218. Conrad, D. 1985. A Note on an Astarte Plaque from Tel Akko. Michmanim 2:19-24. Contenau, G. 1914. La deesse nue babylonienne. Etude d'iconographie comparee. Paris. P. Geuthner. Coogan, M. D. 1987. Canaanite Origins and Lineage: Reflections on the Religion of Ancient Israel. in: Miller, P.D, Hanson, P.D. and McBride, S.D. eds. Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor ofF.M. Cross. Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 115-124. Cook, R.M. 1992. The Wild Goat and Fikellura Styles: Some Speculations. Oxford Journal ofArchaeology 11/3: 255-266. Cooper,1.S. 1983. Reconstructing History from Ancient Inscriptions: the Lagash - Umma Border Conflict. Malibu. Udenda. Courtois,1.S. 1984. Alashia III. Les objects des niveaux stratifies d'Enkomi. Paris. Editions Recherche sur les civilizations, Memoire no. 32. Cross, F.M. 1971. The Old Phoenician Inscription from Spain dedicated to Hurrian Astarte. HTR 64:189195. Cross, F.M. and Milik, 1.T. 1956. Exploration in the Judean Buqe'ah. BASOR 142: 5-17. Crowfoot, 1. W. and Fitzgerald, G. M. 1929. Excavations in the Tyropoeon Valley, Jerusalem, 1927. PEFA IV. Culican, W. 1969. Dea Tyria Gravida. AJBI 1/2: 35-50 (repr. 1986 in: Opera Selecta. From Tyre to Tartessos. Goterborg. P. Astrdms: 265-280). Culican, W. 1973. The Graves at Tell er-Ruqeish. AJBI 2/2: 66-105.

J

118

Culican, W. 1975-6. Some Phoenician Masks and Other Terracottas. Berytus 24: 47-87. Culican, W. 1976. A Terracotta Shrine from Achzib. ZDPV 92: 47-53. Curtis, E. L. and Madsen, A L. 1910. Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books ofChronicles (ICC). Edinburgh. Curtis, E.M. 1984. Man as the Image of God in Genesis in the Llght ofAncient Near Eastern Paralles. Ph.D. Dissertation, the University of Pennsylvania.

Dagan, Y. 1992. The Shefelah during the Period of the Monarchy in Light ofArchaeological Excavations and Survey. M.A Thesis, Tel-Aviv University (Hebrew). Dajani, RW. 1966. Four Iron Age Tombs from Irbed. ADAJ 11: 88-106. Dandamayev, M.A and Lukonin, V.G. 1989. The Culture and Social Institutions of Ancient Iran. Cambridge. Cambridge University. Daviau, P.M. and Dion, P.E. 1994. El, the God of the Ammonites? The Atef-Crowned Head from Tell Jawa, Jordan. ZDPV 110/2: 158-167. Davies, G. L. 1982. Tell ed- Duweir = Ancient Lachish: a Response to G. W. Ahlstrom. PEQ: 25-28. Davies, G. L. 1985. Tell ed- Duweir not Libnah but Lachish. PEQ: 92-96. Davila, 1. R and Zuckerman, B. 1993. The Throne of 'Ashtart Inscription. BASOR 289:67-80. Day, 1. 1986. Asherah in the Hebrew Bible and NorthWestern Semitic Literature. JBL 105/3: 385-408. Day, 1. 1992. Asherah, Astarte. The Anchor Bible Dictionary Vol. 1: 483-7,491-4. Day, J. 1994. Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M.A eds. Etn Gott allein? Freiburg (OBO 139). Universitatsverlag: 181-196. Day, Peggy L. 1989. Gender and Difference in Ancient Israel. Minneapolis. Fortress Press. Day, Peggy L. 1992. Anat: Ugarit's "Mistress of Animals". JNES 51/3: 181-190. De-Miroschedji, P. 1995. The Excavations at Tel Yarmuth. Qadmoniot 109:27-35 (Hebrew). De-Vaux, R 1951. La trosieme campaigne de fouilles a Tell el- Far'ah, pres Naplous. RB 58:393-430. De-Vaux, R 1952. La quartieme campaigne de fouilles a Tell el- Far'ah, pr~s Naplous. RB 59:551-583. De-Vaux, R 1957. Les fouilles de Tell el- Far'ah, pres Nablouse. RB 64: 552-580. De-Vaux, R 1958. Les institutions de l'Ancient Testament. Paris. CERF. English trans. by 1. McHugh. 1961. Ancient Israel, its Life and Institutions. London. Dearman, 1. A 1992. Religion and Culture in Ancient Israel. Peabody Museum. Hendrickson. Deboys, D. G. 1990. The History and Theology in the Chronicler's Portrayal of Abijah. Biblica 71: 48-62. Deem, A 1978. The Goddess Anath and some Biblical Hebrew Cruces. JSS 23/1: 25-30.

Delcor, M. 1974. Le Hieros Gamos d'Astarte. Rivista di Studi Fenici II. Repr. 1976 in: Religion d'Israel et Proche Orient Ancient. Leiden. Brill: 55-71. Deutsch, R. 1988. Ancient Coins and Antiquities. Auction no. 50. Jaffa. Matza Co. (Hebrew). Deutsch, R 1988b. Ancient Coins and Antiquities. Auction no. 45. Jaffa. Matza Co. (Hebrew). Deutsch, R 1989. Ancient Coins and Antiquities. Auction no. 55. Jaffa. Matza Co. (Hebrew). Deutsch, R 1989b. Ancient Coins and Antiquities. Auction no. 60. Jaffa. Matza Co. (Hebrew). Deutsch, R. 1990. Ancient Coins and Antiquities. Auction no. 65. Jaffa. Matza Co. (Hebrew). Deutsch, R 1993. Ancient Coins and Archaeological Antiquities. Auction no. 10, April 1993. Jaffa. Dever, W. G. 1982. Recent Archaeological Confirmation to the Cult of Asherah in Ancient Israel. Hebrew Studies 23: 37-43. Dever, W. G. 1983. Material Remains and the Cult in Ancient Israel. An Essay in Archaeological Systematics. in: Meyers, C. L. and O'Connor, M. eds. The Word ofthe Lord shall go Forth. Essays in Honor of D. N. Freedman. Winona Lake. Eisenbrauns: 571-587. Dever, W. G. 1984. Asherah, Consort of Jahweh? New Evidence from Kuntillet 'Ajrud. BASOR 255:21-37. Dever, W.G. 1987. The Contribution of Archaeology to the Study of Canaanite and Early Israelite Religion. in: Miller, P.D., Hanson, P.D. and McBride, S.D. eds. Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of F. M. Cross. Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 209-247. Dever, W. G. 1990. Recent Archaeological Discoveries and Biblical Research. Seattle and London. University of Washington Press. Dever, W.G. 1991. Archaeology, Material Culture and the Early Monarchical Period in Israel. in: Edelman, Diana. ed. The Fabric of History. JSOT Supplement Series 127. Sheffield: 103-115. Dever, W. G. 1994. Ancient Israelite Religion: how to reconcile the differing Textual and Artifaetual Portraits? in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A eds. Ein Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg. Universitatsverlag: 105-125. Dever, W.G. et.al. eds. 1970, 1974, 1986. Gezer 1, Ill, IV. HUCA Annual I, III, IV. Diakonoff, I.M. 1983. Media. in: Gershevitz, I. ed. The Cambridge Ancient History ofIran 2. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press: 36-148. Dicou, B. 1994. Edom, Israel's Brother and Antagonist. Sheffield. JSOT Supplement Series 169. Dietrich, W. 1992. Review of Cholidis, Nadja, "Mdbel in Ton". UF 24:-499. Dietrich, W. 1994. Der Eine Gott als Symbol politischen Widerstands. Religion und Politik im Juda des 7 Jahrhunderts. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A eds. Ein Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg. Universititsverlag: 463-490. Dietrich, M. and Loretz, O. 1992. "Jahwe und seine Aschera". Anthropomorphes Kultbild in Mesopotamien, Ugarit und Israel. Das biblische Bildverbot. Miinster. Ugarit Verlag.

119

Dion, P. E. 1992.

Les KTYM de Tel Arad:

Grecs ou

Ph~niciens? RB 99/1: 70-97.

Dobbs - Allsop, F. W. 1994. The Genre of the Mesad I;lashavyahu Ostracon. BASOR 295:49-55. Doermann, R W. 1987. Archaeological and Biblical Intertpretation: Tell el-Hesi. in: Perdue, L.G., Toombs, L. E. and Jhonson G.L.eds. Archaeological and Biblical Interpretation. Essays in Memory ofD. G. Rose. Atlanta. 1. Knox: 129-145. Dohmen, C. 1985. Das Bildverbot, Seine Entstehung und seine Entwicklung im Alten Testament (Bonner Biblische Beitrage 62). Bonn. P. Hanstein Verlag. Donatelli, Laura 1988. Small Objects in Funerary Equipment. in: Egyptian Civilization. Religious Beliefs. Egyptian Museum of Turin: 198-212. Donner, H. 1986. Geschichte des Volkes Israel und seiner Nachbiim in Grundzilgen II. GOttingen. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Dornemann, R H. 1983. The Archaeology of the Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Milwaukee. Milwaukee Public Museum. Dothan, M. 1956. The excavationjs at Afula. Atiqot I [ES): 19-70. Dothan, M. 1964. Ashdod. Preliminary Report of the Excavations in Seasons 1962/1963. IE! 14: 79-95. Dothan, M. 1967. Ashdod. A City of the Philistine Pentapolis. Archaeology 20/3: 178-186. Dothan, M. 1967, 1971. see: Ashdod I, Ashdod II-III. Dothan, M. 1977. The Musicians of Ashdod. BA 40/1: 3839. Dothan, Trude. 1982. The Philistines and their Material Culture. Jemsalem. IES. Dothan, T. and Gitin, S. 1987. The Rise and Fall of Ekron of the Philistines. BA 50: 197-222. Driver, S. R 1922. Modern Research as Illustrating the Bible. The Schweich Lectures 1908. London, Oxford University. Duff, A. I., Clark. G. A. and Chadderdon, T. 1. 1992. Symbolism in the Early Paleolithic: A Conceptual Odyssey. Cambridge Archaelogical Journal 2/2: 211-229. Duncan, 1. G. 1924. Fourth Quarterly Report on the Excavation of the Eastern Hill of Jemsalem. PEFQS: 163-180. Duncan, 1. G. 1925. Fifth Quarterly Report on the Excavation of the Eastern Hill of Jemsalem. PEFQS: 8-24. Duncan, 1. G. 1931. Digging up Biblical History. London. Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. Edelstein, G. 1973. Kh. el- Burg. Had. Arch. 46: 26 (Hebrew). Edelstein, G. The Weaver's Quarters at Tel Amal in the Museum of Period of the United Monarchy. Mediterranean Archaeology (Hebrew, Year of Publication not marked). Edelstein, G. and Levy, S. 1972. Cinq ann~es de fouilles Tel'Amal (Nir David). RB 79:325-367. Edwards, O. 1992. The Year of Jerusalem's Destruction. 2 Addaru 597 B.C. Reinterpreted. ZAW 104:101-106.

a

120

Eitam, D. 1990. Royal Industry in Ancient Israel during the Iron Age Period. in: Aerts, E. and Klengel, H. eds. The Town as Regional Economic Centre in the Ancient Near East. Leuven University Press: 56-73. Eitan, A. 1984. (Interview). BARev 12/4: 30-34. Eitan, A. 1994. Rare Sword of the Israelite Period found at Vered Jericho. Israel Museum Journal XII: 61-62. Elat, M. 1975. The political Status of the Kingdoms of Judah and Isreal within the Assyrian Empire in the 7th Century B.C. in: Lachish V: 61-70. Elat, M. 1977. Economical Relations in the Lands of the Bible e. 1000 - 539 Be. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Elat, M. 1990. International Commerce in Palestine under Assyrian Rule. in: Kedar, B.Z., Dothan, T. and Safrai, S. eds. Commerce in Palestine Throughout the Ages. Jerusalem: 67-88 (Hebrew). Elgavish,1. 1967. Shiqmona. Haifa. The City Museum of Ancient Art (without page numbers). Eigavish, 1. 1994. Shiqmona. On the Seacoast of Mount Carmel. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Elitzur, y. 1994. Rumah in Judah. IE! 44/1-2: 123-128. Emerton, 1.A. 1982. New Light on Israelite Religion: The Implications of the Inscriptions from Kuntillet 'Ajrud. ZDPV 92:2-20. Engle, 1. R 1979. Pillar Figurines of Iron Age Israel and Asherah/Asherim. Ph.D Thesis. Pittsburgh University. Eph'al, I. 1984. The Assyrian Ramp at Lachish: Military and Lexical Aspects. Zion XLIX: 333-347 (Hebrew). Eshel, H. 1987. The Late Iron Age Cemetry of Gibeon. IE! 37: 1-16. Eshel, H. 1989. A lmlk Stamp from Beth-EI. IE! 39: 60-62. Eshel, I. 1986. The Chronology of Selected Late Iron Age Pottery Groupsjrom Judah. Ph.D Thesis, Tel Aviv University (Hebrew).

Fantar,

M.H. 1973. A propos d'Astart en Mediterranee Occidentale. RSF 1: 19-29. Fargo, V.M. 1987. Hesi in the Iron Age II Period: A Judean Border Fortres. in: Perdue, L.G., Toombs, L.E. and Johnson, G. L. eds. Archaeological and Biblical Interpretation. Essays in Memory of D. G. Rose. Atlanta.J. Knox: 157-164. Ferron, 1. 1969. Le statuettes au tympanon des hypogees Puniques. Antiquitls Africaines III: 11-33. Finkelstein, I. 1993. Environmental Archaeology and Social History: Demographic and Economic Aspects of the Monarchic Period. in: Biran, A. and Aviram, 1. eds. Biblical Archaeology Today II. Jemsalem. Keter: 56-66. Fitzgerald, G. M. 1930. The four Canaanite Temples of Beth Shean II. University of Pennsylvania. Fowler, M. D. 1985. Excavated Figurines: A Case for Identifying a Site as Sacred? ZA W 97:333-344. Frame, G. 1992. Babylonia 689 - 627 B.C. A Political History. Istanbul. Netherlands HistorischArchaeologisch Institut te Istanbul. Franken, H. 1. 1960. The Excavtions at Deir 'AlIa in Jordan. VT 10: 386-393.

Franken, H. 1. 1989. Human Clay Figurines from Jerusalem -a Note. Levant 21: 197. Franken, H. 1. 1995. Cave 1 at Jerusalem- an Interpretation. in: Bourke, S. and Descoeudres, 1. P. eels. Trade. Contact and the Movement of People in the Eastern Mediterranean. Sydney. (Studies in Honour of 1.B. Hennessy). University of Sydney. Franken, H.1. and Franken-Battershill, C.A. 1963. A Primer of Old Testament Archaeology. Leiden. Brill. Franken, H.1. and Ibrahim, M.M. 1978. Two Seasons of Excavations at Tell deir 'AlIa. ADAJ 22: 57-80. Frazer, 1. 1890. The Golden Bough. London (abridged from the third ed. of 1913, rep. 1990). Frettldh, Magdalene L. 1994. Brauchen oder gebrauchen wir die Gdttin? in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A. eds. Ein Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg. Universitatsverlag: 391-399. Fritz, V. 1990. Kinneret. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen auf dem Tell el- 'Oreme am See Gennaseret, 19821985. Wiesbaden. O. Harrassowitz. Fritz, V. 1993. Kinneret. Excavations at Tell EI- 'Oreimeh (Tel Kinrot) 1982-1985 Seasons. TA 20/2: 187-215. Fritz, V. 1994. An Introduction to Biblical Archaeology. Sheffield. JSOT Supplement Series 172. Frost, S. B. 1968. The Death of Joshia. A Conspiracy of Silence. JBL 87: 369-382. Frymer-Kensky, Tikva. 1992. In the Wake ofthe Goddesses. Women, Culture and the Biblical Transformation of Pagan Myth. NY. F. Columbine. Gadon, Elinor 1989. The Once and Future Goddess. Wellingborough. Aquarian Press. Galil, G. 1987. The Administrative Division of the Kingdom of Judah in the light of the Epigraphical Data. Zion 52/4: 495-509 (Hebrew). Galil, G. 1988. The Administrative Division of the Shefelah. Zion 53/1: 1-12 (Hebrew). Galil, G. 1991. A New Look at the Chronology of the Last Kings of Judah. Zion 56/1: 1-19 (Hebrew). Galil, G. 1992. Geba' Ephraim and the Northern Boundary of Judah in the Days of Joshia. Tarbiz LXIII: 114 (Hebrew). Galil, G. 1992b. Judah and Assyria in the Sargonic Period. Zion 57/2:111-133 (Hebrew). Galil, G. 1995. A New Look at the "Azekah Inscription", RB: 321-329. Galling, K. ed. 1937. Biblisches Reallexikon. Tiibingen. 1. C. Mohr (2nd ed. 1977). Gamer-Wallen, I. 1992. Drei Votivfiguren vom Gebel elZeit am Roten Meer. in: Gamer-Wallert, I. and Helck, W. eds. Festschrift fur Emma BrunnerTraut. Tiibingen. Attempo Verlag: 83-93. Ganzman, et. al. 1987. Das Eschmunheiligtum von Sidon. Die Funde der tiirkischen Ausgrabungen von 1901 bis 1903 im Archaologischen Museum in Istanbul. 1st. Mit. 37: 81-130. Garbini, G. 1964. Campagne di Scavi dell' Universita di Roma in Israele. Or. An. III: 134-139. Garfinkel, Y. 1984. The Distribution of the Identical Seal lmpressions and Settlement Pattern in Judah before

Sennacherib's Campaign. Cathedra 32: 35-53 (Hebrew). Garfinkel, Y. 1985. A Hierarchic Pattern of the Private SealImpressions on the "LMLK" Jar Handles. EI 18: 108-115 (Hebrew). Garfinkel, y. 1987. The City-List, Epigraphic Evidence and the Administrative Division in the Kingdom of Judah. Zion 52/4: 489-494 (Hebrew). Garfinkel, Y. 1988. 2 Chr. 11:5-10 Fortified Cities List and the Imlk Stamps - Reply to N. Naaman. BASOR 271: 69-73. Garstang,1. 1934. Jericho - City and Necropolis. Fourth Report. Annals ofArchaeology and Anthropology, the Institute ofArchaeology, Liverpool University 21: 99-136. Garwood, P. et. al. 1991. Sacred and Profane. Procceedings of a Conference on Archaeology, Ritual and Religion, Oxford 1989. Oxford University, Committee of Archaeology Monographs No. 32. Gates, C. 1992. Art for Children in Mycenaean Greece. in: Laffineur, R. and Crouwley J.L. eds. eikslon. Aegean Bronze Age Iconography. Aegeum 8. Universite de Li~ge: 161-171. Geller, M.1. 1989. A New Piece of Witchcraft. in: Behrens, H., Loding, D. and Roth, M.1. eds. DUMU-E-;; DUB- BA- A. Studies in Honor of1. W. Sjoberg. Philadelphia. The University Museum: 193-203. George, A. R 1993. Review of Farber, W., 1989. "Schlaf, Kindchen, Schlaf!" Mesopotamische BabyBeschworungen und Rituale. Winona Lake. JNES 52: 298-300. Gerstenberger, E.S. 1994. Weibliche spiritualitiit in Psalmen und Hauskult. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A. eds. Ein Gott alJein? (OBO 139). Freiburg. Universifatsverlag: 349-363. Gesell, Geraldine C. 1985. Town, Palace and House Cult in Minoan Crete. SIMA 67. Gdteborg. Gezer I - III. Macalister, R. A. S. 1912. The Excavation of Gezer Vols. I-III. London. J. Murray Gibeon WS. Pritchard, 1. B. 1961. The Water System of Gibeon. Pennsylvania. University Museum. Gibson, Sh. 1994. The Tell ej-Judeideh (T. Goded) Excavations: A Re-appraisal based on archiv Records in the PEF. TA 21/2: 194-234. Gilbert-Peretz, Diana. 1989. The Assemblage of Figurine from the City of David. The 15th Archaeological Congress, Jerusalem. Abstracts of Lectures: 21-22 (Hebrew). Gilbert-Peretz, Diana. In Press. City of David Figurines. Qedem. Gilula, M. 1978. 'To Yahweh Shomron and His Asherah'. Shnaton 111:129-137 (Hebrew) Ginsberg, H.L. 1950. Judah and the Transjordan States from 734 to 582 BCE. in: A. Marx Jubilee Vol. The Jewish Theological Seminary of America: 347-368. Gitin, S. 1989. Tel Miqne - Ekron: a Type Site for the inner Coastal Plain in the Iron Age 2 Period. in: Gitin, S. and Dever, W. G. eds. Recent Excavations in Israel: Studies in Iron Age Archaeology. AASOR 49: 23-58.

121

Gitin, S. 1990. Ekron of the Philistines Part 2: Olive Oil Supplies to the World. BARev 16/2: 32-43. Gitin, S. 1993. Seventh Century BCE Cultic Elements at Ekron. in: Biran, A and Aviram, 1. 005. Biblical Archaeology Today II. Jerusalem. Keter: 248-258. Gitin, S. 1995. Tel Miqne-Ekron in the 7th Century B.C.E: The Import of Economic Innovation and Foreign Cultural Influences on a Neo Assyrian Vassal City State. in: Recent Excavations in Israel. A View to the West. Dubuque, Iowa: 57-79. Gitin, S. and Dothan, Trude. 1987. The Rise and Fall of Ekron of the Philistines. BA: 197-222. Giveon, R 1967. Three Fragments of Statuary from the Bulletin of the Israel Northern Sharon. Exploration Society XXXI: 118-123 (Hebrew). Giveon, S. 1994. Tel Harasim. Periliminary Reoprt ill. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Gladigow, B. 1985-6. Prasenz der Bilder - Prasenz der Gotter. in: Kippenberg, H. E. et. also eds. Visible Religion IV-V: 114-133. Glueck, N. 1933. Further Explorations in Eastern Palestine. BASOR 51:9-19. Glueck, N. 1934. Explorations in Eastern Palestine I. AASOR 14: 1-114. Glueck, N. 1945. The Other Side of the Jordan. New York. ASOR. Goldberg, Naomi R 1979. Changing ofthe Gods. Feminism and the End of Traditional Religions. Boston. Beach Press. Gophna, R 1970. Some Iron Age II Sites in Southern Philistia. 'Atiqot VI: 25-30 (Hebrew). Gophna, R 1981. The Boundary between the Kingdoms of Judah, Ashkelon and Gaza in the Light of an Archaeological Surrey in the Shiqma Valley. Proceedings of the Seventh World Congress ofJewish Studies Vol. 1. Jerusalem: 4952 (Hebrew). Gonen, R 1979. Grain. Dagon Collection. Haifa. Shiqmona. GOrg, M. 1993. Die "Astarte des Kleinviehs". BN 69: 9-11. Goring, Elisabeth. 1991. Pottery Figurines: The Development of a coroplastic Art in Chalcolithic Cyprus. BASOR 282-3:153-161. Goring, Elisabeth. 1992. Secondary Treatment of Prehistoric Figurines: An Example from Chalcolithic Cyprus. in: Ioannides, G.C. ed. Studies in Honor ofVassos Karageorghis. Nicosia. The Society of Cypriote Studies: 37- 40. Grant, E. 1929. Beth Shemesh. Haverford. Biblical and Kindred Studies. Gray,1. 1964. I and II Kings. A Commentary. London. Green, A 1983. Neo Assyrian Apotropaic Figures. Iraq 45: 87-96. Green, A 1985. A Note on the "Scorpion-Man" and Pazuzu. Iraq 47: 75-82 Green, A 1988. The Iconography of Meslamtaea. RA 82: 173-175. Green, A 1994. Mischwesen. RLA VIII/3-4: 222-264. Green, AR 1982. The Fate of King Yehoiakim. AUSS 20/2: 103-109. Green, AR 1993. The Identity of King So of Egypt - An Alternative Interpretation. JNES 52/3: 99-108.

Green, S. W. and Perlman, S. M. eds. 1985. The Archaeology of Frontiers and Boundaries. Orlando. Academic Press. Grimal, N. C. 1985. Les "noyes" de Balat. Melanges offerts a Jean Vercoutter. Paris. Editions recherche sur les Civilisations: 111-121. Grohman, E.D. 1962. Moab. in: Buttrick, G.A et. al. eds. IDB Vol. ill: 418. Gubel, E. 1982. Notes sur un fragment de statuette Phenicienne de la region d'Amurm. in: Arcldologie au Levant. Recueil ~ la memoire de Roger Saidah. Lyon. Maison de l'Orient: 225-231. Gubel, E. 1986. Coroplastie. in: De Coessen, C. ed. Les Pheniciens et Ie Monde Mediterranean. Luxemburg. Banque Generale du Luxemburg: 112123. Gubel, E. 1991. From Amathus to Zarephtah and Back Again. in: Vandenabeele, Frieda and Laffineur, R eds. Cypriote Terracottas. Brussels - Liege. Vrije Universiteit: 131-138. Gudison, Lucy. 1989. Death, Woman and the Sun. Symbolism of Regeneration in Early Aegean Religion. University of London. Gunneweg, 1., Perlman, I. and Meshel, Z. 1985. The Origin of the Pottery of Kuntillet 'Ajrud. IE! 35: 270-283. Gurney, O. R 1960. A Tablet of Incantations against Slander. Iraq 22: 221-227. Guy, P.L.O. 1938. Megiddo Tombs. Chicago (OIP 33). Chicago University Press. Haag, E. ed. 1985. Gott, der Einzige. Zur entstehung des Monotheismus in Israel. Freiburg. Herder Verlag. Hackett,1. A 1987. Women's Studies and the Hebrew Bible. in: Friedman, R E. and Williamson, H. G. M. eds. The Future of Biblical Studies. The Hebrew Scriptures. Atlanta. Scholars Press: 141-164. Hadley, Judith M. 1987. The K.hirbet el- K6m Inscription. VT 37: 50-62. Hadley, J. M. 1993. Kuntilet 'Ajrud: Religious Center or Desert Way Station? PEQ 125: 115-124. Hadley, 1. M. 1994. Yahweh and "his Asherah:" Archaeological and Textual Evidence for the Cult of the Goddess. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A eds. Ein Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg. Universitiltsverlaag: 235-268. Hadzisteliou-Price, Theodora. 1978. Kourotrophos. Cults and Representation of the Greek Nursing Deities. Leiden. Brill. Hagg, R ed. 1981. Official and Popular Cults in Mycenaean Greece. in: Hagg, R andMarinatos, N. eds. Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age. Stockholm. Svenska Institut i Athens and P. Alstroms: 35-40. Haiman, M. 1994. The Iron Age II Sites of the Western Negev Highlands. IE! 44: 36-61. Hallo, W.W. 1983. Cult Statue and Divine Image. A Preliminary Study. in: Hallo, W. W., Moyer, 1.e. and Perdue, L.G. eds. Scripture in Context II. Winona Lake. Eisenbrauns: 1- 17.

122

Hallo, W.W. 1993. Games in the Biblical World. EI 24: 83*-88*. Halpern, B. 1987. "Brisker Pipes than Poetry": the Developement of Israelite Monotheism. in: Neusner, 1., Levin, B. A and Frerichs, E. S. 005. Judaic Perspectives on Ancient Israel. Atlanta. Fortress Press: 77-115. Halpern, B. 1991. The Lineages in seventh Century BCE:? Kinship and the Rise of Individual Moral Liability. in: Halpern, B. and Hobson, D. W. eds. Law and Ideology in Monarchic Israel. JSOT Suppl. Series 124. Sheffield:11-107. Hamilton, R W. 1935. Excavations at Tell Abu Hawam. QDAP 4:1-69. Handy, L. K. 1988. Hezekiah's unlikely Reform. ZAW 100: 111-116. Handy, L. K. 1993. Review of Smith, M.S. 1990. 'The Early History of God.' JNES 52/2: 157- 159. Haran, M. 1992. The 'Incense Altars' in the Archaeological Find and the warship of the Host of Heaven in the Judean Kingdom. Tarbitz LXI: 321-332 (Hebrew). Harding, L. 1937. Some Objects from Transjordan. PEQ: 253-255. Harding, L. 1951. Two Iron Age Tombs in Amman. ADAJ 1: 37, pI. xiv. Harris, K. 1984. Sex, Ideology and Religion. The Representation of Women in the Bible. New Jersey. Barnes and Noble. Hazor I-IV. Yadin, Y. a.o. 1959-1962. Hazor I-IV. The Hebrew University. Magness Press. Heaton, E. W. 1974. Everyday Life in Old Testament Times. London. B.T. Batsford. Hencke, O. 1959. Zur lage von Beth Peor. ZDPV 95: 155163. Hermary, Antoine. 1992. Review of Bdhm, S. 1990. "Die 'nackte Gottin'. Topoi 2: 183-187. Herr, L. G. 1993. What Ever Happened to the Ammonites? BARev 19 :26-35, 68. Herr, L.G. et. al. 1991. Madaba Plains Project: the 1989 Excavations at Tell el- 'Umeiri and Vicinity. ADAJ 35: 155-194. Herzog, Z. a.o. 1984. The Israelite Fortress at Arad. BASOR 254: 1-34. Herzog, Z. a.o. 1987. The Stratigraphy of Israelite Arad: A Rejoinder. BASOR 267: 77-80. Hestrin, Ruth. 1987. The Lachish Ewer and the Asherah. IE! 37: 212-223. Hestrin, Ruth. 1991. Understanding Asherah, BARev 17: 50-59. Higgins, R A 1969. Greek Terracotta Figures. London. The Trustees of the British Museum. Hodder, I. 1982. Symbolic and Structural Archaeology. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. Hodder, I. 1986. Reading the Past. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. Holladay,1. S. 1976. On Sherds and Strata. in: Cross, F. M. et.al. eds. Magnolia Dei: the Mighty Acts of God. Garden City. Doubleday: 253-293. Holladay, 1.S. 1987. Religion in Israel and Judah Under the Monarchy: An Explicitly Archaeological Approach. in: Miller, P. D, Hanson, P. D. and

McBride, S. D. eds. Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of F. M. Cross. Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 249-299. Holland, T. A 1975. A Typological and Archaeological Study ofHuman and Animal Representations in the Plastic Art of Palestine. PhD Thesis, Oxford University. Holland, T.A 1977. A Study of Palestinian Iron Age baked Clay Figurines with special Reference to Jerusalem: Cave 1. Levant 9: 121-155. Holloway, S. W. 1992. The Case for Asyyrian Religious Influence in Israel and Judah: Inference and Evidence. Ph.D Dissertation, Chicago University. Homes-Fredericq, D. 1987. Possible Phoenician Influences in Jordan in the Iron Age. in: Hadidi, A ed. SIHAJ III: 89-96. Honor, L. L. 1926. Sennacherib's Invasion of Palestine. New York. Columbia University Press. Hooke, S. H. 1938. The Origins of Early Semitic Ritual. London. The British Academy. Oxford University. Hom, S.H. 1966. Did Sennacherib campaign Once or Twice against Hezekiah? AUSS 4: 1-28. Hubner, U. 1989. Das Fragment einer Tonfigurine von Tell el-Milh. Uberlegungen zur Funkzion der sog. Pfeilerfigurinen in der Israelitischen Volksreligion. ZDPV 105: 47-55. Hubner, U. 1992. Der Tanz um die Ascheren. UF 24:121132. HUbner, U. 1993. Spiele und Spielzeug im Antiken Paliistina (OBO 121). Freiburg. Universitatsverlag Hutter, M. 1982. Uberlegungen zu Sennacheribs Palastinasfeldzug im Jahr 701 V. Chr. BN 19: 24-30. Hvidberg-Hansen, F. O. 1986. Uni-Ashtarte and Tanit-Iuno Caelestis: two Phoenician Goddesses of Fertility reconsidered from recent Archaeological Discoveries. in: Bonano, A ed. Archaeology and Fertility Cult in the Ancient Mediterranean. Amsterdam. University of Malta Press: 170- 195. Ibach, R 1978. in: Borras, RS. and Geraty, L.T. eds. Heshbon 1976. The Fifth Campaign at Tell ijesb£n. Berien Springs. Andrews University. Ibrahim, M. M. and Van der- Kooij, 1. 1983. Excavations at Tell Deir 'AlIa, Season 1982. ADAJ27:577-586. Ikeda, Y. 1993. Because their Shade is Good - Ashera in the Early Israelite Religion. in: Matsushima, E. ed. Official Cult and Popular Religion in the Ancient Near East. Heidelberg. Universifatsverlag: 56-80. Ikosi, Gloria. 1991 -2. Unpublished Terracottas from Ajia Irini. Medelhavsmuseet Bulletin 26-27. Stockholm: 33-84. Ioannides, G.C. 1992. Secondary Treatment of Prehistoric Figurines. An Example from Chalcolithic Cyprus. Studies in honor of V. Karageorghis. Nicosia: 3740. Isserlin, B. S. 1. 1976. On Some Figurines of "Lamp Goddess" from Transjordan. Rivista de la Universidado Compultense Hamenaje a Garcia Bellido I. Vol 25: 138-142.

123

Jacobs, P. 1992. Iron Age HalifRevisited. Lahavewsletter no. 51, September 1992 (ed. J. Seger. Without page numbers). Jacobs, P. 1993. News from the Field. Lahav. ASOR Newsletter 43/3, Fall 1993: 4-5. Jacobs, P. 1994. Tell Halif. IE! 44/1-2: 152-156. Jacobsen, Th. 1987. The Graven Image. in: Miller, P.D., Hanson, P. D. and McBride, S. D. eds. Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of F. M. Cross. Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 15-28. James, Francis W. 1966. The Iron Age at Beth Shean. A Study of Levels VI-IV. Philadelphia. The University Museum. Jeremias, J. 1993. Thron oder Wagen? Eine aussergewohnliche Terakotte aus der spaten Eizenzeit in Judah. in: Zwickel, W. ed. Biblische Welten. Festschrift fur M. Metzger zu seinem 65 Geburtstag. Freiburg und Gottingen. Universitatsverlag: 41-60. Jericho III. 1981. Kenyon, K M. and Holland, T. A. eds. Excavations at Jerciho Ill. The Architecture and Stratigraphy of the Tell. London. British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem. Jericho IV. 1982. Kenyon, K M. and Holland, T. A. eds. Excavations at Jerciho IV. The Pottery Type Series and other Finds. London. British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem. Jericke, D. 1992. Tell es- Seba' Stratum V. ZDPV 108: 122-148. Jerusalem I. 1985. Tushingham, A D. ed. Excavations in Jerusalem 1961-1967, Vol. 1. Toronto. ROM. Jerusalem II. 1990. Franken, H.l and Steiner M. L. eds. Jerusalem 11: Excavations in Jerusalem 19611967. Vol. II: The Iron Age Extramural Quarter on the South West Hill. Oxford. Oxford University Press. Jirku, A 1967. The World of the Bible. London (German Origin 1957). Johns, C. N. 1948. Discoveries in Palestine Since 1939. PEQ: 81-101 Jones, G. 1994. From Abiyam to Abijah. ZAW 106: 420433. KaIlai, Z. 1960. The Northern Boundaries of Judah. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Kallai, Z. 1986. Historical Geography of the Bible. The Tribal Territories of Israel. Jerusalem and Leiden. Magness and Brill. KamIah, Jens. 1993. Tell el- FublJar (Zarqu?) and die Pflanzenhaltende Gottin in Pallistina. Ergebnisse der Zeraqdn Surveys 1989. ZDPV 109/2: 101-127. Karageorghis, V. 1977. Two Cypriote Sanctuaries of the End ofthe Cypro-Archaic Period. Rome. Consiglio Nazionalle delle Richerche. Karageorghis, V. 1987. The Terracottas. in: Karageorghis, V. and Picard, O. eds. La nlcropole d'Amathonthe tombes 113-367. Nicosia. (Etudes Chypriotes IX). Karageorghis, V. 1993. The Coroplastic Art of Ancient Cyprus 11. Late Cypriote II - Cypro Archaic III. Nicosia. A. G. Levantis Foundation.

Karageorghis, V. 1994. The Coroplastic Art of Ancient Cyprus lILA Large Scale Sculpture. Nicosia. AG. Levantis Foundation. Keel, O. 1972. Die Welt der Altorientalischen Bildsymbolik und das Alte Testament: Am Biespiel der Psalmen. English ed. 1978, The Symbolism of the Biblical World. London. SPCK (trans. by T.l Hallett). Keel, O. 1977. Vogel als Boten. Freiburg. OBO 14. Keel, O. and Uehlinger, C. 1992. Giittinen, Giitter und Gottessymbole. Frieburg. Herder Verlag. Keisan I. 1980. Briend, l and Humbert, l P. eds. Tell Keisan (1971-1976). Une citl phenicienne en Galilee. Paris. Gabalda. Kelley, C.P. 1994. Who did the Iconoclasm in the Dura Synagogue? BASOR 295: 57-72. Kelm, G. L. and Mazar, A 1982. Three Seasons of Excavations at Tel Batash - Biblical Timna. BASOR 248: 1-36. Kelm, G. L. and Mazar, A 1991. Tel Batash (Timnah) Excavations: Third Preliminary Report, 19841989. AASOR Supplement 27: 47-67. Kelso, r. L. 1962. Pottery. IDB 111. Nashville: 846- 853. Kelso, lL. 1968. The Excavation of Bethel (1934-1960). AASOR 39. Kempinski, A 1993. Megiddo. A City State and Royal Centre in North Israel. Tel Aviv (Hebrew. English Version 1989, Bonn). Kempinski, A 1993b. Gezer. Review Article. IE! 43/2: 173180. Kempinski, A et. al. 1981. Excavations at Tel Masos: 1972, 1974, 1975. EI 15: 154-180 (Hebrew). Kenyon, KM. 1967. Jerusalem. Excavating 3000 Years of History. London. Thames and Hudson. Kenyon, KM. 1974. Digging up Jerusalem. New York and Washington. Praeger. Kenyon, K 1976. The Date of the Destruction of Iron Age Beer Sheba. PEQ 108: 63-64. Kerkhof, Vera. 1969. Catalogue of the Shechem Collection in the Rijksmuseum Van Oudheden in Leiden. Oudheidkundige Mededelingen 50: 28-109. Kertesz, Trude. 1976. The Breaking of Offerings in the Cult of Hathor. TA 3: 134-136. Kertesz, Trude. 1989. Terracottas and worked Bone Artifacts. in: Herzog, Z., Rapp, G. and Negbi, Ora. eds. Tel Michal 1. Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel. Tel Aviv University: 361-364. Kippenberg, H. G. 1985-6. Introduction. in: Kippenberg, H. G. et. al. eds. Approaches to Iconology. Visible Religion IV-V: vii-x, • Kitchen, K A. 1982-3. Further Thoughts on Egyptian Chronology in the Third Intermediate Period. RdE 34: 59-69. Kitchen, KA 1983. Egypt, the Levant and Assyria in 701 B.C. In: Gorg, M. ed. Fonte Atque Pontes. Festgabe fUr H. Brunner. Wiesbaden. Harrassowitz: 243-253. Kitchen, KA. 1986. Egypt and Israel during the First Millennium B.C. in: Emerton, led. Supplement to VT 40 (Congress Volume). Leiden. Brill: 107-123. Kitchen, K.A 1989. The Fall and Rise of Covenant, Law and Treaty. Tyndale Bulletin 40: 118-135. 124

Klein, RW. 1983. Abiyah's Campaign against the North (2 Chr. 13) - What were the Chronicler's Sources? ZAW95: 210-217. Kletter, R 1991. The Iscribed Weights of the Kingdom of Judah. TA 18: 121-163. Kletter, R In Press A 'Pots and People': Artifacts and Political Borders in Late Iron Age Judah. Levant. Kletter, R In Press B. The Figurines from Tel 'Ira. in: Beit -Arieh, I. ed. Tel 'Ira Excavation Report. Kloner, A 1992. Maresha. Qadmoniot 95-96: 70-85 (Hebrew). Koch, K 1988. Aschera als Himmelskonigin in Jerusalem. UF 20: 97-120. Kochavi, M. 1970. The First Season of excavations at Tel Malhata. Qadmoniot 9: 22-24 (Hebrew). Kochavi, M. 1973. Khirbet RabGd - Ancient Debir. in: Aharoni, Y. ed. Excavations and Studies. Essays in Honor of Professor Sh. Yeivin. Tel Aviv University: 49-76 (Hebrew). Kochavi, M. 1974. Khirbet RabGd = Debir. TA 1: 1-33. Kochavi, M. 1975. Tel Aphek. IE! 26: 5lf. Kochman, M. 1982. "Yehud Medinta" in the Light of the Seal Impressions YHWD-PHW. Cathedra 24:3-30 (Hebew). Koenig, Y. 1990. Les textes d'envoGtement de Mirgissa. RdE 41: 101-119. Konkel, AH. 1993. The Sources of the Story of Hezekiah in the Book ofIsaiah. VT 43/4: 462-482. Kutsch, E. 1974. Das Jahr des Katastrophe: 587 V. Chr. Biblica 55: 521-545. Kyle, M. G. 1977. Excavating Kiriath-Sepher's Ten Cities. NY. Arno Press. Kyle-McCarter, P. 1987. Aspects of the Religion of the Israelite Monarchy. in: Miller, P. D., Hanson, P. D. and McBride, S. D. eds. Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of F.M. Cross. Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 137-156. Laato, A 1992. Joshia and David Redivivus. Stockholm. Almquist and Wiksell. Lachish III. 1953. Tufnell, Olga. ed. Lachish 111. The Iron Age. Oxford. Oxford University Press. Lachish IV. 1958. Tufnell, Olga. ed. Lachish IV. The Bronze Age. Oxford. Oxford University Press. Lachish V. 1975. Aharoni, Y. ed.Investigations at Lachish. Gateway. Lagro, T. and Noordhuizen, D. 1987. Iron Age Pottery from Jerusalem. A Preliminary Classification of the Pottery found in Two Caves during the 1961 - 1967 Kenyon Excavtions. in: Van As, A ed. A Knapsack full of Pottery (Newsletter- Department of Pottery Technology 5): 1-24. Lambert, W.G. 1982. Booty from Egypt? JJS 33: 61-69. Lamon, RS. and Shipton, G.M. 1939. Megiddo 1. Seasons of 1925-34. Strata I-IV. Chicago. OIP XLIII. Lapp, P. W. 1964. The 1963 Excavation at Tell Ta'annek. BASOR 173: 4-44. Lapp, P. W. 1967. The 1966 Excavations at Tell Ta'anek. BASOR 185: 2-39.

Lapp, P. W. 1981. The third Campaign at Tel el Fill: The Excavations of 1964. AASOR 45. Leclant, J. 1960. Astarte cheval d'apres les representations Egyptiennes. Syria: 1-67. Lee, T. G. 1993. The Jasper Cylinder Seal of ~S1rrbanipal and Nabonidus' making of Sin's Statue. Revue d'Assyriologiques et d'Archeologie Orientale 87/2: 131-136. Lemaire, A. 1977. Les inscriptions de Khirbet el-Qdm et l'Asherah de YHWE. RB 84: 595-608. Lemaire, A 1994. Deesses et dieux de Syrie-Palestine d'apres les inscriptions (c. 1000-500 Av. N. E.). in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A eds. Ein Gott Allein? Freiburg (OBO 139). Universitatsverlag: 127-158. Lemche, N.P. 1992. The God of Hosea. in: Ulrich, E. a.o. eds. Priests, Prophets and Scribes. Essays in Honour of Joseph Blenkinsopp. Sheffield. JSOT Supplement Series 149:241-257. Liebowitz, H. 1984. The Late Bronze Age II and Iron Age Strata at Tel Yenoam. Qadmoniot 65: 12-15. Linder, E. 1986. The Figurines from Shavey Zion - A Rexamination. in: Yeda'aya, M. ed. The Western Galilee Antiquities. Haifa: 409-415 (Hebrew). Lipinski, E. 1972. The Egypto - Babylonian War of the Winter 601 - 600 B.C. Annali Istituto Orientale di Napoli 32 (n.s.xXII): 235-241. Lipiriski, E. 1984. Vestiges ph~nicien d'Andalousie. Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica 15: 81-132. Lipiriski, E. 1986. The Syro - Palestinian Iconography of Women and Goddess. Review Article. IE! 36: 8798. Liverani, M. 1990. Prestige and Interset. International Relations in the Near East ca. 1600-1100 BC. Padova. Sargon SRL. Ljung, I. 1989. Silence or Suppression. Attitudes towards Women in the Old Testament. Uppsala. Loretz, O. 1992. Die Teraphim als "Ahnen- GetterFigur(in)en" im Lichte der Texte aus Nuzi, Emar und Ugarit. UF24: 133-178. Loretz, O. 1994. Das "Ahnen- und Gotterstatuen- Verbot" im Dekalog und die Einzigkeit Jahwes... in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A. eds. Ein Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg. Universitatsverlag: 491- 27. Loud, G. 1948. Megiddo 11. Chicago (OIP 62). Chicago University Press. Lowery, R H. 1991. The Reforming Kings. Cult and Society in First Temple Judah. JSOT Supplement Series 120. Sheffield. Lundquist, J. M. 1983. What is a Temple? A Preliminary Typology. in: Huffmaon, H.B., Spina, F.A. and Green, R W. eds. The Quest for the Kingdom of God: Studies in Honor of G. E. Mendenhall. Winona Lake. Eisenbrauns: 205-219. Lux, O. 1972. Vorlaufiger Bericht uber die Ausgrabung unter den Erldserkirche im Muristan in der Altstadt von Jerusalem in den Jahren 1970 und 1971. ZDPV 88: 185-201.

a

125

Ma'ayah, F.S. 1960. Recent Archaeological Discoveries in Jordan. ADAJ 4-5: 114-116. Macalister, R A. S. 1903. Fourth Quarterly Report on the Excavation at Gezer. PEFQS: 194-228. Macalister, R A. S. 1905. Why did Rachel steal the Teraphim of Laban? PEFQS: 270-271. Macalister, R A. S. 1906. Bible Side Lights from the Mound ofGezer. London. Macalister, R A. S. 1915. Some Interesting Pottery Remains. PEFQS: 35-37. Macalister, R A. S. and Duncan, 1. G. 1926. Excavations on the Hill ofOphel, Jerusalem. PEFA IV. Mackenzie, D. 1912-13. Excavations at Ain Shems (Beth Shemesh). PEFA II. Maisler, B. see: Mazar, B. Malamat, A. 1975. The Historical Background of Josiah's Encounter with Necho at Megoddo. EI 12:83-90 (Hebrew). Malamat, A. 1982. The Last Days of Judah. in: The History ofthe People ofIsrael. The Age ofthe Monarchies. Political History. Am Oved (Hebrew). Malamat, A 1983. Israel in Biblical Times. Historical Essays. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Malamat, A 1988. The Kingdom of Judah between Egypt and Babylon: a Small State within a Great Power Confrontation. in: Classen, W. ed. Text and Context. Studies for F.C. Fensham (JSOT Supplement Series 48). Sheffield: 117-129. Malinowski, B. 1925. Magic, Science and Religion. Repr. in: Needham, 1. ed. Magic, Science and Religion and Other Essays. Macmillan: 17-92. Margalith, O. 1994. A New Type of Ashearh Figurine? VT 44/1: 109-115. Masos I. 1983. Fritz, V. and Kempinski, A eds. Ergebnisse uber die Ausgrabungen auf der IJirbet el-M~a~ (Tel MJo~). Wiesbaden. Harrassowitz. Matsushima, E. 1993. Divine Statues in Ancient Mesopotamia: their Fashioning and Clothing and their Interaction with the Society. in: Official Cult and Popular Religion in the Ancient Near East. Heidelberg. Universitatsverlag: 209-219. Mauss, M. 1950. A General Theory of Magic. English trans. 1972 by R Brain, London. Routhledge. May, 1. G. 1935. Material Remains of the Megiddo Cult. OIP 26. University of Chicago Press. Mayes, AH.D. 1983. The Story ofIsrael between Settlement and Exile. A Reductional Study of the Deuteronomistic History. London. SCM Press. Mazar, A 1980. Excavations at Tel Qasile I. Qedem 12. Mazar, A 1985. Between Judah and Philistia: Timnah (Tel Batash) in the Iron Age II. £1 18: 300-324 (Hebrew). Mazar, A 1985b. Pottery Plaques depicting Goddesses Standing in Temple Facades. Michmanim 2:5-18. Mazar, A 1990. Archaeology ofthe Land ofthe Bible. NY. Doubleday. Mazar, A, Amit, D. and Illan, Z. 1984. The "Border Road" between Michmash and Jericho and Excavations at Horvat Shilha. EI 17: 236-250 (Hebrew).

Mazar, A and Kelm, G. L. 1980. Canaanites, Philistines and Israelites at Timna (Tel Batash). Qadmoniot 51-52: 89-97. Mazar, A and Netzer, E. 1986. On the Israelite Fortress at Arad. BASOR 263: 87-90. Mazar (Maizler), B. 1951. The Excavations at Tel Qasile. Preliminary Report III. IE! 1/4: 194-218. Mazar, B. 1963. Ein Gedi. Archaeological Excavations 1961 -2. Jerusalem (Hebrew. English version 1966, 'Atiqot V. Mazar, B. 1964. Sennacherib's Judean Campaign. in: Liver, 1. ed. The Military History ofthe Land ofIsrael in Biblical Times. Ma'arachot: 286-295 (Hebrew). Mazar, Eilat 1979. Archaeological Evidence for the "Cows of the Bashan who are in the Mountains of Samaria". in: Festschrift R.R. Hecht. Jerusalem. Koren: 151-156. Mazar, Eilat 1985. Edomite Pottery from the End of the Iron Age. IE! 35: 253-269. Mazar, Eilat. 1990. A Horseman's Tomb at Akhziv. Qadmoniot 91-92: 104-109 (Hebrew). Mazar, Eilat 1994. Phoenician Ashlar Built Iron Age Tombs at Achzib. Qadmoniot 105-106: 29-33 (Hebrew). Mazar, Eilat and B. 1989. Excavations in the South of the Temple Mount. Qedem 29. McCarthy, D.1. 1973. Old Testament Covenant. A Survey of Current Opinions. Oxford. 2nd. ed. Blackwell. McCown, C. 1947. see: TN 1. Meerschaert, Camille. 1991. Les musiciens dans la coroplastie chypriote de l'~poque archaique. in: Vandenabeele, Frieda and Laffineur, Reds. Cypriote Terracottas. Brussels and Liege. Vrije Universiteit: 183-192. Mendenhall, G. E. 1985. The Worship of Baal and Asherah. in: Kort, Ann and Morschauser, S. eds. Biblical and Related Studies Presented to Sammuel Iwry. Winona Lake. Eisenbrauns: 147-58. Meshell, Z. 1994. Two Aspects in the Excavation of Kuntillet 'Ajrud. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M.A. eds. £in Gott a//ein? (OBO 139). Freiburg. Universitatsverlag: 99-104. Mettinger, T. N. D. 1994. Aniconism - A West Semitic Context for the Israelite Phenomenon? in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A eds. Ein Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg. Universitatsverlag: 159-178. Meyer, G. R. 1970. Altorientalische Denkmdler im Vorderasiatisches Museum zu Berlin. Leipzig. Seeman. Meyers, Carol. 1987. A Terracottta at the Harvard Semitic Museum and Disc-Holding Female Figures Reconsidered. IE! 37: 116-122. Meyers, Carol. 1988. Discovering Eve. Ancient Israelite Women in Context. Oxford University Press. Meyers, Carol. 1991. Of Drums and Damsels. Women's Performance in Ancient Israel. BA 54:16-27. Miller, P. D. 1986. The Absence of the Goddess in Israelite Religion. HAR 10: 239-248. Mitchell, T. C. 1988. The Bible in the British Museum: Interpreting the Evidence. British Museum Publications. London.

126

Mitchell, T. C. 1992. The Music of the Old Testament Reconsidered. PEQ 124:124-143. Mittmann, S. 1976. Amos 3,12-15 und das Bett der Samarier. ZDPV 92: 149-167. Mittmann, S. 1981. Die Grabinschrift des Siingers Uriahu. ZDPV 97: 139-152. Mittmann, S. 1990. Hizkia und die Philister. JNSL XVI: 91-106. Mommsen, H., Perlman, I. and Yellin, 1. 1984. The Provinience of the Imlk Jars. IE! 34: 89-113. Montgomery, 1.A 1951. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Kings (ICC). Edinburgh. Clark. Moorey, P.RS. 1994. The True and the False. in: Cholidis, Nadja. et. al. eds. Beschreiben und Deuten der Archdologie des Alten Orients. Festschrift fUr Ruth Mayer-Opificius. Miinster, Ugarit Verlag: 201212. Moorey, P.RS. and Fleming, S. 1984. Problems in the Study of the Anthropomorphic Metal Statuary from Syro- Palestine before 330 B.C. Levant XVI: 6790. Morris, B. 1987. Anthropological Studies of Religion. An Introductory Text. Cambridge University Press. Morris, Sarah P. 1992. Daidalos and the Origins of Greek Art. Princeton. Princeton University Press. Morton, W. H. 1989. The 1954, 55 and 65 Excavations at Dhiban in Jordan. in: Dearman, A ed. Studies in the Mesha Inscription and Moab. Atlanta. Scholars Press: 239-246. Moscati, S. 1964. L'Archeologia Italiana nel Vicino Oriente. ., Or. An. III: 1-14. Moscati, S. 1968. The World ofthe Phoenicians. London. Muhly, 1. D. 1980. Bronze Figurines and Near-Eastern Metalwork. IE! 30:148-161. Mulder, M. 1. 1994. Review of: Ackerman, Susan. 1992. Under every Green Tree ... Bi. Or. 51: 375-377. Musberg, R. 1992. The Figurines. in: Zertal, A. ed. The Manasseh Hill Country Survey. Shechem Syncline. Haifa (Hebrew):527-533.

Na'aman, N. 1989. The Kingdom of Judah under Joshia. Zion 54: 17-71 (Hebrew. English ver. 1991, TA 18/1:3-71). Na'aman, N. 1991. Chronology and History in the Late Assyrian Empire (631-619 B.C.). Z4 81/11: 243267. Na'aman, N. 1992. Nebuchadrezzar's Campaign in Year 603 BCE. BN 62: 41-44. Na'aman, N. 1992b. Israel, Edom and Egypt in the 10th Century B.C.E. TA 19: 71-93. Na'aman, N. 1993. Population Changes in Palestine following Assyrian Deportations. TA 20: 104124. Na'aman, N. 1994. Ahaz's and Hezekiah's Policy toward Assyria in the Days of Sargon II and Sennacherib's Early Years. Zion 59:5-27 (Hebrew). Na'aman, N. and Zadok, R 1988. Sargon II's Deportations to Israel and Philistia (716-708 B.C.). JCS 40: 3646. Nadelman, Y. 1989. Iron Age II Clay Fragments from the Excavations. Appendix A in: Mazar, E. and Mazar, B. eds. Excavations in the South of the Temple. Qedem 29:123-25. Nakhai, B.P. 1994. What's a Bamah? How Sacred Space functioned in Ancient Israel. BARev 20/3: 18-29, 77. Naveh, J. 1958. Khirbat al Muqana' - Ekron. lEI 8: 87-100. Naveh, 1. 1962. More Hebrew Inscriptions from Mesad Hashavyahu. lEI 12: 27-32. Naveh, J. 1979. Graffiti and Dedications. BASOR 235: 2730. Negbi, Ora. 1966. A Deposit of Terracottas and Statuettes from Tel Sippor. 'Atiqot VI [ES]. The Double Redaction of the Nelson, RD. 1981. Deuteronomistic History. Sheffield. (JSOT Supplement Series 18). Neufeld, E. 1971. Hygiene Conditions in Ancient Israel (Iron Age). BA 34/2:42-66 (rep. from: Journal of the History of Medicine and Applied Sciences XXV,1970). Nicholls, R V. 1952. Type, Group and Series: A Reconsideration of Some coroplastic Fundamentals. ABSA XLVII: 217-226. Nicholls, R. V. 1970. Greek Votive Statuettes and Religious Continuity, c. 1200-700 B.C. in: Harris, B. F. ed. Auckland Classical Essays Presented to E. M Blaiklock. Auckland University: 1-37. Nicholson, E. W. 1986. Covenant in a Century of Study since Wellhausen. OTS 24: 54-69. Niemeier, W.D. 1994. Greek Pottery: Evidence for Greek Mercenaries at Kabri. in: Niemeier, W. D. and Kempinski, A eds. Excavations at Kabri. Preliminary Report of 1992-1993. Seasons 7-8: *31-*38. Noblecourt, D. 1953. "Concubines du mort" et meres de famille au Moyen Empire. BIFAO 53: 7-47. North, R. 1974. Does Archaeology Prove Chronicles Sources? in: Bream, H.N. et. al. eds. Old Testament Studies in Honor of 1.M. Myers. Philadelphia. Temple University: 375-401.

Na'aman, N. 1974. Sennacherib's Letter to God on his Campaign to Judah. BASOR 214: 25-39. Na'aman, N. 1979. Sennacherib's Campaign to Judah and the Date of the Lmlk Stamps. VT 29: 61-86. Na'aman, N. 1986. Hezekiah's fortified Cities and the Lmlk Stamps. BASOR 261: 5-21. Na'aman, N. 1986b. Borders and Districts in Biblical Historiography. Simor. Jerusalem Biblical Studies 4. Na'aman, N. 1986c. Historical and Chronological Notes on the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the Eight Century B.C. VT 36: 71-92. Na'aman, N. 1987. The Negev in the Last Century of the Kingdom of Judah. Cathedra 42:3-15. Na'aman, N. 1987b. The Historical Background of the Battle between Amaziah and Jehoash. Shnaton X:' 211-217 (Hebrew). Na'aman, N. 1988. The Date of 2 Chronicles 11:5-10 - A Reply to Y. Garfinkel. BASOR 271: 74-77. 127

North, R. 1989. Yahweh's Asherah. in: Horgan, M. P. and Kobelski, P. J. 008. To Touch the Text. Biblical Studies in Honour of J.A Fitzmyer. N.Y. Crossboards. Noth, M. 1943. The Deuteronomistic History (trans. to English 1981). JSOT Supplement Series 15. Sheffield. Noth, M. 1960. The History ofIsrael. 2nd ed., London. A Black. Nylander, C. 1980. Earless in Nineveh: Who mutilated "Sargon's" Head? AJA 84: 329-333. Oates, Jane. 1965. Assyrian Chronology, 631-612 B.C. Iraq 27: 135-159. Ockinga, B. 1984. Die Giiuebenbtldlichkeit im Alten :4."gypten und im Alten Testament. Wiesbaden. Harrassowitz. O'Connor, M. 1987. The Poetic Inscription from Kh. elK8m. fIT 37: 224-230. Oded, B. 1977. Joshia and the Deuteronomic Reformation. in: Hayes, J. H. and Miller, J. M. eds. Israelite and Judean History. SCM Press: 460-468. Oded, B. 1994. Biblical World: Kings I. Davidson-Ati Press (Hebrew). Ohata, K. ed. 1967. Tel Zeror II. Preliminary Report of the Excavation, Second Season 1965. Tokyo. Ohata, K. 1974. The Tel Zeror Excavations. Japanese Society for Near Eastern Studies. Ofer, A 1990. Excavations at Biblical Hebron. Qadmoniot 87-88:88-93 (Hebrew). Ofer, A 1990b. The Judean Hill Country - from Nomadism to Monarchy. in: Na'arnan, N. and Finkelstein, I. eds. Archaeological and Historical Aspects of Early Israel. Jerusalem: 155-214 (Hebrew). Ofer, A 1993. The Highland ofJudah during the Biblical Period. Ph.D Thesis, Tel Aviv University (Hebrew). Ofer, Z. 1954. A Figurine from the Period of the Monarchy brough Evidence. Beer Sheba Diary 12.12.1954. Ofer, Z. 1957. Beer Sheba and its Antiquities. ''Ma Minegev" 1:10-11; 2:9 (Hebrew). Ofer, Z. 1965. Beer Sheba. in: Israel from Dan to Elat. Vol. 5. Tel Aviv. Ministry of Defence (Hebrew). Olyan, S. M. 1985. Problems in the History ofthe Cult and Priesthood in Ancient Israel. Ph.D. Thesis. Harvard University. Oppenheim, A L. 1949. The Golden Garments of the Gods. JJVES 8: 172-193. Oren E.D. 1973. The Northern Cemetery of Beth Shean. Leiden. Brill. Oren, E.D. 1982. Ziqlag - A Biblical City on the Edge of the Negev. BA 45: 155-166. Oren, E. D. 1986. Land of Gerar Expedition: Preliminary Report for the Seasons of 1982 and 1983. RASOR Supplement 24: 57-87. Oren, E.D. 1988. Ziqlag - A Biblical City in the Southern Shephelah. in: Stern, E. and Urman, D. eds. Man and Environment in the Southern Shephelah. Massada: 130-138.

128

Oren, E. D. 1991. Tell Haror - After Six Seasons. Qadmoniot 93-94: 2-19 (Hebrew). Oren, E.D. 1993. Ethnicity and Regional Archaeology: the Western Negev under Assyrian Rule. in: Biran, A and Aviram, J. eds. Biblical Archaeology Today II. Jerusalem. IES:I02-105. Oren, E.D. and Netzer, E. 1974. Tel Sera'. IE! 24: 264-266. Oren, Ronit. 1994. The Figurines from Area F. in: Kempinski, A and Niemeier, W. D. eds. Excavations at Kabri. Preliminary report of 19921993 Seasons (7-8). Tel Aviv: 30-35. Orlinski, H. M. 1940. The Kings - Ishaiah Recensions of the Hezekiah Story. JQR 30: 33-49. Orlinski, H. M. 1954. Understanding the Bible through History and Archaeology. NY. Ktav. Oman, Tallay. 1983. The Dayan Collection. Israel Museum Journal II: 5-18. Oman, Tallay. 1986. Man and his Land - Selection from M. Dayan Collection. Israel Museum Catalogue no. 270 (Hebrew). Oman, Tallay. 1993. The Transition from Figured to NonFigured Representation in First Millennium Mesopotamian Glyptic. in: Seals and Sealing in the Ancient World. Abstracts of Lectures, The Bible Lands Museum, Jerusalem. Orphanides, AG. 1990. The Meaning and Function of the Bronze Age Terracotta Anthropomorphic Figurines from Cyprus. RDAC: 45- 50. Osborne, R 1993. Ala Greque. Review ofW. Burkert, The Orientalizing Revolution. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 6/2: 231-237. Parpola, S. 1980. The Murderers of Sennacherib. in: Death in Mesopotamia (Mesopotamia 8): 171-182. Patai, R 1967. The Hebrew Goddess. New York. Ktav. Patai, R 1987. Folk Religion: Folk Judaism. The Encyclopedia of Religion V. New York. Macmilan: 378-382. Paul, S. M. and Dever, W. G. 1977. Biblical Archaeology. Jerusalem. Keter. Peltenburg, E. J. 1988. A Cypriot Model for Prehistoric Ritual. Antiquity 62 (235): 289-293. Petrie, W. M. F. 1928. Gerar. London. British School of Archaeology in Egypt. Petrie, W.M.F. 1931, 1933, 1934. Ancient Gaza I, III, IV. London. British School of Archaeology in Egypt. Petrie, W. M. F. 1937. Anthedon. London. British School of Archaeology in Egypt. Petrie, W. M. F. 1952. Ancient Gaza V. London. British School of Archaeology in Egypt. Pettey, R J. 1985. Asherah: Goddess of Israel? Ph.D. Thesis, Marquette University, Milwaukee. Phytian-Adams, M. A 1923. Report on the Stratification of Askalon. PEF: 60-84. Piccirillo, M. 1983. Studium Biblicum Franciscum Museum no. 6. Jerusalem. Pilali-Papasteriou, Angeliki. 1989. Social Evidence from the Interpretation of Middle Minoan Figurines. in: Hodder, I. ed. The Meaning ofThings. Material

Culture and Symbolic Expression. London. Unwin Hyman: 96-101. Pilz, E. 1924. Die weiblischen Gottheiten Kanaans. ZDPV 47: 131-168. Pinch, Geraldine. 1983. Childbirth and Female Figurines at Deir el-Medina and el-Amama, OR 52: 405-414. Pinch, Geraldine. 1993. Votive Offerings to Hathor. Oxford. Griffith Institute, Ashmolean Museum. Platt, E. 1989. Umeiri Objects. in: Geraty, T. et.al. eds. Madaba Plains Project. Andrews University Press: 355-366. Posener-Krieger, P. 1988. Les travaux de I'IFAO en 1984-5. BIFAO 85: 297-298. Potts, T.F. 1988. Preliminary Report on the Eighth and Ninth Seasons of Excavations by the University of Sydney at Pella (Tabaqat Fahl), 1986 and 1987. ADAJ 32:115-149. Prausnitz, M.W. 1982. Die Nekropolen von Akhzib und die Entwicklung der Keramik von 10 bis 7 Jh. V. Chr. in: Niemeyer, H.G. ed. Phiinizer im Westen. Mainz. VonZabern: 31-44. Price, Theodora H. 1978. Kourotrophos. Cults and Representations ofGreek Nursing Deities. Leiden. Brill. Pritchard, J. B. 1943. Palestinian Figurines in Relation to Certain Goddesses known through Literature. New Haven (AOS 24). Pritchard, J.B. 1954. The Ancient Near East in Puctures Relating to the Old Testament (ANEP). Princeton. Princeton University. Pritchard, J. B. 1958. The Ancient Near East. An Anthology of Texts and Pictures (ANET). Princeton. Princeton University. Pritchard, J.B. 1965. A Cosmopolitan Culture of the Late Bronze Age. Expedition 7/4: 26-33. Pritchard, J. B. 1968. An eighth Century Traveller. Expedition 10: 26-29. Pritchard, J.B. 1985. Tell el-Sa'idiyeh. Excavations on the Tell 1964-1966. Pennsylvania. The University Museum. Pritchard, J. B. 1988. Sarepta IV. The Objects from Area II, X. Beyrouth. Universite Libanaise. Puech, E. 1993. Le vocable d' 'Attart burri - c~ trr Ugarit et en Ph~nicie. UF 25: 327-330.

Rainey, AF. 1993. Manasseh, King of Judah, in the Whirlpool of the Seventh Century B.C.E. in: Rainey, A F. et. al. eds. Kinattiitu la dar8ti. R Kutscher Memorial. Tel-Aviv University. Institute of Archaeology, Occasional Publications I: 147164. Reed, W. L. 1949. The Asherah in the Old Testament. Fort Worth. Texas Christian University Press. Reese, D. S. and Sease, Catherine. 1993. Some Previously unpublished Tridacna Shells. JJVES 52/2: 109128. Reich, R 1989. A Third Season of Excavations at Mezad Hashavyahu. EI20: 228-232. Reich, R and Brandl, B. 1985. Gezer under Assyrian Rule. PEQ 117: 41-54. Reifenberg, A 1925. Ancient Hebrew Art (German Edition 1927. Paldstinensiche Kleinkunst. Berlin. RC. Schmidt). Renfrew, C. 1984. Approaches to Social Archaeology. Cambridge, Mass.: 258-282. Renfrew, C. 1985. The Archaeology ofCult. The Sanctuary at Phylakopy. London. The British School of Archaeology at Athens and Thames and Hudson. Renfrew, C. and Cherry, J.F. eds. 1986. Peer Polity Interaction and Socio - Political Change. Cambridge. University Press. Reviv, H. 1982. Judah from Hezekiah to Joshia. in: Malarnat, A ed. The Age of the Monarchies Political History. Jerusalem. Am Oved:131- 139 (Hebrew). Reyes, A T. 1994. Archaic Cyprus. Oxford. Clarendon Press. Riis, P. J. 1949. The Syrian Astarte Plaques and their Western Connections. Berytus IX: 69-90. Ritner, R K. 1992. Egyptian Magic: Questions of Legitimacy, Religious Orthodoxy and Social Deviance. in: Lloyd, A B. ed. Studies in Pharaonic Religion and Society in Honour ofJ. G. Griffiths. London. University of Chicago, Oriental Institute Studies 54: 189-200. Ritner, R K. 1993. The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice. Chicago (saoc 54). Rittig, D. 1977. Assyrisch - babylonische Kleinplastik magischer Bedeutung vom 13.-6. Jh. v. Chr. Munchen. Rofe, A 1983. The Prophetical Stories. The Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Magness (Hebrew). Romano, Irene B. 1988. Early Greek Cult Images and Cult Practices. in: Haag, R, Marinatos, N. and Nordquist, G.C. eds. Early Greek Cult Practice. Procceedings of the fifth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 1986. Stockholm: 127-133. Rose, D.G. and Toombs, L.E. 1976. Four Seasons of Excavation at Tell el-Hesi. AASOR 43: 109-150. Rose, M. 1971. Der Ausschltesslichkeitsanspruch Jahwes. Deuteronomische Schultheologie und die Volksfrommigkeit in der spaten Konigszeit. Stu1tart. Verlag W. Kohlhammer· (Beitrage zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament VI/6).

a

Raban, A and Stieglitz, RR 1993. Phoenicians on the Northern Coast of Israel in the Biblical Periods. Haifa. Hecht Museum, Catalogue no. 8. Rainey, AF. 1975. The Fate of Lachish during the Campaigns of Sennacherib and Nebuchadrezzar. in: Lachish V.. 47-60. Rainey, AF. 1982. Wine from the Royal Vineyards. BASOR 245: 57-62 (Hebrew version 1982, EI 16: 177181). Rainey, AF. 1982b. Taharqa. Enc. Miqr. VIII: 926-928 (Hebrew). Rainey, AF. 1983. The Biblical Shefelah of Judah. BASOR 251: 1-22. Rainey, AF. 1987. Arad in the Later Days of the Judean Monarchy. Cathedra 42: 16-25 (Hebrew).

129

Rowe, A 1940. The Four Canaanite Temples of Beth Shan (pPS II/I). University of Pennsylvania. Rowlands, M. et.al. eds.1987. Centre and Periphery in the Ancient World (New Directions in Archaeology). Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. RR I. Aharoni, Y. 1962. Excavations at Ramat Rahel (Seasons 1959 and 1960). Rome. Universita di Roma. Centro di Studi Semitici. RR II. Aharoni, Y. 1964. Excavations at Ramat Rahel (Seasons 1961 and 1962). Rome. Universita di Roma. Centrodi Studi Semitici. Rystedt, Eva 1992. Notes on the Rattle Scenes on Attic Geometric Pottery. Opuscula Atheniensia XIX: 125-133.

Seger, I. 1992b. Tel Halif. Notes and News. IE! 43/1: 6670. Seitz, C. R 1993. Account A and the Annals of Sennacherib: A Reassessment. JSOT 58: 47-57. Sellers,O.R 1933. The Citadel of Beth Zur. Philadelphia. Westminster Press. Sellers, O.R et.al. 1968. The 1957 Excavation at Beth Zur. AASOR 38. Sellin, E. 1904. Tell Ta'annek. Wien. C. Gerod's Sohn (English Translation by Hillers, D. 1962). Sellin, OR 1927. Die Ausgrabung von Sichem. ZDPV 50: 205-211. Sellin, E. and Watzinger, C. 1913. Jericho. Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen. Leipzig. I.C. Hinrichs. Shavit, A 1992. The Ayalon Valley and its Vicinity During the Bronze and Iron Ages. MA Thesis, Tel Aviv University (Hebrew). Shea, W.H. 1985. Sennacherib's Second Palestinian Campaign. JBL 104: 401-418. Shea, W.H. 1990. The Kh. el-K8m Inscription. VT 37/1: 50-63. Shiloh, Y. 1979. Iron Age Sanctuaries and Cult Places in Palestine. in: Cross, F.M. ed. Symposia. Celebrating the Seventy Fifth Anniversary of the Founding of the ASOR (1990-1975). Cambridge MA: 147-157 Shiloh, y. 1984. Excavations at the City of David I. 19781982. Interim Report of the First Five Seasons. Qedem 19 (Hebrew and English). Shiloh, Y. 1989. Judah and Jerusalem in the Eighth - Sixth Centuries B.C.E. AASOR 49: 97-105. Sinclair, A 1960. An Archaeological Study of Gibeah (Tell el-F~). AASOR 34-35. Singer, I. 1990. Toward an Identity of Dagon, the God of the Philistines. Cathedra 54:17-42 (Hebrew). Skorupki, John. 1976. Symbol and Theory. A Philosophical Study of Theories of Religion in Social Anthropology. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. Smelik, K.AD. 1992. Converting the Past. Studies in Ancient Israelite and Moabite Historiography. Leiden. Brill. Smith, M. S.1990. The Early History of God. Jahweh and the other Deities in Ancient Israel. San Francisco. Collins. Smith, M. S. 1994. Yahweh and other Deities in Ancient Israel: Observations on Old Problems and Recent Trends. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M.A eds. Ein Gott alleih? (OBO 139). Freiburg. Universitatsverlag: 197-234.Sophocleous, S. 1985. Atlas des rGpresentations ChyproArchaiques des Divinites, GOterborg. P. Astroms Forlag. S_rensen, L. W. 1991. Cypriote Terracottas from Lindos in the Light of New Discoveries. in: Vandenabeele, Frieda and Laffineur, Reds. Cypriote Terracottas. Procceedings of the First International Conference of Cypriote Studies 1989. Brussels and Liege. Vrije Universiteit: 225-240. Spalinger, A 1973. The Year 712 B.C. and its Implications for Egyptian History. JARCE 10: 95-101.

Sadek, A I. 1988. Popular Religion in Egypt during the New Kingdom. Hildesheim. Gerstenberg Verlag. Saller, S. 1965-6. Iron Age Tombs at Nebo, Jordan. LA 16: 165-298. Samaria I 1924. Reisner, G. A, Fisher, C. S. and Lyon, D. G. eds. Harvard Excavations at Samaria, 19081910. Vol I. Cambridge. Harvard University Press. Samaria III 1957. Crowfoot, J. W., Crowfoot, I. M. and Kenyon, K.M. The Objects from Samaria. London. PEF. Sass, B.1993. The Pre-Exilic Hebrew Seals: !eonism vs. Aniconism. in: Sass, B. and Uehlinger, C. eds. Studies in the Iconography of Northwest Semitic Inscribed Seals (OBO 125). Frieburg: 194-256. Schmidt- Colinet, Constanze 1981. Die Musikinstrumente in der Kunst der A/ten Orient. Bonn. Bouvier Verlag. Schmitt, G. 1990. Moreschet Gat und Libnah. Mit einem Anhang: zu Micha 1:10-16. JNSL XVI: 153-172. Schniedewind, W. M. 1991. The Source Citations of Manasseh: King Manasseh in History and Homily. VT 41/4: 450-461. Schroer, Sylvia 1983. Zur Deutung der Hand unter der Grabinschrift vom Ch. el-K8m. UF 15: 191-200. Schroer, Sylvia 1987. In Israel gab es Bi/der. Nachrichten von darstellen Kunst im Alten Testament. Freiburg. Universitatsverlag. Schumacher, G. 1908. Tell el Mutese//im. Leipzig. R Haupt. Schwartz, C. 1989. Dadalische Terrakotten aus Milet. Ist.Mit. 39: 507-516. Seeden, Helga 1979. A Small Clay Shrine in the AUB Museum. Berytus 27: 7-25. Segal, I.B. 1976. Popular Religion in Ancient Israel. JJS 27: 1-22. Seger, I. 1987. Tel Gezer: Phase II Excavations. 19721994. in: Perdue, L.G., Toombs, G.L. and Johnson, G.L. eds. Archaeological and Biblical Interpretation. Atlanta: 113-127. Seger, I. 1988. The Location of Biblical Ziklag according to Tel HalifExcavations. in: Stern, E. and Urman, D. eds. Man and Environment in the Southern Shephelah. Massada:139-150 (Hebrew). Seger, I. 1992. Cobb Institute of Archaeology. Lahav Newsletter no. 51, September 1992.

130

Spalinger, A 1974a. Esarhaddon and Egypt: an Analysis of the first Invasion of Egypt. Orientalia 63: 316-326. Spalinger, A 1974b. Assurbanipal and Egypt: a Source Study. JAOS 94: 322-325. Spalinger, A 1976. Psammetichus, King of Egypt: I. JARCE XIII: 133-147. Spalinger, A 1978. The Foreign Policy of Egypt Preceding the Assyrian Conquest. CdE 53: 22-47. Spycket, Agnes. 1992. Les figurines de Suse. Vol. I. Les figurines humaines IVe-IIe millenaires Av. I.C. Paris. Gabalda. Spieckermann, H. 1982. Juda unter Assur in den GOttingen. Vandenhoeck & Sargonidenzeit. Ruprecht. Stager, L.E. 1975. Ancient Agriculture in the Judean Desert. A Case Study ofthe Buqe'ah Valley. Ph.D. Dissertation, Harvard University. Stager, L.E. 1976. Farming in the Judean Desert during the Iron Age. BASOR 221: 145-158. Stager, L.E. 1985. The Archaeology of the Family in Ancient Israel. BASOR 260: 1-35. Starkey, I.L. 1937. Lachish as illustrating Bible History. PEQ: 171-179. Stern, E. 1970. Excavations at Gile'am (Kh. er-Rujm). 'Atiqot VI: 31-55 (Hebrew). Stern, E. 1973. The Material Culture of the Land of the Bible in the Persian Period, 538-332 Be. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Stern, E. 1989. What Happened to the Cult Figurines? Israelite Religion after the Exile. BARev 15/4: 2229,53-54. Stern, E. 1989b. Hazor, Dan and Megiddo in the Time of Ahab and the Assyrian Period. EI20: 233-248. Stern, E. 1992. Dor - The Ruler of the Seas. Jerusalem. Bialik Institute (Hebrew). Stern, E. 1994. The Jericho Region and the Eastern Border of the Judean Kingdom in its last Days. EI 24: 192197 (Hebrew). Stromberg, Agneta 1993. Male or Female? A Methodological Study of Grave Gifts as Sex Indicators in Iron Age Burials from Athens. Jonsered. P. Astrdms Forlag. Supinska- Lcjvset, nona 1976. The Ustinov Collection. The Palestinian Pottery. Oslo. Universitatsforlaget. Supinska- Lf'vset, Ilona 1978. The Ustinov Collection. The Terracottas. Oslo. Universitatsforlaget. Suzuki, Y. 1992. A New Aspect on Occupation Policy by King Josiah. AJBI 18: 31-61. Tadmor, H. 1963. Chronology. Ene. Miqr. IV: 245-310 (Hebrew). Tadmor, H. 1982. Treaty and Oath in the Ancient Near East: A Historian's Approach. Shnaton V-VI: 149173. Tadmor, H. 1985. Sennacherib's Campaign to Judah: Historical and Historiographical Considerations. Zion 50: 65-80 (Hebrew). Tadmor, Miriam 1982. Female Cult Figurines in Late Canaan and Early Israel. Archaeological Evidence. in: Ishida, T. ed. Studies in the Period of David

and Solomon and Other Essays (First International Symposium for Biblical Studies 1979). Tokyo. Eisenbrauns: 139-173. Talalay, Lauren E. 1987. Rethinking the Function of Clay Figurine Legs from Neolithic Greece: An Argument by Analogy. AJA 91: 161-169. Tatton Brown, Veronica and Crouwel, I. 1992. A Terracotta Horse and Rider in Brussels. in: Ioannides, G.C. et.al. eds. Studies in Honour of Vassos Karageorghis. Nicosia. Society for Cypriot Studies: 291-296. Tatum, L. 1991. King Mannasseh and the Royal Fortress at Horvat 'Uza. BA: 136-145. Taylor, J.G. 1993. Yahweh and the Sun. Biblical and Archaeological Evidence for Sun - Worship in Ancient Israel. Sheffield. JSOT Supplement Series 111 Taylor, I.G. 1994. Was Yahweh Worshiped as the Sun? BARev 20/3: 53-61, 90-91. TBM II. Albright, W.F. ed. 1937. The Excavation of Tel BeitMirsim. Vol. II. TheBronzeAge.AASOR 17. TBM III. Albright, W.F. ed. 1943. The Excavation of Tel Beit Mirsim. Vol. III. The Iron Age. AASOR 21-22. Teixidor, 1. 1975. A Note on the Phoenician Inscriptions from Spain. HTR 68: 197-198. Teubal, Savina 1984. Sarah the Priestess. The First Matriarch of Genesis. Chicago. Swallow Press. Teubal, Savina. 1990. Hagar the Egyptian. The Lost Tradition of the Matriarchs. San Francisco. Harper. Thiele, E.R. 1965. The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings. A Reconsideration of the Chronology of the Michigan. Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Eardmans. 2nd. ed. Tigay, I. H. 1986. You shall have no other Gods. Israelite Religion in the Light of Hebrew Inscriptions. Harvard Semitic Series 31. Atlanta. Scholars Press. Tigay, I.H. 1987. Israelite Religion: The Onomastic and Epigraphic Evidence. in: Miller, P. D., Hanson, P. D. and McBride, S. D. eds. Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of F.M. Cross. Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 157-194. TN I. 1947. McCown, C. Tell en Nasbeh I: Archaeological and Historical Results. Berkeley and New Haven. Pacific Schools of Religion and the AASOR. TN II 1947. Wampler, I.C. Tell en Nasbeh II: The Pottery. Berkeley and New Haven. Pacific Schools of Religion and the AASOR Tooley, Angela M. I. 1991. Child's Toys or Ritual Objects? GM 123: 101-111. Toombs, L.E. 1983. Tell el Hesi, 1981. PEQ: 25-46. Toombs, L.E. 1991. The Joint Expedition to Tel Hesi and the Results of the Earlier Excavations. PEQ: 101113. Tosi, M. 1988. Popular Cults at Deir el- Medina. in: Egyptian Civilization. Religious Beliefs. Egyptian Museum of Turin: 162-177. Tubb, I. N. 1981. An Iron Age II Tomb Group from the Bethlehem Region. London. British Museum Occasional Papers no. 14.

131

Tubb,1.N. 1988. Tell es- Sa'idiyeh. Preliminary Report on the First Three Seasons of renewed Excavations. Levant 20: 23-88. Tufnell, Olga 1953 see: Lachish III. Tushingham, A.D. 1972. The Excavations at Dibon (Dluo~) in Moab. AASOR XL. Tushingham, AD. 1979. The Western Hill of Jerusalem under the Monarchy. ZDPV 95: 39-55. Tushingham, AD. 1988. The 1961-1967 Excavations in the Armenian Garden, Jerusalem: A Response. PEQ: 142- 145. Tushingham, AD. 1992. New Evidence Bearing on the Two-WingedLMLK Stamp. BASOR 287: 61-65. Ucko,

P.

J.

1968. Anthropomorphic Figurines of Predynastic Egypt and Neolithic Crete, with Compatible Material from the Predynastic Near East and Mainland Greece. London. Szmilda. Uehlinger, C. 1993. Northwest Inscribed Semitic Seals, Iconography and Syro - Palestinian Religions of Iron Age Il. in: Sass, B. and Uehlinger, C. eds. Studies in the Iconography of Northwest Semitic Inscribed Seals. Freiburg (OBO 125): 257-288. Uhelenbrock, 1.P. 1993. Review of: 'Cypriote Terracottas'. AJA 97/1: 175-176. Ussishkin, D. 1977. The Destruction of Lachish by Sennacherib and the Date of the Royal Judean Storage Jars. Tel Aviv 4: 28-57. Ussishkin, D. 1979. The Camp of the Assyrians in Jerusalem. IEJ29: 137-142. Ussishkin, D. 1982. The Conquest of Lachish by Sennacherib. The Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. Ussishkin, D. 1983. Excavations at Tel Lachish 1978-1983: Second Preliminary Report. TA 10/2. Ussishkin, D. 1988. The Date of the Judean Shrine at Arad. IE! 38: 142-157. Ussishkin, D. 1989. The Assyrian Attack on Lachish: the Evidence from the Southwest Comer of the City. EI 20: 97-114 (Hebrew. English ver. TA 17, 1990: 5386). Ussishkin, D. 1993. Fresh Examination of Old Excavations: Sanctuaries in the First Temple Period. in: Biran, A. and Aviram ,1. eds. Biblical Archaeology Today II. Jerusalem. Keter: 67-85. Ussishkin, D. 1994. The Water System of Jerusalem during Hezekiah's Reign. Cathedra 70: 3-28 (Hebrew). Vafoloulou- Richardson, C.E. 1981. Greek Terracottas. Oxford. The Ashmolean Museum. Van der Kooij, G. and Ibrahim, M.M. 1989. Picking up the Leiden. University of Leiden Threads. Archaeological Centre. Van der Toorn, K. 1986. Review of: Winter, U. 1983. "Frau und Gottin. Bi.Or. 43: 439-499. Van Loon, M. 1990. The Naked Rain Goddess. in: Matthiae, P., Van-Loon, M. and Weiss, H. eds. Resurrecting the Past. A Joint Tribute to Adnan Bounni. Leiden. Nederlands Historisch Archaologisch Institut te Istanbul: 363-378. 132

Van Straten, F. 1992. Review of: Alroth, Brita 1989. "Greek Gods and Figurines". Opuscula Atheniensa XIX: 194-195. Van-Winkle, D.W. 1989. I Kings 13: True and False Prophecy. VT39:31-43. Vance, D.B. 1994. Literary Sources for the History of Palestine and Syria: the Phoenician inscriptions, Part Two. BA 57/2: 110-120. Vandenabeele, Frieda 1986. Phoenician Influence on the Cypro Archaic Terracotta Production and Cypriote Influence Abroad. in: Karageorghis, V. ed. Acts of the International Archaeological Symposium "Cyprus between the Orient and the Occident" 1985. Nicosia: 351-360. Vandenabeele, Frieda 1989. Has Phoenician influence modified Cypriot Terracotta Production? in: Peltenburg, E. ed. Early Society in Cyprus. Edinbrgh. Edinburgh University: 266-271. Vargon, Sh. 1994. The Book of Micha. Ramat Gan. Bar IIlan University Press (Hebrew). Vernieylen, 1. 1990. Review of: Hahn, 1. 1987. Das" Goldene Kalb". Die Jahwe Verehrung bei Stierbildern in das Geschichte Israels. Bonn. D. Lang. Bi. Or. 47: 752-754. Versnel, H. S. 1991. Some Reflections on the Relationship Magic - Religion. Numen 38/2: 177-197. Vincent, P. H. 1907. Canaan d'apres l'exploration r~cente. Paris. 1. Gabalda. Vincent, P.H. 1911. Underground Jerusalem. Discoveries on the Hill ofOphel (1909-1911). London. H. Cox. Voigt, Mary M. 1983. Hajji Firuz Tepe, Iran: The Neolithic Settlement (Hasanlu Excavation Reports VoU). Pennsylvania. The University Museum. Von Beckerath, 1. 1992. ~gypten und der Feldzug Sanheribs im Jahre 701 v.Chr. UF 24: 3-8. Vorlander, H. 1986. Aspects of Popular Religion in the Old Testament. in: Greinacher, N. and Mette, N. eds. Popular Religion. Concilium T & T Clark. Edinburgh:63-70. Vrijhof, P. H. and Waardenburg, 1. eds. 1979. Official and Popular Religion. Analysis of a Theme for religious Studies. The Hague. Mouton Publications. Waldbaum, J.C. 1994. Early Greek Contacts with the Southern Levant, Ca. 1000 - 600 BC: The Eastern Perspective. BASOR 293: 53-66. Walls, N.H. 1992. The Goddess Anat in Ugaritic Myth. SBL Dissertation Series 135. Wampler, J. C. 1941. Three Cistern" Groups from Tell enNasbeh. BASOR 82: 25-43. Ward, W.A 1994. Archaeology in Lebanon in the Twentieth Century. BA 57/2: 66-85. Watzinger, C. 1933. Denkmiiller Paldstinas. Eine Einfiihrung in die Archaologie des Heiligen Landes. Vol.I. Leipzig. 1. C. Heinrich. Weber, M. 1922. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. English trans. 1965 by E. Fischoff. The Sociology of religion. London. Meuthen.

Weinberg, S.S. 1971. Eretz-Israel after the Destruction of the First Temple - An Archaeological Report. Proceedings ofthe Israel Academy ofSciences and Humanities IV. Jerusalem:202-216 (Hebrew). Weinberg, S.S. 1978. A Moabite Shrine Group. MUSE 12: 30-49. Weinfeld, M. 1972. Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic School. Oxford. Clarendon Press. Weinfeld, M. 1992. From Joshua to Joshia. Turning Points in the History of Israel from the Conquest of the Land until the Fall of Jerusalem. Jerusalem. Magness (Hebrew). Weippert, Helga 1988. Paldstina in vorhellenistischer Zeit. MUnchen. C. H. Beck. Weippert, Helga 1994. Zu Einer neuen ikonographischen Religionsgeschichte Kanaans und Israel. Biblische Zeitschrift 38/1: 1-28. Weippet, M. 1987. The Relations of the States east of the Jordan with the Mesopotamian Powers during the first Millennium B.C. in: Hadidi, ed. SIHAJ III. Amman: 97-106. Weippert, M. and Helga 1976. Jericho in der Eisenzeit. ZDPV 92: 105-148. Welch, A.C. 1925. The Death of Joshiah. ZAW 43: 255260. Wenning, R. 1989. Mesad IJashavyahu. Ein Stiitzpunkt des Jojakim? in: Hossfeld, F.L. ed. Vom Sinai zum Horeb. Wiirzburg. Echter Verlag: 169-196. Wenning, R. 1991. Wer war der Paredos der Aschera? Notizen zu Terrakottastatuetten in eizenzeitlischen Graben. BN 59: 89-97. Westermann, C. 1969. Isaiah. OTL. London. SCM Press. Whitt, W. D. 1992. The Divorce of Yahweh and Asherah in Hos. 2,4-7. 12ff. Scandinavian Journal of Old Testament 6/1: 31-67. Wiggermann, F.A.M. 1992. Mesopotamian Protective Spirits. The Ritual Texts. Groningen. Styx. Wiggins, S.A. 1991. The Myth of Asherah - Lion Lady and Serpent Goddess. UF23: 383-394. Wiggins, S.A. 1993. A Reassessment of 'Asherah'. A Study According to the textual Sources of the First two Millennia B.C.E. AOAT 235. Neukircher-Vluyn. Wightman, G.D. 1985. Studies in the Stratigraphy and Chronology of the Iron Age 2-3 in Palestine. Doctoral Dissertation, Sydney University. Wilford, 1.N. 1993. Long- Lost Field Notes Help Decode Treasure. The New York Times, September 21, 1993: c1. Williamson, H.G.M. 1982. 1 and 2 Chronicles. The New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids. Eerdmans. Williamson, H.G.M. 1982b. The Death of Joshia and the continuing Developement of the Deuteronomistic History. VT 32: 242-248. Williamson, H.G.M. 1987. Reliving the Death of Joshia: a Response to C.T. Begg. VT 37: 9-15. Winter, U. 1983. Frau und Gdttin. Exegetische und ikonographische Studien zum weiblichen GOttesbild im Alten Israel und in dessen Umwelt. Freiburg und Gottingen. Universitatsverlag (OBO 50).

Wiseman, D.1. 1956. Chronicles ofChaldaean Kings (626556 B. C.). London. British Museum Publications. Wiseman, DJ. 1985. Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon. Oxford (Schweich Lectures 1983). University Press. Wood, B.G. 1990. The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine. Sheffield (JSOT Suppl. Series 103). Worschech, U. 1987. War Nebukadnezzar im Jahre 605 V.Chr. vor Jerusalem? BN 36: 57-63. Worschech, U. 1989. Preliminary Report on the Second Campaign at the Ancient Site of EI-BaIiic in 1987. ADAJ 33: 111-121. Worschech, U. 1990. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen in El BaIu" 1987. ZDPV 106:86-111. Worschech, U. 1990b. Die Beziehungen Moabs zu Israel und Agypten in der Eisenzeit. Wiesbaden. Harrassowitz. Worschech, U. 1992. Pferd, Gottin und Stier. Funde zur moabitischen Religion aus el-Balii' (Jordanien). UF24: 383-391. Wright, G. E. 1943. How did Early Israel differ from her Neighbours. BA 6/1: 1-20. Wright, G. E. 1957. Biblical Archaeology. Philadelphia and London (2nd ed. 1962). Westminster Press. Yadin, y. 1957. Excavations at Hazor, 1957. Preliminary Report. IE! 8/1:1-14. Yadin, Y. 1985. The Lachish Letters - Originals or Copies and Drafts? EII8: 141-146. Yadin, Y. and Geva, Sh. 1983. The Cities of the Negev during Joshia's Days. Appendix 2 in: Hoffman, Y. ed. Jeremiah. Encyclopedia of the Biblical World. Jerusaelm:247-255. Yassine, Kh. 1988. Tell el Mazar, Field I. Preliminary Report of Area G, H, L and M: the Summit. in: Archaeology of Jordan: Essays and Reports. Amman. University ofJordan: 75-113. Yeivin, S. 1961. First Preliminary Report on the Excavtions at Tel "Gat". Jerusalem. Department. of Antiquities. Yisrael, ,M. 1959. 'Astarte' Plaques and Figurines in the Israelite Period. Hedim 24 (61): 127-133. Repr. 1987, The Shephelah Museum, Kefar Menahem (Hebrew). Yon, Marguerite and Caubet, Annie 1988. Ateliers de figurines Kition. in: Tatton-Brown, Veronica ed. Cyprus and the Mediterranean World in the Iron Age. London. The Trustees of the British Museum: 28-43. Young, I. 1992. The Language of the Judicial Plea from Mesad Hashavyahu. PEQ: 56-58.

a

Zadok, R. 1976. Geographical and Onomastical Notes. JANES 8: 113-126. Zawadzki, S. 1988. The Fall of Assyria and MedianBabylonian Relations in Light ofthe Nabopolassar Chronicle. Poznan. Adam Mickiewicz University Press. Zawadzki, S. 1995. A Contribution to the Chronology of the Last days of the Assyrian Empire. Z4 W 85/1: 67-73. 133

Zayadine, F. 1973. Recent Excavations on the Citadel of Amman. ADAJ 18: 17-75. Zayadine, F. 1987. Die Zeit der Kdnigsreiche Edom, Moab und Ammon. in: Mittmann, S. a.o. eds. Der Kiinigsweg. 9000 Jahre Kunst und Kultur in Jordanien. Koln. Von Zabern. Zayadine, F. et.al. 1988. The 1988 Excavations on the Citadel of Amman Lower Terrace, Area A. ADAJ 33: 357-363. Zeeb, F. 1993. Review of: Wiggins, S.A. 1993. A Reassessment of Asherah. UF 25: 512-515. Zemer, A. 1991. Women's Hairstyles in Ancient Art. Haifa. Museum of Ancient Art (Hebrew and English). Zevit, Z. 1984. The Khirbet el K6m Inscription mentioning a Goddess. BASOR 255: 39-48. Zimansky, P. 1993. Scholars, Sailors and Peddlers of

Influence at Civilization's Edge. A Review. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 6/2: 239-245. Zimhoni, Orna 1985. The Iron Age Pottery ofTel'Eton and its Relation to the Lachish, Tell Beit Mirsim and Arad Assemblages. TA 12/1: 63-90. Zimhoni, Orna 1990. Two Ceramic Assemblages from Lachish Levels III and II. TA 17/1:3-52. Zmirin, Sh. 1952. Joshia and his Period. (2nd. ed. 1977) Jerusalem. Bialik Institute (Hebrew). Zori, N. 1958. Cult Figurines in the Eastern plain of Esdraelon and Beth Shean. El5:52-54 (Hebrew). Zorn, J.R. 1993. Tell en-Nasbeh: A Re-evaluation of the Architecture and Stratigraphy of the early Bronze Age, Iron Age and later Periods. Ph.D Thesis. University of California, Berkeley.

Appendixes and Keys "Beware, Sir, of acquiring the habit of reading catalogues; you will never get any good from it, and it will consume much of your time"

(M. Routh, quoted in: J. Morris. 1978. The Oxford Book of Oxford. Oxford: 236).

Introduction to Appendixes 1-2 and drawings, if these exist at all, are often of low quality. It is frustrating to try to identify threedimensional objects by such media, and cases of doubt regarding exact classification remain. Spelling mistakes and misleading data occur. Thus, it happened that one figurines was published twice, without crossreferences between the different publications; or that figurines were "forgotten" after being published in obscure preliminary publications (e.g., JPF nos. 106108, 281-286). I have therefore consulted any publlcanon, even the very preliminary ones, and checked personally any figurine that could be seen in institutions and museums in Israel. Often, JPF assemblages found in early excavations were only partially published, and the rest was discarded or lost. Usually we cannot define the typoloqy, context, date, etc. of these lost figurines. The report of Tel enNasbeh is an exception, in giving more accurate details than usual (TN I: app. A). Dr. G. Zorn kindly helped me with a list of figurines from this site, prepared according to the excavators' records in Berkeley. Even though, there can be no substitute to personal eyesight.

I have arranged in appendix 1 data about 578 figUrines, defined as Judean pillar-figurines (JPF for short). Many of these figurines were not yet published. The data was processed with Paradox Windows, and a basic table format is printed as app. 1, arranged by an alphabetical order of sites. The database was queried and analyzed, and the results are discussed in the textual part of this book. I have not printed the results of each query for lack of space. The data in app. 1 is coded, and each figurines is presented in one row which continues along three printed pages (the second and third pages are numbered with the letters a, b, respectively). In order to enable an easy reference, the first column in each page is the catalogue number of the figurines. The codes used in appendix 1, as well as other details of structure, are explained in the keys preceding it (below). Appendix 2 is a complete catalogue of all 854 JPF, arranged by catalogue numbers. This is an 'identity number' for each figurine, often used in the text for references to specific figurines. Appendix 2 includes a large addenda of figurines that were brought to my attention too late to be included in appendix 1 (nos. 579-854). More JPF are currently known to me, mostly from recent excavations. There are also some JPF that I was not allowed to include in this work.

In my typology I used codes, which are necessary for the computing process and for easy references. Other scholars would have probably invented somewhat different codes, or structured their data-base differently. I tried to be coherent and to present the simplest method of codes, while keeping a possibility to add new figurines in the future without breaking the whole structure of the data-base. Still, every typology is an imosition; we impose a modern typology on ancient artifacts which were created individually, and were not products of a mechanized industry (despite being schematic or conventionalized).

The data in appendix 2 is textual. There is a detailed discussion of each figurine, i.e., a general description and definition (with details about exceptional features), followed by the stratigraphy, context and date. Then there are miscellaneous notes and a full bibliography. The discussion of published JPF is often shorter than that of unpublished, new figurines, since I saw no need to repeat all the technical details which are found in the earlier publications. Regarding dating, the site levels are usually given, since their stratigrapy and date were already explained in chapter 1.3 (above). A few figurines of doubtful definition appear in notes, or numbered by small letters. These dubtful cases are not included in the catalogue numbers. Appendix 2 is arranged by arbitrary catalogue numbers, but with the help of Appendix 1 and the different keys, a specific figurine can be easily located according to type, site, and the main former typologies (of Holland and Engle). The preparation of Appendixes 1-2 was a demanding task, which necessitated to cope with old publications. Thise often left much to be desired; the photographs

134

The first process of work was to make a detailed card (textual and graphic) for each JPF and other Iron Age anthropomorphic figurines. Holland's thesis (1975) served as a natural starting point for that purpose. Then, data was checked and compared with the publications. The dating and the contexts were studied carefully, without taking for granted the opinions expresses in each publication. This had to be done for hundreds of items, each concerning many different details. In a careful estimation, appendix 1 alone includes some 20,000 data entries. With such quantity of words and numbers, some mistakes are bound to happen. I hope that these are few, and negligible in regard to the general picture presented in this work.

135

Key 1: The Fields of Appendix 1 The fields are presented by their order of appearance in the appendix. For an explanation of the codes used within each fields see key 2 below. The field name is given in bold italics.

CAT (catalogue number). An ascending number (1578), defining each JPF. The order is arbitrary, since the data on the JPF was registered and processed during different months within the years 1992-1994. The catalogue number is repeated also in the first (left) column of pages a and b of the appendix. T1, T2, T3 (type). These three fields denote, as a combination, the main type of each figurines, sorted primarily by head features. T1 defines the type of head or body (A, B or C), T2 and T3 define further subfeatures such as shape of the hair or applied parts.

Locks (side-locks). A definition of the side-locks of the moulded heads (type B). The hand-made heads (type A) are much more schematic, and this field was usually not used for them. The following fields define secondary characteristics of the figurines. SL - white-wash or slip. CL - details of colors of painted decorations. B - evidence for burning or blackening by fire. Break - main breakage patterns. Hh - height of heads in millimeters. For hand-made heads, it is measured from the lower point of the nose to the highest point of the head; for moulded heads, it is the face only, measured from the lowest point of the chin until the beginning of the hairdress. Hal - general height of figurine or fragment, in millimeters. The heights in fields Hh and Hal were often calculated from photographs and drawings, for lack of direct access to the figurines. These calculations may not be fully accurate.

Site The names of the sites. Names are given in the fullest possible form, usually following the common (not scientific) English transcription. The word Tel was used consistently, also for Arabic names (instead of Tell), in order to help searching the sites alphabetically. For Jerusalem, where the number of figurines is very large, the first letters of the excavators' names have been added to this field. All the following fields define the location of a figurine in the site, and are fairly straightforward. Fld (field) area of excavations in a site. Squar (square) - square in a dig. Lev and then Locus - the locus and the level in the excavation. Usually, I followed the original form of registration in these field. Sometimes, I had to shorten Roman numerals to Arabic ones, or give only part of the definition of areas and squares, when these form long alphanumeric combinations.

Date appears on "b" pages of app. 1 and defines dates in hundreds of years BC (cf. also chap. I of this work).

Context1 and Cont2 are two field used to define the context. The first field includes a short verbal description of the context, without codes (but with a shortening long names by quoting only the first letters). The second field (cont2) is a more general definition of context (public, private, etc.), using codes. Question marks after the codes indicate cases of doubt. When a general definition is not possible, the main data of field context1 is repeated in field cont2.

Key 2: Codes to Appendix 1

Field T1 - Main Type A

G combination I other forms (Holland A.VII.b-c)

hand-made head

A+ hand-made head with part of body Field T2 for C Type Bodies

Ac whole hand-made figurine

1 whole body (Holland AXa-b)

Holland is a field combined of four sub-fields, referring together to the JPF in Holland's unpublished doctoral dissertation (1975). It enables us to locate specific figurines in comparison with his typological scheme.

B

Engle is a field which refers to the dissertation of Engle (1979). In the last two fields the Roman numerals in the origin are substituted for the shorter Arabic form (e.g., 4.7 instead of IV.7).

C

solid "pillar" body

E

hollow, wheel-made "pillar" body

moulded head

B+ moulded head with part of body

2 upper part (chest)

Be whole moulded figurine

3 base or lower part

Be moulded head and hollow, wheel-made body

? unclear part of body

Field T3 for C Type Bodies Field T2 for Hand-made Heads

Field Reg., Museum Reg. show the registration numbers in the field or in a museum. In some cases, other registration numbers are given, notably that of the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA). Usually, the institutions are specified by letters preceding the numbers (for details see key 3 below).

F hexagonal curls (Holland AVILa)

A1 simple rounded head (Holland A.La)

Classification by the position of the hands: A

beneath them (Holland's types AX.a-b)

A2 with band or "turban" (Holland ALb) A3 with band and side-locks (Holland ALe)

hands supporting the breasts, or placed a little

B the same position as A above, but the hands do not meet each other

A4 with applied conical hat (Holland ALd)

Lfind (find in locus) is a field used to define different finds from loci, where JPF have been also found. Fgrp (groups of finds) specifies groups of figurines found in the same loci together with JPF. For lack of space, the registration in both these fields had to be very short and was quite preliminary.

A5 with applied hat and side-locks (Holland ALe)

C hands uplifted (one or both)

A6 other (Holland A.Lf)

D hands holding a disk, or another object

Place The place of a figurine currently (1995), Le., the name of the institution where it is displayed or stored. The data is coded, as is detailed in key 3 below.

B-E other types, not JPF (not included in app. 1-2)

Prs (preservation state). Since it is not always easy to judge the preservation state of a figurine by photographs or drawing, the data cannot be fUlly accurate. The definition pertains only to the part that remained (l.e., a small fragment may still be judged to be in a good shape, while a whole figurine may be worn out and badly preserved).

Pc (personal check). All the _figUrines checked personally by the author, a total of 123 or about a fifth of all the corpus (excluding the addenda). One has to remember that many figurines were discarded, lost, or deposited in dozens of institutions all over the world. Bibliography A reference is given, usually only one, to the first publication of the figurine or to the most important one (usually the final excavation report). All the references conform with the general bibliographical list, except very few cases of marginal references which are presented in a shortened form. 136

Field T3 for Hand-made Heads A

Field LOCKS for Hand-made Heads

simple depressions for eyes

This field is used to give details of painted decoration (and not of side-locks), classified by numbers:

Field T2 for Moulded Heads

1 necklace

Classification by number of rows of curls above the

2 bracelets

forehead: 1 to 6 rows

3 both 1 and 2

(0 in case of "linear" ridges

without curls).

4 indication of fingers

SRT- one band or ridge without rows of curls

5 other

Other- exceptional types of hairdress Field LOCKS for Moulded Heads Field T3 for Moulded Heads

Classification in three parts:

Classification by shape of curls:

1. Number of curls in each lock.

A rounded (Holland All)

2. Shape of the curls (codes as in field T3 above).

B square (Holland Alii)

3. Number of columns of curls in each lock.

C vertical (Holland A.IV)

Differences between the two side-locks in the same

D wedge shaped (Holland A.V)

head are usually not registered.

E without curls (Holland "linear", A.VI)

SIMP- simple side-locks without curls

137

Other-

Fields Lev, Fld, Squar, Locus

MIX

mixed or disturbed locus

I

incense stands

No codes are used, but often the data is shortened for

OUT

outside the settlement area or walls, possibly

J

jewelry

connected

L

Imlk seal impressions

M

models of furniture

heads without side-locks, or too worn to be

classified exactly.

lack of space (e.g., 1R2 instead of Iron Age II period).

Field SL (Slip)

with

cemetries

or

extra-mural

quarters.

Field OAT (Date)

+ white-wash, or remains of it.

PRES olive press or wine press

R

clay rattles

R red slip

Hundreds of years BC:

POOL

S

standing stones

empty- no white-wash, or data not available.

10, 9, 8 - until 701 BC

PUBL

W

inscribed limestone weights

7-

from 700 to 586 BC

ROOM

6-

after 586 BC

SAC

Field CL (color)

public

Field Fgrp (Figurines in Locus)

sacred context

IR2 - all Iron Age II until 586 BC

SILO

A,B,C JPF types

1 red

MIX - mixed locus (unclear date)

STAB tripartite storehouse (the so-called stable)

AN

2 yellow

?-

doubtful dating

3 black

STOR other kind of storehouse

o

horse and rider

TAB

DV

dove, or bird - figurines

TOWR tower

H

horses (and riders) figurines

TFND foundation trench

+

figurines of unclear types

Field Context1

5 white

Usually textual descriptions. Some abbreviations of

6 red and yellow

writing are used, and a few codes (which are the same

7 red and black

as those used in field Cont.2 (below).

TROB robbery trench

oven (tabun)

Field Place

TEMP temple

Field Cont.2 (context2) Field BREAK (Breakage Patterns) 1

of figurines per locus is indicated

SURF surface find

4 brown

8 other

ALLY

broken neck, more or less at its middle

WALL inside walls, or on walls

narrow passage, usually between domestic

WELL

houses

WSYS water system, including the shaft

1d neck broken at lower end

BALK

earth balk in an excavation

1u neck broken at upper end

BUR

burial

1p the head left with a whole peg, or neck broken and

CASM

casemate room in a wall

peg visible in the cut. In C.1-2 bodies - depression

CAVE

for a peg visible at the upper edge of the body.

CIST

water cistern

IAA

Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem

BM

British Museum, London

Israel Museum, Jerusalem

DEBR earth debris

J

Jordan Museum, Amman

4

broken I damaged breasts

DEST destruction layer

JM

Jewish Museum, New York

5

body broken between breasts and base

DOM

domestic context

WM

Weingreen Museum, Dublin

6

parts of base broken

FAV

favissa

7

broken nose

FIL

fill

8

other head damages.

FLR

on I in a floor

names are common, and not exact transliterations

GRAVE

from the Arabic or Hebrew names. For convenience

HOUS house

sake, the form ''Tel'' is used (also for Arabic names).

INST

installation

See list of sites in key 4 (below).

L1V

living layer (finds in I on the floor)

138

of paint (and usually of the white-wash as well). F

Fair. Medium breaks and fractures. Traces of

hair-dress features are clear.

1M

armIs broken near breasts

GLAC glacis (including ramp)

and hair-dress features not clear, no remains

white-wash and often of paint. Main facial and

3

App. 1 is arranged by an alphabetic order of sites. The

Bad. Large parts broken away or worn; facial

PM, P, I Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem

CORT court in I near house

GATE (inclUding outer gates)

Field Prs (Preservation State)

Field Museum. Reg.

armIs broken near shoulders

Field SITE

Places of figurines today. See codes in key 3 (below).

B

2

FORT fortress

animal figurines. When possible, the number

G

Good. Minor damages and breaks. Remains of the paint are usually visible.

E

Excellent. No real damage; small details of the face and the hair-dress are well preserved.

Field Lfnd (Finds in Locus) P

domestic pottery

F

weapons

Field Pc (Personal Check) +

139

figurine seen personally

Code (app. 1) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 99

Key 3: Places of JPF

Key 4: List of Sites

Place Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem Israel Antiauities Authority Stores at Romema, Jerusalem Same as no. 2, but on loan to another institution or museum Eretz Israel Museum, Ramat Aviv, Tel Aviv Israel Museum, Jerusalem The Institute of Archaeology, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem The Institute of Archaeoloav, Tel Aviv University Yad Meir, Israel The Institute of Archaeology, Ben-Gurion University, Beer Sheba Bar lIIan University, Ramat Gan The British Museum, London The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia USA The Metropolitan Museum, New York The Jewish Museum, New York Roval Ontario Museum, Toronto Kansas City, Michiaan USA Otago Museum, Dunedin, New Zealand Ashmolean Museum, Oxford The Hunterian Museum, Glasgow Universitv of Sheffield, Sheffield, England University of S1. Andrews University of Sydney, Australia The Riikmuseum, Leiden London University (Departmemt of Semitic Studies) The National Jordanian Museum, Amman Leeds University (Department of Semitic Studies) Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery, Birmingham M.C. Carlos Museum, Emory University, Georaia USA The Oriental Museum, Durham Weinareen Museum of Biblical Antiquities, Trinity Colleae, Dublin Australian Institute of Archaeolouv, Melbourne, Australia Ecole Biblique, Jerusalem Southern Baptist Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky Berkeley University (Bade Institute), Berkeley USA Pittsburgh Xenia Museum, USA Haverford Museum, Pennsylvania USA The Prime Minister's Office, Jerusalem Discarded after Excavation

The following alphabetical list includes sites where JPF have been found (in bold letters, cf. app. 1-2 below). The

Notes: a few of the above mentioned departments or institutions no longer exist, and the locations of their figurines are not clear. Other institutions may have been renamed.

sites in italics appear in appendixes 4-5. Transjordanian sites are given in regular script (but a few appear in app,

5 as well). The spelling usually follows the conventional English forms, and is not an accurate scientific transliteration. The form "Tel" is used for both Hebrew and Arabic names (sites mentioned in the text are indexed at the end of the volume). A total of 118 sites are listed below. Abu Ghosh

Gile'am (near Kfar Ata)

Achzib

Hazor

Afulah

Heshbon

Na'ur

Tel er-Rumeit

Amman (Rabat Ammon)

Irbid

Nebo

Tel Erani see: Tel el-

Arad

Jalul (Moab)

Pella

Aroer

Jawa see: Tel Jawa

RamatRahel

Tel es-Safi

Ashdod

Jerusalem

Ramot

Tel es-Sa'idiyeh

Ashke/on

Jericho

Sahab

Tel ez-Zuweid

Azeka

Kabri

Samaria (Shomeron)

Tel Gemmeh

Azor

Kerak (Moab)

Shechem

Tel Gerishe (Grisa)

Beer Sheba see Tel Beer

Kh.Anim

Shiqmona

Tel Halif (Lahav)

Kh. Ayun Musa (near

Ta'anakh

Tel Hadar

Tawilan

Tel Harasim

Kh. el-Balu'

Tel Abu Hawwam

Tel Haror

Beth Lehem

Kh. el-Medeineh

Tel Amal (Nir David)

Tel Ira

Beth Shean

Kh. el- Meshed (near

Tel Aphek (Sharon)

Tel Jawa

Tel Asor

Tel Keisan

Sheba Beit Saida (East of sea of Galilee)

Beth Shemesh

(Moza)

Nebo)

Nebo)

Tel el-'Umeiri Tel en-Nasbeh

Areini

Bethel

Kh. er-Rujm see: Gile'am

Tel Batash (Timnah)

Tel Masad

Buseirah

Kh. Geresh

Tel Beer Sheba

Tel Masos

Debir see: Kh. Rabud

Kh.Hoga

Tel Beit Mirsim

Tel Megadim

Dalhamiya

Kh. Rabud (Debir)

Tel Deir 'Alia

Tel Michal

Dan

Kh. Sit Laila

Tel ej-Judeideh

Tel Qasilah

Dibon (Dhiban)

Kinneret see: Tel el-

Tel el-Ajjul

Tel Qitaf

Tel el-Areini (Tel Erani)

Tel Shera

Dor

'Oremeh

Ein Genin

Lachish

Tel el- Far'ah (north)

Tel Zakariya see: Azeka

Ekron

Lahav see: Tel Halif

Tel e/- Far'ah (south)

Tel Yeno'am (Galilee)

Gat (Sharon Plain), cf Kh.

Ma'alul (near Nazareth)

Tel el-Ful

Tel Yosef

Machmish (Michmash)

Tel el-Hesi

Tel Zeror

Gebel Joffa (Amman)

Malhata

Tel el-Mazar

Vered Jericho

Gebel Qal'ah (Amman)

Maresha

Tel el-Muleiha

Gezer

Mefalsim

Tel

Gibeon

Megiddo

Sit Laila

140

Mevaseret Jerusalem

el-

'Oremeh

(Kinnerot)

141

Key 5: The Classification of Holland Legend: read from left to right. Holland- the classification of Holland (1975). Cat- my catalogue number. T1-T2-T3- my main types. Engle- the type as classified by Engle (1979)

H

A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

01 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

la A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

nd Cat T1 T2 01 2A 1 02 252 Ae 1 14 A 1 03 04 8 Ae 1 9 A+ 1 05 06 10 A+ 1 06a 184 Ae 1 07 40 A 1 08 43 A 1 44 A 1 09 10 45 A+ 1 11 46 A 1 12 47 A 1 13 48 A 1 14 49 A 1 15 50 A 1 16 42 A+ 1 68 A 1 16a 17 338 A+ 1 18 339 A 1 19 340 A 1 20 341 A 1 21 342 A 1 22 343 A 1 23 344 A 1 24 345 A 1 25 346 A 1 26 347 A 1 27 348 A 1 28 349 A 1 350 A 1 29 351 A 1 30 322 A 1 31 321 A 1 32 33 320 A 1 34 319 A 1 35 318 A 1 36 323 A 1 37 324 A 1 38 325 A 1 39 326 A 1 40 327 A 1 41 352 A 1 42 353 A 1 43 354 A 1 44 355 A 1 45 356 A 1 46 357 A 1 47 358 A 1 48 328 A 1 49 329 A 1 50 330 A 1 51 287 Ae 1 331 A 1 52 53 436 A 1 53a 434 A 1 54 81 Ae 1 55 82 Ae 1 56 80 Ae 1 56a 95 A 1 57 196 A+ 1?

H 01 la nd A 1 A 58 A 1 A 59 A 1 A 60 A 1 A 61 A 1 A 62 A 1 A 63 A 1 8 02 A 1 8 03 A 1 8 04 A 1 8 05 A 1 8 06 A 1 8 06a A 1 8 07 A 1 8 09 A 1 C 01 A 1 C 02 A 1 C 03 A 1 C 04 A 1 C 04a A 1 C 05 A 1 C 06 A 1 C 07 A 1 C 08 A 1 C 09 A 1 C 09a A 1 0 01 A 1 0 02 A 1 0 03 A 1 0 04 A 1 0 05 A 1 0 06 A 1 E 01 A 1 E 02 A 1 F 01 A 1 G 01 A 1 G 02 A 1 G 03 A 1 G 04 A 1 G 05 A 1 H 02 A 1 J 08 A 1 J 09 A 1 J 12 A 2 A 01 A 2 A 02 A 2 A 03 A 2 A 04 A 2 A 05 A 2 A 06 A 2 A 07 A 2 A 08 A 2 A 09 A 2 A 10 A 2 A 11 A 2 A 12 A 2 A 13 A 2 A 14 A 2 8 01 A 2 C 01 A 2 C 02 A 2 C 03 A 2 C 04

T3 Engle A Ah A A A Ah A A AD An A An AD An AD AD A An A AD An A A A A A A A A A A A A A A An AD A An AD An An A A A A A A A A A A An A A A A A An A A?

142

Cat T1 129 A 130 A 126 Ae 125 Ae 116 A? 181 A+ 362 A 332 A 363 A 364 A 365 A 433 A 131 A 117 A 333 A 334 A+ 335 A 336 A 435 A 133 A 136 A 134 A 135 A 128 A 138 A 51 A 52 A 369 A 366 A 137 A 140 A 367 A 368 A 53 A 359 A+ 360 C 361 C 179 C 118 A+ 232 Ae 139 A 127 A+ 119 Ae 16 8 54 8 370 8 307 8 308 8e 84 8 83 8 141 8 142 8 145 B 144 8 159 8 146 8 121 B 202 8 442 8 17 8 18 B 55 8

T2 T3 1 A 1 A 1 A 1 AD 1 A 1 A 2 A 2 A 2 A 2 A 2 A 2 A 2 Ap 2 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 4 A 4 A 4 A 4 A 2 A 4 A 5 A 5 A 6 A 1 A 1 D? 1 0 2 0 1 AD 1 A 4 CD 1 C 1 C 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 2 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 2 A 2 A 3 A 3 A 4 A 2 A 1-2 A 1-2 A 1-2 A

Engle

7:29 1:39 3:04 1:09 1:36 3:12 5:107 5:06 5:05 7:16 7:47 3:13 7:17 5:08 6:04 5:105 7:30 7:25 5:201

H 01 la nd Cat A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

T1 2 C 05 56 8 2 C 06 289 8 2 C 07 203 8 204 8 2 C 08 2 C 09 198 8e 2 C 10 149 8 2 C 11 148 8 2 C 12 579 8 2 C 13 337 8 2 0 02 151 8 2 0 03 150 8 2 0 04 152 8 2 E 01 23 8 2 E 04 36 8e 2 E 05 57 8 2 E 06 199 8+ 2 F 02 58 8 2 F 03 120 8 2 G 01 19 8 86 8 2 G 02 20 8+ 2 H 01 2 H 02 185 8 59 8 2 H 03 2 H 04 296 8 2 H 05 200 8+ 2 H 06 205 8 21 01 21 8 3 A 01 186 8 3 A 02 39 8 3 8 01 22 8 3 8 02 371 8 3 8 03 372 8 3 C 01? 7 8e 3 C 02 13 8e 3 C 03 15 8 3 C 04 300 8 3 C 05 201 8 3 C 06 153 8 3 0 01? 263 8 3 0 02 25 8 3 0 03 11 8e 3 0 04 24 8 3 0 04a 26 8 3 0 05 38 8 3 0 06 373 8 3 0 07 301 8 3 0 08 291 8 3 0 09 295 8 3 0 10 233 8 3 0 11 85 8 3 0 12 88 8 3 0 13 87 8 102 8 3 0 14 206 8 3 0 15 3 0 16 207 8 3 0 17 155 8 154 8 3 0 18 156 8 3 0 19 157 8 3 0 20 197 8e 3 E 01 188 8 3 F 01 234 8 3 F 02

T2 T3 1-2 A 1-2 A 2 A 1-2 A 2 A 1-2 A 2 A 2? 1? 2-3 A 2-3 A 2-3 A 2 A 2-3 A 2 A 3 A 3 A 3? 3 A 4 A 3 A 4 A 4 A 3-4 A 3-5 A 1 A 2 8 2 8 3 8 3 8 3 8 3 8 3 8 3 8 3 8 3 8 3 8 3-4 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 3-4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 8 1 8 3 8 3 8

Engle 5:203 7:32 7:11 5:204 7:14 5:01 5:103 7:23 5:102 5:101 7:39 7:06 1:34 8:24 4:08 4:03 4:05 1:25 8:08 7:31 3:05 4:06 1:03 7:28 1:10 7:05 4:04 7:02 8:23 1:15 5:106 2:07 2:02 2:01 1:17 1:27 1:24 6:05 1:37 1:01 1:38 1:11 1:28 1:18 1:16 1:26 1:02 1:30 2:06 1:13 1:12 1:35 7:12 6:03 1:20 1:22 1:23 1:21 4:01 1:08 7:07

143

H

A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

01 la 3 F 4A 4A 4 A 4A 4A 4 A 4 B 4 8 4 8 4 8 4 C 4 0 4 0 4 0 4 0 4 0 4 E 4 E 4 E 4 E 5 A 5 8 5 8 5 C 5 C 6 A 6 8 6 0 6 E 6 E 7 A 78 7 8 7 8 7 C 8 A 8 A 8 A 8 8 8 C 9 A 9 A 9 C 9 0 10 A 10 A 10 A 10 A 10 A 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8

nd 03 01 02 03 04 05 06 02 03 05 4 01 01 02 03 04 05 03 05 06 07 01 01 02 01 02 02 01 01 01 02 01 01 02 03 01 01 02 03 01 01 01 02 01 01 03 04 05 10 12 01? 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

T1 8 8 B 8 8 Be 8 8 B 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 B 8 8 8 B 8 8e B 8 8 3n 8 279 B 278 8 72 8 378 8 rr 8e 78 8e 212 8 211 8 294 8 75 8e 213 8 105 B 292 8 1 8e 168 8 165 B 167 8 166 8 63 C 380 C 381 C 178 C 293 C 6 C? 32 C 31 C 29 C 30 C 33 C 41 C 62 C 67 C 64 C 65 C 66 C

Cat 89 187 189 70 235 76 158 209 208 162 160 210 374 376 375 90 91 93 161 164 163 37 79 92 73 94

Engle 1:33 5:03 5:04 7:20 7:03 2:03 5:02 7:21 3:10 7:18 7:19 5:202 3:03 3:01 3:02 3:07 5:108 8:07 8:09 5:104 7:24 1:29 6:08 6:07 6:02 6:01 4:07 7:33 7:34 1:19 1:14 3:08 3:11 3:09 7:13 7:41 7:26 7:10 7:35 7:38 7:27 7:43 7:45 8 5:07 A 7:44

T2 T3 3 8 1 C 1 C 1 C 1 C 1 C 1 C 2 C 2 C 3 C 2 C 2 A 3 C 3? C 3 C 3 C 3? C 1 C 2 C 2 8 3 8 3 0 3 B 3 0 5 0 4 0 1-2 2? E 4 E? 3? E 5 E 3-4 F 2 G 2 G 2 G 2 G OT 0 O? sr? srt

1 5 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

Key 6: The Classification of Engle Legend: read from left to right. Engle- the type as classified by Engle (1979). Cat-my catalogue number. Holland- the classification of Holland (1975).

H

01

la

nd

A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72

C 03 C 04 C 05

Cat

61 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 379 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 401 402 400 403 404 405 406 407 304 408 305 288 298 237 96 228 224 214 229 223 225 216 217 218 221 215 220 230 227 222 171 176 177 172 174 280 123 122 147 409 410 411

T1 C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C? C C C C C C C A+ C C C C C C

T2 T3 Engle 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2? ? ? ? 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 2

C

1

A

144

H

A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

01

Ie nd

10 C 10 C 10 C 10 C 10 C 10 C 10 I 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 12 B 12 R 12 R 12 R 12 R 12 R

06 07 08 09 10 11 02 02? 04? 05? 08 10 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 44a

47 48 54 55 01 01 04 05 06 08

Cat

412 413 414 297 175 173 303 3 4 5 35 190 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 314 313 312 306 315 317 316 290 299 432 104 231 226 180 170 236 60 302 219 169 143

T1 C C C C C C C C? C? C? C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C? C? C? C? C? C C C C C C C? C C C C C B B B

C B B

T2 T3 Engle 2 2 2 1 C 2 2 1 E

3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 ? ? 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 1 3 ? 1 3 2 ? 3 4? A? 7:08 7:15 1 1.,

5:205 7:48 7:46

Engle 1:01 1:02 1:03 1:04 1:05 1:07 1:08 1:09 1:10 1:11 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:15 1:16 1:17 1:18 1:19 1:20 1:21 1:22 1:23 1:24 1:25 1:26 1:27 1:28 1:29 1:30 1:31 1:32 1:33 1:34 1:35 1:36 1:37 1:38 1:39 2:01 2:02 2:03 2:04 2:05 2:06 2:07 3:01 3:02 3:03 3:04 3:05 3:06 3:07 3:08

Cat 11 295 296 260 74 109 188 307 205 26 87 88 378 371 301 300 373 72 155 157 154 156 153 19 291 201 38 37 233 28 27 89 36 102 308 25 24 54 15 13 76 99 262 85 7 376 375 374 370 185 264 90 77

H

01

A A A

3 3 2

A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

3 2 2 3 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 5 3

A A A A A A A A A A

3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 4

A A A A A A A

3 3 4 4 4 2 2

A A

4 7

la D D

H

F A

H D D D

E B D

C D

E D D

0 0 C G D

C D A D

F E 0 A D D A

C C A

nd 03 09 04

01 04 06 04a 13 12 02 02 07 04 06 01 17 20 18 19 06 01 08 05 05 01 10 03 04 14 05 02 04 02 03 02 05

H

11 01? 02 03 01 03 02

D A

04 01

D

C 0 D D A

Engle 3:09 3:10 3:11 3:12 3:13 3:14 3:15 4:01 4:02 4:03 4:04 4:05 4:06 4:07 4:08 4:09 5:01 5:02 5:03 5:04 5:05 5:06 5:07 5:08 5:101 5:102 5:103 5:104 5:105 5:106 5:107 5:108 5:201 5:202 5:203 5:204 5:205 6:01 6:02 6:03 6:04 6:05 6:07 6:08 7:01 7:02 7:03 7:05 7:06 7:07 7:08 7:09 7:10 7:11 7:12

145

Cat 212 208 78 84 159 267 261 197 97 58 186 120 59 377 199 124 149 158 187 189 142 141 167 121 150 151 148 164 442 372 83 91 55 210 56 204 219 94 73 207 202 263 92 79 69 39 235 21 23 234 236 193 213 203 206

A A A A A

7 4 7 2 2

B B B A A

nd 02 03 01 06 12

A

3

E

01

A A A A A A

2 3 2 2 6 2

F A F

02 01 03 03 02 06

A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

2 4 4 4 2 2 9 2 2 2 2 4 2 3 2 4 2 4 2 2 12 5 5 3 2 3 5 5

A A A A A A

3 4 2 2 3 12

A A

A A A

8 2 3

A

H

la

01

H A

E C A A A A A

C A D D

C E C B A D

C C C C R

C C D B D B B

I

E F B

C D

10 06 01 02 09 08 01 14 03 02 11 06 01 03 07 05 04 01 05 08 05 02 01 16 01 01? 02 01 02 04 01 01 02 01 02 07 15

11 March 1996

Engle

7:13 7:14 7:15 7:16 7:17 7:18 7:19 7:20 7:21 7:22 7:23 7:24 7:25 7:26 7:27 7:28 7:29 7:30 7:31 7:32 7:33 7:34 7:35 7:38 7:39 7:41 7:43 7:44 7:45 7:46 7:47 7:48 8:07 8:08 8:09 8:23 8:24

Cat 211 198 60 145 146 162 160 70 209 98 579 163 18 75 1 200 16 17 20 289 279 278 105 292 152 294 168 166 165 143 144 169 93 86 161 22 57

H A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

01

7 2 12 2 2 4 4 4 4 2 4 2 8 8 2 2 2 2 2 6 6 8 8 2 7 9 9 9 12 2 12 4 2 4 3 2

la B

C R A A B B A B

C E

C A

C H A

C H C B

0 A B

0 C A

0 A R A R E G E B E

nd

03 09 01 10 13 05 4 03 02 12 07 03 01 01 05 01 02 01 06 01 01 03 01 04 01 01 01 02 08 11 06 03 02 05 01 05

146

Cat

T1

1 446 447 450 475 448 449 451 476 479 444 442 445 443 477 480 452 453 454 455 456 457 478 458 110 109 111 2 105 108 107 106 484 486 485 487 3 4 5 6 7 14 9 10 8 466 21 17 18 23 34 28 16 15 22 19 27 24 25 26

Bc A A A A A A A A A+ B B B B C C C C C C C C C C B B B A B B B B B B B C C? C? C? C? Bc A A+ A+ Ac Ac B B B B B B B B B B B B B B

T2

T3

Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites

Locks

S C B

simp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

A A A Ah Ap Ap Ap Ap A

2 2-3 3-4 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 sit 1 0 O? 2? 4? 3 4 4 3

A A AB

2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1-2 1-2 2 2-3 3 3 3 3 3? 3? 4 4 4

+ + + + + + +

1 1 +

simp? R 4AB? 1 + + B + + +

A

2-2? 3A?12

A

A AB C

simp? 4B2 8?A23 8?A?2 5B2 4? 5B-C2

+ + +

8 1

+

Break 1d 1u 1d 1d 1d 1d 1d8 1 1d 5 2458 1p 18 1d 1p23 123 1235 1234 1d5 1d45 2345 1p23 145 5 1 1p 1 1d 1 1 1d 1d 1 1p 1u 5

15 B A A Ah A A A A A A 0

3-4B

+ + + +

8 1u 25 25 46

male

A B B

simp 0/3A 0/3A 0/3 simp? 45AB2 3-4A2 3-4B2 3?B

B B B

3-4B 3?B 3-4B2

+

+ R

+ 1

1 1d 1d 1 35 1u 1p 1d 1p 1u 1u 1 1p 1d7

Hh Hal 32 25 24 15 25 20 25 22 23 30 32 32 33

34 32 30 19 25 20 33 29 28 23

138 25 45 33 45 49 45 40 48 78 85 83? 67 63 76 90 62 45 43 52 64 58 83 35 64 80 54 44 50 40 65 58 60 90 45

60 58 30 175 38 15 24 17 32 28 24 26 25

66 130 102 55 67 50 52 68

26 29 41 28 21 30 33 29

79 60? 85 50 42 58 82 65

147

Site Abu Gosh Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Arad Aroer Aroer Aroer Ashdod Azeka Azeka Azeka Azeka Beer Sheba- shu Beer Sheba- shu Beer Sheba- shu Beer Sheba- shu Beth EI Beth EI Beth EI l3eth EI Beth Lehem? Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh

Page

Fld

C

C

C?

C?

A B 0 0

Square

Locus

Lev

G-15 KL-15 N-16 F-9 H-14 0-16 H-9 G-11

350 17 1500? 414 380 931 450a 448

6 7

H-13 JH-15 J-9

1500 surface 502

4 6? 9

G-9

452a

8

C-11 G-15 G-12 L-9 GH-15 H-9

1500 350 429 643 795=1500 512

9 8 6 Hel 10

E-11 G-11 C-11f

408b 105 62 339 1075

8 II III II 1-2

A-20

I II VI

9 7 6 9

120 n of3 374 Grave 5 Cistern 25 Grave 5

2 2c

S-32 373 "temple" 380

2 IR2 2

383 Grave 1 402

2

Debris 378 42,sub1

3-2

22 February 1996

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

a

Page

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

22 February 1996 Cat

Date

1 446 447 450 475 448 449 451 476 479 444 442 445 443 477 480 452 453 454 455 456 457 478 458 110 109 111 2 105 108 107 106 484 486 485 487 3 4 5 6 7 14 9 10 8 466 21 17 18 23 34 28 16 15 22 19 27 24 25 26 20

7? 8 7 7 8 7 7

Context1

Cont2

tomb room room or alley

tomb sac dam?

room near wall alley or court out glacis room

dam sac?

H 01 la A

nd

8 C 01

Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg. 7:27

dam?

found. trench

7? 8 8

8 8 7 9-8 8 7 7 7

8-7 8-7 8-7 8-7 IR2 IR2 IR2 IR2 8-7 8? 8? 8? 8?

8? mix mix

8? 8? mix

mix

A room pit house? out, surface room room? room or court pit room on floor

2 C 01

5:105

dam? dam?

sac dam? dam dom

court house silo

dom dom

alley?

dom?

1:07 A A

1 A 01 8 A 03

1565/4 A 495/1 888/1 C/6411 1571/2 6713/1 524/1 C/339/1 5602/1 1080/1 5244 799/1 912/1? 718/1 3?768/1 6827/1 1542/1 694/1 5574/1 5355/1 1233/1 560/1 C.108/6 324 104 866/1 0.1035/1

IAA67-609

IAA64-306? IAA67-610 IAA67-611 IAA67-968 IAA64-329? IAA67-608 IAA64-326

IAA67-607

7:35

IAA70-5498 IAA 93-1222 IAA70-5499 IAA 93-1225 IAA70-5497 IAA 93-1223 debris open

tomb? room tomb on divan cistern tomb left sid

room or alley storehouse room house surface/debrs? room house tomb debris

out open room? room?

tomb? dom tomb tomb

dom pUbl dam

dam tomb

dom? dom?

A A A A A A A A A A A A A

A A A A A A A A

11 11 11 10 3 1 1 1 1

B C A A A A

21 2 C 2 C 2 E

2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2

A C B G 0 0 0 H

02? 04? 05? 01? 01? 03 05 06 04 01 02 03 01

01 03 01 01 04 02 04a 01

148

40 467 1011 59 BM.93091

2:07 1933-4-209 1933-4-66

P.444 90-14-350

7:05 7:30 7:25 7:06 1:31 7:29 2:01 8:23 1:25 1:32 1:38 1:37 1:11 7:31

911,1909 (1930)1251 1933-4-112 201 (1928) 1933-4-166 AS 12 Xi? P.406 1933-3-110 1933-4-148

.

1933-4-274 P.411? 1933-3-4 YEAR 1929 1933-4-143 NS 961931 PM.l.10504 1933-3-128

Cat 1 446 447 450 475 448 449 451 476 479 444 442 445 443 477 480 452 453 454 455 456 457 478 458 110 109 111 2 105 108 107 106 484 486 485 487 3 4 5 6 7 14 9 10 8 466 21 17 18 23 34 28 16 15 22 19 27 24 25 26 20

Lfind

Fgrp

Place PrS Pc

P C2

bead

A1A

7 7 7 2 7 7 7 2 37 7 37 7 37 2 2 7 7 7 7 7 7 2 7

P P

b t t

9 t

9 b f-g t g? b t b f-g b t

b-t

Notes

+ + + + + + + +

list no. 16 list no. 30 list no. 22 first season list no. 27 list no. 21 list no. 17 2nd season

+

list no. 37 "no. 31 nevi' ?

+ + + + + + + + + + +

b-t f-g b

2nd season list no. 33 list no. 40? list no. 23 list no. 26? list no. 34 list no. 32 list no. 36 list no. 24

Details unpublis

Forgotten Forgotten Forgotten PLM PLM PLM

A-B A-B A-B

PJ P P P P

0 Ac H A1

P I? LmP

A,H+ AN=2 AN

2AMP P

P

dv,+ +

AN

2 2 2

9 f?

9

+ + +

11 36? 36? 1 5 36? 36? 36? 36? 1 36? 36? 36? 1? 36? 36? 36? 1 36?

A322

bad photo

t t

b b b-t

+ +

Male, eXh.361 found 1909

+

"hat" ct. no. 12. "hat'

+

room/alley?

f-g

b

t

9 f b-t

149

Page

Bibliography (mainlfirst) Abel 1921:97-100, pI.1:3. Feig in Press (2:6) Feig in Press (2:3) Feig in Press (2:7) Unpublished Feig in Press (2:2) Feig in Press (2:4) Feig in Press (2:5) Unpublished Unpublished Feig in press (1:2) Holland 1975: pl.41:6 Feig in Press (1:1) Aharoni & Amiran 1964: 49photo Unpublished Unpublished Feig in Press (1:3) Feig in Press (1:6) Feig in Press (1:4) Feig in Press (1:5) Feig in Press (1:8) Feig in Press (1;7) Unpublished Feig in Press Biran & Cohen 1981:fig.16:8.H Biran & Cohen 1981:fig.8:4. H Biran & Cohen 1981: fig.10:8 H Ashdod II-III:fig. 65:11. Bliss & Macalister 1902:pI68:4 Bliss 1899: pl.6:6 PEFQS Bliss 1899: p1.6:5 PEFQS Bliss 1899: p1.6:7 PEFQS Ofer 1965:31 photo (H) Ofer 1957:11 text only (H) Ofer 1957: 11 text only (H) Ofer 1957: 11 text only (H) Kelso 1968:83, 116 index. Kelso 1968:83, 116 index. Kelso 1968:88, 116 index. Kelso 1968:83, 116 index. Tubb 1980:9,13-14. AS4: pl.51:35. Mackenzie 1912:76, pl.41:9; 42 AS 4: pl.51:36 Mackenzie 1912: 76, pis. 41-2. AS 1: pI.27:2:2= AS2: p1.50:21 AS 3: PL.25:5:3; AS 4:PL.51 :31 Grant 1929: 65: 97 up right. AS 4: pl.51:33. UnpUblished? AS 3: fig.4. AS 3: pI.24:5:5; AS 4:p1.51 :21 Mackenzie 1912:p1.23 left AS 3: pl.22:6:2; AS 4:p1.51 :32 Mackenzie 1912: p1.13b: 1. AS 3: fig.4. AS 4: PL.51 :34 AS 3:pl.25:5:4; AS 4:pI.51:22. AS 2:32 (reg no.96). AS 3: pI.28:2:2; AS 4:p1.51 :23

b

Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites

11 March 1996 Cat 20 124 13 11 12 35 29 30 31 32 33 40 465 39 37 38 36 41 43 44 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 42 45 57 60 55 56 54 58 59 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 71 70

72 73 436 307 308 437 287 288 294 296 295 297 298 299 282

T1 T2 T3 B+ Bc Bc Bc Bc C C C C C C A Ac B B B Bc C A A A A A A A A A A A+ A+ B B B B B B B C C C C C C C A B B B A B Bc B Ac C B B B C C C A

Locks

4

A

0134A

3 4 5

B B A

3-4B2 4B 4A3

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 2-3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 6 1 1

1-2 1-2 3 3 4 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 1 3? 5 1 3 2 3? 1 2 2 4 4 1 2 3 1

S C B

25 + + +

5

R

A Ap B D B A Ap Ap Ap Ap Ap Ap Ap A A A A A

A A A A A

3B simp 4B4? 4?A

Disc 3A? 3?2 3A2 0/3A 3-4A lock? 3-4A

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

1 1 5 1 2 1 6

6 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 6 2 1 1

A C

E D A A A

4D2 3-4A 3-4A

Ap G A B C

A

3A 0/34A 3-4B

Break

+ + + + + +

1

1d 34 1235 1 123 1 1 1d 46 1 1p 1 1d 1d5 1 1d 1 1d 1 1d 1d 8 1 1 235 5 1d8 1d 1 8 1u 1d 1 1d23 1d6 1d24 1d5 15 1235 15 1 1u 1 1 1u 1u 236 1d 35 15 1u8 1 1d 1p26 123 56 1d

Hh Hal 22

97

31 29

145 164 159

23 32 32 22 32

20 30 27 29 25 23 30

30 17 25 19

25

38 32 36 35 28 25

100 90 100 96 104 58 167 44 45 68 58 38 58 48 46 46 39 55 32 57 39 85 53 66 52 67 40 35 53 70 91 85 73 43 56 59 52 54 47 64 75 36 50 165

68? 70? 22 43? 22 42 22 55 94? 58 48

150

Fld

Site Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Beth Shemesh Gazer Gezer Gezer Gazer Gezer Gezer Gazer Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Gibeon Jericho Jericho Jericho Jericho Jerusalem Amtra: Jerusalem Aviga( Jerusalem Aviga( Jerusalem Ben D Jerusalem Bliss Jerusalem Bliss Jerusalem Crow Jerusalem Crow Jerusalem Crow Jerusalem Crow Jerusalem Crow Jerusalem Crow Jerusalem Dunce

22 February 1996

Page Square

Locus 343

2

Grave 1 366 12.xxxix.1 374 Cistern 25 A-1 305 3N

Cave 8-1 Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool stage Ixix

I II

Tomb C.1 A? A

Lev

,

.. 45 (mixed) 44 44 41

2? 2 2c 2 2 2 2a

Cat 124 13 11 12 35 29 30 31 32 33 40 465 39 37 38 36 41 43 44 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 42 45 57 60 55 56 54 58 59 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 71 70

Date

Context1

Page

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Cont2

8-7? tomb room 8?

tomb dom

A A

room or alley 8? cistern 8? 8? 8? room 8? 10??

dom?

A A A A A A A

dom

nd

H 01 la

11 10 10 10 10 10 1

B B B B B A

Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg. 4:09 2:02 1:01

3 C 02 3 D 03 08 04 05 03 02 06 07

P.435 1933-4-110 AS 12 >t39'! P.400 ex373 1933-4-209 1933-4-62 Year 1933 Year 1929 1933-3-95 NS 1207 18/2/12

cave pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 pool 8-7 house

cave pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool pool dom

72 tomb 73 436 7? 307 IR2? 308 8-7? 437 287 288 room 294 room 296 room 295 room 297 298 299 282 284 285

tomb

A 3 A 02 A 5 A 01 A 3 D 05 A 2 E 04 A 10 B 07 A 1 A 08 A 1 A 09 A 1 A 11 A 1 A 12 A 1 A 13 A 1 A 14 A 1 A 15 A 1 0 01 A 1 0 02 A 1 F 01 A 1 A 16 A 1 A 10 A 2 E 05 A 12 R 01 A 2 C 04 A 2 C 05 A 2A 02 A 2 F 02 A 2 H 03 A 10 B 13 A 10 B 08 A 10 A 03 A 10 B 10 A 10 B 11 A 10 B 12 A 10 B 09 A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

4 A 6 E 5 C 1 A 2A 2A 1 10 7 2 3 10 10 11

A B C H D C B

03 01 01 53 04 05 51 44 01 04 09 09 45 43

907

7:02 1:29 1:28 1:34

8:24 7:15 5:201 5:203 1:39 4:03 4:06

7:20 1:19 6:02 1:09 1:36

439 290 503 382 427 462 441 312 86 438 420 557 87 568 548 381 422 421 432+435 379 437 330 511 419 434 3875 760 PM.32.1796

8433-5

IAA8D-2

5013864

7:41 1:03 1:02

N13S 23 6'1 WNN D6?

151

a

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

22 February 1996 Cat

Lfind

124 13 2MPR 11 P 12 35 29 P 30 31 32 PSM 33 40 465 39 37 38 36 41 PBR 43 P 44 P 46 P p 47 p 48 p 49 50 P p 51 p 52 53 P 42 P 45 P p 57 p 60 55 P 56 P p 54 58 P p 59 61 P 62 P p 63 p 64 65 P 66 P 67 P 71 70 72 73 436 307 308 P 437 287 288 294 296 295 297 298 299 282 284

Fgrp dv+ +

H

AN

Place PrS Pc 15 1 36? 1 36? 36? 36? 36? 36? 36? 5

f

+

Notes

cf. no. 34 no fig.

"no peg" "level 3" f f

+

rattle, burial? 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 25 12 12 12 25 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

f f b-f

9 f f f b b-f f

9 f b f

disk in hands

9

engle 5:201 engle 5:203

b b-f b-f f

9 9 b-f

9 9 9 f f

25 1 6? F

f b f

5

+

exceptional? Double molded 1931season

+ b

+ +

24 24 24 24 24

Bibliography (mainlfirst) Kelso 1962 Mackenzie 1912:pls.22:9, 23. AS 3: p1.23. Unpublished, "highplace" area AS 3:96 AS 3:621; AS4: pI.51:29 AS 4: pl.51:24. AS 4: pl.51:30. AS 3:pI.25:8:3. AS 2:320 nO.1207. Gezer 2:233, fig.382:7.

found 1912?

f f AN F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F

Page

b b-f f f b

9 f

152

Gazer 2:418; Gazer 3:p1.221 :20 Gezer 2:418; Gezer 3:p1.221 :22 Gezer 2:418; Gazer 3:pl.221:21 Gezer 2: fig.502. Gezer 3:pl.18:28, plan1 Gibeon WS: fig.41:439. Gibeon WS: fig.41:290. Gibeon WS: fig.41:503. Gibeon WS: fig.41:382. Gibeon WS: fig.41:427. Gibeon WS: fig.41 :462. Gibeon WS: fig.41:441. Gibeon WS: fig.41:312. Gibeon WS: fig.41 :86. Gibeon WS: fig.41:438. Gibeon WS: pI.39:420. Gibeon WS: fig.41:557. Gibeon WS: fig.40:87. Gibeon WS: fig.40:568. Gibeon WS: fig.40:527. Gibeon WS: fig.40:548. Gibeon WS: fig.40:381. Gibeon WS: fig.40:422. Gibeon WS: fig.40:421. Gibeon WS: fig.39:432+435. Gibeon WS: fig.39:379. Gibeon WS: fig.39:437. Gibeon WS: fig.39:330. Gibeon WS: fig.39:511. Gibeon WS: fig.39:419. Gibeon WS: fig.39:434. Jericho IV:555, fig.223:6. Sellin & Watzinger 1913:pl.40. Jericho IV:555, fig.223:5. Holland 1975:84,190, pl.41:9. Amiran & Eitan 1970: pl.8b Avigad 1970: pl.4c Avigad 1970: photo 15 Ben Dov 1982:55 (H) Bliss 1898: pI.27:50. Bliss 1898: pl.27:49. PEFA V:1929: p1.11:3 PEFA V:1929: p1.11:2 PEFA V:1929: p1.11:4 PEFA V:1929: p1.11:2 Holland 1975: p1.3:11 Holland 1975: p1.4:15 Duncan 1931:77 up left Duncan 1931:77 up 3 from left

b

11 March 1996

Cat

T1

284 285 283 281 286 320 321 322 323 328 329 330 331 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 318 319 324 325 326 327 339 340 332 362 363 364 365 333 335 336 366 369 367 368 338 359 334 302 292 377 370 300 371 372

A A A B+ C A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A+ A+ A+ B B B B B B B

T2

T3

1 1 1

A A Ap

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 1 1 3

A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A Ap Ap Ap Ap Ap Ap Ap Ap A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

O? 1-2 3 3 3 3

A B B B

Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Locks

S C B

ridr?

+ +

6

+ +

6 2

+ + +

1

+

+

+ + +

+

6 8

+ 8 + + + + + disk 3-4? schin simp? 3-4A? 3-4B 3-4B 3-4B

+ + + +

1 1 + 4 + 8

1

R + + +

1 1

Break 1 1d 1d 5 1234 1 1u 1 1 1 1 1 1 1d 1d 1u 1u 1d 1d 1d 1u 1u 1d 1 1 1d 1u 1d 1d 1 1d 1 1u 1d 1d 1d 1 1 1d 1 1d 1 1u 1 1d 1u 1d 1d8 1 1d 1 235 235 235 1u8 1 1 8 1u 1d 1d

Hh Hal

Site

Jerusalem Jerusalem Jerusalem Jerusalem Jerusalem 23 50 Jerusalem 23 33 Jerusalem 26 43 Jerusalem 24 42 Jerusalem Jerusalem Jerusalem Jerusalem Jerusalem 26 56 Jerusalem 20 55 Jerusalem 26 37 Jerusalem 21 22 Jerusalem 29 61 Jerusalem 21 53 Jerusalem 23 54 Jerusalem 14 24 Jerusalem 18 34 Jerusalem 29 56? Jerusalem 30 45 Jerusalem 19 40 Jerusalem 24 58 Jerusalem 19 40 Jerusalem 19 50 Jerusalem 18 48 Jerusalem 16 40 Jerusalem 29 58 Jerusalem 29 69 Jerusalem 24 32 Jerusalem 24 48 Jerusalem 29 53 Jerusalem 32 66 Jerusalem 14 24 Jerusalem 22 53 Jerusalem 21 50 Jerusalem 26 40 Jerusalem 30 48 Jerusalem 27 45 Jerusalem 32 39 Jerusalem 30 47 Jerusalem 20 53 Jerusalem 27 44 Jerusalem 26 56 Jerusalem 41 66 Jerusalem 53 69 Jerusalem 50 Jerusalem Jerusalem 21 80 Jerusalem 19 42 Jerusalem 29 80 Jerusalem 48 Jerusalem Jerusalem 28 64 Jerusalem 42 Jerusalem 26 52 Jerusalem 24 69 Jerusalem 25 82 Jerusalem

153

Page Fld

Dunce Dunce Dunce Dunce Dunce Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya Kenya

Square

Locus

Lev

9

A

957.7

A

957.18

L L

XII

L

159.17 853.7

lAc lAd

14.34 I

lAc

L

IV

332.22

lAc

L

I

14.33

lAc

L

XII

158.16

lAd

A

953.13

A

301.12

A A 10?

C? A

A-26

A

840

A

A-26

Cave 1

Cave 1966

22 February 1996

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

Page

a 22 February 1996

Cat 283 281 286 320 321 322 323 328 329 330 331 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 318 319 324 325 326 327 339 340 332 362 363 364 365 333 335 336 366 369 367 368 338 359 334 302 292 377 370 300 371 372 374 375 376

Context1

Date

Cont2

H 01 la

nd

Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.

98227?

fill fill

8-7?

fill

8

8

cave

cave entrance

cave?

cave?

1 A 33 A 1 A 32 A A 1 A 31 A 1 A 36 A 1 A 48 A 1 A 49 A 1 A 50 1 A 52 A A 1 A 20 A 1 A 21 1 A 22 A 1 A 23 A 1 A 24 A 1 A 25 A 1 A 26 A A 1 A 27 1 A 28 A 1 A 29 A A 1 A 30 A 1 A 41 A 1 A 42 A 1 A 43 1 A 44 A 1 A 45 A 1 A 46 A A 1 A 47 A 1 A 35 A 1 A 34 A 1 A 37 A 1 A 38 A 1 A 39 A 1 A 40 A 1 A 18 A 1 A 19 A 1 8 03 A 1 8 02 A 1 8 04 A 1 8 05 A 1 8 06 1 C 01 A A 1 C 03 A 1 C 04 A 1 D 04 A 1 D 03 A 1 E 01 A 1 E 02 A 1 A 17 A 1 G 01 1 C 02 A A 12 R 04 A 8 8 01 A 6 A 02 A 2A 03 A 3 C 04 A 3 8 02 A 3 8 03 A 4 D 01 A 4 D 03 A 4 D 02

154

~

6809

IAA68-797

6816

WM.619

3889 6003

IAA68-822

7371

10.3221

7218

7376 5756

10.3220

1967.866

3923 3338

IAA68-813

379 6222

1962A.346 1967.867

1661

196:.t.523

C.790 7:38 4:07 3:04 1:17 1:15 5:106 3:03 3:02 3:01

3337 901? C.391

IAA68-811 1962.579? D.1968.6 J.9698

Cat 285 283 281 286 320 321 322 323 328 329 330 331 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 318 319 324 325 326 327 339 340 332 362 363 364 365 333 335 336 366 369 367 368 338 359 334 302 292 377 370 300 371 372 374

Lfind

Fgrp

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Place PrS Pc

Notes

b-f b-f b-f b-f 28 25? 27 23 26 20 26 12? 21 25? 17 23 27 21 29 99 20 99 25?

+

+

UN 31 20 22

+

31 17 25? 17 17 28 26 23 18 25? 25? 17 25 2 23 25? 21 21 27 18 5 17 18 25? 26 23 25? 25? 19 25 25 21

Amr 1988:no.9

+

disk

b f? b-f b f f b-f f-g

+ at Oxford? Locus A.966.3Y Amr 1988: nO.1 Kenyon 1967:9:3

155

Page

Bibliography (mainffirst) Duncan 1931:77 up right Duncan 1931:77 up 2 from left Duncan 1931:77 pI. low center Duncan 1931:77 low right Holland 1975: fig.2:1 Holland 1975: fig.1:16 Holland 1975: fig.1:15 Holland 1975: fig.2:4 Holland 1975. Holland 1975. Holland 1975. Holland 1975 Holland 1975: fig.1:4 Holland 1975: fig.1:5 Holland 1975: fig.1:6 Holland 1975: fig.1:7 Holland 1975: fig.1:8 Holland 1975: fig.1:9 Holland 1975: fig.1:11 Holland 1975: fig.1:11 Holland 1975: fig.1:12 Holland 1975: fig.1:13 Holland 1975: fig.1:14 Holland 1975: fig.2:9 Holland 1975: fig.2:10 Holland 1975: fig.2:11 Holland 1975: fig.2:12 Holland 1975: fig.2:14, pI.1:2 Holland 1975:fig.2:14, p1.1:3 Holland 1975: fig.2:15. Holland 1975: fig.2:3 Holland 1975: fig.2:2 Holland 1975: fig.2:5 Holland 1975: fig.2:6 Holland 1975: fig.2:7 Holland 1975: fig.2:8 Holland 1975: fig.1:2 Holland 1975: fig.1:3 Holland 1975: fig.3:2, pl.1:5 Holland 1975: fig.3:1 Holland 1975: fig.3:3 Holland 1975: fig.3:4 Holland 1975: fig.3:5 Holland 1975: fig.3:6 Holland 1975: fig.3:8 Holland 1975: fig.3:9, p1.1:7 Holland 1975: fig.3:11 Holland 1975: fig.3:10 Holland 1975: fig.3:12 Holland 1975: fig.3:13 Holland 1975: fig.1:1 Holland 1975: fig.4:1, pI.1:9 Holland 1975: fig.3:7, pI.1:6 Holland 1975: fig.13:9; p1.5:6 Holland 1975: fig.6:13 Holland 1975: fig.6:10 Holland 1975: fig.6:1 Holland 1975: fig.6:4 Holland 1975: fig.6:2 Holland 1975: fig.6:3, p1.2:7 Holland 1975: p1.3:1

b

11 March 1996

Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites

22 February 1996

Page

Cat Cat 374 375 376 301 373 378 404 304 306 379 381 389 390 391 396 398 399 402 361 360 303 305 380 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 392 393 394 395 397 400 401 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 429 403 315 316 317 415 425 426

T1

T2

B B

3 3 3? 4 4 5

8

B 8 8 C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2? 3 3 3 3 3 3

T3 C C C

B 8

E

Locks 45C2? 5C2 45C2 482-3 3-48 3-4?

S C B + + +

1

+

1

+ + + +

8

+ + + 0 O?

disk disk

+

disk?

+ + + + +

7

E

Break 1 1u 1d8 1u 1u 1d 1 1234 1235 146 15 1d 1d45 16 12?5 1235 16 1236 1234 1236 1d26 1235 23?5 15? 1235 15 35

+ 1 + + +

+ + +

1

+

1

+ + +

+ +

disk? + + + + + + + +

4

1235 1235 1234 15 15 1235 1d35 15 15 1235 15? 15 1234 1234 14?5 1245 1235 1245 1235 1235 1p5? 1u25 1234 1234 1234 23?5 1p23 5 5 5 5 5 5

Hh Hal 29 53 37 53 32 69 26 45 28 43 29 60 85 144 91 83 102 66 85 58 84 100 101 100 84 76 50 43 61 37 48 68 53 50 36 82 56 40 56 90 48 74 56 37 44 55 54 90 42 47 48 27 82 82 42 60 48 77 42 70 64 33 58 64 61 53

156

Site Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya

Fld

A

Square

A-26

A A A

A? L L

Locus

Lev

Cave 1 156a

A-26 A-26

XIV XII

Cave 1 Cave 1

108.1? 371.2 159.32

lAd lAb

105.14c?

AA A A

A-26 A-26

Cave 1 Cave 1

L L

IX IV

912.30 332.18a

lAd lAc

L L

XV VII

457.23 609.5

IAa lAd

L L

VII

608.18 369.13

lAb lAd

L

VIII

711.2

lAd

A

669.2I6?

R? A

845.71 955.18

AA A A A

A-26 A-26 A-26

107.14 Cave 1 Cave 1 Cave 1

Date

Context1

Cont2

cave? cave 301 8 373 378 404 cave? cave 304 8 cave? cave 306 8 379 381 389 390 391 fill 396 fill 398 399 402 361 360 cave? cave 303 8 cave? cave 305 8 380 fill 382 fill 383 384 385 386 fill 387 388 392 393 fill 394 fill 395 397 400 fill 401 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 429 403 cave? cave entrance 315 8 cave? cave entrance 316 8 cave? cave entrance 8 317 415 425 426 427 428 405 406

nd

H 01 la

Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.

1:16 A 3 0 07 1:18 A 3 0 06 1:14 A 6 E 02 37 10 B A A 10 B 41 38 A 11 A 10 B 23 A 10 A 05 A 10 B 21 A 10 B 22 A 10 B 24 A 10 B 29 A 10 B 31 A 10 B 32 A 10 B 34 A 1 G 03 A 1 G 02 A 10 I 02 A 10 B 43 A 10 A 04 A 10 B 14 A 10 B 15 A 10 B 16 A 10 B 17 A 10 B 18 A 10 B 19 A 10 B 20 A 10 B 25 A 10 B 26 A 10 B 27 A 10 B 28 A 10 B 30 A 10 B 35 A 10 B 33 A 10 B 42 A 10 C 03 A 10 C 04 A 10 C 05 A 10 C 06 A 10 C 07 A 10 C 08 19 A 11 20 A 11 21 A 11 22 A 11 23 A 11 24 A 11 25 A 11 26 A 11 27 A 11 32 A 11 A 10 B 36 39 A 11 41 A 11 40 A 11 17 A 11 28 A 11 29 A 11 30 A 11 31 A 11 A 10 B 38 A 1 B 39

o

157

a

Page

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

7366

IAA68-803

3507

IAA68-810

1964.525? C.777 C.335f?366 1969A.704 792 3339 7971 5463 4373

IAA68-807 J.9702 1962A.906?

6812

WM.622

C.365 C.774

IAA68-791

7217 7264

01968.12

3973 3342

4169 5432

IAA 68-814

IAA68-816 J.9699

5108

3509

IAA 68-812

4444? 5890

1966A.101? IAA68-821

10.3336 7260 74601248 O' WM.608? C.793 C.796

1133?

1962A.907?

22 February 1996 Cat 375 376 301 373 378 404 304 306 379 381 389 390 391 396 398 399 402 361 360 303 305 380 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 392 393 394 395 397 400 401 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 429 403 315 316 317 415 425 426 427

Lfind

Fgrp

+

+ +

P P

F F

+ + +

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Place PrS Pc 25? 32 2 25? 25? 26 18 18 25 25 2* 25 27 30 25 21 30 23 2 17 30 19 26 30 25? 20 2 25? 32 30 25? 20 25 31 21 26 25? 2 25 27 2 25 25 99 25 21 28 26 99 99 26 26 31 30 99 99 99 99 33 26

Notes Kenyon 1967:9:4 Kenyon 1967:9:5

9

+

b +

f

+

+

+

+

Page

Bibliography (mainlfirst)

Holland 1975: fig.6:9 Holland 1975: fig.6:8; p1.6:3 Holland 1975: fig.6:6 Amr 1988:no.2? Holland 1975: fig.6:5 Kenyon 1967:9:6 Holland 1975: fig.6:12 Holland 1975: A 10837 Holland 1975: fig.9:1 reg. 366? Holland 1975: fig.12:4 Kenyon 1967: 10:4 Holland 1975: fig.8:1 Holland 1975: fig.7:2 Kenyon 1967:10:6 Holland 1975: fig.10:6 Kenyon 1967:10:3 Holland 1975: fig.10:7 Holland 1975: fig.8:2 Holland 1975: fig.8:7 Amr 1988: nO.5? Holland 1975: fig.8:9 Kenyon 1967:10:5 Holland 1975: fig.8:10, p1.3:8 Holland 1975: fig.8:12, p13:9 disk Holland 1975: fig.4:3 disk Kenyon 1967: fig. 10:2 hand upwards Holland 1975: fig.10:5 Holland 1975: fig.9:3 Holland 1975: fig.7:1 Holland 1975: fig.7:3 Holland 1975: fig.7:4 Holland 1975: fig.7:5, p1.3:5 Amr 1988: nO.3 Holland 1975: fig.7:6 Jerusalem 1: Holland 1975: fig.7:7 Jerusalem 1: Holland 1975: fig.7:8 Amr 1988: nO.6? Holland 1975: fig.7:9 Holland 1975: fig.8:3 Holland 1975: fig.8:4 Holland 1975: fig.8:5 Jerusaelm 1: Holland 1975: fig.8:6 Holland 1975: fig.8:8, p1.3:7 Holland 1975: p1.3:10 Jerusalem 1: Holland 1975: fig.8:11 Holland 1975: fig.9:2 Holland 1975: fig.9:6 Holland 1975: fig.9:7 Amr 1988:no.7 Holland 1975: fig.9:8 Holland 1975: fig.9:9 Holland 1975: fig.9:10 Holland 1975: fig.9:11, pl.4:1 Holland 1975: fig.11 :1, pl.4:7 Holland 1975: fig.11:2 Holland 1975: fig.11:3 Incised niples Holland 1975: fig.11:4 Holland 1975: fig.11:5 Holland 1975: fig.11 :6 Holland 1975: fig.11:7 Holland 1975: fig.11:8 disk? Holland 1975: fig.11:9 Holland 1975: fig.12:1 No fig.! photo Holland 1975: A10836 entrance wash Holland 1975: fig.12:5 entrance wash Holland 1975: pl.4:14 entrance wash Holland 1975: p1.4:13 Holland 1975: fig.10:9 Holland 1975: p1.4:8 Holland 1975: p1.4:9 Holland 1975: p1.4:10

158

11 March 1996

Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites

b Cat 427 428 405 406 407 312 313 314 430 431 432 434 433 435 289 291 290 473 467 468 469 438 440 441 439 279 278 462 68 459 460 461 69 95 81 82 80 93 99 97 83 84 86 89 90 92 91 98 85 87 88 94 79 75 76

T1

C C C C C C C C C? C? C? A A A 8 8 C 8 C C C A 8 8 C 8 8 A A C C C 8 A Ac Ac Ae 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8+ 8e 8e 77 8e 8c 74 78 8e 96 C 100 C 101 C

T2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2

T3

Locks

S C B

Hh Hal

5 5 1 1 1 235 2345 5?

+

O?

Break

obje?

+ +

56 81

40 43 73?

1 2 3 1-2 4 1 2-3 1 1 1 ? 1? ? 2 2? 4 1 1 2 2 3 1-2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3? 4 4 4 4 4 3 1 3-4 4 2 2 3 3

A A A A 8

0/3A 3-48?

A?

?2

+ +

1

simp?

E E? A Ap

3-4? lock?

? A A A Ap C A E A A A 8 C 0 C

?

simp? simp? 3-4A 3-4A 3-4A 482 4-5C2 401 4-5C2

8 8 8 0 8

3-48 482 482? 402-3 383

C F A G

582 4A2 4-58

1d 1d 1d 1d 1 123 1u 1235 1d23 1d23 1 1 1236 1d 1d 1d 1d5 1235 1235 5 1u 1

+

R

1d

+ 1

5 5

+

5

1u 8-7 1 1d 1u 1p 1 1 1u 1p 1d78 1d 1d 1u 1d 5 1d 1d 6 1d 6 15 5 5

26 27 25

58 53 127 50 75 45 110

40

53 84

25? 35 70 80 25 40 40 25 38 34 104 25 135 22 98 29 70 29 30 50 32 70 33 48 21 60 26 63 29 60 32 62 25 72 27 58 26 58 27 63 33 50 30 85 27 114 26 155 25 152 31 151 27 181 27 150 33 65 58 24

159

Site Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Kenya Jerusalem Lux Jerusalem Lux Jerusalem Lux Jerusalem Macal Jerusalem Macal Jerusalem Macal Jerusalem Mamil; Jerusalem Mamil; Jerusalem Mamil; Jerusalem Mamil; Jerusalem Mazar Jerusalem Mazar Jerusalem Mazar Jerusalem Mazar Jerusalem Vincer Jerusalem Vincer Kh. Anim Kh. Hoga Kh. Jeresh Kh. Jeresh Kh. Jeresh Kh.Rabud Lachish Lachish Lachish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Lachish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Laehish Lachish Lachish Lachish Laehish Laehish Laehish

Page Fld

Square

C?

A A A

Lev

6.8-18

A-26 A-26 A-26?

Cave 1 Cave 1 Cave wash Cave 1?

IR? IR? IR?

9 F

IV

Locus

35, mixed Tomb 5,11 Tomb 5,11 Tomb II R.16 EF/15 15026 6015

8 0 E-30 8-6 8-6

P-17 H-17 Of)( Of)( 94c Of)( H-17 Of)( Of)( A-6 8-6 E-30 E-30 E-30 G-18

36 Surface 19 19 19 103 500 1002 106 106 500 41 135 500 500 Shaft 1078 500

82 1-5

IV?

III

III

VI? 1087

III

120 106 1002 1002

1-5 6ft

1002 27 61a 24

6ft I? II II

22 February 1996

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

Page

a Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

22 February 1996 Cat 407 312 313 314 430 431 432 434 433 435 289 291 290 473 467 468 469 438 440 441 439 279 278 462 68 459 460 461 69 95 81 82 80 93 99 97 83 84 86 89 90 92 91 98 85 87 88 94 79 75 76 77 74 78 96 100 101 103 104 472 102 474

Date 8 8 8 81

Context1 cave cave cave cave?

Cont2 cave? cave? cave? cave?

8-71 8-71 8-71

mix 8-7 8-7 8-7

tomb repositor tomb repositor tomb

H 01 la A A A A A A A A A A A A A

10 11 11 11 11 11 11 1 1 1 2 3 11

nd

8 40 37 36 35 33 34 44 A 53a 8 06a C 04a C 06 D 08 42

Engle Field

Reg.

C.770 C.779 C.792 1106?

Museum Reg.

WM.657?

7:32 1:26 98(22A} ? 231 5-105/1 5-84

tomb tomb tomb

IAA91-2159 IAA 91-2153 IAA52-99

1469

8-71

7 8-7 8-7 8-7 8 71 71 71 9-8? 8

8

IR1! 8

8-71 71 71 71

tomb?

bedrock destru surface room IMng room living room living house? out quarter tomb tomb room c tomb room c out quarter open pit lopen area out quarter out quarter water system? room house out quarter

269k 746/10

tomb? A A

6 8 01 6 D 01

A

1 A 16a

475/2

dom dom dom dom dom? tomb tomb tomb

open open publ?

7:01 A A A A A

1 1 1 1 4

A A A A E

56a 54 55 56 03

A A A A A A A

2 2 2 3 4 5 4

A A G F D 8 D

07 06 02 03 04 02 05

tomb tomb tomb tomb

A A A A A A A A

3 D 3 D 3 D 5 C 5 8 8 A 4A 7 A

11 13 12 02 01 01 05 01

tomb publ?

A 7 8 01 A 10 8 47

open street

tomb, communal tomb room c tomb tomb

71 tomb Per? surface gate 7 room? 7 room surface 71 cave on bedroc surface surface

8:07 2:04 4:02 5:107 3:12 8:08 1:33 3:07 6:07 5:108 7:22 2:06 1:12 1:13 6:01 6:08 7:26 2:03 3:08 1:05 3:11

60 49 71 79/1 3880 1255a 333 332 3886 373/2 884/4 3890 3885 7247 7094 3891 3069 789/1

PM.35.3068 PM.33.2056

IAA 78-2808 IAA 78-2807

PM.39.819

IAA 78-2809

7144

5187 334 1225 1318a

PM.36.2245 12,73.268a PM.33.2055

1318

PM.34.128

384/1 177/1

dom? dom?

IAA93-748

7:33 7:34

A 11 A

44a

3 D 14

IM.55-11 1:35

451 M.1776 IAA63-312

160

Cat 428 405 406 407 312 313 314 430 431 432 434 433 435 289 291 290 473 467 468 469 438 440 441 439 279 278 462 68 459 460 461 69 95 81 82 80 93 99 97 83 84 86 89 90 92 91 98 85 87 88 94 79 75 76 77 74 78 96 100 101 103

Lfind

Fgrp

+ + +

P P P

C1AN C1AN

Place PrS Pc 27 99 12? 26 17 19 99 30 22 99 * * *

* 2 2

Object

Wheel made?

b b-f f b-f f f

+ + +

b-f PR

Notes

15.9.1977 +

2 f

9 P

AN2

*

P P P

C,AN C,AN C,AN

* * *

P PB P

8A?

1 1

ABAN

f f f b b b f b f f b

+ + + + + +

1934-5, Persian? eXh. no. 360

P

PLm

1

f b b b-f f f

the great shaft +

9 f P

+

2 f f f

PLm

Debrisl Surface

9 BR P P P P P P PV

B? B? B?

1 14 1

f f f

13 1

9 9 9

f?

+

Communal tomb?

+

exh.no.372

+

donat. Colt 1934 exhib. no. 370

Found 1981.

161

Page

Bibliography (mainlfirst) Holland 1975: fig.11: 10 Holland 1975: A 1OB38 Holland 1975: A10839 Holland 1975: A 1OB40 Holland 1975: fig.12:3 Holland 1975: fig.12:2 Holland 1975: p1.4:11 Holland 1975: A.11.33 Holland 1975: A.11.34 Holland 1975: A.11.44 Lux 1972: taf.22:upper right Lux 1972: taf.22:upper middle Lux 1972: taf.22:upper left PEFA IV:1926: fig.197 right PEFA IV:1926: f1G.197 left. PEFA IV:1926: fig.194 Courtesy R Reich Courtesy R Reich Courtesy R Reich Amiran 1956: pl.c:19 (H) Nadelman 1989a: 125 Nadelman 1989a: photo 120 Nadelman 1989a:125 Nadelman 1989a: photo 121 Vincent 1911: pI.16:2+4 Vincent 1911: pI.16:3+5 Unpublished, courtesy D Amit Gophna 1970:29, pI.6:6. Unpublished, courtesy D. Amit Unpublished, courtesy D. Amit Unpublished, courtesy D. Amit Kochavi 1974: fig.8:11. Holland 1975: pl.41:2 Lachish 3: pI.28:14. Lachish 3: pI.27:3. Lachish 3: pI.27:1. Lachish 3: pl.31:7. Lachish 5: pls.12:2, 33:2. Lachish 5: pl.33:3. Lachish 3: pI.31:9. Lachish 3: pl.31:12. Lachish 3: pl.31:8. Lachish 3: pl.31:6. Lachish 3: pl.31:13. Lachish 3: pl.31:1. Lachish 3: pl.31:5. Lachish 5: pls.12:2, 33:4. Lachish 3: pl.31:3. Lachish 3: pl.31:4. Lachish 3: pl.31:14. Lachish 3: p1.31:2 Lachish 3: pI.27:8. Lachish 3:pl.27:4. Lachish 3: pI.28:11. Lachish 3: pl.28:13. Patai 1967:65, photo 1. Lachish 3: pI.28;10. Lachish 3: pI.32:2. Lachish 3: pI.12:6. Lachish 5: pI.12:5. Hubner 1989:500, tat.7.

b

11 March 1996

Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites

22 February 1996

Page

Cat Cat 103 104 472 102 474 117 118 116 119 120 121 122 123 113 112 114 463 578 577 115 132 310 311 464 309 147 293 337 195 254 255 256 251 481 257 252 267 470 262 266 263 264 260 265 259 258 261 253 268 269 270 272 273 271 274 275 276 277 196 232 204

T1

T2

B C A B C A A+ A? Ac B B C C A B C C C C C C C C C C C C B B A A A A A A Ac B B B B B B B B B B B Bc C C C C C C C C C C A+ Ac B

SR• 1 1 4 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 2? 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1? 2? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1? 2 2? 3-4 3? 4 4 4 6 ? 2? 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 1? 1 1-2

T3 ? Ap B

Locks

S C B

8?B? + 3-4B

A Ap A C A A

simp 3-4A?

Ap A

3-4A2

disk harig

+ +

2-3? + +

A A A Ah Ah Ap Ah A? A

45?23 1 simp?

B? C? E C A?

3-4? 4-5?2 3-4B? 4?2-3 simp? 4C2-3 4A2-3

C

A? A A

child 0/3A

+ + +

2

Break 18 1u 7 18 1235 1 25 1? 1d34 1 1d 1d23 45 1 1 1235 35 1p35 135 5 5 5 5 5 5 1346 1d5 1d 18 1d 1d7 1d7 3457 5 1u

8 6

18 1d7 1d 18 18 1 1 + 18 1u + 6 1 + 6 1d8 + 1 46 + 1234 + 1p26 1d26 1235 + 1245 + 1p25 + 5 + 5 + 5 56 235 1d

Hh Hal 29

32

16 21

31

32 34 32 15 23 19 30 16 25 35 25 26 23 23 33 23 31 23 25 32 27

25 15 26

Site

50 Malhata 110 Malhata 30 Maresha Megiddo Mevaseret=Moza 45 Ramat Rahel RamatRahel RamatRahel 115 RamatRahel 45 Ramat Rahel RamatRahel 85 RamatRahel RamatRahel 50 Ramot06 45 Ramot06 Ramot06 40 Ramot06 78 Ramot06 20 Ramot06 50 Ramot06 35 Ramot06 46 Ramot06 60 Ramot06 34 Ramot06 37 Ramoto6 Samaria Samaria 65 Shechem 62 Shechem 50 Tel BeerSheba 20 Tel BeerSheba 42 Tel BeerSheba 57 Tel Beer Sheba 46 Tel BeerSheba 29 Tel Beer Sheba 135 Tel Beer Sheba 50 Tel Beer Sheba 52 Tel Beer Sheba 50 Tel BeerSheba 48 Tel Beer Sheba 45 Tel Beer Sheba 55 Tel Beer Sheba 45 Tel Beer Sheba 58 Tel Beer Sheba 44 Tel Beer Sheba 53 Tel Beer Sheba 68 Tel Beer Sheba 151 Tel BeerSheba 95 Tel Beer Sheba 95 Tel Beer Sheba 98+ Tel Beer Sheba 80 Tel Beer Sheba 82 Tel Beer Sheba 80 Tel BeerSheba 45 Tel Beer Sheba 55 Tel BeerSheba 60 Tel Beer Sheba 68 Tel Beer Sheba 70 Tel Beit-Mirsim 120 Tel Beit-Mirsim 58 Tel Beit-Mirsim

162

Fld

Square

Locus

Lev

B? 75 N-4

1386/xv surface

215/6

286 329

V V Va? V V

B C B C1

C1 0 0 B OE4-5

120 179 775 1183 243 1152 196 1116 2195 2111 131 131 S11.v S5.b hel

A1

0-18 R-19

B B 0 A4 G C F1

B

A4 F F? C A1 G

B4 F2 SE SE NW

T-1 T-2 S-2 U-3 J-13 R-19 S-10 G-10 H-16 EF-19 0-1 U-4 A-17 MN-16 J-13 C-20 G-1 N-9 0-19 0-1 G-16 A-2I3 K-8/9 0-4 33 22

270 827 1007 tomb? 39=38 25 553 38 443 1603=1004 521 766 462 1782=1200 1253 93 832 256=300 443 1357 11j5 2003 292 1602=1345 479 1261 808a 2 1 Debris

II II II II HEL

I

VI 3-2 A A A

Date

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cant.

Context1

117 room entrance 118 7? 116 119 7? 120 121 7? 122 123 pit 113 8-7 112 8-7 114 8-7 463 8-7 578 8-7 577 8-7 115 8-7 132 8-7 310 8-7 311 8-7 464 8-7 309 8-7 debris 147 debris 293 337 195 254 8? storehouse 255 8 256 8? storehouse wa 251 8 tomb 481 8? street fill 257 8? casemate floor 252 8 surface 267 street 470 8 room house 262 8 storehouse 266 8 alley 263 8 room house 264 8 street 260 8 265 8 259 8 258 8 room house 261 8 storehouse 253 8 room house 268 8 room destruct 269 8 270 8 room? 272 8 street 273 8 room on floor 271 8 274 8 275 room 276 10! casemate? 277 8? room house 196 8? cist open area 232 8 debris 204 8? silo in room 203 8? cistern house 210 8 room house 208 8 casmate 209 8 court house 211 8 room house 212 8

Cont2 publ?

nd

H 01 la A 1 B A 1 G A 1 A A 1 J A 2 F A 2A A 10 B A 10 B

09 05 62 12 03 14 71 70

162/21?

4:05 5:08

B 72

7:23

publ tomb A

1 A 02 3:14 2:05

publ? publ A

3 0 01?

dom

6:05 3:06 1:04

3:15

dom publ publ? dom? dom? publ

publ? dom? dom dom? dom? dom dom dom? dom dom

A A A A A A A A A

1 1 2 2 4 4 4 7 7

A H C C C B B B B

57 02 08 07 01 03 02 03 02

163

IAA64-1375

724 912 136 2963 23710 2969 943 13748 1941 13763 2737=1253 766 4897 3318

publ

sac?

IAA64-1151

30??? IAA62-8 1232/2 7321?5921, IAA64-1376 598211

A 12 C 13 C 12

a

Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.

dom? dom dom dom dom dom dom dom dom dom dom dom A 10 A 10 A 2 A 2

Page

5:204 7:11 5:202 3:10 7:21 7:13 3:09

1716? 14218?118' 5103/1 7760/1 14125/1 7648/1 1462/2 1086/1 8076/1 ? 15853/1 3449/1 14105/1 4739/1 7419/1 328/1 1546211 1075211 1420/1 7289/1 ? 119211 9398/1 ? 16999/1 15923/1 1663211 2293/1 14060/1 12063/1 6053/1? 11511/1 7714/1 SN.1282 SN.670 SN.1808 SN.1328 SN.2450 SN.1332 SN.193 SN.1383 SN.909

1185 1.788

IAA 93-414 IAA 78-1437 IAA 93-14 IAA 93-17 IAA 93-16

IAA 93-13 IAA 93-15

PM.32.2778

PM.1.8928

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont

22 February 1996 Cat

Lfind

Fgrp

104 472 102 474 117 118 116 119 120 121 122 123 113 112 114 463 578

5 *

2n

+

b b

+ f f

2* 2

+464

+

AN,+

* * * * * * * * * * * *

23 1 7 7 7 7 2* 7 5 2 2 2 7 2

+ +

7 7 7 7 7? 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 35? 35? 35? 35?

Notes

Bibliography (mainlfirst)

Koehavi exe.

2

5n

115 132 310 311 464 309 147 293 337 195 254 255 P 256 251 P 481 257 P 252 PM 267 PB 470 262 P 266 P 263 P 264 P 260 265 259 PM 258 261 253 268 269 270 272 P 273 P 271 274 275 276 P 196 232 PM 204 203

Place PrS Pc

11 March 1996 Page

+ f f b b b f b f b f f b-f f b b-f f f? b-f g f f f f f g b b f b b b-f g b f

9 b f f f f f b f

+ + + + + + + + + + + +

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Holland 1975: pl.42:3. Courtesy A Kloner North Site May 1935 MRMC: pI.26:1n6. fond by Mr.Leon Unpublished Season 1960 RR2: p1.24:2 1959 disk RR1: pl.5 Harig 1962 RR2: pl.35:2 1960 RR1: pI.24:3-4. 1961 RR2: pI.35:1. 1960 RR1: pI.24:1. 1961 RR2: pl.36:1. 1961 RR2: pI.36:2. Found 24.6.92 Courtesy A. De Groot Found 29.6.92 Courtesy A. De Groot Courtesy A. De Groot Courtesy A. De Groot Courtesy A. De Groot Courtesy A. De Groot Courtesy A. De Groot Courtesy A. De Groot Courtesy A. De Groot Courtesy A. De Groot Possibly horse Courtesy A. De Groot Courtesy A. De Groot found 18.10.1910 Samaria I: 384, pl.75e Samaria I: 384, pl.75f Kerkhof 1969: fig.24:5 Sellin 1927: 206, pl.20i Unpublished 1971 Unpublished Unpublished Above wall r 193 Unpublished no 1-4613 Unpublished, ct. no. 251 1969 Unpublished 1969 BS 1: photo 27:2, pl.71:1. 1971 BS 1: photo 27:4. 1.4613 Unpublished 1970 BS 1: photo 27:6. 1973 Unpublished 1970 BS 1: photo 27:5. 1971 BS 1: photo 27:9. BS 1: photo 27:8. 1974 Unpublished 1972 Unpublished Unpublished 1971 BS 1: photo 27:7. 1969 Aharoni 1973b:22 photo 5 (H). 1972 2 fragments Unpublished 1974 Unpublished , 1974 Unpublished 1974 Unpublished 1970 Unpublished 1973 Unpublished 5=1973 Unpublished 3=1971 Unpublished 5=1972? Unpublished 3=1971 Unpublished 21.7.1930 TBM 3: 69, pls.31:7; 54b:9. 11.5.28. CHILD! TBM 3: pis. 32:1; 57b:4. 29.6.1932 TBM 3: pI.56:1. 1930 TBM 3: pls.31:11; 54b:5.

164

.'

Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites

b Cat

T1

T2

203 210 208 209 211 212 201 205 202 206 207 213 199 200 197 198 214 215 216 218 219 220 217 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 231 230 129 130 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 137 131 488 489 128 133 134 135

B B B B B B B B B B B B B+ B+ Be Be C C C C C C C C

2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3-5 4 4 4 aTI 2 3-4 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2-4 2-4 3 3 3 3

C C C C C C C C

C C? A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

T3 A A C C G G B A A B B A A B A

Locks 0/3A 2C?2 simp simp 4?B 4?B 3-4B 0/34A 3A? 3-4B 3-4B other simp? O? lock? simp?

S C B Break +

1

1

R

harig C

necla A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A Ap A A A A A A

+ +

+

1

1

1 + + +

8 8

1d 1u7 1 1d 1 1u 1p 1d 1d 1p 1d 1p 5 5 1 6 16 1p23 1d5 1u23 1d78 1 1 1236 1p5 1235 1u5 1u25 1235 1d25 1d5 1d25 5 15 1d 1

Hh Hal 24 72 21 40 23 50 27 60 26 46 34 48 30 84 27 60 20 61 31 73 28 64 22 55 28 102 28 140 28 158 28 210 100 95 96 105 16 59 90 70 68 65 80 80 41 83 46 60 41 44 60 29 68 25 50 42 31 50 40 55 62 49 55 30

1u 1u

38 35

62 45

1d7 1d78 1d 1

30 35 35 35

45 68 55 55

165

Site Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel Beit-Mirsim Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh

Page Fld SE NW SE SE NW SE SE NW SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE NW NW SE NW NW SE NW NW SE

NW SE SE SE NW NW

Locus

Square 13 32 14 51 22 12 32 23 04 22 14 22 21 13 13 31 31 32 13 31 32 13 32 21 12

21 33 51 13 22 31 W-13 AD-17 AK-21 AJ-22 P-17 P-17 AF-20 AC-15 AB-16 AB-16 AB-17

32 10 3 5n 5 5 Debris 13 3 5 6 6 1 pit pit 9 8 10 pit 11 12 pit 12 15

Lev A? A A A A A

-

A A A A A A A

A2 A A A A

A2 A A

A2

A A A nw IE gate A West Tower A A 2 debris A? 8E A 32 A? 13 A 6 A R.586 ci.128 ei.152 ci.216 ci.216 ci.370 534 616 616 625a

AA-18 AC-14

R.566

AG-19 P-17 AA-14 0-14

Ci. 386 Ci.216 R.393 R.239

I

I I I I I

22 February 1996 ~.t 201 205 202 206 207 213 199 200 197 198 214 215 216 218 219 220 217 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 231 230 129 130 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 137 131 488 489 128 133 134 135 136 138 140 139 127 126 125

Date

8? 8 8 8 8 8 8? 8? 8 8 8 8? 8 8 8? 8 8 8? 8? 8? 8 8? 8 8? 8 8

Context1

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

Page

a

debris court open

dom

court house room house room house

dam dam dam

room pit pit room court house court house pit casm house open pit open room house

dom dam dam dam? dam dam dam dam dom? dom dam? dam

court neargate tower street

publ? publ

room? silo in house room house court house

dam? dam dam dam

room

dam

H 01 la

nd

3 C 05 A 2 H 06 A 2 B 01 A 3 D 15 A 3 D 16 A 8 A 02 A 2 E 06 A 2 H 05 A 3 E 01 A 2 C 09 A A 10 B 51 A 10 B 59 A 10 B 55 A 10 B 57 A 12 R 05 A 10 B 60 A 10 B 56 A 10 B 58 A 10 B 63 A 10 B 53 A 10 B 50 A 10 B 54 48 A 11 A 10 B 62 A 10 B 49 A 10 B 52 47 A 11 A 10 B 61 1 A 58 A 1 A 59 A

Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg. 1:27 1:10 6:04 7:12 6:03 7:10 4:08 7:28 4:01 7:14

5:205

SN.881 SN.2105 SN.1228 SN.1019 SN.908 SN.986 SN.523 SN.527 SN.1803 SN.1468 SN.543 SN.2406 SN.2295 SN.1804 SN.2313 SN.2548 SN.1805 SN.2396 SN.1119 SN.988 SN.29 SN.2369 SN.1544 SN.2296 SN.84 SN.1329 SN.1817 SN.2004 X.13 X.26

PM.32.2730

PM.32.2769

PM.32.2762 PM.32.2697

m.224 m.350 m.887 m.995

8-7

7?

room or alley

dam? dam?

A A

1 D 05 1 B 07

X.35 X.12

, dam dom? dam

7?

cist in court cist open area room house open open room house

7?

cist open area

dam?

7-6?

room house cistern

dam?

7

7? 7? 7-6?

7?

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

22 February 1996 Cont2

dam

A A A A A A A A A A A

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

C C C C C C D

J J A A

09 05 07 08 06 09a 06 08 09 60 61

166

M.2480 M.886 M.2338 X4 M.907 1512 M.2814 M.988 M.577 x11 M.146

PM35.3095 PM.31.326

PM.32.2507 PM.35.3219

M.1608 P.3436

Cat 210 208 209 211 212 201 205 202 206 207 213 199 200 197 198 214 215 216 218 219 220 217 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 231 230 129 130 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 137 131 488 489 128 133 134 135 136

Lfind

MP MP

MP P MP P

Fgrp

A A

A

A

PW

P PI

AN1 A-2

Place PrS Pc 1 35? 35? 1 35? 35? 1 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 1 35? 35? 1 35? 1 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 35? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 1 1 34? 34? 34?

f-g

+

9 9 f

+

b

+

f

+

f f

+ +

Notes 5.8.1932 24.7.1930 Casemate,15.5.26 26.7.1930 30.6.1930 27.6.1930 17.7.1932 1930 9.7.1930 30.6.1930 7.7.1930 28.4.1928 1.5.1928 23.6.1932 30.7.1930 2.5.1928 2.8.1932? 25.7.1932 23.6.1932 27.7.1932 29.7.1932 23.6.1932 1.8.1932 14.7.1930 7.7.1930 5.5.1926 29.7.1932 tower! 6.8.1930 25.7.1932 17.5.1926 23.7.1930 30.6.1932 9.7.32, neclace Neck collar?

cist329a? 63,seas1929? Squar 14, not 15

167

Page

Bibliography (mainlfirst) TBM 3: pI.56:5. TBM 3: pls.31:14; 54b:2 TBM 3: pl.57c:1. TBM 3: p1.31:3 TBM 3: pls.31:13; 54:1 TBM 3: pis. 31:1; 54:6. TBM 3: pI.56:2. TBM 3: pis. 31:4; 54b:3 TBM 3: pls.31:12; 54b:8. TBM 3: pls.31:15; 54:4 TBM 3: pls.31:2; 54:7. TBM 2: pl.25:9= TBM 3:pI.57c:2 TBM 2: pI.25:10; 3:pl.57c:3. TBM 3: pls.29:12,12a; 56:3. TBM 3: PL.31 :6. TBM 3: pl. 57c:5. TBM 3: p1.55:6 TBM 3: p1.55:10 TBM 3: pI.55:8. TBM 3: pI.56:4. TBM 3: pI.55:9. TBM 3: pI.55:11. TBM 3: pI.55:7. TBM 3: pls.31:8; 54b:10. TBM 3:pls.31:10; 54:11. TBM 3: pI.57c:6. TBM 3: pl.56:8 TBM 3: pl:31:5 TBM 3: p1.56:6 TBM 3: pI.57c:7. TBM 3: pls.31:9; 54b:12. TBM 3: p1.56:9 TBM 3: pl.56:7 TN1: pl.86:10. TN1: pl.86:11. TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1: pI.86:7. TN1: pI.86:5. TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1: pI.53:18. TN1: p1.86:9 TN1: pI.86:2. TN1: pI.86:1. TN1: pI.86:4.

b

11 March 1996 Cat

T1

T2

T3

136 A 3 A 138 A 3 A 140 A 4 A 139 A 4 Cp 127 A+ 1 C 126 Ac 1 A 125 Ac 1 Ap 143 B 167 B 1 B 158 B 1 C 169 B 1149 B 1-2 A 144 B 2 A 148 B 2 A 159 B 2 A 164 B 2 B 160 B 2 C 161 B 2 C 150 B 2-3 A 151 B 2-3 A 152 B 2-3 A 141 B 3 A 142 B 3 A 145 B 3 A 146 B 3 A 153 B 3 B 163 B 3 B 162 B 3 C 154 B 4 B 155 B 4 B 156 B 4 B 157 B 4 B 166 B 5 A 168 B sr? 165 B srt 171 C 1 172 C 1 507 C 1 508 C 1 509 C 1 510 C 1 511 C 1 512 C 1 513 C 1 514 C 1 515 C 1 516 C 1 517 C 1 518 C 1 519 C 1 520 C 1 521 C 1 522 C 1 523 C 1 524 C 1 525 C 1 526 C 1 527 C 1 528 C 1 529 C 1 530 C 1

Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Locks

S C B + + + + + + R

eyes

simp simp?

+ + +

lock?

2A2 A-3A simp? 4B2 simp? 3?A2 2-3A 2-3A 3-4A 3-4A 3-4A 3-4A 3-4B2 4?B23 simp? 3-4B 3-4B 3-4B 3-4B Other Other

+

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

1

Break 1u 17 1d 1u 5

1d34 18 1 1u 1 1d 8 1 1 7 1p 1p 18 1d 1p 1 8 1p 1 1d 1 1 1d 1 1u 1 1p 1 1 1u 1u 1 1 + 1u8 1 8 1 1 1 1 1u6 1u6

Hh Hal 30 38 46 40 30 28 25 27 28 27 24 27 32 26 29 30 28 28 29 32 31 30 27 33 31 28 34 30 28 32 30

45 58

Site

Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh 77 Tel e-Nasbeh 52 Tel e-Nasbeh 100 Tel e-Nasbeh 140 Tel e-Nasbeh 160 Tel e-Nasbeh 42 Tel e-Nasbeh 40 Tel e-Nasbeh 79 Tel e-Nasbeh 40 Tel e-Nasbeh 53 Tel e-Nasbeh 48 Tel e-Nasbeh 72 Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh 51 Tel e-Nasbeh 52 Tel e-Nasbeh 76 Tel e-Nasbeh 68 Tel e-Nasbeh 42 Tel e-Nasbeh 82 Tel e-Nasbeh 65 Tel e-Nasbeh 52 Tel e-Nasbeh 52 Tel e-Nasbeh 80 Tel e-Nasbeh 50 Tel e-Nasbeh 76 Tel e-Nasbeh 70 Tel e-Nasbeh 53 Tel e-Nasbeh 62 Tel e-Nasbeh 53 Tel e-Nasbeh 47 Tel e-Nasbeh 52 Tel e-Nasbeh 58 Tel e-Nasbeh 65 Tel e-Nasbeh 80 Tel e-Nasbeh 108 Tel e-Nasbeh 66 Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh

168

22 February 1996

Page Fld

Cat

Square AB-25 AB-25 AB-16 P-17 AH-20 RS-22 AK-23 AG-28 AG-28 AA-14 AF R-17 AE-19 2-15 T-14 AL-23 SEC74 AFG19 AB-16 2-14 P-15f AJ-20 AB-24 P-14 P-17 AE-18 AC-17 AF-17 AD-19 2-19 AF-19 2-15 N-17 T-23 W-20 AL-21 ah-20

Locus

Lev

R.221 R.224

I

Ci.216 R.369 Ci. 78 near cave R.642 Ci.370 R.161 R.464 R.670 C321x2 R.361 Si.92 debris R.438 R.398 R.132 Ci.159 Dump

I

I I I I?

I I

"

Ci.216 R.435

I

Dump

I

R.633 mixe

I I? I I I

R.665 Ci.176 R.273 R.77 R.23 cl.156

, ,,c

I?

143 167 158 169 149 144 148 159 164 160 161 150 151 152 141 142 145 146 153 163 162 154 155 156 157 166 168 165 171 172 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538

Date

8-7 7? 7? 7? 7? 7? 7? 7? 8-7? 8? 7? 7?

7? 8-7 7 8-7?

Context1 out open area out court house cist room room or court room or court room house cistern court house silo debris room room house room cist room dump open cist open area room house

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Cont2

dom dom dom dom? dom dom dom? dom? dom dom dom

dump

cist dom dom dom

room house

dom

room house? cistern house gate tower debris house (room?)

dom dom? publ pUbl? dom?

H 01 la A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

12 9 4 12 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 9 9 9 10 10

R C A R C A C A E B E D D D A A A A C E B D D D D D A A B B

nd 08 01 06 06 10 11 11 12 06 4 05 03 02 04 08 09 10 13 06 07 05 18 17 19 20 01 01 02 64 67

Page

Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg. 7:46 5:07 5:02 7:48 5:01 7:47 5:103 3:13 5:104 7:19 8:09 5:101 5:102 7:39 5:06 5:05 7:16 7:17 1:24 7:24 7:18 1:22 1:20 1:23 1:21 7:44 7:43 7:45

M.814 M.816 M.2851 M.2544 M.690 M.2489 M.2870 M.120? M.1550 M.221 M.1072 M.2445 M.2815 M.2350 M.666, x1 M.460 M.1454 M.1195 M.994 M.2535 M.2808 M.2419 M.2759 M.2845 M.2437 M.2868 M.1033 M.1698

Kansas City

PM.35.3104 PM.35.3097 1.1708 PM.32.2516 PM.31.327?

Kansas City

PM.35.3103 PM.35.3218

x.23 M.430

169

a

11 March 1996

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

22 February 1996 Cat 138 140 139 127 126 125 143 167 158 169 149 144 148 159 164 160 161 150 151 152 141 142 145 146 153 163 162 154 155 156 157 166 168 165 171 172 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531

Lfind

Fgrp A1A A-2

P

PLRW

PWM

A-3

A-2

PL

Place PrS Pc 1 1 34? 34? 34? 1 16 34? 34? 1 34? 1 34? 1 1 34? 1 34? 34? 34? 16 34? 34? 34? 34? 1 1 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34?

b-f f

Notes

+ + Eyes Incised?

b-f b f

+

exhib. no. 362 Before cave 193 Chignon at back

9 roc: cist331 ir1

b

9 f f-g f b-f f b-f

+

Hole in neck

+

Sea1928. Kfilut? Season 1932

+

9 Mold not=a2d2-3 reg. 33-031'3 Season 1927

b f b

b-f f f f

+ +

9 f

Only Face

b

Veil holder Veil holder

170

Page

Bibliography (mainlfirst) Holland 1975: pl.41:3. TN1: pI.86:8. TN1: p1.86:3 TN1: p1.86:15 TN1: pl.86:14. TN1: pls.46:6; 87:2. TN1: pl.85:26. TN1: pI.85:17a-b. TN1: pI.85:19. TN1: pls.53:32, 85:28. TN1: pI.85:16. TN1: pI.85:27. TN1: pI.85:11. Unpublished? TN1: pI.85:24. TN1: pI.85:15. TN1: pI.85:22. TN1: pI.85:9. TN1: p1.85:10 TN1: pI.85:12. TN1: p1.85:25 TN1: pls.47:10= 85:13. TN1: pI.85:14. TN1: pI.85:18. TN1: pI.85:8. TN1: pI.85:21. TN1: pl.85:23. TN1: pI.85:7. TN1: pI.85:4. TN1: pI.85:6. TN1: pI.85:5. TN1: p1.85:2 TN1: pls.50:13; 85:1. TN1: pI.85:3. TN1: pls.74:5 up left; 86:17. TN1: pI.86:16. TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN 1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A

Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites

b Cat

T1

T2

531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 173 174 175 176 177 178 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 179 170 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 180 181 483 184 187 189 186

C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C A+ B Ac 8 8 8

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 1 1 1 2

T3

Locks

S C B

+ + + + +

D

A A? A C C 8

1 1

disk

1u5 1u5 15 1u5 5 1u25

56 5

5 245 1d

4?1

+ simp simp? 48

Break

+ 1d 1u 1d

Hh Hal

Site

Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh 73 Tel e-Nasbeh 45 Tel e-Nasbeh 58 Tel e-Nasbeh 85 Tel e-Nasbeh 40 Tel e-Nasbeh 37 Tel e-Nasbeh 69 Tel e-Nasbeh 52 Tel e-Nasbeh 87 Tel e-Nasbeh 32 Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh 70 Tel e-Nasbeh 48 Tel e-Nasbeh 43 Tel e-Nasbeh 38 Tel e-Nasbeh 70 Tel e-Nasbeh 69 Tel e-Nasbeh 44 Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh 51 Tel e-Nasbeh 90 Tel e-Nasbeh 25 Tel e-Nasbeh 69 Tel e-Nasbeh 61 Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Nasbeh 85 Tel e-Nasbeh 62 Tel e-Nasbeh 50 Tel e-Nasbeh Tel e-Safi 32 70 Tel el Muleiha 33 145 Tel el-Areini Tel el-Areini Tel el-Areini Tel el-Areini

171

Page Fld

A A A

Square

Locus

AH-23 SEC74 AJ-22 Z-24 ZAA18 AF-26 AD-17 AJ-20 Y-24 R-17

ci.359 R.64 R.104 si.249

AJ-20 AJ-20 P-22 X-22 Z-13 Z-13 Z-13 AG-17 AJ-20 0-17 0-16 0-17 0-16 X-13 AB-14 AG-19 AJ-20

Ci.159 Ci.159 surface surface surface surface surface dump R.64 R.136 R.137 R.138 R.146 R.346 R.390 R.438 Ci.159

Lev

Debris Si.145 R.639

I I I

I

6-5 45? VI

22 February 1996

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

Page

a Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

22 February 1996 Cat 539 173 174 175 176 177 178 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 179 170 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 180 181 483 184 187 189 186 185 188 190 192 191 193 194 235 234

Date

Context1

Cont2

debris silo open area

dom?

room

dom?

H 01 la A A A A A A

10 10 10 10 10 10

C B C B B A

nd

Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg. M.175 M.775 M.333 x.48 x.35 M.870

11 68 10 65 66 10

M.310 M.577

B-7? cist room 8-7? cist room

8-7?

cist room

dom dom

dom

1 G 04 A 55 A 11

M.464 M.463 x5 x22 x62 x85 x90 x12 x7

x5 x55 x12a M.459

54 A 11 A 1 A 63

9-7? 7? Per? 9? 7-6? 7? 8-7? 8-7? IR2 IR2

surface tomb silo silo

06a 01 02 01 02 01 10

5:03 5:04 4:04 3:05 1:08

M.85

264?

IAA 55-11 IAA6,Q-725

26

IAA59-308

surface A 1 A A 4 A A 4A A 3 A A 2 H A 3 F A 11

M311 M759 M698 M719 M689

122

dom? tomb dom? dom?

7:09 A A

4A 04 3 F 02

172

7:03 7:07

61 142 P.1094

Cat 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 173 174 175 176 177 178 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 179 170 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 180 181 483 184 187 189 186 185

Lfind

Fgrp

+

C3 A

Place PrS Pc 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34? 34?

Notes

Disk

C3

Bad photo 2 5

f-g

+ +

surface find

9

Romema?

173

Page

Bibliography (mainlfirst) TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A . TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1: pI.86:12. TN1: p1.86:21 TN1: pI.86:20. TN1: pl.86:19 TN1: p1.86:13 TN1: pI.86:22. TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1:247, appendix A TN1 :247, appendix A TN1: pI.47:13. TN1: pI.47:11. TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) TN1: pI.47:12. Bliss & Macalister 1902:fig.51 Unpublished Holland 1975: pl.41:1. Yeivin 1961: pI.2:3:2 left (H) Yeivin 1961: p1.2: 3:left (H) Ciasca 1962: pI.9:10. Moscati 1964:5f; Patai 1967:66

b

Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites

11 March 1996 Cat

T1

T2

185 188 190 192 191 193 194 235 234 233 236 237 183 182 239 238 248 245 249 246 247 471 250 240 241 242 243 244 482 280

8 8 C A Ac 8 C 8 8 8 8 C 8e C 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 C C A A 8 C C 8 C

3 3 3 1 1 2 2 1 3 3-4 4? 1 3 2 3 2-3 3 3-4 4 4? 2 3 1 4 3 2 3 2 2

T3 A 8

Locks 5A2! 482-4

A A A

1-2A2

C 8 8 A?

simp 483 482? 4A?12

8?

482

8 A? 8 A? D?

2-382 5A2 5+82 4+A1 4D? simp?

S C B +

+ + +

1

+

1 3

+ + +

+ Ap A

C D?

+ +

simp? objec

1

Break

1d 1 5 1 2346 1d 1u25 1u 1d7 1p 2345 1 25 1235 1 1u 1u 1u 1u8 + 1p8 + 1d 1d5 5 1d 1d 1d 1u5 5 1p

Hh Hal

Site

Tel el-Areini Tel el-Areini Tel el-Areini 20 42 Tel el-Ful Tel el-Ful 21 60 Tel el-Ful 65 Tel el-Ful 30 42 Tel el-Judeida 31 82 Tel el-Judeida 30 65 Tel el-Judeida 29 115 Tel el-Judeida 125 Tel el-Judeida 30 86 Tel el-Dreme 35 Tel el-Dreme Tel Halif/ Lahav Tel Halifl Lahav 26 42 Tel Ira 30 50 Tel Ira 28 44 Tel Ira 26 60 Tel Ira 26 65 Tel Ira Tel Ira 66 Tel Ira 22 40 Tel Masos 38 85 Tel Masos 28 78 Tel Masos 56 Tel Masos 48 Tel Masos 21 70 Tel Michal Tel Qasila

174

22 February 1996

Page Fld

Square

Locus

A A

VI 1-41 roomE Tomb? XVIII Si39 XVIII Si38

Mi Mi

C? D A IV E E E E E E G G G D? G A

Lev

R-17f

F-9 F-5 F-7 F-15

555 683 Surface G.8005 152 574 591 159 191 1580 526 602 778 741 612 708 955 ?

3b 43a 43a

II II 6b 7-6 7 7-6 7

Cat

Date

233 236 237 183 182 239 238 248 245 249 246 247 471 250 240 241 242 243 244 482 280

IR2 IR2 IR2 8 8 8 7 7 7 7

7 7

Context1

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Cont2

H 01 la

nd

A 3 D 10 A 12 8 01 A 10 8 46 storeroom surface room on floor out glacis storeroom out glacis room house casmate room street

773/1 4539/1 4623/1 776/1 4021/1 4572 4548/1 983/3 3646/1 1547/1 1094/1 1460/1 6414/1

publ? dom? dom?

7? court liv.laye 7 PER silo open area 9?

P.63 P.55

1:30 7:08

IAA85-448

sac? publ? publ?

A 10 8 69

? 3 4 2 6 8

175

a

Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.

1962/1 2436/1

publ

Page

IAA 75-902 IAA90-728

Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.

22 February 1996 Cat 188 190 192 191 193 194 235 234 233 236 237 183 182 239 238 248 245 249 246 247 471 250 240 241 242 243 244 482 280

Lfind

Fgrp

Place PrS Pc 5

Notes Pointed hat

9

5? "pre IIIb" "pre IIIb"

P? P 1 1 1 5 P PAl

9

+

"hat"

9

+

C, and not E? lev 6.88 North North gate13.36

f 2? 2 7 7 7 7 7

+ + + + +

7

+ Hat

+

PO b-f

Page

Bibliography (mainlfirst) Moscati 1964: p1.8. Ciasca 1963: p1.20:2 Lapp 1981: pis. 32:4, 16. Macalister1915:35, pI.1:1. Lapp 1981: pI.32:1,13. Lapp 1981: pI.32:2,4. Bliss & Mac.1902: pI.68:6. Bliss & Macalister1902: 68:8 Bliss & Macalister1902: 68:7 Bliss & Macalister1902: 68:10 Bliss & Macalister1902: 68:9 Fritz 1990: pI.102:1, taf.42a Fritz 1990: pI.102:2. Courtesy O. Borowski Seger 1992. Kletter in press A: nO.5 K1etter in press A: nO.1 Kletterin press A: no.3 K1etter in press A: nO.2 K1etter in press A: nO.4 courtesy Y. Beit Arieh K1etter in press A: nO.6 Masos 1: pl.11 0:4. Masos 1: pl.11 0:2. Masos 1: pl.11 0:3. Masos 1: pl.11 0:6ab. Masos 1: pI.111:5. Kertesz 1989: 361 Mazar 1951: 206f, fig.13c

b

Appendix 2: Catalogue of Judean Pillar Figurines 1. A whole figurine of type Be from Deir el Azhar, near Abu Ghosh. It was broken and mended after discovery. The hair or headdress appears like a veil around the face (Abel 1921:100). Holland (1975: vol. I:105, 193) defined it as his type A8, but possibly it is only a badly worn figurine with a common, curly hairdress. Context and date: The figurine was found in a hewn tomb with burial benches, typical of the Iron Age II. It seems that there is pottery of the 7th century BC (Abel 1921: pI. 2), but exact dating is not certain. Literature: Abel 1921; Pritchard 1943: type VII:208; Holland 1975: AlIl.c.1; Engle 1979: typeVII:27. 2. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Ashdod. It has a red painted band on the neck. Hachlili compared this head to heads from Ramat Rahel (Ashdod II-III: 131). Context and date: locus 1075 near the large pit (1076) of levels 1-2. This area was not well defined, but was perhaps an alley between domestic buildings. According to the list of loci, it is a mixed locus (Ashdod 11-111:120). Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 65:11, reg. no. 1035/1; Holland 1975: A.l.a.1. 3. An unidentified body part from Bethel. Either a Photograph or a drawing was not published. Context and date: The locus was not specified, and the excavators had not defined phases within the Iron Age period in this site. Notes: figurines 3-6 from Bethel appear, together with another fragment, as Holland's (1975) nos. AX1.2-5, without a further separation. They cannot be classified with any certainty, since almost no details are given by the excavators. The added fragment does not belong to the JPF (it is Holland's AXI."3", today in the Rockefeller Museum, reg. no. PM.35.442). Literature: Kelso 1968:116, index no. 40, 83, #331; Holland 1975: AXI."2". 4. An unidentified body part from Bethel. Reg. no. 467. Context and date: locus 120 in area II, an unclear area on the southern edge of the excavations (see note to figurine no. 3 above). Literature: Kelso 1968:83, #331; Holland 1975: AXI."4". 5. A torso called "Astarte" from Bethel. Reg. no. 1011, from season 1954. Context and date: It was found in area VI, but the locus was not specified (see note to figurine no. 3 above). Literature: Kelso 1968:88, #355; Holland 1975: AXI."5". . 6. A body part of type C.2 from Bethel. Reg. no. 59. The excavators defined it as a "typical Iron Age II figurine", without any further description. Context and date: "north of 3", perhaps north of locus 3. If so, it is area I, from the Roman - Byzantine periods (see note to figurine no. 3 above). Literature: Kelso 1968:83, pI. 45:15; Holland 1975: AX.b1.

7. A whole figurine of type BC.3.b from a tomb near Bethlehem. The head and the upper body are covered with red paint or slip. The hair and the area around the eyes show traces of blue paint. Mitchell (1988) thought that it is a fertility figurine, which could not have belonged to someone who really believed in Yahweh, thus its owner was pagan. Context and date: The figurine was dated to the 7th century, since it was seen as a "forbidden" cult object and related to the Josiah's reform (Tubb 1980:14). The tomb can be dated to the 8th-7th centuries BC (for the pottery see Mitchell 1988:73). Note: Clermont-Ganneau (1884) had doubts about the origin of this figurine, without indicating Why. But since it was found at a very early date (it was presented to the British Museum in 1865), there is no reason to doubt that it is authentic. Place: British Museum, London. Literature: Clermont-Ganneau 1884:224; Barnett 1968: fig. 17a; Holland 1975: vol. 1:62, 186, Atll.c.t: Engle 1979: type 11:7; Tubb 1980; Mitchell 1988:73. 8. A whole figurine of type AC.1.a from tomb 5 in Beth Shemesh. It is exceptional, since there are no breasts, thus it was explained as a man (with Semitic facial features, Mackenzie 1912:76). Context and date: the figurine was found, together with a group of pottery vessels, in the left back part of tomb 5. This tomb was dated to the 8th-6th centuries BC (ibid; also Holland 1975: vol. 1:71), but seems to belong mainly to the 8th century BC. Note: this figurine may have portrayed a rider (?) or a woman holding a drum that was broken away (?). Place: Rockefeller P.444, exhibition no. 361. Literature: Mackenzie 1912:76-77, pis. 41:10; 42; Holland 1975: vol. 1:71f, 178, type Al.a.4. 9. A head and upper body part of type A+.1.A from tomb 5 in Beth Shemesh. Remains of white-wash are still visible on the neck, and perhaps there is paint on the eyes. Context and date: It was found on the left burial bench. For the dating cf. figurine no. 8 above. Note: Mackenzie suggested that figurines 8 and 9 form a pair, perhaps of protective divinities (but he also mentioned magic and the biblical teraphim as well, 1912:83-84). Literature: Mackenzie 1912:76f, pis. 41:9; 42; Holland 1975:71, type Al.a.5. [Fig. 4:1, where the lower body is restored]. 10. A head and upper body part of type A+.1.Ah from cistern 25 in Beth Shemesh. Context and date: the pottery assemblage of cistern 25 was related to level lie and dated to the 8th-6th centuries Be. It includes a Imlk stamp and other 8th century BC pottery types (AS III: map 1, 62-63; AS V:74-75). The cistern is situated in an open area near the junction of two alleys, in area V34, and it may have been a public cistern. Place: Haverford? Note: figurine no. 29 was found in the same cistern. Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:36; AS V:156; Holland 1975:77, type Al.a.6.

176

177

11. A whole figurine of type Bc.4.B from room 366 in Beth Shemesh. Context and date: room 366, a section of a cobbled floor in area S54. Probably it is a domestic floor, since a dyeing installation was found nearby (AS III: 69-70, map 1). The locus is mixed, as is usual for this excavation (even a Philistine shard was ascribed to it, reg. no. 4-208). Holland (1975:73) defined it as part of house 6 with loci 366 and 343, where figurines nos. 20, 30 were found. The figurine may be dated to the 8th century BC, since remains of the 7th century BC are scanty in Beth Shemesh (except tomb 14 and some finds from the new excavations). Place: Haverford? Literature: AS 111:69-70, pI. 23 lower right, map 1; Wright 1943:16 fig. 7; Pritchard 1943: type VII:216; Holland 1975:77, type AlIl.d.3. 12. A whole figurine of type Bc.4.A from Beth Shemesh. It has five rows of little curls and three bands of red and yellow paint on its neck. The face and hair show traces of dark red paint. The base is concave. Context and date: it was found in the area of the "high place", near the southern gate area. Place: Rockefeller P.400, exhibition no. 373. Notes: it was not published in the report (cf. figurine no. 34 below). The card of the Rockefeller museum carries a reg. no., 3rd.A.S.12.xxxix, probably meaning the third season of 1912. Literature: unpublished (?). I could not locate this figurine in Holland's or Engle's studies. 13. A whole figurine of type BC.3.B from tomb 1 in Beth Shemesh. Mackenzie noted remains of paint, and thought that the hair style is Egyptian (1912:54). He explained this figurine as Astarte, but it was called a male god in the plate (ibid: pI. 22). Context and date: Mackenzie (1912:57ff) dated the tomb by lamps. Wright (AS V:77) and Holland (1975:71) suggested a 10th-9th century BC dating, but the tomb was certainly used in the 8th centuryBC, and an exact date of the figurine itself cannot be established. Note: figurine no. 15 was found in the same tomb. Literature: Mackenzie 1912: 52ff, pis. 22:9; 23; Pritchard 1943: type VII:203; Pritchard 1954; Patai 1967:70 photo 8, center right; Holland 1975: type AlIl.c.2. 14. A hand-made head of type A1 from room 374 in Beth Shemesh (Season 1933). The photograph is bad and the exact shape of the head is not clear. Context and date: Holland ascribed this head to house 5, with rooms nos. 342, 369-375, 385. There are two loci with the no. 374 (AS III: map 1). One is a narrow, probably domestic room or alley between rooms 375 and 370; the other is more to the east and its nature is not clear. For the dating cf. figurine no. 11 above. Place: Haverford? Literature: AS 111:68-69, 85; AS IV: pI. 51:35; AS V:156; Holland 1975: Al.a3. 15. A head of type B.3.B from tomb 1 in Beth Shemesh. It was not described, but just published in a photograph.

Note: figurine no. 11 was found in the same tomb. Place: Haverford? Literature: Mackenzie 1912: pI. 23 left; Holland 1975:77, type AlIl.c.3; Engle 1979: type 11.1. 16. A head of type B.3.B from room 383 in Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Context and date: room 383 is part of building 384+376+383 (AS 111:65, map. 1; house no. 3 of Holland). It was ascribed to level I, or final level II, but pottery from this room was not published. Place: Haverford? Literature: AS 111:65, pI. 24:5.5; AS IV: pI. 51:21; Pritchard 1943: Vllla:277; Holland 1975: type All.a.1; Engle 1979: type VII:29. 17. A head of type B.1-2.A from room 373 in Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Context and date: room 373 in area S.32 may have belonged to building 373+374, but also to street 379. For the date cf. figurine no. 11 above. Place: Haverford? Literature: AS III: pI. 25: fifth line, 3; AS IV: pI. 51:31; Holland 1975: type All.c.2; Engle 1979: type VII:30. 18. Ahead of type B.1-2.A from Beth Shemesh (season 1928). Context and date: the "temple" - a large public building of the Iron Age II in the western part of the site. Exact location was not recorded, and the finds from the building are very disturbed by materials from earlier levels. Holland (1975:70) called the house "a governor's house". Note: according to Grant (1929:107), two heads with similar "beak" faces were found in the "temple". He probably meant my type A1 heads, but such were never published, or were published without an identification of their context. Place: Haverford? Literature: Grant 1929:65 upper row, fifth from the right; 97 upper right, no. 201; Holland 1975:70, type All.c.3 (and not All.c.2); Engle 1979: VII:25. 19. A head of type B.3? from Beth Shemesh. The photograph is somewhat blurred. Context and date: it was found in the city north of the south gate, but further details were not published. Note: this is probably head no. P.411 in the Rockefeller museum, which has three rows without curls above the forehead. Place: Rockefeller? Literature: Mackenzie 1912: pI. 13b:j; Holland 1975: type All.g.1; Engle 1979: type 1:25. [Fig. 6:1] 20. A head and upper body part of type B+.4.A from room 343 in Beth Shemesh (season 1933). The head has four ridges above the forehead, but it is not clear if all have curls. Context and date: room 343, from area S34 (Holland's house no. 6). A tabun and domestic pottery were found in this room (AS III: 73, map 1). For the date cf. figurine no. 11 above. Place: Haverford?

178

Literature: AS III: pI. 28: 22; AS IV: pI. 51:23; Pritchard 1943: type Vlla:276; Holland 1975: type All.h.1; Engle 1979: type VII:31. 21. A head of type B.1.A from Beth Shemesh (season 1930). The photograph and the drawing are both not good, and I have followed Holland's classification, though the details are far from clear. Context and date: only the general area is known, S.32, where domestic buildings and alleys were excavated. Place: Haverford? Literature: AS I: pI. 27: 2nd row 2nd from the left; AS II: pI. 21; Holland 1975: type AII.L1; Engle 1979: type VII:5. 22. A head of type B.3.B from room 402 in Beth Shemesh (season 1933). According to the description it has three 'coils' at the backside (?). Context and date: room 402 was dated to level III of the Iron Age 1, but including the 10th century BC. Yet, the room was mixed with pottery from level lIa (AS IV:155f, n. 28; AS 111:60). Even though, Holland (1975: vol. 1:68) took this head as proof for an early beginning of the pillar-figurines. Note: two photographs of this figurine were published, and Holland thought that there were two different figurines. Place: Haverford? Literature: AS III: pI. 22:6 row 2; AS IV: pI. 51:32, 155f; Holland 1975: AlIl.b.1 = All.e.3; Engle 1979: type VIII:23. 23. A head of type B.2.A from room 380 in Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Context and date: this room belonged to building 379+388+380, partly excavated in the season of 1930 (?). It contained a rich assemblage, but mixed as usual: a Imlk stamp, a scarab of Amenophis III, and a fragment of figurine no. 4-90 (for which nothing else is told in the report). Place: Haverford? Literature: AS III: 66f; AS IV: pI. 51:33; Holland 1975:185, typeAII.e.1; Engle 1979: typeVII:6. 24. A head of type B.4.B from Beth Shemesh (season 1929). Context and date: the head was found in debris in the cemetery area. It was either related to the tombs, or thrown out of the city wall and rolled down the slope. Place: Haverford? Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:34; Holland 1975: type AlIl.d.3; Engle 1979: type VI:38. 25. A head of type B.4.B from room 378 in Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Context and date: room 378 was not described in the reports. Following the map in AS III, it is an open area, perhaps a court or part of an alley in building 377+381. In any case, it is a domestic area. The pottery that was published from this room does not help to date it exactly (lamp 4-237 and juglet 4-241). For the date cf. figurine no. 11 above. Place: Haverford? Literature: AS III: pI. 25: fifth line, 4; AS IV: pI. 51:22; Pritchard 1943: no. 261; Holland 1975:72, 187, type AlIl.d.2; Engle 1979: type 1:37.

26. A head of type B.4.B from room 42 in Beth Shemesh (season 1931). Context and date: this room appears as an alley or long room on the map (AS I: pI. 24), but the head was only mentioned as "reg. no. 96, under I", i.e., under the Arab Byzantine level I. Note: the photograph was first published by Holland. Place: Rockefeller, i.10504. Literature: AS 11:32, no. 96; Holland 1975: vol. 11:84, pI. 41:7, AlIl.d.4a. 27. A head of type B.3? from Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Context and date: this head does not appear in the register of finds (AS 111:85), and its origin is surface or debris without stratigraphy. I could not locate it in Holland's thesis. Place: Haverford? Literature: AS III: fig. 4, reg. no. 33-3-4; Engle 1979: type 1:32. 28. A head of type B.3? from Beth Shemesh. Context and date: unknown. It only appears in the register of finds (AS 111:96). Place: Haverford? Literature: AS III:reg. no. 33-3-110; Engle 1979: type 1:31. 29. A body of type C.1 from cistern 25 in Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Its right arm is missing. Two figurines were found in this cistern - for the context and date cf. figurine no. 10 (above). Place: Haverford? Note: Holland (1975: vol. 1:68) ascribed this figurine to level III, but this is a mistake. Literature: AS 111:62-63, reg. no. 33-4-62, map 1; AS IV: pI. 51:29; AS V: 74-75; Pritchard 1943: type VII:201; Holland 1975: type AX.b.4. 30. A body of type C.1 from Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Context and date: the locus is not clear, only a general area "A1". It is a domestic area in the northern part of the excavations. The body was dated to level II, not III (thus Holland). Place: Haverford? Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:24; Pritchard 1943: type VII:202; Holland 1975: vol. 1:68,72, type AX.b.5. 31. A body of type C.1 from Beth Shemesh (season 1929). Context and date: the locus was not specified. Place: Haverford? Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:30; Pritchard 1943: VII:200; Holland 1975: vol. 1:68, AX.b.3. 32. A body of type C.1 from room 305 in Beth Shemesh. Context and date: this room appears in the center of the 1933 excavation area, disturbed by the wall of the later Arab cemetery. It formed part of a building 305+302 (house 7 of Holland) from level II (AS III: map 1). Some pottery from this room was published, but does not enable an exact dating (AS 111:82, pI. 25). Place: Haverford? Literature: AS III: pI. 25 bottom center, reg. no. 33-3-95;

179

Holland 1975: vol. 1:73, type A.X.b.2. 33. A body of type C.1 from Beth Shemesh (season 1929). Either a Photograph or a drawing was not published, It was described as having the hands supporting the breasts and a concave base. Context and date: "III north", reg. no. 1027. That would be final level lIa (AS V:15), dated to the 10th century BC. An exact locus is unknown Note: the finds from Grant's excavations are usually mixed; Wright separated the phases of only one area (that of 1933), but after the end of the excavations. Place: Haverford? Literature: AS 11:320; Holland 1975: type AX.b.6. 34. A moulded head of type B+.2.D? from Beth Shemesh. It has simple side-locks and three ridges with two rows of curls above the forehead. The nose is damaged and the facial features are worn. Only part of one hand beneath the breast was left from the body. Context and date: unknown. Place: Rockefeller PA06. Note: The figurine carries a number "AS.12.X.i", indicating that it probably came from Mackenzie's season 1912 in Ain Shems. It is not similar to any other figurine published in his reports, and was probably never published (cf. the case of figurine no. 112 below). Literature: not yet published (?). 35. A body of type C from room 374 in Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. It is impossible to classify this figurine clearly. Context and date: the register mentioned a figurine nos. 334-209 from room 374, but without any further details. This room forms part of a large building with rooms 342+ 370+371+374 (Holland's house 1), but the same number appears also as a floor in an alley nearby (AS III: map 1). Place: Haverford? Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975:1:73, type AXI.8. Note: a few other fragments from Beth Shemesh cannot be classified exactly. Holland included them as miscellaneous in his work, and this may indeed be the best option. The few known details concerning these fragments are listed below: A A Woman with bands of paint on the neck. Reg. no. 916., season 1929. Height: 115 mm. Context: unknown. Literature: AS 11:19; Holland 1975: P.l.a.2. B. A Woman, fragmented, with incisions on the front. Reg. no. 881, season 1929. Height: 115 mm. Context: debris near Mackenzie's cemetery. Literature: AS 11:24; Holland 1975: P.l.a.3. C. Reg. no. 33-4-438, season 1933. Context: room 338 in a house. Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.LaA.

E. Reg. no. 33-4-89, season 1929. Height: 50 mm. Context: debris near Mackenzie's cemetery. Literature: AS 11:24; Holland 1975: P.La.6. F. Reg. no. 883, season 1933. Height: 53 mm. Context: alley 379. Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.La.7. 36. A whole figurine type Bc.2-3.A from Gezer. It was called a Phoenician Astarte by the excavator. The neck was broken and mended after discovery. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Gezer 11:418, fig. 502; Pilz 1924: no. 18; Watzinger 1933: photograph 96 or 98; Pritcahrd 1943: VII:210; Holland 1975: vol 1:185, type All.eA; Engle 1979:

yellow, except the eyes and the nose. The back of the figurine was left bare. The placing of the left arm is exceptional, at the upper side of the left breast. Note: the date and nature of the pool are discussed in chapters III, VIII (above). For Gibeon in the late Iron Age cf. also Eshel, H. 1987. Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: 15, pI. 39:420; Holland 1975: Al.a.16.

1:34. [Fig. 4:2).

43. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at Gibeon. The upper part of the head is flattened and protrudes backwards. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: pI. 41:439; Holland 1975: Al.a.8.

37. A moulded head of type B.3.D from Gezer. I follow Holland's classification, but the drawing in the report may be inaccurate. Context and date: not specified. Literature: Gezer 11:418; Gezer III: pI. 221:22; Pilz 1924: c.d.81; Pritcahrd 1943: no. 266; Holland 1979: AV.a.1; Engle 1979: type 1:29.

44. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at Gibeon. The upper part of the head is flattened and protrudes backwards. Remains of red and orange paint. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: pI. 41:290; Holland 1975: Al.a.9.

38. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Gezer. I follow Holland's classification, but the drawing may be inaccurate. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:21; Pilz 1924: c.d.80; Pritcahrd 1943: no. 265; Holland 1975: AIILd.3; Engle 1979: type 1:28. 39. A moulded head of type B.2.B from Gezer. I follow Holland's classification, but the drawing may be inaccurate. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Gezer 11:418; Gezer III: pI. 221 :20; Pilz 1924: c.d.79; Pritcahrd 1943: no. 264; Holland 1975: AIILd.2; Engle 1979: type VII:2. 40. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Gezer. Context and date: unknown. Note: despite the huge extent of excavations, this is the only hand-made JPF head known from Gezer so far. Holland 1975:102, Literature: Gezer 11:233, fig. 382:7; Al.a.7. 41. A body of type C.1 from cave 1.8 at Gezer. Context and date: the cave appears on the plan (Gezer III: plan 1), but its nature is not clear. The excavator defined it as a tomb, re-used as a cistem. Many pottery vessels were found inside it, similar to the assemblage of levels "Semitic 3-4". A pile of human bones was found as well. The mentioning of thin green wares may indicate "Assyrian" pottery, but there are no drawings to prove this. Literature: Gezer I: 81f; Gezer III: pI. 28:18; Pilz 1924: c.a.71; Pritcahrd 1943: no. 211; Holland 1975:102, AX.b.7. 42. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from the pool at Gibeon. The neck and the upper chest are painted with horizontal bands of red and yellow. Four yellow lines indicate fingers of the right hand. The face is covered in

D. Reg. no. 33-4-184, season 1933. Height: 99 mm. Context: alley 379 in a house. Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.l.a.5.

180

45. A hand-made head and upper body part of type A+.1.A from the pool at Gibeon. The figure held a disc with its right hand, close to the chest. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: 16, fig. 41:557; Holland 1975: ALa.10. 46. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at Gibeon. The upper part protrudes backwards. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:503; Holland 1975: ALa.11. 47. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at Gibeon. The head is pointed at the top. Dark, red painted bands appear below and above the nose. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41: 382; Holland 1975: Al.a.12. 48. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at Gibeon. The head is pointed at the top. It has remains of red paint above the neck, and red and yellow bands under the nose. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:427; Holland 1975: Al.a.13. 49. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at Gibeon. The upper part protrudes backwards. There are remains of red paint below the nose. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:462; Holland 1975: Al.a.14.

50. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at Gibeon. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:441; Holland 1975: Al.a.15. 51. A hand-made head of type A4.A from the pool at Gibeon. Only the upper part remained. There is a hat with a folded tassel, covered with white-wash and yellow paint. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:312; Holland 1975: vol. 1:180f, Al.d.1. 52. A hand-made head of type A4.A from the pool at Gibeon. The upper part is covered with white-wash. There is a folded tassel, but only a little fraction from the face survived. The hat was made separately and applied to the head. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:86; Holland 1975: vol. 1:80, Al.d.2. [Fig. 5:5). 53. A hand-made head of type A6.A from the pool at Gibeon. It is exceptional: the face is elongated and narrow, with a suggestion of a mouth. There is kind of a "bun" (collected hair?) on the back side. Shallow groves at the sides of the head were possibly used to applie a hat. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:438; Holland 1975: vol. 1:181, Al.f.1. 54. A moulded head of type B.3.A from the pool at Gibeon. The head is covered with white-wash and yellow paint. Place: Philadelphia. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:381; Holland 1975: All.a.2; Engle 1979: type 1:39. 55. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A from the pool at Gibeon. The head is covered with white-wash and remains of red paint on the face and neck. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Amman. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:527; Holland 1975: All.c.4; Engle 1979: type V:201. 56. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered with white-wash and remains of red paint. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:548; Holland 1975: All.c.5; Engle 1979: type V:203. 57. A moulded head of type B from the pool at Gibeon. The part above the face did not survive, but there is something left of the side-locks. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).

181

Place: Philadelphia. Notes: According to Holland, this head has 2-3 rows of curls and a pointed hat, but the curls do not appear in the photograph. I cannot see any reason why Engle defined this head as 'foreign'. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:87; Holland 1975: All.e.5; Engle 1979: type VIII:24.

Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39:511; Holland 1975: A.X.b.11.

66. A body of type C.2 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered with white-wash and has a band of orange paint around the neck. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39:419; Holland 1975: A.X.b.12.

58. A moulded head of type B.3.A from the pool at Gibeon. The head is covered with white-wash and red paint. According to Holland, it has three rows of small curls, but these are not clear in the photograph. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:422; Holland 1975: AII.f.2; Engle 1979: type IV:3.

67. A body of type C.2 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered with white-wash and the remains of red paint. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39:434; Holland 1975: AX.b.9. 68. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Kh. Hoga. Reg. no. 79/1. Context and date: surface find. Literature: Gophna 1970:29, pI. 6:6; Holland 1975:115, Al.a.16a (addenda).

59. A moulded head of type B.4.A from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered with white-wash and the remains of red paint appear on the neck and around the eyes. Place: Amman. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:421; Holland 1975: All.h.3; Engle 1979: type IV:6.

69. A moulded head of type B.1-2 from Kh. Rabud, badly preserved. Context and date: locus 103, an open area between the city wall and some houses (perhaps a court in one of these houses). The locus was destroyed when the whole level came to its violent end. Literature: Kochavi 1974: 16, fig. 8:11; Engle 1979: type VII:1.

60. A moulded head of type B from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered with white-wash and the remains of red and yellow paint. The neck is very long. The head is not exceptional, only its photograph was taken from a peculiar angle. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:568; Holland 1975: AXll.r.1; Engle 1979: type VII:15.

70. A moulded head of type B.1.C from Jericho. It was described as a male head with hair covering its ears and an 'archaic' smile. Notes: according to the excavation report, two similar heads were found in Jericho: one in a "Judean" house near the wall in area L2, and the other in the "late Judean level" in the north of the Tel. It is not clear which one appeares in the photograph. For an identical head cf. App. 3: no. 70. Literature: Sellin and Watzinger 1913:149, pI. 40:11:1; Holland 1975:120, AIV.a.3; Engle 1979: type VII:20.

61. A body of type C.1 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered with white-wash and the remains of red paint. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39: 432+435; Holland 1975: AX.b.13.

62. A body of type C.1 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered with white-wash and the remains of yellow paint. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39: 379; Holland 1975: AX.b.8.

71. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Jericho. It has a band, or turban, open at the back side and applied sidelocks. The excavators interpreted the figure as a "mother goddess". Context and date: phase LXIX of trench I, probably in a domestic context (Jericho III: app. E, plan 232b). Literature: Jericho IV:555, fig. ~23:6, reg. no. 3875. [Fig. 5:4].

63. A body of type C.1 from the pool at Gibeon. It has some remains of white-wash and the 'stumps' of arms. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39: 437; Holland 1975: AX.a.3.

imprint is the later, where the eyes are whole (it covers the lower one). Literature: Holland 1975:191f, A VI.e.1; Jericho IV:555, fig. 223:5; Engle 1979: type 1:13. [Fig. 6:4]. 73. A moulded head of type B.5.A-B? from Jericho (season 1931). Holland counted four rows of curls, but it seems that there were five. The curls look wedge-shaped in the photograph, but are actually a little rounded, almost square. There are cuts on the neck and lower face, but it is not clear wether these are ancient cuts. Place: Rockefeller, PM.32.1796. Note: according to the card of the museum, the head came from tomb C1. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:121, 190, vol. 11:84, 145, pI. 41:9, type AV.c.1; Engle 1979: type VII:2. 74. A whole figurine of type Bc.4.A from Lachish. The head was found broken (later mended). Context and date: unknown. Place: New York, Metropolitan Museum. Notes: H. Colt, the financier of the Lachish excavations, donated this figurine to the museum. It was not published in the excavation reoprt (but cf. note to figurine no. 76 below). Literature: Patai 1967: 65 photograph 1; Engle 1979: 1:5.

75. A whole figurine of type BC.2? from Lachish. The head is badly preserved; the shoulder and part of the base are broken and restored. Holland classified the side-lock as simple, but perhaps it once had curls, which were worn out. The museum's catalogue mentions two rows of curls above the forehead. Context and date: tomb 106 in square a6, a typical "Judean" tomb with three rooms. About 25 skeletons were interned there. The excavators dated it to between levels III and II, ca. 650-580 BC, but thought that the beginning can be earlier than the end of level III. All the JPF were found in the innermost room, but exact places were not registered. The excavators dated these figurines to before 640 BC, but only because they believed that their production ceased with Josiah's reform (Lachish 1I1:180ff). Place: New York, Jewish Museum JM.12-73.268a. Notes: for more figurines from this tomb cf. figurines nos. 80, 82 below. In the museum catalogue, it is said that some JPF were found in temples, but most are from houses and tombs, therefore they are amulets or magical objects and not "idols". Literature: Lachish III: pI. 27:4; Holland 1975: AVlIl.a.1; Engle 1979: type VII:26; Ackerman and Braunstein 1982: 63 no. 38.

72. A moulded head of type B.3?E? from Jericho. It has 64. A body of type C.2 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered with white-wash and bands of red and orange paint. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39:330; Holland 1975: A.X. b.1 O. 65. A body of type C.2 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered with white-wash and bands of red paint. Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).

"double eyes", probably resulting from a mistaken second imprint of the wet clay in the mould. This is the only type of double imprint known so far among all the JPF. Interstingly, the head was fired and probably used despite its exceptional appearance. Context and date: trench II, but without clear stratigraphy. Notes: Holland defined it as having 5 rows of curls, but this is probably the "doubling" of 3 rows in origin. The upper

182

76. A whole figurine of type BC.1.C from Lachish. The body is rather narrow. The neck was broken and mended. Context and date: tomb 1002,· an irregular cave in the 100 cemetery area, square E.30. It was very disturbed, but probably included secondary burials that suffered burning (Lachish 111:228-235). More than 600 pottery vessels were found there, in three phases (not really stratigraphic). All the figurines came from the upper phase, and were found with models of furniture, rattles, and other figurines (a horse and

rider,a bird and an animal). The excavators thought that the burials were contamporraneous with level III. Place: Rockefeller PM.33.2055, exhibition no. 372. Notes: figurines nos. 77, 78, 81 were found in the same tomb. Another female figurine was not published, but mentioned as stored in the Colt collection (Lachish 111:235, reg. no. 1254). This may be figurine no. 74 (above). Literature: Lachish III: pI. 28:11; Holland 1975: AIV.a.5; Engle 1979: 11:3. 77. Awhole figurine of type Be.3-4.F from Lachish. The body is hollow and wheel-made. For this type cf. figurines nos. 78, 183 below. Context and date: phases 6-10 in tomb 1002, cf. figurine no. 76 above. Notes: Holland (1975:192) refered to AVlIl.b.1 by mistake; read AVll.a.1 instead. Holland thought that these wheelmade variations were very rare and were perhaps ordered especially, and that figurines nos. 77-78 belonged to the same person (but there is no proof for this). Literature: Lachish III: pI. 28:13; Holland 1975:192, AVll.a.1; Engle 1979: 111:8.

78. A whole figurine of type Be.2.G from Lachish. The body is hollow and wheel-made. For this type cf. figurines nos. 77, 183. Context and date: tomb 1002, cf. no. 76 above. Place: Rockefeller PM.34.128, exhibition no. 370. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 28:10, reg. no. 1318; Holland 1975:192, AVll.b.1; Engle 1979: 111:11. [Fig. 4:5].

79. A moulded head and part of a body of type B+.3.B from Lachish. The right chick is scratched. The hands meet under the breasts. According to Holland, the curls are wedge shaped, as they seem in the photograph, but the photograph is misleading since the curies are really square. Context: tomb 120 in square A6 of cemetery 100, south west of the city. Tufnell dated this tomb to the Late Bronze Age, with a second phase after ca. 900 BC, and a third between 700-600 BC. The latest phase included 1500 bodies and many animal bones, including bones of pigs. Sturcky believed that this is a mass burial following the Assyrian conquest, while Tufnell related the tomb to "heathen" that were buried during Josiah's reforms. The pottery is close to that of level III. Place: Rockefeller PM.36.2245. Literature: Lachish 1I1:193f, pI. 27:8, reg. no. 5187; Holland 1975: AV.b.1; Engle 1979: type VI:8. 80. A whole figurine of type Ac.1.Ap from Lachish. The head is pointed. Context and date: tomb 106, cf. figurines nos. 75, 82 (above). Literature: Lachish 111:181, pI. 27:1; Holland 1975: Al.a.56.

81. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Lachish. The head is pointed and has protrusions on its sides, probably representing locks of hair. Context and date: tomb 1002, cf. figurines nos. 76-78 (above). 183

Literature: Lachish 111:181, pI. 28:14; Holland 1975: Al.a.54. 82. A whole figurine of type Ac.1.Ap from Lachish. The head is pointed. Context and date: tomb 106, cf. figurines nos. 75, 80 (above). Literature: Lachish 111:181, pI. 27:3; Holland 1975: Al.a.55. 83. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Lachish. It is badly worn and has a long neck. Context and date: locus 500, a general designation for an area on the slope of the Tel, where domestic buildings from level II-II were found, as well as remains from the Persian period. The exact location is not clear. Note: the eyes are not clear in the photograph, and I am not sure how did Engle classify this head according to his eye shapes. Literature: Lachish 111:219, pI. 31:9, reg. no. 3890; Holland 1975: All.a.7; Engle 1979: type V:107. 84. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Lachish. It is badly worn out. Context and date: locus 500, cf. figurine no. 83 above. Literature: Lachish 111:219, pI. 31:12, reg. no. 3885; Holland 1975: All.a.6; Engle 1979: type 111:12. 85. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Lachish. It is well preserved, except damages to the chin and the nose. Context and date: locus D/X, Le., surface find or debris without clear stratigraphy. Literature: Lachish 111:219, pI. 31:3; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.11; Engle 1979: type 11:6. 86. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Lachish. It is quite worn out, but still has remains of paint on its sides and back. Context and date: square P17, in or near the "great shaft". This shaft was perhaps build in level III, but the head could have been carried from a nearby house of another level as well. Note: I see no reason why Engle classified this head as "foreign" - other than the peculiar shape of the side-locks, there is nothing exceptional. The Lachish report referred as comparison to Gezer II: fig. 502, that is, to a clear JPF (it is figurine no. 36 above). Literature: Lachish 11I:158ff, pI. 31:8; Holland 1975: All.g.2; Engle 1979: type VIII:8. 87. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Lachish. It is worn, but has the remains of white-wash and red paint. Context and date: locus H.17.1087, part of the road leading from the gate to the palace, together with 3 Imlk stamps (Lachish 111:124, plan 114). Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:4, reg. no. 7144; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.13; Engle 1979: type 1:2. 88. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Lachish. It is worn and broken at the chin. Context and date: locus D/X - cf. figurine no. 85 above. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:11; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.12; Engle 1979: type 1:13.

89. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Lachish. It has the remains of white-wash and red paint on the face, and red band on the neck. The face is well preserved. Context and date: locus 1078, a partially excavated room north of the street leading from the gate to the palace. The room is part of a large building (rooms 1079, 1085, 1088 etc.) of level III (Lachish 111:122, plan 114). The building may have been public, but it was more likely domestic. Place: Rockefeller PM.39.819. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:6, reg. no. 7094; Holland 1975: AlIl.f.3; Engle 1979: type 1:33. 90. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Lachish, quite worn out. Context and date: locus 500 - cf. figurine no. 83 above. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:13, reg. no. 3891; Holland 1975: AIV.d.4; Engle 1979: type 111:7. 91. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Lachish. Part of its peg is visible under the smearing of the clay upwards by the potter, which obscured the sharp line of the chin. Context and date: locus D/X - cf. figurine no. 85 above. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:5, reg. no. 3069; Holland 1975: AfV.d.5; Engle 1979: type V:108. 92. A moulded head of type B.3.D from Lachish. It is well preserved. Context and date: locus D/X - cf. figurine no. 85 above. Note: Engle classified this head in his "curly" type, but the eye details are very clear. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:1; Holland 1975: AV.b.2; Engle 1979: type VI:7. 93. A moulded head of type B.1.C from Lachish. It is little worn out, with a pointed "hat" (not applied). Context and date: locus D/X - cf. figurine no. 85 above. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:7; Holland 1975: AIV.e.3; Engle 1979: type VIII:7. 94. A moulded head of type B.4.D from Lachish. It is well preserved, with ful face, but the nose and the mouth are damaged. Context and date: locus D/X - cf. figurine no. 85 above. Note: Holland suggested that it was formed in the same mould as head no. 73 (above). Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:2; Holland 1975: AV.c.2; Engle 1979: type VI:1. 95. A hand-made head of type N1.A from Lachish. Context and date: locus 500 - cf. figurine no. 83 above. Place: Rockefeller PM.35.3068. Notes: a reg. no. 3880 is written on the figurine. According to the museum's card, it was found in 1934-5. It was first published by Holland. Literature: Holland 1975:144, A.l.a.56a, pI. 41:2. 96. A body fragment of type C.2 from Lachish. The hands meet under the breasts. Context and date: locus G.18.27, a large open area within the city. It is very close to the surface and not well

184

preserved; thus the date and the context are not clear. Literature: Lachish 11I:150ff, pI. 32:3, plan 124; Holland 1975: AX.b.47. 97. A moulded head of type B.2 from Lachish. It is quite worn, but has few remains of white-wash. Context and date: locus 135 - a pit at the edge of the excavated area, without clear relation to any building. Place: Romema, IAA no. 78-2807. Literature: Lachish V:16, pis. 12:1, 33:3, reg. no. 884/4; Engle 1979: type IV:2. 98. A moulded head of type B.4 from Lachish. It is very damaged and the shape of the curls is not clear. Context and date: locus 94c, a whole square without any building from level VI of the Late Bronze age (cf. Lachish V: pis. 39-40). Note: if the dating is correct, the head is much earlier than any other JPF, and scholars already refered to this as very unlikely, e.g., Engle 1979:20. Place: Romema, IAA no. 78-2809. Literature: Lachish V:16, pis. 12:3, 33:4, reg. no. 789/1; Engle 1979: VII:22. 99. A moulded head of type B.2.B from Lachish. Part of it is broken, but the remains are well preserved. It has two rows of large square curls above the forehead, with the edge-ofmould line above. Context and date: locus 41, a large open area with poor walls, ascribed to level IV. Place: Romema, IAA no. 78-2808. Literature: Lachish V:16, pis. 12:2, 33:2, reg. no. 373/2; Engle 1979: type 11:4. 100. A pillar base of type C.3 from Lachish. Context and date: locus 61a, an open area or a room from level II in the south part of the excavations. Literature: Lachish V: pI. 12:6. 101. A pillar base of type C.3 from Lachish. Context and date: locus 24, an elongated room beneath the "soliar temple". The room belonged to level II, and included many vessels and rosette stamps. Literature: Lachish V: pI. 12:5, reg. no. 177/1. 102. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Megiddo. It was called "a mother goddess" in the report and compared with the figurines from Judah. It was described as haVing bands covering the ears. The preservation state is bad and the face is blurred. Context and date: surface find from an unexcavated area. Note: Holland mentioned that this head is exceptional at Megiddo, and the only one of his type AlII heads outside of Judah. Literature: May 1935:31, pI. 26:M.1776; Holland 1975:187, typeAlIl.d.14; Engle 1979: type 1:35.

Context and date: surface find found in 1981, ascribed to the 7th-6th centuries, when Malhata prospered. Note: it is possible that this is not a JPF head, but a head of a plaque figurine; cf. one from Tel Ira (Beck 1991). I could not verify this by checking the head from Malhata personally. Literature: Hubner 1989:50-52, pI. 7. 104. A body of type C.1 from Malhata (season 1967). The breasts, the broken hands and the widened base are visible in the photograph. Holland wrote that the figurine was displayed in the Israel Museum, but gave an IAA number (55-11). Context and date: probably the trench area, B, from the end of the Iron Age. Literature: Holland 1975:131f, pI. 42:3, addenda, AX1.44a. 105. A moulded head of type B.O? from Azeka. The existence of a peg is clear, but the head has a protruding wig without curls. Holland defined it as his type AVlIl.a (cf. figurine no. 75 above). Context and date: the head was dated to the "late Judean" level, 800-300 BC, but the context was not specified. Note: Engle did not include this head within his "classic pillar" types, but probably the difficulty in classification results from the bad preservation state of this head. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902:136, pI. 68:4; Holland 1975:174, 193, AVlIl.a.3; Engle 1979: type VII:35. 106. A moulded head of type B.4.A-B from Azeka. The drawing shows rounded face, surrounded by rows of little curls, but the accuracy of the drawing is not clear. Context and date: unknown. Notes: this head and heads 108-109 (below) were only published in a preliminary report (where they were called "Egyptian"). They are missing from the final report of the excavations. They are also missing from Holland's and Engle's lists. Another head that was published in this preliminary report (Bliss 1899: no. 4) is probably part of a plaque figurine. Literature: Bliss 1899:103, pI. 6:1. 107. A moulded head of type B.2?A from Azeka, with a pointed top. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Bliss 1899:103, pI. 6:5. 108. A moulded head of type B.O? from Azeka. According to the drawing it has no curls, other than square ones in the side-locks. Context and date: unknown. Note: it is not certain that this head is really a JPF, and it may have belonged to a plaque figurine or to some other exceptional figurine. Literature: Bliss 1899: 103, pI. 6:6. 109. A moulded head of type B.3.A? from Aroer. It is well preserved, with a pointed top and parts of the peg still visible. The hair is painted yellow, the forehead and face red, and the eyes and the eyebrows black. Context and date: silo 62, where whole vessels of the 7th century BC were found. The silo is probably related to

103. A moulded head of type B.SRT from Malhata. It is exceptional: a narrow band appears above the forehand, without any curled rows of hair. Long side-locks reach the shoulders, with 7-8 square (?) curls in each.

185

117. A hand-made head of type A2 from Ramat Rahel. It has a "turban" around the head. Basket no. 162/21. Context and date: not published. Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-1151. Literature: RR I: pI. 24:2; Holland 1975: type Al.b.9.

domestic houses (Biran and Cohen 1981:259, 272, figs. 7-8 and plan fig. 4). Literature: Biran and Cohen 1975:171, pI. 19c; Biran and Cohen 1981: fig. 4:8, pI. 47:4; Engle 1979: type 1:7. 110. A moulded head of type B.3 from Aroer. Its mouth, nose, left chick and neck are damaged, and the side-locks are worn out. The shape of the curls is not clear anymore. Context and date: locus 105, a court in a house outside the city wall (Biran and Cohen 1981:263ff, fig. 11-12). Literature: Biran and Cohen 1981: fig. 16:8, pI. 51:1.

118. A head and upper body of type A+.1.A from Ramat Rahel. The figure holds a large disc vertically near to its chest, the left hand supporting its bottom while the right hand (now broken) probably beating it. The head is pointed, and shows an effort of modeling facial features, but the details are either worn out or not clear from the photograph. Context and date: locus 286, a small casemate room in the wall, where the "secret passage" was found. The figurine was found on the stones at the inner edge of this passage (RR 1:10f, plan 23), which continued to be used in level IV. Literature: RR I: pI. 5; Holland 1975: vol. 1:154, 181f, type Al.g.5. [Fig. 4:4].

111. A moulded head of type B.SRT? from Aroer. It is fairly well preserved with traces of white-wash. The head is rounded and has a 'band' on its forehead, without the usual rows of curls. Context and date: locus 339 in area D, probably from the 7th century BC (Biran and Cohen 1981: fig. 10:1-7). Note: the head appears flat in the cut and may have belonged to a plaque-figurine, but this is less likely (cf. a plaque figurine from Tel Ira, Beck 1991). Literature: Biran and Cohen 1981:260, 263, fig. 10:8.

119. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Ramat Rahel. It is mentioned as an Astarte in the report. A spiral line is incised on the body. The head was broken and mended after discovery. Place: Romema, IAA 62-8, now in exhibition. Notes: according to the Romema card, the basket no. is 1232/1, and the head was found in locus 329. This is a storeroom in the citadel, probably public, Holland thought that this figurine is very different than the usual JPF, but other than being crude and having the incised line, it is quite regular. Literature: RR I: pI. 24:3-4; Holland 1975: vol. 1:183, type Al.j.12.

112. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Ramot (season 1992, reg. no. 912). It is fairly worn, but probably has three rows of big, rounded curls above the forehead. The sidelocks carry 3-4 similar curls in double columns. Context and date: locus 179, a residential quarter. Place: IAA. Literature: unpublished, courtesy of A de-Groot. 113. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Ramot (season 1992, reg. no. 724). It is very badly preserved. Context and date: locus 120, a pit of unclear nature in a residential quarter. Place: IAA. Literature: unpublished, courtesy of A de-Groot.

120. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Ramat Rahel. It has simple side-locks without curls. Its back side is completely broken and the rest is very worn. Context and date: not published. Place: Romema 64-1376. Note: according to the cards, the basket no. is 7321/1, but the number written on the figurine is 5921/1. Literature: RR II: pI. 35:1; Holland 1975: vol. 1:185, type AII.f.3; Engle 1979: type IV:5.

114. A body fragment of type C.2 from Ramot (season 1992, reg. no. 136). The breasts and the right hand are all that remains from the body. Context: locus 775, a domestic area. Place: IAA. Literature: unpublished, courtesy of A de-Groot.

121. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Ramat Rahel. It is fairly well preserved, but the nose and the left chin are badly damaged. Context and date: not published, but possibly this head was mentioned as a fine "curly head" found in storeroom 329, where many of the JPF from season 1.960 have been found (RR 1:41f). Literature: RR I: pI. 24:1; Holland 1975: All.a.14; Engle 1979: type V:8.

115. A pillar base of type C.3 from Ramot (season 1992, reg. no. 943). The base is concave. Context: locus 196, a domestic area. Place: IAA. Literature: unpublished, courtesy of A de-Groot. 116. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Ramat Rahel. The photograph was made from a peculiar angle, and does not clarify well the nature of the fragment. Context and date: not published. Note: Holland dated all the figurines from Ramat Rahel to level Va, ca. 600 BC. Literature: RR II: pI. 35:2; Holland 1975:153-155, type Al.a.62.

122. A body of type C.1 from Ramat Rahel. The base is missing, as well as the left hand. Reg no. 5982/1 (?). Context and date: not published. Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-1375. Literature: RR II: pI. 36:1; Holland 1975: AX.b.71.

186

123. A body fragment of type C.2 from Ramat Rahel. The hands support the breasts. Context and date: not published. Literature: RR II: pI. 36:2; Holland 1975: AX.b.70. 124. A whole figurine of type Be from Beth Shemesh. Only a picture was published, but it is different than any other figurine in the publications of Beth Shemesh. Context and date: not published. Place: Toronto. Literature: Kelso 1962: pI. 23 right; Engle 1979: type IV:9. 125. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. The head is a little pointed, the neck and the body were broken and mended after discovery. Context and date: cistern 78 in square AK23 in the south of the city, in an open area of cisterns and pits, but little building remains. The pottery indicates a probable date of the 7th century BC (TN 1:129, 293, pI. 46:1-7), but Zorn dates this cistern to his levels 3-4, Le., all Iron Age II (1993:1432). Place: Rockefeller P.3464, exhibition no. 362. Literature: TN 1:300, reg. no. M.146, pis. 46:6, 87:2; Holland 1975: Al.a.61. 126. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. The photograph is bad and small. Context and date: locus 369 is part of house 368+366, near the solid wall. It is not clear whether it is a court or a room, public or domestic. The area saw few bUilding phases, and 369 may be later than the blocking of the nearby gate (TN 1:230f, fig. 60; TN 11:121). Place: Berkeley box 2. Notes: Holland gave the same reference also to figurine Al.c.6. Zorn dated the room to the Persian period (1993:1532). Literature: TN I: reg. no. M.1608, pI. 86:14; Holland 1975: Al.a.60. 127. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. The pupils are incised. Only the shoulders remained from the body. Context and date: unknown. Place: Berkeley. Literature: TN I: 300, reg. no. M.577, pis. 86:15; Holland 1975: A.l.j.9.

129. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has a "collar" applied to the neck, perhaps a necklace (thus Holland, cf. figurine no. 143 below). Only part of a shoulder remained from the whole body. Context and date: a general area of pits and domestic (?) buildings in the west quarter, but exact locus unknown. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:10; Holland 1975: Al.a.58. 130. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context and date: room 586, a room or passage in a house which includes rooms 590, 595 and cistern 356. The date is mixed and uncertain (TN 11:2), but perhaps from early level I (TN 1:184, fig. 43). Zorn could only give a broad limit oftime, between 1000-425 BC (1993:1582). Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 86:11; Holland 1975: Al.a.59. 131. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has an applied ''turban''. The right side is damaged. Context and date: locus 566, a room or a passage in a domestic area. It was dated to "middle and late Iron Age, but defined as mixed (TN 11:123). Zorn (1993:1587) noted two rooms with this number, which he dated to "900-330" BC. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 86:5; Holland 1975: ALb.? 132. A pillar base of type C.3 from Ramot (season 1992). Reg. no. 13748. The base is concave and has some remains of white-wash. Context: locus 1116 in area D, a domestic area. Place: IAA. Literature: unpublished, courtesy of A de-Groot. 133. A hand-made head of type A 3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has an applied "turban" and side-locks, but is broken and a little blackened by fire. The nose is damaged and the right side-lock is broken. Context and date: cistern 216, in a large open area in the north of the city (TN 1:229, n.1; TN II:124). From there came also figurines no. 139, 153 and an exceptional head (TN I: pI. 86:2 = Holland 1975: Al.b.8). Zorn dated this cistern to the Iron Age and until the Roman period (1993:1439). Place: Rockefeller PM.31.326. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:9, reg. no. M.866; Holland 1975: Al.c.5. 134. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has an applied ''turban'' painted with orange. The face is painted red and the neck has a kind of a 'collar', painted orange (necklace?). Context and date: locus 393, probably a domestic room in the west quarter. It is probably later than the thin city wall, but the excavators defined it as mixed (TN 11:121). Zorn dated it to his level 3, of "900-330 BC" (1993:1538). Note: figurine no. 152 is perhaps from the same house. Place: Berkeley, box 5. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:2, reg. M.2338; Holland 1975: Al.c.7.

128. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has a "turban". Holland mentioned side-locks, but I could not see these. The preservation state is good, with the remains of red paint on the turban. Context and date: cistern 368, which had two openings into domestic rooms 441 and 447. Pottery from the 7th century BC, including an "Assyrian" bottle, was found there (TN 1:138, fig. 29b; TN 11:125). Place: Rockefeller PM.35.3095. Notes: the head is defined as "Persian" in the museum card, and related to cistern 329a. Zorn dated cistern 368 to the whole Iron Age II (1993:1448). Literature: TN 1:300, reg. no. M.2480, pI. 53:18; Holland 1975: A.l.c.9.

187

135. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has an applied 'turban', painted orange; the face is red and the hair and pupils are black. It has a 'collar', painted orange, red and black in a geometric pattern (cf. figurine no. 134 above). Context and date: locus 239, an open area with but a few walls and the "bastion" of the early wall (TN 1:181, fig. 41; TN 11:121). It was dated to 600-500 BC; but cf. Zorn (1993:1503, "1000-425 BC"). Place: Berkeley, box 5. Literature: TN I: 300, pI. 86:1, reg. no. M.907; Holland 1975: Al.c.8. 136. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is broken, but has some remains of red paint. Context and date: locus 221, an area south of the gate and north of a large house, excavated during 1929 and 1932. The excavators dated the material from this area to the 6th century BC (late level I; cf. Zorn 1993:1499, "900-425 BC"). Place: Berkeley box 5. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:4; Holland 1975: Al.c.6, but cf. note to figurine no. 126 above. 137. A hand-made head of type A4.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has an applied 'turban' and hat. Side-locks are not seen in the photograph. Context and date: unknown, except a general area of domestic houses and debris piles in the center of the town. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: 300, pI. 86:7; Holland 1975: Al.d.5. 138. A large hand-made head of type A3.A from Tel enNasbeh. The applied ''turban'' is open at the back; the nose is damaged. Reg. no. 1512. Context and date: according to an inscription on the head, it was found on 4.4.1932, in level II "east 224", north of 228. 224 is a living room in a large house south of the early gate (with rooms 227+224). Notes: according to Holland and the museum's card, the head is from level I. It was first published by Holland. Zorn (1993:1499, building 145.02) dated this room to his level 2, from the "Babylonian-Roman" periods. Place: Rockefeller PM.32.2057. Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 41:3, addenda, Al.c.9a. 139. A hand-made head of type A4.Ap from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has an applied hat. The eyes seem to be cut and not pinched, and the left pupil is an incised. Context and date: cistern 216, cf. no. 133 above. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: 300, pI. 86:3, M.998; Holland 1975: Al.j.8. 140. A hand-made head of type A4.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. The photograph is not very clear and does not show that the hat has a folded tassel. These is no representation of sidelocks. Context and date: unknown, except general area of square AB16 in the west city, an area of dense buildings. Place: Rockefeller PM.35.3219. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:6, reg. no. M2814; Holland 1975: Al.d.6.

188

[Fig. 5:6]. 141. A moulded head of type A3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. In the report it was compared to fig. 85:13 (= figurine no. 142 below). Holland probably used this fact for the classification, since otherwise few details are clear. Context and date: room 132, probably a domestic context of small rooms in the north of the city (season 1929). Place: Kansas city, no. 33-0313. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:25, reg. no. M.666; Holland 1975: All.a.8; Engle 1979: type V:6. 142. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has some remains of white-wash. Context and date: cistern 159, which opens into court 52 in a house in the south-west part of the city. The cistern was dated to the 8th-6th centuries BC, and the pottery corroborates this dating (TN I:129, n.1, 276 no. 183, 281, 287: M.471, pI. 47, pI. 45:2; TN 11:124). Note: figurines nos. 170, 179, 180 (below) were found in the same cistern. Place: Berkeley, in exhibition. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:13, pI. 47:10, reg. no. M.460; Holland 1975: All.a.9; Engle 1979: type V:5. 143. A moulded head of type B? from Tel en-Nasbeh. The photograph is bad and taken from a peculiar angle. Holland classified this head as miscellaneous. Context and date: it was fonund in front of cave 193 in the eastern slope of the mound. The cave was used during many periods, and there was an extra-mural domestic quarter nearby during the Iron Age II period (TN 1:73, 217, 230, fig. 59; TN 11:124). Thus, the exact date and the nature of context are unknown. Place: Kansas city? Note: from the same cave cf. figurine no. 167 below. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:26; Holland 1975: AXll.r.8; Engle 1979: type VII:46. 144. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has a hole in the neck. Two rows of large square curls appear above the forehead, with a 'band' beneath them. Holland defined the hairdress otherwise, but the photograph in the report is not good and might have mislead him. The left side-lock is worn out. Context and date: room or court 464, part of a domestic area in the center of the city (season 1935). The room was ascribed to level early I (TN 1:183f), but the area included a few Iron Age phases not well separated. The dating of this level to the 6th century BC was due to a late dating of the Imlk stamps. Today, a date in the 8th-7th centuries BC is the most probable (but cf. Zorn 1993:1556). Place: Rockefeller, PM.35.3097. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:27, reg. no. M.2489; Holland 1975: All.a.11; Engle 1979: type VII:47. 145. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. In the report it was compared to the head in pI. 85:13, and this helped the classification (since the photograph does not show clear details).

Context and date: unclear. The head was found in a huge waste debris west of the early gate. Place: Berkeley, box 5. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:14, reg. no. M.1545; Holland 1975: All.a.10; Engle 1979: type VII:16.

Context and date: square AB/16, but exact provenience is unknown (for the same area cf. figurine no. 140 above). Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:10, reg. no. M.2815; Holland 1975: All.d.2; Engle 1979: type V:102.

146. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. The report mentions that it has three rows of curls and some remains of red paint above white-wash. Context and date: building level II from an open area near the "bastion" in the north of the city. Place: Berkeley, box 5. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:18, reg. no. M.1195; Holland 1975: All.a.13; Engle 1979: type VII:17.

152. A moulded head of type B.2-3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is very well preserved, with white-wash and a peg. Context and date: 398, a little room in a poor bUilding area in the west of the city. From the same building came figurine no. 134 (above). For the date cf. TN 11:121; Zorn 1993:1540, both not quite helpful. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:12, reg. no. M.2350; Holland 1975: All.d.4; Engle 1979: type VII:39.

147. A body of type C.1 from Samaria. The solid body can be seen in the photograph, with the right arm broken and the base damaged. It has a very thick neck. Context and date: S.11.V (season 1910), a mixed debris without clear stratigraphy. Reg. no. 4897. Note: this is probably not a JPF body, but that of a figurine with hair reaching the shoulders (cf. Samaria I: pI. 75g). I have included it here just for reasons of doubt. Literature: Samaria 1:334, pI. 75e; Holland 1975: All.b.72. 148. A moulded head of type B.2?A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has some remains of red paint on the face and black paint on the eyes, and the peg is visible. Context and date: locus 670, a room or a court in an area of small houses and debris piles in the center of the city. Zorn (1993:1601) dated the room later than the Iron Age. Place: Berkeley, box 5. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:11, reg. no. M.2870; Holland 1975: All. c.11; Engle 1979: type V:103. 149. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is well preserved, and probably has one row of curls. Context and date: locus 161, a room or a court with poor bulding walls in the north of the city (season 1929). One of the walls of locus 161 is cut by pit 172. The room was dated to 700-500 BC, but with very few and mixed finds (TN 11:120). Cf. Zorn 1993:1550. Place: Berkeley, in exhibition. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:16, reg. no. M.690; Holland 1975: All.c.10; Engle 1979: type V:1. 150. A moulded head of type B.2-3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. Three rows of curls are mentioned in the report. The photograph shows a scratch or incision on the right chick, and a 'band' between the curls and the face. Context and date: room 438, an elongated space in an area of congested small buildings, with some phases not well defined during the excavation (cf. Zorn 1993:1550). Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:299f, pI. 85:9, reg. M.2245; Holland 1975: A.ll.d.3; Engle 1979: V:101. 151. A moulded head of type B.2-3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is broken, but the surviving part is fairly preserved. Holland thought that it was made in the same mould as figurine no. 150 above.

189

153. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has the remains of white-wash, red paint on the face and orange on the neck. Context and date: cistern 216, cf. figurine no. 133 above. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:8, reg. no. M.994; Holland 1975: AlIl.c.6; Engle 1979: type 1:24. 154. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has four (perhaps five?) rows of curls and some remains of red paint. Context and date: debris pile in square AF17, but dated to level I. Place: Berkeley, box 5. Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:7, reg. no. M.2419; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.18; Engle 1979: type 1:22. 155. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has the remains of white-wash and four rows of curls. Context and date: square AD19, domestic area in the center of city (exact locus unknown). Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:4, reg. no. M.2759; Holland 1975: Alll.d.17; Engle 1979: type 1:20. 156. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has some remains of white-wash and red paint. Context and date: room 633 in the center of city, defined as mixed (TN 11:123). The room is surrounded with other small rooms, near a large building (rooms 643,641,638,637). Cf. Zorn (1993:1593, level 3, all Iron Age II). Note: the head may have been made in the same mould as no. 157 below. Place: once at Berkeley, currently unknown. Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:6, reg. no. M.2845; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.19; Engle 1979: type 1:23. 157. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. Only its face remained. Perhaps it was made ruthlessly, or was not finished (thus TN 1:246). There are some remains of blackening on the surface. Context and date: square AF19, congested with buildings from level I. Note: this head may have been made from the same mould as figurine no. 156 above.

Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:5, reg. no. M.2437; Holland 1975: A.II I.d.20; Engle 1979: type 1:21. 158. A moulded head of type B.1.C from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is well preserved, with the remains of white-wash and red paint. Context and date: locus 642, a large room or court in a house (rooms 650,645,651). Installations and waste debris were found in this room, cf. Zorn 1993:1595. Note: the published photograph is not good, and I have followed Holland's classification. Place: Berkeley, in exhibition. Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:19, reg. no. M.2851; Holland 1975: AIV.a.6; Engle 1979: type V:2. 159. A moulded head of type B.2.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has the remains of the peg and white-wash. A dot of red paint remained on the left eye. Holland defined it as having three rows of curls, but I saw only two. Context and date: surface near pit 2 (season 1928). This pit was not discussed in the TN reports, and I could not locate it in the maps (nor in Zorn's thesis). According to the Rockefeller card, the head is from pit 32 (also not discussed in the TN report). Place: Rockefeller, i.1708. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:20, reg. no. M.120; Holland 1975: All.a.12; Engle 1979: type 111:13. 160. A moulded head of type B.2.C from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has the remains of white-wash and vertical curls. Context and date: silo 92 in square AL23, dated to 650-550 BC by the excavators (one uninscribed stone weight was found there as well: TN 1:276). Place: Berkeley, box 2. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:15, reg. no. M.221; Holland 1975: AIV.b.4; Engle 1979: type VII:19. 161. A moulded head of type B.2.C from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is quite worn out, with probably two rows of curls (and not one) and a peculiar pointed shape. Context and date: debris pile 74, without clear dating; cf. figurine no. 174 below. Place: Rockefeller PM.31.327. Notes: the head was defined as male in the museum's card. Engle defined it as his 'foreign' type, but without any clear reason. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:22, reg. no. M.1702; Holland 1975: AIV.e.5; Engle 1979: VIII:9. 162. A moulded head of type B.3-4.C from Tel en-Nasbeh. The curls are quite worn out, either square or wedge shaped (the photograph is misleading). The back side is very flattened. Context and date: square AC/17, an area of small houses without clear dating. Place: Rockefeller PM.35.3218. Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:23, reg. no. M.2808; Holland 1975: AIV.b.5; Engle 1979: VIII:18.

190

163. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Tel en-Nasbeh. It still has the peg, the remains of white-wash and red paint. The "edge of the mould" line is seen above three rows of large, square curls. Part of the right side is broken. The left side-lock has two columns, with four curls in each column. Context and date: room 435, part of a large complex (rooms 426, 434, 523, 515) in the western part of the town. The exact nature of this building is not clear. Room 435 was dated to level "early I", but with mixed material (TN I: figs. 42-43; TN 11:122; cf. Zorn 1993:1549). Notes: the classification is different than that of Holland, who may have relied on the photograph. Engle classified this head as "doubtful", but it is a goodJPF type. Place: Rockefeller PM.35.31 03. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:21, reg. no. M.2535; Holland 1975: AIV.e.7; Engle 1979: type VIII:24. 164. A moulded head of type B.2? from Tel en-Nasbeh. Its upper and back sides are broken, and the curls are very worn. The right side-lock has two columns of four large, square curls. Context and date: court 361 in a house, which includes room 359 (probably a casemate room of the earlier city wall). Installations and pits were found in this court. Note: Zorn (1993: 1530f) ascribed this head to locus 361a and dated to the Iron II - Persian periods. Place: Rockefeller PM.35.2516. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:24, reg. no. M.1550; Holland 1975: AIV.e.6; Engle 1979: type V:104. 165. A moulded head of type B from Tel en-Nasbeh. According to the report, it has a scarf, or hair, until the chin, and a "veil holder" on the forehead. The photograph is not good and the details are not clear (but cf. figurine no. 168 below). The nose is described as thick and flat, and the remains of white-wash and orange paint are mentioned. Context and date: room 273 in the city gate. Zorn (1993:1511) further specified it as room 273a. The gate was used for a long period of time, until the Persian period. Place: Berkeley box 5. Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:3, reg. no. M.1698; Holland 1975: AIX.a.2; Engle 1979: VIII:45.

Context and date: near cave 193, in the slope outside the city; cf. figurine no. 143 above. For the phases in this cave cf. Zorn (1993: 1424f). Note: the head is not exceptional, a fact noticed by Holland as well. Place: Berkeley box 5. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:17a-b, reg. no. M.816; Holland 1975: AIX.c.1; Engle 1979: V:7.

from the upper classes, dated by the excavators to the end of the Iron Age, but perhaps from the Persian period (TN 1:120, 211f, fig. 52b). Zorn (1993:1457) dated this locus to his level 2, Babylonian-Persian. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 86:16; Holland 1975: AX.b.67. 173. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context and date: square AH23, an open area in the south of the town, with many pits and cisterns. The dating and the exact locus are not clear. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 86:12, reg. no. M.175; Holland 1975: AX.c.11.

168. A moulded head of type B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It was described as having a smooth hair, a band and a "veil holder" above the eyes (cf. figurine no. 165 above). This might be a representation of a jewel (thus Holland). A few traces of white-wash and red paint appear on the face. Context and date: cistern 176 in a two-roomed building near the city wall. 139 baskets of finds were registered from this cistern, including Imlk stamps, a cult stand and a coin (probably intrusive). It was dated to 650-587 BC (TN 1:131, 233, pis. 49-50), but today one should widen the dating to include the 8th century BC (cf. Zorn 1993:1437, "900-586 BC"). Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:1, reg. no. M.1033; Holland 1975:1:193, AIX.a.1; Engle 1979: type VII:43.

174. A body fragment oftype C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context and date: waste heap 74, cf. figurine no. 161 above. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 86:21, reg. no. M.775; Holland 1975: AX.b.68. 175. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has a band of red paint on the neck. Context and date: silo 145, in an open area of cisterns and pits (near one stump of wall). The silo was dated by the excavators to the 10th-8th centuries BC, but included very few finds (cf. Zorn 1993:1619, "levels 2-4"). Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:300, TN 11:124, pI. 86:20, reg. no. M.333; Holland 1975: AX.c.10.

169. A moulded head of type B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has the remains of white-wash and at least one row of curls. Context and date: cistern 370, opening into room 439 in square AF20. Its date is the 8th-7th centuries BC (for the . pottery see TN 1:227, TN 11:125; Wampler 1941:125ff; cf. Zorn 1993:1448f). Notes: Holland classified this head under his 'miscellaneous' hairstyles. According to the museum's card, it was found in pit 331 - but such a pit was not mentioned in the TN report, and was perhaps a slip of hand. Place: Rockefeller, PM.35.3104. Literature: TN I: pis. 85:28, 53:32, reg. no. M.2544; Holland 1975: AXll.r.6; Engle 1979: VII:48.

176. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has the remains of white-wash and a geometric decoration in orange on the neck. The fingers are marked by paint as well. Context and date: square Z.24 north of the early gate (season 1932), but the exact locus is not known. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:300, 313, pI. 86:19; Holland 1975: AX.b.65.

170. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context and date: cistern 159, cf. figurine 142 above. Place: Berkeley B7b. Literature: TN I: pI. 47:11, reg. no. M.463; Holland 1975: AX1.55.

166. A moulded head of type B.5.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is blackened and has a high hairdress with five rows of curls, the remains of red on the face and orange on the curls. It is mentioned in the report as showing Egyptian influences. Context and date: room 665, north of a large waste heap, near rooms 669 and 664. It seems to be a domestic area, but the plan is not very clear (cf. Zorn 1993:1600, house 125.05). Note: Holland and Engle defined this head as exceptional because of the hairdress, but all the other details are usual. Place: Berkeley box 5. Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:2, reg. no. M.2868; Holland 1975: AIX.d.1; Engle 1979: VIII:44.

171. A body of type C.1 from Tel en-Nasbeh. The base is damaged. Context and date: room 77, the massive square "tower" in the center of the town. It was excavated in 1927, but was very poor in finds. It may have been a Roman period building (cf. Zorn 1993:1468), and the head may have come from the surface. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:201f, pis. 86:17, 74:5, reg. no. M.416; Holland 1975: AX.b.64.

167. A moulded head of type B.1.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is very small and has a protrusion at the back, perhaps a "bun" of hair. Some remains of red paint are visible on the face.

172. A body of type C.1 from Tel en-Nasbeh. The base is damaged. Context and date: room 23, a narrow room or court in a large building (rooms 20-26), above the early wall in the south part of the town. It was possibly the house of a person

177. A body fragment oftype C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context and date: room 639 in the center of the city, near room 633 (cf. figurine 156 above). According to Zorn (1993:1549), the locus is 639a from his level 3. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:13; Holland 1975: AX.b.66. 178. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context and date: square AF26 near the city wall, an area of silos, buildings and part of the early city wall. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:22, reg. no. M.870; Holland 1975: AXa.10. 179. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. The hands are holding a large disk, but the photograph is not good. Holland thought that it was a shield. Context and date: cistern 159, cf. figurine no. 142 above. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 47:13, reg. no. MA64; Holland 1975: ALgA.

191

180. A base oftype C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context and date: cistern 159, cf. figurine no. 142 above. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 47:12, reg. no. M.459; Holland 1975: AX1.54. 181. A hand-made head and a body part of type A+.1.A from Tel es-Safi. There are incisions on the neck and the remains of breasts. Context and date: not specified. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: 138, fig. 51; Holland 1975: Al.a.63. 182. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel el-'Oreimeh (Kinneret). Context and date: locus 638, the central space of a public storehouse in area 0 (Fritz 1990:56-58, plan 16, pis. 89-93). The storehouse is dated to the 8th century BC. Literature: Hubner in: Fritz 1990:119, fig. 102:2. 183. A moulded head and upper body part of type BC.3.B from Tel el-'Oreimeh (Kinneret). It is described in detail in the excavation report. The head is similar to the heads from JUdah, with three rows of square curls. The side-locks have two columns of four similar curls. The body is hollow and wheel-made. The preservation state is very good. Context and date: locus 555 from level II of the 8th century BC (fritz 1990; Fritz 1993). Place: Romema, IAA no. 85-448. Literature: Hubner in: Fritz 1990:119, fig. 101:2, pI. 42a. 184. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Tel el-Areini (Tel Erani). There are bands of paint on the body, perhaps denoting a skirt. Context and date: probably area A (reg. no. 60?). Other details were not published. Place: exhibited at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. IAA no. 60-725. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:96-98, 179, vol. II: 144, addenda Al.a.6a; EAEHL New 11:420, bottom left. 185. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel el-Areini (Erani). Context and date: not published, but the Persian period is mentioned. Literature: Garbini 1964:134ft (general description only); Moscati 1964:5-6; Patai 1967:66 photograph 2; Holland 1975: vol. 1:186, All.h.2; Engle 1979: type 111:5. 186. A moulded head of type B.2.B from Tel el-Areini (Tel Erani). Context and date: area A, level VI (Yeivin 1961:11-111), but other details were not published. Literature: Ciasca 1962: pI. ix:10; EAEHL:288 (Hebrew); Holland 1975: vol. 1:186, AlIl.a.1; Engle 1979: type IV:6. 187. A moulded head of type B.1.C from Tel el-Areini (Tel Erani). Context and date: area A, levels IV-V.

Literature: Yeivin 1961: pI. 2: second row, third; Holland 1975: vol. 1:97, AIV.a.1; Engle 1979: type V:3; EAEHL New 11:420 bottom right. 188. A moulded head of type B.3-4.B from Tel el-Areini (Tel Erani). Context and date: area A, level VI. Notes: According to Holland, the head was in the Israel Museum, but he gave only an IAA no. (59-308). Holland counted only three rows of curls above the forehead. Literature: Moscati 1964: pI. 8; Patai 1967: 67, photographs 3-4; EAEHL:288; Holland 1975: vol. 1:187, vol. 11:145, pI. 41:8, AIII.f.1; Engle 1979: type IV:4; EAEHL New 11:420, lower row left. 189. A moulded head of type B.?C from Tel el-Areini (Tel Erani). Context and date: area A, levels V-IV, 8th-7th centuries BC. Literature: Yeivin 1961: pI. 2: third row, first; Holland 1975: 1:187, AIV.a.2; Engle 1979: type V:419; EAEHL New 11:420, upper right. 190. A base of type C.3 from Tel el-Areini (Tel Erani). Context and date: not published. Literature: Ciasca 1962: pI. 20:2; Holland 1975: AX1.10. 191. A whole figurine of type AC.1.a from Tel el-Ful. The head is rounded, the arms and the base are broken. Context and date: burials on the southern slope of the Tel, excavated in July 1909. Macalister dated the figurine to the 8th-7th centuries BC, but thought that it came from a Cypriote origin. Place: the figurines reached the collection of H.E. Clark, later exhibited at the YMCA building, Jerusalem. Currently it is in the Israel Museum (?). Note: It seems that this figurine was 'forgotten', as it was not mentioned in Pritchard's, Holland's or Engle's catalogues. Literature: Macalister 1915:35-37, pI. 1:1; Sinclair 1960:51f. 192. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel el-Ful. Context and date: surface find, but ascribed to level IIlb (dated to the 6th century BC). Literature: Lapp 1981: 113, pI. 32:4, 16. 193. A moulded head of type B.2.A from Tel el-Ful. It has two rows of large rounded curls. The left part of the head is missing. Context and date: locus XVIII S-39, defined as a silo (it is similar to the Gibeon "winery").' It was dated to level lila, "640-587 BC" (Lapp 1981:43, figs. 22-23). Literature: Lapp 1981: 113, 129, pI. 32:1, 13. 194. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel el-Ful. The breasts and the right hand remained, with little traces of white-wash. Context and date: silo 38, a "pre-lIl.a" level assemblage; cf. figurine no. 193 above. Literature: Lapp 1981: 113, pI. 32:2, 4. 195. A moulded head of type B.2 from Shechem. It has white-wash, exaggerated eyes, and probably two rows of

192

curls (now damaged). The side-locks are now worn out. Reg. no. 1716. Context and date: Sellin thought that it belonged to the Hellenistic period, but it was found in an area where also an Iron Age bUildingwas excavated. An exact locus is unknown. Place: Rockefeller, i. 788. Literature: Sellin 1927: 205ft, pI. 20i; Pritchard 1943: Vllla:263; Holland 1975: All.c.12; Engle 1979: type VII:23. 196. A hand-made head of type A+.1.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. It was defines as exceptional in the excavation report, but without any explanation. Context and date: locus SE.4.A2, a small room in a fourroomed house near the casemate wall, between the city wall and the street. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM 111:69, s.n.1239, pis. 31:7, 54b:9; Albright 1939:120, pI. C:7; Holland 1975: Al.a.57. 197. A whole figurine of type BC.1.B from Tel Beit Mirsim. The neck is tall and very thick (it was broken, but mended after discovery). I follow Holland's classification, but the details of the curls are not evident from the published material. Context and date: pit SE.13.A2 in square 13, but exact place inside the square was not specified (perhaps pit 32, where figurines nos. 203, 229 were found; but there are other pits in the same square). Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM 111:69, s.n.1803, pis. 29:12, 56:3; Holland 1975: AliI. e.1; Engle 1979: type IV:1. 198. A whole figurine of type BC.2.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. It has a tall, thick neck. The base is damaged and the left hand is missing. Context and date: a pit in square SE.13.A, cf. figurine no. 197 above. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM 111:69, s.n.1468, pis. 31:6; Holland 1975: All.c.9; Engle 1979: type VII:14. 199. A moulded head and upper body of type B+.2.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. The body is broken below the chest. There are two rows of large curls above the forehead. The sidelocks are either simple or worn out. Context and date: locus SE.22.A6, a small room or an open area (its surroundings were only partially excavated). Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM II: pI. 25:9; TBM 111:176, s.n.523, pI. 57c:2; Albright 1939:pl. B:9; Pritchard 1943: VII:204; Holland 1975: All.e.6; Engle 1979: type IV:3. 200. A nearly whole figurine of type Bc.3-4.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. The base is missing. The neck is very thick. Context and date: locus SE.21.A1, a room south of street 7 (TBM III: plan 4). Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: Albright 1939: pI. B:10; TBM II: pI. 25:10; TBM 111:69, s.n.523, pI. 57c:3; Pritchard 1943: VII:208, fig. 21; Holland 1975: All.h.5; Engle 1979: type VII:28.

193

201. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel Beit Mirsim. The peg is still left. Context and date: debris in the SW quarter. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: s.n.881, pis. 31:1; 54:6; Albright 1939: pI. C:1; Holland 1975: AlIl.c.5; Engle 1979: type 1:27. 202. A moulded head of type B.4.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: square SE.23A (season 1930). Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: s.n.1228, pis. 31:4; 54b:3; Albright 1939:pl. C:4; Holland 1975: All.b.1; Engle 1979: type VIA. 203. A moulded head oftype B.2.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. It is badly preserved. Context and date: silo 32 in square SE.13 (season 1930). The silo was dug into room 19, a room in bUilding 10+18 north of the main street (TBM 111:52, pI.3). Note: Albright thought that it is the earliest pillar-figurine, from the 8th century BC or earlier. Figurine no. 229 (below) was found in the same silo. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:11; TBM III: pis. 31:11; 54b:5; Holland 1975: All.c.7; Engle 1979: type VII:11. 204. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. It is fairly preserved. Context and date: debris of level A in square SE.22 (season 1932). Place: Pittsburgh? Holland 1975: Literature: TBM III: pl. 56:1, s.n.1808; All.c.8; Engle 1979: type V:204. 205. A moulded head of type B.3-5.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: locus NW.32.10, an open area with little bUilding remains and a cistern. There were also remains of an olive press, but not in situ (TBM 111:60). Place: Rockefeller PM.32.2730. Notes: I could not find this head in the museum, and the details of the curls are not clear from the photograph in the report. Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:2, s.n.2105; Holland 1975: A.ll.h.6; Engle 1979: type 1:10. 206. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: locus SE.4.A3, probably a court of a fourroomed house between the city wall and the street. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:12; TBM III: pI. 31:12, pI. 54b:8, s.n.1019; Holland 1975: Alll.d.15; Engle 1979: type VII:12. 207. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: locus SE.22.A5, a long room or court in a large building (rooms 3+4+9) north of the street. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:15; TBM III: pI. 31:15, pI. 54b:4, s.n.908; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.16; Engle 1979: type VI:3.

208. A moulded head of type B.2.C from Tel Beit Mirsim. It is flattened and its nose is broken. It has two rows of large, vertical curls above the forehead. Context and date: locus SE.14.A3, an narrow room in a house situated between the city wall and the street (with casemate rooms 9-10). Possibly, room 3 could have been a storage area. Place: Pittsburgh? Note: the head is very similar to head no. 212 below. Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:14; TBM III: pI. 31:14, pI. 54b:2, s.n.1332; Holland 1975: AIV.b.3; Engle 1979: type 111:10. 209. A moulded head of type B.2.C from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: locus SE.51.5N, a court or a room of a thick-walled building (rooms 5w, 5e, 5n, 6; TBM III: pI. 5). Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: Albright 1939: pI. B:8; TBM II: pI. 25:8; TBM III: pI. 57c:1, s.n.193; Holland 1975: AIV.b.2; Engle 1979: type VII:21. [Fig. 6:6]. 210. A moulded head of type B.2.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. It is covered with white-wash and red paint on the face. Two rows of large, rounded curls appear above the forehead, with an edge-of-mould line clear above them. The left side-lock has two curls, of which the lower is elongated (perhaps an indication of an earring?). Context and date: locus NW.32.10, a cistern in a court of a four-roomed house. No. 10 appears for the court and the room near it as well, but the cistern was surely related to the court (cf. TBM 1I1:50f, 63). Place: Rockefeller PM.32.2778. Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:5, s.n.2450; Holland 1975: AIV.c.1; Engle 1979: type V:102. 211. A moulded head of type B.2.G from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: locus NW.22.5, an open court with installations in a four-roomed house. Place: Rockefeller i-8928. Note: I followed Holland's classification, but the details of the curls are not very clear. Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:3; TBM III: pI. 31:3, s.n.1383; Holland 1975: AVll.b.3; Engle 1979: type VII:13. 212. A moulded head of type B.2.G from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: locus SE.12.A5, a room in a building (loci 1+2+3+5) north of the street. Note: I could not locate the head in the Rockefeller museum. It is similar to no. 208, and may have been done in the same mould. The curls are slightly different - but the drawings may not be precise. Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:13; TBM III: pis. 31:13, 54:1, s.n.909; Holland 1975: AVll.b.2; Engle 1979: type 111:9. 213. A moulded head of type B from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: locus SE.14.A6, a room in a house between the city wall and the street (rooms 5, 6, 7, 16a and casemates 4, 12). Place: Pittsburgh?

194

Note: Holland classified the head as having a simple hair without curls, but it is badly preserved and the curls may have been worn out. Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C.2; TBM III: pis. -31:2, 54:7, s.n.986; Holland 1975: AVlIl.a.2; Engle 1979: type VII:10. 214. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The hands are broken and the base is damaged. Context and date: locus SE.31.A9, a room made of poor walls. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: Albright 1939: pI. B.11; TBM II: pI. 25:11; TBM III: pI. 57c:5, s.n.543; Pritchard 1943: type VII:214, fig. 20; Holland 1975: AX.b.51. 215. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The right arm is missing, but the hand is still glued to the body. There are some remains of white-wash and a depression for the peg of the head. Context and date: locus NW.31.8, an open court in a building (room 7 and casemate 9) near the city wall (TBM 11I:50f). Place: Rockefeller, PM.32.2769. Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:6, s.n.2406; Holland 1975: AX.b.59. 216. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The body was broken and mended after discovery. Context and date: locus SE.32.10, an open court with installations in an area of congested buildings (TBM 11I:50f). Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:10, s.n.2295; Holland 1975: AX.b.55. 217. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The right breast and the base are little damaged. Context and date: pit in locus SE.13.A2, the same pit where figurines no. 197, 218 have been found. Place: Rockefeller PM.32.2697. Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:11, s.n.1805; Holland 1975: AX.b.56. 218. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The left arm is missing. The neck is very thick. Context and date: pit in locus SE.13.A2, the same pit where figurines nos. 197,217 have been found. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:8, s.n.1804; Holland 1975: AX.b.57. 219. A moulded head of type B from Tel Beit Mirsim. It is very crudely made and badly preserved. There are no curls, but the upper part is broken. It has protruding side-locks and the remains of the peg of the head. Context and date: locus NW.31.11, a casemate room in a four-roomed bUilding (TBM 1I1:50f). Place: Rockefeller PM.32.2762. Notes: Holland defined this head as miscellaneous, because of the lack of curls. Engle classified it as his type V, but the shape of the eyes is not clear at all.

Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:4, s.n.2313; Holland 1975: AXll.r.5; Engle 1979: type V:205.

Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:5; TBM III: pI. 31:5, s.n.1544; Holland 1975: AX1.48.

220. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: locus NW.32.12, an area explained as an olive press (TBM 11I:62f). It is a large, probably open area, with remains of small walls and two installations. The exact provenienceof the head is not clear. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:9, s.n.2548; Holland 1975: AX.b.60.

227. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. Part of the chest and the right hand survived. Context: square SE.33, out of context. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:6, s.n.2296; Holland 1975: AX.b.62.

221. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context: locus NW.32.12, cf. figurine no. 220 above. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:7, s.n.2396; Holland 1975: AX.b.58.

228. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The depression of the peg is visible at the upper end of the body. Context: locus SE.51.8E. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM II: pI. 25:13; TBM III: pI. 57c:7, s.n.84; Pritchard 1943: type VII:212; Holland 1975: AX.b.49. 229. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. Only the chest remained. Context and date: silo 32, see figurine no. 203 above. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: pis. 31:9, 54b:12, s.n.1329; Holland 1975: AX.b.52.

222. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The depression for the peg of the head is clearly visible at the upper edge of the body. Context and date: locus NW.21.15, a room in a building surrounded by small alleys (13+14; TBM III: pI.6). Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:8; TBM III: pis. 31:8, 54b:10 s.n.1119; Holland 1975: AX.b.63.

230. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The photograph does not show the details clearly, but two protrusions at the sides of the "pillar" are evident, with impressed motives (wedge shaped?) above them. Context and date: locus NW.31.6, an open court (see TBM 1I1:50f) in a house (rooms 5+6+7) near the city wall. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:7, s.n.2004; Holland 1975: AX.b.61.

223. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: square SE.12.A, without specific locus number. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:10; TBM III: pis. 31:10, 54b:11 s.n.988; Holland 1975: AX.b.53. 224. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The hands and the breasts survived. Context and date: "immediately north-west of the eastern gate", an area of an open piazza on the inner side of the gate. Only two small investigation probes were made in this area (TBM 11I:47f, pI. 5). Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: Albright 1939: pI. B:12; TBM II: pI. 25:12; TBM 111:162, pI. 57c:6, s.n.29; Pritchard 1943: type VII:213; Holland 1975: A.X.b.50. 225. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The breasts and the left hand remained. Context and date: the "western tower", a large public (?) building dated by Albright to the 9th-6th centuries BC (TBM 111:41-47). The specific locus and phase inside the building were not given in the report. Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM 111:201, pI. 56:8, s.n.2360; Holland 1975: AX.b.54. 226. A body oftype C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: locus NW.21.2, part of a street between houses, near an entrance to one house (TBM 111:50, fig. 3, pI. 6). Place: Pittsburgh?

195

231. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beit Mirsim. Context and date: locus NW.22.13, a room (and not a court) in a four-roomed house (loci 4+5+12+13). Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:9, s.n.1817; Holland 1975: AX1.47. 232. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. The "pillar" body and the hand-made head are usual, but the figurine is exceptional since a small hand-made child is applied to its back. The left hand of the woman supports the child, whose head is missing and whose hands clutch the woman's neck. Context and date: cistern E.33.A15 (season 1928), near a 'dyeing' installation in an open area. Albright thought that the cistern is later than the installation. The cistern was rich in finds, and was dated to level A (TBM 111:57, 63f). Place: Pittsburgh? Literature: TBM III: pis. 32:1, 54b:4, s.n.670; Holland 1975: Al.h.2. 233. A moulded head of type B.4?B from Tel ej-Judeideh (Tel Goded). The peg is clear. The head has four rows of curls (following Holland; the drawing shows only three rows). Context and date: cf. figurine no. 234 below. Place: Rockefeller PM.63, currently exhibited at Nir-David. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902:136, pI. 68:7; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.10; Engle 1979: type 1:30.

234. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel ej-Judeideh (Tel Goded). It has a high, pointed "hat", three rows of large, square curls and probably an edge-of-mould line above them. The side-locks have two columns of four square curls. Some traces of red paint appear above the white-wash. The face is beautiful, but the chin, the nose and the right chick are a little damaged. Context and date: the so called "Late Judean" level, where "private" seals of the 8th century BC have been found. The exact locus was not specified. Place: Rockefeller P.1094. Note: Holland should have classified this head as his type AlIl.cand notAlll.f. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: 136, pI. 68:8; Holland 1975: AIII.f.2; Engle 1979: type VII:7; Gibson 1994:136, fig. 20:11.

239. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel Halif (Lahav). Context and date: area A Place: with the excavation team, under study. Literature: unpublished, courtesy of O. Borowski. 240. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Tel Masos. It is pointed and shows the remains of the peg. Context and date: Locus 602 in area G, but the stratigraphy was not mentioned. Locus 602 appears as the chapel of the Nestorian monastery in area D, square G.13 (Masos 1:141143, 248, plan 26). The level where the head was found fits that of the floor of the chapel. Probably the head belonged to the Iron age level, which was found beneath the monastery (ibid:123). Literature: Masos 1:131, pI. 110:4, reg. no. 983/3. 241. A hand-made head of type A4.A from Tel Masos. It has a very long neck and an applied hat. Context and date: Locus 778, a street from building phase 3 of the 7th century BC. Literature: Masos I:131, pI. 110:2, reg. no. 3646/1.

235. A moulded head of type B.1.C from Tel ej-Judeideh (Tel Goded). It is flattened and has one row of large, vertical curls, with a second, higher ridge (but without curls). The side-locks are simple. Context and date: cf. figurine no. 234 above. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902:136, pI. 68:6; Holland 1975: AIV.a.4; Engle 1979: type VII:3.

242. A moulded head of type B.3-4 from Tel Masos. The photograph indicates its bad preservation state, but probably it had 3-4 rows above the forehead (there is no evidence for curls, which may have been worn out). Context and date: Locus 741, under street 768 from phase 3 (area G; Masos I:125ff, plan 23). Thus, the head is earlier than level 3 (but even level 4 belongs to the 8th century BC). The nature of the locus cannot be determined. Literature: Masos 1:131, pI. 110:3, reg. no. 1547/1.

236. A moulded head and upper body of type B.4.A? from Tel ej-Judeideh (Tel Goded). It has a high "hat" with horizontal bands of red paint. The face is covered with whitewash and red paint. There are four rows of little (rounded?) curls above the forehead. The left side-lock survived, with probably 2-3 curls. Context and date: cf. figurine 234 above. Place: Rockefeller P.55. Notes: Holland and Engle classified this head as miscellaneous, but it is not exceptional in any way from the other JPF; cf. also app. 3: no. 86. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: 136, pI. 68: 10; Pritchard 1943: type VII:205; Holland 1975: AXll.b.1; Engle 1979: type VII:8.

243. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel Masos. The breasts, the hands and the neck remained. Context and date: Locus 612, the entrance room to the Nestorian monastery; but the levels indicate that the head was found much lower, in the Iron Age level beneath (Masos 1:123, 141,248, plan 26). Literature: Masos I:131, pI. 110:6a+b, reg. no. 1094/1.

237. A body of type C.1 from Tel ej-Judeideh (Tel Goded). According to the excavators, it is hollow, but perhaps they meant only a hollow (concave) base. A decoration of black lines appears on the neck. Context and date: cf. figurine no. 234 above. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902:136, pl. 68:9; Pritchard 1943: type VII:206; Holland 1975: AX.bA6. 238. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel Halif (Lahav). It has three rows of large, square (?) curls. The side-locks have a few columns of similar curls. Context and date: on floor G.8005, in a room of level Vlb from the end of the 8th century BC. Near the head were found a fenestrated incense-stand and two blocks of worked limestone (standing stones?). The excavators defined the room as a "house shrine". Place: with the excavation team. Literature: Had. Arch. 100-101 (1994):109 (Hebrew); Seger 1992 (without page nos.); Seger 1992b:66; Borowski 1995:151, 152: photograph.

244. A base of type C.3 from Tel Masos. Context and date: Locus 708, a room from phase 2 (area G) of the 7th century BC. The nature of the room is not clear. Literature: Masos 1:130, pI. 111:5, reg. no. 1460/1. 245. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel 'Ira. It is made of orange-red clay, with little traces of white-wash. The face is full and beautiful, but the nose, mouth and lower sidelocks are damaged and the back side is broken. There are three rows of square curls above the forehead, and an edgeof-mould line above them. The side-locks exhibit two columns of five or more similar curls. Context and date: Locus 574, a public storehouse near the city gate. Reg. no. 4539/1. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 1, pI. 13:2. [Fig. 6:2].

surface is blackened. There are four rows of wedge shaped (?) curls and an edge-of-mould line above them. The right side-lock is worn, but probably the left one has four curls. Context and date: Locus 159, in the glacis outside the city wall near the gate. An exact date cannot be established. Reg. no. 776/1. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 2, pI. 13:6. 247. A moulded head of type B.3-4 from Tel 'Ira. The face is elongated, but partly damaged. Evidence of white-wash remained, but part of the surface is blackened. The section of the neck shows clearly the peg. There are four rows above the forehead, three of these probably had curls in origin. The side-locks are either simple or worn out. Context and date: Locus 191, a room at the back of a public bUilding near the gate. Reg. no. 4021/1. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 4, pI. 13:3. 248. A moulded head of type B.2-3.A from Tel 'Ira. It is a bit flattened and has some remains of white-wash and a red band on the forehead. The left chick is scratched and the nose is somewhat damaged. The number of rows of curls is not clear. The side-locks have two columns of five rounded curls. The eyes are large and elongated. Context and date: Locus 152, in the glacis area outside the city wall (cf. no. 264 above). Reg. no. 773/1. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 5, pI. 13:5. 249. A moulded head of type B.3-4.A? from Tel 'Ira. It is very worn, broken on the right side and has a few remains of white-wash. There are probably four ridges, with three rows of small curls above the forehead. There are at least four curls in one column on the left side-lock. Context and date: Locus 591, a large open area near the public storehouse. Reg. no. 4623/1. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 3, pI. 13:4. 250. A body fragment of type C from Tel 'Ira. It is damaged and has a few remains of white-wash. It is probably the lower back part with the beginning of the base. Context and date: Locus 526, a casemate room in the city wall, not connected with a house. Reg. no. 4548/1. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 6. 251. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.Ah from Tel Beer Sheba. The hands are missing. The head is flattened from above and "hammer" shaped (with protrusions, perhaps indications of ears). Signs of breakage on the chest indicate breasts or perhaps an object held in the hands (a disk?). Context and date: Locus 1007 (former 1340), the central space in a public storehouse in square R.19. it is dated to level II of the 8th century BC. Reg. no. 14125/1. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: unpublished, courtesy of the excavation team.

252. A whole figurine of type AC.1.Ah from Tel Beer Sheba. The head is "hammer" like. The neck and the head are decorated with white, red and blue bands. Context and date: Locus 25, on the floor of a room of a domestic house in the western quarter. Near the figurine were found models of a miniature bed and a lamp, as well as daily pottery vessels. Level II, 8th century BC. Reg. no. 1086/1. Place: Exhibited in the Israel Museum, 1M no. 78-1437. Literature: Jerusalem Post 16.9.1969; Aharoni 1971: photograph (without page numbers.); Aharoni 1973:22, photograph 6; BS 1:36, pI. 71:1, photograph pI. 27:2; Holland 1975: Al.a.2. [Fig. 5:2]. 253. A whole figurine of type BC.2.A-B? from Tel Beer Sheba. The head is a little pointed, but not well preserved. The facial features are worn out, one breast is damaged (now restored) and the base is broken and mended. The photograph shows two rows of large, square or rounded curls above the forehead. The hands do not meet under the breasts. Context and date: locus 300 (formerly 256), the western room of a public storehouse near the gate. Level II, 8th century BC. Reg. no. 1192/1. Place: not clear. Note: this figurine is missing from the work of Holland and Engle, and was not published in the BS I report. Literature: Aharoni 1973:22, photograph 5. 254. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel Beer Sheba. It is rounded and covered with white-wash and some remains of yellow-brown paint on the neck. Context and date: Locus 1004, a room of a public storehouse in square P.1. Reg. no. 14218/1 or 14148/1. Note: figurine no. 266 was found in the same locus. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. [Fig. 5:1]. 255. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel Beer Sheba. It is rounded and exceptional, in that there are no clear eyedepressions. Reg. no. 5103/1. Context and date: Locus 270, the central space of the public storehouse in square P.1. Level II, 8th century BC. Note: for a very similar head cf. figurine no. 256. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published. 256. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel Beer Sheba. It is similar to no. 255 above, but rather worn out. Reg. no. 7760/1. Context and date: Locus 827. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published. 257. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel Beer Sheba. It is a little pointed, but the edge is broken. The eye depressions still retain some white-wash (season 1969).

246. A moulded head of type BA.D? from Tel 'Ira. It is not well preserved and the facial details are quite worn. The 196

197

Context and date: Locus 29 (unified with 38), the big circumference street. The head was found in the gray fill of this street. It probably came from square U2 (and not T1, as appears in one of the excavation diaries). Reg. no. 1462/2. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published. 258. A moulded head of type B.6.C from Tel Beer Sheba. There are remains of White-wash, yellow paint on the neck and red on the face. The face is full and well preserved. The eyes are crude and a-symmetric. There are six rows of little wedge-like curls above the forehead. The side-locks have 34 columns, each with four or more similar curls. Reg. no. 1420/1. Context: Locus 93, a small frontal room of a four-roomed house in the western quarter. The nature of the room is not clear (stair-room or storage area?). Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published. [Fig. 6:5]. 259. A moulded head of type B.4.E? from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1972). The face is full but very worn out. There are four ridges above the forehead, probably without any curls. The side-lock are simple or worn out. Reg. no. 10752/1. Context: Locus 1253 in square 01, a space in the eastern annex of the "cellars house" (32). The nature of this complex is not clear, nor if it is really part of the "cellars house". Note: a fragment of a bed model, reg. no. 1758, was found in the same area. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published. 260. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel Beer Sheba. It is not well preserved. Three rows of large, rounded curls are still clear above the forehead. Reg. no. 3281/1? Context: Locus 462, an open area north of the large house (416) in the south of the city. This house was explained as a residency of a governor, because of its size and ashlar masonry (BS 1:14, 135, plan 84). Place: Romema, IAA.1993-15. Note: on the figurine a different number appears: 3281/1. It is possible that this figurine was switched with figurine no. 263 (below) in the BS report (photographs 5 and 8 in the plate of the report). Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:5; Engle 1979: type VI:5.

262. A moulded head of type B.2?A? from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1970). It is a little flattened at the top. The face is full. The nose, hair and chicks are damaged. There are two ridges above the forehead, with large, probably rounded curls. The section of the neck shows the peg. Reg. no. 3449/1. Context and date: Locus 443, a destruction layer on a floor of a building near the gate. The nature of this building is not clear (the pottery was only partially published). Level II, 8th century BC. Note: figurine no. 268 (below) was found in the same locus. Place: Romema, IAA.199~-16. Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:6; Engle 1979: 11:5. 263. A moulded head of type B.4?A-B from Tel Beer Sheba. It is fairly preserved, with full face and four rows of little curls (square or round). Context and date: Locus 521, a narrow passage between the water system and house 529 in the northern part of the city. Level III, 8th century BC. Note: the reg. no. is probably 4739/1 (cf. note to figurine no. 260 above). Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:8; Aharoni 1971: photograph (without page numbers); Engle 1979: type 1:4. 264. A moulded head of type B.3? from Tel Beer Sheba. The face is rounded and worn. There are probably three ridges of large curls above the forehead, but they are very worn out. The side-locks have columns of 4-5 curls, also worn. Context and date: Locus 766, a court or a room in a domestic bUilding in the north part of the city. Level II, 8th century BC. Reg. no. 7419/1. Place: Romema, IAA.1993-13. Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:9. 265. A fragmented moulded head of type B.4.C? from Tel Beer Sheba. All the left side is broken away. The section of the neck shows the peg. I classified the curls as wedge shaped, but they are very worn out. Reg. no. 15462/1. Context and date: Locus 1782, later unified with 1200, the great street leading from the gate towards house 32. Level II, 8th century BC. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published. 266. A fragmented moulded head of type B.2? from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1973). It is badly preserved, pointed and has two rows of rounded, very worn oat curls. Reg. no. 14105/1. Context and date: Locus 1603, square R.19. This was unified with 1004, the eastern space of a public storehouse. The figurine was found high above the floor level. Level II, 8th century BC. Note: figurine no. 254 was found in the same locus. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

261. A moulded head of type B.?A from Tel Beer Sheba. All the upper part is broken, thus the shape of the curls is unknown. The right side-lock has two columns of rounded (?) curls. The face is rounded, with some traces of whitewash, yellow-brown paint on the neck and red paint on the side-locks and lower head. The section of neck shows the peg of the head. Context and date: Locus 832, a room in a house in the western part of the city, between the city wall and the street. Level II, 8th century BC. Note: in the report the reg. no. is 7789/1, but on the head another number is written, 7289/1. Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:7; Engle 1979: type 111:15.

267. A moulded head of type B from Tel Beer Sheba. It is badly preserved and fragmented. The neck is painted yellow and red, and the face is painted red.

198

Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

Context and date: Locus 553, a whole square (S.2) in the east part of the city. The locus extends from surface to about 2 m deep, without bUilding remains. It was dated to the Hellenistic level. Place: Romema, IAA. 1993-14. Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:4; Engle 1979: type 111:14.

274. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1973). It is concave and covered with white-wash. Reg. no. 12063/1. Context and date: Locus 479, a room near house 416, perhaps part of this house or of a nearby one. Level II, 8th century BC. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

268. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1972). The left breast and the arms are broken, but part of the right hand is still in place on the body. A few traces of white-wash survived. Reg. no. 9398/1. Context and date: Locus 443, cf. figurine no. 262 above. Note: according to the area diary, the body was found in a pit full of waste and ashes. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

275. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1971). It is concave and covered with white-wash. Reg. no. 6503/2 (?). Context and date: not clear. The reg. no. is probably wrong, thus I could not locate this figurine in the excavation's records. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

269. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1974). The base is damaged and the arms are broken. The depression for the peg of the head is clear at the upper edge of the body. The upper and back sides are blackened by fire. Reg. no. 16999/1. Context and date: the destruction layer in Locus 1357, square C.20. This is a space near the stairs in the so-called eastern annex of bUilding 32 (cf. figurine no. 259 above). Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

276. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1973 or 1972). It is concave and covered with white-wash. Reg. no. 11511/1. Context and date: Locus 1261 (=1628), a room in the cellars house 32 (cf. figurine no. 259 above). Note: the excavators ascribed this fragment to level VI, under house 32. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

270. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1974). The chest is protruding, but without a clear separation between the breasts. The hands are placed at the upper side of the chest. The base is damaged and concave. Reg. no. 15923/1. Context and date: Locus 1115. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

277. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1973). It is concave, but only the central part remained. Reg. no. 7714/1. Context and date: Locus 808a (?), a room in a four-roomed house near the casemate wall. Locus 808a was ascribed to level III, but the date and the nature of room 808 are not clear (the area was not yet published). Note: a model-bed was found in locus 808, above 808a (reg. no. 7613/1), as well as a "pillar" base no. 7698 (but I could not locate the last). Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

271. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1973). The right breast is damaged and the arms are broken, but traces of their attachment to the chest remain. The section of the neck shows the peg ofthe head. Reg. no. 14060/1. Context and date: Locus 1602 (=1345), a white floor in the area of the storehouses. Level II? Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

Other figurines from Tel Beer Sheba. A few other fragments were mentioned in the diaries of the excavations. Their descriptions in the diaries fit the JPF, but they could not be located with the material currently stored at Tel Aviv (for fragments of other figurines, not JPF, cf. App. 5: figurines 5.1.2.6, 5.1.4.13, 5.1.5.12-13, 5.1.5.16). The known details are presented below:

272. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1974). Both arms are missing, but changes of color indicate that they were placed beneath the breasts. Reg. no. 16632/1. Context and date: Locus 2003, possibly a room in a house in the northern quarter. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published.

A. A female body of type C.1 or C.2. Locus 1385 (a room?). Reg. No. 12918/1. Area E. Season 1973. B. A female body of type C(?). It is fragmented. Locus 1298, square 0.16, level IV. Reg. no. 12118/1. Season 1973.

273. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1970). The breasts are damaged and both arms are missing, but changes of color indicate that they were placed beneath the breasts. Few traces of white-wash. Reg. no. 2293/1. Context and date: Locus 292, unified with 290. This is the street north of the storehouse. Level II.

C. A base of type C3. Locus 2006, Area C. Level II. Reg. no. 16637/1. Season 1974.

199

278. A moulded head of type B.4.E from the "Ophel hill", Jerusalem. It has four ridges without curls above the forehead. Above them are tassels or perhaps a veil (?). Context and date: unknown. Notes: Pilz, Pritcahrd and Holland thought that the two drawings of this figurine belonged to two figurines. This was corrected by Engle. The drawings may not be accurate. Literature: Vincent 1911: pI. 16:3+5; Pilz 1924: nos. 110+112; Pritchard 1943: nos. 268+274; Holland 1975: A Vl.d.1; Engle 1979: type VII:34. 279. A moulded head of type B.2.E from the "Ophel hill", Jerusalem. It has two ridges without curls above the forehead. Note: Pilz and Pritcahrd thought that the two drawings of this figurine belonged to two figurines. This was corrected by Engle. Literature: Vincent 1911: pI. 16:2+4; Pilz 1924: nos. 119+111; Pritchard 1943: nos. 269+275; Holland 1975:191, AVl.b.1; Engle 1979: typeVII:33. 280. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel Qasileh. It is exceptional, since the hands hold an object under the breasts (unlike the few JPF with disks, where the disc covers at least one breast). Context: unknown. Date: level VIII, dated to the ninth century (B. Mazar) or to the end of 10th century BC (A Mazar). Literature: Mazar, B. 1951:206f, fig. 13c; Mazar, A 1980:911; Holland 1975: AX.b.69. Note to figurines nos. 281-286: all these figurines were found in the excavations of Duncan and Macalister in Jerusalem, but published in a preliminary way by Duncan (1931). They were later 'forgotten', and were not included in the works of Pritchard, Holland and Engle. 281. A moulded head and upper body of type B from Jerusalem. Only a photograph of its profile was published, without textual discussion. The details of the hair and the face cannot be clearly seen, but it seems that it is a female figurine that has a protruding wig or hair and breasts. This would fit a JPF. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: lower row, center. 282. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem. It has deep eye depressions and its back is rounded. Context and date: unknown. See note preceding figurine no. 281. Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: upper row, right. 283. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem. Context and date: unknown. See note preceding figurine no. 281. Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: top row, third from the right. 284. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem. It is flattened from above.

200

Context and date: unknown. See note preceding figurine no. 281. Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: top row, second from the right (and inscribed "WNN 6"?). 285. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem. Context and date: unknown. See note preceding figurine no. 281. Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: top row, left. 286. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem. Its left side is damaged, as well as the base (on which a number is inscribed: 9B277?). The left hand is missing. Context and date: unknown. See note preceding figurine no. 281. Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: lower row, right. 287. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from Jerusalem. Its publlcatlon was very brief. Context and date: unknown. Note: this might be a figurine in the Rockefeller museum, no. P.1091, whose origin is not registered in the museum's card. Literature: Bliss 1898:264, pI. 27:50; Holland 1975: Al.a.54. 288. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem. Its publication was very brief. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Bliss 1898:264, pI. 27:49; Holland 1975: A.X.b.44.

Context and date: area S.5B, in debris without a clear stratigraphy. Season 1910. Note: Thi~ is probably not a JPF fragment, but a figurine of a type which has long side-locks reaching the shoulders (cf. figurine no. 147 above). I have included it here just for the sake of being cautious. Literature: Samaria 1:384, reg. no. 3318; Holland 1975: AX.a.12. 294. A moulded head of type B.2.G from Jerusalem. It is covered with white-wash but very badly preserved. According to Holland, it has one row of little, square curls, above it a second row of large, square curls, and then another row of rounded curls. There are three round curls in the side-lock. Context and date: room 45, from a level with mixed Iron Age-Hellenistic finds. The nature of the room is not clear, but it is probably later than the figurine. Place: London, reg. no. 50/3846. Literature: Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: pI. 11:3; Holland 1975: pI. 3:4, AVll.c.1; Engle 1979: type VII:41. 295. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Jerusalem. It is covered with white-wash but not well preserved. The facial features are not clear. The peg of the head is clear at the lower edge of the neck. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: pI. 11:4; Holland 1975: pI. 2:8, AIII.d.9; Engle 1979: type 1:2.

289. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A from Jerusalem. The published photograph is not clear. Context and date: unknown. The excavators mentioned many figurines found in an area, where Imlk stamps were also found. They suggested that the figurines are goddesses. But the exact locus and stratigraphy were not published. Literature: Macalister and Duncan 1926:187, fig. 197:right; Duncan 1925: fig. 18: right; Holland 1975: All.c.6; Engle 1979: type VII:32.

296. A moulded head of type B.4?A from Jerusalem. It is covered with white-wash. There are probably four rows of curls above the forehead. Other details are not clear from the publication. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: pI. 11:5; Holland 1975: pI. 2:6, AII.h.4; Engle 1979: type 1:3.

290. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem. The arms are missing. The number "9B (22A)" is written on the base. Context and date: unknown, probably area 9. Literature: Macalister and Duncan 1926:184, fig. 194; Duncan 1924:179, fig. 6b; Holland 1975: AX1.42.

297. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem. It has some remains of white-wash. The base and the right arm are damaged. Context and date: room 41 of the lowest level, but the date is not clear (cf. figurine no. 294 above). Literature: Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: pI. 11:2; Holland 1975: pI. 4:2, AX.c.9.

291. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Jerusalem. It has white-wash and red paint on the side-locks. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Duncan 1925: fig. 18:left; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.8; Engle 1979: 1:26. 292. A moulded head of type B from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is covered with white-wash and red paint on the face. The hair is arranged in a simple coiffure, long at the sides. It is an exceptional form. Context: unknown. Place: Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 6:13, A VIII. b.1; Engle 1979: type VII:38. 293. A body part of type B.2? from Samaria.

298. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem. It has traces of white-wash and red paint. The base and the arms are missing. It was first published by Holland, but was found by Crowfoot and Fitzgerald. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 3:11, AX. b.45.

traces of white-wash and red paint on the face. Reg. no. C391. Context and date: the entrance to cave I, area A (locus A966.3Y). Place: Glasgow, 0.1968.8. Note: the context is discussed in chapter VIII of this work. Literature: Holland 1975:96, 344, fig. 6:4, A III.c.4; Holland 1977: fig. 7:1; Engle 1979: 1:17; Jerusalem II: frontispiece photograph. 301. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Jerusalem (Kenyon's Excavations). It is well preserved, with traces of white-wash and red paint on the face. It has five rows of little curls above the forehead. The side-locks have 2-3 columns with four curls. Reg. no. 7366. Context: the entrance to cave I, area A (locus A966.3Y, cf. figurine no. 300 above). Place: exhibited in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem, 1M 68803. Literature: Holland 1975:344, fig. 6:6, AlIl.d.7; Holland 1977:139, fig. 7:2; Engle 1979: 1:16. 302. A moulded head of type B from Jerusalem (Kenyon's Excavations). The face is missing; perhaps they felled off the head. ThUS, the head cannot be classified exactly. Reg. no. C790. Context and date: cave I, area A Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975:203, fig. 13:9, AXll.rA; Holland 1977:139, fig. 7:7. 303. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's Excavations). Its base is concave and damaged. Both arms are broken, but one was probably uplifted (according to the shape of the remaining stump). Reg. no. C365. Context and date: cave I, area A Place: Romema, 1M no. 68-791. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:196, vol. 11:99, fig. 10:5, AX.i.2; Holland 1977:139, fig. 7:5.

304. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's Excavations). Its base is concave and damaged. Both arms are broken, but their stumps remained under the breasts. Reg. no. C777. Context and date: cave I, area A Place: Oxford. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:195, vol. 11:12, 98, fig. 9:1, AX.b.41; Holland 1977:139, fig. 7:3.

299. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem. It is covered with white-wash and concave. It was first published by Holland, but was found by Crowfoot and Fitzgerald. Context and date: unknown. Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 4:15, AX1.43.

305. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's Excavations). There are traces of white-wash and red slip. Both arms are broken, but marks of their placement under the breasts remain. Reg. no. C774. Context: cave I. Place: Otago. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1196, vol. 11:98, fig. 9:3, AX.b.43; Holland 1977:139, fig. 7:4.

300. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Jerusalem (Kenyon's Excavations). It is well preserved, with some

306. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's Excavations). Its base is concave and damaged. Both arms

201

313. A body fragment of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). One arm and part of the chest remained. Reg. no. C779. Context and date: cave I, area A 8th century BC. Place: Glasgow. Literature: Holland 1975:100, fig. 12:2, AX1.36; Holland 1977:139.

are broken. The body was broken and mended after discovery. Reg. no. C335-6. Context: cave I, area A Place: Oxford, 1969.704. Note: the body is partially hollow, since the base is very concave. It is still made in the regular JPF pillar technique, and different from the wheel-made bodies of neighboring figurines (for which cf. app. 4-5). Literature: Kenyon 1974: pI. 59 (?); Holland 1975: vol. 1197, vol. 11:100, fig. 12:4, pI. 4:12, AX1.38; Holland 1977:139, fig. 7:6.

314. A body fragment of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of white-wash. Only part of the chest is preserved. Reg. no. C792. Context and date: wash inside cave I, area A 8th century BC. Place: discarded after excavation. Literature: Holland 1975:100, pI. 4:11, AX1.35; Holland 1977:139.

307. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Jerusalem (Avigad's Excavations). Only a photograph was published. At least three rows of curls are visible. Context: not published. Literature: Avigad 1970: pI. 4c; Holland 1975: AII.a.4; Engle 1979: type 1:9.

315. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is a little concave and covered with whitewash. Reg. no. 7460 (according to Holland). Context and date: wash at the entrance to cave I, area A 8th century BC. Place: Dublin, probably JM.608. Note: the museum card gives another number than that given by Holland. Literature: Holland 1975:100, fig. 12:5, AX1.39; Holland 1977:139.

308. A whole figurine of type BC.2.B from Jerusalem (Avigad's Excavations). The base is concave. Both arms are reconstructed. The breasts are exaggerated. There are two rows of large, square curls above the forehead (the edge-ofmould line above them was defined as another row of curls by Holland). The side-locks have two columns of 2-3 similar curls. Avigad called this figurine "the Venus of Jerusalem", and thought that it represented a general fertility goddess, but in a magical use. Reg. no. 8433-5. Context: not published, Place: Israel Museum. Literature: Avigad 1970: pI. 30b; Avigad 1972:93 photograph; Avigad 1980:36, photograph 15; Holland 1975: 183f, All.a.5; Engle 1979: type 1:36.

316. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is a little concave and covered with whitewash. Reg. no. C793. Context and date: wash at the entrance to cave I, area A 8th century BC. Place: discarded after excavation. Literature: Holland 1975:100, pI. 4:14, AX1.41; Holland 1977:139.

309. A base of type C.3 from Ramot (season 1992). Reg. no. 766. Context: locus 131, a domestic area. Note: figurine no. 464 (below) was found in the same locus. Place: 1M. Literature: not yet published, courtesy A De-Groot.

317. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is a little concave and has traces of whitewash. Reg. no. C796. Context and date: wash at the entrance to cave I, area A 8th century BC. Place: discarded after excavation. Literature: Holland 1975:100, pI. 4:13; AX1.40, Holland 1977:139.

310. A base of type C.3 from Ramot (season 1992). Reg. no. 1941. Context: locus 2195, a domestic area. Place: 1M. Literature: as figurine no. 309 above.

318. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is a little pointed backwards. Context: not published. ~ Place: otago. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:3, Al.a.35.

311. A base of type C.3 from Ramot (season 1992). Reg. no. 13763. Context: locus 2195, a domestic area. Place: 1M. Literature: as figurine no. 309 above. 312. A body fragment of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). One arm remained, holding an object (?). Reg. no. C777. Context and date: cave I, area A 8th century BC. Place: otago. Literature: Holland 1975:100, fig. 12:3, AX1.37; Holland 1977:139, fig. 7:3.

319. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is a little pointed backwards and flattened at the top. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:2, A.l.a.34. 320. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations).

202

Context: not published. Place: Emory. I could not locate it in the museum's records (cf. figurine no. 420 below). Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:1, pI. 1:1, Al.a.33.

Literature: Holland 1975: Al.a.49 (Without a photograph or a drawing). 330. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975: AI. a.50 (without photograph or drawing).

321. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:16, Al.a.32.

331. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Holland 1975: A.l.a.52 (without a photograph or a drawing).

322. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Birmingham. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:15, Al.a.31. 323. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:4, Al.a.36.

332. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is covered with white-wash and traces of red paint on the head and yellow on the "turban". Context: not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:2; Holland 1975: fig. 3:2, pI. 1:5,Al.b.3. [Fig. 5:3].

324. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Otago. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:5, Al.a.37.

333. A hand-made head of type A.3.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It has a turben', painted yellow over the white-wash. Context: not published. Place: Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:6, Al.c.1.

325. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Otago. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:6, Al.a.38. 326. A hand-made head of type A1Ap from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is badly preserved. Context: not published. Place: Emory. I could not locate it there (cf. figurine no. 420 below). Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:7, Al.a.39.

334. A hand-made head of type A+.3.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It has a turban and side-locks. There are some remains of orange, red and purple paint above the white-wash. The upper body shows the arms supporting the breasts. Context: not published. Place: St. Andrews. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:7, pI. 1:6, Al.c.2.

327. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Leeds. Note: the head is very small, and may have belonged to a figurine of a rider. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:15, Al.a.31.

335. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It has few traces of white-wash. Note: it was 're-published' by Amr. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:8, Al.c.3; Amr 1988: no. 10, fig. 12.

328. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975: A.l.a.48 (without either a photograph or a drawing).

336. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It has few traces of white-wash and red paint. Context: not published. Place: St. Andrews. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:9, pI. 1:7, Al.c.4.

329. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Sheffield.

337. A moulded head of type B.1? from Shechem. It is not well preserved, and some of the details are not clear from the report. It has few traces of white-wash and red paint.

203

There is probably one, or two rows of curls (rounded or square) above the forehead. The side-locks are worn. Context: not clear. Place: Leiden, museum no. 1-185. Note: there is some doubt about the classification of this head as a JPF. Literature: Kerkhof 1969: fig. 24:5; Holland 1975:184, All.c.13. 338. A hand-made head and upper body of type A 1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is covered with whitewash. Only the shoulders and a stump of the right arm remained from the body. Context: not published. Place: Otago. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:1, Al.a.17.

Context: not published. Place: Birmingham. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:8, Al.a.24. 346. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Reg. no. 3791. Context: locus 713.42, area L, "Early Jewish lAc" (cf. figurine no. 339 above). Place: St. Andrews. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:9, Al.a.25; Jerusalem I: fig. 12:15. 347. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are remains of red and yellow painting. Context: not published. Place: Durham WM.619. According to the museum card, the reg. no. is 6816 from locus A957.18. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:10, Al.a.26.

339. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Reg. no. 7376. Context and date: locus 14.33, area L. This locus was related to "Early Jewish Iron Age C" assemblages, Le., Iron Age finds from later fills of the Herodian buildings (Jerusalem 1:2). Place: Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:2, Al.a.18; Jerusalem I: fig. 9:12.

348. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is very small and has the remains of white-wash and yellow paint. Context: not published. Place: discarded after excavation. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:11, Al.a.27.

340. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Oxford. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:3, Al.a.19.

349. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Sheffield. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:12, Al.a.28.

341. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is covered with white-wash and bands of red and yellow paint. Context: not published. Place: Sr. Andrews. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:4, Al.a.20.

350. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is pointed and has traces of whitewash and red paint. Reg. no. 3889. Context: locus 159.17 in area L. "Early Jewish lAc", cf. figurine no. 339 above. Place: discarded after excavation. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:13, Al.a.29; Jerusalem I: fig. 9:9.

342. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It has some remains of white-wash. Context: not published, Place: Romema, IAA 68-797. According to the card at Romema, the reg. no. is 6809 from locus A957.7. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:5, Al.a.21.

351. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of whitewash. Context and date: locus L.853.7, "Early Jewish Iron Age d", i.e., Iron Age finds from fills of the Roman period and later periods (Jerusalem 1:2). Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-822~ Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:14, AI."'.30; Jerusalem I: fig. 12:12.

343. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Otago. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:6, Al.a.22. 344. A hand-made head of type A 1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:7, Al.a.23.

352. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of whitewash. Context: not published. Place: unknown. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:9, Al.a.41.

345. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations).

353. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Reg. no. 7371.

204

Context and date: locus L.14.34, "Early Jewish lAc", cf. figurine no. 339 above. Place: Melbourne. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:10, Al.a.42; Jerusalem I: fig. 9:11. 354. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of whitewash. Context: not published. Place: Sheffield. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:11, Al.a.43. 355. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Sidney. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:12, A.l.a.44. 356. A hand-made head of type A 1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:13, Al.a.45. 357. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:14, Al.a.46. 358. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of whitewash. Reg. no. 7218. Context: locus L.332.22, "Early Jewish lAc", cf. figurine no. 339 above. Place: Melbourne. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:15, Al.a.47; Jerusalem I: fig. 9:10. 359. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of white-wash. The body is exceptional: the hands held an object, probably a disk. Context: not published. Place: Oxford. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:4, pI. 1:9, Al.g.1.

Place: Dublin, possibly WM.622. If so, it is reg. no. 6612 from locus AA.105.14c (according to the museum's card). Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 10:2, Al.g.3. 362. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is rounded and surrounded by a simple turban. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:1, AI. b.2. 363. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is rounded and surrounded by a turban. There are some remains of yellow, red and white paint. Context: locus L.158.16, "Early Jewish lAd", cf. figurine no. 351 above. Place: Otago. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:3, Al.b.4; Jerusalem I: fig. 12:13. 364. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is rounded and surrounded by a simple turban. Context: not published. Note: this head was 're-published' by Amr. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:4, Al.b.5; Amr 1988: no. 9, fig. 11. 365. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is rounded and surrounded by a simple turban. The face is worn. Context: not published. Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-813. According to the Romema card, it is reg. no. 3338 from locus A953.13. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:5, Al.b.6. 366. A hand-made head of type A4.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is pointed and has an applied hat, now broken. There are white-wash and the remains of paint. Context: not published. Place: St. Andrews. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:11, Al.d.4.

360. A body of type C.1.D from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of white-wash. The base is damaged. The hands hold a large disk close to the body. The disk is painted with red and black. Context: not published. Place: Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 10:2, Al.g.2. [Fig. 4:3].

367. A hand-made head of type A5.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It has an applied, pointed hat and applied side-locks. There are some remains of white-wash and red paint. Holland thought that it is a male figure with a beard. Context: area A, but an exact locus was not published. Place: Oxford. Literature: Holland 1975:181, fig. 3:12, Al.e.1. [Fig. 5:7].

361. A body of type C.1. D from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The hands held an object close to the body, probably a disk. The head is missing, but Holland noted that it was hand-made, perhaps since there is no evident of a peg in the section of the neck. Context: not published.

368. A hand-made head of type A5.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is quite similar to figurine no. 367 above, but badly preserved. There are some remains of white-wash and brown paint on the forehead and on the right eye. There is probably a beard, and thus it might be a male figure and not a JPF.

205

Context: area A, but an exact locus was not pUblished. Place: Dublin. Literature: Holland 1975:181, fig. 3:13, Al.e.2.

Context: not published. Place: St. Andrews. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:3; Holland 1975: fig. 6:7, pI. 3:1, AIV.d.1; Engle 1979: type 111:3.

369. A hand-made head of type A4.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It has an applied, pointed hat with a sort of a tassel at its edge. There are some remains of red paint around the hat, but no sign of a beard. Context: not published. Place: Birmingham, 1962.A.346. According to the museum's card, the reg. no. is 79 from locus A301.12, a mixed locus. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:8; Holland 1975:181, fig. 3:10, Al.d.3.

375. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Jerusalem. (Kenyon's excavations). It is fairly well preserved, except a damaged nose. The side-locks are a-symmetrical. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:4; Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 6:9, AIV.d.3; Engle 1979: type 111:2. [Fig. 6:3].

370. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Its right and lower sides are broken. There are the remains of an orange slip. The drawing shows only two rows of curls, but Holland counted three. Reg. no. 901. Place: Holland gave the place as Amman, but it is in Oxford, 579.1962. Context: not published. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 6:1, All. a.3; Engle 1979: type 111:4.

376. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is fairly well preserved, except a broken right side. Context: not published. Place: Ecole Biblique. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:5; Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 6:8, pI. 3:2, AIV.d.2; Engle 1979: type 111:1. 377. A moulded head of type B.1-2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are the remains of white-wash and red paint on the face, and two ridges above the forehead. There are no curls. The side-locks also lack curls. Context: not published. Place: Romema, 1M no. 68-811. According to the card at Romema, the reg. no. is 3337 from locus 840. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 6:10, AVl.a.2; Engle 1979: type IV:7.

371. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are the remains of whitewash. The nose is damaged and the hair and the face are worn. The side-locks are either worn or simple. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Note: 're-published' by Amr. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:7; Holland 1975: fig. 6:2, Alll.b.2; Engle 1979: type 1:15; Amr 1988: 185, no. 1, figs. 1:1,2:1. 372. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is very damaged, and I followed Holland's classification. Context: not published. Place: Amman, J.9698. Note: It is not clear how Engle classified this head, since the eyes are very worn. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 6:3, pI. 2:7, AlIl.b.3; Engle 1979: type V:106. 373. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is worn and the upper part, the nose and the chin are damaged. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Note: 're-published' by Amr. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 6:5, Alll.d.6; Engle 1979: type 1:18; Amr 1988: 185, no. 2, figs. 1:2,2:2. 374. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is a little worn out. Holland classified it as having vertical curls, though they appear as square in the drawing. I followed Holland, since he could check the head itself.

378. A moulded head of type B.5.E? from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is fairly well preserved, except a broken left side. There are some remains of white-wash and red paint on the face. It has five ridges above the forehead, probably without curls. Reg. no. 3507. Context: locus A156A Place: Romema. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:6; Holland 1975:191, vol. 11:96, fig. 6:12, AVl.e.2; Engle 1979: type 1:14.

379. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The base and the breasts are a little damaged. There are red bands on the neck and black paint on the breasts, and the fingers of the hands are marked in black. Reg. no. 792. Context: not published. Note: 're-published' by Amr. Place: Amman. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 10:4; Holland 1975:22, fig. 8:1, AX.b.23; Amr 1988: no. 4; Franken 1989:197. 380. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Only the chest and the stumps of the arms remained. There are some traces of white-wash. Context: not published. Place: Dublin. Literature: Holland 1975: 11:96, fig. 7:1, AX.a.4.

206

381. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The base is very damaged. There are some traces of white-wash. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 7:2, AX.a.5.

388. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The breasts and the right hand remained. There are some traces of white-wash. Context: not published. Note: 're-published' by Amr. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 7:9, AX.b.20; Amr 1988: no. 6, fig. 8.

382. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The chest and the arms remained. There are some traces of white-wash. Context and date: locus L.912.30, "Early Jewish lAd", cf. figurine no. 351 above. Place: Glasgow. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 7:3, AX.b.14; Jerusalem I: fig. 12:19.

389. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The base and the breasts are Whole, but the right arm is broken. Reg. no. 3339. Context: not published. Place: Romema, 1M. no. 68-807, now in an exhibition. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 10:6; Holland 1975: fig. 7:10, AX.b.21.

383. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Only one breast and the right arm remained. Context and date: locus L.332.18a, "Early Jewish lAc", cf. figurine no. 339 above. Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 7:4, AX.b.15; Jerusalem I: fig. 9:8.

390. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The base and the breasts are a little damaged. The neck is thick and long. Context: not published. Place: Amman, no. J.9702. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 10:3; Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 7:11, pI. 3:6, AX.b.22.

384. A body of type C.2.D from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The figure probably held a disk. Context: not published. Place: Dublin. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 7:5, pI. 3:5, AX.b.16.

391. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The base is damaged. Context: not published. Place: Birmingham. Note: this may be museum no. 1962A906 at Birmingham, and then the locus is A1 08.1 and the reg. no. is 797. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:2, AX.b.24.

385. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is broken under the chest. The arms are broken, except stumps. Context: not published, Place: Amman. Note: 're-published' by Amr. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 7:6, AX.b.17; Amr 1988: no. 3, figs. 3, 4:3. 386. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The right arm and the breast are broken. Reg. no. 3973. Context and date: locus L.457.23, "Early Jewish Iron Age a", i.e., Iron Age finds in-situ, from quarries and loci on the bedrock (Jerusalem 1:2). Place: Sheffield. Note: the excavators believed in the theory that Jerusalem was quite a small town, and that area L was not really settled during the Iron Age. In view of the newer excavations and surveys, this theory can no longer be accepted. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 7:7, AX.b.18; Jerusalem I: fig. 4:13. 387. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are traces of red paint on the back. The peg is clearly seen in the section of the neck. Reg. no. 3342. Context and date: locus L.609.5, "Early Jewish lAd", cf. figurine no. 351 above. Place: Romema, 1M. no. 68-814. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 7:8, AX.b.19; Jerusalem I: fig. 12:17.

392. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The base is missing. Context: not published. Place: Louisville. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:3, AX.b.25. 393. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published. Place: Dublin. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:4, AX.b.26. 394. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The arms and the breasts remained. Reg. no. 4169. Context and date: locus L.608.18, "Early Jewish Iron Age b" assemblage, i.e., fills from the Iron Age period, above the "Iron Age a" assemblages. Place: Romema. 1M no. 68-816. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:5, AX.b.27; Jerusalem I: fig. 6:12. 395. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The base and the right arm are missing. Reg. no. 5432. Context and date: locus L.369.13, "Early Jewish lAd", cf. figurine no. 351 above. Place: Sheffield.

207

Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:6, AX.b.28; Jerusalem I: fig. 12:14. 396. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Reg. no. 5463. Context and date: locus L.371.2, "Early Jewish lAd", cf. figurine no. 351 above. Place: Dublin. Note: I could not locate this figurine despite the correspondence with the museum. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:7, AX.b.29; Jerusalem I: fig. 12:16. 397. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The arms and the chest remained. Context: not published. Place: Amman, no. J.9699. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:8, AX.b.30. 398. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The hands are broken, but marks indicate their placement under the breasts. A small central part of the concave base remained. Reg. no. 4373. Context and date: locus L.159.32, "Early Jewish lAb", cf. figurine no. 394 above. Note: 're-published' by Amr. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 8:9, AX.b.31; Jerusalem I: fig. 6:14; Amr 1988: no. 5, fig. 6. 399. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The base is damaged, but the arms are whole. Context: not pubtished. Place: Oxford, probably no. 1964.522. If so, it is reg. no. 2033. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 10:5; Holland 1975: fig. 8:10, AX.b.32. 400. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Only the breast and the arms survived. Context: not published. Place: Melbourne. Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 3:10, AX.b.35. 401. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The hands support the breasts. The depression of the peg can probably be seen at the top of the body. Reg. no. 5108. Context and date: locus L.711.2, "Early Jewish lAd", cf. figurine no. 351 above. Place: St. Andrews. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 8:11, AX.b.33; Jerusalem I: fig. 12:18. 402. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The base is damaged and the right arm is missing. Context: not published, Place: St. Andrews. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 8:12, AX.b.34.

208

403. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Either a Photograph or a drawing was not published. Context: not published. Place: St. Andrews. Note: I have classified figurines nos. 403-407 as C.2 bodies, but some of them may be whole bodies (C.1). Too few details were published to decide. Literature: Holland 1975: AX.b.36. 404. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Further details were not published (cf. figurine no. 403). Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975: AX.b.37. 405. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Further details were not published (cf. figurine no. 403). Place: discarded after excavation. Literature: Holland 1975: AX.b.38. 406. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Further details were not published (cf. figurine no. 403). Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Holland 1975: AX.b.39. 407. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Further details unknown (cf. figurine no. 403). Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975: AX.bAO. 408. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Only the left arm and breast remained. Context: not published. Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:2, AX.bA2. 409. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations ). Context: not published. Place: Amman. Note: this is probably no. 8 of Amr, but without locus- and registration- numbers, the identification is not certain. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:6, AX.c.3; Amr 1988: no. 8, fig. 10 (?). 410. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The arms and the righLbreast remained, but the left breast is broken. Reg. no. 3509. Context: locus A669.2.6. Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-812. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:7, AX.c.4. 411. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The arm and the left breast remained. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Note: this is probably no. 7 of Amr, but loci and reg. nos. were not published.

Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:8, AX.c.5; Amr 1988:187, no.7, fig. 9?

Place:St. Andrews. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:4, AX1.22.

412. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The arms support the breasts. Context: not published, Place: Birmingham. Note: this is probably museum no. 1966.A.101, reg. no. 4444 from locus R.845.7. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:9, AX.c.6.

420. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations ). Context: not published. Place: Emory. Notes: I could not locate this fragment in the museum of Emory University (cf. figurines nos. 320, 326 above). According to Holland, it is a fragment of a female figurine with a peg. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:5, AX1.23.

413. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Most of the body remained, except the base and the neck. A small part of the concave base can be seen as well. Reg. no. 5890. Context: locus A 955.18. Note: the design of the arms is exceptional, since they descend down from the chest, with the left hand placed on the abdomen. Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-821. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:10, AXc.7. 414. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Only the right arm and part of the chest remained. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:11, AX.c.8. 415. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations ). Context: not published. Place: discarded after the excavation. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 10:9, AX1.17. 416. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The arms are missing, but the marks of the hands on the chest are clear. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:1, pI. 4:7, AX1.19.

421. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The protruding breast is clear. Context: not published. Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:6, pI. 4:7, AX1.24. 422. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations ). Context: not published. Place: discarded after excavation. Note: the drawing is not clear, but Holland described this fragment as a female. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:7, AX1.25. 423. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The breasts are damaged and only stumps remained from the arms. Context: not published. Place: discarded after excavation. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:8, AX1.26. 424. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations ). Context: not published. Place: Leeds. Note: the hands probably hold a disk, cf. figurines nos. 359361, 384 above. This may be fragment no. 1329 from locus C.6.19. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:9, AX1.27.

417. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The arms are missing. Context: not published. Place: discarded after the excavation. Note: the published drawing is not very clear, thus the definition of this fragment as a JPF is doubted. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:196, fig. 11:2, AX1.20.

425. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations ). Context: not published. Place: discarded after excavation. Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 4:8, AX1.28. 426. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem excavations ). Context: not published. Place: Louisville. Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 4:9, AX1.29.

418. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The arms are missing, but probably supported the breasts in origin. Context: not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:3, AX1.21.

(Kenyon's

427. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations ). Context: not published, but possibly locus AA.101.22. Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 4:10, AX1.30.

419. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The arms are missing, but the protruding breast of a woman is clear. Context: not published.

209

428. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published, but possibly locus C.6.8-18 (reg. no. 1133). Place: Birmingham, probably museum no. 1962.A.907. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:10, AX1.31.

436. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Amiran's and Eitan's excavations in the Citadel). The head was not mentioned in the text. Context: not published. Literature: Amiran and Eitan 1970: pI. 8b; Holland 1975: Al.a.53.

429. A body of type C.2? from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). The Drawing is not clear, but Holland described this fragment as a torso with white-wash and brown paint on the neck. It is likely to be a JPF fragment. Context: not published. Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:100, AX1.32.

437. A moulded head of type B.3 from Jerusalem (Ben Dov's excavations). Only a photograph was published. The head is badly preserved. Context: not published. Literature: Ben Dov 1982:55. 438. A hand-made head of type A1? from Jerusalem (B. Mazar's excavations in the Temple mount). Either a photograph or a drawing was not published. Reg. no. 1469. Context: The head was found in locus R16, whose nature is not clear. Place: the Hebrew University? Literature: Nadelman 1989:125.

430. A body of type C.? from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Either a drawing or a photograph was not published, thus an exact classification is not possible. Context: not published. Place: Dublin, probably museum no. WM.657, reg. no. 1106 from cave 1. Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.33.

439. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (B. Mazar's excavations in the Temple mount). The arms are broken and the base is damaged. The breasts are small. Reg. no. 746/10. Context and date: locus 6015, a tomb or a hewn room in the eastern slope of the "western hill" (see Mazar, E. and B. 1989:49-53). Burial remains were not found. Perhaps it was cleaned when the city expanded, or was even an unfinished tomb. 8th-7th centuries BC Place: Romema, IAA no. 1993-748. Literature: Nadelman 1989:125, pI. 29:8, 117: photograph 121.

431. A body of type C.? from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Either a drawing or a photograph was not published, thus an exact classification is impossible. Context: not published. Place: Sydney. Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.34. 432. A body of type C.? from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). Either a drawing or a photograph was not published, thus an exact classification is impossible. Context: not published. Place: discarded after the excavation. Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.44.

440. A moulded head of type B.1? from Jerusalem (B. Mazar's excavations in the Temple mount). It is not well preserved and the nose is damaged. Context: The head was found in area IV in 1977 (square EF/15-16), but the date and nature of this locus are not clear. Place: the Hebrew University? Literature: Nadelman 1989:126, photograph 120.

433. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem (Lux's excavations in the Muristan area). Only a photograph was published. The head has a turban. Context: not published; remains of the 8th-7th centuries BC, including /m/k and rosette stamps, were found in the area. Place: with the excavation team? Literature: Lux 1972: pI. 22: upper row middle; Holland 1975: addenda, Al.b.6a. 434. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem (Lux's excavations in the Muristan area). Only a photograph was published. The head has a turban. Context: not published; cf. figurine 433 above. Place: with the excavation team? Literature: Lux 1972: pI. 22: upper row right; Holland 1975: addenda, AI. a.53a. 435. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Jerusalem (Lux's excavations in the Muristan area). Only a photograph was published. The head has an applied turban and side-locks. Context: not published; cf. figurine no. 433 above. Place: with the excavation team? Literature: Lux 1972: pI. 22: upper row left; Holland 1975: addenda, Al.c.4a.

210

441. A moulded head of type B from Jerusalem (B. Mazar's excavations in the Temple mount). Either a photograph or a drawing was not published. Reg. no. 296K. Context: locus 15026, whose nature is not clear. Place: the Hebrew University? Literature: Nadelman 1989:125. • 442. A moulded head of type B.2.A from Arad. It is well preserved. There are two rows of rounded curls above the forehead. Reg. no. 5422/1 (according to the diaries of the excavation in Tel Aviv). Context: locus 783 in square JH/15. This is the temple area, but the exact stratigraphy and the nature of the locus were not yet published. Place: exhibited at the Prime Minister's office, Jerusalem. IAA no. 67-968. Note: according to the Romema card, the reg. no. is 5244.

Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:52, pI. 41:6, addenda All.c.1; Engle 1979: type V:165. 443. A moulded head of type B.3-4 from Arad. It is well preserved. Context: not published. Notes: except the preliminary publication, this head was not included in Holland's and Engle's work. According to the photograph, it is probably at Romema, IAA no. 64-329. If so, it is reg. no. 912/1. It is exhibited at the Prime Minister's office, Jerusalem. Literature: Aharoni and Amiran 1964:49 photograph; Aharoni 1978: photograph 37.

444. A moulded head and upper body of type B from Arad. All the upper part of the head is missing, thus it cannot be classified exactly. The neck is long and thick. The breasts and the arms are broken, but the hands were placed beneath the breasts. The face is full, with only one eye and a mouth still evident. Reg. no. 1080/1. Context and date: locus 1500 (former 310) in square H/13. This is a Hellenistic foundation trench south of the temple, but no doubt it is a secondary context (cf. figurine no. 452 below). Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 445. A moulded head of type B.2-3?A? from Arad. All the left part of the head is missing, and the rest is badly preserved. There is red slip on the remaining part. Reg. no. 799/1. Context and date: locus 502, a long room in the residential area in the south of the citadel. Level IX? Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 446. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Arad. it is small, rounded and has some traces of white-wash. Reg. no. 1565/4. Context and date: locus 350 in square G/15, a small room west of the altar in the temple. Level IX (?). Note: a zoomorphic figurine (reg. no. 1565) was found in the same locus, as well as figurine no. 453 below. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 447. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Arad. It is a little pointed. Reg. no. A495/1. Context and date: locus 17 in square KU15, a room or a narrow passage in the north part of the citadel (near the late casemate wall). The locus was ascribed to level IV, but this is a preliminary observation only. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

211

448. A hand-made head of type A 1.Ap from Arad. It is pointed and has some remains of white-wash and red paint on the upper edge ofthe left eye. Reg. no. 1571/2. Context and date: locus 380 in square H/14, the area of the entrance to the temple. The locus was ascribed to level IX. Place: Tel Aviv. Note: according to one list of finds, the locus is 388, a little south of 380. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 449. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Arad. It is a little pointed and has some remains of white-wash. The right side is broken along the face and the neck. Reg. no. 6713/1. Context: locus 931 in square 0/16, collapse above the glasis, on the slope outside the fortress. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 450. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Arad. It is small, rounded, covered with white-wash and red paint (except on the neck). Reg. no. 881/1 (?). Context: square N/16, the area of the storehouse and the city wall in the north-east part of the fortress. It is probably a surface find, or one from a mixed locus. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 451. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Arad. It has some remains of white-wash. Reg. no. C524/1. Context and date: locus 450 in square H/9, a domestic room near the wall in the south of the fortress. Level VI. Place: Romema, IAA 64-306 (?). Notes: according to a list of figurines made by the excavators, the locus is 450a. In the Romema card the reg. no. is 544/1. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 452. A body of type Co2 from Arad. Its right arm is broken and its left breast is damaged. Reg. no. 6827/1. Context: square C/11 in the west slope outside the fortress; locus 1500, a general designation for surface finds or finds from unstratified locations (cf. figurine no. 444 above). Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 453. A body of type C.2 from Arad. The left arm and the left breast are missing. Reg. no. 1542/1. Context: locus 350 in the area of the temple, cf. figurine no. 446 above. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 454. A body of type C.2 from Arad. The arms are whole, but

the left breast is damaged. Reg. no. 694/1. Context and date: locus 429, in the 'industrial' area in the west of the fortress. It is a fairly large area of small walls and installations, whose exact function is unknown. Level VIII, 8th century BC. Place: Tel Aviv. Note: according to a list made by the excavators, the reg. no. is 654/1. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

455. A body of type C.2 from Arad. Only the right side of the body survived. Reg. no. 5574/1. Context and date: locus 643, a room or court north of the "Elyashiv house", in the southern part of the fortress. Level VI, 7th century BC. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 456. A body of type C.2 from Arad. There are remains of breasts and a hand under the left breast. The lower side of the body shows the beginning of the concave base. Reg. no. 5355/1. Context and date: locus 795, a Hellenistic period pit in squares GH/15 in the center of the fortress; later changed to locus 1500 (cf. figurines nos. 444, 452 above). Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 457. A body of type C.2 from Arad. The arms are broken and the right breast is damaged, but the hands survived under the breasts. The peg of the head is seen in the section of the neck. Reg. no. 1233/1. Context: locus 512, a domestic (7) room in the south of the fortress, only partially excavated. The figurine was found at 73.40m., right above the floor (73.25m.). Level X (7). Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 458. A base of type C.3 from Arad. It is concave and has some remains of white-wash. Reg. no. C108/6. Context and date: locus 408b in square E/11, a room near the solid wall of the fortress. Level VIII, 8th century BC. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 459. A body of type C.2 from Kh. Geresh. The right arm is broken and the left breast is a little damaged. Reg. no. 60. Context and date: locus 19, a domestic room, which was only partially excavated. The site is an Iron Age village of the 8th-7th centuries BC. Place: under study with the excavation team, 1M. Note: four figurines of animals were found in the same room, as well as figurines nos. 460-461 below. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of D. Amit.

212

460. A body of type C.2 from Kh. Geresh. Both arms are broken and the rest is badly preserved. Reg. no. 49. Context and date: locus 19, cf. figurine no. 459 above. Place: under study with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of D. Amit. 461. A base of type C.3 from Kh. Geresh. Reg. no. 71b. Context and date: locus 19, cf. figurine no. 459 above. Place: under study with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of D. Amit. 462. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Kh. 'Anim. It is rounded and lacks clear depressions for eyes. The nose is damaged. Reg. no. 475/2. Context and date: locus 36, an Iron Age locus sealed by a destruction layer, in the area of the later Synagogue. Two animal figurines were found in the same locus. Place: under study with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of D. Amit. 463. A body of type C.2 from Ramot (season 1992). Part of the chest remained, and a hand under the left breast. Reg. no. 2963. Context and date: locus 1183, a domestic area, 8th-7th centuries BC. Place: under study with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot. 464. A base of type C.37 from Ramot (season 1992). Only a tiny part remained, about 20 mm. high, but it is likely a JPF fragment. Reg. no. 2737. Context and date: locus 131, domestic area, 8th-7th centuries BC. Place: under study with the excavation team. Note: figurine no. 309 above was found in the same locus. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot. 465. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Gezer. The head is pointed. The body is whole, except a few damaged points in the right breast and the base. The hands meet beneath the breasts, without supporting them. Context and date: unknown. Place: Israel Museum, probably formerly in the Clark collection. The number 907 is written on the figurine, and the date 18/2112. Probably it was found in 1912, but it is not similar to any of the figurines published from Gezer in Macalister's reports. Note: there is a possibility that this figurine was acquired in the antiquities markets. Literature: courtesy of the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 466. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Beth Shemesh. The head is rounded and the body is well preserved. Context and date: unknown. Place: Israel Museum, Jerusalem, no. 90-14-350. Probably it was formerly in the Clark collection, It carries an inscription "911 Beth Shemesh 1909". Notes: This figurine is not similar to any of the figurines from Beth Shemesh pubtished by Mackenzie. There is some danger that it was purchased in the antiquities markets. Literature: courtesy of the Israel Museum, Jerusalem.

467. A body of type C.1 from Mamila (Jerusalem). The arms are completely missing and the body is broken in the middle and mended after discovery. Reg. no. 105. Context and date: locus 11 inside tomb 5, from the floor of the central collection area. It is not easy to date this tomb exactly, but the general range is the 8th-7th centuries BC, perhaps rather later than early in this range. Place: Romema, 1M no. 91-2159. Note: figurine no. 468 (below) was found in the same locus. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Reich.

Context and date: locus 35 in area F, debris of a Byzantine period bath. Place: with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Reich. 474. A body of type C.2 from Mevaseret Jerusalem (Mo~a). One arm is missing. Context: surface find by "Mr. Leon". Place: Romema, 1M no. 62-312, now unknown. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

468. A body of type C.1 from Mamila (Jerusalem). The right arm is missing. Reg. no. 84. Context: locus 11 inside tomb 5, cf. figurine no. 467 above. Place: Romema, 1M no. 91-2153. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Reich.

475. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Arad. It is pointed and protrudes backwards. Reg. no. 64/1. Context: locus 414, a small room near the late wall in square F/9, the domestic area in the south of the fortress. Place: Romema, 1M no. 67-609. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

469. A body of type C.1 from Mamila (Jerusalem). The arms are missing. Reg. no. 19. Context and date: a tomb excavated in 1927, while preparing the foundations for a building of the electricity company. Amiran defined the type as Judean in the publication, but the shape of the tomb is unknown. Other than the figurine, only a few vessels were published, from the 8th-7th centuries BC. Place: Romema, 1M no. 52-99. Note: I could not locate this figurine now. Literature: Amiran 1956:177, no. 19; pI. C:19.

476. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Arad. It is pointed and protrudes backwards. Reg. no. 339/1. Context and date: locus 448 in square G/11, the south west part of the fortress. Level VII, 7th century BC. Place: Romema, 1M no. 67-610. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 477. A body of type C.2 from Arad. Its left part is missing. The peg of the head can be seen in the section of the neck. Reg. no. 718/1. Context and date: locus 452a, part of a building in square G/9. Level VIII. Place: Romema, 1M no. 67-608. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

470. A moulded head of type B.17.A7 from Tel Beer Sheba. The hairdress details are very worn out, but one ridge of curls is still evident (their shape is not clear). The side-locks probably had one column of curls. The eyes are very large. Reg. no. 15853/1. Context: locus 38, the long circling street in the west part of the city. Place: Romema, 1M no. 1993-17 (formerly 1-4613). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

478. A body of type C.2 from Arad. The breasts are damaged and the hands do not meet each other. Reg. no. 560/1 or 923/2 (7). Context: not clear. Place: Romema, 1M no. 67-607. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

471. A body of type C.2 from Tel 'Ira (Excavations of Biran and Cohen). Reg. no. 4572. Context: locus 1580, probably a domestic area. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of I. Beit Arieh. 472. A fragment of a hand-made head of type A.1.Ap from Maresha. About half of the head survived, covered with bands of white-wash. The wash leaves a sort of a blank circle in the depression of the eye (only one eye remained), perhaps indicating the pupil. Reg. no. 1386XV. Context and date: on the bedrock in cave 75, together with Iron Age material (including /m/k stamps). The nature of the locus is unknown, and the cave was used in later periods. Place: with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. Kloner and T. Levin.

479. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from Arad. The head is rounded. The breasts are supported by the arms. Reg. no. 560211. Context: not clear. Place: Exhibited in the Prime Minister's office, Jerusalem. 1M no. 67-611. Note: This figurine is missing from the list made by the excavators, or perhaps the reg. no. is mistaken. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

473. A moulded head of type B from Mamila (Jerusalem). It is badly preserved. There are probably two rows of rounded, large curls above the forehead, with a third row of much smaller curls above them. The side-locks have two columns of curls. Reg. no. 231.

480. A body of type C.1 from Arad. The chest is made as one part, without a separation of breasts. The arms are broken and the base is damaged. Reg. no. 786/1. Context: not clear. Place: Romema, 1M no. 67-326.

213

Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 481. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel Beer Sheba. The upper part is missing, but the eye depressions and a small part of the neck survived. Reg. no. 15431/1. IAA no. 93-414. Context: not clear; perhaps a tomb (?). Place: Tel Aviv? Note: the size alone indicates that it is clearly a JPF head, and not a rider's head. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 482. A moulded head of type B from Tel Michal. Nor the drawing in the report, neither the photograph in the Romema card allow clear classification. The head has a hairdress or wig of vertical curls (the number of rows of curls is not clear). It was compared with Holland's types A-B heads. The report stated that there was a peg, from which the existence of a hollow body was assumed (but solid JPF bodies were related to heads with pegs as well). Reg. no. 6414/1. IAA no. 90-728. Context and date: silo 955 in square F/15. There are no building remains nearby. Level VI, the Persian period. Place: currently unknown. Notes: According to the report, the head was made in a double mould. Though this cannot be seen from the drawing, it suggests a hollow head. This would fit well the late dating and also the shape (cf. a head from Gileam, App. 5.VI.5.3 below). Thus, it is probably not a JPF head, and I have included it only for reasons of doubt. Literature: Kertesz 1989:361, fig. 32:3, pI. 78:3. 483. A moulded head of type B.3.A? from Tel Muleiha (Tel el-Milh) near Beit Qamah. It has three rows of curls, probably rounded. The side-locks have one column of four curls. Context: surface find. Place: Romema, IAA no. 55-11. Note: when the head was joined with the body, the potter covered the area cruedly, creating a sort of a ridge at the lower end of the face. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority. 484. A moulded head of type B.3.A-B? from the Beduin Suq area in Beer Sheba. It is well preserved, with a pointed "hat" decorated by a band of paint. There are three rows of curls (worn). The side-lock has two columns of five square curls. Context: the head was found in 1955 in a pit. Animal figurines and at least one Im/k stamp were found in this pit, but its nature and exact date cannot be established. Place: Romema, IAA no. 93-1222 (formerly 70-5498). Literature: Ofer 1954 (without page nos.); Ofer 1957:10-11, photograph p. 11; Ofer 1965:31. 485. A moulded head of type BA from the Beduin Suq area in Beer Sheba. Its left side is damaged. There are four rows of curls above the forehead; the upper is smaller and has

214

rectangular curls. The side-locks probably has two columns of five rectangular, or square curls. Context: cf. figurine no. 484 above. Place: Romema, IAA no. 93-1223 (formerly 70-5497). Literature: Ofer 1965:31; Ofer 1954 (without page nos.); Ofer 1957:10-11(without a photograph or a drawing). 486. A moulded head of type BA? from the Beduin Suq area in Beer Sheba. It has a long neck and a peg. Either a photograph or a drawing was not published. Context: cf. figurine no. 484 above. Place: Romema, IAA no. 93-1225 (formerly 70-5499). Exhibited in Yad-Meir. Literature: cf. figurine no. 484 above. 487. A base of type C.3 from the Beduin Suq area in Beer Sheba. Either a photograph or a drawing was not published. Ofer wrote that this base does not mend with any of the heads found at the site. This indicates that Ofer assumed, that the base may fit a JPF. Context: cf. figurine no. 484 above. Place: unknown. Literature: Ofer 1957:11. 488-489. Two hand-made heads of type A.2 or A,3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Either Photographs or drawings were not published, but the heads are mentioned as "Astarte" heads with a hairdress similar to TN I: pI. 86:1-9 (Which are JPF). According to TN I: app. A, four heads of this type were found, but not published with a photograph. Perhaps figurines nos. 128, 138 above are included here, and this leaves us with at least two other moulded heads of JPF. Unfortunately, details of date, context or even registartion numbers were not published. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: 273, Appendix A: section 4. 490-506. Hand-made heads of type A.1.A from Tel enNasbeh. Either photographs or drawings were not published, but the heads are mentioned in app. A of the report as "Astarte" heads, pinched and without hairdress. 17 heads are left after counting off the fully published ones. A few heads could have belonged to horse and rider figurines. Unfortunately, the context, date and registration numbers were not published. Place: Berkeley? Note: A few of these heads could be identified with the help of a list, kindly given to me by Dr. G. Zorn (figurines nos. 490-498 below), but it is a very short and preliminary list. Literature: TN I: 273, Appendix A, section 2:2. 490. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: cistern 128, square AK/21. Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.224. Note: this pit is not mentioned by Zorn (1993), and perhaps the number is mistaken. Literature: cf. note above. 491. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: cistern 152, square AJ/22.

Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.350. Note: this pit is not mentioned by Zorn (1993). Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).

Literature: TN I: 273, Appendix A, section 3. Only one figurine could be identified with any certainty in the list made by G. Zorn (no. 507 below).

492. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: cistern 216, square P/17. cf. figurine no. 133 above. Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).

507. A body of type C.1 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: cistern 156, square AH/20. This is building 177.04 of Zorn (1993:1434f), dated by him to the Iron Age II. Place: Berkeley, box 5, museum no. MA30. Literature: cf. the note above.

493. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: cistern 216, square P/17, cf. figurines no. 133,492 above. Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).

540-562. Body fragments of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. They are mentioned in appendix A of the report. The total number is mentioned as 29, but 5 were published adequately (TN I: pis. 86-87) and another was possibly published (TN I: pI. 86:16). This leaves us with at least' 23 items, which have no photographs or drawings in the report. Unfortunately, the appendix does not give the dates, contexts and registration numbers of these items. It is very likely that they are all JPF. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: 273, Appendix A, section 3. Few bodies could be identified in the list made by G. Zorn (nos. 540-543 below). Further fragments are included in the list, but with too few details to enable positive identifications.

494. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: cistern 370, square AF/20, cf. figurine no. 169 above. Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above). 495. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: room 534, square AC/15. Levell (building 142.01 of Zorn 1993:1571). Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).

540. A body of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context and ate: cistern 359, square AD/17. Levell. Place: Berkeley, box 5. Literature: cf. the note above.

496. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: room 616, square AB/16. This is bUilding 142.04 of Zorn (1993:1589), defined by him as a mixed locus. Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).

541. A body of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: room 64, square AJ/20. This is building 177.05 of Zorn (1993:1466), defined by him as mixed Iron-Age Persian period locus. Place: Berkeley. Museum no. M.310. Literature: cf. the note before figurine 540 (above).

497. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: room 616, cf. figurine no. 496 above. Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).

542. A body of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: room 104, square Y/24 (cf. Zorn 1993:1474, with a dating to the Babylonian - Persian periods). Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.577. Literature: cf. the note before figurine 540 (above).

498. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: room 625a, square AB/17. This is bUilding 142.06 of Zorn (1993:1591), dated by him to the Iron Age II Persian periods. Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).

543. A body of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Context: silo 249, square R/17 (cf. Zorn 1993:1629). Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. the note before figurine 540 (above).

507-539. Bodies of type C.1 from Tel en-Nasbeh. They are mentioned in appendix A of the report. The total number of whole bodies is mentioned as 39 (excluding two whole figurines which were published in TN I: pis. 86:14, 87:2). Of these 39 bodies, four were published (ibid: pI. 86:12,16-18). One exceptional body has an uplifted left arm (two other exceptional fragments were published, TN I: pI. 86:2, 13). I have also included figurines nos. 179-180 (above) as published JPF bodies. This leaves us with at least 33 items, which have no photographs or drawings in the report. Unfortunately, the appendix does not give the dates, contexts and registration numbers of these items. It is very likely that they are all JPF. Place: Berkeley?

563-576. Bases of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. 15 bases are mentioned in appendix A of the report. Only one base was published fully (figurine no. 170 above), thus 14 are left. The appendix makes it clear that these are JPF bases. Of course, a few could have belonged to bird figurines, or to riders (as discussed in detail in chapter III of the present work). Unfortunately, the appendix does not give the dates, contexts and registration numbers for these bases. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:273, Appendix A, section 4. Note: Many fragments in the list made by G. Zorn seem to be JPF bases, and the number is greater then the expected

215

14 (above). I have defined 14 bases as nos. 563-576 (below). The rest are presented by letters (A-G), not included in the data base (app. 1) until more details are published. 563. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 43 mm. Object no. 5. Context: square P/22, surface. Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. the note above.

Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.698. Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

572. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 69 mm. Object no. 2. Context: square 0/17, room 138 (Zorn 1993:1481, level 3). Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.719. Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

E. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 36 mm. Object no. 6. Context: square AB/16, room 622, level I (Zorn 1993:1590, house 142.04). Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

564. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 38 mm. Object no. 22. Context: square XJ22, surface. Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before figurine no. 563 (above).

573. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 61 mm. Object no. 1. Context: square 0/16, room 146, level I (Zorn 1993:1483, level 3). Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.689. Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

565. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 70 mm. Object no. 62. Context: square Z/13, surface, found while the area was refilled after excavation. Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. note before figurine no. 563 (above).

574. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 51 mm. Object no. 5. Context: square XJ13, room 346, level I (Zorn 1993:1527, house 124.02). Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

566. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 69 mm. Object no. 85. Context: square Z/13, surface, found while the area was refilled after excavation. Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. note before figurine no. 563 (above).

575. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 85 mm. Object no. 35. Context: square AB/24, room 390, level I (Zorn 1993:1538, house 141.03). Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.85. Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

567. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 44 mm. Object no. 90. Context: square Z/13, surface, found while the area was refilled after excavation. Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

576. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 62 mm. Object no. 12a. Context: square AG/19, room 438, level 1- (Zorn 1993:1550, house 177.01). Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

568. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Object no. 12. Context: square AG/17, surface debris, found while the area was re-filled after excavation. Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

A. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 68 mm. Object no. 12b. Context: square AG/19, room 438, cf. no. 576 above. Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

569. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 51 mm. Object no. 7. Context: square AJ/20, room 64 (Zorn 1993:1466, house 177.05). Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.311. Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

B. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 53 mm. Object no. 48. Context: square AG/19, room 443, level I (Zorn 1993:1551, house 177.01). Place: Berkeley. Literature: cf. note before no. 563'(above).

570. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 90 mm. Object no. 10. Context: square 0/17, room 136 (Zorn 1993:1481, house 74.03). Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.759. Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

C. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 50 mm. Object no. 56. Context: square AF/20, room 445, level I (Zorn 1993:1552, house 160.04). Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

571. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 25 mm. Object no. 2. Context: square 0/16, room 137 (Zorn 1993:1481, house 74.02).

D. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 57 mm. Object no. 64. Context: square AE/18, room 513, level I (Zorn 1993:1556, house 159.06).

216

Context: square Z/17, room 662, cf. figurine "F" above. Height: 70 mm. Object no. 19. Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above). 577. A body of type C.2 from Ramot (season 1992). Reg. no. 2969. Context: locus 1152, domestic area. Place: with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot.

F. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 96 mm (?). Object no. 24. Context: square Z/17, room 661, level I (cf. Zorn 1993:1559, house 125.03). Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

578. A body of type C.2 from Ramot (season 1992). The depression of the peg is clear at the upper end of the body. There are remains of hands under the breasts. Reg. no. 23710. Context: locus 243, a domestic area. Place: with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot.

G. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh.

217

Addenda to Appendix 2 All the figurines below were added to the catalogue after October 1994. They are not included in the data base (app. 1) or in the statistical analyses in the text of this work, except the discussion of the distribution (in chapter IV). The reason for this is that the distribution pattern forms a major part of the work, and I wanted to have the maximal database for discuusing it. In any case, the figurines in the addenda do not change radically any of the conclusions reached in the other chapters of the work (based on figurines nos. 1-578). Many of the figurines in the addenda were found in the excavations of Y. Shiloh in the city of David (Jerusalem), included here by courtesy of the excavation team. These figurines will be published soon (cf. Gilbert-Peretz 1989; in press), thus I have shortened the description to the minimum and have not discussed at all their stratigraphy and date (many of these figurines were found in later fills or out of context). I have given registration numbers to allow for the identification of these figurines in the forthcoming report. A few figurines in the addenda were found in earlier excavations, but some of these were not published, and others reached my knowledge only lately. The method of presentation in the addenda is similar to that of appendixes 1-2 (for the codes consult the introduction and keys to appendix 2).

579. A body of type C.2 from Gibeon. It is covered with white-wash and the remains of yellow paint. The hands are placed below the breasts, not supporting them directly. Holland defined this fragmnet as one of the hollow pillarfigurines (his type B). However, the Gibeon report is silent about this matter, and it seems that the photograph is misleading. The report does not fail to mention exceptional details in regard to other figurines, and it is unlikely that a hollow body would not be mentioned. All the other JPF from the Gibeon pool are solid. Context: the public pool, discussed in the text of this work. Literature: Gibeon WS: pI. 39:285; Holland 1975: B.7.2. 580. A moulded head of type B? from Tel el Areini (Erani). Only a photograph was published. The head was probably found in Yeivin's excavations. It is not well preserved. Context and date: not published. Literature: EAEHL New 11:420, upper row left. 581. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Lachish (Ussishkin's excavations). It is covered with white-wash, and has bands of dark red paint on the neck. The nose is damaged. The size of the head and the rounded section of the neck indicate that it is a JPF, and not a rider's head. Reg. no. 31503/1. Context and date: locus 4602. Level III, 8th century BC. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

582. A body of type C.2 from er-Ras (near Jerusalem). The base is damaged. The arms, left breast and neck are broken. Height ca. 85 mm. Reg. no. 1234. Context: locus 109, probably an open court outside a domestic building. Place: with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of N. Feig. 583. A body of type C? from Vered Jericho. Date: 7th century BC. Place: with the excavation team. Note: for the site see Eitan 1984; 1994. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. Eitan. 584. A body of type C? from Vered Jericho. Date: 7th century BC. Place: with the excavation team. Note: for the site see Eitan 1984; 1994. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. Eitan. 585. A moulded head of type B from Vered Jericho. Date: 7th century BC. Place: with the excavation team. Note: for the site see Eitan 1984; 1994. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. Eitan. 586. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Ramat Rahel. Height: 45 mm (face 27 mm). Reg. no. 1622/2. Context: not published. Place: at an exhibition in Daburiya, IAA no. 64-1155. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA. 587. A body of type C.2 from Ramat Rahel. The breasts and parts of arms that support them survived. Height: 60 mm. Reg. no. 1250/8. Context: not published. Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-1159. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA. 588. A body of type C.2 from Ramat Rahel. The arms are missing and the breasts are almost completely broken. Reg. no. 1270n. Context: not published. Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-1156. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA.

, 589. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Mt. Zion, Jerusalem (excavation license 238 from '1970, cf. Had. Arch. . 36:14; Had. Arch. 38 [1971]:15-16). Height: 30 mm. Reg. no. 2535. Context: not published. Place: Romema, IAA no. 76-1410. Note: a card exists at Romema, but the current place of the figurine is not clear. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA. 590. A body of type C.2 from Mt. Zion, Jerusalem (excavation license 508 from 1975). An Iron Age burial cave

218 .

was found in this excavation, one of a few known from this area (cf. Had. Arch. 53 [1975]:22). Reg. no. 188. Context: not published. Place: Romema, IAA no. 75-494. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA. 591. A body of type C.2 from Mt. Zion, Jerusalem (excavation license 508 from 1975). The breasts and parts of the arms remained, but they are badly preserved. Reg. no. 138. Context: not published, cf. figurine no. 590 above. Place: Romema, IAA no. 75-493. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA. 592. A moulded head of type B from Kh. el-Burg (Ramot, near Jerusalem). It was found in the 1970's by G. Edelstein, and was mentioned as an "Astarte head" in a preliminary report. Context: not published. Place: Romema? Literature: Courtesy of the IAA; Edelstein 1973:26. 593. A moulded head of type B.4.A? from Moza (season 1993). It is not well preserved. Traces of red paint remained on the face. The peg of the head is visible in the section of the neck. The side-locks are simple or worn. Height: 60 mm, face 26 mm. Context: area A, locus 163. Place: with the excavation team. Reg. no. 10090. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot. 594. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from Moza (season 1993). The breasts and the left arm remained, but the right arm is mostly missing. Height: 70 mm, face 20 mm. Reg. no. 10496. Context: area A, locus 231. Place: with the excavation team. Note: this head is reminiscent of head no. 118 from Ramat Rahel (above), but it is badly preserved. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot. 595. A body of type C.2 from Moza (season 1993). There are traces of white-wash and red paint. It is very crude. The breasts are separated and fallen. The hands descend along the body, unlike the regular placement beneath the breasts. The neck is long and thick. A peg of a moulded head is not visible. Reg. no. 2014. Height: 85 mm. Context: area B, locus 304. Place: with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot. 596. A base of type C.3 from Moza (season 1993). It is concave. Height: 76 mm. Reg. no. 10463. Context: area A, locus 195. Place: with the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot. 597. A base of type C.3 from Moza (season 1993). It is concave, made of orange ware and very badly preserved. Height: 76 mm. Reg. no. 6053. Context: area C, locus 608.

Place: With the excavation team. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot. 598. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. Only one arm remained, placed closer to the abdomen than to the breast. Reg. no. 11897/1. Context and date: square Q/15, locus 1327. This is a building outside the main settlement area. Level VII, Iron Age I (?). Place: Romema? Literature: BS II: pI. 14:1, fig. 25:1. 599. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. The arms are broken, but the hands survived under the breasts. The breasts form a continuos band without a separation. Reg. no. 12918/1. Context: square C/4, locus 1358, probably a destruction layer in a room. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

600. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. The hands survived under the breasts, but the arms are broken. The breasts form a continuos band without a separation. A depression of a peg is visible at the upper end of the body. Reg. no. 12118/1. Context and date: square D/16, locus 1298. Level IV. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 601. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave. Reg. no. 16637/1. Context: square N/9, locus 2006. Level II. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 602. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel Beer Sheba. The upper half is missing and the classification is not certain. There is probably a beginning of a 'pinched' nose. Reg. no. 12012/1. Context: locus 1279. Place: Tel Aviv. Note: in the object card, the fragment was defined once as a figurine and then as a chalcolithic goblet. The last is unlikely in view of the clay and the stratigraphy. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team . 603. A moulded head of type B.4.A? from Tel Beer Sheba. It is rounded. The face is beautiful and well preserved. There are probably four rows of rounded (?) curls. The nose is a little damaged. The hair was painted black, the face dark red and the upper side of the head yellow. Reg. no. 4768/1. Context: not published. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

219

604. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. Part of the right arm survived. There are marks of the left hand under the left breast. Reg. no. 16107/1. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 605. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is broken at all its length. Only one breast and marks of the hands survived. There is a depression for a peg at the upper end of the body. Reg. no. 3186/1. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 606. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is very thick and rounded. The breaking marks of the arms are visible. The breasts form one continuos band. Reg. no. 15431/1. Context: locus 1208?, possibly a building from level II in area E. Note: this may have been a bird figurine, but less likely. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 607. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave. Reg. no. 8436/1. Context: locus 766, probably from level II. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 608. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave. Reg. no. 8487/1. Context: locus 770, probably from level II. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 609. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave. Reg. no. 6452/9 (?). Context: locus 665, probably from the north area (C), level II. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 610. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave. The outside surface is blackened. Reg. no. 16423/1. Context: locus 1843. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 611. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave and probably has some remains of red paint. Reg. no. 14033/1. Context: not clear. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

220

612. A moulded head of type B.3-4 from Malhata (season 1994). The preservation state is not good. It has three or four rows of curls, now worn, and red slip. The side-locks have two columns of 4-5 curls. Height of the face: 27 mm. Reg. no. 1725. Date: 7th century BC. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of Y. Beit Arieh. 613. A base of type C.3 from Malhata (season 1994). It is concave. There are some remains of white-wash and yellowbrown paint. Height: 68 mm. Reg. no. 1735. Date: 7th century BC. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of Y. Beit Arieh. 614. A hand-made head of type A.1 from Tel Qasileh. Reg. no. 1386. Context: locus 138, "level VII". The stratigraphy is not clear. Literature: Mazar, A. 1980: 113d, fig. 42d, pI. 39:5. 615. A moulded head of type B from the City of David (Jerusalem). There are the remains of white-wash. The face is completely missing, except parts of the side-locks. The peg of the head is visible in the section of the neck. Height: 67 mm. Reg. no. D2/13667. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 616. A moulded head of type B.3-4 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. It is not well preserved, and the shape of the hair is not clear. The nose is damaged. Height: 53 mm, face 24 mm. Reg. no. D1?/13590. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 617. A moulded head of type B.5.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978 (?). There are the remains of white-wash and red paint. The curls are rounded and small, arranged in 5 rows above the forehead. The side-locks have 3-4 columns of 4-5 similar curls. Reg. no. G/2320. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 618. A moulded head of type B.3-4? from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. Th~re are the remains of whitewash and red paint on the face. The head is not well preserved and its lower part is broken. The side-locks have 3-4 curls (probably). Reg. no. E3/19035. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 619. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A? from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. Only the upper part of the head remained, with one ridge of large curls (probably rounded) and a smaller ridge above. Reg. no. D2/20049. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.

Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 620. A moulded head of type B from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are few remains of whitewash. The head is broken and only part of the side-locks remained, with 3-4 curls (now worn). Reg. no. E2I3065. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 621. A moulded head of type B.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. It is quite worn and the shape of the curls is not clear. There are some remains of white-wash and red paint. The side-locks have 3-4 curls. Reg. no. E1/9329. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 622. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. It is rounded and has a few remains of white-wash. Height 42 mm., head 23 mm. Reg. no. E/1968. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

627. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. It has a few remains of Whitewash. Height 24 mm. Reg. no. G/11481. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 628. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is pointed. Height 60 mm., head 32 mm. Reg. no. E3/13198. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 629. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is pointed and very badly preserved. Height 53 mm., head 30 mm. Reg. no. E1/14516. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 630. A hand-made head of type A. 1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is pointed. Height 40 mm., head 28 mm. Reg. no. E1/10377. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

623. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. It is pointed and has a few remains of white-wash and red paint. Height 53 mm., head 22 mm. Reg. no. E/2640. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

631. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is big, pointed and very badly broken. Height 45 mm. Reg. no. D/13363. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

624. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. It is pointed and very worn. Height 30 mm. Reg. no. E/1806. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

632. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is small and very badly preserved. Height 53 mm., head 30 mm. Reg. no. E3/13198. Note: this head could have belonged to a horse and rider figurine. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

625. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. It is rounded and has some remains of a red band of paint on the neck. There are no clear depressions for the eyes. Height 35 mm., head 15 mm. Reg. no. E/5839. Note: the head is small and could have belonged to a horse and rider figurine. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

633. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is pointed and badly preserved. There are some traces of white-wash. The face is broken. Reg. no. D2/14083. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

626. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. The upper part is missing. Height 35 mm. Reg. no. E/1867 or E/1862. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

221

634. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. It is pointed and has some remains of white-wash. Height 26 mm., head 23 mm. Reg. no. E1/17265. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

635. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. It is pointed. Height 35 mm., head 21 mm. Reg. no. 02120243. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 643. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. It is pointed. Reg. no. E3/15643. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

636. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. It is small and pointed. The section of the neck is thin and not rounded. Height 28 mm., head 25 mm. Reg. no. 02120283. Note: this head may have belonged to a horse-and-rider figurine. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

644. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. It is pointed and has the remains of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/15705. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 645. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983 (?). The nose is peculiar, rounded in shape. Reg. no. D2I13743. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

637. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. It is pointed and has a few remains of white-wash. An incised line indicates a mouth, a very rare feature among the JPF. Height 40 mm., head 30? mm. Reg. no. E1/8651. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

646. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. It is pointed and has the remains of white-wash. Only the shoulder survived from the whole body. Reg. no. E1/16680. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

638. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. It is pointed and has some remains of white-wash. Height 50 rnm., head 25 mm. Reg. no. E1/8521. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

647. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. Height: 30 mm., head 23 mm. Reg. no. E3/15703. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

629. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is pointed. Height 50 mm., head 21 mm. Reg. no. E3/13138. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

648. A hand-made head of type A.4 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. It has an applied hat. The back side is damaged. Height: 60 mm., head 40 mm. Reg. no. E3/15787. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

640. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. It is pointed. Height 22 mm., head 20 mm. Reg. no. E1/9524. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Note: the head is small and may have belonged to a horseand-rider figurine. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 641. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. It is rounded. Height 45 mm., head 20 mm. Reg. no. E1n930. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 642. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. It is very badly broken. Height 51 mm. Reg. no. E3/12809. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.

649. A hand-made head of type A.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. It has an applied turben', nearly closed at the back side. There is a yellow band of paint on the neck and red paint on the face, above the white-wash. Height: 50 mm., head 28 mm. Reg. no- G/8227. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 650. A hand-made head of type A.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. It has an applied tureen'. placed vertically on the head. There are traces of white-wash and red paint. Height: 51 mm. Reg. no. G/11026. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

222

651. A hand-made head of type A.4 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. It has an applied hat, of which only a small part survived. Height: 52 mm., head 34 mm. Reg. no. E1/9582. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

661. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/11953. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

652. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash and red paint on the body. The breasts are small. Reg. no. E1/16107. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

662. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are some traces of white-wash. There is only one breast, and both arms are missing. Reg. no. E1/10244. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

653. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. The hands meet under the breasts. Reg. no. E3/15634. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

663. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reddish clay. There is only one hand left on the body (the arms are both broken). Reg. no. E1/14538. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

654. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. The breasts are broken and the arms are completely missing. Reg. no. E1/16360. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

664. A body of type C.2.D from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash and a band of yellow paint above the breasts. The breasts and the arms are usual, but a small disk is applied above the chest, close to the body. Reg. no. E1/13037. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

655. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Only part of the chest remained, without the hands. Reg. no. E1/16284. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 656. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. The hands are placed beneath the breasts. Reg. no. E1/1459. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 657. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash and bands of black paint. There is only one arm and small breasts. Reg. no. E1?/12586. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 658. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. The breasts are broken. The base is concave. Reg. no. E3/13192. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 659. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982.There are few traces of white-wash. The body is broken lengthwise. Reg. no. G/11439. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 660. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are some traces of white-wash and horizontal bands of dark brown paint on the arms. The hands are placed under the breasts. Reg. no. E3/13016. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

665. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. There is a depression for a peg at the upper end of the body. Reg. no. 02/20189. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 666. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. The body is almost whole. The breasts are big. Height: 86 mm. Reg. no. E2/2992. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 667. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. One arm is missing and the other is placed under the breast. Reg. no. E1/6143. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

668. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Both arms are broken. The breasts are small. Reg. no. E1/8520. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 669. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. The hands are placed under the breasts. The base is flattened. The body is thin and not really rounded. Height: 65 mm. Reg. no. E1/6217. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

223

670. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Both arms are broken. Reg. no. E3/17500. Height: 40 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 671. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. One arm is broken. Reg. no. G/3016. Height: 58 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 672. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash and bands of red and yellow paint above the breasts. The hands are separated, placed almost at the sides of the body. Reg. no. G/4331. Height: 73 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 673. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. One arm is broken. Reg. no. 0/6665. Height: 63 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 674. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. The body is small and not well preserved. There are a few traces of white-wash and red paint. Reg. no. G/5797. Height: 42 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 675. A body of type C.1 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. The body is almost whole. There are traces of white-wash. The hands do not join under the breasts. Reg. no. E2/12015. Height: 81 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

676. A body of type C.1 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. The body is almost whole. There are traces of white-wash and bands of red and yellow paint on the neck. The hands join under the breasts. Reg. no. E1/9284. Height: 86mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 677. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash and red bands of paint. Both arms are broken. Reg. no. E2I12015. Height: 75mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 678. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are very few traces of white-wash. The breasts are small. Reg. no. E2I12812 (?). Height: 43 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

224

679. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1985. The body covered with white-wash. The arms are broken and the breasts are damaged. Reg. no. D2/21064. Height: 64 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

688. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Only a small part of the body survived, between the breasts and the base. Reg. no. E1/10205. Height: 52 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

680. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. The hands are placed under the breasts, but the arms are missing. The depression of a peg is visible at the upper end of the body. Reg. no. E/3566. Height: 43 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

689. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. Reg. no. E3/15430. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

681. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. One arm is broken. Reg. no. E2/2777. Height: 52 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 682. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978 (?). There are a few traces of white-wash. Both arms are broken. Reg. no. E/1895. Height: 54 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 683. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. The body is broken lengthwise and only one arm and one breast remained. Reg. no. G/2868 (?). Height: 45mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 684. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Both arms are broken and the breasts are damaged. Reg. no. E/5826. Height: 40 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 685. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. The breasts are small. The hands are placed beneath them, but the arms are broken. Reg. no. E/1939. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 686. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash and red paint. The arms are preserved, but the breasts are very damaged. Reg. no. E/5502. Height: 44 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 687. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are some traces of white-wash. Only a small part of the body survived, between the breasts and the base. Reg. no. E1/10760. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

690. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/15594. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 691. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. D2I13660. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 692. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/15606. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 693. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/1559. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 699. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/17504. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 700. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E1/16979. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 701. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/15684. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 702. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/13129. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 703. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/12962. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 704. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/15908. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

694. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/15841. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

705. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/12959. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

695. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. Reg. no. E3/15850. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

706. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/12868. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

696. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. It is made of well levigated, brown clay, without traces of white-wash (unlike the typical JPF). Reg. no. D2/13620. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

707. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/12983. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

697. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/15444. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

708. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/15430. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 709. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/13098. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

698. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. Reg. no. E3/15655.

225

710. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. E3113022. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 711. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/13147. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

714. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/12819? Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 715. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/13094. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 716. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of burning (?). Reg. no. E3/12980. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 717. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/12895. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 718. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. D2I14111. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 719. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. D2/14144. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 720. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Reg. no. E1/10630. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

732. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E1/9942. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

743. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/5791. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

722. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. Reg. no. E3/19072. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

733. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E1/9882. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

744. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. Reg. no. E2I7268. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

723. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. Reg. no. E1/19602. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

712. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/13001. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 713. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Part of the lower body also survived. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/11462. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

721. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. D2I20352. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

724. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. Reg. no. E1/17323. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 725. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/11065. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 726. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/11173. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 727. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. Reg. no. E1/10023. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 728. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E117037. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 729. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/11115. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 730. A base of type C.3 from the City oJ David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E1/9071. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 731. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E1/8466. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

226

734. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. Reg. no. G/11105. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 735. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E2/12031. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 736. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. Reg. no. D/12621. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 737. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E1/6075. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

745. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E1/9103. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 746. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. Reg. no. E1/9558. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 747. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/1969/1. Height: 40 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

748. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/1716. Height: 52 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

738. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/11249. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

749. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979 (?). Reg. no. E1/1990. Height: 31 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

739. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E1/10044. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

750. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E2/12031. Height: 31 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

740. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E2I12133. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

751. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. Reg. no. E/593. Height: 45 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

741. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E117833. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

752. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/3465. Height: 39 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

742. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. Reg. no. E1/9661. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

753. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. Reg. no. E/3320. Height: 50 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

227

754. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/3525. Height: 45 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

765. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/4130. Height: 55 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

755. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/2636. Height: 30 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

766. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. Reg. no. E/1875. Height: 51 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

756. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. Reg. no. E/3334. Height: 48 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

767. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E2I18067.8? Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

757. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/1925. Height: 50 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

768. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/562.5. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

758. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/1608/1. Height: 25 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

769. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. Reg. no. E1/9355. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

759. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/2781/1? Height: 42 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

770. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/8216. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

760. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. Reg. no. E/4127. Height: 38 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

771. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E2/12098. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

761. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/7613. Height: 32 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

772. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. Reg. no. D/12436. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

762. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/14578. Height: 50 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

773. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1985. Reg. no. D2I21019. Context: locus 2765. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.' Literature: courtesy of the excavationjeam.

763. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/4630. Height: 42 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

774. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1985. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. 02/20573. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

764. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. Reg. no. G/2409. Height: 47 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

775. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1985. The shape of the base is awkward. Reg. no. 02120526. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.

228

Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 776. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/3893. Height: 85 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 777. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. Reg. no. E/3412. Height: 50 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

786. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/3508. Height: 45 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 787. A body fragment of type C from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Only a small part of the middle body remained, between the base and the breasts. Reg. no. E1/10969. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

778. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/5861. Height: 35 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

788. A body fragment of type C from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Only a small part of the middle body remained, between the base and the breasts. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. D2/14079. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

779. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/4574. Height: 67 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

789. A body fragment of type C from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. Only a small part remained from the middle body, between the base and the breasts. There are few traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/14700. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

780. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. Reg. no. G/2254. Height: 61 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 781. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/3247. Height: 43 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 782. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/2089/2 (?). Height: 72 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 783. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/2476/1. Height: 26 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

Following is a list of a few other fragments from the City of David excavations, that are too fragmentary for precise classification. Since it is not clear if these are JPF, I have not numbered them in the catalogue. They are all stored at the Terra Santa bUilding, Jerusalem. A-D. Solid hand-made heads. They could belong to animal figurines. Reg. nos. G/2092 (season 1978); E/3646 (season 1978?); E/4118 (season 1979) and D2I20274 (season 1984). E-G. Pillar bases, probably of type C.3., all from the 1983 season. Reg. nos. E3/15660; E1/16058; E3/15738. H. A Fragment of a base, either of type C.3 or of a solid bird figurine (the last seems more likely). Season 1982. Reg. no. 0/13318. I-K. Pillar bases of type C.3 (?), from the 1978 season. Reg. nos. E/4042, H/5240, E/3525.

L. A base of type C.3 (?), season 1978. Reg. no. E/1817. M. A base oftype C.3 (?), season 1980. Reg. no. E1/8644.

784. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/1425 or E1925. Height: 36 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 785. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. Reg. no. E/1844. Height: 45 mm. Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

229

790. A moulded head of type 8.2-4? from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem). Season 1994. The head is pointed and has a few traces of white-wash. It is badly preserved, but has at least two rows of curls above the forehead. The side-locks are simple or worn. Height: 50 mm., face 25 mm. Reg. no. 3195. Place: with the excavation team, temporarily at the Albright Institute, Jerusalem. Literature: not yetpublished, courtesy of G. Barkay.

791. A moulded head of type B.3-4. from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem). Season 1994. The head is rounded and flattened at the back side. The face is well preserved. There are 3-4 rows of curls above the forehead. The side-locks are simple. Height: 64 mm., face 24 mm. Reg. no. 3314. Place: with the excavation team, temporarily at the Albright Institute, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.

800-803. Four moulded heads of type B from the western wall, Jerusalem (excavations of M. Broshi). Literature: Barkay 1985: 208, list. Note: Courtesy of G. Barkay. 804-806. Three hand-made heads of type A from the western wall, Jerusalem (excavations of M. Broshi). Literature: Barkay 1985: 208, list. Note: Courtesy of G. Barkay.

792. A hand-made head of type C.2 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem). Season 1980. It has an applied turban. Reg. no. 974/1. Context: tomb 34. Literature: Barkay 1985:234, pI. 142:3.

807-834. Twenty eight body fragments of type C from the western wall, Jerusalem (excavations of M. Broshi). Literature: Barkay 1985: 208, list. Note: Courtesy of G. Barkay.

793. A base of type C.3 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem). Season 1988. It is badly preserved. Height: 40 mm. Reg. no. 1752. Context: locus 144. Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.

835. A body of type B.2 from Jerusalem. The head, base and arms are missing. Context: it was found on the bedrock in the Muslim quarter. Height: 85 mm. Literature: Clermont Ganneau 1899 (rep. 1971): Vol. 1:82. Note: I thank G. Barkay for this reference.

794. A base of type C.3 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem). Season 1988. There are traces of white-wash. Height: 51 mm. Reg. no. 1537. Context: locus 134. Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.

836. A moulded head of type B.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). It has three rows of curls above the forehead. Height: 65 mm. Reg. No. D2I20269. IAA no. 86-1834. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

795. A base of type C.3 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem). Season 1994. Height: 48 mm. Reg. no. 3716. Context: fills. Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay. 796. A base of type C.3 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem). Season 1994. Height: 32 mm. Reg. no. 2858. Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay. 797. A base of type C.3 (?) from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem). Season 1994. Pale brown ware. Height: 34 mm. Reg. no. 3348. Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay. 798. A base of type C.3 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem). Season 1994. Reg. no. 3267. Context: locus 423. Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.

799. A hand-made head of type A.2? from the western slope of the west hill, Jerusalem. The upper part is flattened. There are protrusions at the sides, perhaps ears or a turban (?). Height: 52 mm., face 21 mm. Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.

230

842. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. Height: 45 mm. Reg. No. D2I20242. IAA no. 86-1904. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

849. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). There are traces of white-wash. The right arm is broken. Height: 50 mm. Reg. No. 172/1? IAA no. 86-1838. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

843. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. There are some traces of whitewash. Height: 30 mm. Reg. No. D2I20339/2. IAA no. 861882. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

850. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. The left arm is broken. Height: 60 mm. Reg. No. E3/15592. IAA no. 86-1843. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

844. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1978. The head is pointed and has some traces of white-wash. Height: 48 mm. Reg. No. E1/561. IAA no. 86-1854. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

851. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. The arms are broken. Height: 80 mm. Reg. No. E3/15578. Place: Romema, in an exhibition. IAA no. 86-1866. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

845. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1982. The head is pointed. Height: 38 mm. Reg. No. E3/1311/5. IAA no. 86-1855. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

837. A moulded head of type B.1-2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1984. Height: 70 mm. Reg. No. D2/20256. IAA no. 86-1835. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

846. A hand-made head of type A.2? from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1981. The head does not have a real turban, but a sort of an applied lump of clay whose nature is not clear. Height: 50 mm. Reg. No. G/1147. IAA no. 861837. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

838. A moulded head of type B.5 from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are five rows of curls above the forehead. Height: 50 mm. Reg. No. G/3416. IAA no. 86-1836. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

847. A hand-made head of type A.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). It has a horizontal, applied turban shaped as a closed ring. Height: 40 mm. Reg. No. G/7508. IAA no. 861867. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

839. A moulded head of type B.1? from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. There is one row of curls above the forehead. Height: 55 mm. Reg. No. E1/16756. IAA no. 86-1851. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

848. A hand-made head of type A.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). The upper part is pointed. According to the

Romema card, the head has two applied side-locks. Height: 30 mm. Reg. No. 5948. IAA no. 86-1881. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

852. A body of type C.2? from the City of David (Jerusalem). There are white-wash and bands of red and yellow paint. The hands are holding an object (?). Reg. No. D2I13658. IAA no. 86-2030. Context: locus 1882. Place: Romema, in an exhibition. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team. 853. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem). The left arm is broken. Height: 80 mm. Reg. No. E1/3526. IAA no. 86-2031. Place: Romema, in an exhibition. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team. 854. A body of type C.2.D? from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. The hands are holding an object, perhaps a disk. Height: 80 mm. Reg. No. G/11152. IAA no. 86-2032. Place: Romema, in an exhibition. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

840. A moulded head of type B.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem). There are traces of white-wash and red-brown paint on the head, and white band on the neck. Height: 65 mm. Reg. No. E1/18456. IAA no. 86-1872. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team. 841. A moulded head of type B.3? from the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. Height: 55 mm. Reg. No. E3/15571. IAA no. 86-1901. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

231

Appendix 3: JPF from Unknown Origins 6. A whole figurine of type BC.2.B. The right hand is placed

Following is a list of JPF from unknown origins, which is, no doubt, a partial list. The origins of all, or most of these figurines, are the antiquities markets, hence they were obtained through robbery of sites. These figurines contribute little to science, since their origin, date and context are unknown." This is regrettable, as the percentage of whole figurines is high: there are no less then 25 whole figurines among the total 98 items in appendix 3 (almost equal to the number of whole figurines among the 854 JPF of app. 2 above). A few of the figurines without origins might be modern forgeries, but there is no doubt that many are ancient.

on the side of the breasts, and not underneath it. Height: 190 mm. Place: Eretz-Israel Museum, Tel Aviv. Museum no. MHP.6789. Literature: Deutsch 1989: 113 no. 323. 7. A whole figurine of type BcA. It was formerly in the Y.M.CA exhibition, and its origin is said to be "Kh. Nebi Lot". Height: 162 mm. Place: Eretz-Israel Museum, Tel Aviv. Museum no. MHP.144661. Literature: not yet published.

Unlike finds from excavations, figurines from antiquities markets can pass between different private collectors and dealers, and sometime they appear in two publlcations without cross references. I ave tried to identify such cases as far as possible, and have centered mainly on collections of institutions and museums: these would at least have a sound registration system of their finds.

8. A whole figurine of type Bc.2.B? Formerly from the collection of Reifenberg. It seems to have one row of rectangular curls and a second, higher row of square curls. According to Reifenberg, it was found in a tomb near Hebron. Height: 127 mm. Place: Israel Museum. Museum no. AR8, 64-67/4. Literature: Reifenberg 1925:43 fig. 1; Orlinsky 1954: 178 photograph.

Figurines from unknown origins were often published in various leaflets and auction catalogues. Other figurines are as yet unpublished. I have given the shortest possible description of each figurine, since the contribution to the present work is limited. Needless to say, these figurines are not included in the database (app. 1 above).

9-12. Four whole figurines from the collection of Reifenberg. They may be the same as figurines nos. 1, 8 above, but the photographs are not similar. There is one figurine with a hand-made head, holding a disk (no. 127). All the other have moulded faces. In one case, the hands are placed above the breasts (no. 128). Literature: Reifenberg 1927:96, nos. 127-130.

1. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from the collection of A. Reifenberg. The right hand is placed on the side of the breast, and not underneath it. Height: 125 mm. Place: Israel Museum, in exhibition. Museum no. 64-67/3 AR7. Literature: Patai 1967:69, nos. 6-7.

13. A whole figurine of type AC.1A The hands are separated under the breasts. Height: 120 mm. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no. 585. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of O. Rimon, the Hecht Museum.

2. A whole figurine of type Be. from the collection of M. Dayan. The face is completely destroyed, hence an exact classification is impossible. Place: Israel Museum. Literature: Ornan 1986:34.

14. A whole figurine of type Ac.1A The hands hold an object. The right hand is reconstructed. Height: 123 mm. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa, in the exhibition. Museum no. 971. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

3. A moulded head of type B.4.A? from the collection of M. Dayan. Place: Israel Museum. Literature: Oman 1986:34.

15. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1A Height: 90 mm. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no. H.1516. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

4. A moulded head of type B.2-3? from the collection of M. Dayan. Place: Israel Museum. Literature: Oman 1986:34.

16. A whole figurine of type Be.3.G. The lower body is partially restored, with a sort of a ridge (the only comparison to this is found in figurines from Nebo in Transjordan, cf. app. 4.1.1-2). The origin is said to be "Idna near Hebron". Height: 191 mm. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no. H.1514. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

5. A moulded head of type B.2-3A It is well preserved. Place: Eretz-lsrael Museum, Tel Aviv. Museum no. 3345 (old), 169661 (new). Literature: not yet published.

17. A whole figurine of type Bc.2. There are no curls. Orange ware, not typical of the JPF. Height: 141 mm. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no. H.1765. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 18. A whole figurine of type BC.2. the curls are worn. The body and the head were mended, but perhaps composed from more than one ancient figurine. The origin is said to be Idna. Height: 152 mm. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no. H.1515. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 19. A whole figurine of type BC.3.A? The base and the right arms are restored. The nose is damaged. Height: 150 mm. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no. H.42. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

20. A moulded head and upper body of type B+.3.B. It is said to come from Zur Bahar (south of Jerusalem). It may be the same figurine as no. 73 (below), but the photographs were taken from different angels and do not permit exact identification. Height: 93 mm. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no. REH.144. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

26. A moulded head of type B.2A It is well preserved and covered with white-wash. Museum no. H.814 or H.914 (?). Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

27. A whole figurine of type BC.2A It has the remains of white-wash and yellow paint. The hands are placed above the breasts. Museum no. H.1439. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 28. A moulded head of type B.2? It is somewhat damaged, but looks authentic. The curls are worn. Museum no. H.715. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 30. A moulded head of type B.1?A The clay is crude, brown, with remains of red paint. The head is pointed. Museum no. H.716. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 31. A moulded head of type B.2?A Museum no. H.200. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 32. A moulded head of type B.2.A? Museum no. HE.089. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

33. A moulded head of type B.2. The clay is yellowish, unlike other JPF. The back side is shaved with a tool. The facial features are worn. Museum no. H.679. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

21. A moulded head and upper body of type Be.2. The body is hollow. There are no curls. The figurine is said to come from Hebron. The head is very large and exceptional. Height: 110 mm. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no. HA04. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

34. A hand-made head of type A.1A Museum no. EH.147. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

22. A body of type C.1. It was mended with a head from another figurine (now removed). The breasts are very large. It may be a forgery. It is said to come from Hebron. Height: 168 mm. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no. H.970. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

36. A "whole" figurine, built of two parts which probably come from different figurines. The head is hand-made, very long and peculiar. There are marks of ears and bands of purple paint above white-wash. This head is exceptional and perhaps not a JPF head. Note: the body is registered separately as figurine no. 40 (below). Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

23-43. All the follOWing figurines are from the collections of the Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. They are currently not exhibited, but stored in the museum. 23. A moulded head of type B.3? Greenish, peculiar ware. Museum no. H.723. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

35. A hand-made head of type A.1A Unnumbered. It is made of strange, orange ware, not typical of the JPF. The nose is damaged. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

37. A body of type C.1. It is painted with pink paint (?). Museum no. H.720. Note: the authenticity of figurines nos. 37-39 is doubtful. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 38. A body of type C.1. Museum no. H.1764. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

24. A moulded head of type B.3A It is well preserved. Museum no. H.202. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

39. A body of type C.1. Museum no. H.719. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

25. A moulded head of type B.3-4? The face is very worn. Museum no. H.885. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

40. A body of type C.1. It is now mended to head no. 36 (above). There are traces of white-wash. Museum no. REH.1415.

10ften the antiquties dealers suggest an origin, but one cannot rely upon their information.

232

Soft brown ware.

233

Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

Literature: Deutsch 1989:114, no. 324.

41. A moulded head and upper body of type B+.4.A. There are remains of white-wash, yellow paint on the body and red on the face. Museum no. H.718. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

64. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A. Height: 120 mm. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1993:74, no. 260.

42. A moulded head of type B.4.A? The facial worn. The moulding is very crude. The neck modern tool, and the white-wash looks as if it the figurine. The firing looks 'too good'. Museum Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

65. A whole figurine of type BC.2.A? The breasts are very large. Height: 155 mm. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1990: no. 340.

features are is cut by a is "glued" to no. H.1900.

43. A moulded head of type B.4.C. There are remains of white-wash and red paint. The curls are wedge-shaped. Museum no. H.717. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 44-60. All the following figurines are also from the collections of the Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. When examined they were not yet registered or exhibited in the Museum. 44. A moulded head of type B.2-3.A? It has painted bands of yellow on the neck and red paint on the face. Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

45. A moulded head of type B.3.A? Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above) ..

46. A moulded head of type B.3? The curls are worn and the head is pointed. Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 47. A moulded head of type B.2-3. It is badly preserved. Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).

66. A moulded head of type B. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1990: no. 341. 67. A moulded head oftype B. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1990: no. 342. 68. A moulded head of type BA.A. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1990: no. 343. 69. A moulded head of type B. the photograph does not permit exact classification. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1989: no. 280. 70. A moulded head of type B. the photograph does not permit exact classification. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1989: no. 279. 71. A whole figurine of type Be. The hair is very damaged. Height: 145 mm. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1989: no. 278.

48-53. Bases of type C.3. Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 54-59. Body parts of type C.2. Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 60. A hand-made head of type A.1.A. It is pointed and has the remains of white-wash and a yellow band of paint. Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above). 61. A whole figurine of type Be. It was formerly in the Dagon collection, The head is broken and mended to the body, the left arm is broken. The preservation state is bad. Note: the Dagon collection formed the basis of the Hecht Museum, thus this figurine may be one of the figurines from Hecht Museum mentioned above. Literature: Gonen 1979:58f, photograph p. 60. 62. A moulded head of type B.2-3. It has vertical curls. Place: unknown. It was sold in 1989 and may be equal to one of the heads from the museums. Literature: Deutsch 1989: 114, no. 325. 63. A moulded head of type B.2. It has vertical curls. Place: unknown; cf. figurine no. 62 above.

234

72. A whole figurine of type BC.3? Height 131 mm. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1989: no. 278. 73. A moulded head and upper body of type B+.2? Height: 95mm. Place: unknown. Note: this is probably the same figurine as no. 20 above. Literature: Deutsch 1989b: no. 275.

76. A moulded head of type B.3-4.A? The curls are small and probably rounded. Height: 57 mm. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1988: no. 356. 77. A hand-made head of type A.1.A. There are remains of white-wash and red and yellow painting on the neck. It was bought in Jerusalem (said to originate in Tell Beit Mirsim). Place: the prehistoric Museum, Munchen. Notes: Jeremias reported 20 heads of female figurines, mostly "bird shaped", but these were not published and their whereabouts are unknown. Literature: Jeremias 1993:43f, pI. 3b.

78. A moulded head of type B.1? It is very badly preserved. The curls that survived are large and rounded. Place: the Prehistoric Museum, Munchen. Literature: Jeremias 1993:43f, pI. 4b. Note: the figurine in pI. 4a (ibid) is a rider and not a JPF. 79. A whole figurine of type BcA. The breasts are very large. Height: 165 mm. Museum no. 3845. Place: The Museum of Ancient Art, Haifa. Literature: Zemer 1991:25, no. 31. 80. A moulded head of type B.3-4. It is pointed and has the peg beneath the neck. Reg. no. UT.5, Museum no. EM.39731. Place: Oslo, the Ethnographic Museum. Literature: Supinska Lovset 1978:65-66. 81. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A. The hands do not join under the breasts. The left breast is damaged. Reg. no. UTA, Museum no. EM.39784a. Place: Oslo, the Ethnographic Museum. Literature: Supinska Lovset 1978:65-66. 82. A hand-made head of type A.3.A. It has an applied hat and side-locks. Place: London, the University collections. Literature: Holland 1975: A.1.c.1 0, pI. 1:8. 83. A moulded head of type B.4.B. It is excellently preserved. Reg. no. 5002? According to Patai, the head was found in Lachish; but it is not similar to any head published from this site. It is possible that it was given to the Museum by Colt, the financier of the Lachish excavations (cf. app. 2: no. 74 above). Place: Harvard, the Semitic Museum. Literature: Patai 1967:68 photograph 5; Engle 1979: type 1:6.

74. A whole figurine of type AC.1A. There is an applied hat. The breasts are very large and the hands do not meet beneath them. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1989b: no. 274.

84. A body of type C.1.D. It has a large disk, held close to the body. It was bought in Jerusalem. Place: The Prehistoric Museum, Munchen. Literature: Jeremias 1993:44f,pl. 5b.

75. A moulded head of type B.2.A? The curls are large and rounded. The peg is clearly seen at the lower end. Height: 72 mm. Place: unknown. Literature: Deutsch 1988: no. 355.

85. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A. There are remains of white-wash. The head is pointed. There are three yellow bands on the neck and one red band on the shoulder. The

figurine supposedly came from "Dura" (near Hebron). Museum no. 546. Height: 125 mm. Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. Literature: not yet publisbed, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the Institute of Archaeology. 86. A body of type C.2. There are remains of white-wash and red and yellow bands of paint on the neck. Height: 110 mm. Place: the figurine is currently found at the Rockefeller Museum, and carries a museum no. P.53 (from the British Mandate period). Hebrew University no. 547. Note: though the origin is unknown, the fragment looks very similar to a fragment from Tel ej-Judeideh (app. 2: no. 236), and may be the same item. Literature: not yet published (?), courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the Institute of Archaeology. 87. A whole figurine of type Be.2.B. It is crudely made and red-slipped. The body is hollow. The head has two rows of square curls. The side-locks have three columns of 4-5 similar curls. Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. No. 4118. The figurine was bought in 1944 and supposedly came from "the area of Hebron" (negative no. 2352). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the Institute of Archaeology. 88. A moulded head of type B.5. The side locks have 3-4 columns of 4 wedge-shaped curls. There are traces of red paint. Place: Hebrew University no. 551, now at Rockefeller? (cf. note to figurine no. 86 above). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the Institute of Archaeology. 89. A moulded head of type BA. The curls are small but very worn. The head is damaged at its back side (now glued). Height: 50 mm. Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. No. 552. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the Institute of Archaeology. 90. A moulded head of type BA. The side-locks have 2-3 columns of 4 wedge-shaped curls. Height: 56 mm. Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University No. 553 (negative no. 8402). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the Institute of Archaeology. 91. A moulded head of type B.1.C. Its design is special, equal or very similar to a head from Jericho (cf. app. 2: no. 70). Height: 57 mm, face 35 mm. Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. No. 730. The head was bought in 1940 (for the sum of 0.3 Palestinian pounds ...). It was said to come from Dahariya. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the Institute of Archaeology. 92. A moulded head of type B.1. The curls are huge and square. There are traces of white-wash and yellow paint on

235

the neck. The side-locks have 2 columns of 2 curls each. Height: 58 mm, face 24 mm (negative no. 8399). Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. No. 2132. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the Institute of Archaeology.

94. A moulded head of type B.3-4. Height: 68 mm, face 21 mm. Place: Rockefeller. Museum no. P.1095. Literature: not yet publisned, but cf. note above. 95. A moulded head of type B.3-4.B. Height: 62 mm, face 23 mm. Place: Rockefeller. Museum no. P.65. Literature: not yet published, but cf. note above.

93. A moulded head of type B.? It is small and lacks curls. Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. No. 2405 (negatove no. 3400). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the Institute of Archaeology.

96. A moulded head of type B.4. Height: 47 mm, face 29 mm. Place: Rockefeller. Museum no. P.407. Literature: not yet published, cf. note above.

94-98. Five heads at the Rockefeller Museum. It is probable that they were found in excavations made at the beginning of the century, during the Ottoman rule, but their origin is not registered. During the British Mandate period they were registered at the Rockefeller museum (the P serial numbers). Note: I have suggested to identify three other heads from similar background with figurines found in early excavations (see app. 2: no. 19 = P.411; no. 287 = P.1091; no. 569 = pA06). For the current heads, the origins remain obscure.

97. A moulded head of type B.4. Height: 68 mm, face 25 mm. Museum no. P.62. Place: Rockefeller. Literature: not yet published, cf. note above. 98. A moulded head of type B.3-4. Height: 62 mm, face 27 mm. Place: Rockefeller. Museum no. P.66. Literature: not yet published, cf. note above.

Appendix 4: Transjordanian Figurines The present appendix includes anthropomorphic figurines from Iron Age Transjordan. The stress is put on female figurines and heads which possibly belonged to female figurines. The aim of the appendix is to form a body of material for comparison with the JPF, rather than to create a full, independent catalogue. With this aim in mind, I have limited the description of each figurine to the bare minimum.

Literature: Dornemann 1983: fig. 89:2; Amr 1980: no. 82. 4.1.4-5. Two body fragments from Amman. The hands and part of the drums survived. Context: tomb F. Literature: Dornemann 1983:132f, fig. 87:6-7. 4.1.6. A hollow body fragment from Tell er-Rumeit. (Gile'ad area). The hands hold a drum almost perpendicular to the body. Context: level 7. Place: Amman. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 29, pI.4:4.

Many of the figurines from Transjordan cannot be dated accurately, as the number of excavations and the available historical sources are much fewer than for the land of Israel. The chronology is, at present, dependent upon that of Israel, and need not be discussed here further. 1 In many cases, the contexts of the figurines are also obscure, and, similar to the JPF, many fragments are badly preserved and too broken for exact classifications.

4.1.7. A hollow body fragment from Tell er-Rumeit. (Gile'ad area). The right hand is placed on the drum, which is held lower than usual. Context: level 12. Place: Amman. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 12.

I have included very few figurines from unknown origins in this appendix. It is mainly in cases where whole figurines of the discussed type were not found in scientific excavations, or when a figurine from unknown origin has a special interest (e.g., a peculiar design, or features which can be compared with the JPF).

4.1.8. A hollow pillar body from Tell el-Mazar. The hands hold a drum perpendicular to the body; the left hand at its bottom and the right hand against its center. Context: H.3.6. Place: University of Jordan, Irbid. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 30, pI. 5:1; Yassine 1988: pI. 13:4, upper row left.2

The references and the codes which are used in this appendix are the same as those used in the former appendixes. Square brackets ("[ ]") refer to drawings in chapter III of this work.

4.1. Women Playing Drums with Hollow, Wheel-made Bodies

4.11. Moulded Heads 4.11.1. A moulded head from Buseirah. The ears are not depicted. The side-locks reach the shoulders. Context: a waste dump, excavated only in a probe. 9th-8th centuries BC? Literature: Bennett 1972: pI. 44b; 1973: pI. 8a; Holland 1975: A.Vl.a.1; Amr 1980: no. 69; Engle 1979: type VIII:104. For the excavations cf. also Bennett 1966; 1983.

4.1.1-2. Two whole figurines from Nebo. The wheel-made body is hollow and has a ridge near the base (perhaps indicating the edge of a dress). The drum is a disk of clay, held perpendicular to the body. The heads are hollow. The face is mould made and surrounded by two long side-locks that reach the shoulders. The fingers of the hands are shown. Context: grave 84, Iron Age II with later finds. Place: The Biblical Franciscan Museum, Jerusalem. Museum nos. M.1072, M.2001. Notes: Holland was already aware of the similarity with the Phoenician figurines (cf. App. 5.V1.2 below). Amr ignored these figurines in his thesis. Literature: Saller 1965-6:260-262, fig. 28:1-2; Piccirillo 1983:56 left; Holland 1975:146f, B.V.b.2-3. [Fig. 10:1-2].

4.11.2. A moulded head from Kh. el-Balu'. The face is elongated and crowned by large ears. Context: surface find, the slope of the site. Notes: the head was perhaps made in the same mould as figurine 4.11.4 (below). Glueck claimed that it is a male figurine (because of the elongated chin), perhaps the god Kemosh, but also compared it to female figurines from Nebo (4.1.1-2 above). Amr did not include this figurine in his work. Engle missed it in Holland's thesis, presumably because he did not check Holland's type B. Literature: Glueck 1934:24, fig. 7 left; Glueck 1945: fig. 84 left; Grohman 1962:419 fig. 65:left; Holland 1975: S.v1.4; Engle 1979: type VIII:110.

4.1.3. A body fragment from Gebel Oal'a, Amman. The broken part of the chest may indicate a drum (or only a female breast). There is a painting in red and black. The hair reachesthe shoulders. Place: Amman, museum no. J.12327. 11 have dealt with this subject briefly elswhere (Oadmoniot 110 [1995], Hebrew).

236

2For plaque figurines of playing women from Transjordan cf. App.4.V.1, 5.V.1 below.

237

4.11.3. A moulded head from Dibon. The chin is elongated and the ears are large. There are two (?) rows of curls above the forehead, but the photograph is not good. Context: room in area L. Literature: Morton 1989:322 fig. 16. 4.11.4. A moulded head from Kh. el-Medeineh The chin is very long. The head may have been made in the same mould as figurine no. 2 (above). Context: surface find. Literature: Glueck 1934:24, fig. 7:right; Glueck 1945: fig. 84:right; Grohman 1962:419 fig. 65:right; Holland 1975: B.VI.33; Engle 1979: type VIII:109. [fig. 10:3]. 4.11.5. A moulded head from Kh. el-Medeineh. There is an incised line on the right chick and an object applied to the back. Place: Amman ACOR. Note: it may be the same as no. 4 (above), but the photographs look different. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 83.

Literature: Amr 1980: no. 55.

Literature: Amr 1980: no. 58, pI. 11:2.

4.11.12. A moulded head from Gebel Joffa (Amman). It has one row of curls, or perhaps a band for a veil (?) above the forehead. There are curled side-locks as well. Context: an Iron Age tomb with more than 150 vessels, including bottles of the 6th century BC. Place: Amman, museum no. J.11144. Literature: Ma'ayah 1960: pI. 3:2; Holland 1975:48-50, AIV.g.1; Amr 1980: no. 52.

4.11.21. A moulded head from Tel el-Mazar. Context: level 1. Place: Irbid, University of Jordan Museum. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 56, pI. 10:3; Yassine 1988: pI. 13/3: lower row left.

4.11.13. A moulded head from the citadel of Amman. It is very crude, with a peg and probably ears. Context: phase 14. Place: Amman. Literature: Amr 1980:84, no. 78. 4.11.14. A moulded head from Amman. It is painted with black and white. Context: tomb F. Place: not clear. Literature: Dornemann 1983: fig. 87:4.

4.11.6. A moulded head from Heshbon. It has an applied hat, similar to hats of the rider figurines. Size: 37x61 mm. Context: surface. Place: St. Andrews 76.026. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 74; pI. 27:3a-b.

4.11.15. A moulded head from Amman. It is similar to figurine no. 14 (above). Context: tomb F. Place: not clear. Literature: Dornemann 1983: fig. 87:5.

4.11.7. A moulded head from Heshbon. The facial features are worn. Size: 30x40 mm. Context: surface. Place: St. Andrews 76.409. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 73; pI. 27:2.

4.11.16. A moulded head from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. It has a necklace, made of horizontal lines. There are cross-marks on the forehead and on the shoulder (Amr). Context: square P/18, 979, level V. Place: Amman, museum no. J.13022. Literature: Pritchard 1985: fig. 10:31: Amr 1980: no. 62.

4.11.8. A moulded head from Sahab. It is badly broken and cannot be classified exactly. Context: phase 15.3 Place: Amman. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 97.

4.11.17. A moulded head from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. It bears a cross on the neck (Amr). Context: square P/14, 949, level III. Place: Amman, museum no. J.13030. Literature: Pritchard 1985: fig. 18:9; Amr 1980: no. 59.

4.11.9. A moulded head from Sahab. It has a peg and incisions on the left chick. Context: phase 1. Place: Amman. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 77. [Fig. 10:4].

4.11.18. A moulded head from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. It has a rounded pendant on the forehead and horizontal lines above it. There are also earrings (?); cf. figurine no. 24 below. Context: a pit in area AA, level X, 10th-9th centuries BC. Literature: Tubb 1988:37 fig. 12. [Fig. 10:5].

4.11.10. A moulded head from Sahab. The hair reaches the shoulders and is painted red-brown. This may also be a head of a plaque figurine. Context: not stratified. Place: Amman, museum no. J.12958. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 80, pI. 14:2.

4.11.19. A moulded head from Tel ers:Rumeit. The hair is parted at the middle, then continues behind the ears until the chin. Small clay lumps are applied to the chicks. Context: phase 41. Place: Amman. Literature: Tubb 1988:37 fig. 12.

4.11.11. A moulded head from Sahab. Context: phase 18. Place: Amman.

4.11.20. A moulded head from Tel er-Rumeit. It has a cross shaped pendant on the neck; cf. figurines nos. 16, 17 and perhaps 12 (above). Context: phase 16. Place: Amman.

3This is the terminology used by Amr, but the meaning of "phase" is not clear. Amr does not give the full details, and the excavations are not yet published.

238

4.11.22. A moulded head from Tel Deir-'Alla. It is painted white and reddish-brown and has a peg. The eyes are very large. There are two ridges above the forehead. The ears are probably represented, but the photograph is not very clear. Reg. no. DA2689. Context: locus B5.36, level VI? Place: Amman, J.14023. Literature: Van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:104, no. 126; Amr 1980: no. 76, pI. 14:1; EAEHL New 1:342. 4.11.23. A moulded head from Tel Deir-'Alla. It is very similar to head no. 18 (above), and may have been made in the same mould. Context: locus DAD.205, sub phase L2. Place: Amman, J.12678. Literature: Franken, H.J. and C.A. 1963: pI. 15a:right; Holland 1975: AXll.j.1; Engle 1979: type VIII:105; Amr 1980: no. 57.

4.11.24. A moulded head from Tel Deir-'Alla. It is similar to no. 23 above, but without a neck pendant. Context: not yet published. Note: It is missing from the catalogue of Amr. Literature: Franken, H.J. and C.A. 1963: pI. 15a:left; Holland 1975: AVl.c.1; Engle 1979: type VIII:101. 4.11.25. A moulded head from Tel Deir-'Alla. The face is very flattened and peculiar, perhaps since the clay was not pushed hard enough into the mould. The ears are probably not shown. Reg. no. DA3041. Context: not yet published. Literature: Van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:104, no. 127.

4.111. Solid (1-12) and Hollow (13-17) Pillar Bodies 4.111.1. A solid body from Irbid. The hands are placed alongside the body. Context: a tomb, 13th-9th centuries BC. Literature: Dajani 1966:pls. 34:29, 38; Holland 1975: AX.f.2. 4.111.2. A solid body from Buseirah. The hands hold the breasts. The fingers are indicated. Context: locus B.1I1.2.7. Place: the British Museum. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 19. 4.11I.3. A solid body from Buseirah. It is crude and the gesture of the hands is not clear. Context: locus M.11.1.11. Place: ROM, Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: AXVII. b.1, fig. 71:3; Amr 1980: no. 105. 4.11I.4. A solid body from Kh. el-Medeineh. The breasts are small. One hand is placed on the stomach. Note: it may be a hollow body. Context: surface. Place: not specified. Literature: Glueck 1934: fig. 12:right; Holland 1975: AX.48. 4.11I.5. A solid body from Tawilan. It has an applied band. Note: Amr classified this as a human form, but it is more likely an animal figurine. Context: locus B.V.1.5. Place: Kerak (Moab). Literature: Amr 1980: no. 27. 4.11I.6. A solid body from Tell Deir 'Alia. The hands are placed beneath the breasts. Cream colored ware, black core. Context: DA.B.A.9.18. Place: Amman, J.14020. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 22. 4.11I.7. A solid body from Tell Deir 'Alia. The hands are placed beneath the breasts. Context: not stratified. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:4, AX.c.1; Amr 1980: no. 20. [Fig. 10:6].

4.11.26. A moulded head from Jalul (Moab). It has two long, thick side-locks, but is otherwise badly preserved. Size: 25x37 mm. Context: surface. Place: St. Andrews 76.415. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 75, pI. 27:4; Ibach 1978: pI. 18b: right.

4.11I.8. A solid body from Tell Deir 'Alia. The arms were uplifted or extended to the sides. Context: DAAR.102. Place: Leiden. Note: according to Amr, the body is hollow. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 10:6, AXI.9; Amr 1980: no. 13.

Note: Weinberg (1978) published a cultic assemblage from Edom (not found in a scientific excavation). It is now exhibited in the museum of the University of Missouri, Columbia. The photograph shows a head and an upper body of a female figurine, with moulded face and long side-locks. It seems that it was only put inside the shrine-model for demonstration, and not really found with the cultic assemblage (since there is nothing about this figurine in the text, Weinberg 1978:30).

4.111.9. A solid body from Tell Deir 'Alia. The hands descend and then bend forward (?). The breasts are small. Context: DAC.136. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:5, AX.c.2; Amr 1980: no. 21.

239

4.11I.10. A solid body from Tell Deir 'Alia. It is unclear if there are breasts. There is a band of black paint on the neck and on the shoulder. Context: area B, B.VI1.1.2. Place: Manchester. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 71:1, addenda, A.XI.8.a.

headdress, perhaps indicating that it is a god (it is not certain). It is similar to heads no. 4.IV.4, 4.IV.7 (below). Context: area A, Iron Age II (a temple?). Literature: Arav 1994:22 (Hebrew); Arav 1992:252ff, fig. 2; Daviau and Dion 1994:162, table 1:14. [Fig. 10:7].

4.111.11. A solid body from Kh. el-Balu'. The hands hold an object. Context: surface find. Literature: Glueck 1934:27, fig. 12:left; Holland 1975: AX.g.1.

4.1V.3. A moulded head from Kh. el-Medeineh. It has a very long chin (a male beard?). The right chick is scratched (cf. figurine 4.11.5 above). The side-locks reach the shoulders. There is a veil, or triangular curls (?) behind the side-locks. Context: surface find. Literature: Glueck 1933:11f, fig. 1; Glueck 1934:23, fig. 6a; Grohman 1962:418, fig. 62; Holland 1975: B.VI.32; Engle 1979: type VIII:108.

4.11I.12. A solid body from Kh. el-Balu'. There are no breasts. Context: ash fills of a kiln in area A1, Iron Age II period. Literature: Worschech 1989:118, pI. 8:2. 4.11I.13. A hollow body from the citadel of Amman. The right hand holds the breast, the left hand is placed on the abdomen. The fingers are indicated. Context: area A, square 4, locus 47 from level V (phase 1). 7th-6th centuries BC. Literature: Zayadine 1973:32, pI. 20:1. 4.11I.14. A hollow body from Tell er-Rumeit. The right hand is placed on the abdomen. The breasts are small. Context: not stratified. Place: Amman. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 15, pI. 4:2. 4.111.15. A hollow body from Tell el-Mazar. It is hand-made, but only one shoulder and part of one arm remained. Context: phase 21. Place: Irbid, Jordan University. Literature: Amr 1980:93 no. 99, pI. 17:1; Yassine 1988: pI. 13/4: upper row, center. 4.111.16. A hollow body from Tell el-Mazar. The hands hold the breasts (?), which have little perforations. Context: not stratified. Place: Irbid, University of Jordan. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 14, pI. 4:1. 4.11I.17. A hollow body from Tell Deir 'Alia. Part of the peg of the head is still attached to the body. The hands hold something (a dove or a drum?). Reg. no. DA2791. Literature: Van der-Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:104f, no. 129.

4.IV. Male Figurines

4.1V.4. A moulded head from Tell Jawa (near Tell el-Umeiri). It has a high "atef' headdress, cf. figurine 4.IV.2 above. Similar crowns appear on the heads of Ammonite limestone statues (representing kings or gods?). Daviau and Dion (1994) identify the figure as the god EI. Context: a large building from phase 6. Literature: Herr 1991:170f, pI. 2:2; Daviau and Dion 1994. 4.1V.5. A moulded head and upper body from Tell el-Mazar. The body is solid. There is a hand-made "hat" and an object on the back (quilt?). The ears are indicated. Height: 96 mm. Context: phase 2.2. Exact details were not published. Note: it may be the figurine of a rider. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 7, pI. 2:2a-b; Yassine 1988: pI. 13/4: upper row, left. 4.1V.6. A nearly whole figurine from Tell Deir-Alla. The head is pointed and has disk-shaped eyes. The ears are represented. There are remains of something applied to the back. The hands are extended forward. Reg. no. DA2560. Context: AD/DI7I12, level IV, possibly 7th century BC. Note: it may be a figurine of a rider. Place: Amman J.13736, now exhibited at Tell Deir 'Alia. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 5; Franken and Ibrahim 1978:71, pI. 39:1; Zayadine 1987: no. 158. 4.1V.7. A fragment of a male figurine from the citadel of Amman. It has a pointed "atef' crown, a beard and a mustache painted with black; cf. figurines nos. 2, 4 (above). Context: a floor of an Iron Age II room. Literature: Zayadine et. al. 1988:362; Daviau and Dion 1994:116, table 1:15.

4.V. Hand-made Figurines

4.1V.1. The so-called ''traveler'' from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. The body is hollow. The head is hand-made. There is a sort of a bag on the back, and the figure is wearing a long dress. Pritchard (1968) gave a full description of this figurine. Context: level III. Place: Amman J.13013. Literature: Pritchard 1968:26-29; Amr 1980:37-39, no. 1. 4.1V.2. A moulded head from Beit Saida (on the northeastern shore of the Sea of Galilee). It has a high "atef' 240

4.V.1. A whole figurine from Ein Genin, near Buseirah. The head and the body are hollow. The figure probably holds a drum. The facial features are crude and resemble some heads from Philistia. Context: found by locals. Place: Amman. Literature: Harding 1937: pis. 9:4; 10:5; Glueck 1945:151153, fig. 80; Holland 1975: B.II.b.1; Amr 1980: no. 32a. [Fig. 10:8].

4.V.2. A head from Buseirah. The eyes are made of applied disks and there is an applied band on the forehead. Note: according to Amr, the head is hollow, but perhaps he means the body (?). He thinks that they are male figurines. Context: not published. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 4:5, AI.i.14; Amr 1980: no. 2. [Fig. 10:9]. 4.V.3. A head from Buseirah. It is similar to figurine 2 above, but has the representations of ears. Context: B1.1.3, waste debris? Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 4:5, AXVll.a.1; Bennett 1972: no. 3, pI. 44b; Amr 1980: no. 8.

4.V.11. A head from Tell Deir-Alla. There is one row of large, rounded curls. The eyes are made of applied disks, and there is no representation of ears. Context: DAC.302. Place: Leiden. Note: it maya head of a plaque figurine. Literature: Franken 1960: pI. 14a; Holland 1975: AI. i.15, fig. 5:6; Amr 1980: no. 84. 4.V.12. A hand-made head from Tell Deir-Alla. The eyes are incised. Context: not published. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975:183, Al.j.3, fig. 5:5.

4.V.4. A head an upper body from Dibon. It is very crude. The pupils are marked by incisions. Little 'stump' hands. Context: an area of a Nabatean cemetery. Tushingham suggested that it came from an Iron Age tomb. Literature: Holland 1975: AI.L.2; Tushingham 1972: fig. 28:45, pI. 23:10.

4.V.13. A head from Tell Deir-Alla. The eyes and the mouth are incised. There is a tall hat (not applied). Context: DAAA.300. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: A.l.j.2, fig. 5:4; Amr 1980: no. 38.

4.V.5. A head from Kerak (Moab). It has an applied hairdress and incised details. Context: from an antiquity market. Place: Amman J.8995. Literature: Holland 1975: Al.j.6, pI. 2:2.

4.V.14. A head from Tell Deir-Alla. It is similar to no. 13 (above), but with applied disks. Context: not stratified. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: AI.j.1, fig. 5:3; Amr 1980: no. 39.

4.V.6. A head from Tell es-Saidiyeh. It has 'coffee bean' eyes and an incised mouth. It is pointed at the top. Reg. no. S.944. Context: silo 85 from level 4. Place: Amman, J.13024. Literature: Pritchard 1965:26-33; Pritchard 1985: fig. 169:3; Amr 1980: no. 6.

4.V.15. A whole figurine from Amman. It is hermaphrodite: a female body, pregnant, with a male sexual organ. The hands are placed on the abdomen. The breasts are small. There is a beard and a mustache, painted blac~. A crown of volutes towers above the head. Context: tomb "C". Place: Amman? Literature: Harding 1951:37, pI. 14; Dornemann 1983:144145; Homes-Frederiqc 1987:93, photograph 4; Amr 1980: no. 23a, pI. 4:3.

4.V.7. A hollow head from Tell er-Rumeit. It is flattened from above, with representation of ears and a headband. Context: phase 26. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 4, pI. 1:2. 4.V.8. A nearly whole figurine from Tell el-Umeiri. It probably represents a sitting woman, holding something close to the chest (the text mentions a child). Context: A7.K.41. Reg. no. 342. Place: Amman. Literature: Platt 1989:355, fig. 20:5. 4.V.9. A head and upper body part from Tell Deir-Alla. The eyes are hand-made, but other facial features are incised. The hands are outstretched to the sides or forward. Context: sub phase K9, DAID/224. Place: Leiden. Note: it maya figurine of a rider. Literature: Holland 1975: A.l.j.4, fig. 5:6; Amr 1980: no. 48. 4.V.10. A head with a peg from Tell Deir-Alla. The chin is pointed and there is a row of indentations on the forehead. Reg. no. 2742. Context: A7.8, a refuse pit from level III (Persian period?). Literature: Ibrahim and Van der-Kooij 1983: fig. 1:1; Van derKooij and Ibrahim 1989: no. 159.

241

4.VI. Hand-made Body Parts (not Pillar Bodies) 4.VI.1. A solid body from Buseirah. The hands were probably outstretched forward, but there is no indication of breasts. Holland classified the figure as a sitting one. Context: B.VI.4.2. Place: Oxford. Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.c.2, fig. 71:2; Amr 1980: no. 107. 4.VI.2. A solid body from Tell Deir Alia. There are legs and an applied indication of a female sexual organ. Context: DAA220. Place: Amman. Literature: Franken 1963: pI. 14b:right; Holland 1975: vol. 1:183, AXlIl.b.5, fig. 14:5; Amr 1980: no. 46. 4.VI.3. A solid body from Tell Deir Alia. There are legs and the body is similar to no. 2 (above), but incised marks appear on its neck, abdomen and pubic area.

Context: DAA119. Place: Amman, J.12653. Literature: Franken 1963: pI. 14b:left; AXlIl.a.1, fig. 14:1; Amr 1980: no. 10.

Holland

1975:

4.VJ.4. A solid body from Tell Deir Alia. It has twisted legs. The pubic area and a band on the abdomen are marked by indentations. Context: DAAA.304. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.a.2, fig. 14:2; Amr 1980: no. 37. 4.VJ.5. A solid body from Tell Deir Alia. There are legs, and the body was perhaps applied to a vessel. Context: DAD.415. Place: Amman, J.9748. Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.b.6, fig. 14:6; Amr 1980: no.

9. 4.VI.6. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. Context: surface find. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.b.4.

4.VJ.14. An arm from Tell Deir Alia. It was probably part of a large statue (cf. the figures from Qitmit and En Hazevah, Beck 1995; Cohen and YisraeI1995). Place: Amman, J.12692. Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.a.1, fig. 15:2; Amr 1980: no. 110. 4.VJ.15. An arm from Tell Deir Alia. It was probably part of a large statue (cf. no. 14 above). Place: Leiden? Literature: Holland 1975: AXVI.a2, fig. 15:3; Amr 1980: no. 110.

4.VII. Plaque Figurines General notes: for plaque figurines of drum playing women see App. 5.V.1 (below). Most of the figurines of type 4.VII have representations of ears and their side-locks reach the shoulders. 4.VII.1. A nearly whole figurine from Na'ur (?). There is a narrow ledge of clay around the figure. The left hand is placed on the breast, the right one on the side of the body. Context: not stratified. Place: Amman J.6053. Literature: Holland 1975: C.l.b.4, pI. 9:2.

4.VJ.7. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. Context: surface find. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.b.3; Amr 1980: no. 51.

4.VII.2. A nearly whole figurine from Amman (found in 1943). There is a narrow ledge of clay around the figure. The left hand is placed on the breast, the right one along the body. Context: not stratified. Place: Amman J.4973. Literature: Holland 1975: C.Vl.c.1, pI. 10:8.

4.VJ.8. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. Context: surface find. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.b.2; Amr 1980: no. 113? 4.VJ.9. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. Context: K.204. Place: Amman, J.13107. Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.b.1; Amr 1980: no. 112.

4.VII.3. A head and upper body part Tell al Mazar. The hands are placed on the chest. There are remains of black paint on the right shoulder. Context: surface find. Place: University of Jordan Museum. Note: the figure is probably holding a disk (cf. type 5.V.1 below), if it is the same as Yassine 1988: pI. 13/4: upper row, center. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 85, pI. 15:3.

4.VJ.10. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. Context: surface find. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.b.5; Amr 1980: no. 114. 4.VJ.11. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. Place: Amman. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 111. 4.VJ.12. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. Context: not published. Place: Amman, J.13756. Note: it may have been a leg of an animal figurine. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 108.

4.VII.4. A head and upper body part from Tell Deir Alia. There is a wide ledge of clay around the figure. The hands are placed beside the body. The figurine is very crude, and lacks ears. Reg. no. BB.211. Context: surface find. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IV.a.5, pI. 19:5; Amr 1980: no. 64.

4.VJ.13. A solid leg (?) from Tell Deir Alia. It may have been a head of an animal figurine. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: P.1I1.3, fig. 69:3; Amr 1980: no. 50.

4.VII.5. A head from Tell Deir Alia. It is similar to no. 4 (above), but it is hard to see the details. Place: Leiden. Note: I could not find this head in Amr (1980) thesis.

Literature: Holland 1975: C.IV.a.4, pI. 19:4. 4.VII.6. A head from Tell Deir Alia. Reg. no. DAlD.241. Context: sub phase K. Place: Amman, J.12719. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.6, fig. 20:4; Amr 1980: no. 61.

4.VIII.3. A head and upper body from Buseirah. Context: B.VII.1.2. Place: Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: C.II. b.4b, addenda, fig. 71:5; Amr 1980: no. 72.

4.VII.7. A head from Tell Deir Alia. Height 62 mm. Context: not stratified. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.7, fig. 20:5; Amr 1980: no. 54. 4.VII.8. A head from Tell Deir Alia. Reg. no. DA1073. Context: surface find. Place: Amman, J.9747. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IXc.3, pI. 11:1; Van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:104, no. 124.

4.VIII.4. A middle body part from Buseirah. There are remains of red slip. Context: B.VII.1.2. Place: Dublin, Trinity college. Literature: Holland 1975: C.II.b.4c, addenda, fig. 71:6; Amr 1980: no. 17. 4.VIII.5. A nearly whole body from Buseirah. Context: B.II.7.4. Place: Kerak. Literature: Holland 1975: C.II.b.4a, addenda, fig. 71:4; Amr 1980: no. 25.

4.VII.9. A head from Tell Deir Alia. Reg. no. DA3040. It was made in the same mould as head no. 8 (above). Context: 7th-6th centuries BC. Place: Amman J.9747. Literature: Van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:104, no. 125. 4.VII.10. A head and an upper body part from Tell esSaidiyeh. It is similar to figurine no. 3 (above). Reg. no. S.773. Context: surface find. Place: Amman, J.13020. Literature: Pritchard 1985: fig. 169:5; Amr 1980: no. 40. 4.VII.11. A head of an unknown origin. It is not clear whether it belonged to a plaque-figurine or to a pillar-figurine. Place: Amman, J.11146. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 60, pI. 12:2

4.VIII. Plaque Figurines of Pregnant Women in Deep Moulding General notes: Most of these figurines were found in Buseirah. They depict a naked, pregnant woman with an indication of the pubic area. The hands hold the breasts (with a separation of the thumb from the other fingers). Most of these figurines have a square hairdress, reaching the shoulders below. The ears are not marked. Nos. 10-15 are heads, which may have belonged to different types of bodies. No. 16 is exceptional.

4.VIII.6. A middle body part from Buseirah. There are remains of red paint. Context: B.VII.4.7. Place: Kerak. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 18. 4.VIII.7. A nearly whole body from Buseirah. Context: B.VI.3.4. Place: The British Museum. Literature: Holland 1975: C.ll.b.4d, addenda, fig. 71:7; Amr 1980: no. 26. 4.VIII.8. A body part with legs from Tell Deir Alia. There is no indication of the sex. The protrusions at the sides of the body suggest that the hands were placed along the body. Context: DAD.135. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: C.XI.e.1, fig. 20: 8; Amr 1980: no. 93. 4.VIII.9. A middle body part from Buseirah. There are remains of the lower side-locks above the chest. The hands hold the breasts. There are some remains of slip. Context: B.1.2.2, debris without a clear dating. Place: Oxford. Literature: Bennett 1972:430, pI. 44b; Bennett 1973: pI. 8a: upper right; Holland 1975: C.II.b.4, fig. 19:2, pI. 9:3; Amr 1980: no. 36.

4.VIII.1. A nearly whole figurine from Buseirah. There are remains of black paint. Context: B.11.7.4. Place: Kerak. Literature: Holland 1975: C.ll.b.4e, addenda, fig. 72:1; Amr 1980: no. 23. [Fig. 10:10]. 4.VIII.2. A head and upper body from Buseirah. There are remains of burning and encrustation of lime.

242

Context: not published. Place: Kerak. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 71.

4.VIII.10. A head from Buseirah. Context: B.VI.10.2. Place: Toronto, ROM. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 66. 4.VIII.11. A head from Buseirah. Context: B.VI.2.5. Place: St. Andrews.

243

Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.5c, addenda, fig. 72:4; Amr 1980: no. 53.

Place: Amman, J.13786. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 47.

4.VIII.12. A head from Buseirah. Context: B.1I1.2.12. Place: Emory. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.5, fig. 20:3; Amr 1980: no. 67.

4.1X.4. A whole figurine from Pella. It depicts a dressed woman holding a child. The child's sucks from her breast. The woman has long side-locks of hair. Context: phase BI, locus XXXII A 7. 13, 9th century BC (?). Literature: Potts 1988:141f, pl. 22:3.

4.VIII.13. A head from Buseirah. Context: B.1I1.2.6. Place: Manchester. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.3, fig. 20:1; Amr 1980: no. 63. 4.VIII.14. A head from Buseirah. Context: B.1I1.2.12. Place: Emory. Note: I could not locate it in the Amr's thesis. It is not identical to head no. 12 above. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.4, fig. 20:2. 4.VIII.15. A head from Buseirah. It is exceptional - rounded and not square. It may have been part of a different type of figurine. Context: AI.10.1. Place: Manchester. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.5b, addenda, fig. 72:3; Amr 1980: no. 68. 4.VIII.16. A head from Buseirah. According to the drawing, it looks like a head of a pillar figurine, with a peg, short sidelocks and large ears. Still, I followed Holland's classification, since he probably saw the figurine itself. Context: B.II. Place: Oxford. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.5a, addenda, fig. 72:2; Amr 1980: no. 65.

4.X. Leg Fragments of Plaque Figurines 4.X.1. Leg fragment from Buseirah. Probably of type 4.VIII. The pubic area is represented. Context: B.11.5.6. Place: British Museum. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 43. 4.X.2. Leg fragment from Buseirah. Probably of type 4.VIII. The pubic area is represented. Context: B.11.5.6. Place: Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: C.XlIl.a.2e, fig. 72:5; Amr 1980: no. 96. 4.X.3. Leg fragment from Sahab. The fingers of the feet are incised. Context: level 4. Place: Amman. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 49, pI. 10:1.

4.X.8. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. It may have belonged to type 4.VIIi. The pubic area is represented and the belly is protruding. Context: not published. Place: Leiden. Note: according to Amr it is in Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: C.Xl.d.2, fig. 20:6; Amr 1980: no. 89?

remained. Context: DAEE.400. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: C.XlIl.a.3, fig. 20:9; Amr 1980: no. 100.

4.XI. Addenda

4.X.9. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. The pubic area is represented and there are rings on the ankles. Context: DAB.218, sub phase 1. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: C.XIII. a.5, fig. 20: 11; Amr 1980: no. 91.

4.XI.1. A head from Jalul. Only a photograph was published. It may be a figurine already mentioned by Amr (but it is not 4.11.26 above). Literature: Ibach 1978: pI. 18b:left.

4.X.10. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. There pubic area is represented and there are rings on the ankles. Context: DAAA.118. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: C.XlIl.a.6, fig. 20:12; Amr 1980: no. 92.

4.X.2-7. A group of figurines from Tell el-Mazar. They belong to various types, but the photograph does not allow clear classification, and it is best to wait for further publication. Literature: Yassine 1988: pI. 13/1, upper row: center and right; lower row: left and right; pI. 13/3, upper row:left; pI. 1314: lower row:left.

4.X.11. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. There are rings on the ankles. Context: surface find. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: C.xlll.a.4, fig. 20:10; Amr 1980: no. 94.

4.XI.8. A body from Tell es-Saidiyeh. It is female, with incised pubic hair, incised decoration on the hips and a sidelock or pendant on the neck (an edge of it remained on the body). Context: probe area 1, phase 1. Place: Amman. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 45.

4.X.12. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. Only the feet

4.X.4. Leg fragment from the citadel of Amman. The pubic area is represented. Context: SD.35, Iron Age I period? Place: Amman. Literature: Zayadine 1973:32, pI. 20:2; Holland 1975: OXl.d.}, fig. 72:5; Amr 1980: no. 44, pI. 9:2.

4.IX. Unique Plaque Figurines 4.1X.1. A middle body part from Tell Deir Alia. It depicts a woman holding a child. The child's hands are place on the woman's breasts. Context: not published. Literature: Franken 1960: pI. 13b; Franken H.J. and CA 1963: pI. 17b; Holland 1975: C.xIV.b.1, fig. 20:14; Beck 1991: fig. 11:right. 4.IX.2. A hand-made (?) body part from Tell Deir Alia. It depicts a dressed woman, probably pregnant. The hands lie beside the body and carry bracelets. Reg. no. DA2585. Context: DAD.C.7.8. Place: Amman, J.13755. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 41; Van der-Kooij and Ibrahim 1989: no. 152. 4.1X.3. A body part from Tell es-Saidiyeh. It probably depicts a woman holding a child. The pubic hair is marked. Context: not stratified.

244

4.X.5. Leg fragment from Tell el-Mazar. Context: phase 3. Place: University of Jordan. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 95; Yassine 1988: pI. 13/3: upper row, 3rd from the left. 4.X.6. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. The pubic area is represented and there are bracelets on the arms. Context: DAGG.204. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IV.b2, fig. 19:6; Amr 1980: no. 42. 4.X.7. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. It may have belonged to type 4.VIII. The pubic area is represented. Context: surface find. Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: C.Xl.d.3, fig. 20:7; Amr 1980: no. 90.

245

Appendix 5: Other Figurines Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.1. Other Anthropomorphic Figurines from Judah

5.1.2.7. Hollow body from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1983). Creamy ware, covered with white-wash. only one breast and one arm remained. The body is wheel-made (?). There is a band of red paint on the chest. Reg. no. E3/15924. Place: Terra santa, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.1.1: Figurines with moulded Face and Hollow, Wheel-made Body (type Be) These figurines are included in App. 1-2: nos. 78, 183 [cf. fig. 4:5). For other figurines of this type, from unknown origins, see App. 3: nos. 16, 87.

5.1.2: Hollow Body Parts 5.1.2.1. An upper body part from Jerusalem. The hands are placed under the breasts (the right arm is broken). Context: unknown. Literature: Vincent 1911: pI. 16:1; Pilz 1924: Allla.37; Holland 1975: B.VII.11? 5.1.2.2. An upper body part from Jerusalem. There are remains of white-wash. The hands are placed beneath the breasts (the right arm is broken). Reg. no. 3341. Context: locus A840.14a. Place: Dublin, museum no. WM.655. Literature: Holland 1975: B.VII.7, fig. 17:5. 5.1.2.3. A hollow body from Jerusalem. The hands were placed beneath the breasts (now both broken). Reg. no. C.775. Context: cave 1. Place: Birmingham A156.1969. Literature: Holland 1975: B.VI1.8, fig. 17:6, pI. 8:10; Holland 1977: fig. 7:8.

5.1.2.8. Hollow body from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1982). There are remains of white-wash and a red band of paint on the neck. The hands are placed under the breasts. The body is probably wheel-made. Part of the peg of the head is visible inside the hollow body. Height: 80 mm. Reg. no. E1/10126. Place: Terra santa, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.1.3: Female Drum Players These figurines are already included in App. 1-2: nos. 45, 118,359 (above). Body fragments which probably belong to the same type are App. 1-2: nos. 179, 360, 361; perhaps also 280, 312, 424 [fig. 4:3-4). Add one figurine from the City of David, App. 2: nos. 664.

5.1.4: Miscellaneous Heads (nos. 1-12 are moulded, nos. 13-24 are hand-made) 5.1.4.1. A moulded head from Beth Shemesh. The face is crude. A band of curls, shaped as rings, appears above the forehead. The head is pointed. Reg. no. 33-4-515. Context: silo inside room 452, level III or II. Note: Engle classified this head as his "foreign" type, but it is different than all his other "foreign" heads. Literature: AS III: pI. 22:6.1, fig. 4; AS IV: pI. 51:20; Holland 1975: All.e.2; Engle 1979: type VIII:201.

5.1.2.4. A hollow body from Jerusalem. There are remains of white-wash. The hands were placed beneath the breasts (now both broken). Reg. no. C.322. Context: cave 1. Place: Romema, IAA 68-788. Literature: Holland 1975: B.V11.9, fig. 18:1, pI. 8:11; Holland 1977: fig. 7:9.

5.1.4.2. A moulded head from Beth Shemesh. Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. Reg. no. 883. Context: debris near the north-western cemetry. Literature: AS 11:24; Holland 1975: P.l.a.7.

5.1.2.5. Lower body part from Jerusalem. The base is missing. Reg. no. C.258. Context: cave 1. Place: Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: B.VII.10, fig. 18:2; holland 1977:140.

5.1.4.3. A moulded head from Jerusalem. Only the face survived, thus exact classification is impossible. Reg. no. 378. Context: locus A107.6. Place: Birmingham, 1962.a.345. Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.r.3.

5.1.2.6. An upper body part from Tel Beer Sheba. The hands are placed on the chest. The breasts are small and not separated. The depression for a peg remained at the upper end of the body. Reg. no. 7642/1. Context: locus 772, level IV, 9th (?) century BC. Place: Tel Aviv.

5.1.4.4. A moulded head from Jerusalem. It has a peg. The drawing is not very clear, thus it is hard to classify this head.

246

Note: it may be a figurine from a later period than the Iron Age. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 32:3; Holland 1975: AXll.n.1.

Context: not yet published. Place: Birmingham. Note: I could not locate this head there. Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.r.2. 5.1.4.5. A moulded head from Jerusalem. It has a very high headdress and probably side-locks. Context: not yet published. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: AXII.L.1, fig. 13:5, pI. 5:3. 5.1.4.6. A moulded head from Jerusalem. There are remains of white-wash and red paint. Holland called the hair "pompadour" dress. The drawing is not very clear. Context: not yet published. Place: probably at Romema, IAA no. 68-809, reg. no. 6671, now in an exhibition elsewhere. Literature: Holland 1975: A.XII.g.1, fig. 13:2. 5.1.4.7. A moulded head from Jerusalem. The face is elegant and well preserved. There are large ears. The head is flattened from above. Context: under the floor of a Byzantine building. Note: Holland classified two photographs of this head as separate heads. Literature: Duncan 1925: fig. 19; Macalister and Duncan AVl.a; 1926:187, fig. 198:upper; Holland 1975: AIV.e Engle 1979: type VII:40.

=

5.1.4.8. A moulded head from Jerusalem. It is small and the face is fine and well preserved. There is a sort of a turban above the forehead, without any curls. Context: unknown. Note: The head is not similar to the JPF, and may belong to a later period. Literature: Duncan 1925: fig. 18:center; Macalister and Duncan 1926:187, fig. 197. 5.1.4.9. A moulded head from Lachish. The face is elegant and well preserved. There is a hairdress and the remains of white-wash and red paint. Context: locus 1008, probably a court in a building. Level III (?), 8th century BC. Note: Holland classified this head as type B, but this is not very clear. According to the report it is a head of a male figurine (Lachish 111:374). Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:10; Holland 1975: B.VI.31. 5.1.4.10. A moulded head from Lachish. The face is surrounded with a simple hair or hairdress and there are large ears. Context: not clear. Note: Holland classified this head as type B, but it different from the other heads of this type. According to the report it is a head of a male. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:15; Holland 1975: B.VI.30.

5.1.4.12. A moulded head from Tell en-Nasbeh. It has large ears and a simple hairdress. Context: room 445, probably a large court with installations and pits, in a residential area. Place: Rockefeller 35.3091. Literature: TN I: pI. 85:29; Holland 1975: AXll.r.7.

5.1.4.13. A hand-made head from Tel Beer Sheba. It is pointed at the back. The nose is applied and the eyes are incised. There is an incised line on the neck. Reg. no. 15455/2. Context: locus 1789, level IV. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.4.14. A hand-made head from Jerusalem. It is fairly similar to the heads of the JPF, but has an elongated chin or beard. The eyes are applied and the head is perforated. Context: unknown. Literature: Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: pI. 16:30; Holland 1975: AI.i.22, fig. 4:8, pI. 2:1. 5.1.4.15. A hand-made head from Jerusalem. It is fairly similar to the heads of the JPF, but has an elongated chin or beard. The eyes are applied and the head is perforated. Context: unknown. Literature: Holland 1975: AI.i.21, fig. 4:7, pI. 1:12. 5.1.4.16. A hand-made head from Jerusalem. It is pinched by hand, but the mouth, nostrils and eyebrows are incised. The eyes are made of applied disks. Reg. no. 6718. Context: L.857.10, a late fill. Place: Romema, IAA. no. 68-804. Literature: Holland 1975: A.1.i.23, fig. 4:9; Jerusalem I: fig. 12:11.

5.1.4.17. A hand-made head from Jerusalem. A small part of the chest is also preserved. The figure holds an object in one hand, but it is placed on the figure's back. The object is decorated with check patterns of red and black (according to the card at Romema, these are brown and white). Reg. no. 7056. Context: not published, possibly AA.4.8. Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-802. Literature: Holland 1975: Al.h.1, fig. 4:4, pI. 1:10. 5.1.4.18. A hand-made head from Jerusalem. The eyes are incised. There is a long chin (beard?) and a kind of a hairdress around the face. Reg. no. 7052. Context: AA.101.15. Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-801. Note: this head may belong to the Persian period; in any case, it is not similar to the JPF. Literature: Holland 1975: A.l.j.5, fig. 5:7.

5.1.4.11. A moulded head and upper body from Lachish. The figure holds a disk of clay with its right hand. There is a kind of a hairdress and side-locks. The body is not a pillar body. Context: locus 500, without clear context.

247

.J

5.1.4.19. A hand-made head and upper body part from Tell en-Nasbeh. According to the report it is a crude figure, possibly representing a bird. According to Zorn, it is a female figure with its hands holding its breasts. Reg. no. M.2680. Context: room 551, square AF/17. Place: Rockefeller, 35.3162. Literature: TN i: pl. 86:23. 5.1.4.20. A hand-made head from Jericho. It has one row of curls, or hairdress, above the forehead, and triangular sidelocks (cf. figurines 5.111.8.2-3 above, but they are not really similar to this head). Context: area H, unstratified. Literature: Holland 1975: AXIL f.1, fig. 13:1; Jericho IV:555, fig. 224:5. 5.1.4.21. A hand-made head from Jericho. It is crudly shaped. Reg. no. 1318. Context: trench II, unstratified. Literature: Jericho IV:555, fig. 223:7. 5.1.4.22. A hand-made head from Abu Ghosh. It has large ears, applied disk-eyes and an applied and incised mouth. It resembles the coastal heads of type 5.IV.3. Context: a cave? Literature: Vincent 1907: fig. 100; RB 1906:286; Holland 1975: B.III.b.2.

5.1.4.23. A hand-made head from Kh. Rabud. The body is very thin and solid. The eyes are made of applied disks. It may have been a rider (?). Literature: Kochavi 1974: n.6, fig. 8:12. 5.1.4.24. A hand-made head from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1981). It is solid and has "ring" eyes with applied pupils (only one survived). There is an incised ridge above the forehead, with a line of round impressed (reed?) marks beneath it. The mouth is incised. Reg. no. G.1138. Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.1.5: Miscellaneous Body Parts 5.1.5.1. A solid body from Bethel. At least one arm is uplifted (the second is missing). The figure may have held something. Reg. no. 328. Context: locus 44, a domestic building in area I, Iron Age I period. Literature: Kelso 1968:84, 116, pI. 45:14; Holland 1975: AX.g.2. 5.1.5.2. A solid body from Bethel. It has a protrusion, but the photograph is not very clear. Reg. no. 560. Context: area I, perhaps Iron Age I period. Literature: Kelso 1968:84, 116, pI. 45:13; Holland 1975: AXI.1.

248

5.1.5.3. A solid body from Beth Shemesh. There is no representation of breasts, and the figure holds an object close to its body. Context: level III, season 1931, exact context unknown. Place: Rockefeller i.10558 (or P.1092?). Literature: not yet published, but may be Holland 1975: P.III.1. 5.1.5.4. A solid body from Jerusalem. The hands were probably placed on the chest. The drawing of Holland is "on the side", as if it is an animal's body. Context: unknown. Literature: Holland 1975: P.1I1.12, fig. 69:9, pI. 40:5. 5.1.5.5. A solid body from Jerusalem. There are some remains of white-wash. The hands are probably uplifted. Context: not published. Literature: Holland 1975: AXI.8, fig. 10:1O. 5.1.5.6. A solid female body from Jerusalem. There are breasts and legs (now broken). Context: not published. Place: St. Andrews. Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.a.2, fig. 14:8. 5.1.5.7. A solid body from Jerusalem. It is not a pillar body. The photograph is not very clear. Context: not published. Place: Sydney. Literature: Holland 1975: AXIII.c.5, pI. 6:4. 5.1.5.8. A solid body from Jerusalem. The base is concave and there are remains of White-wash, but the exact nature of this fragment is not clear. Cotext: not published. Place: St. Andrews. Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.16, fig. 10:8. 5.1.5.9. A solid body from Lachish. It is very crude, with arms extended sideways and small breasts. The fingers are indicated and the belly is rounded (indicating pregnancy?). Context: locus 56, level VI, the end of the Late Bronze age period (?). Literature: Lachish V: pI. 21:4, pI. 33:1. 5.1.5.10. A solid body from Tell Beit Mirsim. The arms are placed beside the body. There is probably an indication of a dress with horizontal lines. Reg. no. SN.1226. Context: square SE13, level A Place: Rockefeller, i.8945. Literature: TBM III: pI. 29:11, pI. 55:12; Holland 1975: AX1.49. 5.1.5.11. A solid body from Tel Masos. It is solid, polished and painted black. According to the report it has horns. Reg. no. 3594/1. Context: room 775, 7th century BC. Literature: Masos I: pI. 110:1. 5.1.5.12. A solid body from Tel Beer Sheba. There are female breasts and a protruding belly. Reg. no. 8409/1.

Context: locus 881, levels III-II? Place: Romema, IAA 1993-20. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.5.13. A solid body from Tel Beer Sheba. It is a pillar body, but an exceptional one, because it has a kind of a protruding disk in its middle (not applied). Reg. no. 15126/1. Context: casemate room 1684, the area of the storehouses of level II, 8th century BC. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.5.14. A solid body from Tel Beer Sheba. It may be a female pillar body with exceptional protrusions, or the body of an animal with broken hind legs and a tail. Reg. no. 7671/1. Context: locus 818, the Hellenistic period. Place: Tel Aviv. Note: it may be a figurine from a later period; the clay is not typical to the Iron Age figurines. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.5.15. A solid body from Arad. There is a strange protrusion, of an unclear nature. The fragment is red-slipped. Reg. no. C.183/1. Context: not published. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.5.16. A solid body from Tel Harasim. The hands are placed on the belly. It is described as a naked female in the preliminary report, but the drwaing has no indications of breasts. It is white-washed. Reg. no. 5044. Context: locus 609, levels III, 7th century BC or later. Place: with the excavation team. Literature: Giveon 1994: fig. 14:14.

Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.5.20. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1982). It is not a pillar body. There are small female breasts. The arms are uplifted (?) - now broken. Reg. no. 0/12762. Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.5.21. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1980). It is small and nearly whole, but too small to be a JPF. There are a few remains of white-wash, but no visible breasts. Height 48 mm. Reg. no. G/8228. Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem. Note: it may be a rider's body. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.5.22. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1978). It is a pillar body, but exceptional; it has no breasts and the arms are plced on the belly. Reg. no. E/2779. Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.5.23. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1978). It is a pillar body, but exceptional; it has no breasts and the arms are extended to the sides (now broken). Reg. no. E/2711. Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.5.24. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1984). The breasts are not indicated. One arm is placed on the chest, the other lies low on the body. The base is concave. Reg. no. E1/19593. Height: 65 mm. Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.1.5.17. A solid body from Tel Harasim. The hands are broken. It is described as a naked female in the preliminary report. There are marks of breakage on the chest. Reg. no. 5075. Context: locus 611, levels III, 7th century BC or later. Note: it may have been a rider's body. Place: with the excavation team. Literature: Giveon 1994: fig. 14:13.

5.1.6: Miscellaneous Fragments (not Classified)

5.1.5.18. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1982). There are no signs of breasts. One arm is placed horizontally on the body. Reg. no. 0/12754. Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.1.6.1. A fragment from Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. Context: alley, or room 379, cf. figurine no. 6 below. Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.l.a.6.

5.1.5.19. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1983). There are no signs of breasts. One arm is placed diagonally across the body. Reg. no. E3/15570. Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.

5.1.6.2. A fragment from Beth Shemesh. Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. Context: debris near the west-northern cemetry. Literature: AS 11:19; Holland 1975: P.l.a.1. 5.1.6.3. A fragment from Beth Shemesh (season 1929). Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. It is

249

described as having incisions on the neck, breasts and body. Reg. no. 881. Context: debris near the north-western cemetry. Literature: AS 11:24; Holland 1975: P.l.a.3. 5.1.6.4. A fragment from Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. Reg. no. 33-4-438. Context: room 388 in a building of level II, 8th century BC at the latest. Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.l.a.4. 5.1.6.5. A fragment from Beth Shemesh (season 1933). Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. Reg. no. 33-4-184. Context: alley 379, cf. figurine no. 1 above. Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.l.a.5. 5.1.6.6. A fragment from Tel Ira. It may be a part of a vessel, with breasts modelled on the outside. There are remains of white-wash and brown slip. Reg. no. 3536/1. Context: locus 402-6. Note: a very similar fragment, at least in shape, is known from Buseirah (Holland 1975: P.lIl.a; Amr 1980: no. 28). Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of Y. Beit Arieh. 5.1.6.7. A fragment from Bethel (season 1934). It was defined in the report as a male, hollow head. Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. Context: south of a probing pit, Iron Age II. Exact locus not defined. Literature: Kelso 1968:83, no. 96; Holland 1975: P.l.a.1. 5.1.6.8. A small head from the City of David, Jerusalem. (season 1979). It is not a head of a JPF. Reg. no. E/5631. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1.6.9. A small head from the City of David, Jerusalem. (season 1982). It is not a head of a JPF. Reg. no. E1/1073. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.

5.11. Other Related Figurines (Mainly from Judah) 5.11.1: Lamp-Figurines with Pillar Bodies 5.11.1.1. A whole figurine from Ein Genin (near Buseirah). It carries a lamp on the head and holds a disk with both hands. The eyes and the nose are applied and the nostrils are impressed. The body is hollow. The elongated face creates the impression of a male (but this feature is found in many Transjordanian figurines, including female ones). Context: surface find. Place: Amman, J.14053. Literature: Harding 1937: pI. 9:1-2; Glueck 1945:150f, fig. 80:left; Holland 1975: K.ll.b.2; Isserlin 1976:139; Amr 1980: no. 31a, pI. 5:2a, 6.

250

5.11.1.2. A head from Ein Genin (near Buseirah). It is similar to figurine no. 1 (above). Context: surface find. Literature: Harding 1937: pI. 10:6-7; Glueck 1945:150f, fig. 80:center; Holland 1975: K.ll.b.3; Isserlin 1976:139; HomesFredericq 1987:39. 5.11.1.3. A head from Beth Shemesh. It carries a lamp. There are large ears and appliedlincised details. Reg. no. NS.208. Context: "square" V41, season 1931, without an exact locus. Place: Rockefeller i.10551. Literature: AS II: pI. 45:20; Glueck 1945: fig. 81:center. 5.11.1.4. A whole figurine from Tel Beit Mirsim. It has a solid, pillar body and a lamp above the head. There are three small protrusions under the lamp. Reg. no. SN.656. Context and date: square 33, a cistern under room 15 (in the buildings between the street and the city wall). Level A, 8th century BC. Literature: TBM III: pI. 32:2, pI. 57b:2. [Fig. 8:1].

5.11.2: Bird Figurines with Pillar Bases 5.11.2.1. A body from Gezer. The head is missing. Context: grave 28, Iron Age II (Gezer 1:311f). Literature: Gezer III: pI. 73:14; Holland 1975: El.a.1. 5.11.2.2. A body from Gezer. The drawing indicates a pillar body, but the shape of the rest is not clear. There is a broken part in the middle of the body, which is hard to explain as part of a bird figurine. Context: not published. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 126: 10; Holland 1975: E.1. b.1. 5.11.2.3. A solid body from Hazor. The tail, wings and head are missing. There may have been a pillar base, but this is not certain. Reg. no. A.3045. Context: locus 60, the slope outside the buildings of area A, without clear stratification. Note: I have included this fragment for reasons of doubt, but it is probably different from the Judean bird figurines. Literature: Hazor I III: pI. LXVI:33; Holland 1975: E.l.a.2. 5.11.2.4. A body from Jerusalem. The head and the wings are missing. Context: wash at the entrance to cave 1, or square 26 near this cave (Jerusalem 11:128). Place: discarded after excavation. ' Note: a whole figurine is restored from fragments in the final report (Jerusalem II: fig. 7-4), but a separate drawing of each fragment is not given. According to the report, 7 other figurines of this type were found in the cave or nearby. It seems these are already included in the work of Holland (in his type E1, figurines no. 4-14 below). Literature: Holland 1975: El.a.4, fig. 36:2. 5.11.2.5. A base and a beginning of the body from Jerusalem. Context: not published. Place: Sydney. Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.a.5, pI. 18:2.

5.11.2.6. A fragment from Jerusalem. Either a drawing or photograph was not published. Context: not published. Place: Leeds. Literature: Holland 1975: El.a.6.

Note: I have included this figurine, but it is exceptional in comparison to the other figurines from Judah (the base and the applied eyes). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Lachish excavation team.

5.11.2.7. A base and a beginning of the body from Jerusalem. Context: not published. Place: Oxford. Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.a.7, pI. 18:3, fig. 36:3.

5.11.2.17. A base and lower body from Tel en-Nasbeh. Reg. no. M.465. Context: cistern 159, 8th-7th centuries BC. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 47:18, pI. 90:6; Holland 1975: E.l.b.4.

5.11.2.8. A base and a beginning of the body from Jerusalem. Context: not published. Place: Birmingham. Literature: Holland 1975: El.a.8, fig. 36:4.

5.11.2.18. A base and lower body from Tel en-Nasbeh. Reg. no. M.381. Context: cistern 143. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 90:3; Holland 1975: E.l.a.16.

5.11.2.9. A nearly whole figurine from Jerusalem, including the head. Context: not published. Place: Romema. Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.a.9, fig. 36:5.

5.11.2.19. A base and lower body from Tel en-Nasbeh. The published drawing is very unclear. Context: room 556, square AEl18, level II. It is a small room of unknown nature (TN 1:182). Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 90:4; Holland 1975: E.l.a.17.

5.11.2.10. A base and a beginning of the body from Jerusalem. Context: not published. Place: discarded after excavation. Literature: Holland 1975: El.a.10, pI. 18:4, fig. 36:6.

5.11.2.20. A base and lower body from Tel en-Nasbeh. Reg. no. x29. Context: room 360. Note: Holland classified figurines 5.11.2.20-21 as birds on pillar bases, but the report describes them as stands (with horns?; TN 1:241, 236n). There is no reference to them in the section on bird-figurines in appendix A of the report. Even if Holland is wrong, the report mentions at least 6 figurines of birds on pillar bases (see note in figurine no. 22 below). Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 84:17; Holland 1975: E.l.a.18.

5.11.2.11. A nearly whole body from Jerusalem. Context: not published. Place: Toronto. Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.a.11, fig. 36:7. 5.11.2.12. A nearly whole body from Jerusalem. Context: not published. Place: Louisville, Southern Baptist Seminary. Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.a.12, fig. 36:8. 5.11.2.13. A whole figurine from Jerusalem. It has applied, disk shaped eyes. The pupils are shown as small indentations. There is a band on the neck with indented decorations. Context: not published. Literature: Holland 1975: E.1. a.12a, addenda, pI. 46: 8.

5.11.2.21. A base and lower body from Tel en-Nasbeh. Reg. no. x9. Context: room 349 (cf. note to figurine no. 20 above). Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN I: pI. 84:18; Holland 1975: E.l.a.19.

5.11.2.14. A base and lower body from Jerusalem. Context: not published. Place: Birmingham. Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.b.2, fig. 37:1, pI. 18:5.

5.11.2.22. A base of a bird figurine from Tel en-Nasbeh. Note: according to appendix A (TN 1:273, #7), 14 bird figurines were found in the excavations. Of these, 9 were published with drawings or photographs (TN I: pI. 90:1-9). The report mentioned 9 body fragments (within the 14), of which at least 6 fragments had pillar bases. I have therefore added a sixth fragment here, but further details are not known. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:273.

5.11.2.15. A whole figurine from Lachish. The wings are spread. Reg. no. 1268. Context and date: tomb 1002, 8th century BC. Place: Rockefeller, 34.125. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 28:12; Holland 1975: E.l.a.? [Fig. 8:2].

5.11.2.23. A nearly whole figurine from Tel es-Safi. One wing is broken. The eyes are applied. Context: not published. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: 137, fig. 50; Holland

5.11.2.16. A whole figurine from Lachish. It has a small, flattened base. The wings are spread sideways and backwards. There are applied disk-eyes. Reg. no. 2020. Context and date: locus 367, level III? Place: Tel Aviv.

1975: E.l.a.20.

251

5.11.2.24. A base and body from Tel Beer Sheba. It has a high neck, but the head is missing as well as the tail. Reg. no. 3962/1. Context: not published. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.11.3: Male Figurines Often, figurines are defined as male without sufficient evidence, though there are many cases where exact definitions of sex are impossible. 5.11.3.1. A hand-made head from the suq at Beer Sheba, from excavations in 1965. It has a kind of a beard (?). The eyes are made as shallow depressions. Reg. no. 119/1. Context and date: locus 122?, 10th-9th centuries BC. Place: Romema, IAA no. 1993-432 (probably former no. 705432). It is currently in an exhibition. Literature: BS 1:117, pI. 47:4, pI. 79:32. [Fig. 8:3].

5.11.2.25. A base and lower body from Tel Beer Sheba. The head and the tail are missing. Reg. no. 5828/1. Context: locus 407. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.11.2.26. A fragment from Tel Beer Sheba. It is not certain if there is a pillar base. Reg. no. 16404/1. Context: locus 1841, in bUilding 32 of level II. Place: Tel Aviv.

5.11.3.2. A hand-made head from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has a kind of a beard (?) and a band on the forehead. Reg. no. M.885. Context: cistern 216 in square P/17, 8th-7th centuries BC. Place: Berkeley? Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:6; Holland 1975: Al.b.8.

Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.11.3.3. A hand-made head from Jerusalem (excavations of A Mazar). It has a hat, applied ears, and a beard (?). It is covered with white-wash and red paint. Reg. no. 194. Context: locus 6015, either a tomb or a refuse dump. Iron Age II period. Note: it may have been the head of a rider figurine. Literature: Nadelman 1989:123ff, pI. 29:9.

5.11.2.27. A base and part of the body from Tel Beit Mirsim. Reg. no. SN.669. Context: cistern under building 15 in square 33. Level A Literature: TBM III: pI. 32:3, pI. 57b:3. 5.11.2.28. A whole figurine from the Jewish Quarter, Jerusalem. Only a photograph was published. Literature: Geva, EAEHL New II (Hebrew):619, upper right.

5.11.3.4. A hand-made head from the City of David, Jerusalem (season 1980). It is pointed and the eyes are pinched by hand. There are white-wash, a beard and tiny ears. It may have been the head of a rider (?). Height: 30 mm. Reg. no. E1/8494. Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.11.2.29. A figurine from Jerusalem (the excavations of M. Broshi at the western wall). Literature: Barkay 1985: 208 list, and courtesy of G. Barkay. 5.11.2.30-33. Bird figurines (or fragments) from Jerusalem. They were found in the excavations of M. Broshi at the western wall. For details cf. figurine no. 29 above. 5.11.2.34. A whole, solid figurine from an unknown origin. Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa, no. H-630 (in the eXhibition). Height 68 mm. Note: according to the museum's card, the origin is Transjordan (?).

5.111. Moulded Heads from the southern Coastal Plain and Northern Israel

Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Hecht museum.

Notes: I have not included here three other figurines, which Holland classified as his type E.l.a. The first was found at Tel Gemmeh, Holland E.l.a.3, but it is probably a kernos and not a solid figurine (Holland 1975:245, fig. 36:1). The second, from Megiddo, is exceptional (Holland E.l.a.14). It has a special decoration and is probably hollow. The third figurin~ was also found at Megiddo (Holland E.l.b.3). It is very different from the Judean bird figurines. The two ~g.urines from Megiddo were photographed from above, and It IS not clear if they have pillar bases. Both seem hollow, and Schumacher even thought that they functioned as lamps (1908: 101). I ha:ve not included a few other figurines from the City of David, Jerusalem, which will be published in the near future by the excavation team.

5.111.1: 'Schematic Heads' with NeckPendants from the Coastal Plain 5.111.1.1. A head from Kh. Hoga. Context: surface find. Literature: Gophna 1970:29, pI. 7:6; Holland 1975: B.VI.6.a, addenda. [Fig. 7:1]. 5.111.1.2. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The body is hollow. The hands are placed under the breasts. Context: CP.190, a small room of a building complex in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city. 9th century BC? Literature: Petrie 1928:17, pI. 35:21; Holland 1975: B.IV.a.1, fig. 16:3.

5.111.1.3 A head from Tel Gemmeh. It was made in the same mould as no. 2 above. Note: Holland classified heads 2-3 differently, since in one the position of the arms is known (a central criterion in Holland's typological system). Context: unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:16; Pritchard 1943: no. 238; Holland 1975: B.VI.13.

5.111.2.8. A head from Tel Shera. There is a rounded pendant. The hairdress is peculiar, unlike the other 5.111.2 heads; the side-locks are wider and without inner separation lengthwise. There are also long horizontal lines above the forehead. Context: level VI of the 7th century BC. Literature: EAEHL IV:1069, bottom left; Oren 1982: 159, left. [Fig. 7:3].

5.111.1.4. A head from Tel Gemmeh. Context: unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928:17, pI. 35:8; Pritchard 1943: no. 278; Holland 1975: B.VI.8. 5.111.1.5. A head from Tel Gemmeh. Context: EP.186, an open area in Petrie's "22nd dynasty" city. Petrie dated this level to the Iron Age I. Literature: Petrie 1928:17, pI. 35:9; Pritchard 1943: no. 279; Holland 1975: B.VI.9. 5.111.1.6. A head from Tel Gemmeh. Context: unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: 17, pI. 35: 10; Pritchard 1943: no. 280; Holland 1975: B.VI.1 o.

5.111.2: 'Finely Moulded Heads' with NeckPendants from the Coastal Plain 5.111.2.1. A head from Kh. Hoga. The upper part is worn, but the side-locks and the neck-pendant are clear. Context: surface find. Literature: Gophna 1970:29, pI. 6:3; Holland 1975: B.VI.6.b, addenda. 5.111.2.2. A head from Mefalsim. Context: surface find. Place: IAA no. 70-5189, now in the collection at Mefalsim. Literature: Gophna 1970:29, pI. 6:2; Holland 1975: B.VI.33.a, addenda. [Fig. 7:2] 5.111.2.3. A head from Mefalsim. The facial features are worn. The neck pendant and the side-locks are clear. Context: surface find. Place: Romerna, IAA no. 70-5188. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna. 5.111.2.4. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The photograph in the report is not good and the classification is made according to the text. Context: BZ, a large open area in a center of a structure from the "26th dynasty" city. The area is disturbed by Persian period pits. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:46; Holland 1975: B.VI.26.

5.111.2.9. A head from Tel Shera. The peg is intact. The head is much bigger than the moulded face, leaving a sort of an unmoulded ledge around the face. The details are similar to those of the former heads, only the hair is parted in the middle of the forehead. The thin side-locks reach the height of the neck. Context: level VI of the 7th century BC. Place: exhibited at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. Literature: Oren and Netzer 1974: pI. 57d; EAEHL IV:1069, second from left; Engle 1979: type VIII:22; Oren 1982:159, center. [Fig. 7:4]. 5.111.2.10. A head from Tel Shera. The peg is intact. There is a rounded pendant. The hairdress is similar, but not identical, to head no. 9 above. Context: level VI of the 7th century BC. Place: exhibited at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. Literature: EAEHL IV:1069, third from left; Oren 1982:159, right. 5.111.2.11. A head and an upper body part from Mefalsim. The body is hollow. The hands are placed under the breasts. There are 3-4 strands of hair behind the ears, descending almost until the shoulders. The hairdress is similar, but not identical, to the former 5.111.2 heads. There probably was a neck-pendant, but the neck is damaged. Context: surface find. Place: IAA no. 70-5194, now in the collection at Mefalsim. Literature: Gophna 1970:27, pI. 6:1; Holland 1975: B.IV.b.3. 5.111.2.12. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The peg is intact. The photograph in the report is not good. The hair is parted in the middle of the forehead. other details cannot be determined. Context: A195, Petrie's "26th dynasty" level. Exact location unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:33; Holland 1975: B.VI.19.

5.111.3: 'Finely Moulded Heads' with Combed doubled Side-Locks from the Coastal Plain

5.111.2.5. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The peg is intact. Context: AK, a small room in the corner of a public structure from the "26th dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:44; Holland 1975: B.VI.25.

5.111.3.1. A head from Kh. Hoga. Part of the peg survived. Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna. [Fig. 7:5].

5.111.2.6. A head from Tel Gemmeh. Context: "A", a general designation of a structure in the southern part of the excavations. Height 197". Exact locus not clear. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:43; Holland 1975: B.VI.24.

5.111.3.2. A head from Tel el-Hesi. The peg is intact. height: 52mm. Note: it is now clear that this is a Persian period head from level Vc; reg. no. H71 OR596, published in the new final report (Bennett and Blakely 1989). Literature: Rose and Toombs 1976:123, fig. 18:3; Bennett and Blakely 1989:277-279, fig. 208:4.

5.111.2.7. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The peg is intact.

252

Context: CW.193, a room in the northern building complex of the "23rd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:40; Holland 1975: B.VI.22.

253

5.111.3.3. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. It is probably a head with a part of the peg. Context: not stratified. Place: Rockefeller 33.1550. Note: Holland classified this head as a plaque-figurine, but according to the photograph and the drawing in the museum's card, it looks like a head of a pillar-figurine. Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 16:43; Pritchard 1943: no. 131; Holland 1975: C.IX.d.1. 5.111.3.4. A head from Tel Gemmeh. Part of the shoulders survived, as well as the side-locks. Context: not stratified. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:29; Holland 1975: B.V1.29. 5.111.3.5. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The peg is intact. Context: FL.188, probably 10th-9th centuries BC. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:17; Pritchard 1943: no. 140; Holland 1975: B.VI.14. 5.111.3.6. A nearly whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The body is hollow but the base is clear. The hands were placed on the chest, or perhaps extended to the sides. It may have been made in the same mould as no. 5 above. Context: CP.187, a small room in a large building complex in the "23rd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:13; Holland 1975: B.IV.b.1, fig. 16:4, pI. 7:5. 5.111.3.7. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The peg is intact. The photograph is blurred and it is not clear if the side-locks are combed; hence, if this head is similar to the rest of type 5.111.5 heads. Context: FP.188, a large open area in the city of the 22nd dynasty". Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:11; Holland 1975: B.V1.11. 5.111.3.8. A head from Tel Erani. It has the remains of the peg. The side-locks are very thick and curve along the face, nearly merging far below the chin. They are probably not combed. Context: probably area A, levels IV-V. Literature: Yeivin 1961: pI. 2: third row, third from the left; Holland 1975: B.VI.5. 5.111.3.9. A moulded head from Ekron. It has two combed side-locks. Height:65 mm. Context: area I SW. Literature: Gitin 1994:73, fig. 4.1.7.

The side-locks are straight and shorter than in other heads of this type. Reg. no. M.4306. Context: locus 1394, a room or a court in square N9, level III. Literature: May 1935:119, pI. 25:M.4306; Holland 1975: AXll.k.3. 5.111.4.3. A head from Megiddo. It is similar to head no. 2 above. Reg. no. M.4554. Context: room 1521 in square R5, part of a large building complex. Level III. Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.4554; Holland 1975: AXII.k.2. 5.111.4.4. A head from Megiddo. It is similar to heads nos. 2-3 above, but is more elegant. Reg. no. M.4561. Context: under 1561 in square R10, a room in one of the 'Assyrian' court-houses of level III. The exact nature of the room is not clear. 8th century BC (?). Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.4561; Holland 1975: B.VI.34.

5.111.5: 'Crescent' Moulded Heads from the Coastal Plain 5.111.5.1. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The photograph is blurred, but it seems that there are 3 rows of curls surrounding the face. There is a kind of a clay ledge around the hair. Context: unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:12; Holland 1975: B.VI.12. 5.111.5.2. A head from Tel Gemmeh with a peg. There are 3-4 rows of curls above the forehead. The side-locks have 3 columns of curls, reaching until the chin. The ears are probably not represented. Context: AT.194 from Petrie's "26th dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:42; Holland 1975: B.VI.23. 5.111.5.3. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The hands hold a large disk close to the hollow body. The hairdress is similar to that of head no. 2 (above). Note: Petrie thought that the disk represents a cake and that the figure is the Biblical "queen of heaven". Context: unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:14; Pritchard 1943: type V:167; Holland 1975: B.V.d.1. [Fig. 7:7].

Context: the 'palace' of level V. Literature: Schumacher 1908: 102, fig. 156; Pilz 1924: type E.97; Pritchard 1943: V:163; Keel 1972: fig. 454; Holland 1975: B.V1.23. [Fig. 7:8]. 5.111.6.2. A head and an upper body part from Megiddo. It is similar to no. 1 above, but has a neck pendant. Context: room 07.1538 in an 'Assyrian' court-house of level III. Note: head no. 5 (below) was found in the same locus. Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.1119; Holland 1975: B.VI.39. 5.111.6.3. A head and part of a peg from Megiddo. It is probably similar to nos. 1-2 above, but badly preserved. Context: surface find. Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.1489; Holland 1975: B.VI.40. 5.111.6.4. A head from Megiddo. It is similar to nos. 1-2 above, but the side-locks are longer. Context: surface find from square 0.12, area C. Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.1496; Holland 1975: B.VI.41. 5.111.6.5. A head and part of a peg from Megiddo. Context: room 07.1538 in an 'Assyrian' court-house of level III. Note: head no. 2 (above) was found in the same room. Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.4647; Holland 1975: B.VI.42. 5.111.6.6. A head and part of a peg from Megiddo. It is badly preserved. The excavators suggested that it was made in the same mould as head no. 5 (above). Context: area 08, surface find. Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.1633; Holland 1975: B.VI.38. 5.111.6.7. A head with an upper body part from Samaria. The woman holds a drum diagonally to her body. There is a pendant on the forehead. Reg. no. 0.4629. Context: ON, exact locus unknown. Note: the position of the drum is similar to that of the Phoenician figurines, type 5.VI.2 (below), but the shape of the head is different. Literature: Samaria III: pI. 11:8; Holland 1975: B.vl.e.1; Beck 1991: note 3:18.

5.111.7: Various Moulded Heads from Northern 5.111.5.4. A head from Tel el-Far'ah (South) with a peg. Height 75 mm. Context: unknown. Place: Rockefeller 35.4360. Literature: not yet published (?), courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

5.111.4: 'Finely Moulded Heads' with Uncombed doubled Side-Locks from the Coastal Plain 5.111.4.1. A head from Tel Kinnerot. Part of the head and the peg survived. It is not well preserved. Reg. no. 1315/1. Hubner classified this head as similar to Holland's AVIII type, but this seems to be a mistake. Context: locus 352a, level lA, from the end of the 8th-7th centuries BC. Place: Romema IAA no. 85-440. Literature: Hubner, in: Fritz 1990: 119, pis. 102:3, 42b. [Fig. 7:6].

5.111.6: Drum-Playing Pillar-Figurines with Hollow Bodies and Moulded Heads, from Northern Israel 5.111.6.1. A nearly whole figurine from Megiddo. The body is hollow and made as a vessel on the wheel. The hands hold a disk perpendicular to the chest. The fingers are represented. The hair is indicated by many incisions, vertical above the forehead and horizontal on the sides of the face. There is probably a pendant on the forehead. The face is rather crudely made.

5.111.4.2. A head from Megiddo. Part of the peg survived. The photograph is not very clear. There is probably a neckpendant and a ridge above the forehead, but without curls.

254

Israel 5.111.7.1. A head from Beth Shean. It has very large ears and a unique shape. Context: level VII, Late Bronze Age period (?). Place: Rockefeller i.3840. Literature: Row 1940: pI. 53a:1-2; Holland 1975: AXll.q.1. 5.111.7.2. A head from Beth Shean. It is covered with red slip and portrays a female. The side-locks reach the shoulders, probably descending behind the ears. Reg. no. P.29-103906. Context: locus 1076, an open area or a room of level V. Iron Age I period. Literature: Row 1940: pI. 53a:17; James 1966: fig. 111:5; Holland 1975: AXll.c.1.

Context: locus 125, level IV. Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:6; Holland 1975: AXll.e.1. 5.111.7.4. A head from Beth Shean. Black clay. It is difficult to classify this head exactly. It probably has 'Hathor' side-locks reaching the shoulders. There are incisions on the back. Reg. no. 31-9-133. Context: room 1557, upper level V, 10th century BC (?). Place: Rockefeller 32.4. Literature: James 1966: fig. 112:3; Holland 1975: All.f.1. 5.111.7.5. A head from Dan. There are side-locks but no ears. Context: 8th century BC, other details not yet published. Note: Holland suggested that it may be a Cypriot import. Literature: Biran 1974:25 and frontispiece photograph; EAEHL 1:315 upper right; Holland 1975: AXll.q.2; Engle 1979: type VIII:1. [Fig. 7:9]. 5.111.7.6. A head from Hazor. It has a high "hat" and long side-locks. There are large ears and one row of vertical curls above the forehead. This head is unique, unlike any of the other 5.111. 7 heads. Reg. no. 1463/1. Context: room 3147 south of the fort, level IV. Perhaps it originates from level Va. 8th or 7th centuries BC. Literature: Hazor II: pis. 103:1, 163:8; Yadin 1957:5; Holland 1975: AXIl. i.1. 5.111.7.7. A head from Hazor. It has one row of vertical curls above the forehead and long side-locks without curls. The ears are not represented. The head is long and pointed, and has a hole near its top. Reg. no. 1787/1. Contex and date: pool 169, area A It may be a wine-press or some other installation. The area is not well defined. Level VI, 9th-8th centuries BC. Literature: Hazor II: pis. 86:15, 163:4; Holland 1975: AIV.E.1; Engle 1979: VIII:203. 5.111.7.8. A head from Megiddo. It has a high 'hat' and long side-locks. Horizontal lines are incised on the 'hat'. The published drawing is not very good. Context: a room in the 'palace' of level V. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 32b; Holland 1975: AXll.k.1.

5.111.7.9. A head from Megiddo. It has long, curving sidelocks. The photograph does not permit a close study of the features. It may be a head of type 5.111, but also a head of a plaque-figurine (?). Context: Schumacher's "Nordburg", level III, near tomb F. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 79:b; Pilz 1924: Fb:107; Pritchard 1943: Vllla:271; Holland 1975: AIV.f.8; Engle 1979: type VIII:204. 5.111.7.10. A head from Megiddo. The published photograph is not very good. There are no ears. Context: the "pillars room", level V. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 163:b; Holland 1975: AIV.b.1. 5.111.7.11. A hollow head and upper body part from Megiddo. The hair is parted in the middle. The combed side-locks descend behind the ears. Context: R.10.654, domestic bUildings (?) in area A Level I, the Persian period (?). Place: Rockefeller 36.932. Literature: May 1935: pI. 24:M.2213; Pritchard 1943: VII:223; Holland 1975: B.IV.b.4.

5.111.7.3. A head from Beth Shean. There are ears and a 'feathers' hairdress. Reg. no. P29-103-875. Note: it may have been a plaque-figurine.

255

5.111.7.12. A head and upper body part from Megiddo. It is covered with red slip. The position of the arms is not clear. Holland thought that one hand holds a veil (?) under the chin (like a few fragments of type 5.VI.5, see below). Context: locus M.5, surface find. Literature: May 1935: pI. 29:M.1634; Holland 1975: B.V.f.1. 5.111.7.13. A head from Megiddo. It is badly preserved. There are remains of side-locks that reach the shoulders. Context: locus W1727, probably a paved court in a building of level VI. Iron Age I. Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:21, M.5718; Holland 1975: B.VI.34. 5.111.7.14. A head with a peg from Megiddo. The side-locks reach the chin. The photograph is not very clear. Context: the pillars room, level V. Literature: Schumacher 1908: fig. 163a; Holland 1975: B.VI.36. 5.111.7.15. A head with a peg from Megiddo. There are sidelocks and one indented pupil. Context: room 08.1501, in a large public building of level II. Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:MA551; Holland 1975: B.VI.35. 5.111.7.16. A head with a peg from Megiddo. It is badly preserved, but still has some traces of red paint. Context: P9.1026, a little room, probably domestic. Level II. Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.3287; Holland 1975: B.VI.37. 5.111.7.17. A head from Megiddo. It is badly preserved. Context: surface find. Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.1500; Holland 1975: B.VI.44. 5.111.7.18. A head from Megiddo. The long side-locks reach the neck or the shoulders. The ears are represented. Context: square K7 in area M. Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:22; Holland 1975: AIV.fA; Engle 1979: type VIII:10. 5.111.7.19. A head from Megiddo. It is badly preserved. The side-locks descend behind the ears. Note: it may be a head of a plaque-figurine. Context: P10, surface find. Literature: May 1935: pI. 29:M.1387; Holland 1975: AVl.d.2; Engle 1979: type VIII:15. 5.111.7.20. A head with a peg from Megiddo. It is unique, with horizontal bands of zigzag pattern. The ears are very large and the pupils are indented. Context: not clear. Place: Rockefeller 34.1492. Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.1745; Holland 1975: AVl.b.6; Engle 1979: type VIII:16. 5.111.7.21. A head from Megiddo. It is unique, having two ridges or 'ropes' with diagonal incisions. The ears are very large. Context: the "pillars" room, level V. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 162:c; Holland 1975: AXll.aA. 5.111.7.22. A head from Megiddo. There are long side-locks, but perhaps this head belongs to heads of type 5.111.6. Context: the "pillars room", level V. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 163:c; Holland 1975: AXll.e.2.

256

5.111.7.23. A head from Megiddo. There are long side-locks with a few separated strands. The ears are represented, probably with earrings. Note: this may have been a head of a plaque-figurines. Context: the "pillars room", level V. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 162:d; Holland 1975: AXII.d.1. 5.111.7.24. A head from Megiddo. It has incised eyes and a "pompadour" hairdress, covered with red slip. Context: surface find in area M9. Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.2009; Holland 1975: AXll.g.2. 5.111.7.25. A head from Megiddo. It has one row of rounded depressions above the foreheads and large ears. Note: this head is reminiscent of a head from Kenyon's excavations in Jerusalem (the last may be later than the Iron Age, 5.1.4.8 above). Reg. no. A293. Context: area S=2048, south (?) of room 2048 in the 'tower' temple of level VII. Late Bronze age. Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 242:12; Holland 1975: AXll.a.3. 5.111.7.26. A head from Megiddo. It is peculiar and very crude. The hair, or the Wig, is indicated by vertical lines and side-locks behind large ears. The pupils were inlayed (now missing). For a similar head cf. no. 27 below. Context: the "pillars room", level V. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 162:a-b; Holland 1975: AXII.0.1. 5.111.7.27. A head from Megiddo. It is similar to head no. 26 (above). Context: R.11 in Schumacher's trench, level III of the American team. Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.1008; Holland 1975: AXII.0.2. 5.111.7.28. A head from Samaria. It has a few ridges above the forehead, perhaps curled. The ears are probably represented, but are not clear in the photograph. The sidelocks reach the neck at least. There are some remains of red slip. Reg. no. CA29B. Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC. Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:2; Holland 1975: AIV.gA. 5.111.7.29. A head from Samaria. It has two ridges of rounded lumps, or curls above the forehead. There are probably ears with earrings and remains of red slip. Reg. no. 0.2224. Context: ac, an area near the north acropolis. The exact locus is unknown. Note: the head may belong to a period later than the Iron Age. Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:7; Holland 1975: AIV.h.1. 5.111.7.30. A head from Samaria. It has at least two ridges of vertical curls above the forehead. The side-locks descend behind the ears until the neck. It is similar to head no. 28 above. Reg. no. CA05. Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC. Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:4; Holland 1975: AIV.g.5. 5.111.7.31. A head from Samaria. It has circles and incised lines above the forehead and ears. There are remains of red slip. Reg. no. C.1271. Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC. Place: Rockefeller 33.3218. Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:3; Holland 1975: AXll.a.5.

5.111.7.32. A head from Samaria. It has a very high headdress, perhaps representing feathers. There are remains of red slip. Reg. no. C.1026a. Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC. Place: Rockefeller 33.2157. Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:3; Holland 1975: AXII.a.5. 5.111.7.33. A head from Samaria. It is partly broken. There is one row of large, rounded balls of clay (curls?). Context: not clear. Note: Holland thought that this head was made in a hollow mould. If true, it may have belonged to figurines of type 5.IV (below). Place: Rockefeller? Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.h.2. 5.111.7.34. A head and neck from Samaria. It is covered with red slip and cannot be classified exactly. Context: not stratified. Place: London? Literature: Holland 1975: AXII.q.4. 5.111.7.35. A head from Samaria. It is broken. There is not enough published data for an exact classification. There are remains of red slip. Reg. no. C.1283. Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC (according to the museum's card, level G). Place: Rockefeller 33.3222. Literature: Samaria 111:80, catalogue no. 16; Holland 1975: Vol. 11:101, AXll.r.9, fig. 13:10. 5.111.7.36. A head and upper body part from Samaria. There are side-locks (or a veil?) that reach the shoulders. The left hand holds the edge of this veil, like some later figurines of the classical periods. Holland classified it as having a hollow body (his B type). Reg. no. C.1026b. Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC. Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:10; Holland 1975: B.V.f.2, pI. 44:2. 5.111.7.37. A head from Samaria. The peg is intact. There is a representation of the ears and a few ridges above the forehead. Reg. no. C.1014. Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC. Place: Rockefeller 33.2155. Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:1; Holland 1975: B.VI.45. 5.111.7.38. A head from Shechem. A small part of a solid body survived. The hair is arranged in horizontal lines with vertical curls above them. There are ears. Reg. no. K-1807. Note: despite the classification of Holland and Engle, the head is possibly part of a plaque-figurine. This would also suit its early date. Context: area K, a large building from the Late Bronze age. Place: Rockefeller i.787. Literature: Sellin 1927:208, pI. 20f; Holland 1975: AIV.g.6; Engle 1979: type VIII:102. 5.111.7.39. A head and upper body part from Shechem. the body is hand-made. There is a representation of ears. Holland compared it with the head from Abu-Ghosh (app. 5.1.4.22 above) and with heads from Ashdod. Context: not published. Place: Israel Museum, Jerusalem, IM.51.144. Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.q.6, pI. 43:1.

Literature: Lapp 1967:36, fig. 25:2; Holland 1975: B.VI.46. 5.111.7.41. A head from Megiddo. It is broken in half. There is a pendant on the forehead, and a "hat" or a wide headdress. Context: surface find in square 09. Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.1373; Holland 1975: A.IV.e.4; Engle 1979: type VIII:18.

5.111.8: Various Moulded Heads from the Coastal Plain 5.111.8.1. A head from Ashdod, with part of the peg. The hair is arranged in triangles at the sides of the head. Reg. no. 1990/1. Context: locus 1019, square U/16, levels 4-3 (or 1?). The nature of this locus is not clear (area D). Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 58:3, fig. 65:2; Holland 1975: B.VI.3. 5.111.8.2. A head from Ashdod, partly broken. The face is elongated and surrounded with one large row of curls, which look like a rope. The ears are not shown. Reg. no. 4842/1. Context: surface find. Note: Hachlili compared with heads from Cyprus. Literature: Ashdod II-III:129, pI. 58:5, fig. 65:1; Holland 1975: B.VI.2. 5.111.8.3. A head from Ashdod. The hair is arranged in triangles at the sides of the head and horizontal lines above the forehead. The ears are represented. Reg. no. 1756/1. Context: locus 1161, square U/16, levels 4-3? The nature of this locus is not clear (area D). Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 58:4, fig. 65:12; Holland 1975: B.X.a.7. 5.111.8.4. A head from Ashdod. it is too worn out for an exact classification. Reg. no. 1712/1. Context: locus 1162, square U/1. The date and the nature of this locus are not clear. Literature: Ashdod 11-111:128, fig. 64:11; Holland 1975: B.X.a.6. 5.111.8.5. A head from Gezer. It is strange, with a "hat" (not applied) and horizontal lines above the forehead. Context: zone 30, "fourth Semitic" level (i.e., Iron Age II to the Hellenistic period. Holland dated this head to the Persian period). Literature: Gezer 11:77-78, fig. 272; Holland 1975: AXll.q.3. 5.111.8.6. A head from Ashdod. The hair is arranged in sidelocks, reaching at least to the height of the mouth. Hachlili classified this head as a plaque-figurine, but Holland classified it as a hollow pillar type. Reg. no. 838/1. Context: pit 1067, square A/19, level 2. Literature: Ashdod 11-111:128, fig. 64:10; Holland 1975: B.X.a.5. 5.111.8.7. A head from Ashdod. The hair is composed of one ridge of curls, shaped like a rope around the face. The ears are represented. Reg. no. 463/6. Context: area A, surface find. . Note: Holland classified this head as a plaque-figUrine, probably because of the thin section (drawn in the report). It is possible, but not certain. Literature: Ashdod I: pI. 28:8, fig. 47:3; Holland 1975: C.IX.c.2.

5.111.7.40. A head from Ta'anakh, with a peg. The face is surrounded with curls of hair, represented by incised lines. Context: mixed fill, 9th-7th centuries BC (?).

257

5.111.8.8. A head from Ashdod. Too little remained of the hair to enable an exact classification, but generally the head is similar to no. 2 above. Reg. no. 433/4. Context: locus 1013, square UAl15, level 4. This is a room at the corner of a large building. Literature: Ashdod I: pI. 27:3, fig. 43:2; Holland 1975: C.IX.c.1. 5.111.8.9. A head from Mefalsim, with the beginning of the peg. There is a 'ledge' of clay around the moulded face. The hair is arranged in horizontal bands and the ears are represented. There are possibly side-locks similar to those found in type 5.111.3 (above). Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna. 5.111.8.10. A head from Mefalsim. There is a ledge of clay around the moulded face. The hair is arranged in a horizontal band above the forehead, parted into square (?) curls. There are large ears and probably side-locks reaching the shoulders. The facial features are badly preserved. Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna. 5.111.8.11. A head from Mefalsim, badly preserved. There are vertical curls above the forehead, large ears and side-locks until the shoulders. Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna. 5.111.8.12. A head from Kh. Hoga. It probably has side-locks behind the ears, with earrings (?). The upper part of the head is worn out. Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna. 5.111.8.13. A head from Kh. Hoga, partly broken. It has doubled side-locks with curls. The preservation state is bad. It is not clear whether the ears are represented. Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna. 5.111.8.14. A head from Kh. Hoga, partly broken. Only a part of one row of curls survived. The eyes are very large and the face is elongated (perhaps representing a male figure). Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna. 5.111.8.15. A head from Kh. Hoga. It has a grotesque look; a smiling mouth, huge eyes and protruding pupils. There is one row of vertical curls above the forehead and at the sides of the face. The ears are not represented. Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.

Notes: Petrie ascribed this figurine to his "18th dynasty" city, but Holland and Engle dated it to the 9th-8th centuries BC. Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 15: upper, 3:5, pI. 16:39; Pritchard 1943: type VII:225; Keel 1972: fig. 471; Holland 1975: B.V.a.1. 5.111.8.18. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. It has a necklace with three pendants on the neck. The surface is burnt. The photograph does not show the facial features clearly. There are probably long side-locks. Context: GB, the "20th dynasty" city. The head was found in an open area near a kiln (near point F). The exact locus is unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:12; Holland 1975: B.VI.27. 5.111.8.19. A head with a peg from Tel Gemmeh. It probably has thick, doubled side-locks (similar to those of types 5.111.3-5.111.4 above). The bad preservation state does not enable a clear identification. Context: unknown. Literature: Holland 1975: B.VI.28, pI. 8:5, fig. 17:2. 5.111.8.20. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The body is hollow and the hands were probably placed beneath the breasts. The hair is arranged in long side-locks, reaching the shoulders (probably of type 5.111.1-5.111.3, but the photograph is not clear). Context: W.181; nature and date unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:6; Pritchard 1943: no. 259; Holland 1975: B.IV.b.2. 5.111.8.21. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The body is hollow. The hair is arranged in curved sidelocks, reaching the neck (perhaps of type 5.111.5 above). Context: EQ.191, a small room in a building from the "22nd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:25; Holland 1975: B.V1.15, pI. 7:8. 5.111.8.22. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The body is hollow. The hair is arranged in one ridge above the forehead and in straight, short side-locks, descending behind the ears until the neck. A 'ledge' of clay surrounds the face, which is well preserved. Context: unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:30; Holland 1975: B.VI.16. 5.111.8.23. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The hair is parted in the middle of the forehead and combed. Possibly, this head belongs to type 5.111.2. Petrie thought that it represented a male. Context: EN.191, an open area in the "23rd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:10; Holland 1975: B.VI.20.

5.111.8.16. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. It probably has sidelocks, but the photograph does not enable exact classification. Context: the area of the gate at the east side of the tell, but probably outside the gate. The exact locus is unknown. Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 16:44; Holland 1975: B.V1.1.

5.111.8.24. A head with a peg from.Tel Gemmeh. It has long side-locks, probably crescent-shaped (cf. type 5.111.3 above). The face is very worn. There is a band on the neck (necklace?). Context: DW.193, a large open area, not well defined, near the edge of the Tell. Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:39; Holland 1975: B.V1.21, pI. 7:12.

5.111.8.17. A whole figurine from Tel el-Ajjul. It shows a playing woman. The musical instrument looks like a long pole (string instrument?). The body is hollow and the base is missi~g. The hair is arranged in a ridge around the face, reaching until the chin. Context: area PM.1100 (or 1066?, an open area). Place: Rockefeller 33.1567.

5.111.8.25. A head with a peg from Tel Gemmeh. The hair is arranged in crescent-shaped (?) side-locks, with three 'tassels' at each side. Petrie compared it with another head (1928: pI. 35:29), and thought that it is a new type, from around 900 BC and later.

258

Context: DR.190, probably an open area in the "23rd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928:17, pI. 35:23; Holland 1975: B.VI.7. 5.111.8.26. A head with a peg from Tel Gemmeh. The hair is arranged in a sort of an envelope, or kafia close to the face. The ears and the curls are not apparent. The facial features are crude. Context: EF.192, a room or an open area from the "22nd dynasty" city. It was probably disturbed by a later pit from the Persian period. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:32; Holland 1975: B.V1.18, pI. 7:10. 5.111.8.27. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The hair surrounds the face, probably curled above the forehead. There are sidelocks, merging below the chin (according to Holland; thus, it may be a head of my type 5.111.4). There is a representation of the ears. Context: CV.192, a room in a building of the "23rd dynasty" city. Its nature is not clear. . Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:31; Holland 1975: B.V1.17, pI. 7:9. 5.111.8.28. A head with a peg from Tel Gemmeh. There is one row of vertical curls above the forehead. The side-locks reach the neck and are probably not curled. There are probably ears. The face is crude. Context: A194, a large building of the "26th dynasty" city. The exact locus is unknown. Note: the head is similar to head no. 29 below. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:15; Holland 1975: AIV.f.2; Engle 1979: no. 206. 5.111.8.29. A head from Tel Gemmeh. There is one row of vertical curls above the forehead. The side-locks reach the neck. The head is similar to head no. 28 (above). According to Holland, there are incisions on the neck and ears. Context: A200, the "26th dynasty" city, but the exact location is unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:18; Holland 1975: Vol. 1:96, B.IV.f.3, pI. 3:3. 5.111.8.30. A head with a peg from Tel Gemmeh. The photographs are not good enough to study the small details. The hair is arranged in side-locks, reaching the shoulders. Context: BO.198, a long room near a building in the "26th dynasty" city. Note: Petrie claimed that this head shows Greek influence and dated it to ca. 700 BC. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:47; Holland 1975: vol. I:101, AXll.c.2, pI. 5:2. 5.111.8.31. A head from Tel Erani. It probably has two long side-locks (oftypes 5.111.5 or 5.111.4). Context: area A, level 5 or 6 (?). Other details were not published. Literature: Yeivin 1961: pI. 2: third row, fourth from the left; Holland 1975: B.VI.6. 5.111.8.32. A head from Tel Shera. It has long vertical curls above the forehead and long side-locks, descending behind the ears until the shoulders. The face is fine and well preserved. It is surrounded by a 'ledge' of clay. Context: not published.

Literature: EAEHL IV:1069, bottom. 5.111.8.33. A head from Tel Erani. It is so damaged that an exact classification is impossible (follOWing Engle, vs. Holland). There is an incised line on the forehead. Literature: Ciacsa 1963: pI. 20:1; Holland 1975: All.d.2; Engle 1979: type VII:37. 5.111.8.34. A moulded head from Tel el-Ajjul. According to Holland, it has a large, twisted mouth and a headdress. Context: unknown. Place: London? Note: the head was dated to the Bronze age in the report. Holland mentioned that a few heads were found in Iron Age burials at Tel el-'Ajjul. Literature: Petrie 1931: pI. 24: bottom row, no. 1; Holland 1975: AXll.a.1. 5.111.8.35. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. The hair has incised circles pattern. The photograph is not very clear. According to Holland, the head is hand-made (1975: vol. 1:100), but he himself classified it among the moulded AXil heads. Context: unknown. Place: London? Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.a.2. 5.111.8.36. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. The hair is arranged in vertical curls (?) and there are no ears. According to Petrie, it is similar to figurine no. 5.111.8.17 (above). Holland compared it with a head from Ashkelon (cf. 5.111.8.40 below). The head from Gileam seems more similar (cf. 5V1.5.3 below). Context: QA1104, a large open area not well defined, south of the palace. Petrie dated the Q buildings to the Bronze Age (dynasty 18). Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 16:38; Holland 1975: AXll.m.1. 5.111.8.37. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. There are remains of red paint. The details in the published drawing are not clear. Context: FL.973. Place: London? Literature: Petrie 1952: pI. 28:7; Holland 1975: AXll.p.1, pI. 5:4. 5.111.8.38. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. It was published by Holland as a miscellaneous head. Context: unknown. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.p.2, pI. 5:5. 5.111.8.39. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. It is badly preserved, but has a simple wig (according to Holland). Context: unknown. Place: London. Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 16:40; Holland 1975: AXll.p.3. 5.111.8.40. A head from Ashkelon. The published photograph is so small that the details cannot be seen. According to Holland, it is a head of a male from the Iron Age I. Context: unknown. Place: London? Literature: Phythian-Adams 1923:80, pI. 2:9; World of the Bible 1965, PEF Century Exhibition, London: pI. 6b; Holland 1975: vol. 1:57-58,200, AXll.m.2.

259

mouth is shown by incision and the eyes by indentations. The hands are placed horizontally on the chest, but breasts are not represented. Context: "fourth Semitic" level. Place: Rockefeller P.104. Literature: Gazer II: pI. 221:26a; Pilz 1924: C.A.74; Pritchard 1943: type VII:231; Holland 1975:103, B.l.b.1.

5.IV. Hand-made Figurines, Coastal and Northern Israel 5.1V.1: Fairly Whole Figurines with Pillar Bodies 5.1V.1.1. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The face is very crude and has a pointed chin (beard?). The mouth is formed by an applied and incised band of clay. The . position of the hands is not clear. Context: CL.192, a badly defined area between two pits of the Persian period, in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city. Place: London? Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:14; Holland 1975:103, fig. 16:2, B.l.a.2. 5.1V.1.2. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The body is hollow, the hands lie under the breasts. The body is female although the chin is elongated and seems male. The eyes are applied (?). There is a painted decoration in red, orange and blue. Context: height 192", inside a wall, but the exact details are unknown. Petrie dated this figurine to ca. 950 BC. Place: London? Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:14; Holland 1975:103, B.l.a.1, fig. 16:1, pI. 7:1. [Fig. 8:4].

5.1V.1.7. A whole figurine from Megiddo. The body is hollow and the belly is pierced. There are little stump arms. The eyes are applied and the hair is indicated by small lumps of clay. Context: locus 1674, a fill inside the court of the "stables" (1576) in square 0/6. The fill included pottery of levels V-IV and earlier finds. Literature: May 1935: pI. 28:M.5401; Holland 1975: B.l.c.1. 5.1V.1.8. A head and an upper body part from Megiddo. The body is hollow and the navel is indicated (?). The hands hold a drum perpendicular to the body. The eyes are protruding, the mouth is incised and the nostrils are pierced. The hair is formed from lumps of clay. Context: locus 1501, a room of a court house of level II. Note: the face may have been moulded. Literature: May 1935: pI. 24: M.4549; Pritchard 1943: type VII:195; Holland 1975: B.ll.c.2.

5.1V.2: Peg Figurines 5.1V.1.3. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The figure holds something, perhaps a drum. The face is hand-made, fairly similar to the Judean type A1 faces. There are remains of red and white paint in the eyes. The body is hollow. Petrie noted that this figurine is unique among the Tel Gemmeh figurines, but the published photograph is not good. Context: HL.183, a room in a large building of Petrie's "20th dynasty" city. Iron Age I period? Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:3; Holland 1975: vol. 1:208, B.II.a.1.

5.1V.2.1. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The arms are extended to the sides, shaped as stumps (broken?). The head is pointed and very schematic (or just worn out). Context: zone 30, the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer II: fig. 382:2; Holland 1975: AXV.b.1. 5.1V.2.2. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The hands are extended to the sides. There is a representation of the breasts. The head is similar to the "Ashdoda" heads (type 5.IV.4 below). According to Dothan, it is a figurine of a wailing woman. Context: HO.183, an open area in Petrie's "20th dynasty" city. Place: The British Museum. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:2; Holland 1975: A.XV.b.3; Dothan 1982:237ff, fig. 12:1, pI. 26.

5.1V.1.4. A whole figurine from Tel el-Ajjul. It is not clear whether the body is hollow. The hands are placed on the chest, but there are probably no breasts. The eyes are applied (only one eye survived), as well as the ears. Reg. no. 1533. Note: the head is similar to a head from Gezer, no. 5 below. Context: not stratified. Place: Rockefeller 33.4352. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:205, AXIV.c.1, pI. 34:3.

5.1V.2.3. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The arms are broken. The head is flattened and incised with a geometric pattern (before firing?). Context: unknown. Place: London? Literature: Holland 1975: AXV.b.2, pI. 6:10.

5.1V.1.5. A whole figurine from Gezer. The arms are small and perhaps extended to the sides. The eyes are applied (one is missing) as well as the ears. It is not clear if the body is hollow. Context: unknown. Literature: Macalister 1906:105, fig. 35a; Holland 1975: AI.i.17.

5.1V.2.4. A body from Tel Gemmeh. The arms are missing. Context: unknown. Place: London? Literature: Holland 1975: AXV.a.3, pI. 6:9, fig. 15:1.

5.1V.1.6. A whole figurine from Gezer. The body is bellshaped, but not necessarily hollow. It is red-slipped. The

5.1V.2.5. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The eyes are applied, the mouth and the nostrils are incised.

260

The photographs do not show the exact nature of this fragment. Context: FL.187, a large open area in Petrie's "22nd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 38:21; Holland 1975: A.XV.a.2, pI. 6:8. 5.1V.2.6. A nearly whole figurine from Lachish (season 1933). The arms are extended (but broken). There is no representation of breasts. The nose is applied. Reg. no. 1080. Context: locus 158, level III (?). Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1V.2.7. A nearly whole figurine from Lachish. It is made of very crude clay. The arms are extended (one is missing). There is no representation of breasts. The nose is applied. Reg. no. 2020. Context: locus 154, level III (?). Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1V.2.8. A whole figurine from Tel Gherishe (Grisa). The arms are placed on the belly, under the breasts. There is an indication of the fingers. The head is similar to the coastal type 5.IV.3 (below): it is flattened, with applied disk-eyes and incised mouth. Reg. no. 6730/1. Context: locus 1126. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: courtesy of the excavation team. 5.1V.2.9. A body from Azor. The arms are uplifted and there are small breasts (it may be a wailing woman). Place: the private collection of Mr. Weisenfreund. Literature: Dothan 1982: pI. 27. 5.1V.2.10. A nearly whole figurine from Azor. One arms is placed on the head and the other on the chest. The head is similar to that of no. 8 above, with applied disk eyes. The shape is crude. Note: the body ends in a straight cut, perhaps indicating that it was part of a vessel rather than a peg figurine. Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-361. Literature: Dothan 1982:246, pI. 25, fig. 12:2. Note: I have not included further figures of wailing women, attached to pottery vessels (e.g., Dothan 1982: pis. 23-24, fig. 10). These belong to Holland's type K (vessels) and are not free-standing figurines.

Context: locus 1128, an open area of an unclear nature. Levels 1-2? Literature: Ashdod II-III: 127, fig. 62:7, pI. 55:5; Holland 1975: AI.i.6. 5.1V.3.2. A hollow head from Ashdod. The facial features are painted in black, inclUding the eyes. Reg. no. 04375/1. Context: locus 1122, a pit in square Ul15, levels 2. Literature: Ashdod 11-111:127, fig. 62:8, pI. 55:3; Holland 1975: B.X.a.4. 5.1V.3.3. A head from Ashdod. It is solid, except for a depression in its center (for inserting a stick?). There is a ridge along the skull, perhaps a lock of hair. Reg. no. 0380/1. Context: locus 1019, the floor of a court (?) from level 3. Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 43:1, pI. 27:4; Holland 1975: B.X.a.1. 5.1V.3.4. A solid (?) head from Ashdod. Reg. no. C10. Context: surface find. Place: probably Romema, IAA no. 63-2515. Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 47:5, pI. 55:5; Holland 1975: B.X.a.2. 5.IV.3.5. A solid head from Ashdod. Reg. no. B3. Context: surface find. Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 26:3, pI. 15:1; Holland 1975: AI.i.3. [Fig. 8:6]. 5.1V.3.6. A solid head with a peg from Ashdod. Reg. no. 0288/1. Context: locus 1016, an open area in square Al14, levels 3a3b. Note: Holland claimed that this head had a hollow body because of the peg (and hence all of his type B.X heads). Yet, a peg exists also with solid-bodied figurines. Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 43:3, pI. 27:6; EAEHL I (1975):115: Israel Museum Catalogue no. 68: fig. 82; Dothan 1964: pI. 22e; Holland 1975: B.X.a.3. [Fig. 8:7]. 5.1V.3.7. A nearly whole figurine from Ashdod. The head is solid. The body has legs (now broken). There is no indication of breasts. The hands were extended to the front (?). Reg. no. 05021/1. Context: locus 1067, a pit in square Al19, level 2. Literature: Ashdod 11-111:127, fig. 62:10; Holland 1975: AXlll.b.2. 5.1V.3.8. A solid head from Ashdod. Reg. no. 04841/1. Context: surface find. Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:3, pI. 56:3; Holland 1975: AXlIl.b.3. 5.1V.3.9. A nearly whole figurine from Ashdod. it is solid and has legs. The arms were extended to the front (?). The head is rounded. There is no indication of breasts. Context: surface find. Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 62:2; Holland 1975: B.X.a.2. [Fig. 8:8].

5.1V.3: 'Ashdodite' Heads

5.1V.3.10. A head and an upper body part from Ashdod. T~e head is solid and has an applied headdress, decorate? With red and black lines. There are painted points on the chin and back side. The eyes are impressed. Remains at the Ch~st suggest breasts. The hands were extended to the front (.). Reg. no. 04185/1. Context: locus 1122, a pit in level 2.

Note: this type includes hand-made heads, mostly flattened from above and having applied disk eyes and incised or applied mouths. It is not clear whether they represent males of females, and a few are exceptional. 5.1V.3.1. A solid head from Ashdod. The mouth is made of two applied lumps of clay. Reg. no. 04605/1.

261

Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:3, pI. 56:2; Holland 1975: AI.L.1.

Literature: Naveh 1958:99, no. 2, pI. 21c-d; Holland 1975: Al.i.24.

5.1V.3.11. A solid head from Ashdod. It is rounded at the top. Reg. no. D4182/1. Context: locus 1111, a room in square UT/1, level 3. Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:4; Holland 1975: AI.L15.

5.1V.3.20..A so.lid head from Azeka. It is flattened at the top. The nose IS a little damaged. Height 48 mm. Red clay. Context: surface find, from the eastern slope of the site. Place: private collection. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of D. Amit.

5.1V.3.12. A nearly whole figurine from Ashdod. It is solid and shows a figure playing a lyre. The head is rounded at the top. There are remains of red slip and black color. The base is missing. Reg. no. D756/1. Context: locus 1062, square B/8. It is a Byzantine period locus, whose nature is unknown. Note: it may have been part of a cultic stand. The excavators suggest comparisons with Cyprus and Crete. Place: Romema, 1M no. 63-92. Literature: Ashdod II-III: 126f, 133, fig. 62:1, pI. 55:1; Holland 1975: AI.L4; Dothan 1964: pI. 22:f; Israel Museum Catalogue 84; Dothan 1967:185; Keel 1972: fig. 469; Dothan 1977:38f; Dothan 1982:249, pI. 35; Singer 1990:30; Mitchell 1992: fig. 3.

5.1V.3.21. A nearly whole figurine from Maresha. It shows a male with a flattened "Ashdodite" head, applied disk eyes and applied ears. The nostrils are incised. The arms are extended sideways. Context: cave 75, locus 1386xv68 (cf. app. 2: no. 472 above). Literature: Kloner 1992:72, upper. [Fig. 8:5].

5.1V.3.13. A solid head from Ashdod. The upper part is rounded. Crude workmanship and traces of white-wash. Reg. no. A618/6. Context: a balk, unclear nature of context. Place: Romema, 1M no. 63-2428. Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 7:17; Holland 1975: AI.L7. 5.1V.3.14. A solid head from Ashdod. It has a hat, flattened at the top. Reg. no. D1894/6. Context: locus 1155, an open area in square 0/4, without clear context. Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:5, pI. 55:4; Holland 1975: AI.L19. 5.1V.3.15. A solid head from Ashdod. It is rounded and has very large, applied eyes. Reg. no. D4188/1. Context: locus 1116, an area of unclear function and date Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:6, pI. 55:2; Holland 1f~75: AI.i.10. 5.1V.3.16. A solid head from Ashdod. It is rounded at the top. Reg. no. D5040/1. Context: locus 1067, a pit in square A/19, level 2. Place: Romema 1M no. 63-2404. Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:9; Holland 1975: AI.L11. 5.1y.3.17. A solid head from Gezer. It is flattened at the top. !t .I~ shaped as a long wedge, either indicating a peg for JOIning to the body, or a peg-figurine. The mouth is incised and the eyes are made of applied disks of clay. Context: zone 3D, the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer II: fig. 382:12; Holland 1975: AI.L16. 5.1V.3.1.8. A solid head from Lachish, probably with a peg. The facial features are similar to other heads of type 5.IV.3, but the excavators believed that this fragment was attached to a pottery ves~el. They stated that it is very different from the commo~ pillar-figurines. It is interesting that it was compared With figurines from Ayia-lrinL Reg. no. 6252. Con~ext: locus K15.1033, the court of the palace, but this is a mixed assemblage of levels V-II (i.e., all the Iron Age II) Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:16. .

5.1V.4: "Ashdoda" Figurines 5.1V.3.16. A nearly whole figurine from Ashdod. This is the famous "Ashdoda": a woman whose body forms a stool or a bed with four legs. It is solid and hand-made. The head is made as a cylinder, flattened at the top. The eyes and the ears are applied to it, as well as the little breasts. The decoration is similar to that of Philistine Iron Age pottery in general - red and black paint on white background. There is a necklace with a pendant. Context: a house in level XII, Iron Age I. Place: Romema, 1M no. 68-1094. Literature: Ashdod 11-111:129, fig. 91:1, pI. 82; Holland 1975: K.6?; Dothan 1982:234f, fig. 9, pI. 19:1; EAEHL Hebrew I: 18, upper left. [Fig. 8:9]. 5.1V.4.2. A solid "Ashdoda" head from Ashdod. It is rounded at the top. Reg. no. A1752/2. Context: square J7. Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 7:20; Holland 1975:? 5.1V.4.3. A solid "Ashdoda" head from Ashdod. It is rounded at the top. Reg. no. A986/1. Context: square E5. Place: Romema 1M no. 63-2416. Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 7:21; Holland 1975: AI.L8. 5.1V.4.4. A solid "Ashdoda" head and upper body from Ashdod. It is rounded at the top, red slipped and painted with black. There is no sign of breasts. Reg. no. S.50. Context: surface find. Note: Holland thought that it is a peg figurine, but the lower body is missing and it looks more like an "Ashdoda" head. Literature: Ashdod 11-111:131, fig. 65:10; Holland 1975: AXV.a.1. 5.1V.4.5. A solid "Ashdoda" head from Ekron. It may also be a head oftype 5.IV.3 figurines. Context: the area of the kiln, level VIII, Iron Age I. Literature: Gitin and Dothan 1987:203, up center. 5.1V.4.6. A solid "Ashdoda" head from Ashdod. It is concave at the top. Context: not clear. Place: Romema, 1M no. 68-1139. Literature: Dothan 1982: pI. 19:1. 5.1V.4.7. A solid "Ashdoda" head from Jerusalem. It is large and flattened at the top. The eyes are made of applied disks. Reg. no. D13251 (season 1982).

5.1V.3.19. A solid head from Ekron. It is flattened at the top. Context: surface find.

262

Context: not yet published. Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.1V.5.10. A nearly whole figurine from Megiddo. It has legs, but the arms are broken. The head is rounded. Context: square 019, an unstratified area on the slope. Literature: May 1935: pI. 30:M.1824; Holland 1975: AXIII.a.7.

5.1V.5: Various Hand-made Figurines

5.1V.5.11. A head from Megiddo. It has a horizontal band on the forehead. The mouth is incised. Context:Schumacher's "Tempelburg", group 3. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 39:c; Holland 1975: Al.j.11.

5.1V.5.1. A head and upper body part from Beth Shean. There are little stump hands and the figurine is red slipped. The published photograph does not permit a close study. Reg. no. P32-15-199. Context: locus 1564, building E north, upper level V (ca. 10th century BC). Literature: James 1966: fig. 112:2. 5.1V.5.2. A head with a peg from Gezer. The mouth is open and the eyes are depressed. Context: zone 9, the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer II: fig. 382:11; Holland 1975: AI. k.1. 5.1V.5.3. A head from Gezer. It has a ridge (of hair?) descending down, nearly to the lower part of the neck. It is incised horizontally. The eyes are made of applied disks and the mouth is incised. Context: unknown. Literature: Gezer II: fig. 382:6; Holland 1975: AI.L.3. 5.1V.5.4. A hollow head from Gezer. It is unique, with a beard. Part of the head is missing. Context: zone 10, the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer II: fig. 382:5; Holland 1975: B.IIl.b.1. 5.1V.5.5. A head from Gezer. It is rounded and strange. Macalister thought that it represented a monkey. There are applied and incised features. Note: cf. Romema, 1M no. 74-709 (?). Context: unknown. Literature: Gezer II: pI. 125:23a; Holland 1975: AXVII.a.3. 5.1V.5.6. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The head seems to belong to type 5.IV.3. The body is female, with the hands crossed on the lower belly. The legs are separated. Context: zone 8, the ''third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer 11:419, pI. 221:31; Holland 1975: AXlll.a.3. 5.1V.5.7. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The head is rounded, with an incised mouth and impressed eyes. There is an indication of a male organ (?) and small stump-arms. The legs are separated. Context: zone 29, the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer II: fig. 282:4; Holland 1975: AXlIl.b.9. 5.1V.5.8. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. It is very crude and has separated legs. Context: zone 3D, the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezerll: fig. 382:3; Holland 1975: AXlIl.c.4.

5.1V.5.12. A head from Megiddo. It is a male (?) with a peg and large ears. It has a pointed nose, applied disk-eyes and an applied and incised mouth. There is an applied band on the forehead, which is incised. Context: locus 1508, level III. Literature: May 1935: pI. 33:M.4453; Holland 1975: B.IIl.a.2. 5.1V.5.13. A head from Megiddo, similar to no. 12 above but painted red. It is a male with a pointed nose, applied diskeyes and large ears. The mouth is applied and incised. There is an applied band on the forehead. Context: locus 1423, a room in a building of level III. Place: Rokefeller 36.943. Note: for a similar head from Samaria cf. no. 19 below. Literature: May 1935: pI. 33:M.4334; Holland 1975: B.III.a.1. 5.1V.5.14. A head and upper body part from Megiddo. It has a rounded head with an incised mouth and impressed eyes. The arms are broken. Context: P6, under floor 555. It is from the slope of the site, perhaps level II (but actually not stratified). Literature: May 1935: pI. 29:M.2060; Holland 1975: Al.j.10. 5.1V.5.15. A head from Mefalsim. It has applied eyes inside hand-made depressions. There is a suggestion of a beard (?). The upper part of the head is pointed. Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna. 5.1V.5.16. A head from Samaria. It has applied disk eyes and a strange ''tasseled'' headdress (also applied). Literature: Holland 1975: AI.i.25, fig. 5:1. 5.1V.5.17. A head from Samaria. It has a beard, applied ears and disk-eyes and perhaps a conical hat. Reg. no. C.555 (probably). Context: locus E207 (according to the card in Rockefeller). Literature: Samaria III: cat. no. 23; Holland 1975: AI.L26, fig. 5:1. 5.1V.5.18. A head with a peg from Samaria. Place: Jerusalem University, no. 3447. Literature: Holland 1975: AI.L26a, addenda, pI. 41:4. 5.1V.5.19. A head from Samaria. It is similar to heads no. 12-13 above. Reg. no. C.1304. Context: E207. Place: Rockefeller 3224. Note: perhaps heads nos. 12-13, 19, are rider's heads. Literature: Samaria III: pI. 11:5; Holland 1975: B.lIl.a.3.

5.1V.5.9. A head and an upper body part from Kh. Sit Laila. Stump arms (broken). The head is rounded and has an incised mouth and impressed eyes. The ears are represented. Note: cf. a figurine from 'Afulah, 'Atiqot 1, fig. 15:19, and from Gezer, Holland A.I.L17. Context: surface find, probably from the Iron Age I settlement. Literature: Aharoni 1959:114, fig. 1, pI. 14a; Holland 1975: Al.j.7.

5.1V.5.20. A nearly whole figurine from Tel ez-Zuweid. It has a pillar body, pointed head and applied disk eyes. Context: JR.353, Le., phase J (dated to the 9th century BC by the excavator). Literature: Petrie 1937:11, pI. 30:6; Holland 1975: AI. i.28.

263

5.1V.5.21. A whole figurine from Tel el-Ajjul. It has a crescent base, similar to that of some rider figurines, and little stump arms. The head is rounded. Context: EAD.185, a large court. Literature: Petrie 1934:10 pI. 24; Pritchard 1943: VII:229?; Holland 1975: A.XIII.c.1. 5.1V.5.22. A nearly whole figurine from Tel el-Ajjul. It has small legs and stump arms. The head is rounded. The facial features are not clear. Context: LB.1030, dated by Petrie to the Iron Age I. Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 40; Holland 1975: AXIII.c.2. 5.IV.5.23. A head and an upper body part from Tel Asor. It is similar to the 5.IV.3 heads, but has a short bread decorated with incised lines. The body is hollow. Context: unknown. Literature: Giveon 1967:121, pI. 10:4-5; Holland 1975: B.ll.c.3. 5.1V.5.24. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. It has a solid pillar body with the hands under the breasts. The head is rounded and has an applied hat. Note: the shape of the head is close to the JPF, but the nose is different and there are indented details. Context: AZ.195, a silo fom the Persian period. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:16; Holland 1975: AI. b.1, pI. 1:4. 5.1V.5.25. A head from Tel Gemmeh. It is probably similar to the 5.IV.3 heads, but the published photographs are not very clear. Context: height 196, but the location is unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:17; Holland 1975: AI.i.19, pI. 1:11. 5.IV.5.26. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. It depicts a figure sitting in a chariot, very crudely made. The body is solid. The head is similar to the 5.IV.3 heads, with a pointed beard. Context: FJ.188, an area of unclear function in Petrie's "22nd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928:18, pI. 39:14; Holland 1975: Al.i.20. 5.1V.5.27. A head from Tel Gemmeh. It is very crude. There are applied disk eyes with incised pupils. The nose is also applied. Context: unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:20; Holland 1975: AI.i.18. 5.1V.5.28. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The figurine held an object (a child or a vessel?). The head is flattened and the eyes are applied and incised. The body is solid. Context: CW.193, a room (?) in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928:18, pI. 36:13; Holland 1975: Al.k.2, pI. 2:3, fig. 5:8. 5.1V.5.29. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The body is solid. The head has a large beard. Note: this may be a figurine from the Persian period. Context: unknown. Place: Rockefeller 1703 (?). Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:7; Holland 1975: Al.k.3. 5.IV.5.30. A head from Tel Gemmeh. It is probably similar to the 5.IV.3 heads. The top is flattened. Context: DR.192, probably an open area in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city.

264

Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:11; Holland 1975: AI.L.4, pI. 2:4. 5.IV.5.31. A head from Tel Gemmeh. It is very crude, perhaps similar to the 5.IV.3 heads. The eyes are applied and incised, and the ears are pinched by hand. Context: KA.177, an open area in Petrie's "18th dynasty" city. Literature: Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:17; Holland 1975: AI.i.19, pI. 1:11. 5.IV.5.32. A head from Tel Zeror. It is very crude and peculiar, with disk eyes and a unique headdress. It is not similar to the other heads of type 5.IV.5. Reg. no. 6518. Context: surface find from area B. Place: Romema, IAA no. 66-359. Literature: Ohata 1967: pl. 47:4; Holland 1975: AI.i.27, pI. 1:11. 5.IV.5.33. A head from Tel Erani. It is solid, rounded, and simple, except a peculiar horizontal protrusion. Context: area A, levels V-IV. Literature: Yeivin 1961: pI. 2: third row, no. 5; Holland 1975: AXVll.a.2. 5.1V.5.34. A nearly whole figurine from Tel el-Far'ah (south). There are legs. The head is similar to the 5.IV.3 heads; flattened from above, with applied and incised eyes. Context: unknown. Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.b.7, pI. 6:2.

5.IV.5.35. A whole male figurine from Ekron. The head is flattened. The arms are extended to the sides. Context: level VII, the area of the kiln, Iron Age I period. Note: it may be a wailing figure, cf. figurines 5.IV.2.8, 5.IV.2.10 (above). Literature: Gitin and Dothan 1987:203, up center. 5.IV.5.36. A hand-made head from Dor. It is probably a male. Further details are not yet published, other than a general dating to the Iron Age. Literature: Stern 1992: photograph no. 70. 5.IV.5.37. A head from Dan. There are side-locks, but no curls. It is probably hand-made. The right side is damaged. The head is a little similar to heads of type 5.VI.1 (below). The eyes are enhanced by painted circles. Context: level V, area e, Iron Age I. Literature: Biran 1992:127, 132 photograph 102. 5.IV.5.38. A hand-made head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. There were V-shaped legs (now missing). The arms are extended forward. There is no sign of breasts. The mouth is incised. • Note: it may be a rider's figurine. Context: CK.192, a room in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city. Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.b.3. 5.IV.5.39. A hand-made head and upper body part from 'Afulah. It is similar to figurine no. 9 above. There are crossed bands of red paint on the chest and perhaps an indication of a beard. The eyes are applied. Reg. no. A175212. Context: near installation XXIX, level III (?), Iron Age I period. Literature: Dothan, M. 1956:36-37, fig. 15:19, pI. 6:1; Holland 1975:42f, AI.i.2.

5.IV.5.40. A hand-made head from Tel es-Safi. It has applied eyes and ears. The mouth is incised. The hair is made of two tassels of clay, also incised. Context: not clear. Note: the head is similar to heads of type 5.IV.3 (above). Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-362. Literature: Dothan 1982:227f, pI. 12.

Megiddo, figurine 5.IV.1.8 (above). It is narrow, cylindrical and has a protrusion in its middle. Context: locus 1431 in square R5, a room in an 'Assyarian' court house. Level III. Literature: May 1935: pI. 24:M.4385; Pritchard 1943: type VII:198; Holland 1975: ax.e.z

5.IV.5.41. A hand-made head from Beth-Shean. It has rounded curls of hair. Iron Age I period. Literature: Mazar, A 1994. Had. Arch. 101-102:31.

5.IV.6.10. A fragment from Tel el-Far'ah (north). The hands are placed on the chest. Reg. no. F.1983.EBAF. Context: trench II, level 7b under floor 141 in house 187. 11th-10th centuries BC. Literature: De Vaux 1951: pI. 17:1, left; Chambon 1984: fig. 63:5; Holland 1975: B.VI1.1.

5.1V.6: Hollow Body Parts (of Figurine Types 5.111 - 5.1V)

5.IV.6.11. A fragment from Ta'anakh. One hand lies along the body, the other is uplifted (?). The body is female. Context: unknown, probably from the excavations of Lapp. Place: ASOR collection, Jerusalem. Literature: Holland 1975: B.V11.13, fig. 18:3.

5.IV.6.1. A fragment from Ashdod. It shows one hand placed on the right breast. Reg. no. A618/19. Context: not stratified. Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 7:16; Holland 1975: B.X.b.1.

5.IV.6.12. A fragment from Ta'anakh. The hands hold the breasts (now broken). Context: unknown, probably from the excavations of P. Lapp. Place: ASOR collection, Jerusalem. Literature: Holland 1975: B.VI1.14, addenda, fig. 76:1.

5.IV.6.2. A fragment from Kh. Hoga. It is probably hollow. There is one hand placed under something (a breast?). It is similar to no. 3 below. Negative no. 38409. Context: surface find. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna. 5.IV.6.3. A hollow (?) fragment from Tel Haror. The arms are placed underneath the breasts. It is similar to no. 2 above. Context: level G.3, 7th century BC. Literature: Oren 1991:17.

5.IV.6.13. A fragment from Ta'anakh. The hands are placed on the belly. It is a female figure holding a child (?). Context: room B, perhaps part of a tomb. According to Sellin, this locus is related to the public "palace" of the Bronze Age. Literature: Sellin 1904:40, fig. 37; Vincent 1907:159f, fig. 101; Pilz 1924: type F:98; Pritcahrd 1943: type Vlb:183; Holland 1975: BVIII.7.

5.IV.6.4. A fragment from Tel el-Ajjul. It shows a part of the peg. Context: unknown. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: B.IX.1, pI. 9:1.

5.IV.6.14. A fragment from Samaria. It is wheel-made and hollow. The female figure holds a drum. There are some remains of red slip. Literature: Holland 1975: B.VIII.5, pI. 18:8.

5.IV.6.5. A fragment from Tel Gemmeh. It shows a part of the peg. Context: unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:7; Holland 1975: B.IX.2.

5.IV.6.15. A fragment from Samaria. It is wheel-made and hollow. The left hand holds a drum (?), the right hand is missing. There are remains of red paint. Note: following Holland's description, this is probably a figurine mentioned in the report as T61 from the TO area (Samaria III: cat. no. 21). Literature: Holland 1975: B.V1I1.4, pI. 18:7.

5.IV.6.6. A fragment from Tel Gemmeh. It shows hands and breasts. Context: FH.189, an area not well defined in Petrie's "22nd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:19; Holland 1975: B.VI1.4, fig. 17:3, pI. 8:7. 5.IV.6.7. A fragment from Tel Gemmeh. The hands grasped the breasts (now broken). Context: EF.190, a large open area in Petrie's "22nd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:22; Holland 1975: B.VI1.5, fig. 17:4, pI. 8:8.

5.IV.6.16. A fragment from Samaria. It is wheel-made and hollow. The female figure holds a drum. Literature: Holland 1975: B.V1I1.3, pI. 18:6.

5.IV.6.8. A fragment from Tel Gemmeh. Only one arm survived, holding a breast. Context: BM.197, a large room (or a court) of a building in Petrie's "26th dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:45; Holland 1975: B.VI1.6, pI. 8:9. 5.IV.6.9. A fragment from Megiddo. It is hollow and wheelmade. There are little hands holding the inner part of the breasts. The body is similar to that of the musician from

265

5.IV.6.17. A female body from Samaria. it is wheel-made and hollow. The hands hold a child or a musical instrument (?), but not a drum. There is a red slip. Place: Rockefeller 32.2428. Note: following the museum card, the figurine was found in locus E207 and its reg. no. is C.592. Literature: Holland 1975: B.VII1.2, pI. 18:2. 5.IV.6.18. A female fragment from Samaria. It is wheelmade and hollow. There are small breasts. The hands probably hold an object (a child or a musical instrument?). Thin red slip. Reg. no. C.100b? Literature: Holland 1975: B.VIII.1, fig. 18:4.

5.1V.6.19. A female fragment from Samaria. It is wheelmade and hollow, but broken lengthwise. The left hand is placed on the chest. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 3443. Note: the collection card gives the reg. no. as C.583. Literature: Holland 1975: B.VII1.12.a, pI. 44:3. 5.1V.6.20. A female fragment from Samaria. It is wheelmade and hollow, but broken lengthwise. The left hand is placed on the chest and is incised. Dark red slip. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 3444. Note: the collection card gives the reg. no. as. C.584. Literature: Holland 1975: B.VIII.12.b, pI. 44:4. 5.1V.6.21. A female fragment from Samaria. It is wheelmade and hollow. The hands held a drum. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 3445. Note: the collection card gives the reg. no. as C.629. Literature: Holland 1975: B.VII1.6, pI. 45:1. 5.1V.6.22. A solid body fragment from Hazor. It is wheelmade and covered with black-brown paint. Reg. no. 1267/1b. Context: locus 3132a, a room at the corner of a building near the citadel. Level Va, 8th century BC. Literature: Hazor II: pI. 103:5; Holland 1975: B.VII.3, pI. 44:3. 5.1V.6.23. A female fragment from Tel Zeror. It is probably hollow. The lower body is a pillar, painted with geometric patterns in pink. The hands are placed under the breasts. Yellow-brown clay. Reg. no. 461/1. Place: Romema, IAA no. 65-355. Note: according to the card at Romema, the base is hollow. Context: trenches S-R, a mixed assemblage of Iron Age through Arabian periods. Literature: Ohata 1967:10; Holland 1975: AX1.58, pI. 4:5, fig. 10:7.

5.1V.7: Solid Body Parts (of Figurine Types 5.111 - 5.1V) 5.1V.7.1. A female body from Beth Shean. The hands are broken, but the right one was uplifted and the other placed along the body (?). Orange slip. Reg. no. P31-50-107. Context: locus 1527, part of houses B7 in lower level V. Iron Age I period. Literature: James 1966: fig. 111:2; Holland 1975: A.XI.6. 5.1V.7.2. A female body from Beth Shean. The hands are placed on the belly, with an indication of the fingers. Yellow clay. Reg. no. P32-15-200. Context: locus 1350, an area which is not well-defined near the gate. Lower level V, Iron Age I period. Literature: James 1966: fig. 111:3; Holland 1975: AX.d.1. 5.1V.7.3. A female body from Beth Shean. The right hand lies below the breast, the left hand on the belly. The published photograph is not very clear. Reg. no. P32-15201. Context: under locus 1549, whose nature is not clear. Lower level V, Iron Age I period. Literature: James 1966: fig. 112:6; Holland 1975: A.X.d.2. 5.1V.7.4. A female body from Beth Shean. The hands support small breasts. Context: exact details unknown; the end of the Late Bronze Age level.

266

Note: the shape and the date fit a plaque figurine, which is probably what the fragment is (cf. Rowe 1940: fig. 107:7, against the classification of Holland). Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 45a:5; Pritchard 1943: type VII:190; Holland 1975: AX.a.1. 5.1V.7.5. A female body from Beth Shean. The right hand is placed on one breast, the left underneath the other breast. Orange-yellow slip. Reg. no. P29-103-875. Context: locus 281, level IV, ca. 9th century BC. Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:5; Holland 1975: AX.a.2. 5.1V.7.6. A female body from Gezer. The hands are broken. there is no clear sign of breasts, but a necklace is painted in black color. Context: zone 8, Macalister's "third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:29; Pilz 1924: Cb:77; Pritchard 1943: Vllla:282; Holland 1975: AX.h.3. 5.1V.7.7. A female body from Gezer. The hands lie on the chest, with indication of the fingers. The breasts are small. The sexual organ is marked, and there is a crescent-shaped necklace. Red slip. Context: unstratified. Literature: Gezer 111:418, pI. 221:26; Pritchard 1943: type VI11:227; Holland 1975: AX.h.2. 5.1V.7.8. A female pillar body from Gezer. The hands look like wings alongside the body. Context: unknown. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:24; Pilz 1924: Cc:78; Pritchard 1943: type VIII:217; Holland 1975: AX.f.1. 5.1V.7.9. A female pillar body from Gezer. The hands were probably extended to the sides (now broken). The breasts are small and the base has a pronounced ridge. Note: this body is similar to those of Mycenaean figurines. Context: unknown. Literature: Gezer III: pl. 221:13; Pilz 1924: Cb:76; Pritchard 1943: type VIII:226; Holland 1975: AX1.11. 5.1V.7.10. A female pillar body from Gezer. The hands are broken. There is a protruding belly. Context: a grave or a cistern in zone 8, Iron Age II period. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 18:2; Pilz 1924: Cb:75; Pritchard 1943: type VIII:209; Holland 1975: AX1.12. 5.1V.7.11. A female body from Megiddo. There are small breasts, but no remains of hands and arms. Traces of redburnished slip. Reg. no. M.3991. Context: grave (?) 64 in square ST/18, Iron Age II period. Literature: Guy 1938: pI. 171:4; Holland 1975: AX1.46. 5.IV.7.12. A female body from Megiddo. The left hand is placed on the breast. There is an .indication of the fingers. Reg. no. C.590. Context: square N/12, the "stables" areaIthe exact locus is unknown). Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:19; Holland 1975: AX.a.9. 5.1V.7.13. A female body from Megiddo. The hands cover the breasts. There is an indication of fingers and bracelets. Painted lines on the belly mark a dress (perhaps). Reg. no. M.1071. Context: Schumacher's trench, unstratified. Place: Rockefeller 34.1477. Literature: May 1935: pI. 29:M.1071; Pritchard 1943: type VII:224; Holland 1975: A.X.a.6.

5.1V.7.14. A female body from Megiddo. The hands are extended to the sides. There is no indication of breasts. The figure wears a necklace with a rounded pendant. Context: locus 1674, a mixed fill of levels V-IV in the court of the southern stables. Literature: May 1935: pI. 28:M.5393; Holland 1975: AX.hA. 5.1V.7.15. A body from Megiddo. The photograph does not permit an exact classification. There is perhaps a suspension hole. Context: a room in the north-eastern part of Schumacher's "palace", level V. Literature: Schumacher 1908: abb. 79:d; Holland 1975: AX1.45. 5.1V.7.16. A female body from Megiddo. One arm survived, placed on the chest. The body is long and thin. Note: Holland classified this fragment with other JPF, but it is too fragmented for an exact classification. Context: a room in the north-eastern part of Schumacher's "palace", level V. Literature: Schumacher 1908: abb. 149:c; Holland 1975: AX.a.8. 5.1V.7.17. A female body from Samaria. The hands are placed on the abdomen. Context: area QE, unstratified. Place: Harvard. Literature: Holland 1975: AX.e.1, fig. 10:1. 5.1V.7.18. A female body from Samaria. The hands are placed along the body. There is a yellow slip and a necklace of indented holes, painted yellow. Reg. no. C.1224. Context: E207. Note: From the description given by Holland, this fragment can be identified in the Samaria report (mentioned only in the text there). Literature: Holland 1975: A.X.f.3, fig. 10:2; Samaria 1:80, catalogue no. 20. 5.1V.7.19. A female body from Samaria. The hands probably held an object. There is a depiction of legs, and perhaps of a dress on the pillar body. Red slip. Context: unknown. Place: Rockefeller (?). Literature: Holland 1975: AX.gA, fig. 10:3, pI. 42:4. 5.1V.7.20. A female body from Samaria. The hands are placed under the breasts. There are remains of two sidelocks of hair on the shoulders. Reg. no. 2189. Context: zone S.3 west, section A, a mixed assemblage. Note: Holland classified this fragment like the JPF, but it is different. The excavators thought that it may belong to the Hellenistic period. Literature: Samaria 1:384-5, pI. 75g; Holland 1975: AX.a.11. 5.1V.7.21. A female body from Samaria. It is too small for an exact classification. Context: unknown. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: AXI.57, fig. 12:7.

5.1V.7.23. A body from Samaria. The left hand is placed on the belly, the right hand on the chest (now broken). Red slip. Context: unknown. Place: Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 3488. Literature: Holland 1975: AX.d.3, pI. 42:1. 5.1V.7.24. A body from Samaria. The hands hold an object. The lower body is pillar shaped and partially hollow. Red slip. Context: unknown. Place: Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 3442. Literature: Holland 1975: AX.g.5a, addenda, pI. 42:2. 5.1V.7.25. A body from Tel el-Far'ah (south). It is perhaps a male figure. There are red painted bands on the neck and a necklace. Context: WV building, the exact locus is unknown. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:88-89, AX.h.1, pI. 4:3. 5.1V.7.26. A female body from Tel el-Far'ah (south). It has the remains of white-wash and red painted bands on the back. The hands are both uplifted, like the Mycenaean figurines. Context: UP.374, which is probably mistaken; perhaps VP.374 (Holland 1975: vol. 1:89). Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: AX. i.1, pI. 4:4. 5.1V.7.27. A female body from Tel Gemmeh. The arms were extended sideways, or to the front. There is a pillar base. Context: unknown. Place: London? Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.14, pI. 4:5, fig. 10:7. 5.1V.7.28. A male (?) body from Tel Gemmeh. The left arm is placed on the belly, and there is a sign of the right arm there as well (but now broken away). Context: unknown. Place: London? Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.15, pI. 4:6.

5.1V.8: Miscellaneous fragments 5.1V.8.1. A fragment of a hollow, cylindrical base from Beth Shean. Its nature is not clear. Reg. no. 25-9-522. Context: room 1021a, level V, but a very disturbed area. Literature: Fitzgerald 1930: pI. 48:27; Holland 1975: AX1.17. 5.1V.8.2. A fragment of a body with legs from Gezer. Context: unknown. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.b.2, pI. 6:6. 5.1V.8.3. A fragment of a body with legs from Gezer. The arms are uplifted. Context: unknown. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.a.4, pI. 5:7. 5.1V.8.4. A fragment of a body with legs from Beth Shean. Reg. no. 26-11-337. Context: locus 1126, lower level V. Literature: James 1966: fig. 108:2; Holland 1975: AXlIl.c.3.

5.IV.7.22. A pillar body from Samaria. There is no sign of breasts, but remains of the hands (?) in the upper part of the fragment. Context: unknown. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: AXI.56, fig. 12:6.

5.1V.8.5. A fragment of a body with legs from Hazor. There is no indication of breasts. Reg. no. B2I971.

267

Context: locus 3116a, a passage between the citadel and a building east of it. Level Va. Literature: Hazor II: pis. 163:6, 103:2; Holland 1975: AX1.13.

Literature: Glueck 1934: fig. 8; Glueck 1945: fig. 82; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.22; Grohman 1962:419, fig. 63. [Fig. 11:1].

5.1V.8.6. A fragment of a sitting figure with legs from Hazor. There are small arms alongside the body. Reg. no. 971/1. Context: locus 3116a, cf. figurine no. 5 above. Level Va. Literature: Hazor II: pis. 163:7, 103:4; Holland 1975: AXIV.b.2.

5.V.1.3. A nearly whole figurine from Beth Shean. Reg. no. 30-12-84. Context: near 1549, level V, Iron Age I or 10th century BC. Place: Rockefeller, i.9684. Literature: Glueck 1945: fig. 83:right; James 1966: fig. 112:5; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.3; Beck 1991: note 4:3, fig. 3

5.1V.8.7. A fragment of a crude body with legs from Megiddo. Applied lumps of clay indicate the breasts and perhaps the belly. Context: the area of tomb F; an exact locus was not defined. Literature: Schumacher 1908:63, abb. 78; Holland 1975: AXlIl.c.6. 5.1V.8.8. A fragment of a female body from Samaria. The right hand is placed diagonally on the belly. Purple-brown paint. Holland thought that it is a sitting figure. Context: unknown. Place: London? Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.c.3, pI. 14:10. 5.1V.8.9. A fragment of a female body with legs from Tel Gemmeh. It is incised (perhaps these are potter's marks). Context: unknown. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: AXIII.a.5, fig. 14:3, pI. 5:8. 5.1V.8.10. A fragment of a female body with legs from Tel Gemmeh. The arms are extended (to the sides?) and there is an indication of the sexual organ by indentation. Context: HN.183, Petrie's "20th dynasty" city. According to Kenyon, it is phase Va of the 10th century BC. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.a.6, fig. 14:4, pl. 6:1. 5.1V.8.11. A fragment of a female body with protruding belly, probably from Tel Gemmeh. There were probably legs, now missing. Context: unknown. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.a.1, fig. 14:7, pI. 6:5.

5.V. Iron Age Plaque Figurines

5.V.1.5. A body fragment from Beth Shean. Reg. no. 25-9595. P29-103-883. Context: locus 1024, north temple, lower level V, ca. 11th century BC. Literature: Rowe 1945: pI. 44a:2 left; Pritchard 1943: type V:171; James 1966: fig. 111:1; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.5; Beck 1991: note 3:5, fig. 5. 5.V.1.6. A body fragment from Gezer. It portrays a pregnant female, naked (unlike most of the other examples of type 5.V.1). Context: Macalister's "third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer 11:414; Gezer III: pI. 221:2; Pilz 1924: E96, fig. 22; Pritchard 1943: type V:160; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.9; Beck 1991: note 3:21. 5.V.1.7. A head and upper body part from Gezer. Context: Macalister's ''third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer II: fig. 499; Pilz 1924: E95; Pritchard 1943: type V:161; Amiran 1967; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.10; Beck 1991: note 3:20. [Fig. 11:2]. 5.V.1.8. A head and upper body part from Dibon. Context: area L, but the exact location was not defined. Note: there are no decorations or breasts (cf. no. 2 above). Literature: Morton 1989:321, fig. 15. 5.V.1.9. A body fragment from Dalhamiyah (excavations of N. Zori). Reg. no. 2170. Context: square 1, Iron Age I period. Place: Romema, IAA no. 69-1538. Literature: Beck 1991: note 3:6, fig. 6.

5.V.1: Female Plaque Figurines, Holding a Disk of Clay (Drum) 5.V.1.1. A body from Irbid (Transjordan). The head and the base are missing. Context: grave A, 10th-9th centuries BC. The exact position of the figurine inside the grave is unknown. Note: Holland classified this fragment as a pillar body, but there is no proof for this. The comparisons made by the excavator, Dajani, indicate that it is a plaque figurine. Literature: Dajani 1966: pI. 33:16; Holland 1975: vol. 1:196, A.X.g.3; Dornemann 1983:130, ia:16; Beck 1991: note 3. 5.V.1.2. A head and upper body Nebo). Context: surface find. Notes: Glueck though that it is goddes~ holding a loaf of bread decorations - perhaps because of Cf. figurines nos. 8, 30, 36 below.

5.V.1.4. A head and an upper body part from Beth Shean. Reg. no. 25-9-336. Context: locus 1350, lower level V, ca. 11th century BC. Literature: Rowe 1945: pI. 44a:2 upper, pI. 35:19; Pritchard 1943: type V:172; James 1966: fig. 111:4; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.4; Beck 1991: note 3:3.

part from el-Meshed (near

a male (1934:27), later a (1945:153). There are no the bad preservation state.

268

5.V.1.10. A head and upper body part from Hazor. Reg. no. 410/1. Context: area A, locus 159. It is part of street 174, between the wall and the houses. Level VIII, ca. 9th century BC. Literature: Hazor II: pis. 76:12, 163:2; Amiran 1967: note 3; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.12; Beck 1991: note 3:2. 5.V.1.11. A body fragment from Hazor. Reg. no. 1830/1. Context: area A, locus 159b. It is a large open area within the city walls. Level X, ca. 10th century BC. Note: the disk is decorated, but the drawing in the report is not very good. Literature: Hazor II: pis. 76:13, 163:1; Amiran 1967: note 3; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.11; Beck 1991: note 3:1.

Place: Amman. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 88, pI. 16:3, type 2.d.4. 5.V.1.13. A whole body from Megiddo. Context: a grave from level II. Note: Pilz dated it to ca. 1500 BC. Literature: Schumacher 1908: fig. 71; Pilz 1924: E94; Pritchard 1943: type V:159; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.17; Beck 1991: note 3:9, fig. 4. 5.V.1.14. A whole figurine from Megiddo. Context: room 37 south of the "temple", level V. Literature: May 1935:149, pI. 27:M.65; Pritchard 1943: type V:164, fig. 15; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.20; Beck 1991: note 3:10. 5.V.1.15. A head and an upper body part from Megiddo. Context: square 0/14, the "temple" area, level IV. Possibly from room 286. Place: Rockefeller 36.926. Literature: May 1935: pI. 27:M.1138; Pritchard 1943: type V:165; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.19; Beck 1991: note 3:12. 5.V.1.16. A whole body from Megiddo. Context: square R/9, under locus 1693; a paved court under palace 1723. Level V, ca. 11th century BC. Place: Rockefeller 36.958. Literature: May 1935: pI. 28:M.5418; Pritchard 1943: type V:168, fig. 15; Holland 1975: C.V.b.21; Beck 1991: note 3:15. 5.V.1.17. A whole figurine from Megiddo. Context: area N/12, in Schumacher's trench. It may have belonged to level V (of the American excavations), by analogy with figurine no. 16 (above). Literature: May 1935: pI. 27:M.810; Pritchard 1943: type V:169; Holland 1975: C.V.b.18; Beck 1991: note 3:11. 5.V.1.18. A head and upper body part Megiddo. Context: room 1004 in a building of level II, 7th century BC. Note: the excavators though that it is an intrusive object, originally from level III. Place: Rockefeller 36.944. Literature: May 1935: pI. 27:M.4365; Pritchard 1943: type V:166; Holland 1975: C.V.b.16; Beck 1991: note 3:13. 5.V.1.19. A head and upper body part from Megiddo. Context: square 0/13, the temple area, level III. The exact locus is not known. Note: Holland thought that this figurine is a hollow pillar with a peg for the head, but the photograph shows the broken body-line, not a peg. Literature: May 1935: pI. 27:M.787; Pritchard 1943: type V:162; Holland 1975: B.V.c.4; Beck 1991: note 3:14.

5.V.1.22. A head and an upper body part from Samaria. Reg. no. 4782. Context: 67.sub, zone S.2, square H9. It is a room of the Herodian (i.e., Roman) period, above earlier levels. Note: Holland was the first to suggest that it is a woman with a disk. Literature: Samaria I: pI. 75b; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.24. 5.V.1.23. A head and upper body part from Samaria. Reg. no. 4679. Context: 840, zone 58; a room with a mixed assemblage from the Herodian period. It is above the Iron Age palace. Literature: Samaria I: pI. 75e; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.25. 5.V.1.24. A body fragment from Samaria. Reg. no. 3960. Either a photograph or a draWing was not published. Context: room 423 of the "ostraca house", Iron Age II. Literature: Samaria 1:384, Holland 1975: C.vl.a.26. 5.V.1.25. A nearly whole figurine from Tel Aphek. The face is damaged. There is a necklace and a little disk, held in both hands. Context: a favissa in a four-roomed house, 10th century BC. Literature: Kochavi 1975:51f, pI. 11c; Beck 1991: note 3:19. 5.V.1.26. A nearly whole body from Tel Deir Alia. Reg. no. DA/2609. Context: not published. Place: Amman, J.13773. Literature: Van der-Koij and Ibrahim 1989: 104, no. 128; Amr 1980: no. 87, pI. 16:2. 5.V.1.27. A body fragment from Tel Deir Alia. Context: DA/D/CI7.8. Level IV, 8th century BC (?). Place: Amman, J.13746. Literature: Amr 1980:63f, no. 34; Zayadine 1987: no. 159; Beck 1991: note 3:b. 5.V.1.28. A nearly whole body from Tel Deir Alia. Reg. no. DA/A/237? Place: Leiden. Literature: Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.6; Amr 1980: no. 35. 5.V.1.29. A nearly whole body from Tel Hadar. The legs are missing. The figure holds a little drum that covers one breast. Reg. no. 2016/1. Context: locus 279, ca. 10th century BC. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation team.

5.V.1.20. A body fragment from Gebel Qal'ah (the citadel), Amman. Context: surface find. Place: Amman, museum no. J.12313. Literature: Dornemann 1983:129, pI. 89:3; Amr 1980: no. 86; Beck 1991: note 3:E.

5.V.1.30. A whole figurine from Tel Ira. It is hermaphrodite, with a male sexual organ and female breasts. Reg. no. 4265/1. Context: locus 512, a room of a public building near the gate. Level VII, 7th century BC. Place: Romema, IAA no. 84-62. Literature: Beck 1991; Beit Arieh 1985:17-25. Note: on androgynous gods in Egypt see Zandee, J. 1988. Der Androgene Gott. in: Gorg, M. ed. Religion im Erbe Agyptens. Wiesbaden:240-278.

5.V.1.21. A whole figurine from Transjordan. Holland saw it at Amman, but did not report about its origin. Context: not clear. Place: Amman, museum no. JT.1639. Note: I could not locate this figurine in Amr's Ph.D. Literature: Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.2.

5.V.1.31. A body fragment from Tel Amal (Nir-David). Context: level IV, 10th century BC? The exact locus was not publlshed. Place: Romema, IAA no. 67-1134. Literature: Edelstein 19??:25, fig. 21; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.1, pI. 45:4; Edelstein and Levy 1972: fig. 17:7; Beck

5.V.1.12. A body fragment from Heshbon. Height 52 mm. Context: "phase 194".

269

1991: note 3:7. 5.V.1.32. A body from Tel el-Far'ah (north). Museum no. F.3426. Context: locus 420 under floor 440, level Vllb. This is an open area, not well defined. Ca. 11-1oth century BC. Literature: De Vaux 1957: pI. 11b:1; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.8; Chambon 1984: fig. 63:2, pI. 84; Beck 1991: note 3:16, fig.

8. 5.V.1.33. A body from Tel el-Far'ah (north). Museum no. F.3031. Context: locus 426, trench II, level Vllb. This area was disturbed by foundations of the later building 411. Ca. 11th10th centuries BC. Literature: Chambon 1984: fig. 63:1, pI. 84; Beck 1991: note 3:17. 5.V.1.34. A head and an upper body part, probably from Kerak (Moab). It is very crude, with a hat (not applied) and peculiar decorations. Context: unknown. Place: Amman TJ.421. Literature: Harding 1937: pI. X:9; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.6; Beck 1991: note 3:g.

Context: unknown. Place: Amman J.11145. Size 42x66 mm. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 81, pI. 15:1. 5.V.1.42. A head and upper body part from Malhata. It is not well preserved. There are long side-locks, divided into three combed strands or bands. Reg. no. 1719. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of Y. Beit Arieh.

5.V.2: Plaque Figurines with "Hathor Hairdress" General Note. I have included here whole figurines, heads with upper body parts and heads. Nearly all of these have a rounded clay background at the top, and are made in shallow moulding. The position of the arms varies. 5.V.2.1. A figurine from Beth Shemesh. The hands hold lotus branches. Context: room 468, Iron Age I. Literature: AS III: pI. 19; AS IV: pI. 51:17; Pritchard 1943: type 1A:14; Holland 1975: C.V.a.1.

5.V.1.35. A head and an upper body part, probably from Kerak (Moab). The drum is very small and simple. Context: unknown. Place: private collection. Literature: Harding 1937: pI. X:8; Glueck 1945: fig. 83:left; Grohman 1962:419, fig. 64; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.13; Beck 1991: note 3:f.

5.V.2.2. A mould from Gezer. The hands hold lotus branches. Context: Macalister's ''third Semitic" level, the entrance to the water system. Literature: Gezer 1:262, 264; Gezer III: pI. 19:16; Pilz 1924: B.62, fig. 13.

5.V.1.36. A head and an upper body part (from Transjordan? - the exact origin is unknown). The drum is simple. Context: unknown. Place: Haifa, museum of ancient art, no. 3818. Literature: Zemer 1991:26 no. 37, photograph p. 93.

5.V.2.3. A figurine from Gezer. One hand holds the breast, the other lies along the body. Context: zone 29.IV, "third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer 11:413; Gezer III: pI. 220:23; Pilz 1924:137, A451; Pritchard 1943: type Il.d:105; Holland 1975: C.l.a.2.

5.V.1.37. A whole body from Megiddo. It is badly preserved. Context: locus 1760, a paved area of level VII with but few remains of walls. Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:20; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.15.

5.V.2.4. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. Context: not clear; "fourth Semitic", Persian or Hellenistic periods. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:11; Pilz 1924: A3b.44, fig. 28; Pritchard 1943: type lIa:43; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.11.

5.V.1.38. A whole mould for a figurine from Ta'anakh. Context: destruction layer in the "cultic building", room 1, 10th century BC. Literature: Lapp 1964:39-41, fig. 21; BA 30/1: fig. 3; Holland 1975: N.l.a.6; Beck 1991: note 3:8, fig. 2; Nakhai 1994:27. 5.V.1.39. A body fragment from Kh. Ayun Musa (near Nebo). Context: surface find. Literature: Hencke 1959: pI. 4b; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.23; Beck 1991: note 3:c. 5.V.1.40. A nearly whole body from Tel Deir Alia. It is very similar to no. 28 (above). The legs are missing. Reg. no. DAlB.124. Context: not published. Place: Amman J.12699. Literature: Franken 1960: pI. 13a; Franken 1963: pI. 41a; Amiran 1967: note 4; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.7; Amr 1980: no. 33; Beck 1991: note 3:a. 5.V.1.41. A head and upper body part from Transjordan (exact origin unknown). It is similar, but not identical with figurine no. 35 (above). It holds an object, but not necessarily a drum.

270

5.V.2.5. A whole figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. The head has no clay background. Context: the "high place" area, but the exact location is unknown. Literature: Gezer II: fig. 500, 403, 415; Pilz 1924: A3b.38, fig. 28; Pritchard 1943: type lIa:40; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.14. 5.V.2.6. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. Context: the water system. s Literature: Gezer II: pI. 19:17; Pilz 1924: A3b.45, fig. 28; Pritchard 1943: type lIa:44; Holland 1975:~C.II.a.17. 5.V.2.7. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. There are lotus flowers above the figure. Context: zone 29.IV, "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:5; Pilz 1924:142, no. 90; Pritchard 1943: type IIc:99; Holland 1975: C.ll.c.2. 5.V.2.8. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus branches. Context: the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:22; Pritchard 1943: type la:7; Holland 1975: C.V.a.2.

5.V.2.9. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus branches. Context: zone 19.VI, the Hellenistic level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:3; Pritchard 1943: type la:8; Holland 1975: C.V.a.3. [Fig. 11:3].

5.V.2.21. A figurine from Gezer. The hands probably hold lotus-branches. Reg. no. 1297. Context: locus 34086, NE.34.314. Level 10 (?), probably Late Bronze Age period. Literature: Dever a.o. 1986: pI. 54:2. 5.V.2.22. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotusbranches. Reg. no. 907. Context: locus 25047, NE.25.100. Level6a, Late Bronze Age period. Literature: Dever a.o. 1986 (Gezer IV): pI. 58:8.

5.V.2.10. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus branches. Context: a mixed assemblage. Place: Rockefeller P.14. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:10; Pilz 1924:139, B.64; Pritchard 1943: type la:11; Holland 1975: C.V.a6.

5.V.2.23. A figurine from an unknown origin. The hands probably hold lotus-branches. Context: unknown. Place: Rockefeller P.22. Note: Pilz suggested that this figurine is the same as no. 10 (above). This is unlikely, since each figurine has a separate museum number. Literature: Vincent 1907: pI. 3:10; Holland 1975: C.V.a.17.

5.V.2.11. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus branches. Context: the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:22; Pritchard 1943: type la:7; Holland 1975: C.V.a.2. 5.V.2.12. A figurine from Gezer. The hands probably hold lotus branches. Context: the "third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:4; Pilz 1924:142, no. 92; Pritchard 1943: type 111:127; Holland 1975: C.V.a.10.

5.V.2.24. A whole figurine from Lachish. The hands hold the breasts. The feet point to the sides. Reg. no. 6754. Context: grave 71, area 500. The grave is probably from the Late Bronze age. Literature: Lachish IV: pI. 49:1; Holland 1975: C.II.c.3.

5.V.2.13. A figurine from Gezer. The hands probably hold lotus branches. Context: the "third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:20; Pilz 1924: no. B59; Pritchard 1943: type la:6; Holland 1975: C.V.a.11.

5.V.2.25. A whole figurine from Lachish. The hands hold lotus-branches. The feet point to the left. Reg. no. 6990. Context: locus 4034, the "potter's cave". The end of the Late Bronze age. Literature: Lachish IV: pI. 49:4; Holland 1975: C.v.a.14.

5.V.2.14. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The hands probably hold lotus branches. Reg. no. 100. Context: locus 4022, a refuse pit with mixed contents. Literature: Dever a.o. 1970: pI. 37:11, 25a.

5.V.2.26. A nearly whole figurine (composed of two fragments) from Megiddo. The hands hold the breasts. The feet point to the side. Context: Schumacher's "Mittelburg", level III. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 17a; Holland 1975: C.v.a.15.

5.V.2.15. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The hands are uplifted to the sides. Context: zone II1a28, between the "third Semitic" and the "fourth Semitic" levels. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:14; Pilz 1924: no. B65; Pritchard 1943: type Ib:21; Holland 1975: C.V.b.3.

5.V.2.27. A figurine from Megiddo. The hands hold the breasts. Context: Schumacher's "Nordburg". Literature: Schumacher 1908:65, fig. 86; Vincent 1907: pI. 3:9; Pilz 1924: B.54; Pritchard 1943: type i:1; Holland 1975: C.V.a.16.

5.V.2.16. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The hands are uplifted to the sides. Context: the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:12; Pilz 1924:139, no. B66; Pritchard 1943: type Ib:20; Holland 1975: C.V.b.2. 5.V.2.17. A head from Gezer. Context: zone 111.22, the "second Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:8; Pilz 1924: no. Fb:106; Pritchard 1943: type Vllla:246; Holland 1975: C.VIII.b.1. 5.V.2.18. A head from Gezer. Context: zone V.30, the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:5; Pilz 1924: no. Fb:115; Pritchard 1943: type Vllla:247; Holland 1975: C.VlIl.b.2.

5.V.2.28. A figurine from Tel Abu-Hawwam. The hands are placed along the body. Context: level IV, square E2, a residential area of the Iron Age 1 period. Place: Rockefeller 34.343. Literature: Hamilton 1935:31, no. 176; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.10.

5.V.2.19. A head from Gezer. Context: zone VI.16, the Hellenistic level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:2; Pilz 1924: no. Fb:118; Pritchard 1943: type Vllla:248; Holland 1975: C.VlIl.b.3.

5.V.2.29. A nearly whole figurine from Tel el-Hesi. The hands hold lotus-branches. Context: level 3. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: pI. 68:2h; Pritchard 1943: type la:5; Holland 1975: C.V.a.13. 5.V.2.30. A whole figurine from Ta'anakh. The hands are placed on the belly. The feet point to the sides. Context: level 4 (?). Literature: Sellin 1904: fig. 52; Pilz 1924: D.82; Pritchard 1943: type 111:130, fig. 12; Driver 1922:59; Holland 1975: C.lIl.a.5.

5.V.2.20. A head from Gezer with a unique headdress. Context: zone IV.2, the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer II: fig. 496; Pilz 1924: no. Fb:108; Pritchard 1943: type 8A:271; Holland 1975: C.IX.f.1.

271

5.V.2.31. A figurine from an unknown origin. The left hand lies on the belly, the right one on the chest. Context: unknown. Literature: Vincent 1907: pI. 3:11; Pilz 1924: A4:50; Pritchard 1943: type IId:104; Holland 1975: C.l.c.2.

Literature: Dever a.o. 1970: pI. 37:10, 25b.

5.V.4: Plaque Figurines with "Crescent" Hairdresses

5.V.2.32. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The hands are placed along the body. There is almost no clay background. The figurine is pressed in a deep mould (cf. type 5.V.9 below). Context: unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:50; Pritchard 1943: type 111:113; Holland 1975: C.IV.b.7. 5.V.2.33. A whole figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus branches. There is an Egyptianized type of crown on the head. The legs point aside. Context: zone 3.IV, ''third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer 11:413, fig. 498; Pilz 1924: F:100; Pritchard 1943: type la:17; Holland 1975: C.V.a.7.

5.V.3: Plaque Figurines with 'Feathers' above the Forehead and 'Hathor' Side-locks 5.V.3.1. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The left hand is placed on the lower belly, the right one on the chest. Context: zone 28, the "fourth Semitic" level. Place: Rockefeller P.43. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:18; Pilz 1924: M:48, fig. 11; Pritchard 1943: type IId:101; Holland 1975: C.l.c.1. 5.V.3.2. A figurine from Gezer. The hands are placed on the chest. Context: the "third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:1; Pilz 1924: A3a:28; Pritchard 1943: type IIb:92; Holland 1975: C.II.a.7. 5.V.3.3. A figurine from Gezer. The hands lie on the chest. There is probably an indication of pregnancy. Context: the "third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:19; Pilz 1924: A3a:29; Pritchard 1943: type IIb:93; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.8.

5.V.4.1. A whole figurine from Tel Beit-Mirsim. The hands lie on the belly. Reg. no. SN.1387. Context: square SE.22. Place: Rockefeller i.9017. Literature: TBM II: pI. 26:6; Albright 1939: pI. A:6; Pritchard 1943: type Vla:177; Holland 1975: C.lIl.a.4. [Fig. 11:5]. 5.V.4.2. A figurine from Tel Beit-Mirsim. It is similar to figurine no. 1 (above). Reg. no. SN.1227. Context: square SE.23, level B. Literature: TBM II: pI. 26:10; Albright 1939: pI. A:10; Pritchard 1943: type Vla:173; Holland 1975: C.lIl.c.1 (or C.lIl.a.1?). 5.V.4.3. A body fragment from Tel Beit-Mirsim. It is similar to nos. 1-2 (above). Reg. no. SN.1120. Context: square SE.24b, level B. Literature: TBM II: pI. 26:7; Albright 1939: pI. A:7; TBM III: pI. 55:1; Pritchard 1943: type Vla:175; Holland 1975: C.lIl.a.2. 5.V.4.4. A body fragment from Tel Beit-Mirsim. It is similar to nos. 1-2 (above). Reg. no. SN.1208. Context: square SE.14 near silo 36, level B. Literature: TBM II: pI. 26:8; Albright 1939: pI. A:8; TBM III: pI. 55:3; Pritchard 1943: type Vla:176; Holland 1975: C.lIl.a.3. 5.V.4.5. A nearly whole figurine from Jericho. The hands lie along the body. Context: room or court MV2, probably in a public building. Late Bronze Age. Place: London. Literature: Garstang 1934: pI. 43:3; Bienkowski 1986: fig. 61; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.13.

5.V.3.4. A figurine from Gezer. The hands are placed on the chest. Context: the "third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:16; Pilz 1924: A3a:27; Pritchard 1943: type IIb:91; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.9. [Fig. 11:4].

5.V.4.6. A figurine from Megiddo. The hands lie along the body (?). The hairdress is not very clear in the photograph. Context: locus 1817, level VilA, end of the Late Bronze age. It is a room or an open area in a domestic area. Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 242:14, M.6085; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.16.

5.V.3.5. A figurine from Gezer. The hands are placed on the chest. Note: there are no "Hathor' side-locks. Context: a cave in zone 29, without a clear date. Place: Rockefeller P.30. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:17; Pilz 1924: A3a:31; Pritchard 1943: type IIb:95; Holland 1975: C.II.a.10.

5.V.4.7. A figurine from Shechem. The hands lie along the body (?). Context: the south-eastern ''temend's'', but the level and the date are not clear. .~ Literature: Sellin 1927: pI. 29:a; Pritchard 1943: type 111:139; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.19. 5.V.4.8. A nearly whole figurine from Tel Yosef. The hands lie along the body (?). Context: surface find. Literature: lori 1958: pI. 7:4; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.20.

5.V.3.6. A fragment of a head from Gezer. Context: unknown. Literature: Gezer II: fig. 497; Pilz 1924: A3a:22; Pritchard 1943: type IIb:96; Holland 1975: C.VlIl.a.1.

5.V.4.9. A whole figurine from Tel Masad. The hands lie along the body, the feet point forward. Context: a Late Bronze - Iron age 1tomb. Literature: lori 1958: pI. 7:3; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.15.

5.V.3.7. A figurine from Gezer. The hands are placed on the chest (?), but are badly broken. Context: locus 4022, cf. figurine no. 5.V.2.14 above.

272

5.V.4.10. A figurine from Shechem. The hands lie along the body (?). Context: surface find. Literature: lori 1958: pI. 7:1; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.14. 5.V.4.11. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The hands lie along the body. Context: between the city walls, south of the gate. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:13; Pilz 1924: 0.88; Pritchard 1943: type 111:121; Holland 1975: C.rV.a.8.

5.V.4.12. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. The side-locks nearly reach the shoulders. Reg. no. 431. Context: locus 1031.1, level 10, fills of earth under wall 1031. Iron age I period. Place: Romema, IAA no. 74-53. Literature: Holland, in: Dever, et. al. 1974: pI. 40:15; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.17a (addenda). 5.V.4.13. A whole figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. It is very similar to figurine no. 12 (above). Context: fills inside the water system. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:15; Pilz 1924: A3b:46; Pritchard 1943: type lIa:45; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.17b. 5.V.4.14. A nearly whole figurine from Tel es-Safi. The hands hold the breasts. Context: unknown. Literature: Bliss and MAcalister 1902: pI. 67:16; Pilz 1924: A3a:36; Holland 1975: C.II.a.21. 5.V.4.15. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus-branches. Context: unknown. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:12; Pilz 1924: B.63; Pritchard 1943: type la:10; Holland 1975: C.V.a.5.

5.V.4.21. A nearly whole figurine from Tel el-Far'ah (south). The hands lie along the body (?). The side-locks reach the shoulders. Context: area E, date not clear. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IV.a.7, pI. 10:1. 5.V.4.22. A figurine from Azeka. The hands are placed on the breasts. Context: unknown. Literature: Bliss 1899: pI. 6:3; Bliss and Macalister 1902: pI. 67:12; Pilz 1924: A3b.35; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.23.

5.V.5: Plaque Figurines with "Feather Hats", without Clay Backgrounds 5.V.5.1. A mould for a head of a plaque figurine from Megiddo. Context: Schumacher's "palace". Literature: Schumacher 1908: fig. 158a; Pilz 1924: A3a.30; Pritchard 1943: type IIb:94; Holland 1975: C.VlIl.a.2. 5.V.5.2. A head from Megiddo. Context: room 591, a domestic building in square P.14. Iron Age (?). The excavators mentioned that this area is very disturbed. Literature: May 1935: pI. 31:M.227; Holland 1975: C.IX.a.1. 5.V.5.3. A head from Ta'anakh. Context: the "western fortress", above the "outer wall". Literature: Sellin 1904: fig. 51; Holland 1975: C.IX.a.2. 5.V.5.4. A whole figurine from Ta'anakh. The hands hold the breasts, the feet point to the front. Context: the "western fortress, third level". Literature: Sellin 1904: fig. 47; Driver 1922: facing p. 57:1; Pritchard 1943: type IIb:72; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.18. [Fig. 11:6].

5.V.4.16. A figurine from Gezer. The hands lie along the body (?). Context: zone 28?, the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:9; Pilz 1924: B+D.93; Pritchard 1943: type Id:36; Holland 1975: CVa.9. 5.V.4.17. A nearly whole figurine from Beth Shean. The hands lie along the body. Context: level IX, 14th century BC. Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 68a:3; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.2.

5.V.6: Plaque Figurines with "Ureus Symbol", without Clay Backgrounds 5.V.6.1. A head from Gat (in the Sharon plain). Context: surface find. Note: Giveon suggested that the sign on the head is similar to the Egyptian ureus. Literature: Giveon 1967: pI. 10:3; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.2.

5.V.4.18. A figurine from Tel el-Ajjul. The hands hold the breasts. The hair is arranged in triangular locks that do not reach the shoulders. Context: LZ buildings, locus 8, an open area. 10th-9th centuries BC (Albright's dating). Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 16:45; Pritchard 1943: type Ila:53; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.1.

5.V.6.2. A figurine from Megiddo. The hands hold the breasts. Context: square M.12, a residential (?) area. Level VII, under the later stables. Place: Rockefeller 39.489. Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:18; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.13. 5.V.6.3. A head from Megiddo. Context: locus 2071, part of a public (?) building in area AA, level Via. Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:23; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.1.

5.V.4.19. A nearly whole figurine from Jericho (Garstang's excavations). The hands are uplifted and extended to the sides. . Context: unknown. Literature: Holland 1975: CVa.13, pI. 10:5.

5.V.6.4. A head from Ta'anakh. Context: 12th century BC (?). Literature: Lapp 1964: fig. 22:7; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.5.

5.V.4.20. A figurine from Tel el-Far'ah (south). The hands are placed along the body (?). Context: silo ZZW, date not clear. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IV.a.6, pI. 9:10.

5.V.6.5. A head from Ta'anakh. Context: 12th century BC (?). According to the excavator, the head dates to the Late Bronze age.

273

Literature: Lapp 1967: fig. 25:1; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.6. 5.V.6.6. A head from Ta'anakh. Context: the eastern trench; the date and the context are not clear. Literature: Sellin 1904: fig. 96:b; Vincent 1907: fig. 105b; Pilz 1924: Fb:122; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.4. [Fig. 11:7]. 5.V.6.7. A head from Ta'anakh. Context: the eastern trench; date and context are not clear. Literature: Sellin 1904: fig. 96:a; Vincent 1907: fig. 105a; Pilz 1924: Fb:121; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.3. [Fig. 11:8].

not represented. The moulding is crude and simple. The feet turn to the front. Context: tombs from the Late Bronze age, some of which continued to be used in the Iron Age I period. Note: Holland included only five of these figurines, missing those which were published in the line-drawings. Literature: Oren 1973: pI. 76:5-9, figs. 45:24, 47b:26-27; 49:22; 50:13; also figs. 47b:28; 49:23-24. Holland 1975: C.ll.b.2a-e.

=

5.V.7.16. A whole figurine from an unknown origin. The sidelocks reach the shoulders. Context: unknown. Literature: Holland 1975: C.II.b.20. 5.V.7.17. A figurine from Tel Zeror. The legs are missing. The hands are placed on the chest. The hair is arranged in a "Hathor" hairdress. Context: tomb from level V, Iron Age I period. Literature: Ohata 1967: frontispiece, pis. 45, 47:3; Ohata 1974:7, upper photograph. [Fig. 11:9].

5.V.7: Plaque Figurines with Unique Features 5.V.7.1. A figurine of a woman playing a double flute from Beth Shean. The legs are missing. Reg. no. 649. Museum no. 29-103-932. Context: locus 25, in a mixed area, levels V or IV. Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:2; Holland 1975: C.VI.b.1. 5.V.7.2. A figurine of a woman holding a child from Beth Shean. The face is crude. It is made in high moulding, without a clay background. Reg. no. 30-11-41. Context: under loci 1459 and 33, lower level V, ca. 10th century BC. Place: Rockefeller i.9660. Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:7; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.1. 5.V.7.3. A fragment of a woman holding a child from Beth Shean. The moulding is reminiscent of figurines type 5.V.1 (above). Reg. no. 25-11-105. Museum no. P29-103-881. Context: locus 1063, lower level V, ca. 11 century BC. Literature: James 1966: fig. 111:6; Pritchard 1943: type Vlb:186; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.2.

5.V.7.18. A head from Ashdod. The hairdress reaches the shoulders. Reg. no. 1269/1. Context: locus 1072, an open area in square F/11. The stratigraphy is not clear. Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 58:2, fig. 64:9; Holland 1975: C.IX.g.2. 5.V.7.19. A head from Ashdod. It is similar to figurine no. 18 (above). Reg. no. 4078/1. Context: locus 1099, an open area in square U/14. Levels 12 (?). Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 58:1, fig. 64:8; Holland 1975: C.IX.g.1. 5.V.7.20. A body fragment from Megiddo. It shows a woman, probably pregnant and carrying a child. Blue-black clay. The right arm lies on the chest. Context: square N10, level II. The exact locus is unknown. Literature: May 1935: pI. 24:M.2653; Pritchard 1943: type Vlb:184, fig. 18; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.4.

5.V.7.4. A fragment of a woman holding a child from Samaria. Reg. no. C1199. Context: level A, season 1933. Possibly from locus E.207, 8th century BC. Note: perhaps the fragment was made in a double mould. Place: Rockefeller 33.2187. Literature: Samaria 111:77, fig. 6b; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.6. 5.V.7.5. A whole figurine from Beth Shean. The hands are placed on the chest. It is very crude. Context: inside burial T241 , the Iron Age I period. Note: figurines nos. 5.V.5-7 are very similar to each other, and probably imitate Mycenaean figurines. Literature: Oren 1973:125, pI. 76:2, fig. 50:12; Holland 1975:

c.xm.s.a

5.V.7.6. A whole figurine from Beth Shean. The hands are placed on the chest. It is very crude. Context: inside burial T241 , the Iron Age I period. Literature: Oren 1973:125, pI. 76:3, fig. 50:14; Holland 1975: C.XIII.a.2a.

5.V.7.21. A head and an upper body part from Megiddo. The hands hold the breasts. There are long side-locks of hair, bracelets and perhaps a neck-pendant. Context: floor 1693 of building 1723 (square R9). LevellVb. Literature: May 1935: pI. 28:M.5376; Pritchard 1943: type VII:193; Holland 1975: C.II.b.17. 5.V.7.22. A head and an upper body from Megiddo. It has a "Hathor' hairdress without clay-background. A pendant hangs between the breasts (?). The hands are missing. Context: room 590 in square P14, level V. Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.1454; Holland 1975: C.IX.e.1. 5.V.7.23. A head from Megiddo. It has long side-locks and a representation of ears. Reg. no. 619. Context: tomb 3, a mixed assemblage of Late Bronze and Iron Age periods. Square R/18. Literature: Guy 1938: pI. 135:11; Holland 1975: C.IX.g.8.

5.V.7.7. A whole figurine from Beth Shean. The hands are placed on the chest. It is very crude. Context: inside burial T241 , the Iron Age I period. Literature: Oren 1973:125, pI. 76:4, fig. 50:15; Holland 1975: C.XIII. a.2b.

5.V.7.24. A head and upper body part from Megiddo. It has a long, pointed chin and large ears. The hairdress includes rows of small indentations. The arms are placed on the chest, one above the other. Context: locus 1653 in square R/7. It is a room in a bUilding of level V, ca. 10th century BC.

5.V.7.8-15. A group of eight figurines from Beth Shean. They are whole, except two nearly whole ones. All have two simple side-locks which reach the shoulders. The ears are

274

Place: Rockefeller 36.957. Literature: May 1935: pI. 28:M.5042; Holland 1975: C.l.d.1. 5.V.7.25. A nearly whole figurine from Megiddo. The hairdress reaches the shoulders, perhaps with a veil. The woman wears a dress reaching her ankles. The hands lie on the chest. There is probably a neck-pendant. Context: locus 1482 in square R/8. This is a room in a (public?) bUilding 1482, from level IVb. Literature: May 1935: pI. 27:M.4495; Pritchard 1943: type VII:170, fig. 18; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.16. 5.V.7.26. A head from Azeka. It has a wide hairdress but no ears. Notes: Engle did not find this figurine in Holland's thesis, but it is included there. It is unclear whether it is a head of an animal or a plaque figurine. Context: unknown. Place: Rockefeller P.70. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: pl. 68:5; Holland 1975: C.IX.g.9; Engle 1979: type VII:36. 5.V.7.27. A head from Tel el-Far'ah (south). It shows a woman with long side-locks, descending behind the ears to the shoulders. High moulding of type 5.V.4 or 5.V.9. Context: building phase T, height 377'3". Literature: Holland 1975: C.ll.b.5. 5.V.7.28. A head from Tel Yeno'am. It is probably a plaque figurine. Reg. no. 11124. Context: locus 11.55, area B, Iron Age I period (?). Place: Romema 1M no. 82-170. Literature: Liebovitz 1984:14. 5.V.7.29. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. It has a necklace (?) and side-locks until the shoulders. Context: EH.186, Iron Age I period (?). Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:7; Pritchard 1943: no. 258; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.9. 5.V.7.30. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The face is very crude and the published photograph is not good. It is different from the other plaque figurines from Tel Gemmeh. Context: ES.191, a street in Petrie's "21st dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:28; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.11.

hands hold an object. There are horizontal incisions on the lower body. Context: locus 548, an open area in square N7, near an "Assyrian" building (1369) of level III. Literature: May 1935: pI. 30:M.1906; Holland 1975: C.xIV.b.2. 5.V.7.35. A female body part from Megiddo. It is similar to no. 34 (above). Reg. no. M.6221. Context: locus 1827, its nature is not clear. Square 0.10, level Vila, end of the Bronze Age period. Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 242:15; Holland 1975: C.XIV.b.3. 5.V.7.36. A body fragment from Samaria. It shows a dressed female holding a child on her knee. Holland defined it as a plaque figurine, but it may have been a hollow, rounded figurine (e.g., of type 5.VI.1). Reg. no. C.1006. Context: E.207, 9th century BC. Literature: Samaria III: pI. 12:6; Holland 1975: C.XV.a.3. 5.V.7.37. A body fragment from Tel el-Far'ah (north). It shows a dressed woman holding a baby, which suckles from her breast. The woman wears a necklace and bracelets. Museum no. F3452. Context: level "pre-7b", square J.6, under locus 440. Perhaps from the Late Bronze age. Literature: Oe-Vaux 1957: pI. 11b:4; Cham bon 1984: fig. 63:4, pI. 84; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.3. 5.V.7.38. A head from Tel Malhata. Brown clay with bright surface. The facial features are worn out. The hairdress is similar to that of figurine no. 5.V.1.42, and both may have been made in the same mould. Reg. no. 1625. Context: Locus 1110. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of I. Beit Arieh.

5.V.8: Body Fragments of Plaque Figurines with Clay Background (of Types 5.11-5.VII) 5.V.8.1. A body fragment from Ashdod. The hands lie on the chest. Reg. no. C176/1. Context: locus 2001, a refuse pit from the Iron Age I period. Literature: Ashdod I: pI. 17:10, fig. 35:4; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.2.

5.V.7.31. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. It has side-locks that reach the shoulders and a claybackground. It may have belonged to type 5.V.4 (above). Context: CM.190, Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city. According to Kenyon, the date is the 8th-7th centuries BC. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:24; Holland 1975: vol. 1:224, C.IX.d.4.

5.V.8.2. A body fragment from Ashdod. The feet turn to the front. Reg. no. 0215/3. Context: locus 1008, a room disturbed by pits. Levels 3a-3b, Iron Age II period. Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 43:6; Holland 1975: C.XIII.a.1. 5.V.8.3. A body fragment from Beth Shean. The hands lie along the body. Context: locus 1062, a room from level VI, the Iron Age I period. Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 35:17; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.3.

5.V.7.32. A head.and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The side-locks reach the shoulders. Context: FL.188, Petrie's "22nd dynasty" city. Place: London. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:224, vol. 11:107, C.IX.d.3.

5.V.8.4. A body fragment from Beth Shean. The hands are extended and the feet turn to the sides. Context: a secondary context of a Hellenistic period cistern. Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 35:18; Holland 1975: C.V.b.1.

5.V.7.33. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The side-locks reach the shoulders. High moulding. Context: ES.192, a street in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:26; Holland 1975: C.IX.d.2.

5.V.8.5. A nearly whole body from Beth Shemesh. The hands lie on the chest. Context: not stratified.

5.V.7.34. A female body from Megiddo. It has a kind of a peg at its back. Holland classified it as a plaque figurine. The

275

Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:25; AS V:155; Pritchard 1943: type lIa:48; Holland 1975: C.ll.aA. 5.V.8.6. A nearly whole body from Beth Shemesh. The hands lie on the chest. Context: not stratified. Literature: Mackenzie 1912-13: pI. 13b:2; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.6. 5.V.8.7. A body fragment from Beth Shemesh. The feet turn to the left. Context: not stratified. Literature: Mackenzie 1912-13: pl. 13b:6; Holland 1975: C'xII.b.1. 5.V.8.8. A body fragment from Gezer. The left hand lies along the body, holding a small object. The right hand is placed under the breast. Context: not stratified. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:6; Pilz 1924: A4:52; Pritchard 1943: type IId:48; Holland 1975: C.l.a.1. 5.V.8.9. A body fragment from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. Context: not stratified. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:3; Pilz 1924: A3b:39; Pritchard 1943: type lIa:54; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.12. 5.V.8.10. A body fragment from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. Context: a cistern in zone 11, the ''third Semitic" level. It contained a mix assemblage of the Iron Age and the Persian periods. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 187:22; Pilz 1924: A3b:30; Pritchard 1943: type lIa:55; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.16. 5.V.8.11. A body fragment from Gezer. One hand holds the breast (the other is missing). Context: tomb 104, a mixed assemblage, mostly of the Iron Age. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 78:47; Pilz 1924: A3b:41; Pritchard 1943: type lIa:56; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.15.

5.V.8.12. A body fragment from Gezer. The hands lie beside the body. Context: the "second Semitic" level, but the exact location is unknown. Place: Rockefeller P.44. No~e: probably, the head has no clay background at all, while the body has a very narrow one. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:11; Pilz 1924: 0:83, fig. 20; Pritchard 1943: type 111:129; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.9. 5.V.8.13. A fragment of legs from Gezer. Context: it was found on the bedrock without clear dating. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:7; Pilz 1924: B:67; Pritchard 1943: type Ic:29; Holland 1975: C.V.a.8. 5.V.8.14. A fragment of a mould from Gezer. It shows only the legs. Context: surface find. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:16. 5.V.8.15. A body fragment from Gezer. The feet turn to the right and th~ hand~ are probably raised (now broken). ~ontext: a cistern In cave II, zone 15, but from the surface. Lit~rature: Gezer 1:94; Gezer III: pI. 24:2; Pilz 1924: Fb:113; Pntchard 1943: type Vllla:245; Holland 1975: C.XII.a.2.

276

5.V.8.16. A body fragment from Gezer. The feet turn to the left. Context: zone 30, the "fourth Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:4; Pilz 1924: Fb:114; Pritchard 1943: type Vllla:244; Holland 1975: C.XII.b.2. 5.V.8.17. A body fragment from Gezer. The feet turn to the right. Context: unknown. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:8; Holland 1975: C.XII.a.1. 5.V.8.18. A body fragment from Gezer. The feet turn to the left. Reg. no. 1359. Context: area VI, level 6c, Iron Age I period. Literature: Oever a.o. 1986: pI. 55:4. 5.V.8.19. A body fragment from Gezer. Context: zone 28, the "second Semitic" level. Note: I could not locate figurines nos. 19-22 in Holland's thesis. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:5a; Pilz 1924: Fb:105; Pritchard 1943: type 111:147. 5.V.8.20. A body fragment from Gezer. The left hand is placed along the body, the right hand under the breast. Context: the fill of the water system; the dating is not clear.. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:15; Pilz 1924: A4:53; Pritchard 1943: type lid: 100. 5.V.8.21. A body fragment from Gezer. The hands lie under the breasts. Context: the Hellenistic level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:14; Pilz 1924: A2:6, fig. 6; Pritchard 1943: type IIlb:158. 5.V.8.22. A body fragment from Gezer. It is similar to no. 21 (above). Context: zone 30, the "third Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:13; Pilz 1924: A2:4; Pritchard 1943: type IIlb:157. 5.V.8.23. A nearly whole body from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. There are lotus blossoms on the sides of the figure and probably also above the head (the beginning of the branch survived). Context: zone 29, the Hellenistic level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:21; Pilz 1924: A+0:91, fig. 17; Pritchard 1943: type IIc:98, fig. 7; Holland 1975: C.ll.c.1. 5.V.8.24. A body fragment from Hazor. The hands lie on the chest. Reg. no. B2I4255. Context: locus 3265, an open area in building 3220. Level X, 10th century BC. Literature: Hazor III-IV: pI. 207:36, pI. 314:2; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.18. 5.V.8.25. A body fragment from Megiddo~ The feet turn to the front. Context: room 285 in a large building of level III, 8th century BC. Note: the clay background is narrow and long. Literature: May 1935: pI. 30:M.878; Pritchard 1943: type Vla:180; Holland 1975: C'xlll.a.10. 5.V.8.26. A body fragment from Shechem. The feet turn to the right. Reg. no. i.169. Context: unknown. Literature: Kerkhof 1969: fig. 24:10; Holland 1975: C.XII.a.3.

5.V.8.27. A body fragment from Tel Beit Mirsim. There are remains of breasts. The hands were uplifted (?), now broken. Reg. no. SN.553. Context: fills of level B in square 32. Literature: TBM II: pI. 25:6, pI. 28:6; Albright 1939: pI. b:6; Pritchard 1943: type 111:148; Holland 1975: C.X.a.1. 5.V.8.28. A feet fragment from Tel Beit Mirsim. There is a narrow clay-background. Perhaps it belonged to types 5.V.4.1-4 (above). Reg. no. SN.1522. Context: fills from an unclear date in square 23. Literature: TBM II: pI. 26:9; Albright 1939: pI. a:9; Pritchard 1943: type Vla:174; Holland 1975: C.X.b.2. 5.V.8.29. A body fragment from Tel Gemmeh. The hands hold the breasts. Context: JB.174, an open area outside building JO-JG-JF. Late Bronze age (?). Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:2; Pritchard 1943: no. 47; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.19. 5.V.8.30. A body fragment from Tel Gemmeh. It is quite similar to figurine no. 29 (above). The published photograph is not very clear. Context: not stratified. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:1; Pritchard 1943: no. 46; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.20. 5.V.8.31. A body fragment from Tel Gemmeh. The hands lie along the body. Context: JB.177, an open area. Late Bronze age (?). Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:5; Pritchard 1943: no. 119; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.12.

Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 57:5, fig. 64:3; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.1. 5.V.9.6. A body fragment from Ashdod. Reg. no. 5/51. Context: surface find. Place: Romema, IAA no. 63-2419 (?). Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 64:5; Holland 1975: C.Xl.e.2. 5.V.9.7. A body fragment from Ashdod. Reg. no. 0630/1. Context: surface find. Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 64:7; Holland 1975: C.Xl.e.3. 5.V.9.8. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The legs are missing. There is a crescent shaped hairdress (of type 5.VA?). The hands lie on the chest. Context: a cave or a cistern in zone 8, probably from the Iron Age II period. Literature: Gezer 1:81f; Gezer III: pI. 18:1; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.18. 5.V.9.9. A body fragment from Ekron. The hands lie along the body. There is no clay-background. Context: survey find, not stratified. Place: the Shephelah museum, Kefar Menakhem. Literature: Naveh 1958:99 no. 3; Yisrael, M. 1959:130, n. 18, photograph 2; Holland 1975: C.IV.b.9. 5.V.9.10. A body fragment from Tel Gemmeh. There is no clay-background. Context: EY.188, a store or a public room in Petrie's "22nd dynasty" city. The locus was very disturbed by later pits. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:18; Holland 1975: C.Xl.c.3. 5.V.9.11. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. There is no clay-background. The hands lie along the body. The figurine is very thick. Context: not published. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:34; Pritchard 1943: no. 128; Holland 1975: C.XIV.c.3.

5.V.9: Plaque Figurines of Pregnant Women in High Moulding 5.V.9.1. A nearly whole body from Ashdod. One hand lies on the chest, the other is placed along the body. Reg. no. 0868/1. Context: locus 1067, a pit in squareA19. Level 2. Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 57:1, fig. 64:1; Holland 1975: C.l.b.2. 5.V.9.2. A nearly whole figurine from Ashdod. One hand lies on the chest, the other is placed along the body. There is a kind of a hairdress above (?) the side-locks, which descend until the breasts. Reg. no. 0190/1. Context: locus 1004, a pit in a room in square A16. Level 3b. Literature: Ashdod I: pI. 28:2, fig. 43:4; Holland 1975: C.l.b.1. 5.V.9.3. A body fragment from Ashdod. The hands lie on the chest. Reg. no. 0636/1. Context: locus 1051, a large room in square B4. Level 3a. Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 57:2, fig. 64:2; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.1.

5.V.9.12. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. It is moulded deeply on a very crude and large lump of clay, which has a sort of a "peg" at its back. Perhaps it was attached to a wall. The hands lie along the body. Context: not published. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:35; Holland 1975: C.XIV.c.2. 5.V.9.13. A nearly whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The hands lie on the chest. There is no clay background. Context: Petrie's "26th dynasty" city, the exact locus is not clear. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:37; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.8. 5.V.9.14. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The hands lie on the breasts. There are long, straight sidelocks. The published photograph is bad. Context: unknown. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:3; Pritchard 1943: no. 137; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.12. 5.V.9.15. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. One hand lies on the chest, the other probably lies along the body (cf. figurines nos. 1,9, 10 above). There is no clay background. Context: FO.191, Iron Age II period. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:27; Pritchard 1943: no. 42; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.10.

5.V.9.4. A body fragment from Ashdod. One hand lies on the chest, the other is probably placed along the body. Context: not published. Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 57:3; Holland 1975: C.l.b.3. 5.V.9.5. A body fragment from Ashdod. Reg. no. 01022/1. Context: locus 1075, a small street in square A20, disturbed by a pit. Levels 1-2.

5.V.9.16. A nearly whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The

277

legs are missing. The hair reaches the shoulders. There is a clay background. The published photograph is blurred. The figurine is similar to nos. 17-18 (below). Context: not published. Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:38; Holland 1975: C.xIV.c.1. 5.V.9.17. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. It is similar to figurine no. 16 above. Context: unknown. Place: Rockefeller 4350/35. Literature: Holland 1975:C.ll.a.20a, addenda, pI. 45:3. 5.V.9.18. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. It is similar to figurine no. 16 above. Context: DR, an open area (?) in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city. Note: Petrie suggested that this figurine belonged to a late Iron Age series, and related to an Edomite rule. Literature: Petrie 1928:17, pI. 36:35; Holland 1975: C.IV.b.6. 5.V.9.19. A whole mould of a plaque figurine from Tel Batash. The hands hold the breasts. There are long sidelocks that reach the shoulders. Context: area E, a floor of level III, end of the 8th century BC. Literature: Kelm and Mazar 1991 :62f, fig. 18:b. 5.V.9.20. A whole mould of a plaque figurine from Tel Batash. The hands lie along the body. There are long sidelocks that reach the shoulders. Context: area E, a floor of level III, the end of the 8th century BC. Literature: Kelm and Mazar 1991 :62f, fig. 18:a. 5.V.9.21. A mould for a head of a plaque figurine from Tel Batash. There is a necklace and the ears are not represented. Since the head survived alone, it is hard to classify the type of figurine exactly. It may have belonged to type 5.V.9, but perhaps indicated a Phoenician or a Cypriot influence. Context: area E, a floor of level III, the end of the 8th century BC. Literature: Kelm and Mazar 1991:62f, fig. 18:c.

5.V.10: Miscellaneous Body Fragments 5.V.10.1. A body without clay background from Gezer. The pubic triangle is shown by indentations. There are stumps of hands. . Context: the "first Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:1; Pilz 1924: Fb:104; Pritchard 1943: type Vlla:228; Holland 1975: C.Xl.a.1. 5.V.10.2. A body without clay background from Gezer. The pubic triangle is shown by incised lines. The legs are close together. Context: a pit from the Hellenistic period in zone 28. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220: 19; Pilz 1924: Fb:119; Pritchard 1943: type Vlla:241; Holland 1975: b.1.

c.xi

5.V.10.2. A nearly Whole body with narrow clay background from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. Context: a fill in the entrance of the water system' unstratified. ' Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:7; Pilz 1924: A3b:47; Pritchard 1943: type lIa:60; Holland 1975: C.II. a.13.

278

5.V.10.4. A body without clay background from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. There is some kind of a pattern on the back (symbolizing a dress?). Context: zone 27, the "second Semitic" level. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:6; Pilz 1924: A3b:33; Pritchard 1943: type 2:52; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.6. 5.V.10.5. A body without clay background from Megiddo. The hands hold the breasts. There are horizontal lines on the neck (a necklace?). Field no. 1214. Context: locus S=3073 in square KU7, level VilA. It is a room in the treasure house of the Late Bronze age (Loud 1948: plan 384). Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:16; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.14. 5.V.10.6. A body without clay background from Megiddo. The hands hold the breasts. Context: square 0/12, surface find. Note: according to the excavation report, it was made in a double mould, but the other similar fragments from Megiddo belonged to Late Bronze age plaque-figurines. Literature: May 1935: pI. 31:1477; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.15. 5.V.10.7. A body without clay background from Ta'anakh. It is similar to figurine no. 5 (above), but is perhaps made in a double mould. Place: ASOR Jerusalem. Literature: Holland 1975: C.II.b.19a, addenda, fig. 76:2. 5.V.10.8. A body without clay background from Ta'anakh. It is similar to figurine no. 7 (above); perhaps it is made in a double mould. Iron Age I period. Place: ASOR Jerusalem. Literature: Holland 1975: C.II. b.19, fig. 19:3. 5.V.10.9. A body fragment from Ashdod. The hands hold the breasts. Reg. no. B/12. Context: surface find. Place: Romema 1M no. 63-2512. Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 26: 1: Holland 1975: C.II. b.1. 5.V.10.10. A body fragment from Hazor. There is an incised "loop" on the belly. It is simialr to figurine no. 24 (below). Reg. no. A4/1726. Context: locus 156a, an open area not well defined in square G/9. Level VIII. Literature: Hazor II: pis. 64:14, 163:3; Holland 1975:

c.xte.a

5.V.10.14. A body fragment from Beth Shemesh. Pritchard thought that it is a pillar figurine (following AS V:156), while Holland defined it as a mediatory type between plaque and pillar. Context: level II, Iron Age I (exact location not clear). Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:28; Pritchard 1943: type 7:189; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.3. 5.V.10.15. A fragment of legs from Gezer. Context: the north-western house on the acropolis, level 5ac, Iron Age I period. Literature: Dever 1971: BA 3414: fig. 15c; Holland 1975: C.xIV.d.7. 5.V.10.16. A body fragment from Dalhamiyah. The pubic area is indicated. Reg. no. 1820. Context: Iron Age II period, other details not published. Place: Romema, 1M no. 69-1540. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the 1M. 5.V.10.17. A body fragment with clay background from Megiddo. Reg. no. 0619. Context: pit or installation 5151 in area BB, levelVlla (end of the Late Bronze age). Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 242: 13; Holland 1975: C.X. b.1.

Literature: Oe-Vaux 1952:572, pI. 15:14; Chambon 1984:74, pI. 63:3; Holland 1975: C.Xl.c.1. 5.V.10.25. A body fragment from Tel Beit Mirsim. The hands lie beside the body. Reg. no. SN.578. Context: the eastern cave (TBM III: #11, plan 10), but without a clear date. Place: Rockefeller i.4942. Literature: TBM II: fig. 25:7, pI. 28:7; Albright 1939; Holland 1975: C.IV.b.8. 5.V.10.26. A body fragment from Ta'anakh. The hands hold the breasts. Context: unknown. Place: ACOR, Jerusalem. Literature: Holland 1975: C.II. b.19b, fig. 76:3. 5.V.10.27. A body fragment from Malhata. It shows the legs and the pubic area, marked by indentations. The moulding is quite high. Red clay. Reg. no. 2038. Height: 63 mm. Context: not published. Note: fragments nos. 27-29 from Malhata may have belonged to deep-moulded figurines, like type 5.V.9 (above). Literature: not yet published, courtesy of I. Beit-Arieh. 5.V.10.28. A body fragment from Malhata. It shows the legs and the pubic area, marked by indentations. Red clay. Reg. no. 2033. Height: 60 mm. See also note to no. 27 above. Context: not published. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of I. Beit-Arieh.

5.V.10.18. A body fragment from Hazor. Reg. no. 249/1. Context: area G, unstratified. Literature: Hazor III-IV: pI. 356:7; Holland 1975: C.lIl.a.1. 5.V.10.19. A thin body fragment from Hazor. There is almost no clay background. The hands lie along the body. Reg. no. 525/6. Context: area G, unstratified. Literature: Hazor III-IV: pI. 356:9; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.11. 5.V.10.20. A body fragment from Megiddo. The hands lie along the body. Context: level 5, the "palace". Literature: Schumacher 1908: fig. 149b; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.17. 5.V.10.21. A body fragment from Megiddo. It is hand-made and shows a pregnant woman. The navel is indented and the pubic area is indicated. Context: locus 592 in square 0/13, level V. The exact nature of this locus is not clear. Literature: May 1935: pI. 29: M.135; Pritchard 1943: type Vla:181; Holland 1975: C.Xlll.a.s.

5.V.10.11. A body fragment from Beth Shean. It is made of black clay. Context: room 1585 in square 017, level VI (Iron Age I period). Literature: James 1966: fig. 107:10; Holland 1975: C.XIV.dA.

5.V.10.22. A body fragment from Megiddo. It is very similar to figurine no. 20 above. Context: level VII. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 48:i; Pilz 1924: Fb:120; Pritchard 1943: type 111:149; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.18.

5.V.10.12. A body fragment from Beth Shean. The hands hold the breasts. Context: room or court 1709 in square PI7, level VII or VII (Late Bronze or Iron Age I periods). Literature: James 1966: fig. 107:7; Holland 1975: C.XIII. a.2d.

5.V.10.23. A body fragment with clay-background from Samaria. The hands hold the breasts. There is a "Hath or" or crescent hairdress, probably similar to that of type 5.V.2 or type 5.V.4. Reg. no. C.1270. Context: locus E.207. Literature: Samaria III: pI. 11:6; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.22.

5.V.10.13. A body fragment without clay background from Beth Shean. Reg. no. P29-103-892. Context: area 2006 in square 0/8, level VI (?). Literature: James 1966: fig. 107:4; Holland 1975: C.IV.b.1.

5.V.10.24. A body fragment from Tel el-Far'ah (north). It has an incised "loop" on the belly, like figurines nos. 10, 16 (above). Reg. no. F.2469. Context: court 350 of a four-roomed house 327. Trench II, level Vlld, ca. 7th century BC. Place: Paris, Louvre AO.21587

279

5.V.10.29. A body fragment from Malhata. It shows the legs, pointing forward (but broken). There is no indication of the sex. The moulding is very high, nearly square. Red clay. Reg. no. 1743. Height: 57 mm. See also note to no. 27 above. Context: not published. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of I. Beit-Arieh.

5.V.11: Miscellaneous Body Fragments 5.V.11.1. A fragment from Ashdod. Reg. no. 1415/1. Context: area D, square G/11, locus 1087. It is an open area, unstratified. Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 64:6, pI. 57:4; Holland 1975: c.xru a.2. 5.V.11.2. A fragment from Ashdod. It is unique and not similar to any other figurine from Ashdod. Reg. no. 492/2. Context: area D, surface find. Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 46:5, pI. 27:8; Holland 1975: C.XIV.d.1. 5.V.11.3. A fragment from Bethel. Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. It is described shortly in the excavation report as a fragment with clay-background and hands on the chest. Reg. no. 104. Context: unknown. Literature: Kelso 1968: 84, 116; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.13. 5.V.11.4. A fragment from Bethel. Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. It is described shortly in the excavation report as a fragment of feet which turn to the left. Reg. no. 243. Context: locus 31 in area I, near an entrance of a house. Iron Age I period. Literature: Kelso 1968: 84; Holland 1975: C.xIV.d.3.

5.V.11.5. A fragment from Beth Shean. Reg. no. P29-103918. Context: locus 1352, lower level V, Iron Age I period. Literature: James 1966: fig. 111:7; Holland 1975: C.XIIl.a.7. 5.V.11.6. A fragment from Beth Shemesh. Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. Reg. no. 445. According to the excavation report, it is a body fragment with the hands on the chest. Context: unknown. Literature: AS 111:91; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.5. 5.V.11.7. A fragment from Beth Shemesh. Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. Reg. no. 1691. Context: "near 107, level III". 107 is a room (storeroom?) in area W28. The exeat locus and date are not clear. Literature: AS 11:30; AS 111:91; Holland 1975: C.xIV.d.5. 5.V.11.8. A fragment of feet from Hazor. Reg. no. 680/1. Context: locus 10055b, a street near the city wall. Area G, level V, 8th century BC. Literature: Hazor III-IV: pI. 356:8, pI. 253:11; Holland 1975: C.XIII.a.8.

Context: not published. Place: Haifa, museum of ancient art, no. 3224. Literature: Zemer 1991: 24 no. 26. 5.VI.1.4. A body fragment from Ashdod. It is similar to figurine no. 1 (above) and is probably also hollow. Reg. no. 0.743/2. Context: locus 1053, a kiln from the Hellenistic level (?). It is situated inside a room in square A-B/3. Place: Rockefeller 44.263. Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 57:6, fig. 64:4; Holland 1975: C.XV.a.1. 5.VI.1.5. A nearly whole figurine from Beth Shean. It is similar to figurine no. 1 (above). Reg. no. 3427. Context: under a floor of the Arabian period, unstratified. Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 24:3 left; James 1966: fig. 116:7; Holland 1975: C.XV.a.2. 5.VI.1.6. A whole figurine from Beth Shean. It is similar to figurine no. 1 (above). There is red paint on white slip. Reg. no. 3426. Context: under a floor of the Arabian period, unstratified. Place: Rockefeller P.1329. Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 24:3, second; James 1966: fig. 116:4; Holland 1975: C.XV.a.3.

5.V.11.9. A fragment from Samaria. It is unique: the feet are moulded on the front of a pillar body (cf. also figurine no. 10 below). Reg. no. C.1191a. Height 71 mm. Context: locus E.207. Place: Rockefeller 33.2185. Literature: Samaria 111:79; Holland 1975: C.XIV.a.2, fig. 20:13.

5.VI.1.7. A head and upper body part from Megiddo. Both hands are placed on the belly. The preservation state is very bad. Context: square N/13, under locus 282. Level IV, but the exact context is not clear. Note: probably it is a solid figurine made in a single mould. Literature: May 1935: pI. 29: M.967; Pritchard 1943: type 6a:179; Holland 1975: C.lll.b.3.

5.V.11.10. A fragment from Ta'anakh. It shows feet, moulded on a rounded, pillar-like body (cf. no. 9 above, but the details of the moulding are different). Context: the southern pit, but the exact location is unknown. Literature: Sellin 1904:78, fig. 107; Holland 1975: C.XIV.a.3.

5.VI.1.8. A nearly whole figurine from Machmish. The position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1 (above). Context: a temple from the Persian period, 5th-4th centuries BC (?). Note: this figurine is missing from Holland's thesis. There is a possibility that it is only a profile of Avigad 1960: pI. 11a (no. 10 below), but the photographs do not look similar. Literature: Avigad 1960: pI. 11b.

5.VI. 'Phoenician' Figurines 5.VI.1: Dea Tyria (Figurines of Pregnant, Sitting Women)

5.VI.1.9. A whole figurine from Machmish. The position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1 (above). Context: a temple from the Persian period, 5th-4th centuries BC (?). Literature: Avigad, EAEHL 11:326 center (Hebrew); Holland 1975: C.xV.a.10.

5.VI.1.1. A whole figurine from Achzib. One hand lies on the knee and the other is placed on the belly. There are very thick side-locks, with rounded protrusions in the area of the temples. The figurine is made in a hollow, double mould. Note: it may be the same figurine as one in Romema, IAA no. 61-564. Context: the cemetery (for which see Prausnitz 1982). Literature: Prausnitz, EAEHL 1:29 lower right (Hebrew); EAEHL new 1:33 up right. [Fig. 9:1].

5.VI.1.10. A whole figurine from Machmish. The position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1.(above). Context: a temple from the Persian period, 5th-4th centuries BC (?). Note: there is some danger that this is the same figurine as no. 8 (above), but the photographs look different. Literature: Avigad 1960: pI. 11a; Avigad 1970, EAEHL 11:326 right (Hebrew); Holland 1975: C.XV.a.9.

5.VI.1.2. A whole figurine from Achzib. It is similar to figurine no. 1 (above), but both hands lie on the knee and the sidelocks are narrow and long. Context: tomb 28, no. 3, the cemetery of e-Ras. Place: Rockefeller 44.263. Literature: Prausnitz, EAEHL 1:29 lower right (Hebrew).

5.VI.1.11. A nearly whole figurine from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. The position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1 (above). Reg. no. S.1140. Context: 31-C/d-5, level III? The exact nature of the locus is not clear. Place: Amman J.13019.

5.VI.1.3. A whole (?) figurine from Achzib. It is mentioned only briefly, and there is a danger that it is one of the already published figurines from Achzib (and not a new one).

280

Literature: Pritchard 1985: fig. 169:6-7; Amr 1980:107ff, no. 70. 5.VI.1.12. A whole figurine from Tell es-Safi. The position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1 (above). Context: refuse debris, unstratified. Note: Bliss and Macalister mentioned that dozens of fragments of this type of figurine were found in the same refuse pile. Only one example was drawn in the report. Place: Rockefeller P.94. Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: 138, pI. 70: 10; Stern 1973:167, n. 52; Holland 1975: C.XV.a.12. 5.VI.1.13. A body fragment from Tell Abu Hawwam. The position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1 (above). There is red slip. Context: square on outside the city, level II, 6th-4th centuries BC. Note: according to the excavators, it is made of clay similar to that of Phoenician jars (e.g., Hamilton 1935: fig. 3). Place: Rockefeller 34.405. Literature: Hamilton 1935: 17, no. 26; Holland 1975: C.XV.a.6. 5.VI.1.14. A body fragment from Tell Abu Hawwam. It shows part of the legs and the base, with the remains of one hand on the knee. Context: square on out of the city, level II, 6th-4th centuries BC. Place: Rockefeller 34.525. Literature: Hamilton 1935:16, no. 25; Holland 1975: C.XV.a.7. 5.VI.1.15. A whole figurine from an unknown ongm. The position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no. (above). The base is fenestrated. Context: unknown. Place: Hecht museum, Haifa. Note: this item may be the same as one of the fragments already mentioned above. Literature: Raban and Stieglitz 1993:33, 20*. 5.VI.1.16. A body fragment from Kabri. It is made of orange ware. Only the hollow base survived, made in a double mould. It is not necessarily a base of a dea Tyria figurine. Reg. no. 3440/100. Context: locus 1309. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: Oren, R. 1994: pI. 20:4.

5.VI.2.2: A whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks are similar to those of figurine no. 1 (above). The head is hollow and has a hole in the back. Height: 230 mm. Context: the cemetery of e-Ras, tomb 13, no. 44. Place: Rockefeller 44.54. Literature: Johns 1948, PEO:89, pI. 111:2 (?); Holland 1975: B.V.b.1; Engle 1979: type VIII:3; Mazar, E. 1990:108, upper left. 5.VI.2.3. A whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks are similar to those of figurine no. 1 (above). The body is a hollow pillar. Height: 205 mm. Context: the cemetery of e-Ras, tomb 28, no. 4 (season 1943). Place: Rockefeller 44.264. Literature: not yet published (?) - cf. the note to figurine no. 3a (below). [Fig. 9:2]. 5.VI.2.3a. A whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks are similar to those of figurine no. 1 (above). The facial features are worn out. Height: 205 mm. Context: a tomb? Place: Hecht museum, Haifa 4046. Literature: Zemer 1991:24, no. 29, photograph p. 95. Note: it is probably the same figurine as no. 3 (above), therefore it was numbered as "3a". 5.VI.2.4. A whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks are relatively short and there are vertical curls above the forehead. Height: 185 mm. Reg. no. 612 (?). Context: a tomb; further details not published. Place: Romema, IAA no. 61-563. Literature: not yet published (?). 5.VI.2.5. A nearly whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks are similar to those of figurine no. 1 (above). The facial features are not preserved well. Height: 225 mm. Context: not published. 8th century BC (?). Place: Hecht museum, Haifa no. 4047. Literature: Zemer 1991:21 no. 30, 25, 85. 5.VI.2.6. A whole figurine from Achzib (excavations of E. Mazar). The side-locks are not visible (either very short or lacking completely). The head is badly preserved. Context: a tomb, 8th-7th centuries BC. Literature: Mazar, E. 1993, Had. Arch. 99: inner frontispiece, 4-5; EAEHL new I (1993):34. 5.VI.2.7. A whole figurine from Shiqmona. The side-locks are long and twisted. Height: 250 mm. Reg. no. 7146nO? Context: probably "B" city, dated to the 9th-8th centuries BC. Elgavish (EAEHL IV) mentioned figurines (in plural) of this type from level B. Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:166; Eigavish 1978, EAEHL IV:1102, 1109f; Zemer 1991:20 no. 28; probably also Elgavish 1994: 68 fig. 44 (level X, 8th century BC). [Fig. 9:3].

5.VI.2: Figurines of Women playing Drums and Related Types General: All the figurines of this type are made in a double mould. The body is pillar like and hollow. Most of these figurines show women playing a drum, held perpendicular to the body (unless stated otherwise).

5.VI.2.8. A head and an upper body part from Tell Oitaf. The side-locks are relatively short and there are vertical curls above the forehead. The figure probably held a drum, now broken. Context: found by chance during military operations. Place: Romema, IAA no. 54-91. Literature: Zori 1958:53, pI. 7:5; Holland 1975: A.1X.e.1; Engle 1979: type VIII:21.

5.VI.2.1. A whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks reach the breasts and their lower ends are rounded, shaped like earlobes. Height: 173 mm. Context: the cemetery of e-Ras, tomb 13, no. 43. Place: Rockefeller 44.53. Literature: not yet published (?). Note: it may be the same figurine as no. 5 (below).

281

5.VI.2.9. A whole figurine from an unknown origin. The sidelocks are similar to those of figurine no. 1 (above). The face, drum and dress are painted in red and black. Height: 217 mm. Context: unknown. Place: Harvard, Semitic museum no. 5755. Literature: Meyers 1987, pI. 7:a; Meyers 1991:16. 5.VI.2.10. A whole figurine from an unknown origin. The side-locks are long and twisted. H~ight: 161 mm. The facial features are worn. Place: Israel Museum, Jerusalem. Literature: Ornan 1986: no. 10. 5.VI.2.11. A whole figurine from Achzib. It shows a woman holding a dove close to her chest. The side-locks are incised and the eyes are painted with white (?). Height: 190 mm. Context: a tomb. Place: Rockefeller 44.50. Literature: Holland 1975: B.V.c.1; Engle 1979: type VIII:4. 5.VI:2.12. A whole figurine from Achzib. It shows a male (?) playmg a double flute. The head is hollow and has a hole at the back. Height: 200 mm. Context: tomb 29: no. 89. Place: Rockefeller 44.56. Literature: Holland 1975: B.V.c.2; Engle 1979: type VIII:5; Mazar, E. 1990: 108, lower right. 5.VI.2.13. A head and an upper body part from an unknown origin. It is hollow. Remains of a drum (?) are seen on the chest. The side-locks are long and the ears are portrayed. Note: it seems to be a figurine of type 5.V1.2 and not 5.111 (see above). Context: unknown. Place: Romema IAA no. 52.901. Literature: Holland 1975: B.V.d.2, pl. 44:1. 5.VI.2.14-15. Two body parts from Achzib. They are cylindrical and hollow. One is probably part of a drumplaying figurine, the other of a flute-playing figurine. Full details not yet published. Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: Oren, R. 1994:33-34.

5.V1.3: Figurines portraying Daily Life Scenes 5.VI.3.1. A whole figurine of a bathing woman from Achzib. The head is mould-made and has side-locks that reach the shoulders. The ears are represented. Height: 108 mm. Context: tomb 29, no. 60. Iron Age II period. Place: Rockefeller 44.57. Literature: Holland 1975: AIV.f.1; Jirku 1967: fig. 56:left; Neufeld 1971: fig. 1; Engle 1979: type VIII:2. 5.VI.3.2. A whole figurine of a woman from Achzib. She is standing bent above an object which is held in her hands (a phallus?). The figurine is hand-made. Height: 124 mm. Context: tomb 36, no. 154. Iron Age II period. Place: Rockefeller 44.58. Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.b.6, pI. 43:2.

5.VI.~.3. A whole figurine of a woman from Achzib. She is standmg .bent on a rectangular base, preparing dough on a table. HeIght: 75 mm. Context: tomb 3, no. 4. Iron Age II period. Place: Rockefeller 44.51.

282

Literature: Holland 1975: AI.i.1; Pritchard 1958: fig. 22; Prausnitz 1975, EAEHL 1:29, lower left. [Fig. 9:4].

5.VI.4: Other, Fairly Whole Figurines 5.VI.4.1. A whole plaque-figurine of a naked woman from Achzib. She is standing with her hands beside her body. The feet point forward. The face is surrounded by long side-locks and a high cylindrical hat. Height: 195 mm. Context: not published. Place: Haifa, museum of ancient art no. 3322. Literature: Zemer 1991: no. 25. 5.VI.4.2. A whole plaque-figurine of a naked woman from Achzib. It is similar to figurine no. 1 above. Height: 190 mm. Context: not published. Place: Haifa, museum of ancient art no. 3223. Literature: Zemer 1991: no. 27. 5.VI.4.3. A head and an upper body part from Achzib. It shows a woman holding a child. The body is hollow and wheel-made. The face is hand-made (according to Holland). The woman's chin touches the head of the child. Context: locus 4012, a tomb. Place: Romema, IAA no. 63-932. Literature: Moscati 1964: pI. 23; Moscati 1968: pI. 71; Holland 1975: B.II. c.1. 5.VI.4.4. A head and an upper body part from Dor. It shows a woman holding a child (?). The figurine is crude and handmade. Context: area G, Iron Age? Place: Romema, IAA no. 89-62. Literature: Stern 1992: photograph 70. 5.VI.4.4a. A whole figurine from an unknown origin. It shows a dressed woman, standing and holding a child. It is hollow and made in a double mould. The feet turn forward. The face is surrounded with long side-locks. The head of the child is placed on the woman's shoulders. Height: 185 mm. Context: not published. Place: Haifa, museum of modern art no. 3932. Note: this is probably a figurine of the Persian period, therefore not numbered independently in the catalogue. Literature: Zemer 1991:27, no. 47 (no. 46 in the photograph).

5.VI.5: Various Heads (nos. 1-24,36-38) and Body Parts (nos. 25-35, 39-41) 5.VI.5.1. A hollow female head from-Beth Shean. It is mouldmade and has a hole in the back. There are side-locks until the height of the chin, with horizontal IfOes. Vertical lines indicate hair above the forehead. Red slip. Reg. no. P29103-878. Note: Holland included heads nos. 1-2 (here) in his AIV type, although he noticed that they are exceptional. Context: locus 92, a room in square Q/8. Level IV, ca. 9th century BC. Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:1; Holland 1975: AIV.g.2. 5.VI.5.2. A hollow female head from Beth Shean. It is mouldmade and similar to head no. 1 (above). Light brown slip. Reg. no. P29-103-900. Context: not stratified.

Note: cf. also head no. 1 above. Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:3; Holland 1975: AIV.g.3.

Literature: May 1935: pI. 23: M.1360; Holland 1975: A.IV. h.t: Engle 1979: type VIII:17.

5.VI.5.3. A solid female head from Gile'am (Kh. el-Rugm near Kfar Ata). It is badly preserved. It has vertical lines above the forehead and long side-locks. There are remains of red paint. Reg. no. 15/1. Context: surface find. The site was settled throughout the Iron Age II and Persian periods. Place: Romema, IAA no. 66-1730. Note: Holland compared this head with heads from Philistia, but now it can be· compared with heads from Shiqmona (nos. 17-18 below). Literature: Stern 1970:34, fig. 6:14; Holland 1975: AIV.a.2a. [Fig. 9:5].

5.VI.5.10. A hollow female head from Megiddo. It is mouldmade and has a hole in the back. The side-locks are short and simple. There are vertical curls above the forehead and red slip. Note: cf. heads nos. 5.VI.2.4, 5.VI.2.8 above. Context: locus 1025, a small room in a building; square 0/8, levell or II. Place: Rockefeller 36.936. Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.3284; Holland 1975: AIX.e.2; Engle 1979: type VIII:20. [Fig. 9:6].

5.VI.5.4. A moulded male (?) head from Dan. It has a decoration of black paint and impressed circles on the chicks. Note: It is probably an import from the Aegean world, unique in Israel so far (cf. Bisi 1989:260f). Context: a pebble floor in a court of a building; level IV, ca. 10th century BC. Literature: Biran 1992: fig. 134 bottom (preliminary publication only) 5.VI.5.5. A hollow female head from Megiddo. It is mouldmade and has a hole in the back. There are side-locks behind the ears, meeting under the chin. Notes: Holland classified the 5.V1.5 heads from Megiddo as solid (his type A). The form may look similar to a few heads of type 5.111 (above), but the heads here are all hollow. Context: area R/8, probably a room under locus 774. Level II. Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.4090; Holland 1975: AIV.f.6; Engle 1979: type VIII:12. 5.VI.5.6. A hollow head from Megiddo. It is similar to head no. 5 (above). Context: area R/10, level I. Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.1389; Holland 1975: AIV.f.5; Engle 1979: type VIII:11. 5.VI.5.7. A hollow female head from Megiddo. It is mouldmade and has a hole in the back. There are long side-locks, partly broken, but no signs of ears. There are remains of white-wash. Note: cf. heads of musicians of type 5.V1.2 (above). Context: area R/9, surface find. Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.2204; Holland 1975: AIX.b.1; Engle 1979: type VIII:14. 5.VI.5.8. A hollow female head from Megiddo. It is mouldmade and has a hole in the back. There are long side-locks, reaching the shoulders. The facial features are worn out. Context: wall 844 in square 0/9, level I. This area is very close to the surface and the stratification is doubtful (Lamon and Shipton 1939:88, 222). Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.2925; Holland 1975: AIV.f.7; Engle 1979: type VIII:13. 5.VI.5.9. A hollow female head from Megiddo (partly broken). It is mould-made and has a hole in the back. There are long, twisted side-locks. Notes: cf. a head of a musician, 5.VI.2.7 (above). Holland thought that the hole was used for suspension, but it prevents the explosion of the head during firing, when the air inside is heated. Context: area B, surface find.

5.VI.5.11. A solid male head from Shiqmona. It has a high hat with a tassel at its end. The ears are represented. Note: I do not know comparisons from the land of Israel, but similar heads of riders are known from Cyprus (e.g., Ikosi 1991-2:64, fig. 44). Context: not published. Place: Romema, IAA no. 81-1044. Now in Haifa, museum of ancient art (?). Literature: Elgavish 1967 (no page nos.). [Fig. 9:7]. 5.VI.5.12. Two fragments from Shiqmona: a hollow base (similar to those of the "dea Tyria") and a female moulded head. They may belong to the same figurine (as claimed in the publication), but this is not certain. The head has a peg and long, twisted side-locks that reach the shoulders. Context: locus 282, reg. no. 4417146170 (?). Place: Romema, IAA 81-1042. Literature: Zemer 1991:25, no. 32. 5.VI.5.13. A solid female head from Shiqmona. It is mouldmade and has short side-locks, descending behind the ears. There are 2-3 rows of small curls above the forehead. The nose is damaged. Height: 55 mm. Note: cf. heads from Shiqmona and Gile'am, nos. 17-18 (below). Context: locus 294, reg. no. 6044/69 (?). Place: Romema, IAA no. 81-641 (not 642). Literature: Zemer 1991: 25 no. 35. 5.VI.5.14. A moulded female head with a peg from Shiqmona. It has twisted side-locks, probably similar to those of figurine 5.VI.2.7 (above), now mostly missing. Context: locus 47, reg. no. 5599/68 (?). Place: Romema, IAA no. 81-1040. Literature: Zemer 1991: 26 no. 38. 5.VI.5.15. A moulded female head and an upper body part from Shiqmona. It has long side-locks, descending behind the ears until the shoulders. There are vertical curls above the forehead. Height: 72 mm. Pink slip and red-brown paint. Context: locus 666, reg. no. 8058171 (?). Place: Romema, IAA no. 81-640. Literature: Zemer 1991: 26 no. 39. 5.VI.5.16. A female head with a peg from Shiqmona. It is mould-made, but the details in the published drawing are not clear. Height: 63 mm. Context: not published. Place: Haifa, museum of ancient art no. 2353. Literature: Zemer 1991: 25,79, no. 34. 5.VI.5.17. A moulded female head and an upper body part from Shiqmona. The left arm lies on the chest. The face is

283

beautiful, with vertical curls and representations of ears. The head is very similar to head no. 18 (below). Context: not published. Literature: Elgavish 1967 (without page numbers). [Fig. 9:8] 5.VI.5.18. A moulded female head from Shiqmona. It is similar to head no. 17 (above). Context: not published. Place: Romema, IAA no. 65-2355. Literature: Elgavish 1967 (the large photograph, no page nos.); Negev 1972:289 photograph; Holland 1975: AIX.f.1; Elgavish 1978, EAEHL IV:1102; Engle 1979: type VIII:6; perhaps also Elgavish 1994: fig. 45 (the last may be 5.VI.5.16?). 5.VI.5.19. A moulded female head and an upper body part from an unknown origin (supposedly from Ma'alul, a village west of Nazareth). The hands lie on the chest. There are long side-locks, somewhat similar to the shape of an earlobe, and vertical curls above the forehead. Height: 91 mm. Context: unknown. Place: Rockefeller 45.257. Literature: Holland 1975: C.XV.a.11d, addenda, pI. 45:5. 5.VI.5.20. A moulded female head from Tel Keisan. It is moulded and has a hole at the back. There are long sidelocks, descending behind the ears. Red and white paint. Note: a fragment of a base with feet was found with this head. Paraire thought it is an Egyptian type of head - but "Egyptian" features are common in Phoenician art in general. Reg. no. 6.146 + 6.104. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan 1:333-334, pI. 102:5. 5.VI.5.21. A hollow female head from Tel Keisan. It is moulded and has the remains of red paint. Reg. no. 3.672. Context: debris of level IVb, 6th century BC. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:6. 5.VI.5.22. A solid female head from Tel Keisan. It has long side-locks but no representation of ears. There are remains of red paint. Reg. no. 4.049. Context: level IVb, 7th century BC (?). Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:19. 5.VI.5.23. A hollow male head from Tel Keisan. It is moulded and has a long beard. Paraire defined the style as Assyrian. Reg. no. 6.135. Context: not stratified. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:1O. 5.VI.5.24. A fragment of a solid (?) head from Tel Keisan. It shows a disk and two snakes between schematic feathers. Reg. no. 6.139. Context: not stratified. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:9. 5.VI.5.25. A nearly whole body from Tel Keisan. It is hollow and wheel-made. The right hand held a dagger (?). The fingers are shown by incisions. A band is applied on the back. Reg. no. 6.093. Context: level Vllb, ca. 9th century BC. Place: Romema, IAA no. 79-245. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:3. 5.VI.5.26. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is hollow and hand-made. The arms are broken. Reg. no. 6.529. Context: not stratified.

284

Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:2. 5.VI.5.27. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is hollow and wheel-made. The right hand holds a bird (?), the other rests on the hip. Reg. no. 5.302. Context: level IVb, ca. 7th century BC. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:16. 5.VI.5.28. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is hollow and wheel-made. It probably depicted a woman holding a bird. Reg. no. 5.090. Context: not stratified. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:17. 5.VI.5.29. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is hollow and wheel-made. It probably depicted a woman holding something. Part of the peg remained. Reg. no. 2.918. Context: surface find. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:18.

5.VI.5.30. A base fragment from Tel Keisan. It shows part of the feet. Wheel-made. Reg. no. 2.406. Context: not stratified. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:7. 5.VI.5.31. A base fragment from Tel Keisan. It shows part of the feet. Wheel-made. Reg. no. 3.099. Context: level VI, ca. 9th century BC (?). Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:8. 5.VI.5.32. A base fragment from Tel Keisan. It is wheelmade, but resembles type 5.VI.1 and not bases nos. 30-31 above (cf. also a monkey figurine with a similar base, Keisan I: pI. 104:39). Reg. no. 4.190. Context: level V, 8th-7th centuries BC. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:24.

5.VI.5.33. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is solid and wheel-made. The figure is standing, hands along the body and a bird on one hand. Reg. no. 6.331. Context: level IX.b, 11th century BC. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:14. 5.VI.5.34. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is solid and hand-made. It shows a woman sitting on a chair (?) with two supporting animals (?). Reg. no. 6.138. Context: not stratified. Place: Romema, IAA no. 79-247. Note: this fragment may be part of a vessel or a stand, and not a free-standing figurine. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:15. 5.VI.5.35. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. Only the arm survived, with incised fingers. Reg. no. 2.173. Context: levels VI-V, ca. 9th-8th centuries BC (?). Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:4. 5.VI.5.36. A hollow head from Kabri. It is moulded and has vertical curls. Gray ware. Reg. no. 3117. Context: locus 824. Literature: Oren, R. 1994: fig. 20:1. 5.VI.5.37. A hollow head from Kabri. It is moulded and has vertical curls. There are large ears and long side-locks. Few traces of red paint survived. Reg. no. 5018/100. Context: locus 1915. Literature: Oren, R. 1994:33, fig. 20:2.

5.VI.5.38. A hollow (?) female head from Kabri. It has long side-locks reaching the shoulders. The ears are small. The face is covered with red paint and there are red bands on the neck. Orange ware with white slip. Reg. no. 2292/100. Context: locus 890. Literature: Oren, R. 1994: fig. 20:3.

5.VI.5.39. A hollow female body fragment from Kabri. The hands hold the breasts (the thumbs are represented). Orange ware and white slip. There are remains of red paint and black bands. Reg. no. 3401/100. Context: locus 890. Literature: Oren, R. 1994: fig. 20:5. 5.VI.5.40. A body fragment from Kabri. There are remains of red paint and black bands. Orange ware with white slip. Reg. no. 3626/100. Context: locus 1337. Literature: Oren, R. 1994:33, fig. 20:6.

5.VI.5.41. A hollow body-fragment from Kabri. A hand and a drum remained. The belly is full, indicating pregnancy. There are remains of red and black paint. Reg. no. 3528/100. Context: locus 1324. Literature: Oren, R. 1994: fig. 20:7. 5.VI.5.42. A solid head from Tel Keisan. It is hand-made and similar to heads of type 5.IV.3, but is dated to the Persian period. Reg. no. TK.35/20. Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:1.

5.VI.6: Various Figurines of unknown Origin 5.VI.6.1. A hollow head with a hole at the back. Reg. no. H.713. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Hecht museum, University of Haifa. 5.VI.6.2. A hollow female head with a hole at the back. It has "earlobe" shaped side-locks. Reg. no. H.1912. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Hecht museum, University of Haifa. 5.VI.6.3. A hollow feamle head with a hole at the back. It has "earlobe" shaped side-locks (one is broken). Reg. no. H.2053. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Hecht museum, University of Haifa. 5.VI.6.4-5. Two hollow female heads with "earlobe" shaped side-locks. Literature: Deutsch 1988b: nos. 505-506. 5.VI.6.6. A whole figurine of a woman playing a drum. She holds the drum perpendicular to her body. The head has no side-locks (cf. type 5.VI.2?). Literature: Deutsch 1989b: no. 276.

5.VII: Other Figurines 5.VII.1: Persian - Period Figurines I have listed below figurines which are dated to the Persian period, or belong to well-defined types of that period. There are also a few even later figurines. All these figurines were included in Holland's thesis, and were checked only in order to verify that they have no relation with the JPF (for Persian period figurines from Israel see Stern 1973; 1989 and chapter X.7.4 above). Since these figurines are not related to the JPF, I have given the minimum details regarding each figurine, and usually only one reference - to the original publication (other than to Holland's thesis). 5.VII.1.1. A male head from Ashdod. Holland 1975: C.XIV.d.2. Original publication: Ashdod I: pI. 58:7, fig. 65:3. 5.VII.1.2. A female plaque figurine from Beth Shean. Holland 1975: C.XV.a.4. Original publication: Rowe 1940: pI. 24: 2 (1); James 1966: fig. 116:6. For a comparison from Dor cf. Stern 1992: photograph 71. 5.VII.1.3. A dressed, sitting woman from Beth Shean. It is double-moulded. Holland 1975: C.xV.a.5. Original publication: Rowe 1940: pI. 24:2 (2); James 1966: fig. 116:3. For a comparison from Dor cf. Stern 1992: photograph 71. 5.VII.1.4. A head from Hazor. Level /I. Reg. no. G.457/1, locus 10033. Holland 1975: AXII.p.4. Original publication: Hazor III-IV: pI. 258:13. 5.VII.1.5. A hollow body-fragment from Lachish. The hands lie on the lower belly. Reg. no. 3514. Holland 1975: C.III.b.1. Original publication: Lachish III: pI. 33:10. 5.VII.1.6. A hollow body-fragment from Lachish. It shows a pregnant woman. Holland 1975: C.III.b.2. Original publication: Lachish III: pI. 32:4. 5.VII.1.7. A fragment of a plaque figurine from Lachish. Surface find. Holland 1975: C.XIV.d.8. Original publication: Lachish /II: pI. 33:6. 5.VII.1.8. A male head with a beard from Machmish. Holland 1975: AXII.L2. Original publication: Avigad 1960: pI. 9b. 5.VII.1.9. A whole figurine from Machmish. It depicts a sitting man, holding his beard with one hand. Hollow, double mould. Holland 1975: AXV.a.11. Original publication: Avigad 1960: pI. 10a; also EAEHL 11:326 left (Hebrew). 5.VII.1.10. A whole figurine from Machmish. It is similar to figurine no. 9 (above). Holland 1975: A.XV.a.11a. Original publication: Avigad 1960: pI. 10a.

5.VI.6.7. A moulded head of type 5.111 (?). It has ears and simple side-locks that reach the shoulders. White-wash. Height: 57 mm. Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 545. Literature: courtesy of the Hebrew University.

5.V/I.1.11. A whole figurine from Machmish. It depicts a young woman. Hollow, double mould. Holland 1975: AXV.a.11b. Original publication: Avigad 1960: pI. 10c.

285

5.VII.1.12. A figurine of a woman and a suckling child from Machmish. Hollow, double mould. Holland 1975: AXV.a.11 c. Original publication: Avigad 1960: pI. 11c. 5.VII.1.13. A male head with a high hat from Samaria. Holland 1975: AXll.q.5. Original publication: Samaria I: pI. 75k.

Original publication: Gezer II: pI. 221:18. 5.VII.2.2. A figurine made of ivory from Gezer. Holland 1975: C.IV.b.5. Original publication: Gezer II: pI. 221:17. 5.VII.2.3. A figurine from Hazor. It probably depicts an animal's leg and not a human figure. Holland 1975: AXVl.b.16. Original publication: Hazor III-IV: pI. 219:32.

5.VII.1.14. A body fragment of a man which carries a discus from Samaria. Holland 1975: AX.g.5. Original publication: Samaria I: pI. 75q. 5.VII.1.15. A figurine of a man holding his beard with one hand from Samaria. Holland 1975: B.lIl.b.3. Original publication: Samaria I: pI. 75n, Reg. no. 3092. 5.VII.1.16. A male head with a beard from Tell es-Safi. Holland 1975: AXII.L.3. 5.VII.1.17. A figurine of a hollow woman standing on a base from Tell es-Safi. Holland 1975: AXlll.a.8. Original publication: Bliss and Macalister 1902: pI. 70:11. 5.VII.1.18. A male head with a beard from Tell es-Safi. Holland 1975: AXlIl.a.9. Original publication: Bliss and Macalister 1902: pI. 70:12.

5.VII.2.4. A figurine from Jericho. It is dated to the PrePottery Neolithic period. Holland 1975: AXVll.b.2. Original publication: Jericho IV: fig. 224:3. 5.VII.2.5. A figurine made of pumice from Megiddo. Holland 1975: AXlIl.c.7. Original publication: May 1935: pI. 33:M.3342. 5.VII.2.6. A figurine made of limestone from Megiddo. Holland 1975: AXa.7. Original publication: May 1935: pI. 32:M.4418.

5.VIII: Moulds I have already included a few moulds among the different types of figurine, to which they belong. These are: 5.V.1.38 from Ta'anakh; 5.V.2.2 from Gezer; 5.V.5.1 from Megiddo; 5.V.8.14 from Gezer; and 5.V.9.19-21 from Tel Batash.

5.VII.1.19. A fragment of feet and body from Tell AbuHawwam. Holland 1975: CXl.e.5. Place: Rockefeller, 34.232. Original publication: Hamilton 1935:17, no. 28.

Holland put the seal from Ramat Rahel among the moulds. There is no proof that this seal was used as a mould for figurines in general, and JPF in particular (for the seal see RR 11:42, pI. 25:3-5; Holland 1975: N.lIl.a.1). Thus, I have not discussed this artifact here.

5.VII.1.20. A nearly whole figurine of a pregnant woman from Tel Megadim. The hands lie along the body. Holland 1975: AXIV.b.1. 5.VII.1.21. A body fragment from Tel Erani. The hands lie along the body. Holland 1975: C.IV.b.3. Original publication: Ciasca 1962: pI. 7:7. 5.VII.1.22. Three fragments of hollow figurines made in a double mould, from Tel Erani. Holland 1975: C.XIV.d.6. Original publication: Ciasca 1962: pI. 6:6; Ciasca 1963: pI. 15. 5.VII.1.23. A hollow body from Tel Erani. The left hand lies on the hip. Holland 1975: C.XV. b.1.

5.VII.2: Figurines of Other Periods or Other Materials General note: I have listed below figurines of stone, bone and other materials, which Holland included in his thesis (occasionally as regular pillar-figurines). I have also added figurines that, during the years following Holland's thesis (1975), were dated clearly to periods other than the Iron Age (and are therefore not related to the JPF). Again, the folloWing list includes the minimal number of details. I have not included a few unidentified fragments, classified under type P by Holland (except P.1I1.12, following correspondence with the Emory museum where this fragment is stored).

5.VIII.1. A mould of a female head from Beth Shemesh. There are two rows of large, rounded curls. The side-locks probably have similar curls and reach the height of the mouth. Red clay. Reg. no. 33-4-80. Season 1933. Context: room 377 in a bUilding (rooms 381, 390). 8th century BC? Literature: AS 111:65, pI. 22:5; fig. 4; Holland 1975: N.ll.a.1. 5.VIII.2. A mould of a female head from Lachish. There are some incised lines above the forehead. The details of the side-locks are not clear in the photographs. The excavators thought that the retouching (after the moulding) was not finished, thus explaining the lack of fine details for the eyes and the curls. Reg. no. 7274. Context: dlx, unstratified. Place: Rockefeller 39.833, in exhibition. Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:14; Holland 1975: vol. 11:316, N.ll.a.3. ~ 5.VIII.3. A mould of a female head and an upper body part from Lachish. There is a diadem on the forehead and "Hathor" horns above the head, with a feather (?) in between. The figure carries a necklace with a pendant and probably holds her breasts with her hands. Context: area 500, but the exact location is not clear. Literature: Lachish IV: pI. 48:1-3; Holland 1975: N.l.a.3.

captured enemies). Parts of the arms survived, and they were probably both placed on the chest. There are also armlets. Context: a fill oLitside a house in square AP/22. Note: the mould is similar to some of the figurines of type 5.V.1, but an exact classification is impossible since the head is missing. Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 87:3, fig. 4; Holland 1975: N.l.a.5.

Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:19; Holland 1975: vol. 11:316317, N.ll.b.2.

5.VIII.5. A mould of a female head from Tawilan. It has a complex hairdress, with side-locks until the shoulders. Context: Iron Age II, other details not published. Place: Amman. Literature: Holland 1975: N.l.a.7, fig. 75:3, pI. 40:3. 5.VIII.6-8. Three moulds of female heads from Amman. One mould is broken in a half. All have representations of ears and long side-locks. They resemble heads of Transjordanian figurines (app. 4 above), but are not identical to any specific head. Context: tomb F, end of the Iron Age period (?). Place: Amman? Literature: Dornemann 1983:132-134, fig. 88:1-3.

286

5.VIII.15. A mould of a plaque figurine from Samaria (broken into two fragments). It depicts a woman holding a child on her knee. She wears a diadem. Reg. no. C.1013 (cf. 5.V.7.4, 5.V.7.37 above). Context: E.207, 8th century BC. Literature: Samaria III: cat. no. 8, pI. 12:7; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.5, fig. 19:9. 5.VIII.16. A mould of a female head from Megiddo. The ears are represented and there are vertical curls, and probably simple side-locks reaching the shoulders. Reg. no. 1853. Context: near tomb 59, from a mixed assemblage. Literature: GUy 1938: pI. 176:11; Holland 1975: N.ll.b.4.

5.VIII.9. A mould of a female head from Tell Deir 'Alia. It has horizontal lines and large, rounded curls above the forehead (cf. 5.111.7.33, 5.111.7.29 for general comparisons). The sidelocks reach the shoulders. Context: not published. Literature: Franken 1960: pI. 14b; Holland 1975: N.ll.b.1, fig. 68:6.

5.VIII.17. A mould of a female head from Megiddo. There are long side-locks. Context: near tomb 59, in a mixed assemblage. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 158:c; Holland 1975: N.ll.b.5.

5.VIII.10. A mould of a female head from Tell Deir 'Alia. It has a high "hat" (not applied) with horizontal and zigzag lines. There is a necklace and a representation of the ears. Context: not published. Literature: Franken 1961, VT 11/4: pI. 19; Franken 1963: pI. 15b; Holland 1975: N.ll.a.1.

5.VIII.18. A mould of a female head from Megiddo. There are long side-locks with incised horizontal lines; cf. heads of type 5.111.6 (above). Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 157; Holland 1975: N.ll.b.6. 5.VIII.19. A mould of a plaque-figurine from Megiddo. The body is nearly whole. The hands hold the breasts and the fingers are marked. There is a representation of a dress, decorated with incised lines and dots on the lower belly. The woman wears rings on her ankles. Context: the "palace", group B. Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 158:b, pI. 32:d; Holland 1975: N.l.a.4.

5.VIII.11. A mould of a female head from' an unknown origin, supposedly from Transjordan. Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. It has two twisted side-locks that reach the shoulders. Context: unknown. Place: Haifa, museum of ancient Art no. 3566. Literature: Zemer 1991: no. 36. 5.VIII.12. A mould of a female head from Ashdod. It has a triangular hairdress (cf. 5.111.8.1, 5.111.8.3 above). The hands hold the breasts. Context: area D, surface find. Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 46:3, pI. 27:1; Ashdod II-II:125f, 128; Holland 1975: N.l.a.1.

5.VIII.20. A mould of a female head from Megiddo. The peg is preserved. There are long side-locks that reach the shoulders and incised vertical lines above the forehead. Context: locus 1270 in square P/8. This is a narrow room (storeroom?) in a house (rooms 1499, 1264, 1259). Level II. Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.4117; Holland 1975: N.ll.b.4; Engle 1979: type VIII:205.

5.VIII.13. A mould of a female head from Tell Gemmeh. It is badly broken. The side-locks probably reach the shoulders. (cf. the 5.111 types). Context: BZ.201, a large court in a building complex of Petrie's "26th dynasty" city. The court is disturbed by later pits.

5.VIII.21. A mould of a female head from an unknown origin. It has vertical lines above the forehead. It is somewhat similar, but not identical, to heads from Transjordan. Place: Eretz-Israel museum, Tel Aviv, no. 114/16. MHP.7889. Literature: Deutsch 1989b: 104 no. 273.

5.VIII.4. A mould for a lower body of a plaque-figurine from Tell en-Nasbeh. The legs are decorated with rings and the feet turn forward. There are ridges of dress (?) on the belly (the excavators thought that these are ropes, symbolizing

5.VII.2.1. A figurine made of ivory from Gezer. Holland 1975: C.IV.b.4.

5.VIII.14. A mould of a female head from Tell Gemmeh. It has three rows of little curls above the forehead. Context: GC.189, a court (or a room) in a bUilding complex that includes rooms GO, GR. Petrie's "20th dynasty" city. This level was dated by Kenyon to the 10th century BC., and by Holland to the 9th-8th centuries BC. Literature: Petrie 1928:18, pI. 36:6; Holland 1975: pI. 40:4, N.ll.a.2.

287

Indexes 1. Index of Authors 1 A-Campo, AL. 25. Abusch, T. 71. Ackerman, Susan 26. 5, 7, 8, 13, 13 n, 6, 16, Aharoni, Y. 17 n. 12,21,24,49,53,73,78. Ahituv, Sh. 44. Ahlstrom, G.W 7 n. 5, 14, 18, 18 n. 14 27,27 n. 28,44 n. 2, 75-76. Albertz, R 26. Albright, WF. 10,11, 12, 13, 15-16,21, 24,49,53, 73, 78. Alroth, Brita. 17, 25, 62, 69, 71, 77, 79. Alt, A 43-44,45 n. 4. Ammerman. Rebecca M. 25, 51-52, 53, 69, 71, 76 n. 5, 78. Amiran, R 29. Amit, D. 7,43. Amr, Al 17,24. Ardener, Shirley 25. Auerbach, Elise 71,75. Avigad, N. 7, 8. Ayalon, E. 27. Badre, Leila. 25. Bahat, D. 25. 18, 74. Bailey, DW. Bar-Adon, P. 7,47. Barkay, G. 4, 5, 7-8, 8 n. 8, 18, 41, 54,57-58,58 n. 3, 59, 74-75, 79. Barnes, Ruth 26. Barrelet, M.T. 25. Barrett, J.C. 63, 78. 25 n. 25. Bartlett, IR 22,25,27,31-32,34,62, Beck, Pirhiya 65,78-79. Becking, B. 4, 7 n. 7,43. Beer, Cecilia. 25, 35, 53. 6. Begg, C.T Beit-Arieh, Y. 7,8,44,50 n. 3,62. Ben-Arieh, Sarah. 25,78. Berkeley (Father) 10. Berlinerblau, J. 26. 76 n. 6. Betlyon, IW. Best, I 76 n. 6. Bhattacharya, D.K 21, 21 n. 18. Bienkowski, P. 25,25 n. 25. Biran, A 7, 8. Bird, Philis. 18,25 n. 26. Bisi, Anna Maria. 25, 36, 53, 71. Black, J. 25, 70. Bliss, F.J. 70. Bloch-Smith, Elizabeth.M. 18,40,58, 76. Blocher, F. 25, 75. 1 The indexses refer to the text (p. 4-81). The appendixes are not included. A few scholars are missing from the index because of the use of abbreveations (such as Lachish ill, TN I, TBM ill).

Bloom, Joanne B. 5. Boardman, J. 9. Bohm, Stephanie 25,71. 21,75 n. 3. Bonano, A Borger, R 68. Borowski, O. 62. Bourke, H. 59. Bowden, H. 9. Brandes, M 56. Brandl, B. 7 n. 7, 9,43. Bretschneider, J. 23, 69 n. 1. Briend, I 18, 74. Brinkman, IA 6. Bron, F. 22. Broshi, M. 47. Brown, S. 53. Bulbach, SW. 43. Burkert, W. 71. Burstein, S.M 5. Burrows, M. 12, 73, 74, 77. Caquot, A 24. Carless-Hulin, Linda S. 21,23,25,71 n. 4. Caubet, Annie 25, 32, 35-36, 50, 52, 53, 53 n. 10,71. Cazelles, H. 6. Chadderdon, T.I 21. Chadwich, IR 7,47. Cherry, J.F. 44. Childs, B.S. 4. Cholidis, Nadja 66. Ciasca, Antonia 13. Clark, G.A. 21. Clarke, D.L. 44. Clements, RE. 5. Clennont-Ganneau, Ch. 10. Coher, R 5. Cohen, Rudolph. 8, 44, 62, 78-79. Colbow, Gudrun 25. Collombier, AM 9. Connelly, lB. 25,31,79. Conrad, D. 25, 78, 79 n. 8. 10. Contenau, G. Coogan, M.D. 18. Cook, RM 9. Cooper, IS. 44. 33. Courtois, IS. Cresson, B.C. 8. Cross, F.M 7,21. Crouwel, I 20. Crowfoot,J.W. 62 n. 11. Culican, W 25, 35, 53, 69 n. 1. Curtis, E.L. 6 n. 3. Curtis, E.M. 79. 7-8,42 n. 8,43. Dagan, Y. Dandamayev, M.A. 6. Davies, G.L. 7 n. 5. 76 n. 5. Davila, J.R Daviau, P.M 31. Day, J. 74, 76 n. 5, 76 n. 6. Day, Peggy L. 25 n. 26, 76, 76 n. 5. De-Groot, A 47. De-Miroschedji, P. 28 n. 1. 288

De-Vaux, R 14,73. De-Wette, W.M.L. 25. Dearman, J.A. 18,76 n. 6. Deboys, D.G. 43. Deem, A 76. Delcor, M. 76 n. 5. Dever, W.G. 18, 19,21,22,22 n. 21, 27,54,59,72-74,76,76 n. 6. Diakonoff, I.M 6. Dicou, B. 25 n. 25. Dietrich, W 21 n. 19,27, 58, 66, 76 n. 6,78-79. Dion, P.E. 31,44. Dobbs-Allsop, F.W. 44 n. 3. Doermann, RW. 7. Dohmen, C. 21 n. 19. Donatelli, Laura. 79. Donner, H. 4. Domemann, RH. 25, 30. 8,25, 33, 43. Dothan, T 12, 75. Driver, S.R Duff, AI. 21. 74. Duncan, IG. Durkheim, E. 80. Edwards, O. 4, 6. Eicher, J.B. 26. 43. Eitam, D. Eitan, A 8, 43. Elat, M. 5,46. Elgavish, J. 35. 5. Elitzur, y. Emerton, IA 27, 76 n. 6. 11 n. 1, 16, 16 n. 11, 17, Engle, J.R 17 n. 12, 18,22-23,28,29,38,39, 39 n. 19,40-41,41 n. 5, 50-51, 58, 76. 7. Eph'al, I. 7,8. Eshel, H. 7 n. 6, 8, 9, 81 addenda. Eshel, I. Fantar, M.H. 76 n. 5. Fargo, V.M. 7. Ferron, I 36. Finkelstein, I. 7, 43, 47. Fleming, S. 49,78. Fowler, MD. 20,21,57,73,77. Frame, G. 5. Franken, H.I 14,17,59,63,73-74,76. Franken-Battefshill, C.A. 14,73-74,76. Frazer, I 10,80. Frettloh, Magdalene L. 76 n. 6. Frevel, C. 81 addenda. 18. Fritz, V. Frost, S.B. 6. Frymer-Kensky, Tikva 25, 76 n. 6. 25,49, 76. 4-6, 6 n. 4, 7, 43-44. 12. Gamer-Wallert, I. 25, 68. 25,53, 72, 79. Ganzman, Garfinkel, Y. 7,44,47,47 n. 9.

Gadon, Elinor Galil, G. Galling, K

Garwood,P. 21. Gates, C. 73. 25, 70. Geller, M.I 73. George, AR Gerstenberger, E.S. 78. Gesell, Geraldine C. 28 n. 1, 71. Geva, Shulamit 7 n. 6, 9. Gilula, M. 27. Ginsberg, H.L. 43. Gitin, S. 8,25,27, 32,43, 76 n. 6. Giveon, R 35. Gladigow, B. 79. Glueck, N. 35. Goldberg, Naomi R 25, 25 n. 26. Gophna, R 13,29, 32,43. 49,49 n. 1,55. Goren, Y. Gorg, M. 65, 76 n. 5. Goring, Elisabeth 25. Grant, E. 40,47. 5,6,6 n. 3. Gray, I Green, A 25,68,70-71. 4, 6. Green, AR Green, S.W 44. Grimal, N.C. 70. Gubel, E. 25, 28 n. 1, 30, 32, 3536,53,71. Gudison, Lucy 21. Gunneweg, I 27. Gurney,O.R 70. Hachlili, Rachel 13-14,51. Hagg, E. 21 n. 19,25. Hackett, J.A. 25 n. 26. Hadley, Judith M. 22,27,68, 76 n. 6. Hadzisteliou-Price, Theodora 28 n. 1, 75 n.3. Hagg, R 28 n. 1. Haiman, M. 40. 73,78-79. Hallo, WW. Halpern, B. 18. 75. Handy, L.K Haran, M. 12,18. 25 n. 26. Harris, K Heaton, E.W. 14,74, 77. Hennary, Antoine 25, 50, 71. Herr, L.G. 25 n. 25. 7, 8,40, 64. Herzog, Z. Hestrin, Ruth 18, 76, 76 n. 6. 25, 53. Higgins, RA Hirschon, R. 25. 44. Hodder, I. Holladay, IS. 7 n. 5, 19, 20, 26, 57, 59, 61,63-64, 74, 76, 78. Holland, T.A. 11, 11 n. 11, 13, 15, 16, 16 n. 10, 16 n. 11, 20, 22-24, 28, 30, 32, 36, 36 n. 10, 37, 38, 38 n. 16,39, 39 n. 18, 39 n. 19, 50, 54, 59,63,65-66,74-75,78. Holloway,S.W 19,70. Homes-Frederiqc,D. 30,32. Honor, L.L. 4. Hooke, S.H. 12, 74, 77. Hom, S.H. 5 n. 2. 19, 50-51, 54, 73-74, 76 Hubner, U. n.6. Hutter, M. 5 n. 2. Hvidberg-Hansen, F.O. 69, 76, 76 n. 5, 76 n.6.

Ikeda, Y. Ulan, Z. Ioannides, G.C. Isserlin, B.S.J.

76n.6. 7,43. 54. 25,32.

Jacobs, P. Jacobsen, Th. Jeremias, J. Jericke, D. Jones, G.

7,62,66. 79. 17,54,75. 40. 43

Kallai, Z. 43. KamIah, Jens. 79. Karageorghis, V. 25, 33, 36, 71, 81 addenda. Keel, O. 18, 20, 23, 24, 27, 32, 36,50-51,57,57 n. 1,65,74.. Kelley, C.P 56. 7,8. Kelm, G.L. Kelso, IL. 11,16,49-53. Kempinski, A 6 n. 4, 8,43. Kenyon, KM. 7-8, 13, 15-17, 19, 40, 59,61,63,73-74. Kertesz, Trude 54 n. 2. Kippenberg, H.G. 21,23. Kitchen, K.A. 4, 5, 5 n. 2. 43. Klein, RW. Kletter, R 22, 41, 43 n. 1, 44-45, 48-49. Kloner, A 49. Koch, K 76 n. 6. 7,8. Kochavi, M. Kochman, M 8. 70. Koenig, Y. 5. Konkel, AH. Kutsch, E. 6. Kyle, M.G. 19,75,77. Kyle-McCarter, P. 76 n. 6. Laato, A Lagro, T Lambert, WG. Lapp,P.W Leclant, I Lee, TG. Lemaire, A 76n.6. Lemche, N.P. Linder, E. Lipinski, E. Liverani, M Ljung, I. Loretz, O. Lowery, RH. Lukonin, V.G. Lundquist, IM

43. 17.

2. 13,35. 76n.5. 79. 22, 27, 69, 76, 76 n. 5, 21 n. 19,74. 25,46. 6,23, 68-69. 44. 76n.6. 25,27,58,76 n. 6,79. 5,43. 6. 61.

Macalister, RAS. 10, 54, 70, 74. Mackenzie, D. 10, 37, 57. Madsen, AL. 6 n. 3. Malamat, A 4-6, 8,44. Malinowski, B. 80. Margalith, O. 76 n. 5, 76 n. 6. Matsushima, E. 70,79. Mauss, M. 80. 12,73-74. May, IG. 289

Mayes,AH.D. 5. Mazar, A 7-8, 18,40, 43, 64, 69 n. 1,75. Mazar, B. 5 n. 2, 7-8,17,74. 8,44, 54. Mazar, Eilat McCarthy, D.J. 5. Meerschaert, Camille 25,35,36,53. Mendenhall, G.E. 76 n. 6. 27. Meshel, Z. Mettinger, TN.D. 21 n. 19,78. Meyers, Carol. 25,35-36,49. 7. Milik, IT. Miller, P.D. 18, 74. Mitchell, TC. 18,36. 4,27,43. Mittmann, S. Mommsen, H. 7. Montgomery, J.A. 5,6,6 n. 3. Moorey, P.RS. 18,49, 78. Morris, B. 21,77-78. Morris, Sarah P. 53, 71. Muhly, J.D. 78. 26. Mulder, MI Musberg, R 79. Na'aman, N. 4-6, 7 n. 7, 8, 40, 42 n. 8, 43-44,44 n. 2,46,47 n. 9. Nadelman, Y. 17,54,59. Nakhai, B.P. 61. Naveh, J. 27,44. Negbi, Ora 49, 79. 52. Nelson, RD. 7,9,40,64. Netzer, E. Nicholls, RV. 25,51,51 n. 7,52. Nicholson, E.W. 5. Niemeier, W.D. 9. Noblecourt, D. 25, 68. Noordhuizen, D. 17. North, R. 5-6, 27. 5,43, 76 n. 6. Noth, M. Nylander, C. 56. Oates, Jane. 6. Ockinga, B. 79. O'Connor, M. 27. Oded, B. 6, 75. 7,47. Ofer, A Olyan, S.M 27 n. 28, 76 n. 6. Oppenheim, AL. 79. Oren, E.D. 7,9,25. Orlinski, H.M. 5. Oman, Tallay 32 n. 6,78. Orphanides, AG. 20, 71 n. 5, 74. Osborne, R 71. Parpola, S. 52. Patai, R 14, 14 n. 7, 14 n. 8, 15, 16,22,49,53, 75-76. Paul, S.M 21. Peltenburg, E.I 54. Perlman, I. 7. Perlman, S.M. 44. Petrie, WM.F. 33. 18-19,76 n. 6. Pettey, RI Phytian-Adams, M.A. 75. Pilali-Papasteriou, Angeliki 21,25. 11, 26, 40, 75. Pilz, E. Pinch, Geraldine 25, 50, 54 n. 2, 68, 79. Posener-Krieger, P. 50, 68.

Prag, K. 16 n. 10. Price, Theodora H. 25. Pritchard, J.B. 11 n. 1, 12, 13, 25, 35, 40,53,62,72-74,78. Puech, E. 69. Rainey, AF. 5, 5 n. 2, 6-8, 43. Reed, WL. 14, 16, 19,22, 76, 76 n. 6. Reese, D.S. 9. Reich, R. 7 n. 7, 43, 44. Reifenberg, A 12, 74. Renfrew, C. 21,23,25,44, 71. Reuther, Rosmary 25 n. 26. Reviv,H. 5. Reyes, AT. 53. Riis, P.l 78. 10, 25, 54, 56, 69, 70, Ritner, RK. 81. Rittig, D. 70. Rofe, A 5, 5 n. 2. Romano, Irene B. 25, 69, 79. Rose, M. 22, 26, 27. Rowlands, M. 44. Rystedt, Eva. 66. Sadek, AI. 6. Sass, B. 24,78,81. Achmidt-Collinet, Constanze 36. Schmitt, G. 4. Schniedewind, WM. 5. Schroer, S. 24, 27, 76 n. 6. Schwartz, C. 33, 53. Seeden, Helga. 69 n. 1. Sease, Chaterine 9. Segal, I. 50. Segal, J.B. 26. Seger, J. 7 n. 7. Seitz, C.R 5. Sellers,O.R 7-8. Sellin, E. 35. Shavit, A 43. Shea, W.H. 5 n. 2, 27. Shiloh, Y. 7,61. Skorupski, J. 80-81. Smelik, K.A.D. 5,5 n. 2. Smith, M.S. 4, 27, 58, 76, 76 n. 5, 76 n.6. Sophocleus, S. 25, 35. Sorensen, L.W 25, 35, 53, 71. Spalinger, LW. 4-5, 5 n. 2. Spieckermann, H. 5-6,6 n. 3. Spycket,Agnes 25,49, 53, 55, 66, 71. Stadelmann 21. Stager, L.E. 7, 47. Starkey, lL. 7. Stern, E. 6 n. 4, 7, 25, 41, 43, 51 n. 6,79. Stromberg,Agneta 57 n. 2. Supinska-Lovset, TIona 10, 18,74. Suzuki, Y. 6,43. Tadmor, H. 4, 5. Tadmor, M. 25,66,78-79. Talalay, Laurene A 54. Tatton-Brown, Veronica 20. Tatum, L. 2, 9, 43. Taylor, J.G. 19.

Teixidor, J. 69. Teubal, Savina. 25-26,49, 76. Thiele, E.R 1. Thorely, J.P. 11, 16,49,50,51,52-53. Tigai, J.H. 18,76 n. 6, 77. Tooley,Angela M. 68, 73. Toombs, L.E. 7. Tosi, M. 26 n. 27. Tubb, J.N. 10. Tufnell, Olga 13. Tushingham, AD. 7 n. 5. Ucko, P.G. 15,20-21, 55, 58, 73-74, 78. Uehlinger, C. 18, 20, 23, 24, 27, 50, 51,57,57 n. 1,74, 78. Uhelenbrock, lP. 25. Ussishkin, D. 4,6 n. 4, 7-9, 40, 43, 64. Vafoloulou-Richadson, C.E. 53. Van der-Toorn, K. 23. Van Loon, M. 75. Van Straten, F. 25,71. Van Winkle, D.W. 5 n. 2. Vance, D.B. 69. Vandenabeele, Frieda 25, 32, 35-36, 5253. Vargon, Sh. 4. Vernieylen, J. 78. Versnel, H.S. 10,81. Vincent, P.H. 10, 54, 75. Voigt, MaryM. 10,20-21,21 n. 17, 27, 69,73,81. Von Beckerath, 1 5 n. 2. Vorlander, H. 27. Vrijhof, P.H. 26.

Waardenburg, J. 26. Waldbaum, J.C. 9,44. Walls, N.H. 74, 76. Ward, W.A. 25, 33, 53. Watzinger, C. 12, 74, 75. Weber, M. 80. Weinberg, S.S. 8. Weinfeld, M. 5-6, 8,43. Weippert, H. 8, 18, 24, 43. Weippert, M. 43, 25 n. 25, 66. Welch, AC. 6. Wenning, R 6, 9-10, 19, 20, 44, 58, 65, 74,76-77. Westermann, C. 5. Whitt, WD. 18,76 n. 6. Wiggermann, F.A.M. 68,70-71,78. Wiggins, S.A. 22-23, 68, 71, 76, 76 n. 6. Wightman, G.D. 7. Wilford, J.N. 25. Williamson, H.G.M. 5-6, 6 n. 3. Winter, U. 23, 23 n. 22, 40, 49-50, 74,76 n. 6. Wiseman, D.l 6,44. Wittgenstein, L. 23. Wood, B.G. 24,51. Worschech, U. 6,19,25 n. 25. Wright, G.E. 14,26,40,47, 74, 77. Yadin, Y. Yellin, 1

7, 7n. 6,9. 7. 290

Yisrael, Y. 44,62,78-79. Yon, Marguerite 25, 32, 35-36, 53, 53 n. 10,71. Young, 1. 44 n. 3. Zadok,R 5. Zawadzki, S. 6. Zeeb,F. 76 n. 6. Zevit, Z. 27. Zimansky, P. 71. Zimhoni, Orna 7-9. Zmirin, Sh. 5,6. Zorn, lR 7-8,40,41,50,62-64,64 n.14. Zuckerman, B. 76 n. 5.

2. Geographic IndexAchzib 25, 72. Aegean 15,25,28,33,41,52-54,71. Ajrud see: Kuntillet Ajrud. Amathos 35. Amman(RabatAmmon) 30,51 n. 6. Ammon (land of) 16, 79. Arabah (valley) 43. Arad 7-8, 13 n.6, 17, 18 n. 14,22,26, 41,43-44,46-48,61-66,73,78. Aroer (Negev) 8. Ashdod 13-15,33,35,41 n. 6,43,45-46, 48,73. Ashkelon 4,25, 32,43. Ashtarot Karnayim 14 n.8 Assur (cf. also Assyria) 5-6, (71 city of). Assyria (cf. also Assur) 4-6,24. Austalia 52. Azeka 6-8,43,44-45. Azor 43. Babylon 5-6, 44. Beer Sheba (Biblical) 5. Beer Sheba (Tel) 7, 7 n. 6, 9, 13 n.6, 16, 17, 31-32, 39-40, 42-43 (valley of), 46-48, 58-60, 62, 62 n. 11, 63-65,73. Benjamin 5-8,40, 42, 44-45. Berlin 68. Beth Lehem 10,43,47. Beth Shean 35. Beth Shemesh 7, 10-11, 13, 15-16, 18,20, 31,3'7,40,42-43,45-48,50,5760, 62, 64-66. Beth Zur 7,8. Bethel 5,6,44-45,45 n. 5. Buqe'a (valley) 7. Buseirah 31, 39. Cairo

68.

2 Derivative forms are not included, e.g., Israelite, Cypriote, Judean (except the form Near Eastern). Neither are names of sites in references (e.g., Keisan I, Lachish III, Jerusalem II).

Cambridge(U.K.) 81 n. 9 Cana'an 10. Carchemish(Syria) 6. Chichen Iche 59. Chitroi 19 City of David (specific part of Jerusalem) 8. Coastal plain (of Israel) 9, 13, 15, 32-33, 35-37,41,44,45-46. Cyprus 11-12,23,25,28,28 n. 1, 31-33, 35-36,53-54, 71, 79. Dan 62. Dead Sea 43. Deir el Medina 26 n. 27. Delta (of the Nile) 5. Dor 32,51 n. 6, 79. Dura (synagogue) 56. Edom Egypt

31,43-44,62,79. 5-6, 13, 25-26, 44, 49, 54, 56, 66,68-70, 79, 81. Ephraim (land of) 5-6. Ekron 4,8,25,27,32,43,45. Elat 43. Elteke 4 EnGedi 7-8. EnHazevah 44,62,78-79. Europe 74. Gat 43,45, cf. Tel es-Safi Geba' 5. Gebel el-Zeit 25, 68. Gebel Qal'ah (Amman) 30 Gezer 7 n. 7, 10, 11-12,34,43,46, 59. Gibeon 13, 19,42,47,47 n. 8,48 n. 10, 49-50, 59, 62, 65. Gileam 36 n. 10. Greece 13, 17,25,28 n. 1, 51, 53, 62 (world), 71-72 (world), 77.

Haifa 32. Hajj Firuz Tepe 21. Haran 6. Hazor 13,18,24,32,41,60,78. Hebron 7,47. Hittite (empire) 70. Hurru 69. Israel, ancient Kingdomof (northern) 4, 8, 11 n. 2, 15, 18, 22, 24, 32, 36, 40-41, 43, 45-46, 54, 62, 71-72, 76. Israel, land of (as modern term) 6, 8-12, 13 n.6, 23-24, 26,28,43,46,49, 50, 52, 65-66, 69, 72, 78. Israel, United kingdom / or general term for both Israel and Judah 16,2123,27,28 n. 1,30,41,58; 64. Italy 53.

Jaffa 4,43. Jericho 8,43-44,48,52-53,59. Jerusalem 4-9,13,15-17,17 n. 12, 18-20, 22, 22 n. 20, 31-32, 40, 42-43,

46-47,47 n. 9,48-49,52, 55, 59, 61-62,62 n. 10,62 n. 11,63,65, 66, 74, 76, 78-79, 81 addenda. Jordan valley 31,33. Judah 4-11, 13, 15-16, 18, 19 n. 16,20, 22,24,26,28, 31-32, 36-38,40, 41, 43-48, 50, 52, 54, 58, 58 n. 3,61-62,65-68, 71-73, 75, 75 n. 4,76-79. Judean Desert 7-8,41-42,45,47. Judean Mountains 7-8,41-42, 45, 47-48, 52. Kabri 9,36. Kh. el-Kom 4, 16,21,27,76,81. Kh. Geresh 62. Kh. Hoga 32, 45-46. Kh. Rabud 7-8,48. Kh.Radum 8. Kisonegra 54. Kition 35. Kourion 19. Kuntillet 'Ajrud 4, 16,21-22,27, 76, 81. Lachish 4, 6-9, 11, 13, 14, 22 n. 20, 24, 31, 37,43-48, 52, 57-59, 61, 61 n. 9,62,65-66. Lahav see: Tel HalifILahav. Levant 9, 53, 71. Malhata see: TelMalhata Mamila (Jerusalem) 57,59,62. Manasseh (land of) 6. Maresha 49,59,70. Media 6. Mediterranean (Sea/Area) 21,71,74. Megiddo 6, 11, 12, 12 n.4, 15-16, 18, 24, 32-33, 35, 39,41,44-46, 48, 57 n. 1. Medma 51. Mesad Hashavyahu 44. Mesopotamia 12, 21, 25, 27, 28, 44, 53, 56,66,68-71, 73, 77,79,81. Mirgissa 70. Mizpah 43, cf.: tell en-Nasbeh. Moab 16. Mount Nebo 77. Moza 7. Nahariya 14, 14 n.8, 24. Naphtali (land of) 6. Naukratis 69. Near East (Ancient) 9-10, 15, 20, 23, 32, 44,54,66,73-75,77-78,81. Negev 7-8,27,40,42,44-49. Ophra 44. Oxford (UK) 81 n. 9. Palestine 13,24. Paphos 69. Philakopi 25. Philistia 4, 9, 13, 16, 25, 37, 41, 43-46, 62,71,72. Phoenicia 9, 11, 16,24-25,28, 32-33, 3536,41,45-46,49, 53 (coast), 69 (coast), 71-72, 76-77, 79. Punic (world) 28, 32, 35-36. 291

Qitmit

44,62,78-79.

Ramat Rahel 7-8, 13-14, 18, 26, 47 n. 9, 48,52,73. Ramot 7,17,47,63. Romema (Jerusalem) 59. Ruqeish 9,25, Samaria 4-6, 11, 13, 15, 18-19, 20, 27, 32,41,43-46,62,62 n. 10,69. Sarepta 25,72. Seville (Spain) 69. Shechem 45. Shephelah 5, 7-8, 42-43, 45-47, 47 n. 9, 48,49,52. Shiqmona 36 n. 10. Shomeron (in Hebrew) 27. Sidon 72, 79. Simeon (land of) 6. Sinai (desert) 27. Sippar 79. Spain 69. Steppes (of Russia) 13. Syria 6,23,25,28,53,69 (coast), 75. Susa 55. Ta'anakh 13,22, 35. Tawilan 31. Tel Batash (Timnah) 7-8,35,51. Tel Beer Sheba see: Beer Sheba (Tel) Tel Beit Mirsim 7, 11-13, 15, 18 n. 14, 24,34,42,45-47, 52, 58, 61-66, 78. Tel Burna 45. Tel Eitun7. Tel el-Ful62. Tel el-Ajjul 33. Tel el-Mazar (Jordan) 31. Tel en-Nasbeh 7-8, 11,22 n. 20, 23, 32, 40-42, 46-48, 48. n. 10, 49-50, 58,61-66. Tel el-Oreimeh 36,37. Tel es-Safi (Gat) 32, 43 (Gat), 45 (Gat), 45. Tel Erani (Sheikh Ahmad el Areini) 7, 13, 15,40,45-46. Tel Gat see: Tel Erani. Tel Gemmeh 15,32, 33-35. Tel Goded see: Tel Judeideh. Tel HalifILahav 7,42,45,61,66, 79. Tel Haror 9, 25, 32. Tel'lra 7-8, 17,34,42,49-50,60, 73. Tel Hesi 7. Tel Judeideh (Goded) 7,45. Tel Keisan 9,25,35-36,51 n. 6. TelMalhata 8,19, 19n. 16,42. Tel Masos 8,42,48. Tel Michal 40,45. Tel Qasileh 45,62. Tel Shera 9, 25, 32. Tel Sippor 49. Tel Zeror 35. Transjordan 4, 15,24,25 n. 25, 30-32, 34, 36,41,45,72, 77. Uppsala (Sweden) 10.

Ugarit UK.

58. 52. Ur 71. U.S.A. 52. Uzah (Kh.) 8. Winchester 68. Vered Jericho 8,43.

3. Index of Biblical Sources (MT)

35:20-24

6.

General

5.

7:5 12:13 16:1 16:21

76. 76.

6. 79.

Exodus 34: 13 Ezekiel 6.

76.

5.

(Chapters and verses in bold letters)

2:13 33:1-9 33:10-17 34 34:2-7 34:6 34:33

Chronicles n 6,9, 17 n. 13, 76, 81.

General

Jeremiah 6. 54 n. 1. 6.

43.

19:1,11 37:11 34:7 44:30

6,44. 6.

6. 6. 6.

15:13

79.

43. 5.

5,43.

76.

Geneal 18-19 18:13-16 18:17-19a 18:19 19:9b-35 19:36-37 21 21:7 21:19-26 23:2-3 23:6 23:4-7 23:15 23:21-23 23:20-22 23:24-27 23:29 24:1-2 24:10-18 24:17

5,6.

6,44. 6,44. 6. 6.

Micha I

4.

Kings Deuteronomy

Isaiah

General

15:33

4. 4,5. 5. 76. 5.

5. 5. 76,79.

5. 5.

79. 5.

5,44. 5. 6. 6 n. 3.

Kings I

292

n