No title

A PutBiical rch APublicationof the AmnericanSchool1sof OrientalResearch oecember 1986 49 Number 4 Volumne ecemnbe...

Author: American Schools of Oriental Research

5 downloads 322 Views 18MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

A

PutBiical

rch

APublicationof the AmnericanSchool1sof OrientalResearch

oecember

1986

49 Number 4 Volumne

ecemnber1986

i-?C

-.•~

I

I

i-

-L

~

b •..

..•'--h•

?

, .•

'

!•

'

?:t~C

U ?- .•'

.

L

AMERICAN SCHOOLS

OF

ORIENTAL RESEARCH

PA 19104 (215)222-4643 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE,ASOR,4243 SPRUCESTREET,PHILADELPHIA, James A. Sauer, President Eric M. Meyers, First Vice President for Publications William G. Dever, Second Vice President for Archaeological Policy George M. Landes, Secretary Kevin G. O'Connell, Assistant Secretary Charles U. Harris, Teasurer Gough W Thompson, Jr., Chairman of the Board of Trustees Norma Kershaw, Director of bTours Susan Wing, Bookkeeper Catherine Felix, Staff Assistant Sian Avis, Coordinator of Academic Programs

ASOR Newsletter; James A. Sauer, Editor Biblical Archaeologist; Eric M. Meyers, Editor Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research; Walter E. Rast,

Editor Journalof Cuneiform Studies;Erle Leichty,Editor

W.E AlbrightInstitute of ArchaeologicalResearch(AIAR). P.O. Box 19096, 91 190 Jerusalem,Israel. SeymourGitin, Director Thomas E. Levy,Assistant Director JosephA. Callaway,President First Vice JoyUngerleider-Mayerson, President CarolMeyers,Second Vice President KevinG. O'Connell,Secretary-Teasurer

V)

0

jr,

d$;E~

Committeeforthe Baghdad Baghdad

School. McGuireGibson, Chairman OrientalInstitute, University of Chicago, 1155East 58th Street,Chicago, IL60637. American Center of OrientalResearch (ACOR). P.O. Box 2470, JebelAmman, Amman, Jordan. David W McCreery,Director EdgarHarrell,President LawrenceT Geraty,Vice President BertDeVries,Secretary Anne CabotOgilvy, Treasurer

CyprusAmericanArchaeological ResearchInstitute (CAARI). 41 KingPaul Street,Nicosia, Cyprus. StuartSwiny,Director CharlesU. Harris,President LydieShufro,Vice President Ellen Herscher,Secretary AndrewOliver,Jr.,Tfeasurer Damascus AdvisoryCommittee. GiorgioBuccellati, Chairman Center for MesopotamianStudies, University of California,405 Hilgard Avenue,Los Angeles, CA 90024.

Biblical Archaeologist P.O. BOXH.M., DUKESTATION,DURHAM,NC 27706 (919)684-3075 Biblical Archaeologist (ISSN 0006-0895) is published quarterly (March, June, September, December) by the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR), a nonprofit, nonsectarian educational organization

with administrativeoffices at 4243 Spruce Street,Philadelphia,PA 19104. Subscriptions.Annual subscriptionrates are $1'8for individuals and $25 for institutions. There is a special annual rate of $16 for students and retirees.Subscriptionorders and correspondenceshould be sent to ASORPublications Office, P.O.BoxH.M., Duke Station, Durham, NC 27706. Single issues are $6; these should be orderedfrom Eisenbrauns,P.O. Box 275, Winona Lake,IN 46590. Outside the U.S., U.S. possessions, and Canada,add $2 for annual subscriptions and for single issues. Second-classpostagepaid at Philadelphia, PA 19104and additionaloffices. Postmaster:Send addresschanges to ASOR SubscriptionServices,Department BB, P.O.Box 3000, Denville, NJ 07834.

Editor Associate Editor ExecutiveEditor Assistant Editor Book Review Editor Art Director AdvertisingDirector ResearchAssociate

EricM. Meyers LawrenceT. Geraty MartinWilcox KarenS. Hoglund PeterB.Machinist LindaHuff KennethG. Hoglund KathrynE. Dietz

Advertising.Correspondenceshould be addressedto the ASORPublicationsOffice, P.O.BoxH.M., Duke Station, Durham, NC 27706 (telephone:919-684-3075). Biblical Archaeologist is not responsible for errorsin copy preparedby the advertiser. The editor reservesthe right to refuse any ad. Ads for the sale of antiquities will not be accepted.

EditorialAssistants Melanie A. Arrowood StephenLarson EditorialCorrespondence.Article proTimothy Lavallee posals, manuscripts,and editorialcorreStephenGoranson Lue Simopoulos JohnHuddlestun spondence should be sent to the ASOR BrendaV.Jones CatherineVanderburgh Publications Office, PO. BoxH.M., Duke Station, Durham, NC 27706. Unsolicited EditorialCommittee manuscriptsmust be accompaniedby a A. T Kraabel LloydR.Bailey self-addressed,stampedenvelope.Foreign BaruchLevine JamesFlanagan contributorsshould furnish international David W.McCreery CaroleFontaine coupons. reply L. Carol Meyers VolkmarFritz JackSasson SeymourGitin Manuscriptsmust conformto the format Neil A. Silberman David M. Gunn used in Biblical Archaeologist, with full JohnWilkinson bibliographicreferencesand a minimum of endnotes. See recent issues for examples Types,Ltd., CompositionbyLiberated of the properstyle. Durham, NC. Printedby PBMGraphics, Manuscriptsmust also include appropriate Inc.,Raleigh,NC. illustrations and legends.Authors are Copyright ? 1986bythe AmericanSchools responsiblefor obtainingpermission to use illustrations. of OrientalResearch.

B iblcal A

caeo

gis

Publication of the American Schools of Oriental Research Volume 49 Number 4 A

December 1986

Bullae from the City of David: A Hoard of Seal Impressions from the Israelite Period Yigal Shiloh and David Tarler Objects buried for more than 2,500 years allow the reconstruction of scribal practices.

Page 196

TheMuseumTrail The Joe Alon Center for Regional and Folklore Studies Oded Borowski Through research,exhibitions, and education, this center is committed to the study of the southern Shephelah and Negev.

196

210

Some Observations on the Balaam Tradition at Deir cAllfi Jo Ann Hackett The efforts of scholars to reconstruct and read the plaster inscription at Deir cAlla are yielding valuable insights into the religious context of many biblical passages.

216

The Profile of an Israelite City Cornelis de Geus Through groundplans, archaeologyhas accustomed us to thinking about the horizontal aspects of Israelite cities. What about the vertical aspects?

224

LiterarySourcesfor the Historyof Palestineand Syria The Dead Sea Scrolls: Part 2, Nonbiblical Manuscripts Michael Wise Many of the manuscripts found in the caves near Khirbet Qumran are not biblical.

228

Are There Beehive Granaries at Thll Jemmeh? A Rejoinder Gus W Van Beek The circular structures were granaries,but were their roofs domed or flat?

245

Introducing the Authors Book Reviews

194 248

Page 210

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

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1986

193

Introducing the

Authors

David Tarler

JoAnn Hackett

YigalShiloh

Oded Borowski

Yigal Shiloh is Head of The Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where he has been teaching since 1958. He has taught and lectured worldwide and is currently Visiting Professor at Duke University. Professor Shiloh has worked in the field with Ruth Amiran, Nahman Avigad, and Yigael Yadin, and has been the Director of Excavations at the City of David, Jerusalem since 1978. His published works include The Proto-Aeolic Capital and Israelite Ashlar Masonry (Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University, 1979) and Excavations in the City of David 1978-1982, Volume I (Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1984), as well as numerous papers and reviews on various subjects on the ancient Near East. David T'arler received his B.A. from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem with a combined major in biblical and classical archaeology and Jewish history. He has also studied in the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations at the University of Chicago and over the last decade has been involved as a field archaeologist with several excavations in Israel. Since 1978 he has served as Supervisor of area G and is a Senior Staff member of the City of David excavations. Currently,

194


while completing his M.A. in biblical archaeology at the Hebrew University, he is a Codirector of the Tell elHammah Archaeological Project. Oded Borowski is Associate Professor of Hebrew at Emory University. He received his M.A. and Ph.D. in Near Eastern studies from the University of Michigan. His field experience includes excavations at Tel Gezer, Tel Dan, and Tel Halif. Since 1976 he has been a Senior Staff member of the Lahav Research Project. Professor Borowski has written many articles and book reviews that have appeared in such journals as the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, Israel Exploration Journal, and Qadmoniot. He has a forthcoming book on agriculture in biblical times that will be published by Eisenbrauns. Gus W. Van Beek is the Curator of Old World Archaeology at the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. He has completed eleven field seasons at Tell Jemmeh in the northwestern Negev of Israel. Dr. Van Beek previously conducted fieldwork in southern Arabia (including both Yemen and Saudi Arabia, where he developed the pottery chronology for the pre-Islamic period) and conducted research in architecture and the

Henry

Thompson O.

Cornelis H. J.de Geus

Michael Wise

incense economy. He received his Ph.D. from the Johns Hopkins University where he studied under William Foxwell Albright. Jo Ann Hackett has just completed a year as Mellon Fellow in the Near Eastern Studies Department at Johns Hopkins University and is now Assistant Professor of Religious Studies at Indiana University in Bloomington. Dr. Hackett chose the Deir cAlla text as a dissertation topic because "it suited my background and interests in both philology and the Hebrew Bible, and because it would mean making my first trip to the Middle East, since examination of the plaster would be a necessary part of the study."Since the 1984 publication of her dissertation, she has continued to be interested in the Deir cAlla inscription and has turned to exploring the implication this text has for the understanding of Balaam in the Bible. Henry O. Thompson has excavated at a number of sites including Shechem, Tell Hesban, and several places in the vicinity of Amman. He served as the Director of the American Center of Oriental Research in Amman from 1971 to 1972 and was Visiting Professor at the University of Jordan from 1972 to 1973. Over the years he has edited

Gus W VanBeek

The Answers Lie Below (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1984) in honor of his mentor Larry Tombs, Put Your Future in Ruins (Bristol, IN: Wyndham Hall Press, 1985) in honor of Robert J. Bull, and has authored Archaeology and Archaeologists (Amman: Catholic Printing Press, 1972) and Mekal the God of Beth-Shan (Leiden: Brill, 1970). Cornelis H. J.de Geus teaches Near Eastern archaeology and Biblical Hebrew in the Department of Semitic Studies of the State University of Groningen in the Netherlands. His main field of interest is the early history of Israel. In 1976 he published The Tribes of Israel. An Investigation into Some of the Presuppositions of Martin Noth's Amphictyony Hypothesis (Assen/Amsterdam: Van Gorcum, 1976). In recent years his research and writing has focused on ancient Israelite agriculture. Michael Wise is a doctoral candidate at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, where for his dissertation he is analyzing several questions involved with the composition of the Temple Scroll from Qumran. During the past year he was Lecturer in Aramaic at the Institute and he is presently Instructor in Old Testament at Trinity College in Deerfield, Illinois.

1986 BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

195

X ri .??J?:

PZ~e~4a~ _P*: rr

% I--? -?-

?)a;lC L?( 3 .i? ?:?+.I 't"'~:l?a:-:i; 1

'P"'

~ii r . i?

.v

i;*r cr

:-?:::: :-?c~i'

q

-P P

IL?l

I

I

I

?:?

-x r ?~

~~t~

a

s~a~s~tg~g~~

~z

iCr:.

C

ja

~

~l`r~s~Ba~F~ Ij~:l~ :: ~- -~,*l*aara~9~9~~~pl'Wlsa~;=;~"~p~,~;6 _:;,~-?-~-~:

I~ai- i'" :-i . x.

.,

--r

;

P

s

~I

re.

~a

, i:::;

g

-*

ii ?i

a

~t

1

*Y

r ~jil

?f .i,

a:_ ~ -??1?? ~a~sp

ri

4, ?;~tr~" -~I

hen the Babylonians sacked Jerusalem in 586 B.c., a number of

covered during the excavations of the City of David.

papyrusdocuments

Exploration in the City of David Resumed Since the renewal of excavations in 1978, eight consecutive seasons of fieldwork have been conducted on the southeastern hill of Jerusalem, spreading over twelve excavation areas, and comprising almost 4 dunams (approximately 1 acre) of the ancient City of David.' The locations of the excavation areas reflect a problem-oriented strategy aimed at elucidating the component parts of the earliest Bronze Age-Canaanite and Iron Age-Israelite cities.

stored in a house in the northern part of the city perished in the consuming fire. As the papyri burned, however, small clay seals, which were attached to string that bound the documents, were hardened into a more permanent state. All of these round clay objects, called bullae, bear the marks of a stamp seal-very few have only pictorial representations, while the majority are of an epigraphic nature. These seal impressions, which were buried for more than 2500 years, have now been re-

196

,',..


:@r ..i.i s;;-?r

m

In the south, and at the foot of the eastern slope, investigation centered on the subterranean watersupply system and the tunnels connecting the Gihon Spring with the Siloam Pool (areas Al, A2, B, J). On top of the crest, and along the western flank of the Central (Tyropoeon) Valley, excavation focused on structural remains and fortifications from the Second Temple through Byzantine periods (areas D1-2, K, H). A skeletal infrastructure of terraces was exposed, together with the dwellings situated either above them or on the bedrock, along the eastern slope. First built in Early Bronze I, at the end of the fourth millennium

~C~P~hi.~ji :e

?i i',

?h;

:.i

-'ts.:i:a ~:

..*1

; 4"

Bullae

j-r? ??ilff:=? ?*?i f

r

6?:~

from

the

~~c::

i: h-r~:i?~

City of David

G~"

L~E:~1 ~

r?r

i:1 ~~p~

1.

~-st:~: i;

C~-lg;?X (li g

-~p 9% I]s~E~itPt

W

?1E~IC~kl~?~a~a~a~a~a~a~a~a~a~a~a~E~;~

I

r

~%~;~-~LT~EP~~,~:tlP11

J

EB~b~~ilQ

?,

7~ -%

A Hoard of Seal Impressionsfrom the Israelite Period

p~y~??:d

E prr

.I r~lB-

~'%,a; :

i.-

~4b; dd~

D ::?:.'t

r,

-i CI?

?;~X ,_il :e~?

L9~T~r :I

ANDDAVIDTARLER SHILOH BY YIGAL

it

?'t

:... r-

U :I:~.~~s?-:: :::

B:? iJ.

,,

~._:C,

i:1 7?:

$)

': cr ail~~ -:::::::? .: :~;::?: ;:~i :f

:::: :?i:

i,:

::: -a??;:?

I; j-

c:::::::ig

*,:

This and the facing page present two views of the eastern slope of the City of David, looking north. The letters in the picture above identify excavation areas.

B.C., and superimposed later in Middle Bronze II, the series of structures on the slope culminated in the royal Israelite city of the tenth to sixth centuries B.C.Here, the line of the city wall in Canaanite and Israelite Jerusalem (which had served its eastern flank from the eighteenth century B.C.until the destruction in 586 B.C.)has been revealed along a stretch of 120 meters (areas D2, El, E2, E3). Area G, in the north, located immediately beneath the eastern

crest of the hill, yielded the remains of a massive series of support walls. These walls functioned as a substructure impressive in both size and state of preservation, which served the citadel during the Canaanite and Israelite periods. During the fourteenth to thirteenth centuries B.c. support walls were constructed in a series of spines and ribs, creating socalled compartments, between which were placed boulder fills. Some rib walls remained standing to a height of 8 meters. These created a formi-

dable podium; an extension measuring 250 square meters could be appended from the podium to the natural crest of the hill. In the tenth century B.C.this system was covered by a giant, even more impressive, revetment, which became known as the stepped, stone structure. It sealed the Canaanite remains in area G and served to anchor the new citadel. The portion of this structure revealed so far along the eastern slope (its base has not yet been reached) stands to an ex-


197

H

--.i......l-i

r

i

-

.

......

_

_

ATCDT

?i-

A~~~~~i~:

0

100 meters

:-i

S•

-'on

Kidron Valley

GihonSpring

Excavationareas in the City of David as of 1983.

traordinary height of 18 meters. The stepped, stone structure's position relative to the lower city to its south and the Temple Mount to its north,

indicates that it served as a buffer between the residential quartersof the lower city and the public buildings constructed within the confines of the early acropolis in the City of David. Written sources contain much information dealing with the nature of the acropolis areain the Israelite period, where the citadel and various administrativebuildings were located. The Temple and royalpalaces were constructed in the tenth century B.C.on a new site extending north of the acropolis. The former compound housing the citadel and the administrative units was known in the Bible as the ophel, denoting the citadel (2 Chronicles 27:3; 2 Chronicles 33:14; Nehemiah 3:26-27; Nehemiah 11:21), as in the ophel at Samaria (2 Kings 5:24) or the ophel constructed by Mesha, king of Moab, in Dibon. It is thought that the stepped, stone structure supported the southeastern corner of the Israelite ophel, which was constructed immediately on top and north of the Canaanite citadel (Shiloh 1985: 117-22). In area G, approximately 11 meters beneath the crest, a series of

198

OldCityToday

-

u David-Jerusalem of the ntCityofnad of the tenth to ninthcenturiesB.C. Jerusalem of the eighth to

---

and

sixthcenturiesB.C.

I

,

\I

-to Siloam Siloam Pool

20ee

Pool

I,

etal'•

Gihon Spring

"-,..

0 I

200 meters r

Plan of the City of David and Israelite Jerusalem.

structures was erected during the seventh to sixth centuries B.C.(stratum 10). Noted for their quality of construction and architectural plan, they were situated along two terraces covering the stepped, stone structure. Thus was created a level area for additional dwellings or other structural units within the northern confines of the eastern slope. Here, in


what she designated area A, Kathleen Kenyon excavated a trench extending down the slope from the crest to a point above the Gihon Spring. Photographs from Kenyon's excavation indicate that these terraces of structures continued to descend the slope, down to the city wall, which was located along a rock scarp situated above the Gihon Spring (see Kenyon

-- j./

/

• _..

I 3I CT

I/

0--

; '

.y7

"

,

'

9j "

+

~,\'Y~P~,\\\\\\\\\~,\\~,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

/

I r/ I I/ I

..

.t

i

~ ~AL~P~: C~ 'I ,-U~L~mmY ! .Y~VI :~_1~ ::_: A~Un~: I h~YWn~WI~MRU~iI~Y: :::--~l~mWm~UTm\Y I I I I

.."7E

t

~umc, ;I Iswlruv /mU7/

~i?iUmD;~U~$~Um#\Ur:-_ - :i:i:~m~4~--~i _: i:::~m\\\\\\\\\uxn\\\Yltnw ~I -i :I I f

1

I / 7 I I_..~f

I I

rr ?,

I~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\~~? ``?-.,f

.

C ~ O

Str.lOB. II---'

.,.~.

j`?

T~YL~lr~l~i~h\\\\\\\\\\\\\~

?3---J

_

/O A

? i YUU~IIUI~I~J' --- --i~

- ^ --

5m

Isometric drawing and plan of area G showing the remains of the house of Ahiel, the burntroom, and the excavation area of the bullae house.

1974: 131-35). This method of construction is similar to that discovered on the midslope farther south in areas D and E. In area G three distinct building units were found along the two previously mentioned terraces. The house of Ahiel occupied the major portion of the upper terrace and was built on the scheme of a four-room house, a plan used for both public and private structures during the Iron Age in both Judah and Israel. To the north was the burnt room, which belonged to a building that primarily lay farther to the north, beyond the area G boundary. It was named the burnt room because of the remains left by the great conflagration that engulfed it at the time of the city's destruction at the end of the First Temple period. Finally, to the east and 5 meters lower than these two buildings, and on the second, lower terrace, appeared the western part of what is now known as the bullae house (locus 967, stratum 10, excavated in 1982). The Bullae House The western side of the bullae house incorporated the major terrace wall that also supported the upper terrace. Built of especially large stones, the wall was found still partially covered

with a thick lime plaster that had been applied along the floor and up the face of the wall. Because of the constricted area available for investigation, only a narrow strip of the building (7 meters long and 1 meter wide) could be excavated, contiguous with the eastern boundary of area G. The stratigraphy here was very clear and repeated itself elsewhere in both areas G and E. After removing Romanand Hellenistic-period strata, the

excavators reached the top of the partially collapsed bullae house, which had been destroyed, along with the rest of the city, by the Babylonians in 586 B.C. This destruction layer contained a rich assemblage of finds, including twenty-five ceramic vessels, most of them complete. The pottery corpus comprised storage jars, juglets, decanters, holemouth jars, ceramic stands, lamps, andbowls. Noteworthy

Aerial view of area G.

" :::i?:::::i~-ri-:::--:i-::_:::::: :: ::--..t:" -:iìi:--3-";~~iii:ill::li:i:::;li~-:$:-I: idii'ii~:iii _::i?;;:: :::-i:,:_,i;:::::,: ::,::i-:::~:i "; si:_'? I;:";"-? r'

.?r: - ~- ---e w,*

t~ _ ~-~;

x, r~4Clu~ESl~i~iBB~~.`?i; ~c.

F

jr ~5-?

*"` J?

~i?~ g~'?:i'?

:: :::::;:::: :~i~j~s;~-i~~.i-?,:I:::~_ ~~iiini-?i---i -_-_-iii :: :::;: :::,:::_ ... ,::..-_ -.:::... :_::i:i :i:i-i:i::l-i--:-:-:--:'--::-l~:??'i~l'~ ::::::::::;:: :: :::: .. :::??:i :;:?:: ::


~F'--'D-~

:?:: i: r-'

199

;I

:j/

?;

A~

r. i ;

~:i?:

3

???

g

2-

ae~ne~~sa~

r

-~.?"?~:'~E~l 1~.

Documentsof an officialnaturewere sealedwith bullae.

I-. di::: L-:n ii?j: id:--"'" :"~9::"::r :a

1

X tLntj~Cl~b

?a -I

"

J~u

.. I%?

..-"-~s~sa~aaras~a~

--.: 2?

?:?

u~

"-

I~ ?-

i

?*

~ 1~

,'u;'~l~Lt.

Left:The bullae house on the lower terracein area G, looking toward the south. Above:A volunteerclearing the pottery,stone vessels, and bullae on the floor of locus 967 in area G.

-'S~Z;A~rENrrv -~b ?

were two tall kraters of remarkable shape and workmanship, with high trumpet bases, a slip, and a fine burnish. The bottom of each krater had been perforated before firing, perhaps with the intention of preventing the accumulation of moisture. This assemblage is typologically and chronologically parallel to the vessels found in destruction levels on the western hill of Jerusalem, and at such sites in Judah as Lachish,

Ramat Rahel, Tell Beit Mirsim, En-

gedi, Aroer,Tel Malhata,Tel Masos, Kadesh-barnea, and Mesad Hashavyahu. Furthermore, these findings appear to confirm stratigraphical and chronological observations made elsewhere in the City of David, particularly concerning the occupation levels of the eighth through sixth centuries B.C. in area E. Stratum 12, dated to the eighth century B.c., is attributed to Hezekiah; stratum 11

u

•i?""?ii:i .

;i •.

~~

~

~

~

!!•-i• •;i•;>!W

is from the seventh century B.c.; and stratum 10 covers the period from Josiah, in the second half of the seventh century B.C.,until the destruction in 586 B.c.

Additional finds from the bullae

house in stratum 10 included inscribed stone weights, also known from contemporary Judahite sites; four uniquely shaped stone vessels (approximately 20 centimeters high), which may have functioned as cultic stands; and flat, leaf-shaped iron arrowheads and trilobate, socketed bronze arrowheads of the Scythian type. Such arrowheads were also found within other buildings from this same stratum, as well as next to the Israelite tower excavated by Nahman Avigad in the Jewish Quarter that served as part of the northern fortification system when the Israelite city expanded during the late First Temple period (see Avigad 1984; 52-53). The Bullae The Iron II strata at the City of David have yielded numerous epigraphic finds. Earlier seasons produced two rather large, incised paleo-Hebrew stone inscriptions, dozens of pottery sherds with incised Hebrew letters or full names, ostraca (pottery sherds

?:

••.,.;.. Finds from the bullae house including ceramic vessels, stone objects, and the important bullae.

~

200

.rn

~

%

gcp~ll::


1..

r

would take a lump of soft clay and roll it into a small, almost flat cylinder, generally having a diameter of 10 to 15 millimeters. The clay would (11)0 be affixed to the string binding the document and then would be stamped I~ii with the appropriate seal. In order to open the document it would be necessary to break the bulla(e) sealing it. Unlike pottery, the clay bulla c' 8 was not fired and would dry only over a period of time. The bulla(e), therefore, remained friable and could be easily damaged, with the result 10"' • ;•0 ".. 2m that the seal impressions found 9 : today are frequently difficult to decipher. Drawings of objects found in the bullae house: (1 and 2) iron arrowheads,(3) bronzearrowhead, (4)iron ring, (5)bronzeearring,(6 and 7)worked stones, (8)hematite stone weight, (9)iron blade, Finding the bullae. Distinguishing the miniscule, amorphous clay (10)limestone stand. lumps from the pebbles and chunks of earth passing through each trowelfor the seal of a large clay enough with inscriptions painted on them), ful of debris appears to involve more but the sack Rabbi Akiba; Sages (so private seals, and storage jar handles luck than sense. In controlled excasay: Forthe seal of letters). (Danby bearing such seal impressions as the the careful sifting of debris vations 1967: 107) lamelekh (meaning, belonging to the invention of Until paper, prevents a substantial loss of small the king) series. Notable among documents in the ancient Near East objects to the dump. In general siftthem, however, was a collection of written were either on parchment, ing is a thankless, unexciting task fifty-one bullae scattered among the sherds ceramic vessel or that slows the pace of work. papyrus, destruction debris on top of the The sifting at the City of David were incised on or (ostraca), they aptly named bullae floor. tablets tablets waxed wooden or in a discretionary manner, was done clay How the bullae were used. The word fired. With the that were later and was instituted when excavating excepbulla derives from Latin and denotes such tablets and loci tion of ostraca, clearly belonging to occupation clay the seal of an important personage have materials are perishable; they levels, as opposed to the massive fills (such as the pope), or an official edict and dumps covering the eastern slope. been retrieved from exceptiononly proclaimed by the emperor or king. such as the Judean During the first four seasons the siftDuring the Middle Ages it also stood ally dry areas, the but or Sinai, ing usually yielded little reward for Desert, Negev, for the small pieces of clay that had the In where effort. Sieving the debris on top cases from Egypt. been impressed with the seal of either mainly been of the bullae floor during the fifth such have documents preserved, a private individual or public official been have discovered season, however, provided full recomthey generally and affixed to rolled or folded docuIf and tied with Because of the clarity of the rolled string. they pense. ments. The second-century-A.D. seal the watchful eyes as such were of an official impressions, nature, Mishnaic definition for bulla is were able to spot of the volunteers sealed were signed contracts, they rendered in Order Moced, Tractate are with as wax the bullae while Excavation bullae, just sealings sifting. Shabbath 8.5, that is, hotam 'igrot, of the ancient structure itself was The affixed to official papers today. meaning the seal of letters: owner of a document, an authorized halted, all the baskets with debris [He is culpable that takes out] red from that particular locus were official, or another interested party meticulously sieved, and additional Although the documents from bullae were culled from them. Investhe City of David were not tigation within the excavation locus preserved,this drawing of a IL-? s; --.I _ papyrusdeed fromElephantine itself enabled the archaeologists to ~:C determine the exact location of the shows how a manuscript i?: C--would have been sealed with ?- r bullae cache, so that subsequent a single bulla. The drawing is ? ii. bullae were found in situ, within a used courtesy of Professor .. ? Avigad (1986)and the Israel 1-meter-square area in the northwest - ExplorationSociety. corner of the bullae house. A

6


201

i:

i: .? Y t ?,

'P'

~??i ~ ~8a4~92L ::..:

c"o~r:r

~~?

T

::: 4

Obverseand reverseof a bulla bearingthe image of a bird. The bullae in this article are shown in roughlyproportionatesizes.

Bulla (belonging)to Ephrah/Abiyahu.

Description of the bullae. Of the 51 bullae discovered, 41 were very wellpreserved because the conflagration that destroyed the bullae house (along with the rest of Jerusalem) fired them, thus hardening and preserving them for future generations. The fingernail-sized, cylindrically shaped impressions average 14 millimeters in length, 12 millimeters in width, and are 2 to 6 millimeters thick. The reverse sides of some bear impressions of the string used to tie the rolled papyrus, as well as traces of the warp and weft left by the papyrus when the clay lump was affixed to it for sealing. Four bullae bear only pictorial representations, including what may be a griffin, weight scales, and an altar or symbol of a deity. The others are epigraphic and are typical of Judahite seals of the seventh to sixth centuries B.C. with a standard formula indicating the owner's name and patronymic? Those impressions containing personal names are aniconic, with only occasional geometric floral designs employed in the horizontal dividers separating the bulla into registers. This would appear to support the view that Hebrew seals without pictorial decoration characterize the final stage in the morphological and iconographical development of that glyptic art during the

the study of other contemporaneous seals. Accordingly, the bullae from the City of David undoubtedly fall within the range from the midseventh to early sixth century B.C. (Particularly indicative letter forms are the aleph, dalet, he, vav, mem, and resh.) Any qualitative differences must be the result of the varying skills of the seal engravers. Some are poorly executed, for example the two identical impressions made by the same seal, "(belonging) to Ephrah [son of] Ahiyahu." On the other hand, two others that bear the same name, "(belonging) to Elnathan son of Bilgai," are assumed to have served the same individual, but were made by two different seals, both epigraphically well-executed, it would seem, by the same engraver.

202

last century of the Judean Monarchy. On the other hand, the seals of the ninth to eighth centuries B.c. (which, in addition to the owner's name, were accompanied by floral and geometric motifs or mythological creatures, such as the griffin) were influenced by the northern, Israelite kingdom? It is noteworthy that only 4 bullae out of 51 in this assemblage were iconographic and, in addition, totally anepigraphic. Two sealimpressed, storage jar handles dating to the Iron II period from the City of David provide further evidence for faunal iconography. One bears the impression of a horse, while the other depicts what may be an ant. Both are anepigraphic. The overwhelming majority of the epigraphic bullae (41 out of 47, or 87 percent) are readable. Because this is an extremely high percentage relative to comparable groups from other sites, this assemblage permits a well-grounded basis for drawing paleographic and epigraphic conclusions. Paleography The large number of readable impressions and the presence of all the letter forms within the corpus allow a meaningful paleographic analysis. The evidence corroborates earlier, independent conclusions based on


Onomasticon The onomasticon, or list of names appearing on the bullae, contains 51 different Hebrew names including fathers and sons, some of which repeat themselves; altogether, 82 names appear. The standard formula, "(belonging) to X son of Y, is sometimes modified by the omission of the word ben (son of), as in "(belonging) to Ephrahl/Ahliyahu." The most common name is Elishamac, which appears 4 times. The names cAzaryahu, Bilgai,

.~kr?~)tr.

.t :~ ?1?

\4\?1j:i~?"~

:1

C?;~. ~:.. ~.

i

~3~h~

i': r?r r': i~~E

-?,

;?

-?? "'

'?

~(; ?r'\f?, ??i'' ?;~;3~6E~ET~r ?...-

r,

:=t~ ~~ii

.?:

P; 2? "

''..?-r

~l;?L;_ .Ii' -.3 i~kL1 ?I?

??i ~-C~L~~3T~IEC~Ic~'i

r~.O~lCL~-'T? ? ?I.

!r ti;Si~r?~w

r,

::

?, I;] i`

,?.

,? ~~

?r i.

::

Above left: Bulla (belonging)to Elnathan [so]n of Bilgai. Above right: Bulla (belonging)to Elnathan son of Bilgai.

Hoshacyahu, and Zakkur each appear 3 times. The others appear only once or twice. Forty-one names, or about 50 percent of the total, have the theophoric ending yhw (for example, Benayahu). Three names begin with yhw (for example, Yehoab), while 8 begin with el (for example, Elishamac). Thirty names (or 39 percent of the total) are nontheophoric, such as cEzer, Zakkur, and Safan. Even these, however, are likely to be only abbreviated versions of common theophoric names such as cAzaryahu, Zecharyahu, or Zephanyahu. It should be noted that there are no instances of a theophoric name with the shortened diphthong yw, so commonly found on seals and

?-?t~S r r~cu.. jrr;i

~?~?~\? ?'.- :~:tt?~..

Bulla (belonging)to Elishamac son of Semakhyah.

;; ?

S~i

=. -'I

c~?~,

r?;

6

:

Bulla (belonging)to Benayahu son of Hoshacyahu.

~?'~:?.j~c~4

~~ ~~ ~?

i.urY~~~L~C~

~' ?~ 4 ??~~ i' C"',J, ri~;~a 1

'i ;~t r_ c'~?r,?; ???

'' .;YC~F?L'---

nlm:r.

;S

.I ?

Bulla (belonging)to Gadiyahu son of cEzer.

~r~?ljcll~z;~i~ .:?,t .~Y, ?:e

r;

r

-?;

?r : r,.. -

;~rc?,-,i/'

r.:

''

???:'?\~!? c,!C

Ir?

Bulla (belonging)to Elishamac son of Yehoab(or Yehour?).

x" i??~ :*?x,

~?-?I~

rrr C'?YL~'J?~~

;~ *-r

i;--

~ST~r

''

4

t..-, ??. ': ~3;t~;n '''''

;iciu-ji r;? ~Y~r-*rrr? ?\~.%`:f :

I

r:I'

6

.?

?.'~ i ?.'.d~BIPl~uru~-

.I?

Ti~

a

i?

:: r~

io ?~;:ZCr:

Bulla (belonging)to Tovshalomson of Zakkur.

Bulla (belonging)[to Tovshalom]son of Zakkur the healer.


203

I '??rrUR:~, ..r ?.~?I-~;-~~=?? ~Cli~C;r ~.? "' .:i?...? " : ; ??? :? ???~. C\'~ ' --~-?u~r~-:~j~~CiLY v -? ~~Z ??.r ~! .. 1.~G.~LY ??r) '' ?-Ju: "I ;:~'?~.

.c.; ii ~Si ?'. ~,~?

i~.c:P ??-'?r

?

1? r ?: r r?r ?'C r?.~? ~?:~: f?~!? ~cr

."~ ??rr)

?i. ~~1~F~if~ ~' L1+4'' ~-

i:

;1!

t~ .. ;?\- ?_Y.__L?;;I?_. .-??--?_??-Y;-i~L? '" 1??

iH

i. k:~

~ ?:;

r. 5"""" t, ~ii~;~ft~ii?Zr.~~Pdl~'~4?;'' ,.??~ ":: ,z

Bulla (belonging)to Shfatyahuson of Safan.

W:r ~I ,;r ,2.? ...: ~c;?: :~-? i" \\ ~? tr~~

??I; '~''r :.r

t;

Bulla (belonging)to cAzaryahuson of

Bulla (belonging)to Gemaryahu[so]n of Shafan.

.lilkiyahu.

inscriptions from Judah during the ninth to eighth centuries B.c. and from the northern kingdom of Israel (for example, Shemaryaw, Aviyaw, and Gadiyaw). Their absence from a large, late Judahite corpus strengthens the postulation that the practice ceased during the course of the seventh century B.C. Finally, no nonIsraelite theophoric elements appear within the onomasticon of the bullae from the City of David. Surprisingly, although there are 45 cases in which both the personal name and the patronymic survive, there are no bullae that have identical mates with the hundreds of inscriptions, seals, seal impressions, or other bullae comprising the written archaeological source material of ancient Israel. One name, however, "cAzaryahu son of Hilkiyahu," also appears on a seal found in Jerusalem and published by Avigad (1970: 307). While single, nonpaired names have many counterparts, this is of lesser importance. Although the onomasticon from Jerusalem is extensive, all the names, with one exception, are nonhistorical. Formerly, seals or seal impressions with such names as Jeroboam or Hezekiah were identified with the biblical kings. After years of researching Hebrew epigraphy and paleography, Avigad recently published three names which, in his

204

opinion, may be identified with biblical personages (Avigad 1978). A bulla reading "(belonging) to Berachyahu son of Neriyahu the scribe" probably belonged to Baruch son of Neriah, the scribe (Jeremiah 36:4). Another bears the impression "(belonging) to Jerahmeel son of the King" (Jeremiah 36:26), while a third seal is inscribed "(belonging) to SerayahulNeriyahu," who is apparently the brother of Baruch son of Neriah, the scribe (Jeremiah 51:59). Now, a City of David bulla, "(belonging) to Gemaryahu son of Shafan,"offers a fourth example of an identifiable biblical personage. Gemaryahu son of Shafan is mentioned in the book of Jeremiah as a contemporary of King Jehoiakim, son of Josiah: In the fifth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah,king of Judah,in the ninth month, all the people in Jerusalem and all the people who came from the cities of Judahto Jerusalem proclaimed a fast before the Lord. Then, in the hearing of all the people, Baruch read the words of Jeremiah from the scroll, in the house of the Lord, in the chamber of Gemariah the son of Shaphan the secretary,which was in the upper court, at the entry of the New Gate of the Lord'shouse. When Micaiah the son of Gemariah, son of Shaphan, heard all the words of the Lordfrom the scroll, he went down to the king's house, into the secre-


tary's chamber;and all the princes were sitting there: Elishama the secretary, Delaiah the son of Shemaiah, Elnathanthe son of Achbor, Gemariah the son of Shaphan, Zedekiah the son of Hananiah, and all the princes. (Jeremiah36:9-12; emphasis has been added by the author) Even when Elnathan and Delaiah and Gemariah urgedthe king not to burn the scroll, he would not listen to them. And the king commanded Jerahmeelthe king'sson and Seraiah the son of Azriel and Shelemiah the son of Abdeel to seize Baruch the secretaryand Jeremiahthe prophet, but the Lord hid them. (Jeremiah 36:25-26; emphasis has been added by the author) Four times the Bible links Gemaryahu son of Shafan to a stormy chapter in the events surrounding the court of Jehoiakim and the activity of the prophet Jeremiah. Gemaryahu is portrayed as a scribe and officer of the royal court. His son, Mikhayahu, is also an active participant in this historical episode. Furthermore, Shafan son of Asalyahu (who apparently was the father of Gemaryahu and was a scribe and contemporary of King Josiah) is mentioned elsewhere in the Bible: In the eighteenth year of King Josiah, the king sent Shaphanthe son of Azaliah, son of Meshullam, the secretary,to the house of the Lord, saying .... (2 Kings 22:3)

R ~.? :CW rC?? :

;?

???? ~)~d~i: ,~?f (??~' ~?.? i'

'- ; "; g

?;?(??? i~:???~ :~??~ r r" ?T:, ?~~ ?C.?C. "?:'?:~~ ~?C~ :r ~\* z :r:

??-~~r~-,-??~

:?: ?~ ',?.-,. ?, ?:'.:nr? .?~'.C'??r:??~j iJ;i(?~: i:~)-~~~:t? Il"..

:~?.T i C??~

i.:

:=: _

"

Bulla (belonging) to Nahum son of Sheela.

Thebullaefromthe City ofDavid speakto usof thelastdaysofJerusalem in theFirstTemple period. If the name on the bulla and the biblical personage are the same, we have a sealing made by one of the better-known officials active at the royal court in Jerusalem, a person whose father was a scribe at the court of Josiah during the eighteenth year of his reign, around 622 B.C. Eighteen years later, about 604 B.C., in the fifth year of Jehoiakim, Gemaryahu son of Shafan the scribe and his son Mikhayahu were inscribed in biblical history. The location of Gemaryahu's chancellery, "in the upper court, at the entry of the New Gate of the Lord'shouse" (Jeremiah 36:10), from which Baruch the son of Neriah the scribe issued Jeremiah's manifesto, testified to his rank. It is perhaps more than coincidental that another identifiable biblical personage is connected to the same events (and chapter) in the book of Jeremiah as are two of the names identified by Avigad, that is, Berakhyahu son of Neriyahu the scribe and Jerahmeel son of the king. Moreover, Serayahu son of Neriyahu, brother of BaruchlBerakhyahu (and

:~

c

....,,,

Bulla (belonging) to Refayahu son ofEphrah.

?~'?'~.

the third name identified by Avigad), is mentioned during the fourth year of King Zedekiah, when he, too, was sent to the king by Jeremiah: The wordwhich Jeremiahthe prophet commanded Seraiah the son of Neriah, son of Mahseiah, when he went with Zedekiah king of Judah to Babylon,in the fourth year of his reign. Seraiahwas the quartermaster. (Jeremiah51:59) Other Groups of Bullae from the Iron II and Persian Periods Before summarizing the contribution of the bullae from the City of David to the study of the late First Temple period, we will survey similar assemblages from the region dating to the Iron II and Persian periods. The majority of the bullae and seals found in Israel and published have reached scholars under circumstances that prohibit exact knowledge of their provenance, thus depriving researchers of important data such as the location and nature of the site where the finds originate, the stratum from which they derive, and the accompanying artifacts-that is, the chro-

:r

~~,wi

?\:

'I

:'":''' .. ,?

??`

'JCI.~ ?* .;?

Bulla (belonging) to cAzrikam/Mikhayahu.

nological determinators and archaeological context. To this category belong the many important seals and bullae published in the last several years by Avigad (1986). A large number of bullae and seals from the collections of the Israel and Rockefeller Museums, mostly of unknown provenance, were published by Ruth Hestrin and Michal Dayagi-Mendels in 1970. The few bullae that have been discovered in archaeological excavations were for the most part found decades ago, when systems of excavation, registration, and publication did not meet present-day criteria. Examples include the bullae of "Ga'alyahu son of the King" from Beth-zur and two bullae found by the British expedition to Lachish, "(belonging) to Gedalyahu Who is Over the House" and "(belonging) to Hilkiyahu son of Maafas."In excavations at Samaria fifteen bullae were discovered, eleven of them within the same area as the well-known ivories. Located on the northern side of the Samaria acropolis, the site befits a public structure. They were dated to Iron II, and Avigad has suggested an eighth-century-B.C. date (Avigad 1976: 30-31). Traces of Hebrew letters could be discerned on only two of the bullae, while eight bore iconographic impressions apparently depicting a winged sun disk; one bears the image of a griffin.


205

;-Y

: ...

:`6?. ?C ~~ ~jlE~k~lrr

fi.Cf~i~L~ ?G,. ~

q ~?:; rj~S~

ii~l

i:iT

?i~

I~

~

r

~?~:~~~.?; i' ""~

I"i~?"?C

~p'

~~Ia

-:-:::~

~?~"r;: -" .2, ,, ~~a~t?s~I~s~l~P~

?1.

A groupof bullae from the collection of the Israel Museum. Photographfrom Avigad 1986, courtesy of the author and the Israel ExplorationSociety.

Until the discovery from the City of David, the most important hoard of bullae had been recovered by YohananAharoni at Lachish (Aharoni 1975).It belonged to stratum 2, dating from the seventh/sixth centuries B.C. until the destruction of Judah in 586 B.c. and was the first

cache found in a controlled archaeological excavation.Therefore, thanks to circumstantial factors,its date could be determined within a stratigraphical/chronologicalcontext. Seventeen bullae were retrieved

206

from a juglet to which they had been consigned, indicating that they were intentionally saved after being detached from the papyrus documents they sealed, as if remanded for administrative reasons. Because these bullae were found inside a juglet, which lay within a structure that had not undergone a conflagration (as had the bullae house), they were friable and poorly preserved. It was possible to identify the names of the owners of the seals (and only partially at that) on only 8 of the 17 bullae.


Analysis of the clearer portions reveals a striking similarity between the onomasticon of the Lachish bullae and those from the City of David. It appears, however, that the most interesting groups of papyri and bullae yet discovered date from the Persian period. In 1976 Avigad published an impressive collection of 65 well-preserved bullae of unknown provenance (Avigad 1976). They bore a variety of seal impressions: official impressions, for example, Yhd; impressions of officials serving in the administration of the Persian subsatrapy of Yehud, such as "(belonging) to Elnathan the Governor" or "Yehud/Hanana";and private stamps, for example, "(belonging) to Elcazar son of Nahum." In light of the paleographical analysis and historical considerations arising from a scrutiny of this assemblage, Avigad ascribed their date to the late sixth to early fifth centuries B.C.(Avigad 1976: 16-20). This collection is especially interesting in that less than a century separates it from the City of David hoard. Comparative analysis of the two may yet yield significant findings for the development of script during the fascinating transition spanning the seventh to sixth to fifth centuries B.C. Two other groups from the Persian period are important because, in addition to the bullae, the papyri themselves were preserved, some of them still rolled and sealed as their owners had left them. A cave in Wadi Daliyeh, located in the desert of eastern Samaria, was the repository for an archive that had been transported there by refugees fleeing from Samaria at the end of the Persian period, in the fourth century B.C. One of the papyri, deciphered by Frank Moore Cross, had been written in 335 B.c., the accession year of Darius III, whose name appears as part of the introductory date formula (see Cross 1974). While the lot included 128 bullae, 90 of which were well-preserved, only 2 bore paleoHebrew inscriptions. Several of the documents were found still rolled,

Preliminary Scheme of Strata City of David Excavations (1978-1982) Period Medievaland later Islamic -Ayyubid Byzantine Byzantine

Date fourteenth-twentieth centuries C.E. seventh-thirteenth centuries c.E. sixth-seventh centuries c.E. fourth-sixth centuries C.E.

4 5 6 7A

Late Roman Early Roman Early Roman Hellenistic (Hasmonean)

first-fourth centuries C.E. first century C.E. 37 B.C.E.-70C.E. first century B.C.E.

7B 8

Hellenistic (Hasmonean) second half of second century B.C.E. fourth-second centuries B.C.E. EarlyHellenistic

Stratum 1 2 3A 3B

9

Remarks

After 70 c.E.; few finds Destruction rubble-up to 70 C.E. Mostly first century C.E. Up to 37 B.C.E.

Persian

sixth-fourth centuries B.C.E.

O10A

Iron II

sixth century B.C.E.

Mainly destruction debristo 586 B.C.E.

10B/C

IronII

second half of seventh century-

Subdivision B/Conly in Area G

until 586 B.C.E. 11

Iron II

seventh century B.C.E.

Mainly mid-seventh century B.C.E.

12

IronII

eighth century B.C.E.

Mainly reign of Hezekiah

13 14 15

Iron II Iron II Iron I

ninth century B.C.E. tenth century B.C.E. twelfth-eleventh centuries B.C.E.

LateBronzeII Middle BronzeIIA-B Middle BronzeIIA-B Middle BronzeIIA-B EarlyBronzeII EarlyBronzeI Chalcolithic

fourteenth-thirteenth centuries B.C.E. eighteenth century B.C.E. eighteenth century B.C.E. eighteenth century B.C.E. twenty-ninth century (?)B.C.E. thirty-firstcentury B.C.E. second half of fourth millennium B.C.E.

16 17 18A 18B 19 20 21

Note: First'ITmpleperiodis 1000-586 B.C.E. Second TI~mple 70. periodis 539 B.C.E.-A.D.

tied with string, and sealed with 1, 4, or even, in one case, 7 bullae. The second group comprises a fifth-century-B.c. archive containing documents concerning the Jewish military colony at Elephantine, ancient Yeb, an island located adjacent to Aswan (ancient Syene), in Upper Egypt. Some of the papyri, such as the Brooklyn Museum collection published by Emil G. Kraeling (1953), are exceptionally well-preserved and afford the opportunity not only to read the contents themselves but also to observe the procedure of writing the document, folding it,

tying it, and then sealing it from the outside by affixing clay bullae. Finally, mention should be made of an archive and three bullae from the Bar Kokhba period found by Yigael Yadin in the Cave of Letters in the Judean Desert (Yadin 1963: 11819), as well as 27 bullae found by Abraham Negev in a Nabataean tomb at Mamshit (Mampsis) in the Negev (Negev 1969). Summary Synthesizing all the technical data yielded by the bullae hoard from the City of David, and comparing it

with the other collections described above, allows a reconstruction of the scribal practices employed in Jerusalem during the seventh to sixth centuries

B.C. with regard to writing

a document, signing witnesses to it, and sealing and storing it. Again, reference to the book of Jeremiah is instructive: "AndI bought the field at Anathoth from Hanamel my cousin, and weighed out the money to him, seventeen shekels of silver. I signed the deed, sealed it, got witnesses, and weighed the money on the scales. Then I took the sealed deed


207

of purchase, containing the terms and conditions, and the open copy; and I gave the deed of purchase to Baruch the son of Neriah son of Mahseiah, in the presence of Hanamel my cousin, in the presence of the witnesses who signed the deed of purchase, and in the presence of all the Jewswho were sitting in the court of the guard.I chargedBaruch in their presence, saying,'Thus says the Lordof hosts, the God of Israel: Take these deeds, both this sealed deed of purchase and this open deed, and put them in an earthenware vessel, that they may last for a long time....' " (Jeremiah32:9-14; emphasis has been added by the author) The passage deals with a politicoeconomic measure taken by Jeremiah on the eve of the destruction of Jerusalem. Generally, documents of such nature were written on papyrus, since only papyrus or parchment documents could be folded for safekeeping. Parchment, a more expensive commodity, was reserved for more important functions. First, the buyer (here Jeremiah) weighed out the silver in exchange for the field. The conditions of sale were entered in a document, "the deed of purchase." The contract was signed by the buyer, seller, and the witnesses to the transaction. The signed deed was then rolled and sealed on the outside, thus becoming "the sealed deed of purchase." It bore a duplicate text or partial copy, that is, "the open deed," which remained exposed and enabled examination of the contract without resorting to opening the main text and thereby breaking the outer sealings (that is, the bullae). This reconstruction was postulated by Yadin in his analysis of the legal and commercial texts from the Cave of Letters in the Judean Desert (Yadin 1971: 229-31). Isaiah 6:29 is apposite: And the vision of all this has become to you like the wordsof a book that is sealed. When men give it to one who can read, saying "Read this," he says, "I cannot, for it is sealed."(Isaiah29:11) The contract and its duplicate or

208

abbreviated text were deposited with an entrusted agent for the transaction, in this case Baruch son of Neriah, the scribe. Finally, they were stored in a ceramic vessel, a safe, dry place, "that they may last for a long time." Because they were perishable, no papyri were preserved in the City of David; if they were not consumed by fire, then over the years the humidity would have destroyed them. Consequently, only the bullae have survived; yet they themselves bear witness to the process as described by Jeremiah. Following its signature, the document was folded and tied with string, to which soft lumps of clay were then affixed, after which they were impressed with the personal seals of the interested parties, each seal impressing a separate bulla. The string that tied the documents has left its impression on the reverse sides of the bullae, indicating where the soft clay lumps had been fastened, while the fibers of the papyrus have left their imprint as well. The periphery of the bulla often retains the fingerprints of the person who secured it for sealing. Finally, the signed and sealed documents were stored in special ceramic vessels, such as the complete vessels found in the Qumran caves, whose purpose, according to Eliezer Sukenik (1955: 17-18), was to protect the scrolls hidden in them at the end of the Second Temple period. Could the two, unique perforated kraters found in the bullae house have served to store documents? The bullae, discovered in their vicinity, provide the only testimony for the former existence of an archive, although the number of papyri contained therein cannot be estimated on the basis of the number of bullae discovered, since, as the complete corpus at Wadi Daliyeh and Yeb show, various number of bullae could have been used to seal a document. Had the papyri from area G belonged to a private, family archive, a repetition of names or evidence for a genealogical line might have been


expected within the onomasticon of the bullae. Instead, the overwhelming majority of singly occurring, unrelated names, including that of Gemaryahu son of Shafan, may indicate that the archive was of a pub-

lic nature. Situated as it was in the

area forming the juncture of the lower city with the upper city, or ophel, of the City of David - site of the citadel and the center of the administration-the bullae house could plausibly have been part of a compound that housed a chancellery similar to the one connected with Gemaryahu son of Shafan the scribe. In chronological terms, the various categories of artifacts discovered lying on the bullae floor form a homogeneous assemblage. Furthermore, they find parallels with groups from other stratigraphically related floors and structures comprising the last Israelite stratum in Jerusalem, destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C. The basic findings of this study, then, are based on a rich collection of bullae, the overwhelming majority of which are easily readable, together with a wide-ranging repertoire of complete ceramic vessels and other finds that all derive from a stratigraphically clear context within a controlled excavation. The archaeological evidence, grounded on the architecture and small finds, is firmly anchored in historical documentation, and faithfully reflects the biblical description of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem: In the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month-which was the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon-Nebuzaradan, the captain of the bodyguard, a servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem.And he burned the house of the Lord,and the king's house and all the houses of Jerusalem; every great house he burned down. And all the armyof the Chaldeans,who were with the captainof the guard, broke down the walls aroundJerusalem.(2Kings 25:8-10) Aside from the physical archaeological evidence from the bullae

house, the seal impression of Gemaryahu son of Shafan-who was active at the court of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, eighteeen years before the destruction, and was a contemporary of such figures as Jeremiah, Baruch son of Neriah the scribe, Seraiah son of Neriah (Baruch's brother), and Jerahmeel son of the king- serves to focus on a personal, human aspect, providing a dramatic backdrop to the last days of Jerusalem during the First Temple period. It seems fitting, therefore, to conclude with a quote from Nahman Avigad: In conclusion, I cannothelp expressing my inner feeling when working on these bullae and deciphering them for the first time. One feels a certain personal connection with such important figures as Jeremiah and Baruch,who took part in these dramaticevents duringthe difficult times preceding the collapse of Judah.(Avigad1978:56) Notes excavations were undertaken 'The under the auspices of the City of David Society, which includes the Institute of Archaeologyat the HebrewUniversity of Jerusalem,the IsraelExplorationSociety, the JerusalemFoundation,a groupof sponsors from South Africa headedby Mendel Kaplan,and the AmbassadorInternational Cultural Fund.The expedition directoris Yigal Shiloh, of the HebrewUniversity. The senior staff

includes Alon DeGroot, Donald T. Ariel, David Tarler,JaneCahill, YairShoham, Elat Mazar,WolfSchleicher, and Gary Lipton. Study of all the epigraphicfinds, including the bullae, is in progress,and will be published in the Qedem series by JosephNaveh and Yigal Shiloh with the assistance of YairShoham. 2A seal belonging to Elyakim son of

Michael discoveredin areaE3 at the City of David belongs to this same class. 3The fragmentof a scaraboidseal with the depiction of a griffin was discoveredex situ in areaG at the City of David. Bibliography Aharoni,Y. 1975 Investigations at Lachish. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University. Avigad,N. 1970 Six Ancient HebrewSeals.Pp.305-08 in S. YevinFestschrift,edited by S. Avramskiand others. Jerusalem: Qiryat Sefer. 1976 Bullae and Seals from a Post-Exilic JudeanArchive. Series:Qedem 4. Jerusalem:The HebrewUniversity of Jerusalem. 1978 Baruchthe Scribeand Jerahmeelthe King'sSon. IsraelExplorationJournal 28: 52-56. 1984 DiscoveringJerusalem.Oxford: Blackwell. 1986 Hebrew Bullae Fromthe Time of Jeremiah.Jerusalem:IsraelExploration Society. Cross, E M. 1974 The papyriand their Historical Implications. Pp. 17-29 in Discoveries in the WadiEd-Daliyeh,edited by P.W Lappand N. Lapp.Series:

Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research41. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. Danby,H. 1967 The Mishnah. London:Oxford University Press. Hestrin, R., and Dayagi-Mendels,M. 1970 Inscribed Seals. Jerusalem:Israel Museum. Kenyon,K. 1974 Digging Up Jerusalem.London: Benn. Kraeling,E. G. 1953 The BrooklynMuseum Aramaic Papyri.New Haven:Brooklyn Museum. Negev, A. 1969 Seal Impressionsfrom Tomb 107 at Kurnub(Mampsis).Israel Exploration Journal19:89-104. Shiloh, Y 1984 Excavations at the City of David I, 1978-1982. Series: Qedem 19. Jerusalem: The HebrewUniversity of Jerusalem. 1985 The MaterialCulture of Judahand Jerusalemin IronAge II:Origins and Influences.Pp. 113-46 in The Land of Israel: Cross-roadsof Civilizations, edited by E. Lipiiski. Series: OrientaliaLovaniensiaAnalecta 19. Leuven:UitgeverijPeeters. Sukenik, E. 1955 Osar Hamegilot Hagenuzot. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute. Yadin,Y 1963 The Finds from the BarKokhba Periodin the Cave of Letters.Jerusalem: IsraelExplorationSociety. 1971 Bar-Kokhba:The Rediscoveryof the LegendaryHero of the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome. New York: RandomHouse.

Callfor Manuscripts

Submissions are invited for the ASOR Dissertation Series. The editors will consider dissertationsprincipallyfrom the fields of Syria-Palestinian,Cypriote, Mesopotamian,Egyptian,Iranian,andPunic art,archaeology,history,literature, and religion, although manuscripts in related fields will also be considered. Inquiries and submissions should be sent to: Baruch Halpern, Editor,ASOR Dissertation Series, VanierCollege, YorkUniversity, 4700 Keele Street, North York,Ontario M3J 1P3,Canada.

BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

1986

209

TheMuseumTrail

T

heJoe Alon and

Center for

Regional

FolkloreStudies by OdedBorowski

estled in the forest near Kibbutz Lahav in the northeastern Negev is the Joe Alon Center for Regional and Folklore Studies.' The center, which opened in the spring of 1980, is committed to the continuous study of the southern Shephelah and the Negev through research, exhibitions, and educational activities for all age groups. At present the museum houses three exhibits: an archaeological display of artifacts from the region, an exhibit on bedouin culture, and a restored felahin (peasant) cave dwelling. Archaeological Exhibit and Projects The archaeological display is primarily composed of objects recovered less than a mile from the center. Many of these, including pottery vessels and small objects from various periods in the history of ancient Israel, were discovered at Kibbutz Lahav during construction and agricultural activities. In addition, salvage operations in the area around the center have yielded many interesting finds, such as the stone ossuaries, glass vessels, oil lamps, and jewelry from the Roman-Byzantine cemetery of Tilla (a large Jewish village located on the northern slope of Tel Halif). Excavations at Tel Halif itself, situated less than half a mile north of the center, have also contributed an impressive range of artifacts from the Chalcolithic, Early and Late Bronze, Israelite, Persian, and Hellenistic periods. In 1978 the center, under the leadership of David Allon of Kibbutz Mishmar ha-Negev, was instrumental in the discovery, survey, mapping, and publication of cave complexes that were used as hiding places by the followers of Bar Kokhba during the rebellion from 131 to 135 c.E. This effort has resulted in the discovery of new complexes. One of them at Hazan, which is located southeast of Lachish, was recently opened to the public. The collection also features some interesting architectural elements, for instance a lintel with a carved

210


This bronzestand from field II at TelHalif was photographedupside down. The wider end would have served as the base, and a second piece, which is now missing, would have been placed on top of the smaller end as a container for incense. It dates to the Persian period.

A rimmon (orpomegranate)bowl from a burial tomb at TelHalif, dating to the Iron II period. No one knows for certain how this vessel would have been used in antiquity Thepomegranate,however,is known to have signified life and fertility in the ancient Near East.

Objectsfrom TelHalif, dating to the IronIIperiod. Above left: A storagejar from a residential area adjacent to the city-wall in field III.Above center: A juglet from field III. Above right: A fenestrated incense stand discoveredin field II in an area identified as an open courtyard.Left: Cooking pots from field III. They were discoveredin a destruction level that was dated to the end of the eighth century B.C.E.All figures, unless otherwise

indicated, are by Patricia O'Connor,? Lahav ResearchProject.

These four bowls from field III of TelHalif are all typical of the end of the eighth century B.C.E. The one in the upperright cornershows traces of wheel burnishingon its inside.

BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER 1986

211

menorah, from the heavily occupied Jewishvillages that existed during the BarKokhbarebellion. About a mile south of the center the remains of Hurvat Rimmon can be seen on a low hill. This site, as well as Tilla, was mentioned by Eusebius in his Onomasticon as a large Jewishvillage. The center participatedin the excavation of Hurvat Rimmon, carriedout under the direction of Amos Kloner,on behalf of the IsraelDepartment of Antiquities and Museums. The main attraction here is the synagogue, facing north toward Jerusalem, with a menorah and five rosettes carvedin the middle of its stone-pavedfloor.The synagoguewas in use duringthe third to sixth centuries c.E. A gold hoard was discovered under the floor of one of the storage rooms west of the main hall. Since tomb robbersarevery active in this area, the center has been engagedin salvage and protection of the cemetery at HurvatRimmon, and many objects from its burial caves are housed at the center. One of the more interesting sites near the center is Khirbet Abu Hoff, located two miles to the west. Here, excavationsuncovereda Chalcolithic village with several domestic structures,grainstoragepits, and a lined wellprobablyone of the oldest in the region. On the hill above this site, the remains of a settlement from the Early BronzeAge were discovered,and on an adjacenthill were found remains of another village from the RomanByzantine period. Excavations at Khirbet Abu Hoff uncovered structures identified as columbaria and two churches, one with a mosaic floor.This work was carried out with assistance from the center, which also supports the Lahav Research Project'swork at Tel Halif and its environs.

,? I? ~,

u? B?h ?' -~?ss~E?r is

??

1 ?-? 2~L?~t~-.; --?

.e

'";r

:K

,-.

'' *~Zbi -?~

2.

u

-3

'" .. ?r~-

c. ";~"'

Felahin Cave Dwelling The felahin exhibit is housed in a restoreddwelling cavecomplex located at the foot of Tel Halif. It belongs to the

212


?. ,?r

~i4?..-lv

'"--

" ? ?. L ?.~?

i. z:~u~

. )Z ;RMi ~YI~ ?s~~.,r-?,~?~'l;;;b;* .?cr -tc~^ ^, ?;rcii C :'~p~i~?-t~-~ " ~ tZ ?~~. ~r~~. .Ji.~r~l~t~r? ?r

G.I;i:

.?

r

:-?3~-

:i,

St~c~~i ?om 1

r--~ ?

~

;J$~?

? ?.'

~??--?k:-~r 'r-, r.. z~ ;ru 1. .; `ti

L ,?

r, c~--

51di~~~, ~M~i~(~CC.'lrXSt~?;'~u ~":C~PIFf~~!: ii~rs~?-?"-~nI~ ;:?

?-.

;d~-u r

r;J :5~;C~ ~C~.fb~q`~b QP4*2-~~r . i8Tu~h~l~ngg ~L ?i-?:

5~i~

z `??i~~?-? L ~rt? ?C

5 clk i `?? ?? a; -tc; *C '?`

~ ~

7*. :="t

--r r~5:s~ .1:I-??? ? .~~?.c.

) ?.h???,

,~'J;?

,i ~- ?

,,

1 li?

"` iv?. ?;'~ ~FI

k: "'

r

~

?i fE~fE~ ~t;

Cr3(8

'r-.$?

Itr~Jo. ,.?pl ~s~c ~s`S~"

~

...i-? x

~- ) . U)' ;3E~;-?A~~.:e

.. 3; -~? *

:r cr;

..? j~

~ b~~* ~=:x"~~.lso3P~B~i~Ysr.:k~

... C??-'r' ?Cr -1; :IDt .n~:'~

?n i':3.

.I*c?

*? ''

??

:~ Il.?a~rr-cnr .~

:Ra:

~1~ ~.? ir "1\? " i

:

-

:? ?il Y r?.?1? . - rv~?-?~r~?.?

i ??:'~IT~dS~h?.j*? i ?-Lht' :Q h4~ ?: ..??-?~ ~i~sl~P; Y

,

c If~Pr r ~~;JI5i-1- L i', ?~? ir ?-t~i~~ ~ :rX: ?? rr "?:k? ~. ?r --? .-~t~ v

A menorah is carvedin this lintel from the synagogue at Horvat Kishor,which dates to the Byzantine period. The synagogue was discoveredduring a surveyin the JudeanShephelah.

;?r

Bedouin Culture Exhibit The bedouin exhibition movedto a new wing that opened in May of 19857 The collection includes objects collected by members of Kibbutz Lahav,but the bulk of the display belongs to the Association for the Bedouin Culture. Many of the objects belonging to the Association were assembled among the bedouin of the Negev and Sinai, and some of them were once exhibited at the museum near the Monastery of St. Catherine. Many are unique and cannot be seen at other museums. With the transition of many tribes fromnomadic life to permanent settlement, the work of the Association becomes crucial in preserving the physical remains, in recording traditions, and in researchinga disappearingculture and way of life. The exhibition includes displaysof daily activities that take place in the tent, in the field, and during hunting and fishing, and other cultural activities, such as weddings.

a~

XI

,t:`"'''rg ??:,~

~~? Y;

'r "~

,?

?i

~g~t

I "'T ~tp~

--

1~r

-?~iF1~-

~*".,?

-~)~L

??~

5

??

."P~i~-~3" - L "~"

'" "?u j I S?: r r-1CiF"~ ~a~L~ C.?~~ ~ u4 c ;i~C4: ? " Yn~B:-..? r3 "''*\ -s h? ;r -2*,. ~-~ra??- - n:r~t^ -,a i? -? ?~;C. 3? ?a~,J? ~~~ ~?, -? ,? ??? rr;act .. P ~?Z, ~~ -,?f, ?e ??,-

~r;? ~h.

??~

;V .rr t h: ?? "? i' . C?

n ~se ~? ~ `'%,~L~n?

t??

z-~

?

;Ik?

kr ,? ??' -n c~ j3~44~:~ z L

-L~i L

A round structurefrom KhirbetAbu Hoff contains many niches on the inside; it is built offieldstones that are plastered on the exterior. Inside the structureare three walls-a long wall and two short walls, each containing severalniches. The excavator,David Alon, believes this is a columbarium used for the burial of Roman soldiers killed during the BarKokhbarebellion. Photographedby Avi Navon.

A primitive menorah decoration from a tomb of the Byzantine period near TelHalif.

?, t-, g ~C?L~~l~BI??,

??--~^

-1 ~C~SCFI.

i

r?~t~t-?V`'ba ~

Shown below are two objects currentlyon display at the center. The inscription was discoveredat Hurvat Gommer,a site north of TelHalif in the vicinity of Tell Belt Mirsim. Tombrobbershad taken it from the entrance to a burial cave but it was recoveredby the Department of Antiquities. It has been translated by Amos Kloneras follows: "Iam Elazar,son of Aba Mari;I made this burialplace for Aba Mari son of Bata;fear of oath (on whoever breaksin)."The language is southern Aramaic, written in square Hebrewletters, and the inscription dates to the fourth century C.E.The carvedlintel is from the Byzantine synagogue at Hurvat Rimmon. Its decoration includes a series of palm fronds,grapevines,and grape bunches. Two medallions (the one on the right is flanked by pillars that are connected with an arch)are shown with a dentil decoration.At one time the lintel was also decorated with something that looks like a cross, but it has now been defaced.

i

fr I 5 cr:?i -n?

c: t 'f .r

;t

:: ?? ,,

~?i? c n

t trT~ d~%:.:.?'~ c ~:~v ._. ?~

.~c~~~l rg~8??i-. ?i.~.

t~i~-s?

P~Bgl,' ~c?-~a~ -~lt~ap?6~s~? ~-~'~C~_S~k~44P,?, .. ,".ay"&??t~, ii~S~04~.h

~tf' %Cljt_

'JI ~3c~k.

rj

~,ir; i .

:.~ :~I~?-?:-~Btiz

-6~C~ts~ ?;;p~,

'a

P1I

;Y?.

C,~C~;:

?~9~

??;lr`: m? Ll.~db~;~ PL~--'\ d *.;

~n

i

3~-Q~c ,

~i~'

~ii~ i'?t~~~klnYI

e~l~i~P~;ga~~,~,9~t4;

?r~; ?gr,

h~

it: .- t~Ll~dpt~ ~ ?--;e~ .._ ~-- \i-~

'?Q;s~?I .is;lC ~~*?, s?-;~-:

r-

L~f~j~` h~j~ ~i~i? .I~yV.: -~YhokiP~~

?3Di?

: ~P .-1~" CprChr*(b;;tj;;yl~: ?'P1"~ :;9P~g crr~; "*Y~.pi

::I?~??-?ic-

?u

?ie;p?";

"i~?f?

?:':rdlR~

df~

?ir~'

p~ I, ?"ra~?

~4CE1~0~e ?t~ ?~Ep~k i, i

~baa~a~b~ ?-P~?~~',~?9~~~?~; ,??'P'

i_ ~L~?;?I?

"~t?

;i;

k

:? Y~9 I?:~.'ia?,c"P6h~;.:ll

5

?U:

,,

~~Cc`

.~'~c?1

~

.~?g

'r???

B

;;c*r~

_Br

Lj

-Irr~

: ...*~?

.e~~?-

. ?oA: BB?. ~a~?-?

~U?~*`C,,~7~-CI?~'s` . .1 ??~-~--'?-

'"~

~-?;"~

~?~? r ~~?'?s `??-t~. [$r.-?

-q~*, ,*,vc~.pu' Y??i ;;5J?? ~c~ ~^?c?s~-~. j,

i?: r;."bhi? r?;? i~d~Pr:~pp~C;!;,1EV6~-

~P~9?n~;9~;k:??"~'~

:~:~: ~~=Ic~ "~,?:

~sri~

W)iii: ;': "k~t~:~

li~p-`

,~y;

`'V

tr~"~. ~;i" ~1--.

-?'?~

~?~?? ~-~a=lt~; ir

~

;=IUXL4P

,??:

,._*~

a ii P

*_ ~.~

i' "' t

r-:s ta r t Y 2"~:(

i

a

,r~~.

f?

Icr.i?

a

4 3

~?4L

=d

'-t

)t~t

r

..

:P'

k

.e L-

t

1: ?IrY! In

P

j

4? d -r,

I~Li?lqp

i :~b~

!?

~;ie;-~*~?~3~ -?rj5~X~Zt~.s ~::-_

f r

"cit i t::.~ 1"~ ,?,4'~

a ?~

P I?I'd zi'

k 1,

.n

it

id

'?

. :

x *rt?.

?;~

?

1~

-* ;2

t

??.1 ?-??

'~~?~.?~7L 3

1.

1

;rl$ a

" -~i' z 1?cJ

Piu~

J.

?e

E3P

.~

t:

:~:??:I?

r

Si

rrX a 31

a ???(rr; :~,L;XI1L~~ ,ld

i

,5, i

~

Ilj~C.

B~E~- -~i~ak~.


213

U ?;'~*:

"" L 'L.'e

?~

')

* ?I~S; r

-~ "

~,,~x~L? c --~??

h

C

1 ~'

~gaPr~ I r ~;f

-L: P

r

"1

i v'

.~L~

ii S;B

",' j

i

.. .~:n %;

~k?.

.- 4~C~ ~i?LLr~Wr ?'~? f:

r.

,,

~il-i 1??'i r:? c?.r t-f*l ~c~/ i ,t

4.-.~.~

-~

..i

.~ ;?

C;j

1.

~h~B

r

~a~C ~i?: '^ ... .. ?-,h~* Lt:'L r. ~sl;X~S: ~

n? J~i~?

"I

lre~1~8~91~E~i~r~'

i

~B, u-

Irja~Ya~S~m~-'

?

?

b" c~L ,. 1?1-:.:-IE~~L~a~X)C' "' ?'h:Qlf

? -? Yì?

*L1; "' ~fia~ "? .?~ i ;.-~.? C I. .r;

,i; ~I ?.' i-

??~. ?;? i

ii r

;f ?i?" ?? \(??t~i~?ct:4i;?-:~~;;.I `?rrir~,:~..\t~" '" C I Y ???~I IU'L~;`)'j:. ~*;*til?(Ci :~E~. Z~CII.?if..l~

``

Left:The left side of the bedouin tent, where the women spend most of their time doing chores such as grindinggrainfor flour. The figurein the backgroundis shown wearing an elaborate outfit with coins attached to her garments.Above: The right side of the bedouin tent, where guests are entertained and coffee is being made and offered. On the far right a person is shown playing the rababa,a musical instrument that is constructed of local materials. In the center of the scene in the backgroundis a mortar and pestle made of sycamore wood that was used for grinding coffee

*?r~~?~;~-.r

'?

~?

II

P"i~4;r, ~Jea~ ~u I ~I ~trcl;,_--~,~?L"~BB~i~?"

r

I ;~?LI~~

I

_::

c

p:.

i

,.

Early twentieth-centuryartifacts,like this decorated camel saddle, provideinvaluable ethnographicinsights into a vanishing bedouin culture.

A scene of the instruments and productsof bedouin women's work. At the far right the wooden tripodholds a butter or curdle churnmade ofgoatskin, and in the foregroundon the and two right are rounds of cheese. Hangingfrom the wall is a purse with spindle, and yamrn combs for combing wool rest in front of tlhepurse. A woman working at her loom completes the scene.

214


'?ic'?-?~sla;n r

I':Vlt

~u~~. ~?c~~~"~"~'~8~di*~;;: ~i ,.. iai~lLL~

"u"'-i'd~l::

r;a ??~

r .I &6:~

r

C

i4

--

;I?r*

.?t':-

I

rE-. M L`

k

ct

P

r

I~ L?l

r~ II~

??~? : -~??.~:

?:i-7~C~~c~"IC~' JiZ.?. .i? ?-A?po;r;a,: oLI -r 9 ns?1~. ~i~lrxp -..: C`` 1

:1

I':~?; '5P~ .-s ?: "5P~:

-:i .?cl

":~

P:

i, lhlF;9-:~u The interior of the reconstructedcave at TelHalif. The cave was excavated by the Lahav Research ?I:::,,r .-: ;_~ititi~;.~i~~:t~?:aG? Projectand was restoredby local felahin, or villagers. In the far backgroundare the habia, or i ii ?n::~ ~t;cB-::

r ~mr~Esl?.?~!~?~::~i~:~~ Wi;?/: :.a~"i. :

~CI~CC:~ ?? ~5EipCt~pCt~ ~tr~ a-:-~; u~.?

3

grain storagevessels-the last one on the right is reservedfor storing the occupants' bedding materials. Fromleft to right are a toy made of wire, an installation for baking pita bread, a butter churn, stone installations for making dough and grindingflour, and agriculturalinstruments including a pitchfork and sieves.

A mannequin of a bedouin woman leading a camel decoratedfor a wedding ceremony Wedding camels have not been seen in the area since the 1920s, but local bedouin who were familiar with the custom of decorating camels helped with this display

former bedouin settlement of Khirbet Khuweilifeh, where several other cave complexes are still visible. The present cave was occupied by felahin from the Mount Hebron area who worked for the Rammadin bedouin as sharecroppersuntil 1948. The village of Khirbet Khuweilifeh was mentioned by several nineteenth-century travelers,such as Victor Guerin. During WorldWarI the place was used as a headquartersby the Turkisharmyand was shelled by the British, causing heavy losses to the local population. The restoredcave was excavatedby the Lahav Research Project under the supervision of Karen Seger,and several of its latest occupants were identified and interviewed. The cave was restored to its original condition for the center by felahin in a neighboring village who still live in a similar cave. Visitors accompanied by a guide can enter the courtyardand see different domestic installations used by cave dwellers and others. The cave is divided into a kitchen, an animal pen, and a living area containing authentic mud-and-straw furniture and other implements. Visitor Information The center, which is open on weekdays, conducts educational programs in Hebrew, Arabic, and English?

Examples of some of the programs include illustrated lectures on the daily life and culture of bedouin and on archaeological topics related to the region; a guided tour of the museum and a visit to the adjacent bedouin tent where coffee is prepared and served; a visit to Rahat, a new bedouin permanent settlement; a visit to the Rammadin tribe; cooking bedouin style; visiting some of the region's archaeological sites such as T1l Halif, the synagogue at Hurvat Rimmon, the Byzantine churches at Khirbet Abu Hoff, and Bar Kokhba cave complexes. For young visitors, the center specializes in organizing seasonal activities such as reaping and threshing, harvesting grapes and olives, and making wine and oil. Notes 1Thecenter is named forColonel JoeAlon, a commanderof a nearby airfield who was killed in Washington, D.C., while serving as an Israeli air force attache. The museum is maintained by the Bene Shimon Regional Council. Funding for construction is administeredby the JoeAlon Commemorative Foundation. 2The curatorof this exhibit is Orna Goren. make reservations,contact the director,Avi Navon, by aTo phone (057) 961597, or at the JoeAlon Center, Kibbutz Lahav, D.N. Negev 85335, Israel.


215

Observations on the Balaam Tradition at Deir cAllai Some

ANNHACKETT BYJo

he plaster inscription from Tell Deir cAlla currently resides at the Amman Museum. It is impressively displayed across from a copy of the Moabite Stone and next to the Copper Scroll from Qumran. The fragments of the ancient inscription are arranged in order in modern plaster and securely encased in large wood and glass trays, which are themselves enclosed in a wooden cabinet. In 1979 and again in 1981 I went to the museum in order to examine the inscription at close quarters and to photograph it. I was especially interested in checking some specific readings, particularly in the difficult second combination. Thanks to the cooperative efforts of several scholars since the first publication of the inscription, the first combination can now be read with some certainty, although there are still gaps to be filled in. Combination I tells of the experience of a man named blcm brbcr, who is called a seer of the gods (hzh 'lhn, in line 1). We assume that this seer is the same man spoken of in Numbers 22-24 and elsewhere in the Bible. (His name is commonly given as Balaam, son of Beor, in English Bibles, and I continue that tradition here.) In the Deir cAlla text, Balaam is visited at night by the gods ('lhn)

216

he storyof the Deir cAlla texts and their contents has been magnificently published by JacobHoftijzer and G. van der Kooij (1976). During the excavationof Deir cAlla in the JordanValleyin Februaryand Marchof 1967,a sharp-eyedforeman spotted writing on bits of plaster. Thus an important inscription was savedfrom being shoveled out with the debris. The date of the inscription is roughly 700 B.C.E. The precise date is still under discussion, with suggestions rangingfrom the early eighth century to the Persianperiod. The dating comes from analysis of the formation of the letters in the inscription, as well as from analysis of the artifactsfound in the destruction debris. A carbon-14date could push things back to 800 B.C.E., while others claim 650 or even 600 B.C.E. is more appropriate. The excavator,H. J. Franken,has suggestedthat instead of being on the wall of the building that he labels a sanctuary (Hoftijzerand van der Kooij 1976: 12-13), as at Kuntillet cAjrudin the Negeb, the Deir cAlla texts may have been on a stele or at least on some form of displayarea.The building was destroyedby an earthquake,so the plaster may have been thrown out during this destruction. The result is some very fragmentary plaster. Franken theorizes that an earthquake shock destroyedportions of the inscriptions, which may now be lost forever.A second shock actually threw the plasteroff its backing, thus preservingwhat we have now. The excavatorsdid a superbjob of preservation.Unfortunately they did not have a greatdeal to preserve,so in addition to a partialinscription we end up with fragmentarywriting as well. The problem has been made worse by waterdamageto the letters. These arealso damagedin specks where the straw in the original plasterhas rotted away,leaving holes in the plaster and in the writing. The Hoftijzer-vanderKooijvolume gives full details on the find, how the letters were deciphered, suggested transcriptions and translation, general remarks on the texts, photographs(color and infrared),and drawings of the texts. The last shows the use of red ink in severalplaces, instead of the black ink used for most of the writing. Hoftijzer thinks the red ink may represent the introduction of new and important aspects, such as the title of the prophecyand the beginning of direct discourse.McCarter(1980)believes "red was used for passages referringto the inscription itself, its composition, its utilization, and so on,"whereas Kaufman(1980)has suggestedthat the shift fromblack back to redat the beginningmarks off the divine quotation.There may havebeen a magicalelement in the use of red.Others,including Hackett, do not consider the change in the color of the ink significant (see the notes to her transliterationand translation of Combination I). The fragmentsof plaster have been pieced together into fifteen different groups, called combinations. Combination I and Combination II are the largest, with seventeen and thirty-sevenlines respectively.The others range from single letters to several phrases. Since the original publication of the inscription, scholars have made severalsuggestions for changes. Henry O. Thompson


1986

TheDeir cAll textrefersto a man named

Balaan, sonofBeor,a seerof thegods.

Weassumehe is the sameman spokenof in Numbers22-24. 6;8~ G~~;?; ,,

~5'; w i~i-i

4

~ ~

~9

'6:~

g~: -. -

k~

c

He arises the next day and cries passionately. His people come up to him and ask him why he is crying and fasting. In response, Balaamtells them what the gods have done and are going to do. Balaamrelates a vision of the Divine Council sitting in assembly (lines 5/6: 'l[h]n'tyhdw I wnsbw idyn mwcd). The council addressesa goddess (the imperatives that follow are feminine singular);although we cannot determine the deity's identity, we know that the first letter of her name is -the rest of her name is lost in a lacuna in the text. The goddess is asked to close up the heavens "in"or "with" a cloud (line 6), to or-

dain darkness for the earth instead of light, and to seal up the sky fora :~::~: ever.This is presumably a punishI ,,,, ment, as perpetual darkness would .li' -,i bring the loss of fertility and life on earth. "-i ~ The reason the gods are angry ~C3 with the earth is set out in the follow;s: "~ A,: ing lines in the familiar "reversals" text style. It seems that everything 3 a on earth has been turned topsy-turvy. "~ s 6?:~~:c Forinstance, "the [tiny]swift rea, proaches the griffin-vulture,and the L? voice of [normally voiceless] vultures sings out .... Instead of ewes, Twoportrayalsof Balaam riding an ass. Above: :":': it is the staff that is led .... The deaf Fromone of the bronzedoors of the basilica of St. ,8 :"' Zeno in Verona.Above right: Froma carving on the :""~ ~ hear from afar."(This interpretation ~;?5 capital of a column in the churchof Saint-Androche, ~a was proposedby McCarterin 1980.) Saulieu, Burgundy. ,,, P Such a series of reversalsis ~i" ~" ~~ o~ known to us from biblical texts like 1 Samuel 2:4-8 and Isaiah 3:4-5 and 24. We find even more striking paralconclude that the significant comand he sees a vision (wyhz mhzh, munication Balaamreceives from end of line 1),after which the gods lels, however,in Egyptianliterature. speak to him and give him a message the gods must have been disclosed to Forinstance, in "TheAdmonitions of Ipuwer"we read:"See,he who had (in line 2: wy'mrw l[blc]m brbcr).At him in the vision in line 1 and that the beginning of line 3 we are told it is this vision, and not the subnothing is a man of wealth, the nobleman sings his praise .... He who that Balaam"gotup the next day" sequent message in line 2, that he was a messenger sends someone relays to his people later in the ex(wyqm blcm mn mhr), so we must else .... See, the baldheadwho assume that the gods'message to tant text. I would propose that the Balaam,following his vision reported message from the gods in line 2 (un- lacked oil has become owner of jars in line 1, is contained entirely in the fortunately only partially preserved} of sweet myrrh"(Lichtheim 1975: remainderof the second line. This is simply refersback to the vision in a 157);and in "TheComplaints of much too short a message to comwe find:"Hewho summarizing or admonishing man- Khakheperre-Sonb," prise the upsetting information that ner (kh ypcl could begin such a mes- gave orderstakes orders"(Lichtheim was apparentlygiven to Balaam1975: 148).There are obvious paralsage:"thushe [El?]will do ...."-iginformation that is the topic of the noring the change in ink color). The lels in our text, in lines 9, 11, and 12. Combination I breaks off at this rest of Combination I. Therefore,we vision andmessage devastateBalaam. LC~rj;~


217

Balaam in

::::::

the

Bibl

Among that unique groupof people in the Bible called prophets,one of the

?:a::: ,:: V*':.r :,i:::J-" ?:

~::?:; : :,:::

-ii(

?L.: ::::i:

::

:(. ; ii~Y~r:IZ~J~J:1 ^~-

~~::a_: r? .;?:L

A section of Combination II. Photograph courtesy of the Deir cAlla Expedition.

point, and we are still unsure of the relationship between Combination I and Combination II. I have suggested elsewhere that Combination II represents some sort of ritual that is meant to appease the gods and to take away the curse of darkness (Hackett 1984: 80). Late in Combination II, in lines 35 and 36, we can read at the beginnings of the lines, "They [clouds?] will drip with heavy rain" and "They will drip with dew." It would seem that the curse and the loss of fertility have been lifted late in the text. The Deir cAlla Txt and the Bible The Deir cAllh inscription is a fascinating text in its own right but it is also interesting because it casts light on the biblical character Balaam. Balaam at Deir cAlla is a nonIsraelite religious leader revered in Transjordan-precisely as we would expect, given the biblical data. He is a leader in a cult that is not Yahwistic-again as expected from some biblical Balaam traditions (for in-

218

more interesting is the prophetBalaam.Wedo not usually talk abouthim as a biblical prophetbecause he was not an Israelite.Despite this, he prophesied by the powerof Yahweh,the God of Israel- a situation that was unusual, though not without parallels.In Isaiah, the Persianemperor Cyrus is called the messiah - that is, Yahweh'sanointed one (chapter45, verse 1)- andforeign people (Assyria)are designatedas instruments of God (chapter10, verse 5). Balaam is mentioned several times in the Bible, but his best-known appearanceis in Numbers 22-24. A close reading of the story in Numbers presents some problems. Forinstance, where does he live? Although Balaam is said to live on the EuphratesRiver,the description of Balak'smessengers traveling back and forth, as well as the description of Balaam'sown travels, suggests a location closer to Moab. Both the Samaritan and the Septuagint Greek text of Numbers haveBalaamcoming from the land of the Ammonites. If Joshua 13:22 represents the same man, he was in this area when the Israeliteskilled him. The Ammonite areamakes more sense in the context of the Numbers story, as well as in the texts found at Deir cAllh. McCarter's (1980)suggestion that Balaamwas a foreignerat Deir cAllh would fit either tradition. J.Lust (1978)suggests Balaamwas an Ammonite. Another problem involves an apparentcontradiction in the story. The readerwill recall that Balak,the king of Moab,sent messengers to Balaamin orderto hire him to curse the invadingIsraelites.Balaamasked the Lordwhat to do and God told him not to go with the messengers and not to curse the people of Israel.He thereforesent the messengers awaybecause he could only do what Yahwehallowed. (Note that this is not God in generalbut specifically Yahweh,the God of Israel.)But Balakwould not give up. He tried again,using higher-classmessengers.Balaamagainasked the Lordand this time God said, "Go,but only do what I tell you." So Balaamwent. And God got mad. Wesee a parallelto this in the Mosaic tradition in Exodus 4:24, where the Lord,who had just sent Moses back to Egypt,sought to kill him. No clear explanation for the contradiction appears in either instance if we take the texts literally. Why should God want to kill someone he has just allowed or asked to go on an errand?We do not know. Literarycritics have theorized that in Numbers we have the strands of two stories woven together-with the poetry in the chapters coming from still other sources.Accordingto this view, in one strandBalaamhad permission to go, while in the other he was forbiddenor had not asked. If these critics are right, the second strand may help explain why subsequent references to Balaamare mostly negative (Numbers31:8, 16;Deuteronomy 23:4-5;Joshua 13:22, 24:9-10; Nehemiah 13:2;2 Peter 2:15; Jude 11;Revelation 2:14; only Micah 6:5 seems positive: see Baskin 1983 and Coats 1973). Without these referencesit is difficult to explain why the Israeliteswould kill someone who loyally obeyed their God and blessed them. (Psychologically,of course, he could be their scapegoat,since they did not obey God themselves.) stance, Numbers 25 and 31)-a cult that recognizes a council of several gods. The language of the Deir cAlla text exhibits syntax and vocabulary similar to biblical Hebrew; it is to be compared with South Canaanite dialects, as I have argued (Hackett 1984: 109-24), or is at least dependent on


Canaanite literary traditions, as McCarter has proposed (1980: 50-51). Perhaps the most suggestive new information from the Deir cAlla text is the mention of a group of gods known as the idyn. We think immediately of Sadday as an epithet of El in the Hebrew Bible. We are also

e and

at

Deir

cAlla

It is this interesting, but difficult, characterthat we areprobablydealing with when we come to the Deir cAlls texts. Hoftijzer says of the blcm brbcr who appears in the texts, "There can be no reasonable doubt that in the so-called first combination... we have to do with the story of a prophecy."He adds, "Inmy opinion there can be no doubt that the prophet in question is Balaam,the son of Beor." There is, of course, doubt. The word blcm is actually present in the Deir cAllh texts only twice: Combination I, lines 3 and 4 in Hackett's reconstruction (see also McCarter1980andLevine 1981);andCombination I, line 5, and Combination XII,fragment d, line 2, in Hoftijzer'sreconstruction. The name has also been restored. Hoftijzer restored it in both lines 1 and 2 of Combination I, andvirtually all scholarsworkingon the texts since then have followed his lead. In addition, various suggestions have been made for its restorationin other places in the texts. Thus, the two clear instances support the restorations. My concern here is not a detailed analysis of the text but to note that, fragmentary and uncertain as it is, Combination I from Deir cAlla may involve Balaamengagingin prophecyor predictionof doom. As I comparethe biblical story of Balaamwith the Deir cAlls texts, I am struck by an anomaly. In Jeremiah 28, verse 8, Jeremiah says, "The prophets who preceded you [Hananiah]andme from ancient times prophesiedwar,famine, andpestilence against many countries and kingdoms."This is a strong contrast to Numbers 23 and following where Balaamprophesies good. But it is in agreement with the Balaam of Deir cAlla, if the text in Combination I does indeed predict destruction. If there is a call for repentancein Combination I, that too would be in harmony with the biblical tradition of the preexilic prophets. The contrast should not be pressed too far, of course. The biblical prophetshad their moments of hope. Isaiah knew Jerusalemwould be saved. Jeremiahcould tell the exiles to settle down and seek the good of the land. They would go home some day.Further,the context of Numbers 22-24 is a setting in which an enemy of Israelcalled forIsraelto be cursedbut God called for a blessing. Whateverqualifieror explanation might be given, it remains remarkable to me that the Balaamof the seventh-centurytext of Deir cAlli has a closer resemblanceto those figureswe call biblical prophetsthan does the Balaamof Numbers 22-24. Like Micaiah ben Imlah (1 Kings 22:14), Balaam declared in Numbers 22-24 that he could only say what the Lordallowed.But the activity of blessing and cursing is perhaps more priestly than prophetic in nature. It may reflect the activity of the diviners and seers, forerunners of the prophets (1 Samuel 9:9). In the Deir cAllh texts, Balaamis called a divine seer but his activity there more closely resembles the biblical prophets. Henry O. Thompson reminded of the oracles of Balaam in Numbers 24, where he twice describes himself as "the one who hears the words of El I who sees the vision of Sadday" (verses 4 and 16). In the biblical context El and Sadday are parallel epithets for Yahweh. At Deir cAlli, the same names are pre-

sented in parallel, this time in the plural, but they represent the gods meeting in council: "The 'ihn gathered stood as the astogether / the sdyn sembly" (lines 5/6). Here, I would suggest, 'ihn is the general term for the gods and is the epithet of sdyn the gods in their capacity as the

members of the Divine Council. As has long been suggested, the word ladday means "the one of the mountain"from an original *Odw/y,"breast," and the gods in council (with El Sadday as head of the council) are perhaps referred to as "mountain ones" because the council meets on top of a mountain (as in Isaiah 14:13; text 2.1.19-24 in Herdner 1963; see also McCarter 1980: 57). As an epithet of a group of gods in the Transjordanian region, Ady may also have been preserved in the Hebrew Bible. In Deuteronomy 32:17 we read that Israel, in the period between the Exodus and the Conquest, "sacrificed to idym, not Eloah, gods they did not know." The word idym is vocalized ledim here (the simple plural of fed) and is usually translated "demons." (At Deir cAlla Bdyn could not be vocalized edin and read as a plural of &ed.The orthographic system operative in the Deir cAlla text requires that the y in -yn be consonantal and not simply a mater for i.) The Hebrew Bible vocalization ~ed is probably connected with Akkadian ledu (Kaufman 1974: 101-02), even though ledu, "spirit,"carries no negative connotations. Certainly by rabbinic times the meaning "demons" was established. These idym in Deuteronomy 32, however, are specifically called gods, 'A1ohim,in the second part of the colon. So the word Adym in Deuteronomy 32 should describe a group of gods, not simply "demons,"that the Israelites worshipped during their stay in Transjordan (note the reference to Bashan-a region north of the river Jabbok-in verse 14). Furthermore, in Psalms 106:37 it is reported that the Israelites "sacrificed their sons and daughters to the reference is idym.' Again,

to the pre-Conquestsojourn in Transjordan. This report is mentioned shortly after the incident of Baalpeor for which Balaam, son of Beor, is given credit as instigator in Numbers 31:16. These connections push us in the direction of repointing idym in


219

Deuteronomy 32 and Psalms 106, so that the y in biblical idym, like the is consoy in the Deir cAlla sdyn,read for the nantal. We would then and biblical passages *saddayyim, this name one identify by group of the "gods of the nations." The Israelites encountered this group on the east side of the Jordan and participated in its ceremonies, behavior that angered Yahweh. The identificaallows us to tion of *saddayyim attribute more authenticity to the tradition that Balaam was a religious leader in a ritual cult east of the Jordan. This cult would have been a rival to the Yahwistic cult, and its followers might well have practiced rituals connected with death or sex. (Full decipherment of the extant second combination will give us valuable information relating to this matter.) A pattern has begun to emerge that ties together Balaam, son of Beor; the plains of Moab in the east Jordan valley; worship of gods with the epithet and various ritual sdy; practices. Balaam is connected with this geographical area both by the biblical stories and by the location of Deir cAlli itself. The epithet idy is connected to Balaam in Numbers 24 and at Deir cAlla. Some sort of ritual dealing with death or sex is apparently being described in the second combination of the Deir cAlli text (see, for instance, such phrases as rwy ddn in Combination II, line four, likely a sexual image, and byt clmn in Combination II, line 6, which can be translated "grave"); Balaam (via Baal-peor) is connected in the Bible with sacrifices to other gods (Numbers 25:2), sacrifices of the dead (Psalms 106:28), and perhaps to ritual sexual practices (Numbers 25:6-9). (Child sacrifice could also be mentioned here if Psalms 106:37 is to be brought in. Considering the use of sdym in verse 37, I am inclined to add it.) I might further suggest that the prose portions of Numbers 22-24 were seen by their original audience

220

as extremely ironic. If we see Balaam as one of Israel's powerful religious rivals, and a leader in a cult that worshipped not Yahweh but a pantheon of other gods, then portraying Balaam as one who must call on Yahweh to determine his movements

and who has no choice but to bless Israel because of Yahweh's favor toward Israel would surely have delighted the early audience. The new information on Balaam provided by the Deir cAlla text allows us to infer that this was indeed the gist of the

TheDeircAllaText:Combination I TIransliteration 'lwh 1 [VACAT]spr[.blcm.brbc]r.'.h1ih. '1hi[.]h'[.]wy'tw. 'hn.blylh.iyhz.mhzh 2 km'.'l.wy'mrw.1[blclm.brbcr.kh.ypcl[. ]'.'r'h.'a.lr[ ]ctl.] 3 wyqm.blcm.mn.mbr[. ].y[ ].mn.[ J&h.wlyk[l1.1.]wbk 4 h.ybkh.wycl.cmh.h'lwh.[wy'mrw.1]h[lbcm.brbcr.lm.tsm.'tbkh.wy' 5 mr.lhm.8bw. ;tyhdw. 'hwkm.mh.Bd[yn.pclw.]wlkw.r'w.pclt.'lhn.'l[hn. 6 wnsbw.&dyn.mwcd.w'irw.l1[ .]tpry.skry.myn.bcbky.m.h1k.w'l.n 7 gh.chn.wy1.]skrky.thby.ht[m. 8 ]b.h.k.w'1[.]thgy.cd.clm.ky.sscgr.r .]bny.ns.wsrh.'prly.'nph.drr.nirt. 9 pt.hir.wqi.r1hdn.ycnh..[sd. ywn.wapr[. ]yn.[ ].mth.b'&r.rhln.yybl.1.r.'rnbn.'klw. 10 I ].5tyw.hmr.wqbcn.&mcw.mwsr.gry) . ]b.h.p[ 11 [cl. t.mr.wkhnh .lh.kmn.yqk.wcnyh.rqh 12 [ .]ln '.'zr.qrn.b.b.hi.b.wh.b.h 13 rsb. .lwimcw.h rn[.lmn.rhq[.l 14 [ .]Akl.hzw.qqn.&gr.wcltr.1 15 I ].nmr.,nys.hqrqt.bn 16 ]mn.'irn.wcyn. [y. 'Iranslation The account of [Balaam, son of Beo]r, who was a seer of the gods. The gods came to him in the night, and he saw a vision (2) like an oracle of El.Then they said to [Balaa]m,son of Beor:"Thushe will dolmake[ ] hereafter (?), which [ ]." (3) And Balaam arose the next day ] but he was not ab[le to ] and he wept (4) [ ] from [ grievously. And his people came up to him [and said to] him, "Balaam, son of Beor, why are you fasting and crying?"And he sa(5)id to them: "Sit down! I will tell you what the Sadda[yyin have done.] Now, come, see the works of the gods!The g[o]dsgatheredtogether;(6)the Saddayyintook their places as the assembly. And they said to Si[ ]: "Sewup, bolt up the heavens in your cloud, ordainingdarknessinstead of (7)eternal light! And put the dark [ se]al on your bolt, and do not remove it forever!Forthe swift re(8)proachesthe griffin-vultureand the voice of vultures sings out. The st[ork ] the young of the NH$-bird (?)and claws up young herons. The swallow tearsat (9)the doveand the sparrow[ . ] the rod, and instead of the ewes, it is the staffthat is led. Hareseat (10)[a wo]lf (?)[ .] drink wine and hyenas give heed to chastisement. The whelps of the f(11) . [ox ] laughs at the wise. And the poor woman preparesmyrrh . while the priestess (12)[ ] for the prince, a tattered loincloth. The respected one (now) respects (others) and the one who gave respect is (now)re(13)[spected. ] and the deaf hear from afar.(14) ? and a fool see visions. The constraint of of (?)] the [ . fertility (lit. "offspring")(15) [ ] the leopard.The piglet chases the you(16)[ng of ](?) ....


1986

*b*?i-*"

*j

:::: s:::

::::r~

-~

Is

-_~-I~--II

I

?iz,:-: *:::i i*

di

i'

:x

Notes: The text offeredhere reflects several changes that have been suggested since the first publication of the text in Hoftijzer and van der Kooij 1976. A. Caquot and Andr6 Lemairesuggested in 1977 that fragmentsc and d in Combination I should be moved up two lines, to yield the reading wbkh.ybkh across the third and (now) fourth lines of the text. They also suggested that fragment d in CombinationVIIIandfragmentc in Combination XII should be placed together, since blcm.brbcrcould then be read. In fact, these two suggestions should be combined: Fragment d of Combination VIIIand fragment c of Combination XII should be put together and placed within the first combinationas partsof lines 3, 4, and 5, thereby insuring that fragments c andd ofCombination Icouldbe movedup to fit aroundthe newly placed fragments. Additional fragments have been placed

A section of CombinationII. Photographcourtesyof GordonHamilton.

Below left: Fragmentsof the text beforethey were arrangedinto combinations and designated fragmentc of Combination I and fragments c and d of Combination V Photographcourtesy of the Deir cAlla Expedition.Below right: TellDeir cAllJ, viewed from the north.

recently by GordonHamilton, of the Universityof Calgary,who has also workedon the inscription. For instance, Hamilton has put fragmente of CombinationV and fragment c of Combination XV in the largegapat the end of line 1, which placement is reflected in my transliteration. Further, Hamilton argues convincingly that we should disregardchanges in ink color in lines 1 and 2, since the switches occur precisely at the midpoint of each line. Fitzmyer(1978:94-95), Naveh (1979: 134-35), Greenfield (1980: 250), and Levine (1981:196-97) also ignore the ink color, although their translations differ slightly from mine. For a detailed discussion and justification of the readings and translation offeredhere, see Hackett 1984. Underlined words are in red ink in

the original. JoAnn Hackett

Balaam stories in Numbers 22-24. Acknowledgments My visit to the Amman Museum in 1979 was made possible by a grant from the Marion and JasperWhiting Foundation. My return visit in 1981 was made with the assistance of a travel grant from the American Schools of Oriental Research. H. J.Frankenand G. van der Kooijgave me their kind permission to examine the text, and Dr. Adnan Hadidi, Director of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan,and the staff of the Amman Museum were unconditionally helpful. A microscope was obtained for use my through the Geology Depart-


221

ment of the University of Jordan. I would like to thank Marvin Pope for pointing out to me the implicit connection between Balaam and sacrifices of the dead, based on Psalms 106, and Robert Good for bringing to my attention that idym was also present in this psalm. Finally, I would like to add a special note of thanks to H. W. Huehnergard for his work in reproducing the photographs that accompany this article. Bibliography Baskin,J.R. 1983 Origenon Balaam:The Dilemma of the UnworthyProphet.Vigiliae Christianae37: 22-35. Caquot,A., and Lemaire,A. 1977 Lestextes aram~ensde Deir cAlla. Syria 54: 189-208. Coats, G. W. 1973 Balaam:Sinner or Saint. Biblical Research 18:21-29.

1980 ReviewArticle: The AramaicTexts Cross, E M. 1969 EpigraphicNotes on the Amman from Deir cAlla. Bulletin of the Citadel Inscription.Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 239: 71-74. American Schools of Oriental Research 193: 13-19. Levine,B. A. 1981 The Deir cAlli PlasterInscriptions. Fitzmyer,J.A. 1978 Reviewof Hoftijzerandvan derKooij, Journalof the American Oriental Aramaic Textsfrom Deir cAlla. Society 101:195-205. CatholicBiblical Quarterly40: 93-95. Lichtheim, M. 1975 Ancient EgyptianLiterature.Volume Greenfield,J.C. 1980 Reviewof Hoftijzerandvan derKooij, 1: The Old and Middle Kingdoms. Aramaic Textsfrom Deir cAlla. Berkeley:University of California Press. Journalof Semitic Studies25: 248-52. Hackett, J.A. Lust,J. 1984 The Balaam Textfrom Deir cAlld. 1978 Balaam,AnAmmonite. Ephemerides Chico, CA: ScholarsPress. TheologicaeLovanienses54: 60-61. Herdner,A. McCarter,P K., Jr. 1980 The BalaamTextsfrom Deir cAlla: 1963 Corpusdes tablettes en cundiformes The FirstCombination.Bulletin of alphabitiques. Paris:Imprimerie Nationale. the American Schools of Oriental Research239: 49-60. Hoftijzer,J.,and van der Kooij,G. 1976 Aramaic Textsfrom Deir cAlla. Naveh, J. Series:Documenta et Monumenta 1967 The Date of the Deir cAlli InscripOrientis Antiqui 19. Leiden:Brill. tion in AramaicScript.Israel Exploration Journal17:256-58. Kaufman,S. A. 1974 TheAkkadian Influences on Ara1979 Review of J.Hoftijzerand G. van der maic. Chicago:Universityof Chicago Kooij,Aramaic TextsfromDeir cAlla. Press. IsraelExplorationJournal29: 133-36.

Callfor Monographs Scholars are invited to submit manuscripts for the ASOR MonographSeries. Editorswill consider monographsin the areasof ASOR'straditionalinterests, especially biblical studies and ancient Near Easternhistory and archaeology.Inquiries and submissions should be sent to: Eric M. Meyers, Editor, ASOR MonographSeries, ASOR Publications Office, P.O.Box H.M., Duke Station, Durham, North Carolina27706.

222


The

1

r ~I.,'?? r *;~6L :I :)C~,::~:e ~yy 1:

." '15^

r:? ::: I:l:::j:r:::-i:::: :i;?*jrr~~: I;;

\1"*"--:-:t~d'

Profile of Israelite

an

P; Î

?:;:: I:??~

P

:ar ,,

*:,

,i:I

ri

6"

?_

:--:. I

":c~

,1 ?B

r r

?e T

"x .%

r":? ; * ";:!

4:.

city

..*

:_d"l::

ri*

d"r ?

-

:

DEGEUS BY CORNELIS

,? I,,

in:: I~

'ii: rtt

::

f, I/

is)' -?~ "r *r,-? F;???~ --?-Tltl v ii:iQ *

?i.a . si-

i-.?:

7?

ith few exceptions, all that remains of : :: Israelite cities of bib"i~f -?: .~~ lical times are their ~f:cls tells (the mounds formed by the ri: C accumulated debris of successive settlements built on the same place over the centuries). When these tells have been excavated,we have found in most cases only the foundations :a, of the buildings;1sometimes only the traces of the trenches dug for the foundations are visible, because the T~fi original foundation-wallswere used by later builders who needed the stones elsewhere. The archaeologist measures and drawsthe foundations, and so plans are produced.2A consequence of this is that when speak;:I ing of biblical cities we generally discuss their plans, thus tending to think exclusively of their horizontal ::rc~* izaspects. When writing a book on the Israelite city (de Geus 1984),I began to appreciatethis more and more. At the same time it struck me that the biblical descriptions of cities often stress the vertical aspects, especially The famous ceramic incense-burneror cult stand from Taanach,which dates to the tenth the high city-walls.To foreignersthe century B.C.E.It is in the shape of a four-storybuilding. walls could look so high that they could have given the impression that

224


the inhabitants were giants: Yetthe people who dwell in the land are strong, and the cities are fortified and very large;and besides, we saw the descendants of Anak there. (Numbers 13:28) Or consider Isaiah 26:1: Wehave a strong city; he sets up salvation as walls and bulwarks. The only contemporary depictions we have of ancient Near Eastern cities from the Iron Age, the Assyrian palace-reliefs, also stress the vertical aspect. This emphasis in the ancient sources on the vertical aspects of cities led me to wonder what can be said about the profile of a biblical city. To put this another way, what did an ancient Israelite (or Judean) city look like from a distance? The answer is: high. Several features contributed to this effect. First, their positions on tells or on ridges in mountainous areas would have enhanced the feeling of height. Then there were the city-walls-although these were often less high than they might have appeared from a distance because they had houses built on top of them. In such cases only the lower half is a real city-wall. It is hard to tell from the foundations of such walls what their original height would have been. Based on the depictions on Assyrian reliefs, we might estimate heights of twelve meters at the maximum. Eight to ten meters is perhaps average, taking into account that the upper one-third was occupied by houses. Yet other features contributing to the sense of height would be towers and revetment-walls. Rising above the city-walls, towers were built next to the city-gates, at the corners of the city, and at especially threatened stretches of the walls. Revetment walls were built to prevent the citywall from sagging (sometimes they developed into a second line of defense). From a distance it might appear as if there were two walls, one above and behind the other. Assyrian reliefs often show very clearly the

N-

The profile of a Palestinian city was depicted on an Assyrian relief at Nimrud, dating to the eighth century B.CE. The city, Astoreth in Gilead, is shown built on a tell; there is a revetment wall, above which is the actual city-wall with bastions and a gate. Behind the city-wall, the acropolis or citadel rises above the rest of the town. The citadel has its own gate. Drawing is by Linda Huff.

city-wall with bastions and towers, below which is a revetment-wall.The reliefs also often show still another wall abovethe city-wall. There is an increasing consensus among scholars that these "upper" walls are the walls of a citadel or acropolis inside the city. The vertical effect of the citadel would be increased by the fact that it was of course preferablyconstructed on the highest spot of the tell or hill on which the city stood. It was also set apartby other means. At Lachish, for instance, there is a huge platform, on which a palace (orpalaces) for the governorof the city probably stood. A similar platform was discoveredon the highest point of Tel Dan. The citadels thus would have towered abovethe town and dominated the surroundings,unmistakable symbols of the political power

of the states of Judahand Israel. Also at Lachish,the platformforthe palace was situated in a part of the town that was strictly separatedfrom the rest: To the east was a large square; to the north and south of this square were rows of storehouses. The entry to this complex was by a gate that was of the Solomonic type, like the official city-gate (Ussishkin 1983: 28-29). This division of the city in two parts-a public part and a residential quarter-was visible not only in the layout-the plan-but also in its vertical silhouette. As I answeredfor myself the question of what the profile of a biblical city looked like, I realized that I had also answeredanother question. When studying the plans of biblical cities one cannot but wonder with ProfessorAhlstrPm (1982),"Where did the Israelites live?"A heavy city-


225

An imaginary Israelite city is depicted in this drawing based on reconstructionsof biblical Lachish. Severalhouses in the town are given a second floor, and some houses (on the left) are built on the city-wall. The large building on the right is the main building of the acropolis on its platform. Drawing is by MargaretReid.

wall with towers and gates commonly occupied a considerable part of the restricted area available on a tellsometimes as much as 15 percent of the surface on top of the tell. With so much space occupied by defensive structures, and by public buildings, the remaining areas for residential quarters are often not more than 25 to 40 percent of the city's surface. In my opinion something more can be said on this problem if we consider the profiles of the cities. First, as I have already pointed out, in many cases houses were built on (parts of) the city-walls. These walls could also be integrated in the circle of houses that ran immediately behind them, especially if they were of the so-called casemate type. In the Bible we read of people fleeing from cities by means of ropes that were let down from windows in houses that apparently stood on the citywalls (Joshua 2:15; 1 Samuel 19:12). The Assyrian reliefs also show such windows in city-walls. These houses never show on any plan. Second, there are a number of arguments in favor of a serious reconsideration of the almost-traditional reconstruction of the Israelite fourroom house as having just one story. Most reconstruction-drawings of the residental quarters in biblical cities show a sea of low, flat-roofed houses. Only occasionally does one see a so-called upper-chamber or a

226

domed roof. If one takes the average height of a flat-roofed house to be about 3 meters, with sometimes an additional 2.5 meters for an upperchamber, this means that practically no houses reached the height of the city-wall. Most of the population would not have been able to view their fields from their roofs and would not have fully profited from the fresh evening winds. If some houses were built on the city-walls, the rest of the city was very much closed in. Also, one might wonder why in such a low-profile city it would be necessary to elevate the palace to such a degree (by putting it on a platform). Was it because of the need of the palace to see outside the city or to especially impress the inhabitants? After all, the palace would already have been on the highest ground of the tell. This would not be a question, however, if most of the houses had had at least two stories. The wellknown plan of the four-room house gives us two details that suggest that more than one floor can be supposed. The first is the presence of stone roof supports, which were sometimes even monolithic. If we assume an open courtyard, with an open but covered veranda or porch along one side, as most reconstructions do, wooden poles would have been sufficient. Finding stone supports, however, suggests to me that these pillars


had to carry at least one more story. The same goes for the famous storehouses with their double rows of stone pillars. This, of course, has been suggested before and was, for instance, the opinion of William F. Albright (1974: 115-16) and Yigael

Yadin(1964: 196),but I think it is time to take it up again. The second detail is that in a majority of cases where a staircase was found, this staircase was situated outside the house, along the outer wall. If we find a staircase inside we are dealing in most cases with houses that have communal outer walls. There is clearly a preference for an outside staircase. Why? Perhaps the ground floors of such houses were used for all kinds of productive work. In the "courtyards"we find hearths and ovens, and under the porch, loomweights. Other rooms on the ground floor could have served the servants and slaves or have been used as stables. The owner of the house and his family would then have lived on the second floor. Maybe there was even a third and a fourth. Not being an architect myself I only point here to Braemer's recent attempt to achieve a different reconstruction of some subtypes of four-room houses; he leaves open possibilities for upper stories (Braemer 1982: 145-53, figures 40-44). It should be noted that an important reason for the traditional re-

A

7

"

~I

7twopossible reconstructions by FrankBraemerof the roof overa large four-roomhouse (house 379 at Tellen-Nasbeh).If the reconstructionon the right is accurate,it is easy to imagine the structurehaving severalstories. Drawing is by MargaretReid.

construction of the one-story house is that most archaeologists formerly believed that the carrying capacity of mudbrick walls was too low for upper floors. This is no longer accepted. We know, for instance, from Mesopotamia that walls of considerable height - sometimes even tens of meters-were constructed with mudbricks, in most cases unbaked. And the walls were often deeper than necessary as well (Heinrich and Seidl 1968). Today, multiple-story mudbrick houses are still being built and lived in in Yemen. If constructed in the right way, there are no architectural objections against reconstructing some of the four-room houses with at least two stories. One may wonder whether the central "courtyard"in such a case would be partly or completely covered. Perhaps there was a kind of wooden balcony along the inner side of the upper floors, above the courtyard. As support for the idea that multiple-story structures were well known in biblical times I might point to the American excavations of Taanach, where a beautiful pottery incense-burner was found that represents a building (palace?) with four stories.

In conclusion, by assuming that a number of private dwellings in an Israelite city had more than one floor, we can resolve two problems. First, we can understand why the palaces were elevated so much higher than the surrounding urban area; the urban area was originally at least two stories high. Second, the additional stories on private dwellings would have allowed for greater population densities within city walls, explaining how it was possible for such large numbers of people to reside within an Israelite city? These insights reinforce the necessity of considering the vertical profile as well as the horizontal configuration of an ancient Israelite city. Notes 'An exception to this is the Israeli excavationof Tell esh-Sharicah (biblical Ziklag?),where walls have been found standingup to two meters. Still a greater exception is the discoveryof a complete city-gatefrom the Middle BronzeAge at Tel Dan. This find is exceptional in the whole of Near Easternarchaeology.The rareinstances in which some of the superstructureis preservedare of great help in reconstructingbuilding techniques and identifying architectural forms.

2This is not an easy job,because all kinds of stratigraphicalproblems complicate matters. Also, most buildings in ancient Near Easterncities were not freestanding. The many communal walls make it difficult to distinguish plans of individual houses. 3Thereis a relatedpoint that I have not discussed in this article because of the small amount of evidence connected to it. On many Assyrian reliefs that depict cities one can see houses outside the towns, before the walls. Sometimes they were constructed so near the walls that in times of siege Assyrian archers could take positions on their roofs. We must thereforereckon with houses outside the towns between the fields. At greaterdistances from the towns some of these houses were perhapsbuilt together in small clusters. Maybethis is what the Bible calls "daughters" (bnwt). Hardly anything is known archaeologicallyof such habitation because excavationhas nearly alwaysbeen restrictedto tells. Bibliography Albright,W.F. 1974 The Archaeology of Palestine and the Bible, third edition. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research. Ahlstrim, G. W 1982 Wheredid the IsraelitesLive?Journal of Near EasternStudies 41: 133-38. Braemer,E 1982 LeArchitectureDomestique du Levant izlAge du Fer.editions Recherche sur les Civilisations, Cahier 8. Paris: editions Recherchesur les Civilisations. de Geus, C. 1984 De Israelitische Stad. Kampen:Kok. Heinrich, E., and Seidl, U. 1968 Mass und Uebermass in der Dimensionierung von Bauwerkenim alten Zweistromenland.Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft99: 5-55. Shiloh, Y. 1978 Elements in the Development of TownPlanning in the IsraeliteCity. Israel ExplorationJournal28: 36-51. Ussishkin, D. 1983 The Conquest ofLachish by Sennacherib. Series:Institute of Archaeology Publication 6. Tel Aviv:Institute of Archaeology. Yadin,Y. 1964 Excavationsat Hazor (1955-1958). Pp. 196-224 in The Biblical Archaeologist Reader,volume 2. New York: Doubledayand Company,Inc.


227

-
I:t~: ~

u~~B ?~c':s ;:r

-R1 i :

~?J.1 :~ ~3k~

?51;,-;? 7

i ~Jp~g~"L

:~~?I,--?:f~? c?-:-

,3-:9:,:2

~:? if t~"ls~~

a

~

P t-"

,

~..::*

L?

;r ,..

~9~ ??~ 'C'L:?a~~3.2'

II?"

5

~

_1 i:i -`?$:

:: P;

"?

I?:;*

b 01

.rsil ?

`:~ U

~ ;;3r

;

:

t r%

r --Ii

f: I;'i

r

k :i t

u i :s

I ??:11? . tt

:?la

i ??i?:1

?~:s~

::

;Vi~rr

~:r:: t

* II? ?i:;? ":'*C: :,* P

1? j,:,b: -i .. î P" s, ~i:1,: rr

,r

:i: ~;a *:

it~h~ - ;;

: *~:';?~::?1. i, ::I

a:'~3*~ac ,:::,

:;? ~

::::~Sr H

$--*~b~,~:~;? ;:LF 8

,, Z

?C'?

organized around a central theme or idea. Continuous pesharim comment in a series on biblical verses or possibly entire books, usually the Old Testament prophets, but sometimes on significant so-called prophetic psalms. At least fifteen, perhaps eighteen, texts belonging to this latter category have been identified. Continuous pesharim. Continuous pesharim purport to be mysterious explications of truth from Scripture, a truth revealed by God only to the author and his group. These commentaries are unconcerned with the literal sense of the text, instead using metaphor, paronomasia, and development of key words or phrases to unmask the hidden significance of a given biblical portion. The most complete of these pesharim is the commentary on Habakkuk (1QpHab; editio princeps - Burrows and others 1950: 19-21, plates 55-61). This preserves thirteen almost complete columns, providing the text of Habakkuk 1-2 along with commentary. Interestingly, chapter 3 was apparently never included. Important studies include those of Elliger 1953, Silberman 1961, and Brownlee 1979. Also quite complete is the pesher known as 4Q171, which preserves the text of Psalms 37:7-40, 45:1-2, and possibly 60:8-9 (Allegro 1968: 42-50)? Psalm 37 is a psalm of personal tribulation, offering the righteous hope in spite of the evident prosperity of the wicked. The author of the pesher has interpreted the psalm in terms of

9-:s?~

-:fl"~'~ f r?r

?:\

The CopperScroll as it appeared when first discovered.This text, which is the only Dead Sea Scroll that was inscribed on copper,has generated variousinterpretations about the buried treasurethat it describes. Some scholars believe the account of the treasureis a tale that was written by someone outside of the Qumran community, while others believe the precious items actually existed and may have been associated with objects from the JerusalemTemple.Photographcourtesy of the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums.

the sect's enemies and eschatological justification (Pardee 1973; Stegemann 1963, 1967). From a historical vantage point the pesher on Nahum 4Q169 (Allegro 1968: 37-42) may be the most prominent of the pesharim. The author, though mixing historical and eschatological descriptions, mentions a "Demetrius, King of Greece," and refers to a Jewish ruler who crucified great numbers of his opponents. Something of this may be preserved in the writings of Josephus, leading some scholars to identify Demetrius as Demetrius IIIEucaerus (95-88 B.c.) and the Jewish ruler as Alexander Jannaeus (103-76 B.C.). Key studies include Dupont-Sommer 1963, Yadin 1971, and Rabinowitz 1978. Other fragmentary pesher commentaries are known on Micah (Milik 1955: 77-80), Zephaniah (Milik 1955: 80), Isaiah (Baillet 1962: 95-96; Allegro 1968: 11-32), and certain Psalms (Milik 1955: 81-82; Allegro 1968: 51-53). Maurya Horgan (1979) has provided an excellent guide to the continuous pesharim as a whole. Thematic pesharim. Of the thematic pesharim, perhaps none has aroused more profound interest than the text known as 11Q Melchizedek (11Q Melch), first published by van der Woude (1965) and recently reedited by Kobelski (Kobelski 1981: 3-23). Fourteen fragments preserve the remains of three columns. This manuscript comments on isolated Old Testament texts, in particular Leviticus


233

25:9, 10, 13; Deuteronomy 15:2; and Isaiah 61:1. The events connected with these biblical texts are portrayed as taking place in "the end days,"which is further identified as the "tenth Jubilee."According to the text, Melchizedek will free those who belong to his "inheritance" and (if suggested restorations are followed) "atonefor their iniquities." He will further exact God's vengeance upon Belial and those of his "lot." The text presents a conception of Melchizedek that is, from our perspective, approximately contemporary with that of Hebrews 7, connecting him with divine judgment, a day of atonement, and a primary role among God's angels. Also of interest is Melchizedek's possible identification with the "herald" of Isaiah 52:7. This identification would represent a combination of Old Testament figures and motifs in a single person somewhat parallel to the way Jesus is characterized by the New Testament (Fitzmyer 1967). J. T. Milik, in a close analysis of this text, has suggested that 11Q Melchizedek should be combined with two very fragmentary thematic pesharim (known as 4Q180 and 4Q181) to make up a pesher that originally divided the entire history of Israel into ten Jubilee periods (Milik 1972: 112). Though engaging, structural considerations render this suggestion unlikely (Dimant 1979). For further consideration of the conceptual relationship of 11Q Melchizedek to the New Testament, see van der Woude and de Jonge 1966; to help set the document within the larger context of traditions about this figure, see Horton 1976. Three additional thematic pesharim should be noted. The first of these is known as 4Q Ordinances (4Q159; Allegro 1968: 6-9, plate 2). This pesher is halakic in nature and quite revealing in terms of biblical interpretation. The author interprets Exodus 30:11-16 (the traditional basis for the annual Temple tax required of all male Jews) as referring only to a onetime payment. Leviticus 25:39-46, which prohibits the purchase of fellow Israelites as slaves, is here understood to ban also the sale of a Jew to Gentiles. For further details, see Weinert 1974 and Liver 1963. The second thematic pesher is 4Q Florilegium (4Q174; Allegro 1968: 53-57, plates 19, 20). Here 4 large fragments have been joined to form 2 columns, leaving 23 extra, unjoined sections. The author combines quotations from 2 Samuel 7:10-14, Exodus 15: 17-18, Amos 9:11, Psalms 1:1, Isaiah 8:11, Ezekiel 37:23 (uncertain), and Psalms 2:1 with interpretive comments. All of these verses are related to the "endof days,"when God will order that a new "temple of man" be built. Therein, men will perform sacrifices and the "deeds of the Torah,"free from outside harassment or impurity. Prominent in the text are references to the "shoot of David" and the "interpreter of the Law,"terms familiar from other Qumran texts.10 Important studies include Yadin (1959), Flusser (1959), and most recently Brooke (1985).

234


1986

-Q ?~:~

r'

a''a b?-x

a

+.,

--?s~-~~e

~-:cJ, B1I~P~s~J~:I%

x-w~i? \:in. ?~-I"'?"?

??r~~~:~

~i~.hCr-:

jy

j? 4 '?'~

.~b ?~ s:; -?~?t~~6:iI "'IxaC~?~r

*

U?

:, T? j

,-? ??~; ~st'

x~' `Sska~~'

?,

21

i* 4

:1~,???~4

.,,,

~ ~"i~ :B? I~)i~l~'. ;,*

.*Y ~-i~~ I"

~iL;I .~i~~,

i:-

"$ -a~

a

r ibl "L

v

P

:-P

i J ?i ,CI? ~ t

,? .?i

~-~

B

?., r

a x

The interior of a phylactery (one of the two leather boxes, containing slips inscribed with scripturalpassages, that are worn on the head and left arm duringperiods of prayer)from Qumran.Photographis from YigaelYadin'sTefillinfrom QumranXQ Phyl 1-4 and is used courtesy of The Israel ExplorationSociety

The third thematic pesher, 4Q Testimonia (4Q175; Allegro 1968: 57-60, plate 21) has furnished many scholars with the basic substance of Qumran messianic expectation. The text is a catena of quotations from Deuteronomy 5:28-29, 18:18-19, Numbers 24:15-17, Deuteronomy 33:8-11, Joshua 6:26, and an extrabiblical document known as 4Q Psalms of Joshua. These are arranged in the body of the text into four groups, each set off by a scribal device. One reason this text is important is because it furnishes evidence for the existence, long posited, of testimonia or florilegia in pre-Christian Judaism (Fitzmyer 1957). Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha Included among the Dead Sea Scrolls are manuscripts of nonbiblical books that were known before the discoveries at the caves and which are part of the collections called the Apocrypha and the Pseudepigrapha. Apocryphal books attested at Qumran include Tobit11 and Ecclesiasticus (also known as Sirach). Pseudepigraphal

Fromthe GenesisApocryphon(on the miraculousbirthof Noah):My heartwasthen greatlytroubledwithin me, and when Bathenoshmy wife sawthat my countenancehadchanged... Thenshemasteredherangerand spoketo me saying"O my lord,O my [brother,remember]my pleasure!I swearto you by the Holy GreatOne, the Kingof [theheavens]... that this seedis yoursand that [this]conceptionis fromyou. This fruit wasplanted by you..,. and by no strangeror Watcheror Son of Heaven. works include the Testament of Levi (in Aramaic), a portion of the Testament of Naphtali (in Hebrew), Enoch, and Jubilees. Jubilees seems to have been popular, to judge by the manuscripts thus far identified. Portions of Jubilees have been discovered in caves 2, 3 (Deichgriiber 1965), 4 (Milik 1966: 104), and 11 (van der Woude 1971; Milik 1973). Not surprisingly, previously unknown texts that can now be classified as pseudepigraphic were also unearthed. Among these are the Psalms of Joshua mentioned above and a Daniel cycle. Enoch. In 1976 Milik published his long-awaited book on the fragments of Enoch, which were discovered in cave 4 (Milik 1976). The book contains most, but not all,12of the Aramaic texts forming parts of different sections from 1 Enoch. Thus it includes 7 fragmentary manuscripts (4Q Ena-g) that preserve among them parts of the Book of Watchers, the Book of Dreams, and the Epistle of Enoch. Also in the book are 4 other manuscripts (4Q Enastra-d) that point to a vastly expanded recension of what is known in 1 Enoch as the Astronomical Book. Additionally, portions of a literature clearly related to 1 Enoch, but previously unknown, are included under the title the Book of Giants (4Q En Giantsa-e). Significant by its absence is the so-called Book of Parables, which uses the term "Son of Man,"an important self-designation of Jesus. If, as Milik argues from its absence, this portion of 1 Enoch dates from Christian times, the use of this term in the Book of Parables can have had no influence on Jesus' messianic conception. Although the amount of text included in the impressive-sounding list of manuscripts is disappointingly small, it is still of significance for the study of the type of Aramaic used in Palestine at this period, the development of Enoch literature, and the understanding of ancient epistolography (Fitzmyer 1977). If the paleographic dating of at least one Enoch manuscript to the third century A.D. is correct, it shows an unexpected dimension of Judaism at such an early period-interest in such matters as cosmology and astronomy. Another application possible with the publication of the Enoch fragments is an assessment of the character of that book's Greek translation. Preliminary work in this area has been pursued by Barr (1978, 1979). The student will want to consult the work of Sokoloff (1979) as an adjunct to the

defective glossary of Aramaic words contained in Milik's publication. Genesis Apocryphon. One of the apocryphal texts that surfaced among the Dead Sea Scrolls was the otherwise unknown Genesis Apocryphon (Avigad and Yadin 1956; for another portion see Milik 1955: 86-87). Dated around the turn of the eras, it presents the patriarchs of Genesis

telling their own stories. In this it is closely dependenton the biblical stories, with frequent expansions either derived from unknown nonbiblical sources or from imagination. Columns 2 through 5 originally concerned the birth of Noah; 6 through 17 dealt with the flood and the postdiluvian division of the earth among Noah's sons; 18 through 22, where the text breaks off, spoke of Abram according to Genesis 11 through 15. Most scholars regard the Genesis Apocryphon as a midrashic composition, while recognizing features more akin to the known targumim (Vermhs 1961: 67-126; Lehmann 1959). It is thus related to intertestamental works such as Jubilees. The primary importance of the text lies perhaps in its language (Kutscher 1958). As one of the longest Aramaic texts from Qumran, it is of special significance in the effort to recover the form of Palestinian Aramaic used at the time of Jesus. The language is of a form that is transitional between the book of Daniel and the targumim, antedating as well the materials from the Wadi Murabbacat, Wadi Seiyal, and Wadi Habra (Kutscher 1961, 1962). It is thus methodologically preferable to utilize the language of this text and other Dead Sea Scrolls, rather than the targumic Aramaic,'a for the study of the Aramaic background of the New Testament (Fitzmyer 1970). An indispensable tool for the study of the Genesis Apocryphon is the philological commentary by Fitzmyer (1971). Prayer of Nabonidus. Fragments of an Aramaic pseudepigraphon known as the Prayer of Nabonidus (4Q pr Nab) were found in cave 4 (Milik 1956: 407-11). The fragments make up two incomplete columns, including the beginning of column 1. As the name suggests, the text is ostensibly a prayer delivered by the last king of Babylon, Nabonidus. It tells the story of the king's seven-year period of illness-a time when he prayed to "the gods of silver and gold" for a cure. At length a Jewish "exorcist" delivered him, and in gratitude the king wrote this prayer.


1986

235

Glossary a groupof booksor writingsnot partof the Jewish Apocrypha, canonof the HebrewScripturesbut foundin earlyChristian versionsoftheOldTestament and (Greek) suchastheSeptuagint countries,ProtestantpracVulgate(Latin).In English-speaking fromeditionsof the Bible; tice hasbeento omitthe Apocrypha andusethe Catholicsconsidermostofthesebooksauthoritative ascanonical termdeuterocanonical, meaningbooksrecognized at a laterdate,to distinguishthem fromthe protocanonical booksfoundin the Jewishcanonof Scripture. genizah,a storeroomor repositoryin a synagogueused for discarded,damaged,or defectivebooksandpapersandsacred objects. of the historicaland religious Haggadah,the interpretation passagesof JewishScripturethat are not legal in character. could Unlikethestrictlogicofhalakicinterpretation, Haggadah give free play to the imagination.

halakah(plural,halakot),in Judaismthe teachingone is to follow,the rulesorlawsthatareto guidea person'slife.Halakic of the Torah(the first five books of the Old interpretation soughtto expoundthe consequencesof individual Testament) thecasesinpractical lifetowhichtheyapplied, commandments, andhowtheymightbe accuratelypreserved. Merkavah,the Hebrew term meaning "chariot,"usually asso-

ciatedwith Ezekiel'svision andwith the latercontemplative ecstatic experiencesof Jewishmystics duringthe talmudic period. payyeitanim(singular,payyetan),Hebrewword referringto liturgicalpoets,activefromaboutthe fourthcenturyc.E.and theMiddleAges,whocomposedsynagogal hymnsto throughout especiallyforextraorcomplementthe regularorderof prayers, festivals,andfastdays. dinarySabbaths, or "true pesher,BiblicalHebrewwordmeaning"deepmeaning" associatedwith the set of Qumrancommentaries significance" to variousbiblicalbooks. Jewishwritingsof the SecondTempleperiod Pseudepigrapha, butnotincluded in generalcharacter theApocrypha resembling in theBibleorApocrypha. (SeeBA,volume46,number4, pages 235-243,andvolume47,number4, pages225-226.) Thrgum(plural,targumim),an Aramaictranslationor paraphraseof the Old'Tstamentora portionof it. the textusedas the basisof a translation. Vorlage, Note: Many of the definitions given here are based on those found in Harper'sBible Dictionary (New York:Harperand Row,1985).

The parallels with the fourth chapter of Daniel and the story of Nebuchadnezzar's madness are patent, leading many scholars to conclude that in this text we have remnants of the popular traditions from which the Aramaic portions of Daniel were derived. Such literature had the twofold purpose of warning the Jews not to turn to paganism and of preaching to the Gentiles about the folly of idol worship. Important studies devoted to the Prayer of Nabonidus include Meyer (1962), Grelot (1978), and most recently Cross (1984), who argues for a different join of the fragments. The Daniel cycle. The prayer of Nabonidus is evidently just one part of a Daniel cycle, a group that apparently

236


included at least five additional works. Three of these (pseudo-Daniel a, b, and c-Milik 1956) seem to contain an apocalyptic overview of Jewish history, narrated by Daniel. The fourth, yet unpublished, work (Milik 1956: 411, note 2) is a recounting of a dream in which four trees (ortheir "angels")speak to the author. Each tree represents a kingdom (compare Daniel chapters 2 and 7), the first of which is identified as Babylon, and the second as Persia. Depending on the date of this work (known in two exemplars), this could have a bearing on the interpretation (or history of interpretation) of the fourth kingdom mentioned in Daniel 2 and 7. Another text from this Daniel cycle is known as 4Q Ps DanAa (4Q243-not to be confused with pseudo-Daniel a, above). This fragmentary but striking work preserves the phrases "son of God" and "son of the Most High," as well as containing phraseology reminiscent of Luke 1:32 and 1:35 (Fitzmyer 1974a: 391-94). Words of Moses. The Words of Moses (1Q22; Milik 1955: 91-97, plates 18, 19) seems to be a sort of apocryphon to Deuteronomy. God speaks to Moses, who in turn relays the commands to the people, evidently via Eleazar and Joshua. At one point the text requires the appointment of officials (perhaps priests), "to clarify ... all these words of the Torah." Another example of haggadic explanation occurs in the third column (3:8-10), where the date of the Day of Atonement is explained by reason that "your fathers were wandering in the desert until the tenth day of the month." Book of Mysteries. Another tantalizing pseudepigraphon is the Book of Mysteries (1Q27; Milik 1955: 102-07, plates 21, 22). Of the thirteen remaining fragments, only the first is complete enough to make sense. This fragment contains two poetic distichs, cast as oracles, while the rhetorical, rather eloquent, prose that follows each distich provides "signs"bywhich the verisimilitude of the oracles is assured. Of particular interest is the appearance in the text, unfortunately in broken context, of the phrase razei peshac. This phrase is probably the Hebrew equivalent of the Greek musterion tes anomias of 2 Thessalonians 2:7, a passage with which countless commentators have wrestled without producing a consensus exegesis. Targumim To date there are three known Aramaic targumim among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Of these by far the longest and most complete is the targum to Jobfrom cave 11 (van der Woude and van der Ploeg 1971). The significance of this text is considerable, since it represents the only incontestably pre-Christian targum of any appreciable length. The surviving text includes portions of chapters 17 through 42, with the last six chapters the least damaged. On the whole, despite slight additions, subtractions, and dislocations, the Hebrew Vorlage of the scroll seems essentially to have been that of the Masoretic text. This means that

even the supposedly disordered third cycle of debates (22:1-31:40) and the Hymn to Wisdom (28:1-28:28), which is often regarded as an interpolation, are here and in the same problematic order as in the Masoretic text. The most radical divergence from the Hebrew text, probably reflecting a different original, occurs after 42:8-11-verses 12 through 17 are missing and were never a evidently part of the targum (Morrow 1976). Otherwise, the translator has smoothed out various difficulties in the Hebrew text in the process of his rendering, and often telescopes two lines into one without regard for parallelism.

Fitzmyer (1978) and Kasher (1977). Finally, 4Q157 preserves only portions of Job 3:5-9 and 4:16-5:4, reflecting a text virtually identical to the Masoretic text (Milik 1977: 90, plate 28).

Liturgical'ITxts and Phylacteries A number of texts from Qumranhave turned out to be liturgical in nature. One of the most revealing of these is knownas the AngelicLiturgyor 4QShir(shortfor4QSerekh Shirot cOlat hash-Shabbat).(Twofragments were provisionally published by Strugnell in 1960; the entire text was edited by his student CarolNewsom for her disserta-

Fromthe Wordsof Moses:[Godspoke]to Mosesin the [fortieth]year after[the childrenof] Israelhad come[out of the landof] Egypt,in the eleventhmonth, on the firstdayof the month, saying:"[Gathertogether] all the congregationand go up to [MountNebo] and stand[there],you and Eleazarson of Aaron.Inter[pretto the heads]of familyof the Levites and to all the [Priests],and proclaimto the childrenof Israelthe wordsof the Lawwhich I proclaimed[to you] on Mount Sinai" Much debate on this text has centered around the language. Michael Sokoloff, in his very useful edition of the text, has closely analyzed syntax and morphology and concluded that it was "probably composed sometime in the late second century B.C.E!."(Sokoloff 1974: 25). This is essentially the position of the original editors, who also opted for a Palestinian provenance (van der Woude and van der Ploeg 1971: 4, 8). Another scholar, Takamitsu Muraoka, has come to radically different conclusions, arguing that the targum of Jobwas composed between 250 and 150 B.c. in Mesopotamia, not Palestine (Muraoka 1976, 1977). Of interest to students of the New Testament is a comparison of this with a much later targum of Job, thought to be of fifth-century Palestinian origin (for a new edition of this text, see Weiss 1979). Such a comparison has been carried out on a preliminary basis and tends to cast doubt on the antiquity of phrases such as memra and shekintal4 among Palestinian Jews (Fitzmyer 1974b). This of course would vitiate their usefulness in explaining New Testament texts. The other two targumim are extremely fragmentary. The first contains an Aramaic translation of Leviticus 16:12-15, 18-21 (Milik 1977: 86-89, plate 28), and it is not certain that these fragments were part of a targum at all. It is equally conceivable that they may have come from a liturgical work that quoted these verses. If, nevertheless, they do represent portions of a targum, then we have for the first time a pre-Christian targum to a book of the Pentateuch. The translation of the Hebrew is literal (unexpanded). Discussions have been published by

tion in 1982, which was revised and published in 1985.) The composition is partially preserved in six manuscripts from cave 4, as well as fragments from cave 11 (van der Woude 1982) and Masada (Yadin 1965: 105-08; Newsom and Yadin 1984). In it heaven is described as a complicated temple consisting of seven sanctuaries, attended by seven chief prince-priests, their deputies, and seven angelic priesthoods. Also included are the praise offerings that the angels offer up on the Sabbath. Altogether there were originally thirteen compositions. The Angelic Liturgy has interesting aspects and implications. Linguistically, the presence of many biforms of Biblical Hebrew nouns,'s and otherwise unknown words, suggests an almost payyetanic inventiveness. The text is also of importance for the study of angelology, Second Temple liturgical song, and the investigation of early Jewish Merkavah speculation (see Schiffman 1982). An equally noteworthy liturgical opus is known as the Words of the Luminaries (4Q Dib Ham; Baillet 1982: 137-75, plates 18, 20, 23, 24, 49-53). Fragmentary remaining instructions show that the compositions contained in this manuscript were intended for use on given days of the week. The mood of these compositions is with one exception penitential, hence they may appropriately be classed Tahanunim-a type of prayer reflecting such biblical passages as Daniel 9:4-19. The instructions mentioned above evidence that these Tahanumim were used liturgically, as in later Judaism (Flusser 1984: 567, 570-73). The single evident exception to the rather


237

Fromthe DisciplineScroll:The natureof all the childrenof men is ruled by these(two spirits),and duringtheir life all the hostsof men havea portionin their divisionsand walkin (both)theirways.And the whole rewardfor their deedsshallbe, for everlastingages,accordingto whether eachman'sportionin their two divisionsis greator small.For God has establishedthe spiritsin equalmeasureuntil the finalage,and has set an everlastinghatredbetween their divisions. somber tone of the Words of the Luminaries is a composition written for the Sabbath, which is appropriately full of praise rather than contrition. Among many that might be singled out, two further liturgically oriented works can be mentioned here. One is 4Q Lamentations (Allegro 1968: 75-77, plate 26). The text is comprised of five fragments, the order of which is still uncertain. As the name implies, it is a lament or series of laments over the city of Jerusalem, whose imagery is achieved chiefly by allusion to Lamentations, Isaiah, and Jeremiah. It is possible that the lamentation was occasioned by a destruction of Jerusalem that happened at the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (compare 1 Maccabees 1:29-32) or it may be merely a poetic reminiscence of the famous razing by the forces of Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C. (Horgan 1972). A worthwhile study is provided by Pabst 1978. The second text contains vocabulary strikingly similar to that of the Rule of Benediction, and is known as 11Q Berachot (van der Woude 1968). The four fragments speak of blessings upon the "congregation" in eschatological terms borrowed from the prophets, but the sociological milieu from which the text was generated is unclear. Another group of documents from Qumran that are in a broad sense related to liturgy and worship are the phylacteries. A number of these have surfaced from cave 1 (Barth6lemy 1955b: 72-76, plate 14), cave 4 (Milik 1966: 105-06; Kuhn 1957), cave 5 (in such poor condition it was not unrolled), cave 8 (Baillet 1962: 149-57, plates 32, 33), and an unidentified cave (Yadin 1969). Focusing on the examples published by Yadin, a few comments are in order. These phylacteries (which are head-tefillin) are instructive not only regarding the content of the portions of Scripture contained and their order but also have noteworthy textual variants. Yadin was fortunate to obtain his four tefillin in their capsules. This enabled him to investigate several technical points that are treated extensively in rabbinic literature - such matters as the shape of the capsule, the nature of the leather for scriptural portions, and the type of thread with which the capsules are tied. The order of the scriptural portions in the tefillin has been a matter of heated discussion in the history of Judaism. In the early medieval period the most famous

238


controversy on this subject occurred between Rashi and Rabbenu Tam. It is interesting that Yadin'stefillin are not strictly in the order for which either man argued. The fact that some tefillin (arm tefillin) from cave 8 are arranged according to Rashi's system, while others from the approximately contemporary finds at Murabbacat accord with the position of Rabbenu Tam, suggests that both systems may have been known and used concurrently in first-century Palestine. The contents of the tefillin published so far often add additional scriptural verses to the classical portion, but these added texts differ among the various examples. No clear rationale has been adduced to explain these additions. Noteworthy perhaps is that 1Q13, 4Qa, and XQ Phyl3 all contain the Decalogue (Deuteronomy 5:1-21), which is not included in rabbinic phylacteries. Thus the phylacteries from Qumran raise many questions about the halakah governing them at this point in the history of Judaism, while perhaps as well proffering some few tentative answers. Zodiacal Documents The breadth of material included among the Dead Sea Scrolls is demonstrated by a group of zodiacal documents. One zodiac from cave 4 is known to exist (4Q Zodiac) but has not yet been published. Two fragmentary columns of a brontologion (predicting events using thunder) are also unpublished but known to exist (Milik 1959a: 42). Somewhat more can be said about the document known as 4Q Cryptic (4Q186; Allegro 1968: 88-91, plate 31). This is an encoded series of horoscopes in which the author used a mixture of alphabets and wrote from left to right, the opposite of the usual direction for Hebrew. In the text, three people are described in reference to their astrological birth signs; this in turn is related to their physical and spiritual qualities. There are terminological parallels with the Manual of Discipline. Useful studies include Delcor (1966) and Gordis (1966). The significance of this text is that it indicates that astrological ideas had been assimilated very early and quite deeply by the Jews, in spite of what might seem to us the clear connection it had with idolatry for the authors of the Hebrew bible (for example, Isaiah 47:13-14; Jeremiah 10:1-3). This type of interest may be more typical of popular Jewish religion in

this period than has often been realized (compare Goodenough 1954: 3-62). Another zodiacal document, known as 4Q Mess ar, has been called a messianic horoscope (Starcky 1964). This very poorly preserved text contains the Aramaic phrase bhyr 'ih, the equivalent of the Greek phrase ho eklektos tou theou (the elect of God) witnessed by some manuscripts of John 1:34. It is not certain, however, that this phrase is intended in a messianic sense. It occurs as a part of a description of an apparently unborn child, who is ascribed wisdom and precocious intellect. He is also to have a long life, and the success of his plans seems assured by his position as the "elect of God." The description of the child is influenced by the descriptions in the Old Testament of Solomon, and the text is full of wisdom terminology. In spite of the title, the text has no clear astronomical terminology, so it might better be considered an example of physiognomic literature, of which we have many Greco-Roman examples. Fitzmyer, in his important study of 4Q Mess ar, gives good reasons why it may actually deal with the birth of Noah (Fitzmyer 1965). Other valuable studies that deal with this document include Starcky (1963) and Carmignac (1965: 207-10). Greek TIxts The final category of manuscripts is the Greek texts from Qumran. These have come from two caves-4 and 7. Three texts are from cave 4-4QLXXLeva, 4QLXXLevb, and 4QLXXNum-of which only the last has been published (Skehan 1957: 148). As the names evidence, all are Septuagintal manuscripts, dated broadly between 100 B.C. to A.D. 100. They help disprove Kahle's famous thesis that Greek translations of the Old Testament were made randomly and without textual affinity, because they fit neatly into a textual tradition already known from fourth-century Septuagintal manuscripts. Their chief importance, therefore, is in the area of textual research. The documents in Greek from cave 7 (published by Baillet 1962: 142-43, plate 30) have become better known than their extent and significance would otherwise merit, in as much as they have been claimed as text portions of the New Testament. These claims have garnered virtually no scholarly support, however; they are in fact probably texts of the Septuagint, with the single exception of 7Q19, which seems to be nonbiblical. Important works discussing or utilizing these Greek fragments from Qumran include Betz 1973, Barth61emy 1963, and Leaney 1976. Conclusion The great discoveries made in the caves near Khirbet Qumran have only begun to have their impact. The possible applications of what we have learned thus far are many and varied - so much so as to be on occasion daunting. At the same time, much remains to be learned-of

the portions of hundreds of manuscripts found in cave 4, for instance, only about 10 percent have been published. As publication and evaluation of the Dead Sea Scrolls proceed, our understanding of the text of the Hebrew Bible, the nature of Second Temple Judaism, and the roots of the New Testament - to name only three of the many important areas affected-will certainly deepen and may significantly change. I hope that the two parts of this essay have provided the interested reader with a view to this exciting process. Notes lIt is recognized that the genizah text differs to a still uncertain extent from what is known of the text from the Dead Sea Scrolls. Majoreditions of the Damascus Covenant include Schechter 1970, Rabin 1958, and Davies 1983,and photographs appearin Zeitlin 1952. 2FragmentA contains 16pages,columns I throughVIII,IX throughXVI;fragmentB consists of 2 pages,including columns that overlapwith AVII5through VII21,then extending beyond the portion found also in A. 3Exegeticallyandpaleographically,it is uncertain whether one or more messiahs are indicated. 4It is debated whether maskil refers generically to any "personof understanding,"or is a technical term describing a peculiar functionaryof the community. SManyof these proposals have not been supportedby the discoveryof additionalfragments.CompareMilik 1960a:412-16. 6Thefragment,to be fitted at column 19:6-10, is known as 1Q33 and is found in Milik 1955: 135-36. 7Forimportant criticism of Milik's lexicographic suggestions for difficult Aramaic words, Greenfield 1969: 132-35 is essential. 8This problem may be greatly relieved by recognizing the distinction the text itself usually makes between gold or silver specie and gold or silver bullion. A systematic application of this distinction reduces the amount of treasureto a level that has analogies in Palestine and elsewhere during the Roman period. 9Allegro'swork of 1968 has received trenchant criticism, particularlyregardingtextual "joins"and readings.The student will want to refer to Strugnell 1971, which amounts to a new edition of the texts. Also very useful is Fitzmyer 1969, for the earlier bibliographyon Allegro'stexts. 'oThese are often identified as equivalent to the "Messiah of Israel"and the "Messiahof Aaron,"respectively. "Three manuscripts of Tobitareknown, 1 in Hebrew,2 in Aramaic. Though not identical, in general they correspondto the long Greek recension. 12Not included arethe Aramaictexts of the Books of Giants that were included in the allotment given to JeanStarckyfor publication. '3Includingthe most recently discoveredtargum,Targum Neofiti, which has not gained a consensus as to its much vaunted early date. 14TheseAramaicwordsare often urgedas explanationsfor the Greek word or concept, logos, in John 1:1. 'SEspeciallynoticeable aremasculine formswhere biblical Hebrew has feminine-markednouns.


1986

239

1965 Leshoroscopesde QumrAn.Revue de Qumran5: 199-217. Cross, F.M. 1984 Fragments of the Prayer of Nabonidus. Israel Exploration Allegro,J.M. 1960 The of the CopperScroll. GardenCity, NY:DoubleJournal34: 260-64. Treasure day and Company. Davies, P 1964 The Treasureof the CopperScroll, second edition. Garden 1977 IQM, the WarScroll from Qumran. Rome:Biblical Institute Press. City, NY:Doubledayand Company. 1968 Qumran Cave 4. I (4Q158-4Q186).Series:Discoveries in the 1983 The Damascus Covenant.Sheffield:JSOTPress. JudaeanDesert of Jordan5. Oxfnrd:ClarendonPress. Deichgriber,R. 1965 Fragmente einer Jubilaen-Handschriftaus Hohle 3 von Avigad,N., and Yadin,Y. 1956 A Genesis Apocryphon. Jerusalem: Magnes Press of the Qumran.Revue de Qumran5: 415-22. HebrewUniversity and Heikhal ha-Sefer. Delcor, M. 1966 Recherchessur un horoscopeen langue hebraiqueprovenant Baillet, M. 1962 Textes des grottes 2Q 3Q 6Q 7Q a 10Q. Pp. 45-164 in Les de Qumran.Revuede Qumran5: 521-42. 'PetitesGrottes'deQumrin, byM. Baillet,J.T.Milik, andR. de Dimant, D. Vaux. Series: Discoveries in the JudaeanDesert of Jordan3. 1979 The'Pesheron the Periods'(4Q180)and4Q181.Israel Oriental Studies 9: 77-102. Oxford:ClarendonPress. 1982 Qumran Grotte4. III (4Q482-4Q520). Series:Discoveries in Dombkowski-Hopkins,D. the JudaeanDesert 7. Oxford:ClarendonPress. 1981 The QumranCommunity and 1 Q Hodayot:A Reassessment. Revue de Qumran 10:323-64. Bardtke,H. 1974a Literaturberichtiber Qumrin VIII. Teil: Die DamaskusDupont-Sommer,A. schrift CD. TheologischeRundschau39: 189-221. 1963 Observationssur le commentaire de Nahum d~couvertpr~s 1974b LiteraturberichtuiberQumranVII.Teil:Die Sektenrolle 1QS. de la MerMorte.Journaldes Savants 1963:201-27. TheologischeRundschau38: 257-91. Elliger,K. 1953 Studien zum Habakuk-Kommentarvom TotenMeer.Tiibin1975 LiteraturberichtuiberQumrin IX. Teil:Die Loblieder(Hodagen: Mohr. joth)von Qumrin. TheologischeRundschau40: 210-26. Barr,J. Falk,Z. 1978 Aramaic-GreekNotes on the Book of Enoch (I).Journalof 1979 The TempleScrolland the Codificationof JewishLaw.Jewish Semitic Studies 23: 184-98. Law Annual 2: 33-44. 1979 Aramaic-GreekNotes on the Book of Enoch (II).Journalof Fitzmyer,J. Semitic Studies 24: 179-92. 1957 4Q Testimoniaand the New Testament.Theological Studies 18:513-37. Barth6lemy,D. 1965 The Aramaic'Electof God'text fromQumranCave4. Catholic 1955a Rhglede la Congr4gation.Pp. 108-18 in QumranCaveI, by D. Biblical Quarterly27: 348-72. Barth6lemyand J.T. Milik. Series:Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 1. Oxford:ClarendonPress. 1967 FurtherLighton Melchizedek from QumranCave 11.Journal 1955b Textesbibliques. Pp. 49-76 in Qumran Cave I, by D. Barth&of Biblical Literature86: 25-41. 1969 A BibliographicalAid to the Study of QumranCave IV Texts lemy andJ.T.Milik. Series:Discoveriesin the JudaeanDesert 1. OxfordClarendonPress. 158-86. Catholic Biblical Quarterly31: 59-71. 1963 Les Devanciers dAquila. Series: Supplements to Vetus Tes1970 The Languagesof Palestinein the FirstCenturyA.D. Catholic tamentum 10. Leiden:Brill. Biblical Quarterly32: 501-31. 1971 TheGenesis Apocryphonof QumranCave 1:A Commentary, Betz, H. D. second edition. Rome:BiblicalInstitute Press. 1973 2 Cor6:14-7:1:An Anti-PaulineFragment?Journalof Biblical Literature92: 88-108. 1974a The Contribution of Qumran Aramaic to the Study of the New Testament.New TestamentStudies 20: 382-407. Brin,G. 1979 Linguistic Notes to the Temple Scroll. Leshonenu43: 20-23 1974b Some Observationson the Targumof Jobfrom QumranCave 11. Catholic Biblical Quarterly36: 503-24. (Hebrew). 1980 The Bible as Reflected in the Temple Scroll. Shnaton 4: 1977 Implications of the New Enoch Literaturefrom Qumran. 182-225 (Hebrew). Theological Studies 38: 332-45. 1978 The Targumof LeviticusfromQumranCave4. Maarav1:5-23. Brooke,G. 1985 Exegesis at Qumran:4QFlorilegium in its Jewish Context. Flusser,D. Sheffield:JSOTPress. 1959 Two Notes on the Midrashon 2 Sam. vii. Israel Exploration Journal9: 99-109. Brownlee,W. 1979 The Midrash Pesher of Habakkuk. Missoula, MT: Scholars 1984 Psalms Hymns and Prayers.Pp. 551- 77 in Jewish Writingsof Press. the Second TemplePeriod,edited by M. Stone. Philadelphia: FortressPress. Burrows,M., and others 1950 The Dead Sea Scrolls of St. Mark'sMonastery VolumeI: The Garcia,F. Isaiah Manuscript and the Habakkuk Commentary. New 1977 El Rollo del Templo.Estudios Biblicos 36: 247-92. Haven:American Schools of OrientalResearch. Ginzberg,L. 1951 The Dead Sea Scrolls of St. Mark'sMonastery Volume II. 1970 An Unknown Jewish Sect. New York:Ktav. Fascicle 2: Plates and Transcriptionof the Manual of DisGolb, N. 1980 The Problemof the Originand Identificationof the Dead Sea cipline. New Haven:American Schools of OrientalResearch. Scrolls. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society Caquot,A. 124: 1-24. 1978 Le Rouleaudu Templede Qoumrain.ttudes et Theologiques 1985 WhoHidthe DeadSeaScrolls?BiblicalArchaeologist48:68-82. Religieuses 53: 443-500. Goodenough,E. R. Carmignac,J. 1958 La Ragle de la guerre des fils de lumin~re contre les fils de 1954 Jewish Symbols in the Greco-RomanPeriod,volume 4. New York:Pantheon. tinebres. Paris:Letouzeyet Ane.

Bibliography

240


Gordis,R. 1966 A Document in Code from Qumran-Some Observations. Journalof Semitic Studies 11:37-39. Greenfield,J. 1969 The Small Caves of Qumran.Journalof the American Oriental Society 89: 128-41. Grelot, P. 1978 LePrierede Nabonide (4 Q PrNab).Revuede Qumran9: 48395. Holm-Nielsen, S. 1961 Hodayot,Psalmsfrom Qumran.Aarhus:Universitetsforlaget. Horgan,M. 1972 A LamentoverJerusalem.Journalof SemiticStudies 17:222-34. 1979 Pesharim:Qumran Interpretationsof Biblical Books, Washington, D.C.:Catholic BiblicalAssociation of America. Horton, F.L. 1976 The Melchizedek A Critical Examination of the Tradition: Sources to the Fifth CenturyA.D. and in the Epistle to the Hebrews. New York:CambridgeUniversity Press. Jongeling,B. 1962 Le Rouleau de la guerredes manuscrits de Qumran. Assen: VanGorcum. 1970a Publicationprovisoired'unfragmentprovenantde la grotte 11 de Qumran(11QJ~rNouv ar).Journalfor the Study of Judaism 1:58-64. 1970b Note additionnelle.Journalfor the Studyof Judaism1:185-86. Kasher,M. 1977 Notes by Menahem M. Kasheron the Fragmentof Targumto Leviticus and the Commentary by J. T. Milik. Pp. 92-93 in Qumran Grotte 4, by R. de Vaux and J. T. Milik. Series: Discoveriesin the JudaeanDesert 6. Oxford:ClarendonPress. Kittel, B. 1981 The Hymns of Qumran:Translationand Commentary Ann Arbor:ScholarsPress. Kobelski,P. 1981 Melchizedek and Melkiresha. Washington, D.C.: Catholic BiblicalAssociation of America. Kuhn,K. G. 1957 Phylakterienaus Hahle 4 VonQumran.Heidelberg:C. Winter. Kutscher,E. 1958 The Languageof the Genesis Apocryphon:A Preliminary Study.ScriptaHierosolymitana 4: 1-35. 1961 The Languageof the Hebrew and Aramaic Letters of Bar KosibahandHis Generation.Leshonenu25:117-33 (Hebrew). 1962 The Languageof the Hebrew and Aramaic Letters of Bar Kosibahand His Generation.Leshonenu26: 7-23 (Hebrew). Laperrousaz,E. M. 1981 Note Apropos de la datation du Rouleau du Temple et, plus g~ndralement,des manuscrits de la Mer Morte. Revue de Qumran 10:447-52. Leaney,A. R. C. 1976 Greek Manuscriptsfrom the JudaeanDesert. Pp. 283-300 in Supplements to Novum Testamentum44. Leiden:Brill. Lehmann,M. 1959 IQ Genesis Apocryphon in the Light of the Targumimand Midrashim.Revue de Qumran 1: 249-63. 1962 Midrashic Parallels to Selected Qumran Texts. Revue de Qumran3: 545-51. 1964 Identification of the Copper Scroll Based on its Technical Terms.Revue de Qumran 5: 97-105. 1978 The Temple Scroll as a Source of SectarianHalakhah.Revue de Qumrin 9: 579-87. Levine,B.A. 1978 The Temple Scroll:Aspects of its Historical Provenanceand Literary Character. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research232: 5-23.

Licht, J. 1957 The Hymn Scroll. Jerusalem:Bialik (Hebrew). 1965 Megillat ha-Serakhim: The Rule Scroll. Jerusalem:Bialik (Hebrew). 1979 An Ideal Town Plan from Qumran-The Description of the New Jerusalem.Israel ExplorationJournal29: 45-59. Liver,J. 1963 The Half-ShekelOffering in Biblical and Post-BiblicalLiterature. HarvardTheologicalReview 56: 173-98. Lurie,B. Z. 1963 The Copper Scroll from the Judaean Desert. Jerusalem: Kiryath-Sepher. Maier,J. 1978 Die Tempelrollevom TotenMeer. Munich: Ernst Reinhardt Verlag. Mansoor,M. 1961 The ThanksgivingHymns. Leiden:Brill. Mendels, D. 1978- 'Kingship'in the TempleScrolland the Symposiain the Letter 1979 of Aristeas.Shnaton 3: 245-52 (Hebrew). Meyer,R. 1962 Das Gebet des Nabonid. Series:AkademiederWissenschaften zu Leipzig, Phil.-Hist. K1, 107, 3. Berlin: Sitzungsbericht Sachs. Milgrom,J. 1978 Studies in the TempleScroll.Journalof Biblical Literature97: 501-23. Milik, J.T. 1955 Textes non bibliques. Pp. 77-149 in Qumran Cave I, by D. Barth61emyand J.T. Milik. Series:Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 1. Oxford:ClarendonPress. 1956 "Pribrede Nabonide"et autres 6crits d'un cycle de Daniel. Fragmentsaram~ensde Qumrin 4. RevueBiblique63:407-15. 1959a TenYearsof Discoveryin the Wildernessof Judea.Naperville, IL:Allenson. 1959b Le Rouleau de Cuivre de Qumran (3Q 15). Traductionet commentaire topographique.Revue Biblique 66: 321-57. 1960a Review of P. Wernberg-M~ller'sThe Manual of Discipline translated and annotated:Texte des variantesdes dix manuscrits de la Rhglede la Communaut6trouv~sdans la grotte 4. Revue Biblique 67: 410-16. 1960b The CopperDocument from CaveII of Qumran:Translation and Commentary.Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan4/5: 137-55. 1962 Textes de la grotte 5Q. Pp. 167-97 in Les 'PetitesGrottes'de Qumran, by M. Baillet, J. T. Milik, and R. de Vaux. Series: Discoveries in the Judaean Desert of Jordan 3. Oxford: ClarendonPress. 1966 Fragmentd'unesource du psautier (4QPs 89). RevueBiblique 73: 94-106. 1972 Milki-sedeq et Milki-resha dans les anciens 6crits juifs et chretiens. Journalof Jewish Studies 23: 95-144. 1973 AL proposde 11QJub.Biblica 54: 77-78. 1976 The Books of Enoch:Aramaic Fragmentsof Qumran Cave 4. Oxford:ClarendonPress. 1977 Tefillin, Mezuzot, et Targums.Pp.33-90 in QumranGrotte4, by R. de VauxandJ.T.Milik. Series:Discoveriesin the Judaean Desert 6. Oxford:ClarendonPress. Milik, J.T., de Vaux,R., and Baker,H. W 1962 Le rouleau de cuivre provenantde la grotte 3Q (3Q15).Pp. 201-302 in Les 'PetitesGrottes'de Qumran,by M. Baillet,J.T. Milik, and R. de Vaux. Series: Discoveries in the Judaean Desert of Jordan3. Oxford:ClarendonPress. Mink, H. 1983 Die Kol. III der Tempelrolle,Versucheiner Rekonstruktion. Revue de Qumran 11:163-81.


241

Morrow,FE 1976 11QTargumJobandthe MassoreticText.Revuede Qumran8: 253-56. Muraoka,T. 1976 The Aramaicof the Old Targumof Jobfrom QumranCaveXI. Journalof Jewish Studies 25: 425-43. 1977 Notes on the Old Targumof Jobfrom QumranCaveXI.Revue de Qumran9:117-25. Murphy-O'Connor, J. 1969 La genise littdrairede la Rhgle de la Communaut&.Revue Biblique 76: 528-49. 1970 An Essene Missionary Document? CD II, 14-VI,1. Revue Biblique 77: 201-29. 1971a A LiteraryAnalysis of Damascus Document VI, 2-VIII,3. Revue Biblique 78: 210-32. 1971b The Original Text of CD 7:9-8:2 = 19:5-14. HarvardTheological Review 67: 379-87. 1971c The Translationof Damascus Document VI, 11-14. Revuede Qumran7: 553-56. 1972a The Critique of the Princes of Judah(CD VIII,3-19). Revue Biblique 79: 200-16. 1972b A LiteraryAnalysis of Damascus Document XIX,33-XX, 34. Revue Biblique 79: 544-64. Newsom, C. 1982 4Q SerekhShirotcOlat Hashshabbat (The QumranAngelic Liturgy):Edition, Translationand CommentaryUnpublished dissertation,HarvardUniversity. 1985 Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice:A Critical Edition. Series: HarvardSemitic Studies 27. Atlanta:ScholarsPress. Newsom, C., and Yadin,Y. 1984 The MasadaFragmentof the Qumran Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice.Israel ExplorationJournal34: 77-88. Pabst,H. 1978 Eine Sammlungvon Klagenin den Qumranfunden (4Q179). Pp. 137-49 in Qumrdn:sa pidtd,sa thdologie et son milieu, edited by M. Delcor. Paris:Duculot. Pardee,D. 1973 A Restudy of the Commentary on Psalm 37 from Qumran Cave4. (Discoveriesin the JudaeanDesert of Jordan,vol. V no 171).Revue de Qumran8: 163-94. Pixner,B. 1983 Unravellingthe Copper Scroll Code. A Study on the Topographyof 3Q15. Revue de Qumrdn 11:323-65. Ploeg, J.van der 1959 Le Rouleau de la Guerre.Leiden:Brill. Pouilly,J. 1976 La Rbglede la CommunautBde Qumrdin.Paris:Gabalda. Qimron, E. 1978a New Readingsin the TempleScroll.IsraelExplorationJournal 28: 161-72. 1978b The Languageof the Temple Scroll. Leshonenu 42: 85-98 (Hebrew). 1980 The Vocabularyof the Temple Scroll. Shnaton 4: 239-62 (Hebrew). 1981 Threenotes on the Textof the TempleScroll.Tarbiz51:135-37 (Hebrew). 1983 Textual Notes on the Temple Scroll. Tarbiz 53: 139-41 (Hebrew). Rabin,C. 1958 TheZadokite Documents, secondedition. Oxford:Clarendon Press. Rabinowitz,I. 1978 The Meaningof the Key (Demetrius)Passageof the Qumran Nahum Pesher.Journalof the American Oriental Society 98: 394-99. Rengstorf,K. 1960 Hirbet Qumranund die Bibliothekvom TotenMeer.Stuttgart:

242


W.KohlhammerVerlag. Rosso-Ubigli,L. 1978 Ii Documento di Damasco e la HalakahSettaria(Rassegnadi Studi).Revue de Qumran9: 357-99. Sarfati,G. 1971 A riddleof riddlesin the CopperScroll.Leshonenu36:106-11 (Hebrew). Schechter,S. 1970 Documents of Jewish Sectaries.New York:Ktav. Schiffman,L. 1980 The TempleScrollin LiteraryandPhilologicalPerspective.Pp. 143-55 in Approachesto Ancient Judaism,volume 2, edited by W.Green.Chico, CA: ScholarsPress. 1982 MerkevahSpeculation at Qumran:4Q Serekh Shirot cOlat haShabbat.Pp. 15-47 in Mystics, Philosophers, and Politicians, edited by J. Reinharz.Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Silberman,L. H. 1961 Unriddlingthe Riddle.A Studyin the Structureand Language of the HabakkukPesher(IQp Hab.).Revuede Qumran3:32364. Skehan,P.W 1957 The QumranManuscriptsand TextualCriticism. Pp. 148-60 in Volumedu Congress.Series: Supplementsto VetusTestamentum 4. Leiden:Brill. Sokoloff,M. 1974 The Targumto Jobfrom Qumran Cave XI. Jerusalem:Ahava Press. 1979 Notes on the AramaicFragmentsof EnochfromQumranCave 4. Maarav 1: 197-224. Starcky,J. 1963 Les quatre6tapesdu messianisme AQumrAn.RevueBiblique 70: 481-505. 1964 Un texte messianique aram~ende la grotte 4 de QumrAn.Pp. 51-66 in des lanques anciennes de l'Institute CathoEcole lique de Paris:Mimorial du cinquantenaire1914-1964.Paris: Bloud et Gay. Stegemann,H. 1963 Der Peter Psalm 37 aus H6hle 4 von Qumran (4 Q p Ps 37). Revue de Qumrin 4: 235-70. 1967 WeitereSttickevon 4 Q Psalm 37, von 4 Q PatriarchalBlessings, und Hinweisauf eine unedierteHandscriftaus Hdhle 4 Q mit Exzerptenaus dem Deuteronomium. Revue de Qumran 6: 193-227. 1971 Die Entstehung der Qumrangemeinde. Bonn: privately printed. Strugnell,J. 1960 The Angelic Liturgyat Qumran-4Q Serek Sir6t cOlat Haglabbat. Pp.318-45 in CongressVolume.Series:Supplements to VetusTestamentum7. Leiden:Brill. 1971 Notes en margedu volume V des 'Discoveriesin the Judaean Desert of Jordan.'Revuede Qumramn 7: 163-276. Sukenik,E. L. 1954 The Treasureof Hidden Scrolls in the Possession of the Hebrew University. Jerusalem:Bialik Foundation and the HebrewUniversity (Hebrew). 1955 The Dead Sea Scrolls of the Hebrew University.Jerusalem: HebrewUniversity and MagnesPress. Talmon,S., 1960 The "Manualof Benedictions"of the Sect of the Judaean Desert. Revue de Qumrcan2: 475-500. Vaux,R. de 1973 Archaeologyand the Dead Sea Scrolls. Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press. Vermbs,G. 1961 Scriptureand Traditionin Judaism:Aggadic Studies. Leiden: Brill.

Wacholder,B. Z. 1983 The Dawn of Qumran:The Sectarian Torahand the Teacher of Righteousness. Cincinnati: HebrewUnion College. Wallenstein,M. 1980 Hymns from the Judaean Scrolls. Manchester:Manchester University Press. Weinert,E D. 1974 4Q159: Legislation for an Essene Community Outside of Qumran?Journalfor the Study of Judaism 5:179-207. Weiss,R. 1979 The Aramaic Targumof Job.Tel Aviv:Tel Aviv University. P. Wernberg-Moller, 1957 The Manual of Discipline. GrandRapids,MI:Eerdmanns. Wilson, A. M., and Wills, L. 1982 LiterarySources of the Temple Scroll. Harvard Theological Review 75: 275-88. Wise, M. 1986 The Dead Sea Scrolls.Part 1:Archaeologyand BiblicalManuscripts. Biblical Archaeologist 49: 140-54. Woude,A. S. van der 1965 Melchisedek als himmlischer Erl6sergestaltin den Neugefundenen eschatologischen Midrashim aus Qumran Hbhle XI. Oudtestamentische Studien 14:354-73. 1968 Ein neuer Segensspruchaus Qumran (11QBer).Pp. 253-58 in Bibel und Qumran:Beitriagezur Erforschungder Beziehungen zwischen Bibel-und Qumranwissenschaft,editedby S.Wagner. Berlin:EvangelischeHaupt-Bibelgesellschaft. aus QumranXI (11QJub).Pp. 1971 Fragmentedes Buches JubilHien 140-46 in Traditionund Glaube: Das frithe Christentum in seiner Umwelt. Festgabe fitr Karl Georg Kuhn zum 65. Geburtstag, edited by G. Jeremias and others. G6ttingen: Vanderhoeckund Ruprecht.

1982 Fragmente einer Rolle der Lieder fir das Sabbatopferaus Hdhle XI von Qumran (11Q Shir Shabb).Pp. 311-37 in Von Kanaan bis Kerala, edited by W Delsman. Kevelaer:Neu KirchenerVerlag. Woude,A. S. van der,and de Jonge,M. 1966 11Q Melchizedek and the New Testament. New Testament Studies 12:301-26. Woude,A. S. van der,and Ploeg, J.P.M. van der 1971 Le Targum de Job de la Grotte II de Qumran, with the collaborationof B.Jongeling.Leiden:Brill. Yadin,Y 1959 A Midrashon 2 Sam VII (4Q Florilegium).Israel Exploration Journal9: 95-99. 1962 The Scroll of the Warof the Sons of LightAgainst the Sons of Darkness, translatedby C. Rabin.Oxford:University Press. 1965 The Excavations of Masada-1963/64. Preliminary Report. Israel ExplorationJournal15: 1-120. 1969 Tefillin from Qumran (X Q Phyl 1-4). Jerusalem:The Israel ExplorationSociety and the Shrine of the Book. 1971 Pesher Nahum (4Q pNahum) Reconsidered.Israel Exploration Journal21: 1-12. 1977 Megillat ham-Miqdash.The TempleScroll (HebrewEdition), 3 volumes. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society/Hebrew University- Institute of Archeology. 1981 Is the Temple Scroll a SectarianWork?Pp. 152-71 in Thirty Yearsof Archaeology in Eretz-Israel,1948-1978, edited by B. Mazar.Jerusalem:IsraelExplorationSociety (Hebrew). 1983 The Temple Scroll, 3 volumes with plates. Jerusalem:Israel ExplorationSociety. Zeitlin, S. 1952 The Zadokite Fragments.Philadelphia:Dropsie College.

LATEBRONZE PALESTINIAN PENDANTS innovation inacosmopolitan age E.McGovern Patrick $35.00/?25.00 cl ISBN 0 905774 90 6 JSOT/ASOR Monographs, 1 xx + 184pp + 25 plates

JL

T

Largenumbersof jewelrypendantsin a wide arrayof materialsand styles first appearedin Palestinein the LateBronze Age (ca. 1550-1200BC). This detailed and scientificstudyof the archaeological pendants,representing100 types,sheds importantnew lighton foreignrelations, the extentof Egyptiancontrol,religious and artisticsyncretism,socio-economic stratification,and technological innovation. Most of the Late Bronzependant andpassedin typeswere mass-produced and out of fashion,thus providinga relativelytight chronologicalsequence. Since almostall the typesare relatedto Egyptianor Syrianvarieties,they are valuablefor cross-culturaldating. The authorpersonallyexaminedalmost the entirecorpusof morethan 800 well-datedLate Bronzependantswhich are fully cataloguedand illustrated. SinceBeth Shancontributedoverhalfof the examples,manyof which are unpublished,the stratigraphyanddating criteriafor this majorsite are reviewed. Patrick McGovernis Research Specialist in Archaeoceramics at the Museum Applied Science Center for Archaeology (MASCA)at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

JSOT Press, The University, Sheffield S10 2TN, ENGLANDII Eisenbrauns, P.O.B. 275, Winona Lake, IN 46590

BIBLICAL 1986 ARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER

243

at TellJemmeh? A Rejoinder Are ThereBeehiveGranaries by Gus W VanBeek

In"TheBeehive Buildings of Ancient Palestine,"publishedin Biblical Archaeologist, volume 49, number 1, pages 2024, JohnCurridarguedthat beehive structures at Arad,Beth Yerah,Bir el-cAbd, and Tell Jemmeh served as granaries. Petrie first suggestedthis function for the Jemmehcircular structures (Petrie 1928:8-9), and I fully concur (VanBeek 1972:245, 1983: 18-19, 1984:679-82). On the basis of his northwesternmost granary-presumably BFFon plates XIII and XIV:2-where about 1.20 meters of the surviving superstructureabovethe ledge inclined inwardat an angle of about 12 degrees,he assumed that BFF,and all similar structures,had been roofedwith a conical "top."This is certainly possible, and indeed in my 1972reportin the Israel Exploration Journal I followed Petrie,

suggestinga similar reconstruction for our majorgranaryin the northwest sector of Jemmeh.The latter had about 0.84 meters of its superstructurepreservedin two areasabovethe interior ledge. In the areaalong the south side, two bricks in each of the upper four courses were laid on an angle in a manner that suggested the beginning of an ascending spiral in coursing, which might be taken as evidence of a conical dome. It is this report that Curridused in his BA paper.Although there were difficulties with this interpretation- for instance, the superstructurewall was vertical and nowhere inclined inward- it remained our basic explanation of the structureuntil 1978. Owing to new discoveries made in the 1978 field season, the reconstruction of the granarywith a conical dome proved to be wrong, and another reconstruction of the roofing scheme incorporatingthe new information was devised. I briefly describedand illustrated this newer reconstruction in paperspublished in 1983 and 1984.

P~r

,:91~j?? ? I_.,--~;??:_~i~p~p-" ,r ~Y"" U W~i~ ~n .

i~L~ d? ,dp`_ ~Pa,

ii~k~:

ii ?-i::x"~r

-

:::::: I~rl

~:~:?l-~i?l

:-:::?::-

c -s~:: ?

i:-::::::

rr:::

::

~::: -:L ai-i?i~:iiiii::'-,-i~;:???-;,?--i:::::it

a.rIx:r :_:: ~:::

:::'; : ::::''`--iii::'":''::?':: :; :i:::

-

:-:::: :

:: : ::;:::

-:I -:::::i_::_:ii~-:iii::.i~::i-::.-::-1,::i:j,;:I::;_::::::.:_: :::::~; '::::::: :::::: :::::::I::r:1 ,

i::

: :_:~::

i

::::: :i?;,::I:~: i~::I1:: _: ::::;*-:: :::h:b~i:?-i:..: ~i i:::'-:

...:..:::: ::,::;

:: :: : ..: ~

~i~c~"~~:j~~ijs:g~~a~:.~;~:j:_:-ii,:,::

~i~-:11,: ~i-i-_-:~,~~:i-;_,;::,-: ::::: ::-:-:i -:-ii::,. -i,,:::ii~~r.s_:

k:

r. ia? I'

::::f y

r

:::::.

c~-c

jf,

'r

i?

C~,I

I: ::::*

J

The TellJemmehGranary,from the northeast. The scale arrowis 0.50 meters long and points north.

A description of the discoveriesand the process of developingthe new reconstruction may be of interest to readersof BA. During our final majorfield season, architect BrianLolarcarefully checked all standing structuresfor any details that might have been overlookedand that might offer solutions to persistent and naggingproblems.In the granary,he made a series of new observationsthat completely changedour understanding of the roofing of the structure.He noted that, on the east side, all courses of the superstructurewall were horizontal; none were laid on angle in an ascending spiral, as had been assumed from the preservedsection of the superstructure on the south side. These angled bricks,

therefore,did not indicate an ascending spiral forming a domed roof but instead markedthe place where the masons had correctedthe unevenness of the courses that had gotten out of level. A similar correction had been made in the lower courses of the substructureon the west side, but the correction there had been made by using an extraordinarilythick mud mortarbed instead of graduallyaltering the angle of the brick. Moreover, he showed that what we had previously regardedas two entrances and convenience platforms projectinginside the structurewere not that at all. The doorways could not be established because no clear thresholds were found. Further, the courses of each platform were not


245

Schematic reconstructionof superstructure and roofingsupportsof the granary.

detail photographsof either the interior or exterior were included in any of his publications, and his unpublished photographsinclude two that are less than instructive, although one is reproduced here and both will be published in the first Jemmehvolume. In spite of the paucity of his report, it is possible to see some similarities between Petrie'sgranariesand ours. They are stratigraphicallycontemporary.All fall within three standardsizes based on their interior diameters:8-9 meters, about 6 meters, and 4-5 meters. All have basically similar groundplans. All are built partially undergroundin deep foundation holes. All are constructed of mudbrick. At least two of his granarieshave an interior ledge, as do both of ours (the ledge, by the way,is an integralpart of the design and does not indicate, as Petrie assumed, that a portion of the inner brick face of the conical dome had fallen, thus creatingwhat appearedto be a ledge). But there are also differences.Each of his two largestgranarieshas a flight of stairs built into the inner face of the substructurewall; perhapsthis is a characteristic feature of the largestgranaries only, since neither his nor our middlesized and small-sized granarieshad any type of stairs.Our fully excavatedgranary had the remnants of an archedcross-wall, while none of Petrie'sgranarieshad this feature. Our granaryhad two successive mudbrickfloors; Petrieprovidedno information about flooring in any of his, although I suspect some and perhapsall

of his were floored with mudbrick.The superstructureof our granaryrested in part on top of the substructure,and in part on both the backfilled foundation trench and solid ground,so that the offsetting of the superstructurecreatedthe ledge; we know nothing of this aspect of construction in Petrie'sstructures. While the beehive or conical dome assumed by Petrie and Curridis certainly a possible reconstructionfor all granaries at Jemmehexcept our majorone, it is by no means certain. The sole structural evidence for it is the inclination of the superstructurewall in one of Petrie'sgranaries. But the inclination may be the result of stress pressurescausing a tilt during or after the collapse of the structure. It is interesting to note that Petrie reconstructed the conical dome "accordingto the Assyrian form, and having regardto the economy of storage"(Petrie1928:9). Accordingly,it reaches a height of 10.20 meters abovethe ledge, which marked groundlevel (plateXIV:2).Basedon his calculations, his granarywould have had a capacity of 165.20 cubic meters. Our grainary,as reconstructed,reacheda height of 3.88 meters abovegroundlevel and, accordingto our calculations, had a capacity of 155.78 cubic meters. Thus both granarieshad about the same capacity. In terms of construction, it is certainly much easier to erect vertical superstructurewalls to a height of 3.88 meters than to build a conical dome with inwardsloping walls to a height of 10.20 meters. I have a great amount of

laid horizontally,as were all brick courses in the substructureand superstructure, but rather sloped downward,and the angle of the slope increasedby about five degrees from the lowest course to the uppermost course. These sloping courses of the platforms did not result from settling; the platforms were bonded into the circularwall, and a careful examination provedthat no splitting or cracking had occurred,as would be expected if the platforms had subsided with the front tilting downward.It was at that point that we realized these "platforms"were actually the remnants of a radiallyarched ---::; .- : :: ::!i~:-:l:_--~ - :: ~i~~~ cross-wall;its function was to carryhorizontal roofingbeams from the side walls i: ...to the center of the granaryfor a conventional flat roof. Our granary,therefore, -a U; with its vertical walls and a flat mudroof must have somewhat resembled a modern oil or chemical storagetank. Our second granary,located on the east side I '~li~t~~B~L? ; of the tell, was only partially excavated, and no clear evidence was found in the structure to establish its type of roofing. 1~-11 It is difficult to know what Petrie's 4:-;n~ ten tell granarieswere like because his " :. :b ~?-; i. :~: ~ ,:?2: .:4 :~::?, ? ~. ~;;;?; publication is so skimpy;his description 8~:;~~ ,i'4 ?~ u? P -r`c~J1 ~:s of the features of all ten granariesoccur.\i:~LCS ~;? ?~~ less of text. than one-half On pies page the plan, the granariesappearonly as One of Petrie'sgranaries(GranaryWG),excavatedin 1927;see Petrie1928,plate XIII.Theinterior compass-drawncircles with few other stairway can be seen at the near end of the inner wall. This view is from the northeast. details. Curiously, Petrie did not measure the thickness of all granarywalls before rippingthem out. No overallor

246


respect and appreciationfor the design and construction skills of ancient mudbrick masons, and I am fully convinced that they could have built very high conical domes as Petrie suggested.I doubt, however,that they did this: The conical design requiringa height of 10.20 meters would have createdmany construction, maintenance, and function problems that do not occur in a structureone-third as high and built with a design utilizing a vertical wall and a flat roof. It is certainly very difficult (1)to erect corbeled,inclined walls to a height of ten meters (giventhe scaffoldingor massive earthfill requirements),(2)to maintain the integrity of the conical dome with frequent repairsand replasteringthat would requireworking on extraordinarilyhigh laddersor reerectedscaffolding,and (3)

Dove

to fill such a high structureby means of laddersreachingto the top. By contrast, it is much easier (1)to build vertical walls to a height of 3.88 meters and to lay a flat roof with heavy supporting beams, (2)to maintain vertical walls and a flat roof with the same techniques used in ordinaryhouse maintenance, and (3) to fill the granary,given its reasonable height of about four meters and its flat roof surroundingthe aperture,which would providespace for material and workmen. Forthe present, at Tell Jemmehwe have one virtually certain flat-roofed granary,one with possible evidence of a high conical dome (Petrie'sBFFgranary), and ten others lacking any evidence of roof type. Perhapsif more granariesare excavatedthere, we will obtain addition-

al information on the rangeof granary designs and construction techniques employed. Bibliography Currid,i. D. 1986 TheBeehiveBuildingsof Ancient Palestine.Biblical Archaeologist49: 20-24. Petrie,W.M. E

1928 Gerar.Series:Publications of the EgyptianResearchAccount 43. London:British School of Archaeology

in Egypt. VanBeek,G.W 1972 Notes and News: Tel Gamma. Israel ExplorationJournal22: 245-46. 1983 Digging Up Tell Jemmeh.Archaeology 36(1):12-19. 1984 ArchaeologicalInvestigationsat Tell Jemmeh.National GeographicResearch Reports 16:675-96.

Booksellers

m

c

... a new TOTAL BOOK SERVICE for professionalsand othersinterested in the fields of Biblical, Near Eastern, and related studies. The serviceswe provide include: *

Catalogs

*

SpecialOrderService

*

ForeignLanguageComputerSoftwareand ComputerAccessories

*

*

Fast and Efficient Service *

Discounts

*

Booksfrom Abroad

UsedBooks/Search Service

For catalog write to:

Dove Booksellers, P.O. Box 1450, Berkley, MI 48072 Enclose $2.00 for P & H (refundableon firstorder!).

Cities 7he

ofClay

ALISADE

Geoarcheology of Tells

ARLENE MILLER ROSEN

o;_

Rosenoffersa new approachto the singleoldestproblemin

archeology: the tell or urban mound. Archeologists have long

pickedapartthe debrisof ancientcitiesto save the artifactsand throwawaythe dirt.In Citiesof Clay Rosenshows how to extractanthropological information fromthe sediments

_ ------

----

themselves and from other debris traditionallyregarded as

,

havinglittleculturalimportance.She analyzesseveralmajor sites in Israel,but her techniqueswillstimulatenew research amongarcheologistsaroundthe world. _

Paper $9.00

-

oca

192 pages

Librarycloth edition$22.00 Prehistoric Archeology and Ecology

series

The University

of

CH ICAG

O

ess

5801 South Ellis Avenue, Chicago, IL o60637


247

u-i.-

sented only by modest finds or not at all, which permits conclusions about the incorporationof the WesternHill within the city limits. Discovering Jerusalem, by Nahman Even though it is not possible here Avigad, 270 pp. Nashville: Thomas to discuss details, the most importantreNelson Publishers, 1983; $24.95. sults should be briefly summarized. On the northern boundaryof the Western The reconstruction of the JewishQuarter Hill, parts of fortifications from two difafter 1967 made it possible, for the first ferent phases of the end of the Judean time in the history of Jerusalem,to carry were discovered.Herethe older monarchy out large-scaleexcavationsin that part of wall stood on the remains of Iron city the city which had been under continuhouses, which conclusively conous settlement for the past two thousand Age firms that the settlement of this section years. In relation to the formerextent of and its incorporationwithin the city the city, the size of the areaexcavated limits were in place from the eighth cenmay appearrathersmall. But the results The line of the IronAge wall of the excavations can only be called sen- tury B.c. was preservedalso in the Hasmonean period of the city, so that the course of the so-called FirstWallof Josephusis ~?;" now definitively clarified. t)? rlh? .r"?9;

~t~t

18

~' ?~c~

I :'' I r

~_~

?u I~iiRi ~tt~~l

I;Z?r~ Yli.L

r~j ii.

;

i

,e

..e P~

J?2..

\\ ?rr

3~

Y15 t :i ?- -?"? cl '~:'Vrc??

r

L..

4~?~ P:

r 1~1?

c

'i

.?il j?c~Uti? j:'R~~ ?~JT ?:i?-~J: i t~?~r~l'~Y~~lt' ,1! i` .?:I? ?c~.-~c~Z'r ? , *~?,?. c?=~~ '-~?r?~~L??

'~:

`-.~ 1.'

~2~ ~:P 31 ;:: : ::.:." :- -

i I 1~9~n\

I

,Ir -- ?,

cavation was carriedout. All the more astounding, therefore,are the efforts that were expended to unearth, if only partially,two monuments of the Byzantine period that had been known from the MadabaMap and written sources: the cardomaximus and the Nea Church. In both instances the efforts were richly rewarded:The cardomaximus could be traced with its plasteredsurface and a portico on each side for 150 meters, while enough wall fragments of the Nea Church were discoveredto permit a secure determination of the scale, as well as a reconstruction of the building. Thus, two important points on the plan of Byzantine Jerusalemwere established. The book is very lucidly written and supplemented with numerous plans, drawings,and photographs,so that the readergains an impression of the abun-

-S-i

r

i. /

r'"

~

,..??

h ?ccr~f

ti ?: IC~r,

il*

'"'T -;?-w*

?t.?t~;~?9 "s-,

:? :: :

~ ri

sational, since they throw a completely new light on the history and layout of Jerusalemfrom the period of the Judean kingdom on. A part of the spectacular discoveries was alreadymade known in preliminary reports;their full significance, however,can only now be gauged from this comprehensivepresentation. The occupational remains brought to fight come predominantlyfrom three periods:the Judeanmonarchy (eighthseventh centuries B.c.), the Herodian pe-

riod, and the Byzantine period. In these periods Jerusalemattained a special position as the capital of the Judeankingdom, as the city of the Templerebuilt by Herod, and as a holy place of Christianity.The remaining historical periods are repre-

248

Fromthe Herodianperiod numerous houses were unearthed that attest to the strong influence of Hellenistic culture at this time. The structuresin question are houses with an interior court, which were built in an extraordinarilyluxurious way with mosaic pavements and wall-paintingsand which contained collections of costly objects. Striking is the large number of bath installations. In the case of the "BurntHouse,"the building was found in a state of destruction caused by the Roman conquest of A.D.70. In addition to the houses, there were also unearthed severalritual baths for the prescribedwashings. Avigadmakes clear again and again under what difficulties the work of ex-


o Latrnrvra :

a,

Farleft: Thepalatial mansion uncoveredin area P, viewed looking toward the TempleMount and the Mount of Olives. Left:Isometric drawing of the mansion. Photographand drawing are used courtesy of Nahman Avigad.

dance of the finds made duringthe course of the work. Furtherillustration is providedby the numerous color plates, although their quality is not always satisfactory.One also wishes that the details numberedon the plans had been explained in the accompanying captions. It is noteworthythat Avigad's coworkersare given prominent mention in the text, since without them an excavation of this scale could not have succeeded as well as it did. They include aboveall Ami Mazar,Hillel Geva, and RonnyReich, as well as many others who today belong to the excavationteam. In sum, Nahman Avigadis to be sincerely thanked for producingfor the general readerthis impressive and lively

picture of his excavations.Indeed,the documentation with which the results are presentedmakes the book useful to scholars as well. One may hope only that this chapterof urbanand cultural history will be made availablealso in a definitive scholarly reportin the not-toodistant future. VolkmarFritz JohannesGutenberg-Universitit

Ante Pacem:ArchaeologicalEvidenceof Church Life BeforeConstantine, by GraydonF Snyder,xiv + 173 pp., 47 figures (including 3 maps) and 50 plates. Macon, GA:MercerUniversity Press, 1985. This is an impressive and important book. Snyderhas surveyedthe literature (andin many cases the places and artifacts themselves) to put in one place a critical survey of the so-called early Christian (pre-Constantinian)remains. This is no small task, for the volume of materials in the Mediterraneanworld that is touted as certainly early Christian is vast indeed. In the course of eight chapters,Snyder first devotes his exposition to nonverbal materials- symbols, pictures, and buildings; he then attends to verbal materials aside from the early texts - namely, inscriptions, graffiti,and papyri;finally, he presents his conclusions as an exposition of the theological implications of these items. Each chapterfeatures its own bibliographyat the beginning of the chapter. The areaof "earlyChristian archaeology"is by nature controversial,for there is as yet no consensus among scholars whether this can even be called a discipline (despitethe fact that there are professors and departmentsof early Christian archaeologyin certain European universities, particularlyin Italy).Therefore, in chapterone, "Historyand Methodology of EarlyChristian Archaeology," there is much to criticize. In this chapter Snydergives a brief surveyof the history of the discipline (pages3-5), an account of certain methods of interpretation (pages5-7), and some remarkson his own "contextualmethodology"(pages7-11). The history of early Christianarchaeology, accordingto Snyder,is a history of

seems to be mainly Hegelian. That is, he the study of third-century,early Christian remains by scholars in Rome. What interpretsthe artifactsin terms of a he leaves unsaid is that this areais evidevelopinghistorical tension between the revelation ("thegreat tradition")and dently a subdiscipline of the history of art and archaeologyof the Romanworld. the culture at which it is aimed (Rome). This subdiscipline'scrowning achieveSnyderis asserting that in the course of the third century Christianity was movment in the nineteenth century was the ing towardassimilation to the dominant publication of GiovanniB. de Rossi, secculture. Until that assimilation was retaryof the VaticanLibrary,of a great mass of inscriptions (Inscriptioneschris- achieved, the artifactsreflectedthat unresolved tension. They did not reflect tianae urbis Romae, 1857-61, 1888).Uleither a unified tradition or a unified timately the Rome-centered"school"(to use Snyder'sterm) could claim a vast lit- vehicle of revelation (Romanculture). This assertion is squarelyin line erature,including the familiar Dictionnaire d'archbologiechritienne et de litur- with current interpretationsof New Testamentand other early Christian gie, edited by F.Cabroland H. Leclercq thought. It is also more often supported (1924-53). As a matter of fact, their methods were encyclopedic in nature, so than challengedby the archaeological evidence. it is no surpriseto find that the publications tend to be exhaustive, descriptive Chaptertwo is an analysis of early Christian symbols, rangingfrom the catalogues of artifacts,buildings, and lamb, through the olive branch,to the inscriptions. cross. It should be stated immediately Because it is sometimes arguedthat we recognize a discipline by its methods, that Snyderdoes not accept theories of we may legitimatelyask what the methods pre-Constantiniancrosses. Snyderin fact tells his readersthat he assumes social of "earlyChristian archaeology"are. It seems that the most recent methods are origins and implications for signs and still flawedby an assumption that the symbols ratherthan private,mystical scholarcanin factdetectpre-Constantinian meanings for them (page14). What is more vexing about this chapChristian artifacts.Apart from that ter is that it is virtually useless to the questionable assumption, the first step after identification is familiar to archae- student or other lay readernot already acquaintedwith the technical terms asologists almost anywhere- to interpret the item as an expressionof"Volksreligon." sociated with the history of art. Forexample, on page 15 Snyderintroduces the ApparentlySnyderis somewhat uncomfortablewith the frankadmisterm "tituli of the third century"with no sion, in "Methodologyof Interpretation," explanation. Likewise the term "orante" that early Christian archaeologyhas exappears,undefined, on page 17. (Thereis no glossary.)There are also simple asserhibited a religious "Tendenz"-namely, tions that appearas facts but which are in service of Roman Catholic dogma. His defense is to arguethat interest in really interpretations.Forexample, there is no compelling reason simply to assert biblical archaeologyis dependent on an that grapesprobablyrepresentthe wine ideology:provingor illustrating the vaof the agapemeal (page26). But the most lidity or accuracyof the Bible (page7). That may be true of lay audiences, but troubling doubts about this chapter,and revealsno dialogue with workingbiblical indeed aboutmany of the nonverbalitems under consideration, revolvearoundthe archaeologists. question: How does one know that these Snyder'sremarkson "contextual are specifically Christian ratherthan methodology"reveala broadawareness of the works of Hans Bauer,Rolandde Jewish?That question is little-addressed Vaux,RobertThouless, PeterBrown,John but will remain to bedevil "earlyChrisGager,GerdTheissen, RobertGrant,and tian archaeology." Chapterthree introduces "Pictorial RobynScroggsthat is reassuringand reRepresentations,"which also occupies freshing. On the other hand, it is clear that Snyderthinks "biblicalarchaeology" chapterfour. Snyderconsiders as clear is the study of artifacts,which suggests examples of this type of art only the bapthat he is relativelyuntouched by ongoing tistry at Dura-Europosand four examples discussions of the nature of archaeology of sepulchralart in Rome:the sacrament or of interpretationin archaeology. chapels and the double chamberof the LucinaArea of the St. Callixtus CataSnyder'sposition on interpretation


249

comb, the FlavianGallery in the Domitilla Catacomb,and the Capella Grecain the Priscilla Catacomb.He considers as possible additionscertainscenes from the hypogeain the catacombs of St. Genaro in Naples. He mentions the mosaic floor of the north church at Aquileia in Italy, only to point out that no one can establish that it is certainly Christian. This allows him to discuss sarcophagusscenes of Jonahand the "ketos"(not defined, page 36) and other sarcophagusscenes, some of which may be Jewish. Chapterfour is an instructive and provocativechapter.In it Snyderanalyzes eighteen biblical scenes on sarcophagi. Seven are drawnfrom the HebrewBible, one from the apocrypha(Susannahand the Elders,page 50 and following),and the remainderfrom the New Testament. The last have to do with the life of Jesus, though we may question that in one or two cases. The same question about the possible Jewishorigins of some of these sarcophagineeds to be raised here. In fact, it would have been instructive to see a comparativeanalysis of those sarcophagi deemed to be certainly Jewishand those claimed to be Christian.(SeeA. Konikoff's Sarcophagifrom the Jewish Catacombs of Ancient-Rome:A CatalogueRaisonne, Wiesbaden:FranzSteiner, 1985.)What are the differences?Do Jewishsarcophagi alwaysbearunambiguously Jewishsymbols, such as menorah, shofar,and lulab? It is interesting to readthat Noah is in a "boxlikeark"(page49), which suggests that the artist knew his Hebrew,for "ark" does not mean "boat." Snyderstates his thesis clearly on page 55: This art representspeace under extreme threat, or it representsthe hope of paradise.Yethis argumentwould be clearerif he would define for the reader what he means by"narrativeart"(page46). Snyderdevotes chapterfive to early church buildings. This is the one chapter the archaeologistmight turn to first, as architectureis difficult to interpret,but it does not quite bear the same controversial edge as iconography.Here the readerwill find a good summary discussion of the church at Dura-Europos(pages 68-71), with four figures.There is a brief discussion of the "housechurch"at Capernaum in ancient Palestine (pages71-73), with three figures.The figures are incorrectly labeled "isometric"drawings.In actuality they are perspectivedrawings.

250

A discussion of the Aquileia church in Rome occupies three pages,with one figure (pages73-75). The nine tituli churches of Rome are discussed in eight pages,with seven figures (pages75-82). These few pages are probablythe least satisfactoryof all from the point of view of archaeology,for so little in the plans is properlylabeled that one cannot use them to follow the discussion in the text. Yet there is no other single source where we can turn for this information. Cemeterystructuresoccupythe lion's share of this chapter,thirty-onepages, with thirty-fivefigures (pages82-115). In that section St. Peter'sgets the most attention-eleven pages (pages105-15) of remarkablyclear prose illustrated by twelve figures.This is likely the portion that will hold the interest of most readers, but it will probablynot satisfy them all. I find it odd that the Latin inscription on page 113 is not translated.On the other hand, the line drawingsare excellent and go well with the text. The last three pages of this chapterare given overto four baptistries,of which only the one at Dura-Europosis indisputably third century. Chaptersix is entitled "Inscriptions and Graffiti."Here is a densely packed discussion of a difficult subject.Weare bedeviledby a question similar to the one that preoccupiedus with iconography: What makes certain of these eighty-three inscriptions (almost all from Italy)specifically Christian?Snyderis awareof the problemanddevotesa significantamount of space to an attempt to resolve this issue. Forexample, if an epitaph includes the phrase"inpace,"we conclude that this is a Christian epitaph. But the inscription of Juliana(pages128-30) has no such key phrase!If the propername Kyriacete(page131)indicates a Christian mother, what do names from that root in Jewishcontexts mean? The readercan readily discern the nature of the controversywith Snyder. Scholarsneed to debatethe problem openly so as to come to some reasonable consensus. One of the more interesting sections of this chapteris a recapitulationof the work of W M. Ramsayand others on the Christianepitaphsin GreekfromPhrygia in Asia Minor of the "ChristiansforChristians"type. Snyderincludes a reconstruction of the controversialAberciusepitaph from Hieropolis (pages134-40). These


are clearly pre-Constantinian,Christian epitaphs.Finally this chaptercloses with an important discussion of the putative Christian graffitifrom St. Sebastian'sin Rome, from the aedicula of St. Peterin Rome, from the house church in DuraEuropos,and from the choir of the Virgin'sChurch in Trier.It is simply invaluable to have this material gatheredinto one chapter.Yet it does seem odd that nothing is said of the Christian graffiti from Nazareth or Capernaum.More important for understandingearly Christianity are Snyder'sremarksabout the significance of these finds on page 143 and following and on page 147. Chapterseven is entitled "Papyrus Documentation."In this case Snyderis discussing letters, official documents, contractualdocuments, liturgical fragments, and magical papyriin fourteen pages,with one illustration(ofthe famous trinitarianhymn, PapyrusOxyrhynchus 1786).Snyder'sobjective is to answerthe questions of when and how Christians began to identify themselves publicly as Christian. This is extremely useful material. It appearsin Greek and Latin on the page,though it is curious that short phrases and single words are not always translated,though entire letters are. Snyder'sconclusions are gatheredin Here chaptereight, entitled "Summary." he indicates his inferences about Christology, ecclesiology, worship,ruraland urban Christianity,the state, and language in seven brief pages.This is obviously not without its own problems. Forexample his remarkon page 167 that some Phrygian"Christiansfor Christians" inscriptions are datedbeforeA.D.180 does not squarewith his statement on page 136 that the inscription of Aurelios Satorneinos (A.D.242/3) is "theearliest of the dated Phrygianinscriptions." On the other hand, his observation that something happenedabout A.D.180 in the Romanculture that correlates with the sudden appearanceof Christian culture has great merit. This is of course the coming of Commodus as emperor.In Romanarchaeologyin Israeland its neighboringcountries we have called this the beginning of the Middle Roman period,but not without disagreement from others in the field. Without giving awaythe ending, this is an important,even indispensable, book. Here between two coversare most

of the items that must be considered in the search for pre-ConstantinianChristianity. Snyder'stheories and interpretation are themselves apt to feed the debate for some years to come. More than that, he raises certain issues directly and others by implication that we simply cannot evade.An example of an issue that looms in the backgroundis that of the development of popularChristologies. That is, if early Christian Christologies arebased on alienation-deliverance ratherthan upon guilt-redemption or some other pattern, then what is the relation of this Christology to that of Paul'sin the New Testament?Personally I welcome this as the first in a needed series that makes the scholarship of "earlyChristian archaeology"more accessible to Americans. I also welcome Snyder'sanalyses, provocativeas they are, as opening salvos in what promises to be a stimulating engagementof minds. JamesF.Strange of University South Florida

II Samuel, by P KyleMcCarter,Jr. Anchor Bible 9, xvii + 553 pp. Garden City, NY Doubleday, 1984; $18.00 (Cloth). Fortwenty years now the Anchor Bible has contributedto the dissemination of modern biblical scholarship,an accomplishment fittingly celebratedby publication of this new commentary. The readerwill find here, as in other volumes of this series, a vast amount of information from a wide rangeof both ancient and modern sources-including rabbinictraditions, which are cited most often for their literary insights in a way that reflects the growingmodern appreciation for earlierbiblical interpreters. The one subject not given adequateattention is the contemporaryinterest in the narrative'sartistic qualities, although severalcomments (forexample, at 6:20 and 13:4)clearly demonstrateMcCarter's sensitivity to matters of style. On the other hand, comparison of this volume with the author'streatment of 1 Samuel, published just four years ago, demonstratesthe kind of inconsistency that has often been noted with regardto the series as a whole. While in this case the specific changes are relatively minor (mapsare now gatheredat the end rather

than being placed appropriatelythroughout the text, and footnotes now use the social science format so that a topically arrangedbibliography,as in the first volume, is no longer possible), they do make an alreadyfragmentedwork all the more difficult to use. The author'shistorical interpretations are both reasonableand well within the mainstream of biblical scholarship,although this reviewerdid wonder about McCarter'sconfidence that the book's interest in legitimizing David necessarily points to its having been written in the Davidic or Solomonic period. Without attempting to adjudicatethe matter, one would think that questions about David could have persistedthroughout the Northern Kingdom'sexistence and even after.One might even arguethat such theoretical matters were less pressing duringDavid'slifetime, when his personality and armylikely sufficed to put any challenges to rest, than in later centuries, when a growingtendency to cherish his memory clashed with the recollection of his actions. Although reliable, the translation includes a handful of obscure words,such as "portress"(4:6)and "remembrancer" (8:16),and numerous colloquialisms, including "look sharp"(5:24),"wenches" (9:6),"fiendof hell" (6:20),"groveled" (12:5),and "I'llbe damned"(23:17).Several renderingsof this sort are found in David'spsalm (chapter22)-for example: "Withyou [Yahweh]I can leap a gully, with my god I can jump a wall... For who is a god but Yahweh?Who is a crag but our god?"(verses30 and 32). While hardly intended for liturgical use, such translations do sometimes trivialize what the editors'introduction refersto as the "world'sgreatest classic." McCarter'scentral concern seems to be with matters of text. One suspects it would be possible to reconstruct the entire Masoretic text, Qumran Samuel scroll, and severalof the ancient versions from the information presented in his notes. Ratherthan treating any one of these as more reliable than the others, McCarterbelieves that they all deviate, in various ways, from the original, which he calls the primitive text. Since it is this hypothetical, primitive text which is translatedhere, and since no one manuscript or version is regularlymore reliable than the others, McCartermust determine the primitive readingfor each

phrase separately.This eclectic method sometimes yields ratherbizarreresults, particularlywhen the translatormust, for stylistic reasons, insert in bracketsa wordnot found in the text he is following for that particularpassage,even though it does occur in other, possibly even most, versions. Forexample, McCarter adds the name "David"to 8:11,since it is not in the Vaticanustext of the Septuagint translation which he prefersat that point, even though the propername does occur in our Hebrewtexts, four manuscripts of the Septuagint,the Peshitta, and the parallelpassageof 1 Chronicles 18:11.There are severalother instances of similar anomalies. More fundamentally,the concept of a "primitivetext"needs to be defined carefully and explicit criteria set forth about how it can be identified. In a book that has undergoneas complex an editorial process as Samuel,what stageconstitutes the original text? To give an analogy from anotherbiblical book, few would removethe referenceto Satanfrom 1 Chronicles 21:1,even though the Chroniclerhimself presumablyput it in to replacethe referenceto God that stood in his source (compare2 Samuel 24:1). Similarly,McCarterretains readingsin our Hebrewtext that he identifies as interpolations made by the book'sancient Deuteronomistic editors,yet he claims to restoreIshbaal where our text has Ishbosheth, and Meribbaalwhere the HebrewreadsMephibosheth.What text does one translate,and why? And on what basis can we rejectthem all in favor of a readingnot found in any version or Hebrewmanuscript,as when Abner and Absalom are replacedwith the purportedlymore originalAbiner and Abishalom, while Jonathanis retained throughout,even though the Hebrew quite consistently points to Jehonathan? Such questions need more thorough exploration than is providedin this volume and its predecessor,particularlywhen the evidence, so expertly documented in the notes, points to the lack of a fixed version of the text. A more basic question, not for just this commentary but for the series as a whole, pertains to its intended audience. Like other recent volumes in the Anchor Bible, this work contains a wealth of informationand a well-reasonedapproachto many difficult problems in a way reminiscent of the old International


1986

251

Critical Commentary series, although McCarter'sapparatusis vastly more elaborate,reflecting the discoveriesand progressof the past seventy years.The work is a majorcontribution to the discipline and will be of undoubtedinterest and value to both specialists and advanced students of the Bible. The introduction by the Anchor Bible'sgeneral editors,however,which appearshere as it has in each volume of the series over the past twenty years,states that its purpose is "tomake the Bible accessible to the modern reader."WhetherMcCarter's approachis helpful or even comprehensible to such an audience remains to be seen. FrederickE. Greenspahn University of Denver

1 Kings (WordBiblical Commentary 12), by Simon J.De Vries,lxiv + 286 pp. Waco,Texas:WordBooks, 1985; $22.95. This book is part of a series of biblical commentaries that brings together modern critical scholarshipand evangelical Christian homiletics in a form that will be useful to students, ministers, scholars, and teachers.A general introduction treats the historical and cultural world of 1 Kings, scripturalhistory as theological testimony, 1 Kings as literary composition, and text-criticalproblems. Forcomment, De Vries divides the biblical book into units accordingto formal, content, and redactionalcriteria. Foreach section he provides(1)a translation, with copious notes justifying his choices among manuscriptvariants; (2)an outline of structurewith discussion of form, genre, and redactionin the light of modern researches;(3)an exposition of the sense of the text with attention to various redactionallayers and historical issues, only occasionally touching on archaeologicalconcerns; and (4)a final theological "explanation," intended to serve Christian readerswho are"strivingto learn from Scriptureitself how better to interpretit, and accordingly how better to subject themselves to it" (pageix). Extensive and broadlyrepresentative bibliographiesare included for each section. De Vriesworks hardto make his historical-criticalapproachacceptableto

252

those who, accordingto the series editors, presumablysharewith the authora "commitment to scriptureas divine revelation, and to the powerof the Christian gospel" (pagex). It is assumed that throughall aspects of historical researches,one seeks to confront the originativemoment, the first word,God'sdefinitive and normative addressto a modern Christian. First,De Vries seeks the original form of the Hebrewtext of Kings,by exhaustively evaluatingtextual variants. Because he mainly seeks to justify the readingsadoptedfor the nonspecialist, the author'stextual notes are less technical than those found in the International Critical Commentary or Hermeneia series. Inevitablymany of the judgements appeararbitrary;the readeris asked to trust the author'sself-styled "judiciousweighing of the witnesses" (pageliii). Second, while giving full attention to sources and their redaction,for theological purposes De Vriesprefershypothetical original traditions overany later editings, versions, or glosses. His outlines of pericopes clearly indicate what he takes to be secondarymaterial;he allows the latter farless space and treats it as intrusive in an otherwise sensible union of form and content. Similarly, while discussing redactionallayersin a given pericope, De Vries'sexposition concentrates on the earliest layerhe can identify.Here one will discoverthe definitive message of Scriptureunburdened with secondaryaccretions (see, for example, pages xlix-lii and 266). Third, De Vriesvests the book of Kings with reliability at its inception. The work has a "directlyfactual basis" (pagexlix); its definitive edition was produced in the late seventh century B.C. and revised in the early sixth century by a "school"of writers and editors who sharedthe ideals enshrined in the book of Deuteronomy,and who drew upon various sources to write a "Deuteronomistic"history.As key sources, De Vries cites "literalreports"(forexample, the account of how Solomon came to succeed David, the narrativeof Rehoboam's rejection, and various temple archives) and "imaginativeinterpretations"(for example, the stories about the Queen of Shebaand various prophets).There are also post-Deuteronomisticexpansions of 1 Kings,which De Vriesmentions "not so much because of any intrinsic value...


but to be remindedthat the Scriptures retainedthe force of dynamic growth... after the definitive work had been completed"(pagelii). Finally,the original work is itself original. De Vries asserts that the books of Kings were part of ancient Israel's unique historiographictestimony to God'stranscendentalpurposes;"the Hebrewswere the first to come up with genuine historiography... [because] they alone defined themselves in historical ratherthan mythological language... [that is] concerned with real historical event, interpretedfrom a transcendental perspective"(pagesxxix-xxxviii). Forits intended purposes and audience, the commentary successfully supports evangelicalapplication with scholarly foundations-but only if one grants the assumptions and parochialismthat mortise and tenon the pylons. De Vries has written a traditional commentary, seemingly untroubledby recent discomfort in less conservativecircles about the species itself and about the problematic relation of historical scholarshipto lively theological construction. The book is impressive in its sifting of massive researches,and De Vries often walks independently of scholarly consensus. He communicates deftly with scholars and laypeople, and steadily aims at Christological allusion. Yet the book sometimes sounds a tone of strident moralism, as though the Christian faith and modern critical methods somehow justify the arrogance of the victorious. On source and redaction criticism: "Avariant story [narrative B] ... was written down, and then edited to be incorporatedinto NarrativeA. It now looked as if the two were really one -and so it has seemed to everygeneration but our own"(page271). On the true evangelical spirit:"UsingGod comes naturally to the devotees of shrine religion"(page54). On the triumph of higher (Christian?)religion:"Thereis also a sub-biblicalelement of superstition in the Bethel prophet'smotive for burying the man of God in his own grave"(page 172);"Thatit [the story of Solomon's accession] does not present what we would call a flatteringpicture..,. is more than anything else an indictment of the low spiritual ideals of the time in which he lived"(page43). The attitudes that are implied in such statements are perhapssuitable to

the author'sintended audience. They seem more sectarian than scholarly, however,and will detractfrom the book's appeal to those who hold differentconvictions. The issue is not personal but ultimately has to do with a collective Christian ethic: What face will Christians and their books turn to those who believe, just as fervently,in some other religious fulfillment? BurkeO. Long BowdoinCollege Temple,Kirchenund Zisternen:Ausgrabungen in der WiusteNegev, Die Kultur der Nabatier, by Avraham Negev, 258 pp. Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1983; 36 D.M.

sist of religious architectureand hydrological constructions, but there are also excursions on Nabataeanjewelry,seals, and wall-paintings. The discussion of these diverse cultural elements is held together by a historical narrative,unfortunately too brief and at times quite misleading. In particular, the distortion is the result of the author'sregionalmyopia in which the vast Nabataeanrealm is viewed from the perspectiveof the Negev. As a result, purely speculative views are stated as matters of fact. Forexample, it is suggested that AlexanderJannaeus'military campaigns in the Negev and east of the Jordanforced the Nabataeansto develop a route to the Hauranthat broughtthe rise of Damascus under Aretas III(circa

This handsomely published volume rep- 85-62 B.c.) and a general emigration to resents a romance, a love affairbetween the region of southern Syria (page48). a man and a region, reflected in the This interpretationignores the fact that the earliest documented referenceto the name he bears.The geographicalfocal point is the Negev, the desert region of Nabataeans,in the Zenon papyriof the southern Palestine, where Avraham third century B.C.,places them in the vicinity of the Hauran.Evenmore dubiNegev has spent the past four decades ous is the suggestion that a generaldeexcavatingsettlements associated with the ancient Nabataeansand the flourish- cline of Nabataeain the mid-firstcentury ing Mediterraneantradeof the GrecoA.D.can be blamed on hordes of invading Romanera. His personal discoveryof nomads from the Arabianpeninsula these desert settlements is dated precise- (page75). The latter hypothesis is the pat exly to December 6, 1943. Forfive years afterthis, which the author describes as planation for interpretingdestruction the best years of his life, he was a memlayers at sites on the desert fringe,enber of KibbutzRevvim, 30 kilometers demic in Near Easternhistoriography.It southwest of Beer-sheba.During this is noteworthythat in previous publications Negev interpretedthe destruction periodhe encountered the remains of the ancient Nabataeancivilization and of the NabataeanNegev cities as the rethe methods and means by which they sult of the Roman conquest of the region conqueredthis desolate wasteland. From in A.D.106 or even later in the second this experience, questions regarding century;in the presentvolume he chooses climate and hydrologydominated his an earlier,mid-first century date for the inquiry,and he became an avid readerof "event."Criticism about his oscillating previousexplorersof the region, before opinions from a prominent scholar leads him to defend the legitimacy of changproceedingwith his own research. What is presented in more than 30 ing one'smind (page128).Since Negev and the other scholar involvedhave chaptersis a series of brief but exciting vignettes of Nabataeanmaterial culture, changed their minds severaltimes over these matters, this is not the chief concolorfully illustrated by more than 100 cern. What is ratherat issue is the interphotos, 57 in color. The stunning finds at Oboda (Avdat)and Mampsis (Kurnub) pretation of the ebb and flow of such are the particularemphasis, unparalleled frontier settlements by the factorof ineven by the discoveries at the Nabataean vadingbedouin, a thesis without evidence for this period in the Negev. This capital at Petra.Although there is some attempt to providea comprehensive hismay be describedas the "nomadicmirage" torical survey of the region (ahalf-dozen that plagues archaeologistsand historians in search of simplistic solutions for chaptersconcern the pre-Nabataeanperiod),the study is more of a potpourriof complex problems. David F.Graf cultural aspects from the Hellenistic to the Islamic periods.Primarilythese conUniversity of Miami

This limestone plaque from Amarna is an artist's trial piece. It shows Akhenaten's profile carvedin the grossly exaggeratedstyle usually associated with the earlier years of his reign. Photographis used courtesy of Princeton University Press.

Akhenaten:The Heretic King, by Donald B. Redford, 255 pp. + xxvi. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984; $27.50.

Egyptology,like the natural sciences, undergoestransformationsfrom time to time. It is no exaggerationto maintain that Redford'scontribution to the reign of Akhenaten and the Amarna period providesanother,more exact, level in modern understandingof a difficult but significant era. He has both rewritten the life and times of Akhenaten and given a new outlook on a period that has been treated in recent times largelyby art historians. In a well-written book aimed at the generaleducated reader, Redfordpresents an outline of the Eighteenth Dynasty, followed by a painstaking analysis of the opening years of Akhenaten'sreign. Basinghis statements on most of his own new work at East Karnakas well as on the Akhenaten Temple Project,the author successfully challenges many of the hitherto standard - if not, indeed, stereotyped-viewpoints on Akhenaten. Redforddoes not shrink from providinghis personalobservations, and if some may disagreewith the authoritative depiction of the pharaoh, they will at least be given a more correct view of the historical progressof the two decades of Egyptianhistory duringwhich the sun-godAten was significant. For


253

example, on page 235 he concludes that Akhenaten and his entourageinspire contempt. Allowing for his personal viewpoint to enter analysis, is it historically accurateto paint a "sinisterquality" to the king's religion? Ratherthan regard the Aten worship as totalitarian,perhaps we ought to recognize the innate antagonism any single-minded and theocentric religion has for other faiths, whether it be that of Moses as narratedby the redactorsof Exodusor that supportedby Cromwell in early modern England.The real argument that Redfordleaves by the side is the question of the necessity of

Il;s

i

Althougha personalopinion of the author, there is no doubt that much of the king's new religion was astounding if not incomprehensible to foreigners.Nevertheless, I wonder if Aziru could comprehend orthodoxEgyptianreligion, much less the new one of Akhenaten. Indeed, it is highly likely that he neither spoke nor understoodEgyptian. The volume is well producedand includes more than ample photographsand reconstructions of the Karnaktemples of Akhenaten. Chapters5 through 7, which cover Redford'spersonal investigations in the field, may well be the most interest-

,!

Skia%

d~

C----?---?

~J

~- "g

~1IIII~

~;

~i~

alienation and overt aggressionon the part of any adherentof a faith, be it religious or political. The final productof such beliefs may indeed be totalitarian, but considering the historically conditioned hostility towardssuch a religious or political movement, are not the final iconoclastic years of Akhenaten predictable?Indeed,I would say that the latter were as logically consequent as the reaction of the Frenchrevolutionariesin 1792-93 or later identically minded political movements. In presenting the material from the Karnaktalatat (stone blocks from the dismantled temples of Akhenaten), Redfordrevealsfor the first time many side elements concerning the cult and practice of the Aten worship.Likewise, he provides,in the latter chaptersof the work, a healthy reconsiderationof the king's foreignpolicy, thereby complementing the analysis of the internal aspects of Akhenaten'sseventeen-year reign. In this section (see chapter 11 in particular)Redfordstresses his view that Aziru, the ruler of the Syrian state of Amurru in Akhenaten'sday,was "oneof the few"who saw through Akhenaten.

254

nation to conceive of the reaction of the temple officials to the new religion of the pharaoh.In similar fashion it is reasonable to interpretthe famous Restoration Inscriptionof Tutankhamun,Akhenaten's second successor, from this economic viewpoint, especially as part of that text mentions the new endowments instituted by the king and the freeing of the temples from interference"untoeternity." Redford'sAkhenaten, then, is a fresh look with new data at a controversial topic in Egyptology.Some may find the author'spersonal judgments and use of colloquial English too idiosyncratic.In particular,I foundhis antagonismtowards Akhenaten a bit remarkablein light of his personal scholarly involvement with the ruler. Is this position of opposition reconcilable with the "fascinatingheretic"describedon page xxiv? If Akhenaten was autocratic (page235), was not every other pharaohas well? After all, in Egypt

m

-""I

~f~lliil~

~

~1

P'yllar"osooll

~a?

ing from the point of view of a modern Egyptologist.In them the authorprovides much that is original, and the reader will find quite an amount of up-to-date information concerning the first temples built by Akhenaten to his solar deity. Perhapsthe most intriguing and significant aspect of this volume is Redford'sbrief discussion of the EastKarnak sun-temple'sregulations (pages134-36). It is from these fragmentaryofferinglists that we see the pharaohin his role as autocrat. Simply put, Akhenaten redirectedthe revenues of the old temples of Egyptby establishing new ones for his worshippersin the Aten complex. Since all of these offerings supplied part of the daily wages of the temple personnel, such a restructuringimplies a decrease in the wealth of, for example, the greatKarnak complex. This point, first stressed by Adriande Buck, is not left unnoted by Redfordand indeed supplies him with ammunition for the authoritativeinterpretation that he professes. Since the adherentsof Egypt'straditional religions lost their revenues through the new endowments and decrees of Akhenaten, it does not take any greatpower of imagi-


Drawing of the south colonnade of the temple, showing colossal Gm'(t)-p3-itn figures ofAkhenaten. Drawing is used courtesy of Princeton University Press.

the king was both mortal and divine. In fact, one may arguethat the failure of Akhenaten was not merely a result of the innate conservatism and inertia of the country but also of the economic dislocation of the land, howeverspeculative our understandingof this dislocation may be. The overallpicture of the king as rigid, powerful, and no arch conservative may not suit some (althoughit is highly likely that many of Egypt'srulers could be describedthis way).Nevertheless, the educated public now has at its hand an entirely new perspectiveof a thought-provokingperiod, and it is easy to prophesythat Redford'scontribution will be a standardfor many yearsto come. Anthony Spalinger Auckland University BOOKPUBLISHERS Please send all review copies to: Dr. PeterB. Machinist Department of Near EasternStudies The University of Michigan 3074 Frieze Building Ann Arbor,Michigan 48109

?

S?

:WHO : o

WAS THE PHARAOH THE EXODUS

SOF

o

A Symposium Sponsored By The MemphisArea Chapter Of

THE NEAR EAST ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY b

AVinci

?

?

o

• ....

?

'2

'2

? * Gleason Ar * Riv ? * Hans * * Gerald ? Ken Gd.Gordon iLivingston * Willi Kiihe ikvId t Ussishkin * Bruce Wa ?-i

?

dn

on Franz ? Hadidi ? a iller ? od

Yamauchi * Ron Youngbo? 3•

? ? S$45

Registration Fee INDIVIDUALS $75 thru 12-31-86 6 $100 from 1-1-87 GROUPS (5 or More) thru 12-31-86 1-1-87 $60 from FOR REGISTRATION

? ? ?

.. For InformationOn HOTELACCOMODATIONS ? Writeor Call:

A s!/

? Mid-AmericaBaptist Theological Seminary ? 1255 Poplar Ave. ? 3624and SP.O.Box Memphis, TN ? 38173-0624 1-(901) 726-9171

?

"

?

4AST

SNEAR

ARCHAOLOGICAL

?

?

!:....

,s

Notify Dr. James E. Powell

SOCIETY

? ?

Memphis Convention Visitors Bureau 203 Beale Street Suite 301 Memphis,TN 38103 1-(901) 526-1919 SYMPOSIUM HEADQUARTERS Holiday Inn Crowne

?I

?

???????????????

?

?

?

Memphis,TN 38103 1-(901) 527-7300

NOTE The program on Thursday, April 23, 1987, features presentations by Professors Archer and Goedicke, and includes a banquet, followed by a private showing of the Ramesses the Great Exhibit. Admission

S 1,000 who register. EARLY REGISTRATION 3

? ?

Plaza Hotel 250 North Main

to this portion of the program can be guaranteed only to the first

?

? ?

?

9

9

IS STRONGLY RECOMMENDED!?

?

, ?

???


223

THE AMERICAN SCHOOLS OF ORIENTAL RESEARCH announces the publication of

TheSynagogue in LateAntiquity edited by Lee I. Levine

A Centennial of Publication TheJewish of Seminary America Theological These papersfrom a conferencesponsoredby the Center for SynagogueStudies,The JewishTheological Seminaryof America, which was held October21-24, 1984, are gatheredin a single volume with bibliographies,an index, and illustrations.

The Second TempleSynagogue:The Formative Years

Lee I. Levine

The Dead Sea Scrolls and the EarlyHistory of JewishLiturgy Unity and Diversity among Diaspora Synagogues The Dura EuroposSynagoguePaintings:The State of Research

LawrenceH. Schiffman A. T. Kraabel JosephGutmann

The

and Its Blessings:The Realization Sdmac of God'sKingship On the Y6se•rand RelatedTexts

ReuvenKimelman Morton Smith

Sermons,Targums,and the Readingfrom Scripturesin the Ancient Synagogue

AvigdorShinan

Piyyiztas Poetry

J.Yahalom

The CurrentState of Galilean Synagogue Studies

EricM. Meyers

The Art and Architectureof the Synagoguein Its LateRoman Setting The Byzantine Setting and Its Influence on Ancient Synagogues Paganand Christian Evidenceon the Ancient Synagogue Pagan,Christian, and JewishElements in the Art of Ancient Synagogues

Gideon Foerster YoramTsafrir ShayeJ.D. Cohen Bezalel Narkiss

ISBN0-89757-510-5 ISBN0-89757-509-1(paperback)

xiv + 226pp

To order, send $26.95 per copy ($15.95 paperback) plus shipping and handling charges as follows: On orders up to $24.99, shipping and handling costs are 10% of the total order (15% overseas). On orders of $25.00 or more, please add 5% of the total order (10% overseas). Mail orders with payments to: Eisenbrauns

Post Office Box 275

Winona Lake, IN 46590

The editors invite the submission of articles to Biblical Archaeologist. Although the magazine is principally concerned with how archaeology illuminates the history of the ancient Near East,articles from any areaof ancient Near Easternstudies will be considered.Potentialauthors are reminded that all manuscript submissions must be accompanied by illustrativematerial(photographs, line drawings, and so on) that is readyfor the printeror by a detailed explanation of how the article is to be illustrated. In the latter case, acceptancewill be contingent upon the author's supplying suitable illustrations. BA will consult with the author on the choice of illustrations and will in some cases assist in their presentation. Proposalsfor articles and manuscripts should be sent to: Eric M. Meyers,Editor Biblical Archaeologist

In

the

Next

Moving?

Make Sure BA Moves With You

BA

Pleaseattachyourmagazinemailinglabel to this couponandsendbothto:ASOR SubscriptionServices,DepartmentBB,P.O. Box3000,Denville,NJ07834.Be sureto includeyournew addresson the form. Thankyou!

A Tributeto G. E. Wright,

Attach Label Here

thefounderof BA, on itsfiftiethanniversary

Name (please print) YourNew Address

ASOR Publications Office City

P.O.Box H.M., Duke Station Durham, North Carolina 27706

Help

Join

the

State

make

American

the

Schools

come

past

of

Zip

alive:

Oriental

Research!

For eighty-fiveyearsthe AmericanSchools of OrientalResearch(ASOR) has pioneeredthe study of the history, languages,and culturesof the Near East,makinginnumerablecontributionsto our understandingof the roots of Western civilization.Often these advanceshavebeen made in the midst of tumultuous,and sometimes threatening,world events. Today,with permanentoverseascentersin Nicosia, Amman, andJerusalem,ASOR facesboth excitingopportunitiesand difficultchallenges. ASOR invites you to join hundredsof others in the vital explorationof our past. By becoming a member of ASOR, you directlycontributeto the continuing supportof archaeologicalfieldworkand scholarlyenterpriseoverseas. Also, you can take advantageof specialbenefits.Forexample,membershipqualifiesyou to applyfor ASOR-administered grants and fellowshipsthat total thousands of dollarseach year. And members may subscribeto any of ASOR's distinguishedjournalsfor substantialdiscounts as well as purchasesignificantASOR books at specialsavings. You can become a part of this importantwork for as little as $15.00 per year. For more informationon ASOR membership,write: ASOR MembershipServices P.O.Box HM, Duke Station Durham, NC 27706


1986

255

_J/--

I F~ ~ =7 o ~i 9 I r ---r -;C ---LT~f ~--i----U~-.~l i?i

i\ i

~-J~-b'1

If~i~b?b~

~t

Lj

t"-+T ::T7~

~a~F~I~ JiS;1.93_F~iF3_a F(~ R ~y-, ---` '-L-T,1_

-L~

`-

L

i

i 1! 11:1 iijj~ilII; I:i

~

-i s ;r_ r;I

~-.-'---?

::" lijlj; ''i

,

'?

~--~L~-_i-~~L---il_ --L_1T--

-J

Ii -fJ:II

-`? ,~ I- - ~- ~c~ 'r

,1

i

7'

, t-l `LF:r;~f I;?t

Illil !Ji

,Tt

Newly Released by the American Schools of Oriental Research

Romans and Saracens: A History of the Arabian Frontier by S. Thomas Parker When the Roman Empire dominated the Mediterranean, its eastern frontier delineated a zone of contact, and sometimes conflict, between East and West. This landmark study presents for the first time an illuminating synthesis of literary sources and the results of a decade of archaeological research, revealing a fascinating mosaic of Roman policy in the Near East. Dr. Parker'sbook not only explores the mechanisms by which the Empire maintained the peace and security of its eastern holdings but also offers new insights into the peoples of the region. The Nabataeans and their varying relations with the Romans are reviewed in the light of recent research. Considerable attention is given to the Roman army, its fortifications, and the regional road system of the Arabian frontier, all illustrated by over seventy illustrations. Also of importance is the chronicling of Western contacts with various Arabic peoples in this vital formative stage prior to the introduction of Islam. Dr. S. Thomas Parker is an Associate Professor of History at North Carolina State University and is also the director of the Limes Arabicus Project. This volume is in limited supply Place your order today to insure that you will obtain a copy xiii + 238pp + 12 plates

ISBN 0-89757-106-1

ASOR Dissertation Series No. 6

paperbound Please send me

copies of Romans and Saracens by S. Thomas Parker.

Name: Address: State:

City:

Zip:

To order, send check or money order payable to Eisenbrauns at $26.25 per copy ($25.00 plus $1.25 postage and handling) to: Eisenbrauns, P.O.B.275, Winona Lake, IN 46590 U.S.A. For orders outside of the United States, please include $2.00 for postage and handling.

256

1986 ARCHAEOLOGIST/DECEMBER BIBLICAL

announces the publication of:

Biblical Archaeologist

A COMPREHENSIVEINDEX TO BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST

VOLUMES36-45 (1973-1982)

~.; i. r~~?:?

Compiled by D. Bruce MacKay ?:~.?r?+-C~.~Y ~-"" "'~ -?

~':;? .-1.,:...

~~~~

'i?p?' .?sr. ~~:~??.??.? I~c~: \?;?a ?j

'?z I?.I /?

5~?~ ~~

~

"?r,.:

f ~~s~i

/:e .?;i~t ?.?.?

?-?.

"" "5r;~ ~?

.r??~ ?? Y"-: ~~~??:

:-? ~; ~dt~Y~':! ~:~F;~\illuJFfi~;~.~i~;P~;9 ? -sf.?..i rz: .?;?~?.?1. r~ ?. .s~;i?I~?? r? ??:??,; ~-:~~?:? ~

?X :

-?

~

~V: ?;?:?: ';i! .ba~

~r~

j-~f~ r ?4?

I:~i?-: -?;;re

1 6 c. "'

::

'''.j: f: :,~w? .r

~: ~

;s? ~'??

i? :I~j~b -?: ?.?r?? x~~ ;~-?.??~ ,,ta :e

i'

?'C~E~:C :?Ia:?-:

t* ?" ??i ?-. '''- ;r?.?i'?i'i. --

;~I?X? '1' .t':? .~~?:;?.?~-

Using the latest in computer technology, Dr. MacKay has produced a major reference tool covering a critical decade of research on the ancient Near East. The Index contains the following features: * a comprehensive general index which includes geographical place names; * a complete author index to all articles, reviews, and notices which appeared in BA during these years; * a full Scripture index; * an index to all illustrations which appeared in these issues. Over 28,000 individual entries provide a detailed overview of this important epoch in archaeological studies. ISBN 0-89757-008-1

v + 219pp paperbound

Please send me Vols. 3 6-45 (19 73-1982)

copies of A Comprehensive Index to Biblical Archaeologist,

Name Address State

City

Zip

Please include $11.95 per copy plus shipping and handling charges as follows: On orders up to $24.99, shipping and handling costs are 10% of the total order (15% overseas). On orders of $25.00 or more, please add 5% of the total order (10% overseas). Eisenbrauns

Mail orders, with payments, to: Post Office Box 275 Winona Lake,IN 46590

r? ?'P~U~PSIC~~

"

I"

;i

r

.V st 1* "`!

t.r

?*

-1.t

;1 ;p~-

bj

r-e

r

)?

~t?~ r

:b? ~~~'-

n i' ~r~i ?I~

;~k

?.~. ~~f

cr ~iY

G:tr

b~y,

W~r?

g

?7,. r; t~i*'' Irl c--~e P

r

r

r

r

r

r

~~ ?I

/

I

- +? I

?e r-~r i?

i

"~Fd'

4~ r 7~9i~l:?

1 J

c!

ir-

fl r

??r); ~Iii

*.I

.rr. ~'''i'f t i1 ~r

I.

tf:

.? ~

P

.r

:L;T3t~e

--~a~?

~

~~-~IL~P~

Ìr

'Lk

"

' .

"ircc; r~,

,,,

1~ r?

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

Recommend Documents