,A,
i! .
D
10
"1•
-
-
A
1~
4W
I
A
r~a
Q i~c
A
*
'
-•
" Al,
.,9
.
. .. ..
...
-.
,
,.-
•
4.
.
".
. .?.
,
.~
Biblical Archaeolo ontheAncient World fromMesopotamia totheMediterranean Perspectives APublication oftheAmerican SchoolsofOriental Research
122 ?
.
Volume 57 Number 3 1994 September
The AnchorChurchat the Summitof Mt.Berenice,Tiberias YizharHirschfeld Whatruinslay atthe topof Mt.Berenice,highaboveOldTiberias: notthe fabledpalaceof thefirst-century Queen,of course!Instead,a large,sixth-
.
Intheinnersanctuary ofthechurch itself,a myschurch. century Byzantine
''V ..
teriouscultstonein reusefromtheEarlyBronzeAge!Destroyedby an earthquakein 749CE,thechurchwas rebuiltduringtheearlyIslamicperiod:thefirstchurchof theAbbasidperiodeverfoundin Israel.
134 page 122
138
A Wall Painting of a Saint's Face in the Church of Mt. Berenice Roni Ben-Arieh A smallfragmentof a frescobearingthebeautifullypaintedfaceof a ChristiansaintrestedalongsidethemarbleslabthatoncelayundertheAnchor Church'saltar.Wasthefaceintegralto thechurch'sdecorationor a special deposit?Whowas theartistandwho was thesaint?
The Iron 1 WesternDefenseSystemat Tell El-'Umeiri,Jordan Douglas R. Clark Frommoatto rampartandcasematewallto collaredstorejar, Tellel-Jmeiri, southof Ammanin centralJordan,offersan astonishinglycompleteand tantalizinglyearlyIronAge defensesystem.Afterfourseasonsof excavations,therichnessof thiscomplexcontinuestoemerge,suggestingchallenges to prevailingviews of theemergenceof theregion'sIronAge societies.
~'iI
150 page 138
The Oldest Datable Chambers on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem Shimon Gibsonand David M. Jacobson Whowouldpassup theopportunityto venturebeneaththeIFaram alin sensitivities have investiSharTf Jerusalem? Religious longdiscouraged gationof theHaram.Yet,fora briefperiodin thesecondhalfof thenineteenthcenturya handfulof Europeanexplorersvisitedmanyof theunderGibsonandJacobsonhaveexcavatedin groundchambersof theIHaram. Fund(PEF)in Londonto recover thearchivesof thePalestineExploration crucialdataabouttheearlieststructureof theTempleMount
161 The WaterSupply of the DesertFortressesin the JordanValley GiinterGarbrechtand YehudaPeleg Isolatedon rockypeaksin themidstof thearidzone,desertfortressesdemandedspecialeffortsto ensuretheirsupplyof water.IngenuousHasmoneanandHerodianengineersconstructedcisterns,weirs,andconduits forthefortsandpalacesin andaroundtheJordanValley.
171 page 161
Notes,News, and Reviews Ummel-Jimal, Aila,andMiqnereport. On the cover: Remainsof a ByzantineandAbbasidperiodchurchoverlook Tiberiasfromthe summitof Mt.Berenice.Established byJustinian,the Byzantine churchwas incorporated intoancientTiberias's fortification system.Fromits spectacularlocation,the largebasilicaservedthe emperor'spromotionof the imperial religion.Therestorationof the churchin the Abbasidperiodsurprisedarchaeologists,as didthe depositthey discoveredbeneaththe altar:a massivehalf-ton "anchor" stone!
FromtheEditor bleachedhairand mistakenassumptionsoften returntogetherfromthe Sun summerarchaeologicalseason in the Middle East.Whilethe commonsense consistentlyto wear a hatwill shieldone fromadvertizingthe evidenceof fieldwork on one's head, nothingwill protectan archaeologistfrombeing proved wrong in the field. The surprisesof human creativityand archaeological preservationare everywhere,of course:witness this issue's articleson the remarkable"anchor"Churchand the ingenious desert water systems of the Hasmoneans.But more than that,our limited data base affordsbut a tiny keyhole throughwhich we peer at the past, and from a great distance at that. The models we employ to constructcoherencein our data base and the angle of our vision are crucial,and fragile.Researchersdo cling tenaciouslyto cherished views, but ultimately archaeologyis self-correcting,and fieldwork leads the way. The spectacularearly IronAge finds at the MadabaPlainsProject'sTellelcUmeirifocus attentionon a classicillustrationof the potentialmis-direction inherentin researchers'angle of vision: biblicalarchaeology'sfascination with the "settlementperiod."Under the influenceof debate about the Bible's "historicity,"excavatorsheaded first for the greatnamed tells of the biblical record:Ai, Bethel,Jericho,Hazor,and other prominentbiblicalsites. But these famous tells, it turnedout, did not offer any compelling story to place next to the biblicalhistoriography.Among those sites that disappointedin this respectwas Hesban,the tell upon which the incipientMadabaPlains Projectconcentratedits attentionat the height of the debate about conquest of Canaan.Six seasons producedremainsfrom the IronAge through Mamelukeperiods, but no evidence for any occupationof the site before the twelfth centuryBCE. Littlewas learnedabout the settlementperiod and Hesban's role in the conquest (Numbers21) could not be affirmed. Witha differentset of researchobjectives,the MadabaPlainsprojectturned to unheraldedTellel-cUmeiriand, behold (as the Hebrew Bibleoften puts it), the best preservedearly IronAge highland site known throughoutall of Palestine.The early IronAge remainsso far encompassa completeand coherent fortificationsystem, topped by a casematewall whose rooms are filled with collaredpithoi--over fortyand counting.The influenceof this excavationon the question of the emergenceof Israel,Ammon, and the other peoples of the IronAge will be as profoundas it was unanticipated.Likethe data of surface surveys that have revolutionizedreconstructionsof this period,the forthcoming impact of cUmeiri'sexcavationcontainsa hint of biblicalirony.From the least expected (given certainassumptions)and from that which goes unnoticedby the majorchroniclers(ancienthistorywriters),come the greatest, most crucialcontributorsto our portraitof the past, at least the slice of it that we glimpse throughour archaeologicalkey hole. My son and I both returnedfromJordanthis summerwith bleachedhair;I carried the greater load of mistaken assumptions. I was wrong, for example, about Brian's urge to collect: he sherded his way through the entire season. The pieces that returned home, however, were qualitatively improved, or he kept them to fill in a few of the many gaps in his collection, or because he discovered a new category of artifact. Its a good prospect for all of our research.
~A1P4AC
Biblical
Archaeologist
from ontheAncient World Perspectives Mesopotamia totheMediterranean Editor David C. Hopkins Art Director RobertD. Mench, Top Design Book Review Editor James C. Moyer EditorialAssistant Mary Petrina Boyd EditorialCommittee JefferyA. Blakely Douglas A. Knight Elizabeth Bloch-Smith Mary Joan Leith Gloria London Betsy M. Bryan Jodi Magness J.P.Dessel ErnestS. Frerichs Gerald L. Mattingly Ronald S. Hendel Gaetano Palumbo RichardS. Hess Paul Zimansky Kenneth G. Hoglund Subscriptions Annualsubscriptionratesare $35forindividualsand $45forinstitutions.There is a specialannualrateof $28forthoseover 65, physicallychallenged,or unemployed.Biblical is alsoavailableas partof thebenefits Archaeologist of someASORmembershipcategories.Postage forCanadianandotherinternational addressesis an additional$5. Paymentsshould be sent to ASORMembership/SubscriberServices,P.O. Box15399,Atlanta,GA 30333-0399(ph:404-727VISA/ 2345;Bitnet:SCHOLARS@EMORYUI). Mastercardorderscan be phoned in. Backissues Backissuescanbe obtainedby callorwriting SPCustomerServicesat800-437-6692 ing SP CustomerServices,P.O.Box6996,Alpharetta,GA 30239-6996. Postmaster Send addresschangesto Biblical ASORMembership/Subscriber SerArchaeologist, vices,P.O.Box15399,Atlanta,GA30333-0399. Second-classpostagepaid at Atlanta,GA and additionaloffices. Copyright@1994by the AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch. Correspondence All editorialcorrespondence shouldbe addressedto Biblical 4500 Archaeologist, MassachusettsAvenueNW,Washington,DC fax:202-885-8605). 20016-5690(ph:202-885-8699; Booksforreviewshouldbe sentto Dr.JamesC. Moyer,Departmentof ReligiousStudies,Southwest MissouriStateUniversity,901 South MO65804-0095. National,Box167,Springfield, Advertising Correspondenceshouldbe addressedto SarahFoster,ScholarsPress,P.O.Box 15399,Atlanta,GA 30333-0399(ph:404-727-2325; fax:404-727-2348). Ads for the sale of antiquities will not be accepted. BiblicalArchaeologist (ISSN 0006-0895)is published quarterly(March,June, September,December) by ScholarsPress, 819 Houston Mill Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30329, for the American Schools of Oriental Research(ASOR),3301 North Charles Street,Baltimore,MD 21218. Printed by Cadmus JournalServices, BaltimoreMD.
o
OFi 0%~
HtopQk CI
0
WN
The Anchor Church at the of Mt. Berenice, Tiberias
Summit
By Yizhar Hirschfeld ree surprisesawaitedus when we beganexcavatingat the sumL1mitof Mt.Berenice,highabove OldTiberias.Thefirstsurpriselay in what was not found at the site:no evidence at all was uncoveredof Queen Berenice'spalace,whicheveryonehad expectedto findon thepeakwhichbears hername.Thesecondsurprisewas one thatexcitedthe imagination:a mysterious cultstonediscoveredin theinner sanctuaryof a Byzantinechurch.The thirdsurprise,and themostimportant of all,was thatthe Byzantinechurch was rebuilton a grandscaleduringthe earlyIslamicperiod.Thissurveyis devotedto thefindsof Mt.Bereniceand ourattemptto assesstheirsignificance.' T
Locationof the Site Mt.Berenicerisesto a heightof 200meters(650feet)abovethe Seaof Galilee (LakeKinneret),betweenTiberiasand HammatTiberiasjustsouthof it.The hillis in theformof a pyramid,with its baseparallelto the shorelineof the lake. Theeasternside of the hillis characterized by wild cliffsandcaves.Thewesternside,by contrast,slopesgently,and is, in effect,a directcontinuationof the Poriahridgewhichloomsaboveit. Thesiteis reachedfromthe northby an all-vehiclegravelroad,builtespeciallyforthe excavationsby theJewish NationalFund.Theroadwindsup from •iberias'southernneighborhoodto the saddlebetweenMt.Bereniceand the Poriahridge.Thisroadneverexistedin thepast:theancientascentto the top of the hillwas fromthe east,by way of a paththatslopedup the clifffacefrom thecitybelow.IntheByzantineperiod, thepathenteredthecitythrougha gate, of whichremainswereunearthedin the currentexcavations, then climbed the Poriah ridge, and continued west to the harborsof the Mediterranean.
122
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3 (1994)
Thepinnacle-like natureof thesite, It appearsthatsimilarconsiderations sheer from the Sea of Galilee, motivatedthe ancients.In the lightof soaringup the with visitor a provides breath-taking theexcavations,it is certainthatthe view of thelakeandthesitesaroundit, buildersof the site'sByzantinechurch the finest and most perhaps interesting selectedthelocation,notonlybecauseit in the The panorama region. cityof in the of Tiberiaslies palm yourhand beneathyou. Acrossthelake,looming Right. The anchor stone as it was found behindKibbutzEinGev,aretheremains in the apse of the church. Behindit is what of theancientcityof Susita(Hippios),in remainsof the altar;view to the east. Photos courtesyof theauthorandthe itsdaythemostimportanton theeastern andillustrations IsraelAntiquities Authority. shore.Tothenorth,one canmakeout the sites of the ancientfishing villagesof CaPlanof AncientTiberias SCity pernaum,HepTombs tapegon(Tabgha) and MigdalModern Tarichaeae. BeTiberias yond themin the I1 distancearethe two highestpeaks \ 1 4 -Synagogue in thecountry: Mt.Hermonto thenorth,andMt. Wall6th cent. Byzantine S Meronto the northwest.Tothe -I N south,one'sataIReservoir tentionis drawn of Study to theJordanValI SoHouse --Church Basilica ley,andbeyondit N to themouthof Marketplace Bath theYarmukRiver andthemoun\ Theater tainsof Gilead. Thespectacu1 IMt.Berenice larview fromthe * Gate % summitof Mt. ! Berenicewas one HammatTiberias of the considerationsin selectHot Spring ing thesitefor archaeological excavationand 0 250m S\ eventualdevel--, ,, opmentas a touristattraction. 1"+
~II
El
7a~i~i~ C~; V ~?~pl?" i~
~~"
9 r
~C uc-v "
,e.-?
p ,. ;-?~tt.N -rl: n i? ` ?* \???? ~igu;LLr-~
rA\1
.,.., ~~?? ~
p~?? .. ~* ?t.P~rc
~~3~ ,?L1~S~r -~c
.r
S
??
~? r r Y 4, *: "
r ?+cur~q~ph Y o ~hJ~u r-??
LI
-s~ap;i
c?..? 'se ?I,
rC
??; *
?r;jg~ il~s
?a~
*I~ ?~
"
I
`~~h 1
C r
`1
t"
~?C.~,7
,
1,
u~,?
~- s\
~-
, 3t:
..
r.
~; ~r:l g.. _rC~L\ raY? 91C~ C ?~sL
I:
,,,
;~C
ag~
"9~I-~
~e
* rt
?'~I~LI~~
a~
~rr ..
~t; ;??* -
b
?. rr
?-'T'~ Y ,?r
1,
's* ;' ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~; ~,?p-~,rp r? ''
?-.
?
r
:?e ~Y;bkPI~ .. ;r, ~ ?c '3
rr.
i'' iL~?
C
~
~u?~t~
---? r
'5
?. ?: ~ 5
II
.. ~?~'
P c;~?-
??~i-
-?s 4rU\. 71
-,, Zb~~.
~?~~-ta? ?r,r~LL ~i t.:; 2&;? , C
'? 4-;??
-t
r? b "Z,~t~ ~`?~?L?.
~
?L t~?
~
_Yc
~I
-L~4~L-i) ~C~Ct r
~ ,r B? ji ?
9?1~
v ;' "s 's
;L
~
41rl ~P ?-~7~
~L I
~',~P
a
LTs~~_ ~`r~ac~ ~1 ~-.~~1~LI~IP ?? 2. ~~'4~ r=-- ~= i sL;'~IP~;YL;;"k'
~ ~1117~n~ J ??~JI . .?
?l~n, 1"9`) ~C ?N
s
~ps:
r r, I
? ir v Y
~-r
C)
~n,~P'lr x- ?, ~"-
;iF:
4t:
?i~~?; "S
,r
c,.
IJlc-?; u-Q
7'Ps~~~ .r
?-,
i ~a C?~:L h r
?? 'r
U
~ri~L
~
%?
8Y -1
-?rI
;~F~.4
;i si
F )t
IL.
.~ IIE; .s r??
tS*
3
L
1-I
r??
rr.
f:~ 1 f?tic~: ??,, ;CI ?f ~
2??tZ?~ -~i;dY ~Pl~b-l
I
f ?\
Quarry
Tower
a
demo
*
I
II
press
/Oil
It ,Gate
11o
,,
Church
/The
Cistern ."... Tower
Reservoir
0
50
//,
/////
j/ Plan of the remains on top of Mt. Berenice.
dominatedtheSeaof Galilee,butin particularas a way of makingtheirpresencefelt,sincethe churchwas visible fromeverywherearoundthe lake.
The Riddleof the Palace Beforethecurrentexcavations,most scholars(thiswriteramongthem)were agreedthatthe peakaboveTiberiaswas thesiteof thepalaceof HerodAntipas, who foundedthe cityin 20CE.According to theJewishhistorian,Josephus Flavius,thiswas a splendidpalace,coveredwith gold,andrichlydecorated.In Josephus'Life (ch.12-13),thepalaceis describedas having"hadthefiguresof livingcreaturesin it,"andas having "someof the roofsgiltwith gold."In 61CE,Tiberiaswith its palacewereannexedto the kingdomof AgrippaIIand his sisterBerenice,who ruledoverthe regionof Mt.Lebanon,theBashan,and the northernpartof Israel.Although theirroyalcapitalwas at Caesarea 124
57:3 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
Philippi-Baniasof today--it is probable thatthequeenvisitedthe palacein Tiberias,andperhapseven madeit the royalwinterresidence(seeSchurer1973: 472-483forthebesthistoricalsummary). Of the severalreasonsthatled researchersto suggestMt.Bereniceas the siteof thepalace,themostimportant was its name.InArabic,thehill-topsite is knownas 'QasrBintel-Maliq'the Palaceof the King'sDaughter.Thereare manyplacesin theregionwhichcarry royalnamesthathaveno connection with the placeitself,like'QasrBint Farbun'(thePalaceof Pharaoh's Daughter)in Petra,or Solomon'sPools on theroadto Hebron.Inthiscase, however,scholarscouldnot resistthe temptationof linkingthe nameof the sitewithJosephus'storyof thebeautiful
on the summitof Mt.Berenicemetwith littleopposition,andeven gave the placeits presentname. Thiswas the situationuntilthe currentexcavationsbegan.Thefirstseason of diggingin October,1990,turnedup no findswhatever,not even potsherds, fromthefirstcenturyCE.As the excavationsprogressed,it becameclearthat nothingon thesitepredatedthe sixth
centuryCE!
Where,therefore,is the palace?Josephus is knownforhis meticulousness, andthecompleteaccuracyof hisdescriptionshasbeenborneout in one dig after another.Thereis no doubtthatHerod Antipas'palaceexisted;the questionis where? Itis reasonableto assumethatthe palacewas locatedon the lakeshore, somewherewithinancientTiberias.The first as QueenBerenice, suggested by theGermanscholarGotlibSchumacher kingwould logicallyhave chosenthe too,thelocation-- mostbeautifulandconvenientspoton the (1887:85-90). Perhaps, on a highhilltop,overlookingtheSeaof shoreto buildhis residence.Although it is not withGalilee-remindedthe scholarsof Mas- thisis merelyconjecture, out somebasis.InCaesareaMaritima, adaandits palaces.In anyevent,the builtby HerodtheGreat,fatherof Herod of thepalace suggestedidentification
100m
of a greatercomplex,however.Themain constructionprojectwas the erectionof a massivewall whichsurroundedthe andclimbedMt.Berenice cityof Tiberias, as faras the top of its westernpeak. Thewall was mostimpressive,faced with dressedstones,andbackedby a solidcoreof boulderscementedtogetherwith densemortar.Thewall was 2.5 meters(8.3feet)wide,and stoodto an estimatedheightof 15meters(49feet). Thefoundationsof two of thetowers wereuncoveredon the top of thewesternpeakof Mt.Berenice,eachside measuring7.5meters(24.4feet).Sentryaccessto therampartswas by meansof TheAnchorChurch stepsbuiltagainstthewall,someof whichwerefoundin the excavations. Thesummitof Mt.Bereniceis capped and Theentirewall was 2.8kilometers(1.75 small an one two by peaks: eastern a higher,westernone.Thecentralfind miles)longandclimbedstraightup from of the excavationwas madeon the east- the lakeshoreto the summitof the hill. ernpeak:a largeByzantinechurch,built Theremainsfoundatthe summitare evidenceof a complex,expensive,and in thesixthcenturyCE,theremainsof whichhavebeencompletelyuncovered, impressivelyexecutedproject. Accordingto the courthistorian,Proincludingits floors,openingsandinteriorspaces.Thestructurewas only part copiusof Caesarea(Buildings5.9.21),it Antipas,remainsof theroyalpalacewere foundon a promontorythatprotruded intothe sea (LevineandNetzer1986: 149-177.SeealsoHolumandHohlfelder Ifoursuppositionis correct, 1988:86-87). remainsof a palacemayyet be foundin and thelarge-scalearchaeologTiberias; icalexcavationsbeingplannedalong the southernapproachroadof the town mightuncoverat leastthebackof the complex.Thisis admittedlyin therealm of wishfulthinking:theriddleof the palaceremainsunsolved,andits soluwillprobtion,asis usualin archaeology, be stumbled uponunexpectedly. ably
was thegreatByzantineEmperorJustinian (527-565)who was responsiblefor buildingthewallsof Tiberias,thusadding it to the longlistof buildingprojects in theHoly Land--churches,monasteries, andso on---alreadyto his credit. Whywas Justinianespeciallymotivatedto buildthewalls of Tiberias? The with it the would lies answer, seem, churchdiscoveredon theeasternpeakof the site.An examinationof Justinian's buildingprojectsin Israelshows his in genpreoccupationwith Christianity with the and to eral, Holy pilgrimage Land---thenat its height-in particular. Inthisway Justinianhopedto unifyhis empire;andfroma Christianperspective,thebuildingof a largeand splendid churchon a peakoverlookingthe Seaof Galilee-and withinTiberias,the was The sixth century wall of Tiberias Justinianto incorporate the builtby Emperor churchof Mt.Bereniceinthe confinesof the lookingsouthwest. cityof Tiberias,
"jab, -Nowt~a
14."
A4 .46
MIL.
,r7+ ;`
k i,'ENlB I ~ ss~~ E~~r
~
B
f
most "Jewish"townin the countryat the time!-was by way of beinga declarationof victoryby theimperialreligion. (OnJustinian'spropagandain thesixth centuryCE,see Scott[1985:99-109].) Inthisrespect,thecaseof Mt.Gerizim shouldbe mentioned(Magen1990: 333-342).TheByzantine emperorZenon, and afterhimJustinian,builta church anda monasteryon top of themountainthatdominatedthecityof Neapolis (todayNablus,in thecenterof Samaria), the capitalof theSamaritans. Theerectionof Christianedificesabovethemain JewishandSamaritancentershad the samepurpose:declaringthe triumphof ChristianityoveritsJewishandSamaritanrivals.Thecaseof Tiberiaswas even moreimportant,as thehordesof pil-
grimsthatstreamedto theSeaof Galilee in thisperiodwould haveseenthe churchfromafar,its tiledrooftopped by the customarygildedcross. In the courseof theexcavations,we wereableto appreciatetheimpressive planof the church.Thiswas a large basilica,withwallsof well-cutbasalt stone.Thelengthof the churchfrom west to eastwas 48 meters(157feet), andits breadthfromnorthto south28 meters(92feet).Thechurchwas made up of a prayerhall,anda forecourt(atrium) containinga largecisternwith a ceilingsupportedby fourstonearches. Thecistern,with a capacityof 300cubic meters(about400cubicyards),collected winterrainwaterfortheuse of the permanentcommunity.Thechurch
I
complexincludedlivingquarters,apparentlyof a smallmonasticcommunity,whose taskit was to careforthe church,conductits rites,and servethe pilgrimsthatvisitedit. Remainsof an oil-presswerefoundnextto the outer wall,indicatingthatthe monkswere involvedin olivecultivationand the manufactureof its oil,whichwas their traditionaloccupationthroughoutthe countryat thetime(Hirschfeld1992: 106-111).Thegreatwall was designed to protectthiscommunity. The components of the the Byzantine churchon the easternhillof Mt.Berenice appearinthistop plan:1 atrium;2 cistern; 3 prayerhall;4 presbytery; 5 altar;6 apses.
.i,
,
7
/ A •-
""
?
........
,,~--:_---;. ----
c,,
_ O-•...?xx
---e
mowOB
'---~--,,
0
126
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3 (1994)
:-',:.-
20m
,,4
!law-
Oll?
.......... ..........
Above. Aerial view of the church at the end of the excavation, looking east.
I-
Right. The northern aisle of the church; view to the east
The prayer hall of the church was built in the common form of the Byzantine period. Threeentrancesled from the atrium to the interiorof the church:a wide centraldoorway and two narrow side ones. Opposite them, in the eastern wall of the church, were three apses, of which the centralone was the largestand most important.Two lines of columns supported the wooden ceiling beams. The floor of the aisles was decorated with beautifulcolored mosaics depicting birds and fruit (like grapes and pomegranates),while the nave was covered by fine marble tiles in the opus sectile style.2
;
~IIC~ FI
i:
~* a
f II
;;h
t :: 3
~"
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3 (1994)
127
Wv st
Ik4 sr-11? ??4 dW, '.*'r asdb *p O'v 4640 46
low law 40, 00 Ao JP
gk 0
AV
to oft'.-
'* ap 41V
lot
ok
vx?
?k
ilk,
ft
Alp Ir.
Sm
*so& POINA,4 wow isIN 0,ist.I&.-& flag 4pt *,&Ravi
a'
gal$* "alp to64 Wrl', Wow 06.0610 01 wow0 MAN -mA ag, is oil as Itfo JO 4p-a4b v apt* tpan 4W* ? t 0 A et :Vs -% 40 OR 4'? _"W'qm f., 0 ` b"' ?-, T S*Vfft? 0 1& f 1% *? ?.? ? Ift%SArA t"' -" a -v'ftft4i-x Tis fft . '.A ApOR. 04( slowpoilmimm 'W'. -*tr, 11L. -' i op .0 * a.APE V4? -o JwAir 1p 4,11k at0#&go Wc LOS% AN r-,op i9m wkia 10Wim"WAP oft Olt 0910 7mis W AW P#4jpmm w "poof * '4 N ?k. a*%AM*84A war, . . sqf . wow L "bow '11?wAla way, mum 49woof
gb'%P
i"
6
%,
lip
A& jot.. S#
4f
'4
11
&A
IN
X
IBROPWISd
VaRdr1ir
-WISIN
* kaid
los
ot
&as
31,
MA
ft
-! j .?*
40 41k.
4*
WWI*
AN
.4*
14N
a-
0
*a
Aft
404,w
1& sign
?5'
tj
ivai
Ali
Ids
#4
Details from the mosaic of the Byzantine church.
TheAnchorStone
evidenceof thepotsherdsfoundthere), andeverythingpointsto thisbeingespeciallyvenerated,impartingits holinessto thechurchas a whole.Whatwas thenatureof thestone,andwhy was it consideredholy? Thegeneralshapeof thestone,and theholeatitscenter,areverysimilartothe manyanchorsfoundaroundtheSeaof Galilee;butits weightis some ten times greaterthanthatof theaverageanchorof theperiod.Stoneanchorsin the areaof theSeaof Galileeaverage about40kg
Infrontof thecentralapsewas thepresbytery,thesacredpartof thechurch enteredonlyby thepriests.Aroundthe apsewerestonebenches,andat its centerremainsof thealtarwerefound.At thebaseof thealtarwas a largemarble slabwith a holein thecenter.Underthe slabwe expectedto finda holy relic--a boneperhaps-which would haveim(88 lbs; partedits sanctityto theplace,and see turnedthechurchintoa consecrated "houseof God."Instead,whatawaited us was the surpriseof theexpedition. Merelya few centimetersbelow the marbleslab,a largeand impressive blockof basaltstonewas foundlying on its side.Thestoneweighedalmost halfa ton (487kg, 1052lbs,to be precise),was 1.02meters(3.3ft)high,and measuredin cross-section0.5x 0.3meters(1.6x 1 ft). Thefront,back,andsidesof thestone weresmoothlycut,butthebottomwas roughlyfashionedin theformof a stake. Itis dearthatthestoneoriginallystoodin an uprightposition,with its lowerend fixedin theground.Themostsignificant of themonodetailforan understanding lithis a roundholein thestone,18cms (72 inches)in diameter,andin theshape of a doublecone,theresultof having beendrilledfrombothsides. Thestonewas placedbeneaththe o altarin the Byzantineperiod(onthe 128
57:3 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
%'b
Aleft Nor& 0A.
Itis dearthatthisis Num [1977:97-101]). a stonein theshapeof an anchor,butis not an actualanchoritself. was a Theanchorin earlyChristianity and Paul's of (cf. symbol security hope Epistleto theHebrews19:6)and found artisticexpressionin variousways (Child andColls1971:15,190-191). Onecould surmisethatthisanchor-shaped therefore stonehadbeenfoundby thebuildersof the Byzantinechurchand adoptedas a sacredobject.Buta meticulousexaminationof thestoneitselfrevealsthatit is Below. The Anchor stone in perspective (drawn by EmilShapira). Right. Plan and sections of the Anchor stone.
10
20
30cm
farmoreancient,predatingthechurch structureby thousandsof years. the stonecanbe relatTypologically, ed to a well-knowngroupof anchorshapedstonesthathada culticfunction in theEarlyBronzeAge (thefirsthalf of thethirdmillenniumBCE; Wachsmann 1986:395-403. My thanksto Shelley who drewmy attention Wachsmann, to theimportanceof the find.)Suchcult stones,knownto scholarsby theterm shfifon(shfifonimin-theplural),were foundin a verydefinedarea:on the southernandwesternshoresof the Sea of Galilee.Theyresemblethemonolith of Mt.Berenice,notonly in theirform anddimensions,butespeciallyin thebiconicalholedrilledthroughtheircenters. Thesewereanchor-shaped monumental at the of erected stones, gate thecity(as was indeedfoundin theexcavationsof BetYerab), orin othercultplaces.These cultstonesareevidenceof theantiquity of boatingon theSeaof Galilee-at least by thethirdmillenniumBCE-andof theimportanceof theanchorsymbolin thelivesof theregion'sinhabitantsin ancienttimes. Thediscoveryof theEarlyBronze shfifonstonein the Byzantinechurch raisesquestions:How did the stoneget
i
!".!i-
,
_
I"...
0
_._
::
_ _-
I
50cm
;
.?.
*
oii
II
4::
"vt >TIP-low
C
there,andwhatsignificancedid it have in theeyes of thebuildersof thechurch? Mostshfifonimwerefoundin fieldsnear the lake.Onlya few werefoundin situ or (liketheone at thegateof BetYerab), in secondaryuseas tombstones.Itis possiblethattheshfifonof Mt.Berenicewas alsofoundin a fieldandceremonially broughtto the church. Althoughthereis no historicalsource fromwhichthe storyof the stonecan the writaccuratelybe reconstructed, in of the ings pilgrims Byzantineperiod oftenmentionsacredstonesthatwere erectedandveneratedin variouschurches aroundthecountry.Onesuchstone, forexample,was thaton whichtheVirgin Marywas saidto havesaton her way to Bethlehem.Accordingto thepilgrim,Theodosius,thisstonewas displayedin theChurchof theHoly Sepul-
'W
A marble plaque above the anchor stone
whichis madeof basaltstone.Theanchor stone is datedto the sixthcentury;allthe restto the beginningof the twelthcentury. Oneof the smallstonesto the rightbears the frescoface. (Seearticleby Ben-Arieh below.)
chrein Jerusalem.Anotherstonewas the "rollingstone"of thetombof Christ, used as thealtarof the Churchof Golgothain Jerusalem(accordingto the monkAdomnanat theend of theseventhcentury).3 Sincethesanctityof these stonesrelatedto thelifeof Jesus,it may be assumedthatthe stonepresentlyin questionhadsignificanceforthe church becauseit too was connectedin some way with his lifeandworksamongthe fishingvillagesalongtheshoresof the Seaof Galilee. BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3 (1994)
129
we haveno exact Archaeologically, to stone found the underthe parallel but are there two other altar, examples of veneratedblocksof stone,bothof themin thisarea.Oneis a prominent rock,7 meters(23feet)high,nextto the Byzantinemonasteryof Kursi,on the easternshoreof theSeaof Galilee.A chapelwas builtnextto therockto commemoratethemiracleof the swine of theGadarenes(Matt8:23-24;see TzafThesecondsiteis the eris1983:49-51). Churchof theMultiplication (ofthe Loavesand theFishes)at Tabgha/Heptapagon,on thenorthwesternshoresof the lake.Beneaththe altaran unhewn rockwas found,identifiedby traditionas the placewhereJesusplacedthe loaves andfisheswhichfed his thousandsof followers(Matt14:13-21;Avi-Yonah 1976:497-501). By thesixthcentury,thechurchesat bothKursiandTabghaalreadyexisted andfunctionedas pilgrimsitesaround thelake.ThechurchatopMt.Berenice, with its sacredstone,joinedthe others as a focalpointforpilgrims.
/
-.
Tosum up:On thebasisof the above to concludethat evidence,it is reasonable thebuildersof theByzantinechurchin factconnectedthe stonewithJesusor oneof hisdisciples,perhapsSimon-Peter whose namemeans"rock"(Matt16:18; forthe importanceof the "rock"as a symbolin earlyChristiantradition,see Thestonewas Murray1977:205-238).
Reconstructionof the AbbasidPeriod churchshowshow its buildersreusedthe foundationsof the Byzantine church,creating an edificeof a nearlyidenticalplan(below, drawnbyLeenRitmeyer). Thecolumnsof the new churchwereshortened,however,and erectedin pairs.Theworshipsettingthus took on a comparatively diminutive form CAD Erez Cohen). (above, by
/
//
.
,/
ri
;-----~ 0
lOmi"
// .
?--
• -:--• --
--
-- - ----•---•••- -• -:---. . •---c__-•_---• --•_
---___-•-s---_-_. __--_.-
•
•_-_=_---_=.
-.
..
"
.--"
S-~-
~ _ • ____
.
'?
Mo. jemu
77j
riNr
2.p
ItA
--
*
r
-Sr
.4.
-.
joti
-
1*.
broughthereespecially,andinstalled underthealtarin theinnersanctuaryof thechurch.A fittingnameforthechurch, and perhapsits actualname therefore, in antiquity,is "theAnchorChurch."
Israel.Severalcontemporary churches wererecentlyfoundinJordan.Churches of thesecondhalfof theeighthcenturyCE werediscoveredat Um er Rasas,in Jordan,oppositetheDeadSea(Piccirillo 227-231).4TheChristian 1988:208-213, of The Church in the Abbasid Period community Tiberiaswas apparently TheByzantinechurchon Mt.Berenice strongenoughto get thenecessaryperwastotallydestroyedby thegreatearth- missionandmobilizethenecessaryresourcesto rebuildthe Byzantinehill-top quakethatshooktheregionin 749CE For the this 1985:47-49. date of (Russell church.Despitesomechanges,the 'Aband basid"churchcontinuedin use fora Foerster see earthquake, Tsafrir towns considerabletime,untiltheend of the were 1992:23-135). Complete Crusaderperiod. reducedto rubble,and manypublic in Thestateof preservation of thechurch had which collapsedlay buildings on church excellent. of thewalls own is sections until our The ruins Long day. stillstandtoa heightof over3 meters(10 Mt.Berenicesuffereda similarfate. Althoughit was destroyedcompletely, feet),andall thecolumnsof thechurch, however,thestructurewas renovated,or and evenone of thearches,arestillpreservedin situ. Theunusuallevelof ratherrebuilton itsByzantinefoundacencanbe accountedforby the in of the second half the tions, preservation eighth was relative when the a time remotenessof thesite,andthe country turyCE, Ab- difficultyof reachingthesummit,which undertheruleof theBaghdad-based basiddynasty(750CE-1258 CE). discouragedthepilferingof building stonesso commonatotherarchaeologiWhatwe havehere,therefore,is an first sitesin thecountry. cal the church discovery: extraordinary Thebuildersof theeighthcentury of theAbbasidperiodeverfoundin
Remains of the chapel builtwithinthe Abbasidchurch,facingthe presbytery; view to the southeast.
churchmadeextensiveuse of theremainsof theoriginalByzantinestructure,foundingtheirwallsdirectlyon thoseof theearlierperiod.TheAbbasid church,therefore,was builton a plan almostidenticalto thatof its Byzantine TheByzantinewatercistern predecessor. in theatriumwas put backin use, and of coursethe sacredstoneremainedin placebeneaththealtar. and Despitetheuseof thefoundations stones of the building Byzantinechurch, the Abbasidedificeis a completelynew churchbuilding,of a stylepreviously unknownin Israel.Thefloorof thecourtyardwas coveredwith a new mosaicof black-and-white circles.Intheprayerhall, remainsof the Byzantinemosaicwere in a new plasterfloor.The incorporated were covered with originalcolorwalls ful frescoesin shadesof green,yellow, brown,andocher. Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
131
.
'p
.
......
,
x~
4f4
r4
5'.
Otxt
tip
tMr4trkt
The room in the northernaisle, added on to the Abbasidchurch.
The main innovation related to the columns of the church.In the Byzantine period, the columns averaged a minimum height of 3-4 meters (10-13 feet); in the Abbasid period, the height of the columns, including bases and capitals, was merely 1.3 meters (4.2 feet).The maximum height of the only surviving arch(between two columns) is 2.1 meters (6.8 feet),less than half the height of arches known from the Byzantine period. Another characteristicof the columns is the fact that they were erected in pairs, with only a narrow space between the columns of each pair.At the beginning, we surmised thatthis was an unplanned phenomenon, but once all the columns had been found, what emerged was a deliberatestyle thatwas dearly the product of the needs and artistictaste of the designers of the church.Columns and low arches of a similar shape and style characterizemosques of the Abbasid period in Mesopotamiaand Persia.5The Abbasid church on Mt. Berenicecan thereforebe seen as an example of some degree of Islamicarchitecturalinfluence
132
57:3 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
on Christianchurch design, at least in Israel. After the completion of the Abbasid church,several architecturalchanges were made, in particulara significant reduction of the interiorspace. It would appear that the original church was too large for the needs of Tiberias'Christian community and the much reduced number of Christianpilgrims visiting the region. Opposite the presbytery,an area of the nave of the church was enclosed by building walls between the columns along its length and breadth.In this way a modest chapel was created as a place of worship for the small congregation. An entrancewas built in the width-wall in frontof the sanctuary,and benches for the worshippers were added within the walls. Additionalwalls were built between most of the columns, almost separating the two aisles from the central nave. The northernaisle was divided into two by a well-built wall, creatinga room in the northwesterncorner of the church, the purpose of which is as yet unknown. The crusadersbuilt the final phase of the church in the twelfieth century, strengtheningthe structurewith massive
support columns and adding a solid bell tower to the facade of the building. A piece of painted plaster depicting a human face was found next to the marble slab which covered the sacred stone (see articleby R. Ben-Ariehin this issue). The end of the church came, apparently, with the end of the Frankishkingdom. Tiberiasfell to the Muslims after the Battleof the Horns of Hattin in 1187, and very soon afterwardsthe church was abandoned-but not entirely.In the excavations, we found evidence of a short phase of temporary settlement within the abandoned building. Sometime during the thirteenthcentury,the building was either damaged by earthquake or simply crumbled. The rubble covered the site and concealed its story, until its exposure as part of the current excavations of the city of Tiberias. Notes
IFora preliminarysurveyof the findsof the firstexcavationseasonsat Mt.Berenice,see Hirschfeld1991:170-171. 2 Itis interestingto note thatthe closestparallels to the mosaicsof the churcharethose unearthedin the churchat Kursi,on the eastern side of theSeaof Galilee.Itwould seem thatthe
2:497-501.Jerusalem:IESand Massada Press.1976.
6
Seaof
Galiee
.Caesarm
Child,H. and Coils,D. 1971 ChristianSymbolsAncientandModern. New York:Scribner. Hirschfeld,Y. 1991 Excavations atTiberiasRevealRemains of Churchand PossiblyTheater.Biblical Archaeologist54:170-171. 1992 TheJudeanDesertMonasteriesin the ByzantinePeriod.New Haven,Conn. and London:YaleUniversityPress.
Scott,RD. 1985 Malalas,the SecretHistory,and Justinian'sPropaganda.DumbartonOaks Papers39.99-109. Stager,L.and Esse,D. 1986 Ashkelon--1985/1986.Excavation and in Israel5:5-6. Sur•'ys Tzaferis,V. 1983 TheExcavationsof Kursi-Gergesa. Atiqot16.Jerusalem5-18.
Holum,K.G.and Hohlfelder,R.L.,eds. 1988 KingHerod'sDream--Caesarea on the Sea.New Yorkand London:Norton.
Tsafrir,V.and Foerster,G. 1992 TheDatingof the "Earthquake of the SabbaticalYear"of 749CEin Palestine. Bulletinof theSchoolof Orientaland AfricanStudies55:231-35. Wachsmann,S. 1986 Shfifon--EarlyBronzeAge Anchor ShapedCultStonesfromthe Sea of GalileeRegion.Pp.395-403in Thracia PonticaIII3rd (SymposiumInternational).Sofia ?
Levine,LI. and Netzer,E. 1986 Excavation at Caesarea Maritima,1975, 1976, 1979:FinalReport.Qedem 21. Jerusalem:Instituteof Archaeologyof the HebrewUniversity.
LoaionsofSts Discuseda
two churcheswere foundedat thesame time, duringthereignof EmperorJustinian.On Kursi,see Tzaferis1983:5-18. 3Thisevidenceis takenfroma translatedcollectionof writingsof Holy Landpilgrims,found in Wilkinson(1977:69-71:[Theodosius]; 96: [Adomnan]).Thestonefromthe tombof Christ isalrady recoded as a stonereveredby pilgrims in thewritingsof St.Jerome(49),in thedescriptionof Jerusalem(60),and in the descriptionsof the PiacenzaPilgrim(83).Thelatteralso mentionsthesacredstoneof whichJesusstoodin the and which was displayedin the Praetorium,
Magen,Y. 1990 TheChurchof MaryTheotokoson MountGerizim.In:ChristianArchaeology in theHoly Land.Editedby G.C.Bottini,V.C.Corbo,L DiSegni and E.Alliata.Jerusalem:Franciscan PrintingPress. Murray,R 1977 Symbolsof Churchand Kingdom:A Studyin EarlySyriacTradition.London:CambridgeUniversityPress. Num, M. 1977 Seaof Kinneret.TelAviv. Piccirillo,M. 1988 TheMosaicsat Um er-Rasasin Jordan. BiblicalArchaeologist 51:208-213, 227-231
1968 Buildings.Editedby H.B.Dewing. Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversity Press.
southofBaghdad or (RyandRy1970-38-41)
Russell,KW. 1985 TheEarthquakeChronologyof Palestineand NorthwestArabiafromthe 2nd throughthe ninthCenturiesAD. Bulletinof the AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch260:47-9.
Bibliography
Ry,C.J.Du and Ry,van BeestHalle 1970 Art of Islam.New York:Abrams. Schumacher,G. 1887 Researchesin the PlainNorthof Caeand its Vicinity. sarea(II):Tliberias PalestineExplorationFundQuarterly Statement1985-90.
Avi-Yonah,B. 1976 Heptapegon('Enha-Shiv'ah;etTabgha).Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavationsin theHoly Land
Schurer,E. 1973 TheHistoryof theJewishPeoplein the Age of JesusChrist(175 BC-AD 135). Revisededition.Editedby G. Vennrmes,
5Shortcolumnsand simplerectangularcapitals characterize the monumentalarchitecture of the Abbasidperiod,as in the palaceof Ukhaidir, the mosqueof Damghanin Persia(Pope 1965: 78-80).My thanksto BatyaSegalforbringingto my attentiontheinfluenceof Islamicarchitectureon thedesignof thechurchon Mt.Berenice.
Wilkinson, J.
1977 Jerusalem PilgrimsbeforetheCrusaders. Warminster, England:Arisand Phillips.
"'"
" ak " ,
5 ::•
.,.z.-
!?
Pope,A.U. 1965 PersianArchitecture.New York:G. Brazillier
ofSt.Sophia Church inJerusalem (theWise) (84). Procopius 4Itshouldbe mentionedthatin the Ashkelon excavationsa Byzantinechapelwas uncovered which,with alterations,continuedin use until theCrusaderperiod.See Stagerand Esse 1986:5-6.
F Millarand M. Black.Edinburgh: T&TClark.
YizharHirschfeld is currentlythe director of the Tiberiasexcavations of the IsraelAntiquities Authority.The English edition of his Palestinian Dwellings in the Romanand Byzantine Periods,an ethnoarchaeologicalinvestigation of dwellings in Roman-Byzantineand premodem Palestine, will soon be published by the IsraelExplorationSociety and the FranciscanPress. Hirschfeld is currentlyat work on the archaeological reports of his excavations of Hammat Gader (the Roman bath), Tiberias,and Ramat Hanadiv (nearCaesarea).
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3 (1994)
133
A Wall Saint's of Mt.
Painting of in the Face Berenice
a
Church
find during the excavation of the church at the summit of Mt. Berenice:a small fragmentof a frescobearing the beautifully painted face of a Christian saint.1The brokenstone on which the fresco fragment has been preserved was found in the centralapse of the church, alongside the marble slab that once lay under the altar.The location of the stone and the orderly manner in which it was laid, with the face on the fresco looking down, clearlyindicate that it was placed theredeliberately.The apparent importance and holiness of the stone saved it from oblivion, and it was deposited beneath the altarof the church and above the "anchorstone,"the relicof the church. The potsherds found beneath the marble slab indicate that the fresco was deposited there after the Byzantine period. Apart from the fragment unearthed beneath the altar,a variety of other fresco fragments were found in the church. Some were preserved on walls and columns, while others were found among the debris that covered the floor.With the exception of the saint's face, all the surviving frescoes were decorated with geometric or stylized floral motifs. This raisesthe question of whether the saint's face was an integral part of the decor of the church,or whether it had been brought here from some other church in the country or abroad,and laid under the altaras a "relic."The other obvious question concerns the identity of the saint:who was he? In the absenceof identifying symbols, the identity of the saint depicted on the Face of the saint from Mt. Berenice. Photo: Ze'ev Radovan
The Technique The fresco of Mt. Berenicewas painted in a manner typical of the medieval period3 combining two fresco techniques. The first stage employed the fresco buono technique, in which water-based pigments were applied to a damp plaster surface.In the second stage -the
By Roni Ben-Arieh xcavatorsunearthedan unusual
the left cheek emphasized by a circleof brown. Of the small mouth, only the upper lip has survived.
fresco remains a mystery. In addition, the technicaldifferencesbetween this fragmentand the other fragmentsfound on the site indicate that the figure of the saint was brought here from somewhere else.2This fact,in turn,raisesother questions. Who was the artist?When did he/she create the fresco?Was he/she a local artist (Syria-Palestine),a native of one of the neighboring provinces (Cyprus,Greece,Yugoslavia),or a citizen of the capital of Constantinople?And to what school of art can the work be ascribed?In this article,I shall attempt to answer these questionsby a discussion of the style of the painting and a comparison with otherfrescoesfound elsewhere.
Description of the Fresco The frescois small:8 cm (3.1inches) long and 5 cm (2 inches) wide. The stone on which it lies, once part of a wall, is no more than 9 cm (3.5 inches) thick. The face of the saint depicted in the fresco is oval and turns slightly to the left. The eyes have a soulful look, seemingly focused on some distant horizon. The face is framed and defined by a black line. Remnants of brown hair can be seen on the left temple, and two black curls remain above the forehead. The forehead itself is high and is underlined by two black lines representingthe eyebrows. The eyes are deep set and shaded in green. Theiralmond shape is defined by black lines, with the round pupils emphasized by delicate brushstrokesof turquoiseand white. The nose is defined by the brown line that descends from the right eyebrow and shaded on either side of the line in green and ochre. The prominentpartof the nose is highlighted with white lines thatform a "V"between the eyes. The cheeks are light in color,
fresco secco technique-,
pigments were
applied to a dry surface using what was apparently a lime medium as the adhesive. The surface was preparedby the applicationof a smooth and dampened 7mm (0.3 inch) foundation layer of plaster,composed of lime and fine sand. The artistapplied paint in several layers. In the firsthe/she drew the lines of the face in red or ochre. The second layer consisted of areasof color which served as a basis for the painting:light (ochre)in the regionof the foreheadand the cheeks, dark (green) in the region of the eyes, nose and mouth. Withthe thirdlayer,the artistgave definitionto the facialfeatures of the first layer with black and brown lines, and added color to createvariety and emphasis. The fourthand finallayer was applied once the plaster had dried, with white lines used to highlight the facial features.
The Style-A Comparative Study The Mt. Berenicefresco belongs to the Byzantine milieu of the eleventh and twelfth centuriesCE.Definingstylisticdifferences in figurativeart of the period offers the possibility of dating the Mt. Berenicefresco.Thereare several common elements between the facial characteristicsof the Mt. Berenicefresco and those of eleventh centuryfrescoesfound in regions of the ByzantineEmpiresuch as Cyprus, Asia Minor,and the Balkans. Wall paintings of the period can be divided into several trends, among them the "linear/hieratic"and "painterly."4 The "painterly"style is representedby, among others, the frescoes of St. Sofia in Ohrid,Yugoslavia(dated 1037-56 CE;see Mouriki 1980-81:261,n. 2.), the frescoes of St. Nicholas of the Roof in Kakopetria, Cyprus (firsthalf of the eleventh centu-
57:3 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
135
4,, ,
9•
ok4
-
o-.
4d4
54
.. .. =4•
44
4
,4
4
->~ .if:s
74.1./4i
(4,At'4
/ ? -:: ? ,:-
4r...i
iiTr
..
AN r i L:4L
Jk
*.
Ilkr
S~ :tl
rri
I
1*;'
-r
r
t400 L
,
u+..I
4rr
ry CE;see Stylianou and Stylianou 1985: 53-59. My thanks to Lihi Habas who brought this book to my attention.),and the wall mosaics of Nea Moni on the Greek island of Chios (1045-55 CE;see Mouriki 1980-81:21-20). These works provide a basis of comparison with the Mt. Berenicefresco,which can be included in the same group. The Nea Moni mosaics are characterized by the darkshadingof the eye socket, that is, the area between the eyebrows and the eye, and below the eye. Such shading occurs as well in several figures in St. Sofia in Ohrid, St. Nicholas of the Roof, and in the Mt. Berenicefresco. Of the threeabove examples, the closest to the artisticperception of the Mt. Berenicefresco is that representedin the faces in the Church of St. Nicholas of the Roof (Hagios Nikolas Tes Stegas) in Kakopetria,Cyprus. The faces of Jesus and St. Florusin the frescoof this church areoval, framedby a blackline. The forehead is topped by two black curls. The eyebrows, and a horizontalline between them, createa clear differentiationbetween the foreheadand the shaded eyes. The nose is defined by a brown line.
136
57:3 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
With the completion of the picture, the artistadded shortwhite lines to highlight the forehead, the nose (culminating in a "V"between the eyes and a spot at the end of the nose), and the area between the nose and the mouth. All these elements exist in the Mt. Berenicefresco as well. The stylistic differencesbetween the two frescoes,especially in the shape of the mouth and the way the cheeks are formed, cannot detractfrom their strong similarities.A significant change in the perception of saints' faces took place in the twelfth century,in contrast to that of the previous century.In the frescoes of the Church of Panagia Phorbiotissain Asinou, Cyprus (dated 1105--6 CE;see Stylianouand Stylianou 1985:117126),thereis a prominent use of line, not merely to define the shape, but in other ways as well, sometimes even creating geometric forms. A sense of depth is createdby the gradual color shading of the area between the lines (Kuhnel 1988:132). The frescoes of the Church of St. Pantaleimon in Nertzi, Yugoslavia (dated 1164),arecharacterizedby an "expressiveness" in the faces of the saints depicted
Above left. Jesus, from "The Entry to Jerusalem" Churchof St. Nicholasof the Roof, Kakopetria, Cyprus. Fig.20 in Stylianou
andStylianou(1985). Above right. St. Florus from the church of St. Nicholason the Roof, Kakopetria, Cyprus. Fig.21 in Stylianouand Stylianou(1985).
there.The expressiveness is emphasized by the use of short rounded lines drawn in differentdirections,which give the painting a dynamic quality (Grabar 1953:24-39). Tosum up: The saint'sfaceof Mt. Berenice is closest to the artisticperception common in the eleventhcentury,in which the individualityof each saint was highlighted. A three-dimensionaleffect was createdby the sharp transitionfrom color to color,and the contrastbetween light areas of the face like the forehead and cheeks, and dark areas like the eyes. The twelfth century figures, on the other hand, areless individualized,more "schematic",spiritual stereotypes. It should be mentioned that wall-paint-
ings dated to the eleventh century were found in the Church of St. John the Baptist in Samaria-Sebaste,but these have not survived.5Wall-paintingsof the twelfth century,however, have been preserved in a number of locations: Bethlehem,Abu Ghosh,the monastery of Theoctistus(Deir el Mukallik)in the Judean Desert, the crypt of the abovementionedchurchof St.Johnthe Baptist in Samaria-Sebaste, the Chapel of Abraham next to the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem, the Basilicaof Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane, and a church in Ashkelon.6The style of the faces depicted in these frescoesis differentfrom that of the saint'sface at Mt. Berenice.
thankstothedirector oftheexpedition, Yizhar whopermitted metopublishthe Hirschfeld, find;toOrnaCohen,wholentherprofessional skillstothepreservation of thefrescoandthe andtoChenShapira studyof itstechnique; whocontributed totheunderstanding of the of technique throughhispersonal experience frescopainting. 2Thereareconsiderable technical differences betweenthesaint'sfacefrescoandotherfrescoesfoundin thesamechurch, bothinthetype of foundation plasteronwhichtheywere
Sununary
ages, see:Mora,Mora,and Philippot1984:107-
In this articlewe have described a wall painting of the face of a Christiansaint discovered in a church on Mt. Berenice, above Tiberias.In our attempt to determine the date and origin of the fresco, we have reached several clearconclusions. First,the fresco was painted in a differentlocation,and brought to Mt. Berenicewhere it was laid under the altarof the church.Second, the fresco was apparentlypainted in the eleventh centuryCE,a conclusion reached because of the stylistic similarityto wallpaintings of that period, and especially to those of the church at Kakopetriain Cyprus. Finally,the artistwas Byzantine, and her/his considerableartistryis evidence of familiaritywith contemporary frescotechniques. It is clear that the church altarof Mt. Bereniceunderwent some renovation in the late eleventh century,or, more likely, in the Crusaderperiod of the twelfth. The "Byzantine"anchor stone was left in place, but the marble slab above it was replaced,with the fresco preserved along with it. Thereare many unanswered questions, however. Who was the saint represented in the Mt. Berenicefresco? Where was the artistfrom:was he/she local, or from another province?From where was the fresco brought to the church,and by whom? In the absence of inscriptions,epigraphic finds or historicalsources, these questions must remainunanswered.
Notes 1Thefrescowas discoveredin the thirdexcavationseasonat Mt.Berenicein October,1991.My
paintedand in the typeof stoneon which they appear.A chemicalanalysisof the plasterand
thepigmentsis beingconducted byNaomi Poratof theGeological Institute. 3Onthetechniques of frescoes inthemiddle
117andWinfield 1966:63-139. 4Thesuggestion of thisdistinction is mine.
Mouriki(1985:253-269; 1980-81:78-124)elabo-
rateson thecomparison betweenmosaicsand of thesameperiod.Thestylistic wall-paintings of theeleventhcenturyisespedevelopment
%
is
.. 9?~r'
o
.V
RoniBenAriehis a masterstudentof archaeologyand thehistoryof artat the HebrewUniversity.Herthesisis devoted to thestylisticdevelopmentof basalt sculptureanddecoratedarchitectural fragmentsfromtheGolan.Ms.Ben Ariehworksas an areasupervisorat the IsraelAntiquitiesAuthorityexcavationsof Tiberias. Shehaswrittenseveral articleson the Galilean pottery from
theRoman-Byzantine period.
ciallyclearin threechurcheswith mosaics.In the churchof HosiosLoukasin Greece,thereis a clear"linear"trend(earlyeleventhcentury); in Nea Monithe tendencyis "painterly"(mideleventhcentury);and in Daphni(lateeleventh century)thereis a dynamictrendthatantici-
Grabar,A. 1953 Byzantinre Painting:Historicaland CriticalStudy.Geneva:Skira. Hunt, L.A. 1982 DamascusGateJerusalem,and CrusaderWallpaintingsof the MidTwelfth patesthetwelfthcenturyThesametrendsexist in wallpaintingsof the eleventhcentury. Century.Pp. 191-214in CrusaderArt in the TwelfthCentury.Editedby J. 5Thepaintings of theChurchofSt.Johnthe Folda.Oxford:BritishSchoolof Arin havebeendatedto Baptist Samaria-Sebaste chaeologyin Jerusalem. the eleventhCentury,but have not been preserved.SeeCrowfoot1937:24-39. Kuhnel,G. 1988 WallPaitingi i theLatinKingdomof SThepaintingsin the churchesof Bethlehem Jerusalem.Berlin:Gebr.Mann. and AbuCGhosh, themonasteryof Theoctistus inNahalOg(WadiMukallik), andthecryptof Mora,P, Mora,M.,and Philippot,P St.Johnthe Baptistin Samaria-Sebaste have 1984 Conservationof WallPaintings.Glasbeendatedby Kuhnel(1988:132 n.9)tothedygow: Butterworths. namicperiodof the ComnenianRenaissance, Mouriki,D. thatis thethirdquarter ofthetwelfthcentury. 1980-81StylisticTrendsin Monumental Thepaintings fromtheDamascus Gate(the Paintingof Greeceduringthe 11thandtheBasilica of Agony Chapelof Abraham) 12thCenturies.DumbartonOaks intheGardenofGethsemane havebeendated 34-35:78-124. Papers. to the mid-twelfthcentury(Hunt1982:191-214). 1985 TheMosaicsof Nea Moni on Chios. Thepaintings fromtheAshkelonchurchhave Athens:TheCommercialBankof beendatedtotheCrusader period(Stager Greece. 1991:35-53). Stager,L.E. 1991 Eroticismand Infanticideat AshkeBibliography lon. BiblicalArchaeologyReview 17:35-53. Crowfoot,J.W. 1937 Churchesat Bosraand Samaria-SeStylianou,A. and Stylianou,J. baste.BritishSchoolof Archaeologyin 1985 ThePaintedChurchesof Cyprus 4. Jerusalem. Supplementary Paper London:Trigraph. Londonand Beccles:Issuedby the Winfield,D.C. Council. 1966 ByzantineWallPaintingsMethods. DumbartonOaksPapers22:63-139.
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3 (1994)
137
The Tell
at
1 Western
Iron
Defense
System
El-'Umeiri, Jordan
By Douglas R. Clark somewhatthe60metersof verticalrisewhichcharacterizes ll el-cUmeirilies in thefoothillsalongthenorthern the fertile of Madaba Plains of central Transjordan the tell.Inthe past,thisrisesimplifiedthetaskof protecting edge cumeiri's inhabitants.The focus of this halfway betweenHesbanand Sea of Galillee articleis thewesterndefensesystem Amman.'Locatedin the territoryof and associatedbuildings,the topof ancientAmmon,its historyis checkAmman;0 which one canalmostmakeout at the eredby conflictswith surrounding SRujmSelim TellJawa Yarmuk River Tellel-Umeiri* 0 whose some of western-mostedge of themoundand 0 devastating peoples, el-Dreqat incursionshaveleft,to thearchaeolowhichis exposedby a trenchthatexcaTellHesbanO JordanRiver and Madaba vatorshavecut intothe westernslope. gist'sunending perversedelight, OTellJalul JabbokRiver note:BAhasgiventhefollowextensivelayersof destructiondebris. [Editor's Iron1 is the local water source ofTellel-'Umeiri's CUmeiri's ingpresentation Study Area a the character "slide between Madaba and one defense system of only Dr.Clark's show."I verymuchappreciate Ammanand is locatedadjacentto to this novel Morethe tell,justacrosstheroad.This willingness permit layout. Amon River I the reader will that the watersource,ancientagriculture over, hope Dead sea prefind communicates both sentation successfully (especiallyviticulture)on surroundthethrillembodied inunearthing thisimpresing hillsidesand wadibottoms,and Zered River sivefortification and its substansixteenacresof tellhavesupported system tivecontribution toourknowledge Themapaboveandillustration belowwereprepared of occupationat thesiteat leastsince Palestine's tumultuous andpivotalearly theEarlyBronzeperiod.Theaerial Alldrawingsandphotoscourtesyof by DaleChapman. IronAge.] the MadabaPlainsProjectandthe author. photolookingnorthwestbelies 1$h
Section of Western Defense System-Field B Key 1 Eastwall of domestic room inside city wall 2 Domesticroom with packed-earthfloor 3 Row of post-bases for curtain-wall 4 Stones and paved floor of cult center 5 Innercasemate wall 6 Casematestoreroom
7 Ladder(?)platformin casemate storeroom 8 Outercasemate wall 9 Iron1 rampart 10 MiddleBronzerampart 11 Bedrock 12 Iron1 revetmentwall
13 Iron2 defensive wall on east face of moat 14 Iron1 base of moat 15 MiddleBronzebase of moat 16 Bedrock 17 Bedrockwest face of moat
Legend E] 3
1 2
4
5 6
77O 8
IronII IronI Middle Bronze Bedrock
MSL= above mean sea level
*9
0
10 , 14
157717
138
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
913mMSL*
5m
910
N
U
. ....
.. .
.
I%. •k .;
+,
+b
'4%
,
~IA
4A
I "4"
-
--.I'•
I + + , -
...++
-
-I
It
-,
2'. ,
I
+
44
44
'+ "41
+ +
.. .+ + ,
:+ ++: +•
++
11&-
.
'I•
+ .Lo
L I.
.2M+-
;a.
"
a, I'
'
_
Aviewtothesoutheast reveals thefeatures of thesitealongwithan excavationtrench stretchingdown the slope.Themostrecent endeavorshaveextendedthe trenchtwo additionalsquaresto thewest at thebaseof the hill.
;jr?
s? -jj .Mb -1$ 'AV ~
Asworkcontinues onthewestern slope
of Tellel-UJmeiri,it becomesincreasingly dearhow vulnerablethissideof thetellwas to enemyassaultandhow muchenerancient inhabitantsinvestedherein fortifygy the their To site. the west, a saddlejoinsthe tellto a ing ridgeof hillsrunningnorth-south,yieldinga verticalriseon the surfaceof only 1(15metersfromthe bottomof the slope to the top.
thecourse offourfieldseasons of
3Over come to lightfromthe Iron1 period.After work, an impressive defense system has
two seasonsof workingthenarrowtrench, excavationhas exposednearlythe fulllengthof a coherentfortificationstructure. Thisincludeda wide drymoat,a lowerretainingwall, a steep,multilayeredrampart,(whichincorporateda consolidated row of stonesatop the rampartfoundationlayer forstabilityand traversedthe slope midway),and a casematewall at the top of the slope,completewith a fully-clearedcasematestoreroom.
140
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3(1994)
i
:C'Al
3:
:gt~
~
;VII
mn I
Theviewfromthebaseoftheslopeen-
compassesthe majorcomponentsof the Iron1 defenses.Thebedrockbottomof the moatoccupiesthe foreground,bounded on the eastside by the lowerretainingwall, whichis herepartiallyobscuredby a flimsyIron2 defensewall.Abovethe retainingwall is the rampart,theupperstairsteppedappearanceof which servesmodemexcavatorsandnotthe ancientdefendersof the site!Theouterfaceof theoutercasematewallis visibleat the top.
'''' ``
:?
r; ..
:~?~
-II(
r.'
LjpF ~
/'P
?. ~L )
~i
i? ?:
': `??~? : ?
'i?.'9 3
???-:I?.:-:? :.?~;:' ~ ~:18
~ z:-
r "' u
;::i:
d ??.~(~~ '~?"--? ,.....-i.~;S -.. :. ?I .~?._ '?: a ~ h? "<'~'''2. """ '' i:~""'-:~ ~:::::
~;~?: ..
~~
;
:?
~-?': i? :: I:. IF
~??r. ;~
?.~\f
?I_??~:r?l'. '' r
? I
,.??~
:?v;
:? , ::? 1.?:?
.?i??
???. : ..-?i.?...~?: ;:??1',??:-. ';~:;:?? ?L?:: c
..'r; -?~ ~ t:
"-;.??:.
~?Y :??C?; ?:-_?~;~;?:~~I '?~-'??? -?2
?r'?
r-
I
''j -r:??
??'?
?.
(seealsopage138)and two adjoiningrooms will give a good ideaof the entireplan. Overallmeasurementsof the defenseremainsareapproximately33-35 metersin length and 12-13metersin height.Thedetaileddescriptionof thedefenseswill beginwith the moatand move up the slope towardthe casematewall.Then two associatedroomsfromwithinthe citywill be explored,movingthistimetowardthe casemate wall fromthe oppositedirection.
i".
-?? .i:.:?i?
??
?'
~I'"~? ? :i' 4Cc: :??.i i. ?. ii
!1 ?) r
:: ?s?,:?;: ..." ~:?'?::--. ?; . ?. ? ? ??~ ~-.?..::'. .. ..: i '.
..1-
:;.~j~?Z'LJ: ;: :: --:' `-??: ?'?:-:?? ,?r:~? ?,? 1 :?
~~t?
;I
'.
-?
r.
~:
~ ~':' ?' . ? : .. ' ??: ~
:?17
kction of Hkrt?m D?fm~ Syrtwn--R?ld a '" L~gcnd B ,?c~,? o nn [_1h~~~?8ir.t? r3 x~,r
J 5 1
6
8 ~L,
;?';~ ?.R4~?~_; .?:?
9 "
\
-
"
: ?. . ??
U
7
C:
't; I
u
??-.-:?? :
.?;? ? :?'
I
~
:- ?
-?:~?:
c~,*'?;?~?.;?.?:.i :'-?'.'ir?-: ?I?~
? ' ?'?-? ?.
;
"~
.?: .r.:-
ir:? ".
'-i
?::'? ??:" ?\ '.'..
:
hasonlynarrowly and thetrench Since
intersectedthemoat,the perpendicularly moat'slengthis not preciselyknown.Likely it extendedonly alongthevulnerable westernsideof thetellbeforedroppingoff as it stretchedto the northandsouth.Thealmostperfectly flatbottomof themoathadbeencarvedinto bedrockin theMiddleBronzeperiodandmeasured 6 meterswide. Followinga timewhen themoat evidentlyfilledpartiallywith soil and day,the Iron 1 inhabitantsof thesitereusedthemoat,butdid not re-excavateentirelyto bedrock.
i
:~ ?:??]?.'.. ~??:i
?' r?:
??-
? ?:?
j.?:? c
'+i
?j
I '' ~? ?~X~P1~1~ :. ??
?~;
?;
?-~-? t . ?
.G: :.::;:? ~?
Qr t~--??
?
?~i~ c.. 3P' ~,
c~L J?c?'
~~32,
..
I i
1 uc,-, +~ ~' t...
:::. _ .s c -~ .i
t
'?~ -r(~ ~::: cl
-~ :;r
I:?T
??.~: ~-~i'rt
~ : . ..~.
~:?'?':;?'
:
.~..?-1.??;?'
I
*jrrr
!?r?: :4,~? .~: ?:"~?' 3c~~:?"?`
"";:: ?I 3;:
; ?-~ -:??Y-:r'.....:.' 1:?? .? ~!:~ ?:;
',I ?u~l?~c; - ''
?; .?
~: :?:
~
~
:t :Y::.:P ??s?ri, ;.._~y~?:T.ji~C: Jirii ;
~ai?
.c?~ .?e ?i ?.~.:?... 5ic
Il ,,*,,,,;:, ,?
w
~-~~: ,,
:r.
?i? ". .I~. ? ??:p, ?:..~~I ;).~Yla?r:?:
?.
t
L:
.Y .h'~t..:
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
~:,:p? ~?.?~? -.-
141
SNaturally irregular,the western con-
toursof thebedrockopenedat the top of the moatto a width of nearly12meters fromthe top of theeasternface. Themoatwas 5 metersdeep.Lyingon thebottom was a 15to 20 centimeterthicklayerof pure yellow clayand a layerof white nari,averagingca. a mixture 35centimetersin thickness.Interestingly, of yellow clayand nariconstitutedthe foundation layerof the Iron1 rampartat thebaseof the casematewall.Theexactconnectionbetweentheclayand nariinbothlocationsis notcldear. Themoat,whilepresentinga significantdeterrent againstenemiesof thecityduringthe Iron1 period, was, as notedabove,initiallyconstructedmuchearlier.Itlikelycameintouse in conjunctionwith the MiddleBronzerampartwhichis partiallyexcavated up the slope and on whichthe Iron1 casemate wall was built.MiddleBronzeparallelsto the moat includethoseat Hazorand Lachish.On the other hand,personalcommunicationwith MaxMillerinin dicatesthatKhirbetMedeinetel-Mu'arradieh easternMoabalsohasan Iron1 wall connectedwith a dry moatcutwherea ridgejoinsthe tell. Threelayersof therampartalsocamefromthis
-I * ............
?u....~
.
:.i
,
•-
::7 .
period, constructedto provide a 350 slope between
the lowerretainingand outercasematewalls.The top two layers,measuring25 to 75 centimetersin thickness,consistedof compactedsoil,day,charcoal, and nariflecks.
8ThethirdandfoundinglayeroftheIron1
rampartconsistedof yellow day and nari, likethatfoundin the moat,and was distind in constructiondesign.Survivingto a depthof 60 to 90 centimeters,the layergradually becameless steep,in factnearlylevel,as it approachedthe outercasematewall.Thisgradual levelingout,alongwith the factthatthe threelayers of rampartconstructionsealedagainstcoursesof stonein the casematewall to a depthof 175 meters, supportsthe assertionregardingtheuse of therampartlayersto batter(i.e.,to support)the wall,as well as to discourageaccessto the city.Embedded intothisrampartfoundationwere severalclosely laidrowsof smallbouldersextendingacrossthe faceof the rampart,servingto stabilizeit and adhereit to the upperlayers.
142
57:3(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
r
; ? .,
. ..
. .
. .
~~• ??
r? .
..
. . . .. .
.
.
.
..
.
. .
casemate Theouter wallhasbeenexposed to itsfull survivingheightof almost 3 meters.Being1.6to 2 meterswide at the top,it was constructedmostlyof small-tomediumbouldersandfoundeddirectlyuponthe MiddleBronzerampartusing smallbouldersfor levelingpurposes(notethedarkerprobeintothe MiddleBronzerampartbeneaththe wall).Destructiondebriswithinand outsidethecasemateroom suggestsanadditionalheightfortheouterwall of as muchas 4 or5 meters.A proposedtwo-storyconstructionforthiswall would easilyaccommodate thesemeasurements.2
-i: !
ii:
,' ,.i
"
.
)
:
. :...::
?:! -
L
Thecasemateroomitselfhasbeen excavatedto the floorsurfacelast
atthetime utilized ofitsdestruction. Itcontainedwallspreservedto a maximumheightof 2.3meters(forexample,the northcrosswallthatconnectsthetwo parallelwalls), 1 meterwide in thesoutha doorwayapproximately eastcomerof theroom(notvisibleat the lower right),anda stepped,stoneplatformin thesouthwest comer,measuring1.4x 1.7meters.
'
. .
II~ ":;/ •
:!/I' . ??
]
.:
:: ; . ?-~:~:::::: .?i. -:.: . .:.:< ,~. .....
' :.-:? ::? . ..... .~ .. .. ..
i<..:.:. ;
...:
..
.
,-
Evidentlythisplatform,whichabuts two comerwalls,servedas the base
foraladder which would have pro-
:I !"i
~.-
9
r
•,z~L~W"
.t .
.
-
.-
:?:,i L,,
vided accessto a secondstory,much as ourmodernreuseforentryintothe squaresug275 gests.Theroomitselfmeasuredapproximately meterswideby 5 meterslongandwas oriented about200offtruenorthwhichis consistentwiththe restof the structuresof the defensesystem.
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3(1994)
143
Theentire defense isdearly system
-
apparentin thisballoonphoto.The Iron2 westerncitadelsitsabovethe defensesystemon thetop of the tell. Fromallceramicandstratigraphic evidence,constructionof thefortifications datesto thetwelfthcenturyBCE. Althoughotherexamplesof Iron1 defenses fromSyro-Palestine havesimilarfeaturesas this one at Tellel-cUmeiri,few areas completeand feweryet dateas early.(Seminalstudiesof the casematewall includeFinkelstein1988:237-263 and Shiloh1978.)
i-. i
;i
-~
:~"..:?p: . .
~--ri~PP~
~i
I
:C1 :??~~;i:
:?~.??
:::`~i:
:5-
x?:
: r-T
I~
' :??
~ i
-?.?~ i.
?;
C'
9~
(r
-r, :? ?_'
?. ?1 ?-:?;:( .?:--?'??::?.: ?: :'?'
r
CT
~: '9
?~?..?.?
~
1
??i?-:?: ~.?'.: ??
; . 1.?;?
remains ofapproximateThecrushed
;
ly fifteenlarge,collared-rimstorejars restedon thefloorof thecasemate room,amongotherdomesticfoodandfood-storageartifacts. Twoof these preparation survivedtheassaulton thedefensesandweresittinguprightagainstthe northcrosswall,but most had collapsedand had beenflattenedon the floor.
'1
;.2
:
,?
-...:. . ~-??-??-? 't-?
?-
?;
?:. :
:?
.i --eL~
"i??:::; ,'??: ~
~CISL~y~C~F~
9~~r(S~r
c I
I
? .;~
?i .?~-?
'-?: ?:
. ?.-;- - ??
'IZrZp
e
-
??
- ~1~.
'I:??;
?v
.-
;
4
?,?'?:
1P: `
I
:~-~ ( i-;?~ ;~:;? ,~L~U
?t?;c;-
;I
rL
,? ' : j:4' ?:.1:~ ;? :~? -t
::
:
..'
?!-
.i
?7. : :::
;- ?~?:-?:;:? :-? I?F
?~ ~C~
:::
5,-
I::~
s ?P'z ?~r~;.?
::I
~a~~i:1~--~:::? r:.1` :-
:-i4c?~i~
:?
A wide rangeof variationsamong featureson thecollared-rim storejars has
become
apparent
and
deserves
continuedinvestigation.Sucha varied collectionof collared-rimstorejarsin contemporaneoususe is trulyfortuitousand shouldadd a greatdeal of informationto the growingknowledge aboutthemandtheiruse.Someboredistinctive potter'smarks.(ThelateDouglasEsse[1992]has offeredthe most significantstudy of the collaredrimstorejarto date.)
Y. ::?-: zi '' ?:.??. :i
?:'?i
fr;.
::
-? ?:?? -??1:
:
'
o
(OLGH
?s,~~: ...
144
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
c?
??e
j
1.
:C
~??
:ZC:i
?::
Several scholars haveattempted to
demonstratethatthe ancientsused collared-rimjarsforstoringwater, but thebiosamplesfromourstore roomsuggest,at leastin thiscase,foodstuffswere storedin suchjars.Immediatelyinsidethe inner casematewall excavationsuncoveredthebaseof a collared-rimstorejarin a balkwith carbonized barleystillin it and spillingout to the right.InterL.was unVulgare estingly,thissampleof Hordeum of weed The seeds. and free usuallyclean palaeobotanistalso discoveredbeetlesin with the grain, suggestinga considerableperiodof storage. A massivedestructionlayercoveredthe casematestoreroom,with the accumulateddebris reaching1.7metersdeep.Itconsistedof deteriorated roofingmaterialon the floor,blackenedmudbrickson top of that,thencobble-sizedstonesand smallbouldersat a higherlevel.Thissuggestsa secondstoryconstructionconsistingof mudbrick wallswhich,on falling,leftthe second-storybuilding materialon thebottomof the pile. An extensiveconcentration of ash depositsand charcoaledwood throughoutthe debrisreflectsthe natureand intensityof the destruction,while the presenceof a very smallnumberof ballisticmissiles mayconceivably,but in no way convincingly,point to a militaryconquest.Thedepthof debrisand the factthatmanyof the limestonebouldersused in constructingthe wall wereturnedintopowdered lime (cf.Isa27:9)speaksto the magnitudeof the whichdestroyedthe casematewall. conflagration Giventheceramicevidencefoundin the destructionlayerin the casematestoreroomandin the adjoiningstructures,we canpositwith some certaintyan Iron1 date,most likelyin the eleventh century,forthe destructionof thisAmmonitecity.
i~f noa O
~
ITal.
tw Ang:
5A.; WV'
Thecollapseof mudbrickand other
material construction alsocovered Iron1 buildingsinsidethecity from the casematewall.Thisdebris,2 metersin depth,likewisecontainedburnedraftersand beams,carbonizedgrainpockets,as well as articulatedskeletalrearflankremainsof two largemammals-a smallhorseand a cow-complete with butchermarks.Itis unusual,given the penchantof scavenginganimalsto disturbboneslikethese,to findthemin thiscondition.Evidentlythey fell from theupperstory,wheretheyhad beenstored,and wereburiedimmediatelyby the fallingdebris.
off:
Kofs? its
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3(1994)
145
So fartwo buildingsimmediately insidethe innercasematewall have surfacedin the courseof excava-
Pr .
,
.
tions. The only building clearly de-
finedto thispointconsistedof two adjacentrooms, situatedin an east-westalignment.Theeasternmost onecontaineda smallbench,a stone-ringedcooking hearth,a largebasaltmortarand associatedgrindfloor,and a cobing stonerestingon a beaten-earth ble-surfacedstoragebin.All thesefurnishings use dearlysuggesta domestic,food-preparation for the room. Adjacentto thisroomon the west sidestood anotherroom(atthetopof thephoto),separatedby threeflat-toppedbouldersin a spaced,north-south line whichlikelysupportedpostsof a curtainwall.
?
?~~ .z .
• ..
'
.
? . .
.
.,
. . .
. .
.
.
.
,
.
Thewesternroomwas pavedwith largeunworkedflagstoneson which restedan undecoratedstandingstone (20 centimeters thick, 1 meter high,
and nearly50 centimeterswide) againstthe inner ?I'C. casematewall.A largeflat-toppedboulderwas orir,? ri~L~. r entedperpendicularlyto the standingstoneand was r~l*( r in it. of can little doubt that There be directly front ~~5? .. thisis a culticinstallationof some kind,possiblya ... 1 ~. privateshrinelikethosedescribedin the Hebrew '-?ZC~~I~ :)? Biblefromthe sameperiodin the hillcountryof "I.YC~Y ~?'J' I ~S~r~J ~?T~:_rP~iR~tt~ Y~L~ 1 Ephraim(cf.Judg17ff.)amongotherplaces. /9 Tellel-cUmeiri, then,hasprovidedus with a signifc rr~l~E#Xf 5 ?.1? ~I1~CAit~~r~ ~Ma~r:at, icantdefensesystem,alongwithassociatedbuildings, fromtheIron1 period.Fromthe dry moatto the ?:. ; .: ? ???' one steeprampartandcasematewall construction, becomesawareof a thorough-goingprocessof fortifianddefenseposturing. cationconstruction Nevertheless,the end of the systemcamequickly. Normallythe many storejarsin the casemateroom would be clearedout and replacedby rubbleduringtimesof siege.Hereallbut two jarswere obviouslysmashedsuddenly by the collapseof the ceilingof the roomand materialfromthe secondstory.Inaddition,thelargepocketsof abandoned and now carbonizedgrain,the evidenceof rapidand intenseexpansionof the fieryholocaust,and thearticulatedlarge mammalboneswith butchermarksmixedin thedebrisallpointto a suddenand unexpectedtragedy. However,thecauseof thedestructionis notentirelyclear.Theextremelylimitednumberof ballisticsraisesdoubtsabout militaryaction.Yetsuchan assaulton thecitymayhaveoccurredelsewhereagainstothersectorsof its defensesand,once the citywas subdued,thissectionwas thentorched. Inanycase,thescenariodepictedby the remainsof the westerndefensesystemfitswell thecyclicpatternof intensification and abatementof landuse in and aroundtheMadabaPlains.Increasedruralpopulationin the regionand heightenedagriculturalactivityduringthe Iron1 period(thebeginningof the secondidentifiedmajortime-spanof intensification), coupled with an enlargingurbanpopulationand a volatilepoliticalclimateled to extensiveeffortsby cUmeiri'sinhabitantsto fortify theircity.Itwas duringthe sameperiod,however,thatthecityexperienceda suddenand devastatingdisasterand was demolished,as the destructiondebrisin and aroundthe casematewall has demonstrated.
146
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3(1994)
PostScript:
Therecently 1994 season of completed
s~-,hZ~.?;? j i
~
I:???.j~"A hC: .441" n &Z", a do&i5ti i~~
I?(??:: i1;
excavations at CUmeiri(14 June-27
July)has providedus with additional dataon the defensesystemand Iron1 cityand suggestedsome adjustmentsto the analysispresented above.On the basisof ceramicevidence(especially collared-rimpithoiand cookingpots),LarryHerr, directorof the CUmeiriexcavations, is placing the
Of Y constructionof the Iron1 defensesystemvery C., ?r .~~.~%PO'k ~:it. the end of the thirteenth or beearly-near century n Y: ginningof the twelfth.Itsdestructionappearsto date IS to themiddleof the twelfthcentury.In addition, while excavatingthe MiddleBronzerampartto bedrock,it becameclearthatits disuseand a major repaircoincidedwith a significantearthquakewhich brokethebedrockledge supportingpartof the rampartand therebyopeneda gapingfissurein it along the lineof brokenbedrock.Thiswas filledwith simi0 IOLGH %tye, v larmaterialto the upperlayersof the Iron1 rampart, in Iron a a made 1, repair suggesting repairearly pla I
LY
Notes excavation of CUmeiri takesplaceaspart SThe of theMadabaPlainsProject (MPP)in cooperaof AntiquitionwiththeJordanian Department includes tiesandASOR.TheMPPconstorium UnionCollege, AndrewsUniversityCanadian LaSierra LevantFoundation Poland, University, andWallaWallaCollege. 2Fortwomajorreasons,we havebeguntorefer to theparallelwallsof theIron1 defensesystem
as proto-casematein construction.Although some earlierevidenceappearedto suggestbonding of the walls (parallelwalls to crosswalls), especiallyat the upper levels of preservedwall joins,it is no longerdearly the case.In addition, the crosswallsextendbeyond the innercasemate wall into the city at least two rooms,suggestinga largerconstructionalscheme than simply a fortificationwall system.Sincerefined estimateson the date of the constructionplace the system at the end of the thirteenthcentury
or very beginningof the twelfth,the designation "proto"appearsjustified.
Bibliography Esse,D.L. 1992 TheCollaredPithosatMegiddo: CeramicDistribution andEthnicity. Studies Journal ofNearEastern 51:(2):81-103.
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3(1994)
147
fd
S
5 ub--bS Scribe
Toplaceyoursubscriptionto Biblical Archaeologist,complete this form and returnit to ScholarsPress,P.O. Box15399,Atlanta,GA30333-0399. Individualordersmust be prepaid by checkor money-orderdrawnon a UnitedStates bankor by VISAor MasterCard. Forfasterservicewith MasterCard or VISA,call (404) 7272345. Non-USsubscribersadd $5 for postage. O $35 USindividuals El $45 USinstitutions El $40 non-USindividuals El $50 non-USinstitutions L Checkor money-order enclosed [ MasterCard VISA EI CardNumber Date Expiration Signature Name(Pleaseprint.)
Geraty,L.T.,Herr,L.G.,and LaBianca,O.S. 1987 A PreliminaryReporton the First Seasonat Tellel-JUmeiriand Vicinity. AnnualoftheDepartment ofAntiquities of]ordan31:187-199. 1988 TheJointMadabaPlainsProject:A PreliminaryReporton the Second Seasonat TellEl-'cUmeiriand Vicinity (June18 to August 6,1987).Andrews UniversitySeminaryStudies 26:217-252. Geraty,L.T.,Herr,L.G.,LaBianca,O.S., and Younker,R.W.,eds. 1989 Madaba PlainsProject1:The1984Seasonat Tellel-'UmeiriandVicinityand Studies.BerrienSprings, Subsequent MI:AndrewsUniversityPress. Herr,L.G.,Geraty,L.T,LaBianca,O.S., and Younker,RW.,eds. 1992 MadabaPlainsProject2: The1987Seasonat Tellel-UmeiriandVicinityand Studies.BerrienSprings, Subsequent MI:AndrewsUniversityPress. Herr,L.G.et al. 1990 TheMadabaPlainsProject:Three Seasonsof Excavationat Tellel-Ilmeiri and Vicinity,Jordan.EchosduMonde Views.XXXIV, n.s. Classique/Classical 9:129-43. Shiloh,Y. 1978 Elementsin the Developmentof TownPlanningin the IsraeliteCity. IsraelExploration Journal28:36-51.
Address)
Country
148
Finkelstein,I. 1988 TheArchaeology SettleoftheIsraelite ment.Jerusalem:IsraelExploration Society. L.T. Geraty, et al. 1986 MadabaPlainsProject:A Preliminary Reporton the 1984Seasonat TellelCUmeiriand Vicinity.Pp. 117-144in ReportsofASOR-Sponsored Preliminary Excavations 1980-84.BASORSupplement 24. Editedby WalterE. Rast. Baltimore:ASOR. 1990 MadabaPlainsProject:A Preliminary Reportof the 1987Seasonat TellelCUmeiriand Vicinity.Pp. 1-40 in PreliminaryReportsofASOR-Sponsored Excavations1983-87.BASORSupplement 26. Editedby WalterE.Rast. Baltimore:ASOR 1985 TheAndrews UniversityMadaba PlainsProject:A PreliminaryReport on the FirstSeasonat Tellel-cUmeiri. Studies UniversitySeminary Andrezos 23:85-110. 1989 MadabaPlainsProject:The 1987Season at Tellel-cUmeiriand Vicinity. AnnualoftheDepartment ofAntiquities ofJordan33:145-176.
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
All
'lt
Since 1984,ProfessorDouglas R Clark has served as Field Supervisor,Area B, at Tellel-'Umeiri, Jordan.He is also the Consortium Directorof the Madaba Plains Project.He received his Ph.D. from VanderbiltUniversity in 1984. Dr. Clarkcurrentlyholds the position of Dean and Professorat the School of Theology of WallaWallaCollege. The author of numerous articlesin archaeological and other publications, Doug Clarkpresides over the WallaWalla Chapter of the American Institute of Archaeology.
Younker,RW.,Geraty,LT.,Herr,L.G., and LaBianca,O.S. 1990 TheJointMadabaPlainsProject:A PreliminaryReportof the 1989Season, Includingthe RegionalSurvey and Excavationsat El-Dreijat, Tell Jawa,and Tellel-cUmeiri(June19 to August 8,1989).AndrewsUniversity SeminaryStudies28:5-52.
The on
Oldest the
Datable
Temple Mount
Chambers in
Jerusalem
By Shimon Gibson and David M. Jacobson
havediscoursensitivities eligious scientific of
aged investigation ubterraneanfeatures within the Haramal-Shaff in Jerusalem,which incorporatesthe area of the ancient Temple Mount. In consequence, the mystery of this sacred place has been heightened, providing fertile ground for flights of fancy concerning the two Jewish temples that formerly occupied the site. Even serious scholars have had to make do with hypotheses concerning the position and layout of these ancient complexes (Busink 1970:1-20),one of the present authors included (Jacobson1990-91). However, for a brief period in the second half of the nineteenth century a handful of intrepid Europeanexplorers,in particular CharlesWilson, CharlesWarren, Claude Regnier Conder,and Conrad Schick,succeeded in lifting this veil of secrecy and visited many of the underground chambers that pepper this sacred site. They left recordsof some 45 subterraneanchambers that they classified as cisterns as well as other cavities and structural remains. Much of this materialwas published by them (Wilson 1866:42-45; Warren1871:204-17;Warrenand Conder 1884;Schick 1887:72-87; 1896: 292-305), but many important details were confined to manuscript and deposited in the archives of the Palestine ExplorationFund (PEF)in London. Some of the most reliableand detailed information was recorded by the ConradSchick(1822-1901), German-bomrn who settled in Jerusalemand worked there as an architectthrough the second half of the nineteenth century (Carmel 1983;Strobel1988).The house that he designed and built there for his own residence, called "Thabor,"still stands
150
BiblicalArchaeologist57:3 (1994)
on the Streetof the Prophets. Its distinctive characterhas made it a landmark of western Jerusalem:today it is occupied by the Swedish Theological Seminary. In addition to his architecturalpursuits,
Conrad Schick, a German-bornartisan, resided in Jerusalemin the latter half of the nineteenth century,where he practicedas an architect.Schick'sarchitecturalcareerwas launched in 1848, when he was appointed Superintendantof the House of Industry,a craft trainingcenter run by the LondonJews' Society for Jewish converts to Christianity. Duringthis time, he investigated many of the antiquitiesof Jerusalemand recognised the significanceof the Siloam Inscription, which commemorated the completion of KingHezekiah'swater conduit. Thisphotograph was taken in 1897. (Courtesyof the PEF Archives).
Schickwas one of the leading pioneers of the exploration of Jerusalem'sancient remains, regularlypublishing his findings in the learnedjournalsof the British and German societies dedicated to the exploration of Palestine, namely the PalestineExplorationFund and the Deutscher Palistina-Verein.While Schick received considerable encouragement and support for his endeavors from Wilson at PEFheadquartersin London, as attested by their frequent correspondence,he was coldshouldered by Warren,who was directing reconnaissancesurveys and excavations in Jerusalemon behalf of the Fund during the years 1867-70. In a letter to Wilson dated 15 December 1871, Schick,in his poor grammatical English, complained that "Captain Warrenused my service only in a few and very exceptional cases, so to the most part I learned by his printed reports(,)only(,) what was going on" (PEFArchives, Schick2). Yet,Schick,with his sharp eye for detail, subsequently provided superiorinformationaboutthe subterranean cisterns of the .laram. of the Ilaram Normally, the interior was kept out of bounds to explorers,but in 1872 Schickwas afforded a golden opportunityto investigatethis area.Turkey wished to be representedat the Great Exhibitionto be held in Vienna, and the Austrian consul in Jerusalempersuaded them to put on display there a detailed model of the Haramal-Sharff.As Schickrelated in a letter to Charles Wilson, dated 7 June 1872,he was awarded the assignment of producing a suitable model in wood at a reasonablecost (PEF Archives,Schick3). He wanted his model to be of value to "students of history and topography" and not merely a dis-
Arr
4W..
rt.O
play of craftsmanship.It was exhibited with anothermodel in the Turkishpavilion at the Vienna Exhibitionof 1873and laterthey were sold by his agent, Rev. J.H. Briihl,to the Mission House Museum in Basle,Switzerland, as we are informed in lettersfrom Schick to Wilson, written between 16 June, 1873and 23 April 1874 (PEFArchives, Schick7,911).Schickwas determined to depict "thesubstructions(sic),cisterns and all underground buildings as well as those above ground" (PEFArchives, Schick 3). He thereupon set about examining and recordingas many of the subterraneanfeaturesas he was able, during the years 1873and 1875,and continued making models. Some of Schick's models may still be seen in Jerusalemat the St. Paulus Hospice, better known as the Schmidt School, which is situated opposite the Damascus Gate.By Schick'sown admission,his monographon the Taberis nade and the Temple,Die Stiftshfitte, largely a commentary on these models (Schick18%:III-IV,55). This was a period when much need-
ed repairswere being made to the Dome of the Rockby the Ottoman Turkish authorities which brought builders and engineersinto the Haram.Thesecircumstances made it easier for Schick to gain access to areas normally barred to foreigners. He was able to observe digging operations and the clearanceof blocked underground channels. Several of the cisternswere visited and recordedby him at this time. Schick'sdrawings benefit considerably from his architectural knowledge. Much of this valuable materialremains unpublished. We are now engaged in a systematic study of the archivalmaterial held by the Palestine ExplorationFund in London, including its holdings of Schick's papers, focusing particularattentionon documentary material,including correspondence and drawings, relatingto the cisterns.By sifting through these recordsand criticallyanalyzing the information,we have established a typology for the cisterns,which will shortly be published. Associated with this quest is an attempt to date these
AICI
Photograph of the western edge of the Haramal-Sharif,from north to south, taken
Bedfordon April6, 1862.The by Francis Sabil Ba?iri can be seenjustbehindthe tree
inthe foregroundandthe openingto cistern no. 16maybe discernedinsidethe low rectangularwallinfrontof the cornerof the arcadeon the right.Theancientdouble chamberedportionof cisternno. 15 lies beneaththe rockoutcropin the foreground
of the photograph. (Courtesy of the PEF Archives:P 1783).
underground chambers. There can be no doubt that some of the cisterns and caves within the Haram al-Sharffreachback in date to pre-Christian antiquity.On this point, we have the testimony of the pseudepigraphal Epistleof Aristeas.More correctly,this work should be entitled a discourse which provides an account of how the Greek translationof the JewishTorahcame into being. It is generally believed that the author of the Epistleof Aristeaswas an Egyptian, probablyan educated Jew of Alexandria, but scholars have not been
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
151
TheHaramal-Sharif SStruthion Pool
T
rAntonia Fortress
1 j
6(1
8)
0
1 5
(2 )
10 oo
0
0
"
4
30(2)
S/z
29 (34)
#/
O•
CD
* Golen The currentshape the ancient Temple Mount hides numer-
..of
c
Warren's Gate
o
ous subterranean
Dome of
chambers andstruc-
the Rock
turalremains.This mapshowsthe cisterns,numberedaccordingto Schick's system.Wilson/Warren'snumberingis givenin bracketsfor cisternsnos. 15and 29. Cisternnumbers 15and 29 matcha
0
Wilson's Arch __
dP "Solomon's Stables"
Barclay's Gate I •
Robinson's
Arch
Double
152
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
Gate
Triple Gate
type characteristicof Hellenisticwater tanks.
N
eN ,,\.
I
t.
i
0
20m 0
Plan of cistern no.15 accordingto Warren(after PEFArchives, JER/WAR 62:12; originalscale 1:500).
able to form a consensus on the date of its composition. From the internalevidence of the work itself, it can be placed somewhere in the second century BCE (Schtirer1986:677-87).The author of this tractprovided a briefdescriptionof Jerusalemand its Temple in his day, noting that: Thereare moreover wonderful and indescribablecisterns underground, as they pointed out to me, at a distanceof five furlongs[equalto approximately 940m, with one furlong or stadebeing 600 feet or podes]all around the site of the Temple,and each of them has countless pipes so that the differentstreams converge together (Ep.Arist.89; transl.Charles 1913:103). This descriptionbegs the question: among the 45 cisterns and other underground chambers that exist today within the areaof the TempleMount,can any be identified as belonging to the group reportedby the author of the Epistleof
10m
Plan of cistern no.15 according to Schick(after PEFArchives, Schick239:6; originalscale 1:200).
Aristeas?The answer is almost definitely "yes."There are two cisterns that fit a type that is highly characteristicof Hellenistic water tanks of the third and second centuries BCE. These are the cisterns numbered by Schick as nos. 15 and 29 and listed by Wilson and Warrenas nos. 22 and 34, respectively We shall henceforth referonly to Schick'snumbering of these chambers,which is ordered in a clockwise sequence around the HIaram, whereas the Wilson-Warrenscheme followed a somewhat random spatial distribution.
tomb of the same personage. Charles Warren(1871:214)described cistern no.15 as follows: A largecisternof the type found down by BeitJebrinand Deir Duban. It is cut and roofed in rock,domed. A flight of rock-cutsteps runs round the curved wall: there are two openings into it from above, now closed up.
A general plan of this cistern by Warren survives in manuscript,dated 3 February 1869 (PEFArchives,JER/WAR 62:12). Cistern No. 15 The account given by Conrad Schick Cistern no. 15 is situated towards the (1887:78-79)was more specific. He connorth-west comer of the Haram,coincicured that it was completely hewn from the rock and noted that it comprised dent with the present-day SabilBaufrT, three interlinkedchambers. The PEFarthe cubic domed structure.This photowestern of the chive of the IUaram, graph edge possesses a detailed plan drawn taken Francis BedSchick was (PEFArchives, Schick 239/6). south, looking by by This plan must have been executed beford in 1862,during the tour of the East fore 31 December 1875,which is when by the Princeof Wales (laterKing Edhe enclosed it with a letter to Wilson ward VII).Schickrecordsits colloquial name as Bir(well or cistern in Arabic) (PEFArchives, Schick 15), in which he the conferred al-Akhtar, by nearby pointed out that his plan "in some way Shaikh BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3(1994)
153
D
0
0
imensions
Cisterns the-
on
by
other
the
and
al=Shcwlf
M*
observations data
C
of of
C
Warren
of
particulars
15
Nos.
0Hcwctm (Based
and
Schick and
29
flie
on
Jerusalem and C R
supplemented Conder)
SN239/6] [51887, 78] Easternchamber (cisternno.15)
9 x 10.5 m [N239/6]
15 x713
_79x5 x37.7.m
[SN]239/3]
[5 1887,83]
8.2x8.0 m
Southern chamber (cisternNo.29)
N[S239/3] 1 5.4 m
1157m
m chambers: [ x76.m 1887,78-79] [SN239/2] Southenchaberm82x8.0
interconnecting
8.2x8.2 m
S 1887,78]
[N239/6]
.2 m 83] 8[S 23 1887,
S 1887,83]
[SN239/31
passage: 14.4 m
0
1.2
surfacebelow Haram:
14.8 m
[SN239/2] 4ramIS•S1887,78] 13.7m* [SN239/4] 11:m
m
1.9
[S1887 83]
1.2
M
[Wa1871,214] [SN239/2]
m
I[C1880a,83]
1.5.m** [SN239/4]1 rock roof [Wa 1871, 214] Rounded rockceiling [S 1887, 83; SN239/21
1.Domed Oneroun dsha•t opening It
each chamber;An additional roundopening (inlet)close to the northside of this cistern [SN239/6]
One round shaft opening to each
chamber[SN239/2,3,4]
........ Tableabbreviations Archivareferences:SA=PEFArchives,Schick Bibliographicreferences:C=Conder;S=Schick;Wa=Warren
154
57:3(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
......
..... ......
differes (sic) from Captain Warrens."He probably visited the cistern the previous autumn when it was dry, according to his normalhabit(PEFArchives,Schick 5). Schickwrote on the plan that it was measured and sketched by him, indicating that it is based on measurements and observations made on the spot. The southern cave is shown as almost perfectly circular,with a diameter of 11 m. It has an opening in the middle of its roof, which is topped by a domed structure, the SabilBasTri,which was erected at the expense of one Ibrahimal-Rumi in 1435-36 (Wallsand Abul-Hajj1980:17, building no. 180;Burgoyne 1987:54243). The cave, too, may have a medieval origin. This round chamber communicates northwards with a double chambered rock-cutcave via a short passageway, 0.60 m wide, that is asymmetrical to the circularchamber. The double chamberedcisternhas a totally differentcharacter,being kidneyshaped in plan, and would appearto be much more ancient.Its original entrance was through a rectangularopening leading from the surface of the Haramdown a flight of narrow steps (0.60m wide), running anti-clockwise along the wall of the easternchamber.On Schick'splan, this chamber measures about 9 x 10.5 m and the western chamber 7 x 13 m. They were connectedby a doorway 3 m wide. Eachchamberhad a circularshaft entrancein its ceiling and there is an additional circularopening close to the north wall. The latteropening may have constitutedan inlet leading from a conduit. Key dimensions of this group of chambersare summarized in Table1 to the left.
Cistern No. 29
This second kidney-shaped reservoiris located just inside the eastern wall of the inner platform on which the Dome of the Rock is built. Its Arabic name is Biras-Suanehor Well/Cistern of the Firestone (Schick1887:83). Warren(1871:217)made only a very cursory examination of this cistern and described it as follows: No. 34 [Shick'sno. 29] is dose to No. 2 [Schick'sno. 30], at northeast angle
N
?
011
?-*
.r
.*.
A
A
0
lom
..
A-A
of platform;it was examined,butnot measured;it is of an irregularshape, cutin therock,andperhaps60 feetin diameter;at thenorth-eastangleis a passagecutintotherockwhichappearsto terminateafterabout10feet.
Theprincipaldatarecordedby 1887:83). Schickandhis contemporaries forthis are in 1. Table presented cistern
Discussion Theoriginaltwin-chamber arrangementof cisternno. 15is closelysimilar Plansanda sectionof thiscistern to thelayoutof cisternno.29.Bothcomovalcavitieswithbottlewerepreparedby Schicksometimebepriseinterlinked diffore31October1872(PEFArchives, shapedelevations.Thisarrangement ferentiatesthesecisternsfromtheothers Schick4) andsentto Wilsonat thePEF withintheHIaram. on 28 February1873(PEFArchives, Theyalsohavesimilardimensionsandshareothercommon Schick5).Threeversionsof theplan existinthePEFarchives(Schick239-2,3,4). features.Theirdistinctivedesigndoes Likeno. 15,thiscisterncomprisestwo morethansuggestthattheyarecontemovalshapedchambers(9.5x 76 m;&2x poraneous:it actuallyprovidesa firm &0m) connectedby a doorway2.5m clueto theirdate.Thebell-shapedform wide(or3.4m wideaccordingtoSchick.) of thesecisternstakentogetherwith the Inhis drawings,bothchambersare staircasefringingthecircularwallsof shownas havingroundshaftentrances cisternno. 15findimmediateparallelsin thecisternsof Hellenisticdatein the piercingtheirroofs,butonly thesouthGuvrinareain thewesternone was openat thetimeof Schick's Maresha/Beit visit.Schickconcurredthatthesecham- ernedge of theJudaeanhillcountry, bers"areentirelyrockhewn,andhavea whichliesjust24 milesfromJerusalem, rockceilingwhichis rounded"(Schick as thecrowflies(Kloner1993).Thisre-
Plan of cistern no. 29 accordingto Schick Schick239:2;original (afterPEFArchives, scale1:200).
semblancewas firstpointedoutby WarA ren,as notedabove(Warren1875:97). somewhatromanticizedengravingof one of thesecisternsat BeitGuvrin,was publishedin 1880. At the turnof thecentury,morethan 100steppedbell-shapedcisternswere investigatedat Mareshaby F.J.Blissand R.A.S.Macalister(1902:pl.101),andthey describedthesechambersas the "Sanda!annahtype,"aftertheArabicnameof thelocation.Thesecisternsarecompletely rock-cut,with oval or roundedplans and flightsof stepshewn alongtheir innerwallsfromtoptobottom.Thesteps usuallyhavelow rock-cutparapets alongtheirouteredges.Cave56,examinedby BlissandMacalister, has twin chamberswith steps,whicharefairly closein planto cisternsnos. 15and29 in Jerusalem. Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
155
Vx
0
It
of 0,
it
614 LjbLO
ta
jp
to,
oe 4w
?LX,
too,
?R.
01.
NZ
AO' lo .0--,0 ell 4L
ei,
;a;z Ir
4t
N4
q,
-0a
roe
ia-
naeans in 113-112BCE.
IF
:Sl
11V
JIL
Recentarchaeological workat Mareshacarriedoutby Amos Klonerhas shown quiteconclusivelythatthistype of cisternis of Hellenisticdate,frombetweenthethirdandsecondcenturiesBCE Ben-Haimand Kloner (Kloner1991:84; 1989).In theLowerCityof Maresha,in Area53,Kloneruneartheda housethat was builtin themid-thirdcenturybce and destroyedin thesackof thecityby Beneath JohnHyrcanusI in 113-112BCE. the houseweretwo bell-shapedcisterns with spiralstaircases.Thesecisterns belongedto a largernetworkthatencompassedneighboringproperties.Thereafter,we suggestthatMareshawas abandonedand settlementwas transferred to nearbyBeitGuvrin(Gibson1992), who becontraryto Kloner(1993:953), lievesthatsomeformof settlementcontinuedduringthefirstcenturyBCE on themaintellknownas the UpperCity. ad Hence,at Mareshathe (termninus date for this of cistern is the quem) type the settlement the Hasmoof razing by
-7t
51
-?711 ITT
Ar-W
Theoriginof thebell-shapedcistern with a spiralstaircasewhichoccursin Judaeaduringthe Hellenisticperiodis uncertain.No evidencehasbeenfound forits existenceelsewhereso thatit is unlikelyto havebeenimportedfromoutside of Palestine.A typicalcisternencounteredin GreeceandAsiaMinoris bottleor pear-shaped,circularin plan andwithoutsteps(Tblle-Kastenbein 210).Inouropinion,the 1990:106-114, of cistern underdiscussionwould type be the resultof a hybridof two to appear earlierformsof waterinstallations found in theIronAge. Thesearesmallbellshapedwatercisternsas at Tellen-Nasbeh,on theone hand,andshaftwater systemswith stepsspirallingalongthe inner walls as at Gibeon, on the other. The shaft water pool at Gibeon, excavated by J.B.Pritchard(Pritchard1961; Cole 1980)and dated to before the tenth century BCE,has a parapet along the inside edge of the spiralling flight of steps, which is remarkablysimilar to the much View of cistern at Tell Sandatmannah in a nineteenth century engraving (after C.W. Wilson, ed., Picturesque Palestine, Sinai and Egypt [London: 1880]:179).
156
57:3(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
of 50 3 kvwrChwambs
Planof cave 56 at Maresha (afterBliss whichhastwin andMacalister 1902:pl.101) chambersandsteps.
Plan of cisterns beneath Hellenistic houseinArea53 at Maresha(Kloner1991: of A. Kloner). figureon p.84).(Courtesy
laterHellenisticexamples.Thereareno knowninstancesof bellshapedcisterns withstepsbeingconstructedafterthe While stepped second century BCE.
watercisternsdid existin theRoman andByzantineperiods,thesewerevery differentfromthe Hellenistic"Sandahannah" type. Theevidencepresentedabovedclearof ly placesthedateof theconstruction cisternno. 15betweenthethirdandsec-
Gsel ofo
Cistern no. 15 may ond centuries BCE.
havebeenfed withwaterfromtherockhewnpassageleadingfromthedirection of theStruthionPool,north-westof the The (Conder187927;1880:93). I.aram have reached this reserconduit may voirvia thesmallroundcistern,no.16 classifica(no.18 in theWilson-Warren tion),whichmighthaveservedas its previfilteringtank.Conder(1880:93) ouslysuggestedthatcisternsnos.15 and 16receivedwaterfromthe tunnel leadingfromtheStruthionPool.Schick believedthatthiswas trueof (1887:79) cisternno. 16.Theroundopening againstthenorthernwall of cisternno. 15,shownin Schick'splan,mayrepre-
sa
? otashGuw
Sead
Lic d-ns ofSites Dhosm
sentthepointof entryof theconduit leadingfromno. 16.Accordingto Warren,thelattermeasured2.1x 3.0m. Schick,on theotherhand,maintained
thatit was perfectlycircular,with a diameterof 3.25m. Thefloorof thistank is approximately one meterlowerthan thatof cisternno. 15,basedon thedata of Warren(1871:213-14) andSchick(1887: 78-79),whichis consistentwith no.16 servingthefunctionof a filteringtank forits largerneighbor. Concerningtheconduitleadingsouth fromthedirectionof theStruthionPool, Bahat(1988:10-12; has 1991:79) 1990:48; beenableto confirmtheearlierobservationmadeby Wilson(1880:36) thatthe extension of this tunnel wascut southern at the time of the construction through of thewesternwallof theHerodianTemple Mount.Thedateof theconstruction of thispassagecanthereforebe no later thanthemid-first andis probcenturyBaCE A earlier. Hellenistic (or ably pre-Herodian)datethereforeseemsfairlycertain forbothcisternno. 15and the conduit. An additionalcisternlocatedimmediatelysouth-westof cisternno. 15which, extremtogetherwith thesouth-eastern of the was conduit, ity destroyedat the timeof theconstructionof thewestern TempleMountwall,has recentlybeen investigatedby Bahat(1991:76-77).It too maybe of Hellenisticorigin. Finally,whatof cisternno. 29?On typologicalgroundsthistoo mustbe of 57:3(1994) BiblicalArchadwologist
157
Hellenisticdate.Itsposition insidetheinnerplatformof the Domeof theRockmaybe significant.Oneof thepresentauthorshassuggestedthatthe existingplatformderivesfrom thefenced-off areathattraditiondelineated thesacred ally of the TempleMount, precinct andis largelycoextensivewith 1990-91: thatarea(Jacobson 50-51;forotheropinions,see Ritmeyer1992).WhenHerod extendedthesize of theTemple or temenos, thishalendclosure, lowedzonewas markedout by a balustrade,calledthesoregin thecompilationof oralrabbinicaltraditionknownas theMishin Greekand nah.Inscriptions Latinwerepostedto the balustrade, warningGentiles notto crossthisboundaryand set footwithinthesacred AnJewish precinct(Josephus, XV War V 417; Jewish tiquities 194,VI124-28).Onecomplete Greekwarninginscriptioncut intoanashlarfromthisrailing anda largefragmentof a second one,havebeenrecovered 1979285,n. 57;seealso (Schiirer Thefirstis now 1989). Segal housedin theIstanbulArchaeologicalMuseum,andone of theothersis on displayat the PalestineArchaeological Museum (Rockefeller Museum)in thesoreg Jerusalem. Presumably, the reproduced perimeterof the pre-Herodian Templeprecinct, in whichcasecisternno.29 formedpartof theTemple complexas it existedin the
416
158
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
A'
it
, ,..,
PALESTINE EXPLORATION FUND.
TABLET
EROM
Hellenistic period.
cisternno. 29 Accordingly, to have been associatedwiththe appears whereas its near Temple, duplicate,no. 15,mayhavebeenlinkedto thecitadel of Jerusalemas it existedin the Hellenisticperiod.Itis generallyagreed thatthisacropolis,whichis referredto as suchin 2 Maccabees4:12,27-28and 55-6, andas theakrain theEpistle ofAriswas located north of the (100-104), teans in the of this cistern Temple, vicinity
,
HEROD's'
'rEMPLE
Greekinscription warning 'foreigners' (gentiles)fromencroachingon the hallowed areaof the TempleMount,carvedina limestoneashlar.Thiscompleteinscription is inthe IstanbulArchaeological Museum.Translated, it reads:"Noforeigneristo enterwithinthe forecourtandthe balustrade aroundthe Sanctuary.Whoeveris caughtwillhavehimselfto blamefor hissubsequentdeath"(Segal Anothersimilar,butfragmentary, inscribed 1989:79). blockis displayedinthe PalestineArchaeological Museum(Rockefeller Museum)inJerusalem. Thesebelongedto a seriesof warninginscriptions inGreekand Latinthatwerefixedto the balustrade(soreg)markingthe boundaryof the sacredprecinctof the TempleMount.Inthis connection,it shouldbe notedthatsimilarprohibitions appliedwithinGreektemples.(Courtesyof thePEF Archives).
andon thesiteof theformerbirahof the timeof Nehemiah(Neh2.8;7.2;Schiirer n. 39).Indeed,it was calledthe 1973:154, in the Hasmoneanperiod(Josebanis
xv 403;Jewish phusJewishAntiquities War175;118;Will1987).Thisfortressis distinctfromtheakrabuiltduringthe oppressiveruleof theSeleucidking,
% .
%% % %
\
,
-
-7
-5-
% 6
AntiochusIVEpiphanes,whichdominatedtheTempleandseparatedit from theresidentialquarterof theLowerCity (Wightman1989-90:31-39;Jacobson Thisreasoninghelpsto 1990-91:51-54). createa tentativeplanof Jerusalemin the secondcenturyBCE, beforetheHasmonaeansexpandedthecityto the WesternHill.On thismap,the two cisterns(Nos. 15and29)constitutethe earliestdatablechamberson the taram mustsurelybe identified al-Sharffand as two of the "wonderfulandindescribablecisterns"mentionedin the Epistleof Aristeas.
Bibliography Bahat,D. WaterConduitnearthe 1988 TheHasmonaean Mount.ReprintfromAriel-A Temple ReviewofArtsandLettersin Israel81:57-
.7673'1
58IHebrewl.
1991 The WesternWallTunnels,Ariel-A ReviewofArtsandLettersin Israel 84:54--84. AtlasofJenrusalem. 1990 TheIllustrated Jerusalem:Simon and Schuster.
10,,
6W/ N.! ?
250M
Ben-Haim,D. and Kloner,A. 1989 Maresha:UndergroundSystemNo. 74. NiqrotZurim15:1-16[Hebrew]. Bliss,EJ.and Macalister,R.A.S. 1902 ExcavtionsduringtheYears1898-1900. London:PalestineExplorationFund. Burgoyne,M.H. An Architectural 1987 Mamnluk Jerusalem: Study.BuckhurstHill:Worldof Islam FestivalTrust. Busink,T.A. vonSalomobis 1980 DerTenmpel wonJerusalem Herodes: Einearchdologischhistorische deswestStudieunterbernicksichtigung Vol1:DerTemTempelbaus. semnitischen pelSalomos.Leiden:E.J.Brill Carmel,A. 1983 Wiees zu ConradSchicksSendung der nachJerusalemkam.Zeitschrift 99:204-218. DeutschenPalistina-Vereins
Jerusalem in the second century
BCE,
priorto the expansion of the city to the Western
Hill(UpperCity)underthe Hasmonaeans. 1. TempleSanctuary andAltar 2. Sanctifiedprecinctof the TempleMount 3. Cisternno. 29 4. Suggestedlocationof the Seleucidacra 5. Suggestedlocationof the Hellenistic acropolis(birah,baris) 6. Cisternno. 15 7. Conduitand rock-hewnpassageleadingto cisternno. 15. 8. FossedescribedbyWarren 9. Lowercity(Cityof David) of fortifications andgate 10.Remains 11.Smallfortifiedtoweron the WesternHill(M.Broshi'sexcavations)
Charles,R.H. andPseudepigrapha 1913 TheApocrypha ofthe in English.Vol.2. PseudeOldTestament Oxford:OxfordUniversity pigrapha. Press. Conder,C.R. 1879 The High Sanctuaryat Jerusalem. Transactions of theRoyalInstituteof BritishArchitects 11:25-60. 1880 Notes on ColonelWilson'sPaperon the Masonryof the HaramWall.PalesFundQuarterly tineExploration Statement12:91-97.
57:3(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
159
*j~a- gn
-
*/
4w
Pritchard,J.B. 1%1 TheWaterSystemofGibeon.Philadelphia:Universityof Pennsylvania. Ritmeyer,L. 1992 Locatingthe OriginalTempleMount. Biblical Review18(2):24-45, Archaeology 64-65.
-
I'
C. Schick,
I.
N
Shimon Gibson is an archaeologiston the staff of the Palestine Exploration Fund, London, where he is cataloguing an archive of nineteenth century photographs of archaeologicalsites in the Holy Land. During the early 1980s,he was employed by the Israel Department of Antiquities and the Archaeological Survey of Israel.Over the past thirteenyears, Gibson has conducted excavations and field surveys in different parts of Israel,including work at Ras-et-Tawil(1981),Tellel-Full/Ras CAmar(1987),and Sataf (1987-89). He has published numerous articleson subjectsrelatingto ancientJerusalem, landscape archaeology,and early exploration.Since 1987 he has been the editor of the Bulletinof the Anglo-lsrael ArchaeologicalSociety.He is currently completing his Ph.D. on landscape archaeology and ancient field systems, at the Instituteof Archaeology,University College, London. Cole,D. 1980 How WaterTunnelsWorked.Biblical Review6(2):8-29. Archaeology Gibson,S. 1992 TheTell$andahannahShipGraffito Reconsidered.PalestineExploration 124:26-30. Quarterly Jacobson,D.M. 1990-91The Planof Herod'sTemple.Bulletin SocioftheAnglo-Israel Archaeological ety10:36-66. Kloner,A. 1991 Maresha.Qadmoniot 24:70-85 [Hebrew]. 1993 Mareshah(Marisa):The LowerCity. TheNewArchaeological of Encyclopedia in theHoly Excavations Archaeological Land.Editedby E.Stem. New York: Simonand Schuster.
160
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
1887 Beitel Makdas,oderderalteTempelplatz zuJerusalem; wie erjetztist.Jerusalem: privatelypublishedby the author. derTempel inJerusalem 18%96DieStiftshiitte, undderTemrnpelplatz derJetztzeit. Berlin: WeidmannscheBuchhandlung. Schiirer,E. 1973 TheHistoryoftheJewishPeoplein the AgeofJesusChrist(175B.C.E.-A.D. 135).Revisedand editedby G.Vermes, E Millarand M. Black.Vol.1. Edinburgh:T&TClark. 1979 TheHistoryoftheJewishPeoplein the AgeofJesusChrist(175B.C.E.-A.D. 135).Revisedand editedby G.Vermes, E Millarand M. Black.Vol.2. Edinburgh:T&TClark. 1986 TheHistoryoftheJewishPeoplein the AgeofJesusChrist(175B.C.E.-A.D. 135).Revisedand editedby G.Vermes, E Millarand M. Goodman.Vol. 3:1.Edinburgh:T&TClark.
P. Segal,
1989 The Penaltyof the WarningInscription fromthe Templein Jerusalem. IsraelExploration Journal39:79-84. Strobel,A. 1988 ConradSchickEinLebenfir Jerusalem Fiirth:FlaciusVerlag.T6lle-Kastenbein,R. 1990 AntikeWasserkultur. Miinchen:C.H. Beck Walls,A.G.,and A. Abul-Hajj, 1980 ArabicInscriptions in Jerusalem: A HandlistandMaps.London:Worldof IslamFestivalTrust. Warren,C. 1871 TheTanksand Souterrainsof the Sanctuary.Pp.204-17in TheRecovery A Narrative ofJerusalem: ofExploration andDiscoveryin theCityandHolyLand. Editedby C.W Wilsonet al. London: R.Bentley. 1875 Note on the Souterrainsin the Noble Sanctuary.Jerusalem,Palestine FundQuarterly Statement Exploration 7:96-97. 1881 TheSiteof the Templeof theJews. Transactions oftheSocietyofBiblical Archaeology 7:1-22. 1884 Plans,Elevations, Sections,etc.,Shewing theResultsoftheExcavations at Jerusalem,1867-70.London:PalestineExplorationFund. Warren,C. and Conder,C.R. 1884 Surveyof Western Palestine: Jerusalem. London:PalestineExplorationFund.
David M. Jacobsonis a materialsscientist by profession and manages the MaterialsFabricationDivision of the Hirst ResearchCenter of GEC Marconi Ltd. in north London. He studied at the University of Sussex, where he gained his D.Phil. While lecturhingat the Ben Gurion University of the Negev in BeerSheva,between 1972and 1975,Dr.Jacobson developed an interest in the archaeology and history of the Holy Land in the Hellenistic and Roman periods and, on his returnto England, commenced a serious study of the subject.He is completing a Ph.D.on Herodianarchitecture at King's College, London. Jacobson has published widely on Herodian and Roman architecture,history,numismatics, and ancient metallurgy.Currently he is serving as the Honorary Treasurer of the Palestine ExplorationFund.
Wightman, G.J.
1989-90TempleFortressesin Jerusalem. Part1:The Ptolemaicand Seleucid Akras.BulletinoftheAnglo-Israel Archaeological Society929-40. Will,E. 1987 Qu'est-cequ'unebaris.Syria 64:253-59. Wilson,C.W 1866 Ordnance SurveyoflerusalemMadein theYears1864to 1865.Southampton: OrdnanceSurveyOffice. 1871 TheOrdnanceSurveyof Jerusalem: 1864-5.Pp.9-32 in TheRecovwry of A Narrative ofExploration Jerusalem: andDiscoveryin theCityandHolyLand. Editedby C.W.Wilsonet al. London: R. Bentley 1880 The Masonryof the HaramWall. PalestineExploration FundQuarterly Statement12:9-65.
"Ilk.
The in
Water
the
Supply of the
Desert
Fortresses
Jordan Valley
By GiinterGarbrechtand YehudaPeleg
ne of theprerequisites forthe existence of towns, settlements, and even military installations such as fortressesis the guarantee of a securewater supply It is essentialfor the survival of the inhabitants.The water for daily consumption must be supplied mostly from the surroundinggeographicalarea.Difficultiesarise most frequently fromthe factthatsupply and demand are regulated by completely different factorsand so only rarelycoincide. The demand for water is influenced by the prevailing customs of the inhabitants, while available water supply is ruled by climate, precipitation,and the topographicconditions of the site.
The conditions at fortressesin arid areasare extremelyunfavorable.Precipitation is minimal and very unevenly distributedthroughoutthe year;and fortresses are situated on isolated hills or rocky peaks for strategicpurposes. Securingthe water supply under these circumstances calls for much ingenuity and technicalexpertiseon the partof the engineer.Nevertheless, the second-first Hasmonean builders were century BCE able to solve these problemsin the desert fortressesaround the JordanValley.
LocalConditions The watershed between the Mediterranean and the JordanValleyruns in an
approximately north-south direction at approximately 800 to 900 m above sea level, throughJerusalem,Bethlehem,and Hebron. The Hasmoneans and Herod the Greatbuilt a number of fortressesin the rugged mountain area which descends steeply to the east of this watershed, in the rain shadow of the mountains. This arid area east of Jerusalem, called the JudaeanDesert, was only sparsely populated by nomadic herders Fortress Dok on Gebel Karantal, the only Hasmoneanfortress not built up by Herod.(Thewall on top of the mountain is courmodern).Allphotographsandillustrations of authors. the tesy
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
161
Thisdesert,howthroughoutantiquity. ever,servedas theperennialretreatof politicalrefugees.Theywaitedtherefor morepropitiouscircumstances, gathandsometimesreeredtheirsupporters, turnedin victorytoJerusalem. Themost famousof theserefugeeswas David: And Davidwent up fromthence, anddweltin strongholdsat Engedi. And it cameto pass,when Saulwas returnedfromfollowingthePhilistines,thatit was toldhim,saying, Behold,Davidis in thewildernessof Engedi.ThenSaultookthreethousandchosenmen out of all Israel, andwent to seekDavid andhis men upontherocksof the wild goats. (I Sam23:29-24:2)
O• V!..R
14r
IN:'?
Refugeessuchas David,who attained poweraftertheyhad cometo knowthe desertfrompersonal experience,were probablythemost inclinedto found well-designedrefuge fortressesin the desert.Inthebeginning,theseweresimple strongholds. Somewerereinforcedandoccasionallyequippedwith manyconveniences and the trappingsof royalty(Pl6ger1955; Harder1962). Theperiodfrom the Seleucidconquest of Palestinein 201Ba totheJewishWarof 66-70 CEwas a politicallyvolatileperiod of changeandrevolution.TheMaccabaeanrevoltof 167 BCE brought about
Precipitation in Jericho, showing concentration in winter months. of precipitationis acturallymuchmore Distribution erraticthan the averagesshown below. Average precipitation in milimeters M s0
Months
S
10
15
120
25
30
35
Sepember .5 October
November
Februar
* ff~l
March
May June 0
July0o
theindependenceof -ogst 0 Judea,whichlasted untilthe Romanoccupationof the countryin 63BCE. somedefensivepositionson mountaintopsor JewishandRomanprocurators, timeswiththe titleof Kingor Queen, the nearlyinaccessiblespursof mountainranges.A stronghold,however, governeda regionravagedby political and religioustensions.Duringsuch musthavenotonlyanimpregnable positimesthedesertfortressesprovedto be tion,butalsothecapabilityto withstand essentialstrongholdsandplacesof a long siege.Theclearmilitaryadvanrefugeforrulersin difficulty.Sincenone tageof thepositionon a mountaintopin couldbe sureforany lengthof timeof thedesertrepresentsa serioushandicap thestrengthof his or herposition,these withrespectto watersupply fortresseswerevaluableretreatsin Themeanannualprecipitation on whichto waitforthesuppressionof an thewesternslopesof theJordanValley uprisingor thearrivalof helpfromout- is 50 to 200mm, withtheamountinside. Forinstance,duringtheParthian creasingfromsouthto north.Theprecipitationfallsmostlyas rain,almosteninvasion,KingHerodlefthis familyat Masadawhilehe went toask theRotirelybetweenOctoberand April,most mansforassistance(JosephusJewish of it in December,January, and FebruWar1.13.8). ary Thestatisticsof meanannualpreThemaindesertfortresseswereAlex- cipitation,however,canbe misleading, Herod- sincethereareyearsin whichonly a andrion,Dok,Cypros,Hyrcania, and All Machaerus. these few millimetersof rainfalls,andsuch ion,Masada, installationswereerectedin excellent yearscanoccurconsecutivelyConverse162
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
can ly,in otheryearstheprecipitation reachdoubletheaverage.Inmostinstances,thisrainfallcomesin short, heavyshowers.Sincethehardandbarrendesertsoil absorbsonlya little runsoff water,mostof theprecipitation in suddenwadi floods,whichsometimesassumecatastrophic proportions. Despitethissituation,thegeologyof the Judaeanmountainsand therainfall uponthewesternslopesfostertheemergenceof a numberof springson their easternslope,forinstanceEinGedi,or Elisha'sspringatJericho.
theprecipitation, storagewas an essentialelementof any water-supplysystem.Watercollectedin thewinterhadto be storedforuse duringat least12and up to 24 months.Undersuchcircumstances,onlylargeundergroundcisterns weresuitableforthedesertfortresses. Therearea significantnumberof springs on theeasternslope of theJudaean mountains,fedby themoresignificant rainfallwest of thewatershed(e.g.,520 mm in Jerusalem). Theoutputof the springsvarieswiththeseason,but the flow rarelyceasesaltogether. ThevariationsrangefromQmin:Qmax= 1:1.4 WaterResources (Q= volumerateof flow)at EinElisha Thefortressesandmilitarystrongholds nearJerichoto Qmin:Qmax= 1:16at in thejudaeanmountainscoulddrawon EinAuja,northof Jericho.Inprinciple, it is possibleto tapthewest-to-eastdethe-followingresourcesfortheirwater supply:sporadicrunoff,springs,and scendingaquiferwith deepenough groundwater.Runofffromtheinfrequent wells,andso to exploitthisground rainshowerscouldeitherbe diverted waterdirectly. fromnaturalcollectingchannels(the wadis)or-under suitabletopographic Water Demand conditions-collectedin artificialchan- Waterwasneededin thefortresses mainnels.Inview of theinfrequentoccurly fordrinkingandwashingfortheperrenceandveryunpredictable amountof manentadministrative, supply,and
maintenancestaff,as well as forthemilitaryunitsstationedthereatanyonetime. Itis impossibleto estimatehow much waterwas neededin any fortress,as the numberof peopleandanimalstobesuppliedis not known.A minimumof 1020 litersa day foreveryinhabitantcan be assumedundersiegeconditions.At Herod'sfortress-palaces, dailywateruse perpersonmay havereached200300litersandmore.Thiswateruse was theyear. spreadquiteevenlythmroughout
WaterUse As noneof thefortressesoccupieda could largearea,sufficientprecipitation notbe collectedinsidethe wallsto fill cisternslargeenoughtoassurethewater supplyforan extendedperiod.Inaddition,the fortresseswerebuiltin the mountains,mostlyon highpeaks,and thegroundwatertablelayseveralhunPosition of the fortresses (general the toposketch,not to scale),illustrating the to graphicaldifficulty supply fortresses withwater.
Levof nm qFqrtress Domand LA
valrjy
duitwas installed,to a point somewhereon its slope. (3)Intermediate storageon theslope of the fortresshillto storea supply sufficientto allowfordifferent availabilityovertime. (4)Transportation by packanimals intocisternsin the fortforstorage andconsumption.(Forfurther detailssee Garbrecht/Peleg1989 and Amitet al. 1989)
spruw
Generalscheme of the watersupply systems.
dredsmetersbelowthem.Thiswater couldnotbe recoveredwiththetechnology availablein thesecondor firstcenAs a result,additionalwater turyBCE. hadtobe broughtto suchsitesfromoutside.Sinceno waterliftingdeviceswere availablein antiquitywhichcouldlift significantamountsof waterto very greatheights,thewatersupplyhad to be conveyedin gravity-flowconduits. Becausethefortresseshad to be situated on highplacesfordefensivereasons, onlyspringsor surfacerunoffabovethe levelof thesupplychannelcouldbe used,andground-levelconduitscould bringwateronlyto the footof thefortresshill.Thelevelof thesupplychannelcouldbe elevatedby meansof a bridgeto the fortresshillor a groundlevelpressurizedconduit.As a result, thecisternswhichwereessentialin equalizingtheverywidelyfluctuating watersupplyhadto be situatedoutside thefortresson theslopesof thehill.In peacetime,waterwas conveyedfrom thisstoragelevel to theconsumption levelin jarsor waterskinsby portersor packanimals.Duringa siege,however, suchcisternscouldbe reachedonly withdifficulty,andsometime,notat all. Thussufficientwater-storage capacity hadto preparedinsidethewallsto allowforsuchan eventuality.These cisternswithinthewalls,whichalways hadto be filledup fromthelower,out164
Biblical Arcluivogist57:3(1994)
side cisterns,werethemainstayof watersupplyduringa siege. Owingto theprevailinghydrological and topographical conditions,the followingprocedureswereused in organizingthe watersupplyof these fortresses: (1)Watercatchmentat springs, wadis,or collectingchannels. (2)Conveyanceof thewaterby a channelto thefootof thehillor, whena bridgeor pressurecon-
4.r
Channel leading to the cisterns on the easternslopeof GebelKarantal.
ThefortressDokprovidesa good exampleof a systemsuppliedthrough diversionof waterfroma wadi.The systematCyproswill be describedin somedetailas an exampleforwater collectionand springcapture.
Dok ThefortressDok (Dagon),on theQuarantanapeak(GebelKarantal) west of Jericho,is scarcelymentionedin historical sources.Itwas probablyfounded duringtheMaccabaean uprisingby PtolatJeriemy,theson of Abubus,strategos cho.Simon,thebrotherof JudasMacwas cabaeus,HighPriestsince143BCE murdered there in 134 BCE. Dok is ap-
parentlytheonlyfortthatwas notlater rebuiltby Herod. Theeastside of theQuarantana mountainis a sheercliffdescendingto theJerichoplain,and in thenorthand souththerearesteepslopes.Onlyon thewest is the fortresshillconnectedto theJudaeanmountainplateau,and herea dry moatwas excavated.Not muchis leftof thefortress,as thepeak was clearedat thebeginningof this centuryforthebuildingof a church, whichwas nevercompleted. Dokhasthesimplestwater-supply systemof thegroupof fortressesdiscussed here.During the infrequentrains, water was diverted from a wadi on the west to nine cisterns.One other cistern was situated somewhat higher. It seems that,owing to the local topography,even during a siege the cisterns on the steep slopes were accessible only to the defenders, and not to the assailants.The supply channel for this system began at a small divertingweir above a small cliff in the wadi. Only tracesof masonry on the cliff show the position of the weir.
Legend 0
Cisterns - DiversionCanal
Weir SDiversion Monasteryof Temptation I?
0
.
"
,,oom
X wS
u
'4l
1'gu'g
1
11
O/P0 Thefirstcisternis 500metersaway.The channel,partlybuiltof fieldstonesand partlyhewn in therock,is (150to 0.70m broad,witha fallof about1%.Whenthe channelwas freeof obstructions(gravel fromthewadi or erosionmaterialfrom theslopes)andflowingata depthof 030 m, it coulddeliverup to 12 cubicmeters persecond.Thecisternsfilledby this channelareroughlyhewninthehardlimestonebedrock.Theyareapproximately in plan(L[ength]7-11m, rectangular W[idth]3-5 mrn, H[eight]5-7 m). Theirca-
pacitiesrangefrom190-270cubicmeters (m3);the total capacity of the nine cis-
ternsis 2100(m3).Thelowerpartof the cisternopenings,whichweremade quitehighto facilitatetheremovalof the construction spoil,as laterblockedby to masonry enlargethecisterncapacity. All thecisternswerelinedwithseveral layersof plaster. Cypros Cyprosis situated3 kmsouthof Dok, on theprominentmountainpeakTelel
Gebel Karantaland fortress Dok, diversionweir,channelandcisternsaccordingto Amit(1989).Theoccasionalflow inthe wadi was divertedintothe channelandconveyed by it to the storagecisterns.
Akaba,250m abovetheJerichoplain. Thefortressconsistsof a 1800m2acropolisanda lowerterraceof about4500 m2to thesouth.Theruinsarefromthe andHerodianperiods.In Hasmnonean theJewishWar(1.21.9), JosephusFlayius writesthatHerodbuiltan especially Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
165
strongandornatefortressaboveJericho,namingit Cyprosin honorof his mother(Harder1962).Thereis no literaryevidenceof a Hasmoneanforthere, butit is assumedthatone of theforts TraxandTaurus(mentionedby Strabo in his accountof Pompeius'drivefrom JerichotoJerusalem) occupiedthissite. was WhiletheHasmoneanstronghold a fortressproper,the Herodianinstallationwas moreof a palace,its luxury andcomfortattestedby the two sumptuousbathsfoundthere.TheolderHasmoneanfortresswas suppliedby a collectingchannel.Threehundredmeters southwestof Telel Akabathereis a hill only25 m lowerthantheacropolis.A channelat theheightof thecol (saddle) betweenthetwo peaks,55 m below theirsummits,encirclesthelowerhill, anareaof about43,000n m2,forcollection of itsrun-offwater.Thechannelmost probablywentaroundthenorthside of Telel Akabato thecisternson theeasternslope.Togetherwith thenorthern halfof thefortresshill,theentirecatchment area was about 100,000m2. The
nearJerichois meanyearlyprecipitation 140mm.Ifhalfof thistotalresultsin runoff and50%of therun-offreachesthe channel, approximately3,500 m3 can be
"harvested" yearly.Thetotalcapacityof thefourcisternson theeasternslopeis 166
Biblical 57:3(1994) Arcduologist
more than2000m3.The probableaverage
annualsupplyfromthissourcewould havebeenmorethanenoughto fillup thecisternsin the fortduringthewinter months.Thecisternsarebuiltatapproximately40 mnbelowsea level,5 m below 55 m thesaddle,andapproximately below theacropolis. ApartfromHerodion,whichwas suppliedby springwaterfromthesocalled"Solomonic Pools,"Cyproswasthe
-SO
Cypros, seem from Jericho. Herodbuilt thisverystrongandornatefortresson a formerHasmonean fortand namedit in honorof hismother.Cisternson the slope arevisible.
insufficient.As therewereno springs, suitablewadis,orcatchmentareasin the immediatevicinity,theoutflowof two springsin the upperpartof the nearbyWadiKelt,75 and 12km distant
t.
Is I fromEnIFaarY CaWn (43,000 m2)
ok•=
onlyfortressto makeuse of springwater. Itseemsthataftertherebuildingof the fortby Herodand itsconversionintoa luxuriouscastle,the formerreliablebut frugalwatersupplywasconsideredtobe
Watersupply system of Cypros accordingto Meshel-Amit (1979).Thecollecting the fort.Herod served Hasmonean system builta mostelaborateaqueductinorderto bringspringwaterto Cypros.
as thecrowflies,was capturedand led to Cyprosthroughextremelydifficult terrain.Theoutputof theupperspring (EinFara)was led by a 6 kmlongchannel to thelowerspring(Einel Fawar), andtheircombinedoutputbroughtto Cypros.ThechannelfromEinel Fawar to Cyproswas 14km longandincorporatedtenbridgesandfive tunnelsin orderto overcomethemanysmall ravinesdescendingintothewadi.The lowerpartof someof thepillarsof the longest bridge (L 135m), are still stand-
ing.Themaximumheightof thebridge was about14m, and thespanof the widestarchwas 12.60m. SincebothEinFaraandEinel Fawar arekarsticsprings,theiroutputvaries greatlyovertime.At Einel Fawara maximaloutputof 0.83cubicmetersper second(m3/s)was recorded,butsometimestheflow ceasescompletelyAt a medianoutputof 0.133m3/stheoverall yearly total would be 4 million m3.Tak-
ing intoaccounttheconsiderablelosses on theway,a yearlysupplyof 3 million rr canbe expectedat theend of theconduit,0.10m3/sof fresh,runningspring water.Someof thisdischargewas stored in thecisterns,andsomewas used directlyfromthechannel,butit is apparentthatmorewaterarrivedat thecastle thanwas needed.On theeastslope,betweencisternsnos.2 and3, a channel
Ir4
0
0
J '
OW*F
PAOW .
r. 4.
j
continuedon downhillin a serpentine courseto supplythewinterpalaceof Herodon thesouthbankof WadiKelt and to irrigatethenearbyplantations. Special Structures Thestoragecisternsat Cyproshad to be installedas highas possiblein orderto minimizethe toilsomeportageof water up theslopeintothe fortress.At first sight,thislevelseemsdictatedby the topographical heightof the saddlebetweenthefortressandtheadjacent
qw
Section of run-off collecting channel, encirclinghillwest of Cypros.
mountainarea.Provisionof a bridgeor pressureconduit,however,would have allowedconstructionof the storagecisternshigherup theslope,closerto the fort.At Cypros,thespringwatertraverseda long bridge,and at Machaerus a wallcarriedthesupplychannelto the Fortress Cypros (left)and hillwithcollecting channel(right),fromthe west.
-j. .
-
?,
,
r .-.
'.-rS--
quitefrequentwinterfloodsin the Kidron(WadiNur),it appearsreasonable to assumethatwaterof thesereservoirs
was used firstand thecontentof the cisternssavedforlateruse orduringa siege. Excavationof thereservoirsserved severalpurposes:thecreationof a moat, theprovisionof quarriedstoneforthe fort.Thehighestsaddlecrossingis foundatHyrcania.Here,thenaturalsadconstructionof thefort,and waterstordle was deepenedfordefensepurposes. age. Themostinterestingpartof thewater Onlya narrowpathwas lefton which thefoundationof thewater-supply ALL supplyof Alexandrionis certainlythe 112m channelwas laid,a substructure crossingof thesaddlewestof thefortress. m Two and 16.80 are Run-offfromthenearbymountainRas high. phases long discerniblein the masonry.Duringthe Kuneitrawas collectedby a circumferAO firstphase,possiblyof theHasmonean entialcollectingchannel.Thelevelof the four lower on cisterns thelowerstoragecisternscouldbe highIlk period,only thesouthslopecouldbe supplied.Durerbecauseof theconstructionof a presthe sure conduit(invertedsiphon)by which ing second,possiblyHerodian, more cisterns an twelve higherup phase aqueductcancrossa topographical theslopecouldbe filled. depressionin its course.Thisconsisted Threeunroofedpoolsmeasuring of a masonrychannel(W(160m, H (180 about18x 15x 5 m deep werequarried m) coveredby (030m highstoneslabs in therockon bothsidesof thepathand and plasteredon all its interiorsurfaces. the inside on (totalcapacity plastered Perhapsbecauseit was builton a bank about4000cubicmeters).Thesereserof loosestone,only thebeginningand voirswerefilledafterthecisternson the Masonry pressurized conduit between theend of theinvertedsiphonhave full. Ras and a of the fortress were Kuneitra been Alexandrion,veryexcepslope already preserved.Thedischargeend of As Hyrcaniareceiveditswaterfromthe tionalengineeringfeature. thesiphonlies2.51m lowerthanits
Hyrcania,channel bridge acrosssaddle betweenthe fortressandtheJudeanmountains.Inforegroundone of the rockcut pools.
168
57:3(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
intake,givinga fallof 1.3%alongits 190 m length,similarto thefallof theopen channelupstream.As themiddlepart - Plaster of thissiphonis missing,theexactmaxo imalpressureat its lowestpointis un" -, ... . known,butit wasat least5 atmospheres . . . .-II I ,• I ,. . andperhapsreached10atmospheres. I I ...... .-.-....a water column of 5 Assuming only m, theoutwardpressureon a I m long I I (3tons), I , Redonstruction(D. Amit) coveringslabwas30kilonewtons againsta counterweightof only8 kilonewtons(0.8tons)fromthe I m wide eExisting I I slab.As no dampswerefoundwhich have fastened the or cover slabs, might additional ballast,thesiphontheoretically couldnothavefunctioned.Afterfailureof thesiphon,mostlikelya higher crossingwas built. Invertedsiphonsin antiquitytypicalPlaster builtof lead,stone,or ceramic were ly The other slab-built invertpiping. only ed siphonwhichhasbeenpublished . w was foundat Angitiain Italy(Blake1959. 82).At Alexandrionthereis a 220 m 0 .m widemasonrywallalongsidethesiphon. Ifthiswall hadbeenmeantto carryan openchannel,itsmasonrycourseswould havebeenhorizontal.Infact,thecours- Inverted siphon at Alexandrion accordingto Amit (1989),showing a composite crosses arelaidapproximately parallelto the section of the wall and the siphon with different probableconstructionstages.
an
DesetaFrgrsse
Fcm
IL
ghir
ate
S
atm
C-45
Mexandrion
Surface runoff
Collection canal
-
Dok
Surface flow
Diversion fromWadi
Kypros
Surfacerunoff springs
Hyrcania
Surface flow
Herodion
Pools of
1.2 km
Inv.Syphon (1= 190 m)
14 Cisterns -4.700 m3
-110
?
- 500 m
-
9 Cisterns -2.100 m3
-40
?
Collectioncanal Conversioncanal
- 400 m - 14 km
Dam Bridge(135 m)
4 Cisterns -2.000 m3
-55
? -4000 m3
Diversionfrom two Wadis
-
2 km 9 km
Bridge(112m)
16 Cisterns --16.000 m3
-22
-
7 km
-
3 Cisterns
-25
Solomon
-
200 m3
-2.500 m3
Masada
Surface flow
Diversionfrom two Wadis
Machaerus
Surface flow
Diversionfrom two Wadis
- 350 m - 200 m ?
-
Wall
12 Cisterns -38.500 m3 6 Cisterns
-40 -80 ?
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
-8000
m3
?
169
"1
Opp
.tow
YehudaPeleg'sfieldof expertiseis ancienttechnologies.He specialisesin watersupplyandis currentlyengaged in theSusita-Hippos aqueductresearch project,a jointprojectof theTelAviv UniversityandtheFachhochschule Liibeck.Peleqhasexploredthewater DorandJericho. systemsof Caesarea, AncientPipeAmonghispublications: in Aquelinesin Israelin FutureCurrents ductStudies(1991),TwoAqueductsto InstidesLeichtweiss Dorin Mitteilungen tutes(1984),andTheWaterSupplyof CaesareaMaritimain IEJ27 (1977).
slope of the saddle, possibly indicating that the wall was intended to carrya second inverted siphon. Summary and Conclusion In the mountain desert on the outskirts of the densely inhabited portion of Judaea, the Hasmonean rulers erected a number of fortressesthat resemble each other both in their choice of sites facing east toward the desert and in the form of their water-supply installations.The oldest fortifiedvantage point was probfollowed by ably Dok (about 167BCE), Alexander JanHyrcania(134-104 BCE). neus (134-107BCE) probably founded Masada,Alexandrion, and Machaerus. Cypros, rebuiltby Herod, was most likely built by the Hasmoneans. Herodion was founded by Herod. All the fortresseshad both "consumption cisterns"inside the fort, filled by precipitationand by transportof water
170
57:3(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
from the lower storage cisterns,and "storagecisterns"on the slope of the fortresswhich were situated as high as the topography allowed. The storage cisterns were filled by the diversion of run-offwater from wadis (Dok, Hyrcania, Masada, probablyMachaerus),the collection of runoff water from an adjacent hilltop (Alexandrion,Cypros), or the capture and conveyance of spring water (Cypros, Herodion). The consumption cisterns had to be full at all times, as theircontents constituted the only water-supply available during a siege. With the exception of the "harvesting" of run-offfrom nearby hilltops by means of circumferentialcollecting channels, a seemingly local invention, all the techniques used in these watersupply systems were well known in the eastern Mediterraneanarea:water diversion, gravity flow conduits, conduit bridges, pressurized conduits, and cisterns. The originality of the Hasmonean engineering achievement lies in its optimal configurationof these elements to exploit in the most efficientway water resourceswhich were distributed very unevenly in time and place. Lackingthe modern scientificresourcesof hydrology, hydraulics, statics,and soil mechanics, and with a quite limited repertoire of building techniques, the Hasmonean and Herodian engineers nevertheless succeeded in assuring a sufficient supply of life-sustainingwater to the isolated fortressesabove the JordanValley. The prerequisitesof such planning and design were a wealth of original ideas, the skilled exploitation of local conditions, good workmanship, and, not in the least, the experience accumulated during many generations of handling water in arid conditions. For their time, the installationswere great technical achievements, and deserve respect even in the context of today's technology.
Bibliography Y.andPatrich, D.,Hirschfeld, J. Amrnit,
1989 AncientAqueducts in Israel.Jerusalem
(Hebrew). Blake,M.
in Italy 1959 RomanBuildingConstruction fromTiberius throughtheFlavians.
Washington.
AO
in retirement GiintherGarbrecht, since 1987,was Professorof Hydraulicengineeringat theMiddleEastTechnical Universityin Ankaraandat theTechnicalUniversityin Braunschweig. Comto his research and plementary teaching in engineeringsciences,he investigated ancienthydrotechnical systemsand in Turkey(Tuspa,Pergamon), structures Egypt(Saddel-Kafara, Fayum),Syria (Resapha),Italy(Rome,Pompeii),and Israel(Jericho). A considerableportion of his morethanone hundredpublicationsdealswiththehistoryof hydraulic engineering.
H.H. Conder,R.C.andKitchener, Palestine(SWP)II. 1882 Surveyof Western
London: TheCommittee of thePalesFund. tineExploration G.andPeleg,J. Garbrecht, 1989 "DieWasserversorgung geschichtlichamJordantal." erWistenfestungen AntikeWelt
20"2-20. G. Harder, 1962"Herodes-Burgen undHerodesStiidte des im Jordangraben." Zeitschrift DeutschenPalestina-Vereins 78:49-63.
Meshel,Z.andAmit,D. 1979 "TheWaterSupplyof theCypros Fortress." 12:46-47,67-77 Qadmoniot (Hebrew). Pl6ger,D. Zeit1955 "Diemakkabhischen Burgen," schriftdesDeutschenPalestinaVereins
71:141-172.
The Umm el-Jimal 1994 Field Season Author(s): Bert de Vries Source: The Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 57, No. 3 (Sep., 1994), p. 171 Published by: The American Schools of Oriental Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3210412 Accessed: 02/04/2010 11:15 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asor. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
The American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Biblical Archaeologist.
http://www.jstor.org
News,
Notes,
and
Reviews
TheUmmel-Jimal 1994FieldSeason he
1994seasonoftheUmmel-Jimal posed thewallsand floorsof several
focusedon theexcavationof SProject LateAntiquetombs,(2)theexcavation of a housein al-Herri,thesiteof the Nabataean/LateRomanvillage,and (3) a surveyof thedecorativefragments andinscriptionsin theruinsof the Byzantine/Umayyad town.
Burial special-
istsexcavatedthirteencisttombs whichcontaineda
rooms.FiveNabataeanpaintedsherds foundin levelsabovethe floorstestify to theinfluenceof theNabataeanshere in theRomanera.Domesticoccupation lastedfromthefirstto thethird century,but thehousewas destroyedearlyin thefourth. Thesiteis veryimportantbecauseit is theonlyruralEarly/ LateRomansettlementin northernJordanthathasnot
beendisturbed bylateroccupation.
Cist grave at Umm el-JimalareaAA. PhotobyBertde Vries.
Afterthedestructionof the housein theEarlyByzantine ployeda staffof twentyarchaeologists the ruin was and studentsand twentyfieldworkers one skeletonsfrom period, entire a thick ash-filled fromtheUmmel-Jimalvillage.The theEarlyByzantine coveredby of soil characteristic of seniorstaffincludedJanetBrashler, The deposit period. simply and Exconstructedtombs AhmadMomani,CherieLenzen,Amjad dumping burning. in rich and Late offeredfew grave Tomb stone found southof elBataineh, tremely Early Sallyde Vries,andGerard "al-Herri" reads: Roman the conthe fanciest The Abgaros,age Hammink. on-goingprojectis dipottery, dump goods; tainedenoughEarlyByzanrectedby Bertde Vries.Generousfinanitemwas a pairof 70. Photoby Bertde Vries. tine to date cialsupportcamefromtheAmbassador The potterythroughout gold earrings. its to the were of buried here fourthcenturycE. Foundation,CalvinCollege,theWarndeposition probably people out the of this debris and er-Lambert Foundationandseveral to moderate status. economic Figuring origin verypoor Whilemostbodieswereplacedcare- why it was dumpedon thisruinshould privatedonors. inthesoilorinwood- shedsignificantlighton theancient fullyeitherdirectly methodof garbagedisposal!Perhaps BertdeVries en coffins,thereweresomebizarreexsuch a had function was One cleanups hygienic casually ceptions. person related to disease and dumpedon top of a woodencoffinin whichanotherhadalreadybeenburied, epidemiccontrol. An intensivesurandanotherwas interredin separate and so that articulated arms other vey of theByzantinepieces were found disconnected Umayyadtown bodyparts fromeachother.Thoughmostcistscon- recordednumerous decorativeand epitainedone or two skeletons,one somewhatlargertombheldfourteenpersons, graphicfeatures.These includeda largenumstackedone on topof theotherin a sinberof Byzantine wooden coffin! gle crossesfromchurches Thebonesandrelatedsoilsamples and houselintels,and havebeenshippedbackto Michigan, will wherefulllaboratory analysis sup- manyNabataeanand Greekinscriptions, data. the plement stratigraphic of a houseatal-Herri,a Excavation includingsomeprevirubblesite300m in diameter,100m east ouslyunknownones. BruceHobbs and Ahmad al-Momani excavatehouseR.4in Theproject emeast of Ummel-Jimal. PhotobyBertde Vries. of Ummel-Jimal'sByzantineruins,ex"al-Herri"
ofthirtyminimum
BiblialArchaeologist 57:3(1994)
171
TheRoman AqabaProjectAilaRediscovered thesummerof 1994thisnew
During projectrediscoveredtheancient
Romanportof Aila,nowwithinthemoderncityof Aqabain SouthernJordan. Thecitywas foundedby theNabataeans in thefirstcenturyBCE, whenit floura ishedas majoremporiumbetweenthe RomanEmpireanditseastemneighbors. Luxuryproducts,suchas frankincense, myrrh,andspices,wereoff-loadedfrom shipstocamelcaravansfortransport intotheEmpire.DirectRomanrule beganinCE106,whenAilabecamethe southernterminusof thegreatvianove Traiana connectingSyriawith theRed About 300CE,thefamedRoman Sea. TenthLegion,whichhaddestroyedthe SecondTempleandstormedMasada, fromJerusalemto Aila, was transferred the suggesting strategicimportanceof thecity.Ailacontinuedto flourish throughouttheByzantineperiod,then surrendered to Islamin 630CEthrough withthe conducted negotiations Muhammed himself. TheclasProphet sicalcityseemsto havedeclinedrapidly aftertheseventhcentury,whena new Islamictownwas foundednearby. AlthoughAilawas long knownfrom a varietyof documentarysources,its exactlocationat theheadof theGulfof Aqabahasbeena mystery.No nruins werevisibleon thesurface.But,aided by aerialphotographsandscattersof surfaceartifacts,theprojectteamof fifty staffandstudents,aidedby 70Jordanians,locatedsubstantialportionsof the
14 AWV
4e 4p. .jairo"'to ,'4
?ro
lk .010.
4F
-IQ
?_
W_'N'
101! ancientcity.Theseincludeda substantialsegmentof thecitywall,builtin stoneanddatedto the EarlyByzantine period.Theexcavatedsegment,illustratedhere,was 30 meterslong,over2 metershigh,anddefendedby a projecttower.Severalcomplexing rectangular es of mudbrickhouses,an industrial area,anda cemeterywerealldatedto the Romanor Byzantineperiods.Vast quantitiesof artifactsincludingpottery, glass,metal,coins,andorganicremains shouldpermitreconstruction of the a surface city'seconomy.Finally, survey of WadiArabanorthof Ailarecovered some 160otherarchaeological sitesthat revealmuchabouttheregionalenvi-
The Early Byzantine city wall and
tower of the cityof Aila.
ronment.Theprojectis sponsoredby NorthCarolinaStateUniversityand directedby S. ThomasParker.Principal fundingforthe firstseasonwas provided by grantsfromtheNationalEndowmentforthe Humanities,the National GeographicSociety,theSamuelH. KressFoundation,theKyleKelsoFoundation,andNCSU.A secondseasonis plannedfor 1996. S. Thomas Parker
Miqne/Ekron: SpringSeason1994 r
oftheW.EAl-. *ejointexpedition
brightInstituteof Archaeologyand theHebrewUniversityof Jenrusalem at TelMiqne/Ekronin Israelwas supplementedin 1994by a specialspringseason involvinga 150studentvolunteer forcefromBrighamYoungUniversity's CenterforNearEasternStudJerusalem which hasjoinedtheconsortiumof ies, 172
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
in theTel schoolsparticipating excavations. Miqne/Ekron Thespringexcavationopeneda new areaat TelMiqne/Ekrondesignatedas FieldII.BYUstudentsopened22 new squaresin a 66x 12meterareain FieldII, partiallyexposinga verylargecomplex of workroomsin the IronAge IICindustrialbeltwhichrunsalongthesouth
and eastperipheryof theancientPhilistinecity.Theworkroomswereused by the inhabitantsof Ekronforlargescale productionof oliveoil,andincludednumerouscrushingbasins,oil pressinstallations,and largestoneweights.The workroomswerealsoapparentlyused forproductionanddyeingof fabricduring springandsummer(theoff-season
forolives),as indicatedby discoveryof numerousloomweightsanddye vats. Theentireindustrialcomplexseemsto havebeenbuiltup duringtheAssyrian dominationof thePhilistiaandJudah (700-630BCE), duringwhichtimeolive oil andfabricwereproducedin great amountsat Ekronforexportto Egypt. Withthedeclineof AssyrianhegeEkron'soil industry monyafter630BKE, experienceda quantitative"downsizing,"with someof itscrushingbasins andoil pressesadaptedforsecondary use as dye vatsorbuildingstones.This secondphaseof use lasteduntiltheviolentdestructionof Ekronin 603BCE by Itwas thisphase(retheBabylonians. ferredto as StratumI-Bin theterminology of theTelMiqne/Ekronexpedition) thattheJerusalemCenterstudentsencounteredin FieldII.Evidenceof the 603BCE Babyloniandestructionof the workroomswas everywhere.Excavatorsuneartheda greatdealof ceramic wareamongthefallenbricksof thewalls, as well as on thefrequentlypavedcobble floorsof theworkrooms.Happily,a goodnumberof intactpotteryforms survivedthedestruction,including ovoidstoragejars,decanterjugs,dipper
ASOR
Outreach
Education
juglets,anddrink-
ingbowls.Special
findsincludedan alabasterjuglet,an inscribedscale weightof stone, and two homed Avg;.,. altars,evidently used forritualpurposesin connectionwith oliveoil production. Thejointexpeditionat Tel Miqne/Ekronis directedby ProfessorSeymourGitin, Directorof the AlbrightInstitute, Prof. Kent Brown (left), Directorof the BYUJerusalemCenterfor NearEasternStudies,and Dr.JeffreyChadwick, andProfessor JerusalemCenter a TrudeDothanof horned altar fromexcavaarchaeologist, display storagejarand HebrewUniversi- tionsat TelMiqne/Ekron. ty.Thedirectorof theJerusalemCenterforNearEasternStudiesis Professor MichaelBawden,JerusalemCenter S. KentBrown.Dr.JeffreyChadwickof AcademicCoordinator, arrangedphysiCenter handled theJerusalem organiza- callogisticsforthestudentvolunteers. tionandtrainingforthe 150student volunteersandservedas oneof the J.R.Chadwick elevenareasupervisorsat Ekron.
Annual
Meeting
Teachers Workshop for Classroom Education SOR'sOutreach Section, middleandhighschools,areinvitedto
cooperationwiththeOriental Instituteof theUniversityof Chicago, willbe offeringa specialworkshopfor teachersat thisyear'sAnnualMeetings centeredon thethemeof 'Archaeology Curricuas a FocusforInterdisciplinary be lum."Theworkshop,to heldat the NovemOrientalInstituteon Saturday, will feature ber19,1994, archaeologists andeducatorswithdiverseexperience in theMiddleEast. Thesessionis designedto offerteachersof religiousstudies,history,geography,finearts,andsciencespecificsuggestionson how archaeologycanbe includedin theinterdisciplinary dclassroom.All teachers,fromelementaryto
participate. Theday will includea programof speakers,morningcoffee,a boxlunch, Market"with disandan "Archaeology of educational resources frommuplays seumsandcreatorsof materialof interest to teachersof ancientcivilizations. Theworkshopwill runfrom9:30am invited until1:45pm,with participants to stayforfurtherquestionsanddiscussionof archaeologyin theclassroom. Dr.JonathanTubbof the BritishMuseum (ASORprogramchairman)and Drs.WilliamSumner,Director,and LannyBellof TheOrientalInstitutewill welcomeparticipants. In additionto discussionsof therole
of archaeologyin teachinghistory,religion,and thearts,topicswill includea presentationon theinterdisciplinary classroomby Neil Bierlingof theAda ChristianSchool,"UsingArchaeology of theBiblelandsto TeachtheSeven 'BigIdeas'of Science"led by Dr.0ysteinS. LaBiancaof AndrewsUniversity, A ComputerSimulated "Archaeotype: Excavation" of an Assyriantellby a teamfromtheDaltonSchoolin New YorkCity,and 'AncientBoardGamesas ClassroomTeachingTools,"presented by RobertaMaltese,CombinedCaesareaExcavationsand EnglishEditorof of Excavations theNew Encydclopedia in theHoly Land.JudyBrilliantand SeeASOR,page2174
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
173
A SOR from 173 page
EleanorGuralnickof theAmericanInstituteof Archaeologywill makepresentationson two award-winningprogramsdevelopedforschoolstudentsin theSt.LouisandChicagoareas. Followinga hands-onarchaeology in theclassroompresentation by ChristineNelsonof theUniversityof South-
ernCalifornia, areinvitedto participants stayfordiscussionled by CarolynDraper,OutreachEducationChair,Madaba plainsProject,and facultyof Archbishop RyanH.S.,Philadelphia. Theworkshopis freeforparticipants, withoptionalboxlunchavailablefor contact $5.00.Forfurtherinformation, CarolKrucoff,Headof Educationand PublicPrograms,TheOrientalInstitute,
British
School
at
Athens:
The ManagingCommitteeof the BritSishSchoolat Athens(BSA)hasapproveda programto preservethe65,000 photographsin theBSAarchivesand makethemaccessibleto archaeologists, arthistorians,ethnographers, geologists, and otherinterestedpartiesthroughan innovativecomputerimagingsystem. Datingto 1886,thesephotographsdocumenttheschool'sextendedinvolvementin thehistoryandcivilizationof Greece,theBalkans,andAsiaMinor. Morethanjustarchaeological records, thearchivesencompassculturalceremonies,eventsandregionalcostumes Iron Sieve Age and customswhichcharacterized life 80-100yearsago,butwhichhavesince passedintoobscurity. excavationof anIronAge II Manyphotographsdocumentlost During houseatTellHalif,the "four-room" andcivilizations.The monuments LahavResearchProjectteamrecovered Fund collection,forexample, Byzantine an unusualceramicartifacton thefloor containsphotographs,drawings,and of oneof itsrooms.Thestratigraphic contextplacestheartifactamonghouse- observationson monumentsin Salonika (manydestroyedin thegreatfireof 1917), holditemsburnedin a firewhichhad Cyprus(damagedor destroyedin 1974), probablybeenstartedby attackingAsYugoslavia (imperiledsince1992),and in Itsfunnel-like syriansoldiers 701BCE. other sitesin AsiaMinorandthe many shapeanditsperforatedend suggestits Middle East.TheJohnPendleburyColliquids function:a sieve.Apparently, thepersonalarchiveof the lection is werefunneledandstrainedthroughthis ancientsieveintolargecontainers,prob- scholarandwarherowhose knowledge of thearchaeologyof Creterenmains unablythelargefour-handled store-jars His collection covers Crete paralleled. wall an whichlinedone of interiorroom of thehouse.Althoughthesieve/funnel andmainlandGreecefromthe 1930s (asopposed untilhis prematuredeathat thehands belongstoaclassofordinary of a Germanarmysquadin 1941.From to exotic)objects,it seldomappearsin thearchaeological pointof view,the thelistsof IronAge itemsexcavated. Knossosexcavationrecordsdocument all theworkafterSirArthurEvanson PaulJacobs the Palaceof KingMinosandhomeof MississippiStateUniversity
B
174
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
1155East58thSt.,Chicago,IL60637or the ASORoffice,3301N. CharlesSt., Baltimore,MD 21218(tel.410-516-3498). Thosewishingto attendtheAnnual Meetingas a whole mustregisterwith ScholarsPress.
Draper Carolyn
Photo
Archive
the well-knownMinotaurof Greek Mythology.Theexcavationshaveextendedbeyondthepalaceitselfto indude thetownand surroundings. Inorderto preserveandincreasethe accessibilityof theseimages,and the manyothersin thecollection,theywill be scannedat highresolution(1200dpi and upward)intoa computerdatabase withall accompanyinginformation.
Unlikesystemsrelyingonopticalstor-
age discs,all 65,000imageswill be simultaneouslyavailableto any interested parties.Additionally,theentire collectionwillbe accessibleby modem and telephonelines,thusgivingunprecedentedaccessto thecollectionyet preservingtheoriginalimages. BSAis now raisingfundsto see this five-yearprogramthroughto its completion.Whiletheproposalhas already beensubmittedforfinancialsupport, finalequipmentandvendorselection will be madewheneversufficientfunds havebeenraisedto commencework. Furtherinformationabouttheprogram, includingtechnologyand materials,is availablefromtheBSA.ContactBSAat. BritishSchoolat Athens:PhotoArchive, 52 OdosSouedias,10676Athens, Greece,Tel.72 10974,Fax7236560.
The
Harper
Concise
Atlas
of
the
Bible
amount of information transferred,and many of the introductoryand closing paragraphsare new. The new introductory paragraphsnormally give background information and/or provide a context for the more detailed discussion that follows; they are an improvement indicated by its title, the Harper Concise AtlasoftheBible(hereinafter over the HAB in that regard.After the new introduction,subsequent paraHCAB)is a scaled-downversionof the Bible Atlas the (hereinafter HAB), graphs of the HAB often appear in the Harper of in HCAB in substantiallyunmodified and Row 1987, published by Harper which contained 130 attractivefull-color form. There are, however, several segmaps, a countlessnumber and wide vari- ments that have been modified, and a few sections have been completely ety of full-colorphotographs,and an exrewritten so that they bear little resemrich collection of ceptionally diagrams, blance to the HAB, even though their and reproductions,linedrawings, charts and illustratea subjectsremain unchanged. Those seggraphs to accompany ments with significant changes include that text has a remarkablyeven and lucid the "Wanderingsand journeys of the quality,given the lack of textual uniforpatriarchs"(pp. 16-7), "Israeland Moab" mity that often characterizessuch volumes of multiple authorship.Despite (pp. 66-7), "Pagancults and the practice of religion" (pp. 68-9), "Peaceand prosbeing roughly half the size of HAB,the HCABretainsa remarkablylarge numperity under JeroboamII"(pp. 74-5), 'The resurgence of Judah'spower" (pp. ber of the maps (some have been reori78-9), "Assyrianattackson Philistiaand ented), most of the graphic and illustrative materials,and all of the modem Judah"(pp. 80-1), and "Judahunder technologiesfound in the parentpublica- Hezekiah and Manasseh" (pp. 82-3). The last sections of the volume (New tion. Some supplementaryfeaturesof the HAB have been included ratherintact Testament,pp. 102-35) have been extensively rewritten (by Michael White), (e.g. a complete gazetteer,based on idenand most pages contain new informatificationsof Y Aharoni, TheLandof the tion when compared to HAB. Segments Bible,1979:424-43,except where that in the HCAB devoted to the travels of view has been eclipsed by more recent the apostle Paul (pp. 124-27) reflect evidence or by the opinion of an individual contributor),some have been modidetails of the biblical text, whereas the HAB also containsa fairamount of extrafied (e.g. the chronologicaltimeline has biblical information.In addition to the been reduced to include only principal vast graphic and illustrativeresources charactersand events), and some have been dropped altogether (e.g. "People brought over from the HAB, the HCAB of the Bible"section). Four new features also contains some fresh material.New have been added to the HCAB:1) an photographs appear on pages 16,24,31, index of personaland divine names cited 32, 42, 63, 67, 76, 81, 83, 85,106,122,123 in the text, 2) an index of biblicalreferand 131.Two helpful side-bars have been included (one containing a text ences found in the text (cited by book from AshurnasirpalII [p. 52], and the only, without chapter and verse referother containing texts which show a ence;arrangedalphabetically,not canonlink between the biblical world and the ically), 3) a short bibliography,and 4) an index of distances (see below). world-at-large [p.71]).Moreover,five Most of the segments of text that desnew maps appear in the HCAB (pp. 66, cribe events portrayed on the accompa113 [maps 2 & 3], 126, and 126-7). Then nying maps employ the same wording again, a number of the maps that appear in HAB have been altered in the HCAB or very similar wording to the HAB. Some selectivity was made on the to include new features or expanded
James B. Pritchard, general editor.
Revised by Pritchard and L. Michael White. 151pp. New York:Harper Collins Publishers, 1991. $30.00 ($15.95 paper).
As
data (pp. 24-5, 32-3, 68-9, 72-3 [map 1], 102-03 [map 1], 105,114-15,116-17 [maps 1 & 2], 118 and 130-31 [map 1]). The volume is remarkablyfree of printing or editorial glitches. I noticed only a few. The map on page 13 contains a misaligned directionalarrow.The text of pages 38-9 intends to discuss various theories of Israel'ssettlementin Canaan. The problem is that when the text of the HAB was abridgedfor use in the HCAB, one entire paragraph (and hence one settlement theory) was omitted. So whereas the HCAB text indicates that "threesettlementtheories"arediscussed, and the second of these theories is called a "thirdrecentlyproposed explanation," only two settlement theories, in point of fact, are actually described in the text. The map on pages 90-1 (map 2) is dearly mistitled, and a typo occurs on page 137 (Ezekiel).On the other hand, map 5 on page 55 correctsan errorin the HAB by properly identifying ShalmaneserV (not II)as the Assyrian monarch responsible for conquering Samariaand the northernkingdom. When I reviewed the HAB in 1990 (BARev 16/4, p. 4), my harshestcriticism was levelled against what I considered to be the contrived cartographicprocedures adopted in the volume. While the introduction of the HAB prodclaimsthis projectionscheme to be "morerealistic" than conventional methods, and the HCAB more accuratelycalls it "recessive or unorthodox," professional cartographerswith whom I have worked label this projectionan "obliquepseudoperspective" viewpoint, one that can be generated and/or manipulated by a computer or drawn as a schematicpiece of art,but a viewpoint that does not exist in reality!Thus, the unwary user, and the nonspecialist user in particular, will find it difficult to account for the spatial unevenness or distortion in linear relationshiprepeatedly presented on most maps, where such problems as these even made it impossible for the publisherto indude an indicationof scale on the page. HCAB's effort to rectify See Harper,page 176
BiblicalArchaeologist57:3 (1994)
175
Harper
from page 175
this deficiency,in the form of an index showing distances in airlinemiles between certainplaces mentioned in the biblicalnarratives,does little to diminish this criticism.Moreover,because the maps are not consistently oriented to any one point of the compass, this projection scheme is likely to have a further disorientingeffecton the user,especially when it becomes desirable to study the maps comparatively or sequentially. Numerous scientificstudies (e.g. see most recently,The ProfessionalGeographer 44/4:431-43) underscore the
The Architecture to the Prehistoric
of
Ancient
Persian
Edited by Aharon Kempinski and Ronny Reich, 332 pp., 294 figures, 47 photographs. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1992; $48.00.
The purpose of this posthumous festSschriftin honor of Immanuel Dunayevsky, the dean of Israeliexcavation architectsis: "(a)to present the reader with (as far as possible) an up-to-date survey of the ancientarchitectureof Palestine, from its beginnings to the end of the Persianperiod;and (b) to make available to students of archaeologyin Israel a dear guide to the data, opinions, and condclusionsof a variety of scholarsthat are dispersed throughout the scientific literature"(p. xii). The first part of the avowed purpose of the volume was in the main achieved: the bibliographyis up-to-dateas of 198587, with some referencesas recent 198990. Each of the twenty-seven chapters discusses the main issues involved for each topic, citing parallelsnot only from Israel,but from the entire eastern Mediterraneanas far east as Mesopotamia. Dwellings, palaces, temples, fortification systems, and settlement planning are treatedfor each of the periods covered. 176
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
advisability of employing a standard and consistent orientation-specificplan in producing maps that will be used by readerswith varying levels of graphic literacy;cartographicrepresentations exhibiting multi-orientationstend to produce higher rates of errorsin directional judgments or distance estimates than does learning from a single orientation. I do need to indicate here, however, that the HCAB, unlike the parent volume, includes a directionalarrow on all maps (aside from a few small inset maps) that points to a north-south axis. Pritchard'sand White's superb supervisory and editorial achievement in
Israel: Periods
From
this volume must be thankfully recognized. The utilization of multi-disciplinary data (e.g. geography, history,sociology, philology, archaeology) that are presented in clearand understandable prose, the evenness of text that originally came from the pen of nearly fifty differentscholars,and the aesthetic integration of text, map and illustrative material,all combine to make the HCAB an importantreferencetool thatwill contributeto the greaterillumination of the biblicalworld.
BarryJ.Beitzel TrinityEvangelicalDivinity School
the
The articlesarepacked with information. The text or notes usually do a good job of presenting debated issues. The plans provide a good feel for the buildings or settlements discussed, though not every building mentioned is illustrated. One of the most interesting sections is that on 'Materialand Fashions of Constructions"which covers the types of materialsand architecturalelements used in buildings in ancient Israeland also how massive structuresare constructedand destroyed. It is unfortunate that we are still at a stage where archaeologists must debate how thick a mudbrick wall must be to support a second story.Perhaps some day experimental archaeologistsworking with civil engineers will be able to help answer such vexing questions. Unfortunately,the work focuses on architecturalfeatures the size of a house or larger,including Shiloh's chapteron water systems. Absent are treatmentsof smaller featuressuch as kilns, storage pits, cisterns and drainage systems, ovens, and presses (grape and olive). Tombs also receive inadequate treatment; only dolmens and structural tombs of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages are discussed. In addition, some
important sites are not mentioned at all (e.g. KuntilletAjrud). The volume's second purpose of serving as a guide for students cannot be said to have been achieved. Thereis no master bibliography,only footnote referencesand a list of abbreviations. There are editorial lapses. One occasionally finds referencesto "Chap00 in this volume" (p. 145 n. 15).Although the chaptershave numbers,the numbers are not in the table of contents, which makes checking cross referencestiresome, unless one pencils in the numbers in the margin. Some of the photographs are washed out; most do not contain captions giving the number(s) of the features shown or the area of the tell in which they are located;nor are they keyed directly to the text. There are also lapses in keying the text to the building plans; not all rooms cited in the text are on the appropriate plans. Page 237 contains a math error.If 15buildings were found in an area of 1,200m2 (= 1.2 dunams), then the building density is 12.5 per dunam and an area of 26 dunams would contain 325 dwellings, not 137 as in the text. On the positive side, the volume does contain a glossary of architecturalterms
andan indexof sitesdiscussedin the text(buta mapof the countryshowing thesitescitedwouldhavebeenhelpful). Onlya few of the authorstabulatetheir data,whichwould havemadecomparing sizesand orientationsmucheasier. If thebookis intendedforstudents, theauthorsandeditorsmusthavehada graduateaudiencein mind,one which will profitfromtheup-to-datetreatment of thetopicsselectedandwhichis accus-
tomedto diggingreferencesout of foot- will be limitedto an almostneverinnotes.Theformatis notuser-friendly creasingdataset (singleperiodsitesor siteswithlowertownsoccupiedfor for enough undergraduates. the one notes that Finally, chapters only a shorttimearetheexceptions). with One town dealing planningprimarily hopesthatthe "newer"archaeolowill used sitesexcavatedfiftyyearsago or one day beginto delivernew gy more.Thisis notthefaultof the authors. datausefulto allscholars. Currentexcavationmethods,whichat Zorn bestonlyuncovera few adjacentbuild- Jeffrey let town that alone insure Universityof Californiaat Berkeley ings, quarters, scholarsinterestedin town planning
The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological in the Excavations Land. Holy Edited by E. Stern, 4 vols. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993; $360.00.
ver 365entriesby 205archaeologists fill 1552large(9"x14") pagesof withrelativelyfine(justover NEAEHL ninepoint)typegenerouslyenhanced by an averageof two or threeillustrationsperpage,in all,over4000maps, plans,charts,anddrawings.Interspersed throughoutareover75 colorplatesin thesehandsomelyboundvolumes.Each entry,or segmentthereof,is followed by its author'sname.Theworkis fully crossreferenced. Eacharticleincludesa bibliography. ThisEnglisheditionupdatesto 1991 theHebreweditionwhichwas updated to 1990.Bothreplacethe Englishedition publishedin 1975-1978whichupdated thefirstHebreweditionof 1970.The chronological scopeof thepresentvolumes extendsfromthedawn of human creativityto theOttomanperiod.The geographicalscopeextendsto the traditionalboundariesof the Holy Landon bothsidesof theJordanRiverandfrom thesourcesof theJordanin the northto theSinaiin the south.Inadditionto entrieson sitesandgeographical regions, therearealsoentrieson collectivesubjects.Whilethereis an entryon marine archaeologythereis noneon archaeology as such.Othertopicalentriesindclude suchas churches, typesof architecture, synagogues,andmonasteries,butnot
Ok
on fortresses,castles,or mosques,although,as mentionedabove,thechronologicalscopeis saidto continueto the Ottomanperiod.E.Stekelis'EAEHL articleon megalithicmonumentsis replacedby one on dolmens.Themap of dolmendistributionis better,because sitesarenow identifiedby name.Two of theillustrativephotographsdefinitely lackproperillumination,whichis unusualforNEAEHL. Thefirstvolumebeginswithanintroductionto the Englishedition,a Users' Guide,an editor'sforward,and alphabeticallistsof authors,entiresandabbreviations,followedby the individualsite entries.Eachvolumerepeatsthe abbreviations,and a mapof allsitescovered in the set is repeatedin thefrontand backinsidecoversof eachvolume.The finalvolumeconcludeswith chronologicaltables,a chronologicalchartof the alphabet,a veryfineandextensiveglossaryfollowedby indicesof persons, places,biblicalreferences,andan index of colorillustrations. Printingandbindingconsiderations undoubtedlydictatetheplacementof colorplateswhichappeartogetherin alphabetical sequenceaccordingto sites. A referencein theartidcle itself,e.g.,Ashkelon,to colorplateswould helpa person readingthe detaileddescriptionof the Ashkeloncalf(p. 106).Otherwise, the colorplatesareverypleasingand quiteinformative. Thebriefintroductionto the English
editionsketchesthehistoryof archaeologicalresearchfromearliestknown attemptsto preserveselectedmaterial culturalremainsto thefoundingof formalizedarchaeological societiesand large-scaleexcavations.Specialnotice recognizesthearchitecturally-based Israelistyleof large-scale excavation,and manyentriesreflectthis.Extremely helpful architectural andsiteplansabound; potteryassemblagesappearfrequently. Sectiondrawingsillustrativeof stratigof potraphyarerare.Demonstrations terysequencesessentialto establish ceramictypologyas a basisforstratigraphicchronologyarebeyondthescope of thiswork,butidentification of sources used to establishceramictypologyare not.Theyaregreatlyappreciatedwhen theyappear.Reasoningforspecificceramicdatingoftenseemsto be largely intuitive.Thisis not a shortcomingon the partof NEAEHL, but a reflectionof the currentstateof archaeological research.Itis importantto undertakecomparativestudiesbasedon factualtypologies ratherthanassumed,interpretive chronologies. Eachentrybeginswitha siteidentification-with gridreferenceswhere available-and history,followedby a historyof excavations.Excavationresults,themainfocusof thepublication, aregivennext,accordingto chronologiandmilicallyseparatedarchaeological divisions.Thelatterare tary-political See NEAEHL,page 178
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:3(1994)
177
NEAEHL
from page 177
calledhistorical-cultural periods,which shouldremindthereadertobe flexible concerningthetransitionsfromone era to thenext.A sparklingvictorymay havemadevictors(andvanquished) experiencea suddenandtotalchange in theirrespectiveworldviews,but the impactof suchpreciseanddecisive eventsupon thegeneralmaterialculturethatremainsforus to examinewas neitherso swiftnorso precise. As a new editionof an olderwork, NEAEHL includesnew and renewed excavationsas expected.Italsoreproducesreportson sitesuntouchedsince earliereditions. "... [P]ortionsthat are not
out of dateareretainedin entriescontributedby luminariesof thediscipline, amongthemthe lateYohananAharoni, WilliamFoxwellAlbright,Nahman Avigad,MichaelAviYonah,Nelson Glueck,KathleenM.Kenyon,Moshe Stekelis,G.ErnestWright,Rolandde Vaux,andYigaelYadin,"to citethe we(the canonof theeditor."Ingeneral, retained editors) of unchanged anyportions entriesnotoutofdate."Thisis an intriguing statement,sincedecisionsas to what is andwhatis not out of daterequirea hostof judgmentcallson the partsof botheditorsandauthors.How thetwo editionscompareis interesting.We sampledthe firsttwo personson the list,AharoniandAlbright. Therearetwo entriesunderAradin the 1975edition,bothby Y Aharoni.The andhistory, firstentry,on identification briefas it is, was kept.Theother,on excavations,was replacedas would be expectedsinceexcavationsby R.Amiran(whohad alreadybeenexcavating the EarlyBronzeAge city)werecontinued at Arad to 1984.Earlierillustrations are kept for the most part.The site plan is no longer superimposed on the contour map. Instead a large aerialview gives a much better sense of the place. An architecturalphoto in 1975,captioned as "EBAIIlower city" is replaced with a more extensive photo less interpretively captioned as "streetbuilding at the southern edge of the city."Such improvements are generally evident elsewhere and are undoubtedly charac178
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
teristicof theentireset.Eachillustration had to havebeenreviewedandjudged denovo.Sometimesthereproduction of earlierillustrationsmeetswith a bitless success.Imagesof theostracafrom Eliashib'sarchivesaresharperin the earliervolume,despitebeingslightly enlargedforthenew edition.An aerial view of theAradcitadelshowingthe dumpson everysideshouldremindthe viewerof theneed to maketheeffortto picturethe tellwithoutthedumps.As elsewherein allvolumes,bothsiteand smallobjectphotographsexhibitsuperb definitionandareof excellentquality, aptlytestifyingto thehighstandardsof boththeeditorsandthepublisher.An occasionalslipdoes happen,e.g.,the photographon p.45 is upsidedown. Aharonialsodug atMegiddo.Judgmentsas to whatis oris notout of date aremoreinteresting,especiallyin the unchanged, lightof "retaining portionsnot outofdate."The1977entryof two parts was writtenby Aharoni(toStratum VIIB)andYadin(fromStratumVIIAto StratumII).Thenew entryis by Aharoni (upto StratumVIIBinclusive),Yadin (StrataVIIAto VIB),andShiloh(Strata VIAto I).Lookingonly at theAharoni portion,it cansafelybe saidthatthenotout-of-dateportionsarenotleftverbatim unchanged.Acceptablechangeswould be decisionsthatrelatedsimplyto mechanicallayouts(e.g.,from"historyand to "identification and identification" corrections history"),grammatical ("were"for "was"witha pluralsubject),andgeneraleditorialpoliciesthat do notchangewhatan authorstates. Forexample,"60dunams"is dropped as an equivalentof 15acres,probably because"dunams"is notused elsewherein thevolumes,and in the listof
ultimatebattle)againsttheforcesofGod," an interestingomissionin lightof the decisionto select"HolyLand"as an essentialin thebook'stitle. Theentryby W.EF Albrighton TellBeit Mirsimcontainsa few puzzles-if you thinkwhatis printedoverthisluminary's nameareonlythoseintactportionsof the 1975EnglishEAEHL textthatpassed scrutiny.Theopeningparagraphsreto conform arrangeandaddinformation with thework'sbasicstyle,whichis acceptable,exceptto thepuristwho will certainlywonderwhy an article,purportedlyby Albrightrepeatsreferences to Albright"as manytimes "according as it does (pp.178-9).Thissuggeststhat significant portionsoverhisnamedo not reflecthis expressedopinion.Fortunately,thatis notthecase.Editorialchanges arebasicallyin accordwith theearlier publication. ThefirstoccupationatTellBeitMirsirnoccursin the EarlyBronzeAge, assignedhereby Albrightto EBRIB,identifiedin thebodyof hisartidcle as "stratum But,theupdateby R.Greenbergcites J"' DeverandRichardas revisingthatdate to-the sameEBHI!Actually,Albright did notreferat thispointin his 1975 articleto "stratum J."Itwas added.Used severaltimesin theearlieredition,the word "Palestine," hasnow disappeared. Politicalboundaryupdatingis alsoattributedto AlbrightforKaratepe.He had saidit was in northernSyria,and now he clairvoyantlyhadsaid (supposedly)it is in southernTurkey(p.180). Also,thirteenpresumablyoutdatedbiblicalcitationshavebeenstrippedfrom theAlbrighttext,the effectof which changestheflavorof his enterpriseand undercutsanybasisforhis statingconcludingopinionsregardingthedating
abbrevations,where "a."is for "acres," the term "acres"is not defined in relation to dunams. Editorialactivity between English editions goes furtherin that word or phrase orders are frequently rearranged,perhaps due to a translator's style or the desire to produce a smoother renderingof the Hebrew original. In an expected referenceto the Armageddon of The Apocalypse of John (16.12ff),the new version omits Aharoni's final phrase, ("...will fight the
of the biblicalpatriarchs.Since they no longer follow from the body of the article and do not in any way flow from the excavationevidence, they aredeleted along with nine other omissions varying in length from a sentence to whole paragraphs. Thus is Albright updated. Several insertions are contributedto Albright.Added to what he did say"Theexcavator followed the ReisnerFishermethod of excavation,but paid closer attention to the pottery than did
othersexcavatingwith thismethodat the time"-is forsome unknownpurpose:'The expeditiondid notuse the methodlaterinadvancedstratification andK Kenytroducedby M.Weiler(sic) did but this not on, significantlyinterferewith the excavationsatTellBeit Mirsim."Furtheron, oversix linesare addedto Albright'sstratum(herecalled phase)B3.Theluminaryhasbeenilluminated,butby whom?Thislicense exercisedoverAlbright'sandothers' namescanonly confusethehistoryof
Satire
and
the
Hebrew
and establishesa good interpretation, reasonforretainingthe earlieredition. Thisconcerndampensan otherwise overwhelmingenthusiasmin congratulatingtheentireteamfortheirotherwise marvellousachievement. NEAEHLis a resourceto keepwithin arm'sreach.Itneedsto be in everylibraryandworkingstudy.Nowhereon earthhasarchaeological activitybeenso extensiveandintensiveas in thispartof ourever-shrinking world,and these volumesarepresentlyas closeas one
canget to havingit alleasilyaccessible. Theentriesareconcise,articulate,and amplyillustrated.Thelevel of presentationis gearedwell forteacher,student, andeducatedlayperson.Wecannow know moreabouttheancientNearEast thananybodycouldpossiblyhave knownup to now,and thesefourvolumes makethequesteasierandeven moreexciting. DonaldH. Wimmer SetonHallUniversity
Prophets
Ezekiel16,pp. 102-6).Suchlanguageis oftenreducedto euphemismsin the (paper). Englishversions.Equallyhelpfulis Jemielity'sdiscussionof theprophets' as heroicfiguresof rightself-portrait eousnesswho werereluctantlycalledto J emielity'sworksetsout to examine theconnectionbetweenprophecyand judgesocietyforits wickedness(pp. 152-62).HereJemielityinformsthegen(p.11).Inthefirsthalfof hisbook, eralreaderas to how passagessuchas Jemielitydiscussessatirein themessage confessionsfunctionwiththe toJemniel- Jeremiah's of theprophets.Foundational text. Thisinformation,however,will be of ity'sargumentis his identification familiarto thespecialistsinceit hasbeen shameas the connectionbetweenthe notedrepeatedlyin pastscholarship. prophetsandthesatirists(chapter1).He Inspiteof thesepoints,I remainunarguesthatthereis an intrinsicpowerin convincedthatJemielityproperlyidentishame,andthatit is thispowerthat fiestheconnectionbetweenprophecy boththeprophetsandsatiristsdrew andsatire.As is oftenthecasein crossupon.He thenprovidesdiscussionsof theartsof speechof theprophetsand disciplinarystudies,Jemielity'sproblem satirists,whichinvolvenew andshock- restsin thefactthathe failsto readthe textas fullywithinthecontextof ancient ing uses of languagein orderto convey theirmessage.Inthesecondhalf,Jemiel- Israel.A goodexampleof thisis histoo narrowdefinitionof theprophetssolely ity turnsto a generaldescriptionof the as criticswho passedjudgmentsfrom Theprophets,as the satirists, prophet. outsidethecentralpowerstructuresof have the need to establishtheirown inthefaceof opposition. This society.Morecentralto his thesis, credibility needdictatestheprophet'sselfportraits, Jemielityfailsto understandthenature com- of shamein ancientIsraelas thelossof justas it does theautobiographical one'sreputation,andto somedegree, mentsof thesatirists. one'slife.Jemielityseesshamemerelyas Forthe generalreader,Jemielity's severeembarrassment, andhe locates bookis usefulin thatit introducesthe thepowerof theprophetsandthe readerto "newways of lookingat [the satiristsin theirabilityto laughat their HebrewScriptures]" (p.17).Forexample, the generalreaderwill benefitfrom enemies(chapter1).Interestingly, laternotesthatthesatirists realize Jemielity Jemielity'sexposeof the prophets'use of sexualandexcremental (p.67).Jemielity language(pp. thisto be "ineffectual" missesthefactthat,forthepmrophets, the 98-106,especiallyhis discussionof
By ThomasJemielity,256 pp. Louisville: Knox, 1992;$17.99 Westminster/John
poweris notin theirtaunts,butin God's actions.Itis Godwho will actso todestroytheirenemies'name,i.e.,todestroy theirreputation andbringshameupon them.Hence,theveryconnectionthat Jemieltyhopesto establishbetweenthe prophetsandthesatirists,i.e.,thepower of shameitself,is lost.Itwouldbe more accurate,I believe,forJemielityto state simplythatthecommonlinkbetween theprophetsandthesatirists(andmoddaycriticsaswell)is thattheyareall emrn human,andhumanscannotresist mockingtheirenemies. I recommendJemielity's bookto thoseHebrewBiblespecialistswhose careersfocuson literaryissues.Because Jemielity'sstudyis at timesrathertechnicalanda littlepedantic(e.g.,his discussionof therelationship between prophecyandMikhailBakhtin'sstudy of Menippeansatire,pp.61-66),thegeneralreaderwill probablynothavethe patiencetowadethroughit,despitethe factthatit is preciselythegeneralreader who wouldbenefitthemost.Thenarrow scopeof thework-satire, notliterarytheoryas a whole-probablyplaces thisbooklow on thereadinglistof all who areprimarilyinterestedin historicalissuesandonlyoccasionallypeek intoliterarytheory. JohnStrong SouthwestMissouriStateUniversity
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
179
New
Vol.
Testament I,
Writings
and Related Writings. Apocrypha. Vol. I, Gospels to the Relating Apostles; Apocalypses and Related
Subjects ed sectiondivisionsforalltranslations, as was done,forexample,in TheClement Romance (vol.2.504-30). Thesevolumescontaina greatdeal of new material.Theyincludesomeof therecentlydiscoveredtextsfromthe Nag HammadiCodices:thosetextsthat world preservesayingsof Jesus.Thereis one verystudentoftheancient eeds to readtheprimarysources. apostolicacts,alongwith two Christian FormanyBiblical readers apocalypses.Ineachof thesecasesthe Archaeologist Few Englishtranslationpreparedby Eurothesesourcesmustbe in translation. of us controlallthelanguagesin which peanscholarsoffersthereaderan alternativeto existingtranslations. we findthetextsthatarea majorwinToinsurethatEnglishtranslations dow to thecultureof theancientworld. werenottoodistantfromtheoriginal,the mustbe accurateand Suchtranslations Hencerevisions editorstranslatedtheGermanandthen currentwithscholarship. becauseof new checkedtheEnglishtranslationof the areperiodically necessary discoveriesandprogress Germanagainstthe originallanguage archaeological of the text.Insome cases,however,they in scholarship.ForthirtyyearstheNew Testament hasprovidedspeprovidecompletelynew translations Apocrypha fromtheoriginaldirectlyintotheEngcialistandnon-specialistalikeaccessto thenon-canonical earlyChristianlitera- lish,as is the case,forexample,withthe tureandhasnow appearedin a revised CopticActsofAndrew(2.123-28). Mostof theentrieshavebeenrevised edition. Therevisededitionis a translationof in varyingdegrees;yetmanyof theintroductionsmustbe describedas completetheGermansixthedition(1989/90), whichincludesthethoroughrevisions ly new essays.Thisis the case,forex"General ample,withSchneemelcher's previouslymadein theGermanfifth Introduction" edition.Itfeaturesdesignchanges,in(1.9-75).His discussion of theCanon("concepts," those clusionof new texts(particularly "historyof canon"[1.10-34]and "NewTestament fromNag Hammadi),anda considerablenumberof new introductionsto apocrypha"[1.50-61])is virtuallynew, andthewholeis expandedby a new haveallbeen texts.Thebibliographies sectionon-"thecontinuanceandinfluto so as to reflect curdate broughtup enceof theNew Testamentapocrypha" rentscholarship. Theredesignof theGermanfifthedi- (1.61-65).On theotherhand,a few sectionsof theintroductionappearonlyto tionofferedtheeditorsof theEnglish be revisedso as to matchthenew deto imedition an opportunity language of thevolumes. of the the sign English prove readability Itis not alwaysclearto whatextent volumes.Theyhavereducedthe point the translations arerevised.Insome size fornotesandbibliographyand casestranslations structuredthetextby meansof outline appearto be newly headingsthatmakeuse of boldfaceand done,as is thecasewith PapyrusEgerton2 (1.98-99)andthe Gospel of textsarein a italicfonts.Translations ofThomas. Edited by WilhelmSchneemelcher Englishtranslationedited by R. McL. Wilson,vol. 1:560 pp.; vol 2:771 pp. KnoxPress, Louisville:Westminster/John 1992;vol. 1: $32.00,vol. 2: $4000.
E
noticeably largerpoint size than their introductions.This results in volumes more usable than the previous edition. Still, the longer translationswould have been easier to use had the editors bold-
180
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
The first edition published a "fresh" translationof Thomas in an appendix (1.511-22).The new translationin the revised edition (1.117-33)is different from the first edition. In other cases
translationsaredearlyrevised,butit is not dearto whatextent(viz.Epistula 1.252-84). Apostolorum InsomecasestheNag Hammadidiscoverieshavedclarified poorlyunderstoodtexts.HenceOxyrhynchusPapyri 1,654,655as fragmentsof differentGreek versionsof the GospelofThomas have intothetranslation of beenincorporated the CopticGospel (1.117-18, ofThomas 121-23).Likewisethebriefnoteon the "Dialogueof the Redeemer"in thefirst editionof theNewTestament Apocrypha is droppedand theNag (1.248-50) HammadiDialogue oftheSavioris publishedinstead(1.300-31). Someknowntextshavebeenrearrangedso as to reflectcurrentscholarship.Forexample,the translationand Petrou introductionto theKerygmata intothe entry havebeenincorporated on ThePseudo-Clementines (2.483-541) and thewholeexpandedby the inclusion of the Letter ofPetertoJames(2.49396),a textthatdid not appearin the firstedition. Thereareseveralcuriositiesin the of thevolumesthatsuggest arrangement theeditorswereconcernedwithpreserving theformof thepreviousedition.For example,withthe discoveryandpublicationof theGospel ofPhilip(1.179-208), the GospelofThomas (1.110-33),andthe ofJames(1.285-99),theediApocryphon torswereableto providethesetextswith theirseparatelengthyentriesto correspondto otherGospelentrieslikethe Yet entryon theGospel ofPeter(2.216-27). they alsoretainbriefentrieson these textselsewherein thevolume(insection IX.E"GospelsundertheName of an Apostle")directingthereaderto the mainentry.Thispromptsthe question, "Whyretainthebriefentriesat all?" A longer entry on the Nag Hammadi text the SophiaofJesusChrist(2.361), would have been appropriatesince it is a dialogue of Jesuswith his disciples.The revised edition radically reduced the
size of the entryforthistextanddid not Theentryon the providea translation. Apocryphon ofJohn(1stedition,2.314-31) was likewisereducedto a briefnote (2.387),even thoughit alsois a dialogue betweenJesusandJohn.If,as theynote, it "doesnotbelongin thiscollection" (2.387),why retainthebriefentry?These two textsarenot unlikethe Gospelof Maryforwhichtheydo retaina slightly longerentry(2.391-95),thoughwithout a completetranslation. TheeditorsdecidedthattheNag HammadiGospelofTruthdoes notbelong to the Gattung"gospel"andin the revisededitioneliminatedits lengthy entry(firstedition:1.233-41,523-31), leavingonly a briefnote(1.358).Itdoes
What
Has
makeone wonder,however.Ifthereare narrativegospels(Matthew, Mark,Luke, John),sayingsgospels(Q Thomas, Philip)anddialoguegospels(Bookof Thomas, Apocryphon ofJames,Letter of PetertoPhilip,andothers),why notalso a "homilygospel,"suchas the Gospelof Truth? Orto put the matterdifferently: Iftheyindclude the Gospel ofPhilip,which a of statements relatcollection presents in the to main Valentinian theologiing calspeculationandthe significanceof sacramentsin a Valentinian community, the GospelofTruth, why not alsoindclude whichrelatesthe significanceof the community? "gospel"to a Valentinian TwootherNag Hammaditexts in the couldeasilyhavebeenindcluded
Archaeology to Do
With
CharlesW Hedrick SouthwestMissouriStateUniversity
Faith?
ormaterialevidence.Thefirstis "afaith tradition"andthesecondis "having faith."Thetitleof thebookseemstoindicatethatthequestionbeingaddressedis, "Whathas archaeologyto do with having faith?"Bothdefinitions,however,are *book consistsof fourlecturesde- used withinthebook,even to thepoint themwithinthe same Ilivered initiallyin a 1990sympoof interchanging Whetheror not thisis intentional siumon thecampusof FloridaSouthern artidcle. is undclear. Whatis dearaboutthe interCollege.That1990meetingwas one in a seriesof symposiadedicatedto thetopic changeis thatit is convenient.Toconof faithandhistory.Theideais thatfour siderthe relationshipbetweenarchaeolfourdifdifferentscholars,representing ogy and "havingfaith"is to attemptto considerthe relationshipbetweenthe ferentfieldsof study,will considerthe betweenarchaeologyand resultsof a particularbranchof anthrorelationship faith.Thefourauthorsandareasare: pologicalresearchanda beliefthatGod Professorof has actedin history.Toconsiderthe JamesH. Charlesworth, New TestamentLanguageandLiterarelationshipbetweenarchaeologyanda "faithtradition"is to considerthe relature;JamesF.Strange,Professorof ReligiousStudies;J.MaxwellMiller,Profes- tionshipbetweentheresultsof a particandW Waite ularbranchof anthropological research sorof OldTestament; and humanactivityat a particulartime Willis,Jr.,AssociateProfessorof Reliand place.Thefirstis humanresearch gionandPhilosophy. Inthetitle,"archaeology" is obviintodivineactivity;the secondis buttheterm humanresearchintohumanactivity. ouslybiblicalarchaeology, "faith"seemsto wanderbackandforth Toanswerthequestion,"Whathas itis obvitodo withfaith?.', betweentwo definitions.Thefirstdefin- archaeology itionis faithas a corporate religionand ously moreconvenientto deal with thehistoryofthatreligion,e.g.,theChris- humanresearchintohumanactivity. tianfaith.Theseconddefinitionis faith Thefirstcenturyartifactthathas so as a confidentbeliefin something,ora muchtosayabouttheactivityof human beliefthatdoes notreston logicalproof beingsin thefirstcentury,suddenly
Edited by JamesH. Charlesworthand WalterPRWeaver,xi + 116pp. Philadelphia: TrinityPress International, 1992;$1a95.
ontheResurrection collection(theTreatise and the Teachings hadvolofSylvanus) ume two indcluded a categoryon "early Christianletters." In thefinalanalysisthesevolumes cannotbe consideredsimplya "revision"of thefirstedition.Theyarebasicallynew works,bearinglittleresemblanceto thefirstedition,whichis now completelyout of date.Ifreadersfound the firsteditioninformativeandserviceable(inspiteof designflaws),the revisededitionwill be a valuableresourceforyearsto comeforbothspecialistandnon-specialistalike.
losesits voicewhenaskedaboutGod's activityin thatsameplaceandtime. InChapterOne,Charlesworth utilizesbothdefinitionsof faith.Itis interestingto notethatwhen he talksabout archaeologyanditsrelationshipto faith, he meansfaithas a corporatereligion, theChristianFaith.Howevspecifically, er,when he talksaboutfaithin termsof "havingfaith,"it is notarchaeologythat is beingconsidered,but the senseof awe andwondermentthatcomesfrom sight-seeingin the Holy Land.On one page,we see how theremainsof the BurntHousegive us a betterunderstandingof thefallof Jerusalemin 70 CE.On another page we read:
Thosewho havebeenwithme in Israelon a personalpilgrimageorin an international seminarhaveshared Iwas suchthoughtswithme.InGalilee, privytothesewords:'NowImorefully understand my faith,standinghere eastof theSeaof Galilee,in theruins of Hippus,lookingwestwardasthe sunsetsbehindMt Tabor.-' InJerusalem,atthespotwhereJesuswas crucified,I thoughtI heardthesethoughts: is realandnotanideal; Jerusalem Golgothais nota partofa creedbutan See Archaeology,page 182
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
181
the author,in whatamountsto an aside, confidesto thereaderin a confessional outcroppingof whitestoneon which posture.Thisbriefconfessiondescribes how archaeologycanemphasizethe (page18). my Lordwascrucified' plightof allthosewho havegonebeThesearenotthewordsof a New fore.Excavationslay openthe "physical scholarconsideringtherelaTestament misery"andthe "marginalsubsistence" thathumanshaveenduredthroughthe tionshipof archaeologyandfaith;they arethewordsof a Christianpilgrim ages."Inshort,archaeologyraisesagain, forme, thetheodicyquestion:How reflectingona visitto theHolyLand. InChapterTwo,JamesStrangebecoulda good andjustGodbe responsibleforsucha world?"(page62).Miller's ginsby askingthequestion,"Whatcan between analysisof therelationship archaeologydo andnot do forbiblical studies?"(page23).Withthisquestion,it archaeologyand "havingfaith"results is clearthatStrangeis dealingwith faith in a challengeto faith;it is sensitive,honas a "corporate religion"andnotas "hav- est,andauthentic.Intheend,it maybe that,theread- theonlyrelationshipbetweenarchaeoling faith."Understanding erwill enjoyaninterestingdiscussionon ogy and "havingfaith."Itsetsthescene the abilityof archaeologyto reconstruct forthequestionhe reallywishesto adthesocialcontextin whichJesuslived dress:Whatcanbe saidaboutthe origin Thisis familiarground andministered.Specifically, theauthor of theIsraelites? dealswith theextentof urbanizationin forMillerandmanyof us havewatched Galilee.Thereaderwill be pleasedwith with interestandappreciation as he has therewardsof thisdiscussion. movedoverit in thepast.Thenewcomer MaxMiller,in ChapterThree,senses will findthe discussionclear,concise, thetwo definitionsof faith.Inan attempt and,onceagain,challenging. to say somethingabout"havingfaith," W.WaiteWillisis the only author
Archaeology frompage 181
Archaeology and
Bible
Johnson GaryLance PhillipsGraduateSeminary
History
By JosephP.Free. Revised and expanded by Howard Vos,314 pp. GrandRapids: Zondervan, 1992;$17.99 (paper).
D ecentyearshavewitnessedthepubl.licationof numerousvolumes attemptingto presentbiblicalhistoryin thecontextof theancientworld.Inthese works,thedataof archaeology, usually witha focuson theLevant,complement thenarration of eventsforwhichtheprisource is thebiblicalrecord.Many mary volumeshavemadeeithermodestor somehavesimcontributions; significant credential plyprovideda bibliographic ona curriculum and the weaknesses vita; of othershavepromptedoneto ponder therationalefortheirpublication. This volumefallswithinthelattercategory formanyreasons. Thevolumewas firstpublishedby JosephFreein 1950andwaswithdrawn 182
who is not in biblicalstudiesor archaeology.InChapterFour,he movesdirectly to the questionof therelationshipof archaeologyand "havingfaith."The Itis alsotheois livelyanddclever. artidcle logicallysensitive.Withouttrivializing his discussion,I thinkit is fairto say he activity arguesthatGod'sincarnational canbe seenonlythroughthe eyes of "havingfaith."And whatis comprehendedthroughthoseeyesis truth,but thattruthisnotnecessarilyevidentin historicalevents. Iftheeditorsof thebookintended "faith"in thetitleto carrythemeaning of a "corporate religion,"thenthearticlesarequitehelpfulin demonstrating how archaeologycaninformandillustratethehistoryofthatcorporate religion. If,however,theterm"faith"in thetitle was intendedto carrythemeaningof "havingfaith,"thentheanswerto the question,"Whathasarchaeologyto do withfaith?"is "notmuch."
Biblical 57:3(1994) Archaeologist
afterthefourteenth fromcirculation printwas chairing in 1976.Free(1910-1974) manof theDepartmentof Archaeology atWheatonCollegeinWheaton,Illinois, nineseasonsofexcavations anddirected at TellDothanbetween1953and1964.This revised,updated,andexpandededition is theworkof HowardVos,professorof historyandarchaeologyat TheKing's Manor,New York. Collegein Briarcliff Theworkbeginswitha dearstatementof the author'sintentto "follow thesequenceof Biblehistoryas a unifying threadandshow how archaeologicaldiscoveriesilluminateandconfirm the successiveeventsof biblicalhistory." Itis furtherstatedthatin additionto the book'susefulnessto Sundayschool teachersandlaypersons,it is intendedto be usedas a "textoras collateralreading in academiccoursesthatdealwithBible survey,BiblehistoryorBiblearchaeology."Aftera briefchapterthatcomments
onthehistoricity ofthebiblicalrecord,the and objectivesof "Biblearchaeology," method,theau(briefly)archaeological thorsurveysthe OldandNew Testaments(chapters2-22 and25-29 respectively),devotingtwo chapters(23-24) to theIntertestamental period.Manyof the eventspresentedin eachchapterare furtherstudiedfromtheperspectiveof evidence.Thebook'suse archaeological of archaeologyfallsintotwo categories: a biblicalevent evidencethat"confirmns" or personageandthatwhich "illuminates"thebiblicalnarrative.Thetextis lacedwithdiscussionsof literarycriticismandapologeticsfroma trulyultraconservativetradition.Vignettesrelated to varioustopicsof biblicaltheologyare frequent.Thebookcontains49blackand whitephotographsthatcomplement the textratherwell, 8 mapsof marginal quality,and3 plansof Jerusalemthatare with a pooratbest.Theworkcondcludes
Anotherweakness,andperhapsthe bibliography(pp.297-307)thatis largely theproductof thevolume'sexpansion mostegregious,is thevolume'sfrequent of datedarchaeological eviandrevision. presentation to the number of dence. the relates the Despite publications Again, problem in thisgenrethathaveappearedin the of revision. inadequacy Admittedly, pastdecadeandcontraryto thenumer- therearenumerousdiscussionsthatare informedandup-to-date,buttheseare ousvoicesthatseekanannulmentof the between archaeinfrequentcomparedto thosethatdo legitimaterelationship biblical not and the there reflectthemostrecentarchaeological narrative, ology remainstheneedfora volumethatseeks evidence.Insomeinstances,thestudy to documentthosemomentswhen the errorsorrehearses misguidperpetuates data of dovetail ed thathavebeenrevised empirical archaeology interpretations recordofbiblical Generaldiscussionsthat events, or corrected. withthehistorical caution must are and peoples, places.Surely, impoverishedby a datedpresentabeexercisedwithregardtohow thedata tionoftheevidenceorthatfailtoexplore in of archaeologyareto be interpreted topicsof significantandrichinteraction biblical bibof and how the between thebiblicalrecordandarchaelight history in lightof licaldataareto be interpreted thehistorical andcultural ologyindclude: but still for materials for the the need exists patriarchal background archaeology, a scholarlyandcontemporary treatperiod(forexample,certaininterpretamentthatutilizesthebiblicalrecordas a tionsof Nuzi/Hurriansocialandlegal customsdo notreflectcontemporary documentof historyandnotpureliterand Bible thechronologyof patriarHistory aryfancy.Archaeology scholarship); doesnotmeetthisneed. chaltraditionsandthecharacterization of patriarchal Oneof themanyweaknessesof this lifestyle(thereis virtually volumeisnota failuretoregardthenarra- no mentionof thewealthof recentmatertiveashistorically credible,thoughexcesses ialrelatingto nomadicstudies);thedate of theExodus;therouteof thewilderabound(thecreationof humanitybetween4000and8000BCE!), butratherin nesstrekfromEgyptthroughSinaito itsantiquatedunderstandinganddated thePlainsof Moab;thearchaeological of Israel with fortheearlysettlement of evidence presentation scholarship regard Forexam- (nota footnotemakesmentionof the to issuesthateffecthistoricity. orithearplethoraofrecentpublications); ple,thediscussionof Pentateuchal Davidic evidence for the and the historythroughout early gins chaeological numerous anunderandSolomonicmonarchies; chaptersfailstocommunicate in of IronAge, of critical each the modem concensus events century standing and ninth andsimplyrehearsesthepositionsand the eighthcenturies; especially Further, discussionsrelatedto ancientpeoples perspectivesof pastgenerations. theattemptto addressthoseviews that andculturessuchas theEdomites, biblical is andPhilistines,enigmatic Phoenicians, question historidcitysimilarly articulation of both who areemergingfromthe The the peoples antiquated. criticalperspective(s) andtheapologetic shadowsof timethroughrecentsurveys Eventhepresentation of andexcavations. responsesuggestsanunawareness contemporaryOld Testamentscholarship in terms of who is saying what with regardto early biblicaltraditions. The majorityof footnotes and bibliographic notations cites publicationsthat date between the late 19th century and 1948.The scholarshipof the past decade, criticaland conservativetraditionsalike, is virtuallyignored. This problem pervades the volume. Presumably,such notable deficiencies should have been correctedin the courseof revisionand expansion.
of the content and immense contributions of the Dead Sea Scrollsto biblical study is dated (less so than with other topics) and superficial.The discussions relatingto the New Testamentand archaeology suffersimilarly,though not with the same intensityas the treatment of Old Testament.A casual perusal of the scholarlycitationsyields relatively few referencesfrom the past eight years with some truly notable lacunae, espedally fromthe internationalcommunity of archaeologicalscholarship.
andBibleHistorylacks Archaeology balancein itsselectionof biblicalevents, peoples,andplacesto be highlightedby excavatedevidence.Someofthemost interestingandsignificantexamplesof interaction betweenthesetwo sources areabsentornotfullyexplored,while theinsubstantial andeven the sillyare frequentlysubjectsof note.Lot'smobproofdoorreceivesmoreattentionthan theveritablewealthof tenth-ninthcenfromsiteslikeHazor, turyarchitecture and Gezer, Megiddoandmorecomment of thantheIronAge citadel-fortresses Aradwithcornercultplace. Althoughmanyof thevignettesare up-to-dateandinteresting,thelacunae arenotable,bothin quantityandquality. theearlyeditionsof this Admittedly, volumedid nothavethebenefitof the pasttwo decadesof intensivearchaeologicalinvestigationthroughoutthe countriesthatencompasstheworldof theancientNearEast.Althoughthetask wouldbe trulyherculean,therevision andexpansion ofthisfortyyearoldstudy shouldreflectthiswealthof new data. Thebiblicalandarchaeological scholarshipis dated.Theselectionof biblicalmaterialsexaminedin lightof excavatedevidenceis unbalancedwith majoromissions.Thoughrevisedand expanded,thisvolumeshouldnothave beenresurrected. GaryD. Pratico Gordon-Conwell TheologicalSeminary
Sub-
57:3(1994) Biblical Archaeologist
183
Oir-a o
diool1s
......
Officr
, • : • k; -: 7" :7 ".:"". . • ?<7' -- -, ... ....•: : •)..,:. :"";..:-•L."! -:i":..•,;:] . '"- :,/ . ... ..<-1-I -,- ••7= .• .: "--7'-1-:--'.;..,, ":"L•,• .",.., . i;+s ':."..i. • .',:-"•"
R.
EricE
M.
Meyers,
ident
P
.,ThomasSd ub, FirstVY ident,Publications esident,CAP WalteiRast, Dona~Y~jngerVicdresideuitCo"p~ato~ . HoldenGibbs,VicePresident, Finance,TreasurerZ PublicRelations dieT.Shufro,Vice-President ErnestFrerichs, ice-Presidentat-Large 2 George des Secrtary
Special offer
THE
MOST THE
STUDY OF COMPREHENSIVE
WALLS
OF
JERUSALEM
"a monumentalworkof very high calibre ... an important scholarlyworkusefulfor everyoneinterestedin the historyof Jerusalem" - reviewer'scomment
The WallsofJerusalem. From the Canaanites to the Mamluks by Gregory J. Wightman Wightman'sworkis the firstcompletescholarlyreferenceto the walls of Jerusalem, containing a treasure of information which is well organized, clearly written, and richly illustrated.Dealing with the defence systems of Jerusalem from the earliest times to the end of the Middle Ages, The Walls of Jerusalem combines archaeological and literaryevidence whilst remaining accessible to the general reader. 210x297mmhardcover.345 pages,89 illustrations, 31 endplates indexed.ISBN0 646 160087 Comprehensively
MEDITERRANEANARCHAEOLOGYSUPPLEMENT4
ORDR
OR
cut or copy, and fax or Please send ...... copy/ies of
sendto
The Wallsof Jerusalem
MEDITARCH Box 243 Holme Bldg Universityof Sydney NSW 2006 Australia Fax: +61 2 692 4889
* Special price: US$98 (NormalpriceUS$115) Please add for postage: US$8pervol. (Aust.&NZ) US$14(allothercountries) Ienclose US$............ cheque/money order (payable to the Universityof Sydney) OR 1 Please send a pro-formainvoice OR charge my: E Visa U Mastercard
Card No.Expirydate:
Signature:
Name:
........ ...........................
Address
..................
......
..................................... ..... .............................. .... .. .. Postcode:...
Country: ... ................................
RecentBOOKS INNER WAY
PARADIGMSIN POLITY
Towarda Rebirthof EasternChristianSpiritualDirection Josephj. Allen "Aconvincingpresentation for spiritualrenewalandthe meansto - CarnegieSamuelCalian accomplishit throughspiritualdirectors." 0695-3, paper,$10.99
ClassicReadingsin Reformedand PresbyterianChurchGovernment David W. Hall & joseph H. Hall, editors "Thebest anthologyof the ReformedtraditionthatI haveseen.It will be usefulfor studentsof churchhistoryandchurchpolityand beneficialto - WJack officersandleadersin localchurches." W•liamson 0684-8, paper,$29.99
THE CHURCH IN THE MOVEMENT OF THE SPIRIT
CHRISTUS PRAESENS
WilliamR. Barr & Rena M. Yocom, editors Faithand Orderseries '•Thiswide-rangingstudyseeksto be biblicalin orientationandecumenical in flavor.It couldprovidea fascinatingstartingpointfor workingout the unitywe havein Christ."- MichaelGreen 0554-X,paper,$12.99
A Reconsideration of RudolfBultmann'sChristology james F.Kay "Oneof the finestexpositionsof the thoughtof the greatestbiblical of the twentiethcentury"- RoyA. Harrisville interpreter 0131-5, paper,14.99
SUFFERINGAND HOPE
A Prolegomenonto EvangelicalTheology RichardUnts for all who areseriousabouthow to do evangelicaltheology "Important in the contemporary setting.Lintscombinesclearthinking,theological - George M. Marsden insight,commonsense,andastuteculturalanalysis." 0674-0, paper,$19.99
The BiblicalVisionand the HumanPredicament New Edition J. ChristiaanBeker The Storybehindthe Bookby Ben C. Ollenburger Thiscompellingstudyprovidesa moving,triumphant answerto one of life's - the presenceof sufferingin God'sworld. greatestmysteries 0722-4, paper,$9.99
FREETO LOVE Paul'sDefense of ChristianLibertyin Galatians LouvainTheologicaland PastoralMonographs John Buckel 0575-2,paper,$24.99
MAJESTYAND MEEKNESS
THE FABRICOF THEOLOGY
A CHORUS OF WITNESSES ModelSermonsfor Today'sPreacher Thomas G. Long& CorneliusPlantinga,jr., editors "Awonderfulcollection!This is a volumethatmustbe readandreread, savoredandstudied,analyzedandemulatedby all who careaboutgood - Richard preaching." J. Mouw 0132-3, paper,$17.99
GOD'S YES WAS LOUDERTHAN MY NO
A ComparativeStudyof Contrastand Harmonyin the Conceptof God IFACSStudiesin a ChristianWorldView series John B. Carman "A profoundtheologicalworkthatcomparesreligioustraditionsin order to takeseriouslythe challengethey represent.Carman'smethodology - LaminSanneh bringsus to freshlevelsof engagement." 0693-7, paper,$24.99
Rethinkingthe AfricanAmericanCallto Ministry WilliamH. Myers "A thoroughlyscholarlyyet fascinatinginvestigation of a long-neglected yet veryimportantsubject.A must-readfor personsin ordainedministry of anykind."- HenryH. Mitchell 0109-9, paper,$19.99
JESUS OF NAZARETH:Lord and Christ:
ON THE FRONTIERSOF GENETICS AND REiUGION
Essayson the HistoricalJesus and New TestamentChristology Joel B. Green & Max Turner,editors "A richmineof informationfor scholarsof differingbackgrounds to explore,andfromwhichto garnernuggetsof insightaboutthe person of Christ."- GeraldE Hawthorne 3750-6, cloth,$37.00
LETTERSFROM LAKECOMO and the HumanRace Explorationsin Technology Ressourcement:Retrievaland Renewalin CatholicThought Romano Guardini "Anoutstandingtheologianexaminesthe modemage in the lightof Christianfaith."- RobertA. Krieg "Readingthis simple,beautiful,andchallengingbook instantlymovedme to a moreradicalandpassionatecommitmentto the soulfullife." - Thomas Moore 0108-0, paper,$9.99
MATTHEW
J. RobertiNelson "Awell-balanced of scientificknowledgeandthe ethicalpresentation religiousconcernsthatwill flow fromthe applicationof this knowledge."
- Kevin O'Row.r*e, 0,P 0741-0, paperl$12.99
CALVINUS SACRAE SCRIPTURAEPROFESSOR Calvinas Confessorof Holy scripture WilliamH. Neuser, editor pro.. a pors Documented from and seminarreports proceedings, paperspreent presented, ..0.. the mostrecentInternational Cogress on CalvinIncludesannotated 0716-X,paper.$24.99 bibliography
The New CenturyBible Commentary PROVERBS
A Commentaryon His Handbookfor a MixedChurchunderPersecution SecondEdition Robert H. Gundry
R. orran Whybray 0787-9, paper,$19.99
This second edition includes a new preface as well as two hundred ncw endnotesandan appendixthatprovidefreshreflctionon thc textandhighlight Gundry'sown responseto rccent criticism.O735-6,paper,$36.99
Paul L Redditt 0748-8, paper,$14.99
MALACHI HAGGAI,ZECHARIAH,
from
ENd
A WORD FOR ALL SEASONS
THE INTRUSIVEWORD
MissionaryPerspectives,1960-1992 Lesslie Newbigin
Preachingto the Unbaptized WilliamWillimon
This collection of previously unpublished essays, sermons, and addressesby Bishop Lesslie Newbigin puts forth his developing view of the agenda for Christianmissions from 1960 to the present. 0730-5, paper, $14.99
"Willimon on preaching is the freshest voice in the country right now." - Eugene H Peterson 0706-2, paper, $10.99
THE IMPACTOF THE REFORMATION Heiko A. Oberman
"This new collection is vintage Oberman. The range of topics is simply immense, from the late Middle Ages to the present." - ThomasA. Brady,fJr 0732-1, paper, $19.99
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY, Volume2
WolfhartPannenberg
"WolfhartPannenberg has produced the major work in systematic theology of the last twenty years. No serious Christian theologian can afford to miss this work." - David Tracy 3707-7, cloth, $39.99
SIN: RadicalEvilin Souland Society
Ted Peters
"Peters'book tells us wisely and winsomely just about everything an informed Christian needs to know about the evil that so satanically bedevils both our cloaked souls and our naked society."-Lewis B. Smedes 3764-6, cloth, $24.99 0113-7, paper, $14.99
IMAGESOF DISCORD A GraphicInterpretationof the OpeningDecades of the EightyYears'War JamesTanis& Daniel Horst 0742-9, paper, $27.50s
THE DEAD SEA SCROLLSTODAY James C. Vander Kam
"Simple, straightforward, and entirely reliable.... This is the best and the most up-to-date introductory work on the scrolls that I know of." - David Noel Freedman 0736-4, paper, $12.99
THE LIBERATINGSPIRIT Towardan HispanicAmericanPentecostalSocialEthic EldinVillafahie "Should be required reading for anyone interested in the study of social ethics, Pentecostal theology, or Hispanic American theology." - Samuel Solivan 0728-3, paper,$14.99
EVERA FRONTIER The BicentennialHistoryof the PittsburghTheologicalSeminary James ArthurWalther,editor 3723-9, cloth, $24.99
SINGLENESSOF HEART
The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting Bruce W. Winter, editor
VOLUMEI: THEBOOKOF ACTS IN ITS ANCIENTLITERARY SETTING Bruce W. Winter & Andrew D. Clarke, editors
"This work lifts the study of Acts onto a new, much more contextual plane..... A most attractive entr6e to a promising series." - Edwin A. Judge 2433-1, cloth, $37.50
VOLUME2: THEBOOKOF ACTS IN ITS GRAECO-ROMAN SETTING David W. J. Gill& Conrad Gempf, editors
"Outstanding as Jackson and Lake was in its day, this volume on the Graeco-Roman setting of Acts holds out the promise of equaling if not surpassing that great achievement."- Paul Barnett 2434-X, cloth, $37.50
CONFLICTAND COMMUNITY IN CORINTH A Socio-Rhetorical Commentaryon I & 2 Corinthians Ben WitheringtonIII Witherington applies an exegetical method informed by both sociological insights and rhetoricalanalysisto the study of 1 & 2 Corinthians. 0144-7, paper, $34.99
EZEKIELI (Chapters 1-12)
Calvin's Old Testament Commentaries The RutherfordHouse Translation
D. F.Wright,general editor 2468-4, cloth, $34.99
$24.99 0751-8, paper,
THE POLITICS OF JESUS, SecondEdition John HowardYoder
"This new edition updates Yoder's original findings and is especially useful for provokingtheologicaland ethical reflections."- Dennis P McCann 0734-8, paper, $16.99 Eerdmans' ISBN prefix: 0-8028Prices subject to change without notice. An "s" after the price indicates a limited discount. For more information on these or other Eerdmanstitles, or for details about our textbook examination policy, contact the Eerdmans Textbook
fora copyof our at1-800-253-7521, orFAX616-459-6540 Department
most recent Academic Catalog.
At your bookstore, or call 800-253-7521 FAX 616-459-640
Restoringthe DividedSoul CliffordWilliams "An experientiallydeep yet sophisticated treatment of the dynamics that constantly hinder a sinple and straightforwarddoing of the good for God's sake."- Dalla Willardn 0705-4, paper;$9.99
5L
i
42L11K
AWM.BeCEERDMANS
PUBLISHING CO.
255JEFFERSONAVE.S.E. / GRAND RAPIDS,MICH. 49503
'a>'
4p
do
low*
14
a.
ap
0r1at
op
-%, -4"
lopwosw
~AA-
':..."V
. 1
010r
--"
Ao
4,
-'
j
4,t
.1
-V
AW
oolk
000A4tvIt
a)
.
1...Ie
Ct
~r)lei_
do
< -
a
%
.v :i"
.
..•
...
.
.
-;'! "
-1
*
-.r••
.....
-pop
?*
•.••?
"
