The Biblical Archaeologist - Vol.45, N.2

65 Pages·1982·13.73 MB·English

by  American Schools of Oriental Research

BIBLICAL
)
ARCHEOLOGIST
Spring 1982 Volume 45 Number 2
Biblical/Palestinian
Archeology:
and
Retrospects
Prospects
IN THE NEXT BA
Inp ointingo uts cribalm istakesi nt he ancientm anuscriptosf
the biblicatle xt,m oderns cholarsh aveo ftenl eftt he impression
thatp rofessionaclo pyistsw erei rresponsiblaen d incompetent.
Ina fascinatinges say entitled" InP raiseo f AncientS cribes,"
AlanR . Millarrde vealss ome of the proceduresa nd
safeguardst hatw eree mployedt o ensurea faithfual nd
trustworthcyo py of ancientd ocumentsa ndt he sacredt ext.
BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST/SPRING 1982 65
James A. Sauer is Associate Curator of
Syro-PalestinianA rchaeology at the University
Museum, University of Pennsylvania, and former
BIBLICAL(.'
Director of the American Center of Oriental
ARCHEOLOGIST
Research in Amman, Jordan. He is also the
President-Electo f ASOR.
James F. Strange is Professor of Religious Studies
Editor and Dean of the College of Arts and Letters of the
DavidN oel Freedman
University of South Florida. He is coauthor with
AssociateE ditor Eric M. Meyers of Archaeology, the Rabbis, and
David F. Graf Early Christianityp ublished in 1981.
AssistantE ditor Larry E. Toombs, Professor of Religion and
MarshaD . Stuckey Culture at Wilfred Laurier University in Waterloo,
EditorialC ommittee Ontario, Canada, who began his 26-year career in
FrankM . Cross,J r. field archeology under the tutelage of Dame
TikvaF rymer-Kensky Kathleen M. Kenyon at Jericho, has participated
SharonH erbert in excavations at Balatah, Caesarea Maritima,
CharlesR . Krahmalkov and Tell el-Hesi.
John A. Miles, Jr.
WalterE . Rast David Ussishkin is the Director of the Institute of
Archaeology at Tel Aviv University and editor of
ProductionM anager the Institute'sj ournal Tel Aviv. Since 1973, he
BruceE . Willoughby has been director of the excavations at Tel Lachish.
EditorialA ssistants
David M. Howard,J r.
TerrenceM . Kerestes H. Darrell Lance is professor of Old Testament at
Colgate Rochester/ Bexley/Crozer Theological
GraphicD esigner Seminary.A s a Guggenheim Fellow, he was annual
SuellenF einberg professor at the Albright Institute in 1973-74.
SusanO gden His book, The Old Testamenta nd the Archaeologist,
DistributionM anager appearedi n 1981.
R. Guy Gattis
William G. Dever, Chairmano f the Department
Biblical Archeologist (ISSN: 0006-0895) is of OrientalS tudies at the University of Arizona
published quarterly (Winter, Spring, Sum- in Tucson, was the Director of the W. F. Albright
mer, Fall) by the American Schools of
Oriental Research. Its purpose is to pro- Institute of Archaeological Research in Jerusalem
vide the general reader with an accurate,
scholarly, yet easily understandable account and is the currente ditor of the Bulletin of the
of archeological discoveries and their bear-
ing on the biblical heritage. Unsolicited mss. American Schools of Oriental Research.
are welcome but should be accompanied by
a stamped, self-addressed envelope. Address
all editorial correspondence and advertising
to Biblical Archeologist, 468 Lorch Hall, L. Y. Rahmani is Chief Curator of State
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
4to8 1A09S.O ARd, d1r2e6s sI namlla nb uSstirneeests, Ccaomrrbersipdogned, eMncAe Antiquities with the Israel Department of
02139. Antiquities and Museums in Jerusalem and author
Copyright 0 1982 American Schools of of numerous articles on the remains at Jerusalem
Oriental Research. Annual subscription rate:
$16.00. Foreign subscription rate: $18.00 from the Hellenistic and Roman periods.
(American currency). Current single issues:
$5.00.
Second class postage paid at Cambridge,
MchAan g0e2s 13to9 . BiPbOlicSaTl MAArSchTeEoRlo:g isSt,e n1d2 6 aIdndmreasns Biblical Archeologisti s published with the financial
Street, Cambridge, MA 02139. assistance of Zion Research Foundation, a non-
TChoem pUonsiivtieornsi tayn do fp rMinitcihnigg abny. Printing Services, sectarian foundation for the study of the Bible and
the history of the Christian Church.
66 BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST/SPRING 1982
Cover: left to right, top to bottom: David McCreery examining flints in the
BBLICASL; eastern desert of Jordan; Sharon Herbert at Tel Anafa; Jim Sauer at Ain
ARCHEOLOGIST Shellely in southern Jordan; Bill Dever; David Ussishkin at the 1981 Lachish
excavations;J im Strangea t Nabratein.
(BIBLICAL
NAVY:
ARCHEOLOGIST
Spring 1982 Volume 45 Number 2
JamesA . Saner Prospects for Archeology in Jordan and Syria 73
JamesF . Strange New Developments in Greco-RomanA rcheology as a
Discipline 85
LarryE . Toombs The Developmenot f PalestinianA rcheologya s a Discipline 89
DavidU ssishkin Where is Israeli Archeology Going? 93
H. DarrellL ance American Biblical Archeology in Perspective 97
WilliamG . Dever Retrospectsa nd Prospectsi n Biblicala nd Syro-Palestinian
Archeology 103
L. Y. Rahmani Ancient Jerusalem's Funerary Customs and Tombs,
Part Four 109
DEPARTMENTS Lettert o the Readers 68
Polemicsa nd Irenics 69
Notes and News 120
Pratico,T elle l-Kheleifeh
McGovern,B aqah ValleyP roject
Betlyon, Joint Expeditiont o Telle l-Hesi
InternationalG lass Conference
Book Reviews. 126
Soggin, Judges (Boling)
ButterfieldO, riginso f History (Starr)
Biran, Templesa nd High Places (Clifford)
BIBLICALA RCHEOLOGIST/SPRIN1G98 2 67
Letter
-
to the
Readers
lum.~
6
"State-of-the-art." It is bold Sophistication of method is one thing. Toward the
to claim that an account can end of his life, G. Ernest Wright, BA's founder and
be given of where a discipline long-time editor, used to speak of two deficiencies
stands at a particular time- characterizing archeology in the Near East: deficiency
as to theory, practice, and re- in field technique and deficiency in curiosity. The
sults. Nonetheless, this issue of imaginations of archeologists needed prodding to get
BA comes close to being a them to ask all manner of new questions. Professor
presentation of the state-of- James Strange tackles this aspect of archeology most
the-art in an enterprise we explicitly, though all our authors at least touch on it.
have, for some time, been Strange calls for a body of theory to go with practice.
calling "biblical archeology." Prodded particularly by anthropologists, he gives illus-
Here we publish the papers trations of new possibilities pertaining to Palestine in
given at an ASOR symposium Greco-Roman times. You will find yourself musing as
held 18 November 1978 in you read: "Say, I never thought of that before."
New Orleans. The symposium was planned by William The rapid pace of recent discovery is frequently
G. Dever, editor of BA's sister publication, BASOR. mentioned by all our authors, but it is Professor James
Professor Dever has become in recent years the Sauer's paper that focuses on it. His portrait of arche-
outspoken advocate of the "professionalization" of ological activity and potential in Syria and Jordan is
biblical archeology. He sees that as requiring, among quite simply the best and most up-to-date available any-
other things, a shift from viewing biblical archeology where. Sauer assumes that our interests extend backward
as an academic discipline to seeing it as a cross-dis- to prehistoric times and forward to the 16th century
ciplinary activity, while the academic discipline emerges A.D. He reminds us that for all our necessary reflection
as "Syro-Palestinian archeology." Such a shift relieves on our methods and theories, discovery remains exhila-
archeology in that region of an embarrassment-that of rating and goes on challenging our limits.
appearing to be motivated by concerns of a particular A final thought. Lance at one point suggests the
faith-tradition rather than by a broadly humanistic presence on any archeological staff of a person whose
impulse. If you are wondering what the fuss is all primary job it is to interpret what is found for biblical
about, the spirited encounter between Dever and Pro- scholars. I picture such a person also playing the role
fessor H. Darrell Lance contained in their contributions of reminding his colleagues on the dig that the peoples
to the symposium will tickle your mind. These two, how- whose homes and streets and fortifications and govern-
ever, are not the only ones who address that issue here. ment buildings and sanctuaries and garbage dumps
Although Dever claims that the problem is a purely they are exploring really lived, thought, hoped, and be-
American one, Professor David Ussishkin indicates that lieved. There is a reciprocity of influence here; the
archeologists in modern Israel are very much involved academic world needs to encounter biblical scholarship
in it. about as much as, if not more than, biblical scholarship
In describing the motivation of his Israeli col- needs to encounter other academic disciplines. I am
leagues, Ussishkin notes a disagreement with Professor never quite sure which is the more negligent here! In
Lawrence Toombs' paper: Toombs' study of archeologi- any case, the need for serious interpretation of archeol-
cal method could apply to archeology anywhere. Toombs ogy for biblical studies was never more pressing; may
agrees. He portrays a discipline come of age in the BA go on making its unique contribution to the dialogue.
realm of technique, and that is an important gain.
Sophistication in method nowadays demands coopera-
tion among members of a team, each contributing ex- Eg4w-x 1
pertise while staying sufficiently knowledgeable of other Camp-aL
facets of modern archeological technique so that joint
effort produces a sound synthesis. Several of our authors
speak about teamwork and diffusion of leadership and
the consequences.
68 BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST/ SPRING 1982
Polemics&
Irenlcs
Gilgamesha nd the Magic Plant is modern,n ot ancient,l egendt hat this planth as anythingt o do
Writing for the general reader surely implies cautious with longevityo f Sumerianh eroes.
adherencet o fact and specific markingo f theory as theory,
while in writing for scholars one is free to indulge in less W. G. Lambert
cautiouss peculation,s ince they can (or should)b e able to sift Universityo f Birmingham
truth from unproveni deas. In this light Ronald A. Veenker's England
article" Gilgamesha nd the MagicP lant"( BA 44.4 [1981]:1 99-
205) leavess omethingt o be desired.F irst,w hati s stateda s fact
is not alwayss o. At the outset he states that the eleven-tablet A Responset o W. G. Lambert
Akkadianv ersiono f Gilgameshi s based on "severali ndepen- It appears indeed that in editing the portion on the literary
dent Sumerians tories,"o f whichh e givesf ive titles, butt hen he history of the epic for the BA readership, I have sacrificed
adds that "a Semitic author ... added to elementso f the six precision for brevity. However, I intended to refer to five,
Sumeriant ales other legendarym aterial.. . ." Is it five or six? not six, Sumerian stories. I am grateful for Professor
In fact it is two. Nothing of The Death of Gilgamesho r Lambert furnishing the reference to CT 46 35 (plate 36)
GilgameshE, nkidu,a nd the Netherworlda ppearsi n the eleven- which is available in the CAD L 11lb . Since he refers to
tabletA kkadianv ersion,a nd the accounto f the flood in Tablet
my translationo f XI 280, 1 call attention to the fact that
IX was almost certainlyt aken from the AkkadianA tra-hasis I have used throughoutt he article E. A. Speiser's transla-
story rather than from the very differenta nd much shorter
tion from ANET with the exception of XI 94-95 on page
Sumerianf lood story. Then, his translationo f Tablet XI 280
has an unexplainedg ap. As a readero f cuneiformh e should 205, which appeared in print before the publication of
have filled this gap from CuneiformT extsf rom Babylonian Lamberta nd Millard'sC T 46 in 1965.
Tabletsi n the BritishM useum, Part 46 pl. 36: lu ia-kill i-ba- The "highly speculative" map of Gilgamesh's world
am-mas am-ma lul-tuk, "I shall feed it to an old man and try illustration is nothing more than an ornament and is not
out the plant." meant to be scientifically illustrative of anything in the
The chartw ith the caption" TheW orldo f Gilgamesh"o n essay itself. Indeed, all of the artwork is intended in that
p. 200 is a highlys peculativem odernc onstructionb, asedl arge- spirit.
ly on a generalB abylonianw orldm ap of the first millennium The larger portion of Lambert'sr esponse is addressed
B.C(.I t placesU rartun ext to Assyria.)B ut the Babylonianm ap to editing and artwork. Only in his last paragraphd oes he
knowsn othingo f any paradise,a nd I knowo f no evidencet hat refer to the body of the article. I find it difficult to accept
Sumerianso r Babylonianse ver conceivedo f a paradisea t the Lambert'ss uggestion that the entire episode of "Gilgamesh
middleo f the world.T his is a moderni dea. Also, contraryt o and the Magic Plant" was told primarily to provide an
the captiont o the seal impressiono n p. 203, I submitt hat there explanation for snakes shedding their skins. Furthermore,
is no proof that this hero known from art was taken as if Lambert is suggesting that my thesis is dependent upon
Gilgameshb efore the second millenniumB .c., that is, some the historical Gilgamesh having returned to Uruk and
hundreds of years after this particular seal was cut. In actually cultivated the plant, I would have difficultyr elating
Sumeriana rt this motif goes back so far as to exclude Gilga- that to what I proposed in the article. As I made clear
mwhesehth earti nt hthe ee Aakrlkieasdt p oecrcioudrrt henisc tersa.d Iitt ioisn aplmu roet isf preepcurelasteinotns previously, the thesis pertains to an independent story,
Gilgamesho r not. A second-millenniume xample would not reconstructed from elements of the Gilgamesh version,
have been open to the same doubt. which served as popular lore to answer the question in the
I can agree with part of the main point of the articlet hat minds of any Mesopotamiansw ho had ever heard of the
the story of the magic plant is not taken over from the long-lived Sumeriank ings: "How could they have lived so
SumerianG ilgameshs tories, but in the text the episodei s ex- long?"
plicitlya n explanationo f how the snake acquiredt he powert o
shed its skin, and so to experiencer ejuvenationI.t has nothing
to do witht he long-livedS umeriank ingsi n the SumerianK ing RRoonnaalldd AA.. VVeeeennkkeerr
List, except in moderns peculation.B y the time of Gilgamesh WWeesstteerrnn KK eennttuucckkyy UU nniivveerrssitiyty
theirr eignsa re almostd ownt o whatw e wouldc onsidern ormal. BBoowwlliinngg GGrreeeenn, , KKYY
In the storyG ilgameshh ad the disappointmenotf failingt o find
the key to eternal life, so as a consolationp rize he was told
aboutt his magicp lant,b y whichh e hopedt o rejuvenateh imself Pivots and Pilates
in his old age and so obtain a second life. But even this hope Filas' description of the placement of the Pontius Pilate
provedv ainw hent he snakes wallowedt he planta t a well. Thus, coins on the Turin Shroud (BA 44.3 [1981]: 135) is very
Gilgameshd id not in fact returnt o Uruk with the plant,a nd it confusing and in need of further explanation, particularly
BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST/SPRING 1982 69
Fig. 1
. . ,- --or
tfook)\
to
.f
i.t t ,
.(cid:127) ..-,,. .
- (cid:127)"-'.." ~~v 'r (cid:127)," ?-'.!.;..:.,(cid:127). '. . . .. ....... . ,..,;.....(cid:127) . . . .. -.!..... ,, . (cid:127)
--,.... ..
iFig. 2
' N ., ' " ... ':" N "-
...
?Iz? .!,,;cr. 2i ' Fig
.....
Fig. 1. On the left is the actual corpse and coin; to the right
is the imprinto n the shroud if this was the case. Fig. 2. To
the right is the negative impression of the Shroud image;
on the left is the imprint as a flopped double negative.
NUMISMATICS AND PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGES:
Fig. 3
A RESPONSE
It must be conceded that Fischer's remarks legitimately
concern one point: the confusion about the rights and lefts
since it is the right eye of the human image that he is of photographic positives and negatives ofi the Shroud of
describing. Turin. That confusion arose simply because the photo-
First, the corpus in situ (facing us) would have this graph in BA (44.3 [1981]: 136) was accidently "flopped"
coin on his right eye, but it appears on the left hand side so that the encircled eye was improperly reversed.
of his photo. Second, the shroud, lifted and facing us,
after being affected by whatever mysterious forces acted
upon it, should have received, in positive form, a darkening FrancisL . Filas, S.J.
of the high portionso f the body; the coin and its inscription Loyola Universityo f Chicago
would be seen in black on white, but with the lettering in
reverse (the right eye on the left hand side). Third, a nega-
tive of this impressions hould come out in one of two ways: Atlas Addendum
either a white inscriptiono n a dark coin with the right hand I am most grateful to David Graf for his exceedingly kind
eye in reverse (fig. 1) or a white inscription( readingl eft to addition to my review article of biblical atlases, but I
right) of this coin with the eye on the left hand side as a fear that in the matter of the Reader's Digest Atlas of the
"floppedn egative" (fig. 2). The photos in his article show Bible he is giving me a great deal more credit than I
the opposite situation. actually deserve. The Consultants for this project were
Moreover,I wonder if Filas has taken into considera- exactly what the word implies: we were consulted.W e were,
tion the thickness of the coin. Unlike our present thin in fact, rather like the Queen in Britain. We could advise
coins, the Roman one, particularlyo f the crude variety he and warn, but not govern. My own contributionw as modest.
describes, would be thick enough to create a situation The base map for all the historical maps had already been
where either the coin was pushed deeply into the eyeball decided upon before I came upon the scene. Tom Frank
(highly unlikely) or the position of the shroud is misrepre- and I did work closely together on the identification of
sented (fig. 3). The contours around the eyes could not sites, the routes, and geographical questions in the text,
possibly show up properly with a thick coin acting as a but everythingw as subject to subsequente diting. Many of
protuberancea bove the eyeball, even with the softest cloth. the maps I saw only in their preliminaryf orm and some,
Only the coin would show, in fairly sharp outline, with indeed, not at all, because, as the result of a delay in the
very little of the hollow near the nose bridge of the other completion of the project, I had gone back to Jordan on
sabbatical leave before some of the material was even in
eye.
its first draft. The first 49 pages of the Atlas were written
last and I was therefore unable to comment on the maps
Sam Fischer in that section. The Atlas is a sumptuous and beautifully
Houston, Texas illustrated volume, but I confess to being not altogether
70 BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST/SPRING 1982
happy about some of the cartography. I would not have A Word of Appreciation
written this rejoindere xcept that I do not want readers of The publications of the ASOR continue to be a source of
the BA to get, accidentally, a false impression. endless fascinationa nd enrichment!
Lydia and CharltonH eston
Denis Baly
Beverly Hills, CA
Kenyon College
Gambier,O H
BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST/SPRING 1982 71
NEW PUBLICATIONS
FROM ASOR
Annual of ASOR The New Discoveries in St. Catherine's
45--
The Third Campaign at Tell el-Ful: Monastery:A PreliminaryR eport on the
The Excavations of 1964 Manuscripts
By Nancy L. Lapp and others By James H. Charlesworth
This volume is the report of excavations at Tell el-Ful The discovery in 1975 of a massive hoard of ancient
and the 1964 campaign in particular. In addition to the manuscripts at St. Catherine's monastery at Mt. Sinai
discussions on the pottery, architecture, and artifacts, did not come to public attention until 1977 and still
the historical importance of Tell el-Ful, identified as remains largely surrounded by secrecy and confusion.
Gibeah of Saul, is analyzed throughout all its occupa- Presented here are the first photographs of some of the
tions, but most importantly during the time of the recent discoveries, along with a collection of previously
Philistine settlement and expansion. 313 pp., 35 figures, published information about the discovery and a fur-
81 plates, 14 plans. ther update. xv + 45 pp.; 7 plates. ASOR Monograph
Series, No. 3.
List
Cloth $25.00 List
Paper $6.00
ASOR Members' Discount
$20.00 ASOR Members' Discount
$4.80
Annual of ASOR 46-
The Southeastern Dead Sea Plain
Expedition:A n InterimR eporto f the 1977
Season
By WalterE . Rast and R. ThomasS chaub
To Order:
The initial findings of the excavations in the South-
eastern Dead Sea Plain, particularly at Bab edh-Dhra Send your order and payment to
and Numeira. The book is divided into three main
Eisenbrauns
sections: Settlements, Burials, and Environment and P.O.B. 275
Region. It is hoped that this volume is just the begin- Winona Lake, IN 46590 USA
ning of further research concerning the Cities of the
Plain. 190 pp., 119 figures. Master Card and Visa are accepted; please supply
your card number and the expiration date.
Please add shipping charges to your payment as
List
follows:
Cloth $25.00
Order total Shipping Charge
ASOR Members' Discount
United States
$20.00
$0.00 - $15.00 Minimum: $1.50
$15.00 - $25.00 10% of order total
$25.00 - up 5% of order total
Foreign (including Canada)
$0.00 - $20.00 Minimum: $2.00
$20.00 - up 10% of order total
72 BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST/ SPRING 1982
prospects for archeologyin
&
JORDAN
SYRIA
James A. Sauer
Geographical Background periods. In the northeast corner of
Geographically, Jordan (East Bank) Jordan is a basalt and lava-covered
and Syriat ogetherc omprisen early9 0% regionw hichi s an extensioni nto Jordan
of the area which is usuallyi ncludedi n of the volcanic region around Jebel
the term "Syro-Palestinian Druze, in southern Syria.
Archeology." GeographicallyJ, ordan has links with
Jordan. In the south, Jordan Arabiat o the south,w ith Palestinea nd
touches the Gulf of Aqabah, the main ultimatelyE gypt to the west, and with
outlet to the Red Sea. From Aqabah, Syria to the north.
the deep rift valley runs north through Syria. Southern Syria up to
the Wadi Arabah to the Dead Sea, at Damascusi s closely relatedt o Jordan.
ca. 394 m below sea level. Betweent he To the east is the volcanic region of
Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea, the Jebel Druze, at ca. 1800 m above sea
Jordan River meanderss outh through level, and to the west is Mt. Hermon
the JordanV alleyp ortiono f the rift.T o and the Anti-Lebanonm ountainr ange,
the east of the rift valley are the hills at ca. 2800 m. The low Qalamunm oun-
Jordan and Syria, which together which rise sharplyt o ca. 600-1500+ m tain rangec uts off Damascusf rom the
comprise a very large percentage above sea level, formingt he edge of the regions in northernS yria. Includedi n
of the area of Syria-Palestine, high plateau area of Jordan. This the north are the regions of Homs,
plateaus lopes graduallyt o the east, to Hama, the Ghab,a nd the Rouj, located
have rich archeological histories the Azraqo asis andt he WadiS irhan,a t along the northward-flowingO rontes
which include the Paleolithic- ca. 500 m above sea level. The western River, and the northernp lateaur egion
Neolithic periods, the Bronze- hilly region along the edge of the around Aleppo. To the west is the
plateaut oday receivesa dequate annual Nuseiriyahm ountainr ange,a t ca. 1500
Iron Ages, the Classical periods, rainfall( ca. 200-500 mm), and several m, beyondw hichl ies the narrowc oastal
and the Islamic periods. Many rivers, including the Yarmuk, Zerqa, region.T he coast is connectedt o the in-
countries are participatingi n the Mojib, and Hesa, cut into the plateau terioro f Syriab y two maing aps, one in
and flow westwardi nto the rift valley. the south near Tartous-Homsa, nd one
recovery of this history, and the The sloping eastern plateau today in the north near Latakia.T o the east
new evidence that is coming from receivesf ar less rainfall( ca. 200 mm or and southeasto f Aleppoi s the regiono f
this research is of great less) and is a steppe-desertr egion, but the Euphrates River, which runs
the numerousd ry lakes and river beds southeastt hrought he fairlyf lat plateau
significance for many problems in the region indicate that it received at ca. 350-200 m. To the east of the
of Syro-Palestiniana rcheology. more rainfall during the prehistoric Euphratesi s the region of the Jezireh,
BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST/SPRING 1982 73